If you're living in the United States (or if you're following the race to the White House from another country/overseas), you've probably noticed that - while the presidential candidates have talked about a broad range of important issues - they haven't spent a great deal of time discussing scientific topics/science policy... You might be interested to learn that ScienceDebate2008.com, a grassroots organization, has been calling for - and has apparently now organized - a presidential debate on science and technology.

While it's not clear which presidential candidates will attend the debate (April 18th in Philadelphia), I think it could be pretty interesting: science/scientific policy is certainly not the most important issue for many Americans, but I'd personally like to learn more about the candidates' positions on funding, scientific education, and some of the other topics listed on the ScienceDebate2008.com website.

I've been thinking about this topic for a few days, and I've come up with a few questions I thought I'd throw out to our readers:

What scientific issue(s) could potentially swing your vote one way or another? For example, could you vote for someone who didn't 'believe' in evolution, or would that be an instant 'thumbs down'? What about a candidate who mandated that abstinence-only programs were the only kinds of sexual education allowed in public junior high/high schools? What 'hot button' issue is so important to you that it would cause you to re-think who will get your vote?

With that in mind, what question (or questions) do you think need(s) to be asked during this debate for it to be useful to the scientific community? Should a prominent scientist be asked to co-host the debate? If so, who has the intellect and the charisma to do it (well)?

Let's say you won the election and were going to be the next president. What big (science-related) changes/initiatives would you make/fund in your first year in office? For example, would you try to double the NIH and/or NSF budget(s) over the next five years? Maybe you would boost NASA's budget so that we can put a man/woman on Mars in our lifetime? Would you cut back on research related to bio-terrorism or spend more on this topic? (For the sake of this discussion, let's assume that you're so popular/persuasive that you could convince any relevant governmental bodies to do whatever you recommended...)

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 05:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Happy new year to everyone! I hope you were all able to take off a few days from lab-work/school-work/work and catch up on sleep, read a few good books, and decompress a bit...

It's been a long time since I've blogged, but I just wanted to tell you some great news - I'm very happy to announce that Stuart Cantrill will be the chief editor of Nature Chemistry (set to launch in early 2009)...

Some of you may have noticed that NPG is now searching for editors to join Stuart at Nature Chemistry, as well as a chemistry editor to take his place at Nature Nanotechnology...

If you have any questions about what life is like as an editor, please feel free to post it here and one (or more) of us will let you know our thoughts...

Hope you all had a great break!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (0)

I only have time for a quick post, as I'm about to run off to a meeting - but I was in a baby gear/toy store yesterday, and I'm sorry to report that the children's chemistry sets were in the "Science & Magic" section.

That pairing really threw me for a loop - I guess any sufficiently advanced technology really is indistinguishable from magic...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 10:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Like Catherine, I'm a bit behind on scientific posts - so here's a quick recap of some of the talks I attended earlier in the week.

My Sunday morning started with an excellent session on malaria/anti-malarials - Solomon Nwaka from the World Health Organization's Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases 'kicked off' the session with a broad overview that really drove home why malaria is (still) such an important disease: every 30 seconds a child dies from malaria, and the disease is responsible for more that one million deaths each year. Anti-malarial drug resistance is a huge problem (and there aren't that many new drug candidates in the pipeline), so the session focused on several academic scientists who are searching for new drug candidates. This is often done as a collaboration with Medicines for Malaria Venture, a non-profit organization created to “discover, develop and deliver new antimalarial drugs through public-private partnerships.” (For more information on public-private partnerships, click here and here).

I was only able to stay for the first half of the session, but I heard Jonathan Vennerstrom talk about synthetic peroxide anti-malarials (including this simplified analog of artemisinin) and Paul O'Neill talk about analogs of amodiaquine that were active against drug-resistant strains of malaria (click here for a recent review on 4-aminoquinoline anti-malarials).

The debate about whether or not academic scientists should try to get involved in drug discovery can get quite heated (see Derek Lowe's take on it here; you might also be interested in this NRDD 'Outlook'). Though I understand why some scientists think that academics should avoid this area of research, many pharmaceutical companies aren't willing (or able) to pursue a drug discovery program that focuses on malaria or other important, yet neglected, infectious diseases that disproportionately affect developing countries. (NITD and GSK are important exceptions to this general rule...)

So my question is if many pharmaceutical companies aren't willing/able to tackle these problems, why shouldn't academic groups give it a try?

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 08:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I only have time for a quick post, but I wanted to mention a few other blogs/bloggers that are at the fall ACS meeting - most of you know that Paul and Kyle are here, but it looks like journalists from C&EN and Chemistry World are blogging from the meeting (including Carmen Drahl, who used to post at She Blinded Me with Science/who now works for C&EN...)

It also looks like Mitch (from Chemical Forums) and Eric (from Homebrew and Chemistry) are here too... Have I missed anyone? If so, please add a link to their (or your) blog in the 'comments' section of this post...

It sounds like some of these bloggers will be at John Harvard’s Brew House in Harvard Square tomorrow night. I'll try to swing by for a round (and will see if I can convince any of the other NPG editors to join me) - hope to see you there...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 09:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the drug store, but that's just peanuts to space.

This Douglas Adams quote was one of the first things that popped into my head when I entered the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center. Simply put, the building is huge: "516,000 square feet of contiguous exhibit space" with "3 exhibition halls each ranging in size from 162,000 to 184,000 square feet."

After looking at the floorplan, I realized that it would be pretty tough to rapidly hop from session to session - the convention center has two skybridges that you need to use if you're moving from the west side of the building to the east side of the building, so it can take 10 to 15 minutes to get from one session to another. This must be why the refrigerator in the press office was packed full of bottles of Gatorade/Powerade...

The first day of the ACS was great (more about the science in my next post), but I've yet to find a good place to grab coffee that doesn't have a huge line at all hours of the day - on my way to the afternoon session I saw people crowded around a table containing snacks and coffee. Alas, the giant drum of coffee was decaf! I saw another table further down the corridor, but it too contained only decaf coffee. Oh cruel world, why must you mock me so?

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, the fall ACS meeting is nearly here - a few NPG editors will be attending the meeting (including myself), so don't forget to check back for daily updates...

I also wanted to mention that we've put together another special issue of Nature that will be distributed at the meeting - in this week's issue, there's a News Feature on metal-organic frameworks and several papers:

- Structure-based activity prediction for an enzyme of unknown function by Hermann et al. (click here for the News & Views)
- Vitrification of a monatomic metallic liquid by Bhat et al. (click here for the News & Views)
- A transglutaminase homologue as a condensation catalyst in antibiotic assembly lines by Fortin et al. (click here for the News & Views)
- Selection and evolution of enzymes from a partially randomized non-catalytic scaffold by Seelig & Szostak (click here for the News & Views)

If you're going to be at the meeting, don't forget to swing by the NPG booth (booth #434) to pick up free issues of Nature, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Materials, Nature Methods, Nature Nanotechnology, and Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

And last (but certainly not least), Paul thinks we should meet for "[d]rinks or dinner at a neutral location" - depending on where and when it is, I'll try to swing by (and bring along a few of the other editors...) Hope to see you there!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 03:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It's been ages since I've posted, but I saw this news this morning and thought it'd be worth mentioning on the blog - the board of directors recently decided to continue Nature Publishing Group's foray into the chemical sciences, and has just announced that it is searching for a Chief Editor to launch Nature Chemistry:

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. We require a dynamic 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 related 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 academia 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 1500 words) that encapsulates their vision for the content, competitive position and longer-term development of Nature Chemistry.

Applications are due in a few weeks, so don't forget to mark your calendars if you're interested in this position... And best of luck to you if you decide to apply!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

On Wednesday night (June 27th), Nature Network Boston will be hosting their first 'pub night' at Tavern in the Square (in Central Square, Cambridge). Corie Lok, the editor of Nature Network Boston, recently blogged about this event, which will be "your chance to meet other scientists from the Boston area, including other members of and bloggers on Nature Network Boston and a few people from Nature’s Cambridge office..."

The pub night officially starts at 6:30 PM, and I'll be there for an hour or so; I think Catherine said that she's planning on being there for a little while too. So if you're in Cambridge that night, please swing by and say 'hello.' Make sure you come early, as Corie's buying the first 30 people a free drink...

Hope to see you on Wednesday night!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 05:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Apologies to our international readers for the U.S.-centric post, but the National Institutes of Health announced earlier today that PAR-07-353, a grant involving Cheminformatics Research Centers, has been canceled for "programmatic reasons." For those of you who haven't heard of the Cheminformatics Research Centers, they are part of the Molecular Libraries Roadmap Program (MLP), which is

an integrated set of initiatives aimed at developing and using selective and potent chemical probes for basic research ... [The MLP] was proposed to introduce high-throughput screening approaches to small molecule discovery, formerly limited to the pharmaceutical research industry, into the public sector... [and] is made up of the following major components: (1) access to a library of compounds (Molecular Libraries Small Molecule Repository); (2) access to bioassays provided by the larger research community; (3) support for the development of breakthrough instrumentation technologies; (4) access to a network of screening and chemical probe generation centers (MLPCN) where assays are screened and probe development is undertaken; (5) Pubchem, the primary portal through which the screening results of the MLPCN are made public and (6) the Cheminformatics Research Centers (CRCs) with multiple roles focused on high-level data analysis and dissemination with a focus on developing new understanding of the cellular processes (genes and pathways).

One reason why this is so surprising is because the grants were due next week (June 28th). I imagine the timing of this decision (and the decision itself) is bound to upset a number of people in this community, especially since many applicants were probably working around the clock to get their grant submitted before the (now non-existent) deadline...

Does anyone know more about this story or why the grant was canceled?

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 02:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

(Editor's note: at the request of the GRC, this post has been removed.)

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 11:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

[In lieu of profiles, the contributors to this blog have decided to do their own Reactions pieces...]

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was a bit of a ‘late bloomer’ when it came to chemistry: I didn’t own a chemistry set when I was growing up or run reactions in my garage. And I didn’t really enjoy high school chemistry classes (though I liked that feeling you get after successfully balancing a complex chemical reaction...) But I had an amazing AP chemistry teacher in high school, so I went into college with an open mind. When I got there, I was drawn to organic and biological chemistry: I thought it was so cool that a chemist could (design and) synthesize a biologically-active organic molecule that could be used to tease apart a complex cellular process or could be developed into a drug.

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

Like Andy, I probably would have been a musician - I play drums, jazz piano, various percussion instruments, and sing a bit. (I’m trying to learn how to play guitar, but don’t think my fingers are the right length/shape - or maybe I just need to practice more?) I played in a few bands in graduate school (which really helped keep my spirits up when my chemistry wasn’t working), and I miss the feeling you get when you’re playing music with close friends in a dirty/dusty basement...

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

The simple answer is to work on an important scientific problem that isn’t being adequately addressed by other chemists - easier said than done, though... I guess an important question to constantly ask is "why am I doing this experiment/project?" As long as you know the answer to that question, then you are probably "contributing to the world at large" - if you can't think of a good/satisfying answer, maybe it's time to change projects?

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

If I had to choose a scientist, I’d probably invite Linus Pauling or RB Woodward to dinner - I’d be interested in hearing what they think about all the things scientists have discovered in the last few decades. If I could choose any historical figure, I think I’d invite Oscar Wilde or John Coltrane – I imagine Wilde would be hilarious in person and I’d love to hear Coltrane talk about music and tell stories about the jazz scene in the 50s and 60s...

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

Several years ago – I can’t remember exactly what it was, but it involved DNA glycosylases...

