科学数据库对学术研究的影响日益显著,其兴衰虽稍纵即逝,却是当代迅猛发展的科学技术与社会相互作用的生动写照。非营利性的生物分子相互作用数据库——BIND曾兴盛一时,却在数年后迅速衰落,免费获取的渠道最终走向并不成功的商业化之路。在此过程中,BIND既是建立学术新范式的一次尝试,也是受新兴技术如开放式科学数据库影响的结果。建立与运行大型科技类数据库并非只是学术共同体内部的一项纯粹的技术活动,政府与企业对科学数据库的态度很大程度上决定了BIND的命运。科学数据库的“公器”困境,表面上是不同科学家与政府、企业对科学数据库的不同态度,实质上反映了当代科学知识转为公共知识的社会成本。 The influence of scientific databases to research activities is becoming more and more significant. The rise and decline of a database could be transient, but vividly reflect the interactions between society and the booming development of science and technology. The non-profit Biomolecular In-teraction Network Database (BIND) was once very prosperous but faded just in a few years. Its open access concept finally ended with an unsuccessful commercialization. In this process, BIND tried to establish a new paradigm in the scholarly world. Meanwhile, it was also a result of the affection of emerging technologies like Open Science data. Establishing and running a massive scientific database is not a pure technique activity within the scholarly community. The attitudes of gov-ernments and enterprises determined the fate of BIND to a large degree. Considering scientific da-tabase as a “public instrument” leads to a dilemma. The apparently different attitudes towards scientific database among various scientists, governments, and enterprises, in fact, reveal the social cost of the transition from scientific knowledge to public knowledge in the contemporary era.
科学数据库,BIND,新范式,公共知识, Scientific Database BIND New Paradigm Public Knowledge科学数据库的“公器”困境—当代史视角下的BIND兴衰
BIND的政府资金来源在此后几度出现问题,但仍坚守公共数据库的初衷。2003年加拿大政府承诺的经费并没有全部到位,尤其是安大略省应该出的将近一千万加元被无限延期 [10] 。Hogue转而向与他有密切合作的新加坡方面需求解决。2004年他以新加坡国立大学为依托与新加坡政府的经济发展局(Economic Development Board of Singapore, EDB)合作成立了Blueprint Initiative Asia Pte.Ltd。它虽然叫做公司,但仍然是非营利的 [11] 。然而新加坡承诺的总额1800万美元为期5年的经费投入,因为种种原因没有全部兑现。
1) 内容全面。BIND囊括了生物分子间,以及生物分子与非生物分子间的各种相互作用。收集分子间相互作用信息的数据库,BIND并不是第一个,比如加州大学洛杉矶分校在1999年就构建了一个关于蛋白质相互作用的数据库(Database of Interacting Proteins,简称DIP),根据最新的统计其中已经收集了57,683条蛋白质相互作用的记录 [16] 。更早些时候建立的有专门收集大肠杆菌代谢途径的EcoCyc数据库,它是由斯坦福研究所(Stanford Research Institute,简称SRI)维护的,现在已经扩展到了506种生物。到了2000年前后,同类数据库大量涌现,有些专门收集某些分子的相互作用,有些专门收集某种模式生物的相关数据,它们大多只是某个大学或研究所下属的项目,因此数据类型各有侧重,并且规模都比较小。在2003年《核酸研究》杂志对所有生物学数据库所做的统计中,列举了9个关于分子间相互作用的比较有代表性的数据库,BIND是其中唯一全面收集各种分子相互作用信息的,并且这个记录至今仍未被打破。
可见,做高品质且非营利性的“公共数据库”是BIND团队的信念。首席科学家Hogue一直致力于把BIND打造成可以为全世界生命科学领域的研究,尤其对药物研发,疾病防控等领域的研究提供重要参考资源的公共平台。事实也确如此,在2004年Nature Cell Biology的编辑栏目,有专文介绍BIND并予以了很高的评价 [20] 。当BIND的知识产权出让给Unleashed公司之后,该公司网站的注册人数迅速攀升了10倍,这也可以侧面说明BIND在业界的受欢迎程度。2004至2005年间,BIND升级了数据库,建立了与多个世界顶尖杂志的合作关系,并与诺华公司的热带病研究所(Novartis Institute for Tropical Diseases 简称NITD)成立了一个登革热的合作研究项目。即便在2005年加拿大完全停止了对BIND的资助,该项目仍持续了一段时间。
BIND投入几乎都源自加拿大政府。在BIND总共接受的1780万加元(当时约折合1200万美元)经费中,三分之二强来自加政府管理的非营利性组织Genome Canada,剩下的接近三分之一来自安大略省研究发展基金(Ontario R&D Challenge Fund,简称ORDCF),另外还有来自加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会(National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, NSERC),加拿大健康研究所(Canadian Institutes of Health Research, CIHR)等单位的小额资助。
李 昂,孙 烈. 科学数据库的“公器”困境—当代史视角下的BIND兴衰 Scientific Database in a Dilemma about Becoming Public Instrument—The Rise and Fall of the BIND from a Contemporary History’s Perspective[J]. 社会科学前沿, 2016, 05(02): 241-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.12677/ASS.2016.52035
参考文献 (References)ReferencesBarraclough, G. and Kellett, N. (1964) An Introduction to Contemporary History. Watts, London, 42-46.Golinski, J. (1999) Science as Public Culture: Chemistry and Enlightenment in Britain, 1760-1820. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1-10.Gertz, M. (2010) Scientific and Statistical Database Management. 22nd International Conference, SSDBM 2010, Heidelberg, Germany, 30 June-2 July 2010. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 4-5.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13818-8Chia, L. and Idema, W.L. (2007) Books in Numbers: 75th An-niversary of the Harvard-Yenching Library. Harvard- Yenching Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, Distri-buted by the Chinese University Press, Hong Kong, 420.Wikipedia (2016) List of Academic Databases and Search Engines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_academic_databases_and_search_engines&oldid=706265886Harvey, M. and McMeekin, A. (2009) Public or Private Economies of Knowledge?: Turbulence in the Biological Sciences. Edward ElgarEdward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, 1-36.Bader, G.D. (2003) Design and Use of the Biomolecular Interaction Network Database (BIND) for Storing and Analyzing Protein-Protein Interaction Data. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto.Bader, G.D. and Hogue, C.W.V. (2000) BIND—A Data Specification for Storing and Describing Biomolecular Interactions, Molecular Complexes and Pathways. Bioinformatics, 16, 465-477.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/16.5.465Bader, G.D., Betel, D. and Hogue, C.W. (2003) BIND: The Biomolecular Interaction Network Database. Nucleic Acids Research, 31, 248-250. <br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg056Kondro, W. (2005) Canadian Global Database May Move to Singapore after Loss of Funding. Science, 308, 1529- 1529. <br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.308.5728.1529aHogue, C. (2005) Canadian Database in Singapore. Science, 309, 875-877.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.309.5736.875bWang, K. (2007) The Other Side of Staying out of a BIND. Nature Biotechnology, 25, 971-972.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt0907-971bAilamaki, A. and Bowers, S. (Eds.) (2012) Scientific and Statistical Database Management. Proceedings of 24th International Conference, SSDBM 2012, Chania, 25-27 June 2012, Vol. 7338, Springer, 1-2.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31235-9Lin, Y. (2003) XML Schema of Biomolecular Interaction Network Database and an XQuery Use Case. M.S. Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames.Alfarano, C., Andrade, C. E., Anthony, K., Bahroos, N., Bajec, M., Bantoft, K., Buzadzija, K., et al. (2005) The Biomolecular Interaction Network Database and Related Tools 2005 Update. Nucleic Acids Research, 33, D418-D424.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gki051UCLA (2016) Database of Interacting Proteins. http://dip.doe-mbi.ucla.edu/dip/Stat.cgiSRI International Is an Independent, Nonprofit Corporation. LIST OF BIOCYC PATHWAY/GENOME DATABASES.
http://biocyc.org/biocyc-pgdb-list.shtmlJohnston, N. (2004) The BINDs That Tie. Drug Discovery, 9, 59-60.Baxevanis, A.D. (2003) The Molecular Biology Database Collection: 2003 Update. Nucleic Acids Research, 31, 1-12.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg120(2004) Editorial. Nature Cell Biology, 6, 681. <br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb0804-681Walsh, M.P. (2005) Co-Funding versus Scientific Excellence. The Biochemist, 10, 45-46.Ellis, L.B. and Kalumbi, D. (1999) Financing a Future for Public Biological Data. Bioin-formatics, 15, 717-722.
<br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/15.9.717Merali, Z. and Giles, J. (2005) Databases in Peril. Nature, 435, 1010-1011. <br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/4351010aPiateski, G. and Frawley, W. (1991) Knowledge Dis-covery in Databases. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Ackoff, R.L. (1989) From Data to Wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3-9.French, J.C., Jones, A.K. and Pfaltz, J.L. (Eds.) (1990) Scientific Database Management: Report of the Invitational NSF Workshop on Scientific Database Management, Charlottesville, Va., March 1990: Final Report (Vol. 90, No. 21). University of Virginia, Charlottesville.Bourne, P. (2005) Will a Biological Database Be Different from a Biological Journal? PLoS Computational Biology, 1, e34. <br>http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010034