Find research datasets worth reusing

Figures 34-37. 34 in Monographic revision of the genus Aegidinus Arrow (1904) and generic phylogeny of the world Orphninae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Orphninae).

Figures 34-37. 34) Aegidium sp. male dorsal view. 35) Aegidium sp. female, dorsal view. 36) Aegidiellus alatus male, dorsal view. 37) Aegidiellus alatus female, dorsal view.

Figures 22-28 in Monographic revision of the genus Aegidinus Arrow (1904) and generic phylogeny of the world Orphninae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Orphninae).

Figures 22-28. All scale bars = 1 mm. 22) Abdomen of Aegidinus sp. Arrows indicate stridulatory combs. 23) Completely sclerotized phallobase of Aegidinus howdenorum (ventral view). 24) Incompletely sclerozited phallobase of Hybalus sp. (ventral view). 25) Spiculum gastrale (Orphnus sp.) harp- shaped. 26) Spiculum gastrale (Chaetonyx robustus) wishbone- shaped. 27) Spiculum gastrale (Aegidium sp.) t- shaped. 28) Madecorphnus sp. phallobase (dorsal view). Arrow indicates bulge.

Figure 15-21 in Monographic revision of the genus Aegidinus Arrow (1904) and generic phylogeny of the world Orphninae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Orphninae).

Figure 15-21. Scale bar = 1 mm. 15) Prefemoral cleaning brush composed of a line of setae (Madecorphnus sp.). 16) Prefemoral cleaning brush composed of a patch of setae (Aegidium sp.). 17) Prefemoral cleaning brush composed of a line and a patch of setae (Orphnus sp.). 18) Mesofemur without ridge along posterior edge (Aegidiellus alatus). 19) Mesofemur with ridge along posterior edge; surface posterior to ridge minutely roughened (Aegidium sp.). Arrow indicates position of ridge. 20) Ventral view of Brenskea coronata. a) Mesocoxae contiguous. b) Mesometasternum unsutured. 21) Ventral view of Orphnus sp. a) Mesocoxae separated. b) Meso- metasternum sutured.

Figure 31-33. Paraegidium costalimai. 31 in Monographic revision of the genus Aegidinus Arrow (1904) and generic phylogeny of the world Orphninae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Orphninae).

Figure 31-33. Paraegidium costalimai. 31) Clypeus (frontal view). 32) Dorsal habitus of female. Note vermiform punctures on pronotum and U- shaped punctures on elytra. 33) Dorsal habitus of male.

Figure 10-14. 10 in Monographic revision of the genus Aegidinus Arrow (1904) and generic phylogeny of the world Orphninae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Orphninae).

Figure 10-14. 10) Mandible of Aegidinus sp. Arrow indicates single, external, lateral lobe. Scale bar = 100 m. 11) Mandible of Aclopus sp. Scale bar = 1 mm. 12) Mandible of Aegidium sp. a) Mesal mandibular brush. b) Mandibular prostheca. Scale bar = 1 mm. 13) Galea of Paraegidium sp. Arrow indicates trapezoidal distagalea. 14) Protibia of Aegidinus sp. Arrow indicates apical denticle. Scale bar = 1 mm.

Fig. 121 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 121. Phylogeny of bee families overlaid on the geological column. The shaded area indicates the period of angiosperm diversification. Although flowering plants originated earlier than the shaded area indicates, the geological record does not show a dramatic increase in angiosperm diversity until when first indicated in the figure.

Fig. 120 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 120. Hypothesis of relationship for the corbiculate bees as envisioned by Cockerell (reproduced from Cockerell, 1908b). He did not include tribe Euglossini and the ages he used for particular deposits are now understood to be as follows: Calyptapis [considered as a junior subjective synonym of Bombus by Zeuner and Manning (1976)] is from early Oligocene deposits of Florissant, while the genera Sophrobombus, Chalcobombus, Protobombus, and Electrapis, all in Baltic amber, are middle Eocene in age. Most species of Synapis (a subgenus of Apis) are from Oligocene strata but at least two species are from early Miocene deposits (Engel, 1999c, unpubl. data). Meliponorytes (described by Tosi, 1896) is either a true fossil in Miocene amber from Sicily or perhaps misidentified in African copal and congeneric with living meliponines (see appendix 1).

Fig. 118 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 118. Phylogeny of corbiculate Apinae based on cladistic analysis of data presented in table 15 (Length 65, CI 0.81, RI 0.93). Black dots are unreversed changes; white dots homoplastic character transitions. The character number is indicated above the branch and the state change is indicated below. Anthophora, Centris, and Xylocopa are the outgroups.

Fig. 119 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 119. Distribution of social ethotypes among the corbiculate apines as well as fossils exhibiting worker morphologies. The euglossine genera (Euglossa, Eufriesea, and Eulaema) are generally communal or solitary, while the outgroups (not depicted here) are solitary. Extinct genera are italicized.

Fig. 117 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 117. Phylogeny of Xylocopinae based on cladistic analysis of data presented in table 13 (Length 16, CI 1.00, RI 1.00). Black dots are unreversed changes; white dots homoplastic character transitions. The character number is indicated above the branch and the state change is indicated below. Exomalopsis is the outgroup.

Fig. 116 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 116. Phylogeny of Lithurginae based on cladistic anlaysis of data presented in table 11 (Length 11, CI 0.88, RI 0.90). Black dots are unreversed changes; white dots homoplastic character transitions. The character number is indicated above the branch and the state change is indicated below. Fideliinae is the outgroup.

Figs. 113–115 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Figs. 113–115. Mesosomal structures of Liotrigonopsis rozeni, new species. 113. Forewing. 114. Outer surface of metatibia and metatarsus. 115. Metadistitarsus, claw, and arolium. Scale bars = 0.5 mm (a: for fig. 113) (b: for fig. 114); 0.25 mm (b: for fig. 115).

Fig. 111 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 111. Forewing of holotype female of Kelneriapis eocenica (KelnerPillault). Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

Figs. 109–110 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Figs. 109–110. Wings of holotype female of Melissites trigona, new species. 109. Forewing. 110. Hind wing. Scale bars = 1 mm (a = fig. 109; b = fig. 110).

Fig. 112 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 112. Right lateral view of head of holotype female of Liotrigonopsis rozeni, new species. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

Figs. 106–108 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Figs. 106–108. Leg structures of holotype female of Melissites trigona, new species. 106. Outer surface of metatibia and metabasitarsus. 107. Inner surface of metatibia and metabasitarsus. 108. Claw and arolium. Scale bar = 0.5 mm (figs. 106, 107); 0.25 mm (fig. 108).

Figs. 103–104 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Figs. 103–104. Wings of holotype female of Melikertes stilbonotus (Engel). 103. Forewing. 104. Hind wing. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

Fig. 105 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 105. Frontal view of holotype female head of Melissites trigona, new species. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

Figs. 100–101 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Figs. 100–101. Holotype female of Melikertes stilbonotus (Engel). 100. Frontal view of head. 101. Dorsal view. Scale bars = 0.5 mm (a = fig. 101; b = fig. 100).

Fig. 56 in A Monograph Of The Baltic Amber Bees And Evolution Of The Apoidea (Hymenoptera)

Fig. 56. Scanning electron micrograph of paratype female of Boreallodape striebichi, new species; partial specimen preserved at amber surface of BBS 153 (AMNH).