Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
275
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
275 results for “living fossils”
Figure 11 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 11. Some elements of the skull roof of osteoglossids in dorsal view. A, Osteoglossum bicirrhosum (190 mm SL; drawn after Taverne, 1977: fig. 44). B, †Phareodus testis (composite, drawn after Taverne, 1978: fig. 4). C, †Brychaetus muelleri (composite, drawn after Taverne, 1978: fig. 22). Note the distinctive anterior supraorbital shelf present in †Phareodus and †Brychaetus. This character is described by Li & Wilson (1996a: character 25) as the condition of having the anterior portion of the frontal at least as twice as wide as the posterior portion (see also discussion in Li et al., 1997a). It is proposed here, however, that the 'supraorbital shelf ' is recognizable as a distinct structure. Anterior facing left.
Figure 10 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 10. Extrascapular bones in dorsal view. A, Hiodon alosoides (UMA F10586, 273 mm SL). B, Chitala chitala (UMA F10349, 437 mm SL). C, Scleropages formosus (UMA F11266, approx. 320 mm SL). Dashed lines indicate path of the supratemporal sensory canal; note that this sensory canal is not enclosed in the extrascapular in Chitala. Anterior facing left. Illustration of Hiodon modified from Hilton (2002: fig. 28).
Figure 8 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 8. Otic and occipital region in lateral or posterolateral view. A, Alosa sapidissima (UMA F10359, 390 mm SL). B, Hiodon alosoides (UMA F10581, 315 mm SL). C, Chitala chitala (UMA F10349, 437 mm SL). D, Campylomormyrus tamandua (FMNH 51337, 145 mm SL). E, Osteoglossum bicirrhosum (UMA F10160, 365 mm SL). F, Pantodon buchholzi (UMA F11265, approx. 50 mm SL). Dashed red line indicates the outline of the temporal fossa. Illustration of Hiodon modified from Hilton (2002: fig. 21). Anterior facing left.
Figure 20 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 20. Infraorbital bones in lateral view. A, Elops saurus (UMA F11258, 62 mm SL). B, Hiodon alosoides (UMA F10150, 293 mm SL). C, Chitala chitala (UMA F10349, 437 mm SL). D, Petrocephalus simus (MCZ 50113, 54 mm SL). E, Campylomormyrus tamandua (FMNH 55300B, 84 mm SL). F, Arapaima gigas (UMA F11261, 145 mm SL). G, Scleropages formosus (FMNH uncatalogued in Geology Department, 67 mm SL). H, Pantodon buchholzi (UMA F11264, 70 mm SL). Anterior facing left. Illustration of Hiodon modified from Hilton (2002: fig. 36). Illustrations of Arapaima, Petrocephalus and Campylomormyrus are of right side; images reversed so anterior facing left.
Figure 6. A-E in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 6. A-E, the five most parsimonious cladograms and F, their strict consensus resulting from analysis of the data matrix in Appendix 1 with the exclusion of all fossil taxa. Note that the strict consensus of these trees (F) is consistent with that for the full analysis (Fig. 5).
Figure 1 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 1. Schemes of interrelationships among 'lower' teleostean fishes, drawn after: A, Cope (1871a,b); B, Garstang (1931); C, Gosline (1961); and D, Greenwood et al. (1966). Bold-face indicates taxa considered here to belong in Osteoglossomorpha. Question marks and dashed lines indicate the author's doubt concerning the exact placement of a taxon. These diagrams were translated from textual classifications (with the exception of Greenwood et al.'s, which is partly redrawn from their fig. 1), and therefore are somewhat extrapolated (i.e. some of these authors indicated ancestors, which have been redrawn as sister groups).
Figure 36 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 36. Caudal skeleton of a large juvenile and an adult Arapaima gigas. A, photograph and B, line drawing of an estimated 780 mm SL specimen (FMNH 85741). C, photograph and D, line drawing of an estimated 1270 mm SL specimen (UMA F11263). Fin rays dissected away in C & D; fin rays omitted from drawings. Note that in FMNH 85741 (A & B), the fusion of the uroneural to hypural 6 is very nearly complete; these elements are completely fused in UMA F11263 (C & D). Also note the double haemal arches and likely double (although fused) neural arches on pu2 in FMNH 85741 (A & B). Anterior facing left.
