D E P A R T M E N T O F A G R I C U L T U R E, F I S H E R I E S A N D F O R E S T R Y Options for national and ASEAN wide data sharing Emma Lumb

Where does your data come from, and why share it?

ISPM 8 – Determine of pest status in an area General requirements for acceptable pest record: Current scientific name -> specimen based best so can check morphology when updating taxonomy Life stage or state Taxonomic group Identification method Date collected Name of host Host damage, or circumstances of collection Abundance Bibliographic references

Pest Information Sources Primary Literature (research papers, specialist texts) Grey Literature (conference proceedings; pamphlets, PRA’s, surveillance reports) Secondary Literature (“encyclopaedias”) Electronic sources Specimen information Listservers Newspapers

Consider… Do local collections pest records always have all this information required under ISPM 8? Is all this information always reliable?

Example: Gathering information on Bactrocera tryoni Froggart. By ISPM 8: General requirements for acceptable pest record: Current scientific name Life stage or state Taxonomic group Identification method Date collected Name of host Host damage, or circumstances of collection Abundance Bibliographic references

From collection data base #1 Pest collected in New South Wales

From collection database #2 Pest collected in NSW, and in QLD

From collection database #3 Pest recorded on: cherry, peach, blackberry, mango, banana, tomato, apricot, and Eugenia jambosa

From collection database #4 Pest recorded on: cherry, peach, blackberry, mango, banana, tomato, apricot, and Eugenia jambosa and bush lemon, valencia orange, mulberries and mandarins

From collection database #5 Geo-coordinates giving exact collection points help determine range of pest Pest collected in NSW, and in QLD, and in SA and in VIC and NT

Searching on Bactrocera tryoni Froggart – putting it all together National picture of: –Distribution –Abundance Greater knowledge of host range Knowledge of damage Date collected Identification methods Authenticated records

Searching on Bactrocera tryoni Froggart – putting it all together Confirm with surveillance data Primary literature Primary literature, master checklists

The more data you have, The more robust your pest list will be! Herbarium A A B B C A B C A Data confidence

Data sharing: general features ADVANTAGESDISADVANTAGES Network of plant health specialistsCostly (technology, human resources, management) Generate scientifically robust pest lists Protecting Intellectual Property and participants individual interests (e.g. domestic trade issues) Access to more information – useful for domestic pest management Data quality (misidentifications, taxonomic changes, populating, collecting more) Generate host lists for Import Risk Assessments Chance to properly curate/ validate existing collections of pest data Record national and regional pest distributions Participate in global biodiversity activities through “Global Biodiversity Information Facility” MEET INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS UNDER WTO SPS AND IPPC = greater chance to trade with WTO members

How can national/ regional data sharing be done? 1.Swap specimens and associated notes (duplicates) OR 2.EXPORT local database data to master database routinely (manual process) OR 3.LINK local databases together using special software and internet (distributed database system) National Phytosanitary Database Australian Plant Pest Database

Some examples of regional data sharing 1.NZ Aid Plant Protection Database (MANUAL SYSTEM) PDD Lao PRD, Myanmar, Cambodia and Vietnam Version 2 - Arab Emirates - ? Distributed system? 2.Pacific Island Pest List Database (MANUAL SYSTEM) PIPDL Pacific Islands e.g. Samoa, Tonga, Marshall Islands…) Secretariat of the Pacific Community, assisted by AusAID, NZ Aid and the EU. 3.Australian Plant Pest Database (DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM) APPD The 6 states and 2 territories in Australia 19 plant pest collections DAFF and Plant Health Australia 4.Global Biodiversity Information Facility (DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM) GBIF Global system Many different databases

PIPDL – Pacific Islands Pest List Database (MANUAL SYSTEM) Many of the Pacific Islands have lots of survey data (=reports), but cannot afford to maintain pest collections (=records) Each Island has own copy of MS Access Pest List Database Each Island enters REPORT and RECORD information into local copy of database –Data that is a) validated by plant health specialist; or b) appears as a pest report in an internationally recognised journal, is treated as reliable evidence for the pest existing in the country. This data is marked as PUBLIC ACCESS –Data that does not meet the above requirements is still entered but marked as NON PUBLIC ACCESS, until such date as source can be validated Each Island regularly sends a copy of their database minus NON PUBLIC ACCESS reports/ records, to head office Head office CONSOLIDATES all copies of databases into MASTER DATABASE Anybody with access to the web may search the master database by: 1.Pest list for selected host; 2.Host list for selected pest; 3.Comparative pest report (a basic PRA); 4.Regional pest distribution report; 5.Country distribution report; or 6.Species search (basic information)

MS Access: 350 records Internet MS Access: 100 records MS Access: 50 records MS Access: 200 records Island 1 Island 3 Island 2 PIPLD Host User searching PIPLD Data entry person updating local copy of PIPLD

PIPDL – Pacific Islands Pest List Database ADVANTAGES Easily implemented, easy to use Easy access via internet (anyone can generate a search) Low IT cost DISADVANTAGES Information for a set number of commonly occurring pests Routine updates rather than live connection, mean that data is out of data on master database instantly (high human resource cost) Requires a number of data entry personnel and a database operator forever (ongoing cost of salaries and training) Outputting on master database is restricted and not possible to see source of data (must go back to collection curators) Limited detail for specimen records, and information somewhat consolidated Requires all agencies to run/ populate the same database locally Too simple??

