Category Archives: New Media

Curiosity Collider (Vancouver, Canada) presents Neural Constellations: Exploring Connectivity

I think of Curiosity Collider as an informal art/science  presenter but I gather the organizers’ ambitions are more grand. From the Curiosity Collider’s About Us page,

Curiosity Collider provides an inclusive community [emphasis mine] hub for curious innovators from any discipline. Our non-profit foundation, based in Vancouver, Canada, fosters participatory partnerships between science & technology, art & culture, business communities, and educational foundations to inspire new ways to experience science. The Collider’s growing community supports and promotes the daily relevance of science with our events and projects. Curiosity Collider is a catalyst for collaborations that seed and grow engaging science communication projects.

Be inspired by the curiosity of others. Our Curiosity Collider events cross disciplinary lines to promote creative inspiration. Meet scientists, visual and performing artists, culinary perfectionists, passionate educators, and entrepreneurs who share a curiosity for science.

Help us create curiosity for science. Spark curiosity in others with your own ideas and projects. Get in touch with us and use our curiosity events to showcase how your work creates innovative new ways to experience science.

I wish they hadn’t described themselves as an “inclusive community.” This often means exactly the opposite.

Take for example the website. The background is in black, the heads are white, and the text is grey. This is a website for people under the age of 40. If you want to be inclusive, you make your website legible for everyone.

That said, there’s an upcoming Curiosity Collider event which looks promising (from a July 20, 2016 email notice),

Neural Constellations: Exploring Connectivity

An Evening of Art, Science and Performance under the Dome

“We are made of star stuff,” Carl Sagan once said. From constellations to our nervous system, from stars to our neurons. We’re colliding neuroscience and astronomy with performance art, sound, dance, and animation for one amazing evening under the planetarium dome. Together, let’s explore similar patterns at the macro (astronomy) and micro (neurobiology) scale by taking a tour through both outer and inner space.

This show is curated by Curiosity Collider’s Creative Director Char Hoyt, along with Special Guest Curator Naila Kuhlmann, and developed in collaboration with the MacMillan Space Centre. There will also be an Art-Science silent auction to raise funding for future Curiosity Collider activities.

Participating performers include:

The July 20, 2016 notice also provides information about date, time, location, and cost,

7:30pm on Thursday, August 18th 2016. Join us for drinks and snacks when doors open at 6:30pm.

H. R. MacMillan Space Centre (1100 Chestnut Street, Vancouver, BC)

$20.00 sliding scale. Proceeds will be used to cover the cost of running this event, and to fund future Curiosity Collider events. Curiosity Collider is a registered BC non-profit organization. Purchase tickets on our Eventbrite page.

Head to the Facebook event page: Let us know you are coming and share this event with others! We will also share event updates and performer profiles on the Facebook page.

There is a pretty poster,


[downloaded from]


You have till June 30, 2016 to submit your NanoArt and/or art-science-technology paper

A June 9, 2016 news item on Nanotechnology Now features a call for submissions to a NanoArt festival,

The 4th International Festival of NanoArt An Art-Science-Technology special session will be hosted in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, by Babes-Bolyai University between September 8 – 14, 2016 in parallel with the 11th International Conference On Physics Of Advanced Materials (Nanomaterials).

The artworks will be shown in the Hall of Transilvania Philharmonic Cluj-Napoca (…). The exhibition is curated by artist and scientist Cris Orfescu, founder of NanoArt 21 and artist Mirela Suchea, PhD, researcher in the field of nanostructured materials synthesis. The previous editions of the festival were held in Finland, Germany, and Romania. For additional Information, visit:

Call for Papers

An Art-Science-Technology special session will be held during the 11th International Conference on Physics of Advanced Materials (ICPAM 11) between 8th to 14th of September, 2016 at Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

This session focuses on presentations (oral and poster) related to NanoArt, Scientific Photography (microphotography, bio, medical, space, environmental, etc.), Digital Art, Video Art, Computer Graphics, Computer Animation, Game Design, Interactive Art, Net Art, Fractal Art, Algorithmic Art, Virtual Reality, Math Art.

Abstract Submission – Deadline June 30th 2016. Authors are invited to submit a summary of no more than 2000 characters (including spaces) using Conference Online Management System ( …

According to the submission page, there are a few more rules,


  • The presenting author must be a paid registrant.
  • The authors can choose the presentation form of the paper among oral presentation or poster presentation.
  • Members of the Advisory Board can decide to change the final presentation form of the proposed contribution.
  • Authors will be notified of acceptance and mode of presentation of their papers before August 15, 2016.


There is also a call for artworks, from the 4th International Festival of NanoArt webpage,

Open to All Artists and Scientists

Submission deadline July 15, 2016

The following are the general directions for artwork submission. For selection, the artists can send for free up to 5 images in .jpeg format at a resolution of 72 dpi with the longest dimension of maximum 800 pixels. Each image should be sent with an entry form (click to download). The image(s) and entry form(s) should be sent by e-mail to no later than July 15, 2016. The artists will receive the acceptance email by July 30, 2016 and they should submit high resolution (300dpi) .jpeg files of the accepted works in A3 format size (29.7cm x 42cm or 11.69in x 16.54in) no later than July 30, 2016. The selected images will be sent in digital format to the host venue where they will be printed, matted, and framed. The cost TBA should be paid (see ‘Buy Now‘ button bellow) at the time when artists send the high resolution files. After the event, the works may be exhibited in different venues for continuing education. A travel exhibition to different venues is always a possibility. If artists would like to have their print, they will have to pay for handling and shipping.

The festival will be promoted on different venues online, contacts, social media, word-of-mouth. The artists could also promote the competition on their websites and other venues. All selected artworks will be shown in a multimedia presentation on the festival’s page.

Copyright of entered artworks remains with the artist who agrees by submitting his/her works to grant permission to and Cristian Orfescu to use the submitted material in exhibits, on the web site, and other media for marketing and printing for off line marketing. Your permission to display the entry for the festival and later online and in the archives cannot be reversed and its use or removal is entirely at the discretion of

After the artworks have been accepted for the festival, the artists can pay 20 Euro/artwork for printing, framing, matting, and exhibition by … .

Good luck with your submissions.

Next Horizons: Electronic Literature Organization (ELO) 2016
 conference in Victoria, BC

The Electronic Literature Organization (ELO; based at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT]) is holding its annual conference themed Next Horizons (from an Oct. 12, 2015 post on the ELO blog) at the University of Victoria on Vancouver Island, British Columbia from June 10 – June 12, 2016.

