Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0May 2019View details →

Fig. 3 in A large hyaenodont from the Lutetian of Switzerland expands the body mass range of the European mammalian predators during the Eocene

Fig. 3. Comparison of the length of the lower premolars and molars of Cartierodon egerkingensis gen. et sp. nov. from the Eocene of Switzerland, Egerkingen γ (MP13?); Prodissopsalis eocaenicus from the Eocene of Switzerland, Geiseltal-Obere Mittelkohle (MP12) and Geiseltal-Untere Mittelkohle (MP13) (based on Lange-Badré and Haubold 1990: table 3); and Paenoxyaenoides liguritor from the late Eocene of France, Quercy Phosphorites (based on Lange-Badré 1979: table 10).

Fig. 4 in Unusual theropod eggshells from the Early Cretaceous Blesa Formation of the Iberian Range, Spain

Fig. 4. Variations in outer surface ornamentation of prismatoolithid therapod eggshell Trigonoolithus amoae oogen. et oosp. nov. from La Cantalera 1 site, Early Barremian. Eggshells showing triangular (A–C) and rounded ornamentation (D–F). Pristine eggshells showing well-preserved ornamentation (A, D). Lightly eroded eggshells showing degradation (B, E). Eroded eggshells showing coalescence of triangles (C, F). A. MPZ 2012/740. B. MPZ 2012/742. C. MPZ 2012/743. D. MPZ 2012/731. E. MPZ 2012/729. F. MPZ 2012/728. Scale bar 1000 μm.

Fig. 5 in Unusual theropod eggshells from the Early Cretaceous Blesa Formation of the Iberian Range, Spain

Fig. 5. Strict consensus trees showing the hypothesized phylogenetic position of Trigonoolithus amoe oogen. et oosp. nov. from La Cantalera 1 site, Early Barremian. A. Matrix of Varricchio and Jackson (2004). Strict consensus of six equally parsimonious trees of 38 steps was recovered (C.I. 0.737; R.I. 0.853; R.C. 0.629). B. Matrix of Grellet-Tinner and Makovicky (2006). Strict consensus tree of three equally most parsimonious trees of 36 steps (C.I. 0.750; R.I. 0.852; R.C. 0.639). C. Matrix of Zelenitsky and Therrien (2008b). Most parsimonious tree of 18 steps (C.I. 1.000; R.I. 1.000; R.C.1.000). D. LópezMartínez and Vicens (2012) version of the dataset: a new analysis of Prismatoolithidae using the matrix of Zelenitsky and Therrien (2008) and adding the new oogenus Sankofa and the Patagonian eggs of Bajo de la Carpa (Schweitzer et al. 2002). Strict consensus of seven equally parsimonious trees of 19 steps (C.I. 0.947; R.I. 0.958; R.C. 0.907). All trees show Trigonoolithus placed in polytomy or at the base of the "Prismatoolithidae+avian eggs" clade.

Fig. 1 in Unusual theropod eggshells from the Early Cretaceous Blesa Formation of the Iberian Range, Spain

Fig. 1. Geographical and geological location of the site of La Cantalera 1 (early Barremian, Teruel, Spain), modified from Canudo et al. (2010). A. Simplified geological map of the Iberian Peninsula. B. Palaeogeographic subbasins (Ol, Oliete; Pa, Las Parras; Ga, Galve; Mo, Morella; Pe, Perelló; Sa, Salzedella; Pg, Peñagolosa) within the Maestrazgo Basin and active faults during Early Cretaceous sedimentation, modified from Salas et al. (2001). C. Detailed location of the La Cantalera site near the village of Josa, Teruel. D. Geological map of the La Cantalera area with the local geological units.

Fig. 3 in Unusual theropod eggshells from the Early Cretaceous Blesa Formation of the Iberian Range, Spain

Fig. 3. Thin-sections of prismatoolithid therapod eggshell Trigonoolithus amoae oogen. et oosp. nov. from La Cantalera 1 site, Early Barremian. A. MPZ 2012/856, light microphotograph. B. MPZ 2012/862, light microphotograph (B 1), microphotograph showing eggshell under cross-polars (B 2). C. MPZ2012/850, cathodoluminescence image showing dark blue luminescence except for some orange tones in the mammillary layer, probably due to the high amount of organic matter in this area. Scale bars 500 μm.

