Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 3 in The killer's toolkit: remarkable adaptations in the canine teeth of mammalian carnivores

Figure 3. Morphospace of all upper and lower canine teeth measured in this study, showing shape variation in robustness, curvature and tip sharpness among families. Principal components analysis (PCA) of the Procrustes coordinates, where principal component 1 (PC1) is correlated with robustness and explains 50.63% of the shape variation present, and PC2 is correlated with curvature and explains 16.91% of the shape variation present. A, H, show the variation present in terrestrial mammalian carnivores across family groups. B–G, I–N, show differences in upper and lower canine teeth for key families, as indicated by minimum convex hulls (upper canine convex hulls are depicted by a lighter shade of the family colour and lower canine convex hulls by a darker shade of the family colour). Family groups represented are as follows: Canidae (B, I), Felidae (C, J), Ursidae (D, K), Mustelidae (E, L), Herpestidae (F, M) and Dasyuridae (G, N).

Figure 2 in The killer's toolkit: remarkable adaptations in the canine teeth of mammalian carnivores

Figure 2. Sharpness measurements (A, B) and landmarking protocol (C) as shown on a jaguar (Panthera onca; NMV R2541) upper canine. The cross-sectional area at 50% of the cusp height is indicated by the yellow line, and the sharpness areas measured are indicated by yellow-outlined areas. The three curves used in three-dimensional geometric morphometric analysis are indicated by red lines, and the landmarks are indicated by dots (blue, fixed landmark; red, sliding semi-landmark).

Figure 5 in The killer's toolkit: remarkable adaptations in the canine teeth of mammalian carnivores

Figure 5. Morphospace of all upper and lower canine teeth measured in this study, showing shape variation in robustness, curvature and tip sharpness among killing techniques. Principal components analysis (PCA) of the Procrustes coordinates, where principal component 1 (PC1) is correlated with robustness and explains 50.63% of the shape variation present, and PC2 is correlated with curvature and explains 16.91% of the shape variation present. A, H, show the variation present in terrestrial mammalian carnivores across killing technique groups. B–G, I–N, show differences in upper and lower canine teeth for key killing techniques, as indicated by minimum convex hulls (upper canine convex hulls are depicted by a lighter shade of the family colour and lower canine convex hulls by a darker shade of the family colour). Killing technique groups represented are as follows: shake toss (B, I), nape throat (C, J), anterior bite (D, K), invertebrate feeder (E, L), head bite (F, M) and rarely (G, N). In O–Q, the lower case letters denote significant differences and are based on phylogenetically corrected analyses (series of phylogenetic ANOVAs, followed by pairwise post hoc testing for significant differences among killing technique groups) of robustness (PC1; O), curvature (PC2; P) and canine tip sharpness (based on standardized crosssectional areas; Fig. 2; Q).

Figure 6 in The killer's toolkit: remarkable adaptations in the canine teeth of mammalian carnivores

Figure 6. Differences between upper and lower canine teeth of the same individual. A, canine tooth length based on a phylogenetic generalized least squares (PGLS) regression of log10(upper and lower canine tooth length). The dashed black line indicated a 1:1 relationship. B, plot of the differences in robustness [principal component 1 (PC1)] and curvature (PC2) between upper and lower canines; differences in PC scores were calculated as: (lower canine PC score) minus (upper canine PC score).

Figure 4 in The killer's toolkit: remarkable adaptations in the canine teeth of mammalian carnivores

Figure 4. Morphospace of all upper and lower canine teeth measured in this study, showing shape variation in robustness, curvature and tip sharpness among diets. Principal components analysis (PCA) of the Procrustes coordinates, where principal component 1 (PC1) is correlated with robustness and explains 50.63% of the shape variation present, and PC2 is correlated with curvature and explains 16.91% of the shape variation present. A, H, show the variation present in terrestrial mammalian carnivores across diet groups. B–G, I–N, show differences in upper and lower canine teeth for key diets, as indicated by minimum convex hulls (upper canine convex hulls are depicted by a lighter shade of the family colour and lower canine convex hulls by a darker shade of the family colour). Diet groups represented are as follows: meat (B, I), meat/bone (C, J), generalist (D, K), invertebrate terrestrial (E, L), carrion/bone (F, M) and plant (G, N). In O–Q, the lower case letters denote significant differences and are based on phylogenetically corrected analyses (series of phylogenetic ANOVAs, followed by pairwise post hoc testing for significant differences among diet groups) of robustness (PC1; O), curvature (PC2; P) and canine tip sharpness (based on standardized cross-sectional areas; Fig. 2; Q).

publicJan 2019View details →

Data from: Human activities influence the occupancy probability of mammalian carnivores in the Brazilian Caatinga

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJun 2019View details →

Data from: Abiotic conditions mediate intraguild interactions between mammalian carnivores

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJun 2019View details →

Data from: Ecological correlates of the spatial co-occurrence of sympatric mammalian carnivores worldwide

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.