This is the GIS data and imagery used for analyses in the article
Sixty-seven years of land-use change in southern Costa Rica by Zahawi
et al. currently in revision at PLOS One.

This study required the orthorectification of historic aerial photographs, as well as forest cover mapping and landscape analysis of 320 km² around the Las Cruces Biological Station in San Vito de Coto Brus, Costa Rica. The imagery and GIS data generated were used to account for forest cover change over five different time periods from 1947 to 2014.

The datasets supplied include GIS files for:

• Extent of the study area (shapefile).
• Forest cover mapped for each time period (geotiff).
• Imagery of the mosaics generated with the orthorectified historic aerial photographs (geotiff).
• Age in studied time periods of the current forest patches (shapefile).
• Connectivity lines inside the studied area (shapefiles).

All files are in Costa Rica Transverse Mercator 2005 (CRTM05) projected coordinate reference system. For transformation between coordinate systems please refer to http://epsg.io/5367

Aerial photographs for the years 1947, 1960, 1980 and 1997 were acquired from the Organization for Tropical Studies GIS Lab and the Instituto Geográfico Nacional of Costa Rica. The orthorectification process was done first on the 1997 set of images and used the current 1:50,000 and 1:25,000 Costa Rican cartography to identify geographical reference points. The set of 1997 orthophotos was used as a reference set to orthorectify remaining years with the exception of 1947 images. The orthorectification process and all other geospatial analyses were done on the CRTM05 spatial reference system and the resulting orthophotos had a 2m cell size. The largest Root Mean Square error (RMSE) of the orthorectification of these three time slices of aerial photographs was 15 m.

Given the lack of information on flight parameters, and the expansive forest coverage in 1947 photographs, images were georeferenced and built into a mosaic using river basins and the few forest clearings that had a similar shape in the 1960 flyover. The 1947 set of images did not cover the whole study area, having empty areas without photographs that represented ˜12.1% of the analysis extent. Nonetheless, these areas were classified as forested given that forest was present in these same areas in the 1960 imagery.

Forest mapping was done by visual interpretation of orthophotos and Google imagery. The areas were considered forested if tree crowns were easily identified when viewing the images at a scale of 1:10,000. In areas where it was difficult to discern the type of land cover, a scale of 1:5,000 was used. This was done to eliminate agroforestry systems such as shaded coffee areas (with trees planted in rows) or very early stages of forest regeneration from the forest land-cover class. The analysis was done only in areas that were cloud free in the five time slices. This resulted in the elimination of 134 ha (~0.4%) from of the original area outlined above. Polygons were drawn over the different areas using QGIS and were transformed into raster files of 10 m cell size.

Tracking an animal's location from video has many applications, from providing information on health and welfare to validating sensor-based technologies. Typically, accurate location estimation from video is achieved using cameras with overhead (top-down) views, but structural and financial limitations may require mounting cameras at other angles. We describe a user-friendly solution to manually extract an animal's location from non-overhead video. Our method uses QGIS, an open-source geographic information system, to: (1) assign facility-based coordinates to pixel coordinates in non-overhead frames; 2) use the referenced coordinates to transform the non-overhead frames to an overhead view; and 3) determine facility-based x, y coordinates of animals from the transformed frames. Using this method, we could determine an object's facility-based x, y coordinates with an accuracy of 0.13 ± 0.09 m (mean ± SD; range: 0.01–0.47 m) when compared to the ground truth (coordinates manually recorded with a laser tape measurer). We demonstrate how this method can be used to answer research questions about space-use behaviors in captive animals, using 6 ewe-lamb pairs housed in a group pen. As predicted, we found that lambs maintained closer proximity to their dam compared to other ewes in the group and lamb-dam range sizes were strongly correlated. However, the distance traveled by lambs and their dams did not correlate, suggesting that activity levels differed within the pair. This method demonstrates how user-friendly, open-source GIS tools can be used to accurately estimate animal location and derive space-use behaviors from non-overhead video frames. This method will expand capacity to obtain spatial data from animals in facilities where it is not possible to mount cameras overhead.

ps-places-metadata-v1.01

SUMMARY

This dataset comprises a pair of layers, (points and polys) which attempt to better locate "populated places" in NZ. Populated places are defined here as settled areas, either urban or rural where densitys of around 20 persons per hectare exist, and something is able to be seen from the air.

RATIONALE

The only liberally licensed placename dataset is currently LINZ geographic placenames, which has the following drawbacks: - coordinates are not place centers but left most label on 260 series map - the attributes are outdated

METHODOLOGY

This dataset necessarily involves cleaving the linz placenames set into two, those places that are poplulated, and those unpopulated. Work was carried out in four steps. First placenames were shortlisted according to the following criterion: - all places that rated at least POPL in the linz geographic places layer, ie POPL, METR or TOWN or USAT were adopted. - Then many additional points were added from a statnz meshblock density analysis.
- Finally remaining points were added from a check against linz residential polys, and zenbu poi clusters.

Spelling is broadly as per linz placenames, but there are differences for no particular reason. Instances of LINZ all upper case have been converted to sentance case. Some places not presently in the linz dataset are included in this set, usually new places, or those otherwise unnamed. They appear with no linz id, and are not authoritative, in some cases just wild guesses.

Density was derived from the 06 meshblock boundarys (level 2, geometry fixed), multipart conversion, merging in 06 usually resident MB population then using the formula pop/area*10000. An initial urban/rural threshold level of 0.6 persons per hectare was used.

Step two was to trace the approx extent of each populated place. The main purpose of this step was to determine the relative area of each place, and to create an intersection with meshblocks for population. Step 3 involved determining the political center of each place, broadly defined as the commercial center.

Tracing was carried out at 1:9000 for small places, and 1:18000 for large places using either bing or google satellite views. No attempt was made to relate to actual town 'boundarys'. For example large parks or raceways on the urban fringe were not generally included. Outlying industrial areas were included somewhat erratically depending on their connection to urban areas.

Step 3 involved determining the centers of each place. Points were overlaid over the following layers by way of a base reference:

a. original linz placenames b. OSM nz-locations points layer c. zenbu pois, latest set as of 5/4/11 d. zenbu AllSuburbsRegions dataset (a heavily hand modified) LINZ BDE extract derived dataset courtesy Zenbu. e. LINZ road-centerlines, sealed and highway f. LINZ residential areas, g. LINZ building-locations and building footprints h. Olivier and Co nz-urban-north and south

Therefore in practice, sources c and e, form the effective basis of the point coordinates in this dataset. Be aware that e, f and g are referenced to the LINZ topo data, while c and d are likely referenced to whatever roading dataset google possesses. As such minor discrepencys may occur when moving from one to the other.

Regardless of the above, this place centers dataset was created using the following criteria, in order of priority:

• attempts to represent the present (2011) subjective 'center' of each place as defined by its commercial/retail center ie. mainstreets where they exist, any kind of central retail cluster, even a single shop in very small places.
• the coordinate is almost always at the junction of two or more roads.
• most of the time the coordinate is at or near the centroid of the poi cluster
• failing any significant retail presence, the coordinate tends to be placed near the main road junction to the community.
• when the above criteria fail to yield a definitive answer, the final criteria involves the centroids of: . the urban polygons . the clusters of building footprints/locations.

To be clear the coordinates are manually produced by eye without any kind of computation. As such the points are placed approximately perhaps plus or minus 10m, but given that the roads layers are not that flash, no attempt was made to actually snap the coordinates to the road junctions themselves.

The final step involved merging in population from SNZ meshblocks (merge+sum by location) of popl polys). Be aware that due to the inconsistent way that meshblocks are defined this will result in inaccurate populations, particular small places will collect population from their surrounding area. In any case the population will generally always overestimate by including meshblocks that just nicked the place poly. Also there are a couple of dozen cases of overlapping meshblocks between two place polys and these will double count. Which i have so far made no attempt to fix.

Merged in also tla and regions from SNZ shapes, a few of the original linz atrributes, and lastly grading the size of urban areas according to SNZ 'urban areas" criteria. Ie: class codes:

1. Not used.
2. main urban area 30K+
3. secondary urban area 10k-30K
4. minor urban area 1k-10k
5. rural center 300-1K
6. village -300

Note that while this terminology is shared with SNZ the actual places differ owing to different decisions being made about where one area ends an another starts, and what constiutes a suburb or satellite. I expect some discussion around this issue. For example i have included tinwald and washdyke as part of ashburton and timaru, but not richmond or waikawa as part of nelson and picton. Im open to discussion on these.

No attempt has or will likely ever be made to locate the entire LOC and SBRB data subsets. We will just have to wait for NZFS to release what is thought to be an authoritative set.

PROJECTION

Shapefiles are all nztm. Orig data from SNZ and LINZ was all sourced in nztm, via koordinates, or SNZ. Satellite tracings were in spherical mercator/wgs84 and converted to nztm by Qgis. Zenbu POIS were also similarly converted.

ATTRIBUTES

Shapefile: Points id : integer unique to dataset name : name of popl place, string class : urban area size as above. integer tcode : SNZ tla code, integer rcode : SNZ region code, 1-16, integer area : area of poly place features, integer in square meters. pop : 2006 usually resident popluation, being the sum of meshblocks that intersect the place poly features. Integer lid : linz geog places id desc_code : linz geog places place type code

Shapefile: Polygons gid : integer unique to dataset, shared by points and polys name : name of popl place, string, where spelling conflicts occur points wins area : place poly area, m2 Integer

LICENSE

Clarification about the minorly derived nature of LINZ and google data needs to be sought. But pending these copyright complications, the actual points data is essentially an original work, released as public domain. I retain no copyright, nor any responsibility for data accuracy, either as is, or regardless of any changes that are subsequently made to it.

Peter Scott 16/6/2011

v1.01 minor spelling and grammar edits 17/6/11

The Residential Schools Locations Dataset in Geodatabase format (IRS_Locations.gbd) contains a feature layer "IRS_Locations" that contains the locations (latitude and longitude) of Residential Schools and student hostels operated by the federal government in Canada. All the residential schools and hostels that are listed in the Residential Schools Settlement Agreement are included in this dataset, as well as several Industrial schools and residential schools that were not part of the IRRSA. This version of the dataset doesn’t include the five schools under the Newfoundland and Labrador Residential Schools Settlement Agreement. The original school location data was created by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and was provided to the researcher (Rosa Orlandini) by the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation in April 2017. The dataset was created by Rosa Orlandini, and builds upon and enhances the previous work of the Truth and Reconcilation Commission, Morgan Hite (creator of the Atlas of Indian Residential Schools in Canada that was produced for the Tk'emlups First Nation and Justice for Day Scholar's Initiative, and Stephanie Pyne (project lead for the Residential Schools Interactive Map). Each individual school location in this dataset is attributed either to RSIM, Morgan Hite, NCTR or Rosa Orlandini. Many schools/hostels had several locations throughout the history of the institution. If the school/hostel moved from its’ original location to another property, then the school is considered to have two unique locations in this dataset,the original location and the new location. For example, Lejac Indian Residential School had two locations while it was operating, Stuart Lake and Fraser Lake. If a new school building was constructed on the same property as the original school building, it isn't considered to be a new location, as is the case of Girouard Indian Residential School.When the precise location is known, the coordinates of the main building are provided, and when the precise location of the building isn’t known, an approximate location is provided. For each residential school institution location, the following information is provided: official names, alternative name, dates of operation, religious affiliation, latitude and longitude coordinates, community location, Indigenous community name, contributor (of the location coordinates), school/institution photo (when available), location point precision, type of school (hostel or residential school) and list of references used to determine the location of the main buildings or sites. Access Instructions: there are 47 files in this data package. Please download the entire data package by selecting all the 47 files and click on download. Two files will be downloaded, IRS_Locations.gbd.zip and IRS_LocFields.csv. Uncompress the IRS_Locations.gbd.zip. Use QGIS, ArcGIS Pro, and ArcMap to open the feature layer IRS_Locations that is contained within the IRS_Locations.gbd data package. The feature layer is in WGS 1984 coordinate system. There is also detailed file level metadata included in this feature layer file. The IRS_locations.csv provides the full description of the fields and codes used in this dataset.

The subspecies of American badger (Taxidea taxus berlandieri Baird, 1858), also called tlalcoyote (Figure 1), is distributed in north-central Mexico. However, its occurrence records are scarce and the few that exist are uncertain due to incorrect georeferencing or identification of the taxonomic unit. In view of this, we disgned a spatial sampling in part of the states of Coahuila de Zaragoza, Durango, Nuevo León, San Luis Potosí and Zacatecas. In this north-central protion of Mexico, we generated a grid of squares measuring 5 × 5 km over the entire study area using QGIS® 3.10 software. Subsequently, we excluded squares that included urban settlements, agricultural land, or water bodies in more than 30% of their extension; we also descarted squares located at an altitude over 2,250 meters above sea level. To perform this filtering, we used both the land use and vegetation chart of the INEGI [Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática] (2018) and the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) downloaded from the USGS page [United States Geological Survey] (2019) as a basis. As result, we obtained 3,471 squares separated by at least 5 km. Then, through simple random sampling, 177 (≈5%) squares were selected, where we generated centroids to be used as sampling sites.

In field work, between 2009 and 2015, at these 177 sites we traced a 10 × 100 m transect, where we searched for T. t. berlandieri signs (i.e., burrows and scratching posts). In this case, their burrows and scratching posts are easily observed and quantified, and there is no chance of mistaking them for burrows of other species (Long 1973; Merlin 1999). Also, we recorded possible sightings, as other studies (e.g., Merlin 1999; Elbroch 2003). As result, we only found 33 with signs of occurrence.

Figure 1. Individual of tlalcoyote (Taxidea taxus Berlandieri). Photo obtained from Naturalista (2023) and uploaded by David Molina©. All rights reserved (CC BY-NC-ND).

To increase the number of records, we included occurrence data from GBIF [Global Biodiversity Information Facility portal] (2022). We downloaded only the records that included coordinates and that their basis of registration was "preserved specimen". This, because they are correctly identified as specimens from biological collections (Maldonado et al. 2015). In addition, we only selected records for Mexico. Subsequently, we filtered the downloaded database, discarding records that were incorrectly georeferenced, with atypical and duplicate coordinates, as well as with low geospatial accuracy (e.g., less than three decimals of precision).

We loaded the remaining data into the QGIS® software and performed a spatial filtering, where we excluded data that were outside the study area, located in unlikely areas (e.g., human settlements, bodies of water, agricultural areas) and with a distance of less than 5 km from the records obtained in the field. This gave a total of 10 records from the GBIF portal. Finally, we loaded the raster layers of elevation (Elev; INEGI 2007), normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI, USGS 2019) and the slope of the terrain into the software to extract the pixel values based on the GBIF records and those obtained in the field. With this, we generated a new global dataset to which we performed environmental filtering to find environmental outliers. We plotted the normality distribution of the data for each variable and the dispersion of the data among the variables. In this filtering, we conserve all records. Figure 2 shows the normality distribution of the records as a function of Elev. Figure 3 shows the dispersion of the data between Elev and NDVI.

Figure 2. Normality distribution of T. t. berlandieri occurrence records as a function of the elevation variable (Elev).

Figure 3. Scatter plot of T. t. berlandieri occurrence records as a function of elevation (Elev) and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI).

For the north-central region of Mexico, we present the global database (i.e., Tatabe_joint.csv), as well as the database that contains only the field evidence records (i.e., Tatabe_first_order.csv) and another one with the filtered GBIF records (i.e., Tatabe_GBIF.csv).

The twisted-wing parasite order (Strepsiptera Kirby, 1813) is difficult to study due to the complexity of strepsipteran life histories, small body sizes, and a lack of accessible distribution data for most species. Here, we present a review of the strepsipteran species known from New York State. We also demonstrate successful collection methods and a survey of species carried out in an old-growth deciduous forest dominated by native New York species (Black Rock Forest, Cornwall, NY) and a private site in the Catskill Mountains (Shandaken, NY). Additionally, we model suitable habitat for Strepsiptera in the United States with species distribution modeling. We base our models on host distributions and climatic variables to inform predictions of where these twisted-wing parasites are likely to be found. With this work, we hope to provide a useful reference for the future collection of Strepsiptera. Methods Our specimens were collected in Black Rock Forest (BRF), Cornwall, New York over the course of six trips in July and August of 2022 and 2023. BRF is an old growth forest protected and maintained by a namesake scientific organization dedicated to its study—as such, this forest provides a uniquely mature and native environment in which to collect ecological data. We sampled six areas: native growth by the Black Rock Forest (BRF) Science Center (41.41408°, -74.011919°), a patch of wild growth in the parking lot (41.413249°, -74.011421°), the meadow of the Upper Reservoir (41.411015°, -74.007048°), Aleck Meadow (41.406405°, -74.014587°), meadows of Jim’s Pond (41.387490°, -74.020348°), and brush near the Stone House (41.397177°, -74.021423°) (Figure S1). In addition to the BRF sites, we sampled one privately owned site in the Catskill Mountains, Shandaken, New York in June and July 2023 (42.129425°, -74.377613°). To generate predictive models of host and Strepsiptera ranges, we gathered occurrence data for each host-parasite pair for which collection coordinates were available from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and combined it with the locality data from our collection efforts. Of the 78 strepsipteran species documented in the United States, only a subset had occurrence data. Of these, 51 species included specific coordinate data, and only 15 species had multiple unique coordinates. If hosts of these strepsipterans did not have occurrence data, we excluded these host species from the predictive analyses as well. Since our models require at least 5 occurrence datapoints to run, we ran models on genera instead of species to ensure that our predictions were robust. Our list was based on a checklist of strepsipteran species and their hosts in the United States from Kathirithamby, 2005, plus a United States checklist (Zabinski & Cook, 2023) and world checklist of the genus Stylops (Straka et al., 2015). Our GBIF search parameters specified human observation and preserved specimens as basis of record, data with coordinates, and the United States as an administrative area to restrict the search. When necessary for lessening computational time, we thinned the data by specifying coordinate uncertainty between 0-1 meters. We took a species distribution modeling approach with the R package “wallace” and its modeling application Wallace v2.0 (Kass et al., 2018, 2023), using the algorithm MaxEnt (Maximum Entropy) (Phillips et al., 2004) and incorporating Bioclim environmental data (Booth et al., 2014) as explanatory variables driving species presence. For each species of Strepsiptera, we incorporated its host presence-absence prediction (10 percentile training presence threshold visualization) as a categorical variable. We standardized our models by specifying their region of study to a shapefile of the 48 contiguous United States, which we generated in QGIS using publicly available data (United States Government, 2023). We chose each model based on corrected Akaike information criterion (AICc), average omission rate when applying a 10-percentile training presence threshold to withheld validation data (OR.10p), and area under the curve of a receiver operating characteristic plot (auc.val.avg) (Kass et al., 2021; Peterson et al., 2011). Our R scripts for each model are openly available at Dryad. We visualized all data resulting from our models in QGIS v3.2.6 (Flenniken et al., 2020), and generated our host-parasite and species richness maps by using the QGIS Raster Calculator addition function.

Abstract

The dataset is a geodatabase focusing on the distribution of freshwater fish species in Northern Greece. The study area encompasses various lakes and rivers within the regions of Thrace, Eastern, Central, and Western Macedonia, and Epirus. It classifies fish species into three categories based on their conservation status according to the IUCN Red List: Critically Endangered, Endangered, and Vulnerable. The data analysis reveals that the study area is characterized by high fish diversity, particularly in certain ecosystems such as the Evros River, Strymonas River, Aliakmonas River, Axios River, Volvi Lake, Nestos River, and Prespa Lake. These ecosystems serve as important habitats for various fish species. Mapping of the dataset shows the geographic distribution of threatened fish species, indicating that Northern Greece is a hotspot for species facing extinction risks. Overall, the dataset provides valuable insights for researchers, policymakers, and conservationists in understanding the status of fish fauna in Northern Greece and developing strategies for the protection and preservation of these important ecosystems.

Methods

Data Collection: The dataset was collected through a combination of field surveys, literature reviews, and the compilation of existing data from various reliable sources. Here's an overview of how the dataset was collected and processed:

• Freshwater Fishes and Lampreys of Greece: An Annotated Checklist
• The Red Book of Endangered Animals of Greece
• The "Red List of Threatened Species"
• The study "Monitoring and Evaluation of the Conservation Status of Fish Fauna Species of Community Interest in Greece"
• The international online fish database FishBase

Data Digitization and Georeferencing: To create a comprehensive database, we digitized and georeferenced the collected data from various sources. This involved converting information from papers, reports, and surveys into digital formats and associating them with specific geographic coordinates. Georeferencing allowed us to map the distribution of fish species within the study area accurately.

Data Integration: The digitized and georeferenced data were then integrated into a unified geodatabase. The geodatabase is a central repository that contains both spatial and descriptive data, facilitating further analysis and interpretation of the dataset.

Data Analysis: We analyzed the collected data to assess the distribution of fish species in Northern Greece, evaluate their conservation status according to the IUCN Red List categories, and identify the threats they face in their respective ecosystems. The analysis involved spatial mapping to visualize the distribution patterns of threatened fish species.

Data Validation: To ensure the accuracy and reliability of the dataset, we cross-referenced the information from different sources and validated it against known facts about the species and their habitats. This process helped to eliminate any discrepancies or errors in the dataset.

Interpretation and Findings: Finally, we interpreted the analyzed data and derived key findings about the diversity and conservation status of freshwater fish species in Northern Greece. The results were presented in the research paper, along with maps and visualizations to communicate the spatial patterns effectively.

Overall, the dataset represents a comprehensive and well-processed collection of information about fish fauna in the study area. It combines both spatial and descriptive data, providing valuable insights for understanding the distribution and conservation needs of freshwater fish populations in Northern Greece.

Usage notes

The data included with the submission is stored in a geodatabase format, specifically an ESRI Geodatabase (.gdb). A geodatabase is a container that can hold various types of geospatial data, including feature classes, attribute tables, and raster datasets. It provides a structured and organized way to store and manage geographic information.

To open and work with the geodatabase, you will need GIS software that supports ESRI Geodatabase formats. The primary software for accessing and manipulating ESRI Geodatabases is ESRI ArcGIS, which is a proprietary GIS software suite. However, there are open-source alternatives available that can also work with Geodatabase files.

Open-source software such as QGIS has support for reading and interacting with Geodatabase files. By using QGIS, you can access the data stored in the geodatabase and perform various geospatial analyses and visualizations. QGIS is a powerful and widely used open-source Geographic Information System that provides similar functionality to ESRI ArcGIS.

For tabular data within the geodatabase, you can export the tables as CSV files and open them with software like Microsoft Excel or the open-source alternative, LibreOffice Calc, for further analysis and manipulation.

Overall, the data provided in the submission is in a geodatabase format, and you can use ESRI ArcGIS or open-source alternatives like QGIS to access and work with the geospatial data it contains.

this data set contains processed multibeam sounder data from 12 dives of asterx auv performed on active faults scarps of the north anatolian fault system in the sea of marmara during the marmesonet cruise (2009). the auv carried a simrad em2000 multibeam echosounder, operating at 200 khz, and surveyed at 50 to 70 m altitude, allowing a swath width of 150-200 m. digital elevation models (dem, in meters below sealevel) and seafloor backscatter intensity mosaics (relative amplitude in db) are provided for 7 zones: tekirdağ basin w (dive 13), tekirdağ basin nw (dive 14), western high (dives 10, 11 and 12), western high e (dive 15), central high (dive 6,7,8 and 9), çınarcık basin n (dive 16), çınarcık basin s (dive 2) (see figure). the horizontal resolution and grid pixel size of the dem is 2 m. that of the backscatter intensity image is 1 m. two versions of the dem are provided. version 1 is consistent with the backscatter image. version 2 was updated applying a fofonoff correction to the depths and relocating part of the auv multibeam sounding points to fit em302 shipborne multibeam maps. version 2 depths and absolute positions are more accurate (10 m in the wgs-84 reference frame), but version 1 will give better results if the backscatter image is applied as a texture or shading on the dem. dem and backscatter raster files are provided in geotiff format (readable with arcgis 10.3 and qgis 3) and use projected cartesian coordinates. they were converted from caraibes (ifremer bathymetry and imagery processing software) output raster files with qgis using gdal translator. the coordinate reference system is a world mercator projection based on wgs-84 datum, using meter units and a standard parallel at n40° latitude (latitude of preserved scale) {proj4: +proj=merc +lon_0=0 +lat_ts=+40 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=wgs84 +units=m +no_defs}. for gis skeptics, one possible way to use these grids with generic mapping tools is to perform a reverse projection back to geographic coordinates. assuming the default proj_ellipsoid is properly set to wgs-84, the reverse projection can be applied (using gmt version 5) with the following command line:gmt grdproject auv_xxx.tif=gd -gauv_xxx.grd -jm0/40/1:1 -f -c -i -v

This data set contains processed multibeam sounder data from 12 dives of AsterX AUV performed on active faults scarps of the North Anatolian Fault system in the Sea of Marmara during the Marmesonet cruise (2009). The AUV carried a SIMRAD EM2000 multibeam echosounder, operating at 200 kHz, and surveyed at 50 to 70 m altitude, allowing a swath width of 150-200 m. Digital Elevation Models (DEM, in meters below sealevel) and seafloor backscatter intensity mosaics (relative amplitude in dB) are provided for 7 zones: Tekirdağ Basin W (dive 13), Tekirdağ Basin NW (dive 14), Western High (dives 10, 11 and 12), Western High E (dive 15), Central High (dive 6,7,8 and 9), Çınarcık Basin N (dive 16), Çınarcık Basin S (dive 2) (see figure). The horizontal resolution and grid pixel size of the DEM is 2 m. That of the backscatter intensity image is 1 m. Two versions of the DEM are provided. Version 1 is consistent with the backscatter image. Version 2 was updated applying a Fofonoff correction to the depths and relocating part of the AUV multibeam sounding points to fit EM302 shipborne multibeam maps. Version 2 depths and absolute positions are more accurate (10 m in the WGS-84 reference frame), but Version 1 will give better results if the backscatter image is applied as a texture or shading on the DEM. DEM and Backscatter raster files are provided in GeoTIFF format (readable with ArcGis 10.3 and QGIS 3) and use projected cartesian coordinates. They were converted from CARAIBES (Ifremer bathymetry and imagery processing software) output raster files with QGIS using GDAL translator. The Coordinate Reference System is a world Mercator projection based on WGS-84 datum, using meter units and a standard parallel at N40° latitude (latitude of preserved scale) {proj4: +proj=merc +lon_0=0 +lat_ts=+40 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs}. For GIS skeptics, one possible way to use these grids with Generic Mapping Tools is to perform a reverse projection back to geographic coordinates. Assuming the default PROJ_ELLIPSOID is properly set to WGS-84, the reverse projection can be applied (using gmt version 5) with the following command line: gmt grdproject AUV_XXX.tif=gd -GAUV_XXX.grd -Jm0/40/1:1 -F -C -I -V

The dataset and the validation are fully described in a Nature Scientific Data Descriptor https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-019-0265-5

If you want to use this dataset in an interactive environment, then use this link https://mybinder.org/v2/gh/GeographerAtLarge/TravelTime/HEAD

The following text is a summary of the information in the above Data Descriptor.

