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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |