Search

Data standardization combined with descriptive metadata facilitate data reuse, which is the ultimate goal of the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) principles. Community data or metadata standards are increasingly created through an approach that emphasizes collaboration between various stakeholders. Such an approach requires platforms for collaboration on the development process that centers on sharing information and receiving feedback. Our objective in this study was to conduct a systematic review to identify data standards and reporting formats that use version control for developing data standards and to summarize common practices, particularly in earth and environmental sciences. Out of 108 data standards and reporting formats identified in our review, 32 used GitHub as the version control platform, and no other platforms were used. We found no universally accepted methodology for developing and publishing data standards. Many GitHub repositories did not use key features that could help developers to gather user feedback, or to create and revise standards that build on previous work. We provide guidance for community-driven standard development and associated documentation on GitHub based on a systematic review of existing practices.

Recent emphasis and requirements for open data publication have led to significant increases in data availability in the Earth sciences, which is critical to long-tail data integration. Currently, data are often published in a repository with an identifier and citation, similar to those for papers. Subsequent publications that use the data are expected to provide a citation in the reference section of the paper. However, the format of the data citation is still evolving, particularly with regards to citing dynamic data, subsets, and collections of data. Considering the motivations of both data producers and consumers, the most pressing need is to create user-friendly solutions that provide credit for data producers and enable accurate citation of data, particularly integrated data. Providing easy-to-use data citations is a critical foundation that is required to address the socio-technical challenges around data integration. Studies that integrate data from dozens or hundreds of datasets must often include data citations in supplementary material due to page limits. However, citations in the supplementary material are not indexed, making it difficult to track citations and thus giving credit to the data producer. In this paper, we discuss our experiences and the challenges we have encountered with current citation guidance. We also review the relative merits of the currently available mechanisms designed to enable compact citation of collections of data, such as data collections, data papers, and dynamic data citations. We consider these options for three data producer scenarios: a domain-specific data collection, a data repository, and a large-scale, multidisciplinary project. We posit that a new mechanism is also needed to enable citation of multiple datasets and credit to data producers.

Leaf-level gas exchange data support the mechanistic understanding of plant fluxes of carbon and water. These fluxes inform our understanding of ecosystem function, are an important constraint on parameterization of terrestrial biosphere models, are necessary to understand the response of plants to global environmental change, and are integral to efforts to improve crop production. Collection of these data using gas analyzers can be both technically challenging and time consuming, and individual studies generally focus on a small range of species, restricted time periods, or limited geographic regions. The high value of these data is exemplified by the many publications that reuse and synthesize gas exchange data, however the lack of metadata and data reporting conventions make full and efficient use of these data difficult. Here we propose a reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata to provide guidance to data contributors on how to store data in repositories to maximize their discoverability, facilitate their efficient reuse, and add value to individual datasets. For data users, the reporting format will better allow data repositories to optimize data search and extraction, and more readily integrate similar data into harmonized synthesis products. The reporting format specifies data table variable naming and unit conventions, as well as metadata characterizing experimental conditions and protocols. For common data types that were the focus of this initial version of the reporting format, i.e., survey measurements, dark respiration, carbon dioxide and light response curves, and parameters derived from those measurements, we took a further step of defining required additional data and metadata that would maximize the potential reuse of those data types. To aid data contributors and the development of data ingest tools by data repositories we provided a translation table comparing the outputs of common gas exchange instruments. Extensive consultation with data collectors, data users, instrument manufacturers, and data scientists was undertaken in order to ensure that the reporting format met community needs. The reporting format presented here is intended to form a foundation for future development that will incorporate additional data types and variables as gas exchange systems and measurement approaches advance in the future. The reporting format is published in the U.S. Department of Energy's ESS-DIVE data repository, with documentation and future development efforts being maintained in a version control system.

In recent years, the availability of airborne imaging spectroscopy (hyperspectral) data has expanded dramatically. The high spatial and spectral resolution of these data uniquely enable spatially explicit ecological studies including species mapping, assessment of drought mortality and foliar trait distributions. However, we have barely begun to unlock the potential of these data to use direct mapping of vegetation characteristics to infer subsurface properties of the critical zone. To assess their utility for Earth systems research, imaging spectroscopy data acquisitions require integration with large, coincident ground-based datasets collected by experts in ecology and environmental and Earth science. Without coordinated, well-planned field campaigns, potential knowledge leveraged from advanced airborne data collections could be lost. Despite the growing importance of this field, documented methods to couple such a wide variety of disciplines remain sparse. We coordinated the first National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (AOP) survey performed outside of their core sites, which took place in the Upper East River watershed, Colorado. Extensive planning for sample tracking and organization allowed field and flight teams to update the ground-based sampling strategy daily. This enabled collection of an extensive set of physical samples to support a wide range of ecological, microbiological, biogeochemical and hydrological studies. We present a framework for integrating airborne and field campaigns to obtain high-quality data for foliar trait prediction and document an archive of coincident physical samples collected to support a systems approach to ecological research in the critical zone. This detailed methodological account provides an example of how a multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional team can coordinate to maximize knowledge gained from an airborne survey, an approach that could be extended to other studies. The coordination of imaging spectroscopy surveys with appropriately timed and extensive field surveys, along with high-quality processing of these data, presents a unique opportunity to reveal new insights into the structure and dynamics of the critical zone. To our knowledge, this level of co-aligned sampling has never been undertaken in tandem with AOP surveys and subsequent studies utilizing this archive will shed considerable light on the breadth of applications for which imaging spectroscopy data can be leveraged.

Research can be more transparent and collaborative by using Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) principles to publish Earth and environmental science data. Reporting formats-instructions, templates, and tools for consistently formatting data within a discipline-can help make data more accessible and reusable. However, the immense diversity of data types across Earth science disciplines makes development and adoption challenging. Here, we describe 11 community reporting formats for a diverse set of Earth science (meta)data including cross-domain metadata (dataset metadata, location metadata, sample metadata), file-formatting guidelines (file-level metadata, CSV files, terrestrial model data archiving), and domain-specific reporting formats for some biological, geochemical, and hydrological data (amplicon abundance tables, leaf-level gas exchange, soil respiration, water and sediment chemistry, sensor-based hydrologic measurements). More broadly, we provide guidelines that communities can use to create new (meta)data formats that integrate with their scientific workflows. Such reporting formats have the potential to accelerate scientific discovery and predictions by making it easier for data contributors to provide (meta)data that are more interoperable and reusable., (© 2022. © Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.)

Microbiome samples are inherently defined by the environment in which they are found. Therefore, data that provide context and enable interpretation of measurements produced from biological samples, often referred to as metadata, are critical. Important contributions have been made in the development of community-driven metadata standards; however, these standards have not been uniformly embraced by the microbiome research community. To understand how these standards are being adopted, or the barriers to adoption, across research domains, institutions, and funding agencies, the National Microbiome Data Collaborative (NMDC) hosted a workshop in October 2019. This report provides a summary of discussions that took place throughout the workshop, as well as outcomes of the working groups initiated at the workshop.