cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/27183570.v1
title: Data from: Detection of the 1016Gly and 989Pro <i>knockdown resistance</i> mutations in Florida, USA <i>Aedes aegypti</i>

description: <i>Aedes aegypti</i> is a major arboviral disease vector and is therefore a critical target for control by public health programs. Early eradication efforts have shown that <i>Ae. aegypti</i> can rapidly build insecticide resistance and now, resistance to pyrethroids, the major class of adulticides used for operational control, is common in many populations. A major contributor to this resistance is a group of knockdown resistance<i> </i>(<i>kdr</i>) SNPs that normally exist in distinct ensembles in the Western Hemisphere and the Indopacific with little known mixing. In this study, we detected, and confirmed using multiple methods, two Indopacific <i>kdr</i> SNPs, V1016G and S989P, in three recent collections from Osceola County, Florida. This represents a large expansion of the geographic range of the Indopacific <i>kdr</i> SNPs. We consider the implications of this finding on future insecticide resistance surveillance studies, including assessing the ability of our current screening tools to detect these SNPs. We find that the presence of the Indopacific SNPs requires modification of existing resistance screening protocols and requires further work to understand the operational implications for mosquito control. The information in this repository consists of the data supporting the original detection and the confirmation of the presence of the Indopacific mutations. It also includes sequencing protocols, analysis scripts, and sequencing metadata used in the study.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25102976
title: Assessing the attractiveness of native wildflower species to bees (Hymenoptera: Anthophila) in the southeastern United States

description: Pesticide use, disease, climate change, and habitat loss associated with agricultural intensification and urbanization have contributed to the decline of numerous insect groups. Recent government incentives have recognized the importance of supplementary wildflower plantings to support native bee populations, yet little information exists on the attractiveness of recommended plant species to bees. We evaluated the bee attractiveness of 18 native wildflower species belonging to 6 families (Apiaceae, Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, and Verbenaceae) commonly recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) to land managers in the southeastern United States. To accomplish this, we planted the 18 wildflower species in separate 1 m2 plots arranged in a randomized block design with four replicates in Auburn, Alabama, USA. We conducted floral counts and timed sweep netting events to assess each species’ attractiveness to bees from May-November 2019. We also evaluated the floral preferences of seven bee taxa (<em>Apis mellifera</em>, <em>Halictus poeyi/ligatus</em>, <em>Bombus griseocollis, Bombus impatiens, Lasioglossum </em>spp., <em>Megachile </em>spp., and <em>Xylocopa virginica</em>) to the planted wildflower species. We found that <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted the greatest abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees compared to the other wildflower species. While several wildflower species attracted low abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees, they are still ecologically important for attracting uncommon or specialist bee species. Each bee taxa were attracted to a particular combination of planted wildflower species; collectively, <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted 89% of all be taxa in the study, which exemplifies the importance of including them in a wildflower mixture to attract native bees. Our results highlight that each species of native wildflower varies in the abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees they attract; this could be considered in the decision-making of landowners and land managers to promote wildflower plantings to reflect their needs.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25102976.v2
title: Assessing the attractiveness of native wildflower species to bees (Hymenoptera: Anthophila) in the southeastern United States

description: Pesticide use, disease, climate change, and habitat loss associated with agricultural intensification and urbanization have contributed to the decline of numerous insect groups. Recent government incentives have recognized the importance of supplementary wildflower plantings to support native bee populations, yet little information exists on the attractiveness of recommended plant species to bees. We evaluated the bee attractiveness of 18 native wildflower species belonging to 6 families (Apiaceae, Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, and Verbenaceae) commonly recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) to land managers in the southeastern United States. To accomplish this, we planted the 18 wildflower species in separate 1 m2 plots arranged in a randomized block design with four replicates in Auburn, Alabama, USA. We conducted floral counts and timed sweep netting events to assess each species’ attractiveness to bees from May-November 2019. We also evaluated the floral preferences of seven bee taxa (<em>Apis mellifera</em>, <em>Halictus poeyi/ligatus</em>, <em>Bombus griseocollis, Bombus impatiens, Lasioglossum </em>spp., <em>Megachile </em>spp., and <em>Xylocopa virginica</em>) to the planted wildflower species. We found that <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted the greatest abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees compared to the other wildflower species. While several wildflower species attracted low abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees, they are still ecologically important for attracting uncommon or specialist bee species. Each bee taxa were attracted to a particular combination of planted wildflower species; collectively, <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted 89% of all be taxa in the study, which exemplifies the importance of including them in a wildflower mixture to attract native bees. Our results highlight that each species of native wildflower varies in the abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees they attract; this could be considered in the decision-making of landowners and land managers to promote wildflower plantings to reflect their needs.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25102976.v1
title: Assessing the attractiveness of native wildflower species to bees (Hymenoptera: Anthophila): in the southeastern United States