Fig. 1 in Assessing confidence intervals for stratigraphic ranges of higher taxa: The case of Lissamphibia

Fig. 1. Current hypotheses on the origin of the extant amphibians. Extant taxa in bold, paraphyletic taxa in quotation marks. A, B. Monophyletic origin from within the temnospondyls, with lepospondyls at the basalmost part of the amphibian stem (Panchen and Smithson 1988; Trueb and Cloutier 1991; Lombard and Sumida 1992; Ahlberg and Milner 1994). C, D. Monophyletic origin from within the temnospondyls, with the lepospondyls as reptiliomorphs (Ruta and Coates 2007; see also Ruta et al. 2003). E. Monophyletic origin from within the lepospondyls (Vallin and Laurin 2004; see also Laurin and Reisz 1997, 1999). F. Diphyletic origin with the anurans as temnospondyls, caecilians as lepospondyls, and urodeles as either temnospondyls or lepospondyls (Carroll and Currie 1975; Carroll and Holmes 1980; Carroll et al. 2004).

Fig. 4. A in Assessing confidence intervals for stratigraphic ranges of higher taxa: The case of Lissamphibia

Fig. 4. A comparison of the origination (A–C) and diversification (B, C) times of Lissamphibia according to time−calibrated phylogenetic trees of (A) Stegocephali, (B) Lissamphibia based on the molecular analysis by Zhang et al. (2005), and (C) Lissamphibia based on the fossil record (Marjanović and Laurin 2007). In A, the stem of Lissamphibia is placed as high in the geological section as plausible under the various phylogenetic hypotheses: (I) as the sister−group of Doleserpeton; (II) within Branchiosauridae; (III) as the sister−group of the Doleserpeton + Amphibamus clade; (IV) as the sister−group of Lysorophia; (V) polyphyletic from within "lepospondyls" (caecilians, or caecilians and caudates) and "temnospondyls". Known stratigraphic ranges are shown as thick lines, ghost ranges as thin lines. In B, the 95% credibility intervals of molecular dates are represented by blank boxes; the best estimates and lower and upper boundaries of the credibility intervals are also indicated in parentheses. In C, the numbers given next to the nodes represent the age estimates (Ma) based on the assumptions used for the supertree by Marjanović and Laurin (2007: fig. 9b). In parentheses follow the ranges of minimum (rather than actual) divergence dates as obtained using various minimum branch length assumptions (Marjanović and Laurin 2007: appendix 4); these ranges, also represented as blank boxes, are not true confidence intervals. The colored boxes represent the confidence intervals on the lower bound of the stratigraphic range of Lissamphibia calculated in the present paper (1–6 correspond to the lower half of Table 4: CI 1–Cl 6), where the bottom of the rectangle shows the lower limit of the 75% confidence interval and the black bar in each colored box corresponds to the lower limit of the 50% confidence interval. Abbreviations: Arch, Archaeobatrachia; Cry, Cryptobranchoidea; Mississi., Mississippian; Sal, Salamandridae.

Fig. 3. A in Assessing confidence intervals for stratigraphic ranges of higher taxa: The case of Lissamphibia

Fig. 3. A histogram of the curves (C) representing the recovery potential functions showing each period's or epoch's fraction of the total recovery potential calculated under eleven different assumptions (Table 4: CI 1–CI 6, which assume six different rates across extinction events and two different ages of origin for each except CI 6 which is independent of the age of origin). A bar chart of these data would be more appropriate than a dot−andline graph, but much more difficult to read. The total recovery potential un− der each assumption (i.e., the area under each "curve") is 1. Note the wide divergence between CI 6, which is based only on the exposure area of sedimentary rocks (Table 1), and all others, which include an exponential model of diversification. The much lower recovery potential of CI 1–Cl 5 in the Paleozoic generates correspondingly wider CIs.

Fig. 2. Lissamphibian biodiversity through time. A in Assessing confidence intervals for stratigraphic ranges of higher taxa: The case of Lissamphibia

Fig. 2. Lissamphibian biodiversity through time. A. Number of species found in each geologic stage. B. Standardized species numbers, calculated to account for uneven stage durations. C. Number of lineages, obtained by adding the number of recorded species and the number of ghost lineages for each geologic stage. Major biological crises identified in other taxa are shown as continuous gray lines. Minor crises that may have affected lissamphibians are shown as dashed gray lines. Since most post−Miocene species are excluded, this figure ends with the terminal Miocene. Minimum (white) and maximum (black) values have been calculated under various assumptions about the age of several middle Miocene species and the status of specimens with questionable affinities. The geologic timescale follows Gradstein et al. (2004) in all figures. Abbreviations: J, Jurassic; K, Cretaceous; M, Miocene; O, Oligocene; P, Permian; Pg, Paleogene; Tr, Triassic.

