Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Data Packages”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Meteorological and Soil Data from Ecohydrology Sensor Towers at Pump House and Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado, 2019-2025

This data package includes hourly meteorological and soil sensor data at eight ecohydrology monitoring sites in East River Watershed, Colorado as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) research led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL). Four field sites were located on the hillslope of East River (ER) near Pump House (PH) at Mount Crested Butte (ER-PHS1 to 4), and the other four are in the Snodgrass Mountain (SG) area (SG-EHS5 to 8). In terms of vegetation cover, three sites are in montane grasslands (ER-PHS1, ER-PHS2, and SG-EHS5), three are below evergreen conifer canopy (ER-PHS3, SG-EHS6, and SG-EHS7), and two are below deciduous aspen canopy (ER-PHS4 and SG-EHS8). The monitoring period began in October 2019 at the East River sites, in October 2020 at SG-EHS5 and SG-EHS6, and in October 2021 at SG-EHS7 and SG-EHS8. In September 2024, all four East River sites were fully retired. The four Snodgrass Mountain sites remain active. Each site is equipped with a comprehensive suite of meteorological sensors on a tripod and soil sensors that measure weather, energy fluxes, and soil variables. This data package includes measurements from ten different types of sensors and up to thirteen individual sensors per site, including (1) a weather station (measurement height ranges from 2.8~3.8 meters (m) above ground), (2) a quantum sensor for photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (2.4~3.3m), (3) a net radiometer (1.7~2.1m), (4) an infrared radiometer (1.6~2.2m), (5) a sonic distance sensor (1.5~1.9m), (6) a soil carbon dioxide (CO2) flux chamber (0m), (7) a soil heat flux plate (-0.05m below ground), (8) a soil oxygen sensor (-0.3m), (9) a soil water potential sensor (-0.3m), and (10) soil water content sensors at 3~4 depths (-1.15 ~ -0.1m). A total of twenty-three variables is reported in this data package, including (1) atmospheric variables: air temperature (TA), atmospheric pressure (PA), vapor pressure (VP), and vapor pressure deficit (VPD), (2) precipitation variables: rain precipitation (P) and snow depth (D_SNOW), (3) energy fluxes variables: four-component net radiation (NETRAD) (shortwave/longwave incoming/outgoing radiation, SW_IN, SW_OUT, LW_IN, LW_OUT), photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD), and soil heat flux (G), (4) soil variables: soil water content (SWC), soil water potential (SWP), soil temperature (TS), soil bulk electrical conductivity (COND_SOIL), and soil gaseous oxygen concentration (O2_SOIL), (5) wind variables: two-dimensional wind speed (WS), gust speed (WS_MAX), and wind direction (WD), and (6) surface variables: surface infrared temperature (T_CANOPY) and soil CO2 flux (CO2_SOIL). Please see the Methods section for data processing and QA/QC steps taken to generate the hourly datasets. The following files are included in this data package (notes on version: v{x}-{y}, where x is the metadata version, and y is the data version, when applicable): (1) “metadata_site_v{x}-{y}.csv” - a site metadata file that summarizes location information of all sites, including site ID, description, coordinates, timeframe, elevation, and vegetation cover, (2) “metadata_instrument_v{x}-{y}.csv” - an instrument metadata file that summarizes sensor information of all sites, including sensor manufacturer and model, measurement height, and sampling and averaging interval of all variables, (3) "data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.csv" - eight data files that contain hourly data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (4) “/figure/data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.png" - eight figures that help visualize data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (5) “/photo/*” - photos of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, and (6) four file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (*_dd.csv) files that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. Notes: (1) Measurement height: Each variable name is followed by conventional positional qualifiers “H_V_R”, where H indicates the relative horizontal positions of that specific variable, V the vertical positions, and R the replicates. In this data package, only the vertical qualifier V varies, and V increases from the highest vertical position (V=1) to the lowest. Variables with the same qualifier are not necessarily measured by the same sensor, and the same variable with the same qualifier across different sites are not necessarily measured at the same height. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor information and measurement heights, and whether a variable is measured below the canopy. (2) Variable availability: Snow depth is not available at ER-PHS3 and SG-EHS7. SWC, soil temperature, and soil bulk EC at the deepest depth (<-1m) are not available at SG-EHS6 and SG-EHS7. The missing value code for numeric variables is -9999, except for SWP. For SWP, the missing value code is +9999, because SWP values are negative. (3) Sampling frequency: Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the increase of sampling frequency of some variables from 30-min to 1-min at ER-PHS1 to 4 in July 2020. (4) Sensors: While the methods of each sensor are not detailed, all sensors are commercially available, and their methods can be found in their manuals. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor manufacturer and model information. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

EFA Soil Project Work Order: 554001

Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) Standard Operating Procedures. Any technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical case narratives in the enclosed data package. The enclosed data package contains the following sections: General Narrative, Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation, and data from the following fractions: General Chemistry, Metals and Radiochemistry. This package, to the best of my knowledge, is in compliance with technical and administrative requirements.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

WHONDRS-GUI: a web application for global survey of surface water metabolites

Background The Worldwide Hydrobiogeochemistry Observation Network for Dynamic River Systems (WHONDRS) is a consortium that aims to understand complex hydrologic, biogeochemical, and microbial connections within river corridors experiencing perturbations such as dam operations, floods, and droughts. For one ongoing WHONDRS sampling campaign, surface water metabolite and microbiome samples are collected through a global survey to generate knowledge across diverse river corridors. Metabolomics analysis and a suite of geochemical analyses have been performed for collected samples through the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL). The obtained knowledge and data package inform mechanistic and data-driven models to enhance predictions of outcomes of hydrologic perturbations and watershed function, one of the most critical components in model-data integration. To support efforts of the multi-domain integration and make the ever-growing data package more accessible for researchers across the world, a Shiny/R Graphical User Interface (GUI) called WHONDRS-GUI was created. Results The web application can be run on any modern web browser without any programming or operational system requirements, thus providing an open, well-structured, discoverable dataset for WHONDRS. Together with a context-aware dynamic user interface, the WHONDRS-GUI has functionality for searching, compiling, integrating, visualizing and exporting different data types that can easily be used by the community. The web application and data package are available at https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/view/doi:10.15485/1484811 , which enables users to simultaneously obtain access to the data and code and to subsequently run the web app locally. The WHONDRS-GUI is also available for online use at Shiny Server ( https://xmlin.shinyapps.io/whondrs/ ).

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data and scripts associated with the manuscript evaluating the hydrologic responses of the Pacific Northwest watersheds to wildfires (v2)

This data package is associated with the publication “Evaluating Post-fire Watershed Response to Varying Burn Severity and Precipitation Regimes Using Fully-distributed and Integrated Hydrologic Models” submitted to Journal of Hydrology (Li et al. 2025). In this study, we employed the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), an integrated watershed model that couples surface flow, subsurface flow, and canopy biophysical processes, to investigate post-fire hydrologic responses in a few selected watersheds with varying burn severity.The data package contains the required input data (meteorological forcing, Leaf Area Index, wildfire burn severities, etc.) to run the model, configuration files, the Jupyter notebooks in Python to pre-process and post-process data, the figures in the manuscript, and the modeling output files. The variables include watershed-averaged evapotranspiration, watershed-averaged surface/subsurface/canopy water content, and river discharge at watershed outlet.The data package contains a file-level metadata that lists and describes all the files contained in the data package (ATS_flmd.csv), a data dictionary file that defines columns headers across all csv files contained in the data package (ATS_dd.csv), a data package level readme file (the current file), and four zipped folders.The ‘data’ folder provides data needed to run the model in .h5, .i2s, .xyz, .shp, and .exo formats. The sub-folders are for each data types. The ‘model’ folder provides input files (.xml format) and essential model outputs. Each sub-folder provides the files from each simulated watershed. The ‘notebooks’ folder provides the Jupyter notebooks (.ipynb format) for pre- and post- processing model files, and for producing the figures in the manuscript. The ‘figures’ folder provides the figures associated with manuscript in .pdf and .png formats.The ‘model’ folder and the ‘data’ folder have been split into 5GB-large pieces using the Linux command ‘split -b 5120m model.zip model.zip.’ and ‘split -b 5120m data.zip data.zip.’, respectively. They can be merged back using the Linux command ‘cat model.zip.* > model.zip’ and ‘cat data.zip.* > data.zip’, respectively.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Data Processing Package for Cyclic Integrated Reversible Bending Fatigue Testing

A data processing software package has been introduced. The package was developed using MATLAB with the aid of the Curve Fitting Toolbox. The package is made up of four modules: pre-processing, data processing for static testing, data processing for monitoring, and data processing for measurements. CIRFT data are structured with multiple levels of architecture involving group, specimen, session, and scan/block. The degree of complexity of the data structure depends on whether a test is static or cyclic.The test results are presented in figures, scatter plots, and tables. For static testing, the output in tables provides bending mechanical properties and characteristic points of moment–curvature relation: flexural rigidities in linear segments of loading and unloading stages, intersection points between characteristic segments of the curve, and equivalent stress and strain quantities. For cyclic testing, the table output lists control and fatigue life and responsive/dependent quantities including moment, curvature, flexural rigidity, flexural hysteresis, rigidity phase angle, and equivalent stresses and strains. In addition, derivatives such as half-gage length and sensor spacing correction are included. The output also provides standard deviations of the reported quantities when they are applicable or available. The data processing package can serve as a fundamental characterization tool in mechanical study of materials. The package is intended primarily for data processing for the CIRFT process and can also be used in applications for which similar testing requirements exist.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Full spectrum (350-2500 nm) leaf and canopy spectral reflectance, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2019

Full-range (350 - 2500 nm) leaf and canopy reflectance spectra of various Arctic tundra ecosystem endmembers, including species-level leaf reflectance, canopy-scale species endmember spectra, plot-scale spectra, and transect spectra. These data were collected in support of ongoing NASA ABoVE AVIRIS data synthesis work. The datasets were collected at the NGEE-Arctic watershed sites, Kougarok MM64 and MM80, and Teller MM27 on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. The data were collected in July 2019 using a full-range Spectra Vista Corporation (SVC) HR-1024i spectroradiometer. Leaf-level spectra were collected with the original SVC leaf clip/plant probe connected to the spectrometer through a 1.15 meter long fiber optic cable, while canopy-scale reflectance was collected with an 8-degree field-of-view (FOV) foreoptic lens. All spectral measurements were collected as calibrated surface radiance and converted to surface reflectance using a 99.99% reflective Spectralon white reference standard. For those canopy spectra collected with associated functional trait data, the FOV of the instrument was positioned to include the same leaves harvested for functional trait measurements, including leaf mass per area (LMA) and foliar carbon and nitrogen content (see leaf trait data package for these data). Canopy spectra were obtained for 23 different species, and leaf spectra for 8 species. This data package includes processed canopy and leaf spectra (*.csv), processed dGPS locations (*.csv and *.kmz), digital photographs of spectral targets (*.jpg) and raw data from spectroradiometer and dGPS instruments (compressed as tar.gz). Metadata files include data descriptions (_dd.csv) for tabular data and a key to species symbols used in data files. All included files are listed and described in NGA212_flmd.csv.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Intra-canopy leaf trait variation facilitates high LAI and compensatory growth in a clonal woody encroaching shrub in the tallgrass prairie

