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.
7,849
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
7,849 results for “Conservancy”
Figure 8 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 8: Geographic distribution of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus in the ecoregions of the Horn of Africa (Burgess et al. 2004; Olson et al. 2001).
Figure 7 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 7: Geographic distribution of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus in the Horn of Africa relative to mean annual temperature.
Figure 2 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 2: Geographic distribution of the four putative subspecies of common warthog Phacochoerus africanus. The geographic limits are poorly understood and, therefore, are approximate. Based on Butynski and De Jong (2018), De Jong et al. (2016b), Muwanika et al. (2003), Vercammen and Mason (1993), and this study.
Figure 4 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 4: Adult male desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus (left) and adult male common warthog Phacochoerus africanus on Suyian Ranch, Laikipia, central Kenya. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first photograph of these two species together. Photograph by ©Yvonne de Jong and Tom Butynski.
Figure 1 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 1: Main traits for distinguishing desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus from common warthog Phacochoerus africanus in the field. Photographs by ©Yvonne de Jong and Tom Butynski.
Figure 3 in Reviewing the status and demise of the Endangered Eld's deer and identifying priority sites and conservation actions in Cambodia
Figure 3: Minimum counts of Eld's deer recorded at Ang Trapeang Thmor and Siem Pang Wildlife Sanctuary.
Figure 3 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 3: Estimated historic geographic distribution of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus, common warthog Phacochoerus africanus, and Phacochoerus sp.? In the Horn of Africa. Coordinates of the records used to compile this map are presented in WarthogBase at: www.wildsolutions.nl/warthogbase. 'Phacochoerus species?' is based on maps presented in Stewart and Stewart (1963) and Kingdon (1979) for Kenya, Funaioli and Simonetta (1966) for Somalia, and Yalden et al. (1984) for Eritrea, Ethiopia, and extreme northwest Somalia.
Figure 5 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 5: Geographic distribution of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus in the Horn of Africa relative to altitude.
Figure 2 in Reviewing the status and demise of the Endangered Eld's deer and identifying priority sites and conservation actions in Cambodia
Figure 2: Distribution of Eld's deer records in Cambodia up to 2020, divided into three regions: northern, eastern and central-western Cambodia. Management area boundaries, including protected areas, districts and communes, have been used to illustrate where records have occurred, and as such does not depict the actual extent of Eld's deer in each location. Svay Leu and Kaoh Nheaek Districts and Srayang Commune overlap with protected areas, however Eld's deer were recorded outside of the protected areas so only the proportion of the district/ commune outside of protected areas is shown. The historical distribution of Eld's deer prior to 2000 was outside the scope of the review, however we included any locations with pre-2000 records that appeared within our literature review. Therefore, this map is not an accurate reflection of Eld's deer historical distribution. The white area on the map is not necessarily lacking Eld's deer, given suitable habitat, but is unsurveyed.
Figure 9 in Biogeography and conservation of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus (Artiodactyla: Suidae) in the Horn of Africa
Figure 9: Estimated current geographic distribution of desert warthog Phacochoerus aethiopicus and common warthog Phacochoerus africanus, and the areas of sympatry, in the Horn of Africa.
FIG. 2 in The Utility of Acoustic Citizen Science Data in Understanding Geographic Distributions of Morphologically Conserved Species: Frogs in the Litoria phyllochroa Species Group
FIG. 2. Map of eastern Australia including the states of Queensland (QLD), New South Wales (NSW), Australian Capital Territory (ACT), and Victoria (VIC) showing the mapped ranges of known extant species in the Litoria phyllochroa group as informed by data from FrogID and the Atlas of Living Australia, including areas where species' ranges may overlap.
FIG. 1 in The Utility of Acoustic Citizen Science Data in Understanding Geographic Distributions of Morphologically Conserved Species: Frogs in the Litoria phyllochroa Species Group
FIG. 1. Map of eastern Australia including the states of Queensland (QLD), New South Wales (NSW), Australian Capital Territory (ACT), and Victoria (VIC) showing records of known extant species of the Litoria phyllochroa group from the Atlas of Living Australia (ALA; A), FrogID (B), and a combined dataset containing both FrogID records and those deemed spatially and taxonomically reliable from ALA (C).
Data from: Publication and use of genetics tools in conservation management applications: a systematic review
<p><span>Genetic tools are used in applied conservation management for taxonomic identification, delineation of management units, management of wild populations, captive breeding and reintroduction, and control of invasive species, disease, and hybridisation. </span></p> <p><span>To assess the extent to which genetics tools are being used for applied conservation management, we conducted a systematic literature review of over 53,767 papers focussing on wildlife research that reported results on species delineation, translocations, and population augmentation. We synthesised information on papers that used genetics tools in an expressly applied manner across all wildlife species. </span></p> <p><span>We found that the application of genetics tools in conservation management was biased towards fishes, mammals, and birds and northern hemisphere locations, especially the USA and Europe. </span></p> <p><span>Despite genetics tools being a highly published topic, it was difficult to find published applications of these tools in both the primary and the grey literature. Of the 115 papers on 152 species that could be considered an applied use of a genetics tool expressly for conservation management, only 49 had definable applied outcomes. The remaining 66 made recommendations, but it was often unclear if the recommendations were ever used to make conservation management decisions because of the time-lag between publication of the initial recommendation and publication of the results of the use of the tool in a conservation management situation, as well as the lack of dissemination in the primary literature. </span></p> <p><span>Our study highlights the relatively low publication rate of applications of genetics tools compared to the general conservation genetics field. These tools appear to have either a low percentage of translations into publication ('conservation genetics publishing gap') or a poor uptake among wildlife conservation managers ('conservation genetics gap')—the two are indistinguishable in this review. </span></p> <p><span><em>Policy implications</em>. Conservation genetics tools must be brought to the forefront of conservation policy and management. Users should support the use of systems and accessible databases to increase the uptake of genetic tools for conservation in applied management decisions for wildlife, reducing barriers to disseminating the results to other end users and interested parties.</span></p>
Figure 2 in Endemic lineages of spiny frogs demonstrate the biogeographic importance and conservational needs of the Hindu Kush-Himalaya region
Figure 2. Minimum-spanning haplotype networks of Allopaa hazarensis generated for 16S and COI sequence data with the number of used sequences, detected haplotypes, and the level of nucleotide variability. Symbol sizes reflect haplotype frequencies, and a small black line between two haplotypes corresponds to one mutation step. Sequence-IDs are indicated for each haplotype (h1–h8). Map shows the localities from where the respective haplotypes originate.
Figure 3 in Endemic lineages of spiny frogs demonstrate the biogeographic importance and conservational needs of the Hindu Kush-Himalaya region
Figure 3. Distribution map for Allopaa hazarensis (A) and Chrysopaa sternosignata (B) derived from species distribution model (SDM) using MAXENT, including known records of the species (red = A. hazarensis, green = C. sternosignata). Photo credit: D. Jablonski.
Figure 1 in Endemic lineages of spiny frogs demonstrate the biogeographic importance and conservational needs of the Hindu Kush-Himalaya region
Figure 1. Bayesian inference (BI; left) and maximum likelihood tree (ML; right) based on concatenated mtDNA and nDNA sequence data (16S + COI + Rag1) of the tribe Paini. Numbers at branch nodes refer to posterior probabilities ≥ 0.9 (BI tree), as well as Felsenstein's bootstrap values ≥ 70% and transfer bootstrap expectation ≥ 0.9 (ML tree). Branches of Allopaa hazarensis are indicated red, while Chrysopaa sternosignata is highlighted green. Species names are followed by voucher number (if available). Coloured shaded boxes indicate subgroups of Nanorana and the new clade (in yellow) with so far unidentified specimens.
