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.
123
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
123 results for “Carbon cycle”
Carbon Cycle Dynamics in Soil Warming Experiments at Harvard Forest 2019
Microbes are responsible for cycling carbon (C) through soils, and predicted changes in soil C stocks under climate change are highly sensitive to shifts in the mechanisms assumed to control the microbial physiological response to warming. Two mechanisms have been suggested to explain the long-term warming impact on microbial physiology: microbial thermal acclimation and changes in the quantity and quality of substrates available for microbial metabolism. Yet studies disentangling these two mechanisms are lacking. To resolve the drivers of changes in microbial physiology in response to long-term warming, we sampled soils from 13- and 28-year-old soil warming experiments in different seasons. We performed short-term laboratory incubations across a range of temperatures to measure the relationships between temperature sensitivity of physiology (growth, respiration, carbon use efficiency, and extracellular enzyme activity) and the chemical composition of soil organic matter. We observed apparent thermal acclimation of microbial respiration, but only in summer, when warming had exacerbated the seasonally-induced, already small dissolved organic matter pools. Irrespective of warming, greater quantity and quality of soil carbon increased the extracellular enzymatic pool and its temperature sensitivity. We propose that fresh litter input into the system seasonally cancels apparent thermal acclimation of C-cycling processes to decadal warming. Our findings reveal that long-term warming has indirectly affected microbial physiology via reduced C availability in this system, implying that earth system models including these negative feedbacks may be best suited to describe long-term warming effects on these soils.
The Southern Ocean carbon cycle 1985-2018: Mean, seasonal cycle, trends and storage - Data
<p>Postprocessed data set used for RECCAP2 Southern Ocean chapter:</p><p>Hauck, Gregor, et al.: The Southern Ocean carbon cycle 1985-2018: Mean, seasonal cycle, trends and storage</p><p>The raw data is available at: Müller, Jens Daniel. (2023). RECCAP2-ocean data collection [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7990823</p><p>Scripts for plotting are available at https://github.com/RECCAP2-ocean/Southern-Ocean and a frozen version of the scripts is deposited at:</p><p>Judith Hauck, Luke Gregor, Cara Nissen, Lavinia Patara, Mark Hague, & Precious Mongwe. (2023). The Southern Ocean carbon cycle 1985-2018: Mean, seasonal cycle, trends and storage - Scripts. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10076121</p><p> </p>
Local scale carbon and nitrogen cycling in temperate forests, eastern U.S., 2017-2018
Data collected in 2017-2018 from individual mature canopy trees (and their surrounding soil) and from monospecific common garden plots to assess how aboveground and belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling are related. Data include foliar, litter, root, and soil carbon and nitrogen pools and fluxes. Field sites span the eastern United States, including south-central Indiana (Moores Creek), Maryland (Smithsonian Environmental Research Center), Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania State University common garden), and Massachusetts (Harvard Forest).
Modeling the effect of explicit vs implicit representation of grazing on ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycling in response to elevated carbon dioxide and warming in arctic tussock tundra, Alaska - Dataset A
We use a simple model of coupled carbon and nitrogen cycles in terrestrial ecosystems to examine how explicitly representing grazers versus having grazer effects implicitly aggregated in with other biogeochemical processes in the model alters predicted responses to elevated carbon dioxide and warming. The aggregated approach can affect model predictions because grazer-mediated processes can respond differently to changes in climate from the processes with which they are typically aggregated. We use small-mammal grazers in arctic tundra as an example and find that the typical three-to-four-year cycling frequency is too fast for the effects of cycle peaks and troughs to be fully manifested in the ecosystem biogeochemistry. We conclude that implicitly aggregating the effects of small-mammal grazers with other processes results in an underestimation of ecosystem response to climate change relative to estimations in which the grazer effects are explicitly represented. The magnitude of this underestimation increases with grazer density. We therefore recommend that grazing effects be incorporated explicitly when applying models of ecosystem response to global change.
