A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata

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

International longitudinal registry of patients with atrial fibrillation and treated with rivaroxaban: RIVaroxaban Evaluation in Real life setting (RIVER)

Background Real-world data on non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are essential in determining whether evidence from randomised controlled clinical trials translate into meaningful clinical benefits for patients in everyday practice. RIVER (RIVaroxaban Evaluation in Real life setting) is an ongoing international, prospective registry of patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and at least one investigator-determined risk factor for stroke who received rivaroxaban as an initial treatment for the prevention of thromboembolic stroke. The aim of this paper is to describe the design of the RIVER registry and baseline characteristics of patients with newly diagnosed NVAF who received rivaroxaban as an initial treatment. Methods and results Between January 2014 and June 2017, RIVER investigators recruited 5072 patients at 309 centres in 17 countries. The aim was to enroll consecutive patients at sites where rivaroxaban was already routinely prescribed for stroke prevention. Each patient is being followed up prospectively for a minimum of 2-years. The registry will capture data on the rate and nature of all thromboembolic events (stroke / systemic embolism), bleeding complications, all-cause mortality and other major cardiovascular events as they occur. Data quality is assured through a combination of remote electronic monitoring and onsite monitoring (including source data verification in 10% of cases). Patients were mostly enrolled by cardiologists (n = 3776, 74.6%), by internal medicine specialists 14.2% (n = 718) and by primary care/general practice physicians 8.2% (n = 417). The mean (SD) age of the population was 69.5 (11.0) years, 44.3% were women. Mean (SD) CHADS2 score was 1.9 (1.2) and CHA2DS2-VASc scores was 3.2 (1.6). Almost all patients (98.5%) were prescribed with once daily dose of rivaroxaban, most commonly 20 mg (76.5%) and 15 mg (20.0%) as their initial treatment; 17.9% of patients received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. Most patients enrolled in RIVER met the recommended threshold for AC therapy (86.6% for 2012 ESC Guidelines, and 79.8% of patients according to 2016 ESC Guidelines). Conclusions The RIVER prospective registry will expand our knowledge of how rivaroxaban is prescribed in everyday practice and whether evidence from clinical trials can be translated to the broader cross-section of patients in the real world

A reporting format for field measurements of soil respiration

Field observations of the soil-to-atmosphere CO2 flux—soil respiration, RS—are a prime example of ‘long tail’ data that historically have had neither centralized databases nor an agreed-upon reporting format. This has hindered scientific transparency, analytical reproducibility, and syntheses with respect to this globally-important component of the carbon cycle. Here we propose a new data and metadata reporting format for RS data, based on engagement with a wide range of researchers in the earth and ecological sciences as well as expert advisory panels. Our goal was a reporting format that would be relevant and useful for synthesis activities, optimizing data discoverability and usability while not placing an undue burden on data contributors. We describe previous RS data collection efforts, lessons learned from related databases and data-oriented networks (e.g., FLUXNET) in earth and ecological sciences, and the process of community consultation. The proposed reporting format focuses on chamber-level data and metadata, specifying measurement conditions and, for a given measurement period defined by beginning and ending timestamps, a mean RS flux (or CO2 concentration) and associated ancillary measurements. With input from the research community, we have also developed research data and metadata templates to support data collection adhering to the reporting format. Fundamentally, this format aims to enable findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable data, while providing ‘future-proofing’ capabilities to support reanalyses using as yet unknown algorithms or approaches. This proposed RS reporting format is openly available online and is intended to be a dynamic document, subject to further community feedback and/or change

A reporting format for field measurements of soil respiration

Field observations of the soil-to-atmosphere CO2 flux—soil respiration, RS—are a prime example of ‘long tail’ data that historically have had neither centralized databases nor an agreed-upon reporting format. This has hindered scientific transparency, analytical reproducibility, and syntheses with respect to this globally-important component of the carbon cycle. Here we propose a new data and metadata reporting format for RS data, based on engagement with a wide range of researchers in the earth and ecological sciences as well as expert advisory panels. Our goal was a reporting format that would be relevant and useful for synthesis activities, optimizing data discoverability and usability while not placing an undue burden on data contributors. We describe previous RS data collection efforts, lessons learned from related databases and data-oriented networks (e.g., FLUXNET) in earth and ecological sciences, and the process of community consultation. The proposed reporting format focuses on chamber-level data and metadata, specifying measurement conditions and, for a given measurement period defined by beginning and ending timestamps, a mean RS flux (or CO2 concentration) and associated ancillary measurements. With input from the research community, we have also developed research data and metadata templates to support data collection adhering to the reporting format. Fundamentally, this format aims to enable findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable data, while providing ‘future-proofing’ capabilities to support reanalyses using as yet unknown algorithms or approaches. This proposed RS reporting format is openly available online and is intended to be a dynamic document, subject to further community feedback and/or change

A Guide to Using GitHub for Developing and Versioning Data Standards and Reporting Formats

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

Guidelines for Publicly Archiving Terrestrial Model Data to Enhance Usability, Intercomparison, and Synthesis

Scientific communities are increasingly publishing data to evaluate, accredit, and build on published research. However, guidelines for curating data for publication are sparse for model-related research, limiting the usability of archived simulation data. In particular, there are no established guidelines for archiving data related to terrestrial models that simulate land processes and their coupled interactions with climate. Terrestrial modelers have a unique set of challenges when publishing data due to the diversity of scientific domains, research questions, and the types and scales of simulations. Researchers in the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) projects use a variety of multiscale models to advance robust predictions of terrestrial and subsurface ecosystem processes. Here, we synthesize archiving needs for data associated with different DOE models, and provide guidelines for publishing terrestrial model data components following FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles. The guidelines recommend archiving model inputs and testing data used in final simulation runs along with associated codes, workflow scripts, and metadata in public repositories. Researchers should consider archiving model outputs if they are within the storage limits of the repository. We also provide considerations for how to bundle files into different data publications with citable digital object identifiers. Finally, we identify repository features and tools that would enable storage and reuse of model data. Given the diversity of DOE terrestrial models, these guidelines are transferable to other model types and will enable efficient reuse of simulation data for purposes such as model intercomparisons, initialization, benchmarking, synthesis, and comparisons with field observations

Not just for programmers: How GitHub can accelerate collaborative and reproducible research in ecology and evolution

Researchers in ecology and evolutionary biology are increasingly dependent on computational code to conduct research. Hence, the use of efficient methods to share, reproduce, and collaborate on code as well as document research is fundamental. GitHub is an online, cloud-based service that can help researchers track, organize, discuss, share, and collaborate on software and other materials related to research production, including data, code for analyses, and protocols. Despite these benefits, the use of GitHub in ecology and evolution is not widespread. To help researchers in ecology and evolution adopt useful features from GitHub to improve their research workflows, we review 12 practical ways to use the platform. We outline features ranging from low to high technical difficulty, including storing code, managing projects, coding collaboratively, conducting peer review, writing a manuscript, and using automated and continuous integration to streamline analyses. Given that members of a research team may have different technical skills and responsibilities, we describe how the optimal use of GitHub features may vary among members of a research collaboration. As more ecologists and evolutionary biologists establish their workflows using GitHub, the field can continue to push the boundaries of collaborative, transparent, and open research

Not just for programmers: How GitHub can accelerate collaborative and reproducible research in ecology and evolution

Abstract Researchers in ecology and evolutionary biology are increasingly dependent on computational code to conduct research. Hence, the use of efficient methods to share, reproduce, and collaborate on code as well as document research is fundamental. GitHub is an online, cloud‐based service that can help researchers track, organize, discuss, share, and collaborate on software and other materials related to research production, including data, code for analyses, and protocols. Despite these benefits, the use of GitHub in ecology and evolution is not widespread. To help researchers in ecology and evolution adopt useful features from GitHub to improve their research workflows, we review 12 practical ways to use the platform. We outline features ranging from low to high technical difficulty, including storing code, managing projects, coding collaboratively, conducting peer review, writing a manuscript, and using automated and continuous integration to streamline analyses. Given that members of a research team may have different technical skills and responsibilities, we describe how the optimal use of GitHub features may vary among members of a research collaboration. As more ecologists and evolutionary biologists establish their workflows using GitHub, the field can continue to push the boundaries of collaborative, transparent, and open research