Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig 4 in Multigene phylogeny reveals a new Iranian earthworm genus (Lumbricidae: Philomontanus) with three new species

Fig 4. Diagram of external morphology of the Philomontanus species. Yellow, Spermathecae Blue, Male pore Brown, Clitellum Green, Tubercula pubertatis Orange, Variation of Tubercula pubertatis. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208904.g004

Fig 1 in Multigene phylogeny reveals a new Iranian earthworm genus (Lumbricidae: Philomontanus) with three new species

Fig 1. Study area in the Zagros and Elburz Mountains of Iran (This map is originally created by first author, using ArcGIS, Mapping & Analytical platform. Red, Type locality of Philomontanus sarii sp. nov, Elburz Mountains. Green, Type locality of Philomontanus mahmoudi sp. nov, Zagros Mountains. Blue, Type locality of Philomontanus baloutchi sp. nov, Zagros Mountains. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208904.g001

Fig 9 in Four new species of Capsicum (Solanaceae) from the tropical Andes and an update on the phylogeny of the genus

Fig 9. Somatic metaphase chromosomes and ideogram of Capsicum piuranum. (A) Methaphase chromosomes. (B) Ideogram. Solid black blocks or dots denote CMA+/DAPI- (NOR) or CMA+/DAPIo (terminal and intercalary) heterochromatic bands. The NOR is indicated as a separate block. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209792.g009

Fig 8. Capsicum piuranum Barboza & S in Four new species of Capsicum (Solanaceae) from the tropical Andes and an update on the phylogeny of the genus

Fig 8. Capsicum piuranum Barboza & S. Leiva. (A) Plant. (B) Leaves, abaxial surface. (C) Fruiting branch. (D) Flower bud. (E) Flower and immature fruit. (F) Mature fruit. (G) Fruit, transverse section, showing placenta and seeds. (H) Fruit transverse section, showing a stone cell at the apex (arrow). Photos by S. Leiva González and G. E. Barboza. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209792.g008

Fig 5 in Four new species of Capsicum (Solanaceae) from the tropical Andes and an update on the phylogeny of the genus

Fig 5. Somatic metaphase chromosomes and ideogram of Capsicum longifolium. (A) Methaphase chromosomes. (B) Ideogram. Solid black blocks or dots denote CMA+/DAPI- (NOR) or CMA+/DAPIo (terminal and intercalary) heterochromatic bands. The NOR is indicated as a separate block. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209792.g005

Fig 12 in Four new species of Capsicum (Solanaceae) from the tropical Andes and an update on the phylogeny of the genus

Fig 12. Distribution of Capsicum neei Barboza & X. Reyes. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209792.g012

Fig. 37 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Fig. 37. Hypothesis for the morphological evolution of trachelophyllids from a Spathidium-like ancestor via an Enchelyodon-like stage. Arrowheads mark the monokinetidal tail of brush row 3. B3 – dorsal brush row 3, CK – circumoral kinety, OB – oral bulge.

Figs 21–32 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Figs 21–32. Trachelophyllum brachypharynx, Korean specimens in vivo (21–24, 27–29) and after protargol impregnation (25, 26, 30–32). 21, 27, 28, 30 – overview showing the narrowly fusiform body, the nuclear apparatus composed of two macronuclear nodules, and the turbid cytoplasm packed with many small granules and some lipid droplets; 22, 24, 25 – detail of the anterior body end showing the pin-shaped to conical oral bulge studded with extrusomes; 23 – extrusomes are about 30 µm long in vivo and are filiform with pointed and slightly curved ends; 26 – the nuclear apparatus is typically composed of two ellipsoidal macronuclear nodules that are distinctly separate and connected by a fine strand. The arrowhead denotes an ellipsoidal micronucleus; 29 – detail of the rear body end showing the single posterior contractile vacuole and hat-shaped lepidosomes (arrowhead) forming a mucilaginous layer around the cell; 31 – dorsal view of the ciliary pattern in the anterior body portion of a typical specimen. The dorsal brush is composed of two isostichad dikinetidal rows and a single monokinetidal row; 32 – dorsal view of the ciliary pattern in the anterior body portion of a malformed specimen whose brush row 3 also commences with a dikinetidal part (arrowheads) similar to the first two brush rows. B1–3 – dorsal brush row 1–3, CK – circumoral kinety, CV – contractile vacuole, E – extrusomes, F – fiber, FM – fecal mass, MA – macronuclear nodules, OB – oral bulge, SK – somatic kinety. Scale bars: 10 µm (29), 30 µm (22, 26, 31, 32), 50 µm (24, 25), and 100 µm (21, 27, 28, 30).

