PubMed · 16106521
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Rohannes Rath, Bernhard Jank. 2005-08-12. Using ethics to fight bioterrorism.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16106521/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Modern research techniques have led to exponential growth in the volume and complexity of scientific data. Consequently, managing these volumes securely and efficiently has become a major challenge. While all research domains face these challenges, life science research is particularly affected because current approaches often rely on a large set of different file formats, with metadata stored in separated databases or spreadsheets. This leads to fragmented datasets, orphaned data, and compromised research reproducibility. Traditional solutions also force researchers to choose between security and accessibility, with encrypted files preventing selective access and indexed formats lacking adequate security for sensitive data. These limitations are particularly problematic in large-scale genomic studies where researchers must decompress multi-gigabyte files to access specific regions, creating computational bottlenecks and inefficient network usage when working with cloud-stored datasets. We introduce Pithos, a next-generation file format specifically designed for scientific data management in distributed cloud environments. The format uses content-defined chunking to enable efficient deduplication across distributed storage systems, thereby reducing storage costs and bandwidth requirements. The append-only structure ensures data immutability and allows for incremental updates without compromising content. Benchmark results show that Pithos outperforms existing solutions in read and write performance, with comparable or improved storage efficiency.
In a 1991 editorial in The FASEB Journal, Robert W. Krauss commented on a recent report of the Presidential Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program (Augustine report). He concluded that, although a manned mission to Mars with life sciences as the priority was endorsed by the Committee, it failed to deal realistically with one huge gap; biological sciences have never been given high priority. According to Krauss, this left a void that will cripple, perhaps fatally, any early effort to ensure long-term survival on any mission of extended duration. The gap included insufficient flight time for fundamental biological space research and insufficient funds. Krauss expressed his opinions 15 years ago. Have we better knowledge of space biology now? This question becomes more acute now that President George W. Bush recently proposed a manned return to the moon by 2015 or 2020, with the moon to become our staging post for manned missions to Mars. Will we be ready so soon? A review of the progress in the last 15 years suggests that we will not. Because of the Columbia disaster, flight opportunities for biological sciences in shuttle spacelabs and in Space Station laboratories compete with time for engineering problems and construction. Thus, research on gravity, radiation, and isolation loses out to problems deemed to be of higher priority. Radiation in deep space and graded gravity in space with on board centrifuges are areas that must be studied before we undertake prolonged space voyages. Very recent budgetary changes within National Aeronautics and Space Administration threaten to greatly reduce the fundamental space biology funds. Are we ready for a trip to Mars? Like Krauss 15 years ago, I think not for some time.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.