« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »

April 30, 2007

Endangered elements

I was chatting recently with an academic friend about the merits of homogeneous gold catalysis in organic chemistry (inspired by our recent review on the subject), and he expressed the opinion that it was just platinum chemistry in disguise. Then he surprised me by saying “But we need gold chemistry, because we’re going to run out of platinum in a few years time.” On further questioning, he said that the demand for platinum has increased enormously (not least because it is used in catalytic converters in cars), so that Earth’s limited supplies are running out. He believes that the same applies to rhodium, for much the same reasons.

This reminded me of various random snippets that I’ve heard about other ‘endangered’ elements. For example, the US stockpiles helium and the Netherlands has been recycling it for years. Indium is incredibly useful as a component of indium tin oxide — an optically transparent electrical conductor — but supplies are low and alternatives are needed.

Even the price of copper has shot up recently, because of the increased demand in rapidly developing economies such as China and India. There have been reports in the UK of copper wiring and pipes being stolen from building sites, and even from train tracks and people’s homes. I don’t think there’s any danger of Earth’s copper supplies running out — it’s far more abundant than the other elements mentioned — but it’s interesting to see that previously uneconomical sources are now being seriously considered for exploitation (for example, see the recent article on deep sea mining in Chemistry World).

Intriguing stuff, and maybe something that we should be seriously thinking about. Does anyone know of other useful elements that might be running out?

Andy


Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

April 27, 2007

Add it up

The chief executive of the Royal Society of Chemistry thinks that the standard of mathematics amongst students heading off to university to pursue science degrees in the UK is poor in comparison to that in countries like China.

To back up his point, the RSC website has reproduced a question from a Chinese university entrance exam and is offering a fairly decent cash prize (500 GBP) to tempt people to send in their answers - the deadline is noon today (London time), so sorry for the short notice. The BBC has even covered this story, and for comparison, shows a question that is used in the first year at a UK university to test the mathematics ability of students.

Now, the UK question is something I was doing at school when I was about 10 (this is a rough guess, it could be plus or minus a few years). Admittedly that was a while ago, but the human race hasn't gotten that much more stupid since - has it?

As for the Chinese question... well, I spent a certain amount of time last night (I'm embarrassed to give exact details) with pencil and paper trying to figure out the answers. I've got some 'answers', but let's just say I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they are not altogether correct - I might confess when the real answers get posted.

Have a go - see how you do... and let me know!

***UPDATE - THE QUESTION IS NO LONGER ON THE RSC WEBSITE, BUT CAN BE FOUND HERE***

Stuart


Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Reactions - Jonathan Steed

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was always going to be a chemist even before I really knew what it meant. It seemed to be proper, tactile science. My two year old son was standing up on a chair at the sink this afternoon pouring water into washing up liquid and, I suppose, unwittingly making monolayers or micelles. My mum says that was me about 35 years ago. Maybe he’ll be the same?

2. If you weren't a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be - and why?

I would be a writer I guess; from the mould of Giles Milton (author of Nathaniel’s Nutmeg and some other amazing tales of historical fact). I love to throw myself into a project and live and breathe it until it’s out there as a finished package. As a chemist I get to be a writer anyway… and a whole host of other things besides, and textbooks are a hell of a lot easier to get published than fiction! P.S. … I suppose I might be tempted to be a hotshot lawyer – they make a staggering amount of money. That might be nice for a little while at least but then I hate to argue.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

How long have we got? Everything that is real and tactile in the modern world is underpinned by chemistry. Apart from the myriad of everyday things like soap, asprin and WD40, I think the challenge facing molecular scientists is to gain that molecule-scale control over materials that could underpin substances and objects with the kind of smart functionality only the likes of the recently departed Kurt Vonnegut could dream of.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

My partner and I love to play “fantasy dinner guests”. For a while we had Kirstie and Phil from Location, Location, Location up there on the list. Connie Nielsen and Russell Crowe (from the movie Gladiator) were also contenders. Historical figures is a more interesting one. Somewhere (lower) on my list I would have both Jesus Christ and Adolf Hitler – I’d ask them both the same question: “What were you thinking?!” The top choice would go to someone from ancient history though, unfettered by our current (in my case, Western) cultural mould. I bet the “old liar” Herodotus could spin a good yarn to entertain the guests over a glass of fine wine. “What have you heard about the Minoans? Atlantis? Akhenaten?” I would ask, and then sit back and enjoy the results.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab - and what was it?

I labour under the misapprehension that I can crystallise things that others cannot. This usually means that I leave dried out vials of slowly darkening, valuable chemicals laying around to gather dust and dead flies. I can now reveal that, in fact, deceased insects and fluff do not aid crystal nucleation and growth, contrary to my fondest hopes.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

The book (after a long struggle that ultimately ended with the rejection of Lord of the Rings solely because Liv Tyler is only in the movie, not the written version), would be John Fowles’ The Magus (the second, re-written edition). It’s seductive and enigmatic enough to keep you interested on a few re-reads, and it has that beauty of language and warm Mediterranean imagery that pros like Fowles have honed over many years… I kind of want to go off and read it right now actually. As for the CD (hopefully with a CD player and a decent battery? I know, I’m anal) it would be a late 90s style dance/chillout/electronica type compilation. Something with things like Sandstorm, Silence, Offshore… If you’re on a desert island it might as well be Ibiza.

Jonathan Steed is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Durham and works on supramolecular chemistry and nanochemistry.

April 24, 2007

Pour some sugar on me


In this week's issue of Nature, there's an Insight - a special collection of six or seven related review articles - on Glycochemistry & Glycobiology. In this particular Insight, there are seven review articles:

Chemical glycosylation in the synthesis of glycoconjugate antitumour vaccines from Galonic & Gin
Unusual sugar biosynthesis and natural product glycodiversification from Thibodeaux, Melancon, & Liu
Cycling of O-linked beta-N-acetylglucosamine on nucleocytoplasmic proteins from Hart, Housley, & Slawson
Glycan-based interactions involving vertebrate sialic-acid-recognizing proteins from Varki
Heparan sulphate proteoglycans fine-tune mammalian physiology from Bishop, Schuksz, & Esko
Exploiting the defensive sugars of HIV-1 for drug and vaccine design from Scanlan, Offer, Zitzmann, & Dwek
Synthesis and medical applications of oligosaccharides from Seeberger & Werz

There's also a paper from van Kasteren et al. (with a News & Views from Grotenbreg & Ploegh) describing a new chemical tagging approach that can be used to add multiple sugars to bare protein scaffolds (i.e., proteins that were over-expressed and purified from bacteria). (You may have also noticed Wang et al's paper in last week's Nature, so it looks like April may be the sweetest - and not the cruelest - month after all...)

As I wrote in the editorial that accompanies the Insight, scientists generally shy away from carbohydrates - I barely remember learning about them in my undergraduate years and spent little time thinking about them during graduate school. But now it seems like the field is exploding: everywhere you look there's an interesting paper about carbohydrate chemistry and biology.

So with that in mind, we've put together this collection of review articles to celebrate chemists and biologists working with carbohydrates... We hope you enjoy them!

Joshua


Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

April 20, 2007

Who's the hardest of them all?

A chemistry paper in Science came out yesterday where materials scientists have studied the hardness of rhenium diboride. It is SUPER hard and ULTRA incompressible (my addition of capitals for extra emphasis - I like saying things like ULTRA in a booming voice).

Here's a news piece I wrote for news@nature. While I was digging around, a number of researchers pointed out that this isn't a new material. So why do Science want to publish this? It seems that no one had really taken trouble to do detailed measurements on the material before. The researchers (including Sarah Tolbert and Richard Kaner) came at the problem of making a really hard material by working out how to pack enough covalent bonds into a metallic structure and lo and behold, rhenium diboride fitted nicely.

Reactions - Tom Muir

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

Chemistry always came easy to me in school and college and so for the longest time it was the path of least resistance. It wasn’t until I had a wonderful undergraduate summer research experience that the switch was irreversibly flipped. What did it was making (unintentionally as it turned out) a molecule that apparently hadn’t been made before. This really blew my mind and still does when it happens.

2. If you weren't a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be - and why?

I think something in the visual arts. Chemistry is a very creative science, but in some respects an abstract one in that we use somewhat arcane glyphs to represent the molecules we make. With painting or sculpting one actually sees that product of one’s creative efforts. This I would love to be able to do.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

By continuing to do what we do, i.e., make things that the world needs, and without damaging it in the process. Chemistry often gets a bad rap by the popular media and I actually think it is best if most of us try to stay under the media radar. Some scientists are gifted ambassadors and so we should let them do the talking, the rest of us should stick to the experiments lest we run the risk of being chewed up and spat out by the press.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

Great question, it is tempting to say someone like Da Vinci or Socrates, but since this is dinner I would probably go with the poet Rabbie Burns, a man who lived his short life to the full and whose words and music continue to inspire and comfort. Dinner with Burns certainly wouldn’t be dull.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab - and what was it?

A real experiment! Probably a year or two ago when I tried to attach ATP to a protein. However, I routinely help people in the lab with certain procedures that are tricky and/or potentially dangerous to perform.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

The CD would be “London Calling” by The Clash and as for the book, this seems like an appropriate time to re-read Joyce’s Ulysses.

Tom Muir is in the Lab of Synthetic Protein Chemistry, Rockefeller University, New York and works on developing and applying chemistry-driven approaches for controlling and studying proteins.

April 19, 2007

On the streets of Philadelphia


You may have already seen this news story in C&EN about a recent trial in Philadelphia: Merisant (the company that produces Equal and NutraSweet) has sued McNeil Nutritionals (the company that makes Splenda) because Merisant doesn't think it's fair that Splenda's marketing campaign includes the phrase "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar."

This is the kind of advertising campaign that makes most chemists cringe, and - though this may sound like a petty dispute between two rival companies - I think we need to hold companies accountable for exploiting the general public's lack of scientific knowledge. Unfortunately many people will think: Splenda is not sugar, but it is made from sugar - so it must be safe, right? (Wasn't palytoxin made from sugar?) Though this sort of ad campaign wouldn't work on many scientists, it certainly worked on the general public: "sales of Splenda were weak in 2001, when McNeil launched an ad campaign saying the sweetener is made from sugar and including the phrase 'but it's not sugar.'" Since then, "Splenda has eclipsed Equal in the lucrative artificial sweeteners market" - and it's not like Merisant can counter with an ad campaign, saying that Aspartame's "made from phenylalanine, so it tastes like phenylalanine"...

It should be an interesting trial, as it's bound to have "phalanxes of neurobiologists and chemists as expert witnesses." (As an aside, I guess that the answer to Stuart's question is 'a phalanx of chemists'...) And the best part is that it's a jury trial, so anything can happen...

Do you think they'll use voir dire to exclude people who prefer natural sugar or are loyal to one of the two brands? Maybe I should offer my services, as I'm pretty indiscriminant when it comes to sweetening my coffee...

Joshua


Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

April 17, 2007

May Day comes early

Hi all,

It's my favorite day of the month - yet another issue of Nature Chemical Biology is available for your viewing pleasure. Our May issue features some interesting stuff, including iron-sulfur clusters, probes for hydrogen peroxide, and ground states of stem cells (yet another tongue twister?).

In addition to the primary research articles, our editorial focuses on collaborations - both how they can help catalyze and elevate research as well as a few cautionary notes for the planning stages. What have you all found to be important considerations in starting a new project with someone, whether they are in your lab, in your department, or a national or international peer? What have you gained from the experiences? As collaborations seem to be central to many current research efforts, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

April 16, 2007

50 ways to write a (cover) letter


Kyle's blog entry on writing scientific papers got me thinking about an important - and underappreciated - part of submitting your work to a journal. So I thought I'd write down a few of my thoughts about cover letters. A caveat, of course, is that these are just my opinions - maybe other NPG editors can chime in and let me know if they agree/disagree with the items on this list...

1. You don't need to discuss much, but always submit a cover letter (unless the journal doesn't allow it) - I obviously can't speak for editors at other journals, but I always read the cover letter. It's often the first thing an editor reads, so don't miss out on a chance to make a good impression.

2. You don't need to be coy, Roy - the cover letter should contain a brief summary of the work, but be careful not to over- or underplay the discovery. If there are other key papers that have been recently published (i.e., this work refutes the model proposed in that paper), then point them out in the cover letter too - this part of the letter can be used to put your work into a broader context and highlight certain aspects that were unexpected/surprising.

3. Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation - it's fine to assume the reader is a Ph.D.-level scientist, but I think it's worth remembering that they may not be intimately familiar with every detail of your particular system. For this reason, I think it's worth taking the time to highlight the main points/the major implications of the work (see #2, though) without getting too bogged down in the technical details. If it's the first time anyone's shown X, then that's worth highlighting - just don't forget to explain why X is so important...

4. Eats, Shoots & Leaves - Microsoft Word's spell-check can be very helpful, but I think it's worth asking someone outside of your immediate field to read through your cover letter (and paper) to see if they notice any spelling/grammatical errors or confusing sentences/paragraphs. (But don't get too worried - you don't need to buy a Chicago Manual of Style to write a good cover letter...)

5. If you've talked with an editor about the work (at a meeting, for example), definitely mention this in your cover letter. This is less important if the team of editors is fairly small (but I think it's still worth doing) - at Nature, there's a fairly large editorial team and your paper may not be assigned to the person you talked with (this is especially true for multidisciplinary work). Though we circulate new submissions to editors who handle papers in related areas, it's always good to know if you've talked with someone else on the team, as this will ensure that they see the paper before any editorial decision is made.

6. Always suggest referees - most journals let you list a few potential referees that you feel are particularly qualified to review the work. But don't put down your old Ph.D./post-doc advisor or someone who you've recently published with (as many editors check PubMed or other databases before contacting referees) - even if there is no actual conflict of interest, many editors avoid a situation where there could be a perceived conflict of interest. These lists tend to be useful starting places when contacting referees (especially if there is a special technique involved or if the paper involves a discovery in a relatively small field).

7. Nature allows authors to submit a short list (usually two or three names) of people working on related work (or people who the authors feel may not be able to act as an impartial referee). This is very useful information, as (unfortunately) competition and bias exist, and it's best to know this before we start contacting referees. But please keep the list short - I've seen entire departments or schools listed in this section - or you may get an email from the editor asking you to revise your list.

Hmm - I think that's it. I guess I'm a few shy of 50 - any other NPG editors want to add their thoughts?

Joshua


Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

April 13, 2007

Reactions - Shuguang Zhang

1. What made you want to be a biochemist?

I grew up in Chengdu, China. When I was about 7 years old, I was often very curious about how my pet silkworm made silk from only eating mulberry tree leaves! Why cannot we do the same? The leaves are from plants, which are mostly made of cellulose or sugar units, but the silkworm silk is protein, made of amino acids! When I was about 9, I had a white hen as a pet. I was often wondering how the hen could eat rice and other things, but lay an egg every day! An egg has a hard shell that encloses the egg white and yellow yolk. I could not understand how the white hen could do that at all.

Unfortunately, the chaotic Culture Revolution went into full swing when I was only 13 and I lost the chance to go to junior high and high school because they were all closed for several years. But fortunately, in 1976, I was able to go to college to pursue my interest through a fortuitous opportunity to study biochemistry. Once there, I tried to recover the time I had lost and pursued biochemistry enthusiastically with all my effort. There were no textbooks at all and we had to take our notes from lectures – I had never heard of the great biochemistry textbooks by leading biochemists such as Albert Lehninger, Lubert Stryer and Geoffrey Zubay. I never heard of Nature nor Science magazines. However, my thirst for learning was so great, I overcame many obstacles and finished my biochemistry B.S. degree in China.

2. If you weren't a biochemist and could do any other job, what would it be - and why?

I would probably become a marine biologist, studying the fantastic oceans around the world. The oceans are the most fascinating places on the planet. There are so many extraordinary, alien-like, otherworldly, unimaginable and amazing creatures that live right under our nose, but we know virtually nothing about their biochemistry and physiology. For example, how can some creatures survive under several thousand meters of water on the deep sea floor, where no steel submarine can go? How can they see in the utter darkness? How fast do they reproduce and how does their DNA replicate? How can they change color so quickly to capture prey or to avoid predators? What are the colors made of? Do their proteins function like ours? The oceans are full of under-explored treasures. Currently, green fluorescent protein (GFP) from jellyfish and red fluorescent protein from coral have been enormously useful for biology, biotechnology and neuroscience. But they are only two out of trillions or zillions of treasures we know nothing about. Studying creatures in the oceans would be a great lifetime pursuit.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

Chemists can make big contributions, particularly by making new materials for collecting the practically inexhaustible supply of solar energy, biosolar energy and other truly renewable energy sources. Chemists must do to a lot more to find solutions to combat the undeniable effect of global warming. It is our responsibility. All other activities, including making new drugs are much less important than finding an alternative source of clean and renewable energy, since all our activities depend on cheap energy. Imagine if the energy cost goes up, everything will quickly follow. Sadly, most chemists have not done enough at all in pursuing new energy research. Most big oil companies have made so much money in recent years, but little has been reinvested to solve the looming big problem, except for BP, who have invested a substantial amount of revenue for new energy research. Without solving the energy and global warming problems, which are tightly coupled, everything else will become insignificant.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with - and why?

I would like to have dinner with Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Ludwig Beethoven and other great classical music composers. They not only truly captured pure human spirit and life experience, but also distilled the best culture that will resonate universally forever. Their music has been played for a few hundred years and will likely be played for thousands more years. Mozart often composed his elegant and timeless music at the last minute, a true music composer genius! Sadly, much of the current music songs are likely short-lived, trendy and fashionable. Few trendy music songs will be played 100 years from now. Unfortunately, some of today's science activities are also like the current music, very trendy and fashionable.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab - and what was it?

The last time I did experiments, was to try to grow membrane protein crystals in February 2007 in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Cambridge, UK when I was on my academic sabbatical with a Guggenheim Fellowship. Membrane proteins are one of the most difficult protein classes to work with. For example, as of April 2007, there are about 40,000 protein structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank, but there are only a total of 250 membrane protein structures, with only 124 unique structures. That is an enormous disparity! If you look at the chemical and biological sciences as a whole, very few people work on these elusive protein structures because they are very difficult to deal with. Yet, they are the best nature-made nanomaterials and nanodevices, from harvesting clean energy to ultrasensitive sensing devices. Membrane proteins comprise a very large number of our total proteins, ~30% of genes in organisms sequenced so far code for membrane proteins, namely, ~8,000-10,000 human genes code for membrane proteins. Embarrassingly, only 2 human membrane protein structures are known.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

The one book I would like to take with me is 'Atlas of the Human Brain'. I have always been curious to read it, but never find time to do so. I am curious to know how such an unusual organ, only a few kilograms in weight, can not only organize memory, produce thoughts and images and detect smells, but also produce emotions and feelings. The only CD I would like to take is one featuring Mozart's piano concertos. The only DVD I would take is 'From Russia with Love' with Sean Connery as the best 007 Bond - James Bond, a timeless fun movie full of various cultures, humor, fun, excitement, exotic places and beauty.

Shuguang Zhang is in the Center for Biomedical Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA and has invented several self-assembling peptide systems, including 1) lipid-like peptide surfactants that not only form nanotubes and nanovesicles, but also stabilize diverse membrane proteins, 2) designer Lego-like peptides that form nanofiber scaffolds for 3D cell culture and regenerative medicine, and 3) designer active peptide inks that can be printed on surfaces to produce biologically active surfaces.

April 12, 2007

Pure and simple

So, I was in a delicatessan last week that was proudly announcing its range of Himalayan sea salt, making a big deal about how pure it was. They then went on to comment that the bright pink colour of the salt was due to its high iron content. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

Not very important in the grand scheme of things, I know, but I'd like to think that our food producers and retailers would be a bit more careful about how they use words like 'pure'. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest...

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

April 11, 2007

Learning Japanese, I think I'm learning Japanese...

I recently started studying Japanese. It is super fun, and I highly recommend it. Every time I pick up my books, however, I am momentarily stopped by the realization that I am quite spoiled to be able to do this 'for fun,' whereas a huge number of scientists (chemists and otherwise) are effectively required to learn English to communicate with other scientists. This topic has come up before, and in fact our September editorial touched on the problems involved in writing English (but made the case that unclear writing, due in part to unclear thinking, is equally prevalent with native English speakers). I just don't think the topic is brought up enough, though, given the tremendous amount of work required to become conversant in a second language (or third, or fourth...).

So, the point of this blog, basically, is to say: I am amazed at and grateful for the outstanding efforts of all the non-native English speaking chemists, biologists, physicists, etc., that allow a united scientific language.

There are more things I could say, but I will (mostly) leave it at that. In the interest of improving scientific interchanges, however, I have a few questions: how can we improve our ability to communicate between languages, be they Japanese or French or Finnish, or the language of chemists and biologists (where I would argue that a mention of vinyl benzene or TUNNEL assays is almost equally incomprehensible)? When should we be expanding our communication skills? Should universities in the United States go back to their requirement of proficiency in a second language, and how do schools in other countries handle this?

I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts. I bet they're good - in fact, I really think so.

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

Very superstitious...


I was chatting with a pregnant co-worker yesterday about how many old wives' tales there are about 'predicting' the sex of a pregnant woman's fetus. For example, she mentioned that there's an old wives' tale in Greece that says that if you have a turtle in the house, and the turtle grows faster from neck-to-tail than from side-to-side, it's a girl. Otherwise, it's a boy. (Or maybe it's the other way around?)

I was thinking about this last night and realized that - though I'm generally quite skeptical and I don't believe in old wives' tales - I was fairly superstitious back in graduate school. I'm the proud owner of a 'lucky' calculator that came to almost every exam I've taken since 9th grade. And there were certain t-shirts I wore to lab on 'important' days (maybe when running a reaction for the first time or when I was performing a key biochemical/cellular assay...) I wasn't alone in this regard: other people in the lab had 'lucky' pens or certain rituals they performed before doing an important experiment...

How about you? Any superstitions or rituals that you do (or did) in the lab that don't make any scientific sense? Do you ever have trouble reconciling your scientific/logical side with the superstitious side?

Joshua


Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

April 06, 2007

Reactions - Vince Rotello

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

When I was ten or so I met one of my uncles who was a chemical engineer. We started talking about chemistry a bit, and he drew some structures of organic molecules. I became entranced by the variety of structures one could build up from carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen, and started drawing new structures in my notebook. The capability of chemists to plug components together both covalently and non-covalently to create new things is what continues to move me as a scientist.

2. If you weren't a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be - and why?

I'd be a chef! I have a good ability in "visualizing" what various combinations of flavors and textures will produce in the finished product. Cooking also provides me with an outlet for all of the synthetic skills I honed prior to becoming a faculty member - plus my success ratio is way higher in cooking. My wife (a rather picky soul) has only complained of one meal in the last ten years, and that's because she's morally opposed to pineapple in savoury foods.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

We have a unique viewpoint, centered at the atomic level. As synthetic chemists, we can control the structures of molecules with atomic resolution, giving us the ability to create typical "chemicals" such as drugs, household products, etc. Beyond this, however, our ability to manipulate matter and understand its behavior at this Angstrom scale puts us in a unique position to contribute to the worlds of materials and nanotechnology.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with - and why?

Mozart - he is a man that had a fairly tough life but made magic look so easy.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab - and what was it?

Today, when I ran a few electrochemical experiments with Mike Pollier, one of my graduate students. The group gets uncomfortable when I try to do things around lab, but some things are "safe".

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

As far as the book goes, a quick Google search would suggest "Boatbuilding: A Complete Handbook of Wooden Boat Construction" by Howard Irving Chapelle as a rather good idea. For the CD I'd go with Mozart's Le Nozze de Figaro. A bonus would be to have either Cecillia Bartoli or Frederica von Stade (very different but both beautiful voices) as Cherubino...

Vince Rotello is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and works on interfacing nanosystems for biological and materials applications.

