Biodiversity Informatics

Chapter

Abstract

Biodiversity informatics, the application of informatics techniques to biodiversity data, is rooted in physical objects and nomenclatural codes. Through two user stories, one from wildlife conservation and another from agriculture, we demonstrate the importance and process of biodiversity informatics. We discuss the importance and integration of taxonomic names, identification tools, species distributions, phylogenetic trees, traits, associations, the literature, ontologies, controlled vocabularies, standards, and genomics. Despite the plethora of resources, a seamless, biodiversity question and answer engine is still out of reach. The largest impediment to our user stories is the lack of cross-disciplinary infrastructure and the digitized and standardized data to support services. Satisfying our user stories will require additional investment in infrastructure and data that will be a challenge to manage and sustain. This chapter discusses the basic biodiversity informatics concepts that are at the heart of our user stories, and will be the basis of the user stories of the future as society rushes to cope with global environmental change.

References

  1. Amanqui FK, Serique KJ, Cardoso SD et al (2014) Improving biodiversity data retrieval through semantic search and ontologies. Paper presented at the 2014 IEEE/WIC/ACM international joint conferences on web intelligence and intelligent agent technologies, University of Warsaw, 11–14 Aug 2014Google Scholar
  2. Archibald JM (2015) Endosymbiosis and eukaryotic cell evolution. Curr Biol 25(19):R911–R921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA et al (2000) Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet 25(1):25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Audubon and Cornell Lab of Ornithology (2016) eBird. http://ebird.org/content/ebird/. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  5. Axiell Group (2016) Emu: transforming data into knowledge. https://emu.kesoftware.com. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  6. Balhoff JP, Dahdul WM, Kothari CR et al (2010) Phenex: ontological annotation of phenotypic diversity. PLoS One 5:e10500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Balhoff JP, Dahdul WM, Lapp H (2011) Employing reasoning within the Phenoscape knowledgebase. Proceedings of the international conference on biomedical ontology (ICBO), University at Buffalo, 28–30 July 2011, p 230. http://icbo.buffalo.edu/ICBO-2011_Proceedings.pdf
  8. Balhoff JP, Mikó I, Yoder MJ et al (2013) A semantic model for species description applied to the ensign wasps (Hymenoptera: Evaniidae) of New Caledonia. Syst Biol 62:639–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bandrowski A, Brinkman R, Brochhausen M et al (2016) The ontology for biomedical investigations. PLoS One 11:e0154556. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) (2016) BHL: Biodiversity Heritage Library. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  11. Bisby FA (2000) The quiet revolution: biodiversity informatics and the internet. Science 289:2309–2312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boyle B, Hopkins N, Lu Z (2013) The taxonomic name resolution service: an online tool for automated standardization of plant names. BMC Bioinform 14:16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brickell DC, Alexander C, Cubey JJ et al (eds) (2016) International code of nomenclature for cultivated plants, 9th edn. Belgium, International Society of Horticultural ScienceGoogle Scholar
  14. California Academy of Sciences (2016) Welcome to iNaturalist.org Guides! http://www.inaturalist.org/guides/. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  15. Carbon S, Ireland A, Mungall CJ et al (2009) AmiGO: online access to ontology and annotation data. Bioinformatics 25:288–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (2016) Convention on biological diversity. https://www.cbd.int. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  17. Chandler M, See L, Copas K et al (2017) Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring. Biol Conserv. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.004
  18. Chapman AD (2009) Numbers of living species in Australia and the world report. Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra. http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/abrs/publications/other/species-numbers/index.html. Accessed 4 Dec 2016
  19. Chawuthai R, Takeda H, Wuwongse V et al (2016) Presenting and preserving the change in taxonomic knowledge for linked data. Semant Web 7(6):589–616. doi: 10.3233/SW-150192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Catalogue of Life (COL) (2016) http://www.catalogueoflife.org/. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  21. Collins RA, Cruickshank RH (2012) The seven deadly sins of DNA barcoding. Mol Ecol Resour 13(6):969–975. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12046 Google Scholar
  22. Cornell University (2016a) The Cornell Lab: Merlin. http://merlin.allaboutbirds.org. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  23. Cornell University (2016b) The Cornell Lab of Ornithology Macaulay Library. http://macaulaylibrary.org. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  24. Costello MJ, Wilson S, Houlding B (2012) Predicting total global species richness using rates of species description and estimates of taxonomic effort. Syst Biol 61(5):871–883. http://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cross V, Stroe C, Hu X et al (2011) Aligning the parasite experiment ontology and the ontology for biomedical investigations using AgreementMaker. Proceedings of International Conference on Biomedical Ontology (ICBO), University at Buffalo, 28–30 July 2011, pp 125–131. http://icbo.buffalo.edu/ICBO-2011_Proceedings.pdf. Accessed 4 Dec 2016
  26. Cui H (2012) CharaParser for fine-grained semantic annotation of organism morphological descriptions. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63:738–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dallwitz MJ (2010) Overview of the DELTA System. http://delta-intkey.com/www/overview.htm. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  28. Dececchi TA, Balhoff JP, Lapp H (2015) Toward synthesizing our knowledge of morphology: using ontologies and machine reasoning to extract presence/absence evolutionary phenotypes across studies. Syst Biol 64:936–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. DINA Consortium (2016) Welcome to the DINA project! http://www.dina-project.net. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  30. DiscoverLife (2016) IDnature guides. http://discoverlife.org/mp/20q. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  31. Droege G, Barker K, Astrin JJ et al (2014) The Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) Data Portal. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D607–D612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Droege G, Barker K, Seborg O et al (2016) The Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) data standard specification. Database 2016: baw125Google Scholar
  33. Ellwood ER, Dunckel BA, Flemons P et al (2015) Accelerating the digitization of biodiversity research specimens through online public participation. Bioscience 65(4):383–396. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biv005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Encyclopedia of Life (EOL) (2016) http://www.eol.org. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  35. Evans MEK, Merow C, Record S et al (2016) Towards process-based range modeling of many species. Trends Ecol Evol 31(11):860–871. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2016.08.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Farnsworth EJ, Chu M, Kress WJ et al (2013) Next-generation field guides. Bioscience 63(11):891–899. doi: 10.1525/bio.2013.63.11.8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Federhen S (2012) The NCBI Taxonomy database. Nucleic Acids Res 40:D136–D143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Franz N (2010) Biological taxonomy and ontology development: scope and limitations. Biodivers Inform 7:45–66Google Scholar
  39. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2016) Global Biodiversity Information Facility: free and open access to biodiversity data. http://www.gbif.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  40. GBIF Science Committee (2016) GBIF science review 2016. http://www.gbiforg/resource/82873. Accessed 14 Nov 2016
  41. Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) (eds) (2011+, continuously updated) The GGBN Data Portal. GGBN Secretariat, NMNH, Washington, DC. Compiled by GGBN Technical Management, BGBM, Berlin, Germany. http://data.ggbn.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  42. Gillison A, Asner G, Fernandes E et al (2016) Biodiversity and agriculture in dynamic landscapes: integrating ground and remotely-sensed baseline surveys. J Environ Manag 177:9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. GitHub Inc. (2016) GitHub. https://github.com. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  44. Global Names Index (GNI) (2016) http://gni.globalnames.org. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  45. Global Names Recognition and Discovery (GNRD) (2016) http://gnrd.globalnames.org/. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  46. Gliozzo A, Biran O, Patwardhan S et al (2013) Semantic technologies in IBM Watson™. In: Proceedings of the fourth workshop on teaching natural language processing, Aug 4–9 2013. Sofia, Bulgaria, pp 85–92. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W13-3413. Accessed 29 Nov 2016
  47. Godfray H, Beddington J, Crute I et al (2010) Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327:812–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gratton P, Marta S, Bocksberger G et al (2016) A world of sequences: can we use georeferenced nucleotide databases for a robust automated phylogeography? J Biogeogr. doi:10.1111/jbi.12786Google Scholar
