The practicality of science

A few weeks ago, the research group I lead at New York University announced an interesting discovery. For a long time, it was thought that rice evolved twice — once in China and another time separately in India. My research team had been exploring the rice genome, and based on genetic data we now think rice arose maybe 8,200 years ago. This is consistent with archaeological work that says it comes only from China. .

The BBC News, the UPI wire news agency, and the Forbes Magazine blog reported on our work. It also appeared in some media outlets in the Philippines.

While many congratulated us on our work, I found it interesting that a substantial number of people expressed their disappointment that our study was so “basic.” They felt our work did not seem to do anything to help feed the hungry, develop new varieties that were resistant to pests, or generally do something practical.

That got me thinking.

First of all, there is a practical side to this apparent piece of trivia that rice originated once and not multiple times. Over the last decade, new methods of mapping genes have been developed. These require us to know beforehand what is the evolutionary history of the crop species, or the methods don’t work. Knowing how a species evolves helps us and breeders design better gene mapping strategies to develop new and improved varieties.

But let us say for the moment that our discovery has no immediate practical benefit. Is there anything wrong with that?

People usually don’t ask a singer or actor or film director what is the practical benefit of what they do — does their work feed or clothe the poor? They don’t inquire of a writer or painter what is the use of their novel or art. But when I talk to non-scientists, especially in the Philippines, almost everyone asks me what is the practical benefit of my research.

Many seem to think of science only in practical terms, and see no point in understanding the universe just for its own sake. But for many of us, what drives our work is a curiosity to know something new about the world.

Now almost all scientists I know are interested in seeing if our research can help solve important practical problems. Pause for a moment, however, about some scientific research in the Philippines that may excite your own imagination. 

I have colleagues at UP Diliman who are using molecular tools to trace where the Filipino really came from and how we got here to this archipelago. There is an internationally renowned astronomer working out in Cebu who three years ago discovered a new Red Spot on Jupiter. A group of Filipino scientists are about to embark on what they dub the Philippine Expedition, to explore our country and see what new plant and animal species remain undiscovered in our forests and seas.

There are no direct practical benefits to these scientific discoveries or research (although I can think of a lot of indirect practical gains). But the world would be a duller place if we did not know all that basic science teaches us about the universe.

We also know that basic science is the foundation for all applied research. Without science done in pursuit of pure knowledge, we really won’t have much of the modern technology we now enjoy.

In a world with so many problems, those who do research to directly solve the issues we face are a valuable resource we should nurture. But we also need scientists who just want to advance knowledge — they enrich our culture with their discoveries, and without them we wouldn’t have as much technology as we now do.

We discovered that rice arose only once and probably came from China about 8,200 years ago. This new discovery will help us design new ways to map important genes in the rice genome. We are now working with plant breeders to use this and our other basic research findings to help track what genes are involved in the evolution of rice varieties adapted to different environments. We think this will eventually lead to helping farmers and feeding a hungry world.

On the impractical side, our discovery also helps us understand how human cultures behaved several thousand years ago, and understand a little better the rules of how species evolve. 

And I think that’s really fascinating, and I hope you do, too.

* * *

Michael Purugganan is the co-director of the Center for Genomics and Systems Biology and the Dorothy Schiff Professor of Genomics at New York University. He graduated BS Chemistry at UP Dilliman in 1985, and went to the US to get an MA at Columbia and Ph.D. at the University of Georgia. He has been awarded a Sloan Young Investigator Award, a Guggenheim Fellowship, honored by the Ayala Foundation/PhilDev Foundation and is a member of PAASE. You can learn more about his impractical research at http://puruggananlab.bio.nyu.edu/