Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2002View details →

Figure 3 in Locomotion in terrestrial mammals: the influence of body mass, limb length and bone proportions on speed

Figure 3. Regression plots of independent contrasts for fore limb parameters. Log running speed is in km h-1. a, Fore limb length in mm/3÷body mass in kg; b, radius/humerus ratio; c, metacarpus/humerus ratio; d, olecranon process length in mm/ 3÷body mass in kg. Regression lines fitted to the contrasts by means of least squares (model I) analysis.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2002View details →

Figure 4 in Locomotion in terrestrial mammals: the influence of body mass, limb length and bone proportions on speed

Figure 4. Regression plots of independent contrasts for hind limb parameters. Log running speed is in km h-1. a, Hind limb length in mm/3÷body mass in kg; b, metatarsus/femur ratio; c, cnemial crest height in mm/3÷body mass in kg; d, calcaneal tuber length in mm/3÷body mass in kg. Regression lines fitted to the contrasts by means of least squares (model I) analysis.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2002View details →

Figure 2 in Locomotion in terrestrial mammals: the influence of body mass, limb length and bone proportions on speed

Figure 2. Plots of standardized contrasts to their standard deviations. a, log forelimb length in mm; b, radius/humerus ratio; c, metacarpus/humerus ratio; d, tibia/femur ratio; e, cnemial crest height in mm/3÷body mass in kilograms; f, calcaneal tuber/metatarsus ratio.

Figure 16 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 16. Possible adaptive value of diagonal-sequence walking gaits in primates. At the moment of forefoot touchdown, when weight is about to be transferred to a new and untested substrate, the line of gravity (grey arrow: the vertical through the body's centre of mass, estimated here as the vertical through the midpoint of an ischium-to-occiput line) passes approximately through the supporting hindfoot (grey tone) in the D-S walk of the baboon (top), but not in the L-S walk of the horse (bottom). In primates or other arboreal animals with marked grasping specializations of the hind foot, the primate support pattern allows the animal to draw back or regain its balance if the new support breaks or bends precipitously.

Figure 11 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 11. Modified Hildebrand diagram for the walking gaits (average duty factor ≥ 50) in our data set. The theoretically relevant duty factor in each case – Sh for diagonal-sequence walks, Sf for lateral-sequence walks – is plotted against diagonality. The diagonal lines show the distribution predicted by the support-polygon model as initially formulated.

Figure 12 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 12. Modified Hildebrand diagram for our data set: revised support-polygon model. The relevant duty factor in each case – which is now Sf for L-S, D-C gaits (Rule 2: D = 100 – Sf) and Sh for the others – is plotted against diagonality. The diagonal lines show the distribution predicted for walking gaits by the revised support-pattern model. Compare Figs 3 and 11.

Figure 8 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 8. Values of diagonality predicted from the support-polygon model. Duty factors and graphic conventions as in Figure 4. To minimize overall bipedality while maximizing diagonal bipedality ('2-diag'), a quadruped walking with a lateral-sequence gait (A) should adopt a Dvalue equal to 100 minus the forelimb duty factor (100 − Sf: horizontal arrows). A quadruped using a diagonal-sequence walk (B) should adopt a D-value equal to the hindlimb duty factor (Sh: horizontal arrows). In A, this entails that forefoot liftoffs and ipsilateral hind footfalls should be simultaneous; in B, fore footfalls and ipsilateral hindfoot liftoffs should be simultaneous (vertical arrows). In both A and B, diagonal bipedality ('2-diag') comprises the minimal percentage (64%) of the stride period possible for these duty factors. The animal is supported on 3 legs ('3-ped') for the remaining 36% of the stride period.

Figure 15 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 15. Values of diagonality predicted for lateralsequence, lateral-couplets walks from the revised supportpolygon model. Duty factors and graphic conventions as in Figure 4. To minimize overall bipedality while maximizing unilateral bipedality ('2-unilat'), a quadruped walking with an L-S, L-C gait should adopt a D-value equal to the hindlimb duty factor minus 50 (horizontal arrows). This entails that fore footfalls and contralateral hind liftoffs should be simultaneous (vertical arrows). Compare Figure 8.

Figure 7 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 7. Curves of unilateral bipedality (Bu) and diagonal bipedality (Bd) against diagonality (D) for the general case where the duty factors of the hind- and forelimbs (Sh, Sf) are unequal. Kh = Sh − 50; Kf = Sf − 50. All variables represent durations expressed as percentages of the stride period (time between two successive falls of the same foot). See text for explanation.

Figure 6. Diagrammatic quadruped seen from above. Points A-D in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 6. Diagrammatic quadruped seen from above. Points A-D represent the animal's four feet; point G represents the vertical drawn through its centre of gravity. The animal will be more nearly balanced when standing on two diagonally opposite feet (A, C) than when standing on two ipsilateral feet (A, D), as long as G is closer to line AC than to line AD – which will be the case in most situations.

Figure 2 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 2. Plot of diagonality against (average) duty factor: the Hildebrand diagram. Positions of some mammalian gait types (two-letter codes) are plotted on the diagram. DS, diagonal-sequence walks; LS, lateral-sequence walks; RP, running pace; RT, running trot; WP, walking pace; WT, walking trot.

