Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2018View details →

Fig. 5 in Fish beta diversity responses to environmental heterogeneity and flood pulses are different according to reproductive guild

Fig. 5. Relationship between beta diversity (mean distance to centroid), environmental heterogeneity and period of the hydrological cycle. a. Beta diversity of non-migratory fish species with external fertilization and parental care (NEFC); b. beta diversity of non-migratory fish species with internal fertilization (NIF).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2018View details →

Fig. 4 in Fish beta diversity responses to environmental heterogeneity and flood pulses are different according to reproductive guild

Fig. 4. Beta diversity variation among the guilds. The boxes represent the interquartile ranges, the horizontal lines indicate the medians, the bars indicate the minimum and maximum values, and the closed diamonds represent the mean beta diversity of each guild. LMEF: long-distance migratory and external fertilization; NEFC: non-migratory with external fertilization and parental care; NEFW: nonmigratory with external fertilization without parental care; NIF: non-migratory with internal fertilization; DET: detritivorous; HER: herbivorous; INS: insectivorous; INV: invertivorous; ONI: omnivorous; and PIS: piscivorous.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2018View details →

Fig. 2 in Fish beta diversity responses to environmental heterogeneity and flood pulses are different according to reproductive guild

Fig. 2. Hydrometric-level (a) and environmental heterogeneity (b) variation between 2000 and 2012 in the Paraná River. The horizontal black dashed line indicates the flood level of the floodplain. Source: ANA - Estação Fluviométrica of Porto São José, PR.

Fig. 3 Canonical correspondence analysis. Only axes 1 and 2 are shown. Type 2 in Evaluating the correlation between area, environmental heterogeneity, and species richness using terrestrial isopods (Oniscidea) from the Pontine Islands (West Mediterranean)

Fig. 3 Canonical correspondence analysis. Only axes 1 and 2 are shown. Type 2 scaling is shown. A right-angled projection of a point representing a response variable (ecological categories of species) onto an arrow representing an explanatory variable (biotope type)

Fig. 2 in Evaluating the correlation between area, environmental heterogeneity, and species richness using terrestrial isopods (Oniscidea) from the Pontine Islands (West Mediterranean)

Fig. 2 Path analysis model. In this model, species richness (S) is the dependent variable. Area (A) and environmental heterogeneity (H) can have a direct effect on S, whereas A can also have an effect on H. The indicators used for A and S are the log-transformed area in square kilometres (LogA) and the number of species (LogS). Different indicators were used for environmental heterogeneity (B, LogB, Shannon, and 1-D, see main text). The symbols bAS, bAH, and bHS indicate the partial standardised regression coefficients

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2015View details →

Figure. Constrained ordination plot as produced from canonical correspondence analysis (CCA). The variability of environmental variables is summarized on Axis 1 and Axis 2 of the constrained biplot, explaining the variability of the trophic groups included in the red fox's diet. Trophic groups are shown with black line (unfilled) pyramids, whereas environmental variables are shown with black filled pyramids. Proximity and distance of response centroids to predictor centroids indicate positive and negative correlations between them, respectively. in Factors affecting the diet of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in a heterogeneous Mediterranean landscape

Figure. Constrained ordination plot as produced from canonical correspondence analysis (CCA). The variability of environmental variables is summarized on Axis 1 and Axis 2 of the constrained biplot, explaining the variability of the trophic groups included in the red fox's diet. Trophic groups are shown with black line (unfilled) pyramids, whereas environmental variables are shown with black filled pyramids. Proximity and distance of response centroids to predictor centroids indicate positive and negative correlations between them, respectively.

Fig. 5 in Environmental heterogeneity causes differences in the amphibian assemblage structure of an undisturbed montane cloud forest in southern Mexico

Fig. 5. Canonical Correspondence Analysis of the most common amphibians. The arrow orientation and length represent the association, direction, and strength between the environmental variables and the ordination axis. Species names correspond to: Crm (C. matudai), Plm (Pl. matudai), Pls (Pl. sagorum), Pte (Pt. euthysanota), Bof (B. franklini), Boo (B. occidentalis), and Dex (D. xolocalcae) Environmental acronyms correspond to: Hum (Humidity), Understory_Den (Under story density), Le_Li_depth (leaf litter depth), and Temp (temperature).

Fig. 4 in Environmental heterogeneity causes differences in the amphibian assemblage structure of an undisturbed montane cloud forest in southern Mexico

Fig. 4. (a) Principal Component Analysis, grouping the eight sites present in the core zones according to eight environmental variables taken in each site. Blue triangles: TCZ (El Triunfo core zone) sites; pink circles: QCZ (El Quetzal core zone) site. (b) Eight environmental variables measured in the eight sites (four per core zone). Median (solid line), 25th and 75th percentiles (boundaries of boxes), minimum and maximum (lines).

Fig. 1 in Environmental heterogeneity causes differences in the amphibian assemblage structure of an undisturbed montane cloud forest in southern Mexico

Fig. 1. Location of the two sampled zones, El Triunfo core zone [TCZ] (1) and the El Quetzal core zone [QCZ] (3), in the El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve (ETBR), Sierra Madre de Chiapas, Mexico, and illustration of the sample design (core zones, sites, and plots).

Fig. 3 in Environmental heterogeneity causes differences in the amphibian assemblage structure of an undisturbed montane cloud forest in southern Mexico

Fig. 3. (a) Rank-abundance Curves for the El Triunfo core zone [TCZ] and Quetzal core zone [QCZ] in the El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve. Letters on the Rank-abundance Curves correspond to Crm (C. matudai), Crs (C. stuarti), Pll (Pl. lacertosa), Plh (Pl. hartwegii), Plm (Pl. matudai), Pls (Pl. sagorum), Dus (D. schmidtorum), Pte (Pt. euthysanota), Exs (E. sumichrasti), Lim (L. maculatus), Bof (B. franklini), Boo (B. occidentalis), Bofl (B. flavimembris), and Dex (D. xolocalcae). (b) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling of the eight sites within the core zones in the ETBR. Blue triangles: TCZ sites, pink circles: QCZ sites. (c) Dendrogram of functional groups of the El Triunfo core zone amphibian species, using Euclidian Distance, and tested functional groups by ANOSIM are highlighted in different colors (FG1: green; FG2: brown; FG3: blue; FG4: red, and FG5: yellow).

Fig. 2 in Environmental heterogeneity causes differences in the amphibian assemblage structure of an undisturbed montane cloud forest in southern Mexico

Fig. 2. Box plots of amphibian species diversity in the El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve (ETBR), Chiapas, Mexico, showing the median (solid line), 25th and 75th percentiles (boundaries of boxes), and minimum and maximum (lines). (a) Number of individuals, (b) Species richness (0D), (c) Common species (1D), and (d) Dominant species (2D).

FIGURE 6 in Effects of urbanization and environmental heterogeneity on fish assemblages in small streams

FIGURE 6 | Ordination of fish species composition by distance-based redundancy analysis (dbRDA) in relation to environmental heterogeneity (EH; estimated from environmental data and transformed by loge(x) prior to dbRDA) and the proportion of impervious surfaces (ImpSurf). Species codes, 1: Poecilia reticulata; 2: Corydoras aeneus; 3: Phenacogaster jancupa; 4: Astyanax abramis; 5: Hoplias malabaricus; 6: Hypostomus khimaera; 7: Serrapinnus calliurus; 8: S. microdon; 9: Hemigrammus tridens; 10: A. lacustris.

FIGURE 5 in Effects of urbanization and environmental heterogeneity on fish assemblages in small streams

FIGURE 5 | Relationship between the local contribution to beta diversity (LCBD) and the proportion of impervious surfaces in urban streams in Cuiabá. The line indicates fitted values.

FIGURE 4 in Effects of urbanization and environmental heterogeneity on fish assemblages in small streams

FIGURE 4 | Relationship between rarefied species richness (Srarefied) and the proportion of impervious surfaces in urban streams in Cuiabá. The line indicates fitted values.

FIGURE 3 in Effects of urbanization and environmental heterogeneity on fish assemblages in small streams

FIGURE 3 | Spatial variation in rarefied species richness (Srarefied; A) and the local contribution to beta diversity (LCBD; B) in urban streams in Cuiabá (Mato Grosso, Brazil). The circle sizes in the legend indicate the minimum, mean, and maximum values of Srarefied and the LCBD. The arrow in "A" indicates flow direction.

FIGURE 2 in Effects of urbanization and environmental heterogeneity on fish assemblages in small streams

FIGURE 2 | Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) of local environmental variables of streams from the urban area of Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, midwestern Brazil. The symbol sizes are proportional to the environmental heterogeneity (EH); PlaMat: plant matter; GraRoc: gravel and rocks; CanCov: canopy cover.