Find research datasets worth reusing

Figs 40-49 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 40-49. Caraguata atricornis (Clark): ♀: 40, abdomen, ventral view; 41, ventrite V and genitalia; 42, sternite VIII; 43, vaginal palpi; 44, spermatheca. Caraguata guaporensis BechYnÉ, ♀: 45, abdomen, ventral view; 46, ventrite V and genitalia; 47, sternite VIII; 48, vaginal palpi; 49, spermatheca. (ap, apodeme; bc, bursa copulatrix; i, intestine; ov, oviduct; re, receptacle; sd, spermathecal duct; sg, spermathecal gland; sp, spermatheca; t7, tergite VII; t8, tergite VIII; v, vagina; v5, ventrite V). Scale bars: Figs 40, 41, 45, 46 = 0.5 mm; Figs 42-44 = 0.2 mm; Figs 47-49 = 0.2 mm.

Figs 28-39 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 28-39. Caraguata atricornis (Clark), ♂: 28, abdomen, ventral view; 29, ventrite V and genitalia; aedeagus: 30, lateral view; 31, ventral view; tegmen: 32, ventral view; 33, lateral view; 34, flagellum. Caraguata guaporensis BechYnÉ, ♂: 35, abdomen, ventral view; 36, ventrite V and genitalia; aedeagus: 37, lateral view; 38, ventral view; 39, flagellum. (ah, apical hood; fl, flagellum; h, hook; i, intestine; is, internal sac; ml, median lobe; o, basal orifice; os, ostium; t, tegmen; t7, tergite VII; t8, tergite VIII; v5, ventrite V). Scale bars: Figs 29-31, 35-38 = 0.5 mm; Figs 32-34 = 0.2 mm; Fig. 39 = 0.1 mm.

Figs 23-27 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 23-27. Meso- and metasternum: 23, Caraguata atricornis (Clark); 24, Caraguata guaporensis BechYnÉ. Metendosternite, dorsal view: 25, C. atricornis; 26, C. guaporensis. 27, C. guaporensis, ♂: mesotibiae (al, anterior lamina; at, anterior tendon; bt, basal tendon; dr, dorsal ridge; fa, furcal arm; s, spur; vl, ventral lamina). Scale bars: Figs 23, 24 = 0.5 mm; Figs 25-27 = 0.2 mm.

Figs 17-22 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 17-22. Pronotum: 17, Caraguata atricornis (Clark); 18, Caraguata guaporensis Bechyné. Prothorax, ventral view: 19, C. atricornis; 20, C. guaporensis. Proendosternite: 21, C. atricornis; 22, C. guaporensis. (pr, proendosternite). Scale bars = 0.5 mm.

Figs 1-8 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 1-8. Habitus, dorsal view: 1, Caraguata atricornis (Clark); 2, Caraguata guaporensis Bechyné. Habitus, lateral view: 3, C. atricornis; 4, C. guaporensis. Head, frontal view: 5, C. atricornis; 6, C. guaporensis. Antennae: 7, C. atricornis; 8, C. guaporensis. Scale bars: Figs 1-4 = 1 mm; Figs 5-8 = 0.5 mm.

Figs 9-16 in Comparative morphology of two species of Caraguata Bechyné (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Galerucini)

Figs 9-16. Labrum: 9, Caraguata atricornis (Clark); 10, Caraguata guaporensis Bechyné. Mandible, inner view: 11, C. atricornis; 12, C. guaporensis. Maxilla, ventral view: 13, C. atricornis; 14, C. guaporensis. Labium, ventral view: 15, C. atricornis; 16, C. guaporensis. Scale bars = 0.1 mm.

Figs. 2, 3. Fig. 2 in Molecular and morphological approaches for species delimitation and hybridization investigations of two Cichla species

Figs. 2, 3. Fig. 2 (adapted of Kullander & Ferreira, 2006), body measures used for morphological analyses of Cichla Bloch & Schneider, 1801 individuals: Standard length (1); head length (2); snout length (3); length of the lower jaw (4); length of the upper jaw (5); orbit diameter (6); head height (7); body height (8); length of pectoral fin (9); length of the dorsal fin spines (10); length of the dorsal fin radius (11); length of caudal peduncle (12); caudal peduncle height (13); and inter-orbital width (14). Fig. 3 (adapted of Kullander & Nijssen 1989): meristic parameters included the following measures. Numbers of dorsal fin spines (ED); dorsal fin radius (RD); upper lateral line scales (LS); lower lateral line scales (LI); pectoral fin radius (RP); and anal fin radius (RA).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2016View details →

Fig. 1 in Habitat heterogeneity on feeding habit of two sympatric and congeneric characidae fishes in two tropical reservoirs

Fig. 1. NMDS plot showing relation of food item abundance found in the diet of Astyanax aff. bimaculatus Linnaeus, 1758 and A. parahybae Eigenmann, 1908 in Lajes and Santana reservoirs, state of rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Ap, Astyanax parahybae; Ab, Astyanax aff. bimaculatus; Ljs, Lajes; Snt, Santana).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2016View details →

Fig. 2 in Effect of temperature changes on the cercarial-shedding rate of two trematodes

Fig. 2. Average daily emergence of cercariae at three temperatures (MC, monostome cercariae; PE, pleurolophocercous cercariae). The bars correspond to the standard deviation. In the figure the ordinate indicates the mean number of cercariae shed per 24 h at each of the temperatures shown on the abscissa.

Fig. 6 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 6. Skull remains of (putative) basal Caseasauria. A. Callibrachion gaudryi Boule and Glangeaud, 1893, holotype MNHN.F.AUT490 from Margenne France), Artinskian (Cisuralian). B.?Eothyrididae indet., CM 47746 from Lisbon Valley (Arizona, USA), Cutler Group (Cisuralian). C. Eothyris parkeyi Romer, 1937, holotype MCZ 1161 from Archer County (Texas, USA), Kungurian (Cisuralian), in lateral (C1) and dorsal (C2) views. D. Datheosaurus macrourus Schroeder, 1904, holotype MB.R. 1015 from Nowa Ruda (Poland), Gzhelian (Pennsylvanian), in ventral (D1) and dorsal (D2) views.

Fig. 5 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 5. Reconstructions of caseasaurian synapsid skeletons in dorsal views (A2, B2) and lateral aspects of skulls (A1, B1). A. Datheosaurus macrourus Schroeder, 1904 (Upper Pennsylvanian, Poland). B. Callibrachion gaudryi Boule and Glangeaud, 1893 (Cisuralian, France).

Fig. 4 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 4. Explanatory drawing of the holotype of caseasaurian synapsid Datheosaurus macrourus Schroeder, 1904 from Upper Pennsylvanian of Nowa Ruda, Poland. MB.R. 1015.1 (A) and MB.R. 1015.2 (B). C. Right humerus of MB.R. 1015.2 in ventral aspect, photograph (C1), drawing (C2).

Fig. 2 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 2. Explanatory drawing of the holotype of caseasaurian synapsid Callibrachion gaudryi Boule and Glangeaud, 1893 from Cisuralian of Autun, France (MNHN.F.AUT490).

Fig. 3 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 3. Holotype of caseasaurian synapsid Datheosaurus macrourus Schroeder, 1904 from Upper Pennsylvanian of Nowa Ruda, Poland. A. MB.R. 1015.1 laying slab), exposing an internal view onto ventral elements (A1), with close-up of distal-most tail portion (A2). B. MB.R. 1015.2 (hanging slab), exposing an internal view onto dorsal elements (B1), detail (B2), trough stratification of the area indicated by the arrowhead in B1.

Fig. 1 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 1. Holotype of caseasaurian synapsid Callibrachion gaudryi Boule and Glangeaud, 1893 from Cisuralian of Autun, France (MNHN.F.AUT490). A. General view. B. Close-up of right manus. C. Right ilium, dorsally covered by proximal femur. D. Isolated shark coprolithes from the holotypic slab (Jörg W. Schneider, personal communication 2015).

Fig. 7 in Callibrachion and Datheosaurus, two historical and previously mistaken basal caseasaurian synapsids from Europe

Fig. 7. Drawings of appendicular elements of selected Caseasauria: humeri (A1–C1, D), manus (A2, B2, E, F1), and pedes (B3, C2, F2, G). A. Datheosaurus. B. Callibrachion. C. Casea, refers to C. broilii. D. Oedaleops. E. Euromycter. F. "Casea" nicholsi (from Olson 1968: fig. 18G, H). G. Eocasea. Compiled from: C, UC 657 (FS personal observation) and UC 656 (after Romer and Price 1940: fig. 41H); D, Sumida et al. (2014); E, Sigogneau-Russell and Russell (1974); F, Olson (1954, 1968); G, Reisz and Fröbisch (2014). Not to scale.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2017View details →

-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 PC1 (29.8% of total variance) Fig. 8. Morphospace plot of the first two PCO axes generated in the R statistical environment (Claddis package). Branches are superimposed from a single representative topology selected from amongst the 48 MPTs. in The sauropodomorph biostratigraphy of the Elliot Formation of southern Africa: Tracking the evolution of Sauropodomorpha across the Triassic-Jurassic boundary

-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 PC1 (29.8% of total variance) Fig. 8. Morphospace plot of the first two PCO axes generated in the R statistical environment (Claddis package). Branches are superimposed from a single representative topology selected from amongst the 48 MPTs.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2019View details →

Fig. 14 in Two new stegosaur specimens from the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation of Montana, USA

Fig. 14. Left coracoid of stegosaur GPDM 178, near Giffen, Cascade County, Montana; in anterior (A1), lateral (A2), posterior (A3), and anterior (A4) views.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2019View details →

Fig. 10 in Two new stegosaur specimens from the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation of Montana, USA

Fig. 10. Maxillary and dentary teeth of stegosaur GPDM 178 (A–D), near Giffen, Cascade County, Montana; C2, explanatory drawing showing the wear facet and cross-cutting gouges. Not to scale, anteroposterior wear facet length of approximately 2–2.5 mm.