Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 10 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 10. Comparisons of inflammatory cells recruited to inflammatory foci in cane toads, Rhinella marina (a) and native frogs, Cyclorana australis (b). Each anuran species was exposed to infective larvae of Rhabdias hylae (white bars) and Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala (grey bars). Graphs show average values ± 1 S.E.M.

Fig. 7 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 7. Histological investigation of lungworm infection in anurans. Graphs show the proportion of (a) metamorph native frogs (Cyclorana australis) and (b) metamorph cane toads (Rhinella marina) infected with lungworms, not infected with lungworms, or with inflammatory 'foci' (probable cases of a lungworm larva penetrating the anuran's body but failing to survive).

Fig. 2 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 2. The distribution of lungworm larvae in cane toad metamorphs. (a) Toad metamorphs infected with Rhabdias hylae (native frog lungworm) and (b) toad metamorphs infected with Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala (cane toad lungworm). Data in panel (b) are from Pizzatto et al. (2010), with permission. LUNG refers to adult lungworms found within the lung, SKIN/MUSCLE refers to larvae found in the skeletal muscle or subcutaneous tissue, HEAD refers to larvae detected in the head or neck region (excluding those found in eye tissue), EYE indicates larvae found in the eye or periocular tissue, and COELOM denotes larvae within the coelom or coelomic membranes.

Fig. 1. Histological image depicting a in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 1. Histological image depicting a transverse section of (a) R. hylae larva in the connective tissue of the head of a cane toad and (b) the inflammatory response composed primarily of macrophages and multinucleated giant cells surrounding the parasite. Haematoxylin and eosin stain, 400× magnification, scale bar equals 30 μm.

Fig. 4 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 4. Effect of time since exposure to Rhabdias hylae larvae on cane toad metamorphs: (a) shows the number of larvae found in toads and (b) shows the number of foci (areas of inflammation with no visible larvae) in toads, as determined by histological methods.

Fig. 9 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 9. Change in the average number of inflammatory foci (probable cases of larval parasites breaking down) observed in all anurans over time. Graph shows average values ± 1 S.E.M.

Fig. 6 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 6. Effects of Rhabdias hylae infection on cane toad metamorphs: (a) the average percentage of neutrophils and (b) lymphocytes around inflammation sites over time in cane toads infected with Rhabdias hylae. Graphs show average values ±1 S.E.M.

Fig. 3 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 3. The state of Rhabdias hylae larvae in cane toads as a function of days-post treatment. The graph shows larval numbers as the percentage of total larvae that were seen at each time period.

Fig. 5 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 5. Average inflammation severity surrounding Rhabdias hylae larvae and foci (probable larvae being broken down by the host's immune system) within infected cane toads at different numbers of days post-infection. Graph shows average values ±1 S.E.M.

Fig. 8 in Host-parasite interactions during a biological invasion: The fate of lungworms (Rhabdias spp.) inside native and novel anuran hosts

Fig. 8. Changes through time (days post-infection) on the relative numbers of anurans that were infected with lungworms, and that contained adult versus juvenile stages of the parasites involved. Data are shown for two lungworm species (Rhabdias hylae from native frogs, and Rhabdias pseudosphaerocephala from invasive cane toads) and for two types of host: the native frog, Cyclorana australis, and the cane toad, Rhinella marina. The panels show data for (a) C. australis infected with R. pseudosphaerocephala, (b) C. australis infected with R. hylae, (c) cane toads infected with R. pseudosphaerocephala and (d) cane toads infected with R. hylae.

Fig. 5 in First record of viviparity in polystomatid flatworms (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) with the description of two new species of Madapolystoma from the Madagascan anuran hosts Blommersia domerguei and Mantella expectata

Fig. 5. Scatter diagram of a × c plotted against b × c for all known Madapolystoma spp., M. magnahami n. sp. and M. isaloensis n. sp. The ellipses represent 95% of the confidence interval about the mean.

