bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Rodriguez, R. L.

Publications and source records attributed to Rodriguez, R. L..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

A motif for domain-specific analysis applets that are easy to learn, reuse, test, and to compose into pipelines: application to vision science

Scientific progress depends on the analysis of primary data, yet the small, domain-specific programs that perform most scientific analyses are typically poorly documented, narrowly tested, and difficult to reuse outside the lab that created them. General-purpose pipeline tools address the problem of running steps in order but do not enforce documentation, testing, or standardized outputs. We describe a motif for building domain-specific analysis applets, which we call calculators, that constrains developer choices in order to produce code that is readable, tested, and reusable almost as a byproduct of following the template. Calculators operate on a typed, searchable database of documents, eliminating the need to explicitly wire inputs and outputs together; instead, each calculator searches the database for documents it can operate on and adds its results as new typed documents. Calculators must provide documentation in a standard location, self-tests that can be run and inspected interactively, adjustable input parameters, a single well-defined output document type, and a default plotting method. Sets of calculators compose naturally into pipelines whose outputs satisfy FAIR principles at every stage. We demonstrate the motif by implementing calculators for common analyses in vision science, including orientation and direction selectivity, contrast tuning, spatial and temporal frequency tuning, speed tuning, and Hartley reverse correlation. These calculators have been used in published work and are in active use across collaborating laboratories. We discuss the design principles of the motif, its advantages and limitations, and its applicability to domain-specific computation across neuroscience and beyond. Significance StatementScientists often must write small programs to analyze their own data. These programs are usually poorly documented, lightly tested, and hard for other labs to reuse. Mistakes in this kind of code have even caused well-known papers to be retracted. We describe a simple pattern for writing these programs, which we call a calculator. The pattern requires the programmer to include clear documentation, built-in tests, adjustable settings, and a standard form of output. Calculators work by searching a shared database for data they know how to handle, so many calculators can be chained together into a pipeline without extra setup. We show how this works by building calculators for common visual neuroscience analyses that other labs are already using.

neuroscience↗

Developmental integration cannot explain major features of stomatal anatomical evolution in seed plants

Functional and developmental constraints on phenotypic variation may cause traits to covary over millions of years and slow populations from reaching their adaptive optima. Alternatively, trait covariation may result from selective constraint if some trait combinations are generally maladaptive. Quantifying the relative contribution of functional, developmental, and selective constraints on phenotypic variation is a longstanding goal of macroevolution, but it is often difficult to distinguish different types of constraints. The anatomy of leaves with stomata on both surfaces (amphistomatous) present a unique opportunity to test the importance of functional and developmental constraints on phenotypyic evolution. The key insight is that stomata on each leaf surface encounter the same functional and developmental constraints, but potentially different selective constraints because of leaf asymmetry in light capture, gas exchange, and other features. Independent evolution of stomatal traits on each surface imply that functional and developmental constraints alone likely do not explain trait covariance. Packing limits on how many stomata can fit into a finite epidermis and cell-size-mediated developmental integration are hypothesized to constrain variation in stomatal anatomy. The simple geometry of the planar leaf surface and knowledge of stomatal development make it possible to derive equations for phenotypic (co)variance caused by these constraints and compare them with data. We analyzed evolutionary covariance between stomatal density and length in amphistomatous leaves from 236 phylogenetically independent contrasts using a robust Bayesian model. Stomatal anatomy on each surface diverges partially independently, meaning that packing limits and developmental integration are not sufficient to explain phenotypic (co)variation. Hence, selective constraints, which require an adaptive explanation, likely contribute to (co)variation in ecologically important traits like stomata. We show how it is possible to evaluate the contribution of different constraints by deriving expected patterns of (co)variance and testing them using similar but separate tissues, organs, or sexes.

plant biology↗