An Open Letter to ISI Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar, and SciVerse Scopus

A bit of context first. This letter arose as a result of discussions regarding citations practices in meta-analyses on Twitter several weeks ago. We all agreed citations of work within meta-analyses should be counted, but noted that many modern citation counting services disregard any citations not in the main body of a paper. Appendix citations are dropped, however. And due to a variety of restrictions, we often only cite the papers we use as data in appendices, and so are not counted. Our discussion resulted in the following letter that sixty-eight scientists around the globe have signed. I look forward to further fruitful discussion with the organizations above (who have been contacted) and hope that this situation is corrected.

Update 1: Within a few minutes, Chris from Web of Knowledge contacted me to make sure he had the details correct, and has forwarded this to the WoK Dev team. We’ll see if they get in contact.

Update 2: More signatures added on Nov 24, 2013. We’re now at 72.

Update 3: Despite also hearing from SCOPUS that this was being forwarded on to their product manager, no word back. Also, no word from GS, despite this being sent directly to members of their dev team by common contacts.

Dear Staff & Support Teams,

We are writing as a community of researchers in ecology, evolution and conservation biology who rely on the citation metrics you provide. We love your service, and, frankly, depend on it for a wide variety of reasons (e.g., identifying research trends, finding relevant papers, evaluating the influence of papers/researchers). However, in one respect your counts are becoming increasingly inaccurate. We have come to realize that citations – sometimes hundreds of them – that we have made in the appendices of our own published papers are not being counted by your service. We felt obligated to bring this issue to your attention, as it affects the accuracy and reliability of your statistics.

We are a group of researchers who conduct meta-analyses: analyses of published data, typically gathered by extracting data from published scientific papers. The standard practice in our and many other fields is to include citations to works that we use for data – but in the case of meta-analyses in particular, these citations do not necessarily appear in the main reference section of our papers. As meta-analyses regularly get their data from 50+ papers, and journals often have strict space limits and limits on the number of references, the citations are often included in supplementary material, most of which are online only (SOMs). These appendices are subject to the same level of peer review as the core article.

As far as we understand, citations in SOMs are not recorded by you. Hence, the papers we cite do not receive the proper citation credit, and the citation lists you provide for our own papers are incomplete. The failure to consider references in SOMs – particularly in the case of meta-analyses – severely reduces the accuracy of the citation counts you present for each paper. It is also poses a huge ethical problem for us because it means that we do not give proper credit, in the form of a citation, to the many superb scientists whose high-quality work is the jumping-off point for our own analyses. In turn, these colleagues of ours may be less inclined to be charitable when we come asking for data contributions to future meta-analyses.

We ask that you consider including citations garnered from supplementary online materials in academic journals.

If there is any way that we can facilitate this by contacting journals and editors in our own fields, we are more than happy to help. We feel very strongly about correcting this problem, and hope it can lead to some tangible benefits for both you and countless numbers of scientists.

Thank you, and we look forward to engaging in a productive dialogue about this issue.

Signed,

Jarrett Byrnes
Department of Biology
University of Massachusetts Boston
Boston, MA 02125

Ross Mounce
Department of Biology & Biochemistry
University of Bath
Bath, BA2 7AY
UK

Alexander Bond
Department of Biology
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5E2
Canada

John Griffin
Department of Biosciences
Swansea University
Swansea, Wales, SA28PP
UK

Mark Anthony Browne
National Center for Ecological Analysis & Synthesis
University of California, Santa Barbara
735 State Street, Suite 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-3351

Gavin Simpson
Institute of Environmental Change and Society
University of Regina
3737 Wascana Parkway,
Regina, SK S4S 0A2
Canada

Michael P. Taylor
Department of Earth Sciences
University of Bristol
Bristol BS8 1RJ
UK

Julia Stewart
National Center for Ecological Analysis & Synthesis
University of California, Santa Barbara
735 State Street, Suite 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-3351

Mary Hunsicker
National Center for Ecological Analysis & Synthesis
University of California, Santa Barbara
735 State Street, Suite 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-3351

Robert Lanfear
Ecology, Evolution, and Genetics
Australian National University
116 Daley Road, Acton
Canberra, ACT 2602
Australia

Ethan White
Department of Biology and The Ecology Center
Utah State University
5305 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84341
United States

Morgan Ernest
Department of Biology and The Ecology Center
Utah State University
5305 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84341
United States

Noam Ross
Department of Environmental Science and Policy
University of California at Davis
1 Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
twitter: @noamross

Trevor A. Branch
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences
University of Washington
Seattle, WA, 98195
United States
twitter: @TrevorABranch

Philip Martin
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology,
Wallingford,
Oxfordshire.
OX10 8BB.
UK.
twitter:@_PhilMartin

Kyle Edwards
Kellogg Biological Station
Michigan State University
3700 E. Gull Lake Dr.
Hickory Corners, MI 49060

Jonathan S. Lefcheck
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
The College of William & Mary
Gloucester Point, VA 23062

Terry McGlynn
Department of Biology
California State University Dominguez Hills
1000 E. Victoria St.
Carson, CA 90747
USA

Karthik Ram
Museum of Vertebrate Zoology
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720
USA

Daniel Falster
Biological Sciences,
Macquarie University NSW 2109,
Australia

Bradley Cardinale
School of Natural Resources & Environment
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48103

Ignasi Bartomeus
Postdoctoral Researcher
Department of Ecology,
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,
SE-75007 Uppsala, Sweden
@ibartomeus

Sean Tuck
Department of Plant Sciences
University of Oxford
South Parks Road
OX1 3RB

Helen Phillips
Department of Ecology and Evolution
Imperial College London
Silwood Park Campus
SL5 7PY

Mark Westoby
Dept of Biological Sciences
Macquarie University, Sydney NSW 2109 Australia

Thomas White
Dept of Biological Sciences
Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109
Australia

Gregory Carey
School of Biological and Chemical Sciences
Queen Mary, University of London
London
E1 4NS

Adam Algar
School of Geography
University of Nottingham
Nottingham NG7 2RE
UK

J. Emmett Duffy
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
The College of William and Mary
Gloucester Point, VA 23062-1346

Eduardo S. A. Santos
Departamento de Ecologia
Universidade de São Paulo
Rua do Matão, 321 – Trav. 14, sala 243
Cid. Universitária – São Paulo, SP
05508-090
Brazil

Lauri Laanisto
Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Estonian University of Life Sciences
Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014, Tartu
Estonia

Emilio M. Bruna
Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation &
Center for Latin American Studies
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0430

Julian A. Velasco
Laboratorio de Análisis Espaciales
Instituto de Zoología
Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México
México, D.F. CP. 04510
Phone: (55) 5622-8222 ext: 47880

Timothée E. Poisot
Theoretical Ecology Group
Université du Quebec a Rimouski
Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Sciences
Rimouski, QC, Canada

Steven J. Cooke
Biology Department
Carleton University
Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada

Mick Watson
Director of ARK-Genomics
The University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh, UK
EH25 9RG

Xiao Xiao
Department of Biology and The Ecology Center
Utah State University
5305 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84341
United States

Joshua King
Biology Department
University of Central Florida
Orlando, FL 32816

Andrew D. Steen
Department of Microbiology
University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996

Chris Harrod
School of Biological Sciences
Queen’s University, Belfast
BT9 7BL
UK

Allen Hurlbert
Department of Biology
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3280

Mike S. Fowler
Department of Biosciences
Swansea University
Swansea, SA2 8PP
UK

Dieter Lukas
Department of Zoology
University of Cambridge
Cambridge, CB23EJ
UK

Kate Boersma
Department of Zoology
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331

Ramón E. Martínez-Grimaldo
Instituto de Biología
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Fernando T. Maestre
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
Departamento de Biología y Geología
Escuela Superior de Ciencias Experimentales y Tecnología
C/ Tulipán s/n, Móstoles, 28933
SPAIN

Andrew B. Cooper
School of Resource and Environmental Management
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, CANADA V5A 1S6

Josef C. Uyeda
Institute for Bioinformatics and Evolutionary Studies
University of Idaho
Moscow, Idaho 83844

Elita Baldridge
Department of Biology and The Ecology Center
Utah State University
5305 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84341
United States

Franciska T. de Vries
Faculty of Life Sciences
Michael Smith Building
The University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester
M13 9PT
United Kingdom

Aidan M. Keith
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology
Lancaster Environment Centre
Library Avenue
Bailrigg, Lancaster
LA1 4AP, United Kingdom
@Aidan_M_Keith

Christophe Thebaud
UMR “Evolution & Biological Diversity”
CNRS & Univ Paul Sabatier
F-31062 Toulouse
France

Rafael D. Zenni
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN
USA

Natalie Cooper
School of Natural Sciences
Trinity College Dublin
Dublin 2, Ireland

Philippe Desjardins-Proulx
Université du Québec à Montréal
Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Sciences
Rimouski, Québec
Canada

Lars Gamfeldt
Deparment of Biological and Environmental Sciences
University of Gothenburg
Gothenburg, Sweden

Mark Hahnel
figshare
4 Crinan Street
London
N1 9XW
UK

Jessica Couture
National Center for Ecological Analysis & Synthesis
University of California, Santa Barbara
735 State Street, Suite 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93101-3351

Jarrod Cusens
Institute for Applied Ecology New Zealand
Auckland University of Technology
31-33 Symonds Street
Auckland
New Zealand

Steph Borrelle
Institute for Applied Ecology New Zealand
Auckland University of Technology
31-33 Symonds Street
Auckland
New Zealand

Nick Isaac
NERC Centre for Ecology & Hydrology
Wallingford OX10 9QA
UK

Sally Keith
ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies
James Cook University
Townsville, QLD 4811
Australia

Sarah Supp
Department of Ecology and Evolution
Stony Brook University
650 Life Sciences Building
Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245

Jessica Blois
School of Natural Sciences
5200 N. Lake Rd.
Merced, CA 95343
USA

Mike Whitfield
Botany, School of Natural Sciences
Trinity College
College Green
Dublin 2
Ireland

Richard J. Butler
School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham, B15 2TT

Jens Kattge
Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry
Hans Knoell Str. 10
07745 Jena
Germany

Scott Chamberlain
Biology Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6

Blaire Steven
Bioscience Department
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Los Alamos, NM, USA, 87545

Santiago Soliveres
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
Departamento de Biología y Geología
Escuela Superior de Ciencias Experimentales y Tecnología
C/ Tulipán s/n, Móstoles, 28933
SPAIN

Francis Brearley
School of Science and the Environment
Manchester Metropolitan University
Chester Street
Manchester
M1 5GD
UK

Michiel van Breugel
Smithsonian Tropical research Institute
Av. Rossevelt 401
Balboa, Ancon
Panama, Panama

Dylan James Craven, PhD.
Synthesis Centre for BioDiversity Sciences (sDiv)
German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv)
Leipzig, Germany

Proxy Server Bookmarklet

Like so many of us, when I’m off campus, in order to read journal pdfs and the like is a chore. I have to go to my university’s library website, login to their proxy server, go back to the article in question – either by surfing there from the library webpage, or adding the relevant text to the journal article URL.

Pain in the tuchus.

Then, the ever helpful Sean Anderson tweeted a link to a little code he’d written for a bookmarklet using Dalhousie’s ezproxy.

Create a bookmark with this address:
(create some dummy bookmark and then edit the address)

javascript:u=window.location.href;window.location.href=’http://’+u.substring(7,u.indexOf(‘/’,8))+’.ezproxy.library.dal.ca/’+u.substr(u.indexOf(‘/’,8)+1);

Then go to a journal page and click the bookmark when you want to log in through the library server.

