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.
76,402,788
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
76,402,788 results
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 95th percentile monthly time-series (2000)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 50th percentile monthly time-series (2002)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 5th percentile monthly time-series (2008)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 50th percentile monthly time-series (2000)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 5th percentile monthly time-series (2000)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 5th percentile monthly time-series (2009)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Monthly aggregated GLASS FAPAR V6 (250 m): 50th percentile monthly time-series (2001)
<p><strong>List of Subdatasets:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Long-term data: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8381409">2000-2021</a></li> <li>5th percentile (p05) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408654">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411611">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412712">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413021">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8413689">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414639">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411609">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414085">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414960">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415476">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415686">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412154">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414082">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411364">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414933">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415414">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8412246">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8414083">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8411366">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415203">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415549">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8387608">2021</a></li> <li>50th percentile (p50) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408710">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408798">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408866">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415319">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415619">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415878">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416080">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416619">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417164">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417513">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417708">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415669">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416000">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416542">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417055">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417467">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8415747">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416333">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416835">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417326">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417589">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388078">2021</a></li> <li>95th percentile (p95) monthly time-series: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408949">2000</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409059">2001</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409154">2002</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409362">2003</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8416487">2004</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417029">2005</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417833">2006</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417996">2007</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418308">2008</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418669">2009</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418986">2010</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417649">2011</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417816">2012</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417959">2013</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418253">2014</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418625">2015</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417759">2016</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8417898">2017</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418076">2018</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418442">2019</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8418751">2020</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8392976">2021</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>General Description</strong></p> <p>The <i>monthly aggregated Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</i> dataset is derived from <abbr title="glass.umd.edu/FAPAR/MODIS/250m/">250m 8d GLASS V6 FAPAR</abbr>. The data set is derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reflectance and LAI data using several other FAPAR products (MODIS Collection 6, GLASS FAPAR V5, and PROBA-V1 FAPAR) to generate a bidirectional long-short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) model to estimate FAPAR. The dataset time spans from March 2000 to December 2021 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like land degradation modeling, land productivity mapping, and land potential mapping. The dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Long-term:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Derived from monthly time-series. This dataset provides linear trend model for the p95 variable: (1) slope beta mean (p95.beta_m), p-value for beta (p95.beta_pv), intercept alpha mean (p95.alpha_m), p-value for alpha (p95.alpha_pv), and coefficient of determination R<sup>2</sup> (p95.r2_m).</p> <ul> <li><strong>Monthly time-series:</strong></li> </ul> <p>Monthly aggregation with three standard statistics: (1) 5th percentile (p05), median (p50), and 95th percentile (p95). For each month, we aggregate all composites within that month plus one composite each before and after, ending up with 5 to 6 composites for a single month depending on the number of images within that month.