Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33218019›Full record

ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Biological Practices and Fields, Missing Pieces of the Biomimetics' Methodological Puzzle.

Eliot Graeff, Nicolas Maranzana, Améziane Aoussat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Education Pipeline of Biomimetics and Its Challenges.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Eliot GraeffLaboratory of Product Design and Innovation, LCPI, Arts et Metiers Institute of Technology HESAM University, 151 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-8437-5699
Nicolas MaranzanaLaboratory of Product Design and Innovation, LCPI, Arts et Metiers Institute of Technology HESAM University, 151 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1982-9041
Améziane AoussatLaboratory of Product Design and Innovation, LCPI, Arts et Metiers Institute of Technology HESAM University, 151 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facing current biomimetics impediments, recent studies have supported the integration within biomimetic teams of a new actor having biological knowledge and know-how. This actor is referred to as the "biomimetician" in this article. However, whereas biology is often considered a homogenous whole in the methodological literature targeting biomimetics, it actually gathers fundamentally different fields. Each of these fields is structured around specific practices, tools, and reasoning. Based on this observation, we wondered which knowledge and know-how, and so biological fields, should characterize biomimeticians. Following the design research methodology, this article thus investigates the operational integration of two biological fields, namely ecology and phylogenetics, as a starting point in the establishment of the biomimetician's biological tools and practices. After a descriptive phase identifying specific needs and potential conceptual bridges, we presented various ways of applying biological expertise during biomimetic processes in the prescriptive phase of the study. Finally, we discussed current limitations and future research axes.

Indexed as

biological toolsbiomimeticsbiomimicryinnovationpluridisciplinarity

Identifiers

PMID33218019
PMCPMC7709660

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.