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.
8,460
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
8,460 results for “MONITORING”
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Belgium
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Belgium. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - The Czech Republic
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of The Czech Republic. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture; National Institute of Public Health in Prague, Center for Health, Nutrition and Food</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture; National Institute of Public Health in Prague, Center for Health, Nutrition and Food</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture; National Institute of Public Health in Prague, Center for Health, Nutrition and Food</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture; National Institute of Public Health in Prague, Center for Health, Nutrition and Food</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture; National Institute of Public Health in Prague, Center for Health, Nutrition and Food</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – State Veterinary Administration - Ministry of Agriculture</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Bulgaria
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Bulgaria. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – Central Laboratory for Veterinary Sanitary Expertise and Ecology within the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – Central Laboratory for Veterinary Sanitary Expertise and Ecology within the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – Central Laboratory for Veterinary Sanitary Expertise and Ecology within the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – Central Laboratory for Veterinary Sanitary Expertise and Ecology within the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – Risk Assessment Center on Food Chain</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – Bulgarian Food Safety Agency</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Hungary
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Hungary. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – National Food Chain Safety Office</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Sweden
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Sweden. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – National Food Agency</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – National Food Agency</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Lithuania
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Lithuania. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Spain
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Spain. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition; Ministry of Health</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – Spanish Agency for Food Safety and Nutrition; Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Food and Environment</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - Germany
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of Germany. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2020 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2019 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2018 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p> <p>VMPR_2017 – Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety</p>
Results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products - United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland
<p>This dataset contains the monitoring results of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances measured in live animals and animal products analysed by the national competent authority of United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland. The presence of unauthorised substances, residues of veterinary medicinal products in food may pose a risk factor for public health.</p> <p>For this reason and in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU) which defines maximum limits permitted in food and monitoring programmes for the control of the presence of these substances in the food chain. Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 establishes maximum limits for residues of veterinary medicinal products in food-producing animals and animal products. Maximum residue levels for pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1646 lays down practical arrangements for and specific content of official controls of the use of veterinary medicinal products in live animals and products of animal origin through three different official national control plans: a national risk-based control plan for production in the Member States, a national randomised surveillance plan for production in the Member States and a national risk-based control plan for third-country imports. Additionally, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1644 lays down the range of samples and stage of production, processing and distribution at which the samples are to be taken.</p> <p>Since 2018 until 2022, the data on the national residue monitoring plan were reported to EFSA in accordance with Council Directive 96/23/EC.</p> <p>The dataset contains the results of laboratory tests from samples taken from bovines, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, poultry, rabbits, farmed game, wild game aquaculture, milk, eggs and honey, and from 2023 also samples from casings, insects and reptiles.</p> <p>Targeted samples are taken with the aim of detecting illegal treatment or controlling compliance with the maximum levels laid down in the relevant legislation. This means that, in their national plans Member States target the groups of animals (species, gender, age) where the probability of finding residues is the highest. Conversely, the objective of random sampling is to collect significant data to evaluate, for example, consumer exposure to a specific substance.</p> <p>Suspect samples are taken as a consequence of i) non-compliant results on samples taken in accordance with the control plans, ii) possession or presence of prohibited substances at any point during manufacture, storage, distribution or sale through the food and feed production chain, or iii) suspicion or evidence of illegal treatment or non-compliance with the withdrawal period for an authorised medicinal veterinary product.</p> <p>Residues of pharmacologically active substances mean active substances, excipients or degradation products and their metabolites, which remain in food.</p> <p>Unauthorised substances mean substances that are not authorised as veterinary medicinal products or as a feed additive under European Union legislation.</p> <p>Prohibited substances mean substances which are prohibited for use in food producing animals according to the European Union legislation.</p> <p>Non-compliant sample is a sample that has been analysed for the presence of one or more substances and failed to comply with the legal provisions for at least one substance. Thus, a sample can be non-compliant for one or more substances.</p> <p>For 2021 and 2022 the only United Kingdom data that were reported to EFSA were from Northern Ireland. In accordance with the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Irelandfrom the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 5(4) of the WindsorFramework (see Joint Declaration No 1/2023 of the Union and the United Kingdom in the Joint Committee establishedby the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the EuropeanUnion and the European Atomic Energy Community of 24 March 2023, OJ L 102, 17.4.2023, p.87) in conjunction withsection 24 of Annex 2 to that Framework, for the purposes of this Regulation, references to Member States include theUnited Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland.</p> <p><strong>REPORTING AUTHORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO EACH DATA COLLECTION:</strong></p> <p>VMPR_2023 – Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs</p> <p>VMPR_2022 – Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs</p> <p>VMPR_2021 – Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs</p>
GLC_FCS30D: the first global 30-m land-cover dynamic monitoring product with fine classification system from 1985 to 2022
<div> <p>GLC_FCS30D is the first global fine land cover dynamic product at a 30-meter resolution that adopts continuous change detection. It utilizes a refined classification system containing 35 land-cover categories and covers the time span from 1985 to 2022. Before the year 2000, the update cycle was every 5 years, while after 2000, it is updated annually. In specific, it developed by combining the continuous change detection method, local adaptive updating models and the spatiotemporal optimization algorithm from dense time-series Landsat imagery, and was validated to achieve an overall accuracy of 80.88% (±0.27%) for the basic classification system 10 major land-cover types) and 73.24% (±0.30%) for the LCCS level-1 validation system (17 LCCS land-cover types).</p> <p>The GLC_FCS30D has been compressed into 36 zip files, and<strong> <em>the details about the GLC_FCS30D can be found in the User's guides.</em></strong></p> </div>
SolarStations.Org - A global catalog of solar irradiance monitoring stations
<p>The SolarStations.Org catalog provides a global overview of multi-component solar irradiance monitoring stations with the aim of streamlining the identification of relevant stations. The list of stations and their metadata are stored in a single CSV file with the following columns: station name, location, elevation, owner, network, period of operation, data availability, instrumentation, and climate zone. The station catalog and an interactive map are available at <a title="SolarStations.Org website" href="https://SolarStations.Org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">SolarStations.Org</a>. As of April 2025, the catalog contains information on 808 stations, of which 440 are active. The website and catalog are developed openly on GitHub and welcome community contributions.</p>
Supplementary Table for Earth observation data-driven cropland soil monitoring: A review
<p>Table including 46 manuscripts written in English referring to topsoil monitoring related to Earth observation data-driven cropland soil monitoring: A review paper.</p>
Data from: Monitoring microarthropods assemblages along a pH gradient in a forest soil over a 60 years' time period
<p>The goal of this study was to assess the development, over 60 years, of microarthropod communities over a pH gradient in forest soil.</p> <p>Site Description</p> <p>Hackfort is an oak coppice grove in the East-Southeast of the city of Zutphen in the province of Gelderland, the Netherlands, 52°06′09.7″ N, 6°15′56.0″ E (see Figure 1). The experimental area is about 1.5 ha and is divided in a 10 m × 10 m grid. Vegetation is dominated by common oak (<em>Quercus robur</em>), mixed with birch (<em>Betula pendula</em>), and had in 1959, an understory of wood sage plugs (<em>Teucrium scorodonia</em>), wood anemone (<em>Anemone nemorosa</em>), bracken (<em>Pteridium aquilinum</em>), and wavy-hair grass (<em>Deschampsia flexuosa</em>). In later years, the understory became more dominated by bramble species (<em>Rubus fruticosus </em>and<em> R. idaeus</em>) and common nettles (<em>Urtica dioica</em>) at the edges of the forest, due to increased N deposition from adjacent farmland. The forest is situated at the transition from western riverine deposits and eastern periglacial cover sands. The soil is a riverine deposit with a few elevation differences, making a number of gradients in clay and loam content, which results in many short-distance gradients in soil types, varying from typic haplaquolls with the largest loam contents, via psammaquentic haplorthods to humaqueptic spodic psammaquents, slightly elevated and low in loam contents.</p> <p>Microarthropod Sampling and pH Measurement</p> <p>In 1959, samples were taken at three subsequent dates: 11 September, 9 October, and 30 October. Samples in 1987 were taken on one date, 9 October, just as on 30 October 2019. Samples were taken following a standard procedure, developed at the Institute for Applied Biological Research in Nature, Wageningen, the Netherlands (later merged into the Research Institute for Nature management, Institute for Forestry and Nature Research and Alterra resp., now known as Wageningen Environmental Research); this procedure has been published by Siepel and van de Bund in 1988 (Siepel and van de Bund, 1988). Each mineral soil sample has 100 cc: a volume of 5 cm diameter and 5 cm depth plus litter on top. In 1959, two samples per date were taken on each plot, making a total of 6 samples (only pooled data are available); in 1987 and in 2019, 4 and 5 samples for each plot were taken on, respectively (data per sample available).</p> <p>Soil cores were put on a Tullgren funnel for 1 week, during which temperature was increased from 35 to 45 °C, and then, microarthropods were collected in 70% alcohol and later put into 20% lactic acid for clarification and identification (Siepel, 1990; Siepel and van de Bund, 1988). The Tullgren funnel used for extraction (Siepel, 1990) has been used ever since 1936 and efficiency has not changed as the tool and protocol was the same all over the years.</p> <p>Identification was done to the species level as much as possible using at present the keys for Oribatida(Weigmann and G., 2006), for Gamasina (Lehtinen, 1994), for Uropodina (Karg, 1989), and for Collembola (Hopkin, 2007). Material from the extractions of 1959 and 1987 was re-examined as far as possible to check the correct species identification. In the 1959 and 1987 samples, only oribatid mites were identified to the species level, whereas in 1959, all species of <em>Quadroppiidae, Oppiidae</em>, and <em>Suctobelbidae</em> were pooled. In 2019, all microarthropods were identified to the species level.</p> <p>Sorting and identification of the 1959 microarthropods was carried out by an experienced acarologist (J.G. de Gunst), in 1987, this was done by a student (C. Arnold) and completed and checked by the second author. For the 2019 samples, we decided to demonstrate the potential difference in picking out the microarthropods from the extraction fluid into the slides for identification as part of the experiment: the first author made a first series of slides including all distinguished animals (dataset 2019 a), while the second author made an extra set of slides with the animals missed by the first (dataset 2019 b). The first author did know since the beginning that the second author would check all samples after her sorting session. In this way, we intended to demonstrate the potential difference in this crucial part of the procedure by a starting and an experienced professional. In the analysis, we compare dataset (2019 a) with (2019 a + b), in order to highlight the difference between a starting and an experienced acarologist. Nomenclature adopted was updated according to current standards, following, e.g., the checklists for Oribatida (Siepel et al., 2009), for Astigmatina (Siepel et al., 2016), and for Mesostigmata (Siepel, 2018). Values of pH-KCl were measured in the core material after the extraction of the microarthropods, both in 1959, 1987, and 2019.</p> <p> </p> <p>We have four data files:</p> <p>1959 hackfort microarthropods data.csv</p> <p>1989 hackfort microarthropods data.csv</p> <p>2019 hackfort microarthropods data.csv</p> <p>pH data Hackfort 1959-2019.csv.</p> <p> </p> <p>Explanation of the variables in the datasets:</p> <p>higher taxon: Oribatida, Astigmata, Mesostigmata, Prostigmata, Collembola or Protura</p> <p>Name in De Gunst 1959: taxonomic identification by De Gunst in 1959</p> <p>Valid name: Henk Siepel re-checked these species names in 2019</p> <p>Plot: plot 1, plot 2, plot 3, plot 4, plot 5</p> <p>a: identified by Yuxi Guo</p> <p>b: re-checked by Henk Siepel from remaining soil microarthropods in slide</p> <p>pH(KCL) and pH(H2O): pH values based on indicated methods</p> <p> </p>
Competition and geography underlie speciation and morphological evolution in Indo-Australasian monitor lizards
<p>How biotic and abiotic factors act together to shape biological diversity is a major question in evolutionary biology. The recent availability of large datasets and development of new methodological approaches provide new tools to evaluate the predicted effects of ecological interactions and geography on lineage diversification and phenotypic evolution. Here, we use a near complete phylogenomic-scale phylogeny and a comprehensive morphological dataset comprising more than a thousand specimens to assess the role of biotic and abiotic processes in the diversification of monitor lizards (Varanidae). This charismatic group of lizards shows striking variation in species richness among its clades and multiple instances of endemic radiation in Indo-Australasia (i.e., the Indo-Australian Archipelago and Australia), one of Earth's most biogeographically complex regions. We found heterogeneity in diversification dynamics across the family. Idiosyncratic biotic and geographic conditions appear to have driven diversification and morphological evolution in three endemic Indo-Australasian radiations. Furthermore, incumbency effects partially explain patterns in the biotic exchange between Australia and New Guinea. Our results offer insight into the dynamic history of Indo-Australasia, the evolutionary significance of competition, and the long-term consequences of incumbency effects.</p>
December 2021 eclipse monitoring of WWV at 10 MHz using Grape 1
<p>Ten days of fldigi recordings in HamSci Grape 1 format of WWV at 10 MHz around the December 2021 eclipse</p>
PM2.5 4 days forecast from December, 22 2020 retrieved from Copernicus Monitoring Service
<p>Dataset used in the Galaxy Pangeo tutorials on Xarray.</p> <p>Data is in netCDF format and is from <a href="https://ads.atmosphere.copernicus.eu/">Copernicus Air Monitoring Service</a> and more precisely PM2.5 (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates#Size,_shape_and_solubility_matter">Particle Matter < 2.5 μm</a>) 4 days forecast from December, 22 2021. This dataset is very small and there is no need to parallelize our data analysis. Parallel data analysis with Pangeo is not covered in this tutorial and will make use of another dataset.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>This dataset is not meant to be useful for scientific studies.</strong></p>
Joint Communication and Sensing: a Proof of Concept and Datasets for Greenhouse Monitoring using LoRaWAN
<p>The goal of these LoRaWAN based greenhouse monitoring datasets, is to provide the global research community with a benchmark tool to evaluate different techniques for precision agriculture in large greenhouse environments. An identical collection methodology was used for both of the two datasets over the same tomato crop: during a period of five months, respectively. Together with temperature and humidity values, network information such as receiving time of the message and Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) were stored in the greenhouse monitoring datasets:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Greenhouse-1.csv</strong> <ul> <li>Data from 27 sensors denoted as AF 16-42 with an average of 19687 LoRaWAN messages per sensor from April till August 2020, obtained in the greenhouse for tomato crop in Belgium.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Greenhouse-2.csv</strong> <ul> <li>Data from 19 sensors denoted as AF 49-67 with an average of 19009 LoRaWAN messages per sensor from July till November 2020, obtained in the other greenhouse for tomato crop in the Netherlands.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Greenhouse-1-Transformed-Data.csv</strong> <ul> <li>Mean temperature, humidity, and RSSI values along with plant height for the same period.</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <p>Both the greenhouses, had no LoRaWAN connectivity, so individual gateway were installed for both locations. For Greenhouse-1 data, sensors were switched on in a room on 10<sup>th</sup> of April and brought to the greenhouse chamber on 17<sup>th</sup> April at 06:38 am for sensing. It would be crucial to accordingly use data set, considering the above time period.</p> <p>The collection methodology of datasets, and first results of a joint communication and sensing proof-of-concept are documented in the journal paper : https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/4/1326.</p> <p> </p>
Global indicators framework for socially responsible research and innovation (RRI): How to monitor public and researcher perspectives (Supplemental material)
<p>This data upload provides a detailed account of indicators that can be used to measure RRI progress around the world against the UNESCO Recommendation for Science and Scientific Researchers at the level of individual researchers and public opinion. This data upload provides supplemental material for an article in Open Research Europe entitled, 'Global indicators framework for socially responsible research and innovation (RRI): How to monitor public and researcher perspectives'.</p> <p>Abstract for main article:</p> <p>As calls for more socially responsible research and innovation (RRI) policies and practices grow more insistent, the need for high quality indicators that can be used to evaluate progress is becoming increasingly important. Given the global nature of science, such indicators need to be relevant to countries across all world regions. Moreover, the methodological quality of indicators is critical to provide a strong foundation for long-term comparative measurement of the impacts of different kinds of policy intervention. There is a practical challenge in this effort relating to the uneven mechanisms for data collection and analysis available in different countries. There is also a geopolitical challenge in gaining buy-in from countries with very different, and sometimes competing, agendas. Here, the 2017 UNESCO-led Recommendation on Science and Scientific Researchers is highlighted as an existing vehicle that can enable cooperation on globally comparative measurement of socially responsible research and innovation. In particular, the quadrennial monitoring of the implementation of this wide-ranging global policy instrument that has been ratified by 195 countries affords a unique opportunity to add value for these countries by linking RRI to the 2017 Recommendation while establishing benchmark indicators for RRI more generally. As a practical and methodological contribution to the global community of science and innovation policymakers, researchers and research and innovation stakeholders committed to socially responsible research, this report contains specific, detailed survey questions and response options focusing on the public opinion and individual researchers’ level of measurement. It provides details of sources of benchmark survey data that have readily available open data that can be used to benchmark the development of socially responsible research and innovation over time from the vantage points of the public and researchers around the world. The aim of this kind of indicators framework is to enable evidence-based practice in socially responsible research and innovation. Robust and practical RRI measurement on a global scale can reduce the risk that well-intentioned but ill-conceived RRI policy and practice interventions create undetected, unchecked, and unreformed negative impacts in practice.</p>
Spectrograms and frequencies of the first mode of Schumann Resonance according to multi-position monitoring parformed at the Ukrainian Antarctic Station (2002-2020) and at the Arctic SOUSY facility (2013-2020)
<p>This dataset contains the processed data used for the publication: ELECTROMAGNETIC SEASONS IN SCHUMANN RESONANCE RECORDS. The dataset contains the daily spectrograms and frequensies of first mode of Schumann Resonance (derived for North-South and East-West magnetic components) of ELF signals recorded at the Ukrainian “Akademik Vernadsky” Antarctic station (65.25° N and 64.25° W) 2002-2020, and at SOUSY Arctic facility (Svalbard 78.15° N and 16.05° E) 2013-2020.</p>
Field setup and metadata of the NBS monitoring experiment in OAL-Austria
<p>Field setup and metadata of the NBS monitoring experiment assessing the performance of a prototype of a bio-degradable bentonite mat conducted in OAL-Austria, including the locations of</p> <p>- the ground control points (GCPs) measured with the help of a differential global navigation satellite system (DGNSS)</p> <p>- the dynamic cone penetration tests (DCPTs)</p> <p>- probes of the electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) monitoring (4 transects)</p> <p>- positions of the individual terrestrial laser scans (TLS)</p> <p>- locations of the continuous soil moisture monitoring based on time-domain reflectometry (TDR)</p> <p> </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.