Find research datasets worth reusing

Fig. 2 in The distribution of overwintering brown marmorated stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in college dormitories

Fig. 2. Percentage of rooms where residents observed BMSB, shown by floor. Data are pooled from Perry and Voorhees residence halls. Bars with the same letter shown above are not statistically different as determined with a Kruskal– Walis test (P> 0.05).

Fig. 1 in The distribution of overwintering brown marmorated stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in college dormitories

Fig. 1. Floor plans for Perry (lef) and Voorhees (right). Gray and white rooms represent rooms where overwintering BMSB was and was not observed, respectively, by the occupants. Diagonally patterned rooms represent rooms where no data were collected.

Fig. 2 in Predation of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) by a complex of predators in cotton and adjoining soybean habitats in Georgia, USA

Fig. 2. Least squares means (± SE) for number of stink bugs (species combined) and Orius insidiosus per 1.83 m length of row and percentage of predators positive for stink bug DNA in soybean and cotton by treatment. Within an insect group in a crop, treatment means with the same lowercase letter are not significantly different (Tukey's HSD, P> 0.05).

Fig. 4 in Predation of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) by a complex of predators in cotton and adjoining soybean habitats in Georgia, USA

Fig. 4. Least squares means (± SE) for number of stink bugs (species combined) and Oxyopes salticus per 1.83 m length of row and percentage of predators positive for stink bug DNA in (A) soybean and cotton by treatment and (B) soybean and cotton by sampling week. Within an insect group in a crop, treatment or week means with the same lowercase letter are not significantly different (Tukey's HSD, P> 0.05). Only 1 Ox. salticus individual screened positive for stink bug (Nexara viridula) DNA in cotton. No predators were collected for PCR analyses in weeks 4 and 5 in cotton.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →

Data: What about Haskell Bugs?

<div> <div><span># Data Package for: "What about Haskell Bugs?"</span></div> <br> <div><span>## General Introduction</span></div> <br> <div><span>The goal of the paper is to identify the extent to which existing bug taxonomies can classify bugs in Haskell, and how they could be adapted to better accommodate the unique features of Haskell. The specific research questions that were studied are:</span></div> <div><span>RQ1 What are the most common types of Haskell bugs?</span></div> <div><span>RQ2 What are the limitations of existing bug taxonomies in capturing the unique features of Haskell bugs?</span></div> <div><span>RQ3 How do Haskell developers classify bugs and how is it different from the previously discussed taxonomies?</span></div> <br> <div><span>The data collected for the creation of the paper includes:</span></div> <div><span>• A bug dataset of 142 bugs from 10 Haskell FOSS (free open-source software) projects;</span></div> <div><span>• A qualitative codebook created after 4 interviews performed with Haskell developers about their perspectives on bugs.</span></div> <br> <div><span>## BugDB</span></div> <br> <div><span>The bug dataset contains 142 bugs, collected from 10 Haskell FOSS repositories. The repositories have been chosen from Github, to be as diverse as possible, to avoid bias towards any defect type. From each repository a number of 20 bugs were collected, or the maximum available.</span></div> <br> <div><span>The bugs have been taken based on the most recent closed issues with tags that contain the term </span><span>**bug**</span><span>. The issues were ensured to relate to commits or pull requests, which have been merged into the main branch. The code in the commits and pull requests was checked to include bug fixes for the specified bug report. They were ensured to contain true bugs in the code, and all duplicates were removed. Also, the fix of the bug needed to include a change in at least one </span><span>*.hs*</span><span> file to ensure that they are bugs related to Haskell. Note that they can modify other types of files alongside the Haskell ones.</span></div> <br> <div><span>The bug dataset has been fully classified manually, based on the two chosen taxonomies. The chosen taxonomies can be found in the </span><span>*Bug_taxonomies*</span><span> PDF file. The most relevant category from each of the taxonomies was the one chosen, but complex bugs, where a clear distinction was hard to make, have been documented. </span></div> <br> <div><span>## Codebook</span></div> <br> <div><span>Four open-source Haskell developers took part in a semi-structured interview. The interviews took approximately 30 minutes and were done online. They were audio recorded and transcribed. The participants were asked about how they identify, understand, classify, and fix bugs in practice, as well as what their opinion was on the proposed taxonomies. The participants agreed to the storage, usage and publication of data by signing an informed consent form. The data gathered during the interviews was used to construct a qualitative codebook, using a bottom-up approach.</span></div> <br> <div><span>## Description of the data in this data set</span></div> <br> <div><span>| File Name | File Format | Description |</span></div> <div><span>| --------- | ----------- | ----------- |</span></div> <div><span>|     Bug_taxonomies      |   PDF          |    This file includes the 2 taxonomies used in the study. It provides the citation and an explicit description of each of the types of bugs as proposed by each respective taxonomy.         |</span></div> <div><span>|   Codebook        |    PDF         |    This file is the qualitative codebook produced from the 4 interviews with Haskell developers. It is split into 5 columns: Theme, Code, Explanation, Examples, and Partial-fit Examples. The last two columns include examples, relating to the specific code and theme, taken from the interview transcripts.        |</span></div> <div><span>| bug_db | CSV | This file represents the bugs collected from Github issues and classified according to the 2 taxonomies. The columns are  </span><span>**1.Repository**</span><span>: name of the repository from which the bug was taken; </span><span>**2.Bug Name**</span><span>: name of the issue as it appears on the GitHub page; </span><span>**3.Link to bug**</span><span>: link to the Github issue of the respective bug; </span><span>**4.Taxonomy Catolino**</span><span>: categorization according to the taxonomy proposed by Catolino et al. (See </span><span>*Bug_taxonomies*</span><span> for more information) This can only include one of the types of bugs from this taxonomy; </span><span>**5.Taxonomy Seaman**</span><span>: categorization according to the taxonomy proposed by Seaman et al. (See </span><span>*Bug_taxonomies*</span><span> for more information) This can only include one of the types of bugs from this taxonomy; </span><span>**6.Notes**</span><span>: This includes details explaining the decisions made when choosing the types for each of the bugs. When the text includes the term </span><span>*COMPLEX*</span><span>, the bug is considered a complex bug, meaning it might also fit as other types of bugs within the same taxonomy. In this case, the types are specifically mentioned after the phrase </span><span>*Might also be considered*</span><span>. | </span></div> <div><span>| bug_db_result_counts | CSV | This file contains 3 tables. The first one is the count and percentages per type of bug for the taxonomy proposed by Catolino et al. The second one is the count and percentages per type of bug for the taxonomy proposed by Seaman et al. The third one is a representation of the Complex bugs. It has 4 columns: </span><span>**Chosen type**</span><span>: the type as chosen in the taxonomy column of the complex bugs. </span><span>**Other type**</span><span>: the types as mentioned in the Notes column of the complex bugs. </span><span>**Count**</span><span>: the number of bugs that have the respective chosen type in the taxonomy column and the other type in the notes. </span><span>**Reverse count**</span><span> the number of bugs that have the chosen type in the notes column and the other type in the taxonomy column. The one bug that has 2 other types has been split into separate instances with Logic as the chosen type, one with Algorithm/Method as the other type, and one with Checking as the other type.| </span></div> <br><br> <div><span>## Interview Transcipts</span></div> <br> <div><span>The interview transcripts are not shared due to data protection. </span></div> <div><span>We have further explicitly ensured participants to not share their transcripts, but only the anonymized codebook. </span></div> </div>

Fig. 1. Stink bug pheromone–baited trap with a in Stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges in Georgia, USA

Fig. 1. Stink bug pheromone–baited trap with a pyramid base (A) and a bamboo pole base (B) in peanut row. Distance between each trap treatment was 9 m.

Fig. 5 in Stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges in Georgia, USA

Fig. 5. Mean number of Chinavia hilaris individuals per sample in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges and in crops in farmscapes over time in 2007, 2008, and 2009.

Fig. 3 in Stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges in Georgia, USA

Fig. 3. Mean number of Euschistus tristigmus individuals per sample in pheromone-baited traps near crop field edges and in crops in farmscapes over time in 2007, 2008, and 2009.

Fig. 4 in Stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges in Georgia, USA

Fig. 4. Mean number of Nezara viridula individuals per sample in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges and in crops in farmscapes over time in 2007, 2008, and 2009.

Fig. 2 in Stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pheromonebaited traps near crop field edges in Georgia, USA

Fig. 2. Mean number of Euschistus servus individuals per sample in pheromone-baited traps near crop field edges and in crops in farmscapes over time in 2007, 2008, and 2009.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2023View details →

Map 1 in The pine cone bug, Gastrodes grossipes grossipes (De Geer, 1773) (Hemiptera: Rhyparochromidae), in Portugal

Map 1.- Iberian distribution of Gastrodes grossipes grossipes (De Geer, 1773), with Andorra and the previously known Portuguese districts and Spanish provinces in grey, the new Portuguese district in green, the previously known Portuguese MGRS 100 km2 squares in blue and the new Portuguese MGRS 100 km2 square in orange.

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2023View details →

Fig. 1 in The pine cone bug, Gastrodes grossipes grossipes (De Geer, 1773) (Hemiptera: Rhyparochromidae), in Portugal

Fig. 1.- Female specimen of Gastrodes grossipes grossipes (De Geer, 1773) collected in Parque de Avioso - S. Pedro (Maia, Portugal) on 24/12/2022 (MHNCUP/ART/41079)

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2021View details →

Figs. 1-9 in First record of the mullein bug Campylomma miyamotoi Yasunaga, 2001 (Heteroptera: Miridae) in Europe

Figs. 1-9.- Habitus of the Iberian Campylomma species. 1-3.- C. miyamotoi (lateral, dorsal, ventral). 4-5.- C. verbasci (dorsal). 6-7.- C. annulicorne (dorsal). 8-9.- C. ribesi (dorsal).