description: Pesticide use, disease, climate change, and habitat loss associated with agricultural intensification and urbanization have contributed to the decline of numerous insect groups. Recent government incentives have recognized the importance of supplementary wildflower plantings to support native bee populations, yet little information exists on the attractiveness of recommended plant species to bees. We evaluated the bee attractiveness of 18 native wildflower species belonging to 6 families (Apiaceae, Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, and Verbenaceae) commonly recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) to land managers in the southeastern United States. To accomplish this, we planted the 18 wildflower species in separate 1 m2 plots arranged in a randomized block design with four replicates in Auburn, Alabama, USA. We conducted floral counts and timed sweep netting events to assess each species’ attractiveness to bees from May-November 2019. We also evaluated the floral preferences of seven bee taxa (<em>Apis mellifera</em>, <em>Halictus poeyi/ligatus</em>, <em>Bombus griseocollis, Bombus impatiens, Lasioglossum </em>spp., <em>Megachile </em>spp., and <em>Xylocopa virginica</em>) to the planted wildflower species. We found that <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted the greatest abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees compared to the other wildflower species. While several wildflower species attracted low abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees, they are still ecologically important for attracting uncommon or specialist bee species. Each bee taxa were attracted to a particular combination of planted wildflower species; collectively, <em>Asclepias tuberosa, Gaillardia pulchella, </em>and <em>Verbena hastata </em>attracted 89% of all be taxa in the study, which exemplifies the importance of including them in a wildflower mixture to attract native bees. Our results highlight that each species of native wildflower varies in the abundance, richness, and diversity of native bees they attract; this could be considered in the decision-making of landowners and land managers to promote wildflower plantings to reflect their needs.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/28724138
title: Crop response and changes in soil properties as affected by soil erosion, topsoil replacement, and application of anaerobically digested dairy manure solids in a Mollisol landform

description: These data provide field measurements of plant and soil at a geographical site as affected by (a) tillage and water erosion (b) replacement of translocated topsoil through soil-landscape rehabilitation, and (c) amending soil with solids from anaerobically digested dairy manure. The study site located in Stevens County, Minnesota was a heavily eroded landform due to long term tillage and other environmental factors. The study was initiated in 2006 and continued to 2016 in two phases. In Phase-1, which was concluded in 2011, replacement of translocated topsoil on crop productivity and soil properties were evaluated. Phase-1 data associated with pre-restoration soil properties, digital elevation model, tillage and water erosion estimates, annual assessments of crop emergence, crop biomass, grain yield and quality, soil biological, chemical, and physical properties, weed communities, and weather information has been published in Ag Data Commons (https://doi.org/10.15482/USDA.ADC/25206968.v1). Phase-2 was conducted in 2011-2016. At the beginning of Phase-2, 40 mega gram per hectare of anaerobically digested dairy manure solids were applied to eroded plots and plots that had soil added in Phase-1. These treatments allowed comparisons of plots with eroded soil, topsoil added in 2005, manure solids added in 2011, and soil (2005) plus manure solids (2011) added. Data reported in Phase-2 include crop stand, biomass, grain yield and quality, soil chemical properties, and weather information. The data can be used to develop agronomic best management practices to improve crop production and to protect soil health. The data also could contribute to meta-analyses describing effects of erosion, soil-landscape rehabilitation, and amending soil with digested dairy manure solids on crop performance and changes in soil properties.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/28724138.v1
title: Crop response and changes in soil properties as affected by soil erosion, topsoil replacement, and application of anaerobically digested dairy manure solids in a Mollisol landform

