Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 18 in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 18. Soliga ecarinata gen. et sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (AIMB). a. Head and mesosoma, ventral view. b. Propodeum, dorsal view. c. Fore and mid legs. d. Fore wing. e. Metasoma, lateral view. f. Metasoma, dorsal view.

Fig. 13. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 13. a. Carria sp., mesosoma, dorsal view. b. Colpotrochia sp., metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. c. Trieces irwini Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022, mesosoma, dorsal view. d. Trieces orientalis Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022, metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 13a points to the presence of notauli on mesoscutum (compared to the absence of notauli on mesoscutum in Fig. 13c). Arrow in Fig. 13b points to first metasomal tergite narrow basally (compared to first metasomal tergite broad basally in Fig. 13d).

Fig. 9. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 9. a. Carria sp., head, dorsal view. b. Hypsicera sp., head, dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 9a points to the absence of occipital carina (compared to the presence of occipital carina in Fig. 9b).

Fig. 3. a–c in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 3. a–c. Acerataspis sp. a. Fore wing. b. Metasoma, dorsal view. c. Mid leg. d. Hypsicera sp., fore wing. e. Trieces irwini Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022, metasoma, dorsal view. f. Hypsicera sp., mid leg. Arrow in Fig. 3a points to the presence of fore wing areolet (compared to the absence of fore wing areolet in Fig. 3d. Arrow in Fig. 3b points to clavate metasoma (compared to parallel sided metasoma in Fig. 3e. Arrow in Fig. 3c points to single mid tibial spur (compared to the presence of two mid tibial spurs in Fig. 3f.

Fig. 5. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 5. a. Triclistus sp., head, dorsal view. b. Hypsicera sp., head, dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 5a points to vertical lamellate structure on frons (compared to lack of lamella on frons in Fig. 5b).

Fig. 20 in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 20. Soliga ecarinata gen. et sp. nov., paratype, ♂(AIMB). a. Genitalia, dorsal view. b. Genitalia, ventral view.

Fig. 19 in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 19. Soliga ecarinata gen. et sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (AIMB). a. Head, ventro-lateral view. b. Metasoma, ventral view.

Fig. 2. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 2. a. Trieces irwini Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022, metasoma, lateral view. b. Exochus sp., metasoma, lateral view. Arrow in Fig. 2a points to the lack of laterotergite on metasomal tergite 3–5 (compared to the presence of laterotergite on metasomal tergites 3–5 in Fig. 2b).

Fig. 4. a–c in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 4. a–c. Chorinaeus sp. a. Mesosoma, lateral view. b. Anterior metasomal tergites, lateral view. c. Mesosoma, dorsal view. d–f. Trieces isolatus Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022. d. Mesosoma, lateral view. e. Anterior metasomal tergites, lateral view. f. Mesosoma, dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 4a points to the presence of sulcus on mesopleuron (compared to the absence of sulcus on mesopleuron in Fig. 4d). Arrow in Fig. 4b points to metasomal tergites 2–3 without lateral carina (compared to metasomal tergites 1–3 with lateral carina in Fig. 4e). Arrow in Fig. 4c points to pronotum with dorsal transverse depression (compared to pronotum without dorsal transverse depression in Fig. 4f).

Fig. 8. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 8. a. Colpotrochia sp., fore wing. b. Trieces orientalis Ranjith & Priyadarsanan, 2022, fore wing. Arrow in Fig. 8a points to fore wing with areolet (compared to fore wing without areolet in Fig. 8b).

Fig. 7. a–c in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 7. a–c. Stethoncus sp. a. Mesosoma, dorsal view. b. Head, antero-ventral view. c. Head, antero-dorsal view. d–f. Exochus sp. d. Mesosoma, dorsal view. e. Head, antero-ventral view. f. Head, antero-dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 7a points to inflated upper part of pronotum (compared to normally curved upper part of pronotum in Fig. 7d). Arrow in Fig. 7b points to lobe like upper tooth of mandible (compared to triangular, acutely pointed upper tooth of mandible in Fig. 7e). Arrow in Fig. 7c points to the presence of a sharp transverse carina separating interantennal processes and upper face (compared to the absence of transverse carina separating interantennal processes and upper face in Fig. 7f).

Fig. 6. a–c in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 6. a–c. Colpotrochia sp. a. Metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. b. Metasomal tergite 1, lateral view. c. Head, antero-ventral view. d–f. Triclistus sp. d. Metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. e. Metasomal tergite 1, lateral view. f. Head, antero-ventral view. Arrow in Fig. 6a points to metasoma petiolate anteriorly (compared to broad metasoma anteriorly in Fig. 6d). Arrow in Fig. 6b points to metasomal tergite 1 with long sternite (compared to metasomal tergite with short sternite in Fig. 6e). Arrow in Fig. 6c points to mandible with subequal teeth (compared to the mandible with shorter lower tooth in Fig. 6f).

Fig. 11. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 11. a. Exochus sp., mid leg. b. Hypsicera, mid leg. Arrow in Fig. 11a points to mid tibia with shorter outer spur (compared to subequal midtibial spurs in Fig. 11b).

Fig. 16. a–b in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 16. a–b. Hypsicera sp. a. Head, lateral view. b. Metasoma, ventral view. c–d. Macromalon sp. c. Head, lateral view. d. Metasoma, ventral view. Arrow in Fig. 16a points to vertical occiput (compared to rounded occiput in Fig. 16c). Arrow in Fig. 16b points to wide laterotergite on metasomal tergite 2 (compared to narrow laterotergite on metasomal tergite 2 in Fig. 16d).

Fig. 12. a–c in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 12. a–c. Hypsicera sp. a. Head, lateral view. b. Mesosoma, ventral view. c. Metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. d–f. Exochus sp. d. Head, lateral view. e. Mesosoma, ventral view. f. Metasomal tergite 1, dorsal view. Arrow in Fig. 12a points to vertical occiput (compared to rounded occiput in Fig. 12d). Arrow in Fig. 12b points to posterior transverse carina on mesosternum convex medio-posteriorly (compared to straight posterior transverse carina on mesosternum in Fig. 12e). Arrow in Fig. 12c points to the long lateromedial carina on first metasomal tergite (compared to the short lateromedial carina on first metasomal tergite in Fig. 12f).

Fig. 1. a in A new Darwin wasp genus, Soliga (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Metopiinae), from India

Fig. 1. a. Metopius sp., head, anterior view. b. Triclistus sp., head, anterior view. Arrow in Fig. 1a points to raised carina delineating shield-shaped area (compared to lack of carina in Fig. 1b).

opencc-zeroJun 2023View details →

What Darwin couldn't see: Island formation and historical sea levels shape genetic divergence and island biogeography in a coastal marine species

Oceanic islands play a central role in the study of evolution and island biogeography. The Galapagos Islands are one of the most studied oceanic archipelagos but research has almost exclusively focused on terrestrial organisms compared to marine species. Here we used the Galapagos bullhead shark (Heterodontus quoyi) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to examine evolutionary processes and their consequences for genetic divergence and island biogeography in a shallow-water marine species without larval dispersal. The sequential separation of individual islands from a central island cluster gradually established different ocean depths between islands that pose barriers to dispersal in H. quoyi. Isolation-by-resistance analysis suggested that ocean bathymetry and historical sea level fluctuations modified genetic connectivity. These processes resulted in at least three genetic clusters that exhibit low genetic diversity and effective population sizes that scale with island size and the level of geographic isolation. Our results exemplify that island formation and climatic cycles shape genetic divergence and biogeography of coastal marine organisms with limited dispersal comparable to terrestrial taxa. Because similar scenarios exist in oceanic islands around the globe our research provides a new perspective on marine evolution and biogeography with implications for the conservation of island biodiversity.

opencc-zeroOct 2023View details →

Persistence explains differences in innovation in Darwin's finches with a different foraging ecology

The capacity to create new behaviors is influenced by environmental factors such as foraging ecology, which can lead to phylogenetic variation in innovativeness. Alternatively, these differences may arise due to the selection of the underlying mechanisms, collaterally affecting innovativeness. To understand the evolutionary pathways that might enhance innovativeness, we examined the role of diet breadth and degree of extractive foraging, as well as a range of intervening cognitive and behavioral mechanisms (neophilia, neophobia, flexibility, motivation and persistence). Darwin's finches are very suitable for this purpose: the clade is composed of closely related species that vary in their feeding habits and capacity to develop food innovations. Using a multi-access box, we conducted an interspecies comparison on innovative problem-solving between two diet specialists, extractive foragers (woodpecker and cactus finch), and two diet generalist, non-extractive foragers (small and medium ground finch). We predicted that, if extractive foraging was associated with high innovativeness, variation would be best explained by species differences in persistence and motivation, whereas if diet generalism was the main driver then variation would be due to differences in flexibility and responses to novelty. We found a faster capacity to innovate and a higher persistence for extractive foragers, suggesting that persistence might be adaptive to extractive foraging and only secondarily to innovation. Our findings also show that diet generalism and some variables linking it to innovation were unrelated to innovativeness, and call for the development of joint experimental approaches that capture the diversity of factors giving rise to novel behaviors.

publicApr 2023View details →

Data from: Gene flow, ancient polymorphism, and ecological adaptation shape the genomic landscape of divergence among Darwin's finches

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.