Genomic Data Are Not Commodities: Advocating for Collective Responsibility in Open Science

ABSTRACT The availability of genomic and genetic data is fundamental to advancing biogeographical research, particularly in biodiversity‐rich but data‐poor regions such as the South Atlantic. Yet, despite increasing mandates for open science, researchers face significant barriers to accessing datasets from published studies. While some authors may withhold data due to legitimate concerns about intellectual property protection, ongoing analyses, or conservation purposes, these situations should be clearly justified. Otherwise, prolonged or indefinite data restriction, manifesting as missing accession numbers, incomplete metadata, withheld sample information, poor geographic localisation, or even demands for co‐authorship as a condition for data sharing, undermine transparency, reproducibility, and scientific progress. We argue that such practices constitute more than technical oversights. They represent structural and ethical obstacles that undermine transparency, reproducibility, and scientific progress. In this perspective, we aim to underscore the relevance of this discussion in the context of biogeography. To test biogeographic hypotheses using published data, particularly in comparative analyses, genetic data must be properly georeferenced and accompanied by accurate taxonomic identification. We emphasise that requesting data is not an attempt to appropriate or diminish the merit of the original work. Rather, it is a means of amplifying its value through new analyses and the generation of novel insights that remain grounded in proper attribution and collaboration. We call upon journals to strengthen data‐sharing policies and enforce compliance. We urge institutions to redefine ethical standards around data availability. We also advocate for funding agencies to treat open data as a core metric of research impact. Without a collective shift in culture and responsibility, science risks falling short of its ideals. Data are not academic currency. They are the foundation upon which science must stand.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Biogeography
Published
2025-10-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.70062
Primary Topic
Research Data Management Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Genomic Data Are Not Commodities: Advocating for Collective Responsibility in Open Science

Isabel A. S. Bonatelli, Danilo T. Amaral, João Roberto Fentanes‐Machado
Journal of Biogeography
Research Data Management Practices
article

Genomic Data Are Not Commodities: Advocating for Collective Responsibility in Open Science

Isabel A. S. Bonatelli, Danilo T. Amaral, João Roberto Fentanes‐Machado
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT The availability of genomic and genetic data is fundamental to advancing biogeographical research, particularly in biodiversity‐rich but data‐poor regions such as the South Atlantic. Yet, despite increasing mandates for open science, researchers face significant barriers to accessing datasets from published studies. While some authors may withhold data due to legitimate concerns about intellectual property protection, ongoing analyses, or conservation purposes, these situations should be clearly justified. Otherwise, prolonged or indefinite data restriction, manifesting as missing accession numbers, incomplete metadata, withheld sample information, poor geographic localisation, or even demands for co‐authorship as a condition for data sharing, undermine transparency, reproducibility, and scientific progress. We argue that such practices constitute more than technical oversights. They represent structural and ethical obstacles that undermine transparency, reproducibility, and scientific progress. In this perspective, we aim to underscore the relevance of this discussion in the context of biogeography. To test biogeographic hypotheses using published data, particularly in comparative analyses, genetic data must be properly georeferenced and accompanied by accurate taxonomic identification. We emphasise that requesting data is not an attempt to appropriate or diminish the merit of the original work. Rather, it is a means of amplifying its value through new analyses and the generation of novel insights that remain grounded in proper attribution and collaboration. We call upon journals to strengthen data‐sharing policies and enforce compliance. We urge institutions to redefine ethical standards around data availability. We also advocate for funding agencies to treat open data as a core metric of research impact. Without a collective shift in culture and responsibility, science risks falling short of its ideals. Data are not academic currency. They are the foundation upon which science must stand.

Journal of BiogeographyVol. 52(11)
Instituto de Ciências Farmacêuticas (BR), Universidade Federal do ABC (BR), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR)
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Research Data Management Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.