Research resources: Curating the new eagle-i discovery system

Nicole Vasilevsky, Tenille Johnson, Karen Corday, Carlo Torniai, Matthew Brush, Erik Segerdell, Melanie Wilson, Christopher Shaffer, David Robinson, Melissa Haendel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Development of biocuration processes and guidelines for new data types or projects is a challenging task. Each project finds its way toward defining annotation standards and ensuring data consistency with varying degrees of planning and different tools to support and/or report on consistency. Further, this process may be data type specific even within the context of a single project. This article describes our experiences with eagle-i, a 2-year pilot project to develop a federated network of data repositories in which unpublished, unshared or otherwise 'invisible' scientific resources could be inventoried and made accessible to the scientific community. During the course of eagle-i development, the main challenges we experienced related to the difficulty of collecting and curating data while the system and the data model were simultaneously built, and a deficiency and diversity of data management strategies in the laboratories from which the source data was obtained. We discuss our approach to biocuration and the importance of improving information management strategies to the research process, specifically with regard to the inventorying and usage of research resources. Finally, we highlight the commonalities and differences between eagle-i and similar efforts with the hope that our lessons learned will assist other biocuration endeavors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberbar067
JournalDatabase
Volume2012
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Eagles
eagles
Information management
Research
Data structures
Information Management
information management
Information Storage and Retrieval
Information Systems
Planning
planning
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Information Systems
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Vasilevsky, N., Johnson, T., Corday, K., Torniai, C., Brush, M., Segerdell, E., ... Haendel, M. (2012). Research resources: Curating the new eagle-i discovery system. Database, 2012, [bar067]. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bar067

Research resources : Curating the new eagle-i discovery system. / Vasilevsky, Nicole; Johnson, Tenille; Corday, Karen; Torniai, Carlo; Brush, Matthew; Segerdell, Erik; Wilson, Melanie; Shaffer, Christopher; Robinson, David; Haendel, Melissa.

In: Database, Vol. 2012, bar067, 2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Vasilevsky, N, Johnson, T, Corday, K, Torniai, C, Brush, M, Segerdell, E, Wilson, M, Shaffer, C, Robinson, D & Haendel, M 2012, 'Research resources: Curating the new eagle-i discovery system', Database, vol. 2012, bar067. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bar067
Vasilevsky N, Johnson T, Corday K, Torniai C, Brush M, Segerdell E et al. Research resources: Curating the new eagle-i discovery system. Database. 2012;2012. bar067. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bar067
Vasilevsky, Nicole ; Johnson, Tenille ; Corday, Karen ; Torniai, Carlo ; Brush, Matthew ; Segerdell, Erik ; Wilson, Melanie ; Shaffer, Christopher ; Robinson, David ; Haendel, Melissa. / Research resources : Curating the new eagle-i discovery system. In: Database. 2012 ; Vol. 2012.
@article{ded00b502e9447dda87bdf520092b73d,
title = "Research resources: Curating the new eagle-i discovery system",
abstract = "Development of biocuration processes and guidelines for new data types or projects is a challenging task. Each project finds its way toward defining annotation standards and ensuring data consistency with varying degrees of planning and different tools to support and/or report on consistency. Further, this process may be data type specific even within the context of a single project. This article describes our experiences with eagle-i, a 2-year pilot project to develop a federated network of data repositories in which unpublished, unshared or otherwise 'invisible' scientific resources could be inventoried and made accessible to the scientific community. During the course of eagle-i development, the main challenges we experienced related to the difficulty of collecting and curating data while the system and the data model were simultaneously built, and a deficiency and diversity of data management strategies in the laboratories from which the source data was obtained. We discuss our approach to biocuration and the importance of improving information management strategies to the research process, specifically with regard to the inventorying and usage of research resources. Finally, we highlight the commonalities and differences between eagle-i and similar efforts with the hope that our lessons learned will assist other biocuration endeavors.",
author = "Nicole Vasilevsky and Tenille Johnson and Karen Corday and Carlo Torniai and Matthew Brush and Erik Segerdell and Melanie Wilson and Christopher Shaffer and David Robinson and Melissa Haendel",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1093/database/bar067",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2012",
journal = "Database : the journal of biological databases and curation",
issn = "1758-0463",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research resources

T2 - Curating the new eagle-i discovery system

AU - Vasilevsky, Nicole

AU - Johnson, Tenille

AU - Corday, Karen

AU - Torniai, Carlo

AU - Brush, Matthew

AU - Segerdell, Erik

AU - Wilson, Melanie

AU - Shaffer, Christopher

AU - Robinson, David

AU - Haendel, Melissa

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Development of biocuration processes and guidelines for new data types or projects is a challenging task. Each project finds its way toward defining annotation standards and ensuring data consistency with varying degrees of planning and different tools to support and/or report on consistency. Further, this process may be data type specific even within the context of a single project. This article describes our experiences with eagle-i, a 2-year pilot project to develop a federated network of data repositories in which unpublished, unshared or otherwise 'invisible' scientific resources could be inventoried and made accessible to the scientific community. During the course of eagle-i development, the main challenges we experienced related to the difficulty of collecting and curating data while the system and the data model were simultaneously built, and a deficiency and diversity of data management strategies in the laboratories from which the source data was obtained. We discuss our approach to biocuration and the importance of improving information management strategies to the research process, specifically with regard to the inventorying and usage of research resources. Finally, we highlight the commonalities and differences between eagle-i and similar efforts with the hope that our lessons learned will assist other biocuration endeavors.

AB - Development of biocuration processes and guidelines for new data types or projects is a challenging task. Each project finds its way toward defining annotation standards and ensuring data consistency with varying degrees of planning and different tools to support and/or report on consistency. Further, this process may be data type specific even within the context of a single project. This article describes our experiences with eagle-i, a 2-year pilot project to develop a federated network of data repositories in which unpublished, unshared or otherwise 'invisible' scientific resources could be inventoried and made accessible to the scientific community. During the course of eagle-i development, the main challenges we experienced related to the difficulty of collecting and curating data while the system and the data model were simultaneously built, and a deficiency and diversity of data management strategies in the laboratories from which the source data was obtained. We discuss our approach to biocuration and the importance of improving information management strategies to the research process, specifically with regard to the inventorying and usage of research resources. Finally, we highlight the commonalities and differences between eagle-i and similar efforts with the hope that our lessons learned will assist other biocuration endeavors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861554524&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861554524&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/database/bar067

DO - 10.1093/database/bar067

M3 - Article

C2 - 22434835

AN - SCOPUS:84861554524

VL - 2012

JO - Database : the journal of biological databases and curation

JF - Database : the journal of biological databases and curation

SN - 1758-0463

M1 - bar067

ER -