Data from: Gauging the purported costs of public data archiving for long-term population studies

It was recently proposed that long-term population studies be exempted from the expectation that authors publicly archive the primary data underlying published articles. Such studies are valuable to many areas of ecological and evolutionary biological research, and multiple risks to their viability were anticipated as a result of public data archiving (PDA), ultimately all stemming from independent reuse of archived data. However, empirical assessment was missing, making it difficult to determine whether such fears are realistic. I addressed this by surveying data packages from long-term population studies archived in the Dryad Digital Repository. I found no evidence that PDA results in reuse of data by independent parties, suggesting the purported costs of PDA for long-term population studies have been overstated.

近期有研究提议，长期种群研究可免于遵循"作者需公开归档发表论文所依托的原始数据"这一规范要求。此类研究对生态与进化生物学诸多领域的研究均具有重要价值，而公共数据归档（public data archiving, PDA）被认为会对其存续性带来多重风险，且所有此类风险最终均源于归档数据被独立复用。然而，此前缺乏相关实证评估，使得我们难以判断此类担忧是否符合实际。为此，我对存档于Dryad数字知识库（Dryad Digital Repository）中的长期种群研究数据包展开了调研。结果显示，并无证据表明公共数据归档会导致第三方独立复用归档数据，这说明针对长期种群研究的公共数据归档所谓的潜在成本被高估了。