Find research datasets worth reusing

FIG. 9 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 9. — Bivariate plot of width of shaft vs length of the tibia of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 (Ti13 vs Ti3 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 8 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 8. — Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893, Tighennif (Algeria):A, metapodials, from left to right metatarsals MNHN.F.TER1664, TER1690, and metacarpals TER1648, TER1681, and TER1652; B, right tibia TER1682; B1, lateral view; B2, proximal view; C, left astragalus TER1670; C1, anterior view; C2, plantar view; C3, medial view; C4, distal view; D, left calcaneus TER1666; D1, anterior view; D2, plantar view; D3, medial view; E, left cuboid 1982-5-60; E1, proximal view; E2, distal view; E3, medial view; F, right navicular TER1679; F1, proximal view; F2, distal view; F3, lateral view. Scale bar: A, B, 40 cm; 20 cm for all others.

FIG. 10 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 10. — Bivariate plot of the widths of the cuboid facet vs navicular facet of the astragalus of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 (Ta15 vs Ta14 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 7 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 7. — Bivariate plot of depth vs thickness of the mandibular corpus of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 (M20 vs M15 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 6 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 6. — Bivariate plot of mesial vs distal widths of M2 of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 (Ds24 vs Ds25 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 5 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 5. — Bivariate plot of M2 mesial width vs length of molar row of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 (C34 vs Ds24 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 3 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 3. — Bivariate plot of cranial measurements of Camelus bactrianus Linnaeus, 1758, C. dromedarius Linnaeus, 1758 and C. thomasi Pomel, 1893 showing the position of the orbit (C24 vs C14 of Martini et al. 2017).

FIG. 2 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 2. — Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893, Tighennif (Algeria): A, maxilla MNHN.F.TER1816, occlusal view; B, maxilla with M1-M2 and tentatively associated M3, holotype no. 7236001; B1, right lateral view; B2, occlusal view; C, partial mandible 1900-27, dorsal view; D, partial mandible TER1688, dorsal view; E, partial mandible TER1686, dorsal view; F, mandible TER1683; F1, dorsal view; F2, lateral view; G, mandible TER1685; G1, dorsal view; G2, medial view. Holotype no. 7236001 (B) is housed in the Musée de Géologie (Algier); all others specimens are housed in the MNHN. Scale bar: F2, G2, 40 cm; 20 cm for all others.

FIG. 1 in Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893 from the Pleistocene type-locality Tighennif (Algeria). Comparisons with modern Camelus

FIG. 1. — Camelus thomasi Pomel, 1893, Tighennif (Algeria), cranium, MNHN.F.TER1689: A, left lateral view; B, ventral view of the cranial basis (stereo); C, ventral view; D, dorsal view. Scale bar: 40 cm.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2017View details →

Text-fig. 4. Known geographic distribution of Microtscoptini on a modern-day biome map (Arc-GIS feature TNC terrestrial ecoregions). 1 – Ertemte 1 and 2; 2 – Olan Chorea; 3 – Harr Obo 2; 4 – Shala; 5 – Baogeda Ula; 6 – Bilutu; 7 – Kholu (Southern Tuva); 8 – Sarayskoe (Olkhon Island); 9 – Hyargas-nuur; 10 – Petropavlovsk; 11 – Pavlodar; 12 – Akshauli; 13 – Selety 1A; 14 – Kedej 1A; 15 – Makovka; 16 – Cherevychne 3; 17 – Protopopovka 3; 18 – Verkhnya Krynytsa 2; 19 – Vasylivka 1; 20 – Lobkove; 21 – Rome; 22 – Bartlett Mountain; 23 – Bartlett Mountain (General); 24 – Juniper Creek; 25 – Little Valley; 26 – Stroud Claim; 27 – Kelley Road; 28 – Moonstone Formation; 29 – Lemoyne Quarry; 30 – Feltz Ranch; 31 – Cambridge; 32 – Rick Irwin Site; 33 – Rabbit Hole. 1–20, 30–32 – Steppe biomes, 21–29, 33 – xeric shrubland biomes. in Comments On The Age And Dispersal Of Microtoscoptini (Rodentia: Cricetidae)

Text-fig. 4. Known geographic distribution of Microtscoptini on a modern-day biome map (Arc-GIS feature TNC terrestrial ecoregions). 1 – Ertemte 1 and 2; 2 – Olan Chorea; 3 – Harr Obo 2; 4 – Shala; 5 – Baogeda Ula; 6 – Bilutu; 7 – Kholu (Southern Tuva); 8 – Sarayskoe (Olkhon Island); 9 – Hyargas-nuur; 10 – Petropavlovsk; 11 – Pavlodar; 12 – Akshauli; 13 – Selety 1A; 14 – Kedej 1A; 15 – Makovka; 16 – Cherevychne 3; 17 – Protopopovka 3; 18 – Verkhnya Krynytsa 2; 19 – Vasylivka 1; 20 – Lobkove; 21 – Rome; 22 – Bartlett Mountain; 23 – Bartlett Mountain (General); 24 – Juniper Creek; 25 – Little Valley; 26 – Stroud Claim; 27 – Kelley Road; 28 – Moonstone Formation; 29 – Lemoyne Quarry; 30 – Feltz Ranch; 31 – Cambridge; 32 – Rick Irwin Site; 33 – Rabbit Hole. 1–20, 30–32 – Steppe biomes, 21–29, 33 – xeric shrubland biomes.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2018View details →

