Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2005View details →

Figure 3 in Life history dynamics and biogeography of a nudibranch with contrasting developmental modes: A hypothesis for the evolution of larval types

Figure 3. Abundance of spawn masses deposited by Dendronotus spp. at: (a) York, Maine, (b) Eastport, Maine and (c) the intertidal site at West Quoddy Head, Lubec, Maine.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2005View details →

Figure 4 in Life history dynamics and biogeography of a nudibranch with contrasting developmental modes: A hypothesis for the evolution of larval types

Figure 4. Weekly mean (¡SD), minimum and maximum water temperature (in °C) at the subtidal sampling sites in York and Eastport, Maine.

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2014View details →

Fig. 1. Phylogenetic hypothesis for Lyropaeus Waterhouse, 1878 in Molecular phylogeny and classification of Lyropaeini (Coleoptera: Lycidae) with description of larvae and new species of Lyropaeus

Fig. 1. Phylogenetic hypothesis for Lyropaeus Waterhouse, 1878 based on a maximum likelihood analysis of five fragments 18S and 28S rDNA, cox1, nad5 and rrnl mtDNA. Numbers at the branches are Bayesian frequencies and likelihood and parsimony bootstrap values.

FIG. 5 in The origin(s) of extant amphibians: a review with emphasis on the "lepospondyl hypothesis"

FIG. 5. — Criteria for choosing calibration points and determining their minimum and maximum ages (after Raaum et al. 2005: fig. 2) exemplified by the origin of Bombinanura (i.e. the cladogenesis in which Discoglossoidea and Pipanura originated). Known stratigraphic ranges shown by thick lines. The minimum age is the age of the oldest known bombinanuran fossil, the discoglossoid Eodiscoglossus oxoniensis (circled). The maximum age is more difficult to constrain, but is probably close to the bottom of the interval marked by the double arrow, from which bombinanurans are not known, even though closely related and presumably eco- logically similar salientians (Prosalirus and Vieraella) were present. That fossils of the Mesophryne lineage older than Eodiscoglossus have not been discovered, and that Amphicoela (Ascaphus and Leiopelma) lacks a known pre-Pleistocene fossil record altogether, is unfortunate, but has little relevance for the above argument. The root of this tree extends down to the approximate age of the oldest known salientians, Triadobatrachus and Czatkobatrachus. The authors of all taxon names are listed in Appendix 11.

FIG. 2 in The origin(s) of extant amphibians: a review with emphasis on the "lepospondyl hypothesis"

FIG. 2. — Time-calibrated trees showing Romer's and Carroll's Gaps. Names of extant taxa in bold. Known stratigraphic ranges, including uncertainties, are shown by thick lines. The timescale follows Gradstein et al. (2004); the unlabeled stage is the Serpukhovian, which began 326.4 ± 1.6 Ma ago. Mississi., Mississippian. A, a phylogeny of early limbed vertebrates and extant amphibians. The "microsaurs" are likely paraphyletic with respect to Lysorophia; their gray extension consists of the undescribed possible representatives from the mid-late Permian of Russia and the Late Early Triassic of China (see text). The undescribed possible branchiosaurid from the late Early Triassic of China (Gao et al. 2004) is not shown, because Tungussogyrinus has about the same age. The position of Gerobatrachus in a trichotomy follows FrÖbisch & Reisz (2008) and Marjanović & Laurin (2008b, 2009); that of Tungussogyrinus is taken from Werneburg (2009); the oldest known "microsaur" is Kirktonecta, named and described by Clack (2011). Note that all lepospondyls, amphibamids, or lissamphibians from Carroll's Gap are restricted to four or possibly five representatives from the Early Triassic,with the single exception of the purported Russian "microsaur"; their age range is shown as a bleached zone in Carroll's Gap. "Gymnophiona" includes Gymnophiona and all fossils that either belong to it or represent its closest known relatives; see Marjanović & Laurin (2007: fig. 3, as "Apoda") and Rage & Pickford (2011). The Roman numerals represent possible origins of Lissamphibia or parts thereof, placed as high in the geological section as possible: I, Lissamphibia (TH), Batrachia (PH), or Salientia (PH); II, Batrachia (PH); III, Gymnophionomorpha (PH); IV, Lissamphibia (TH) or Caudata (PH); V, Lissamphibia (TH), Batrachia (PH), or Salientia (PH); VI, Lissamphibia (LH); VII, basal split between the extant amphibians (PH). B, Time-calibrated phylogeny of Lissamphibia showing stratigraphic estimates of the age of that clade. The rectangles 1 to 4 represent the confidence intervals on the origin of Lissamphibia calculated under four different assumptions on the presumed severity of the impact of mass extinction events (Permian-Triassic,Triassic-Jurassic, and Cretaceous-Paleogene boundaries) on lissamphibian diversity.The bottom of each rectangle shows the older limit of the 75% confidence interval, the black bar the older limit of the 50% confidence interval. Note that none of the rectangles extends beyond the base of Carroll's Gap, while the PH predicts a date within Romer's Gap (VII in A) for the split between Gymnophionomorpha and Salientia. From Marjanović & Laurin (2007: fig. 9b; 2008a: fig. 4C). The authors of all taxon names are listed in Appendix 11.

