Search for: All records

Abstract Critical to answering large-scale questions in biology is the integration of knowledge from different disciplines into a coherent, computable whole. Controlled vocabularies such as ontologies represent a clear path toward this goal. Using survey questionnaires, we examined the attitudes of biologists toward adopting controlled vocabularies in phenotype publications. Our questions cover current experience and overall attitude with controlled vocabularies, the awareness of the issues around ambiguity and inconsistency in phenotype descriptions and post-publication professional data curation, the preferred solutions and the effort and desired rewards for adopting a new authoring workflow. Results suggest that although the existence of controlled vocabularies is widespread, their use is not common. A majority of respondents (74%) are frustrated with ambiguity in phenotypic descriptions, and there is a strong agreement (mean agreement score 4.21 out of 5) that author curation would better reflect the original meaning of phenotype data. Moreover, the vast majority (85%) of researchers would try a new authoring workflow if resultant data were more consistent and less ambiguous. Even more respondents (93%) suggested that they would try and possibly adopt a new authoring workflow if it required 5% additional effort as compared to normal, but higher rates resulted in a steep decline in likely adoption rates. Among the four different types of rewards, two types of citations were the most desired incentives for authors to produce computable data. Overall, our results suggest the adoption of a new authoring workflow would be accelerated by a user-friendly and efficient software-authoring tool, an increased awareness of the challenges text ambiguity creates for external curators and an elevated appreciation of the benefits of controlled vocabularies. 

Abstract Producing findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) data cannot be accomplished solely by data curators in all disciplines. In biology, we have shown that phenotypic data curation is not only costly, but it is burdened with inter-curator variation. We intend to propose a software platform that would enable all data producers, including authors of scientific publications, to produce ontologized data at the time of publication. Working toward this goal, we need to identify ontology construction methods that are preferred by end users. Here, we employ two usability studies to evaluate effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction with a set of four methods that allow an end user to add terms and their relations to an ontology. Thirty-three participants took part in a controlled experiment where they evaluated the four methods (Quick Form, Wizard, WebProtégé and Wikidata) after watching demonstration videos and completing a hands-on task. Another think-aloud study was conducted with three professional botanists. The efficiency effectiveness and user confidence in the methods are clearly revealed through statistical and content analyses of participants’ comments. Quick Form, Wizard and WebProtégé offer distinct strengths that would benefit our author-driven FAIR data generation system. Features preferred by the participants will guide the design of future iterations. 

Abstract The early twenty-first century has witnessed massive expansions in availability and accessibility of digital data in virtually all domains of the biodiversity sciences. Led by an array of asynchronous digitization activities spanning ecological, environmental, climatological, and biological collections data, these initiatives have resulted in a plethora of mostly disconnected and siloed data, leaving to researchers the tedious and time-consuming manual task of finding and connecting them in usable ways, integrating them into coherent data sets, and making them interoperable. The focus to date has been on elevating analog and physical records to digital replicas in local databases prior to elevating them to ever-growing aggregations of essentially disconnected discipline-specific information. In the present article, we propose a new interconnected network of digital objects on the Internet—the Digital Extended Specimen (DES) network—that transcends existing aggregator technology, augments the DES with third-party data through machine algorithms, and provides a platform for more efficient research and robust interdisciplinary discovery. 

Summary High‐quality microbiome research relies on the integrity, management and quality of supporting data. Currently biobanks and culture collections have different formats and approaches to data management. This necessitates a standard data format to underpin research, particularly in line with the FAIR data standards of findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability. We address the importance of a unified, coordinated approach that ensures compatibility of data between that needed by biobanks and culture collections, but also to ensure linkage between bioinformatic databases and the wider research community.