Modeling the effect of explicit vs implicit representation of grazing on ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycling in response to elevated carbon dioxide and warming in arctic tussock tundra, Alaska - Dataset B
We use a simple model of coupled carbon and nitrogen cycles in terrestrial ecosystems to examine how explicitly representing grazers versus having grazer effects implicitly aggregated in with other biogeochemical processes in the model alters predicted responses to elevated carbon dioxide and warming. The aggregated approach can affect model predictions because grazer-mediated processes can respond differently to changes in climate from the processes with which they are typically aggregated. We use small-mammal grazers in arctic tundra as an example and find that the typical three-to-four-year cycling frequency is too fast for the effects of cycle peaks and troughs to be fully manifested in the ecosystem biogeochemistry. We conclude that implicitly aggregating the effects of small-mammal grazers with other processes results in an underestimation of ecosystem response to climate change relative to estimations in which the grazer effects are explicitly represented. The magnitude of this underestimation increases with grazer density. We therefore recommend that grazing effects be incorporated explicitly when applying models of ecosystem response to global change.
Consequences of non-random tree species loss on litter mass loss, nutrient dynamics, carbon cycling, and decomposer communities across a terrestrial-aquatic interface at Coweeta Hydrologic Lab, Otto, NC
Although litter decomposition is a fundamental ecological process, most of our understanding comes from studies of single-species decay. Recently, litter-mixing studies have tested whether monoculture data can be applied to mixed-litter systems. These studies have mainly attempted to detect non-additive effects of litter mixing, which address potential consequences of random species loss. The focus is not on which species are lost, but the decline in diversity per se. Under global change, species loss is likely to be non-random, with some species more vulnerable to extinction than others. Under such scenarios, the effects of individual species (additivity) as well as of species interactions (non-additivity) on decomposition rates are of interest. To examine potential impacts of non-random species loss on ecosystems, we studied additive and non-additive effects of litter mixing on decomposition. A full-factorial litterbag experiment was conducted using four deciduous leaf species, from which mass loss and nitrogen content were measured. Data were analysed using a statistical approach that first looks for additive identity effects based on the presence or absence of species and then significant species interactions occurring beyond those. It partitions non-additive effects into those caused by richness and or composition.
Detrital Carbonate Minerals in Earth's Element Cycles (Data & Scripts)
<p>Earth surface conditions, including climate and sea level, are largely controlled by the cycling of carbon and biogeochemically coupled elements. However, most elemental budgets cannot be consentaneously balanced for the present state. Here, we investigate the possible role of riverine carbonate minerals in biogeochemical cycles. We derive individual river basin export fluxes, the global export flux to the ocean and its reduction by human influence, utilizing state-of-the-art regression techniques and published global-scale datasets. Results point to a significance of riverine detrital carbonates for the global mass balances of carbon, calcium, alkalinity and strontium, which might help solving this long-standing problem. </p> <p>[Plain Language summary from: Müller et al. 2022, Detrital Carbonates in Earth's Element Cycles, GBC, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10508409.1">https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10508409.1</a> ].</p> <p>Here data and scripts on which these investigations are based can be accessed.</p> <p> </p> <p>Funding:<br> This work was carried out under the umbrella of the Netherlands Earth System Science Centre (NESSC). This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie, grant agreement No 847504. Funding was also provided by BMBF-project PALMOD (Ref 01LP1506C) through the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) as Research for Sustainability inititative (FONA). AS thanks the European Research Council for Consolidator Grant 771497.</p>
Data associated with the publication "Interannual variability in the Australian carbon cycle over 2015-2019, based on assimilation of OCO-2 satellite data".
<p>This dataset refers to the publication "Interannual variability in the Australian carbon cycle over 2015-2019, based on assimilation of OCO-2 satellite data". https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-15.</p> <p> </p>
Processing and Data for "Estimating ocean net primary productivity from daily cycles of carbon biomass measured by profiling floats"
<p><strong>Description: </strong></p> <p>These files contain processed BGC-Argo float data, figure data, the radiocarbon productivity subset, bootstrapping results, and the associated Python/Matlab code to calculate net primary productivity from daily cycles of optical backscatter and dissolved oxygen.</p> <p>The raw float data used in this study are available from the Argo Global Data Assembly Centers in Brest, France (ftp://ftp.ifremer.fr/ifremer/argo/dac/coriolis) and Monterey, California (ftp://usgodae.org/pub/outgoing/argo/dac/coriolis). The raw MODIS satellite-based productivity data is available from the Oregon State University Ocean Productivity site (<a href="http://orca.science.oregonstate.edu/npp_products.php">http://orca.science.oregonstate.edu/npp_products.php</a>). The raw MODIS satellite-based euphotic depth estimates are available from the NASA L3 browser (<a href="https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/l3/">https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/l3/</a>). The original ship-based estimates of net primary productivity are available from the Pangaea (<a href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.932417">https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.932417</a>) and the British Oceanography Data Centre (<a href="https://www.bco-dmo.org/dataset/814803">https://www.bco-dmo.org/dataset/814803</a>).</p> <p><strong>Please cite as: </strong></p> <p>Stoer, A., and Fennel, K. 2022. Processing and Data for Estimating ocean net primary productivity from daily cycles of carbon biomass measured by profiling floats. Zenodo. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6977161.</p> <p><strong>Python/MATLAB Software Description: </strong></p> <p>dielFit_GOPeqCR.m: This code is from Johnson and Bif (2021). We have added outputs for standard errors for linear and PvE models and sunrise/sunset times. To run this code with the associated Python software a MATLAB engine needs to be installed. Please see: <a href="https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/matlab-engine-for-python.html">https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/matlab-engine-for-python.html</a></p> <p>argo_so_processing_20220815.py: This code is the first of two pieces of software for estimating net primary productivity from floats in the Southern Ocean. The program below obtains the data from the BGC Argo database (Argo, 2021) and processes it. Simple data quality control, interpolation, biogeochemical calculations, and data binning occur. The processed float data is located in the folder 'Processed Argo Transects'.</p> <p>argo_daily_npp_20220815.py: This code using processed Argo float data that contains oxygen and particle backscatter measurements to infer net primary production. The code combines the float that meet the criteria of sampling at all local hours of the day throughout its lifetime. Then, it constructs diel cycles from this data by finding the median value of each hour and uses the code from Johnson and Bif (2021), which is a modified version from Barone et al. (2019). The algorithm used to convert particle backscatter to particulate organic carbon is from Graff et al. (2015). We assume that dissolved primary productivity accounts for 30% of total primary productivity (Moran et al., 2022).</p> <p>argo_daily_npp_bootstrap_20220815.py: This code using processed Argo float data that contains co-located oxygen and particle backscatter measurements to infer net primary production. This code is very similar to argo_daily_npp_20220815.py but randomly samples a subset of the co-located profiles at different sample sizes before calculating net primary productivity. Productivity is calculated at each sample size 1000 times. The results of this analysis is located in the folder 'Bootstrapped Results'. </p> <p>More details can be found in the code itself. </p> <p><strong>Data Descriptions: </strong></p> Data from 'Processed Argo Transects' Folder | Description for each variable <table><tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>depth</td> <td>Average depth of depth bin</td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>mid_depth</td> <td>Center of depth bin</td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>pressure</td> <td>Average pressure in depth bin</td> <td>dbar</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_index</td> <td>Profile number or index</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_longitude</td> <td>Average longitude of profile</td> <td>degE</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_latitude</td> <td>Average latitude of profile</td> <td>degN</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_time</td> <td>Average UTC time of profile</td> <td>yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_local_time</td> <td>Average local time of profile</td> <td>yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_local_hour</td> <td>The hour of the local timestamp</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>salinity</td> <td>Seawater salinity</td> <td>PSU</td> </tr> <tr> <td>temperature </td> <td>Seawater temperature</td> <td>degC</td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxygen</td> <td>Dissolved oxygen concentration</td> <td>umol kg-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxygen_saturation</td> <td>Saturated dissolved oxygen concentration calculated from the Garcia and Gordon (1992) equation.