description: These data provide field measurements of plant and soil at a geographical site as affected by (a) tillage and water erosion (b) replacement of translocated topsoil through soil-landscape rehabilitation, and (c) amending soil with solids from anaerobically digested dairy manure. The study site located in Stevens County, Minnesota was a heavily eroded landform due to long term tillage and other environmental factors. The study was initiated in 2006 and continued to 2016 in two phases. In Phase-1, which was concluded in 2011, replacement of translocated topsoil on crop productivity and soil properties were evaluated. Phase-1 data associated with pre-restoration soil properties, digital elevation model, tillage and water erosion estimates, annual assessments of crop emergence, crop biomass, grain yield and quality, soil biological, chemical, and physical properties, weed communities, and weather information has been published in Ag Data Commons (https://doi.org/10.15482/USDA.ADC/25206968.v1). Phase-2 was conducted in 2011-2016. At the beginning of Phase-2, 40 mega gram per hectare of anaerobically digested dairy manure solids were applied to eroded plots and plots that had soil added in Phase-1. These treatments allowed comparisons of plots with eroded soil, topsoil added in 2005, manure solids added in 2011, and soil (2005) plus manure solids (2011) added. Data reported in Phase-2 include crop stand, biomass, grain yield and quality, soil chemical properties, and weather information. The data can be used to develop agronomic best management practices to improve crop production and to protect soil health. The data also could contribute to meta-analyses describing effects of erosion, soil-landscape rehabilitation, and amending soil with digested dairy manure solids on crop performance and changes in soil properties.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25293466
title: Data from: Managing to survive despite the weather: seeding decisions affecting simulated dryland restoration outcomes

description: The purpose of these data is to assist with understanding barriers to restoration outcomes in Great Basin sagebrush ecosystems, which are currently threated by ongoing invasion and frequent fire. Specifically, these data explore the effects of seeding decisions, such as seeding year, delay (within a year), and seed source selection. The data included are simulations for weather effects on seedling germination, emergence, and mortality for 9776 locations across the Great Basin for 10 common native perennial grass species with varying temperature behavior in response to temperature. We tested outcomes associated with either seeding in the first year post-fire or the best year of 5. Fire years were based on years with high fire probability for each location. We also tested for the effects of seeding mid-fall, Oct. 15, versus delaying germination (with seed technology, by 30 or 60 days) or the roughly equivalent effect of delaying seeding by a month, Nov. 15, or Dec. 15. We evaluated our assumptions related to the timing of emergence and germination by including simulations for each of three germination subpopulations (rate cohorts, 10, 25, 50%) and three emergence speeds (5, 10, 15 days). The analyses cover the period between 1988-2019.
<br>
 Funding provided by the SCINet project of the USDA Agricultural Research Service, ARS project number 0500-00093-001-00-D. 
<br>
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25293466.v1
title: Data from: Managing to survive despite the weather: seeding decisions affecting simulated dryland restoration outcomes

description: The purpose of these data is to assist with understanding barriers to restoration outcomes in Great Basin sagebrush ecosystems, which are currently threated by ongoing invasion and frequent fire. Specifically, these data explore the effects of seeding decisions, such as seeding year, delay (within a year), and seed source selection. The data included are simulations for weather effects on seedling germination, emergence, and mortality for 9776 locations across the Great Basin for 10 common native perennial grass species with varying temperature behavior in response to temperature. We tested outcomes associated with either seeding in the first year post-fire or the best year of 5. Fire years were based on years with high fire probability for each location. We also tested for the effects of seeding mid-fall, Oct. 15, versus delaying germination (with seed technology, by 30 or 60 days) or the roughly equivalent effect of delaying seeding by a month, Nov. 15, or Dec. 15. We evaluated our assumptions related to the timing of emergence and germination by including simulations for each of three germination subpopulations (rate cohorts, 10, 25, 50%) and three emergence speeds (5, 10, 15 days). The analyses cover the period between 1988-2019.
<br>
 Funding provided by the SCINet project of the USDA Agricultural Research Service, ARS project number 0500-00093-001-00-D. 
<br>
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17612885
title: Twenty-one years of global atmospheric chlorine inventories from Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier-Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS) measurements

description: MPC781_t042_yyyy01mm.nc:TOMCAT Chemical-Transport Model (CTM) model output; vertical profiles of chlorine-containing species used in the Raymond et al., (2025) study.

