Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 1 in Convergent evolution of shell shape in freshwater limpets: the African genus Burnupia

Figure 1. General shell shape, size and chirality of the taxa studied. Shells are derived from the populations utilized here, but not necessarily from the specimen used for DNA work. The representative for the genus Burnupia is B. stenochorias. Scale bars = 2 mm.

Figure 2 in Convergent evolution of shell shape in freshwater limpets: the African genus Burnupia

Figure 2. Bayesian phylogram for basommatophoran taxa based on 2423 nucleotide positions of combined COI and 18S rRNA sequences showing the 50% majority-rule consensuses of topologies sampled during the Bayesian search. The tree was rooted with the outgroup Acroloxus lacustris. The scale bar indicates the expected number of substitutions per site according to the model of sequence evolution applied. Posterior probabilities are provided above the branches. Note that the topology of a maximum likelihood phylogram (not presented here) is identical with the Bayesian phylogram. Maximum likelihood bootstrap support (1000 replicates) is indicated below the branches. Family assignments follow Boss (1982). Ambiguous assignments are indicated by hatchings.

Figure 7 in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 7. Location of the Peyrère outcrop in the late Oligocene to mid Miocene fill of the Saubrigues palaeocanyon (from Kieken, 1973; Cahuzac et al., 1995).

Figure 6 in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 6. Pisulinella sp. from Mimbaste (Lower Miocene). A, apical view of the protoconch; arrow indicates the embryonic shell (MNHN-PL15356). B, enlarged portion of the protoconch showing the spiral ridges.

Figure 4 in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 4. Bourdieria faviai sp. nov. from Peyrère (Upper Oligocene). A, broken specimen (apical whorls removed) showing (arrowed) the ridge inside the aperture (MNHN-PL1634E). B & C, juvenile specimen of 0.8 adult whorl (MNHN- PL1634C). B, apical view of the protoconch showing the position of three weak ridges (arrowed). D-F, views of the holotype (MNHN-PL1634A); D, apertural view, E, right lateral view, F, dorsal view. G, view of the apical part showing the ridges of the protoconch (arrow). H, broken specimen showing internal view of the columellar area. I & J, apical view of the protoconch; arrow indicates the embryonic shell. I, detail of the embryonic shell.

Figure 5 in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 5. Pisulinella? aucoini sp. nov. from Meilhan (Lower Miocene). A, broken specimen (apical whorls removed) showing (arrowed) the ridge inside the aperture (MNHN-PL15356B). B & C, holotype (MNHN-PL15355A). B, in apertural view; C in right lateral view.

Figure 2 in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 2. Neritilia bisinuata sp. nov. from Bois-Gouët (Middle Eocene). A, apertural view of the holotype (MNHN- LR67776A); B, apical view of a paratype (MNHN-LR67776B), C, apical view of the protoconch; arrow indicates the embryonic shell.

Figure 3. A-J in The European Tertiary Neritiliidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Neritopsina): indicators of tropical submarine cave environments and freshwater faunas

Figure 3. A-J, Neritilia neritinoides (Cossmann & Peyrot, 1917). K & L, Vitta picta (Férussac, 1825). A-D, operculum. E, apertural view (MNHN-PL15281). F, apical view of the protoconch. G, enlarged portion of the protoconch showing minute pits (MNHN-PL4185). H, apertural view. I, right lateral view. J, dorsal view (MNHN-PL14078). K, apical view of the protoconch. L, juvenile specimen of 0.8 whorl with operculum showing a tooth (arrowed) on the inner lip (MNHN-PL15385). Sources of specimens: A-E, Lucbardez; F & G, Pessac; H-L, Mimbaste (all Lower Miocene).

Figure 15 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 15. Representatives of the Iridinidae. A, Mutela rostrata MCZ 172817. B, Pleiodon ovata (Swainson, 1823) MCZ 30613. C, Chambardia rubens (Lamarck, 1819) FMNH 2588. D, Aspatharia rugifera UMMZ 111952.

Figure 11 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 11. Diagram of patterns of posterior mantle fusion types in the Palaeoheterodonta. In the diagrams, the darker, outer layer represents the outer fold of the mantle, and the inner layer is the inner fold. The middle sensory fold is greatly reduced in the Unionoida. See text for discussion. e, excurrent aperture; i, incurrent aperture; sa, supra-anal aperture.

Figure 10 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 10. Evolution of larval morphologies in the Unionoida. Potamilus was not included in the present analysis, but is well supported amongst the Lampsilini (Roe & Lydeard, 1998). See text for discussion.

Figure 5 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 5. Phylogeny of bivalve orders. Drawn from Giribet & Wheeler (2002: Fig. 11). The star indicates the position of the hypothetical archetypical heteroconch (HAH). The traditional taxa 'protobranchia', 'myoida', and 'veneroida' are depicted as nonmonophyletic.

Figure 9. Unionoida parasitic larval types. A in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 9. Unionoida parasitic larval types. A, Hooked-type glochidium of Alasmidonta marginata (Unioninae). B, Hookedtype glochidium of Triplodon corrugatus (Lamarck, 1819) (Hyriidae). C, Unhooked-type glochidium of Villosa iris (Lampsilini). D, Axe-head-type glochidium of Potamilus alatus (Say, 1817) (Lampsilini). E, Lasidium of Monocondylaea paraguayana (d'Orbigny, 1835) (Mycetopodidae). F, Haustorium-type lasidium of Mutela bourguignati (Bourguignat, 1885) (Iridinidae). A, C, D, redrawn from Baker (1928); B, E, redrawn from Bonetto & Ezcurra (1963); F, re-drawn from Fryer (1961).

Figure 4 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 4. Combined evidence phylogeny of palaeoheterodont families. Internal nodes are labelled with letters (A–F) and are the basis for the organization of the text. Synapomorphies, reconstructed from our analysis (Fig. 3), are marked along the branches. Rectangles indicate unambiguous transformations; ovals indicate transformations that have equally parsimonious alternative optimizations (Appendix 2). Character numbers are listed below each mark; shading denotes character state: white, 0; grey, 1; black,> 1 (Appendix 1).

Figure 12 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 12. Photographs of palaeoheterodont apertures. A, Type I, Margaritifera margaritifera ANSP A7659 (Margaritiferidae). B, Type II, Actinonaias carinata ANSP A11149 (Unionidae). C, Type III, Anodontites trapesialis (Brug., 1797) INHS 17028 (Mycetopodidae). D, Type IV, Hyridella menziesi ANSP 413054 (Hyriidae). E, Type IV, Chambardia nyassaensis (Lea, 1864) ANSP A17036 (Iridinidae). F, Type V, Pleiodon spekii (Woodward, 1859) ANSP 413055 (Iridinidae). Arrows indicate mantle structures: either 'pallial ridges' (A) or mantle fusion (B–F).

Figure 2 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 2. Strict consensus cladograms derived from phylogenetic analysis of molecular and combined evidence data. Numbers above the branches are bootstrap percentages; those below are Bremer decay index values (≥ 2). Arrows indicate taxa with problematic cytochrome oxidase subunit I sequences (as discussed in the text), including cases in which these sequences have been excluded.

Figure 17. A in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 17. A representative of the Margaritiferidae. Cumberlandia monodonta (Say, 1829) ANSP 358640.

Figure 3 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 3. Phylogram of one of the ten equally most parsimonious trees recovered by combined evidence analysis. Numbers associated with the branches are lengths, summed across all character partitions. Branches that were not resolved in the strict consensus (Fig. 2) are shown as broken lines. Problematic cytochrome oxidase subunit I sequences were excluded from the analysis.

Figure 16 in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 16. Representatives of the Mycetopodidae. A, Anodontites trigonus FMNH 21479. B, Monocondylaea minuana UMMZ 248904. C, Leila blainvilliana (Lea, 1834) ANSP 41827. D, Mycetopoda pittieri Marshall, 1927 INHS 14870.

Figure 6. Palaeoheterodont hinges. A in Palaeoheterodont diversity (Mollusca: Trigonioida + Unionoida): what we know and what we wish we knew about freshwater mussel evolution

Figure 6. Palaeoheterodont hinges. A, Neotrigonia pectinata (Lamarck, 1819) ANSP 71515. B, Lamellidens marginalis (Lamarck, 1819) ANSP 41775. C, Fusconaia ebena (Lea, 1831) ANSP 188259. D, Aspatharia chaiziana (Rang, 1835) ANSP 41813. E, Pleiodon ovata (Swainson, 1823) UMMZ 112006.