This StoryMap series contains a collection of four Dashboards used to display active project data on the Connecticut road network. Dashboards are used to display Capital Projects, Maintenance Resurfacing Program (MRP) projects, and Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program (LOTCIP) projects, as well as a dashboard to display all data together.Dashboards are listed by tabs at the top of the display. Each dashboard has similar capabilities. Projects are displayed in a zoomable GIS interface and a Project List. As the map is zoomed and the extent changes, the Project List will update to only display projects on the map. Projects selected from the Map or Project List will display a Project Details popup. Additional components of each dashboard include dynamic project counts, a Map Zoom By Town function and a Project Number Search.Capital Project data is sourced from the CTDOT Project Work Areas feature layer. The data is filtered to display active projects only, and categorized as "Pre-Construction" or "Construction." Pre-Construction is defined as projects with a CurrentSchedulePhase value of Planning, Pre-Design, Final Design, or Contract Processing.Maintenance Project data is sourced from the MRP Active feature layer. Central Maintenance personnel coordinate with the four districts to develop an annual statewide resurfacing program based upon a variety of factors (age, condition, etc.) that prioritize paving locations. Active MRP projects are incomplete projects for the current year.LOTCIP Project data is sourced from the CTDOT LOTCIP Projects feature layer. The data updates from LOTCIP database nightly. The geometry of the LOTCIP projects represent the approximate outline of the projects limits and does not represent the actual limits of the projects.

This map supports a story map application developed for UDOT Planning for the review of the corridor planning process. This web map compiles static layers created based on information sent by UDOT Planning as well as dynamic layers developed by UDOT GIS. The static data in this map does not have a refresh cycle and is current as of 7/13/2016. Additional information about the UDOT served layers can be found by searching UPlan. For questions on this map please contact Sarah Rigard at srigard@bio-west.com.

Summary: Creating the world’s first open-source, high-resolution, land cover map of the worldStorymap metadata page: URL forthcoming Possible K-12 Next Generation Science standards addressed:Grade level(s) K: Standard K-ESS3-1 - Earth and Human Activity - Use a model to represent the relationship between the needs of different plants or animals (including humans) and the places they liveGrade level(s) K: Standard K-ESS3-3 - Earth and Human Activity - Communicate solutions that will reduce the impact of humans on the land, water, air, and/or other living things in the local environmentGrade level(s) 2: Standard 2-ESS2-1 - Earth’s Systems - Compare multiple solutions designed to slow or prevent wind or water from changing the shape of the landGrade level(s) 2: Standard 2-ESS2-2 - Earth’s Systems - Develop a model to represent the shapes and kinds of land and bodies of water in an areaGrade level(s) 3: Standard 3-LS4-1 - Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity - Analyze and interpret data from fossils to provide evidence of the organisms and the environments in which they lived long ago.Grade level(s) 3: Standard 3-LS4-1 - Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity - Analyze and interpret data from fossils to provide evidence of the organisms and the environments in which they lived long ago.Grade level(s) 3: Standard 3-LS4-4 - Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity - Make a claim about the merit of a solution to a problem caused when the environment changes and the types of plants and animals that live there may changeGrade level(s) 4: Standard 4-ESS1-1 - Earth’s Place in the Universe - Identify evidence from patterns in rock formations and fossils in rock layers to support an explanation for changes in a landscape over timeGrade level(s) 4: Standard 4-ESS2-2 - Earth’s Systems - Analyze and interpret data from maps to describe patterns of Earth’s featuresGrade level(s) 5: Standard 5-ESS2-1 - Earth’s Systems - Develop a model using an example to describe ways the geosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, and/or atmosphere interact.Grade level(s) 6-8: Standard MS-ESS2-2 - Earth’s Systems - Construct an explanation based on evidence for how geoscience processes have changed Earth’s surface at varying time and spatial scalesGrade level(s) 6-8: Standard MS-ESS2-6 - Earth’s Systems - Develop and use a model to describe how unequal heating and rotation of the Earth cause patterns of atmospheric and oceanic circulation that determine regional climates.Grade level(s) 6-8: Standard MS-ESS3-3 - Earth and Human Activity - Apply scientific principles to design a method for monitoring and minimizing a human impact on the environment.Grade level(s) 9-12: Standard HS-ESS2-1 - Earth’s Systems - Develop a model to illustrate how Earth’s internal and surface processes operate at different spatial and temporal scales to form continental and ocean-floor features.Grade level(s) 9-12: Standard HS-ESS2-7 - Earth’s Systems - Construct an argument based on evidence about the simultaneous coevolution of Earth’s systems and life on EarthGrade level(s) 9-12: Standard HS-ESS3-4 - Earth and Human Activity - Evaluate or refine a technological solution that reduces impacts of human activities on natural systems.Grade level(s) 9-12: Standard HS-ESS3-6 - Earth and Human Activity - Use a computational representation to illustrate the relationships among Earth systems and how those relationships are being modified due to human activityMost frequently used words:areaslandclassesApproximate Flesch-Kincaid reading grade level: 9.7. The FK reading grade level should be considered carefully against the grade level(s) in the NGSS content standards above.

