Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 6 in Cranial phenotypic variation in Meriones crassus and M. libycus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae), and a morphological divergence in M. crassus from the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia (Western Zagros Mountains)

Fig. 6. Scatter plot of PCA results on shape variables of the (A) ventral, (B) dorsal and (C) lateral sides of Meriones crassus Sundevall, 1842 specimens. Legends: ○ = Iranian Plateau, ● = Western Zagros, * = Kuwait, Δ = Arabian, ▲ = Jeddah, □ = Jordan/NW Arabia, ■ = African. Deformation grids (two times magnified) along the first principal components, representing shape differences between configurations corresponding to minimal and maximal scores, are shown to the right of each plot. For the numbering of landmarks, see Fig. 2.

Fig. 4 in Cranial phenotypic variation in Meriones crassus and M. libycus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae), and a morphological divergence in M. crassus from the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia (Western Zagros Mountains)

Fig. 4. Scatter plot of the CVA results of the (A) ventral and (B) dorsal shape data of Meriones crassus Sundevall, 1842 (two groups) and M. libycus Lichtenstein, 1823. Legends: ○ = M. crassus (other than Western Zagros), ● = M. crassus of Western Zagros, □ = M. libycus. The grids below show deformation along the arrows, when moving from the M. crassus group mean shape to the Western Zagros group mean shape (A1 and B1), and from the M. libycus mean shape to the mean shape of the Western Zagros (A2 and B2) (shape differences magnified three times for better visualization). For the numbering of landmarks, see Fig. 2.

Fig. 3 in Cranial phenotypic variation in Meriones crassus and M. libycus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae), and a morphological divergence in M. crassus from the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia (Western Zagros Mountains)

Fig. 3. Scatter plot of RW1 versus RW2 of the (A) ventral and (B) dorsal cranium of Meriones crassus Sundevall, 1842 and M. libycus Lichtenstein, 1823. Legends: ○ = M. crassus (other than Western Zagros), ● = M. crassus of Western Zagros, □ = M. libycus. Below: thin-plate spline deformation grids visualize shape variation as expressed by the first two RWs axes (grids represent shape difference between configurations corresponding to lowest and highest RW-values). For the numbering of landmarks, see Fig. 2.

Fig. 7 in Cranial phenotypic variation in Meriones crassus and M. libycus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae), and a morphological divergence in M. crassus from the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia (Western Zagros Mountains)

Fig. 7. CVA scatter plot (axes 1 and 2) on shape variables of the (A) ventral, (B) dorsal and (C) lateral side of the Meriones crassus groups (Jeddah group not included). Legends: ○ = Iranian plateau, ● = Western Zagros, Δ = Arabian and ■ = African. Grids show deformation (3 x magnified) when following the trajectory within the morphospace along the arrows and between the groups' consensus (from African to Western Zagros – A1, B1 and C1; and from Iranian plateau to Western Zagros – A2, B2 and C2). For the numbering of landmarks, see Fig. 2.

Fig. 1 in Cranial phenotypic variation in Meriones crassus and M. libycus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae), and a morphological divergence in M. crassus from the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia (Western Zagros Mountains)

Fig. 1. Map showing the sampling localities of Meriones crassus Sundevall, 1842 (circles) and M. libycus Lichtenstein, 1823 (squares) and groups of sampling localities indicated by ellipses (see more detail about the grouping in Material and Methods). The dark closed symbols are the sampling localities of the type specimens (synonyms of Meriones crassus and M. libycus, see Table 1). The ellipses (from left to right) show the following groups: African, Jeddah, Arabian, Western Zagros and Iranian Plateau.

Fig. 6 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 6 Further examples of relatively recent Zagros mid-Cretaceous biozonation schemes that utilize larger benthic foraminifera. No numerical scaling of the geological timescale is implied. The age assignments and taxonomic nomenclature are often outdat- ed, and the uncertainty precludes precise calibration of stage boundaries and the precise relationship of one zonal scheme to another.

Fig. 4 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 4 Morphological variability (apical angle, test height and diameter) of the late Aptian – middle Albian Mesorbitolina texana (Roemer). a late Aptian Taft Formation of Central Iran. b late Aptian of Lebanon (from Schroeder and Neumann, 1985, pl. 36, fig. 2, topotype of Orbitolina discoidea var. libanica Henson; coll. F.R.S. Henson). Also note the convex test base in a and the central depression in b with a few final annular chambers.