</p> <p><strong>Data Details</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Time period:</strong> March 2000 – December 2021</li> <li><strong>Type of data:</strong> Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FAPAR)</li> <li><strong>How the data was collected or derived:</strong> Derived from 250m 8 d GLASS V6 FAPAR using Python running in a local HPC. The time-series analysis were computed using the <a href="https://github.com/scikit-map/scikit-map">Scikit-map</a> Python package.</li> <li><strong>Statistical methods used:</strong> for the long-term, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) of p95 monthly variable; for the monthly time-series, percentiles 05, 50, and 95.</li> <li><strong>Limitations or exclusions in the data:</strong> The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.</li> <li><strong>Coordinate reference system:</strong> EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax):</strong> (-180.00000, -62.0008094, 179.9999424, 87.37000)</li> <li><strong>Spatial resolution:</strong> 1/480 d.d. = 0.00208333 (250m)</li> <li><strong>Image size:</strong> 172,800 x 71,698</li> <li><strong>File format:</strong> Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Support</strong></p> <p>If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please raise a GitHub issue: <a href="https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues">https://github.com/Open-Earth-Monitor/Global_FAPAR_250m/issues</a></p> <p><strong>Reference</strong></p> <p>Hackländer, J., Parente, L., Ho, Y.-F., Hengl, T., Simoes, R., Consoli, D., Şahin, M., Tian, X., Herold, M., Jung, M., Duveiller, G., Weynants, M., Wheeler, I., (2023?) "Land potential assessment and trend-analysis using 2000–2021 FAPAR monthly time-series at 250 m spatial resolution", submitted to PeerJ, preprint available at: <a href="https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1">https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3415685/v1</a></p> <p><strong>Name convention</strong></p> <p>To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:</p> <ol> <li><strong>generic variable name:</strong> fapar = Fraction of Absorbed Photosynthetically Active Radiation</li> <li><strong>variable procedure combination:</strong> essd.lstm = Earth System Science Data with bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi–LSTM)</li> <li><strong>Position in the probability distribution / variable type:</strong> p05/p50/p95 = 5th/50th/95th percentile</li> <li><strong>Spatial support:</strong> 250m</li> <li><strong>Depth reference:</strong> s = surface</li> <li><strong>Time reference begin time:</strong> 20000301 = 2000-03-01</li> <li><strong>Time reference end time:</strong> 20211231 = 2022-12-31</li> <li><strong>Bounding box:</strong> go = global (without Antarctica)</li> <li><strong>EPSG code:</strong> epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326</li> <li><strong>Version code:</strong> v20230628 = 2023-06-28 (creation date)</li> </ol>
Polarized and nonpolarized Twitter networks from the 2019 Finnish Parliamentary Elections
<p><strong>Polarized and nonpolarized Twitter networks from the 2019 Finnish Parliamentary Elections</strong></p> <p>This dataset includes 183 Twitter retweet networks collected during the 2019 Finnish Parliamentary Elections.</p> <p>The first 150 networks are built around single hashtags, such as #police, #nature, and #immigration. The remaining 33 networks are constructed using a combination of hashtags focused on specific topics like climate change and economic policy.</p> <p>Each filename consists of two parts: the first part indicates whether the network is based on a single hashtag (in lowercase) or a set of hashtags (in uppercase). The second part represents the tweet period.</p> <ul> <li> <p>"p1" corresponds to the pre-election period (March 1 to April 14).</p> </li> <li> <p>"p2" corresponds to the inter-election period (April 15 to May 26).</p> </li> <li> <p>"p3" corresponds to the post-election period (May 27 to July 31).</p> </li> </ul> <p>The nodes in the networks represent anonymized Twitter accounts, and directed ties indicate retweet endorsements on specific topics. Each file contains three columns: retweeter, retweeted, and weight.</p> <p>Please see the references for more details.</p> <p>Network labels, whether they are labeled as controversial, and whether they are based on single or multiple hashtags, can be found in the "networks_info.csv" file.</p> <p>Importantly, the dataset does not contain any identifying information or original raw data from the Twitter platform. Anonymization was achieved by shuffling the order of unique nodes across all networks and assigning each node a new identifier (ID). These new IDs were then applied to the edgelists to obtain the anonymized version.</p> <p>Kindly ensure to reference the original article(s) when utilizing this dataset.</p> <p>Chen, T. H. Y., Salloum, A., Gronow, A., Ylä-Anttila, T., & Kivelä, M. (2021). Polarization of climate politics results from partisan sorting: Evidence from Finnish Twittersphere. <em>Global Environmental Change</em>, <em>71</em>, 102348. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102348">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102348</a></p> <p>Salloum, A., Chen, T. H. Y., & Kivelä, M. (2022). Separating polarization from noise: comparison and normalization of structural polarization measures. <em>Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction</em>, <em>6</em>(CSCW1), 1-33. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3512962">https://doi.org/10.1145/3512962</a></p>
MS and NMR data of in situ Captured Marine Exometabolites
<p>This folder contains the raw data pertaining to the article <i><strong>In Situ</strong></i> <strong>Capture and Real Time Enrichment of Marine Chemical Diversity </strong></p><p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.3c00661">https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.3c00661</a></p><p>Data are organized in folders corresponding to each figure. Briefly, this folder contains the raw mass spectrometry (MS) data, the cytoscape files of the full molecular network (Fig3), the xcel spreadsheets of annotated MS spectra related to each investigated specialized exometabolites from the Mediterranean sponges <i>Aplysina cavernicola </i>(AC, Fig4), <i>Spongia officinalis </i>(SO, Fig5)<i>, </i>and <i>Agelas oroides </i>(AO, Fig6)<i>, </i>the raw 1H NMR data from each sponge exometabolite (EM) extract with their corresponding crude extract (CR).</p><ul><li>All MS2 data were acquired on a Bruker Impact II qTOF (ESI positive, collision energy 20-40eV) also deposited here : MSV000091465</li><li>SIRIUS software and CANOPUS were used to further annotate the chemodiversity of captured marine EMs</li><li>All NMR data were acquired on a BRUKER avance II+ instrument (600 MHz, cryoprobe) in CD<i>3</i>OD</li></ul><p>-------------------------</p><p><strong>References related to in silico MS annotation tools:</strong></p><ul><li>Kai Dührkop, Louis-Félix Nothias, Markus Fleischauer, Raphael Reher, Marcus Ludwig, Martin A. Hoffmann, Daniel Petras, William H. Gerwick, Juho Rousu, Pieter C. Dorrestein and Sebastian Böcker <i>Systematic classification of unknown metabolites using high-resolution fragmentation mass spectra</i>. Nature Biotechnology, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0740-8</li><li>Yannick Djoumbou Feunang, Roman Eisner, Craig Knox, Leonid Chepelev, Janna Hastings, Gareth Owen, Eoin Fahy, Christoph Steinbeck, Shankar Subramanian, Evan Bolton, Russell Greiner, David S. Wishart <i>ClassyFire: automated chemical classification with a comprehensive, computable taxonomy </i>J Cheminf, 8, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13321-016-0174-y</li><li>Kim, Hyun Woo and Wang, Mingxun and Leber, Christopher A. and Nothias, Louis-Félix and Reher, Raphael and Kang, Kyo Bin and van der Hooft, Justin J. J. and Dorrestein, Pieter C. and Gerwick, William H. and Cottrell, Garrison W. NPClassifier:<i> A Deep Neural Network-Based Structural Classification Tool for Natural Products. </i>Journal of Natural Products, 84, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.1c00399</li></ul>
Climate change velocity metrics calculated for three climate variables across Finland
<p>This dataset contains files that show the climate change velocity metrics calculated for three climate variables across Finland. The climate velocities were used to study the magnitude of projected climatic changes in a nation-wide Natura 2000 protected area (PA) network (Heikkinen et al., 2020). Using fine-resolution climate data that describes the present-day and future topoclimates and their spatio-temporal variation, the study explored the rate of climatic changes in protected areas on an ecologically relevant, but yet poorly explored scale. The velocities for the three climate variables were developed in the following work, where in-depth description of the different steps in velocity metrics calculation and a number of visualisations of their spatial variation across Finland are provided:</p><p>Risto K. Heikkinen 1, Niko Leikola 1, Juha Aalto 2,3, Kaisu Aapala 1, Saija Kuusela 1, Miska Luoto 2 & Raimo Virkkala 1 2020: Fine-grained climate velocities reveal vulnerability of protected areas to climate change. Scientific Reports 10:1678. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58638-8</p><p>1 Finnish Environment Institute, Biodiversity Centre, Latokartanonkaari 11, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland</p><p>2 Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, FI-00014, Helsinki, Finland</p><p>3 Finnish Meteorological Institute, FI-00101, Helsinki, Finland </p><p>The dataset includes GIS compatible geotiff files describing the nine spatial climate velocity surfaces calculated across the whole of Finland at 50 m × 50 m spatial resolution. These nine different velocity surfaces consist of velocity metric values measured for each 50-m grid cell separately for the three different climate variables and in relation to the three different future climate scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The baseline climate data for the study were the monthly temperature and precipitation data averaged for the period from 1981 to 2010 modelled at a resolution of 50-m, based on which estimates for the annual temperature sum above 5 °C (growing degree days, GDD, °C), the mean January temperature (TJan, °C) and the annual climatic water balance (WAB, the difference between annual precipitation and potential evapotranspiration; mm) were calculated. Corresponding future climate surfaces were produced using an ensemble of 23 global climate models for the years 2070–2099 (Taylor et al. 2012) and the three RCPs. The data for the three climate variables for 1981–2010 and under the three RCPs will be made available in separately via METIS - FMI's Research Data repository service (Aalto et al., in prep.). </p><p>The climate velocity surfaces included in the present data repository were developed using climate-analog approach (Hamann et al. 2015; Batllori et al. 2017; Brito-Morales et al. 2018), whereby velocity metrics for the 50-m grid cells were measured based on the distance between climatically similar cells under the baseline and the future climates, calculated separately for the three climate variables. In Heikkinen et al. (2020), the spatial data for the Natura 2000 protected areas were used to assess their exposure to climate change. The full data on N2K areas can be downloaded from the following link: https://ckan.ymparisto.fi/dataset/%7BED80465E-135B-4391-AA8A-FE2038FB224D%7D. However, note that the N2K areas including multiple physically separate patches were treated as separate polygons in Heikkinen et al. (2020), and a minimum size requirement of 2 hectares were requested. Moreover, the digital elevation model (DEM) data for Finland (which were dissected to Natura 2000 polygons to examine their elevational variation and its relationships to topoclimatic variation) can be downloaded from the following link: https://ckan.ymparisto.fi/en/dataset/dem25_astergdem25. </p><p>The coordinate system for the climate velocity data files is: ETRS-TM35FIN (EPSG: 3067) (or YKJ Finland/Finnish Uniform Coordinate System (EPSG: 2393)). Summary of the key settings and elements of the study are provided below. A detailed treatment is provided in Heikkinen et al. (2020).</p><p>Code to the files (four files per each velocity layer: *.tif, *.tfw. *.ovr and *.tif.aux.xml) in the dataset: </p><p>(a) Velocity of GDD with respect to RCP2.6 future climate (Fig 2a in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: GDDRCP26.*</p><p>(b) Velocity of GDD with respect to RCP4.5 future climate (Fig. 2b in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: GDDRCP45.*</p><p>(c) Velocity of GDD with respect to RCP8.5 future climate (Fig. 2c in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: GDDRCP85.*</p><p>(d) Velocity of mean January temperature with respect to RCP2.6 future climate (Fig. 2d in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: TJanRCP26.*</p><p>(e) Velocity of mean January temperature with respect to RCP4.5 future climate (Fig. 2e in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: TJanRCP45.*</p><p>(f) Velocity of mean January temperature with respect to RCP8.5 future climate (Fig. 2f in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: TJanRCP85.*</p><p>(g) Velocity of climatic water balance with respect to RCP2.6 future climate (Fig. 2g in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: WABRCP26.*</p><p>(h) Velocity of climatic water balance with respect to RCP4.5 future climate (Fig. 2h in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: WABRCP45.*</p><p>(i) Velocity of climatic water balance with respect to RCP8.5 future climate (Fig. 2i in Heikkinen et al. 2020). Name of the file: WABRCP85.*</p><p>Note that velocity surfaces e and f include disappearing climate conditions.</p><p><strong>Summary of the study:</strong></p><p>Climate velocity is a generic metric which provides useful information for climate-wise conservation planning to identify regions and protected areas where climate conditions are changing most rapidly, exposing them to high rates of climate displacement (Batllori et al. 2017), causing potential carry-over impacts to community structure and ecosystem functions (Ackerly et al. 2010). Climate velocity has been typically used to assess the climatic risks for species and their populations, but velocity metrics can also be used to identify protected areas which face overall difficulties in retaining ecological conditions that promote present-day biodiversity. </p><p>Earlier climate velocity assessments have focussed on the domains of the mesoclimate (resolutions of 1–100 km) or macroclimate (>100 km scales), and fine-grained (<100 m) local climatic conditions created by variation in topography ('topoclimate'; Ackerly et al. 2010; 2020) have largely been overlooked (Heikkinen et al. 2020). This omission may lead to biased exposure assessments especially in rugged terrain (Dobrowski et al. 2013; Franklin et al. 2013), as well as a limited ability to detect sites decoupled from the regional climate (Aalto et al. 2017; Lenoir et al. 2017). This study provided the first assessment of the climatic exposure risks across a national PA (Natura 2000) network based on very fine-grained velocities of three established drivers of high latitude biodiversity. </p><p>The produce fine-grain climate velocity measures, 50-m resolution monthly temperature and precipitation data averaged for 1981–2010 were first developed, and based on it, the three bioclimatic variables (growing degree days, mean January temperature and annual climatic water balance) were calculated for the whole study domain. In the next phase, similar future climate surfaces were produced based on data from an ensemble of 23 global climate models, extracted from the CMIP5 archives for the years 2070–2099 and the three RCP scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5)26. In the final step, climate velocities for each the 50 x 50 m grid cells were measured using climate-analog velocity method (Hamann et al. 2015) and based on the distance between climatically similar cells under the baseline and future climates.</p><p>The results revealed notable spatial differences in the high velocity areas for the three bioclimatic variables, indicating contrasting exposure risks in protected areas situated in different areas. Moreover, comparisons of the 50-m baseline and future climate surfaces revealed a potential wholesale disappearance of current topoclimatic temperature conditions from almost all the studied PAs by the end of this century.</p><p><strong>Calculation of climate change velocity metrics for the three climate variables</strong></p><p>The overall process of calculation of climate velocities included three main steps. </p><p>(1) In the first step, we developed high-resolution monthly average temperature and precipitation data averaged over the years 1981–2010 and across the study domain at a spatial resolution of 50 × 50 m. This was done by building topoclimatic models based on climate data sourced from 313 meteorological stations (European Climate Assessment and Dataset [ECA&D]) (Klok et al. 2009). Our station network and modelling domain covered the whole of Finland with an additional 100 km buffer. However, it was also extended to cover large parts of northern Sweden and Norway for areas >66.5°N, as well as selected adjacent areas in Russia (for details see Heikkinen et al. 2020). This was done to capture the present-day climate spaces in Finland which are projected to move in the future beyond the country borders but have analogous climate areas in neighbouring areas; this was done to avoid developing a large number of velocity values deemed as infinite or unknown in the data for Finland. </p><p>The 50-m resolution average air temperature data were developed for the study domain using generalized additive modelling (GAM), as implemented in the R-package mgcv version 1.8–7 (R Development Core Team 2011; Wood 2011). In this modelling we utilised variables of geographical location (latitude and longitude, included as an anisotropic interaction), topography (elevation, potential incoming solar radiation, relative elevation) and water cover (sea and lake proximity), and subsequent leave-one-out cross-validation tests to assess model performance (for full process description, see Aalto et al. 2017; Heikkinen et al. 2020). The resulting topoclimate data effectively captured the physiographic effects of solar radiation and cold-air pooling.</p><p>To produce gridded precipitation data, we applied global kriging interpolation to the data from 343 rain gauges from the ECA&D dataset. The interpolation was carried out using information on geographical location, topography (elevation and eastness index) and proximity to the sea and R package gstat. The eastness index was obtained from a sine-transforming aspect raster surface calculated from a 50 m × 50 m digital elevation model to capture the effect of prevailing westerly winds on the accumulated precipitation on windward slopes. The gridding was first run at a resolution of 500 × 500 m, whereafter gridded precipitation values were bilinearly interpolated into the same 50 × 50 m resolution as the air temperature data. </p><p>Next, the three bioclimatic variables ((i) growing degree days (GDD, °C days) indicating the accumulated warmth during the growing season; (ii) mean January air temperature - TJan, °C; (iii) climatic water balance - WAB, mm) were calculated for each 50 x 50 grid cell from the high-resolution gridded 1981–2010 ('baseline') climate data. Earlier research has demonstrated the ecological relevance of these three complementary variables which provide estimations of winter cold, seasonal warmth and moisture availability (Sykes et al. 1996; Luoto et al. 2006; Huntley et al. 2007, 2008). </p><p>Following Carter et al. (1991), GDD was calculated as the effective temperature sum above the base temperature of 5 °C as follows:</p><p><i>GDD</i>5 = <i>∑ni (Ti - Tb), if Ti -Tb > 5</i></p><p>where Ti denotes the mean temperature at day i, Tb represents the base temperature, and n is the length of the summation period. However, because the daily air temperature data was