Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 6 in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 6. Björk method of superimposition of the frontals in dorsal/ventral views. A. Scaled to same length between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture. B. Smallest and largest specimen superimposed. C. Smallest and second largest specimen superimposed. D. Scaled to same width between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline. E. Smallest and largest specimen superimposed. F. Smallest and second largest specimen superimposed. Largest specimens preserve entire nasal process, which emphasize relative shortening during growth. Not to scale.

Fig. 7 in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 7. Björk method of superimposition of the frontals in lateral/medial views. A. Scaled to same length between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture. B. Smallest and largest specimen superimposed. C. Scaled to same depth near the lacrimal socket region. D. Smallest and largest specimen superimposed. Largest specimens preserve entire nasal process, which emphasize relative shortening during growth. Not to scale.

Fig. 5 in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 5. Bivariate allometric results of different parts of Tarbosaurus bataar frontals. A. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (pfn-pl length, 4) and the length of the postorbital suture (ps length, 10). B. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the depth of the anterior part of the postorbital suture (rps depth, 11). C. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the depth of the posterior part of the postorbital suture (cps depth, 12). D. Depth of the anterior part of the postorbital suture (11) and the depth of the posterior part of the postorbital suture (12). E. Depth of the frontal at the region that is immediately anterior to the most anterior point of the sagittal crest (depth, 9) and the depth of the anterior part of the postorbital suture (11). F. Depth of the frontal at the region that is immediately anterior to the most anterior point of the sagittal crest (9) and the depth of the posterior part of the postorbital suture (12). G. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the length of the dorsotemporal fossa (dtf length, 7). H. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (os-mid width, 5) and the length of the dorsotemporal fossa (7).

Fig. 1. Tyrannosaurid theropod Tarbosaurus bataar Maleev, 1955a in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 1. Tyrannosaurid theropod Tarbosaurus bataar Maleev, 1955a from Mongolia, Nemegt Formation, Maastrichtian; frontals used to create bone silhouettes for superimposition. A. MPC-D 107/10, from Bugiin Tsav, in dorsal (A1) and lateral (A2) views. B. MPC-D 107/09, Bugiin Tsav, in dorsal (B1) and lateral (B2) views. C. MPC-D 107/05, Nemegt, in dorsal view. D. MPC-D 107/11, Bugiin Tsav, in dorsal view. E. MPC-D 107/13, Nemegt, in dorsal (E1) and lateral (E2) views. F. MPC-D 107/22, Bugiin Tsav, in dorsal (F1) and lateral (F2) views. G. MPC-D 107/06, Bugiin Tsav, in dorsal (G1) and medial (G2) views. The arrangement is from smallest to largest. Scale bars 50 mm.

Fig. 4 in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 4. Bivariate allometric results of different parts of Tarbosaurus bataar frontals. A. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (pfn-pl length, 4) and the width of the nasal process (np width, 1). B. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (os-mid width, 5) and the width of the nasal process (1). C. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the width of the prefrontal suture (prf width, 2). D. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (5) and the width of the prefrontal suture (2). E. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the width of the lacrimal socket (ls width, 3). F. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot (5) and the midline and the width of the lacrimal socket (3).

Fig. 3 in Allometric growth in the frontals of the Mongolian theropod dinosaur Tarbosaurus bataar

Fig. 3. Bivariate allometric results of different parts of Tarbosaurus bataar frontals. A. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (os-mid width, 5) and the depth of the frontal at the region that is immediately anterior to the most anterior point of the sagittal crest (depth, 9). B. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (pfn-pl length, 4) and the depth of the frontal at the region that is immediately anterior to the most anterior point of the sagittal crest (9). C. Width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (5) and the length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4). D. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the width of the frontal between the most lateral point of the posterior shelf and the midline (cds-mid width, 6). E. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the brain length (8). F. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (5). G. Length of the frontal between prefrontonasal process and the frontoparietal suture (4) and the width of the frontal between the most lateral point of the posterior shelf and the midline (6). H. Width of the frontal between the most lateral point of the posterior shelf and the midline (6) and the width of the frontal between medial edge of the orbital slot and the midline (5).

Fig. 5 in Early development and allometric growth in Nannacara anomala Regan, 1905 (Perciformes: Cichlidae) under laboratory conditions

Fig. 5. Allometric growth equations between measured body proportions and total length during Nannacara anomala development. BD, body depth; ED, eye diameter; HD, head depth; HL, head length; MH, musculature height; TAL, tail length; TD, tail depth; TL, total length and TRL, trunk length. The dashed line represents the inflection point of growth.

Fig. 4 in Early development and allometric growth in Nannacara anomala Regan, 1905 (Perciformes: Cichlidae) under laboratory conditions

Fig. 4. Changes in total length (TL) from hatching to 18 days post hatch (DPH). Standard deviation (SD) represented by whiskers.

