Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 3 in Four-toed sengi (Petrodromus tetradactylus, Afrotheria, Mammalia) museomics reveals a crucial role of East African forests in macroscelidean diversification

Figure 3. Evolutionary and biogeographic history of Petrodromus. Top: Summary of secondary dating using StarBEAST2 with different numbers of lineages. For details for each run see Supporting Information, Fig. S1. Major biogeographic events are annotated to the respective nodes/branches. Boưom: Synoptic hypothesis of Petrodromus' biogeographic history through time. Moist broadleaf forest in neon green, more arid savannas, bushlands and woodlands in olive green.

Figure 2. Phylogenetic structure within Petrodromus. Colour coding indicates the main phylogenetic lineages found. A in Four-toed sengi (Petrodromus tetradactylus, Afrotheria, Mammalia) museomics reveals a crucial role of East African forests in macroscelidean diversification

Figure 2. Phylogenetic structure within Petrodromus. Colour coding indicates the main phylogenetic lineages found. A, Bayesian phylogenetic tree from mitochondrial (less) and nuclear DNA (right) with major genetic lineages highlighted. Numbers indicate posterior probability of deeper nodes. B, Collecting locations of samples assigned to lineages, with squares representing the P.t.s.s. lineages and dots all other lineages. C, Haplotype network of the nuclear gene IRBP (top) and mitochondrial gene 16S rRNA (boưom).

Figure 1 in Four-toed sengi (Petrodromus tetradactylus, Afrotheria, Mammalia) museomics reveals a crucial role of East African forests in macroscelidean diversification

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of Petrodromus tetradactylus. Topographic map of Sub-Saharan Africa with the red area showing the species' currently accepted distribution (IUCN Red List 2024, Rathbun 2015). Blue lines and areas represent major rivers and lakes. Black doưed lines indicate the East African Riss Valley, with the easternmost line representing the course of Kingdon's Line (red dots). Yellow circles mark the origin of samples analysed in this study.

Figure 4 in Four-toed sengi (Petrodromus tetradactylus, Afrotheria, Mammalia) museomics reveals a crucial role of East African forests in macroscelidean diversification

Figure 4. Evolutionary parallelism in forest-dwelling sengis, Rhynchocyon (less) and Petrodromus (right). Ŋe geographically widespread P.t.ss lineage (dark blue) mimics the cirnei/stuhlmanni sister pair in Rhynchocyon. Rhynchocyon species: Rch R. chrysopygus (cyan), Rci R. cirnei (dark blue), Rpe R. petersi (red), Rst R. stuhlmanni (dark blue), Rud R. udzungwensis (yellow). Petrodromus lineages: NC/Z Northern coastal/ Zanzibar Archipelago (red), P.t.ss (dark blue), Ud Udzungwa Mountains (yellow).

Figure 4 in Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from two priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Amazon and range extension for Carollia benkeithi (Phyllostomidae)

Figure 4: Female specimen of Micronycteris sp. (MPEG 37789) registered in the Mamirauá SDR. (A) Dorsal (left) and ventral (right) fur views; (B) two upper dorsal views of the head showing the separation of the ear band (arrows). Scale bars: 10 mm.

Figure 1 in Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from two priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Amazon and range extension for Carollia benkeithi (Phyllostomidae)

Figure 1: Map of South America showing the Mamirauá and Amanã Sustainable Development Reserves in Amazonas state, Brazil.

Figure 10 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 10: Portrait and a frontal (middle) and lateral views (right) of the horseshoe of Rhinolophus cervenyi sp. n. (photo by J. Červený).

Figure 9 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 9: Type locality of Rhinolophus cervenyi sp. n.: small cave near the old park lodge in the Sehlabathebe National Park, Lesotho, and the bat colony containing the type series (photo by J. Červený).

Figure 6 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 6: Maximum likelihood tree of reconstructed phylogenetic relationships of the Lesotho horseshoe bats with species of the fumigatus group and other Rhinolophus groups based on the nuclear dataset. Branch support values are shown by pie charts on the nodes.

Figure 5 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 5: Maximum likelihood tree of reconstructed phylogenetic relationships of the Lesotho horseshoe bats with species of the fumigatus group and other Rhinolophus groups based on the Cyt-b dataset. Branch support values are shown by pie charts on the nodes.

