Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.3.443
James W. E. Lowe, Miguel García-Sancho, R. Leng, Mark Wong, N. Vermeulen, G. Viry
In this essay, we reflect on how the findings of the preceding papers enabled us to thicken the history of genomics. We have expanded the number of dimensions across which our historical work operated beyond extending the dimension of time. Building on this, we argue that the history of genomics became synchronically entangled with a range of communities, target species, and research agendas—among them yeast biochemistry, pig and human immunology, systematics, medical genetics, and agricultural genetics. We make sense of these entanglements with analytic categories to characterize modes of organizing and conducting sequencing, and the relationships between the practices of sequencing and the objectives of those collaborating around it: horizontal and vertical, proximate and distal, directed and undirected, as well as intensive and extensive sequencing. Our categories emerged as we analyzed and qualitatively interpreted datasets and co-authorship networks. Throughout this special issue, we have characterized genomics as a set of tools that open up connections between actors, institutions, experimental organisms, and historically contingent forms of research. We contend that presenting genomics in this way emphasizes the agency of the communities that mobilized the sequence data and offers a fresh perspective for addressing the medical and agricultural translation of that data. We close by proposing how we can develop our mixed-methods approach through the establishment of a domain ontology that would allow information on sequence submissions and publications to be connected to other forms of data, thus expanding the range of evidence available for historical analysis. This essay is part of a special issue entitled The Sequences and the Sequencers: A New Approach to Investigating the Emergence of Yeast, Human, and Pig Genomics, edited by Michael García-Sancho and James Lowe.
{"title":"Across and within Networks","authors":"James W. E. Lowe, Miguel García-Sancho, R. Leng, Mark Wong, N. Vermeulen, G. Viry","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.3.443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.3.443","url":null,"abstract":"In this essay, we reflect on how the findings of the preceding papers enabled us to thicken the history of genomics. We have expanded the number of dimensions across which our historical work operated beyond extending the dimension of time. Building on this, we argue that the history of genomics became synchronically entangled with a range of communities, target species, and research agendas—among them yeast biochemistry, pig and human immunology, systematics, medical genetics, and agricultural genetics. We make sense of these entanglements with analytic categories to characterize modes of organizing and conducting sequencing, and the relationships between the practices of sequencing and the objectives of those collaborating around it: horizontal and vertical, proximate and distal, directed and undirected, as well as intensive and extensive sequencing. Our categories emerged as we analyzed and qualitatively interpreted datasets and co-authorship networks. Throughout this special issue, we have characterized genomics as a set of tools that open up connections between actors, institutions, experimental organisms, and historically contingent forms of research. We contend that presenting genomics in this way emphasizes the agency of the communities that mobilized the sequence data and offers a fresh perspective for addressing the medical and agricultural translation of that data. We close by proposing how we can develop our mixed-methods approach through the establishment of a domain ontology that would allow information on sequence submissions and publications to be connected to other forms of data, thus expanding the range of evidence available for historical analysis. This essay is part of a special issue entitled The Sequences and the Sequencers: A New Approach to Investigating the Emergence of Yeast, Human, and Pig Genomics, edited by Michael García-Sancho and James Lowe.","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78719106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.40
Sjang ten Hagen
Historical methods have long been put to use in the making of natural knowledge. In this article, I examine the use of historical methods by nineteenth-century physicists, focusing on the Austrian researcher Ernst Mach in particular. I argue that Mach applied methods characteristic of the then-dominant historical and philological disciplines to his own discipline of physics. He construed history as a tool for the physicist. On the basis of a study of his notebooks and correspondence with the chemist-turned-historian Emil Wohlwill, I explain what he sought to achieve by means of this tool, and reconstruct the practices characterizing his historical research. These practices included the reading, ordering, and comparison of textual sources. Moreover, Mach appropriated the historical-philological method of source criticism. I show that prominent fellow physicists of Mach, including Johann Poggendorff and Hermann von Helmholtz, made use of similar historical methods, even though their aims were different. Together, the cases of these history-writing physicists illustrate how history and natural science continued to intertwine in a time of increasing disciplinary fragmentation.
{"title":"History as a Tool for Natural Science","authors":"Sjang ten Hagen","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.40","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.40","url":null,"abstract":"Historical methods have long been put to use in the making of natural knowledge. In this article, I examine the use of historical methods by nineteenth-century physicists, focusing on the Austrian researcher Ernst Mach in particular. I argue that Mach applied methods characteristic of the then-dominant historical and philological disciplines to his own discipline of physics. He construed history as a tool for the physicist. On the basis of a study of his notebooks and correspondence with the chemist-turned-historian Emil Wohlwill, I explain what he sought to achieve by means of this tool, and reconstruct the practices characterizing his historical research. These practices included the reading, ordering, and comparison of textual sources. Moreover, Mach appropriated the historical-philological method of source criticism. I show that prominent fellow physicists of Mach, including Johann Poggendorff and Hermann von Helmholtz, made use of similar historical methods, even though their aims were different. Together, the cases of these history-writing physicists illustrate how history and natural science continued to intertwine in a time of increasing disciplinary fragmentation.","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88097733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.140
S. Parthasarathy
Over the last two years, there has been a lot of talk about expertise: who has it, who doesn’t, who is claiming it but shouldn’t. Amid a global pandemic that has brought tremendous uncertainty and damaged our health, learning, livelihoods, and happiness, ensuring that policymakers base their decisions on the correct expertise seems crucial. And, pandemically speaking, the definition of expert appears to be self-evident: Anthony Fauci, an immunologist who has long served as the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, fits the bill. Former U.S. president Donald Trump, selfproclaimed genius, does not. Yet, we’ve seen frequent accusations, across the media and academic landscapes, of what philosopher Nathan Ballantyne calls “epistemic trespassing”: people without relevant knowledge or credentials opining in public forums on matters they know nothing about.1 Commentators warn that listening to these false experts, particularly when it comes to crucial policy or public health matters, could have catastrophic consequences. I’ve observed these attempts to identify and police epistemic trespassers with some discomfort. As a science and technology studies (STS) scholar, I know that politics and knowledge are inextricably intertwined, and that policyrelevant knowledge and expertise are not always clear. National political cultures and histories shape not only how we define but also how we reason through public problems.2 At the level of particular policy domains,
{"title":"How to Be an Epistemic Trespasser","authors":"S. Parthasarathy","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.140","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last two years, there has been a lot of talk about expertise: who has it, who doesn’t, who is claiming it but shouldn’t. Amid a global pandemic that has brought tremendous uncertainty and damaged our health, learning, livelihoods, and happiness, ensuring that policymakers base their decisions on the correct expertise seems crucial. And, pandemically speaking, the definition of expert appears to be self-evident: Anthony Fauci, an immunologist who has long served as the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, fits the bill. Former U.S. president Donald Trump, selfproclaimed genius, does not. Yet, we’ve seen frequent accusations, across the media and academic landscapes, of what philosopher Nathan Ballantyne calls “epistemic trespassing”: people without relevant knowledge or credentials opining in public forums on matters they know nothing about.1 Commentators warn that listening to these false experts, particularly when it comes to crucial policy or public health matters, could have catastrophic consequences. I’ve observed these attempts to identify and police epistemic trespassers with some discomfort. As a science and technology studies (STS) scholar, I know that politics and knowledge are inextricably intertwined, and that policyrelevant knowledge and expertise are not always clear. National political cultures and histories shape not only how we define but also how we reason through public problems.2 At the level of particular policy domains,","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79335783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80
A. McManus
During the Second World War, journal editors working under the American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications (ACSP) struggled to reconcile new demands of secrecy with their commitment to open exchange of knowledge. ACSP referees’ dilemmas were most acute where the consequences of disclosure were least obvious. Their greatest disagreements emerged not out of nuclear weapons research, but rather from problems of lesser perceived military significance, which were nevertheless the subject of contracted work with the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Although civilian scientists could publish on these topics without consequences to national security, the ACSP frequently restricted civilian publications for the simple reason that military-contracted scientists were performing similar research. This paper examines three cases in which the priority claims of federally contracted researchers influenced decisions on censorship. In these cases, referees imposed censorship to ensure equal access to publication channels, when federal contracts had divided the American scientific community into civilian and military-adjacent subgroups. Uniform censorship preserved the image of a uniform scientific community.
