Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 13. Characteristic conodonts from Baghuk Mountain section A in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 13. Characteristic conodonts from Baghuk Mountain section A (scale bars = 100 µm), oral and oblique views; all specimens stored in the collection of the Islamic Azad University, Tehran North Branch (IAUTNB). (a) Clarkina orientalis (Barskov and Koroleva, 1970), specimen IAUTNB#115; −8.90 m. (b) Clarkina subcarinata (Sweet in Teichert et al., 1973), specimen IAUTNB#137; −7.50 m. (c) Clarkina changxingensis (Wang and Wang, 1981), specimen IAUTNB#142; −5.00 m. (d) Clarkina deflecta (Wang and Wang, 1981), IAUTNB#189; −2.50 m. (e) Clarkina bachmanni Kozur, 2004, specimen IAUTNB#162; −3.90 m. (f) Clarkina nodosa Kozur, 2004, specimen IAUTNB#203; −2.20 m. (g) Clarkina yini Mei in Mei et al., 1998, specimen IAUTNB#215; −1.95 m. (h) Clarkina abadehensis Kozur, 2004 specimen IAUTNB#231; −0.25 m. (i) Clarkina hauschkei Kozur, 2004, specimen IAUTNB#250; −0.05 m. (j) Hindeodus parvus (Kozur and Pjatakova, 1976), specimen IAUTNB#251; +2.15 m. (k) Isarcicella staeschei Dai and Zhang, 1989, specimen IAUTNB#265; +3.75 m. (l) Isarcicella isarcica (Huckriede, 1958), specimen IAUTNB#264; +3.75 m.

Figure 2 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 2. Palaeogeographic position of the Baghuk Mountain area during the Permian–Triassic boundary time interval (after Stampfli and Borel, 2002).

Figure 15 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 15. Selected Wuchiapingian representatives of ammonoids from Baghuk Mountain; all specimens stored in the collection of the Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin. (a) Prototoceras sp., specimen MB.C.30219 (Araxoceras beds). (b) Vedioceras sp., specimen MB.C.30220 (Vedioceras beds). (c) Eoaraxoceras sp., specimen MB.C.30221 (Araxoceras beds). (d) Urartoceras sp., specimen MB.C.30222 (Pseudotoceras beds). Scale bar units = 1 mm.

Figure 5 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 5. Stratigraphic subdivision of the Permian–Triassic boundary sections in the Julfa sections (from Ghaderi et al., 2014) and at Baghuk Mountain (from Farshid et al., 2016) with lithostratigraphic correlation. W – Wuchiapingian.

Figure 12 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 12. Columnar section of the basal part of the Elikah Formation at Baghuk Mountain with the position of microbial buildups, changes in bed thickness and frequency of bivalve shells.

Figure 1 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 1. Geographic position of Permian–Triassic boundary sections, including Baghuk Mountain (BM), in Central Iran.

Figure 11 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 11. Field photograph of in situ microbialite occurrence showing digitate upward growing branches of digitate stromatolite columns in the Baghuk Member; Baghuk Mountain K section. Scale bar units = 10 cm.

Figure 4 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 4. Correlation of the Permian–Triassic boundary beds in Central Iranian sections. Kuh-e-Hambast rock column after Kozur (2005). Position of the conodont-based Permian–Triassic boundary after Kozur (2005; 1, 3), Farshid et al. (2016; 2) and Richoz et al. (2010; 4). Asadabad section after unpublished data.

Figure 8. Section C in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 8. Section C with the top part of the Hambast Formation and the basal 40 m of the Elikah Formation including the Baghuk Member. View towards the west.

Figure 3 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 3. The Permian–Triassic boundary at Baghuk Mountain section C, Central Iran. View towards the north-west, in the background, summit composed of Triassic rocks.

Figure 9 in Baghuk Mountain (Central Iran): high-resolution stratigraphy of a continuous Central Tethyan Permian-Triassic boundary section

Figure 9. Columnar sections of the Baghuk Member ("Boundary Clay") in some of the sections at Baghuk Mountain. Legend as in Figs. 4 and 6; EH – extinction horizon.

