Find research datasets worth reusing

FIGURES 84–89 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 84–89. Male morphology of Winnertzia lobata (84) and Winnertzia ombergensis (85–89), holotypes. 84: Genitalia, ventral. 85: Posterior portion of ninth tergite, dorsal. 86: Gonostylus, ventral. 87: Genitalia, ventral. 88: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 89: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 80–83 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 80–83. Male morphology of Winnertzia hemisphaerica (80–82) and Winnertzia incisa (83), holotypes. 80: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 81: Ditto, medial. 82: Genitalia, ventral. 83: Ditto. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 67–73 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 67–73. Male morphology of Winnertzia acutistylus (67–69) and Winnertzia arctostylus (70–73). 67: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 68: Ditto, medial. 69: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 70: Ditto. 71: Gonostylus, ventral, paratype. 72: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 73: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 74–79 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 74–79. Male morphology of Winnertzia egregia (74–76) and Winnertzia fraxinophila (77–79), holotypes. 74: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 75: Ditto, medial. 76: Genitalia, ventral. 77: Ditto. 78: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 79: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 30–34 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 30–34. Male morphology of Winnertzia parvidens. 30: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 31: Posterior portion of ninth tergite, dorsal, holotype. 32: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 33: Ditto, medial. 34: Palpus, lateral, paratype. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnosis.

FIGURES 48–53 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 48–53. Male morphology of Winnertzia grytsjoenensis (48–50) and Winnertzia normalis (51–53). 48: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 49: Ditto, medial. 50: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 51: Ditto. 52: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 53: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 63–66 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 63–66. Male morphology of Winnertzia bulbifera agg. (63–65) and Winnertzia fusca (66). 63: Winnertzia "bulbifera A", gonostylus, ventral, specimen from Östergötland. 64: Winnertzia "bulbifera B", gonostylus, ventral, specimen from Östergötland.. 65: Winnertzia "bulbifera C", gonostylus, ventral, specimen from Uppland. 66: Genitalia, ventral, specimen from Uppland. Scales 0.05 mm.

FIGURES 7–13 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 7–13. Male morphology of Winnertzia brachytarsus (7–9) and Winnertzia imbecilla (10–13), holotypes. 7: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 8: Ditto, medial. 9: Genitalia, ventral. 10: Genitalia, ventral. 11: Palpus, lateral. 12: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 13: Ditto, medial. Scales for 7–10 and 12–13, 0.05 mm; for 11, 0.025 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 54–62 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 54–62. Male morphology of Winnertzia oelandica (54–57) and Winnertzia setosa (58–62). 54: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 55: Ditto, medial. 56: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 57: Basitarsus of foreleg, lateral, holotype. 58: Posterior portion of ninth tergite, dorsal, holotype. 59: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 60: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 61: Ditto, medial. 62: Dorsal gonocoxal bridge, ventral, paratype. Scales for 54–57 and 59–61, 0.05 mm; for 58 and 62, 0.025 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 1–6 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 1–6. Male morphology of Winnertzia angustistylus. 1: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 2: Gonostylus, ventral, paratype. 3: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 4: Ditto, medial. 5: Palpus, lateral, paratype. 6: Wing, dorsal, specimen from Södermanland. Scales for 1, 3 and 4, 0.05 mm; for 2 and 5, 0.025 mm; for 6, 0.50 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnosis.

FIGURES 41–47 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 41–47. Male morphology of Winnertzia dentata (41–43) and Winnertzia ekdalensis (44–47), holotypes. 41: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 42: Ditto, medial. 43: Genitalia, ventral. 44: Ditto. 45: Wing, dorsal. 46: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 47: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 20–21 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 20–21. Male genitalia of Winnertzia spp., ventral, holotypes. 20: Winnertzia upplandensis. 21: Winnertzia warraensis. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 14–19 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 14–19. Male morphology of Winnertzia pilosistylus (14–16) and Winnertzia rickebasta (17–19). 14: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 15: Ditto, medial. 16: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 17: Ditto. 18: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 19: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

FIGURES 22–29 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 22–29. Male morphology of Winnertzia "xylostei A" (22–25) and Winnertzia "xylostei B" (26–29). 22: Genitalia, ventral, specimen from Uppland. 23: Wing, dorsal, specimen from Lule Lappmark. 24: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, specimen from Uppland. 25: Ditto, medial. 26: Genitalia, ventral, specimen from Öland. 27: Wing, dorsal, specimen from Öland. 28: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, specimen from Öland. 29: Ditto, medial. Scales for 22, 24–26 and 28–29, 0.05 mm; for 23 and 27, 0.5 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the text.

FIGURES 35–40 in Reevaluation of species richness in Winnertzia (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae, Winnertziinae), with descriptions of 37 new species from Sweden, Peru and Australia

FIGURES 35–40. Male morphology of Winnertzia serri (35–37) and Winnertzia tumidoides (38–40). 35: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, paratype. 36: Ditto, medial. 37: Genitalia, ventral, holotype. 38: Ditto. 39: Fourth flagellomere, lateral, holotype. 40: Ditto, medial. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.

opennotspecifiedSep 2020View details →

FIGURE 1. Species richness and sampling density. A in Tardigrades of Finland: new records and an annotated checklist

FIGURE 1. Species richness and sampling density. A) Sampling density map. Type localities in Finland shown (A: type locality of Acanthechiniscus distinctus, G: type localities of Grevenius pulcher, I: type locality of Itaquascon enckelli, M: type locality of Milnesium quadrifidum, U: neotype locality of Ursulinius septentrionalis). Additionally, biggest five Finnish cities by population shown; B) Species richness by biogeographical province (For abbreviations see https://laji.fi/theme/emk); C) Species richness by administrative region (1 = Lapland, 2 = North Ostrobothnia, 3 = Kainuu, 4 = Central Ostrobothnia, 5 = Central Finland, 6 = North Savo, 7 = North Karelia, 8 = Ostrobothnia, 9 = South Ostrobothnia, 10 = Satakunta, 11 = Pirkanmaa, 12 = Päijät-Häme, 13 = South Savo, 14 = Southwest Finland, 15 = Kanta-Häme, 16 = Uusimaa, 17 = Kymenlaakso, 18 = South Karelia, 19 = Åland).

opencc-zeroDec 2021View details →

Environmental heterogeneity predicts global species richness patterns better than area

Aim: It is widely accepted that biodiversity can be determined by niche-relate processes and by pure area effects from local to global scales. Their relative importance, however, is still disputed, and empirical tests are still surprisingly scarce at the global scale. We compare the explanatory power of area and environmental heterogeneity as a proxy for niche-related processes as drivers of native mammal species richnessworldwide and with biogeographical regions. Location: Global Time Period: Data was collated form the IUCN (2013) Major Taxa Studied: All mammal species, including possibly extinct species and species with uncertain presence. Methods: We developed a random walk algorithm to compare the explanatory power of area and environmental heterogeneity on native mammal species richness. As measures for environmental heterogeneity, we used elevation and precipitation ranges, which are well known correlates of species richness. <div> Results: We find that environmental heterogeneity explains species richness relationships better than area does, suggesting that niche-related processes are more prevalent than pure area effects at broad scales. Main Conclusions: Our results imply that niche-related processes are essential to understand broad-scale species-area relationships and that habitat diversity is more important than area alone for the protection of global biodiverstiy. </div>

opencc-zeroDec 2010View details →

Data from: Small-scale variation in fuel loads differentially affects two co-dominant bunchgrasses in a species-rich pine savanna

Ecological disturbances frequently control the occurrence and patterning of dominant plants in high-diversity communities like C4 grasslands and savannas. In such ecosystems disturbance-related processes can have important implications for species, and for whole communities when those species are dominant, yet mechanistic understanding of such processes remains fragmentary. Multiple bunchgrass species commonly co-dominate disturbance-dependent and species-rich pine savannas, where small-scale fuel heterogeneity may influence bunchgrass survival and growth following fires. We quantified how fire in locally varying fuel loads influenced dynamics of dominant C4 bunchgrasses in a species-rich pine savanna in southeastern Louisiana, USA. We focused on two congeneric, co-dominant species (Schizachyrium scoparium and S. tenerum) with similar growth forms, functional traits and reproductive strategies to highlight effects of fuel heterogeneity during fires. In experimental plots with either reduced or increased fuels versus controls with unmanipulated fuels, we compared: 1) bunchgrass damage and 2) mortality from fires; 3) subsequent growth and 4) flowering. Compared to controls, fire with increased fuels caused greater damage, mortality and subsequent flowering, but did not affect post-fire growth. Fire with reduced fuels had no effect on any of the four measures. The two species responded differently to fire with increased fuels – S. scoparium incurred measurably more damage and mortality than S. tenerum. Logistic regression indicated that the larger average size of S. tenerum tussocks made them resistant to more severe burning where fuels were increased. We speculate that locally increased fuel loading may be important in pine savannas for creating colonization sites because where fuels are light or moderate, dominant bunchgrasses persist through fires. Small-scale heterogeneity in fires, and differences in how species tolerate fire may together promote shared local dominance by different bunchgrasses.

opencc-zeroSep 2019View details →

Data from: Environmental factors explain the spatial mismatches between species richness and phylogenetic diversity of terrestrial mammals

Aim: Explore the spatial variation of the relationships between species richness (SR), phylogenetic diversity (PD) and environmental factors to infer the possible mechanisms underlying patterns of diversity in different regions of the globe. Location: Global. Time period: Present day. Major taxa studied: Terrestrial mammals. Methods: We used a hexagonal grid to map SR and PD of mammals and four environmental factors (temperature, productivity, elevation and climate-change velocity since the Last Glacial Maximum). We related those variables through direct and indirect pathways using a novel combination of Path Analysis and Geographically Weighted Regression to account for spatial non-stationarity of path coefficients. Results: SR, PD and environmental factors relate differently across the geographic space, with most relationships varying in both, magnitude and direction. Species richness is associated with lower phylogenetic diversity in much of the tropics and in the Americas, which reflects the tropical origin and the recent diversification of some mammalian clades in these regions. Environmental effects on PD are predominantly mediated by their effects on SR. But once richness is controlled for, the relationships between environmental factors and PD (i.e. PDSR) highlight environmentally driven changes in species composition. Environmental-PDSR relationships suggest that the relative importance of different mechanisms driving biodiversity shifts spatially. Across most of the globe, temperature and productivity are the strongest predictors of richness, while PDSR is best predicted by temperature. Main conclusions: Richness explains most spatial variation in PD, but both dimensions of biodiversity respond differently to environmental conditions across the globe, as indicated by the spatial mismatches in the relationships between environmental factors and these two types of diversity. We show that accounting for spatial non-stationarity and environmental effects on PD while controlling for richness uncovers a more complex scenario of drivers of biodiversity than previously observed.