Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

Find research datasets worth reusing

Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.

43

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.9.0

Reset

Dataset results

43 results for “ant-plant”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
dryad32/100

Data from: Polygyny does not explain the superior competitive ability of dominant ant associates in the African ant-plant, Acacia (Vachellia) drepanolobium

1. The Acacia drepanolobium (also known as Vachellia drepanolobium) ant-plant symbiosis is considered a classic case of species coexistence, in which four species of tree-defending ants compete for nesting space in a single host tree species. Coexistence in this system has been explained by trade-offs in the ability of the ant associates to compete with each other for occupied trees versus the ability to colonize unoccupied trees. 2. We seek to understand the proximal reasons for how and why the ant species vary in competitive or colonizing abilities, which are largely unknown. 3. In this study, we use RADseq derived SNPs to identify relatedness of workers in colonies to test the hypothesis that competitively dominant ants reach large colony sizes due to polygyny, i.e., the presence of multiple egg-laying queens in a single colony. 4. We find that variation in polygyny is not associated with competitive ability; in fact, the most dominant species, unexpectedly, showed little evidence of polygyny. We also use these markers to investigate variation in mating behavior among the ant species, and find that different species vary in the number of males fathering the offspring of each queen. Finally, we show that the nature of polygyny varies between the two commonly polygynous species, Crematogaster mimosae and Tetraponera penzigi: in C. mimosae, queens in the same colony are often related, while this is not the case for T. penzigi. 5. These results shed light on factors influencing the evolution of species coexistence in an ant-plant mutualism, as well as demonstrating the effectiveness of RADseq-derived SNPs for parentage analysis.

opencc-zeroDec 2017View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Resilient networks of ant-plant mutualists in Amazonian forest fragments

BACKGROUND: The organization of networks of interacting species, such as plants and animals engaged in mutualisms, strongly influences the ecology and evolution of partner communities. Habitat fragmentation is a globally pervasive form of spatial heterogeneity that could profoundly impact the structure of mutualist networks. This is particularly true for biodiversity-rich tropical ecosystems, where the majority of plant species depend on mutualisms with animals and it is thought that changes in the structure of mutualist networks could lead to cascades of extinctions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We evaluated effects of fragmentation on mutualistic networks by calculating metrics of network structure for ant-plant networks in continuous Amazonian forests with those in forest fragments. We hypothesized that networks in fragments would have fewer species and higher connectance, but equal nestedness and resilience compared to forest networks. Only one of the nine metrics we compared differed between continuous forest and forest fragments, indicating that networks were resistant to the biotic and abiotic changes that accompany fragmentation. This is partially the result of the loss of only specialist species with one connection that were lost in forest fragments. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We found that the networks of ant-plant mutualists in twenty-five year old fragments are similar to those in continuous forest, suggesting these interactions are resistant to the detrimental changes associated with habitat fragmentation, at least in landscapes that are a mosaic of fragments, regenerating forests, and pastures. However, ant-plant mutualistic networks may have several properties that may promote their persistence in fragmented landscapes. Proactive identification of key mutualist partners may be necessary to focus conservation efforts on the interactions that insure the integrity of network structure and the ecosystems services networks provide.

opencc-zeroDec 2011View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Ants at plant wounds – a little-known trophic interaction with evolutionary implications for ant-plant interactions

Extrafloral nectaries (EFNs) allow plants to engage in mutualisms with ants preventing herbivory in exchange for food. EFNs occur scattered through the plant phylogeny and likely evolved independently from herbivore-created wounds subsequently visited by ants collecting leaked sap. Records of wound-feeding ants are, however, anecdotal. By surveying 38,000 trees from 40 species, we conduct the first quantitative ecological study of this overlooked behavior. Ant-wound interactions were widespread (0.5% of tree individuals) and occurred on 23 tree species. Interaction networks were opportunistic, closely resembling ant-EFNs networks. Fagaceae, a family lacking EFNs, were strongly overrepresented. For Fagaceae, ant occurrence at wounds correlated with species-level leaf damage, potentially indicating that wounds may attract mutualistic ants, supporting the hypothesis of ant-tended wounds as precursors of ant-EFNs mutualisms. Given the commonness of herbivore wounds, wound sap as steadily available food source might furthermore help to explain the overwhelming abundance of ants in (sub)tropical forest canopies.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Harnessing ant defence at fruits reduces bruchid seed predation in a symbiotic ant-plant mutualism