I modified it for UMB:

javascript:u=window.location.href;window.location.href=’http://’+u.substring(7,u.indexOf(‘/’,8))+’.ezproxy.lib.umb.edu/’+u.substr(u.indexOf(‘/’,8)+1);

Or just, if you’re at UMB, drag the following link to your browser bookmarklet bar: umb-ezproxy – go to an article you want but can’t read, and click it. Such naches!

I’m sure the rest of you kinder can modify it to match your own situation!

How I Use Different Social Media Platforms for Science

OK, so, you’re a scientist interested in jumping into the world of online social networking for interacting with colleagues, fun and profit bringing science to the world at large. Fantastic!

So, you log on, and are suddenly confronted by a dizzying array of sites you could use to communicate. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Google+, Myspace (yes, it’s back), Blogspot, WordPress, FriendFeed, Tumblr, …. I could go on for a while. And then you may also have concerns about mixing personal and private.

So, which should you use? And why? Before going on, read Bik and Goldstein. Just, trust me. In particular, their Box 1, Box 2, and Fig 2. That paper is gold.

For me, I’ll be honest, I only use three of the above – and each for a distinct purpose. Other social media mavens out there might have different takes, or find that different platforms have better milage for them – and I’d love to hear what you’re using and why! But, this is my take on the platforms I use and how I handle things like privacy and the kind of things I’ll say in each.

0) A Personal Webpage – This one seems obvious, but I find so many instances of people *not* having at least a professional web presence as a slice of hypertext on someone else’s webpage (e.g., advisor, organization you work for, etc.) that it bears repeating. This is the face you present to the world, and often the first hit on a search for you. Make it count!

If you’re not HTML savvy and don’t know where to start, services like Weebly and WordPress not only provide tools to build a site, but reams of wonderful templates. They’ve also got some fancier options for a small fee. Or host your own on a site service like Hostmonster as I do. Such sites often have tools for easily installing content rich professional websites (often using things like WordPress) with just a few clicks.

1) Twitter – To me, this is the ur-site for social media and science. It’s quick, easy, has a ton of tools (HootSuite, TweetDeck, etc.) to make the information firehose that it contains easy to sort (hashtags and lists are fabulous), and provides a great way to dip into the stream of scientific conversation very easily. It’s also fully public. What you say there will tell a lot of people about who you are. It really is your choice who you want to be. So, it is where my professional scientific persona lives, as it were. Which is pretty much just me, but with some guardrails on, as it were. The brevity of posts is also a huge benefit, as it’s a low barrier to entry, and low barrier to interaction. And there are a ton of Ecologists, Evolutionary, and Marine Biologists on it.

2) Blogs – This is where one can go long-form and really lay out some thoughts or a meaty juicy piece of what they’re doing. There’s no set form, structure, or rules, really. Basically, I view my blog as an intellectual sandbox. And it’s excellent practice for writing. Heck, I’ve even knitted together significant pieces of papers from blog posts. Basically, I view blogs as the place for good, well thought out, detailed, interaction and communication to take place. It’s where you can show all of who you are and how you think. It’s where you can try and connect with audiences – public and scientific – using the broadest most informative brush. It’s not a substitute for the peer reviewed literature, but rather a place where the scientific ebb and flow of ideas can find a home when we’re not all at a meeting or somesuch.

3) Google+ – I’m still not sure about this one. I LOVE hangouts, and am going to be trying some experiments with them in the future. They’ve basically replaced Skype for me, and I’ve found that G+’s groups and communities are terribly convenient for organizing and posting to groups of folk working on a project. But as a primary source of social media presence….you can post longer things than you can on Twitter? I think the multi-media capabilities and hangouts are key for what G+ has to offer, and, so, that’s what I use it for!

4) Facebook – you notice that I haven’t mentioned Facebook up to this point? Curious, no? Maybe it’s because of historical reasons (remembering a long line of social media sites – Friendster, Orkut, Myspace, etc.), maybe it’s because of the higher degree of immediate interaction, maybe its because my mom is on it (hi, mom!) – I’m not totally sure why, but I, at least, use Facebook for personal purposes only. I mean, I pipe my Twitter feed into it, and enjoy the conversation that occurs off of it. But I generally only add folk who I have met personally or have a personal connection of somesort. Basically, folk I’m willing to let in to see who I am a little less guardedly – my not-so-professional online persona, if you will (there are a lot of cat photos, I admit). This is not true of all fields. For example, my wife is in theater, and theater is all about being social. Thus, Facebook becomes a professional space.

This is not to say that Facebook cannot evolve into a professional space. Actually, my favorite use of it lately has been the number of fellow scientists with whom I have a professional relationship sharing some of their inside thoughts regarding their own careers, their daily struggles, and a good bit of camaraderie and commiserations.

Oh, last, a word of caution to those of you not yet aquatinted with this fact – everything you say on the internet is forever able to be associated with you. It will come up when you least expect it. What you say online shapes how folk perceive you. Even things that you think are completely 100% private…not always so much (particularly if Facebook randomly changes its privacy settings). This is not to say that people are not forgiving of context – they are or should be delightfully so – but, you know, think before you hit post.

In fact, all of this brings me to a point I make a lot in public, and, I should perhaps post here so that I can have it in digital print: If you are not curating your online identity, someone or something else is doing it for you. By someone I don’t mean some specific person (usually), but, rather, a combination of the crowd and information sifting algorithms. So, want to leave a good impression? Be known as a person interested in topic X? Only you have that power. And with great power…

So, feel free to use the above as a general guide, or discover that, in internet terms, I’m a fuddy-duddy and there are better ways of using social network tools that are at your disposal. Or, heck, I’m sure there are tools waiting out there somewhere on the horizon that can enhance the scientific conversation even more!

Updated 10/2013 with some links to sites to help you build professional websites

Marshall the generalists! Generalize the marshallists!

While working more on the bacterial network stuff, Jen and I realized I was wrong. Yep, I was wrong on the internet. Namely, in my post on bacterial networks, I got the answer wrong on the abundance of OTUs with different degrees of specialization. I had a rowSum after inverting a matrix instead of before, producing wonky vertex sizes. Jen cleverly discovered it when totaling up some of the data by hand, and after alerting me to the issue I produced the following plot which doesn’t agree with the network at all:

Screen Shot 2013-07-02 at 1.29.24 PM

So, I went back in, found the error, and now I give you the corrected network. Still very interesting – and it really shows that in the marsh, generalist bacteria dominate numerically, although they are relatively rare with far more specialists.

Screen Shot 2013-07-02 at 1.23.17 PM

Updating the github soon…

Giving Honest Resources to Prospective Students

A question for the peanut gallery –

I’m starting to get a trickle of the interested-in-grad-school student emails. So far the few I’ve gotten have been great. So, I’m revising my prospective students page after noticing a few things in year one. The first was a lack of some students realizing that I wanted to know their interests beyond ‘marine ecology’. I wanted a research question – any question, no matter how broad – as having a question does not guarantee it’s what you’re going to follow in your graduate career. It was just to see how students think and what I might expect from them. Now I’ve made that a wee bit more explicit, and the division between potential masters and PhD students on the page. This is all ok

OK – honesty aside, as who knows if one of the potential mentors I interviewed with is reading this, but, one of my potentially most embarrassing moments as a prospective PhD student was my first meeting with her. I had just taken a cross country flight or two, and then went to dinner with them. The first thing they asked me was, “What are you interested in?” And, indeed, I answered, after far too long of a pause, “Marine ecology.” Long pause. Then, they were kind enough to gently say, “OK, what about marine ecology?…” After I screwed my head back on a bit straighter, we had a lovely conversation about ideas, work, etc., and I passed out as soon as my head hit my pillow that night. So, you know, everyone flounders a bit. Particularly when extremely jet-lagged and getting an adrenaline rush of peering into the future.

