Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bionet!dmb.csiro.au!REISNER
From: REISNER@dmb.csiro.au
Newsgroups: bionet.general
Subject: The closure of BIONET one Australian's view
Message-ID: <8907082346.AA13484@uunet.uu.net>
Date: 8 Jul 89 23:33:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@NET.BIO.NET
Lines: 45



     On July 1 BIONET received notification that the NIH would not renew its 
grant.  As matters stand, BIONET, therefore, will cease operations on the 30 
September this year.

     Several years ago Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial 
Research Organization's (CSIRO) Division of Molecular Biology (now 
Biotechnology) placed on line its Molecular Biological Information Service 
(MBIS) which is patterned on BIONET and dependant upon it. The 100 or so 
individuals who use MBIS throughout Australia have obtained significant 
benefit from the software that BIONET has made available, the bulletin 
boards run by it, more recently the Tables of Content that are being 
provided, and by no means least the active realization that they BELONG to 
the 'global molecular biological village' so fostered by the electronic 
communication of which BIONET is so much a part.

     The effect that closing BIONET may have on Australian Molecular Biologists 
can have little bearing on decisions made effecting what is a domestic 
matter.  Nevertheless, it must be realized that the closing of BIONET will 
have international consequences.

     Obviously as an outsider I am not privy to the detailed reasoning that led 
to the recommendations that were made by the site committee, but the 
shutting down of BIONET appears irrational.  If BIONET ceases to function, 
surely it will only be a matter of time before some instrument will be 
placed into operation to fulfil the services BIONET presently provides.  One 
of the points raised by our extra Divisional users is that for them to have 
to provide resources to update databases, provide new software and guidance 
in its use would be non cost effective.  With the expected exponential 
increase in sequence data in the near future and the implementation of large 
secondary databases the utility of a national service would appear to be 
increasingly important.  In short to dismantle BIONET simply to build a 
clone seems unreasonable.

     I visited BIONET some eight months ago and was struck by the competence, 
dedication and enthusiasm that its staff brought to the Service and to its 
improvement.  There is no doubt that Australian Molecular Biology will be 
the poorer for BIONET's demise; I suspect America's will be as well.

Alex Reisner
MBIS
Division of Biotechnology
CSIRO
Sydney