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.
33
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
33 results for “mound-building”
Incubation mound-building by the Australian megapode (Malleefowl, Leipoa ocellata) creates novel, resource-rich patches in a semi-arid woodland
<p> Desert ecosystems are characterised by a patchy distribution of resources. Nutrient sinks associated with landscape modulators (trees) differ markedly from the resource-poor interpatch matrix. Fauna can also act as landscape modulators, modifying patch dynamics by redistributing resources via 'ecosystem engineering'. In semi-arid woodlands, malleefowl (<em>Leipoa ocellata</em>: Megapodiidae) reconfigure surface characteristics by scavenging leaf litter to construct large incubation mounds. The extent to which this movement of resources creates a novel patch and alters extant patches is largely unknown. Ecosystem engineering effects by megapodes have been little studied, but are potentially great, particularly in drylands, where mammalian engineers are known to enhance ecosystem function and drive restoration.</p> <p>We measured vegetation, ground cover, and soil chemistry at malleefowl mounds and four extant microsites (trees and open areas close to, and far from, mounds) and predicted that: 1) malleefowl mounds would represent enriched, yet novel, microsites; 2) the characteristics of tree and open patches close to the mounds would differ from those away from the mounds, because of the diminishing intensity of disturbance; and 3) effects at tree and open patches close to the mound would be shorter-term, compared to the more substantial high-resource patch formation occurring at the mound, but we expected all effects would diminish with time since malleefowl activity.</p> <p>We found that: 1) malleefowl mounds were novel microsites with soil chemistry more similar to tree-modulated patches, and groundcover and vegetation variables more similar to the open, interpatch matrix; 2) effects extended to tree and open patches near the mound, but most effects were short lived; and 3) some novel mound attributes (e.g., soil pH, phosphorus, nitrogen, carbon) were greater at mounds, irrespective of their age, while less plant cover and richness on young mounds dissipated with age.</p> <p><strong><em>Synthesis</em></strong>: Mound-building megapodes can modulate the distribution of locally derived resources and create a novel microsite. Engineering effects can enhance spatial heterogeneity and ecosystem function over broad spatial and temporal scales, and may assist with ecological restoration, particularly in depauperate, arid systems.</p>
Incubation mound-building by the Australian megapode (Malleefowl, Leipoa ocellata) creates novel, resource-rich patches in a semi-arid woodland
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
On following pages: 534. Macedonian Mouse (Mus macedonicus); 535. Mound-building Mouse (Mus spicilegus); 536. Cypriot Mouse (Mus cypriacus); 537. Ethiopian Striped Mouse (Mus imberbis); 538. Mahomet Mouse (Mus mahomet): 539. Hausa Mouse (Mus haussa); 540. West African Pygmy Mouse (Mus musculoides); 541. Baoule Mouse (Mus baoulei); 542. Matthey's Mouse (Mus mattheyi); 543. Toad Mouse (Mus bufo); 544. Callewaert's Mouse (Mus callewaerti); 545. Gounda Mouse (Mus goundae); 546. Neave's Mouse (Mus neavel); 547. Ubangui Mouse (Mus oubanguii); 548. Peters's Mouse (Mus setulosus); 549. Thomas's Mouse (Mus sorella): 550. Gray-bellied Mouse (Mustriton); 551. Delicate Mouse (Mus tenellus); 552. Desert Pygmy Mouse (Mus indutus); 553. Sub-Saharan Pygmy Mouse (Mus minutoides); 554. Setzer's Mouse (Mus setzeri); 555. Little Indian Field Mouse (Mus booduga); 556. Phillips's Mouse (Mus phillipsi); 557. Flat-haired Mouse (Mus platythrix); 558. Saxicolous Mouse (Mus saxicola); 559. Earth-colored Mouse (Mus terricolon); 560. Servant Mouse (Mus famulus): 561. Ceylon Spiny Mouse (Mus fernandoni); 562. Mayor's Mouse (Mus mayori); 563. Ryukyu Mouse (Mus caroli); 564. Fawn-colored Mouse (Mus cervicolor); 565. Cook's Mouse (Mus cookii); 566. Sheath-tailed Mouse (Mus fragilicauda); 567. Little Burmese Field Mouse (Mus lepidoides); 568. Blyth's Mouse (Mus nitidulus); 569. Indochinese Shrew-like Mouse (Mus pahari); 570. Shortridge's Mouse (Mus shortridgei); 571. Sumatran Shrew-like Mouse (Mus crociduroides); 572. Javan Shrew-like Mouse (Mus vulcani). in Muridae
On following pages: 534. Macedonian Mouse (Mus macedonicus); 535. Mound-building Mouse (Mus spicilegus); 536. Cypriot Mouse (Mus cypriacus); 537. Ethiopian Striped Mouse (Mus imberbis); 538. Mahomet Mouse (Mus mahomet): 539. Hausa Mouse (Mus haussa); 540. West African Pygmy Mouse (Mus musculoides); 541. Baoule Mouse (Mus baoulei); 542. Matthey's Mouse (Mus mattheyi); 543. Toad Mouse (Mus bufo); 544. Callewaert's Mouse (Mus callewaerti); 545. Gounda Mouse (Mus goundae); 546. Neave's Mouse (Mus neavel); 547. Ubangui Mouse (Mus oubanguii); 548. Peters's Mouse (Mus setulosus); 549. Thomas's Mouse (Mus sorella): 550. Gray-bellied Mouse (Mustriton); 551. Delicate Mouse (Mus tenellus); 552. Desert Pygmy Mouse (Mus indutus); 553. Sub-Saharan Pygmy Mouse (Mus minutoides); 554. Setzer's Mouse (Mus setzeri); 555. Little Indian Field Mouse (Mus booduga); 556. Phillips's Mouse (Mus phillipsi); 557. Flat-haired Mouse (Mus platythrix); 558. Saxicolous Mouse (Mus saxicola); 559. Earth-colored Mouse (Mus terricolon); 560. Servant Mouse (Mus famulus): 561. Ceylon Spiny Mouse (Mus fernandoni); 562. Mayor's Mouse (Mus mayori); 563. Ryukyu Mouse (Mus caroli); 564. Fawn-colored Mouse (Mus cervicolor); 565. Cook's Mouse (Mus cookii); 566. Sheath-tailed Mouse (Mus fragilicauda); 567. Little Burmese Field Mouse (Mus lepidoides); 568. Blyth's Mouse (Mus nitidulus); 569. Indochinese Shrew-like Mouse (Mus pahari); 570. Shortridge's Mouse (Mus shortridgei); 571. Sumatran Shrew-like Mouse (Mus crociduroides); 572. Javan Shrew-like Mouse (Mus vulcani).
Fig. 35 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 35: Nest-sample means of the discriminant score and the first factor of principal component analysis of workers of For- mica truncorum (white dots) and of Formica sinensis (black rhombs) considering seven phenotypic characters. The posi- tions of the single type specimens of F. truncorum FABRICIUS, 1804 (abbreviation TM), Formica truncicola NYLANDER, 1846 (TA), and Formica yessensis WHEELER, 1913 (YE) and of the type series of Formica approximans WHEELER, 1933 (AP), F. sinensis WHEELER, 1913 (SI), and Formica wongi WU, 1990 (WO) are indicated by arrows.
Fig. 34 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 34: Nest-sample means of a linear discriminant analysis and principal component analysis of workers of Formica frontalis (black rhombs) and Formica truncorum (white dots). Six phenotypic characters were considered.
Fig. 25 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 25: Position of the type samples of Formica major NY- LANDER, 1849 (MA) and Formica constricta KARAVAJEV, 1929 (CO) in a linear discriminant analysis considering 58 nest samples of Formica polyctena (black squares), 27 nest samples of Formica aquilonia × polyctena or backcrosses (white dots), and 75 nest samples of F. aquilonia (black rhombs). The type samples were run as wild-cards. Sixteen phenotypic characters were considered.
Fig.26 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.26: Principal component analysis of gynes of Formica polyctena (black squares, n = 33), Formica aquilonia × polyctena or backcrosses (white dots, n = 18), and F. aquilonia (black rhombs, n = 29). Twenty-four phenotypic characters were considered.
Fig.23 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.23: Linear discriminant analysis of 169 samples of workers of Formica rufa (white rhombs), Formica polyctena × rufa and backcrosses (black squares), and F. polyctena (white dots) considering 12 morphological characters. The missing gaps between the clusters indicate introgression and prevent a clear discrimination of hybrids from parental species. Note that the frequency of hybrids in the analysis is about fivefold larger than expected for random sampling all over Europe.
Figs.14-20 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Figs.14-20: (14-lugu) Formica lugubris, worker, normal morph, head; central vertex suggestedly shiny due to weaker transverse microsculpture. (15-lugu) Formica lugubris, worker, Hippie morph, head; central vertex suggestedly shiny due to weaker transverse microsculpture. (16-helv) Formica helvetica sp.n., worker, holotype, head. (17-helv) Formica helvetica sp.n., worker, holotype, lateral. (18-trun) Formica truncorum, worker, head. (19-trun) Formica truncorum, gyne, head. (20-sine) Formica sinensis, worker, lateral; note the contrast between weak pronotal and strong gular pilosity.
Fig.2 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.2: Formica polyctena, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. There is some trend to show stronger transverse microripples and a more dilute pubescence than Formica rufa.
Fig. 36 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 36: Worker nest-sample means of principal component analysis of Formica aquilonia (white squares, 75 nest samples) and of Formica lugubris (black dots, 217 nest samples) from the whole Palaearctic range considering 10 phenotypic char- acters. The black square marks the F. aquilonia sample from Severobaikalsk with a mtDNA haplotype clustering with that of syntopic F. lugubris. Formica lugubris samples with very large scores of first principal component do mainly or fully contain workers of the Fennoscandian Hippie morph.
Fig.3 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.3: Formica lugubris, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. The transverse microsculpture is as weak as in Formica rufa, but the density of pubescence and microfoveolae is much higher.
F in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
F ig. 21: Data of 49 samples from of E Saxony / Germany with Formica rufa (white rhombs), Formica polyctena × rufa (black squares), and F. polyctena (white dots). The first canonical vector of a three-class LDA, separating the parental species and considering 12 morphological characters, is plotted against the percentage of F. polyctena alleles determined by BAPS clustering (with K = 5) of 19 microsatellite markers (from SEIFERT & al. 2010, changed).
Figs.5-13 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Figs.5-13: (5-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., worker, holotype, head. (6-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., worker, holotype, lateral. (7-ussu) Formica ussuriensis sp.n., gyne, head; note the more trapezoid head shape. (8-aqui) Formica aquilonia, gyne, head; note the more rounded head shape. (9-prat) Formica pratensis, worker, neotype, head; note the more reticulate microsculpture of central vertex compared with Formica lugubris (Figs.14, 15), producing a matt surface appearance. (10-prat) Formica pratensis, worker, neotype, lateral aspect. (11-prat) Formica pratensis, gyne, P morph, lateral; almost no setae on head, mesosoma, and first gaster tergite. (12-prat) Formica pratensis, gyne, N morph, lateral; many setae on head, mesosoma, and first gaster tergite. (13-kupy) Formica kupyanskayae, gyne, head.
Fig.33 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.33: Principal component analysis of gynes of Formica paralugubris (black dots), Formica lugubris morph A1 (squares), F. lugubris morph A3 (triangles), and Formica helvetica sp.n. (rhombs). Eight phenotypic characters were considered. The placement of the four entities within the plot is similar to that in workers (Fig. 32).
Fig. 38 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 38: Schematic presentation of hybridization and reticulate evolution in Palaearctic Formica rufa group ants as it is apparent in the younger evolutionary history. The arrows connecting the main branches indicate the direction of gene flow after backcrossing of hybrids – for example, brown arrows directed from Formica pratensis to Formica lugubris indicate that Formica pratensis × lugubris hybrids have backcrossed with F. pratensis. Examples of both uni- and bidirectional gene flow are shown. The number of arrows is proportional to the supposed frequency of hybridization or backcrossing. Formica paralugubris is likely to be of hybridogenous origin. For details, see the main text.
Fig. 4 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 4: Formica pratensis, gyne; paramedian surface of the dorsum of first gaster tergite. The strength of transverse mi- croripples is at maximum within the Formica rufa group and pubescence density comparable with Formica lugubris.
Fig. 37 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 37: Worker nest-sample means of a linear discriminant analysis separating Formica aquilonia (squares), Formica lugubris (triangles), and Formica rufa (discs). The 10 and nine worker individuals of the hybrid samples F. lugubris × rufa (black rhombs) were run as wild-cards. Ten phenotypic characters and a total of 165 nest samples with 794 individuals of the three species compared were considered.
Fig.27 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig.27: Classification by four variants of NC-clustering of 75 nest samples of workers of Formica aquilonia (grey bars) and 10 nest samples of Formica ussuriensis sp.n. (black bars). The mean error of four exploratory data analyses is 0.6%. Eight phenotypic characters were considered.
Fig. 31 in A taxonomic revision of the Palaearctic members of the Formica rufa group (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) - the famous mound-building red wood ants
Fig. 31: Nest-sample means of a linear discriminant analysis and principal component analysis of Formica lugubris complex gynes considering eight phenotypic characters; Formica helvetica sp.n. (white dots), F. lugubris morph A1 (black squares), F. lugubris morph A3 (squares with white center). The means were calculated from 28, 38, and 18 individuals for each entity.
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.