Open Access
Issue
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 29, Number 3, Juillet/Septembre 2021
Page(s) 262 - 273
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2021063
Published online 03 December 2021
  • Abir-Am P.G., 1992. The politics of macromolecules: molecular biologists, biochemists, and rhetoric, Osiris, 7, 1, 164-191, https://doi.org/10.1086/368709. [Google Scholar]
  • Angeli Aguiton S., 2014. La démocratie des chimères : gouvernement des risques et des critiques de la biologie synthétique, en France et aux États-Unis. Thèse de doctorat en sociologie, Paris, Institut d’études politiques. [Google Scholar]
  • Bailey J.E., 1991. Toward a science of metabolic engineering, Science, 252, 5013, 1668-1675, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2047876. [Google Scholar]
  • Bensaude-Vincent B., 2013. Discipline-building in synthetic biology, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 441, 2, 122-129. [Google Scholar]
  • Bensaude-Vincent B., Simon J., 2008. Chemistry: the impure science, London, Imperial College Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Bensaude-Vincent B., Stengers I., 2001 [1re éd. 1993]. Histoire de la chimie, Paris, La Découverte. [Google Scholar]
  • Beurton P.J., Falk R., Rheinberger H.-J. (Eds), 2000. The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Bonneuil C., 2015. Le siècle du gène, in Bonneuil C., Pestre D. (Eds), Histoire des sciences et des saviors : le siècle des technosciences (depuis 1914), Paris, Seuil, 297-319. [Google Scholar]
  • Calvert J., 2012. Ownership and sharing in synthetic biology: A ‘diverse ecology’of the open and the proprietary?, BioSocieties, 7, 2, 169-187. [Google Scholar]
  • Campos L., 2012. The biobrick™ road, BioSocieties, 7, 115-139, https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2012.6. [Google Scholar]
  • Cassier M., 2002. L’engagement des chercheurs vis-à-vis de l’industrie et du marché : normes et pratiques de recherche dans les biotechnologies, in Alter N. (Ed.), Les logiques de l’innovation. Approche pluridisciplinaire, Paris, La Découverte, 155-182. [Google Scholar]
  • Claeys-Mekdade C., 2006. La participation environnementale à la française : le citoyen, l’État… et le sociologue, VertigO, 7, 3, https://doi.org/10.4000/vertigo.8446. [Google Scholar]
  • Cooper M.E., 2008. Life as surplus. Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era, Seattle, University of Washington Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Creager A.N.H., 1996. Wendell Stanley’s dream of a free-standing biochemistry department at the University of California, Berkeley, Journal of the History of Biology, 29, 331-360, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00127379. [Google Scholar]
  • Chadarevian S. de, Gaudillière J.-P., 1996. The tools of the discipline: biochemists and molecular biologists, Journal of the History of Biology, 29, 327-330, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00127378. [Google Scholar]
  • Gaudillière J.-P., 2002. Inventer la biomédecine. La France, l’Amérique et la production des savoirs du vivant, 1945-1965, Paris, La Découverte. [Google Scholar]
  • Gaudillière J.-P., Rheinberger H.-J. (Eds), 2004. Classical genetic research and its legacy: the mapping cultures of twentieth-century genetics, London/New York, Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  • Gieryn T.F., 1983. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists, American Sociological Review, 48, 6, 781-795, https://doi.org/10.2307/2095325. [Google Scholar]
  • Grossetti M., Detrez C., 2000. Science d’ingénieurs et sciences Pour l’ingénieur : l’exemple du génie chimique, Sciences de la Société, 49, 63-85. [Google Scholar]
  • Hacking I., 2002. Historical ontology, Cambridge (Mass)/London (GB), Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Hilgartner S., 2015. Vanguards, visions and the synthetic biology revolution, in Hilgartner S., Miller C.A., Hagendijk R. (Eds), Science and democracy: making knowledge and making power in the biosciences and beyond, New York/London, Routledge, 33-56. [Google Scholar]
  • Holmes F.L., 1994. Hans Krebs: architect of intermediary metabolism 1933-1937, New York, Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Kaiser D.I. (Ed.), 2010. Becoming MIT: moments of decision, Cambridge/London, MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Kay L.E., 1998. A book of life? How the genome became an information system and DNA a language, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 41, 4, 504-528, https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.1998.0038. [Google Scholar]
  • Kay L.E., 2000. Who wrote the book of life? A history of the genetic code, Stanford, Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Kohler R.E., 1973. The enzyme theory and the origin of biochemistry, Isis, 64, 2, 181-196, https://doi.org/10.1086/351080. [Google Scholar]
  • Molyneux-Hodgson S., Meyer M., 2009. Tales of emergence-synthetic biology as a scientific community in the making, BioSocieties, 4, 2-3, 129-145. [Google Scholar]
  • Morange M., 2013 [1re éd. 1994]. Histoire de la biologie moléculaire, Paris, La Découverte. [Google Scholar]
  • Mullins N.C., 1972. The development of a scientific specialty: the phage group and the origins of molecular biology, Minerva, 10, 1, 51-82, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01881390. [Google Scholar]
  • Ndiaye P., 2001. Du nylon et des bombes : Du Pont de Nemours, le marché et l’État américain, 1900-1970, Paris, Belin. [Google Scholar]
  • O’Malley A., Powell M., Davies A., Calvert J., 2008. Knowledge‐making distinctions in synthetic biology, BioEssays, 30, 1, 57-65. [Google Scholar]
  • Peerbaye A., 2004. La construction de l’espace génomique en France : la place des dispositifs instrumentaux. Thèse de doctorat en sociologie, Cachan, École normale supérieure de Cachan. [Google Scholar]
  • Raimbault B., 2018. À l’ombre des biotechnologies : reformuler la production de savoirs par la bio-ingénierie en France et aux États-Unis. Thèse de doctorat en sociologie, Créteil, Université Paris-Est. [Google Scholar]
  • Raimbault B., Cointet J.-P., Joly P.-B., 2016. Mapping the emergence of synthetic biology, PLOS ONE, 11, 9, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161522. [Google Scholar]
  • Rogers E.M., 1962. Diffusion of innovations, New York, Free Press of Glencoe. [Google Scholar]
  • Shapin S., 2008. The scientific life: a moral history of a late modern vocation, Chicago/London, University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Sismondo S., 2015. Ontological turns, turnoffs and roundabouts, Social Studies of Science, 45, 3, 441-448, https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312715574681. [Google Scholar]
  • Stephanopoulos G.N., 1998. Metabolic engineering. Principles and methodologies, San Diego, Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Stephanopoulos G.N., 2012. Synthetic biology and metabolic engineering, ACS Synthetic Biology, 11, 1, 514-525, https://doi.org/10.1021/sb300094q. [Google Scholar]
  • Strasser B.J., 2003. Who cares about the double helix?, Nature, 422, 803-804, https://doi.org/10.1038/422803a. [Google Scholar]
  • Strasser B.J., 2006. La fabrique d’une nouvelle science. La biologie moléculaire à l’âge atomique, Firenze, Leo S. Olschki. [Google Scholar]
  • Zucker L.G., Darby M.R., 1997. Individual action and the demand for institutions: star scientists and institutional transformation, American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 4, 502-513, https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040004012. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.