A Quality Management Workflow Proposal for a Biodiversity Data Repository

  • Michael Owonibi
  • Birgitta Koenig-Ries
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8823)


The importance of quality-assured data in scientific analysis necessitates the inclusion of data quality management (DQM) functionality in research data repositories in addition to their primary role of data storage, sharing and integration. Typically, the DQM workflow in data repositories is fixed and semi-automated for datasets whose structure and semantics is known a-priori, however, for other types of datasets, DQM is either manual or minimal. In comparison, classical DQM methodology (especially in data warehousing research) has established standard, typically manually undertaken, DQM procedures for different types of data. Therefore, our proposal aims at customizing and semi-automating the classical DQM procedures for bio-diversity data repositories. As opposed to reviewing scientific contents of the data, we focus on technical data quality. Our proposed workflow includes DQM criteria specification, client and server-side validation, data profiling, error detection analysis, data enhancement and correction, and quality monitoring.


Error Detection Outlier Detection Data Repository Biodiversity Data Global Biodiversity Information Facility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chrisman, N.R.: The Error Component in Spatial Data. In: Maguire, D.J., Goodchild, M.F., Rhind, D.W. (eds.) Geographical Information Systems, vol. 1, pp. 165–174. Longman Scientific and Technical, Principals (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Redman, T.C.: Data Quality for the Information Age. Artech House, Inc., Boston (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chapman, A.D.: Principles of Data Quality, version 1.0. Report for the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Copenhagen, pp. 1–58 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Costello, M., Michener, W., Gahegan, M., Zhang, Z., Bourne, P.: Biodiversity data should be published, cited, and peer reviewed. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28(8), 454–461 (2013), doi:10.1016/j.tree.2013.05.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Swan, A., Sheridan, B.: To Share or Not to Share: Publication and Quality Assurance of Research Data Outputs. A report for the Research Information Network. School of Electronics & Computer Science, University of Southampton (2008), (Online: Accessed February 2014)
  6. 6.
    Sadiq, S.: Handbook of Data Quality. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    English, L.P.: Improving Data Warehouse and Business Information Quality: Methods for Reducing Costs and Increasing Profits. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chisholm, M.: Data Quality is Not Fitness for Use, (Online: Accessed February 2014)
  9. 9.
    Batini, C., Cappiello, C., Francalanci, C., Maurino, A.: Methodologies for data quality assessment and improvement. ACM Comput. Surv. 41(3), 1–52 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barateiro, J., Galhardas, H.: A Survey of Data Quality Tools. Datenbank-Spektrum 14, 15–21 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aggarwal, C.C.: Outlier Analysis. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seo, S.: A review and comparison of methods for detecting outlier in univariate data sets. PhD thesis. University of Pittsburgh, Department of Biostatistics (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fürber, C., Hepp, M.: Ontology-Based Data Quality Management - Methodology, Cost, and Benefits. In: 6th Annual European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2009), Heraklion, Greece, May 31-June 4 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Malik, W.A., Unwin, A., Gribov, A.: An Interactive Graphical System for Visualizing Data Quality - Tableplot Graphics. In: Loracek-Junge, H., Weihs, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th IFCS Conference Classification as a Tool for Research, pp. 331–339. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ball, S., French, G.: NBN Record Cleaner user guide, V., (Online: Accessed February 2014)
  16. 16.
    Hyvönen, E., Alonen, M., Koho, M., Tuominen, J.: BirdWatch—supporting citizen scientists for better linked data quality for biodiversity management. In: Workshop on Semantics for Biodiversity (S4BIODIV), ESWC, Montpellier, France. CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lotz, T., Nieschulze, J., Bendix, J., Dobbermann, M., König-Ries, B.: Diverse or uniform? - Intercomparison of two major German project databases for interdisciplinary collaborative functional biodiversity research. Ecological Informatics 8, 10–19 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chamanara, J., König-Ries, B.: A conceptual model for data management in the field of ecology. Ecological Informatics (2013),
  19. 19.
    Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: Ontologies and Thesauri References. 3, (Online: Accessed February 2014)
  20. 20.
    Oracle Warehouse Builder User’s Guide, 11g Release 1 (11.1) (2009), (Online: Accessed February 2014)

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Owonibi
    • 1
  • Birgitta Koenig-Ries
    • 1
  1. 1.Friedrich Schiller UniversityJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations