Cargando…

Community annotation in biology

Attempts to engage the scientific community to annotate biological data (such as protein/gene function) stored in databases have not been overly successful. There are several hypotheses on why this has not been successful but it is not clear which of these hypotheses are correct. In this study we ha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mazumder, Raja, Natale, Darren A, Julio, Jessica Anne Ecalnir, Yeh, Lai-Su, Wu, Cathy H
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2834641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20167071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6150-5-12
_version_ 1782178587263107072
author Mazumder, Raja
Natale, Darren A
Julio, Jessica Anne Ecalnir
Yeh, Lai-Su
Wu, Cathy H
author_facet Mazumder, Raja
Natale, Darren A
Julio, Jessica Anne Ecalnir
Yeh, Lai-Su
Wu, Cathy H
author_sort Mazumder, Raja
collection PubMed
description Attempts to engage the scientific community to annotate biological data (such as protein/gene function) stored in databases have not been overly successful. There are several hypotheses on why this has not been successful but it is not clear which of these hypotheses are correct. In this study we have surveyed 50 biologists (who have recently published a paper characterizing a gene or protein) to better understand what would make them interested in providing input/contributions to biological databases. Based on our survey two things become clear: a) database managers need to proactively contact biologists to solicit contributions; and b) potential contributors need to be provided with an easy-to-use interface and clear instructions on what to annotate. Other factors such as 'reward' and 'employer/funding agency recognition' previously perceived as motivators was found to be less important. Based on this study we propose community annotation projects should devote resources to direct solicitation for input and streamlining of the processes or interfaces used to collect this input. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by I. King Jordan, Daniel Haft and Yuriy Gusev
format Text
id pubmed-2834641
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28346412010-03-09 Community annotation in biology Mazumder, Raja Natale, Darren A Julio, Jessica Anne Ecalnir Yeh, Lai-Su Wu, Cathy H Biol Direct Opinion Attempts to engage the scientific community to annotate biological data (such as protein/gene function) stored in databases have not been overly successful. There are several hypotheses on why this has not been successful but it is not clear which of these hypotheses are correct. In this study we have surveyed 50 biologists (who have recently published a paper characterizing a gene or protein) to better understand what would make them interested in providing input/contributions to biological databases. Based on our survey two things become clear: a) database managers need to proactively contact biologists to solicit contributions; and b) potential contributors need to be provided with an easy-to-use interface and clear instructions on what to annotate. Other factors such as 'reward' and 'employer/funding agency recognition' previously perceived as motivators was found to be less important. Based on this study we propose community annotation projects should devote resources to direct solicitation for input and streamlining of the processes or interfaces used to collect this input. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by I. King Jordan, Daniel Haft and Yuriy Gusev BioMed Central 2010-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC2834641/ /pubmed/20167071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6150-5-12 Text en Copyright ©2010 Mazumder et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Opinion
Mazumder, Raja
Natale, Darren A
Julio, Jessica Anne Ecalnir
Yeh, Lai-Su
Wu, Cathy H
Community annotation in biology
title Community annotation in biology
title_full Community annotation in biology
title_fullStr Community annotation in biology
title_full_unstemmed Community annotation in biology
title_short Community annotation in biology
title_sort community annotation in biology
topic Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2834641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20167071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6150-5-12
work_keys_str_mv AT mazumderraja communityannotationinbiology
AT nataledarrena communityannotationinbiology
AT juliojessicaanneecalnir communityannotationinbiology
AT yehlaisu communityannotationinbiology
AT wucathyh communityannotationinbiology