Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 20. A in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 20. A. Overview looking northeast at exposures of Zofia's Hill (right foreground) Zofia's Middle (center), and Zofia's North (left background). B. View looking east at Zofia's Middle with prominent bed of conglomerate (Facies C) exposed near the base (by crew members).

Fig. 4 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 4. Cross-stratified, tabular concretions of Facies E-2, exposed southwest of Xanadu, interpreted as early-cemented sheets that developed parallel to stratification within eolian dune deposits.

Fig. 5. A in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 5. A. Structureless sandstone with small lens of conglomerate of Facies S (below hammer), exposed at the base of the Sphinx, interpreted as sand slides down the lee slopes of eolian dunes (sandstone), mixed with fluvial gravel. B. Structureless sandstone with pebbles imbedded in matrix of Facies F interpreted as mass flow composed of a mixture of dune- and stream-derived material.

Fig. 12 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 12. Sphinx, showing low-relief exposures of structureless sandstone (Facies S) at the base and crossstratified sandstone (Facies E-1), which forms the butte.

Fig. 3 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 3. Cross-stratified sandstone of Facies E-1, exposed at Little Ukhaa, containing inverse-graded ripple laminations, interpreted as migration of eolian dunes (far right) and ripples (center and left).

Fig. 14 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 14. View looking east showing low ridge composed of siltstone (Facies M) below buttes of Camel Humps.

Fig. 2 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 2. Concave-up fold in cross-stratified sandstone of Facies E-1 interpreted as track of large vertebrate. Width of field of view is 30 cm.

Fig. 1 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 1. Cross-stratified sandstone of Facies E-1, exposed near the base of the Sphinx, interpreted as eolian dune deposits.

Fig. 9 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 9. Top: Schematic cross section of exposures at Downlap Hill. Location of site is labeled on map 2. For lithologies in all cross sections, see fig. 8. Bottom: View looking north at Downlap Hill, with low-angle bedding in sandstone of Facies F (below person) underlying distinctly cross-stratified sandstone of Facies E- 1 (slightly above and to right of person). See top for interpretation.

Fig. 19. A in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 19. A. View looking southeast showing basal ridges of siltstone (Facies M) and overlying structureless sandstone (Facies S) at First Strike. B. View looking northeast between Camel Humps and First Strike showing trace of white caliche pebble layer exposed on top of low ridges (center) and flats (right) near First Strike.

Fig. 6 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 6. Andesitic cobble with phenocrysts of potassium feldspar adjacent to lens of white, caliche pebble conglomerate of Facies C, exposed above Death Row, interpreted as fluvial deposit.

Fig. 18 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 18. View looking southeast across flats and low bluffs of Xanadu. The low ledge in the foreground is composed of structureless sandstone (Ks) that contains abundant fossils, whereas the low bluffs in the distance beyond the pack are composed of cross-stratified sandstone (Ke).

Fig. 16 in The Geology of Ukhaa Tolgod (Djadokhta Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Nemegt Basin, Mongolia)

Fig. 16. Top: Schematic cross section of exposures on north side of Camel Humps Basin containing localities of Death Row and admixed sandslide and fluvial deposits. Location of site is labeled on maps 1 and 4. Bottom: Exposures on northern side of Camel Humps Basin, including Death Row, which is contained in structureless sandstone (Facies S) about 7–8 m below the top of the ridge.

Fig. 27 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 27. Phylogeny of Eucoilinae after Fontal-Cazalla et al. (2002) with the putative positions of the three Cretaceous amber taxa (Anteucoila, Jerseucoila, and Syneucoila) being noted (support for clades is outlined in table 4).

Fig. 26 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 26. Phylogeny of the Cynipoidea summarizing relationships among major lineages. Fossil records are tabulated in appendix 1. Abbreviations for particular deposits are: Rott (Rott, Germany), Fr (Cantal, France), Wig (Isle of Wight, England), Flor (Florissant, Colorado), Biamo (Biamo, today Bol'shaya Svetlovodnaya), Baltic (Baltic amber), Can (Canadian amber), Sib (Siberian amber of the Taimyr Peninsula), NJ (New Jersey amber), and Obe (Obeshchayushchiy Creek).

Fig. 24 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 24. Character optimization showing unambiguous character changes on internodes of one of the single shortest trees from figure 23 (the two minimal length topologies differ only in relationships within Liopteridae, and thus the subfamilies of this group are collapsed into a single terminal for the purposes of the figure, with those unambiguous character optimizations for the modern liopterid clade being noted). Solid circles indicate unambiguous character transformations; open circles show homoplastic character transformations.

Fig. 25 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 25. Preferred cladogram of cynipoid relationships; character optimization showing unambiguous character changes on internodes of the single shortest tree from figure 21 (the two minimal length topologies differ only in relationships within Liopteridae, and thus the subfamilies of this group are collapsed into a single terminal for the purposes of the figure, with those unambiguous character optimizations for the modern liopterid clade being noted). Solid circles indicate unambiguous character transformations; open circles show homoplastic character transformations.

Fig. 22 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 22. Strict consensus tree of the two shortest trees (L 5 235, CI 5 54, RI 5 79) resulting from analyses of the data matrix (as described in the text and in fig. 20), with the inclusion of two additional Cretaceous amber taxa known only from males (i.e., Tanaoknemus and Micropresbyteria) and no constraints.

Fig. 23 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 23. Strict consensus tree of the two shortest trees (L 5 239, CI 5 55, RI 5 79) resulting from analysis of the data matrix from figure 22 (i.e., with Tanaoknemus and Micropresbyteria included), with the phylogenetic relationship of Anteucoila with the two representative figitids constrained.

Fig. 21 in Phylogeny and Geological History of the Cynipoid Wasps (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea)

Fig. 21. Preferred set of cladistic relationships among Cynipoidea; strict consensus of the two shortest tree (L 5 228, CI 5 57, RI 5 80) resulting from analysis of the data matrix (as described in the text and in fig. 20), with the phylogenetic position of Anteucoila with the two representative figitids constrained.