Find research datasets worth reusing

FIGURES 17–18 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 17–18. Paroster darlotensis, metathoracic leg (third-instar larva): (17) anterior aspect; (18) posterior aspect. Scale bar = 0.50 mm.

FIGURES 21–22 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 21–22. Paroster macrosturtensis (third-instar larva): (21) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (22) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bars = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 5–9 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 5–9. Paroster darlotensis (first-instar larva), head appendages: (5) mandible, dorsal aspect; (6–7) maxilla, (6) dorsal aspect; (7) ventral aspect; (8–9) labium; (8) dorsal aspect; (9) ventral aspect. LA, labium; MN, mandible; MX, maxilla. Numbers and lowercase letters refer to primary setae and pores, respectively. Scale bars = 0.10 mm.

FIGURES 23–24 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 23–24. Paroster mesosturtensis (third-instar larva): (23) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (24) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bars = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 1–2 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 1–2. Paroster darlotensis (first-instar larva), head capsule: (1) dorsal aspect; (2) ventral aspect. EB, egg bursters: FR, frontoclypeus; PA, parietale; TP, tentorial pits. Numbers and lowercase letters refer to primary setae and pores, respectively. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 3–4 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 3–4. Paroster darlotensis (first-instar larva), antenna: (3) ventral aspect; (4) dorsal aspect. AN, antenna. Numbers and lowercase letters refer to primary setae and pores, respectively. Scale bar = 0.10 mm.

FIGURES 43–44 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 43–44. Paroster nigroadumbratus (third-instar larva): (43) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (44) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 41–42 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 41–42. Paroster niger (third-instar larva): (41) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (42) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 19–20 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 19–20. Paroster hinzeae (third-instar larva): (19) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (20) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bars = 0.50 mm.

FIGURES 37–38 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 37–38. Paroster insculptilis (third-instar larva): (37) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (38) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 31–32 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 31–32. Paroster baylyi (third-instar larva): (31) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (32) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 35–36 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 35–36. Paroster couragei, metathoracic leg (third-instar larva): (35) anterior aspect; (36) posterior aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 29–30 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 29–30. Paroster wedgeensis (third-instar larva): (29) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (30) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bar = 0.20 mm.

FIGURES 12–14 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 12–14. Paroster darlotensis (first-instar larva): (12–13) abdominal segment eight; (12) dorsal aspect; (13) ventral aspect; (14) urogomphus, dorsal aspect; AB, abdominal segment eight; UR, urogomphus. Numbers and lowercase letters refer to primary setae and pores, respectively. Scale bars = 0.10 mm.

FIGURES 10–11 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 10–11. Paroster darlotensis (first-instar larva), metathoracic leg: (10) anterior aspect; (11) posterior aspect. CO, coxa; FE, femur; PT, pretarsus; TA, tarsus; TI, tibia; TR, trochanter. Setae PT1 and PT2 not represented. Numbers and lowercase letters refer to primary setae and pores, respectively. Scale bar = 0.10 mm.

FIGURES 15–16 in Larval morphology of Paroster Sharp, 1882 (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Hydroporinae): reinforcement of the hypothesis of monophyletic origin and discussion of phenotypic accommodation to a hypogaeic environment

FIGURES 15–16. Paroster darlotensis (third-instar larva): (15) head capsule, dorsal aspect (not all secondary setae represented); (16) abdominal segment eight and proximal portion of urogomphi, dorsal aspect. Scale bars = 0.50 mm.

F in Behavioural and morphological adaptations for a low-quality resource in semi-arid environments: dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) associated with the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.)

F 6–9. Epipharynx of (6) Onthophagus (Palaeonthophagus) latigena d'Orbigny (150×) and (7) O. (Parentius) emarginatus Mulsant (170×), rabbit-pellet consumers, and (8) O. (Palaeonthophagus) fracticornis (Preyssler) (120×) and (9) O. (Onthophagus) taurus (Schreber) (130×), fresh-dung consumers. acr, acroparia; zg, zygum.

F in Behavioural and morphological adaptations for a low-quality resource in semi-arid environments: dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) associated with the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.)

F 10–13. Epipharynx of (10) Aphodius (Ammoecius) elevatus (Olivier) (140×) and (11) A. (Anomius) baeticus Mulsant and Rey (160×), rabbit-pellet consumers, and (12) A. (Otophorus) haemorrhoidalis (L.) (400×) and (13) A. (Eudolus) quadriguttatus (Herbst) (350×), fresh-dung consumers. co, corypha; epz, epizygum.

F in Behavioural and morphological adaptations for a low-quality resource in semi-arid environments: dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) associated with the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.)

F 2–5. Hypopharynx and mandibles of (2, 3) Thorectes intermedius (Costa) (170×), a rabbit-pellet consumer and (4, 5) Geotrupes stercorarius (L.) (80×), a fresh-dung consumer. m, molar area; pgl, paraglossa; r, retinaculum; sa, scissorial area.

F in Behavioural and morphological adaptations for a low-quality resource in semi-arid environments: dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) associated with the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.)

F. 1. Scheme of breeding patterns of the dung beetle community associated with the European rabbit. Drawings after Brussaard (1983), Klemperer and Lumaret (1985) and our results.