Find research datasets worth reusing

opennotspecifiedFeb 2021View details →

Fig. 6 in Ecological and spatial patterns associated with diversification of South American Physaria (Brassicaceae) through the general concept of species

Fig. 6 Geographic and climatic niche distribution for delimited lineages of South American Physamia. (a) Maximum clade credibility (MCC) species tree estimated from ITS and cpDNA datasets using the multispecies coalescent method implemented in *BEAST 1.8.4 and the hypothesis of six independently evolving lineages. Numbers on branches correspond to posterior probability. (b) Geographic distribution of lineages: green,

opennotspecifiedFeb 2021View details →

Fig. 5 in Ecological and spatial patterns associated with diversification of South American Physaria (Brassicaceae) through the general concept of species

Fig. 5 Results of species delimitation analyses. (a) Results from GMYC (discovery approach), BPP, and BFD (validation approaches) plotted onto the MCC tree obtained with the concatenated ITS+cpDNA dataset. GMYC analyses were conducted using MCC trees obtained with nrITS, cpDNA, concatenated nrITS+cpDNA, and coalescence nrITS–cpDNA analyses. BPP analyses were conducted using six different combinations

opennotspecifiedFeb 2021View details →

Fig. 3 in Ecological and spatial patterns associated with diversification of South American Physaria (Brassicaceae) through the general concept of species

Fig. 3 Median-joining networks of a, nrITS dataset; b, cpDNA dataset (tmnLF, tmnH-psbA, tmnG intron, tmnS-tmnG spacer). Six morphologically defined species are distinguished by different colors: blue, P. cmassistigma; pink, P. latemalis; red, P. mendocina; black, P. okanensis; yellow, P. pygmaea; green: P. umbaniana. Intermediate (unobserved) haplotypes are distinguished by small gray circles. Circle sizes correspond to relative numbers of in- dividuals sharing a particular haplotype

Figure 7. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 3 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 7. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 3: protibia. A, L. mesatlanticus; B, L. fretalis; C, typical female tibia (L. fretalis) for comparison.

Figure 4 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 4. Schematic view of L. truncatellus aedeagus as an example. a-add, apical addition of median lobe; a1, main ventral appendage; a2, secondary ventral appendage; a3, main dorsal appendage; a4, secondary dorsal appendage; fo, structure associated with flagellum opening; lp, left paramere; rp (?), possible derivation of the right paramere; ml, median lobe; ml-c, border of the ventral channel of the median lobe; bc, margin of the basal capsule; bf, basal foramen.

Figure 3 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 3. Examples of different aedeagus patterns of Limnebiini in the ventral aspect (if no indication), basal foramen—below, bar—relative length: 1, Laeliaena sichuanensis (a, ventral; b, lateral aspects); 2, L. evanescens (sp-p, sperm pump of L. perparvulus, typical of Bilimneus, in scale); 3, L. feuerborni; 4, L. boukali; 5, L. pollex (a, ventral; b, lateral aspects); 6, L. mitus; 7, L. arenicolus; 8, L. aluta; 9, L. parvulus; 10, L. stagnalis; 11, L. furcatus; 12, L. setifer; 13, L. cordobanus; 14, L. gracilipes; 15, L. paganettii; 16, L. fretalis; 17, L. nitiduloides; 18, L. mesatlanticus; 19, L. truncatellus; 20, L. pilicauda (a, ventral; b, lateral aspects); 21, L. murentius; 22, L. attalensis 23, L. kocheri; 24, L. minoricensis; 25, L. graecus; 26, L. maurus. (lp, left paramere; rp, right paramere; a1–4, additional appendages; a-add, apical addition; f, fold of medal lobe; s, setae; end, endophallus), length of aedeagus of L. fretalis (biggest genitalia) is 1.2 mm.

Figure 6. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 2 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 6. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 2: abdomen. A, L. furcatus; B, L. fretalis. (s, setae; p, protuberance).

Figure 2 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 2. Examples of Limnebius wings: A, Bilimneus (L. evanescens); B, Limnebius s.s. (L. minoricensis); C, set of measurements: l, total length; vl, length of vein; pw, proximal width; mw, maximal width, a: angle.

Figure 8 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 8. Histological transversal sections of the connection zone of the aedeagus' appendages, marked by the rectangle in the genitalia view (not in scale). A, L. cordobanus; B, L. fretalis; C, L. truncatellus; D, L. pilicauda; E, L. maurus. (ml, median lobe; lp, left paramere; a1–a4, additional appendages; f, flagellum; fo, flagellum opening; s, setae). Numeration is from the apical to basal, dorsal part in each section—above.

Figure 5. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 1 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 5. Limnebius structural sexual dimorphism 1: metatibia. A, typical female tibia (L. fretalis) for comparison; B, L. fretalis; C, L. furcatus; D, L. truncatellus.

Figure 9 in Morphological diversification with emphasis on the structural and homology patterns of male genitalia in genus Limnebius (Leach 1815; Hydraenidae: Coleoptera)

Figure 9. Histological transversal sections of the zone of aedeagus around the flagellum opening. A, L. furcatus; B, L. cordobanus; C, L. fretalis; D, L. nitiduloides; E, L. truncatellus (a1 broken); F, L. pilicauda; G, L. maurus. (Orientation, indication, and abbreviations are the same as in Figure 8.)

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

dryad32/100

Data from: Microhabitat and climatic niche change explain patterns of diversification among frog families

A major goal of ecology and evolutionary biology is to explain patterns of species richness among clades. Differences in rates of net diversification (speciation minus extinction over time) may often explain these patterns, but the factors that drive variation in diversification rates remain uncertain. Three important candidates are climatic niche position (e.g., whether clades are primarily temperate or tropical), rates of climatic niche change among species within clades, and microhabitat (e.g., aquatic, terrestrial, arboreal). The first two factors have been tested separately in several studies, but the relative importance of all three is largely unknown. Here we explore the correlates of diversification among families of frogs, which collectively represent ∼88% of amphibian species. We assemble and analyze data on phylogeny, climate, and microhabitat for thousands of species. We find that the best-fitting phylogenetic multiple regression model includes all three types of variables: microhabitat, rates of climatic niche change, and climatic niche position. This model explains 67% of the variation in diversification rates among frog families, with arboreal microhabitat explaining ∼31%, niche rates ∼25%, and climatic niche position ∼11%. Surprisingly, we show that microhabitat can have a much stronger influence on diversification than climatic niche position or rates of climatic niche change.

dryad32/100

GARD 1.5 range shapefiles used in: Global diversity patterns are explained by diversification rates at ancient, not shallow, timescales

Explaining global species richness patterns is a "Holy Grail" of ecology and evolution. These richness patterns are often attributed to spatial variation in diversification rates (speciation minus extinction). Surprisingly, prominent studies of birds, fish, and angiosperms reported higher diversification rates at higher latitudes (mismatched with richness). Yet these studies only examined diversification rates at relatively recent timescales. Here, we quantify global richness patterns among lizard and snake species (10,213; 94%) and explore their underlying causes. We found that diversification rates at more recent timescales in squamates also show mismatched patterns of rates and richness. However, diversification rates at deeper timescales were positively related to richness. These observations may help resolve the paradoxical results of previous studies. Remarkably, these diversification patterns are largely unrelated to climate. Instead, higher tropical richness is related to ancient occupation of tropical regions. Thus, these large-scale diversity patterns are only understood by considering climate, deep-time diversification rates, and the time spent in different regions.

opencc-zeroDec 2020View details →

opennotspecifiedSep 2015View details →

Figure 3. Consensus Bayesian tree for 28 in Patterns of morphological diversification of mainland Anolis lizards from northwestern South America

Figure 3. Consensus Bayesian tree for 28 species of mainland Colombian Anolis, their main clades, and their geographical distribution. Values at nodes indicate posterior probability (PP); black circles at nodes indicate PP = 1.0. Coloured ovals at tips identify morphotypes (MTs) as follows: blue: MT1, green: MT2; black: MT3, purple: MT4; yellow: MT5; red: MT6; cyan: MT7; grey: MT8, orange: MT9, white: MT10. Filled bars indicate geographical distribution: montane (white), cis-Andean (grey), trans-Andean (black), and wide distribution (red).