OK, so, my question – One thing I’ve been pondering, though, is putting a piece on the page as a heads-up about the prospects of a PhD or masters student. In particular in reading Jacquelyn’s recent piece and the excellent discussion therein, and thinking about the answers to my question, “Why this degree?” to prospectives last year, I’ve realized that most students just haven’t thought about it, or have unrealistic expectations. My question is, what should we be telling them? This page – the prospective students information – is perhaps the venue they will scan most closely, and hence one of the best places to give students some knowledge about what this degree can do for them and what long-term challenges will be once they enter the employment market. I’m trying to be brief, and provide a few helpful, if sobering, links to start further reading. So – do you think this is a good idea? And if so, does the tone veer too far one way or another? I’ve tried to be gentle, if cautionary.

Or, maybe I won’t put this up at all…

— Here’s the new section

Why a graduate degree?

Why are you interested in a graduate degree? If you have no research experience aside from working as a lab tech, a masters degree might be what you’re looking for. Or it’s excellent as there are a wide variety of career options that are open to you with a masters. Do some homework – ask yourself how this degree will help you achieve your professional goals. For a PhD, I know the default answer is always “So I can be a university professor.” That’s great, and I look forward to working together to help you achieve that goal. Do some reading, though, and make sure you know what you’re jumping into (and be sure to read the comment thread at that link). The job market for academics is never great. This is not to discourage you, but take a breath before diving in and think about long-term goals. Know also that a PhD is amazing training for a wide variety of careers as well. So, think about your long-term goals and why a PhD is the right road for you. You may also be interested in checking out this book.

Beautiful Bacterial Networks in the Marsh

“So,” I’m sure you aren’t wondering, how did that creating ‘ecospecies’ from bacterial sequences based on sequence similarity, co-occurrence, and network theory work out for you?”

Quite well, thanks for asking! Heck, have a git repository, why dontcha!

Jen is furiously writing the manuscript, but, the technique indeed seems to indicate that 12% sequence similarity was the optimal number.

Once we got that down, and started plotting the network with individual Operational Taxonomic Units (OTU) each connected to one or more of the 8 plots they were found in, we started seeing some neat things. More more than that, they were just pretty pictures! I mean, come on, these plots are always cool.

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 4.18.40 PM

First, you can see that there is indeed some separation of species by plot and treatment (# is plot, letter is treatment). We got really excited about this, and so dug deeper to produce…

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 4.19.49 PM

Yes. Not you can see that most OTUs are specialists. True generalists are exceedingly rare.

We had one other piece of information up our sleeve, though. Abundance. We have abundances of OTUs. Playing around with edge widths (abundance in plot) didn’t produce anything striking. But then we looked at total abundance of an OTU across the whole marsh, and resized OTU nodes accordingly. I think this is exceedingly beautiful. And shows some striking patterns with respect to treatment and who is most abundant.

Screen Shot 2013-06-26 at 4.19.10 PM

Jen knows this experiment backwards and forwards, so is writing a much more nuanced discussion of what this means, and analyzing the data in more detail. But it’s pretty awesome. And pretty beautiful.

Just another way of viewing the wonder of nature.

p.s. I am learning to love RColorBrewer in a serious way

Les Miserables Larides

One of the great things about field stations is the silliness they engender. I mean, there you are, in the middle of nowhere, with no one but other scientists thinking about the wonder of the natural world. Awe and wonder can only take you so far. And then, at some point, you cross over, and start to get a little silly.

It leads to things like dressing up as fouling panels, launching serious plans to make an ‘underwater office,’ elaborate nail-polish-marking designs for crab carapaces, and no small number of pranks.

And then, there’s this. This may be on the order of the silliest things ever to come out of field station. I heard the gull interns (seagull science is notorious for producing silliness alongside great science) talking about this idea to sync some of their videos up with the Les Mis soundtrack and now…now I found they’ve… well..

You must see this to believe it. Astounding. My hats off to the SML 2013 Gull crew. Marine science music video of the year?

(also, who is singing on ‘I dreamed a dream’ – amazing voice!)