five

Replication Data for: Fig 7.1, Focal times, WTPDs, raw data, 04 Nov 2025-COPY

收藏
DataCite Commons2025-11-05 更新2026-04-25 收录
下载链接:
https://data.indores.fr:443/citation?persistentId=doi:10.48579/PRO/7XCCKJ
下载链接
链接失效反馈
官方服务:
资源简介:
FILE DESCRIPTION Keywords: Focal times, white-tailed prairie dog, raw data Filename = Fig 7.1, Focal times, WTPDs, raw data, 04 Nov 2025 OLD Filename = WTPDs, focal times from 2012, 26 April 2022 All these focal times from spring 2012 This file checked by Julia Phillip in Fall 2021 I checked Julia's entries, and made only a few trivial changes on 26 April 2022 I did another quick check of this file in December 2021. And I have made a quick second check. For statistical analyses of focal samples, I used data from a single overall percentage for the entire field season calculated from single percentages of vigilance from focal samples per day per individual. WTPD marker = Nyanzol dye marker. No information from eartags in this file. Note, however, that all data are from a single year (2012). All data on WTPD focal times in this file were collected in 2012. Note, however, that all data for WTPD scan samples, were collected in 2007. These data used for Fig 7.1 in Hoogland 2026. This file ready for longterm storage on 30 May 2025. This file does NOT include data from focal samples from Hoogland 1979 = The effect of colony size on individual alertness of prairie dogs (Sciuridae: Cynomys spp.). Animal Behaviour 27:394-407. For Hoogland 1979, I used different methods than the ones for the data collected on WTPD focal times in 2012. Also, this file does NOT include information from Hoogland et al 2013 = Individual variation in vigilance among white-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys leucurus). Southwestern Naturalist 58:279-285. Hoogland et al. 2013 has information from SCAN SAMPLES, and that information is in a different EXCEL file with the following title: Filename = Focal times, WTPDs, raw data, 30 May 2025 These data are in Hirschler IM, et al. 2016. What is the best way to estimate vigilance? A comparison of two methods for Gunnison's prairie dogs, Cynomys gunnisoni. Anim Behav. 121:117-122. Notice that this file is not sorted BY INDIVIDUAL WTPD. I did that to get the "Single estimate per individual of vigilance from focal samples = 8.75%+ 3.03 % (Mean + SD) depicted in Figure 7.1. This file thus contains ALL RAW DATA for WTPD focal samples for Fig 7.1. The raw data in this file comes from 50 different WTPDs. Note that N = 105 for SCAN SAMPLES. Sex = M = male, and Sex= 2 = female Filename = Fig 7.1, Focal times, WTPDs, raw data, 04 Nov 2025
提供机构:
data.InDoRES
创建时间:
2025-11-05
5,000+
优质数据集
54 个
任务类型
进入经典数据集
二维码
社区交流群

面向社区/商业的数据集话题

二维码
科研交流群

面向高校/科研机构的开源数据集话题

数据驱动未来

携手共赢发展

商业合作