Gold Coast , Australia, 1- 3 December 2008

HOME

CALL FOR PAPERS

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS

PROGRAM

POSTER

CONFERENCE COMMITTEES

SPONSORS

REGISTRATION
AND PAYMENT

CONFERENCE VENUE
AND ACCOMMODATION

VISA INFORMATION

TRAVEL INFORMATION

STUDENT BURSARY

ASSOCIATED EVENT - BioSearch08

ABOUT THE
GOLD COAST

CONFERENCE ORGANISERS
Martin Lack &
Associates
E:giw2008@mlaa.com.au
P:+61 7 3878 2974
Suite 5, 39 Tinarra Cres Kenmore Hills
QLD
Australia 4069

GIW Roundtable Workshops

Round table 1 - Monday 1 December 15:50 - 17:00

FORUM ON INNOVATION AND COMMERCIALISATION IN GENOME-SCALE BIOINFORMATICS

Chair/Moderator:
Mervyn Thomas, CEO, Emphron Informatics Pty Ltd, Australia

Expert Panel:
Mr Jeremy Barker,
CEO, Queensland Facility for Advanced Bioinformatics (QFAB)

Dr Jill Gray, Manager,
Technology & Commercialisation, Department of Tourism, Regional
Development & Innovation, Queensland Government

Professor Ming Li,
Founder, Bioinformatics Solutions Ltd (Canada)

Professor Limsoon Wong,
Founder, GeneticXchange (USA) and Molecular Connections (India)

Bioinformatics grew out of the early genome-sequencing projects, and has now developed into an enabling platform essential for life science research. Advances in technology make it possible to deeper questions, but also present challenges arising from the large volumes of data that must be captured, managed, integrated, analysed and visualised. Addressing these challenges demand innovative bioinformatics and information technology solutions. Organisations are tackling these challenges in a variety of ways, and have applied a range of commercialisation models with varying degrees of short- and long-term success. This forum on innovation and commercialization in bioinformatics brought together representatives from industry, government and academia with experience in the commercialisation of bioinformatics to share their thoughts and experience, and to answer questions from conference delegates.

The panellists first shared with GIW delegates their own diverse experiences with bioinformatics commercialisation and innovation. Mervyn, Limsoon and David described their experiences with commercialisation of bioinformatics research and services and various start-up companies, highlighting commercial strategies that were or were not successful. Jill then presented Queensland Government policies supporting innovation and commercialisation, and Jeremy concluded the opening addresses with a description of his key findings from a Churchill Fellowship-supported international study tour of bioinformatics services provision, and the QFAB experience.

A common theme from these presentations involved the commercial challenges faced in the commercial sector for bioinformatics products, including the nature of the product (e.g. software, data or hardware) or service (e.g. data curation or provision of skills-based solutions) to be commercialised. A strength highlighted by the discussions was the sustainability provided by commercial bioinformatics solutions: whereas open-source or in-house bioinformatics can be derailed by loss of key personnel, commercial services can guarantee continuity and quality. It was also noted, however, that open-source solutions can be adequate for some intended uses, and companies have successfully commercialised software in this arena.

The panelists presented a variety of models for bioinformatics commercialisation which had met varying degrees of success. Limsoon contrasted pricing strategies actually used by two different companies: in one, a full product was packaged with a single, expensive price, whereas the second was incremental, with an entry-level price for a basic product and many small increases for additional features; the latter was more successful. Mervyn highlighted the importance of offering cutting-edge products and services in a field such as bioinformatics that changes so rapidly. A skill or technique may be “cutting-edge today, but in six months a commodity”; it is, therefore, imperative for providers to stay at the crest of the wave in order to survive. Ming characterised his company’s strategy as providing cutting-edge services to the more-discerning sector of the market.

Discussions initiated by questions from the floor covered difficulties in assessing the value of research and knowledge-based products to justify government investment in innovation and commercialisation; the importance of preserving commercial value through intellectual property management; managing the potentially competing interests of science and commercialisation; the difficulties in determining an appropriate business model for bioinformatics; and the important role of governments in linking R&D with domestic and international markets. The animated discussion around these and other topics of interest reflect the level of interest in innovation and commercialisation in bioinformatics across a broad sector of the Australian and international community.

