Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
    Biol Direct. 2010 Feb 18;5:12.

    Community annotation in biology.

    Source

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular & Cellular Biology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20007, USA. rm285@georgetown.edu

    Abstract

    Attempts to engage the scientific community to annotate biological data (such as protein/gene function) stored in databases have not been overly successful. There are several hypotheses on why this has not been successful but it is not clear which of these hypotheses are correct. In this study we have surveyed 50 biologists (who have recently published a paper characterizing a gene or protein) to better understand what would make them interested in providing input/contributions to biological databases. Based on our survey two things become clear: a) database managers need to proactively contact biologists to solicit contributions; and b) potential contributors need to be provided with an easy-to-use interface and clear instructions on what to annotate. Other factors such as 'reward' and 'employer/funding agency recognition' previously perceived as motivators was found to be less important. Based on this study we propose community annotation projects should devote resources to direct solicitation for input and streamlining of the processes or interfaces used to collect this input. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by I. King Jordan, Daniel Haft and Yuriy Gusev.

    PMID:
    20167071
    [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
    PMCID: PMC2834641
    Free PMC Article

    Images from this publication.See all images (2) Free text

    Figure 1
    Figure 2

      Supplemental Content

      Click here to read Click here to read

      Recent activity

      Your browsing activity is empty.

      Activity recording is turned off.

      Turn recording back on

      See more...
      Write to the Help Desk