</td> <td>umol kg-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxygen_anom</td> <td>The difference between observed dissolved oxygen concentration and saturated oxygen </td> <td>umol kg-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>bbp470</td> <td>Optical backscatter coefficient at 470 nm. Particulate organic carbon is calculated in argo_daily_npp_20220815.py</td> <td>m-1</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>wmo</td> <td>WMO number of float</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_index</td> <td>Profile index or profile number taken by float</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_latitude</td> <td>Average profile latitude</td> <td>degN</td> </tr> <tr> <td>profile_longitude</td> <td>Average profile longitude</td> <td>degE</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>fod</td> <td>Fraction of day</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxy</td> <td>Sinusoidal curve fit to oxygen</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>poc</td> <td>Sinusoidal curve fit to particulate organic carbon</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxy_med</td> <td>Hourly median oxygen</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxy_sem</td> <td>Hourly standard error of oxygen</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>poc_med</td> <td>Hourly median particulate organic carbon</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>poc_sem</td> <td>Hourly standard error of particulate organic carbon</td> <td>mol m-3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>region</td> <td>Name of data subset (e.g., 30-40 deg N, co-located)</td> <td> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>region</td> <td>Name of data subset (e.g., 30-40 deg N) </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>depth</td> <td>Depth of profile</td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>zeu</td> <td>1% euphotic depth from Lee et al. (2013) algorithm from NASA (2022) L3 satellite products. </td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>n_profiles_bpp</td> <td>Number of backscatter profiles</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>n_profiles_oxy</td> <td>Number of oxygen profiles</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>n_floats_bbp</td> <td>Number of floats with backscatter measurements</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>n_floats_oxy</td> <td>Number of floats with oxygen measurements</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do</td> <td>Gross oxygen productivity estimated from dissolved oxygen</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_serr</td> <td>Standard error of gross oxygen productivity estimated from dissolved oxygen</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_p</td> <td>p-value of curve fit to hourly oxygen data</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_r2</td> <td>r-squared value of curve to hourly oxygen data</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxy_sr</td> <td>The calculated sunrise time as a fraction of the day</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxy_ss</td> <td>The calculated sunset time as a fraction of the day</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gpp_bbp</td> <td>Gross carbon productivity estimated from optical backscatter</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gpp_bbp_serr</td> <td>Standard error of gross carbon productivity estimated from optical backscatter</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_p</td> <td>p-value of curve fit to hourly particulate organic carbon data</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_r2</td> <td>r-squared value of curve to hourly particulate organic carbon data</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_bbp</td> <td>Gross oxygen productivity calculated from gross carbon productivity (gpp_bbp)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_bbp_serr</td> <td>Standard error of gross oxygen productivity calculated from gross carbon productivity (gpp_bbp_serr)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>npp_bbp</td> <td>Net primary productivity calculated from backscatter-based gross oxygen productivity (gop_bbp)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>npp_bbp_serr</td> <td>Standard error of net primary productivity calculated from backscatter-based gross oxygen productivity (gop_bbp_serr)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>npp_do</td> <td>Net primary productivity calculated from oxygen-based gross oxygen productivity (gop_do)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>npp_do_serr</td> <td>Standard error of net primary productivity calculated from oxygen-based gross oxygen productivity (gop_do_serr)</td> <td>mol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table> </table> Data for Fig. S1 | Description for number_of_bbp_profiles_in_each_year.csv and number_of_oxy_profiles_in_each_year.csv <table><tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>year</td> <td>Year</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>bbp470</td> <td>Number of backscatter profiles</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>oxygen_anom</td> <td>Number of oxygen profiles</td> <td> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table> </table> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>mid_depth</td> <td>Depth of NPP profile</td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>mean</td> <td>Mean volumetric 14C-NPP at depth</td> <td>mmol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>median</td> <td>Median volumetric 14C-NPP at depth</td> <td>mmol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>min</td> <td>Minimum volumetric 14C-NPP at depth</td> <td>mmol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>maximum</td> <td>Maximum volumetric 14C-NPP</td> <td>mmol m-3 yr-1</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <table> <tbody><tr> <th><strong>Variable</strong></th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>subset</td> <td>Number of profiles randomly sampled from the co-located dataset</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>int_npp_do</td> <td>Euphotic-depth-integrated net primary productivity calculated from oxygen-based gross oxygen productivity</td> <td>mol m-2 y-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>int_npp_bbp</td> <td>Euphotic-depth-integrated net primary productivity calculated from backscatter-based gross oxygen productivity</td> <td>mol m-2 y-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>gop_do_r2</td> <td>R-squared of the sinusoidal curve to the diel cycle of oxygen anomaly</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>gpp_bbp_r2</td> <td>R-squared of sinusoidal curve to the diel cycle of particulate organic carbon</td> <td> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>ROSE</td> <td>Topographic (negative values are below sea level)</td> <td>m</td> </tr> <tr> <td>ETOPO05_Y</td> <td>Latitude</td> <td>degN</td> </tr> <tr> <td>ETOPO05_X</td> <td>Longitude</td> <td>degE</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <table> <tbody><tr> <th>Variable</th> <th>Description</th> <th>Units</th> </tr> </tbody><tbody> <tr> <td>database</td> <td>Database the data was extracted from</td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Month</td> <td>Month of NPP measurement</td> <td>month of year</td> </tr> <tr> <td>npp_14c</td> <td>Net primary productivity estimated from the radiocarbon method</td> <td>mmol m-3 y-1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>depth</td> <td>depth of 14C-NPP measurement</td> <td>m</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table> </table>
Data from "Into the unknown: The role of post-fire soil erosion in the carbon cycle"
<p>Wildfires directly emit 2.1 Pg carbon (C) to the atmosphere annually. The net effect of wildfires on the C cycle, however, involves many interacting source and sink processes beyond these emissions from combustion. Among those, the role of post-fire enhanced soil organic carbon (SOC) erosion as a C sink mechanism remains essentially unquantified. Wildfires can greatly enhance soil erosion due to the loss of protective vegetation cover and changes to soil structure and wettability. Post-fire SOC erosion acts as a C sink when off-site burial and stabilization of C eroded after a fire, together with the on-site recovery of SOC content, exceed the C losses during its post-fire transport. Here we synthesize published data on post-fire SOC erosion and evaluate its overall potential to act as longer-term C sink. To explore its quantitative importance, we also model its magnitude at continental scale using the 2017 wildfire season in Europe. Our estimations show that the C sink ability of SOC water erosion during the first post-fire year could account for around 13% of the C emissions produced by wildland fires. This indicates that post-fire SOC erosion is a quantitatively important process in the overall C balance of fires, and highlights the need for more field data to further validate this initial assessment.</p> <p>Here we provide the post-fire SOC erosion dataset ("Post-fire SOC erosion rates" file) used for calculating the SOC ratio of eroded sediments implemented in the RUSLE modelling; as well as the list of data sources ("List of data sources" file).</p>
Towards a more complete quantification of the global carbon cycle
<p>These are the data and IDL code required to create Table3 from the paper.</p> <p><strong>Abstract.</strong></p> <p>The main components of global carbon budget calculations are the emissions from burning fossil fuels, cement production, and net land-use change, partly balanced by ocean CO<sub>2</sub> uptake and CO<sub>2</sub> increase in the atmosphere. The difference between these terms is referred to as the residual sink, assumed to correspond to increasing carbon storage in the terrestrial biosphere through physiological plant responses to changing conditions (Δ<em>B</em><sub>phys</sub>). It is often used to constrain carbon exchange in global earth-system models. More broadly, it guides expectations of autonomous changes in global carbon stocks in response to climatic changes, including increasing CO<sub>2</sub>, that may add to, or subtract from, anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> emissions.</p> <p>However, a budget with only these terms omits some important additional fluxes that are important to correctly infer Δ<em>B</em><sub>phys</sub>. They are cement carbonation and fluxes into increasing pools of plastic, bitumen, harvested-wood products, and landfill deposition after disposal of these products, and carbon fluxes to the oceans via wind erosion and non-CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes of the intermediate break-down products of methane and other volatile organic compounds. While the global budget includes river transport of dissolved inorganic carbon, it omits river transport of dissolved and particulate organic carbon, and the deposition of carbon in inland water bodies.</p> <p>Each one of these terms is relatively small, but together they can constitute important additional fluxes that would significantly reduce the size of the inferred Δ<em>B</em><sub>phys</sub>. We estimate here that inclusion of these fluxes would reduce Δ<em>B</em><sub>phys</sub> from the currently reported 3.6 GtC yr<sup>–1 </sup>down to about 2.1 GtC yr<sup>–1</sup> (excluding losses from land-use change). The implicit reduction in the size of ΔB<sub>phys</sub> has important implications for the inferred magnitude of current-day biospheric net carbon uptake and the consequent potential of future biospheric feedbacks to amplify or negate net anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> emissions.</p>
Dataset associated with the manuscript "A comprehensive assessment of anthropogenic and natural sources and sinks of Australasia's carbon budget" by Villalobos et al. (2023), part of the the second phase of the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP-2).
<p>Dataset associated with the manuscript "A comprehensive assessment of anthropogenic and natural sources and sinks of Australasia’s carbon budget" by Villalobos et al. (2023), part of the the second phase of the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP-2). </p>
Results of semantic queries for "carbon cycling" for datasets in the DataONE catalog
DataONE (https://www.dataone.org) is a federation of institutions involved with the earth and environmental sciences that share data through common cyberinfrastructure. In 2016, the DataONE project carried out a quantification of the utility of semantic query, by measuring the precision and recall of relevant datasets available through that catalog. Precision is defined as the proportion of relevant data in the retrieved results, and recall is the proportion of relevant data retrieved, compared to all relevant data present in the repository (see Methods). This dataset contains the queries and results of that study. Four data tables are included. First, a table of the 10 queries, which were formatted in several ways, including natural language and text strings (for plain text searches of various parts of metadata), and URIs for measurements in the EcoSystem Ontology (ECSO). A second table contains 994 relevant datasets in the DataONE catalog, with a column for each of the ten queries and boolean value indicating whether the dataset is a match for that query. Two query results tables are included, for the raw and summarized results of the query tests. A fifth entity contains the zipped code (R language) used to perform the queries in the DataONE system. When run against approximately 1000 datasets (in October, 2016), results for the ten queries ranged from 0-50% (precision) and 0-100% (recall), indicating that traditional searches may sometimes be adequate to return all relevant data in a corpus, but results can be erratic and inconsistent, with potentially large returns of irrelevant data in the result set. When querying through semantic classes, precision and recall were much higher and more consistent (90-100% and 75-100%, respectively).
Soil temperature in Black Spruce Carbon cycling study along a temperature gradient in interior Alaska
Study conducted on black spruce C cycling study along a temperature gradient in interior Alaska from 1999 to 2002. The temperature gradient was established by locating sites in the Fairbanks area that varied in elevation and aspect. Measurements include:soil temperature, forest aboveground production, litterfall, decomposition of litter and cellulose proxies, soil carbon dioxide efflux, moss photosynthesis, soil moisture, foliar isotopes (15N and 13C).
Nitrogen cycling at treeline. II. Percent Soil Carbon and Nitrogen
We studied spatial and temporal patterns of nitrogen pools and fluxes in soils at treeline and forested sites within three mountain ranges across a 785 km transect in Alaska during 2001- 2002. We measured pools of soil mineral (ammonium and nitrate) and organic (amino acid and microbial biomass) nitrogen, in situ rates of net mineralization, net nitrification, net amino acid production, and decomposition, as well as soil carbon turnover in a laboratory incubation experiment. A complete characterization of the study can be found in Loomis et al. (2006).
Nitrogen cycling at treeline. III. Total Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Content
We studied spatial and temporal patterns of nitrogen pools and fluxes in soils at treeline and forested sites within three mountain ranges across a 785 km transect in Alaska during 2001- 2002. We measured pools of soil mineral (ammonium and nitrate) and organic (amino acid and microbial biomass) nitrogen, in situ rates of net mineralization, net nitrification, net amino acid production, and decomposition, as well as soil carbon turnover in a laboratory incubation experiment. A complete characterization of the study can be found in Loomis et al. (2006).
Soil carbon cycling response to hemlock mortality at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory
We studied the impacts of hemlock mortality from infestation by the hemlock woolly adlegid (HWA) on soil carbon cycling at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory. The HWA was first found at Coweeta in 2003. In 2013 and 2014, we re-sampled plots established in an earlier study by Elliott and others. There were 12 20 x 20 m plots: 4 were control hardwood stands, 4 were untreated hemlock communities, and 4 were hemlock that were girdled. We measured soil C and N concentration, soil delta 13 C, exoemzyme activities, root biomass, soil respiration, forest floor mass, and fungal hyphal biomass.
Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest: Landscape scale (valley-wide) soil carbon and nitrogen cycling data
The valley-wide plots are a grid of 431 sites along fifteen N–S transects established at 500-m intervals spanning the entire Hubbard Brook Valley. This dataset includes total soil carbon, nitrogen and organic matter content, potential net nitrogen mineralization and nitrification rates, microbial respiration rates, soil water content and holding capacity, soil ammonium and nitrate concentrations, soil pH, and tree composition in a subset of 100 randomly selected plots in 2000. These data were gathered as part of the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study (HBES). The HBES is a collaborative effort at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, which is operated and maintained by the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. An analysis of these data can be found in: Venterea, R. T., Lovett, G. M., Groffman, P. M., & Schwarz, P. A. (2003). Landscape patterns of net nitrification in a northern hardwood-conifer forest. Soil Science Soc. Amer. J., 67, 527–539. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2003.5270
Viskari et al. (2019) The influence of canopy radiation parameter uncertainty on model projections of terrestrial carbon and energy cycling
<p>Zenodo DOI release for permanent archiving outside of GitHub</p>
Code and data for publication "Assessing carbon cycle projections from complex and simple models under SSP scenarios" published in "Climatic Change"
<p>Data and scripts for the article "Assessing carbon cycle projections from complex and simple models under SSP scenarios" by I. Melnikova, P. Ciais, O. Boucher and K. Tanaka was accepted for publication in Climatic Change (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03639-5)</p><p> </p><p>We use bash, CDO, and python.</p><p>SSP2.xlsx contains preprocessed annual estimates of climate and carbon cycle variables from ESMs and SCMs used in the paper.</p><p>Two bash scripts contain preprocessing cdo commands for ESM output.s SCMs were preprocessed directly in python.</p><p>Jupyter notebook (python) contains preprocessing of data and plotting of all figures of the manuscript. The folder "additional" contains some more Excel files needed to run Jupyter-Notebook. Please adapt the folder names.</p><p>If you have any questions, please contact the corresponding author Irina MELNIKOVA at melnikova . irina@nies.go.jp</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.