Find research datasets worth reusing

Figs 64–66. Female genitalia. 64. S in A review of Mexican Stamnodes (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) with the description of 16 new species

Figs 64–66. Female genitalia. 64. S. favilla sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2020-037, CNIN). 65. S. fuego sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2020-024, USNM 154201). 66. S. matrona sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2023-284, USNM 154214). Scale bar = 2 mm.

Figs 19–30 in A review of Mexican Stamnodes (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) with the description of 16 new species

Figs 19–30. Adult Stamnodes Guenée, [1858], dorsal (a) and ventral (b) views. 19. S. saltillo sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (CNIN). 20. S. formosata (Strecker, 1878) (USNMENT01771263). 21. S. lampra Rindge, 1878, paratype (USNMENT01771264). 22. S. franckata (Pearsall, 1909) (USNMENT01771255). 23. Stamnodes sp. (?undescribed; Mexico: Nuevo León) (USNMENT01523823). 24. S. patamon (Druce, 1893) (CNIN). 25. S. coenonymphata (Hulst, 1900) (TAM). 26. S. catarina sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (AMNH_IZC 00352926). 27. S. churro sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (AMNH_IZC 00352920). 28. S. ferropulvisa sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (USNMENT01523824). 29. S. calcarea sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (CMNH). 30. S. ululata Pearsall, 1912 (USNMENT01771256). Scale bar = 1 cm.

Figs 44–46 in A review of Mexican Stamnodes (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) with the description of 16 new species

Figs 44–46. Male genitalia: genital capsules (a) and phalli (b). 44. S. clara sp. nov., holotype (TAM- 2022-130, AMNH). 45. S. carota sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2023-262, USNM 154208). 46. S. favilla sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2020-042, CNIN). Scale bar = 1 mm.

Figs 49–51 in A review of Mexican Stamnodes (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) with the description of 16 new species

Figs 49–51. Male genitalia: genital capsules (a) and phalli (b). 49. S. disrupta sp. nov., paratype (TAM- 2023-260, USNM 154211). 50. S. mariachi sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2023-285, USNM 154213). 51. S. erupta sp. nov., paratype (TAM-2023-257, USNM 154210). Scale bar = 1 mm.

Figs 11–18 in A review of Mexican Stamnodes (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) with the description of 16 new species

Figs 11–18. Adult Stamnodes Guenée, [1858], dorsal (a) and ventral (b) views. 11. S. fergusoni Matson & Wagner, 2020, holotype, ♂ (USNMENT01771260). 12. S. deceptiva Barnes & McDunnough, 1918 (USNMENT01771261). 13. S. fervefactaria (Grote, 1881) (USNMENT01771262). 14. S. disrupta sp. nov., holotype (BMEC). 15. S. mariachi sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (EMEC174828). 16. S. erupta sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (USNMENT01771245). 17. S. ceniza sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (LEP190410CNIN). 18. S. proana (Druce, 1893), holotype (NHMUK). Scale bar = 1 cm.

SCOPING REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL LITERATURE ON EVALUATION OF EDITORIAL POLICIES SUPPORTING OPEN SCIENCE PRACTICES IN SCHOLARLY JOURNALS

Excel file containing the description of methods & materials used in the scoping review, the whole dataset of included studies, and respective descriptive metadata.

Understanding Organizational Commitment and its Factors Influencing the Nurse's Job Satisfaction in Hospitals- A Systematic Literature Review and Further Research Agendas

<div> Organizational commitment is a crucial concept when it comes to human resource management and Organizational behavior. It has to do with how much a worker commits to and identifies with the goals, values, and purposes of their company. Elevated levels of Organizational commitment are associated with enhanced job satisfaction, less attrition, and better performance. The expected ideal condition, status, and research deficit are all included in this article. A research agenda is determined by applying the ABCD framework to qualitatively analyze the identified research gap.The paper documents the topic and provides helpful information about it, which will aid future scholars. </div>

Figure 2 in Review of the family Serranidae (Perciformes) from the Canary Islands (eastern-central Atlantic), with the first records of Serranus hepatus and Epinephelus aeneus

Figure 2. – Serranus hepatus from Tenerife, Canary Islands (GBIF-CFM-IEOCA 1199, 86.0 mm TL, 69.2 mm SL) (Credits: J.F. González-Jiménez, 2020).

Figure 1 in Taxonomic review of the "posteli-species group" of goatfishes (genus Parupeneus, Mullidae), with description of a new species from the northern Red Sea

Figure 1. – Relationships among eight morphometric characters including SL and total number of gill rakers in the five posteli-group species and three populations of Parupeneus posteli.

Figure 1 in Review of the family Serranidae (Perciformes) from the Canary Islands (eastern-central Atlantic), with the first records of Serranus hepatus and Epinephelus aeneus

Figure 1. – The Canary Islands. Collection and sighting locations: (Ê) Serranus hepatus; (■) Epinephelus aeneus; (●) Epinephelus costae (map adapted from BlueChart Atlantic v9.5).

Figure 3. – A-E in Taxonomic review of the "posteli-species group" of goatfishes (genus Parupeneus, Mullidae), with description of a new species from the northern Red Sea

Figure 3. – A-E: Parupeneus posteli; A: SAIAB 83959, 88 mm SL, Baissac Bank, southern Mascarene Plateau (O. Alvheim and D. Tweddle); B: SAIAB 83959, 90 mm SL, same locality details (O. Alvheim and D. Tweddle); C: SAIAB 83898, 105 mm SL, Soudan Bank, southern Mascarene Plateau (O. Alvheim and D. Tweddle); D: large-sized fish (SL unknown), Réunion, Mascarene Islands (P. Guézé); E: MNHN 1965-0056, HT, 150 mm SL, same locality details (MNHN); F: Parupeneus sinai n. sp., MNHN 1967-0557, HT, 83 mm SL, northern Red Sea, right side shown, image reversed (F. Uiblein). Scale bars = 20 mm.

Figure 2. – A in Taxonomic review of the "posteli-species group" of goatfishes (genus Parupeneus, Mullidae), with description of a new species from the northern Red Sea

Figure 2. – A: Parupeneus chrysonemus BPBM 34775, 129 mm SL, Midway Atoll, Hawaiian Islands (J.E. Randall); B: P. chrysonemus BPBM 39141, 140 mm SL, Oahu, Hawaiian Islands (J.E. Randall); C: P. louise, large-sized fish (SL unknown), Rurutu, Austral Islands, French Polynesia (A. Stein); D: P. moffiti, HT, 230 mm SL, Guam, Mariana Islands (R.F. Myers). Scale bars = 20 mm.

opencc-zeroJan 2024View details →

dryad40/100

Mining the health disparities and minority health bibliome: A computational scoping review and gap analysis of 200,000+ articles

Without comprehensive examination of available literature on health disparities and minority health (HDMH), the field is left vulnerable to disproportionately focus on specific populations or conditions, curtailing our ability to fully advance health equity. Using scalable open-source methods, we conducted a computational scoping review of more than 200,000 articles to investigate major populations, conditions, and themes in the literature as well as notable gaps. We also compared trends in studied conditions to their relative prevalence in the general population using insurance claims (42 million Americans). HDMH publications represent 1% of articles in MEDLINE. Most studies are observational in nature, though randomized trial reporting has increased five-fold in the last twenty years. Half of all HDMH articles concentrate on only three disease groups (cancer, mental health, endocrine/metabolic disorders), while hearing, vision, and skin-related conditions are among the least well-represented despite substantial prevalence. To support further investigation, we also present HDMH Monitor, an interactive dashboard and repository generated from the HDMH bibliome.

Fig. 3 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 3. Single MP cladogram with multistate characters analyzed as ordered, and a posteriori weighting on the RC (1,446 steps, CI = 0.20, RI = 0.47, RC = 0.09).

Fig. 6 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 6. Lateral view of post-temporal and supracleithrum in: a) Brachyrhaphis terrabensis, AMNH 2503; b) Alfaro cultratus, TU 24927; c) Anableps dowi, TU 39076; d) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, TU 183396; e) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; pectoral fin girdle in: f) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, TU 183396; g) Brachyrhaphis terrabensis, AMNH 2503; h) Brachyrhaphis episcopi, SU 50303; i) Phalloceros caudimaculatus, MCP 40527; j) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 10 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 10. Lateral view of gonapophyses in: a) Brachyrhaphis olomina, TU 24997; b) Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora, TU 84483; c) Poeciliopsis pleurospilus, USAC 838; d) Brachyrhaphis episcopi, SU 50303; e) Xiphophorus alvarezi, USAC 1782; f) Brachyrhaphis terrabensis, AMNH 20503; g) Phallichthys fairweatheri, USAC 1797; h) Poecilia rositae, USAC 1822; i) Priapichthys annectens, TU 25193; j) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, CAS 78795; k) Poeciliopsis turrubarensis, TU 24130; l) Pseudoxiphophorus obliquus, LSUMZ 14339; m) Poeciliopsis gracilis, TU 84966; n) Phalloceros caudimaculatus, MCP 40527; o) Pseudoxiphophorus litoperas, USAC 1813; p) Gambusia affinis, TU 114758; q) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; r) Pamphorichthys araguaiensis, MCP 40919; s) Phalloptychus iheringi, MCP 11054. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 2 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 2. Single MP tree with multistate characters analyzed as unordered, and with a posteriori weighting using RC (1,444 steps, CI = 0.20, RI = 0.47, RC = 0.09).

Fig. 9 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 9. Lateral view of gonopodial suspensorium in: a) Alfaro cultratus, TU 24927; b) Pseudoxiphophorus litoperas, USAC 1813; c) Brachyrhaphis terrabensis, AMNH 2503; d) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, CAS 78795; e) Pseudoxiphophorus obliquus, LSUMZ 14339; f) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; g) Brachyrhaphis olomina, TU 24997; h) Gambusia affinis, TU 114758; i) Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora, TU 84483; j) Pamphorichthys araguaiensis, MCP 40919; k) Phallichthys fairweatheri, USAC 1797; l) Brachyrhaphis episcopi, SU 50303. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 5 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 5. Lateral view of retroarticular in: a) Phalloceros buckupi, SU 64230; b) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; c) Brachyrhaphis olomina, TU 24997; d) Xenophallus umbratilis, TU 186285; e) Phallichthys fairweatheri, USAC 797; f) Carlhubbsia stuarti, USAC 204; g) Poeciliopsis turrubarensis, TU 24130; h) Brachyrhaphis terrabensis, AMNH 2503; i) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, TU 183396; j) Jenynsia eirmostigma, MCP 40527; k) Phalloceros caudimaculatus, MCP 40527; hyomandibula in: l) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; m) Pseudoxiphophorus obliquus, LSUMZ 14339; n) Pseudoxiphophorus diremptus, LSUMZ 14337; o) Pseudoxiphophorus bimaculatus, TU 183396; p) Brachyrhaphis olomina, TU 24997; q) Jenynsia eirmostigma, MCP 40527; r) Anableps dowi, TU 39076; s) Profundulus guatemalensis, USAC 769; dentary in: t) Pseudoxiphophorus obliquus, LSUMZ 14339; u) Pseudoxiphophorus diremptus, LSUMZ 14337; v) Brachyrhaphis episcopi, SU 50303; w) Brachyrhaphis olomina, TU 24997; x) Pamphorichthys araguaiensis, MCP 40919; y) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; z) Profundulus guatemalensis, USAC 769. Scale bars = 1 mm.

Fig. 8 in Monophyly of Heterandriini (Teleostei: Poeciliidae) revisited: a critical review of the data

Fig. 8. Lateral view of the tip of gonopodium in: a) Heterandria formosa, TU 24002; b) Pseudoxiphophorus cataractae, LSUMZ 14338; c) Pseudoxiphophorus obliquus, LSUMZ 14339; d) Pseudoxiphophorus litoperas, USAC 1813; e) Phalloceros caudimaculatus, MCP 40527; f) Cnesterodon decemmaculatus, MCP 35215; g) Xiphophorus mayae, LSUMZ 14336; h) Poecilia rositae, USAC 1822; i) Gambusia affinis, TU 114758; j) Phallichthys fairweatheri, USAC 1797; k) Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora, TU 84483; l) Pamphorichthys araguaiensis, MCP 40919; m) Alfaro cultratus, TU 24927. Scale bars = 1 mm.