The Darwin Project collaborated with the Cambridge Digital Library to publish images of about 1,200 letters exchanged between Charles Darwin and Joseph Dalton Hooker. There are more than 5,000 images in the collection.
No single set of letters was more important to Darwin than those exchanged with the botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker (1817-1911). Their letters account for around 10% of Darwin’s surviving correspondence and provide a structure within which all the other letters can be explored. They are a connecting thread that spans forty years of Darwin’s mature working life from 1843 until his death in 1882, and bring into sharp focus every aspect of Darwin’s scientific work throughout that period. They illuminate the mutual friendships he and Hooker shared with other scientists, but they also provide a window of unparalleled intimacy into the personal lives of the two men.
This article came from the April/May 2013 issue of the Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
“Collaborative Annotation for Scientific Data Discovery and Reuse” by Kirk Borne
The enormous growth in scientific data repositories requires more meaningful indexing, classification and descriptive metadata in order to facilitate data discovery, reuse and understanding. Meaningful classification labels and metadata can be derived autonomously through machine intelligence or manually through human computation.
This issue also has many articles concerning altmetrics. Heather Piwowar has a great introduction to the special issue.
Researchers at Elsevier, the academic journal publisher, have used bibliographic data to identify trends in scientific mobility and collaboration across 17 countries. Tracking unique author IDs, they documented authors’ movements from one country to another and identified rates of co-authorship between scientists from different countries. They found that migration and co-authorship are distinct trends, driven by different factors. For example, shared language and geographic proximity drive rates of migration more strongly than they influence rates of co-authorship between countries. The authors also note that political tensions have less of an effect on migration than they do on co-authorship. Relative to rates of co-authorship, the researchers found high rates of migration from Taiwan to China, Iran to the United States, and between India and Pakistan.
Here is a new article in issue 3 of the Journal of eScience Librarianship
Raboin, Regina; Reznik-Zellen, Rebecca C.; and Salo, Dorothea. (2012). “Forging New Service Paths: Institutional Approaches to Providing Research Data Management Services.” Journal of eScience Librarianship 1(3): Article 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2012.1021
Overview: This paper is based on the Librarian Panel Discussion during the 4th Annual University of Massachusetts and New England Region e-Science Symposium. Librarians representing large public and private research universities presented an overview of service models developed at their respective organizations to bring support for data management and eScience to their communities. The approaches described include two library-based, integrated service models and one collaboratively-staffed, center-based service model.
This article recently came out as an “early view” in the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. It is “Quantifying the benefits of international scientific collaboration,” by Vicente P. Guerrero Bote, Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, and Félix de Moya-Anegón. (Subscription required.)
We analyze the benefits in terms of scientific impact deriving from international collaboration, examining both those for a country when it collaborates and also those for the other countries when they are collaborating with the former. The data show the more countries there are involved in the collaboration, the greater the gain in impact. Contrary to what we expected, the scientific impact of a country does not significantly influence the benefit it derives from collaboration, but does seem to positively influence the benefit obtained by the other countries collaborating with it. Although there was a weak correlation between these two classes of benefit, the countries with the highest impact were clear outliers from this correlation, tending to provide proportionally more benefit to their collaborating countries than they themselves obtained. Two surprising findings were the null benefit resulting from collaboration with Iran, and the small benefit resulting from collaboration with the United States despite its high impact.
The report noted below came out way back in June, but it was just recently blogged about at the ACRL Insider website.
Here is the full PDF for “Academic Libraries and Research Data Services: Current Practices and Plans for the Future: An ACRL White Paper” by Carol Tenopir, Ben Birch, and Suzie Allard.
As science becomes more collaborative, data-intensive, and computational, academic researchers are faced with a range of data management needs. Combine these needs with funding directives that require data management planning, and there is both a need and an imperative for research data services in colleges and universities. Academic libraries may be ideal centers for research data service activities on campuses, providing unique opportunities for academic libraries to become even more active participants in the knowledge creation cycle in their institution. Recently the academic library community has identified data curation as one of the top ten trends in 2012. Some academic libraries are already engaged in these activities, and others are examining ways they can best provide a range of research data services.