1,720,978 research outputs found
Global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems are poorly correlated
Data repository for ‘Global and local estimates of environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems are poorly correlated ‘
prepared by Mathis L. Messager ([email protected])
1. Overview and background ----------------------------------------------------------
This documentation describes the input and output data associated with the analysis presented in: Messager, M. L., Dickens, W. S. C., Eriyagama, N., Tharme, R. E., Stassen, R. (2024). Limited comparability of global and local estimates of
environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad1cb5.
Environmental flows (e-flows) are a central element of sustainable water resource management to mitigate the detrimental impacts of hydrological alteration on freshwater ecosystems and their benefits to people. Many nations strive to protect e-flows through policy, and thousands of local-scale e-flows assessments have been conducted globally, leveraging data and knowledge to quantify how much water must be provided to river ecosystems, and when, to keep them healthy. However, e-flows assessments and implementation are geographically uneven and cover a small fraction of rivers worldwide. This hinders globally consistent target-setting, monitoring and evaluation for international agreements to curb water scarcity and biodiversity loss. Therefore, dozens of models have been developed over the past two decades to estimate the e-flows requirements of rivers seamlessly across basins and administrative boundaries at a global scale.There has been little effort, however, to benchmark these models against locally derived e-flows estimates, which may limit confidence in the relevance of global estimates. The aim of this study was to assess whether current global methods reflect e-flows estimates used on the ground, by comparing global and local estimates for 1194 sites across 25 countries. We found that while global approaches broadly approximate the bulk volume of water that should be precautionarily provided to sustain aquatic ecosystems at the scale of large basins or countries, they explain a remarkably negligible 0%–1% of the global variability in locally derived estimates of the percentage of river flow that must be protected at a given site. Even when comparing assessments for individual countries, thus controlling for differences in local assessment methods among jurisdictions, global e-flows estimates only marginally compared (R2 ⩽ 0.31) to local estimates. Such a disconnect between global and local assessments of e-flows requirements limits the credibility of global estimates and associated targets for water use. To accelerate the global implementation of e-flows requires further concerted effort to compile and draw from the thousands of existing local e-flows assessments worldwide for developing a new generation of global models and bridging the gap from local to global scales..
The data repository includes data required to perform this analysis as well as the data outputs from this analysis. Input data from local e-flow assessments included herein were either provided by collaborators or extracted from published governmental and academic reports by the authors. Input hydrographic data not available for download elsewhere were provided by Dr. Bernhard Lehner and hydrological simulations from PCR-GLOBWB 2.0 at a spatial resolution of 5 arc-min (not provided herein) were provided by Dr. ir. Edwin H. Sutanudjaja.
All scripts necessary to reproduce this analysis are freely available for all purposes (and can be copied, modified and distributed) at: https://github.com/messamat/globalEF_testPy (for data-preformatting and global e-flow calculations) and https://github.com/messamat/globalEF_testR (for comparing global and local MAF and e-flow estimates). The structure of the analysis relies as much as possible on good enough practices in scientific computing, which users are encouraged to read.
2. Repository content ----------------------------------------------------------
The data repository has the following structure, which must be conserved to run the analysis workflow:
---------------------------------------------------------
data/
Formatted_data_Chandima_20211018: pre-formatted local e-flow assessment sites.
Formatted_data_Chandima_20211102: pre-formatted local e-flow assessment sites.
GEFIS_test_data/:
Master Data Table_20230424.xlsx: final database of local e-flow assessments.
HydroATLAS/: hydrographic data required for downscaling and mapping global MAF and e-flow estimates
HydroATLAS_metadata_MLMv11.xlsx: metadata of RiverATLAS attributes used in producing distribution histogram in Supplementary Material.
----------------------------------------------------------
results/
france_preprocessing.gdb: outputs from spatial formatting of local e-flow assessment data for the Rhone River basin in France. The main output file is /Rhone_EFpoints_cleanjoin.
mexico_preprocessing.gdb: outputs from spatial formatting of local e-flow assessment data for Mexico. The main output file is /Mexico_EFpoints_cleanjoin.
processing_outputs.gdb: outputs from overall spatial formatting of local e-flow assessment data. The fully formatted point data of the sites is: EFpoints_20230424_clean_riverjoin. Associated with global e-flow estimates: EFpoints_20230424_clean_globalEF.
victoria_preprocessing.gdb: outputs from spatial formatting of local e-flow assessment data for the state of Victoria, Australia. The main output file is /Victoria_EFpoints_cleanjoin.
EFpoints_20230424_clean_globalEF.csv: all global e-flow estimates extracted for local e-flow assessment sites.
----------------------------------------------------------
isimp2_qtot_accumulated15s.gdb.zip: all global MAF and e-flow estimates in raster format. In the analytical workflow, these data are in the results/ folder but here they have been placed outside to conform with the maximum file size limit of this dataverse.
----------------------------------------------------------
README_Technical_documentation_globalEFcomparison_Messageretal2023.pdf : documentation for this repository
3. Data format and projection ----------------------------------------------------------
The spatial datasets are distributed in ESRI® file geodatabase format. Please contact the author should you want the data in another format. These datasets are available in compressed zip file format. To use the data files, the zip files must first be decompressed.
All data layers are provided in geographic (latitude/longitude) projection, referenced to datum WGS84. In ESRI® software this projection is defined by the geographic coordinate system GCS_WGS_1984 and datum D_WGS_1984 (EPSG: 4326).
4. License and citations ----------------------------------------------------------
4.1 License agreement
This documentation and datasets are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC-BY-4.0 License). For all regulations regarding license grants, copyright, redistribution restrictions, required attributions, disclaimer of warranty, indemnification, liability, waiver of damages, and a precise definition of licensed materials, please refer to the License Agreement (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). For a human-readable summary of the license, please see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
4.2 Citations and acknowledgements.
Citations and acknowledgements of this dataset should be made as follows:
Messager, M. L., Dickens, W. S. C., Eriyagama, N., Tharme, R. E., Stassen, R. (2024). Limited comparability of global and local estimates of
environmental flow requirements to sustain river ecosystems. Environmental Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad1cb5.
We kindly ask users to cite this study in any published material produced using it. If possible, online links to this repository (DOI) should also be provided
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
Author Under Sail The Imagination of Jack London, 1893-1902
In Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Spirit Truth -- 2. From Absorption to Theatricality and Back Again -- 3. "I Will Build a New Present" -- 4. Sons as Authors -- 5. Fathers as Publishers -- 6. The Daughter as Author -- 7. Lovers as Authors -- 8. At Sea with the Family -- 9. Yellow News, Yellow Stories -- 10. The Return Home -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- About Jay WilliamsIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
- …
