Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 18 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 18. Didelphis marsupialis (AMNH 210427) and Micoureus regina (AMNH 48757), proximal portion of ulna in lateral view. The caudal border is straight in Didelphis (ch. 71[1]), whereas it is strongly curved in Micoureus (ch. 71[0]). Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 19 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 19. Caluromysiops irrupta (AMNH 244364) and Marmosops parvidens (AMNH 267348), proximal portion of ulna (ul) and radius (ra) in lateral view. The olecraneon (ol) is short and wide in Marmosops (ch. 72[0]), whereas it is proportionally longer and more slender in Caluromysiops (ch. 72[1]). In both species, the longitudinal groove (lg) for Mm. anconeus and abductor pollicis longus (ch. 77[2]) is well developed. Scale bars: 5 mm.

Fig. 16 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 16. Lestodelphys halli (UWZM 22422) and Didelphis marsupialis (AMNH 210439), left scapula in lateral view. In Lestodelphys the supraspinous fossa (suf) width is less than one-fourth its length (ch. 54[0]) and the caudal angle (ca) is acute (ch. 57[0]), whereas in Didelphis the supraspinous fossa width is between one-fourth and one-half its length (ch. 54[1]) and the caudal angle is rounded (ch. 57[2]). Note the scapular notch (scn) in Didelphis, extended to less than half of the scapula (ch. 58[0]), whereas in Lestodelphys it is extended to the middle of the scapula (ch. 58[1]). Other abbreviations: acr, acromion; inf, infraspinous fossa, s, spine. Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 4 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 4. Philander opossum (AMNH 262415) and Marmosa mexicana (ROM 99608), last cervical vertebrae and first thoracic vertebra in lateral view. In Philander, the C7 spinous process is taller than the C6 process (ch. 20[0]), whereas in Marmosa mexicana the C6 and C7 spinous processes are similar in size (ch. 20[2]). Note the C6 spinous process resembling a protuberance in both species (ch. 17[2]). Abbreviation: r, rib. Scale bars: 5 mm.

Fig. 3 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 3. Monodelphis brevicaudata (AMNH 257203) and Lutreolina crassicaudata (AMNH 133250), partial vertebral series in lateral view. In Monodelphis, C3–C5 spinous processes are lower than the axis spinous process (ch. 19[0]). The first thoracic vertebra with tall spinous process relative to other vertebrae is placed in the T2 position in Monodelphis (ch. 24[1]), but it is in the T1 position in Lutreolina (ch 24[0]). Abbreviation: Ma, manubrium of sternum. Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 8 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 8. Chironectes minimus (AMNH 264571) and Caluromys philander (AMNH 267001), fifth lumbar vertebra in anterior view. In Chironectes, the transverse process (tp) is ventrally extended beyond the vertebral body (b) (ch. 37[1]), whereas in Caluromys it is not extended beyond the vertebral body, being more laterally extended (ch. 37[0]). Other abbreviations: mp, mammillary process; sp, spinous process; vf, vertebral foramen. Scale bars: 5 mm.

Fig. 1 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 1. Didelphis marsupialis (AMNH 21439) and Metachirus nudicaudatus (AMNH 244617), axis in lateral view. The spinous process (Sp) in Metachirus is posteriorly extended (ch. 10[1]), whereas in Didelphis it is not extended beyond the neural arches (Na) (ch. 10[0]). In Didelphis, the anterior extension of the dens (de) is barely anterior to the anterior tip of the spinous process (ch. 11[0]), whereas in Metachirus the dens is cranialy extended (ch. 11[2]). The ventral tubercle (Vt) is a uniform crest in Didelphis (ch. 14[0]), whereas in Metachirus it forms two protruding lobes (ch. 14[1]). Other abbreviations: As, articular surface; Tc, transverse canal; Tp, transverse process. Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 7 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 7. Thylamys macrurus (MSB 70700) and Metachirus nudicaudatus (AMNH 244617), lumbar vertebrae in dorsal view. An intervertebral space (ip) is evident dorsally in Thylamys (ch. 36[0]), whereas in Metachirus this space is absent (ch. 36[1]). Other abbreviations: mp, mammillary process; po, postzygapophysis; sp, spinous process; tp, transverse process. Scale bar: 5 mm.

