Find research datasets worth reusing

Figs 60–63. 60–61 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 60–63. 60–61 – Physopelta (Physopeltoides) dentipes sp. nov. 60 – male, paratype; 61 – female, paratype. 62–63 – Physopelta (Afrophysopelta) melanoptera Distant, 1904. 62 – male; 63 – female. (Photo: L. Dembický).

Figs 17–19 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 17–19. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), male. 17 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 50×), 18 – detail of procoxa and protrochanter (95×), 19 – ventral surface of profemur (37×). Scale bars: 0.5 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 13–16. 13–15 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 13–16. 13–15 – Physopelta (Physopelta) robusta Stål, 1863: 13–14 – head and pronotum (13 – male, 14 – female), 15 – apex of male protibia. 16 – Physopelta (Physopelta) biguttata Stål, 1870. (Photos: L. Dembický).

Figs 30–34 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 30–34. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), male, paramere (different orientations, magnification 190×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 6–12 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 6–12. Physopelta (Physopelta) robusta Stål, 1863. 6–7 – pygophore (6 – dorsal view, magnification 50×; 7 – lateral view, 47×). 8–12 – paramere (different orientations, 150×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm (Figs 8–12), 0.5 mm (Figs 6–7). (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 81–84 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 81–84. Kmentia festiva (Fabricius, 1803), male. 81 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 47×); 82 – detail of procoxa and protrochanter (70×); 83 – ventral surface of profemur (32×); 84 – detail of peritreme (150×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm (Fig. 84), 0.5 mm (Figs 81–83). (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 70–74 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 70–74. Physopelta (Afrophysopelta) melanoptera Distant, 1904, male, pygophore: 70 – intact, dorsal view (magnification 80×), 71 – dissected, dorsal view (75×), 72 – intact, postero-dorsal view (80×), 73 – intact, posterior view (80×), 74 – intact, lateral view (85×). Scale bars: 0.5 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 93–98 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 93–98. Kmentia festiva (Fabricius, 1803). 93 – female; 94 – male; 95–96 – fore leg (95 – large male, 96 – small male); 97 – ventral surface of profemur. 98 – Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), ventral surface of profemur. (Photos: L. Dembický).

Figs 64–69 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 64–69. Physopelta (Afrophysopelta) melanoptera Distant, 1904, male. 64 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 75×); 65 – detail of procoxa and protrochanter (110×); 66–67 – profemur: 66 – anterior view (35×), 67 – ventral surface (70×); 68 – external scent efferent system (100×); 69 – peritreme and evaporatorium (170×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm (Figs 64, 66–68), 0.5 mm (Figs 65, 69). (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 52–59 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 52–59. Physopelta (Physopeltoides) dentipes sp. nov., male. 52–54 – pygophore: 52 – dorsal view (magnification 75×), 53 – postero-dorsal view (75×), 54 – lateral view (70×). 55–59 – paramere (different orientations; 230×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 48–51 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 48–51. Physopelta (Physopeltoides) dentipes sp. nov., male, paratype. 48 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 60×), 49 – detail of procoxa and protrochanter (90×), 50 – fore leg, anterior view (35×), 51 – ventral surface of profemur (40×). Scale bars: 0.5 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 1–5 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 1–5. Physopelta (Physopelta) robusta Stål, 1863, male. 1 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 47×), 2 – detail of procoxa and basal portion of trochanter (stridulatoty process marked with white arrow) (70×), 3 – external scent efferent system (40×), 4 – detail of ostiole and peritreme (140×), 5 – ventral surface of profemur (23×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm (Fig. 4), 0.5 mm (Figs 1–3), 1 mm (Fig. 5). (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 26–29 in Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae)

Figs 26–29. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), male, pygophore (magnification 50×): 26 – dorsal view, 27 – postero-dorsal view, 28 – posterior view, 29 – lateral view. Scale bars: 0.5 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

opencc-zeroApr 2022View details →

dryad40/100

Data from: A coherent biogeographic framework for Old World Neogene and Pleistocene mammals

<p>In order to understand mammalian evolution and compute a wide range of biodiversity indices, we commonly use spatial division adapted to ecological and evolutionary constraints called bioregion. While commonly conducted by neontologists, the establishment of bioregions in palaeontology is generally a secondary analysis, shaped on subjective time scales and areas specific to the investigated questions and groups. This heterogeneity, coupled with the scale-dependency of biodiversity indices, prevents the clear identification of macroecological and macroevolutionary trends for large taxonomic groups like extinct mammals. Here we tackle this issue by providing a coherent framework for Neogene and Pleistocene mammals of the Old World following two steps: (A) a temporal scale adapted to mammalian evolutionary history (i.e. evolutionary fauna) is defined by poly-cohort analysis, and (B) bioregions are then computed for each evolutionary fauna by clustering, ordination and intermediate approaches at multiples spatial scales (i.e. continental to regional) for Eurasia and Africa. Additionally, providing a coherent framework for a wide range of mammalian datasets, our results show: (1) the synchronous emergence and fall of five mammalian evolutionary faunas identified at chronological scales varying from the epoch to the geological stage; (2) a transition from a longitudinal to a latitudinal biogeographical structuring between the Miocene and Pliocene, especially in Europe; (3) the long-term affinity of southern Asian with African faunas, in sharp contrast with the modern Palearctic bioregion extension; and (4) the establishment of a vast Mediterranean bioregion from fragmented areas in late Miocene to its full extent in the Pleistocene.</p>

dryad40/100

Phylogenomics of fresh and formalin specimens resolves the systematics of old world mud snakes (Serpentes: Homalopsidae) and expands biogeographic inference