FIG. 6 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 6.—The evolutionary origin and loss of key courtship traits in Rhŋacotriton and plethodontid genera. Character origins are shown with solid rectangles; character losses are shown with open rectangles: sff ¼ spermatophore deposition in front of the female, TSW ¼ tail-straddling walk, tpd ¼ transdermal pheromone delivery (tpd1 and tpd2), tbf ¼ turning back towards the female during TSW, tm ¼ tail massage during spermatophore pickup, opd ¼ olfactory pheromone delivery. The question marks on the Amphiuma and Hŋdromantes branches indicate that courtship behavior has not been adequately described. Dendrotriton is not shown on this tree but is the sister group to the Bolitoglossa-Pseudoeurŋcea lineage. The time of origin for each trait is bounded by the times at the ends of the branch on which it resides. Arrowhead pointing to the right indicates that the origin of traits on that branch precedes the date for the right end of the branch. Time-calibrated phylogeny based on Shen et al. (2016), using an independent-rate model (clock ¼ 2). Time scale shown in millions of years.

FIG. 4 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 4.—Courtship in Desmognathus organi. (a) During bite and seize (bas) the male (foreground) holds the female̕s tail base in his jaws. The female holds her chin on the male̕s tail base in an apparent attempt to elicit tail-straddling walk. (b) During spermatophore deposition (SD), the male (right) aligns his hind limbs perpendicular to his body (align). Position of spermatophore indicated with ^. The female holds her chin over his undulating tail base in TSW position. (c) The male has moved forward after SD and has helped positioned the female over the spermatophore. The female has now departed from the spermatophore (base visible above the ^), while the male continues to arch his tail and extend on his hind limbs (extend).

FIG. 5 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 5.—Olfactory pheromone delivery during turning back to the female (tbf) in Plethodon shermani (from Arnold 1976). (1) The dotted arrow shows the path of the male̕s head as he turns back towards the female during tailstraddling walk (TSW). (2) The path of the male̕s head as he slaps his mental gland across the female̕s nares. (3) The solid arrow shows the path of the male̕s head as he returns to TSW position. A video of a similar sequence is cataloged in Appendix S2.

FIG. 8 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 8.—The evolutionary origin and loss of key courtship traits in the genus Desmognathus. Character origins are shown with solid rectangles; losses are shown with open rectangles: tbf ¼ turning back towards the female, tpd ¼ transdermal pheromone delivery (tpd1 and tpd2), ps ¼ pulling and snapping, rfh ¼ rub female head, bas ¼ bite and seize, fm ¼ forelimb movement, and fs ¼ forelimb strokes. Small solid circle denotes branch of origin for adjacent trait box. The time of origin or loss for each trait is bounded by the times at the ends of the branch on which it resides. Time-calibrated phylogeny based on Kozak et al. (2009); time scale shown in millions of years.

FIG. 3 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 3.—Transdermal pheromone delivery in Eurŋcea aeilderae during an underwater courtship (from Arnold 1977). (A) Ventral view of the male̕s mental gland (MG), also showing three premaxillary teeth protruding through his upper lip. (B) The male̕s head during pulling, showing the backward motion that he uses to abrade the female̕s epidermis. (C) The male̕s position during pulling. The female is shaded. This image is based on a video recording cataloged in Appendix S2.

FIG. 1 in The Evolution of Courtship Behavior in Plethodontid Salamanders, Contrasting Patterns of Stasis and Diversification

FIG. 1.—Modular analysis of courtship in Rhŋacotriton and plethodontids. Modules are labeled: AP ¼ approach, HC ¼ head contact, TSW ¼ tailstraddling walk, SD ¼ spermatophore deposition, and POS ¼ positioning. Courtship sequences flow from left to right (as indicated by large arrows) and from top to bottom within modules. Behaviors shown in the same color occur in the same temporal context. Behaviors shown with different shades of the same color occur in a predictable sequence; those in lighter shades occurring earlier than those shown in darker shades. See Fig. 2 for inventory of behavior by module and submodule.