Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 14. Conodont P1 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 14. Conodont P1 elements of Idiognathodus auritus (Chernykh, 2005) from the Heebner Shale, Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian). A. SUI 141042 (TT0314); Sedan 17. B. SUI 141043 (TT0311); Sedan 24. C. SUI 141044 (TT0251); Sedan 11. D. SUI 141045 (TT0222); Clinton 12. E. SUI 141046 (TT0251); Sedan 11. F. SUI 141047 (TT0235); Sedan 11. G. SUI 141048 (TT0256); Sedan 11. H. SUI 141049 (TT0095); I229-83. I. SUI 141050 (TT0093); Clinton 21. J . SUI 141051 (TT0094); I229-83. K. SUI 141052 (TT0221); Clinton 12. L. SUI 141053 (TT0169); Sedan 23. M. SUI 141054 (TT0167); Sedan 23.

Fig. 12 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 12. Canonical variation (CV) cross-plots and wireframes for all grooved sinistral (A) and dextral (B) elements, using locality (red, Clinton; green, I-229; blue, Sedan) as the group-defining criterion. Gray wireframes, mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit; black wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate.

Fig. 11 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 11. Cross-plot of morphotype membership for each grooved sinistral (A) and dextral (B) specimen on the x-axis and their centroid size along the y-axis. Centroid size is not a measure of length, because the outwards movement of any landmark from the centroid will cause it to increase, but for the sake of providing reference, specimens with a platform length less than 0.4 mm generally had a centroid size below 900.

Fig. 8 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 8. Cross-plot of the first two principal components (labeled with their corresponding eigenvalues) and wireframes (A) and canonical variation plot (using chirality membership as the group defining criterion) and wireframes (B) for Idiognathodus luganicus. Black wireframes, form with values of the corresponding principal component values; gray wireframes, mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit; blue/red wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate; blue, sinistral; red, dextral.

Fig. 10 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 10. Principal component cross-plots of the first two principal components (labeled with their corresponding eigenvalues) and wireframes (A, B) and canonical variation plots (using chirality membership as the group defining criterion) and wireframes (C, D) for Idiognathodus simulator (A, C) and Idiognathodus auritus (B, D). Black wireframes, form with values of the corresponding principal component values; gray wireframes, mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit; blue/red wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate; blue, sinistral; red, dextral.

Fig. 6 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 6. Canonical variation plot and wireframes for all grooved specimens, using chirality membership as the group-defining criterion. Gray wireframe, the mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit, and blue/ red wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate; blue, sinistral; red dextral.

Fig. 7 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 7. Canonical variation (CV) cross-plots and wireframes for all grooved sinistral (A) and dextral (B) elements, using lobe membership (red, 0 lobes; blue, 1 lobe; green, 2 lobes; purple, dicconnected ridge) as the group-defining criterion. Gray wireframes, mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit; black wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate.

Fig. 9 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 9. Principal component cross-plots of the first two principal components (labeled with their corresponding eigenvalues) and wireframes (A, B) and canonical variation plots (using chirality membership as the group defining criterion) and wireframes (C, D) for Idiognathodus lateralis (A, C) and Idiognathodus praenuntius (B, D). Black wireframes, form with values of the corresponding principal component values; gray wireframes, mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit; blue/red wireframes, form achieved with values of the corresponding canonical variate; blue, sinistral; red, dextral.

Fig. 2. A in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 2. A. Composite stratigraphic section of the lithologic members of the Oread Megacylothem and relative sea level curve; modified from Heckel 1999, 2013). B. Detailed measured stratigraphic sections of the Heebner Shale at each locality. Darkness of the shale intervals corresponds to the darkness of the shale in hand sample. See SOM 1 for exact locations.

Fig. 5 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 5. Principal component (PC) cross-plot and wireframes for all grooved specimens. A. Principal component cross plot of the first two principal components, labeled with their corresponding eigenvalues (blue, sinistral; red dextral). B. Black wireframes, the resulting form with values of the corresponding principal component values; gray outline, the mean form provided by the preliminary Procrustes fit.

Fig. 1 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 1. Paleogeographic map of Laurentia (A) and the Midcontinent sea (B) during Late Pennsylvanian time. Terrestrial/marine environments represent regions dependent on glacio-eustatic and basin controls. Modern day state outlines for reference to sample locations: 1, Sedan spillway; 2, Clinton Dam; 3, interstate I-229 roadcut. A.W.A., Ancestral-Wichita-Amarillo mountains. A, based on Heckel (1999); B, modified from Algeo and Heckel (2008).

Fig. 3 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 3. Transformation of a conodont P1 element into morphometric coordinate points: 1, specimen is photographed; 2, coordinates are placed on the image using the software TspUtil; 3, wireframe outline is created by linking landmarks to each other; 4, image is removed to illustrate that all analyses beyond this point are performed on the landmarks only, and all other biological criteria are no longer considered. Open circles, location of Type 1 landmarks, and black ovals, location of Type 2 landmarks.

