Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Incorporating RDA Outputs in the Design of a European Research Infrastructure for Natural Science Collections Cover

Incorporating RDA Outputs in the Design of a European Research Infrastructure for Natural Science Collections

Data Science Journal
Volume 19 (2020): Issue 1
By: Sharif Islam,  Alex Hardisty,  Wouter Addink,  Claus Weiland and  Falko Glöckler  
Open Access
|Dec 2020

References

  1. 1Addink, W, et al. 2020. Advancing the Catalogue of the World’s Natural History Collections – 10 recommendations from DiSSCo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3949839
    Back to article
  2. 2Agosti, D, et al. 2019. Biodiversity Literature Repository (BLR), a repository for FAIR data and publications. Biodiversity Information Science and Standards. DOI: 10.3897/biss.3.37197
    Back to article
  3. 3Bechhofer, S, et al. 2013. Why linked data is not enough for scientists. Future Generation Computer Systems, 29(2): 599–611. DOI: 10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004
    Back to article
  4. 4Besnard, G, et al. 2016. Valuing museum specimens: high-throughput DNA sequencing on historical collections of New Guinea crowned pigeons (Goura). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 117(1): 71–82. DOI: 10.1111/bij.12494
    Back to article
  5. 5Blagoderov, V, Kitching, IJ, Livermore, L, Simonsen, TJ and Smith, VS. 2012. No specimen left behind: industrial scale digitization of natural history collections. ZooKeys, 209: 133. DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.209.3178
    Back to article
  6. 6Cazenave, N, Béchard, L and Rouchon O. 2019. Digitisation infrastructure design for EUDAT/CINES. ICEDIG Deliverable 6.2. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3364533
    Back to article
  7. 7Chapman, A, et al. 2020. Developing standards for improved data quality and for selecting fit for use biodiversity data. Biodiversity Information Science and Standards, 4: e50889. DOI: 10.3897/biss.4.50889
    Back to article
  8. 8Cocks, N, Livermore, L, Smith, V and Woodburn, M. 2020. Technical capacities of digitisation centres within ICEDIG participating institutions. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 6: e55522. DOI: 10.3897/rio.6.e55522
    Back to article
  9. 9Cook, JA, et al. 2020. Integrating Biodiversity Infrastructure into Pathogen Discovery and Mitigation of Emerging Infectious Diseases. BioScience, 70(7): 531–534. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biaa064
    Back to article
  10. 10Copas, K, Noesgaard, D and Schigel, D. 2019. Crediting the reuse and impact of free, FAIR and open biodiversity data through DOI citations and event tracking. AGUFM, 2019: IN21A–06.
    Back to article
  11. 11De Smedt, K, Koureas, D and Wittenburg, P, 2020. FAIR Digital Objects for Science: From Data Pieces to Actionable Knowledge Units. Publications, 8(2): 21. DOI: 10.3390/publications8020021
    Back to article
  12. 12Díaz, S, et al. 2016. The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature, 529(7585): 167–171. DOI: 10.1038/nature16489
    Back to article
  13. 13DiSSCo DMP. 2019. Provisional Data Management Plan for the DiSSCo infrastructure. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3532937
    Back to article
  14. 14European Commission. 2018. Turning FAIR into reality. Final Report and Action Plan from the European Commission Expert Group on FAIR data. Luxembourg Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 78. DOI: 10.2777/1524
    Back to article
  15. 15Grobe, P, et al. 2019. From Data to Knowledge: A semantic knowledge graph application for curating specimen data. Biodiversity Information Science and Standards. DOI: 10.3897/biss.3.37412
    Back to article
  16. 16Groom, Q, Dillen, M, Hardy, H, Phillips, S, Willemse, L and Wu, Z, 2019. Improved standardization of transcribed digital specimen data. Database, 2019. DOI: 10.1093/database/baz129
    Back to article
  17. 17Güntsch, A, et al. 2017. Actionable, long-term stable and semantic web compatible identifiers for access to biological collection objects. Database, 2017. DOI: 10.1093/database/bax003
    Back to article
  18. 18Guralnick, RP, et al. 2015. Community next steps for making globally unique identifiers work for biocollections data. ZooKeys, 494: 133. DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.494.9352
    Back to article
  19. 19Hardisty, A., et al. 2020. Conceptual design blueprint for the DiSSCo digitization infrastructure-DELIVERABLE D8. 1. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 6. DOI: 10.3897/rio.6.e54280
    Back to article
  20. 20Hardisty, A and Roberts, D. 2013. A decadal view of biodiversity informatics: challenges and priorities. BMC ecology, 13(1): 16. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6785-13-16
    Back to article
  21. 21Hedrick, BP, et al. 2020. Digitization and the future of natural history collections. BioScience, 70(3): 243–251. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz163
    Back to article
  22. 22Hobern, D, et al. 2019. Connecting data and expertise: a new alliance for biodiversity knowledge. Biodiversity data journal, 7. DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.7.e33679.suppl10
    Back to article
  23. 23Kahn, R and Wilensky, R, 2006. A framework for distributed digital object services. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 6(2): 115–123. DOI: 10.1007/s00799-005-0128-x
    Back to article
  24. 24Kays, R, et al. 2020. An empirical evaluation of camera trap study design: How many, how long and when?. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.13370
    Back to article
  25. 25Kays, R, McShea, WJ and Wikelski, M. 2020. Born-digital biodiversity data: Millions and billions. Diversity and Distributions, 26(5): 644–648. DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12993
    Back to article
  26. 26Lannom, L, Koureas, D and Hardisty, AR. 2020. FAIR data and services in biodiversity science and geoscience. Data Intelligence, 2(1–2): 122–130. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00034
    Back to article
  27. 27Lendemer, J, et al. 2020. The extended specimen network: A strategy to enhance US biodiversity collections, promote research and education. BioScience, 70(1): 23–30. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz165
    Back to article
  28. 28Leonelli, S, 2016. Data-centric biology: A philosophical study. University of Chicago Press. DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226416502.001.0001
    Back to article
  29. 29Lewis, KP, Vander, Wal, E and Fifield, DA. 2018. Wildlife biology, big data, and reproducible research. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 42(1): 172–179. DOI: 10.1002/wsb.847
    Back to article
  30. 30Lister, AM and Climate Change Research Group. 2011. Natural history collections as sources of long-term datasets. Trends in ecology & evolution, 26(4): 153–154. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2010.12.009
    Back to article
  31. 31Livermore, L and Cubey, R. 2019. Specimen Data Refinery: A landscape analysis on machine learning, computer vision and automated approaches to capture specimen metadata. Biodiversity Information Science and Standards. DOI: 10.3897/biss.3.37647
    Back to article
  32. 32Martin, P, Chen, Y, Hardisty, A, Jeffery, K and Zhao, Z. 2017. Computational Challenges in Global Environmental Research Infrastructures. In: Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challenges and Opportunities, Chabbi, A and Loescher, HW (eds.). CRC Press ISBN 9781498751315. DOI: 10.1201/9781315368252
    Back to article
  33. 33Mons, B, et al. 2017. Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud. Information Services & Use, 37(1): 49–56. DOI: 10.3233/ISU-170824
    Back to article
  34. 34Nachman, MW. 2013. Genomics and museum specimens. Molecular Ecology, 22(24): 5966–5968. DOI: 10.1111/mec.12563
    Back to article
  35. 35Nelson, G and Ellis, S. 2019. The history and impact of digitization and digital data mobilization on biodiversity research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 374(1763): 20170391. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0391
    Back to article
  36. 36Nieva de la Hidalga, A, Hardisty, A, Martin, P, Magagna, B and Zhao, Z. 2020. The ENVRI Reference Model. In Towards Interoperable research infrastructures for environmental and earth sciences – A reference model guided approach for common challenges, Zhao, Z and Hellstrom, M (eds.). LNCS 12003, 61–81. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-52829-4_4
    Back to article
  37. 37Page, R. 2016. Towards a biodiversity knowledge graph. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 2. DOI: 10.3897/rio.2.e8767
    Back to article
  38. 38Patterson, D, Mozzherin, D, Shorthouse, DP and Thessen, A. 2016. Challenges with using names to link digital biodiversity information. Biodiversity Data Journal, 4. DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.4.e8080
    Back to article
  39. 39RDA DTR. 2015. Data Type Registries working group output. DOI: 10.15497/A5BCD108-ECC4-41BE-91A7-20112FF77458
    Back to article
  40. 40RDA DF&T. 2015. Data Foundation and Terminology Work Group Products. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/06825049-8CA4-40BD-BCAF-DE9F0EA2FADF
    Back to article
  41. 41RDA DFIG. 2018. Data Fabric Interest Group; Summary of Virtual Layer Recommendations. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00026
    Back to article
  42. 42RDA FAIR Data Maturity Model. 2020. FAIR Data Maturity Model: specification and guidelines. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00050
    Back to article
  43. 43RDA PID KI. 2019. RDA Recommendation on PID Kernel Information. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00031
    Back to article
  44. 44RDA PID Information Types. 2015. Final deliverable. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/FDAA09D5-5ED0-403D-B97A-2675E1EBE786
    Back to article
  45. 45RDA Research Data Collections. 2017. Recommendation on Research Data Collections. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00022
    Back to article
  46. 46RDA/TDWG Attribution Metadata. 2018. Final Recommendations. Research Data Alliance. DOI: 10.15497/RDA00029
    Back to article
  47. 47Schindel, DE and Cook, JA. 2018. The next generation of natural history collections. PLoS Biology, 16(7): e2006125. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2006125
    Back to article
  48. 48Senderov, V, et al. 2018. OpenBiodiv-O: ontology of the OpenBiodiv knowledge management system. Journal of biomedical semantics, 9(1): 5. DOI: 10.1186/s13326-017-0174-5
    Back to article
  49. 49Sharp, C. 2016. Overview of the digital object architecture (DOA). An Internet Society Information Paper, Internet Society. Retrieved from https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2016/overview-of-the-digital-object-architecture-doa/.
    Back to article
  50. 50Smith, V, et al. 2019. SYNTHESYS+ Abridged Grant Proposal. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 5: e46404. DOI: 10.3897/rio.5.e46404
    Back to article
  51. 51Sterner, B and Franz, NM. 2017. Taxonomy for humans or computers? Cognitive pragmatics for big data. Biological Theory, 12(2): 99–111. DOI: 10.1007/s13752-017-0259-5
    Back to article
  52. 52Stocker, M, et al. 2018. Curating Scientific Information in Knowledge Infrastructures. Data Science Journal, 17(21): 1–16. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2018-021
    Back to article
  53. 53Sun, S, Lannom, L and Boesch B. 2003. Handle System Overview, RFC 3650. DOI: 10.17487/rfc3650
    Back to article
  54. 54Sustkova, HP, Hettne, KM, Wittenburg, P, Jacobsen, A, Kuhn, T, Pergl, R, Slifka, J, McQuilton, P, Magagna, B, Sansone, SA and Stocker, M. 2020. FAIR convergence matrix: Optimizing the reuse of existing FAIR-related resources. Data Intelligence, 2(1–2): 158–170. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00038
    Back to article
  55. 55Webster, MS. (ed.) 2017. The extended specimen: emerging frontiers in collections-based ornithological research. CRC Press.
    Back to article
  56. 56Weigel, T, et al. 2020. Making data and workflows findable for machines. Data Intelligence, 2(1–2): 40–46. DOI: 10.1162/dint_a_00026
    Back to article
  57. 57Wilkinson, M, Dumontier, M, Aalbersberg, I, et al. 2016. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3(1): 1–9. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18
    Back to article
  58. 58Wittenburg, P, et al. 2019. Digital objects as drivers towards convergence in data infrastructures. Technical paper. DOI: 10.23728/b2share.b605d85809ca45679b110719b6c6cb11
    Back to article
  59. 59Wittenburg, P and Strawn, G. 2019. Commenting on “Digital Object” Aspects. DOI: 10.23728/b2share.2317b12321764f669c92ebbcf7518164
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-050 | Journal eISSN: 1683-1470
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Jul 17, 2020
Accepted on: Nov 17, 2020
Published on: Dec 14, 2020
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
Distributed System of Scientific Collections,
DiSSCo,
Research Data Alliance,
RDA,
Digital Object Architecture,
Digital Specimen

© 2020 Sharif Islam, Alex Hardisty, Wouter Addink, Claus Weiland, Falko Glöckler, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 19 (2020): Issue 1Next article