第二次世界大战期间，在美国科学出版物咨询委员会(American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications, ACSP)领导下工作的期刊编辑们努力调和新的保密要求与他们公开交流知识的承诺。在信息披露的后果最不明显的地方，ACSP审稿人的困境最为严重。他们最大的分歧不是来自核武器的研究，而是来自那些被认为不太重要的军事问题，尽管如此，这些问题仍然是科学研究和发展办公室承包工作的主题。虽然民间科学家可以在不影响国家安全的情况下发表这些主题，但ACSP经常限制民间出版物，原因很简单，即与军方签约的科学家正在进行类似的研究。本文考察了三个案例，其中联邦合同研究人员的优先权要求影响审查决定。在这些案例中，当联邦合同将美国科学界划分为民用和邻近军事的小组时，裁判施加审查以确保平等地进入出版渠道。统一的审查制度维护了科学界统一的形象。
{"title":"Science, Interrupted","authors":"A. McManus","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80","url":null,"abstract":"During the Second World War, journal editors working under the American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications (ACSP) struggled to reconcile new demands of secrecy with their commitment to open exchange of knowledge. ACSP referees’ dilemmas were most acute where the consequences of disclosure were least obvious. Their greatest disagreements emerged not out of nuclear weapons research, but rather from problems of lesser perceived military significance, which were nevertheless the subject of contracted work with the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Although civilian scientists could publish on these topics without consequences to national security, the ACSP frequently restricted civilian publications for the simple reason that military-contracted scientists were performing similar research. This paper examines three cases in which the priority claims of federally contracted researchers influenced decisions on censorship. In these cases, referees imposed censorship to ensure equal access to publication channels, when federal contracts had divided the American scientific community into civilian and military-adjacent subgroups. Uniform censorship preserved the image of a uniform scientific community.","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85888435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.136
Catherine Mas
{"title":"How Not to Be an Expert","authors":"Catherine Mas","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.136","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81260386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.123
Katja Guenther
{"title":"How to Train Your Analyst","authors":"Katja Guenther","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.123","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83332936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.120
G. Campagnolo
{"title":"How to Win Games and Influence Football Players","authors":"G. Campagnolo","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.120","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91137004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.143
Alisha Rankin
{"title":"How to “Be Expert” in Early Modern Europe","authors":"Alisha Rankin","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.143","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86286433","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.128
Alexandra Hui
{"title":"How to Call a Duck","authors":"Alexandra Hui","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.128","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"108 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84864796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.1
Gina Surita
This paper concerns the development of a central tenet of modern biochemistry: that cellular metabolism coordinates biological energy supply through the cyclical making and breaking of “energy-rich” phosphate bonds. This interpretation of intermediary metabolism was comprehensively set forth in two review articles published nearly simultaneously (though independently) in early 1941 by German biochemist Fritz Lipmann and Danish biochemist Herman Kalckar. Lipmann and Kalckar first met in the early 1930s in Copenhagen, where they were in frequent contact until 1939, when both left Denmark. Despite the similar claims advanced in Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s reviews, the two men’s presentations differed substantially with respect to their descriptions of “energy-rich” phosphate bonds and their target audiences. In order to explore the circumstances behind these divergences, this paper utilizes a “parallel lives” approach. By analyzing Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s lives in parallel, particular institutional contexts emerge as having been especially significant in shaping their differing interpretations of the power of phosphate bonds. The period that Lipmann spent in muscle researcher Otto Meyerhof’s laboratory (1927–30) conditioned his physiological interpretation of the role of phosphate bonds in cellular energy metabolism. Kalckar’s time at California Institute of Technology (1939–40)—where he was in regular communication with chemists such as Linus Pauling—played the most significant role in his decision to present the power of phosphate bonds from a chemical perspective. Ultimately, an examination of the life stories behind Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s 1941 reviews illuminates how older physiological perspectives were combined with recent advances in theoretical chemistry to explain how energy flows through living organisms.
{"title":"The Power of Phosphate","authors":"Gina Surita","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.1","url":null,"abstract":"This paper concerns the development of a central tenet of modern biochemistry: that cellular metabolism coordinates biological energy supply through the cyclical making and breaking of “energy-rich” phosphate bonds. This interpretation of intermediary metabolism was comprehensively set forth in two review articles published nearly simultaneously (though independently) in early 1941 by German biochemist Fritz Lipmann and Danish biochemist Herman Kalckar. Lipmann and Kalckar first met in the early 1930s in Copenhagen, where they were in frequent contact until 1939, when both left Denmark. Despite the similar claims advanced in Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s reviews, the two men’s presentations differed substantially with respect to their descriptions of “energy-rich” phosphate bonds and their target audiences. In order to explore the circumstances behind these divergences, this paper utilizes a “parallel lives” approach. By analyzing Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s lives in parallel, particular institutional contexts emerge as having been especially significant in shaping their differing interpretations of the power of phosphate bonds. The period that Lipmann spent in muscle researcher Otto Meyerhof’s laboratory (1927–30) conditioned his physiological interpretation of the role of phosphate bonds in cellular energy metabolism. Kalckar’s time at California Institute of Technology (1939–40)—where he was in regular communication with chemists such as Linus Pauling—played the most significant role in his decision to present the power of phosphate bonds from a chemical perspective. Ultimately, an examination of the life stories behind Lipmann’s and Kalckar’s 1941 reviews illuminates how older physiological perspectives were combined with recent advances in theoretical chemistry to explain how energy flows through living organisms.","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85171635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：