The Case for Basic Biological Research

Did the early full genome sequencing of yeast boost gene function discovery?

BACKGROUND

Although the genome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) was the first one of a eukaryote organism that was fully sequenced (in 1996), a complete understanding of the potential of encoded biomolecular mechanisms has not yet been achieved. Here, we wish to quantify how far the goal of a full list of S. cerevisiae gene functions still is.

RESULTS

The scientific literature about S. cerevisiae protein-coding genes has been mapped onto the yeast genome via the mentioning of names for genomic regions in scientific publications. The match was quantified with the ratio of a given gene name's occurrences to those of any gene names in the article. We find that ~ 230 elite genes with ≥ 75 full publication equivalents (FPEs, FPE = 1 is an idealized publication referring to just a single gene) command ~ 45% of all literature. At the same time, about two thirds of the genes (each with less than 10 FPEs) are described in just 12% of the literature (in average each such gene has just ~ 1.5% of the literature of an elite gene). About 600 genes have not been mentioned in any dedicated article. Compared with other groups of genes, the literature growth rates were highest for uncharacterized or understudied genes until late nineties of the twentieth century. Yet, these growth rates deteriorated and became negative thereafter. Thus, yeast function discovery for previously uncharacterized genes has returned to the level of ~ 1980. At the same time, literature for anyhow well-studied genes (with a threshold T10 (≥ 10 FPEs) and higher) remains steadily growing.

CONCLUSIONS

Did the early full genome sequencing of yeast boost gene function discovery? The data proves that the moment of publishing the full genome in reality coincides with the onset of decline of gene function discovery for previously uncharacterized genes. If the current status of literature about yeast molecular mechanisms can be extrapolated into the future, it will take about another ~ 50 years to complete the yeast gene function list. We found that a small group of scientific journals contributed extraordinarily to publishing early reports relevant to yeast gene function discoveries.

The rise to dominance of genetic model organisms and the decline of curiosity-driven organismal research

Curiosity-driven, basic biological research "…performed without thought of practical ends…" establishes fundamental conceptual frameworks for future technological and medical breakthroughs. Traditionally, curiosity-driven research in biological sciences has utilized experimental organisms chosen for their tractability and suitability for studying the question of interest. This approach leverages the diversity of life to uncover working solutions (adaptations) to problems encountered by living things, and evolutionary context as to the extent to which these solutions may be generalized to other species. Despite the well-documented success of this approach, funding portfolios of United States granting agencies are increasingly filled with studies on a few species for which cutting-edge molecular tools are available (genetic model organisms). While this narrow focus may be justified for biomedically-focused funding bodies such as the National Institutes of Health, it is critical that robust federal support for curiosity-driven research using diverse experimental organisms be maintained by agencies such as the National Science Foundation. Using the disciplines of neurobiology and behavioral research as an example, this study finds that NSF grant awards have declined in association with a decrease in the proportion of grants funded for experimental, rather than genetic model organism research. The decline in use of experimental organisms in the literature mirrors but predates the shift grant funding. Today's dominance of genetic model organisms was thus initiated by researchers themselves and/or by publication peer review and editorial preferences, and was further reinforced by pressure from granting agencies, academic employers, and the scientific community.