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.
208
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
208 results for “invasive alien species”
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment, list of literature for Chapter 3
<p>This list of literature represents the literature reviewed for chapter 3 of IPBES thematic assessment of invasive alien species and their control. Please see respective data management report for more details.</p><p>For each data management report, please refer to below links:</p><p>3.2.1 Socio-cultural drivers and social values: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8031019">10.5281/zenodo.8031019</a></p><p>3.2.2.1 Regional and national changes in human population density: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8031519">10.5281/zenodo.8031519</a></p><p>3.2.2.2 Human migration: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8032105">10.5281/zenodo.8032105</a></p><p>3.2.2.3 International crises: armed conflict and humanitarian aid: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8032211">10.5281/zenodo.8032211</a></p><p>3.2.2.4 Urbanisation: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5553573">10.5281/zenodo.5553573</a></p><p>3.2.3.5 Externalities of negative impacts and cost: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8032327">10.5281/zenodo.8032327</a></p><p>3.2.4.1 Research: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5717444">10.5281/zenodo.5717444</a></p><p>3.2.4.2 Development of communication technology:<a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8035280">10.5281/zenodo.8035280</a></p><p>3.2.4.3 Breeding and genomic technologies: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5591058">10.5281/zenodo.5591058</a></p><p>3.2.5 Policies, governance, and institutions: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5717451">10.5281/zenodo.5717451</a></p><p>3.3.1.1 Introductions intentionally or accidentally from agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and aquaculture: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8035344">10.5281/zenodo.8035344</a></p><p>3.3.1.2 Fragmentation of ecosystems: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8035352">10.5281/zenodo.8035352</a></p><p>3.3.1.3 Creation of anthropogenic corridors: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5529361">10.5281/zenodo.5529361</a></p><p>3.3.1.5 Changes in landscape - seascape disturbance regimes (intensification and reduction): <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8036425">10.5281/zenodo.8036425</a></p><p>3.3.1.6 Landscape and seascape degradation: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5533042">10.5281/zenodo.5533042</a></p><p>3.3.2.3 Mining (minerals, metal, oil, fossils fuels): <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8036498">10.5281/zenodo.8036498</a></p><p>3.3.3.1 Eutrophication and nitrient deposition: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8036544">10.5281/zenodo.8036544</a></p><p>3.3.3.2 Other contaminants in water and soil: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5587987">10.5281/zenodo.5587987</a></p><p>3.3.3.3 Marine debris: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5588374">10.5281/zenodo.5588374</a></p><p>Box 3.8: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5588389">10.5281/zenodo.5588389</a></p><p>3.3.4.1 Temperature change: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8036828">10.5281/zenodo.8036828</a></p><p>3.3.4.2 Precipitation: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8036879">10.5281/zenodo.8036879</a></p><p>3.3.4.3 Climate extremes: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5533052">10.5281/zenodo.5533052</a></p><p>3.3.4.4 Carbon dioxide enrichment in air, water: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8037007">10.5281/zenodo.8037007</a></p><p>3.3.4.5 Fire regime changes: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5591070">10.5281/zenodo.5591070</a></p><p>3.3.4.6 sea level rise: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8037086">10.5281/zenodo.8037086</a></p><p>Box 3.9 Assisted colonisation: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5535113">10.5281/zenodo.5535113</a></p><p>3.3.5.1 Biotic facilitation: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5722695">10.5281/zenodo.5722695</a></p><p>3.3.5.2 Unintended consequences of management (including biological control): <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8037235">10.5281/zenodo.8037235</a></p><p>3.4.1 Natural hazards: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5533488">10.5281/zenodo.5533488</a></p><p>3.5.4 Urbanisation and Pollution: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5588440">10.5281/zenodo.5588440</a></p><p>Figure 3.34: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7861162">10.5281/zenodo.7861162</a></p><p> </p>
Belgian baseline distribution of invasive alien species of Union concern (Regulation (EU) 1143/2014)
<p><strong>Aims and scope</strong></p> <p>The European Alien Species Information Network team (EASIN, http://easin.jrc.ec.europa.eu) of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) requests the European member states to provide and verify the baseline distribution data of invasive alien species of Union Concern (Tsiamis et al. 2017) as provided by the EASIN mapping system (Katsanevakis et al. 2012). These are species with documented biodiversity impacts sensu the European Union Regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of Invasive Alien Species in Europe (IAS Regulation No 1143/2014) (European Union 2014). The purpose of this baseline is to set a representative geographic account of the distribution of these species at (i) country and (ii) 10km<sup>2</sup> grid level before the entry into force of the Regulation (and the listing of species through implementing regulations). This distribution provides the baseline for subsequent reporting by the member states as required by the IAS Regulation.</p> <p>The dataset provides a shapefile on the baseline distribution of the invasive species of EU concern in Belgium based on an aggregated dataset (<em>ias_belgium_t0_xxxx</em>). Data were compiled from various datasets holding invasive species observations such as data from research institutes and research projects (76%), citizen science observatories (23%) and a range of other sources (1%) such as governmental agencies, water managers, invasive species control companies, angling and hunting organizations etc. Data were normalized using a custom mapping of the original data files to Darwin Core (Wieczorek et al. 2012) where possible. Species names were mapped to the GBIF Backbone Taxonomy (GBIF 2016) using the species API (http://www.gbif.org/developer/species). Appropriate selection of records was performed based on predefined cut-off dates (see data range) and record content validation (see validation procedure). Data were then joined with GRID10k layer Belgium based on GRID10k cellcodes (ETRS_1989_LAEA).</p> <p><strong>File description</strong></p> <p>The dataset contains two types of data:</p> <ol> <li> <p>Shapefiles (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2016.zip, ias_belgium_t0_2018.zip, ias_belgium_t0_2020.zip and ias_belgium_t0_2023.zip</em>) providing the presence of the species of EU concern at 10km<sup>2</sup> (European Terrestrial Reference System projection - 1989 ETRS_1989_LAEA) level (resp. for 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th batch of species added to the Union List). The attributes table field “ACCEPTED” provides coded information on the distribution validation: correct squares (Y) represent data overlapping between the collated baseline data for Belgium and the EASIN maps. Incorrect data (N) can represent records mapped on wrong 10km2 squares, non-validated records or records that fall outside of the date range applied. New squares (New) represent previously unpublished data that were absent from EASIN. The work was supervised and validated by the Belgian national scientific council on invasive alien species, an official consultative structure coordinating scientific input and data aggregation between Belgian regions and institutions with regards to technical implementation of the Regulation No 1143/2014 on invasive alien species.</p> </li> <li> <p>A geojson version of the same shapefiles (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2016.geojson, ias_belgium_t0_2018.geojson, ias_belgium_t0_2020.geojson, ias_belgium_t0_2023.geojson</em>), in WGS84 projection.</p> </li> </ol> <p><strong>Date range</strong></p> <p>The baseline distribution reflects the current status and situation of the IAS of Union concern in Belgium at 10km<sup>2</sup> grid level. Historical records were not taken into consideration for the baseline. The choice of cut-off date was based on an analysis of the relative contribution of a year in defining the total distribution of the species at 1km<sup>2</sup> grid level (calculated as [the sum of unique UTM 1km<sup>2</sup> grid squares year-1/total number of unique UTM 1km<sup>2</sup> grid squares for that species]) based on the complete dataset. </p> <p>The dataset comprises observations of Union List invasive species <strong>from 2000 <em>until the entry into force </em>for every species</strong>, hence between January 2000 (2000-01-01) and February 2016 (2016-01-31) for the species of the first batch (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2016.zip</em>), between January 2000 (2000-01-01) and August 2017 (2017-08-31) for the species of the first update of