Fig. 7 in Leaf-footed bugs (Heteroptera, Coreidae) damaging red raspberry in the south of Primorsky Krai

Fig. 7. Late instar nymphs of the leaf-footed (Coreidae) bugs Coreus marginatus orientalis (left) and Molipteryx fuliginosa (right): A — instar IV; B — instar V. Photo by M. Maslov Рис. 7. Δичинки Coreidae старших возрастов — Coreus marginatus orientalis (сΛева) и Molipteryx fuliginosa (справа): A — IV возраст; B — V возраст. Фото М. МасΛова

Fig. 3 in Leaf-footed bugs (Heteroptera, Coreidae) damaging red raspberry in the south of Primorsky Krai

Fig. 3. Coreus marginatus orientalis breeding and feeding on generative organs of red raspberry: A — adults mating on an unripe fruit; B — eggs laid by a female directly on a raspberry fruit; C — an instar II nymph sucking the fruit cell sap; D — red raspberry drupelets drying after being eaten by leaf-footed bugs. Photo by M. Maslov Рис. 3. Размножение и питание Coreus marginatus orientalis на генеративных органах маΛины обыкновенной: A — копуΛяция имаго на незреΛом пΛоΑе; B — яйца, отΛоженные самкой непосреΑственно на пΛоΑ маΛины; C — Λичинка II возраста, сосущая кΛеточный сок пΛоΑа; D — усыхание костянок в резуΛьтате питания кΛопов на пΛоΑах маΛины. Фото М. МасΛова

Fig. 2 in Leaf-footed bugs (Heteroptera, Coreidae) damaging red raspberry in the south of Primorsky Krai

Fig. 2. Molipteryx fuliginosa feeding on vegetative parts of red raspberry: A — instar II nymph on the apical part of a shoot; B — traces of sucking and necrosis on a part of the shoot. Photo

Рис. 2. Место обитания Solenoxyphus lepidus, Dictyonota sareptana и Crypsinus angustatus в окр. Δ. НовоаΛексанΔровка, соΛонец с куртинами Lepidium ruderale Fig. 2. Habitat of Solenoxyphus lepidus, Dictyonota sareptana and Crypsinus angustatus in the vicinity of the village of Novoalexandrovka, salt lick with Lepidium ruderale in New data on the fauna of true bugs (Heteroptera) of the Tyumen Region, Russia. Part 3

Рис. 2. Место обитания Solenoxyphus lepidus, Dictyonota sareptana и Crypsinus angustatus в окр. Δ. НовоаΛексанΔровка, соΛонец с куртинами Lepidium ruderale Fig. 2. Habitat of Solenoxyphus lepidus, Dictyonota sareptana and Crypsinus angustatus in the vicinity of the village of Novoalexandrovka, salt lick with Lepidium ruderale

Fig. 5 in Leaf-footed bugs (Heteroptera, Coreidae) damaging red raspberry in the south of Primorsky Krai

Fig. 5. Coreus marginatus orientalis (left) and Molipteryx fuliginosa (right): A — two converging sharp spines on the head located between the antennae bases; B — lateral angles of the pronotum bent anteriorly, its margins behind forming rounded lobes, anterior margins with teeth Рис. 5. Coreus marginatus orientalis (сΛева) и Molipteryx fuliginosa (справа): A — Αва схоΑящихся острых шипа на гоΛове, межΑу основаниями усиков; B — боковые угΛы переΑнеспинки загнуты впереΑ, ее края позаΑи образуют округΛые Λопасти, переΑние края переΑнеспинки усажены зубчиками

Рис. 1. Карта-схема точек сбора поΛужесткокрыΛых насекомых в национаΛьном парке «Тункинский». Цифрами обозначены точки сбора насекомых автором, пояснения в тексте in Data on the fauna of true bugs (Heteroptera) of the Tunkinsky National Park, Buryatia, Russia

Рис. 1. Карта-схема точек сбора поΛужесткокрыΛых насекомых в национаΛьном парке «Тункинский». Цифрами обозначены точки сбора насекомых автором, пояснения в тексте

Fig. 1 in Leaf-footed bugs (Heteroptera, Coreidae) damaging red raspberry in the south of Primorsky Krai

Fig. 1. Behavioral patterns exhibited by Coreus marginatus orientalis and Molipteryx fuliginosa when encountering each other: A — tapping the competitor with the antennae when a nymph and an adult of different species meet; B — active contact between adults of the two species, with an attempt to push the competitor off. Photo by M. Maslov