Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 11 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 11. Distribution of larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) in the Loma Candelaria section, western Cuba (modified from Torres-Silva et al. 2017).

Figure 15. Nummulites striatoreticulatus Rutten. A–C in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 15. Nummulites striatoreticulatus Rutten. A–C, Entronque de Herradura; A, 98LC-2-686; B, 98LC-2-687; C, 98LC-2-1a. D–F, Loma Candelaria; D, 98LC-1-660; E, 98LC-1-630; F, 98LC-1-806. G–K, La Esperanza; G, E-126-474; H, E-126-466; I, E-126-458; J, E-126-470, gaps in the septa between adjacent alar prolongations of the chambers; K, E-126-459; L, M, Loma El Santo; L, CA-215- 865; M, CA-215- 65. A, B, E, F, H, I, L and M are A forms in equatorial section; C, D, G and J are A forms in axial section.

Figure 13 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 13. Distribution of larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) in the Norona section, western Cuba (modified from Torres-Silva et al. 2017).

Figure 10 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 10. Distribution of larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) in the Entronque de Herradura section, western Cuba.

Figure 8 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 8. Palaeogeographical distribution of the Eocene nummulitid species found at the Cuban localities. Map adapted from Pindell (2009).

Figure 19 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 19. Discriminant analysis of nummulitid species, where the important discriminators are ranked along the discriminant functions. Orange arrows indicate possible source of morphological changes. A, discriminant analysis within Nummulites striatoreticulatus at localities 98LC-2, 98LC-2 and E-126. B, discriminant analysis within Operculinoides floridensis at localities 98 LC-1, CA-215 and CA-216. C, discriminant analysis within O. soldadensis at localities 98LC-1, CA-125 and NOR-UN.

Figure 7. A in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 7. A, schematic diagram showing the Eocene depositional environments in sections from western and central Cuba (modified from Cotton 2012). B, schematic diagram showing depth zonation of nummulitid species and larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) present in the Eocene section across the depositional gradient (modified from Beavington-Penney & Racey 2004).

Figure 4 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 4. Discriminant analysis of nummulitid species, where the important discriminators are ranked along the discriminant functions. A, discriminant analysis between Operculinoides and Palaeonummulites species; B, discriminant analysis within Nummulites striatoreticulatus from different localities; C, discriminant analysis within O. floridensis from different localities; D, discriminant analysis within O. soldadensis from different localities.

Figure 9 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 9. Distribution of larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) in the Angelita Quarry section, western Cuba.

Figure 6 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 6. Stratigraphical ranges of the nummulitid species from the Cuban sections and their correlation with the standard planktonic zones. A, Pearson et al. (2006); B, Berggren et al. (1995); C, Martini (1971); D, Agnini et al. (2014).

Figure 5. Ordinations and discriminant analysis. A in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 5. Ordinations and discriminant analysis. A, two-dimensional ordination of studied specimens; genera are separated by different shapes (squares = Operculinoides; polygons = Palaeonummulites; triangles = Heterostegina). B, three-dimensional ordination of the studied specimens emphasizes the variation in the third component, highlighting the differentiation between Heterostegina sp. indet. and Operculinoides. C, discriminant analysis of Heterostegina species and Operculinoides or Palaeonummulites species; parameters are sorted in order of their importance as discriminators.

Figure 2 in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 2. Measurements of characters in equatorial section. A, embryonic apparatus; B, marginal test spiral; C, chamber measurements; D, example individual, Operculinoides floridensis, specimen 98LC-1H-648.

Figure 1. A in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 1. A, schematic tectonic map of western and central Cuba (after Iturrlade-Vinent 1994), with locations of the stratigraphical sections and samples. B, stratigraphical relations of Eocene units in western and central Cuba, slightly modified from Garćıa-Delgado & Torres-Silva (1997); stratigraphical ranges of the studied sections: A, 98LC-2; B, 98LC-1; C, LM-52; D, NOR-UN; E, 98MT-1; F, E-126; G, CA-215.

