cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.5439/1984920
title: aosmet (a1)

description: AOSMET are standard meteorological measurements of the ambient temperature, pressure, relative humidity, and wind speed and direction intended solely for analyzing the data from the AOS instruments.
DOI: 10.25919/cjvt-na90
title: RV Investigator Voyage IN2022_V09 End of Voyage (EOV) Archive

description: NOTE: This is a temporary record, intended to provide metadata information without access to the data, until the new S3 storage system at the CSIRO DAP is operational. This record describes the End of Voyage (EOV) data archive from the Marine National Facility (MNF) RV Investigator voyage IN2022_V09, titled "Valuing Australia’s new Gascoyne Marine Park." The voyage took place between November 19, 2022 and December 19, 2022 (AEST), departing from Fremantle and returning to Fremantle. For further information please refer to the voyage documentation links. Instruments used and data collected include: Regular measurements: Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP; 75, 150 KHz ), Greenhouse Gas Analysers (Picarro), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (CCN), Condensation Particle Counters (CPC), Disdrometer, Radon sensor, Scanning Mobility Particle Sizers (SMPS), Fisheries Echosounder (EK80), Multibeam Echosounder (EM710, EM122), Sub-bottom Profiler (SBP120), GPS Positioning System, Doppler Velocity Log, Thermosalinographs (TSG), Fluorometer, Oxygen Optode, Infrared Sea Surface Temperature Autonomous Radiometer (ISAR), pCO2, Gravimeter, Multiangle Absorption Photometer (MAAP), Ozone Sensor, Nephelometer, Atmospheric Temperature, Humidity, Pressure, Wind and Rain sensors, Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) sensor, Precision Infrared Radiometer (PIR), Precision Spectral Pyranometer (PSP), ITI Trawl Net, Starboard and Portside Radiometers, Air Sampler, Ultra Short BaseLine Underwater Positioning System (USBL), Weather Radar. Voyage-specific measurements: Biogeochemical (BGC) Argo floats, Beam Trawl, Demersal Trawl, Sherman Epibenthic Sled, Baited Remote Underwater Video System (BRUVS), Deep Towed Camera (DTC), Video, Environmental DNA (eDNA). The archive for the IN2022_V09 EOV raw data is curated by the CSIRO National Collections and Marine Infrastructure (NCMI) Information and Data Centre (IDC) in Hobart, with a permanent archive at the CSIRO Data Access Portal (https://data.csiro.au/), providing access to voyage participants and processors of the data collected on the voyage. All voyage documentation is available electronically to MNF support via the local network. Applications to access voyage documentation by non-CSIRO participants can be made via data-requests-hf@csiro.au.
DOI: 10.25584/pnnldh/1985149
title: Data for Influence of soil depth, irrigation, and plant genotype on the soil microbiome, metaphenome, and carbon chemistry: Summary Data

description: Climate change is causing an increase in drought in many soil ecosystems and a loss of soil organic carbon. Calcareous soils may partially mitigate these losses via carbon capture and storage. Here, we aimed to determine how irrigation-supplied soil moisture and perennial plants impact biotic and abiotic soil properties that underpin deep soil carbon chemistry in an unfertilized calcareous soil. Soil was sampled up to one meter in depth from irrigated and planted field treatments and analyzed using a suite of omics and chemical analyses. Carbon cycling processes in the surface soil were dominated by plant-microbe interactions that drive organic carbon cycling, whereas inorganic carbon chemistry dominated in deeper soil layers. Both irrigation and plant cover impacted organic and inorganic carbon pools in the soil profiles. This study reveals the complex interactions between water, plants, minerals, and microorganisms that govern organic and inorganic pools of soil carbon at different depths.
DOI: 10.25584/pnnldh/1985150
title: Data for Influence of soil depth, irrigation, and plant genotype on the soil microbiome, metaphenome, and carbon chemistry: Sequence Data

description: Climate change is causing an increase in drought in many soil ecosystems and a loss of soil organic carbon. Calcareous soils may partially mitigate these losses via carbon capture and storage. Here, we aimed to determine how irrigation-supplied soil moisture and perennial plants impact biotic and abiotic soil properties that underpin deep soil carbon chemistry in an unfertilized calcareous soil. Soil was sampled up to one meter in depth from irrigated and planted field treatments and analyzed using a suite of omics and chemical analyses. Carbon cycling processes in the surface soil were dominated by plant-microbe interactions that drive organic carbon cycling, whereas inorganic carbon chemistry dominated in deeper soil layers. Both irrigation and plant cover impacted organic and inorganic carbon pools in the soil profiles. This study reveals the complex interactions between water, plants, minerals, and microorganisms that govern organic and inorganic pools of soil carbon at different depths.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8045436
title: The appendix for evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach

description: <strong>Appendix I</strong>: The program of evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach <strong>Appendix II</strong>: The sensitivity analysis of evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8045435
title: The appendix for evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach

description: <strong>Appendix I</strong>: The program of evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach <strong>Appendix II</strong>: The sensitivity analysis of evaluating the impact of large-scale nucleic acid testing and home quarantine on COVID-19 prevention and control: a dynamic modeling approach
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5532619
title: Avizo files of segmented endocast of Eoarctos vorax

description: An exquisitely preserved skeleton (USNM 637259) of a basal ursoid is the basis of a monograph in Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology Memoir entitled "An Exquisitely Preserved Skeleton of Eoarctos vorax new gen. and sp. from Fitterer Ranch, South Dakota (early Oligocene) and Systematics and Phylogeny of North American Basal Arctoids (Carnivora, Caniformia)". This upload contains the Avizo files pertaining to an endocast segmentation.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5532564
title: Avizo files of segmented endocast of Eoarctos vorax

description: An exquisitely preserved skeleton (USNM 637259) of a basal ursoid is the basis of a monograph in Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology Memoir entitled "An Exquisitely Preserved Skeleton of Eoarctos vorax new gen. and sp. from Fitterer Ranch, South Dakota (early Oligocene) and Systematics and Phylogeny of North American Basal Arctoids (Carnivora, Caniformia)". This upload contains the Avizo files pertaining to an endocast segmentation.
DOI: 10.34740/kaggle/dsv/5934908
title: (🌇Sunset) 🇺🇦 Ukraine Conflict Twitter Dataset
DOI: 10.25346/s6/8dcowv
title: News on the Web (NOW)

description: The NOW corpus (News on the Web) contains 17.2 billion words of data from web-based newspapers and magazines from 2010 to the present time (the most recent day is 2023-04-23). More importantly, the corpus grows by about 180-200 million words of data each month (from about 300,000 new articles), or about two billion words each year. While other resources like Google Trends show you what people are searching for, the NOW Corpus is the only structured corpus that shows you what is actually happening in the language -- virtually right up to the present time. For example, see the frequency of words since 2010, as well as new words and phrases from the last few years. In this sense, NOW is the most robust monitor corpus of English. Access to material is limited to UCLA graduate students and faculty. Undergraduates please use the standard web interface for the corpora: https://www.english-corpora.org/now/
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528921
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S7_ESM.xlsx from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528924
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S3_ESM.xlsx from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528924.v1
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S3_ESM.xlsx from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528927
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S1_ESM.tsv from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528927.v1
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S1_ESM.tsv from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528930
title: takeuchiETAL_scripts_ESM.tar.gz from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528930.v1
title: takeuchiETAL_scripts_ESM.tar.gz from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528933
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S5_ESM.tsv from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528933.v1
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S5_ESM.tsv from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23528936
title: takeuchiETAL_table-S8_ESM.xlsx from Prophages and plasmids can display opposite trends in the types of accessory genes they carry

description: Mobile genetic elements (MGEs), such as phages and plasmids, often possess accessory genes encoding bacterial functions, facilitating bacterial evolution. Are there rules governing the arsenal of accessory genes MGEs carry? If such rules exist, they might be reflected in the types of accessory genes different MGEs carry. To test this hypothesis, we compare prophages and plasmids with respect to the frequencies at which they carry antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and virulence factor genes (VFGs) in the genomes of 21 pathogenic bacterial species using public databases. Our results indicate that prophages tend to carry VFGs more frequently than ARGs in three species, whereas plasmids tend to carry ARGs more frequently than VFGs in nine species, relative to genomic backgrounds. In <i>Escherichia coli</i>, where this prophage-plasmid disparity is detected, prophage-borne VFGs encode a much narrower range of functions than do plasmid-borne VFGs, typically involved in damaging host cells or modulating host immunity. In the species where the above disparity is not detected, ARGs and VFGs are barely found in prophages and plasmids. These results indicate that MGEs can differentiate in the types of accessory genes they carry depending on their infection strategies, suggesting a rule governing horizontal gene transfer mediated by MGEs.