  49. Gray CL, Hill SLL, Newbold T et al (2016) Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat Commun 7:12306. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Gries C, Gilbert E, Franz N (2014) Symbiota – a virtual platform for creating voucher-based biodiversity information communities. Biodiv Data J 2:e1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gwinn NE, Rinaldo C (2009) The Biodiversity Heritage Library: sharing biodiversity literature with the world. IFLA J 35:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL et al (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc Biol Sci 270(1512):313–321. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Heidorn PBH (2011) Biodiversity informatics. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 37:38–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hill AW, Guralnick R, Flemons P et al (2009) Location, location, location: utilizing pipelines and services to more effectively georeference the world’s biodiversity data. BMC Bioinf 10(Suppl 14):S3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-S14-S3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hinchliff CE, Smith SA, Allman JF et al (2015) Synthesis of phylogeny and taxonomy into a comprehensive tree of life. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112(41):12764–12769. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1423041112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hobern D, Apostolico A, Arnaud E et al (2013) Global biodiversity informatics outlook: delivering biodiversity knowledge in the information age. GBIF Secretariat 41 p. http://www.gbif.org/resource/80859. Accessed 29 Nov 2016
  57. Holt RD (2016) Geographical variation in the availability of natural history field guides: personal reflections, causes, and consequences. Am Nat 188S:S90–S95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hortal J, De Bello F, Alexandre J et al (2015) Seven shortfalls that beset large-scale knowledge of biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:523–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. The International Plant Names Index (IPNI) (2012) http://www.ipni.org. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  60. Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) (2016) http://www.itis.gov. Accessed 11 Nov 2016
  61. Jensen LJ, Bork P (2010) Ontologies in quantitative biology: a basis for comparison, integration, and discovery. PLoS Biol 8(5):e1000374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Jetz W, McPherson JM, Guralnick RP (2012) Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: toward a global map of life. TREE 27:151–159Google Scholar
  63. Joly A, Goëau H, Glotin H et al (2015) LifeCLEF 2015: multimedia life species identification challenges. In: Mothe J, Savoy J, Kamps J et al (eds) Experimental IR meets multilinguality, multimodality, and interaction: 6th international conference of the CLEF Association, CLEF’15, Toulouse, France, September 8–11, 2015, Proceedings. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 462-483. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24027-5_46
  64. Kaschner K, Kesner-Reyes K, Garilao C (2016) AquaMaps: predicted range maps for aquatic species. www.aquamaps.org, Version 08/2016
  65. Kelling S, Hochachka WM, Fink D et al (2009) Data-intensive science: a new paradigm for biodiversity studies. Bioscience 59(7):613–620. doi: 10.1525/bio.2009.59.7.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. King AMQ (ed) (2011) Virus taxonomy: classification and nomenclature of viruses: ninth report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  67. Kumar N, Belhumeur PN, Biswas A (2012) Leafsnap: a computer vision system for automatic plant species identification. In: Fitzgibbon A, Lazebnik S, Perona P et al (eds) Computer Vision – ECCV 2012: 12th European conference on computer vision, Florence, Italy, October 2012. Proceedings Part II. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 502–516Google Scholar
  68. Lapage SP, Sneath PHA, Lessel EF et al (eds) (1992) International code of nomenclature of bacteria. ASM Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  69. Lapp H, Morris RA, Catapano T et al (2011) Organizing our knowledge of biodiversity. Bull Assoc Inf Sci Technol 37:38–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Leary PR, Remsen DP, Norton CN et al (2007) uBioRSS: tracking taxonomic literature using RSS. Bioinformatics 23:1434–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lis JA, Lis B, Ziaja DJ (2016) In BOLD we trust? A commentary on the reliability of specimen identification for DNA barcoding: a case study on burrower bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Cydnidae). Zootaxa 4114(1):83–86. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4114.1.6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Lucidcentral (2016) Lucid. http://www.lucidcentral.com. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  73. Mabee PM, Ashburner M, Cronk Q et al (2007) Phenotype ontologies: the bridge between genomics and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 22(7):345–350. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Malaverri JG, Vilar B, Medeiros CB (2009) A tool based on web services to query biodiversity information. In: Proceeding of the 5th international conference on web information systems and technologies (WEBIST), Lisbon Portugal, 23–26 March 2009, pp 305–310Google Scholar
  75. Malone J, Holloway E, Adamusiak T et al (2010) Modeling sample variables with an Experimental Factor Ontology. Bioinformatics 26(8):1112–1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Manda P, Balhoff JP, Lapp H (2015) Using the phenoscape knowledgebase to relate genetic perturbations to phenotypic evolution. Genesis 53:561–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. McNeill J, Barrie FR, Buck WR et al (2012) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. Regnum Veg 154(1):208Google Scholar
  78. Midford PE, Dececchi TA, Balhoff JP et al (2013) The vertebrate taxonomy ontology: a framework for reasoning across model organism and species phenotypes. J Biomed Semant 4:34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Miller SE, Hausmann A, Hallwachs W et al (2016) Advancing taxonomy and bioinventories with DNA barcodes. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 371(1702):20150339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Map of Life (MOL) (2016) Map of Life: putting biodiversity on the map. https://mol.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  81. Mora C, Tittensor DP, Adl S et al (2011) How many species are there on Earth and in the ocean? PLoS Biol 9(8):e1001127. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Morris RA, Barve V, Carausu M et al (2013) Discovery and publishing of primary biodiversity data associated with multimedia resources: The Audubon Core strategies and approaches. Biodivers Inform 8(2):185–197. doi: 10.17161/bi.v8i2.4117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Mukherjee S, Stamatis D, Bertsch J et al (2016) Genomes OnLine Database (GOLD) v.6: data updates and feature enhancements. Nucleic Acids Res. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw992
  84. Nakhleh L (2013) Computational approaches to species phylogeny inference and gene tree reconciliation. TREE 28:719–728Google Scholar
  85. National Center for Biotechnology Information: Taxonomy Database (NCBI) (2016) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy. Accessed 20 Nov 2016
  86. Noy NF, Shah NH, Whetzel PL et al (2009) BioPortal: ontologies and integrated data resources at the click of a mouse. Nucleic Acids Res, 37 (Web Server issue):W170–W173. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp440
  87. OBO Technical WG (2016) The OBO Foundry: phenotypic quality. http://obofoundry.org/ontology/pato.html. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  88. Open Tree of Life (2016) Open Tree of Life. https://tree.opentreeoflife.org/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  89. Page RDM (2008) Biodiversity informatics: the challenge of linking data and the role of shared identifiers. Brief Bioinform 9(5):345–354. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbn022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Page LM, MacFadden BJ, Fortes JA et al (2015) Digitization of biodiversity collections reveals biggest data on biodiversity. Bioscience 65:841–842. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biv104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Parr CS, Guralnick R, Cellinese N et al (2012) Evolutionary informatics: unifying knowledge about the diversity of life. TREE 27:94–103Google Scholar
  92. Parr CS, Wilson N, Leary P et al (2014) The Encyclopedia of Life v2: providing global access to knowledge about life on Earth. Biodiv Data J 2:e1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Parr CS, Wilson N, Schulz KS, Leary P, Rice J, Hammock J, Corrigan B (2016) TraitBank: practical semantics for organism attribute data in Special Issue on Semantics for Biodiversity. Semantic Web 7(6):577–588. doi: 10.3233/SW-150190
  94. Patterson DJ (2014) Helping protists to find their place in a Big Data world. Acta Protozool 53:115–128Google Scholar
  95. Patterson DJ, Cooper J, Kirk PM et al (2010) Names are key to the big new biology. TREE 25:686–691Google Scholar
  96. Patterson D, Mozzherin D, Shorthouse DP et al (2016) Challenges with using names to link digital biodiversity information. Biodivers Data J 4(4):e8080. doi: 10.3897/BDJ.4.e8080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Pereira HM, Ferrier S, Walters M et al (2013) Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339(6117):277–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Peterson AT, Papeş M, Soberón J (2015) Mechanistic and correlative models of ecological niches. Eur J Ecol 1(2):28–38. doi: 10.1515/eje-2015-0014 Google Scholar
  99. Phenoscape (2016a) Phenoscape. http://phenoscape.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  100. Phenoscape (2016b) Phenoscape wiki. http://phenoscape.org/wiki/EQ_for_character_matrices. Accessed 29 Nov 2016
