Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2009View details →

Fig. 3 in Interpreting the condition of the forest environment with use of the SCP/MIB model of carabid communities (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

Fig. 3. The SCP/MIB model presenting the development of the Carabidae communities as taking part in the course of the Scots pine forest stands production cycle, in the post arable ground (dotted line) and in the forest soil (solid line). Denotations I. Post arable grounds: A – arable ground, A1 - 2-6- year old forest cultures, A2 - 8-14 year old coppices, Pdc3 - 18-year old coppices, A4 - 25-year-old forest stands, A5 - 33-62-year old forest stands, A6 – old growth (98-year old) forest stands. II. Forest grounds: F1 - 2-3- year old forest cultures, F2 - 6-11- year old coppices, F3 - 18 22-year old forest stands, F4 - 25-42- year old forest stands, F5 - 62-98 year old forest stands.

Figure 16 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 16. Ovoid curves: a) Hügelschäffer (according to Obradovic et al., 2013); b) Blaschke (according to Köller, 2000); с) Schauberger (according to Coats, 2001).

Figure 15 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 15. Yamamoto oval (а) (according to Yamamoto, 2020); Cartesian oval (b) (according to Köller, 2000); Möller oval (c) (according to Möller, 2009).

Figure 13 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 13. Cone-like ovoids: a) zeta-curve (Stadnicki, 2015); b) Phalacrocorax carbo; c) Anser anser; d) Phalacrocorax pelagicus; e) Grus canadensis; f) Grus grus.

Figure 14 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 14. Cartesian ovals: а) with p = 1, q = 2 and c = 5; b) with p = 1, q = 3 and c = 5 (Beverlin, 2006); с) hyperbolic cone (Kirsh, 2010).

Fig. 10 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Fig. 10. Spher-obtuse аsymmetric pseudo-ovoid: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2, 10, 18) egg profile diagram; bird egg profiles: 3) Accipiter gentilis; 4) Accipiter nisus; 5) Falco vespertinus; 6) Falco tinnunculus; 7) Panurus biarmicus; 8) Asio otus; 11) Milvus milvus; 12) Hieraaetus pennatus; 13) Picus canus; 14) Falco cherrug; 15) Columba oenas; 16) Falco tinnunculus; 19) Dendrocopos major; 20) Cuculus canorus; 21) Sylvia atricapilla; 22) Fringilla coelebs; 23) Crex crex; 24) Phasianus colchicus.

Fig. 9 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Fig. 9. Аsymmetric sphere-rounded pseudo-ovoid: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2, 10, 18) egg profile diagram; bird egg profiles: 3) Egretta alba; 4) Podiceps nigricollis; 5) Porzana parva; 6) Ardea cinerea; 7) Cygnus olor; 8) Podiceps cristatus; 11) Cygnus olor; 12) Casuarius casuarius; 13) Egretta garzetta; 14) Mergus serrator; 15) Egretta alba; 16) Phalacrocorax carbo; 19) Anser anser; 20) Pelecanus crispus; 21) Podiceps grisegena; 22) Cygnus olor; 23) Phalacrocorax carbo; 24) Podiceps cristatus,

Figure 12 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 12. Rounded -drop-shaped asymmetric pseudo-ovoid: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the matrix of forms; 2, 10, 18) egg profile diagram; bird egg profiles: 3) Oriolus oriolus; 4) Podiceps nigricollis; 5) Remiz pendulinus; 6) Porzana porzana; 7) Procellaria leucomelas; 8) Fulica atra;11) Catharacta maccormicki; 12) Corvus corax; 13) Phalacrocorax pelagicus; 14) Riparia riparia; 15) Larus genei; 16) Alauda arvensis; 19) Platalea leucorodia; 20) Upupa epops; 21) Larus cachinnans; 22) Pica pica; 23) Lunda cirrhata; 24) Gavia arctica.

Fig. 11 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Fig. 11. Asymmetric rounded-typical pseudo-ovoids: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2), 10), 18) egg profile diagram; bird egg profiles: 3) Fringilla coelebs; 4) Tetrastes bonasia; 5) Chloris chloris; 6) Fulica atra; 7) Sturnus vulgaris; 8) Turdus merula; 11) Acrocephalus palustris; 12) Turdus viscivorus; 13) Cuculus canorus; 14) Oriolus oriolus; 15) Luscinia luscinia; 16) Dendrocopos major; 19) Haematopus ostralegus; 20) Remiz pendulinus; 21) Porzana porzana; 22) Anthropoides virgo; 23) Cygnus cygnus;24) Anas strepera.

Figure 4 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 4. Rounded symmetric pseudo-ovoid: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2, 10, 18) egg profile diagram; bird egg profiles: 3) Pygoscelis papua; 4) Struthio camelus; 5) Alcedo atthis; 6) Strix aluco; 7) Hieraaetus pennatus; 8) Aegolius funereus; 11) Pygoscelis antarctica; 12) Merops apiaster; 13) Strix aluco; 14) Ardeola ralloides; 15) Streptopelia decaocto; 16) Asio otus; 19) Bubo bubo; 20) Ciconia ciconia; 21) Columba palumbus; 22) Streptopelia turtur; 23) Anas platyrhynchos; 24) Ixobrychus minutus.

Figure 5 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 5. Obtuse symmetric pseudo-ovoid: 1, 9, 17) construction of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2, 10, 18) egg profile diagram and profiles: 3) Columba livia; 4) Anas platyrhynchos; 5) Egretta alba; 6) Ixobrychus minutus; 7) Columba palumbus; 8) Rhea americana; 11) Otis tarda; 12) Egretta alba; 13) Merops apiaster; 14) Aythya ferina; 15) Caprimulgus europaeus; 16) Anas quеrquedula; 19) Upupa epops; 20) Egretta alba; 21) Anser anser; 22) Egretta garzetta; 23) Ardea cinerea; 24) Ardea cinerea.

Figure 3 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 3. Sphere-like symmetric pseudo-ovoid: 1) plotting of ovoids in the shape matrix; 2) a profile for comparison with real egg shapes; bird egg profiles: 3) Otus scops; 4) O. brucei; 5) Athene noctua; 6) Merops apiaster; 7) M. superciliosus; 8) Alcedo atthis.

Figure 2 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 2. Variability of the polar zones curvature of symmetric pseudo-ovoids: а) short, b) normal, c) long.

Figure 1 in Mathematical interpretation of avian egg shapes

Figure 1. The formation of asymmetric and symmetric (а) pseudo-ovoids; b-с) schemes for measuring the semi-axes: (L – length, D – diameter, rc – cloacal and ri – infundibular radii, ip – interpolar segment, lc - cloacal and li - infundibular semi-axes)

FIGURE 5 in Ataxioceras (Ataxioceras) lopeztichae Cantú-Chapa, 1991: Updating the systematic and palaeobiogeographic interpretation

FIGURE 5. Adapertural structures in microconchiate Schneidia, Ataxioceras and Parataxioceras drafted from different authors as indicated: 1 - Schneidia lussasense Atrops (= Ataxioceras [Atax.] subinvolutum [Siemiradzki] in Geyer, 1961, pl 10, fig. 6). 2 - Schneidia lussasense (= Atax. [Schn.] lussasense in Atrops, 1982, pl. 21, fig. 6). 3 - Schneidia lopeztichai (=Atax. [Atax.] lopeztichae in Cantú-Chapa, 1991, fig. 2). 4 - Atax. lothari (Oppel) morphotype lothari Oppel [m] (Moliner, 2009, fig. 2.5 d). 5 - Atax. (Parataxioceras) hyppolytense (Atrops, 1982, pl. 7, fig. 7). 6 - Atax. (Paratax.) hyppolytense (Atrops, 1982, pl. 8, fig. 6). 7 - Atax. (Paratax.) lothari lothari (Oppel) (Atrops, 1982, pl. 42, fig.4). 8 - Atax. (Paratax.) pseudolothari (Geyer, 1961, pl. 16, fig. 6). 9 - Atax. (Paratax.) evolutum (Atrops, 1982, pl.4, fig. 5). 10 - Atax. (Paratax.) planulatum (Quenstedt) (Geyer, 1961, pl. 14, fig. 2). 11 - Atax. (Paratax.) planulatum (Quenstedt) (Atrops, 1982, pl. 43, fig. 6). 12 - Atax. (Paratax.) oppeli (Geyer, 1961, pl. 16, fig. 5). 13 - Atax. (Paratax.) oppeli (Geyer, 1961, pl. 14, fig. 2). 14 - Atax. (Paratax.) pseudoeffrenatum Wegele (Geyer, 1961, pl. 16, fig. 1).

FIGURE 4 in Ataxioceras (Ataxioceras) lopeztichae Cantú-Chapa, 1991: Updating the systematic and palaeobiogeographic interpretation

FIGURE 4. Bivariate plot of primary ribs' crowding vs. coiling degree for Schneidia lussasense (Atrops, 1982; ammonite species in his synonymy list included), Schneidia lopeztichai (Cantú-Chapa, 1991), and involute "species" assigned to genus Ataxioceras by Wegele (1929), Schneid (1944), and Geyer (1961). Colours and asterisk as in Figure 3. Original measurements separated up to 3%-5% from those obtained from the illustrations of the specimens referred (squares). See text for comparative analyses.

FIGURE 2. 1 in Ataxioceras (Ataxioceras) lopeztichae Cantú-Chapa, 1991: Updating the systematic and palaeobiogeographic interpretation

FIGURE 2. 1 - Type of Ataxioceras (Ataxioceras) lopeztichae as illustrated by Cantú-Chapa (1991), and re-interpreted as Schneidia lopeztichai (Cantú-Chapa); reproduced with permission of the Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas. 2 - Ribbing pattern of Schneidia lopeztichai (Cantú-Chapa) obtained from computer image–analysis showing sculpture relief according to the degree of shading (dark to light for higher to lower relief) and white for inter-ribs and depressed spaces.

FIGURE 1 in Ataxioceras (Ataxioceras) lopeztichae Cantú-Chapa, 1991: Updating the systematic and palaeobiogeographic interpretation

FIGURE 1. Map of Mexico with approximate locations for reported records of Lower Kimmeridgian ataxioceratin ammonites mentioned in text, with reference to Mexican states. Light brown (Oaxaca state). Black star (town of Tlaxiaco at the surroundings of which Schneidia lopeztichai [Cantú-Chapa] was found). Red dots (north-to-south surface records reported and illustrated by López-Caballero, 2009 from Coahuila; Villaseñor, 1991 and Villaseñor et al., 2000, 2015 from Zacatecas; Cantú-Chapa, 1984 and Jiménez-López, 2011 from San Luis Potosí; and Cantú-Chapa, 1991 from Oaxaca). Green triangle (subsurface record reported and illustrated from Veracruz by Cantú-Chapa, 2001). Purple square (subsurface records reported without illustration by Cantú-Chapa, 1969, 1971).

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2023View details →

Figure 2 in First record of Parochlus kiefferi (Garrett, 1925) in a sediment sequence from a Slovak mountain lake with notes on paleolimnological interpretation

Figure 2. Detail of the head capsule of Parochlus kiefferi found in lake Vrbické pleso. Photo: Martina Jambrović.