Find research datasets worth reusing

Distribution. Disjunct range in C & E Europe (from Denmark, Germany, and N & NE Italy) E to SC Siberia and NW China (Xinjiang), and in Russian Far East, extreme E Mongolia, E & C China, N Myanmar, Korea, Taiwan, and Japan (Senkaku Is). in Muridae

Distribution. Disjunct range in C & E Europe (from Denmark, Germany, and N & NE Italy) E to SC Siberia and NW China (Xinjiang), and in Russian Far East, extreme E Mongolia, E & C China, N Myanmar, Korea, Taiwan, and Japan (Senkaku Is).

Distribution. Three disjunct populations in SW & E South Africa, in the Paarl Valley and Cape Peninsula of Western Cape Province and E slopes of the Drakensberg in Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal provinces. in Muridae

Distribution. Three disjunct populations in SW & E South Africa, in the Paarl Valley and Cape Peninsula of Western Cape Province and E slopes of the Drakensberg in Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal provinces.

Distribution. Disjunct in South Africa in Cape Fold Belt Mts in Western Cape and isolated populations in S Free State and Eastern Cape N of 33° S. in Muridae

Distribution. Disjunct in South Africa in Cape Fold Belt Mts in Western Cape and isolated populations in S Free State and Eastern Cape N of 33° S.

Distribution. Disjunct in W, C & E Africa, from S Senegal E to SW Ethiopia and S to extreme E Zimbabwe and C Mozambique. in Muridae

Distribution. Disjunct in W, C & E Africa, from S Senegal E to SW Ethiopia and S to extreme E Zimbabwe and C Mozambique.

opencc-zeroAug 2022View details →

dryad32/100

Data from: Effects of climate and topography on the diversity anomaly of plants disjunctly distributed in eastern Asia and eastern North America

Aim: Differences in physiography have been proposed to explain the diversity anomaly for vascular plants between environmentally similar regions of eastern Asia (EAS) and eastern North America (ENA). Here, we use plant species within disjunct genera to examine whether differences in topography contribute to the diversity anomaly and whether the richness–environment relationships differ between regions. Disjuncts are used to ensure that the diversity anomaly relates to post-disjunction evolution and diversification rather than regional differences in clade ages or immigration. Location: EAS and ENA. Time period: Current. Major taxa studied: Plant taxa disjunctly distributed in EAS and ENA. Method: We compiled county-level plant distribution data, and calculated species richness and variables of topography and climate within unit grid cells. We compared estimated coefficients of region effects among models, where richness was fitted with or without topography and climate. Topography and climate were also used to separately model within-region spatial diversity patterns using spatial simultaneous autoregressive error models. Results: The coefficients of region effects varied from -0.776 for the model only including region to -0.309 when topography was controlled for, but remained significant. Climate dominated the spatial diversity patterns in ENA. In contrast, the influence of climate (14.2%) on species richness was weaker than that of topography (18.3%) in warm EAS. Relations to elevation and temperature varied between regions, shifting between positive and negative relationships in several cases. Main conclusion: Our results demonstrate that variability in local topography contributes to the strong regional anomaly in plant species richness between EAS and ENA. Nevertheless, the diversity anomaly persists after controlling for local topography and climate. EAS and ENA also exhibit contrasting richness–environment relationships, providing another divergent aspect between the EAS-ENA disjunct floras. Our findings highlight that regional differences in topography or other environmental factors may underlie the diversity anomaly.

FIGURE 2 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 2. Fenimorea striata (KIENER, 1840). A. ORIgINAL DRAWINg OF Pleurotoma striata KIENER, 1840 (SEE KIENER 1840). APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW. B. THE MATERIAL OF P. striata FOUND IN THE DELESSERT COLLECTION AND THE LAbEL ACCOMPANYINg IT— 35.6×13.5 (MHNG-MOLL-93953). C–E. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF THE SHELL IN B.

FIGURE 1. ORIgINAL LAbELS. A. Conopleura striata HINDS, 1844 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 1. ORIgINAL LAbELS. A. Conopleura striata HINDS, 1844 OLDEST LAbEL KNOWN. FROM TOP TO bOTTOM: I) PRESUMAbLY HANDWRITTEN bY E.A. SMITH; II) PRESUMAbLY HANDWRITTEN bY J.E. GRAY; III) PRESUMAbLY HANDWRITTEN bY AN UNKNOWN MUSEUM ASSISTANT OR CURATOR [A. SALVADOR, PERS. COMM.]. B. Conopleura latiaxisa CHINO, 2011 HOLOTYPE LAbEL. C. Conopleura aliena SMRIgLIO, MARIOTTINI & CALASCIbETTA, 1999 HOLOTYPE LAbEL. D. Buccinum lima DILLWYN, 1817 OLDEST LAbEL KNOWN, HANDWRITTEN bY L. SPENgLER [T. SCHIøTTE, PERS. COMM.]. E. Kenyonia pulcherrima BRAZIER, 1896 OLDEST LAbEL KNOWN, PRESUMAbLY HANDWRITTEN bY J. BRAZIER [A. CROWTHER, PERS. COMM.]. F. Buccinum labyrinthus GMELIN, 1791 OLDEST LAbEL KNOWN, HANDWRITTEN bY O.A.L. MøRCH [OLDER LAbELS PRESUMAbLY LOST: T. SCHIøTTE, PERS. COMM.].

FIGURE 6 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 6. AbNORMAL SPECIMENS SHOWINg HYPERMORPHIC SHOULDER, ANAL SINUS, AND/OR SHOULDER SULCUS WITH SEPTA, AND COMPARISON WITH CONSPECIFIC SPECIMENS SHOWINg USUAL MORPHOTYPES. SPECIMENS/SHELLS NOT TO SCALE. A–H. Mitra zonata MARRYAT, 1819. A–B. APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL OF AN AbNORMAL SHELL—SPANISH MOROCCO—50–80 M—33.3×13 (FS). C–E. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF AN AbNORMAL SHELL—TUSCAN ARCHIPELAgO (ITALY)—71×20.3 (FG). F–H. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF A USUAL SHELL—GULF OF NAPLES (ITALY), 20–50 M—78.8×19.8 (AN). I–L. Mitra mitra (LINNAEUS, 1758). I–J. APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW OF AN AbNORMAL SHELL—OLANgO ISLAND (PHILIPPINES)—67.9×22.9 (AMI). K–L. APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW OF A USUAL SHELL—PHILIPPINES—88.5×25 (AN). M–P. Conus SP. sensu lato. HOLOTYPE OF Kenyonia pulcherrima BRAZIER, 1896—NEW HEbRIDES (VANUATU)—28.6×9.6 (SAMA D6181). APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, APICAL VIEW AND MAgNIFICATION OF PROTOCONCH AND FIRST WHORLS. Q–W. Buccinum undatum LINNAEUS, 1758. Q–T. HOLOTYPE OF Buccinum labyrinthus GMELIN, 1791—SCHEWENINgEN (HOLLAND)—60.7×39 (ZMUC-GAS-186). APERTURAL, ADAPERTURAL, APICAL VIEW AND MAgNIFICATION OF THE FIRST WHORLS. U–W. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, APICAL VIEW AND MAgNIFICATION OF PROTOCONCH AND FIRST WHORLS OF A USUAL SPECIMEN—BELgIUM—78.8×47.4 (AN).

FIGURE 5 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 5. AbNORMAL SPECIMENS/SHELLS SHOWINg HYPERMORPHIC SHOULDER, ANAL SINUS, AND/OR SHOULDER SULCUS WITH SEPTA, AND COMPARISON WITH CONSPECIFIC SPECIMENS SHOWINg USUAL MORPHOTYPES. SPECIMENS/SHELLS NOT TO SCALE. A–D. Semicassis granulata (BORN, 1778). A–B. APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW OF AN AbNORMAL SPECIMEN—ANZIO (ITALY), 50–80 M—65×44.4 (PB). C–D. APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW OF A USUAL SPECIMEN—BACOLI (ITALY), 30 M—90.5×54.9 (AP). E–J. Bolinus brandaris (LINNAEUS, 1758). E–G. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF AN AbNORMAL SPECIMEN—ANZIO (ITALY), 50–80 M—70.2×42.7 (PB). H–J. APERTURAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF A USUAL SPECIMEN—LA SPEZIA (ITALY)—74×43.8 (PB). K–R. Mitra aurantia (GMELIN, 1791). K–N. APERTURAL, LATERAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF AN AbNORMAL SHELL—PHILIPPINES—28.4×12.7 (AN). O–R. APERTURAL, LATERAL, AbAPERTURAL, AND APICAL VIEW OF A USUAL SHELL—LILOAN (PHILIPPINES), 07/2015, LUMUN LUMUN NETS, 60 M—24.6×10.9 (AN).

FIGURE 4 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 4. COMPARISON bETWEEN "Conopleura" aliena SMRIgLIO, MARIOTTINI & CALASCIbETTA, 1999 AND Tritia lima (DILLWYN, 1817). SPECIMENS/SHELLS NOT TO SCALE. A–H, W. C. aliena HOLOTYPE—CENTRAL TYRRHENIAN SEA (ITALY)—6.8×4 (MZB 12694). A–C. APERTURAL, LATERAL, AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW. D. APICAL VIEW. E. BASAL VIEW HIgHLIgHTINg A POSSIbLE AXIAL SCULPTURE OF FAINT RIbS (WHITE ARROWHEADS). F–H. BREAK ON SHELL SHOULDER LEADINg TO THE DISCONTINUOUS LAMELLAR SCULPTURE (bLACK ARROWHEADS). F. APICAL VIEW. G–H. PROTOCONCH: SEM APICAL AND LATERAL VIEWS. I–V. T. lima. I–J. TYPE OF Buccinum lima DILLWYN, 1817—"EAST INDIES"—32.2×18.4 (ZMUC-GAS-819). APERTURAL AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW. K. APERTURAL VIEW—CHIOggIA (ITALY), 25 M— 33.7×18.8 (AP). L. APERTURAL VIEW—SARDINIAN CHANNEL (ITALY), 650 M—11.2×6.9 (AN). M. APERTURAL VIEW—CANNIZZARO (ITALY), 45 M—10.7×5.7 (AN). N. APERTURAL VIEW—SIRACUSA (ITALY), 75 M—18.6×11 (AN). O. APERTURAL VIEW—CENTRAL TYRRHENIAN SEA (ITALY), 300 M—6.6×3.9 (AN). P–T. VARIAbILITY OF AXIAL SCULPTURE—CENTRAL TYRRHENIAN SEA (ITALY)—10.6×6.4; 12.7×7.7; 9.9×5.8; 10.7×6.1; 11.2×6.9 (AN). U–V. SHELL OF A jUVENILE SPECIMEN—CENTRAL TYRRHENIAN SEA (ITALY)—4.2×2.8 (AN). U. LIgHT AND SEM PHOTOS. V. SEM APICAL VIEW OF THE SHELL FIgURED IN U. W. SEM APICAL VIEW OF THE SHELL FIgURED IN A– H. SCALE bARS: V–W—500 µM.

FIGURE 2 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 2. LANDMARKS (LMS) USED IN THE STUDY OF TAXA CONFIRMED IN Conopleura HINDS, 1844 (SEE "RESULTS" FOR FURTHER EXPLANATIONS), AND THIN-PLATE SPLINE REPRESENTATION OF THE MEAN RW1 VALUE. NUMbERS (1–12) AS REPORTED IN "GEOMETRIC MORPHOMETRY". LANDMARKS CONNECTED bY LINES TO FACILITATE INTERPRETATION OF THE DIFFERENCES bETWEEN THE TWO TAXA (SEE TEXT). A, C. Conopleura striata HINDS, 1844. B, D. Conopleura latiaxisa CHINO, 2011. SCALE bARS: 1 CM.

FIGURE 3 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 3. SPECIES CONFIRMED IN Conopleura HINDS, 1844. SPECIMENS/SHELLS NOT TO SCALE. A–L. Conopleura striata HINDS, 1844. A–C. SYNTYPE 1. APERTURAL, LATERAL, AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW—NEW GUINEA—8.1×4.5 (NHMUK 1879.2.26.39). D. LIVE SPECIMEN—ALIgUAY ISLAND (PHILIPPINES)—15.7 TOTAL HEIgHT. E. OPERCULUM—OFF PANgLAO (BOHOL ISLAND, PHILIPPINES)—3.3×1.6 (USNM 903590). F–J. ALIgUAY ISLAND (PHILIPPINES)—16.7×8.7 (AN). F–G. APERTURAL AND LATERAL VIEW. H. APICAL VIEW. I. MAgNIFICATION OF THE PRIMARY CORDS OF THE SPIRAL SCULPTURE. J. MAgNIFICATION OF THE COLUMELLAR EDgE. K–L. PROTOCONCH: SEM LATERAL AND APICAL VIEWS—OFF SURIgAO (MINDANAO ISLAND, PHILIPPINES)—9.8×5.1 (AN). M–Z. Conopleura latiaxisa CHINO, 2011. M–O. HOLOTYPE. APERTURAL, LATERAL, AND AbAPERTURAL VIEW—OFF PUNTA ENgAñO (MACTAN ISLAND, PHILIPPINES)—10.6×4.8 (NSMT- MO. 77385). P–U. OFF MALINgIN ISLAND (PHILIPPINES)—10.1×4.4 (AN). P–Q. APERTURAL AND LATERAL VIEW. R. APICAL VIEW. S. THE TRIgONAL ACUMINATE-ELONgATE SPINES gIVINg AN UNDULATINg APPEARANCE TO SHELLS. T. MAgNIFICATION OF THE PRIMARY CORDS OF THE SPIRAL SCULPTURE. U. MAgNIFICATION OF THE COLUMELLAR EDgE. V–Z. PROTOCONCH: SEM LATERAL AND APICAL VIEWS—OFF MALINgIN ISLAND (PHILIPPINES)—10.1×4.4 (AN). SCALE bARS: K, V, L, Z—500 µM.

FIGURE 1 in Revisiting the disjunct distribution of Conopleura Hinds, 1844 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Drilliidae)

FIGURE 1. Biogeographic realms and worldwide distribution of the genus Conopleura Hinds, 1844. Numbers as reported in "Material examined" and "Known distribution and bathymetric range". Stars corresponding to type localities, squares to published data and/or unpublished material coming from sites of occurrence already known, dots to new localities reported in the present paper. A. Biogeographic realms modified from Spalding et al. (2007), and squares highlighting the areas magnified in B–D. B. Known distribution of Conopleura striata Hinds, 1844 (sites of presence in blue), square highlighting the area magnified in C. C. Known distribution of Conopleura latiaxisa Chino, 2011 (sites of presence in red). D. Known distribution of Conopleura aliena Smriglio, Mariottini & Calascibetta, 1999 (sites of presence in purple). Scale bars: A–B—1000 km; C–D—500 km.

FIGURE 3 in Hypogean presumably sister species Quedius repentinus sp. n. from Altai and Q. roma from Sikhote-Alin (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae): a disjunct distribution or poorly sampled Siberia?

FIGURE 3. Quedius repentinus sp.n.: A, C, D, F–H (holotype), B (paratype, female), E (paratype, male); A, B, habitus; C, aedeagus (laterally); D, same (in parameral view); E, paramere, underside (side facing median lobe); F, tergite X; G, sternite IX; H, sternite VIII. Scale bars: A–D, F–H = 1 mm, E = 0.2 mm.

FIGURE 2 in Hypogean presumably sister species Quedius repentinus sp. n. from Altai and Q. roma from Sikhote-Alin (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae): a disjunct distribution or poorly sampled Siberia?

FIGURE 2. Quedius przewalskii, holotype: A, habitus; B, aedeagus (laterally); C, same (in parameral view); D, apex of paramere, underside (side facing median lobe); E, tergite X; F, sternite IX; G, sternite VIII; H, labels. Scale bars: A–C, E–G = 1 mm, D = 0.4 mm.

FIGURES 14–17 in Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallaCei: a new weevil from Borneo highlights the enigmatic Ethiopian-Oriental disjunct distribution (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Molytinae)

FIGURES 14–17. Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallacei sp. nov.: 14. Tegmen ring, dorsal view. 15. Lateral view. 16. Penis, dorsal view. 17. Lateral view. Scale bar: 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 9–13 in Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallaCei: a new weevil from Borneo highlights the enigmatic Ethiopian-Oriental disjunct distribution (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Molytinae)

FIGURES 9–13. Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallacei sp. nov.: 9. Ventrites, ventral view. 10. Tergite VII, dorsal view. 11. Tergite VIII, dorsal view. 12. Spiculum gastrale, dorsal view. 13. Sternite VIII, dorsal view. Scale bars: 9. 5.0 mm; 10–13. 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 5–8. 5 in Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallaCei: a new weevil from Borneo highlights the enigmatic Ethiopian-Oriental disjunct distribution (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Molytinae)

FIGURES 5–8. 5. Humeral angle of Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallacei sp. nov.. 6. Humeral angle of Omophorus (Pangomophorus) biroi Voss, 1960, holotype. 7. Vestiture of abdomen of Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallacei sp. nov. 8. Vestiture of abdomen of Omophorus (Pangomophorus) biroi Voss, 1960, holotype.

FIGURES 1–4 in Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallaCei: a new weevil from Borneo highlights the enigmatic Ethiopian-Oriental disjunct distribution (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Molytinae)

FIGURES 1–4. Omophorus (Sinomophorus) wallacei sp. nov.: 1. Habitus, dorsal view. 2. Habitus, lateral view. 3. Head, lateral view. 4. Head, dorsal view. Scale bars: 1–2. 5.0 mm; 3–4. 1.0 mm.