Fig. 33 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Fig. 33. Bayesian inference (BI) tree inferred from 1476 nucleotide characters of 69 litostomatean taxa under the GTR + I (= 0.5960) + Г (= 0.4870) evolutionary substitution model. Results from maximum likelihood (ML) bootstrap analysis are mapped onto the Bayesian phylogenetic tree. A dash indicates a mismatch in the branching pattern. The scale bar indicates three substitutions per 100 nucleotide positions.

Fig. 35 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Fig. 35. Original drawing of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx, length 350–400 µm (from Levander 1894). Fig. 36. Redrawing of T. brachypharynx, length 400 µm (from Kahl 1930).

Fig. 34. Phylogenetic network inferred from 1,476 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Fig. 34. Phylogenetic network inferred from 1,476 nucleotide characters of 69 litostomatean taxa, using the NeighborNet algorithm and the uncorrected distances. Numbers along the edges indicate bootstrap support values coming from 1,000 replicates. Only bootstraps> 50% and relevant to this study are shown. The scale bar indicates three substitutions per one thousand nucleotide positions.

Figs 1–20 in Morphology, Ciliary Pattern and Molecular Phylogeny of Trachelophyllum brachypharynx Levander, 1894 (Litostomatea, Haptoria, Spathidiida)

Figs 1–20. Trachelophyllum brachypharynx, Korean specimens in vivo (1–4, 8, 10–16) and after protargol impregnation (5–7, 9, 17–20). 1 – ventral view of a representative specimen; 2–4 – the pin-shaped oral bulge becomes conical in contracted specimens; 5 – ventral view of the ciliary pattern and nuclear apparatus of a typical specimen; 6, 7 – dorsal view of the ciliary pattern in the anterior body portion of a normal (6) and abnormal (7) specimen. Typically, only brush row 1 and 2 are composed of dikinetids, while brush row 3 is monokinetidal throughout. In the abnormal specimen, brush row 3 also commences with a dikinetidal part but the brush is deformed (asterisk); 8, 9 – extrusomes are about 30 µm long in vivo and are filiform with pointed and slightly curved ends (8). When weakly impregnated, they display some small darker granules; 10 – lepidosomes are hat-shaped and about 4 × 3.7 µm in size; 11 – detail of the anterior body portion showing the conical oral bulge, the long filiform extrusomes, and the hat-shaped lepidosomes; 12 – the dorsal brush consists of three-rows. The first two rows are dikinetidal and bear 5 µm long, slightly inflated bristles, while the third row is monokinetidal and associated with 1 µm long stumps; 13–20 – variability in body shape and size as well as nuclear apparatus. Drawn to scale. B1–3 – dorsal brush row 1–3, CK – circumoral kinety, CV – contractile vacuole, E – extrusomes, F – fiber, L – lepidosomes, MA – macronuclear nodules, MI – micronucleus, OB – oral bulge, SC – somatic cilia. Scale bars: 50 µm (6, 7) and 100 µm (1, 5, 13–20).

Fig. 5 in Morphological and Morphogenetic Redescriptions and SSU rRNA Gene-based Phylogeny of the Poorly-known Species Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 (Ciliophora, Euplotida)

Fig. 5. Phylogenetic tree based on SSU rRNA gene sequences, showing the position of Euplotes amieti (arrow) by Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI). Numbers near branches denote ML bootstrap value/BI posterior probability value. '–' indicates topologies that differ between the ML and BI phylogenies. Fully supported (100%/1.00) branches are marked with solid circles. All branches are drawn to scale. The scale bar corresponds to 5 substitutions per 100 nucleotide positions. GenBank accession numbers are given for each species. Systematic classification is mainly according to Lynn (2008). Euplotid clades I–VI were designated according to Yi et al. (2009).

Fig. 7 in Ultrastructure and 28S rDNA Phylogeny of Two Gregarines: Cephaloidophora cf. communis and Heliospora cf. longissima with Remarks on Gregarine Morphology and Phylogenetic Analysis

Fig. 7. Relative rates of molecular evolution in long-branch apicomplexans: SSU rDNA (white columns) and LSU rDNA (black columns), calculated as ratio of the length of the current branch to average branch length of the non-long-branch apicomplexans (see the text for more explanations). Relative rates of LSU rDNA evolution are lower than those of SSU rDNA, especially in gregarines.