The overarching conclusion was that each commercialisation strategy demands a careful assessment of the presented opportunity; no single solution is the absolute answer in every instance, and opportunities can appear, evolve and disappear on a dynamic basis. Astute business judgment determines the blend of nature of the products and/or services that can successfully be commercialised in each case.

The workshop was very well-attended, with no shortage of questions and comments from the audience. Informal discussion continued well after the close of the session.

Specific dot-points:

The challenges:

  • What are we selling? (a product / service / expertise?)
  • Bridging enabling technologies into traditional sectors
  • Innovation as more than just R&D
  • Managing growth, maintaining focus

The benefits:

  • Market responsiveness
  • Sustainability & ongoing development (e.g. of software – contrast is with open-
    source software)

Different models: what has worked

  • Service-for-equity
  • High-level algorithmics for targeted market (“be the best”)
  • Integrated solutions defined by client requirements
  • Incremental pricing model – “take small bites” as more features added
  • Customised integration of laboratory equipment – requires good service provision
  • Information extraction & curation, human post-processing (importance of match
    with available personnel base – education, skills, temperament)

Different models: what hasn’t worked

  • Single expensive package – hard to add new customers (consider what level of
    approval would be needed to purchase – researcher, unit manager, Board)
  • Complex licensing agreements
  • Difficult user interface, weak documentation – customers don’t like


Ideas

  • “Many different models – everything works”
  • Bioinformatics as an enabling technology beyond biotechnology (clinical
    trials, environmental data management, defense sector)
  • Vital role of government in linking R&D with domestic & international markets

Innovation Round Table Workshop Report .pdf

back to program page


Round table 2 - Tuesday 2 December 15:50 - 17:00

FORUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GENOME-SCALE BIOINFORMATICS IN CHINA AND INDIA

Participants:
Professor Ashok Kolaskar (India)
Professor Ming Li (Canada)
Professor Yi-xue Li (China)
Professor Shoba Ranganathan (Australia), chair

Genome-scale biology is generating unprecedented quantities of data relevant to most fundamental and applied areas of the life sciences including agriculture, fisheries and forestry, ecological sciences and biodiversity, human health and disease, and molecular and cellular biotechnology. Existing and new technologies for automated DNA sequencing, gene expression analysis, proteomics, systems analysis, imaging and high-content screening are widely available, adding locally produced data sources to the wealth of information available on-line from international data facilities such as EBI or NCBI. The quantity and complexity of these data requires researchers, institutions and countries to apply information technologies of corresponding scale and sophistication. Bioinformatics encompasses the management and analysis of these data, and development and provision of software tools, and immediately proximate areas of mathematics, statistics and algorithmics.

In Asia, the economically developing countries China and India have been deeply involved in bioinformatics for several decades. With the emergence of these countries as economic superpowers, this is an opportune moment to discuss where these countries are currently poised; what challenges they face; what strategies they have developed or are developing in research, development, infrastructure, education and training for bioinformatics; what the prognosis might be for their future development in this important area; what opportunities are available for international coordination and collaboration; and not least, what broader lessons can be learnt from their development and success in genome informatics.

“Rising bioinformatic stars”

CHINA
The article “Bioinformatics in China: a personal perspective” by Liping Wei and Jun Yu (published in PLoS Computational Biology 4(4):e1000020, April 2008) is absolutely essential reading in this context. The authors present statistics on the growth of publications, and information on online databases, webtools and software developed and maintained in China and on bioinformatics training programs offered by institutions in China.

