Dataset Information

The trouble with triplets in biodiversity informatics: a data-driven case against current identifier practices.

ABSTRACT: The biodiversity informatics community has discussed aspirations and approaches for assigning globally unique identifiers (GUIDs) to biocollections for nearly a decade. During that time, and despite misgivings, the de facto standard identifier has become the "Darwin Core Triplet", which is a concatenation of values for institution code, collection code, and catalog number associated with biocollections material. Our aim is not to rehash the challenging discussions regarding which GUID system in theory best supports the biodiversity informatics use case of discovering and linking digital data across the Internet, but how well we can link those data together at this moment, utilizing the current identifier schemes that have already been deployed. We gathered Darwin Core Triplets from a subset of VertNet records, along with vertebrate records from GenBank and the Barcode of Life Data System, in order to determine how Darwin Core Triplets are deployed "in the wild". We asked if those triplets follow the recommended structure and whether they provide an easy and unambiguous means to track from specimen records to genetic sequence records. We show that Darwin Core Triplets are often riddled with semantic and syntactic errors when deployed and curated in practice, despite specifications about how to construct them. Our results strongly suggest that Darwin Core Triplets that have not been carefully curated are not currently serving a useful role for relinking data. We briefly consider needed next steps to overcome current limitations.

SUBMITTER: Guralnick R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4254916 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The trouble with triplets in biodiversity informatics: a data-driven case against current identifier practices.

Guralnick Robert R Conlin Tom T Deck John J Stucky Brian J BJ Cellinese Nico N

PloS one 20141203 12

The biodiversity informatics community has discussed aspirations and approaches for assigning globally unique identifiers (GUIDs) to biocollections for nearly a decade. During that time, and despite misgivings, the de facto standard identifier has become the "Darwin Core Triplet", which is a concatenation of values for institution code, collection code, and catalog number associated with biocollections material. Our aim is not to rehash the challenging discussions regarding which GUID system in ...[more]

PMID: 25470125

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Biodiversity informatics is a relatively new discipline extending computer science in the context of biodiversity data, and its development to date has not been uniform throughout the world. Digitizing effort and capacity building are costly, and ways should be found to prioritize them rationally. The proposed 'Biodiversity Informatics Potential (BIP) Index' seeks to fulfill such a prioritization role. We propose that the potential for biodiversity informatics be assessed through three concepts: (a) the intrinsic biodiversity potential (the biological richness or ecological diversity) of a country; (b) the capacity of the country to generate biodiversity data records; and (c) the availability of technical infrastructure in a country for managing and publishing such records. METHODS: Broadly, the techniques used to construct the BIP Index were rank correlation, multiple regression analysis, principal components analysis and optimization by linear programming. We built the BIP Index by finding a parsimonious set of country-level human, economic and environmental variables that best predicted the availability of primary biodiversity data accessible through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) network, and constructing an optimized model with these variables. The model was then applied to all countries for which sufficient data existed, to obtain a score for each country. Countries were ranked according to that score. RESULTS: Many of the current GBIF participants ranked highly in the BIP Index, although some of them seemed not to have realized their biodiversity informatics potential. The BIP Index attributed low ranking to most nonparticipant countries; however, a few of them scored highly, suggesting that these would be high-return new participants if encouraged to contribute towards the GBIF mission of free and open access to biodiversity data. CONCLUSIONS: The BIP Index could potentially help in (a) identifying countries most likely to contribute to filling gaps in digitized biodiversity data; (b) assisting countries potentially in need (for example mega-diverse) to mobilize resources and collect data that could be used in decision-making; and (c) allowing identification of which biodiversity informatics-resourced countries could afford to assist countries lacking in biodiversity informatics capacity, and which data-rich countries should benefit most from such help.

Project description:Translational medicine is becoming increasingly dependent upon data generated from health care, clinical research, and molecular investigations. This increasing rate of production and diversity in data has brought about several challenges, including the need to integrate fragmented databases, enable secondary use of patient clinical data from health care in clinical research, and to create information systems that clinicians and biomedical researchers can readily use. Our case study effectively integrates requirements from the clinical and biomedical researcher perspectives in a translational medicine setting. Our three principal achievements are (a) a design of a user-friendly web-based system for management and integration of clinical and molecular databases, while adhering to proper de-identification and security measures; (b) providing a real-world test of the system functionalities using clinical cohorts; and (c) system integration with a clinical decision support system to demonstrate system interoperability. We engaged two active clinical cohorts, 747 psoriasis patients and 2001 rheumatoid arthritis patients, to demonstrate efficient query possibilities across the data sources, enable cohort stratification, extract variation in antibody patterns, study biomarker predictors of treatment response in RA patients, and to explore metabolic profiles of psoriasis patients. Finally, we demonstrated system interoperability by enabling integration with an established clinical decision support system in health care. To assure the usefulness and usability of the system, we followed two approaches. First, we created a graphical user interface supporting all user interactions. Secondly we carried out a system performance evaluation study where we measured the average response time in seconds for active users, http errors, and kilobits per second received and sent. The maximum response time was found to be 0.12 seconds; no server or client errors of any kind were detected. In conclusion, the system can readily be used by clinicians and biomedical researchers in a translational medicine setting.

Project description:BackgroundTo conduct a systematic assessment of library and informatics training at accredited Western U.S. medical schools. To provide a structured description of core practices, detect trends through comparisons across institutions, and to identify innovative training approaches at the medical schools.MethodsAction research study pursued through three phases. The first phase used inductive analysis on reported library and informatics skills training via publicly-facing websites at accredited medical schools and the academic health sciences libraries serving those medical schools. Phase Two consisted of a survey of the librarians who provide this training to undergraduate medical education students at the Western U.S. medical schools. The survey revealed gaps in forming a complete picture of current practices, thereby generating additional questions that were answered through the Phase Three in-depth interviews.ResultsPublicly-facing websites reviewed in Phase One offered uneven information about library and informatics training at Western U.S. medical schools. The Phase Two survey resulted in a 77% response rate. The survey produced a clearer picture of current practices of library and informatics training. The survey also determined the readiness of medical students to pass certain aspects of the United States Medical Licensure Exam. Most librarians interacted with medical school curricular leaders through either curricula committees or through individual contacts. Librarians averaged three (3) interventions for training within the four-year curricula with greatest emphasis upon the first and third years. Library/informatics training was integrated fully into the respective curricula in almost all cases. Most training involved active learning approaches, specifically within Problem-Based Learning or Evidence-Based Medicine contexts. The Phase Three interviews revealed that librarians are engaged with the medical schools' curricular leaders, they are respected for their knowledge and teaching skills, and that they need to continually adapt to changes in curricula.ConclusionsThis study offers a long overdue, systematic view of current practices of library/informatics training at Western U.S. medical schools. Medical educators, particularly curricular leaders, will find opportunities in this study's results for more productive collaborations with the librarians responsible for library and informatics training at their medical schools.

Dataset Information

The trouble with triplets in biodiversity informatics: a data-driven case against current identifier practices.

Publications

The trouble with triplets in biodiversity informatics: a data-driven case against current identifier practices.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets