Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

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

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.9.0

Reset

Dataset results

8 results for “Biodiversity surrogates”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
dryad36/100

Data from: Patterns of biodiverse, understudied groups do not mirror those of the surrogate groups that set conservation priorities: a case study from the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain of eastern North America

We conducted biodiversity inventories of lichens, woody plants, and sedges at 32 sites on the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain of eastern North America between November 2012 and June 2015. Each site comprised a single, uniform habitat, and sites were classified as: Coastal Plain Floodplain forest, Coastal Plain Flatwood swamp, Coastal Plain Oak-Pine forest, Maritime forest, Mixed Mesic Hardwood forest, or Tidal forest. We compared alpha diversity and community assemblages of each organismal group across the sites, and compared selected minimal reserve sets in order to visualize biodiversity patterns and assess whether specific components of vascular plants (sedges and woody plants) serve as an effective surrogate for lichens. Woody plants provide a direct substrate for lichen growth, but there was no significant correlation between the alpha diversity of these groups. For conserving maximal species richness among the studied groups, lichens outperformed the sedges and woody plants as the better surrogate group for building minimum reserve sets, even though vascular plants are more commonly used as a surrogate. Likewise, sedge alpha diversity was not correlated with lichens, or with woody plants. Although no group was an effective indicator for high alpha diversity sites of other organisms, a significant correlation between the community assemblages of lichens and woody plants suggests that protecting varied types of plant communities might serve as a workable surrogate for protecting lichens. The lack of congruence between species richness patterns across organismal groups suggests that the mechanisms that shape patterns of diversity are not identical, and that identifying and incorporating specific biodiversity indicators for understudied groups into conservation policy is necessary to ensure their protection.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →
dryad36/100

Data from: Surrogate taxa and fossils as reliable proxies of spatial biodiversity patterns in marine benthic communities

Rigorous documentation of spatial heterogeneity (β-diversity) in present-day and preindustrial ecosystems is required to assess how marine communities respond to environmental and anthropogenic drivers. However, the overwhelming majority of contemporary and palaeontological assessments have centred on single higher taxa. To evaluate the validity of single taxa as community surrogates and palaeontological proxies, we compared macrobenthic communities and sympatric death assemblages at 52 localities in Onslow Bay (NC, USA). Compositional heterogeneity did not differ significantly across datasets based on live molluscs, live non-molluscs, and all live organisms. Death assemblages were less heterogeneous spatially, likely reflecting homogenization by time-averaging. Nevertheless, live and dead datasets were greater than 80% congruent in pairwise comparisons to the literature estimates of β-diversity in other marine ecosystems, yielded concordant bathymetric gradients, and produced nearly identical ordinations consistently delineating habitats. Congruent estimates from molluscs and non-molluscs suggest that single groups can serve as reliable community proxies. High spatial fidelity of death assemblages supports the emerging paradigm of Conservation Palaeobiology. Integrated analyses of ecological and palaeontological data based on surrogate taxa can quantify anthropogenic changes in marine ecosystems and advance our understanding of spatial and temporal aspects of biodiversity.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →
dryad36/100

Data from: Patterns of biodiverse, understudied groups do not mirror those of the surrogate groups that set conservation priorities: a case study from the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain of eastern North America

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicAug 2018View details →
dryad36/100

Data from: Surrogate taxa and fossils as reliable proxies of spatial biodiversity patterns in marine benthic communities

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicFeb 2017View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: The use and utility of surrogates in biodiversity monitoring programmes

Monitoring programmes are intended to inform effective biodiversity conservation and management (Legge et al. 2018). Well‐designed programmes can establish baseline conditions, determine trends in threatened species populations, quantify the effects of management, and provide warning of ecosystem changes (Magurran et al. 2010). For these reasons, biodiversity monitoring underpins the activities of land management agencies worldwide. However, it is not always possible to directly monitor key variables at ideal spatio‐temporal resolutions, due to resourcing or logistic constraints. For example, direct monitoring of koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) can be cost‐ and time‐intensive as koalas are cryptic, occur at low densities, and are difficult to reliably observe in dense forest canopies (McAlpine et al. 2006).

opencc-zeroDec 2018View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Dynamic species co-occurrence networks require dynamic biodiversity surrogates

In conservation it is inevitable that surrogates be selected to represent the occurrence of hard–to–find species and find priority locations for management. However, species co–occurrence can vary over time. Here we demonstrate how temporal dynamics in species co–occurrence influence the ability of managers to choose the best surrogate species. We develop an efficient optimisation formulation that selects the optimal set of complementary surrogate species from any co–occurrence network. We apply it to two Australian datasets on successional bird responses to disturbances of revegetation and fire. We discover that a surprisingly small number of species are required to represent the majority of species co–occurrences at any one time. Because co–occurrence patterns are temporally dynamic, the optimal set of surrogates, and the number of surrogates required to achieve a desired surrogacy power, depend on sampling effort and the successional state of a system. Overlap in optimal sets of surrogates for representing 70% of co–occurring species ranges from zero to 57% depending on when the surrogacy decision is made. Surrogate sets representing early successional communities over–estimate the power of surrogacy decisions at later times. Our results show that in dynamic systems, optimal surrogates might be selected in different ways: (1) use short–term monitoring to choose a larger number of static less–informative surrogates; (2) use long–term monitoring to choose a smaller number of static high–power surrogates that may poorly represent early successional co–occurrence; (3) develop adaptive surrogate selection frameworks with high short–term and long–term surrogacy power that update surrogate sets and capture temporal dynamics in species co–occurrence. Our results suggest vigilance is needed when selecting surrogates for other co–occurring species in dynamic landscapes, as selected surrogates from one time may have reduced effectiveness at a different time. Ultimately, decisions that fail to acknowledge dynamic species co–occurrence will lead to uninformative or redundant surrogates.

opencc-zeroDec 2015View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Dynamic species co-occurrence networks require dynamic biodiversity surrogates

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJan 2016View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: The use and utility of surrogates in biodiversity monitoring programmes

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicFeb 2019View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated 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.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

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.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record