Proposed Action Map for the Upper Cheat River Project Area October 2021. Data reflects the proposed action in the Draft Environmental Assessment.

USFS Disclaimer – The USDA Forest Service makes no warranty, expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, completeness or utility of these geospatial data, or for the improper or incorrect use of these geospatial data. These geospatial data and related maps or graphics are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such. The data and maps may not be used to determine title, ownership, legal descriptions or boundaries, legal jurisdiction, or restrictions that may be in place on either public or private land. Natural hazards may or may not be depicted on the data and maps, and land users should exercise due caution. The data are dynamic and may change over time. The user is responsible to verify the limitations of the geospatial data and to use the data accordingly. USFS Disclaimer – The USDA Forest Service makes no warranty, expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, completeness or utility of these geospatial data, or for the improper or incorrect use of these geospatial data. These geospatial data and related maps or graphics are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such. The data and maps may not be used to determine title, ownership, legal descriptions or boundaries, legal jurisdiction, or restrictions that may be in place on either public or private land. Natural hazards may or may not be depicted on the data and maps, and land users should exercise due caution. The data are dynamic and may change over time. The user is responsible to verify the limitations of the geospatial data and to use the data accordingly. USFS Disclaimer – The USDA Forest Service makes no warranty, expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, completeness or utility of these geospatial data, or for the improper or incorrect use of these geospatial data. These geospatial data and related maps or graphics are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such. The data and maps may not be used to determine title, ownership, legal descriptions or boundaries, legal jurisdiction, or restrictions that may be in place on either public or private land. Natural hazards may or may not be depicted on the data and maps, and land users should exercise due caution. The data are dynamic and may change over time. The user is responsible to verify the limitations of the geospatial data and to use the data accordingly. Please do not re-distribute this data. This data is dynamic and potentially will change.

Description

This dataset contains a list of 186 Digital Humanities projects leveraging information visualisation techniques. Each project has been classified according to visualisation and interaction methods, narrativity and narrative solutions, domain, methods for the representation of uncertainty and interpretation, and the employment of critical and custom approaches to visually represent humanities data.

Classification schema: categories and columns

The project_id column contains unique internal identifiers assigned to each project. Meanwhile, the last_access column records the most recent date (in DD/MM/YYYY format) on which each project was reviewed based on the web address specified in the url column.
The remaining columns can be grouped into descriptive categories aimed at characterising projects according to different aspects:

Narrativity. It reports the presence of information visualisation techniques employed within narrative structures. Here, the term narrative encompasses both author-driven linear data stories and more user-directed experiences where the narrative sequence is determined by user exploration [1]. We define 2 columns to identify projects using visualisation techniques in narrative, or non-narrative sections. Both conditions can be true for projects employing visualisations in both contexts. Columns:

• non_narrative (boolean)

• narrative (boolean)

Domain. The humanities domain to which the project is related. We rely on [2] and the chapters of the first part of [3] to abstract a set of general domains. Column:

• domain (categorical):

• History and archaeology

• Art and art history

• Language and literature

• Music and musicology

• Multimedia and performing arts

• Philosophy and religion

• Other: both extra-list domains and cases of collections without a unique or specific thematic focus.

Visualisation of uncertainty and interpretation. Buiding upon the frameworks proposed by [4] and [5], a set of categories was identified, highlighting a distinction between precise and impressional communication of uncertainty. Precise methods explicitly represent quantifiable uncertainty such as missing, unknown, or uncertain data, precisely locating and categorising it using visual variables and positioning. Two sub-categories are interactive distinction, when uncertain data is not visually distinguishable from the rest of the data but can be dynamically isolated or included/excluded categorically through interaction techniques (usually filters); and visual distinction, when uncertainty visually “emerges” from the representation by means of dedicated glyphs and spatial or visual cues and variables. On the other hand, impressional methods communicate the constructed and situated nature of data [6], exposing the interpretative layer of the visualisation and indicating more abstract and unquantifiable uncertainty using graphical aids or interpretative metrics. Two sub-categories are: ambiguation, when the use of graphical expedients—like permeable glyph boundaries or broken lines—visually convey the ambiguity of a phenomenon; and interpretative metrics, when expressive, non-scientific, or non-punctual metrics are used to build a visualisation. Column:

• uncertainty_interpretation (categorical):

• Interactive distinction

• Visual distinction

• Ambiguation

• Interpretative metrics

Critical adaptation. We identify projects in which, with regards to at least a visualisation, the following criteria are fulfilled: 1) avoid repurposing of prepackaged, generic-use, or ready-made solutions; 2) being tailored and unique to reflect the peculiarities of the phenomena at hand; 3) avoid simplifications to embrace and depict complexity, promoting time-consuming visualisation-based inquiry. Column:

• critical_adaptation (boolean)

Non-temporal visualisation techniques. We adopt and partially adapt the terminology and definitions from [7]. A column is defined for each type of visualisation and accounts for its presence within a project, also including stacked layouts and more complex variations. Columns and inclusion criteria:

• plot (boolean): visual representations that map data points onto a two-dimensional coordinate system.

• cluster_or_set (boolean): sets or cluster-based visualisations used to unveil possible inter-object similarities.

• map (boolean): geographical maps used to show spatial insights. While we do not specify the variants of maps (e.g., pin maps, dot density maps, flow maps, etc.), we make an exception for maps where each data point is represented by another visualisation (e.g., a map where each data point is a pie chart) by accounting for the presence of both in their respective columns.

• network (boolean): visual representations highlighting relational aspects through nodes connected by links or edges.

• hierarchical_diagram (boolean): tree-like structures such as tree diagrams, radial trees, but also dendrograms. They differ from networks for their strictly hierarchical structure and absence of closed connection loops.

• treemap (boolean): still hierarchical, but highlighting quantities expressed by means of area size. It also includes circle packing variants.

• word_cloud (boolean): clouds of words, where each instance’s size is proportional to its frequency in a related context

• bars (boolean): includes bar charts, histograms, and variants. It coincides with “bar charts” in [7] but with a more generic term to refer to all bar-based visualisations.

• line_chart (boolean): the display of information as sequential data points connected by straight-line segments.

• area_chart (boolean): similar to a line chart but with a filled area below the segments. It also includes density plots.

• pie_chart (boolean): circular graphs divided into slices which can also use multi-level solutions.

• plot_3d (boolean): plots that use a third dimension to encode an additional variable.

• proportional_area (boolean): representations used to compare values through area size. Typically, using circle- or square-like shapes.

• other (boolean): it includes all other types of non-temporal visualisations that do not fall into the aforementioned categories.

Temporal visualisations and encodings. In addition to non-temporal visualisations, a group of techniques to encode temporality is considered in order to enable comparisons with [7]. Columns:

• timeline (boolean): the display of a list of data points or spans in chronological order. They include timelines working either with a scale or simply displaying events in sequence. As in [7], we also include structured solutions resembling Gantt chart layouts.

• temporal_dimension (boolean): to report when time is mapped to any dimension of a visualisation, with the exclusion of timelines. We use the term “dimension” and not “axis” as in [7] as more appropriate for radial layouts or more complex representational choices.

• animation (boolean): temporality is perceived through an animation changing the visualisation according to time flow.

• visual_variable (boolean): another visual encoding strategy is used to represent any temporality-related variable (e.g., colour).

Interactions. A set of categories to assess affordable interactions based on the concept of user intent [8] and user-allowed perceptualisation data actions [9]. The following categories roughly match the manipulative subset of methods of the “how” an interaction is performed in the conception of [10]. Only interactions that affect the aspect of the visualisation or the visual representation of its data points, symbols, and glyphs are taken into consideration. Columns:

• basic_selection (boolean): the demarcation of an element either for the duration of the interaction or more permanently until the occurrence of another selection.

• advanced_selection (boolean): the demarcation involves both the selected element and connected elements within the visualisation or leads to brush and link effects across views. Basic selection is tacitly implied.

• navigation (boolean): interactions that allow moving, zooming, panning, rotating, and scrolling the view but only when applied to the visualisation and not to the web page. It also includes “drill” interactions (to navigate through different levels or portions of data detail, often generating a new view that replaces or accompanies the original) and “expand” interactions generating new perspectives on data by expanding and collapsing nodes.

• arrangement (boolean): the organisation of visualisation elements (symbols, glyphs, etc.) or multi-visualisation layouts spatially through drag and drop or

MapViewer is a graphical tool for viewing and comparing Gossypium spp. genetic maps. It includes dynamically scrollable maps, correspondence matrices, dot plots, links to details about map features, and exporting functionality. It was developed by the MainLab at Washington State University and is available for download for use in other Tripal databases. The query interface allows the user to select Species, Map, and Linkage Group options. Help information includes a video tutorial, user manual, and sample map, correspondence matrix, dot plot, and exported figures. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Website Pointer for CottonGen Map Viewer. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.cottongen.org/MapViewer MapViewer is a graphical tool for viewing and comparing Gossypium spp. genetic maps. It includes dynamically scrollable maps, correspondence matrices, dot plots, links to details about map features, and exporting functionality. It was developed by the MainLab at Washington State University and is available for download for use in other Tripal databases. The query interface allows the user to select Species, Map, and Linkage Group options. Help information includes a video tutorial, user manual, and sample map, correspondence matrix, dot plot, and exported figures.