Fig. 2 in Ultrastructure and 28S rDNA Phylogeny of Two Gregarines: Cephaloidophora cf. communis and Heliospora cf. longissima with Remarks on Gregarine Morphology and Phylogenetic Analysis

Fig. 2. Light microscopy of the gregarine studied: free individuals (gamonts) of Cephaloidophora cf. communis (A, common light microsopy; B, DIC microscopy); a free gamont (C) and a syzygy (D) of Heliospora cf. longissima. Epimerite (ep), promerite (pr), deutomerite (de), septum between poto- and deutomerite (s1), and septum between proto- and epimerite (s2) are visible.

Fig. 1 in Ultrastructure and 28S rDNA Phylogeny of Two Gregarines: Cephaloidophora cf. communis and Heliospora cf. longissima with Remarks on Gregarine Morphology and Phylogenetic Analysis

Fig. 1. Layout of ribosomal operon fragment amplifications. Up- per part, schematic ribosomal operon with approximate positions of the direct and reverse primers used. Lower part, the amplified fragments of ribosomal DNA aligned with the ribosomal operon (above). Numbers indicate the length of the overlapping regions. Roman numerals denote the fragments discussed in this paper. SSU rDNA fragments analyzed previously by Rueckert et al. (2011b) have no numerical designations.

Fig. 1. Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 in Morphological and Morphogenetic Redescriptions and SSU rRNA Gene-based Phylogeny of the Poorly-known Species Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 (Ciliophora, Euplotida)

Fig. 1. Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 in vivo (A), after protargol (B–D) and silver nitrate (E, F) impregnation. (A) Ventral view of a representative cell. Arrows indicate caudal cirri. (B) Different shapes of macronucleus. (C, D) Ventral (C) and dorsal (D) view, showing the infraciliature and nuclear apparatus. Arrow shows the sigmoidal adoral zone. (E, F) Silverline system on ventral (E) and dorsal side (F). Arrow shows the sigmoidal adoral zone. AZM, adoral zone of membranelles; CC, caudal cirri; CVP, contractile vacuole pore; FVC, frontoventral cirri; MC, marginal cirri; PM, paroral membrane; TC, transverse cirri. Scale bars: 100 μm.

Fig. 4 in Morphological and Morphogenetic Redescriptions and SSU rRNA Gene-based Phylogeny of the Poorly-known Species Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 (Ciliophora, Euplotida)

Fig. 4. Photomicrographs of Euplotes amieti during morphogenesis after protargol impregnation. (A) Ventral view of a middle divider showing the migration of cirri and the division of the macronucleus. (B, C) Ventral view of an early divider demonstrating two sets of frontal-ventral-transverse cirral streaks (arrowheads) and the oral primordium in opisthe (arrow). (D) To show new cirri derived from the frontal-ventral-transverse cirral anlagen. (E) Ventral view, arrows point to the paroral membrane (PM) in the proter and the development of the PM-anlage in the opisthe; arrowhead indicates the frontal cirrus I/1 in the opisthe formed de novo. (F) Ventral view, indicating the marginal anlagen of the proter (arrow) and the opisthe (arrowhead). (G) Arrowheads showing the dorsal kinety anlage of an early divider. (H) Portion of the ventral view, showing the marginal cirri in the proter (arrow) and the opisthe (arrowhead). (I) Dorsal view, arrowheads indicating the development of the dorsal kinety anlage. (J) Portion of the dorsal view, to show the newly formed caudal cirri in the proter (arrowheads). Scale bars: 100 μm.

Fig. 3 in Morphological and Morphogenetic Redescriptions and SSU rRNA Gene-based Phylogeny of the Poorly-known Species Euplotes amieti Dragesco, 1970 (Ciliophora, Euplotida)

Fig. 3. Morphogenesis of Euplotes amieti after protargol impregnation. (A, B) Ventral (A) and dorsal (B) view of the same specimen at an early stage to show the five frontal-ventral-transverse cirral streaks and oral primordium within which membranelles are forming (arrow). (C, D) Ventral (C) and dorsal (D) view of the same specimen at a middle stage to show the completion of the cirral formation, the differen- tiation of caudal cirri at posterior ends of the two rightmost dorsal anlagen (arrowheads), the de novo formation of the new marginal cirri and the frontal cirrus I/1 in both proter and opisthe (arrows). (E, F) Ventral (E) and dorsal (F) view, showing the migration of newly formed cirri and the development of dorsal kineties, arrowheads show the marginal cirri. (G, H) Ventral (G) and dorsal (H) side of the same divider at a late stage showing infraciliature and nuclear apparatus. Scale bars: A–D = 100 μm; E–H = 150 μm.