Annual Resident Population Estimates, Estimated Components of Resident Population Change, and Rates of the Components of Resident Population Change; for the United States, States, Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Counties, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // The contents of this file are released on a rolling basis from December through March. // Note: Total population change includes a residual. This residual represents the change in population that cannot be attributed to any specific demographic component. // Note: The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // The Office of Management and Budget's statistical area delineations for metropolitan, micropolitan, and combined statistical areas, as well as metropolitan divisions, are those issued by that agency in September 2018. // Current data on births, deaths, and migration are used to calculate population change since the 2010 Census. An annual time series of estimates is produced, beginning with the census and extending to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., Vintage 2019) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the entire estimates series is revised. Additional information, including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, research papers, and methodology is available on website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html.

This dataset contains human population density for the state of California and a small portion of western Nevada for the year 2000. The population density is based on US Census Bureau data and has a cell size of 990 meters.

The purpose of the dataset is to provide a consistent statewide human density GIS layer for display, analysis and modeling purposes.

The state of California, and a very small portion of western Nevada, was divided into pixels with a cell size 0.98 km2, or 990 meters on each side. For each pixel, the US Census Bureau data was clipped, the total human population was calculated, and that population was divided by the area to get human density (people/km2) for each pixel.

These Demographic Data are U.S. Census American Community Survey Data, from the 2014 5-year set. Data Driven Detroit calculated densities (Per Sq Mile) by dividing the population by the ALAND10 field, which is the census land area field, in square meters.

This is a hybrid gridded dataset of demographic data for the world, given as 5-year population bands at a 0.5 degree grid resolution. This dataset combines the NASA SEDAC Gridded Population of the World version 4 (GPWv4) with the ISIMIP Histsoc gridded population data and the United Nations World Population Program (WPP) demographic modelling data. Demographic fractions are given for the time period covered by the UN WPP model (1950-2050) while demographic totals are given for the time period covered by the combination of GPWv4 and Histsoc (1950-2020) Method - demographic fractions Demographic breakdown of country population by grid cell is calculated by combining the GPWv4 demographic data given for 2010 with the yearly country breakdowns from the UN WPP. This combines the spatial distribution of demographics from GPWv4 with the temporal trends from the UN WPP. This makes it possible to calculate exposure trends from 1980 to the present day. To combine the UN WPP demographics with the GPWv4 demographics, we calculate for each country the proportional change in fraction of demographic in each age band relative to 2010 as: (\delta_{year,\ country,age}^{\text{wpp}} = f_{year,\ country,age}^{\text{wpp}}/f_{2010,country,age}^{\text{wpp}}) Where: - (\delta_{year,\ country,age}^{\text{wpp}}) is the ratio of change in demographic for a given age and and country from the UN WPP dataset. - (f_{year,\ country,age}^{\text{wpp}}) is the fraction of population in the UN WPP dataset for a given age band, country, and year. - (f_{2010,country,age}^{\text{wpp}}) is the fraction of population in the UN WPP dataset for a given age band, country for the year 2020. The gridded demographic fraction is then calculated relative to the 2010 demographic data given by GPWv4. For each subset of cells corresponding to a given country c, the fraction of population in a given age band is calculated as: (f_{year,c,age}^{\text{gpw}} = \delta_{year,\ country,age}^{\text{wpp}}*f_{2010,c,\text{age}}^{\text{gpw}}) Where: - (f_{year,c,age}^{\text{gpw}}) is the fraction of the population in a given age band for given year, for the grid cell c. - (f_{2010,c,age}^{\text{gpw}}) is the fraction of the population in a given age band for 2010, for the grid cell c. The matching between grid cells and country codes is performed using the GPWv4 gridded country code lookup data and country name lookup table. The final dataset is assembled by combining the cells from all countries into a single gridded time series. This time series covers the whole period from 1950-2050, corresponding to the data available in the UN WPP model. Method - demographic totals Total population data from 1950 to 1999 is drawn from ISIMIP Histsoc, while data from 2000-2020 is drawn from GPWv4. These two gridded time series are simply joined at the cut-over date to give a single dataset covering 1950-2020. The total population per age band per cell is calculated by multiplying the population fractions by the population totals per grid cell. Note that as the total population data only covers until 2020, the time span covered by the demographic population totals data is 1950-2020 (not 1950-2050). Disclaimer This dataset is a hybrid of different datasets with independent methodologies. No guarantees are made about the spatial or temporal consistency across dataset boundaries. The dataset may contain outlier points (e.g single cells with demographic fractions >1). This dataset is produced on a 'best effort' basis and has been found to be broadly consistent with other approaches, but may contain inconsistencies which not been identified. {"references": ["UN. (2019). World Population Prospects 2019: Data Booklet. Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2019_DataBooklet.pdf", "NASA SEDAC, & CIESIN. (2016). Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): Population Count. New York, New York, USA: Columbia University. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.7927/H4X63JVC", "ISIMIP. (2018). ISIMIP Project Design and Simulation Protocol. Retrieved from https://www.isimip.org/gettingstarted/input-data-bias-correction/details/31/"]}

Datasets archived here consist of all data analyzed in Duan et al. 2015 from Journal of Applied Ecology. Specifically, these data were collected from annual sampling of emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) immature stages and associated parasitoids on infested ash trees (Fraxinus) in Southern Michigan, where three introduced biological control agents had been released between 2007 - 2010. Detailed data collection procedures can be found in Duan et al. 2012, 2013, and 2015. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Duan J Data on EAB larval density-bird predation and unknown factor from Journal of Applied Ecology. File Name: Duan J Data on EAB larval density-bird predation and unknown factor from Journal of Applied Ecology.xlsxResource Description: This data set is used to calculate mean EAB density (per m2 of ash phloem area), bird predation rate and mortality rate caused by unknown factors and analyzed with JMP (10.2) scripts for mixed effect linear models in Duan et al. 2015 (Journal of Applied Ecology).Resource Title: DUAN J Data on Parasitism L1-L2 Excluded from Journal of Applied Ecology. File Name: DUAN J Data on Parasitism L1-L2 Excluded from Journal of Applied Ecology.xlsxResource Description: This data set is used to construct life tables and calculation of net population growth rate of emerald ash borer for each site. The net population growth rates were then analyzed with JMP (10.2) scripts for mixed effect linear models in Duan et al. 2015 (Journal of Applied Ecology).Resource Title: DUAN J Data on EAB Life Tables Calculation from Journal of Applied Ecology. File Name: DUAN J Data on EAB Life Tables Calculation from Journal of Applied Ecology.xlsxResource Description: This data set is used to calculate parasitism rate of EAB larvae for each tree and then analyzed with JMP (10.2) scripts for mixed effect linear models on in Duan et al. 2015 (Journal of Applied Ecology).Resource Title: READ ME for Emerald Ash Borer Biocontrol Study from Journal of Applied Ecology. File Name: READ_ME_for_Emerald_Ash_Borer_Biocontrol_Study_from_Journal_of_Applied_Ecology.docxResource Description: Additional information and definitions for the variables/content in the three Emerald Ash Borer Biocontrol Study tables: Data on EAB Life Tables Calculation Data on EAB larval density-bird predation and unknown factor Data on Parasitism L1-L2 Excluded from Journal of Applied Ecology Resource Title: Data Dictionary for Emerald Ash Borer Biocontrol Study from Journal of Applied Ecology. File Name: AshBorerAnd Parasitoids_DataDictionary.csvResource Description: CSV data dictionary for the variables/content in the three Emerald Ash Borer Biocontrol Study tables: Data on EAB Life Tables Calculation Data on EAB larval density-bird predation and unknown factor Data on Parasitism L1-L2 Excluded from Journal of Applied Ecology Fore more information see the related READ ME file.

The total population in the United States was estimated at 341.2 million people in 2024, according to the latest census figures and projections from Trading Economics. This dataset provides - United States Population - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Computed prospective ages for 1950-2100 for all countries and regions based on 2017 Revision of the UN World Population Prospects.Content:1. codebook.pdf contains a brief overview of the dataset, its background and a description of the cases and variables.2. methods.pdf is a (draft but complete) write up of the calculations used to create the dataset.3. 2017_prospective-ages.csv is the human readable form of the prospective age dataset containing the calculated prospective old-age thresholds for 241 countries and regions, for the period 1950-2100, for men, women and both together, as well as the proportions of the population (male, female and total) over these thresholds.This figshare fileset is published directly from the github repository ProspectiveAgeData. For an application of this data see the factsheet on ageing in the Middle East and Northern Africa which will be published in Population Horizons journal.

These data represent the estimated population of the Kingdom by governorate for the last available year

IPEADS15 - Estimated Population. Published by Central Statistics Office. Available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY-4.0).Estimated Population...

The Global Population Density Grid Time Series Estimates provide a back-cast time series of population density grids based on the year 2000 population grid from SEDAC's Global Rural-Urban Mapping Project, Version 1 (GRUMPv1) data set. The grids were created by using rates of population change between decades from the coarser resolution History Database of the Global Environment (HYDE) database to back-cast the GRUMPv1 population density grids. Mismatches between the spatial extent of the HYDE calculated rates and GRUMPv1 population data were resolved via infilling rate cells based on a focal mean of values. Finally, the grids were adjusted so that the population totals for each country equaled the UN World Population Prospects (2008 Revision) estimates for that country for the respective year (1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000). These data do not represent census observations for the years prior to 2000, and therefore can at best be thought of as estimations of the populations in given locations. The population grids are consistent internally within the time series, but are not recommended for use in creating longer time series with any other population grids, including GRUMPv1, Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4), or non-SEDAC developed population grids. These population grids served as an input to SEDAC's Global Estimated Net Migration Grids by Decade: 1970-2000 data set.

The Census Planning Database is produced by the U.S. Census Bureau. It assembles a range of housing, demographic, socioeconomic, and census operational data that can be used for survey and census planning.

The Planning Database uses selected Census and selected 2012-2016 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates. In addition to variables extracted from the census and ACS databases, operational variables include the 2010 Census Mail Return Rate for each block group and tract.

This dataset is a subset of the 2018 Census Planning Database, filtered for the state of Connecticut, and including calculated percentages for a variety of variables. Variables relating to geography, population, households, housing units, census operations, and hard to count populations at the tract and block level can also be found on the CT Data Portal with the tag "Census 2020."

A Population technical workgroup was formed in Sana’a (IOM, UNFPA, OCHA, NAMCHA and CSO ) and another one in Aden (IOM, OCHA, CSO, MOPIC including Executive Unit). IDP data flow figures (from district to district) were collected, cross checked between different sources (IOM DTM, NAMCHA, Executive unit) in cases multiple datasets for the same location were available. This resulted in a country-wide IDP movement database.

The TWGs agreed to use this database to calculate the estimated population using the following formula : Estimated Population = CSO projected population( 2019) – IDPS who left the district + idps who came to the district

All members in both workgroups agreed on the final results on 3 Dec 2018. The attached dataset represents the results of the work of both groups and will be used for 2019 HNO and HRP.

Excel Age-Range creator for Office for National Statistics (ONS) Mid year population estimates (MYE) covering each year between 1999 and 2016

These files take into account the revised estimates for 2002-2010 released in April 2013 down to Local Authority level and the post 2011 estimates based on the Census results. Scotland and Northern Ireland data has not been revised, so Great Britain and United Kingdom totals comprise the original data for these plus revised England and Wales figures.

This Excel based tool enables users to query the single year of age raw data so that any age range can easily be calculated without having to carry out often complex, and time consuming formulas that could also be open to human error. Simply select the lower and upper age range for both males and females and the spreadsheet will return the total population for the range. Please adhere to the terms and conditions of supply contained within the file.

Tip: You can copy and paste the rows you are interested in to another worksheet by using the filters at the top of the columns and then select all by pressing Ctrl+A. Then simply copy and paste the cells to a new location.

ONS Mid year population estimates

Open Excel tool (London Boroughs, Regions and National, 1999-2016)

Also available is a custom-age tool for all geographies in the UK. Open the tool for all UK geographies (local authority and above) for: 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015.

This full MYE dataset by single year of age (SYA) age and gender is available as a Datastore package here.

Ward Level Population estimates

Single year of age population tool for 2002 to 2015 for all wards in London.

New 2014 Ward boundary estimates

Ward boundary changes in May 2014 only affected three London boroughs - Hackney, Kensington and Chelsea, and Tower Hamlets. The estimates between 2001-2013 have been calculated by the GLA by taking the proportion of a the old ward that falls within the new ward based on the proportion of population living in each area at the 2011 Census. Therefore, these estimates are purely indicative and are not official statistics and not endorsed by ONS. From 2014 onwards, ONS began publishing official estimates for the new ward boundaries. Download here.

National and subnational mid-year population estimates for the UK and its constituent countries by administrative area, age and sex (including components of population change, median age and population density).

