cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852364
title: Table 1 in Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies

description: Table 1. Summary of active and passive sampling gears and attributes used to capture bigheaded carp (Hypophthalmichthys spp.) across larval, juvenile, and adult life stages.
ApproachGearLife stageUnitsGear attributesActivePush netEggs, LarvaedensitySingle or dual conical nets, 0.5 m diameter, 2.0 m long, 0.8 mm meshNueston netEggs, Larvaedensity1 × 2 m, 500 µm meshSurface plankton netEggs, Larvaedensity0.5 diameter opening, 2-m length, 500 µm meshBongo netEggs, Larvaedensity0.6 cm diameter opening, 333 µm meshCast netJuvenileper cast2.7 m diameter; 10 mm meshSeine–BeachJuvenileper haul10 m length, 3–5 mm meshSeine–PurseJuvenileper haul122 × 3.05 m, with 2.5 cm meshSeine–ContractedJuvenile, Adultper haulVarying set lengths; mesh size range 1.6–5.1 cmTrawl–PaupierJuvenile, AdultCPUEStandard amperage adjusted to conductivity, 30 Hz, 15%, 2–4 × 1.5 m frame, 38 mm stretched body mesh to 6 mm mesh codTrawl–ElectrifiedJuvenile, AdultCPUEAmperage adjusted to conductivity, 30 Hz, 15%, 2.13 × 0.9 m frame, 38 mm stretched body mesh to 6 mm mesh codTrawl–DozerJuvenile, AdultCPUETwo seam; 4.8 m wide × 4.5 m long with 18 mm stretch mesh. Bag 1.8 m; Mesh, 3 mmElectrofishing–ACJuvenile, AdultCPUE3-phase, 3 Kw, 230-V, 60 hz; 100–250 V, 3–10 amps, 60–120 hz, 25% Duty cycle, 60–80 pulses/sElectrofishing–DCJuvenile, AdultCPUE180–1000 V, 15–60 Hz, 25–50% duty cycleHydroacousticAdultdensityTwo horizontal-orientated split-beam transducers, 5 pings/s, pulse duration of 0.40 ms, 70 kHz (5 beam angle)–200 kHz (6.6 beam angle)Trammel net–DrivenAdultCPUEHeight, 1.8–3.6 m; Inner panel, 2.5–7.6 cm; Outer panel, 20–34 cm, varying set lengthsGill net–DrivenAdultCPUEHeight, 1.8–3.6 m; Mesh size range:2.54–25.4 cm; Varying set lengthsPassiveDrift netEggs, Larvaedensity0.5 diameter opening, 2-m length, 750 µm mesh, 1-m below surface waterBongo netEggs, Larvaedensity0.6 cm diameter opening, 333 µm meshLight trapsLarvaetrap nightCloverleaf array; 25.0 cm tall with 5.0 mm entry slots. Collection pan with 6 holes cover by 250 µm meshMinnow trapLarvae, juvenilenet nightTrap dimensions, 42 × 19 × 22 cm, baitedMini fyke netJuvenilenet night4.5 × 0.6 m lead, 0.6 × 1.2 m trap 3 mm mesh; some tandem setsHoop netAdultnet nightDiameter, 0.6–1.8 m; Mesh range, 3.8–10 cm; Some tandem setsStop log netAdultnet night25 × 25 cm wood frames; 0.9 m hoops; 1.9 cm meshFyke netAdultnet night0.9 m × 1.8 m frame with 15.2 m × 1.4 m lead, 1.8 to 3.8 cm bar meshPound netAdultnet nightTrap dimensions, 6.1 × 3.1 × 3.1 m; 100 m lead and wingsTrammel netAdultCPUEHeight, 1.8–3.6 m; Inner panel, 2.5–7.6 cm; Outer panel, 20–34 cm, varying set lengthsGill netAdultCPUEHeight, 1.8–3.6 m; Mesh size range: 2.54–25.4 cm; Varying set lengths
description: Published as part of Lederman, Nathan J., Collins, Scott F., Hammen, Jeremy J. & Parkos, Joseph J., 2024, Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies, pp. 27 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 27, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.02, http://zenodo.org/record/11976473
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852368
title: Table 3 in Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies

description: Table 3. Summary of catch per unit effort of Hypophthalmichthys spp. across larval, juvenile, and adult life stages among the various habitat strata found in this literature review. Comparison of catch rates among rows should be done with caution as units of effort may vary (e.g., number per time vs. number per length of net) and are not be directly comparable. Habitat strata: BW = Backwater; IMP = Impoundment; MC = Main channel; SC = Secondary channel; TW = Tailwater.
SpeciesTypeGearBWIMPMCSCTWBHCActiveCast net–0.00–––EF–AC––0.02––EF–DC0.040.000.080.080.00Gill net1.150.000.240.425.0Gill/trammel net4.032.000.300.10–Trammel net2.991.390.260.24–Hydroacoustic0.85–0.23––Seine–beach0.01–0.550.35–Seine–contracted32.77–3.1531.25–Trawling––0.000.000.04PassiveGill net0.000.130.190.37–Hoop net0.040.060.010.030.09Mini fyke0.250.150.160.561.60Minnow traps––0.0––Pound net8.93–0.0––Trammel net–0.740.01––Trap net0.400.090.040.000.96SCPActiveCast net–0.03–––EF–AC––16.59––EF–DC17.2918.6716.5925.87161.28Gill net16.150.003.1683.722.67Gill/trammel net31.6526.0038.8672.88–Trammel net41.6144.8411.4669.98–Seine–beach34.50–0.010.06–Seine–contracted236.81–82.081140.50–Seine–purse14.00–0.59––Trawl–dozer64.77–336.82––Trawl–Paupier27.48101.88–––Trawling––0.000.000.00PassiveGill net0.255.000.250.30–Hoop net0.000.080.030.020.04Mini fyke10.8542.185.557.47604.92Minnow traps––0.00––Pound net35.922.86–––Trammel net–0.110.01––Trap net0.060.060.030.010.11BothActiveBongo net1.30–0.23261.63–Hydroacoustics––0.63––Push net––4.24––PassiveDriftnet––0.10––Light trap–9.06–0.00–
description: Published as part of Lederman, Nathan J., Collins, Scott F., Hammen, Jeremy J. & Parkos, Joseph J., 2024, Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies, pp. 30 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 30, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.02, http://zenodo.org/record/11976473
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852367
title: Table 3 in Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies

description: Table 3. Summary of catch per unit effort of Hypophthalmichthys spp. across larval, juvenile, and adult life stages among the various habitat strata found in this literature review. Comparison of catch rates among rows should be done with caution as units of effort may vary (e.g., number per time vs. number per length of net) and are not be directly comparable. Habitat strata: BW = Backwater; IMP = Impoundment; MC = Main channel; SC = Secondary channel; TW = Tailwater.
