Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
1,968
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
1,968 results for “morphological taxonomy”
Density-dependent effects of exotic brook trout on aquatic communities in mountain lakes revealed by environmental DNA and morphological taxonomy
Invasion of non-native fishes threatens freshwater biodiversity worldwide. Yet, detailed estimates of population demography for invasive species, that estimate population size and body size of the invasive species, are rarely integrated in evaluating aquatic community responses. Our study capitalized on detailed brook trout population demographic data collected for a replicated whole lake ecosystem experiment involving experimental harvesting of exotic brook trout in nine mountain lakes. We applied environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding and morphological taxonomy to examine the response of crustacean zooplankton and macroinvertebrate communities to gradients in brook trout effective density and lake elevation. Density-dependent effects of brook trout on crustacean zooplankton and macroinvertebrate communities were detected even decades after their first introductions (between 1926 and 1980). However, they were moderated by environmental factors such as elevation, lake maximum depth and dissolved organic carbon. Elevation was important in structuring crustacean zooplankton and macroinvertebrate community composition. While there were differences in explanatory variables when describing communities characterized by eDNA metabarcoding and morphological taxonomy, the principal environmental factors that structured the communities were similar. Our paper highlights persisting density-dependent impacts of exotic trout on invertebrate communities even decades after first introduction, and it considers the conservation implications for lake restoration.
Fig. 4 in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 4. Comparisons among different buccal apparatus patterns of Paramesanophrys gen. nov. and some related genera; arrows in A–J show different positions to which PM extends anteriorly and highlighted structures in A–J mark M2. A. Paramesanophrys typica gen. et sp. nov. (from the present work). B. Mesanophrys carcini (Grolière & Léglise, 1977) Small & Lynn in Aescht, 2001 (from Song & Wilbert 2000). C. Uronema marinum Dujardin, 1841 (from Song et al. 2009). D. Uronemella filificum (Kahl, 1931) Song & Wilbert, 2002 (from Song & Wilbert 2002). E. Metanophrys sinensis Song & Wilbert, 2000 (from Song & Wilbert 2000). F. Anophryoides haemophila Cawthorn et al., 1996 (from Cawthorn et al. 1996). G. Philasterides armatalis Song, 2000 (from Song 2000). H. Paranophrys marina Thompson & Berger, 1965 (from Song et al. 2002). I. Paralembus digitiformis Kahl, 1931 (from Song & Wilbert 2000). J. Cohnilembus verminus (Müller, 1786) Kahl, 1933 (from Song 2000). Abbreviations: M1–3 = membranelles 1, 2 and 3; PM = paroral membrane; Sc = scutica.
Fig. 7 in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 7. Metanophrys similis Song et al., 2002, in vivo (A–F) and after protargol staining (G–J). A. Ventral view of a typical individual. B–D. Ventral views of three individuals; arrowheads in D mark somatic cilia. E. Food vacuole (arrow). F. Posterior region; arrow shows caudal cilium. G, I. Ventral views, to show detailed structure of the buccal area. H. Dorsal view; arrow shows monokinetids, arrowhead marks dikinetids. J. Macronucleus. Abbreviations: M1–3 = membranelles 1, 2 and 3; Ma = macronucleus; PM = paroral membrane. Scale bars: A–D = 30 μm.
Fig. 6 in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 6. Metanophrys sinensis Song & Wilbert, 2000, in vivo (A–D, G) and after protargol (E–F, I–J) or silver nitrate (H) staining. A. Ventral view of a typical individual. B. Ventral view of another individual; arrowheads mark somatic cilia. C. Ventral view; arrowhead exhibits buccal field. D. Notched pellicle (arrowhead). E. Detailed structure of buccal area. F. Individual in morphogenesis, to show buccal apparatus. G. Ventral view, showing bar-shaped crystal (arrowhead). H. Detail of somatic kinetids. I. Dikinetids of scutica (arrowheads). J. Posterior region; arrowheads show monokinetids of somatic kineties. Abbreviations: M1–3 = membranelles 1, 2 and 3; PM = paroral membrane. Scale bars: A–B = 15 μm.
Fig. 5 in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 5. Mesanophrys carcini Small & Lynn in Aescht, 2001, in vivo (A–D) and after protargol staining (E–G). A. Ventral view of a representative individual; arrow shows contractile vacuole. B–D. Ventral views of four individuals; arrow in B shows caudal cilium and arrow in D marks food vacuole. E–F. Ventral views, detailed structure of buccal area. G. Dorsal view; arrow indicates somatic kinety. Abbreviations: M1–3 = membranelles 1, 2 and 3; Ma = macronucleus; PM = paroral membrane; Sc = scutica. Scale bars: A–D = 30 μm; E–G = 5 μm.