  101. Poelchau M, Childers C, Moore G et al (2015) The i5k Workspace@NAL – enabling genomic data access, visualization and curation of arthropod genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 43(Database issue):D714–D719. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku983 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Poelen JH, Simons JD, Mungall CJ (2014) Global biotic interactions: an open infrastructure to share and analyze species-interaction datasets. Ecol Inform 24:148–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Poisot T, Gravel D, Leroux S et al (2015) Synthetic datasets and community tools for the rapid testing of ecological hypotheses. Ecography (Cop) 38:001–007. doi: 10.1111/ecog.01941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. ProtectedPlanet (2016) Protected planet: discover our thematic areas. https://protectedplanet.net. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  105. Purves D, Scharlemann JPW, Harfoot M et al (2013) Time to model all life on Earth. Nature 493(7432):295–297. doi: 10.1038/493295a Google Scholar
  106. Pyle RL, Michel E (2008) ZooBank: developing a nomenclatural tool for unifying 250 years of biological information. Zootaxa 1950:39–50Google Scholar
  107. Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN (2007) BOLD: the barcode of life data system. Mol Ecol Notes 7:355–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Read WJ, Demetriou G, Nenadic G et al (2016) The BioHub knowledge base: ontology and repository for sustainable biosourcing. J Biomed Semant 7:30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Rees T (compiler) (2016) The interim register of marine and nonmarine genera. http://www.irmng.org. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  110. Remsen D (2016) The use and limits of scientific names in biological informatics. ZooKeys 550:207–223. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.550.9546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Ride WDL, Cogger HJ, Dupuis C et al (eds) (1999) International code of zoological nomenclature, 4th edn. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, LondonGoogle Scholar
  112. Rios NE, Bart HL (2010) GEOLocate (Version 3.22) [Computer software]. Tulane University Museum of Natural History, Belle Chasse, LAGoogle Scholar
  113. RO Project (2016) oborel/obo-relations. https://github.com/oborel/obo-relations/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  114. Roskov Y, Abucay L, Orrell T et al (2016) Species 2000 & ITIS catalogue of life, 2016 annual checklist. Digital resource at www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2016. Species 2000: Naturalis, Leiden, the Netherlands ISSN 2405-884X
  115. Ruggiero MA, Gordon DP, Orrell TM et al (2015) A higher level classification of all living organisms. PLoS One 10(4):e0119248. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Sanderson MJ, Donoghue MJ, Piel WH et al (1994) TreeBASE: a prototype database of phylogenetic analyses and an interactive tool for browsing the phylogeny of life. Am J Bot 81:183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Santschi L, Hanner RH, Ratnasingham S et al (2013) Barcoding life’s matrix: translating biodiversity genomics into high school settings to enhance life science education. PLoS Biol 11(1):1-8 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001471
  118. Schmitz OJ, Hambäck PA, Beckerman AP (2000) Trophic cascades in terrestrial systems: a review of the effects of carnivore removals on plants. Am Nat 155:144–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Schwartz MD, Betancourt JL, Weltzin JF (2012) From Caprio’s lilacs to the USA National Phenology Network. Front Ecol Environ 10(6):324–327. doi: 10.1890/110281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Seltmann KC, Pénzes Z, Yoder MJ et al (2013) Utilizing descriptive statements from the Biodiversity Heritage Library to expand the Hymenoptera Anatomy Ontology. PLoS One 8:e55674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Shen Y-Y, Chen X, Murphy RW (2013) Assessing DNA barcoding as a tool for species identification and data quality control. PLoS One 8(2):1–5. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057125 Google Scholar
  122. Simons JD, Yuan M, Carollo C et al (2013) Building a fisheries trophic interaction database for management and modeling research in the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem. Bull Mar Sci 89:135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Slashdot Media (2016) sourceforge. https://sourceforge.net/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  124. Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C et al (2007) The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol 25:1251–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Smith VS, Rycroft SD, Harman KT et al (2009) Scratchpads: a data-publishing framework to build, share and manage information on the diversity of life. BMC Bioinf 10(Suppl 14):S6. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/10/S14/S6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Smithsonian Institution (2016a) eMammal. https://emammal.si.edu/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  127. Smithsonian Institution (2016b) Global genome initiative. https://ggi.si.edu. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  128. Soldatova LN, King RD (2006) An ontology of scientific experiments. J R Soc Interface 3:795–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Solomon DJ, Laakso M, Björk BC (2013) A longitudinal comparison of citation rates and growth among open access journals. J Inf Secur 7:642–650Google Scholar
  130. Specify Software Project (2016) Specify. http://specifyx.specifysoftware.org. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  131. Staats M, Arulandhu AJ, Gravendeel B et al (2016) Advances in DNA metabarcoding for food and wildlife forensic species identification. Anal Bioanal Chem 408(17):4615–4630. doi: 10.1007/s00216-016-9595-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Stucky BJ, Deck J, Conlin T et al (2014) The BiSciCol Triplifier: bringing biodiversity data to the Semantic Web. BMC Bioinf 15:257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Suttle KB, Thomsen MA, Power ME (2007) Species interactions reverse grassland responses to changing climate. Science 315:640–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Tarnecki JH, Wallace AA, Simons JD et al (2016) Progression of a Gulf of Mexico food web supporting Atlantis ecosystem model development. Fish Res 179:237–250. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2016.02.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Taxonomic Databases Working Group (TDWG) (2016) Biodiversity information standards: TDWG. http://www.tdwg.org. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  136. The GRIN-Global Project (2016) The GRIN-Global Project. http://www.grin-global.org. Accessed 3 Dec 2016
  137. The Phyloinformatics Research Foundation, Inc. (2016) TreeBASE: a database of phylogenetic knowledge. https://treebase.org/. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  138. Theobald EJ, Ettinger AK, Burgess HK et al (2015) Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biol Conserv 181:236–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Thessen AE (2016) Adoption of machine learning techniques in ecology and earth science. One Ecosyst 1:e8621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Thessen AE, Cui H, Mozzherin D (2012) Applications of natural language processing in biodiversity science. Adv Bioinforma 2012:1–17. doi: 10.1155/2012/391574 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Thessen AE, Bunker DE, Buttigieg PL et al (2016) Emerging semantics to link phenotype and environment. PeerJ 3:e1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Tylianakis JM, Didham RK, Bascompte J et al (2008) Global change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol Lett 11:1351–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. University of Oxford (2016) BRAHMS database. http://herbaria.plants.ox.ac.uk/bol/. Accessed 21 Nov 2016
  144. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2016) National agricultural library thesaurus and glossary. http://agclass.nal.usda.gov. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  145. United States Geological Survey (USGS) (2016) Biodiversity Information Serving Our Nation (BISON) – Explore & download U.S. species occurrence data & maps. https://bison.usgs.gov/#home. Accessed 22 Nov 2016
  146. Walls RL, Deck J, Guralnick R et al (2014) Semantics in support of biodiversity knowledge discovery: an introduction to the Biological Collections Ontology and related ontologies. PLoS One 9:e89606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Walter DE, Winterton S (2007) Keys and the crisis in taxonomy: extinction or reinvention? Annu Rev Entomol 52(1):193–208. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.51.110104.151054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. White JW, Hunt LA, Boote KJ et al (2013) Integrated description of agricultural field experiments and production: The ICASA Version 2.0 data standards. Comput Electron Agric 96:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Widrow B, Hartenstein R, Hecht-Nielson R (2005) Eulogy: Karl Steinbuch 1917-2005. IEEE Computational Intelligence Society Newsl 5Google Scholar
  150. Wieczorek J, Bloom D, Guralnick R et al (2012) Darwin Core: an evolving community-developed biodiversity data standard. PLoS One 7(1):e29715. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Wilson EO (ed) (1988) Biodiversity. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  152. Wilson EO (1999) The diversity of life. WW Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  153. Wong EHK, Hanner RH (2008) DNA barcoding detects market substitution in North American seafood. Food Res Int 41:828–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. WoRMS Editorial Board (2016) World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org at VLIZ. Accessed 21 Nov 2016 doi: 10.14284/170
  155. Xiang Z, Mungall CJ, Ruttenberg A et al (2011) Ontobee: a linked data server and browser for ontology terms. In: Proceedings of international conference on biomedical ontology (ICBO), University at Buffalo, 28–30 July 2011, pp 279–281Google Scholar
  156. Yoder MJ, Mikó I, Seltmann KC et al (2010) A gross anatomy ontology for Hymenoptera. PLoS One 5:e15991CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Agricultural LibraryBeltsvilleUSA
  2. 2.Ronin Institute for Independent ScholarshipMonclairUSA
  3. 3.The Data DetektivWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations