In many cases, the logical presentation of scientific results masks the actual unfolding of experimental progress. Our work to identify the mechanisms by which chemicals break red rice seed dormancy is presented as an example. Doing the simplest experiments first, allowing the data to drive subsequent work, frequent and aggressive study of published literature, and examination of potentially key findings using multiple, interlocking strategies have been the keys to defining the relationship between the structure and action of dormancy-breaking chemicals. Our experiments show that chemical activity is dependent upon the lipophilicity as well as the nature and position of functional groups. However, the chemical that is applied to a dormant seed is not necessarily the chemical that actually breaks dormancy. A combination of approaches using structure–activity studies, metabolic inhibitors, and physiological measurements indicate that alcohols must first be metabolized to carboxylic acids to elicit germination of red rice. This report summarizes these findings as a personal account, illustrating the importance of logic, luck, and imagination in scientific discovery, as well as to highlight some important lessons about conducting research.

Many research questions focused upon seed dormancy and germination remain unanswered due to problems created by inappropriate assumptions concerning the design and implementation of experiments. Lack of attention to the genetic background and growing conditions required for seed production and subsequent storage may compromise an investigator's ability to pool data or assimilate data trends due to variability in seed performance from year to year. Seed aging events during the afterripening process can be mistaken for those involved in the transition from the dormant to nondormant state. After imbibition, inaccurate criteria for and scoring of the germination event may lead to confusion of seed vs. seedling physiology and biochemistry. In addition, a sufficient number and proper spacing of data points during timecourse experiments are required to properly stage a sequence of events. Studies comparing dormant vs. nondormant seeds must be supplemented with kinetic experiments examining the effect of a dormancy-breaking treatment upon the transition between the dormant and nondormant states. In comparisons of the relative efficacy of various dormancy-breaking chemical treatments, the physical properties of substances under evaluation (e.g. lipophilicity) should be considered. In addition, since many dormancy-breaking chemicals are toxic to vegetative growth, there is a danger of introducing pharmacological artifacts that confuse interpretation of the results obtained. These toxic properties also necessitate the use of viability tests during construction of dose-response curves to avoid confusing seed death with dormancy. Seed scientists must also avail themselves of the extensive literature on developmental arrest in other organisms, which may generate fresh ideas for experimentation.

The phenomenon of dormancy extends beyond the boundaries of the plant kingdom. While plant biologists typically associate dormancy-breaking treatments only with seeds, buds or tubers, these chemicals and environmental stimuli have much broader activity as general terminators of developmental arrest in other, non-plant species. The activation of growth by these treatments is associated with signal transduction processes, metabolic upregulation and changes in gene expression, in addition to other events that may or may not be species specific. The study of both the classic and current developmental arrest literature beyond the boundaries of plant biology may be helpful in generating useful ideas and analogies for meaningful experimental progress towards understanding seed dormancy.