Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig.2 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig.2: Formica polyctena, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. There is some trend to show stronger transverse microripples and a more dilute pubescence than Formica rufa.

Fig. 36 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 36: Worker nest-sample means of principal component analysis of Formica aquilonia (white squares, 75 nest samples) and of Formica lugubris (black dots, 217 nest samples) from the whole Palaearctic range considering 10 phenotypic char- acters. The black square marks the F. aquilonia sample from Severobaikalsk with a mtDNA haplotype clustering with that of syntopic F. lugubris. Formica lugubris samples with very large scores of first principal component do mainly or fully contain workers of the Fennoscandian Hippie morph.

Fig.3 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig.3: Formica lugubris, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. The transverse microsculpture is as weak as in Formica rufa, but the density of pubescence and microfoveolae is much higher.

opennotspecifiedDec 2020View details →

F in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

F ig. 21: Data of 49 samples from of E Saxony / Germany with Formica rufa (white rhombs), Formica polyctena × rufa (black squares), and F. polyctena (white dots). The first canonical vector of a three-class LDA, separating the parental species and considering 12 morphological characters, is plotted against the percentage of F. polyctena alleles determined by BAPS clustering (with K = 5) of 19 microsatellite markers (from SEIFERT & al. 2010, changed).

Figs.5-13 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Figs.5-13: (5-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., worker, holotype, head. (6-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., worker, holotype, lateral. (7-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., gyne, head; note the more trapezoid head shape. (8-aqui) Formica aquilonia, gyne, head; note the more rounded head shape. (9-prat) Formica pratensis, worker, neotype, head; note the more reticulate microsculpture of central vertex compared with Formica lugubris (Figs.14, 15), producing a matt surface appearance. (10-prat) Formica pratensis, worker, neotype, lateral aspect. (11-prat) Formica pratensis, gyne, P morph, lateral; almost no setae on head, mesosoma, and first gaster tergite. (12-prat) Formica pratensis, gyne, N morph, lateral; many setae on head, mesosoma, and first gaster tergite. (13-kupy) Formica kupyanskayae, gyne, head.

Fig.33 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig.33: Principal component analysis of gynes of Formica paralugubris (black dots), Formica lugubris morph A1 (squares), F. lugubris morph A3 (triangles), and Formica helvetica sp.n. (rhombs). Eight phenotypic characters were considered. The placement of the four entities within the plot is similar to that in workers (Fig. 32).

Fig. 38 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 38: Schematic presentation of hybridization and reticulate evolution in Palaearctic Formica rufa group ants as it is apparent in the younger evolutionary history. The arrows connecting the main branches indicate the direction of gene flow after backcrossing of hybrids – for example, brown arrows directed from Formica pratensis to Formica lugubris indicate that Formica pratensis × lugubris hybrids have backcrossed with F. pratensis. Examples of both uni- and bidirectional gene flow are shown. The number of arrows is proportional to the supposed frequency of hybridization or backcrossing. Formica paralugubris is likely to be of hybridogenous origin. For details, see the main text.

Fig. 4 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 4: Formica pratensis, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. The strength of transverse mi- croripples is at maximum within the Formica rufa group and pubescence density comparable with Formica lugubris.

Fig. 37 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 37: Worker nest-sample means of a linear discriminant analysis separating Formica aquilonia (squares), Formica lugubris (triangles), and Formica rufa (discs). The 10 and nine worker individuals of the hybrid samples F. lugubris × rufa (black rhombs) were run as wild-cards. Ten phenotypic characters and a total of 165 nest samples with 794 individuals of the three species compared were considered.

Fig.27 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig.27: Classification by four variants of NC-clustering of 75 nest samples of workers of Formica aquilonia (grey bars) and 10 nest samples of Formica ussuriensis sp.n. (black bars). The mean error of four exploratory data analyses is 0.6%. Eight phenotypic characters were considered.

Fig. 31 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 31: Nest-sample means of a linear discriminant analysis and principal component analysis of Formica lugubris complex gynes considering eight phenotypic characters; Formica helvetica sp.n. (white dots), F. lugubris morph A1 (black squares), F. lugubris morph A3 (squares with white center). The means were calculated from 28, 38, and 18 individuals for each entity.

Fig. 28 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 28: Classification by three variants of NC-clustering of 225 nest samples of workers of Formica lugubris (black bars) and 76 nest samples of Formica pratensis (grey bars). The mean error of three analyses is 0.2%. Ten phenotypic characters were considered. The small, well separated sub-branch in the F. lugubris cluster represents Fennoscandian nest samples containing exclusively Hippie morph workers.

Fig. 32 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants

Fig. 32: Nest-sample means of the first and second principal component of workers of Formica paralugubris (black dots), Formica lugubris morph A1 (squares), F. lugubris morph A3 (triangles), and Formica helvetica sp.n. (rhombs). Eleven phenotypic characters were considered.

Fig. 13. 3D in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 13. 3D reconktruction of t̍e midleg mukclek of Formica rufa. ′A) Dorkal view, anterior to t̍e bottom. ′B) Lateral view, anterior to t̍e front. ′;) Ventral view, anterior to t̍e top. ′D) Pretarkal claw retractor mukcle ′IIfpm1) in lateral view, anterior to t̍e front.

Fig. 11 in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 11. Mukclek of metat̍orax and propodeum of Formica rufa, kagittal view, anterior to t̍e left. ′A)T̍e kimplified diagram of kceletomukcular kyktem redrawn from t̍e worc of Marcl ′1966: Fig. 23). ′B) T̍e 3D reconktruction of t̍e metat̍ oracic and propodeal mukclek.

Fig. 12 in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 12. ′A,;) T̍e kimplified diagramk of kceletomukcular kyktem redrawn from t̍e worc of Marcl ′1966: Fig. 22). ′B, D) T̍e 3D reconktructionk of t̍e coxal mukclek of Formica rufa, pokterodorkal view, anterior to t̍e top. ′A, B) Procoxa; ′;, D) mekocoxa.

Fig. 10. 3D in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 10. 3D reconktruction of meko- and metat̍ oracic mukclek of Formica rufa; anterior to t̍e left. ′A) Lateral view. ′B) Sagittal view. ′;) Dorkal view. ′D) Ventral view.

Fig. 9 in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 9. Mukclek of prot̍orax of Formica rufa from kagittal view to k̍ow t̍e orientation of dorko-ventral mukclek from Figure 7, anterior to t̍e left. ′A) T̍e kimplified diagram of kceletomukcular kyktem redrawn from t̍e worc of Marcl ′1966: Fig. 21). ′B) T̍e 3D reconktruction of t̍e prot̍ oracic mukclek.

Fig. 8 in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 8. Mukclek of prot̍orax of Formica rufa, dorkal view, anterior to t̍e top. Profurcal armk were cut to k̍ow t̍e ventral mukclek. ′A) T̍e kimplified diagram of kceletomukcular kyktem redrawn from t̍e worc of Marcl ′1966: Fig. 19). ′B) T̍e 3D reconktruction of t̍e prot̍oracic mukclek.

Fig. 7 in The Skeletomuscular System of the Mesosoma of Formica rufa Workers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Fig. 7. Mukclek of prot̍orax of Formica rufa, dorkal view, anterior to t̍e top. ′A) T̍e kimplified diagram of kceletomukcular kyktem redrawn from t̍e worc of Marcl ′1966: Fig. 18). ′B) T̍e 3D reconktruction of t̍e prot̍ oracic mukclek.