“Conducted Properly, Published Incorrectly”: The Evolving Status of Gel Electrophoresis Images Along Instrumental Transformations in Times of Reproducibility Crisis

Berichte Zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 46 (2-3):233-258 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

For the last ten years, within molecular life sciences, the reproducibility crisis discourse has been embodied as a crisis of trust in scientific images. Beyond the contentious perception of “questionable research practices” associated with a digital turn in the production of images, this paper highlights the transformations of gel electrophoresis as a family of experimental techniques. Our aim is to analyze the evolving epistemic status of generated images and its connection with a crisis of trust in images within that field.From the 1980s to the 2000s, we identify two key innovations (precast gels and gel docs) leading to a “two‐tiered” gel electrophoresis with different standardization procedures, different epistemic statuses of the produced images and different ways of generating (dis)trust in images. The first tier, exemplified by differential gel electrophoresis (DIGE), is characterized by specialized devices processing images as quantitative data. The second tier, exemplified by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), is described as a routine technique making use of image as qualitative “virtual witnessing.” The difference between these two tiers is particularly apparent in the ways images are processed, even though both tiers involve image digitization. Our account thus highlights different views on reproducibility within the two tiers. Comparability of images is insisted upon in the first tier while traceability is expected in the second tier. It is striking that these differences occur not only within the same scientific field, but even within the same family of experimental techniques. In the second tier, digitization entails distrust, whereas it implies a collective sentiment of trust in the first tier.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-01

Downloads
1,118 (#19,731)

6 months
178 (#24,823)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alexandre Hocquet
Université de Lorraine

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Objectivity.Lorraine Daston & Peter Galison - 2007 - Cambridge, Mass.: Zone Books. Edited by Peter Galison.
Re-Thinking Reproducibility as a Criterion for Research Quality.Sabina Leonelli - 2018 - Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 36 (B):129-146.
Facts, artifacts, and mesosomes: Practicing epistemology with the electron microscope.Nicolas Rasmussen - 1993 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 24 (2):227-265.

View all 12 references / Add more references