April 04, 2007

Going postal

I came home today to find my copy of Chemical & Engineering News waiting for me... yes, I know, we can get it online, but I like flipping through the real thing. What is unusual about this picture? Well, the issue of C&EN in question is from March 5th, the one with the technical program for the ACS meeting in Chicago - the meeting I returned home from 4 days ago...

I had wondered where it was... I like to browse through the programme before the meeting and get an idea of what I want to see - and the online version is only slightly better than useless (yes, the search feature is great, but browsing is tortuous). Anyway, when the March 26th issue showed up a few days ago with George Whitesides smiling at me, I didn't think twice about it.

Sure, I live in the UK, so my copies of C&EN have to cross an ocean, but it's all a bit inconsistent... George shows up a few days before the issue that is three weeks older... I don't get it. To be fair, it wasn't much different when I was at UCLA, two or three issues would often show up at the same time and it seems as though I'm not the only one with this problem. If I thought it would make a difference, I'd think about paying my membership dues on time...

Stuart


Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

April 03, 2007

ACS: Slow writer (part 3), or, Go Phoenixes!

I'm not sure whether this technically counts as an ACS-related post, because I wasn't actually at the conference this day. But, I was at the University of Chicago, which would have been unlikely if I hadn't already been in Chicago for the meeting. And, this blog may be a bit rambling, which is due to the fact that I left my brain in Chicago, so it all comes together...

One extra fun thing about visiting the campus relates to some family history: my grandfather wanted to be a chemist, and actually spent some time as a graduate student at the University of Chicago before dropping out due to lack of funds. It was very interesting to think of what the campus must have looked like when he was there, or what he might have worked on. It also brings to mind some comments that I've heard in passing over the last couple of years; to sum up, it's the idea that scientific results only have to age by a certain amount before people forget about them, attempt the same (or almost the same) experiments again, and publish them as new information. Perhaps some poor graduate student will get their Ph.D. by figuring out what the length of time 'x' is that governs this phenomenon (and then the next poor student will write up the same report 'x' years later, and so on, and so on...)

While I was treated to some fascinating stories by Jun Yin, Chuan He, Sergey Kozmin, Joe Piccirilli, and David Lilley (who was also there visiting), what I most want to discuss here is the interesting lunch I had. Dr. Kozmin took me over to the faculty club, and specifically to the 'chemistry table.' Not surprisingly, perhaps, this consisted of a long table (~20-25 seats) where chemistry professors came and ate lunch, with later arrivals sitting further down the table, and so on, and so on. While I'm sure most departmental topics were curbed by my presence, there was lots of general discussion and just a sense of familiarity. On the way back to the chemistry department, I was chatting with Dr. Kozmin and our lunchtime neighbor, Robert Haselkorn, about this practice, and they both indicated that these lunches are a great way to discuss anything related to departmental affairs, and that in the end, the chemistry faculty don't need to have very many official faculty meetings because everything gets sorted out at lunch (or, perhaps, that issues that are raised in formal meetings but have been previously discussed rise from the ashes of the lunchtime conversations, much like their own beloved mascot?). I think this is a lovely idea, as it provides an opportunity to discuss things in a more casual way, and with less of a time limit (although I guess it's possible that if you don't go to lunch, you miss out on the decision-making).

I'm all for casual and comfortable discussions. Do you all know of other examples where faculty (or industrial teams, or similar) get together in a similar way? Do you wish that there were more opportunities like this, or do you like more formal meetings where everything's on the record? Or at least can you recommend some good faculty clubs? After all, I've got visits to plan...

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

Roll with it

Now that ACS Chicago is finally behind us and we've all returned to a mountain of work, whether it be manuscripts or reactions, I just wanted to put up a quick post and point out that our blogroll has been updated... no more Tenderbutton or Endless Frontier, but a whole host of other fantastic chemistry related blogs for you to read. The blogosphere (surely this is not a real word yet, is it?) is constantly (and rapidly) evolving, so if we've missed any blogs or sites that you think we should be linking to, please let us know - and we'll consider them for the next update.

Stuart


Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Subscribe

Subscribe to this blog's feeds:

[What is this?]

Recent Comments

Out of 754 total comments,
the most recent were:
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2