cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877350
title: Raw temperature and salinity data from moorings in the Laptev Sea in 2013-2016

description: The data set contains raw datafiles from instruments that were moored in the Laptev Sea between 2013 and 2016. The moorings were operated as part of the Russian-German BMBF-funded Transdrift project. Four moorings (1893-T1, Kotelnyy, Vilkitzky, Taymyr-T1) were deployed in September 2013 and recovered in September 2014 aboard the RV Viktor Buinitsky. During the 2014 expedition, five moorings were re-deployed, two of which were recovered in 2015 (Taymyr-T1-14 and 1893-T1-14) and three in 2016 (Vilkitzky-T1-14, Vilkitzky-T2-14, Vilkitzky-T3-14) by a Russian expedition to the Laptev Sea. The attached files include raw data from numerous SBE37-CTDs, as well as some turbidity meters and 2 records from a Wetlabs Ecotriplet. The moorings also contained ADCP current profilers, which are not included in this file due to limitations in the Russian-German data agreements. A spreadsheet with coordinates and instruments as well as mooring schematics are included in the attachment.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877494
title: Urban meteorological data of station 2242 for the city of Wageningen during the summer of 2015
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877495
title: Urban meteorological data of station 2243 for the city of Wageningen during the summer of 2015
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879578
title: Diffuse downwelling attenuation coefficients (Napierian) for Southern Ocean waters for wavelengths 290-700 nm

description: Diffuse downwelling attenuation coefficients in Napierian form (DAC down) for Southern Ocean waters for wavelengths 290-700 nm. Coefficients for 320-700 nm were calculated directly from depth profiles of in situ irradiance made with an Ocean Optics Jaz spectrophotometer at PAL-LTER Station B, Arthur Harbor, Antarctica. The station is a 75 m deep sampling location about 1 km offshore. Due to the low signal-to-noise ratio in the in situ irradiance observations at wavelengths &lt; 320 nm, coefficients were estimated for 290-320 nm using an exponential model fit to observed data from the 320-370 nm interval:DAC down =e^(-0.0152 * lamda+3.84)To achieve minimum boat shadow while making the irradiance profile measurements, the fiber optic cable and light sensor (cosine corrector) were streamed away from the small boat in a direction that was both to windward and toward the sun; the boat was then allowed to drift downwind from the measurement location to a suitable stand-off distance. A series of concurrent surface irradiance measurements made with a LI-COR PAR sensor (model LI-193SA; LI-COR Biosciences, Lincoln, NE, USA) was used to correct the spectra made as part of these profiles for any changes in incident light intensity that occurred between measurements.
description: PLEASE NOTE: This is an old Version of data collection doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.879582, please refer to the newer Version (see "Replaced by" reference)
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877496
title: Urban meteorological data of station 2244 for the city of Wageningen during the summer of 2015
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10673681
title: ЛИНГВОКУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ОСОБЕННОСТИ ФРАЗЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ЕДИНИЦ РУССКОГО И АНГЛИЙСКОГО ЯЗЫКОВ

description: Annotatsiya. Ushbu maqola rus va ingliz tillarining frazeologik birliklarini lingvomadaniy jihatdan o‘rganishga bag‘ishlangan bo‘lib, tilshunoslikda “ekvivalent bo‘lmagan lug‘at” atamasining ishlatilishi ham ko‘rib chiqiladi va tushuntiriladi.

Kalit so‘zlar: til, madaniyat, lingvokulturologiya, frazeologik tizim, frazeologik birliklar, frazeologik birliklar, til va madaniyatning o‘zaro ta’siri.

Abstract. This article is devoted to the study of phraseological units of the Russian and English languages in the linguocultural aspect; the use of the term “non-equivalent vocabulary” in linguistics is also considered and explained.

Keywords: language, culture, linguoculturology, phraseological system, phraseological units, phraseological units, interaction of language and culture.

Аннотация. Данная статья посвящена изучению фразеологических единиц русского и английского языков в лингвокультурологическом аспекте также рассматривается и поясняется употребление в лингвистике термина «безэквивалентная лексика.

Ключевые слова: язык, культура, лингвокультурология, фразеологическая система, фразеологические единицы, фразеологизм, взаимодействие языка икультуры.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10673682
title: ЛИНГВОКУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ОСОБЕННОСТИ ФРАЗЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ЕДИНИЦ РУССКОГО И АНГЛИЙСКОГО ЯЗЫКОВ

description: Annotatsiya. Ushbu maqola rus va ingliz tillarining frazeologik birliklarini lingvomadaniy jihatdan o‘rganishga bag‘ishlangan bo‘lib, tilshunoslikda “ekvivalent bo‘lmagan lug‘at” atamasining ishlatilishi ham ko‘rib chiqiladi va tushuntiriladi.

Kalit so‘zlar: til, madaniyat, lingvokulturologiya, frazeologik tizim, frazeologik birliklar, frazeologik birliklar, til va madaniyatning o‘zaro ta’siri.

Abstract. This article is devoted to the study of phraseological units of the Russian and English languages in the linguocultural aspect; the use of the term “non-equivalent vocabulary” in linguistics is also considered and explained.

Keywords: language, culture, linguoculturology, phraseological system, phraseological units, phraseological units, interaction of language and culture.

Аннотация. Данная статья посвящена изучению фразеологических единиц русского и английского языков в лингвокультурологическом аспекте также рассматривается и поясняется употребление в лингвистике термина «безэквивалентная лексика.

Ключевые слова: язык, культура, лингвокультурология, фразеологическая система, фразеологические единицы, фразеологизм, взаимодействие языка икультуры.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877905
title: Seafloor images at near field seafloor observatory DELOS A, off the coast of Angola, in the South East Atlantic Ocean, 2009-02-16 to 2009-05-23, Deployment 1

description: The DELOS (Deep-ocean Environmental Long-term Observatory System, http://www.delos-project.org) system comprises two environmental monitoring platforms located within petroleum lease Block 18 in a mid- slope area off Angola, between the deep-sea fans of the Congo and Kwanza rivers. DELOS A is located in the near field (within 50 m of a sea floor well). DELOS B is located in the far field (~16 km from sea floor infrastructure).The DELOS platforms (DELOS A and DELOS B) are under Angolan jurisdiction and all activities must abide by Angolan law. As such, any person intending to publish DELOS data in any form is required to obtain prior permission from the National Concessionaire (Sonangol). Permission can be requested via Robert O'Brien at BP UK (Robert.OBrien@uk.bp.com) or the DELOS PI Dr. David Bailey (David.Bailey@glasgow.ac.uk). This process is not intended as a deterrent and applications to use DELOS data are welcomed.Participating Institutions: BP Exploration, BP Angola, University of Aberdeen, MBARI, National Oceanography Centre, INIP - Angola Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (Angolan National Institute of Fisheries), Texas A&M University, Glasgow University
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.878876
title: Thirteen years annual mean land surface temperature dataset over the Third pole, links to GeoTIFF files
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879381
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/261-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821088), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879390
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/262-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821089), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879391
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/267-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821091), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879392
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/268-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821092), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879393
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/269-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821093), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879394
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/270-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821094), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879395
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/271-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821095), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879396
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/276-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821096), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879397
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/277-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821097), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879398
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/278-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821098), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879399
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/279-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821099), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879400
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/281-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821100), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879401
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS71/263-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821101), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879402
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/267-4 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821173), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879403
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/268-5 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821174), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.