Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 10. Juvenile Staurois parvus performing a in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 10. Juvenile Staurois parvus performing a foot-flagging behavior. Interdigital webbing are transparent grey and not white as observed in adults (see also Fig. 2). Image by N. Potensky.

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2012View details →

Figure 1 in Husbandry, captive breeding, larval development and stages of the Malayan horned frog Megophrys nasuta (Schlegel, 1858) (Amphibia: Anura: Megophryidae)

Figure 1. Megophrys nasuta enclosures in the amphibian breeding unit at the Cologne Zoo: a) terrarium of the adults, b) rearing tank for larvae at early developmental stages, c) aquaria for advanced larval stages, and d) rearing terraria for juveniles. Photos: D. Karbe.

Figure 9 in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 9. Artificial waterfall habitat at the Borneo Rainforesthouse in the Vienna Zoo. Image by N. Potensky.

Figure 5 in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 5. Ex situ breeding facility designed to offer different egg deposition sites (described in detail in the Methods section). Image by D. Preininger.

Figure 6 in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 6. Comparison of temperatures and relative humidity measured for a period of three weeks in the natural habitat in Brunei (2010) and the breeding facility in the Vienna Zoo (2012). Solid lines represent air temperature, dotted line water temperature, and dashed lines denote relative humidity in the respective habitat.

Figure 4. The bio-secure container facility a in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 4. The bio-secure container facility a modern Noah´s Ark, which houses Staurois guttatus and S. parvus at the Vienna Zoo Schönbrunn. Image by D. Preininger.

Figure 3. A in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 3. A waterfall habiat of Staurois guttatus at the Sungai Mata Ikan ("Fish-Eye" River) in the Temborong District in Brunei, Borneo. Image by D. Preininger.

Figure 2. A in The conservation breeding of two foot-flagging frog species from Borneo, Staurois parvus and Staurois guttatus

Figure 2. A male of Staurois parvus displaying the white interdigital webbing during foot-flagging behavior. The visual signals are mainly employed during male-male agonistic interactions. Image by D. Preininger.

Figure 4 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 4. Seven species of frogs were included in a husbandry research and technician training program during the first year of the project. The IUCN Red List status, in parenthesis, follows species. A) Heterixalus betsileo (LC). B) Mantidactylus betsileanus, (LC). C) Heterixalus punctatus (LC). D) Blommersia blommersae (LC). E) Guibemantis aff. albolineatus "Andasibe" (DD). F) Stumpffia sp. "Ranomafana" (DD). G) Boophis pyrrhus (LC).

Figure 3 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 3. Terraria and aquaria at the breeding facility. A) Terraria setup on shelving and plumbed so wastewater flows into a drain in the floor. B) A terrarium housing a group of Boophis pyrrhus. C) Aquaria for raising tadpoles. D) Boophis pyrrhus tadpoles produced at the facility.

Figure 9 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 9. Pilot study and training exercise on the optimal larval diet for Mantidactylus betsileanus.

Figure 1. The facility was constructed between November 2010 and March 2011 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 1. The facility was constructed between November 2010 and March 2011 from the foundations of an old abandoned forest station. A) Original abandoned building in January 2009. B) Facility construction November 2010. C) Facility construction December 2010. D) Facility construction January 2011.

Figure 8 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 8. Locally-sourced crickets from Andasibe being bred at Mitsinjo's facility. A) Field cricket (Modicogryllus sp.). B) Large field cricket (Modicogryllus sp.). C) Large black cricket (Gryllus sp.). D) Tropical house cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus). E) Cave cricket (Rhaphidophoridae). F) Shelves with boxes housing field crickets and tropical house crickets.

Figure 2 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 2. Overview of the biosecure Mitsinjo amphibian captive breeding and husbandry research center as of April 2012.

Figure 5 in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 5. Lectures and discussions during January-March 2011 helped train Mitsinjo technicians in captive frog husbandry techniques.

Figure 7. A in Building capacity to implement conservation breeding programs for frogs in Madagascar: Results from year one of Mitsinjo's amphibian husbandry research and captive breeding facility

Figure 7. A) Fruit fly cultures on shelves at the facility. B) Fruit flies are cultured in discarded plastic water bottles collected in Andasibe. Fabric is secured in place, over the top with rubber bands, and strips of plastic bag are placed inside (above the media) on which the flies can deposit eggs.

Fig. 1 in Reproduction and spawning behavior in the frog, Engystomops pustulatus (Shreve 1941)

Fig. 1. Size and fecundity rates for amplectant pairs of Engystomops pustulatus. After collected in amplexus in the field, pairs were left in plastic containers where they could spawn. (A) Proportion of unfertilized eggs among pairs that successfully built a nest, (B) Female vs. male snout-vent length (SVL) with linear regression and 95% confidence intervals (dashed lines).

Fig. 2 in High prevalence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in an Andean frog community (Reserva Las Gralarias, Ecuador)

Fig. 2. Significant Bd infection differences in amphibians according to reproductive modes, habitat use, and taxonomy. P values are reported for 2012 and 2013; significance is noted by ** (p <0.01) and *** (p <0.001).

Fig. 5 in Reproduction and spawning behavior in the frog, Engystomops pustulatus (Shreve 1941)

Fig. 5. Relationship (in log space) for body and testis mass among 11 species of Leptodactylinae frogs. Except for Engystomops pustulatus, data is from Prado and Haddad (2003). Open circles indicate species on which multimale spawning has been reported. Note that E. pustulatus, in which multi-male spawning apparently occurs, also has larger testis than other Leptodactylinae.

Fig. 2 in Reproduction and spawning behavior in the frog, Engystomops pustulatus (Shreve 1941)

Fig. 2. Bivariate plots for (A) nest volume vs. number of eggs, (B) females size vs. nest volume, and (C) male size vs. number of eggs in Engystomops pustulatus. Linear regressions with 95% confidence intervals (dashed lines), determination coefficients (R2), and ANOVA's P values are shown.