1. "Cherish old knowledge that you may acquire new" - The Analects of Confucius http://datadryad.org, http://blog.datadryad.orghttp://datadryad.org, http://blog.datadryad.org, http://datadryad.org/wikihttp://datadryad.org/wiki dryad-users@nescent.orgdryad-users@nescent.org; Twitter: @datadryad Todd Vision – DryadUK Sustainability workshop - 4/1/2011 - The British Library

2. PublishersJournals Researchers Funders 1.What is the value proposition? 2.What is the appropriate revenue model? 3.What is the role of funders?

3. Long tail of orphan data Volume Rank frequency of datatype Specialized repositories (e.g. Genbank, PDB) Orphan data after B. Heidorn

4. Source: PARSE Insight survey report, http://www.parse-insight.eu/

5. Bumpus HC (1898) The Elimination of the Unfit as Illustrated by the Introduced Sparrow, Passer domesticus. A Fourth Contribution to the Study of Variation. pp. 209-226 in Biological Lectures from the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass.

6. Source: PARSE Insight survey report, http://www.parse-insight.eu/

7. Source: Publishing Research Consortium, http://publishingresearch.net n=3824

8. Peer-to-peer sharing is problematic Wicherts et al. requested data from from 141 articles in American Psychological Association journals. “6 months later, after … 400 emails, [sending] detailed descriptions of our study aims, approvals of our ethical committee, signed assurances not to share data with others, and even our full resumes…” only 27% of authors complied Wicherts, J.M., Borsboom, D., Kats, J., & Molenaar, D. (2006). The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. American Psychologist, 61, 726-728.

9. Benefits to data archiving Modified from Beagrie et al. (2009) Keeping Research Data Safe 2 Direct Verification of published research Preserving accessibility to data Allowing reuse and repurposing of data Discoverability of data Indirect (costs avoided) Redundant data collection Inefficient legacy data curation Burden of sharing-upon-request Opportunity cost of science not done Near term Protection against personnel turnover Availability for review and validation Long term Secure long-term stewardship Increased impact per publication Private Increased citations New collaborations New research opportunities Fulfilling funding mandates Public More efficient use of research dollars Public trust in science Educational opportunities Improved methodologies More informed policy

10. Brussels Declaration on STM Publishing “Raw research data should be made freely available to all researchers. Publishers encourage the public posting of the raw data outputs of research. Sets or sub-sets of data that are submitted with a paper to a journal should wherever possible be made freely accessible to other scholars” Signed by 46 publishers and 13 trade organizations, incl. Elsevier, Nature Publ. Group, Springer, Oxford U Press, Wiley-Blackwell.

11. The End  To make data archiving and reuse a standard function of scholarly communication. The Means  Enable low-burden, inexpensive data archiving in conjunction with article publication.  Ensure individuals receive direct benefits from data sharing.  Reduce unnecessary barriers to data reuse.  Empower journals, societies & publishers in shared governance.  Plan for long-term preservation at the outset.

12. Dryad vs. Supplementary Online Materials DryadSOM Discoverable: indexed and exposed to both web and bibliographic search engines ✔✗ Identifiable: Data DOIs within articles serve as permanent, resolvable identifiers ✔✔/✗✔/✗ Attributable: reuse of data leads to article citations ✔✔ Permanent: preservation planning, including format migration ✔ ? Curated: quality control of data submissions and indexing metadata ✔✔/✗✔/✗ Ease of deposit: streamlined deposit, allowance for large and complex datasets ✔/✗✔/✗✔/✗✔/✗ Formatted for reuse: support for non-PDF file formats ✔✔/✗✔/✗ Updatable: new versions of data files can be added, metadata can be enhanced ✔✗ Support for embargoes: can delay release of data in accordance with journal policy ✔ ? Free reuse: no paywall, clear terms of reuse ✔ ? Economy of scale: cost efficiency from shared infrastructure ✔✔/✗✔/✗ Responsive to needs of individual journals ✔✔ Core business: aligned with organizational mission ✔✔/✗✔/✗

13. How well do we understand the value proposition? For researchers  Dryad increases the impact of, and citations to, published research. It preserves and makes available others’ data to verify published results, to refine methodologies, and for other forms of reuse. It frees researchers from being responsible for data preservation and access. For journals  Dryad frees journals from the responsibility and costs of maintaining supplemental data in perpetuity, and allows publishers to increase the value of their journals to its authors and readers. For funders  Dryad provides a cost-effective mechanism to make research more accessible, and to leverage existing investments in order to enable new science.