Figure 9 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 9. Skull roof in dorsal view. A, Elops saurus (UMA F10255, 425 mm SL). B, Arapaima gigas (UMA F11262, approx. 240 mm SL). C, Hiodon alosoides (UMA F10581, 315 mm SL). D, Chitala chitala (UMA F10349, 437 mm SL). Anterior facing left. Illustration of Hiodon modified from Hilton (2002: fig. 9).
Figure 2 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 2. Hypotheses of osteoglossomorph interrelationships, redrawn from: A, Nelson (1968); B, Greenwood (1973); C, Taverne (1979); and D, Li & Wilson (1996a). The letters in Taverne's phylogeny are the ancestral 'forms' that Taverne described in his text. Question marks and dashed lines indicate the author's doubt concerning the placement of a taxon.
Figure 5 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 5. The strict consensus of the two equally parsimonious cladograms shown in Fig. 4. Numbers above the nodes are the Bremer support; numbers below the nodes are bootstrap values (5000 replicates).
Figure 13 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 13. Skull roof of an adult specimen of Heterotis niloticus (MCZ 50959, adult, unknown SL) in dorsal view. A, photograph. B, line drawing. Note that the left opercle was removed, the exoccipitals are missing, and the dermosphenotic and infraorbital 4 of the left side are fused in this specimen. Anterior facing left.
Figure 4 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 4. The two fundamental most parsimonious trees resulting from analysis of the data matrix provided in Appendix 1; characters and character states described in text are listed in Appendix 2. The strict consensus is provided in Fig. 5. These trees both have a length of 171 steps, a consistency index (CI) of 0.6433 (0.6139 excluding uninformative characters, a homoplasy index (HI) of 0.3977 (0.3861 excluding uninformative characters), a retention index (RI) of 0.7782 and a rescaled consistency index (RC) of 0.5006. Letters above the nodes correspond to those listed in the text under the heading Character Optimization and Node Support.
Figure 19 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 19. Photographs of neurocrania in anterolateral view showing aspects of the trigeminofacialis chamber in four osteoglossomorphs. A, Hiodon alosoides (UMA F10581, 315 mm SL). B, Chitala chitala (UMA F10349, 437 mm SL). C, Pantodon buchholzi (UMA F11265, approx. 50 mm SL). D, Gnathonemus petersii (UMA F11267, approx. 140 mm SL). Arrows indicate position of the foramen for the nerve historically called the combined cranial nerves V and VII; this nerve likely contains a portion of the anteroventral lateral line nerve as well. In Gnathonemus, as in some other mormyroids, there are two separate foramina (i.e. one for V and one for VII).
Figure 3 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 3. Hypotheses of osteoglossomorph interrelationships, redrawn from: A, Shen (1996); B, Bonde (1996); C, Taverne (1998). Question marks and dashed lines indicate doubt concerning the placement of a taxon. Note that Shen's (1996) hypothesis places several fossil taxa that are commonly regarded as osteoglossomorphs outside the group (e.g. †Jiaohichthys, †Lycoptera, †Tongxinichthys & †Plesiolycoptera). Taverne's (1998) hypothesis resulted from analysis of 344 characters, although these were presented as a list rather than in the form of a data matrix, and some characters were reversals of others (see Cavin & Forey, 2001). Note that Taverne (1998) considered †Brychaetus to be distantly related to †Phareodus (contrary to Li et al., 1997a), and he considered both genera to be paraphyletic. Contrary to Li & Wilson (1996a), Taverne (1998) considered †Ostariostoma and †Lycoptera to be closely related to the hiodontids, †Singida to be relatively basal, and the monophyly of Scleropages to be uncertain.
Figure 21 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 21. Infraorbital bones of Elops and osteoglossomorphs showing different numbering strategies employed by Nelson (1969), Li & Wilson (1996a), and the present study. Nelson's and Li & Wilson's numbering systems are given anterior to posterior, and distinct elements are separated by commas. All are redrawn from those illustrated by Nelson (1969) except for †Lycoptera, which is from Jin et al. (1995) (Nelson did not illustrate †Lycoptera in his study). Black dots indicate position of the neuromast organ(s) associated with each element.
Figure 26 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 26. Suspensorium and opercular bones of Heterotis niloticus (MCZ 50959, adult, unknown SL) in medial view. A, photograph. B, line drawing. Note the reduced subopercle. The element labelled 'dpl + ecp' has been suggested in the past to be a fusion of the dermopalatine and the ectopterygoid, although no ontogenetic evidence supports this (see Character 30). Anterior facing right.
Figure 34 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 34. Abdominal region of Notopteridae. A, Abdominal region of Chitala sp. (UMA F10341, 75 mm SL), showing several features characteristic of the family Notopteridae. Note particularly the abdominal scutes, abdominal ribs, elongate second and third true ribs (perhaps abdominal ribs and true ribs that have fused), anal scutes and an enlarged proximal radial of the first anal pterygiophore. The abdominal ribs develop like true ribs and may fuse to the true ribs; the autogenous abdominal ribs are marked with arrows. There is a small cartilaginous element that is developed posterior to the last ossified abdominal rib, which likely is the fifth autogenous abdominal rib. B, close-up of pelvic fin region showing details of the pelvic girdle, abdominal scutes and the proximal radial of the first anal pterygiophore. Note that the abdominal and anal scutes are both paired structures.
Figure 33 in Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)
Figure 33. Some elements of the left branchial arches of A, Heterotis niloticus (UMA F10653, 75 mm SL) and B, Pantodon buchholzi (FMNH 63752, 74 mm SL) in dorsal and medial views showing position of the accessory cartilages associated with the fourth and fifth branchial arches. Gill rakers omitted. Cartilage shown in black. Anterior facing right.
Supporting data for: The de novo genome of the Black-necked Snakefly (Venustoraphidia nigricollis Albarda, 1891): A resource to study the evolution of living fossils
<p>Snakeflies (Raphidioptera) are the smallest order of holometabolous insects that have kept their distinct and name-giving appearance since the Mesozoic, probably since the Jurassic, and possibly even since their emergence in the Carboniferous, more than 300 million years ago. Despite their interesting nature and numerous publications on their morphology, taxonomy, systematics, and biogeography, snakeflies have never received much attention from the general public, and only a few studies were devoted to their molecular biology. Due to this lack of molecular data, it is therefore unknown, if the conserved morphological nature of these living fossils translates to conserved genomic structures. Here, we present the first genome of the species and of the entire order of Raphidioptera. The final genome assembly has a total length of 669 Mbp and reached a high continuity with an N50 of 5.07 Mbp. Further quality controls also indicate a high completeness and no meaningful contamination. The newly generated data was used in a large-scaled phylogenetic analysis of snakeflies using shared orthologous sequences. Quartet score and gene-concordance analyses revealed high amounts of conflicting signals within this group that might speak for substantial incomplete lineage sorting and introgression after their presumed re-radiation after the asteroid impact 66 million years ago. Overall, this reference genome will be a door-opening dataset for many future research applications, and we demonstrated its utility in a phylogenetic analysis that provides new insights into the evolution of this group of living fossils.</p>
Data for: Reliable biogeography requires fossils: Insights from a new species-level phylogeny of extinct and living carnivores
<p>A central objective of historical biogeography is to understand where clades originated and how they moved across space and over time. However, given the dynamic history of ecosystem changes in response to climate change and geologic events, the manifold long-distance dispersals over evolutionary timescales, and regional and global extinctions, it remains uncertain how reliable inferences based solely on extant taxa can be achieved. Using a novel species-level phylogeny of all known extant and extinct species of the mammalian order Carnivora and related extinct groups, we show that far more precise and accurate ancestral areas can be estimated by fully integrating extinct species into the analyses, rather than solely relying on extant species or identifying ancestral areas only based on the geography of the oldest fossils. Through a series of simulations, we further show that this conclusion is robust under realistic scenarios in which the unknown extinct taxa represent a biased subset of all extinct species. Our results highlight the importance of integrating fossil taxa into a phylogenetic framework to further improve our understanding of historical biogeography and reveal the dynamic dispersal and diversification history of carnivores.</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.