Find research datasets worth reusing

FIG. 8 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 8. — Actinopterygian remains from the Berriasian of Angeac-Charente: A, isolated tooth of Amiiformes indet. (ANG M-39); B, C, isolated tooth of Amiiformes indet. (ANG M-110); D, dentulous vomerine element of Amiiformes indet. (ANG M-56); E-G, isolated tooth of Ionoscopiformes indet. (ANG M-111); H, jaw frag- ment of Actinopterygii indet. (ANG M-38) in lingual view; I, vertebra of Actinopterygii indet. (ANG M-069). Scale bar: A-C, E-H, 500 µm; D, 250 µm; I, 2 mm.

FIG. 21 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 21. — Ornithischian teeth from Angeac-Charente: A, B, Heterodontosaurid premaxillary tooth of Echinodon sp. (ANG15-R671) in lingual (A) and labial (B) views; C, D, Heterodontosaurid premaxillary tooth of Echinodon sp. (ANG14-3368) in lingual (C) and labial (D) views; E, F, hypsilophodontid premaxillary tooth (ANG M-119) in lingual (E) and labial (F) views; G, H, hypsilophodontid dentary tooth (ANG15-R927) in labial (G) and lingual (H) views; I-L, hypsilophodontid maxillary tooth (ANG 10-153) in lingual (I), distal (J), labial (K) and mesial (L) views. Scale bars: A-D, I-L, 5 mm; E-H, 3 mm.

FIG. 25 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 25. — Sauropod embryonic or hatchling teeth from Angeac-Charente: A, tooth of Macronaria indet. (ANGM-18) in lingual view; B, C, tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANGM-118) in labial (B) and lingual (C) views. Scale bar: 500 µm.

FIG. 20 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 20. — Pterosaur teeth from Angeac-Charente: A, Pterodactyloidea indet. A (ANG M-24) in labial view; B, Pterodactyloidea indet. A (ANG M-10) in lingual view; C, D, Pterodactyloidea indet. A, (ANG M-42) in lingual (C) and mesial (D) views; E, F, Pterodactyloidea indet. B, (ANG M-43) in lingual (E) and mesial (F) views; G, H, Pterodactyloidea indet. B, (ANG M-112) in lingual (G) and mesial (H) views; I, Pterodactyloidea indet. B, (ANG M-40) in lingual view; J, K, Pterosauria indet. (ANG M-41) in labial (J) and distal (K) views; L, M, Pterosauria indet. (ANG M-113) in lingual (L) and mesial (M) views. Scale bar: 500 µm.

FIG. 24 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 24. — Sauropod teeth from Angeac-Charente: A-D, posterior left maxillary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG11-837) in labial (A), mesial (B), lingual (C) and distal (D) views; E-H, left maxillary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG15-R905) in labial (E), mesial (F), lingual (G) and distal (H) views; I-L, left maxillary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG13-2330) in labial (I), mesial (J), lingual (K) and distal (L) views; M-P, left premaxillary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG14-R289) in labial (M), mesial (N), lingual (O) and distal (P) views; Q-T, dentary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG14-3495) in labial (Q), mesial (R), lingual (S) and distal (T) views; U-X, left dentary tooth of Turiasauria indet. (ANG14- R435) in labial (U), mesial (V), lingual (W) and distal (X) views; Y-AA, maxillary tooth of Macronaria indet. (ANG R-1732) in labial (Y), distal (Z) and lingual (AA) views. Scale bar: A-X, 2 cm; Y-AA, 1 cm.

FIG. 30 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 30. — Ornithomimosaur remains from Angeac-Charente: A-C, proximal end of right tibia (ANG12-1893) in posterior (A), anterior (B) and lateral (C) views; D, distal end of right tibia (ANG10-56) in anterior view; E, proximal end of right fibula (ANG11-696) in medial view; F-H, Left astragalus and calcaneum (ANG12- 1803) in anterior (F), posterior (G) and dorsal (H) views. Scale bar: A-E, 4 cm; F-H, 2 cm.

FIG. 26 in Vertebrate paleobiodiversity of the Early Cretaceous (Berriasian) Angeac-Charente Lagerstätte (southwestern France): implications for continental faunal turnover at the J/K boundary

FIG. 26. — Sauropod caudal vertebrae from Angeac-Charente: A-C, anterior caudal vertebra of Turiasauria indet. (ANG15-R679) in left lateral (A), posterior (B) and dorsal (C) views; D-F, anterior caudal vertebra of Turiasauria indet. (ANG15-R698) in right lateral (D), posterior (E) and dorsal (F) views; G-I, anterior caudal vertebra of Turiasauria indet. (ANG15-R921) in right lateral (G), posterior (H) and dorsal (I) views; J-L, middle caudal vertebra of Turiasauria indet. (ANG15-R652) in right lateral (J), posterior (K) and dorsal (L) views. Scale bar: 10 cm.

