Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 773–791 | Cite as

Causal isolation robustness analysis: the combinatorial strategy of circadian clock research

Article

Abstract

This paper distinguishes between causal isolation robustness analysis and independent determination robustness analysis and suggests that the triangulation of the results of different epistemic means or activities serves different functions in them. Circadian clock research is presented as a case of causal isolation robustness analysis: in this field researchers made use of the notion of robustness to isolate the assumed mechanism behind the circadian rhythm. However, in contrast to the earlier philosophical case studies on causal isolation robustness analysis (Weisberg and Reisman in Philos Sci 75:106–131, 2008; Kuorikoski et al. in Br J Philos Sci 61:541–567, 2010), robustness analysis in the circadian clock research did not remain in the level of mathematical modeling, but it combined it with experimentation on model organisms and a new type of model, a synthetic model.

Keywords

Modeling Robustness analysis Causal isolation Synthetic biology Circadian clock 

References

  1. Alon U, Surette M, Barkai N, Leibler S (1999) Robustness in bacterial chemotaxis. Nature 397(6715):168–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkai N, Leibler S (2000) Circadian clocks limited by noise. Nature 403(20):267–268Google Scholar
  3. Bechtel W, Abrahamsen A (2010) Dynamic mechanistic explanation: computational modeling of circadian rhythms as an examplar for cognitive science. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part A 41:321–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bechtel W, Abrahamsen A (2011) Complex biological mechanisms: Cyclic, oscillatory, and autonomous. In: Hooker CA (ed) Philosophy of complex systems. Handbook of the philosophy of science, vol 10. Elsevier,Oxford, pp 257–285Google Scholar
  5. Calcott B (2011) Wimsatt and the robustness family: Review of Wimsatt’s Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings. Biol Philos 26:281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cartwright N (1989) Nature’s capacities and their measurement. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Cartwright N (1999) The vanity of rigour in economics: theoretical models and Galilean experiments. Centre for philosophy of natural and social science. Discussion paper series 43/99. (Published also in Fontaine P, Leonard R (eds) The Experiment in the History of Economics. Routledge, 2005)Google Scholar
  8. Elowitz M, Leibler S (2000) A synthetic oscillatory network of transcriptional translation. Nature 403(6767):335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldbeter A (1995) A model of circadian Oscillations in the Drosophila period protein (PER). In Proceedings of the R Soc B 261:319–324Google Scholar
  10. Goldbeter A (1996) Biochemical Oscillations and cellular rhythms: the molecular bases of periodic and chaotic behavior. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodwin B (1963) Temporal organization in cells. Academic Press, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Hardin PE, Hall JC, Rosbash M (1990) Feedback of the Drosophila period gene product on circadian cycling of its messenger RNA levels. Nature 343:536–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Humphreys P (2002) Computational models. Philos Sci 69:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Humphreys P (2004) Extending ourselves: computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacob F, Monod J (1961) Genetic regulatory mechanisms in the synthesis of proteins. J Mol Biol 3:318–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kerner E (1957) A statistical mechanics of interacting biological species. Bul of Math Biophys 19:121–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kitano H (2004) Biological robustness. Nat Rev Genet 5:826–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knuuttila T (2009) Isolating representations versus credible constructions? Economic modeling in theory and practice. Erkenntnis 70:59–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knuuttila T, Loettgers A (in press) The productive tension: mechanisms vs. templates in modeling the phenomena. In: Humphreys P, Imbert C (eds) Representations, models, and simulations. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Konopka RJ, Benzer S (1971) Clock mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci 68(9):2112–2116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krugman P (1991) Increasing returns and economic geography. J Political Econ 99(3):483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kuorikoski J, Lehtinen A, Marchionni C (2010) Economic modeling as robustness analysis. Br J Philos Sci 61:541–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levins R (1966) The strategy of model building in population biology. Am Sci 54:421–431Google Scholar
  24. Levins R (1968) Evolution in changing environments; some theoretical explorations. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  25. Levins R (1993) A response to Orzack and Sober: formal analysis and the fluidity of science. Q Rev Biol 68:547–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Loettgers A (2007) Model organisms, mathematical models, and synthetic models in exploring gene regulatory mechanisms. Biol Theor 2:134–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mäki U (1992) On the method of isolation in economics. Poznan Stud Philos Sci Humanities 26:319–354Google Scholar
  28. Mäki U (2005) Models are experiments, experiments are models. J Econ Meth 12:303–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mäki U (2009) MISSing the world. Models as isolations and credible surrogate systems. Erkenntnis 70:29–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mäki U (2011) Models and the locus of their truth. Synthese 180:47–63Google Scholar
  31. Mill JS (1843) A system of logic. Longman, Green, & co, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Mitchell SD (2008) Exporting causal knowledge in evolutionary and developmental biology. Philos Sci 75:697–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morrison M (2008) Fictions, representations, and reality. In: Suárez M (ed) Fictions in science: philosophical essays on modeling and idealization. Routledge, New York & London, pp 110–135Google Scholar
  34. Orzack SH, Sober E (1993) A Critical assessment of Levins’s The strategy of model building in population biology (1966). Q Rev Biol 68:533–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parker W (2009) Does matter really matter? Computer simulations, experiments and materiality. Synthesis 169(3):483–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stegenga J (2009) Robustness, discordance, and relevance. Philos Sci 76:650–661Google Scholar
  37. Stelling J, Sauer U, Szallasi Z, Doyle FJ III, Doyle J (2004) Robustness of cellular functions. Cell 118:675–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Strevens M (2008) Depth: an account of scientific explanation. Harvard University Press, HarvardGoogle Scholar
  39. Strogatz S (1994) Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: with applications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering. Perseus Pub, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  40. Sugden R (2000) Credible worlds: the status of theoretical models in economics. J Econ Meth 7(1):169–201Google Scholar
  41. Taguchi G, Chowdhury S, Taguchi S (2000) Robust engineering. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Volterra V (1927) Variations and fluctuations in the numbers of coexisting animal species. In: Scudo FM, Ziegler JR (eds) 1978, The golden age of theoretical ecology: 1923–1940. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–236Google Scholar
  43. Wagner A (2007) Robustness & evolvability in living systems (Princeton Studies in Complexity). Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  44. Weisberg M (2006a) Forty years of “The strategy”: Levins on model building and idealization. Biol Philos 21:623–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weisberg M (2006b) Robustness analysis. Philos Sci 73:730–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Weisberg, M (2007) Three kinds of idealization. J Philos CIV(12):639–659Google Scholar
  47. Weisberg M, Reisman K (2008) The robust Volterra principle. Philos Sci 75:106–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Whittaker E (1941) Vito Volterra. Obit Notices Fellows Royal Soc London 3:691–729Google Scholar
  49. Wimsatt WC (1981) Robustness, reliability, and overdetermination. In: Brewer MB, Collins B (eds) Scientific inquiry and the social sciences–A volume in honor of Donald T. Campbell. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 124–163Google Scholar
  50. Wimsatt WC (2007) Re-engineering philosophy for limited beings: approximations to reality. Harvard Univ, Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Winfree AT (1967) Biological rhythms and the behavior of populations of coupled Oscillators. J Theoret Biol 16:15–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Woodward J (2006) Some varieties of robustness. J Econ Meth 13:219–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.California Institute of TechnologyPasadenaUSA

Personalised recommendations