Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 4 in Year-round monitoring of bat records in an urban area: Kharkiv (NE Ukraine), 2013, as a case study

Figure 4. Spatial distributions of records of E. serotinus in Kharkiv. (a) The records in periods from 1 August to 2 December; (b) the records in winter, 1 January to 29 March and from 3 December to 31 December.

Figure 3 in Year-round monitoring of bat records in an urban area: Kharkiv (NE Ukraine), 2013, as a case study

Figure 3. Spatial distributions of four bat species records throughout the year in Kharkiv. NNOC: N. noctula; PKUH: P. kuhlii; VMUR: V. murinus; PAUR: P.auritus.

Figure 10 in Year-round monitoring of bat records in an urban area: Kharkiv (NE Ukraine), 2013, as a case study

Figure 10. The body mass dynamics by month of adult individuals of N. noctula during 2013 in Kharkiv. F – ♀♀, M – ♂♂ (black dot – mean value, line – median value, whiskers – min and max values, open dot – outlier).

Figure 9 in Year-round monitoring of bat records in an urban area: Kharkiv (NE Ukraine), 2013, as a case study

Figure 9. Comparative ratios of the causes of death or significant injury during 2013 in Kharkiv: dir. people – directly killed or injured by people; cas. people – indirectly/casually killed or injured by people; attenuation – death after exhaustion; oil – death after fouling by oil products; cat – killed or injured by a cat; window trap – death as a result of becoming trapped in a window; un – uncertain.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2018View details →

B in The monitoring of feather mites (Acari, Astigmata) of the Warbler (Aves: Sylviidae) species in the Kızılırmak delta, Samsun, Turkey

B rd spec es Figure 2. Number of the feather mite species identified on members of the family Sylviidae.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2019View details →

Fig. 1 in From incidental findings to systematic discovery: locating and monitoring a new population of the endangered Harlequin Toad

Fig. 1 Location and boundaries of the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor (ASBC) in the province of San José, Costa Rica.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2019View details →

Fig. 3 in From incidental findings to systematic discovery: locating and monitoring a new population of the endangered Harlequin Toad

Fig. 3 Males, females, and juveniles of Atelopus varius found in the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor. (A) Male found during February surveys. (B) Sleeping male in the leaf litter in the same location of a male in Fig. 2(A). (C) and (E) are juveniles high above the river bank, at least 3–4 m high in the vegetation of the understory, and juvenile (C) is sleeping. (D) A female Harlequin Toad sleeping on the vegetation five m above the river.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2019View details →

Fig. 2 in From incidental findings to systematic discovery: locating and monitoring a new population of the endangered Harlequin Toad

Fig. 2 Detail of Atelopus varius individuals found during February and June 2017 in the ASBC. The left column includes males; the right column includes females. Males (B) and (C) were photographed as found, as were females (E), (G), and (H). Note the spread-out basking position of female (G).

Fig 5 in Monitoring Spodoptera frugiperda in Benin: assessing the influence of trap type, pheromone blends, and habitat on pheromone trapping

Fig 5. Phylogenetic tree based on a portion of the COI barcoding segment showing the relationships of selected non-target moth specimens (g54xxx) isolated from fall armyworm pheromone traps relative to selected GenBank sequences. GenBank sequences are indicated by species name followed by accession number. Fall armyworm R-strain and fall armyworm C-strain are consensus sequences for the 2 fall armyworm host strains.

Fig 3 in Monitoring Spodoptera frugiperda in Benin: assessing the influence of trap type, pheromone blends, and habitat on pheromone trapping

Fig 3. Field screening of home-made trap design (Jar2 and Jar4) in comparison to Unitrap model using pheromone lures (all combined) over 2 maize cropping systems (maize monoculture and maize-cowpea intercrops) during the second planting season. The traps were installed on 30 Sep 2019 during the second maize growing season, and the moth collection period covered Oct to Dec. The data denotes average numbers per trap type for overall 3-d intervals moth collections with standard errors.

Fig 2 in Monitoring Spodoptera frugiperda in Benin: assessing the influence of trap type, pheromone blends, and habitat on pheromone trapping

Fig 2. Preliminary field test of pheromone traps using the 2-component fall armyworm pheromone PSU lure during the first maize growing season: comparison between home-made Jar2 trap and Unitrap model (A) (average number per trap type for overall weekly moth collections; error bars represent standard error and different lowercase letters denote statistical difference), and fluctuation in moth trap catch of the Unitrap-2-component lure combination (B) (moth collections were done every 3 d).

