Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 4. A–E. Uronemita filificum Kahl, 1931. F–I. Uronema marinum Dujardin, 1841. J–N. Pleuronema setigerum Calkins, 1902. A–C, F–H, J–L in Seven scuticociliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Alabama, USA, with descriptions of two parasitic species isolated from a freshwater mussel Potamilus purpuratus

Fig. 4. A–E. Uronemita filificum Kahl, 1931. F–I. Uronema marinum Dujardin, 1841. J–N. Pleuronema setigerum Calkins, 1902. A–C, F–H, J–L. In vivo. D–E, M–N. After silver impregnation. A, F, J. Ventral views of typical individuals. B–C, G–H, K–L. Different individuals, showing variation in body shape, arrow in (B) shows the conspicuous apical plate, arrows in (C, H) mark contractile vacuoles. D, I, M–N. Detailed structures of buccal area, arrow in (M) indicates the ring-like posterior end of M2a, arrowheads in (M) mark preoral kineties. E. Ventral view, arrowheads show somatic kineties. Abbreviations: M1, 2, 3 = membranelle 1, 2 and 3; M2a = the anterior part of membranelle 2; M2b = the posterior part of membranelle 2; Ma = macronucleus; PM = paroral membrane. Scale bars: A–B = 20 μm; F, H, N = 10 μm; G = 5 μm, J–L = 30 μm.

Fig. 3. A–D in Seven scuticociliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Alabama, USA, with descriptions of two parasitic species isolated from a freshwater mussel Potamilus purpuratus

Fig. 3. A–D. Pseudocohnilembus hargisi Evans & Thompson, 1964. E–J. Parauronema cf. longum Song, 1995. A–C, E–I. In vivo. D, J. After silver impregnation. A, E. Ventral views of typical individuals, arrow in (A) shows caudal cilia. B–C, F–G. Different individuals, showing varying body shapes, arrowheads in (F) mark somatic kineties. D, J. Detailed structure of the buccal area. H. Ventral view, arrow refers to dumbbell-shaped crystals. I. Posterior end, arrow marks caudal cilium. Abbreviations: M1, 2, 3 = membranelle 1, 2 and 3; PM = paroral membrane; Sc = scutica. Scale bars: A–B = 15 μm; C, E = 40 μm; G = 60 μm.

Fig. 5. All reported populations for the following species. A. Uronema marinum Dujardin, 1841. B in Seven scuticociliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Alabama, USA, with descriptions of two parasitic species isolated from a freshwater mussel Potamilus purpuratus

Fig. 5. All reported populations for the following species. A. Uronema marinum Dujardin, 1841. B. Pseudocohnilembus hargisi Evans & Thompson, 1964. C. Metanophrys similis Song et al., 2002. D. Pleuronema setigerum Calkins, 1902. E. Uronemita filificum Kahl, 1931.

Fig. 2. A–D in Seven scuticociliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Alabama, USA, with descriptions of two parasitic species isolated from a freshwater mussel Potamilus purpuratus

Fig. 2. A–D. Mesanophrys cf. carcini Small & Lynn in Aescht, 2001. E–G. Metanophrys similis Song et al., 2002. A–C, E–F. In vivo. D, G. After silver impregnation. A, E. Ventral views of typical individuals, arrow in (E) shows caudal cilia. B, F. Different individuals, showing different body shapes. C. Individual in morphogenesis. D, G. Detailed structure of the buccal area. Abbreviations: M1, 2, 3 = membranelle 1, 2 and 3; Ma = macronucleus; PM = paroral membrane. Scale bars: 30 μm.

Fig. 1. Sampling map. A in Seven scuticociliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) from Alabama, USA, with descriptions of two parasitic species isolated from a freshwater mussel Potamilus purpuratus

Fig. 1. Sampling map. A. Chewacla Creek, Auburn, Alabama (32º36′56″ N, 85º28ʹ58″ E). B. Orange Beach, Alabama (30º16′44″ N, 87º33′35″ E).

opencc-zeroMar 2024View details →

FIG. 3 in DNA barcoding revealed the presence of the invasive freshwater mussel Sinanodonta aff. woodiana (Lea, 1834) in Afghanistan

FIG. 3. — The Bayesian phylogenetic tree on the basis of 37 unique COI sequences of Sinanodonta sp. and related taxa, including one new sequence from Afghanistan (red) and 36 sequences from GenBank. Margaritifera laosensis (I. Lea, 1863) and M. dahurica (Middendorff, 1850) are the outgroups. The numbers above branches show the bootstrap support value. The scale bar represent the branch lengths.

opencc-zeroMar 2024View details →

FIG. 2 in DNA barcoding revealed the presence of the invasive freshwater mussel Sinanodonta aff. woodiana (Lea, 1834) in Afghanistan

FIG. 2. — Non-indigenous Sinanodonta aff. woodiana (Lea, 1834) in Afghanistan: A, live samples of the mussels settled in the river, Qala-I-Zal (10 August 2020); B, shell exterior view of the mussels: a, b and c represent very small, small and medium size classes, respectively.

Fig. 7 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 7. Micrographs of the outer edge of the inhalant siphon in mussels: 1 — A. cygnea (r. Derevychka); 2 — A. anatina (Lyutsymer lake); 3 — P. complanata (r. Uzh); 4 — S. woodiana (r. Danube). Рис. 7. Микрофотографии наружного края вводных сифонов у беззубок: 1 — A. cygnea (р. Деревичка); 2 — A. anatina (оз. Люцимер); 3 — P. complanata (р. Уж); 4 — S. woodiana (р. Дунай.

Fig. 5 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 5. The distribution of mussels from four species in the space of canonical variables made by conchological characters. N o t e. Еxtrapolation of specimens distribution on probability level is p <0.05. Рис. 5. Распределение особей четырёх видов беззубок в пространстве канонических переменных, построенных по конхиологическим признакам. П р и м е ч а н и е. Экстраполяция распределения особей проведена на уровне вероятности p <0,05.

Fig. 2 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 2. UPGMA phenogram of genetic distances (Nei, 1972) between mussel species and populations. N o t e. Aa — A. anatina, Ac — A. cygnea, Pc — P. complanata, Sw — S. woodiana. Riwer systems: 1 — Danube, 2 — r. Tysa, 3 — Upper Dniester, 4 — Lower Dniester, 5 — r. Ingul, 6 — r. Western Bug, 7 — r. Prypyat, 8 — Upper Dnipro, 9 — r. Ros, 10 — r. Psel, 11 — r. Siversky Donets, 12 — r. Salgyr.

Fig. 1 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 1. Main places of material collection: 1 — r. Danube, 2 — r. Tysa, 3 — Upper Dniester, 4 — Lower Dniester, 5 — r. Ingul, 6 — r. Western Bug, 7 — r. Prypyat, 8 — Upper Dnipro, 9 — r. Ros, 10 — r. Psel, 11 — r. Siversky Donets, 12 — r. Salgyr.

Fig. 4 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 4. UPGMA phenogram of genetic distances (Tamura et al., 2004, 2011) between specimens of four Anodontinae species made by homologous sequences of two homologous loci (COI and 16S). Рис. 4. UPGMA фенограмма генетических дистанций (Tamura et al., 2004, 2011), построенная по гомологичным последовательностям двух локусов (COI и 16S) между отдельными особями четырёх видов Anоdontinae.

Fig. 3 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 3. Geographic variation of Mdh-1 locus in P. complanata populations in Ukraine (Mdh-1110 — filled with black, Mdh-1120 — filled with grey).

Fig. 6 in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Fig. 6. The umbonal structure of the shell in molluscs from subfamily Anodontinae: 1 — A. cygnea; 2 — A. anatina; 3 — P. complanata; 4 — S. woodiana. Рис. 6. Структура вершины раковины моллюсков подсемейства Anodontinae: 1 — A. cygnea; 2 — A. anatina; 3 — P. complanata; 4 — S. woodiana.

Рис. 3. Географическая изменчивость локуса Mdh-1 в популяциях P. complanata в пределах Украины (Mdh-1110 — заполнение чёрным цветом, Mdh-1120 — серым). in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Рис. 3. Географическая изменчивость локуса Mdh-1 в популяциях P. complanata в пределах Украины (Mdh-1110 — заполнение чёрным цветом, Mdh-1120 — серым).

Рис. 2. UPGMA — фенограма генетических дистанций (Nei, 1972) между видами и популяциями двустворчатых моллюсков. П р и м е ч а н и е. Aa — A. anatina, Ac — A. cygnea, Pc — P. complanata, Sw — S. woodiana. Речные системы: 1 — Дунай, 2 — р. Тиса, 3 — Верхний Днестр, 4 — Нижний Днестр, 5 — р. Ингул, 6 — р. Западный Буг, 7 — р. Припять, 8 — р. Верхний Днепр, 9 — р. Рось, 10 — р. Псёл, 11 — р. Северский Донец, 12 — р. Салгир. in Genetic And Morphological Variability And Differentiation Of Freshwater Mussels (Bivavia, Unionidae, Anodontinae) In Ukraine

Рис. 2. UPGMA — фенограма генетических дистанций (Nei, 1972) между видами и популяциями двустворчатых моллюсков. П р и м е ч а н и е. Aa — A. anatina, Ac — A. cygnea, Pc — P. complanata, Sw — S. woodiana. Речные системы: 1 — Дунай, 2 — р. Тиса, 3 — Верхний Днестр, 4 — Нижний Днестр, 5 — р. Ингул, 6 — р. Западный Буг, 7 — р. Припять, 8 — р. Верхний Днепр, 9 — р. Рось, 10 — р. Псёл, 11 — р. Северский Донец, 12 — р. Салгир.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Fig. 1 in Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca, Bivalvia, Unionidae) Of The Danube River Basin Of Ukraine

Fig. 1. Shells (left side): 1 — U. tumidus (the Stalineshty River, Mamalyga); 2 — U. pictorum (the Stalineshty River, Mamalyga); 3 — U. crassus (the Borzhava River, Vilkhivka); 4 — A. anatina (PMK channel, Vylkove); 5 — A. cygnea (PMK canal, Vylkove); 6 — P. complanata (the Danube River, Lisky); 7 — S. woodiana (the Danube River, Vylkove); 8 — S. woodiana (the Latorytsa River, Solomonove). Scale 10 mm.

dryad40/100

U.S. freshwater mussel occurrence data

<p>Natural history collections are uniquely positioned to chronicle biodiversity changes across time and space and are a fundamental data source in taxon-based research and conservation. With over 90 species listed under the Endangered Species Act, freshwater mussels are one of the most imperiled animal assemblages in the United States and are the focus of considerable conservation efforts. Unfortunately, natural history collections data are often underleveraged in taxon-based conservation efforts because much of the data are decentralized and nonstandard, and thus, difficult to access and analyze. Our objective herein is to synthesize, standardize, and enrich digitized US freshwater mussel collections data to better suit the needs of conservation stakeholders. We aggregated specimen records from 45 US natural history collections and enriched these records by programmatically standardizing taxonomic information, flagging potentially problematic records, and joining records with freshwater-specific spatial frameworks and their associated hydrological metadata. The assembled dataset includes 408,770 records from 302 species and 1,540 hydrological units (8 digit-level). Using these enriched records, we estimated ecological attributes for over 280 freshwater mussel species including aspects of range size and hydrological preferences. Listed species had significantly fewer occurrences, smaller area of occupancy, and experienced greater declines in area of occupancy in comparison to non-listed species. Listed species also had a higher stream order preference and discharge preference than non-listed species. The synthesized, standardized, and enriched natural history collections data and our novel ecological estimates have revealed and corroborated important insights into freshwater mussel diversity, distribution, and decline. Stakeholders can access this data via download or interactively at the companion web app, MusselMapR (<a href="https://musselmapr.shinyapps.io/hic_sunt_naiades/">https://musselmapr.shinyapps.io/hic_sunt_naiades/</a>).</p>

opencc-zeroOct 2022View details →