cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011765
title: The relationship between relative CPC deficits in a specific month and P/ET in previous months

description: <b>Table 1.</b> 
 The relationship between relative CPC deficits in a specific month and P/ET in previous months. In general, summer droughts lasted from June to August, and we will focus only on the monthly CPC deficits in those three months.
 <strong>Abstract</strong> Increasing occurrences of climate extreme events urge us to study their impacts on terrestrial carbon sequestration. Ecosystem potential productivity deficits could characterize such impacts and display the ecosystem vulnerability and resilience to the extremes in climate change, whereas few studies have analyzed the yearly dynamics of forest potential productivity deficits. Based on a perfect-deficit approach, we used <em>in situ</em> eddy covariance flux data and meteorological observation data at Qianyanzhou station from 2003 to 2010 to explore the relationship between potential productivity and climate extremes, such as droughts in 2003 and 2007, ice rain in 2005, and an ice storm in 2008. We found (1) the monthly canopy photosynthetic capacity (CPC) deficits could be mainly explained by air temperature (Ta) deficits (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.45, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.000 01); (2) a significant correlation was noted between seasonal CPC deficits and co-current Ta deficits (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.45, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.000 01), especially in winter (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.79, <em>p</em> = 0.003); (3) drought in summer exerted a negatively lagged effect on potential productivity (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.59, <em>p</em> = 0.02), but at a short time scale; and (4) annual CPC deficits captured the impacts of climate extremes on the forest ecosystem potential productivity, and the two largest potential productivity deficits occurred in 2003 (relative CPC deficits = 0.34) and in 2005 (relative CPC deficits = 0.35), respectively. With the perfect-deficit approach, the forest ecosystem vulnerability to extremes was analyzed in a novel way.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011765.v1
title: The relationship between relative CPC deficits in a specific month and P/ET in previous months

description: <b>Table 1.</b> 
 The relationship between relative CPC deficits in a specific month and P/ET in previous months. In general, summer droughts lasted from June to August, and we will focus only on the monthly CPC deficits in those three months.
 <strong>Abstract</strong> Increasing occurrences of climate extreme events urge us to study their impacts on terrestrial carbon sequestration. Ecosystem potential productivity deficits could characterize such impacts and display the ecosystem vulnerability and resilience to the extremes in climate change, whereas few studies have analyzed the yearly dynamics of forest potential productivity deficits. Based on a perfect-deficit approach, we used <em>in situ</em> eddy covariance flux data and meteorological observation data at Qianyanzhou station from 2003 to 2010 to explore the relationship between potential productivity and climate extremes, such as droughts in 2003 and 2007, ice rain in 2005, and an ice storm in 2008. We found (1) the monthly canopy photosynthetic capacity (CPC) deficits could be mainly explained by air temperature (Ta) deficits (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.45, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.000 01); (2) a significant correlation was noted between seasonal CPC deficits and co-current Ta deficits (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.45, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.000 01), especially in winter (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.79, <em>p</em> = 0.003); (3) drought in summer exerted a negatively lagged effect on potential productivity (<em>R</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.59, <em>p</em> = 0.02), but at a short time scale; and (4) annual CPC deficits captured the impacts of climate extremes on the forest ecosystem potential productivity, and the two largest potential productivity deficits occurred in 2003 (relative CPC deficits = 0.34) and in 2005 (relative CPC deficits = 0.35), respectively. With the perfect-deficit approach, the forest ecosystem vulnerability to extremes was analyzed in a novel way.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011971
title: The static dipole (α<sub>1</sub>) and quadrupole (α<sub>2</sub>) polarizabilities (in au) for the ground states of the alkali and alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 1.</b> The static dipole (α<sub>1</sub>) and quadrupole (α<sub>2</sub>) polarizabilities (in au) for the ground states of the alkali and alkaline-earth atoms. A recent review summarizes static dipole polarizabilities calculations and experiments [42]. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011971.v1
title: The static dipole (α<sub>1</sub>) and quadrupole (α<sub>2</sub>) polarizabilities (in au) for the ground states of the alkali and alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 1.</b> The static dipole (α<sub>1</sub>) and quadrupole (α<sub>2</sub>) polarizabilities (in au) for the ground states of the alkali and alkaline-earth atoms. A recent review summarizes static dipole polarizabilities calculations and experiments [42]. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011972
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 2.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth atoms. The numbers in the square brackets denote powers of ten. <em>C</em><sub>6</sub> coefficients derived from MBPT-SD and CI+MBPT dynamic polarizability [64] are given in the rows with no other <em>C<sub>n</sub></em> coefficients and have estimated errors given by the numbers in brackets. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011972.v1
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 2.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth atoms. The numbers in the square brackets denote powers of ten. <em>C</em><sub>6</sub> coefficients derived from MBPT-SD and CI+MBPT dynamic polarizability [64] are given in the rows with no other <em>C<sub>n</sub></em> coefficients and have estimated errors given by the numbers in brackets. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011973
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s<em>n</em>p <sup>1</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> excited states of alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 3.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s<em>n</em>p <sup>1</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> excited states of alkaline-earth atoms. <em>n</em> = 2, 3, 4 and 5 for Be, Mg, Ca and Sr, respectively. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. Dispersion coefficients which could be influenced by an accidental degeneracy with pseudo-states in the alkali atom continuum are indicated by underlining. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011973.v1
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s<em>n</em>p <sup>1</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> excited states of alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 3.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s<em>n</em>p <sup>1</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>P<sup><em>o</em></sup> excited states of alkaline-earth atoms. <em>n</em> = 2, 3, 4 and 5 for Be, Mg, Ca and Sr, respectively. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. Dispersion coefficients which could be influenced by an accidental degeneracy with pseudo-states in the alkali atom continuum are indicated by underlining. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011974
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s(<em>n</em> − 1)d <sup>1</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> excited states of calcium and strontium

description: <b>Table 4.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s(<em>n</em> − 1)d <sup>1</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> excited states of calcium and strontium. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011974.v1
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s(<em>n</em> − 1)d <sup>1</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> excited states of calcium and strontium

description: <b>Table 4.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the ground state of alkali atoms interacting with the <em>n</em>s(<em>n</em> − 1)d <sup>1</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> and <sup>3</sup>D<sup><em>e</em></sup> excited states of calcium and strontium. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011975
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the excited states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth

description: <b>Table 5.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the excited states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011975.v1
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the excited states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth

description: <b>Table 5.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the excited states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of alkaline-earth. The notation <em>a</em>[<em>b</em>] means <em>a</em> <b>×</b> 10<sup><em>b</em></sup>. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011976
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the lowest <em>n</em>d states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of the alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 6.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the lowest <em>n</em>d states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of the alkaline-earth atoms. The numbers in the square brackets denote powers of 10. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011976.v1
title: The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the lowest <em>n</em>d states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of the alkaline-earth atoms

description: <b>Table 6.</b> The dispersion coefficients (in au) for the lowest <em>n</em>d states of alkali atoms interacting with the ground states of the alkaline-earth atoms. The numbers in the square brackets denote powers of 10. <strong>Abstract</strong> Dispersion coefficients between the alkali metal atoms (Li–Rb) and alkaline-earth metal atoms (Be–Sr) are evaluated using matrix elements computed from frozen core configuration interaction calculations. Besides dispersion coefficients with both atoms in their respective ground states, dispersion coefficients are also given for the case where one atom is in its ground state and the other atom is in a low-lying excited state.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1012188
title: Test parameters of the filter

description: <b>Table 1.</b> Test parameters of the filter. <strong>Abstract</strong> We propose a scheme of a surface electrostatic velocity filter capable of preparing cold polar molecules on the surface of a substrate by selecting a low-velocity component of an effusive beam from a thermal gas reservoir. Using ND<sub>3</sub> as a molecular sample, the dependence of the performance of the filter on the parameters of both the filter setup and the incident molecular beam is investigated by using a theoretical model and Monte Carlo simulations. A detailed study of the guiding process of molecules, including the evolution of phase space density of the packet in the filter, is carried out and shows that the beam selection process is mainly completed in the front part of the filter.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1012188.v1
title: Test parameters of the filter

description: <b>Table 1.</b> Test parameters of the filter. <strong>Abstract</strong> We propose a scheme of a surface electrostatic velocity filter capable of preparing cold polar molecules on the surface of a substrate by selecting a low-velocity component of an effusive beam from a thermal gas reservoir. Using ND<sub>3</sub> as a molecular sample, the dependence of the performance of the filter on the parameters of both the filter setup and the incident molecular beam is investigated by using a theoretical model and Monte Carlo simulations. A detailed study of the guiding process of molecules, including the evolution of phase space density of the packet in the filter, is carried out and shows that the beam selection process is mainly completed in the front part of the filter.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1012312
title: Threshold energies (in eV) for free and confined Xe

description: <b>Table 1.</b> Threshold energies (in eV) for free and confined Xe. Model (1) and model (2) are theoretical calculations using potentials 1 and 2, respectively. <strong>Abstract</strong> Confining resonances in the photoionization of endohedral atoms are a topic of major research interest. The C<sub>60</sub> fullerene cage has been commonly modelled as a spherical attractive cavity and more recently with a newly proposed jellium model (Verkhovtsev <em>et al</em> 2012 <em>J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.</em> <strong>45</strong> 215101). In this work, the bound wavefunctions are determined by solving the relativistic multiconfiguration Dirac–Fock equations. The photoionization cross sections of Xe and Xe@C<sub>60</sub> have been calculated using the relativistic <em>R</em>-matrix method for both a spherical attractive cavity and the newly proposed jellium potential. Comparison between the present calculations and other experimental and theoretical results demonstrate that configuration interaction has an important effect. The resonance resulting from confinement by the fullerene cage compares well with the experimental measurements.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1012312.v1
title: Threshold energies (in eV) for free and confined Xe

description: <b>Table 1.</b> Threshold energies (in eV) for free and confined Xe. Model (1) and model (2) are theoretical calculations using potentials 1 and 2, respectively. <strong>Abstract</strong> Confining resonances in the photoionization of endohedral atoms are a topic of major research interest. The C<sub>60</sub> fullerene cage has been commonly modelled as a spherical attractive cavity and more recently with a newly proposed jellium model (Verkhovtsev <em>et al</em> 2012 <em>J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.</em> <strong>45</strong> 215101). In this work, the bound wavefunctions are determined by solving the relativistic multiconfiguration Dirac–Fock equations. The photoionization cross sections of Xe and Xe@C<sub>60</sub> have been calculated using the relativistic <em>R</em>-matrix method for both a spherical attractive cavity and the newly proposed jellium potential. Comparison between the present calculations and other experimental and theoretical results demonstrate that configuration interaction has an important effect. The resonance resulting from confinement by the fullerene cage compares well with the experimental measurements.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1014318
title: Dataset 1 and 2. qPCR results of CD45+ splenocytes/ lung fibroblasts.

description: qPCR data were generated using Viia7 real-time PCR system software. Ct: Threshold cycle number where florescence signal of each sample reached threshold level as defined by the software. Undetermined: Florescence signal of the samples did not reach the threshold level before maximum (40) PCR cycles of each run. SD: Standard deviation of Ct of technical triplicate of each biological sample.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1014318.v1
title: Dataset 1 and 2. qPCR results of CD45+ splenocytes/ lung fibroblasts.

description: qPCR data were generated using Viia7 real-time PCR system software. Ct: Threshold cycle number where florescence signal of each sample reached threshold level as defined by the software. Undetermined: Florescence signal of the samples did not reach the threshold level before maximum (40) PCR cycles of each run. SD: Standard deviation of Ct of technical triplicate of each biological sample.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1016971
title: Age and origin of charoitite, Malyy Murun massif, Siberia, Russia

description: Сharoitite consists of gem-quality mineral charoite and subordinate quartz, aegirine, K-feldspar, tinaksite, canasite, and some other minerals. This rock type is known only from one locality in the world associated with the Early Cretaceous (131.3 ± 2.4 Ma, K–Ar age) Malyy Murun syenite massif, Siberia, Russia. Although charoitite mineralogy is well known, there is disagreement whether it reflects metasomatic or magmatic activity. In order to understand when the charoitites formed we attempted to date it by <sup>40</sup>Ar/<sup>39</sup>Ar incremental step-heating and laser ablation techniques. Our results show that the fibrous structure of water-bearing charoite does not retain radiogenic argon. Laser ablation <sup>40</sup>Ar/<sup>39</sup>Ar for K-feldspar and tinaksite from the charoitite yielded several age clusters even from the same mineral grain. The oldest cluster of 134.1 ± 2.9 Ma for the K-feldspar agrees with the age of the Malyy Murun syenites. The youngest age of 113.3 ± 3.4 Ma for charoitite K-feldspar overlaps with the youngest of published K–Ar ages (112 ± 5 Ma) for one K-feldspar sample of the Malyy Murun syenite. Tinaksite is characterized by a similar spread of ages (from 133.0 ± 3 Ma to 115.7 ± 4.3 Ma) within a single grain. We suggest that charoitites originated due to the interaction of metasomatic agents derived from the Malyy Murun magma and country rocks. Timing of magma emplacement and charoitite crystallization is reflected by the older cluster of ages, whereas the younger ages are due to a secondary process.