The Experts below are selected from a list of 8796 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Torres, Patricia L. M. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FIGURES 22 – 25 in Description of the preimaginal stages of Enochrus (Hugoscottia) variegatus (Steinheil, 1869) and E. (Methydrus) vulgaris (Steinheil, 1869) (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), with emphasis on larval morphometry and chaetotaxy
2018Co-Authors: Byttebier Barbara, Torres, Patricia L. M.Abstract:FIGURES 22 – 25. Enochrus variegatus, third-instar larva: 22, Labium, dorsal view; 23, Labium, ventral view. Enochrus vulgaris, third-instar larva: 24, Labium, dorsal view; 25, Labium, ventral view. Scale bars = 0.05 mm
-
FIGURES 7 – 13 in Description of the preimaginal stages of three species of the genus Tropisternus Solier, subgenus Strepitornus Hansen (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), with emphasis on morphometry and chaetotaxy
2018Co-Authors: Torres, Patricia L. M., Michat, Mariano C., Archangelsky MiguelAbstract:FIGURES 7 – 13. Tropisternus scutellaris, first-instar larva: 7, left mandible, dorsal view; 8, right mandible, dorsal view; 9, left maxilla, dorsal view; 10, right maxilla, ventral view; 11, left antenna, dorsal view; 12, Labium, dorsal view; 13, Labium, ventral view. Scale bars = 0.1 mm
-
FIGURES 11 – 17 in Description of the preimaginal stages of Enochrus (Hugoscottia) variegatus (Steinheil, 1869) and E. (Methydrus) vulgaris (Steinheil, 1869) (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), with emphasis on larval morphometry and chaetotaxy
2018Co-Authors: Byttebier Barbara, Torres, Patricia L. M.Abstract:FIGURES 11 – 17. Enochrus variegatus, first-instar larva: 11, left mandible, dorsal view; 12, right mandible, dorsal view; 13, right antenna, dorsal view; 14, Labium, dorsal view; 15, Labium, ventral view; 16, left maxilla, dorsal view; 17, right maxilla, ventral view. Scale bars = 0.05 mm
Bamber, Roger N. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FIGURE 3 in Shallow water tanaidaceans (Crustacea: Peracarida: Tanaidacea) from New Caledonia and the Loyalty Islands
2018Co-Authors: Bamber, Roger N.Abstract:FIGURE 3. Konarus cheiris gen. et. sp. nov., A, holotype female, dorsal; B, pleotelson and left uropod; C, antennule; D, antenna; E, labrum; F, left mandible; G, right mandible; H, Labium; I, maxillule; J, maxilla; K, maxilliped bases; L. maxilliped; M, epignath. Scale line = 1 mm for A, 0.4 mm for B, 0.2 mm for C to M
-
FIGURE 7 in Shallow water tanaidaceans (Crustacea: Peracarida: Tanaidacea) from New Caledonia and the Loyalty Islands
2018Co-Authors: Bamber, Roger N.Abstract:FIGURE 7. Pseudoleptochelia bulbus sp. nov., female: A, holotype, dorsal; B, antennule; C, antenna; D, labrum, lateral; E, right mandible; F, left mandible; G, maxilliped, palp setae shown on left only, basis setae on right only; H, maxillule; I, Labium; J, pleopod (most setae shown only by their bases). Scale line = 1 mm for A, 0.2 mm for B and C, 0.15 mm for D to J
Byttebier Barbara - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FIGURES 22 – 25 in Description of the preimaginal stages of Enochrus (Hugoscottia) variegatus (Steinheil, 1869) and E. (Methydrus) vulgaris (Steinheil, 1869) (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), with emphasis on larval morphometry and chaetotaxy
2018Co-Authors: Byttebier Barbara, Torres, Patricia L. M.Abstract:FIGURES 22 – 25. Enochrus variegatus, third-instar larva: 22, Labium, dorsal view; 23, Labium, ventral view. Enochrus vulgaris, third-instar larva: 24, Labium, dorsal view; 25, Labium, ventral view. Scale bars = 0.05 mm
-
FIGURES 11 – 17 in Description of the preimaginal stages of Enochrus (Hugoscottia) variegatus (Steinheil, 1869) and E. (Methydrus) vulgaris (Steinheil, 1869) (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), with emphasis on larval morphometry and chaetotaxy
2018Co-Authors: Byttebier Barbara, Torres, Patricia L. M.Abstract:FIGURES 11 – 17. Enochrus variegatus, first-instar larva: 11, left mandible, dorsal view; 12, right mandible, dorsal view; 13, right antenna, dorsal view; 14, Labium, dorsal view; 15, Labium, ventral view; 16, left maxilla, dorsal view; 17, right maxilla, ventral view. Scale bars = 0.05 mm
Jongwon Rhie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
internal pudendal perforator artery based gull wing flap for vulvovaginal 3d reconstruction after tumour excision a new flap
