Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 3 in Composition and Dynamics of Hexapod Communities on Yushan Bamboo () in the Subtropical Montane Areas of Taiwan.

Fig. 3. Variations of hexapod biodiversity indices in bimonthly surveys. Variations of Evenness (circle), Shannon (square), and Simpson (triangle) indices during 2009–2012. Temperature is indicated by gray bars.

Fig. 4 in Composition and Dynamics of Hexapod Communities on Yushan Bamboo () in the Subtropical Montane Areas of Taiwan.

Fig. 4. Numbers of individuals and the biomass transformed on the basis of body length data collected in bimonthly survey during 2009–2012. The numbers of individuals (solid circles) and biomass (empty circles, mg) were transformed into logN values. Temperature is indicated by gray bars.

Fig. 2 in Composition and Dynamics of Hexapod Communities on Yushan Bamboo () in the Subtropical Montane Areas of Taiwan.

Fig. 2. Bimonthly dynamics of numbers of individuals in the dominant hexapod orders Collembola (square), Hemiptera (triangle), and Hymenoptera (circle) surveyed during 2009–2012. Temperature is indicated by gray bars.

Fig. 1 in Composition and Dynamics of Hexapod Communities on Yushan Bamboo () in the Subtropical Montane Areas of Taiwan.

Fig. 1. Percentage distribution of individuals belonging to hexapod families of the dominant orders of Hemiptera, Collembola, and Hymenoptera surveyed on Yushan bamboo during 2009–2012. Family names are listed beneath the axis. Families were presented in colors.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2017View details →

Fig. 2 in Temporal and demographic blood parasite dynamics in two free-ranging neotropical primates

Fig. 2. Individual infection status by parasite by year. Strength and thickness of lines are scaled to the number of individuals that took a given infection trajectory from one year to the next. Two diagonal lines span 2012‾2014 because those individuals were not sampled in 2013. The + symbols represent every infection or non-infection found across all individuals in the study.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2017View details →

Fig. 3 in Temporal and demographic blood parasite dynamics in two free-ranging neotropical primates

Fig. 3. Parasite species richness by species, age class and sex. Colors represent females (black) and males (gray).

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2017View details →

Fig. 1 in Temporal and demographic blood parasite dynamics in two free-ranging neotropical primates

Fig. 1. Annual prevalence of single- and co-infections by species. Prevalence indicated for each parasite (dark gray), and each pairwise combination of parasites (light gray). Numbers near the top of each bar show the exact prevalence; black lines indicate 95% confidence intervals; dots indicate expected levels of co-infection (refer to Section 3.2). M-D is co-occurrence of M. mariae and Dipetalonema spp., D-T is Dipetalonema spp. and T. minasense, and M-T is M. mariae and T. minasense.

Fig. 2 in Impacts of crustacean invasions on parasite dynamics in aquatic ecosystems: A plea for parasite-focused studies

Fig. 2. Introduced hosts ‾ native parasites: hypothetical examples of the potential effects of invasive crustaceans on native parasites. Note that only a subsample of nonexclusive scenarios from a number of potential outcomes of biological invasion on native parasite dynamics is represented here. The hypothetical native parasite considered here has a two-host life cycle involving a definitive host predator and an intermediate host prey, transmission from the intermediate host to the definitive host requiring consumption of infected intermediate host prey. The variable sizes of squares, circles and diamonds represent relative intermediate and definitive hosts, and parasite abundances, respectively. During transmission, some parasites are unsuccessful and therefore lost from the system (parasite loss); the thickness of the arrows indicates the relative numbers that are either lost or successfully transmitted. The life cycle at the top represents the situation prior to the invasion, providing a benchmark for comparisons. (A) The invader is a suitable alternative intermediate host in which native parasite larvae can survive. However, the introduced host is also a poor transmission vector, due to low predation rate from the definitive host and/or failed host manipulation by the parasite, for example. Introduced hosts are thus more infected than their congeneric, native hosts only because of the accumulation of native parasite larvae that fail to get transmitted to the definitive host. This may in turn negatively affect parasite dynamics in native hosts as shown here. (B) The invader is again a suitable alternative intermediate host but also a good transmission vector to the definitive host, leading to greater infection risk for native definitive hosts. In this case, the invader positively influences parasite dynamics and may increase infection levels in definitive hosts, as shown here. In extreme cases, invasive hosts may be more efficient vectors for the parasite than native hosts and become key hosts. (C) The invader is not a suitable host but directly impacts native intermediate hosts, the transmission vector for the parasite, through predation and thus indirectly reduces native parasite abundance in native definitive hosts.

Fig. 1 in Impacts of crustacean invasions on parasite dynamics in aquatic ecosystems: A plea for parasite-focused studies

Fig. 1. Hypothetical examples of enemy release (A), dilution effect (B), parasite spillback (C) and spillover (D) following introduction of a non-native host in a recipient ecosystem, illustrating the fundamental differences among the different processes. The theoretical recipient ecosystem is here composed of a native host infected by a parasite with a simple life cycle and direct transmission, invaded by a congeneric non-native host infected with a co-introduced parasite with a similar life cycle, to simplify representation. The variable sizes of squares and diamonds represent relative host and parasite abundances, respectively. The thickness of the arrows represents transmission dynamics of the parasite and account for parasite loss during transmission. Enemy release (A) happens when the introduced species benefits from a reduction, or total loss as represented here, in parasitism as a result of invasion. This may in turn have drastic effects on invasion success and both native and invasive host abundances. Dilution effect (B) results from the failure of native parasites to use invasive hosts for successful reproduction and transmission. Native parasites may be unable to infect or be killed (as represented here) by the invasive host. Dilution may in turn decrease parasite transmission among native hosts and negatively affect parasite population dynamics. Parasite spillback (C) happens when invasive hosts acquire a native parasite that is already present in the native host population. Infected invasive hosts can then act as reservoirs of native parasites, potentially increasing infection levels in native hosts as represented here. Increased infection levels in the native host may in turn reduce native host abundance, compared to pre-invasion levels (not represented here). Parasite spillover (D) follows the co-introduction of non-native parasites with their invasive hosts and infection of native hosts by the introduced parasite. Infection of the native host can be maintained by the invasive host, which acts as a reservoir of infection, self-sustained if the parasite can reproduce in its novel host, or both as represented here. Infection of the native host by the introduced parasite can in turn influence host abundances, compared to pre-invasion levels. Note that in scenario D, the native host may or may not possess native parasites.

Fig. 3 in Impacts of crustacean invasions on parasite dynamics in aquatic ecosystems: A plea for parasite-focused studies

Fig. 3. Introduced parasites ‾ native/introduced hosts: hypothetical examples of the potential effects of invasive crustaceans on native parasites. Note that only a subsample of non-exclusive scenarios from a number of potential outcomes of non-native parasite introduction is represented here. The hypothetical non-native parasite considered here has a two-host life cycle involving a definitive host predator and an intermediate host prey, transmission from the intermediate host to the definitive host requiring consumption of infected intermediate host prey. The variable sizes of squares, circles and diamonds represent relative intermediate and definitive hosts, and parasite abundances, respectively. During transmission, some parasites are unsuccessful and therefore lost from the system (parasite loss); the thickness of the arrows indicates the relative numbers that are either lost or successfully transmitted. The life cycle at the top left represents the situation in the ecosystem of origin of the parasite, providing a benchmark for comparisons. Prior to the invasion, the hypothetical recipient ecosystem does not contain native parasites for simplification of representation. (A) The parasite is co-introduced with its intermediate host prey. The invasive parasite retains its original, co-introduced hosts and uses native definitive hosts to complete its life cycle. The situation represented here is the simplest one where the native predator exactly replaces the original definitive host of the parasite with no effect on either parasite dynamics or host abundance. However, parasite invasion may in turn negatively affect native predators and change parasite dynamics compared to that observed in the original ecosystem (shown at the top left). (B) The parasite is again cointroduced with its intermediate host prey. The invasive parasite retains its original, co-introduced hosts and uses native definitive hosts to complete its life cycle but also uses the native prey species as an alternative transmission vector. The introduced parasite may negatively influence native host abundance, thus influencing invasion success of its co-introduced host, as shown here. This may in turn lead to greater infection levels in definitive hosts in the recipient ecosystem than in the original ecosystem of the parasite (situation not represented here) (C) The non-native parasite is introduced without its original host (or this host does not survive translocation) but is subsequently included in the recipient food web. The novel parasite may in turn have drastic effects on intermediate and/or native hosts and reach higher infection levels in these novel hosts as represented here. However, a multitude of alternative scenarios are possible with as many outcomes in terms of parasite dynamics.

Fig. 4 in Parasite community dynamics in an invasive vole ‾ From focal introduction to wave front

Fig. 4. Statistical associations between ectoparasites and endoparasites infecting bank voles, Myodes glareolus. All associations are due to the presence of a coinfecting species, positive relationships are shown in black and negative relationships are in grey. The predicted absolute percentage change (see Methods for definition) of the dependent variable is given for each interaction. Parentheses identify whether the relationship is based on body mass (BM), host sex (S) or at the mid-point along the invasion wave (WM). Lice had a prevalence of less than 10% so were excluded from analyses.

Fig. 1 in Parasite community dynamics in an invasive vole ‾ From focal introduction to wave front

Fig. 1. Sampling sites of the invasive bank vole, Myodes glareolus, across the Republic of Ireland. Curraghchase and Adare are the focal point of introduction, Gort, Nenagh and Cashel are mid-wave, and Tuam, Birr and New Ross represent the invasion front. For all trapping sites along the invasion gradient (black = focal point of introduction, grey = mid-wave, and white = invasion front), bar charts depict the prevalence of each parasite and boxplots indicate the mean parasite abundance (log x +1), where boxes indicate the mean, and lines the 95% confidence intervals.

Fig. 3 in Parasite community dynamics in an invasive vole ‾ From focal introduction to wave front

Fig. 3. Parasite interactivity index from eight sampling sites at three points along an invasion gradient (black = focal point of introduction, grey = mid-wave, and white = invasion front) in the Republic of Ireland. Boxes represent upper and lower quartile, with median indicated, with bars representing maximum and minimum range.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2023View details →

Рис. 2. Процесс поеΔания гусеницами искусственной питатеΛьной среΔы Fig. 2. Caterpillars feeding on artificial nutrient medium in Development dynamics of Kavkaz-2 and Sovetskaya-14 NGL silkworm caterpillars on artificial nutrient medium IPS 7.2-G

Рис. 2. Процесс поеΔания гусеницами искусственной питатеΛьной среΔы Fig. 2. Caterpillars feeding on artificial nutrient medium

Fig. 2 in Parasite community dynamics in an invasive vole ‾ From focal introduction to wave front

Fig. 2. Parasite abundance of the invasive bank vole, Myodes glareolus, from eight locations at three points along an invasion gradient (black = focal point of introduction, grey = mid-wave, and white = invasion front) in the Republic of Ireland. Boxes represent upper and lower quartile, with median indicated, with bars representing maximum and minimum range.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →

Рис. 2. ΔоΛговременная Αинамика весенней чисΛенности трех виΑов уток (A — трескунка; B — касатки; C — шиΛохвости) на ΑебеΑинском стационаре Хинганского заповеΑника (показаны уровень значимости и 95-процентный ΑоверитеΛьный интерваΛ) Fig. 2. Long-term spring number dynamics of three duck species at the Lebedinsky Station of Khingansky State Nature Reserve with p-values and 0.95 confidence intervals. A — Gargany; B — Falcated Duck; C — Pintail in The results of long-term observation of waterfowl spring migration in Khingan Nature Reserve, Eastern Russia

Рис. 2. ΔоΛговременная Αинамика весенней чисΛенности трех виΑов уток (A — трескунка; B — касатки; C — шиΛохвости) на ΑебеΑинском стационаре Хинганского заповеΑника (показаны уровень значимости и 95-процентный ΑоверитеΛьный интерваΛ) Fig. 2. Long-term spring number dynamics of three duck species at the Lebedinsky Station of Khingansky State Nature Reserve with p-values and 0.95 confidence intervals. A — Gargany; B — Falcated Duck; C — Pintail

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →

Modeling the Emission of Energetic Neutral Atoms in Titan's Dynamic Magnetospheric Environment

Data for the manuscript "Modeling the Emission of Energetic Neutral Atoms in Titan's Dynamic Magnetospheric Environment" by Tippens et al., (2024). See README.txt for a description of the data files included here.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →

Model configuration files and forcing data for Implementing deep soil and dynamic root uptake in Noah-MP (v4.5): impact on Amazon dry-season transpiration

This repository includes the model configuration files, input data, and forcing data used for simulations in Bieri et al. (2025) - Implementing deep soil and dynamic root uptake in Noah-MP (v4.5): impact on Amazon dry-season transpiration. <ul> <li>forcing.tar.gz - Compressed folder containing HRLDAS Noah-MP model forcing NetCDF files <ul> <li>These forcing files were derived from the NASA Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS; Beaudoing et al. 2020)</li> <li>The compressed file contains 3-hourly forcing files for the entire simulation period (01 Jun 2000 to 31 Dec 2019)</li> </ul> </li> <li>wrfinput_d01 - NetCDF file used as HRLDAS input file in HRLDAS Noah-MP simulations <ul> <li>Generated from WRF WPS (https://github.com/wrf-model/WPS)</li> </ul> </li> <li>Namelist files <ul> <li>namelist.hrldas.ROOT - Model namelist settings used for ROOT experiment</li> <li>namelist.hrldas.SOIL - Model namelist settings used for SOIL experiment</li> <li>namelist.hrldas.GW - Model namelist settings used for GW experiment</li> <li>namelist.hrldas.CONTROL - Model namelist settings used for FD (CONTROL) experiment</li> </ul> </li> </ul>

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2018View details →

Data and results for manuscript "Imaging groundwater infiltration dynamics in karst vadose zone with long-term ERT monitoring"

This data set contains raw and inverted data from an Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) monitoring experiment conducted over a period of three years at the Rochefort Cave Laboratory (RCL) site in South Belgium. It highlights variable hydrodynamics in the karst vadose zone of Lorette Cave. More conventional hydrological measurements (drip discharge monitoring, soil moisture and water conductivity data sets) are also included in the package, which aims at provide a thorough understanding of the groundwater infiltration. Seasonal changes affect all the imaged areas leading to increases in resistivity in spring/summer attributed to enhanced evapotranspiration, whereas winter is characterised by a general decrease in resistivity associated with a groundwater recharge of the vadose zone. This study provides detailed images of the sources of drip discharge spots traditionally monitored in caves and aims to support modelling approaches of karst hydrological processes.