Tracking the emergence of synthetic biology

Synthetic biology is an emerging domain that combines biological and engineering concepts and which has seen rapid growth in research, innovation, and policy interest in recent years. This paper contributes to efforts to delineate this emerging domain by presenting a newly constructed bibliometric definition of synthetic biology. Our approach is dimensioned from a core set of papers in synthetic biology, using procedures to obtain benchmark synthetic biology publication records, extract keywords from these benchmark records, and refine the keywords, supplemented with articles published in dedicated synthetic biology journals. We compare our search strategy with other recent bibliometric approaches to define synthetic biology, using a common source of publication data for the period from 2000 to 2015. The paper details the rapid growth and international spread of research in synthetic biology in recent years, demonstrates that diverse research disciplines are contributing to the multidisciplinary development of synthetic biology research, and visualizes this by profiling synthetic biology research on the map of science. We further show the roles of a relatively concentrated set of research sponsors in funding the growth and trajectories of synthetic biology. In addition to discussing these analyses, the paper notes limitations and suggests lines for further work.

[1]  D. Endy,et al.  Refinement and standardization of synthetic biological parts and devices , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[2]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  How to combine term clumping and technology roadmapping for newly emerging science & technology competitive intelligence: “problem & solution” pattern based semantic TRIZ tool and case study , 2014, Scientometrics.

[3]  Rainer Breitling,et al.  Synthetic biology advances for pharmaceutical production , 2015, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[4]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time , 2009, Scientometrics.

[5]  Timo Minssen,et al.  Standardization, IPRs and open innovation in synthetic biology , 2014 .

[6]  Ralf Jungmann,et al.  From DNA nanotechnology to synthetic biology , 2008, HFSP journal.

[7]  Thomas Reiss,et al.  The development of synthetic biology: a patent analysis , 2013, Systems and Synthetic Biology.

[8]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping , 2009, Scientometrics.

[9]  Pablo Carbonell,et al.  Mapping the patent landscape of synthetic biology for fine chemical production pathways , 2016, Microbial biotechnology.

[10]  Martin Fussenegger,et al.  Emerging biomedical applications of synthetic biology , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[11]  Martina Merz,et al.  The local configuration of new research fields : on regional and national diversity , 2016 .

[12]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  From a word to a world: the current situation in the interdisciplinary field of synthetic biology , 2015, PeerJ.

[13]  H. Small,et al.  Identifying emerging topics in science and technology , 2014 .

[14]  Eugene Garfield,et al.  THE SIGNIFICANT SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE APPEARS IN A SMALL CORE OF JOURNALS , 1996 .

[15]  Magnus Hagevi,et al.  Follow the money: Public subsidies and the changing intra-party balance of power between different faces of the party organisation—the case of Sweden , 2018 .

[16]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses , 2007, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[17]  Peter van den Besselaar,et al.  Mapping science through bibliometric triangulation: An experimental approach applied to water research , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  Andrei Mogoutov,et al.  Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking , 2007 .

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Aggregated journal–journal citation relations in scopus and web of science matched and compared in terms of networks, maps, and interactive overlays , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[20]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs , 2013, Scientometrics.

[21]  F. Lienert,et al.  Synthetic biology in mammalian cells: next generation research tools and therapeutics , 2014, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[22]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Synthetic biology in China: An update from the field , 2015 .

[23]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[24]  J. Keasling Synthetic biology and the development of tools for metabolic engineering. , 2012, Metabolic engineering.

[25]  Aliya Kuzhabekova,et al.  Mapping the emerging field of genome editing , 2014, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[26]  Li Tang,et al.  Funding acknowledgment analysis: Queries and caveats , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[27]  Margret Engelhard Synthetic Biology Analysed : Tools for Discussion and Evaluation , 2016 .

[28]  C PhilpJames,et al.  Emerging Policy Issues in Synthetic Biology , 2014 .

[29]  Karen M Polizzi What is synthetic biology? , 2013, Methods in molecular biology.

[30]  Wolfgang Glänzel Bibliometrics-aided retrieval: where information retrieval meets scientometrics , 2014, Scientometrics.

[31]  Jane Calvert,et al.  A Synthetic Biology Roadmap for the UK , 2012 .

[32]  Christina D Smolke,et al.  Building outside of the box: iGEM and the BioBricks Foundation , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.

[33]  Jane Calvert,et al.  Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Study of Socioethical Issues in Systems Biology” , 2007, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[34]  Markus Schmidt,et al.  Synthetic biology: An emerging research field in China , 2011, Biotechnology advances.

[35]  D. Aksnes CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGHLY CITED PAPERS , 2003 .

[36]  Raymond A Zilinskas,et al.  The promise and perils of synthetic biology. , 2006, New Atlantis.

[37]  D. Stemerding,et al.  Discourses on synthetic biology in Europe , 2013 .

[38]  Can Huang,et al.  Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies , 2011 .

[39]  L.J. Clarke,et al.  Synthetic biology in the UK – An outline of plans and progress , 2016, Synthetic and systems biotechnology.

[40]  J. Collins,et al.  A brief history of synthetic biology , 2014, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[41]  George M. Church,et al.  Regenesis: How Synthetic Biology Will Reinvent Nature and Ourselves , 2012 .

[42]  P. Waila,et al.  Sentiment analysis of movie reviews: A new feature-based heuristic for aspect-level sentiment classification , 2013, 2013 International Mutli-Conference on Automation, Computing, Communication, Control and Compressed Sensing (iMac4s).

[43]  D. W. Sharp CITATION DATA IDENTIFY COLON CANCER, MENTAL HEALTH AS HOT RESEARCH AREAS , 1996 .

[44]  Christopher Moraes,et al.  Next generation tools to accelerate the synthetic biology process. , 2016, Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro.

[45]  Philip Shapira,et al.  UK Synthetic Biology Centres tasked with addressing public concerns , 2015 .

[46]  Paula E. Stephan How Economics Shapes Science , 2012 .

[47]  Kristin Hagen,et al.  Science Policy and Concomitant Research in Synthetic Biology—Some Critical Thoughts , 2016 .

[48]  Rainer Breitling,et al.  Judging synthetic biology risks , 2015, Science.

[49]  Morgan Meyer,et al.  Assembling, Governing, and Debating an Emerging Science: The Rise of Synthetic Biology in France , 2013 .

[50]  Eric M. Ramirez-Weaver,et al.  A saving science , 2017 .

[51]  Jan L. Youtie,et al.  Is there a clubbing effect underlying Chinese research citation Increases? , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[52]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[53]  Le Feuvre RA,et al.  SYNBIOCHEM Synthetic Biology Research Centre, Manchester – A UK foundry for fine and speciality chemicals production , 2016, Synthetic and systems biotechnology.

[54]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology , 2011, Scientometrics.

[55]  Helen Pearson NEWS FEATURE 眠ってやせる , 2006 .

[56]  Jonathan Adams,et al.  China's absorptive State: research, innovation and the prospects for China-UK collaboration , 2013 .

[57]  Erin A. Cech,et al.  How Economics Shapes Science , 2013 .

[58]  Markus Schmidt,et al.  Synthetic biology in the view of European public funding organisations , 2012, Public understanding of science.

[59]  Luis Campos,et al.  That Was the Synthetic Biology That Was , 2009 .

[60]  Jane Calvert,et al.  The Commodification of Emergence: Systems Biology, Synthetic Biology and Intellectual Property , 2008 .

[61]  Shouhuai Xu,et al.  Spatiotemporal Patterns and Predictability of Cyberattacks , 2015, PloS one.

[62]  Amal Zouaq,et al.  An Assessment of Online Semantic Annotators for the Keyword Extraction Task , 2014, PRICAI.

[63]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Emerging Technology , 2001 .

[64]  Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez,et al.  Differences in citation impact across countries , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[65]  Huimin Zhao,et al.  A brief overview of synthetic biology research programs and roadmap studies in the United States , 2016, Synthetic and systems biotechnology.

[66]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’ , 2015, Scientometrics.

[67]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Emerging technologies: quantitative identification and measurement , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[68]  Yingying Zhou,et al.  The rapid rise of a research nation , 2015, Nature.

[69]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Is There a Relationship between Research Sponsorship and Publication Impact? An Analysis of Funding Acknowledgments in Nanotechnology Papers , 2015, PloS one.

[70]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems , 2004 .

[71]  J. Stilgoe,et al.  Mapping the landscape of climate engineering , 2014, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[72]  Division on Earth,et al.  Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century , 2013 .

[73]  Jan Youtie,et al.  Social science contributions compared in synthetic biology and nanotechnology , 2015 .

[74]  Christopher A. Voigt,et al.  Realizing the potential of synthetic biology , 2014, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[75]  Jean-Philippe Cointet,et al.  Mapping the Emergence of Synthetic Biology , 2016, PloS one.

[76]  Tiago Moreira,et al.  Structures of Scientific Collaboration , 2009 .

[77]  Bernadette Bensaude Vincent,et al.  Discipline-building in synthetic biology. , 2013, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[78]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents , 2007, Scientometrics.

[79]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  International Collaboration in Science: The Global Map and the Network , 2013, ArXiv.

[80]  Fang Han,et al.  Identifying emerging topics in a technological domain , 2016, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[81]  T. Lu,et al.  Synthetic biology: an emerging engineering discipline. , 2012, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[82]  P. Oldham,et al.  Synthetic Biology: Mapping the Scientific Landscape , 2012, PloS one.

[83]  C. Mao,et al.  DNA nanotechnology. , 2004, BioTechniques.

[84]  Margret Engelhard,et al.  Synthetic Biology Analysed , 2016 .

[85]  Synthetic biology in China, UK and US , 2016, Synthetic and systems biotechnology.

[86]  L. Aharonson-Daniel,et al.  Twitter in the Cross Fire—The Use of Social Media in the Westgate Mall Terror Attack in Kenya , 2014, PloS one.

[87]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[88]  Dirk Stemerding,et al.  Governing synthetic biology for global health through responsible research and innovation , 2013, Systems and Synthetic Biology.

[89]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Visualization of Disciplinary Profiles: Enhanced Science Overlay Maps , 2017, J. Data Inf. Sci..

[90]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Concentration of the Most-Cited Papers in the Scientific Literature: Analysis of Journal Ecosystems , 2006, PloS one.

[91]  J. Youtie,et al.  Refining search terms for nanotechnology , 2008 .

[92]  Philip Handler Biology and the Future of Man , 1970 .

[93]  P. K. Ajikumar,et al.  The future of metabolic engineering and synthetic biology: towards a systematic practice. , 2012, Metabolic engineering.

[94]  Richard J. R. Kelwick,et al.  Promoting microbiology education through the iGEM synthetic biology competition. , 2015, FEMS microbiology letters.

[95]  Fujia Li,et al.  Framing responsible innovation in synthetic biology: the need for a critical discourse analysis approach , 2015 .

[96]  Drew Endy,et al.  Engineering BioBrick vectors from BioBrick parts , 2008, Journal of Biological Engineering.

[97]  Yougen Li,et al.  Beyond Protein Engineering: its Applications in Synthetic Biology , 2012 .

[98]  David H. Guston,et al.  Responsible innovation: who could be against that? , 2015 .