Request for Information (not funding): Accelerating Open Biomedical Research in Latin America

May be relevant for some of you!


The Open Science team at the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is excited to hear your ideas on accelerating the uptake and implementation of open science best practices in Latin America, particularly among biomedical researchers. Researchers in Latin America, Africa, and other regions of the Global South who are interested in open science often can’t access the tools, software, and training needed to practice it. Today we are announcing a request for information about projects and organizations working to address these issues and accelerate biomedical research in Latin America through open science.

This is a Request for Information (RFI), not a Request for Proposals or Funding Applications.

https://cziscience.medium.com/request-for-information-accelerating-open-biomedical-research-in-latin-america-1d9145c7b13a

Hi All

Has anyone already submitted a response to this RFI discussing open reagents and local production?

The deadline is 29 March and the format for a response is below (800-1000 words). Would anyone (ideally from Latam!) be willing to lead a response from Reclone to make sure that open reagents are on the table? I’m not sure anyone else will be doing this, so it is up to us. :slight_smile:

Jenny

Submitting a response

Through this Request for Information (RFI), we aim to learn more about the projects and organizations that are working to accelerate the uptake of open science for biomedical researchers in Latin America. We are also interested in ideas and opportunities for addressing the challenges identified in practicing open biomedical research in Latin America. Submissions are due by March 29, 2024, 17:00 Pacific Time. The RFI form has the following fields:

  • Title of idea/information
  • Description of problem or challenge (200 words maximum).
  • Description of how this problem or challenge could be addressed. Include who could be involved, resources needed, and a rough time scale (200 words maximum).
  • Describe the value proposition of your idea/solution to Latin American biomedical researchers and any relevant potential outcomes (200 words maximum).
  • (optional) Progress made to date (200 words maximum).

I’m new here and haven’t been able to involve myself in the network as much as I originally wanted to, so I’m a little hesitant to “lead a response”… but if no one’s biting I guess I can give it a go. An RFI doesn’t seem so scary. I started to dump my brain onto here: recloning - Google Docs

Apologies for incomplete sentences… I’m a very nonlinear writer. Feel free to come in and add/edit/suggest. I can only speak of my personal experience. Also, do let me know if to abort or if to move forward with it.

1 Like

Amazing - thanks so much @haldanesghost! I’ll take a look today and welcome others to chip in :slight_smile: . If funders are asking what they need to fund, we don’t want to miss the opportunity to tell them, so this is an important and much appreciated contribution.

FYI: I wrote a response on open science hardware and mentioned reagents and reclone. Nevertheless, it’s a good idea to submit another response just in this topic.

1 Like

Fantastic - thanks very much Tobey :clap:

I am reviewing this now, I should be done in about an hour (maybe sooner but I have a call in 10 min) then I’ll send back here for last minute edits. @haldanesghost will you submit to CZI? I can if you’re busy or don’t get this in time.

Jenny

This is later than I thought but here goes! This needs to be submitted in just over four hours so please add comments in the next three, ideally!

Note that this is the “open science” team, not the science team. So they specifically want to see:

ideas on accelerating the uptake and implementation of open science best practices in Latin America, particularly among biomedical researchers.

I tried to make this distinction, building on the points supplied by @haldanesghost .
The outcomes part needs work. I’ll come back to it shortly.

Jenny

Just FYI that the Reclone Latam WhatsApp group are also reviewing this now and Maria Teresa Damiani (who is lead on the Reclone Argentina Reagent Hub) will submit it. So dive in with your own comments soon if you’d like to contribute!

Submitted!! Thanks all for your efforts. Here are the final answers, we will also publish this as a blog on the Reclone website.

Jenny

Title of idea/information

Reclone Network: open biological reagents for biomedical research

Description of problem or challenge (200 words maximum).

Supply chains for biological tools in Latin America are expensive and prone to delays, sometimes taking weeks to months. Researchers pay significantly more than the US due to supply chain intermediaries and higher shipping costs, and are often restricted from local sharing by the sales contracts and institutional MTAs. These issues, which are not experienced by researchers in higher income countries, introduce inequity in scientific opportunities and reduce productivity for Latin American researchers. They limit the type and scale of research undertaken, and ultimately constrain local ability to respond to public health crises (e.g. COVID) and generate the knowledge needed for science to address all diseases, but especially those disproportionately affecting Latin America e.g. Zika, Dengue or Chagas disease. Openly sharing biomaterials as part of open science practices, and especially sharing the materials needed to produce tools and reagents locally, could help. However, biomaterials are a neglected research output within the broader open science movement. They have their own legal, infrastructural and scientific requirements but researchers, and critically their institutions, have limited awareness or training in best practices for open sharing. Institutions frequently have policies and practices that disincentivise sharing, contributing to limited adoption of open science tools.

Description of how this problem or challenge could be addressed. Include who could be involved, resources needed, and a rough time scale (200 words maximum).

A practical and innovative solution to this problem is building a network of Latin American researchers who develop and use open biological materials and reagents, and can support others to do the same. This could be accomplished by establishing Reagent Hubs at universities; developing and delivering open training on biomaterial sharing for researchers, universities, technology transfer professionals and policy makers; proactive community building; and providing fellowships and other knowledge exchange mechanisms across the region. It would also be important to train and catalyze a community who understand how to develop, share and maintain open biomaterials: e.g. patent laws, material transfer agreements, identifiers, documenting best practices, collaborative development practices, etc. This would involve Latin American universities, research institutes, policy makers, local reagent manufacturers, national and international biological repositories (e.g. Addgene). It would directly accelerate biomedical research through increasing timely and affordable access to essential research tools that are well-documented and properly licensed for research, innovation and manufacture. It could be built up over a period of 3-5 years and the resources needed would range from $30k per annum for delivery of a basic training programme to $300k+ per annum for a fully fledged programme of activities described above.

Describe the value proposition of your idea/solution to Latin American biomedical researchers and any relevant potential outcomes (200 words maximum).

I think this is about on word count, if someone else is happy with these edits and accepts them, we can check

The direct value proposition is significant acceleration and lowering of research costs through enhancing timely and affordable access to reagents, cell lines and microbial strains that underpin experimental biomedical research. We note that a cultural shift towards open science can only be catalyzed by enabling the researchers that share this philosophy to do their research in the first place. Sharing open tools for knowledge production, including biomaterials, will increase the scale and speed of data and publications: the typical focus of open science. Translational activities may benefit even more from open enabling technologies, and one outcome could be universities widening their toolbox of translational mechanisms, which usually focus on proprietary IP to the exclusion of other strategies. Latin American companies and public-private partnerships using open resources to supply researchers, or as a platform to translate findings into products, will incur fewer transaction costs (e.g. onerous MTAs) and could help counter a misconception that open science cannot lead to economic benefit; at the same time as directly helping biomedical research(ers) to benefit society. Overall, potential outcomes include increased access to tools, more rapid basic and translation biomedical research, reduced barriers and cost for sharing across institutions and even sectors.

(optional) Progress made to date (200 words maximum).

Reclone (the Reagent Collaboration Network) was founded in 2020 to convene a community that could address inequities in access to reagents globally. Reclone has since convened five symposia, over 20 community meetings including information on open material transfer agreements and other aspects of open materials, published ten open protocols via protocols.io, and developed an open source Research in Diagnostics DNA Toolkit for manufacturing key molecular biology enzymes, with the involvement of several Latin American researchers. This toolkit, and the Open Enzyme Collection that Reclone now stewards, have already reached 500 researchers in approximately 50 countries. We are currently: i) establishing a Reclone Hub in Argentina following a successful training for 20 researchers from six Latin American countries in Mendoza in Dec 2022 and discussions with local TTOs; ii) running an invitation-only workshop series on best practices for open biosharing, which will generate a report with recommendations including on how to embed biomaterials into more established open science practices; iii) actively contributing to open science discussions at meetings of UNESCO in Latin America, in university TTOs and other fora in the region (e.g. CILAC); iv) encouraging public universities to adopt open science tools for teaching/research on biomedical sciences.

1 Like

Hey, to follow up on this thread. CZI Open Science has interviewed both a reclone representative in Latin America (who exactly?) and me for Open Hardware in the context of advancing biomedical research in Latin America through open science. Apparently they have received about 85 submissions and shortlisted 15 for interviews. They are contemplating of supporting us with funding in some way as a joined category: Regents and Hardware. I think that is a good idea but there is still no additional detail. To scale this in Latin America there is a lot to do and I don’t know yet what resources might be available. To be prepared for this, and perhaps help CZI along in the process, I suggest we connect in the coming weeks to proactively discuss what would be needed for the community and our activities.

In this context, I would also be keen in FINALLY presenting the LIBRE hub initiative (https://librehub.github.io) in a seminar as our communities are still partially disconnected.

Last but not least, I’m just coming back from the Janelia conference on “Microscopy Technology Dissemination to Underserved Communities” (Microscopy Technology Dissemination to Underserved Communities | Janelia Research Campus) with a strong Latin America representation, and have some exciting news/possibility: At Janelia they have an amazing chemistry core facility that synthesises and gives away for free huge libraries of dyes for developmental biology staining and imaging, including super resolution dyes. They would be happy to start a program with (for Latin America and beyond) where they can 1) develop recipes to synthesise dyes that are relevant for our community and share the protocols, and importantly 2) set up a training program for some regional chemists to fly over, get trained, and then make the dyes for the local community. I think this is an amazing opportunity - are there any chemists interested?

Hi Tobey!

María Teresa Damiani from Universidad Nacional de Cuyo has been leading on interviews with CZI to discuss the Reclone RFI submission.

@YKH mentioned there may be space to present at the July Reclone community meeting, and maybe we can all speak then about the synergies? It is nice to hear that CZI are being generally positive about the potential of reagents and hardware. Like you, I’m wary that lumping too many things together might lead to limited progress - the reagents stuff has quite a specific value proposition, where hardware plays a role but is secondary, and science hardware for biomedical research will be quite diverse in the goals and audiences.

Would you be willing to share more on your RFI submission ahead of a meeting?

I feel like, unless resources are very generous, supporting specific ongoing efforts like Reclone for reagents and LIBRE hub for bioimaging, that target specific scientific communities and have already done a lot of the ground work, would be more effective in the short term to deliver positive results for science and also crowd-in other funding.

We really need good examples of open resources reaching adoption at scale and stories of how open science contributed to making specific biomedical research projects bigger/faster/better. Trying to go too broad with too few resources could not move us very far forward, so I fully agree that coordinating could be helpful and hopefully the July meeting is not too late.

I was aware of the Janelia dyes - they are very cool! If you find any chemists for this and they want to synthesise also DNA stains, we made about $500k worth of EvaGreen for $500 in Cambridge and it is a really easy synthesis (so I’m told!!).

Jenny

1 Like

Hi @MakerTobey

As Jenny mentioned, it’ll be great to hear you present your LIBRE Hub initiative, and read more on your RFI submission ahead of setting a meeting with Teresa, Jenny, and you.

My apologies, I mis-remembered, and the next slot to present will be for the (Wed 21) August Reclone Community Meeting! I’ll be happy to message you directly to arrange this separately as well.

Yan Kay

I think we should discuss ways to share across the Reclone and LIBRE hub communities at the community meeting, no need for a separate meeting, at least not on my side :slight_smile:

@MakerTobey if there is something specific to the CZI RFI, it would probably be best to liaise with Teresa - maybe as and when any clear directions come from CZI? I can share her email with you directly.

Jenny

Hi, I agree 100% to keep open hardware and open reagents as separate missions/messages for this call, they have their own goals and barriers. At some point, we discussed with Teresa and the latam reclone members of the current RFI to not include any open hardware work just to keep the message clearer. We have only mentioned past work to provide context on how the work on open reagents has been supported/complemented by OSH efforts, particularly in env monitoring and education (but not to work on open hardware in this proposal) in collab with members of the reGOSH network (REGOSH – Rede Latino Americana de Tecnologias Livres). But I agree that these initiatives on open hardware are very different and have their own barriers, limitations and possibilities compared to the ReClone mission on open reagents. I support the idea to focus on open reagents and the work being pushed in Mendoza/UNC and collabs. There is a big need for this.
Saludos
Fernan

Hi Yan Kay, thanks. I don’t seem to be able to see your first message. But the context across responses is quite clear. Yes I shall follow up with CZI to convey the notion of keeping things separate.
August 21 is not ideal for me but I think I can make it work depending on the timing of the meeting (timezones). Is the time already set for that time of year?