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.
62
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
62 results for “geospatial data”
LAGOS-US GEO v1.0: Data module of lake geospatial ecological context at multiple spatial and temporal scales in the conterminous U.S.
The LAGOS-US GEO data package is one of the core data modules of LAGOS-US, an extensible research-ready platform designed to study the 479,950 lakes and reservoirs larger than or equal to 1 ha in the conterminous US (48 states plus the District of Columbia). The GEO module contains data on the geospatial and temporal ecological setting (e.g., land use, terrain, soils, climate, hydrology, atmospheric deposition, and human influence) quantified at multiple spatial divisions (e.g., equidistant buffers around lakes, watersheds, hydrologic basins, political boundaries, and ecoregions) relevant to the LAGOS-US lake population defined in the LAGOS-US LOCUS module. The database design that supports the LAGOS-US research platform was created based on several important design features: lakes are the fundamental unit of consideration, all lakes in the spatial extent above the minimum size must be represented, and most information is connected to individual lakes. The design is modular, interoperable (the modules can be used with each other), and extensible (future database modules can be developed and used in the LAGOS-US research platform by others). Users are encouraged to use the other two core data modules that are part of the LAGOS-US platform: LOCUS (location, identifiers, and physical characteristics of lakes and their watersheds) and LIMNO (in situ lake physical, chemical, and biological measurements through time) that are each found in their own data packages.
MacroSheds: a synthesis of long-term biogeochemical, hydroclimatic, and geospatial data from small watershed ecosystem studies
The MacroSheds dataset is an ongoing synthesis of data records from small-watershed ecosystem studies, including those managed by LTER, CZO/CZNet, NEON, and many other networks. While details of instrumentation and sampling methods vary across these studies, the types of data collected and the questions that motivate their analysis are remarkably similar. Nevertheless, little effort toward the compilation of these datasets has previously been made, and comparative watershed analyses have remained limited in scale. The MacroSheds dataset includes daily time series of streamflow (discharge) and stream chemistry, as well as precipitation and precipitation chemistry where available. Each of the 200+ watersheds included in the MacroSheds dataset is described by a comprehensive collection of watershed attributes, summarized from a diverse set of gridded data products. A subset of these watershed attributes conform as closely as possible to the specifications of the CAMELS dataset (https://ral.ucar.edu/solutions/products/camels), allowing the MacroSheds dataset to function as a small-watershed supplement to that corpus, and a resource for hydrologists as well as biogeochemists and watershed ecosystem scientists. Data paper: https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/lol2.10325 Data dashboard for visualization: macrosheds.org R package for data access and analysis: https://github.com/MacroSHEDS/macrosheds R package vignettes: https://macrosheds.org/pages/vignettes Live dataset changelog: https://macrosheds.org/pages/changelog.html Questions: mail@macrosheds.org
LAGOS - Lake nitrogen, phosphorus, stoichiometry, and geospatial data for a 17-state region of the U.S.
This dataset includes information about total nitrogen (TN) concentrations, total phosphorus (TP) concentrations, TN:TP stoichiometry, and 12 driver variables that might predict nutrient concentrations and ratios. All observed values came from LAGOSLIMNO v. 1.054.1 and LAGOSGEO v. 1.03 (LAke multi-scaled GeOSpatial and temporal database), an integrated database of lake ecosystems (Soranno et al. 2015). LAGOS contains a complete census of lakes greater than or equal to 4 ha with corresponding geospatial information for a 17-state region of the U.S., and a subset of the lakes has observational data on morphometry and chemistry. Approximately 54 different sources of data were compiled for this dataset and were mostly generated by government agencies (state, federal, tribal) and universities. Here, we compiled chemistry data from lakes with concurrent observations of TN and TP from the summer stratified season (June 15-September 15) in the most recent 10 years of data included in LAGOSLIMNO v. 1.054.1 (2002-2011). We report the median TN, TP and molar TN:TP values for each lake, which was calculated as the grand median of each yearly median value. We also include data for lake and landscape characteristics that might be important controls on lake nutrients, including: land use (agricultural, pasture, row crop, urban, forest), nitrogen deposition, temperature, precipitation, hydrology (baseflow), maximum depth, and the ratio of lake area to watershed area, which is used to approximate residence time. These data were used to identify drivers of lake nutrient stoichiometry at sub-continental and regional scales (Collins et al, submitted). This research was supported by the NSF Macrosystems Biology program (awards EF-1065786 and EF-1065818) and by the NSF Postdoctoral Research Fellowship in Biology (DBI-1401954).