Fig. 2 in Phylogenetic placement of a new paleoendemic pill scarab from the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, triggers biogeographic interpretations (Coleoptera: Hybosoridae, Ceratocanthinae)

Fig. 2 – Balleriodes sphaera gen. et sp. nov., paratypes (A-R, specimen 8969, S, specimen 8752), details. A-B, head, fronto-dorsal (A) and frontal (B); C, maxilla; D, labrum; E-F, mandibles; G, antenna; H: labium; I-J, elytron in ventral view showing phoretic mites (J, enlarged); K, prothorax, ventral view; L-N, fore, middle and hind left legs; O, pterothorax, ventral view; P-R, phallobase and parameres, right lateral (P), left lateral (Q) and dorsal (R) views; abdomen, with male genitalia in situ. Images are not to scale.

Fig. 4 in Phylogenetic placement of a new paleoendemic pill scarab from the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, triggers biogeographic interpretations (Coleoptera: Hybosoridae, Ceratocanthinae)

Fig. 4 – Habitus of select ingroup and outgroup pill scarabs, left lateral view; images are to scale.

Fig. 5 in Phylogenetic placement of a new paleoendemic pill scarab from the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, triggers biogeographic interpretations (Coleoptera: Hybosoridae, Ceratocanthinae)

Fig. 5 – Maximum likelihood tree of Ceratocanthinae pill scarabs (Coleoptera: Hybosoridae), as reconstructed by RAxML from the three-fragment concatenated matrix.Balleriodes sphaera gen. et sp. nov. is inside the monophyletic Synarmostes group. Branches with ML bootstrap support percentage ≥90 are marked by black circles; those with bootstrap <90 and ≥75 are marked by open rhombi. Colours of Ceratocanthinae taxa and branches indicate their biogeographical region. Habitus images are to scale; small black arrows indicate imaged specimens.

Fig. 1 – A in Phylogenetic placement of a new paleoendemic pill scarab from the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, triggers biogeographic interpretations (Coleoptera: Hybosoridae, Ceratocanthinae)

Fig. 1 – A, Distribution of Balleriodes sphaera gen. et sp. nov. and potentially related and/or similar pill scarabs in Africa and Madagascar. B-F: Balleriodes sphaera gen. et sp. nov., holotype, habitus (B: left lateral, C: dorsal, D: ventral; E: anterior, F: posterior).

Fig. 2 in Comparative phenology and cohort survival of beech scale (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in part of its native range (Caucasus Mountains, Georgia) and in an invaded area (Massachusetts, USA)

Fig. 2. Cloth wrapping used to cage beech trunk section in 2012 at Gulelebi Forest in Georgia where one part of the scale cohort survival study was conducted.

Fig. 6 in Comparative phenology and cohort survival of beech scale (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in part of its native range (Caucasus Mountains, Georgia) and in an invaded area (Massachusetts, USA)

Fig. 6. Comparative cumulative day-degrees for Tianeti in the country of Georgia (cum DD GEO) and Windsor, Massachusetts, USA (cum DD MA), each in the years in which phenological observations on beech scale were made at the 2 locations.

Fig. 5 in Comparative phenology and cohort survival of beech scale (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in part of its native range (Caucasus Mountains, Georgia) and in an invaded area (Massachusetts, USA)

Fig. 5. Phenology of life stages of beech scale in Massachusetts (USA) (Notchview Reservation, property of Trustees of Reservations, Windsor, 2013), showing univoltine cycle, with settled crawlers being the overwintering stage.

Fig. 4 in Comparative phenology and cohort survival of beech scale (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in part of its native range (Caucasus Mountains, Georgia) and in an invaded area (Massachusetts, USA)

Fig. 4. Phenology of life stages of beech scale in Georgia (Gulelebi Forest, Tianeti District, 2011), showing bivoltine cycle, with adult females being the overwintering stage.

Fig. 3 in Comparative phenology and cohort survival of beech scale (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in part of its native range (Caucasus Mountains, Georgia) and in an invaded area (Massachusetts, USA)

Fig. 3. (a) Example of trunk cages made from small Petri dishes (with an open bottom) that were used to isolate scale patches in Massachusetts. (b) Patches of beech scale initiated by delimiting groups (<50) of newly settled crawlers with top patch (defined by black circle marked on bark) lef uncaged, whereas lower patch was caged (caged removed here) from Oct 2011 to Oct 2012 (1 scale generation) at which time scales were a mixture of adults and crawlers of the next generation; done on American beech at Notchview Reservation (property of Trustees of Reservations), Windsor, Massachusetts, USA. Note the greater number of large white woolly dots (adults of the test generation) in the bottom circle, suggesting significant mortality due to factors, like generalist predators, that were excluded by the cages.