Dataset search in biodiversity research: Do metadata in data repositories reflect scholarly information needs?

Vienna, Austria: October 22nd, 2017; 2017. Available from: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1933/poster-paper- 10.pdf. 52. Fleiss JL. Measuring Nominal Scale Agreement Among Many Raters. Psychological Bulletin. 1971; 76 (5):378–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619 53. Gwet KL. Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology. 2008; 61(1):29–48. https://doi.org/10.1348/ 000711006X126600 PMID: 18482474 54. Quarfoot D, Levine RA. How Robust Are Multirater Interrater Reliability Indices to Changes in Fre- quency Distribution? The American Statistician. 2016; 70(4):373–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00031305.2016.1141708 55. Landis JR, Koch GG. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics. 1977; 33(1):159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 PMID: 843571 56. The International Organization for Standardization. ISO 23081.1—s3 Terms and Definitions; 2017. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:23081:-1:ed-2:v1:en, accessed on 20.09.2020. 57. re3data; 2020. https://https://www.re3data.org, accessed on 15.09.2020. 58. RDA Metadata Standards Catalog, version 2; 2020. https://rdamsc.bath.ac.uk/, accessed on 15.09.2020. 59. M M. (ed.) San Diego CA: FORCE11, Data Citation Synthesis Group: Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles.; 2014. 60. Fenner M, Crosas M, Grethe JS, Kennedy D, Hermjakob H, Rocca-Serra P, et al. A data citation road- map for scholarly data repositories. Scientific Data. 2019; 6(1):28. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019- 0031-8 PMID: 30971690

61. Gaiji S, Chavan V, Ariño AH, Otegui J, Hobern D, Sood R, et al. Content assessment of the primary bio- diversity data published through GBIF network: Status, challenges and potentials. Biodiversity Informat- ics. 2013; 8(2). https://doi.org/10.17161/bi.v8i2.4124 62. Cunningham H, Tablan V, Roberts A, Bontcheva K. Getting more out of biomedical documents with GATE’s full lifecycle open source text analytics. PLoS computational biology. 2013; 9(2):e1002854– e1002854. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002854 PMID: 23408875 63. Cunningham H, Maynard D, Bontcheva K, Tablan V. GATE: A Framework and Graphical Development Environment for Robust NLP Tools and Applications. In: Proceedings of the 40th Anniversary Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’02); 2002. 64. Naderi N, Kappler T, Baker CJO, Witte R. OrganismTagger: detection, normalization and grounding of organism entities in biomedical documents. Bioinformatics. 2011; 27(19):2721–2729. https://doi.org/10. 1093/bioinformatics/btr452 PMID: 21828087 65. Lo¨ ffler F, Abdelmageed N, Babalou S, Kaur P, Ko¨nig-Ries B. Tag Me If You Can! Semantic Annotation of Biodiversity Metadata with the QEMP Corpus and the BiodivTagger. In: Proceedings of The 12th Lan- guage Resources and Evaluation Conference. Marseille, France: European Language Resources Association; 2020. p. 4557–4564. Available from: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.560. 66. RDA—FAIR Data Maturity Model WG. FAIR Data Maturity Model, Specification and Guidelines 2020; 2019-2020. https://www.rd-alliance.org/system/files/FAIR.

67. Hart EM, Barmby P, LeBauer D, Michonneau F, Mount S, Mulrooney P, et al. Ten Simple Rules for Digi- tal Data Storage. PLOS Computational Biology. 2016; 12(10):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pcbi.1005097 PMID: 27764088 68. Michener WK. Ten Simple Rules for Creating a Good Data Management Plan. PLOS Computational Biology. 2015; 11(10):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004525 PMID: 26492633 69. Goodman A, Pepe A, Blocker AW, Borgman CL, Cranmer K, Crosas M, et al. Ten Simple Rules for the Care and Feeding of Scientific Data. PLOS Computational Biology. 2014; 10(4):1–5. https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.pcbi.1003542 PMID: 24763340 70. Andersson AF, Bissett A, Finstad AG, Fossøy F, Grosjean M, Hope M, et al. Publishing sequence- derived data through biodiversity data platforms;. https://docs.gbif-uat.org/publishing-sequence- derived-data/1.0/en/. 71. Jurburg SD, Konzack M, Eisenhauer N, Heintz-Buschart A. The archives are half-empty: an assess- ment of the availability of microbial community sequencing data. Commun Biol. 2020; 3(474). https:// doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01204-9 PMID: 32859925 72. McDonald R, Pereira F. Identifying gene and protein mentions in text using conditional random fields. BMC Bioinformatics. 2005; 6(1):S6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-6-S1-S6 PMID: 15960840 73. Doms A, Schroeder M. GoPubMed: exploring PubMed with the Gene Ontology. Nucleic Acids Research. 2005; 33:W783–W786. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gki470 PMID: 15980585 PLOS ONE Dataset search in biodiversity research

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246099 March 24, 2021 35 / 36