This is not an article: Model organism newsletters and the question of ‘open science’

Kelty, Christopher

doi:10.1057/biosoc.2012.8

Cited by 46 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the widespread sharing advocated by the Open Data movement has also long been supported by biologists working on key nonhuman organisms for molecular research, such as the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster (Kelty, 2012;Kohler, 1994;Leonelli & Ankeny, 2012). Furthermore, prominent biomedical researchers such as Francis Collins (who used to direct the Human Genome Project and now heads the National Institute of Health) have forcefully argued against the privatization of human genomic data, for instance, by underwriting international agreements to release sequence data as soon as they are produced.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why the Current Insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production, and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology

Leonelli

2013

Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The collection and dissemination of data on human and nonhuman organisms has become a central feature of 21st-century biology and has been endorsed by funding agencies in the United States and Europe as crucial to translating biological research into therapeutic and agricultural innovation. Large molecular data sets, often referred to as "big data," are increasingly incorporated into digital databases, many of which are freely accessible online. These data have come to be seen as resources that play a key role in mediating global market exchange, thus achieving a prominent social and economic status well beyond science itself. At the same time, calls to make all such data publicly and freely available have garnered strength and visibility, most prominently in the form of the Open Data movement. I discuss these developments by considering the conditions under which data journey across the communities and institutions implicated in globalized biology and biomedicine, and what this indicates about how Internet-based communication and the use of online databases affect scientific research and its role within contemporary society.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why the Current Insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production, and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology

Leonelli

2013

Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Databases can help encourage the circulation of types of data that the database does not support by creating expectations that scientists will share data when asked (Leonelli & Ankeny, 2012). Kelty (2012) discusses how scientific newsletters in biology not only constituted an infrastructure to build communities around particular organisms, but also promoted sharing of research objects by requiring openness of researchers as a condition of receiving the newsletter (and thus continued membership of the community).…”

Section: Gaining Access To Extant Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A second way to maximize scientific work is to aggregate and integrate existing data more effectively (Leonelli & Ankeny, 2012;Meyer, 2009), for instance by embedding common standards within or across domains (Bowker, 2005;Leonelli & Ankeny, 2012) or by building links between members of the domain and fostering norms of data sharing and openness across this domain (Kelty, 2012;Leonelli, 2010). The C-DEBI data infrastructure exists to foster collaboration among other deep subseafloor biosphere researchers, and to assemble and circulate data produced by distributed domain scientists.…”

Section: How Domains Share or Build Their Own Infrastructuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ship space to database: emerging infrastructures for studies of the deep subseafloor biosphere

Darch

Borgman

2016

PeerJ Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. An increasing array of scientific fields face a ''data deluge.'' However, in many fields data are scarce, with implications for their epistemic status and ability to command funding. Consequently, they often attempt to develop infrastructure for data production, management, curation, and circulation. A component of a knowledge infrastructure may serve one or more scientific domains. Further, a single domain may rely upon multiple infrastructures simultaneously. Studying how domains negotiate building and accessing scarce infrastructural resources that they share with other domains will shed light on how knowledge infrastructures shape science. Methods. We conducted an eighteen-month, qualitative study of scientists studying the deep subseafloor biosphere, focusing on the Center for Dark Energy Biosphere Investigations (C-DEBI) and the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) and its successor, the International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP2). Our methods comprised ethnographic observation, including eight months embedded in a laboratory, interviews (n = 49), and document analysis. Results. Deep subseafloor biosphere research is an emergent domain. We identified two reasons for the domain's concern with data scarcity: limited ability to pursue their research objectives, and the epistemic status of their research. Domain researchers adopted complementary strategies to acquire more data. One was to establish C-DEBI as an infrastructure solely for their domain. The second was to use C-DEBI as a means to gain greater access to, and reconfigure, IODP/IODP2 to their advantage. IODP/IODP2 functions as infrastructure for multiple scientific domains, which creates competition for resources. C-DEBI is building its own data management infrastructure, both to acquire more data from IODP and to make better use of data, once acquired. Discussion. Two themes emerge. One is data scarcity, which can be understood only in relation to a domain's objectives. To justify support for public funding, domains must demonstrate their utility to questions of societal concern or existential questions about humanity. The deep subseafloor biosphere domain aspires to address these questions in a more statistically intensive manner than is afforded by the data to which it currently has access. The second theme is the politics of knowledge infrastructures. A single scientific domain may build infrastructure for itself and negotiate access to multi-domain infrastructure simultaneously. C-DEBI infrastructure was designed both as a response to scarce IODP/IODP2 resources, and to configure the data allocation processes of IODP/IODP2 in their favor.

show abstract

“…Within the context of microbiology, the deep subseafloor biosphere is a recently established domain of study, lacking much of the infrastructure and community that characterizes more mature domains. Some knowledge products, such as scientific newsletters, have been shown to help build communities and establish scientific norms of practice (Kelty, ). Our study extends this scope to infrastructures for scientific data management.…”

Section: Social Motivations For Data Management Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

Ship space to database: Motivations to manage research data for the deep subseafloor biosphere

Darch

Borgman

2014

Proc of Assoc for Info

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What motivates data management strategies of scientific collaborations? In this paper, we argue that infrastructures for data management are designed to support scientific work per se and to perform a variety of social functions. We present findings from a longitudinal ethnographic case study of a large, multidisciplinary, distributed scientific project studying subseafloor microbial life. A critical element of this project's plan for data management is to construct an online portal that includes a data registry and data repository. We found that a range of factors motivate the construction of these systems and their features. In addition to scientific concerns for curation and accessibility of diverse and scarce data, we argue that the building of the registry and repository is also motivated by social factors. One factor is the attempt to build a community of domain researchers to endure beyond the end of this project in 2020. Another is the potential use of the registry and database as tools to demonstrate the productivity of the project in negotiations about the allocation of ocean drilling cruise resources. Considering the social and scientific factors together enriches accounts of how knowledge infrastructures are constructed.

show abstract

This is not an article: Model organism newsletters and the question of ‘open science’

Cited by 46 publications

References 55 publications

Why the Current Insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production, and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology

Why the Current Insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production, and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology

Ship space to database: emerging infrastructures for studies of the deep subseafloor biosphere

Ship space to database: Motivations to manage research data for the deep subseafloor biosphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About