Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 5 in How not to describe a species: lessons from a tangle of anacondas (Boidae: Eunectes Wagler, 1830)

Figure 5. Ordination of green anaconda (Eunectes murinus) specimens along the first two discriminant axes of a Discriminant Function Analysis. Enlarged symbols indicate group centroids. The first and second discriminant function account for 70.2% and 25.2% of total variance, respectively. See Supporting information, Table S7, for the pooled discriminant scores table of this analysis.

Figure 4 in How not to describe a species: lessons from a tangle of anacondas (Boidae: Eunectes Wagler, 1830)

Figure 4. Comparison of ZISP 1441, the lectotype of Boa murina Linnaeus, 1758, with plate 29, fig. 1 in Seba (1735). A, photograph of ZISP 1441. Numbering, lettering and coloured ovals refers to equivalent blotches and pattern features for comparison with Seba's figure. B, plate 29, fig. 1 from Seba (1735) with pattern features equivalent to those in (A) highlighted. C, D, detail of head in Seba's plate 29, fig. 1 and of ZISP 1441. Note the posterior extension of the lower postocular stripe and the arrow-shape of the dark mark on top of the head. Photos of ZISP 1441 by Konstantin Milto. The high-resolution illustration of Seba's anaconda were downloaded from the Biodiversity Heritage Library, contributed by Smithsonian Libraries and Archives.

Figure 3 in How not to describe a species: lessons from a tangle of anacondas (Boidae: Eunectes Wagler, 1830)

Figure 3. Ordination of specimens of yellow anacondas (E. beniensis, E. deschauenseei, E. notaeus) along axes displaying the first two principal components (PC) of a principal component analysis. PC-1 and PC-2 explain 29.0% and 19.5% of the total variance in the data, respectively. See Supporting information, Table S6 for the principal components table.

Figure 1 in How not to describe a species: lessons from a tangle of anacondas (Boidae: Eunectes Wagler, 1830)

Figure 1. Timetrees inferred with MCMCtree, estimating the split between yellow and green anaconda lineages (genus Eunectes). We show these to illustrate the considerable uncertainties surrounding the evolutionary age of anacondas with the limited data available and the large differences between inferences from nuclear-encoded vs. mitochondrial DNA sequences. Analyses are based on 2150 bp of four fragments of nuclear-encoded protein-coding genes (A) and 1098 bp of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene (B), constraining the Epicrates-Eunectes split to 15.8–37.3 Mya (secondary calibration obtained from www.timetree.org). Constraints are shown in purple, credibility intervals in light blue. Preferred age estimates of the split between yellow and green anacondas are shown in green. See Supporting information for additional analyses and detailed methods. Photo of Eunectes murinus by Frank Glaw.

Figure 2 in How not to describe a species: lessons from a tangle of anacondas (Boidae: Eunectes Wagler, 1830)

Figure 2. Ordination of green anaconda (Eunectes murinus) specimens along axes displaying the first two principal components (PC) of a principal component analysis. PC-1 and PC-2 explain 28.8% and 19.2% of the total variance in the data, respectively. See Supporting information, Table S2 for the principal components table.

Figure 5 in Morphological trends and genetic divergence in anacondas, genus Eunectes Wagler, 1830 (Serpentes: Boidae)

Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree (left) and haplotype network (right) based on the analysis of mitochondrial Cytochrome b sequences. Bayesian inference tree is shown; the nodes with the posterior probability support below 0.5 are shown as unresolved. Above the nodes, posterior probabilities are shown, and bootstrap values inferred from ML analysis with RaxML if exceeding 50. The boxes indicate 95% HPD intervals for the estimated split times. Haplotype/ allele networks: size of the pies are proportional to the number of individuals/ alleles.

Figure 1 in Morphological trends and genetic divergence in anacondas, genus Eunectes Wagler, 1830 (Serpentes: Boidae)

Figure 1. Sampling locations of Eunectes spp. Sampling locations of specimens used for genetic analysis pointed, and the individual sample numbers, indicated in supplementary table S1 and figs 4 and 5 shown in frames. Outlines depict ranges of the Eunectes species, after the IUCN Red List website: green – E. murinus, orange – E. deschauenseei, yellow – E. notaeus, red – E. beniensis.

Figure 4 in Morphological trends and genetic divergence in anacondas, genus Eunectes Wagler, 1830 (Serpentes: Boidae)

Figure 4. Assignment of the 20 individuals in the RAPD dataset to genetic groups using STRUCTURE analyses for K = 3 optimal number of clusters (L(K) = -914.64). Each individual is represented by a column, which is partitioned in K coloured segments that represent the genetically based membership to each species cluster. The labels below indicate the species and specimens labels used in the RAPD (and partly sequencing) analysis.

Figure 3 in Morphological trends and genetic divergence in anacondas, genus Eunectes Wagler, 1830 (Serpentes: Boidae)

Figure 3. Dendrogram (between-group average linkage) based on the squared Euclidean distance between population centroids based on the first two discriminant scores.

Figure 2 in Morphological trends and genetic divergence in anacondas, genus Eunectes Wagler, 1830 (Serpentes: Boidae)

Figure 2. Principal Component analyses based on 23 morphological traits, depicting the separation of E. murinus from the other three species of Eunectes along the first two PCA axes.