JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for RESEARCH-DATAMAN Archives


RESEARCH-DATAMAN Archives

RESEARCH-DATAMAN Archives


RESEARCH-DATAMAN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

RESEARCH-DATAMAN Home

RESEARCH-DATAMAN Home

RESEARCH-DATAMAN  September 2013

RESEARCH-DATAMAN September 2013

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: DataCite DOIs and tissue samples

From:

Keith Jeffery <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Research Data Management discussion list <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 20 Sep 2013 07:48:00 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Miriam, all -

Using any appropriate identifier is fine; the key thing is that the metadata associated with that identifier is sufficient to determine (a) that the object being referred to is not digital; (b) relevant description for discovery; (c) relevant restriction as to use (e.g. has to be viewed in the museum or can be sent for examination) and (d) relevant context (who collected, when, why,ownership, custodianship, related aatasets, publications, equipment and/or facility used for examination.....  All of this can be recorded using CERIF (Common European Research Information Format) http://eurocris.org/Index.php?page=CERIFreleases&t=1 which can interoperate with (i.e. map/generate) common metadata formats used in research.

Best

Keith







Keith G Jeffery Consultants

Prof Keith G Jeffery

E: [log in to unmask]

T: +44 7768 446088

S: keithgjeffery



President ERCIM www.ercim.eu   ([log in to unmask]) 

President emeritus euroCRIS www.eurocris.org   

Past Vice President VLDB www.vldb.org 

Fellow (CITP, CEng) BCS www.bcs.org 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the 

intended recipient only.  If you are not one of the intended 

recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but 

return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





-----Original Message-----

From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jens Klump

Sent: 20 September 2013 08:24

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: DataCite DOIs and tissue samples



Hi Miriam,



The questions you asked with respect to DOIs for tissue samples are the same questions we asked ourselves in the project "Publication and Citation of Primary Research Data" (STD-DOI) <http://www.std-doi.de> if we wanted to assign DOI as identifiers to geological samples. Due to the specific use cases of geological samples and due to the business model for DOIs at the time we decided against using DOI and set up our own handle-based system, now modelled after the example of DataCite. It is now in operation as the International Geo Sample Number (IGSN). More information can be found at <http://www.igsn.org> and <http://dokuwiki.gfz-potsdam.de/datawiki/doku.php?id=igsn:start>.



The IGSN persistent identifier infrastructures could be used for other types of samples or disciplines, too.



Since the inception of the IGSN things have changed and it is clearly feasible to use DOI for physical specimens.



Can DOI be used for physical objects?

Yes, because DOI is a digital identifier for objects, not only an identifier for digital objects.



Where should the DOI point in the case of physical samples?

The DOI should point to a digital representation of the physical object, i.e. a "landing page" with metadata on this object.



What about specimens being consumed or degrading with time?

The consumption of degradation with time of specimens is a common case in geochemistry. The specimen, if published, is still an object that is being referenced by data and literature and has thus become part of the record of science. It is therefore in line with common practice in scientific communication to keep a reference to the object of investigation, even if the object no longer exists.



A really significant feature of DOI and IGSN is their metadata element "relatedIdentifier" which allows to point from one identifier to another identifier, e.g. data to literature, and codify the nature of this relation, e.g. "isCitedBy". This element allows a much tighter integration of literature, data and samples, aiding both systematic and serendipitous discovery. 



Citation of specimens is certainly an important factor in the acknowledgement for curation of the specimen.



The primary goal for the development of the IGSN was to create a system of unambiguous, worldwide resolvable names for geological samples. [1] Unsystematic naming of samples made close to impossible to compile synthesis studies of global geochemistry. I am sure the issue of sample identification is also relevant to tissue samples [2].



Kind regards,



Jens



[1] Lehnert, K. A., and J. Klump (2012), The Geoscience Internet of Things, in Geophysical Research Abstracts, vol. 14, pp. EGU2012–13370, Copernicus Society, Vienna, Austria. [online] Available from:

http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2012/EGU2012-13370.pdf



[2] Engel, M. (2012), Falsche und verunreinigte Zellen - Akademisches Risiko durch falsche Etikettierung, Forschung Aktuell. [online] Available from: http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/forschak/1708955/

(Accessed 21 March 2012)











> ------------------------------

> 

> Date:    Thu, 19 Sep 2013 20:15:29 +0000

> From:    "M. Casula" <[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: DataCite DOIs and tissue samples

> 

> Hello,

> 

> 

> 

> Sometime ago an inquiry was posted on my behalf regarding the use of 

> DOIs for tissue samples to enable their citation in derivative works.

> 

> 

> 

> The added value of aknowledging the source should not be 

> underestimated, as it gives due credit to the curators and donors, and 

> promotes use of the samples for further research. This is infact what 

> is motivating my interest to assign identifiers to tissue samples.

> 

> 

> 

> While in principle it is feasible to use DOIs with tissue samples (by 

> having them resolve to metadata about the samples themselves) the 

> question arises as to whether a digital object identifier should be 

> used for something real as opposed to something digital? Although this 

> may seem somewhat academic, there is a practical issue in this 

> particular case because tissue samples are gradually consumed and will 

> eventually no longer exist. In which case, I wonder whether the use of 

> DOIs to identify real things is advisable?

> 

> 

> 

> Any advice and/or opinion would be welcome.

> 

> 

> 

> Kind regards,

> 

> Miriam

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Miriam Casula, PhD

> Neuropathology Department

> Academic Medical Centre

> University of Amsterdam

> Meibergdreef 9

> The Netherlands

> Tel: +31205665649

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> AMC Disclaimer : http://www.amc.nl/disclaimer

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> ------------------------------

> 

> Date:    Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:46:18 +0100

> From:    Andy Turner <[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: DataCite DOIs and tissue samples

> 

> Hi Miriam et al.,

> 

> It is my understanding that a DOI itself is digital, but it can refer

to a physical sample or other physical data like it can refer to some digital data. Physical samples are clearly data and informational and using DOI's to refer to these is a good idea. Physical samples that are scanned to produce digital data about the sample may not last as long as the digital data. Whether it is worth assigning a DOI comes down to how long that sample is going to be around. If it's not likely to be around for long enough for it to be reused then it probably isn't worth it.

What that means in practice is probably at least weeks, but then I suppose that depends on how fast the field is.

> 

> In terms of tissue samples, these clearly are data in my mind. Indeed,

by extension, whole organisms are too in stored contexts. The thing I struggle with is if there is scope to use a DOI to refer to an individual person or a collection of people that may have been part of a study, are not stored for further study, but can be found via addresses for further study. If there is a DOI for a living person, I'd really like to hear about it.

> 

> Regards,

> 

> Andy

> 

> ________________________________

> From: Research Data Management discussion list

[[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of M. Casula [[log in to unmask]]

> Sent: 19 September 2013 21:15

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: DataCite DOIs and tissue samples

> 

> 

> Hello,

> 

> 

> 

> Sometime ago an inquiry was posted on my behalf regarding the use of

DOIs for tissue samples to enable their citation in derivative works.

> 

> 

> 

> The added value of aknowledging the source should not be

underestimated, as it gives due credit to the curators and donors, and promotes use of the samples for further research. This is infact what is motivating my interest to assign identifiers to tissue samples.

> 

> 

> 

> While in principle it is feasible to use DOIs with tissue samples (by

having them resolve to metadata about the samples themselves) the question arises as to whether a digital object identifier should be used for something real as opposed to something digital? Although this may seem somewhat academic, there is a practical issue in this particular case because tissue samples are gradually consumed and will eventually no longer exist. In which case, I wonder whether the use of DOIs to identify real things is advisable?

> 

> 

> 

> Any advice and/or opinion would be welcome.

> 

> 

> 

> Kind regards,

> 

> Miriam

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Miriam Casula, PhD

> Neuropathology Department

> Academic Medical Centre

> University of Amsterdam

> Meibergdreef 9

> The Netherlands

> Tel: +31205665649

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> AMC Disclaimer : http://www.amc.nl/disclaimer

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> ------------------------------

> 

> End of RESEARCH-DATAMAN Digest - 17 Sep 2013 to 19 Sep 2013

(#2013-131)

>

***********************************************************************







--

Dr. Jens Klump

Centre for GeoInformation Technology

Phone: +49 331 288-1702

FAX: +49 331 288-1703

E-mail: [log in to unmask]

_______________________________________



Helmholtz Centre Potsdam

GFZ German Research Centre For Geosciences Public Law Foundation State of Brandenburg Telegrafenberg, D-14473 Potsdam



"Digital information lasts forever - or five years, whichever comes first."

(Jeff Rothenberg, RAND Corp., 1997)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
September 2008


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager