Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 2 in Geometric morphometric and molecular evidence suggest a new fruit fly species in Bactrocera (Zeugodacus) tau complex (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Figure 2. Landmark design for wing and aculeus GM analyses. A. Type 1 landmarks on wing venation labeled with downward arrows and numbers indicating locations in geometric analysis. B. A trilobed aculeus. C. A yellow line representing the alignment of pseudolandmarks along an outline of aculeus tip, from one lateral apex to another lateral. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B = 50 μm.

Figure 6 in Effect of soil class and moisture on the depth of pupation and pupal viability of Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (1994)

Figure 6 Effect of time and moisture on the emergence of flies from three soil types (sandy, sandy clay loam and clay loam).The lines in the graphs of the relation between the number of flies emerged and time (a-c) represent nonlinear models with a quadratic term [a) y = 4.12***-0.94***x+0.04x^2, b)y = 0.81*+0.5*x-0.098***x^2 and c) y = 2.47***-0.26x-0.02x^2], while the lines in the graphs of the relation between number of flies emerged and moisture (d-f) represent linear models with Poisson distributions [d) y = 0.11+0.0016x, e) y = -0.69***+0.01***x and f) y = -0.37***+0.008***x]. *:P<0.05; *** P<0.001.

Figure 5 in Effect of soil class and moisture on the depth of pupation and pupal viability of Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (1994)

Figure 5 Effect of soil depth and moisture on the number of pupae in three soil types (sandy, sandy clay loam and clay loam). The lines in the graphs of the relation between the number of pupae and depth (a-c) represent exponential models [a) y=exp(1.58-1.24***x), b) y=exp(1.42-0.21***x) and c) y=exp(1.18-0.16***x)], while the lines in the graphs of the relation between number of pupae and moisture (d-f) represent linear models with Poisson distributions [d) y = 0.56-0.0006x, e) y = 0.55-0.0017x and f) y = 0.55-0.0025x].*** P<0.001.

Figure 4 in Effect of soil class and moisture on the depth of pupation and pupal viability of Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (1994)

Figure 4 Number of pupae per centimeter for each treatment (T1 to T4 with sandy soil, T5 to T8 with sandy clay loam and T9 to T12 with clay loam) in combination with different moisture levels (0%, 30%, 60% and 90% for T1 to T4, T5 to T8 and T9 to T12, respectively). Treatments: T1 = sandy × 0% moisture, T2 = sandy x 30% moisture, T3 = sandy x 60% moisture, T4 = sandy x 90% moisture, T5 = sandy clay loam x 0% moisture, T6 = sandy clay loam x 30% moisture, T7 = sandy clay loam x 60% moisture, T8 = sandy clay loam x 90% moisture, T9 = clay loam x 0% moisture, T10 = clay loam x 30% moisture, T11 = clay loam x 60% moisture, and T12 = clay loam x 90% moisture.

Figure 3 in Effect of soil class and moisture on the depth of pupation and pupal viability of Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (1994)

Figure 3 Illustration of the steps of the experiment: A) Larvae on the soil surface; B) Containers used in the experiment; C) Removal of a 1 cm ring; D) Transfer of the soil to a plastic tray; E) Sorting and counting of the pupal cases; and F) Insects that were unable to rupture the soil layer. Photos: Eric Joel Ferreira do Amaral.

Figure 1 in Effect of soil class and moisture on the depth of pupation and pupal viability of Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (1994)

Figure 1 Representation of the steps for rearing B. carambolae: A) Oviposition container; B) Cage with adults; C) Eggs; D) Feed based on carrots in a plastic tray containing larvae; E) Paper envelope containing the plastic tray with larvae. Photos: Eric Joel Ferreira do Amaral.

Figure 5 in Trapping Pestiferous Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Studies on the Performance of Solid Bactrocera Male Lures and Separate Insecticidal Strips Relative to Standard Liquid Lures

Figure 5. Captures of Bactrocera cucurbitae males in traps baited with toxicants of variable age. Data for DDVP strips weathered in Arizona and Florida are given in top and bottom plots, respectively. While toxicant age varied among treatments, the lure was fresh (no weathering) in all treatments. All traps were baited with fresh liquid CL, except the Fresh DDVP treatment which employed a fresh CL plug. Height of bar represents mean number of males captured per trap (n = 15 traps per treatment) in a 24-h period; error bars are + 1 SE. No significant variation existed among treatments for either Arizona (F = 2.5, P = 0.07) or Florida (F = 0.5, P = 0.66). Bars sharing a letter did not differ significantly (P> 0.05).

Figure 1 in Trapping Pestiferous Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Studies on the Performance of Solid Bactrocera Male Lures and Separate Insecticidal Strips Relative to Standard Liquid Lures

Figure 1. (A) CL plug contained in two face-to-face perforated baskets along with Plato strip (red object). (B) ME wafer with plastic basket holding DDVP strip affixed. Photos show the lures and DDVP strips only, and when deployed in the field, these were housed in Jackson traps.

Figure 3 in Trapping Pestiferous Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Studies on the Performance of Solid Bactrocera Male Lures and Separate Insecticidal Strips Relative to Standard Liquid Lures

Figure 3. Captures of Bactrocera dorsalis males in traps baited with toxicants of variable age. Data for DDVP strips weathered in Arizona and Florida are given in top and bottom plots, respectively. While toxicant age varied among treatments, the lure was fresh (no weathering) in all treatments. All traps were baited with fresh liquid ME, except the Fresh DDVP treatment which employed a fresh ME wafer. Height of bar represents mean number of males captured per trap (n = 15 traps per treatment) in a 24-h period; error bars are + 1 SE. Significant variation existed among treatments for Arizona (F = 3.7, P = 0.02) but not for Florida (H = 1.8, P = 0.61); bars sharing a letter did not differ significantly (P> 0.05).

Figure 2 in Trapping Pestiferous Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Studies on the Performance of Solid Bactrocera Male Lures and Separate Insecticidal Strips Relative to Standard Liquid Lures

Figure 2. Captures of Bactrocera dorsalis males in traps baited with ME lures of variable age. Data for wafers weathered in Arizona and Florida are given in top and bottom plots, respectively. While lure age varied among treatments, the toxicant was fresh (no weathering) in all treatments. Liquid was applied to a cotton wick; in all other cases ME was presented in a polymeric wafer. Height of bar represents mean number of males captured per trap (n = 15 traps per treatment) in a 24-h period; error bars are + 1 SE. Significant variation existed among treatments for both Arizona (F = 10.5, P <0.001) and Florida (F = 11.0, P <0.001); bars sharing a letter did not differ significantly (P> 0.05).

Figure 4 in Trapping Pestiferous Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Studies on the Performance of Solid Bactrocera Male Lures and Separate Insecticidal Strips Relative to Standard Liquid Lures

Figure 4. Captures of Bactrocera cucurbitae males in traps baited with CL lures of variable age. Data for CL plugs weathered in Arizona and Florida are given in top and bottom plots, respectively. While lure age varied among treatments, the toxicant was fresh (no weathering) in all treatments. Liquid was applied to a cotton wick; in all other cases CL was presented in a polymeric plug. Height of bar represents mean number of males captured per trap (n = 15 traps per treatment) in a 24-h period; error bars are + 1 SE. No significant variation existed among treatments for either Arizona (F = 0.5, P = 0.65) or Florida (F = 1.9, P = 0.15). Bars sharing a letter did not differ significantly (P> 0.05).

Figure 16 in Unusual Dark Forms of the Solanum Fruit Fly Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) in Hawaii (Tephritidae: Dacini)

Figure 16. Lateral views showing the difference in the width of the mesopleural stripe. A. Bactrocera latifrons ex USDA fruit fly lab, Honolulu, Hawaii. B. Holotype of B. citima, Chiangdao, Chiangmai prov., Thailand.

Figures 1–15 in Unusual Dark Forms of the Solanum Fruit Fly Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) in Hawaii (Tephritidae: Dacini)

Figures 1–15. Lateral, dorsal views and abdomen close-ups of five specimens of Hawaiian Bactrocera latifrons with varying degrees of dark markings on the abdomen and the scutum and legs. 1–3: female collected on Oahu, Kahuku, Fukuyama farm, leg. S. Graham (no date on labels), with typical 'textbook' orange-brown abdomen and absence of dark markings. 4–6: UHIM2015.04242 male collected on Maui, Kula, Howard Harada coffee, 26.vii–4.viii-06. leg. L. Leblanc. 7–9: female collected on Oahu, 2017, leg. S. Graham. 10–12: UHIM2015.04243 collected on Maui, Kula, Flora Umeno's coffee plot, 16–23.vi.06, leg. L. Leblanc. 13–15: UHIM2016.25466 female collected on Oahu, Ala Wai, garden, 5.ii.90 ex wild tomatoes, leg. M. M. Ramadan.

Figure 17 in Unusual Dark Forms of the Solanum Fruit Fly Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) in Hawaii (Tephritidae: Dacini)

Figure 17. Dorsal view drawing of the aculeus (piercer) of the ovipositor, which is needle shaped (above) in Bactrocera citima and trifurcate (below) in B. latifrons and B. parvula.

Fig. 1 in The Taxonomy And Phylogenetic Relationships Of Species In The Bactrocera Musae Complex Of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) In Papua New Guinea

Fig. 1. Bactrocera (Bactrocera) balagawii, new species.

Fig. 2 in The Taxonomy And Phylogenetic Relationships Of Species In The Bactrocera Musae Complex Of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) In Papua New Guinea

Fig. 2. Bactrocera (Bactrocera) parabancroftii, new species.

Fig. 4 in The Taxonomy And Phylogenetic Relationships Of Species In The Bactrocera Musae Complex Of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) In Papua New Guinea

Fig. 4. Bactrocera (Bactrocera) rufivitta, new species.

Fig. 5 in The Taxonomy And Phylogenetic Relationships Of Species In The Bactrocera Musae Complex Of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) In Papua New Guinea

Fig. 5. Bactrocera (Bactrocera) uvariae, new species.

Fig. 3 in The Taxonomy And Phylogenetic Relationships Of Species In The Bactrocera Musae Complex Of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) In Papua New Guinea

Fig. 3. Bactrocera (Bactrocera) ramuensis, new species.