This data package contains the data for Tooley et al. (2022) Intra-canopy leaf trait variation facilitates high leaf area index and compensatory growth in a clonal woody encroaching shrub. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the leaf ecophysiological traits of Cornus drummondii C.A. Mey to better understand how C. drummondii maximizes photosynthetic rates across large gradients of light availability in its short, dense canopies. We also evaluate how C. drummondii modifies its allocation of leaf traits in response to grassland disturbance. High LAI canopies and a compensatory growth response to disturbance are two key factors contributing to the success of C. drummondii and other woody species responsible for the encroachment of grasslands.The data package contains ecophysiological measurements, including leaf morphological, physiological, and chemical traits; photosynthetic measurements, leaf carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes, leaf area index, and photosynthetically active radiation. All measurements were taken vertically across canopies of the clonal woody-encroaching shrub Cornus drummondii under browsed, grazed, and control (unbrowsed and ungrazed) conditions.Files:SeasonalMeasurements_Archive.csv - Data for all seasonal measurements used in the study.LeafPhotoSeasonalRaw_Archive.zip - zip file containing raw data from an li-6400 for each sampling period in the study.LAI_Archive.xlsx - Data for LAI Measurements.ACiandLightCurveResults_Archive.xlsx - Contains parameters extracted from A-ci and Light Response curves along with the morphological and chemical traits for each leaf.ACiRaw Archive.xlsx - Raw data from Li-6400 for A-ci response curvesLightCurves_Raw.zip - zip file containing raw data for Li-6400 light response curves. Excel file format: "IslandID"-"Depth"-lc.xlsx (or .csv)DataCollectionMethods.docx - file containing the methods of data collection, processing, and QA/QC for all data files. File also contains a list of excel file headers, abbreviations, and their units.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Raw seedling and sapling census data collected from June 2015 - April 2019 within a tropical wet forest in Puerto Rico

This data package contains data used to evaluate the effects of experimental warming (4˚C above ambient), drought, and hurricane disturbance on species richness, diversity, and composition of understory plant communities across ontogeny at the Tropical Responses to Altered Climate Experiment (TRACE) in Luquillo, Puerto Rico. The raw data in this package include a file for the species composition matrix of woody seedlings (>10 cm and <20 cm height; TRACE_composition_seedling.csv) and saplings (>20 cm height; TRACE_composition_sapling.csv) within the six TRACE plots, collected during six census dates from June 2015 to April 2019. Also included is also a file with the species names associated with the species codes found in the composition files (TRACE_species_codes.csv), and a data dictionary file describing the columns in the composition files (data_dictionary_composition_files.csv). All data files are in csv format, with the exception of the metadata which is in xml format.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Leaf spectra, Feb2016-April2016, PA-SLZ, PA-PNM, PA-BCI: Panama

This data package contains leaf spectra data measured on a monthly basis from February to April, 2016. Measurements were taken at the Bosque Protector San Lorenzo (SLZ), Barro Colorado Island (BCI) and Parque Natural Metropolitano (PNM) NGEE Tropics sites in Panama. Data from the BCI site are only available for March, 2016. Within the attached zip file are PDF manuals for instruments used, a guide to data collection protocol, and metadata files, including a PDF containing metadata for the 2016 ENSO gas exchange campaign. Also included is an additional zip file "2016_ENSO_BNL_Leaf_Spectra_Archive.zip" with data in .csv format organized by site. This data was collected as part of the 2016 ENSO campaign. See related datasets (existing and future) for further sample details, leaf water potential data, LMA, and gas exchange and leaf chemistry data. VERSION 2 update. The identification of a species from the PNM site has been corrected as follows: the identification of the tree initially identified as Pseudosamanea guachapele (ALBIED) has been revised to Albizia adinocephala (ALBIAD). The updated data package includes revised data, metadata and protocol documents updated to reflect this change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Perceived Costs and Benefits of ICON Science and Foundational Documents associated with “Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) Science to Advance the Geosciences: Introduction and Synthesis of a Special Collection of Commentary Articles"

This data package is associated with the publication "Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) Science to Advance the Geosciences: Introduction and Synthesis of a Special Collection of Commentary Articles" in Earth and Space Science (Goldman et al. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EA002099). The manuscript is an introductory article for a special collection of commentary articles across 19 geoscience disciplines that explore the challenges and opportunities associated with the use of ICON science principles. These principles focus on research intentionally designed to be Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) with the goal of maximizing mutual benefit (among stakeholders) and cross-system transferability of science outcomes. This data package contains data, figures, and R scripts associated with the cost/benefit analysis presented in the manuscript. The writing teams involved in the special collection placed each letter of ICON on a plot with perceived cost on one axis and perceived benefit on the other to summarize their perceptions of pursuing each principle of ICON science. These data were subsequently quantified and analyzed. Files are saved as .csv, .R, and .pdf. This data package also contains (1) the public foundational and instructional documents that enabled the crowdsourced creation of the special collection; (2) file-level metadata (flmd) that lists each file in the data package with a description; (3) data dictionary (dd) that defines column headers that appear in csv files. Files are saved as .pdf and .csv.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Artificial intelligence models, photos, and data associated with the manuscript “Quantifying Streambed Grain Size, Uncertainty, and Hydrobiogeochemical Parameters Using Machine Learning Model YOLO” (v2)

This data package is associated with the manuscript “Quantifying Streambed Grain Size, Uncertainty, and Hydrobiogeochemical Parameters Using Machine Learning Model YOLO” published in Water Resources Research (Chen et al., 2024). This data package includes the training, validation, testing, and prediction data used by the artificial intelligence (AI) model for automated grain size and hydro-biogeochemistry quantification using streambed photos. The grain size data are extracted for each photo using You Look Only Once (YOLO), a pre-trained object detection model. This data package was originally published in October 2023. It was updated August 2025 (v2; new and modified files). File and folder names were not revised to indicate changes. See the change history section in the readme for more details. Please see flmd.csv for a list of all files contained in this data package and descriptions for each. Please see dd.csv for a data dictionary that defines the column headers of .csv files in the data package. This dataset is comprised of one data folder containing (1) file-level metadata; (2) data dictionary; (3) readme; and (4) six subfolders. Subfolders 1 to 4 include the training, validation, testing, and prediction data. Subfolder 5_Summary includes the summary results of different combinations of training, validation, testing, and prediction data. Subfolder 6_SupplementalData includes additional data downloaded from public sources (Kaufman et al., 2023a; Kaufman et al., 2023b; Garefalakis et al., 2023; Mair et al., 2024; https://github.com/river-corridors-sfa/Geospatial_variables). In total, the data package includes 110 folders and 44,283 files. These files include 9,047 .jpg photos, 1 .png photo, 3 .tif photos; 26,639 photo labels and individual grain sizes and probability from AI (.txt); 8,447 grain size distribution data (.dat); and 126 CSV files for results summary, and 14 required metadata files (.xlsx). The summary CSV files contain 68 columns and approximately 2,200 rows that represent photo names, site locations, recording time, GPS coordinates, grains sizes (D10, D50, D60, and D84), number of grains, and additional hydro-biogeochemical data such as water depth, flow velocity, Manning’s coefficient, friction factor, hydraulic conductivity, permeability, streambed interstitial velocity magnitude, mass transfer rate, and nitrate uptake velocity. The photos were obtained from 75 sites in the Yakima River Basin and the Columbia River shorelines, and other associated data from samples and sensors obtained when the photos were taken are publicly available (Fulton et al. 2022; Grieger et al. 2023). All files are .csv, .txt, .dat, .jpg, or .pdf. We acknowledge the Yakama Nation as owners and caretakers of the lands where we collected some of these data. We thank the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation Tribal Council and Yakama Nation Fisheries for working with us to facilitate sample collection and optimization of data usage according to their values and worldview.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data, model inputs, and analysis scripts associated with a manuscript on stream intermittency controls across spatial scales in Pacific Northwest watersheds