Large carnivore conservation and traditional pastoralism: An economic analysis on the efficacy of bear-reindeer predation mitigation measures: Dataset for 2014–2016 corralling versus forest treatment analysis
<p>While wildlife and cultural preservation goals can be either complimentary or counteractive, the goals of large carnivore conservation and traditional pastoralist lifestyles are often at odds. Livestock depredation can negatively impact the economies of livestock herders, while subsequent lethal removals contribute to local carnivore population declines. Here, we collaborated with two Sámi reindeer herding communities (2010–2016) situated in Sweden's boreal forest to evaluate the efficacy and economic feasibility of three brown bear predation mitigation measures: corralling pregnant reindeer during parturition, lethal bear management removals, and public bear-license hunting. Calving corrals increased survival for reindeer calves born to average-sized females by 7% to 15% and by 14% to 30% for calves born to small females. However, the realized cost of implementing calving corrals outweighed the financial gain for both our study areas (net losses ranged between €1,111 and €6,210 per calf saved from bear predation per year when using the updated 2021 calf value), as well as for almost every theoretical scenario we explored (net losses €234 and €13,995 per calf saved from bear predation). The exception was the theoretical scenario where small herding communities overlapped large bear populations, which crossed the breakeven efficacy bear/reindeer ratio of 13.5 bears/100 reindeer and had a potential net gain of €36 per saved calf. Similarly, the cost of lethal management removals of bears also outweighed the potential financial gain from saved calves, with net losses between €75 and €239 per calf. License hunting, where the hunters voluntarily incur the monetary costs of removing bears, is in most cases the only economically viable mitigation measure where the cost of mitigation did not outweigh the financial gain from increased reindeer survival. While the annual public license hunt was the most cost-effective mitigation measure, it may be less biologically effective, i.e., bear hunting occurs in the fall and reindeer parturition the following spring which leaves time for the empty niche of harvested bears to be filled by survivors. Economically and biologically effective predation mitigation measures are key for promoting coexistence, and we suggest that potential mitigation measures should be studied in collaboration with local people.</p>
Data for: Habitat functionality: integrating environmental and geographic space in niche modelling for conservation planning
<p>Niche modelling is typically used to assess the effects of anthropogenic land use and climate change on species distributions and to inform spatial conservation planning. These models focus on the suitability of local biotic and abiotic conditions for a species in environmental space (E-space). Although movements also affect species occurrence, efforts to formally integrate geographic space (G-space) into niche modelling have been hindered by the lack of comprehensive theoretical frameworks. </p> <p>We propose the 'functional habitat' framework to define areas that are simultaneously of high-quality in E-space and functionally connected to other suitable habitat in G-space. Originating in metapopulation ecology, approaches have been developed to assess the amount of suitable connected habitat, based on the proximity between pairs of locations. Using network theory, which operates in topological space (T-space, defined by a network), we extended these metapopulation approaches to integrate movement constraints in G-space with niche modelling in E-space. </p> <p>We demonstrate the functional habitat framework using empirical data (GPS-tracking and population monitoring) throughout the European wild mountain reindeer (<em>Rangifer t. tarandus</em>) distribution range. We show that functional habitat outperforms traditional suitability in explaining the species' distribution. This approach integrates effects from habitat loss and fragmentation for spatial conservation planning and avoids overemphasizing small, inaccessible areas with locally suitable habitat. The functional habitat framework formally integrates biotic, abiotic, and movement constraints in niche modeling using network theory, thus opening a wide range of applications in spatial conservation planning.</p>
FIGURE 17. A in Singapore's herpetofauna: updated and annotated checklist, history, conservation, and distribution
FIGURE 17. A) Dendrelaphis kopsteini, B) Dendrelaphis pictus, C) Dryophiops rubescens, D) Calamaria albiventer, E) Calamaria lovii, F) Calamaria lumbricoidea, G) Calamaria schlegeli, and H) Pseudorabdion longiceps. Photographs by: Law Ing Sind [A, E], Alex Figueroa [B, G], Emmanuel Goh [C], Evan S.H. Quah [D], and Kelvin K.P. Lim [F, H].
FIGURE 25. A in Singapore's herpetofauna: updated and annotated checklist, history, conservation, and distribution
FIGURE 25. A) Asthenodipsas laevis, B) Pareas margaritophorus, C) Malayopython reticulatus, D) Python brongersmai, E) Python brongersmai, F) Argyrophis muelleri, G) Indotyphlops braminus, and H) Ramphotyphlops lineatus. Photographs by: Evan S.H. Quah [A, E], Alex Figueroa [B–C, G], Kelvin K.P. Lim [D, H], and Nick Baker [F].
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.