[open-science] (Lack of) data sharing for fossil data

[Matt Jones]

Definitely interesting.  The article also didn't mention PaleoDB (
http://paleodb.org/), one of the main international data sharing efforts in
paleontology, crossing all taxa, with replica sites in Australia, Germany,
and two sites in the US.  Its a voluntary effort, so differs somewhat from
the journal mandated sharing described in the article, but still I would
think it deserved a mention.  Its quite a bit more targeted than MorphBank
for this topical area.

Do you know if the Open Dinosaur project is contributing their specimen
measurements to the broader PaleoDB?

Getting these types of data repository systems to interoperate, expose data
to each other, and be able to provide persistence and replication services
to each other are some of the goals of the DataONE federation (see
http://dataone.org).  Dryad, mentioned in the article, is one of the
founding nodes in DataONE. If DataONE is successful, when researchers choose
to use one repository for their data, they won't be contributing to a single
repository, but rather to a federation that allows data to persist beyond
the lifetime of the individual repository project they choose.  Seems pretty
compatible with OKFN goals to me.

Matt

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>wrote:

> Interesting article on data sharing in Palaeontology:
> <http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110411/full/472150a.html>
>
> Made me think of the excellent Open Dinosaur project:
>
> <http://ckan.net/package/open-dino>
> <http://opendino.wordpress.com/>
>
> Rufus
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20110414/74456d75/attachment-0002.html>