Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 2 in Development of a decision support system for managing Heterodera schahtii in sugar beet production

Figure 2: Crop sequence in rotation 1: standard sugar beets variety "Mixer"; Cereals; Cereals; "Mixer." The SBN initial population (Pi eggs g−1 soil) = 2.

Figure 3 in Development of a decision support system for managing Heterodera schahtii in sugar beet production

Figure 3: Crop sequence in rotation 2: standard sugar beets variety "Mixer"; Cereals; WOSR; Cereals; "Mixer." The SBN initial population (Pi eggs g−1 soil) = 2.

Figure 1 in Development of a decision support system for managing Heterodera schahtii in sugar beet production

Figure 1: A screenshot of the user interface showing a selected crop rotation and the estimated final SBN population (Pf) values, sugar yield (tonnes/ha), income (SEK/ha) and the reproduction factor (Rf) values.

Figure 9 in Development of a decision support system for managing Heterodera schahtii in sugar beet production

Figure 9: (A) relationship between initial SBN population (Pi eggs g−1 soil) and reproduction factors (Rf) of three sugar beets varieties estimated by SBNWatch; (B) relationship between initial SBN population Pi (eggs g−1 soil) and reproduction factors (Rf) of four sugar beets varieties sown in microplots in 2013–2014 (n = 4). The bars represent means of Rf ± Sd.

Figure 7 in Development of a decision support system for managing Heterodera schahtii in sugar beet production

Figure 7: Crop sequence in rotation 6: tolerant sugar beets variety "Julietta"; Cereals; WOSR; Cereals; Oil radish; "Julietta." The SBN initial population (Pi eggs g−1 soil) = 2.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2024View details →

Supplementary information: Subsistence and Population development from the Middle Neolithic B (2800-2350 BCE) to the Late Neolithic (2350-1700 BCE) in Southern Scandinavia

<p>This is the supplementary information of the paper “Subsistence and Population development from the Middle Neolithic B (2800-2350 BCE) to the Late Neolithic (2350-1700 BCE) in Southern Scandinavia” (DOI: tba). Please consult the publication for in depth description of the data, its context and for the method applied on the data, as well as references to primary sources. Requirements to be installed to run the scripts: Python 3 (https://www.python.org/) with the packages numpy (https://numpy.org/), pandas (https://pandas.pydata.org/), matplotlib (https://matplotlib.org/), seaborn (https://seaborn.pydata.org/) and scipy (https://scipy.org/); all included in Ancaonda (Python-Distribution, https://www.anaconda.com/). R (https://cran.r-project.org/) with the packages here (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/here/index.html) and rcarbon (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rcarbon/index.html), tidyverse, vegan, ggplot2, reshape2, RcppRoll. </p>

Fig. 5 in Evidence for parallel development of ever-growing molars in Early Pleistocene rodents from southern Spain and their paleoenvironmental implications

Fig. 5. ESEM images (all in occlusal view) of murids from Lower Pleistocene, Barranco de los Conejos, Guadix-Baza Basin, Spain.. A–D. Apodemus atavus Heller, 1936. A. Right M1, IPHES-BC-11. B. Left M1, IPHES-BC-5. C. Right m1, IPHES-BC-6. D. Left m1, IPHES-BC-13. E–O. Castillomys gracilis Weerd, 1976. E. Right M1, IPHES-BC-1. F. Right M1, IPHES-BC-2. G. Left M1, IPHES-BC-15. H. Left M1, IPHES-BC-16. I. Right M2, IPHES-BC-20. J. Left M3, IPHES-BC-19. K. Left m1, IPHES-BC-7. L. Left m1, IPHES-BC-9. M. Right m2, IPHES-BC-8. N. Right m2, IPHES-BC-10. O. Right m2, IPHES-BC-21.

Fig. 4 in Evidence for parallel development of ever-growing molars in Early Pleistocene rodents from southern Spain and their paleoenvironmental implications

Fig. 4. ESEM images (all in occlusal view) of Tibericola vandermeuleni (Agustí, 1992), from Lower Pleistocene, Barranco de los Conejos, Guadix-Baza Basin, Spain. A. Right m1, IPHES-BC-135. B. Right m1, IPHES-BC-34. C. Right m1, holotype, IPHES-BC-36. D. Right m1, IPHES-BC-114. E. Right m1, IPHES-BC-115. F. Right m1, IPHES-BC-116. G. Left m1, IPHES-BC-29. H. Left m1, IPHES-BC-40. I. Left m1 (the posterior lobe is missing), IPHES-BC-136. J. Right M3, IPHES-BC-141. K. Right M3 (part of the posterior lobe is missing), IPHES-BC-142. L. Left M3, IPHES-BC-121. M. Right M3, IPHES-BC-140.

Fig. 1 in Evidence for parallel development of ever-growing molars in Early Pleistocene rodents from southern Spain and their paleoenvironmental implications

Fig. 1. Nomenclature and measurements of arvicoline molars. A, B. Left m1 of Manchenomys (nomenclature (A) and measurements (B). C. Right M3 of Manchenomys. Abbreviations: A, ACC length; AC2, anteroconid cap; AL1, anterior lobe; B, shortest distance between BRA3 and LRA4; BRA, buccal re-entrant angle; BSA, buccal salient angle; C, shortest distance between LRA3 and BRA3; L, occlusal surface length; LRA, lingual re-entrant angle; LSA, lingual salient angle; PC, posterior cap; PL, posterior lobe; T1–T7, triangles 1–7; W, width.

Fig. 3 in Evidence for parallel development of ever-growing molars in Early Pleistocene rodents from southern Spain and their paleoenvironmental implications

Fig. 3. ESEM images (all in occlusal view) of Manchenomys oswaldoreigi (Agustí, Castillo, and Galobart, 1993), from Lower Pleistocene, Barranco de los Conejos, Guadix-Baza Basin, Spain. A. Left m1, IPHES-BC-28. B. Left m1, IPHES-BC-33. C. Right m1 (the posterior lobe is missing), IPHES-BC-38. D. Left M3, IPHES-BC-145.

Fig. 2 in Evidence for parallel development of ever-growing molars in Early Pleistocene rodents from southern Spain and their paleoenvironmental implications

Fig. 2. ESEM images (all in occlusal view, except A2, B2, C) of Early Pleistocene arvicolines from Spain. A–G. Orcemys giberti Martin, Tesakov, Agustí, and Johnston, 2018, from Barranco de los Conejos, Guadix-Baza Basin. A. Left m1 in occlusal (A1) and lateral (A2) views, holotype, IPHES-BC-30. B. Right m1 in occlusal (B1) and lateral (B2) views, IPHESA-BC-118. C. Right m1 in basal view, IPHES-BC-31. D. Right M2, IPHES-BC-32. E. Right M2, IPHES-BC-117. F. Right M3, IPHES-BC-120. G. Posterior fragment of right M3, IPHES-BC-119. H. Mimomys sp. from Cortijo de Don Alfonso, Guadix-Baza Basin; left m1, IPHES-CDA-01. I. Mimomys sp. from Cementerio de Orce, Guadix-Baza Basin; anterior fragment of right m1, IPHES- CO-B-01. J–L. Mimomys medasensis Michaux, 1971, from Almenara-Casablanca 1, eastern Spain. J. Left m1, IPHESA-ACB-1-CS-4. K. Left m1, IPHESA-ACB-1-CS-3. L. Left m1, IPHESA-ACB-1-CS-5. The white arrows indicate the mimomyan ridge.

Fig. 7 in Enamel microstructure of permanent and deciduous teeth of a species of notoungulate Toxodon: Development, functional, and evolutionary implications

Fig. 7. Diagrammatic representation indicating microstructural variation of buccal and lingual enamel from distinct regions of the dental axis in upper (dP4, A–D) and lower (dp4, E, F) deciduous premolars of Toxodon sp. Symbols represent different percentages of enamel zones from the enamel-dentine junction (EDJ) up to theouter enamel surface. Microstructural features are obtained from longitudinal (A, B) and transversal sections (C–E). Illustration based on Lindenau (2005).

Fig. 2 in Enamel microstructure of permanent and deciduous teeth of a species of notoungulate Toxodon: Development, functional, and evolutionary implications

Fig. 2. Enamel microstructure in upper molar of Toxodon sp. from the upper Pleistocene of Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil (southern Coastal Plain, Santa Vitória Formation). Scanning electron micrographs of transversal sections of the ectoloph (A1) and paracone, including the anterior fold (A2–A4). MCN-PV 30077.PHIS-055, M3, general view of enamel exhibiting Schmelzmuster with three enamel types (A1), Hunter-Schreger bands in the enamel of loop from anterior fold on the protocone and modified radial enamel below the dashed line (A2), enamel of outermost loop from anterior fold on the metacone, in opposite position to that observed in A2 (A3, A4). Arrows indicate difference in depth between Hunter-Schreger bands. Dashed line in A1 indicates the morphology of enamel-dentine junction.

Fig. 6 in Enamel microstructure of permanent and deciduous teeth of a species of notoungulate Toxodon: Development, functional, and evolutionary implications

Fig. 6. Diagrammatic representation indicating microstructural variation of enamel in upper permanent molar (A, B) and lower permanent premolar (C) and molar (D–K) of Toxodon sp. A, B. M3. C. p4. D–K. m1–2. Symbols represent different percentages of enamel zones from the enamel-dentine junction EDJ) up to the outer enamel surface. A. Ectoloph (mesial distal). B. Anterior fold (distal). C. Buccal enamel. D. Hypoconulid. E. Meta-entoconid fold mesial loop close to internal portion of fold). F. Meta-entoconid fold (distal loop close to internal portion of fold). G. Ento-hypoconulid fold (mesial loop). Illustration based on Lindenau (2005). H. Ento-hypoconulid fold (distal loop). I. Meta-entoconid fold (distal loop). J. Meta-entoconid fold (innermost area of the distal loop). K. Meta-entoconid fold (internal portion).

Fig. 5 in Enamel microstructure of permanent and deciduous teeth of a species of notoungulate Toxodon: Development, functional, and evolutionary implications

Fig. 5. Diagrammatic representation indicating microstructural variation of buccal enamel in upper (A, B) and lower (C–E) incisors of Toxodon sp. A. I1. B. I2. C, D. i1. E. i3. Areas close to mesial (C) and distal (D) portions of the dental axis. Illustration based on Lindenau (2005). Abbreviation: EDJ, enamel-dentine junction.

Fig. 8 in Comparative cranial osteology of subadult eucentrosauran ceratopsid dinosaurs from the Two Medicine Formation, Montana, indicates sequence of ornamentation development and complex supraorbital ontogenetic change

Fig. 8. Size comparison of squamosal versus face in Einiosaurus procurvicornis Sampson, 1995, subadult MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (A) and MOR 456 8-9-6-1, holotype (B, mirrored); squamosal superimposed in B. C. Outline of MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (red) superimposed over outline of MOR 456 8-9-6-1 (grey). D. Outline of MOR 591 (blue) superimposed over outline of MOR 456 8-9-6-1 (grey). Outlines aligned by otic notch.

Fig. 5 in Comparative cranial osteology of subadult eucentrosauran ceratopsid dinosaurs from the Two Medicine Formation, Montana, indicates sequence of ornamentation development and complex supraorbital ontogenetic change

Fig. 5. Lateral views of jugals of Einiosaurus procurvicornis Sampson, 1995, MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (A) and eucentrosauran (Einiosaurus procurvicornis or Achelousaurus horneri Sampson, 1995), MOR 591 (B, mirrored), from the Campanian Two Medicine Formation, Montana, USA. Arrow indicates epijugal.

Fig. 6 in Comparative cranial osteology of subadult eucentrosauran ceratopsid dinosaurs from the Two Medicine Formation, Montana, indicates sequence of ornamentation development and complex supraorbital ontogenetic change

Fig. 6. Ontogenetic series of supraorbital ornamentation of Einiosaurus procurvicornis Sampson, 1995 from the Campanian Canyon Bonebed, Two Medicine Formation (TM-046), Montana, USA. A, B. Juvenile, MOR 456 8-10-87-20 (A) and MOR 456 8-8-87-19 (B). C, D. Early subadult, MOR 456 8-9-7-3 (C) and MOR 456 2020-C-1 (D). E, F. Late subadult, MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (E) and MOR 456 8-23-87 (F). G, H. Young adult, MOR 456 2020-C-2 (G) and MOR 456 8-9-6-1 (H). B and D are mirrored. All specimens in anterior view, lateral is to the right in A–D, G, H; E, entire skull width; F, lateral is to the left.

Fig. 4 in Comparative cranial osteology of subadult eucentrosauran ceratopsid dinosaurs from the Two Medicine Formation, Montana, indicates sequence of ornamentation development and complex supraorbital ontogenetic change

Fig. 4. Anterior views of supraorbital ornamentation of Einiosaurus procurvicornis Sampson, 1995, MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (A) and eucentrosauran Einiosaurus procurvicornis or Achelousaurus horneri Sampson, 1995), MOR 591 (B), from the Campanian Two Medicine Formation, Montana, USA.

Fig. 7 in Comparative cranial osteology of subadult eucentrosauran ceratopsid dinosaurs from the Two Medicine Formation, Montana, indicates sequence of ornamentation development and complex supraorbital ontogenetic change

Fig. 7. Ontogenetic series of supraorbital ornamentation of Einiosaurus procurvicornis Sampson, 1995 from the Campanian Canyon Bonebed (TM-046), Montana, USA. A, B. Juvenile, MOR 456 8-10-87-20 (A) and MOR 456 8-8-87-19 (B). C, D. Early subadult, MOR 456 8-9-7-3 (C) and MOR 456 2020- C-1 (D). E, F. Late subadult, MOR 456 8-8-87-1 (E) and MOR 456 8-23-87 (F). G, H. Young adult, MOR 456 2020-C-2 (G) and MOR 456 8-9-6-1 (H). B, D–G are mirrored. All specimens in lateral view, anterior is to the left in all images.