Advertisement
Perspective

Perspective The Perspective section provides experts with a forum to comment on topical or controversial issues of broad interest.

See all article types »

Lost Branches on the Tree of Life

  • Bryan T. Drew mail,

    bdrew@ufl.edu

    Affiliation: University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America

    X
  • Romina Gazis,

    Affiliation: Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States of America

    X
  • Patricia Cabezas,

    Affiliations: Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, United States of America, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States of America

    X
  • Kristen S. Swithers,

    Affiliation: Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, United States of America

    X
  • Jiabin Deng,

    Affiliation: University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America

    X
  • Roseana Rodriguez,

    Affiliation: University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America

    X
  • Laura A. Katz,

    Affiliation: Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, United States of America

    X
  • Keith A. Crandall,

    Affiliation: George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States of America

    X
  • David S. Hibbett,

    Affiliation: Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States of America

    X
  • Douglas E. Soltis

    Affiliations: University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America, Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America

    X
  • Published: September 03, 2013
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001636

Reader Comments (4)

Post a new comment on this article

the way we reward science needs to change....

Posted by binay on 26 Sep 2013 at 03:28 GMT

public data sharing will need:
1. enforcement by journals BEFORE publishing the articles
2. funding agencies ensuring long-term funding to run & sustain data repositories
3. common format for codes/scripts submission (biologists don't understand this but this not only is necessary but essential)
4. big & famous scientists, who regularly publish in scn journals, mandate that not a single paper goes out of the lab door unless 100% of the raw data along with software and codes/scripts gets deposited in a public repositories
5. i don't think the alignments and trees have to be deposited. if a step-by-step procedure along with codes/scripts and version of the tool/software used to generate those data is clearly mentioned in the methods section, this is good to reproduce the results. there has to be a sustainable solution for long-term data access.

lets not be presumptuous. science is v competitive and what brings rewards and grants/grant renewal is not to be a good samaritan and submit all your data/scripts/codes but publications in good journals. how many times you heard in a grant award or grant renewal mtg that one needs to be funded because he/she has been doing thorough science, has ben a good scientist and has been depositing all the raw data in time and easily accessible public repositories etc. unless the attitude towards publications and the excessive weight given to publications change, nothing is going to happen. it all stems from that. binay
p.s. i also posted this comment in part/full in other posts related to public data release.

No competing interests declared.