Fig. 2 in Early development and allometric growth in Nannacara anomala Regan, 1905 (Perciformes: Cichlidae) under laboratory conditions

Fig. 2. Larval development of Nannacara annomala: (a) 0 DPH, days post hatch; (b) 1 DPH; (c) 2 DPH; (d) 3 DPH; (e) 5 DPH; (f) 7 DPH; (g) 10 DPH; (h) 15 DPH; (i) 18 DPH. Scale bars = 1 mm. ag, adhesive glands; ba, branchial arches; ffv, finfold vessels; no, notochord; pfb, pelvic-fin bud; rp, rays primordia; sb, swim bladder.

Fig. 1 in Early development and allometric growth in Nannacara anomala Regan, 1905 (Perciformes: Cichlidae) under laboratory conditions

Fig. 1. Morphometric characters measured in Nannacara annomala. BD, body depth; ED, eye diameter; HD, head depth; HL, head length; MH, musculature height; TAL, tail length; TD, tail depth; TL, total length and TRL, trunk length.

Fig. 2 in Allometric larval growth of the bottom-dwelling catfish Lophiosilurus alexandri Steindachner, 1876 (Siluriformes: Pseudopimelodidae)

Fig. 2. Mean ± standard deviation of total length of Lophiosilurus alexandri larvae in relation to age.

Fig. 1 in Allometric larval growth of the bottom-dwelling catfish Lophiosilurus alexandri Steindachner, 1876 (Siluriformes: Pseudopimelodidae)

Fig. 1. Drawing of Lophiosilurus alexandri larvae (circa 13 mm TL, 8 DAH): total length (TL), head length (HL), head height (HH), head width (HW), mouth length (ML), eye diameter (ED), maxillary barbel length (MB), trunk length (TRL), trunk height (TH), trunk width (TW), yolk sac length (YSL), yolk sac height (YSH), and postanal length (PAL).

Fig. 4 in Allometric larval growth of the bottom-dwelling catfish Lophiosilurus alexandri Steindachner, 1876 (Siluriformes: Pseudopimelodidae)

Fig. 4. Allometric growth of measurements on the trunk of Lophiosilurus alexandri during early development (0-29 days after hatching). The dotted line on total length represents the inflexion point of growth, b = allometric growth coefficient, r² = coefficient of determination, and n= number of individuals. (a) trunk length, (b) trunk height, (c) trunk width, (d) postanal length, (e) yolk sac volume.

Fig. 3 in Allometric larval growth of the bottom-dwelling catfish Lophiosilurus alexandri Steindachner, 1876 (Siluriformes: Pseudopimelodidae)

Fig. 3. Allometric growth of measurements on the head of Lophiosilurus alexandri during early development (0-29 days after hatching). The dotted line on total length represents the inflexion point of growth, b = allometric growth coefficient, r² = coefficient of determination, and n= number of individuals. (a) head length, (b) head height, (c) head width, (d) mouth length, (e) eye diameter, (f) maxillary barbel length.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2013View details →

Fig. 4. Allometric relationships among bone measurements concerning four sexually dimorphic skeletal ratios. A in New information on sexual dimorphism and allometric growth in Keichousaurus hui, a pachypleurosaur from the Middle Triassic of Guizhou, South China

Fig. 4. Allometric relationships among bone measurements concerning four sexually dimorphic skeletal ratios. A. Humerus length vs. snout-vent length. B. Femur length vs. snout-vent length. C. Humerus vs. femur length. D. Maximum vs. minimum width of humerus.

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2013View details →

Fig. 1 in New information on sexual dimorphism and allometric growth in Keichousaurus hui, a pachypleurosaur from the Middle Triassic of Guizhou, South China

Fig. 1. General appearance of typical individuals of pachypleurosaur Keichousaurus hui Young, 1958, late Ladinian of Middle Triassic Xingyi, Guizhou Province. The sexually dimorphic features of the forelimb are marked by black ellipses. A. WS 28-R5, female. B. WS 30-R39, male.

Figure 3 in The amphipod genus Alexandrella (Amphipoda, Stilipedidae): taxonomic status, allometric growth and description of two new species

Figure 3. Alexandrella dentata. Juvenile taken from the brood pouch of female 24 mm (RV Eltanin, station 264).

Figure 2. Alexandrella dentata. Female 24 in The amphipod genus Alexandrella (Amphipoda, Stilipedidae): taxonomic status, allometric growth and description of two new species

Figure 2. Alexandrella dentata. Female 24 mm, RV Eltanin, station 264. Figure of incisor and lacinia mobilis (Mnd next moult) as seen through the current moult.

Figure 1. Alexandrella australis. T in The amphipod genus Alexandrella (Amphipoda, Stilipedidae): taxonomic status, allometric growth and description of two new species

Figure 1. Alexandrella australis. T ad. and Lbr ad. from female 40 mm RV Eltanin, station 432. All other appendages from a juvenile specimen taken out of the brood pouch of the female.

Figure 10 in The amphipod genus Alexandrella (Amphipoda, Stilipedidae): taxonomic status, allometric growth and description of two new species

Figure 10. Alexandrella subchelata. Upper: immature 8 mm, RV Eltanin, cruise 26, station 4. Lower: immature 6 mm, RV Polarstern, ANDEEP station 133-3.