References
- Agricultural Research Federation. 2023. About us. Available at
https://www.agrefed.org.au/WhoAreWe [Last accessed 5th February 2023]. - Amdouni, E and Jonquet, C. 2022. FAIR or FAIRer? An integrated quantitative FAIRness assessment grid for semantic resources and ontologies. Metadata and Semantic Research. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-98876-0_6
- Arnaud, E, et al. 2020. The ontologies community of practice: A CGIAR initiative for big data in agrifood systems. Patterns, 1(7): 100105. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2020.100105
- Austrailian Research Data Commons. 2022. A national agenda for research software, 28 March 2022. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6378082
- Bahim, C, Dekkers, M and Wyns, B. 2019. Results of an analysis of existing FAIR assessment tools. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00035
- Bahlo, C, et al. 2019. The role of interoperable data standards in precision livestock farming in extensive livestock systems: A review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 156: 459–466. DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2018.12.007
- Bahlo, C and Dahlhaus, P. 2021. Livestock data – Is it there and is it FAIR? A systematic review of livestock farming datasets in Australia. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 188. DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2021.106365
- Betancort Cabrera, N, et al. 2020. White paper on implementing the FAIR principles for data in the social, behavioural, and economic sciences. Berlin, Germany: RatSWD. DOI: 10.17620/02671.60
- Bonello, J, Cachia, E and Alfino, N. 2022. AutoFAIR-A portal for automating FAIR assessments for bioinformatics resources. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) – Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, 1865(1): 194767. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2021.194767
- Box, P, et al 2020. White paper for the enactment phase of the Agricultural Research Federation (AgReFed). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3707057
- Caracciolo, C, et al. 2020. 39 hints to facilitate the use of semantics for data on agriculture and nutrition. Data Science Journal, 19(47): 1–12. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2320-047
- Data sharing and the future of science. 2018. Nature Communications, 9(1): 2817. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05227-z
- Devaraju, A, et al. 2021. From conceptualization to implementation: FAIR assessment of research data objects. Data Science Journal, 20(4): 1–14. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2321-004
- Devaraju, A and Huber, R. 2021. An automated solution for measuring the progress toward FAIR research data. Patterns, 2(11): 100370. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100370
- Devare, M, et al. 2021. AgroFIMS: A tool to enable digital collection of standards-compliant FAIR data. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.726646
- Gehlen, K, et al. 2022. Recommendations for discipline-specific FAIRness evaluation derived from applying an ensemble of evaluation tools. Data Science Journal, 21(1). DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2322-007
- Genova, F, et al. 2021. Recommendations on FAIR metrics for EOSC. Lexembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2777/70791
- Gruenpeter, M. 2021. Software as a first class output in a FAIR ecosystem. In: Workshop on Sustainable Software Sustainability 2021. (WOSSS21),
6–8 October 2021 . DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5563028 - Hasselbring, W, et al. 2020. From FAIR research data toward FAIR and open research software. It — Information Technology, 62: 39–47. DOI: 10.1515/itit-2019-0040
- Jacobsen, A, et al. 2020. FAIR principles: Interpretations and implementation considerations. Data Intelligence, 2: 10–29. DOI: 10.1162/dint_r_00024
- Katz, DS, Gruenpeter, M, Honeyman, T, Katz, DS, Gruenpeter, M and Honeyman, T. 2021. Taking a fresh look at FAIR for research software. Patterns, 2: 100222. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100222
- Koers, H, et al. 2020. Assessment report on ‘FAIRness of services’. Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3688762
- Krans, NA, et al. 2022. FAIR assessment tools: evaluating use and performance. NanoImpact, 27: 100402. DOI: 10.1016/j.impact.2022.100402
- Lamprecht, AL, et al. 2020. Towards FAIR principles for research software. Data Science, 3: 37–59. DOI: 10.3233/DS-190026
- MacLeod, A, et al. 2020. The Agricultural Research Federation (AgReFed) technical and information policy suite. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3993784
- Misra, NN, et al. 2022. IoT, big data, and artificial intelligence in agriculture and food industry. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9: 6305–6324. DOI: 10.1109/JIOT.2020.2998584
- Mons, B, et al. 2020. The FAIR principles: First generation implementation choices and challenges. Data Intelligence, 2: iii–vi. DOI: 10.1162/dint_e_00022
- Osinga, SA, et al. 2022. Big data in agriculture: Between opportunity and solution. Agricultural Systems, 195. DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103298
- Petrosyan, L, et al. 2023. FAIR degree assessment in agriculture datasets using the F-UJI tool. Ecological Informatics, 76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102126
- Rosenzweig, C, et al. 2013. The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and pilot studies. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 170: 166–182. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.09.011
- Sales, L, et al. 2020. GO FAIR Brazil: A Ccallenge for Brazilian data science. Data Intelligence, 2: 238–245. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00046
- Sansone, SA, et al. 2019. FAIRsharing as a community approach to standards, repositories and policies. Nature Biotechnology, 37: 358–367. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-019-0080-8
- Schultes, E, et al. 2020.
Reusable FAIR Implementation Profiles as Accelerators of FAIR Convergence . In: Grossmann, G, Ram, S, Grossman, G and Ram, S (eds.), Advances in Conceptual Modeling. Cham: Springer International Publishing pp. 138–147. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-65847-2_13 - Soares, FM, et al. 2022. Building a community-based FAIR metadata schema for Brazilian agriculture and livestock trading data. In: 18th International Conference on Semantic Systems. Vienna, Austria on
12–15 September 2022 . - Stausberg, J, et al. 2022. FAIR and quality assured data — the use case of trueness. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 289: 25–28. DOI: 10.3233/SHTI210850
- Subirats-Coll, I, et al. 2022. AGROVOC: The linked data concept hub for food and agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 196. DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2020.105965
- Sustkova, HP, et al. 2020. FAIR convergence matrix: Optimizing the reuse of existing FAIR-related resources. Data Intelligence, 2: 158–170. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00038
- Thompson, M, et al. 2020. Making FAIR easy with FAIR tools: From creolization to convergence. Data Intelligence, 2: 87–95. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00031
- Top, J, et al. 2022. Cultivating FAIR principles for agri-food data. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 196. DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2022.106909
- Torres, AM, Balbi, S and Villa, F 2023. Scientific modelling can be accessible, interoperable and user friendly: An example for pasture and livestock modelling. PloS One, 18(2):
e0281348 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281348 - Van Reisen, M, et al. 2020. Towards the tipping point for FAIR implementation. Data Intelligence, 2: 264–275. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00049
- Wilkinson, MD, et al. 2016. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, 3: 160018. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18
- Wilkinson, MD, et al. 2019. Evaluating FAIR maturity through a scalable, automated, community-governed framework. Scientific Data, 6: 174. DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0184-5
- Wong, M, et al. 2022. Development and governance of FAIR thresholds for a data federation. Data Science Journal, 21. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2322-013
- WorldFAIR. 2022. The WorldFAIR Project. Available at
https://worldfair-project.eu/ [Last accessed 23 March 2023].