We suggest that public archiving of data and setting standards for data citations may not be enough to ensure scientific transparency (Nature 537, 138 (2016) and see D. Roche Nature 538, 41; 2016).

Verification of results and bias limitation are crucial elements of science that call for a more inclusive set of transparency standards (see T. H. Parker et al. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 711–719; 2016). For example, in many countries, pre-registration is now a requirement for clinical-trial research studies to discourage publication bias. And the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines (https://cos.io/top), designed to be widely applicable across empirical scientific disciplines, have already had a large impact in psychology and are spreading in ecology and evolution.

Acceptance of standards for transparency can be uneven. However, the practice of data archiving in the fields of ecology and evolution indicates that — once funders and journals have established clear transparency standards — scientists will broadly adopt them.