International Wound Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Hyun Ho Han, Daiwon Jun, Bommie Florence Seo, Sukho Moon, Sang T Ahn, Jongwon RhieAbstract:Various skin tumours such as squamous cell carcinoma and extramammary Paget's disease can occur in the vulval area, and reconstruction of the vulval area can be a very challenging task. A retrospective analysis of vulvar reconstruction using the new method 'internal pudendal perforator artery-based gull wing flap' was performed from April 2012 to December 2013. A perforator vessel from the internal pudendal artery was detected with a portable Doppler and marked, and this was the pivot point around which the flap was rotated. The flap was rotated by more than 150°-180° internally, and the Labium and the external wall of the vagina were reconstructed with sufficient volume. Anatomical and aesthetic reconstruction of the Labium and the vagina was performed without serious complications. Functional and aesthetic vulvar reconstruction can be achieved by using a flap that provides sufficient volume of the Labium. Our new technique, the 'internal pudendal perforator artery-based gull wing flap', is good and it can be used to reconstruct a functional and aesthetically acceptable vulvovagina for large defect wound after tumour excision.
Tennessen, Kenneth J - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
How Did E. M. Walker Measure the Length of the Labium of Nymphs of \u3ci\u3eAeshna\u3c/i\u3e and \u3ci\u3eRhionaeschna\u3c/i\u3e (Odonata: Aeshnidae)?
ValpoScholar, 2018Co-Authors: Dubois, Robert B, Tennessen, Kenneth JAbstract:The exhaustive studies of nymphs of Aeshna Fabricius and Rhionaeschna Förster by E. M. Walker (1912-1958) have long guided the taxonomy of these groups and formed the basis for keys still in use today. However, uncertainty about how he measured the length of the Labium, including the varied terminology he used over the duration of his career concerning this structure, has led to confusion about application of his taxonomic recommendations. We recalculated ratios of the maximum width/length [W(max)/L] by measuring the illustration dimensions of folded labia and prementums in publications throughout his career and compared these data with the ratios he stated in those publications and with ratios derived from measurements of specimens in our collections. Our results show that from 1912 to 1941, Walker restricted length measurement to the prementum proper (which he called the “mentum of the Labium”), exclusive of the ventrally visible portion of the postmental hinge. However, in 1941 he reported ratios from length measurements done two ways, excluding the postmental hinge in his description of the nymph of A. verticalis Hagen, but including the hinge in his description of the nymph of A. septentrionalis Burmeister (Whitehouse 1941). In Walker’s most recent and influential work (1958), he included the postmental hinge in Labium length measurements of nine species, but restricted length measurements to the prementum for five others. He was consistent with the use of terms, using both “folded Labium” by which he meant the prementum plus the postmental hinge, and “prementum” by which he meant only that structure. However, Walker’s descriptions of the Labium in his latest work are buried in long, frequently punctuated sentences that for most species include the terms “folded Labium” and “prementum” in the same sentence, so careful reading is required to know which term is intended in the width/length ratio. Width/length ratios we each calculated independently were invariably similar for a given species and were usually similar to Walker’s stated ratio for that species. These similarities affirm our conclusion that while Labium measurements must be done with care, they are closely repeatable among workers and will consistently lead to correct determinations in properly designed couplets of dichotomous keys to these genera. We recommend measuring the length of the prementum proper in future studies of these genera when Labium ratios are calculated because we found less variability in those cases than when the measurements included the postmental hinge. An approximate conversion between the two methods of calculating W(max)/L ratios can be made as follows: ratio calculated when the length of the prementum excluding the postmental hinge is used x 0.88 is approximately equal to the ratio when the postmental hinge is included for species of Aeshna and Rhionaeschna in North America