Fig. 6 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 6. Metachirus nudicaudatus (AMNH 267009) and Caluromys philander (AMNH 267001), lumbar vertebrae in dorsal view. In Metachirus the mammillary process (mp) of L3 is not anteriorly extended beyond the articulation with L2 (ch. 34[0]), whereas in Caluromys it is extended (ch. 34[1]). Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 12 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 12. Didelphis marsupialis (AMNH 210439 and Caluromys philander (AMNH 267001), sacral vertebrae in ventral view. A ventral foramen (vef) in the S1 body is present in Didelphis (ch. 42[1]), whereas in Caluromys it is absent (ch. 42[0]). Other abbreviations: psf, pelvic sacral foramen; w, wing. Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 10 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 10. Monodelphis brevicaudata (AMNH 257203) and Lestodelphys halli (UWZM 22422), sacral vertebrae in dorsal view. In Monodelphis there is a posterior process (pp) on the lateral sacral crest (lsc) on S2 (ch. 39[1]), whereas in Lestodelphys it is absent (ch. 39[0]). Scale bars: 5 mm.

Fig. 11 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 11. Marmosops incanus (MVZ 182768) and Metachirus nudicaudatus (AMNH 267009), right os coxae with sacral vertebrae in lateral view. In the sacral vertebrae of Marmosops incanus the spinous process is present only in S1 (ch. 40[0]), whereas in Metachirus the process is present in both vertebrae (ch. 40[1]), and the S1 spinous process is taller than the S2 spinous process (ch. 41[1]). In Metachirus, the acetabulum (ac) is close, deep, and with the dorsal part laterally extended (ch. 83[1]), and the iliac wing (iw) forms a large blade (ch. 84[1]). Scale bars: 10 mm.

Fig. 9 in Phylogenetic Analyses Of Postcranial Skeletal Morphology In Didelphid Marsupials

Fig. 9. Hyladelphys kalinowskii (RSV 1572) and Caluromysiops irrupta (AMNH 244364), pelvis, sacrum, and posterior lumbar vertebrae in dorsal view. In Hyladelphys, just the first sacral vertebra (S1) is contacting the illium (il) (ch. 38[0]), whereas in Caluromysiops both sacral elements (S1 and S2) are contacting the illium (ch. 38[1]). Note the absence of the posterior process on the lateral sacral crest of S2 in Hyladelphys (ch. 39[0]). Other abbreviations: ac, acetabulum; is, ischium; of, obturator foramen. Scale bars: 5 mm.

Fig. 7 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 7. Scatter plots of Neohelos P3 and M1 dimensions (in mm) from the Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, the Leaf Locality, South Australia, and the Bullock Creek LF, Northern Territory. A. P3 length versus width segregated by species. B. P3 length versus width segregated by site and faunal zone. C. M1 length versus anterior width segregated by species. D. M1 length versus anterior width segregated by site and faunal zone. E. M1 anterior width versus posterior width segregated by species. F. M1 anterior width versus posterior width segregated by site and faunal zone. Abbreviations: Bull, Bullock Creek; dav, davidridei; Leaf, Leaf Locality; Ne, Neohelos; tir, tirarensis; Riv, Riversleigh; sol, solus; stirt, stirtoni. Riversleigh site abbreviations: BC2, Black Coffee 2; BO, Burnt Offering; BR, Bone Reef; COA, Cleft Of Ages; D, Site D; CR, Creaser's Ramparts; CS, Camel Sputum; DT, Dirk's Towers; Dun, Dunsinane; FT, Fig Tree; Inab, Inabeyance; JJ, Jaw Junction; JJS, Jim's Jaw; KCB, Keith's Chocky Block; MM, Mike's Menagerie; SB, Sticky Beak; UBO, Upper Burnt Offering; WW, Wayne's Wok. Measurements from Table A (Appendix 2). Colors in graphs B, D, and F denote Riversleigh faunal zones: Faunal Zone A (Late Oligocene), green; Faunal Zone B (Early Miocene), blue; Faunal Zone C (Middle Miocene), red; uncertain age, purple; non− Riversleigh sites, black.

Fig. 6 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 6. Diprotodontid marsupial Neohelos stirtoni Murray, Megirian, Rich, Plane, and Vickers−Rich, 2000a, material from Middle Miocene deposits of the Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. A. QM F40165, partial right maxilla with P3–M3 from the Dwornamor LF (Gag Site); occlusal stereopair (A1), buccal (A2), and lingual (A3) views. B. QM F40169, right p3 from the Henk's Hollow LF; occlusal stereopair (B1), lingual (B2), and buccal (B3) views. C. QMF40117, left dentary fragment with m3 and protolophid of m4, from the Golden Steph LF; occlusal stereopair (C1), lingual (C2), and buccal (C3) views. Scale bars 20 mm.

Fig. 3 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 3. Diprotodontid marsupial Neohelos davidridei sp. nov., holotype QM F40175, from the Middle Miocene Jaw Junction LF, Faunal Zone C, Riverlseigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. A. RP3; occlusal stereopair (A1), lingual (A2), and buccal (A3) views. B. RM1; occlusal stereopair. C. Right deciduous P3; occlusal stereopair (C1), lingual (C2), and buccal (C3) views. D. RM2; occlusal stereopair. Scale bar 20 mm.

Fig. 9 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 9. Comparison of diprotodontid marsupials Neohelos tirarensis Stirton, 1967 (QMF 30438) (A) and Neohelos solus sp. nov. (QMF29739) (B) first upper molars (M1) in occlusal (A1, B1) and lingual (A2, B2) views. In addition to differences in size and relative width the following distinctions are evident: 1, elongate protoloph compared with; 2, short, arcuate protoloph; 3, shallow posterior face of protoloph compared with; 4, deep cleft on posterior face of protoloph; 5, broad, high stylar cusp E compared with; 6, weak, low stylar cusp E; 7, lingual cingulum low compared with; 8, lingual cingulum ascends lingual surface of metaconule; 9, weak postparacrista and weak/absent premetacrista compared with; 10, distinct postparacrista and premetacrista that meet in the interloph valley. Scale bar 10 mm.

Fig. 8 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 8. Comparison of Neohelos tirarensis and Neohelos solus sp. nov. P3 and M1 dimensions (in mm). A. P3 length versus width. B. M1 length versus anterior width. C. M1 length versus posterior width. D. M1 anterior width versus posterior width.

Fig. 2 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 2. Diprotodontid marsupial Neohelos solus sp. nov. from the Middle Miocene Cleft Of Ages LF, Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. A. QMF30231, partial left dentary with m1–2, partial m3; occlusal stereopair (A1), buccal (A2), and lingual (A3) views. B. QMF31357, Lm1; occlusal stereopair. C. QMF36232, Rp3; occlusal stereopair (C1), lingual (C2), and buccal (C3) views. Scale bars 10 mm.

Fig. 5. Diprotodontid marsupial Neohelos tirarensis Stirton, 1967 in Revision in the diprotodontid marsupial genus Neohelos: Systematics and biostratigraphy

Fig. 5. Diprotodontid marsupial Neohelos tirarensis Stirton, 1967 material from the Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. A. QM F56135, partial right maxilla with P3–M4 from the Early Miocene Wayne's Wok LF; occlusal stereopair (A1), buccal (A2), and lingual (A3) views. B. QMF41200, partial left dentary with p3–m2 from the Middle Miocene Keith's Chocky Block LF; occlusal stereopair (B1), lingual (B2), and buccal (B3) views. Scale bars 20 mm.