Biological Data Curation Task

A Biological Data Curation Task is a Data Curation Task for Biological Data.

• AKA: Biocuration.
• Context:
  • It can be performed by a Biocurator.
• See: Product Data Curation Task.

---

---

References

2009

• (Cusick et al., 2009) ⇒ Michael E Cusick, Haiyuan Yu, Alex Smolyar, Kavitha Venkatesan, Anne-Ruxandra Carvunis, Nicolas Simonis, Jean-François Rual, Heather Borick, Pascal Braun, Matija Dreze, Jean Vandenhaute, Mary Galli, Junshi Yazaki, David E Hill, Joseph R Ecker, Frederick P Roth, and Marc Vidal. (2009). “Literature-Curated Protein Interaction Datasets.” In: Nature Methods 6, 39 - 46 (2009)

2008

• (Howe et al., 2008) ⇒ Doug Howe, Maria Costanzo, Petra Fey, Takashi Gojobori, Linda Hannick, Winston Hide, David P. Hill, Renate Kania, Mary Schaeffer, Susan St Pierre, Simon Twigger, Owen White, and Seung Yon Rhee. (2008). “Big Data: The future of biocuration.” In: Nature, 455.
  • Such data, produced at great effort and expense, are only as useful as researchers' ability to locate, integrate and access them. In recent years, this challenge has been met by a growing cadre of biologists — 'biocurators' — who manage raw biological data, extract information from published literature, develop structured vocabularies to tag data and make the information available online.

2006

• (Salimi & Vita, 2006) ⇒ Nima Salimi, and Randi Vita. (2006). “The Biocurator: Connecting and Enhancing Scientific Data.” In: PLoS Computational Biology, 2(10).
  • Despite the use of our extensive Curation Manual, there are difficult situations that inherently arise during curation. We often encounter inconsistent terminologies in the literature that present formidable challenges to our consistent interpretation of the data. Scientists frequently use highly diverse and controversial nomenclature, for example, in the naming of MHC molecules. The methods used to perform an experiment may be somewhat obscure or contradictory. The conclusions drawn by the authors may be difficult to represent based upon the limitations of the database fields and our curation guidelines. Newly created assay types may require interpretation and assignment to a particular assay group. Thus, valuable meetings involving the curation team and the EC are held weekly to discuss novel issues arising in curation and to review specific references. While every effort is made to address such problems using our established guidelines, novel challenges are often dealt with on a reference-by-reference basis. The solution is then translated into a generalized guideline that can be consistently applied to similar occurrences in the future.
• (Bukhardt et al., 2006) ⇒ Kyle Burkhardt, Bohdan Schneider, and Jeramia Ory. (2006). “A Biocurator Perspective: Annotation at the Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics Protein Data Bank.” In: PLoS Computational Biology, 2(10). doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020099
• (Bourne and McEntyre, 2006) ⇒ P. E. Bourne and J. McEntyre. (2006). “Biocurators: Contributors to the World of Science.” In: PLoS Comput Biol 2(10).

---