Geospatial data for Luquillo Mountains, Puerto Rico: Mean annual precipitation, elevation, watershed outlines, and rain gage locations
The data archive is here: https://doi.org/10.5066/F74F1PM2 please use this DOI when citing this data set. These geospatial data sets were developed as part of a new analysis of all known current and historical rain gages in the Luquillo Mountains, Puerto Rico published in the journal article Murphy, S.F., Stallard, R.F., Scholl, M.A., Gonzalez, G., and Torres-Sanchez, A.J., 2017, Reassessing rainfall in the Luquillo Mountains, Puerto Rico: Local and global ecohydrological implications: PLOS One 12(7): e0180987, p. 1-26, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180987. That article provides a revised map of mean annual precipitation developed using elevation regression functions and residual interpolation, and that map is presented here in a raster file. Most previous forest- and watershed-wide estimates of precipitation (and evapotranspiration, as inferred by a water balance) have assumed that precipitation increases consistently with elevation in the Luquillo Mountains; therefore, precipitation in leeward Luquillo watersheds has been overestimated by up to 40%.Because the Luquillo Mountains often serve as a wet tropical archetype in global assessments of basic ecohydrological processes, these revised estimates are relevant to regional and global assessments of runoff efficiency, hydrologic effects of reforestation, geomorphic processes, and climate change. \<para\> Support for this work was provided by grants BSR-8811902, DEB-9411973, DEB-9705814 , DEB-0080538, DEB-0218039 , DEB-0620910 , DEB-1239764, DEB-1546686, and DEB-1831952 from the National Science Foundation to the University of Puerto Rico as part of the Luquillo Long-Term Ecological Research Program. Additional support provided by the University of Puerto Rico and the International Institute of Tropical Forestry, USDA Forest Service.\</para\>
Geospatial data on indicators for parks in the city of Berlin, Germany
<p>The data contains features and indicators for 224 parks (at least 2 ha in size) in the city of Berlin and overall scores (indices) for natural elements, built elements (infrastructure) and spatial context (e.g. distance to public transport). All data is supplement to linked online web map.</p> <p><strong>List of data and content</strong></p> <ul> <li>Park_Berlin_Indicators: vector files (*.shp, *.geojson)</li> <li>Park_Berlin_Indicators: excel files (*.xlsx)</li> </ul> <p><strong>Spatial reference</strong><br> All data is projected in ETRS 1989 UTM Zone 33N (<a href="https://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/25833/">EPSG:25833</a>)</p> <p><strong>Web-GIS</strong><br> View data and explore interactively using the <a href="https://arcg.is/5a9me">online application.</a></p> <p><strong>Data sources and processing</strong><br> For details on underlying data sources (e.g. availabilty, spatial resolution, time reference) and on data processing please refer to the linked publication, incl. Appendix 1</p> <p><strong>Acknowledgments</strong><br> We thank the City of Berlin for providing data. We greatly acknowledge OpenStreetMap (OSM) and contributers for providing important parts of the used data. This work was supported by the research project “Environmental‐Health Interactions in Cities (GreenEquityHEALTH) ‐ Challenges for Human Well‐Being under Global Changes” (project duration 2017–2022), funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; no.01LN1705A).</p> <p><strong>Based on related original publication</strong><br> Kraemer, R., & Kabisch, N. (2021). Parks in context: Advancing citywide spatial quality assessments of urban green spaces using fine-scaled indicators. Ecology and Society, 26(2). <a href="https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12485-260245">https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12485-260245 </a></p>
Synthetic geospatial data for performance analysis of geospatial database systems
<p>This dataset contains a set of synthetic data that can be used to evaluate the efficiency of geosaptial datasbases. </p> <p>The datasets is composed of four json file, characterized by different size. They can be used to analyze the scalability of geospatial datasets with respect to the database size.</p> <p>Each json file contains a set of "points", each one characterized by a set of random attributes (description, url of a picture linked to the point, creation date, delete date, update date, identifier, partition identifier).</p> <p>The synthetically generated points are uniformly distributed among the world.</p>
ArcGIS Map Packages and GIS Data for: A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, Gillreath-Brown et al. (2019)
<p><strong>ArcGIS Map Packages and GIS Data for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019)</strong></p> <p>**When using the GIS data included in these map packages, please cite all of the following:</p> <blockquote> <p>Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, 2019. PLoSONE 14(8):e0220457. <a href="http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220457">http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220457</a></p> <p>Gillreath-Brown, Andrew, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton. ArcGIS Map Packages for: A Geospatial Method for Estimating Soil Moisture Variability in Prehistoric Agricultural Landscapes, Gillreath-Brown et al., 2019. Version 1. Zenodo. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2572018">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2572018</a></p> </blockquote> <p><strong>OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS</strong></p> <p>This repository contains map packages for Gillreath-Brown, Nagaoka, and Wolverton (2019), as well as the raw digital elevation model (DEM) and soils data, of which the analyses was based on. The map packages contain all GIS data associated with the analyses described and presented in the publication. The map packages were created in ArcGIS 10.2.2; however, the packages will work in recent versions of ArcGIS. (Note: I was able to open the packages in ArcGIS 10.6.1, when tested on February 17, 2019). The primary files contained in this repository are:</p> <ul> <li>Raw DEM and Soils data <ul> <li>Digital Elevation Model Data (Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program, and can be downloaded from the <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/">National Elevation Dataset</a>) <ul> <li><strong>DEM_Individual_Tiles</strong>: Individual DEM tiles prior to being merged (1/3 arc second) from USGS National Elevation Dataset.</li> <li><strong>DEMs_Merged</strong>: DEMs were combined into one layer. Individual watersheds (i.e., Goodman, Coffey, and Crow Canyon) were clipped from this combined DEM. </li> </ul> </li> <li> Soils Data (Map services and data available from <a href="https://data.nal.usda.gov/dataset/natural-resources-conservation-service-web-soil-survey">Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey</a>, U.S. Department of Agriculture) <ul> <li><strong>Animas-Dolores_Area_Soils</strong>: Small portion of the soil mapunits cover the northeastern corner of the Coffey Watershed (CW).</li> <li><strong>Cortez_Area_Soils</strong>: Soils for Montezuma County, encompasses all of Goodman (GW) and Crow Canyon (CCW) watersheds, and a large portion of the Coffey watershed (CW).</li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> <li>ArcGIS Map Packages <ul> <li><strong>Goodman_Watershed_Full_SMPM_Analysis</strong>: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the full Goodman Watershed (GW).</li> <li><strong>Goodman_Watershed_Mesa-Only_SMPM_Analysis</strong>: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the mesa-only Goodman Watershed.</li> <li><strong>Crow_Canyon_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis</strong>: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Crow Canyon Watershed (CCW).</li> <li><strong>Coffey_Watershed_SMPM_Analysis</strong>: Map Package contains the necessary files to rerun the SMPM analysis on the Coffey Watershed (CW).</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <p>For additional information on contents of the map packages, please see see "Map Packages Descriptions" or open a map package in ArcGIS and go to "properties" or "map document properties."</p> <p><strong>LICENSES</strong></p> <p>Code: <a href="http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT">MIT</a> year: 2019 <br> Copyright holders: Andrew Gillreath-Brown, Lisa Nagaoka, and Steve Wolverton</p> <p><strong>CONTACT</strong></p> <p><strong>Andrew Gillreath-Brown, PhD Candidate, RPA</strong><br> <a href="https://anthro.wsu.edu/">Department of Anthropology</a>, Washington State University<br> <a href="mailto:andrew.brown1234@gmail.com">andrew.brown1234@gmail.com</a> – Email<br> <a href="https://andrewgillreathbrown.wordpress.com/">andrewgillreathbrown.wordpress.com</a> – Web</p>
Geospatial, biophysical and socioeconomic data for the Athens municipality on a zipcode resolution
<p>A collated dataset from various remote sensing, local and national sources. </p>
LAGOS-NE – Lake nutrient chemistry and geospatial data to measure spatial structure of ecosystem properties in a 17-state region of the U.S.
This dataset includes data for the lake water quality and geospatial variables that describe climate, hydrology, land use land cover, and lake characteristics that were used to study spatial structure in lake properties at the sub-continental scales (Lapierre et al. Quantifying spatial structure to improve understanding of the relationships between climate, landscape, and lake ecosystem properties, to be submitted to Ecology). All observations came from LAGOS-NELIMNO v. 1.054.1 and LAGOS-NEGEO v. 1.03 (LAke multi-scaled GeOSpatial and temporal database), an integrated database of lake ecosystems (Soranno et al. 2015). LAGOS-NE contains a complete census of lakes great than or equal to 4 ha with corresponding geospatial information for a 17-state region of the U.S., and a subset of the lakes has observational data on morphometry and chemistry. Approximately 54 different sources of data were compiled for the LAGOS-NELIMNO v. 1.054.1 dataset and were mostly generated by government agencies (state, federal, tribal) and universities. In this analysis, we compiled lake water quality data from the summer stratified season (June 15-September 15) in the most recent 10 years of data included in LAGOS-NELIMNO v. 1.054.1 (2002-2011). We report the median total nitrogen, total phosphorus, secchi depth, and chlorophyll values for each lake, which was calculated as the grand median of each yearly median value. We also include data for lake and landscape characteristics including variables related to lake morphometry, climate, hydrology, atmospheric deposition, land use and land cover.
Demographic, economic, geospatial data for municipalities of the Central Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) in 2010-2016
<p>The database contains demographic, economic, geospatial data for 452 municipalities of the 16 administrative units of the Central Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) for 2010-2016.</p> <p>The sources of data are the municipal-level statistics of Rosstat, Google Maps data and calculated indicators. The statistical data were arranged by the year, the data on municipalities for which there were administrative and territorial transformations for the period under study were excluded (in some cases, the data were provided in accordance with the administrative-territorial demarcation as of 2016).</p> <p>Municipalities' websites were used to fill the lack of population information in individual municipalities for some years.</p> <p>Calculated variables were made to estimate a number of indicators per capita, to introduce additional demographic indicators (e.g. migration inflow rate), to bring price economic indicators to base year prices (2010). For example, indicators of income of the local budget, volumes of investments in fixed assets (excluding budgetary funds), level of wages are modified to a comparable form (to 2010 prices).</p> <p>The distances on roads in different units of measurement from the geographical center of municipalities to the center of the capital of the region are calculated using the Google Maps database.</p> <p>Data mapping was performed using ArcGIS software.</p> <p>The data set consists of</p> <p>1) Municipalities_CFD_Russia_2010_2016_ENG.xlsx - The database of demographic, economic, geospatial data for 452 municipalities of the 16 administrative units of the Central Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) for 2010-2016,</p> <p>2) MUNICIPALITIES_CFD_RUSSIA_SHAPE.rar - The shape-files for maps construction,</p> <p>3) Fig.1. Municipalities ENG.jpg - The map of studied administrative units and municipalities of the Central Federal District in Russia .</p>
GRIDCERF: Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility
<p><strong>Abstract:</strong></p> <p>Climate change, energy system transitions, and socioeconomic change are compounding influences affecting the growth of electricity demand. While energy efficiency initiatives and distributed resources can address a significant amount of this demand, the United States will likely still need new utility-scale generation resources. The energy sector uses capacity expansion planning models to determine the aggregate need for new generation, but these models are typically at the state or regional scale and are not equipped to address the wide range of location- and technology-specific issues that are increasingly a factor in power plant siting. To help address these challenges, we have developed the Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (GRIDCERF) data package, a high-resolution product to evaluate siting suitability for renewable and non-renewable power plants in the conterminous United States. GRIDCERF offers 265 suitability layers for use with 56 power plant technology configurations in a harmonized format that can be easily ingested by geospatially-enabled modeling software. It also provides pre-compiled technology-specific suitability layers and allows for user customization to robustly address science objectives when evaluating varying future conditions.</p> <p><strong>Accompanying GitHub repository:</strong></p> <p>The following GitHub repository contains the code used to generate the data in this archive: https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/vernon-etal_2023_scidata</p> <p><strong>Contents:</strong></p> <p><strong>Note:</strong></p> <p>GRIDCERF does not provide the source data directly due to some license restrictions related for direct redistribution of the unaltered source data. However, the included file "gridcerf_source_data_description.csv" details the provenance associated with each source dataset and notes their individual licenses/disclaimers.</p> <p><strong>Common Rasters:</strong></p> <p><strong>Suitability Layer Type and Source</strong></p> <p><strong>GRIDCERF Raster Name</strong></p> <p><strong>Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Surface Management Agency Areas</strong><strong><sup>33</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_blm_surface_management_agency_areas.tif</p> <p><strong>BLM National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) - National Monuments</strong><strong><sup>34</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_blm_nlcs_national_monument_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>BLM NLCS - Outstanding Natural Areas</strong><strong><sup>35</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_blm_nlcs_outstanding_natural_areas_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>BLM NLCS - Wilderness</strong><strong><sup>36</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_blm_nlcs_wilderness_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>BLM NLCS - Wilderness Study Areas</strong><strong><sup>37</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_blm_nlcs_wilderness_study_areas_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>National Park Service (NPS) Class 1 airsheds</strong><strong><sup>38</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_class1_airsheds_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>NPS Administrative Boundaries</strong><strong><sup>39</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nps_administrative_boundaries_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>NPS Historic Trails</strong><strong><sup>40</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nps_historic_trails_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>NPS Scenic Trails</strong><strong><sup>41</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nps_scenic_trails_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) - Critical Habitat</strong><strong><sup>42</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfws_critical_habitat_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>USFWS - Special Designation</strong><strong><sup>43</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfws_special_designation_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>USFWS - Wild and Scenic River System</strong><strong><sup>44</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfws_national_wild_scenic_river_system_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>USFWS - National Realty Tracts</strong><strong><sup>45</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfws_national_realty_tracts_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) Wetlands</strong><strong><sup>46</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nlcd_wetlands_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Administrative Boundaries</strong><strong><sup>47</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfs_administrative_boundaries_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>USFS Wilderness Areas</strong><strong><sup>48</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usfs_wilderness_areas_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Wilderness Lands</strong><strong><sup>49</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usgs_wilderness_areas_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>USGS Protected Areas of the U.S - Class 1&2</strong><strong><sup>50</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usgs_padus_class_1_to_2_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>U.S. State Protected Lands</strong><strong><sup>51</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_wdpa_state_protected_lands_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Nature Conservancy lands</strong><strong><sup>52</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_wdpa_tnc_managed_lands_conus.tif</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Technology-specific Rasters:</strong></p> <p><strong>Suitability Layer Type and Source</strong></p> <p><strong>GRIDCERF Raster Name</strong></p> <p><strong>Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Land Area Representations Dataset</strong><strong><sup>53</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_bia_land_area_representations_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Slope 5% or less suitable</strong><strong><sup>20</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_srtm_slope_5pct_or_less.tif</p> <p><strong>Slope 10% or less suitable</strong><strong><sup>20</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_srtm_slope_10pct_or_less.tif</p> <p><strong>Slope 12% or less suitable</strong><strong><sup>20</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_srtm_slope_12pct_or_less.tif</p> <p><strong>Slope 20% or less suitable</strong><strong><sup>20</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_srtm_slope_20pct_or_less.tif</p> <p><strong>Airports (10-mile buffer)</strong><strong><sup>54</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_airports_10mi_buffer_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Airports (3-mile buffer)</strong><strong><sup>54</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_airports_3mi_buffer_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Proximity to Railroad and Navigable Waters (< 5 km)</strong> <strong><sup>55,56</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usdot_railnodes_navwaters_within5km.tif</p> <p><strong>Coal Supply</strong><strong><sup>55–57</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_coalmines20km_railnodes5km_navwaters5km_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) CO Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_co_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA NOx Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_no2_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA Ozone Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_ozone_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA Lead Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_lead_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA PM10 Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_pm10_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA PM2.5 Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_pm2p5_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>EPA SOx Non-attainment Areas</strong><strong><sup>58</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_epa_nonattainment_so2_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Earthquake Potential</strong><strong><sup>59</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_usgs_earthquake_pga_0.3_at_2pct_in_50yrs_conus.tif</p> <p><strong>Densely population areas</strong><strong><sup>11</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_densely_populated_ssp[2,3,5]_[year].tif</p> <p><strong>Densely population areas buffered by 25 miles</strong><strong><sup>11</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_densely_populated_ssp[2,3,5]_[year]_buff25mi.tif</p> <p><strong>Densely population areas – nuclear</strong><strong><sup>11</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_densely_populated_ssp[2,3,5]_[year]_nuclear.tif</p> <p><strong>National Hydrography Dataset (version 2; NHDv2)</strong><strong><sup>32</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nhd2plus_surfaceflow_greaterthan[bin]mgd_buffer20km.tif</p> <p><strong>National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) concentrating solar direct normal potential</strong><strong><sup>26</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nrel_solar_csp_centralized_potential.tif</p> <p><strong>NREL photovoltaic potential</strong><strong><sup>26</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nrel_solar_pv_centralized_potential.tif</p> <p><strong>NREL Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) toolkit</strong><strong><sup>22</sup></strong></p> <p>gridcerf_nrel_wind_development_potential_hubheight[080,110,140]_cf35.tif</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Compiled Technology Rasters:</strong></p> <p>The list of layers that make up each compiled technology raster can be found in the "reference/compiled_layer_configuration.txt" file in this data archive.</p> <p>The following technology raster file names are self-descriptive in the format "gridcerf_<technology>_<subtype>_<carbon_capture>_<cooling_type>.tif". Some technologies do not have a carbon capture or cooling type designation and will simply have technology specific considerations listed.</p> <pre>gridcerf_biomass_conventional_ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_no-ccs_pond.tif gridcerf_biomass_conventional_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_with-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_with-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_biomass_igcc_with-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_no-ccs_pond.tif gridcerf_coal_conventional_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_with-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_with-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_coal_igcc_with-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_no-ccs_pond.tif gridcerf_gas_cc_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_gas_turbine_dry.tif gridcerf_gas_turbine_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_gas_turbine_pond.tif gridcerf_gas_turbine_recirculating.tif gridcerf_nuclear_gen3_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_nuclear_gen3_pond.tif gridcerf_nuclear_gen3_recirculating.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_no-ccs_dry.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_no-ccs_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_cc_no-ccs_recirculating.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_ct_dry.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_ct_oncethrough.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_ct_pond.tif gridcerf_refinedliquids_ct_recirculating.tif gridcerf_solar_csp_centralized_dry-hybrid.tif gridcerf_solar_csp_centralized_recirculating.tif gridcerf_solar_pv_centralized.tif gridcerf_wind_onshore_hubheight080m.tif gridcerf_wind_onshore_hubheight110m.tif gridcerf_wind_onshore_hubheight140m.tif </pre> <p><strong>Reference Data: </strong>Contains land mask and other useful boundary data. Also contains additional literature review resource and the layers used to build the compiled suitability.</p> <p><strong>References:</strong></p> <p>1. Bureau of Land Management. BLM National Surface Management Agency Area Polygons - National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA). <em>Landscape Approach Data Portal</em> https://gbp-blm-egis.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/blm-national-sma-surface-management-agency-area-polygons/about (2023).</p> <p>2. Bureau of Land Management. BLM National NLCS National Monuments, National Conservation Areas and Similar Designations Polygons. <em>U.S.Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Business Plaform</em> https://gbp-blm-egis.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/BLM-EGIS::blm-natl-nlcs-national-monuments-national-conservation-areas-polygons/about (2023).</p> <p>3. Hartger, P. NLCS Outstanding Natural Areas. <em>ArcGIS Hub</em> https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/Wilderness::nlcs-outstanding-natural-areas/about (2017).</p> <p>4. Bureau of Land Management. BLM National NLCS Wilderness Areas Polygons. <em>U.S.Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Business Plaform</em> https://arcg.is/a01uC (2023).</p> <p>5. Bureau of Land Management. BLM National NLCS Wilderness Study Areas Polygons. <em>U.S.Department of Interior</em> https://arcg.is/14XPiC (2023).</p> <p>6. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mandatory Class 1 Federal Areas Web Service. <em>Mandatory Class 1 Federal Areas Web Service</em> https://edg.epa.gov/metadata/catalog/search/resource/details.page?uuid=%7BF234E37B-E7CE-4A47-89D6-68399D540576%7D (2015).</p> <p>7. National Park Service. National Park Service Boundary. <em>National Park Service</em> https://public-nps.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/nps::nps-boundary-4/about (2023).</p> <p>8. National Park Service. National Historic Trails. <em>Geospatial Energy Mapper</em> https://gem.anl.gov/tool (2019).</p> <p>9. National Park Service. National Scenic Trails. <em>Geospatial Energy Mapper</em> https://gem.anl.gov/tool (2019).</p> <p>10. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. <em>ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System</em> https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html (2023).</p> <p>11. U.S. Fish and Wildlife. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Special Designation. <em>U.S. Fish and Wildlife</em> https://gis-fws.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fws::fws-special-designation/about (2023).</p> <p>12. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. <em>Geospatial Energy Mapper</em> https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/edw_resources/shp/S_USA.WildScenicRiver_LN.zip (2014).</p> <p>13. U.S. Fish and WIldlife Service. USFWS National Realty Tracts. <em>ServCat Fish and Wildlife Service Catalog</em> https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/Reference/Profile/154057 (2023).</p> <p>14. Dewitz, J. & U.S. Geological Survey. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019 Products (ver. 2.0, June 2021). <em>Multi-Resoltuion Land Characteristics Consortium</em> https://www.mrlc.gov/data/nlcd-2019-land-cover-conus (2021).</p> <p>15. USDA Forest Service. Administrative Forest Boundaries. <em>Download National Datasets</em> https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php?dsetCategory=boundaries (2015).</p> <p>16. U.S. Forest Service. National Wilderness Areas. <em>Download National Datasets</em> https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php?xmlKeyword=Wilderness+areas (2023).</p> <p>17. U.S. Geological Survey. Wilderness Areas in the United States. <em>ScienceBase-Catalog</em> https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/4fc8f0e4e4b0bffa8ab259e7 (2000).</p> <p>18. U.S. Geological Survey Gap Analysis Project. Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 3.0 (ver. 2.0, March 2023). <em>ScienceBase-Catalog</em> https://doi.org/10.5066/P9Q9LQ4B (2023).</p> <p>19. Protected Planet. Protected Areas (WDPA). <em>Protected Areas (WDPA)</em> https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/wdpa?tab=WDPA (2023).</p> <p>20. The Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conservancy lands. <em>The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Lands</em> https://geospatial.tnc.org/datasets/TNC::tnc-lands-north-america/about?layer=0 (2022).</p> <p>21. Bureau of Indian Affairs. American Indian and Alaskan Native Land Area Representations (LAR). <em>U.S. Department of the Interior Indian Affairs</em> https://biamaps.doi.gov/bogs/datadownload.html (2019).</p> <p>22. Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I., Nelson, A. & Guevara, E. Hole-filled SRTM for the globe Version 4. <em>CGIAR Consortium for Spatial Information</em> https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/hole-filled-srtm-for-the-globe-version-4-data-grid (2008).</p> <p>23. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Aviation Facilities. <em>Transportation.gov U.S. Department of Transportation</em> https://geodata.bts.gov/maps/usdot::aviation-facilities (2023).</p> <p>24. U.S. Department of Transportation. North American Rail Network Nodes. <em>U.S. Department of Transportation</em> https://data-usdot.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/usdot::north-american-rail-network-nodes/explore?location=34.085743%2C-108.310932%2C3.96 (2023).</p> <p>25. U.S. Department of Transportation. Navigable Waterway Network Lines. <em>Bureau of Transportation Statistics</em> https://geodata.bts.gov/datasets/usdot::navigable-waterway-network-lines/about (2023).</p> <p>26. Energy Information Association (EIA). Energy Information Association U.S. Coal Mining Locations. <em>ScienceBase-Catalog</em> https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5748a4cbe4b07e28b664dd78 (2017).</p> <p>27. Environmental Protection Agency. Green Book GIS Download. https://www.epa.gov/green-book/green-book-gis-download (2023).</p> <p>28. Shumway, A. <em>Data Release for the 2014 National Seismic Hazard Model for the Conterminous U.S</em>. https://doi.org/10.5066/P9P77LGZ (2019).</p> <p>29. Zoraghein, H. & O’Neill, B. C. U.S. State-level Projections of the Spatial Distribution of Population Consistent with Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. <em>Sustainability</em> <strong>12</strong>, (2020).</p> <p>30. Moore, R. B. <em>et al.</em> <em>User’s guide for the national hydrography dataset plus (NHDPlus) high resolution: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2019–1096</em>. https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20191096 (2019).</p> <p>31. Perez, R. <em>et al.</em> A new operational model for satellite-derived irradiances: description and validation. <em>Solar Energy</em> <strong>73</strong>, 307–317 (2002).</p> <p>32. Draxl, C., Clifton, A., Hodge, B.-M. & McCaa, J. The Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) Toolkit. <em>Applied Energy</em> <strong>151</strong>, 355–366 (2015).</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Input data for the OnStove Nepal model "AAchieving Nepal's clean cooking ambitions: an open source and geospatial cost–benefit analysis"
<p>This repository includes input data to run the OnStove Nepal model presented in the paper "<strong>Achieving Nepal's clean cooking ambitions: an open source and geospatial cost–benefit analysis</strong>" DOI: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00209-2">https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00209-2</a>.</p> <p>The code and automated workflow to run the model can be found in the Github repository <a href="https://github.com/Open-Source-Spatial-Clean-Cooking-Tool/OnStove-Nepal">https://github.com/Open-Source-Spatial-Clean-Cooking-Tool/OnStove-Nepal</a>. All result files and figures can be downloaded from the permanent repository <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10643983">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10643983</a>.</p> <p>The "<strong>GIS_input_data/</strong>" directory includes all the geospatial datasets needed to run the model. Each dataset folder contains a Source.md file describing the dataset, source, attribution, and license. To run the model extract the data inside your "<strong>1. Data</strong>"<strong> </strong>folder in your project. </p> <p>The "<strong>Scenario_inputs/</strong>" directory includes the CSV files with the input socio- and techno-economic data for the different scenarios. Sources for the socio- and techno-economic data can be found in the <strong>supplementary material</strong> of the related publication in the link <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00209-2">https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00209-2</a>. To run the model extract the scenario data inside your "<strong>2. Scenario inputs</strong>"<strong> </strong>folder in your project. </p>
Spatiotemporal dataset of dengue influencing factors in Brazil based on geospatial big data cloud computing
<p>We produced a spatiotemporal dataset of dengue influencing factors in Brazil based on geospatial big data cloud computing from 2001-2024.</p> <p>GDP and building surface area are yearly data.</p> <p>PDSI is monthly data.</p>
Mapping 10-m global impervious surface area (GISA-10m) using multi-source geospatial data
<p>Artificial impervious surface area (ISA) documents human footprints. Accurate, timely, and detailed ISA datasets are therefore essential for global climate change and urban planning. However, due to the lack of sufficient training samples and operational mapping methods, global ISA mapping at 10-m resolution is still lacking. To this end, we proposed a global ISA mapping method leveraging multi-source geospatial data. Based on the existing satellite-derived ISA maps and the crowdsourcing OpenStreetMap (OSM), 58 million training samples were extracted via a series of temporal, spatial, spectral, and geometric rules. Combined with over 2.7 million Sentinel optical and radar images on the Google Earth Engine, we produced the 10 m global ISA dataset (GISA-10m). Based on the test samples that are independent to the training set, GISA-10m embraced an overall accuracy greater than 86%. In addition, the GISA-10m was comprehensively compared with the existing global ISA datasets, and the superiority of GISA-10m was demonstrated. </p>
Geospatial data and 3D representation of Maungataketake, Auckland, New Zealand
<p><em>Context</em></p> <p>Maungataketake (Ellett’s Mountain) was a volcanic cone on the shore of the Manukau Harbour, Mangere, New Zealand. In the second half of the twentieth century the mountain was quarried away. Maungataketake was a terraced Māori Pā, and archaeological excavations (only now in the process of being published) were undertaken there between 1972 and 1975, and in 1982, prior to its complete destruction. There is aerial imagery of the mountain available that depicts the mountain prior to quarrying. With these data a 3D model of the site was made using photogrammetry, which was also used to create a digital surface model (DSM) and contour map of the mountain. The resulting data is provided here and is aimed for further geospatial applications. In addition, the resolution of the provided DSM has analogues for the wider region and therefore could be incorporated to represent the landscape pre-destruction. Further to this a representation of the 3D model may be found on <a href="https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/maungataketake-9a58745853154b88ac9bde1a74025cc4">SketchFab</a>.</p> <p> </p> <p><em>Method</em></p> <p>The photogrammetry model was created in Agisoft Metashape version 1.5.4. Ten aerial images were used of Maungataketake and the surrounding area, captured on 19<sup>th</sup> August 1960. These images were downloaded from http://retrolens.co.nz and are licensed by LINZ CC-BY 3.0. The model was aligned and the spare point cloud filtered by gradual selection with the following parameters: projection error = 0.2; reconstruction uncertainty = 10; projection accuracy = 2.5. The dense cloud was processed with depth maps of ultra high quality and aggressive filtering. The resulting points cloud was edited to remove outlying points and processed into a 3D model.</p> <p>The resulting 3D model was manually edited to remove faces representing trees on Maungataketake only, but not the surrounding area. This was done as to obtain representative surface contours of the mountain. The model was georeferenced by the identification of points on the landscape present on the 1960 composite image and contemporary satellite imagery. A 0.5 m DSM and contours at 1 m resolution were calculated of Maungataketake.</p> <p> </p> <p><em>Contents of dataset</em></p> <ul> <li>A geodatabase with: <ul> <li>Control points used for georectification</li> <li>1 m contours without elevation of Maungataketake</li> <li>1 m contours with elevation of Maungataketake</li> <li>0.5 m composite aerial image</li> <li>0.5 m DSM of area covering control points</li> <li>0.5 m DSM of Maungataketake</li> </ul> </li> <li>Aerial photographs Crown_583-1924_22-26, Crown_583_1925_22-26</li> <li>Licence for aerial photographs from http://retrolens.co.nz</li> <li>Attributes of aerial photographs</li> </ul>
Processed Sentinel 1, Sentinel 2 and Copernicus Emergency Management Service data for fine tuning and predicting flood extent with IBM's granite-geospatial-uki-flood-detection model
<p>This dataset contains processed Sentinel 1 Sentinel 2 imagery together with flood event labels extracted from the Copernicus Emergency Management Service. It has been assembled to demonstrate fine tuning and inference of flood event segmentation using granite geospatial foundation models developed by IBM Research. Please see <a href="https://huggingface.co/ibm-granite/granite-geospatial-uki-flooddetection">https://huggingface.co/ibm-granite/granite-geospatial-uki-flooddetection</a> for more information on models and use.</p> <p>Sentinel-1</p> <p>The European Space Agency. 2014. Sentinel-1 Mission. <a href="https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/copernicus/sentinel-1">https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/missions/sentinel1</a>. Accessed: 2024-11-25.</p> <p>Sentinel-2</p> <p>The European Space Agency. 2015. Sentinel-2 Mission. <a href="https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/copernicus/sentinel-2">https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/missions/sentinel2</a>. Accessed: 2024-11-25.</p> <p>Copernicus Emergency Management Service</p> <p><a href="https://emergency.copernicus.eu/mapping/list-of-activations-rapid">https://emergency.copernicus.eu/mapping/list-of-activations-rapid</a>. Accessed: 2024-11-25. </p> <p><strong>Attribution</strong></p> <p>Contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data [2019-2024]</p> <p>Contains modified Copernicus Service information [2019-2023]</p>
Sample ERA5 Climate Reanalysis Data for UW Geospatial Data Analysis Course
<p>Used for Module 09: https://uwgda-jupyterbook.readthedocs.io/en/latest/modules/09_NDarrays_xarray_ERA5/</p> <p>Generated using Copernicus Climate Change Service information [2022]<br> Original license: https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/api/v2/terms/static/licence-to-use-copernicus-products.pdf</p>
Geospatial data used in "Estimation of river water surface elevation using UAV photogrammetry and machine learning"
<p>Geospatial data used in article "Estimation of river water surface elevation using UAV photogrammetry and machine learning" by Radosław Szostak, Marcin Pietroń, Przemysław Wachniew, Mirosław Zimnoch and Paweł Ćwiąkała (AGH UST).</p> <p>Each zip archive contains the following files:</p> <ul> <li>dsm.tif - raster of digital surface model,</li> <li>ortho.tif - raster of orthophoto,</li> <li>gnss_wse.json - geojson multipoint shape containing RTN GNSS measurements of water surface elevation,</li> <li>grid.json - geojson multipolygon shape containing square areas of samples used in deep learning solution.</li> <li>centerline.json - geojson multipoint shape containing values sampled from DSM along centerline,</li> <li>wateredge.json - geojson multipoint shape containing values sampled from DSM along "water-edge".</li> </ul> <p>Data in AMO18.zip archive was collected by Bandini et. al (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3519888).</p> <p>Preprocessed machine learning dataset and source codes are available in github repository at: https://github.com/radekszostak/river-wse-uav-ml</p>
Geospatial micro-estimates of slum populations in 129 Global South countries using machine learning and public data
<p><span>Reliable estimation of populations living in slums or slum-like conditions is crucial for urban planning, humanitarian resource allocation, and human well-being improvement. We generate the micro-estimate of slum population at a neighborhood level (~</span><span>3.63 arc-minutes</span><span>, preserving the privacy of vulnerable people) for 129 Global South countries in 2018. The estimates are built based on the Sustainable Development Goals 11.1 indicator framework and machine learning algorithms to heterogeneous data from household-based surveys and satellite images, as well as grided population data. Our integrated regional models show strong predictive capabilities for cluster-level slums proxy, explaining 82% to 96% of the variation in ground-truth surveys conducted in Global South countries, with root mean squared error ranging from 4.85% to 10.47%. The models perform match or surpass benchmarks established by previous studies.</span><span> </span><span>Cross-comparison with independent data sources at multi-scales suggest that our approach can yield reliable and consistent slum population estimates.</span></p>
Data from: Incorporating explicit geospatial data shows more species at risk of extinction than the current Red List
The IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List classifies species according to their risk of extinction, informing global to local conservation decisions. Unfortunately, important geospatial data do not explicitly or efficiently enter this process. Rapid growth in the availability of remotely sensed observations provides fine-scale data on elevation and increasingly sophisticated characterizations of land cover and its changes. These data readily show that species are likely not present within many areas within the overall envelopes of their distributions. Additionally, global databases on protected areas inform how extensively ranges are protected. We selected 586 endemic and threatened forest bird species from six of the world's most biodiverse and threatened places (Atlantic Forest of Brazil, Central America, Western Andes of Colombia, Madagascar, Sumatra, and Southeast Asia). The Red List deems 18% of these species to be threatened (15 critically endangered, 29 endangered, and 64 vulnerable). Inevitably, after refining ranges by elevation and forest cover, ranges shrink. Do they do so consistently? For example, refined ranges of critically endangered species might reduce by (say) 50% but so might the ranges of endangered, vulnerable, and nonthreatened species. Critically, this is not the case. We find that 43% of species fall below the range threshold where comparable species are deemed threatened. Some 210 bird species belong in a higher-threat category than the current Red List placement, including 189 species that are currently deemed nonthreatened. Incorporating readily available spatial data substantially increases the numbers of species that should be considered at risk and alters priority areas for conservation.
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.