Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
NCBI, fi rst brought before Congress in 1986, reasoned that “knowledge
in the fi eld of biotechnology is accumulating faster than it can reason-
ably be assimilated” and that advances in computation were the solu-
tion.
87
In particular, the bill recognized that the design, development,
implementation, and management of biological information constituted
a set of distinct skills that required a distinct institutional home. Like-
wise, in Europe, the formation of the European Bioinformatics Institute
(EBI) as a quasi-independent outstation of the European Molecular Bi-
ology Laboratory (EMBL) was justifi ed on the grounds that the applica-
tion of computing tools to biology constituted a necessary and distinct
skill set.
Sophisticated interacting information resources must be built
both from EMBL Data Library products and in collabora-
tion with groups throughout Europe. Support and training in
the use and development of such resources must be provided.
Research necessary to keep them state-of-the-art must be car-
ried out. Close links with all constituents must be maintained.
These include research scientists, biotechnologists, software and
computer vendors, scientifi c publishers, and government agen-
cies. . . . Increased understanding of biological processes at the
molecular level and the powerful technologies of computer and
information science will combine to allow bioinformatics to
transcend its hitherto largely service role and make fundamen-
tally innovative contributions to research and technology.
88
The computer was no longer to be considered a mere lab tool, but rather
the basis of a discipline that could make “innovative contributions” to
biomedicine.
The knowledge and skills that were needed to manage this data crisis
were those that been associated with computing and computers since
the 1950s. In particular, molecular biology needed data management
and statistics. From the mid-1990s onward, new journals, new confer-
ences, and new training programs (and textbooks) began to appear to
support this new domain of knowledge. In 1994, the new
Journal of
Computational Biology
announced that
computational biology is emerging as a discipline in its own right,
in much the same way molecular biology did in the late 1950s
and early 1960s. . . . Biology, regardless of the sub-specialty,
is overwhelmed with large amounts of very complex data. . . .