Fig 4 in Monitoring Spodoptera frugiperda in Benin: assessing the influence of trap type, pheromone blends, and habitat on pheromone trapping

Fig 4. Moth trap catch of 3 pheromone lures over 2 cropping systems (maize monoculture and maize-cowpea intercrops) using Unitraps. The traps were installed on 30 Sep 2019 during the second maize growing season and allowed to collect moths Oct to Dec 2019. The 4-component lure type (4C) contained Z9-14:Ac (78.3%), (Z)-11-hexadecenyl acetate (Z11-16:Ac) (3.6%), Z7-12:Ac (11.2%), and (Z)-9-dodecenyl acetate (Z9-12:Ac) (7.0%); whereas the 3-component lure type (3C) was composed of Z9-14:Ac (66.1%), Z11-16:Ac (4.7%), and Z7-12:Ac (29.3%); and the 2-component lure type (2C) of Z9-14:Ac (90.5%) and Z7-12:Ac (9.5%). The data represents average numbers for overall 3-d intervals moth collections.

Fig 1 in Monitoring Spodoptera frugiperda in Benin: assessing the influence of trap type, pheromone blends, and habitat on pheromone trapping

Fig 1. Traps used in study: commercially available Unitrap (A); home-made Jar2 trap constructed from 2 L plastic jar (B). The Jar2 trap was designed by G.T. TepaYotto and J.K. Winsou.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2017View details →

Fig. 2 in Evaluating the use of phenylacetonitrile plus acetic acid to monitor Pandemis pyrusana and Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple

Fig. 2. Mean (SE) number of male, female, and total Pandemis pyrusana caught in traps baited with either the sex pheromone lure (males only) or with phenylacetonitrile plus an acetic acid co-lure (males, females, and total moths). '*' denotes a significant mean difference as compared to male catch in the sex pheromone-baited trap, P <0.05.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2017View details →

Fig. 1 in Evaluating the use of phenylacetonitrile plus acetic acid to monitor Pandemis pyrusana and Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple

Fig. 1. Mean (SE) number of male, female, and total Cydia pomonella caught in traps with a sex pheromone plus pear ester combo lure and an acetic acid (AA) co-lure versus in traps with these same lures with the addition of a phenylacetonitrile (PAN) sachet lure, 7–21 Jul 2014, Moxee Washington, USA. 'N.S.' denotes a nonsignificant difference in moth catches between the 2 types of lures, P> 0.05.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2018View details →

Fig. 1 in Potential of unmanned aerial sampling for monitoring insect populations in rice fields

Fig. 1. Rotary-wing unmanned aerial vehicle equipped with remote-controlled insect net openings (a). Layout of double-layered insect net designed to prevent loss of insect samples during aerial sampling (b). Representative flight path of unmanned aerial vehicle for aerial sampling over rice field (c).

Fig. 2 in Comparison of two traps for monitoring California red scale (Hemiptera: Diaspididae)

Fig. 2. (A) Mean (± SE) number of California red scale per trap by sampling date, based on estimate California red scale counts. Male flight periods are delimited with vertical dashed lines. (B) Degree-d accumulation across sampling dates, for temperature data collected from onsite weather station and regional weather station. Solid horizontal lines correspond to the degree-d requirements for the second and fourth male flights.

Fig. 1 in Comparison of two traps for monitoring California red scale (Hemiptera: Diaspididae)

Fig. 1. The California red scale traps used in this study deployed in the field. (A) Single-sided California red scale trap, consisting of a wirelessly networked digital camera mounted to a sticky card platform. (B) A commercial double-sided California red scale trap.

Fig. 3 in Comparison of two traps for monitoring California red scale (Hemiptera: Diaspididae)

Fig. 3. (A) Mean (± SE) California red scale counts (based on estimated California red scale counts) for all trap locations in this study. (B) Schematic of relative position of trap locations in our field plot; shape indicates estimated marginal mean California red scale counts. In (A) and (B) circles are <500 California red scale, triangle is 501 to 1,000 California red scale, and squares> 1,000 California red scale. (C) Mean (± SE) California red scale trap counts by flight number. Bars with different letters are significantly different (α = 0.05).

Fig. 4 in Comparison of two traps for monitoring California red scale (Hemiptera: Diaspididae)

Fig. 4. The probability of a trap capturing> 1,000 California red scale in a sampling period, based on (A) actual California red scale counts, and (B) estimated California red scale counts. Male flight periods are delimited with vertical dashed lines.