Figure 4 - Extreme shape differences between Apis mellifera intermissa, Apis mellifera sahariensis and Apis mellifera capensis along the first two canonical variates (Fig. 3A, B). A and B fore wing shape differences along the first and second canonical variate, respectively. C and D hind wing shape differences along the first and second canonical variate, respectively (scale factor ×3 and ×2 respectively). Grey lines depict the shape associated with the negative values and black lines the shape associated with the positive values of the respective canonical variate
Honeybee (Apis mellifera) subspecies usually are distinguished by standard morphometry methods, bas...
Figure 4. Females of Megalopta. (A‒E) Posterolateral view of mesosoma; (A) Megalopta yanomami sp. n....
Figure S2. Canonical variance analysis factor loadings of wing geometry and standard morphometric me...
Figure 3 - Shape variability among Apis mellifera intermissa, Apis mellifera sahariensi...
In this study, a landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis was carried out on three honeybee su...
Abstract – Honeybee (Apis mellifera) subspecies usually are distinguished by standard morphometry me...
Figure 4 Comparison of selected diagnostic characteristics of females of Schwarziaelizabethae Bosser...
Figure 4 Epeolus ainsliei A female, lateral habitus (scale bar 3 mm) B female holotype, dorsal habit...
Figure 4 Left forewing of Bombus (Bombus) terrestris (Linnaeus, 1758) with the 18 landmark points in...
FIGURE 3. Rediviva (Albiviva) albifasciata Whitehead & Steiner ♀: a. metasoma with distinct white ap...
We studied the population structure of Apis florea using geometric morphometrics of wing shape. We f...
Honeybee (Apis mellifera ) populations are usually distinguished using standard morphometric methods...
A single honeybee subspecies, Apis mellifera adansonii, has been described from all of West and Cent...
FIGURE 4. T. anae—♀: A—frontal view, B—lateral view, C—dorsal view (DZUP Santa Tereza—ES, Brasil, 8/...
Wing venation is used as a tool in honeybee (Apis mellifera L., 1758) subspecies identification. The...
Honeybee (Apis mellifera) subspecies usually are distinguished by standard morphometry methods, bas...
Figure 4. Females of Megalopta. (A‒E) Posterolateral view of mesosoma; (A) Megalopta yanomami sp. n....
Figure S2. Canonical variance analysis factor loadings of wing geometry and standard morphometric me...
Figure 3 - Shape variability among Apis mellifera intermissa, Apis mellifera sahariensi...
In this study, a landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis was carried out on three honeybee su...
Abstract – Honeybee (Apis mellifera) subspecies usually are distinguished by standard morphometry me...
Figure 4 Comparison of selected diagnostic characteristics of females of Schwarziaelizabethae Bosser...
Figure 4 Epeolus ainsliei A female, lateral habitus (scale bar 3 mm) B female holotype, dorsal habit...
Figure 4 Left forewing of Bombus (Bombus) terrestris (Linnaeus, 1758) with the 18 landmark points in...
FIGURE 3. Rediviva (Albiviva) albifasciata Whitehead & Steiner ♀: a. metasoma with distinct white ap...
We studied the population structure of Apis florea using geometric morphometrics of wing shape. We f...
Honeybee (Apis mellifera ) populations are usually distinguished using standard morphometric methods...
A single honeybee subspecies, Apis mellifera adansonii, has been described from all of West and Cent...
FIGURE 4. T. anae—♀: A—frontal view, B—lateral view, C—dorsal view (DZUP Santa Tereza—ES, Brasil, 8/...
Wing venation is used as a tool in honeybee (Apis mellifera L., 1758) subspecies identification. The...
Honeybee (Apis mellifera) subspecies usually are distinguished by standard morphometry methods, bas...
Figure 4. Females of Megalopta. (A‒E) Posterolateral view of mesosoma; (A) Megalopta yanomami sp. n....
Figure S2. Canonical variance analysis factor loadings of wing geometry and standard morphometric me...