Citation
Research support services: agricultural sciences

Material Information

Title:
Research support services: agricultural sciences
Creator:
Stapleton, Suzanne C.
Minson, Valrie I.
Spears, Laura
Edition:
Pre-print edition
Physical Description:
Technical Reports

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Ithaka S+R, agriculture

Notes

Acquisition:
Collected for University of Florida's Institutional Repository by the UFIR Self-Submittal tool. Submitted by Suzanne Stapleton.
Publication Status:
In Press
General Note:
This is the final report from the University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries participation in the Ithaka S+R Research Support Services: Agricultural Sciences study.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Creator/Rights holder. Permission granted to University of Florida to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ESDLZSCF3_LH3DZQ INGEST_TIME 2017-01-23T18:27:17Z PACKAGE IR00009135_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

Research Support Services: Agricultural Sciences Marston Science Library George A. Smathers Libraries University of Florida Suzanne Stapleton Valrie Minson, Laura Spears

PAGE 2

Table of Contents Introduction nstitute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Characteristics of study participants Departments and schools represented Rank of study participants Appointment of study participants Location of study participants Research Methodology Research Support Service Themes Finding sources for research Data management issues & tools R epositories for sharing research products Active use of data repositories Costs and risks of sharing data Research dissemination Where to publish Implications and Opportunities for Library Research Support Services Access Collection management Data repositories Information literacy instruction Final thoughts References Appendix A. Semi structured interview guide for research support services study for the field of agriculture Appendix B. Glossary of abbreviations and terms

PAGE 3

Introduction The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries is one of 19 institutions that participated in the Ithaka S+R Research Support Services: Agricultural Sciences study. The formal description of the research design is outlined by Ithaka S +R: This study is an in depth qualitative analys i s of the research practices of academics in agriculture in order to understand the resources and services these faculty members need to be successful in their teaching and research. This information will be used to articulate the research activities and ne eds of agriculture scholars including identifying improvements to pre existing research support services at [ University of Florida ] and opportunities for developing new research support services for agriculture more widely. This study also adds to the know ledge in library and information studies on user needs and activities by examining the specific needs of agriculture scholars, a group that has been previously under represented in this literature. The local study proposed here is connected to a suite of parallel studies being developed locally at other US based higher education institutions with agriculture departments (Ithaka S+R, 2016 a p. 6 ). The local research project was implemented exclusively by the researchers at the University of Florida. Ithaka S+R, a not for profit research and consulting service that supports academic, cultural, and publishing communities, provided ] guidance on research methodology and data analysis a p. 6 ). Researchers at UF participated in an Ithaka S+R t raining designed to encourage consistency across all participating institutions. The anonymized aggregated data and analysis from all 19 institutions will be incorporated into a comprehensive report written and made publically available by Ithaka S+R. (I thaka S+R, 2016 a p.6 ). A number of core themes emerged from the analysis of research practices in the local study at UF. This report summarizes a subset of the results, focusing on themes related to research support services. The UF research team will pres ent analysis of additional themes that emerged from this study in subsequent publication(s). University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences All of the interviews for the local study involved agricultural science researchers in the UF I nstitute of Food and Agricultural Sciences ( UF/IFAS ). UF/IFAS land grant college or university is an institution that has been designated by its state legislature or Congress to receive the benefits of the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890. The original mission of these institutions,

PAGE 4

as set forth in the first Morrill Act, was to teach agriculture, military tactics, and the mechanical arts as well as classical studies so that members of (University of Florida, 2012). As a land grant institution, UF/IFAS is charged with an outreach mission to disseminate research results to practitioners throughout the state. This outreach typically occurs through the world renowned Cooperative Extension Service, a tri body partnership between the federal, state and local county governments where off campus faculty work as extension agents. Extension agents rely on content provided by state extension specialists from agricultural scientists. In recognition of the different dissemination goals of UF/IFAS faculty with exten sion appointments, UF researchers made an effort to recruit interviewees with varied responsibilities. UF/IFAS faculty typically have appointment s in 2 of 3 areas: research, teaching and extension. W hile not within the original scope of this study, the UF research team acknowledges that success in extension activities is also important to academics in the agricultural sciences. The expectation to translate research results into practical guidelines permeates all appointments : n appointment, but the nature of my grants usually require that we demonstrate impact and to demonstrate impact, you're usually doing some kind of extension programs for The responsibility to provide information to the public extends to the publication practices of all agricultural scholars : So you're basically writing two different types of articles, then, because one's a very applied [one] for the extension publications, you're talking to the UF/IFAS employs 10 12% of the university faculty (UF OIPR, 2016 ) and comprises a total of 14 departments and 2 interdiscip linary schools: School of Natural Resources & Environment and the School of Forest Resources & Conservation ( UF/IFAS Briefing Book, 2013). veterinary medicine, forest management, nat ural resources management, and other adjacent fields. For the purposes of this project, scholars more strongly aligned with these fields, and less focused on the science and practice of farming, will be held out b ). However, UF study participants described a shift in focus in agricultural research towards sustainability, including conservation of natural resources. Therefore, for a more comprehensive understanding of research needs of agricultural scholars at UF, the UF researc h team included participants from forestry and wildlife ecology. Participants from the College of Veterinary Medicine were not included. UF/IFAS employees are located at 12 off campus Research and Education Centers (RECS) in addition to the main campus. These RECs provide statewide

PAGE 5

presence of UF/IFAS faculty and enable region specific research, teaching and extension throughout the state. Chara cteristics of study participants Respondents for this study represented 12 departments and 2 schools. The academic rank of respondents were 6 Full Professors, 4 Associate Professors, 4 Assistant Professors and 1 non tenure track Research Assistant. 11 we re based on the main campus and 4 were based at off campus Research & Education Centers. Observed diversity measures were noted: 9 respondents were male; 6 female; and for nearly half of the respondents, English was their second language. Departments & Sc hools Represented Agricultural & Biological Engineering Agricultural Education & Communication Agronomy Animal Sciences Entomology & Nematology Environmental Horticulture Food & Resource Economics Food Science & Human Nutrition Horticultural Sciences Plant Pathology School of Forest Resources & Conservation School of Natural Resources & Environment Soil and Water Sciences Wildlife Ecology & Conservation UF/IFAS departments not represented by study participants: Family Youth & Community Services, Microbiolo gy and Cell Science, Veterinary Medicine ( IFAS Directory, Centers and Programs 2016 )

PAGE 6

Rank of study participants Rank No. of Participants Full 6 Associate 4 Assistant 4 Other 1 Appointment of study participants One of the respondents had responsibilities in all 3 appointment areas (teaching, research, and extension) and one was in a fully administrative role. With the exception of one administrator, all respondents in this study had research appointments; 9 also had teachi ng and 6 had extension appointments. Appointment No. of Participants Research 14 Teaching 9 Extension 6 Administration 1 Note: Numbers exceed the total 15 participants because 14 participants has split appointments: Research plus either Teaching or Extension. 1 participant has appointments in all 3 areas. 1 participant has an exclusively administrative appointment.

PAGE 7

Location of study participants Location No. of Participants Main campus 11 Off campus REC 4 UF/IFAS has 12 off campus Research and Education Centers (REC) throughout the state. Research Methodology T he University of Florida research team comprised three librarians: Valrie Minson (Chair of Marston Science Library and Agricultural Sciences Librarian), Suzanne Stapleton (Agricultural Sciences Librarian & Digital Initiatives ), and Laura Spears (Assessment Librarian). The UF team obtained study approval from the UF Institutiona l Review Board (IRB) and participated in an Ithaka S+R training designed to encourage consistency across all institutions participating in the Ithaka S+R study of agricultural scholars. During the summer of 2016, 15 UF/ IFAS agricultural scholars particip ated in one on one semi structured interviews with a member of the UF research team. The interviews lasted 60 interview process participants gave consent for researchers to take photographs documenting their work space. Recorded interviews were transcribed by a commercial transcription service.