the Union List (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2018.zip</em>), between January 2000 (2000-01-01) and August 2019 (2019-08-31) for the species of the second update of the Union List (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2020.zip</em>), between January 2000 (2000-01-01) and August 2022 (2022-08-2) for the species of the third update (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2023.zip</em>). For raccoon dog (<em>Nyctereutes procyonoides), </em>included in the second update (<em>ias_belgium_t0_2020.zip</em>) the date cut-off is 01/01/2000 to 31/01/2019. Note that <em>Pistia stratiotes</em>, <em>Xenopus laevis </em>and <em>Fundulus heteroclitus </em>enter into force only as from 2 August 2024, <em>Celastrus orbiculatus </em>on 2 August 2027 because of prolonged transitionary measures. However, these species are already included in the baseline now with a cut-off date set on August 2022. The data include both casual records as well as established populations and also comprise data from eradicated populations for the period 2000-2022.</p> <p><strong>Validation procedure</strong></p> <p>Record validation was performed to exclude dubious records, wrong identifications etc. This was done based on the IdentificationVerificationStatus field (to which validation information from original data were mapped) if available. In general, non-validated data were not considered for ias_belgium_t0_xxxx. Data were validated in the original datasets based on evidence (e.g. pictures), on the observer’s experience, or based on a set of predefined rules (e.g. automated validation based on geographic filtering). Data from research institutes were generally considered validated. A few casual records of EU list species that were clearly planted were discarded manually. When the original dataset did not mention any validation status, records were not considered validated and therefore not taken into account for ias_belgium_t0_xxxx, unless for Chinese mitten crab <em>Eriocheir sinensis</em>, ruddy duck <em>Oxyura jamaicensis</em>, raccoon <em>Procyon lotor</em>, Siberian ground squirrel <em>Tamias sibiricus</em>, sacred ibis <em>Threskiornis aethiopicus</em>, and red-eared slider <em>Trachemys spp</em>. For these species, we assumed all records were correct as they originate from dedicated sampling (<em>E. sinensis</em>) within research projects or represent species that are readily recognizable by people in the field. Likewise, for the second batch species, all records of Egyptian goose <em>Alopochen aegyptiaca, </em>Himalayan balsam <em>Impatiens glandulifera</em>, giant hogweed <em>Heracleum mantegazzianum </em>and muskrat <em>Ondatra zibethicus</em> (mostly derived from public eradication services) were considered validated and taken into account. For the third batch species, records of the widespread tree of heaven <em>Ailanthus altissima </em>and pumpkinseed <em>Lepomis gibbosus </em>were also considered validated. For species with less than 10 records (<em>Salvinia molesta</em>, <em>Acridotheres tristis</em>), every record was manually checked.</p> <p>A visual check was performed on the resulting distribution maps by representatives of the Belgian scientific council on IAS and the Belgian Comittee on IAS, two official bodies created in response to the EU Regulation within the framework of a cooperation agreement between the Belgian regions and the Federal Authority. Data in the distribution maps provided by EASIN but not present in ias_belgium_t0_xxxx were carefully checked and kept/rejected accordingly.</p> <p><strong>Data providers</strong></p> <p>The providers of the invasive species data for this exercise (individuals and their respective organizations) are listed in the "data providers" section of the dataset metadata. Much of the primary occurrence data that formed the basis for this aggregated dataset will be published as open data on the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) within the framework of the <strong>Tracking Invasive Alien Species project (TrIAS, https://osf.io/7dpgr/, 2017-2020)</strong>.</p>
Distribution of invasive alien species of Union concern (Regulation (EU) 1143/2014) in Belgium for the reporting period 2015-2018
