Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 3 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Figure 3. In situ photographs of Apterodela spp. A) Apterodela ovipennis (Asia). B) Apterodela unipunctata (North America).

Figure 2 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Figure 2. Representative dorsal habitus of Parvindela new genus. A) Parvindela debilis (type species. B) Parvindela terricola. C) Parvindela celeripes.

Figure 1 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Figure 1. Maximum-likelihood phylogenetic hypothesis for North American lineages Ellipsoptera, Dromochorus, Brasiella, and Cylindera. Maximum-likelihood phylogeny inferred in IQ-TREE based on three mitochondrial fragments (16S, COX3 and CytB). Taxon naming follows previous naming conventions with different colors highlighting new generic groupings we propose. * denotes the C. lemniscata specimen from GenBank and † denotes the chimera specimen.

Figure 3 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Figure 3. In situ photographs of Apterodela spp. A) Apterodela ovipennis (Asia). B) Apterodela unipunctata (North America).

Figure 2 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Figure 2. Representative dorsal habitus of Parvindela new genus. A) Parvindela debilis (type species. B) Parvindela terricola. C) Parvindela celeripes.

Figure 1 in Unifying systematics and taxonomy: Nomenclatural changes to Nearctic tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae) based on phylogenetics, morphology and life history

Fig. 12 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 12 Nonsensical statement under branch-based definitions, examples with cases involving 4 species. The taxon under scrutiny is defined as>B∼A (i.e. as 'the clade consisting of B and all organisms or species that share a more recent ancestor with B than with A', or as 'the most inclusive clade containing B but not A'); for further explanations, see text

Fig. 8 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 8 Variations of the inferred ancestral character states under cladotypic procedure, in relation to alternative phylogenetic hypotheses (A–G are species); the two tress are assumed to be produced from a single matrix (though the latter could not be designed). Definition of taxon T under scrutiny involves character state 1 as exhibited by species B and C; lineages designated by the definition are indicated by bold lines; for further explanations, see text

Fig. 1 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 1 Retrieval of hierarchy information based on a ranked taxonomy using standardized endings, case of balanced topology representing relationships among eight genera (A–H; I–N are more

Fig. 6 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 6 Variations of the inferred ancestral character states under nodebased procedure, in relation to alternative phylogenetic hypotheses (A–G are species); case of a given character state matrix providing two equally most parsimonious trees. Taxon T under scrutiny is the one

Fig. 4 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 4 Necessary and sufficient number of words for naming species and taxa under the traditional procedure, and under a non-ranked procedure using uninominal species names; case of an unbalanced topology involving 8 species; see text for explanations

Fig. 3 in Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures

Fig. 3 Necessary and sufficient number of words for naming species and taxa under the traditional procedure, and under a non-ranked nomenclatural procedure using uninominal species names; case of a balanced topology involving 8 species; see text for explanations

FIGURE 14 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 14. Lectotype of Lagerstroemia tomentosa var. caudata Koehne (E, E00284579). © The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Edinburgh.

FIGURE 2 in Nomenclature review on grasses (Poaceae) published in the Bombay Flora

FIGURE 2. Lectotype of Arundinella spicata Dalzell, DD (acc. no. 172602) [© Dehra Dun Herbarium (DD), Forest Research Institute, Dehra Dun (India)]

FIGURE 11 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 11. Lectotype of Lagerstroemia minuticarpa Debbarman ex P.C.Kanjilal (ASSAM0000000190). © The Botanical Survey of India.

FIGURE 10 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 10. Second-step lectotype of Lagerstroemia hypoleuca Kurz (CAL0000010206). © The Botanical Survey of India.

FIGURE 6 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 6. Second-step lectotype of Rotala illecebroides (Arnott) Koehne (K000729643). © The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.

FIGURE 13 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 13. Lectotype of Lagerstroemia parviflora var. benghalensis C.B.Clarke (CAL, 176955). © The Botanical Survey of India.

FIGURE 2 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae

FIGURE 1 in Nomenclatural notes on type materials of fourteen names in Lythraceae