ArticleIntegrative and comparative biology2017
Data Management Rubric for Video Data in Organismal Biology.
Article in Integrative and comparative biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diffusion Diaries: Diffusible Iodine-Based Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography for Vertebrate Natural History Specimens.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Beam theory predicts muscle deformation and vertebral curvature during feeding in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).The Journal of experimental biology · 2023Article
- Emerging biological insights enabled by high-resolution 3D motion data: promises, perspectives and pitfalls.The Journal of experimental biology · 2023Article
- Animal linguistics: a primer.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2023Article
- Water temperature and precipitation stimulate small-sized Japanese eels to climb a low-height vertical weir.PloS one · 2022Article
- Long-Axis Rotation of Jaws of Bamboo Sharks (Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Fishes can use axial muscles as anchors or motors for powerful suction feeding.The Journal of experimental biology · 2020Article
- Locomotor rib kinematics in two species of lizards and a new hypothesis for the evolution of aspiration breathing in amniotes.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Dual function of epaxial musculature for swimming and suction feeding in largemouth bass.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020Article
- Article
- An XROMM Study of Food Transport and Swallowing in Channel Catfish.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Bifunctional Role of the Sternohyoideus Muscle During Suction Feeding in Striped Surfperch,Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- A Practical Guide to MeasuringIntegrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Channel catfish use higher coordination to capture prey than to swallow.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Three-dimensional movements of the pectoral fin during yaw turns in the Pacific spiny dogfish,Biology open · 2019Article
- Eye Movements in Frogs and Salamanders-Testing the Palatal Buccal Pump Hypothesis.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Rib Motions Don't Completely Hinge on Joint Design: Costal Joint Anatomy and Ventilatory Kinematics in a Teiid Lizard,Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Axial morphology and 3D neurocranial kinematics in suction-feeding fishes.Biology open · 2018Article
- Advancing quantitative techniques to improve understanding of the skeletal structure-function relationship.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
synopsisStandards-based data management facilitates data preservation, discoverability, and access for effective data reuse within research groups and across communities of researchers. Data sharing requires community consensus on standards for data management, such as storage and formats for digital data preservation, metadata (i.e., contextual data about the data) that should be recorded and stored, and data access. Video imaging is a valuable tool for measuring time-varying phenotypes in organismal biology, with particular application for research in functional morphology, comparative biomechanics, and animal behavior. The raw data are the videos, but videos alone are not sufficient for scientific analysis. Nearly endless videos of animals can be found on YouTube and elsewhere on the web, but these videos have little value for scientific analysis because essential metadata such as true frame rate, spatial calibration, genus and species, weight, age, etc. of organisms, are generally unknown. We have embarked on a project to build community consensus on video data management and metadata standards for organismal biology research. We collected input from colleagues at early stages, organized an open workshop, "Establishing Standards for Video Data Management," at the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology meeting in January 2017, and then collected two more rounds of input on revised versions of the standards. The result we present here is a rubric consisting of nine standards for video data management, with three levels within each standard: good, better, and best practices. The nine standards are: (1) data storage; (2) video file formats; (3) metadata linkage; (4) video data and metadata access; (5) contact information and acceptable use; (6) camera settings; (7) organism(s); (8) recording conditions; and (9) subject matter/topic. The first four standards address data preservation and interoperability for sharing, whereas standards 5-9 establish minimum metadata standards for organismal biology video, and suggest additional metadata that may be useful for some studies. This rubric was developed with substantial input from researchers and students, but still should be viewed as a living document that should be further refined and updated as technology and research practices change. The audience for these standards includes researchers, journals, and granting agencies, and also the developers and curators of databases that may contribute to video data sharing efforts. We offer this project as an example of building community consensus for data management, preservation, and sharing standards, which may be useful for future efforts by the organismal biology research community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.