Research scientists have long been considered to be refractory to change, especially internet-flavored change. Ask any random researcher for a definition of a wiki, and I am willing to bet you will get either a blank stare or a long-winded explanation of the function of a really obscure protein. Lately, the gap between the majority of scientists and new web technology is growing narrower and narrower.
Research institutions and universities are slowly beginning to integrate new web tools, such as wikis, into everyday operations. Yale and Brown have wikis up and running for their research labs, and the word of their usefulness is spreading. The staff at the West Quad Computing Group at Harvard Medical School are happy to set up lab wikis for all those interested, and they even do house calls (or lab calls, as the case may be) for those labs still on the fence about the new technology – the Computing guys come to the lab to describe wikis, how they can be beneficial in a lab setting, and how researchers can use them in their daily work. My lab scheduled just such a lab visit. In just over an hour, the Computing guys described wiki basics and how they may be applied to lab life. The wiki offers collaborative writing tools with all versions of the document saved online and available for reversion at any time (just in case your collaborator decided to go rogue and re-interpret all the data). The long list of other lab wiki functionalities includes storing and discussing data, maintaining lab supply order lists, plasmid libraries, reagent catalogs, and even online lab notebooks.
And that’s where the webby guys hit an academic research wall. It turns out that Harvard, as well as many other research institutions, have specific guidelines for the maintenance of lab notebooks. Notebooks are to be kept on paper, in hard copy, on university premises. It’s ok to type your notes on the computer, as long as you print them out and store them, physically. The wiki alone currently does not comply with university standards for notebook keeping (I could not find this policy online, strangely enough, though my PI is certain of it). Although the wiki offers a one button export to PDF of most page contents – so hard copies of lab notebook contents can still be generated – the rule barring exclusively online storage seems strangely outdated.
When stored on a wiki, lab notebook contents are safe from fires, flood, pestilence, and all other plagues. The wiki server is backed up regularly, making loss of data highly unlikely, while a number of labs have lost years of work – stored on paper – through natural disaster (anyone recall Hurricane Katrina?). Wiki contents can be accessed from anywhere, reduce paper waste, increase data security… I could go on about the benefits, but that won’t change the fact that old rules cannot yet support the new technology.
Has anyone had experience with academic wikis in other institutions? Does anyone have details of official lab record keeping policies? How about personal experiences with lab wikis? My inner (ok, outer) web geek is screaming “cool!” but the researcher inside is slightly more restrained. Are wikis as useful a tool in the lab as they promise to be, rules and regulations aside?
Part of each team’s entry to IGEM is a lab wiki. Our work in progress was hosted on OpenWetWare and information for the finished article was transferred to the IGEM website for judging.
Whilst perhaps not quite representative of the work of an established lab, our IGEM team’s experience allowed us to sample some of the pros and pitfalls of using a wiki.
Useful things include being able to easily access the data from anywhere – with our team working in both wet and dry labs across the campus we could access the same information at the same time (and also access it when away from campus). As all the IGEM teams are obliged to use wikis, we could keep track of what other teams were doing and share information between teams where it was useful.
One barrier was learning the wiki syntax in the first instance – not difficult but a hurdle. Another was overcoming my reluctance to put half-baked ideas on the internet tagged with my name for all to see. I did come to see that most IGEMmers use their wikis notebook-style to keep track of progress, but I didn’t like my unpolished thoughts being there with my name on them.
Hiya Erika! Thanks for the links to the iGEM wiki. This is a slightly different wiki from the one I discuss in the post, though the principles are the same. The wiki software is commercial, so the ease of use issue is resolved – the thing really looks like Windows, or Blogger (Harvard pays a fee for use). Also, the wiki is locked – only lab members can see the contents. I really should have made that clearer in the post. This is not one of those open-to-all wikis. It really is a private lab tool. I am glad to hear that you found it useful in the course of the competition! I think the same reasons you found it helpful would only be magnified in a lab setting, assuming that all the regulation wrinkles get ironed out.
Ah, I hadn’t realised that what you were describing was a private tool. When I think of wikis I think of ones like the one we worked with.
What you describe may well have the pros that I listed, if the lab members are willing. It is then curious that a wiki would not be satisfactory documentation, as it can be backed up off-site. If using wikis as lab notebooks becomes a popular option this policy may have to change.