Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 6 from: Albert J, Packer L (2013) Nesting biology and phenology of a population of Halictus farinosus Smith (Hymenoptera, Halictidae) in northern Utah. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 32: 55-73. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.32.4646

Figure 6 - Cumulative degree days between March and August in 1977, 1978, 2002 and 2010. Phenological markers (queen foraging slows, first adult worker, first reproductive brood cell, first adult male reproductive, first adult female reproductive) have been included as coloured bars to note the dates of the events. Males and females from the second brood were not differentiated in the 2002 study, and some events were not recorded in 1977 and 1978.

Figure 5 from: Albert J, Packer L (2013) Nesting biology and phenology of a population of Halictus farinosus Smith (Hymenoptera, Halictidae) in northern Utah. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 32: 55-73. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.32.4646

Figure 5 - Total rainfall per month for the four years of study on Halictus farinosus in Green Canyon and the monthly average over the previous 65 years.

Figure 2 from: Albert J, Packer L (2013) Nesting biology and phenology of a population of Halictus farinosus Smith (Hymenoptera, Halictidae) in northern Utah. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 32: 55-73. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.32.4646

Figure 2 - Proportion of nests excavated with the queen present, organized in 6 day intervals. Very few excavations took place between 16 July and 8 August so data are pooled together to show overall trend during this period. See Figure 1 for the number of nests excavated during each period.

Figure 4 from: Albert J, Packer L (2013) Nesting biology and phenology of a population of Halictus farinosus Smith (Hymenoptera, Halictidae) in northern Utah. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 32: 55-73. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.32.4646

Figure 4 - Average daily maximum (a) and minimum (b) temperatures for the four years of study on Halictus farinosus in Green Canyon and the seasonal average over the previous 65 years.

Figure 1 from: Albert J, Packer L (2013) Nesting biology and phenology of a population of Halictus farinosus Smith (Hymenoptera, Halictidae) in northern Utah. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 32: 55-73. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.32.4646

Figure 1 - Percentage of brood in different developmental stages throughout the season, taken every six days. The rate of nest excavation throughout the season was not consistent. Numbers above each column represents the number of nests excavated during that time period.

Figure 5 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 5 - Box-plot of the number of individuals of Drimeotus viehmanni, in the winter and the summer months, in the five stations (I–V) of Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului.

Figure 4 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 4 - Monthly variation of the number of individuals of Drimeotus viehmanni in the five stations (I–V) of Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului.

Figure 2 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 2 - Box-plot of the air temperature, during winter and summer months, at the surface (S), the entrance (E) and the five stations (I-V) for Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului.

Figure 7 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 7 - The migration routes of Drimeotus viehmanni inside Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului: yellow = mark for individuals at station II, blue = mark for individuals at station III.

Figure 3 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 3 - Box-plot of the relative air humidity at the surface (S), the entrance (E) and the five stations (I–V) for Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului.

Figure 6 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 6 - The evolution of the Drimeotus viehmanni abundance in two stations of Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului.

Figure 1 from: Moldovan O, Fejér A (2013) Population size and dispersal patterns for a Drimeotus (Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Leptodirini) cave population. Subterranean Biology 11: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.11.4974

Figure 1 - Peştera cu Apă din Valea Leşului (modified after Cocean 1995), with the position of the cave in Romania and the sites for climatic measurements (red) and fauna counting (green): I-V stations; S = surface; E = entrance.

Figure 1b from: Kotze D, Brandmayr P, Casale A, Dauffy-Richard E, Dekoninck W, Koivula M, Lovei G, Mossakowski D, Noordijk J, Paarmann W, Pizzoloto R, Saska P, Schwerk A, Serrano J, Szyszko J, Taboada Palomares A, Turin H, Venn S, Vermeulen R, Zetto Brandmayr T (2011) Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation. ZooKeys 100: 55-148. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1523

Figure 1b - Front covers of the first European meetings, ECM 1–8 and that of Hamburg 1984 (centre cover) (see also Table 2).

Figure 2 from: Kotze D, Brandmayr P, Casale A, Dauffy-Richard E, Dekoninck W, Koivula M, Lovei G, Mossakowski D, Noordijk J, Paarmann W, Pizzoloto R, Saska P, Schwerk A, Serrano J, Szyszko J, Taboada Palomares A, Turin H, Venn S, Vermeulen R, Zetto Brandmayr T (2011) Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation. ZooKeys 100: 55-148. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1523

Figure 2 - Different pitfall types. A = Jar or yoghurt can. B and C = traps with an outer can to make collecting of the sample easier. B = funnel trap with small jar. C = trap for moist biotopes (the outer can contains gravel or stones to prevent the can from being pushed up by groundwater). V = preservative (usually formaldehyde 3–4% or propylene glycol), S = stones or gravel.

Figure 1a from: Kotze D, Brandmayr P, Casale A, Dauffy-Richard E, Dekoninck W, Koivula M, Lovei G, Mossakowski D, Noordijk J, Paarmann W, Pizzoloto R, Saska P, Schwerk A, Serrano J, Szyszko J, Taboada Palomares A, Turin H, Venn S, Vermeulen R, Zetto Brandmayr T (2011) Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation. ZooKeys 100: 55-148. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1523

Figure 1a - Participants of the first European Carabidologist Meeting in Wijster, 1969. From left to right: Vlijm, Van der Aart, Lindroth, Stein, Wijmans, Hengeveld, Palmén, Van Dijk, Richter, Venema, Mook, Thiele, Tjallingii, Den Boer, Haeck, Neumann, Meijer.

Figure 1c from: Kotze D, Brandmayr P, Casale A, Dauffy-Richard E, Dekoninck W, Koivula M, Lovei G, Mossakowski D, Noordijk J, Paarmann W, Pizzoloto R, Saska P, Schwerk A, Serrano J, Szyszko J, Taboada Palomares A, Turin H, Venn S, Vermeulen R, Zetto Brandmayr T (2011) Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation. ZooKeys 100: 55-148. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1523

Figure 1c - Front covers of the last five ECMs and of a few major carabidology publications (Thiele 1977; Ball et al. 1998; Erwin et al. 1979; Noonan et al. 1992) (see also Table 2).

opencc-by-4.0May 2015View details →

Figure 1 from: Ueti A, Pompeu PS, Ferreira RL (2015) Asymmetry compensation in a small vampire bat population in a cave: a case study in Brazil. Subterranean Biology 15: 57-67. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.15.4807

Figure 1 - Graphical representation of the compensation of asymmetry in the constituent structures of the wing and the maintenance of wing area. The height of the wing remains in the various plans through inverse variation in the size of structures 3 with 4 and 4 with 2. At length the maintenance is done by varying inversely in size from 1 to 5. 1 forearm 2 second phalanx of the fifth digit 3 fourth metacarpal of the digit 4 first phalanx of fourth digit, and 5 first phalanx of third digit.