In horizontally transmitted mutualisms, mutualists disperse separately and reassemble in each generation with partners genetically unrelated to those in the previous generation. Because of this, there should be no selection on either partner to enhance the other's reproductive output directly. In symbiotic ant–plant mutualisms, myrmecophytic plants host defensive ant colonies, and ants defend the plants from herbivores. Plants and ants disperse separately, and, although ant defence can indirectly increase plant reproduction by reducing folivory, it is unclear whether ants can also directly increase plant reproduction by defending seeds. The neotropical tree Cordia alliodora hosts colonies of Azteca pittieri ants. The trees produce domatia where ants nest at stem nodes and also at the node between the peduncle and the rachides of the infloresence. Unlike the stem domatia, these reproductive domatia senesce after the tree fruits each year. In this study, I show that the tree's resident ant colony moves into these ephemeral reproductive domatia, where they tend honeydew-producing scale insects and patrol the nearby developing fruits. The presence of ants significantly reduced pre-dispersal seed predation by Amblycerus bruchid beetles, thereby directly increasing plant reproductive output.

opencc-zeroDec 2013View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Limited gene dispersal and spatial genetic structure as stabilizing factors in an ant-plant mutualism

Comparative studies of the population genetics of closely associated species are necessary to properly understand the evolution of these relationships because gene flow between populations affects the partners' evolutionary potential at the local scale. As a consequence (at least for antagonistic interactions), asymmetries in the strength of the genetic structures of the partner populations can result in one partner having a co-evolutionary advantage. Here, we assess the population genetic structure of partners engaged in a species-specific and obligatory mutualism: the Neotropical ant-plant, Hirtella physophora, and its ant associate, Allomerus decemarticulatus. Although the ant cannot complete its life cycle elsewhere than on H. physophora and the plant cannot live for long without the protection provided by A. decemarticulatus, these species also have antagonistic interactions: the ants have been shown to benefit from castrating their host plant and the plant is able to retaliate against too virulent ant colonies. We found similar short dispersal distances for both partners, resulting in the local transmission of the association and, thus, inbred populations in which too virulent castrating ants face the risk of local extinction due to the absence of H. physophora offspring. On the other hand, we show that the plant populations probably experienced greater gene flow than did the ant populations, thus enhancing the evolutionary potential of the plants. We conclude that such levels of spatial structure in the partners' populations can increase the stability of the mutualistic relationship. Indeed, the local transmission of the association enables partial alignments of the partners' interests, and population connectivity allows the plant retaliation mechanisms to be locally adapted to the castration behaviour of their symbionts.

opencc-zeroDec 2015View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: The direct and ecological costs of an ant-plant symbiosis

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicFeb 2012View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Limited gene dispersal and spatial genetic structure as stabilizing factors in an ant-plant mutualism

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicSep 2016View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Harnessing ant defence at fruits reduces bruchid seed predation in a symbiotic ant-plant mutualism

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicApr 2014View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Phylogeny of Cecropieae (Urticaceae) and the evolution of an ant-plant mutualism

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicNov 2016View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Polygyny does not explain the superior competitive ability of dominant ant associates in the African ant-plant, Acacia (Vachellia) drepanolobium

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicDec 2018View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: The influence of spatial sampling scales on ant-plant interaction network architecture

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicMar 2019View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Ants at plant wounds – a little-known trophic interaction with evolutionary implications for ant-plant interactions

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicMar 2017View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Resilient networks of ant-plant mutualists in Amazonian forest fragments

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicAug 2012View details →
zenodo28/100

The impacts of tropical forest degradation and fragmentation on ant-plant mutualisms, and consequences for plant community dynamics

<b>Description: </b><p>Myrmecophyte interactions in differing habitats</p><p><b>Project: </b>This dataset was collected as part of the following SAFE research project: <a href="https://www.safeproject.net/projects/project_view/119"><b>The impacts of tropical forest degradation and fragmentation on ant-plant mutualisms, and consequences for plant community dynamics</b></a></p><p><b>Funding: </b>These data were collected as part of research funded by: </p><ul><li>GACR (National, 16-09427S, <a href="NA">NA</a>)</li></ul><p>This dataset is released under the CC-BY 4.0 licence, requiring that you cite the dataset in any outputs, but has the additional condition that you acknowledge the contribution of these funders in any outputs.</p><p></p><p><b>Permits: </b>These data were collected under permit from the following authorities:</p><ul><li>Sabah Biodiversity Council (Research licence NA)</li></ul><p></p><p><b>XML metadata: </b>GEMINI compliant metadata for this dataset is available <a href="https://www.safeproject.net/datasets/xml_metadata?id=3979296">here</a></p><p><b>Files: </b>This consists of 1 file: M.pearsonii_habitat_comparison_OP_Matrix_MH_August.xlsx</p><p><b>M.pearsonii_habitat_comparison_OP_Matrix_MH_August.xlsx</b></p><p>This file contains dataset metadata and 3 data tables:</p><ol><li><p><b>Branch data</b> (described in worksheet Branch_data)</p><p>Description: Branch data</p><p>Number of fields: 86</p><p>Number of data rows: 611</p><p>Fields: </p><ul><li><b>Tree_code</b>: Tree ID (Field type: location)</li><li><b>Branch_code</b>: Branch code (Field type: id)</li><li><b>Coccids</b>: Number of coccids on br0nches (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood1</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants1</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates1</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen1</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood2</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants2</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates2</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen2</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood4</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants4</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates4</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen4</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood5</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants5</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates5</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen5</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood6</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants6</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates6</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen6</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood7</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants_7</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates7</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen7</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood8</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants8</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates8</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen8</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood9</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants9</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates9</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen9</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood10</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants10</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates10</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen10</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood11</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants11</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates11</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen11</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood12</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants12</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates12</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen12</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood13</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants13</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates13</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen13</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood14</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants14</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates14</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen14</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood15</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants15</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates15</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen15</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood16</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants16</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates16</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen16</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood17</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants17</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates17</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen17</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood18</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants18</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates18</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen18</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood19</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants19</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates19</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen19</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood20</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants20</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates20</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen20</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Brood21</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ants21</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Allates21</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>queen21</b>: Number of ants on branch (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>damaged_queens</b>: Number of damaged ants (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>wasp</b>: Number of wasps (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Notes</b>: Comments (Field type: comments)</li></ul></li><li><p><b>Tree data</b> (described in worksheet Tree_data)</p><p>Description: Tree data, including soil nutrient profiles</p><p>Number of fields: 23</p><p>Number of data rows: 84</p><p>Fields: </p><ul><li><b>Date</b>: Date of sampling (Field type: date)</li><li><b>Tree</b>: Tree ID (Field type: id)</li><li><b>Tree_code</b>: Tree ID code (Field type: location)</li><li><b>Habitat</b>: Habitat type (Field type: categorical)</li><li><b>Number_ants_first_5_leaves</b>: Number of ants on first 5 leaves (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>DBH</b>: Diametre at breast height (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Height</b>: Tree height (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>N</b>: Canopy cover (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>S</b>: Canopy cover (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>E</b>: Canopy cover (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>W</b>: Canopy cover (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Canopy_cover</b>: Canopy cover (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Leaf_biomass</b>: Leaf biomass (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Total_branches</b>: Total number of branches (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Phosphate</b>: Leaf phosphates (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Nitrate</b>: Leaf nitrates (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Total_wet_weight</b>: Total soil wet weight (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Wet_weight_sample</b>: Soil wet weight (sample) (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Dry_weight_sample</b>: Soil dry weight (sample) (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>pH</b>: Leaf pH (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Dry_Wet_ratio</b>: Soil wet: dry weight ratio (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Total_dry_weight</b>: Total soildry weight (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Density</b>: Soil density (Field type: numeric trait)</li></ul></li><li><p><b>All M.Pearsonii-Herbivory data</b> (described in worksheet All_Pearsonii-Herbivory_data)</p><p>Description: Summarised version of data used for analysis</p><p>Number of fields: 17</p><p>Number of data rows: 86</p><p>Fields: </p><ul><li><b>Date</b>: Date the measurements were taken (Field type: date)</li><li><b>Tree</b>: Tree tag (Field type: id)</li><li><b>Tree_Code</b>: Tree code (Field type: id)</li><li><b>Habitat</b>: Habitat type (Field type: categorical)</li><li><b>Tree_Height_Rank</b>: Tree height rank (Field type: categorical)</li><li><b>Corrected_Leaf_Biomass</b>: Corrected leaf biomass (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Herbivory</b>: Leaf herbivory (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Coccids</b>: Coccid abundance (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ant_abundance</b>: Ant abundance (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Ant_ranked_abundance</b>: Ant coverage ranked (Field type: categorical)</li><li><b>Brood</b>: Ant abundance (Field type: numeric interaction)</li><li><b>Biomass_height_ratio</b>: Tree biomass to height ratio (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Coccid_ant_ratio</b>: Coccid to ant ratio (Field type: numeric)</li><li><b>Brood_ant_ratio</b>: Brood to ant ratio (Field type: numeric trait)</li><li><b>Attendence_ratio</b>: Attendence ratio (Field type: numeric)</li><li><b>DomTaxa</b>: Taxa record for the dominant species (Field type: taxa)</li><li><b>Dominant_species</b>: Is there a dominant species? (Field type: categorical interaction)</li></ul></li></ol><p><b>Date range: </b>2016-11-19 to 2017-11-24</p><p><b>Latitudinal extent: </b>4.5000 to 5.0700</p><p><b>Longitudinal extent: </b>116.7500 to 117.8200</p><p><b>Taxonomic coverage: </b><br> All taxon names are validated against the GBIF backbone taxonomy. If a dataset uses a synonym, the accepted usage is shown followed by the dataset usage in brackets. Taxa that cannot be validated, including new species and other unknown taxa, morphospecies, functional groups and taxonomic levels not used in the GBIF backbone are shown in square brackets.</p><div>&ensp;-&ensp; Plantae <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Tracheophyta <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Magnoliopsida <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Malpighiales <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Euphorbiaceae <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; <i>Macaranga</i> <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; <i>Macaranga pearsonii</i> <br>&ensp;-&ensp; Animalia <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Arthropoda <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Insecta <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Hymenoptera <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Formicidae <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.1 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.2 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.4 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.5 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.6 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.7 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.8 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.9 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.10 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.11 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.12 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.13 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.14 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.15 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.16 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.17 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.18 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.19 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.20 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; sp.21 <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Hemiptera <br>&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp;&ensp;-&ensp; Coccidae <br></div><p></p>