PAGE 8

The UF research team met to discuss the interviews conducted, reviewing highlights and developing a research design based on a grounded theory approach. Key concepts and terms were derived from multiple readings of the interview transcriptions and the researchers identified core themes that summarize the user needs and activities of interview ee s. The UF research team used the resu lting focused codes to summarize and annotate findings from each transcript, resulting in Research Support Service themes categorized by topics including finding sources and research needs, data management issues and tools, repositories for sharing researc h products and research dissemination. A synthesis of i mplications for academic library services reviews the opportunities for library resources and instruction to bette r support agricultural sciences research at the University of Florida. Research Support Service Themes Finding sources for research Agricultural science researchers interpret primary sources in many different ways. All locate the primary and secondary source question immediately followed the q typically elicit ? leading to answers that included: databases for locating journal articles, bacterial specimens needed to do microbiology research, graduate students, as the primary people responsible for lab work, expected research findings, with serendipit ous findings considered "secondary" findings. Within the information science community, primary sources are considered original documents and within the humanities this may be diaries, letters, or origi nal historical materials. Within the scientific community, primary sources are typically the original data/research, scientific experiments, or research studies. When interviewees were asked about specific tools for locating primary research, answers incl uded: Web of Science CAB Abstracts GRIN Taxonomy Agricola Zootaxa cited references conference presentations ERIC PubMed

PAGE 9

Google Scholar, particularly utilizing alerts and "backward and forward citations" of people evaluation reports through a local Center's database skimming Table of Contents for journals specific journals listservs statistical and theory based books that assist with coding Not unlike the challenges of locating primary research materials in other disciplines, the general response from inte much of what we do these days, of course, everything pretty much is, I mean, through Internet sources. So online sources. So how do you locate that? Well, the process is not easy. Okay. So either you as an exp ert have been exposed to those tools through conferences or meetings or colleagues or you can discover them through certain years, okay, and more often than not, they are as ancillary products of the papers that are written. So you have to use, find the literature, and then they would refer to a particular study and from there, you can get to their data. Now, unfortunately as you know, the data is not readily available in publications. That's a big barrier. So I usually have to contact the authors and ge t those data or in some way or another get access primary sources, but also the importance of locating primary data. Primary data is very important within the sc iences and interviewees communicated the importance of Dryad, Figshare, GBIF, or GenBank for locating primary data. One biological sciences researcher discussed the importance of accessing/viewing the original research article when a species or organism wa s initially discovered. The researcher communicated the challenge of accessing the historical literature and the importance of the librarian to the process. The need for publications in multiple disciplines as well as assistance locating relevant journals that cover multiple disciplines is support that researchers need. As one researcher stated he/she ecology, and biology in which the stressors can be genetic or environmental and therefore, he/she frequently consulted experts in other fields, resulting in what he/she explore new, hybrid publications for researchers working in a variety of fields on one study. Dat a management issues & tools Data is seminal to the work of the agricultural sciences. Due to the breadth of research that falls within the agricultural sciences, agricultural data covers a wide range of types including: quantitative, qualitative, or non n ormal data (such as rating scales); behavioral or economic data;

PAGE 10

spatial, such as remote sensing data; images, such as satellite images or images to identify vegetation density; sound recordings, such as bird songs; Existing data, such as legacy data co llected by retired researchers or data collected by federal agencies or corporations; field trials that include vegetation density; museum specimen data Agricultural researchers collect, sanitize, and analyze data as a means to solving agricultural challenges both big and small. Many of the researchers utilize data to predict change. Taking into account many different types of variables whether biophysical, chemical, or land use researchers analyze the data to try to understand what might be the main drivers behind that change. As one researcher explained: real complex systems can never be understood in their parts. So what we're trying to do is reduce the complexity of that system to a few meaningful components that then we can go and operate on, and that's typical of every environmental system. So wherever humans and natural system are, they are complex systems. They cannot be really fully understood, and we still are trying to understand it perfectly, just reduce them to a few things that mat ter Data helps researchers better understand the complex systems, both the drivers of the system and the unique context N ot only is the agricultural research environment complex, so are the barriers encountered when attempting to collect, find, or acces s data. The barriers include: Finding and accessing data can be difficult. Not all data is readily available and many data can be expensive to acqu ire. Costs of data analysis tools can be very high. need. We got all the data we need. Now, how are Data has the ability to be analyzed in countless ways, but there are time constraints both in the collection of the data and also in that a student will need and Processing data requires specialized programmers, or specialized skills. Data processing requires complex mathematical m odeling insights that are difficult to intensive, and require skill sets in computer programming and the analysis of increasingly complex or large datasets. And so, I can do those t hings myself, but department, you know, someone who had expertise in computer programming and database management and manipulation who can help prepare and

