Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
19
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
19 results for “Atractoscion”
Data from: Population connectivity and phylogeography of a coastal fish, Atractoscion aequidens (Sciaenidae), across the Benguela Current region: evidence of an ancient vicariant event.
Contemporary patterns of genetic diversity and population connectivity within species can be influenced by both historical and contemporary barriers to gene flow. In the marine environment, present day oceanographic features such as currents, fronts and upwelling systems can influence dispersal of eggs/larvae and/juveniles/adults, shaping population substructuring. The Benguela Current system in the southeastern Atlantic is one of the oldest upwelling systems in the world, and provides a unique opportunity to investigate the relative influence of contemporary and historical mechanisms shaping the evolutionary history of warm-temperate fish species. Using the genetic variation in the mitochondrial DNA Control Region and eight nuclear microsatellite DNA loci, we identified the presence of two highly divergent populations in a vagile and warm-temperate fish species, Atractoscion aequidens, across the Benguela region. The geographical distributions of the two populations, on either side of the perennial upwelling cell, suggest a strong correlation between the oceanographic features of the system and the breakdown of gene flow within this species. Genetic divergence (mtDNA φST = 0.902, microsatellite FST = 0.055: probability of genetic homogeneity for either marker = p<0.001), absence of migrants (less than 1% per generation) between populations and coalescent estimates of time since most recent common ancestor suggest that the establishment of the main oceanographic features of the system (2 million years ago), particularly the strengthening and position of the perennial upwelling cell, is the most likely mechanism behind the observed isolation. Concordance between mitochondrial and nuclear genetic markers indicates that isolation and divergence of the northern and southern Benguela populations of A. aequidens occurred deep in the past and has continued to the present day. These findings suggest that the Benguela Current system may constitute an ancient and impermeable barrier to gene flow for warm-temperate fish species.
FIGURE 3 in Two new species of the genus Atractoscion, and resurrection of the species Atractoscion atelodus (Günther 1867) (Perciformes: Sciaenidae)
FIGURE 3. NJ-tree showing relationships among Atractoscion species including Atractoscion microlepis sp. nov. and Atractoscion macrolepis sp. nov. Numbers at branches indicate bootstrap probabilities in 5000 bootstrap replications. Bar indicates genetic distance of 0.02. *Atractosion atelodus was resurrected from synonym of A. aequidens.
FIGURE 2 in Two new species of the genus Atractoscion, and resurrection of the species Atractoscion atelodus (Günther 1867) (Perciformes: Sciaenidae)
FIGURE 2. Photographs of the type specimens. (A) Atractoscion atelodus, holotype, BMNH 1886.6.19.9, 263.0 mm SL, Australia (previously reported as Otolithus atelodus); (B) Atractoscion macrolepis sp. nov., holotype, SAIAB 187117–2, 284.0 mm SL, Tombua beach of Angola; (C) Atractoscion microlepis sp. nov., holotype, PKU 9315, 280.0 mm SL, Gulf of Oman, illustration of dorsal view of swimbladder (left below) and sagitta in otolith (right below).
FIGURE 4 in Two new species of the genus Atractoscion, and resurrection of the species Atractoscion atelodus (Günther 1867) (Perciformes: Sciaenidae)
FIGURE 4. Photographs of the comparative materials. (A) Syntype of Otolithus aequidens, MNHN A–5586, 835.0 mm SL from South Africa; (B) Holotype of Otolithus atelodus, BMNH 1886.6.19.9, 263.0 mm SL from Australia; (C) Holotype of Otolithus teraglin, AMS I.9773, 515.0 mm SL from Australia; (D) Syntype of Otolithus californiensis, NMW_31129, 273.3 mm SL from California; (E) Syntype of Otolithus californiensis, MCZ 10898, 309.0 mm SL from California.
FIGURE 1 in Two new species of the genus Atractoscion, and resurrection of the species Atractoscion atelodus (Günther 1867) (Perciformes: Sciaenidae)
FIGURE 1. Map showing the distribution area of Otolithus aequidens, MNHN A–5586 (*), Atractosion atelodus, BMNH 1886.6.19.9 (□), Otolithus californiensis, NMW_31129 and Otolithus californiensis, MCZ 10898 (Ǫ), Otolithus teraglin, AMS I.9773 (□), Atractoscion macrolepis sp. nov., SAIAB 187117–1, 2, 6 and 7 (Δ), Atractoscion microlepis sp. nov., PKU 9312– 9316, 10774–10783 (●).
FIGURE 4 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
FIGURE 4. Scatterplot of individuals of Atractoscion aequidens (red circles) and A. macrolepis (blue circles) along Principal Components 2 (explaining 12.6% of the observed variation) and 3 (9.8%) from the Principal Components Analysis of eight transformed otolith variables. 95% confidence ellipses are indicated for each species, overlayed in the respective colours.
FIGURE 5 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
FIGURE 5. Frequency histogram of observations of individuals of Atractoscion aequidens (grey) and A. macrolepis (black) according to their scores along the canonical root extracted in the Discriminant Functions Analysis using four (of eight) transformed otolith variables.
FIGURE 3 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
FIGURE 3. Scatterplots of (A) medial caudal fin length (MCL) against head length (HL), (B) anal fin length (AFL) against pelvic fin length (PLFL) and (C) pectoral fin length (PFL) against anal fin length (AFL), all expressed as proportions of standard length (SL), showing the distinction between individuals of Atractoscion aequidens (red circles) and A. macrolepis (blue circles).
FIGURE 2 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
FIGURE 2. Frequency histogram of observations of individuals of Atractoscion aequidens (light grey) and A. macrolepis (dark grey) according to their scores along the canonical root extracted in the Discriminant Functions Analysis using 23 transformed morphometric variables.
FIGURE 1 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
FIGURE 1. Scatterplot of individuals of Atractoscion aequidens (red circles) and A. macrolepis (blue circles) along Principal Components 1 (explaining 40.4% of the observed variation) and 2 (17.5%) from the Principal Components Analysis of 23 transformed morphometric variables. 95% confidence ellipses are indicated for each species, overlayed in the respective colours.
Data from: Population connectivity and phylogeography of a coastal fish, Atractoscion aequidens (Sciaenidae), across the Benguela Current region: evidence of an ancient vicariant event.
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
TABLE 5 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 5.</b> Frequency distribution of the number of second dorsal fin rays in <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Species</th><th></th><th></th><th>2nd Dorsal fin rays (2DR)</th><th></th><th></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td>24</td><td>25</td><td>26</td><td>27</td><td>28</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><th><i>Atractoscion aequidens</i></th><td></td><td></td><td>6</td><td>15</td><td>9</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><th><i>Atractoscion macrolepis</i></th><td>1</td><td>6</td><td>17</td><td>27</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 2 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 2.</b> Factor loadings, eigenvalues and the variation (individually and cumulatively) explained by the first five principal components in the Principal Components Analysis of 23 transformed morphometric variables examining morphological variation among <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>. Only Principal Components with eigenvalues> 1 are reported.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Variable</th><th></th><th></th><th>Principal Components</th><th></th><th></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td>PC1</td><td>PC2</td><td>PC3</td><td>PC4</td><td>PC5</td></tr><tr><th><i>TL’</i></th><td>0.667</td><td>-0.213</td><td>-0.057</td><td>0.184</td><td>0.186</td></tr><tr><th><i>FL’</i></th><td>0.510</td><td>-0.118</td><td>-0.098</td><td>-0.073</td><td>0.401</td></tr><tr><th><i>BD’</i></th><td>0.590</td><td>-0.046</td><td>0.420</td><td>0.198</td><td>0.008</td></tr><tr><th><i>1DFL’</i></th><td>0.554</td><td>-0.079</td><td>0.155</td><td>0.353</td><td>-0.190</td></tr><tr><th><i>2DFL’</i></th><td>-0.036</td><td>0.203</td><td>0.749</td><td>0.444</td><td>-0.031</td></tr><tr><th><i>CPL’</i></th><td>-0.504</td><td>0.217</td><td>-0.107</td><td>0.215</td><td>0.377</td></tr><tr><th><i>UCLL’</i></th><td>0.791</td><td>-0.055</td><td>-0.206</td><td>0.077</td><td>-0.042</td></tr><tr><th><i>MCL’</i></th><td>0.931</td><td>-0.194</td><td>-0.049</td><td>0.054</td><td>-0.043</td></tr><tr><th><i>LCLL’</i></th><td>0.475</td><td>-0.073</td><td>-0.287</td><td>0.331</td><td>0.518</td></tr><tr><th><i>AFB’</i></th><td>0.416</td><td>0.568</td><td>-0.193</td><td>-0.099</td><td>-0.380</td></tr><tr><th><i>AFL’</i></th><td>0.926</td><td>-0.036</td><td>-0.059</td><td>-0.056</td><td>-0.078</td></tr><tr><th><i>PFB’</i></th><td>0.444</td><td>0.722</td><td>-0.152</td><td>0.144</td><td>-0.179</td></tr><tr><th><i>PFL’</i></th><td>0.871</td><td>0.008</td><td>-0.003</td><td>0.055</td><td>0.092</td></tr><tr><th><i>PLFB’</i></th><td>0.047</td><td>0.820</td><td>-0.137</td><td>0.218</td><td>-0.214</td></tr><tr><th><i>PLFL’</i></th><td>0.877</td><td>-0.201</td><td>-0.027</td><td>-0.019</td><td>-0.125</td></tr><tr><th><i>PPL’</i></th><td>0.707</td><td>0.025</td><td>0.394</td><td>-0.169</td><td>0.182</td></tr><tr><th><i>HL’</i></th><td>0.934</td><td>-0.072</td><td>0.071</td><td>-0.216</td><td>0.012</td></tr><tr><th><i>LDL’</i></th><td>0.895</td><td>0.054</td><td>0.063</td><td>-0.290</td><td>0.026</td></tr><tr><th><i>IOW’</i></th><td>0.173</td><td>0.695</td><td>0.215</td><td>-0.483</td><td>0.146</td></tr><tr><th><i>OD’</i></th><td>0.854</td><td>0.175</td><td>-0.175</td><td>0.086</td><td>-0.030</td></tr><tr><th><i>SNL’</i></th><td>-0.033</td><td>0.792</td><td>0.177</td><td>-0.311</td><td>0.280</td></tr><tr><th><i>GFL’</i></th><td>0.392</td><td>0.715</td><td>-0.031</td><td>0.232</td><td>0.096</td></tr><tr><th><i>PSF’</i></th><td>-0.344</td><td>0.777</td><td>-0.107</td><td>0.184</td><td>0.159</td></tr><tr><th>Eigenvalue</th><td>9.296</td><td>4.024</td><td>1.283</td><td>1.232</td><td>1.068</td></tr><tr><th>% Total variation</th><td>40.42</td><td>17.50</td><td>5.58</td><td>5.36</td><td>4.64</td></tr><tr><th>Cumulative %</th><td>40.42</td><td>57.91</td><td>63.49</td><td>68.85</td><td>73.49</td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 1 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 1.</b> The morphometric, meristic and otolith variables considered in the comparison of <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i> in the current study. Means and ranges (in parenthesis) of both raw measurements and proportions (prop.), with body variables expressed as a proportion of standard length (SL), head variables (*) as a proportion of head length (HL) and otolith variables as a proportion of fork length (FL), are presented for the morphometric and otolith variables. Modes and ranges are presented for the meristic counts and counts of otolith processes. Samples sizes (<i>n</i>) are indicated for each variable.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Variable</th><th></th><th><i>Atractoscion aequidens</i></th><th></th><th><i>Atractoscion macrolepis</i></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td><i>n</i></td><td>Mean (min.–max.)</td><td>Mean prop. (min.–max.)</td><td><i>n</i></td><td>Mean (min.–max.)</td><td>Mean prop. (min.–max.)</td></tr><tr><th>Morphometrics</th></tr><tr><th>SL</th><td>33</td><td>522.2 (323.0–825.0)</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>334.0 (229.9–556.0)</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>TL</th><td>31</td><td>603.7 (381.0–958.0)</td><td>1.18 (1.16–1.30)</td><td>52</td><td>401.3 (279.6–663.0)</td><td>1.20 (1.16–1.24)</td></tr><tr><th>FL</th><td>33</td><td>580.8 (364.0–913.0)</td><td>1.11 (1.05–1.14)</td><td>52</td><td>381.5 (268.8–629.0)</td><td>1.14 (1.01–1.19)</td></tr><tr><th>BD</th><td>33</td><td>105.6 (68.4–165.7)</td><td>0.20 (0.17–0.23)</td><td>52</td><td>73.4 (48.7–123.6)</td><td>0.22 (0.17–0.24)</td></tr><tr><th>1DFL</th><td>33</td><td>73.4 (46.8–115.8)</td><td>0.14 (0.11–0.16)</td><td>52</td><td>52.6 (35.0–87.1)</td><td>0.16 (0.13–0.26)</td></tr><tr><th>2DFL</th><td>33</td><td>175.2 (75.4–298.6)</td><td>0.33 (0.14–0.38)</td><td>52</td><td>111.9 (68.8–205.1)</td><td>0.34 (0.19–0.37)</td></tr><tr><th>CPL</th><td>33</td><td>79.8 (50.3–125.7)</td><td>0.15 (0.13–0.17)</td><td>52</td><td>47.4 (29.6–77.8)</td><td>0.14 (0.12–0.19)</td></tr><tr><th>UCLL</th><td>32</td><td>100.0 (62.4–158.7)</td><td>0.19 (0.15–0.21)</td><td>52</td><td>72.9 (47.2–122.1)</td><td>0.22 (0.19–0.25)</td></tr><tr><th>MCL</th><td>32</td><td>60.8 (41.5–87.7)</td><td>0.12 (0.10–0.13)</td><td>52</td><td>48.5 (33.2–75.8)</td><td>0.15 (0.13–0.17)</td></tr><tr><th>LCLL</th><td>32</td><td>94.8 (63.4–145.9)</td><td>0.19 (0.11–0.21)</td><td>51</td><td>66.2 (42.7–111.0)</td><td>0.20 (0.13–0.22)</td></tr><tr><th>AFB</th><td>33</td><td>43.9 (29.3–71.7)</td><td>0.08 (0.08–0.09)</td><td>52</td><td>29.3 (14.6–47.6)</td><td>0.09 (0.06–0.10)</td></tr><tr><th>AFL</th><td>33</td><td>59.9 (38.6–90.1)</td><td>0.12 (0.10–0.13)</td><td>52</td><td>44.2 (28.7–71.0)</td><td>0.13 (0.12–0.15)</td></tr><tr><th>PFB</th><td>33</td><td>17.8 (12.6–27.7)</td><td>0.03 (0.03–0.04)</td><td>52</td><td>12.7 (4.2–21.2)</td><td>0.04 (0.02–0.05)</td></tr><tr><th>PFL</th><td>33</td><td>82.7 (52.3–125.2)</td><td>0.16 (0.15–0.17)</td><td>52</td><td>61.7 (37.6–103.9)</td><td>0.19 (0.14–0.20)</td></tr><tr><th>PLFB</th><td>33</td><td>18.4 (12.5–30.0)</td><td>0.04 (0.03–0.04)</td><td>52</td><td>12.1 (3.1–22.9)</td><td>0.04 (0.01–0.04)</td></tr><tr><th>PLFL</th><td>33</td><td>73.1 (47.8–111.8)</td><td>0.14 (0.12–0.16)</td><td>52</td><td>53.0 (37.5–82.1)</td><td>0.16 (0.14–0.18)</td></tr><tr><th>PPL</th><td>33</td><td>168.7 (104.9–271.4)</td><td>0.32 (0.29–0.34)</td><td>52</td><td>113.3 (76.8–186.5)</td><td>0.34 (0.32–0.36)</td></tr><tr><th>HL</th><td>33</td><td>146.4 (94.5–229.0)</td><td>0.28 (0.26–0.30)</td><td>52</td><td>103.4 (70.5–166.9)</td><td>0.31 (0.29–0.33)</td></tr><tr><th>LDL*</th><td>33</td><td>81.7 (52.3–128.0)</td><td>0.56 (0.53–0.59)</td><td>52</td><td>56.9 (37.3–91.8)</td><td>0.55 (0.53–0.58)</td></tr><tr><th>IOW*</th><td>33</td><td>32.1 (17.9–52.2)</td><td>0.22 (0.16–0.24)</td><td>52</td><td>20.8 (11.3–34.0)</td><td>0.20 (0.16–0.23)</td></tr><tr><th>OD*</th><td>33</td><td>20.0 (14.9–28.3)</td><td>0.14 (0.09–0.17)</td><td>52</td><td>15.9 (7.5–23.0)</td><td>0.16 (0.11–0.18)</td></tr><tr><th>SNL*</th><td>33</td><td>43.2 (26.2–69.5)</td><td>0.29 (0.23–0.31)</td><td>52</td><td>27.0 (13.9–46.2)</td><td>0.26 (0.20–0.28)</td></tr><tr><th>GFL*</th><td>32</td><td>15.9 (10.0–23.8)</td><td>0.11 (0.08–0.13)</td><td>52</td><td>11.8 (3.2–18.8)</td><td>0.11 (0.04–0.14)</td></tr><tr><th>PSF*</th><td>32</td><td>23.9 (12.4–38.4)</td><td>0.16 (0.13–0.20)</td><td>52</td><td>13.7 (3.6–28.2)</td><td>0.13 (0.05–0.17)</td></tr><tr><th>Meristics</th></tr><tr><th>1DS</th><td>33</td><td>10</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>10</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>2DS</th><td>33</td><td>1</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>1</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>2DR</th><td>33</td><td>27 (26–29)</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>27 (24–28)</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>AFS</th><td>33</td><td>2</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>2</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>AFR</th><td>33</td><td>9</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>9 (9–10)</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>P</th><td>33</td><td>17 (16–18)</td><td>–</td><td>52</td><td>18 (16–19)</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>LL</th><td>15</td><td>72, 73, 74 (71–75)</td><td>–</td><td>31</td><td>70 (68–74)</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><th>Otoliths</th></tr><tr><th>OH</th><td>16</td><td>6.8 (5.1–8.7)</td><td>0.014 (0.011–0.016)</td><td>27</td><td>7.5 (5.6–9.7)</td><td>0.015 (0.013–0.036)</td></tr><tr><th>OL</th><td>17</td><td>14.3 (10.9–7.7)</td><td>0.030 (0.024–0.041)</td><td>27</td><td>14.7 (11.0–18.1)</td><td>0.030 (0.025–0.071)</td></tr><tr><th>OCD</th><td>17</td><td>3.9 (2.6–6.3)</td><td>0.008 (0.006–0.013)</td><td>27</td><td>3.5 (2.3–4.8)</td><td>0.007 (0.005–0.016)</td></tr><tr><th>OrCD</th><td>17</td><td>6.3 (4.9–7.7)</td><td>0.013 (0.010–0.018)</td><td>27</td><td>6.4 (4.3–8.3)</td><td>0.013 (0.010–0.028)</td></tr><tr><th>TOTC</th><td>17</td><td>6.3 (4.5–8.0)</td><td>0.013 (0.011–0.018)</td><td>27</td><td>6.8 (4.8–8.2)</td><td>0.014 (0.011–0.035)</td></tr><tr><th>TOBC</th><td>17</td><td>13.2 (9.7–16.8)</td><td>0.028 (0.023–0.039)</td><td>27</td><td>13.5 (9.8–16.9)</td><td>0.028 (0.023–0.062)</td></tr><tr><th>WC</th><td>17</td><td>1.9 (1.1–2.6)</td><td>0.004 (0.003–0.006)</td><td>27</td><td>2.0 (1.3–2.7)</td><td>0.004 (0.003–0.008)</td></tr><tr><th>OW</th><td>17</td><td>6.1 (4.3–7.4)</td><td>0.013 (0.010–0.022)</td><td>27</td><td>6.1 (1.1–8.6)</td><td>0.013 (0.002–0.028)</td></tr><tr><th>Processes</th><td>17</td><td>5 (3–10)</td><td></td><td>27</td><td>2, 3, 4 (0–8)</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 4 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 4.</b> Standardised coefficients of the 16 transformed morphometric variables for the canonical root, and the eigenvalues and cumulative variance explained by this root, extracted from the Discriminant Functions Analysis separating <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Standardised coefficient</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th><i>TL’ BD’ 2DFL’ CPL’ MCL’ LCLL’ AFBL’ AFL’ PFB’ PFL’ PLFL’ HL’ OD’ SNL’ PSF’ GFL’</i></th><td>-0.287 0.177 -0.239 -0.252 0.612 -0.685 -0.353 0.302 0.470 0.603 -0.455 0.644 -0.367 -0.593 -0.361 0.495</td></tr><tr><th>Eigenvalue Cumulative proportion</th><td>7.337 100%</td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 6 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 6.</b> Frequency distribution of the number of pectoral fins rays in <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Species</th><th></th><th>Pectoral fin rays (P)</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th>Lateral line scales (LL)</th><th></th><th></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td>16</td><td>17</td><td>18</td><td>19</td><td>68</td><td>69</td><td>70</td><td>71</td><td>72</td><td>73</td><td>74</td><td>75</td></tr><tr><th><i>Atractoscion aequidens</i></th><td>2</td><td>18</td><td>13</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><th><i>Atractoscion macrolepis</i></th><td>1</td><td>21</td><td>27</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>8</td><td>5</td><td>7</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 9 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 9.</b> Standardised coefficients of the four (of eight) transformed otolith variables for the canonical root extracted from the Discriminant Functions Analysis separating <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>. and the eigenvalue of this root and cumulative percentage of the variance explained.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Canonical root</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th><i>OH’ OCD’ TOBC’ TOTC’</i></th><td>-2.026 0.498 -1.407 2.843</td></tr><tr><th>Eigenvalue Cumulative proportion</th><td>1.457 100%</td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 3. A in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 3.</b> <i>A posteriori</i> reclassification and percentage classification success of individuals to the two respective species, <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>, based on classification functions derived in the Discriminant Functions Analyses of 16 transformed morphometric variables, two meristic counts and four otolith variables, respectively.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Data set</th><th>Species</th><th>Percent correct</th><th><i>A posteriori</i> classification</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td></td><td></td><td><i>A. aequidens</i></td><td><i>A. macrolepis</i></td></tr><tr><th>Morphometric</th><td><i>A. aequidens</i> <i>A. macrolepis</i> Total</td><td>100.00 98.03 98.73</td><td>28 1</td><td>0 50</td></tr><tr><th>Meristic</th><td><i>A. aequidens</i> <i>A. macrolepis</i> Total</td><td>80.00 74.19 76.09</td><td>12 8</td><td>3 23</td></tr><tr><th>Otoliths</th><td><i>A. aequidens</i> <i>A. macrolepis</i> Total</td><td>87.50 81.48 83.72</td><td>14 5</td><td>2 22</td></tr></tbody></table>
TABLE 8 in Revisiting the description of Atractoscion macrolepis (Perciformes: Sciaenidae): Another argument for comprehensive taxonomy
<p><b>TABLE 8.</b> Factor loadings, eigenvalues and the variation explained by the first three (of eight) principal components extracted in the Principal Components Analysis of eight transformed otolith variables examining variation among <i>Atractoscion aequidens</i> and <i>A. macrolepis</i>.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Principal Components</th><th></th><th></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th><i>OH’ OL’ OCD’ OrCD’ TOTC’ TOBC’ WC’ OW’</i></th><td>PC1 0.929 0.966 0.573 0.893 0.902 0.976 0.648 0.084</td><td>PC2 -0.068 -0.050 0.136 0.072 -0.071 -0.042 -0.015 0.985</td><td>PC3 -0.235 0.053 0.743 0.071 -0.117 0.036 -0.372 -0.134</td></tr><tr><th>Eigenvalue % Variation Cumulative variation</th><td>5.116 63.95 63.95</td><td>1.007 12.59 76.54</td><td>0.787 9.83 86.37</td></tr></tbody></table>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.