Text-fig. 2. Latest Albian – Late Cretaceous palaeobotanical-palaeogeographical subregions of the North Pacific Region (a); modern outline of North-eastern Asia is shown for the Coniacian (after Smith et al. 1981): 1 – the Verkhoyansk-Chukotka Subregion, 2 – the Okhotsk-Chukotka Subregion, 3 – the Anadyr-Koryak Subregion (modified from Herman 2013) and geographical and geological position of the Turonian – Coniacian floras (b) (present-day map, modified from Shczepetov and Herman 2013). in On The Likely Palaeoelevation Of The Turonian - Coniacian Arman Flora Site (North-Eastern Asia)

Text-fig. 2. Latest Albian – Late Cretaceous palaeobotanical-palaeogeographical subregions of the North Pacific Region (a); modern outline of North-eastern Asia is shown for the Coniacian (after Smith et al. 1981): 1 – the Verkhoyansk-Chukotka Subregion, 2 – the Okhotsk-Chukotka Subregion, 3 – the Anadyr-Koryak Subregion (modified from Herman 2013) and geographical and geological position of the Turonian – Coniacian floras (b) (present-day map, modified from Shczepetov and Herman 2013).

Figure 7 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 7. Cartoon to depict consensus relationships among Charadriiformes ('shorebirds') along with the holotype specimen of Morsoravis sedile, a new and exceptionally well-preserved fossil from Palaeocene–Lower Eocene deposits in Jutland, Denmark (1–2; G. J. Dyke, M. van Tuinen & D. M. Waterhouse, unpubl. data). The tree is based on various sources; see text for details. Scale bar = 10 mm.

Figure 6 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 6. Cartoon to depict consensus relationships among Galliformes ('landfowl') along with some selected fossil material (based on Dyke, 2003b and Dyke et al., 2003): A, hypothesis for the phylogenetic positions of the Lower Eocene (c. 55 Mya) taxa Gallinuloides and Paraortygoides; B, fossil elements of Paraortygoides from the Lower Eocene London Clay Formation of England (see Dyke & Gulas, 2002); C, holotype specimen of Gallinuloides wyomingensis from the Lower Eocene Green River Formation of Wyoming (North America) (Dyke, 2003b). Scale bar = 10 mm.

Figure 5 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 5. Cartoon depicting consensus phylogenetic relationships among Anseriformes ('waterfowl') (based on Livezey, 1997) (Presbyornithidae includes the taxa Presbyornis and Teviornis; see text for details) along with a selection of wellpreserved fossil taxa: A, holotype skull of Anatalavis oxfordi in lateral view from the Lower Eocene London Clay Formation (The Natural History Museum, London, Palaeontology Department Collections, BMNH PAL 5922) (see Dyke, 2001b); B, holotype coracoid of BMNH PAL 5922 in dorsal and medial views) (scale bars = 10 mm); C, holotype carpometacarpus of Teviornis gobiensis from the Late Cretaceous Nemegt Formation of Mongolia (Palaeontological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, PIN 4499–1) in dorsal and ventral views (see Kurochkin et al., 2002). Scale bar = 10 mm.

Figure 4 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 4. Phylogenetic relationships within Palaeognathae including the well-represented fossil taxa Palaeotis and Lithornis (see text for details): A, new specimen of Lithornis from the Palaeocene-Lower Eocene Fur Formation of Denmark (Dankrae Collections of the Geologisk Museum, Copenhagen, DK 330) encased in cement stone nodule; B, skull of DK 330 acid prepared in oblique lateral view; C, palate of Lithornis in ventral view (ba, basitemporal plate; de, dentary; pa, palatine; pt, pterygoid; vo, vomer); D, the phylogenetic placement of Lithornis and Palaeotis inferred from cladistic analysis of osteological characters (see G. J. Dyke & M. van Tuinen, unpubl. data for details of analysis and matrices).

Figure 3 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 3. Seven possible definitions for the 'radiation of birds'. The true radiation of morphology observed in today's birds may have taken place as recently as points 6 or 7. Archaic ornithurines have not been found after the K–T boundary (black arrow). Although predicted from molecular clock analyses (dotted line; see text), little convincing evidence exists for neornithine fossils preceding the K–T boundary. The variation in number of species among traditional neornithine orders indicates that the 'radiation' was not equal across every major clade. Numbers refer to the following major evolutionary bird divergences: 1, diversification of Aves; 2, origin of Neornithes; 3, diversification of Neornithes; 4, origin of Neoaves; 5, origin of most orders (including 'Neoavian comb'); 6, diversification of most orders; 7, diversification of most families.

Figure 1 in The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record

Figure 1. Summary cladogram to show the phylogenetic relationships at the base of Neornithes (based on Cracraft et al., 2004). Despite advances in the use of genetic data to resolve the phylogenetic relationships of birds, differences between data sets remain and have led to conflict with regard to the interrelationships of clades within Neoaves. The part of this tree to the right-hand side (relationships within Neoaves) has often been referred to as the 'neoavian comb' (Cracraft et al., 2004).

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2007View details →

Figure 18 in Higher-order phylogeny of modern birds (Theropoda, Aves: Neornithes) based on comparative anatomy. II. Analysis and discussion

Figure 18. Detailed segment of strict consensus tree of all MPTs recovered in present study. Part G. Neornithes: Piciformes, and Passeriformes. Nodes are labelled above by percentages of bootstrapped replicates in which node was retained (italics), and below by Bremer support indices (bold type).

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2007View details →

Figure 15 in Higher-order phylogeny of modern birds (Theropoda, Aves: Neornithes) based on comparative anatomy. II. Analysis and discussion

Figure 15. Detailed segment of strict consensus tree of all MPTs recovered in present study. Part D. Neornithes: Gruiformes and Charadriiformes. Nodes are labelled above by percentages of bootstrapped replicates in which node was retained (italics), and below by Bremer support indices (bold type).