On the Growth of Scientific Knowledge: Yeast Biology as a Case Study

The tempo and mode of human knowledge expansion is an enduring yet poorly understood topic. Through a temporal network analysis of three decades of discoveries of protein interactions and genetic interactions in baker's yeast, we show that the growth of scientific knowledge is exponential over time and that important subjects tend to be studied earlier. However, expansions of different domains of knowledge are highly heterogeneous and episodic such that the temporal turnover of knowledge hubs is much greater than expected by chance. Familiar subjects are preferentially studied over new subjects, leading to a reduced pace of innovation. While research is increasingly done in teams, the number of discoveries per researcher is greater in smaller teams. These findings reveal collective human behaviors in scientific research and help design better strategies in future knowledge exploration.

[1]  Richard C Trembath,et al.  Mutations in VPS33B, encoding a regulator of SNARE-dependent membrane fusion, cause arthrogryposis–renal dysfunction–cholestasis (ARC) syndrome , 2004, Nature Genetics.

[2]  Michael R. Green,et al.  Dissecting the Regulatory Circuitry of a Eukaryotic Genome , 1998, Cell.

[3]  K. Popper.  Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach , 1972 .

[4]  R. Ozawa,et al.  A comprehensive two-hybrid analysis to explore the yeast protein interactome , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  A. Bloecher,et al.  Genetic interactions between GLC7, PPZ1 and PPZ2 in saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2000, Genetics.

[6]  Ronald W. Davis,et al.  Functional characterization of the S. cerevisiae genome by gene deletion and parallel analysis. , 1999, Science.

[7]  Gianluca Carnabuci.  A theory of knowledge growth : network analysis of US patents, 1975-1999 , 2005 .

[8]  H. Pelham,et al.  A New Yeast Endosomal SNARE Related to Mammalian Syntaxin 8 , 2002, Traffic.

[9]  B. Barrell,et al.  Life with 6000 Genes , 1996, Science.

[10]  R. Guimerà,et al.  Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks , 2005, Nature.

[11]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Error and attack tolerance of complex networks , 2000, Nature.

[12]  Jianzhi Zhang,et al.  Why Do Hubs Tend to Be Essential in Protein Networks? , 2006, PLoS genetics.

[13]  Harry Lustig.  To Advance and Diffuse the Knowledge of Physics... , 1999 .

[14]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[15]  P. Romer.  Endogenous Technological Change , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[16]  A. Muijtjens,et al.  Growth of knowledge in psychiatry and behavioural sciences in a problem‐based learning curriculum , 2004, Medical education.

[17]  Andrey Rzhetsky,et al.  Emergent behavior of growing knowledge about molecular interactions , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[18]  A. Bernheim,et al.  Molecular cloning, expression analysis, and chromosomal localization of human syntaxin 8 (STX8). , 1999, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[19]  Mike Tyers,et al.  BioGRID: a general repository for interaction datasets , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  Robert Hoffmann,et al.  Temporal patterns of genes in scientific publications , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[22]  Joon-Oh Park,et al.  The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2011 .

[23]  Joan H. Fujimura,et al.  Authorizing Knowledge in Science and Anthropology , 1998 .

[24]  Frederick P Roth,et al.  Discovering functional relationships: biochemistry versus genetics. , 2005, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[25]  Sean R. Collins,et al.  Global landscape of protein complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2006, Nature.

[26]  Arun K. Ramani,et al.  How complete are current yeast and human protein-interaction networks? , 2006, Genome Biology.

[27]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Lethality and centrality in protein networks , 2001, Nature.

[28]  Roger Guimerà,et al.  Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance , 2005, Science.

[29]  A. Monaco,et al.  Cell Biology of Membrane Trafficking in Human Disease , 2006, International Review of Cytology.

[30]  Andrew J Link,et al.  Tandem affinity purification and identification of protein complex components. , 2004, Methods.

[31]  S. Fields,et al.  A novel genetic system to detect protein–protein interactions , 1989, Nature.

[32]  Hanna Mandel,et al.  A mutation in SNAP29, coding for a SNARE protein involved in intracellular trafficking, causes a novel neurocutaneous syndrome characterized by cerebral dysgenesis, neuropathy, ichthyosis, and palmoplantar keratoderma. , 2005, American journal of human genetics.