search

fmsabatini / sPlotOpen_Manuscript

Manuscript describing the creation of the data set 'sPlot Open'
https://fmsabatini.github.io/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/
Other
9 stars 45 forks source link

Coauthor list #1

Closed fmsabatini closed 3 years ago

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

The initial list of coauthors ONLY includes the custodians AND deputy custodians of those dataset contributing data to sPlot OPEN. The initial deal, however, was to make the participation to his paper NOT conditional on releasing data open-access. It might make sense, therefore, to invite also all the other custodians from sPlot v2.1.

Some custodians, also asked to include some colleagues: Abel Monteagudo (suggested by Oliver Philipps) Henry Brisse + 1 PhD studend (suggested by Emmanuel Garbolino)

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Elizabeth Kearsley recently stepped back from being custodian of AF-CD-001. Should we count her in, or rather ask her replacement, Kim Sarah Jacobsen? The first option is probably fairer

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Should we invite TRY contributors? Or rather only Jens and the gap-fillers?

lenjon commented 4 years ago

I am not sure it is fair though to invite as co-authors those database custodians and data owners who did not agree to share data as open access... But we could indeed send an invitation (is this the opt-in case?) to all database custodians registered in sPlotv2.1.

lenjon commented 4 years ago

@fmsabatini, before I forgot, could you add Tarek Hattab as a third author in the list? Tarek is the one who wrote the functions in C++ to speed up the whole resampling procedure we used for sPlotOpen. Thus, he fully deserve a very good plac in the co-author list. If that is ok for you, Tarek's affiliation is "MARBEC, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, IFREMER and IRD, Sète, France" and his ORCID is "http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1420-5758". Sorry for not incorporating his name directly but I am not sure how to modify or update the author list page....

lenjon commented 4 years ago

@fmsabatini I have tried to update the "metadata.yaml" file in sPlotOpen_Manuscript/content by adding information for Tarek Hattab as the third author. Here is modification I made in the file:

Can you see it in the "push" requests? Sorry to ask but this is first time I am using this... How can I see if it worked?

lenjon commented 4 years ago

And yes, we need to add the PhD student suggested by Emmanuel Garbolino. I cannot remember the name of this PhD student. Do you have it? If not I can try to search in my emails. There might be other co-authors to add here. I remember that I strated to build a list of co-authors to add in the manuscript, using a separate file. I have to search and dig this from my old folders in my computer. I'll send it to you.

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Thanks @lenjon. I included your changes. Next time, please don't forget to click the 'pull request' button. In a nutshell, this is how it works. When you use the online editor to make changes to the fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript repository online results, you are implicitly forking (=making a personal copy) of the project, which you know have among your repositories (lenjon/sPlotOpen_Manuscript). All edits stay within your personal copy (normally within an automatically generated new branch - 'Patch-1') until you push the 'pull request' button. If you do so, I receive your request, can check your edits and approve them

hbruelheide commented 4 years ago

Sorry, for jumping in late. I would suggest to only include co-authors that have contributed to sPlotOpen, plus those that have been nominated by the respective custodians, plus the TRY core team (who did the gap filling). Nevertheless, I would send out an opt-in to all other custodians, allowing them to be part of this, but making the request that this opt-in would require them to also make data available in a future update of sPlotOpen. Thus, it will be clear that the co-authorship is not for free and that they owe us. I believe the latter would make sense because we have members in sPlot 3 who did not have the chance to contribute to sPlotOpen, but would have loved to.

hbruelheide commented 4 years ago

I just had a look at the rendered version. So far, only three authors are mentioned first. Shouldn't we do the same as in the JVS 2019 paper and list the core members before starting with the alphabet: the Steering Committee, the TRY core team, the programmer (Stephan Hennekens), data cleaner (Ute Jandt)? Please, also exchange my affiliations: for me and Ute, MLU is the first affiliation. Affiliation 56 (Ute Jandt) is the same as 2.