FIG. 4 in The origin(s) of extant amphibians: a review with emphasis on the "lepospondyl hypothesis"

FIG. 4. — Crown-group tetrapod phylogeny according to analyses that support the LH, showing diversity within the LH. All are simplified from their sources (by collapsing suprageneric taxa), and the names are made comparable. Internal topology of Microsauria in B and C not shown. Colored boxes: yellow (), Lissamphibia; pastel green (), Lysorophia; cyan (), Amphibia; olive (), "microsaurs"; violet (), "nectrideans"; blue (), Aïstopoda; dark green (), amniotes and diadectomorphs. A, Vallin & Laurin (2004: fig. 6); B, Pawley (2006: fig. 92), with the taxon sample and cranial characters of Ruta et al. (2003) but Pawley's own set of postcranial characters, and reweighting; C, Germain (2008a: fig. 5.15); D, Marjanović & Laurin (2008b: fig. 6c), Tuditanidae, and Hapsidopareiontidae are OTUs that may not be monophyletic, their composition was not tested, but carried over from McGowan (2002); E, Marjanović & Laurin (2009: supplementary figure); F, Marjanović (2010: chapter 5), unconstrained analysis without added taxa. The majority-rule consensus is shown; internodes absent from the strict consensus are gray.

FIG. 3 in The origin(s) of extant amphibians: a review with emphasis on the "lepospondyl hypothesis"

FIG. 3. — Reinterpretation of the skull roof of the lysorophian lepospondyl Brachydectes (C, F, I) in comparison to the "microsaurian" lepospondyls Rhynchonkos (A, D, G) and Batropetes (B, E, H); A-C, dorsal view; D-F, right lateral view; G-I, caudal (occipital) view. Where interpretations of Brachydectes differ, those by Sollas (1920), Romer (1966) and Bolt & Wassersug (1975) are in bold, those by Wellstead (1991) are in italics, and ours (Marjanović & Laurin 2008b) are in regular typeface; they are always shown in this order. The colored bones are, in our interpretation, the tabular (yellow/light gray), the postorbital (cyan/middle gray), and the postfrontal (magenta/ dark gray). Abbreviations: boc, basioccipital; eoc, exoccipital; f, frontal; j, jugal; l, lacrimal; m, maxilla; n, nasal; oc, fusion of ex- and basioccipital; oot, opisthotic; otoc, fusion of pro- and opisthotic to ex- and basioccipital; p, parietal; pal, palatine; pl, pleurosphenoid; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; pof, postfrontal; pp, postparietal; prf, prefrontal; ps, parasphenoid; pt, pterygoid; q, quadrate; qj, quadratojugal; s, stapes; se, sphenethmoid; sm, septomaxilla; soc, suproccipital; sq, squamosal; st, supratemporal; t, tabular; v, vomer. Scale bar: 1 cm. Modified from Marjanović & Laurin (2008b: fig. 4).

FIG. 1 in The origin(s) of extant amphibians: a review with emphasis on the "lepospondyl hypothesis"

FIG. 1. — Hypotheses on the origin of Lissamphibia in the recent literature (modified from Marjanović & Laurin 2008b: fig. 1). Extant taxa in bold; extant amphibians underlain in yellow () if monophyletic (Lissamphibia) or pastel orange () if polyphyletic, temnospondyls underlain in violet (), lepospondyls in cyan (), the amniote-diadectomorph clade in green (): A, B, Temnospondyl hypothesis (TH) as of the late 1980s and early 1990s; B, simplified from Trueb & Cloutier (1991); C, D, TH, simplified from Ruta & Coates (2007); E, Lepospondyl hypothesis (LH), simplified from Vallin & Laurin (2004); F, Polyphyly hypothesis (PH), simplified from Carroll & Holmes (1980) through Carroll et al. (2004); G, PH simplified from Anderson et al. (2008b); the name Amphibia does not apply to any clade under this topology; H, a version of the PH, simplified from Carroll (2007: fig. 77), where extant amphibians and "lepospondyls" are nested inside the "temnospondyls"; "Anthracosauroidea" is an OTU that includes Embolomeri, Gephyrostegidae and Seymouriamorpha; "basal temnospondyls" is an OTU composed of Dendrerpeton and Balanerpeton; the "Microsauria" OTU consists of all "microsaurs" except Rhynchonkos; I, skull roof of the temnospondyl Iberospondylus schultzei, modified from Laurin & Soler-Gijón (2001). Scale bar: 1 cm. The authors of all taxon names are listed in Appendix 11.

Fig. 27 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 27. Size structure on four foraging grounds that presumably represent benthic developmental habitat for Lepidochelys kempii. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, is from Pritchard and Marquez (1973). Sources are: A, Carr and Caldwell (1956); B, Morreale et al. (1992); C, Musick and Limpus (1996); and D, Henwood and Ogren (1987).

Fig. 24 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 24. Size structure on four foraging grounds that presumably represent benthic developmental habitats for Chelonia mydas. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, for C. mydas in the Atlantic (A, B, and D) based on 178 laparoscopies of C. mydas in Panama (Meylan and Meylan, unpubl. data); that for the Pacific (C) from Balazs (1980). Sources are: A, Bjorndal and Bolten (1995); B, Ehrhart et al., (1996); C, Balazs et al., (1987); D, Carr and Caldwell (1956).

Fig. 23 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 23. Life cycle models for cheloniid sea turtles that reflect overlap between benthic developmental habitat and other stages of the life cycle. A, Overlap between developmental habitat and the adult migratory pathway as occurs for Chelonia mydas at the Zapatilla Cays, Bocas del Toro Province, Panama (this study, Meylan and Meylan, unpubl. data). B, Overlap between developmental habitat and internesting habitat that apparently occurs for Caretta caretta along the east coast of Florida (Henwood, 1987; Ernest et al., 1989). C, Partial overlap between developmental habitat and the adult foraging range as appears to occur for Eretmochelys imbricata at Mona Island, Puerto Rico (Van Dam and Diez, 1998b), and around Antigua and Barbuda (Fuller et al., 1992). D, Complete overlap between developmental habitat and the adult foraging range that may be common for Chelonia mydas in the Pacific (see text on contradictory evidence).

Fig. 19 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 19. Size distribution of Chelonia mydas at Zapatilla Cays, Bocas del Toro Province, Panama. A, Captures made during 13 migratory season samples (May, June, July, and September), 1990–2005. B, Captures from one nonmigratory season sample, January, 1994. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, is based on laparoscopy of 178 C. mydas in Bocas del Toro, Panama, and size criteria developed from laparoscopy data (this study; Meylan and Meylan, unpubl. data).

Fig. 20 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 20. Carapace length (SCLmin), weight, and maturity status for 69 immature Chelonia mydas from Zapatilla Cays, Bocas del Toro Province, Panama. For explanation of maturity stages, see Methods. Maturity status is based on laparoscopy. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, is based on laparoscopy of 178 C. mydas in Bocas del Toro, Panama, and size criteria developed from laparoscopy data (this study; Meylan and Meylan, unpubl. data).

Fig. 21 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 21. Carapace length, weight, and maturity status for Eretmochelys imbricata from Zapatilla Cays, Bocas del Toro Province, Panama (n 5 29), and Mona Island, Puerto Rico (n 5 16). Maturity status was determined by laparoscopy or nesting. For explanation of maturity stages, see methods. The minimum size at maturity indicated by the dashed line (67 cm SCLmin), is based on laparoscopies and observations of ''soft plastra'' in reproductive males (Wibbels et al., 1991a; see Discussion).

Fig. 25 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 25. Size structure for Eretmochelys imbricata on four foraging grounds that represent, at least in part, benthic developmental habitat for this species. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, for A, B, and C is from this study (see discussion), minimum adult size for D is from Limpus (1992). Sources are: A, Leon and Diez (1999); B, Van Dam and Diez (1998b); C, Boulon (1994); D, Limpus (1992). Note that turtle size is given as straight carapace length (SCL) in A–C and as curved carapace length (CCL) in D. Limpus (1992) gives the following relationship for CCL and SCL, SCL 5 CCL (0.936) + 0.403.

Fig. 26 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 26. Size structure for Caretta caretta on four foraging grounds that represent, at least in part, benthic developmental habitat. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, is from Kaufmann (1975). Sources are: A, Ehrhart et al., (1996); B, Ruckdeschel and Zug (1982); C, Musick and Limpus (1996); and D, Henwood (1987).

Fig. 17 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 17. Size distribution of 81 Caretta caretta at first capture near Secretary, Panama (1987–1997). SCLmin for seven turtles calculated from standard carapace length (SCLn-t); see table 9.

Fig. 18 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 18. Carapace length (SCLmin), weight, and maturity status as determined by laparoscopy for 22 Caretta caretta from Bocas del Toro Province and the Comarca Ngöbe-Bugle´, Panama. Seventeen were captured at the Secretary study site and five at the Zapatilla Cays study site. For explanation of maturity stages, see methods. Minimum adult size, indicated by dashed line, based on Kaufmann (1975; see Discussion).

Fig. 16 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 16. International recaptures of 36 immature Chelonia. mydas and 6 immature Caretta caretta (in parentheses) tagged in the Bocas del Toro area of Panama. Turtles tagged at both the Secretary and Zapatilla Cays study sites are shown.

Fig. 15 in The Ecology And Migrations Of Sea Turtles 8. Tests Of The Developmental Habitat Hypothesis

Fig. 15. Carapace length (SCLmin), weight, and maturity status for 56 Chelonia mydas captured at Secretary, Panama, (1989–1997). For explanation of stages of maturity status, see Methods. Minimum adult size, indicated by the dashed line, is based on laparoscopy of 178 C. mydas in Bocas del Toro, Panama, and size criteria developed from laparoscopy data (this study; Meylan and Meylan, unpubl. data).