

Science Exchange (YC S11): A Central Database For Core Research Facilities - canistr
http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/16/yc-funded-science-exchange-a-central-database-for-core-research-facilities/

======
eam
We actually launched a very similar website with the same goal earlier this
year which is cool because it validates our idea. Works almost the same way!
<http://zombal.com/>

~~~
chrislo
Interesting. A lot of the "challenges" here: <http://zombal.com/scientific-
challenges> seem like generic questions rather than requests for specific
technical work/lab experiments (e.g. "Is dieting an ineffective way to lose
weight?")

Is that a design choice? Is there as much overlap as you think between your
site and the one mentioned in the original post?

~~~
eam
We actually have two formats, one is called Standard Zombs (standard tasks)
which is bid-based just like ScienceExchange. The other is called Bounty Zombs
(Q&A's) similar to <http://prizes.org/> format. If you go to
<http://zombal.com/scientific-challenges> as you pointed out you can filter
out the different types.

------
lbarrow
This is awesome! I'm really happy to see a start-up that contributes to
scientific advancement in a meaningful, direct way. This service offers a
straight-up efficiency improvement over the old method, in which most
universities tried to replicate the core experimental facilities of everyone
else.

------
hardtke
The trouble with this idea is that university researchers have very little
cash and are loathe to part with it. Almost all of their grant money goes to
paying the salaries of people in their lab (fixed costs). If they need to use
a piece of equipment at another institution, the current method is to propose
a collaboration with a researcher at that university. Additionally, any decent
researcher already knows where the specialized equipment resides (they can
figure it out by reading the papers in their field or chatting at
conferences), so there is no need for a centralized database.

~~~
elizabethiorns
As an university researcher (faculty at University of Miami) I agree that
efficiency of spending is very important - what is interesting is that
researchers are often unaware that by making use of economies of scale that
exist at specialized core facilities it is often cheaper than conducting
experiments in house (a good example is cloning).

In some fields salaries might comprise the majority of lab costs but in
biology this is not the case - experimental costs which can be spent as the
researcher sees fit comprise the majority of costs. These costs can be
outsourced to pay core facilities (currently $2B is spent outsourcing
experiments to core facilities annually in the US).

While i agree that it is possible for researchers to establish where
specialized equipment resides by reading papers and chatting with colleagues
at conferences this is obviously inefficient and an incomplete record of
potential providers. A centralized marketplace is a more efficient method for
identifying providers.

~~~
tryitnow
"A centralized marketplace is a more efficient method for identifying
providers."

That's spot on. Access to resources shouldn't be based on "special knowledge"
Success in research should be a result of insights, creativity, and hard work,
not "being in the know." Best of luck.

------
mrjasonroy
I've worked in Scientific Websites (Biocompare the main one) for 6 years, and
I love what Science Exchange is doing. The old guard of distributor networks,
old boy research journals and closed research communities. It's taken a while
but the industry is ready.

Biocompare received the same reaction when they launched - "scientists like
their distributors and the free swag they get", "they'll never order products
themselves". Research is ready for a disruption.

------
bbgm
There are other efforts to create exchanges or marketplaces for scientific
research as well (e.g. <http://www.assaydepot.com/>). Small number, but
definite possibilities. The problem is that a lot of research institutes and
companies have a strong "we need to do everything" mindset that will take time
to overcome

 _edit_ as noted elsewhere, funding models also implicitly encourage this
behavior

------
davidedicillo
I wish I could see more startups like this one, that goes beyond the hot (and
often useless) markets of the moment. Really smart people working to solve
real problems or to optimize our resources. This is what this country need.

------
rdl
I think this is a strong datapoint that YC isn't just random consumer web
features!

------
hirenj
I just had a burl at the site, and threw in a couple of techniques that I
would be interested in, or figured should be generic enough. The site seemed
empty: Microarrays (error page), mass spectrometry, protein purification, NMR,
PCR, biostatistics, bioinformatics.

Are there currently any open projects or facilities renting themselves out?

------
anandkulkarni
Brilliant. I can't wait to see how this expands to other kinds of scientific
outsourcing - problems like scientific software development are highly
specialized and surprisingly easy to outsource, but there's no good way for
specialists to find folks interested in doing this kind of work.

------
tryitnow
It would be cool to see if amateurs/hobbyists could someday make use of
services like this.

------
recampbell
It seems like this could be made into a even more generic experiment service.
Sort of like Mechanical Turk for science experiments, where you pay other
scientists to reproduce your results?

~~~
troymc
I think perhaps you meant to write "...pay other scientists to repeat your
experiments?"

(Their experiment might not reproduce your results. It happens!)

------
rorrr
I really would love to see this work, but I have very very strong doubts. I
hope you've done your market research, and aren't wasting time creating this
website.

I've done scientific research, got published, so I saw this process first
hand.

1) Grants are usually very small, only high end labs and a few science centers
would do this (in my opinion).

2) Scientists are crazy about keeping their research private. There's a lot of
competition and back stabbing going on in the scientific world.

3) Most scientists would find it very hard to rely on somebody they don't
know. Experiments are extremely important, and often there's not much room for
failure. Let's say you're a biologist who worked on a cell line for 3 years,
and you finally have enough material to do an experiment. Would you ship it
somewhere else to save some money?

4) Research projects that cannot be done locally are generally not approved.
Meaning that the whole research project is financed and planned ahead of time.
It's hard enough to get grant money, now imagine your proposed project has
many more moving parts and points of failure.

~~~
hirenj
I wholeheartedly agree on points 2 and 3 - In fact, I've known scientists that
were loathe to send BLAST jobs out to external servers.

Another point is that I've yet to see any core facilities that are running
idle. Our core facility mass spec guys are running 24/7, and that's not even
taking into account the time they lose to the instrument screwing up. In fact,
it'll be hard to see some of the high end equipment running under heavier load
– it's all just too fragile.

~~~
riprock
I emailed my dad (biosci professor) for his opinion on this company, but from
what I know of his work history and past collaborations, points 2 and 3 are
likely road blocks to using this webapp. Trust is definitely a huge deal as I
know he flies in specialized technicians he trusts over more "local" and
likely "cheaper" technicians. Not saying the local technicians aren't
trustworthy or aren't as skilled, but no matter the costs, trust founded on
years of collaboration is irreplaceable.

That said, I'm guessing this kind of service may be more appealing to fresh
PhDs.

------
lurker14
The world needs more YC startups like this.

