This weeks Nature Biotechnology features an article by two not-exactly computational biologists offering advice on becoming one :)
The article is entitled "So you want to be a computational biologist?" and although it is rather one-sided focusing mostly on technical aspects of bioinformatics it gives a good idea of what is perceived today as "being a computational biologist". The article misses the big picture on what lies behind all the "pipelines" and the "analyses", namely the algorithmic innovations, the mathematical conceptual approach to biological problems and in general all things that are necessary before someone sits in front of terminal to "run analyses".
But what do you think of it?
Give it a read and post your comments here.
The article is entitled "So you want to be a computational biologist?" and although it is rather one-sided focusing mostly on technical aspects of bioinformatics it gives a good idea of what is perceived today as "being a computational biologist". The article misses the big picture on what lies behind all the "pipelines" and the "analyses", namely the algorithmic innovations, the mathematical conceptual approach to biological problems and in general all things that are necessary before someone sits in front of terminal to "run analyses".
But what do you think of it?
Give it a read and post your comments here.
RSS Feed