SpeciesTypeGearBWIMPMCSCTWBHCActiveCast net–0.00–––EF–AC––0.02––EF–DC0.040.000.080.080.00Gill net1.150.000.240.425.0Gill/trammel net4.032.000.300.10–Trammel net2.991.390.260.24–Hydroacoustic0.85–0.23––Seine–beach0.01–0.550.35–Seine–contracted32.77–3.1531.25–Trawling––0.000.000.04PassiveGill net0.000.130.190.37–Hoop net0.040.060.010.030.09Mini fyke0.250.150.160.561.60Minnow traps––0.0––Pound net8.93–0.0––Trammel net–0.740.01––Trap net0.400.090.040.000.96SCPActiveCast net–0.03–––EF–AC––16.59––EF–DC17.2918.6716.5925.87161.28Gill net16.150.003.1683.722.67Gill/trammel net31.6526.0038.8672.88–Trammel net41.6144.8411.4669.98–Seine–beach34.50–0.010.06–Seine–contracted236.81–82.081140.50–Seine–purse14.00–0.59––Trawl–dozer64.77–336.82––Trawl–Paupier27.48101.88–––Trawling––0.000.000.00PassiveGill net0.255.000.250.30–Hoop net0.000.080.030.020.04Mini fyke10.8542.185.557.47604.92Minnow traps––0.00––Pound net35.922.86–––Trammel net–0.110.01––Trap net0.060.060.030.010.11BothActiveBongo net1.30–0.23261.63–Hydroacoustics––0.63––Push net––4.24––PassiveDriftnet––0.10––Light trap–9.06–0.00–
description: Published as part of Lederman, Nathan J., Collins, Scott F., Hammen, Jeremy J. & Parkos, Joseph J., 2024, Catching carp: a review of bigheaded carp capture strategies, pp. 30 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 30, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.02, http://zenodo.org/record/11976473
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852369
title: Table 1 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 1. Number of field samples (including controls) for each qPCR assay at each site sampled for eDNA in 2018 and 2019 in western Lake Erie. DR = Detroit River, HP = Hot Ponds, MB = Maumee Bay. Note that samples are site-specific.
SiteYear20182019AssaySamplesAssaySamplesDRGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3278 78 78GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3281 81 81HPGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3277 77 77GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3282 82 82MBGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3278 78 78GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3280 80 80
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 56 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 56, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852370
title: Table 1 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 1. Number of field samples (including controls) for each qPCR assay at each site sampled for eDNA in 2018 and 2019 in western Lake Erie. DR = Detroit River, HP = Hot Ponds, MB = Maumee Bay. Note that samples are site-specific.
SiteYear20182019AssaySamplesAssaySamplesDRGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3278 78 78GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3281 81 81HPGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3277 77 77GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3282 82 82MBGCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3278 78 78GCTM10 GCTM22 GCTM3280 80 80
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 56 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 56, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852371
title: Table 2 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 2. Gene region, primer, and probe sequences used to amplify GCTM10,GCTM22, and GCTM32 for grass carp.
GenePrimers and ProbesSequenceND2Forward5′- CCYTACGTACTCGCAATTCTAC -3′ND2Reverse5′- GTGGTGGTGTTGGGCTATTA -3′ND2Probe5′- VIC- ACCCTAACCTTTGCTAGCTCCCAC -MGBNFQ-3′COIIForward5′- CCGACTCCTAGAAACAGATCAC -3′COIIReverse5′- GGGACAGCTCAGGAATGTAATA -3′COIIProbe5′- 56-FAM- CCAGTTCGT/ZEN/GTCCTAGTATCTGCCGA -3IABkFQ -3′COIIIForward5′- CCACGGACTACACGTCATTATT -3′COIIIReverse5′-GATGTTCGGATGTAAAGTGGTATTG -3′COIIIProbe5′-NED- TTCCTAGCTGTTTGCCTTCTCCGT -MGBNFQ-3′
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 57 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 57, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852372
title: Table 2 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 2. Gene region, primer, and probe sequences used to amplify GCTM10,GCTM22, and GCTM32 for grass carp.
GenePrimers and ProbesSequenceND2Forward5′- CCYTACGTACTCGCAATTCTAC -3′ND2Reverse5′- GTGGTGGTGTTGGGCTATTA -3′ND2Probe5′- VIC- ACCCTAACCTTTGCTAGCTCCCAC -MGBNFQ-3′COIIForward5′- CCGACTCCTAGAAACAGATCAC -3′COIIReverse5′- GGGACAGCTCAGGAATGTAATA -3′COIIProbe5′- 56-FAM- CCAGTTCGT/ZEN/GTCCTAGTATCTGCCGA -3IABkFQ -3′COIIIForward5′- CCACGGACTACACGTCATTATT -3′COIIIReverse5′-GATGTTCGGATGTAAAGTGGTATTG -3′COIIIProbe5′-NED- TTCCTAGCTGTTTGCCTTCTCCGT -MGBNFQ-3′
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 57 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 57, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852374
title: Table 3 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 3. Candidate set of hierarchical occupancy models used to estimate probability of grass carp eDNA occurrence among sites (ψ), the conditional probability of grass carp eDNA occurrence at a sampling locality within a site given that grass carp were present at the site (Θ), and the conditional probability of eDNA detection on replicate filters collected at a sampling locality given that the species is present at the sampling locality (p) from three sites in western Lake Erie sampled in 2018 and 2019. Covariates included location (site), time (Month) and probe type (GCTM10, GCTM22, GCTM32). Model comparison was evaluated with the Widely Applicable Information Criterion (WAIC).
