Ecology and Evolution 2017; 7: 815–823	 	 	 | 	815www.ecolevol.org
Received:	22	September	2016  |  Accepted:	20	November	2016
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2679
O R I G I N A L  R E S E A R C H
IRBAS: An online database to collate, analyze, and synthesize 
data on the biodiversity and ecology of intermittent rivers 
worldwide
Catherine Leigh1,2,3  | Baptiste Laporte2 | Núria Bonada4 | Ken Fritz5 |  
Hervé Pella1 | Eric Sauquet6 | Klement Tockner7 | Thibault Datry1
This	is	an	open	access	article	under	the	terms	of	the	Creative	Commons	Attribution	License,	which	permits	use,	distribution	and	reproduction	in	any	medium,	
provided	the	original	work	is	properly	cited.
©	2016	The	Authors.	Ecology and Evolution	published	by	John	Wiley	&	Sons	Ltd.
1Irstea,	UR	MALY,	centre	de	Lyon-
Villeurbanne,	Villeurbanne	Cedex,	France
2CESAB-	FRB,	Immeuble	Henri	Poincaré,	Aix-
en-Provence	Cedex	3,	France
3Australian	Rivers	Institute	and	Griffith	School	
of	Environment,	Griffith	University,	Nathan,	
Qld,	Australia
4Grup	de	Recerca	Freshwater	Ecology	
and	Management	(FEM),	Departament	
d’Ecologia,	Institut	de	Recerca	de	la	
Biodiversity	(IRBio),	Universitat	de	Barcelona	
(UB),	Barcelona,	Catalonia/Spain
5US	EPA,	Office	of	Research	and	
Development,	National	Exposure	Research	
Laboratory,	Cincinnati,	OH,	USA
6Irstea,	UR	HHLY,	centre	de	Lyon-
Villeurbanne,	Villeurbanne	Cedex,	France
7IGB,	Leibniz-Institute	of	Freshwater	Ecology	
and	Inland	Fisheries,	and	FU,	Institute	of	
Biology,	Freie	Universität	Berlin,	Berlin,	
Germany
Correspondence
Catherine	Leigh,	Australian	Rivers	Institute	
and	The	Griffith	School	of	Environment,	
Griffith	University,	Nathan,	Qld,	Australia
Email:	c.leigh@griffith.edu.au
Funding information
IRBAS;	Centre	for	Synthesis	and	Analysis	
of	Biodiversity	(CESAB);	French	Foundation	
for	Research	&	Biodiversity	(FRB);	French	
National	Agency	for	Water	and	Aquatic	
Environments	(ONEMA).
Abstract
Key	questions	dominating	contemporary	ecological	research	and	management	concern	
interactions	between	biodiversity,	ecosystem	processes,	and	ecosystem	services	provi-
sion	in	the	face	of	global	change.	This	is	particularly	salient	for	freshwater	biodiversity	
and	in	the	context	of	river	drying	and	flow-	regime	change.	Rivers	that	stop	flowing	and	
dry,	herein	intermittent	rivers,	are	globally	prevalent	and	dynamic	ecosystems	on	which	
the	body	of	research	is	expanding	rapidly,	consistent	with	the	era	of	big	data.	However,	
the	data	encapsulated	by	this	work	remain	 largely	fragmented,	 limiting	our	ability	to	
answer	the	key	questions	beyond	a	case-	by-	case	basis.	To	this	end,	the	Intermittent	
River	 Biodiversity	 Analysis	 and	 Synthesis	 (IRBAS;	 http://irbas.cesab.org)	 project	 has	
collated,	analyzed,	and	synthesized	data	from	across	the	world	on	the	biodiversity	and	
environmental	characteristics	of	intermittent	rivers.	The	IRBAS	database	integrates	and	
provides	free	access	to	these	data,	contributing	to	the	growing,	and	global,	knowledge	
base	on	these	ubiquitous	and	important	river	systems,	for	both	theoretical	and	applied	
advancement.	The	IRBAS	database	currently	houses	over	2000	data	samples	collected	
from	 six	 countries	 across	 three	 continents,	 primarily	 describing	 aquatic	 invertebrate	
taxa	inhabiting	intermittent	rivers	during	flowing	hydrological	phases.	As	such,	there	is	
room	to	expand	the	biogeographic	and	taxonomic	coverage,	for	example,	through	addi-
tion	of	data	collected	during	nonflowing	and	dry	hydrological	phases.	We	encourage	
contributions	and	provide	guidance	on	how	to	contribute	and	access	data.	Ultimately,	
the	IRBAS	database	serves	as	a	portal,	storage,	standardization,	and	discovery	tool,	ena-
bling	collation,	synthesis,	and	analysis	of	data	to	elucidate	patterns	in	river	biodiversity	
and	guide	management.	Contribution	creates	high	visibility	for	datasets,	facilitating	col-
laboration.	The	IRBAS	database	will	grow	in	content	as	the	study	of	intermittent	rivers	
continues	and	data	retrieval	will	allow	for	networking,	meta-	analyses,	and	testing	of	
generalizations	across	multiple	systems,	regions,	and	taxa.
K E Y W O R D S
aquatic	and	terrestrial	biodiversity,	data	sharing,	global	change,	meta-analysis,	temporary	river,	
water management
816  |     LEIGH Et aL.
1  | INTRODUCTION
In	the	era	of	big	data,	there	is	growing	interest	and	need	for	data	col-
lation,	synthesis,	and	access	to	facilitate	scientific	networking,	discov-
ery,	and	innovation.	This	is	particularly	relevant	in	the	ecological	realm	
given	the	 increasing	prevalence	and	need	to	address	major	environ-
mental	problems	 (Hampton	et	al.,	2013).	Some	of	 the	key	questions	
dominating	contemporary	discussions	and	literature	on	ecological	re-
search	and	management	concern	the	interactions	between	biodiver-
sity,	ecosystem	processes,	and	ecosystem	services	provision	in	the	face	
of	global	change	(Cardinale	et	al.,	2012).	With	freshwater	biodiversity	
in	crisis,	this	 is	particularly	salient	for	river	systems	and	understand-
ing	those	interactions	in	the	context	of	river	flow,	its	modification	via	
human	activities	(Dudgeon	et	al.,	2006;	Vörösmarty	et	al.,	2010),	and,	
increasingly,	flow	cessation	and	river	drying	(Acuña	et	al.,	2014;	Datry,	
Fritz,	 &	 Leigh,	 2016;	 Gilvear,	 Greenwood,	 Thoms,	 &	Wood,	 2016).	
