The need for data standards in zoomorphology

Lars Vogt, Michael Nickel, Ronald A. Jenner, Andrew Robert Deans

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

eScience is a new approach to research that focuses on data mining and exploration rather than data generation or simulation. This new approach is arguably a driving force for scientific progress and requires data to be openly available, easily accessible via the Internet, and compatible with each other. eScience relies on modern standards for the reporting and documentation of data and metadata. Here, we suggest necessary components (i.e., content, concept, nomenclature, format) of such standards in the context of zoomorphology. We document the need for using data repositories to prevent data loss and how publication practice is currently changing, with the emergence of dynamic publications and the publication of digital datasets. Subsequently, we demonstrate that in zoomorphology the scientific record is still limited to published literature and that zoomorphological data are usually not accessible through data repositories. The underlying problem is that zoomorphology lacks the standards for data and metadata. As a consequence, zoomorphology cannot participate in eScience. We argue that the standardization of morphological data requires i) a standardized framework for terminologies for anatomy and ii) a formalized method of description that allows computer-parsable morphological data to be communicable, compatible, and comparable. The role of controlled vocabularies (e.g., ontologies) for developing respective terminologies and methods of description is discussed, especially in the context of data annotation and semantic enhancement of publications. Finally, we introduce the International Consortium for Zoomorphology Standards, a working group that is open to everyone and whose aim is to stimulate and synthesize dialog about standards. It is the Consortium's ultimate goal to assist the zoomorphology community in developing modern data and metadata standards, including anatomy ontologies, thereby facilitating the participation of zoomorphology in eScience.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)793-808
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Morphology
Volume274
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2013

Fingerprint

terminology
Publications
Terminology
standardization
Anatomy
Controlled Vocabulary
Data Mining
Semantics
Documentation
Internet
methodology
Research Design
Research
Metadata

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Developmental Biology

Cite this

Vogt, Lars ; Nickel, Michael ; Jenner, Ronald A. ; Deans, Andrew Robert. / The need for data standards in zoomorphology. In: Journal of Morphology. 2013 ; Vol. 274, No. 7. pp. 793-808.
@article{7f624da634b743d882535475b446be63,
title = "The need for data standards in zoomorphology",
abstract = "eScience is a new approach to research that focuses on data mining and exploration rather than data generation or simulation. This new approach is arguably a driving force for scientific progress and requires data to be openly available, easily accessible via the Internet, and compatible with each other. eScience relies on modern standards for the reporting and documentation of data and metadata. Here, we suggest necessary components (i.e., content, concept, nomenclature, format) of such standards in the context of zoomorphology. We document the need for using data repositories to prevent data loss and how publication practice is currently changing, with the emergence of dynamic publications and the publication of digital datasets. Subsequently, we demonstrate that in zoomorphology the scientific record is still limited to published literature and that zoomorphological data are usually not accessible through data repositories. The underlying problem is that zoomorphology lacks the standards for data and metadata. As a consequence, zoomorphology cannot participate in eScience. We argue that the standardization of morphological data requires i) a standardized framework for terminologies for anatomy and ii) a formalized method of description that allows computer-parsable morphological data to be communicable, compatible, and comparable. The role of controlled vocabularies (e.g., ontologies) for developing respective terminologies and methods of description is discussed, especially in the context of data annotation and semantic enhancement of publications. Finally, we introduce the International Consortium for Zoomorphology Standards, a working group that is open to everyone and whose aim is to stimulate and synthesize dialog about standards. It is the Consortium's ultimate goal to assist the zoomorphology community in developing modern data and metadata standards, including anatomy ontologies, thereby facilitating the participation of zoomorphology in eScience.",
author = "Lars Vogt and Michael Nickel and Jenner, {Ronald A.} and Deans, {Andrew Robert}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jmor.20138",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "274",
pages = "793--808",
journal = "Journal of Morphology",
issn = "0362-2525",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "7",

}

The need for data standards in zoomorphology. / Vogt, Lars; Nickel, Michael; Jenner, Ronald A.; Deans, Andrew Robert.

In: Journal of Morphology, Vol. 274, No. 7, 01.07.2013, p. 793-808.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - The need for data standards in zoomorphology

AU - Vogt, Lars

AU - Nickel, Michael

AU - Jenner, Ronald A.

AU - Deans, Andrew Robert

PY - 2013/7/1

Y1 - 2013/7/1

N2 - eScience is a new approach to research that focuses on data mining and exploration rather than data generation or simulation. This new approach is arguably a driving force for scientific progress and requires data to be openly available, easily accessible via the Internet, and compatible with each other. eScience relies on modern standards for the reporting and documentation of data and metadata. Here, we suggest necessary components (i.e., content, concept, nomenclature, format) of such standards in the context of zoomorphology. We document the need for using data repositories to prevent data loss and how publication practice is currently changing, with the emergence of dynamic publications and the publication of digital datasets. Subsequently, we demonstrate that in zoomorphology the scientific record is still limited to published literature and that zoomorphological data are usually not accessible through data repositories. The underlying problem is that zoomorphology lacks the standards for data and metadata. As a consequence, zoomorphology cannot participate in eScience. We argue that the standardization of morphological data requires i) a standardized framework for terminologies for anatomy and ii) a formalized method of description that allows computer-parsable morphological data to be communicable, compatible, and comparable. The role of controlled vocabularies (e.g., ontologies) for developing respective terminologies and methods of description is discussed, especially in the context of data annotation and semantic enhancement of publications. Finally, we introduce the International Consortium for Zoomorphology Standards, a working group that is open to everyone and whose aim is to stimulate and synthesize dialog about standards. It is the Consortium's ultimate goal to assist the zoomorphology community in developing modern data and metadata standards, including anatomy ontologies, thereby facilitating the participation of zoomorphology in eScience.

AB - eScience is a new approach to research that focuses on data mining and exploration rather than data generation or simulation. This new approach is arguably a driving force for scientific progress and requires data to be openly available, easily accessible via the Internet, and compatible with each other. eScience relies on modern standards for the reporting and documentation of data and metadata. Here, we suggest necessary components (i.e., content, concept, nomenclature, format) of such standards in the context of zoomorphology. We document the need for using data repositories to prevent data loss and how publication practice is currently changing, with the emergence of dynamic publications and the publication of digital datasets. Subsequently, we demonstrate that in zoomorphology the scientific record is still limited to published literature and that zoomorphological data are usually not accessible through data repositories. The underlying problem is that zoomorphology lacks the standards for data and metadata. As a consequence, zoomorphology cannot participate in eScience. We argue that the standardization of morphological data requires i) a standardized framework for terminologies for anatomy and ii) a formalized method of description that allows computer-parsable morphological data to be communicable, compatible, and comparable. The role of controlled vocabularies (e.g., ontologies) for developing respective terminologies and methods of description is discussed, especially in the context of data annotation and semantic enhancement of publications. Finally, we introduce the International Consortium for Zoomorphology Standards, a working group that is open to everyone and whose aim is to stimulate and synthesize dialog about standards. It is the Consortium's ultimate goal to assist the zoomorphology community in developing modern data and metadata standards, including anatomy ontologies, thereby facilitating the participation of zoomorphology in eScience.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879185492&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879185492&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jmor.20138

DO - 10.1002/jmor.20138

M3 - Review article

VL - 274

SP - 793

EP - 808

JO - Journal of Morphology

JF - Journal of Morphology

SN - 0362-2525

IS - 7

ER -