Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36786388›Full record

ArticleMicrobial biotechnology2023

Scientific novelty beyond the experiment.

John E Hallsworth, Zulema Udaondo, Carlos Pedrós-Alió, Juan Höfer, Kathleen C Benison, Karen G Lloyd, Radamés J B Cordero, Claudia B L de Campos, Michail M Yakimov, Ricardo Amils

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Quantum entanglement and coherence in plant signaling networks: a theoretical framework.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2026
    Review
  2. NewStudies in mycology · 2024
    Article
  3. ChatGPT in Healthcare Writing: Advantages and Limitations.Healthcare informatics research · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Scientific novelty beyond the experiment.Microbial biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

John E HallsworthInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6797-9362
Zulema UdaondoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3445-6842
Carlos Pedrós-AlióDepartment of Systems Biology, Centro Nacional de Biotecnología (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1009-4277
Juan HöferEscuela de Ciencias del Mar, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-5887-4929
Kathleen C BenisonDepartment of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6104-2333
Karen G LloydMicrobiology Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0914-6375
Radamés J B CorderoDepartment of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3026-7094
Claudia B L de CamposInstitute of Science and Technology, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo (UNIFESP), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1836-0915
Michail M YakimovInstitute of Polar Sciences, ISP-CNR, Messina, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1418-363X
Ricardo AmilsDepartment of Molecular Biology, Centro de Biología Molecular Severo Ochoa (CSIC-UAM), Nicolás Cabrera n° 1, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Practical experiments drive important scientific discoveries in biology, but theory-based research studies also contribute novel-sometimes paradigm-changing-findings. Here, we appraise the roles of theory-based approaches focusing on the experiment-dominated wet-biology research areas of microbial growth and survival, cell physiology, host-pathogen interactions, and competitive or symbiotic interactions. Additional examples relate to analyses of genome-sequence data, climate change and planetary health, habitability, and astrobiology. We assess the importance of thought at each step of the research process; the roles of natural philosophy, and inconsistencies in logic and language, as drivers of scientific progress; the value of thought experiments; the use and limitations of artificial intelligence technologies, including their potential for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research; and other instances when theory is the most-direct and most-scientifically robust route to scientific novelty including the development of techniques for practical experimentation or fieldwork. We highlight the intrinsic need for human engagement in scientific innovation, an issue pertinent to the ongoing controversy over papers authored using/authored by artificial intelligence (such as the large language model/chatbot ChatGPT). Other issues discussed are the way in which aspects of language can bias thinking towards the spatial rather than the temporal (and how this biased thinking can lead to skewed scientific terminology); receptivity to research that is non-mainstream; and the importance of theory-based science in education and epistemology. Whereas we briefly highlight classic works (those by Oakes Ames, Francis H.C. Crick and James D. Watson, Charles R. Darwin, Albert Einstein, James E. Lovelock, Lynn Margulis, Gilbert Ryle, Erwin R.J.A. Schrödinger, Alan M. Turing, and others), the focus is on microbiology studies that are more-recent, discussing these in the context of the scientific process and the types of scientific novelty that they represent. These include several studies carried out during the 2020 to 2022 lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic when access to research laboratories was disallowed (or limited). We interviewed the authors of some of the featured microbiology-related papers and-although we ourselves are involved in laboratory experiments and practical fieldwork-also drew from our own research experiences showing that such studies can not only produce new scientific findings but can also transcend barriers between disciplines, act counter to scientific reductionism, integrate biological data across different timescales and levels of complexity, and circumvent constraints imposed by practical techniques. In relation to urgent research needs, we believe that climate change and other global challenges may require approaches beyond the experiment.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCOVID-19Communicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsPhilosophy

Identifiers

PMID36786388
PMCPMC10221578

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.