Find research datasets worth reusing

FIG. 24. Solpugidae Leach, 1815 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 24. Solpugidae Leach, 1815, chelicerae and cheliceral fixed fingers, prolateral views (A–D), indicating stridulatory organs (A, D), bulbous base of flagellum, prolateral view (E), and apex of flagellar shaft, prolateral view (F). A, B. Solpugiba lineata (C.L. Koch, 1842), 3 (NMNW 13814), shaft distorted during processing for scanning electron microscopy. Inset: closeup of mucron organ (mo). C. Zeriassa cuneicornis (Purcell, 1899), 3 (NMNW 13883). D, E. Zeria sericea (Pocock, 1897), 3 (NMNW 13800). F. Metasolpuga picta (Kraepelin, 1899), 3, Namibia: Gobabeb. Arrows indicate suture in bulbous base (B, C, E) and shaft (F). Abbreviations: FD, fixed finger, distal tooth; FGP, flagellar groove process; FM, fixed finger, medial tooth; FP, fixed finger, proximal tooth; FSD, fixed finger, subdistal tooth; FSM, fixed finger, submedial teeth; MD, movable finger, distal tooth; MM, movable finger, medial tooth; mo, mucron organ; MP, movable finger, proximal tooth; MSM, movable finger, submedial tooth; pvd, proventral distal setae.

FIG. 13. Solpugidae Leach, 1815 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 13. Solpugidae Leach, 1815, Solpugiba lineata (C.L. Koch, 1842), 3 (NMNW 13814), cheliceral movable finger, prolateral view, illustrating dorsodistally directed prodorsal (mpd) setae, distally directed promedian (mpm) setae, and ventrodistally directed proventral (mpv) setae (A); closeup of distal setal area illustrating long apical mpd seta (arrow) and modified distal mpv setae (B); and closeup of socket of modified subapical mpv seta with distally directed insertion (C). Additional abbreviations: MD, movable finger, distal tooth; MP, movable finger, proximal tooth; MSD, movable finger, subdistal tooth.

FIG. 5 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 5. Solifugae, chelicerae, retrolateral (A, B, D, G, I) and dorsal (C, E, F) views, and fixed finger, retrolateral view (H), measurements, ratios, and landmarks. A–C. Landmarks used to measure cheliceral length (CL), including (A) fixed finger apex to cheliceropeltidial condyle (Muma, 1951; Brookhart and Cushing, 2004); (B) fixed finger apex to anterolateral propeltidial lobe anterior margin, in direct line (i) or parallel to longitudinal axis (ii) of chelicera; and (C) fixed finger apex to propeltidium anterior margin. D. CL/CH ratio (CloudsleyThompson, 1961). E. CL/CW* ratio (asterisk indicates use of CW as defined in present contribution). F. A/ CP index (Brookhart and Muma, 1981, 1987; Muma and Brookhart, 1988). G. Fixed and movable (ventral) finger lengths from retrolateral interdigital condyle (ric) center to (applicable) finger apex. H. FN ratio (FNL/ FNH), i.e., fondal notch L/W or FN ratio sensu Brookhart and Muma (1981, 1987) and Muma and Brookhart (1988), and FL/FW ratio sensu Brookhart and Cushing (2004); and FNH/FFH ratio (FW/FFW) sensu Brookhart and Cushing (2004), based on finger to notch ratio (FF/FN) of Brookhart and Muma (1987), with numerator and denominator switched. I. CH/FFH ratio. Abbreviations: CH, cheliceral height; CL, cheliceral length; CP, chelicera-propeltidium length; CW, cheliceral height; FFH, fixed finger height; FFL, fixed finger length; FN, fondal notch; FNH, fondal notch height; FNL, fondal notch length; MFL, movable finger length; ric, retrolateral interdigital condyle.

FIG. 23. Lipophaginae Wharton, 1981 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 23. Lipophaginae Wharton, 1981, Bdellophaga angulata Wharton, 1981, 3 (NMNW 11601), chelicera, prolateral view (A) and flagellar complex setae, retrolateral (B) and prolateral (C) views, indicating stridulatory apparatus and type B sfc. Abbreviations: MM, movable finger, medial tooth; MP, movable finger, proximal tooth; MSM, movable finger, submedial tooth; pic, prolateral interdigital condyle; pvd, proventral distal setae (plumose); pvsd, proventral subdistal setae; sfc, setiform flagellar complex.

FIG. 1. Galeodidae Sundevall, 1833 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 1. Galeodidae Sundevall, 1833 (A, B), Rhagodidae Pocock, 1897 (C, D), Hexisopodidae Pocock, 1897 (E, F), Solpugidae Leach, 1815 (G, H), Daesiidae Kraepelin, 1899 (I, J), Gylippinae Roewer, 1933 (K), Eremobatidae Kraepelin, 1899 (L), Ammotrechidae Roewer, 1934 (M), and Mummuciidae Roewer, 1934 (N), habitus in life. A, B Galeodes caspius fuscus Birula, 1890, Kazakhstan, ♀ (A) and 3 (B). C. Rhagodes sp., ♀, Kenya. D. Rhagodes sp., ♀, India. E. Hexisopus sp., ♀, Namibia. F. Chelypus sp., 3, Namibia. G. Metasopuga picta (Kraepelin, 1899), 3, Namibia. H. Zeria sericea (Pocock, 1897), 3, Namibia. I. Hemiblossia sp., ♀, Namibia. J. Blossia sp., 3, Namibia. K. Gyllipus (Paragylippus) monoceros Werner, 1905, 3, Turkey. L. Eremocosta striata (Putnam 1883), ♀, U.S.A. M. Nothopuga cuyana Maury, 1976, 3, Argentina, N. Gaucha sp. ♀, Brazil.

FIG. 7. Eremobatidae Kraepelin, 1899 in Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

FIG. 7. Eremobatidae Kraepelin, 1899 (A, B), Solpugidae Leach, 1815 (C), and Ammotrechidae Roewer, 1934 (D), cheliceral shape modifications and positional comparison of fondal notch and medial notch, prolateral (A) and retrolateral (B–D) views. A. Eremochelis andreasana (Muma, 1962), holotype 3 (AMNH), shallow fondal notch, illustrating proximal position, relative to reduced median series dentition. B. Eremobates bajadae Muma and Brookhart, 1988, 3 (AMNH [LP 5740]), deep fondal notch. C. Solpugema derbiana (Pocock, 1895), 3 (AMNH [LP 7709]), illustrating medial notch situated within median series dentition, distal to FP. D. Branchia angustus Muma, 1951, 3, adapted from Muma (1951: 136, fig. 305), illustrating medial notch situated within median series dentition. Abbreviations: FD, fixed finger, distal tooth; FM, fixed finger, medial tooth; FN, fondal notch; FP, fixed finger, proximal tooth; FSM, fixed finger, submedial tooth; MN, medial notch; MPL, movable finger, prolateral tooth; PFM, profondal medial tooth; PFP, profondal proximal tooth; PFSM, profondal submedial tooth; PFSP, profondal subproximal tooth; RDP, retrodorsal process; RF, retrofondal teeth; RFM, retrofondal medial tooth; RFP, retrofondal proximal tooth; RFSM, retrofondal submedial tooth; RFSP, retrofondal subproximal tooth; VN, ventral notch.

opencc-by-4.0Nov 2023View details →

Figure 2 in The tegumen morphology is inappropriate as a diagnostic character for Trabala niphanae-inga-pinratanai sp. group (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae)

Figure 2. Male genitalia of Trabala niphanae variabilis ssp. nov. from Laos: A) Holotype (Sekong province, Lamam town); B–D) Paratypes (Sekong province, Lamam town); E–I) Paratypes (Champasak province, Wopakok).

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2006View details →

Fig. 56. Character 79, M. intermandibularis supplementary element morphology. A in PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICS OF DART-POISON FROGS AND THEIR RELATIVES (AMPHIBIA: ATHESPHATANURA: DENDROBATIDAE)

Fig. 56. Character 79, M. intermandibularis supplementary element morphology. A: State 0, anterolateral (Rhinoderma darwinii, AMNH 37849). B: State 1, anteromedial (trinitatis, uncataloged AMNH specimen, part of series collect- ed with AMNH 87392–93).

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2013View details →

Fig. 2. The 50 in Verification Of Four Species Of The Mud Lobster Genus Thalassina (Crustacea: Decapoda: Gebiidea: Thalassinidae) Using Molecular And Morphological Characters

Fig. 2. The 50% majority-rule consensus tree resulting from maximum likelihood analysis of (a) partial PEPCK sequences (substitution rate parameters: TC = 0.5206, TA = 0.1254, TG = 0.0125, CA = 0.1254, CG = 0.0125, AG = 0.2036), - Ln likelihood 1935.877; (b) partial NaK sequences (TC = 0.5183, TA = 0.1061, TG = 0.0727, CA = 0.0972, CG = 0.0223, AG = 0.1834), - Ln likelihood 2117.352; (c) partial COI sequences (TC = 0.7231, TA = 0.1315, TG = 1.4301e–5, CA = 0.0153, CG = 0.0311, AG = 0.0991), - Ln likelihood 2729.365; (d) combined PEPCK, NaK and COI DNA sequences (TC = 0.5687, TA = 0.1190, TG = 0.0211, CA = 0.1190, CG = 0.0211, AG = 0.1511), - Ln likelihood 6914.207. The bootstrap values (ML/MP/BI) are shown at the branches. Bar indicates substitutions per site.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2013View details →

Fig. 3 in Verification Of Four Species Of The Mud Lobster Genus Thalassina (Crustacea: Decapoda: Gebiidea: Thalassinidae) Using Molecular And Morphological Characters

Fig. 3. Locations of examined specimens of T. squamifera (circles) and T. kelanang (triangles) by various authors. Museum catalogue numbers at each site are indicated. = Poore & Griffin, 1979; ● = Ngoc-Ho & de Saint Laurent, 2009; = Moh & Chong, 2009; O = Sakai & Turkay, 2012; ▲ = Moh & Chong, 2009, this study. Dotted line indicates Wallace's Line. Modified base map from http:// commons.wikimedia.org.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2013View details →

Fig. 1 in Verification Of Four Species Of The Mud Lobster Genus Thalassina (Crustacea: Decapoda: Gebiidea: Thalassinidae) Using Molecular And Morphological Characters

Fig. 1. SFDA ordination diagram of morphological and meristic characters for four species of Thalassina.

Fig. 12 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 12. The same morphospaces as Fig. 11 showing the distribution of 115 species based on measurements.

Fig. 10 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 10. Measurements of the whorl expansion rate (Wc) and width of umbilicus (D). Note that c1 and c2 are defined as the distances from the coiling axis to the centers of the whorls. d1 and d2 are distances of umbilical seams from the coiling axis.

Fig. 8 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 8. Sketches of radial cross sections of ammonoids to illustrate various types of shell forms, such as planorbicone (A, B), serpenticone (C, D), oxycone (E), discocone (F), platycone (G, H), spherocone (I, J, K), and cadicone (L). A. Paraceltites elegans. B. Pseudoclymenia dillensis. C. Tropigastrites lahontanus. D. Pterolytoceras sp. E. Beloceras sp. F. Phylloceras consanguineum Gemmellaro. G. Craspedites sp. H. Tetragonites glabrus. I. Damesites sugata. J. Goniatites multiliratus Gordon. K. Latanarcestes sp. L. Cabrieroceras sp.

Fig. 9 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 9. Theoretical morphospace composed of ae and ar displaying several examples of computer−generated ammonoids that represent observed types illustrated in Fig. 8. A. e = 1.5 and r = 0.27. B. e = 1.75 and r = 0.34. C. e = 2.0 and r = 0.17. D. e = 2.3 and r = 0.05. E. e = 2.0 and r = 0.6. F. e = 1.7 and r = 0.27. G. e = 1.8 and r = 0.24. H. e = 2.3 and r = 0.21. I. e = 2.3 and r = 0.32. J. e = 1.95 and r = 0.28. K. e = 1.8 and r = 0.10. L. e = 1.6 and r = 0.8.

Fig. 7 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 7. Relationship between whorl perimeter (L) and square root of cross−sectional area of the whorl (A0.5) which varies with aand avalues. Dashed line i e r in each diagram represents the A0.5/Lcurve in the case of isometry of E and R (a= a= 1.0). A0.5/Lis generally small when ahas a large value. In each i e r i r model, e = 1.9 and r = 0.24.

Fig. 11 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 11. Results of computer simulations. A–D, theoretical morphospaces based on the piggyback whorls model composed of ae and ar showing values of shape parameters (S, A0.5/L, W, D) of a theoretical model corresponding to each combination of aand a. E, negative correlation between Wand S values i c e r c obtained from theoretical models. F, positive correlation between D and S. The values of S, A0.5/L, Wor D are exhibited by the size of the plots, and × indii c cates that a "forbidden" combinations of ae, ar, e, and r was employed in each simulation resulting in failure of defining form (A–D).

Fig. 6 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 6. Allometric growth of ammonoids. Computer models were generated with ae and ar values of 0.97, 1.0, and 1.3. Each diagram shows ontogenetic change in relationship between whorl height (H) and whorl breadth (B) that are standardized by the perimeter of the last whorl (Lmax). Dashed line in each diagram represents the B/H curve in the case of isometry of E and R (ae = ar = 1.0). Note that B/H decreases with growth in the case of ar = 0.97. In each model, e = 1.9 and r = 0.24.

Fig. 5 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 5. Spectrum of the computer−produced ammonoids with various values of E and R when each of them is fixed throughout growth.

Fig. 4 in Piggyback whorls: A new theoretical morphologic model reveals constructional linkages among morphological characters in ammonoids

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of an ammonoid whorl section. The shape of the whorl (S) is represented by the closed curve illustrated here which is given by the parametric equations indicated above the diagram. Figures in the right show examples of hypothetical whorl shapes with systematically varying the S value.