Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30709688›Full record

ArticleStudies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences2019

Between mice and sheep: Biotechnology, agricultural science and animal models in late-twentieth century Edinburgh.

Miguel García-Sancho, Dmitriy Myelnikov

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Miguel García-SanchoScience, Technology and Innovation Studies, University of Edinburgh, UK. Electronic address: miguel.gsancho@ed.ac.uk.
Dmitriy MyelnikovCentre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, University of Manchester, UK.

Funding

European Research Council 678757Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 205393Wellcome Trust 205393/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the ways in which a group of scientists in Edinburgh worked across mice and sheep during the last quarter of the twentieth century. With this local episode, we show the utility of an interspecies perspective to investigate recent historical transformations in the life sciences. We argue that the emergence of animal biotechnology was the result of interactions between neoliberal policymakers, science administrators, molecular biologists, agricultural breeders, and the laboratory and farm organisms with which they worked. During the early 1980s, all these actors believed that the exportation of genetic engineering techniques from mice to farm animals would lead to more effective breeding programmes in the agricultural sciences. However, the circulation of people, money, expertise and infrastructures that the experiments required, as well as the practical constraints of working with mice and sheep, resisted a simple scaling-up from one organism to the other. This displaced the goals of the Edinburgh scientists from the production of transgenic sheep to stem cell research and human regenerative medicine. We account for this unexpected shift by looking at the interplay between science policy and its implementation via collective action and bench work across different organisms. The emergence of animal biotechnology in Edinburgh also provides historiographical insights on the birth of Dolly the sheep and, more generally, on the interactions between the molecular and the reproductive sciences at the fall of the twentieth century.

Indexed as

Animals, Genetically ModifiedMiceModels, AnimalSheepAgricultureAnimalsBiotechnologyGenetic EngineeringHistory, 20th CenturyHumansRegenerative MedicineScotlandStem Cell ResearchAgricultural biotechnologyAnimal modelDollyEmbryologyGeneticNeoliberalism

Identifiers

PMID30709688
PMCPMC6551221

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.