You can get a better sense of what it’s all about by looking at the conference schedule/programme,

Friday, June 10, 2016

8:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.: Registration
MacLaurin Lobby A100

8:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m: Breakfast
Sponsored by Bloomsbury Academic

10:00 a.m.-10:30: Welcome
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium A 144
Speakers: Dene Grigar & Ray Siemens

10:30-12 noon: Featured Papers
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium A 144
Chair: Alexandra Saum-Pascual, UC Berkeley

  • Stuart Moulthrop, “Intimate Mechanics: Play and Meaning in the Middle of Electronic Literature”
  • Anastasia Salter, “Code before Content? Brogrammer Culture in Games and Electronic Literature”

12 Noon-1:45 p.m.  Gallery Opening & Lunch Reception
MacLaurin Lobby A 100
Kick off event in celebration of e-lit works
A complete list of artists featured in the Exhibit

1:45-3:00: Keynote Session
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium A 144
“Prototyping Resistance: Wargame Narrative and Inclusive Feminist Discourse”

  • Jon Saklofske, Acadia University
  • Anastasia Salter, University of Central Florida
  • Liz Losh, College of William and Mary
  • Diane Jakacki, Bucknell University
  • Stephanie Boluk, UC Davis

3:00-3:15: Break

3:15-4:45: Concurrent Session 1

Session 1.1: Best Practices for Archiving E-Lit
MacLaurin D010
Chair: Dene Grigar, Washington State University Vancouver

  • Dene Grigar, Washington State University Vancouver
  • Stuart Moulthrop, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
  • Matthew Kirschenbaum, University of Maryland College Park
  • Judy Malloy, Independent Artist

Session 1.2: Medium & Meaning
MacLaurin D110
Chair: Rui Torres, University Fernando Pessoa

  • “From eLit to pLit,” Heiko Zimmerman, University of Trier
  • “Generations of Meaning,” Hannah Ackermans, Utrecht University
  • “Co-Designing DUST,” Kari Kraus, University of Maryland College Park

Session 1.3: A Critical Look at E-Lit
MacLaurin D105
Chair: Philippe Brand, Lewis & Clark College

  • “Methods of Interrogation,” John Murray, University of California Santa Cruz
  • “Peering through the Window,” Philippe Brand, Lewis & Clark College
  • “(E-)re-writing Well-Known Works,” Agnieszka Przybyszewska, University of Lodz

Session 1.4: Literary Games
MacLaurin D109
Chair: Alex Mitchell, National University of Singapore

  • “Twine Games,” Alanna Bartolini, UC Santa Barbara
  • “Whose Game Is It Anyway?,” Ryan House, Washington State University Vancouver
  • “Micronarratives Dynamics in the Structure of an Open-World Action-Adventure Game,” Natalie Funk, Simon Fraser University

Session 1.5: eLit and the (Next) Future of Cinema
MacLaurin D107
Chair: Steven Wingate, South Dakota State University

  • Steve Wingate, South Dakota State University
  • Kate Armstrong, Emily Carr University
  • Samantha Gorman, USC

Session 1.6: Authors & Texts
MacLaurin D101
Chair: Robert Glick, Rochester Institute of Technology

  • “Generative Poems by Maria Mencia,” Angelica Huizar, Old Dominion University
  • “Inhabitation: Johanna Drucker: “no file is ever self-identical,” Joel Kateinikoff, University of Alberta
  • “The Great Monster: Ulises Carrión as E-Lit Theorist,” Élika Ortega, University of Kansas
  • “Pedagogic Strategies for Electronic Literature,” Mia Zamora, Kean University

3:15-4:45: Action Session Day 1
MacLaurin D111

  • Digital Preservation, by Nicholas Schiller, Washington State University Vancouver; Zach Coble, NYU
  • ELMCIP, Scott Rettberg and Álvaro Seiça, University of Bergen; Hannah Ackermans, Utrecht University
  • Wikipedia-A-Thon, Liz Losh, College of William and Mary

5:00-6:00: Reception and Poster Session
University of Victoria Faculty Club
For ELO, DHSI, & INKE Participants, featuring these artists and scholars from the ELO:

  • “Social Media for E-Lit Authors,” Michael Rabby, Washington State University Vancouver
  • “– O True Apothecary!, by Kyle Booten,” UC Berkeley, Center for New Media
  • “Life Experience through Digital Simulation Narratives,” David Núñez Ruiz, Neotipo
  • “Building Stories,” Kate Palermini, Washington State University Vancouver
  • “Help Wanted and Skills Offered,” by Deena Larsen, Independent Artist; Julianne Chatelain, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
  • “Beyond Original E-Lit: Deconstructing Austen Cybertexts,” Meredith Dabek, Maynooth University
  • Arabic E-Lit. (AEL) Project, Riham Hosny, Rochester Institute of Technology/Minia University
  • “Poetic Machines,” Sidse Rubens LeFevre, University of Copenhagen
  • “Meta for Meta’s Sake,” Melinda White


7:30-11:00: Readings & Performances at Felicita’s
A complete list of artists featured in the event

Saturday, June 11, 2016


8:30-10:00: Lightning Round
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium A 144
Chair: James O’Sullivan, University of Sheffield

  • “Different Tools but Similar Wits,” Guangxu Zhao, University of Ottawa
  • “Digital Aesthetics,” Bertrand Gervais, Université du Québec à Montréal
  • “Hatsune Miku,” Roman Kalinovski, Independent Scholar
  • “Meta for Meta’s Sake,” Melinda White, University of New Hampshire
  • “Narrative Texture,” Luciane Maria Fadel, Simon Fraser University
  • “Natural Language Generation,” by Stefan Muller Arisona
  • “Poetic Machines,” Sidse Rubens LeFevre, University of Copenhagen
  • “Really Really Long Works,” Aden Evens, Dartmouth University
  • “UnWrapping the E-Reader,” David Roh, University of Utah
  • “Social Media for E-Lit Artists,” Michael Rabby

10:00: Gallery exhibit opens
MacLaurin A100
A complete list of artists featured in the Exhibit

10:30-12 noon: Concurrent Session 2

Session 2.1: Literary Interventions
MacLaurin D101
Brian Ganter, Capilano College

  • “Glitching the Poem,” Aaron Angello, University of Colorado Boulder
  • “WALLPAPER,” Alice Bell, Sheffield Hallam University; Astrid Ensslin, University of Alberta
  • “Unprintable Books,” Kate Pullinger [emphasis mine], Bath Spa University

Session 2.2: Theoretical Underpinnings
MacLaurin D105
Chair: Mia Zamora, Kean University

  • “Transmediation,” Kedrick James, University of British Columbia; Ernesto Pena, University of British Columbia
  • “The Closed World, Databased Narrative, and Network Effect,” Mark Sample, Davidson College
  • “The Cyborg of the House,” Maria Goicoechea, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Session 2.3: E-Lit in Time and Space
MacLaurin D107
Chair: Andrew Klobucar, New Jersey Institute of Technology

