Chapter Five DATABASE DEVELOPMENTshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/6398/6/06...Chapter 5: Database Development 81 The above databases have a wide scope and include data about

Chapter 5: Database Development

79

Chapter Five

DATABASE DEVELOPMENT Identification of information needs of mycologists and farmers was the first aspect of

the present study. The second objective was to develop a database prototype which

would reflect the needs of the users and could be used on the Web to create a

collaboratively create a repository of fungal information. However, to achieve this it

was necessary for the researcher to interpret the results of the user assessment survey

and to convert them into database specifications for the computer specialist. The LIS

professional’s role as an intermediary, in the organization of information, in the

changed information and technological scene is reaffirmed.

5.1 Specification of requirements

As part of the detailing of specifications available online fungal, databases were

reviewed. This review is first presented before spelling out the specifications.

Online database

Biodiversity databases

Many countries have realized the importance of species data and have signed the

Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD - www.biodiv.org/) treaty, which was

established to support various projects for organisation and digitization of biological

information. This has resulted in a global sharing of biodiversity information and

recent years have seen a rapidly growing number of biodiversity databases on the

Internet which include data on animal, plant and microbial species, land formations,

climate changes, ecologies, animal and plant physiology and anatomy, biological

systems, molecular and chemical biology and behaviour, genome data, etc. These

projects are designed to better understand and manage the world’s natural heritage

(Heidorn, 2003). A good list of such databases is available at the Biological and

Biodiversity Web server (http://www.keil.ukans.edu). Some of the important

multinational initiatives are listed below:


80

§ Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF): http://www.gbif.org

GBIF is an interoperable network of biodiversity databases and information

technology tools that enables users to navigate and put to use the world’s vast

quantities of biodiversity information to produce national economic,

environmental and social benefits.

§ SPECIES 2000: http://www.sp2000.org

A project focusing on enumerating all known species of plants, animals, fungi

and microbes on Earth as the baseline data set for studies of global biodiversity.

Its goal is to provide a simple access point enabling users to link to other data

systems for all groups of organisms using direct species- links

§ Tree of Life: http://tolweb.org/tree/

Multi-authored by biologists around the world, it is an effort to summarize

current knowledge about the phylogenetic relationships of organisms.

§ International Organization for Plant Information (IOPI):

http://iopi.csu.edu.au/iopi/

IOPI manages a series of cooperative international projects that aim to create

databases of plant taxonomic information.

§ DIVERSITAS: http://www.icsu.org/DIVERSITAS/

A partnership of inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations,

formed to promote, facilitate, and catalyze scientific research on biodiversity

including its origin, composition, ecosystem function, maintenance and

conservation.

In addition several small-scale private initiatives are also underway (e.g. Nature

Serve www.natureserve.org, All species foundation - http://www.all-species.org/)

with the hope that electronic data about species will be more readily accessible than

their print counterparts.


81

The above databases have a wide scope and include data about fungi. However, their

extensive coverage of species necessitates a limitation on the depth of data provided.

The exceptions are Tree of Life and Species2000, which provide fairly detailed

information.

Fungal Databases

Several online databases specially devoted to fungi exist on the Internet. These have

been created by different research groups and mycological associations. They include

different types of information and are varied in structure. Some of them disseminate

information at an electronic catalogue level (give basic information about the fungi)

whereas others provide keys to identify species.

To locate the online databases in the area of mycology, an extensive search was

carried out on the Internet. Google (http://www.google.com) and a Meta search

engine like Dogpile (http://www.dogpile.com) were used with different combinations

of keywords. Mycological portals also helped in locating online fungal databases

viz. Internet Directory of Botany ( http://www.helsinki.fi/kmus/botherb.html), NBII

Metadata Clearinghouse ( http://www.nbii.gov/datainfo/metadata/clearinghouse/) and

biodiversity portal ( http://biodiversity.uno.edu/~fungi/ftaxon.html).

It was observed that the number of fungal databases is large. Static databases

provided a list of fungal species along with basic information about the collection

and permitted only a browsing facility. It was not possible to search and retrieve

specific data. Therefore it was decided to omit these databases from the study.

Finally 20 fungi databases (including Species2000 and Tree of life) were identified

for further study based on their coverage, structure, retrieval, etc.

The list of fungal databases reviewed is listed in table 5.1 (Brief description of these

databases is given in Annexure IV).

http://www.helsinki.fi/kmus/botherb.html

http://www.nbii.gov/datainfo/metadata/clearinghouse/

http://biodiversity.uno.edu/~fungi/ftaxon.html


82

Table 5.1: List of Online Fungal Databases

ID TITLE URL

1.

British Fungi database hosted by CABI Bioscience

http://194.203.77.76/fieldmycology/

2. Cereal Disease Laboratory Online Databases

http://www.cdl.umn.edu/databases.html

3. Freshwater Ascomycete Database

http://www.life.uiuc.edu/fungi/

4. Discover life http://www.discoverlife.org/

5. Fungi collection database

http://www2.nrm.se/kbo/saml/svapkol.html.en

6. Fungi of Ecuador http://www.mycokey.com/Ecuador.html

7. GLOPP Uredinales

http://www.diversitycampus.net

8. Index Fungorum http://www.speciesfungorum.org/Names/Names.asp

9. Morels, Truffles, and Related Cup-Fungi Database

http://www.nacse.org/ocid/fungi.html

10. Mycology Lab at the University of Tennessee

http://tenn.bio.utk.edu/fungus/fungus.html

11. Mycorrhizal Fungi Databases

http://www.nacse.org/ocid/mycorrhizal.html

12.

National Catalogue of Strains: Fungi & Yeasts

http://www.bdt.fat.org.br/colecoes/microrganismo/fungi

13. New Zealand Fungi Database

http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/research/biodiversity/fungiprog/fungi_intro.asp

14. Pacific Northwest Fungi Database

http://pnwfungi.wsu.edu/programs/aboutDatabase.asp

15. Pathogenic Fungi Database (PFDB)

http://timm.main.teikyou.ac.jp/pfdb/cover/database_eng.html

16. Species2000 http://www.species2000.org/

17.

Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory

http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/index.cfm

18. Tree of Life http://tolweb.org/tree?group=fungi

19. US NTFP Species Database

http://www.ifcae.org/cgibin/ntfp/db/dbsql/db.cgi?db=prod&uid=default

20 Micokey http://www.mycokey.com

http://www.speciesfungorum.org/Names/Names.asp

http://www.mycokey.com/


83

Having selected the databases for detail study the issues on which the databases were

to be reviewed had to be decided. No previous studies comparing the existing fungal

databases had been reported. The only exception was a study published online

(http://circa.gbif.net/Public/irc/gbif/pr/library?l=/speciesbank_workshop) by Global

Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), Denmark. During 2004-05 it had

compared 225 online databases of plants, animals and microbes to create a

SpeciesBank. Thus a database of databases was created and each record has 65

fields, which included taxonomic information, molecular data, distribution, collector

and collection information, bibliographic information database information

(structure, search mode), network information and web site technology. The GBIF

study was limited in two ways. Firstly it included only a few fungal databases.

Secondly the contents of the databases were described at a very general level; details

such as spores, fungicides, biological observations, etc. were not covered.

In the present study, 15 important fields of out of the 65 fields of GBIF SpeciesBank

were selected as criteria for reviewing the 20 fungal databases. Each database was

studied according to the availability or non-availability of these criteria. The

summary of this review is given below.

Table 5.2 indicates no database provides all the identified information contents or

facilities. Fungal information is required by researchers from the fields of biology,

environmental sciences, biotechnology, agriculture and sometimes by public

administrators. However, the above databases were not suitable for multiple user

groups.

Even complete taxonomic information which is a basic necessity for identification

and classification of new fungal species is not provided by all. Only 60% database

producers provide detail information on classification.