Which	 rivers	 cease	 flow	 and	 dry,	 either	 naturally	 or	 due	 to	 human	
activities,	and	how	are	they	distributed	across	the	globe,	now	and	in	
the	future?	How	does	flow	cessation	and	drying	influence	spatial	and	
temporal	patterns	in	aquatic	and	terrestrial	biodiversity,	and	how	do	
we	monitor,	conserve,	or	restore	such	biodiversity?	Although	there	is	
a	solid	and	rapidly	growing	body	of	ecological	research	on	rivers	that	
periodically	cease	flow,	herein	intermittent	rivers	for	simplicity	but	de-
scribed	by	 several	 terms	 (e.g.,	 temporary	 rivers,	nonperennial	 rivers,	
and	ephemeral	streams;	Datry,	Arscott,	&	Sabater,	2011;	Arthington,	
Bernardo,	 &	 Ilhéu,	 2014;	 Leigh,	 Boulton,	 et	al.,	 2016),	 considered	
among	the	most	common	type	of	running	water	system	in	the	world,	
the	 data	 encapsulated	 by	 this	work	 remain	 largely	 fragmented	 and	
hence	“dark.”	As	such,	our	ability	to	answer	the	key	questions	beyond	
a	case-	by-	case	basis	remains	limited.
The	Intermittent	River	Biodiversity	Analysis	and	Synthesis	(IRBAS,	
Datry,	Larned,	&	Tockner,	2014)	database	 is	the	first	of	 its	kind	spe-
cifically	dedicated	to	the	digital	storage	and	provision	of	biodiversity,	
and	associated	hydrological	 and	environmental,	 data	on	 intermittent	
rivers	worldwide.	 The	 IRBAS	 database	 (http://irbas.cesab.org)	 draws	
on	 primary	 datasets,	 collates	 data	 into	 standardized	 formats,	 and	 is	
accessible	via	an	online	platform	where	users	 can	contribute,	query,	
and	request	data.	The	IRBAS	database	thus	has	the	capacity	to	grow	in	
content	as	the	study	of	intermittent	rivers	continues	and	allows	data	
retrieval	for	meta-	analyses	to	address	questions	and	test	hypotheses	
across	multiple	systems,	regions,	and	taxa	 (Table	1).	 It	also	facilitates	
networking	within	and	among	scientists,	managers,	policymakers,	and	
the	public	interested	or	involved	in	the	study	and	management	of	river	
biodiversity	(e.g.,	as	represented	by	networks	and	aligned	projects	such	
as	 BioFresh,	 http://project.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/;	 Life	 TRivers,	
www.lifetrivers.eu;	 1000	 Intermittent	 Rivers	 Project,	 http://1000_	
intermittent_rivers_project.irstea.fr;	 H2020	 European	 COST	 Action	
Science	 and	 Management	 of	 Intermittent	 Rivers	 and	 Ephemeral	
Streams,	SMIRES,	http://www.cost.eu/COST_Actions/ca/CA15113).
In	this	paper,	we	describe	the	IRBAS	database,	including	how	users	
can	contribute	to	 it	and	access	data.	We	outline	the	key	benefits	of	
using	and	contributing	to	the	database	and	consider	its	future	applica-
tions	for	fundamental	and	applied	research.
2  | DATABASE STRUCTURE, MODULES,  
AND LANGUAGE
The	IRBAS	database	 is	a	relational	database	that	houses	three	main	
types	of	data:	mandatory	(1)	site	and	sampling	 location	information,	
(2)	biotic	sample	data	and	methods	information,	and	optional	(3)	en-
vironmental	 sample	 data	 and	 methods	 information.	 Together	 with	
general	 metadata	 (e.g.,	 data	 contributor	 and	 associated	 publication	
information;	Table	1),	these	types	of	data	are	each	uniquely	identified	
and	 linked	to	an	 individual	and	uniquely	 identified	dataset,	which	 is	
entered	 into	the	database	by	a	contributor	through	the	use	of	tem-
plate	files	(Figure	1).
The	IRBAS	database	is	designed	so	that	it	can	flexibly	handle	and	
represent	datasets	from	different	sources,	and	which	may	vary,	for	ex-
ample,	 in	 levels	of	taxonomic	resolution	and	sampling	methods.	 It	 is	
based	on	the	structure	of	a	similarly	flexible	database,	BETSI	(http://
betsi.cesab.org)	 for	 soil	 invertebrates,	 which	 in	 turn	 possesses	 key	
aspects	of	other,	flexible	relational	database	schema	(e.g.,	as	used	in	
genomics	 research,	 such	 as	 CHADO;	 http://gmod.org/wiki/Chado)	
specifically	 designed	 to	 handle	 complex	 representations	 of	 biologi-
cal	knowledge	via	the	use	of	controlled	vocabulary	and	modules	that	
logically	separate	database	components.	These	aspects	reduce	data-
base	complexity	while	facilitating	modification	and/or	extension	in	the	
future.
Several	modules	handle	general	metadata	on	the	contributed	data-
sets	(Table	1).	A	dedicated	module	links	source	information	(e.g.,	pub-
lication	details)	to	each	contributed	dataset.	A	second	module	stores	
information	 such	 as	 dataset	 contributor	 and	 availability	 status	 (i.e.,	
whether	the	contributor	has	allowed	users	full	or	restricted	access	to	
the	dataset).	A	third	module	stores	all	other	types	of	general	metadata	
(e.g.,	the	date	of	entry	into	the	database).
A	module	 is	 dedicated	 to	 storing	what	we	 refer	 to	 as	 sample	
data,	 allowing	 us	 to	 separate	 data	 into	 biotic	 (i.e.,	 taxonomic	 ob-
servations	of	biota)	or	environmental	(e.g.,	water	temperature	mea-
sures)	data.	Taxonomic	observations	are	also	 linked	to	a	taxonomy	
module	which	stores	 information	on	 taxonomic	classification.	This	
identifies	 the	 rank	 of	 each	 taxon	 observed	 (e.g.,	 as	 family,	 genus,	
or	species)	and	allows	datasets	to	 include	taxa	 identified	at	differ-
ent	 levels	of	 taxonomic	 resolution	 (see	Taxonomy Module	 for	more	
information).	 Each	 sample	within	 a	 dataset,	whether	 it	 is	 a	 biotic	
or	an	environmental	sample,	must	include	information	on	sampling	
methods	(metadata;	Table	1)	as	well	as	the	actual	values	of	the	mea-
sures	taken	(sample	data)	and	must	also	be	linked	to	a	spatial	com-
ponent	(i.e.,	a	particular	location	identified	by	latitude	and	longitude	
in	the	WGS84	datum)	which	is	managed	in	a	dedicated	module	and	
allows	 samples	 to	 be	visually	 located	 on	 a	map	 of	 the	world	 (see	
Contributing and Accessing Data).	This	spatial	information	is	also	con-
sidered	metadata	(Table	1).
The	IRBAS	database	is	written	in	Structured	Query	Language	(SQL)	
and	 runs	 under	 PostgreSQL,	which	will	 allow	 the	 option	 of	 adding	
geographical	 information	 system	 (GIS)	 functionality	 to	 the	 database	
in	 the	 future	 if	 desired	 (via	 the	 PostGIS	 module).	 Queries	 are	 per-
formed	as	functions	written	in	pl/SQL,	via	scripting	executed	through	
     |  817LEIGH Et aL.
TABLE  1 Types	of	metadata	stored	in	the	IRBAS	database.	Asterisks	indicate	metadata	that	are	available	through	the	IRBAS	interface	via	a	
map-	based	search	(Figure	2)
Type Provision Details
General	metadata Mandatory Dataset name*
Name(s)	of	the	data	owner(s)	and	contributor(s)*
Contact	name(s)	and	e-mail(s)	for	the	data	provider(s)*
Data	availability	status*
Date	the	file	was	created	(i.e.,	when	the	template	was	filled	and	entered	into	the	database)*
Name(s)	of	the	coder(s)	(person(s)	who	filled	the	templates	with	data)
Optional Name(s)	of	the	data	collector(s)
Name(s)	of	the	taxonomic	identifier(s)
Name(s)	of	the	research	project(s)	associated	with	the	dataset
Any	existing	citation	details	(e.g.,	for	the	publication(s)	associated	with	the	dataset	or	for	the	actual	
dataset	itself)*
Site metadata Mandatory Name(s)	of	sampling	location(s)
Latitude(s)	and	longitude(s)	of	sampling	location(s)*
Name(s)	of	river(s)	sampled*
Flow	regime	(intermittent	or	perennial)	of	the	sampled	river(s)*
Water	regime	(permanent	or	nonpermanent)	of	the	sampled	river(s)*
Name(s)	of	the	catchment(s)	and	country(ies)	in	which	the	sampled	river(s)	is(are)	located*
Climate	(Köppen-	Geiger)	classification	zone(s)	in	which	the	sampled	river(s)	is(are)	located*
Main	land	use/land	cover	category(ies)	and	level(s)	of	human	modification	of	the	land	surrounding	the	
sampling	location(s)*
Optional Name(s)	of	discharge,	rain,	and/or	temperature	gauging	station(s)	near	or	at	the	sampling	location(s)
Latitude(s)	and	longitude(s)	of	discharge,	rain,	and/or	temperature	gauging	station(s)	near	or	at	the	
sampling	location(s)
Summary	information	on	the	long-	term	hydrology	at	the	sampling	location(s)	(e.g.,	mean	annual	
duration	of	zero	flow)
Biota	metadata Mandatory Date(s)	of	sampling*
Flow	state(s)	at	time	of	sampling	(flowing,	not	flowing,	and	dry)*
Water	state(s)	at	time	of	sampling	(wet	and	dry)*
Sampling	strategy(ies)	and	method(s)
Zone(s)	of	sampling	(e.g.,	benthic	zone)*
Sampled	habitat(s)	(e.g.,	riffle	and	pool)*
Number	of	samples	collected	at	each	location*
Type(s)	of	biota	collected	(e.g.,	aquatic	invertebrates)*
Type(s)	of	abundance	data	collected	(e.g.,	counts,	presence/absence)*
Optional Additional	information	on	sampling	methods
Environment	metadata	(if	
an	Environment	template	
is	completed)
Mandatory Date(s)	of	sampling*
Flow	state(s)	at	time	of	sampling	(flowing,	not	flowing,	and	dry)*
Water	state(s)	at	time	of	sampling	(wet	and	dry)*
Sampling	strategy(ies)	and	method(s)
Zone(s)	of	sampling	(e.g.,	benthic	zone)*
Sampled	habitat(s)	(e.g.,	riffle	and	pool)*
Number	of	samples	collected	at	each	location*
Type(s)	of	measures	collected	(e.g.,	waterbody	dimensions	and	water	chemistry)*
Optional Additional	information	on	sampling	methods
818  |     LEIGH Et aL.
an	interface	under	the	content	management	system	(CMS)	DRUPAL,	
written	in	PHP.	This	allows	data	to	be	checked	(e.g.,	for	compatibility	
with	the	controlled	vocabulary)	when	inserted	into	the	database	and	
to	control	what	contributors	and	users	of	 the	database	can	do	 (e.g.,	
to	restrict	direct	access	to	the	database	but	allow	online	querying	via	
an	interface).	This	centralized	system,	with	its	consistently	organized	
and	described	data,	can	easily	be	extended	into	standard	interoperable	
format,	such	as	EML,	to	enhance	discovery	and	hence	reusability	of	
the data.
3  | CONTRIBUTING AND ACCESSING  
DATA
The	IRBAS	database	is	accessible	via	its	online	Web	interface,	hosted	
by	CESAB	(Centre	de	Synthèse	et	d’Analyse	sur	la	Biodiversité;	http://
irbas.cesab.org),	and	includes	several	pages	dedicated	to	data	contri-
bution	and	access.	These	pages	explain	how	to:
Step	1.	contribute	data
a.	 get	started	as	a	registered	user
b.	 fill	in	data	entry	templates
c. save the completed templates
Step 2. insert completed templates into the database
Step	3.	explore	the	database	and	request	data
a.	 via	a	map	interface	(identifying	locations	of	samples	and	extract-
ing	metadata)
b.	 via	 queries	 (performing	 more	 detailed	 data	 requests	 and	 ex-
traction)	(Figure	2).
3.1 | Step 1: Contributing data
Contributing	 data	 first	 requires	 setting	 up	 a	 username	 and	 pass-
word	to	become	a	registered	user	of	the	IRBAS	database	(Step	1a;	
Figure	2).	This	allows	users	to	log-	in	and	gain	full	access	to	the	data-
base	as	both	a	contributor	and	requester.	Registered	users	wishing	
to	 contribute	data	 can	download	empty	 template	 spreadsheets	 (in	
the	form	of	tab-	delimited	.txt	files)	that	are	used	to	standardize	the	
format,	 units,	 and	 terminology	of	datasets,	 samples,	 and	measures	
(Step	1b;	Figure	2).
For	each	dataset	submitted,	a	completed	Site	and	Biota	template	
must	be	provided	(i.e.,	completion	of	these	two	templates	is	manda-
tory);	completion	of	the	Environment	template	is	optional	(Figure	1).	
The	database	 is	primarily	a	biodiversity	database,	but	environmental	
data	are	welcome	and	increase	the	value	and	usefulness	of	the	data	
contributed	and	the	versatility	of	the	database.
Mandatory:
1. Site:	 used	 to	 insert	 spatial	 (geo-locational)	 data	 and	 other	meta-
data	 on	 the	 sampling	 sites	 and	 study	 area,	 such	 as	 river	 names	
and	 flow	 regimes	 (i.e.,	 intermittent	 or	 perennial)
2. Biota:	used	to	insert	biotic	sample	data	(taxonomical	inventories	of	
biota,	 including	 count,	 presence/absence,	 biomass,	 or	 other	 bio-
logical	measures)	along	with	metadata	on	the	associated	sampling	
methods	and	flow	status	of	sites	at	the	time	of	sampling	(i.e.,	flow-
ing,	not	flowing,	or	dry)
Optional:
3. Environment:	 used	 to	 insert	 physical	 and	 chemical	 sample	 data	
along with metadata on the associated sampling methods and 
flow	 status	 of	 sites	 at	 the	 time	 of	 sampling	 (i.e.,	 flowing,	 not	
flowing,	 or	 dry).
These	templates,	along	with	a	set	of	prefilled	examples,	and	a	help	
guide	for	their	completion,	are	downloadable	via	the	interface.	Each	
template	 also	 contains	 fields	 for	 general	metadata	which	 detail	 the	
associated	 dataset	 name,	 data	 contributor,	 associated	 publication	
citation	 details,	 data	 availability	 status,	 etc.	 (Table	1).	 The	 general	
metadata	must	be	uniform	across	each	Site,	Biota,	and	Environment	
templates	 that	 encapsulate	 a	 unique	 dataset	 (Figure	1).	 The	 data	
F IGURE  1 Schematic	of	the	processing	and	flow	of	data	in	the	IRBAS	database.	For	each	dataset	submitted,	completion	of	a	Site	and	Biota	
template	is	mandatory	(solid	arrows)	and	completion	of	an	Environment	template	is	optional	(broken	arrows).	A	dataset	must	comprise	general	
metadata	(e.g.,	dataset	name,	data	contributor;	Table	1)	and	data	collected	on	sites,	biota,	and	optionally	on	habitat	(environmental	data).	The	
Site	template	is	used	to	insert	the	site	data,	including	spatial	(geo-	locational)	data	and	other	metadata	about	the	sampling	locations,	for	example,	
river	names	and	flow	regimes	(Table	1).	The	Biota	template	is	used	to	insert	the	biotic	sample	data	(taxonomical	inventories	of	biota)	along	with	
metadata	on	the	associated	sampling	methods	and	flow	status	of	sites	at	the	time	of	sampling	(Table	1).	The	Environment	template	is	used	to	
insert	the	environment	sample	data	(physical	and	chemical	measures)	along	with	metadata	on	the	associated	sampling	methods	and	flow	status	
of	sites	at	the	time	of	sampling	(Table	1).	The	general	metadata	are	entered	uniformly	across	each	Site,	Biota,	and	Environment	templates	that	
encapsulate	a	unique	dataset.	IRBAS	logo	©	IRBAS
dataset
Site data
Biotic data
Environmental data
General metadata
Site template
Biota template
Environment 
template
IR
BA
S 
da
ta
ba
se
     |  819LEIGH Et aL.
availability	status	is	decided	by	the	contributor	and	indicates	whether	
all	of	the	data	are	available	or	whether	access	is	restricted	to	meta-
data	only	(see	also	Important Considerations).	Contributors	must	save	
their	completed	templates	(Step	1c;	Figure	2)	before	insertion	into	the	
database.
3.2 | Step 2: Inserting data
Saved,	completed	templates	are	inserted	into	the	database	via	the	in-
terface’s	file-	selection	dialog	box	 (Step	2;	Figure	2).	Step	2	 involves	
a	 quality	 control	 and	 assurance	 parsing	 process	 to	 ensure	 data	 are	
entered	correctly,	completely,	and	in	accordance	with	the	standardi-
zation	requirements	[e.g.,	mandatory	fields	are	filled,	taxonomy	is	ac-
ceptable	(see	Taxonomy Module),	data	values	are	not	impossible,	and	
sample	 identifiers	are	unique].	Where	errors	are	detected,	 the	con-
tributor	is	given	information,	via	the	interface,	which	will	allow	them	
to	detect	and	correct	 the	errors,	and	 resave	and	 reinsert	 their	files.	
This	process	continues	until	no	further	errors	are	detected	at	which	
point	 the	 contributor	 is	 informed	 that	 the	 files	 have	 been	 inserted	
successfully.
3.3 | Step 3: Exploring the database and 
requesting data
All	 registered	users	 can	explore	 the	database	and	access	data	via	a	
map	(Step	3a;	Figures	2	and	3)	or	via	queries	(Step	3b).	The	map	shows	
the	locations	in	the	world	of	all	samples	across	all	datasets	in	the	da-
tabase.	Users	can	zoom	in	and	out	to	identify	specific	locations	where	
samples	are	present	and	to	access	summary	metadata	on	these	sam-
ples	and	locations	(Table	1).	Queries	follow	a	simple	check-	box	proce-
dure	and	allow	users	to	make	generic	or	specific	data	requests	via	the	
interface.	For	example,	users	may	be	interested	in	data	on	fish	only,	
or	 from	 certain	 time	 spans,	 rivers	 or	 regions,	 or	 in	 certain	 datasets	
only.	Results	are	extracted	from	the	database	and	provided	to	users	
as	downloadable	(tab-	delimited)	.csv	files.
4  | TAXONOMY MODULE
To	ensure	taxa	stored	in	the	IRBAS	database	are	named	according	to	the	
latest	international	conventions,	the	IRBAS	database	uses	Encyclopedia	
F IGURE  2 Steps	involved	in	contributing	to	and	accessing	data	from	the	IRBAS	database.	Steps	1	and	2	result	in	the	contribution	of	a	
dataset	to	the	IRBAS	database	(see	Figure	1),	which	requires	users	to	register,	fill	in	templates	with	data	(solid	arrows	indicate	mandatory	
templates	and	broken	arrows	optional	templates),	save	these	as.csv	files,	and	then	insert	them	into	the	IRBAS	database	via	the	IRBAS	interface.	
Step	2	involves	a	quality	control	and	assurance	parsing	process	to	ensure	data	are	inserted	correctly,	completely,	and	in	accordance	with	the	
standardization	requirements	of	the	database,	and	the	checking	of	taxonomic	nomenclature	in	the	Biota	file	against	the	IRBAS	taxonomic	
library	(Figure	4).	Registered	users	can	explore	the	database	via	the	interface	by	zooming	in	on	locations	with	data	presented	on	a	map	of	the	
world	(Step	3a)	and	make	requests	to	download	data	(Step	3b)	using	a	simple	check-	box	selection	procedure	that	sends	specific	queries	via	the	
interface	to	the	database.	IRBAS	logo	©	IRBAS
Step 1: Contribung data
a)
 R
eg
is
te
r
Site template
Biota template
Environment 
templateb)
 F
ill
 in
 te
m
pl
at
es
c)
 s
av
e 
as
 .c
sv
 fi
le
s
Step 2: Inserng data
Site .csv file
Biota .csv file
Environment 
.csv file I
RB
A
S 
in
te
rf
ac
e
Step 3: Exploring and requesng data
IR
BA
S 
in
te
rf
ac
e a) Map search
b) Queries for 
data 
downloads
IR
BA
S 
da
ta
ba
se
IR
BA
S 
da
ta
ba
se
820  |     LEIGH Et aL.
of	 Life	 (hereafter	 EOL;	 http://www.eol.org/)	 as	 its	 authoritative	 re-
source	for	taxonomic	nomenclature	and	classification	hierarchies.	The	
taxonomic	and	geographical	coverage	of	EOL	is	not	limited	to	particular	
countries,	continents,	or	hemispheres,	or	to	particular	groups	of	organ-
isms	(e.g.,	invertebrates,	fish,	or	plants),	thus	matching	the	global	scope	
of	the	IRBAS	database.	All	names	of	taxa	supplied	by	contributors	are	
parsed	via	a	list	of	names	stored	on	the	database	(the	IRBAS	taxonomic	
library),	recognized	by	EOL,	before	datasets	are	inserted	(Figure	4).
We	compiled	the	library	by	first	 identifying	families	of	taxa	from	
around	 the	world	 commonly	 found	 in	 rivers,	wetlands,	 and	 riparian	
zones.	All	taxa	within	these	families	and	their	associated	classification	
ranks	within	 the	 taxonomic	hierarchies	 listed	 in	EOL	were	 then	en-
tered	 into	 the	database	using	a	PHP	script	and	 the	EOL	application	
programming	interface	(API)	(http://eol.org/info/api_overview),	which	
essentially	embeds	the	functionality	of	EOL	into	the	taxonomy	module	
of	the	IRBAS	database.	The	resulting,	relational	list	of	taxa	(>600,000)	
and	their	ranks	is	 likely	to	cover	the	majority	of	taxa	encountered	in	
contributed	datasets.	During	dataset	insertion,	the	taxonomic	nomen-
clature	used	 in	 the	completed	Biota	files	of	 contributors	 is	 checked	
against	 this	 EOL-	generated	 library,	 and	 if	 errors	 are	 encountered,	
the	contributor	is	alerted	following	the	procedure	outlined	in	Step	2	
above.	Taxa	can	also	be	stored	locally,	being	added	to	the	IRBAS	tax-
onomic	library	by	the	administrator	when	and	if	required	(with	liaison	
with	EOL	if	required).
5  | DATABASE CONTENT
As	 of	August	 2016,	 the	 IRBAS	 database	 houses	 data	 from	11	 con-
tributed	 datasets,	 associated	with	 over	 2,000	 individual	 samples	 of	
biological,	 hydrological,	 and	 environmental	 data	 and	 over	 400	 taxa.	
These	data	were	collected	from	intermittent	rivers	(and	in	some	cases	
also	from	nearby	perennial	rivers)	in	North	America	(USA,	3	datasets),	
Europe	 (France,	 Spain,	 and	 UK;	 3,	 1	 and	 1	 datasets,	 respectively),	
and	Oceania	 (Australia	 and	New	Zealand;	1	and	2	datasets,	 respec-
tively;	 Figure	3).	 The	 database	 currently	 lacks	 data	 from	 the	 conti-
nents	of	Africa,	Asia,	and	South	America	and	from	rivers	in	tropical	(D)	
and	 polar-	alpine	 (E)	 climate	 zones	 (according	 to	 the	Köppen-	Geiger	
climate	 classification).	The	majority	of	 sampling	 sites	 are	 in	 temper-
ate	climate	zones	 (60%)	and	on	 intermittent	 rivers	 (67%).	The	data-
base	also	includes	data	collected	from	perennial	rivers	and	perennial	
reaches	of	intermittent	rivers.	This	is	because	many	ecological	studies	
F IGURE  3 Geographical	coverage	and	numbers	of	samples	with	biodiversity	or	environmental	data	collected	from	intermittent	and	nearby	
perennial	rivers,	stored	in	the	IRBAS	database	as	of	August	2016.	The	IRBAS	database	allows	users	to	contribute	and	access	data	and	will	thus	
continue	to	grow	in	content	and	value	as	a	research	and	networking	tool.	Map	data:	©2016	Google
F IGURE  4 The	IRBAS	database	uses	Encyclopedia	of	Life	(EOL;	
http://www.eol.org/)	as	its	authoritative	resource	for	taxonomic	
nomenclature	and	classification	hierarchies.	All	names	of	taxa	
supplied	by	contributors	are	parsed	via	a	list	of	names	stored	on	the	
database	(the	IRBAS	taxonomic	library),	recognized	by	EOL,	before	
datasets	are	inserted	into	the	IRBAS	database
EO
L
IR
BA
S 
ta
xo
no
m
ic
 
lib
ra
ry
Dataset a
Dataset b
Dataset c
     |  821LEIGH Et aL.
of	intermittent	rivers	seek	to	make	comparisons	with	perennial	rivers	
(asking	questions	such	as	“Are	biological	communities	of	intermittent	
river	reaches	subsets	of	those	of	nearby	perennial	river	reaches?”)	to	
better	understand	how	flow	intermittence	acts	as	a	hydrological	deter-
minant	of	river	biodiversity	(e.g.,	Datry,	Larned,	Fritz,	et	al.,	2014;	Leigh	
&	Datry,	2016).	Hence,	the	IRBAS	database	accepts	datasets	compris-
ing	data	collected	from	both	intermittent	and	perennial	rivers.
Biotic	samples	currently	housed	in	the	database	primarily	describe	
aquatic	invertebrate	communities	(80%	of	biotic	samples).	Fish	and	ter-
restrial	invertebrate	communities	are	represented	to	a	lesser	extent	(7%	
and	8%	of	biotic	samples,	respectively),	and	to	date,	there	are	no	plant	
community	 samples	 represented.	 Biota	 have	 been	 sampled	 primarily	
from	rivers	during	wet	hydrological	phases	(85%	of	biotic	samples	col-
lected	from	flowing	reaches	and	14%	from	nonflowing,	isolated	pools	
of	surface	water),	with	only	five	biotic	samples	collected	from	dry	riv-
erbeds.	This	reflects	the	historical	focus	on	understanding	biodiversity	
patterns	in	perennially	flowing	rivers,	with	intermittent	rivers	sampled	
most	commonly	when	they	were	flowing	(or	at	least	containing	surface	
water	 in	 isolated	pools;	Leigh,	Boulton,	et	al.,	2016).	Growing	interest	
in	the	dry	(terrestrial)	phases	of	intermittent	rivers	and	understanding	
these	 systems	 as	 coupled	 aquatic-	terrestrial	 ecosystems	will	 help	 to	
rectify	these	gaps	(Corti	&	Datry,	2016;	Datry,	Pella,	Leigh,	Bonada,	&	
Hugueny,	2016;	Steward,	von	Schiller,	Tockner,	Marshall,	&	Bunn,	2012).
6  | BENEFITS OF CONTRIBUTING AND 
ACCESSING DATA
The	 IRBAS	database	was	 compiled	with	 the	view,	 espoused	by	 col-
laborative	research	centers	such	as	CESAB	(http://www.cesab.org/),	
National	Center	for	Ecological	Analysis	and	Synthesis	(NCEAS;	https://
www.nceas.ucsb.edu/),	and	Australian	Centre	for	Ecological	Analysis	
and	 Synthesis	 (ACEAS;	 http://www.aceas.org.au/),	 that	 answers	 to	
important	 ecosystem,	 ecological,	 and	 biodiversity	 questions	 can	 be	
elicited	through	the	assembly	of	multiple	and	heterogeneous	existing	
datasets,	 facilitating	collaboration	and	analyses,	and	 insights	beyond	
those	possible	from	the	use	of	data	collected	by	individual	studies	or	
research	 and	 management	 programmes.	 Recent	 meta-	analyses	 and	
syntheses	 of	 biodiversity	 data	 from	 intermittent	 rivers	 around	 the	
world	 (Datry,	Larned,	Fritz,	et	al.,	2014;	Leigh	&	Datry,	2016;	Leigh,	
Stubbington,	 Sheldon,	&	Boulton,	2013;	 Leigh,	Bonada,	 et	al.,	 2016)	
demonstrate	the	value	of	collating,	standardizing,	and	analyzing	data	
from	disparate	sources;	in	fact,	many	of	the	individual	datasets	com-
piled	and	synthesized	for	these	studies	are	now	available	via	the	IRBAS	
database.	These	studies	have	deepened	understanding	of	the	resist-
ance	and	 resilience	of	aquatic	biota	 to	flow	 intermittence	and	 iden-
tified	general	 relationships	between	hydrological	 and	environmental	
drivers	and	community	responses,	a	major	goal	of	ecological	and	biodi-
versity	research.	Further	insights	will	no	doubt	come	from	new	analy-
ses	and	continued	synthesis	of	data	from	across	the	globe	facilitated	
by	the	IRBAS	database	to	address	the	myriad	of	questions	and	chal-
lenges	that	 intermittent	river	systems,	respectively,	 inspire	and	pose	
(Datry,	Fritz,	et	al.	2016;	Datry,	Larned,	&	Tockner,	2014;	Table	2).
Through	its	visibility,	the	database	portal	will	also	raise	awareness	
of	the	global	prevalence	and	ecological	significance	of	intermittent	riv-
ers	for	scientists	and	water	managers.	Biological	and	ecological	infor-
mation	on	intermittent	rivers	is	being	sought	increasingly	by	managers	
and	policymakers	 faced	with	 increasing	flow	 intermittence,	 resulting	
from	 climate	 change	 and	 growing	 demands	 for	 freshwater,	 and	 the	
monitoring	and	management	challenges	this	presents	(Datry,	Fritz,	&	
Leigh,	2016).	Observed	and	projected	shifts	from	perennial	to	intermit-
tent	flow	regimes	and	increased	duration	and	frequency	of	drying	in	
intermittent	rivers	have	thus	heightened	the	need	for	a	centralized	and	
open-	access	database	such	as	the	IRBAS	database.
TABLE  2 Ten	research	questions	the	IRBAS	database	is	helping	to	address	or	may	help	to	address	in	the	future
Top research questions
1. Are	there	predicable,	cyclic	trajectories	of	change	in	community	composition	that	can	be	matched	to	cycles	of	hydrological	phases	in	
intermittent	rivers?
2. To	what	extent	do	trajectories	of	population	and	community	change	depend	on	antecedent,	local	and	regional	physical,	and	chemical	and	
biological	conditions,	both	individually	and	interactively?
3. How	do	food	webs	assemble	and	disassemble	in	intermittent	rivers	as	they	cycle	through	the	different	hydrological	phases?
4. How	are	taxonomic,	functional,	phylogenetic,	and	genetic	diversity	related	to	each	other	and	to	ecosystem	diversity	(e.g.,	measured	as	
spatiotemporal	habitat	heterogeneity)	in	intermittent	rivers,	and	do	these	relationships	vary	across	spatial	and	temporal	scales?
5. Are	intermittent	rivers	equivalent	to	the	sum	of	uncoupled	aquatic	and	terrestrial	ecosystems	in	terms	of	biodiversity	or	are	they	more	
than	that?
6. How	congruent	are	the	responses	of	terrestrial	and	aquatic	biota	of	intermittent	rivers	to	hydrological,	physical,	chemical,	and	biological	
changes	in	their	environment?
7. Are	biological	responses	to	changes	in	the	environment	and	to	stresses	such	as	floods	in	intermittent	rivers	the	same	as	observed	in	
perennial	rivers?
8. Are	the	biological	metrics	and	indicators	currently	used	to	access	ecological	condition	of	perennial	rivers	suitable	for	intermittent	rivers,	
and	if	so,	where	and	when?
9. Are	there	predictable	differences	in	community	diversity	and	composition	between	natural	and	human-	induced	intermittent	rivers?
10. How	are	intermittent	rivers	and	their	biota	responding	to	global	change,	and	what	do	we	predict	for	the	future?
822  |     LEIGH Et aL.
By	nature	of	its	open	access,	the	IRBAS	database	will	promote	syn-
ergies	among	research	groups	worldwide.	It	will	also	build	on	previous	
freshwater	biodiversity	data	 synthesis	 efforts	 at	 the	European	 scale	
and	beyond,	for	example,	via	links	to	BioFresh	(http://data.freshwater-
biodiversity.eu/)	and	GBIF	(http://www.gbif.org/),	and	will	continue	to	
grow	both	in	terms	of	its	user	and	dataset	numbers.	For	example,	the	
database	will	be	expanded	and	used	by	a	consortium	of	150	research-
ers	involved	in	the	SMIRES	Cost	Action.
7  | IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS
The	IRBAS	consortium	has	applied	the	Creative	Commons	CC-	By	4.0	
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)	 approach	 to	 protect	
the	data	and	ensure	 that	data	providers	are	properly	acknowledged	
by	users.	Access	to	the	database	is	password	protected	and	to	ensure	
users	 that	 the	data	 they	contribute	are	held	securely:	 (1)	Data	 from	
the	 IRBAS	database	are	not	to	be	used	for	any	commercial	purpose	
without	permission	from	the	data	contributor(s)	and	(2)	users	accept	
all	risks	and	responsibility	for	losses,	damages,	costs,	and	other	conse-
quences	(direct	or	 indirect)	resulting	directly	or	 indirectly	from	using	
the	interface	and	any	information	or	material	available	from	it.
Any	use	of	data	from	the	IRBAS	database	must	attribute	credit	to	
the	IRBAS	consortium	(by	citing	this	IRBAS	database	publication	along	
with	 the	 IRBAS	project	publication	Datry,	 Larned,	&	Tockner,	2014)	
and	the	original	data	contributor(s).	Use	of	the	data	must	also	include	
citation	of	the	original	source(s)	[e.g.,	journal	publication(s)]	describing	
the	collection	and	presentation	of	the	relevant	datasets.	Citation	de-
tails	are	available	when	accessing	data	via	the	interface	to	the	IRBAS	
database	(http://irbas.cesab.org).
Users	need	also	to	be	aware	that	the	data	housed	within	the	data-
base	are	limited	to	those	encapsulated	by	the	fields	and	standardized	
formats	of	the	Site,	Biota,	and	Environment	templates.	There	is	capac-
ity,	however,	to	expand,	adapt,	or	improve	the	existing	database	owing	
to	the	underlying,	flexible	nature	of	the	database	structure	and	its	use	
of	modules	and	a	controlled	vocabulary.	Essentially,	new	functional-
ities	and	data	types	could	be	added	in	the	future	without	the	need	for	
major	redevelopment.	This,	for	example,	could	include	the	addition	of	
new	modules	 linked	 to	 the	 taxonomy	module	 that	 house	molecular	
systematics	and	species	traits	information.
The	 IRBAS	database	 is	 currently	 incomplete	 in	 terms	 of	 its	 bio-
geographic	and	taxonomic	coverage	(see	Database Content);	this	paper	
serves	as	a	call	to	researchers	to	share	their	data,	from	individual	and	
large-	scale	 investigative	 studies,	 and	 thus	 play	 an	 active	 role	 in	 ex-
panding	the	database.	This	will	not	only	help	to	close	gaps	in	coverage	
but	also	facilitate	networking	and	ultimately	deliver	a	deeper	under-
standing	and	appreciation	of	the	biodiversity	of	intermittent	rivers.
8  | CONCLUDING REMARKS
The	 IRBAS	 database	 acts	 as	 both	 a	 data	 portal	 and	 discovery	 tool,	
facilitating	the	synthesis	and	analysis	of	data	to	elucidate	patterns	in	
and	controls	on	intermittent	river	biodiversity.	Contributing	data,	and	
providing	 them	 in	 the	 standardized	 formats	 generated	by	 the	data-
base,	not	only	increases	data	visibility	but	also	useability.	As	the	IRBAS	
database	grows,	we	expect	 to	 see	new	 insights	arising	 from	 future,	
previously	 impossible	 and	 unimagined,	 meta-	analyses	 and	 for	 col-
laborative	research	initiatives	to	continuously	evolve.	This	will	allow	
generalizations	to	be	tested	across	multiple	systems,	regions,	and	taxa	
and	better	equip	 scientists	and	managers	with	 the	data	and	knowl-
edge	they	need	to	study,	conserve,	or	restore	river	ecosystems	and	
biodiversity.	We	heartily	encourage	contributions	of	data	from	around	
the world.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CL	was	 funded	 as	 a	 postdoctoral	 researcher	 by	 IRBAS	 (Intermittent	
River	Biodiversity	Analysis	 and	Synthesis	working	 group;	www.irbas.
fr),	 which	 is	 supported	 by	 the	 Centre	 for	 Synthesis	 and	 Analysis	 of	
Biodiversity	 (CESAB),	 and	 funded	 jointly	 by	 the	 French	 Foundation	
for	Research	&	Biodiversity	(FRB)	and	the	French	National	Agency	for	
Water	 and	 Aquatic	 Environments	 (ONEMA).	 CESAB	 hosted	 several	
workshops	where	ideas	central	to	this	manuscript,	and	the	development	
of	the	IRBAS	database,	were	discussed	among	 its	authors.	We	thank	
CESAB	staff	Magali	Grana	and	directors	Eric	Garnier	and	Alison	Specht	
for	 their	 support	 throughout,	 Andrew	 Boulton,	 Clifford	 Dahm,	 and	
Bernard	Hugueny	for	their	contributions	to	and	support	of	the	IRBAS	
project	and	participants,	and	Pierre	Mancini	for	assistance	with	Web	in-
terface	development.	We	thank	Andrew	Boulton	and	Alison	Specht	and	
the	reviewers	of	this	manuscript	for	their	insightful	comments	on	earlier	
versions	of	this	manuscript.	The	views	expressed	in	this	journal	article	
are	those	of	the	authors	and	do	not	necessarily	represent	the	views	or	
policies	of	the	US	Environmental	Protection	Agency.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None	declared.
REFERENCES
Acuña,	V.,	Datry,	T.,	Marshall,	J.,	Barceló,	D.,	Dahm,	C.	N.,	Ginebreda,	A.,	
…	Palmer,	M.	A.	(2014).	Why	should	we	care	about	temporary	water-
ways?	Science,	343,	1080–1081.
Arthington,	A.	H.,	 Bernardo,	 J.	M.,	&	 Ilhéu,	M.	 (2014).	Temporary	 rivers:	
Linking	 ecohydrology,	 ecological	 quality	 and	 reconciliation	 ecology.	
River Research and Applications,	30,	1209–1215.
Cardinale,	B.	J.,	Duffy,	J.	E.,	Gonzalez,	A.,	Hooper,	D.	U.,	Perrings,	C.,	Venail,	
P.,	…	Naeem,	S.	 (2012).	Biodiversity	 loss	and	 its	 impact	on	humanity.	
Nature,	486,	59–67.
Corti,	 R.,	 &	Datry,	T.	 (2016).	Terrestrial	 and	 aquatic	 invertebrates	 in	 the	
riverbed	of	an	intermittent	river:	Parallels	and	contrasts	in	community	
organisation.	Freshwater Biology,	61,	1308–1320.
Datry,	T.,	Arscott,	D.,	&	Sabater,	S.	(2011).	Recent	perspectives	on	tempo-
rary	river	ecology.	Aquatic Sciences,	73,	453–457.
Datry,	T.,	Fritz,	K.,	&	Leigh,	C.	(2016).	Challenges,	developments	and	perspec-
tives	in	intermittent	river	ecology.	Freshwater Biology,	61,	1171–1180.
Datry,	T.,	Larned,	S.	T.,	Fritz,	K.	M.,	Bogan,	M.	T.,	Wood,	P.	J.,	Meyer,	E.	I.,	&	
Santos,	A.	N.	(2014).	Broad-	scale	patterns	of	invertebrate	richness	and	
     |  823LEIGH Et aL.
community	composition	in	temporary	rivers:	Effects	of	flow	intermit-
tence. Ecography,	37,	94–104.
Datry,	T.,	Larned,	S.	T.,	&	Tockner,	K.	(2014).	Intermittent	rivers:	A	challenge	
for	freshwater	ecology.	BioScience,	64,	229–235.
Datry,	T.,	Pella,	H.,	Leigh,	C.,	Bonada,	N.,	&	Hugueny,	B.	(2016).	A	landscape	
approach	to	advance	intermittent	river	ecology.	Freshwater Biology,	61,	
1200–1213.
Dudgeon,	 D.,	Arthington,	A.	 H.,	 Gessner,	M.	O.,	 Kawabata,	 Z.,	 Knowler,	
D.,	 Lévêque,	 C.,	…	 Stiassny,	M.	 L.	 J.	 (2006).	 Freshwater	 biodiversity:	
Importance,	 threats,	 status,	 and	 conservation	 challenges.	 Biological 
Reviews,	81,	163–182.
Gilvear,	D.	J.,	Greenwood,	M.	T.,	Thoms,	M.	C.,	&	Wood,	P.	J.	(eds).	2016.	
River science: Research and management for the 21st century.	Chichester,	
UK:	John	Wiley	&	Sons,	Ltd,	416	pages.
Hampton,	S.	E.,	Strasser,	C.	A.,	Tewksbury,	J.	J.,	Gram,	W.	K.,	Budden,	A.	E.,	
Batcheller,	A.	L.,	…	Porter,	J.	H.	(2013).	Big	data	and	the	future	of	ecol-
ogy.	Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment,	11,	156–162.
Leigh,	 C.,	 Bonada,	 N.,	 Boulton,	A.	 J.,	 Hugueny,	 B.,	 Larned,	 S.	 T.,	 Vander	
Vorste,	R.,	&	Datry,	T.	(2016).	Invertebrate	assemblage	responses	and	
the	dual	roles	of	resistance	and	resilience	to	drying	in	intermittent	riv-
ers. Aquatic Sciences,	78,	291–301.
Leigh,	C.,	Boulton,	A.	J.,	Courtwright,	J.	L.,	Fritz,	K.,	May,	C.	L.,	Walker,	R.	H.,	
&	Datry,	T.	(2016).	Ecological	research	and	management	of	intermittent	
rivers:	An	 historical	 review	 and	 future	 directions.	Freshwater Biology,	
61,	1181–1199.
Leigh,	C.,	&	Datry,	T.	(2016).	Drying	as	a	primary	hydrological	determinant	
of	 biodiversity	 in	 river	 systems:	 A	 broad-	scale	 analysis.	 Ecography,	
doi:10.1111/ecog.02230
Leigh,	C.,	Stubbington,	R.,	Sheldon,	F.,	&	Boulton,	A.	J.	 (2013).	Hyporheic	
invertebrates	as	bioindicators	of	ecological	health	in	temporary	rivers:	
A	meta-	analysis.	Ecological Indicators,	32,	62–73.
Steward,	A.	L.,	von	Schiller,	D.,	Tockner,	K.,	Marshall,	J.	C.,	&	Bunn,	S.	E.	
(2012).	When	the	river	runs	dry:	Human	and	ecological	values	of	dry	
riverbeds. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment,	10,	202–209.
Vörösmarty,	C.	J.,	McIntyre,	P.	B.,	Gessner,	M.	O.,	Dudgeon,	D.,	Prusevich,	
A.,	Green,	P.,	…	Davies,	P.	M.	 (2010).	Global	 threats	 to	human	water	
security	and	river	biodiversity.	Nature,	467,	555–561.
How to cite this article:	Leigh	C,	Laporte	B,	Bonada	N,	et	al.	
IRBAS:	An	online	database	to	collate,	analyze,	and	synthesize	
data	on	the	biodiversity	and	ecology	of	intermittent	rivers	
worldwide. Ecol Evol. 2017;7:815–823. doi:10.1002/ece3.2679.