https://cdn.earthdata.nasa.gov/conduit/upload/5182/KeywordsCommunityGuide_Baseline_v1_SIGNED_FINAL.pdf 23.8 2026-04-29T10:52:37.449Z https://gcmd.earthdata.nasa.gov/KeywordViewer/scheme/projects/99bfdead-54e1-4ef1-9d59-284a6f730c16 BIOMASS The BIOMASS Programme was established in the late 1970's for the studyof the Antarctic marine ecosystem and its living resources. Datawere collected during 3 major field experiments between 1981 and1985. The first focused on extended spatial coverage, whilst thesecond and third were concerned with repeat sampling at pre-definedlocations to give a temporal sequence. Data collected from thesefield experiments were transferred to a central BIOMASS Data Centreto enable their standardisation for integrated analysis. The DataCentre was also responsible for running a series of data analysisworkshops. With the end of the BIOMASS Programme in 1991, the dataset and its supporting documentation are being prepared fordistribution to those scientists who took part in BIOMASS and to anyother investigators who request copies. The BIOMASS Data Centrefaced many problems in standardising, integrating and documentingthe data supplied by individual researchers into a coherent data!set. The majority of these problems were managerial rather thantechnical. There was a lack of integration of the data managementwith the objectives of the science programme. For example, the needfor a BIOMASS Data Centre was identified in 1979, but it was notfinally established until 1986. Once established, the Data Centredid not always respond to the scientific requirements of theprogramme. There was an over reliance on software that was developedwithin the Data Centre instead of using commercially availableproducts. Time was spent creating and testing software, which wouldhave been better spent supporting data analysis.Problems were experienced in persuading individual researchers tocontribute data to the Data Centre. Researchers often found that theeffort involved in submitting their data to the Data Centre was muchgreater than the benefits they gained. Ensuring that the data werevalidated and of the required quality was also difficult. The task washampered by the lack of supporting information about the datathemselves (the meta-data). Restricted access to certain data setsreduced the effectiveness of the BIOMASS Data Centre and it operatedfor much of its life with a very restrictive data accessprotocol. This was designed to protect some data sets before theiroriginators had published their own analyses, but hampered thedistribution of data to the wider BIOMASS community.The lessons that have been learned from BIOMASS about the managementof complex, large-scale, biological data sets will be of great use tofuture programmes. Increasing the quality of data holdings, especiallyby the inclusion of meta-data, will increase the chances ofsuccessfully networking databases together to support biodiversity andother research.