studio practice
about bioart
i approached this year with the intent of exploring bio-artistic practices and the intersections of art, science, and the political conundrums that such intersections can produce and explore. i say political because that's what I'm most interested to at the moment, but the questions that can be posed by interlacing art and science (and philosophy, because i personally see no difference between art and philosophy) can comprise economics, sociology, design, innovation and much more. furthermore, what fascinates me the most about this dichotomy/harmony is the game of counterbalance that both provide to each other.
science helps art in being less anthropocentric. of course, complete de-anthropocentrism is impossible, science is still about simplification. no matter what, the idea of understanding is inherently human and humanistic. but science tries to step back, organising controlled environments to allow something to flourish without human intervention, elevating the act of observing to a rule, wearing gloves to handle pathogens. science is, in the end, a "sysiphussian" task, the impossible will to reach god with wings made of wax and paper, and that i personally admire - the effort.
art helps science by posing the right question. no art is made of statements, statements are the ruination of art. an artist need to be able to look around, connect the numbers, and pose the right question. in this way art is quite scientific, given that any theory is made to be dismantled. art adds the experimental approach - of course experiment is also a term used in science, although it is used to confirm a theory. art instead uses the experiment to ask "what if?". for sure there are also instances where the combination of art and science are utilised to democratise the latter using the expressive capabilities of the first, and i find that noble per se. nevertheless i find that the ultimate goal shall not be simplification of an idea, but instead it should be a question that leads both artists and scientists to think outside the box.
(to be continued)
context
as of now i'm focusing on 2 different organic "materials" to convey the idea of life and death. algae and mould. in my studio project proposal i noted how i would like my work to be a tryptic in order to contextualise how life and death are constituted by an interrelation between each other. i agree that this need to be explored further to justify it's own being. my points are that the choice of a tryptic comes from religion, where the number 3 is often viewed as a symbol of interrelation between different elements (triple goddess in wicca, holy trinity in christianity, the three pure ones in taoism and many more). i want this work to have symbolic connotations, and i want symbology to be a central part of how this work is perceived. the three parts can be seen as 3 totems, of life, death and cyclicity.
i think it's needed to say that my dissertation will explore themes of (lack of) structures of support, capitalistic exploitation, environmental crisis. how death and life are perceived from a political point of view, hence the need of the religious connotations, because religion has much influence in how we construct our social systems. i would argue that religion is a form of proto-politics, because it can be theorized that the birth of politics comes along the birth of the cemetery. so in a way i make no real difference between religion and politics, the religious nature of the work is more a way to suggest the primeval essence of religion as a starting point for politics.
i think that eventually the 3 totems should lead one another in harmony, or at least i would like to suggest how each influences the other. i don't really know yet how i'd do that, but my guess is that computation shall be the maker of this connection. each of the 3 totems will have different materials, different outputs but, because they're finished objects, they can be quantified in numbers. that's why computation could come in handy. of course computation will be used in other ways to construct these totems as well, each with it's own set of rules and systems, but i'm also interested in a computational part that gathers each totem's output to influence the others.
to get back to the material choice, to the algae and the mould. why is algae the symbol of life? algae is believed to be the oldest complex form of life of the planet Earth. bacteria is known to be the oldest form of life, but i won't be working with it because it would just be too complicated. algae instead offers some "simplicity" in how it can be handled and experienced. it comes from salty water, which is the culturing media par excellence. at one point in the planet, every life form came to be thanks to this mixture of salts and minerals and chemicals. algae is also the actual major contributor of oxygen alongside dryland's plants, actually, algae produces up to 80% of the Earth's oxygen reserves (not all of it leaves the water's surface, but that's the gist of it). the particular algae i would work with is a bioluminescent algae, meaning that it can emanate light, and this reinforces the idea of a living organism (again, religion comes up: often life - or life giving deity - is pictured as a form of light). despite me saying that algae are "simple" to work with, they really aren't all things considered. the water needs to be of a specific Ph, the salinity needs to be at a precise percentage - and it can't be table salt! a range of salts are present in seawater - the temperature needs to be in a specific range without too much swing, the light conditions need to be optimal, not to mention: growing these organisms required some good deal of housekeeping, otherwise bacteria won't think twice about simply overtaking and eating them away, so the culture vessel needs to be sterile. in other words, algae, like life, need care. systems of support must be put in place for its maintenance, and balance must be kept under control to allow for flourish.
mould instead is the symbol of death. once the right amounts of proteins and moisture are left to rot, mould develops with ease. every organic thing will eventually mould, because mould is the main actor in place for decomposition, for giving back what was borrowed from the Earth. mould, differently from the algae, does not really need "care", it instead thrives because of the lack of it, because it will eventually arrive. energy must be spent if one wishes to destroy it - a useless expense, given that it will arrive again soon after. in this way, the mould reminds me of a memento mori, a sign of unstoppable decay. of entropy towards simple form: decomposition leads the organic to become mineral salts, water, sugars and carbon dioxide, so that it can be repurposed to feed another birthing lifeform. mould is also often seen as bio-degradation. some black and brown moulds eat through the wood in our homes, making them weaker. mould doesn't need care, or balance, it needs acknowledgement. i'll talk about black mould in social housing in my dissertation to emphasize how a lack of care for life leads to an imbalance, and the growth of the toxic element.
totem of life: dinoflagellates
dinoflagellates is a superclass of organisms (microalgae) quite present all around the world. in my dissertation i'll explore them by talking about environmental issues, in particular about the so called harmful algal blooms (HAB). an harmful algal blooms usually occurs when the high temperatures allow for overgrowth of these organisms, mixed with a uncontrolled use of fertilizer - which get carried in the coast by rivers. the most popular HAB is said to be the Red Tide in the Gulf of Mexico, which every year causes great detriment to the marine health present along the coasts of Florida, Texas and Mexico. that's because the main organism responsible for these red tides is the Karenia Brevis, a single-celled photosynthetic organism of the genus Karenia. K. Brevis is widely popular along the east coast of America, and when at bay it doesn't represent much of a threat, but when blooming it colours the waters red with its over-presence (hence the name Red Tides). K. Brevis releases a neurotoxin called brevetoxin, which in high concentration can be extremely harmful to the local fauna. the brevetoxin can also be harmful to humans if molluscs full of the toxin are to be ingested, leading to neurotoxic shellfish poisoning. moreover, the blooms can also be harmful to people with respiratory conditions, also leading to eye and skin irritations.
K. Brevis, alongside a multitude of species of dinoflagellates, can also produce bioluminescence, leading to spectacular displays of blue light in the waters at night. bioluminescence has a variety of functions in the animal kingdom, but in this case it's mainly viewed as a "burglar alarm", a way for the algae to alert bigger predators when an algae's predator approaches. the burglar alarm hypothesis is reinforced by the fact that the bioluminescence triggers in a peculiar way - mechanical friction, suggesting that when a K. Brevis' predator enters the bloom it will lead to a formation of a trace of itself, allowing other bigger predators to chase it down.
of course i will not work with karenia brevis for my final year's project. the main issue is with its toxicity, the second issue is about importing an organism native to the US here in Scotland. dinoflagellate is a enormously varied superclass, and luckily there are a few options - some of them are even local.
Binomial Name: Karenia Brevis
Domain: Eukaryota
Clade: Diaphoretickes
Clade: SAR
Clade: Alveolata
Phylum: Myzozoa
Superclass: Dinoflagellata
Class: Dinophyceae
Order: Gymnodiniales
Family: Kareniaceae
Genus: Karenia
Binomial Name: Lingulodinium Polyedra
Domain: Eukaryota
Clade: Diaphoretickes
Clade: SAR
Clade: Alveolata
Phylum: Myzozoa
Superclass: Dinoflagellata
Class: Dinophyceae
Order: Gonyaulacales
Family: Lingulodiniaceae
Genus: Lingulodinium
Binomial Name: Pyrocystis Lunula
Domain: Eukaryota
Clade: SAR
Phylum: Dinoflagellata
Order:n Gonyaulacales
Suborder: Goniodomineae
Family: Pyrocystaceae
Genus: Pyrocystis
L. Polyedra and P. Lunula are quite interesting organisms for my purpose because 1) they are found globally, 2) they are not toxic in the same way as K. Brevis is, 3) their bioluminescence is triggered in the same way as the K. Brevis does and 4) they are also responsible for algal blooms alongside K. Brevis. worth mentioning that L. Polyedra is also able to produce toxins called yessotoxins, which accumulate in molluscs and can be harmful to humans if those molluscs are then ingested. both L. Polyedra and P. Lunula can be easily found in the UK, both in coasts and in labs, and although i'd love to go on an expedition to find these algae armed with a microscope and a small boat, getting them from a lab is much safer and less expensive.
a couple years ago i already tried culturing L. Polyedra at home. due to negligence, my specimen died and was replaced by a common green algae. darn. the specimen costed me £30 so this time i opted for the much cheaper Pyrocystis Lunula (£17). P. Lunula also has no known toxicity of any kind.
both these specimens are purchased from Culture Collection of Algae and Protozoa (CCAP), the leading labs in the UK for these kind of things - they are based in Oban.
Pyrocystis Lunula is called like that because of it's shape, resembling a half moon. it differentiates only morphologically from Pyrocystis Fusiformis, but fundamentally they are the same organism.
like all dinoflagellates, P. Lunula feeds on nitrate, phosphate, trace metals, and vitamins. it thrives at temperatures between 16 and 25C, needing a full spectrum light in order to photosynthesize. it is known to be quite forgiving, if one can handle a houseplant, they can also handle a P. Lunula with the right care. there's a few resources online to help growing it, along with a few different media options (in this case the word medium refers to the mix of nutrients that help the algae grow).
eventually i'd like to get back to L. Polyedra, but for now i want to use the P. Lunula to lead some early experiments because of its resilience.
the medium of choice for my first time growing Lunula is a vial of L1 medium complete with sea salts. the L. Polyedra i've tried to grow before was purchased also alongside some L1 medium, but i purchased the single components to DIY the medium and, given that i don't own an autoclave, that was probably why i got so much contamination. an autoclave sterilises nutrients without the need to add heat, it does so by applying pressured steam. this means that vitamins can be sterilised, as the heat would denature and destroy them.
for the Lunula i instead opted for an easier approach: each vial makes 1 litre of full-fledged medium ready to use. all i had to do was purchase some de-ionised water to avoid over-presence of various minerals.
I could make my own de-ionised water at home by building a rudimentary distilling device, but to be honest the cost of gas used would surpass the cost of just buying a few litres online.
i also wanted to experiment with another medium, this time without sea salts, so to be used with either natural or artificial sea water. this is more to test water quality. i went to Ayr and collected some salt water from the coast. NOTE: this is not how saltwater should be collected, as it's well known that the coast water is much more polluted. i wanted to try to prove the point.
I could make my own de-ionised water at home by building a rudimentary distilling device, but to be honest the cost of gas used would surpass the cost of just buying a few litres online.
i also wanted to experiment with another medium, this time without sea salts, so to be used with either natural or artificial sea water. this is more to test water quality. i went to Ayr and collected some salt water from the coast. NOTE: this is not how saltwater should be collected, as it's well known that the coast water is much more polluted. i wanted to try to prove the point.
the sample of P. Lunula I received was around 30ml. when transferring the samples to some new medium there are some rules to keep in mind. the culture should be added in 10% increments, so 10ml of culture should be added into 100ml of medium. the medium itself should be kept at room temperature.
the culture vessel should be clear, to allow for light and also to allow me to actually assess how the culture is doing. i opted for a couple of olives jars. eventually i'll move the culture to a more appropriate vessel, but for my home experiments these will do just fine.
the light cycle will be controlled for a couple of reasons: the main reason has to do with how the bioluminescence in these microalgae work. they emit the blue light only during the night. this is probably because that's when the algae rises to surface (in a normal sea setting) to come in contact with oxigen. it's a bit more complicated than that, but this bioluminescence works with 3 factors:
the algae produces luciferase enzyme and luciferin molecule inside of a structure called scintillion. luciferase is produced similarly to chlorophyll, and it reacts with the luciferin whenever there's some environmental stress. when friction, for example, is applied to the dinoflagellate's cell, its membrane becomes weaker, activating a series of chemical reactions. oxygen seeps through the outer membrane of the cell, the scintillion becomes more acidic, and the luciferase accelerates the binding of luciferin with oxigen. the chemical reaction produces oxyluciferin, generating light as a bioproduct.
i divided my sample into 2 vessels, 15ml of it in each vessel. i prepared the vessels by carving a 1/8 inch hole and covering it with a piece of cloth. this allows oxygen in while also protecting the water from any falling bacteria. eventually that piece of cloth should be substituted by some parafilm tape. the full-spectrum light is placed above and besides the vessels. if the light is too low it might overheat my cultures, killing the dinoflagellates, if it's too far up it won't give them enough light. above you can see how i configured my improvised "growing facility".
i thought that my method was a bit too DIY, so i was initially worried i wouldn't get much out of it, but after 2 weeks my cultures have acclimated to the light cycles, and are now thriving.
when i say that they needed to acclimate themselves to the light cycles i really mean it. exhibitions do tend to take place during daylight hours, meaning that i can't have a piece that only shows it's potential only during the night. to remediate that, i tricked the algae to think that the day is night, and the night is day. because the bioluminescence is strictly linked to circadian rhythms, now the algae do emit light only during the day. i was so happy to see that my P. Lunula is growing happily, and the unique blue colour that it emits is truly fascinating.
triggering the bioluminescence on demand
while my algae is growing happily, i can focus on what to do with it. if motion triggers the light, then i figured that a system should use some kind of motion factor, as this opens up a range of possibilities.
the main idea at the moment revolves around constructing a grid of some sorts, and then map in some interaction that provokes the single cells in the grid to produce motion.
the grid system
the grid would work as follows:
a leap motion sensor or ML image detection will map the hand of a visitor. the position of the hand and some gestures are captured and translated into signal. the data is then sent to a microcontroller (arduino based), which in turn will send it to the corresponding speaker - the position of the hand will declare which speaker needs to be activated. the grid of speakers, which is put in contact with the tray containing the algae, will then put some motion in the water through cymatics, and that will prompt the algae to illuminate accordingly.
things to research:
- are speakers correct, or should i rely on more powerful (and cheaper) vibration motors? or should they be piezo contact speakers?
- what material should the tray be? is a grid even correct or does that add unwanted tension which would distort the vibrations (because of the 90 degree angles)?
- should a leap motion or a webcam with ML be used? the leap motion works well in a low light settings, so in my opinion it seems like the safest route.
as of now i'm looking into using speakers, because they're easier to test and because a friend of mine gave me a bunch of tiny 8ohm speakers for free, so i can experiment with those easily. using speakers comes with some problems, though. each speaker should need its own amplifier, because I want them to trigger singularly.
I purchased a fem LM386 op amp, and I'm looking into how to build my own audio amplifiers. this would keep the costs low, and apart from the amp chips all the needed materials will be sourced from the e-waste i have lying around my flat.
this is the schematic that i'm following to build my first audio amplifier. the build seems quite easy, and not many materials are needed. I'd have to build 25 of these so i'm also looking into the option of etching my own board so that I can have all the audio amplifiers in one space. this would simplify things, and again keep the costs low. I have a bunch of empty PCB boards, so etching comes as a no-brainer.