Permanent forest plots provide an empirical understanding of forest change over time, and are an invaluable part of forestry and ecological research. Walter Lyford began measurements of a 2.88 ha red oak-red maple forest on the Prospect Hill Tract of Harvard Forest in 1969. All trees over 2 inches (5 cm) were mapped on very large-scale (1 inch = 5 feet) hand-drawn maps, and included live and dead trees, stumps, windthrows and other features such as stone walls, boulders, soil moisture and a damage boundary from the 1938 hurricane. All living and dead trees have been re-located and measured (diameter at breast height, canopy class for live trees; condition, decay class, diameter, bole length and stem orientation for fallen dead trees) in 1969, 1975, 1987-1992, 2001, and 2011. In 2001, the original, hand-drawn maps were digitized using ArcView GIS. From 1969 to 2011, red oak (Quercus rubra) increased its dominance of the stand’s total basal area from 52% to 60%; however, red maple (Acer rubrum) has become relatively less abundant, decreasing from 30% to 23%. While red oak and red maple continue to account for the majority of the basal area in the stand, the secondary species experienced a dramatic increase in relative abundance of individuals in the stand; yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), black birch (Betula lenta), American chestnut (Castanea dentata), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), and eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) have increased from comprising 25% of the individuals in the stand in 1969 to comprising 52% in 2011. The total biomass of living individuals is increasing linearly (R2=0.99, p=0.0002), which implies that the stand has not yet experienced an age-induced decrease in biomass accumulation.

For regional transportation planning purposes only.School site locations and their attributes are as of June 2018, though other school sites may have recently begun the same or similar program since the date referenced here. If seeking the most current locations and attributes, visit San Bernardino County Public Health's site movetoschool.com, or the local jurisdiction/agency based on where a feature in question is shown located by this data. Locations and attributes reported from local jurisdictions/agencies to SBCTA and were approved by the local jurisdiction/agency for regional transportation planning purposes. Visit the following web address to see data in use:gosbcta.com/activesanbernardino : Active San Bernardino Data dynamic story maps sitegosbcta.com/planning-sustainability : SBCTA Planning documentsgosbcta.com/nonmotorizedplan : Non-Motorized Transportation Plan (Adopted June 2018) web GIS application site

Most of the central New England landscape was cleared for agriculture in the mid-19th century and then naturally reforested into "secondary forests" with the abandonment of agricultural land. Some sites, often poorly drained, remained forested, but were usually subjected to intensive fuelwood cutting or logging and are termed "primary forests." The Hemlock Woodlot was never cleared for agriculture, but has a history of cutting and natural disturbance. The hemlock woodlot is located in the center of Harvard Forest's Prospect Hill Tract, adjacent to a spruce-blackgum swamp. Soils are moist and rocky, with a thick organic layer. Hemlock dominates tree species composition (62% by basal area), with hardwoods and scattered large white pine comprising the remainder. Most of the trees are 100-150 years old, with a few hemlock trees up to 230 years old. While the site was never cleared for agriculture, it was logged several times and chestnut blight removed a chestnut-dominated overstory in the 1910s. The 0.72 ha stem-mapped plot is at the center of a 4-ha hemlock-dominated forest. This plot serves as a major reference site and is part of a network of hemlock forests that are being intensively sampled as the hemlock woolly adelgid arrives.

Data CitationPlease cite this dataset as follows:Vasquez, V., Cushman, K., Ramos, P., Williamson, C., Villareal, P., Gomez Correa, L. F., & Muller-Landau, H. (2023). Barro Colorado Island 50-ha plot crown maps: manually segmented and instance segmented. (Version 2). Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.25573/data.24784053This data is licensed as CC BY 4.0 and is thus freely available for reuse with proper citation. We ask that data users share any resulting publications, preprints, associated analysis code, and derived data products with us by emailing mullerh@si.edu. We are open to contributing our expert knowledge of the study site and datasets to projects that use these data; please direct queries regarding potential collaboration to Vicente Vasquez, vasquezv@si.edu, and Helene Muller-Landau, mullerh@si.edu.Note that this dataset is part of a collection of Panama UAV data on Smithsonian Figshare, which can be viewed at https://smithsonian.figshare.com/projects/Panama_Forest_Landscapes_UAV/115572Additional information about this research can be found at the Muller-Landau lab web site at https://hmullerlandau.com/All required code is freely available at https://github.com/P-polycephalum/ForestLandscapes/blob/main/LandscapeScripts/segmentation.py and it can be cited as:Vicente Vasquez. (2023). P-polycephalum/ForestLandscapes: segmentwise (v0.0.2-beta). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10380517Data DescriptionThis dataset is part of a larger initiative monitoring forests in Panama using drones (unoccupied aerial vehicles), an initiative led by Dr. Helene Muller-Landau at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. As part of this initiative, we have been collecting repeat imagery of the 50-ha forest dynamics plot on Barro Colorado Island (BCI), Panama, since October 2014 (see Garcia et al. 2021a, b for data products for 2014-2019).Contained within this dataset are two sets of field-derived crown maps, presented in both their raw and improved versions. The 2021 crown mapping campaign was overseen by KC Cushman, accompanied by field technician Pablo Ramos and Paulino Villarreal. Additionally, Cecilia Williamson and KC Cushman reviewed polygon quality and made necessary corrections. Image data occurred on August 1, 2020, utilizing a DJI Phantom 4 Pro at a resolution of 4cm per pixel. A total of 2454 polygons were manually delineated, encompassing insightful metrics like crown completeness and liana load.The 2023 crown mapping campaign, led by Vicente Vasquez and field technicians Pablo Ramos, Paulino Villarreal, involved quality revisions and corrections performed by Luisa Fernanda Gomez Correa and Vicente Vasquez. Image data collection occurred on September 29, 2022, utilizing a DJI Phantom 4 Pro drone at a 4cm per pixel resolution. The 2023 campaign integrated model 230103_randresize_full of the detectree2 model garden (Ball, 2023). Tree crown polygons were generated pre-field visit, with those attaining a field validation score of 7 or higher retained as true tree crowns.The data collection forms are prepared using ArcGIS field maps. The creator of the data forms uses the spatial points from the trees in the ForestGeo 50-ha censuses to facilitate finding the tree tags in the field (Condit et al., 2019). The field technicians confirm that the tree crown is visible from the drone imagery, they proceed to collect variables of interest and delineate the tree crown manually. In the case of the 2023 field campaign, the field technicians were able to skip manual delineation when the polygons generated by 230103_randresize_full were evaluated as true detection.The improved version of the 2023 and 2021 crown map data collection takes as input the raw crown maps and the globally aligned orthomosaics to refine the edges of the crown. We use the model SAM from segment-anything module developed my Meta AI (Krillov, 2023). We adapted the use of their instance segmentation algorithm to take geospatial imagery in the form of tiles. We inputted multiple bounding boxes in the form of CPU torch tensors for each of the files. Furthermore, we perform several tasks to clean the crowns and remove the polygons overlaps to avoid ambiguity. This results in a very well delineated crown map with no overlapping between tree crowns. Despite our diligent efforts in detecting, delineating, and evaluating all visible tree crowns from drone imagery, this dataset exhibits certain limitations. These include missing tags denoted as -9999, erroneous manual delineations or instance segmentation of tree crown polygons, duplicated tags, and undetected tree crowns. These limitations are primarily attributed to human error, logistical constraints, and the challenge of confirming individual tree crown emergence above the canopy. In numerous instances, particularly within densely vegetated areas, delineating polygons and assigning tags to numerous small trees posed significant challenges.MetadataThe dataset comprises four sets of crown maps bundled within .zip files, adhering to the naming convention MacroSite_plot_year_month_day_crownmap_type. As an illustration, a sample file name follows the structure: BCI_50ha_2020_08_01_improved.For a comprehensive understanding of variable nomenclature within each shapefile, exhaustive details are provided in the file named variables_description.csv. Additionally, our dataset incorporates visualization figures corresponding to both raw and refined crown maps.The raw crown maps contain:A GeoTiff-formatted raster image reflecting the image acquisition date during field data collection.The tiles folder housing all tiles utilized for instance segmentation.The most recent version of the raw crown map manually revised and retaining its original naming scheme.A reformatted iteration of the raw crown map, involving column renaming and the reprojection of its coordinate reference system.The improved crown maps contain:"_crownmap_segmented.shp" version: This subproduct has all polygons segmented via the SAM model from the segment-anything process."_crownmap_cleaned.shp" version: This subproduct features one polygon allocated per GlobalID, specifically the one with the highest segment-anything score."_crownmap_avoidance.shp" version: This subproduct is devoid of any overlapping polygons."_crownmap_improved.shp" version: The outcome of the instance crown segmentation workflow, incorporating all original crown map fields.Author contributionsVV wrote the code for standardized workflow for processing, alignment, and segmentation of the tree crowns. MG and MH led the drone imagery collection. HCM conceived the study, wrote the grant proposals to obtain funding, and supervised the research.AcknowledgmentsVicente Vasquez and KC Cushman created the field map forms and coordinated the 2023 and 2021 crown map field campaign. Milton Solano assistance with the ArcGIS platform. Field technicians Pablo Ramos, Paulino Villareal, and Melvin Hernandez delineated and evaluated tree crown polygons. Luisa Gomez-Correa and Cecilia Williamson assisted with quality assurance and quality control after field data collection. Milton Garcia and additional interns in the Muller-Landau lab assisted with drone data collection. Funding and/or in-kind support was provided by the Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Studies grant program (HCM), the Smithsonian Institution Equipment fund (HCM), Smithsonian ForestGEO, the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute.ReferencesBall, J.G.C., Hickman, S.H.M., Jackson, T.D., Koay, X.J., Hirst, J., Jay, W., Archer, M., Aubry-Kientz, M., Vincent, G. and Coomes, D.A. (2023), Accurate delineation of individual tree crowns in tropical forests from aerial RGB imagery using Mask R-CNN. Remote Sens Ecol Conserv. 9(5):641-655. https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.332Condit, Richard et al. (2019). Complete data from the Barro Colorado 50-ha plot: 423617 trees, 35 years [Dataset]. Dryad. https://doi.org/10.15146/5xcp-0d46Garcia, M., J. P. Dandois, R. F. Araujo, S. Grubinger, and H. C. Muller-Landau. 2021b. Surface elevation models and associated canopy height change models for the 50-ha plot on Barro Colorado Island, Panama, for 2014-2019. . In Smithsonian Figshare, edited by S. T. R. Institute. https://doi.org/10.25573/data.14417933Kirillov, A., Mintun, E., Ravi, N., Mao, H., Rolland, C., Gustafson, L., Xiao, T., Whitehead, S., Berg, A. C., Lo, W.-Y., Dollár, P., & Girshick, R. (2023). Segment Anything. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02643.Scheffler D, Hollstein A, Diedrich H, Segl K, Hostert P. AROSICS: An Automated and Robust Open-Source Image Co-Registration Software for Multi-Sensor Satellite Data. Remote Sensing. 2017; 9(7):676.

