[Nhcoll-l] Access and authorship in natural history collections

[Deborah Paul]

Hi All,

On this sensitive topic, I'd like to add to Andy and Dirk's comments. In 
a space where collection managers and curators help to make the data -- 
-- and specimens and derivatives -- available and fit - for - research 
use, it's worth it to take a moment to think about what they get credit 
for at their own institutions. Often, it's still limited to the 
academically "traditional" grants or publications / citation. There was 
a time when lab technicians (making the research possible) and lab 
managers (orchestrating the whole endeavor) didn't get authorship 
either. Seconding Andy's point, it's citing the objects (and data from 
them) that can help collections highlight relevance of collections. 
Capturing the standardized data (who, what, where, when) and getting 
samples suitable for sequencing take both time and expertise. This work 
would need to be done by the author/s (as Luis and others point out) if 
not by the curator / collection manager. Considering it seems to be 
"policy" part that is stirring this pot, it's not surprising given the 
funding issues many collections (and staff) are facing and as a result 
-- seeking ways to ensure they are both being seen -- and heard.

I too have seen / see papers, where specimens only appear in the paper 
as a note: "specimens vouchered at [Institution]" with no mention of how 
many, or any attachment to any dataset of said specimens with their 
associated details. This too, is something we can address at the 
publishing level, if those of us reviewing papers, come back to the 
authors with the request to include the specimen records (e. g. as a 
supplemental file) or better yet, as an accompanying data paper. 
Collections need (more) ways to show relevance.

Thoughtfully,
Debbie

On 2/2/2026 8:43 AM, Bentley, Andrew Charles wrote:
> Although I do agree that demanding co-authorship on publications for 
> collections use is probably not warranted or justified in most cases, 
> I think the attached will add to this conversation.
>
> I also do think that if researchers were more collections advocacy 
> aware and got into the habit of reporting publications and sequence 
> information from specimens cited in their research to the relevant 
> collections, this would go a long way to building advocacy and 
> attribution metrics for collections that would ensure their longevity 
> and their ability to showcase their worth to potential funders - more 
> than any citation of a curator or collection manager could ever do.  
> There are way to many researchers who, once their analysis and 
> subsequent paper is complete, do not bother or are just lazy.  
> Collections are critical infrastructure for downstream research of all 
> types and without attribution metrics available to highlight that, 
> collections become increasingly at risk of being sidelined and 
> neglected by those holding the purse strings.

-- 
- Deborah Paul, Biodiversity Informatics Community Liaison
- Species File Group (INHS), University of Illinois
-- Natural History Collections and Museomics NHCM Editor-in-Chiefhttps://nhcm.pensoft.net
-- Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) Past Chair 2021-2022
-- Florida State University Courtesy Appointment
-- Species File Group and Eventshttps://speciesfilegroup.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20260202/74f1487a/attachment.html>