Find research datasets worth reusing

FIGURE 3 in A new species of sun-spider from sand dunes in Coahuila, Mexico, (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

FIGURE 3. Eremocosta arenarum sp. nov. Detail of male cheliceral fixed finger, showing the mesoventral groove.

FIGURES 1–2 in A new species of sun-spider from sand dunes in Coahuila, Mexico, (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

FIGURES 1–2. Eremocosta arenarum sp. nov. 1 Ectal view of right male chelicera lateral view, 2 Mesal view of right male chelicera. Scale 1mm.

FIGURES 5–6 in A new species of sun-spider from sand dunes in Coahuila, Mexico, (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

FIGURES 5–6.Eremocosta arenarum sp. nov. 5 Ectal view of right chelicerae of the putative female, 6 Mesal view of right putative female chelicera. Scale 1mm.

Fig. 7 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 7. Ancestral state estimation and mapping of binary states of male A) male flagellar groove and B) fondal notch. Absent = no flagellar groove/no fondal notch, present = flagellar groove/fondal notch.

Fig. 4 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 4. Maximum likelihood topology of Eremobatidae inferred using IQ-TREE 2 and the 75% occupancy concatenated UCE matrix with taxa that rendered>10 UCE loci with outgroups removed. Nodal support for major clades refer to maximum likelihood bootstrap values (ML) on the left and local posterior probabilities estimated based on gene tree quartet frequencies in ASTRAL (MSC) on the right.Tip colors illustrate generic designations as per current eremobatid taxonomy. Male (left column) and female (right column) structures of eremobatid species are shown on the right of the topology. Images are ordered phylogenetically. A) Eremochelis andreasana (♂, DMNS ZA.41919; ♀, DMNS ZA.40822). B) Hemerotrecha marathoni (♂, CNAN loan; ♀, CNAN loan). C) Hemerotrecha xena (♂, DMNS ZA.16469; ♀, DMNS ZA.42101). D) Eremochelis bilobatus (♂, DMNS ZA.17629; ♀, DMNS ZA.17359). E) Horribates spinigerus (♂, DMNS ZA.40086; ♀, AMNH_ Holotype). F) Chanbria regalis (♂, DMNS ZA.25443; ♀, DMNS ZA.25442). G) Hemerotrecha serrata (♂, DMNS ZA.16059; ♀, DMNS ZA.22169). H) Eremochelis flexacus (♂, DMNS ZA.16134; ♀, DMNS ZA.23593). I) Hemerotrecha parva (♂, DMNS ZA.42131; ♀, DMNS ZA.42131). J) Eremochelis larreae (♂, CASENT9033550; ♀, DMNS ZA.33721). K) Eremochelis insignatus (♂, DMNS ZA.28260; ♀, DMNS ZA.26390). L) Eremochelis striodorsalis (♂, DMNS ZA.31773; ♀, DMNS ZA.23593). M) Hemerotrecha californica (♂, DMNS ZA.18288; ♀, DMNS ZA.32217). All scale bars represent 1 mm.

Fig. 8 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 8. Ancestral state estimation and mapping of Gaussian mixture modeling (GMM) cluster membership onto our phylogram for ingroup male eremobatid species inferred from Elliptical Fourier coefficients for chelicerae. Character states 1−4 refer to the 4 distinct clusters in morphospace (Fig. 5B).

Fig. 1. Male chelicera variation from the family Eremobatidae. A in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 1. Male chelicera variation from the family Eremobatidae. A) Hemerotrecha parva (DMNS ZA.42131), B) Hemerotrecha macra (DMNS ZA.35652), C) Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.38315), D) Eremochelis flexacus (DMNS ZA.16134), E) Chanbria regalis (DMNS ZA.25444), F) Eremorhax magnus (DMNS ZA.42055. Photograph credit: Cole Logan), G) Hemerotrecha hanfordana (DMNS ZA.37358), H) Horribates spinigerus (DMNS ZA.40086), I) Eremobates leechi (DMNS ZA.37070. Photograph credit: Quincy Hansen). All scale bars refer to 1 mm, except F, which refers to 2.5 mm.

Fig. 3 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 3. Summary of the quantitative and qualitative traits considered in this study for eremobatid males and females. A) Right, retrolateral view of male Eremochelis insignatus (DMNS ZA.33749) chelicera. Measurements considered in this study are illustrated. B) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of papillated texturing inside flagellar groove of Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.37135). C) SEM image of prolateral view of male fixed finger and associated flagellar groove belonging to Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.37135). D) Right, retrolateral view of female chelicera of Hemerotrecha delicatula (DMNS ZA.41812) depicting the fixed finger tooth pattern and tip (apex) of fixed finger to fixed finger distal tooth (FF-to-FD) measure. Coloration and abbreviations follow Bird et al. (2015).Terminology abbreviations are FD = fixed finger, distal teeth, FSD = fixed finger, subdistal teeth, FM = fixed finger, medial teeth, FSM = fixed finger, submedial teeth, FP = fixed finger, proximal teeth. E) Operculum length, width, and diagonal measures on female Eremochelis plicatus (DMNS ZA.41887).

Fig. 2 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 2. Female cheliceral morphology from representatives of the family Eremobatidae. A) Hemerotrecha delicatula (DMNS ZA.41812), B) Eremochelis striodorsalis (DMNS ZA.18968), C) Horribates spinigerus (AMNH Holotype), D) Chanbria rectus (DMNS ZA.25456), E) Eremochelis andreasana (DMNS ZA.40822), F) Hemerotrecha serrata (DMNS ZA.25449), G) Hemerotrecha sp. (CIDA107821), H) Hemerotrecha prenticei (DMNS ZA.18169), I) Eremochelis bilobatus (DMNS ZA.17685). All scale bars refer to 1 mm.

Fig. 6 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 6. Ancestral state reconstruction of EFA coefficients. A) PC1 from the PCA of male chelicera EF coefficients and B) PC1 from the PCA of female opercula EF coefficients.

Fig. 5 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 5. Morphospace plots based on PCA analysis of EF coefficients and GMM cluster assignments recovered from the first 3 PCs as input. Individuals with uncertain cluster membership are displayed in gray.Top row pertains to male chelicera, central row depicts female chelicera, and bottom row refers to female opercula. All PCA plots summarize PC1 and PC2 and illustrate: A) male cheliceral shape by genus, B) male cheliceral shape by cluster membership with mean shapes of each cluster to the right (cluster 1 was not supported after implementing the 0.95 uncertainty threshold), C) female cheliceral shape by genus, D) female cheliceral shape by cluster membership with mean shapes of each cluster to the right, E) female opercula shape by genus, F) female opercula shape by cluster membership with reconstructed operculum from the single opercula median shape. All shapes are not to scale.

zenodo28/100

FIGURE 4 in A new species of sun-spider from sand dunes in Coahuila, Mexico, (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

FIGURE 4. Eremocosta arenarum sp. nov. Sternites X–XII of males showing ctenidia

zenodo28/100

FIGURE 7 in A new species of sun-spider from sand dunes in Coahuila, Mexico, (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

FIGURE 7. Landscape in the type locality (Photograph by Kari J. McWest).