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.
13,276
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
13,276 results for “IT management”
Fig. 1 in Toxicity, repellency, and laboratory performance of consumer bait products for German cockroach (Blattodea: Ectobiidae) management
Fig. 1. Performance index (PI) relationships for German cockroach bait products and an untreated control determined in Ebeling choice boxes against 7 fieldcollected and 1 susceptible strain. Points represent means of 6 replicate boxes, each containing 20 adult male German cockroaches.
Fig. 2 in Management of flower thrips in Florida strawberries with Steinernema feltiae (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae) and the insecticide sulfoxaflor
Fig. 2. Least square means (± 95% confidence intervals) for (A) adult and (B) larval thrips (Frankliniella bispinosa) per 10 strawberry flowers from research plots near Balm, Florida, sprayed 3, 7, and 16 Mar 2016 with Steinernema feltiae and 3 and 16 Mar 2016 with insecticides. Treatments were applied and reapplied when total thrips counts exceeded 5 per flower. Means in lower panel with the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey's HSD test, α = 0.05) (Experiment 2).
Fig. 1 in Management of flower thrips in Florida strawberries with Steinernema feltiae (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae) and the insecticide sulfoxaflor
Fig. 1. Least square means (± 95% confidence intervals) for (A) adult and (B) larval thrips (Frankliniella bispinosa) per 10 strawberry flowers from research plots near Balm, Florida, sprayed 26 Feb, and 1, 5, and 9 Mar 2016 with Steinernema feltiae or insecticides. Means in each panel with the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey's HSD test, α = 0.05) (Experiment 1).
Fig. 3 in Management of flower thrips in Florida strawberries with Steinernema feltiae (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae) and the insecticide sulfoxaflor
Fig. 3. Hourly temperature (lef y-axis), rainfall, and relative humidity (right y-axis) 26 Feb to 25 Mar 2016 at Balm, Florida.
Fig. 2 in Tyrosine hydroxylase, a potential target for the RNAi-mediated management of diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae)
Fig. 2. Larval feeding rate in treatments with various concentrations of dsRNA. Here, T1, T2, and T3 are 3 concentrations of TH dsRNA. The initial leaf disc area was 19.16 cm2.
Fig. 1 in Tyrosine hydroxylase, a potential target for the RNAi-mediated management of diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae)
Fig. 1. Extent of TH silencing in the larvae treated with various concentrations of dsRNA. The expression levels of TH were analyzed on the 3rd day of feeding on various concentrations of cognate TH dsRNA and 3.12 μg/cm2 non-target DREB1A (control) dsRNA. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean of 3 replicates.
Fig. 1 in Comparison of attractants, insecticides, and mass trapping for managing Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in blueberries
Fig. 1. The laboratory assay conducted in a wind chamber testing the effectiveness of baits to attract Drosophila suzukii.
Fig. 3 in Comparison of attractants, insecticides, and mass trapping for managing Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in blueberries
Fig. 3. Mean (± SE) number of adult Drosophila suzukii captured in baited traps suspended in a wind chamber. Treatments with the same letter are not significantly different (P> 0.05).
Fig. 6 in Comparison of attractants, insecticides, and mass trapping for managing Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in blueberries
Fig. 6. Mean (± SE) number of female Drosophila suzukii captured in yeast + sugar traps placed in a blueberry field in Hawthorne, Florida, USA, blocked into 4 separate treatments: border spray, mass trapping, alternative row spray, and an untreated control. Populations were monitored weekly during a 6-wk period; asterisks indicate those treatments that were significantly different (P ≤ 0.05) during a sample period.
Fig. 8 in Comparison of attractants, insecticides, and mass trapping for managing Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in blueberries
Fig. 8. Mean (± SE) number of Drosophila suzukii reared from blueberries collected from a field in Hawthorne, Florida, USA, blocked into 4 separate treatments: border spray, mass trapping, alternative row spray, and an untreated control. Fruit was collected weekly for 6 wk. Treatments were not significantly different (P> 0.05).
Fig. 5 in Comparison of attractants, insecticides, and mass trapping for managing Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in blueberries
Fig. 5. Mean (± SE) number of adult Drosophila suzukii captured in yeast + sugar traps placed in a blueberry field in Hawthorne, Florida, USA, blocked into 4 separate treatments: border spray, mass trapping, alternative row spray, and an untreated control. Populations monitored weekly during a 6-wk period; asterisks indicate those treatments that were significantly different (P ≤ 0.05) during a sample period.
Fig. 1 in Options for managing Antestiopsis thunbergii (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) and the relationship of bug density to the occurrence of potato taste defect in coffee
Fig. 1. Effects of pest management tactics on the occurrence of potato taste defect in coffee. No Prun(P) & No Pest (No Pruning and No Pesticide), P & No Pest (Pruning and No Pesticide), P & Fastac (Pruning and Fastac), P & Pyr 5EW (Pruning and Pyrethrum 5EW), P & Pyr EWC (Pruning & Pyrethrum EWC), P & Agroblast (Pruning and Agroblast), and P & Imida (Pruning and Imidacloprid). Fastac sprayed in pruned plots had the lowest levels of potato taste defect whereas the control had the highest. Bars represent the standard error of means. Means followed with the same letter are not statistically different (P ≤ 0.05, ANOVA and Tukey's test).
Fig. 3 in Effect of BAM-FX in developing a management program to control major insect pests of tomato: sweetpotato whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), and their transmitted viruses
Fig. 3. Mean number of western flower thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis) per 5 leaf sample of tomato treated with various treatments of BAM‑FX and N‑P‑K granular fertilizer in 2016. Bars represent standard error of the means. T1 = BAM‑FX applied on soil, no pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T2 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, no pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T3 = BAM‑FX applied on soil, pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T4 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T5 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; T6 = no BAM‑FX, pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; T7 = no BAM‑FX, no pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; D1 = first sampling date (14 Dec); D2 = second sampling date (21 Dec); D3 = third sampling date (21 Dec); D4 = fourth sampling date (28 Dec); D5 = fifth sampling date (4 Jan); D6 = sixth sampling date (11 Jan).
Fig. 2 in Effect of BAM-FX in developing a management program to control major insect pests of tomato: sweetpotato whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), and their transmitted viruses
Fig. 2. Mean number of common blossom thrips (Frankliniella schultzei) per 5 leaf sample of tomato treated with various treatments of BAM‑FX and N‑P‑K granular fertilizer in 2016. Bars represent standard error of the means. T1 = BAM‑FX applied on soil, no pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T2 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, no pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T3 = BAM‑FX applied on soil, pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T4 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, pesticide, no N‑P‑K fertilizer; T5 = BAM‑FX applied on foliage, pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; T6 = no BAM‑FX, pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; T7 = no BAM‑FX, no pesticide, N‑P‑K fertilizer; D1 = first sampling date (14 Dec); D2 = second sampling date (21 Dec); D3 = third sampling date (21 Dec); D4 = fourth sampling date (28 Dec); D5 = fifh sampling date (4 Jan); D6 = 6th sampling date (11 Jan).
Fig. 2 in Trichogramma yousufi sp. nov. employed for the management of Spodoptera exigua and Spodoptera litura in Indonesia
Fig. 2. Trichogramma yousufi sp. nov. (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) adult male (A), adult female (B), fore wing (C), RS1 (D), head with antennae (E), and male genitalia (F).
Fig. 1 in Trichogramma yousufi sp. nov. employed for the management of Spodoptera exigua and Spodoptera litura in Indonesia
Fig. 1. Adults of Trichogramma yousufi sp. nov. (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) parasitizing an egg mass of Spodoptera exigua (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) (A) and a parasitized egg mass (B) in a commercial nursery of Acacia crassicarpa (Fabaceae) in Sumatra, Indonesia.
Fig. 3 in Trichogramma yousufi sp. nov. employed for the management of Spodoptera exigua and Spodoptera litura in Indonesia
Fig. 3. Genitalic difference between adults of Trichogramma chilonis (A) and Trichogramma poliae (B) (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae).
Fig. 1 in Evaluation of seedling tray drench of insecticides for cabbage maggot (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) management in broccoli and cauliflower
Fig. 1. (A) Insecticides were delivered using a syringe and (B) inoculation of Delia radicum larvae into the base of transplant seedling in the greenhouse.
Fig. 3 in Evaluation of seedling tray drench of insecticides for cabbage maggot (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) management in broccoli and cauliflower
Fig. 3. Least squares means (± SE) of (A) severity of Delia radicum feeding injury, (B) Delia radicum larvae, and (C) fresh weight of 10 cauliflower plants in the field trial 3 conducted in 2015. Means with different letters are significantly different between treatments for each parameter according to Tukey's HSD test at P <0.05.
Fig. 2 in Evaluation of seedling tray drench of insecticides for cabbage maggot (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) management in broccoli and cauliflower
Fig. 2. Least squares means (± SE) of severity of Delia radicum feeding injury to 5 insecticides and an untreated control in (A) broccoli and (B) cauliflower in the greenhouse. Means with different letters are significantly different between treatments for each commodity according to Tukey's HSD test at P <0.05.
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.