Computational Biology Is Not Simply Bioinformatics
There is a tendency to treat bioinformatics and computational biology as interchangeable. We do computational biology: our starting point is not a dataset to analyze but a molecular system we want to understand, and we build physical, mathematical, and computational models to reproduce its thermodynamics, kinetics, and dynamics. This piece explains what we mean by computational biology and how our work relates to, and differs from, bioinformatics.
Show details Hide details
There is a tendency to use bioinformatics and computational biology as interchangeable terms. This is understandable: both use computation, algorithms, and data to study biological problems, and their boundaries overlap. But they are not quite the same.
We do computational biology.
Our starting point is not necessarily a biological dataset that we want to analyze. Our starting point is a molecular system that we want to understand: a protein, a molecular interaction, a membrane, a conformational transition, or a molecule whose behavior we want to explain and predict, or that we want to modify or design to address a biological problem.
To do so, we develop and use theoretical models—physical, mathematical, and computational—that represent different aspects of molecular reality.
Bioinformatics has historically developed around the analysis of biological information: sequences, genomes, gene expression, and, today, large datasets of many different kinds. The distinction, however, is not absolute: bioinformatics also uses models, and computational biology also uses data. There is a vast shared territory. The fundamental difference lies in what the model represents and what role it plays in the research.
Our systems have geometry, energy, interactions, and degrees of freedom. Molecules obey physical and chemical principles. By translating the physical principles that govern molecular systems into mathematical and computational models, we aim to reproduce their thermodynamics, kinetics, and dynamics in order to understand and predict their behavior in biological processes.
For us, therefore, programming is necessary but not sufficient. Our work lies at the intersection of:
physics + chemistry + biochemistry + mathematics + computation + data science.
Distinguishing this approach from bioinformatics does not imply a hierarchy. They are closely related, complementary, and increasingly interconnected disciplines. But using computation to study biology does not automatically make every such endeavor bioinformatics.
Within the broad landscape of computational biology, our work is much closer to computational molecular science and computational biophysics than to bioinformatics, and naturally intersects with molecular modeling and molecular simulation.
If we had to summarize our way of doing science:
We build and use physical, mathematical, and computational models of molecular systems to understand and address biological problems. Doing so requires combining modeling with a solid understanding of chemistry and biochemistry.
That is what we mean by computational biology.
We do not merely study information about molecules. We study molecules through models.