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.
642
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
642 results for “ornaments”
Figure 3 in Anatomy, histology, and systematic implications of the head ornamentation in the males of four species of Limnonectes (Anura: Dicroglossidae)
Figure 3. Radiographs of the four species of Limnonectes examined in the present study in dorsal (top row), ventral (middle row), and lateral (bottom row) views. Note the translucent caruncle and the underlying osseous bulging of the parietal bone, most pronounced in Limnonectes dabanus (arrowhead). The arrows indicate the concave lateral curvature of the anterior ramus of the pterygoid bone. Only the dorsal images are to scale. Scale bar: 1 cm.
Figure 2 in Anatomy, histology, and systematic implications of the head ornamentation in the males of four species of Limnonectes (Anura: Dicroglossidae)
Figure 2. Head of a male Limnonectes gyldenstolpei, mediosagittally split. The actual specimen is shown on the left, whereas the right-hand image shows the H&E stained surface of the corresponding view. Note the flap-like caudad curve of the posterior margin of the caruncle (ca). Abbreviations: br, brain; ca, caruncle; to, tongue. Scale bar: 1 cm.
Figure 1 in Anatomy, histology, and systematic implications of the head ornamentation in the males of four species of Limnonectes (Anura: Dicroglossidae)
Figure 1. Appearance of caruncles in dorsal (top row), lateral (middle row), and frontal (bottom row) views of the four species of Limnonectes. Only the dorsal images are to scale. Scale bar: 1 cm.
Data from: Colour ornamentation in the blue tit: quantitative genetic (co)variances across sexes
Although secondary sexual traits are commonly more developed in males than females, in many animal species females also display elaborate ornaments or weaponry. Indirect selection on correlated traits in males and/or direct sexual or social selection in females are hypothesized to drive the evolution and maintenance of female ornaments. Yet, the relative roles of these evolutionary processes remain unidentified, because little is known about the genetic correlation that might exist between the ornaments of both sexes, and few estimates of sex-specific autosomal or sex-linked genetic variances are available. In this study, we used two wild blue tit populations with 9 years of measurements on two colour ornaments: one structurally based (blue crown) and one carotenoid based (yellow chest). We found significant autosomal heritability for the chromatic part of the structurally based colouration in both sexes, whereas carotenoid chroma was heritable only in males, and the achromatic part of both colour patches was mostly non heritable. Power limitations, which are probably common among most data sets collected so far in wild populations, prevented estimation of sex-linked genetic variance. Bivariate analyses revealed very strong cross-sex genetic correlations in all heritable traits, although the strength of these correlations was not related to the level of sexual dimorphism. In total, our results suggest that males and females share a majority of their genetic variation underlying colour ornamentation, and hence the evolution of these sex-specific traits may depend greatly on correlated responses to selection in the opposite sex.
Figs. 1–3 in New Ornamental Host Record for the Cactus Weevil,Cactophagus spinolae(Gyllenhal) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Morelos, Mexico
Figs. 1–3. Cactus weevil on Selenicereus hamatus. 1) Larva in fruit; 2) Larva in stem; 3) Adult feeding on stem.
FIGURE 1 in Pyrenochaetopsis kuksensis (Pyrenochaetopsidaceae), a new species associated with an ornamental boxwood in the Czech Republic
FIGURE 1. Maximum likelihood tree generated from the combined analysis of ITS, LSU, tub2 and rpb2 sequence data. ML/MP bootstrap values are given at the nodes. Bootstrap values less than 50 % are not shown. The tree was rooted to Xenopyrenochaetopsis pratorum and Neopyrenochaetopsis hominis
FIGURE 2 in Pyrenochaetopsis kuksensis (Pyrenochaetopsidaceae), a new species associated with an ornamental boxwood in the Czech Republic
FIGURE 2. Pyrenochaetopsis kuksensis. Colony on OA (a). Colony on MEA (b). Colony on PDA (c). Pycnidia forming on poplar twigs (d,e). Cut through pycnidia (f). Conidia (g). Scale bars: d, e = 100 μm. f= 50 μm. g = 10 μm.
The relative effects of pace of life and habitat characteristics on the evolution of sexual ornaments: a comparative assessment
<p><span>Selection may favor greater investment into sexual ornaments when opportunities for future reproduction are limited (e.g., due to high adult mortality). However, a key driver of mortality, predation, typically selects against elaborate sexual ornaments. Here, we examine the evolution of sexual ornaments in a group of killifishes, which have marked contrasts in life-history strategy between species and inhabit environments that differ in their accessibility to aquatic predators. We first assessed if the size of sexual ornaments (unpaired fins) influenced swimming performance and found that larger fins negatively affected swimming performance. Second, we investigated whether the evolution of larger ornamental fins is driven primarily by the pace of life-history (i.e., investment into current vs future reproduction) or habitat type (as a proxy for predation risk). We found that males from species inhabiting ephemeral habitats with lower predation risk had both larger fins and more pronounced sexual dimorphism in fin size, compared to males from more accessible permanent habitats. Our results indicate that enlarged ornamental fins impair locomotion and evolve more frequently in environments that are less accessible to predators, but with no clear association to the pace of life-history. We provide a rare link between the evolution of sexual ornaments, decreases in locomotion, and natural selection on ornaments through vulnerability to predation.</span></p>
FIGURE. Pollen morphology of S. glandulata and S. lupulina observed under SEM. A–C. Strobilanthes lupulina. A: Equatorial view, B, C: Exine ornamentation. D–F. Strobilanthes glandulata. D: Equatorial view, E, F: Exine ornamentation. in Strobilanthes glandulata (Acanthaceae), a new species from Sri Lanka based on the morphological and molecular evidences
FIGURE. Pollen morphology of S. glandulata and S. lupulina observed under SEM. A–C. Strobilanthes lupulina. A: Equatorial view, B, C: Exine ornamentation. D–F. Strobilanthes glandulata. D: Equatorial view, E, F: Exine ornamentation.
Data For: Ornamentation diversified faster than eco-morphology across Nearctic dragonflies
<p>A major goal of biology is to understand the origins and maintenance of phenotypic differences between closely related species. Eco-morphology and ornamentation are two phenotypic dimensions along which co-existing species often diverge, yet theory makes contrasting predictions about how these phenotypes diversify relative to each other. Some theory predicts that intense, idiosyncratic sexual selection will cause more pronounced divergence in ornamentation than in eco-morphology. Other theory predicts that the ability of condition-dependent ornaments to signal local specialization will result in different species evolving similar ornaments but very divergent eco-morphology. Here, we evaluated these conflicting predictions in Nearctic Libelluloidea dragonflies by testing if the diversification of a condition-dependent ornament, male wing melanization, was slower and less pronounced between closely related species than the diversification of two key eco-morphological traits, body size and relative wing size. Our results show that male wing melanization evolved much faster than either body size or relative wing size. Furthermore, in contrast to the patterns for either eco-morphological trait, the best-supported models of diversification in male wing melanization indicate that the majority of divergence arose between the most closely related species. These results reveal that the primary axis of divergence between closely related Libelluloidea dragonflies is ornamentation rather than eco-morphology. Our study therefore suggests that evolutionary responses to disparate reproductive demands may be fundamental to the persistence and co-existence of closely related species.</p>
Figure 2 in A strikingly ornamented fossil alligator lizard (Squamata: Abronia) from the Miocene of California
Figure 2. Holotype of Abronia cuyama sp. nov. UCMP 54560. Images on the left are of the physical specimen and those on the right are digital renderings; B, D and F are volume renderings, whereas H and I are surface renderings. A, B, skull in right lateral view. C, D, skull in left lateral view. E, F, skull in dorsal view. G, quadrate, squamosal and osteoderms from mudstone block in posterior view. H, I, segmented quadrate, squamosal and osteoderms dorsal to the quadrate in posterior and anterior view, respectively. Scale bars: 1 mm. Abbreviations: am.s, anteromedial surface; co, conch; De, dentary; fn, frontonasal; f.pr, facial process; fp, frontoparietal; Fr, frontal; Ju, jugal; k, keel; La, lacrimal; m.so, median supraocular; Me.gr, Meckelian groove; Mx, maxilla; or.pr, orbital process; p.in, posterior internasal; Pp, palpebral; prf, prefrontal; pt.lm, pterygoid lamina; Px, premaxilla; px.pr, premaxillary process; Qu, quadrate; Smx, septomaxilla; Sq, squamosal; ty.cr, tympanic crest.
Figure 4 in A strikingly ornamented fossil alligator lizard (Squamata: Abronia) from the Miocene of California
Figure 4. Comparison of Abronia cuyama sp. nov. and skulls of extant gerrhonotines, in anterior view. A, Abronia cuyama sp. nov. UCMP 54560. B, Abronia graminea UTA 38831. C, Elgaria multicarinata TNHC 35666. D, Barisia leƲicollis MVZ 68783. Scale bars: 1 mm.
Figure 1. A, geographical context. B in A strikingly ornamented fossil alligator lizard (Squamata: Abronia) from the Miocene of California
Figure 1. A, geographical context. B, local Oligocene and Miocene sedimentary units. In A, distribution data for Abronia are from GBIF.org (2021). Distribution data were filtered manually to remove selected outliers using the study by GutiérrezRodríguez et al. (2021) as a reference. Grey shading in A indicates elevation (i.e. mountainous areas). Geological data in B are based on the studies by Hoyt et al. (2018) and Jennings (2010). The location of the UCMP V-5847 fossiliferous site was obtained from the study by James (1963).
Figure 5 in A strikingly ornamented fossil alligator lizard (Squamata: Abronia) from the Miocene of California
Figure 5. Phylogenetic position of Abronia cuyama sp. nov. among alligator lizards in Bayesian inference analyses. A, partially constrained tree. B, fully constrained tree. Outgroups are removed for clarity, and other gerrhonotine genera or species are condensed to single terminals. Black circles indicate nodes with posterior probability> 0.95.
Supplementary material 2 from: Süle G, Miholcsa Z, Molnár C, Kovács-Hostyánszki A, Fenesi A, Bauer N, Szigeti V (2023) Escape from the garden: spreading, effects and traits of a new risky invasive ornamental plant (Gaillardia aristata Pursh). NeoBiota 83: 43-69. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.83.97325
The results of mixed models analysing the effects of the invasion and the coverage of Gaillardia aristata on the species richness, Shannon diversity and the height of local vegetation
Figure 8 in Osteological comparison of casque ontogeny in palaeognathous and neognathous birds: insights for selecting modern analogues in the study of cranial ornaments from extinct archosaurs
Figure 8. Examples of modern casque analogues suitable for specific non-avian dinosaur ornamentation comparisons in the context of (top row) development, (middle row) structural composition, and (boưom row) homologous structures. Each skull shown in right lateral view. Grey regions depict non-ornamental elements, and orange-highlighted regions depict ornamental elements for each represented species (see main text for relevant osteology); neognathous birds surveyed from the literature collectively represented by hornbill illustration (lowest less).
Figure 7 in Osteological comparison of casque ontogeny in palaeognathous and neognathous birds: insights for selecting modern analogues in the study of cranial ornaments from extinct archosaurs
Figure 7. Illustrations of bony cranial anatomy among exemplar dinosaurs with skull ornamentation, i.e. Saurolophus osborni (paired nasals, prefrontals, and frontals; Bell 2011), Protoceratops andrewsi (paired parietals and squamosals; Dodson 1976), Stegoceras validum (paired frontals and parietals; Schoư et al. 2011), Citipati osmolskae (paired premaxillae, nasals, and frontals; Clark et al. 2002), Carnotaurus sastrei (paired frontals; Paulina Carabajal 2011), Monolophosaurus jiangi (paired premaxillae, nasals, lacrimals, prefrontals, and frontals; Brusaưe et al. 2010), Numida meleagris (paired frontals), Macrocephalon maleo (paired frontals and parietals); Casuarius casuarius (mesethmoid, median casque element, paired nasals, paired lacrimals, and paired frontals; Green and Gignac 2021). Each skull shown in right lateral (top) and dorsal (boưom) views. Grey regions depict non-ornamental elements and orange-highlighted regions depict ornamental elements for each represented species.
Figure 6 in Osteological comparison of casque ontogeny in palaeognathous and neognathous birds: insights for selecting modern analogues in the study of cranial ornaments from extinct archosaurs
Figure 6. Three-dimensional renderings from micro-computed tomography data of a developmental series of Casuarius casuarius: A, TLG C025; B, TLG C037; C, TLG C031; D, AMNH SKEL 963; E, AMNH SKEL 962 (see Table 1). Skulls are shown in (top) less lateral and (boưom) dorsal views. Casque elements specific to Casuarius casuarius are indicated by colored cells [dark red (X) = element not participating at specified age; dark green (✓) = element participating at specified age] in the table, and grey cells indicate bones that do not contribute to bones in the species represented in this figure, but do contribute to others in the study. Dashed line divides specimens without (less) and with (right) casques developmentally present.
Figure 5 in Osteological comparison of casque ontogeny in palaeognathous and neognathous birds: insights for selecting modern analogues in the study of cranial ornaments from extinct archosaurs
Figure 5. Three-dimensional renderings from micro-computed tomography data of a developmental series of Macrocephalon maleo: A, UAZ MM005; B, UAZ MM003; C, UAZ MM004; D, UAZ MM002; E, UAZ MM006 (see Table 1). Skulls are shown in (top) less lateral and (boưom) dorsal views. Casque elements specific to Ma. maleo are indicated by colored cells [dark red (X) = element not participating at specified age; dark green (✓) = element participating at specified age] in the table, and grey cells indicate bones that do not contribute to bones in the species represented in this figure, but do contribute to others in the study. Dashed line divides specimens without (less) and with (right) casques developmentally present.
Figure 3 in Osteological comparison of casque ontogeny in palaeognathous and neognathous birds: insights for selecting modern analogues in the study of cranial ornaments from extinct archosaurs
Figure 3. Three-dimensional renderings from micro-computed tomography data of immature (A) Numida meleagris (TLG NM002), (B) Macrocephalon maleo (UAZ MM003), and (C) Casuarius casuarius (TLG C004). (Immature specimens are figured to emphasize clearer suture lines.) Broad cranial casque paưerns divided into geminal (sampled neognaths; N. meleagris and Ma. maleo) and disunited (sampled palaeognath; Casuarius casuarius). Skulls are shown in (top) lateral and (boưom) dorsal views with elements that will contribute to the fully matured adult casque false coloured (maroon = nasals; green = median casque element; blue = mesethmoid; orange = lacrimals; purple = frontals; yellow = parietals).
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.