Specific issues discussed in this workshop included:

  • The recruitment of overseas Chinese back to China
    • Diversity and flexibility of arrangements, e.g. appointment as guest professors
    • Wide range of salaries, start-up packages across institutions
    • The possibility of “reverse culture shock
  • R&D investment plans
    • Multiple national Ministries and bodies are involved
    • Ministry of Science & Technology: 2001-2010 US$3.8B in biological & biomedical
      Research
    • Phase I (2001-05): main fields are bioengineering, gene manipulation, bioinformation
      technologies, biomedical technologies
    • Phase II (2006-10): main fields are industrial technologies, gene manipulation, biomedical technologies, bioinformation & biocomputing technologies(*)
    • (*) National “863” program in bioinformatics, 2006-2010
      Increasing focus on neuro-informatics

  • In addition, there is ongoing investment by other national ministries (Health, Education) and by local governments.
  • New national programs (November 2008):
    • New drugs (US$ 1B) – note that China doesn’t have a large pharmaceutical industry, although international pharmaceutical companies have recently located R&D facilities in China and graduates are finding jobs there.
    • Infectious disease (US$ 800M)
    • 3%-5% of these funds set aside for bioinformatics
    • Funds must be spent in next two years
  • Heavy investment nationally in data production (genome sequencing, metagenomics,
    microbial genomics, functional genomics, proteomics, metabolomics).

Job prospects for bioinformatics graduates in China are good. Some graduates go
overseas, e.g. for further training. Many others are finding jobs within China.


INDIA

Much information is available at the following two websites:

Bioinformatics in India started in 1981
Bioinformatics task force – 1983

  • Recommends a distributed network approach: BioGrid
  • Triggered internet connectivity for scientific research across India
  • More recently, development of a three-tiered system:
    • Centres of Excellence (6 nationally)
    • Distributed information centres (10) and sub-centres (51)
    • Infrastructure facilities (76)

Main components of national strategy (for further detail, see below):

  • Advanced research
  • Development of human resources
  • Academia-industry interface
  • International linkages
  • Advanced Research
    • About 1050 bioinformatics research papers, plus >3000 that use bioinformatics
  • Development of human resources
    • Goal is to train >2000 bioinformaticians per year at all levels
    • Central government support for 7 undergraduate, 28 postgraduate, 12 certificate /
      diploma, 9 PhD and 9 other training programs; many other programs funded by
      private institutions. Quality, especially of the latter, is variable. Hence BINC,
      Bioinformatics National Certification Examination. The BINC is open to anyone,
      including self-taught candidates, but is (intentionally) very difficult and the pass
      rate is “very, very low”. The BINC is implemented in three steps: short-answer
      questions, long-answer questions, and a practical; >50% correct answers is needed
      to proceed to each successive step. Website: http://bioinfo.ernet.in/BINC
    • Discussions are underway with Malaysia about adopting the BINC there.
    • BioGrid as a “virtual classroom”
    • Market is (so far) imperfect in matching graduates to jobs. There is difficulty in
      finding qualified teachers. Some graduates have trouble finding jobs, although
      these are mostly from the programs of questionable quality. There was much
      discussion in the workshop about how to match graduates to jobs lies: Professor
      Kolaskar advised that the principal approach must be through improvement in quality.
  • Academia-industry interface
    • Since 1982, central government support of the bioinformation industry has been about
      US$ 25M in total, of which >$5M is being spent this year.
    • There is a very active ICT industry in India, including large and small companies in
      bioinformatics (e.g. Molecular Connections, already mentioned in the Innovation
      and Commercialisation forum).
    • Note that there is a large drug industry in India. This has attracted bioinformatics and
      software companies from overseas, e.g. Accelrys, to invest in India.
  • International linkages
    • The main partners in bioinformatics at this point are Japan, Australia, and others in
      the Asia-Pacific region; and Europe, particularly Italy.


IBIN – Indian Bioresource Information Network

  • In three regional languages
  • Pictorial, common-language focus to facilitate broad public impact Development of databases in highly relevant: rice, tuberculosis

The Indian government and institutions have noted China’s success in attracting overseas Chinese back to China, and are considering how to emulate this vis-à-vis overseas Indians, whether for permanent relocation or on a part-time basis. One possibility being discussed is that overseas Indians might be made eligible to apply for government research grants.