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.
13,117
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
13,117 results for “Maps”
Text-fig. 3. Geology of the Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique. Sections and geological map adapted from Tinley (1977). The star symbols close to Mhengere Hill represent fossil wood and stem sites. Note that the fault relationships proposed in the northernmost Inhaminga section require re-examination. The Nguere Hills were called Gadjiua by Tinley (1977). in Stratigraphy, Chronology And Palaeontology Of The Tertiary Rocks Of The Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique
Text-fig. 3. Geology of the Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique. Sections and geological map adapted from Tinley (1977). The star symbols close to Mhengere Hill represent fossil wood and stem sites. Note that the fault relationships proposed in the northernmost Inhaminga section require re-examination. The Nguere Hills were called Gadjiua by Tinley (1977).
Text-fig. 1. Relief map of Africa to show the location of the Cheringoma Plateau at the southern extremity of the African Rift System. in Stratigraphy, Chronology And Palaeontology Of The Tertiary Rocks Of The Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique
Text-fig. 1. Relief map of Africa to show the location of the Cheringoma Plateau at the southern extremity of the African Rift System.
Text-fig. 1. a: Simplified geological map of the Permo-Carboniferous Brive Basin (after Feys 1989) with marked localities L 1 (Brive, road D1089), L 2 (Lanteuil). b: Profile of the Brive Basin (modified from Feys 1989). c: Profile recorded by Guy and Maryse Chantepie in 2007 on the type locality Brive, road D1089. in New Actinopterygians From The Permian Of The Brive Basin, And The Ichthyofaunas Of The French Massif Central
Text-fig. 1. a: Simplified geological map of the Permo-Carboniferous Brive Basin (after Feys 1989) with marked localities L 1 (Brive, road D1089), L 2 (Lanteuil). b: Profile of the Brive Basin (modified from Feys 1989). c: Profile recorded by Guy and Maryse Chantepie in 2007 on the type locality Brive, road D1089.
Text-fig. 7. Geology of the Muaredzi-Muanza sector of the Cheringoma Plateau showing the location of fossil occurrences. White stars – fossiliferous localities mapped by Pickford (2012, 2013), Black stars – fossil sites mapped by Habermann et al. (2019) and d'Oliveira Coelho et al. (2021) (GPL 12 and GPL 12b correspond to the White Patch sites). TTI – Cheringoma Formation, TTs1 – Mazamba Formation, TTs1a – Palaeopan facies, TTs2 – Inhaminga Formation, Qc – Quaternary sediments. The base map is modified from Google Earth. in Stratigraphy, Chronology And Palaeontology Of The Tertiary Rocks Of The Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique
Text-fig. 7. Geology of the Muaredzi-Muanza sector of the Cheringoma Plateau showing the location of fossil occurrences. White stars – fossiliferous localities mapped by Pickford (2012, 2013), Black stars – fossil sites mapped by Habermann et al. (2019) and d'Oliveira Coelho et al. (2021) (GPL 12 and GPL 12b correspond to the White Patch sites). TTI – Cheringoma Formation, TTs1 – Mazamba Formation, TTs1a – Palaeopan facies, TTs2 – Inhaminga Formation, Qc – Quaternary sediments. The base map is modified from Google Earth.
Text-fig. 5. East-west cross section of the Urema Graben and Cheringoma Plateau adapted from Pfaffhuber et al. (2009). The Urema Graben is ca. 45–50 km broad. Note that in this scheme, the Eocene Limestone (i.e., the Cheringoma Fm) is overlain by Oligocene sandstone in the position mapped as Mazamba Formation by Real (1966) and by Tinley (1977). in Stratigraphy, Chronology And Palaeontology Of The Tertiary Rocks Of The Cheringoma Plateau, Mozambique
Text-fig. 5. East-west cross section of the Urema Graben and Cheringoma Plateau adapted from Pfaffhuber et al. (2009). The Urema Graben is ca. 45–50 km broad. Note that in this scheme, the Eocene Limestone (i.e., the Cheringoma Fm) is overlain by Oligocene sandstone in the position mapped as Mazamba Formation by Real (1966) and by Tinley (1977).
Fig. 1. Map showing the Kii Peninsula. Blank circles and a in Three New Infaunal Species of Taeniogyrus (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea: Apodida: Chiridotidae: Taeniogyrinae) from Southern Coast of Wakayama, Japan
Fig. 1. Map showing the Kii Peninsula. Blank circles and a solid black circle denote the sampling sites, for the three new taeniogyrid species of the present study and the previous studies (Yamana and Tanaka 2017a; Yamana et al. 2017), respectively.
