Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 5 in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 5. Phylogenetic tree of rDNA (spanning the entire ITS1, 5.8S, ITS2 and a portion of 28S and 18S) reconstructed with Bayesian Inference. Numbers at each node show percentages of Bayesian posterior probability (>70%) and MP bootstrap (>50%); – = no support. Filled circles indicate well-supported clades (bootstrap values ≥99 and posterior probability of 100).

Fig. 8 in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 8. In situ images of the examined taxa: A, Blastomussa merleti, New Caledonia, ST117; B, B. loyae, Djibouti; C, B. omanensis, Yemen; D, B. wellsi, New Caledonia, ST1084; E, B. vivida, new species, New Caledonia (IRD HS3000), ST332; F, Nemenzophyllia turbida, Semporna, Malaysia; G, Physogyra lichtensteini, New Caledonia, ST1477; H, Plerogyra sinuosa, New Caledonia, ST1461. Scale bars = 1 cm

Fig. 4 in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 4. Phylogenetic tree of mitochondrial gene COI reconstructed with Bayesian Inference. Numbers at each node show percentages of Bayesian posterior probability (>70%) and MP bootstrap (>50%); – = no support. Filled circles indicate well-supported clades (bootstrap values ≥99 and posterior probability of 100).

Fig. 2 in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 2. Blastomussa vivida, new species: A, the holotype (MNHN IK 2012 14226) (c1 and c2 are the larger and the smaller corallite, respectively); B, top view of corallite c1 of the same specimen, numbers 1–5 in front of the septa their cycle number; C, detail of the same corallite as in A and B showing the dentation and granulation of the septa; D, paratype (RMNH Coel. 40091); E, paratype (IRD HS3100); F, UBDM 6.0003; G, RMNH Coel. 40092; H, UBDM 6.0002. Scale bar = 1 cm

Fig. 3 in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 3. Blastomussa vivida, new species in situ: A, holotype (MNHN IK 2012 14226) from New Caledonia (same specimen as in Figs. 2A–C); B, specimen IRD HS3100 from New Caledonia; C, colony from Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia showing the typically fleshy and bright coloured polyps; D, the same colony as in C with partially retracted polyps showing cerioid arrangement; E, specimen RMNH Coel. 40092 from Brunei (same specimen as in Fig. 2G); F, from Cebu, the Philippines. Scale bars = 1 cm

Fig. 6. A in Phylogenetic relationships and revision of the genus Blastomussa (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia) with description of a new species

Fig. 6. A, Corallum; and B, detail of corallites of the holotype of Blastomussa omanensis (BMNH 1991.6.4.150) collected by C. Sheppard in Oman (Sheppard & Sheppard, 1991: Fig. 147); C, neotype of Parasimplastrea sheppardi (MTQ G 55860); and D, close up of corallites; E, paratype of Blastomussa loyae (ZMA 8322); and F, close up of its corallites. Scale bars A, C, E = 1 cm; B, D, F = 5 mm.

Fig. 24 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 24. Tlacuatzin canescens, photographed by Gerardo Ceballos in March 1995 at the ChamelaCuixmala Biosphere Reserve, Jalisco, Mexico. Specimens from southern populations (especially topotypical material from Oaxaca) are markedly grayer than this individual.

Fig. 12 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 12. Bivariate comparison of two dental proportions discussed in the text, with illustrated examples of contrasting morphologies. Closed curves delimit sets of taxa assigned to alternative states of character 57. Taxon labels: 1, Caluromys lanatus; 2, Caluromys philander; 3, Caluromysiops irrupta; 4, Chironectes minimus; 5, Didelphis albiventris; 6, Didelphis marsupialis; 7, Didelphis virginiana; 8, Glironia venusta; 9, Gracilinanus microtarsus; 10, Lestodelphys halli; 11, Lutreolina crassicaudata; 12, Marmosa canescens; 13, Marmosa lepida; 14, Marmosa mexicana; 15, Marmosa murina; 16, Marmosa robinsoni; 17, Marmosa rubra; 18, Marmosops impavidus; 19, Marmosops incanus; 20, Marmosops noctivagus; 21, Marmosops parvidens; 22, Marmosops pinheiroi; 23, Metachirus nudicaudatus; 24, Micoureus demerarae; 25, Micoureus paraguayanus; 26, Micoureus regina; 27, Monodelphis adusta; 28, Monodelphis brevicaudata; 29, Monodelphis emiliae; 30, Monodelphis theresa; 31, Philander frenata; 32, Philander mcilhennyi; 33, Philander opossum; 34, Thylamys pallidior; 35, Thylamys venustus. Other labels: MC, metacrista; PC, postprotocrista.

Fig. 20 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 20. Strict consensus of 18 maximumlikelihood trees under the bestfit model of IRBP sequence evolution, rooted to be consistent with our assumption of ingroup (didelphine) monophyly (see text). Bootstrap support values are shown below each branch. Outgroup taxa are indicated with asterisks.

Fig. 9 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 9. Oblique ventrolateral view of left ear region in Marmosops impavidus (A, MUSM 13284) and Philander mcilhennyi (B, MUSM 13299) illustrating taxonomic differences in ectotympanic suspension. Whereas the ectotympanic (ect) is suspended from the skull by attachments both to the petrosal (pet) and to the malleus (mal) in Marmosops, the ectotympanic of Philander is suspended only from the malleus (there is no attachment to the petrosal). Other abbreviations: als, alisphenoid; pro, promontorium; rtp, rostral tympanic process (of petrosal); sq, squamosal.

Fig. 2 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 2. Ventral view of rhinarium in Thylamys pallidior (A, UMMZ 156349) and Marmosa robinsoni (B, UMMZ 117236). Only a single groove is present on the ventral margin of the rhinarium to either side of the median sulcus in T. pallidior, whereas two ventrolateral grooves are present in M. robinsoni. Scale bars = 2 mm.

Fig. 5 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 5. Palatal morphology of Thylamys venustus (AMNH 261254) illustrating nomenclature for fenestrae and foramina described in the text. The maxillary dentition (C–M4) provides convenient landmarks for defining the size and position of palatal perforations. Abbreviations: if, incisive foramen; m, maxillary fenestra; mp, maxillopalatine fenestra; p, palatine fenestra; plpf, posterolateral palatal foramen.

Fig. 15 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 15. Occlusal views of right dp3 and m1 illustrating taxonomic differences in trigonid morphology of the deciduous tooth. Top, Marmosa murina (MUSM 15297) with a distinctly tricuspid (complete) dp3 trigonid. Bottom, Marmosops impavidus (MUSM 13286) with a bicuspid (incomplete) dp3 trigonid.

Fig. 16 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 16. Lingual views of right m2 and m3 illustrating taxonomic differences in entoconid size. Top, Thylamys pallidior (AMNH 262405) with a large entoconid (arrow). Bottom, Monodelphis adusta (AMNH 272781) with an indistinct entoconid (arrow).

Fig. 7 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 7. Oblique dorsolateral view of the left orbit in Thylamys venustus (A, AMNH 263562) and Monodelphis adusta (B, AMNH 272695) illustrating taxonomic differences in sutural patterns. In Thylamys (and most other didelphids), the maxillary (max) and alisphenoid (als) bones are separated by the palatine (pal), but the alisphenoid extends anteriorly across the palatine to contact the maxillary in Monodelphis. Other osteological abbreviations: fr, frontal; hp, hamular process of pterygoid; ju, jugal; la, lacrimal; par, parietal; sq, squamosal.

Fig. 11 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 11. Unworn premaxillary dentitions of Marmosops pinheiroi (A, AMNH 267341) and Lutreolina crassicaudata (B, AMNH 210422) illustrating taxonomic differences in the shape of the incisor crowns. In Marmosops and many other small didelphines, the crowns of I2–I5 are symmetrically rhomboidal, with subequal anterior (mesial) and posterior (distal) cutting edges that converge to form a sharp central apex; a distinct posterior corner (distostyle) is always present on I5. By contrast, in Lutreolina (and certain other taxa), the crowns of I2–I5 are conspicuously asymmetrical, with longer anterior than posterior cutting edges; a distinct distostyle is usually absent on I5. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 6 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 6. Ventral midcranial view of Caluromys philander (A, AMNH 267002) and Micoureus demerarae (B, AMNH 266428) illustrating taxonomic differences in palatal morphology. In caluromyines the posterior palate slopes gently ventrally, and the palatal margin is arched (concave posteriorly) without strongly projecting lateral corners; the internal nares (in) are very broad. In didelphines, however, the posterior palate is abruptly inflected ventrally and the palatal margin is moreorless straight with projecting lateral corners (arrows in lower panel); the internal nares are narrow.

Fig. 1 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 1. Strict consensus of 18 equally mostparsimonious trees resulting from a heuristic analysis of IRBP sequences by Jansa and Voss (2000). For simplicity, placental outgroups and nondidelphid marsupial ingroup taxa (Caenolestes, Dromiciops, Echymipera, Phascogale, Pseudochirops, Vombatus) are not shown. Alphabetic labels (A, B, C, etc.) serve to identify clades for which formal taxon names are either unavailable or confusing due to conflicting usages.

Fig. 4 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 4. Ventral view of rostrum in Marmosa rubra (A, MVZ 153280) and Monodelphis brevicaudata (B, AMNH 257203) illustrating taxonomic differences in premaxillary morphology. A broad, shelflike rostral process (rp) extends the suture between right and left bones well anterior to the incisors in M. rubra, but the premaxillae form only narrow alveolar rims anterior to I1 in M. brevicaudata, where the left and right bones are separated by a small tissuefilled gap (not a distinct suture).

Fig. 10 in Phylogenetic Studies On Didelphid Marsupials Ii. Nonmolecular Data And New Irbp Sequences: Separate And Combined Analyses Of Didelphine Relationships With Denser Taxon Sampling

Fig. 10. Posterior and lateral views of the occipital region in Lestodelphys halli (A, B, UWZM 22422) and Metachirus nudicaudatus (C, D, AMNH 267009). In Lestodelphys the dorsal margin of the foramen magnum (fm) is formed by the excoccipitals (exo) and the supraoccipital (sup), but in adult specimens of Metachirus the right and left exocciptals are joined to exclude the supraoccipital from the dorsal margin of the foramen. Another conspicuous taxonomic difference illustrated in these views concerns the parocciptal process (pp), which is a small, inconspicuous bony mass adnate to the pars mastoideus (mas) of the petrosal in Lestodelphys. By contrast, the paroccipital process of Metachirus is much larger and projects almost straight ventrally. Other abbreviations: als, alisphenoid tympanic wing; par, parietal; sq, squamosal.