Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2016View details →

Fig. 2 in Trophic strategy of Atlantirivulus riograndensis (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae), a non-annual rivulid threatened by extinction, in a perennial environment, Brazil)

Fig. 2. Sampling area of Atlantirivulus riograndensis. Evidence of seasonal modification of landscape at the collection point at Banhado dos Pachecos wildlife refuge, Viamão, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, during the year 2012 (a) Summer in March; Autumn in (b) May and (c) in June; (d) Winter in September; Spring in (e) October and (f) November.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2016View details →

Fig. 1 in Trophic strategy of Atlantirivulus riograndensis (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae), a non-annual rivulid threatened by extinction, in a perennial environment, Brazil)

Fig. 1. Geographic location of the capture area of Atlantirivulus riograndensis. Geographical representation of South America, especially (a) Brazilian territory, (b) the state of Rio Grande do Sul and (c) Banhado dos Pachecos wildlife refuge in the city of Viamão, sampling area of Atlantirivulus riograndensis in 2012.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2016View details →

Fig. 4 in Trophic strategy of Atlantirivulus riograndensis (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae), a non-annual rivulid threatened by extinction, in a perennial environment, Brazil)

Fig. 4. Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) of food composition of Atlantirivulus riograndensis representing the importance of seasonal and ontogenetic variables, with p <0:05, according to the length of arrows associated with each vector. Individuals collected at the Banado dos Pachecos wildlife refuge, Viamão, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, in 2012. A: ≤ 21.6 mm Standard length; B: Standard length from 21.7 to 32.6 mm; C: Standard length ≥ 32.7 mm.

FIGURE 2 in Big-headed marine crocodyliforms and why we must be cautious when using extant species as body length proxies for long-extinct relatives

FIGURE 2. Comparative view of three fossil thalattosuchian crocodylomorphs: (1) teleosaurid Platysuchus multiscrobiculatus SMNS 9930; (2) basal metriorhynchoid Pelagosaurus typus MTM M62 2516; and (3) metriorhynchid Cricosaurus suevicus SMNS 9808. Scale bars equal 50 cm.

FIGURE 1 in Big-headed marine crocodyliforms and why we must be cautious when using extant species as body length proxies for long-extinct relatives

FIGURE 1. Comparative view of four fossil teleosaurid crocodylomorphs used in the regression analyses: (1) Steneosaurus bollensis GPIT/RE/1193/2; (2) Steneosaurus priscus MNHN.F CNJ 78a; (3) Steneosaurus bollensis MH unnumbered A; and (4) Steneosaurus bollensis MH unnumbered B. Scale bars equal 100 cm.

FIGURE 4 in Big-headed marine crocodyliforms and why we must be cautious when using extant species as body length proxies for long-extinct relatives

FIGURE 4. Comparative least-squares regression gradient plot, of cranial length-to-total length, with the solid line representing Teleosauridae, and the dashed lines representing (1) Crocodylus, (2) Alligator, (3) Gavialis, and (4) Metriorhynchidae, respectively.

FIGURE 5 in Big-headed marine crocodyliforms and why we must be cautious when using extant species as body length proxies for long-extinct relatives

FIGURE 5. Comparative view of estimated body length of large-bodied teleosaurids (see Table 8). (1) Machimosaurus rex (holotype); (2) Machimosaurus hugii (referred specimen from Krebs, 1968); (3) Machimosaurus mosae (neotype, grey silhouette is the lost holotype); (4) Machimosaurus buffetauti (holotype, grey silhouette is the specimen from Buffetaut, 1982b); (5) Steneosaurus edwardsi (referred specimen from Johnson et al., 2015); (6) Steneosaurus obtusidens (holotype); (7) Steneosaurus bollensis (based on MH unnumbered A). The skull drawings are modified from (Fanti et al., 2016 and Young et al., 2014). Scale bar equals 1 m.

FIGURE 3 in Big-headed marine crocodyliforms and why we must be cautious when using extant species as body length proxies for long-extinct relatives

FIGURE 3. Bivariate plots of cranial (1, 3) and femoral lengths (2, 4) plotted against total lengths for complete specimens only (1, 2) and for all specimens (3, 4). In each case a line of least-squares regression is fitted along with a shaded area representing the confidence interval around the regression model.

FIGURE 5 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 5 | Collection points for 442 threatened Neotropical freshwater fishes (NFF) colored by elevation and sized by species' description year. Threatened NFF species are often those described decades ago, with range-restricted distributions in the upland rivers of the Brazilian Shield and the Colombian Andes, and coastal Atlantic and Caribbean drainages. CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU: Vulnerable; DD: Data Deficient (gray). Data for 4,412 localities with geographic coordinates.

FIGURE 6 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 6 | Collection points for 671 potentially threatened Neotropical Freshwater Fishes (NFF). Potentially threatened NFF species predicted by the ConR package using EOO estimates are usually distributed outside protected areas (e.g., national parks, indigenous lands: green) and more often located in the upland rivers of the northern, central and southern Andes, and Eastern Guiana Shield. CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU: Vulnerable; LC or NT: Least Concern or Near Threatened; DD: Data Deficient. Data for 4,412 localities with geographic coordinates. Protected areas (green) from: https://www.protectedplanet.net.

FIGURE 2 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 2 | Extinction risks in 3,001 Neotropical freshwater fishes (NFF). On average, 14% (422 of 3,001) NFF species are classified by the IUCN Red List (RL) as Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EN) or Critically Endangered (CR). Extinction risks are relatively similar among the orders Characiformes (8.2%), Siluriformes (10.8%), Cichliformes (10.0%), and Gymnotiformes (14.9%). An exception is the clade Cyprinodontiformes, where about 48% of species are classified as either VU, EN, or CR. LC or NT: Least Concern or Near Threatened; DD: Data Deficient.

FIGURE 4 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 4 | Collection points for 442 threatened Neotropical freshwater fishes (NFF). Threatened NFF species classified by the IUCN Red List (RL) are often distributed in the upland rivers of the Brazilian Shield and the Colombian Andes, and coastal Atlantic and Caribbean drainages. CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU: Vulnerable; DD: Data Deficient. Data for 4,412 localities with geographic coordinates.

FIGURE 3 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 3 | Association among three variables and extinction risks in 3,001 Neotropical freshwater fishes (NFF). A. IUCN-Red List (RL) threat categories by species description dates. B. Species description dates by taxonomic orders. C. IUCN-RL categories by geographic ranges. D. Geographic ranges by taxonomic orders. E. IUCN-RL categories by elevation ranges. F. Elevational ranges by taxonomic orders. Threatened status are usually higher for recently described NFF species, those inhabiting narrow geographic ranges, and those confined to upland river drainages. CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU: Vulnerable; DD: Data Deficient.

FIGURE 1 in Assessing extinction risk from geographic distribution data in Neotropical freshwater fishes

FIGURE 1 | Sample of the phenotypic diversity of Neotropical freshwater fishes. Upper left to lower right: Lycengraulis grossidens (Spix & Agassiz, 1829); Hyphessobrycon hexastichos Bertaco & Carvalho, 2005; Geophagus neambi Lucinda, Lucena & Assis, 2010; Crenicichla lepidota Heckel, 1840; Trachelyopterus galeatus (Linnaeus, 1766); Anablepsoides xinguensis (Costa, 2010); Abramites hypselonotus (Günther 1868); Pituna xinguensis Costa & Nielsen, 2007; Gymnotus cuia Craig, Malabarba, Crampton & Albert, 2018; Apteronotus caudimaculosus de Santana, 2003; Colomesus tocantinensis Amaral, Brito, Silva & Carvalho, 2013; Corydoras britskii (Nijssen & Isbrücker, 1983). Species not shown in scale.

FIGURE 16 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 16. Eutherian morphotype EuE (UCMP specimen 218901, from locality V91065; right) in anterior (1) and posterior (2) stereopair views, and in lateral (3), medial (4), and distal (5) views.

FIGURE 19 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 19. Summary of humerus morphotypes and relative sizes in our study area in the Hell Creek and Tullock formations of eastern Montana. Multituberculate morphotypes are shown as black bars, metatherians as gray bars, and eutherians as white bars. Numbers within the bars indicate the sample size for each temporal bin. Morphotypes are arranged left to right according to increasing size (see text for specimen numbers, localities, and details; Appendices 7–8 for morphotype mean sizes). Gradients for MuF, EuC, and EuD indicate morphotypes were present in the timeaveraged Bug Creek Anthills assemblages, and the morphotype range may extend into the Pu1 and/or the Lancian. Pu2 assemblages are not known from our study area (hashmarks indicate resultant uncertainty of range-through morphotypes; Clemens 2015). The age model is based on previous geochronological work in this study area (Swisher et al., 1993; Renne et al., 2011, 2013; Wilson, 2014; Sprain et al. 2014); note the temporal axis is not to scale. Modified from Sprain et al. (2014). Abbreviations: Fm, Formation; NALMA, North American Land Mammal "age"; Pu1, early Puercan; Pu3, middle/late Puercan; queries (?) indicate specimens that are only tentatively attributed to that morphotype, see Methods.

FIGURE 9 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 9. Multituberculate morphotype MuF (UCMP specimen 127384, from locality V87001; left), in ventral (1) and dorsal (2) stereopair views, and in lateral (3), medial (4), and distal (5) views.

FIGURE 11 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 11. Metatherian morphotype MeA (UCMP specimen 152394, from locality V93169; left) in anterior (1) and posterior (2) stereopair views, and in lateral (3), medial (4), and distal (5) views.

FIGURE 6 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 6. Multituberculate morphotype MuC (UCMP specimen 153039, from locality V84193; left), in ventral (1) and dorsal (2) stereopair views, and in lateral (3), medial (4), and distal (5) views.

FIGURE 12 in Mammalian distal humerus fossils from eastern Montana, USA with implications for the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction and the adaptive radiation of placentals

FIGURE 12. Eutherian morphotype EuA (UCMP specimen 153100, from locality V99438; left) in anterior (1) and posterior (2) stereopair views, and in lateral (3), medial (4), and distal (5) views. Specimen images are CT scan views, not photographs; see Methods for details. Rough patches inside the shaft and within the entepicondylar foramen are the result of sediment infilling, whereas other rough areas (i.e., supinator crest, medial entepicondyle, posterior articular surfaces) indicate specimen breakage.