Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 5 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 5. Global phylogenetic trees of killer whales based on (a) haplotypes from 452 mitogenomes and (b) 49 nuclear genome sequences. Reprinted with permission from Morin et al. [15] (figure 2; by permission from John Wiley & Sons, licence 5458310335802) and [9] (electronic supplementary material, figure S3b, by permission from Andrew D. Foote). Black branches in (a) lead to haplotypes that are from animals that have not been identified to ecotype (see electronic supplementary material, table S1 from [15]).

Figure 3 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 3. PCA plot of first two principal components based on (a) 88 SNPs: offshore (n = 3), resident (n = 11), Bigg's (n = 30) from data in Morin et al. [15]; (b) 26 microsatellites: offshore (n = 5), resident (n = 250), Bigg's (n = 116) (samples genotyped at ≥20 loci) [56]; unpublished); (c) 3678 RADseq SNPs: offshore (n = 7), resident (n = 52) and Bigg's (n = 37) populations [57,62]; (d) 1 00 000 (subset from 6 371 282) SNPs from 147 high-coverage genomes of offshore (n = 7), Bigg's (n = 14) and resident (n = 126) samples from multiple geographically and behaviourally defined subpopulations (Alaska, northern and southern resident populations) (based on subset of SNP genotype data from [113]. See Supplementary Materials for methods and data set information.

Figure 7 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 7. Photographs of neotype skulls for (a) Orcinus rectipinnus (USNM 594671) and (b) Orcinus ater (USNM 594672).

Figure 1 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 1. Expected range maps for (a) resident and (b) Bigg's killer whales, including locations of samples used for mitogenome analysis (figure 5a, resident n = 106, Bigg's n = 93) [15]. Distribution ranges have been inferred based on published identifications of individuals that are identified by ecotype [48–53]. Sample distributions cover the known ranges of both ecotypes, with the exception of residents of Oregon and northern California, and both ecotypes off northern Japan (Hokkaido) in the western Pacific [48,54]. Sample maps for microsatellite data are in electronic supplementary material, figure S2.

Figure 8 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 8. Vertical images of (a) an adult male Bigg's killer whale (BKW) from the West Coast Transient population of Bigg's killer whales and (b) an adult male resident killer whale (RKW) from the sympatric Southern Resident population of resident killer whales. Images are scaled to the estimated asymptotic lengths of 7.3 m [20] and 6.9 m [145], respectively. Vertical images were collected using an octocopter drone using methods described by Durban et al. [146], provided by John Durban and Holly Fearnbach.

Figure 6 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 6. Illustrations of (a) O. ater and (b) O. rectipinnus from Scammon [138,140]. These illustrations were likely made by Scammon, or made under his guidance from his field notes and sketches. Whether they represent renderings of specific specimens, or composite sketches, is unknown.

Figure 2. Canonical variate 1 and 2 in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 2. Canonical variate 1 and 2 plots for cranial shape features that distinguish among ecotypes for (a) skull morphology (resident (n = 17), Bigg's (n = 13) and offshore (n = 6)) and (b) dentary bone morphology (resident (n = 21), Bigg's (n = 12) and offshore (n = 8) specimens) (reprinted from [103]).

Figure 4. Structure assignment probability plots for K in Revised taxonomy of eastern North Pacific killer whales ( Orcinus orca ): Bigg's and resident ecotypes deserve species status

Figure 4. Structure assignment probability plots for K = 3 groups from (a) 26 microsatellites: offshore (n = 5), resident (n = 250), Bigg's (n = 116) samples genotyped at ≥ 20 loci) (56; unpublished); (b) 3340 RADseq SNPs (polymorphic in sample set): offshore (n = 7), resident (n = 52) and Bigg's (n = 37) populations [57,62]. Vertical bars represent the individual assignment probability for each group inferred by Structure (groups identified by shading), with samples sorted by a priori ecotype assignment. See electronic supplementary material for methods and data set information.

Figure 22 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 22. Niphargus polymorphus sp. n., holotype. Pereopods III–IV, detail of pereopod IV dactylus. Retinacle of pleopod II. Uropods I–III. Telson.

Figure 18 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 18. Niphargus lourensis sp. n., holotype. Pereopods III–IV, detail of pereopod IV dactylus. Uropods I–III. Telson.

Figure 14 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 14. Niphargus dabarensis sp. n., holotype. Pereopods III–IV, detail of pereopod IV dactylus. Uropods I–III. Telson.

Figure 3 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 3. Distribution of characters ''antenna I-length'' (character 19, CI50.18, RI50.53; left) and ''gnathopod II article 6 size'' (character 39, CI50.33, RI50.7; right). Long antennae are considered as troglomorphic, whereas a large-sized gnathopod II is supposed to be a synapomorphy of ''Orniphargus'' (S. Karaman (1950c)).

Figure 10. N in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 10. N. dolichopus sp. n., holotype. Pereopods III–IV, detail of pereopod IV dactylus. Retinacle of pleopod II. Uropods I–III. Telson.

Figure 2 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 2. Distribution of characters ''body shape'' (character 2, CI51, RI51; left) and ''body size'' (character 1, CI50.28, RI50.37; right). Note that the body shape is plesiomorphic in most of the ''Orniphargus'' taxa, and large body size is a highly convergent (possibly troglomorphic) character.

Figure 1. A in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 1. A strict consensus tree of 34 most parsimonious trees (length5472; CI50.26, RI50.60). Values of Bremer support index (decay index) are indicated below branches. Taxa traditionally assigned to the ''Orniphargus'' species aggregate, as well as clades for which character analysis was performed, are encircled in boxes. Note 1: Despite of its position on the cladogram N. pectinicauda has never been considered as an ''Orniphargus'' taxon. Note 2: Taxa are named according to their lowest rank. For full names, see Tables I and II.

Figure 5 in Phylogenetic analysis of the Niphargus orcinus species- aggregate (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Niphargidae) with description of new taxa

Figure 5. Distribution of characters ''type of setae/spines along postero-dorsal margin of pleonites'' (character 14, CI50.2, RI50.5; left) and ''uropod I rami-spines'' (character 58, CI50.37, RI50.73; right). Both characters are supposed to be characteristics of ''Orniphargus'' (S. Karaman (1950c)).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2011View details →

Fig. 30 in On the identity of Chalcionellus orcinus and Chalcionellus libanicola (Coleoptera: Histeridae)

Fig. 30: Distributional map of Chalcionellus orcinus Reichardt, 1932 and Ch. libanicola (Marseul, 1870).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2011View details →

Figs. 22–29 in On the identity of Chalcionellus orcinus and Chalcionellus libanicola (Coleoptera: Histeridae)

Figs. 22–29: Chalcionellus libanicola (Marseul, 1870). 22 – Eighth sternite and tergite, ventral view; 23 – same, dorsal view; 24 – same, lateral view; 25 – ninth and tenth tergites + spiculum gastrale, lateral view; 26 – ninth and tenth tergites, dorsal view + spiculum gastrale, ventral view; 27 – aedeagus, dorsal view; 28 – same, lateral view; 29 – phallobase (basal piece of aedeagus), lateral view.