Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 1 in Breeding biology of mimetic species based on secondary data sources should address misidentifications: the case of the lesser kiskadee Philohydor lictor (Aves: Tyrannidae)

Figure 1. Reproductive records (nest construction, eggs, nestlings, and fledglings) of lesser kiskadee (Philohydor lictor) from citizen science, literature, and museum egg collections. Ecoregion abbreviations: Temp = Temperate, Trop = Tropical and Subtropical. Asterisks indicate the country's centroid.

Figure 4 in Breeding biology of mimetic species based on secondary data sources should address misidentifications: the case of the lesser kiskadee Philohydor lictor (Aves: Tyrannidae)

Figure 4. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) based on egg length, width, volume, and pointedness of eight kiskadee-like mimetic species.

Table 2 in Breeding biology of mimetic species based on secondary data sources should address misidentifications: the case of the lesser kiskadee Philohydor lictor (Aves: Tyrannidae)

<p><b>Table 2.</b> Comparison of traits among eight kiskadee-like mimetic species. Body mass from Dunning (2007) and Tobias <i>et al</i>. (2022), bill length from (Tobias <i>et al</i>. 2022), nest type, clutch size, and range from Billerman <i>et al</i>. (2020).</p><table><tbody><tr><th></th><th>Body mass Bill length (g) (mm)</th><th>Egg length (mm)</th><th>Egg width (mm)</th><th>Egg volume (mm3)</th><th>Egg pointedness</th><th>Clutch size</th><th>Nest type</th><th>Range</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th><b>Smaller body size mimetic species</b></th><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th><i>Philohydor lictor</i></th><td>25.5</td><td>23.4</td><td>20.89 ± 1.41</td><td>16.06 ± 0.66</td><td>2734.66 ± 334.87</td><td>0.0002 ± 0.0001</td><td>1–4</td><td>Open cup</td><td>E Panama to E Brazil</td></tr><tr><th><i>Myiozetetes cayanensis</i></th><td>25.9</td><td>14.4</td><td>22.17 ± 0.99</td><td>15.99 ± 0.67</td><td>2894.08 ± 317.26</td><td>0.0003 ± 0.0001</td><td>2–3</td><td>Domed</td><td>SW Costa Rica to SE Brazil</td></tr><tr><th><i>Myiozetetes similis</i></th><td>28</td><td>16.64</td><td>22.21 ± 1.09</td><td>16.03 ± 0.64</td><td>2897.21 ± 303.41</td><td>0.0004 ± 0.0002</td><td>2–4</td><td>Domed</td><td>W Mexico to NE Argentina</td></tr><tr><th><i>Phelpsia inornata</i></th><td>29.4</td><td>17.9</td><td>21 ± 0.42</td><td>15.95 ± 0.07</td><td>2690 ± 84.85</td><td>0.0003 ± 0.00008</td><td>2</td><td>Open cup</td><td>N and C Venezuela to NE Colombia</td></tr><tr><th><i>Conopias parvus</i></th><td>21</td><td>20</td><td>21.26 ± 0.35</td><td>15.98 ± 0.38</td><td>2787.19 ± 191.05</td><td>0.0002 ± 0.00003</td><td>2–3</td><td>Tree hole or</td><td>S and E Venezuela to N Bolívia and</td></tr><tr><th></th><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>cavity</td><td>N Brasil</td></tr><tr><th><i>C. trivirgatus</i></th><td>24.36</td><td>16.6</td><td>20.98</td><td>15.76</td><td>2647.62</td><td>0.0003</td><td>NA</td><td>Tree hole or</td><td>Venezuela to N Brazil and SE Brazil to NE</td></tr><tr><th></th><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>cavity</td><td>Argentina</td></tr><tr><th><b>Larger body size mimetic species</b></th><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th><i>P. lictor</i>: misidentified</th><td>_</td><td>_</td><td>29.03 ± 1.92</td><td>19.84 ± 0.35</td><td>5799.84 ± 543.71</td><td>0.0004 ± 0.0001</td><td>2–3</td><td>_</td><td>_</td></tr><tr><th>eggs</th></tr><tr><th><i>Megarynchus</i></th><td>63.4</td><td>32.82</td><td>28.01 ± 1.53</td><td>20.19 ± 0.55</td><td>5863.74 ± 520.85</td><td>0.0003 ± 0.0002</td><td>2–3</td><td>Open cup</td><td>SE Mexico to S Argentina</td></tr><tr><th><i>pitangua</i></th><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th><i>Pitangus sulphuratus</i></th><td>74</td><td>29</td><td>27.93 ± 1.52</td><td>19.94 ± 0.74</td><td>5657.18 ± 564.55</td><td>0.0003 ± 0.0001</td><td>2–5</td><td>Domed</td><td>S Texas to C Argentina</td></tr></tbody></table>

Table 1 in Breeding biology of mimetic species based on secondary data sources should address misidentifications: the case of the lesser kiskadee Philohydor lictor (Aves: Tyrannidae)

<p><b>Table 1.</b> Misidentifications in breeding records of lesser kiskadee (<i>Philohydor lictor</i>) found in citizen science databases (WikiAves, eBird, iNaturalist), museum egg sets, and literature up to August 2023. NA indicates that no information was available.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Misidentification type</th><th>Locality</th><th>Year</th><th>Record type</th><th>Code/reference/museum</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Amazonas, Brazil</td><td>2015</td><td>Citizen science</td><td>WA1599942</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Colón, Panama</td><td>2016</td><td>Citizen science</td><td>ML34302821</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Pará, Brazil</td><td>2018</td><td>Citizen science</td><td>WA3137441</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Rondônia, Brazil</td><td>2021</td><td>Citizen science</td><td>WA4371921</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Meta, Colombia</td><td>2022</td><td>Citizen science</td><td>145727415</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Guyana</td><td>1848</td><td>Literature</td><td>Schomburgk (1848)</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Brazil</td><td>1997</td><td>Literature</td><td>Euler (1867)</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</td><td>1900</td><td>Literature</td><td>Euler (1900)</td></tr><tr><th>Larger eggs</th><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>Literature</td><td>Oates and Reid (1903)</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Guyana</td><td>1929</td><td>Literature</td><td>Young (1929)</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Brazil</td><td>1935</td><td>Literature</td><td>Snethlage (1935)</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Argentina</td><td>NA</td><td>Literature</td><td>Hellebrekers (1942)</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Argentina</td><td>NA</td><td>Literature</td><td>Hellebrekers (1945)</td></tr><tr><th>Domed nest</th><td>Guyana</td><td>1936</td><td>Literature</td><td>Davis (1961)</td></tr><tr><th>Larger eggs</th><td>NA</td><td>1832</td><td>Museum</td><td>MNHN–489/490</td></tr><tr><th>Larger eggs; outside species range</th><td>Argentina</td><td>1898</td><td>Museum</td><td>ZBM–SN</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Argentina</td><td>1901</td><td>Museum</td><td>NBCN–181945</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Santa Catarina, Brazil</td><td>1908</td><td>Museum</td><td>SNMB–24013</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Santa Catarina, Brazil</td><td><1910</td><td>Museum</td><td>SNMB–24012</td></tr><tr><th>Outside species range</th><td>Santa Catarina, Brazil</td><td><1910</td><td>Museum</td><td>SNMB–24014</td></tr><tr><th>Larger eggs; domed nest</th><td>Sucre, Venezuela</td><td>1934</td><td>Museum</td><td>DMNH–10519</td></tr><tr><th>Larger eggs</th><td>Brazil</td><td>NA</td><td>Museum</td><td>WFVZ–184215</td></tr></tbody></table>

FIGURE 47 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURE 47. Anisochirus madagascariensis (Dejean, 1831) (holotype of A. alluaudi Jeannel, 1946), habitus. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 33–36. Harpalus fuscoaeneus Dejean, 1929 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 33–36. Harpalus fuscoaeneus Dejean, 1929 (Cape of Good Hope). 33, gonocoxite; 34, laterotergite, gonosubcoxite, and gonocoxite; 35, 36, median lobe of aedeagus. Lateral (33, 35), ventral (34) and dorsal (36) views. Scale bar = 0. 5 mm.

FIGURES 45, 46 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 45, 46. Hypharpax australis (Dejean, 1829) (45, New Zealand; 46, holotype), habitus. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 12–19. Harpalus asemus Basilewsky, 1947 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 12–19. Harpalus asemus Basilewsky, 1947 (12–15, Lac Dakka; 16, 17, "holotype" from Naivasha; 18, 19, paratype from Amboni). 12, labium; 13, left metacoxa; 14, gonocoxite; 15, laterotergite, gonosubcoxite, and gonocoxite; 16–19, median lobe of aedeagus. Ventral (12, 13, 15), lateral (14, 16, 18), and dorsal (17, 19) views. Scale bars: A = 0.5 mm (12, 14–19), B = 1.0 mm (13).

