Blog

Modern Palaeoanthropology advances towards greater openness and accessibility

 

In 1912, Charles Dawson, an amateur antiquarian and solicitor, along with Arthur Smith Woodward, the Curator of Geology at the Natural History Museum of London, proclaimed the discovery of the ‘missing link’ bridging the gap between apes and humans. They claimed to have found a fragment of a skull resembling that of a human in Pleistocene gravel beds near Piltdown village in Sussex, England. Additionally, they uncovered mandible fragments that were posited to belong to the same individual. Smith Woodward reconstructed the skull fragments, and collectively, they theorized that the discovery provided evidence of a human ancestor from 500,000 years ago. They unveiled their findings at a Geological Society meeting in 1912 (1), which were generally accepted by the scientific community. The fossil was named “Piltdown man,” creating a new species: Eoanthropus dawsoni. Unfortunately, the story does not end here.

Continue reading

Setting the record straight: how data and code transparency caught an error and how I fixed it

 

“We were unable to reproduce your results, and I think the reason is that there is a bug in how you are calculating your correlation coefficients.”

 

That was part of an email I got this summer that absolutely crushed me. It doesn’t take much empathy to feel that knot in your stomach and existential dread from imposter syndrome, especially if you are currently a graduate student, post-doc, or another early-career researcher. What happens when you or someone else catches an error post-publication is not something most scientists know, certainly none of my peers or advisors did, but I got to experience the process from a supportive group of colleagues, advisors, and journal editors. I’m not writing this piece to commiserate on the fears, anxieties, and setbacks we have as scientists, nor am I going to belabor the details of the analysis or the justifications/explanations of how I missed the error; I’m writing this because the larger picture of the scientific process, when aided by data transparency, works to make our collective knowledge better.

Continue reading

PeerJ Award Winners at SORTEE 2023

 

The third annual SORTEE conference was held virtually in October 2023, continuously over 24 hours to cover all time zones. There were 266 registered participants from 36 countries. The conference programme included plenary talks, 5 workshops, 5 hackathons and 8 unconference sessions. During the closing sessions two winners were announced for the SORTEE “Student Award” and “Researcher Award”. These awards have been renamed and redesigned to increase transparency, equity and inclusions. In the new award process, nominations were initially assessed for eligibility, then eligible candidates were entered as finalists into a lottery to select the winner for each award. The lottery was run using a random ‘spin the wheel’ program, requiring one re-spin to ensure fulfilment of SORTEE Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy. The winner of the ‘Student Award’ was: Euan Young affiliated with the University of Groningen in the Netherlands. The winner of the ‘Researcher Award’ was Birgit Szabo affiliated with the University of Bern in Switzerland.

Continue reading

Complexities of reuse and synthesis in the open data landscape

Open data offers immense opportunities for ecologists and evolutionary biologists. The more good quality data are available, the more questions can be answered—and at broader spatial and temporal scales and at greater taxonomic generality. However, making use of open data is far from straightforward.

At this year’s SORTEE conference, Rose Trappes and Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar co-organized a productive unconference to tackle this complex topic. For that, they invited three experienced panellists: Matt Grainger, Antica Culina and Benno Simmons, and held a discussion about the opportunities and challenges of data reuse and data synthesis in the fast-moving world of open data. We heard from researchers experienced in reusing and synthesising data, as well as those active in creating open data resources for ecologists and evolutionary biologists.

Continue reading

SORTEE member voices – Félicie Dhellemmes

[SORTEE member voices is a weekly Q&A with a different SORTEE member]
   

Name: Félicie Dhellemmes (she/her)
 

Date: 28 June 2023.
 

Position: Post-Doc.
 

Research and/or work interests:
Behavioral ecology, movement ecology, individual differences in behavior, foraging.
   

How did you become interested in open research?
I became interested in ORT research practices pretty early on when it became evident to me that if we wanted the public to trust science (in the context of climate, for example), science had to be exemplary and as trustworthy as possible.
   

Continue reading

SORTEE member voices – Saeed Shafiei Sabet

[SORTEE member voices is a weekly Q&A with a different SORTEE member]
   

Name: Saeed Shafiei Sabet
 

Date: 8 December 2022.
 

Position: Research Fellow.
 

Research and/or work interests:
Animal behavior, Anthropogenic noise, predator-prey interactions,
noise impacts, wildlife, anti-predator behavior, fish, crustaceans.
   

How did you become interested in open research?
To be able to share our findings and behavioral observations in a more
clear and available way.
   

What is an open/reliable/transparent science practice that you admire but have not yet adopted in your own work?
Data availability and access.
   

Continue reading