3 datasets found
  1. M

    Tampa Metro Area Population (1950-2025)

    • macrotrends.net
    csv
    Updated May 31, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    MACROTRENDS (2025). Tampa Metro Area Population (1950-2025) [Dataset]. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/cities/23160/tampa/population
    Explore at:
    csvAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    May 31, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    MACROTRENDS
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 1950 - Jun 30, 2025
    Area covered
    Tampa, Tampa-St. Petersburg Metropolitan Area, United States
    Description

    Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Tampa metro area from 1950 to 2025.

  2. U.S. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro area population 2010-2023

    • statista.com
    Updated Oct 16, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). U.S. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro area population 2010-2023 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/815278/tampa-metro-area-population/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 16, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    In 2023, the population of the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metropolitan area in the United States was about 3.34 million people. This was a slight increase from the previous year, when the population was about 3.3 million people.

  3. Data from: Complex patterns of genetic population structure in the...

    • data.niaid.nih.gov
    • datadryad.org
    zip
    Updated May 5, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    David Portnoy; Shannon O'Leary; Andrew Fields; Christopher Hollenbeck; Dean Grubbs; Cheston Peterson; Jayne Gardiner; Douglas Adams; Brett Falterman; Marcus Drymon; Jeremy Higgs; Erin Pulster; Tonya Wiley; Steven Murawski (2025). Complex patterns of genetic population structure in the mouthbrooding marine catfish, Bagre marinus, in the Gulf of Mexico and U.S. Atlantic [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.nvx0k6f0n
    Explore at:
    zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    May 5, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Texas A&M University – Corpus Christi
    University of South Florida
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Havenworth Coastal Conservation
    New College of Florida
    Saint Anselm College
    University of Southern Mississippi
    Mississippi State University Coastal Research and Extension Center
    FSU Coastal and Marine Laboratory
    Fisheries Research Support
    Fish and Wildlife Research Institute
    Authors
    David Portnoy; Shannon O'Leary; Andrew Fields; Christopher Hollenbeck; Dean Grubbs; Cheston Peterson; Jayne Gardiner; Douglas Adams; Brett Falterman; Marcus Drymon; Jeremy Higgs; Erin Pulster; Tonya Wiley; Steven Murawski
    License

    https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.htmlhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html

    Area covered
    Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America), United States
    Description

