Anthony Caravaggi

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of Web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform current models while avoiding as many of the biases of existing systems as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that, at least partially, resolves many of the technical and social issues associated with peer review, and can potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments.

Niche overlap of mountain hare subspecies and the vulnerability of their ranges to invasion by the European hare; the (bad) luck of the Irish

Niche conservatism is the tendency of related species to retain ancestral tolerances after geographic separation. We used Ecological Niche Modelling and Principal Components Analysis of bioclimatic and habitat variables to describe the extent of the species niche, and degrees of bioclimatic–habitat niche conservatism within the mountain hare (L. timidus) clade. Mountain hare niche space was contrasted with that of the European hare (L. europaeus), to shed light on species interactions in contact zones throughout Europe. All five subspecies of mountain hare had quantifiably distinct niches. Fennoscandian (L.t. sylvaticus, L.t. timidus) and highland (L.t. scoticus, L.t. varronis) subspecies, however, were most similar, exhibiting greatest apparent niche conservatism. They inhabit tundra, boreal forest and uplands, and, hence are presumed most similar to the ancestral form. The Irish hare was distinct, being consistently distinguished from other mountain hares in both 2D and nth dimensional (4D) niche space. The ecological distinctiveness of the Irish hare provides further evidence that it is an Evolutionarily Significant Unit, particularly vulnerable to displacement by introduced European hares with which it competes and hybridises. Projections under global climate change suggest that, by 2070, bioclimatic space for invasive European hares in Ireland will expand (by 79%) but contract for endemic Irish hares (by 75%), further facilitating their replacement. The near complete species replacement of the heath hare (L.t. sylvaticus) in southern Sweden, where the European hare has also been introduced, may suggest a similar fate may be in store for the Irish hare.

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review [version 2; referees: 2 approved]

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments.

Management and control of invasive brown hares (Lepus europaeus): contrasting attitudes of selected environmental stakeholders and the wider rural community

Management of wildlife is often a contentious issue in which stakeholders are increasingly infl uential. The European hare (Lepus europaeus) is a non-native invasive species, now established in Northern Ireland. The European hare impacts the endemic Irish hare (L. timidus hibernicus), a priority species of conservation concern, via competition and hybridisation to the extent that control of European hares is a priority. We conducted a questionnaire survey among members of Countryside Alliance Ireland (CAI)—an organisation that promotes rural interests, including fi eld sports—and non-members, to ascertain the contrasting attitudes to the lethal control of European hares in Northern Ireland; a total of 342 (20%) questionnaires were returned. We hypothesised that: (i) CAI members would exhibit greater support for intervention than non-members; and (ii) respondents in the core invasive range will differ in their outlook when compared to respondents from other zones. CAI members were more likely to be aware of the presence of the non-native species and to support lethal management. Both groups considered the threat posed to biodiversity by the European hare to be important. We conclude that members of rural interest groups may be important advocates of intervention, whilst non-members of fi eld sports organisations may be more reluctant to support any proposed management plan involving lethal control. Active engagement to develop a mutual understanding, prior to developing management options, is crucial in ensuring long-term success.