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2019View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: Ant-plant interactions evolved through increasing interdependence

Ant–plant interactions are diverse and abundant and include classic models in the study of mutualism and other biotic interactions. By estimating a time-scaled phylogeny of more than 1,700 ant species and a time-scaled phylogeny of more than 10,000 plant genera, we infer when and how interactions between ants and plants evolved and assess their macroevolutionary consequences. We estimate that ant–plant interactions originated in the Mesozoic, when predatory, ground-inhabiting ants first began foraging arboreally. This served as an evolutionary precursor to the use of plant-derived food sources, a dietary transition that likely preceded the evolution of extrafloral nectaries and elaiosomes. Transitions to a strict, plant-derived diet occurred in the Cenozoic, and optimal models of shifts between strict predation and herbivory include omnivory as an intermediate step. Arboreal nesting largely evolved from arboreally foraging lineages relying on a partially or entirely plant-based diet, and was initiated in the Mesozoic, preceding the evolution of domatia. Previous work has suggested enhanced diversification in plants with specialized ant-associated traits, but it appears that for ants, living and feeding on plants does not affect ant diversification. Together, the evidence suggests that ants and plants increasingly relied on one another and incrementally evolved more intricate associations with different macroevolutionary consequences as angiosperms increased their ecological dominance.

opencc-zeroDec 2017View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: The evolution of communication in two ant-plant mutualisms

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicMay 2011View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: Ant-plant interactions evolved through increasing interdependence

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicDec 2018View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: Comparative genomics reveals convergent rates of evolution in ant-plant mutualisms

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJul 2017View details →
dryad28/100

Data from: Foliar uptake of nitrogen from ant faecal droplets: an overlooked service to ant-plants

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJul 2018View details →
dryad24/100

Data from: Ant-plant mutualism: a dietary by-product of a tropical ant's macronutrient requirements

Many arboreal ants depend on myrmecophytic plants for both food and shelter; in return, these ants defend their host plants against herbivores, which are often insects. Ant-plant and other mutualisms do not necessarily involve the exchange of costly rewards or services; they may instead result from by-product benefits, or positive outcomes that do not entail a cost for one or both partners. Here, we examined whether the plant-ant Allomerus octoarticulatus pays a short-term cost to defend their host plants against herbivores, or whether plant defense is a by-product benefit of ant foraging for insect prey. Because the food offered by ant-plants is usually nitrogen-poor, arboreal ants may balance their diets by consuming insect prey or associating with microbial symbionts to acquire nitrogen, potentially shifting the costs and benefits of plant defense for the ant partner. To determine the effect of ant diet on an ant-plant mutualism, we compared the behavior, morphology, fitness, stable isotope signatures, and gaster microbiomes of A. octoarticulatus ants nesting in Cordia nodosa trees maintained for nearly a year with or without insect herbivores. At the end of the experiment, ants from herbivore exclosures preferred protein-rich baits more than ants in the control (i.e., herbivores-present) treatment. Furthermore, workers in the control treatment were heavier than in the herbivore-exclusion treatment, and worker mass predicted reproductive output, suggesting that foraging for insect prey directly increased ant colony fitness. The gaster microbiome of ants was not significantly affected by the herbivore exclusion treatment. We conclude that the defensive behavior of some phytoecious ants is a by-product of their need for external protein sources; thus, the consumption of insect herbivores by ants benefits both the ant colony and the host plant.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated datasets

Allen Brain Atlas

Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)

ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

DANDI Archive for NWB datasets

DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

International Brain Laboratory public data

The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

OpenNeuro

OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record