Text-fig. 1. Locality map with the approximate extent of Clarkia Lake during Miocene times in what is today northern Idaho, USA. Black dots mark three of the localities yielding the Miocene Clarkia flora; the fossil leaf of Nymphaea sp. described here comes from locality P-33. Other symbols: Dashed lines for county boundaries; a thin dotted line for Idaho State Hwy 3; a triangle for the local peak of Bechtel Butte; and a star for the town of Clarkia. Inset: Location of the map in northern Idaho. Abbreviations: WA – Washington state, OR – Oregon, ID – Idaho, MT – Montana. Map redrawn from Ladderud et al. (2015). in First Water Lily, A Leaf Of Nymphaea Sp., From The Miocene Clarkia Flora, Northern Idaho, Usa: Occurrence, Taphonomic Observations, Floristic Implications
Text-fig. 1. Locality map with the approximate extent of Clarkia Lake during Miocene times in what is today northern Idaho, USA. Black dots mark three of the localities yielding the Miocene Clarkia flora; the fossil leaf of Nymphaea sp. described here comes from locality P-33. Other symbols: Dashed lines for county boundaries; a thin dotted line for Idaho State Hwy 3; a triangle for the local peak of Bechtel Butte; and a star for the town of Clarkia. Inset: Location of the map in northern Idaho. Abbreviations: WA – Washington state, OR – Oregon, ID – Idaho, MT – Montana. Map redrawn from Ladderud et al. (2015).
Text-fig. 1. a: Map of France showing geographic position of Saint-Bauzile (source: http://d-maps.com/m/europa/france/france/ france09.gif). b: Overview of the active diatomite quarry at the Montagne d'Andance, photograph taken in 2017. c: SEM image of a frustule of pennate diatom (cf. Navicula sp.) from Saint-Bauzile. d) SEM image of frustules forming a colony of centric diatoms (cf. Diatoma sp.) from Saint-Bauzile. in Evidence For Wildfires During Deposition Of The Late Miocene Diatomites Of The Konservat-Lagerstätte Lake Saint-Bauzile (Ardèche, France) - Preliminary Results
Text-fig. 1. a: Map of France showing geographic position of Saint-Bauzile (source: http://d-maps.com/m/europa/france/france/ france09.gif). b: Overview of the active diatomite quarry at the Montagne d'Andance, photograph taken in 2017. c: SEM image of a frustule of pennate diatom (cf. Navicula sp.) from Saint-Bauzile. d) SEM image of frustules forming a colony of centric diatoms (cf. Diatoma sp.) from Saint-Bauzile.
Text-fig. 1. Context and location of the Govone outcrop. a: Location of the Piedmont Basin at the northern margin of the Mediterranean Basin and distribution of Messinian evaporites. b: Simplified geological map of the Piedmont Basin showing the location of the Govone outcrop close to the town of Alba. in Remains Of A Subtropical Humid Forest In A Messinian Evaporitebearing Succession At Govone, Northwestern Italy - Preliminary Results
Text-fig. 1. Context and location of the Govone outcrop. a: Location of the Piedmont Basin at the northern margin of the Mediterranean Basin and distribution of Messinian evaporites. b: Simplified geological map of the Piedmont Basin showing the location of the Govone outcrop close to the town of Alba.
Text-fig. 5. Vegetation zones in P. R. China (Editorial Committee of Vegetation Map of China, The Chinese Academy of Sciences 2007), and assumed location of extant reference vegetation type of Wiesa fossil assemblage (rectangle), as revealed from qualitative floristic analysis. Extant reference vegetation type present in southern belt of zone of subtropical evergreen broadleaved forest, with minor overlap into zone of tropical forest. in Assessment Of Phytogeographic Reference Regions For Cenozoic Vegetation: A Case Study On The Miocene Flora Of Wiesa (Germany)
Text-fig. 5. Vegetation zones in P. R. China (Editorial Committee of Vegetation Map of China, The Chinese Academy of Sciences 2007), and assumed location of extant reference vegetation type of Wiesa fossil assemblage (rectangle), as revealed from qualitative floristic analysis. Extant reference vegetation type present in southern belt of zone of subtropical evergreen broadleaved forest, with minor overlap into zone of tropical forest.
Text-fig. 4. Graphical visualization of Phytogeographic Reference Regions Assessment (PRRA) of nearest living relative genera of fossil-taxa from late Early Miocene Wiesa assemblage in eastern Germany. Analysis yields only NLRs which have modern distribution area (partly) in E and SE Asia. For relationships of fossil-taxa to nearest living relatives or ecological equivalents, see Tab. 6; taxa used for analysis marked with asterisks. Three geographic resolutions conducted: a – grid with 1.5° latitude/longitude resolution, b – grid with 2°, c – grid with 3°; similarity column indicates cooccurrences of genera of nearest living relatives in single grid box. Maximum value in our analysis: grid box marked with arrow in map a, located in western Yunnan Province, P. R. China and southern Kachin Province, NE Myanmar (east of Myitkyina city), area with 97.371 7–98.874 2° longitude and 24.586 7–25.837 5° latitude, yields 23 co-occurring species of 13 genera (Tab. 7). in Assessment Of Phytogeographic Reference Regions For Cenozoic Vegetation: A Case Study On The Miocene Flora Of Wiesa (Germany)
Text-fig. 4. Graphical visualization of Phytogeographic Reference Regions Assessment (PRRA) of nearest living relative genera of fossil-taxa from late Early Miocene Wiesa assemblage in eastern Germany. Analysis yields only NLRs which have modern distribution area (partly) in E and SE Asia. For relationships of fossil-taxa to nearest living relatives or ecological equivalents, see Tab. 6; taxa used for analysis marked with asterisks. Three geographic resolutions conducted: a – grid with 1.5° latitude/longitude resolution, b – grid with 2°, c – grid with 3°; similarity column indicates cooccurrences of genera of nearest living relatives in single grid box. Maximum value in our analysis: grid box marked with arrow in map a, located in western Yunnan Province, P. R. China and southern Kachin Province, NE Myanmar (east of Myitkyina city), area with 97.371 7–98.874 2° longitude and 24.586 7–25.837 5° latitude, yields 23 co-occurring species of 13 genera (Tab. 7).
Text-fig. 2. Map of the Bolca area, showing all the relevant fossil sites, and map of Italy, with the Bolca area marked by a star. in A Whole-Plant Specimen Of The Marine Macroalga Pterigophycos From The Eocene Of Bolca (Veneto, N-Italy)
Text-fig. 2. Map of the Bolca area, showing all the relevant fossil sites, and map of Italy, with the Bolca area marked by a star.
Text-fig. 1. Location of Wiesa fossil site in eastern Germany and other fossil sites for comparison. Explanation for map b: all fossil sites – black circles; grey circles – cities; topographic names in italics – German states (Länder). For bio- and lithostratigraphic data of fossil sites, see chapter Methodologies and material and Text-fig. 3. in Assessment Of Phytogeographic Reference Regions For Cenozoic Vegetation: A Case Study On The Miocene Flora Of Wiesa (Germany)
Text-fig. 1. Location of Wiesa fossil site in eastern Germany and other fossil sites for comparison. Explanation for map b: all fossil sites – black circles; grey circles – cities; topographic names in italics – German states (Länder). For bio- and lithostratigraphic data of fossil sites, see chapter Methodologies and material and Text-fig. 3.
Fig. 15. – Distribution maps. A in Novelties in African Apocynaceae
Fig. 15. – Distribution maps. A. Tabernaemontana fragrans Jongkind (circles) and T. psorocarpa (Pierre ex Stapf) Pichon (triangles). B. Voacanga bracteata Stapf. C. Voacanga cornuta Jongkind (stars) and V. diplochlamys K. Schum. (circles).
Fig. 8. – Distribution maps. A in Novelties in African Apocynaceae
Fig. 8. – Distribution maps. A. Landolphia anthonii Jongkind (triangles), L. persooniana O. Lachenaud & Jongkind (circles) and L. verrucosa Jongkind & O. Lachenaud (stars). B. Landolphia glandulosa (Pellegr.) Pichon (stars), L. obovata O. Lachenaud & Jongkind (circles) and Oncinotis gabonica O. Lachenaud (triangle).
High-resolution maps of material stock, population and employment in Austria from 1985 to 2018
<p>Global societal material stocks such as buildings and infrastructure accumulated rapidly within recent decades, along with population growth. Material stocks constitute the physical basis of most socio-economic activities and services, such as mobility, housing, health, or education. The dynamics of stock growth, and its relation to the population that demands those services, is an essential indicator for long-term societal resource use and patterns of emissions. The creation of societal material stock creates path dependencies for future resource use, with an important impact on how the transformation towards sustainable societies can succeed.</p> <p>This dataset features detailed maps of material stock and population, as well as the distribution of jobs, for Austria on a 30m grid. The data is based on recent maps of material stock and building volume (compare to Haberl et al. 2021, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.0c05642, data: https://zenodo.org/record/4522892), recent and historic census data, and a time series of Landsat TM, ETM+, and OLI Earth Observation data.</p> <p><strong>Temporal extent</strong></p> <p>The data contains annual maps from 1985 to 2018.</p> <p><strong>Data format and units</strong></p> <p>Per Austrian federal state, the data come in tiles of 30x30km. The projection is EPSG:3035. The images are compressed GeoTiff files (*.tif). There is a mosaic in GDAL Virtual format (*.vrt), which can readily be opened in most Geographic Information Systems. Please consider the generation of image pyramids before using *.vrt files.</p> <p>All image data has 34 bands, where band 1 is data for 1985, and band 34 is data for 2018.</p> <p>The dataset features</p> <ul> <li>population (Scaled by 100 to reduce data storage size. Divide by 100 to get people per cell)</li> <li>jobs (Scaled by 100 to reduce data storage size. Divide by 100 to get jobs per cell)</li> <li>mass (in tons) of … <ul> <li>total material stock <ul> <li>material stock in buildings <ul> <li>in commercial and industrial buildings</li> <li>in multi-family residential buildings</li> <li>in high-rise buildings</li> <li>in single-family residential buildings</li> <li>in lightweight buildings</li> </ul> </li> <li>material stock in road infrastructure</li> <li>material stock in rail infrastructure</li> <li>material stock in other infrastructure</li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> <p><strong>Further information</strong></p> <p>For further information, please see the publication or contact Franz Schug (fschug@wisc.edu). Visit our <a href="https://boku.ac.at/understanding-the-role-of-material-stock-patterns-for-the-transformation-to-a-sustainable-society-mat-stocks">website </a>to learn more about our project MAT_STOCKS - Understanding the Role of Material Stock Patterns for the Transformation to a Sustainable Society.</p> <p><strong>Funding</strong></p> <p>This research was funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (MAT_STOCKS, grant agreement No 741950).</p> <p> </p>
NOAA NCCOS Assessment: Agency priorities for mapping coral reef ecosystems in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 2021-11-03 to 2022-01-14
<p>Description:</p> <p>The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) developed a spatial framework, process, and online application (Buja and Christensen 2019) to identify mapping needs along the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Island (USVI) coasts to support shallow coral reef management by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP). Participants from local, federal, academic, and other institutions (sixteen in Puerto Rico, eighteen in USVI), entered their priorities in an online participatory Geographic Information System (pGIS). Participants used virtual coins to denote their priorities in 2.6 km<sup>2</sup> hexagonal grid cells overlaid on the study area, individually for Puerto Rico and USVI. Grid cells with more coins were higher priorities than cells with fewer coins. Participants also reported why these locations were important, what data types were needed, and data collection methodologies using a pre-set list of options. Results were compiled, summarized, and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. Identifying these high priority areas provide a critical spatial framework for prioritizing mapping efforts in shallow coral reef ecosystems in Puerto Rico and USVI.</p> <p> </p> <p>Purpose:</p> <p>The overall goal of the project was to systematically gather and quantify suggestions for mapping needs to support management of shallow coral reef ecosystems along the coasts of Puerto Rico and USVI. This dataset supports these goals by compiling input from a diversity of regional experts on their recommended priorities for mapping data collection.</p> <p> </p> <p>Methods:</p> <p>An advisory group was established which included individuals from NOAA CRCP and NOAA Fisheries. This advisory team customized the pGIS process specifically to meet the needs of CRCP and local coral reef manager priorities. In the online pGIS, the Puerto Rico study area was divided into 2007 hexagonal grid cells 2.6 km2 in size. The USVI study area was divided into 644 hexagonal grid cells 2.6 km2 in size. Existing relevant spatial datasets (e.g., bathymetry, Sanctuary Protection Areas, etc.) were provided as a digital atlas to help participants understand information and data gaps within the project area and to identify locations they wanted to prioritize for future data collections. The pGIS was used by 16 participants in Puerto Rico and 18 participants in USVI to convey their recommendations. Each Puerto Rico participant was provided with 600 virtual coins to place into grid cells that they wished to prioritize. Each USVI participant was provided with 200 coins. They were instructed to place more coins in grid cells that were higher priorities. A maximum of 60 coins could be placed into an individual grid cell in Puerto Rico by each respondent, and a maximum of 20 coins could be place into an individual grid cell in USVI. Respondents also reported why these locations were important by selecting a minimum of one, and a maximum of two, management uses from the following list: endangered species management (e.g.,), habitat restoration, monitoring, coastal vulnerability planning, watershed management, fisheries management, consultations and permitting, emergency response, and spatial protection and management. Respondents also reported requirements of data were needed in priority cells. A minimum of one, to a maximum of two choices were selected from the following list: delineations of large topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability for key taxa or communities, delineations of substrate type (e.g. sand, mud, coral, rock), models of presence/absence or density of corals, identification of coral species and their local environments, documentation of individual specimen condition. Coin values were summarized and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. This ESRI shapefile contains the 2.6 km2 grid cells used in this prioritization and their associated coin values overall, as well as by management use, data product, and mapping methodology. Other summary values include the number of participants, number of participating groups, number of management uses, and number of data requirements. Additionally, coins for microscale (identification of coral species and their local environments and documentation of individual specimen condition), mesoscale (delineations of substrate type, models of presence/absence/density of corals), and regional (delineations of topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability) requirements were summarized. Also included is a ranking of each grid cell based on the total number of coins, management uses, and participating groups allocating coins in the respective cell. For a complete description of the process and analysis see: Kraus et al. 2022, in prep.</p> <p> </p>
Data for: Image-based evaluation of beers at an online Pint of Science festival using Projective Mapping, Check-All-That-Apply and Acceptability
<p>Data obtained from n=67 untrained attendants at an outreach Pint of Science festival, online because of the COVID-19 pandemic but usually held at bars. The participants used images of brand logos to evaluate eight beers among the most commonly consumed in Spain. Three sensory analysis techniques were used: Projective Mapping, Acceptability and Check-All-That-Apply (CATA).</p>
Making Data Work: A Systematic Mapping of Collaborative Data Curation Practices
<p>This file contains dataset associated with the paper Making Data Work: A Systematic Mapping of Collaborative Data Curation Practices</p>
Asiantuntijakysely kaupunkibiotooppien monimuotoisuudesta ja kaupunkibiotooppikartta Suomen pääkaupunkiseudulla / Expert Questionnaire Results Regarding Biodiversity of Urban Biotopes and an Urban Biotope Map in Helsinki Metropolitan Area, Finland
<p>(in English below)</p> <p><strong>ASIANTUNTIJAKYSELY KAUPUNKIBIOTOOPPIEN MONIMUOTOISUUDESTA JA KAUPUNKIBIOTOOPPIKARTTA SUOMEN PÄÄKAUPUNKISEUDULLA</strong></p> <p><strong>Tausta ja tavoitteet</strong></p> <p>Luonnonsuojelu on keskittynyt perinteisesti Suomessa tiettyihin lajeihin ja luontotyyppeihin, mikä ei välttämättä kuvaa erilaisten kaupunkiympäristöjen ekologisia arvoja kattavasti. Lisäksi tulisi huomioida eliöyhteisöjä, jotka turvaavat kestävän ja monimuotoisen ekosysteemien toiminnallisuuden.</p> <p>Tämän asiantuntijakyselyn tavoitteena oli selvittää, miten erilaiset kaupunkibiotoopit tukevat erilaisia ekologisten yhteisöjen monimuotoisuutta kuvaavia tekijöitä eri eliöryhmillä. Nämä <em>monimuotoisuuden laatutekijät</em> kuvaavat yhdessä biotooppien roolia kaupunkiluonnon monimuotoisuudessa, toiminnallisuudessa ja täten epäsuorasti myös mm. ekosysteemipalvelujen tarjoamisessa. Kyselyn tuloksia voidaan hyödyntää ekologisten arvojen turvaamiseksi paremmin osana kaupunkisuunnittelua tai kaupunkiluonnon monimuotoisuuden kattavan turvaamisen perustana. Kysely keskittyi pääkaupunkiseudun (Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Kauniainen) biotooppeihin. Lisäksi asiantuntijat antoivat arvionsa biotooppipisteytyksen sovellettavuudesta muualla Suomessa.</p> <p>Kysely on kuvattu Terra-lehdessä (Jalkanen & Vierikko 2022) sekä Jalkanen ym. (2020).</p> <p><strong>Menetelmät</strong></p> <p><em>Kaupunkibiotooppien pisteytys</em></p> <p>Aineisto kerättiin internetkyselyllä 5.10.-21.11.2016 välisenä aikana. Kysely lähetettiin 38 paikalliselle lajiasiantuntijalle (Luonnontieteellisessä keskusmuseossa, Helsingin yliopistossa, Suomen ympäristökeskuksessa, ympäristökonsulttiyrityksissä ja luontojärjestöissä), joista 24 osallistui kyselyyn.</p> <p>Mukana olleet asiantuntijat (suluissa heidän lajiryhmänsä):</p> <ul> <li>Heidi Björklund (Linnut)</li> <li>Tea von Bonsdorff (Sienet, muut kuin käävät)</li> <li>Eero Haapanen (Nisäkkäät, muut kuin lepakot)</li> <li>Nina Hagner-Wahlsten (Lepakot)</li> <li>Jari Kaitila (Perhoset)</li> <li>Jarkko Korhonen (Sienet, muut kuin käävät)</li> <li>Jaakko Kullberg (Perhoset)</li> <li>Eeva-Maria Kyheröinen (Lepakot)</li> <li>Esa Lammi (Putkilokasvit)</li> <li>Riku Lumiaro (Nisäkkäät, muut kuin lepakot)</li> <li>Sampsa Malmberg (Kovakuoriaiset)</li> <li>Ilpo Mannerkoski (Kovakuoriaiset)</li> <li>Olli Manninen (Käävät)</li> <li>Heikka Marttila-Tornio (Matelijat & sammakkoeläimet)</li> <li>Juho Paukkunen (Pistiäiset)</li> <li>Terhi Ryttäri (Putkilokasvit)</li> <li>Jarmo Saarikivi (Matelijat & sammakkoeläimet)</li> <li>Hannu Sarvanne (Linnut)</li> <li>Keijo Savola (Käävät)</li> <li>Ilkka Teräs (Pistiäiset)</li> <li>Stephen Venn (Kovakuoriaiset)</li> <li>Tarmo Virtanen (Perhoset)</li> <li>Terhi Wermundsen (Lepakot)</li> <li>Rauno Yrjölä (Linnut)</li> </ul> <p>Asiantuntijat pisteyttivät kyselyssä 68 biotooppia sen mukaan, kuinka ne tukevat heidän lajiryhmiensä eri ominaisuustekijöitä. Jokainen biotooppi arvioitiin erikseen kunkin tekijän näkökulmasta. Pisteet annettiin 5-portaisella asteikolla (0–4; 0 alin). Asiantuntijoita ohjeistettiin miettimäään koko vuodenaikaiskiertoa (arvioimaan biotooppien merkitystä siis myös esim. talvehtimisen kannalta). Kysely perustui Vierikon ym. (2014) biotooppiluokitteluun seuraavin muutoksin:</p> <ul> <li>Metsäbiotoopit jaettiin kahteen ikäluokkaan (30–100-vuotiaat ja yli 100-vuotiaat metsät)</li> <li>Piha-alueet jaettiin päällystettyihin ja maavaraisiin</li> <li>Tiiviiden pientaloalueiden ja townhouse-alueiden pihat lisättiin omana biotooppinaan</li> <li>Kalliolaet, -rinteet ja -seinämät sekä kivikot yhdistettiin samaksi biotoopiksi (paljaat kalliopinnat)</li> <li>Uimarannat, kanaalit ja rantaterassit yhdistettiin samaksi biotoopiksi (rakennetut rannat)</li> <li>Kiviseinät ja lintuluodot poistettiin</li> <li>Viherseinät lisättiin omana biotooppinaan</li> </ul> <p>Biotooppien merkitystä kysyttiin seuraavissa eliöyhteisöjen monimuotoisuuden laatua kuvaavissa kategorioissa:</p> <ol> <li>Lajirikkaus</li> <li>Vaatelias lajisto</li> <li>Biomassa</li> <li>Runsaus</li> <li>Tasaisuus</li> <li>Uniikkius</li> <li>Seudullinen edustavuus</li> <li>Herkkyys ihmissyntyisiä häiriöitä kohtaan</li> <li>Kytkeytyvyys</li> </ol> <p>Asiantuntijat arvioivat lisäksi omien vastaustensa luotettavuutta, erikseen jokaisen tekijän kohdalla. Tässä aineistossa biotooppien pisteet on painotettu nousevan painokertoimen mukaan, jotta luotettavat vastaukset korostuvat epäluotettavia voimakkaammin. Luotettavuuskertoimet ovat 0, 1, 2, 4 ja 8, mitkä tarkoittavat “erittäin epäluotettavia”, “epäluotettavia”, “jonkin verran epäluotettavia”, ”melko luotettavia” ja ”erittäin luotettavia” vastauksia.</p> <p> <em>Biotooppipisteiden sovellettavuus muualla Suomessa</em></p> <p>Kyselyn jälkeen asiantuntijat arvioivat työpajassa, kuinka hyvin heidän vastauksiaan voi soveltaa muissa suomalaisissa kaupungeissa. Työpaja pidettiin 29.11.2016. Tarkka kysymyksenasettelu oli:</p> <p><em>Tämä kysely on laadittu Etelä-Suomen ja erityisesti pääkaupunkiseudun (Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Kauniainen) näkökulmasta. Kuinka hyvin kyselyn tulokset kuvaavat eliöryhmäsi lajistoa muiden Suomen maakuntien kaupungeissa? Vastaa asteikolla 0–10 (0: tämän kyselyn tuloksia ei voi soveltaa lainkaan ko. maakunnan kaupunkeihin, 10: kyselyn tulokset soveltuvat erittäin hyvin ko. maakunnan kaupunkiluontoon). Vastaa myös, kuinka luotettavina vastauksiasi voidaan pitää asteikolla 0-3 (0: hyvin epäluotettavina, 3: hyvin luotettavina). <strong>Vastaa oman eliöryhmäsi näkökulmasta.</strong></em></p> <p>Tässä aineistossa vastaukset näytetään alkuperäisinä, eli luotettavia vastauksia ei korosteta erikseen kuten biotooppipisteytyksessä.</p> <p><strong>Aineistot:</strong></p> <p>Aineistot ovat suomeksi (etuliite ”FIN”) ja englanniksi (”ENG”). Aineisto sisältää:</p> <ul> <li>Monimuotoisuuden laatutekijöiden luonnehdinnat ja pisteytysohjeet (.pdf)</li> <li>Kaupunkibiotooppien luonnehdinnat (.pdf)</li> <li>Kaupunkibiotooppien pisteytys taulukkona (.xlsx)</li> <li>Taulukko vastausten sovellettavuudesta muualla Suomessa (.xlsx)</li> </ul> <p>Taulukkotiedostoissa monimuotoisuuden laatutekijän tai eliöryhmän perässä oleva numero viittaa asiantuntijaan (esim. lintuja koskevissa sarakkeissa ”Lajirikkaus 1” ja ”Vaateliaat lajit 1” viittaavat saman lintuasiantuntijan vastauksiin). Asiantuntijoiden vastaukset on listattu satunnaisjärjestyksessä. Kaikki asiantuntijat ovat suostuneet heidän vastaustensa ja nimiensä julkaisemiseen kirjallisesti.</p> <p><strong>KAUPUNKIBIOTOOPPIKARTTA</strong></p> <p>Kansiossa "FIN_Kaupunkibiotooppikartta" on rasterimuotoinen kartta pääkaupunkiseudun kaupunkibiotoopeista paikkatietomuodossa. Kartta on luotu 2021 eri paikkatietolähteistä (ks. Jalkanen ym. 2020). Kaupunkibiotooppikartta mahdollistaa esimerkiksi monimuotoisuusarvojen tarkastelun pääkaupunkiseudulla yhdessä asiantuntijakyselyn tulosten kanssa. HUOM! Karttaa ei ole tarkoitettu sellaisenaan suunnittelukäyttöön. Minkäänlaisia takuita tulosten oikeellisuudesta, virheettömyydestä tai käytettävyydestä ei myönnetä.</p> <p>Kansiossa on seuraavat tiedostot:</p> <ul> <li>Kaupunkibiotooppikartta (.tif) (CRS: EPSG 3902)</li> <li>Kaupunkibiotooppikartan soluarvojen selitykset (.xlsx). Kaupunkibiotooppikartta käsittää 53 biotooppia/maanpeiteluokkaa, eli kaikkia asiantuntijakyselyn biotooppeja ei ole pystytty koostamaan kartalle.</li> <li>Kaupunkibiotooppikartan koostamisen ja lähtöaineistojen kuvaus (.pdf)</li> </ul> <p><strong>Kiitokset: </strong>Kiitämme Silviya Korpiloa, Susanna Lehvävirtaa ja Stephen Venniä avusta englanninnosten kanssa. </p> <p><strong>Viittausohje:</strong> Jalkanen, J. & Vierikko, K. (2022) Asiantuntijakysely kaupunkibiotooppien monimuotoisuudesta sekä kaupunkibiotooppikartta Suomen pääkaupunkiseudulla [Aineisto] https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6563190</p> <p>Aineistoon tulee viitata käytettäessä.</p> <p><strong>Viitteet: </strong></p> <ul> <li>Jalkanen, J. & Vierikko, K. (2022) Viheralueiden elonkirjo – Asiantuntijakysely ja luonnon monimuotoisuuden laatumittaristo kaupunkisuunnittelun tueksi. <em>Terra</em> 134: 207–223. https://doi.org/10.30677/terra.120163</li> <li>Jalkanen, J., Vierikko, K. & Moilanen, A. (2020) Spatial prioritization for urban Biodiversity Quality using biotope maps and expert opinion. <em>Urban Forestry & Urban Greening</em> 49: 126586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126586.</li> <li>Vierikko, K., Niemelä, J., Salminen, J., Jalkanen, J. & Tamminen, N. 2014: Helsingin kestävä viherrakenne –Miten turvata kestävä viherrakenne ja kaupunkiluonnon monimuotoisuus tiivistyvässä kaupunkirakenteessa. Helsingin kaupunkisuunnitteluviraston yleissuunnitteluosaston selvityksiä 2014:27. Helsinki. 132 s.</li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>EXPERT QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS REGARDING BIODIVERSITY OF URBAN BIOTOPES AND AN URBAN BIOTOPE MAP IN HELSINKI METROPOLITAN AREA, FINLAND</strong></p> <p><strong>Background and aim:</strong></p> <p>Finnish biodiversity conservation has traditionally focused on certain species and biotopes, which does not necessarily describe urban areas’ ecological values in a comprehensive manner. In addition, focus should be put on ecological communities that enable resilient and diverse ecosystem functioning.</p> <p>The aim of this questionnaire was to determine how different urban biotopes support different biodiversity quality attributes of ecological communities of different higher taxonomic groups. Together these attributes describe biotopes’ support for sustainable urban ecosystem functioning and, thus, indirectly for ecosystem services provisioning. The results can be used to better preserve ecological values in urban planning and as a basis for comprehensive urban biodiversity conservation. The questionnaire focused on biotopes found in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area (HMA; municipal cities of Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, and Kauniainen), Southern Finland. In addition, the applicability of the scoring elsewhere in Finnish cities was evaluated.</p> <p>The questionnaire is described in Terra (Jalkanen & Vierikko 2022; in Finnish with English abstract) and in Jalkanen et al. (2020).</p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong></p> <p><em>Scoring of urban biotopes</em></p> <p>The data was collected using an online questionnaire during 5.10.-21.11.2016. It was sent to 38 local taxonomic experts (from Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Finnish Environment Institute, environmental consultant firms, and local environmental NGOs), out of which 24 replied.</p> <p>Experts who participated were (their taxon):</p> <ul> <li>Heidi Björklund (Birds)</li> <li>Tea von Bonsdorff (Fungi, other than polypores)</li> <li>Eero Haapanen (Mammals, other than bats)</li> <li>Nina Hagner-Wahlsten (Bats)</li> <li>Jari Kaitila (Butterflies)</li> <li>Jarkko Korhonen (Fungi, other than polypores)</li> <li>Jaakko Kullberg (Butterflies)</li> <li>Eeva-Maria Kyheröinen (Bats)</li> <li>Esa Lammi (Vascular plants)</li> <li>Riku Lumiaro (Mammals, other than bats)</li> <li>Sampsa Malmberg (Beetles)</li> <li>Ilpo Mannerkoski (Beetles)</li> <li>Olli Manninen (Polypores)</li> <li>Heikka Marttila-Tornio (Herpetofauna)</li> <li>Juho Paukkunen (Hymenoptera)</li> <li>Terhi Ryttäri (Vascular Plants)</li> <li>Jarmo Saarikivi (Herpetofauna)</li> <li>Hannu Sarvanne (Birds)</li> <li>Keijo Savola (Polypores)</li> <li>Ilkka Teräs (Hymenoptera)</li> <li>Stephen Venn (Beetles)</li> <li>Tarmo Virtanen (Butterflies)</li> <li>Terhi Wermundsen (Bats)</li> <li>Rauno Yrjölä (Birds)</li> </ul> <p>In the questionnaire, the experts scored 68 local urban biotopes in terms of how well they support different biodiversity attributes of their taxonomic group. Each biotope was scored separately for every attribute. Scores were given on a 5-rank scale (0–4; 0 being the lowest). Experts were advised to consider all seasons (e.g., to consider the importance of the biotope also for wintering). We used the biotope classification from the expert questionnaire by Vierikko et al. (2014) with the following modifications:</p> <ul> <li>Forest biotopes were further divided into two age classes (30-100 y. and over 100 y.)</li> <li>Yards were further divided into sealed and bare yards</li> <li>Densely-built residential gardens & townhouse gardens were added as a new biotope</li> <li>Outcrops, ledges, and rocky grounds were combined to one biotope (bare rocks)</li> <li>Beaches, canals, and terraced embankments were combined to one biotope (artificial shores)</li> <li>Stone walls and bird-colonized islets were excluded</li> <li>Green walls were added as a new biotope</li> </ul> <p>The relevance of biotopes was evaluated for the following Biodiversity Quality attributes that describe or relate to the diversity of urban ecological communities:</p> <ol> <li>Species richness</li> <li>Habitat specialist species</li> <li>Biomass</li> <li>Abundance</li> <li>Evenness</li> <li>Uniqueness</li> <li>Regional representativeness</li> <li>Sensitivity towards anthropogenic disturbance</li> <li>Connectivity</li> </ol> <p>In addition, experts gave overall self-evaluated confidence rates for their answers concerning each attribute. In the data, biotopes’ scores are weighted by an increasing confidence coefficient in order to emphasize confident answers over non-confident ones. Confidence coefficients are 0, 1, 2, 4, and 8 that refer to ‘very unconfident’, ‘unconfident’, ‘somewhat unconfident’, ‘somewhat confident’, and ‘very confident’ answers, respectively.</p> <p><em>Applicability of the urban biotope scores elsewhere in Finland</em></p> <p>After the questionnaire, experts assessed how applicable their answers are elsewhere in Finland. This task was done in an expert workshop on 29.11.2016. The exact question, given to the experts, was:</p> <p><em>This questionnaire is designed from Southern Finnish, and especially from the Helsinki Metropolitan area (cities of Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Kauniainen) perspective. How well do the questionnaire results describe the species assemblages of your taxon found in cities in other Finnish provinces? Answer on a scale of 0-10 (0: the results of this questionnaire are completely inapplicable to the cities in the given province, 10: the results of the questionnaire apply very well to the urban nature of the given province). Also evaluate the confidence of your answers at the scale of 0-3 (0: very unconfident, 3: very confident). <strong>Answer from the point of view of your own taxon.</strong></em></p> <p>In the data, the expert answers are reported as they were given, i.e., confident answers are not emphasized over non-confident ones like with biotope scores.</p> <p><strong>Data:</strong></p> <p>Data is provided in Finnish (files starting with ‘FIN’) and in English (‘ENG’). This data set includes:</p> <ul> <li>Biodiversity Quality attribute descriptions and scoring instructions (.pdf)</li> <li>Urban biotope descriptions (.pdf)</li> <li>Table of urban biotope scores (.xlsx)</li> <li>Table of the applicability of biotope scores elsewhere in Finland (.xlsx)</li> </ul> <p>In the tables, the Arabic number after the attribute or taxon name refers to the corresponding expert (i.e., under birds (‘Richness 1’ and ‘Specialist species 1’ refer to the answers of the same bird expert). Experts’ answers are listed in random order. All experts have agreed on publication of their answers and names using written informed consent.</p> <p><strong>URBAN BIOTOPE MAP</strong></p> <p>The folder ’ENG_UrbanBiotopeMap’ includes a raster-type GIS layer of urban biotopes in the Helsinki Metropolitan area. The map has been compiled from several GIS sources (see Jalkanen et al. 2020). The urban biotope map allows for example spatial analyses of biodiversity values together with the expert questionnaire results. OBS! The map is not meant for planning purposes. No warrant about the correctness, flawlessness, or feasibility of the results is given.</p> <p>The folder includes the following files:</p> <ul> <li>The urban biotope map (.tif) (CRS: EPSG 3902)</li> <li>The explanation of the cell values of the urban biotope map (.xlsx). The urban biotope map comprises of 53 different biotopes/land cover types, i.e., every biotope asked in the questionnaire are not found in the map.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Acknowledgements:</strong> We thank Silviya Korpilo, Susanna Lehvävirta, and Stephen Venn for help with the English translations.</p> <p><strong>How to cite: </strong>Jalkanen, J. & Vierikko, K. (2022) Expert questionnaire results regarding biodiversity of urban biotopes and an urban biotope map in Helsinki Metropolitan Area, Finland [Data set] https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6563190</p> <p>Data should be properly cited when used.</p> <p><strong>References:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Jalkanen, J. & Vierikko, K. (2022) Viheralueiden elonkirjo – Asiantuntijakysely ja luonnon monimuotoisuuden laatumittaristo kaupunkisuunnittelun tueksi (Biodiversity in urban green spaces: Expert questionnaire about urban Biodiversity Quality to support urban planning) . <em>Terra</em> 134: 207–223. https://doi.org/10.30677/terra.120163 [In Finnish with English abstract.]</li> <li>Jalkanen, J., Vierikko, K. & Moilanen, A. (2020) Spatial prioritization for urban Biodiversity Quality using biotope maps and expert opinion. <em>Urban Forestry & Urban Greening</em> 49: 126586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126586.</li> <li>Vierikko, K., Salminen, J., Niemelä J., Jalkanen, J. & Tamminen, N. 2014: Sustainable green infrastructure of Helsinki – urban ecological research report and recommendations for the Helsinki master plan 2050. Strategic Planning Office of the City Planning Department of the City of Helsinki. Research report. [In Finnish with English abstract.] Available in: <a href="https://www.hel.fi/hel2/ksv/julkaisut/yos_2014-27.pdf">https://www.hel.fi/hel2/ksv/julkaisut/yos_2014-27.pdf</a> (Cited 16.1.2018). 132 pp.</li> </ul> <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.