university of copenhagen Mind the Gut-displaying microbiome research through artistic collaboration Bencard, Adam; Whiteley, Louise Emma Published in: Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease DOI: 10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433 Publication date: 2018 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Document license: CC BY Citation for published version (APA): Bencard, A., & Whiteley, L. E. (2018). Mind the Gut-displaying microbiome research through artistic collaboration. Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, 29(2), [1555433]. https://doi.org/10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433 Download date: 09. aug.. 2020
Transcript
u n i ve r s i t y o f co pe n h ag e n
Mind the Gut-displaying microbiome research through artistic collaboration
Bencard, Adam; Whiteley, Louise Emma
Published in:Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease
DOI:10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433
Publication date:2018
Document versionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Document license:CC BY
Citation for published version (APA):Bencard, A., & Whiteley, L. E. (2018). Mind the Gut-displaying microbiome research through artisticcollaboration. Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, 29(2), [1555433].https://doi.org/10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433
Mind the Gut—displaying microbiome researchthrough artistic collaboration
Adam Bencard & Louise Emma Whiteley
To cite this article: Adam Bencard & Louise Emma Whiteley (2018) Mind�the�Gut—displayingmicrobiome research through artistic collaboration, Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, 29:2,1555433, DOI: 10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433
Mind the Gut—displaying microbiome research through artistic collaborationAdam Bencard and Louise Emma Whiteley
Medical Museion, Institute of Public Health and Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research, University ofCopenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
ABSTRACTThis paper presents the Mind the Gut exhibition, opened in 2017 at the Medical Museion, theUniversity of Copenhagen's museum for the culture and history of medicine. It is an experi-mental exhibition combining science, art, and history in an examination of the relationshipbetween mind and gut, including the trillions of microbes that inhabits them. Mind the Gutwas the result of a 2-year-long research and curatorial process, which began in 2015 whenMuseion was awarded the Bikuben Foundation Vision Award. The exhibition brings togetherthe long history of attempts to understand and intervene in the relationship between mindand gut, between emotions and digestion with cutting-edge biomedical research, andincludes the perspectives of science, medicine, and personal experience, via a combinationof artworks, historical objects from the Medical Museion collections, items from laboratories,and individual stories. The exhibition is organized around different ways the body has beenhandled in order to intervene in interactions between mind, gut, and bacteria, includingimaging, electrifying, feeding, drugging, and opening surgically. This paper outlines some ofthe thoughts on science communication that motivated the exhibition, discussing why thedisplays emphasize the exploratory over the explanatory. Also discussed are several artisticcollaborations that formed part of the displays. Ultimately, Mind the Gut is created to bea public space that encourages reflection and curiosity, by showing how biomedicine fits intosocial, cultural, historical, and directly personal contexts. The exhibition does not aim toprovide answers about what food the visitors should eat or what the truth of how gut andbrain interactions might be. Rather, it emphasizes process over result, hopefully encouragingthe visitors to ask their own questions of the relationship between mind and gut, betweenbody and microbes.
ARTICLE HISTORYReceived 10 October 2018Revised 27 November 2018Accepted 28 November 2018
KEYWORDSExhibitions; sciencecommunication; medicalhumanities; history andphilosophy; art and science
In October 2017, the Mind the Gut exhibition openedat Medical Museion, offering glimpses into thestrange history of our attempts to understand andtreat the relationship between brain and belly (seeFigure 1, Figure 2). Medical Museion is theUniversity of Copenhagen’s museum for the cultureand history of medicine, integrated with an interdis-ciplinary research group and housing the‘Metabolism in Culture’ program of the NovoNordisk Foundation Center for Basic MetabolicResearch.
Mind the Gut was the result of a 2-year-longexperimental research and curatorial process, whichbegan in 2015 when Museion was awarded theBikuben Foundation Vision Award. The VisionAward is, unlike most exhibition awards, not givenretrospectively to an already completed exhibition,but is given to a promising and experimental exhibi-tion concept. The winning institution is granted 3 millDKK to realize the concept, turning it from an ideainto a finished exhibition. The time and means pro-vided by the award allowed us to engage in a properlyexperimental curation process, and an exhibition that
cut across science, art, and history. This paper out-lines some of the ideas that went into its making,including thoughts on science communication andthe relationship between art and science, witha focus on the unique challenges presented byattempts to display the microbial realm and its rela-tionship to our human-sized experience.
As the title suggests, Mind the Gut examines therelationship between mind and gut, between brain andbowels including the trillions of microbes that inhabitthem. From a public engagement and museum per-spective, this was in some ways an easy choice; it isa ‘hot topic’ and an interesting case study of a complex,unsettled research field with potentially profoundimplications for both medicine and culture. Yet gut-brain-microbiome (GBM) interaction is a complexrelationship, as difficult to display as it is to study;contemporary scientific research struggles to disentan-gle inputs and outputs, conditions and effects. As wediscovered, some of our contemporary concerns andscientific challenges have a long history. Doctors andscientists have long been intrigued by both local ques-tions of disease and discontent, and the implications
CONTACT Adam Bencard [email protected] Medical Museion, Institute of Public Health and Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for BasicMetabolic Research, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
MICROBIAL ECOLOGY IN HEALTH AND DISEASE2018, VOL. 29, 1555433https://doi.org/10.1080/16512235.2018.1555433
for how we understand the human organism. Andthroughout history people have worked on mind-gutconnections in their daily lives, changing what theyeat, how they sleep and exercise, taking supplements,fermenting foods, having enemas, purchasing com-mercial brain stimulation kits, and so on. The exhibi-tion brings together this history with cutting edgeresearch, and brings together the perspectives ofscience, medicine, and personal experience, via
a combination of artworks, historical objects fromthe Medical Museion collections, items from labora-tories, and individual stories. The exhibition is orga-nized around different ways the body has beenhandled in order to intervene in interactions betweenmind, gut, and bacteria, including imaging, electrify-ing, feeding, drugging, and opening surgically.
Microbiome-gut-brain (MGB) research promises tohave profound implications for a number of the
Figure 1. View from inside the Mind the Gut exhibition. The exhibition is located in the basement of the Medical Museion,a space filled with wiring and ventilation. These spatial qualities resonate with the themes of complexity and connectedness atthe heart of the exhibition, and are also echoed in the exhibition design. Copyright Medical Museion.
Figure 2. Mind the Gut is organized in a series of themes, each showing a type of view upon or intervention in the relationshipbetween mind and gut. Seen here is the theme ‘cultivate’, which features five people who in various ways have tried tomanipulate their gut microbes. In the back are a series of Winogradsky columns, living microbial ecosystems with distinctaesthetic qualities.
2 A. BENCARD AND L. E. WHITELEY
pathologies and health problems that characterize ourpost-industrial societies—and while these promises areyet to be fulfilled, public culture and medical practiceare already responding to their possible implications. Itis thus a tempting case for anyone interested inscience-society relations—they are evolving fast andin public. Fermentation workshops and other bacte-rially driven food practices are everywhere, DIY fecaltransplant videos can be found online, open scienceprojects are selling personal microbiome sampling kits,probiotics are becoming more mainstream, there area steady stream of TED talks and media reports, best-selling science journalism books, microbiome cook-books, microbially based makeup products, andmuch more. Alongside the more practical healthimplications of mind-gut-microbiome research, italso seems to offer a fundamentally different perspec-tive on long-held views on human development(Pradeu [1], Gilbert [2]), our sense of self (Hird [3],Bencard [4]), and our connection to our environments(McFall-Ngai et al. [5]). It engages a complex, envir-onmentally entangled body, whose very existence isinterwoven with nonhuman life—can we thereforetalk of our bodies as simply human? How should weconceptualize the kinds of relationship we have to themicroscopic organisms that live on and in us? Doesour emotional state belong solely to us? Thus weengaged the research as a study of how science andculture is interwoven and plays into deeply individualand existentially resonant experiences. All this makesfor a profoundly messy and entangled field, and a richand engaging topic for on-going experiments at themuseum in science communication and publicengagement.
An interdisciplinary process for aninterdisciplinary topic
The concept behind Mind the Gut was built ona merger of an experimental content—the rapidlydeveloping research field of MGB interaction—withan experimental form: an open-ended cocuratorialprocess which involved scientists and artists fromthe start, as well as historical curators. In otherwords, we wanted to see what would happen if weinvited scientists and artists to be part of handling the‘total medium’ of the exhibition, rather than justusing scientists as sources or simply commissioningartists to produce works based on the exhibitionthemes. We wanted to make them part of a shareddiscussion and a longer-term process, aimed at break-ing down disciplinary boundaries. We wanted toavoid making an exhibition that had a science sec-tion, an art section, and a history section, but ratherlook for questions that arose at the overlaps of—oreven out of interactions between—those practices.This was in part a reaction to more traditional
approaches to involving artists and scientists inmuseums of science, technology, engineering, andmedicine, which can tend to instrumentalise theirexpertise toward an (often unnegotiated) communi-cative goal (e.g., Born and Berry [6]).
We started with an open call for collaborators, inwhich we asked for ‘four curious, inventive collabora-tors interested in crossing disciplinary boundaries tojoin our team’. Successful applicants were expected tojoin 12 workshops over an 18-month period, as wellas participating in a 2-day international conferencefollowing the conclusion of the project; they wouldcontribute to the exhibition content in a manner tobe agreed during the process; and participate in threeresearch interviews about the project conducted dur-ing and after the process. We received 155 applica-tions from a wide range of people—artists, scientists,chefs, philosophers, art curators, cultural historians,speculative designers, and science communicators.With the help of a jury, we ended up choosing fivecocurators; three artists; and two scientists. The teamthen embarked on the year-long journey until theexhibition was opened to the public. Part of thereasoning behind this process was to create data forour own academic research on cocuration and trans-disciplinary collaboration; in essence, embeddinga research project within the exhibition project.
In setting up this process, we were inspired byscholars Dez Fitzgerald and Felicity Callard, andtheir work as part of the first interdisciplinary resi-dency at The Hub at Wellcome Collection in London.Their project was entitled Hubbub, and was dedicatedto exploring the dynamics of rest, noise, and work. Itconsisted of a 50-strong international collective ofsocial scientists, artists, humanities researchers, scien-tists, broadcasters, public engagement professionals,and mental health experts. Through this experimentalprogram, Fitzgerald and Callard developed the con-cept of ‘experimental entanglements’ as a way to gobeyond traditional disciplinary boundaries, and asa way of creating what they call an awkward intra-disciplinarity—awkward because there is no set struc-ture, and intra- rather than inter-, because it is set upto go beyond an exchange between different disci-plines and hopefully become a process in which themembers of the working group impact each otherand the object studied and produced. They arguethat this approach is a way, as they write, to ‘to helpscholars circumvent a burgeoning, but bloodless andsterile, literature on “interdisciplinarity” between thesocial sciences and the life sciences’ (Callard andFitzgerald [7])
Applying an experimental, cocuratorial approachto produce an exhibition about biomedical sciencealso built on a decade of museological research andpractical experimentation at Medical Museion, whichhas grasped the challenge of communicating
MICROBIAL ECOLOGY IN HEALTH AND DISEASE 3
contemporary biomedical research, which can oftenbe complex, opaque, and intangible—not the naturalchoice for museums that like to exhibit medium-sized, easily interpretable objects (see Söderqvistet al. [8], Whiteley et al. [9]). Mind the Gut repre-sented another step in this journey, via an unusuallylengthy and open process that aimed to predetermineas little as possible about the roles each participantshould play. Mind the Gut was thus set up asa science communication experiment in how to usethe exhibition medium to display, investigate, andinvite audiences to engage in GBM interactionresearch as process, and driven by the hypothesisthat ‘experimentally entangled’ cocuration mighthelp us to do so.
Our commitment was to showing science in and asprocess, and as culturally embedded, relevant, andresonant, leads to an emphasis on the exploratoryover the explanatory. In other words, we wanted toshow science as an on-going and open-endedexploration, rather than a progressive fact-based pro-cess of explanation. For example, we followed threescientific research projects, two of which were stillongoing at the time, not to put the results on displaybut rather to show what they look like in practice. Wefilmed the day-to-day work of the scientists, we col-lected equipment and animal specimens used in theresearch, and we worked with the scientists to createpublicly digestible diagrams of their experimentalsetups and hypotheses. The exhibition emphasizesthe detective-like aspect of this work, portraying itas something at once incredibly detailed, sophisti-cated and high tech, as well as open, intuitive, andoccasionally downright strange. There has beena general tendency in museums of science to pushagainst traditional modes of only representing scienceas a slow, steady, objective march toward truth;instead, its open-ended nature is emphasized, com-municating about the processual nature of scientificwork as much as its results. With Mind the Gut thisfelt particularly pertinent, due to the unsettled natureof GBM interaction research—overselling results andmaking overly strong claims about causal relation-ships between microbes, moods, and mental states isa real danger.
Art and the microbiome
An important aspect of the cocuration approach toexhibiting complex science as process was collabora-tion with artists. In recent decades, it has beenincreasingly popular for scientific institutions andscience museums to collaborate with artists. ReginaBorn and Mathew Berry categorized art-science col-laboration as being driven by logics of accountability,innovation, or ontology. The logic of accountability isperhaps the most well-known and practiced. Here,
artists are asked to communicate science in moreinteresting, approachable, or aesthetically pleasingways. They are also often delegated responsibilityfor asking critical or ethical questions, in a way thatincreases the apparent accountability of scientificinstitutions whilst keeping these debates at arm’slength. The logic of innovation is mostly associatedwith industry where, e.g. IT companies have involvedartists in product development (Born and Berry [6]).However, we were primarily interested in what Bornand Berry term the logic of ontology. The aim here isto find collaborative structures that are more equal—or at least equally awkward—ideally leading to trans-fers of knowledge and practices across disciplinaryboundaries. Artists are not merely involved as aninstrument of science, but rather as an equal colla-borator with alternative perspectives and approaches.According to Born and Berry this has the potential tochange our understanding of science and of the worlditself, by offering encounters with multiple alternativeontologies. This experience of different ways of think-ing about what kinds of things make up the worldcan provide a framework for a more open-endedinteraction between science and the public.
Artists working with microbes and the problems ofmicrobial entanglement have been growing in num-bers in the past decades, alongside the growth of bothscientific and cultural engagement with microbes assomething other than our enemies. Our engagementwith microbes could be argued to be shifting froma dominant narrative of control to one of promise(Paxson and Helmreich [10]). Artists are increasinglyusing microbes as media and as tools to constructartistic conceptions of a complex, ecosystemic naturein which the boundaries demarcating animals, plants,humans, and a swarming, lively microbial biosphereare continuously breached (Hauser [11]).
Including such artistic interventions into micro-biome research into Mind the Gut was an easy choicefor us, as it aligned with the experimental nature ofthe exhibition, as well as the more open-endedapproach to science communication founded partlyon the logic of ontology as outlined above. Weincluded a number of such art works and collabora-tions. One such example is the work of the artistKathy High, whose practice lies at the intersectionof art, science, and the personal, engaging both ethi-cal dilemmas, speculative futures and existential con-cerns of biomedicine and biotechnology. We featuredthree objects from her work around fecal mattertransplants (FMT), which she has a personal interestin because of her personal experience of havingCrohn’s disease. The first object is a speculative pro-totype of a DIY stool bank, consisting of a glasscontainer filled with honey and ceramic excrement.The piece belongs to a series ‘The Bank of AbjectObjects’ which responds to the notion that healthy
4 A. BENCARD AND L. E. WHITELEY
feces might become a valuable commodity in the nearfuture. As our internal microbiomes continue tobecome more unbalanced, mirroring the shifts inour larger ecological sphere, feces might transformfrom a dangerous waste product that must becleansed and made invisible into a possible sourceof ecological intervention.
While High was investigating FMT, a friend askedwhose stool she would want to use—in a sense, askingwhich other person she might want to take in. Shesettled on David Bowie, being a lifelong fan, anddecided to make a series of photos of herself costumedas famous images of him. She sent the photographs toBowie along with a letter asking for an unusualexchange: Whether he would send some of his fecesin return. The exchange never happened, as Bowieunbeknownst to the artist was battling cancer at thetime. In our exhibition, we display both the letter andone of the images of Kathy as Bowie (see Figure 3).These works bind together patient perspectives—thehopes, fears, frustrations, and anxieties connected tosuffering from a chronic medical condition that themedical establishment is still trying to figure out—withan artistic, playful reflection upon our entanglement in
the microbial biosphere inside and outside of us. Likeother potential transplant recipients, the artist won-ders what exactly is being exchanged when organicmatter is moved from one body to another, somethingthat is further complicated by the possibility of thecommensal microbes possibly impacting the mentalstate and moods of the recipient. High’s work alsoinvites us to ask broader cultural questions of FMT,such as how wemight rethink our relationship to feces,why we often are ashamed of our bodily functions, andwhere this shame came from culturally andhistorically.