Fig. 2 in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 2. Paramesanophrys typica gen. et sp. nov., from life (A–F) and after protargol staining (G–I). A. Ventral view of a representative individual. B. Different body shapes. C. Changing shapes of buccal field of the same individual. D. Movement trace. E. Food granules. F. Part of pellicle, to show extrusomes. G–H. Ventral (G) and dorsal (H) views of the same specimen (holotype), showing infraciliature and nuclear apparatus. I. Detailed structure of the buccal area. Abbreviations: M1–3 = membranelles 1, 2 and 3; Ma = macronucleus; PM = paroral membrane; Sc = scutica. Scale bars: A = 30 μm; B = 40 μm.
Fig. 1. Sampling sites. A in Taxonomy and morphology of four "ophrys-related" scuticociliates (Protista, Ciliophora, Scuticociliatia), with the description of a new genus, Paramesanophrys gen. nov.
Fig. 1. Sampling sites. A. Coastal waters of the Yellow Sea at Qingdao, Shandong province. B. A coastal mariculture-region in Zhanjiang, Guangdong province. C. Coastal waters of Daya Bay, Guangdong province.
Fig. 14. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866 in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 14. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. SEM micrographs from two medium-sized specimens (BIOICE sample 2060, IINH-40471). A. Anterior end, ventral view. B–C. Unciniger 2, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. D–E. Unciniger 7, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. F. Scaphal hooks and scaphal basis ciliary patches.
Fig. 10. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866 in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 10. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. SEM micrographs from three large specimens (BIOICE sample 3252, IINH-40477). A. Anterior end, left ventrolateral view. B. Notochaetal scale covering, detail. C–D. Unciniger 1, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. E–F. Unciniger 12, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively.
Fig. 2 in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 2. Temperature vs depth data of the BIOICE samples where specimens of Pectinariidae were found. A. Amphictene auricoma (O.F. Müller, 1776). B. Lagis koreni Malmgren, 1866. C. Cistenides granulata (Linnaeus, 1767). D. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. Specimens studied under SEM are indicated with black arrows and sample numbers.
Fig. 12. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. SEM micrographs from a in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 12. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. SEM micrographs from a medium-sized specimen (BIOICE sample 2660, IINH-40474). A. Anterior end, right lateral view (framed: paleae distal end, detail). B–C. Unciniger 1, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. D–E. Unciniger 9, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. F. Scaphal hooks.
Fig. 8 in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 8. Cistenides granulata (Linnaeus, 1767). SEM micrographs from two large specimens (BIOICE sample 3249, IINH-40467). A. Anterior end, right lateral view. B–C. Unciniger 1, dorsal and ventral uncini, respectively. D. Unciniger 6, ventral uncini. E. Unciniger 12, dorsal uncini. F. Scaphe, posterodorsal view (framed: scaphal hooks, detail).
Fig. 15. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866 in Taxonomy and distribution of Pectinariidae (Annelida) from Iceland with a comparative analysis of uncinal morphology
Fig. 15. Cistenides hyperborea Malmgren, 1866. SEM micrographs from two medium-sized specimens (BIOICE sample 2060, IINH-40471). A. Mid-body parapodium, notochaetae. B. Notochaeta, serrated distal end, detail. C. Scaphe, dorso-lateral view. D. Cuticular structures (framed in C). E. Anal lobe and anal papilla. F. Ciliary field dorsal to anal lobe (framed in E).
Figs 30–35 in Description of a new species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe (Araneae, Sicariidae) recluse spiders from Hidalgo, Mexico, under integrative taxonomy: morphological and DNA barcoding data (CO1 + ITS2)
Figs 30–35. Variation of the male palps, left palps, prolateral views. 30–33. Loxosceles tolantongo sp. nov. 30–32. Tourist Center Grutas de Tolantongo, Municipality of Cardonal, Hidalgo (type locality). 33. 500 m west of the entrance No. 5 to the Tourist Center Grutas de Tolantongo, Municipality of Cardonal, Hidalgo. 34–35. Loxosceles jaca Gertsch & Ennik, 1983. 2.5 km north of Jacala de Ledezma, Municipality of Jacala de Ledezma, Hidalgo. Scale bars = 0.5 mm.
Fig. 56 in Description of a new species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe (Araneae, Sicariidae) recluse spiders from Hidalgo, Mexico, under integrative taxonomy: morphological and DNA barcoding data (CO1 + ITS2)
Fig. 56. Maximum likelihood tree inferred from the concatenated matrix (CO1 + ITS2) of species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe, 1832 from Mexico. Colors of branches and bars indicate different species. Numbers above bars represent the delimitation methods: 1 = morphology (M); 2 = neighbor joining (NJ); 3 = ABGD with initial partitions (IP); 4–5 = ABGD with recursive partitions (RP); 6 = GMYC yule analysis; 7 = GMYC coalescent analysis; 8 bPTP with ML; 9 = bPTP with IB. Numbers below bars represent species recovered for each delimitation method. Red numbers correspond to Bayesian posterior probabilities, black numbers are bootstrap support values from the ML analysis.
Figs 20–25 in Description of a new species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe (Araneae, Sicariidae) recluse spiders from Hidalgo, Mexico, under integrative taxonomy: morphological and DNA barcoding data (CO1 + ITS2)
Figs 20–25. Loxosceles tolantongo sp. nov., ♂ holotype (CNAN-T01317). 20–22. Left palp, prolateral, dorsal and retrolateral views, respectively. 23–25. Detail of the bulb and embolus, retrolateral, dorsal and apical views, respectively. Scale bars: 20–22 = 0.5 mm; 23–25 = 0.2 mm.
Fig. 54 in Description of a new species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe (Araneae, Sicariidae) recluse spiders from Hidalgo, Mexico, under integrative taxonomy: morphological and DNA barcoding data (CO1 + ITS2)
Fig. 54. Maximum likelihood tree inferred from CO1 gene of species of Loxosceles Heineken & Lowe, 1832 from Mexico. Colors of branches and bars indicate different species. Numbers above bars represent the delimitation methods: 1 = morphology (M); 2 = neighbor joining (NJ); 3 = ABGD with initial partitions (IP); 4–6 = ABGD with recursive partitions (RP); 7 = GMYC yule analysis; 8 = GMYC coalescent analysis; 9 = bPTP with ML; 10 = bPTP with IB. Numbers below bars represent species recovered for each delimitation method. Red numbers on branches correspond to Bayesian posterior probabilities, black numbers are bootstrap support values from the ML analysis.
FIG. 1 in Historical note on the taxonomy of the genus Delphinium L. (Ranunculaceae) with an amended description of its floral morphology
FIG. 1. — Illustrations showing speciment of Consolida (DC.) Gray with other names than 'Consolida' or 'Delphinium', reproduced from: A, Bourdichon (1505- 1510: 35); B, Fuchs (1542: 27); C, Fuchs (1543: 15); D, Matthioli (1554: 357); E, Laguna (1555: 308); F, Matthioli (1565: 760). A, Plant called by the vernacular French name 'Jalousie'; B, Plant named by the erroneous name 'Chamaemelum eranthemon' and B, C, by the vernacular German name 'Rittersporn' still in use; D-F, Plants are named by the erroneous name 'Cuminum syl. alternum'.
FIG. 3. — A in Historical note on the taxonomy of the genus Delphinium L. (Ranunculaceae) with an amended description of its floral morphology
FIG. 3. — A, Flower drawing of Chienia honanensis W.T. Wang (modified from Wang [1964]); B, Chienia honanensis specimen [PE00026940] housed at PE herbarium (there are no scales on the original drawing and on the image of the original specimen); C, D, D. grandiflorum L. specimens [PE00477116 and PE00477117 respectively] housed at PE herbarium collected in the same province and the same year as the Chienia honanensis specimen and with which it matches morphologically speaking, excepted that PE00026940 specimen would show a teratological form of the floral structure.
FIG. 2 in Historical note on the taxonomy of the genus Delphinium L. (Ranunculaceae) with an amended description of its floral morphology
FIG. 2. — Photographs and drawings of flowers from herbarium specimens used for lectotypifying of the genus Delphinium L. or showing a peloric floral organization: A, a1, Consolida regalis Gray (LINN 694.1); B, b1, Delphinium peregrinum L. (BM-000628786); C, c1, D. elatum (S09-28218); D, d1, D. turcicum (H. Duman, Vural, Aytaç & Adigüzel) Espinosa (P04021863). Floral diagrams and formulae of: a2, a3, Consolida regalis; b2, b3, D. peregrinum; c2, c3, D. elatum; d2, d3, D. turcicum. Dark green, peduncle or receptacle, bract and bracteoles; violet, sepals; blue, petals; yellow cream colour, tepals; yellow, stamens; light green, carpels. Scale basr: 1 cm.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.