cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.25909/29323673.v1
title: Results

description: This repository contain results on "Planning Battery Electric Bus Systems: No One-Size-Fits-All Solution for Cost and Emissions Across Climates and Chemistries".
DOI: 10.25909/29374514
title: Supplementary data - Multi-level analysis of morphological variation in the vertebral column of lagomorph mammals

description: Supplementary data for reproducing the results as shown in the research article "Multi-level analysis of morphological variation in the vertebral column of lagomorph mammals"Please note that to reproduce all the results presented in this article, the data from other study is required, which can be downloaded from the following link:https://adelaide.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_Data_for_small-and-medium_sized_mammals_vertebrae/25295197<br>For any enquiry, please contact Nuttakorn Taewcharoen (ntaewcharoen@gmail.com).
DOI: 10.25909/29374514.v1
title: Supplementary data - Multi-level analysis of morphological variation in the vertebral column of lagomorph mammals

description: Supplementary data for reproducing the results as shown in the research article "Multi-level analysis of morphological variation in the vertebral column of lagomorph mammals"Please note that to reproduce all the results presented in this article, the data from other study is required, which can be downloaded from the following link:https://adelaide.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_Data_for_small-and-medium_sized_mammals_vertebrae/25295197<br>For any enquiry, please contact Nuttakorn Taewcharoen (ntaewcharoen@gmail.com).
DOI: 10.25909/29389208
title: Professional Statistical Training in Agricultural Science Survey Results

description: The University of Adelaide Biometry Hub, based in the School of Agriculture Food and Wine and funded by the GRDC Analytics for the Australian Grains Industry (AAGI) investment, provides statistical training workshops for researchers working in agronomic and plant sciences. The goal of these workshops (referred to internally as W0 to W3) is to educate these researchers in best practice statistical methodology for use in the design and analysis of agronomic comparative experiments, and promote consistency in statistical analyses across the industry.<br><br>To assess the benefits for workshop participants, we implemented a self-confidence survey. The survey consisted of questions aligned with the key outcomes of each workshop. Administered both before and after each session, the pre- and post-surveys shared questions related to participants' confidence in their ability to meet the workshop's key learning objectives. Respondents used a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 'not confident' (shown as 1 in the data) to 'very confident' (7), to express their agreement or disagreement with the questions. The purpose of conducting surveys before and immediately after the workshop was to track the shift in participants' self-efficacy. Participants self-created unique, anonymised identifiers based on personal characteristics to enable confidential linking of the pre- and post-survey responses.<br>Data fields:<br>ID: User created ID<br>Q1 to Q12: Numerical user response to questions.
DOI: 10.25909/29389208.v1
title: Professional Statistical Training in Agricultural Science Survey Results

description: The University of Adelaide Biometry Hub, based in the School of Agriculture Food and Wine and funded by the GRDC Analytics for the Australian Grains Industry (AAGI) investment, provides statistical training workshops for researchers working in agronomic and plant sciences. The goal of these workshops (referred to internally as W0 to W3) is to educate these researchers in best practice statistical methodology for use in the design and analysis of agronomic comparative experiments, and promote consistency in statistical analyses across the industry.<br><br>To assess the benefits for workshop participants, we implemented a self-confidence survey. The survey consisted of questions aligned with the key outcomes of each workshop. Administered both before and after each session, the pre- and post-surveys shared questions related to participants' confidence in their ability to meet the workshop's key learning objectives. Respondents used a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 'not confident' (shown as 1 in the data) to 'very confident' (7), to express their agreement or disagreement with the questions. The purpose of conducting surveys before and immediately after the workshop was to track the shift in participants' self-efficacy. Participants self-created unique, anonymised identifiers based on personal characteristics to enable confidential linking of the pre- and post-survey responses.<br>Data fields:<br>ID: User created ID<br>Q1 to Q12: Numerical user response to questions.
DOI: 10.25909/29389748
title: FPINO datasets

description: Training datasets for FPINO
DOI: 10.25909/29389748.v1
title: FPINO datasets