The dataset is a suite of global travel-time accessibility indicators for the year 2015, at approximately one-kilometre spatial resolution for the entire globe. The indicators show an estimated (and validated), land-based travel time to the nearest city and nearest port for a range of city and port sizes.

The datasets are in GeoTIFF format and are suitable for use in Geographic Information Systems and statistical packages for mapping access to cities and ports and for spatial and statistical analysis of the inequalities in access by different segments of the population.

These maps represent a unique global representation of physical access to essential services offered by cities and ports.

The datasets travel_time_to_cities_x.tif (where x has values from 1 to 12) The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time in minutes to the nearest urban area in 2015. There are 12 data layers based on different sets of urban areas, defined by their population in year 2015 (see PDF report).

travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)

The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time to the nearest port in 2015. There are 5 data layers based on different port sizes.

Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes

Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)

No data value 65535

Flags None

Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds

Spatial extent

Upper left -180, 85

Lower left -180, -60 Upper right 180, 85 Lower right 180, -60 Spatial Reference System (SRS) EPSG:4326 - WGS84 - Geographic Coordinate System (lat/long)

Temporal resolution 2015

Temporal extent Updates may follow for future years, but these are dependent on the availability of updated inputs on travel times and city locations and populations.

Methodology Travel time to the nearest city or port was estimated using an accumulated cost function (accCost) in the gdistance R package (van Etten, 2018). This function requires two input datasets: (i) a set of locations to estimate travel time to and (ii) a transition matrix that represents the cost or time to travel across a surface.

The set of locations were based on populated urban areas in the 2016 version of the Joint Research Centre’s Global Human Settlement Layers (GHSL) datasets (Pesaresi and Freire, 2016) that represent low density (LDC) urban clusters and high density (HDC) urban areas (https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datasets.php). These urban areas were represented by points, spaced at 1km distance around the perimeter of each urban area.

Marine ports were extracted from the 26th edition of the World Port Index (NGA, 2017) which contains the location and physical characteristics of approximately 3,700 major ports and terminals. Ports are represented as single points

The transition matrix was based on the friction surface (https://map.ox.ac.uk/research-project/accessibility_to_cities) from the 2015 global accessibility map (Weiss et al, 2018).

Code The R code used to generate the 12 travel time maps is included in the zip file that can be downloaded with these data layers. The processing zones are also available.

Validation The underlying friction surface was validated by comparing travel times between 47,893 pairs of locations against journey times from a Google API. Our estimated journey times were generally shorter than those from the Google API. Across the tiles, the median journey time from our estimates was 88 minutes within an interquartile range of 48 to 143 minutes while the median journey time estimated by the Google API was 106 minutes within an interquartile range of 61 to 167 minutes. Across all tiles, the differences were skewed to the left and our travel time estimates were shorter than those reported by the Google API in 72% of the tiles. The median difference was −13.7 minutes within an interquartile range of −35.5 to 2.0 minutes while the absolute difference was 30 minutes or less for 60% of the tiles and 60 minutes or less for 80% of the tiles. The median percentage difference was −16.9% within an interquartile range of −30.6% to 2.7% while the absolute percentage difference was 20% or less in 43% of the tiles and 40% or less in 80% of the tiles.

This process and results are included in the validation zip file.

Usage Notes The accessibility layers can be visualised and analysed in many Geographic Information Systems or remote sensing software such as QGIS, GRASS, ENVI, ERDAS or ArcMap, and also by statistical and modelling packages such as R or MATLAB. They can also be used in cloud-based tools for geospatial analysis such as Google Earth Engine.

The nine layers represent travel times to human settlements of different population ranges. Two or more layers can be combined into one layer by recording the minimum pixel value across the layers. For example, a map of travel time to the nearest settlement of 5,000 to 50,000 people could be generated by taking the minimum of the three layers that represent the travel time to settlements with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, 10,000 and 20,000 and, 20,000 and 50,000 people.

The accessibility layers also permit user-defined hierarchies that go beyond computing the minimum pixel value across layers. A user-defined complete hierarchy can be generated when the union of all categories adds up to the global population, and the intersection of any two categories is empty. Everything else is up to the user in terms of logical consistency with the problem at hand.

The accessibility layers are relative measures of the ease of access from a given location to the nearest target. While the validation demonstrates that they do correspond to typical journey times, they cannot be taken to represent actual travel times. Errors in the friction surface will be accumulated as part of the accumulative cost function and it is likely that locations that are further away from targets will have greater a divergence from a plausible travel time than those that are closer to the targets. Care should be taken when referring to travel time to the larger cities when the locations of interest are extremely remote, although they will still be plausible representations of relative accessibility. Furthermore, a key assumption of the model is that all journeys will use the fastest mode of transport and take the shortest path.

The High Resolution Digital Elevation Model (HRDEM) product is derived from airborne LiDAR data (mainly in the south) and satellite images in the north. The complete coverage of the Canadian territory is gradually being established. It includes a Digital Terrain Model (DTM), a Digital Surface Model (DSM) and other derived data. For DTM datasets, derived data available are slope, aspect, shaded relief, color relief and color shaded relief maps and for DSM datasets, derived data available are shaded relief, color relief and color shaded relief maps. The productive forest line is used to separate the northern and the southern parts of the country. This line is approximate and may change based on requirements. In the southern part of the country (south of the productive forest line), DTM and DSM datasets are generated from airborne LiDAR data. They are offered at a 1 m or 2 m resolution and projected to the UTM NAD83 (CSRS) coordinate system and the corresponding zones. The datasets at a 1 m resolution cover an area of 10 km x 10 km while datasets at a 2 m resolution cover an area of 20 km by 20 km. In the northern part of the country (north of the productive forest line), due to the low density of vegetation and infrastructure, only DSM datasets are generally generated. Most of these datasets have optical digital images as their source data. They are generated at a 2 m resolution using the Polar Stereographic North coordinate system referenced to WGS84 horizontal datum or UTM NAD83 (CSRS) coordinate system. Each dataset covers an area of 50 km by 50 km. For some locations in the north, DSM and DTM datasets can also be generated from airborne LiDAR data. In this case, these products will be generated with the same specifications as those generated from airborne LiDAR in the southern part of the country. The HRDEM product is referenced to the Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum of 2013 (CGVD2013), which is now the reference standard for heights across Canada. Source data for HRDEM datasets is acquired through multiple projects with different partners. Since data is being acquired by project, there is no integration or edgematching done between projects. The tiles are aligned within each project. The product High Resolution Digital Elevation Model (HRDEM) is part of the CanElevation Series created in support to the National Elevation Data Strategy implemented by NRCan. Collaboration is a key factor to the success of the National Elevation Data Strategy. Refer to the “Supporting Document” section to access the list of the different partners including links to their respective data.

