Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0May 2015View details →

Рис. 13. Гениталии Tetramorium schneideri, самец: a — вид сверху; b — вид снизу; c — вид сбоку; d — вид сзади. in Taxonomic Revision Of The Striativentre Species Group Of The Genus Tetramorium (Hymenoptera, Formicidae)

Рис. 13. Гениталии Tetramorium schneideri, самец: a — вид сверху; b — вид снизу; c — вид сбоку; d — вид сзади.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2022View details →

Interactions between land use, taxonomic group and aspects and levels of diversity in a Brazilian savanna: implications for the use of bioindicators

The study was carried out in the Triângulo Mineiro region of Minas Gerais state, covering the municipalities of Uberlândia, Monte Alegre, and Nova Ponte, in south-eastern Brazil. We conducted the study in five habitat types, comprising two natural habitats (savanna and semideciduous forest), and three anthropogenic land-uses: cattle pastures (planted with introduced Urochloa grasses), soy fields (where sampling took place when plants were at the vegetative phase) and  plantations of Eucalyptus trees (≥ 6 yrs old). Ants and beetles were sampled at the same 40 sites (8 replicates per land use), and birds at 30 sites (6 replicates per land use), only some of which were the same as for ants and beetles.  Ants that forage on ground and dung beetles were sampled using pitfall traps. Sampling took place in November and December (early wet season) 2017. In each site, eight traps were installed with traps located at the corners of a 100×100 m square, and at the mid-points of the sides of the square, keeping a minimum distance of 50 m between any two traps. All traps were at least 75 m distant from the edge of the respective land use. Traps were plastic containers (19 cm diam, 11 cm height) filled with 150 ml of a saline solution and detergent. Each trap had a wire hoop suspended over it to accommodate a small (4 cm diam, 4 cm height) plastic container for holding a dung bait. We used a 20 cm diameter plastic cover supported by three sticks to protect traps from rain. Traps were baited with ~40 g of a mixture of pig dung and human faeces (4:1 proportion) and left in the field for 48-hrs. Birds were surveyed using 20-min point counts in the rainy season (November 2017 to March 2018). At each site, five sampling points were established, 200 m distant from each other. All surveys started at sunrise (about 6 a.m.), and all species seen or heard from each point were recorded. Each sampling site was re-surveyed in the following dry season (April to October to 2018); however, for logistic reasons we were unable to re-survey the plantation sites.  Ant and dung beetle species were identified to species or morphospecies by comparison with named species in the Zoological Collection at the Federal University of Uberlândia (UFU) or with specialist assistance from Fernando Vaz de Mello, respectively. Vouchers of all species have been deposited at UFU´s Zoological Collection. Birds were identified directly in the field and species names follow the checklist produced by the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee. We classified species functionally based on primary diet, foraging location and/or behaviour, and body size, as these traits are known to be sensitive to habitat modifications and of importance for the ecosystem services provided by ants, birds, and dung beetles. Ant species were classified according to their diet as predators, fungivores, nectarivores or omnivores, and according to their main foraging location as arboreal, epigeal (aboveground) or hypogeal (in soil and litter), based on information provided by Brown (2000) and Silvestre et al. (2003). Species were further classified into four body size categories based on our measurements of body length (Weber´s length; Brown, 1953) of 1-5 ant workers per species: 1 (< 0.75 mm), 2 (0.75-1.74 mm), 3 (1.75-3 mm), and 4 (> 3 mm). Dung beetles were classified as coprophagous, necrophagous, frugivore, generalist or predator, according to the type of food resource each species is most often attracted to. This classification was based on over 30 years of field experience throughout Brazil by one of the authors of this study (FVM), who used multiple types of baits (e.g., carcasses, fruits, faeces) to attract and collect dung beetles, and/or on literature information. Although information about the “attractiveness” of different types of baits to dung beetles (used here as a proxy for primary diet) was not obtained directly in the sites of the present study, it is importat to note that we are not aware of any evidence of geographic or habitat variation in bait preference among tropical species of dung beetles. Dung beetles were also classified according to their foraging behaviour as: telecoprid (species that make a dung ball and roll it away for burial), paracoprid (species that store dung in tunnels dug immediately below the dung source), or endocoprid (species living within or immediately below the dung, without moving it). For this, we used the database of the Zoological Collection of the Federal University of Mato Grosso (UFMT). Whenever sample sizes allowed, 30 individuals from each species were weighed for determination of body mass (following Almeida et al., 2011), and species were classified according to the following ordinal scale: 1 (< 10 mg); 2 (10-99 mg); 3 (100-300 mg); and 4 (>300 mg). Each bird species was classified according to its primary diet as frugivores granivore, insectivore, nectarivore, carnivore, detritivore, or omnivore, and according to the main foraging location as ground, understory/shrubby vegetation, or tree canopy, based on the Wilman et al. (2014) database and our own field experience. Using these same sources, we obtained information on mean body weights of each species and assigned them to one of five size categories: 1- (<15 g); 2 (15-39 g); 3 (40-199 g); 4 (200-599 g); and 5 (> 600 g).

dryad40/100

Global contemporary effective population sizes across taxonomic groups

Effective population size (Ne) is a particularly useful metric for conservation as it affects genetic drift, inbreeding and adaptive potential within populations. Current guidelines recommend a minimum Ne of 50 and 500 to avoid short-term inbreeding and to preserve long-term adaptive potential, respectively. However, the extent to which wild populations reach these thresholds globally has not been investigated, nor has the relationship between Ne and human activities. Through a quantitative review, we generated a dataset with 4610 georeferenced Ne estimates from 3829 unique populations, extracted from 723 articles. These data show that certain taxonomic groups are less likely to meet 50/500 thresholds and are disproportionately impacted by human activities; plant, mammal, and amphibian populations had a <54% probability of reaching = 50 and a <9% probability of reaching = 500. Populations listed as being of conservation concern according to the IUCN Red List had a smaller median than unlisted populations, and this was consistent across all taxonomic groups. was reduced in areas with a greater Global Human Footprint, especially for amphibians, birds, and mammals, however relationships varied between taxa. We also highlight several considerations for future works, including the role that gene flow and subpopulation structure plays in the estimation of in wild populations, and the need for finer-scale taxonomic analyses. Our findings provide guidance for more specific thresholds based on Ne and help prioritize assessment of populations from taxa most at risk of failing to meet conservation thresholds.

opencc-zeroMay 2024View details →

Fig. 4 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 4. Ordinations summarizing species variation in shape using the first two axes of (a) a conventional PCA (total variance in parentheses) or (b) those of a bgPCA (between group variance in parentheses).

Fig. 3 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 3. Visualizations of species by sex interactions using group means.a. Mean CS profile plot. For size, males are on average slightly larger than females, but the difference is small and roughly similar in all species. Thus, lines are approximately parallel in the profile plot. b. Phenogram of mean shapes. In the phenogram, with the exception of the Alaskan marmot (bro) (whose sampling error is huge, having only eight individuals of known sex), female and male means are paired within each species with almost identical shape distances between sexes in each species. The similarity of SDM shape distances provides an information equivalent, in terms of the magnitude of the sex differences, to that of the parallel lines in the CS profile plot (Fig. 3a).

Fig. 7 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 7. UPGMA phenogram of Procrustes mean shape distances for the random, mutually exclusive, species subsamples. Shape variation (magnified five times, relative to the grand mean of all species) is illustrated using the six species mean shapes (all specimens included) with wireframes and thin-plate spline deformation grids (drawn in Morpheus et al. - Slice 1999) - but equivalent to those made using MorphoJ or the TPS Series).

Fig. 6 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 6. PC1–PC2 of mean shapes for the random, mutually exclusive, species subsamples. Shape variation (magnified five times) at the opposite extremes of each PC is shown using wireframes, as well as deformation grids and expansion factors computed in PAST using the thin plate spline interpolation. (In these wireframes, unlike those in MorphoJ, the mental foramen is also connected by a line to its neighbouring landmarks, as PAST constrains users to link all landmarks: the difference is, however, minimal and purely visual).

Fig. 5 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 5. Example of visualization of shape change: hoary marmot SDM illustrated using (a) superimposed shapes (male mean, in black, and grand mean of female and male means, in grey) or separate diagrams for male (b) and female (c) mean shapes. Focusing on the coronoid region, the violet arrow shows the potentially misleading effect of the superimposition, suggesting a backward 'movement' of the tip of the coronoid in males. Separate diagrams (b–c), in contrast, correctly suggest that change happens in the region whose boundary are marked by the landmarks, with the rostral margin of the coronoid becoming longer (red arrow) in males and shorter (blue arrows) in females.

Fig. 9 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 9. Divergent allometries and their effect on size-corrected shape. (a) PLS1 summarizing allometries (35% of variance in allometric predictions) vs CS. The vertical lines emphasize the scores of speciesspecific predicted allometric shapes for either the smallest mandible of all North American marmots (CS = 56 mm, emphasized with a vertical yellow line and arrows to show the extrapolations of the allometric trajectories to CS = 56 mm) or the mean CS of all species (CS = 77 mm, emphasized with a light grey vertical line). (b1) Scatterplot of bgPC1–2 (percentages of between group shape variance in parentheses) for the size-corrected shapes predicted using species-specific allometries (i.e., separate slopes) and CS = 56 mm as 'common' size. (b2, inset) Scatterplot of bgPC1–2 of size-corrected shapes using independent trajectories (as in b1) and CS = 77 mm: if differences in slopes were negligible, b1 and b2 should be almost identical.

Fig. 1 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 1. Box and jitter-plots of CS, for each species. a. Separate plots for females, males and unknown individuals. b. Plots with pooled sexes. As in part A, as well as shown in Table 1, species names in all figures are abbreviated using the first three letters of the scientific name (e.g., caligata = cal) and F for female, M for male, and U for individuals of unknown sex.

Fig. 2 in A practical, step-by-step, guide to taxonomic comparisons using Procrustes geometric morphometrics and user-friendly software (part B): group comparisons

Fig. 2. Visualization of shape SDM in relation to interspecific differences using a bgPCA. In this, and other Figures, percentages of variance in the scatterplots of multivariate shape are shown in parentheses, below the label for the corresponding axis. On bgPC1–2, which together account for almost all between group variance (94%), there is a large overlap between females and males within each species, whereas, between species, the separation is clear.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2016View details →

Fig. 5 in Taxonomic groups with lower movement capacity may present higher beta diversity

Fig. 5. Similarity in species composition of birds among the 16 localities sampled in Minas Gerais, Brazil, based on the Jaccard coefficient of similarity and subsequent cluster analysis (UPGMA). Obs.: dashed line (significance level: 0.5 or 50%) (AIU, Aiuruoca; BOC, Bocaina de Minas; CAM, Camanducaia; CAX, Caxambu; DEL, Delfim Moreira; EXT, Extrema; GUA, GuaxupÉ; MAR, Maria da FÉ; MON, Monte Belo; MVE, Monte Verde; PAS, Passa Quatro; POÇ, Poços de Caldas; POU, Pouso Alegre; SGS, SÃo Gonçalo do SapucaÍ; SRJ, Santa Rita de Jacutinga; VIR, VirgÍnia).

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2016View details →

Fig. 6 in Taxonomic groups with lower movement capacity may present higher beta diversity

Fig. 6. Similarity in species composition of primates among the 16 localities sampled in Minas Gerais, Brazil, based on the Jaccard coefficient of similarity and subsequent cluster analysis (UPGMA). Obs.: dashed line (significance level: 0.5 or 50%) (AIU, Aiuruoca; BOC, Bocaina de Minas; CAM, Camanducaia; CAX, Caxambu; DEL, Delfim Moreira; EXT, Extrema; GUA, GuaxupÉ; MAR, Maria da FÉ; MON, Monte Belo; MVE, Monte Verde; PAS, Passa Quatro; POÇ, Poços de Caldas; POU, Pouso Alegre; SGS, SÃo Gonçalo do SapucaÍ; SRJ, Santa Rita de Jacutinga; VIR, VirgÍnia).

Fig. 14 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 14. Histogram showing the distribution of the species and specimens attributed to Anhnagueridae during the Cretaceous. Each bar of the histogram represents the number of diverse species found in each labelled site, whilst the geometric figures identified the species within the three anhangerid clades: Coloborhynchinae, Anhanguerinae, and Tropeognathinae. Drawing by BH. Abbreviations: Al, Albian; Ap, Aptian; Ba, Barrenian Be, Berriasian; Ca, Campanian; Ce, Cenomanian; Co, Coniacian; Ha, Hauterivian; Ma, Maastrichtian; Sa, Santonian; Tu, Turonian; Va, Valangian.

Fig. 13 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 13. Paleogeographic maps showing distribution of Anhangueridae. A. Barremian: 1, St. LeonardsonSea, East Sussex, Hastings Group (late Berriasian/Valanginian), England; 2, Bol'shoi Kemchug, lower Ilek Formation (?Hauterivian–Barremian) Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia; 3, Las Hoyas, La Huérgina Formation (Barremian), Cuenca, Spain; 4, Isle of Wight, Wessex Formation (Barremian), England. B. Aptian: 5, Mogoito, Murtoi Formation Aptian), Buryatia, Russia; 6, Sekmenevka Formation (Aptian), Belgorod Oblast, Russia; 7, Jiufotang Formation (Aptian), Liaoning, China; 8, Elrhaz Formation (Aptian), Niger; 9, Krasnyi Yar, Khilok Formation (Aptian), Buryatia, Russia; 10, Pedra Furada, Recôncavo Basin, Marizal Formation? Aptian), Bahia, Brazil; 11, Sierra de Perijá, Apón Formation (Aptian), Zulia, Venezuela; 12, Crato Formation (late Aptian), Ceará, Brazil. C. Albian: 13, KhurenDukh, DzunBayin Formation (late Aptian–Albian), Mongolia; 14, Sheskatovo, upper Ilek Formation (late Aptian–Albian), Kemerovo Oblast, Russia; 15, Chenini Formation (early Albian), Tunisia; 16, Romualdo Formation (Albian), Ceará, Brazil; 17, Lightning Ridge, Griman Creek Formation Albian), New South Wales, Australia; 18, Tarrant County, Paw Paw Formation (Albian), Texas, USA; 19, Boulia, Toolebuc Formation (Albian), Queensland, Australia; 20, Cortes de Arenoso, Utrillas Formation (Albian), Valencia, Spain; 21, Cambridge Greensand (Cenomanian, but fossils Albian in age), England; 22, Hughenden, Mackunda Formation (late Albian), Queensland, Australia. D. Cenomanian: 23, Strelitsa Graysand with phosphorite (late Albian–Cenomanian), Voronezh Region, Russia; 24, Pavlovsk (Cenomanian), Voronezh Region, Russia; 25, Kem Kem beds, lower Ifezouane and upper Aoufous Formations (Cenomanian), Dr'a Tafilalt, Southeast Morocco; 26, Laje do Coringa, São LuísGrajaú basin, Alcântara Formation (Cenomanian), Maranhão, Brazil; 27, Saratov yellow sand with phosphorite (late Cenomanian), Saratov Region, Russia; 28, Belmont Station, Winton, Winton Formation late Cenomanian–early Turonian), Queensland, Australia. Red question marks refer those specimens tentatively considered Anhangueridae, a red question mark inside one of the above geometric figures means a specimen tentatively attributed to each clade under consideration. World maps modified from the Palaeobiology Database (https://paleobiodb.org/navigator/) under the CC BY 4.0 license. Drawing by BH.

Fig. 11. Coloborhynchinae comparative plate. A in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 11. Coloborhynchinae comparative plate. A. Coloborhynchus clavirostris in anterior (A1), right lateral (A2), and palatal (A3) views. B. Aerodraco sedgwickii in anterior (B1), right lateral (B2), and palatal (B3) views. C. Uktenadactylus wadleighi in anterior (C1), right lateral (C2), and palatal (C3) views. D. Uktenadactylus rodriguesae. in anterior (D1), left lateral (mirrored, D2), and palatal (D3) views. E. Nicorhynchus capito (holotype) in anterior (E1), right lateral (E2), and palatal (E3) views. F. Nicorhynchus capito (referred specimen, originally designated as the holotype of Ornithocheirus reedi, now presumed lost from CAMSM collections) in anterior (F1) and right lateral (F2) views. G. Nicorhynchus cf. capito in anterior (G1) and left lateral (mirrored, G2). H. Nicorhynchus fluviferox (holotype) in anterior (H1), right lateral (H2), and palatal (H3) views. Dark grey represents depressions, lighter gray with lines represents bulbous projections, white represents alveoli. Scale bars 50 mm. Drawings by RVP.

Fig. 9. Tropeognathine pterosaur Tropeognathus mesembrinus Wellnhofer, 1987, BSPG 1987 I 47 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 9. Tropeognathine pterosaur Tropeognathus mesembrinus Wellnhofer, 1987, BSPG 1987 I 47, Chapada do Araripe, Ceará, Brazil, Albian. In right lateral (A1), palatal (A2), and anterior (A3) views. Photographs by RVP (A1) and BH (A2). A3 modified from Rodrigues and Kellner (2013).

Fig. 8 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 8. Tropeognathine pterosaur Siroccopteryx moroccensis Mader and Kellner, 1999, LINHM FR016, Kem Kem beds, Morocco,?Albian–lower Cenomanian. A. Photograph in anterior (A1), left lateral (A2), and dorsal (A3) views. B. Interpretation of the palatal view following Mader and Kellner (1999). Photographs courtesy of Megan L. Jacobs. Drawing by RVP based on Mader and Kellner (1999).

Fig. 6 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 6. Anhanguerid pterosaur Aerodraco sedgwickii gen. et comb. nov., CAMSM B54422, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, England, Albian. In anterior (A1), left lateral (A2), palatal (A3), right lateral (A4), and dorsal (A5) views. Photographs by BH.

Fig. 1. Anhanguerid pterosaur Coloborhynchus clavirostris Owen, 1874 in A taxonomic and phylogenetic review of the anhanguerid pterosaur group Coloborhynchinae and the new clade Tropeognathinae

Fig. 1. Anhanguerid pterosaur Coloborhynchus clavirostris Owen, 1874, NHMUK PV R1822, St. LeonardsonSea, East Sussex, England, late Berriasian–Valanginian. In anterior (A1), left lateral (A2), palatal (A3), dorsal (A4), and right lateral (A5) views. Photographs from NHMUK data portal collections (https://data.nhm.ac.uk/).