Fig. 9. N-dimensional morphospace for the 28 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 9. N-dimensional morphospace for the 28 species of Loimia Malmgren, 1866, calculated for the larger (body length>100 mm, grey) and smaller (body length <100 mm, pink) species separately; red dots = larger and smaller individuals of Loimia davidi sp. nov.; large points with white borders = centroids of each hypervolume; hypervolume shape and boundaries defined by 5000 random points; table = summary of hypervolume richness, dispersion and evenness.

Fig. 10 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 10. Original drawing of Terebella gigantea Montagu, 1819 by Eliza Dorville, included in Montagu (1819: pl. xi) and downloaded at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/758907 [accessed 12 Dec. 2018].

Fig. 5 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 5. Loimia davidi sp. nov.A–C, G–H. Paratype CEAB A.P. 935B.D–F. Paratype MNCN 16.01/19140. A. Anterior fragment in ventral view. B. Anterior end in ventral view. C. Anterior end in lateral view. D. Anterior end in dorsal view. E. Anterior end in frontal view. F. Anterior end in lateral view, showing ocular spots. G. Posterior end in dorsal view. H. Detail of the pygidial papillae. Abbreviations: ll = lower lip; ll1 = first pair of lateral lappets; ll2 = second pair of lateral lappets; tm = tentacular membrane; ul =

Fig. 8 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 8. Phylogenetic reconstruction after Maximum Likelihood analyses of the cox1 fragment. Bootstrap

Fig. 4 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 4. Schematic drawings of the thoracic uncini. A. Loimia davidi sp. nov., holotype (CEAB A.P. 935A). B. L. ramzega Lavesque, Bonifácio, Londoño-Mesa, Le Garrec & Grall, 2017, redrawn after Lavesque et al. (2017). C. L. davidi sp. nov., paratype (CEAB A.P. 935B). D. L. salazari LondoñoMesa & Carrera-Parra, 2005, redrawn after Londoño-Mesa & Carrera-Parra (2005). E. L. minuta Treadwell, 1929 from Florida (USA), redrawn after Londoño-Mesa (2009). F. L. minuta from the Mexican Caribbean, redrawn after Londoño-Mesa & Carrera-Parra (2005). G. L. medusa (Savigny, 1822) from the Persian Gulf, redrawn after Hutchings & Glasby (1995). H. L. medusa from the Mexican

Fig. 7 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 7. Loimia gigantea (Montagu, 1819), ARC-Loimia-IND2. A. Dorsolateral section of thoracic neuropodium 12, showing the uncinal growing zone (black arrow). B. View of entire abdominal neuropodium 4. C. Detail of the uncinal arrangement of abdominal neuropodium 4. D. Uncinus from

Fig. 2 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 2. Loimia davidi sp. nov., holotype (CEAB A.P. 935A), preserved. A. Anterior region, ventral view. B. Detail of anterior end, ventral view. C. Detail of anterior end, lateral view. D. Detail of anterior end, frontal view. E. Entire view of the regenerating posterior end. F. Detail of the pygidium showing the anal papillae. Abbreviations: ul = upper lip; ll = lower lip; ll1 = first pair of lateral lappets; ll2 = second

Fig. 6 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 6. Loimia davidi sp. nov., paratype MNCN 16.01/19140. A. Alimbate capillary chaeta. B. Unilimbate capillary chaeta. C. Position of the thoracic uncini from segment 10. D. Single thoracic uncinus from

Fig. 3 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 3. Loimia davidi sp. nov., holotype (CEAB A.P. 935A), preserved. A–C. Chaetae from chaetiger 11. A. Alimbate capillary chaeta. B. Unilimbate capillary chaeta. C. Bilimbate capillary chaeta. — D–G. Chaetiger 12. D. Ventro-lateral section of thoracic parapodium. E. Uncini of the same, arranged in two rows, back to back. F. Single thoracic uncinus of the same. G. Detail of the uncinal growing region of the same. — H–I. Segment 25. H. Abdominal parapodium (arrow pointing to uncinal growing zone).

