39 research outputs found
Metadata for tarping datasets (Kinnebrew et al. 2022)
No full textThis document contains metadata associated with the datasets published in the FigShare collection: "Data associated with: Tradeoffs of a rising agroecological practice: addressing uncertainty around tarping with participatory action research and mixed methods"
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].</p
Metadata for the Impact of Agricultural Tarping on Environmental Variables, Surface-Active Arthropods, and Soil-Dwelling Arthropods
No full textMetadata associated with the datasets used in the manuscript: Differing short-term impacts of agricultural tarping on soil-dwelling and surface-active arthropods by Kinnebrew et al. 2023, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment.
DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2023.108542
</p
Land cover maps for Jamanxim National Forest in Brazil for 2008 & 2018
No full textMaps were generated using a supervised classification (with a random forest classifier). We used Landsat satellite imagery (L5 and L7 for 2008 and L7 and L8 for 2018), elevation, EVI, and EVI difference as input variables.
Land cover codes used in the rasters:
1: Agriculture
2: Forest
3: Bare soil
4: Urban
5: Water
6: Desert
7: Wetland
For additional information, see Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (PLOS ONE) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268970 </p
Land cover maps for Amboró and Carrasco National Parks in Bolivia for 2008 & 2018
No full textMaps were generated using a supervised classification (with a random forest classifier). We used Landsat satellite imagery (L5 and L7 for 2008 and L7 and L8 for 2018), elevation, EVI, and EVI difference as input variables.
Land cover codes used in the rasters:
1: Agriculture
2: Forest
3: Bare soil
4: Urban
5: Water
6: Desert
7: Wetland
For additional information, see Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (PLOS ONE) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268970 </p
Land cover maps for Tambopata National Reserve and Bahuaja-Sonene National Park in Peru for 2008 & 2018
No full textMaps were generated using a supervised classification (with a random forest classifier). We used Landsat satellite imagery (L5 and L7 for 2008 and L7 and L8 for 2018), elevation, EVI, and EVI difference as input variables.
Land cover codes used in the rasters:
1: Agriculture
2: Forest
3: Bare soil
4: Urban
5: Water
6: Desert
7: Wetland
For additional information, see Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (PLOS ONE) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268970 </p
Tarp impacts on crop growth
No full text
These data demonstrate the impacts of tarps on crop (lettuce, Lactuca sativa) growth. We planted lettuce 1 week after tarp removal and surveyed lettuce growth 2, 3, and 4 weeks after tarp removal. We surveyed lettuce by randomly selecting 10 lettuce individuals in each plot (1 m x 2 m) and for each lettuce individual counting the number of leaves it contained and measuring the length and width of its largest leaf.
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].
Column Names and Explanations:
1. Farm: the farm site (“A,” “B” or “C”) where the plot was located. All farms were located in Chittenden County, Vermont, USA
2. Sampling: the sampling period, indicating the number of weeks after tarps were removed
3. Date: date of sampling
4. Treatment: indicates the treatment type (silage tarps, clear plastic tarps, or control)
5. Plot_Replicate: the treatment replicate number on each farm (1-6 for each treatment on each farm)
6. Plot_ID: the unique identifier for each spatial plot
7. Lettuce_Replicate: the replicate number (1-10) of lettuce individuals that were measured in each plot
8. Number_Leaves: the number of leaves on the lettuce individual
9. Length_LargestLeaf: length in mm of the largest leaf on the measured lettuce individual
10. Width_LargestLeaf: width in mm of the largest leaf on the measured lettuce individual </p
Tarp impacts on soil nitrate and soil moisture
No full text
These data demonstrate the impact of tarps on soil nitrate availability and soil moisture. We measured soil nitrate availability 2-3 days before and after tarp application and include the difference between these two time periods to show how tarps change soil nitrate availability. We additionally include here soil moisture measurements 3 weeks into the tarp application.
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].
