Main

Archive by category: Careers

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Neuroscience speaks up for young researchers

The Editorial in the November issue of Nature Neuroscience (12, 1351; 2009) emphasizes the importance of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy of funding an increasing number of grants to young investigators with merit scores below the 'payline'. Early-stage investigators are "especially vulnerable to funding crisis and are often at a disproportionate disadvantage when competing with more established laboratories for R01 grants. Such actions that protect some of these young investigators are critical if we are to retain young scientists and encourage our future research base", states the journal. This problem may have been exacerbated by recent efforts to streamline the grant peer-review process, which may mean that evaluators are putting even more store on previous track-record, hence putting young researchers at a greater disadvantage. The Editorial identifies other factors that could be hindering young researchers in the cold funding climate. Although affirmative actions to help younger, less established, researchers are seen by some as unfair, Nature Neuroscience concludes: "Given the dismal projections for NIH budget growth, a step of this magnitude is necessary to support young investigators and to preserve the future of the scientific community as a whole."

Nature Neuroscience journal website.
About Nature Neuroscience.
Nature Neuroscience guide to authors.

Bookmark in Connotea

Two views of the Lindau Nobel chemistry laureates' meeting

Each year since 1951, young researchers and Nobel laureates have gathered on the shores of Lake Constance for a unique scientific conference. In 2009 the meeting was dedicated to chemistry, and laureates and students all came away enriched by their experiences. Martin Chalfie, one of the three recipients of the 2008 Nobel prize in Chemistry, reports what they learned from each other in the November issue of Nature Chemistry (1, 586-587; 2009) He writes:
"From their reading or from simply listening to my talk, the students generated a large number of fascinating questions. They wanted to know details of the experiments and they wanted to discuss potential future experiments. Conclusions about my research that had taken me years to realize (and which I have not written about or described in my talk) were instantly suggested by several of the students at the session. Seeing their excitement and quickness was humbling, but also invigorating.
The meeting allowed the students (as well as the laureates) to broaden their horizons, to have a chance to meet, exchange ideas, and learn about new areas of research from investigators from all over the world (the conference participants came from 67 different countries). The word 'exchange' is important here, because I don't believe that the real benefits were associated with hearing advice from a bunch of older scientists who had been fortunate enough to get some recognition for their work." The meeting's significance is "the acknowledgement it gives to young scientists, especially at a time when they do not get much recognition, that they are on their way to succeeding in science, and that we think that they are important. Although they really do not need any seal of approval, everyone likes to get the occasional pat on the back."
In a companion article in the same issue of Nature Chemistry (1, 587-590; 2009), Jeffrey R. Lancaster, a fourth-year graduate student in the Department of Chemistry, Columbia University, looks back at what he got out of the Lindau meeting: "two subtle points have ultimately distinguished the Lindau meeting for me as a unique event of which I was honoured to have been a part.
First, conversation and the sharing of ideas were fostered not solely between scientists with comparable levels of experience, but also across scientific generations and geographies. I had worthwhile discussions with my peers from Australia, China, India, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain (to name but a few), and was able to speak to scientists at various stages of their careers, from undergraduate to graduate students, postdocs, professors, governmental scientists and, of course, Nobel laureates. Second, the activities pursued by scientists outside of publishable, academic research also featured prominently at the meeting. That scientists might have a life apart from, and in addition to, their research is most often a topic best reserved for conference happy hours, not keynote addresses."

Bookmark in Connotea

Editorial opportunity at Molecular Systems Biology

Molecular Systems Biology has a vacancy for a full-time research Editor. This exciting position involves working together with the existing editorial team on all aspects of the editorial process including critically reading submitted research, organizing peer-review, commissioning and editing reviews, and developing the content and editorial policies of the journal.
Molecular Systems Biology was launched by Nature Publishing Group and EMBO (the European Molecular Biology Organisation) in March 2005, and has rapidly become the premier journal in the fields of systems biology, synthetic biology and systems medicine.
This is a great opportunity to continue to work in science and to be intensively exposed to high quality research in the rapidly developing discipline of systems biology.
Qualifications and Experience: To meet the challenging tasks of this role, the ideal candidate will have a strong research background, a PhD in molecular biology and a keen interest in systems biology. Other essential attributes include a broad knowledge in cell and molecular biology, excellent written and verbal communication skills and a commitment to the communication of scientific ideas. An important aspect of the job is interaction with the scientific community and attending international conferences. Successful candidates must therefore be dynamic and outgoing, be prepared to travel, and have excellent interpersonal skills.
For more details, see the job posting at the EMBO website (scroll down the page).
Molecular Systems Biology journal website.
About the journal and the editors.
Guide to authors.
Open access policy.

Bookmark in Connotea

The Source Event careers fair is on 25 September

A final reminder that The Source Event careers fair takes place in London later this week - Friday 25 September. The Source Event, now in its 3rd successful year, is a dedicated science career fair that combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions. The event will showcase opportunities in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe for careers in science, be it in industrial research, research organizations or academia.
Jobseekers will be able to meet with potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. Plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet high-profile scientists and gain careers information and advice. The details of the programme are now available. The sessions are split into three streams, for graduates, for postdocs, and for non-traditional careers. Among the speakers are Gene Russo, editor of NatureJobs, who will talk about careers in science writing, and Sowmya Swaminathan, a Senior Editor at Nature Cell Biology, who will describe what editors look for in a paper and will provide advice on how to get your work published in a leading scientific journal.

The Source Event in London will take place at the Business Design Centre. There will be a second event in Berlin in December.

Bookmark in Connotea

No time to waste in assisting minorities, says Nature Immunology

The research community needs to increase the number of minority students who choose scientific research careers, according to the September Editorial in Nature Immunology (10, 927; 2009). Black and Hispanic Americans compose roughly one third of the US population, yet the percentage of graduate degrees earned by members of these minorities is much less than 30%. Only 168 people of a minority background were listed as faculty members in biological science departments of the top 50 research institutions in the United States as of 2007. How can the research community encourage more minority students to pursue a research career?
The Editorial describes varous programmes and initiatives, for example the NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) is increasing student diversity in its Maximizing Student Development initiative; the American Association of Immunologists has established a Minority Affairs Committee; the AAAS and other organizations are sponsoring the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students, to be held this year in Phoenix, Arizona (4–7 November); and the Keystone symposia have initiated a Diversity in Life Science programme. The Editorial notes that such 'critical mass' networking interactions help to inspire confidence and can continue long after the attendees have returned home.
The Editorial concludes: "As the US population becomes less 'white dominated', more minority workers will enter the workforce. This scenario is no less true for scientific research, especially as a substantial number of white male faculty members prepare to retire in the next decade. Thus, the training of tomorrow's scientists and faculty must begin today. To achieve this, faculty chairs and administrators must identify those hurdles that might now preclude the career development of under-represented minorities on their campuses and take steps to ensure their education programs are sufficiently rigorous to train competitive minority scientists. There is no time to waste."

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Cell Biology on the gender imbalance in academia

Nature Cell Biology's August Editorial (11, 915; 2009) focuses on the issue of why women remain under-represented in senior academic positions, despite similar numbers of male and female graduates. The imbalance is best addressed by focusing on the reasons for divergent career choices, according to the Editorial (the following is an excerpt):

"A 2007 survey of more than 1,300 NIH postdoctoral fellows (43% female) commissioned by the NIH showed that women with children were already under-represented at the postdoctoral level (10% fewer than men with children, same age distribution). Women were less likely to consider a Principal Investigator position (51% compared with 70% men), especially those with children (45% compared with 69% men with children), and they were more prone to consider family responsibilities as a source of conflict with professional life. Moreover, women were more ready to make career concessions for their partners. Women seem to have less self-confidence, as they were 20% less likely to persevere after a failed first attempt to secure a Principal Investigator position, which 19% more men were confident they would eventually obtain. Men seemed better at securing technical support and a transferrable project, and the salary differential might also relate to better negotiation skills. On the other hand, we found no evidence that male authors had more papers published in NCB. Also, two recent large bibliometric studies concluded that gender had no effect on peer review.
No country can afford to be complacent in pursuing gender and racial equality in academia and, as more subtle reasons for divergent career choices emerge, governments and funding agencies must have an active role in addressing them. Indeed, both the NIH and EC reports concluded that women were far more likely to find Principal Investigator positions with affordable childcare and flexible working arrangements attractive. Encouraging smaller labs would also serve to attract female Principal Investigators. Affirmative action yields neither equality nor quality. Crucially, "stating a family shouldn't be seen as a weakness", as Sally Shaywitz [co-author of a National Academy of Sciences study] puts it. According to the Association for Women in Science, most female PhDs who leave academia take on alternative jobs, indicating that an academic career is currently simply less attractive for them."

Further reading via Connotea.
Nature Cell Biology journal website.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Awards for Mentoring in Science, 2009

The Nature Awards for Mentoring in Science are annual prizes that have been awarded by Nature since 2005 in recognition of excellence in the nurturing of young scientists.
The 2009 awards will be held in Japan, the first time that they have honoured mentors from an Asian nation. Nominations are invited for outstanding mentors from any scientific discipline based in Japan, in two categories: mid-career (up to 59 years of age) and lifetime achievement (60 years of age and over).
Nominations can come from current or former students or colleagues of the nominee from anywhere in the world, and must be supported by two additional people mentored at different times during the nominee's career. The awards, worth ¥1.5 million (US$16,000) each, will be presented in December 2009 at a ceremony at the UK ambassador's residence in Tokyo.
Nominations opened on 22 July, and will close on 25 September 2009. Applications may be made in either Japanese or English. Further details and nomination forms are available for download in English and in Japanese.

More about Nature awards.
More about Nature's mentoring scheme.
Nature' s journal home page.

Bookmark in Connotea

The Source Event is in its third year

The Source Event, now in its third successful year, is a dedicated science career fair that combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions. The event will promote the United Kingdom and Europe as a great place to pursue a career in science, be it in industrial research, research organizations or academia. It will present the best opportunities from the best organizations: public, private, national and international.
Jobseekers will be able to meet potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. Plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet well-known scientists and gain careers information and advice.
The Source Event careers fairs are in London on 25 September and in Berlin on 4 December 2009.

Bookmark in Connotea

Small is beautiful for science start-ups

Venture funding is declining quickly and is unlikely to bounce back. But less money means lower expectations — good news for smaller science start-ups, says John Browning in an Essay in today's issue of Nature (460, 459; 2009 - free to access online for one week from publication date). From the Essay:

Given the lacklustre returns of traditional investment strategies, venture capitalists are also looking to do more with less. Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape Communications and a pillar of the Silicon Valley establishment, recently co-launched a venture firm that plans to invest as little as $50,000 per start-up — far less than the $3 million considered to be a minimum by many venture capitalists. Although it is early days, efforts such as this might reshape venture capitalism. Without the weight of Googlesque expectations on their shoulders, companies that might have joined the ranks of the living dead could start to look lively. A start-up focused on a non-blockbuster drug or diagnostic test might now find itself with an attractive niche market, garnering the attention of venture capitalists who would usually have avoided this type of limited-growth company.
Smaller investments will force entrepreneurs to work harder — no more plush offices or fridges stocked with designer fruit juice. But, because the returns demanded by investors are proportional to the amounts put in, smaller investments also reduce the pressure on companies and allow them to become more flexible in their business strategies. And that is what entrepreneurship needs most.

The full article is here.

Bookmark in Connotea

NSMB on US visa procedures for scientists

The US State Department promises to accelerate the visa process for foreign graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, a promise welcomed by Nature Structural & Molecular Biology in its July Editorial (16, 677; 2009). The Editorial decries the occasions when researchers have been severely delayed in trying to obtain or renew visas, leaving some stranded and others unable to travel to the United States for work or to attend scientific meetings.
The US State Department is now streamlining its procedures, aiming (eventually) to deal with routine requests within 2 weeks, an improvement on the current reported 4 months' average delay for applicants from China, for example. The Editorial concludes: "We must continue to attract and retain the best and the brightest from all over the world if we are going to retain America's global competitiveness, and reducing visa-processing delays is definitely a step in the right direction. If we don't, America's loss will be the rest of the world's gain."

Nature Structural & Molecular Biology journal home page.
Nature Structural & Molecular Biology guide to authors.


Bookmark in Connotea

Thursday 25 June: Women in Science, Engineering and Technology – and the recession

The UK Resource Centre for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology is hosting an evening of speakers and discussion on Thursday 25 June at the Institute of Physics,London, 6pm – 8.30pm (approx). There are some spaces left – men and women are very welcome, but booking in advance is essential.
The discussion:
Women in Science, Engineering and Technology – and the recession
Is gender equality key to recovery?
What is the impact of the recession on women in science, entineering and technology professions? We’ll look at the role of these disciplines in economic recovery, whether gender equality become a luxury in a recession, and the place of women in the new employmnet landscape that emerges.
Speakers include Ruth Sunderland (chair), Business Editor at the Observer; Anne Pettifor, an expert commentator and campaigner on financial systems, author of the Green New Deal and the Debtonation blog; Professor Douglas Kell, Chief Executive of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, also a blogger; Mandy Clarke (Halcrow Ltd); Professor Ursula Martin (Queen Mary University of London); and Annette Williams (Director of the UK Resource Centre)
There will be refreshments and networking before and after. The meeting is upstairs at the Institute of Physics, but places are limited and prior booking is essential by email or by telephone (+44) 01274 436485.
About UKRC.
See also this Nature Network forum entry by Ruth Wilson.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Chemical Biology on creating communities

In its June Editorial, Nature Chemical Biology (5, 365; 2009) calls for mechanisms to initiate, develop and support emerging research communities that cross traditional scientific and geographical boundaries.
Some extracts from the Editorial:
Over time, scientific societies, journals, conferences and funding mechanisms are formed to disseminate new findings, to provide forums for recommending standards and nomenclature, and to facilitate collaborations. However, establishing this research infrastructure typically requires significant time and resources. As science becomes increasingly dynamic and interdisciplinary, new and more effective ways to nucleate and support emerging communities are required.
In practice, bringing together scientists from diverse backgrounds may not be so easy. In a commentary in this issue, Peter Seeberger outlines the challenges in bringing together carbohydrate researchers (p. 368). In particular, the diversity and complexities of these molecules, the difficulty in accessing synthetic samples, and the different languages used to describe the compounds in the chemical and biological communities have hindered communication and scientific progress. As Seeberger discusses, the most important initial steps in bringing together carbohydrate researchers included the creation of a shared set of technological resources and a shared vision for priorities in advancing the field.
The creation of an organized community was enabled in part by taking advantage of a focused funding initiative—a US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Glue Grant. Taking a page from the earlier proteomics and genomics efforts, these grants provide short-term funding for large-scale collaborative projects, offering services and resources that individual scientists can use to advance their own research at a scale that would not be possible for an individual laboratory or even a single university or institute.
Beyond financial support for research, communities need forums for sharing information and results and for discussing community standards. The publication of Essentials of Glycobiology in 1999, the first comprehensive book in the field, was an important step in uniting the carbohydrate community. The second edition of the book, reviewed by Nicola Pohl (p. 373), is freely available online through the US National Center for Biotechnology Information at the request of the authors and with agreement from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Online communities are now a particularly effective way for scientists to communicate in real time without geographical barriers.
The Editorial describes some further research communities, and some online partnerships with Nature Publishing Group which help to foster these interactions.
Nature Chemical Biology website.
Functional Glycomics gateway.


Bookmark in Connotea

The female underclass in science

The European Commission Gender Challenge in Research Funding report discussed in one of today's Nature Editorials (Nature 459, 299; 2009 - free to access online) "was written by a 17-strong expert group chaired by a woman and containing five men. That male minority is an inversion of the usual pervasive and regrettable imbalance of the sexes in European peer-review structures. Only in those countries that have been most proactive in supporting women's careers — Finland, Sweden and Norway — do women constitute more than 40% of 'gatekeeper' scientific boards, according to 2004 data, the latest available, quoted in the report.
Many leading funders are trying to do better. Germany's DFG, for example, has set equal opportunities as a statutory objective since 2002, with working groups targeting the various factors that undermine that goal. But Germany's overall performance is depressing for its women — and for its men too, who presumably want to see the country make good use of its talent. Between 1999 and 2004, the proportion of women acting as peer reviewers for the DFG rose — from 6% to 9%. Of all European Union countries, Germany has the lowest representation of women in the highest academic positions, despite an equal representation of men and women as graduates.
The pressures on women who want to excel in science are acute everywhere. This is particularly true for mothers of young children who, even in the most progressive countries, are generally expected to take on most of the responsibility for home and family while still being expected to write proposals, publish papers and spend long hours in the lab. Added to that is the committee work. Ironically, being a member of a minority that is targeted for positive action can lead to endless requests for advice and involvement, which cut even further into research time.
Many of these pressures will ease only when fathers regard themselves as having equal responsibility for parenting. But employers also have a responsibility to assist parents. Another report published last week by the EC, Women in Science and Technology — Creating Sustainable Careers, highlights the ways in which Europe's employers provide support. These include such prosaic but essential initiatives as ensuring that important meetings are timed to allow parents to leave the office as necessary, and not overlooking those who work part-time when it comes to assigning senior responsibilities.
According to the report, the Netherlands is a notable hotspot for promoting women's interests. Over the past ten years, the funding agency NWO has given Dutch universities incentives to award senior lectureships and professorships to high-achieving women, without branding them as tokens.
Such collaboration, perhaps with sticks as well as carrots, between funding agencies and the institutions they fund, is essential if robust change is to come more rapidly. Without it, Europe will continue to include far too few countries that, for ambitious women scientists, are good places from which to start."


Bookmark in Connotea

System for research proposals overwhelmed

US federal agencies are scrambling to prepare for a wave of research proposals from scientists eager to win funding offered in the nation's economic stimulus package, as reported in an online Nature News story on 16 March. White House officials fear that the number of applications could overwhelm the country's online grant-application system, Grants.gov, if immediate action is not taken. From the News story: "The Grants.gov system, which went online in 2004, was intended to streamline the grant process by offering a central electronic application portal for all federal grant-making agencies. But it was designed to handle only about 65,000 applications a year, says Sheila Conley, acting deputy assistant secretary in the office of grants at the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) in Washington, DC, which manages the system. "We've blown that out of the water," she says. The system received 200,000 applications in 2008; that's expected to jump to 275,000 this year."
Various researchers and research administrators have described their experiences with this system, and compared it with other application procedures, both in the News story and in online comments at the Nature News website. In view of the complex procedures, technical hitches and bureaucracy, tight deadlines and number of applications, researchers planning to request funding need to be well prepared. Let's hope that is enough.

Bookmark in Connotea

EMBO Reports series on convergence research

I always enjoy Frank Gannon's editorials in EMBO Reports, so it is a pleasure to see the latest issue's table of contents alert in my inbox. This month (EMBO R. 10, 103; 2009), Dr Gannon discusses 'convergence', the latest business buzzword, but hardly a new concept to scientists, he writes.
"Research is, and should always be, ahead of its time, and convergence research is no exception. The potential of convergence in the development of new products and in public outreach is enormous and will provide valuable, diverse career options for those scientists and engineers who are ready to expand their skills and knowledge into new domains. The old days of a single skill career are now behind us and we have to prepare for this new and complex environment."
Enoy the rest of the article at EMBO Reports.

This Editorial introduces the EMBO Reports Science & Society Series on Convergence Research, which features viewpoints from authors who attended the 'Doing Society and Genomics—Convergence and Competence Building' workshop organized by Peter Stegmaier for the Centre for Society and Genomics at Radboud University (Nijmegen, the Netherlands) in September 2008. The journal editors hope that this series will help to introduce readers to the new multi- and transdisciplinary developments among the life sciences, social sciences and the humanities. The first article, 'Genomics in school', by Roald Verhoeff, Dirk Jan Boerwinkel and Arend Jan Waarlo, is free to access online. (EMBO R. 10, 120-124; 2009.)

Bookmark in Connotea

Stimulating the creative spirit

Can visual arts stimulate creativity in the science laboratory? A new biochemistry building for the University of Oxford might provide the answer, writes Georgina Ferry (Nature 457, 541; 2009). From the article:

"The prime purpose of the art project is to create a stunning physical environment for research. "The senior people [in the university] grasped that if you are trying to recruit the best people in the world, walking them through a building that is dark and dingy is not the best way to get them," says Sansom. Time will tell if money spent on art gives a significant return in scientific discovery."

A 360-degree interactive view of the building can be found here.

See also Martin Kemp's article Laudable Labs? (Nature 395, 849; 1998). "You can read much about the history of science and of architecture in the changing styles and materials used in the building of laboratories. It's a story of fashion, functionality and financial constraints.....We are all too familiar with the messy clutter of disparate laboratory buildings squeezed into congested university campuses. The lab is a major building type, yet we have come to expect little of it — other than as providing functional spaces which almost invariably prove to be inadequate as soon as they are occupied. It would be better if we cared more about the buildings' effects on our visual ambience."

More on creativity at Nautilus.

Bookmark in Connotea

Journey's end for four postdoc journals

Four postdoctoral researchers have been writing their diaries over the past year in NatureJobs. In the first 2009 issue of Nature, they offer parting thoughts on a year of personal and professional milestones.
NatureJobs editor Gene Russo writes:
At a time when financial markets are shaky, science career opportunities uncertain and the plight of the serial postdoc as much of a concern as ever, this year's Postdoc Journal keepers offer hope. In the past few months two of them have earned permanent positions. One has embarked on the challenge of motherhood. The fourth has found a research position that, although immensely challenging, always enthralls her. Each sums up their experiences and future ambitions in online essays (free to access).
Jon Yearsley, a veritable postdoc-aholic of ten years' experience, managed to live up to one of his New Year's resolutions from last year: to have a permanent position or no position at all. He recently landed a lecturing job in Dublin and was joined by his partner after much time apart. Of course, challenges remain: will his brand of interdisciplinary research attract funding? What about students?
New responsibilities have proven daunting for Zachary Lippman, who has just moved to Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York as an assistant professor after a postdoc in Israel. He knows he must generate preliminary data and write grant proposals, but he remains wistful about his past experiences and colleagues.
Aliza le Roux started the year with a research trek of epic proportions. She went from her native South Africa to her new principal investigator's lab at Michigan State University before, in short order, heading to Ethiopia for her new postdoc. She is fascinated every day by the natural soap opera performed by a troop of baboons she studies there. Le Roux loves her job, she says unabashedly. She gets to play with animals and chase her own intellectual questions. But she worries that her work might make a 'normal' life a difficult prospect.
Amanda Goh, on the other hand, has taken a step towards that so-called normal life. Goh became quite frustrated with her lab work this year; she contemplated starting a completely new project. Now, as she prepares for the birth of her first child, she already recognizes that the careful planning she strives for in the lab may be even more difficult to carry out in the nursery.
NatureJobs archive of articles for postdocs and students.
NatureJobs home - includesfree scientific job search and free job postings.
Careers advice by NatureJobs forum at Nature Network.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Materials on the global importance of research investment

Nature Materials starts the new year with a rousing editorial in its January edition (Nat. Mater. 8, 1; 2009) on the importance of innovation: "we cannot afford reductions in fundamental research or to be complacent on issues such as the energy crisis. The lesson from the recent financial meltdown seems straightforward. If we do not understand the risks we are exposed to and cover ourselves against them, the long-term implications might be grim. Unlike the banks and their complex financial instruments, which even proved too complex for sophisticated risk-assessment computer models, the gamble we are taking with our planet is painfully clear."
According to the editorial, the energy crisis and global warming need immediate action if we are to avoid significant costs and serious implications. "Even though public budgets are badly strained, it is clear that we have to take a long-term approach and cannot afford to reduce our spending on fundamental research. Budget cuts and hiring freezes are anything but a solution. We must equip our academic system with sufficient funds to push ahead fundamental research in areas such as clean energy technologies." The journal hopes "that 2009 will mark a turning point, not only for the economy, but also in our approach to science policy and science funding."

See also in the same issue of the journal (Nat. Mater. 8, 3-4; 2009) an interview with Joseph Michels, a managing director at One Equity Partners, who talks to Nature Materials editor Joerg Heber about making private equity investments in high-tech companies in times of recession.

Bookmark in Connotea

Kavli prizewinner on this "century of neuroscience"

As the year 2008 draws to a close, excitement and an expectation of change hang in the air, and not least in the field of neuroscience, according to the Editorial in the December issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience (9, 885; 2008). From the Editorial:
"We have recently had a decade of the brain, and there is a sense that this will be a century of neuroscience," says Pasko Rakic, one of three winners of this year's Kavli prize for neuroscience, in an interview on page 893 of the December issue. Pasko Rakic, Sten Grillner and Thomas Jessell were recognized for their pioneering work and outstanding contributions to elucidating the development and function of neural circuits. This highly prestigious prize, which will be given biannually in the fields of nanoscience, neuroscience and astrophysics, was awarded for the first time this year. The interviews highlight the milestones in the careers of the awardees, their outlook on neuroscience and their advice for young neuroscientists.

Previous Nautilus posts on prizes and awards.

Bookmark in Connotea

Research rewards are worth the effort

Tracey L. Rogers of the University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia writes in Correspondence (Nature 456, 29; 2008):
The reasons women drop out of science are complex, and Timothy Roper and Larissa Conradt have hit on an important factor in their Correspondence 'Childcare not enough to make a science career family-friendly' (Nature 455, 1029; 2008). However, I don't see encouraging more women into science as either pointless or unethical.
Careers in science can offer enormous rewards to women. Moving into an academic environment has provided great opportunities for me as a mother, owing to its flexibility. I am now measured largely on my productivity, and my ability to multitask — honed by motherhood — is an asset as I juggle research, administrative duties and teaching.
I have worked in the male-dominated field of Antarctic research for the past 15 years, and I run a research programme looking at climatic warming impacts on the top predators, leopard seals. This work has been successful, thanks to my scientific team — which, incidentally, is mainly composed of women. As the mother of two children under the age of six, I suspect that a large part of my success has been due to the enduring support of my partner. I'm not going to pretend that it has been plain sailing, but I wouldn't have done it any differently.
Let's stop asking why there are so few women in science. Instead, let's turn the question round to ask how those who made it actually got there.
As scientists, we are skilled strategists, overseeing the conception of a new research initiative, then the project's gestation and its birth as a peer-reviewed article. These planning skills also sustain our lives outside the lab.
To those women embarking on the journey, I would say that it is not a road for everyone — but if, like me, you have a burning passion for your research, I would encourage you whole-heartedly to pursue it. It's a long journey, so pace yourself and plan — including your home life and time with your family in your plan. Sometimes you need to step back a little in order to move forwards.

Readers are invited to discuss these issues at Nature Network.

Bookmark in Connotea

Two million hours of science

G. N. Greaves of Aberystwyth Univesity and co-authors write in a Commentary in Nature Materials 7, 827-839 (2008):
"The world's first dedicated X-ray synchrotron radiation storage ring, the Synchrotron Radiation Source or SRS (Fig. 1), is closing down this autumn after 27 years of operation. Designed, built and commissioned at Daresbury Laboratory in less than four years, it thrust the United Kingdom into a world-leading position in 19801, delivering the first uninterrupted beams of intense X-rays. Since then, the use of synchrotron X-rays has led to major advances in both fundamental and applied science, which at the SRS has ranged from the structure of glass to catalysts in operation, from the crystallography of proteins to elements at high pressure, and from semiconductor surfaces to the magnetism of atomic layers, to take just a few examples. The SRS has had a substantial role in what has truly become a revolution in characterization science. With over 5,000 papers published, research and instrumentation from the SRS continues to influence facilities across the world."
The authors review the range of fields of science in which the SRS has made significant contributions, calculating that since 1981 "the SRS has served a staggering 11,000 individual users from 25 countries, and been the training ground of over 4,000 doctorate students and 2,000 post-doctorate researchers. With materials research making up around 40% of this research programme, the legacy of the SRS in this field is enormous. We have picked out examples where the international impact of the SRS has been particularly impressive, but there are many more: developments in industrial materials, biomaterials, electrochemical materials and, very recently, heritage materials. The international conference series, 'Synchrotron Radiation in Materials Science', which began in Chester, UK, in 1994, charts this progress and involvement of the SRS over the years. Indeed, many of the new concepts, experiments, theory and instrumentation in X-ray science owe their origins to research at Daresbury, starting 27 years ago when the SRS heralded the age of dedicated synchrotron radiation.
It is worth reflecting on the relatively short time taken for authorization to build the SRS by the then Science Research Council. The decision in the late 1970s followed the briefest of approval procedures compared with the current process-driven practice of seeking the widest consultation before dipping into the public purse. If the gut-reaction decision to build the SRS had taken any longer, it would have jeopardized its place as a world-first and, more importantly, the confidence to build new science over the next generation — much of which has been internationally leading and continues to influence the synchrotron radiation community worldwide."

Bookmark in Connotea

Naturejobs podcasts for careers advice

The Naturejobs series of free audio shows features interviews and advice from experts in the field and highlights diverse career issues relevant to today's scientists. Naturejobs podcasts can be delivered directly to your desktop by subscribing to the free RSS feed. Simply click here and copy and paste the URL into your media player.

Bookmark in Connotea

Discuss Nature's Commentaries on innovation

Are you interested in innovation and how to promote and predict it? Check out Nature ’s series of commentaries on the subject and tell us what you think at a Nature Network forum for online discussion.
In June, Bill Destler, president of the Rochester Institute of Technology discussed his school’s plan to foster innovation through academic-industrial partnerships.
In July, Lan Xue director of the China Institute for Science and Technology Policy argues that pushes to globalize science must not threaten local innovations in developing countries.
In August, David Guston of Arizona State University discusses the inherrent contradictions in the idea of introducing innovation policies, and offers ways of anticipating change without predicting it.
In September, Fred Gault and Susanne Huttner discuss some of the ways the OECD is looking to apply metrics to measure the impacts of innovation policies.
Podcast Extra!
David Goldston talks with experts about policies to implement innovation in this run up to the US presidential election.
Do you think innovation can be directed? Can it be predicted? Encouraged? Measured? Join the discussion at Nature Network.
The Nature commentaries are collected in this web focus.

Bookmark in Connotea

UK physics gets a health check

In a Commentary exclusive to Nature (Nature 455, 592; 2 October 2008), Professor Bill Wakeham, Vice Chancellor of the University of Southampton, discusses the findings of his long-awaited review on the state of physics in the United Kingdom. The field is healthy, he says, but scientists need to reclaim the intellectual ownership of research at the margins of the discipline such as medical or atmospheric physics. Read the article free online for two weeks from today, and check out next week’s issue on 9 October for more news and audio. (Nature's website is here.)
There is a Nature Network forum for discussion of Wakeham's key messages that physicists will need to take ownership over their field and capture new funding streams. All are cordially invited to participate.
See also a related Nature news story by Geoff Brumfiel. (Nature 1 October 2008. doi:10.1038/news.2008.1145)


Bookmark in Connotea

The Source Event is on Friday of this week

A reminder that The Source Event, a free, dedicated science career fair that combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions, is on Friday 26 September. The event will promote Europe as a great place to pursue a career in science, be it in industrial research, research organisations or academia. It will present the best opportunities from the best organizations: public, private, national and international. Jobseekers will be able to meet with potential employers who are offering hundreds of genuine vacancies. Our plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet high profile scientists and gain careers information and advice.
Editors from Nature journals and Nature Network will be speaking or on-hand to meet attendees, and there will be information available about Nature Publishing Group's internship scheme and other career opportunities. One presentation will be by Simon Frantz of the Nobel Foundation (previously, Simon was Chief Editor of Nature Reviews Drug Discovery). Simon's presentation is entitled Careers in science writing/editing, and he has been carrying out a 'web 2.0' experiment in advance of the event at Nature Network, encouraging his audience to help shape his talk.
The Source Event is at the Business Design Centre, London.

Bookmark in Connotea

Encouraging women to participate in science

Ashleigh Griffin of the Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh reviews (Nature 454, 827; 2008) the book Women in Science, Engineering and Technology: Three Decades of UK Initiatives by Alison Phipps (Trentham Books: 2008. 184 pp. $16.99, £25.50). The review is reproduced here:

The lack of women, especially senior women, in science departments is familiar. Less widely appreciated is the effort that has gone into addressing this under-representation. Women in Science, Engineering and Technology presents a history of around 150 initiatives to encourage women's participation in science, engineering, construction and technology in the United Kingdom during the past three decades. Alison Phipps, director of gender studies at the University of Sussex, UK, has compiled a valuable resource for activists, policy-makers and educational practitioners, also providing social and political context and analysis.
To a woman working in science, rather than one working for women in science, the book is much more than a reference manual. It puts our experience in context — within the global economy and the women's movement. Phipps makes a compelling case that achieving fundamental change depends on understanding this context and she urges closer communication between educators, academics and social scientists.

Continue reading "Encouraging women to participate in science" »

Bookmark in Connotea

Avoiding rejection of high-quality grant proposals

Philip Strange of the School of Pharmacy, University of Reading, UK, writes in Nature's Correspondence (Nature 454, 397; 2008):

In his Correspondence 'Fewer academics could be the answer to insufficient grants' (Nature 453, 978; 2008), Andrew Doig suggests that the endemic problem of the rejection of high-quality grant proposals could be solved by cutting the number of academic staff. This proposal could create a new problem.
The number of academic staff is generally related to the number of undergraduates. Cutting the number of academics would reduce the number of trained students produced, which would have a negative effect on the nation's health and wealth.
In this increasingly technological age, we need all the trained scientists we can muster to combat issues such as global warming. The way to prevent the rejection of high-quality grant proposals and to support research is to put a bit more money into the system.

Bookmark in Connotea

Challenge yourself, says Paul Smaglik

Monitor your performance reviews and ensure that they are showing progress, writes Paul Smaglik at the Nature Network NatureJobs forum. "Create your own set of metrics—publication, citations and patents for academics, targets met and products advanced through the pipeline for industry science. Create your own goals, set deadlines to meet them. Challenge yourself. Also, seek informal feedback from colleagues both in and outside your organization. Seek out new projects and collaborations to keep work from being route. As a science journalist, I created my own metrics
for attending meetings. And I ask people outside my organization what they think of my work. I also challenge myself to write about things I’ve never covered before (one of my scariest professional experiences was an internship at Science News; I wnated to write only about medicine, but my colleagues there encouraged me to write about a different discipline every week—truly scary!) and I try different approaches to story-telling to keep myself fresh. And I seek out healthy risks like my decision last year to leave my permanent job at Nature to hike the Appalachian Trail. Creating your own parameters for success helps exceed the metrics set by others and gives you control over the direction and progress of your own career."

Bookmark in Connotea

Employment conditions for UK academics

Paul Smaglik, in a Prospects article for NatureJobs, (Nature 454, 131; 2008) discussed a survey of 109 UK universities by Hampshire-based Incomes Data Services for the Universities and Colleges Employers Association, which concludes that academics are contracted to work fewer hours, have more holiday time, and better child-care policies, pension plans and sick pay than elsewhere in the public and private sectors. A related report also says that academic pay has improved in recent years, with a 30% increase between 2002 and 2007, putting the average salary at £42,588 (US$85,000) in 2007.
But Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said in the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) that the report used data on contracted hours rather than actual time worked, thus painting a "misleading picture". Other surveys show that academics work some 50+ hours a week, rather than the 35 contracted hours. In a related blog, several THES readers agreed, saying that they put in far more than the contracted weekly hours and often forgo holiday time in order to catch up. And when they do take leave, they often take work with them. As far as salaries go, Hunt agrees that academics' pay has increased — but she says that it still lags behind equivalent positions in the private sector.

Bookmark in Connotea

Reality lags behind rhetoric in building interdisciplinary work

Danae Rebecca Dodge of the Graduate School of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, UK, writes in Nature's Correspondence pages (Nature 454, 27; 2008):

As a PhD student in archaeology and genetics, I am all too aware of the difficulties in crossing a gaping discipline divide, as well as of their effect on academic career prospects, as discussed in the Naturejobs article 'Assembly work' (Nature 453, 422–423; 2008).
For my master's degree in biomolecular archaeology, I needed a foot in two UK universities: one in the University of Manchester's biology department and the other in the University of Sheffield's archaeology department. My former lecturers later became part of the Manchester Interdisciplinary Biocentre (MIB) and the MSc course shifted to Sheffield, where eventually the programme ceased.
This closure was a disappointment for the nascent field of bioarchaeology, set to thrive only on a foundation of solid postgraduate training. Although the MIB and other new centres for interdisciplinary research are enthusiastically welcomed, they are few and far between and so able to offer only limited postdoctoral prospects.
Opening such centres and creating training programmes is not enough — it is also necessary to make interdisciplinary fields attractive to graduates and for senior academics to appreciate their significance. This would improve project turnover, bringing more funding to collaborative projects that would sustain interdisciplinary centres and allow academics from each discipline to gauge publications on an equal footing.
Perhaps then my search for a postdoctoral position in bioarchaeology would be easier. Although interdisciplinary projects are viewed as hot topics, in reality they lag behind as they await official establishment and recognition.

Bookmark in Connotea

Careers advice online forum for the Source Event

The NatureJobs Source Event career fair will be taking place in London on 26 September 2008. This dedicated science career fair combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions. The event will promote the UK and the rest of Europe as a great place to pursue a career in science, be it in industrial research, research organizations or academia. It will present the best opportunities from the best organizations: public, private, national and international.
Jobseekers will be able to meet with potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. The plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet high-profile scientists and gain careers information and advice.
Several of the invited speakers have kindly agreed to answer career-related questions in advance of the meeting, at Nature Network. The Nature Network Question & Answer session with some of the meeting’s speakers is now "live". The NatureJobs team invites you to ask the speakers about their backgrounds, career paths, advice for getting in to a particular field or sector, relevant or important skill sets, and so on. The relevant speaker(s) will post responses, and factor the questions into their presentations at the event.

The following speakers have kindly agreed to participate:
Jim Loftus, Research Recruitment Manager, Pfizer
Matthais Haury, Coordinating Manager, EMBL International Centre for Advanced Training
Zonya Jeffrey, Biomedical Scientist, Central Manchester and University Hospitals NHS Trust
Stijn Oomes, Assistant Professor in Human–Computer Interaction, Delft University of Technology
George Schlich, Chartered and European Patent Attorney & founder of Schlich & Co
Jonathan Yearsley, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne.

Already in the Nature Network Source Event forum there are questions and answers about moving from academia to industry, what participants hope to gain from the event, which recruitment and other companies will be exhibiting, how to upload your CV, and more.
Please join this free Nature Network group to ask your questions and to obtain further careers advice from the panel of experts.
The Question and Answer sessions are here.

Bookmark in Connotea

European life scientists' conference in Nice

Frontiers of cellular, developmental and molecular biology, Nice; 30 August – 2 September 2008.
The seventh international congress of the European Life Scientist Organization (ELSO) returns this year to Nice on the French Cote d’Azur. Promoted for the first time in collaboration with the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO), the ELSO meeting offers a broad palette of top-notch international molecular life science mixed with informative and practical events to promote the career development of young researchers.
From the conference information pages: Plenary session speakers this year include: systems biologist Ursula Klingmueller; cell biologist Graham Warren; stem cell biologist Andreas Trumpp; developmental biologist Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz; tissue engineer Donald Ingber, and proteomics expert Matthias Mann. The 21 minisymposia and the poster sessions cover topics ranging from entry of pathogens into cells, through epigenetics to computational biology and all stops en route. Around 180 speakers, 600 posters and 80 commercial exhibitors will provide four full days of exciting and topical life science. Abstract submission deadline is 15 June.
If you are looking for advice on what to do next, whether it be a postdoc or a junior group leader position in another country or a move into a career outside academia, ELSO’s career development events can give you the inspiration to try something new and challenging and the practical help to put your plans into practice. At this year’s meeting there will be mentoring and mobility sessions, first-hand accounts of careers outside academia, as well as a new career enhancement workshop looking at your own personality, CV, interview techniques, and so on. Not to be missed if you are planning a career move soon!

Bookmark in Connotea

Is there a loophole in start-up funding?

In many countries funding agencies have set up dedicated funding schemes to help the plight of young principal investigators. But is the playing field level for all qualified scientists? This question is asked in the June Editorial of Nature Cell Biology (10, 629; 2008), and we welcome your views here.

In many countries it is possible to obtain one's first position as principal investigator within five years of a first postdoc, and funding policies that encourage this fast-track route are all the rage. In the UK, for example, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust offer generous Career Development Awards of up to £1 million — enough to effectively kick-start a successful independent career. However, both specify a narrow time-frame (three to six years' postdoctoral experience), which markedly restricts the number of candidates. This reflects the international funding landscape; for example, in Germany the 'Junior Professor' scheme is also capped at nine years of postgraduate research.
Some of the most promising candidates who follow a less linear career path run the risk of disqualifying themselves from vital funding. An investigator who has gone through multiple postdocs to learn different skills in diverse disciplines may be better equipped for innovative and independent research than fast-track, inexperienced principal investigators. Clearly, it is good to encourage early independence, but not at the expense of researchers who delay the move for the right reasons. Such principal investigators may actually find themselves between a rock and a hard place: they may have been awarded a coveted university position but be unable to apply for start-up funding and have to compete for programme grants with senior researchers who have established groups of a dozen people.

Continue reading "Is there a loophole in start-up funding?" »

Bookmark in Connotea

How to succeed in science

Making discoveries, part II of Jonathan W. Yewdell's How to succeed in science: a concise guide for young biomedical scientists, is published in the June issue of Nature Reviews Cell and Molecular Biology (9, 491-494; 2008). "Making discoveries is the most important part of being a scientist, and also the most fun", writes Dr Yewdrell. "This article provides practical advice to young scientists on choosing a research topic, on designing, performing and interpreting experiments and on maintaining their sanity in the process."
Part I, Taking the plunge, was published in May.

Bookmark in Connotea

Calling all young physiologists

James Butcher, publisher of the eight Nature Clinical Practice journals, is giving a talk on careers in scientific publishing at this year’s Young Physiologists’ Symposium, on Sunday 13 July 2008, at Cambridge, UK. James writes: "The Young Physiologists’ Symposium is a fabulous meeting that is well worth attending. 10 years ago I helped to organise a YPS meeting at the University of Bristol, where I was a PhD student at the time. The internet was still in its infancy in the late 1990s and I don’t think we even had a website to promote the conference, but somehow we managed to get together young physiologists from all over the UK who had an interest in cardiovascular physiology. I’m really pleased to be attending again, this time as a speaker rather than as an organiser."

Bookmark in Connotea

How to promote creativity and innovation

If the United States is losing its competitive edge in science and technology, as some indicators show (see Nature 453, 133-134; 8 May 2008), how can that trend be reversed? As well as various recent welcome recommendations to increase funding, graduate stipends, research facilities and teaching, May's Editorial in Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (15, 425; 2008) identifies the importance of more funding for high-risk, highly innovative projects. Although 40 European funding agencies have programmes that support such "novel" projects, the main funder in the United States is the National Institutes of Health. Its EUREKA program is for investigators "testing novel, unconventional hypotheses or are pursuing major methodological or technical challenges". Another initiative is the Grand Challenges Explorations, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. As the Nature Structural and Molecular Biology Editorial puts it: "If these programs in Europe and the United States lead to even a few discoveries like those of Archimedes—who, when he stepped into his bath and realized he could calculate the volume and density of an object by submerging it in water, leaped out of the tub and dashed outside without clothes on crying, "Eureka! I have found it!"—the monies will have been well spent."

Bookmark in Connotea

Stimulating progress by changing research direction

Is scientific progress being stifled by a lack of support for researchers who aim to change research directions? This is the question asked in Nature Cell Biology's May Editorial (10, 499; 2008).

At a time when cell biologists are exposed more than ever to diverse fields of research, it is notable that we are not seeing a parallel increase in researchers moving into new areas. There are certainly compelling examples of cell biologists who have successfully maintained more than one research focus or shifted the direction of their laboratory entirely — but not as many as one might expect. Perhaps people really do have a healthy obsession with their particular research focus, but is there also a fear of failure that is being compounded by the current funding and publishing process?

The Editorial goes on to identify some initiatives designed to encourage this type of innovation, for example schemes such as the Pioneer Award, requiring that "the proposed research must reflect ideas substantially different from those already being pursued in the investigator's laboratory or elsewhere".
Some fields, particularly smaller ones, can be harder to break into than others, partly because of a sense of "ownership" by those working in the discipline. According to the Editorial, "No doubt some of the best research is done by those who appreciate a particular system in all its depth and complexity; however, a fresh view can provide clarity. Exploring new areas may be risky for the individual but there is no question that it drives overall research progress."

Bookmark in Connotea

Choices in neuroscience careers

Choices in neuroscience careers are discussed by Tamas Bartfai, Tom Insel, Gord Fishell and Nancy Rothwell in the Viewpoint in the May issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience (9, 401-405; 2008).
What factors should young scientists (PhD students and postdoctoral researchers) consider to ensure they choose wisely when selecting their field of study, place of study, laboratory and mentor? Most students and postdoctoral researchers aiming for a successful career in neuroscience ask themselves these questions. In this article, Nature Reviews Neuroscience asks four successful neuroscientists for their thoughts on the factors one should consider when making these decisions, with the hope of creating a useful resource for junior neuroscientists who have to make important and sometimes difficult decisions that might have long-lasting consequences for their careers.

Bookmark in Connotea

Women physicists suffer gender bias

Sherry Towers, a particle physicist who is now a statistician, reports a study using public databases to study the career paths of 57 former postdoctoral researchers from Fermilab who worked on the Run II Dzero experiment to examine if males and females were treated in a gender-blind fashion on the experiment. Dr Towers's results are highlighted in a Nature news story this week (23 April 2008) .
Female researchers were on average significantly more productive compared to their male peers, yet were allocated only one-third the amount of conference presentations based on their productivity. The study also finds that the dramatic gender bias in allocation of conference presentations appeared to have significant negative impact on the academic career advancement of the females.
Nature contacted some physicists to ask them their views. Some are sceptical, arguing for example that one of the criteria used in the study, internal papers, are not necessarily a direct measure of productivity, and that the small number of physicists surveyed is not enough to prove systematic bias. But even those expressing scepticism do not doubt that females suffer gender discrimination. Several female physicists contacted by Nature said Towers's data matched their personal experiences of institutional sexism in physics. According to the news story, Fermilab did undertake a review of its policies after the complaints of gender bias.
Various points of view are expressed in the comment thread to the Nature story, to which you are welcome to add your experiences and/or views.

Bookmark in Connotea

Vision for Chinese neuroscience research

Haihong Ye wrote a fascinating post on Action Potential, the blog of the journal Nature Neuroscience, last month, on the amazing changes in Chinese neuroscience over the past decade. He writes: "Over the past 10 years, especially the last five, the whole world has been amazed by the Chinese economy. To me, however, the improvement in biological science research in China is much more amazing. In the summer of 1998 I left Beijing and went to the US to pursue a PhD in neuroscience. In 2007, after nine years of graduate study and post-doc training abroad, I came back to Beijing, seeking opportunities for further career development. What a difference some strong funding and visionary directives, not to mention a decade, can make."
Please visit Action Potential to read on and to discuss this stimulating article about the driving forces behind the country's neuroscientific achievements, the problems in maintaining progress, and how things look for the future.
For those interested in reading more on the topic, Chinese neuroscience was featured in Nature Neurocience's March editorial (11, 1; 2008).

Bookmark in Connotea

Chasing biotech across Europe

From a Feature by Barbara Nasto in Nature Biotechnology 26, 283 - 288 (2008):

Europe's biotech sector has tripled in size over the past decade, expanding to include 2,350 companies in 2006 compared with the 700 that existed ten years ago. At the highest political echelons, the European biotech industry enjoys the endorsement of its leaders, as demonstrated by the creation of the EU Life Science and Biotechnology Strategy in January 2002 and the Lead Market Initiative for Europe, announced early this year. But the difficulties that companies face in negotiating the EU's bureaucratic machinery, the poor availability of risk capital, the lack of harmonized fiscal and legal systems, and the slow evolution from a patchwork of largely uncoordinated national initiatives to more coordinated efforts across the continent mean that European biotech remains a work in progress.

Europe is home to a potpourri of initiatives to support the biotech industry. Implementation of European-wide, national and local policies to support the industry help to create several unique environments not only within countries but also within regions and even individual cities. Many of its organizations, both governmental and private, are well aware of ways to further improve the environment. The overall trend is toward the increased adoption of technology and the creation of greater market uniformity within Europe. Growth in the sector promises to continue as all the nations have agreed that a knowledge-based economy is the way forward for Europe and biotech is a part of the endeavor to reach the goals laid out in the Lisbon Agreement.

Read the article in full in the April 2008 issue of Nature Biotechnology.

Bookmark in Connotea

Editor needed for the Protein Structure Initiative knowledge base

Nature Publishing Group is looking for a dynamic, organized and creative science graduate with a background in structural biology to launch and maintain the forthcoming Protein Structure Initiative (PSI) knowledge base. The successful applicant will also have a keen interest in and ideas for making the site accessible to a broad audience of molecular and cellular biologists as well as geneticists.
Launching in 2008, the knowledge base will be an accessible online publication widely read by the research community. The site will encompass editorial content updated monthly on recent research, news and events, as well as databases and other information resources from the PSI. The Knowledgebase is an innovative publication of a type that is becoming increasingly important in academic publishing, and we are looking for someone who is eager to establish the Knowledgebase as a major information resource for researchers.
The Editor will take responsibility for site's content and high scientific quality, including writing summaries of key research developments. The editor will work as part of the existing teams in NPG’s Web Publishing department and at Nature Structural and Molecular Biology, and will liaise with the PSI. They will have, or will be shortly expecting to receive, a PhD in a structural biology-related discipline, and will have a broad interest and understanding of the structural biology field, including technologies and their applications. A sound knowledge of good web practice and a passion for the exploitation of the medium as a means of scientific communication are crucial.
Key personal qualities for this position include excellent writing skills, strong ability to communicate with leading scientists, an acute eye for detail, and the ability to work to firm deadlines.
The successful candidate will ideally be based in our offices in New York, although other localities may be possible.
To Apply: Send cover letter stating salary requirements and resume via email to admin@natureny.com (Nature Publishing Group, Human Resources Department) no later than 14 April 2008. Note “Online Editor” in the subject header. NPG is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

Bookmark in Connotea

Boost your career at Nature Network NatureJobs forum

Paul Smaglik writes on Nature Network's NatureJobs careers advice forum:
Taking longer in grad school? Undergoing multiple postdocs? Waiting for independent-investigator status?

"Naturejobs diagnosed these symptoms four years ago and prescribed some solutions. But we’re seeing signs that the maladies hampering young scientists’ career progression might be getting worse. One underlying cause? The US National Institutes of Health has caught the budget-crunch bug since then. Funding has been flat the past five years. This chronic condition hits young scientists hardest. Over that time, new faculty have seen their grant success rates drops and the age to independence increase. Grant renewals have also been harder to come by over that time period—especially for younger faculty. Now the NIH has frozen postdoc stipend levels; for fellows, this is like coming down with a stomach flu when they already have a cold. I’m loathe to just point out a problem, without pointing to any solution. But I’d like to hear the health of your career at this stage. Is your career feeling under the funding weather? Or are you budgetarily healthy? Please let us know. And I’ll soon follow up with some bright spots and ways to boost your career’s immune system."
Please join Paul at the Nature Network forum, and let him know your views.

Bookmark in Connotea

Europe needs to be bolder in supporting synthetic biology research

In an editorial in Molecular Systems Biology (3, 158; 2008), Synthetic biology: promises and challenges,
Luis Serrano of the Centro de Regulación Genomica in Barcelona addresses wide-ranging and fascinating aspects of this nasent field. He asks why Europe is "lagging behind the US? Perhaps it is due to a general problem in Biology research and the way Europe has structured its research. In particular, Europe will need to take more and bolder initiatives in funding and building new institutes to create the necessary critical mass, and should raise its ambition for starting novel research areas. Competitive European groups in areas related to Synthetic Biology definitely exist, mainly amongst the very top EU institutes, where the system is more flexible and excellence is actively pursued. But these few world-class laboratories are usually small, scattered and in many cases have just entered into the field of Systems Biology and, therefore, do not have the capacity to fully embark into Synthetic Biology. As in many other fields, if Europe wants to stay competitive, we will need a major overhauling of the system, promoting excellence, flexibility and young investigators with new crazy projects. In this sense the European Research Council (ERC) initiative may represent a decisive step forward."

Bookmark in Connotea

One woman is still not enough

From a recent Editorial in Nature (451, 869; 2008):
"Seven years ago, Mitiko Go, a biophysicist then at Nagoya University, told Nature about a disturbing experience she had had at a meeting of the university's Division of Biological Science (see Nature 410, 404–406; 2001). The academics were considering a female applicant for a vacant chair, and one male member said: "I'm sorry to have to say this in front of Dr Go, but one woman is enough."
Go thought she might be scolded for relating the story (and indeed she says she was accused of "tarnishing the honour of the university"), but she was about to retire from the university and felt the time had come to say something radical.
Times have changed. Far from retiring, Go is now president of the prestigious Ochanomizu University in Tokyo and a member of the Council for Science and Technology Policy, the country's highest science body, which is chaired by the prime minister. Go and others have implored the government to do more in support of women. The science and education ministry has responded."
Read the rest of this free-access Editorial here, which addresses the questions of why, when Japanese science needs its women more than ever, it does not treat them accordingly.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Events directory 2008 -- digital edition

The digital edition for the Nature Events directory 2008 is available. Now in its ninth year, the directory is full of conferences, meetings, courses and symposia being held during 2008 across all scientific and medical disciplines. From each entry in the Nature Events listings, you can click directly to the conference website for further information.
If you prefer a PDF version of the directory, you can obtain it from the Nature Events main page. Whether via the directory or its regularly updated database, Nature Events aims to offer a comprehensive resource that will help researchers identify the right event to attend.

Bookmark in Connotea

Under-representation of women in geoscience

Nautilus has featured many posts about gender issues in scientific research, as can be seen at this link. The question of opportunities for women is one that endures: hard on the heels of two studies in EMBO Reports last November comes a Feature in February's issue of Nature Geoscience, Gender imbalance in US geoscience academia, by Mary Anne Holmes, Suzanne O'Connell, Connie Frey and Lois Ongley (Nature Geoscience 1, 79 - 82; 2008). From the article:

"We could wait for the pipeline to supply more women by having more women enter our programs, but the wait will be a long one: the proportion of women on the faculty will never equal the proportion receiving PhDs if we do not intervene to stop women's exodus from academia. The problem is not only the supply of women into geosciences majors, but the continual loss as more women drop out and head for other fields or other careers instead of tenure-track jobs and tenure. The processes by which our students complete a PhD and go on to achieve tenure may not be selecting for all traits that can contribute to the best science and teaching. We assert from our own experiences and acquaintances that the ongoing loss of women from the geosciences is not 'best selection', but a brain drain."

The full Nature Geoscience article is available here.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature is seeking a managing editor

Managing Editor - Nature
Nature is the world's leading scientific journal and is the flagship publication of Nature Publishing Group. With its authoritative journalism and opinion, a leading position in its science research content, and worldwide influence and engagement, Nature stands ready to undertake a period of further investment in both print and online formats. The publisher and the Editor-in-Chief of Nature wish to employ a senior manager who will take direct responsibility for the implementation of the publishing programme and for key aspects of publishing and editorial management.
Applicants must have a demonstrable familiarity with the scientific landscape, a strong commercial drive, and the ability to manage projects and to achieve demanding goals in a way that stimulates and inspires the colleagues on whom they depend. The job is based in the London offices of the Nature Publishing Group (NPG), and involves close interactions with colleagues in other parts of Europe, the United States and the Asia-Pacific.
Candidates should have prior commercial and editorial experience, preferably in scientific publishing. They should be comfortable with print and online media and have had experience of running projects and managing teams. Contact details: please send your CV, a summary of relevant experience, and your current salary, quoting reference number to NPG/LON/815, to Geetika Juneja, Personnel Assistant, at londonpersonnel@macmillan.co.uk All candidates must demonstrate the right to live and work in the UK to be considered for the vacancy. Closing Date: 14 February 2008.

Bookmark in Connotea

How to keep Europe's pipeline full

In an editorial in EMBO Reports this month, The pipeline (EMBO R. 9, 1; 2008), Frank Gannon writes that the number of scientists, technicians and engineers that the European Union needs to keep up its current rate of growth is often estimated to be 700,000 by the year 2010. He writes: "the European economies face a huge deficit of the trained people needed to sustain modern knowledge-based economies". He goes on to discuss some of the reasons for this deficit, concluding that "We need to support and encourage young students and help teachers to communicate science in an exciting and inspiring manner, even as early as primary school. In fact, the scientific community has a lot to do and it needs to start soon if we are to avoid the deficit of skilled scientists and engineers predicted for the coming decade."

Bookmark in Connotea

Opportunities for scientists at the museum

For scientists who want to combine public outreach with research, a museum may be the perfect place to work, writes Ricki Lewis in Nature this week in a special report on science career issues and alternative jobs for scientists (Nature 451, 218-219; 2008). "Scientists who work in museums enjoy a dynamic mix of laboratory and field research, collection managing, outreach and education, and exhibition design. The primary advantage is research flexibility, says Kathlyn Stewart, a research scientist in palaeobiology at the Canadian Museum of Nature in Ottawa. "My work focus is a research programme of my design using museum collections," she says, contrasting this with universities, where teaching and advising students is the focus, or industry or government, where scientists may have little say in their research focus."
"Whether helping to start a new museum or just designing an innovative exhibition, museum work is most valued by those scientists hoping to make an impact with the public. "When I work on an exhibition, I realize that maybe a million visitors a year will see it," says John Flynn of the American Museum of Natural History. "That's an incredible opportunity." "

Bookmark in Connotea

Earnings of life-science researchers

Nature Biotechnology's Data Page this month (Nat. Biotech. 26, 14; 2008) features a topic of perennial interest, that of salaries. Stacy Lawrence reports that life-science researchers in the United States earn more than their counterparts in Japan, Australia and, by quite a considerable amount, Europe. The United States also employs more life scientists in companies than anywhere else. Large biotechnology companies generate as much profit as smaller pharmaceutical firms—with only about half the staff. At the higher end of the scale, chief executives of US biotechnology companies earned an average of $350,000 last year and held an average 5.5% stake in their companies.
Tables of these data are available at Nature Biotechnology.

Bookmark in Connotea

The single author as endangered species

"Any issue of Nature today has nearly the same number of Articles and Letters as one from 1950, but about four times as many authors. The lone author has all but disappeared. In most fields outside mathematics, fewer and fewer people know enough to work and write alone. If they could, and could spare the time and effort to do so, their funding agencies and home institutions would not permit it." So writes Mott Greene of the University of Puget Sound in his recent (single-author, naturally) Nature essay "The demise of the lone author" (Nature 450, 1165; 2007).
Professor Greene goes on to discuss how this practice is affecting, and will affect, the system of awarding credit for work done, predicting that "in those fields where multiple authorship endangers the author credit system, we shall soon see institutionally initiated restriction on the number of authors. Paradoxically, this is likely to be endorsed by all parties as preferable to cinema-style specification of who actually did what. Most will prefer full credit for a few papers to little or no credit for many, considering where it matters most: university committees in charge of tenure, promotion and salary increments based on scholarly production. Given Nature's role in determining, as well as chronicling, how science is reported (see Nature 450, 1; 2007), interested parties could watch these pages to see whether a trend towards more restricted authorship is emerging."

Nature's policy on author contribution statements is here, and was introduced in an Editorial here.
Professor Greene's article is also available on the beautiful website that celebrates the history of the journal Nature.

Bookmark in Connotea

Steps required for good mentoring

In a Commentary in the latest (January) issue of Nature Immunology (9, 3-5; 2008), Mentoring and networking: how to make it work, Laura Haynes and coauthors describe the importance and steps required for good mentoring and networking.
Mentoring is considered so important for the development of scientists that the National Science Foundation now requires its grantees to provide information on how they will mentor postdoctoral fellows. The Nature Immunology authors address why this function is crucial, how good mentors can be found, and outline the process and benefits -- "a mentor should equip the mentee with the necessary advice and tools to establish themselves as a researcher, while the mentee must be prepared to translate advice into action."
It is perhaps not so intuitively obvious why networking is important. Clearly, it is a useful skill in finding a new job, but as Haynes et al. point out, it is essential to continuing success in all aspects of a career, as it consists of making meaningful, long-lasting contacts to enhance a researcher's visibility in a field where other people are reviewing one's grants and publications, choosing speakers to invite to conferences and seminars, and providing job and award references. The authors write: "new and innovative ways to network have become available to the more technologically savvy researcher. One example is Nature Network, which is an online meeting place for local scientists to gather, talk and find out about the latest scientific news and events in their area. Among other features, the website allows researchers to create personal profiles and set up groups for labs, departments or institutions, and it allows each member to build a network of like-minded scientists."

Update: Corie Lok, Editor of Nature Network, writes here about why networking is good for your career, describing a talk she gave at the New York Academy of Sciences.

Bookmark in Connotea

Repaying the rewards of research

Fundamental research can yield unforeseen benefits of great value for society, but often this happens only many years after the initial breakthroughs have been made. Can society find a way to pay back this debt?
In a Commentary in this month's issue of Nature Physics (3, 824-825; 2007), Leon N. Cooper of Brown University, writes that "Money is required to do science and as systems become more complex, more people, equipment, and therefore more money is required for each new result. Naturally, people hark back with sentimentality to the good old days when results could be obtained on a tabletop. In fact, some results are still obtained on tabletops, but the tables are getting larger and the tops more expensive. More and more results come from huge collaborations demanding enormous resources. And this brings us inevitably to the questions of who pays, how and why."
After outlining some of the problems in supporting the fundamental research necessary for science to progress, Professor Cooper suggests three measures to improve the current system, involving investment, distribution, and a clear distinction between fundamental and applied research. Referring to the breakthroughs in superconductivity research, he writes: "No single method can solve all of our problems, but the measures outlined above would substantially improve our present system. I would hope that they would make it easier for some current gifted program officer to reach as wise a decision as was made in the Army Ordnance Office fifty years ago."
Read the full article, entitled "The unpaid debt", in the December issue of Nature Physics.

Bookmark in Connotea

Do you want to write for Nature's Postdoc Journal?

Following on a successful inaugural year of Postdoc Journal, Naturejobs is pleased to announce the launch of an international competition to select new writers for 2008.
The Postdoc Journal gives four postdoctoral fellows the opportunity to each write a monthly journal entry for Naturejobs. These writers will chart their ups and downs over the course of a year and describe how their experiences shape their future career choices. Some occasional blogging may be requested as well.
We ask that applicants provide three things:
--A cover letter saying why you want to be considered and what would make you a good journal keeper. Include your institutional affiliation, general area of research, the focus of your graduate degree, and how long you've been a postdoc.
--A sample first entry, 250 words long, that introduces yourself, identifies the biggest career question you will face in the upcoming year and how you plan to search for an answer.
--Your CV.
Deadline for applications is 17 December 2007. See here for previous journal entries.
The applicants will be judged by a panel including Naturejobs editorial staff and past postdoc journal keepers. Applicants must commit to submitting monthly for one year regardless of any changes in student or employment status. Please email the cover letter, sample entry and CV as Word document attachments to this address..
In the subject line, write 'postdoc journal contest' and state the country you are based in and your discipline (example: postdoc journal contest, Canada, cell biology).

Bookmark in Connotea

Changing the way scientists are trained

If you could make one change to the way young scientists are taught and trained, what would it be and why? If you could make one change to the way scientists communicate their latest experimental results, what would it be and why? Corie Lok, Editor of Nature Network, asked some Boston scientists these questions. You can see thir answers in Corie's Network news article How would you change the way scientists are trained?. Here are a few of the points made by the scientists, who are at different stages of their careers:

"I think that at the very least, young scientists in training should know who founded their field, when, and why."

"The postdoctoral period seems to be getting longer and longer. This is a tough pill to swallow when you are in your early to mid-20s. If this continues, more and more talented scientists will leave the bench."

"I would make books like Jared Diamond’s Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed essential reading at the high school level."

"No one in their right mind would give competitors ideas that would expedite their research. This mentality is necessary to stay on top of the field and remain competitive for grants. However, the “secretive” nature of science drastically slows our progress."

For more answers, and to add your own thoughts on these questions, please visit the Nature Network forum.

Bookmark in Connotea

Tribulations of women in academic research

Frank Gannon, Director General of Science Foundation Ireland and senior scientist at the European Molecular Biology Organisation (EMBO) highlights the women issue in his editorial in the current issue of EMBO Reports ( 8, 11, 975; 2007) about two studies published in the same issue of the journal that, "like many others preceding them—show once again that there are great inequalities in the career prospects of men and women in science." Gannon highlights "the blatant unfairness of the fact that, although an identical number of men and women get a PhD in the life sciences, only 15–20% of tenured positions are secured by women. Put another way, it means that men are almost three times more 'successful' than their erstwhile female colleagues."
The first of the two studies, Falling off the Academic Bandwaggon by E. D. Martinez et al. (EMBO Reports 8, 11, 977–981; 2007) documents that women are more likely to quit research at the transition of postdoc to principal investigator. The authors conclude that "the scientific community should wake up to the needs of female PIs by fully supporting—in both theory and practice—initiatives and policies that address the problems faced by women who could take up an independent position. Targeting this population of scientists will increase the number of women entering the PI track and will ultimately result in an increase in the number of women who hold senior positions—thus sustaining the involvement of women in academic science through future generations."
The second study, A Persistent Problem, by A. Ledin et al. (the authors include Gannon) (EMBO Reports 8, 11, 982–987; 2007) concludes that traditional gender roles hold back female scientists. "Employers, policy-makers, scientists and society all need to consider whether we can afford to lose such a large number of trained specialists from the workforce. The consequence of the current system is that a large percentage of higher education graduates are not reinvesting their skills in the economy, owing to traditional gender roles that are no longer in accordance with the demands of modern women and men. We need to ensure that men and women who want to have families are not prevented from also having careers and contributing to society in every way that they can. This can only be achieved by a significant change in the way that society and individuals think about the roles of men and women, and by taking positive action to improve the working conditions and available support for both women and men at all stages of their careers."
See also News in Brief, Nature 450, 149 (2007).

Bookmark in Connotea

Assessing the value of the PhD

It can take twice as long to get a PhD in biomedical sciences in the United States as it does in other countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia. This month's Editorial in Nature Medicine (13, 1265; 2007) asks whether US PhDs are worth more, or whether there are advantages to a speedier system.

Which is the better system probably depends on who you ask. Ask the students and they would probably prefer the short PhD, as it allows them to try out research within a shorter time frame and get out early if they decide it's not for them. And if the purpose of a PhD is not simply training for a life in academia, but also training in the sort of intellectual discipline that can be used in activities aside from the bench, there are clear advantages to not lingering around. Even for those students who are keen to continue on in research, completing a PhD in three years allows them to pursue the next step in a different, perhaps more successful lab if they are not happy with the lab they chose as green, inexperienced novices. Principal investigators might have a different viewpoint: why should they spend three years training a student, only for that student to leave the lab and pursue a postdoc elsewhere as soon as he or she becomes competent enough to do experiments without close supervision? It's only natural for researchers to want to maximize the return on their investment.

Read the full Editorial at Nature Medicine's website.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature focus on biotechnology and pharmacology

If you are looking to fill an appointment, looking for a position yourself, or wanting to advertise or announce an event, award or conference in the fields of biotechnology and phamacuetical R&D, the 15 November isssue of Nature will feature a special focus in these disciplines in the Nature Jobs section of the journal. The contact details for placing your advertisement or announcement can be found at this PDF -- the deadlines are 8 or 9 November, depending on where you are located. The main Nature Jobs website can be seen here.

Bookmark in Connotea

National Academy members' biographies

Via Washington University, St Louis' Biology Library News, I read that the National Academy of Sciences has made its entire historical collection of biographical memoirs freely available online, as PDFs. Fom the National Academy website:

Published since 1877, Biographical Memoirs are brief biographies of deceased National Academy of Sciences members, written by those who knew them or their work. These biographies provide a personal and scholarly view of the lives and work of America's most distinguished scientists and a biographical history of science in the United States.
Over the next several months, the entire collection of Biographical Memoirs will be available online as PDFs. Although memoirs published since 1995 have been freely available online, more than 900 memoirs published prior to 1995 were available previously only through archives and libraries. Among the 500 memoirs published recently online are those of famed naturalist Louis Agassiz; Joseph Henry, the first secretary of the Smithsonian Institution; Thomas Edison; Alexander Graham Bell; noted anthropologist Margaret Mead; and psychologist and philosopher John Dewey.

The alphabetical list of available memoirs is at this link. You can also sign up to an email list to receive news of updates.

Bookmark in Connotea

Opportunities for women in early genetics

There is an interesting historical piece in the current issue of Nature Reviews Genetics (8, 897-902; 2007) by Marsha Richmond of Wayne State University, Detroit, entitled Opportunities for Women in Early Genetics. From the abstract:
"Although women have long been engaged in science, their participation in large numbers was limited until they gained access to higher education in the last decades of the nineteenth century. The rediscovery of Mendel's work in 1900 coincided with the availability of a well trained female scientific workforce, and women entered the new field in significant numbers. Exploring their activities reveals much about the early development of the field that soon revolutionized biology, and about the role of gender in the social organization of science."
See here for the complete article.

Bookmark in Connotea

Ask the Nature editor: scientific publishing careers

The Ask the Nature Editor forum on Nature Network is now taking questions on careers in science publishing. Moderator Corie Lok (also Editor of Nature Network) writes: "Have you ever wondered about careers in scientific publishing? What is it like being a manuscript editor, a science writer, or a copy editor? You can find out by posting your careers question here. Editors at Nature, including ones who hire editors here, will answer your queries."
If you have questions about publishing in the Nature journals, peer review, writing your paper, and so on, you can still post them in the Ask the Nature Editor forum, and they will be answered by Nature editors, including me (Maxine), Karl Ziemelis (Chief Physical Sciences Editor), Ritu Dhand (Chief Biology Editor), Natalie De Witt (senior biology editor), Chris Gunter (senior biology editor) and Linda Miller (US Executive Editor), and Nature journal editors, including Laurie Dempsey (senior editor, Nature Immunology). We are receiving some interesting questions, and are enoying answering them and interacting with you.

Bookmark in Connotea

Academic managers can ensure equal pay

From Nature's current issue (Nature 449, 769; 2007):
Aggressive academic management can correct pay disparities between male and female scientists, say researchers. Their study assesses the effects of intervention to equalize salaries at the University of Arizona's College of Medicine in Tucson between 2000 and 2004 (A. L. Wright et al. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 22, 1398–1402 ; 2007). By 2004, women with basic science doctorates, for instance, were paid 97.6% of the amount men were paid.
Lead author Anne Wright, the college's associate dean for faculty affairs, says the study was undertaken to gauge the success of administrative actions after an earlier analysis found women faculty members were paid about $13,000 (11%) less than men (A. L. Wright et al. Acad. Med. 78, 500—508; 2003).
The new study directly involved personnel records of about 400 faculty members, anthropologist Wright says, rather than using a percentage of staff who respond to a survey.

Bookmark in Connotea

'Wisdom of the crowds' in mentoring?

Mentoring and training for ethical behaviour aren't all they're cracked up to be, according to the (free access) Editorial in the current issue of Nature (449, 638; 2007) . Melissa Anderson and her colleagues at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis decided to investigate the relative effects of mentoring and formal instruction in setting a young scientist's ethical framework (M. S. Anderson et al. Acad. Med. 82, 853–860; 2007). As many as a quarter of the NIH PhD fellows in 2000–01 had not taken ethics courses or been mentored in ethics workshops or discussion roundtables. One quarter of the survey respondents admitted that they did not feel well prepared to deal with ethical issues in their work.
After highlighting several puzzling and dissapointing resposes to the survey, the Editorial goes on to conclude:
"Collective discussions are perhaps a better way to reinforce good behaviour. A good forum for such discussions might be the lab's journal club — particularly if the mentor is skilled in inviting open discussion in a non-confrontational atmosphere. Mentors who regularly set aside time to discuss issues of concern may find that everyone benefits from the 'wisdom of the crowd'. Students can be asked to propose topics to kick off discussion: "I have a friend whose adviser asked her to write several anonymous reviews for him because he is too busy. Should she say yes? Ask for proper attribution?" Figuring it out together is the way to raise everyone's game."
Read the full Editorial here.
Also in the current issue of Nature is the report of our South African mentoring awards (449, 752; 2007).


Bookmark in Connotea

Outsourcing research to third parties

Outsourcing has been relatively rare in academia until now, but is that beginning to change? So ask Franz B. Pichler and Susan J. Turner of the University of Aukland in their Commentary in this month's Nature Biotechnology (25, 1093-1096; 2007). They write: "The rapid development of ever more complex and expensive technology coupled with the increasingly competitive environment in the life sciences is changing both how we access technology and how we conduct research. It is no longer possible to expect every technology to be readily available within a research institution, let alone a laboratory, yet access to such technology is often the difference between success and failure within today's competitive funding models. To fully embrace emerging technologies, scientists are increasingly reliant on outsourcing to contract technology providers (CTPs). In this context, CTPs are companies or institutes that conduct partial or entire experiments on a commercial basis."
The Commentary addresses the pros and cons of going out of house, and some of the strategies needed to make sure this novel form of collaboration works. On what side of the fence sit the authors? "Ultimately, science is more about the conceptualization of the experiment, its design, analysis and interpretation than the actuality of conducting an experiment. Provided that the experiment is performed to the required specifications, it should not matter that some or all of the work has been outsourced. As outsourcing can achieve significant efficiencies in research, we predict that it will become an increasingly common component of research programs, even in academia."

Bookmark in Connotea

Are women more engaged in collaborative research?

Charles S. Hendricksen of the University of Washinton writes in a comment to the post "A female road of science": It has been my personal experience that women are more inclined to engage in collaborative efforts. In my dissertation research on a Web environment for distributive collaborative research, I spent some time attempting to gather research that supported that view. I found no social science research that supported that view, but found much unsupported opinion in the business literature. Has anyone found good evidence?

Bookmark in Connotea

The long hike of science research

Nature's erstwhile NatureJobs editor, Paul Smaglik, writes (Nature 449, 253; 2007) a dispatch from the wilderness:
Long-distance hiking is a lot like doing science. After leaving my post as editor of Naturejobs this spring, it took me about 1,200 kilometres, 20 thunderstorms and 12 rattlesnakes to really understand the similarities. While walking a portion of the 3,380-kilometre Appalachian Trail, which runs from Georgia to Maine, it seemed that there was always farther to go, with no promise of an immediate payback. Days could go by without even the reward of a scenic vista. Some days, the walking felt akin to the daily slog of accumulating data without the guarantee of a publication or a grant.
My wife and I experienced obstacles ranging from the mildly irritating (ticks and mosquitoes) to the potentially dangerous (wind, sleet and hail on exposed ridges). These obstacles have their professional analogues. Ticks are akin to professional parasites trying to take credit for your data. Mud could be compared to the fallout from controversial findings. And weather that can change from sunny to cataclysmic in an instant sums up the mercurial funding world in which scientists function.
There are positive analogies, too. The panorama of layers of blue and green mountain ridges, glimpsed from above the clouds, feels like a eureka moment in an experiment. And the occasional hiker's high of striding effortlessly over 30 kilometres of peaks and valleys felt like one of those rare lab days when everything clicks.
The experience gave my wife and I insights that will serve us off the trail — and that scientists may well appreciate. Both on the trail and in the lab, there are so many things that can go wrong every day that there's no point in blaming anyone: just accept the situation and get on with it.
My wife developed a hiking litmus test, which could also be applied to scientific careers. If we woke up in the morning eager to walk again, no matter how much we had been beaten up by the elements the previous day, we would continue. That feeling of excitement never subsided, no matter how cold, wet, sore and dirty we got. So too in science, if you no longer have that sensation of hope, curiosity and anticipation, it might be time to stop — or at least to look for another job.

Bookmark in Connotea

Are there too many scientists?

Funding woes plague US biomedical researchers. But calls for more funding ignore the structural problems that push universities to produce too many scientists, argues Brian C. Martinson in a Nature Commentary this week (Nature 449, 141-142; 2007). Instead, existing researchers should be given more time, space and freedom to ask questions in new ways, to take risks, and to innovate. Reducing the intensity of competition for NIH (National Institutes of Health) funds is one way of making this happen. Dr Martinson writes:

There are two main routes to contraction of the academic workforce today — through tenure failures, and with younger investigators shifting from academia into industry research. This is worrisome for university research in particular because history suggests that the most dramatic innovations come from the young. So is the only solution to force long-time NIH grant getters into retirement? Perhaps not. Universities have benefited handsomely from the efforts of senior faculty members in securing NIH grants during their careers, perhaps those same universities could now return the favour by taking full responsibility for paying these faculty salaries in their later years. This would serve the dual purpose of getting them off the NIH dole, and encouraging them to share their knowledge with their younger colleagues through more teaching.
This won't be easy. Given the levels of dependency on NIH money, it is akin to asking an addict to give up an easy fix. And not all universities will be in financial positions to employ this strategy, but it's difficult to imagine that richer institutions — some of whom acknowledge that their success lies in capturing an increasing share of the NIH pie— could not lead the way in this. Prospective students and their parents may also look favourably on senior faculty members spending more time teaching.

See here for the full Commentary article.
A related Editorial on the NIH grant-allocation process is discussed at Peer to Peer.

Bookmark in Connotea

Online symposia and groups to develop students' skills

In an Essay, "Look who's talking too: graduates developing skills through communication" in the September issue of Nature Reviews Genetics (Nat. Rev. Genet. 8, 724-726; 2007), Eleni M. Tomazou & Gareth T. Powell of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, write that "greater opportunities for young scientists to present their doctoral research to large general audiences will encourage development of transferable skills and involvement in the scientific community." In their article, they describe how students communicate their research and explore the benefits of student-led meetings.

The entire article can be read via the link above, but it is worth reproducing another part of it here:
"One way in which students can overcome geographical and financial boundaries is through the internet. The recent First On-line EMBL PhD Symposium is an interesting new twist on the conference format that has great potential. Collaborations between students at different institutes can also help to gather sponsorship. A strong example of this is the PhD Student Conference, which was organized (in rotation) by young scientists from the Netherlands Cancer Institute in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, the Institute of Molecular Pathology–Institute of Molecular Biotechnology Research Centre in Vienna, Austria, the Friedrich Miescher Institute in Basel, Switzerland, and the Cancer Research UK London Research Institute in London. Most importantly, young scientists need not wait for opportunities to organize and communicate to be provided for them, nor must they arrange an international conference for every subject — events can be equally successful as small, simple and local. Talking to faculty members and senior scientists at one's own university or institute is the best way to find out what is possible. Exchanging ideas and experiences with other PhD students who have already been engaged in this kind of activity is also important. The PhD students at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute have created a Nature Network group in order to encourage discussions arising from SCAMPS (Sanger-Cambridge PhD Symposium) for University of Cambridge PhD students, but also for more general discussions about life as a PhD student. The group is open to all students participating in or planning similar events, and we hope that this will foster collaborations between institutes and lead to large, well regarded national and international PhD student meetings involving young scientists from around the world. So start talking!"
See here for the SCAMPS Nature Network group.

Bookmark in Connotea

Difficulties for women in international reserarch

Asha Gopinathan of GenSci-e-Tech, Kerala, India, writes in Nature's Correspondence pages (Nature 448, 749; 2007):
The difficulties facing women and under-represented minorities in science and engineering are highlighted in your Naturejobs Special Reports 'Beyond the glass ceiling' and 'Closing the gender gap' (Nature 448, 98–100 and 101–102; 2007). But women from developing countries who work abroad face additional problems, which are not addressed by efforts to help either women or minorities.
During our studies and beyond, we face financial troubles, assumptions of ineptitude by faculty members, harassment and lack of mentoring. In a survey I conducted among 13 women who graduated from the Indian Institutes of Technology and went to the United States, several reported problems with supervisors, including harassment or having to switch supervisors; two of them eventually left research because of lack of support. On top of that, the stress caused by problems with elderly family members at home can be enormous and is not always understood by people in Western societies, whose family ties and responsibilities may differ. Visa problems are also not unusual.
For those of us who return to our home countries, there are more hurdles to clear. Institutions in many developing countries do not open their doors easily to women, even if they actively seek out and recruit men who have studied abroad. Often it is hard to find a position that is appropriate for our education and experience. And the styles of working abroad and at home can be very different.
To make the best use of our talents and training — whether in the United States, Europe or elsewhere — a full survey of our concerns should be conducted and used to frame new policies and instil change within academic culture.

Bookmark in Connotea

Raw deal for young biology researchers

It's official: biology postgraduates in the United States face greater competition for tenure than ever before. A wealth of data released this month will reopen discussions about employment and training in the US biomedical system, writes Erika Check in a Nature news report (Nature 448, 848-849; 2007). According to data collected by FASEB (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology) from several sources, the number of biology students in graduate programmes has increased steadily since 1966, but the number of biomedical PhDs with tenure has remained constant (See the Nature news report for a graph.)
A huge question, discussed in the News report, is why the doubling of the NIH budget from 1998 to 2003 seems not to have helped young scientists. According to anEditorial in the same issue of the journal (Nature 448, 839-840; 2007): "FASEB's data suggest that too many graduate schools may be preparing too many students, so that too few young scientists have a real prospect of making a career in academic science. More effort is needed to ensure that recruitment interviews include realistic assessments of prospective students' expectations and potential in the academic workplace. And training should address broader career options from day one rather than focusing unrealistically on jobs that don't exist.

Bookmark in Connotea

Is EU funding worth the effort?

As the EU continues to roll out FP7 (the seventh Framework programme for research and development), researchers are asking whether the prize of significant research funding is worth the effort that is involved in applying, according to the Editorial in September's Nature Reviews Microbiology. (Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 5, 654; 2007.)
Why are European researchers so negative about the programme? "The main complaint, as everyone who has submitted an application will testify, is the overwhelming amount of bureaucracy. The paperwork demands are off-putting for many researchers, especially those who are already well funded from other sources, a situation that might deprive many EU-funded projects of the researchers with the most appropriate expertise and experience."
The Editorial goes on to conclude: "being the world's biggest programme for research funding brings with it inevitable problems and it remains to be seen whether these changes will placate scientists, promote research and untangle bureaucratic constraints. What is clear is that, despite the programme's complexity, long bureaucratic procedures and the inevitable tough competition, many European researchers are witnessing increasingly tight constraints on their national funding sources and will have to look to FP7 as their best hope to make up the shortfall. Most agree, therefore, that despite the mountain of paperwork, the prize of EU funding is certainly worth the effort."

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature spotlight on Canada

In its 6 September issue, Nature will highlight Canada in the Naturejobs section of the journal. This feature offers an opportunity to advertise positions, conferences and other notices, as it will be read by an international audience of potential employees, investors, employers, potential conference attendees and others. Job advertisements will also receive a complimentary 8-week posting on naturejobs.com and will be matched to relevant content across nature.com. Event advertisements will also receive a complimentary 8-week posting on nature events. The deadline for submission of advertisements is 30 August.
Canada is a leader in the life sciences and biotechnology sector. With world-class institutes, research hospitals and universities, it leads the research in genomics, proteomics, bioinformatics, immuno-therapies, protein engineering and new drug-delivery systems. Canada's government has invested more than $1 billion since 2005 to create new jobs and scientific opportunities, demonstrating a commitment to research and development. So if you are thinking of relocating, watch out for the 6 September issue of Nature to find out more about opportunities in the region.
For more information about participating in the feature, contact Helen Wu (western Canada) or Lhea Copeland (eastern Canada).
See here for our interactive map of our various spotlights and focuses on other regions around the world.


Bookmark in Connotea

Announcing Nature Chemistry

We are delighted to announce the launch of a new journal, Nature Chemistry, in the first part of 2009. Alongside the highest-quality original research, Nature Chemistry will cover news, commentary and analysis from and for the chemistry community, as well as striving to develop a voice that chemists care about.
Over the past five years, Nature Publishing Group (NPG) has expanded its portfolio of Nature journals in the physical sciences, with Nature Materials, Nature Physics, Nature Photonics and Nature Nanotechnology.
Nature Chemical Biology marked NPG's first major foray into chemistry publishing. Launched in June 2005, Nature Chemical Biology has established itself as the home for primary research covering the interface between chemistry and biology. Its first impact factor is 12.409, making it the number one primary research journal in related chemical sciences.
Nature itself has also expanded its coverage of chemistry, with the addition of several chemists as editors to select papers for publication and to report news on chemistry in the News and Views and News sections of the journal.
We have also created additional online services and publications, such as the Sceptical Chymist blog, chemistry podcasts, a chemistry subject area, and our bi-monthly chemistry e-alert about what is new for chemists and chemistry. We also regularly provide hundreds of job opportunities for chemists via naturejobs.

We are looking for a Chief Editor who is able to develop, launch and establish Nature Chemistry as the essential publication for the chemistry community. The role will be based in NPG's Boston office.
Applicants must have a strong track record of research in a chemistry discipline, as well as significant editorial and/or senior research experience. They must demonstrate a good understanding of the challenges faced by researchers in both academic institutions and industry.
This is a demanding and extremely stimulating role, which calls for a keen interest in the practice and communication of science. The successful candidate will therefore be dynamic, motivated and outgoing, and must possess excellent interpersonal skills.
Applicants should include a covering letter stating their suitability for this post, as well as their salary expectations, a current CV and a statement (maximum 1,500 words) that encapsulates their vision for the content, competitive position and longer-term development of Nature Chemistry.
Applications should be sent to Denise Pitter, Personnel Assistant at londonrecruitment@macmillan.co.uk. Applicants should clearly mark on their submissions the reference number. Incomplete applications will not be considered. Closing Date: 24 September 2007


Bookmark in Connotea

News for job seekers and recruiters

As the world’s largest scientific recruitment site with over 4,000 jobs globally within academic institutions, industry and government, naturejobs.com provides everything you need to find your next position.
The naturejobs team is now redeveloping and improving this site. As there are so many open positions, the site has been updated to make it easier for job seekers to find the right position. The job search function and the way in which your search results are presented are in an iimproved and simpler format, making it easier for you to find the most relevant positions. You can also apply directly using the ‘Apply to job’ field below the job description -- just paste in your application and CV with no need for attachments.
If you have an existing Resume/CV with naturejobs.com you will be able to retrieve this information up until October 2007. To do so, please login here.
To start searching our new jobs database, please do so here.
Naturejobs.com is continuing to evolve, so watch out for more information. The naturejobs team welcomes your questions or comments via email.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature seeks a Books&Arts editor

Nature, the leading international journal of science in print and online, seeks a full-time Books & Arts Editor to play a key role in the development of its growing Opinion section.
The Books & Arts Editor will be responsible for producing timely, authoritative, urbane, informative, useful, competitive, entertaining, opinionated and engaging culture coverage in print and online, from commissioning to publication. Their section must review, preview and reflect upon the most important developments and trends in books, media, film, theatre, dance, music and visual art of interest to a broad, literate, global audience of working scientists and science-interested opinion leaders.
The ideal candidate will be passionate about science, books, the arts and the internet, educated to Masters level or beyond, with exemplary scientific and cultural contacts and at least 3 years editing experience, preferably in running a similar magazine section. S/he will thrive on ideas, deadlines, collaboration and innovation. The post is London based, but may involve some travel to Nature's overseas offices.
All candidates must demonstrate the right to live and work in the UK to be considered for the vacancy.
Contact Details:
Applicants should email a covering letter, 3 clips of their writing and editing, a CV of no more than 2 pages, and an outline of no more than 400 words of how they would cover Autumn 2007's biggest books and arts stories, quoting reference number NPG/LON/694, to Geetika Juneja at londonpersonnel@macmillan.co.uk by 29 August 2007.

Bookmark in Connotea

EU visa rules need to be more scientist-friendly

This month's Editorial in Nature Cell Biology (9, 855; 2007), "Scaling the EU visa barrier", addresses the fact that laboratories depend on an international workforce, yet crossing national boundaries remains a trial of endurance for many academics both in the United States and Europe.

From the Editorial: "Realizing that unnecessary visa hurdles hinder attracting global talent to Europe, the EU Council issued a directive in 2005 to streamline the process for visa applications by non-EU scientists.The details of the process — which can sometimes take months — varies between EU states and depends on the applicant's nationality. It often involves interviews with consular officials, expensive medical appointments with consulate-prescribed doctors, and a hefty dossier of supporting material to document one's ties to the country of origin. A key feature of this directive is that the host institution in the EU provides a 'hosting agreement' that would allow the applicant to obtain a residence permit rapidly without also having to obtain a work permit. Under the aegis of this 'scientific visa', 'third-country nationals' (non-EU citizens) can also conduct research for less than three months in EU states other than the primary hosting country, subject to the visa and entry regulations of the individual country. The directive is to be implemented in member states by October 2007 but has so far been adopted by only four EU members: Austria, Slovenia, Slovakia and, most recently, Germany. Notably, the UK, which hosts a large proportion of non-EU scientists and has a cumbersome visa-granting system in developing countries, is not legally bound to translate the directive into national law."

After providing some case histories, the Editorial goes on to propose that for scientists based in the EU, a special long-term, multiple-entry visa category is required to enable third-country nationals to travel freely throughout the EU. "The National Academies in the US have proposed a similar policy for scientists' visas. They and other agencies, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, have advocated effectively for changes to US visa policies. It is time that the European Research Council and European scientific societies did the same."


Bookmark in Connotea

Deb Koen's advice on careers

NatureJobs offers a careers advice service. Send us your career questions and Deb Koen, the Naturejobs careers expert, columnist for the Wall Street Journal Online and President of Career Development Services, will consider your toughest questions and offer her professional career perspective. Deb writes:
"I invite you to send your questions for a posted response in the column. While we can’t respond to every request, we will try to select samples that represent the interests of our reading audience.
Examples of questions may include topics related to the job search, interviewing, career management, work-place politics and dilemmas, interpersonal skills, career change, decision making and work-life balance. My goal is to deliver concise and practical advice that is immediately applicable."
Please go here to find out more details and send your questions - and view the latest questions from readers together with Deb's answers.

Bookmark in Connotea

Careers and events in chemistry for August

Nature's 16 August issue will contain special NatureJobs features on chemistry, so it is the ideal opportunity to advertise or look for chemistry jobs, events and announcements. This issue will be disributed at the American Chemical Society Fall Meeting. The deadline for advertisements and announcements is 9 August. See the NatureJobs website for further information.

Bookmark in Connotea

The first two lines

There is a succinct and useful post at the addictive FemaleScienceProfessor blog entitled "The First Two Lines", in which FSP advises a student on how to give a good presentation.

"When my students are preparing presentations for conferences, I always tell them that the first 2-3 lines are particularly critical and I want them to think carefully about how they will introduce the talk. After the first few lines, the rest of a talk is typically straightforward (data, interpretation, conclusions), but the first few lines are where you either grab the audience or you don't. This is when you lay out why the work is interesting and important, and why anyone should care about the rest of what you have to say. In fact, it's a lot like writing a proposal."

Read the rest of the advice here. If you are inexperienced or unsure about giving a scientific presentation, or indeed writing a paper, I think you'll find it very helpful. Certainly the student who received the advice found it so, according to the comments to FSP's blog post.

Bookmark in Connotea

New rector for ETH

From Nature 448; 117 (12 July 2007):
The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich has completed recruitment for its top positions with the appointment of Heidi Wunderli-Allenspach, a chemistry professor there, as the university's first-ever female rector.
She will work alongside the institute's new president, Ralph Eichler, who was appointed in May. Eichler, a physicist, is currently director of the Paul Scherrer Institute, a sister research institute. Both will take office on 1 September.
The ETH has lately been rocked by internal disputes that culminated in the resignation of its last president, Ernst Hafen, in November 2006, and formal complaints to the government about perceived unfairness in the allocation of federal university funds.
Wunderli-Allenspach says that this is now a time for consolidation and reconciliation — and, perhaps, for hiring more women. "It is not a hostile place here for women, but we have to make a bigger effort, earlier on, in recruitment," she says.

Bookmark in Connotea

Not as good as all that for British research

Dr Philip Strange writes in Nature's Correspondence page this week (Nature 448, 22; 2007):

Your Editorial 'Never had it so good?' (Nature 447, 231; 2007) claims that British science is in "rather good shape". Those in British universities who apply for research grants might not fully agree.
In the case of the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), the new Labour government in 1997 made more cash available. As a result, the success rate for grant applications went up to about 40% in 1998–2000. Since then, however, there has been a steady decline to the present success rate of about 25%, leaving 10–15% of applications rated of international quality but unfunded. During the same period, the number of applications to the BBSRC has increased from about 1,200 a year in 1998 to about 1,900 a year in 2005. This may reflect a decline in other sources of funding from bodies such as the Medical Research Council, or a preference among applicants for funders who, unlike charities, include an amount for overheads.
This situation is not good news for British science, in that about 75% of applications to the BBSRC are now rejected, representing a huge waste of effort and ideas.
One obvious solution is to put more money into the system, to increase the success rate among applications ranked as internationally competitive. Another suggestion is to change the system for submitting and assessing applications, placing more of the onus on the universities, perhaps via a quota system for applications. A third is to weight the system more in favour of applicants' published track record and less in favour of the proposed science (with a special track for first-time applicants).
Above all, let's try to do something about this crazy situation in which so many grant applications fail, with the result that so much time is wasted for applicants, reviewers and administrators.
Philip Strange
School of Pharmacy, University of Reading, UK.

Bookmark in Connotea

Challenges for the modern public university

Robert J. Birgeneau, the Chancellor of the University of California at Berkeley, writes about the challenge for universities in a Commentary in the current issue of Nature Matierials (6, 465 - 467; 2007).From his article:


As information technology fuels the expansion of knowledge at an ever-accelerating pace, universities everywhere are confronting the question of how a successful university should be structured in the next century. In the past decade, changes have swept European university systems from Britain through Switzerland to Germany. In the United States, publicly funded universities are facing a growing gap in trying to remain at the forefront of higher education and research while competing with private universities with wealthy endowments. My own institution, the University of California Berkeley, widely regarded as one of the world's leading public universities, must consider how to maintain and enhance its success as a pre-eminent academic leader while still retaining its distinct public mission and character. This is our challenge for the twenty-first century.

Read on at the Nature Materials website (subscription or site licence required).

A related Editorial in Nature Materials (6, 463; 2007) can be read here.

Frank Gannon, in the current issue of EMBO Reports (8, 7, 611; 2007), looks at different countries' ways of funding scientific research, and asks whether the "pinnacle" or "plateau" model is optimal.

Bookmark in Connotea

Blair's legacy to the UK scientific community

This week saw the much trailed departure of Tony Blair as UK prime minister. In a Commentary (Nature 447, 1053; 2007) in the current issue of Nature, Sir Robert May, the government's chief science adviser from 1995 to 2000, reflects on the Blair legacy. In many ways, he says, science and engineering prospered. Yet there is general discontent amongst scientists in UK universities, and many current trends are potentially damaging. Blair's successors — Gordon Brown initially — will have much to do if the country is to continue to thrive scientifically.

...why is there discontent among scientists in UK universities? Are we perhaps revealing an inherent, Eeyore-like glumness? I think not. Although student numbers, faculty positions and research funds have all increased, they have not done so in equal proportions. Student-to-staff ratios are almost universally higher than 15 years ago. And research funding — despite its increase in real terms — has not kept pace with the increasing number of active researchers, themselves spurred on by the demands of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), which every few years rates individual academic departments. Life seems harder than it used to be. Even more important, in my opinion, than higher teaching loads and the increasingly fierce competition for grants, is the extreme growth of bureaucracy — too often masquerading as accountability. The ballooning of the civil service since 1997 means that there are now more conscientious administrators who hold meetings and send out forms to be filled in. And universities have matched or exceeded the growth in bureaucrats seen in the civil service. This growth is only partly justified by need. One issue that Brown might address is that the current number of central administrative staff is roughly equal to the number of faculty for four major UK universities; this would certainly raise eyebrows at many top US universities.
Bookmark in Connotea

A female road of science

Dr Monica Zoppè writes: The Nature News story 'Applicants challenge male order at Howard Hughes' (Nature 447, 242-243; 17 May 2007) highlights only some aspects of the gender imbalance that dominates the science system everywhere. All scientific funding agencies distribute money on the basis of competition, which is an attitude typical of males. Women are more inclined to collaboration than competition, and if forced to compete do so reluctantly. Some refuse even to take part, hence relegating themselves to the lower steps of the career ladder.
Women often feel that competition can easily degenerate into rivalry and open hostility, which is damaging to everyone, but is an issue often overlooked by men. If Howard Hughes, or any other funding agency, really believes that scientific excellence is equally distributed among men and women, then the best way to grant women their share of funding (50%) would be to have separate distribution avenues: one for men, in which male scientists set the rules and judge applications; and one for women, managed by and dedicated to female scientists.
This would be a very bold and unusual move for any funding agency, and it would need to run for several years before women could define a 'female road of science' independent of the typical 'competition road' to which we have had to adapt until now. Yet it may eventually allow women to demonstrate that a different attitude is possible, scientifically as good, or even better. Of course, it is necessary to define terms like 'success' or 'good science' according to a more (gender)-balanced value system: I am sure that many women are ready to participate in such a discussion, if it is started.
Monica Zoppè
Institute of Clinical Physiology
Pisa, Italy

Bookmark in Connotea

Academic discrimination against Iran

From this week's (21 June issue) Nature Correspondence (Nature 447, 908; 2007):

The US Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) processes the applications of foreign students for the US Medical Licensing Examination, which evaluates candidates' basic and clinical knowledge in medicine. The examination has two steps, both of which must be passed for the ECFMG to recognize the individual as a medical doctor in the United States.
As a medical student, I applied for step 1 in January 2007, entering my country (Iran) in the contact address section. A message in red letters appeared on the registration page: "It has come to our attention that ECFMG may be subject to specific United States federal regulations that prohibit entities from doing business with or providing a service to any individuals who have an address of residence in specific restricted countries. The country of Iran is included on this list of restricted countries. In light of this, ECFMG is not able to allow you to request this service."
The political status of Iran or any other nation is not relevant to education. The result of the restriction is that all medical students and graduates who live in Iran are prevented from taking the US licensing examination. This surely is academic discrimination against a whole country.
Sina Zarrintan
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Bookmark in Connotea

State of the Planet course

From this week's Correspondence page (Nature 447, 775; 2007): Ours is a world in crisis. We are despoiling our habitat, outstripping our resources and failing to provide an acceptable living standard for much of the world's population. Although academic institutions are equipped to help remedy these problems by informing the leaders of tomorrow, they often fail to do so. Increasing pressure for specialization has led universities to trade breadth for depth in curricula, thereby depriving students of an understanding of complex, interconnected global issues. For example, solutions to our energy crisis span economics, engineering and politics, yet the typical student is exposed to only a portion of this spectrum.
Here, we propose a first step in addressing such shortcomings. We, the undersigned graduate students, have created a campus-wide 'State of the Planet' course at Cornell University under the mentorship of faculty members Tom Eisner and Mary Lou Zeeman.
Our goal is threefold: to improve understanding of complex issues; to add global context to disciplinary education; and to motivate action and involvement. To this end, we recruited experts, mostly resident faculty members and community leaders, to address the challenges we agreed were paramount.
Administrative support was quick to materialize, as was a pool of enthusiastic participants. We launched the course in January 2007, after campus-wide publicity highlighting its multidisciplinary nature. Our 250 current students come from 45 different majors ranging broadly across the humanities and basic and applied sciences. In lectures, experts familiar with our most pressing global problems emphasize how solutions span disciplines. Students participate in discussion groups led by graduate assistants, where they not only build on ideas presented in lectures, but also set up projects aimed at solving problems.
Mid-semester student evaluations have been overwhelmingly positive, with 93% saying that the course has changed their views on education, career plans and lifestyle, and 95% believing that their peers should also take this course.
Comments include: "This course has influenced my perspectives on almost everything, from the food I eat to how long I leave my computer on" and "The course demonstrates how many different skills and backgrounds can help shape policy that is instrumental for the planet."
We are continuing to expand our course in the hope that it will become a campus-wide requirement. Our vision is that other universities will adopt similar courses as a curriculum component for all students. We extend an open invitation to like-minded people at other institutions to join us, and others launching parallel efforts, in what we believe will be a modest but fundamental change to university education.
We maintain the optimistic belief that, given the right information, people will change their habits and their world. But the burden is on us, as educators, to motivate this change.
Krystal L. Rypien, Jill Anderson, Jason Andras, Rulon W. Clark, Gretchen A. Gerrish, James T. Mandel, Marie L. Nydam & Daniel K. Riskin
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University.