Figure 3. A in Morphometric analysis of Eocene nummulitids in western and central Cuba: taxonomy, biostratigraphy and evolutionary trends

Figure 3. A, two-dimensional ordination of studied specimens; colours accord with the results of the K-means cluster analysis. Numbers indicate the measured type material: 1, Nummulites stritoreticulatus, holotype; 2, N. macgillavry (from Butterlin 1981); 3, Operculinoides trinitatensis, holotype; 4, O. spiralis, holotype; 5. O. kugleri, holotype; 6, N. trinitatensis (from Butterlin 1961); 7, O. willcoxi (from Barker 1939); 8, O. willcoxi (from Cole 1941); 9, O. floridensis (from Frost & Langenheim 1974); 10, O. floridensis (from Cole 1941); 11, O. floridensis (from Cole 1941); 12, O. soldadensis (from Vaughan & Cole 1941); 13, O. suteri (from Caudri 1996); 14, N. floridensis (from Butterlin 1961). B, three-dimensional ordination of the studied specimens emphasizes the variation in the third component, highlighting the differentiation between Nummulites from 98LC-2 and Palaeonummulites from 98LC-1. C, discriminant analysis between the interpreted species: Nummulites striatoreticulatus, Palaeonummulites trinitatensis, Operculinoides floridensis and Operculinoides soldadensis; parameters are sorted in order of their importance as discriminators.

Figure 2 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 2. Hypothetical visualization of morphology in a single dimension. Trait morphology is normally distributed, whereby the mean morphology (solid vertical arrow) should form the type specimen. Morphospecies with high intraspecific variation may be represented by the dot-dashed distribution curve. Conversely, morphospecies with moderate and low intraspecific variation are represented by the dashed and dotted distribution curves, respectively. Finer taxonomic splitting results in more morphospecies with a narrow (dotted line) distribution curve. SD: standard deviation.

Figure 20 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 20. Example of circularity and curvature values for Globigerinoidesella fistulosa specimens. More lobate values are those in blue, those less lobate are red. Specimens 1 and 2 are more elongate and possess the lowest circularity values, but have a low perimeter length compared to test area and thus also generate low curvature values. Conversely, specimens 3 and 4 have high curvature values due to the protuberances increasing the perimeter length, but also relatively high circularity values because of the large area compared to test diameter (see Material and methods). Scale bar = 200 Lm.

Figure 15 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 15. Protuberance development from immaturus and quadrilobatus morphotypes resulting in fistulosa morphotypes (light microscope images). A, Trilobatus quadrilobatus (d'Orbigny, 1846); B, C, Trilobatus immaturus (LeRoy, 1939); D–F, Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (Schubert, 1910). A, ODP Site 1115, Woodlark Basin, western Pacific; 11H/04/25–27 cm (umbilical view). B, C, ODP Site 1115, Woodlark Basin, western Pacific; 11H/04/25–27 cm (umbilical view). D–F, ODP Site 1115, Woodlark Basin, western Pacific; 11H/04/25–27 cm (umbilical view). Scale bar = 100 Lm.

Figure 16 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 16. Size and ontogeny contrasts in the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus. A–D, Trilobatus sacculifer (Brady, 1877); E, Trilobatus trilobus (Reuss, 1850); F, Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (Schubert, 1910). A–D, GLOW-3, south-west Indian Ocean (A, D, spiral view; B, C, umbilical view, B is similar to subsacculifer morphospecies, see text). E, GLOW-3, south-west Indian Ocean (spiral view; earlier whorls obscured). F, ODP Site 1115, Woodlark Basin, western Pacific; 11H/04/25–27 cm (spiral view). Scale bars = 100 Lm.

Figure 1 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 1. Phylogenetic interpretations of the evolution of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus. A, phylogeny of Banner & Blow (1960); B, phylogeny of Keller (1981) based on a stratophenetic investigation (average 12,000-year resolution sampling) of Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) Site 292 (north-western Pacific Ocean); C, phylogeny of Srinivasan & Kennett (1981) and Kennett & Srinivasan (1983). Note that the original nomenclatural combinations (binomial and trinomial) used in the authors' separate phylogenies are retained for this figure.

Figure 22 in Systematic taxonomy of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus and descendant Globigerinoidesella fistulosa (planktonic foraminifera)

Figure 22. Exponential relationship between maximum test size and test surface area in morphospecies of the Trilobatus sacculifer plexus, and to a lesser extent in Globigerinoidesella fistulosa. The T. sacculifer plexus morphospecies all show comparable relationships, whereas data for G. fistulosa show more scatter.