14. Dryad as an organization International nonprofit, with multiple institutional hosts Governed by a Board of open size  Each partner journal appoints one (voting) representative  The full Board votes on all financial and governance matters Executive Committee  Currently five members elected by the Board  Responsible for repository policy, short-term strategic decisions  Brings issues to full Board for discussion and vote Institutional oversight, advisory structure both TBD Next board meeting 7-9 July in Vancouver  Transition from interim status  Adopt initial governance model  Adopt initial cost-recovery model

15. 2007 2008 2012 2009 2010 2011 NSF/ESA Data Sharing and NESCent Small Science workshops Beginning negotiation of Joint Data Archiving Policy Journals/societies join NESCent & others to fund Dryad through NSF NSF funding for Dryad begins (lasts through Aug 2012) Repository went online First consortium board meeting Debut of integrated data submission Announcement of Joint Data Archiving Plan JISC funding begins Discussions with potential charter partners JDAP (and NSF DMP mandate) takes effect Transitional funding campaign Approval of cost-recovery plan and governance structure Cost-recovery begins Transitional funding begins

16. Projecting Dryad’s operating costs Activity-based cost model, from KRDS Includes  Management & administrative support  Storage and server hardware (incl. permanent storage)  Personnel for system maintenance  Curation and preservation  A small amount of outreach and user support Does not include  Facilities and other institutional costs (e.g. human resources)  Repository innovation (grants, foundation support)  Special projects (grants, foundation support) More detail in Beagrie, Eakin-Richards and Vision, iPres 2010

17. 17 integrated journals Curation

18. Revenue return Costs are recovered upfront, in order to  allow free dissemination  assure preservation Fees predominantly paid by journals, which may be  passed on to authors  subsidized by societies  rolled into publisher costs/revenue Fees should be  attractive: cost-effective relative to SOM  fair: to all different types of journals Model will surely evolve  Under control of consortium of partner journals

19. A Full B Associate C Author pays Joining fee (waived for charter members) $1000 NA Annual fee from journal a. all peer-reviewed articles in prior yr b. articles with data deposited to Dryad Prospective $25/article a Retrospective $100/article b 0 Author charge at deposit00$200 Length of contract3 or 5 yrs n/a Legacy data deposits free?YNN Can move between plans A & B?YYN/A Representative on Consortium BoardYYN Can vote on board and serve on executive committee YNN Coordinated data depositYYY/N Data DOI in published articleYYY/N Branding of journal contentYYN

20. JournalSociety or publisherArchiving rqmnt Submission integration Subscriber American NaturalistASNYYA EvolutionSSEYYA Systematic BiologySSBYYA Molecular Biology & EvolutionSMBEY-A HeredityThe Genetics Soc.YIn progressA Journal of HeredityAGANYA Paleobiology / J. of PaleontologyPaleontology SocietyYIn progressA Ecological MonographsESAYIn progressA Journal of Evolutionary BiologyESEBYYA Molecular Ecology / MERWiley-BlackwellYY- Biological J. Linnean SocietyLinnean Soc. LondonNY- Evolutionary ApplicationsWiley-BlackwellYY- Integrative & Comparative Biology SICB-In progress- BMC Ecology / BMC EvolutionSpringer/BMCY?In progress- BMJ OpenBMJ-In progress PLoS BiologyPLoS-In progress- Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution Elsevier--- Ecology LettersCNRS/W-B--- Journal of EcologyBritish Ecological Soc. ---

21. Issues with the subscription plan Are the differences in per-article costs appropriate?  Plan B and Plan C are set based on incentives, not cost  Should there be a Plan B at all?  Should there be a greater safety buffer for Plan A? How to accommodate  journals from developing countries?  authors from non-partner journals who lack grant resources? Annual fee depends only on article volume  Is this the most equitable arrangement?

22. Role for funders? “this sort of open access archiving costs money and it is not clear who pays. Certainly research funding agencies seen very keen on the doing and not very keen on the paying.” n=564 H. Piwowar (unpubl.)

23. Role for funders? Policy  Strong archiving guidelines, with enforcement  Endorsement of trusted repositories Funding  Renewable infrastructure grants (supporting curation, maintenance, user support, business operations)  Matching funds to repositories based on deposits or reuse  Top-slicing to researchers  Waiver funds for researchers

24. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0