Fig. 4 in Geometric morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of the Gzhelian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodont Idiognathodus simulator from North America

Fig. 4. Wireframe created by connecting landmarks chosen for the Idiognathodus simulator morphometric analysis. Numbers represent the landmark number designations used for the morphometric analysis: 1, ventral termination of the rostral adcarinal ridge; 2, dorsal termination of the carina; 3, ventral termination of the caudal adcarinal ridge; 4, rostral termination of the most ventral transverse ridge on the rostral side; 5, caudal termination of the most ventral transverse ridge on the rostral side; 6, rostral termination of the most ventral transverse ridge on the caudal side; 7, caudal termination of the most ventral transverse ridge on the caudal side; 8, rostral termination of the transverse ridge closest to the point of maximum curvature along the rostral platform margin on the rostral side. 9, caudal termination of the transverse ridge closest to the point of maximum curvature along the rostral platform margin on the rostral side; 10, rostral termination of the transverse ridge closest to the point of maximum curvature along the caudal platform margin on the caudal side; 11, caudal termination of the transverse ridge closest to the point of maximum curvature along the caudal platform margin on the caudal side; 12, rostral termination of the most dorsal transverse ridge on the rostral side; 13, caudal termination of the most dorsal transverse ridge on the rostral side; 14, rostral termination of the most dorsal transverse ridge on the caudal side; 15, caudal termination of the most dorsal transverse ridge on the caudal side; 16, dorsal tip of the element; 17, midpoint along the rostral adcarinal ridge; 18, midpoint along the caudal adcarinal ridge.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2019View details →

Fig. 7. Geometric morphometric analyses. A. Principal Component Analysis. B in Early steps in the radiation of notoungulate mammals in southern South America: A new henricosborniid from the Eocene of Patagonia

Fig. 7. Geometric morphometric analyses. A. Principal Component Analysis. B. Canonical Variate Analysis.

Fig. 7 in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 7. RW1/RW2 plot showing the neat separation of Krithe compressa from Krithe iniqua specimens. Deformation grids along RW1 (set at values of –0.2 and 0.2) are reported. A. Plot of RW1 against RW2 scores. B, C. Shell deformation at extreme values along RW1.

Fig. 4 in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 4. Main morphological features of studied ostracods species. A. Krithe iniqua Abate, Barra, Aiello, and Bonaduce, 1993, right valve, transparence drawing from external view, sample 59, B.O.C. 2518, upper Pliocene, KI−29, sample 59. B. Krithe compressa (Seguenza, 1880), right valve, transparence drawing from external view, KC−29, sample 58, B.O.C. 2547, upper Pliocene.

Fig. 2 in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 2. Krithe iniqua Abate, Barra, Aiello, and Bonaduce, 1993, right valves; transparence drawings from external view; sample 59; upper Pliocene. A. KI−01, B.O.C. 2490. B. KI−02, B.O.C. 2491. C. KI−03, B.O.C. 2492. D. KI−04, B.O.C. 2493. E. KI−05, B.O.C. 2494. F. KI−06, B.O.C. 2495. G. KI−07, B.O.C. 2496. H. KI−08, B.O.C. 2497. I. KI−09, B.O.C. 2498. J. KI−10, B.O.C. 2499. K. KI−11, B.O.C. 2500. I. KI−12, B.O.C. 2501. L. KI−13, B.O.C. 2502. M. KI−14, B.O.C. 2503. N. KI−15, B.O.C. 2504. O. KI−16, B.O.C. 2505. P. KI−17, B.O.C. 2506. Q. KI−18, B.O.C. 2507. R. KI−19, B.O.C. 2508. S. KI−20, B.O.C. 2509. T. KI−21, B.O.C. 2510. U. KI−22, B.O.C. 2511. V. KI−23, B.O.C. 2512. W. KI−24, B.O.C. 2513. Y. KI−25, B.O.C. 2514. Z. KI−26, B.O.C. 2515. AA. KI−27, B.O.C. 2516. BB. KI−28, B.O.C. 2517.

Fig. 9 in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 9. Continuous shape variation in Krithe compressa valves drawn along RW 2. Deformation grids relate to specimen of the three different samples belonging to Krithe compressa from the highest (A) to the lowest (C) RW 2 scores (see Fig. 7). Deformation grid in B refers to undeformed shape. From the above, a valve from sample 58 (specimen KC 25), a specimen from sample 51 (KC 16), and a specimen from sample 50 (KC 1).

Fig. 5 in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 5. The logarithm of number of pairs C of points with mutual distance smaller than R (̊m), as a function of log(R). Vertical dashed lines are the limits inside which the linear slope of log(C) on log(R) provides the best fitting to the data.

Fig. 1. A in Fractal analysis of ostracod shell variability: A comparison with geometric and classic morphometrics

Fig. 1. A. Ideal uniform network of 225 points spaced 2 mm apart over an area of 30 × 30 mm2. B. The log of number of pairs C of the stations, with mutual distance smaller than R, as a function of log(R) (mm); the vertical dashed lines represent the lower (4 mm) and upper (16 mm) limits of R, inside which the linear slope provides the best fitting to the investigated co−ordinates.