Archiving Primary Data: Solutions for Long-Term Studies

Archiving Primary Data: Solutions for Long-Term Studies. Mills, J. A., Teplitsky, C., Arroyo, B., Charmantier, A., Becker, P., Birkhead, T. R., Bize, P., Blumstein, D. T., Bonenfant, C., Boutin, S., Bushuev, A., Cam, E., Cockburn, A., Côté, S. D., Coulson, J. C., Daunt, F., Dingemanse, N. J., Doligez, B., Drummond, H., Espie, R. H. M., Festa-Bianchet, M., Frentiu, F., Fitzpatrick, J. W., Furness, R. W., Garant, D., Gauthier, G., Grant, P. R., Griesser, M., Gustafsson, L., Hansson, B., Harris, M. P., Jiguet, F., Kjellander, P., Korpimäki, E., Krebs, C. J., Lens, L., Linnell, J. D. C., Low, M., McAdam, A., Margalida, A., Merilä, J., Møller, A. P., Nakagawa, S., Nilsson, J., Nisbet, I. C. T., van Noordwijk, A. J., Oro, D., Pärt, T., Pelletier, F., Potti, J., Pujol, B., Réale, D., Rockwell, R. F., Ropert-Coudert, Y., Roulin, A., Sedinger, J. S., Swenson, J. E., Thébaud, C., Visser, M. E., Wanless, S., Westneat, D. F., Wilson, A. J., & Zedrosser, A. 30(10):581–589.

Paper doi abstract bibtex

The recent trend for journals to require open access to primary data included in publications has been embraced by many biologists, but has caused apprehension amongst researchers engaged in long-term ecological and evolutionary studies. A worldwide survey of 73 principal investigators (Pls) with long-term studies revealed positive attitudes towards sharing data with the agreement or involvement of the PI, and 93\,% of PIs have historically shared data. Only 8\,% were in favor of uncontrolled, open access to primary data while 63\,% expressed serious concern. We present here their viewpoint on an issue that can have non-trivial scientific consequences. We discuss potential costs of public data archiving and provide possible solutions to meet the needs of journals and researchers. [::Trends] Public data archiving is the archiving of primary data used in publications so that they can be preserved and made accessible to all online. [\n] Public data archiving is increasingly required by journals. However, the costs of public data archiving might be underestimated, in particular with respect to long-term studies. [\n] Long-term studies have been responsible for the answers to many important questions in evolution and ecology which could only be answered through following the life-histories of individuals for decades. [\n] Several papers have been published in favor of public data archiving, but a more balanced viewpoint is necessary to allow a discussion to emerge on a code of ethics and ways to preserve and protect the data, encourage the initiation and continuation of long-term studies, and meet the requirements of the whole scientific community. [Excerpt: Concluding Remarks] Long-term studies currently generate science with high impact in all major fields of biology. These longitudinal studies began during an era when PDA did not exist. Although we agree that it is essential to archive data so that they are not lost to science, a key concern is that recently introduced data-archiving regimes combined with difficulty in obtaining continuous financial support will be a disincentive both for the initiation of long-term studies, and for maintenance of ongoing studies. It would be appropriate for journals and data-archiving institutions to enter into a dialog with researchers about how best to meet the objectives of data archiving while allowing valuable long-term studies to thrive. [\n] Specifically, we recommend the development of a formal code of conduct which respects the data generated through long-term studies, and (i) allow tabulated summaries to be provided in the first instance backed up by the confidential submission of primary data if required by editors, (ii) encourage collaborative research with the data collector by people wishing to use the data, (iii) extend embargoes on the use of archived data [5, (iv) consider allowing archiving on institutional servers rather than open-access servers, and (iv) develop enforceable procedures that enable the researcher to be contacted when someone wishes to access primary data. Through these modifications, a compromise could be crafted that provides an advantage to the scientific community, journals, and researchers generating long-term data, as well as benefiting science. [Outstanding Questions] [::] How long can long-term studies continue to flourish with a requirement to publicly archive data? Providing public access to the data disadvantages those who invest time and resources in the collection and maintenance of long-term data. [::] Will journals and scientists with long-term studies be able to develop and implement an approach to data archiving that is acceptable to both? Collaboration, longer embargo and a code of ethics on data usage are components of a potential solution. [::] What are the implications of copyrighting long-term datasets? Copyrighting their datasets would allow scientists to protect their intellectual property in the same way that journals protect their publications. [\n] [...]

@article{millsArchivingPrimaryData2015,
title = {Archiving Primary Data: Solutions for Long-Term Studies},
author = {Mills, James A. and Teplitsky, Céline and Arroyo, Beatriz and Charmantier, Anne and Becker, Peter and Birkhead, Tim R. and Bize, Pierre and Blumstein, Daniel T. and Bonenfant, Christophe and Boutin, Stan and Bushuev, Andrey and Cam, Emmanuelle and Cockburn, Andrew and Côté, Steeve D. and Coulson, John C. and Daunt, Francis and Dingemanse, Niels J. and Doligez, Blandine and Drummond, Hugh and Espie, Richard H. M. and Festa-Bianchet, Marco and Frentiu, Francesca and Fitzpatrick, John W. and Furness, Robert W. and Garant, Dany and Gauthier, Gilles and Grant, Peter R. and Griesser, Michael and Gustafsson, Lars and Hansson, Bengt and Harris, Michael P. and Jiguet, Frédéric and Kjellander, Petter and Korpimäki, Erkki and Krebs, Charles J. and Lens, Luc and Linnell, John D. C. and Low, Matthew and McAdam, Andrew and Margalida, Antoni and Merilä, Juha and Møller, Anders P. and Nakagawa, Shinichi and Nilsson, Jan-Åke and Nisbet, Ian C. T. and van Noordwijk, Arie J. and Oro, Daniel and Pärt, Tomas and Pelletier, Fanie and Potti, Jaime and Pujol, Benoit and Réale, Denis and Rockwell, Robert F. and Ropert-Coudert, Yan and Roulin, Alexandre and Sedinger, James S. and Swenson, Jon E. and Thébaud, Christophe and Visser, Marcel E. and Wanless, Sarah and Westneat, David F. and Wilson, Alastair J. and Zedrosser, Andreas},
date = {2015},
journaltitle = {Trends in Ecology \& Evolution},
volume = {30},
pages = {581--589},
issn = {0169-5347},
doi = {10.1016/j.tree.2015.07.006},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.07.006},
abstract = {The recent trend for journals to require open access to primary data included in publications has been embraced by many biologists, but has caused apprehension amongst researchers engaged in long-term ecological and evolutionary studies. A worldwide survey of 73 principal investigators (Pls) with long-term studies revealed positive attitudes towards sharing data with the agreement or involvement of the PI, and 93\,\% of PIs have historically shared data. Only 8\,\% were in favor of uncontrolled, open access to primary data while 63\,\% expressed serious concern. We present here their viewpoint on an issue that can have non-trivial scientific consequences. We discuss potential costs of public data archiving and provide possible solutions to meet the needs of journals and researchers.

[::Trends]

Public data archiving is the archiving of primary data used in publications so that they can be preserved and made accessible to all online.

[\textbackslash n] Public data archiving is increasingly required by journals. However, the costs of public data archiving might be underestimated, in particular with respect to long-term studies.

[\textbackslash n] Long-term studies have been responsible for the answers to many important questions in evolution and ecology which could only be answered through following the life-histories of individuals for decades.

[\textbackslash n] Several papers have been published in favor of public data archiving, but a more balanced viewpoint is necessary to allow a discussion to emerge on a code of ethics and ways to preserve and protect the data, encourage the initiation and continuation of long-term studies, and meet the requirements of the whole scientific community.

[Excerpt: Concluding Remarks]

Long-term studies currently generate science with high impact in all major fields of biology. These longitudinal studies began during an era when PDA did not exist. Although we agree that it is essential to archive data so that they are not lost to science, a key concern is that recently introduced data-archiving regimes combined with difficulty in obtaining continuous financial support will be a disincentive both for the initiation of long-term studies, and for maintenance of ongoing studies. It would be appropriate for journals and data-archiving institutions to enter into a dialog with researchers about how best to meet the objectives of data archiving while allowing valuable long-term studies to thrive.

[\textbackslash n] Specifically, we recommend the development of a formal code of conduct which respects the data generated through long-term studies, and (i) allow tabulated summaries to be provided in the first instance backed up by the confidential submission of primary data if required by editors, (ii) encourage collaborative research with the data collector by people wishing to use the data, (iii) extend embargoes on the use of archived data [5, (iv) consider allowing archiving on institutional servers rather than open-access servers, and (iv) develop enforceable procedures that enable the researcher to be contacted when someone wishes to access primary data. Through these modifications, a compromise could be crafted that provides an advantage to the scientific community, journals, and researchers generating long-term data, as well as benefiting science.

[Outstanding Questions]

[::] How long can long-term studies continue to flourish with a requirement to publicly archive data? Providing public access to the data disadvantages those who invest time and resources in the collection and maintenance of long-term data.

[::] Will journals and scientists with long-term studies be able to develop and implement an approach to data archiving that is acceptable to both? Collaboration, longer embargo and a code of ethics on data usage are components of a potential solution.

[::] What are the implications of copyrighting long-term datasets? Copyrighting their datasets would allow scientists to protect their intellectual property in the same way that journals protect their publications.

[\textbackslash n] [...]},
keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-14127511,~to-add-doi-URL,digital-preservation,long-term,research-management,research-metrics,rewarding-best-research-practices,sustainability},
number = {10},
options = {useprefix=true}
}

Downloads: 0