description: Training datasets for FPINO
DOI: 10.25909/29540027
title: Supplemental data - Organic geochemical research in Adelaide University

description: Titles and abstracts of all theses supervised by staff in the Department of Earth Sciences, 1967 to 2024.
DOI: 10.25909/29540027.v2
title: Supplemental data - Organic geochemical research in Adelaide University

description: Titles and abstracts of all theses supervised by staff in the Department of Earth Sciences, 1967 to 2024.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17908236
title: Basic Transformation of Legal Pictures: Purpose and Method of Comparative Law

description: The article argues that comparative jurisprudence should be re‑grounded in a constructivist, autopoietic understanding of law and in an explicitly spatial conception of legal reality, rather than in the traditional search for universal methods or neutral functional equivalents. Law is treated as an autonomous communicative system that reproduces itself through legal constructions, with legal norms, institutions, and formants understood as segments of these deeper constructions that exist simultaneously at the level of public consciousness, positive legal texts, and concrete legal practice. On this basis, the text criticizes method universalism (functionalism, law and economics, etc.), contending that every comparative method is culture‑bound and only becomes epistemically meaningful within a specific “meta‑epistemic” paradigm and legal tradition accepted by the participants in legal communication.

The article links the plurality and conflict of legal cultures to the differentiation of legal space into distinct loci: national legal orders, emergent city law, regional/meta‑legal regimes, and a rapidly forming virtual legal space. It emphasizes the historically constitutive role of urban law (ius civile) and its dialectic with the ius gentium in generating the Western legal tradition’s communicative code, and suggests that this tradition’s nationally organized repertoire is now exhausted, producing a structural crisis that manifests in quasi‑states, “mutant” legal cultures, and the erosion of international legality. Against this background, legal urbanism and comparative‑institutional analysis are proposed as methodological avenues for understanding how inclusive institutions and open‑access orders are rooted in specific legal traditions and cannot be transplanted as neutral, universally functional devices.

A further claim is that conflicts between civilizations are, at bottom, clashes between structures of consciousness that are crystallized in legal constructions, rather than mere terminological or institutional divergences that could be overcome through linguistic unification or formal harmonization. The article, therefore, reconceives actors of law as representations of particular communication codes generated by autopoietic legal cultures, and insists that legal communication becomes possible only where a shared legal tradition provides a common code, while at the same time recognizing that each legal culture has value only for its own members and does not necessarily correspond to any “civilizational ideal.” In this setting, comparative jurisprudence’s central contemporary task is framed as identifying the conditions under which legal communication across heterogeneous, often conflictual legal spaces remains possible, especially in relation to emergent virtual legal constructions (AI, social credit, virtual property, smart contracts, and virtual public spaces) that further complicate the legal map of the world.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17908237
title: Basic Transformation of Legal Pictures: Purpose and Method of Comparative Law

description: The article argues that comparative jurisprudence should be re‑grounded in a constructivist, autopoietic understanding of law and in an explicitly spatial conception of legal reality, rather than in the traditional search for universal methods or neutral functional equivalents. Law is treated as an autonomous communicative system that reproduces itself through legal constructions, with legal norms, institutions, and formants understood as segments of these deeper constructions that exist simultaneously at the level of public consciousness, positive legal texts, and concrete legal practice. On this basis, the text criticizes method universalism (functionalism, law and economics, etc.), contending that every comparative method is culture‑bound and only becomes epistemically meaningful within a specific “meta‑epistemic” paradigm and legal tradition accepted by the participants in legal communication.

The article links the plurality and conflict of legal cultures to the differentiation of legal space into distinct loci: national legal orders, emergent city law, regional/meta‑legal regimes, and a rapidly forming virtual legal space. It emphasizes the historically constitutive role of urban law (ius civile) and its dialectic with the ius gentium in generating the Western legal tradition’s communicative code, and suggests that this tradition’s nationally organized repertoire is now exhausted, producing a structural crisis that manifests in quasi‑states, “mutant” legal cultures, and the erosion of international legality. Against this background, legal urbanism and comparative‑institutional analysis are proposed as methodological avenues for understanding how inclusive institutions and open‑access orders are rooted in specific legal traditions and cannot be transplanted as neutral, universally functional devices.

A further claim is that conflicts between civilizations are, at bottom, clashes between structures of consciousness that are crystallized in legal constructions, rather than mere terminological or institutional divergences that could be overcome through linguistic unification or formal harmonization. The article, therefore, reconceives actors of law as representations of particular communication codes generated by autopoietic legal cultures, and insists that legal communication becomes possible only where a shared legal tradition provides a common code, while at the same time recognizing that each legal culture has value only for its own members and does not necessarily correspond to any “civilizational ideal.” In this setting, comparative jurisprudence’s central contemporary task is framed as identifying the conditions under which legal communication across heterogeneous, often conflictual legal spaces remains possible, especially in relation to emergent virtual legal constructions (AI, social credit, virtual property, smart contracts, and virtual public spaces) that further complicate the legal map of the world.
DOI: 10.25909/29565308
title: Data for: Rapid evolution and cranial morphospace expansion during the terrestrial to marine transition in elapid snakes

description: R script and data files to support the publication.Analyses were completed in the R Statistical Environment, and the file "<b>Macroskull analyses.R</b>" can be used to recreate all analyses and figures in the publication.The data files called by the script are as follows:<b>Macroskull raw coords.tps</b> - 3D coordinate data for 63 landmarks placed on elapid skull models. There are 63 landmarks, but the script averages the position of two closely-positioned medially-paired landmarks to result in 62 landmarks for analysis<b>Macroskull classifier.csv</b> - metadata for 219 specimens from 91 species. Table gives <i>file_name</i>, the name of the skull model in the coordinate data file; <i>species, </i>the Latin binomial; <i>spec_number</i>, the museum identifier (see Supplementary materials Table S1 of publication for details); <i>species_abrev</i> and <i>species_abrev2</i>, codes for plotting species names; <i>Ecology</i> and <i>Ecology2</i>, codes for habitat classification, detailed in publication.<b>Elapid_tree_Lee2016.nex</b> - phylogenetic tree in nexus format from https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150277<b>Elapid skull land pairs 62.csv</b> - medially-paired landmarks identified for generalised Procrustes superimposition taking into account left-right asymmetry.<b>Elapid skull links 62.csv</b> - landmark pairs for plotting landmark configuration with a wireframe.<b>Sidlauskas 2008 scripts</b> - folder of .R scripts from Brian Sidlauskas to perform mode analyses, which accompanied https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00519.x
DOI: 10.25909/29565308.v1
title: Data for: Rapid evolution and cranial morphospace expansion during the terrestrial to marine transition in elapid snakes

description: R script and data files to support the publication.Analyses were completed in the R Statistical Environment, and the file "<b>Macroskull analyses.R</b>" can be used to recreate all analyses and figures in the publication.The data files called by the script are as follows:<b>Macroskull raw coords.tps</b> - 3D coordinate data for 63 landmarks placed on elapid skull models. There are 63 landmarks, but the script averages the position of two closely-positioned medially-paired landmarks to result in 62 landmarks for analysis<b>Macroskull classifier.csv</b> - metadata for 219 specimens from 91 species. Table gives <i>file_name</i>, the name of the skull model in the coordinate data file; <i>species, </i>the Latin binomial; <i>spec_number</i>, the museum identifier (see Supplementary materials Table S1 of publication for details); <i>species_abrev</i> and <i>species_abrev2</i>, codes for plotting species names; <i>Ecology</i> and <i>Ecology2</i>, codes for habitat classification, detailed in publication.<b>Elapid_tree_Lee2016.nex</b> - phylogenetic tree in nexus format from https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150277<b>Elapid skull land pairs 62.csv</b> - medially-paired landmarks identified for generalised Procrustes superimposition taking into account left-right asymmetry.<b>Elapid skull links 62.csv</b> - landmark pairs for plotting landmark configuration with a wireframe.<b>Sidlauskas 2008 scripts</b> - folder of .R scripts from Brian Sidlauskas to perform mode analyses, which accompanied https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00519.x
DOI: 10.25909/29595041
title: <b>Datasets for</b> <i>“Identification and Removal of System-Induced Autofluorescence in Miniaturized Fiber-Optic Fluorescence Endoscopes”</i>

description: <b>Datasets for</b> <i>“Identification and Removal of System-Induced Autofluorescence in Miniaturized Fiber-Optic Fluorescence Endoscopes”</i>:<b>14 </b><b><i>in vivo</i></b><b> mouse datasets</b><b>1 phantom dataset</b>These datasets were used to validate the autofluorescence removal algorithm across both biological and controlled experimental conditions.
DOI: 10.25909/29595041.v1
title: <b>Datasets for</b> <i>“Identification and Removal of System-Induced Autofluorescence in Miniaturized Fiber-Optic Fluorescence Endoscopes”</i>

description: <b>Datasets for</b> <i>“Identification and Removal of System-Induced Autofluorescence in Miniaturized Fiber-Optic Fluorescence Endoscopes”</i>:<b>14 </b><b><i>in vivo</i></b><b> mouse datasets</b><b>1 phantom dataset</b>These datasets were used to validate the autofluorescence removal algorithm across both biological and controlled experimental conditions.
DOI: 10.25909/29595234
title: Autonomous Agriculture to Support Space Exploration

description: Partner Investigators:Vertical Future, UK (Dr. Jennifer Bromley); Axiom Space, USA (Dr. Rahul Goel); University of Adelaide (Profs. Jenny Mortimer, Matthew Gilliham); University of Cambridge (Prof. Alex Webb); University of Western Australia (Prof. A. Harvey Millar); University of Southern Queensland (Prof. Bernadette McCabe, Dr. Cheryl McCarthy); Saber Astronautics Australia/USA (Dr. Jason Held).Data collected at Vertical Future, University of Adelaide, University of Cambridge, University of Western Australia and University of Southern Queensland.Scientists involved included Dr. Ali Gill, Ms Chalotte Bampton and Ms Wendy Sullivan (Adelaide), Dr Samalka Wijeweera and Dr Troy Miller (UWA), Dr Eva Herrero Serrano (Cambridge), Dr John Stamford (Vertical Future).<br>Project Overview (Taken from public Executive Summary of report submitted to the UK Space Agency/Australian Space Agency)<br>This project developed a prototype autonomous controlled-environment agriculture (CEA) system, designed to optimise plant growth in space and support both long-duration missions and scientific experimentation. Through a cross-disciplinary collaboration between plant scientists and space technology providers from the UK, Australia, and the USA, we explored new opportunities for automating crop production in orbit and on Earth.The system was designed with Axiom Station in mind, building on insights from prior experiments aboard the International Space Station (ISS). A key milestone was the successful parabolic flight of the engineering development unit (EDU), significantly advancing its Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and validating core system capabilities under microgravity conditions.The project also established a global testbed of replicated plant growth sites, enabling robust comparison of environmental and phenotypic data streams across research and commercial environments. These testbeds provided critical input into the development of machine vision tools and decision-support systems, forming a strong foundation for future commercial applications in space and terrestrial AgriTech.Public engagement was a key pillar of the project. We delivered a comprehensive outreach programme that engaged with government, industry, education, and the general public. This included the development of free educational resources to promote understanding of how space-based research informs the future of food systems on Earth.<br><br>This dataset represents an archive of images taken of plants growing in controlled environments and responding to various imposed stresses. These were used to train various algorithms to drive early identification of problems in growing plants and use this to drive early intervention (whether autonomous, remote or in person), reducing crop losses. Images were captured using a raspberry pi system, across 5 remote sites (University of Adelaide, University of Western Australia, and University of Southern Queensland (Australia); University of Cambridge, and Vertical Future Syan Farms (UK).
DOI: 10.25909/29595234.v1
title: Autonomous Agriculture to Support Space Exploration

description: Partner Investigators:Vertical Future, UK (Dr. Jennifer Bromley); Axiom Space, USA (Dr. Rahul Goel); University of Adelaide (Profs. Jenny Mortimer, Matthew Gilliham); University of Cambridge (Prof. Alex Webb); University of Western Australia (Prof. A. Harvey Millar); University of Southern Queensland (Prof. Bernadette McCabe, Dr. Cheryl McCarthy); Saber Astronautics Australia/USA (Dr. Jason Held).Data collected at Vertical Future, University of Adelaide, University of Cambridge, University of Western Australia and University of Southern Queensland.Scientists involved included Dr. Ali Gill, Ms Chalotte Bampton and Ms Wendy Sullivan (Adelaide), Dr Samalka Wijeweera and Dr Troy Miller (UWA), Dr Eva Herrero Serrano (Cambridge), Dr John Stamford (Vertical Future).<br>Project Overview (Taken from public Executive Summary of report submitted to the UK Space Agency/Australian Space Agency)<br>This project developed a prototype autonomous controlled-environment agriculture (CEA) system, designed to optimise plant growth in space and support both long-duration missions and scientific experimentation. Through a cross-disciplinary collaboration between plant scientists and space technology providers from the UK, Australia, and the USA, we explored new opportunities for automating crop production in orbit and on Earth.The system was designed with Axiom Station in mind, building on insights from prior experiments aboard the International Space Station (ISS). A key milestone was the successful parabolic flight of the engineering development unit (EDU), significantly advancing its Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and validating core system capabilities under microgravity conditions.The project also established a global testbed of replicated plant growth sites, enabling robust comparison of environmental and phenotypic data streams across research and commercial environments. These testbeds provided critical input into the development of machine vision tools and decision-support systems, forming a strong foundation for future commercial applications in space and terrestrial AgriTech.Public engagement was a key pillar of the project. We delivered a comprehensive outreach programme that engaged with government, industry, education, and the general public. This included the development of free educational resources to promote understanding of how space-based research informs the future of food systems on Earth.<br><br>This dataset represents an archive of images taken of plants growing in controlled environments and responding to various imposed stresses. These were used to train various algorithms to drive early identification of problems in growing plants and use this to drive early intervention (whether autonomous, remote or in person), reducing crop losses. Images were captured using a raspberry pi system, across 5 remote sites (University of Adelaide, University of Western Australia, and University of Southern Queensland (Australia); University of Cambridge, and Vertical Future Syan Farms (UK).
DOI: 10.25909/29614706
title: Do you speak cat?

description: HSROC analysis of participant accuracy to detect positive or negative human-cat interactions
DOI: 10.25909/29614706.v1
title: Do you speak cat?

description: HSROC analysis of participant accuracy to detect positive or negative human-cat interactions
DOI: 10.25909/29661812
title: Corynebacterium Concatenated Sequencing Files - FastQs

description: Concatenated raw sequencing files in fastq format used to generate Corynebacterium genomes
DOI: 10.25909/29661812.v1
title: Corynebacterium Concatenated Sequencing Files - FastQs

description: Concatenated raw sequencing files in fastq format used to generate Corynebacterium genomes
DOI: 10.25909/29663831
title: Corynebacterium Genome Assemblies

description: Corynebacterium genome assemblies isolated and assembled at the BHI
DOI: 10.25909/29663831.v1
title: Corynebacterium Genome Assemblies

description: Corynebacterium genome assemblies isolated and assembled at the BHI
DOI: 10.25909/29663906
title: Eggnog Annotations of Corynebacterium Genomes

description: Functional annotation of Corynebacterium genomes using eggNOG database v5 and eggNOG-mapper v2.1.12. Sequence searches performed using DIAMOND.
DOI: 10.25909/29663906.v1
title: Eggnog Annotations of Corynebacterium Genomes

description: Functional annotation of Corynebacterium genomes using eggNOG database v5 and eggNOG-mapper v2.1.12. Sequence searches performed using DIAMOND.
DOI: 10.25909/29712923
title: Metadata

description: Metadata including barcode to sample number conversions, clinical data, genomes quality metrics, raw data for annotation analyses.
DOI: 10.25909/29712923.v1
title: Metadata

description: Metadata including barcode to sample number conversions, clinical data, genomes quality metrics, raw data for annotation analyses.