    Patterns of genetic variation reflect interactions among microevolutionary forces that vary in strength with changing demography. For marine species, these patterns are often interpreted under the expectation that larval movement drives connectivity because most marine species exhibit broadcast spawning dispersal strategies. Here, patterns of variation within and among samples of the mouth brooding gafftopsail catfish (Bagre marinus, Family Ariidae) captured in the U.S Atlantic and throughout the Gulf of Mexico were analyzed using genomics to generate neutral and non-neutral SNP data sets. Because genomic resources are lacking for ariids, linkage disequilibrium network analysis was used to examine patterns of putatively adaptive variation. Finally, historical demographic parameters were estimated from site frequency spectra. The results show four differentiated groups, corresponding to the (1) U.S. Atlantic, and the (2) northeastern, (3) northwestern, and (4) southern Gulf of Mexico. Patterns of genetic variation for the neutral data resemble that of other fishes that use the same estuarine habitats as nurseries, regardless of the presence/absence of a dispersive larval phase, supporting the idea that adult/juvenile behavior and habitat are important predictors of contemporary patterns of genetic structure. The non-neutral data presented two contrasting signals of structure, one due to increases in diversity moving west to east and north to south, and another to increased heterozygosity in the Atlantic. Demographic analysis suggested recently reduced long-term effective population size in the Atlantic is likely an important driver of patterns of genetic variation and is consistent with a known reduction in population size potentially due to an epizootic. Methods Sampling and library prep Fin clips were obtained from 382 mixed-age samples of gafftopsail catfish collected from nine geographic sampling locations (hereafter locations; Figure 1) from 2015 to 2018: one in the Atlantic in Indian River Lagoon, Florida and adjacent coastal waters (ATL) and eight in the Gulf. Locations in the Gulf were near Tampa Bay, Florida (FLGS), North of Tampa Bay, Florida (FLGN), near Mobile Bay, Alabama, (MB), in Mississippi Sound, Mississippi (MISS), in Chandeleur Sound, LA (CS), off Louisiana west of the Mississippi River (LA), in Corpus Christi Bay, Texas (CC) and in the Bay of Campeche, Mexico (CAMP). All locations were selected because they represent inshore habitats used by mouth brooding males for parturition and by juveniles as nursery habitat, except CAMP which was opportunistically sampled further offshore. Sampling took place as part of surveys routinely conducted by state or academic entities, the latter following approved animal care protocols. All fin clips were preserved in 20% DMSO-0.25M EDTA-saturated NaCl buffer (Seutin et al., 1991) and stored at room temperature until time of extraction. DNA was extracted using Mag-Bind Tissue DNA kits (Omega Bio-Tek, Norcross, GA) and 500-1000 ng of high-quality genomic DNA used in a modified version of the ddRAD genomic library preparation method (Peterson et al., 2012). Briefly, genomic DNA was digested with two restriction endonucleases (EcoRI, MspI), and a barcoded adapter was ligated to EcoRI sites while a common adapter was ligated to MspI sites. Following adapter ligation, individuals were pooled by index and size-selected using a Pippin Prep size-selection system (Sage Science, Beverly, MA) to a standard size range (338 – 412 base pairs). Polymerase chain-reaction (PCR) amplification of fragments was performed to incorporate adaptors necessary for annealing to an Illumina flow cell and index-specific identifiers. Index pools were then combined into libraries of approximately 150 individuals spread across the geographic range of sampling and duplicate individuals (technical replicates), and three libraries were sequenced (paired-end) each on a lane of an Illumina HiSeq 4000 DNA sequencer at GeneWiz®, New Jersey, USA. Genotyping RAD sequences retrieved from each run were demultiplexed using process_radtags (Catchen et al., 2011) and quality trimming, reduced-representation reference assembly, read mapping and SNP calling were performed using the dDocent pipeline (Puritz et al., 2014). The ten individuals with the highest number of reads were selected from each lane for de novo reduced-representation reference assembly, using the overlapping read (OL) assembly option in dDocent. Similarity threshold for clustering (c = 0.8), minimum within individual coverage (K1 = 5) and minimum number of individuals a read must occur in to be included (K2 = 2) were chosen after comparing mapping statistics for ten individuals randomly chosen from each library and mapped to references generated for c = 0.8, K1 = 2 – 10, and K2 = 1 – 10 using BWA (Li & Durbin, 2009) to maximize the number of reads mapped as a proper pair and minimize reads where forward and reverse reads mapped to different contigs. The constructed reduced-representation reference encompassed a total 10,874,990 base pairs across 37,872 fragments (mean 287 bp; mode 307 bp). Reads were mapped to the reduced-representation reference using BWA (Match=1, mismatch penalty=3 and gap penalty=5; Li, 2013) and SNPs called using freebayes (Garrison & Marth, 2012). The resulting data set was filtered to remove low quality and artefactual SNPs, paralogs, and low-quality individuals using vcftools (Danecek et al., 2011) and custom scripts following O’Leary et al. (2018), allowing for the retention of SNPs with more than 2 alleles. Genotypes with quality < 20 and < 5 reads were coded as missing, retaining loci with quality > 20, genotype call rate > 90%, and mean depth 15 – 300. Loci were also filtered based on allelic balance (remove SNPs < 0.25 and >0.75), mapping quality ratios (remove SNPs < 0.25 and >1.75), strand balance (remove SNPs with > 100x more forward alternate reads than reverse alternate reads and > 100x more forward reverse reads than reverse alternate reads), paired status, depth/quality ratio (< 0.2), and excess heterozygosity (remove SNPs > 0.5 and that deviate significantly from the expectations of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium). Individuals with > 25% missing data were removed. Finally, rad_haplotyper (Willis et al., 2017) was used to merge SNPs on the same fragments into SNP-containing loci (hereafter microhaplotypes), by using a random sample of 20 reads per locus and recording all possible haplotypes and then discarding haplotypes that are not possible given the SNPs present in the final dataset. Loci are flagged as paralogs if too may haplotypes are called given SNP genotypes. Genotyping error is flagged if an individual as too few haplotypes given SNP genotypes). The resulting haplotyped data set was further filtered to remove loci haplotyped in < 90% of individuals, flagged as potential paralogs in > 4 individuals, or as affected by genotyping error in > 10 individuals. Technical replicates were compared to assess genotyping error, and loci systematically affected by genotyping error or flagged as deviating significantly from the expectations of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) in > 5 sites were removed.

  4. Not seeing a result you expected?
    Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
MACROTRENDS (2025). Tampa Metro Area Population (1950-2025) [Dataset]. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/cities/23160/tampa/population

Tampa Metro Area Population (1950-2025)

Tampa Metro Area Population (1950-2025)

Explore at:
csvAvailable download formats
Dataset updated
May 31, 2025
Dataset authored and provided by
MACROTRENDS
License

Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically

Time period covered
Dec 1, 1950 - Jun 30, 2025
Area covered
Tampa, Tampa-St. Petersburg Metropolitan Area, United States
Description

Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Tampa metro area from 1950 to 2025.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu