Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →

FIGURE 3 in Body mass divergence in sympatric deer species of Pleistocene Crete (Greece)

FIGURE 3. Distribution of the calculated body sizes for each postcranial element. The body mass bins are arranged in 5 kg increments.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →

FIGURE 6 in Body mass divergence in sympatric deer species of Pleistocene Crete (Greece)

FIGURE 6. Body masses of living and fossil deer. The bars represent the body mass of each species. Similar shades of green unify congeneric taxa. Asterisks indicate insular taxa. The Candiacervus body masses are based on postcranial elements. The body masses are plotted along the phylogenetic tree of Cervidae (adapted from Carotenuto et al., 2015). Animal silhouettes from Phylopic.org.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2017View details →

Figure. Distribution of body mass of 22 edible dormouse juveniles at the last weighing before hibernation. in Changes in body mass of postweaning juveniles of the edible dormouse, Glis glis (L.), in captivity

Figure. Distribution of body mass of 22 edible dormouse juveniles at the last weighing before hibernation.

Fig. 11 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 11. Left humerus of giant Mosbach mammoth (MNHM PW1947/23) from Middle Pleistocene, Mosbach, Germany; in lateral view.

Fig. 10 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 10. Different growth curves for Loxodonta africana from average-sized to world record specimens based on isometric growth (red), Laws' (1975) equations for wild population in good conditions up to average size (brown), Homo sapiens (in optimal conditions) allometric growth (grey), and the proposed allometric growth curve for proboscideans in this study (black).

Fig. 6 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 6. Femur length vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data).

Fig. 3 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 3. Humerus lengths vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data). The ratios shaded in grey correspond to the maximal length of the humerus and the white ones to the articular length of the humerus.

Fig. 9 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 9. Plot of height vs. weight for 561 male Homo sapiens in optimal conditions from 170 cm (low average) to 225 cm tall. Average growth curve (red line).

Fig. 2 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 2. Scapula lengths vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data). The ratios shaded in grey correspond to the maximal length of the scapula and the white ones to the articular length of the scapula.

Fig. 5 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 5. Radius length vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data).

Fig. 1 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 1. Reconstruction of the forelimb of the Zhalainuoer III mammoth in anatomical position. The actual shoulder height (black): total height in anatomical position 3690 mm. The height obtained by adding the articular (green): manus (500 mm) + ulna (960 mm) + humerus (1233 mm) + scapula (1075 mm) = 3768 mm. Maximal lengths of different bone elements (red): manus (500 mm) + radius (985 mm) + humerus (1274 mm) + scapula (1115 mm) = 3874 mm. The actual shoulder height can be calculated by multiplying the result by 0.98 in the case of the sum of articular lengths and by 0.95 in the case of maximal lengths.

Fig. 4 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 4. Ulna lengths vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data). The ratios shaded in grey correspond to the maximal length of the humerus, and the white ones to the articular length of the humerus.

Fig. 8 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 8. Fibula length vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data).

Fig. 7 in Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans

Fig. 7. Tibia length vs. skeletal shoulder height ratio of selected proboscideans based on the data collected in this study (Appendix 1, SOM: table 2; AL unpublished data).

Fig. 6 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 6. Bivariate plots representing the Relative Premolar Size (RPS) versus the Relative Blade Length (RBL) for some selected hyaenodonts from the Eocene of Europe.

Fig. 5 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 5. Results of the phylogenetic analysis of Hyaenodonta character-taxon matrix. Results are visualized as an "all compat" (majority rule plus compatible groups) consensus tree. Major named clades recovered or discussed in this analysis and recovered in other analyses are illustrated.

Fig. 7 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 7. Values of the body mass (in ln) of oxyaenids, mesonychids, and hyaenodonts (Hyaenodontoidea, "Sinopinae", "Arfiinae", Hyainailourinae, and Hyaenodontinae) from MP7 to MP19 with particular attention on the new species from Egerkingen γ (Hyaenodontinae + "Arfiinae"). Values from Table 1 (Cartierodon egerkingensis gen. et sp. nov.) and Solé et al. (2015). Egerkingen γ is here represented to be close to the MP13 reference-level. Abbreviations: ELMA, European Land Mammal Ages; ETM-2, Eocene Thermal Maximum 2; MECO, Middle Eocene Climatic Optimum; MDE, Mammal Dispersal Event; MP, Mammal Palaeogene; PETM, Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Fig. 4 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 4. Comparison of the ratio width/length estimated for the lower premolars of Paenoxyaenoides liguritor from late Eocene of France, Quercy Phosphorites (based on Lange-Badré 1979: table 10), Prodissopsalis eocaenicus from Eocene of Switzerland, Geiseltal-Obere Mittelkohle (MP12) and Geiseltal-Untere Mittelkohle (MP13) (based on Lange-Badré and Haubold 1990: table 3); Cartierodon egerkingensis gen. et sp. nov. from Eocene of Switzerland, Egerkingen γ (MP13?); and Cartierodon cf. egerkingensis from Eocene of France, Lissieu (MP14) (based on Lange-Badré 1972: table 1).

Fig. 3 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 3. Comparison of the length of the lower premolars and molars of Cartierodon egerkingensis gen. et sp. nov. from the Eocene of Switzerland, Egerkingen γ (MP13?); Prodissopsalis eocaenicus from the Eocene of Switzerland, Geiseltal-Obere Mittelkohle (MP12) and Geiseltal-Untere Mittelkohle (MP13) (based on Lange-Badré and Haubold 1990: table 3); and Paenoxyaenoides liguritor from the late Eocene of France, Quercy Phosphorites (based on Lange-Badré 1979: table 10).