FIGURES 37, 38. Harpalus parvulus Dejean, 1929 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 37, 38. Harpalus parvulus Dejean, 1929 (37, S Africa; 38, holotype), habitus. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 10, 11. Harpalus asemus Basilewsky, 1947 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 10, 11. Harpalus asemus Basilewsky, 1947 (10, Yemen; 11, Tanzania), habitus. Scale bars = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 2–9. Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 2–9. Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851 (2, 3, 6, 7, "Syria Abyssinia", 4, 5, lectotype; 8, 9, holotype of H. sundaicus Schauberger, 1933). 2, gonocoxite; 3, laterotergite, gonosubcoxite, and gonocoxite; 4–9, median lobe of aedeagus. Lateral (2, 4, 6, 8), ventral (3), and dorsal (5, 7, 9) views. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

FIGURES 29–32. Harpalus spp., habitus. 29–31, H. fuscoaeneus Dejean, 1929 in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 29–32. Harpalus spp., habitus. 29–31, H. fuscoaeneus Dejean, 1929 (29, S Africa; 30, lectotype; 31, holotype of H. nanus Dejean, 1829); 32, H. australasiae Dejean, 1829 (holotype). Scale bars = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 20, 21. Harpalus spp., habitus. 20, H in On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region

FIGURES 20, 21. Harpalus spp., habitus. 20, H. pseudoasemus sp. n. (paratype from Naivasha); 21, H. merkli sp. n. (holotype). Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

opennotspecifiedNov 2009View details →

FIGURE 7. Misidentification and non relations. A in Syngraph: An application for graphic display and interactive use of synonym lists

FIGURE 7. Misidentification and non relations. A misidentification is represented as a three-branch solid gray line to the right of the names. The name that was misapplied (imposed on light grey) is linked to the first mention of the name the authority considered valid and to the name used by the authority, which is indicated by a gray box, and which is followed, at the end of the line, by the name of the authority and the bibliographic citation to the source of the information. The relation shown here should be read: Carlgren (1938) found that Bolocera longicornis Carlgren, of Stephenson (1918) is Bolocera capensis Carlgren, 1928. The two-branch relation in red to the right of the names illustrates the use of non. The name the authority considered non (imposed on black) is linked to the name considered valid by the authority, indicated by a red box, and which is followed, at the end of the line, by the name of the authority and the bibliographic citation to the source of the information. The relation shown here should be read: Dunn (1983) considered Bolocera longicornis Carlgren, 1891, not to be a synonym of Bolocera kerguelensis Studer, 1879.

opennotspecifiedSep 2021View details →

FIGURE 1 in Considering challenging insights from a taxonomic misidentification

FIGURE 1. Right hemimaxillaries in ventral view: a, Mus sp. from Sabazan, Carriacou (SFU 0707CSZ000024-M-249, originally identified as Zygodontomys brevicauda, modified from Mistretta et al. 2021: fig. 7); b, Mus musculus from La Angostura, Chubut, Argentina (Colección "Elio Massoia," Centro Nacional Patagónico, Puerto Madryn, Argentina; CNP-E 774); c, Rattus sp. from Gaiman, Chubut, Argentina (CNP-E 852). All the materials approximately scaled to the same size.

opencc-zeroDec 2022View details →

Supplementary material 1 from: Zeng X-S, Sun C-H, Huang X-Y, Lao Y-L, Huang J-L, Li S, Zhang Q (2022) DNA barcoding of Scomberomorus (Scombridae, Actinopterygii) reveals cryptic diversity and misidentifications. ZooKeys 1135: 157-170. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1135.93631

DNA barcoding of Scomberomorus (Scombridae, Actinopterygii) reveals cryptic diversity and misidentifications

Figure 10 in Cryptic and widespread: a recipe for taxonomic misidentification in a freshwater crab species (Decapoda: Potamonautidae: Potamonautes sidneyi) as evident from species delimitation methods

Figure 10. Potamonautes Ʋalles sp. nov., male holotype (SAM-MB A 094482). A, left gonopod 1, anterior view; B, left gonopod 1 posterior view; C, left gonopod 2 anterior view; D, right third maxilliped. Scale bar represents 10 mm.

Figure 9 in Cryptic and widespread: a recipe for taxonomic misidentification in a freshwater crab species (Decapoda: Potamonautidae: Potamonautes sidneyi) as evident from species delimitation methods

Figure 9. Potamonautes Ʋalles sp. nov., male holotype (SAM-MB A 094482). A, major right cheliped; B, minor left cheliped. Scale bar represents 10 mm.

Figure 8 in Cryptic and widespread: a recipe for taxonomic misidentification in a freshwater crab species (Decapoda: Potamonautidae: Potamonautes sidneyi) as evident from species delimitation methods

Figure 8. Potamonautes Ʋalles sp. nov., male holotype (CL = 30.90 mm) (SAM-MB A094482) from Muilhuis section, Blyde River Canyon Nature Reserve, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. A, whole animal dorsal aspect; B, whole animal ventral aspect; C, cephalothorax, frontal aspect. Scale bar represents 10 mm.

Figure 7 in Cryptic and widespread: a recipe for taxonomic misidentification in a freshwater crab species (Decapoda: Potamonautidae: Potamonautes sidneyi) as evident from species delimitation methods

Figure 7. Potamonautes karooensis sp. nov., male holotype (SAM-MB A094477) A, left gonopod 1, anterior view; B, left gonopod 1 posterior view; C, left gonopod 2 anterior view; D, right third maxilliped. Scale bar represents 10 mm.