Book contents
- Integrative Bioinformatics for Biomedical Big Data
- Integrative Bioinformatics for Biomedical Big Data
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- 1 No-Boundary Thinking
- 2 Artificial Intelligence Approaches to No-Boundary Thinking
- 3 No-Boundary Thinking in Undergraduate Bioinformatics Education
- 4 No-Boundary Course Developments
- 5 No-Boundary Thinking for Transcriptomics and Proteomics Big Data
- 6 Pharmacogenomics
- 7 The Ethical Status of an AI
- 8 Computational Thinking and No-Boundary Thinking
- 9 Carving Nature at the Joints: Which Joints?
- Index
- References
3 - No-Boundary Thinking in Undergraduate Bioinformatics Education
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 September 2023
Book contents
- Integrative Bioinformatics for Biomedical Big Data
- Integrative Bioinformatics for Biomedical Big Data
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- 1 No-Boundary Thinking
- 2 Artificial Intelligence Approaches to No-Boundary Thinking
- 3 No-Boundary Thinking in Undergraduate Bioinformatics Education
- 4 No-Boundary Course Developments
- 5 No-Boundary Thinking for Transcriptomics and Proteomics Big Data
- 6 Pharmacogenomics
- 7 The Ethical Status of an AI
- 8 Computational Thinking and No-Boundary Thinking
- 9 Carving Nature at the Joints: Which Joints?
- Index
- References
Summary
Bioinformatics is one of the fastest growing fields in the twenty-first century. Over the last few decades, studies of biology have moved from low-throughput hands-on experiments to computational analyses of the increasingly complex tree of life. Alongside this change are multiple challenges. The first challenge exists in interdisciplinary collaboration. The current interdisciplinary collaboration model is still bounded by individual disciplines and is far from seamless. The second challenge is big data. How to extract the useful data from the haystack of big data? The third challenge is human infrastructure. We need to educate the next generation of scientists as early as possible to solve the interdisciplinary and complex biology problems with computational resources. To address these challenges, we propose a No-Boundary Thinking approach to teach the next generation of scientists. To explain it, we present three No-Boundary Thinking teaching and research models. All of them are embedded into undergraduate computer science curriculums.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Integrative Bioinformatics for Biomedical Big DataA No-Boundary Thinking Approach, pp. 25 - 44Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Banta, LM, Crespi, EJ, Nehm, RH, et al., 2012. Integrating genomics research throughout the undergraduate curriculum: a collection of inquiry-based genomics lab modules. CBE Life Sci Educ, 11:203–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beheshti, I, Demirel, H, Matsuda, H, 2017. Classification of Alzheimer’s disease and prediction of mild cognitive impairment-to-Alzheimer’s conversion from structural magnetic resource imaging using feature ranking and a genetic algorithm. Comput Biol Med, 83(1):109–119.Google Scholar
Berger, B, Daniels, NM, Yu, YW, 2016. Computational biology in the 21st century: scaling with compressive algorithms. Commun ACM, 59(8):72–80.Google Scholar
Bialek, W, Botstein, D, 2004. Introductory science and mathematics education for 21st-century biologists. Science, 303(5659):788–790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, BS, Christmann, JL, Thatcher, EF, 2004. Bioinformatics for undergraduates: steps toward a quantitative bioscience curriculum. Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 34:180–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, B, Pak, A, 2006. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: definitions objectives and evidence of effectiveness. Clin Invest Med, 29(6):351–364.Google ScholarPubMed
Ditty, JL, Kvaal, CA, Goodner, B, et al., 2010. Incorporating genomics and bioinformatics across the life sciences curriculum. PLoS Biol, 8(8):1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dyer, BD, LeBlanc, M, 2002. Meeting report: incorporating genomics research into undergraduate curricula. Cell Biol Educ, 1:101–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greengard, S, 2014. How computers are changing biology. Commun ACM, 57(5):21–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, AG, Harmon, JE, Reidy, M, 2007. Communicating Science: The Scientific Article from the 17th Century to the Present. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Howard, DR, Miskowski, JA, Grunwald, SK, Abler, ML, 2007. Assessment of a bioinformatics across life science curricula initiative. Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 35:16–23.Google Scholar
Huang, X, Bruce, B, Buchan, A, et al., 2013. No-boundary thinking in bioinformatics research. BioData Min, 6:19–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irwin, JJ, Shoichet, BK, 2016. Docking screens for novel ligands conferring new biology. J Med Chem, 59(9):4103–4120.Google Scholar
Kessler, LG, Barnhart, HX, Buckler, AJ, et al., 2015. The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions. Stat Meth Med Res, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280214537333CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khoury, MJ, Ioannidis, JPA, 2014. Big data meets public health. Science, 346(6213):1054.Google Scholar
Labov, JB, Reid, AH, Yamamoto, KR, 2009. Integrated biology and undergraduate science education: a new biology education for the twenty-first century? CBE Life Sci Educ, 9(1):10–16.Google Scholar
Lopatto, D, Hauser, C, Jones, CJ, et al., 2014. A central support system can facilitate implementation and sustainability of a classroom-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in genomics. CBE Life Sci Educ, 13(4):711–723.Google Scholar
Maloney, M, Parker, J, LeBlanc, M, et al., 2010. Bioinformatics and the undergraduate curriculum. CBE Life Sci Educ, 9:172–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merelli, E, Armano, G, Cannata, N, et al., 2006. Agents in bioinformatics, computational and systems biology. Brief Bioinformat, 8(1):45–59.Google Scholar
Miskowski, JA, Howard, DR, Abler, ML, Grunwald, SK, 2007. Design and implementation of an interdepartmental bioinformatics program across life science curricula. Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 35:9–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Needleman, SB, Wunsch, CD, 1970. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. J Mol Biol, 48(3):443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, SH, Hancock, MP, McCullough, J, 2007. Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316:548–549.Google Scholar
Shaffer, CD, Alvarez, C, Bailey, C, et al., 2010. The Genomics Education Partnership: successful integration of research into laboratory classes at a diverse group of undergraduate institutions. CBE Life Sci Educ, 9:55–69.Google Scholar
Tymann, P, Congdon, CB, Dougherty, J, et al., 2005. Computer science and bioinformatics. In Steen, LA (ed.), Math & Bio: Linking Undergraduate Disciplines. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America, pp. 75–82.Google Scholar
Venter, JC, Adams, MD, Myers, EW, et al., 2001. The sequence of the human genome. Science, 291(5507):1304–1351.Google Scholar
Zhernakova, A, Kurilshikov, A, Bonder, MJ, et al., 2016. Population-based metagenomics analysis reveals markers for gut microbiome composition and diversity. Science, 352(6285):565–569.Google Scholar