1. 1.

   Read these authorship policies and guidelines.
2. 2.

   Consult the current list of manuscripts (http://terraref.org/manuscripts) for current proposals and active manuscripts, contact the listed lead author on any similar proposal to minimize overlap, or to join forces. Also carefully read these guidelines.
3. 3.

   Prepare a manuscript proposal. Your proposal will list the lead author(s), the title and abstract body, and the specific data types that you will use. You can also specify more detail about response and predictor variables (if appropriate), and indicate a timeline for analysis and writing. Submit your proposal through this form.

   Proposed ideas are reviewed by the authorship committee primarily to facilitate appropriate collaborations, identify potential duplication of effort, and to support the scientists who generate data while allowing the broader research community access to data as quickly and openly as possible. The authorship committee may suggest altering or combining analyses and papers to resolve issues of overlap.
4. 4.

   Circulate your draft analysis and manuscript to solicit Opt-In authorship.

   For global analyses, the lead author should circulate the manuscript to the Network by submitting a email to the TERRA REF team.

   For analyses of more limited scope, the lead author should circulate the manuscript to network collaborators who have indicated interest at the abstract stage, those who have contributed data, and any others who the lead author deems appropriate.

   In both cases, the subject line of the email should include the phrase "OPT-IN PAPER"; This email should also include a deadline by which time co-authors should respond.

   The right point to share your working draft and solicit co-authors is different for each manuscript, but in general:

   1. 1.

      sharing early drafts or figures allows for more effective co-author contribution. While ideally this would mean circulating the manuscript at a very early stage for opt-in to the entire network, it is acceptable and even typical to share early drafts or figures among a smaller group of core authors.
   2. 2.

      circulating essentially complete manuscripts does not allow the opportunity for meaningful contribution from co-authors, and is discouraged.
5. 5.

   Potential co-authors should signal their intention to opt-in by responding by email to the lead author before the stated deadline.
6. 6.

   Potential co-authors should inform the lead author of any additional candidates for co-authorship who should be considered.
7. 7.

   Lead authors should is responsible for making sure that any who have made contributions warranting co-authorship have actively opted in or out (authors should not be excluded due to a missed email or a misunderstanding of the scope of the manuscript and their contributions). The goal is to ensure that the author list is inclusive and consistent.
8. 8.

   Lead authors should keep an email list of co-authors and communicate regularly about progress including sharing drafts of analyses, figures, and text as often as is productive and practical.
9. 9.

   Lead authors should circulate complete drafts among co-authors and consider comments and changes. Given the wide variety of ideas and suggestions provided on each TERRA REF paper, co-authors should recognize the final decisions belong to the lead author.
10. 10.

    Final manuscripts should be reviewed and approved by each co-author before submission.
11. 11.

    All authors and co-authors should fill out their contribution in the authorship rubric and attach it as supplementary material to any TERRA REF manuscript. Lead authors are responsible for ensuring consistency in credit given for contributions, and may alter co-author's entries in the table to do so.

    The authorship rubric provides a framework for the opt-in process. Lead authors should copy the template and edit the contents for a specific manuscript, then circulate to potential co-authors.

    Note that the last author position may be appropriate to assign in some cases. For example, this would be appropriate for advisors of lead authors who are graduate students or postdocs and for papers that two people worked very closely to produce.
12. 12.

    The lead author should carefully review the authorship contribution table to ensure that all authors have contributed at a level that warrants authorship and that contributions are consistently attributed among authors. The lead author should also ensure that all contributions that warrant co-authorship.

    • Has each author made contributions in at least two areas in the authorship rubric?
    • Did each author provide thoughtful, detailed feedback on the manuscript?
    • Have all qualified contributors actively opted in or out of co-authorship?

    ​

• Substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, and
• Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and
• Final approval of the version to be published, and
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

• First is lead author
• Last is the supervisor of the lead author.
• if > 1 lead or senior authors these will be listed first and last, respectively, and identified in the author contributions section of the acknowledgements.
• All other contributors are listed alphabetically.

The [information / data / work] presented here is from the TERRA REF experiment, funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), U.S. Department of Energy, under Award Number DE-AR0000594. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.