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.
29
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
29 results for “trampling”
Figure 3 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
Figure 3 The taxon richness, Shannon index, Simpson index, and Evenness index (mean ± SD) of soil Acari at different treatment sites at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013. OE = open places under enclosure, OT = open places under trampling; EE = E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under enclosure, ET =E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under trampling, TE =T. aphylla canopy habitat under enclosure, TT =T. aphylla canopy habitat under trampling, CE =C. sempervirens canopy habitat under enclosure, CT =C. sempervirens canopy habitat under trampling. Different letters represent significance at p<0.05.
Figure 2 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
Figure 2 The abundance (individuals per 10 g dry soil substrate; mean ± SD) of soil microarthropod taxa extracted from core samples at different treatment sites at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013. OE = open places under enclosure, OT = open places under trampling; EE =E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under enclosure, ET =E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under trampling, TE = T. aphylla canopy habitat under enclosure, TT =T. aphylla canopy habitat under trampling, CE = C. sempervirens canopy habitat under enclosure, CT =C. sempervirens canopy habitat under trampling. Different letters within the same group represent significance at p<0.05.
Figure 1 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
Figure 1 Location of study sites at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel. OE = open places under enclosure, OT = open places under trampling; EE =E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under enclosure, ET = E. camaldulensis canopy habitat under trampling, TE =T. aphylla canopy habitat under enclosure, TT = T. aphylla canopy habitat under trampling, CE =C. sempervirens canopy habitat under enclosure, CT = C. sempervirens canopy habitat under trampling.
Fig. 2 in Preliminary assessment of trampling effects on soil-dwelling insects in coastal dunes of El Saladar, southeastern Spain.
Fig. 2.- Soil and vegetation conditions at El Saladar dunes (Alicante, Spain). a.- Yellow dune (YD) crossed by pedestrian path (YDt). b.- Grey dune (GD) crossed by pedestrian path (GDt). Fig. 2.- Condiciones de suelo y vegetación en las dunas de El Saladar (Alicante, España). a.- Duna móvil (YD) cruzada por un camino peatonal (YDt). b.- Duna fija (GD) cruzada por un camino peatonal (GDt).
FIGURE 10. 1 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 10. 1, Trackway Gl6; 2, Close up of the Gl6-Pd interference; 3, Interpretative drawing of Gl6-Pd interference; 4, Orthophoto of trackway Gl6; 5, Shaded grey photogrammetric model of the interference. White arrows and letters a, b and c indicate interruption (a), displacement (b) of the tail trace, and trackway Gl6 last set (c). Scale bar is 5 cm.
FIGURE 9. 1 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 9. 1, Drawing of different parts making up the slab; 2, 3D photogrammetric false coloured model; 3, 3D photogrammetric shaded grey model. Scale bar is 0,5 m.
FIGURE 8 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 8. Slab MPUR NS 34/28. 1, Interference between trackways Gl4 and Pd indicating the relative antecedence of Gl4 trackmaker; 2, Trackway Pd, sets 2 and 3 interfering with Gl2, Gl4, Gl5 and Jb trackways. Scale bar is 5 cm.
FIGURE 7 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 7. Slab MPUR NS 34/28. 1, Swimming traces (indicated by black and white arrows) belonging to trackway Gl1; 2-3, Close-up of the best Gl1 tracks. Scale bar is 5 cm (1) and 1 cm (2-3).
FIGURE 4. 1 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 4. 1, Ganasauripus ladinus; 2, Pachypes dolomiticus manus; 3-4, Pachypes dolomiticus pedes. Scale bar is 1 cm (1) and 5 cm (2-4). Roman numerals refer to digits.
FIGURE 5. Event timeline. 1 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 5. Event timeline. 1, Ripple marks and Gl1 tracks formation; 2, Gl2 and Gl3 tracks formation; 3; Gl4 trackway formation; 4, Jb trackway formation; 5, Gl5 and Ct1 trackways formation; 6, Ct2 trackway formation; 7, Gl6 and Gl7 trackways formation; 8, Pd trackway formation; 9, Final interpretative drawing of the slab MPUR NS 34/28; 10, Trackmakers advancement directions. rip, ripple marks; Pd, Pachypes dolomiticus trackway; Ct1-Ct2, Chelichnus tazelwürmi trackways; Gl1-Gl7, Ganasauripus ladinus trackways; Jb, Janusichnus bifrons trackway; dcr,? desiccation cracks. Scale bar is 50 cm.