A second collaboration was made with theCanadian scientist and bioartist Francois-JosephLapointe. Lapointe is professor of evolutionary ecol-ogy at the University of Montreal, and also holdsa PhD in dance. His artistic practice revolves aroundwhat he terms performance experiments, in which hemodifies and studies his own microbes in differentways, using his body as a laboratory and a seismicregister of how our microbial constituents shiftsthrough different actions and environments. InMind the Gut, we featured his project BecomingBatman, undertaken during a research trip to New
Figure 3. Silicone torso made to resemble Alexis St. Martin, a young man who in 1822 survived a gunshot wound to thestomach but developed a permanent fistula. He was treated by the physician William Beaumont, who later experimented onhim by tying food on silk strings and inserting them into the stomach through the fistula. Beaumont’s pivotal observations waspublished in 1838, in the book Experiments and Observations on the Gastric Juice, and the Physiology of Digestion. CopyrightMedical Museion.
MICROBIAL ECOLOGY IN HEALTH AND DISEASE 5
Guinea in 2016. While studying the local bat popula-tion, Lapointe noticed the locals eating the bats, anddecided that he would do the same (along with otherlocal species), while sampling his oral microbiomebefore and after the meal, to see how consumingthe animal changed his microbial population, and inturn, himself. From the data produced by this andsimilar performance experiments, Lapointe produceswhat he calls ‘microbiome selfies’, artistically modi-fied data visualizations. He has conducted a numberof such selfie projects, including the project 1000Handshakes which Lapointe conducted in collabora-tion with Medical Museion in 2014, where he visitedthe medical faculty at the University of Copenhagenand shook a 1000 people’s hands; his palm micro-biome was then sampled after every 50 handshakes,to see how the contact with other people changedhim. The selfies were then exhibited at the MedicalMuseion in an exhibition entitled Hello Bacteria!
Alongside Becoming Batman, we also collaboratedwith Lapointe to produce a series of microbial portraitsof a family living in the same house in Montreal,consisting of a baby, a young child, a mother, anda grandmother. Fecal samples from the four familymembers were collected and sequenced by Lapointeand his team, and then visualized as four slowly turn-ing microbial ‘planets’, whose networked surfaces con-sisted of dots representing microbial species, and therelative size of the dots the abundance of the givenspecies. The planets show how microbial diversityshifts over the lifetime of the organism: the baby’smicrobiome is the least diverse, and diversity thenincreases through the young child and the mother,
and then decreases again in the grandmother. Themicrobial planets provide a useful talking point forour guided tours as well as an artistic representationof the complicated and interwoven nature of ourmicrobial relations. They communicate directly andeasily, but also prompt discussion amongst scientifi-cally trained visitors in how the visualizations werepossible and what rhetorical functions they play.
Engaging with artists in the making of the exhibi-tion is a way to highlight how microbes, both inscientific and artistic fields, increasingly are becoming‘model organisms’, that is, organisms that are madeto signify larger biological worlds and imaginedfutures. More specifically, we have been interestedin microbiomes being used as ‘model ecologies’, thatis, models for thinking about coexistence and humanand nonhuman entanglement (Ankeny and Leonelli[12]). In this light, the work of Kathy High empha-sizes a new mode of ecological thinking about inter-vention, where fecal transplants is both a medical andan existential procedure, transferring qualities fromone collective to another. And similarly, the perfor-mance experiments of Lapointe points to ecosystemicentanglement in everyday actions, from shakinghands to eating. His artistic practice thus highlightsthe implications of bacteria as model ecologies, point-ing tensions about complexity, reductionism versusholism, and of scales and possibilities of intervention.
Conclusion
Mind the Gut deals with a topic that is public, and whichbelong to culture and society in several ways: Both
Figure 4. The work of artist Kathy High as featured in the exhibition. In the display case is a copy of the letter she wrote toDavid Bowie, as well as a glass vessel containing ceramic stool in honey, from her series The Bank of Abject Objects. Theaudience can also listen to an interview with High about her work. Copyright Medical Museion.
