title: Biodiversity data should be published, cited, and peer reviewed.
abstract: Concerns over data quality impede the use of public biodiversity databases and subsequent benefits to society. Data publication could follow the well-established publication process: with automated quality checks, peer review, and editorial decisions. This would improve data accuracy, reduce the need for users to 'clean' the data, and might increase data use. Authors and editors would get due credit for a peer-reviewed (data) publication through use and citation metrics. Adopting standards related to data citation, accessibility, metadata, and quality control would facilitate integration of data across data sets. Here, we propose a staged publication process involving editorial and technical quality controls, of which the final (and optional) stage includes peer review, the most meritorious publication standard in science.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand. m.costello@auckland.ac.nz
authors.forename: Mark J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Costello
authors.forename: William K
authors.initials: WK
authors.lastname: Michener
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Gahegan
authors.forename: Zhi-Qiang
authors.initials: ZQ
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Philip E
authors.initials: PE
authors.lastname: Bourne
mesh_terms: D044822:Biodiversity; D019992:Databases as Topic / Q000592:standards; D033181:Information Dissemination / Q000379:methods; D010380:Peer Review; D011786:Quality Control
keywords: Global Biodiversity Information Facility; databases; journals; quality control; species