Abstract
ELIXIR is the European infrastructure established specifically for the sharing and sustainability of life science data. To provide up-to-date resources and services, ELIXIR needs to undergo a continuous process of refreshing the services provided by its national Nodes. Here we present the approach taken by ELIXIR-UK to address the advice by the ELIXIR Scientific Advisory Board that Nodes need to develop " mechanisms to ensure that each Node continues to be representative of the Bioinformatics efforts within the country". ELIXIR-UK put in place an open and transparent process to identify potential ELIXIR resources within the UK during late 2015 and early to mid-2016. Areas of strategic strength were identified and Expressions of Interest in these priority areas were requested from the UK community. Criteria were established, in discussion with the ELIXIR Hub, and prospective ELIXIR-UK resources were assessed by an independent committee set up by the Node for this purpose. Of 19 resources considered, 14 were judged to be immediately ready to be included in the UK ELIXIR Node's portfolio. A further five were placed on the Node's roadmap for future consideration for inclusion. ELIXIR-UK expects to repeat this process regularly to ensure its portfolio continues to reflect its community's strengths.
Highlights
ELIXIR, the European infrastructure for life science data[1], is made up of individual Nodes, one for each of the organisation’s constituent members (21 as of 1st March 2017: Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, EMBL-European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI), Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK), and a coordinating hub
Nodes need to take full account of these requirements when selecting and proposing their services, which are judged for suitability by the ELIXIR Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) and Board of ELIXIR
ELIXIR-UK identified a set of priority areas within which to focus submissions to the process
Summary
1. Christine Durinx , SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Janet Kelso, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany. Any reports and responses or comments on the article can be found at the end of the article. This article is included in the ELIXIR gateway. This article is included in the International Society for Computational Biology Community Journal gateway. We believe we have responded to all the comments raised by the reviewers and that this version of the manuscript is improved as a results. In particular the reviewers were keen that we explained better (and in some cases clarified) the criteria that were used to assess resources during this exercise. To improve understanding of this we have included an additional table that goes into more detail about the interpretation of the criteria we applied.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
