Franz sterner tdwg 2016 new power balance needed for trustworthy biodiversity data

  • View
    263

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

Text of Franz sterner tdwg 2016 new power balance needed for trustworthy biodiversity data

PowerPoint Presentation

A new power balance is needed

for trustworthy biodiversity data

Please@taxonbytesNico Franz1 & Beckett W. Sterner1

With contributions by Edward Gilbert1, Andrew Johnston1,

Guanyang Zhang1, Bertram Ludscher2 & Alan Weakley3

1 School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University

2 iSchool, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

3 Herbarium, University of North Carolina at Chapel HillTDWG 2016 Biodiversity Information Standards

December 09, 2016 Instituto Tecnolgico de Costa Rica (#TDWG16)@ http://www.slideshare.net/taxonbytes/franz-sterner-tdwg-2016-new-power-balance-needed-for-trustworthy-biodiversity-data

Largely derived from doi:10.3897/rio.2.e1061091dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.2

Premise: We agree that there are significant data quality issues91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be

Aggregated Australian millipede data 'taken to the cleaners'

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.3

Premise: We agree that there are significant data quality issues91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be

Aggregated Australian millipede data 'taken to the cleaners'Aggregators respond to the charges

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.4

Premise: We agree that there are significant data quality issues91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be

Aggregated Australian millipede data 'taken to the cleaners'Aggregators respond to the chargesBut this leaves open the question(s):Who (exactly) is responsible forhow much of each particular issue?

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.5

We seem to disagree on the question of responsibility assignment(s)91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be Source: Belbin et al. 2013. A specialist's audit []: An 'aggregator's' perspective. doi:10.3897/zookeys.305.5438

Page 73

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.6

Often enough, aggregators respond by:Acknowledging the general issues and their relevance.

Pointing to many issues that effectively reside "with the sources".

Calling for more collaboration across all levels; as well as new tools and annotation options that "motivate and empower" the research community.91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be

Source: Belbin et al. 2013. A specialist's audit []: An 'aggregator's' perspective. doi:10.3897/zookeys.305.5438Page 74

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.7

Thesis: For taxonomy integration, this both wrong and self-defeating 91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be Many aggregators are designed to impose a single taxonomic hierarchy one at a time onto all taxonomically annotated records.

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.8

91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be Many aggregators are designed to impose a single taxonomic hierarchy one at a time onto all taxonomically annotated records.

By design, these "backbones" are rarely attributable to individual (expert) authors, but instead are newly created systematic theories that only appear at the system level.Thesis: For taxonomy integration, this both wrong and self-defeating

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.9

91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be Many aggregators are designed to impose a single taxonomic hierarchy one at a time onto all taxonomically annotated records.

By design, these "backbones" are rarely attributable to individual (expert) authors, but instead are newly created systematic theories that only appear at the system level.

Data are aggregated accordingly; yet backbone-driven modifications may newly disrupt the original integrity of submitted data packages.Thesis: For taxonomy integration, this both wrong and self-defeating

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.10

91dd0ee1-8a37-4efc-85b7-8176874cf5be Many aggregators are designed to impose a single taxonomic hierarchy one at a time onto all taxonomically annotated records.

By design, these "backbones" are rarely attributable to individual (expert) authors, but instead are newly created systematic theories that only appear at the system level.

Data are aggregated accordingly; yet backbone-driven modifications may newly disrupt the original integrity of submitted data packages.

By deflecting on responsibilities, aggregators may cause additional self-harm. Ultimately, the power balance as presently built in must shift to bring experts back into the process of licensing succinct, trustworthy data packages.Thesis: For taxonomy integration, this both wrong and self-defeating

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.11

Let's re-diagnose:

What happens in dynamic,

open systems?

Charly Lewisw, CC BY-SA 3.0

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.12

Taxonomic views of a frequently revised organismal lineageSource: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

9 schemata for the NA Cleistes/Cleistesiopsis complex (orchids, "pogonias")

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.13

Snapshot of a more frequently revised organismal lineage

9 schemata for the NA Cleistes/Cleistesiopsis complex (orchids, "pogonias")

Vertical sections identify taxonomic concept regions

Source: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.14

Snapshot of a more frequently revised organismal lineage

9 schemata for the NA Cleistes/Cleistesiopsis complex (orchids, "pogonias")

Vertical sections identify taxonomic concept regionsColors identify lineages of taxonomic names (epithets) in use

Source: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.15

Snapshot of a more frequently revised organismal lineage

9 schemata for the NA Cleistes/Cleistesiopsis complex (orchids)

Vertical sections identify taxonomic concept regionsColors identify lineages of taxonomic names (epithets) in use

There is no consensus! Five incongruent schemata are used concurrently

Source: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.16

Further diagnosis:

If incongruent taxonomies are endorsed

locally, provisionally, and democratically

then what is the impact for

aggregated biodiversity data?

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.17

Further diagnosis:

Taxonomy becomes a variable

that we need to represent,

and thereby control for

(at the system level)

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.18

The 'consensus'Query: "Where do these orchid species occur?"

Same set of 250 orchid specimens, according to 4 taxonomies."Controlling the taxonomic variable"Example: the Cleistes use caseSource: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.19

The 'consensus'The 'bible'"Controlling the taxonomic variable"Query: "Where do these orchid species occur?"

Same set of 250 orchid specimens, according to 4 taxonomies.Example: the Cleistes use caseSource: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.20

The 'consensus'The 'bible'The (formerly) federal 'standard'"Controlling the taxonomic variable"Source: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.21

The 'consensus'The 'bible'The (formerly) federal 'standard'The 'best', latest regional flora"Controlling the taxonomic variable"Source: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.22

The 'consensus'The 'bible'The (formerly) federal 'standard'The 'best', latest regional flora"Controlling the taxonomic variable" Expert views

are in conflictSource: Franz et al. 2016. Controlling the taxonomic variable: []. RIO Journal. doi:10.3897/rio.2.e10610

The more one looks, the more complicated it gets. Notice also the node labeling, or lack thereof.23

The 'consensus'The 'bible'The (formerly) federal 'standard'The

Search related