Cl_inventory_2004_2024.nc:The dataset contains annual latitude–altitude distributions of total atmospheric chlorine (Cl_tot) volume mixing ratios (VMR) derived from ACE-FTS measurements. The file provides 21 years of data (2004–2024) on a fixed 0–61 km altitude grid (61 levels) for five predefined latitude bands. Each data field includes the total chlorine VMR (dimensionless mol mol⁻¹) together with its associated 1-σ uncertainty. Latitude bands are indexed from 0 to 4, with the corresponding latitude boundaries supplied in the lat_bnds variable. Time is represented as integer years, and all variables follow CF-compliant metadata conventions
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17612886
title: Twenty-one years of global atmospheric chlorine inventories from Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier-Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS) measurements

description: MPC781_t042_yyyy01mm.nc:TOMCAT Chemical-Transport Model (CTM) model output; vertical profiles of chlorine-containing species used in the Raymond et al., (2025) study.

Cl_inventory_2004_2024.nc:The dataset contains annual latitude–altitude distributions of total atmospheric chlorine (Cl_tot) volume mixing ratios (VMR) derived from ACE-FTS measurements. The file provides 21 years of data (2004–2024) on a fixed 0–61 km altitude grid (61 levels) for five predefined latitude bands. Each data field includes the total chlorine VMR (dimensionless mol mol⁻¹) together with its associated 1-σ uncertainty. Latitude bands are indexed from 0 to 4, with the corresponding latitude boundaries supplied in the lat_bnds variable. Time is represented as integer years, and all variables follow CF-compliant metadata conventions
DOI: 10.15468/dl.754457
title: Occurrence Download

description: A dataset containing 97 species occurrences available in GBIF matching the query:
{
 "and" : [
 "Geometry POLYGON((-9.87003 35.82030,13.85774 35.82030,13.85774 45.30735,-9.87003 45.30735,-9.87003 35.82030))",
 "HasCoordinate is true",
 "HasGeospatialIssue is false",
 "OccurrenceStatus is Present",
 "TaxonKey is Aetomylaeus bovinus"
 ]
}

 The dataset includes 97 records from 15 constituent datasets; see https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/download/0003029-251120083545085/datasets/export for details.
 
Data from some individual datasets included in this download may be licensed under less restrictive terms.
DOI: 10.15482/usda.adc/25343293
title: 2023 USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map Mean Annual Extreme Low Temperature Rasters

description: These rasters provide the local mean annual extreme low temperature from 1991 to 2020 in an 800m x 800m grid covering the USA (including Puerto Rico) based on interpolation of data from more than a thousand weather stations. Each location's Plant Hardiness Zone is calculated based on classifying that temperature into 5 degree bands.The classified rasters are then used to create print and interactive maps.Temperature station data for the 2023 edition of the USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map (PHZM) came from many different sources. In the eastern and central United States, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii, data came primarily from weather stations of the National Weather Service and several state networks. In the western United States and Alaska, data from stations maintained by USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA Forest Service, U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Reclamation, and DOI Bureau of Land Management also helped to better define hardiness zones in mountainous areas. Environment Canada provided data from Canadian stations, and data from Mexican stations came from the Mexico National Weather Service and the Global Historical Climate Network. The USDA PHZM was produced with PRISM, a highly sophisticated climate mapping technology developed at Oregon State University. The map was produced from a digital computer grid, with each cell measuring about a half mile on a side. PRISM estimated the mean annual extreme minimum temperature for each grid cell (or pixel on the map) by examining data from nearby stations; determining how the temperature changed with elevation; and accounting for possible coastal effects, temperature inversions, and the type of topography (ridge top, hill slope, or valley bottom). Information on PRISM can be obtained from the PRISM Climate Group website https://prism.oregonstate.edu. Once a draft of the map was completed, it was reviewed by a team of climatologists, agricultural meteorologists, and horticultural experts. If the zone for an area appeared anomalous to these expert reviewers, experts doublechecked the draft maps for errors or biases. A detailed explanation of the mapmaking process and a discussion of the horticultural applications of the 2012 PHZM (similar to 2023) are available from the articles listed below. Daly, C., M.P. Widrlechner, M.D. Halbleib, J.I. Smith, and W.P. Gibson. 2012. Development of a new USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map for the United States. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 51: 242-264.Widrlechner, M.P., C. Daly, M. Keller, and K. Kaplan. 2012. Horticultural Applications of a Newly Revised USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map. HortTechnology, 22: 6-19.