Search

Data curators play an important role in assessing data quality and take actions that may ultimately lead to better, more valuable data products. This study explores the curation practices of data curators working within US-based data repositories. We performed a survey in January 2021 to benchmark the levels of curation performed by repositories and assess the perceived value and impact of curation on the data sharing process. Our analysis included 95 responses from 59 unique data repositories. Respondents primarily were professionals working within repositories and examined curation performed within a repository setting. A majority 72.6% of respondents reported that "data-level" curation was performed by their repository and around half reported their repository took steps to ensure interoperability and reproducibility of their repository's datasets. Curation actions most frequently reported include checking for duplicate files, reviewing documentation, reviewing metadata, minting persistent identifiers, and checking for corrupt/broken files. The most "value-add" curation action across generalist, institutional, and disciplinary repository respondents was related to reviewing and enhancing documentation. Respondents reported high perceived impact of curation by their repositories on specific data sharing outcomes including usability, findability, understandability, and accessibility of deposited datasets; respondents associated with disciplinary repositories tended to perceive higher impact on most outcomes. Most survey participants strongly agreed that data curation by the repository adds value to the data sharing process and that it outweighs the effort and cost. We found some differences between institutional and disciplinary repositories, both in the reported frequency of specific curation actions as well as the perceived impact of data curation. Interestingly, we also found variation in the perceptions of those working within the same repository regarding the level and frequency of curation actions performed, which exemplifies the complexity of a repository curation work. Our results suggest data curation may be better understood in terms of specific curation actions and outcomes than broadly defined curation levels and that more research is needed to understand the resource implications of performing these activities. We share these results to provide a more nuanced view of curation, and how curation impacts the broader data lifecycle and data sharing behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research data sharing has become an expected component of scientific research and scholarly publishing practice over the last few decades, due in part to requirements for federally funded research. As part of a larger effort to better understand the workflows and costs of public access to research data, this project conducted a high-level analysis of where academic research data is most frequently shared. To do this, we leveraged the DataCite and Crossref application programming interfaces (APIs) in search of Publisher field elements demonstrating which data repositories were utilized by researchers from six academic research institutions between 2012–2022. In addition, we also ran a preliminary analysis of the quality of the metadata associated with these published datasets, comparing the extent to which information was missing from metadata fields deemed important for public access to research data. Results show that the top 10 publishers accounted for 89.0% to 99.8% of the datasets connected with the institutions in our study. Known data repositories, including institutional data repositories hosted by those institutions, were initially lacking from our sample due to varying metadata standards and practices. We conclude that the metadata quality landscape for published research datasets is uneven; key information, such as author affiliation, is often incomplete or missing from source data repositories and aggregators. To enhance the findability, interoperability, accessibility, and reusability (FAIRness) of research data, we provide a set of concrete recommendations that repositories and data authors can take to improve scholarly metadata associated with shared datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "Seek and you may (not) find: A multi-institutional analysis of where research data are shared." The correction states that the ORCID iDs (unique identifiers for researchers) are missing for several authors, and provides the correct ORCID iDs for each author. Additionally, there is an error in the first bullet of the "How complete are the metadata records associated with these datasets?" subsection of the Results, which is corrected in the notice. The authors of the article are Lisa R. Johnston, Alicia Hofelich Mohr, Joel Herndon, Shawna Taylor, Jake R. Carlson, Lizhao Ge, Jennifer Moore, Jonathan Petters, Wendy Kozlowski, and Cynthia Hudson Vitale. [Extracted from the article]

INTRODUCTION Data curation may be an emerging service for academic libraries, but researchers actively "curate" their data in a number of ways-even if terminology may not always align. Building on past userneeds assessments performed via survey and focus groups, the authors sought direct input from researchers on the importance and utilization of specific data curation activities. METHODS Between October 21, 2016, and November 18, 2016, the study team held focus groups with 91 participants at six different academic institutions to determine which data curation activities were most important to researchers, which activities were currently underway for their data, and how satisfied they were with the results. RESULTS Researchers are actively engaged in a variety of data curation activities, and while they considered most data curation activities to be highly important, a majority of the sample reported dissatisfaction with the current state of data curation at their institution. DISCUSSION Our findings demonstrate specific gaps and opportunities for academic libraries to focus their data curation services to more effectively meet researcher needs. CONCLUSION Research libraries stand to benefit their users by emphasizing, investing in, and/or heavily promoting the highly valued services that may not currently be in use by many researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This investigation was undertaken to determine whether the mosquito larvicide temephos (applied as Abate 4-E®) created an environmental hazard for nontarget organisms in a southwest Florida salt marsh community. Field toxicity tests were performed during routine larvicide applications using larvae of salt marsh crabs (Aratus pesonii and Uca rapax) and adult Mysidopsis bahia. Laboratory toxicity tests were performed using survival through 48 and 96 h and through first molt as toxicity endpoints. Larvae of both species exhibited 96 h lowest observable effects concentration (LOEC) in the range of 15 to 20 µg/L temephos. First-molt LOEC ranged from 7 to 12 µg/L. No effect on M. bahia survival, growth, or fecundity was observed up to 40 µg/L temephos. Field studies of routine temephos application rates produced an expected environmental concentration (EEC) of 12 ± 10 µg/L in marsh water, causing an environmental hazard to crab larvae. Reduction of the application rate effectively reduced the EEC to 4 ± 3 µg/L, indicating no hazard for 48 and 96 h toxicity; however, a hazard was observed for survival through the first molt. This information was used to modify larviciding applications to effect a reduction of the environmental hazard to nontarget organisms in the salt marsh. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assesses the predominance of cryptomonads and diatoms in the coastal waters of the Antarctic Peninsula. Association of cryptomonads and diatoms with phytoplankton; Results of observation of primary productivity in the coastal waters; Identification of the pigment composition of phytoplankton; Characteristics cryptomonads.

Assesses the temporal variability of transparent exopolymer particles in Antarctic Peninsula during the growth season from 1994 to 1995. Importance of transparent exopolymer particles to bacteria; Measurement of the concentration of the exopolymer particles; Correlation of the concentrations of the particles with the presence of chlorophyll.

Examines the spatial and temporal variability in primary production of phytoplankton in the Antarctic Peninsula during the growth season from 1994 to 1995. Methods used by researchers in taking water samples from the Ocean; Use of neutral nickel screen for evaluating light levels in the Peninsula; Analysis of factors influencing the production of the organism.

Abstract: In shelf waters of the western Antarctic Peninsula (wAP), with abundant macro- and micronutrients, water-column stability has been suggested as the main factor controlling primary production; freshwater input from sea-ice melting stabilizes the upper water column by forming a shallow summer mixed layer. Retreating sea ice in the spring and summer thus defines the area of influence, the sea-ice zone (SIZ) and the marginal ice zone (MIZ). A 12-year time series (1995–2006) was analyzed to address two main questions: (1) what are the spatial and temporal patterns in primary production; and (2) to what extent and in what ways is primary production related to sea-ice dynamics. Data were collected on cruises performed during January of each year, at the height of the growth season, within the region bounded by 64°S and 64°W to the north and 68°S and 66°W to the south. Average daily integrated primary production varied by an order of magnitude, from ∼250 to ∼1100mgCm−2 d−1, with an average cruise primary production of 745mgCm−2 d−1. A strong onshore–offshore gradient was evident along the shelf with higher production observed inshore. Inter-annual regional production varied by a factor of 7: maximum rates were measured in 2006 (1788mgCm−2 d−1) and minimum in 1999 (248mgCm−2 d−1). The results support the hypothesis that primary production in the wAP shelf is related to sea-ice dynamics. To first order, shallower summer mixed-layer depths in the shelf correlated with late sea retreat and primary production. Principal component analysis showed that high primary production in January was associated with enhanced shelf production toward the coast and in the south, explaining 63% of the variability in space and time. This first mode captured the inter-annual variability in regional production. Temporal variability in primary production (time series of anomalies defined for each location) showed spatial dependence: higher primary production correlated with shallow mixed-layer depths only at mid-shelf; in coastal and offshore waters, primary production correlated with deeper mixed layers. Thus, coastal primary production can show a non-linear relationship with summer mixed layers. Under conditions of large biomass (>20mgchl a m−3) and shallow mixed-layer depth (e.g., 5m) phytoplankton production becomes light limited. This limitation is reduced with a deepening of the summer mixed layer (e.g., 20m). Dominance of diatoms and the ability to adapt and photosynthesize at higher light levels characterized the large phytoplankton blooms. No significant regional trend in primary production was detected within the 12-year series. We conclude that the regional average primary production on the wAP shelf is associated with shallow summer mixed layers in conjunction with late sea-ice retreat. An opposite relationship is observed for the highest production rates in coastal waters, associated with large biomass, where a deepening of the summer mixed layer relieves light limitation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]