Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 4 in Redescription of the terrestrial isopod Armadillo mayeti Simon, 1885 and its comparison with Armadillo officinalis Duméril, 1816 from Tunisian populations

Figure 4. Male Armadillo mayeti. (A) Right mandible. (B) Left mandible. (C) Maxilliped. (D) Maxillula. (E) Maxilla.

Figure 8 in Redescription of the terrestrial isopod Armadillo mayeti Simon, 1885 and its comparison with Armadillo officinalis Duméril, 1816 from Tunisian populations

Figure 8. Male Armadillo officinalis. (A) Antenna. (B) Pereopod 1. (C) Pereopod 7. (D) Uropod, ventral view.

Figure 7 in Redescription of the terrestrial isopod Armadillo mayeti Simon, 1885 and its comparison with Armadillo officinalis Duméril, 1816 from Tunisian populations

Figure 7. Male Armadillo officinalis. (A) Body, lateral view. (B) Pereion-epimera I and II latero-ventral view. (C) Cephalon and tergite I, dorsal view. (D) Setae on tergite I. (E) Pleotelson ventral view (pereopods 7 removed) with pereopods 6, pleopods l and 2, uropods, telson apex. (F) Stridulation apparatus on propodus 5. (G) Enlarged scale.

Figure 3 in Redescription of the terrestrial isopod Armadillo mayeti Simon, 1885 and its comparison with Armadillo officinalis Duméril, 1816 from Tunisian populations

Figure 3. Male Armadillo mayeti. (A) Antenna. (B) Antennula. (C) Telson dorsal view. (D) Uropod exopodite insertion. (E) Uropod ventral view.

Figure 4 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 4. (A) Substrate types between island and mainland populations of Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi; (B) Number of observed individuals at positions (in or out) in different time intervals; (C) Elevations resided by island and mainland populations; (D) Distances from the observed animal to the near stream shore among four study areas.

Figure 3 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 3. Micro-habitat characteristics of Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi (A) Substrate temperature; (B) Canopy coverage; (C) Height above the ground in relation to the Snout-Vent Length (From low to high levels mentioned the frequency of captured animals); (D) Stream section type; (E) Surface substrate condition; (F) Activity status.

Figure 6 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 6. Comparisons of macro-climatic niches of Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi between island and mainland populations. (A) Climate niche space of the mainland population; (B) Climate niche space of the mainland population along the first two axes of the PCA-env (The solid (100%) and dashed contour (50%) lines illustrate the available macro-climate space); (C) The contribution of 19 climatic variables for loading PCA-env axes and the percentage of inertia explained by axes one and two.

Figure 5 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 5. (A) Scatterplot of all variable groups for the first (Dim1) and second (Dim2) axes in the Multiple factor analysis (MFA) (green triangles as inactive groups, red triangles as active groups or variables); (B) Scatterplot of all qualitative variables in the Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA); (C) The first four important variables of the Dim1; and (D) The Dim2; (E) Scatter diagram illustrating the micro-habitat niche space of island and mainland populations.

Figure 1 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 1. Records of Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi (orange circles – surveyed locations; blue green circles – other recorded occurrences); (1): Bai Tu Long National Park, Quang Ninh Province (2): Chi Linh District, Hai Duong Province, (3): Yen Tu Mountain, Quang Ninh Province, (4): Tay Yen Tu Nature Reserve, Bac Giang Province. The background depicts elevation in northern Vietnam and southern China (from dark blue to red indicating higher elevation).

Figure 2 in First ecological assessment of the endangered Lichtenfelder's Tiger Gecko (Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi) from northern Vietnam: micro-habitat and macro-climatic niche comparisons between island and mainland populations

Figure 2. (A) Natural micro-habitat of Goniurosaurus lichtenfelderi; (B) An adult male resting on a moss-rock substrate.

opencc-zeroJun 2021View details →

dryad32/100

Comparison of adult census size and effective population size support the need for continued protection of two Solomon Island endemics

