It feels very cliché to say we live in a connected world. But… it’s true isn’t it? We hold our beloved smartphones all day long. Some wear bracelets that track our physical activity. Objects in our homes are connected, allowing us to remotely control the air conditioning systems, lights, and windows blinds. This constant flow of data is supposed to make our lives more efficient, or help us gain special insights on our health. The technology gives us a probably unprecedented feeling of control, and data driven lifestyle is getting traction amongst the general public (us scientists included). But could we say as much for what we do in our laboratories?
Surprisingly, our lab instruments are commonly left alone without any supervision, hoping they will function “as normal” throughout their lifetimes. But of course that is wishful thinking. Most laboratories are like any other buildings. Temperature changes, humidity changes, vibrations comes and go. People turn off equipment by mistake, or turn a knob in a direction or the other. All of it can happen without the experimentalist even noticing.
In these circumstances, it is difficult to truly understand in which environmental conditions experiments are performed. Reproducibility can suffer from this lack of control. When scientists report in protocols experiments at room temperature, what does that truly mean? The “room temperature” in the un-airconditioned laboratory in southern France (Montpellier) I spent my PhD years in was certainly different than the one in my current Northern European research institute.
TetraScience is a company amongst a few others thinking of bringing a new layer of information to modern experimentation. Powered by cloud based software, TetraScience collects and stores data from scientific instruments so that you know what conditions your lab is running in. For instance, TetraScience will stream data from freezers and incubators directly to your mobile device indicating vital parameters such as temperature, humidity CO2 levels, and will notify you when something goes wrong.
TetraScience helps you get concrete idea of how their technology can help researchers through a few case studies. For instance, a happy TetraScience user has been Mathieu Gonidec, a chemist in the Whiteside’s Lab at the Harvard Department of Chemistry.
“When running experiments, especially those stretching over long periods of time, an error can derail your timeline. Even worse, you are often unsure of what exactly went wrong”, Mathieu says.
In one instance, Mathieu was running a series of experiments where something seemed to not be right. What he discovered from looking at the historical temperature log was that the temperature was fluctuating in swings of 20-30 degrees from the set temperature, causing the experiment to fail.
TetraScience allowed Mathieu to identify the issue, resolve the problem immediately, and move onto the next step of his research.
Here’s another exemple. Jon Barnes is a synthetic chemist in the Johnson Research Group at the MIT Department of Chemistry also told his TetraScience story.
He and his lab seeks to develop new methodologies for the construction and modification of complex material libraries. For years, Jon had been frustrated by the lack of control over simple reaction parameters including temperature monitoring, the ability to turn off a hot plate, as well as to activate a syringe pump from a remote location. Day-to-day experiments often required constant in-person monitoring, which was both inefficient and frustrating.
TetraScience’s real-time monitoring data has granted Jon’s Industry lab peace of mind to start experiments at the end of the day, knowing that they will be immediately alerted if anything goes wrong so they can come back to the lab and take corrective action.
If anyone had tried their services, I would love to hear about your experience. Feel free to comment below!