[Nhcoll-l] Converging Digital and Extended Specimens: An observation on nomenclature
Dirk Neumann
neumann at snsb.de
Thu Jan 28 02:47:06 EST 2021
Dear Alex and all,
maybe few cautionary remarks, even though I understand (and share) the
huge opportunities digital specimens have and enthusiasm in this discussion.
'Digital specimens' - irrespective how they are finally defined -
increase the visibility of these specimens, and the collections. Not
only for researchers (our key audience), but also for others. We know,
and the European Commission is very clear on this, that from a Nagoya /
ABS-legislation perspective, such data on specimens is used for
compliance check on ABS. Therefore, such systems will permit increased
checks by national authorities on the use of specimens, as revealed by
the data that can be retrieved. These include domestic compliance – in
some EU Member States, for the risk-based compliance checks of national
authorities, databases have been set up that screen for “uses” and
“utilisation” of specimens in the sense of the NP – and provider
countries – again, some have set up scanning systems to detect whether
genetic resources are being used as authorised in permits. Increased
visibility will increase the pressure on the compliance side for
institutions ‘Powered by DOI’ (e.g. for CETAF members).
Speaking as co-chair of the respective Legislations & Regulations
working groups of SPHNC and CETAF, we are not sure if currently all are
aware and have the capacity to cope with this kind of increased ‘impact
on research’ the system offers (to all users), especially as many
collection holding institutions seem not to be fully prepared to manage
associated legal risks, increased availability of information and
visibility of specimens introduce.
For example, we see in some ABS contracts with certain Providing
Countries that these require 'authorisation' before publication of data
through national authorities or ministries, especially if "digital
specimens" include 'Digital Sequence Information'. A condition that is
often overlooked by respective researchers and caused some troubles with
'publication' lately. This raises the question how contractual
information and obligations are and can be linked with 'digital specimens'.
For an “open Digital Specimen” the steps to determine whether a specimen
is open (or not) prior to publication needs consideration. Under ABS
conditions and especially in the light of the current controversial
discussion on Digital Sequence Information (DSI) (cf. scoping study on
the potential of a Global Multilateral Benefit Sharing Mechanisms ),
some stakeholders and Providing Countries have a keen interest in
governing conditions and uses of specimens stored outside their
jurisdiction e.g. in Natural History Collections in the northern
hemisphere. Specimen data of two major CETAF members (Kew & MNHN) have
recently been cited in a CBD report as examples demonstrating the need
to apply pre-CBD responsibilities for the collection holding institutions.
This issue is not academic.
Without doubt, data on digital specimens, e.g. available via platforms
like GBIF or BOLD, will be key not only but especially for many of the
monitoring elements under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.
This surely is the one opportunity to boost collection, as they set the
baselines with their specimen data for many if not most of these parameters.
However, prior to the release of such data, associated conditions for
such specimens must be checked through the platform. If the
responsibility for the creation of an (open) Digital Specimen – and thus
the correct setting of parameters – is with the respective scientists, a
mechanism for handling submissions must be flexible enough to avoid
damage for the respective collection holding institutions.
All the best
Dirk
Am 22.01.2021 um 11:26 schrieb Alex Hardisty:
>
> Andy, Derek 😊
>
> Thanks Mike for your remarks.
>
> On the ‘twin’ remark, DiSSCo has used various terms at moments in the
> past 3 years and digital twin is the present one. My personal
> preference is to express as follows: ‘/A Digital Specimen is a digital
> representation on the Internet (a surrogate) corresponding to an
> //identifiable physical specimen in a natural science collection./’ –
> a ‘Specimen on the Internet’ if you will.
