Open Access to the Digital Biodiversity Database: A Comprehensive Functional Model of the Natural History Collections

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I find the paper quite original and relevant to fill the gap of Digital Accessible Knowledge (DAK) which is indispensable for data use to inform decisions.

When referring to GBIF in the introduction (47) they just cite a website address whereas there are a considerable number of relevant documents they can consider to appropriately appraise the scope of GBIF. Their references need to be complemented

The reference (57) refers to TDWG not to GBIF

It is said in the conceptual model in section 3 that the specimen data will be transferred to GBIF. What is about the occurrence data? I recommend that both occurrence data and related specimen data be transferred to GBIF.

In section 4, please, add to AMUNATCOLL IT system an interface to GBIF data. This will increase the frequentation of the portal. I also recommend you to have also in the menu, a platform for partnership

In sub section 4.1 the metadata structure should be more extended so as to distinguish between preserve specimen, living specimen, fossil specimen etc. It will be more profitable with respect to future data inputs

 

In sub section 4.2, I suggest that the architecture of the portal includes a menu of news on biodiversity events so that relevant and updated news can be shown and then attractive to users

In sub section 4.2, it is clear that the architecture of the portal is quite rich, however, it is possible to enrich it more, for example by including the basis of records that describes the method of data collection. When looking for data for specific analysis like ecological niche modeling, it is useful to exclude for example data from introduced specimens

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper provides a good case study for the exploitation of natural history collections and natural history data. Although this paper does not a contain "standard" scientific  experiments, I encourage authors to present such a usecase in English. I point out several suggestion to improve and make the paper informative.

1)Any of the Figre6 and 7 are not readable, and figures with higher resolution should be provided. Or, the authors should enlarged figure in supplmentary files.

2) the URL of the AMUNATCOLL https://amunatcoll.pl/ should be mentioned in the text for convinience.

3) How about providing a list of fields as a supplementary data for Table 1. I read the numbers indicated in Table 1 as a number of data sets, but is my understand correct? If not it is not easy to understand. Please provide the meaning of the figures in table 1.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

The paper clearly describes the development and functionality of the open access AMUNATCOLL natural history collection management system and web portal. The system has an integrated citizen science app and direct exchange functionality through the BioCASe software with the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. The paper is well structured as well as well written, hence I have few comments.

First, is the AMUNATCOLL platform open source, i.e. can other NHMs implement the software? Second, would it be possible to include a few lines on the Digital Extended Specimen (DES) concept which is an aggregation of the open digital specimen concept developed under DiSSCo and the extended specimen concept developed by Lendemer and implemented by BCoN (Biodiversity Collections Network - https://bcon.aibs.org/). The DES concept was developed through an open community consultation led by GBIF https://discourse.gbif.org/t/digital-extended-specimens-phase-2/2651. Finally, I have one question regarding the mobile app, does this include anything of AI species recognition as is implemented by e.g. iNaturalist?

Minor comments and remarks:

L195      What is the specific importance of the inflow of external biodiversity data into AMUNATCOLL. Other data owners can also publish their data directly to GBIF and AMUNATCOLL can harvest the data from GBIF.

L203      Is the app available in an App store? What is the name of the app?

L242      Table 1 - Maybe use the actual DwC terms instead of their descriptions to avoid confusion

Table 1  Indicate which specific fields are used for each collection category, not just the number.

Figure 6 & 7         Font too small

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf