Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Over the past 3 ½ years, Dryad has become an independent organization with a committed team and organizational capacity. During this time, integrations and partnerships have expanded and sustainability plans have grown. From these efforts, we increased the amount of curated and openly published data available to the public. With great pride and bittersweet feelings, I will be moving on to pursue a new opportunity on Feb 23.

Working with the staff has meant collaborating with a group of committed, mission-driven professionals. Leading this group to become a collegial and very high-functioning team has been my absolute pleasure. I have also been honored to be accepted as an equal in the field of open data advocates and crafters of scholarly communication workflows, and to be able to share my vision of Dryad as a critical service. The support, encouragement, and concern of the Dryad board of directors was always behind me, and I’ve been energized at what we’ve accomplished in support of curated, open, and FAIR data.

A search for a new Executive Director has begun. This person will have the opportunity to develop mission-critical business strategies and to offer an innovative vision for promoting data openness in the scientific community and securing Dryad’s place as a key facilitator of data sharing. With the Dryad board’s support, Elizabeth Hull, Dryad Operations Manager, is filling in during the interim.

I want to thank our incredibly supportive community of submitters, members, partners, and collaborators for their dedication to open data and to Dryad’s mission. This next phase for the organization is now beginning. We invite you to join us and grow Dryad!

 

Chain link fence with highway in backgroundDryad is a curated, non-profit, general-purpose repository specifically for data underlying scientific and medical publications — mainly journal articles. As such, we place great importance on linking data packages to the articles with which they are associated, and we try our best to encourage authors and journals to link back to the Dryad data from the article, ideally in the form of a reference in the works cited section. (There’s still a long way to go in this latter effort; see this study from 2016 for evidence).

Submission integration provides closer coordination between Dryad and journals throughout the publishing workflow, and simplifies the data submission process for authors. We’ve already implemented this free service with 120 journals. If you’re interested in integrating your journal, please contact us.

We’re excited to share a few recent updates that are helping to make our data-article linkages more efficient, discoverable, and re-usable by other publishers/systems.

The Automated Publication Updater

One of the greatest housekeeping challenges for our curation team lies in finding out when the articles associated with Dryad data packages become available online. Once they do, we want to add the article citation and DOI link to our record as quickly as possible, and to release any data embargoes placed “until the article appears.” Historically, we’ve achieved this through a laborious patchwork of web searches, journal alert emails, and notifications from authors or editors themselves.

But over the past year or so, we’ve built and refined a webapp that we call the APU (or Automated Publication Updater). This super-handy tool essentially compares data packages in the Dryad workflow with publication metadata available at Crossref. When a good match is found, it automatically updates article-related fields in the Dryad record, and then sends our curation team an email alert so they they can validate the match and finalize the record. The webapp can be easily run by curators as often as needed (usually a few times a week).

While the APU doesn’t find everything, it has dramatically improved both efficiency with which we add article information and links to Dryad records — and our curators’ happiness levels. Big win. (If you’re interested in the technical details, you can find them on our wiki).

Scholix

Dryad is also pleased to be a contributor to Scholix, or Scholarly Link Exchange, an initiative of the Research Data Alliance (RDA) and the World Data System (WDS). Scholix is a high-level interoperability framework for exchanging information about the links between scholarly literature and data.

  • The problem: Many disconnected sources of scholarly output, with different practices including various persistent identifier (PID) systems, ways of referencing data, and timing of citing data.
  • The Scholix solutionA standard set of guidelines for exposing and consuming data-article links, using a system of hubs.

Here’s how it works:

  1. As a DataCite member repository, Dryad provides our data-publication links to DataCite, one of the Scholix Hubs. 
  2. Those links are made available via Scholix aggregators such as the DLI service
  3. Publishers can then query the DLI to find datasets related to their journal articles, and generate/display a link back to Dryad, driving web traffic to us, increasing data re-use, and facilitating research discovery.

Crossref publishers, DataCite repositories/data centers, and institutional repositories can all participate — information on how is available on the Scholix website.

Programmatic data access by ISSN

Did you know that content in Dryad is available via a variety of APIs (Application Program Interfaces)? Details are available at the “Data Access” page on our wiki.

The newest addition to this list is the ability to access Dryad data packages via journal ISSN. So, for example, if you wanted access to all Dryad content associated with the journal Evolution Letters, you would format your query as follows:

https://datadryad.org/api/v1/journals/2056-3744/packages

If you’re a human instead of a machine, you might prefer to visit our “journal page” for Evolution Letters:

https://datadryad.org/journal/2056-3744

————

Dryad is committed to values of openness, collaboration, standardization, seamless integration, reduction of duplication and effort, and increased visibility of research products (okay, data especially). The above examples are just some of the ways we’re working in this direction.

If you’re part of an organization who shares these values, please contact us to find out how you can be part of Dryad.

Today we celebrate our Board of Directors, and introduce three new members whose expertise and wide-ranging skills will help advance Dryad’s mission to provide free and easy access to data.

Dryad’s 12-member BOD supports and promotes our mission to make the data underlying scientific publications discoverable, freely reusable, and citable. The Board is comprised of diverse stakeholders, representing publishing, research, policy development, data networks, private funding, and scholarly organizations. BOD members are nominated by Dryad members and are elected or re-elected each year. They do not represent the organizations to which they belong; rather, they act as individuals in their involvement in the strategic planning and fiscal oversight of the company.

Who are the new members for 2017?

Adding to our esteemed Board of Directors this summer, we introduce our newest members:

Brian Hole (Class of 2020) will serve as treasurer of the Board. He is the CEO of Ubiquity Press, an open access publisher that focuses on alternative research outputs such as data, software, hardware, and bioresources. Previously, he managed the DryadUK project at the British Library, which focused on establishing a sustainable business model and publisher integrations, and also on building cost models for digital preservation. Brian brings a valued data-centric research background and detailed knowledge of open access publishing to Dryad this year.

 Fiona Murphy (Class of 2020) will serve as secretary of the Board. She is an independent research data and publishing consultant for institutions, societies, and commercial publishing companies and an Associate Fellow at the University of Reading. Fiona has written and presented widely on data publishing, open data, and open science. She has been involved in several research projects including PREPARDE, Data2Paper, and the Scholarly Commons Working Group. As an active member and sometime Co-Chair for several Research Data Alliance Groups focusing on data publishing policies, workflows, and accreditation systems, Fiona has organized several data-related events and sessions at scientific meetings.

Carly Strasser (Class of 2020) is a Program Officer at the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and is especially interested in open science and scholarly communication. She works in the Data-Driven Discovery Initiative, which is focused on promoting both the researchers and the practices required for high impact data-driven research. Previously, Carly was a Research Data Specialist at the California Digital Library where she was involved in development and implementation of many of the University of California Curation Center’s services, and worked to promote data sharing and good data management practices. Carly’s prior experience as a researcher in marine science and mathematical ecology has informed her work of ushering in the new era of open, transparent, and collaborative science.

We wish to thank our current and past members for bringing their expertise and passion to help advance Dryad’s mission and we look forward to their contributions and to another exciting year of open data.

In 2011 Peggy Schaeffer penned an entry for this blog titled “Why does Dryad use CC0?” While 2011 seems like a long time ago, especially in our rapidly evolving digital world, the information in that piece is still as valid and relevant now as it was then. In fact, Dryad curators routinely direct authors to that blog entry to help them understand and resolve licensing issues. Since dealing with licensing matters can be confusing, it seems about time to revisit this briefly from a practical perspective.

Dryad uses Creative Commons Zero (CC0) to promote the reuse of data underlying scholarly literature. CC0 provides consistent, clear, and open terms of reuse for all data in our repository by allowing researchers, authors, and others to waive all copyright and related rights for a work and place the work in the public domain. Users know they can reuse any data available in Dryad with minimal impediments; authors gain the potential for more citations without having to spend time responding to requests from those wishing to use their data. In other words, CC0 helps eliminate the headaches associated with copyright and licensing issues for all stakeholders, leading to more data reuse.

So what does this mean in practical terms? Dryad’s curators have come up with a few suggestions to keep in mind as you prepare your data for submission. These tips can help you manage the CC0 requirements and avoid any problems:

DO:

  • Make sure any software included with your submission can be released under CC0. For example, licenses such as GPL or MIT are common and are not compatible with CC0. Be sure there are no licensing statements displayed in the software itself or in associated readme files.
  • Be aware that there are software applications out there that automatically place any output produced by the software under a non-CC0 compatible license. Consider this when you are deciding which software to use to prepare your data.
  • Know the terms of use for any information you get from a website or database.
  • Ensure that any images, videos, or other media that are not your own work can be released under CC0.
  • Be sure to clean up your data before submitting it, especially if you are compressing it using a tool such as zip or tar. Remove anything that can’t be released under CC0, along with any other extraneous materials, such as user manuals for hardware or software tools. Not only does removing extraneous files lessen the chance something will conflict with Dryad’s CC0 policy, it also makes your data more streamlined and easier to use.

DON’T:

  • Don’t add text anywhere in your data submission requiring permission or attribution for reuse. Community norms do a great job of putting in place the expectation that anyone reusing your data will provide the proper citations. CC0 actually encourages citation by keeping the process as simple as possible.
  • Don’t include your entire manuscript or parts of your manuscript in your data package. Most publications have licensing that restricts reuse and is not compatible with CC0.

I hope this post leaves you with a little more understanding about why Dryad uses CC0 and with a few tips that will help make following Dryad’s CC0 requirement easier.

 

Keeping research data open and accessible has always been our goal at Dryad. Now, we’ve partnered with Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) to ensure long-term preservation of curated data. We are proud to be taking this step to safeguard open data and ensure future discoverability.

Public content on Dryad servers, currently over 15,000 data packages and 50,000 files, will soon be backed up in the DANS archive regularly (with multiple copies in different locations), to add an extra layer of protection.

DANS will also serve as Dryad’s successor archive, to ensure that functionality of Dryad Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) is maintained for the long term. Metadata will be available in open access format to all researchers using the DANS online archiving system, EASY.

This partnership ensures that data in Dryad will remain accessible and linked to the scholarly literature in the unlikely case of disruption of Dryad services. DANS has proven to be a natural fit for us in this effort. Dryad and DANS share a deep commitment to the stewardship of global scientific data on behalf of more than 50,000 researchers who trust us with their data and hundreds of publishing partners working with Dryad.

Henk Harmsen, Deputy director of DANS, says:

Together with Dryad we are committed to making digital research data and related outputs Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR). This collaboration minimizes the risk of loss or corruption of data over time. We are pleased to extend our capacity and data archive by partnering with Dryad.

We present a guest post from researcher Falk Lüsebrink highlighting the benefits of data sharing. Falk is currently working on his PhD in the Department of Biomedical Magnetic Resonance at the Otto-von-Guericke University in Magdeburg, Germany. Here, he talks about his experience of sharing early MRI data and the unexpected impact that it is having on the research community.

Early release of data

The first time I faced a decision about publishing my own data was while writing a grant proposal. One of our proposed objectives was to acquire ultrahigh resolution brain images in vivo, making use of an innovative development: a combination of an MR scanner with ultrahigh field strength and a motion correction setup to remediate subject motion during data acquisition. While waiting for the funding decision, I simply could not resist acquiring a first dataset. We scanned a highly experienced subject for several hours, allowing us to acquire in vivo images of the brain with a resolution far beyond anything achieved thus far.

 MRI data showing the cerebellum in vivo

MRI data showing the cerebellum in vivo at (a) neuroscientific standard resolution of 1 mm, (b) our highest achieved resolution of 250 µm, and (c) state-of-the-art 500 µm resolution.

When our colleagues saw the initial results, they encouraged us to share the data as soon as possible. Through Scientific Data and Dryad, we were able to do just that. The combination of a peer-reviewed open access journal and an open access digital repository for the data was perfect for presenting our initial results.

17,000 downloads and more

‘Sharing the wealth’ seems to have been the right decision; in the three months since we published our data, there has been an enormous amount of activity:

A distinct need for data re-use

MRI studies are highly interdisciplinary, opening up numerous opportunities for sharing and re-using data. For example, our data might be used to build MR brain atlases and illustrate brain structures in much greater detail, or even for the first time. This could advance our understanding of brain functions. Algorithms used to quantify brain structures needed in the research of neurodegenerative disorders could be enhanced, increasing accuracy and reproducibility. Furthermore, by making available raw signals measured by the MR scanner, image reconstruction methods could be used to refine image quality or reduce the time it takes to collect the data.

There are also opportunities beyond those that our particular dataset offers. A recent emerging trend in MRI comes from the field of machine learning. Neuronal networks are being built to perform and potentially improve all kinds of tasks, from image reconstruction, to image processing, and even diagnostics. To train such networks, huge amounts of data are necessary; these data could come from repositories open to the public. Such re-use of MRI data by researchers in other disciplines is having a strong impact on the advancement of science. By publicly sharing our data, we are allowing others to pursue new and exciting directions.

Download the data for yourself and see what you can do with it. In the meantime, I am still eagerly awaiting the acceptance of the grant application . . . but that’s a different story.

The data: http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.38s74

The article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.32

— Falk Lüsebrink

As a non-profit repository dependent on support from members and users, Dryad is greatly concerned with the economics and sustainability of data services. Our business model is built around Data Publishing Charges (DPCs), designed to recover the basic costs of curating and preserving data. Dryad DPCs can be covered in 3 ways:

  1. The DPC is waived if the submitter is based in a country classified by the World Bank as a low-income or lower-middle-income economy.
  2. For many journals, the society or publisher will sponsor the DPC on behalf of their authors (to see whether this applies, look up your journal).
  3. In the absence of a waiver or a sponsor, the DPC is US$120, payable by the submitter.

Our long-term aim is to increase sponsorships and reduce the financial responsibility of individual researchers.

Last year, we launched a pilot study sponsored by the US National Science Foundation to test the feasibility of having a funding agency directly sponsor the DPC. We conducted a survey of Dryad submitters as part of the pilot, hoping to learn more about how researchers plan and pay for data archiving.

Initial survey results

We first want to say a hearty THANK YOU to our participants for giving us so much good information to work with! (10 participants were randomly selected to receive gift cards as a sign of our appreciation). Respondents were located around the world, with nearly all based at academic institutions.

Survey respondents' positions

A word about selection of survey participants. We know that approximately 1/3 of all Dryad data publications do not have a sponsor or waiver, meaning the researcher is responsible for covering the $120 charge. We wanted to learn more about payment methods and funding sources for these non-sponsored DPCs.

We specifically solicited researchers for our survey who had 1) submitted to Dryad in the previous year and 2) paid their Data Publishing Charge directly (via credit card or voucher code). The survey questions focused on a few topics:

  • Grant funding and Data Management Plans
  • Where the money for their Data Publishing Charges ultimately came from, and
  • Whether funding concerns affect their data archiving behavior.

A few highlights are presented below; we intend to dig deeper into the survey results (and other information gathered as part of the pilot study) and report on them publicly in the coming months.

Planning for data in grant proposals

Nearly 72% of respondents indicated that the research associated with their publication/data was supported by a grant. We wanted to know how (or whether) researchers planned ahead for archiving their data in their grant proposals, and the results were enlightening:

  • 43% did not include a Data Management Plan (DMP) as part of their proposal for funding.
  • Of those who did submit a DMP, only about 46% committed to archiving their data as part of that plan.
  • A whopping 96% said they did not specifically budget for data archiving in their proposal.
  • Only 41% were able to archive their data within the grant funding period, while 59% were unable to, or were unsure.

As these results indicate, data management/stewardship is still not a high priority at the grant proposal stage. Even when researchers plan for data deposition, they don’t consider the costs associated. And even if they do (hypothetically) have funding specifically for data, the timing may not allow them to use it before the grant expires.

These factors suggest that if funding agencies want to prioritize supporting data stewardship, they should make funds available for this purpose outside the traditional grant structure.

Show me the money

When submitters pay the Dryad Data Publishing Charge themselves, where does that money come from? Are submitters being reimbursed? If so, how/by whom?

Our results showed that, unfortunately, about a quarter of our participants paid their DPCs out-of-pocket and did not receive any reimbursement. Approximately the same number paid themselves but were reimbursed (by their institution, a grant, or some combination of these), and 37% of DPCs were paid directly by the institution (using an institutional credit card or voucher code).

How was the Dryad DPC paid?

 

Some respondents view self-funding of data publication as worthwhile:

My belief is that scientific data should be publicly available and I am willing to cover the costs myself if supervisors (grant holders) do not.

As long as the cost is reasonable, in the worse case scenario I pay from my pocket. Better the data are safe and easily accessible for years to come than stored in spurious formats and difficult-to-access servers.

But for many others, covering the payment can be a real pain point:

I paid the processing charge myself mainly because our University’s reimbursement process was so laborious, I felt it easier just to get it over and done with myself and absorb the relatively small cost personally.

I just have to beg and plead for funding support each time.

If I am publishing after the postdoc ends then I am no longer paid to work on the project. Since I have had four postdocs, each lasting less than two years, this has happened for all my publications.

Examples from the “other” payment category shown above illustrate the scrappiness of researchers in finding funding:

I paid this from flexible research funds that were recently awarded by my institution. Had that not occurred, I would have had to pay personally and not be reimbursed.

I used my RTF (research trust fund) since I didn’t have dedicated grant funding.

Scavenged money from other projects.

Key takeaways

Our preliminary results show that at a time of more and stronger open data policies, paying for data publication remains far from straightforward, with much of the burden passed along to individual researchers.

Concerns about funding for open data can have real impacts on research availability and publication choice. More than 15% of our participants indicated that they have collected data in the last few years that they have been unable to archive due to lack of funds. Meanwhile, over 40% say that when choosing which journal(s) to submit to, sponsorship of the Dryad DPC does, or at least may, influence their decision.

The good news it that during our 8-month pilot implementation period, the US National Science foundation sponsored nearly 200 Data Publishing Charges for which researchers would otherwise have been responsible.

We at Dryad are committed to finding and implementing solutions, and very much appreciate the feedback and support we receive from the research and publishing community. Stay tuned for more lessons learned.