Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 4 in Past and present taxonomy of the Liolaemus lineomaculatus section (Liolaemidae): is the morphological arrangement hypothesis valid?

Figure 4. Number of midbody scales amongst individuals of the Liolaemus archeforus, Liolaemus kingii, Liolaemus lineomaculatus, and Liolaemus magellanicus groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the L. kingii and L. archeforus groups. Female data are shown in white and male in grey.

Figure 3 in Past and present taxonomy of the Liolaemus lineomaculatus section (Liolaemidae): is the morphological arrangement hypothesis valid?

Figure 3. Pictures of dorsal scales of all the species belonging to the Liolaemus archeforus, Liolaemus kingii, Liolaemus lineomaculatus, and Liolaemus magellanicus groups. Squares are 1 cm2. No differences or trends can be observed between scales of the species included in the L. kingii and L. archeforus groups.

Figure 2 in Past and present taxonomy of the Liolaemus lineomaculatus section (Liolaemidae): is the morphological arrangement hypothesis valid?

Figure 2. Phylogenetic relationships hypothesized for the Liolaemus lineomaculatus section using nuclear (nu) and/or mitochondrial (mt) genes; A, species tree inferred using mt and nu genes by Breitman et al. (2011a); posterior probability (Pp) values higher than 0.5 are shown, bold branches show clades with Pp> 0.95; B, Bayesian tree, representing concatenated analyses and summarizing information from maximum parsimony (MP) and maximum likelihood (ML) methods from Breitman et al. (2011a); nodes with high support from three methods (MP jack-knife and ML bootstrap> 0.70; Pp> 0.95) are identified by bold branches; open squares show nodes with weak MP support, and circles nodes with weak MP and ML support; C, ML tree recovered using mt genes by Schulte & Moreno-Roark (2010).

Figure 5 in Past and present taxonomy of the Liolaemus lineomaculatus section (Liolaemidae): is the morphological arrangement hypothesis valid?

Figure 5. Snout–vent length (SVL, expressed in millimetres) amongst individuals of the Liolaemus archeforus, Liolaemus kingii, Liolaemus lineomaculatus, and Liolaemus magellanicus groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the L. kingii and L. archeforus groups. Female data are shown in white and males in grey.

opennotspecifiedAug 2021View details →

FIGURE 1. A–C in The valid publication and identity of Aristolochia compressicaulis (Aristolochiaceae)

FIGURE 1. A–C: Isotrema compressicaule. A. Flowering branch, B. Flower in frontal view, C. Longitudinal-section of flower. D–F: I. versicolor. D. Flowering branch, E. Flower in frontal view, F. Longitudinal-section of flower. G–I: I. liangshanense. G. Flowering branch, H. Flower in frontal view, I. Longitudinal-section of flower.—A–F: photographed by Xin-Xin Zhu; G–I: photographed by Hai-Ning Li.

FIGURE 5 in Validation and morphology of Begonia fagopyrofolia in B. sect. Stolonifera (Begoniaceae) in China

FIGURE 5. Illustration of Begonia fagopyrofolia W.H.Chen & Y.M.Shui, sp. nov. (Y.M.Shui & W.H.Chen 44326, KUN) A. Plant; B. Male flower; C. Open female flower; D. Young female flower; E. Adaxial view of the stamen; F. Lateral view of the stamen; G. Abaxial view of the stamen; H. Middle section of the ovary; I. Fruit. Drawn by Xi-Lin Wu.

FIGURE 4 in Validation and morphology of Begonia fagopyrofolia in B. sect. Stolonifera (Begoniaceae) in China

FIGURE 4. Paraffin sections of the 3 positions of the ovary in Begonia fagopyrofolia (A) and B. cehengensis (B). A1, B1. Superior part of the ovary; A2, B2. Middle part of the ovary; A3, B3. Inferior part of the ovary. Scale bar: A (1–3) and B (1–3) = 2 mm.

FIGURE 2 in Validation and morphology of Begonia fagopyrofolia in B. sect. Stolonifera (Begoniaceae) in China

FIGURE 2. Micromorphology of the leaf epidermis in Begonia cehengensis (A–H) and B. fagopyrofolia (I–P). A–D and I–L. The adaxial surface; E–G and M–P. The abaxial surface; A, D, E, F and I, K, M. Trichomes; B, C, J. The epidermal cells; A, E, G and I, K, L, N, P. Glands; G, H and N, O. Stomata. Note: g. Glands; s. Stomata; p. Tuberulate surface of trichome cells; sm. Smooth surfaces of trichome cells. Scale bar: A, K=300μm; B, J, L, M=100μm; C, D, H O, P=50μm; E, I=500μm; F=20μm; G, N=200μm.