<p>The known biodiversity of Asia and Australasia is continuously expanding with more focused studies on systematics of various groups and the respective biogeography. Historically, fluctuating sea-levels and cyclic connection and separation of now-disjunct landmasses have been invoked to explain the accumulation of biodiversity via species pump mechanisms. However, recent research has shown that geological shifts of the mainland and dispersal events may be better explanations of the biodiversity in these regions. We investigate these processes using the poorly-studied and geographically widespread Mud Snakes (Serpentes: Homalopsidae) using a target capture approach of ~4,800 nuclear loci from fresh tissues and supplemental mitochondrial data from formalin tissues from museum specimens. We use these datasets to reconstruct the first resolved phylogeny of the group, identify their biogeographic origins, and test hypotheses regarding the roles of sea-level change and habitat selection on their diversification. Divergence dating and ancestral range estimation yielded support for an Oligocene origin and diversification from mainland Southeast Asia and Sundaland in the rear-fanged group ~20 million years ago, followed by eastward and westward dispersal. GeoHiSSE models indicate that niche expansion of ancestral rear-fanged lineages into aquatic environments did not impact their diversification rates. Our results highlight that Pleistocene sea-level changes and habitat specificity did not primarily lead to the extant species richness of Homalopsidae, and that, alternatively, geological shifts in mainland Southeast Asia may be a major driver of diversity in this group. We also emphasize the importance of using fresh and degraded tissues, and both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, for filling in knowledge gaps in poorly known, but highly diverse and conceptually important groups, constituting a non-traditional model study system for understanding transitions between terrestrial, marine, and freshwater environments.</p>

opencc-zeroJun 2024View details →

Figs 90–95 in A Review Of The Old World Species Of Ceroptera Macquart, 1835 (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae)

Figs 90–95. Ceroptera setiscutellata sp. n., male sternite 5 and genitalia: 90 = epandrium, cerci andsubepandrialsclerite (partlycovered), caudalview, 91 = hypandrium, ventralview, 92 =sternite 5, ventralview, 93 = postgonite, broadest (sublateral) view, 94 = leftsurstylus, broadest (sublateral) view, 95 = phallusandphallapodeme. Scales: 0.2 mmforFigs 90–92,

Figs 44–48. Ceroptera pelengensis Vanschuytbroeck, 1959 in A Review Of The Old World Species Of Ceroptera Macquart, 1835 (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae)

Figs 44–48. Ceroptera pelengensis Vanschuytbroeck, 1959 (Aspinilimosina ndelelensis (Vanschuytbroeck, 1959), syn. n.), holotypefemale: 44 = apexofhindtibiawithbasitarsus, lat- eral view, 45 = tergites 6 to 8, dorsal view, 46 = epiproct and cerci, dorsal view, 47 = sperma- thecae, 48 = sternite 8 and hypoproct, ventral view. Scales: 0.4 mm for Fig. 44, 0.2 mm for Figs 45–46, 48, 0.1 mm for Fig. 47.

Figs 78–83 in A Review Of The Old World Species Of Ceroptera Macquart, 1835 (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae)

Figs 78–83. Ceroptera moroccana sp. n., male, sternite 5 and genitalia: 78 = sternite 5, ventral view, 79 = anteriorlobeofleftsurstylus, broadest (sublateral) view, 80 = posteriorlobeof leftsurstylus, broadest (sublateral-subcaudal) view, 81 = phallusandphallapodeme, lateral view, 82 = postgonite, lateralview, 83 = contoursofsubepandrialsclerite, inner (anterior)

Figs 60–63 in A Review Of The Old World Species Of Ceroptera Macquart, 1835 (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae)

Figs 60–63. Ceropteraglobosa sp. n., malegenitalia: 60 = epandrium, cerciandsubepandrial sclerite, caudalview, 61 = phalluswithejaculatoryapodeme, lateralview, 62 = medialpart ofphallusinhighermagnification, lateralview, 63 = postgoniteandphallapodeme, lateral

Figs 64–70 in A Review Of The Old World Species Of Ceroptera Macquart, 1835 (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae)

Figs 64–70. Ceroptera inermis sp. n., male: 64 = hind 5th tarsomere, ventral view, 65 = sternite 5, ventralview, 66 = cerciandsurstyliwithsubepandrialsclerite (covered), caudalview, 67 = hypandrium, ventral view, 68 = postgonite with medial part of hypandrium, lateral view, 69 = leftsurstylus, lateralview, 70 = phallusandphallapodeme, lateralview (e: empodium,