Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 7 Phlebotomus creticus n in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 7 Phlebotomus creticus n. sp. female. a Head. b Mouth parts (mandible, maxilla, hypopharynx and labrum, respectively). c labial furca. d Palp. e Third palpal article. f Flagellomeres 1, 2, 3, 12, 13 and 14; G pharynx. h Cibarium. i Spermathecae. j Genital fork. k Body of the spermathecae. l Wing

Fig. 6 Phlebotomus creticus n in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 6 Phlebotomus creticus n. sp. male. a Genitalia. b Sperm pump and aedeagal ducts. c Top of the aedeagal ducts. d Parameral sheath. e Sperm pump

Fig. 5 Phlebotomus creticus n in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 5 Phlebotomus creticus n. sp. male. a Head. b Pharynx. c Cibarium. d Flagellomeres 1, 2 and 3. e Flagellomeres 12, 13 and 14. f Palp. g Third palpal article. h Labial furca. i Labrum. j Wing

Fig. 3 in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 3 Bayesian inference phylogenetic tree, including posterior probabilities computed in the BI analysis (values> 0.95 are shown) and bootstrap values computed in the ML analysis (values> 70 are shown)

Fig. 2 in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 2 Percentages of species collected per prefecture in both published literature and present samplings

Fig. 1 in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 1 Measurements of male genitalia. a Measurements of the length of the gonocoxite (in black), beginning of the internal tuft of setae (in blue) and ending of the internal tuft of setae (in red). b Area of the internal tuft of setae of the gonocoxite. c Parameral sheath length (in red) and distance from the tubercle to the top of the parameral sheath (in black)

Fig. 4 in Sand fly fauna of Crete and the description of PhleboToMUS (AdleRIUS) CReTICUS n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 4 MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry of Phlebotomus creticus n. sp. a Dendrogram obtained by cluster analysis of MALDI-TOF MS protein profiles of 28 sand fly specimens collected in Crete. Distances are displayed in relative units. b Comparison of protein spectra of Ph. creticus n. sp. with four species of the subgenus Adlerius, zoomed mass range 4–15 kDa

Fig. 5 in Sand fly fauna of South-Eastern Romania, with the description of PhlebotomUS (TranSphlebotomUS) Simonahalepae n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 5 Female of Phlebotomus simonahalepae n. sp. Holotype. Included in the ML tree according to Fig. 4. a Head. b Flagellomeres 1, 2, 3. c Labrum—epipharynx, maxillary lacinia, mandible, hypopharynx (from left to right). d Pharynx. e Spermathecae. f Genital furca and spermathecae

Fig. 1 in Sand fly fauna of South-Eastern Romania, with the description of PhlebotomUS (TranSphlebotomUS) Simonahalepae n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 1 Canaraua Fetii, Dobrogea Region, Romania. a Cave entrance. b, c, d Limestone formations. e The specific collection site for the current study. f General view of the natural reserve

Fig. 3 in Sand fly fauna of South-Eastern Romania, with the description of PhlebotomUS (TranSphlebotomUS) Simonahalepae n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 3 Morphological details of the spermathecae for the female specimen of the Phlebotomus simonahalepae n. sp.

Fig. 2 in Sand fly fauna of South-Eastern Romania, with the description of PhlebotomUS (TranSphlebotomUS) Simonahalepae n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Fig. 2 Morphological details of the pharynx for the female specimen of the Phlebotomus simonahalepae n. sp.

Figure 4 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree inferred from Phlebotomus chabaudi and Ph. riouxi specimens using the data of elongation factor 1-a gene. Sequences of Ph. chabaudi published by Tabbabi et al. (2014) were added to the analyses. The phylogram results from bootstrapped data sets obtained using the PhyML 3.0 program [21] using the HKY85 [25] + I (proportion of invariant sites) model. The tree was visualized using the TreeDyn program, version 198.3 [7]. Percentages shown above the branches are the frequencies at which a given branch appeared in 500 bootstrap replications. Only bootstrap values higher than 50% on the early branches are shown. A sequence of Ph. sergenti (EF416841) was used as the outgroup. The sequences marked by * were published by Tabbabi et al. (2014); R = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. riouxi. RC = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. chabaudi or Ph. riouxi. Int = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as intermediate between Ph. riouxi and Ph. chabaudi. RCint = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. riouxi, Ph. chabaudi and intermediate specimens between the two species.