FIGURE 1. Begonia cehengensis T.C in Validation and morphology of Begonia fagopyrofolia in B. sect. Stolonifera (Begoniaceae) in China

FIGURE 1. Begonia cehengensis T.C.Ku and B. fagopyrofolia W.H.Chen & Y.M.Shui in Begonia sect. Stolonifera Y.M.Shui & W.H.Chen. A–D. Begonia cehengensis T.C.Ku (Y.M. Shui & W.H Chen B2004–522 in KUN); E–H. Begonia fagopyrofolia W. H. Chen & Y. M. Shui, sp. nov. (Y.M. Shui & W.H.Chen 44326 in KUN). A, E. Habit. B. Staminate flowers; C. Fruit; D, G and H. Pistillate flowers; F. Staminate and pistillate flowers. Scale bar: A=20 cm, B–D and F–H=5 mm, E=10 cm. All photographs were taken by Yu-Min Shui.

FIGURE 3 in Validation and morphology of Begonia fagopyrofolia in B. sect. Stolonifera (Begoniaceae) in China

FIGURE 3. Micromorphology of the seed (A–C) and pollen grains (G–I) of Begonia cehengensis, and of the seed (D–F) and pollen grains (J–L) of B. fagopyrofolia. A, D. Whole seed; B, E. Anticlinal walls; C, F. The epidermal ornamentation of the seed; G, H. Colpi with margo; J. Colpi without margo; I, K, L. Equatorial view of pollen, showing the fine striates on the surface. Scale bar: A, D=100μm; B=20μm; E, C and G–L=10μm; F=5μm.

FIGURE 1 in Validation of the name Hedysarum damghanicum (Fabaceae, Hedysareae) from Iran

FIGURE 1. Holotype of Hedysarum damghanicum Rechinger (G00365781). Photography by courtesy of the herbarium G; reproduced with permission.

Figure 10 in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 10. Scanning electron micrographs of the anterior of the palate of A, Clinus spatulatus; B, Clinus superciliosus (with permission of NISC). D = diastema between teeth of upper jaw; L = lip; LA = lamellae; TD = tooth band; V = vomer; VA = valve.

Figure 9. A in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 9. A, Bayesian tree of the combined mtDNA and nDNA fragments with a total of 2070 bp. Numbers at nodes are support values (ML above and Bayesian PP and MP below); values less than 50% are marked with - -; B, ML tree of the control region only showing the monophyly of the Clinus superciliosus and C. spatulatus clades. Only ML support values are shown.

Figure 11. Sea surface temperatures for 15 March 2011 in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 11. Sea surface temperatures for 15 March 2011, showing usual summer temperature gradient and upwelling areas on the west coast. (The MODIS Sea Surface Temperature data were downloaded from the Marine Sensing Unit website http://www.afro-sea.org.za).

Figure 8. A, Linnaeus type NRM4729a in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 8. A, Linnaeus type NRM4729a, photograph; B, radiograph; C, Linnaeus type ZIU 54 photograph, identified as Clinus taurus of Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908; D, radiograph.

Figure 7. A, Gronovius type specimens BMNH 53.11.12.49 in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 7. A, Gronovius type specimens BMNH 53.11.12.49, Clinus mycterizans, identified as Clinus superciliosus; B, BMNH 53.11.12.50, Clinus mycterizans, identified as Clinus cf. ornatus; C, BMNH 53.11.12.51, Clinus mycterizans, identified as Clinus superciliosus; D, BMNH 53.11.12.52, Clinus ignobilis, identified as Clinus acuminatus (Bloch & Schneider, 1801); E, MNHN 2143, Castelnau type specimen of Clinus marmoratus photograph; F, radiograph, identified as Clinus agilis Smith, 1931; G, Clinus superciliosus Linnaeus type NRM135a, photograph; H, radiograph.

Figure 4. A in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 4. A, Clinus ornatus, Lectotype, SAM MB-F038012, male, 158 mm SL (drawn by Elaine Heemstra); B, orbital cirri; C, D, Clinus ornatus underwater, False Bay (C, G. Zsilavecz; D, unknown); E, Clinus spatulatus, SAIAB 93658, male, 84.6 mm SL, Klein River estuary, aquarium photograph (W. Holleman); F, orbital cirri (from Bennett 1983); G, Clinus spatulatus underwater, male; H, female, Bot River estuary; I, female, Klein River estuary (G. Zsilavecz).

Figure 5 in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 5. Posterior of skull with first three dorsal-fin spines and supporting pterygiophores: A, Clinus superciliosus; B, Clinus ornatus.

Figure 3. A in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 3. A, Clinus musaicus, holotype, SAIAB 96616, male, 108 mm SL, Windmill, False Bay (drawn by Elaine Heemstra); B, orbital cirri; C, Clinus musaicus, photograph of holotype (G. Zsilavecz); D–F, Clinus musaicus underwater, habitat and different colour forms, False Bay (G. Zsilavecz).

Figure 6. A in Delineating the fishes of the Clinus superciliosus species complex in southern African waters (Blennioidei: Clinidae: Clinini), with the validation of Clinus arborescens Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908 and Clinus ornatus Gilchrist & Thompson, 1908, and with descriptions of two new species

Figure 6. A, Clinus superciliosus, SAIAB 8260, male, 78 mm SL (drawn by David Voorveld); B, orbital cirri; C–F, Clinus superciliosus underwater, different colour forms and habitats, False Bay; C is the 'default' colour form (G. Zsilavecz).