Fig. 4 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 4. The lingulid brachiopod Tunisiglossa almalensis Popov and Mambetov, sp. nov. from the Almaly Formation, Caradocian (Upper Ordovician) of Kyrgystan. Schematic representation of ventral (A) and dorsal (B) valve interior showing position of muscle scars, mantle canals and a pedicle nerve impression.

Fig. 7 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 7. The holopeid gastropod Ptychonema agyris Ebbestad, sp. nov. from the Almaly Formation, Caradocian (Upper Ordovician) of Kyrgystan. A. Reconstruction of the shell in dorsal view. B. Reconstruction of the shell in lateral view. C. Reconstruction of the shell in presumed life position with the apertural plane horizontal and with slight regulatory detorsion to balance the shell. Note how the emargination is not in an anterior position. D. Reconstruction of the shell in presumed life position with the apertural plane horizontal, but without regulatory detorsion, so that the emargination is in an anterior position.

Fig. 6 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 6. The holopeid gastropod Ptychonema agyris Ebbestad, sp. nov. from the Almaly Formation, Caradocian (Upper Ordovician) of Kyrgyz Range. A. NMW 98.66G.950, specimen with partially preserved aperture. B. NMW 98.66G.951, base of a specimen with shell preserved. C. NMW 98.66G.952, partial last whorl with shell intact. D. NMW 98.66G.953, cross section of large specimen. E. NMW 98.66G.954, cross section of initial whorls of small specimen. Scale bars 2.5 mm.

Fig. 8 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 8. Palaeogeographic reconstruction for the Late Ordovician (early Caradocian) showing geographical destribution of shallow water (BA1) lingulid−mollusc associations on Kazakh terranes. The reversed position of the North China plate in low northern latitudes and position of Tarim plate at 36.5°S are mainly after Zhao et al. (1996). Relative positions of Gondwana, Armorica, Baltica, Avalonia, and Laurentia are mainly after Torsvik (1998). Kazakhstan in the Ordovician was not a single plate but an assemblage of island arcs and microplates (Apollonov 2000; Webby et al. 2000). Some Kazakh terranes (Chingiz−Tarbagatai) are remnants of several Early Palaeozoic intra−oceanic island arcs, in a part possibly representing the Cambrian eastern active margin of Baltica detached sometime within the Late Cambrian–Early Ordovician. Another group of Kazakh terranes (North Tien Shan, Chu−Ili, Balkhash−Dzhungaria, Ulutau−Karatau−Naryn) are microplates presumably of a peri−Gondwanan origin. Position of North Tien−Shan at low southern latitudes after Bazhenov et al. (2003).

Fig. 1 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 1. Geological map of the western part of Kyrgyz Range (after Farid Kh. Apayarov and Matvei M. Gutermakher, unpublished) showing position of the measured sections and fossil localities. This mountainous area is a central part of the North Tien Shan mountain system, which is a series of parallel south−southwest to east−northeast ranges stretching for about 2500 km from Turkestan in the west to northern China in the east. Black arrows indicate direction of water flow in tributaries and rivers; 509 and 510 are fossil localities.

Fig. 3 in A low diversity shallow water lingulid brachiopod-gastropod association from the Upper Ordovician of Kyrgyz Range

Fig. 3. The lingulid brachiopod Tunisiglossa almalensis Popov and Mambetov, sp. nov. from the Almaly Formation, Caradocian (Upper Ordovician) of Kyrgyz Range. A. NMW 98.66G.869, ventral internal mould. B. NMW 98.66G.871, ventral valve, exterior. C. NMW 98.66G.865, dorsal valve exterior. D. NMW 98.66G.866, dorsal valve, exterior. E. NMW 98.66G.860–862, cluster of three disarticulated valves on a bedding surface. F. NMW 98.66G.872, dorsal valve, interior, latex cast. G. NMW 98.66G.870, holotype, dorsal valve, interior, latex cast showing position of muscle scars (tm., transmedian; o.l., outside latreral; a.l., middle lateral; c.m., central; anterior lateral) and proximal parts of dorsal vascular media (v.m.). H. NMW 98.66G.873, ventral valve, exterior, latex cast (H1) and ventral internal mould showing umbonal muscle scars (u.m.) (H2). I. NMW 98.66G.867, ventral valve, interiors showing position of pedicle nerve impression (p.n.) and NMW 98.66G.868, dorsal valve interior. Scale bars 2.5 mm.

Fig. 8 in The digital Plateosaurus II: An assessment of the range of motion of the limbs and vertebral column and of previous reconstructions using a digital skeletal mount

Fig. 8. Digital skeleton mount of prosauropod Plateosaurus engelhardti Meyer, 1837 GPIT1, from Trossingen, Germany, posed to conform to drawings by Paul (1987, 2000; Fig. 2A). A. Left antepodium and manus in lateral and dorsal view. B. Right antepodium and manus in medial and dorsal view. C. Right crus and pes in medial view. Note intersection of tarsals and metatarsals with crus. D. Pelvis and femora in lateral view. E. Anteroventral view, parallel with the long axis of the dorsal column, of the pelvis and femora and the last five dorsal ribs. F. Lateral view of "gallop" position. Note gaps in knees and neck. Length of ulna 239 mm, length of fibula 463 mm, length of femur 595 mm.

Fig. 7 in The digital Plateosaurus II: An assessment of the range of motion of the limbs and vertebral column and of previous reconstructions using a digital skeletal mount

Fig. 7. Digital skeleton mount of prosauropod Plateosaurus engelhardti Meyer, 1837 GPIT1, from Trossingen, Germany, posed: head at ground level (A), hands at ground level (B), resting pose in lateral (C) and dorsal (D) views. Length of femur 595 mm.

Fig. 4 in The digital Plateosaurus II: An assessment of the range of motion of the limbs and vertebral column and of previous reconstructions using a digital skeletal mount

Fig. 4. Range of motion of prosauropod Plateosaurus engelhardti Meyer, 1837 using the digital skeleton mount of GPIT, from Trossingen, Germany. A. Lateral view of cervicals in neutral articulation, maximal dorsiflexion and maximal ventriflexion. B. Dorsal view of cervicals in neutral articulation and maximal lateral flexion. C–F. Dorsal vertebral column and ribcage in dorsal view in maximal lateral flexion (C), lateral view in maximal ventriflexion (D), lateral view in maximal dorsiflexion (E); air exchange volume determination (F). Pink ribs and dark green volume = exhaled volume, red ribs and translucent green volume = inhaled volume. See text for further explanation. G. Tail in lateral view, showing (top to bottom) dorsiflexion at 10° and at 5° per joint, neutral articulation, maximum ventriflexion. H. Tail in dorsal view, straight and at 10° lateral flexion. Length of cervical series 103 cm, length of dorsal series 137 cm, length of caudal series 261 cm. Anterior to the left in A–C and F–H, to the right in D and E.

Fig. 3 in The digital Plateosaurus II: An assessment of the range of motion of the limbs and vertebral column and of previous reconstructions using a digital skeletal mount

Fig. 3. Examples for the influence of soft tissues on joint motions. A. Outline drawing of caudals 5 and 6 of salt−water crocodile Crocodylus porosus, IPFUB OS 13 in dorsal view. Anterior is up. Caudal 6 is shown in positions with full, 50% and minimal zyapophysal overlap (0°, 10°, 21°, respectively). Width of caudal 5 across transverse processes is 113 mm. B–D. Ulnae of stegosaur Kentrosaurus aethiopicus Hennig, 1915 from the Upper Jurassic Tendaguru Formation of Tanzania, in anterior (B1–D1) and lateral (B2–D2) views. Right (B, field number St [unknown]) and left (C, field number St 113) ulnae, both part of GPIT 1424 (mounted skeleton). D. Left ulna (part of skeletal mount in MFN) MB.R.4800.33 (length 306 mm) shows cartilage preservation on the distal and especially proximal end, preserving a large olceranon process.

Fig. 6 in The digital Plateosaurus II: An assessment of the range of motion of the limbs and vertebral column and of previous reconstructions using a digital skeletal mount

Fig. 6. Range of motion of the hind limb of prosauropod Plateosaurus engelhardti Meyer, 1837 using the digital skeleton mount of GPIT1, from Trossingen, Germany. A–H. Left pes in left to right: flexion, probable standing pose, extension, in lateral (A), medial (B), oblique (C–F), plantar (G), and dorsal (H) views. Length of metatarsal III 231 mm. I–K. Pelvis and left hind limb, in lateral (I, J) and anterior (K) views. I, K, probable standing (blue) and minimally possible flexion (resting) pose; J, maximum femur protraction and retraction angles for locomotion, resulting stride length 1.34 m. L. Left hind limb showing knee range of motion. Crus positions left to right: maximal extension, maximum flexion under large loads, maximum flexion for resting. M. Crus in lateral view, showing maximum ankle flexion and extension under load. Length of fibula 463 mm.