Check out the PhilaStats Vital Statistics Dashboard for the City of Philadelphia, for interactive maps and charts of vital statistics and trends in natality (births), mortality (deaths), and population for Philadelphia residents. See also the technical notes for the creation and visualization of Philadelphia's Vital Statistics. View metadata for key information about this dataset.Vital statistics are annually published calculations on birth and death records that facilitate the tracking of important health and population trends in Philadelphia over time. Public officials, researchers, and citizens alike may use vital statistics to plan for population shifts and healthcare needs, to perform research, and to stay informed and up-to-date on the natality and mortality trends in our City. The vital statistics dataset consists of natality and mortality data on Philadelphia City residents for each year of finalized data available, back to 2011 for births and 2012 for deaths. Citywide metrics and metrics by Philadelphia Planning District are provided for both natality and mortality metrics. A population estimates table is also provided, which includes the population counts used to calculate some metrics.The Vital Statistics - Population dataset is also available aggregated by planning district and in this citywide table.For questions about this dataset, contact epi@phila.gov. For technical assistance, email maps@phila.gov.

Each year, the Forecasting and Trends Office (FTO) publishes population estimates and future year projections. The population estimates can be used for a variety of planning studies including statewide and regional transportation plan updates, subarea and corridor studies, and funding allocations for various planning agencies.The 2020 population estimates reported are based on the US Census Bureau 2020 Decennial Census. The 2021 population estimates are based on the population estimates developed by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) at the University of Florida. BEBR uses the decennial census count for April 1, 2020, as the starting point for state-level projections. More information is available from BEBR here.This dataset contains boundaries of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)/Transportation Planning Organizations (TPOs)/Transportation Planning Agencies (TPAs) in the State of Florida with 2020 census population and 2021 population estimates. All legal boundaries and names in this dataset are from the US Census Bureau’s TIGER/Line Files (2021).BEBR provides 2021 population estimates for counties in Florida. However, MPO/TPO/TPA boundaries may not coincide with the jurisdictional boundaries of counties and can spread into several counties. To estimate the population for an MPO/TPO/TPA, first the ratio of the subject MPO/TPO/TPA that is contained within a county (or sub-area) to the area of the entire county was determined. That ratio was multiplied by the estimated county population to obtain the population for that sub-area. The population for the entire MPO/TPO/TPA is the sum of all sub-area populations estimated from the counties they are located within. Note: Baldwin County, AL’s 2021 population from the US Census annual population estimates (2020-2021) was used for estimating Florida-Alabama TPO’s population Please see the Data Dictionary for more information on data fields. Data Sources:US Census Bureau 2020 Decennial CensusUS Census Bureau’s TIGER/Line Files (2021)Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) – Florida Estimates of Population 2021 Data Coverage: StatewideData Time Period: 2020 – 2021 Date of Publication: July 2022 Point of Contact:Dana Reiding, ManagerForecasting and Trends OfficeFlorida Department of TransportationDana.Reiding@dot.state.fl.us605 Suwannee Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399850-414-4719

This is a hybrid gridded dataset of demographic data for China from 1979 to 2100, given as 21 five-year age groups of population divided by gender every year at a 0.5-degree grid resolution.

The historical period (1979-2020) part of this dataset combines the NASA SEDAC Gridded Population of the World version 4 (GPWv4, UN WPP-Adjusted Population Count) with gridded population from the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP, Histsoc gridded population data).

The projection (2010-2100) part of this dataset is resampled directly from Chen et al.’s data published in Scientific Data.

This dataset includes 31 provincial administrative districts of China, including 22 provinces, 5 autonomous regions, and 4 municipalities directly under the control of the central government (Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao were excluded due to missing data).

Method - demographic fractions by age and gender in 1979-2020

Age- and gender-specific demographic data by grid cell for each province in China are derived by combining historical demographic data in 1979-2020 with the national population census data provided by the National Statistics Bureau of China.