NOTE: The manuscript associated with this data package is currently in review. The data may be revised based on reviewer feedback. Upon manuscript acceptance, this data package will be updated with the final dataset and additional metadata. This data package is associated with the manuscript "Hydroclimatic Memory and Watershed Template Shape Stream Intermittency: Multi-scale Attribution Using Process-based Simulation and Explainable ML" by Niroula et al. (2026), submitted to Water Resources Research (WRR). The study investigates the dominant controls on stream intermittency across local, reach, and watershed scales using a coupled process-based simulation and explainable machine-learning framework. Long-term daily simulations from the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS) were used to generate wetness states and ponded-depth responses over river-corridor cells. These ATS outputs were then aggregated across scales and used to train XGBoost (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) models. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) was applied to quantify the relative importance of hydroclimatic forcings, watershed template attributes, and antecedent-memory effects in shaping intermittency behavior. The analysis is carried out for three contrasting Pacific Northwest watersheds: Oak Creek (OCW), American River Watershed (ARW), and H.J. Andrews (HJA). Across these testbeds, the package contains ATS-ready watershed inputs, ATS run configuration and selected output files, model-evaluation data products, intermittency-analysis datasets, machine-learning target-feature tables, SHAP outputs, and notebooks used to organize, analyze, and visualize results. At a high level, the package documents a workflow in which ATS provides the physically based simulation backbone and explainable machine learning is used as a post-processing attribution tool. The contents are intended to support interpretation of the manuscript figures and results, provide context for how intermittency metrics were generated at multiple scales, and preserve the key artifacts needed to understand and reuse the analysis workflow. The package contains a high-level directory summary file (`summary.txt`) and four main content folders (1) `evaluation_plots` contains evaluation figures and supporting evaluation datasets; (2) `intermittency_plots` contains intermittency-focused analysis notebook and prepared datasets; (3) `ml-training-and-shap_values_plots` contains ML training inputs, SHAP outputs, and figure-generation notebooks; and (4) `watershed_mesh_and_ats_input` contains ATS model setup materials, forcing inputs, geometry, and selected run files. More specifically, the `evaluation_plots` folder contains the notebook used for ATS evaluation plotting and site-specific evaluation datasets. These include evapotranspiration and water-balance products for three watersheds, as well as an Oak Creek field-measurement discharge file. The `intermittency_plots` folder contains the notebook used for intermittency analysis and the prepared datasets used to analyze intermittent and non-intermittent wetness behavior across the study watersheds. The `ml-training-and-shap_values_plots` folder contains notebooks and outputs for the machine-learning and explainability workflow. This includes the main XGBoost and SHAP notebook(s), a beeswarm plotting notebook, target-feature tables for machine-learning training, SHAP summary tables, and per-sample SHAP value archives. The `watershed_mesh_and_ats_input` folder contains ATS-related watershed inputs and supporting materials. This includes mesh and shape products, ATS-readable LAI and meteorological forcing inputs, selected ATS spinup and transient-run files, and a watershed workflow example notebook. Subdirectories are organized by watershed where applicable.All files are .cpg (codepage files), .csv (comma-separated values), .dbf (database files), .exo (Exodus mesh format), .h5 (HDF5 format), .ipynb (Jupyter notebooks), .pkl (Python pickle), .prj (projection files), .sh (shell scripts), .shp (shapefile geometry), .shx (shapefile index), .txt (text files), or .xml (markup data).

Advanced Terrestrial Simulator↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2025

GLBRC Soil Yearlong Incubation 13C-SIP-Lipidomics

Data package for Lipids represent a dynamic, yet stable pool of microbially-derived soil carbon This data is published under a CC0 license. The authors encourage data reuse and request attribution by referencing the below citations for the data packages and associated manuscript. Please cite as: Rempfert KR, Bell SL, Kasanke CP, Kyle JE, Hofmockel KS. 2025. GLBRC Soil Yearlong Incubation 13C-SIP-Lipidomics. [Data Set] PNNL DataHub. doi: Rempfert KR, Bell SL, Kasanke CP, Kyle JE, Hofmockel KS. 2025. MSV000097435: GLBRC soil yearlong incubation 13C-SIP-Lipidomics [Data Set] MassIVE. doi:10.25345/C57659T3K Rempfert KR, Bell SL, Kasanke CP, Kyle JE, Hofmockel KS. 2025. Lipids represent a dynamic, yet stable pool of microbially-derived soil carbon. In Prep This data package consists of compound-specific 13C SIP-lipidomics data from a yearlong tracer incubation experiment designed to investigate microbial lipid persistence in switchgrass bioenergy crop soils. In order to explore how lipid structure may modulate the persistence of C in soil lipids, we leveraged soils from two sites (Michigan - sandy texture, Wisconsin - silty texture) operated by the U.S. Department of Energy-funded Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC). These sites had comparable climates, identical management practices, but contrasting soil textures, allowing us to assess the variability of lipid accrual or degradation in soils as well as provide insight regarding the degree to which edaphic properties may regulate the retention of soil lipids. Untargeted lipidomics analyses were performed to identify 13C-labeled lipids in the soil microbiome after long-term incubation. Soils were supplemented with 100 micrograms glucose per gram dry soil (99 atom % 13C or natural abundance for paired control) and incubated; samples were collected two months and one year after glucose addition. Lipid extracts (MPLEx) were analyzed by LC-MS/MS and identified using LIQUID. Calculation of isotopic enrichment of lipids was performed by targeted approach using TarMet to quantify lipid isotopologues and IsoCorrectoR to correct for natural abundance isotopes. Contents: Data package contents reported here are the first version and contain downstream analysis files for the raw LC-MS mass spectrometry files (.mzXML) deposited at the MassIVE database repository under accession MSV000097435 (80 experimental runs; 5.85 GB) | MassIVE DOI: 10.25345/C57659T3K. Support files include the additional data download 'Read Me' file containing data descriptor information. Reported data download contents are structured for compliance with project data sharing guidelines, community standards initiatives, and sponsor stakeholder policies supporting FAIR data principles. Data processing software, analysis tools, and data workflows are listed below corresponding to the host repository long-term location. Available Data Downloads (0.3 GB): "GLBRC soil yearlong incubation 13C-SIP-Lipidomics_readme.txt" - 'Read Me' data package content file (txt) "GLBRC_DataPackage_analysis files" - Data processing files (Rmd) and saved intermediate data processing outputs (rds, csv, xlsx) "GLBRC_13C_lipidomics_dataset.xlsx" - processed data in tabular format (xlsx) Linked Software: LIQUID LC-MS Analysis Software | 10.5281/zenodo.6459462 Lipid Mini-On Software Tools | 10.5281/zenodo.1492803 pmartR Omics Statistical Software | 10.5281/zenodo.6108667 xcms (v4.3.3) TarMet (v1.1.1) IsoCorrectoR (1.24.0) Funding Acknowledgments: This research was supported by an Early Career Research Program award funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research (OBER) Genomic Science program under FWP 68292, FWP 07880 and EMSL Exploratory Research Project 51095. A portion of this work was performed in the William R. Wiley Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, a national scientific user facility sponsored by OBER and located at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). PNNL is a multi-program national laboratory operated by Battelle for the DOE under Contract DE-AC05-76RLO1830.

Rempfert, Kaitlin R [Pacific Northwest National La↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data and Scripts Associated with the Manuscript “Water Column Respiration in the Yakima River Basin is Explained by Temperature, Nutrients and Suspended Solids”

This data package is associated with the publication “Water Column Respiration in the Yakima River Basin is Explained by Temperature, Nutrients and Suspended Solids” published in EGU Biogeochemistry (Laan et al. 2025). In this research, water column respiration (ERwc) data, surface water chemistry data, organic matter (OM) chemistry data, and publicly available geospatial data were used in analysis to evaluate the variability in ERwc at 47 sites across the Yakima River basin in Washington, USA. In addition to this readme, this data package also includes a file-level metadata (FLMD) file that describes each file and a data dictionary (DD) that describes all column/row headers and variable definitions. The data package includes the data inputs, and outputs, and R scripts to reproduce all the analyses performed in the manuscript and create manuscript figures. The data package is comprised of three main folders (Code, Data, and Figures). The Code folder is comprised of four scripts and three analysis-specific subfolders that contain the R scripts to perform the analyses described in the publication and create publication figures. The Data folder is comprised of two “.csv” files and four subfolders that contain data input and output files. The Published_Data folder contains a readme that directs the user to download the appropriate files and add to this folder when using scripts. The Figures folder includes figures from the manuscript in “.pdf” and “.png” formats and a folder with intermediate figure files. This data package is associated with a GitHub repository which can be found at https://github.com/river-corridors-sfa/rcsfa-RC2-SPS-ERwc. We acknowledge the Yakama Nation as owners and caretakers of the lands where we collected some of these data. We thank the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation Tribal Council and Yakama Nation Fisheries for working with us to facilitate sample collection and optimization of data usage according to their values and worldview.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