Column Names and Explanations:
1. Farm: the farm site (“A,” “B” or “C”) where the plot was located. All farms were located in Chittenden County, Vermont, USA
2. Treatment: indicates the treatment type (silage tarps, clear plastic tarps, or control)
3. Plot_Replicate: the treatment replicate number on each farm (1-6 for each treatment on each farm)
4. Plot_ID: the unique identifier for each spatial plot
5. Nitrate_PreTarping: nitrate availability (soil nitrate-N mg/kg) measured 2-3 days before tarp application (20 May 2021)
6. Nitrate_PostTarping: nitrate availability (soil nitrate-N mg/kg) measured 2-3 days after tarp removal (23 June 2021)
7. Nitrate_Change: Change in nitrate availability with tarping (soil nitrate-N mg/kg), calculated as post tarping minus pre tarping nitrate values
8. Soil_Moisture: volumetric water content (%) of soil, measured with TDR soil probes on 16 June 2021</p
Tarp impacts on weed growth
No full text
These data demonstrate the impacts of tarps on weed growth. We surveyed weeds weekly for five weeks after tarp removal. Weeds were identified to species and we calculated species richness, Shannon’s diversity, and total cover (%) for each plot (plots were 1 m x 2 m). We additionally include the cover for specifically purslane, a weed species of interest.
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].
Column Names and Explanations:
1. Farm: the farm site (“A,” “B” or “C”) where the plot was located. All farms were located in Chittenden County, Vermont, USA
2. Sampling: the sampling period, indicating the number of weeks after tarps were removed
3. Plot_Replicate: the treatment replicate number on each farm (1-6 for each treatment on each farm)
4. Plot_ID: the unique identifier for each spatial plot
5. SpRichness: species richness (number of weed species)
6. Shannon: Shannon’s diversity of weed species
7. Total_Cover: summed cover (%) within the plot area of all individual weed species’ cover (cover can exceed 100% when there are multiple layers of weed cover)
8. Purslane_Cover: percent of only purslane cover within the plot area</p
Tarp impacts on soil temperature
No full text
These data show the impacts of tarps on soil temperature, and we present the raw continuous temperature measurements for 1 month during tarp application. We buried iButtons under 1 cm and 10 cm of soil in each plot to measure soil surface and soil temperature, respectively. Temperatures were automatically taken every 30 minutes, and specific time and dates of each soil or soil surface temperature measurement are given in the “Date_soil” and “Date_surface” columns, respectively.
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].
Column Names and Explanations:
1. Farm: the farm site (“A,” “B” or “C”) where the plot was located. All farms were located in Chittenden County, Vermont, USA
2. Treatment: indicates the treatment type (silage tarps, clear plastic tarps, or control)
3. Plot_Replicate: the treatment replicate number on each farm (1-6 for each treatment on each farm)
4. Plot_ID: the unique identifier for each spatial plot
5. Temp_soil: temperature in Celsius measured 10 cm below the soil surface
6. Temp_surface: temperature in Celsius measured at the soil surface (1 cm below the surface)
7. Date_soil: date associated with the measurement of soil temperature
8. Date_surface: date associated with the measurement of the soil surface temperature</p
Tarp impacts on crop yields
No full text
These data demonstrate the impact of tarps on crop yields (for lettuce, Lactuca sativa). We planted lettuce 1 week after tarp removal and harvested lettuce after 4 weeks of growth. At the time of harvest, we counted the number of lettuce individuals that grew within each plot (1 m x 2 m). We then harvested the lettuce and (after washing and drying it) measured the total weight (crop yield) of all lettuce individuals in each plot.
For more information, please refer to Kinnebrew et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2146254) or contact Dr. Kinnebrew at [email protected].
Column Names and Explanations:
1. Farm: the farm site (“A,” “B” or “C”) where the plot was located. All farms were located in Chittenden County, Vermont, USA
2. Treatment: indicates the treatment type (silage tarps, clear plastic tarps, or control)
3. Plot_Replicate: the treatment replicate number on each farm (1-6 for each treatment on each farm)
4. Plot_ID: the unique identifier for each spatial plot
5. Number_lettuce: number of lettuce individuals in each plot
6. Total_Crop_Weight: weight in grams of all lettuce plants (cleaned and dried) within the plot boundaries. This weight is used to indicate crop yields. </p
