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.
544
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
544 results for “integrated models”
Soil Moisture Forecasting integrating Physical-based model and Deep Learning
<p>Dataset used in "Soil Moisture Forecasting integrating Physical-based model and Deep Learning".</p> <p>(1) <strong>1-24.tar</strong> is training/test data (after preprocessing) over 24 sub-regions in China.</p> <p>(2) <strong>GFS*</strong> is 3-day forecast of Global Forecast System (GFS) over 2015-2017 and 2018 years.</p> <p>(3) <strong>auxiliary.json</strong> is utility data (e.g., land mask for sub-task).</p> <p>(4) <strong>valid_data.tar</strong> contains 2018 year of SoMo.ml, ERA5-Land, SMOS L3, LPRM-AMSR2, which were used to triple collocation analysis in our study. The CMA in-situ datasets only could be available from us after certain permission in CMA.</p> <p> </p>
Example simulation showing spatial and temporal variations in surface carbon biomass of plankton functional groups during a Spring bloom as shown by a 3D hydrodynamic-biogeochemical model (FVCOM-ERSEM), with and without integration of the mixoplankton paradigm.
<p>The outputs are from simulations from using the FVCOM hydrodynamic model coupled to two different versions of ERSEM – (i) ERSEM and (ii) ERSEM-PB (the latter includes the implementation of the mixoplankton paradigm through integration of the 'Perfect Beast' PB model; Flynn and Mitra 2009 <em>Journal of Plankton Research</em>).</p> <p>The FVCOM domain was configured to represent Lyme Bay: a protected bay on the South Coast of England. This region is an important area for shellfish aquaculture. The domain was configured at 350 m – 5 km high-resolution, resolving sub-km scale dynamics in the area. A nested modelling approach of increasing model resolution was set up using two model domains. For the coupled hydrodynamic-biogeochemical model, a parent domain of 1.5 km – 10 km resolution was used to drive Lyme Bay model domain. The atmospheric forcing was provided by a 3-step downscaling of GFS global datasets to reach the 3 km of the final model domain using the Weather Research Forecast (WRF) model. Hydrodynamic boundary conditions are extracted from the European Copernicus Marine System North West European Shelf Forecast system. River flows were extracted from a National scale hydrology model run by the Center for Hydrology and Ecology in the UK. Simulations were initialised at Jan 1<sup>st</sup> 2005, and spun up for 3 months prior to the output of the data visualised in these videos. </p> <p>The 6 videos portray spatial and temporal variation of daily averaged surface carbon biomass (μgC L<sup>-1</sup>) during the month of April 2005 for the different plankton functional types (FTs) as follows:</p> <ul> <li>Video 1: all phytoplankton FTs in standard ERSEM grouped together. These thus include diatoms, nano-, pico- and micro- plankton; i.e., these simulations do not discriminate between phytoplankton and constitutive mixoplankton (CM).</li> <li>Video 2: phytoplankton FT in ERSEM-PB now considering only diatoms and picoplankton (i.e., cyanobacteria) only; CM are now included in Video 3 outputs.</li> <li>Video 3: all mixoplankton FTs grouped together in ERSEM-PB. These outputs thus include biomasses of micro-CM, nano-CM and NCM.</li> <li>Video 4: all zooplankton FTs grouped together in standard ERSEM. Thus, these include nanoflagellates, meso- and micro- zooplankton and thus includes the primary producing non-constitutive mixoplankton</li> <li>Video 5: zooplankton FT representing only the heterotrophic nano- and micro- zooplankton in ERSEM-PB.</li> <li>Video 6: spatio-temporal variability between the constitutive and non-constitutive mixoplankton functional groupings within FVCOM-ERSEM-PB. </li> </ul> <p>For further information about the mixoplankton paradigm, please see the following open access publications and references there in:</p> <p>Mitra A, Caron DA, Faure E, Flynn KJ, Leles SG, Hansen PJ, McManus GB, Not F, Gomes HR, Santoferrara L, Stoecker DK, Tillmann U (2023) <strong>The Mixoplankton Database – diversity of photo-phago-trophic plankton in form, function and distribution across the global ocean</strong>. <em>Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology</em>, e12972. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jeu.12972">https://doi.org/10.1111/jeu.12972</a></p> <p>Glibert PM, Mitra A (2022) <strong>From webs, loops, shunts, and pumps to microbial multitasking: evolving concepts of marine microbial ecology, the mixoplankton paradigm, and implications for a future ocean</strong>. <em>Limnology and Oceanography</em> 67: 585-597 <a href="https://doi.org.10.1002/lno.12018">https://doi.org.10.1002/lno.12018</a> </p> <p>Mitra A, Irigoien X (2022) <strong>Mixoplankton – Marine Organisms that break the rules</strong>. EU Researcher. <a href="https://issuu.com/euresearcher/docs/mixitin_eur28_h_res">https://issuu.com/euresearcher/docs/mixitin_eur28_h_res</a> </p> <p>Flynn KJ, Mitra A, Anestis K, Anschütz AA, Calbet A, et al. (2019) <strong>Mixotrophic protists and a new paradigm for marine ecology: where does plankton research go now?</strong> <em>Journal of Plankton Research</em> 41: 375-391 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbz026">https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbz026</a></p>
Exchange of molecular and cellular information: a hybrid model that integrates stem cell divisions and key regulatory interactions
GEO Series GSE155464. Arabidopsis thaliana. 22 samples. Type: Expression profiling by high throughput sequencing.
Data from: Integrating diverse data for robust species distribution models in a dynamic ocean
<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Species distribution models (SDMs) are an important tool for marine conservation and management, yet guidance on leveraging diverse data to build robust models is limited. While various approaches can be used to integrate different datasets, studies comparing their performance, particularly for highly migratory and mobile species, are scarce. Here, we assess whether a model-based integrative framework improves performance over traditional data pooling or ensemble approaches when synthesizing multiple data types.</p> <p><strong>Location: </strong>North Atlantic Ocean</p> <p><strong>Time Period: </strong>1993 - 2019</p> <p><strong>Major Taxa Studied: </strong>Blue shark (<em>Prionace glauca</em>)</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>We trained traditional, correlative SDMs and integrated SDMs (iSDMs) with three distinct data types: fishery-dependent marker tags, fishery observer records, and fishery-independent electronic tag data. We evaluated data pooling and ensemble approaches in a correlative SDM framework and compared performance to an iSDM approach designed to explicitly account for data-specific biases while retaining the strengths of each dataset.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>While each integration approach yielded robust models, model performance varied among data types, with all models predicting fishery-dependent data more accurately than fishery-independent data. Differences in performance were primarily attributed to each model's ability to explain the spatiotemporal dynamics of the training data. iSDMs that explicitly accounted for seasonal variability yielded the most accurate and ecologically realistic estimates. However, such approaches are computationally intensive and warrant identifying model purpose as an important step in the data-integration process.</p> <p><strong>Main Conclusions: </strong> Our findings reveal important trade-offs among the current techniques for integrating data in SDMs, including variability in accurately estimating species distributions, generating ecologically realistic predictions, and practical feasibility. With increasing access to growing and diverse data sources, maximizing our ability to leverage available data with robust analytical approaches will be instrumental in enhancing conservation and management efforts and for understanding current and future species distributions in a dynamic ocean.</p>
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.