To combine the national population census data with the historical demographics, we constructed the provincial fractions of demographic in each age groups and each gender according to the fourth, fifth and sixth national population census, which cover the year of 1979-1990, 1991-2000 and 2001-2020, respectively. The provincial fractions can be computed as:

\(\begin{align*} \begin{split} f_{year,province,age,gender}= \left \{ \begin{array}{lr} POP_{1990,province,age,gender}^{4^{th}census}/POP_{1990,province}^{4^{th}census} & 1979\le\mathrm{year}\le1990\\ POP_{2000,province,age,gender}^{5^{th}census}/POP_{2000,province}^{5^{th}census} & 1991\le\mathrm{year}\le2000\\ POP_{2010,province,age,gender}^{6^{th}census}/POP_{2010,province}^{6^{th}census}, & 2001\le\mathrm{year}\le2020 \end{array} \right. \end{split} \end{align*}\)

Where:

- \( f_{\mathrm{year,province,age,gender}}\)is the fraction of population for a given age, a given gender in each province from the national census from 1979-2020.

- \(\mathrm{PO}\mathrm{P}_{\mathrm{year,province,age,gender}}^{X^{\mathrm{th}}\mathrm{census} }\) is the total population for a given age, a given gender in each province from the X^th national census.

- \(\mathrm{PO}\mathrm{P}_{\mathrm{year,province}}^{X^{\mathrm{th}}\mathrm{census} }\) is the total population for all ages and both genders in each province from the X^th national census.

Method - demographic totals by age and gender in 1979-2020

The yearly grid population for 1979-1999 are from ISIMIP Histsoc gridded population data, and for 2000-2020 are from the GPWv4 demographic data adjusted by the UN WPP (UN WPP-Adjusted Population Count, v4.11, https://beta.sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/gpw-v4-population-count-adjusted-to-2015-unwpp-country-totals-rev11), which combines the spatial distribution of demographics from GPWv4 with the temporal trends from the UN WPP to improve accuracy. These two gridded time series are simply joined at the cut-over date to give a single dataset - historical demographic data covering 1979-2020.

Next, historical demographic data are mapped onto the grid scale to obtain provincial data by using gridded provincial code lookup data and name lookup table. The age- and gender-specific fraction were multiplied by the historical demographic data at the provincial level to obtain the total population by age and gender for per grid cell for china in 1979-2020.

Method - demographic totals and fractions by age and gender in 2010-2100

The grid population count data in 2010-2100 under different shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP) scenarios are drawn from Chen et al. published in Scientific Data with a resolution of 1km (~ 0.008333 degree). We resampled the data to 0.5 degree by aggregating the population count together to obtain the future population data per cell.

This previously published dataset also provided age- and gender-specific population of each provinces, so we calculated the fraction of each age and gender group at provincial level. Then, we multiply the fractions with grid population count to get the total population per age group per cell for each gender.

Note that the projected population data from Chen’s dataset covers 2010-2020, while the historical population in our dataset also covers 2010-2020. The two datasets of that same period may vary because the original population data come from different sources and are calculated based on different methods.

Disclaimer

This dataset is a hybrid of different datasets with independent methodologies. Spatial or temporal consistency across dataset boundaries cannot be guaranteed.

Local ecological evidence is key to informing conservation. However, many global biodiversity indicators often neglect local ecological evidence published in languages other than English, potentially biassing our understanding of biodiversity trends in areas where English is not the dominant language. Brazil is a megadiverse country with a thriving national scientific publishing landscape. Here, using Brazil and a species abundance indicator as examples, we assess how well bilingual literature searches can both improve data coverage for a country where English is not the primary language and help tackle biases in biodiversity datasets. We conducted a comprehensive screening of articles containing abundance data for vertebrates published in 59 Brazilian journals (articles in Portuguese or English) and 79 international English-only journals. These were grouped into three datasets according to journal origin and article language (Brazilian-Portuguese, Brazilian-English and International). We analysed the taxonomic, spatial and temporal coverage of the datasets, compared their average abundance trends and investigated predictors of such trends with a modelling approach. Our results showed that including data published in Brazilian journals, especially those in Portuguese, strongly increased representation of Brazilian vertebrate species (by 10.1 times) and populations (by 7.6 times) in the dataset. Meanwhile, international journals featured a higher proportion of threatened species. There were no marked differences in spatial or temporal coverage between datasets, in spite of different bias towards infrastructures. Overall, while country-level trends in relative abundance did not substantially change with the addition of data from Brazilian journals, uncertainty considerably decreased. We found that population trends in international journals showed stronger and more frequent decreases in average abundance than those in national journals, regardless of whether the latter were published in Portuguese or English. Policy implications. Collecting data from local sources markedly further strengthens global biodiversity databases by adding species not previously included in international datasets. Furthermore, the addition of these data helps to understand spatial and temporal biases that potentially influence abundance trends at both national and global level. We show how incorporating non-English-language studies in global databases and indicators could provide a more complete understanding of biodiversity trends and therefore better inform global conservation policy. Methods Data collection We collected time-series of vertebrate population abundance suitable for entry into the LPD (livingplanetindex.org), which provides the repository for one of the indicators in the GBF, the Living Planet Index (LPI, Ledger et al., 2023). Despite the continuous addition of new data, LPI coverage remains incomplete for some regions (Living Planet Report 2024 – A System in Peril, 2024). We collected data from three sets of sources: a) Portuguese-language articles from Brazilian journals (hereafter “Brazilian-Portuguese” dataset), b) English-language articles from Brazilian journals (“Brazilian-English” dataset) and c) English-language articles from non-Brazilian journals (“International” dataset). For a) and b), we first compiled a list of Brazilian biodiversity-related journals using the list of non-English-language journals in ecology and conservation published by the translatE project (www.translatesciences.com) as a starting point. The International dataset was obtained from the LPD team and sourced from the 78 journals they routinely monitor as part of their ongoing data searches. We excluded journals whose scope was not relevant to our work (e.g. those focusing on agroforestry or crop science), and taxon-specific journals (e.g. South American Journal of Herpetology) since they could introduce taxonomic bias to the data collection process. We considered only articles published between 1990 and 2015, and thus further excluded journals that published articles exclusively outside of this timeframe. We chose this period because of higher data availability (Deinet et al., 2024), since less monitoring took place in earlier decades, and data availability for the last decade is also not as high as there is a lag between data being collected and trends becoming available in the literature. Finally, we excluded any journals that had inactive links or that were no longer available online. While we acknowledge that biodiversity data are available from a wider range of sources (grey literature, online databases, university theses etc.), here we limited our searches to peer-reviewed journals and articles published within a specific timeframe to standardise data collection and allow for comparison between datasets. We screened a total of 59 Brazilian journals; of these, nine accept articles only in English, 13 only in Portuguese and 37 in both languages. We systematically checked all articles of all issues published between 1990 and 2015. Articles that appeared to contain abundance data for vertebrate species based on title and/or abstract were further evaluated by reading the material and methods section. For an article to be included in our dataset, we followed the criteria applied for inclusion into the LPD (livingplanetindex.org/about_index#data): a) data must have been collected using comparable methods for at least two years for the same population, and b) units must be of population size, either a direct measure such as population counts or densities, or indices, or a reliable proxy such as breeding pairs, capture per unit effort or measures of biomass for a single species (e.g. fish data are often available in one of the latter two formats). Assessing search effectiveness and dataset representation We calculated the encounter rate of relevant articles (i.e. those that satisfied the criteria for inclusion in our datasets) for each journal as the proportion of such articles relative to the total number of articles screened for that journal. We assessed the taxonomic representation of each dataset by calculating the percentage of species of each vertebrate group (all fishes combined, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) with relevant abundance data in relation to the number of species of these groups known to occur in Brazil. The total number of known species for each taxon was compiled from national-level sources (amphibians, Segalla et al. 2021; birds, (Pacheco et al., 2021); mammals, Abreu et al. 2022; reptiles, Costa, Guedes and Bérnils, 2022) or through online databases (Fishbase, Froese and Pauly, 2024). We calculated accumulation curves using 1,000 permutations and applying the rarefaction method, using the vegan package (Jari Oksanen et al., 2024). These represent the cumulative number of new species added with each article containing relevant data, allowing us to assess how additional data collection could increase coverage of abundance data across datasets. To compare species threat status among datasets, we used the category for each species available in the Brazilian (‘Sistema de Avaliação do Risco de Extinção da Biodiversidade – SALVE’, 2024) and IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2024), and calculated the percentage of species in each category per dataset. To assess and compare the temporal coverage of the different datasets, we calculated the number of populations and species across time. To assess geographic gaps, we mapped the locations of each population using QGIS version 3.6 (QGIS Development Team, 2019). We then quantified the bias of terrestrial records towards proximity to infrastructures (airports, cities, roads and waterbodies) at a 0.5º resolution (circa 55.5 km x 55.5 km at the equator) and a 2º buffer using posterior weights from the R package sampbias (Zizka, Antonelli and Silvestro, 2021). Higher posterior weights indicate stronger bias effect. Generalised linear mixed models and population abundance trends We used the rlpi R package (Freeman et al., 2017) to calculate trends in relative abundance. We calculated the average lambda (logged annual rate of change) for each time-series by averaging the lambda values across all years between the start and the end year of the time-series. We then built generalised linear mixed models (GLMM) to test how average lambdas changed across language (Portuguese vs English), journal origin (national vs international), and taxonomic group, using location, journal name, and species as random intercepts (Table 1). We offset these by the number of sampled years to adjust summed lambda to a standardised measure, to allow comparison across different observations with different length of time series and plotted the beta coefficients (effect sizes) of all factors. Finally, we performed a post-hoc test to check pairwise differences between taxonomic groups (Table S2). To assess the influence of national-level data on global trends in relative abundance, we calculated the trends for both the International dataset and the two combined Brazilian datasets (Brazilian-Portuguese and Brazilian-English), using only years for which data were available for more than one species, to be able to estimate trend variation. We also plotted the trends for the Brazilian datasets separately. All analyses were performed in R 4.4.1 (R Core Team, 2024).

Analysis of ‘COVID-19 Cases by Population Characteristics Over Time’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/a3291d85-0076-43c5-a59c-df49480cdc6d on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Note: On January 22, 2022, system updates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of San Francisco COVID-19 cases and deaths data were implemented. You might see some fluctuations in historic data as a result of this change. Due to the changes, starting on January 22, 2022, the number of new cases reported daily will be higher than under the old system as cases that would have taken longer to process will be reported earlier.

A. SUMMARY This dataset shows San Francisco COVID-19 cases by population characteristics and by specimen collection date. Cases are included on the date the positive test was collected.

Population characteristics are subgroups, or demographic cross-sections, like age, race, or gender. The City tracks how cases have been distributed among different subgroups. This information can reveal trends and disparities among groups.

Data is lagged by five days, meaning the most recent specimen collection date included is 5 days prior to today. Tests take time to process and report, so more recent data is less reliable.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Data on the population characteristics of COVID-19 cases and deaths are from: * Case interviews * Laboratories * Medical providers

These multiple streams of data are merged, deduplicated, and undergo data verification processes. This data may not be immediately available for recently reported cases because of the time needed to process tests and validate cases. Daily case totals on previous days may increase or decrease. Learn more.

Data are continually updated to maximize completeness of information and reporting on San Francisco residents with COVID-19.

Data notes on each population characteristic type is listed below.

Race/ethnicity * We include all race/ethnicity categories that are collected for COVID-19 cases. * The population estimates for the "Other" or “Multi-racial” groups should be considered with caution. The Census definition is likely not exactly aligned with how the City collects this data. For that reason, we do not recommend calculating population rates for these groups.

Sexual orientation * Sexual orientation data is collected from individuals who are 18 years old or older. These individuals can choose whether to provide this information during case interviews. Learn more about our data collection guidelines. * The City began asking for this information on April 28, 2020.

Gender * The City collects information on gender identity using these guidelines.

Comorbidities * Underlying conditions are reported when a person has one or more underlying health conditions at the time of diagnosis or death.

Transmission type * Information on transmission of COVID-19 is based on case interviews with individuals who have a confirmed positive test. Individuals are asked if they have been in close contact with a known COVID-19 case. If they answer yes, transmission category is recorded as contact with a known case. If they report no contact with a known case, transmission category is recorded as community transmission. If the case is not interviewed or was not asked the question, they are counted as unknown.

Homelessness Persons are identified as homeless based on several data sources: * self-reported living situation
* the location at the time of testing * Department of Public Health homelessness and health databases * Residents in Single-Room Occupancy hotels are not included in these figures.
These methods serve as an estimate of persons experiencing homelessness. They may not meet other homelessness definitions.

Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) occupancy * A Skilled Nursing

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

The latest 8 and 10 digit HUC boundaries, along with the calculated US Census population within each subbasin and watershed for 2020, 2010, and 2000.

HUC boundaries are from the USGS National Hydrography Watershed Boundary Dataset. US Census 2020, 2010, and 2000 Block Data was acquired through NC OneMap.

Subbasin and watershed population estimates were derived from the 2020, 2010, and 2000 Block population data from the US Census. The ArcGIS Tool "Summarize Within" was used to calculate the total population within each subbasin and watershed for each census period. As census blocks and HUC boundaries do not always coincide, the calculated population is only an estimate and is not to be used as an exact figure.