An open future for ecological and evolutionary data?

Kenall, Amye; Harold, Simon; Foote, Christopher

doi:10.1186/1472-6785-14-10

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, similar to other experimental data sets, ecological data sets are gathered through years of fieldwork and expected to support multiple innovative papers. To maintain the privilege of first publication, data sets are viewed as being too previous to be shared immediately after collection, but this risks them never being published or shared and thus lost (Kenall, Harold, & Foote, 2014). Fourth, due to the standard deficiencies of data citation, the contributions of external data providers cannot be recognized.…”

Section: Supporting Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Dai

Xiong

et al. 2018

JGR Biogeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research data sharing is appealing for its potential benefits on sharers' scientific impact and is also advocated by various policies. How do scientific benefits and policies correlate with practical ecological data sharing? In this study, we investigated data‐sharing practices in eddy covariance flux research as a typical case. First, we collected researchers' data‐sharing information from major observation networks. Then, we downloaded bibliometric data from the Web of Science and evaluated scientific impact using LeaderRank, a synthetic algorithm that takes both citation and cooperation impacts into consideration. Our results demonstrated the following: (1) specific to eddy covariance flux research, 8% of researchers published information in public data portals, whereas 64% of researchers provided their available data online in a downloadable form; (2) regional differences in data sharing, publications, and observation networks existed; and (3) the data sharers in impact‐ranked ecologists followed a long‐tail distribution, which suggested that, although sharing data is not necessary for researchers to be influential, data sharers are more likely to be high‐impact researchers. Differentiated policies should be proposed to encourage ecologists in the long tail of data sharers, and from regions with little tradition of data sharing, to embrace a more open model of science.

show abstract

Section: Supporting Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Dai

Xiong

et al. 2018

JGR Biogeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers using citizen science data should welcome communication with scheme organizers (Kenall et al., ). This would increase their research impact through feedback to volunteers, and more widely to members and supporters of scheme organizations, improving societal understanding of science.…”

Section: Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Public data archiving (PDA), where data are made freely available on demand through recognized data repositories (Reichman, Jones, & Schildhauer, 2011;Roche et al, 2014), is increasingly mandated by funders and journals to promote open data (Hampton et al, 2013;Kenall, Harold, & Foote, 2014). However, more flexible models of open data access including user registration (e.g., Sullivan et al, 2014), multiyear embargos (Roche et al, 2014) and multiple open data licences (Groom et al, 2016) are available (Table 1).…”

Section: Open Data and Public Data Archivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, by enabling researchers to extract data about which they have no personal knowledge, PDA increases the risk of inappropriate manipulation, analysis, and interpretation which could affect the reputation of the scheme and the researchers themselves (e.g., Tellería, Ramírez, & Aguirre, 2015) and require effort from scheme organizers to correct (e.g., Siriwardena, Baillie, Fuller, & Robinson, 2014). Although not commonly regarded as a major issue in other disciplines where PDA is the norm, the complexities of ecological data can make archiving for independent use particularly challenging (Kenall et al, 2014;Mills et al, 2015).…”

Section: Research Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overcoming the challenges of public data archiving for citizen science biodiversity recording and monitoring schemes

Pearce‐Higgins

Baillie

Boughey

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public data archiving (PDA) is widely advocated as a means of achieving open data standards, leading to improved data preservation, increased scientific reproducibility, and transparency, as well as additional data use. Public data archiving was primarily conceived to archive data from short‐term, single‐purpose scientific studies. It is now more widely applied, including to large‐scale citizen science biodiversity recording and monitoring schemes which combine the efforts of volunteers with professional scientists. This may affect the financial security of such schemes by reducing income from data and analytical services. Communication between scheme organizers and researchers may be disrupted, reducing scientific quality and impeding scheme development. It may also have an impact on the participation of some volunteers. Synthesis and applications. In response to the challenges of public data archiving for citizen science biodiversity recording and monitoring schemes, the archive function of scheme organizations should be better recognized by those promoting open data principles. Increased financial support from the public sector or from commercial or academic data users may offset financial risk. Those in favour of public data archiving should do more to facilitate communication between nonscheme users and the originating schemes, while a more flexible approach to data archiving may be required to address potential impacts on volunteer participation.

show abstract

“…One intermediate solution would be to collate these references in a supplement, but it is unclear that these would be counted (Seeber ), and therefore contribute to the impact of each individual dataset (and hence, collector; Kueffer et al ). This is a problem that we argue is best solved by publishers; proper attribution and credit is key to provide incentives to data release (Kenall et al , Whelan et al , Pronk et al ). As citations are currently the ‘currency’ of scientific impact, publishers have a responsibility not only to ensure that data are available (which many already do), but that they are recognized; data citation, no matter how many data are cited, is a way to achieve this goal.…”

Section: An Illustrative Case‐studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthetic datasets and community tools for the rapid testing of ecological hypotheses

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increased availability of both open ecological data, and software to interact with it, allows the fast collection and integration of information at all spatial and taxonomic scales. This offers the opportunity to address macroecological questions in a cost‐effective way. In this contribution, we illustrate this approach by forecasting the structure of a stream food web at the global scale. In so doing, we highlight the most salient issues needing to be addressed before this approach can be used with a high degree of confidence.

show abstract

An open future for ecological and evolutionary data?

Cited by 14 publications

References 14 publications

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Overcoming the challenges of public data archiving for citizen science biodiversity recording and monitoring schemes

Synthetic datasets and community tools for the rapid testing of ecological hypotheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About