Bookmark in Connotea

Academic diversity in universities

US universities must act to recruit and retain minority faculty members.

From an Editorial in Nature 447, 753-754 (2007): The diversity of the typical American research university is widely admired, but is fashioned mainly on the basis of students and staff recruited from abroad. The universities have done less well at harnessing the talents of the racial minorities within the US population.
So-called under-represented minorities — African Americans, Latinos and Native Americans — formed more than a quarter of the American population in 2000, and are projected to account for more than 40% of it by 2050. Yet according to a 2005 study of 50 élite universities, undertaken by Donna Nelson, a chemist at the University of Oklahoma, they account for only 3% of tenured or untenured faculty in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology and astronomy. Numbers are only slightly higher in engineering (4.6%).

Continue reading "Academic diversity in universities" »

Bookmark in Connotea

Creating an interdisciplinary research culture

James A. Smith and Genna E.Carey of the University of Adelaide ask in this week's Nature Correspondence page (Nature 447, 638; 2007) how we can practically encourage and foster interdisciplinary research. They say:
Despite a shift towards an interdisciplinary research culture, we are yet to grapple with how to support a growing number of interdisciplinary researchers. As interdisciplinary postgraduate research students, we face this reality head-on.
We have found it difficult to synthesize the separate perspectives of two or more disciplines into a meaningful middle ground. Unless the scientific community identifies strategies for supporting interdisciplinary researchers to negotiate this middle ground, little progress can be made. Here we suggest two useful approaches.
First, interdisciplinary researchers are expected to develop a different skill set from that of their single-discipline colleagues. In this 'interlocker' role, they engage in a shared conversation between disciplines and work through the tensions this creates. This is more than simply negotiating the different languages and ways of working — it is about appreciating a breadth of knowledge in theory, approach and discourse.
Unfortunately, few systems accommodate this type of researcher — as is sadly demonstrated by emerging frameworks designed to assess research quality in New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Australia. Interdisciplinary committees are needed to assess research proposals, to review grant applications and to examine theses. This would be more effective than the current practice of putting interdisciplinary researchers in assessment 'silos' where they are unrealistically measured against, and by, people in a single discipline.
A second challenge is the disjunct between, on one hand, rhetoric encouraging inter-disciplinary research and, on the other, the lack of institutional structure and support for it. Although we are encouraged to work in interdisciplinary environments and to join interdisciplinary research clusters, we face numerous administrative hurdles. Cross-enrolment of interdisciplinary students is seldom acknowledged, and adequate resources and structures — such as guidance on writing for interdisciplinary audiences, or longer candidatures for postgraduate students — are rarely provided to support the interdisciplinary researcher.
It would be simple for institutional leaders to ask current interdisciplinary researchers about the challenges they face and to document these issues. These leaders could then address the issues by formalizing the interdisciplinary researcher role and reducing demands to satisfy the needs of multiple disciplines. Supportive environments must be created if we are committed to achieving interdisciplinary research goals.

See also this Recruiters article (Nature 445, 950; 2007) by A. Paytan and M.-L. Zoback.

Your views are welcome.

Bookmark in Connotea

Strengthening gender equity for physics researchers

This month's Editorial in Nature Physics (3, 363; 2007) is entitled Take the lead, and is about how to tackle the under-representation of women at all career levels in physics research.
From the Editorial:
Last month, a workshop entitled Gender Equity: Strengthening the Physics Enterprise in Universities and National Laboratories took place at the headquarters of the American Physical Society in Maryland, with the stated aim of facilitating a doubling of the number of women in physics over the next 15 years. The under-representation of women in research careers in physics is proving a tough nut to crack. Why would this workshop, ahead of many other well-meaning efforts, come any closer to a solution?
What was remarkable about the Maryland workshop was its participants: chairs from 50 major physics departments across the USA, 14 division directors of national laboratories units, and leaders from the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. After all, if there is to be change, it has to come from the top.
In the list of preliminary recommendations from the workshop, many begin with the words "leaders should". Leaders should "set a code of conduct", "make expectations clear", "be aware of subtle biases" and so on. Many of these recommendations are easily recognizable as good management practice. A good manager creates the appropriate atmosphere in which all team members can thrive, each being encouraged to play to their strengths, and, through their collective effort, carry the interests of the team forwards. That picture doesn't necessarily describe the average physics research group — although it probably should.

See here for the full text of the Editorial (subscription or site licence required).
See here for the conference website, from which you can download most of the talks as PDFs as well as obtain other resources.


Bookmark in Connotea

The Source Event careers fair for scientists

An announcement from NatureJobs. The Source Event is a dedicated science career fair launched by Naturejobs and London First, to be held in London on 21 September 2007. The event will be split into a dynamic and exciting exhibition with plenary conference and workshop sessions running alongside the event.
The Source Event will highlight opportunities in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe for a career in science, whether in academic research, industrial research or research organizations. It will present the best opportunities from the best organizations: public, private, national and international.
Jobseekers will be able to meet potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. Our plenary and workshop sessions will provide the opportunity to meet high-profile scientists and gain careers information and advice.
You can sign up here for the programme details as they become available.
You can register as a delegate here.
See here for location and directions.

Bookmark in Connotea

Your lab website is your shop window

prospect : how headlines affect science jobs : Naturejobs
Paul Smaglik writes:
A website is often the first point of contact people have with a laboratory — a sort of digital window into the workings of the place. Most lab websites articulate research programmes and give names and contacts of the lab's members. Good sites also provide ways to seek collaborations. And excellent ones allow potential future members to see what past and present lab participants have gone on to do.

If I was searching for a new lab, I'd want to know that the previous members have published under the principal investigators and have gone on to positions that I'm interested in exploring — whether in academia, industry or government, both on and off the bench. I'd also want to know about lab culture. Do the members interact both professionally and socially? Do they have some sense of humour and a culture of cooperation?

To explore these 'best practices', graduate student, stem-cell scientist and blogger Attila Csordás is hosting a laboratory website competition on his blog Partial Immortalization. Csordás' thesis is that few lab websites take full advantage of the medium's technology and don't give visitors the information they want about a group's science and culture. "Am I alone with my opinion that most academic laboratory web pages simply do not meet any advanced, current, dynamic web standards, although this would be crucial for them?" Csordás writes in his blog. He provides a few examples of sites in his discipline that come close, but is challenging life-science labs around the world to share their best efforts. Taking on this challenge will help labs sell their science — and might also attract promising young scientists to their groups.

Bookmark in Connotea

An early review of Nature Network

Attila Csordas of the biotechnology blog "Partial Immortalization" reviews Nature Network, the social site for scientists. He writes:

At this point I am strongly supportive of NN as I embraced its core mission a long time ago: “Connecting scientists at a global and local level.”

In his article, Attila compares the Nature Network to LinkedIn, a site for job seekers in the business, IT and technology industries. Although Nature Network is smaller, it is much younger, and has a broader range of operation:

According to the numbers, Nature Network is currently a very small but organically growing strong online community. This is exactly the most exciting period in the life cycle of every forming network, so it is a guaranteed experience and challenge to join and participate - now at least - for people like me, who are eager to test and modulate every flexible beta product.

If you are interested in participating in a "Web 2.0" social network for scientists, then it is worth reading this review, which investigates the benefits and pitfalls for scientists of making Nature Network their main networking site. The verdict? "From the user-scientist point of view, NN is good for scientists hungry for all level of scientific information and contacts."

Bookmark in Connotea

Starting at the top

Scientific élites retain a severe gender imbalance, according to an Editorial in this week's Nature (447, 115-116; 2007). Seventy-two names are on the list of new members of the US National Academy of Sciences, elected on 1 May. Nine stand out: Tania Baker, Ursula Bellugi, Karen Cook, Mary Estes, Pamela Fraker, Angela Gronenborn, Helen Hobbs, Laura Kiessling and Eve Marder.
Two years ago, the academy elected 19 women to its ranks; this year, the number is less than half of that. Over the years there have been a plethora of programmes designed to introduce women into science, and more sporadic efforts to keep them in the career pipeline while they bear and raise children. Yet women have still not come remotely close to closing the gender gap at the senior level.

Continue reading "Starting at the top" »

Bookmark in Connotea

Breaking barriers project for women in science

Where are the women in science? And what would attract them from other sectors? So asks Jan Bogg, director of the Breaking Barriers Project at the University of Liverpool, UK, in NatureJobs this week (Nature 447, 114; 2007). She discusses means, such as mentoring schemes, by which employers can help to change the culture that has led to an under-representation of women in the profession. "Currently my work is focused on developing the lessons learned into frameworks for change in policy and practice. This includes new research evaluating mid-career women working in the bio- and health-sciences sectors. Issues to be addressed include barriers, drivers and progression to seniority. The challenge for employers is to listen to research evidence and to adapt to changing workforce needs."
Readers are invited to complete an online questionnaire on the topic.

Bookmark in Connotea

Praising or lamenting the brain drain?

The authors of two contributions to Nature's Correspondence page differ in their responese to the Editorial " In praise of the 'brain drain'" (Nature 446, 231; 2007).

Volker Hiene of the Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge answers the question of how UK science flourishes despite the continual brain drain to California and elsewhere by highlighting "the compensating in-drain from the Commonwealth, the rest of Europe and elsewhere" (Nature 447, 28; 3 May 2007). He says: "Instead of complaining about the brain drain out, we should be encouraging the brain drain in. All PhD research studentships could be open equally to anyone in the world. Even those who then go back to their home country make a contribution in addition to the work they have done here: in a few years' time they start sending us their best output as PhD students or young postdocs, and the cycle repeats itself, with some of the new crop staying on."
Andrew Isaac Meso of Royal Holloway College, University of London, however, believes "that there is nothing to praise about the brain drain when it occurs en masse from the developing countries into richer, more developed ones with dramatically more power." See his Correspondence, also at Nature 447, 28; 3 May 2007.


Bookmark in Connotea

Contributing more to science

Scientists have a crucial role in educating the public about the importance of science if we are to have any hope of facilitating future innovation. A few notable scientists have taken this duty to heart, altering their career tracks to promote science and education. So states Nature Structural & Molecular Biology in the May issue's editorial (14, 353; 2007)

But what makes one place more conducive to innovation than another? Certainly money invested in science and education is an important part of the equation, but other factors are equally critical. The quality of education the next generation receives is essential to give them the knowledge and skills needed to drive innovation. That can be achieved only with higher levels of success across disciplines. The ability to recruit and keep the world's most talented people is also of key importance. By not giving visas to leading foreign scientists and thus sending foreign students to other countries, the US has severely limited the potential for scientific exchange in this country. Finally, it is important to create an environment where people are encouraged to think creatively and where risk-taking is rewarded.
Bookmark in Connotea

Why so few women speakers at scientific conferences?

Pamela Silver writes in Correspondence this week (Nature 446, 856; 2007):
Mary Ann Holmes and Suzanne O'Connell comment on the lack of women in the academic ranks in your Recruiters article "Leaks in the pipeline" (Nature 446, 346; 2007). In the same issue, advertisements for two Nature conferences illustrate part of the problem — the poor representation of women speakers at scientific meetings.
The Nature conference "Oncogenes and human cancer: the next 25 years" features 36 speakers, of whom four are women. The "Days of molecular medicine: emerging technologies and cancer biology" conference, co-sponsored by Nature Medicine, features 19 speakers, of whom two are women. There are many accomplished women scientists in the areas covered by these meetings. There is no obvious reason why the number of women speakers should be so low.
The representation of women speakers at many meetings remains dismally poor and thus may contribute to the lack of success of women in academia.
However, this is a problem that could be easily remedied, if more attention were paid by organizers and the agencies that provide funding for meetings to the issue of whether qualified female speakers have been missed.

Pamela A. Silver
Harvard Medical School

Bookmark in Connotea

A short time in science publishing

A short trial period in science publishing | nodalpoint.org
For those interested in considering a career in scientific publishing, or perhaps an internship or sabbatical to see what it is all about, Pedro Beltrao in the post linked above describes his period as a trainee at Molecular Systems Biology. Pedro provides his assessment of what a journal does and what is involved in producing it. He concludes:

I thought this was a very useful experience. I think that it would be to everyone's benefit if this type of trainee period was a standard part of a scientific education. It would give everyone more to relate to when we have to go through the publishing process either as author, referee or editor.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature's scientific mentoring awards 2007

Last week, Nature announced its 2007 awards for scientific mentoring, in this editorial (subscription required: 446, 584; 5 April 2007). Nature is this year inviting nominations of outstanding scientific mentors in South Africa. The closing date for nominations is 31 May and we will announce the winners on 21 September 2007. The Editor-in-Chief of Nature, Dr Philip Campbell, will present the awards at a special event in Cape Town.

Further details about the awards, including how to make a nomination, the process, the prizes and the judges, can be found here.

Bookmark in Connotea

Blogs as part of your c.v.?

"Are blogs the new way to get a job? With 55 million blogs on the Internet and 100,000 more being created daily, some bloggers are wondering whether personal weblogs will replace traditional CVs and résumés when job-hunting." Paul Smaglick's Prospect column in this week's Nature discusses some of the advantages and disadvantages of blogs as career tools.
Full article at: Nature 446, 343 (2007) | doi:10.1038/nj7133-343a.

Bookmark in Connotea

Planning a productive (and long) academic career

In this month's (February) Nature Chemical Biology, the Editorial "The ivory tower grays" (subscription or site licence required) discusses how the aging of the professoriate has raised questions about how to support productive faculty members late in their careers, while integrating the vitality of youthful scientists.

Arguing strongly for an abolition of a mandatory retirment age, the Editorial concludes: "Although forward-looking universities have been planning for the effects of an aging professoriate for many years, recent trends suggest that the issue deserves much greater attention among today's faculty and university leaders. These decision makers must provide answers to the major questions facing academia's future, including: what retirement options are appropriate and reasonable for research universities? What are the appropriate space and funding levels for scientists at different career stages? How does the changing face of the professoriate affect the current tenure system? Though the challenges and answers will likely be different for each country, there is a global need to reevaluate how we sustain and nurture academic faculty—one of science's greatest resources."

From Nature Chemical Biology 3, 69 (2007) ; doi:10.1038/nchembio0207-69