Figure 10 in Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals

Figure 10. Running gaits (Sh <50> Sf) in our data, plotted on the Hildebrand diagram. The arrow ('trot line') indicates the diagonality predicted for running gaits (D = 50).

opencc-zeroSep 2021View details →

dryad40/100

Data from: Genetic diversity in a long-lived mammal is explained by the past's demographic shadow and current connectivity

Within-species genetic diversity is crucial for the persistence and integrity of populations and ecosystems. Conservation actions require an understanding of factors influencing genetic diversity, especially in the context of global change. Both population size and connectivity are factors greatly influencing genetic diversity; the relative importance of these factors can however change through time. Hence, quantifying the degree to which population size or genetic connectivity are shaping genetic diversity, and at which ecological time scale (past or present), is challenging, yet essential for the development of efficient conservation strategies. In this study, we estimated the genetic diversity of 42 colonies of Rhinolophus hipposideros, a long-lived mammal vulnerable to global change, sampling locations spanning its continental northern range. We present an integrative approach that disentangles and quantifies the contribution of different connectivity measures in addition to contemporary colony size and historic bottlenecks in shaping genetic diversity. In our study, the best model explained 64% of the variation in genetic diversity. It included historic bottlenecks, contemporary colony sizes, connectivity and a negative interaction between the latter two. Contemporary connectivity explained most genetic diversity when considering a 65 km radius around the focal colonies, emphasizing the large geographic scale at which the positive impact of connectivity on genetic diversity is most profound and hence the minimum scale at which conservation should be planned. Our results highlight that the relative importance of the two main factors shaping genetic diversity varies through time, emphasizing the relevance of disentangling them to ensure appropriate conservation strategies.

dryad40/100

Contributions of genetic and non-genetic sources to variation in cooperative behaviour in a cooperative mammal

The evolution of cooperative behaviour is a major area of research among evolutionary biologists and behavioural ecologists, yet there are few estimates of its heritability or of its evolutionary potential and long-term studies of identifiable individuals are required to disentangle genetic and non-genetic components of cooperative behaviour. Here we use long-term data on over 1800 individually recognisable wild meerkats (Suricata suricatta) collected over 30 years and a multi-generational genetic pedigree to partition phenotypic variation in three cooperative behaviours (babysitting, pup feeding and sentinel behaviour) into individual, additive genetic and other sources, and to assess their repeatability and heritability. In addition to strong effects of sex, age and dominance status, we found significant repeatability in individual contributions to all three types of cooperative behaviour both within and across breeding seasons. Like most other studies of the heritability of social behaviour, we found that the heritability of cooperative behaviour was low. However, our analysis suggests that a substantial component of the repeatable individual differences in cooperative behaviour that we observed was a consequence of additive genetic variation. Our results consequently indicate that cooperative behaviour can respond to selection, and suggest scope for further exploration of the genetic basis of social behaviour.

opencc-zeroOct 2021View details →

FIG. 40 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 40. — Left maxillary (MHNC 13853) of sub-adult Alcidedorbignya inopinata (stage 6) with roots of P3 and P4-M2 erupted. M3 is missing but the crypt is present with its anterior border located above the posterior edge of M2 thus indicating that the tooth was erupting. The position of P4 (turned clockwise c. 45° and with the metastyle embedded) above the paracingulum of M1 is pathological: A, occlusal view; B, posterior view showing the anterior part of the crypt of M3. Scale bar: 5 mm.

FIG. 44 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 44. — Wear facets on deciduous premolars of Alcidedorbignya inopinata indicating solid food ingestion: A, right dP4 of MHNC 8416 (stage 3); B, left dp4 of MHNC 8279 (stage 3+); C, right dp4 of MHNC 8298 (stage 3+). Scale bar: 5 mm.

FIG. 45 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 45. — Wear facets on deciduous premolars of Alcidedorbignya inopinata indicating solid food ingestion: A, right dP3-4 of MHNC 13961 (stage 4); B, right dP3-4 of MHNC 13957 (stage 4); C, right dp4 of MHNC 8417 (stage 4). Scale bar: 5 mm.

FIG. 38 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 38. — Slices of the lateral, coronal, and frontal CT-scans of the mandible (MHNC 13858) of juvenile Alcidedorbignya inopinata (stage 5): A, slice 230 of lateral CT-scan; B-D, slices 408, 576, and 631 of coronal CT-scan (slice 230 is the most dorsal and slice 631 is the most central); E-H, slices of frontal CT-scan, 1439, 1242 1070, 336 of CT scan (slice 1439 is the most anterior and slice 336 is the most posterior). The number for each illustrated slice refers to the position within the sequence of 604 images for A, 1003 images for B-D and 1864 images for E-H (resolution binned images voxel size = 0.0159859 mm). Scale bar: 5 mm.

FIG. 35 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 35. — Right maxilla (MHNC 13860) of juvenile Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Stage 5): A, occlusal view; B, posterodorsal view, C, posterior view showing crypt for M3; D, slice 680 of a lateral CT-scan of MHNC 13860, showing the relative position of the crypt for M3 and the paracone of M2. The number for the illustrated slice refers to the position within the sequence of 1004 images (resolution binned images voxel size = 0.0159859 mm). Scale bars: 5 mm.

FIG. 32 in Dental ontogeny in the early Paleocene placental mammal Alcidedorbignya inopinata (Pantodonta) from Tiupampa (Bolivia)

FIG. 32. — Left mandible (MHNC 8417) of juvenile Alcidedorbignya inopinata (stage 4): A, lateral view; B, medial view; C, occlusal view; D, slice 124 of the lateral CT scan showing the paraconid of p4 in natural position and the metaconid rocked (approximately 130°) posteriorly; E, slice 179 of the lateral CT scan, showing section of the protoconid rocked (approximately 130°) posteriorly; F, slice 255 of coronal CT Scan showing section of paraconid of p4 mesially and metaconid distally; G, slice 299 of coronal CT Scan showing section of fused protoconid and metaconid of p4. Scale bar: 5 mm.