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Thanks Helge. I agree. At the moment, I simply created the list of coauthors programmatically, taking all the custodians and deputy-custodians of all the datasets we used. So it's by far not complete nor final. So my understanding is that your are suggesting this list:

Me\Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge Bruelheide

I only have one issue. Which is that when sending around the request to make data open-access, I clearly stated that we were all in this together, so that custodians who could not grant access to data were not automatically excluded by the paper. So, I would soften the condition, and ask all people opting-in to keep in mind we'll get back to them asking for data, but without asking for a formal promise.

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Affiliation 56 (Ute Jandt) is the same as 2.

should be corrected now

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

Please, also exchange my affiliations: for me and Ute, MLU is the first affiliation.

This is done programmatically in a language I don't master. So, let's keep it mind and we'll do it manually later

hbruelheide commented 4 years ago

Dear Francesco, this is perfectly fine. Your formulation is much better than mine.

Best wishes

Helge

On 19 Oct 2020 at 6:13, fmsabatini wrote:

Thanks Helge. I agree. At the moment, I simply created the list of coauthors programmatically, taking all the custodians and deputy-custodians of all the datasets we used. So it's by far not complete nor final. So my understanding is that your are suggesting this list: Me\Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge Bruelheide I only have one issue. Which is that when sending around the request to make data open-access, I clearly stated that we were all in this together, so that custodians who could not grant access to data were not automatically excluded by the paper. So, I would soften the condition, and ask all people opting-in to keep in mind we'll get back to them asking for data, but without asking for a formal promise.

You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

lenjon commented 4 years ago

Hi Helge and Francesco,

I very much agree with you two here about co-authorship. I also like the current format:

Francesco/me + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge

This makes perfect sense to me. I am also ok for the opt-in to all database custodians, even those who did not contribute data. But like you said Francesco, meaning that they kind of owe us to contribute some data in the future, in case we want to release a new sPlotOpen version.

Also, as we speak about co-authorship, I just would like to suggest a few more co-authors specifically from the NVD database (EU-00-018) for which I am acting as a custodian. Indeed, most of the data in the NVD database is not from me (I am just the custodian) and I would feel better to invite as co-authors those who contributed most of the data in the NVD, which is kind of unique as there was not much data from the Nordic countries in EVA when we submitted the NVD. It feels a bit weird to me to include people who finally did not contribute data yet to sPlotOpen (cf. custodians who refused to contribute data as open access) but not inviting those who actually contributed a lot of data for sPlotOpen as direct contributors. In fact, many of the plots in the NVD have been selected as candidate plots for sPlotOpen. By the way, Francesco and Helge, do you have the information of the plotID as registered in EVA, in addition to the plotID as registered in sPlot? This would be useful for me to trace back who I should actually mention as potential co-authors for sPlotOpen. I think it is just a handful of people from the NVD whose contribution to sPlotOpen in terms of data is meaningful, these are: Vigdis Vandvik, John-Arvid Grytnes, Miska Luoto, Jörg Brunet, and Inger Alsos. Those persons are the one who should represent the high North in sPlotOpen, not just me ;)

I can actually play with the pull request tool in GitHub to suggest this change in the co-author list and provide all the necessary information (affiliations, emails, etc.). What do you think?

Best,

Jonathan

Jonathan Lenoir Chargé de Recherche CNRS

Université de Picardie Jules Verne Ecologie et Dynamiques des Systèmes Anthropisés UMR 7058 CNRS-UPJV 1 Rue des Louvels 80000 AMIENS FRANCE

http://www.u-picardie.fr/edysan/_listing-personnel/jonathan-lenoir/ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx5 http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ2nH4AAAAJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jonathan_Lenoir/ http://jonathanlenoir.wordpress.com/

Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 21:07, Helge Bruelheide notifications@github.com a écrit :

Dear Francesco, this is perfectly fine. Your formulation is much better than mine.

Best wishes

Helge

On 19 Oct 2020 at 6:13, fmsabatini wrote:

Thanks Helge. I agree. At the moment, I simply created the list of coauthors programmatically, taking all the custodians and deputy-custodians of all the datasets we used. So it's by far not complete nor final. So my understanding is that your are suggesting this list: Me\Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge Bruelheide I only have one issue. Which is that when sending around the request to make data open-access, I clearly stated that we were all in this together, so that custodians who could not grant access to data were not automatically excluded by the paper. So, I would soften the condition, and ask all people opting-in to keep in mind we'll get back to them asking for data, but without asking for a formal promise.

You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/issues/1#issuecomment-712382375, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AELUDUVKMAAZVA23ZYE7E7DSLSE7FANCNFSM4SSCG3TA .

hbruelheide commented 4 years ago

Dear Jonathan, I am completely fine with adding a handful more authors to this particular sPlot paper. Please, go ahead. However, according to the sPlot rules, for future projects, you as custodian should invite these people on particular projects where they have a particular focus. For that reason, it might be useful, when contacting them, to learn about their focal topics.

Best wishes

Helge

On 20 Oct 2020 at 2:16, Jonathan Lenoir wrote:

Hi Helge and Francesco,

I very much agree with you two here about co-authorship. I also like the current format:

Francesco/me + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge

This makes perfect sense to me. I am also ok for the opt-in to all database custodians, even those who did not contribute data. But like you said Francesco, meaning that they kind of owe us to contribute some data in the future, in case we want to release a new sPlotOpen version.

Also, as we speak about co-authorship, I just would like to suggest a few more co-authors specifically from the NVD database (EU-00-018) for which I am acting as a custodian. Indeed, most of the data in the NVD database is not from me (I am just the custodian) and I would feel better to invite as co-authors those who contributed most of the data in the NVD, which is kind of unique as there was not much data from the Nordic countries in EVA when we submitted the NVD. It feels a bit weird to me to include people who finally did not contribute data yet to sPlotOpen (cf. custodians who refused to contribute data as open access) but not inviting those who actually contributed a lot of data for sPlotOpen as direct contributors. In fact, many of the plots in the NVD have been selected as candidate plots for sPlotOpen. By the way, Francesco and Helge, do you have the information of the plotID as registered in EVA, in addition to the plotID as registered in sPlot? This would be useful for me to trace back who I should actually mention as potential co-authors for sPlotOpen. I think it is just a handful of people from the NVD whose contribution to sPlotOpen in terms of data is meaningful, these are: Vigdis Vandvik, John-Arvid Grytnes, Miska Luoto, Jörg Brunet, and Inger Alsos. Those persons are the one who should represent the high North in sPlotOpen, not just me ;)

I can actually play with the pull request tool in GitHub to suggest this change in the co-author list and provide all the necessary information (affiliations, emails, etc.). What do you think?

Best,

Jonathan

Jonathan Lenoir Chargé de Recherche CNRS

Université de Picardie Jules Verne Ecologie et Dynamiques des Systèmes Anthropisés UMR 7058 CNRS-UPJV 1 Rue des Louvels 80000 AMIENS FRANCE

http://www.u-picardie.fr/edysan/_listing-personnel/jonathan-lenoir/ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx5 http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ2nH4AAAAJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jonathan_Lenoir/ http://jonathanlenoir.wordpress.com/

Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 21:07, Helge Bruelheide notifications@github.com a écrit :

Dear Francesco, this is perfectly fine. Your formulation is much better than mine.

Best wishes

Helge

On 19 Oct 2020 at 6:13, fmsabatini wrote:

Thanks Helge. I agree. At the moment, I simply created the list of coauthors programmatically, taking all the custodians and deputy-custodians of all the datasets we used. So it's by far not complete nor final. So my understanding is that your are suggesting this list: Me\Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge Bruelheide I only have one issue. Which is that when sending around the request to make data open-access, I clearly stated that we were all in this together, so that custodians who could not grant access to data were not automatically excluded by the paper. So, I would soften the condition, and ask all people opting-in to keep in mind we'll get back to them asking for data, but without asking for a formal promise.

You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/issues/1#issuecomment-712382375, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AELUDUVKMAAZVA23ZYE7E7DSLSE7FA NCNFSM4SSCG3TA .

- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

lenjon commented 4 years ago

Hi Helge,

Cool. Then I'll contact them about sPlotOpen and also ask them if they would be happy to contribute to some of the other sPlot ongoing projects depending on their expertise. I have already mentioned this to some of the sPlot paper projects that indeed data contributors from the NVD I am managing could be meaningful to invite as co-authors given their strong expertise in vegetation science. By the way, some of them (Miska Luoto for instance) recently offered to contribute more vegetation plots from nordic countries (Finland). I have to think about a major update for the NVD ;)

Best,

Jonathan

Jonathan Lenoir Chargé de Recherche CNRS

Université de Picardie Jules Verne Ecologie et Dynamiques des Systèmes Anthropisés UMR 7058 CNRS-UPJV 1 Rue des Louvels 80000 AMIENS FRANCE

http://www.u-picardie.fr/edysan/_listing-personnel/jonathan-lenoir/ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx5 http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ2nH4AAAAJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jonathan_Lenoir/ http://jonathanlenoir.wordpress.com/

Le mar. 20 oct. 2020 à 11:43, Helge Bruelheide notifications@github.com a écrit :

Dear Jonathan, I am completely fine with adding a handful more authors to this particular sPlot paper. Please, go ahead. However, according to the sPlot rules, for future projects, you as custodian should invite these people on particular projects where they have a particular focus. For that reason, it might be useful, when contacting them, to learn about their focal topics.

Best wishes

Helge

On 20 Oct 2020 at 2:16, Jonathan Lenoir wrote:

Hi Helge and Francesco,

I very much agree with you two here about co-authorship. I also like the current format:

Francesco/me + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge

This makes perfect sense to me. I am also ok for the opt-in to all database custodians, even those who did not contribute data. But like you said Francesco, meaning that they kind of owe us to contribute some data in the future, in case we want to release a new sPlotOpen version.

Also, as we speak about co-authorship, I just would like to suggest a few more co-authors specifically from the NVD database (EU-00-018) for which I am acting as a custodian. Indeed, most of the data in the NVD database is not from me (I am just the custodian) and I would feel better to invite as co-authors those who contributed most of the data in the NVD, which is kind of unique as there was not much data from the Nordic countries in EVA when we submitted the NVD. It feels a bit weird to me to include people who finally did not contribute data yet to sPlotOpen (cf. custodians who refused to contribute data as open access) but not inviting those who actually contributed a lot of data for sPlotOpen as direct contributors. In fact, many of the plots in the NVD have been selected as candidate plots for sPlotOpen. By the way, Francesco and Helge, do you have the information of the plotID as registered in EVA, in addition to the plotID as registered in sPlot? This would be useful for me to trace back who I should actually mention as potential co-authors for sPlotOpen. I think it is just a handful of people from the NVD whose contribution to sPlotOpen in terms of data is meaningful, these are: Vigdis Vandvik, John-Arvid Grytnes, Miska Luoto, Jörg Brunet, and Inger Alsos. Those persons are the one who should represent the high North in sPlotOpen, not just me ;)

I can actually play with the pull request tool in GitHub to suggest this change in the co-author list and provide all the necessary information (affiliations, emails, etc.). What do you think?

Best,

Jonathan

Jonathan Lenoir Chargé de Recherche CNRS

Université de Picardie Jules Verne Ecologie et Dynamiques des Systèmes Anthropisés UMR 7058 CNRS-UPJV 1 Rue des Louvels 80000 AMIENS FRANCE

http://www.u-picardie.fr/edysan/_listing-personnel/jonathan-lenoir/ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx5 http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ2nH4AAAAJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Xx52nH4AAAAJ http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jonathan_Lenoir/ http://jonathanlenoir.wordpress.com/

Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 21:07, Helge Bruelheide notifications@github.com a écrit :

Dear Francesco, this is perfectly fine. Your formulation is much better than mine.

Best wishes

Helge

On 19 Oct 2020 at 6:13, fmsabatini wrote:

Thanks Helge. I agree. At the moment, I simply created the list of coauthors programmatically, taking all the custodians and deputy-custodians of all the datasets we used. So it's by far not complete nor final. So my understanding is that your are suggesting this list: Me\Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge Bruelheide I only have one issue. Which is that when sending around the request to make data open-access, I clearly stated that we were all in this together, so that custodians who could not grant access to data were not automatically excluded by the paper. So, I would soften the condition, and ask all people opting-in to keep in mind we'll get back to them asking for data, but without asking for a formal promise.

You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/issues/1#issuecomment-712382375 , or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AELUDUVKMAAZVA23ZYE7E7DSLSE7FA NCNFSM4SSCG3TA> .

- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

-- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/issues/1#issuecomment-712729323, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AELUDUWZXKR5MC3IU3LOWS3SLVLVLANCNFSM4SSCG3TA .

fmsabatini commented 4 years ago

for FORESTS PLOTS and RAINFOR we selected in agreement with the Custodian - Oliver Philipps - ca. 100 plots from S. Peru where there two principal investigators are Olive himself, and Abel Monteagudo. Oliver suggested to invite Abel to coauthor the ms, and I think it makes a lot of sense

lenjon commented 4 years ago

Yes indeed. It makes perfect sense to add them as co-authors

Le jeu. 22 oct. 2020 à 17:05, fmsabatini notifications@github.com a écrit :

for FORESTS PLOTS and RAINFOR we selected in agreement with the Custodian

  • Oliver Philipps - ca. 100 plots from S. Peru where there two principal investigators are Olive himself, and Abel Monteagudo. Oliver suggested to invite Abel to coauthor the ms, and I think it makes a lot of sense

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fmsabatini/sPlotOpen_Manuscript/issues/1#issuecomment-714558027, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AELUDUQDKPRTJM2ZOS6VMALSMBC2BANCNFSM4SSCG3TA .

fmsabatini commented 3 years ago

I realize I left the TRY core team out of the list of coauthors. New version:

Francesco/Jonathan + Tarek [sPlot core team + Stephan + Ute] [TRY core team] [Data contributors - 1 custodian per dataset effectively contributing data] & [other opt-ins, including members of sPlot 3.0] Helge

lenjon commented 3 years ago

About the coauthor list, I sent a pull request (PR) to add 8 persons from the NVD (EU-00-018) who aggreed to share their data and be listed as co-authors. In addition to that, I also commited in my PR another list of potential co-authors not yet included but who should (I think) be included. These persons are Franziska Schrodt, Richard Field, Sylvia Haider and Peter van Bodegom. There is also Cyrille Violle who participated to the very first sPlot meeting but I was not sure that if he signed up for sPlot paper #2. I just remmeber that especially Richard and Franzisca contributed a lot to paper #2 during the sPlot meetings. That is why they should be included in the list and invited to edit the ms, I think.

Finally, I am listing below a list of people who, at some point, raised interest in paper #2 and thus I noted down their name in a text file that I was keeping aside for sPlot paper #2. Here is the list of people I have but who are not yet included in teh coauthor list:

Note that I did exchange a lot with Attila Lengyel while preparing the resampling algorithm as we used Attila's approach for the selection of plots within a PC1-PC2 grid cell. So, shall we also include all these persons in the co-author list? I am fine with that but I prefer to discuss this with you @hbruelheide & @fmsabatini. What do you guys think? I would at least include Attila Lengyel for his help when implementing the resampling algorithm.

fmsabatini commented 3 years ago

Asked Jens Kattge and Franziska Schrodt whether we are forgetting somebody from TRY

fmsabatini commented 3 years ago

We tried to get in touch with some of the developers of the gap-filling algorithm but with no luck. @fisw10 suggests to drop the issue, and I agree.