not available, here the GDD was estimated using monthly data as in Araújo & Luoto (2007). The WAB is the difference between the total annual precipitation sum and the potential evapotranspiration (PET), which was estimated from the monthly air temperatures following Skov and Svenning (2004): </p><p><i>PET </i>= 58.93 × <i>Tabove </i>0°<i>C </i>/ 12</p><p>(2) In the second step we developed data on future climates by using the climate projections from the ensemble of 23 global climate models (GCMs), derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 archives (Taylor et al. 2012). From these archives, we processed to predicted averaged changes in mean temperature and precipitation with respect to the baseline 1981–2010 for the years 2070–2099, and the three RCP scenarios (cf. Moss et al. 2010). As the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 climate scenario data represent coarse-scale resolution data, we converted it to match our fine-resolution baseline climate data by interpolation. For this, the climate model data depicting the predicted change in mean temperatures and precipitation with respect to the baseline climate were bilinearly interpolated to the 50 × 50 m grid system, and the change predicted by the GCMs was added to the spatially detailed baseline climate data. After this, the bioclimatic variables were recalculated for each RCP scenario to allow the calculation of climate change velocities across the whole country and the Natura 2000 protected areas.</p><p>(3) In the third step we developed climate change velocities for the three bioclimatic variables using the climate-analog approach (Hamann et al. 2015) where velocity is calculated by measuring the distance between present-day locations with certain climatic conditions and their future climate analogues, divided by the number of years between the two points in time. Thus, we calculated climate-analog velocities for the 50-m resolution grid climate data by measuring the distance between climatically similar grid cells for the present and future climates under RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. </p><p>Prior the actual climate-analog velocity measurements, the climate variable surfaces were converted from continuous values into classified variable surfaces. For this, we defined the boundary values for the variable classes so that the climatically matching grid cells had their within-class ranges as small as possible but, at the same time, avoided artefactual extreme precision. After a set of pilot reclassifications, the following within-class ranges were applied: GDD, within-class range 50 °C with 51 categories; TJan, within-class range 0.5 °C with 60 categories; WAB, within-class range 50 mm with 55 categories. Next, using the reclassified present-day and future climate surfaces the search of the minimum distances between grid cells with similar present-day and future GDD/TJan/WAB climates were executed. The search was carried out using the ArcGIS software (Desktop 10.5.1.) by employing the Euclidean distance function. The minimum distances measured for each 50-m grid cell were divided by the difference between the mean points in the two time slices, 1981–2010 and 2070–2099. </p><p>The resulting 50-m resolution climate velocity surfaces for the three climate variables are provided in the zipped files included this data repository. In Heikkinen et al. (2020), these climate velocity data were employed in a series of subsequent analyses. For example, high-velocity areas ('velocity hotspots') of the three climate variables were visually compared with each other based on maps showing their 50-m resolution velocities across mainland Finland and the degree of overlap between the present-day range and projected future range of the three climate variables were investigated in each of the 5,068 Natura 2000 polygons included in the study.</p><p><strong>References</strong></p><p>Aalto, J., Riihimäki, H., Meineri, E., Hylander, K., Luoto, M., 2017. Revealing topoclimatic heterogeneity using meteorological station data. International Journal of Climatology 37, 544-556.</p><p>Ackerly, D.D., Loarie, S.R., Cornwell, W.K., Weiss, S.B., Hamilton, H., Branciforte, R., Kraft, N.J.B., 2010. The geography of climate change: implications for conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions 16, 476-487.</p><p>Ackerly, D.D., Kling, M.M., Clark, M.L., Papper, P., Oldfather, M.F., Flint, A.L., Flint, L.E., 2020. Topoclimates, refugia, and biotic responses to climate change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 18, 288-297.</p><p>Araujo, M.B., Luoto, M., 2007. The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16.</p><p>Batllori, E., Parisien, M.-A., Parks, S.A., Moritz, M.A., Miller, C., 2017. Potential relocation of climatic environments suggests high rates of climate displacement within the North American protection network. Global Change Biology 23, 3219-3230.</p><p>Brito-Morales, I., García Molinos, J., Schoeman, D.S., Burrows, M.T., Poloczanska, E.S., Brown, C.J., Ferrier, S., Harwood, T.D., Klein, C.J., McDonald-Madden, E., Moore, P.J., Pandolfi, J.M., Watson, J.E.M., Wenger, A.S., Richardson, A.J., 2018. Climate Velocity Can Inform Conservation in a Warming World. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 33, 441-457.</p><p>Carter, T.R., Porter, J.H., Parry, M.L., 1991. Climatic warming and crop potential in Europe: Prospects and uncertainties. Global Environmental Change 1, 291-312.</p><p>Dobrowski, S.Z., Abatzoglou, J., Swanson, A.K., Greenberg, J.A., Mynsberge, A.R., Holden, Z.A., Schwartz, M.K., 2013. The climate velocity of the contiguous United States during the 20th century. Global Change Biology 19, 241-251.</p><p>Franklin, J., Davis, F.W., Ikegami, M., Syphard, A.D., Flint, L.E., Flint, A.L., Hannah, L., 2013. Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: how fine scale do climate projections need to be? Global Change Biology 19, 473-483.</p><p>Hamann, A., Roberts, D.R., Barber, Q.E., Carroll, C., Nielsen, S.E., 2015. Velocity of climate change algorithms for guiding conservation and management. Global Change Biology 21, 997-1004. </p><p>Heikkinen, R.K., Leikola, N., Aalto, J., Aapala, K., Kuusela, S., Luoto, M., Virkkala, R., 2020. Fine-grained climate velocities reveal vulnerability of protected areas to climate change. Scientific Reports 10:1678.</p><p>Huntley, B., Green, R.E., Collingham, Y.C., Willis, S.G., 2007. A climatic atlas of European breeding birds. Durham University, The RSPB and Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.</p><p>Huntley, B., Collingham, Y.C., Willis, S.G., Green, R.E., 2008. Potential Impacts of Climatic Change on European Breeding Birds. Plos One 3.</p><p>Klok, E.J., Klein Tank, A.M.G., 2009. Updated and extended European dataset of daily climate observations. International Journal of Climatology 29, 1182-1191.</p><p>Lenoir, J., Hattab, T., Pierre, G., 2017. Climatic microrefugia under anthropogenic climate change: implications for species redistribution. Ecography 40, 253-266.</p><p>Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R.K., Pöyry, J., Saarinen, K., 2006. Determinants of biogeographical distribution of butterflies in boreal regions. Journal of Biogeography 33, 1764-1778.</p><p>Moss, R.H., Edmonds, J.A., Hibbard, K.A., Manning, M.R., Rose, S.K., van Vuuren, D.P., Carter, T.R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., Meehl, G.A., Mitchell, J.F.B., Nakicenovic, N., Riahi, K., Smith, S.J., Stouffer, R.J., Thomson, A.M., Weyant, J.P., Wilbanks, T.J., 2010. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747-756.</p><p>R Development Core Team, 2011. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing).</p><p>Skov, F., Svenning, J.-C., 2004. Potential impact of climatic change on the distribution of forest herbs in Europe. Ecography 27, 366-380.</p><p>Sykes, M.T., Prentice, I.C., Cramer, W., 1996. A bioclimatic model for the potential distributions of north European tree species under present and future climates. Journal of Biogeography 23, 203-233.</p><p>Taylor, K.E., Stouffer, R.J., Meehl, G.A., 2012. An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design. Bulletin of the American meteorological Society 93, 485-498.</p><p>Wood, S.N., 2011. Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 73, 3-36.</p><p> </p>
Dataset for algorithmic thinking skills assessment: Results from the virtual CAT pilot study in Swiss compulsory education
<p><strong>Overview</strong><br>This dataset was collected during a pilot study that evaluated the virtual Cross Array Task (CAT) platform as an assessment tool for algorithmic thinking (AT) skills among K-12 students in Swiss compulsory education.<br>As algorithmic thinking becomes increasingly vital in our digital age, this study bridges the gap between traditional assessments and the needs of today's learners by introducing a digital platform. The virtual CAT, a digital adaptation of an unplugged assessment activity, offers scalable, automated assessments with reduced human intervention.</p><p><strong>Study Context, Location and Participants</strong><br>To demonstrate the virtual CAT's effectiveness, we conducted a pilot study in March 2023.<br>The study was conducted in Switzerland, specifically within the Ticino canton.<br>The sample consisted of 31 students (21 girls and 10 boys) from a preschool class (ages 4-6) and two low secondary classes (1st grade, ages 11-12). </p><p><strong>Data Collection</strong><br>Data collection was integrated into a validation module of the app. <br>Sessions required manual input for details like date, canton, and school information. <br>Students' details, anonymised for privacy, encompassed their gender and date of birth. <br>Each interaction within the platform was meticulously logged, capturing operations like task confirmations, command updates, mode changes, and more.</p><p><strong>Data Features</strong><br>The dataset comprises the following files:</p><ul><li>ALGORITHMS.csv</li><li>CANTONS.csv</li><li>DF.csv</li><li>LOGS.csv</li><li>RESULTS.csv</li><li>SCHOOLS.csv</li><li>SESSIONS.csv</li><li>STUDENTS_SESSIONS.csv</li></ul><p>These files collectively provide insights into the algorithmic actions of the students, demographic details, session logs, results, and more.</p><p><strong>Usage & Ethics</strong><br>In the spirit of open science, this dataset is made available to the public after meticulous anonymisation to ensure all participants' privacy and ethical treatment. <br>Initial authorisations were secured from school administrators, teachers, and parents. <br>Detailed communication regarding the study's nature, data handling, and objectives was transparently shared with all stakeholders.</p><p> </p><p><strong>REFERENCES</strong></p><p><strong>[1]</strong> A. Piatti, G. Adorni, L. El-Hamamsy, L. Negrini, D. Assaf, L. Gambardella & F. Mondada. (2022). The CT-cube: A framework for the design and the assessment of computational thinking activities. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 5, 100166. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100166">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100166</a></p><p><strong>[2]</strong> Adorni, G., & Piatti, S., & Karpenko, V. (2023). virtual CAT: An app for algorithmic thinking assessment within Swiss compulsory education. Zenodo Software. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10027851">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10027851</a> On GitHub: <a href="https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-app/">https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-app/</a></p><p><strong>[3]</strong> Adorni, G., & Karpenko, V. (2023). virtual CAT programming language interpreter. Zenodo Software. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10016535">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10016535</a> On GitHub: <a href="https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-programming-language-interpreter/">https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-programming-language-interpreter/</a></p><p><strong>[4]</strong> Adorni, G., & Karpenko, V. (2023). virtual CAT data infrastructure. Zenodo Software. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10015011">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10015011</a> On GitHub: <a href="https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-data-infrastructure">https://github.com/GiorgiaAuroraAdorni/virtual-CAT-data-infrastructure</a></p>
Patterns of Speciation in a Parapatric Pair of Saturnia Moths as Revealed by Target Capture
<p>This is the dataset for the manuscript entitled Patterns of Speciation in a Parapatric Pair of Saturnia Moths as Revealed by Target Capture. This study helps in the delimitation of a parapatric pair of two species of moths in a complex distribution considering their evolutionary history with the help of the Target Capture method.</p>
X-PSI Parameter Recovery for Temperature Map Configurations Inspired by PSR J0030+0451
<p>Posterior sample files associated with the preprint "X-PSI Parameter Recovery for Temperature Map Configurations Inspired by PSR J0030+0451 " by Vinciguerra et al. (2023; <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.12840">arXiv</a>; almost submitted to for publication in ApJ) and Jupyter notebook scripts to reproduce the corresponding figures.</p> <p>Also included are examples of model modules in the Python language using the X-PSI framework.</p> <p>Please refer to the READme for detailed information.</p>
Trabecular bone – screw interaction. Micro-CT models and experimental push-in results.
<p>The dataset disclosed herein was employed to build the screw-bone interaction models, specifically for tasks related to screw push-in simulation.</p>
30 m Normalized Difference Vegetation Index Maps of Pure Pixels over China for Estimation of Fractional Vegetation Cover (2014, 2018, 2022)
<p>Using multi-angle remote sensing data, we generated 30-m maps for the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) of fully-covered vegetation (<em>Vv</em>) and bare soils (<em>Vs</em>) across China in 2014, 2018 and 2022. These pixel-wise <em>Vv</em> and <em>Vs</em> maps can be integrated with the vegetation index (VI)-based model to facilitate the accurate and rapid estimation of fractional vegetation cover (FVC) across various spatial resolutions and large scales. The products were produced using a multi-angle algorithm (MultiVI), which effectively addressed the spatial variability inherent in <em>Vv</em> and <em>Vs</em> and enhanced the accuracy of FVC estimations in comparison to traditional statistical methods. The estimated FVC demonstrated a root mean square deviation (RMSD) of approximately 0.1 when evaluated against field-measured FVC across different experimental sites.</p>
Open Science Quest
<p>The Open Science Quest was an activity organised as part of a national Open Science event in Luxembourg at the university library and was displayed for two weeks from 12 to 23 November 2018. Its aim was for library users (mainly Bachelor and Master students) and the event’s attendees (early-career and senior researchers, librarians and research support staff) to explore and discover Open Science practices at their own pace.</p> <p><br> The activity was stand-alone and promoted independent learning – once set up no external help was needed apart from issuing the diploma and prize for completing the Quest. The aim was also to make the activity as informative and engaging as possible by requiring participants to use a mix of information gathering techniques – text, images and videos presented on the displays, websearch and online tools, (very simple) puzzle-solving. The Quest was created and displayed in such a way that allowed various types of individual learning goals – each display provided knowledge without requiring to do the Quest and the Quest itself could be completed by grasping a minimal of concepts, while allowing participants to get more in-depth knowledge of each subject if they wanted to.</p> <p>All resources and materials used to prepare and showcase the Quest can be found here.<strong> Please read the 'User Guide' and the README files</strong> included in each folder and sub-folder to get more detailed information. You may also be interested in the blogpost: <a href="https://www.openaire.eu/blogs/open-science-quest">https://www.openaire.eu/blogs/open-science-quest</a></p> <p>Share, reuse, adapt and organise your own Open Science Quest! #OpenScienceQuest</p>
Pythia8 Quark and Gluon Jets for Energy Flow
<p>Two datasets of quark and gluon jets generated with Pythia 8, one with all kinematically realizable quark jets and one that excludes charm and bottom quark jets (at the level of the hard process). The one without c and b jets was originally used in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.05165">Energy Flow Networks: Deep Sets for Particle Jets</a>. Generation parameters are listed below:</p> <ul> <li>Pythia 8.226 (without bc jets), Pythia 8.235 (with bc jets), <span class="math-tex">\(\sqrt{s}=14\,\text{TeV} \)</span></li> <li>Quarks from WeakBosonAndParton:qg2gmZq, gluons from WeakBosonAndParton:qqbar2gmZg with the Z decaying to neutrinos</li> <li>FastJet 3.3.0, anti-ki jets with R=0.4</li> <li><span class="math-tex">\(p_T^\text{jet}\in[500,550]\,\text{GeV},\,|y^\text{jet} |<1.7\)</span></li> </ul> <p>There are 20 files in each dataset, each in compressed NumPy format. Files including charm and bottom jets have 'withbc' in their filename. There are two arrays in each file</p> <ul> <li>X: (100000,M,4), exactly 50k quark and 50k gluon jets, randomly sorted, where M is the max multiplicity of the jets in that file (other jets have been padded with zero-particles), and the features of each particle are its pt, rapidity, azimuthal angle, and pdgid.</li> <li>y: (100000,), an array of labels for the jets where gluon is 0 and quark is 1.</li> </ul> <p>If you use this dataset, please cite this Zenodo record as well as the corresponding paper:</p> <ul> <li>P. T. Komiske, E. M. Metodiev, J. Thaler, Energy Flow Networks: Deep Sets for Particle Jets, JHEP 01 (2019) 121, arXiv:1810.05165.</li> </ul> <p>For the corresponding dataset of Herwig jets, see <a href="https://zenodo.org/record/2664330">this Zenodo record</a>. The datasets can be downloaded and read into python automatically using the <a href="https://energyflow.network/docs/datasets/#quark-and-gluon-jets">EnergyFlow Python package</a>.</p> <p>Changes:</p> <ul> <li>v1 - Added files with b and c quark jets.</li> </ul>
Dataset of Pedigree, genotypes, clinical and biochemical characteristics of families of Northeastern Mexico
<p>This dataset combines pedigree, genotypes, clinical and biochemical data of 37 families of Northeastern Mexico. Primary reference is the article:</p> <p>Gallardo‑Blanco, H.L., Villarreal‑Perez, J.Z., Cerda‑Flores, R.M., Figueroa, A., Sanchez‑Dominguez, C.N., Gutierrez‑Valverde, J.M. ... Martinez‑Garza, L.E. (2017). Genetic variants in KCNJ11, TCF7L2 and HNF4A are associated with type 2 diabetes, BMI and dyslipidemia in families of Northeastern Mexico: A pilot study. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 13, 523-529. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3990</p> <p><strong>If you use these data please cite the corresponding manuscript, which can be downloaded here:</strong></p> <p>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5348709/</p> <p>https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/etm.2016.3990</p> <p>This dataset contains genotypes for the following SNPs:</p> <p>rs2986742</p> <p>rs4846051</p> <p>rs1801131</p> <p>rs1801133</p> <p>rs6541030</p> <p>rs12130799</p> <p>rs11208654</p> <p>rs1137100</p> <p>rs12405556</p> <p>rs3118378</p> <p>rs3737576</p> <p>rs10923931</p> <p>rs7554936</p> <p>rs3737787</p> <p>rs2516839</p> <p>rs1040404</p> <p>rs4670767</p> <p>rs7578597</p> <p>rs13400937</p> <p>rs10496971</p> <p>rs2627037</p> <p>rs1801262</p> <p>rs1569175</p> <p>rs2975760</p> <p>rs3792267</p> <p>rs10510228</p> <p>rs1801282</p> <p>rs3856806</p> <p>rs4955316</p> <p>rs9809104</p> <p>rs4607103</p> <p>rs6548616</p> <p>rs734873</p> <p>rs5400</p> <p>rs2030763</p> <p>rs4402960</p> <p>rs1513181</p> <p>rs9291090</p> <p>rs10010131</p> <p>rs10007810</p> <p>rs385194</p> <p>rs1799883</p> <p>rs2504853</p> <p>rs7754840</p> <p>rs7745461</p> <p>rs1800750</p> <p>rs1800629</p> <p>rs361525</p> <p>rs12200998</p> <p>rs2397060</p> <p>rs192655</p> <p>rs1044498</p> <p>rs4463276</p> <p>rs731257</p> <p>rs864745</p> <p>rs32314</p> <p>rs2330442</p> <p>rs4717865</p> <p>rs3173798</p> <p>rs10954737</p> <p>rs854555</p> <p>rs3917542</p> <p>rs662</p> <p>rs705308</p> <p>rs3943253</p> <p>rs751141</p> <p>rs1471939</p> <p>rs12544346</p> <p>rs13266634</p> <p>rs7844723</p> <p>rs2242103</p> <p>rs1408801</p> <p>rs10811661</p> <p>rs10511828</p> <p>rs12779790</p> <p>rs3793791</p> <p>rs4746136</p> <p>rs1111875</p> <p>rs10885390</p> <p>rs11196175</p> <p>rs7903146</p> <p>rs10885406</p> <p>rs12255372</p> <p>rs290487</p> <p>rs4918842</p> <p>rs2237892</p> <p>rs10839880</p> <p>rs1837606</p> <p>rs5210</p> <p>rs5218</p> <p>rs5219</p> <p>rs2946788</p> <p>rs11227699</p> <p>rs7930460</p> <p>rs1800849</p> <p>rs1387153</p> <p>rs948028</p> <p>rs2270031</p> <p>rs2416791</p> <p>rs7961581</p> <p>rs2070586</p> <p>rs1503767</p> <p>rs2269793</p> <p>rs8050136</p> <p>rs818386</p> <p>rs2966849</p> <p>rs1879488</p> <p>rs757210</p> <p>rs2033111</p> <p>rs11652805</p> <p>rs10512572</p> <p>rs2125345</p> <p>rs12946618</p> <p>rs12946115</p> <p>rs12950541</p> <p>rs1885088</p> <p>rs3907047</p> <p>rs2071023</p> <p>rs2833479</p> <p>rs2833483</p> <p>rs2300386</p> <p>rs2835370</p> <p>rs1296819</p> <p>rs1892848</p> <p>rs4821004</p> <p> </p>
doi_________::0b8474776c3b6e32c455309776f1b4d9
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
doi_________::262969fcefe47003a203c06b8df43135
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
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.