Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 12 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 12. Instantaneous specific power in a stroke cycle of cicada flight. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 6. Wing motion during a in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 6. Wing motion during a stroke. (a) Start of downstroke; (b) middownstroke; (c) start of upstroke; and (d) mid-upstroke.

Figure 8 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 8. Streamline around the leading edge at mid-downstroke. Only the right wing is presented for a clearer view.

Figure 10 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 10. Surface pressure distribution projected on the X-direction (left column) and the Y-direction (right column). (a) Mid-downstroke (Y – Z plane); (b) midupstroke (Y – Z plane); and (c) before the end of the upstroke (X – Y plane).

Figure 5 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 5. Pitch angle (a) and effective angle of attack (aeff) of the forewing during downstroke and upstroke (a); aeff of the forewing over a full stroke cycle. The leading edge is denoted by a dot. The dotted line indicates the direction of the mean stroke plane (b). The downstroke is shaded. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 4 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 4. Stoke angle (0° lateral, downstroke positive), deviation angle (upward positive) and pitch angle (rotation around wing span, smaller than 90° when leading edge is forward) for the forewing (a) and the hindwing (b). (Online version in colour.)

Figure 1 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 1. Real cicada and its reconstruction. (a) Raw picture and (b) comparison of real and reconstructed cicada. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 2 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 2. Polar coordinates defined by three Euler angles; the wing position shown here is at the mid-downstroke. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 3 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 3. Body displacement of the cicada during forward flight, surface reconstructions were done for three strokes. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 15 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 15. Lift production from this study and previous works on a robotic fruit fly wing. (a) Advanced rotation. (b) Delayed rotation. (Online version in colour.)

Figure 7 in Computational investigation of cicada aerodynamics in forward flight

Figure 7. (a – f) Time course of vortex development, visualized by the Q-criterion. The left and middle columns are back view and top view, respectively, and the vortex structures are coloured by spanwise vorticity. The right column shows the structures in projection view, coloured by streamwise vorticity. Colour bars in the first row apply to figures in the same column.

opennotspecifiedAug 2000View details →

FIG. 3 in Taxonomic separation by isozyme electrophoresis of two closely related species of Cicada L. (Hemiptera: Cicadoidea) in Portugal

FIG. 3. CK banding patterns in Cicada orni and C. barbara. The enzyme phenotypes are identified across the bottom of the illustrations with the phenotypes of the Greek specimens of C. orni on the left, the Portuguese C. orni in the middle and the Portuguese C. barbara on the right.

opennotspecifiedAug 2000View details →

FIG. 2 in Taxonomic separation by isozyme electrophoresis of two closely related species of Cicada L. (Hemiptera: Cicadoidea) in Portugal

FIG. 2. AAT banding patterns in Cicada orni and C. barbara. The enzyme phenotypes are identified across the bottom of the illustrations with the phenotypes of the Greek specimens of C. orni on the left, the Portuguese C. orni in the middle and the Portuguese C. barbara on the right.

opennotspecifiedAug 2000View details →

FIG. 1 in Taxonomic separation by isozyme electrophoresis of two closely related species of Cicada L. (Hemiptera: Cicadoidea) in Portugal

FIG. 1. MDH banding patterns in Cicada orni and C. barbara. The enzyme phenotypes are identified across the bottom of the illustrations with the phenotypes of the Greek specimens of C. orni on the left, the Portuguese C. orni in the middle and the Portuguese C. barbara on the right.

FIGURE 3. COX I in DNA barcoding of new world cicada killers (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae)

FIGURE 3. COX I gene tree resulting from NJ analysis of the full data set, including 56 Sphecius sequences. Bootstrap values greater than 70% are provided above the branches. Haplotype symbols match those used in Fig. 1. Abbreviations after each name indicate the state where the individual was collected (and gc indicates Grand Canyon National Park). When multiple individuals from a state were used in the analysis, they are numbered.

FIGURE 2. COX I in DNA barcoding of new world cicada killers (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae)

FIGURE 2. COX I gene tree resulting from NJ analysis of the BBNP data set. Bootstrap values greater than 70% are provided above the branches. Haplotype symbols match those used in Fig. 1. Note that S. speciosus and the majority of S. convallis individuals have the same haplotype. The different symbols here emphasize that these are different species.

FIGURE 1 in DNA barcoding of new world cicada killers (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae)

FIGURE 1. Geographic distribution of mitochondrial haplotypes for individuals of the three Sphecius species sampled from the USA. Approximate localities for all 54 individuals are shown. (Note: S. spectabilis does not occur in the USA; the two individuals sampled were Argentinean).

FIGURE 4. COX 1 in DNA barcoding of new world cicada killers (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae)

FIGURE 4. COX 1 gene tree resulting from maximum likelihood analysis of the pruned data set, with duplicate Sphecius sequences removed. Bootstrap values greater than 70% are provided above the branches. Haplotype symbols match those used in Fig. 1.

opennotspecifiedAug 2016View details →

Fig. 3 in Dead-twig discrimination for oviposition in a cicada, Cryptotympana facialis (Hemiptera: Cicadidae)

Fig. 3 Kinematic diagrams for oviposition-related behaviors. Sequential relationships between behaviors, which occurred successively within 60 s, are linked with lines for females hung on a wood stick (a, from 25 females), a dead twig (b, from 24 females), or a live twig (c, from 25 females). The number in a box is a cumulative total number of observations of each behavior. The number associated with a line is the number of observations of a flow, and the thickness of a line indicates its proportion relative to the total number of sequences, except that flows constituting less than 10 % are depicted as broken lines. T-shaped lines indicate the end of a sequence that did not lead to oviposition. For the definition of each action, see Table 1