Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
2,315
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
2,315 results for “Dinosaurs”
FIGURE 1 in Overosaurus paradasorum gen. et sp. nov., a new sauropod dinosaur (Titanosauria: Lithostrotia) from the Late Cretaceous of Neuquén, Patagonia, Argentina
FIGURE 1. Geographic location (A) and a photograph and reconstructed outline drawing of the articulated material of MAU- Pv-CO-439 (B).
Figure 4 in Sex estimation from morphology in living animals and dinosaurs
Figure 4. Biases in the total versus dimorphic part of the data in three exemplar species. Biases, seen as sex-wise correlation of principal component space, is less when analysing the dimorphic part of the data only as opposed to the total data, likely because the signal/noise ratio is higher in the former: A–D, Seminatrix pygae; E–H, Cyperideis torosa; I–L, Mus musculus. Blue is male and red is female (true sex).
Figure 2 in Sex estimation from morphology in living animals and dinosaurs
Figure 2. Five types of dimorphism expression observed, with exemplar species. For each species, a biplot of DVP and a histogram of the most bimodal metric is given, except for Cyperideis torosa, for which two additional plots, of PCAll 1–2 and PCDVP 1–2, are also provided to demonstrate sex-wise correlations in these variable pairs. A–D, Type 1; E–H, Type 2; I, J, Type 3; K–N, Type 4; O, P, Type 5, Q–T, Type 1'. Species are: A, B, Seminatrix pygae; C, D, Homarus gammarus; E, F, Mus musculus; G, H, Parus major; I, J, Gymnorhamphichthys rondoni; K, L, Anolis hendersoni; M, N, Longiperna concolor; O, P, Panthera leo; Q, T, Cyperideis torosa. Blue is male and red is female (true sex).
Figure 3 in Sex estimation from morphology in living animals and dinosaurs
Figure 3. Biplot of DVP and histogram of the most bimodal metric in dinosaurs. A, B, Allosaurus fragilis; C, D, Hesperosaurus mjosi; E, F, Protoceratops andrewsi; G, H, Plateosaurus sp. Blue is male and red is female (inferred sex).
Figure 1. Schematic plots a in Sex estimation from morphology in living animals and dinosaurs
Figure 1. Schematic plots a sexually dimorphic sample to explain basic notions. A, a biplot showing the difference between the total and sex-wise regression lines. B, a biplot of a case in which PC1 and 2 are correlated when viewed sex-wise. C, an idealized case of sexual size dimorphism without shape dimorphism. D, an idealized case of sexual shape dimorphism without size dimorphism. E, an idealized mixture of sexual size and shape dimorphism. F, a typically observed mixture of sexual size and shape dimorphism. Blue and red indicate two sexes (specific sex is irrelevant in these theoretical plots).
Figure 5 in Sex estimation from morphology in living animals and dinosaurs
Figure 5. Effects of sample size on ACR and dip tests of unimodality. A, population distribution for D and G, with equal sample sizes and standard deviations between the modes. B, population distribution for E and H, with equal standard deviations between the modes but the sample sizes are unequal, with a ratio of 2:3. C, population distribution for F and I, with equal samples sizes between the modes but the standard deviations are unequal, with a ratio of 2:1. D–F, boxplots of P-values from dip test of unimodality based on 1000 random samples per sample size form population distributions in A–C, respectively. G–I, boxplots of P-values from ACR test of unimodality based on 1000 random samples per sample size form population distributions in A–C, respectively. Samples drawn from the bimodal distributions tend to be falsely judged unimodal (i.e. P-values above 0.05) by the tests at small sample sizes. Red lines are for a P-value of 0.05.
NEST DINOSAUR Maiasaura NHM LONDON 2020
Maiasaura is one of the most famous examples of dinosaur nests and parental behaviour. This is a Museum model of what a nest with eggs and hatchlings might have looked like. See : https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/were-dinosaurs-good-parents.html Source: Objaverse 1.0 / Sketchfab
Dinosaur Skull - Brian
He's a dinosaur that lives in my flat. He is called Brian. 🦖 Source: Objaverse 1.0 / Sketchfab
Data from: Elevated evolutionary rates of biting biomechanics reveal patterns of extraordinary cranio-dental adaptations in some herbivorous dinosaurs
<p>Adaptation to specialist ecologies is a key innovation that has contributed to the evolutionary success of many vertebrate clades, underpinning the acquisition of diverse skull morphologies. Dinosaurs, which dominated Mesozoic terrestrial faunas, acquired herbivory multiple times, including in clades historically regarded as predominantly carnivorous. The evolution of herbivory in theropod dinosaurs is linked to drastic changes in dental and craniomandibular functional morphology, yet whether such changes occurred more rapidly in herbivorous lineages compared to in carnivorous lineages remains untested in a phylogenetic framework. Here, we infer rates of phenotypic evolution in relative biting edge lengths to test the hypothesis that the acquisition of herbivory is associated with rapid changes in jaw biomechanics. We find elevated rates of biomechanical evolution in theropods with foreshortened and beaked skulls (Oviraptorosauria, <em>Limusaurus</em>), as well as in ceratopsians and <em>Diplodocus</em>. A reduced biting edge length and increased jaw efficiency unites these high-rate lineages, indicating selection for greater efficiency in biting biomechanics. Additionally, we hypothesise that extreme ontogenetic changes within species' lifetimes may be behind some instances of branch-wise elevated rates. Thus, we show how exceptional rates of biomechanical evolution can reveal signatures of adaptations within dinosaur lineages and potentially along ontogenetic sequences.</p>
Dinosaurs dataset
<p>Dinosaurs dataset</p>
Accounting for sampling heterogeneity suggests a low palaeolatitude origin for dinosaurs
<p>All code and data for manuscript: Accounting for sampling heterogeneity suggests a low palaeolatitude origin for dinosaurs </p>
Dataset for: Combined Ca, Sr isotope and trace element analyses of Late Cretaceous dinosaur teeth: assessing diet versus diagenesis
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: An exquisitely preserved in-ovo theropod dinosaur embryo sheds light on avian-like prehatching postures
<p>Phylogenetic data matrix</p> <p>Supplemental anatomical description of YLSNHM01266</p>
Data from: A new solution to an old riddle: elongate dinosaur tracks explained as deep penetration of the foot, not plantigrade locomotion
<p class="western"><span><span>The dinosaur track record features numerous examples of trackways with elongate metatarsal marks. Such "elongate tracks" are often highly variable and characterised by indistinct outlines and abbreviated or missing digit impressions. Elongate dinosaur tracks are well-known from the Paluxy River bed of Texas, where some had been interpreted as "man tracks" by </span><span>creationists</span><span> due to their superficially human-like appearance. The horizontal orientation of the metatarsal marks led to the now widely accepted idea of a facultative plantigrade, or "flat-footed", mode of locomotion in a variety of dinosaurian trackmakers small to large. This hypothesis, however, is at odds with the observation that elongate tracks do not indicate reduced locomotion speeds and increased pace angulation values, but instead are correlated with low anatomical fidelity. We here interpret elongate tracks as deep penetrations of the foot in soft sediment. Sediment may collapse above parts of the descending foot, leaving a shallow surface track that preserves a metatarsal mark. The length of a metatarsal mark is determined by multiple factors and is not necessarily correlated with the length of the metatarsus. Other types of posterior marks in dinosaur footprints, such as drag and slip marks, are reviewed.</span></span></p>
Figure 16 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 16. Comparison between astragali. Left astragalus (CPT-1244) in dorsal (A) and posterior (D) views of Turiasaurus riodevensis (paratype) and right (B, E) (MAP-6119) and left (C, F) astragalus (MAP-6117) of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen) in dorsal (B, C) and posterior (E, F) views.
Figure 14 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 14. Right tibia (MAP-6115) of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen) in dorsal (A), ventral (B), medial (C), posterior (D), anterior (E) and lateral (F) views.
Figure 13 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 13. Right femur (MAP-6113) of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen) in dorsal (A), ventral (B), medial (C), posterior (D), lateral (E) and anterior (F) views.
Figure 12 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 12. Left ulna (MAP-6111) of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen) in anterior (A), lateral (B), posterior (C), anteromedial (D), medial (E), anterolateral (F) and dorsal (G, H) views.
Figure 9 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 9. Caudal vertebrae in lateral views of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen): 5th (MAP-1846a), 6th (MAP-6052), 7th (MAP-1846b), 8th (MAP-6053), 9th (MAP-6054), 10th (MAP-6055), 11th (MAP-6056), 12th (MAP-6057), 13th (MAP-6058), 14th (MAP-6059), 15th (MAP-6062), 16th (MAP-6061), 17th (MAP-6060), 18th (MAP-6063), 19th (MAP-6064), 20th (MAP-6066), 21st (MAP-6065), 23rd (MAP-6068), 24th (MAP-6069), 25th (MAP-6070), 26th (MAP-6071), 27th (MAP-6072), 28th (MAP-6073), 29th (MAP-6074), 30th (MAP-6075), 31st (MAP-6076), 33rd (MAP-6078), 34th (MAP-6079), 35th (MAP-6080) and 40th (MAP-6083).
Figure 11 in Origin and evolution of turiasaur dinosaurs set by means of a new 'rosetta' specimen from Spain
Figure 11. Chevrons of Losillasaurus giganteus (San Lorenzo specimen) in posterior view: from anterior to posterior, chevron 1 to chevron 9 (MAP-6085 to MAP-66093), chevron 12 (MAP-6096), chevron 14 to 19 (MAP 6098 to MAP-6103), chevron 21 (MAP 6015) and chevron 22 (MAP-6016).
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.