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.
33
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
33 results for “hedgerows”
Terrestrial laser scanning - RIEGL VZ-1000, individual tree point clouds and cylinder models, Belgian hedgerows and tree rows
<p>Terrestrial laser scans were acquired for 69 trees (<em>Quercus robur</em>: 39 trees; <em>Alnus glutinosa</em>: 19 trees; <em>Betula pendula: </em>11 trees) in hedgerows and tree rows in agricultural lands in Flanders, Belgium. We used a RIEGL VZ-1000 terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL Laser Measurement Systems GmbH, Austria) with a beam divergence of 0.35 mrad operating in the infrared (wavelength 1550 nm) with a range up to 1000 m. We scanned leaf-off and all recorded variables are valid for overbark measurements. Individual trees were manually extracted from the co-registered point cloud in RiSCAN PRO software (provided by RIEGL). To the extracted trees, quantitative structure models (QSM) were fitted. We used the QSMs to derive branch length (m), total wood volume (m³) and merchantable wood volume (m³, using only cylinders with diameter > 7 cm). From the point clouds, we extracted the tree structural features such as crown projection (m²), maximum crown diameter (m) and tree height (m). Biomass expansion factors (BEF) were calculated by dividing total tree volume to merchantable tree volume. We expressed the age dependency of the BEF values via non-linear regression models. See Van Den Berge et al. (2021) for further information (DOI: 10.1007/s12155-021-10250-y).</p>
Carbon storage in old hedgerows: The importance of below-ground biomass
<p>Dataset to the manuscript: Drexler, S., Thiessen, E., & Don, A. (2023). Carbon storage in old hedgerows: The importance of below-ground biomass. GCB Bioenergy. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.13112</p><ul><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-cn_biomass: contains the data on the biomass C/N measurements</li><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-overallstocks: contains the calculated carbon stocks per subplot for all carbon pools</li><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-soc_cropland: contains the calculated soil organic carbon stocks (0-100cm soil depth) of the reference cropland</li><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-soc_weight_fine_roots: contains the raw data on the dry weight of the fine roots and the raw data on the soil samples (C/N data, dry weight, stone/root fraction) per subplot and sampling depth</li><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-weight_above_ground_biomass: contains the raw data on the dry weight of the harvestable biomass and biomass of the mature trees per subplot</li><li>Drexler_et_al_2023-weight_coarse_roots_litter: contains the raw data on the dry weight of the coarse roots, litter and stumps per subplot</li></ul>
Data from: Winter game crop plots for gamebirds retain hedgerow breeding songbirds in an improved grassland landscape
<p>The cause of recent population declines in some farmland / hedgerow breeding bird species in the UK is related to a lack of cover and food resources in winter. In improved grassland areas some of those declines have been particularly acute and some have been shown to be related to the availability of grass and weed seed in winter. The provision of seed-bearing crops as part of AES options has been shown to benefit some of these birds. Game crop plots sown on shooting estates for holding and driving gamebirds in autumn and winter have been shown to hold relatively high densities of farmland and wood-edge birds during the winter.</p> <p>We studied breeding songbirds in hedges in a primarily improved grassland area in the SW of England where there are some large shooting estates that sow relatively large game crop plots (1 - 5 ha) in the landscape. In this study we found that otherwise similar hedges in terms of size and density near to those winter game crop plots, had between 1.5 and 2 times as many breeding resident songbirds per unit length the following spring compared to hedges further away from game crop plots. This was despite game management in these plots being wound down during February and in many cases, the crops themselves being removed by mid-March. Hedges within approximately 350m from game crop plots had more breeding birds. We discuss possible mechanisms and suggest that some passerines preferentially establish breeding territories in hedges near to game crops in late winter. We suggest how to distribute game crop plots to maximise any benefit in an improved grassland landscape.</p>
Carbon sequestration potential in hedgerow soils: Results from 23 sites in Germany
<p>Dataset to the manuscript: Drexler, S. & Don, A. (2024). Carbon sequestration potential in hedgerow soils: Results from 23 sites in Germany. Geoderma. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116878">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116878</a></p> <ul> <li>Drexler_Don_2024_Data: contains the lab data for all samples</li> <li>Drexler_Don_2024_SOC_Stock_Per_Core: contains the calculated SOC stocks per soil core</li> </ul>
Not only hedgerows, but also flower fields can enhance bat activity in intensively used agricultural landscapes
<p>Agri-environment schemes (AES) have become important tools for farmland biodiversity conservation, providing suitable habitats, resources, and connectivity within agricultural landscapes. Bats are rarely studied in relation to AES effectiveness in contrast to birds, even though their presence and activity as biological control agents on insects, especially pest species, can be important for agricultural crops. While the role of hedgerows for bat occurrence and activity, as well as for their prey's diversity and abundance has been widely studied, the role of other AESs such as flower fields remains unclear. We monitored the activity of the main functional groups (edge, narrow and open space foragers) using ultrasound recorders, as well as potential prey abundances using light traps, across 35 study sites representing different AES in Central Germany from late July to September 2018. The sampled AES consisted of annual flower fields, mixed flower fields (with annual and biennial vegetation), perennial flower fields (sown every 5 years), hedgerows (surrounded by meadows and agricultural fields), and were compared to winter wheat (control) in a balanced design. Bat activity over hedgerows increased threefold for edge space foragers and sevenfold for narrow space foragers compared to wheat fields. Compared to wheat fields, narrow space forager activity increased fourfold over perennial flower fields, threefold over annual and twofold over mixed flower fields. This group's activity over hedgerows also increased almost threefold compared to mixed flower fields. However, the number of feeding buzzes and prey abundance did not differ significantly between AES. We detected foraging group-specific differences in bat activity between the studied AES. Thus, to promote bats in agricultural landscapes and to ensure their biological control services, it is important to establish more AES, such as hedgerows and flower fields, to increase their diversity and connectivity in intensively used agricultural landscapes.</p>
Data from: Winter game crop plots for gamebirds retain hedgerow breeding songbirds in an improved grassland landscape
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Not only hedgerows, but also flower fields can enhance bat activity in intensively used agricultural landscapes
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Organic farming and seminatural habitats for multifunctional agriculture: a case study in hedgerow landscapes of Brittany
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Woodland, cropland and hedgerows promote pollinator abundance in intensive grassland landscapes, with saturating benefits of flower cover
<p>To enable reproduction of analyses in the linked journal article, we provide a table of habitats, woody linear features and elevation of all pollinator survey transect sections. This table can be linked to the publicly available data, based on square ID and section ID, to reproduce the analyses (except for one discontinued square with ID marked 'NA' in the publicly available data).</p> <p>Journal article abstract:</p> <p>1. Pollinating insects provide economic value by improving crop yield. They are also functionally and culturally important across ecosystems outside of cropland. To understand landscape-level drivers of pollinator declines, and guide policy and intervention to reverse declines, studies must cover (1) multiple insect and plant taxa and (2) a range of agricultural and semi-natural land uses. Furthermore, in an era of woodland restoration initiatives and rewilding ideologies, the contribution of woodland and woody linear features (WLFs; e.g. hedgerows) to pollinator abundance demands further investigation. 2. We demonstrate fine-scale analysis of high-quality, co-located measurements from a national environmental survey. We relate pollinator transect counts to ground-truth habitat and WLF maps across 300 1km squares in Wales, UK. We look at effects of habitat type, flower cover, WLF density and habitat diversity on summer abundance (July and August) of eight insect groups, representing three insect orders (Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and Diptera). 3. Compared with improved grassland (the dominant habitat in Wales), pollinator abundance is consistently higher in cropland and woodland - especially broadleaved woodland. For solitary bees and two hoverfly groups, abundance is predicted to be at least 1.5× higher in woodland ecosystems than elsewhere. Furthermore, we estimate contributions of WLFs to abundance in agriculturally improved habitats to be up to 14% for honeybees and up to 21% for hoverflies. 4. The abundance of all insect groups increases with flower cover, which is a key mechanism through which woodland, cropland and grassland support pollinators. Importantly, we observe diminishing returns of increasing flower cover for abundance of non-Apis pollinator groups, expecting roughly twice the increase in abundance per % flower cover from 0-5%, as compared with 10-15%. However, the shape of the relationship was inverted for honeybees, which showed steeper increases in abundance at higher flower cover. 5. Synthesis & applications: We provide a holistic view of the drivers of pollinator abundance in Wales, in which flower cover, woodland, WLFs and cropland are critical. We propose a key role for woodland creation, hedge-laying and farmland heterogeneity within future land management incentive schemes. Finally, we suggest targeting of interventions to maximise benefits for non-Apis pollinators. Specifically, increasing floral provision in areas where existing flower cover is low – e.g. in flower-poor improved grasslands - could effectively increase pollinator abundance and diversity, while prioritising wild over managed species.</p>
Data from: Ecosystem multifunctionality is promoted by organic farming and hedgerows at the local scale but not at the landscape scale
<p><span>This dataset gathers information used for the paper Couthouis et al. "Ecosystem multifunctionality is promoted by organic farming and hedgerows at the local scale but not at the landscape scale", part of the BIOMHE project (2019-2022) funded by the Fondation de France. It contains data about (i) species richness and abundances used for calculating ecological performance, (ii) crop yield used for calculating agronomic performance, (iii) labour and semi-net margin used for calculating socio-economic performance. Combined, these information allows for the calculation of ecosystem multifunctionaliy indices.</span></p>
Data for: Hedgerows have contrasting effects on pollinators and natural enemies and limited spillover effects on apple production
<p>Agricultural intensification has resulted in a decline in insect biodiversity and threatens the provision of valuable ecosystem services. Agri-environment schemes (AESs) have been implemented in an effort to conserve biodiversity on farmland and increase agricultural sustainability, but their effectiveness can vary widely. To better determine which factors influence AES effectiveness, the relative roles of local habitat features, habitat quality, and landscape context need to be further explored. The aim of this study was to determine the most important factors influencing field margin AES effectiveness in commercial apple orchards, in terms of arthropod biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision. We surveyed wild bees and aphid natural enemies in field margins and apple trees in 20 orchards, ten bordered by hedgerow field margins (an AES) and ten with herbaceous field margins (no hedgerows present, not an AES). We considered field margin floral resources and the cover of semi-natural habitat in the surrounding landscape as indicators of local habitat quality and landscape context, respectively. We furthermore quantified pollination and pest control as measures of ecosystem service delivery and the relationship between arthropod communities and apple yield (initial and final fruit set) and quality. We found that hedgerow presence strongly predicted both pollinator and natural enemy communities and that these relationships were more pronounced than those with local habitat quality and landscape context. Hedgerows were negatively related to wild bee richness and abundance within the orchard, and positively related to natural enemy richness and abundance at the field margin but not within the orchard. We found no relationships between local and landscape factors and ecosystem service delivery, and no relationship between wild bee communities and apple yield, suggesting that apple is not pollen limited in our study system. There was, however, a negative relationship between natural enemy richness and initial fruit set. We conclude that annually cut hedgerows can benefit the conservation of natural enemies, but have limited arthropod-mediated private benefits for apple production, and likely need to be supplemented with additional local habitat resources for the conservation of wild bees. Our findings indicate that local habitat factors can strongly influence biodiversity regardless of landscape context, but that AESs likely need to be designed with separate biodiversity and ecosystem service targets, and specific taxonomic groups, in mind.</p>
Managing hedgerows for biodiversity: Disentangling the effects of trimming, structure and connectivity on the use of linear features by bats
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Ecosystem multifunctionality is promoted by organic farming and hedgerows at the local scale but not at the landscape scale
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Woodland, cropland and hedgerows promote pollinator abundance in intensive grassland landscapes, with saturating benefits of flower cover
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data for: Hedgerows have contrasting effects on pollinators and natural enemies and limited spillover effects on apple production
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Landscape greening and local creation of wildflower strips and hedgerows promote multiple ecosystem services
1. The explicit and implicit aims of creating ecological focus areas (EFAs) and implementing greening measures in European agro-ecosystems include the promotion of regulatory ecosystem services (ES) to sustain crop production in conventional cropping systems. However, the extent to which these goals are achieved with current policy measures remains poorly explored. 2. We measured insect-mediated pollination and natural pest control service provisioning in 18 winter oilseed rape fields as a function of the independent and interactive effects of local EFA establishment ─ sown wildflower strips and hedgerows ─ and landscape-scale greening measures within a 1 km radius around focal fields and quantified their contribution to crop yield. 3. Insect pollination potential and pest predation increased on average by 10 and 13%, respectively, when landscape-scale greening measures share was increased from 6 to 26%. For pollination, the increase was stronger in fields adjoining an EFA (14%) than in fields without adjacent EFA (7%). 4. Agricultural management practices were the main drivers of crop yield. Neither insect pollination potential or natural pest control (pest predation & parasitism) nor adjacent EFAs and landscape-scale greening significantly affected crop yield in addition to agricultural management. 5. Synthesis and applications. Local establishment of perennial, species–rich wildflower strips and hedgerows, combined with landscape-scale greening measures in agricultural landscapes, can promote multiple ecosystem services (ES) in conventional production systems. Benefits may be maximized when local and landscape measures are combined. However, enhanced pollination and natural pest regulation seem to contribute relatively little to final crop yield compared to local agricultural management practices in the high-input conventional production system studied. Further research is needed to better understand how to improve the effectiveness of ecological focus areas and other greening measures in promoting regulatory ES. Potential improvements include minimising trade-offs while promoting synergies between ES provision, food production and biodiversity conservation.
Plant and pollinator interactions from British Columbia from Oak Savannah, Shrub-Steppe, and restored hedgerows
<p>This dataset contains the data analyzed in "Guzman, L.M., Chamberlain, S. and Elle, E. (2021) Network robustness and structure depends on the phenological characteristics of plants and pollinators. Ecology and Evolution"</p> <p>The data comprises plant-pollinator interactions collected in three ecosystems (Oak Savannah, Shrub-Steppe and restored hedgerows) from British Columbia. <b>These</b> three vegetation types comprised three different studies. The average distance between sites within studies was 19km, 18km and 29km for the oak savannah, shrub-steppe and hedgerows respectively. For simplicity we use "pollinator" throughout this paper to refer to insects and hummingbirds observed visiting flowers and contacting reproductive organs, although their effectiveness at transfer of pollen has not been assessed. The networks were comprised largely of bees, with wasps and hoverflies also common. Less common were butterflies and beetles. The plants were largely forbs with some shrubs; insect-pollinated trees were not sampled for largely logistical reasons of tree height but tended to be uncommon in these ecosystems.</p>
Figure 8 in Breeding ecology of Eurasian bullfinches Pyrrhula pyrrhula in an Iberian hedgerow habitat
Figure 8. Temporal variation in the sighting rate of dependent young Iberian bullfinches outside the nest in NW Spain. Records of dependent young include records of adults feeding young. Each record refers to one or several young individuals together, linked to one or two (pair) adult individuals which were definitely or very likely their parents. Number of field trips each month: 49 in June, 54 in July, 52 in August, 39 in September, 26 in October. Pooled data for 2001–2006.
Figure 5 in Breeding ecology of Eurasian bullfinches Pyrrhula pyrrhula in an Iberian hedgerow habitat
Figure 5. Spring-summer relative abundance of proven and potential predators of Iberian bullfinches in NW Spain, for a 78 ha plot. Pooled data for 2001–2006. Spring: March to May. Summer: June to August. Sighting rate was estimated as the average number of individuals seen per field trip (summation of individuals/number of field trips) multiplied by 10. n: number of field trips.
Figure 3 in Breeding ecology of Eurasian bullfinches Pyrrhula pyrrhula in an Iberian hedgerow habitat
Figure 3. Monthly distribution of clutch size in Iberian bullfinches in NW Spain. The month refers to when the clutch was completed. n: total number of complete clutches per month. Monthly mean clutch size ± SD. Pooled data for 2001–2005.
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.