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2022View details →

Interactions between land use, taxonomic group and aspects and levels of diversity in a Brazilian savanna: implications for the use of bioindicators

The study was carried out in the Triângulo Mineiro region of Minas Gerais state, covering the municipalities of Uberlândia, Monte Alegre, and Nova Ponte, in south-eastern Brazil. We conducted the study in five habitat types, comprising two natural habitats (savanna and semideciduous forest), and three anthropogenic land-uses: cattle pastures (planted with introduced Urochloa grasses), soy fields (where sampling took place when plants were at the vegetative phase) and  plantations of Eucalyptus trees (≥ 6 yrs old). Ants and beetles were sampled at the same 40 sites (8 replicates per land use), and birds at 30 sites (6 replicates per land use), only some of which were the same as for ants and beetles.  Ants that forage on ground and dung beetles were sampled using pitfall traps. Sampling took place in November and December (early wet season) 2017. In each site, eight traps were installed with traps located at the corners of a 100×100 m square, and at the mid-points of the sides of the square, keeping a minimum distance of 50 m between any two traps. All traps were at least 75 m distant from the edge of the respective land use. Traps were plastic containers (19 cm diam, 11 cm height) filled with 150 ml of a saline solution and detergent. Each trap had a wire hoop suspended over it to accommodate a small (4 cm diam, 4 cm height) plastic container for holding a dung bait. We used a 20 cm diameter plastic cover supported by three sticks to protect traps from rain. Traps were baited with ~40 g of a mixture of pig dung and human faeces (4:1 proportion) and left in the field for 48-hrs. Birds were surveyed using 20-min point counts in the rainy season (November 2017 to March 2018). At each site, five sampling points were established, 200 m distant from each other. All surveys started at sunrise (about 6 a.m.), and all species seen or heard from each point were recorded. Each sampling site was re-surveyed in the following dry season (April to October to 2018); however, for logistic reasons we were unable to re-survey the plantation sites.  Ant and dung beetle species were identified to species or morphospecies by comparison with named species in the Zoological Collection at the Federal University of Uberlândia (UFU) or with specialist assistance from Fernando Vaz de Mello, respectively. Vouchers of all species have been deposited at UFU´s Zoological Collection. Birds were identified directly in the field and species names follow the checklist produced by the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee. We classified species functionally based on primary diet, foraging location and/or behaviour, and body size, as these traits are known to be sensitive to habitat modifications and of importance for the ecosystem services provided by ants, birds, and dung beetles. Ant species were classified according to their diet as predators, fungivores, nectarivores or omnivores, and according to their main foraging location as arboreal, epigeal (aboveground) or hypogeal (in soil and litter), based on information provided by Brown (2000) and Silvestre et al. (2003). Species were further classified into four body size categories based on our measurements of body length (Weber´s length; Brown, 1953) of 1-5 ant workers per species: 1 (< 0.75 mm), 2 (0.75-1.74 mm), 3 (1.75-3 mm), and 4 (> 3 mm). Dung beetles were classified as coprophagous, necrophagous, frugivore, generalist or predator, according to the type of food resource each species is most often attracted to. This classification was based on over 30 years of field experience throughout Brazil by one of the authors of this study (FVM), who used multiple types of baits (e.g., carcasses, fruits, faeces) to attract and collect dung beetles, and/or on literature information. Although information about the “attractiveness” of different types of baits to dung beetles (used here as a proxy for primary diet) was not obtained directly in the sites of the present study, it is importat to note that we are not aware of any evidence of geographic or habitat variation in bait preference among tropical species of dung beetles. Dung beetles were also classified according to their foraging behaviour as: telecoprid (species that make a dung ball and roll it away for burial), paracoprid (species that store dung in tunnels dug immediately below the dung source), or endocoprid (species living within or immediately below the dung, without moving it). For this, we used the database of the Zoological Collection of the Federal University of Mato Grosso (UFMT). Whenever sample sizes allowed, 30 individuals from each species were weighed for determination of body mass (following Almeida et al., 2011), and species were classified according to the following ordinal scale: 1 (< 10 mg); 2 (10-99 mg); 3 (100-300 mg); and 4 (>300 mg). Each bird species was classified according to its primary diet as frugivores granivore, insectivore, nectarivore, carnivore, detritivore, or omnivore, and according to the main foraging location as ground, understory/shrubby vegetation, or tree canopy, based on the Wilman et al. (2014) database and our own field experience. Using these same sources, we obtained information on mean body weights of each species and assigned them to one of five size categories: 1- (<15 g); 2 (15-39 g); 3 (40-199 g); 4 (200-599 g); and 5 (> 600 g).

Fig. 5 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 4 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes

Fig. 2 in Taxonomic implications of describing a new species of Loimia (Annelida, Terebellidae) with two size-dependent morphotypes