Find research datasets worth reusing

FIG. 4. Average T in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 4. Average T concentration for calling and non-calling males of L. grylio across months, where like letters indicate non-significant differences in concentrations and numbers indicate sample size. A significant seasonal decrease was observed in circulating T (F3,31 ¼ 16.187; P, 0.001).

FIG. 5. A in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 5. A linear regression of ambient call rates averaged over one minute and circulating T for individual males. Individual circulating T was positively correlated with the number of conspecific calls recorded during each respective evening of sampling (R2 ¼ 0.285; Ŷ ¼ i 3895.38þ31.08Xi; P, 0.01).

FIG. 7 in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 7. Linear regression of circulating CORT and glucose concentrations in calling and non-calling males shows the amount of glucose in circulation positively correlates with circulating CORT within non-calling males (R2 ¼ 0.665; Ŷ ¼ 31.447 þ 0.098X; P, 0.001). The regression i i line is only indicative of a relationship between CORT and glucose concentrations for non-calling males, as there was no significant relationship between CORT and glucose in calling males (R2 ¼ 0.149; P ¼ 0.305).

FIG. 2 in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 2. (A) A linear regression of SVL and body mass suggests a positive linear allometric relationship between the variables (R2 ¼ 0.21; Ŷ ¼ i 37.64þ1.26Xi; P ¼ 0.02). (B) A boxplot of the residuals from Figure 2A for the ethotypes indicates calling males have significantly higher body masses than what is predicted by the SVL and body mass regression line (t23 ¼ 5.599; P, 0.001). Box size is based on the range of data points falling between the 2nd and 3rd quartiles. Mean is represented by the filled circle and median by the bold line.

FIG. 1 in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 1. Boxplots illustrating average (A) body mass, (B) snout–vent length (SVL), and (C) body condition index (BCI ¼ mass/SVL) for calling (n ¼ 11) and non-calling (n ¼ 14) males. Calling males had significantly higher body masses (A; t23 ¼ 3.725; P ¼.001) and body condition indices (C; t23 ¼ 5.599; P, 0.001) than non-callers. SVL did not significantly differ (n.s.) between the two ethotypes (B; t23 ¼ 0.577; P ¼ 0.570). Box size is based on the range of data points falling between the 2nd and 3rd quartiles. Mean is represented by the filled circle and median by the bold line. Open circles denote potential outliers that were not omitted from statistical analysis.

FIG. 3 in Testosterone and Corticosterone Profiles and Body Condition of Calling and Non-calling Lithobates grylio

FIG. 3. (A) Average circulating T in calling (n ¼ 20) and non-calling males (n ¼ 16). The numbers on the bars indicate sample size. T was significantly higher in callers (t34 ¼ 2.987; P, 0.01). (B) Average circulating CORT in calling (n ¼ 19) and non-calling (n ¼ 17) males, where CORT was elevated in non-callers (t ¼ 2.153; P ¼ 0.0381). Box size is based on the range of data points falling between the 2nd and 3rd quartiles. Mean is represented by 36 the filled circle and median by the bold line. Open circles denote potential outliers that were not omitted from statistical analysis.

Figure 11 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 11. Monthly distribution of body sizes (snout-vent length, SVL) of 126 males, 128 females, 44 juveniles, and 11 metamorphoslings (four legs with a tail) of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA).

Figure 9 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 9. Geographic variation in sexual-size dimorphism (SSD) in the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA) across latitude (a) and longitude (b). We calculated the SSD from counties that had at least two adult specimens of each sex using the Lovich and Gibbons (1992) index. Sample sizes to calculate mean snout-vent length (SVL) of males and females from each county were: Bexar (F = 36, M = 24); Brewster (F = 3, M = 2); Cameron (F = 41, M = 28); Glasscock (F = 4, M = 15); Hidalgo (F = 6, M = 7); Hudspeth (F = 2, M = 2); Irion (F = 5, M = 13); and Uvalde (F = 13, M = 17).

Figure 8 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 8. The relationship between body size (snout-vent length, SVL) and latitude (a) and longitude (b) in the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). We selected the largest SVL from each county that had at least one adult specimen of each sex, which resulted in 30 specimens (15 males and 15 females) from 15 counties: Atascosa, Bexar, Brewster, Cameron, Coke, Concho, Glasscock, Hidalgo, Hudspeth, Irion, Jeff Davis, Kendall, Presidio, Regan and Uvalde.

Figure 10 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 10. Frequency of extensive fat and the presence of food in each of the four ovarian stages of 98 female Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). See text for details on reproductive stages.

Figure 5 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 5. Monthly frequency of extensive fat in the body cavity and the presence of food in the stomach for 104 male (a) and 98 female (b) Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA).

Figure 6 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 6. Monthly ovarian cycle of 101 female Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). See text for details on reproductive stages.

Figure 7 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 7. The relationship between clutch size and body size (snout-vent length, SVL) in 15 female Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). Grey shading indicates a 95% confidence interval.

Figure 4 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 4. Monthly distribution of testis length and width as a percentage of body size in 92 male Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA).

Figure 3 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 3. Distribution of body sizes presented as violin plots for 128 female and 126 male Rio Grande leopard frogs (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). Dashed line indicates the sample mean.

Figure 2 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 2. Monthly incidence of captures for 540 specimens (a) and our sample of 310 specimens (b) of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) from Texas (USA). Specimen records originate from three collections: USNM, UTEP and CM. See text for details on museums.

Figure 1 in Life history of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) in Texas

Figure 1. Map of Texas (USA) showing the 39 counties of origin (in grey) for 310 museum specimens of the Rio Grande leopard frog (Lithobates berlandieri) examined in this study. Bottom left: Picture of L. berlandieri from Jeff Davis County (photo by Frank Portillo. with permission).