Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
4,144
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
4,144 results for “ITS barcode”
Fig. 3. A. Amynthas carnosus roki subsp. n in Survey of Busan Oligochaeta earthworms supported by DNA barcodes
Fig. 3. A. Amynthas carnosus roki subsp. n. holotype (H, DNA w56) showing habitus, prostomium, spermathecae, caecum and prostate of 18lhs in situ with X2 enlargements of post-intersegmental spermathecal pores of 8rhs and simple male pore of 18rhs. B. Sketch of these from Busan paratype (P, DNA H4 agreeing 100%). 3C and 3D are comparison sketches with similar X2 enlargements for sympatric A. carnosus carnosus (Goto and Hatai, 1899) specimens from Incheon (200 and 280 mm long) with pre-intersegmental spermathecal pores that provided DNA samples w55 and w57, respectively, agreeing>99% with each other (see Fig. 1 and Appendix).
Fig. 15 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 15 Phorcus articulatus (Lamarck 1822). a PCA plot of PC1 vs. PC2 for genus Phorcus. Single specimen of Phorcus articulatus separates from all other species. b Representative specimen of Ph. articulatus from this study. c One syntype of Ph. articulatus (INVE 51532). Scale bars 5 mm
Fig. 13 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 13 Phorcus mutabilis (Philippi, 1846). a PCA plot of PC1 vs. PC3 from genus Phorcus. Phorcus mutabilis (olive) splits into two morphotypes: one from Croatia and one from Crete. b Representative specimen of Ph. mutabilis (Croatia) from this study. c Representative specimen of Ph. mutabilis (Crete) from this study. d Specimen (black arrow) showing Ph. richardi morphology, but Ph. mutabilis COI barcode. From this study. Scale bars 5 mm
Fig. 9 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 9 Steromphala rarilineata (Michaud, 1829). a PCA plot of PC1 vs. PC3 from genus Steromphala. Steromphala rarilineata (violet) is separated but very near St. adriatica and St. divaricata. b Representative specimen of St. rarilineata from this study. Scale bar 5 mm
Fig. 7 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 7 Steromphala adansonii (Payraudeau 1826). a PCA plot of PC1 vs. PC2 of genus Steromphala. Single specimen of Steromphala adansonii (black) clusters near St. umbilicaris. b Representative specimen of St. adansonii from this study. Scale bar 5 mm
Fig. 6 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 6 Steromphala umbilicaris (Linnaeus, 1758) and Steromphala nebulosa (Philippi, 1848). a PCA plot of PC1 vs. PC2 of genus Steromphala. Steromphala umbilicaris (green) separates well from all other species. There is no overlap between specimens from this study and the type material. One individual (Linné 24) nests within St. adriatica. Steromphala nebulosa (grey) nests at the edge of St. umbilicaris. b Representative specimen of St. umbilicaris from this study. c Representative specimen of St. nebulosa from this study. d: Designated lectotype for St. umbilicaris located at LSL (LSL.504). Scale bars 5 mm
Fig. 8 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 8 Steromphala adriatica (Philippi, 1844). a PCA plot of PC1 vs PC2 of genus Steromphala. Steromphala adriatica (red) is separated from all but St. divaricata. One individual of Steromphala umbilicaris (Linné
Fig. 3 in Revision of the genus complex Gibbula: an integrative approach to delineating the Eastern Mediterranean genera Gibbula Risso, 1826, Steromphala Gray, 1847, and Phorcus Risso, 1826 using DNA-barcoding and geometric morphometrics (Vetigastropoda, Trochoidea)
Fig. 3 RAxML based phylogenetic reconstruction (GTRGAMMA model and 1000 rapid bootstrap replicates). COI barcodes were used to identify species and reconstruct relationships between species and genera.
Supplementary material 1 from: Adeoba MI, Kabongo R, Van der Bank H, Yessoufou K (2018) Re-evaluation of the discriminatory power of DNA barcoding on some specimens of African Cyprinidae (subfamilies Cyprininae and Danioninae). ZooKeys 746: 105-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.13502
Table S1 : Explanation note: Taxonomy of African Cyprinidae and geographic origins.
Figures 36-44 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 36-44 Male genitalia of Udea species. 36–37 U. altaica (Mally prep. 1090) 36 male genitalia 37 posterior phallus apodeme 38–41 U. juldusalis 38 male genitalia, Paralectotype (Mally prep. 1081) 39–41 posterior phallus apodeme 39 Paralectotype (Mally prep. 1081) 40 Lectotype (Mally prep. 1082) 41 (Mally prep. 1089) 42–44 U. plumbalis 42 male genitalia, Holotype (Mally prep. 1083) 43–44 posterior phallus apodeme 43 Holotype (Mally prep. 1083) 44 (Mally prep. 1094); 500 µm scale bar refers to male genitalia, 200 µm scale bar to posterior phallus apodemes.
Figures 23-35 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 23-35 Male genitalia of the Udea austriacalis species complex. 23–28 U. austriacalis 23 male genitalia (Mally prep. 1092) 24–28 posterior phallus apodeme 24 Mally prep. 1042 25 Mally prep. 1043 26 Mally prep. 1044 27 Mally prep. 1045 28 Mally prep. 1046 29–33 U. donzelalis 29 male genitalia (Mally prep. 1024) 30–33 posterior phallus apodeme 30 Mally prep. 1024 31 Mally prep. 866 32 Mally prep. 867 33 Mally prep. 1022 34–35 U. cretacea (Mally prep. 523) 34 male genitalia 35 posterior phallus apodeme; 500 µm scale bar refers to male genitalia, 200 µm scale bar to posterior phallus apodemes.
Figure 1 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figure 1 Maximum Likelihood analysis of COI Barcode data of the Udea alpinalis species group. Numbers on branches represent bootstrap values of ≥ 50 % inferred from 1,000 replicates, scale bar represents substitutions per site.
Figures 7-14 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 7-14 Adult specimens of Udea species. 7–10 U. austriacalis 7–8 male, dorsal (7) and ventral (8) 9–10 female, dorsal (9) and ventral (10), abdomen removed 11–14 U. donzelalis 11–12 male, dorsal (11) and ventral (12) 13–14 female, dorsal (13) and ventral (14), abdomen removed. Scale bars: 500 µm.
Figure 5 from: Adeoba MI, Kabongo R, Van der Bank H, Yessoufou K (2018) Re-evaluation of the discriminatory power of DNA barcoding on some specimens of African Cyprinidae (subfamilies Cyprininae and Danioninae). ZooKeys 746: 105-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.13502
Figure 5 - Parsimonious phylogenetic tree showing some plotted morphological characters, such as anal soft rays, barbels, dorsal soft rays, length, lip types, and ploidy status of 86 African Cyprinidae species.
Figure 4 from: Adeoba MI, Kabongo R, Van der Bank H, Yessoufou K (2018) Re-evaluation of the discriminatory power of DNA barcoding on some specimens of African Cyprinidae (subfamilies Cyprininae and Danioninae). ZooKeys 746: 105-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.13502
Figure 4 - Neighbour-joining tree analysis using Rosenberg's (2007) test. Nodes in red are strongly supported nodes, indicating species monophyly.
Figure 2 from: Adeoba MI, Kabongo R, Van der Bank H, Yessoufou K (2018) Re-evaluation of the discriminatory power of DNA barcoding on some specimens of African Cyprinidae (subfamilies Cyprininae and Danioninae). ZooKeys 746: 105-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.13502
Figure 2 - Evaluation of barcode gap in the dataset. Line plot of the barcode gap for the 315 Cyprinidae individuals. The black lines indicate where the smallest interspecific distance is longer than the longest intraspecific distance (bottom of line value), thus showing the existence of a barcode gap. The red lines show where this pattern is reversed.
Figures 45-47 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 45-47 Female genitalia of Udea species. 45 U. austriacalis (Mally prep. 1047) 46 U. donzelalis (Mally prep. 1023) 47 U. altaica (Mally prep. 1084).
Figures 2-3 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 2-3 Maximum Likelihood analysis of EF1a (2) and wingless (3) data of the Udea alpinalis species group. Numbers on branches represent bootstrap values of ≥ 50% inferred from 1,000 replicates. Note that the taxon set is not identical for the two analyses, scale bars represent substitutions per site.
Figures 15-22 from: Mally R, Huemer P, Nuss M (2018) Deep intraspecific DNA barcode splits and hybridisation in the Udea alpinalis group (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Crambidae) – an integrative revision. ZooKeys 746: 51-90. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.22020
Figures 15-22 Adult specimens of Udea species. 15–18 U. altaica 15–16 male, dorsal (15) and ventral (16) 17–18 Lectotype (NHMW) female, dorsal (17) and ventral (18) 19–20 U. juldusalis Lectotype (NHMW) male, dorsal (19) and ventral (20) 21–22 U. plumbalis Holotype (NHMW) male, dorsal (21) and ventral (22). Scale bar: 500 µm.
Figure 3 from: Adeoba MI, Kabongo R, Van der Bank H, Yessoufou K (2018) Re-evaluation of the discriminatory power of DNA barcoding on some specimens of African Cyprinidae (subfamilies Cyprininae and Danioninae). ZooKeys 746: 105-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.746.13502
Figure 3 - Determination of the threshold genetic distance for species identification. False positive (grey) and false negative (black) identification error rates summed across a range of distance thresholds from 0.01 to 1.9 %. The cumulative error plot indicates the transition between intraspecific and interspecific distances, the genetic distance corresponding to the least cumulative error (1.51 %) showing the appropriate threshold value for the dataset.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.