Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 5 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 5. Principal components analysis of the relative abundance (mol %, logit- transformed) of individual NLFAs of Trochosa ruricola using body size (small, large), flooding index (FI), plant species richness (SR), plant functional group richness (FG), presence of grasses (Gr), legumes (Leg), small herbs (SH) and tall herbs (TH) as supplementary variables.

Figure 4 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 4. Variations in δ15N signatures of Trochosa ruricola as affected by flooding index (P = 0.04, R2 = 0.12) and body size (small, large; P <0.01).

Figure 1 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 1. Variations in δ15N and δ13C signatures of Harpalus rufipes (black) and Trochosa ruricola (pink) across the study site of the Jena Experiment.

Figure 3 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 3. Principal components analysis of the relative abundance (mol %, logit-transformed) of individual NLFAs of Harpalus rufipes using flooding index (FI), plant species richness (SR), plant functional group richness (FG), presence of grasses (Gr), legumes (Leg), small herbs (SH) and tall herbs (TH) as supplementary variables.

Figure 6 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 6. Principal components analysis of the relative abundance (mol%, logit- transformed) of individual PLFAs of soil microorganisms using flooding index (FI), plant species richness (SR), plant functional group richness (FG), presence of grasses (Gr), legumes (Leg), small herbs (SH) and tall herbs (TH) as supplementary variables.

Figure 2 in Variations in trophic niches of generalist predators with plant community composition as indicated by stable isotopes and fatty acids

Figure 2. Variations in δ15N signatures of Harpalus rufipes (P <0.01, R2 = 0.11) as affected by plant species richness (log-transformed).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2014View details →

Fig. 3 in Impact Of Coastal Wetland Restoration Strategies In The Chongming Dongtan Wetlands, China: Waterbird Community Composition As An Indicator

Fig. 3. Densities of Charadriidae (a), Anatidae (b), Ardeidae (c), and Laridae (d) among autumn, winter and spring in four sites. Error bars represent ±1 SE.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2020View details →

Рис. 2. Река БоΛьшая Пёра, ниже устья реки Юхта Fig. 2. The Bolshaya Pyora River, below the mouth of the Yukhta River in The Taxonomic Composition And Quantitative Indicators Of Zoobenthos In The Downstream Of The Bolshaya Pyora River (Zeya River Basin, Amur Region)

Рис. 2. Река БоΛьшая Пёра, ниже устья реки Юхта Fig. 2. The Bolshaya Pyora River, below the mouth of the Yukhta River

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2020View details →

Рис. 1. Карто-схема реки БоΛьшая Пёра с указанием мест отбора проб (обозначены кружками) Fig. 1. Maps of the Bolshaya Pyora River with sampling locations (marked by circles) in The Taxonomic Composition And Quantitative Indicators Of Zoobenthos In The Downstream Of The Bolshaya Pyora River (Zeya River Basin, Amur Region)

Рис. 1. Карто-схема реки БоΛьшая Пёра с указанием мест отбора проб (обозначены кружками) Fig. 1. Maps of the Bolshaya Pyora River with sampling locations (marked by circles)

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2023View details →

SI Figure 3: Compositional difference among eukaryotic microinvertebrate external and internal microbiomes, using Bray Curtis distance matrix visualized with a NMDS ordination. Circles indicate each community and stars centroid location of each microbiome type. Communities do not cluster by animal, microbiome type, mat type, or stream. in External and internal microbiomes of Antarctic nematodes are distinct, but more similar to each other than the surrounding environment

SI Figure 3: Compositional difference among eukaryotic microinvertebrate external and internal microbiomes, using Bray Curtis distance matrix visualized with a NMDS ordination. Circles indicate each community and stars centroid location of each microbiome type. Communities do not cluster by animal, microbiome type, mat type, or stream.

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2023View details →

SI Figure 2: Compositional differences among bacterial microinvertebrate external and internal microbiomes as well as mats they were isolated from using Bray Curtis distance matrix visualized with a NMDS ordination. Circles indicate each community and stars show centroids of microbiome types for each animal host. All host microbiomes (internal and external) are distinct from mat communities (P<0.05), but external microbiomes are more similar to mats than internal microbiomes are to mats. in External and internal microbiomes of Antarctic nematodes are distinct, but more similar to each other than the surrounding environment

SI Figure 2: Compositional differences among bacterial microinvertebrate external and internal microbiomes as well as mats they were isolated from using Bray Curtis distance matrix visualized with a NMDS ordination. Circles indicate each community and stars show centroids of microbiome types for each animal host. All host microbiomes (internal and external) are distinct from mat communities (P<0.05), but external microbiomes are more similar to mats than internal microbiomes are to mats.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2019View details →

Рис. 1. Карта-схема распоΛожения станций отбора проб на р. Амазар Fig.1. Location of sampling stations on the Amazar River in Species Composition And Quantitative Indicators Of Rotifers And Crustaceans In The Middle And Lower Streams Of The Amazar River (Zabaikalskiy Kray)

Рис. 1. Карта-схема распоΛожения станций отбора проб на р. Амазар Fig.1. Location of sampling stations on the Amazar River

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2023View details →

Рис. 1. Карта-схема заповеΑника «КомсомоΛьский» с указанием станций отбора проб зообентоса (по: http://www.zapovedamur.ru) Fig. 1. Map of the Komsomolsky Reserve with indication of zoobenthos sampling stations (after: http://www.zapovedamur.ru) in Taxonomic composition of benthic invertebrates of the Komsomolsky Nature Reserve watercourses (Khabarovsky Region)

Рис. 1. Карта-схема заповеΑника «КомсомоΛьский» с указанием станций отбора проб зообентоса (по: http://www.zapovedamur.ru) Fig. 1. Map of the Komsomolsky Reserve with indication of zoobenthos sampling stations (after: http://www.zapovedamur.ru)

Fig. 3 in Call survey indicates rainbow trout farming alters glassfrog community composition in the Andes of Ecuador

Fig. 3. Map of the study area. Inset: Pichincha Province, Ecuador. Main: Blue points indicate non-trout farm sites whereas red points indicate trout farm sites. Yellow line represents the equator (latitude 0).

Fig. 2 in Call survey indicates rainbow trout farming alters glassfrog community composition in the Andes of Ecuador

Fig. 2. Glassfrog species found during surveys. (A) Centrolene heloderma, (B) Centrolene ballux, (C) Esparana prosoblepon, (D) Nymphargus lasgralarias, (E) Centrolene peristictum, (F) Nymphargus grandisonae, (G) Centrolene lynchi, (H) Egg mass from C. ballux. Nymphargus griffithsi was not encountered during the 2017 survey but has been documented at Kathy's creek in 2012 and 2013 (by Jane A. Lyons). Photographs by Dana G. Wessels (A–F) and Timothy J. Krynak (G–H).

Fig. 1 in Call survey indicates rainbow trout farming alters glassfrog community composition in the Andes of Ecuador

Fig. 1. Trout farming in the Mindo region of Ecuador utilizes a flow-through aquaculture technique. Stream water is diverted into tandem raceways/holding reservoirs and then flows through these reservoirs back into the natural stream system. This figure displays a panoramic view of Finca de Jaime's (FJ) set-up. Photograph by Katherine L. Krynak.

Fig. 4 in Call survey indicates rainbow trout farming alters glassfrog community composition in the Andes of Ecuador

Fig. 4. Two-dimensional NMDS ordination of survey sites and glassfrog species based upon presence of frogs audibly documented in 2017 survey conducted in the Mindo region of Ecuador (Stress = 3%). Red points and labels represent glassfrog species; grey points represent trout farms; and black points represent non-trout farms. RSR = Río Santa Rosa, LC = Lucy's Creek, Bcrk = Ballux Creek, KC = Kathy's Creek, M = Michelle's, C = tributary of the Chalguayacu Grande River, 5F = Five Frog Creek, LRSR = Lower Río Santa Rosa, ST = Santa Teresita, FJ = Finca de Jaime, LS = La Sierra, VC = Verdecocha, EP = El Paraíso del Pescador. Trout farms EP, LS, and VC are not included in the analysis because glassfrogs were not observed at these sites. A significant difference in glassfrog community composition between trout farm and non-trout farm sites was indicated by MRPP (delta = 0.59, A = 0.11, P = 0.03). NMDS1 correlated with elevation; NMDS2 correlated with: percent canopy openness, dissolved oxygen (mg/L), total dissolved solids (mg/L), and conductivity (µS).