USGS ScienceBase: Deposit Eligibility & DMP Fit

For a research administrator or PI weighing repository options for earth-science data, “is USGS ScienceBase the right place to deposit” is a narrower and more useful question than “what is ScienceBase” — because eligibility, not openness, is the gating factor. Unlike Dryad, Zenodo, or Figshare, ScienceBase is not a generalist repository any researcher can self-register with. It is the U.S. Geological Survey’s institutional data catalog and hosting platform, and its deposit path is tied to a formal relationship with USGS. This guide covers what that relationship needs to look like, how ScienceBase’s “Trusted Digital Repository” status is actually certified, and when it is — and is not — the correct answer on a data management plan.

What ScienceBase Is, in RDM Terms

ScienceBase is operated by USGS’s Science Data Management program as a catalog and hosting system for datasets, images, and aggregated metadata drawn from many USGS data and information domains. Per its re3data registry entry, its subject coverage sits under Natural Sciences and Geosciences, with particular concentration in climatic change, energy and environment, geophysics, landscape, and cartographic (map) data. It supports persistent identification through both DOIs and PURLs, and exposes a REST API for programmatic access.

It is worth distinguishing ScienceBase from the USGS Science Data Catalog: the Science Data Catalog is USGS’s aggregated discovery index across all of its approved repositories, while ScienceBase is one specific repository (a “Trusted Digital Repository,” see below) whose items get indexed there. A dataset can be deposited in ScienceBase and discovered via the Science Data Catalog — the two are not interchangeable names for the same system.

Trusted Digital Repository (TDR) Status — What It Actually Certifies

USGS’s Fundamental Science Practices policy requires USGS scientists to identify an approved digital repository as part of their data management plan at the start of a project, and ScienceBase is one of the bureau systems evaluated and approved under USGS’s own Trusted Digital Repositories (TDR) program.

The certification mechanics matter for anyone citing this status in a compliance document: USGS’s Fundamental Science Practices Advisory Council (FSPAC) evaluates a candidate system against the CoreTrustSeal Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements — the same 16-criterion framework behind independent CoreTrustSeal certification used industry-wide — and approval is granted for a three-year period, after which the system must be re-evaluated. This is USGS’s own internal certification process, modeled on and reviewed against the CoreTrustSeal requirements, rather than an independent seal issued directly by the CoreTrustSeal assessment body itself. If a funder or reviewer needs “trusted repository” status stated precisely on a DMP, that distinction — internally-administered TDR certification using CoreTrustSeal’s criteria, versus a repository that has gone through CoreTrustSeal’s own external assessment and appears on its public registry — is the accurate way to describe it. See CASRAI’s CoreTrustSeal Certification guide for how that external process works, and the Trusted digital repository dictionary entry for the general concept.

Who Can Actually Deposit Data in ScienceBase

This is the detail most “what is ScienceBase” explainers skip, and it is the one that determines whether this guide is even relevant to your project. Per USGS’s own Fundamental Science Practices FAQ on data collected using external funding, responsibility for appropriate release runs through USGS whenever data are collected by USGS employees, students, emeritus staff, volunteers, or contractors, or using USGS funds — and where a cooperator or collaborator is involved, the governing agreement between that party and USGS is expected to specify data management responsibilities explicitly.

In practice, that means the realistic depositor population is:

USGS scientists and staff, as the default and most common case;
Cooperators and collaborators operating under a formal agreement with USGS that assigns data management responsibility;
Externally funded researchers whose work is conducted to benefit USGS or under USGS funding, subject to the same release requirements as USGS-collected data.

If none of those describe your project — for example, you hold an NSF or DOE award for earth-science research with no USGS funding, cooperative agreement, or staff involvement — ScienceBase is generally not an available deposit target, regardless of subject-matter overlap. That is a different situation from a repository being merely “not the best fit”; it is a genuine eligibility gate, and a DMP that names ScienceBase without a documented USGS relationship is likely to draw a reviewer question. In that case, the right move is to select a domain repository appropriate to the specific earth-science subfield (for hydrology, for instance, CASRAI covers CUAHSI HydroShare as a non-federal alternative) or a generalist repository — see CASRAI’s How to Choose an Open Data Repository guide for the decision framework.

The Data Release Process and DOI Assignment

For eligible depositors, USGS’s Science Data Management team runs a defined ScienceBase Data Release (SBDR) process. The SBDR tool generates a ScienceBase landing page and a DOI for the release, drawing on the APIs of the Information Product Data System (IPDS), ScienceBase itself, and USGS’s Asset Identifier Service (AIS) to automate identifier assignment rather than requesting one manually.

Per USGS’s Data Release policy, any data approved for release — whether to support a publication or for general public/cooperator use — is expected to be reviewed for completeness, consistency, accuracy, and precision before release, and documented with a metadata record in the USGS Science Data Catalog carrying a DOI link back to the source, regardless of where the underlying data are actually hosted. That last point is what makes the Science Data Catalog the correct place to check discoverability, even when ScienceBase is the hosting system.

Access Models and FAIR Alignment

ScienceBase supports more than one access tier for a given item: fully open access, restricted access requiring registration, fee-based restricted access, and closed access, per its re3data listing. This matters for a DMP’s data-sharing section — “deposited in ScienceBase” does not by itself specify openness level, and the actual access model chosen for a given item should be stated explicitly rather than assumed from the repository name.

USGS frames its TDR program, ScienceBase included, as supporting the FAIR Data Principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) as part of the bureau’s data lifecycle model — persistent DOIs/PURLs and structured metadata are the concrete mechanisms behind that framing.

ScienceBase vs. Other Repository Options — Where It Fits in a DMP

The decision an administrator actually needs to make is rarely “ScienceBase or nothing” — it’s which repository type correctly matches the funding and institutional relationship behind the data:

USGS-affiliated data (USGS-collected, USGS-funded, or produced under a USGS cooperative agreement): ScienceBase is the expected repository per USGS’s Fundamental Science Practices, and stating so in a DMP is straightforward and well-supported.
Non-USGS federally funded earth-science data (e.g., an NSF or NOAA award with no USGS relationship): ScienceBase is not a deposit option; choose a domain repository matched to the subfield, or a generalist repository. CASRAI’s guides on Dryad and Figshare, and comparisons like Zenodo vs. Dryad and Figshare vs Dryad, cover the generalist-repository landscape in detail.
Discipline-specific non-federal alternatives: for subfields with an established community repository — hydrology’s CUAHSI HydroShare is a direct example — a domain repository may better serve discoverability within that research community even where ScienceBase would technically also be permitted for USGS-affiliated work.

Because ScienceBase’s certification is administered internally against CoreTrustSeal’s criteria rather than through CoreTrustSeal’s own external assessment (see above), a DMP that needs to name a repository meeting an independently-verified CoreTrustSeal seal specifically — some funder templates ask for exactly this — should confirm which framing is actually required before defaulting to ScienceBase on trust-signal grounds alone.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is USGS ScienceBase open to researchers outside USGS?

Only where a formal relationship exists — a cooperative agreement, contractor status, or external funding that supports USGS work. Researchers with no such relationship to USGS should use a domain or generalist repository instead.

Is ScienceBase CoreTrustSeal certified?

ScienceBase is a USGS-designated Trusted Digital Repository, approved through USGS’s own internal FSPAC evaluation process against CoreTrustSeal’s 16 core requirements, renewed every three years. That is distinct from holding an independent seal issued directly by CoreTrustSeal’s own external assessment and listed on its public certified-repository registry — check which one your funder’s template actually requires.

What is the difference between ScienceBase and the USGS Science Data Catalog?

ScienceBase is a specific hosting repository; the Science Data Catalog is USGS’s aggregated discovery index across all of its approved repositories, including ScienceBase. A dataset’s metadata record in the Science Data Catalog links back to wherever the data actually reside.

Can I get a DOI through ScienceBase? Yes — eligible depositors receive a DOI as part of the ScienceBase Data Release (SBDR) process, assigned via USGS’s Asset Identifier Service.

What data types does ScienceBase accept? Datasets, images, and aggregated metadata across earth-science and natural-science domains, with particular strength in climatic, geophysical, landscape, and cartographic data, per its re3data subject classification.

USGS ScienceBase: Trusted Digital Repository Status, Deposit Eligibility, and DMP Fit