PAGE 11

Data sca rce regions in the world often lack infrastructure to support data availability. Additionally, when the data is available, many of the agencies in charge of collecting these data will not publically share. Understanding the complex systems also assists the agricultural community with Computer simulation models are utilized to reproduce the behavior and identify the various ways to reproduce the behavior as a means for understanding complex systems. Data visualization and analysis has built a new framework of how to test, store, and cur ate data. The various types of analysis conducted on agricultural research includes: statistical analysis risk models distribution models simulations Integral projection models Econometrics Variance analysis Bioinformatics RNA Seq ESTs Cloning Repositories for sharing research products Agricultural scientists are active users of research repositories. There is a strong tradition of using shared data in agricultural disciplines. Respondents described the acknowledged the costs and risks of contributing to repositories. While knowledge and use of data repositories is advanced among these scientists, use of repositories for published papers was less developed. As one researcher stated, Active us e of data repositories Appreciation for shared data is well established among agricultural scholars. Agricultural scholars have used shared data of natural resources, specifically weather and soil data, for centuries. Over time, shared data has expanded to include markets and trade, water quality, and genetic code. The vast majority of these data are provided by national government, although some scholars report using proprietary

PAGE 12

data or working in countries where national data is not shared. With this common appreciation for using shared data, agricultural scholars are strong supporters of repositories. Scholars in agricultural disciplines also contribute their own data to data repositories by requirement and by their own initiative Researchers in se veral disciplines are required to deposit biological specimens into specific repositories, as is the case of first reports of invasive species. Depending on the discipline, biological specimens collected by respondents have been deposited into the USDA Fu ngal Isolate Collection, the Food & and in local herbariums that report to statewide agencies, such as the Florida State Collection of Arthropods. Researchers voluntari ly contribute their own data into repositories as well. On going contributions to data repositories are critical for modelling, as more data leads to better models. In addition to improved research and collaboration, motivations for depositing data into r epositories include preservation and being a good citizen. Generally, agricultural scholars are strong supporters of data sharing. Their own research benefits from using shared data and many expressed a sense of duty to contribute their data for others us e. a return on their investment and I think part of that return on investment is the in that treatment step based on what's happened in other similar food products. you input that raw data into their repository so that it can be used to help sometimes, we use those repositories, and a lot of food companies use those repositories to try to predict what's going to happen i n their food products. And so, sort of being a good citizen in our field is to add data into those repositories One agricultural researcher mentioned the challenge of sharing data saved on internal servers o r drives and transitioning these data into publicly accessible repositories : We do have a website or drive here that I guess all of our data goes on. We call it TDrive that all of our group, all 18 or 20 people, post docs and grad students can get in, and we've got it back to 1977 or something like

PAGE 13

can let them have it, but we do not at this point, we have not put it on a Another researcher commented on the importance of embargos when archiving data: now more and more journals are actually requiring mandatory data archiving, but I started doing that about six years ago just because I thought it was important to do. And so, that's something else that I do require my students to do. Whether they've publ ished, no matter what journal they're in, I want their data archived upon submission. And they're welcome to embargo it. I embargo mine too for a couple years at a time or whatever sometimes, but everybody also archives their data and I also try to archive my code, any kind of computer Costs and Risks of Sharing Data In spite of widespread support of data repositories, respondents recognize the costs and risks of sharing data, both at personal and disciplinary levels. The cost of sharing data is mainly incurred in the preparation of the data for widespread use. Formatting working on innovative research. document it. We have historical data for years. It has inconsistencies. The missing variables are not what it should be. The zeros are not consistent. The n ames of should have a more proactive ways to store this data, and -but you need computer scientists. You need people to clean the data. You need students and faculty. We have too many small tasks and one task of cleaning and preparing a dataset doesn't look good in your [promotion packet] I don't think it's a waste of time. I think it's an investment for the long whereby younger scientists are strongly supportive of open access to data while older sc ientists may be more protective of their research data. Younger scientists are more always hold true, however, as younger faculty may need to protect their data for use i n future publications necessary to achieve tenure while established faculty are more immune to the pressures to publish, having already gained tenure. Attitudes vary across disciplines as well, where, for instance, time to publication in agricultural

PAGE 14

econ omics is a considerably longer process than in other fields. Peer pressure to contribute data towards collaborations may be stronger in some research areas than others. you can imagine how long that takes. There is a concern with putting three, four more There are risks inherent in contributing data to a repository as well. Shared data is open to be used by others, perhaps in ways unintended by the original researcher. Scholars mentioned an example of poorly conducted studies on genetically modified organisms y by the majority of people but are constantly picked up by people to use as examples, even though the studies themselves are scientists to deposit their research data in to repositories. repository, all agricultural scholars interviewed responded to their use of data repositories. Only two respondents volunteered practices regarding repositories for their research papers without prompting. One submits publications to a local reprint Center for Produce Safety where active links are maintained to all relevant papers. Some scientists post their publications on personal websites or on social media sites. Agricultural scholars expressed unfamiliarity with repository locations as one bar rier impeding their contributions to research repositories. Most were embarrassed to admit the IR@UF Many were interested to learn more whether data and grey literature were app ropriate and could be easily handled by the IR@UF. This is a topic that merits follow up education. is. So I've love to hear about it, like, go to a session or something and hear more about it, but I don't know if you guys do that. But you know, what kinds of things would go in there? Do you take datasets? Do you take the whole gamut of Only about half of the respondents were aware that the Office for Science and arch articles as well as data (Holdren 2013). Most rely upon publishers to archive their publications. Although several respondents post their published work on websites (e.g. own

PAGE 15

webpage, ResearchGate), this is mainly for increased readership and not for preservation objectives. plans to be included in grant proposals. As scientists become more proficient in developing and implementing data management plans, it is expected that the knowledge and skill of formatting data for re use will increase. In conclusion, agricultural scholars are very familiar with the benefits of sharing data to advance research. Individual study data, however, is still very difficult to access. Some of the constraints to accessing this data are the need to format this data for widespread utility, persistent unwillin gness to share it ( e.g. for legitimate plans to use the data in future publications or for fear of being scooped), and uncertainty about appropriate repositories. Use of research repositories in agricultural disciplines is expanding, in part due to requi rements by funders and the federal government. The beneficiaries of research repositories include current and future scientists, and through the improvements in their research afforded by access to shared data, all global residents. Ultimately, m aintain those data repositories because they give us an edge in trying to solve the Research Dissemination Dissemination of research results in peer reviewed journals is an integral component for su ccess as an agricultural scholar. As research has become more specialized, the number of journals has been increasing, providing greater options and new challenges for agricultural researchers. Scientists are challenged to evaluate and select the most ap propriate outlets to communicate research results. Assessment of journals involves familiarity with the readership, the editorial board and reviewers. Each scientist maintains an unwritten hierarchy of journals that structures their dissemination practice s. Hierarchy of prestigious journals as defined by peers in the same discipline do not always align with the hierarchy structured by J ournal I mpact F actors Where to publish The number of jou rnals in agricultural sciences continues to grow; hence agricultural really boo number of factors agricultural scholars consider in determining where to publish:

PAGE 16

audience editorial board, including knowledgeable reviewers journal prestige (hierarchy) impact f actor of journal other issues Agricultural scholars state that their primary selection criteria is the journal audience and agricultural scholars at land grant institutions there is an obl igation to disseminate research results to practitioners; most agricultural faculty rely upon speaking engagements and extension publications to reach farmers and lay people. At the University of Florida, extension publications are produced by EDIS, the E lectronic Data Information Source of UF/IFAS Extension following departmental review. However, peer r for rectly in the area One respondent proposed a solution by spelling out the necessary commitment to the common good all scholars should review a paper for every paper they submit and provide three reviews for every paper they author that is accepted. Every scientist interviewed maintained an internal hierarchy of journals they wanted to publish in. Altho ugh the specific journals vary by discipline, the structure of the hierarchy of desirability was similar. The very top tier in the hierarchy are the scientific weekly publications that reach a broad, national audience. Then, there are the 3 4 second tier of journals within each field follow. It is noteworthy that the most prestigious journals in a field do not necessarily have high Impact Factors. weeklies: Science Nature Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences type places, and then we have our top of the line disciplinary journals and then a kind of second tier disciplinary journals an

PAGE 17

Journal of Experimental Biology The impact factor of a journal is the m ost controversial criterion for where to publish. The J ournal I mpact F actor (JIF) is the ratio of citations to articles published within a journal, typically over a year time period (Pringle, 2008). eveloped by Clarivate Analytics to establish the relative merit of journals indexed within the Web of Science Core Collection (Testa, 2016) However, the JIF developers caution against its misuse, t he user is encouraged to explore the data and use it appropriately, ins tead of simply grabbing the JIF and using raw a lot of attention. However, many respondents spoke strongly against the use of journal impact factors to represent journal quality. These scientists question the ability of the journal impact factor to provide Certainly there are scholarly agricultural journals published that are not included in the Core Collection of Web of Science. if you read a bout the origin of impact factors, if you look at how impact factors are meant to be that, but people for particularly university people who should who should have critical thinking Scientists with interdisciplinary research spoke of the challenges of publishing since their research exceeds the traditional boundaries of discipline specific journals. Extra effort alt rejected from one journal are rewritten for submission to other journals; t hese revisio ns can be burdensome. A few additional considerations in disseminating research were noteworthy. The costs of publishing can be prohibitive and influence dissemination. Rising page charges prompted one scientist to stop submitting to a journal s/he had used previously; now the page charges have recently dropped and the scientist may submit to that journal again. New types of journals provide additional dissemination options; journals that

PAGE 18

specifically publish data. Two scientists mentioned their desire to disseminate research Choices for disseminating research results abound and scholars are well aware that where they publish has important implications. One agricultural scholar compared work in aca tenth of the pressure I feel as a tenure track assistant professor, and I Agricultural researchers have many options to dissemina te their research that evaluating the merits of various publications can become a concern. Generally, the researchers select dissemination outlets based upon the appropriate audience for their research they aim to publish where their targeted readers ar e reading. This can require substantial revisions to place their research within the scope of a particular journal. This is particularly apparent for cross disciplinary researchers who must re write their research results in the context of different disc iplines for different journals. Agricultural scholars are increasingly disseminating articles in Open Access avenues. This practice is more common for tenured scholars. Collaborations with international colleagues, especially in developing countries wher e resources are more limited provided several respondents with the motivation to publish Open Access. With the desired audience in mind, all researchers maintain a hierarchy of journals in terms of preference for dissemination. The preferred journals are the big name scientific weeklies their research is too specialized for the broader audiences reached by these outlets. Scholars identify 3 e, highly regarded by colleagues, regardless of Journal Impact Factor. Second tier journals are used when papers are not accepted in more preferable outlets. In addition, agricultural scholars also translate research results into practical guidelines for practitioners; these are published in EDIS for IFAS Extension. Scholars expressed divergent opinions about Journal Impact Factor. Most acknowledged that publishing in journals with high Journal Impact Factors is important, particularly for non tenured sc ientists. Many also expressed frustration with the weight placed on Journal Impact Factors since the most highly regarded journals in their disciplines do not necessarily carry high Journal Impact Factors. Scholars described the importance of good advised all scholars to accept reviewing offers, at least one for every paper submitted and three for each accepted paper authored. Appropriate dissemination of research results is a key componen t of success for agricultural scholars.

PAGE 19

Implications and Opportunities for Library Research Support Services Collections have long been the traditional purview of the library and interviewees communicated several opportunities for libraries related to access to and development of collections. The prominent need by researchers for access to shared data provides a n opportunity for libraries to expand their traditional concept of collections to include data by providing research repositories to the research community. Opportunities for expanded information literacy instruction are identified in the interviews. Int erviewees were unfamiliar with key library services. The library needs to better market their role in providing unique services to the research community. Access Researchers may misunderstand which campus entity provides access to the campus wide subs criptions: "I rarely go through the university's library's web portal to find them" as "those are almost entirely [provided] now via our university's subscriptions to those journals". Few scholars mentioned use of the library catalog, emphasizing its incr easing irrelevance to information discovery. Library communities need to improve the functionality of the library catalog, or retire the system and move to a better model. In recognition of the widespread use of Google Scholar for searches, librarians sho uld inform researchers of its advantages and disadvantages compared with discipline specific databases. Also mentioned by interviewees was the importance of social network sites (e.g. Mendeley or Research G ate) for accessing materials. Librarians should rec ognize these about their value and limitation. Collection Management Several interviewees were frustrated in the lack of funding for journals important to their own publishin g record. Libraries frequently purchase new journal subscriptions based on an increase in interlibrary loan requests, but specialized journals (where agricultural sciences faculty frequently publish) are not in high demand and, thus, subscriptions to these journals may not be owned by the library. One researcher recounted how important it is that libraries maintain collections, even those that are esoteric or little used, as these can become rich sources of data when the right study needs it, saying t hat t he development that happened from their own [study] was the result of somebody having had the hindsight to put together the data and the repository of the

PAGE 20

that access to da no substitute, and your role as storing to repositories, making accessible this information, Data Repositories Given the prominence of access to data expressed within the interviews, librar y collection management should expand their traditional materials to include data as another material to offer patrons. There is strong evidence that libraries have an opportunity to design and create data/research r epositories. Researchers are using subject specific repositories and agency repositories when required by a grant but most researchers lacked understanding of the options available to them within the university, and were not clear about the purpose of the IR@UF or whether their data could reside there as well. There are opportunities to provide training for researchers, both to increase usage and to create awareness of the policies that govern information deposited within the IR@UF. Librarians offer guid ance in development of data management plans to meet funders requirements. The Data Management and Informatics Librarians, new library faculty positions, reflect the expected increased demand for these key services. The researchers were pleased to hear t hat the libraries had hired individuals to support their data management needs but they expressed that challenges remain for them as their datasets can often be large and they lack the staff support to prepare it for storage and dissemination. Information Literacy Instruction Researchers emphasized the need to teach students how to conduct comprehensive literature reviews and identified this as an area that librarians could support. Librarians should also share techniques to evaluate appropriate disseminat ion outlets with research faculty. Final Thoughts The UF librarians found the Ithaka S+R research study to be of great importance and will disseminate the findings to library functional specialists that include the Data Management Librarian the Digital S cholarship Librarian, the Scholarly Communications Librarian, and the Informatics Librarian. Additionally, the findings have provided a deeper understanding of the challenges agricultural researchers face and have fed into campus wide research and scholars hip conversations. This report summarizes themes related to research services support that emerged from analysis of research practices of agricultural scholars at UF. Additional themes from the local study, not

PAGE 21

covered by this report, include shifts in ag ricultural research towards sustainability and the impact of public perceptions of agriculture on agricultural scholars. Analysis of these additional themes will be s ummarized in the future. We thank the agricultural sciences faculty who participated in the study and we hope to improve and better promote library research support services, particularly in the areas of access to resources, data support, and new instructi on.

PAGE 22

References Holdren, J. (2013). Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_me mo_2013.pdf IFAS Directory, Centers and Programs (2016). Gainesville, FL: Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences and University of Florida. Retrieved from htt p://directory.ifas.ufl.edu/searchdir?pageID=3&pl=02 Ithaka S+R. (2016 a) Research Support Services: Prospectus for the Field of Agriculture. Ithaka S+R. (2016 b ) Research Support Services Study: Guide to the IRB ( Institutional Review Board) Process Pringle, J. (2008). Trends in the use of ISI citation databases for evaluation. Learned Publishing 21(2):85 91. Testa, J. (2016, 18 July). The Thomson Reuters journal selection process New York, NY: Thomson Reuters. Retrieved from http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal selection process/?utm_source=false&utm_m edium=false&utm_campaign=false University of Florida (2012). UF Faculty Handbook: Characteristics. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. Retrieved from http://handbook.aa.ufl.edu/c haracteristics.aspx University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Briefing Book 2013 (2013). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. Retrieved from http://ifas.ufl.edu/media/ifasufledu/ifas dark blue/docs/BriefingBook2013.pdf University of Florida Office of Institutional Planni ng and Research, UF OIPR. (2016 ). [Interactive chart display of workforce demographics data, Fall 2015]. Faculty detail: faculty count, Fall 2015. Retrieved fromhttp://ir.aa.ufl.edu/workforce USDA Nat ional Institute of Food and Agriculture. (n.d.) Land Grant University Website Directory Washington, D. C.: United States Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from

PAGE 23

https://nifa.usda.gov/land grant colleges and universities partner website directory?state=FM&type=All&order=field_filter&sort=asc

PAGE 24

Appendix A. Semi structured interview guide for re search support services study for the field of agriculture Interviewer: Date: Identifier Number: Research focus 1. Describe your current research focus and how this focus is situated within the broader agriculture discipline and the academy more broadly. [Probe for whether/not they see themselves as located firmly within agriculture as a discipline or locat ed across/between disciplines; What are these disciplines? Does this involve collaborators here at UF? With other institutions?] Research methods 2. What research methods do you currently use to conduct your research? [Are these methods typically used in your field? Can you describe an application of this in your own research?] 3. What kinds of data does your research typically elicit? [How do you capt ure this? How do you analyze this?] 4. How do you locate the primary and/or secondary source materials you use in your research? 5. Think back to a past or ongoing research project where you faced challenges in the process of conducting the research. a. Describe these challenges. [How did this turn out? Were you able to document these challenges?] b. What could have been done to mitigate these challenges? 6. How do you keep up with trends in your field more broadly? [Publications? Conferences? Format?]

PAGE 25

Dissemination Practices 7. Where do you typically publish your research in terms of the kinds of publications and disciplines? How do your publishing practices relate to th ose typical to your discipline? [Do you anticipate any changes in these outlets? Are you prepared for these changes?] 8. Have you ever deposited your data or final research products in a repository? a. If so, which repositories and what has been your motivations for depositing? (i.e. required, for sharing, investment in open access principles) b. If no, why not? [Are you familiar with or have you used UFIR? Are you aware and/or have you been impacted by Federal public access mandates?] Future and State of the Field 9. What future challenges and opportunities do you see for the broader field of agriculture? 10. If I gave you a magic wand that could help you with your research and publication process what would you ask it to do? [ or re phrase : If you could have any resource that could help you with your research and publication process, what would it be? What do you need it to do for you? ] Follow up 11. ls there anything else about your experiences as a scholar of agriculture and/or the agriculture discipline that you think it is important for me to know that was not covered in the previous questions? Possible prompts or follow up questions appear in brackets.

PAGE 26

Appendix B. Glossary of Abbreviations and Terms Agricola : ( AGRICultural OnLineAccess), Bibliographic database of citations to the agricultural literature created by the National Agricultural Library and its cooperators; https://agricola.nal.usda .gov/help/aboutagricola.html CAB Abstracts bstracts; http://www.cabi.org/publishing pro ducts/online information resources/cab abstracts/ Dryad Digital Repository: a curated resource that makes the data underlying scientific publications discoverable, freely reusable, and citable; http://datadryad.org/pages/organization ERIC : Education Resou rces Information Center, a database of education research maintained by the Institute of Education Science, https://eric.ed.gov/ ESTs: Expressed sequence tags used to identify gene transcripts, instrumental in gene se quence determination used for genetic research Figshare: a repository where users can make all of their research outputs available in a citable, shareable and discoverable manner; browers supports all file format types, content may include posters, presen tations, datasets and code; https://figshare.com/about GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility) an international open data infrastructure to biodiversity data, funded by participating governments; http://www.gbif.org/what is gbif GenBank : the Nation al Institutes of Health genetic sequence database, an annotated collection of all publicly available DNA sequences; GenBank is part of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration; https ://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/ GRIN Taxonomy (USDA Germplasm Resources Information Network: http://www.ars grin.gov/ PubMed : citation database with links to full text content where possible produced by the U. S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed ResearchGa te: a professional network of scientists to connect and collaborate with colleagues, share publications, discuss research problems and provide a job board for scientists; https://www.researchgate.net/about

PAGE 27

RNA seq: RNA sequencing U.S.D.A. United States Department of Agriculture Zootaxa : a peer reviewed international journal on systematic zoology published by Magnolia Press; http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/