ModelWAICΔ WAICLack of fitPredicted Varianceψ(Site)Θ(Site)p(.)309.44-298.7018.63ψ(.)Θ(Site)p(.)309.500.06298.9910.73ψ(.)Θ(Month)p(.)317.618.18299.0518.56ψ(Season)Θ(.)p(.)317.678.24299.0118.65ψ(Month)Θ(.)p(.)317.728.28299.0418.67ψ(Season)Θ(Season)p(.)317.848.40299.0418.79ψ(.)Θ(Season)p(.)317.748.31299.0718.66ψ(Site)Θ(.)p(.)317.948.51299.0418.90ψ(.)Θ(.)p(.)325.0015.57305.5020.21ψ(Season)Θ(Site)p(.)325.4115.98305.4919.91ψ(Site + Season)Θ(.)p(.)325.5916.16305.4420.15ψ(Site)Θ(Season)p(.)325.7216.29305.4820.23ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(.)325.9216.49305.4920.43ψ(.)Θ(Site + Season)p(.)326.3716.94305.5220.84ψ(Site)Θ(Month)p(.)329.5720.14308.6520.92ψ(Month)Θ(Month)p(.)330.1420.71308.6621.84ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site)p(Probe)377.6368.20276.90100.72ψ(Site + Season)Θ(.)p(Probe)378.3568.92277.00101.34ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)378.4268.99277.00101.41ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Season)p(Probe)378.5569.12277.09101.46ψ(Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.4169.98277.28102.10ψ(Site)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.6270.19277.40102.21ψ(.)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.8870.45277.31102.57ψ(Site + Month)Θ(.)p(.)383.5674.13282.86100.69ψ(Site + Month)Θ(Site + Month)p(.)385.4776.04283.38102.09ψ(Site + Month)Θ(Site + Month)p(Probe)386.9577.52282.90104.05ψ(.)Θ(Site + Month)p(.)396.4487.01292.14104.29ψ(.)Θ(.)p(Probe)396.4587.01292.14104.29
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 62 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 62, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852373
title: Table 3 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 3. Candidate set of hierarchical occupancy models used to estimate probability of grass carp eDNA occurrence among sites (ψ), the conditional probability of grass carp eDNA occurrence at a sampling locality within a site given that grass carp were present at the site (Θ), and the conditional probability of eDNA detection on replicate filters collected at a sampling locality given that the species is present at the sampling locality (p) from three sites in western Lake Erie sampled in 2018 and 2019. Covariates included location (site), time (Month) and probe type (GCTM10, GCTM22, GCTM32). Model comparison was evaluated with the Widely Applicable Information Criterion (WAIC).
ModelWAICΔ WAICLack of fitPredicted Varianceψ(Site)Θ(Site)p(.)309.44-298.7018.63ψ(.)Θ(Site)p(.)309.500.06298.9910.73ψ(.)Θ(Month)p(.)317.618.18299.0518.56ψ(Season)Θ(.)p(.)317.678.24299.0118.65ψ(Month)Θ(.)p(.)317.728.28299.0418.67ψ(Season)Θ(Season)p(.)317.848.40299.0418.79ψ(.)Θ(Season)p(.)317.748.31299.0718.66ψ(Site)Θ(.)p(.)317.948.51299.0418.90ψ(.)Θ(.)p(.)325.0015.57305.5020.21ψ(Season)Θ(Site)p(.)325.4115.98305.4919.91ψ(Site + Season)Θ(.)p(.)325.5916.16305.4420.15ψ(Site)Θ(Season)p(.)325.7216.29305.4820.23ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(.)325.9216.49305.4920.43ψ(.)Θ(Site + Season)p(.)326.3716.94305.5220.84ψ(Site)Θ(Month)p(.)329.5720.14308.6520.92ψ(Month)Θ(Month)p(.)330.1420.71308.6621.84ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site)p(Probe)377.6368.20276.90100.72ψ(Site + Season)Θ(.)p(Probe)378.3568.92277.00101.34ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)378.4268.99277.00101.41ψ(Site + Season)Θ(Season)p(Probe)378.5569.12277.09101.46ψ(Season)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.4169.98277.28102.10ψ(Site)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.6270.19277.40102.21ψ(.)Θ(Site + Season)p(Probe)379.8870.45277.31102.57ψ(Site + Month)Θ(.)p(.)383.5674.13282.86100.69ψ(Site + Month)Θ(Site + Month)p(.)385.4776.04283.38102.09ψ(Site + Month)Θ(Site + Month)p(Probe)386.9577.52282.90104.05ψ(.)Θ(Site + Month)p(.)396.4487.01292.14104.29ψ(.)Θ(.)p(Probe)396.4587.01292.14104.29
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 62 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 62, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852375
title: Table 4 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 4. Percentage of positive eDNA replicate detections in each month and site in 2018 and 2019 in western Lake Erie (based on at least one positive detection on at least one marker and one replicate). All markers (GCTM10, GCTM 22, GCTM32) were used to calculate these proportions. Samples were collected monthly from June to November for each site. The number of telemetered grass carp detected within 7 days before sampling for eDNA is denoted in parentheses. Acoustic telemetry receivers in MB in 2018 were not available. DR = Detroit River, HP = Hot Ponds, and MB = Maumee Bay. NA denotes when acoustic telemetry receivers were not in operation.
YearSite20182019JuneJulyAugSeptOctNovMayJuneJulyAugustOctNovDR0.0%2.3%2.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.5%10.614.117.4%14.1%2.2%(1)(1)(2)(1)(2)(0)(1)% (1)% (1)(2)(2)(0)HP0.0%0.1%4.1%2.2%15.8%0.0%9.0%1.5%34.81.5%15.8%22.7%(1)(1)(2)(2)(3)(NA)(2)(2)% (2)(3)(2)(2)MB12.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.1%37.18.3%8.3%0.0%(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(0)(0)% (0)(0)(0)(0)
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 64 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 64, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852376
title: Table 4 in Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA

description: Table 4. Percentage of positive eDNA replicate detections in each month and site in 2018 and 2019 in western Lake Erie (based on at least one positive detection on at least one marker and one replicate). All markers (GCTM10, GCTM 22, GCTM32) were used to calculate these proportions. Samples were collected monthly from June to November for each site. The number of telemetered grass carp detected within 7 days before sampling for eDNA is denoted in parentheses. Acoustic telemetry receivers in MB in 2018 were not available. DR = Detroit River, HP = Hot Ponds, and MB = Maumee Bay. NA denotes when acoustic telemetry receivers were not in operation.
YearSite20182019JuneJulyAugSeptOctNovMayJuneJulyAugustOctNovDR0.0%2.3%2.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.5%10.614.117.4%14.1%2.2%(1)(1)(2)(1)(2)(0)(1)% (1)% (1)(2)(2)(0)HP0.0%0.1%4.1%2.2%15.8%0.0%9.0%1.5%34.81.5%15.8%22.7%(1)(1)(2)(2)(3)(NA)(2)(2)% (2)(3)(2)(2)MB12.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.1%37.18.3%8.3%0.0%(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(NA)(0)(0)% (0)(0)(0)(0)
description: Published as part of Bopp, Justin, Nathan, Lucas R., Robinson, John D., Kanefsky, Jeanette, Scribner, Kim T., Herbst, Seth & Robinson, Kelly F., 2024, Assessing grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) occupancy and detection probability within Lake Erie from environmental DNA, pp. 64 in Management of Biological Invasions 15 (1) on page 64, DOI: 10.3391/mbi.2024.15.1.04, http://zenodo.org/record/11976725
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852377
title: Tabl. 1 in The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon

description: Tabl. 1 - Length and width measurements for Aublysotlon mirandus teeth. Mesures des longueur et largeur des dents de Aublysotlon mirandus.
Specimen Numberanterioposterior lengthwidthKU 1291911.5min11.5mmUCM 434473025UCM 38OÓO8045UCMP 641436045UCMP 7309I654oUCMP 73l0l5025UCMP 851413525UCMP 1243672520UCMP 1243984525UCMP 1249714025UCMP 1249803530UCMP 1299813525UCMP 1249822520UCMP 1249933020UCMP 1249994530UCMP 1249957545UCMP 1249965510USNM 83556010
description: Published as part of R. E. Molnar & K. Carpenter, 1989, The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon, pp. 449 in Géobios 22 (4) on page 449, DOI: 10.1016/S0016-6995(89)80098-1, http://zenodo.org/record/1037473
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852378
title: Tabl. 1 in The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon

description: Tabl. 1 - Length and width measurements for Aublysotlon mirandus teeth. Mesures des longueur et largeur des dents de Aublysotlon mirandus.
Specimen Numberanterioposterior lengthwidthKU 1291911.5min11.5mmUCM 434473025UCM 38OÓO8045UCMP 641436045UCMP 7309I654oUCMP 73l0l5025UCMP 851413525UCMP 1243672520UCMP 1243984525UCMP 1249714025UCMP 1249803530UCMP 1299813525UCMP 1249822520UCMP 1249933020UCMP 1249994530UCMP 1249957545UCMP 1249965510USNM 83556010
description: Published as part of R. E. Molnar & K. Carpenter, 1989, The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon, pp. 449 in Géobios 22 (4) on page 449, DOI: 10.1016/S0016-6995(89)80098-1, http://zenodo.org/record/1037473
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13852379
title: Tabl. 2 in The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon

description: Tabl. 2 - Characters used in determining the relationships of Aublysodon. Caractères utilises pour determiner la position systématique Ae Aublysodon.
characterplesiomorphic/apomorphic1. premaxillary teeth D-shaped in sectiona2. premaxillary teeth not serratep3. premaxillary teeth with low ridge on posterior facea4. cheek teeth relatively large (with respect to depthof muzzle and jaw)p5. muzzle long and lowp6. frontals longer than widep7. two or three prongs of nasal overlap frontala8. dorsolaterally directed prefrontal contact on frontalp9. socket for prefrontal on frontalp10. elongate contact for prefrontal on frontalp11. orbital rim on frontal very shortp12. frontal-prefrontal suture expandedp13. pronounced buttress at frontal-postorbital contactp14. parietal process separates frontal posteriorlyp15. sagittal crest extends onto frontalsp16. frontals essentially flat between orbitsp17. nasals smoothp18. anterior margin of antorbital fossa v-shapedp19. acute angle of premaxillary-maxillary contact withventral margin of snoutp20. ventral margin of symphysis only slightly inclinedto horizontalp
Characters 1 to 8, 10, and 17 to 20 discussed in text, characters 9 and 11 to 16 from Currie (1987).
description: Published as part of R. E. Molnar & K. Carpenter, 1989, The Jordan theropod (Maastrichtian, Montana, U. S. A.) referred to the genus Aublysodon, pp. 452 in Géobios 22 (4) on page 452, DOI: 10.1016/S0016-6995(89)80098-1, http://zenodo.org/record/1037473