84

Table 5.2: Database Contents and Status

Sr. No.

Contents Available % Not

availability %

Contents of database

1 Synonym 8 40% 12 60%

2 Basionym 3 15% 17 85%

3 Detail classification 12 60% 8 40%

5 Images 11 55% 9 45%

6 Collector 5 25% 15 75%

7 Features – morphological characters

14 70% 6 30%

8 Spore information 1 50% 19 95%

9 Link to molecular information / databases

0 0% 20 100%

10 Bibliographic information 14 70% 6 30%

11 Digital Library 2 10% 18 90%

Geographic information

12 Type Locality (firstly described)

7 35% 13 65%

13 Occurrences 7 35% 13 65%

14 Distribution maps 5 25% 15 75%

System Type

15 Distributed 04 20% 16 80%

16 Collaborative 16 80% 04 20%

Search Mode

17 Simple 18 90% 02 10%

18 Advanced 08 40% 12 60%

Fungal characteristics such as spore information and images also play a significant

role in identification of species. While spore information was provided by only one

database, 55% database producers provide images and pictures of fungal species.

None of the databases provided more detailed information about host-parasite

interaction, culture collection, infection details, fungicides data, etc. which are

frequently needed by users. Hence the users needed to search several databases to

get this information. Further it was not clear from the introduction to the databases,

whether the users had been consulted regarding their information needs. Goodchild,

Bowker and Bauldock had all suggested that biodiversity databases should be


85

designed in a way to be searched easily and convey information in appropriate form

according to user needs (Goodchild 1992, Bowker, 2000, Bauldock, 2001).

Information about the collector is important to trace the collection and also for

identifying intellectual property rights. Collector information is also used by other

systematists who need individual specimens. However only 25% databases provided

this information. Location of the fungal species through description or maps is also

provided by less than half the databases.

Most of the data sets are not linked with each other. Although references to previous

research and name of the person along with the publication details which

authenticates the species information, is provided by most of the databases, none of

the databases provide links to molecular databases. With the growth of digital

libraries it is possible to provide links to other researches. Only two database

producers (10%) provided access to full text articles. These too were listed in their

own fungal species databases. Perhaps the question of the protection of intellectual

property rights, ensuring proper crediting of data sources, maintenance of control

over the use of information, and commercialisation are issues preventing such

linkages. .

The above table indicates that more than 80% databases were collaborative.

Construction of distributed databases is difficult, as it needs different infrastructure

and high-speed network facilities. Most of the database producers provided advanced

search facility except a few.

Retrieval and visualization facilities were also limited. Personalization of

information was not provided by any of the database producers except the ‘Tree of

Life’ which does so to a certain extent. While many of the databases were built

through inter- institutional collaboration, none of them were participatory i.e. had a

facility for the scientist to directly enter his / her data.

It was generally noticed that there was a lack of standardization in many fields.

Standards for naming of fungi species, geographic areas, authors, journals were not


86

followed despite the Taxonomic Data Working Group (TDWG) recommendations

(TDWG, 2001).

Survey results and study of mycological databases provided the inputs and assisted in

decision making for specifying the requirements of the prototype of Fungal Species

Information System (FSIS).

FSIS was conceived as an online database of fungal species. The standard qualities

of all databases viz. robust structure, flexible retrievability and ease of use had to be

maintained even in the case of FSIS.

In addition, there were three special requirements underlying the design.

1. The database should be useful to users from different disciplines and should

satisfy a wide variety of needs. In order to meet varied information needs of

different users a large number of fields would be included and be made

searchable.

2. The database was to be a prototype to be put up on the web and used by scientists

in a participatory manner to populate it thus creating a digital repository of

fungus information contributing to cyberinfrastructure in the life sciences

3. Users should be able to develop personal interfaces to the database through the

use of self-defined data entry, search and display options.

Besides these broad specifications, based on user needs assessment study, the details

of the entity and attributes were specified. Considering that the database would be

built up through participatory methods, it was very likely that information on the

entity (fungus) would be repeated. These repetitions would be useful because the

detailed elements would vary. For example for the same fungus, host plant,

geographical area, season, characteristics, biochemical changes may all differ. Hence

a decision was deliberately taken to permit multiple records on the same entity.


87

Entities and attributes

Initially 72 attributes were selected for inclusion in the database. These included the

21 items from the scientists’ user survey questionnaire and the others were from

suggestions received from the researchers. To manage this large number of attributes,

they were classified into clusters such as Characteristics of fungus, Biological

observations / field observations, Geographical information, Host Parasite Interaction

Information, Biochemical changes, Molecular Sequence information, Classification

of fungus, Economic importance of fungi, Fungicide Information, Bibliographic

references and links to other database entries.

In order to help the computer professional in constructing the database, data elements

were also classified as different types, such as text, number, image, etc. (Table 5.3).

Figure 5.1 depicts the way the different data types would appear on the screen.

Table 5.3: Data Types

ID Data Type

1 Text Only

2 Text with E-Mail

3 Master Entry (Drop down list)

4 Big Text

5 Big Text with web Link

6 Check Box with Text

7 Check Box with Column wise Text

8 Multiple Options, Select One (Radio buttons)

9 Text with List Options

10 Image


88

Figure 5.1: Different Data Types as they Appear on FSIS Screens

Each data element was assigned a data type; for example, somatic structure (text),

number of fruiting bodies (numerical), Biological observations (big text), etc. Data

types for all items are listed in Annexure V.


89

User Templates

Further, to make the database adaptable to different user groups it was suggested that

the data elements be organized through templates. These templates would provide for

flexibility and adaptability to individual needs. Initially three broad groups of users

were identified, mycologists, biotechnologists/biochemists and farmers. Hence three

templates were created in addition to the master template. Appropriate data element

clusters were selected for the above groups to match their needs (Table 5.4).

Table 5.4 User Groups

Cluster Mycology Biotechnology/Biochemistry

Farmer Master

Characteristics of fungus P P

Biological observations / field observations

P P

Geographical information P P P

Host Parasite Interaction Information

P P P

Biochemical changes P P

Molecular Sequence information

P P

Classification of fungus P P P

Economic importance of fungi

P P P P

Fungicide Information P P

Bibliographic references P P P

Links to other database entries

P P P

Users could select the appropriate template for data entry and for search. To further

personalize the database, the interface template creation facility was also to be

offered to the user. The effort was to make the external schema of the database as

user oriented as possible.

Next, based on the above specifications a model of the database was prepared as a

flat file (Prototype I) and discussed with 5-6 subject experts. They suggested a few

minor changes in templates and clustering. These changes were incorporated and the

specifications were given to the computer professional for database construction.


90

5.2 Database construction

Using the specifications provided, the computer professional developed a database

using MYSQL 4.1 (stable version)

Technical details

In all, a total 11 tables were created where all information related to users, searches

and basic information about the fungal species was stored. A primary key was

assigned in all tables; this technique enabled the linking of the tables and ensured

that data for particular column could not be duplicated. MySQL provides all

required database functionality like views, indexes which help to run queries and

display results quickly. HASH-TREE functionality for INDEX in MySQL database

was used which ensured that searching in the database was fast.

Management of data

The database developer in consultation with the researcher established privileges for

the user and the administrator and the programmer. Privileges for creating data entry

search and display templates were given to the user. Users could create their own

data entry, search and display templates. All users were also provided with a facility

to contact other users to comment, correct and react to their data.

In order to enhance flexibility the database administrator was given several

privileges. She could create data entry, search and display templates assign

individual users to different groups. Further in relation to information she could club

different items together to create repeatable groups of information, prepare validation

masters, add data fields and create new columns.

The programmer could create new data display types.

The 11 tables created by the database professional at the backend to provide

flexibility and maintain certain quality control and data security are as follows:

(Table 5.5).


91

Table 5.5 Main Tables in the Database

Table no.

Table Name Description

Basic Data Tables

1. Entry name Entries by users – scientific name of fungus

2. Entry Data table (fungal species data)

Administrator’s Privileges

3. Template group Templates assigned to group of users

4. Search group Search groups with user ids

5. Master Master entries

6. Items Data fields

7. Columns Create new coloumn

Programmer

8. Display Display types used in database

System

9. Users Details of users

10. Templates User templates – 4 templates created by administrator

11. Search Search table – has searchable items

Relationships among the 11 tables have been illustrated in Figure 5.2. The basic data

was maintained in two tables. The ‘entry name’ table (Table 1) was the control table,

which contained the scientific name of the fungus. There was only one entry for each

name. The records in this table were linked to the ‘entry’ table (Table 2). It was

necessary to do this since there could be more than one entry for one fungus. The

data entered by users was maintained in the ‘entry’ table

The system, in order to maintain user information and keep track of user defined data

entry template and searches, would automatically create and update three tables

numbers 9, 10 and 11. All details collected during user registration, such as name,

designation, address, e-mail, contact details etc. were maintained in the ‘user’ table.

In addition, the category of the user as given by the administrator was included in

this table and was linked to data entry and search templates.


92 Figure 5.2: Relationships Among 11 Tables


93

To the MYSQL database layer, the database developer added two more layers

creating a three-tier web architecture. The middle layer used Java-Bean functionality

to connect the database to the interface. For the front end i.e. the user interface JSP

1.2 with JSP Taglibs + servlets + HTML 4.0 with JavaScript were used. Facility to

export the data in XML format was also developed so that migration of the data to

other databases could be enabled.

Populating the Database

Once the database framework was prepared by the database developer, it was given

to the LIS professional for filling in the details about the fields, creation of user

groups and templates. It was also necessary to add some records, so that it could be

demonstrated and tested. Using available information (in print form) from various

Ph.D. theses, fifteen records were created using the master template. Since the

structure of the information in the theses was different from that of the database, it

had to be interpreted before entry. It was recognised that capturing this data and

recording it was a time consuming and complex process. However, for a subject

expert the complexity level would be much less.

5.3 Laboratory Testing

The database (Prototype II) was hosted in the laboratory of Modern College, Pune

which had a post graduate research centre in the Department of Botany where

considerable research on the subject was being done. There were ten scholars

working on fungal research. These scholars were asked to browse and search the

database and enter information about a fungus which they had collected. Five

scholars entered data. They were also given a feedback form (Annexure III) asking

for comments. Comments received related to addition of new fields, changes in the

user interface, changes in data types and help messages.

Feedback: Addition of new items

Fungal species are usually classified into different groups as per their characteristics.

The scholars suggested additional characteristics, which were included. These are

listed below (Table 5.6):


94

Table 5.6: Additional Items for Identification of Fungal Species

Sr. No.

Group of fungus

Additional items

Mycology template

1 Ascomycetes § Stromata

§ Stromata image with description, § Perithesia § Asci, § Ascospores

§ Ascospore image with description

2. Oomycetes § Sexual compatibility for group A (Hermaphroloic, Dioecious, Sexually undifferentiated)

§ Sexual compatibility for group B (Homotalic, heterothallic, secondarily homothallic)

Biotechnology / Biochemistry template

3. Basideomycetes § Secondary metabolites, § Products

§ Chlorophyll Proteins § Reducing sugar § Proline § Free amino acids § Polyphenols § Hormones and Enzymes

Feedback: User Interface

As far as the user interface was concerned, a scholar suggested that

§ Name of fungus should be displayed on each data entry page.

§ Ready list of fungal species during the searches on the search interface should

display one fungal entry on each separate page.

§ Option for short and full displays be provided.

§ The text box for bibliographic references and spore details was found to be

insufficient; the size should be increased.

§ Each screen should have its own help message, instead of help messages being

clubbed together.

5.4 Web Hosting (Prototype III)

The suggestions received during the laboratory testing and the comments from the

scholars were used to modify the database. Additional fields were included and data

types assigned. The total number of items became 88. The complete list of data


95

elements and their data types is given in Annexure IV. The structure of the website

is shown in Figure 5.3 and the home page is shown in Figure 5.4

The application was deployed on TOMCAT 5.5.4 with JDK 1.5 (J2SE) support

which ensured the latest functionality of Java as well as TOMCAT web server.

A URL was acquired for the project http://www.fungalspecies.co.in and web space

reserved. The FSIS (designed and the modified prototype) hosted on the Web in

August 2006 for re-testing. A feedback form (Annexure III) was also made available

on the site for new users who were asked to test the site. A guided tour (Annexure

VI) was created by the LIS professional and hosted on the same site


96

Introduction

New User Existing

User

Registration form With User

Preferences

Search Data

Entry Preferences User Feed Back

Personalize search

Quick

Simple Advance

Selected fugal species

Short display Full Display

List of fungus

Add new entry

Select template

Select fungus name if working on same fungus

Select items as per your needs name your

personalize search

Write to administrator to

create a new

template

Data entry

Email from administrator

Work with your template

Select areas and set up your search

Go to show “My searches”

Search the database

Select Customize display

Display Results

Figure 5.3: Structure of FSIS


97

Figure 5.4: Home Page of FSIS Prototype

5.5 Finalisation

The prototype was made available for testing purposes for a period of three months.

Local users were informed and asked to visit the web site. This request was also sent

to mycology listservs so that any interested mycologist could visit the site. Scientists

who had responded to the information need survey and others who had expressed an

interest on the project were informed personally and asked to register, enter and

search data, provide feedback. Feedback of the users and their comments were then

analyzed and final changes were made in the prototype.

A total of thirty users from different parts of the world (USA, UK, Europe, etc.) sent

their comments through the online form. These included twenty mycologists, seven

biotechnologists and three farmers.


98

Contents of the database

Half the respondents were completely satisfied with the contents, twelve were

partially satisfied and only three were not at all satisfied.

As regards the structure of the database only one suggestion was received for

additional fields, namely link to protein sequence of the fungal species. (This was

added, making a total of 89 items Annexure V).

As regards the contents of the fields of the items, it was suggested that the name of

the fungus be linked to Index Fungorum database (http://www.indexfungorum.org).

Since this is an open database, it was possible to do so and the change was made.

The templates were found to be “excellent for personalisation”. However a few

respondents requested that more help be provided.

Half of the feedback forms received claimed that they were completely satisfied with

the templates; 40% were satisfied to some extent while 10% found it difficult to

understand. It was found that scientists created more than one template for searches.

Perhaps this was to coincide with their research interest.

All respondents understood the simple and advance search facilities.

In the display, suggestions were made to standardize the hyperlink text, for the

mandatory display of the fungus name field and whatever the template created.

Local language interface, both for data entry and help for use of farmers was

suggested.

Five scientists used the data entry facility to enter their own records. Three

respondents took less than 30 minutes to put in the data. One took between 30

minutes to one hour while the remaining took more than one hour.


99

The need for standardization of data was pointed out by several respondents. The

lack of standards would create difficulties as the database grows.

The guided tour was found useful though the size of some of the images need to be

increased. A few scientists had suggested that some terminology changed. (In the

light of these comments the help messages were again reviewed and modified

wherever required). More than 40% of the respondents felt that the help was

sufficient and one third of the group of respondents required a little more help while

about a quarter of the respondents felt that much more help was required.

Some respondents experienced difficulty in accessing the site. The reason for poor

access to the site was explored and it was found that the service provider took back

ups or did maintenance work on the server at that particular time. The service

provider was requested to provide a message about this problem on the site.

If the system was not in use a cut off login period had been provided after 30

minutes. Increase in login period was suggested by the users. The login period was

increased to 90 minutes.

Action taken on suggestions

The additional fields suggested were added making a total of 89 items. The

suggestions regarding the standardization of hyperlink text was implemented.

However, the suggestion to translate the site into local language could be

implemented. The comments regarding standardisation were accepted. Wherever

possible, data validation masters were prepared. To ensure the standardisation in

name special instructions were provided. To prevent variations of spelling in the

fungus name the standard spelling of fungi would automatically appear at appropriate

places. However, in some fields the suggestion for standardisation was deliberately

rejected in order to provide greater flexibility to the scientists. It was recognized that

there would be additional need for standardisation by the database administrator after

it had been populated. Help messages were again reviewed and modified where

required. The sizes of the images in the guided tour were increased.


100

General comments

General comments received were positive. Some of them were:

“The layout is very well organized, the contents with the different possibilities of configuration is well thought-out. Must have been much of technical and conceptual work”.

“Very useful data base with interdisciplinary approach”.

“One of the excellent online resources available to look out for the fungal details including most important and original references. Overall a very good and useful database”.

“The resource is useful and is a good prototype to digitize individual's / museum collection”.

“The interface and search strategies used are innovative and provide a free hand to the experienced users”.

The local mycologists who were shown the final version had the following

comments:

“FSIS is useful in several ways. Firstly, FSIS prototype provides a facility to document Information which is extremely important for identification of new fungal species”

“Accurate and authentic information will be made available in detail”.

“Today information is available in variety of media including books, journals, CD-ROM and on Internet. These resources are scattered and it is difficult to acquire print media due to the increased cost. Under such circumstances the project like FSIS provides a platform to create and share data in structured manner”.

“FSIS contains almost all necessary information to create online Exsiccata (refer to specimens published, comprising printed labels used like standard of comparison). Exsiccata contains information about live and dried material at local level. Collaborative approach will help to create local, regional, national as well as international Exsiccata”.

“Linking of FSIS with other databases like Molecular Sequence databases ( http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) and to Index Fungorum

http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/


101

(www.speciesfungorum.org) will help to understand the recent position of fungal species in taxonomy” “FSIS is interactive and therefore will increase the communication among various scientists at national and international level. Collaborative research will become possible. Fungal database at central place will minimize the mis-identification and mis- interpretation of fungal species as well as it will reduce the duplication and repetition of work. It will further increase the possibility for exchanging the actual material and will increase the mutual understanding among fellow professionals”.

“We recommend FSIS to our students, so that they may document the various species collected by them”

After undertaking the changes the database was frozen and the site

(http://www.fungalspecies.co.in) accordingly updated. A demo version of FSIS and

guided tour are provided in the enclosed CD-ROM.

The development part of this project was thus accomplished in close collaboration

with scientists and computer experts. The process followed was iterative and

participatory. The results indicate that not only is it possible to develop a database

for interdisciplinary use, based on information need survey but the final product was

very well appreciated.


102

References

Bauldock, Barbara, Wicks, Wendy & O’Neill, Jill. (2001). Assessing the Information Requirements of the Biodiversity Community: Summary of Findings, METADIVERSITY II. Retrieved November 13, 2006, from www.nbii.gov/about/pubs/metadiv2.pdf

Bowker, Geoff. (2000). The Distributed Collective Activity of Biodiversity

Research. Retrieved November 30, 2006 from http://www.limsi.fr/WkG/PCD2000/textes/bowker.html

Goodchild, M. F. (1992). Geographical information science. International Journal

on Geographical Information Systems (London) 6(1),31–45. Heidorn, B. (2003). Publishing Digital Floras and Faunas Bulletin of the American

Society for Information Science and Technology, 30(1) Retrieved August 10, 2006, from http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Dec-03/heidorn2.html

Documents

Chapter Five DATABASE DEVELOPMENTshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/6398/6/06...Chapter 5: Database Development 81 The above databases have a wide scope and include data about