Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2015View details →

Fig. 3 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 3. The state of Rhabdias hylae larvae in cane toads as a function of days-post treatment. The graph shows larval numbers as the percentage of total larvae that were seen at each time period.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2015View details →

Fig. 5 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 5. Average inflammation severity surrounding Rhabdias hylae larvae and foci (probable larvae being broken down by the host's immune system) within infected cane toads at different numbers of days post-infection. Graph shows average values ±1 S.E.M.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2015View details →

Fig. 8 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 8. Changes through time (days post-infection) on the relative numbers of anurans that were infected with lungworms, and that contained adult versus juvenile stages of the parasites involved. Data are shown for two lungworm species (Rhabdias hylae from native frogs, and Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala from invasive cane toads) and for two types of host: the native frog, Cyclorana australis, and the cane toad, Rhinella marina. The panels show data for (a) C. australis infected with R. pseudosphaerocephala, (b) C. australis infected with R. hylae, (c) cane toads infected with R. pseudosphaerocephala and (d) cane toads infected with R. hylae.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2014View details →

Fig. 2 in A walk on the tundra: Host-parasite interactions in an extreme environment

Fig. 2. Representation of historical drivers for host and parasite distributions across North America during the Last Glacial Maximum and the post-Pleistocene. The map depicts the current geography of the continent showing an overlay of the maximum extent of past glaciations, pathways for expansion and episodic range shifts by ungulates and parasitic nematodes, and the contemporary distributions of caribou of the migratory Dolphin and Union herd, and of the sedentary Kangerlussuaq-Sisimiut and AkiaManiitsoq herds of West Greenland.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2014View details →

Fig. 1 in A walk on the tundra: Host-parasite interactions in an extreme environment

Fig. 1. The parasite fauna of Arctic ungulates has been shaped by historical and contemporary processes. Today, the Arctic today is characterized by extremes in temperature, high seasonality, and low host species diversity and abundance. Rapid climate warming is now a dominant feature that is altering host–parasite interactions in several ways. Temperatures directly affect parasite development and survival in the environment and in ectotherm hosts, and although warming temperatures may initially accelerate transmission, they may quickly exceed the upper thermal tolerance limits for some arctic parasites. Using the Metabolic Theory of Ecology, temperature dependencies can be modeled and generalized to provide broader insights across genera and ecological regions. Climate changes may also alter both host and parasite life-history strategies and phenology, including migration patterns, leading to non-linear changes and tipping points in transmission ecology. Climate warming and associated changes in the cryosphere also alters ecological barriers and corridors, leading to range shifts and new contact zones.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2016View details →

Fig. 6. Ectoparasite-host interactions for A in Ectoparasitism on deep-sea fishes in the western North Atlantic: In situ observations from ROV surveys

Fig. 6. Ectoparasite-host interactions for A) Antimora rostrata, B) Nezumia bairdii, and C) Synaphobranchus spp. across the region for which the presence or absence of ectoparasites could be confirmed. Circle Size = Number of confirmed ectoparasite-host interactions 10 m —2. Square = No ectoparasites observed. Colors denote habitats.

Fig. 3 in Host-parasite interaction and impact of mite infection on mosquito population

Fig. 3. Attachment preferences of mites for mosquito body parts. Bars show ± SE, comparisons are made at 95% confidence using ANOVA. Bars without SE = no variations.

Fig. 4 in Host-parasite interaction and impact of mite infection on mosquito population

Fig. 4. Attachment preference of mites for mosquito sexes. Bars show ± SE, comparisons are made at 95% confidence using ANOVA. Bars without SE = no variations.

Fig. 2 in Host-parasite interaction and impact of mite infection on mosquito population

Fig. 2. Mosquitoes parasitized by mites. Tukey's multiple comparison tests were applied at 95% confidence to compare differences. Bars (±SE) with different letters show significant differences at p ≤ 0.05. Bars without SE = no variations.

Fig. 1 in Host-parasite interaction and impact of mite infection on mosquito population

Fig. 1. (A) Culex pipiens fatigans infected by Arrenurus danbyensis; (B and C) Coquillettidia sp. infected with Leptus sp.; (D) Aedes sp., infected with Arrenurus danbyensis.

Fig. 6 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 6. Marginal effects plot of the gamma generalised linear model of the Zeroaltered gamma model, predicting kidney fat weight as a function of snout-vent length and sex of the host. The colour of the 95% confidence interval corresponds to the sex of the same colour. The plot is based on the most parsimonious model identified after model selection (see Table 3). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

Fig. 3 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 3. Marginal effects plot of a logistic regression model predicting the presence (a) of T. acutum as a function of sex of the host and the presence/absence of S. nasicola, the other parasite, (b) of S. nasciola as a function of sex of the host and (c) of S. nasciola as a function of age of the host and the presence/absence of T. acutum. The 95% confidence intervals are shown as error bars or in grey. The plots is based on the most parsimonious model identified after model selection (see Table 1).

Fig. 5 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 5. Marginal effects plot of the zero hurdle model of the Zero-altered gamma model, predicting the presence of kidney fat as a function of (a) snout-vent length, (b) abundance of T. acutum, (c) abundance of S. nasicola and (d) sex of the host. The 95% confidence intervals are shown in grey. The plot is based on the most parsimonious model identified after model selection (see Table 3).

Fig. 2 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 2. Geographic origin of the skulls of the European polecat (Mustela putorius) analysed in this study. The size of the pie charts is indicative of the number of skulls analysed per locality and the contents of the pie charts are indicative of the infestation status of the corresponding animals. SKJ: Skrjabingylus nasicola, TRO: Troglotrema acutum. The numbers are indicative of the major landscape unit of origin of the samples.

Fig. 1 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 1. Dorsal views of European polecat (Mustela putorius) skulls with or without infestations of the cranial helminths Skrjabingylus nasicola and Troglotrema acutum. (a) Skull of a non-infested one-year-old male. (b) Skull of a threeyear-old male with lesions in the frontal bone resulting from an infestation with T. acutum. (c) Lesions in both postorbital processes and the rear of the frontal bone of a skull of a two-year-old male infested with both parasites. (d) Lesion in the right postorbital process of a skull of a two-year-old male infested with both parasites. (e) Skull of a three-year-old female with lesions in both postorbital processes resulting from an infestation with S. nasicola. (f) Lesions in both postorbital processes and the frontal bone of a skull of a four-year-old female infested with both parasites. (g) Skull of a two-year-old female infested with T. acutum that is characterised by large perforations in the frontal bone and exposure of the frontal sinus and the nasal cavity. (h) Skull of a four-year-old male with perforations in and distensions of the frontal bone resulting from an infestation with T. acutum. (i) Skull of a five-year-old male characterised by multiple perforations and distended and sponge-like appearance of the bones across the whole of the frontal dorsal cranium.

Fig. 4 in Interactions of cranial helminths in the European polecat (Mustela putorius): Implications for host body condition

Fig. 4. Marginal effects plot of logistic regression model predicting the presence of skull damage as a function of sex of the host, the abundance of S. nasciola and a selection of T. acutum abundances. The colour of the 95% confidence interval corresponds to the T. acutum abundance of the same colour. The plot is based on the most parsimonious model identified after model selection (see Table 2). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

Fig. 2 in Host selection and potential predation in the host-parasite interaction between the isopod Tachaea chinensis and freshwater host species

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the experimental system used to test the host selection behavior of the isopods in the single-host treatments. A: Tachaea chinensis at 20-min acclimation. B: T. chinensis after release.

Fig. 3 in Host selection and potential predation in the host-parasite interaction between the isopod Tachaea chinensis and freshwater host species

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of the experimental system used to test the host selection behavior of the isopods in the common vs un-common host treatments. A: Tachaea chinensis at 20-min acclimation. B: T. chinensis after release.

Fig. 7 in Host selection and potential predation in the host-parasite interaction between the isopod Tachaea chinensis and freshwater host species

Fig. 7. Average predation proportion of Tachaea chinensis in each freshwater decapod's species treatment. Fishers exact test, *P <0.05, **P <0.01.

Fig. 9 in Host selection and potential predation in the host-parasite interaction between the isopod Tachaea chinensis and freshwater host species

Fig. 9. Attachments of Tachaea chinensis on various freshwater decapods during this study. The arrows indicate the position of the isopod on the host. (a) T. chinensis on the left-side of the carapace of Palaemon paucidens; (b) T. chinensis on the right-side of the carapace of Procambarus clarkii; (c) T. chinensis attached on the right-side of the carapace of Neocaridina spp.; and (d) T. chinensis initially clinging on the abdomen of Macrobrachium nipponense.