Dataset - Seagrass subtidal fish and macroinvertebrate survey data from BC Central Coast

[hakai-it]

Seagrass subtidal fish and macroinvertebrate survey data from BC Central Coast

https://cioos-siooc.github.io/metadata-entry-form/#/en/hakai/lJHlH9nm20QQOPuk217xLlxWbNv1/-NPt7327bul36pby-Odi

Best Practices Checklist

In General

• No previous versions of this metadata record exist (eg for earlier versions of the data, if so update that record rather than creating a new one)

Data Identification

Dataset title:

• No version information in the title
• Frontloaded (with the most important information first)
• Include the geographical region the data apply to
• Short – aim for 60 characters including spaces
• Does not include acronyms – put these in the keywords
• Does not include the word “dataset”
• Time series datasets should include “time series” at the end of the title
• Does not include the time period (this is covered in the temporal extents fields)

Abstract

• Abbreviations have been expanded upon at first mention

Spatial

• Ensure that Depth or Height Positive is correctly selected

Contact

• No organizations listed under first / last name
• ROR and ORCID(s) are included and linked properly where applicable
• The citation in the metadata record matches the preferred citation mentioned in the data package.
• Include Hakai Institute as Publisher

Resources

• Resource links go to specific dataset download (not generic platform like waterproperties.ca)
• Readme, changelog, data dictionary, protocols included in data-package #14
• An archive folder for older data versions is included in the data package if the version is not 1.0
• Links work
• Resource link links to a download of the compressed data package (.zip) of the correct version.
• All files in the data package can be opened and are not corrupt

Platform

[zmonteith]

Not sure who is monitoring these autogenerated data package issues, but I'm interested to hear more about the intention with them. Seems like it could be a great approach for documenting the publishing steps better.

I do have a few specific questions/comments relating to this dataset:

• What is the process for editing the metadata record? There are a few small changes I'd like to make
• Can we add a DOI to this package? Is there a step we can add to the metadata record submission where you 'check' to have a DOI assigned to a package?

[JessyBarrette]

@zmonteith nice! I think you're part of the data mobilization meetings so you can see hear more at those meetings. I can take over the review process.

What is the process for editing the metadata record? There are a few small changes I'd like to make

Just unpublish the metadata records on the metadata and you should be able to make any changes.

Can we add a DOI to this package? Is there a step we can add to the metadata record submission where you 'check' to have a DOI assigned to a package?

@timvdstap and @Br-Johnson can help you regarding the DOI minting. We don't have an atomated process yet.

Once you have the DOI available, you can unpublish the form and add the DOI in the appropriate field on the Data page:

[JessyBarrette]

As far as I can see you mostly just missing Hakai in the contact as a distributor with no person name associated with it!

[zmonteith]

Thanks Jessy. I think I've figured it out, I was just looking in the wrong place to unpublish, got it all sorted now.

@timvdstap @Br-Johnson let me know when we have a DOI for this package so I can add it in.

Thanks!

[Br-Johnson]

@zmonteith https://doi.org/10.21966/NMNG-SF35

:)

[timvdstap]

@Br-Johnson Thanks for minting that Brett, and my apologies @zmonteith that I hadn't replied yet, fell off the radar...

[zmonteith]

Thanks @Br-Johnson. I've added the DOI in and republished now.

Some thoughts with regarding the checklist: there isn't anywhere that I can tell to add ROR and ORCiDs, is this a field that's still to be added? Or did I miss it?

[Br-Johnson]

Hey @zmonteith no worries. The field is going to be added to the metadata intake form but yeah currently it's not there. So no problem you didn't miss anything!

[Br-Johnson]

@zmonteith Everything in the metadata looks good except the link to the google drive folder where the data package is stored has restricted access.

[Br-Johnson]

@zmonteith Hey I'm not sure what happened to this record. Is updated the link to the submitted record because for some reason the link in this issue title didn't work.

It's now: https://cioos-siooc.github.io/metadata-entry-form/#/en/hakai/lJHlH9nm20QQOPuk217xLlxWbNv1/-NPt7327bul36pby-Odi

I also see the google drive folder is public now. Any reason this shouldn't be published?

[timvdstap]

https://hakaiinstitute.github.io/hakai-metadata-entry-form/#/en/hakai/lJHlH9nm20QQOPuk217xLlxWbNv1/-NPt7327bul36pby-Odi

@zmonteith I'm just going through the outstanding issue in this repo, came across this record. It's still in the submitted phase and I'm wondering if it can / should be published after some (minor) changes? The DOI drafted for this is 'live' but as the record is not published it doesn't point anywhere. There have been a few changes to the form since this record was drafted/submitted, so that's why it may have fallen through the cracks. Few things to consider:

• Add theme of this record: I suspect this is 'Biological'
• Add project this record is part of
• Is the project / data collection still on-going? Or does this data package have a specific start and end date?
• What's the version number of this data package? If no older versions exist, this is likely 1.0 or 1.0.0
• Add taxonomic coverage metadata to the 'Taxonomic Classification' tab. I realize that this survey probably covers quite a few taxa - if so I would perhaps either add the most dominant taxa or include taxa at higher taxonomic rank. The taxa included here will show up as keywords in the metadata record
• If the theme of the record is 'Biological' you will have to add a description of the geographic extent under 'Spatial' (e.g., 'BC Central Coast')
• Please add ORCIDs to the contacts
• Add Tula Foundation with role: 'Funder' - you can unselect the 'appear in citation' box for this
• Should we consider standardizing this dataset and publishing it to OBIS?
• Are there any related works to this data package (publications using the data, a DMP, etc)?