>
> The current use of the term by DiSSCo ‘twin’ reflects two aspects. One
> is a political dimension among the policy and workprogramme statements
> of the European Commission as the EC finalises and enters into the
> next 7-year framework programme for research, ‘Horizon Europe’. Here
> among the funding instruments and desired work focuses, the idea of
> digital twins is prominent in the ICT domain. The other aspect relates
> to the fact that we can foresee entirely different kinds of usages of
> physical specimens and digital specimen data in the future. There are
> kinds of work that can only be done based on the physical specimen,
> such as analysing it’s chemistry. It is clear that in the future there
> will be entirely new kinds of work that can’t be done on physical
> specimens but which rely on the availability in digital form of data
> derived from and related to physical specimens – data science. To
> extend Derek’s reference to his offspring, the twin is not identical
> and it can have a different job to that of its sibling.
> Extended/extendable Digital Specimen digital objects are a new
> abstraction and this is what the consultation is principally concerned
> with.
>
> On persistent identifiers, these are not specifically a topic of the
> first round of consultation. It is planned to include discourse about
> a persistent identification scheme for Digital Specimens (DS) in a
> subsequent round planned for late Spring. To be clear again, we are
> talking here only about persistent identification of Digital Specimen
> digital objects and nothing else. We are not proposing to alter or
> replace any scheme of identification (persistent or not) presently in
> use for physical objects. PIDs for DS will sit alongside identifiers
> of anything else and have their own role to play.
>
> In the present decade, enabled by the Internet we will enter a new era
> of what it means to work with specimens. DiSSCo and BCoN are at the
> forefront of thinking about that. The global team behind the coming
> consultation wants to consult as widely as possible, taking all views
> into account to build common understanding and direction of that future.
>
> Kind regards
>
> --
>
> Alex
>
> Alex Hardisty Alex Hardisty
>
> Director of Informatics Projects Cyfarwyddwr y Prosiect Gwybodeg
>
> School of Computer Science and Informatics Yr Ysgol Cyfrifiadureg a
> Gwybodeg
>
> Cardiff University, Queens Buildings Prifysgol Caerdydd, Adeiladau’r
> Frenhines
>
> 5, The Parade, Cardiff CF24 3AA 5, The Parade, Caerdydd CF24 3AA
>
> United Kingdom Y Deyrnas Unedig
>
> tel: +44 (0)29 2087 4861 ffôn : +44 (0)29 2087 4861
>
> email: hardistyar at cardiff.ac.uk
> <mailto:hardistyar at cardiff.ac.uk>ebost: hardistyar at caerdydd.ac.uk
> <mailto:hardistyar at caerdydd.ac.uk>
>
> skype: alex.hardisty skype: alex.hardisty
>
> orcid id: orcid.org/0000-0002-0767-4310
> <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0767-4310>
>
> *From:*Bentley, Andrew Charles <abentley at ku.edu>
> *Sent:* 21 January 2021 20:58
> *To:* Derek Sikes <dssikes at alaska.edu>
> *Cc:* Howe, Michael P.A. <mhowe at bgs.ac.uk>; nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu;
> Alex Hardisty <HardistyAR at cardiff.ac.uk>
> *Subject:* Re: [Nhcoll-l] Converging Digital and Extended Specimens:
> An observation on nomenclature
>
> *External email to Cardiff University - *Take care when
> replying/opening attachments or links.
>
> *Nid ebost mewnol o Brifysgol Caerdydd yw hwn - *Cymerwch ofal wrth
> ateb/agor atodiadau neu ddolenni.
>
> Agreed. However, the point here is that if you had a photo/x-ray, CT
> scan and vital staistics of one of your twins, you couldn’t actually
> get rid of the child right?
