More Like this

1. Nomenclature over 5 years in TaxonWorks: Approach, implementation, limitations and outcomes

   https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.5.75441  

   Yoder, Matthew ; Dmitriev, Dmitry ( September 2021 , Biodiversity Information Science and Standards)

   We are now over four decades into digitally managing the names of Earth's species. As the number of federating (i.e., software that brings together previously disparate projects under a common infrastructure, for example TaxonWorks) and aggregating (e.g., International Plant Name Index, Catalog of Life (CoL)) efforts increase, there remains an unmet need for both the migration forward of old data, and for the production of new, precise and comprehensive nomenclatural catalogs. Given this context, we provide an overview of how TaxonWorks seeks to contribute to this effort, and where it might evolve in the future. In TaxonWorks, when we talk about governed names and relationships, we mean it in the sense of existing international codes of nomenclature (e.g., the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN)). More technically, nomenclature is defined as a set of objective assertions that describe the relationships between the names given to biological taxa and the rules that determine how those names are governed. It is critical to note that this is not the same thing as the relationship between a name and a biological entity, but rather nomenclature in TaxonWorks represents the details of the (governed) relationships between names. Rather than thinking of nomenclature as changing (a verb commonly used to express frustration with biological nomenclature), it is useful to think of nomenclature as a set of data points, which grows over time. For example, when synonymy happens, we do not erase the past, but rather record a new context for the name(s) in question. The biological concept changes, but the nomenclature (names) simply keeps adding up. Behind the scenes, nomenclature in TaxonWorks is represented by a set of nodes and edges, i.e., a mathematical graph, or network (e.g., Fig. 1). Most names (i.e., nodes in the network) are what TaxonWorks calls "protonyms," monomial epithets that are used to construct, for example, bionomial names (not to be confused with "protonym" sensu the ICZN). Protonyms are linked to other protonyms via relationships defined in NOMEN, an ontology that encodes governed rules of nomenclature. Within the system, all data, nodes and edges, can be cited, i.e., linked to a source and therefore anchored in time and tied to authorship, and annotated with a variety of annotation types (e.g., notes, confidence levels, tags). The actual building of the graphs is greatly simplified by multiple user-interfaces that allow scientists to review (e.g. Fig. 2), create, filter, and add to (again, not "change") the nomenclatural history. As in any complex knowledge-representation model, there are outlying scenarios, or edge cases that emerge, making certain human tasks more complex than others. TaxonWorks is no exception, it has limitations in terms of what and how some things can be represented. While many complex representations are hidden by simplified user-interfaces, some, for example, the handling of the ICZN's Family-group name, batch-loading of invalid relationships, and comparative syncing against external resources need more work to simplify the processes presently required to meet catalogers' needs. The depth at which TaxonWorks can capture nomenclature is only really valuable if it can be used by others. This is facilitated by the application programming interface (API) serving its data (https://api.taxonworks.org), serving text files, and by exports to standards like the emerging Catalog of Life Data Package. With reference to real-world problems, we illustrate different ways in which the API can be used, for example, as integrated into spreadsheets, through the use of command line scripts, and serve in the generation of public-facing websites. Behind all this effort are an increasing number of people recording help videos, developing documentation, and troubleshooting software and technical issues. Major contributions have come from developers at many skill levels, from high school to senior software engineers, illustrating that TaxonWorks leads in enabling both technical and domain-based contributions. The health and growth of this community is a key factor in TaxonWork's potential long-term impact in the effort to unify the names of Earth's species. 

   more » « less
2. TaxonWorks as a Tool for Managing Large Biodiversity Projects

   https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.6.93668  

   Dmitriev, Dmitry ; Cao, Yanghui ; Dietrich, Christopher H. ( August 2022 , Biodiversity Information Science and Standards)

   Large systematic revisionary projects incorporating data for hundreds or thousands of taxa require an integrative approach, with a strong biodiversity-informatics core for efficient data management to facilitate research on the group. Our original biodiversity informatics platform, 3i (Internet-accessible Interactive Identification) combined a customized MS Access database backend with ASP-based web interfaces to support revisionary syntheses of several large genera of leafhopers (Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadellidae). More recently, for our National Science Foundation sponsored project, “GoLife: Collaborative Research: Integrative genealogy, ecology and phenomics of deltocephaline leafhoppers (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), and their microbial associates”, we selected the new open-source platform TaxonWorks as the cyberinfrastructure. In the scope of the project, the original “3i World Auchenorrhyncha Database” was imported into TaxonWorks. At the present time, TaxonWorks has many tools to automatically import nomenclature, citations, and specimen based collection data. At the time of the initial migration of the 3i database, many of those tools were still under development, and complexity of the data in the database required a custom migration script, which is still probably the most efficient solution for importing datasets with long development history. At the moment, the World Auchenorrhyncha Database comprehensively covers nomenclature of the group and includes data on 70 valid families, 6,816 valid genera, 47,064 valid species as well as synonymy and subsequent combinations (Fig. 1). In addition, many taxon records include the original citation, bibliography, type information, etymology, etc. The bibliography of the group includes 37,579 sources, about 1/3 of which are associated with PDF files. Species have distribution records, either derived from individual specimens or as country and state level asserted distribution, as well as biological associations indicating host plants, predators, and parasitoids. Observation matrices in TaxonWorks are designed to handle morphological data associated with taxa or specimens. The matrices may be used to automatically generate interactive identification keys and taxon descriptions. They can also be downloaded to be imported, for example, into Lucid builder, or to perform phylogenetic analysis using an external application. At the moment there are 36 matrices associated with the project. The observation matrix from GoLife project covers 798 taxa by 210 descriptors (most of which are qualitative multi-state morphological descriptors) (Fig. 2). Illustrations are provided for 9,886 taxa and organized in the specialized image matrix and could be used as a pictorial key for determination of species and taxa of a higher rank. For the phylogenetic analysis, a dataset was constructed for 730 terminal taxa and >160,000 nucleotide positions obtained using anchored hybrid enrichment of genomic DNA for a sample of leafhoppers from the subfamily Deltocephalinae and outgroups. The probe kit targets leafhopper genes, as well as some bacterial genes (endosymbionts and plant pathogens transmitted by leafhoppers). The maximum likelihood analyses of concatenated nucleotide and amino acid sequences as well as coalescent gene tree analysis yielded well-resolved phylogenetic trees (Cao et al. 2022). Raw sequence data have been uploaded to the Sequence Read Archive on GenBank. Occurrence and morphological data, as well as diagnostic images, for voucher specimens have been incorporated into TaxonWorks. Data in TaxonWorks could be exported in raw format, get accessed via Application Programming Interface (API), or be shared with external data aggregators like Catalogue of Life, GBIF, iDigBio. 

   more » « less
3. TaxonWorks

   https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.25560  

   Dmitriev, Dmitry ( May 2018 , Biodiversity Information Science and Standards)

   TaxonWorks (http://taxonworks.org) is an integrated workbench for taxonomists and biodiversity scientists. It is designed to capture, organize, and enrich data, share and refine it with collaborators, and package it for analysis and publication. It is based on PostgreSQL (database) and the Ruby-on-Rails programming language and framework for developing web applications (https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks). The TaxonWorks community is built around an open software ecosystem that facilitates participation at many levels. TaxonWorks is designed to serve both researchers who create and curate the data, as well as technical users, such as programmers and informatics specialists, who act as data consumers. TaxonWorks provides researchers with robust, user friendly interfaces based on well thought out customized workflows for efficient and validated data entry. It provides technical users database access through an application programming interface (API) that serves data in JSON format. The data model includes coverage for nearly all classes of data recorded in modern taxonomic treatments primary studies of biodiversity, including nomenclature, bibliography, specimens and collecting events, phylogenetic matrices and species descriptions, etc. The nomenclatural classes are based on the NOMEN ontology (https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/nomen). 

   more » « less
4. Functional random forests for curve response

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02265-4  

   Fu, Guifang ; Dai, Xiaotian ; Liang, Yeheng ( December 2021 , Scientific Reports)

   The rapid advancement of functional data in various application fields has increased the demand for advanced statistical approaches that can incorporate complex structures and nonlinear associations. In this article, we propose a novel functional random forests (FunFor) approach to model the functional data response that is densely and regularly measured, as an extension of the landmark work of Breiman, who introduced traditional random forests for a univariate response. The FunFor approach is able to predict curve responses for new observations and selects important variables from a large set of scalar predictors. The FunFor approach inherits the efficiency of the traditional random forest approach in detecting complex relationships, including nonlinear and high-order interactions. Additionally, it is a non-parametric approach without the imposition of parametric and distributional assumptions. Eight simulation settings and one real-data analysis consistently demonstrate the excellent performance of the FunFor approach in various scenarios. In particular, FunFor successfully ranks the true predictors as the most important variables, while achieving the most robust variable sections and the smallest prediction errors when comparing it with three other relevant approaches. Although motivated by a biological leaf shape data analysis, the proposed FunFor approach has great potential to be widely applied in various fields due to its minimal requirement on tuning parameters and its distribution-free and model-free nature. An R package named ’FunFor’, implementing the FunFor approach, is available at GitHub.

    

   more » « less
5. An exact version of Life Table Response Experiment analysis, and the R package exactLTRE

   https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.14065  

   Hernández, Christina M. ; Ellner, Stephen P. ; Adler, Peter B. ; Hooker, Giles ; Snyder, Robin E. ( March 2023 , Methods in Ecology and Evolution)

   Matrix population models are frequently built and used by ecologists to analyse demography and elucidate the processes driving population growth or decline. Life Table Response Experiments (LTREs) are comparative analyses that decompose the realized difference or variance in population growth rate () into contributions from the differences or variances in the vital rates (i.e. the matrix elements). Since their introduction, LTREs have been based on approximations and have not included biologically relevant interaction terms.

   We used the functional analysis of variance framework to derive an exact LTRE method, which calculates the exact response of to the difference or variance in a given vital rate, for all interactions among vital rates—including higher‐order interactions neglected by the classical methods. We used the publicly available COMADRE and COMPADRE databases to perform a meta‐analysis comparing the results of exact and classical LTRE methods. We analysed 186 and 1487 LTREs for animal and plant matrix population models, respectively.

   We found that the classical methods often had small errors, but that very high errors were possible. Overall error was related to the difference or variance in the matrices being analysed, consistent with the Taylor series basis of the classical method. Neglected interaction terms accounted for most of the errors in fixed design LTRE, highlighting the importance of two‐way interaction terms. For random design LTRE, errors in the contribution terms present in both classical and exact methods were comparable to errors due to neglected interaction terms. In most examples we analysed, evaluating exact contributions up to three‐way interaction terms was sufficient for interpreting 90% or more of the difference or variance in .

   Relative error, previously used to evaluate the accuracy of classical LTREs, is not a reliable metric of how closely the classical and exact methods agree. Error compensation between estimated contribution terms and neglected contribution terms can lead to low relative error despite faulty biological interpretation. Trade‐offs or negative covariances among matrix elements can lead to high relative error despite accurate biological interpretation. Exact LTRE provides reliable and accurate biological interpretation, and the R packageexactLTREmakes the exact method accessible to ecologists.

    

   more » « less