E. Callaway, Glowing plants spark debate. Critics irked over planned release of engineered organism, Nature, vol.498, pp.15-16, 2013.

D. Cheng, Science + crowdfunding: match or no match?, MIT Center for Civic Media Blog, 2013.

C. C. Conrad and K. G. Hilchey, A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities, Environmental Monitoring Assessment, pp.273-291, 2011.

E. H. Ecklund, S. A. James, and A. E. Lincoln, How Academic Biologists and Physicists View Science Outreach, PLoS ONE, vol.14, issue.4, 2012.
DOI : 10.1371/journal.pone.0036240

K. Fitzpatrick, Peer-to-peer review and the future of scholarly authority, Social Epistemology, pp.161-179, 2010.

B. Gates, Social innovation fast pitch: American idol for social impact, The Gates Notes, http://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Social-Innovation-Fast- Pitch-American-Idol-for-Non-Profits, 2012.

J. B. Holbrook, Assessing the science???society relation: The case of the US National Science Foundation's second merit review criterion, Technology in Society, vol.27, issue.4, pp.437-451, 2005.
DOI : 10.1016/j.techsoc.2005.08.001

K. Kaplan, Crowd-funding: Cash on demand, Nature, vol.481, issue.7447, pp.147-149, 2013.
DOI : 10.1038/nj7447-147a

T. Khoo, Are you being " grantist " ?, The Research Whisperer, 2014.

J. Rasmussen, V. Langer, and H. F. Alrøe, Bias in Peer Review of Organic Farming Grant Applications, Agriculture and Human Values, vol.8, issue.2, pp.181-188, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/s10460-005-6105-6

J. Richman, uBiome data policy, uBiome: blog, 2013.

L. Souder, The ethics of scholarly peer review: a review of the literature, Learned Publishing, vol.24, issue.1, pp.55-72, 2011.
DOI : 10.1087/20110109

J. Stemwedel, Ethical and practical issues for uBiome to keep working on, Doing Good Science, http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/doing-good-scienceethi- cal-and-practical-issues-for-ubiome-to-keep-working-on, 2013.