6 A. BENCARD AND L. E. WHITELEY
because it speaks to fundamental somatic aspects of whatit means to be human, and because scientific develop-ments are being reported and brought to the public asthey happen, long before basic scientific issues are settled.This makes GBM research both vital and vulnerable tooverinterpretation. As microbiome interventions arerelatively cheap and accessible, it is also a potentiallycreative but undisciplined source of personal understand-ing and treatment, and a potential ‘wild west’ for com-mercial interests. Mind the Gut is a public space thataimed to encourage reflection and curiosity, by showinghow biomedicine fits into social, cultural, historical, anddirectly personal contexts. The exhibition does not aim toprovide answers about what food the visitors should eator what the truth of how gut and brain interactionsmightbe.We emphasize process over result, hopefully encoura-ging the visitors to ask their ownquestions of the relation-ship betweenmind and gut, between body andmicrobes.
The exhibition ultimately rests on a series of existentialand philosophical questions that have piqued our interestover the last years, butwhich are only just beginning to beexplored. What are we to make of microbial entangle-ments creeping into the traditional confines of the‘human experience’? What might it be taken to implyfor our self-understanding, both individually and asa community? What sort of social practices and culturalpatterns emerge if we see bacteria as foundational to ourhumanity, and what does it mean for technological andscientific intervention in our distributed environment?Andwhat are the implications for howwephilosophicallydefine the human subject, as a thinking, conscious being?
Mind the Gut offers no answer to these questions, butrather aims at the more modest goal of startinga conversation about them, the first step in broachingwhat is likely one of the biggest set of questions in thecoming decades: What does it mean to both be and bea part of an ecosystem? How might such questions shiftthe complex boundaries between mind, body, and envir-onment? Whatever the answers to these questions mightbecome, our workwithMind the Gut has emphasized theneed for interdisciplinary engagement across art andscience.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This work was supported by the Novo Nordisk FoundationCenter for Basic Metabolic Research, as well as the TheBikuben Foundation.
ORCID
Adam Bencard http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2500-9023Louise Emma Whiteley http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9352-365X
References
[1] Pradeu T. Mixed self: a the role of symbiosis indevelopment. Bio Theory. 2011;6(1):80–88.
[2] Gilbert SF. A holobiont birth narrative: the epigenetictransmission of the human microbiome. Front Genet.2014;5:282–287.
[3] Hird MJ. The origins of sociable life, evolution afterscience studies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan;2009.
[4] Bencard A. Du er ikke alene: om bevidsthed og bak-terier. In: Kirkhoff E, editor. Im/materialitet 3. Sorø:Sorø Kunstmuseum. 2014. p. 73–80.
[5] Mcfall-Ngai M. Animals in a bacterial world, a newimperative for the life sciences. Proc Natl Acad SciU S A. 2013;110(9):3229–3236.
[6] Born G, Andrew B. Art-science. J Cult Economy.2010;3(1):103–119.
[7] Fitzgerald D, Callard F. Social science and neu-roscience beyond interdisciplinarity: experimentalentanglements. Theory Cult Soc. 2015;32(1):3–32.
[8] Söderqvist T, Bencard A, Mordhorst C. Betweenmeaning culture and presence effects: contemporarybiomedical objects as a challenge to museums. StudHist Philos Sci. 2009;40(4):431–438.
[9] Whiteley L, Tybjerg K, Pedersen BV, et al. Exhibitinghealth and medicine as culture. Public HealthPanorama. 2017;3(1):59–68.
[10] Paxson H, Helmreich S. The perils and promises ofmicrobial abundance: novel natures and model eco-systems, from artisanal cheese to alien seas. Soc StudSci. 2014;44(2):165–193.
[11] Hauser J. Molekulartheater, Mikroperformativität undPlantamorphisierungen. In: Stemmler S, editor.Wahrnehmung, Erfahrung, Experiment, Wissen.Objektivität und Subjektivität in den Künsten undden Wissenschaften. Zürich: Diaphanes; 2014. p.173–189.
[12] Ankeny RA, Leonelli S. What’s so special about modelorganisms? Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2011 Jun;42(2):313–323.
