Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2017View details →

Figure 2 in A web based tool to merge geometric morphometric data from multiple characters

Figure 2. Description of the landmarks, curves and merged data. a). Epipharynx (Onthophagus (Palaeonthophagus) gibbulus in dorsal view), 14 landmarks and five curves. b). Mandible (right mandible of Synapsis yunnanus in dorsal view), eight landmarks and four curves. c). Pronotum (Euonthophagus amyntas), two landmarks and one curve. d). Elytra (Euonthophagus amyntas), three landmarks and one curve. e). Hind wing (right hind wing of Copris lunaris), 19 landmarks, terminology following Kukalová- Peck and Lawrence (1993). f). Metendosternite (Digitonphagus gazelle in lateral view), nine landmarks and four curves. g). Metendosternite (Digitonphagus gazelle in dorsal view), 14 landmarks and five curves. h). Merged data of all seven characters. All curves were re-sampled in 30 semi-landmarks, except the curves mentioned in different numbers of semi-landmarks, such as all curves in Figs 1a–b, and curve 1 in Fig. 1f.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2017View details →

Figure 3 in A web based tool to merge geometric morphometric data from multiple characters

Figure 3. Morphological variation of 25 dung beetles species based on merged geometric morphometric data from the epipharynx, right mandible, pronotum, elytra, hind wing, and metendosternite in lateral and dorsal view (totally 649 landmarks). Relative warps computed from the landmark data set merged from seven body character complexes. Each tribe is indicated by a different color. The Minimal Spanning Tree is the shortest possible set of lines connecting all points.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2007View details →

Fig. 4. Geometric parameters for the numerical optimization process. a in Scientific Note Proposal of a Sluice-type Fish Pass

Fig. 4. Geometric parameters for the numerical optimization process. a) water level in the pool, b) intermediate wall height c) level difference between the pools, d) opening under the sluice, e) the dimension of the pool and f) position of the wall (see Fig. 3 for legend).

Figure 7 in Intra- and interspecific skull variation in two sister species of the subterranean rodent genus Ctenomys (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae): coupling geometric morphometrics and chromosomal polymorphism

Figure 7. Phenogram computed from the Mahalanobis distances between chromosomal groups for Ctenomys torquatus from Brazil (2n = 40, 44, and 46), C. torquatus from Uruguay (2n = 44u), and Ctenomys pearsoni (2n = 66 and 70). Tree made by using the neighbour-joining method with branch lengths proportional to morphological distances. Scale bar: 4 units.

Figure 4 in Intra- and interspecific skull variation in two sister species of the subterranean rodent genus Ctenomys (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae): coupling geometric morphometrics and chromosomal polymorphism

Figure 4. Kernel density estimates on principal components (PC) 1 and 2 of shape variables and convex hulls for specimens of Ctenomys torquatus (•) and Ctenomys pearsoni (Δ). Variance percentages are given on the y axis. Dark areas indicate higher density regions.

Figure 6 in Intra- and interspecific skull variation in two sister species of the subterranean rodent genus Ctenomys (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae): coupling geometric morphometrics and chromosomal polymorphism

Figure 6. Plot of the six chromosomal populations for the first two axes of the linear discriminant analysis (LDA) for three integrated views. Ctenomys torquatus, 2n = 40, 44, 44u, and 46; Ctenomys pearsoni, 2n = 66 and 70.

Figure 3 in Intra- and interspecific skull variation in two sister species of the subterranean rodent genus Ctenomys (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae): coupling geometric morphometrics and chromosomal polymorphism

Figure 3. Box-and-whisker plots showing the distribution of centroid size for the lateral view of the skull of two Ctenomys torquatus and Ctenomys pearsoni specimens, and for each sex. Upper and lower hinges correspond to the first and third quartiles, and whiskers correspond to the 95% confidence interval.

Figure 2 in Intra- and interspecific skull variation in two sister species of the subterranean rodent genus Ctenomys (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae): coupling geometric morphometrics and chromosomal polymorphism

Figure 2. Ctenomys torquatus skull, with indication of morphological landmarks for the dorsal (A), ventral (B), and lateral (C) views of the cranium. Appendix 2 gives the key to the landmarks. Scale bar: 1 cm.

Figure 6 in Evolution of the zygomasseteric construction in Rodentia, as revealed by a geometric morphometric analysis of the mandible of Graphiurus (Rodentia, Gliridae)

Figure 6. Zygomasseteric construction in extinct and extant Gliridae with the origin and insertion of the lateral (thin arrows) and medial (thick arrows) portions of the masseteric muscle. A, QP 625, Gliravus majori (Quercy, France, Oligocene), protrogomorphy; B, ITD 140 Bransatoglis micio [Itardies, Quercy, Oligocene (MP23)], derived protrogomorphy (or primitive myomorphy); C, Glis glis, myomorphy; D, Graphiurus hueti, hystricomorphy. The dotted lines are reconstructions. Abbreviations: iof, infraorbital foramen; zp, zygomatic plate. Scale bar, 5 mm.

Figure 4 in Evolution of the zygomasseteric construction in Rodentia, as revealed by a geometric morphometric analysis of the mandible of Graphiurus (Rodentia, Gliridae)

Figure 4. Plot of the discriminant analysis of the Fourier coefficients versus morphological type. Solid symbols indicate families with hystricomorphous skull: squares, Anomaluridae; rhombi, Ctenodactylidae; circles, Pedetidae; triangles, Dipodidae; stars, Graphiurinae. Open symbols indicate myomorph families: stars, Gliridae (Glirinae/Leithiinae); rhombi, Nesomyidae; circles, Muridae; triangles, Cricetidae.

Figure 2 in Evolution of the zygomasseteric construction in Rodentia, as revealed by a geometric morphometric analysis of the mandible of Graphiurus (Rodentia, Gliridae)

Figure 2. Phylogenetic hypotheses for Graphiurus (A) based on cranial and dental characters of fossils and living species (Vianey-Liaud & Jaeger, 1996), (B) based on cranial and dental characters of living species (Wahlert et al., 1993), (C) based on dental morphological characters of fossils and extant species (Daams & De Brujn, 1995), (D) based on incisor enamel microstructure (Koenigswald, 1995), (E) based on partial mitochondrial gene sequences (Bentz & Montgelard, 1999), and (F) based on partial mitochondrial and nuclear gene sequences (Montgelard et al., 2003).

Figure 1 in Evolution of the zygomasseteric construction in Rodentia, as revealed by a geometric morphometric analysis of the mandible of Graphiurus (Rodentia, Gliridae)

Figure 1. The four basic types of rodent skulls. A, protrogomorphy; B, sciuromorphy; C, hystricomorphy; D, myomorphy. Thin and thick arrows show the origin and the insertion of the lateral and medial portions of the masseter respectively.

Figure 14 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 14. Outline shape models of positions along the canonical variate axes (numbers in parentheses) shown in Figure 13 projected into the space of the extended eigenshapes. Outlines are overlain at the landmark from which digitization started in the figure to the right of each sequence in order to illustrate better the magnitudes and directions (arrows) or localized shape change. See text for discussion.

Figure 10 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 10. Outline shape models of positions along the canonical variate axes (numbers in parentheses) shown in Figure 9 projected into the space of the extended eigenshapes. Outlines are overlain at the landmark from which digitization started in the figure to the right of each sequence in order to illustrate better the magnitudes and directions (arrows) or localized shape change.

Figure 11 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 11. Canonical variates ordination of gonopod shape data for two Allothereua serrulata subspecies as assessed by landmark data and relative warps analysis. As there are only two groups the first canonical variate axes account for all of the observed between-groups shape variation. Nevertheless, higher canonical variates exist (see MacLeod, 2007) and the second canonical variate axis is shown here in order to illustrate aspects of the overall ordination in the discriminant space. Cross-tabulation analysis of these results using only the distribution along the first axis (Table 5) indicated that almost 85% of the sample can be assigned to the correct subspecies.

Figure 9 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 9. Canonical variates ordination of outline semi-landmark data for the gonopod mesarthra of three Allothereua species as assessed by extended eigenshape analysis. Only the first two of the five possible canonical variate axes are shown. As there are only three groups these two canonical variate axes account for 100.00% of the observed betweengroups shape variation. Cross-tabulation analysis (Table 4) indicated that almost 75% of the sample can be assigned to the correct species.

Figure 8 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 8. Thin-plate spline models of positions along the canonical variate axes (numbers in parentheses) shown in Figure 7 projected into the space of the relative warps. Landmark positions are overlain with one another in the figure to the right of each sequence in order to illustrate better the magnitudes and directions (arrows) or localized shape change.

Figure 5 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 5. Canonical variates ordination of outline semi-landmark data for the gonopod mesarthra for genera as assessed by extended eigenshape analysis. Only the first two of the five possible canonical variate axes are shown. This analysis was based on seven extended eigenshape variables which together accounted for 93.7% of the observed outline shape variation. Cross-tabulation analyses of these results (Table 2) indicated that over 90% of the sample can be assigned to the correct genus.

Figure 4 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 4. Thin-plate spline models of positions along the canonical variate axes (numbers in parentheses) shown in Figure 3 projected into the space of the relative warps. Landmark positions are overlain with one another in the figure to the right of each sequence in order to illustrate better the magnitudes and directions (arrows) or localized shape change. See text for discussion.

Figure 2 in Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha)

Figure 2. Map of the distributions of the different species and subspecies of Allothereua in south-eastern Australia (using only geographical data for the specimens in this analysis).