APPD – the Australian Plant Pest Database (DISTRIBUTED DATABASE SYSTEM) Developed in response to the national need for a plant health information system: –Local and State governments responsible for domestic pest management; but –Federal government responsible for trade and quarantine 20 collections of plant pests and pathogens –A vouchered specimen for all records –All collections have different systems (software, different data fields) – LINKED BY INTERNET and special, custom built software –The APPD can be searched through a single internet site Agreed on MINIMUM DATA REQUIREMENTS for each record (ISPM 8) Some records verified, others not, so ACCESS TO APPD IS RESTRICTED to approved, Australian plant health specialists As is a live connection to each database, DATA IS ALWAYS UP TO DATE Searches can be either simply on pest taxa or “Boolean based”, e.g: –Taxa+ pest host –Taxa+ pest host+geo-coordinates –Taxa+…locality…collection date And can use “equals”; “contains” or “starts with” Searches can be on one or multiple databases at same time Can check taxonomy through links to master names lists Results include: –Summary page of results –Details page (accession number, host, collector, identifier, trapping method, etc) –Mapping options

DPI NSW CSIRO DPIWE PIR Vic WAITE/ SARDI FT CALM DBIRD DAWA DPI NSW BSES QDPIF UQ QDPIF DPI NSW PIR Vic DAWA DBIRD QDPIF Insect/ Mite/Nematode collection Herbarium

TPPD ASCU ANIC VAIC WINC TFIC BugBase NTEIC ICDb FNIC BSES QDPIF UQIC QDPIF

Distributed system querying heterogenous databases Internet APPD Host Broker Collection C: Texpress Collection A: MS Access Collection B: BioLink

Internet APPD Host Broker Collection C: Texpress Collection A: MS Access Collection B: BioLink Distributed system – return of results from system

Example 1: Trade decision support Guignardia citricarpa The Australian Plant Pest Database

APPD results for Guignardia citricarpa

Overlaying records with citrus industry areas shows… limited range disease unlikely in commercial areas (supports Area Freedom) in a Market Access bid Central Burnett Sunraysia Riverina Riverland Major citrus area Minor citrus area G. citricarpa record

Demonstrates “not known to occur” rather than “known not to occur” (survey data needed to prove for this) Problem of synonomy Incorrect (outdated/ misidentified) identifications Seasonal occurrence of pests e.g. fruit fly in NSW Quarantine interceptions Not permitted in APPD but some have snuck in Remarks: 1. Collection curators are responsible for adhering to the data standards set up by the Steering Committee; but 2.APPD users should be aware that while the APPD is a useful tool for Pest Risk Analysis, it shouldn’t replace taxonomic texts nor taxonomists APPD presently only available to plant health scientists able to scrutinise APPD data Users acknowledge the disclaimer for every search Present data constraints of APPD

APPD – the Australian Plant Pest Database (DISTRIBUTED DATABASE) ADVANTAGES Data is always up to date No limit to data contained (over 1 million records of plant pests and pathogens) All data is record based Easy access via web Secure system (password protected) Low cost for day to day routines Can link to GBIF later DISADVANTAGES Internet based (??) Special technology (cost about 55,000 USD) [upfront cost] Ongoing commitment by collection curators: –To provide computer/ internet for their database to the network –Add/ update data Project officer to monitor system –Occasional outages –Occasional novel problems with the technology –Issues with data standards –Passwords

General features of distributed systems DISADVANTAGES Need good internet connection Upfront cost of technology Upfront cost managing implementation phase Need password protect for security Advantages If you have an internet connection and a password, you can access data (allows multiple users) Low maintenance once system established Information always up to date Can participate/ gain funding and support from GBIF Can add fancy tools: Mapping Links to names lists Links to images Downloadable formats for pest lists

Global Biodiversity Information Facility (an alternative???) ADVANTAGES Biodiversity data Free “wrapper” software to develop your database – but requires skilled person to install $$ available for digitising specimen record data International biodiversity community DISADVANTAGES How to consolidate national collection? Need person for training in complex IT Data must be publicly available (part of GBIF agreement) Searching – requires user to have sound understanding of database systems and judgements on taxonomy in order to get most out of GBIF databases May be a long while before partner countries can join!

Priorities for establishing a system for data sharing 1.Agree on system (manual or distributed) 2.Agree on data fields (consider requirements under ISPM’s and record/ report reference) 3.Agree on data to share (pest based, host based, verified) and terms and conditions of sharing 4.Public versus non public access? 5.Agree on outputting: 1.Key fields for REPORTING and for SEARCHING (host, collector, source/ reference/ accession number) 2.Key tools (mapping, links to master names, sort by function, searching) 6.Institutional responsibility 7.Establish/ identify funding sources (who, where, how much, how long) 8.Key Drivers 9.Key data sources 10.Coordination group 11.Establish terms of reference for sharing data (address IP and security concerns) 12.Population of database 13.Validation of data 14.Monitoring of system (eg APPD) OR coordinating data updates (PIPDL) 15.Responsibility when technology changes/ becomes outdated

Some of the local system available in ASEAN at present time… BRAHMS ? ? ? ?

GROUP DISCUSSION 1.Discuss advantages and disadvantages of the three options presented (PIPDL, APPD, GBIF) 1.Consider in terms of cost and ongoing maintenance; 2.Ease of use; 3.Compliance with ISPM 8 4.Data quality and quantity 5.Management issues (such as sharing data, intellectual property, etc) 2.Which system (manual or distributed) would be more practical (easy to implement) and useful for ASEAN? Why? 3.List the key features required for an ASEAN pest list database system and number each feature in priority. Consider: Outputting type (what information should be given) Searching functions (How should one be able to search) 4.Report back to main group on items 2 and 3 Thankyou for your attention!