>
> Andy
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> Andy Bentley
>
> Ichthyology Collection Manager
>
> University of Kansas
>
> Biodiversity Institute
>
> Dyche Hall
>
> 1345 Jayhawk Boulevard
>
> Lawrence, KS, 66045-7561
>
> USA
>
> Tel: (785) 864-3863
>
> Fax: (785) 864-5335
>
> Email: abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>
>
> http://ichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu
> <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7CHardistyAR%40cardiff.ac.uk%7Cb68b30d73b974f92850908d8be4f33f9%7Cbdb74b3095684856bdbf06759778fcbc%7C1%7C0%7C637468595607109744%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=z8xHCS%2BeUG9uvXNt6Xl5qJpEAmHElhujsWw5SiPXqcI%3D&reserved=0>
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> *From: *Derek Sikes <dssikes at alaska.edu <mailto:dssikes at alaska.edu>>
> *Date: *Thursday, January 21, 2021 at 1:40 PM
> *To: *Andrew Bentley <abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>>
> *Cc: *"Howe, Michael P.A." <mhowe at bgs.ac.uk <mailto:mhowe at bgs.ac.uk>>,
> "nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>"
> <nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>>, Alex
> Hardisty <HardistyAR at cardiff.ac.uk <mailto:HardistyAR at cardiff.ac.uk>>
> *Subject: *Re: [Nhcoll-l] Converging Digital and Extended Specimens:
> An observation on nomenclature
>
> I'll just chime in here, as a father of identical twins, that anyone
> who thinks the word twin means 100% identical is incorrect.
>
> -Derek
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 9:18 AM Bentley, Andrew Charles
> <abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael
>
> I agree on both counts and have indicated as much to the DiSCCCo
> folks. I too was worried that the word “twin” would and could be
> misconstrued and that the vast amount of additional information
> provided by the specimen itself would be lost or ignored. We have
> struggled in the past with views that once a specimen is digitized
> that the specimen can be discarded, and I worry that this
> terminology simply reinforces that obviously incorrect connotation.
>
> I also agree that the coining of a new term for persistent
> identifiers simply muddies the water even further – unless there
> is something unique about PIDs that is not already conveyed by
> existing identifiers – which I am not sure there is. Our
> community has struggled with a proliferation of unique identifier
> systems and no coalescence around a single system that works for
> everyone. Adding another one to the mix I fear will not solve the
> problem but rather exacerbate it.
>
> These are both great discussion threads that I think should be
> mentioned during the consultation coming up. I have copied Alex
> Hardisty who is more involved in the DiSCCCo process that
> developed both of these terms and may have more insights.
>
> Thanks
>
> Andy
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> Andy Bentley
>
> Ichthyology Collection Manager
>
> University of Kansas
>
> Biodiversity Institute
>
> Dyche Hall
>
> 1345 Jayhawk Boulevard
>
> Lawrence, KS, 66045-7561
>
> USA
>
> Tel: (785) 864-3863
>
> Fax: (785) 864-5335
>
> Email: abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>
>
> http://ichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu
> <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7CHardistyAR%40cardiff.ac.uk%7Cb68b30d73b974f92850908d8be4f33f9%7Cbdb74b3095684856bdbf06759778fcbc%7C1%7C0%7C637468595607119695%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=x99RzlHzhG8EOAIDlh69YBRckE25CRu%2F4ppyH1vqXxw%3D&reserved=0>
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> *From: *"Howe, Michael P.A." <mhowe at bgs.ac.uk
> <mailto:mhowe at bgs.ac.uk>>
> *Date: *Thursday, January 21, 2021 at 12:09 PM
> *To: *Andrew Bentley <abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>>,
> "nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>"
> <nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>>
> *Subject: *Converging Digital and Extended Specimens: An
> observation on nomenclature
>
> Dear All,
>
> As the exciting work that many of us have been engaged in for the
> past 10 - 20 years, to digitze our collections and thereby make
> them more accessible, grows in support, complexity and
> achievement, I wish to offer a warning and a comment.
>
> I believe the term "digital twin" should be avoided and replaced
> by "digital proxy", "digital surrogate" or just "digital
> specimen". The word twin implies that the digital specimen is
> absolutely identical to the physical specimen, which it is clearly
> not. The physical specimen can subjected to new forms of physical
> analysis and at greater resolutions, in a way that a digital
> surrogate cannot. Also, the cynic in me knows that before long, a
> hard pressed administrator will argue that if we have the digital
> twin we don't need the physical twin.
>
> I am also concerned with the use of the term PID - persistent
> identifiers. Collections have been using persistent identifiers -
> unique registration numbers - for over two hundred years (and the
> British Geological Survey since 1849). Actionable or executable
> persistent identifiers are a vital tool for linking to objects,
> but are a very much newer concept. It seems disingenuous of data
> scientists not to acknowledge two centuries of good practice (and
> all the hard work of curators and registrars) and instead use an
> acronym such as EPID or APID?
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Howe
>
> Chief Curator, British Geological Survey
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*Nhcoll-l <nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu
> <mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu>> on behalf of Bentley,
> Andrew Charles <abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>>
> *Sent:* 21 January 2021 16:09
> *To:* nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
> <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu><nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
> <mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>>
> *Subject:* [Nhcoll-l] Consultation on Converging Digital and
> Extended Specimens: Towards a global specification for data
> integration
>
> Dear all,
>
> Over the past year several exciting conversations about the
> possibilities of digital representations of the billions of
> specimens currently held in the world’s natural history
> collections. Two concepts—the Digital Specimen
> <https://dissco.tech/2020/03/31/what-is-a-digital-specimen/>proposed
> by the Distributed System of Scientific Collections
> <https://www.dissco.eu/>(DiSSCo) in Europe and the Extended
> Specimen
> <https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/BCoN/Extending-Biodiversity-Collections-Full-Report%282%29.pdf>emerging
> from the Biological Collections Network
> <https://bcon.aibs.org/>(BCoN) in the United States—are now
> aligning towards a shared vision that connects all information
> related to a specimen, creating in effect “digital twins” for the
> materials held in scientific collections.
>
> Plans for the
> /alliance/<https://www.allianceforbio.org/>consultation on
> Converging Digital and Extended Specimens: Towards a global
> specification for data integration
> <https://www.allianceforbio.org/post/converging-digital-and-extended-specimens-towards-a-global-specification-for-data-integration> are
> progressing well.
>
> Beginning in February, the consultation
> <http://bit.ly/esdsconsult>will seek to engage the wider community
> on a handful of topics that have technical, financial, social,
> governance and professional implications that require broader
> discussion and consensus. The consultation aims to expand
> participation in the process, build support for further
> collaboration, identify key use cases, and develop an initial
> roadmap for community adoption and implementation.
>
> GBIF, DiSCCo, iDigBio, ALA, and the Biodiversity Collections
> Network (BCoN), among others, invite you to register for one of
> the two virtual opening sessions that will be held on February 16
> by following the links below and then to become involved in the
> Discourse consultation discussion process.
>
> *Session 1 6:00 UTC*
> <https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZcodemvrD0vHdXJqojDgS3KACD8bbXorB-D>
>
> *Session 2 15:00 UTC*
> <https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZwkf-2rrTkjE9zZIWu18G3DgDUHAGSyELz1>
>
> The GBIF community forum landing page for the consultation
> <https://discourse.gbif.org/t/about-the-digital-extended-specimen-category/2394> is
> also now live. This page will hold guidance on the consultation
> process with links to the discussion threads. Please see links on
> the landing page to more background documents. If you are a new
> user of the GBIF community forum you will need to register.
>
> The organizers are excited by the large attendance at recent
> related events and expect a thoughtful and robust consultation.
>
> Thanks
>
> Andy (on behalf of BCoN)
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> Andy Bentley
>
> Ichthyology Collection Manager
>
> University of Kansas
>
> Biodiversity Institute
>
> Dyche Hall
>
> 1345 Jayhawk Boulevard
>
> Lawrence, KS, 66045-7561
>
> USA
>
> Tel: (785) 864-3863
>
> Fax: (785) 864-5335
>
> Email: abentley at ku.edu <mailto:abentley at ku.edu>
>
> http://ichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu
> <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fichthyology.biodiversity.ku.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7CHardistyAR%40cardiff.ac.uk%7Cb68b30d73b974f92850908d8be4f33f9%7Cbdb74b3095684856bdbf06759778fcbc%7C1%7C0%7C637468595607119695%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=x99RzlHzhG8EOAIDlh69YBRckE25CRu%2F4ppyH1vqXxw%3D&reserved=0>
>
> A : A : A :
>
> }<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<(((_°>.,.,.,.}<)))_°>
>
> V V V
>
> This email and any attachments are intended solely for the use of
> the named recipients. If you are not the intended recipient you
> must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or any of
> its attachments and should notify the sender immediately and
> delete this email from your system. UK Research and Innovation
> (UKRI) has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise risk of
> this email or any attachments containing viruses or malware but
> the recipient should carry out its own virus and malware checks
> before opening the attachments. UKRI does not accept any liability
> for any losses or damages which the recipient may sustain due to
> presence of any viruses. Opinions, conclusions or other
> information in this message and attachments that are not related
> directly to UKRI business are solely those of the author and do
> not represent the views of UKRI.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nhcoll-l mailing list
> Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>
> https://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l
> <https://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NHCOLL-L is brought to you by the Society for the Preservation of
> Natural History Collections (SPNHC), an international society whose
> mission is to improve the preservation, conservation and management of
> natural history collections to ensure their continuing value to
> society. See http://www.spnhc.org <http://www.spnhc.org/>for
> membership information.
> Advertising on NH-COLL-L is inappropriate.
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Derek S. Sikes, Curator of Insects
> Professor of Entomology
> University of Alaska Museum
>
> University of Alaska Fairbanks
>
> 1962 Yukon Drive
> Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960
>
> dssikes at alaska.edu <mailto:dssikes at alaska.edu>
>
> phone: 907-474-6278
>
> FAX: 907-474-5469
> he/him/his
> University of Alaska Museum - search 400,276 digitized arthropod records
> http://arctos.database.museum/uam_ento_all
> <http://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/ento/>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Interested in Alaskan Entomology? Join the Alaska Entomological
> Society and / or sign up for the email listserv "Alaska Entomological
> Network" at
> http://www.akentsoc.org/contact_us <http://www.akentsoc.org/contact_us>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nhcoll-l mailing list
> Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
> https://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> NHCOLL-L is brought to you by the Society for the Preservation of
> Natural History Collections (SPNHC), an international society whose
> mission is to improve the preservation, conservation and management of
> natural history collections to ensure their continuing value to
> society. See http://www.spnhc.org for membership information.
> Advertising on NH-COLL-L is inappropriate.
--
Dirk Neumann
Tel: 089 / 8107-111
Fax: 089 / 8107-300
neumann(a)snsb.de
Postanschrift:
Staatliche Naturwissenschaftliche Sammlungen Bayerns
Zoologische Staatssammlung München
Dirk Neumann, Sektion Ichthyologie / DNA-Storage
Münchhausenstr. 21
81247 München
Besuchen Sie unsere Sammlung:
http://www.zsm.mwn.de/sektion/ichthyologie-home/
---------
Dirk Neumann
Tel: +49-89-8107-111
Fax: +49-89-8107-300
neumann(a)snsb.de
postal address:
Bavarian Natural History Collections
The Bavarian State Collection of Zoology
Dirk Neumann, Section Ichthyology / DNA-Storage
Muenchhausenstr. 21
81247 Munich (Germany)
Visit our section at:
http://www.zsm.mwn.de/sektion/ichthyologie-home/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20210128/f8beb3ef/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: nfhhpfocmdmnadpc.png
Type: image/png
Size: 23308 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20210128/f8beb3ef/attachment.png>
More information about the Nhcoll-l
mailing list