Abstract
Reusability has been a key issue since the origins of the parts-based approach to synthetic biology. Starting with the BioBrick™ standard part, multiple efforts have aimed to make biology more exchangeable. The reusability of parts and other deoxyribonucleic acid-based data has proven over time to be challenging, however. Drawing on a series of qualitative interviews and an international workshop, this article explores the challenges of reusability in real laboratory practice. It shows particular ways that standards are experienced as presenting shortcomings for capturing the kinds of contextual information crucial for scientists to be able to reuse biological parts and data. I argue that researchers in specific laboratories develop a sense of how much circumstantial detail they need to share for others to be able to make sense of their data and possibly reuse it. When choosing particular reporting formats, recharacterizing data to gain closer knowledge or requesting additional information, researchers enact an 'economy of details'. The farther apart two laboratories are in disciplinary, epistemological, technical and geographical terms, the more detailed information needs to be captured for data to be reusable across contexts. In synthetic biology, disciplinary distance between computing science and engineering researchers and experimentalist biologists is reflected in diverging views on standards: what kind of information should be included to enable reusability, what kind of information can be captured by standards at all and how they may serve to produce and circulate knowledge. I argue that such interdisciplinary tensions lie at the core of difficulties in setting standards in synthetic biology.