Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 1 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 1. Sampling localities of Mesocarabus specimens used in this study and identified by voucher number, as listed in Table 1. Colour code: brown, Carabus riffensis; red, Carabus macrocephalus; orange, Carabus macrocephalus barcelecoanus; purple, Carabus dufourii; yellow, Carabus lusitanicus; pink, Carabus lusitanicus baguenai; blue, Carabus problematicus; and green, Carabus problematicus, from Ochagavía.

Figure 5 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 5. Ultrametric time-calibrated tree for combined DNA markers (ALL-B data set) in Carabus. Numbers above nodes represent posterior probabilities. Grey bars on nodes represent the 95% confidence intervals for node ages (Myr), with mean ages indicated inside the bars. Labels A–D indicate the cladogenetic events for Mesocarabus and Iberian Oreocarabus referred to in the main text; labels G1 and G2 indicate nodes used as calibration priors. Specimen illustrated: Carabus (Mesocarabus) lusitanicus from Albacete, Spain.

Figure 4. Bayesian 50 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 4. Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree for the total evidence data set (ALL-B). Numbers besides nodes represent posterior probabilities and bootstrap values for maximum-likelihood and maximum-parsimony analyses, respectively. Labels A–D indicate the cladogenetic events for Mesocarabus and Iberian Oreocarabus referred to in the text. The species colour codes are as described in Figure 1. Voucher numbers are indicated in brackets. Vertical bars represent the main lineages, as proposed by Imura (1996) and Deuve (2004). Specimens illustrated: 1, Carabus (Mesocarabus) lusitanicus from Tarragona, Spain; 2, Carabus (Mesocarabus) macrocephalus from León, Spain; 3, Carabus (Mesocarabus) riffensis from El Biutz, Morocco; 4, Carabus (Oreocarabus) guadarramus from Madrid, Spain; 5, Carabus (Oreocarabus) amplipennis from León, Spain; 6, Carabus (Orinocarabus) concolor from Bex, Switzerland; 7, Carabus (Nesaeocarabus) abbreviatus from Tenerife, Spain; 8, Carabus (Eurycarabus) faminii from Rif Massif, Morocco.

Figure 2 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 2. Distribution map of some Carabus lineages within the Metacarabi in the western Palaearctic region.

Figure 3. Bayesian 50 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 3. Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus trees from (a) nuclear (NUC) and (b) mitochondrial (MIT) data sets. The numbers beside nodes represent posterior probabilities and bootstrap values for maximum-likelihood and maximumparsimony analyses, respectively. Labels A–D indicate cladogenetic events referred to in the text for Mesocarabus (in blue) and Iberian Oreocarabus (in red). Asterisks indicate incongruent nodes between MIT and NUC data sets. The species colour codes are as described in Figure 1. Voucher numbers are indicated in brackets. Specimens illustrated: 1, Carabus (Mesocarabus) lusitanicus from Salamanca, Spain; 2, Carabus (Oreocarabus) ghiliani from Segovia, Spain.

Figure 6 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the subgenus Mesocarabus Thomson, 1875 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Carabus), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA

Figure 6. Ultrametric time-calibrated tree for combined DNA markers (ALL-B data set) in Carabus showing ancestral area inferences (A, Iberian Peninsula; B, Eurasia; C, North Africa and Canary Islands). Pie charts represent the probability for each area reconstruction. The grey bars on nodes represent the 95% confidence intervals for node ages (Myr), with mean ages indicated inside bars. The palaeogeographic reconstructions are taken from Andeweg (2002).

Figure 2 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the Ptinidae (Coleoptera: Bostrichoidea) and related families

Figure 2. Phylogenetic relationships based on the parsimony analysis of all three genes (COI, 16S, and 28S). Single most parsimonious tree of length 5052 steps.

Figure 3 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the Ptinidae (Coleoptera: Bostrichoidea) and related families

Figure 3. Phylogenetic relationships based on parsimony analysis of the expanded data set. Strict consensus of 509 most parsimonious trees of length 9533 steps.

Figure 1 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the Ptinidae (Coleoptera: Bostrichoidea) and related families

Figure 1. Phylogenetic relationships based on parsimony analysis. A, COI, single most parsimonious tree (MPT) of length 2378 steps. B, 16S, strict consensus of three MPTs of length 1356 steps. C, 28S, strict consensus of nine MPTs of length 1540 steps.

Figure 5 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the Ptinidae (Coleoptera: Bostrichoidea) and related families

Figure 5. Phylogenetic relationships based on Bayesian analysis of all three genes (COI, 16S, and 28S). Majority rule consensus of sampled trees from 2 ¥ 3 000 000 generations with a burn-in of 300 000 generations: (A) the partitioned, harmonic mean of the log likelihoods is -22 145.56; (B) the non-partitioned, harmonic mean of the log likelihoods is -22 920.45. Bayesian posterior probabilities are displayed at nodes supported at a level greater than 0.5.

Figure 4 in Molecular systematics and evolution of the Ptinidae (Coleoptera: Bostrichoidea) and related families

Figure 4. Phylogenetic relationships based on Bayesian analysis. A, COI, majority-rule consensus of sampled trees from 2 ¥ 3 000 000 generations, with a burn-in of 1 200 000 generations; the harmonic mean of the log likelihoods is -9943.92. B, 16S, majority-rule consensus of sampled trees from 2 ¥ 3 000 000 generations, with a burn-in of 1 250 000 generations; the harmonic mean of the log likelihoods is -5921.906. C, 28S, majority-rule consensus of sampled trees from 2 ¥ 1 000 000 generations, with a burn-in of 250 000 generations; the harmonic mean of the log likelihoods is -5860.17. Bayesian posterior probabilities are displayed at all nodes supported at a level greater than 0.5.

Figure 3 in A molecular phylogenetic appraisal of the systematics of the Aglaopheniidae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa, Leptothecata) from the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean

Figure 3. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis of the dataset containing all the 16S Aglaopheniidae sequences used in this study. Note that the part of the phylogenetic tree with all the branches of the Aglaophenia pluma complex is represented in a separate figure – Figure 5. Numbers near the nodes indicate the values of bootstrap (left) and posterior probabilities (right) in percentages. Values less than 70% are replaced by <; if equal to 100%, an asterisk is used instead. Values of bootstrap and posterior probabilities are omitted if both were less than 70% for the same node. The branch length indicator represents 0.1 substitutions per site.

Figure 5 in A molecular phylogenetic appraisal of the systematics of the Aglaopheniidae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa, Leptothecata) from the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean

Figure 5. Part of the phylogenetic tree of Figure 3 with all the branches of the Aglaophenia pluma complex represented. Numbers near the nodes indicate the values of bootstrap (left) and posterior probabilities (right) in percentages. Values less than 70% are replaced by <; if equal to 100%, an asterisk is used instead. Values of bootstrap and posterior probabilities are omitted if both were less than 70% for the same node. The branch length indicator represents 0.1 substitutions per site.

Figure 4 in A molecular phylogenetic appraisal of the systematics of the Aglaopheniidae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa, Leptothecata) from the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean

Figure 4. Hydrothecae of Aglaophenia species revealed as distinct by genetic data: A, Aglaophenia sp. 1 from deep waters of the Azores; B, Aglaophenia sp. 2 from coastal waters of Madeira. Scale bars = 0.1 mm. Credits: C. J. Moura.

Figure 2 in A molecular phylogenetic appraisal of the systematics of the Aglaopheniidae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa, Leptothecata) from the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean

Figure 2. Map of the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean with representation of the sites with Aglaopheniidae haplotypes sampled specifically for this study.

Figure 1 in A molecular phylogenetic appraisal of the systematics of the Aglaopheniidae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa, Leptothecata) from the north-east Atlantic and west Mediterranean

Figure 1. Examples of Aglaopheniidae colonies: A, Gymnangium montagui off Berlengas – west Portugal; B, Macrorhynchia philippina off Madeira island; C, undetermined Aglaophenia species off Madeira. Credits: C. J. Moura.

Figure 6 in Molecular systematics of the Philippine forest skinks (Squamata: Scincidae: Sphenomorphus): testing morphological hypotheses of interspecific relationships

Figure 6. Sulcate, lateral, and asulcate views of Pinoyscincus abdictus abdictus hemipenis showing (arrows) the unique bulbous lobe structures on the lateral region of the main shaft before the bifurcation. Scale bar = 5 mm.

Figure 1. A in Molecular systematics of the Philippine forest skinks (Squamata: Scincidae: Sphenomorphus): testing morphological hypotheses of interspecific relationships

Figure 1. A map of the Philippine Islands with the major landmasses labelled. The light grey areas depict the 120 m bathymetric contour that joined some neighbouring islands into Pleistocene aggregate island complexes (PAICs).

Figure 3. Molecular phylogeny from Figure 2 in Molecular systematics of the Philippine forest skinks (Squamata: Scincidae: Sphenomorphus): testing morphological hypotheses of interspecific relationships

Figure 3. Molecular phylogeny from Figure 2 with sampling reduced to one sample per species. Support is the same as Figure 2. Biogeographical ranges for Sphenomorphus species are marked on the phylogeny. Clades discussed in the text are denoted with letters A–K.

Figure 5 in Molecular systematics of the Philippine forest skinks (Squamata: Scincidae: Sphenomorphus): testing morphological hypotheses of interspecific relationships

Figure 5. Lateral view of the heads of Tytthoscincus hallieri (A, redrawn from Inger et al., 2001: fig. 4) and of Parvoscincus cf. decipiens 1 (B). The temporal scales (highlighted in grey) of the new genus Tytthoscincus are small and blend in with the body scales, which is different from the typical shield-like temporal scales (B).