Summary:

The files contained herein represent green roof footprints in NYC visible in 2016 high-resolution orthoimagery of NYC (described at https://github.com/CityOfNewYork/nyc-geo-metadata/blob/master/Metadata/Metadata_AerialImagery.md). Previously documented green roofs were aggregated in 2016 from multiple data sources including from NYC Department of Parks and Recreation and the NYC Department of Environmental Protection, greenroofs.com, and greenhomenyc.org. Footprints of the green roof surfaces were manually digitized based on the 2016 imagery, and a sample of other roof types were digitized to create a set of training data for classification of the imagery. A Mahalanobis distance classifier was employed in Google Earth Engine, and results were manually corrected, removing non-green roofs that were classified and adjusting shape/outlines of the classified green roofs to remove significant errors based on visual inspection with imagery across multiple time points. Ultimately, these initial data represent an estimate of where green roofs existed as of the imagery used, in 2016.

These data are associated with an existing GitHub Repository, https://github.com/tnc-ny-science/NYC_GreenRoofMapping, and as needed and appropriate pending future work, versioned updates will be released here.

Terms of Use:

The Nature Conservancy and co-authors of this work shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein. Any sale, distribution, loan, or offering for use of these digital data, in whole or in part, is prohibited without the approval of The Nature Conservancy and co-authors. The use of these data to produce other GIS products and services with the intent to sell for a profit is prohibited without the written consent of The Nature Conservancy and co-authors. All parties receiving these data must be informed of these restrictions. Authors of this work shall be acknowledged as data contributors to any reports or other products derived from these data.

Associated Files:

As of this release, the specific files included here are:

• GreenRoofData2016_20180917.geojson is in the human-readable, GeoJSON format, in geographic coordinates (Lat/Long, WGS84; EPSG 4263).
• GreenRoofData2016_20180917.gpkg is in the GeoPackage format, which is an Open Standard readable by most GIS software including Esri products (tested on ArcMap 10.3.1 and multiple versions of QGIS). This dataset is in the New York State Plan Coordinate System (units in feet) for the Long Island Zone, North American Datum 1983, EPSG 2263.
• GreenRoofData2016_20180917_Shapefile.zip is a zipped folder containing a Shapefile and associated files. Please note that some field names were truncated due to limitations of Shapefiles, but columns are in the same order as for other files and in the same order as listed below. This dataset is in the New York State Plan Coordinate System (units in feet) for the Long Island Zone, North American Datum 1983, EPSG 2263.
• GreenRoofData2016_20180917.csv is a comma-separated values file (CSV) with coordinates for centroids for the green roofs stored in the table itself. This allows for easily opening the data in a tool like spreadsheet software (e.g., Microsoft Excel) or a text editor.

Column Information for the datasets:

Some, but not all fields were joined to the green roof footprint data based on building footprint and tax lot data; those datasets are embedded as hyperlinks below.

• fid - Unique identifier
• bin - NYC Building ID Number based on overlap between green roof areas and a building footprint dataset for NYC from August, 2017. (Newer building footprint datasets do not have linkages to the tax lot identifier (bbl), thus this older dataset was used). The most current building footprint dataset should be available at: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Housing-Development/Building-Footprints/nqwf-w8eh. Associated metadata for fields from that dataset are available at https://github.com/CityOfNewYork/nyc-geo-metadata/blob/master/Metadata/Metadata_BuildingFootprints.md.
• bbl - Boro Block and Lot number as a single string. This field is a tax lot identifier for NYC, which can be tied to the Digital Tax Map (http://gis.nyc.gov/taxmap/map.htm) and PLUTO/MapPLUTO (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/data-maps/open-data/dwn-pluto-mappluto.page). Metadata for fields pulled from PLUTO/MapPLUTO can be found in the PLUTO Data Dictionary found on the aforementioned page. All joins to this bbl were based on MapPLUTO version 18v1.
• gr_area - Total area of the footprint of the green roof as per this data layer, in square feet, calculated using the projected coordinate system (EPSG 2263).
• bldg_area - Total area of the footprint of the associated building, in square feet, calculated using the projected coordinate system (EPSG 2263).
• prop_gr - Proportion of the building covered by green roof according to this layer (gr_area/bldg_area).
• cnstrct_yr - Year the building was constructed, pulled from the Building Footprint data.
• doitt_id - An identifier for the building assigned by the NYC Dept. of Information Technology and Telecommunications, pulled from the Building Footprint Data.
• heightroof - Height of the roof of the associated building, pulled from the Building Footprint Data.
• feat_code - Code describing the type of building, pulled from the Building Footprint Data.
• groundelev - Lowest elevation at the building level, pulled from the Building Footprint Data.
• qa - Flag indicating a positive QA/QC check (using multiple types of imagery); all data in this dataset should have 'Good'
• notes - Any notes about the green roof taken during visual inspection of imagery; for example, it was noted if the green roof appeared to be missing in newer imagery, or if there were parts of the roof for which it was unclear whether there was green roof area or potted plants.
• classified - Flag indicating whether the green roof was detected image classification. (1 for yes, 0 for no)
• digitized - Flag indicating whether the green roof was digitized prior to image classification and used as training data. (1 for yes, 0 for no)
• newlyadded - Flag indicating whether the green roof was detected solely by visual inspection after the image classification and added. (1 for yes, 0 for no)
• original_source - Indication of what the original data source was, whether a specific website, agency such as NYC Dept. of Parks and Recreation (DPR), or NYC Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP). Multiple sources are separated by a slash.
• address - Address based on MapPLUTO, joined to the dataset based on bbl.
• borough - Borough abbreviation pulled from MapPLUTO.
• ownertype - Owner type field pulled from MapPLUTO.
• zonedist1 - Zoning District 1 type pulled from MapPLUTO.
• spdist1 - Special District 1 pulled from MapPLUTO.
• bbl_fixed - Flag to indicate whether bbl was manually fixed. Since tax lot data may have changed slightly since the release of the building footprint data used in this work, a small percentage of bbl codes had to be manually updated based on overlay between the green roof footprint and the MapPLUTO data, when no join was feasible based on the bbl code from the building footprint data. (1 for yes, 0 for no)

For GreenRoofData2016_20180917.csv there are two additional columns, representing the coordinates of centroids in geographic coordinates (Lat/Long, WGS84; EPSG 4263):

• xcoord - Longitude in decimal degrees.
• ycoord - Latitude in decimal degrees.

Acknowledgements:

This work was primarily supported through funding from the J.M. Kaplan Fund, awarded to the New York City Program of The Nature Conservancy, with additional support from the New York Community Trust, through New York City Audubon and the Green Roof Researchers Alliance.

Since 1998, approximately 148,134,806 m2 (14,813.5 Ha) of seagrass habitat has been mapped across the United Kingdom coastline. This was calculated from a total of 1,872 polygons from 67 datasets of mapped seagrass meadows using various methodologies of surveying (diving, aerial photography, hydrographic surveys, walking surveys, drone mapping, in situ assessments) and various resolutions. This data was collated from a wide range of databases outlined in the paper by Green et al. (2021; doi:10.3389/fpls.2021.629962). The datasets were subsequently projected into QGIS, merged, and dissolved into one layer as one single shapefile. The resulting dataset is a composite shapefile depicting mapped seagrass distribution across the United Kingdom, saved as a QGIS polygon shapefile, using the Assigned Coordinate Reference System (CRS) EPSG:4326 – WGS 84.

This index contains a basic set of primary spatial, toponym, attribute, and external link information on more than 500 archaeological locations where texts written in cuneiform and derived scripts have been found, prepared by researchers of the Department of Linguistics and Philology of Uppsala University. The index is intended as a tool for students and researchers in cuneiform studies and related areas and as an aid to cultural heritage managers and educators in communicating and safeguarding this unique body of world written heritage. The version 1.2 index contains a total nineteen fields, namely one primary ID, one spatial accuracy field, six integer and string fields for external data links, nine string fields with toponyms, and two integer fields making up the point coordinate of the record. Coordinates given use the WGS 1984 geographic coordinate reference system (EPSG 4326) and have been truncated to four decimal digits. Site locations have been traced from archaeological gazetteers and web mapping services (e.g. Pleiades and OpenStreetMap) and digitally generated from optical recognition using current and legacy satellite imagery datasets in QGIS 3.x. Versions v.0.x are prepared as part of Memories For Life: Materiality and Memory of Ancient Near Eastern Inscribed Private Objects, funded by a Research Project Grant from the Swedish Research Council (grant no. 2016-02028). Versions v.1.x and higher are prepared as part of Geomapping Landscapes of Writing (GLoW): Large-scale Spatial Analysis of the Cuneiform Corpus (c. 3400 BCE to 100 CE), funded by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, the Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences Research (grant number MXM19-1160:1).

OpenStreetMap (OSM) is a free, editable map & spatial database of the whole world. This dataset is an extract of OpenStreetMap data for French Polynesia in a GIS-friendly format.

The OSM data has been split into separate layers based on themes (buildings, roads, points of interest, etc), and it comes bundled with a QGIS project and styles, to help you get started with using the data in your maps. This OSM product will be updated weekly.

The goal is to increase awareness among Pacific GIS users of the richness of OpenStreetMap data in Pacific countries, as well as the gaps, so that they can take advantage of this free resource, become interested in contributing to OSM, and perhaps join the global OSM community.

OpenStreetMap data is open data, with a very permissive licence. You can download it and use it for any purpose you like, as long as you credit OpenStreetMap and its contributors. You don't have to pay anyone, or ask anyone's permission. When you download and use the data, you're granted permission to do that under the Open Database Licence (ODbL). The only conditions are that you Attribute, Share-Alike, and Keep open.

The required credit is “© OpenStreetMap contributors”. If you make a map, you should display this credit somewhere. If you provide the data to someone else, you should make sure the license accompanies the data

Effective population size (Ne) is a particularly useful metric for conservation as it affects genetic drift, inbreeding and adaptive potential within populations. Current guidelines recommend a minimum Ne of 50 and 500 to avoid short-term inbreeding and to preserve long-term adaptive potential, respectively. However, the extent to which wild populations reach these thresholds globally has not been investigated, nor has the relationship between Ne and human activities. Through a quantitative review, we generated a dataset with 4610 georeferenced Ne estimates from 3829 unique populations, extracted from 723 articles. These data show that certain taxonomic groups are less likely to meet 50/500 thresholds and are disproportionately impacted by human activities; plant, mammal, and amphibian populations had a <54% probability of reaching = 50 and a <9% probability of reaching = 500. Populations listed as being of conservation concern according to the IUCN Red List had a smaller median than unlisted populations, and this was consistent across all taxonomic groups. was reduced in areas with a greater Global Human Footprint, especially for amphibians, birds, and mammals, however relationships varied between taxa. We also highlight several considerations for future works, including the role that gene flow and subpopulation structure plays in the estimation of in wild populations, and the need for finer-scale taxonomic analyses. Our findings provide guidance for more specific thresholds based on Ne and help prioritize assessment of populations from taxa most at risk of failing to meet conservation thresholds. Methods Literature search, screening, and data extraction A primary literature search was conducted using ISI Web of Science Core Collection and any articles that referenced two popular single-sample Ne estimation software packages: LDNe (Waples & Do, 2008), and NeEstimator v2 (Do et al., 2014). The initial search included 4513 articles published up to the search date of May 26, 2020. Articles were screened for relevance in two steps, first based on title and abstract, and then based on the full text. For each step, a consistency check was performed using 100 articles to ensure they were screened consistently between reviewers (n = 6). We required a kappa score (Collaboration for Environmental Evidence, 2020) of ³ 0.6 in order to proceed with screening of the remaining articles. Articles were screened based on three criteria: (1) Is an estimate of Ne or Nb reported; (2) for a wild animal or plant population; (3) using a single-sample genetic estimation method. Further details on the literature search and article screening are found in the Supplementary Material (Fig. S1). We extracted data from all studies retained after both screening steps (title and abstract; full text). Each line of data entered in the database represents a single estimate from a population. Some populations had multiple estimates over several years, or from different estimation methods (see Table S1), and each of these was entered on a unique row in the database. Data on N̂e, N̂b, or N̂c were extracted from tables and figures using WebPlotDigitizer software version 4.3 (Rohatgi, 2020). A full list of data extracted is found in Table S2. Data Filtering After the initial data collation, correction, and organization, there was a total of 8971 Ne estimates (Fig. S1). We used regression analyses to compare Ne estimates on the same populations, using different estimation methods (LD, Sibship, and Bayesian), and found that the R2 values were very low (R2 values of <0.1; Fig. S2 and Fig. S3). Given this inconsistency, and the fact that LD is the most frequently used method in the literature (74% of our database), we proceeded with only using the LD estimates for our analyses. We further filtered the data to remove estimates where no sample size was reported or no bias correction (Waples, 2006) was applied (see Fig. S6 for more details). Ne is sometimes estimated to be infinity or negative within a population, which may reflect that a population is very large (i.e., where the drift signal-to-noise ratio is very low), and/or that there is low precision with the data due to small sample size or limited genetic marker resolution (Gilbert & Whitlock, 2015; Waples & Do, 2008; Waples & Do, 2010) We retained infinite and negative estimates only if they reported a positive lower confidence interval (LCI), and we used the LCI in place of a point estimate of Ne or Nb. We chose to use the LCI as a conservative proxy for in cases where a point estimate could not be generated, given its relevance for conservation (Fraser et al., 2007; Hare et al., 2011; Waples & Do 2008; Waples 2023). We also compared results using the LCI to a dataset where infinite or negative values were all assumed to reflect very large populations and replaced the estimate with an arbitrary large value of 9,999 (for reference in the LCI dataset only 51 estimates, or 0.9%, had an or > 9999). Using this 9999 dataset, we found that the main conclusions from the analyses remained the same as when using the LCI dataset, with the exception of the HFI analysis (see discussion in supplementary material; Table S3, Table S4 Fig. S4, S5). We also note that point estimates with an upper confidence interval of infinity (n = 1358) were larger on average (mean = 1380.82, compared to 689.44 and 571.64, for estimates with no CIs or with an upper boundary, respectively). Nevertheless, we chose to retain point estimates with an upper confidence interval of infinity because accounting for them in the analyses did not alter the main conclusions of our study and would have significantly decreased our sample size (Fig. S7, Table S5). We also retained estimates from populations that were reintroduced or translocated from a wild source (n = 309), whereas those from captive sources were excluded during article screening (see above). In exploratory analyses, the removal of these data did not influence our results, and many of these populations are relevant to real-world conservation efforts, as reintroductions and translocations are used to re-establish or support small, at-risk populations. We removed estimates based on duplication of markers (keeping estimates generated from SNPs when studies used both SNPs and microsatellites), and duplication of software (keeping estimates from NeEstimator v2 when studies used it alongside LDNe). Spatial and temporal replication were addressed with two separate datasets (see Table S6 for more information): the full dataset included spatially and temporally replicated samples, while these two types of replication were removed from the non-replicated dataset. Finally, for all populations included in our final datasets, we manually extracted their protection status according to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Taxa were categorized as “Threatened” (Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered), “Nonthreatened” (Least Concern, Near Threatened), or “N/A” (Data Deficient, Not Evaluated). Mapping and Human Footprint Index (HFI) All populations were mapped in QGIS using the coordinates extracted from articles. The maps were created using a World Behrmann equal area projection. For the summary maps, estimates were grouped into grid cells with an area of 250,000 km2 (roughly 500 km x 500 km, but the dimensions of each cell vary due to distortions from the projection). Within each cell, we generated the count and median of Ne. We used the Global Human Footprint dataset (WCS & CIESIN, 2005) to generate a value of human influence (HFI) for each population at its geographic coordinates. The footprint ranges from zero (no human influence) to 100 (maximum human influence). Values were available in 1 km x 1 km grid cell size and were projected over the point estimates to assign a value of human footprint to each population. The human footprint values were extracted from the map into a spreadsheet to be used for statistical analyses. Not all geographic coordinates had a human footprint value associated with them (i.e., in the oceans and other large bodies of water), therefore marine fishes were not included in our HFI analysis. Overall, 3610 Ne estimates in our final dataset had an associated footprint value.

OpenStreetMap (OSM) is a free, editable map & spatial database of the whole world. This dataset is an extract of OpenStreetMap data for Tuvalu in a GIS-friendly format.

The OSM data has been split into separate layers based on themes (buildings, roads, points of interest, etc), and it comes bundled with a QGIS project and styles, to help you get started with using the data in your maps. This OSM product will be updated weekly.

The goal is to increase awareness among Pacific GIS users of the richness of OpenStreetMap data in Pacific countries, as well as the gaps, so that they can take advantage of this free resource, become interested in contributing to OSM, and perhaps join the global OSM community.

Graduate tracer studies provide an avenue for assessing the impact of residency training on the distribution and access to specialty care and exploring job and professional satisfaction of alumnus. This study examined how the Mbarara University of Science and Technology (MUST) clinical residency training program influenced the spatial distribution and career paths of specialists. We conducted a mixed methods study involving an online survey and 12 in-depth interviews (IDIs) from June to September 2022. The online survey was distributed to a convenient sample of clinical residency alumnus from MUST via email and Whatsapp groups. Alumnus were mapped across the countries of current work in QGIS (version 3.16.3) using GPS coordinates. Descriptive and thematic analyses were also conducted. Ninety-five alumni (34.3%) responded to the tracer survey. The majority were males (80%), aged 31–40 years (69%), and Ugandans (72%). Most graduated after 2018 (83%) as obstetricians/gynecologists (38%) and general surgeons (19%). There was uneven distribution of specialists across Uganda and the East-African community—with significant concentration in urban cities of Uganda at specialized hospitals and academic institutions. Residency training helped prepare and equip alumnus with competencies relevant to their current work tasks (48%) and other spheres of life (45%). All respondents were currently employed, with the majority engaged in clinical practice (82%) and had obtained their first employment within six months after graduation (76%). The qualitative interviews revealed the reported ease in finding jobs after the training and the relevance of the training in enhancing the alumnus’ ability to impact those they serve in teaching, research, management, and clinical care. Graduates cited low payment, limited resources, and slow career advancement concerns. Residency training improves the graduates’ professional/career growth and the quality of health care services. Strategic specialty training addressing imbalances in subspecialties and rural areas coverage could optimize access to specialist services.

This database contains nine land use / land cover datasets collected in a standardized manner between 2013 and 2022 in seven tropical countries within the framework of the international JECAM initiative: Burkina Faso (Koumbia), Madagascar (Antsirabe), Brazil (São Paulo and Tocantins), Senegal (Nioro, Niakhar, Mboro, Tattaguine and Koussanar), Kenya (Muranga), Cambodia (Kandal) and South Africa (Mpumalanga) (cf Study_sites‧kml). These quality-controlled datasets are distinguished by ground data collected at field scale by local experts, with precise geographic coordinates, and following a common protocol. This database, which contains 31879 records (24 287 crop and 7 592 non-crop) is a geographic layer in Shapefile format in a Geographic Coordinates System with Datum WGS84. Field surveys were conducted yearly in each study zone, either around the growing peak of the cropping season, for the sites with a main growing season linked to the rainy season such as Burkina Faso, or seasonally, for the sites with multiple cropping (e‧g. São Paulo site). The GPS waypoints were gathered following an opportunistic sampling approach along the roads or tracks according to their accessibility, while ensuring the best representativity of the existing cropping systems in place. GPS waypoints were also recorded on different types of non-crop classes (e‧g. natural vegetation, settlement areas, water bodies) to allow differentiating crop and non-crop classes. Waypoints were only recorded for homogenous fields/entities of at least 20 x 20 m². To facilitate the location of sampling areas and the remote acquisition of waypoints, field operators were equipped with GPS tablets providing access to a QGIS project with Very High Spatial Resolution (VHSR) images ordered just before the surveys. For each waypoint, a set of attributes, corresponding to the cropping practices (crop type, cropping pattern, management techniques) were recorded (for more informations about data, see data paper being published). These datasets can be used to validate existing cropland and crop types/practices maps in the tropics, but also, to assess the performances and the robustness of classification methods of cropland and crop types/practices in a large range of Southern farming systems.

This dataset contains shapefile boundaries for CA State, counties and places from the US Census Bureau's 2023 MAF/TIGER database. Current geography in the 2023 TIGER/Line Shapefiles generally reflects the boundaries of governmental units in effect as of January 1, 2023.