The PALEOMAP project produces paleogreographic maps illustrating the Earth's plate tectonic, paleogeographic, climatic, oceanographic and biogeographic development from the Precambrian to the Modern World and beyond.

A series of digital data sets has been produced consisting of plate tectonic data, climatically sensitive lithofacies, and biogeographic data. Software has been devloped to plot maps using the PALEOMAP plate tectonic model and digital geographic data sets: PGIS/Mac, Plate Tracker for Windows 95, Paleocontinental Mapper and Editor (PCME), Earth System History GIS (ESH-GIS), PaleoGIS(uses ArcView), and PALEOMAPPER.

Teaching materials for educators including atlases, slide sets, VHS animations, JPEG images and CD-ROM digital images.

Some PALEOMAP products include: Plate Tectonic Computer Animation (VHS) illustrating motions of the continents during the last 850 million years.

Paleogeographic Atlas consisting of 20 full color paleogeographic maps. (Scotese, 1997).

Paleogeographic Atlas Slide Set (35mm)

Paleogeographic Digital Images (JPEG, PC/Mac diskettes)

Paleogeographic Digital Image Archive (EPS, PC/Mac Zip disk) consists of the complete digital archive of original digital graphic files used to produce plate tectonic and paleographic maps for the Paleographic Atlas.

GIS software such as PaleoGIS and ESH-GIS.

This file includes an input and output folder. The input folder includes soil moisture measurements fromt the 50-ha Forest Dynamics Plot on Barro Colorado Island (BCI) in Panama and R code to create custom soil water potential maps for the plot. The output folder contains soil water potential maps on a 5 m resolution for early, mid and late dry season conditions during a regular year and mid dry season during a drought year.

This dataset provides the spatial distribution of vegetation types, soil carbon, and physiographic features in the Imnavait Creek area, Alaska. Specific attributes include vegetation, percent water, glacial geology, soil carbon, a digital elevation model (DEM), surficial geology and surficial geomorphology. Data are also provided on the research grids for georeferencing. The map data are from a variety of sources and encompass the period 1970-06-01 to 2015-08-31.

This paper proposes a dynamic analytical processing (DAP) visualization tool based on the Bubble-Wall Plot. It can be handily used to develop visual warning systems for visualizing the dynamic analytical processes of hazard data. Comparative analysis and case study methods are used in this research. Based on a literature review of Q1 publications since 2017, 23 types of data visualization approaches/tools are identified, including seven anomaly data visualization tools. This study presents three significant findings by comparing existing data visualization approaches. The primary finding is that no single visualization tool can fully satisfy industry requirements. This finding motivates academics to develop new DAP visualization tools. The second finding is that there are different views of Line Charts and various perspectives on Scatter Plots. The other one is that different researchers may perceive an existing data visualization tool differently, such as arguments between Scatter Plots and Line Charts and diverse opinions about Parallel Coordinate Plots and Scatter Plots. Users’ awareness rises when they choose data visualization tools that satisfy their requirements. By conducting a comparative analysis based on five categories (Style, Value, Change, Correlation, and Others) with 26 subcategories of metric features, results show that this new tool can effectively solve the limitations of existing visualization tools as it appears to have three remarkable characteristics: the simplest cartographic tool, the most straightforward visual result, and the most intuitive tool. Furthermore, this paper illustrates how the Bubble-Wall Plot can be effectively applied to develop a warning system for presenting dynamic analytical processes of hazard data in the coal mine. Lastly, this paper provides two recommendations, one implication, six research limitations, and eleven further study topics.

TreeMap 2016 provides a tree-level model of the forests of the conterminous United States. We matched forest plot data from Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) to a 30x30 meter (m) grid. TreeMap 2016 is being used in both the private and public sectors for projects including fuel treatment planning, snag hazard mapping, and estimation of terrestrial carbon resources. We used a random forests machine-learning algorithm to impute the forest plot data to a set of target rasters provided by Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools (LANDFIRE: https://landfire.gov). Predictor variables consisted of percent forest cover, height, and vegetation type, as well as topography (slope, elevation, and aspect), location (latitude and longitude), biophysical variables (photosynthetically active radiation, precipitation, maximum temperature, minimum temperature, relative humidity, and vapour pressure deficit), and disturbance history (time since disturbance and disturbance type) for the landscape circa 2016.

The main output of this project (the GeoTIFF included in this data publication) is a raster map of imputed plot identifiers at 30×30 m spatial resolution for the conterminous U.S. for landscape conditions circa 2016. In the attribute table of this raster, we also present a set of attributes drawn from the FIA databases, including forest type and live basal area. The raster map of plot identifiers can be linked to the FIA databases available through the FIA DataMart (https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2001-FIADB) or to the text and SQL files included in this data publication to produce tree-level maps or to map other plot attributes. The accompanying database files included in this publication also contain attributes regarding the FIA plot CN (or control number, a unique identifier for each time a plot is measured), the subplot number, the tree record number, and for each tree: the status (live or dead), species, diameter, height, actual height (where broken), crown ratio, number of trees per acre, and a code for cause of death where applicable. The dataset has been validated for applications including percent live tree cover, height of the dominant trees, forest type, species of trees with most basal area, aboveground biomass, fuel treatment planning, and snag hazard. Because falling snags cause hazard to firefighting personnel and other forest users, in response to requests from the field, we provide a separate map that provides a rating of the severity of snag hazard based on the density and height of snags. Application of the dataset to research questions other than those for which it has been validated should be investigated by the researcher before proceeding. The dataset may be suitable for other applications and for use across various scales (stand, landscape, and region), however, the researcher should test the dataset's applicability to a particular research question before proceeding.Geospatial data describing tree species or forest structure are required for many analyses and models of forest landscape dynamics. Forest data must have resolution and continuity sufficient to reflect site gradients in mountainous terrain and stand boundaries imposed by historical events, such as wildland fire and timber harvest. The TreeMap 2014 dataset (Riley et al. 2019) was the first of its kind to provide such detailed forest structure data across the forests of the conterminous United States. The TreeMap 2016 dataset updates the TreeMap 2014 dataset to landscape conditions c2016. Prior to this imputed forest data, assessments relied largely on forest inventory at fixed plot locations at sparse densities.See the Entity and Attributes section for details regarding the relationship between the data files included in this publication and the FIA DataMart (https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2001-FIADB).

These data were published on 08/26/2021. On 02/01/2024, the metadata was updated to include reference to a recently published article and update URLs for Forest Service websites.

For more information about these data, see Riley et al. (2022).

This dataset includes maps of canopy height and aboveground biomass at spatial resolutions of 25 m and 100 m for Mexico, Gabon, French Guiana, and the Amazon Basin. The GEDI-TanDEM-X (GTDX) fusion maps were created by combining data from NASA's Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) Version 2 footprint data (from 2019-04-18 to 2021-08-18) and TanDEM-X (abbreviated as TDX) Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) images (from 2011-01-06 to 2020-12-31). The GTDX canopy height maps were generated by using the TDX coherence maps to invert the TDX height and subsequently using GEDI canopy height as reference data to calibrate the inverted height. The GTDX aboveground biomass maps were produced based on a generalized hierarchical model-based (GHMB) framework that utilizes GEDI biomass as training data to establish models for estimating biomass based on the GTDX canopy height. The dataset also includes maps of canopy height uncertainty, biomass uncertainty, and ancillary data including a regional modeling parameter and forest disturbance. The uncertainty of GTDX canopy height was estimated for each pixel by propagating the GEDI-TDX model error to each GTDX pixel prediction. The uncertainty of GTDX aboveground biomass was estimated by considering the error in both the GEDI footprint biomass data and the GEDI-TDX model, and then applying it to each GTDX biomass pixel prediction. The regional model parameter indicates the size of the analysis window (2 to 50 km or country wide) used for each pixel. The forest disturbance information identifies pixels where disturbance occurred between 2011 and 2020, and provides the year of last disturbance.

This data set provides map images of hydrographic, morphologic, and edaphic features for the northern Amazon Basin in eastern Ecuador. The hydrographic data are available at two scales based on the 1:50,000 and 1:250,000-scale topographic source maps that were generated in 1990 and 1993, respectively. Morphological and edaphological data were digitized from a 1:500,000 map published in 1983. There are 3 compressed (*.zip) data files with this data set.

This data set shows the Tag number, Quadrat location, Species code, diameter and XY coordinates of stems >=10 cm D130 present at the time of Hurricane Hugo and in the first census. The data set is composed of two files both with the same file structure. In LFDP_C1treemap.txt the diameters (Fdiam) are as recorded in the field data. In LFDP_C1TREEMAPa.txt the stem diameters (Fdiam) were calculated to allocate "missed" stems (stems >=10 cm D130) that were found in survey 2, 3 or Census 2 to Census 1 survey 1. We calculated the diameter the stem would have had, if it had been recorded at the same time the quadrat it was located in was assessed, in the appropriate survey for that stem size. To extrapolate the stem size back in time, we used the actual growth rate of that individual stem if more than one measurement was available. If only one diameter measurement was available we used the median growth rate for that species in the appropriate size class stems >=10, <30 cm D130). In our publications we will combine data sets LFDP_C1treemap.txt and LFDP_C1TREEMAPa.txt to make Census 1 and to reconstruct the forest for stems >= 10 cm D130 at the time of Hurricane Hugo. We have divided the data into two separate files to ensure that when stem diameters are compared to future censuses the diameter data in LFDP_C1TREEMAPa.txt are not used to calculate growth rates. The last corrections to the Census 1 data were made in May 2001. The National Science Foundation requires that data from projects it funds are posted on the web two years after any data set has been organized and "cleaned". The data from each census of the LFDP will be updated at intervals as each survey of the LFDP shows errors in the previous data collection. After posting on the web, researchers who are not part of the project are then welcome to use the data. Given the enormous amount of time, effort and resources required to manage the LFDP, obtain these data, and ensure data accuracy, LFDP Principal Investigators request that researchers intending to use this data comply with the requests below. Through complying with these requests we can ensure that the data are interpreted correctly, analyses are not repeated unnecessarily, beneficial collaboration between users is promoted and the Principle Investigators investment in this project is protected. Submit to the LFDP PIs a short (1 page) description of how you intend to use the data; · Invite LFDP PIs to be co-authors on any publication that uses the data in a substantial way (some PIs may decline and other LFDP scientists may need to be included); If the LFDP PIs are not co-authors, send the PIs a draft of any paper using LFDP data, so that the PIs may comment upon it; In the methods section of any publication using LFDP data, describe that data as coming from the "Luquillo Forest Dynamics Plot, part of the Luquillo Experimental Forest Long-Term Ecological Research Program"; Acknowledge in any publication using LFDP data the "The Luquillo Experimental Forest Long-Term Ecological Research Program, supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation, the University of Puerto Rico, and the International Institute of Tropical Forestry"; · Supply the LFDP PIs with 10 reprints of any publication using LFDP data. · Accept that the LFDP PIs can not guarantee that the LFDP data you intend to use, has not already been submitted for publication or published.

For regional transportation planning purposes only.Sampled locations for existence of obstructions on sidewalks (defined as features directly impeding, obscuring, or preventing pedestrian paths of travel) and their attributes are as of October 2019, though obstruction locations and/or attributes may have been more recently updated since the date referenced here. If seeking the most current obstructions and attributes, contact the local jurisdiction/agency based on where a feature in question is shown located by this data. Initial locations and attributes collected using SBCTA/San Bernardino County aerial imagery from 2018 and field verification sampling throughout summer of 2019. Updates on extents and/or attributes reported from local jurisdictions/agencies to SBCTA. Data was received and acknowledged by SBCTA Board of Directors April 2020 as source for local jurisdictions/agencies for regional transportation planning purposes.Visit the following web address to see data in use:gosbcta.com/activesanbernardino : Active San Bernardino Data dynamic story maps sitegosbcta.com/planning-sustainability : SBCTA Planning documents

This data publication contains an update for the 2006 Continental United States (CONUS) and Alaska to the first continental forest stand age map of North America. A new map for 2011 covering Alaska, CONUS and Canada has been produced. It was made by combining forest inventory data, historical fire data, optical satellite data and other disturbance/forest change products that have become available after the original product was published. A companion map of the standard deviations for age estimates, developed for quantifying uncertainty, is also included.The forest stand age data can be used in large-scale carbon modeling, both for land-based biogeochemistry models and atmosphere-based inversion models, in order to improve the spatial accuracy of carbon cycle simulations.This product is an updated version of Pan et al. (2014).

Original metadata date was 11/06/2015. Minor metadata updates on 12/15/2016 and 07/02/2019.