Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Figure 1. The genus Ophiomorus currently comprises 12 in Shape variation in head scales of species of the genus Ophiomorus DUMÉRIL & BIBRON, 1839 in Iran, a geometric morphometrics approach

Figure 1. The genus Ophiomorus currently comprises 12 extant species and distribution from southeastern Europe (mainland of Greece) to western India (Camaiti et al., 2019).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Figure 6 in Shape variation in head scales of species of the genus Ophiomorus DUMÉRIL & BIBRON, 1839 in Iran, a geometric morphometrics approach

Figure 6. Above wireframe graph in PC2 and scatter plot resulting from the between-group principal components analysis on specimens of the genus Ophiomorus.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Figure 5 in Shape variation in head scales of species of the genus Ophiomorus DUMÉRIL & BIBRON, 1839 in Iran, a geometric morphometrics approach

Figure 5. Landmarks that were used on the intersection of dorsal head scales in Ophiomorus. For detailed definitions of each landmark see Appendix 2.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2020View details →

Fig. 1 in Differentiation of Trichuris species eggs from non-human primates by geometric morphometric analysis

Fig. 1. Trichuris sp. eggs collected from the samples. A. Macaque (Macaca sylvanus) B. Colobus (Colobus guereza kikuyensis). C. Grivet (Chlorocebus aethiops. D. Brazza's monkey (Cercopithecus neglectus). The bar represents 20 μm.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2020View details →

Fig. 2 in Differentiation of Trichuris species eggs from non-human primates by geometric morphometric analysis

Fig. 2. Trichuris sp. egg lineal measurements. L1: maximum width of polar opercula, L2: minimum width of polar opercula, L3: base width of polar opercula, L4: length of polar opercula, measured from exterior midpoint to the narrow midpoint, L5: total length of polar opercula, measured from the exterior midpoint to the base midpoint, L6: wall thickness at its midpoint, L7: wall thickness in contact with polar opercula, L8: interior length of the egg.

Fig. 5. Ordination plot for principal components 1 and 2 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 5. Ordination plot for principal components 1 and 2 representing elytra shape variation between sexes of Xyleborus Affinis: deformation grids describing variation between sexes on the 2 first principal components are presented.

Fig. 4 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 4. Boxplots for the body structure centroid size in Xyleborus affinis: (A) elytra centroid size; (B) pronotum centroid size. The line within each box represents the median, and the height of each box represents first and third quartiles (75% of all data). The lines correspond to the observed minimum and maximum values and dots are outliers

Fig. 2 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 2. Allometric regression of shape on centroid size for each sex: (A) predicted elytra shapes (Predline) to each centroid size; (B) predicted pronotum shapes (Predline) to each centroid size.

Fig. 1 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 1. Configuration of landmarks and semi-landmarks used to register 1 side of the 2 body structures (elytra and pronotum) of Xyleborus affinis: (A) configuration of 3 landmarks (1, 9, 10) and 7 semi-landmarks (2–8) describing elytra shape; (B) configuration of 3 landmarks (1, 2, 8) and 5 semi-landmarks (3–7) describing pronotum shape.

Fig. 3 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 3. Linear regression of partial least squares vectors from the pronotum shape matrix and elytra shape matrix.

Fig. 6. Ordination plot for principal components 1 and 2 in Evaluating sexual dimorphism in the ambrosia beetle Xyleborus affinis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) using geometric morphometrics

Fig. 6. Ordination plot for principal components 1 and 2 representing pronotum shape variation between sexes of Xyleborus Affinis: deformation grids describing variation between sexes on the 2 first principal components are presented.

Fig. 7 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 7. Ulna. Distribution of males (black dots) and females (white dots) of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804) in the plane determined by the first two relative warps (RW1 and RW2). Numbers indicate specimens. Deformation grids below the graph show shape changes linked to negative (left) and positive (right) scores in RW1. Grids on the right show deformations linked to negative (below) and positive (above) scores in RW2.

Fig. 6 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 6. Scatterplot for the ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804), showing the distribution of the individuals in the plane formed by the two first principal components. The black outlines below the plot represent the shape variation associated to PC1, and those of the right show the changes associated to PC2 with respect to the consensus of the species (grey outlines).

Fig. 4 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 4. Humerus. Distribution of males (black dots) and females (white dots) of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804) in the plane determined by the first two relative warps (RW1 and RW2). Numbers indicate specimens. Deformation grids below the graph show shape changes linked to negative (left) and positive (right) scores in RW1. Grids on the right show deformations linked to negative (below) and positive (above) scores in RW2.

Fig. 3 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 3. Scatterplot for the humerus of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804), showing the distribution of the individuals in the plane formed by the two first principal components. The black outlines below the plot represent the shape variation associated to PC1, and those of the right show the changes associated to PC2 with respect to the consensus of the species (grey outlines).

Fig. 2 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 2. Canonical analysis for the humerus of males and females of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804). The bone outlines below the graph represent the tendencies to deformation in males and females (black dots and lines) with respect to the consensus of the species (grey dots and lines) along the axis.

Fig. 1 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 1. Landmarks digitised on the left appendicular bones of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804). Scapula in dorsal view; humerus in caudal view; ulna in lateral view.

Fig. 5 in A geometric morphometric study of sex differences in the scapula, humerus and ulna of Chaetophractus villosus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae)

Fig. 5. Canonical analysis for the ulna of males and females of Chaetophractus villosus (Desmarest, 1804). The bone outlines below the graph represent extreme individuals (black dots and lines) with respect to the consensus of the species (grey dots and lines) along the axis.

opencc-by-4.0Feb 2016View details →

Fig. 16. Conodont P1 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 16. Conodont P1 elements of Idiognathodus luganicus (Kozitskaya, 1978) from the Heebner Shale (Gzhelian, Late Pennsylvanian). A. SUI 141094 TT0200); Sedan 11. B. SUI 141095 (TT0209); Clinton 12. C. SUI 141098 (TT0285); Clinton 12. D. SUI 141096 (TT0284); Clinton 12. E. SUI 141097 TT0141); Clinton 28. F. SUI 141099 (TT0018); Clinton 15. G. SUI 141100 (TT0026); I229-83. H. SUI14101 (TT0016); Clinton 14. I. SUI 14102 TT0119); Sedan 20. J. SUI 141103 (TT0118); Sedan 20. K. SUI 141104 (TT0102); Sedan 12.