Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 5 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 5. External scent efferent system of dorsoabdominal glands in Hyocephalidae. A–F – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906, female: A – abdomen, dorsal view (magnification 19×); B, D, E – dorsoabdominal scent efferent system on tergites IV–V (B – 47×, D – 200×, E – 400×); C, F – dorsoabdominal scent efferent system on tergites V–VI (C – 80×, F – 200×). G–K – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male: abdomen, dorsal view (30×); H – suture between tergites III and IV (42×); I, K – dorsoabdominal scent efferent system on tergites IV–V (I – 130×, K – 500×); J – dorsoabdominal scent efferent system on tergites V–VI (120×). Abbreviations: DAGIV–V, DAGV–VI – scent efferent system of dorsoabdominal scent glands on tergites IV–V and V–VI, respectively. Scale bars: 0.1 mm (E, K), 0.2 mm (D, F), 0.4 mm (I–J), 0.5 mm (C), 1 mm (B, G–H), 3 mm (A).

Fig. 4 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 4. Ultrastructure of thoracic spiracles in Hyocephalidae. A–C – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906, male: A – mesothoracic spiracle (magnifi- cation 400×); B–C – metathoracic spiracle (B – 200×, C – 500×). D – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002: metathoracic spiracle (500×). Scale bars: 0.1 mm (A, C–D), 0.2 mm (B).

Fig. 2 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 2. Head and prothorax of Hyocephalidae. A–C – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male: A – dorsal habitus (magnification 13×); B – head and pronotum, dorsal view (32×), C – apex of profemur with spines (130×). D–H – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906, female: D–F – head and prothorax (D – dorsal view, 23×; E – lateral view, 21×; F – ventral view, 23×); G–H – head (G – dorsal view, 40×; H – lateral view, 30×). Scale bars: 0.4 mm (C), 1 mm (B, G–H), 2 mm (D–F), 4 mm (A).

Fig. 1 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 1. Dorsal habitus of Hyocephalidae. A – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906, female (15.4 mm); B – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male (8.7 mm).

Fig. 7 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 7. Schematic drawing of abdomen of Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male, in lateral view. Scale bar: 1 mm.Abbreviations: AT3–7a–c – particular positions of abdominal trichobothria on sternites III–VII; sml – submarginal depressed line; sp – spiracle; tss – tergosternal suture.

Fig. 3 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 3. External scent efferent system of metathoracic glands in Hyocephalidae. A–E – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906 (A–D – male, E – female): A – meso- and metathorax, lateral view (magnification 37×); B – external scent efferent system, lateral view (60×); C – ostiole and peritreme, lateral view (180×); D – peritreme, lateral view (300×); E – ostiole and peritreme, ventral view (180×). F–H – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002: F – external scent efferent system, lateral view (85×); G – ostiole and peritreme, lateral view (250×); H – peritreme, lateral view (550×).Abbreviations: mss – mesothoracic spiracle, mts – metathoracic spiracle, o – ostiole, vs – vestibular scar. Scale bars: 0.1 mm (D, H), 0.2 mm (G), 0.3 mm (C, E), 0.5 mm (B, F), 1 mm (A).

Fig. 6 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 6. Strainer organ in Hyocephalidae. A–D – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906: A – female, abdomen, lateral view (magnification 18×); B–D – strainer (B – male, 150×; C – female, 150×; D – female, 600×). E – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male, strainer (370×). F – Maevius indecorus (Stål, 1874), female, strainer (250×).Abbreviations:AT3–7 – abdominal trichobothria on sternites III–VII; cp – closed pore; op – open pore; st – strainer. Scale bars: 50 μm (D), 0.1 mm (E), 0.2 mm (F), 0.3 mm (B–C), 3 mm (A).

Fig. 9 in Scanning the Hyocephalidae: details of their external morphology with respect to phylogenetic relationships within Eutrichophora (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)*

Fig. 9. Details of abdomen and thorax in Hyocephalidae and Stenocephalidae. A–B – Hyocephalus aprugnus Bergroth, 1906, female: A – abdominal trichobothria on sternite VI (AT6) (magnification 800×); B – AT7 (400×). C–D – Maevius luridus Brailovsky, 2002, male: C – AT5 (400×), D – AT6 (400×). E–H – Dicranocephalus agilis (Scopoli, 1763): E – external scent efferent system (261×); F – abdomen in lateral view (27×); G–H – abdominal trichobothria on sternite VI (G – 120×, H – 400×). Abbreviations: AT5–7 – abdominal trichobothria 5–7; bo – bothrium; o – ostiole; pe – peritreme; sp – spiracle. Scale bars: 50 μm (A), 0.1 mm (B–D).

Text-fig. 9. Mean individual differences in non-metric and metric variables of M1 from respective mean values of extant A. flavicollis, A. sylvaticus and A. uralensis in the Recent samples (left) and fossils of particular Pleistocene biozones (right), superimposed to variation ranges and centroids of the former ones. in Genus Apodemus In The Pleistocene Of Central Europe: When Did The Extant Taxa Appear?

Text-fig. 9. Mean individual differences in non-metric and metric variables of M1 from respective mean values of extant A. flavicollis, A. sylvaticus and A. uralensis in the Recent samples (left) and fossils of particular Pleistocene biozones (right), superimposed to variation ranges and centroids of the former ones.

Text-fig. 7. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual M1 of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (based on the discrimination analysis of total set of characters, both metric and non-metric). in Genus Apodemus In The Pleistocene Of Central Europe: When Did The Extant Taxa Appear?

Text-fig. 7. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual M1 of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (based on the discrimination analysis of total set of characters, both metric and non-metric).

Text-fig. 8. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual m1 of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (standardized discrimination scores based on nine most significant variables). in Genus Apodemus In The Pleistocene Of Central Europe: When Did The Extant Taxa Appear?

Text-fig. 8. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual m1 of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (standardized discrimination scores based on nine most significant variables).

Text-fig. 6. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual m1 and M1 teeth of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (based on the discrimination analysis of metric variables of M1 and m1). in Genus Apodemus In The Pleistocene Of Central Europe: When Did The Extant Taxa Appear?

Text-fig. 6. Plot of discriminant scores (R1/R2) of individual m1 and M1 teeth of Apodemus spp. from particular Pleistocene biozones superimposed onto a plot of variation ranges for the respective variables for the Recent Apodemus sample (based on the discrimination analysis of metric variables of M1 and m1).

opencc-zeroSep 2021View details →

dryad40/100

Data from: Mass extinctions alter extinction and origination dynamics with respect to body size

Whether mass extinctions and their associated recoveries represent an intensification of background extinction and origination dynamics versus a separate macroevolutionary regime remains a central debate in evolutionary biology. Previous focus has been on extinction, but origination dynamics may be equally or more important for long-term evolutionary outcomes. The evolution of animal body size is an ideal process to test for differences in macroevolutionary regimes, as body size is easily determined, comparable across distantly related taxa, and scales with organismal traits. Here, we test for shifts in selectivity between background intervals and the "Big Five" mass extinction events using capture-mark-recapture models. Our body-size data cover 10,203 fossil marine animal genera spanning 10 Linnaean classes with occurrences ranging from Early Ordovician to Late Pleistocene (485–1 Mya). Most classes exhibit differences in both origination and extinction selectivity between background intervals and mass extinctions, with the direction of selectivity varying among classes and overall exhibiting stronger selectivity during origination after mass extinction than extinction during mass extinction. Thus, not only do mass extinction events shift the marine biosphere into a new macroevolutionary regime, the dynamics of recovery from mass extinction also appear to play an underappreciated role in shaping the biosphere in their aftermath.

opencc-by-4.0Feb 2023View details →

Table 6. The average epithelialization time in the control, comparison, and 10% concentration respectively was day 10, day 8 and day 7

Table 6. The average epithelialization time in the control, comparison, and 10% concentration respectively was day 10, day 8 and day 7