Fig. 4. a–b in First record of viviparity in polystomatid flatworms (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) with the description of two new species of Madapolystoma from the Madagascan anuran hosts Blommersia domerguei and Mantella expectata

Fig. 4. a–b) Ventral view of M. isaloensis n. sp. holotype. (c) Hamuli from mature specimens and (d) Marginal hooklets 1–8. Scale bars: B, 200 μm; C, 100 μm; D, 20 μm. Abbreviations: de, developing embryo; ee, early embryo; ev, excretory vessel; gb, genital bulb; gc, genito-intestinal canal; ha, hamuli. hp, haptor; ic, intestinal caecum; mh, marginal hooklet; mo, mouth; ph, pharynx; su, sucker; sv, seminal vesicle; va, vagina; vd, vas deferens; vi, vitelline follicles; vv, vitelline duct.

Fig. 3. a–b in First record of viviparity in polystomatid flatworms (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) with the description of two new species of Madapolystoma from the Madagascan anuran hosts Blommersia domerguei and Mantella expectata

Fig. 3. a–b) Ventral view of M. magnahami n. sp. holotype. (c) Hamuli from mature specimens and (d) Marginal hooklets 1 (top) and 2–8 (bottom). Scale bars: B, 500 μm; C, 100 μm; D, 25 μm. Abbreviations: em, embryo; ev, excretory vessel; gb, genital bulb; gc, genito-intestinal canal; ha, hamuli. hp, haptor; ic, intestinal caecum; mh, marginal hooklet; mo, mouth; pe, potential embryo; ph, pharynx; su, sucker; sv, seminal vesicle; va, vagina; vd, vas deferens; vi, vitelline follicles; vv, vitelline duct.

Fig. 2 in First record of viviparity in polystomatid flatworms (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) with the description of two new species of Madapolystoma from the Madagascan anuran hosts Blommersia domerguei and Mantella expectata

Fig. 2. Minimum Evolution tree for Madapolystoma spp. Numbers on nodes indicate bootstrap support values. Madapolystoma sp. from B. domerguei refers to M. magnahami n. sp. and Madapolystoma sp. from M. expectata refers to M. isaloensis n. sp.

Fig. 1. a in First record of viviparity in polystomatid flatworms (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) with the description of two new species of Madapolystoma from the Madagascan anuran hosts Blommersia domerguei and Mantella expectata

Fig. 1. a) Map of Madagascar with the distribution areas and sampling localities of the two investigated frogs; b) Blommersia domerguei; c) Mantella expectata. (Map-Library, 2007).

Figure 7 in Chondrocranial differences in Bufotes variabilis (Anura: Bufonidae): geometric morphometric comparison with two anuran species

Figure 7. DFA results among three anuran species (B. variabilis, R. macrocnemis, and H. orientalis).

Figure 6 in Chondrocranial differences in Bufotes variabilis (Anura: Bufonidae): geometric morphometric comparison with two anuran species

Figure 6. Scatter plot of CVA among three species (B. variabilis, R. macrocnemis, and H. orientalis) and positive (right) and negative (left) curvature of landmarks on CV1.

Figure 2 in Chondrocranial differences in Bufotes variabilis (Anura: Bufonidae): geometric morphometric comparison with two anuran species

Figure 2. Larval chondrocranium in different species. A) B. variabilis, stage 31; B) R. macrocnemis, stage 29; C) H. orientalis, stage 34. ct, cornu trabeculae; lop, larval otic process; cqo, commissura quadratoorbitalis; sc, suprarostral cartilage.

Figure 1 in Chondrocranial differences in Bufotes variabilis (Anura: Bufonidae): geometric morphometric comparison with two anuran species

Figure 1. The suprarostral cartilages in different species. A) B. variabilis, stage 28; B) R. macrocnemis, stage 35; C) H. orientalis, stage 31. cc, central corpus; la, lateral ala.

Figure 3 in Chondrocranial differences in Bufotes variabilis (Anura: Bufonidae): geometric morphometric comparison with two anuran species

Figure 3. Hyobranchial skeleton in different species. A) B. variabilis, stage 45; B) R. macrocnemis, stage 46; C) H. orientalis, stage 44. alp, anterolateral process; c, corpus; h, hyale; plp, posterolateral process; pmp, posteromedial process.