Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 8 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 8. Predation marks produced by Trophon geversianus (Pallas, 1774) in mussels under aquarium conditions. A–D. Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854. A. CEGH−UNC 25339, left valve in external view. B. CEGH−UNC 25340, right valve in external view. C. CEGH−UNC 25341, left valve in external view. D. CEGH−UNC 25342, left valve in external view (D1), detailed (D2). E. Trophon geversianus (Pallas, 1774), CEGH−UNC 25343, shell in dorsal view. F–J. Brachidontes purpuratus (Lamarck, 1819). F. CEGH−UNC 25344, left valve in external view. G. CEGH−UNC 25345, left valve in external view. H. CEGH−UNC 25346, right valve in external view. I. CEGH−UNC 25347, right valve in external view. J. CEGH−UNC 25348, left valve in external view. K–M. Aulacomya atra (Molina, 1782). K. CEGH−UNC 25349, left valve in external view. L. CEGH−UNC 25350, left valve in external view. M. detailed sector of marginal area of both valves of specimen CEGH−UNC 25349 in internal view. Arrows indicate marginal drillings. Scale bars 10 mm.

Fig. 10 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 10. Predation marks produced by Acanthina monodon (Pallas, 1774) in mussels under aquarium conditions. A–C. Brachidontes purpuratus (Lamarck, 1819). A. CEGH−UNC 25357, articulated specimen, external view of right valve. B. CEGH−UNC 25358, articulated specimen, external view of left valve. C. CEGH−UNC 25359, articulated specimen, external view of left valve. D–F, I–O. Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854. D. CEGH−UNC 25360, left valve in external view. E. CEGH−UNC 25361, right valve in external view. F. CEGH−UNC 25362, left valve in external view. I. CEGH−UNC 25365, right valve in external view. J. CEGH−UNC 25366, left valve in external view. K. CEGH−UNC 25367, right valve in external view. L. CEGH−UNC 25368, right valve in external view. M. CEGH−UNC 25369, left valve in external view. N. CEGH−UNC 25370, right valve in external view. O. CEGH−UNC 25371, right valve in external view. G, H. Acanthina monodon (Pallas, 1774). G. CEGH−UNC 25363, valve in dorsal view. H. CEGH−UNC 25364, valve in lateral view. P–S. Aulacomya atra (Molina, 1782). P. CEGH−UNC 25372, right valve in external view. Q. CEGH−UNC 25372, right valve in internal view. R. CEGH−UNC 25375, left valve in external view. S. CEGH−UNC 25375, left valve in internal view (S1), close−up of the notches (S2). Black arrows indicate chipping margins, white arrows indicate notches. Scale bars 10 mm.

Fig. 7 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 7. Counts of eating and resting specimens of Trophon geversianus (Pallas, 1774) in three different localities: Bahía Golondrina (A, B), Bahía Ushuaia (C, D), and San Pablo (E). A and C correspond to a first period of observation (the first year). B, D, and E correspond to a second year.

Fig. 6 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 6. Position of drill holes on Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854. Y axis: valve sector; X axis: frequency. A. Bahía Brown shell accumulations (n = 81). B. Bahía Golondrina shell accumulations (n = 295). C. Poduced by Trophon geversianus (Pallas, 1774) under aquarium conditions (n = 85). D. Produced by Xymenopsis muriciformis (King, 1832) under aquarium conditions (n =19).

Fig. 3 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 3. Means with confidence limits of shell lengths of Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854 consumed by the three different predators included in aquarium experiments. Dashed lines separate size categories.

Fig. 2 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 2. Scheme of the surface of a mussel shell indicating 5 (I, II, III, IV and V) sectors used for the drill site preference analyses.

Fig. 9 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 9. Predation marks produced by Xymenopsis muriciformis (King, 1832) in mussels under aquarium conditions on Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854. A–C, E, F. Mytilus chilensis Hupé, 1854. A. CEGH−UNC 25351, left valve in external view. B. CEGH−UNC 25352, left valve in external view. C. CEGH−UNC 25353, left valve in external view. E. CEGH−UNC 25355, right valve in external view. F. CEGH−UNC 25356, right valve in external view (F1), close−up of the drill hole (F2). D. Xymenopsis muriciformis (King, 1832), CEGH−UNC 25354, shell in dorsal view.

Fig. 5 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 5. Bar chart of size classes for drilled and undrilled shells collected in the field. Y axis is the frequency of each size class. A. Bahía Golondrina. B. Bahía Brown.

Fig. 1 in Predation by drilling gastropods and asteroids upon mussels in rocky shallow shores of southernmost South America: Paleontological implications

Fig. 1. Map showing sampling sites in Tierra del Fuego. A. Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego. B. A sector of the Beagle Channel showing localities on the southern part of the island. Abbreviations: BB, Bahía Brown; BE, Bahía Ensenada; BG, Bahía Golondrina; BU, Bahía Ushuaia; SP, Cabo San Pablo.

Fig. 6. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946 in New data on the ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus and its implications for the validity of the genus

Fig. 6. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, SMSS "SGS", holotype, from the late Aptian of Salzgitter, Germany. Skull roof of the type−specimen in dorsal view. A. Photograph. B. Interpretative drawing by Kolb and Sander (2009). C. Reinterpretation based on the nasal morphology of MHNH 2010.4 and on a cast of SMSS "SGS". As in MHNH 2010.4 (see Fig. 2), the nasal is markedly elongated anteriorly and wide posteriorly, overlapping the postfrontal extensively. The nasal is coloured grey. The foramen situated at the nasal−frontal suture is interpreted as the internasal foramen, and the holotype lacks the parietal foramen and most of the frontal. Illustrations borrowed from Kolb and Sander (2009) and used with the permission of both authors.

Fig. 5. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4 in New data on the ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus and its implications for the validity of the genus

Fig. 5. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4, from the late Albian of Saint−Jouin−Bruneval, France. Left quadratojugal in medial (A) and lateral (B) views. Photographs (A1, B1), explantatory drawings (A2, B2). The quadratojugal possess an extensive lateral facet for the missing postorbital and squamosal, and a large processus quadratus.

Fig. 3. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4 in New data on the ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus and its implications for the validity of the genus

Fig. 3. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4, from the late Albian of Saint−Jouin−Bruneval, France. Detail of the orbital and narial regions. A. Photograph. B. Explanatory drawing. The lacrimal is broken in two and participates to the posterior and ventral borders of the bony naris aperture. The nasal is expanded posterolaterally, as in SMSS "SGS". A possible septomaxilla is present inside the naris, but its identification remains tentative. All bones are from the right side of the skull, except when stated otherwise by a (L).

Fig. 2. Ophthalmosaurid ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4 in New data on the ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus and its implications for the validity of the genus

Fig. 2. Ophthalmosaurid ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4, from the late Albian of Saint−Jouin−Bruneval, France. Skull roof anatomy. A. Photograph. B. Explanatory drawing. The bones found in connection are coloured in pale grey and the bone placed manually at their supposed position are coloured in dark grey. C. Reconstruction. This reconstruction is designed to provide an overview of the skull roof of MNHN 2010.4; please refer to the description and the other figures for anatomical comparison or character state scoring in phylogenetic analysis. The anterior ramus of the nasal is developed, forming the dorsomedial part of the rostrum over a very long distance. The nasal is also developed posterolaterally, overlapping the postfrontal extensively. The frontal participates to three cranial openings: the internasal foramen anteriorly, the pineal foramen posteromedially, and the supratemporal fenestra posterolaterally.

Fig. 4. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4 in New data on the ichthyosaur Platypterygius hercynicus and its implications for the validity of the genus

Fig. 4. Platypterygiine ophthalmosaurid Platypterygius hercynicus Kuhn, 1946, MHNH 2010.4, from the late Albian of Saint−Jouin−Bruneval, France. Detail of the fronto−parietal region. A. Photograph. B. Explanatory drawing. The frontal forms a thickened posteromedial process that fully encloses the parietal foramen and separates it from the parietal.

Fig. 12. Elliptical reticulofenestrids from the Central Paratethys Oligocene and Early Miocene. A–K. Reticulofenestra minuta Roth, 1970 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 12. Elliptical reticulofenestrids from the Central Paratethys Oligocene and Early Miocene. A–K. Reticulofenestra minuta Roth, 1970, <3.5 µm, zones NN1 and NN2. A. Borehole LR−10/12 m, Zone NN2. B–D. Borehole LR−2/48 m, Zone NN1. E, F. Borehole LR−2/28 m, Zone NN2. G. Borehole FV−1/440 m, Zone NN1. H. Borehole EH−1/155 m, Zone NN2. I, J. Borehole EH−1/85 m, Zone NN2. K. Borehole EH−2/155 m, Zone NN2. L–W. Reticulofenestra minuta Roth, 1970, <3.5 µm, Zone NN5. L–N. Section Kralice, sample 4. O, P Section Kralice, sample 7. Q, R. Section Kralice, sample 10. S–U. Borehole PY−1/2.2 m. V, W. Borehole PY−1/1.5 m. X–AY. – group (4–5 µm), zones NP25–NN4. X, Y. Borehole LR−10/350 m, Zone NP25. Ą

Fig. 10 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 10. Two morphotypes of Reticulofenestra haqii–pseudoumbilicus group in the lower part of the Zone NN2. Interval FO Helicosphaera scissura/ FO Discoaster druggii–FO Helicosphaera ampliaperta lower Zone NN2 (22.8–20.0 Ma); n = 243 (samples LR2/28, C2/10, FV1/240, FV1/40, EH2/ 155, EH1/85, EH1/105).

Fig. 5 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 5. Variability of the placolith size for the individual assemblages, Egerian to Eggenburgian. Vertical axis, number of specimens; horizontal axis, placolith size (in µm). Location of the boreholes LR10, LR9, LR2, C2, FV1, EH1, EH2, and section Lipovany (LIP) is illustrated on Fig. 1, their lithology and sampled intervals on Fig. 2. Abbreviation: LO, last occurrence.

Fig. 6 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 6. Variability of the placolith size for the individual assemblages, Ottnangian to Early Badenian. Vertical axis, number of specimens; horizontal axis, placolith size (in µm). Location of the boreholes D19, LKŠ1, BE2, PY1, and sections Lipovany (LIP) and Kralice (KRAS) is illustrated on Fig. 1, their lithology and sampled intervals on Fig. 2.

Fig. 2 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 2. Lithology, stratigraphical ranges, and sampled interval of studied sections. Location of boreholes LR−10, LR−9, LR−2, C−2, FV−1, EH−1, EH−2, D−19, LKŠ−1, BE−2,PY−1, and sections Lipovany and Kralice II is illustrated on Fig. 1.

Fig. 4 in Morphological variability of the Paratethyan Oligocene-Miocene small reticulofenestrid coccolites and its paleoecological and paleogeographical implications

Fig. 4. Scatter plots and frequency histograms visualizing correlations between biometric characteristics of the placoliths. A. Length/width−ratio of placoliths. B. Length/width−ratio of central opening. C. Length of placolith/length of central opening.