Fig. 5 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 5 Examples of relatively recent Zagros mid-Cretaceous biozonation schemes that utilize larger benthic foraminifera. No numerical scaling of the geological timescale is implied. The age assignments and taxonomic nomenclature are often outdated, and the uncertainty precludes precise calibration of stage boundaries and the precise relationship of one zonal scheme to another.

Fig. 2 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 2 Lower- to mid-Cretaceous Orbitolinidae from Iran. a Subaxial section of Mesorbitolina sp. or Orbitolina sp. (= Dictyoconus pachymarginalis Schroeder in Dehghanian and Afghah, 2021, Fig. 7.4, Albian Kazhdumi Formation SW Iran). b–c Dictyoconus? pachymarginalis Schroeder, subaxial sections, Aptian Taft Formation, Central Iran. d "Dictyoconus pachymarginalis Schroeder" axial section (extracted from Afghah et al., 2014, fig. 11A), Cenomanian Sarvak Formation of SW Iran. e–f Persiconus sarvaki Yazdi-Moghadam & Schlagintweit, axial and tangential sections, Cenomanian Sarvak Formation of SW Iran.

Fig. 1 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 1 Optimal and sub-optimal workflows for the identification of larger benthic foraminifera. Following a review of identification, the identity of a specimen can be confirmed or downgraded to a non-specific identity. If the identification is confident based on morphological features, stratigraphic range extension is possible, but should be evaluated carefully if the vast majority of well-established records suggest a different age.

Fig. 3 in Developing Best Practice In Micropalaeontology: Examples From The Mid-Cretaceous Of The Zagros Mountains

Fig. 3 Early – mid-Cretaceous Zagros biozonations (mostly assemblage zones or biofacies) utilising larger benthic foraminifera. The Wynd (1965) zonation and Sissingh (1977) zonations are based on data presented in Motiei (1993). Sampò (1969) and Kalantari (1976) are published schemes, whilst that of Ammen & Gharib (2014) is a scheme using more modern taxonomic concepts. LAD = Last Appearance Datum. FAD = First Appearance Datum. s.l. = sensu lato. No numerical scaling of the geological timescale is implied. The age assignments and taxonomic nomenclature are often outdated, and the uncertainty precludes precise calibration of stage boundaries and the precise relationship of one zonal scheme to another.

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2015View details →

Figure 2 in Sexual dimorphism in Trachylepis vittata (Olivier, 1804) (Sauria: Scincidae) in the Zagros Mountains, western Iran

Figure 2. Ordination of male and female specimens of Trachylepis vittata on the first 2 principal components. Note the relatively high degree of separation along PC1.

Fig. 3 in A new gecko genus from Zagros Mountains, Iran

Fig. 3. (a) Dorsal, (b) ventral, (c) lateral head, and (d) lateral tail views of the holotype of Lakigecko aaronbaueri sp.n. Red stars: tubercular whorls; white star: keeled scale interspaces.

Fig. 4 in A new gecko genus from Zagros Mountains, Iran

Fig. 4. Dorsal view in life of (a) holotype and (b) paratype of Lakigecko aaronbaueri sp.n. before preservation. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:9809A55C-652A-4510-B39A-753EA57CC81D

Fig. 2 in A new gecko genus from Zagros Mountains, Iran

Fig. 2. Comparisons of (1) head shape, (2) dorsal view, (3) dorsal view of tail, (4) lateral view of tail, (5) ventral view of tail, and (6) subdigital lamella of hindlimbs, in the new gecko with other genera. (a) Bunopus tuberculatus, (b) Tenuidactylus caspius, (c) Cyrtopodion scabrum, (d) Carinatogecko heteropholis, (e) Mediodactylus russowii, and (f) Lakigecko aaronbaueri sp.n. Photos by F. Torki (a–d, f) and B. Safaei-Mahroo (e).

Fig. 1 in A new gecko genus from Zagros Mountains, Iran

Fig. 1. Map showing the type locality of Lakigecko aaronbaueri sp.n. in the Garmabe region, Nourabad, Lorestan Province, Iran.

Fig. 5 in A new gecko genus from Zagros Mountains, Iran

Fig. 5. Habitat of Lakigecko aaronbaueri sp.n. at the type locality in the Garmabe region, Nourabad, Lorestan Province, Iran.