Skip to main content

Collaboration in Metagenomics: Sequence Databases and the Organization of Scientific Work

  • Conference paper
ECSCW 2009

Abstract

In this paper we conduct an ethnographic study of work to explore the interaction between scientific collaboration and computing technologies in the emerging science of metagenomics. In particular, we explore how databases serve to organize scientific collaboration. We find databases existing across scientific communities where scientists have different practices and priorities. We suggest while these databases appear to be boundary objects, they are better understood as boundary negotiating artifacts. Due to rapid scientific and technical innovation the tools, practices, and scientific questions change over the course of merely a few years resulting in challenges for collaboration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Atkins, D. E., Droegemeier, K. K., Feldman, S. I., Garcia-Molina, H., Klein, M. L., Messina, P., et al. (2003): Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel On Cyberinfrastructure. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnholtz, J., & Bietz, M. J. (2003): ‘Data at work: Supporting sharing in science and engineering’ Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, New York, NY: ACM Press, pp. 339–348.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999): Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K., & Pachter, L. (2005): ‘Bioinformatics for whole-genome shotgun sequencing of microbial communities’, PLoS Computational Biology, vol. 1, no. 2, Jul, pp. 106–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995): Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, D., Garrity, G., Gray, T., Morrison, N., Selengut, J., Sterk, P., et al. (2008): ‘The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification’, Nature Biotechnology, vol. 26, no. 5, May 2008, pp. 541–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genomic Standards Consortium (2008): ‘Genomic Rosetta Stone’, Retrieved March 5, 2009, from http://gensc.org/gc_wiki/index.php/Genomic_Rosetta_Stone

  • Gilbert, J. A., Thomas, S., Cooley, N. A., Kulakova, A., Field, D., Booth, T., et al. (2009): ‘Potential for phosphonoacetate utilization by marine bacteria in temperate coastal waters’, Environmental Microbiology, vol. 11, no. 1, Jan, pp. 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967): The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grudin, J. (1989): ‘Why groupware applications fail: problems in design and evaluation’, Office: Technology and People, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 245–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman, J., Rondon, M. R., Brady, S. F., Clardy, J., & Goodman, R. M. (1998): ‘Molecular biological access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: a new frontier for natural products’, Chemical Biology, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct, pp. R245–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, R. (1998): Inside the IMF: An Ethnography of Documents, Technology and Organizational Action. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper, R., Procter, R., Randall, D., & Rouncefield (2001): ‘‘Safety in numbers’: Calculation and document re-use in knowledge work’ Proceedings of the 2001 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, New York: ACM, pp. 242–251.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, K. (1999): On Line and On Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilgartner, S. (1995): ‘Biomolecular databases: New communication regimes for biology?’, Science Communication, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 240–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hine, C. (2006): ‘Databases as scientific instruments and their role in the ordering of scientific work’, Social Studies of Science, vol. 36, no. 2, April 1, 2006, pp. 269–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hugenholtz, P., Goebel, B. M., & Pace, N. R. (1998): ‘Impact of culture-independent studies on the emerging phylogenetic view of bacterial diversity’, Journal of Bacteriology, vol. 180, no. 18, pp. 4765–4774.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987): Science in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. P. (2007): ‘Boundary negotiating artifacts: Unbinding the routine of boundary objects and embracing chaos in collaborative work’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 307–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutters, W. G., & Ackerman, M. S. (2002): ‘Achieving safety: A field study of boundary objects in aircraft technical support’ Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New York: ACM, pp. 266–275.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. (2001): The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Biotechnology Information (April 2, 2008): ‘GenBank Overview’, Retrieved February 23, 2009, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Genbank/index.html

  • O'Day, V., Adler, A., Kuchinsky, A., & Bouch, A. (2001): ‘When worlds collide: Molecular biology as interdisciplinary collaboration’, in W. Prinz, M. Jarke, Y. Rogers, K. Schmidt & V. Wulf (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 399–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski, S. D., Robey, D., & Raven, A. (2000): ‘Supporting shared information systems: Boundary objects, communities, and brokering’ Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems, Atlanta, GA: Association for Information Systems, pp. 329–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K., & Simone, C. (1996): ‘Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems design’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 155–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K., & Wagner, I. (2002): ‘Coordinative artifacts in architectural practice’, in M. Blay-Fornarino, A. M. Pinna-Dery, K. Schmidt & I. Wagner (eds.), Cooperative Systems Design: A Challenge of the Mobility Age, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press, pp. 257–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K., & Wagner, I. (2005): ‘Ordering systems: Coordinative practices and artifacts in architectural design and planning’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, vol. 13, no. 5–6, pp. 349–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuurman, N., & Leszczynski, A. (2008): ‘Ontologies for bioinformatics’, Bioinformatics and Biology Insights, vol. 2008, no. 2, pp. 187–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L. (1987–1989): ‘The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving’, in L. Gasser & M. N. Huhns (eds.), Distributed Artificial Intelligence, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, Vol. II, pp. 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989): ‘Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39’, Social Studies of Science, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subrahmanian, E., Monarch, I., Konda, S., Granger, H., Milliken, R., Westerberg, A., et al. (2003): ‘Boundary objects and prototypes at the interfaces of engineering design’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, vol. 12, no. 2, 2003, pp. 185– 203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbaugh, P. J., Backhed, F., Fulton, L., & Gordon, J. I. (2008): ‘Diet-induced obesity is linked to marked but reversible alterations in the mouse distal gut microbiome’, Cell Host Microbe, vol. 3, no. 4, Apr 17, pp. 213–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998): Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew J. Bietz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bietz, M.J., Lee, C.P. (2009). Collaboration in Metagenomics: Sequence Databases and the Organization of Scientific Work. In: Wagner, I., TellioÄŸlu, H., Balka, E., Simone, C., Ciolfi, L. (eds) ECSCW 2009. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-854-4_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-854-4_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-853-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-854-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics