Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 5 in Geographic Range Updates for the Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) of Northern Ontario, Canada

Fig. 5. Northern Ontario distribution map showing new and previous collection records for Cicindela hirticollis.

Fig. 9 in Geographic Range Updates for the Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) of Northern Ontario, Canada

Fig. 9. Northern Ontario distribution map showing new and previous collection records for Cicindela repanda.

Fig. 3 in Geographic Range Updates for the Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) of Northern Ontario, Canada

Fig. 3. Northern Ontario distribution map showing new and previous collection records for Cicindela duodecimguttata.

Fig. 8 in Geographic Range Updates for the Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) of Northern Ontario, Canada

Fig. 8. Northern Ontario distribution map showing previous collection records for Cicindela purpurea.

opennotspecifiedJun 2019View details →

Fig. 2 in Leaping Somersaults by Larvae are Phylogenetically Widespread and Likely Primitive for Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 2. Still frames from high-speed video of a larva of Omus dejeani performing leaping somersaults.

opennotspecifiedJun 2019View details →

Fig. 1 in Leaping Somersaults by Larvae are Phylogenetically Widespread and Likely Primitive for Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 1. Still frames from high-speed video of a larva of Tetracha carolina performing leaping somersaults.

opennotspecifiedJun 2008View details →

Figs. 1–10. Cosmodela batesi.1 in Larval Description of the Tiger BeetleCosmodela batesi(Fleutiaux, 1893) (Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Figs. 1–10. Cosmodela batesi.1) pronotum, third instar (left half); 2) pronotum, second instar (left half); 3) left antenna, third instar (dorsal view); 4) right maxilla, third instar (ventral view); 5) hump, third instar (left part, dorsal view); 6) hump, first instar (left part, dorsal view); 7) ninth abdominal segment and pygopod, third instar (dorsal view); 8) ninth abdominal segment and pygopod, third instar (ventral view); 9) ninth abdominal segment and pygopod, first instar (dorsal view); 10) ninth abdominal segment and pygopod, first instar (ventral view). [scale bar 5 1.0 mm].

Fig. 1 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 1. Marking scheme for individual identification of Ohlone tiger beetle adults used during the capturerecapture and frequency of capture studies. Some variation in the maculations exists. Numbers on the elytra represent the positions for marking each beetle with a unique identification number. Marks applied to single or multiple locations uniquely identify each marked beetle. For example, beetle #1 would have a mark at the #1 position, beetle #12 would have marks at the #2 and #10 locations, and beetle #147 would have marks at the #7, #40, and #100 locations.

Fig. 4 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 4. Population curves for adult Ohlone tiger beetle generations at Glenwood, Santa Cruz Co., CA. a) Triangular model in 2016, b) Multi-peak model in 2017.

Fig. 3 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 3. Frequency of observed dispersal distances (m) by Ohlone tiger beetle males (bars with vertical lines) and females (bars with horizontal lines).

Fig. 2 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 2. Recapture decay plot of observed Ohlone tiger beetle adult lifespans (i.e., residence) and fitted trend line

Fig. 6 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 6. Inverse correlation between annual (July 1 – June 30) rainfall amounts (cm) and estimated Ohlone tiger beetle (OTB) adult generation population sizes for Moore Creek, Santa Cruz Co., CA.

Fig. 5. Annual Ohlone tiger beetle adult generation population estimates from 2000 through 2017 in Biology and Conservation of Cicindela ohlone Freitag and Kavanaugh (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae), the Endangered Ohlone Tiger Beetle. II. Population Ecology of Adults and Larvae and Recommended Monitoring Methods

Fig. 5. Annual Ohlone tiger beetle adult generation population estimates from 2000 through 2017 at four study sites near Santa Cruz, CA. Horizontal line represents the average generation size of all annual estimates for each site.

Fig. 1. A in The Tiger Beetle Therates alboobliquatus W. Horn, 1909 (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) Spends Its Immature Stages Inside Rotting Wood

Fig. 1. A) Typical environment in which Therates alboobliquatus adults and larvae were observed, B) Adult female ovipositing in rotting wood (scale bar = 5 mm), C) Egg found inside a piece of rotting wood (scale bar = 1 mm), D) Larva inside a piece of rotting wood (scale bar = 10 mm).

Fig. 4. 1938 in Determining Type Locality Habitat and Historic Land Use at Current Sites of the Miami Tiger Beetle, Cicindelidia floridana (Cartwright) (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 4. 1938 aerial photograph of Richmond pine rocklands and vicinity. White rectangle indicates location of Fig. 5A–D. Pine rockland forests are visible on elevated terrain (diagonally from upper right to lower left), largely adjacent to riverbeds and interspersed with agricultural development (in the lower left quarter).

Fig. 3. Terrestrial photographs from 1940 in Determining Type Locality Habitat and Historic Land Use at Current Sites of the Miami Tiger Beetle, Cicindelidia floridana (Cartwright) (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 3. Terrestrial photographs from 1940 at the site of Barry University. Photographs provided by Barry University Archives and Special Collections.

Fig. 2 in Determining Type Locality Habitat and Historic Land Use at Current Sites of the Miami Tiger Beetle, Cicindelidia floridana (Cartwright) (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 2. Peter's (1981) "island" (outlined area), type locality of Cicidelidia floridana (circle), and approximate location of Fig. 3 (star). A) 1940 aerial photograph, B) 1950 aerial photograph. Satellite image underlay courtesy of Google Earth.

Fig. 5 in Determining Type Locality Habitat and Historic Land Use at Current Sites of the Miami Tiger Beetle, Cicindelidia floridana (Cartwright) (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae)

Fig. 5. Cicindelidia floridana occurrences projected on Richmond pine rocklands. A) 1938 aerial photograph, B) 1952 aerial photograph (arrows indicate areas of modified substrate without canopy), C) 1963 aerial photograph (stars approximately indicate areas with little or no canopy), D) 2017 satellite imagery, courtesy of Google Earth.

opencc-zeroSep 2021View details →

dryad32/100

Genomic distinctness despite shared color patterns among threatened populations of a tiger beetle

Conservation biologists have long debated the value of subspecies, which are morphologically and geographically identifiable but not necessarily evolutionarily distinctive. One example of a controversial subspecies is Cicindela formosa gibsoni, a tiger beetle that is nationally listed as threatened in Canada and whose taxonomic status is based primarily on its unique elytral (forewing) color pattern. To determine whether C. f. gibsoni represents one or more genetically distinctive units, we sampled 14 populations within or near this subspecies' disjunct North American range and assessed their genetic differentiation from neighboring and phenotypically distinctive populations of C. f. formosa and C. f. fletcheri. Instead of clustering by color pattern, analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear markers recovered three geographically structured genetic groupings: a northern cluster from Canada, a southwestern cluster from northwestern Colorado, and a southeastern cluster of US populations east of the Continental Divide. These data, coupled with previously documented differences in larval morphology, suggest that populations of C. formosa in western Canada and northwestern Colorado may have independently evolved similar color patterns. Thus, we consider C. f. gibsoni to be endemic to Canada and describe the novel subspecies C. f. gaumeri ssp. nov. from northwestern Colorado. Both subspecies are evolutionarily significant units, and each deserves consideration for conservation listing. Collectively, our results reveal general congruence between mitochondrial and nuclear genetic data but conflict with color pattern, the conventional basis for subspecies designations in tiger beetles.