<p><strong>Aims and scope</strong></p> <p>Member State authorities are required to report on the distribution in their territory of each of the invasive alien species (IAS) of Union concern. These are species with documented biodiversity impacts sensu the European Union Regulation on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of Invasive Alien Species in Europe (IAS Regulation No 1143/2014) (European Union 2014). This distribution represents the official reporting under Article 24(1) of R.1143/2014 on invasive alien species for the period 2015–2018. Baseline distribution of these species has previously been reported and published (Adriaens et al. 2018, ).</p> <p>Data were compiled from various datasets holding invasive species observations such as data from research institutes and research projects (9%), citizen science observatories (68%) and a range of other sources (23%) such as governmental agencies, water managers etc. More specifically the dataset includes:</p> <ul> <li>The citizen science recording portals www.waarnemingen.be and www.observation.be which has a specific alert system for IAS where nature volunteers can report their observations (Adriaens et al. 2018);</li> <li>Data from the Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO), the Flemish government institute that coordinates N2000, WFD and BIrd Directive and IAS monitoring in the terrestrial, estuarine and freshwater environment;</li> <li>Data from the Flemish Environment Agency which performs management of muskrat and invasive water plants in Flanders, gathered with a dedicated smartphone app since 2015;</li> <li>Data from the Flemish provinces and Rato vzw that manage water plants, muskrat, giant hogweed etc.;</li> <li>Some smaller datasets from cities;</li> <li>Data from the Brussels Capital Region from the Brussels Environment data portal;</li> <li>Plant inventories of the ‘contrats de rivière’ along watercourses in Wallonia, making use of a dedicated application to collect data directly from the field (fulcrum);</li> <li>The government reporting portals for IAS of the ‘Observatoire wallon de la flore, de la faune et des habitats (Service Public de Wallonie)’;</li> <li>Some validated data from specific datasets on gbif (iNaturalist, Natusfera, Naturgucker).</li> </ul> <p>Data were normalized using a custom mapping of the original data files to Darwin Core (Wieczorek et al. 2012) where possible. Species names were mapped to the GBIF Backbone Taxonomy (GBIF 2016) using the species API (http://www.gbif.org/developer/species). The mapping was assisted by dedicated software (SMARTIE) which was specifically written for the purpose of aggregating IAS data from various sources. Appropriate selection of records was performed based on the cut-off dates (see data range) and record content validation (see validation procedure). Data were then joined with GRID10k layer Belgium based on GRID10k cellcodes (ETRS_1989_LAEA). The technical format is in line with the <a href="http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/help/ias_regulation/material/IAS-species-distribution-user-manual">guidelines</a> provided to the member states for the compilation of reports on Species Distribution (SD) of Invasive Alien Species of Union concern.</p> <p><strong>File description</strong></p> <p>The dataset contains a shapefiles (<em>T1_Belgium_Union_List_Species.shp</em>) with the distribution of the species of Union Concern at 10km<sup>2</sup> (European Terrestrial Reference System projection - 1989 ETRS_1989_LAEA) level. The attributes table contains <em>Cellcode </em>(ETRS<sup> </sup>grid cell code) and <em>Species </em>(scientific name + authority).</p> <p><strong>Date range</strong></p> <p>The data reflects the distribution of the IAS of Union concern in Belgium in the first reporting period for the EU Regulation hence comprises observations of Union List invasive species between January 2015 (2015-01-01) and December 2018 (2018-12-31). </p> <p><strong>Validation procedure</strong></p> <p>Record validation was performed to exclude dubious records, wrong identifications etc. This was done based on the IdentificationVerificationStatus field (to which validation information from original data were mapped) if available. In general, non-validated data were not considered. Data were validated in the original datasets based on evidence (e.g. pictures), on the observer’s experience, or based on a set of predefined rules (e.g. automated validation based on geographic filtering). Data from research institutes were generally considered validated. A few casual records of EU list species that were clearly planted were discarded manually. When the original dataset did not mention any validation status, records were not considered validated and therefore not taken into account unless for Chinese mitten crab <em>Eriocheir sinensis</em>, ruddy duck <em>Oxyura jamaicensis</em>, raccoon <em>Procyon lotor</em>, Siberian ground squirrel <em>Tamias sibiricus</em>, sacred ibis <em>Threskiornis aethiopicus</em>, Egyptian goose <em>Alopochen aegyptiaca, </em>Himalayan balsam <em>Impatiens glandulifera</em>, giant hogweed <em>Heracleum mantegazzianum, </em>muskrat <em>Ondatra zibethicus </em>and red-eared slider <em>Trachemys spp</em>. For these species, it was assumed all records were correct as they originate from dedicated sampling (<em>E. sinensis</em>) within research projects, were gathered by public bodies (e.g. muskrat), or represent species that are readily recognizable by people in the field. Data provided by EASIN in the care package and GBIF data were carefully checked.</p> <p>A visual check was performed on the resulting distribution maps by representatives of the Belgian national scientific council on invasive alien species, an official consultative structure coordinating scientific input and data aggregation between Belgian regions and institutions with regards to technical implementation of the Regulation No 1143/2014 on invasive alien species.</p> <p><strong>Data providers</strong></p> <p>The providers of the invasive species data for this exercise (individuals and their respective organizations) are listed in the "data providers" section of the dataset metadata. Much of the primary occurrence data that formed the basis for this aggregated dataset will be published as open data on the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF).</p>
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment: Summary for Policymakers. Figures, tables and captions
<p>Figures, tables and their captions from the Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.</p>
A list of taxa currently and historically regulated under South Africa's National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, Alien & Invasive Species Regulations
<p>This information is lists of alien species regulated in South Africa under the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act in an accessible form.</p> <p>The first worksheet is essentially metadata.</p> <p>The second worksheet is intended to be a link between any taxa listed or proposed for listing and various taxonomic backbones.</p> <p>The third worksheet is intended to provide a list of taxonomically verified names linked to the current lists.</p> <p>The other worksheets link to particular versions of the regulations (including version sent for public comment that were never published), the intention is for this to be an exact copy (including formatting), please report any inconsistencies between this and the published version to john.wilson2@gmail.com, but before doing so please double-check that what is presented here, is not how it is presented in the lists themselves.</p> <p>The data were extracted by John Wilson at various dates from pdfs in the government gazette, contact john.wilson2@gmail.com</p> <p>For further details please see: Wilson JRU, Kumschick S (2024). The regulation of alien species in South Africa. South African Journal of Science. vol. 120, issue 5/6, Art. #17002. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2024/17002 </p> <p>If only the database is to be cited, cite as Wilson, J. R. (2025) A list of taxa currently and historically regulated under South Africa's National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, Alien & Invasive Species Regulations. v1.1(20250325) doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15082537 (NOTE CHECK FOR LATEST VERSION )</p> <p>For a full description of metadata see: the latest species list available at iasreport.sanbi.org.za/ or http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8217211</p>
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment: Summary for Policymakers. Figures, tables and captions in Arabic
<p>Arabic translations of the figures, tables and their captions from the Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.</p>
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment: Summary for Policymakers. Figures, tables and captions in Chinese
<p>Chinese translations of the figures, tables and their captions from the Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.</p>
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment: Summary for Policymakers. Figures, tables and captions in French
<p>French translations of the figures, tables and their captions from the Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.</p>
IPBES Invasive Alien Species Assessment: Summary for Policymakers. Figures, tables and captions in Russian
<p>Russian translations of the figures, tables and their captions from the Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.</p>
Figure 3 in Mowing inhibits the invasion of the alien species Solidago altissima and is an effective management strategy
Figure 3. (a) Aboveground biomass of S. altissima in September 2019. (b) Biomass of rhizomes of S. altissima in September 2019. Mowing 1: mowed once in July; Mowing 2: mowed twice in May and September; Mowing 3: mowed three times in May, July, and September. Data are presented as means ± standard errors of 14 replicates. Bars with different letters are significantly different at p <0.05 (ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's test).
Figure 4 in Mowing inhibits the invasion of the alien species Solidago altissima and is an effective management strategy
Figure 4. Effects of control practices on flowering rates of S. altissima in October 2019. Mowing 1: mowed once in July; Mowing 2: mowed twice in May and September; Mowing 3: mowed three times in May, July, and September. Data are presented as means ± standard errors of 14 replicates. Bars with different letters are significantly different at p <0.05 (ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's test).
Figure 1 in Novel tools and best practices for education about invasive alien species
Figure 1. On the right: Franz Josef Glacier School student recording a European alder (Alnus glutinosa) sapling using the iNat app, New Zealand (Photo: Murray Dawson). On the left: High school students measuring tree diameter in an urban park, Portugal (Photo: Hélia Marchante) and the excavation of Bohemian knotweed (Fallopia bohemica) during a KORINA science camp, Germany (Photo: Katrin Schneider).
Figure 1 in Mowing inhibits the invasion of the alien species Solidago altissima and is an effective management strategy
Figure 1. (a) Coverage of S. altissima and (b) the average number of species per quadrat in the S. altissima-dominant areas or uninvaded areas. Data are presented as means ± standard errors of 14 replicates. Bars with different letters are significantly different at p <0.05 (Student's t-test).
Figure 2 in Mowing inhibits the invasion of the alien species Solidago altissima and is an effective management strategy
Figure 2. Number of shoots of S. altissima in March 2018 and April 2019. Mowing 1: mowed once in July; Mowing 2: mowed twice in May and September; Mowing 3: mowed three times in May, July, and September; Eco 200: 30% of shoots in the quadrats were cut near the ground, and the cut surfaces were covered with Eco 200 block. Data are presented as means ± standard errors of 14 replicates. Bars with different letters are significantly different at p <0.05 (ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's test).
Figure 3 in The effectiveness of hot water pressurized spray in field conditions to slow the spread of invasive alien species
Figure 3. (A) Average maximum temperature, (B) Average thermal exposure (area under the curve), of hot water spray applied to Dreissena polymorpha, Dikerogammarus villosus and Crassula helmsii from three distances (10, 20, 30 cm) and for three durations (5, 10, 15 seconds). Error bars show standard error (n = 36).
Figure 2 in The effectiveness of hot water pressurized spray in field conditions to slow the spread of invasive alien species
Figure 2. Average temperature of hot water spray treatment applied to Dreissena polymorpha, Dikerogammarus villosus and Crassula helmsii from three distances (10, 20, 30 cm) and for three durations (5, 10, 15 seconds) and control cold water treatment (from 10 cm for 15 seconds). Grey shading shows standard error of average (n = 36).
Figure 1 in The effectiveness of hot water pressurized spray in field conditions to slow the spread of invasive alien species
Figure 1. Photographs of four invasive alien species utilised in hot water spray effectiveness experiments; a. Dikerogammarus villosus, b. Dreissena polymorpha, c. Crassula helmsii, d. Hydrocotyle ranunculoides. Photographs by Chris Pollock (a, b, c) and Stephanie Bradbeer (d).
Figure 4 in The effectiveness of hot water pressurized spray in field conditions to slow the spread of invasive alien species
Figure 4. (A) Average maximum temperature, (B) Average thermal exposure (area under the curve), of hot water spray applied to Crassula helmsii from two distances (10 and 30 cm) for three durations (30, 60, 90 seconds). Error bars show standard error (n = 12), * show statistical significance and letters show treatments statistically the same to another.
Fig. 7 in Reciprocal Predation Between Preserved And Invasive Species: Adult Bombina Bombina Predate Young Whitebaits Of Alien Fish Perccottus Glenii
Fig. 7. Dynamics of relative predation (% from existed number of live whitebaits) for all model populations of B. bombina.
Fig. 1 in Reciprocal Predation Between Preserved And Invasive Species: Adult Bombina Bombina Predate Young Whitebaits Of Alien Fish Perccottus Glenii
Fig. 1. Overlapping areas of B. bombina and P. glenii distribution in Latvia (Pupina et al. In press).
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.