FIGURE 6 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 6. Slab MPUR NS 34/28. 1, Ripple marks counterprints; 2, Interference between ripple marks counterprints and Gl7 trackway. Scale bar is 5 cm.
FIGURE 3. 1-2 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 3. 1-2, Chelichnus tazelwürmi; 3, Janusichnus bifrons; 4, Ganasauripus ladinus. Scale bar is 1 cm. Roman numerals refer to digits.
FIGURE 1. 1 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 1. 1, Location map of the Butterloch-Bletterbach area – Redagno; 2, Schematic drawing of the ButterlochBletterbach section with the distribution of ichnotaxa; red tracks indicates the stratigraphic level from which the studied footprints came (from Ceoloni et al., 1988, redrawn and slightly modified).
Ungulate herbivores promote beta diversity and drive stochastic plant community assembly by selective defoliation and trampling: From a four-year simulation experiment
<p>Ungulate herbivores shape grassland plant communities at multiple scales, ultimately affecting ecosystem function. However, ungulates have complex effects on grasslands, including defoliation, trampling, excreta return, and their interactions. Moreover, the effects of ungulate density on grasslands are regulated by these three mechanisms. Nevertheless, how these three mechanisms affect biodiversity at multiple scales and community assembly remains poorly understood.</p> <p>Here, we conducted a 4-year novel field experiment to disentangle the effects of defoliation, trampling, and excreta return by ungulates on plant community assembly in a temperate grassland in Inner Mongolia, China. This experiment set two different scenarios: moderate ungulate density (Moderate, characterised by selective defoliation and moderate trampling) and high ungulate density (Intense, characterised by non-selective defoliation and heavy trampling), including different combinations of defoliation, trampling, and excreta return in each scenario.</p> <p>We found that defoliation and trampling increased stochasticity in community assembly and promoted alpha and beta diversity under both scenarios. Specifically, defoliation promoted the coexistence of species with multiple resource acquisition strategies (higher functional trait diversity) by reducing interspecific competition; trampling tended to facilitate random species colonisation. Conversely, excreta return favoured grasses, promoting deterministic assembly and impacting species coexistence. Notably, selective defoliation in the moderate scenario led to a dominance of stochastic processes during community assembly, whereas non-selective defoliation still did not change the dominance of deterministic processes. Further, communities subject to selective defoliation were insensitive to changes in soil properties caused by trampling and excreta return, maintaining a high-level beta diversity and the stochastic of community assembly.</p> <p><em>Synthesis:</em></p> <p>Our study provides important insights into the mechanisms by which ungulate herbivores influence plant community assembly, suggesting that defoliation and trampling have the potential to drive stochastic processes, while excreta return plays the opposite role. Our study also suggests that selective foraging by ungulates acts as stronger stochastic forces during community assembly compared to non-selective defoliation. These results imply that considering ungulate feeding preferences and foraging behaviour in grassland management will help prevent biodiversity loss and biotic homogenisation.</p>
FIGURE 2 in Unveiling trampling history through trackway interferences and track preservational features: a case study from the Bletterbach gorge (Redagno, Western Dolomites, Italy)
FIGURE 2. Orthophoto of the slab MPUR NS 34/28. Scale bar is 50 cm.
Table 2 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
<p><b>Table 2</b> Mean values (± SD) of soil physical and chemical parameters at different treatment sites at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013. SM = soil moisture, OM = organic matter, pH = soil pH, SEC = soil electrical conductivity, SD = soil density, WHC = water-holding capacity. OE = open places under enclosure conditions, OT = open places under trampling conditions; EE <i>E.</i> = <i>camaldulensis</i> canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, ET = <i>E</i>. <i>camaldulensis</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions, TE <i>T</i> =. <i>aphylla</i> canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, TT = <i>T. aphylla</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions, CE = <i>C</i>. <i>sempervirens</i> canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, CT = <i>C. sempervirens</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions. Different letters in the same column represent significant difference <i>p</i> at <0.05.</p><table><tbody><tr><th></th><th>SM (%)</th><th>OM (%)</th><th>pH</th><th>SEC (µ -1) cm</th><th>SD (g -3) cm</th><th>WHC (%)</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>OE</th><td>25.6±3.4a</td><td>1.1±0.2b</td><td>7.5±0.2b</td><td>87.6±17.5d</td><td>1.1±0.0b</td><td>53.6±0.9ab</td></tr><tr><th>OT</th><td>7.8±1.7c</td><td>0.2±0.0e</td><td>7.6±0.0b</td><td>150.3±51.3c</td><td>1.6±0.0a</td><td>25.6±1.0c</td></tr><tr><th>EE</th><td>16.6±1.6b</td><td>1.3±0.2b</td><td>7.6±0.0b</td><td>130.2±9.4cd</td><td>1.0±0.1c</td><td>52.6±11.1ab</td></tr><tr><th>ET</th><td>23.2±3.8a</td><td>2.0±0.3a</td><td>7.6±0.0b</td><td>255.3±39.6ab</td><td>1.1±0.0bc</td><td>31.9±3.5c</td></tr><tr><th>TE</th><td>21.9±4.4ab</td><td>0.4±0.1d</td><td>7.9±0.0a</td><td>152.0±17.8c</td><td>1.0±0.1c</td><td>52.1±14.6ab</td></tr><tr><th>TT</th><td>14.1±5.2b</td><td>1.1±0.1b</td><td>7.6±0.1b</td><td>254.1±48.0ab</td><td>1.0±0.1c</td><td>43.3±6.2b</td></tr><tr><th>CE</th><td>26.9±3.4a</td><td>0.8±0.3c</td><td>7.6±0.1b</td><td>209.9±22.5b</td><td>1.0±0.1c</td><td>56.3±5.8a</td></tr><tr><th>CT</th><td>22.0±6.0ab</td><td>0.5±0.2d</td><td>7.8±0.1a</td><td>275.9±21.9a</td><td>1.0±0.0c</td><td>43.0±3.9b</td></tr></tbody></table>
Table 3 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
<p><b>Table 3</b> Effects of sampling habitat (“Habitat”), trampling management (“Trampling”), and their interaction on soil parameters, abundance of soil microarthropods, and diversity indices of soil Acari at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013 (General linear model, α = 0.05). * <i>p</i> <0.05, ** <i>p</i> <0.01, *** <i>p</i> <0.001.</p><table><tbody><tr><th><b>Microarthropods</b></th><th><i>d</i> <i>f</i></th><th><i>F</i></th><th><b>Soil parameters</b></th><th><i>d</i> <i>f</i></th><th><i>F</i></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th><b>Total microarthropod abundance</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Soil moisture</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>15.85***</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>109.38***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>39.13***</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>18.46***</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>1.65</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>5.90**</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>4.89**</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>12.84***</td></tr><tr><th><b>Collembola abundance</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Organic matter</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>4.90**</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>116.32***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>11.18**</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>0.05</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>2.29</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>48.99***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>2.56</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>32.99***</td></tr><tr><th><b>Other arthropod abundance</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Soil pH</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>1</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>35120.21***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>1.8</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>0.73</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>4.69*</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>0.73</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>13.93***</td></tr><tr><th><b>Soil Acari abundance</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Electrical conductivity</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>18.85***</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>156.31***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>43.09***</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>61.80***</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>0.88</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>20.89***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>3.60*</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>1.76</td></tr><tr><th><b>Taxon richness of soil Acari</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Soil density</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>16.11***</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>1769.86***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>34.68***</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>57.12***</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>3.17*</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>82.99***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>1.23</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>36.99***</td></tr><tr><th><b>Shannon index of soil Acari</b></th><td></td><td></td><td><b>Water-holding capacity</b></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>18.88***</td><td>Model</td><td>8</td><td>155.49***</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>51.07***</td><td>Trampling</td><td>1</td><td>45.98***</td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>4.03*</td><td>Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>3.22*</td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>0.78</td><td>Trampling * Habitat</td><td>3</td><td>2.6</td></tr><tr><th><b>Simpson index of soil Acari</b></th></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>13.42***</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>0</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>7.47**</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>5.22**</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th><b>Evenness index of soil Acari</b></th></tr><tr><th>Model</th><td>8</td><td>42.11***</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Trampling</th><td>1</td><td>120.61***</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>3.68*</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th>Trampling * Habitat</th><td>3</td><td>1.82</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
Table 1 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
<p><b>Table 1</b> Sampling design (replication = 4) for sites at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013. Herbaceous ground cover: +++ patchy; + a few plants, – no plants. OE = open places under enclosure conditions, OT = open places under trampling conditions; EE <i>E</i> =. <i>camaldulensis</i> canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, ET = <i>E. camaldulensis</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions, TE <i>T</i> =. aphylla canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, TT <i>T</i> =. <i>aphylla</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions, CE = <i>C</i>. <i>sempervirens</i> canopy habitat under enclosure conditions, CT = <i>C</i>. <i>sempervirens</i> canopy habitat under trampling conditions.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Habitat</th><th>Code</th><th>Treatment</th><th>Tree height (m)</th><th>Tree canopy crown (m2)</th><th>Herbaceous vegetation</th><th>Soil physical/biological top layer</th><th>Litter layer (cm)</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>Open spaces</th><td>OT OE</td><td>Trampling Enclosure</td><td>- -</td><td>- -</td><td>No +++</td><td>No Physical top layer</td><td>No No</td></tr><tr><th><i>E. camaldulensis</i></th><td>ET EE</td><td>Trampling Enclosure</td><td>10-13</td><td>6×8</td><td>No +</td><td>No Biological top layer</td><td>No 2-3</td></tr><tr><th><i>T. aphylla</i></th><td>TT TE</td><td>Trampling Enclosure</td><td>14-16</td><td>8×8</td><td>No +++</td><td>No Physical top layer</td><td>No Few</td></tr><tr><th><i>C. sempervirens</i></th><td>CT CE</td><td>Trampling Enclosure</td><td>14-16</td><td>7×9</td><td>No +</td><td>No Biological layer</td><td>No 1-2</td></tr></tbody></table>
Table 4 in Changes in a soil microarthropod community in the vicinity of dominant tree species under trampling management at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel
<p><b>Table 4</b> Correlation coefficients (Pearson correlation, <i>r</i>) between the abundance of microarthropods, diversity indices of soil Acari, and soil parameters at the Safari Zoological Center, Israel, December 2013. SM = soil moisture, OM = organic matter, pH = soil pH, SEC = soil electrical conductivity, SD = soil density, WHC = water-holding capacity <i>p</i>. <*0.05, ** <i>p</i> <0.01, *** <i>p</i> <0.001.</p><table><tbody><tr><th><b>Index</b></th><th></th><th><b>SM</b></th><th><b>OM</b></th><th><b>pH</b></th><th><b>SEC</b></th><th><b>SD</b></th><th><b>WHC</b></th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th></th><td>Acari</td><td>0.349*</td><td>0.068</td><td>-0.198</td><td>-0.506**</td><td>-0.299</td><td>0.571***</td></tr><tr><th>Abundance</th><td>Collembola Other soil arthropods</td><td>0.153 0.202</td><td>0.210 0.098</td><td>-0.486** -0.294</td><td>-0.506** -0.209</td><td>-0.107 -0.065</td><td>0.207 0.245</td></tr><tr><th></th><td>Total microarthropod</td><td>0.292</td><td>0.158</td><td>-0.403*</td><td>-0.574***</td><td>-0.233</td><td>0.445*</td></tr><tr><th>Diversity indices of Acari</th><td>Taxon richness Shannon index Simpson index</td><td>0.253 0.285 -0.006</td><td>0.023 0.032 -0.175</td><td>-0.098 -0.120 0.165</td><td>-0.392* -0.455** 0.240</td><td>-0.316 -0.293 -0.475**</td><td>0.561*** 0.585*** 0.336</td></tr><tr><th></th><td>Evenness index</td><td>0.387*</td><td>0.009</td><td>-0.203</td><td>-0.466**</td><td>-0.411*</td><td>0.739***</td></tr></tbody></table>
Single versus repeated human trampling events: Responses of ground vegetation in sub-urban beech forests
<p>Forests provide important ecosystem services and are often the only natural areas that are freely accessible to the public for outdoor recreation. Large numbers of forest visitors can cause severe damage to forest ecosystems, which in turn can affect the ecosystem functioning. We aimed to assess whether experimental short-term and long-term trampling affect the ground vegetation in deciduous forests and its recovery to a different extent. We used a standard experimental trampling procedure to simulate single and repeated human trampling events of different intensity. Experimental trampling of different intensity was conducted on a single day (single trampling) or on five days at intervals of four weeks (repeated trampling) in three suburban beech forests on different soil types. We recorded the cover, height, species density and species composition of the ground vegetation in the trampling lanes. We also assessed the recovery of the ground vegetation one and two years after trampling.</p> <p>Trampling intensity and the type of trampling (single vs. repeated) affected the ground vegetation in the three forests. Vegetation cover, plant height and species density all decreased with increasing trampling intensity, but to a different extent in the three forests. Most vegetation characteristics were more severely affected by repeated trampling than single trampling of equal intensity. A longer trampling period strengthened the effects of trampling on ground vegetation, except in one forest. Two years after experimental trampling, most vegetation characteristics still differed from those of undisturbed ground vegetation</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.