cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.3886/e44561v1
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/87835f7ba95e413aa6cbd436cb649e75
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-05-23
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/a99dc050cafdc1af9c97c3e5641e188b
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Konza Prairie LTER collected on 1994-03-27
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/b25f37b1b368a99296ec0db0862b77ff
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-07-10
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/bbb9c096269adb839d67ed9964aa9e5e
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-04-28
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/bbbceb352279fbec9f0547641f7deefb
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-05-30
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/d9402c5ea21ed449ac289d9b3fb7d089
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-06-08
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/ead6c2b7358137a3b94f807b842ca298
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-06-24
DOI: 10.17614/q41c1vj0g
title: (r)-cyano(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl (1r,3r)-3-[(1z)-2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoro-1-propen-1-yl]-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate
DOI: 10.17614/q4542kb4m
title: (4e)-3,24-dimethoxy-2-methyl-4-(methylimino)-29-oxa-1,7,17-triazaoctacyclo[12.12.2.1~2,6~.0~7,28~.0~8,13~.0~15,19~.0~20,27~.0~21,26~]nonacosa-8,10,12,14,19,21,23,25,27-nonaen-16-one
DOI: 10.17614/q48w3948f
title: (3r,4as,5r,6r,6ar,10r,10as,10br)-6,10,10b-trihydroxy-3,4a,7,7,10a-pentamethyl-1-oxo-3-vinyldodecahydro-1h-benzo[f]chromen-5-yl (3-azido-5-hydroxy-4-iodophenoxy)acetate
DOI: 10.17614/q4dn40z2s
title: 7-amino-1-(5-amino-2,4-difluoro-cyclohexyl)-6-fluoro-8-methyl-4-oxo-2,5-dihydroquinoline-2,3,4a,5,6,7,8,8a-octaide-3-carboxylic acid
DOI: 10.17614/q4hd7pv88
title: 4-(cyclohexylmethoxy)-3-[4-[(1-methyl-4-piperidyl)oxy]phenyl]indazol-2-ium-3a-ide
DOI: 10.17614/q4j961c43
title: (2S,3S)-3-cyclopentyl-2-methyl-2-propyl-oxirane
DOI: 10.17614/q4n29q874
title: (2R,3S)-3-amino-1-(cyclohexylmethylamino)-4-phenyl-butan-2-ol
DOI: 10.17614/q4rv0f32m
title: 4-azido-2-iodo-phenol
DOI: 10.17614/q4wm14w6b
title: (2R,3R)-3-nitropentan-2-ol
DOI: 10.3886/e44381v2
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44411v2
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44411v3
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44501v2
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44531v2
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict.      <br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44561v2
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/16f76ee72cae1bf0ac96b22101844a23
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Konza Prairie LTER collected on 1994-07-01
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/2e3568750b1a7232a44e80266897698c
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-08-11
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/84a70ef51f4140bcfde01d7fca419703
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-07-26
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/89c0bfff02f1b232ed2ba1d9c809a5c9
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-06-15
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/d44c5894c5701d14fd9f341f90746484
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-08-27
DOI: 10.17614/q40c4tn1q
title: (E)-(3-methoxy-4-nitro-phenyl)-phenyl-diazene
DOI: 10.17614/q4445jf5v
title: 1-(hydroxymethyl)-17-pentyl-17-azapentacyclo[6.6.5.0~2,7~.0~9,14~.0~15,19~]nonadeca-2,4,6,9,11,13-hexaene-16,18-dione
DOI: 10.17614/q47w6879p
title: [[[(2R,3S,4R,5R)-5-(6-aminopurine-1,3,7-triium-9-yl)-3,4-dihydroxy-tetrahydrofuran-2-yl]methoxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl]oxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl]oxy-N-benzyl-phosphonamidic acid
DOI: 10.17614/q4cn7023f
title: 4-[(17S,18R,19S,20S,21R,28R,29R,30S,31S)-30-hydroxy-19-[(2R)-4-methoxy-6-methylene-3,5-dioxo-tetrahydropyran-4-id-2-yl]oxy-28,29-dimethyl-37-oxapentacyclo[BLAH.BLAH.BLAH.BLAH.BLAH.BLAH]octadecan-20-yl]-5-oxo-pent-4-en-1-yn-1-olate
DOI: 10.17614/q4gf0nz73
title: cyclopropyl-[(1R,2R)-2-methylcyclopropyl]methanone
DOI: 10.17614/q4m61cs1v
title: cyclopropyl-[(1S,2S)-2-methylcyclopropyl]methanone
DOI: 10.17614/q4qv3d62c
title: cyclopropyl-[(1R,2S)-2-methylcyclopropyl]methanone
DOI: 10.17614/q4vm4406h
title: (2S)-2-amino-5-[(3-iodobenzoyl)amino]pentanoic acid
DOI: 10.3886/e44288v1
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44381v3
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44501v3
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict.      <br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44531v3
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict.      <br>
DOI: 10.3886/e44561v3
title: Meaning Threat Can Promote Peaceful, Not Only Military-Based Approaches to Intergroup Conflict: The Moderating Role of Ingroup Glorification

description: Most research on threat documents its negative consequences. Similarly, most research on intergroup context has emphasized its negative behavioral effects. Drawing on the Meaning Maintenance Model and recent perspectives on the potential for positivity in intergroup conflict, we predicted that meaning threat can produce both antisocial and prosocial responses to intergroup conflict, depending on people’s preexisting meaning frameworks. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that under meaning threat, low ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for peaceful conflict resolution, whereas high ingroup glorifiers strengthened their support for military-based conflict resolution. In the context of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Study 3 found that low glorification was associated with greater support for peace during “hot” (but not “cold”) conflict, because hot conflict reduced meaning in life. These findings are consistent with the notion that when meaning is threatened, people affirm their preexisting values – whether pro-social or anti-social – even in the context of intergroup conflict. 
<br>
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/032a26eacc5f15095821446f45f1102b
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-10-30
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/2bbf8cdadfda2fb6b18e5fb9af35e77b
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-10-14
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/5e9c7183f2a9bd5c8903ca665c72a4f0
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-07-01
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/85a19f7cd215258e7b3f887b46ae68e0
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-09-12
DOI: 10.17614/q4348hj63
title: 2-chlorothiazolo[4,5-d]pyrimidin-7-amine
DOI: 10.17614/q46w97b9f
title: 2'-deoxy-5-nitro-5,6-dihydrouridine 5'-(dihydrogen phosphate)
DOI: 10.17614/q49p2x82n
title: methyl 2,3,4,6-tetra-o-methyl-d-glucopyranoside
DOI: 10.17614/q4bn9z53t
title: 1-(2-deoxy-5-o-phosphonopentofuranosyl)-5-nitrodihydro-2,4(1h,3h)-pyrimidinedione
DOI: 10.17614/q4ff3n26s
title: 7-acetyl-5h-chromeno[2,3-b]pyridin-5-one
DOI: 10.17614/q4k64bw04
title: n-[4-(4-oxo-1,4-dihydro-2-quinazolinyl)phenyl]-2-thiophenecarboxamide
DOI: 10.17614/q4pz52p4z
title: (9z,12e)-12-nitro-9,12-octadecadienoic acid
DOI: 10.17614/q4tm73368
title: 2,8-dimethylnonane-4-thione
DOI: 10.17614/q4zc7sx1q
title: 5-[[4-[2-(BLAHcyclopenta-4,5-dien-5-yl)phenyl]phenyl]methyl]-2-methyl-4-propyl-BLAHbicyclo[4.3.0]nona-2,3,6,7-tetraen-8-one
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/00969abb081560d3636c0e660e45ef9f
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-12-17
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/1022368ee8a841f94d2bafb109d278fd
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-12-01
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/243558fd04ed45814275e9c70c1fe884
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2002-11-15
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/43b5dec864334f34c637b70b1c8064d3
title: Forest Inventory of a Whole Tree Harvest: Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest Watershed 5, 1982, pre-harvest
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/6d4fed2a9e9ce2bfb343344b6ced7fed
title: Forest Inventory of a Whole Tree Harvest: Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest Watershed 5, 1990, 7 years post-harvest
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/7b57ff48bfbb356abf88f7bea9fb959d
title: Forest Inventory of a Whole Tree Harvest: Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest Watershed 5, 1994, 10 years post-harvest
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/c7c63772515cf41b0cc09ab90208a40d
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Konza Prairie LTER collected on 1994-07-17
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/e8d9e9a95e733d033a0d2f93545dfd1a
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-07-17
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/ed78f38da2ed652d2e2a8c181b2a5041
title: Fluffgrass rhizosphere N mineralization potential
DOI: 10.17614/q4251gn5x
title: d&c red dye 27
DOI: 10.17614/q45x26f9r
title: methyl 2,3,4,6-tetra-o-methyl-d-glucopyranoside
DOI: 10.17614/q48p5wc4c
title: 3'-o-(6-o-acetyl-3,4-di-o-phosphono-alpha-d-glucopyranosyl)adenosine 2'-(dihydrogen phosphate)
DOI: 10.17614/q4df6m571
title: (2S)-N-[(1S,2R)-1-benzyl-2-[(2R,3R)-3-benzyloxiran-2-yl]-2-hydroxy-ethyl]-3-methyl-2-[(2-phenoxyacetyl)amino]butanamide
DOI: 10.17614/q4j67b01s
title: [(E)-6-methylhept-1-enyl]cyclopropane
DOI: 10.17614/q4nz81s56
title: [(Z)-6-methylhept-1-enyl]cyclopropane
DOI: 10.17614/q4sq8rk9z
title: 3-nitro-7,8,9,10-tetrahydrobenzo[a]pyrene
DOI: 10.17614/q4xg9gd3q
title: n-[(1,5,6,7,9,11,14-heptahydroxy-3-methyl-8,13-dioxo-5,6,8,13-tetrahydrobenzo[a]tetracen-2-yl)carbonyl]alanine
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/3117d1c65c5ff33ec005c1fa2f73dd91
title: Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2007-07-20
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/4726ed0c56d69b5620d5cada526e44f7
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2003-01-18
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/58906198d8791d81226d6771c1f1d517
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Kellogg Biological Station LTER collected on 2006-08-02
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/59ee939b680247a31a562dfbaf20e160
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2003-02-19
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/6ea7c478dd0e59b540a479eeed993270
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Konza Prairie LTER collected on 1994-08-02
DOI: 10.6073/pasta/8c48114b986ac9f9b8c57f3100f3ed53
title: LEDAPS corrected Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper image data for Jornada Basin LTER collected on 2003-02-03