Figure 7 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 7. Differentiation criteria of males (A to F) 100X. A and D: aedeagus and basal lobe of coxite of Ph. chabaudi (SMO562); B and E: aedeagus and basal lobe of coxite of Ph. riouxi from Algeria (RX2); C and F: aedeagus and basal lobe of coxite of Ph. riouxi from Tunisia (TAT63). All photographs are set on the same scale.

Figure 8 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 8. Differentiation criteria of females (A to D), 100X. A and C: pharynx and spermathecae of Ph. chabaudi (CBZAT583); B and D: pharynx and spermathecae of Ph. riouxi (TAT186 and TAT24). All photographs are set on the same scale.

Figure 1 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 1. Sampling locations. Numbers indicate the number of specimens studied with round and square symbols corresponding to Ph. chabaudi and Ph. riouxi, respectively. Samples with a black fill come from Tabbabi's sampling while those with a white fill come from our sampling. The three uncertain specimens of Tabbabi are indicated by a rounded square.

Figure 3. Phylogenetic tree inferred from cytochrome B in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 3. Phylogenetic tree inferred from cytochrome B data of Phlebotomus chabaudi and Ph. riouxi specimens. We added to the analysis the sequences of Ph. chabaudi published by Tabbabi et al. (2014). The phylogram results from bootstrapped data sets obtained using the PhyML 3.0 program [21] using GTR (general time reversible) + G distribution (gamma distribution of rates with four rate categories). The tree was visualized using the TreeDyn program, version 198.3 [7]. The percentages above the branches are the frequencies with which a given branch appeared in 500 bootstrap replications. Only bootstrap values higher than 50% on the early branches are shown. A sequence of Ph. sergenti (AF161216) was used as the outgroup. The sequences marked by * were published by Tabbabi et al. (2014); R = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. riouxi. C = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. chabaudi. RC = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as Ph. chabaudi or Ph. riouxi. Int = sequences found in specimens morphologically characterized as intermediate between Ph. riouxi and Ph. chabaudi.

Figure 5 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree inferred from Phlebotomus chabaudi and Ph. riouxi specimens using the data of D1-D2 domain of 28S rDNA. Sequences of Ph. chabaudi published by Tabbabi et al. (2014) were added to the analyses. The phylogram results from bootstrapped data sets obtained using the PhyML 3.0 program [21] using the HKY85 model [25]. The tree was visualized using the TreeDyn program, version 198.3 [7]. The percentages above the branches are the frequencies with which a given branch appeared in 500 bootstrap replications. Only bootstrap values higher than 50% on the early branches are shown. A sequence of Ph. sergenti (KY764627) was used as the outgroup.

Figure 2 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 2. Illustration of the procedure of morphometrical measures of area and perimeter of the basal lobe of the coxite. Left, unmarked; right, marked with perimeter and area.

Figure 6 in Phlebotomus (Paraphlebotomus) chabaudi and Phlebotomus riouxi: closely related species or synonyms?

Figure 6. Phylogenetic tree inferred by concatenation of the three loci under study. The phylogram was obtained by a partitioned ML analysis with a GTR (general time reversible) + G (gamma distribution of rates with four rate categories) + I (proportion of invariant sites) model using RAxML software [39]. The tree was visualized using the TreeDyn program, version 198.3 [7]. The percentages above the branches are the frequencies with which a given branch appeared in 500 bootstrap replications. Only bootstrap values higher than 50% on branches are shown. Concatenated sequences of Ph. sergenti were used as the outgroup.