DATA ARE THE FOUNDATION FOR SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS. While researchers often report statistical summaries of the data they collect in their publications, there is widespread recognition that the raw data themselves are increasingly useful for meta-analyses, to address novel questions, or as baselines for studies evaluating temporal changes in biological processes (Clark 2007, Whitlock et al. 2010). In many fields, the archiving of raw data as a precondition for publication of research papers has been common practice for decades. For instance, many journals require that the DNA sequences used in evolutionary or genomic studies be deposited in archives such as the National Center for Biotechnology Information’s GenBank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) or The Arabidopsis Information Resource (http://www.arabidopsis.org), making them publicly available to other researchers. Similarly, fields such as oceanography and atmospheric sciences also have a well-developed tradition of data sharing (e.g., the British Oceanographic Data Center [http://www.bodc.ac.uk]). Despite admirable efforts to promote data archiving by several international research consortia (e.g., the Center for Tropical Forest Science and the Large-Scale Biosphere Atmosphere Program) and academic societies (e.g., the Ecological Society of America’s Data Registry program), this practice has yet to become widespread among ecologists (Nelson 2009). Consequently, many datasets are unavailable to the scientific community even years after they were last used by the researchers that collected them. Most of these datasets are eventually lost permanently—they are stored on media that are outdated or unreliable (e.g., punch cards, floppy disks, hard drives, cassette tapes) or are discarded as investigators pursue new avenues of research, change careers, retire, or die (Michener et al. 1997). Even datasets that are still accessible can be effectively lost because they are poorly organized or lack the metadata necessary for their interpretation (Michener et al. 1997, Borer et al. 2009). The loss of these datasets—usually collected at considerable expense and great personal effort—is an impediment to scientific progress that could be avoided if researchers placed datasets and associated metadata in permanent digital data repositories. Awareness of this problem has led to an increasingly loud call for researchers to clarify where and how the data used in their publications are archived, as well as for funding agencies and journals to develop mechanisms to promote this practice (e.g., Clark 2007, Anonymous 2009, Schofield et al. 2009). Now a suite of prestigious journals that includes Evolution and The American Naturalist has taken the bold step of requiring that data used in papers they publish be archived and made freely available in a digital data repository (Whitlock et al. 2010). The editors of these journals argue that in addition to minimizing the loss of priceless data, archiving advances the field because it encourages novel studies or meta-analyses, promotes a culture of transparency, and makes it easier for others to verify results (Whitlock et al. 2010). I propose that the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation (ATBC) consider adopting a similar policy for papers published in Biotropica. In addition to the potential benefits highlighted by Whitlock et al. (2010), the archiving of data on which Biotropica’s papers are based will bring with several other tangible benefits. First, tropical ecosystems are undergoing myriad, rapid, and unprecedented environmental changes. The data collected by Biotropica’s authors could provide an invaluable resource to the scientists and decision-makers studying global change phenomena and designing conservation and management strategies. For example, Clark et al. (2010) used publicly available datasets of tree growth (Clark & Clark 2006), atmospheric CO2 levels (Keeling et al. 2005, available at http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu), and local climate (available from the Organization for Tropical Studies at http://www.ots.duke.edu) to study wood production in tropical forests; it is only because they were able to integrate these archived datasets that they were able to conclude that wood production in lowland rain forests may be severely reduced in future climates that are only slightly drier or warmer than present-day ones. Second, archived data could play a critical role in capacity building—undergraduates and graduate students will be able to use previously inaccessible datasets to conduct novel studies or meta-analyses for their theses. Because research using publicly available data requires no expenditure beyond stipends and the purchase of computers, they are also a very costefficient means of increasing a country’s scientific productivity and developing a cadre of highly trained and productive postdoctoral scientists (sensu the postdoctoral fellows of the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu). Third, publicly archiving data could help assuage concerns regarding the export of intellectual property, biopiracy, and the failure to include local scientists in data collection efforts that often plague foreign scientists working in tropical countries (Stocks et al. 2008). Finally, it is the policy of many government agencies—as stated in a recent request for proposals of the United States Department of Received 18 March 2010; revision accepted 28 March 2010. Corresponding author; e-mail: embruna@ufl.edu BIOTROPICA 42(4): 399–401 2010 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2010.00652.x
Read full abstract
Jul 25, 2013
V.P Tewari + 3
Open Access