Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 11 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 11: Opamyrma hungvuong male, nontype (Dai19iii2019-029, Son La, Vietnam). (A) head in full-face view; (B) head and mesosoma in lateral view; (C) mouthparts in anteroventral view; (D) head and mesosoma in dorsal view; (E) petiole in lateral view; (F) metasoma in lateral view; (G) petiole in ventral view; (H) metasoma in dorsal view. Abbreviations: Atp = anterior tentorial pit; Lbp = labial palp; Lbr = labrum; Mdl = mandalus; Mxp = maxillary palp; Nt = notauli; Pl = parapsidal line; Pv = penisvalva; Tm = telomere; Tsl = tergosternal line.

Fig. 3 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 3: Maxillolabial complex of Opamyrma hungvuong worker, nontype (AKY05vii17-06, China, Guangxi). (A) Scanning electron microscope image of maxillolabial complex in ventral view, labrum removed; (B) right maxilla in outer view; (C) labium in lateral view; (D) labium in dorsal view. Abbreviations: Ams = anteromedian sclerite; Gcss = galeal crown's stout seta; Hyp = hypopharynx; Lbp = labial palp; Lcn = lacinia; Mxco = maxillary comb; Mxp = maxillary palp; Mxst = maxillary stipes; Prm = prementum; Sglb = subglossal brush.

Fig. 7 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 7: Scanning electron microscope images of legs of Opamyrma hungvuong worker, nontype (AKY05vii17-06, China, Guangxi). (A) strigil of right proleg in anterior view; (B) calcar of strigil of right proleg in anterior view; (C) strigil of right proleg in posterior view; (D) distitarsus of right proleg in posterior view; (E) tibial spurs and basitarsus of right mesoleg in anterior view; (F) tibial spurs and basitarsus of right metaleg in posterior view; (G) pretarsal claws of right metaleg in posteroventral view; (H) tibial spurs of left metaleg in anterior view. Abbreviations: Ats = anterior spur; Ca = calcar; Pts = posterior spur; Ptb = protibia; Pbts = probasitarsus; Ptss = protibial stout seta; Mnb = manubrium; Mstb = mesotibia; Msbts = mesobasitarsus; Mttb = metatibia; Mtbts = metabasitarsus.

Fig. 12 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 12: Male wings of Opamyrma hungvuong, nontype (Dai19iii2019-029, Son La, Vietnam). (A) forewing in dorsal view; (B) hind wing in dorsal view. Abbreviations: 1A = first anal vein; Bc = basal cell; C = costal vein; Cc = costal cell; Cu = cubital vein; Mc1 = marginal cell 1; R = radial vein; Rs = radial sector; Sbc = subbasal cell; Sc = subcostal vein; Sdc1 = subdiscal cell 1; Smc = submarginal cell.

Fig. 2 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 2: Scanning electron microscope images of cephalic parts of Opamyrma hungvuong worker, nontype (AKY05vii17-06, China, Guangxi). (A) anterior part of head in frontal view; (B) cranium in ventral view; (C) right mandible in dorsal view; (D) right hypostomal process in lateral view; (E) left mandible in ventral view; (F) labrum in outer view. Abbreviations: Ctl = canthellus; Hysp = hypostomal process; Occ = occipital carina; Lbr = labrum; Lps = labral peg-like seta; Mdl = mandalus; Mps = mandibular peg-like seta; Pat = preapical tooth; Ptg = peritorular groove; Ptp = posterior tentorial pit; Sca = supraclypeal area.

Fig. 6 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 6: Scanning electron microscope images of mesosoma of Opamyrma hungvuong worker, nontype (AKY05vii17-06, China, Guangxi). (A) whole mesosoma in lateral view; (B) anterior articulation of mesonotum in lateral view, prothorax removed; (C) whole mesosoma in dorsal view; (D) whole mesosoma in ventral view, all legs removed; (E) metapleuron and propodeum in lateral view; (F) prosternite in ventral view, propleurae and prolegs removed. Abbreviations: Mgo = metapleural gland orifice; Mlf = metapleural longitudinal flange; Msg = mesonotal groove; Mstp = mesosternal pit; Mtsp = metanotal spiracle; Pcc = procoxal cavity; Pdl = propodeal lobe.

Fig.10 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig.10: Opamyrma hungvuong queen, nontype (Dai19iii2019-029, Son La, Vietnam). (A) head in full-face view; (B) body in lateral view; (C) head in ventral view; (D) head and mesosoma in dorsal view; (E) Scanning electron microscope image of mesosoma in lateral view; (F) Scanning electron microscope image (SEM) of meso- and metanotum in dorsal view; (G) forewing in dorsal view; (H) hindwing in dorsal view. Abbreviations: Axa = axilla; Axu = axillula; Msg = mesonotal groove; Occ = occipital carina; Pgr = postgenal ridge; Pl = parapsidal line; Prx = preaxilla; Rs = radial sector; Scs = scutoscutellar sulcus.

Fig. 8 in Unveiling the morphology of the Oriental rare monotypic ant genus Opamyrma YAMANE, BUI & EGUCHI, 2008 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Leptanillinae) and its evolutionary implications, with first descriptions of the male, larva, tentorium, and sting apparatus

Fig. 8: Scanning electron microscope images of metasoma of Opamyrma hungvuong worker, nontype (AKY05vii17-06, China, Guangxi). (A) petiole in lateral view; (B) petiole in ventral view; (C) helcium in anterior view; (D) helcium in ventral view; (E) pretergite of abdominal segment IV in dorsal view; (F) gaster in lateral view; (G) gaster in ventral view. Abbreviations: Absg = abdominal segment; Prsn = presternite; Prtg = pretergite; Ptlt = petiolar laterotergite; Ptsn = petiolar sternite; Tss = tergosternal suture.

opencc-zeroDec 2013View details →

Data from: The potential influence of morphology on the evolutionary divergence of an acoustic signal.

The evolution of acoustic behaviour and that of the morphological traits mediating its production are often coupled. Lack of variation in the underlying morphology of signalling traits has the potential to constrain signal evolution. This relationship is particularly likely in field crickets, where males produce acoustic advertisement signals to attract females by stridulating with specialized structures on their forewings. In this study, we characterize the size and geometric shape of the forewings of males from six allopatric populations of the black field cricket (Teleogryllus commodus) known to have divergent advertisement calls. We sample from each of these populations using both wild-caught and common-garden-reared cohorts, allowing us to test for multivariate relationships between wing morphology and call structure. We show that the allometry of shape has diverged across populations. However, there was a surprisingly small amount of covariation between wing shape and call structure within populations. Given the importance of male size for sexual selection in crickets, the divergence we observe among populations has the potential to influence the evolution of advertisement calls in this species

opencc-zeroDec 2015View details →

Data from: Evolutionary processes and its environmental correlates in the cranial morphology of western chipmunks (Tamias)

The importance of the environment in shaping phenotypic evolution lies at the core of evolutionary biology. Chipmunks of the genus Tamias (subgenus Neotamias) are part of a very recent radiation, occupying a wide range of environments with marked niche partitioning among species. One open question is if and how those differences in environments affected phenotypic evolution in this lineage. Herein we examine the relative importance of genetic drift versus natural selection in the origin of cranial diversity exhibited by clade members. We also explore the degree to which variation in potential selective agents (environmental variables) are correlated with the patterns of morphological variation presented. We found that genetic drift cannot explain morphological diversification in the group, thus supporting the potential role of natural selection as the predominant evolutionary force during Neotamias cranial diversification, although the strength of selection varied greatly among species. This morphological diversification, in turn, was correlated with environmental conditions, suggesting a possible causal relationship. These results underscore that extant Neotamias represent a radiation in which aspects of the environment might have acted as the selective force driving species' divergence.

opencc-zeroApr 2020View details →

Supplemental material for: Morphological phylogenetics evaluated using novel evolutionary simulations

Evolutionary inferences require reliable phylogenies. Morphological data has traditionally been analysed using maximum parsimony, but recent simulation studies have suggested that Bayesian analyses yield more accurate trees. This debate is ongoing, in part, because of ambiguity over modes of morphological evolution and a lack of appropriate models. Here we investigate phylogenetic methods using two novel simulation models – one in which morphological characters evolve stochastically along lineages and another in which individuals undergo selection. Both models generate character data and lineage splitting simultaneously: the resulting trees are an emergent property, rather than a fixed parameter. Standard consensus methods for Bayesian searches (Mki) yield fewer incorrect nodes and quartets than the standard consensus trees recovered using equal weighting and implied weighting parsimony searches. Distances between the pool of derived trees (most parsimonious or posterior distribution) and the true trees – measured using Robinson-Foulds (RF), subtree prune and regraft (SPR), and tree bisection reconnection (TBR) metrics – demonstrate that this is related to the search strategy and consensus method of each technique. The amount and structure of homoplasy in character data differs between models. Morphological coherence, which has previously not been considered in this context, proves to be a more important factor for phylogenetic accuracy than homoplasy. Selection-based models exhibit relatively lower homoplasy, lower morphological coherence, and higher inaccuracy in inferred trees. Selection is a dominant driver of morphological evolution, but we demonstrate that it has a confounding effect on numerous character properties which are fundamental to phylogenetic inference. We suggest that the current debate should move beyond considerations of parsimony versus Bayesian, towards identifying modes of morphological evolution and using these to build models for probabilistic search methods.

opencc-zeroDec 2011View details →

Data from: A phylogeny and evolutionary natural history of Mesoamerican toads (Anura: Bufonidae: Incilius) based on morphology, life history, and molecular data

We combine mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequence data with non-molecular (morphological and natural history) data to conduct phylogenetic analyses and generate an evolutionary hypothesis for the relationships among nearly every species of Mesoamerican bufonid in the genus Incilius. We collected a total of 5,898 aligned base-pairs (bp) of sequence data from mitochondrial (mtDNA: 12S–16S, cyt b, ND2–CO1, including tRNAsTRP–TYR and the origin of light strand replication; total 4,317 bp) and nuclear (CXCR4 and RAG1; total 1,581 bp) loci from 52 individuals representing 37 species. For the non-molecular data, we collected 44 characters from 29 species. We also include Crepidophryne, a genus that has not previously been included in molecular analyses. We present results of parsimony and Bayesian analyses for these data separately and combined. Relationships based on the non-molecular data were poorly supported and did not resolve a monophyletic Incilius (Rhinella marina was nested within). Our molecular data provide significant support to most of the relationships. Our combined analyses demonstrate that inclusion of a considerably smaller dataset (44 vs. 5,898 characters) of non-molecular characters can provide significant support where the molecular relationships were lacking support. Our combined results indicate that Crepidophryne is nested within Incilius; therefore, we place the former in the synonymy of the latter taxon. Our study provides the most comprehensive evolutionary framework for Mesoamerican bufonids (Incilius), which we use as a starting point to invoke discussion on the evolution of their unique natural history traits.

opennotspecifiedDec 2016View details →

FIGURE 13. Evolutionary relationships among a in Molecular and morphological systematics of Elysia Risso, 1818 (Heterobranchia: Sacoglossa) from the Caribbean region

FIGURE 13. Evolutionary relationships among a subsample of COI haplotypes from specimens of E. crispata, inferred by Maximum Likelihood. Significant bootstrap values are given adjacent to supported nodes. External morphology of 15 specimens with bolded isolate codes is shown in Fig. 14, with the corresponding panel given in parentheses. Terminals with multiple isolates denote haplotypes sampled more than once; multiple specimens from the same site and year are indicated by two-digit numbers following the corresponding year-site combination, except the total number from two sites is given for the common haplotype sampled in the Dry Tortugas, Dominica and St. Lucia.

FIGURE 25. Exechonella kleemanni n in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 25. Exechonella kleemanni n. sp. Red Sea (A‒H: holotype DPUV 2012-0004-0001). A, general view of holotype from above. B, D, close-up of several autozooids. C, lateral view of autozooids showing shape of peristomes, conical foramina, marginal pores and frontal hollow spikes. E, autozooids on colony periphery showing shape of primary orifice, conical foramina, marginal pores and multiporous mural septula (two kenozooids shown by arrows). F, G, close-up of frontal shield. H, details of primary orifice. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B‒H = 100 µm.

FIGURE 28 in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 28. Actisecos discoidea (Canu & Bassler, 1929). Philippines (A, B: lectotype USNM 545923; C, D, F, paralectotype USNM 545924; E, G, paralectotype USNM 545925; H, paralectotype USNM 545927). A, B, general view of lectotype (A) and paralectotype (C) from above. B, central part of lectotype from above (ancestrula shown by arrowhead). D, F, peripheral part of colony showing peristomes (mostly broken in F) and ooecia. E, general view of paralectotype from below. G, close-up of the peripheral part of colony from below showing details of partial ooecium, basal pore chambers (some shown by arrows) with communication pores and flat kenozooids. H, details of primary orifice and frontal shield. Scale bars: A, C, E = 500 µm; B, D, F, G = 200 µm; H = 100 µm.

FIGURE 24. Exechonella spinosa Osburn, 1940 in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 24. Exechonella spinosa Osburn, 1940. Bermuda (A‒E: lectotype USNM 11849, A‒D, first fragment, E, second fragment). A, D, E, general view of fragments. B, primary orifice and peristome of first fragment. C, close-up of frontal shield showing foramina and broken processes. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B‒E = 100 µm.

FIGURE 21. Exechonella nikitai n in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 21. Exechonella nikitai n. sp. Indian Ocean, Maldive Islands (A‒C, E, G, H: paratype DPUV 2012-0007-0006; D: paratype DPUV 2012-0007-0007; F: DPUV 2012-0007-0008). A, B, general colony view from above (in B peristomes have a sinus). C, D, lateral view of colony showing shape of peristomes and multiporous mural septulum. Kenozooids shown by arrows (in C). E, lateral view of autozooid showing shape of foramina, peristome, marginal pores and multiporous mural septulum. Kenozooid shown by arrow. F, close-up of autozooids (view from above). G, ancestrula (to the right) and two distal zooids. H, details of primary orifice and peristome. Condyle shown by arrow. Scale bars: A, B, D = 1 mm; C, E‒H = 100 µm.

FIGURE 19. Exechonella catalinae n in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 19. Exechonella catalinae n. sp. Red Sea (A, C, F: paratype DPUV 2012-0002-0006, Northern Bay of Safaga; B, D: E, paratype DPUV 2012-0002-0007, Northern Bay of Safaga; G, H: IPUW 7016, Jeddah). A, G, general colony view from above. B, close-up of two zooids showing details of primary orifice and peristomes. Three lateralmost foramina shown by arrows. C, D, lateral view of peripheral colony part showing shape of peristomes and multiporous mural septula. E, close-up of lateralmost foramen with avicularium associated with kenozooid in cleaned colony. Central nipple-like structure is surrounded by denticulate rim. Pores of kenozooid have centrally perforated cuticular plates. F, H, details of primary orifice and peristome. Scale bars: A, C = 1 mm; B, D‒F = 100 µm; G = 2 mm; H = 400 µm.

FIGURE 18. Exechonella claereboudti n in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 18. Exechonella claereboudti n. sp. Indian Ocean, Oman (A‒H: holotype DPUV 2012-0003-0001). A, general view of holotype from above. B, peripheral part of holotype (frontal view): primary orifices have either quadrate or shallow rounded poster. C, lateral view of peripheral part of holotype showing shape of peristomes and multiporous mural septula. D, close-up of several peripheral autozooids. Some lateralmost foramina with avicularium shown by arrows. E, ancestrular zone of holotype with ancestrula in the centre. F, H, details of primary orifice with shallow rounded poster and peristome. G, close-up of lateralmost foramen with avicularium associated with kenozooid in cleaned colony. Pores of kenozooid have centrally perforated cuticular plates. Marginal pores are visible in this and neighbour zooids. Scale bars: A, B = 1 mm; C‒H = 100 µm.

FIGURE 16. Exechonella azeezi n in Revision of the Recent species of Exechonella Canu & Bassler in Duvergier, 1924 and Actisecos Canu & Bassler, 1927 (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata): systematics, biogeography and evolutionary trends in skeletal morphology

FIGURE 16. Exechonella azeezi n. sp. (A‒G: A, IPUW 7544; B, G, paratype DPUV 2012-0001-0008; C, IPUW 7543; D, IPUW 7545, non-cleaned; E, F, paratype DPUV 2012-0001-0007 (all from Red Sea). H, I: D, IPUW 7546; I, D, IPUW 7013 (both from Maldive Islands)). A, general view of the part of colony from above. B, close-up of three zooids. Some lateralmost foramina with avicularia shown by arrows. C, lateral view of the peripheral part of the colony, showing peristome shape and multiporous mural septula. D, lateralmost foramen with avicularium. Arrowhead shows an edge of mandible. E, close-up of lateralmost foramen with avicularium associated with kenozooid (below). Pores of kenozooid have centrally perforated cuticular plates, larger marginal pores are seen laterally. F, G, close-up of two autozooids showing details of primary orifice and peristome. In F kenozooid (k) associated with avicularium (arrowhead) is visible to the left. H, general view of six peripheral autozooids from above. Some lateralmost foramina with avicularium shown by arrows. I, young colony of three autozooids and kenozooid (below). Supposed ancestrula is to the left. Scale bars: A = 1 mm; B, C, F, G, I = 100 µm; D, E = 10 µm; H = 500 µm.