Figure 4 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 4: Bivariate plot of skull dimensions of the examined samples of the Lesotho bats and comparative taxa: condylocanine length of skull (LCc) against length of the upper tooth-row (CM3); values in millimetres. Explanations: Lesotho I = samples from Lesotho examined by molecular genetic analysis; Lesotho II = samples from Lesotho examined only by the morphological analysis; Namibia 0 = samples of R. damarensis examined only by the morphological analysis; Namibia 1 = samples of R. damarensis of the Namibia 1 lineage; Namibia 2 = samples of R. damarensis of the Namibia 2 lineage; damarensis T = holotype specimen of Rhinolophus darlingi damarensis; S Africa II = extremely small-sized specimens from South Africa (Free State) originally identified as R. clivosus (see text for details).

Figure 2 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 2: Bivariate plot of skull dimensions of the examined samples of the Lesotho bats and comparative taxa: first two roots of the principal component analysis of 15 plain skull dimensions; for explanations see Figure 1.

Figure 7 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 7: Map of localities of the examined specimens of Rhinolophus acrotis (diamonds), R. damarensis (squares) and R. cervenyi sp. n. (circles) in southern Africa (A) and in Lesotho (B); L, Lesotho; M, Mozambique; SZ, Eswatini. Open symbols – localities of origin of the specimens examined by the molecular genetic methods (except those of R. acrotis), numbers at the symbols correspond with the mitochondrial haplotype numbers as in Figure 5 and Table S1, number script denotes the lineage assignation: regular – Namibia1, bold – Namibia2, italics – South Africa & Lesotho bats. Small letters denote known localities of R. cervenyi sp. n.: Lesotho (B): a – Ha Mokoto, b – Ha Natla, c – Hermon, d – Mateanong, e – Moqotoane, f – Mount Moorosi, g – Nkokamele, h – Phallang, i – Roma, cave, j – Sehlabathebe NP, lodge, k – Semonkong, l – Ski Lodge, Oxbow; South Africa (A): m – Jagersfontein, n – Uintjiesburg.

Figure 12 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 12: Occlusal views on the mesial part of the left upper tooth-row (C–M1) and the right lower toothrow (I –M) of Rhinolophus cervenyi sp. n. 3 1 (NMP 97760, holotype). Scale bar: 2 mm.

Figure 1 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 1: Bivariate plot of skull dimensions of the examined samples of the Lesotho bats and comparative taxa: condylocanine length of skull (LCc) against length of the upper tooth-row (CM3); values in millimetres. Explanations: Abyssinia = samples of R. acrotis acrotis from Ethiopia, Eritrea and the Sudan; E Africa = samples of R. acrotis augur from East Africa (Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, Malawi); S Africa = samples of R. acrotis augur from southern Africa (Mozambique, South Africa); types = holotype specimens of Rhinolophus augur (G), Rhinolophus augur zambesiensis (B), Rhinolophus augur zuluensis (U), and Rhinolophus darlingi damarensis (D); S Africa II = extremely small-sized specimens from South Africa originally identified as R. clivosus (see text for details); polygon = range extremes of the values for R. damarensis from Namibia.

Figure 8 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 8: General view of the type locality of Rhinolophus cervenyi sp. n.: upper parts of the Sehlabathebe National Park, Lesotho (photo by J. Červený).

Figure 3 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 3: Bivariate plot of skull dimensions of the examined samples of the Lesotho bats and comparative taxa: relative length of rostrum (CM3/LCc) against relative width of skull (LaZ/LCc); for explanations see Figure 1.

Figure 11 in On the systematic position of the horseshoe bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from Lesotho

Figure 11: Skull in lateral view (top) and in dorsal view (below) of Rhinolophus cervenyi sp. n. (top – NMP 97760, holotype; below – NMP 97758, paratype). Scale bars: 5 mm.

Figure 5 in Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from two priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Amazon and range extension for Carollia benkeithi (Phyllostomidae)

Figure 5: Skull of Micronycteris sp. (MPEG 37789, female). (A) Lateral view of the skull shows the developed maxillary premolars; (B) dorsal skull view; (C) maxillary external incisors visible to the naked eye (arrow); and (D) lateral views of mandible. Scale bar: 5 mm.

Figure 3 in Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from two priority areas for biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Amazon and range extension for Carollia benkeithi (Phyllostomidae)

Figure 3: Skull of Carollia benkeithi (MPEG 37664, female). Skull shown in (A) dorsal and (B) ventral views; (C) left lateral view of the skull, the arrow indicates the cingulum of the last maxillary premolar; and (D) left lateral mandible, the arrow indicates the pm2 greater than the m1. Scale bar: 5 mm.