  • “Electronic Literary Artifacts,” John Barber, Washington State University Vancouver; Alcina Cortez, INET-MD, Instituto de Etnomusicologia, Música e Dança
  • “The Old in the Arms of the New,” Gary Barwin, Independent Scholar
  • “Space as a Meaningful Dimension,” Luciane Maria Fadel, Simon Fraser University

Session 2.4: Understanding Bots
MacLaurin D110
Chair: Leonardo Flores, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez

  • Allison Parrish, Fordham University
  • Matt Schneider, University of Toronto
  • Tobi Hahn, Paisley Games
  • Zach Whalen, University of Mary Washington

10:30-12 noon: Action Session Day 2
MacLaurin D111

  • Digital Preservation, by Nicholas Schiller, Washington State University Vancouver; Zach Coble, NYU
  • ELMCIP, Allison Parrish, Fordham University; Scott Rettberg, University of Bergen; David Nunez Ruiz, Neotipo; Hannah Ackermans, Utrecht University
  • Wikipedia-A-Thon, Liz Losh, College of William and Mary

12:15-1:15: Artists Talks & Lunch
David Lam Auditorium MacLaurin A144

  • “The Listeners,” by John Cayley
  • “The ChessBard and 3D Poetry Project as Translational Ecosystems,” Aaron Tucker, Ryerson University
  • “News Wheel,” Jody Zellen, Independent Artist
  • “,” Erik Zepka, Independent Artist

1:30-3:00: Concurrent Session 3

Session 3.1: E-Lit Pedagogy in Global Setting
MacLaurin D111
Co-Chairs: Philippe Bootz, Université Paris 8; Riham Hosny, Rochester Institute of Technology/Minia University

  • Sandy Baldwin, Rochester Institute of Technology
  • Maria Goicoechea, Universidad Complutense de Madrid
  • Odile Farge, UNESCO Chair ITEN, Foundation MSH/University of Paris8.

Session 3.2: The Art of Computational Media
MacLaurin D109
Chair: Rui Torres, University Fernando Pessoa

  • “Creative GREP Works,” Kristopher Purzycki, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
  • “Using Theme to Author Hypertext Fiction,” Alex Mitchell, National University at Singapore

Session 3.3: Present Future Past
MacLaurin D110
Chair: David Roh, University of Utah

  • “Exploring Potentiality,” Daniela Côrtes Maduro, Universität Bremen
  • “Programming the Kafkaesque Mechanism,” by Kristof Anetta, Slovak Academy of Sciences
  • “Reapprasing Word Processing,” Matthew Kirschenbaum, University of Maryland College Park

Session 3.4: Beyond Collaborative Horizons
MacLaurin D010
Chair: Jeremy Douglass, UC Santa Barbara

  • Jeremy Douglass, UC Santa Barbara
  • Mark Marino, USC
  • Jessica Pressman, San Diego State University

Session 3.5: E-Loops: Reshuffling Reading & Writing In Electronic Literature Works
MacLaurin D105
Chair: Gwen Le Cor, Université Paris 8

  • “The Plastic Space of E-loops and Loopholes: the Figural Dynamics of Reading,” Gwen Le Cor, Université Paris 8
  • “Beyond the Cybernetic Loop: Redrawing the Boundaries of E-Lit Translation,” Arnaud Regnauld, Université Paris 8
  • “E-Loops: The Possible and Variable Figure of a Contemporary Aesthetic,” Ariane Savoie, Université du Québec à Montréal and Université Catholique de Louvain
  • “Relocating the Digital,” Stéphane Vanderhaeghe, Université Paris 8

Session 3.6: Metaphorical Perspectives
MacLaurin D107
Chair: Alexandra Saum-Pascual, UC Berkeley

  • “Street Ghosts,” Ali Rachel Pearl, USC
  • “The (Wo)men’s Social Club,” Amber Strother, Washington State University Vancouver
Session 3.7: Embracing Bots
MacLaurin D101

Zach Whalen, Chair

  • Leonardo Flores, University of Puerto Rico Mayagüez Campus
  • Chris Rodley, University of Sydney
  • Élika Ortega, University of Kansas
  • Katie Rose Pipkin, Carnegie Mellon

1:30-3:30: Workshops
MacLaurin D115

  • “Bots,” Zach Whalen, University of Mary Washington
  • “Twine”
  • “AR/VR,” John Murray, UC Santa Cruz
  • “Unity 3D,” Stefan Muller Arisona, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern; Simon Schubiger, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern
  • “Exploratory Programming,” Nick Montfort, MIT
  • “Scalar,” Hannah Ackermans, University of Utrecht
  • The Electronic Poet’s Workbench: Build a Generative Writing Practice, Andrew Koblucar, New Jersey Institute of Technology; David Ayre, Programmer and Independent Artist

3:30-5:00: Keynote

Christine Wilks [emphasis mine], “Interactive Narrative and the Art of Steering Through Possible Worlds”
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium A144

Wilks is British digital writer, artist and developer of playable stories. Her digital fiction, Underbelly, won the New Media Writing Prize 2010 and the MaMSIE Digital Media Competition 2011. Her work is published in online journals and anthologies, including the Electronic Literature Collection, Volume 2 and the ELMCIP Anthology of European Electronic Literature, and has been presented at international festivals, exhibitions and conferences. She is currently doing a practice-based PhD in Digital Writing at Bath Spa University and is also Creative Director of e-learning specialists, Make It Happen.

5:15-6:45: Screenings at Cinecenta
A complete list of artists featured in the Screenings

7:00-9:00: Banquet (a dance follows)
University of Victoria Faculty Club

Sunday, June 12, 2016


8:30-10:00: Town Hall
MacLaurin David Lam Auditorium D144

10:00: Gallery exhibit opens
MacLaurin A100
A complete list of artists featured in the Exhibit

10:30-12 p.m.: Concurrent Session 4

Session 4.1: Narratives & Narrativity
MacLaurin D110
Chair: Kendrick James, University of British Columbia

  • “Narrativity in Virtual Reality,” Illya Szilak, Independent Scholar
  • “Simulation Studies,” David Ciccoricco, University of Otago
  • “Future Fiction Storytelling Machines,” Caitlin Fisher, York University

Session 4.2: Historical & Critical Perspectives
MacLaurin D101
Chair: Robert Glick, Rochester Institute of Technology

  • “The Evolution of E-Lit,” James O’Sullivan, University of Sheffield
  • “The Logic of Selection,” by Matti Kangaskoski, Helsinki University

Session 4.3: Emergent Media
MacLaurin D107
Alexandra Saum-Pascual, UC Berkeley

  • Seasons II:  a case study in Ambient Video, Generative Art, and Audiovisual Experience,” Jim Bizzocchi, Simon Fraser University; Arne Eigenfeldt, Simon Fraser University; Philippe Pasquier, Simon Fraser University; Miles Thorogood, Simon Fraser University
  • “Cinematic Turns,” Liz Losh, College of William and Mary
  • “Mario Mods and Ludic Seriality,” Shane Denson, Duke University

Session 4.4: The E-Literary Object
MacLaurin D109
Chair: Deena Larsen, Independent Artist

  • “How E-Literary Is My E-Literature?,” by Leonardo Flores, University of Puerto Rico Mayagüez Campus
  • “Overcoming the Locative Interface Fallacy,” by Lauren Burr, University of Waterloo
  • “Interactive Narratives on the Block,” Aynur Kadir, Simon Fraser University

Session 4.5: Next Narrative
MacLaurin D010
Chair: Marjorie Luesebrink

  • Marjorie Luesebrink, Independent Artist
  • Daniel Punday, Independent Artist
  • Will Luers, Washington State University Vancouver

10:30-12 p.m.: Action Session Day 3
MacLaurin D111

  • Digital Preservation, by Nicholas Schiller, Washington State University Vancouver; Zach Coble, NYU
  • ELMCIP, Allison Parrish, Fordham University; Scott Rettberg, University of Bergen; David Nunez Ruiz, Neotipo; Hannah Ackermans, Utrecht University
  • Wikipedia-A-Thon, Liz Losh, College of William and Mary

12:15-1:30: Artists Talks & Lunch
David Lam Auditorium A144

  • “Just for the Cameras,” Flourish Klink, Independent Artist
  • “Lulu Sweet,” Deanne Achong and Faith Moosang, Independent Artists
  • “Drone Pilot,” Ian Hatcher, Independent Artist
  • “AVATAR/MOCAP,” Alan Sondheim, Independent Artist

1:30-3:00 : Concurrent Session 5

Session 5.1: Subversive Texts
MacLaurin D101
Chair: Michael Rabby, Washington State University Vancouver

  • “E-Lit Jazz,” Sandy Baldwin, Rochester Institute of Technology; Rui Torres, University Fernando Pessoa
  • “Pop Subversion in Electronic Literature,” Davin Heckman, Winona State University
  • “E-Lit in Arabic Universities,” Riham Hosny, Rochester Institute of Technology/Minia University

Session 5.2: Experiments in #NetProv & Participatory Narratives
MacLaurin D109
Chair: Mia Zamora, Kean University

  • Mark Marino, USC
  • Rob Wittig, Meanwhile… Netprov Studio
  • Mia Zamora, Kean University

Session 5.3: Emergent Media
MacLaurin D105
Chair: Andrew Klobucar, New Jersey Institute of Technology

  • “Migrating Electronic Literature to the Kinect System,” Monika Gorska-Olesinka, University of Opole
  • “Mobile and Tactile Screens as Venues for the Performing Arts?,” Serge Bouchardon, Sorbonne Universités, Université de Technologie de Compiègne
  • “The Unquantified Self: Imagining Ethopoiesis in the Cognitive Era,” Andrew Klobucar, New Jersey Institute of Technology

Session 5.4: E-Lit Labs
MacLaurin D010
Chair: Jim Brown, Rutgers University Camden

  • Jim Brown, Rutgers University Camden
  • Robert Emmons, Rutgers University Camden
  • Brian Greenspan, Carleton University
  • Stephanie Boluk, UC Davis
  • Patrick LeMieux, UC Davis

Session 5.5: Transmedia Publishing
MacLaurin D107
Chair: Philippe Bootz

  • Philippe Bootz, Université Paris 8
  • Lucile Haute, Université Paris 8
  • Nolwenn Trehondart, Université Paris 8
  • Steve Wingate, South Dakota State University

Session 5.6: Feminist Horizons
MacLaurin D110
Moderator: Anastasia Salter, University of Central Florida

  • Kathi Inman Berens, Portland State University
  • Jessica Pressman, San Diego State University
  • Caitlin Fisher, York University

3:30-5:00: Closing Session
David Lam Auditorium MacLaurin A144
Chairs: John Cayley, Brown University; Dene Grigar, President, ELO

  • “Platforms and Genres of Electronic Literature,” Scott Rettberg, University of Bergen
  • “Emergent Story Structures,” David Meurer. York University
  • “We Must Go Deeper,” Samantha Gorman, USC; Milan Koerner-Safrata, Recon Instruments

I’ve bolded two names: Christine Wilks, one of two conference keynote speakers, who completed her MA in the same cohort as mine in De Montfort University’s Creative Writing and New Media master’s program. Congratulations on being a keynote speaker, Christine! The other name belongs to Kate Pullinger who was one of two readers for that same MA programme. Since those days, Pullinger has won a Governor General’s award for her fiction, “The Mistress of Nothing,” and become a professor at the University of Bath Spa (UK).

Registration appears to be open.

5D data storage is forever

Combine nanostructured glass and femtosecond laser writing with five-dimensional digital data and you can wave goodbye to any anxieties about losing information. Researchers at Southampton University (UK) made the announcement in a Feb. 15, 2016 news item on ScienceDaily,

Scientists at the University of Southampton have made a major step forward in the development of digital data storage that is capable of surviving for billions of years.

Using nanostructured glass, scientists from the University’s Optoelectronics Research Centre (ORC) have developed the recording and retrieval processes of five dimensional (5D) digital data by femtosecond laser writing.

A Feb. 15, 2016 University of Southampton press release (also on EurekAlert), which originated the news item, offers more detail,

The storage allows unprecedented properties including 360 TB [Terabyte]/disc data capacity, thermal stability up to 1,000°C and virtually unlimited lifetime at room temperature (13.8 billion years at 190°C ) opening a new era of eternal data archiving. As a very stable and safe form of portable memory, the technology could be highly useful for organisations with big archives, such as national archives, museums and libraries, to preserve their information and records.

The technology was first experimentally demonstrated in 2013 when a 300 kb [kilobit] digital copy of a text file was successfully recorded in 5D.

Now, major documents from human history such as [the] Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Newton’s Opticks, Magna Carta and Kings [sic] James Bible, have been saved as digital copies that could survive the human race. A copy of the UDHR encoded to 5D data storage was recently presented to UNESCO by the ORC at the International Year of Light (IYL) closing ceremony in Mexico.

The documents were recorded using ultrafast laser, producing extremely short and intense pulses of light. The file is written in three layers of nanostructured dots separated by five micrometres (one millionth of a metre).

The self-assembled nanostructures change the way light travels through glass, modifying polarisation of light that can then be read by combination of optical microscope and a polariser, similar to that found in Polaroid sunglasses.

Coined as the ‘Superman memory crystal’, as the glass memory has been compared to the “memory crystals” used in the Superman films, the data is recorded via self-assembled nanostructures created in fused quartz. The information encoding is realised in five dimensions: the size and orientation in addition to the three dimensional position of these nanostructures.

Professor Peter Kazansky, from the ORC, says: “It is thrilling to think that we have created the technology to preserve documents and information and store it in space for future generations. This technology can secure the last evidence of our civilisation: all we’ve learnt will not be forgotten.”

The researchers will present their research at the photonics industry’s renowned SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering Conference in San Francisco, USA this week. The invited paper, ‘5D Data Storage by Ultrafast Laser Writing in Glass’ will be presented on Wednesday 17 February [2016].

The team are now looking for industry partners to further develop and commercialise this ground-breaking new technology.

I have written a number of pieces about digitization, data storage, and memory such as this Jan. 30, 2014 post titled, Does digitizing material mean it’s safe? A tale of Canada’s Fisheries and Oceans scientific libraries. If you scroll down about 50% of the way, you’ll find some material that provides an overview.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights recorded into 5D optical data

Universal Declaration of Human Rights recorded into 5D optical data


An open science policy platform for Europe and a technology programme for the arts community

Thanks to David Bruggeman’s Dec. 8, 2015 posting on his Pasco Phronesis blog, I’ve gotten some details about the European Union’s (EU) Open Science Policy Platform and about a science, technology and arts programme to connect artists with scientists (Note: Links have been removed),

Recently the European Commission’s [EC] Directorate-General for Research and Development announced the development of an Open Science Policy Platform.  In the European Commission context, Open Science is one of its Digital Government initiatives, but this Policy Platform is not technical infrastructure.  It is a communications mechanism for stakeholders in open access, new digital tools for research and joint arts and research communities.

David goes on to contrast the open science situation in the US with the approach being taken in the EU. Unfortunately, I do not have  sufficient knowledge of the Canadian open science scene to offer any opinion.

Getting back to Europe, there is some sort of a government document from the EC’s Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (RTD [Research and Technological Development]) titled, New policy initiative: The establishment of an Open Science Policy Platform,

The Open Science Policy Platform will be governed by a Steering Group composed of top-leading individuals of (European) branch organisations with the required decision-power. DG RTD will seek to appoint individuals from the following stakeholder groups:

-academies of science;
-research funding bodies;
-research performing organisations;
-Citizen Science;
-scientific publication associations;
-Open Science platforms and intermediaries;
-(research) libraries.

The Open Science Policy Platform will advise the Commission on the development and implementation  of open science policy on the basis of the draft European Open Science Agenda.

The steering group for this platform will be set up in early 2016 according to the undated document describing this new policy initiative.

Regarding the arts project mentioned earlier, it’s part of the European Union’s Digital Agenda for Europe, from the ICT (information and communication technology) and art – the StARTS platform webpage on the European Commission’s website,

Scientific and technological skills are not the only forces driving innovation. Creativity and the involvement of society play a major role in the innovation process and its endorsement by all. In this context, the Arts serve as catalysts in an efficient conversion of Science and Technology knowledge into novel products, services, and processes.

ICT can enhance our capacity to sense the world, but an artwork can reach audiences on intrinsic emotional levels.

The constant appropriation of new technologies by artists allows them to go further in actively participating in society. By using ICT as their medium of expression, artists are able to prototype solutions, create new products and make new economic, social and business models. Additionally, by using traditional mediums of expression and considering the potentials of ICT, they propose new approaches to research and education.

The European Commission recognised this by launching the Starts programme: Innovation at the nexus of Science, Technology and the Arts  (Starts) to foster the emergence of joint arts and research communities. It supported the ICT Art Connect study which lead the way to the StARTS initiative by revealing new evidence for the integration of the Arts as an essential and fruitful component within research and innovation in ICT.

A Call for a Coordination and support action (CSA) has been launched to boost synergies between artists, creative people and technologists under Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2016/17.

You can find out more on events that are taking place throughout Europe. Follow StARTS on Facebook or via #StartsEU.

You can find the Starts website here.

Performances Tom Hanks never gave

The answer to the question, “What makes Tom Hanks look like Tom  Hanks?” leads to machine learning and algorithms according to a Dec. 7, 2015 University of Washington University news release (also on EurekAlert) Note: Link have been removed,

Tom Hanks has appeared in many acting roles over the years, playing young and old, smart and simple. Yet we always recognize him as Tom Hanks.

Why? Is it his appearance? His mannerisms? The way he moves?

University of Washington researchers have demonstrated that it’s possible for machine learning algorithms to capture the “persona” and create a digital model of a well-photographed person like Tom Hanks from the vast number of images of them available on the Internet.

With enough visual data to mine, the algorithms can also animate the digital model of Tom Hanks to deliver speeches that the real actor never performed.

“One answer to what makes Tom Hanks look like Tom Hanks can be demonstrated with a computer system that imitates what Tom Hanks will do,” said lead author Supasorn Suwajanakorn, a UW graduate student in computer science and engineering.

As for the performances Tom Hanks never gave, the news release offers more detail,

The technology relies on advances in 3-D face reconstruction, tracking, alignment, multi-texture modeling and puppeteering that have been developed over the last five years by a research group led by UW assistant professor of computer science and engineering Ira Kemelmacher-Shlizerman. The new results will be presented in a paper at the International Conference on Computer Vision in Chile on Dec. 16.

The team’s latest advances include the ability to transfer expressions and the way a particular person speaks onto the face of someone else — for instance, mapping former president George W. Bush’s mannerisms onto the faces of other politicians and celebrities.

Here’s a video demonstrating how former President Bush’s speech and mannerisms have mapped onto other famous faces including Hanks’s,

The research team has future plans for this technology (from the news release)

It’s one step toward a grand goal shared by the UW computer vision researchers: creating fully interactive, three-dimensional digital personas from family photo albums and videos, historic collections or other existing visuals.

As virtual and augmented reality technologies develop, they envision using family photographs and videos to create an interactive model of a relative living overseas or a far-away grandparent, rather than simply Skyping in two dimensions.

“You might one day be able to put on a pair of augmented reality glasses and there is a 3-D model of your mother on the couch,” said senior author Kemelmacher-Shlizerman. “Such technology doesn’t exist yet — the display technology is moving forward really fast — but how do you actually re-create your mother in three dimensions?”

