Investigations of coastal change and coastal resources often require continuous elevation profiles from the seafloor to coastal terrestrial landscapes. Differences in elevation data collection in the terrestrial and marine environments result in separate elevation products that may not share a vertical datum. This data release contains the assimilation of multiple elevation products into a continuous digital elevation model at a resolution of 3-arcseconds (approximately 90 meters) from the terrestrial landscape to the seafloor for the contiguous U.S., focused on the coastal interface. All datasets were converted to a consistent horizontal datum, the North American Datum of 1983, but the native vertical datum for each dataset was not adjusted. Artifacts in the source elevation products were replaced with other available elevation products when possible, corrected using various spatial tools, or otherwise marked for future correction. This data release contains the assimilation of multiple elevation products into a continuous digital elevation model at a resolution of 3-arcseconds (approximately 90 meters) from the terrestrial landscape to the seafloor for the contiguous U.S. that were constructed using this shapefile.

USGS is assessing the feasibility of map projections and grid systems for lunar surface operations. We propose developing a new Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM), the Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS), and the Lunar Grid Reference Systems (LGRS). We have also designed additional grids designed to NASA requirements for astronaut navigation, referred to as LGRS in Artemis Condensed Coordinates (ACC), but this is not released here. LTM, LPS, and LGRS are similar in design and use to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Universal Polar Stereographic (LPS), and Military Grid Reference System (MGRS), but adhere to NASA requirements. LGRS ACC format is similar in design and structure to historic Army Mapping Service Apollo orthotopophoto charts for navigation. The Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) projection system is a globalized set of lunar map projections that divides the Moon into zones to provide a uniform coordinate system for accurate spatial representation. It uses a transverse Mercator projection, which maps the Moon into 45 transverse Mercator strips, each 8°, longitude, wide. These transverse Mercator strips are subdivided at the lunar equator for a total of 90 zones. Forty-five in the northern hemisphere and forty-five in the south. LTM specifies a topocentric, rectangular, coordinate system (easting and northing coordinates) for spatial referencing. This projection is commonly used in GIS and surveying for its ability to represent large areas with high positional accuracy while maintaining consistent scale. The Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) projection system contains projection specifications for the Moon’s polar regions. It uses a polar stereographic projection, which maps the polar regions onto an azimuthal plane. The LPS system contains 2 zones, each zone is located at the northern and southern poles and is referred to as the LPS northern or LPS southern zone. LPS, like is equatorial counterpart LTM, specifies a topocentric, rectangular, coordinate system (easting and northing coordinates) for spatial referencing. This projection is commonly used in GIS and surveying for its ability to represent large polar areas with high positional accuracy, while maintaining consistent scale across the map region. LGRS is a globalized grid system for lunar navigation supported by the LTM and LPS projections. LGRS provides an alphanumeric grid coordinate structure for both the LTM and LPS systems. This labeling structure is utilized in a similar manner to MGRS. LGRS defines a global area grid based on latitude and longitude and a 25×25 km grid based on LTM and LPS coordinate values. Two implementations of LGRS are used as polar areas require a LPS projection and equatorial areas a transverse Mercator. We describe the difference in the techniques and methods report associated with this data release. Request McClernan et. al. (in-press) for more information. ACC is a method of simplifying LGRS coordinates and is similar in use to the Army Mapping Service Apollo orthotopophoto charts for navigation. These data will be released at a later date. Two versions of the shape files are provided in this data release, PCRS and Display only. See LTM_LPS_LGRS_Shapefiles.zip file. PCRS are limited to a single zone and are projected in either LTM or LPS with topocentric coordinates formatted in Eastings and Northings. Display only shapefiles are formatted in lunar planetocentric latitude and longitude, a Mercator or Equirectangular projection is best for these grids. A description of each grid is provided below: Equatorial (Display Only) Grids: Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) Grids: LTM zone borders for each LTM zone Merged LTM zone borders Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) Grids: North LPS zone border South LPS zone border Lunar Grid Reference System (LGRS) Grids: Global Areas for North and South LPS zones Merged Global Areas (8°×8° and 8°×10° extended area) for all LTM zones Merged 25km grid for all LTM zones PCRS Shapefiles:` Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) Grids: LTM zone borders for each LTM zone Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) Grids: North LPS zone border South LPS zone border Lunar Grid Reference System (LGRS) Grids: Global Areas for North and South LPS zones 25km Gird for North and South LPS zones Global Areas (8°×8° and 8°×10° extended area) for each LTM zone 25km grid for each LTM zone The rasters in this data release detail the linear distortions associated with the LTM and LPS system projections. For these products, we utilize the same definitions of distortion as the U.S. State Plane Coordinate System. Scale Factor, k - The scale factor is a ratio that communicates the difference in distances when measured on a map and the distance reported on the reference surface. Symbolically this is the ratio between the maps grid distance and distance on the lunar reference sphere. This value can be precisely calculated and is provided in their defining publication. See Snyder (1987) for derivation of the LPS scale factor. This scale factor is unitless and typically increases from the central scale factor k_0, a projection-defining parameter. For each LPS projection. Request McClernan et. al., (in-press) for more information. Scale Error, (k-1) - Scale-Error, is simply the scale factor differenced from 1. Is a unitless positive or negative value from 0 that is used to express the scale factor’s impact on position values on a map. Distance on the reference surface are expended when (k-1) is positive and contracted when (k-1) is negative. Height Factor, h_F - The Height Factor is used to correct for the difference in distance caused between the lunar surface curvature expressed at different elevations. It is expressed as a ratio between the radius of the lunar reference sphere and elevations measured from the center of the reference sphere. For this work, we utilized a radial distance of 1,737,400 m as recommended by the IAU working group of Rotational Elements (Archinal et. al., 2008). For this calculation, height factor values were derived from a LOLA DEM 118 m v1, Digital Elevation Model (LOLA Science Team, 2021). Combined Factor, C_F – The combined factor is utilized to “Scale-To-Ground” and is used to adjust the distance expressed on the map surface and convert to the position on the actual ground surface. This value is the product of the map scale factor and the height factor, ensuring the positioning measurements can be correctly placed on a map and on the ground. The combined factor is similar to linear distortion in that it is evaluated at the ground, but, as discussed in the next section, differs numerically. Often C_F is scrutinized for map projection optimization. Linear distortion, δ - In keeping with the design definitions of SPCS2022 (Dennis 2023), we refer to scale error when discussing the lunar reference sphere and linear distortion, δ, when discussing the topographic surface. Linear distortion is calculated using C_F simply by subtracting 1. Distances are expended on the topographic surface when δ is positive and compressed when δ is negative. The relevant files associated with the expressed LTM distortion are as follows. The scale factor for the 90 LTM projections: LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the LTM portion of the Moon: LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor in LTM portion of the Moon LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_CF_combined_factor.tif The relevant files associated with the expressed LPS distortion are as follows. Lunar North Pole The scale factor for the northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the north pole of the Moon: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor for northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_CF_combined_factor.tif Lunar South Pole Scale factor for the northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the south pole of the Moon: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor for northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_CF_combined_factor.tif For GIS utilization of grid shapefiles projected in Lunar Latitude and Longitude, referred to as “Display Only”, please utilize a registered lunar geographic coordinate system (GCS) such as IAU_2015:30100 or ESRI:104903. LTM, LPS, and LGRS PCRS shapefiles utilize either a custom transverse Mercator or polar Stereographic projection. For PCRS grids the LTM and LPS projections are recommended for all LTM, LPS, and LGRS grid sizes. See McClernan et. al. (in-press) for such projections. Raster data was calculated using planetocentric latitude and longitude. A LTM and LPS projection or a registered lunar GCS may be utilized to display this data. Note: All data, shapefiles and rasters, require a specific projection and datum. The projection is recommended as LTM and LPS or, when needed, IAU_2015:30100 or ESRI:104903. The datum utilized must be the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Development Ephemeris (DE) 421 in the Mean Earth (ME) Principal Axis Orientation as recommended by the International Astronomy Union (IAU) (Archinal et. al., 2008).

Please note that this dataset is not an official City of Toronto land use dataset. It was created for personal and academic use using City of Toronto Land Use Maps (2019) found on the City of Toronto Official Plan website at https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/planning-development/official-plan-guidelines/official-plan/official-plan-maps-copy, along with the City of Toronto parcel fabric (Property Boundaries) found at https://open.toronto.ca/dataset/property-boundaries/ and Statistics Canada Census Dissemination Blocks level boundary files (2016). The property boundaries used were dated November 11, 2021. Further detail about the City of Toronto's Official Plan, consolidation of the information presented in its online form, and considerations for its interpretation can be found at https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/planning-development/official-plan-guidelines/official-plan/ Data Creation Documentation and Procedures Software Used The spatial vector data were created using ArcGIS Pro 2.9.0 in December 2021. PDF File Conversions Using Adobe Acrobat Pro DC software, the following downloaded PDF map images were converted to TIF format. 9028-cp-official-plan-Map-14_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9042-cp-official-plan-Map-22_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9070-cp-official-plan-Map-20_LandUse_AODA.pdf 908a-cp-official-plan-Map-13_LandUse_AODA.pdf 978e-cp-official-plan-Map-17_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97cc-cp-official-plan-Map-15_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97d4-cp-official-plan-Map-23_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97f2-cp-official-plan-Map-19_LandUse_AODA.pdf 97fe-cp-official-plan-Map-18_LandUse_AODA.pdf 9811-cp-official-plan-Map-16_LandUse_AODA.pdf 982d-cp-official-plan-Map-21_LandUse_AODA.pdf Georeferencing and Reprojecting Data Files The original projection of the PDF maps is unknown but were most likely published using MTM Zone 10 EPSG 2019 as per many of the City of Toronto's many datasets. They could also have possibly been published in UTM Zone 17 EPSG 26917 The TIF images were georeferenced in ArcGIS Pro using this projection with very good results. The images were matched against the City of Toronto's Centreline dataset found here The resulting TIF files and their supporting spatial files include: TOLandUseMap13.tfwx TOLandUseMap13.tif TOLandUseMap13.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap13.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap14.tfwx TOLandUseMap14.tif TOLandUseMap14.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap14.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap15.tfwx TOLandUseMap15.tif TOLandUseMap15.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap15.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap16.tfwx TOLandUseMap16.tif TOLandUseMap16.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap16.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap17.tfwx TOLandUseMap17.tif TOLandUseMap17.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap17.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap18.tfwx TOLandUseMap18.tif TOLandUseMap18.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap18.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap19.tif TOLandUseMap19.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap19.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap20.tfwx TOLandUseMap20.tif TOLandUseMap20.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap20.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap21.tfwx TOLandUseMap21.tif TOLandUseMap21.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap21.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap22.tfwx TOLandUseMap22.tif TOLandUseMap22.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap22.tif.ovr TOLandUseMap23.tfwx TOLandUseMap23.tif TOLandUseMap23.tif.aux.xml TOLandUseMap23.tif.ov Ground control points were saved for all georeferenced images. The files are the following: map13.txt map14.txt map15.txt map16.txt map17.txt map18.txt map19.txt map21.txt map22.txt map23.txt The City of Toronto's Property Boundaries shapefile, "property_bnds_gcc_wgs84.zip" were unzipped and also reprojected to EPSG 26917 (UTM Zone 17) into a new shapefile, "Property_Boundaries_UTM.shp" Mosaicing Images Once georeferenced, all images were then mosaiced into one image file, "LandUseMosaic20211220v01", within the project-generated Geodatabase, "Landuse.gdb" and exported TIF, "LandUseMosaic20211220.tif" Reclassifying Images Because the original images were of low quality and the conversion to TIF made the image colours even more inconsistent, a method was required to reclassify the images so that different land use classes could be identified. Using Deep learning Objects, the images were re-classified into useful consistent colours. Deep Learning Objects and Training The resulting mosaic was then prepared for reclassification using the Label Objects for Deep Learning tool in ArcGIS Pro. A training sample, "LandUseTrainingSamples20211220", was created in the geodatabase for all land use types as follows: Neighbourhoods Insitutional Natural Areas Core Employment Areas Mixed Use Areas Apartment Neighbourhoods Parks Roads Utility Corridors Other Open Spaces General Employment Areas Regeneration Areas Lettering (not a land use type, but an image colour (black), used to label streets). By identifying the letters, it then made the reclassification and vectorization results easier to clean up of unnecessary clutter caused by the labels of streets. Reclassification Once the training samples were created and saved, the raster was then reclassified using the Image Classification Wizard tool in ArcGIS Pro, using the Support...

Urban areas have a manifold and far-reaching impact on our environment, and the three-dimensional structure is a key aspect for characterizing the urban environment.

This dataset features a map of building height predictions for entire Germany on a 10m grid based on Sentinel-1A/B and Sentinel-2A/B time series. We utilized machine learning regression to extrapolate building height reference information to the entire country. The reference data were obtained from several freely and openly available 3D Building Models originating from official data sources (building footprint: cadaster, building height: airborne laser scanning), and represent the average building height within a radius of 50m relative to each pixel. Building height was only estimated for built-up areas (European Settlement Mask), and building height predictions <2m were set to 0m.

Temporal extent
The acquisition dates of the different data sources vary to some degree:
- Independent variables: Sentinel-2 data are from 2018; Sentinel-1 data are from 2017.
- Dependent variables: the 3D building models are from 2012-2020 depending on data provider.
- Settlement mask: the ESM is based on a mosaic of imagery from 2014-2016.
Considering that net change of building stock is positive in Germany, the building height map is representative for ca. 2015.

Data format
The data come in tiles of 30x30km (see shapefile). The projection is EPSG:3035. The images are compressed GeoTiff files (*.tif). Metadata are located within the Tiff, partly in the FORCE domain. There is a mosaic in GDAL Virtual format (*.vrt), which can readily be opened in most Geographic Information Systems. Building height values are in meters, scaled by 10, i.e. a pixel value of 69 = 6.9m.

Further information
For further information, please see the publication or contact David Frantz (david.frantz@geo.hu-berlin.de).
A web-visualization of this dataset is available here.

Publication
Frantz, D., Schug, F., Okujeni, A., Navacchi, C., Wagner, W., van der Linden, S., & Hostert, P. (2021). National-scale mapping of building height using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 time series. Remote Sensing of Environment, 252, 112128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2020.112128

Acknowledgements
The dataset was generated by FORCE v. 3.1 (paper, code), which is freely available software under the terms of the GNU General Public License v. >= 3. Sentinel imagery were obtained from the European Space Agency and the European Commission. The European Settlement Mask was obtained from the European Commission. 3D building models were obtained from Berlin Partner für Wirtschaft und Technologie GmbH, Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg / Landesbetrieb Geoinformation und Vermessung, Landeshauptstadt Potsdam, Bezirksregierung Köln / Geobasis NRW, and Kompetenzzentrum Geodateninfrastruktur Thüringen. This dataset was partly produced on EODC - we thank Clement Atzberger for supporting the generation of this dataset by sharing disc space on EODC.

Funding
This dataset was produced with funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (MAT_STOCKS, grant agreement No 741950).

Overview

This dataset is the repository for the following paper submitted to Data in Brief:

Kempf, M. A dataset to model Levantine landcover and land-use change connected to climate change, the Arab Spring and COVID-19. Data in Brief (submitted: December 2023).

The Data in Brief article contains the supplement information and is the related data paper to:

Kempf, M. Climate change, the Arab Spring, and COVID-19 - Impacts on landcover transformations in the Levant. Journal of Arid Environments (revision submitted: December 2023).

Description/abstract

The Levant region is highly vulnerable to climate change, experiencing prolonged heat waves that have led to societal crises and population displacement. Since 2010, the area has been marked by socio-political turmoil, including the Syrian civil war and currently the escalation of the so-called Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, which strained neighbouring countries like Jordan due to the influx of Syrian refugees and increases population vulnerability to governmental decision-making. Jordan, in particular, has seen rapid population growth and significant changes in land-use and infrastructure, leading to over-exploitation of the landscape through irrigation and construction. This dataset uses climate data, satellite imagery, and land cover information to illustrate the substantial increase in construction activity and highlights the intricate relationship between climate change predictions and current socio-political developments in the Levant.

Folder structure

The main folder after download contains all data, in which the following subfolders are stored are stored as zipped files:

“code” stores the above described 9 code chunks to read, extract, process, analyse, and visualize the data.

“MODIS_merged” contains the 16-days, 250 m resolution NDVI imagery merged from three tiles (h20v05, h21v05, h21v06) and cropped to the study area, n=510, covering January 2001 to December 2022 and including January and February 2023.

“mask” contains a single shapefile, which is the merged product of administrative boundaries, including Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Syria, and Palestine (“MERGED_LEVANT.shp”).

“yield_productivity” contains .csv files of yield information for all countries listed above.

“population” contains two files with the same name but different format. The .csv file is for processing and plotting in R. The .ods file is for enhanced visualization of population dynamics in the Levant (Socio_cultural_political_development_database_FAO2023.ods).

“GLDAS” stores the raw data of the NASA Global Land Data Assimilation System datasets that can be read, extracted (variable name), and processed using code “8_GLDAS_read_extract_trend” from the respective folder. One folder contains data from 1975-2022 and a second the additional January and February 2023 data.

“built_up” contains the landcover and built-up change data from 1975 to 2022. This folder is subdivided into two subfolder which contain the raw data and the already processed data. “raw_data” contains the unprocessed datasets and “derived_data” stores the cropped built_up datasets at 5 year intervals, e.g., “Levant_built_up_1975.tif”.

Code structure

1_MODIS_NDVI_hdf_file_extraction.R

This is the first code chunk that refers to the extraction of MODIS data from .hdf file format. The following packages must be installed and the raw data must be downloaded using a simple mass downloader, e.g., from google chrome. Packages: terra. Download MODIS data from after registration from: https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mod13q1v061/ or https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/search (MODIS/Terra Vegetation Indices 16-Day L3 Global 250m SIN Grid V061, last accessed, 09th of October 2023). The code reads a list of files, extracts the NDVI, and saves each file to a single .tif-file with the indication “NDVI”. Because the study area is quite large, we have to load three different (spatially) time series and merge them later. Note that the time series are temporally consistent.

2_MERGE_MODIS_tiles.R

In this code, we load and merge the three different stacks to produce large and consistent time series of NDVI imagery across the study area. We further use the package gtools to load the files in (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.). Here, we have three stacks from which we merge the first two (stack 1, stack 2) and store them. We then merge this stack with stack 3. We produce single files named NDVI_final_*consecutivenumber*.tif. Before saving the final output of single merged files, create a folder called “merged” and set the working directory to this folder, e.g., setwd("your directory_MODIS/merged").

3_CROP_MODIS_merged_tiles.R

Now we want to crop the derived MODIS tiles to our study area. We are using a mask, which is provided as .shp file in the repository, named "MERGED_LEVANT.shp". We load the merged .tif files and crop the stack with the vector. Saving to individual files, we name them “NDVI_merged_clip_*consecutivenumber*.tif. We now produced single cropped NDVI time series data from MODIS. The repository provides the already clipped and merged NDVI datasets.

4_TREND_analysis_NDVI.R

Now, we want to perform trend analysis from the derived data. The data we load is tricky as it contains 16-days return period across a year for the period of 22 years. Growing season sums contain MAM (March-May), JJA (June-August), and SON (September-November). December is represented as a single file, which means that the period DJF (December-February) is represented by 5 images instead of 6. For the last DJF period (December 2022), the data from January and February 2023 can be added. The code selects the respective images from the stack, depending on which period is under consideration. From these stacks, individual annually resolved growing season sums are generated and the slope is calculated. We can then extract the p-values of the trend and characterize all values with high confidence level (0.05). Using the ggplot2 package and the melt function from reshape2 package, we can create a plot of the reclassified NDVI trends together with a local smoother (LOESS) of value 0.3.To increase comparability and understand the amplitude of the trends, z-scores were calculated and plotted, which show the deviation of the values from the mean. This has been done for the NDVI values as well as the GLDAS climate variables as a normalization technique.

5_BUILT_UP_change_raster.R

Let us look at the landcover changes now. We are working with the terra package and get raster data from here: https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/download.php?ds=bu (last accessed 03. March 2023, 100 m resolution, global coverage). Here, one can download the temporal coverage that is aimed for and reclassify it using the code after cropping to the individual study area. Here, I summed up different raster to characterize the built-up change in continuous values between 1975 and 2022.

6_POPULATION_numbers_plot.R

For this plot, one needs to load the .csv-file “Socio_cultural_political_development_database_FAO2023.csv” from the repository. The ggplot script provided produces the desired plot with all countries under consideration.

7_YIELD_plot.R

In this section, we are using the country productivity from the supplement in the repository “yield_productivity” (e.g., "Jordan_yield.csv". Each of the single country yield datasets is plotted in a ggplot and combined using the patchwork package in R.

8_GLDAS_read_extract_trend

The last code provides the basis for the trend analysis of the climate variables used in the paper. The raw data can be accessed https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/datasets?keywords=GLDAS%20Noah%20Land%20Surface%20Model%20L4%20monthly&page=1 (last accessed 9th of October 2023). The raw data comes in .nc file format and various variables can be extracted using the [“^a variable name”] command from the spatraster collection. Each time you run the code, this variable name must be adjusted to meet the requirements for the variables (see this link for abbreviations: https://disc.gsfc.nasa.gov/datasets/GLDAS_CLSM025_D_2.0/summary, last accessed 09th of October 2023; or the respective code chunk when reading a .nc file with the ncdf4 package in R) or run print(nc) from the code or use names(the spatraster collection). Choosing one variable, the code uses the MERGED_LEVANT.shp mask from the repository to crop and mask the data to the outline of the study area.From the processed data, trend analysis are conducted and z-scores were calculated following the code described above. However, annual trends require the frequency of the time series analysis to be set to value = 12. Regarding, e.g., rainfall, which is measured as annual sums and not means, the chunk r.sum=r.sum/12 has to be removed or set to r.sum=r.sum/1 to avoid calculating annual mean values (see other variables). Seasonal subset can be calculated as described in the code. Here, 3-month subsets were chosen for growing seasons, e.g. March-May (MAM), June-July (JJA), September-November (SON), and DJF (December-February, including Jan/Feb of the consecutive year).From the data, mean values of 48 consecutive years are calculated and trend analysis are performed as describe above. In the same way, p-values are extracted and 95 % confidence level values are marked with dots on the raster plot. This analysis can be performed with a much longer time series, other variables, ad different spatial extent across the globe due to the availability of the GLDAS variables.

(9_workflow_diagramme) this simple code can be used to plot a workflow diagram and is detached from the actual analysis.

Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data Curation, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration, and Funding acquisition: Michael

Tiff files: Maps of Above Ground Biomass change (2019-2020) over the study region near Iñapari, Peru, derived from the texture of the NIR band for SPOT-7 (SPOT_DeltaAGB_Map), PlanetScope (PlanetScope_DeltaAGB_Map.tif) and Sentinel-2 (Sentinel2_DeltaAGB_Map.tif) data for a 1-ha resolution.QML file contains the style for the biomass change maps. Shapefile contains location of four selectively logged plots.CSV file contains data on observed changes in these four plots, obtained by TLS and manual inventory.

Crowther_Nature_Files.zip This description pertains to the original download. Details on revised (newer) versions of the datasets are listed below. When more than one version of a file exists in Figshare, the original DOI will take users to the latest version, though each version technically has its own DOI. -- Two global maps (raster files) of tree density. These maps highlight how the number of trees varies across the world. One map was generated using biome-level models of tree density, and applied at the biome scale. The other map was generated using ecoregion-level models of tree density, and applied at the ecoregion scale. For this reason, transitions between biomes or between ecoregions may be unrealistically harsh, but large-scale estimates are robust (see Crowther et al 2015 and Glick et al 2016). At the outset, this study was intended to generate reliable estimates at broad spatial scales, which inherently comes at the cost of fine-scale precision. For this reason, country-scale (or larger) estimates are generally more robust than individual pixel-level estimates. Additionally, due to data limitations, estimates for Mangroves and Tropical coniferous forest (as identified by WWF and TNC) were generated using models constructed from Topical moist broadleaf forest data and Temperate coniferous forest data, respectively. Because we used ecological analogy, the estimates for these two biomes should be considered less reliable than those of other biomes . These two maps initially appeared in Crowther et al (2015), with the biome map being featured more prominently. Explicit publication of the data is associated with Glick et al (2016). As they are produced, updated versions of these datasets, as well as alternative formats, will be made available under Additional Versions (see below).

Methods: We collected over 420,000 ground-sources estimates of tree density from around the world. We then constructed linear regression models using vegetative, climatic, topographic, and anthropogenic variables to produce forest tree density estimates for all locations globally. All modeling was done in R. Mapping was done using R and ArcGIS 10.1.

Viewing Instructions: Load the files into an appropriate geographic information system (GIS). For the original download (ArcGIS geodatabase files), load the files into ArcGIS to view or export the data to other formats. Because these datasets are large and have a unique coordinate system that is not read by many GIS, we suggest loading them into an ArcGIS dataframe whose coordinate system matches that of the data (see File Format). For GeoTiff files (see Additional Versions), load them into any compatible GIS or image management program.

Comments: The original download provides a zipped folder that contains (1) an ArcGIS File Geodatabase (.gdb) containing one raster file for each of the two global models of tree density – one based on biomes and one based on ecoregions; (2) a layer file (.lyr) for each of the global models with the symbology used for each respective model in Crowther et al (2015); and an ArcGIS Map Document (.mxd) that contains the layers and symbology for each map in the paper. The data is delivered in the Goode homolosine interrupted projected coordinate system that was used to compute biome, ecoregion, and global estimates of the number and density of trees presented in Crowther et al (2015). To obtain maps like those presented in the official publication, raster files will need to be reprojected to the Eckert III projected coordinate system. Details on subsequent revisions and alternative file formats are list below under Additional Versions.----------

Additional Versions: Crowther_Nature_Files_Revision_01.zip contains tree density predictions for small islands that are not included in the data available in the original dataset. These predictions were not taken into consideration in production of maps and figures presented in Crowther et al (2015), with the exception of the values presented in Supplemental Table 2. The file structure follows that of the original data and includes both biome- and ecoregion-level models.

Crowther_Nature_Files_Revision_01_WGS84_GeoTiff.zip contains Revision_01 of the biome-level model, but stored in WGS84 and GeoTiff format. This file was produced by reprojecting the original Goode homolosine files to WGS84 using nearest neighbor resampling in ArcMap. All areal computations presented in the manuscript were computed using the Goode homolosine projection. This means that comparable computations made with projected versions of this WGS84 data are likely to differ (substantially at greater latitudes) as a product of the resampling. Included in this .zip file are the primary .tif and its visualization support files.

References:

Crowther, T. W., Glick, H. B., Covey, K. R., Bettigole, C., Maynard, D. S., Thomas, S. M., Smith, J. R., Hintler, G., Duguid, M. C., Amatulli, G., Tuanmu, M. N., Jetz, W., Salas, C., Stam, C., Piotto, D., Tavani, R., Green, S., Bruce, G., Williams, S. J., Wiser, S. K., Huber, M. O., Hengeveld, G. M., Nabuurs, G. J., Tikhonova, E., Borchardt, P., Li, C. F., Powrie, L. W., Fischer, M., Hemp, A., Homeier, J., Cho, P., Vibrans, A. C., Umunay, P. M., Piao, S. L., Rowe, C. W., Ashton, M. S., Crane, P. R., and Bradford, M. A. 2015. Mapping tree density at a global scale. Nature, 525(7568): 201-205. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1038/nature14967Glick, H. B., Bettigole, C. B., Maynard, D. S., Covey, K. R., Smith, J. R., and Crowther, T. W. 2016. Spatially explicit models of global tree density. Scientific Data, 3(160069), doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.69.

This dataset is part of Deliverable 4.2, 4.3 and 5.3 and was produced by the WP4 team of the Landmark H2020 project. It contains the following shapefiles: PO5_Current_SFs_PrimaryProductivity.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_ClimateRegulation.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_WaterRegulation_Drought.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_WaterRegulation_WaterLoggging.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_WaterPurification.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_NutrientCycling.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_Biodiversity.tiff PO5_Current_SFs_EnvZone.shp PO5_Current_SFs_NUTS1.shp PO5_Maximization_ClimateRegulation.shp PO5_Maximization_Drought.shp PO5_Maximization_NCycling.shp PO5_Maximization_PrimaryProductivity.shp PO5_Maximization_Waterlogging.shp PO5_Maximization_Waterpurification.shp PO5_Maximization_Waterpurification.shp The tiff-files give the spatial variation in soil function performance for 6 soil functions in in agricultural soils across the EU. The soil functions were mapped by applying a number of crop specific Bayesian networks on a combination of spatial maps which describe soil properties, climate, land use and land management on agricultural soils throughout the European Union. PO5_Current_SFs_EnvZone.shp and PO5_Current_SFs_NUTS1.shp give the z-scores for both grasslands and cropland in 12 environmental zones for the six soil functions. The z-scores give the signed fractional number of standard deviations by which SF means for an environmental zone are above or below the mean value and allow us indicate which areas have a higher or lower soil function performance compared to the mean value. These values were extracted from the tiff-files provided in this dataset. The PO5_Maximization shapefiles give an estimation of the change in soil function performance across the EU when one soil function is maximized through changes in management. This spatial variation is represented in change in z-scores compared to the current SF supply. To develop the scenario, for each of the locations, the soil function was maximized in the underlying Bayesian networks, by allowing it to change different types of management (irrigation, fertilizer, etc.) for each location taking soil, climate and crop type into account. These changes also impact the performance of the other soil functions. For each of the soil functions a separate spatial map was created. Which was then used to calculate z-scores for each of the environmental zones. Z-scores from the current SF maps and scenario maps were then compared to each other to calculate the change in z-scores. This change in z-scores is given in the shapefiles and describes the relative change in soil function performance. Positive values indicate an improvement in soil functioning compared to the current situation, negative values a decrease. More information regarding calculation and interpretation of both this dataset and the soil function maps used to calculate the z-scores can be found in: Vrebos D., J. Staes, R. Schulte, L. O’Sullivan, E. Lugato, A. Jones, A. Georgoulas and P. Meire (2018). Soil function supply maps. LANDMARK Report 4.2. Vrebos D., F. Bampa, R. Creamer, A. Jones, E. Lugato, L. O’Sullivan, P. Meire, R.P.O. Schulte, J. Schröder and J. Staes (2018). Scenarios maps: visualizing optimized scenarios where supply of soil functions matches demands. LANDMARK Report 4.3. and Jones A. et al. (2019). An options document to propose future policy tools for functional soil management. LANDMARK 5.3. All available from www.landmark2020.eu.