Because a population's ability to respond to rapid change is dictated by standing genetic variation, we can better predict a population's long-term viability by estimating and then comparing adult census size (N) and effective population size (Ne). However, most studies only measure N or Ne, which can be misleading. Using a combination of field and genomic sequence data, we here estimate and compare N and Ne in two range-restricted endemics of the Solomon Islands. Two Zosterops White-eye species inhabit the small island of Kolombangara, with a high elevation species endemic to the island (Z. murphyi) and a low elevation species endemic to the Solomon Islands (Z. kulambangrae). Field observations reveal large values of N for both species with Z. kulambangrae numbering at 114,781 ± 32,233 adults, and Z. murphyi numbering at 64,412 ± 15,324 adults. In contrast, genomic analyses reveal that Ne was much lower than N, with Z. kulambangrae estimated at 694.5 and Z. murphyi at 796.1 individuals. Further, positive Tajima's D values for both species suggest that they have experienced a demographic contraction, providing a mechanism for low values of Ne. Comparison of N and Ne suggests that Z. kulambangrae and Z. murphyi are not at immediate threat of extinction but may be at genetic risk. Our results provide important baseline data for long-term monitoring of these island endemics, and argue for measuring both population size estimates to better gauge long-term population viability.

FIGURE 6. Phylogenetic relationships between 23 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 6. Phylogenetic relationships between 23 species and strains of Steinernema with bootstrap analysis of ITS regions. The eight strains of S. feltiae from a monophyletic group. Numbers at the nodes represent bootstrap proportion.

FIGURE 5 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 5. SEM of infective juvenile of S. feltiae strain BC showing lateral field pattern. A, anterior region showing smooth head, amphid, and one line in lateral field. B, lateral field with two ridges. C, lateral field with two ridges anteriorly, seven ridges posteriorly. D, lateral field with eight ridges. E, lateral field in posterior region showing four ridges near anus. F, lateral field with two ridges and phasmid. Scale bars: A=4.29 µm, B=5.0 µm, C=7.5 µm, D=7.5 µm, E=23.1 µm, F=1.67 µm.

FIGURE 4 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 4. Light microscope photographs of S. feltiae strain BC. A–C, infective juvenile showing excretory pore, basal bulb and long tail. D–F, second generation female, D, tail, E, young, F, old specimen. Scale bars: A–C=14 µm, D=32 µm, E, F=20 µm.

FIGURE 3 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 3. SEM of female of S. feltiae strain BC. A, an abnormal face view. B, a normal face view. C, vulva. D–E, variations of female tail tip. Scale bars: A=6.67 µm, B=10.0 µm, C=15 µm, D=12 µm, E=15 µm, F=16.7 µm.

FIGURE 2 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 2. SEM and light microscopy. Comparative morphology of spicules S. feltiae and S. oregonense. A, spicule of S. feltiae strain SN. B, spicule of S. oregonense. C,D, variation of spicule of S. feltiae strain BC. Scale bars: A=21 µm, B=24 µm, C=24 µm, D=16 µm (in C).

FIGURE 1 in Morphological and molecular characterization of a new isolate of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev, 1934) from Vancouver, Canada, with morphometrical comparison with the topotype population from Russia

FIGURE 1. SEM of male of S. feltiae strain BC. A, face view. B, C, posterior regions with prominent genital papillae in B and not very prominent in C. D–F, variation of mucron and tail tip. Scale bars: A=7.5 µm, B=50.0 µm, C=85.7 µm, D=23.1 µm, E=10 µm, F=8.57 µm.

opennotspecifiedSep 2017View details →

Figure 1 in Diet comparison between rainforest and cave populations of Craugastor alfredi (Anura: Craugastoridae): does diet vary in contrasting habitats?

Figure 1. Observed (dark grey bars) and estimated (light grey bars) dietary diversity based on numeric data of the rainforest and cave populations of Craugastor alfredi. Error bars of estimated dietary diversity are 95% confidence intervals.

opennotspecifiedJun 2018View details →

FIG. 2 in Geographical Ecology ofTropidurus hispidus(Squamata: Tropiduridae) andCnemidophorus ocellifer(Squamata: Teiidae) in a Neotropical Region: A Comparison among Atlantic Forest, Caatinga, and Coastal Populations

FIG. 2. Microhabitat use percentages of Cnemidophorus ocellifer and Tropidurus hispidus lizards from Caatinga, Restinga, and Atlantic Forest populations. Numbers represent sample sizes.