One day the reconstruction technology could be taken a step further, researchers say.

“Imagine being able to have a conversation with anyone you can’t actually get to meet in person — LeBron James, Barack Obama, Charlie Chaplin — and interact with them,” said co-author Steve Seitz, UW professor of computer science and engineering. “We’re trying to get there through a series of research steps. One of the true tests is can you have them say things that they didn’t say but it still feels like them? This paper is demonstrating that ability.”

Existing technologies to create detailed three-dimensional holograms or digital movie characters like Benjamin Button often rely on bringing a person into an elaborate studio. They painstakingly capture every angle of the person and the way they move — something that can’t be done in a living room.

Other approaches still require a person to be scanned by a camera to create basic avatars for video games or other virtual environments. But the UW computer vision experts wanted to digitally reconstruct a person based solely on a random collection of existing images.

To reconstruct celebrities like Tom Hanks, Barack Obama and Daniel Craig, the machine learning algorithms mined a minimum of 200 Internet images taken over time in various scenarios and poses — a process known as learning ‘in the wild.’

“We asked, ‘Can you take Internet photos or your personal photo collection and animate a model without having that person interact with a camera?'” said Kemelmacher-Shlizerman. “Over the years we created algorithms that work with this kind of unconstrained data, which is a big deal.”

Suwajanakorn more recently developed techniques to capture expression-dependent textures — small differences that occur when a person smiles or looks puzzled or moves his or her mouth, for example.

By manipulating the lighting conditions across different photographs, he developed a new approach to densely map the differences from one person’s features and expressions onto another person’s face. That breakthrough enables the team to ‘control’ the digital model with a video of another person, and could potentially enable a host of new animation and virtual reality applications.

“How do you map one person’s performance onto someone else’s face without losing their identity?” said Seitz. “That’s one of the more interesting aspects of this work. We’ve shown you can have George Bush’s expressions and mouth and movements, but it still looks like George Clooney.”

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper presented at the conference in Chile,

What Makes Tom Hanks Look Like Tom Hanks by Supasorn Suwajanakorn, Steven M. Seitz, Ira Kemelmacher-Shlizerman for the 2015 ICCV conference, Dec. 13 – 15, 2015 in Chile.

You can find out more about the conference here.

Upcoming PoetryFilm appearances and events

It’s been a while since I last (in a March 17, 2015 post) featured PoetryFilm. Here’s the latest from the organization’s Oct. 2015 newsletter,

  • I have been invited to join the International Jury for the CYCLOP International Videopoetry Festival, 20-22 November 2015 (Kiev, Ukraine)
  • PoetryFilm Paradox events, featuring poetry films about love, as part of the BFI LOVE season, 6 and 22 December 2015 (London, UK)
  • PoetryFilm screening + Zata Banks in conversation with filmmaker Roxana Vilk at The Scottish Poetry Library, 3 December 2015 (Scotland, UK)
  • I have been invited to judge the Carbon Culture Review poetry film competition (USA)
  • poetryfilmkanal in Germany recently invited me to write an article about the poetry film artform – it can be read here

FYI, the “I” in the announcement’s text is for Zata Banks, the founder and director of PoetryFilm since 2002.

There’s more about the CYCLOP International Videopoetry Festival in a Sept. 13, 2015 posting on the PoetryFilm website,

*The 5th CYCLOP International Videopoetry Festival will take place on 20 – 22 November 2015 in Ukraine (Kyiv). The festival programme features video poetry-related lectures, workshops, round tables, discussions, presentations of international contests and festivals, as well as a demonstration of the best examples of Ukrainian and world videopoetry, a competitive programme, an awards ceremony and other related projects.

One of the projects is a new Contest for International poetry films within the framework of the CYCLOP festival. The International Jury: Alastair Cook (Filmpoem Festival, Edinburgh, Scotland), Zata Banks (PoetryFilm, London, United Kingdom), Javier Robledo (VideoBardo, Buenos Aires, Argentina), John Bennet (videopoet, USA),  Alice Lyons (Videopoet, Sligo, Ireland), Sigrun Hoellrigl (Art Visuals & Poetry, Vienna, Austria), Lucy English (Liberated Words, Bristol, United Kingdom), Tom Konyves (poet, video producer, educator and a pioneer in the field of videopoetry, British Columbia, Canada), Polina Horodyska (CYCLOP Videopoetry Festival, Kyiv, Ukraine) and Thomas Zandegiacomo (ZEBRA Poetry Film Festival, Berlin, Germany).

*Copy taken from the CYCLOP website

You can find the CYCLOP website here but you will need Ukrainian language reading skills.

I can’t find a website for the Carbon Culture Review poetry film competition or a webpage for it on the Carbon Culture Review website but  here’s what they have to say about themselves on the journal’s About page,

Carbon Culture Review is a journal at the intersection of new literature, art, technology and contemporary culture. We define culture broadly as the values, attitudes, actions and inventions of our global society and its subcultures in our modern age. Carbon Culture Review is distributed in the United States and countries throughout the world by Publisher’s Distribution Group, Inc. and Annas International as well as digitally through 0s&1s, Magzter and Amazon. CCR is a member of Councils of Literary Magazines and Presses and also publishes monthly online issues.

The last item from the announcement that I’m highlighting is Zata’s essay for poetryfilmkanal ,

Poetry films offer creative opportunities for exploring new semiotic modes and for communicating messages and meanings in innovative ways. Poetry films open up new methods of engagement, new audiences, and new means of self-expression, and also provide rich potential for the creation, perception and experience of emotion and meaning.

We are surrounded by communicative signs in literature, art, culture and in the world at large. Whilst words represent one system of communicating, there are many other ways of making meanings, for instance, colour semiotics, typographic design, and haptic, olfactive, gustatory and durational experiences – indeed, a comprehensive list could be infinite. The uses of spoken and written words to communicate represent just two approaches among many. Through using meaning-making systems other than words, by communicating without words, or by not using words alone, we can bypass these direct signifiers and tap directly into pools of meaning, or the signifieds, associated with those words. Different combinations of systems, or modes, can reinforce each other, render meanings more complex and subtle, or contrast with each other to illuminate different perspectives. Powerful juxtapositions, associations and new meanings can therefore emerge.

The essay is a good introduction for beginners and a good refresher for those in need. Btw, I understand Zata got married in March 2015. Congratulations to Zata and Joe!

arts@CERN: welcomes new artist-resident (Semiconductor) and opens calls for new artist-residencies

It’s exciting to hear that CERN (European Particle Physics Laboratory) has an open call for artists but it’s also a little complicated, so read carefully. From an Oct. 12, 2015 CERN press release,

CERN1 has today announced three new open calls giving a chance to artists to immerse themselves in the research of particle physics and its community. Two new international partners have joined the Accelerate @ CERN programme: the Abu Dhabi Music & Arts Foundation (ADMAF) from UAE2 and Rupert, the centre for Art and Education from Vilnius, Lithuania3. The Collide @ CERN Geneva award is also now calling for entries, continuing the fruitful collaboration with The Republic and Canton of Geneva and the City of Geneva4. Last but not least, the Collide @ CERN Ars Electronica winning artists start their residency at CERN this week.

“Science and the arts are essential parts of a vibrant, healthy culture, and the Arts @ CERN programme is bringing them closer together,” said CERN DG Rolf Heuer. “With CERN’s diverse research programme, including the LHC’s second run getting underway, there’s no better place in the world to do that than here.”

With the support of The Abu Dhabi Music & Arts Foundation (ADMAF), Arts @ CERN gives the chance for an Emirati visual artist to come to CERN for a fully funded immersion in high-energy physics in the Accelerate @ CERN programme. Thanks to the support by Rupert, Centre for Art and Education in Vilnius, the same door opens to Lithuanian artists who wish to deepen their knowledge in science and use it as a source of inspiration for their work. Each of the two open calls begins today for artists to win a one-month research stay at CERN. Applications can be submitted up to 11 January 2016.

Funded by The Republic and Canton of Geneva and The City of Geneva, Collide @ CERN Geneva has operated successfully since 2012. Arts @ CERN announces the fourth open call for artists from Geneva, this time celebrating the city’s strength in digital writing. Today, the competition opens to writers [emphasis mine] who were born, live or work in the Geneva region, and would like to win a three-month residency where scientific and artistic creativity collide.  The winner will also receive a stipend of 15,000CHF. The deadline for applications is 11 January 2016.

“Arts and science have always been interlinked as major cultural forces, and this is the fundamental reason for CERN to continue to proactively pursue this relationship,” said Mónica Bello, Head of Arts @ CERN. “The arts programme here continues to flourish.”

Semiconductor, the artist duo formed by Ruth Jarman and Joe Gerdhardt, are the winners of the Collide @ CERN Ars Electronica award5. Out of 161 projects from 53 countries, the jury6 awarded Semiconductor for their broad sense of speculation, complexity and wonder, using strategies of analysis and translation of the phenomena into tangible and beautiful forms. Their two-month Collide @ CERN residency starts on 12 October 2015.


1. CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, is the world’s leading laboratory for particle physics. It has its headquarters in Geneva. At present, its member states are Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Romania is a Candidate for Accession. Serbia is an Associate Member in the pre-stage to Membership. Pakistan and Turkey are Associate Members. India, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, the European Union, JINR and UNESCO have observer status.

6. Members of the Jury for Collide @ CERN Ars Electronica were: Mónica Bello (ES), Michael Doser (AT), Horst Hörtner (AT), Gerfried Stocker (AT) and Mike Stubbs (UK).

Here are a few more links,

Online submissions for artists

Further information:

Arts@CERN website
Accelerate@CERN website
Collide@CERN Facebook site (link is external)
Twitter ArtsAtCern (link is external)

Good luck!

Is the medium the message? Virtual museums and the the user’s experience technology experience

A Sept. 21, 2015 Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) news release by Matt Swayne (also on EurekAlert) puts a different spin on art/science (Note: Links have been removed),

Museum curators planning to develop virtual exhibits online should choose communication and navigation technologies that match the experience they want to offer their visitors, according to a team of researchers.

“When curators think about creating a real-world exhibit, they are thinking about what the theme is and what they want their visitors to get out of the exhibit,” said S. Shyam Sundar, Distinguished Professor of Communications and co-director of the Media Effects Research Laboratory. “What this study suggests is that, just like curators need to be coherent in the content of the exhibit, they need to be conscious of the tools that they employ in their virtual museums.” [emphasis mine]

For some reason that phrase “need to be conscious of the tools that they employ” reminds of Marshall McLuhan and his dictum “the medium is the message.” Here’s more about study from the news release,

Many museum curators hope to create an authentic experience in their online museums by using technology to mimic aspects of the social, personal and physical aspects of a real-world museum experience. However, a more-is-better approach to technology may actually hinder that authentic experience, the researchers suggest.

In a study, visitors to an online virtual art museum found that technology tools used to communicate about and navigate through the exhibits were considered helpful when they were available separately, but less so when they were offered together. The researchers tested customization tools that helped the participants create their own art gallery, live-chat technology to facilitate communication with other visitors and 3-D tool navigation tools that some participants used to explore the museum.

The participants’ experiences often depended on what tools and what combinations of tools they used, according to the researchers, who released their findings in a recent issue of the International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction.

The news release goes on to provide some examples of when technologies do not mesh together for a good experience,

“When live chat and customization are offered together, for example, the combination of tools may be perceived to have increased usability, but it turns out using either customization or live chat separately was greater than either both functions together, or neither of the functions,” said Sundar. “We saw similar results not just with perceived usability, but also with sense of control and agency.”

The live chatting tool gave participants a feeling of social presence in the museum, but when live chatting was used in conjunction with the 3D navigation tool, the visitor had less of a sense of control, said Sundar, who worked with Eun Go, assistant professor of broadcasting and journalism, Western Illinois University; Hyang-Sook Kim, assistant professor of mass communication and media communication studies, Towson University and Bo Zhang, doctoral candidate in mass communications, Penn State.

Similarly, participants indicated the live chatting function lessened the realistic experience of the 3D tool, according to the researchers, who suggested that chatting may increase the user’s cognitive burden as they try to navigate through the site.

Each of these tools carries unique meaning for users, Sundar said. While customization provides an individualized experience, live-chatting signals a social experience of the site.

“Our data also suggest that expert users prefer tools that offer more agency or control to users whereas novices appreciate a variety of tools on the interface,” he added.

Users may react to these tools on other online platforms, not just during visits to online museums, Sundar said.

“We might be able to apply this research on tools you might add to news sites, for example, or it could be used to improve educational sites and long-distance learning,” he added. “You just have to be careful about how you deploy the tools because more is not always better.”

The researchers recruited 126 participants for the study. The subjects were assigned one of eight different website variations that tested their reactions to customization, live chat, 3D navigation and combinations of those tools during their visit to a virtual version of the Museum of Modern Art. The museum’s artworks were made available through the Google Art Project.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Communicating Art, Virtually! Psychological Effects of Technological Affordances in a Virtual Museum by S. Shyam Sundar, Eun Goc, Hyang-Sook Kim, & Bo Zhang. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
Volume 31, Issue 6, 2015 pages 385-401 DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1033912 Accepted author version posted online: 15 Apr 2015

This paper is behind a paywall.

ISEA (International Symposium on Electronic Arts) 2015 and the pronoun ‘I’

The 2015 International Symposium on Electronic Arts (or ISEA 2015) held  in Vancouver ended yesterday, Aug. 19, 2015. It was quite an experience both as a participant and as a presenter (mentioned in my Aug. 14, 2015 posting, Sneak peek: Steep (1): a digital poetry of gold nanoparticles). Both this ISEA and the one I attended previously in 2009 (Belfast, Northern Ireland, and Dublin, Ireland) were jampacked with sessions, keynote addresses, special events, and exhibitions of various artworks. Exhilarating and exhausting, that is the ISEA experience for me and just about anyone else I talked to here in Vancouver (Canada). In terms of organization, I have to give props to the Irish. Unfortunately, the Vancouver team didn’t seem to have given their volunteers any training and technical difficulties abounded. Basics such as having a poster outside a room noting what session was taking place, signage indicating which artist’s work was being featured, and good technical support (my guy managed to plug in a few things but seemed disinclined or perhaps didn’t have the technical expertise (?) to troubleshoot prior to the presentation) seemed elusive (a keynote presentation had to be moved due to technical requirements [!] plus no one told the volunteer staff who consequently misdirected people). Ooops.

Despite the difficulties, people remained enthusiastic and that’s a tribute to both the participants and, importantly, the organizers. The Vancouver ISEA was a huge undertaking with over 1000 presentation submissions made and over 1800 art work submissions. They had 900+ register and were the first ISEA able to offer payment to artists for their installations. Bravo to Philippe Pasquier, Thecla Schiphorst, Kate Armstrong, Malcolm Levy, and all the others who worked hard to pull this off.

Moving on to ‘I’, while the theme for ISEA 2015 was Disruption, I noticed a number of presentations focused on biology and on networks (in particular, generative networks). In some ways this parallels what’s happening in the sciences where more notice is being given to networks and network communications of all sorts.  For example, there’s an Aug. 19, 2015 news item on ScienceDaily suggesting that our use of the pronoun ‘I’ may become outdated.  What we consider to be an individual may be better understood as a host for a number of communities or networks,

Recent microbiological research has shown that thinking of plants and animals, including humans, as autonomous individuals is a serious over-simplification.

A series of groundbreaking studies have revealed that what we have always thought of as individuals are actually “biomolecular networks” that consist of visible hosts plus millions of invisible microbes that have a significant effect on how the host develops, the diseases it catches, how it behaves and possibly even its social interactions.

“It’s a case of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts,” said Seth Bordenstein, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt University, who has contributed to the body of scientific knowledge that is pointing to the conclusion that symbiotic microbes play a fundamental role in virtually all aspects of plant and animal biology, including the origin of new species.

In this case, the parts are the host and its genome plus the thousands of different species of bacteria living in or on the host, along with all their genomes, collectively known as the microbiome. (The host is something like the tip of the iceberg while the bacteria are like the part of the iceberg that is underwater: Nine out of every 10 cells in plant and animal bodies are bacterial. But bacterial cells are so much smaller than host cells that they have generally gone unnoticed.)

An Aug. 19, 2015 Vanderbilt University news release, which originated the news item, describes this provocative idea (no more ‘I’)  further,

Microbiologists have coined new terms for these collective entities — holobiont — and for their genomes — hologenome. “These terms are needed to define the assemblage of organisms that makes up the so-called individual,” said Bordenstein.

In the article “Host Biology in Light of the Microbiome: Ten Principles of Holobionts and Hologenomes” published online Aug. 18 [2015] in the open access journal PLOS Biology, Bordenstein and his colleague Kevin Theis from the University of Michigan take the general concepts involved in this new paradigm and break them down into underlying principles that apply to the entire field of biology.

They make specific and refutable predictions based on these principles and call for other biologists to test them theoretically and experimentally.

“One of the basic expectations from this conceptual framework is that animal and plant experiments that do not account for what is happening at the microbiological level will be incomplete and, in some cases, will be misleading as well,” said Bordenstein.

The first principle they advance is that holobionts and hologenomes are fundamental units of biological organization.

Another is that evolutionary forces such as natural selection and drift may act on the hologenome not just on the genome. So mutations in the microbiome that affect the fitness of a holobiont are just as important as mutations in the host’s genome. However, they argue that this does not change the basic rules of evolution but simply upgrades the types of biological units that the rules may act upon.

Although it does not change the basic rules of evolution, holobionts do have a way to respond to environmental challenges that is not available to individual organisms: They can alter the composition of their bacterial communities. For example, if a holobiont is attacked by a pathogen that the host cannot defend against, another symbiont may fulfill the job by manufacturing a toxin that can kill the invader. In this light, the microbes are as much part of the holobiont immune system as the host immune genes themselves.

According to Bordenstein, these ideas are gaining acceptance in the microbiology community. At the American Society of Microbiology General Meeting in June [2015], he convened the inaugural session on “Holobionts and Their Hologenomes” and ASM’s flagship journal mBio plans to publish a special issue on the topic in the coming year. [emphases are mine]

However, adoption of these ideas has been slower in other fields.

“Currently, the field of biology has reached an inflection point. The silos of microbiology, zoology and botany are breaking down and we hope that this framework will help further unify these fields,” said Bordenstein.

Not only will this powerful holistic approach affect the basic biological sciences but it also is likely to impact the practice of personalized medicine as well, Bordenstein said.

Take the missing heritability problem, for example. Although genome-wide studies have provided valuable insights into the genetic basis of a number of simple diseases, they have only found a small portion of the genetic causes of a number of more complex conditions such as autoimmune and metabolic diseases.

These may in part be “missing” because the genetic factors that cause them are in the microbiome, he pointed out.

“Instead of being so ‘germophobic,’ we need to accept the fact that we live in and benefit from a microbial world. We are as much an environment for microbes as microbes are for us,” said Bordenstein.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Host Biology in Light of the Microbiome: Ten Principles of Holobionts and Hologenomes by Seth R. Bordenstein and Kevin R. Theis. PLOS DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002226 Published: August 18, 2015

This is an open access paper.

It’s intriguing to see artists and scientists exploring ideas that resonate with each other. In fact, ISEA 2015 hosted a couple of sessions on BioArt, as well as, having sessions devoted to networks. While, I wasn’t thinking about networks or biological systems when I wrote my poem on gold nanoparticles, I did pose this possibility (how we become the sum of our parts) at the end:

Nature’s alchemy
breathing them
eating them
drinking them
we become gold
discovering what we are

As for how Raewyn handled the idea, words fail, please do go here to see the video here.