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

I think I’d want to bring something I’d read before/knew I liked - so I’d probably go with Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina or Eco’s Foucault's Pendulum. As for music, I don’t think I could survive if I only had a single CD - does a mix CD count? If so, I'd burn one that had the second movement of Beethoven’s 7th Symphony, John Coltrane’s Giant Steps, Dizzy Gillespie’s A Night in Tunisia, Beck’s Tropicalia, Life In A Glass House from Radiohead’s Amnesiac and/or Morning Bell from Radiohead’s Kid A, Stevie Wonder’s Superstition, and a few other tracks… (Thank goodness for iPods…)

Joshua Finkelstein is a Senior Editor for Nature and a regular contributor to the Sceptical Chymist.

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 05:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

There's an interesting news piece over at news@nature.com that caught my eye - a team led by Helge Riemann at the Institute of Crystal Growth is trying to generate a 'pure' sample of crystalline silicon-28:

The new barbell-shaped crystal, which weighs 5 kilograms and was completed on 23 May by Riemann's team ... is nearly isotopically pure. It was made from Russian source material, whose silicon was 99.994% pure silicon-28.

A standard kilogram is currently calibrated using the "international prototype," which "was manufactured in the 1880s [from] an alloy of 90% platinum-10% iridium" and is housed in the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures in France. Over time, the loss and/or gain of atoms from the international prototype may have altered its weight - the news story suggests that it might be off by 0.1 milligrams/0.01% (but I couldn't find any additional information to verify that statement...)

Making this (two-million euro/2.7-million USD) piece of silicon was no easy task:

The researchers spent six months eliminating contaminating elements by repeatedly melting the silicon in an apparatus that does not touch the material. The resulting crystal is thought to contain one foreign atom to every 10 million atoms of silicon.

Talk about a pure sample...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

I was out at the pub last night with a few other editors, and one of my colleagues mentioned that an editor from Nature Materials is leaving the company (and the country) - while she'll be definitely be missed by all, this means that Nature Materials is searching for a new associate editor to join their team:

We are particularly interested in applicants with expertise in bio-inspired, biomedical and biomolecular materials, but we would welcome applications from outstanding candidates in any area of materials science.

The ideal candidate should have a PhD and preferably postdoctoral experience with a strong research record. The successful candidate will play an important role in determining the representation of their field in the journal, and will work closely with the other editors on all aspects of the editorial process, including manuscript selection, commissioning and editing of Reviews and News & Views, and writing for the journal. A key aspect of the job is liaising with the scientific community through laboratory visits and international conferences.

If you're interested in the position (which will be based in the London office - with Stuart and Andy), you'll need to apply soon - applications need to be in by June 4th...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 06:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Every six months or so, I pop over to England to catch up with my colleagues in our London office (NPG's largest office). I love visiting this city, and it's not just because I get to use words like 'skint' and eat fantastic Indian food every night...

But I was thinking about how difficult it must be for people who move to a new country to start their Ph.D.s/post-docs/jobs - in addition to adjusting to a new lab/co-workers (which can be difficult even if you're working in a familiar city/country), you have to learn how things are done/how things work in your new environment. As trite as it sounds, so many things can be so different.

For example, I lived in London for two months when I started at Nature, and I'm embarrassed to say that I had to dig out the manual for my combo washer/dryer to figure out how to operate it. (I thought I was doing something wrong because my clothes never came out 100% dry - it turns out that the machine in my apartment didn't use heat to dry the clothes, just an extended spin cycle...) Even going to the pub can be problematic: we had a German post-doc in our lab who frequently forgot to bring his passport when we went out for drinks. Despite the fact that he was in his mid-30s (and clearly looked old enough to drink in the U.S.), he had a difficult time convincing waiters/waitresses to serve him without ID...

For those of you who changed countries when starting your Ph.D./post-doc/job, I was wondering what little differences were the most frustrating for you? And for those of you who are living in a city/country you know well, how do you help your new co-workers adjust to their new environment? (For example, I've heard that some schools/labs distriubte packets that contain local information, FAQs, etc. - are these useful/helpful?)

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

The office coffee machine broke down this morning, so I've been using Coca-Cola to fight off the postprandial dip. I rarely drink soda (aside from the occasional Cuba Libre), so I'm usually the last to know about (crazy) new kinds of soda. But there's a case of Diet Coke Plus in our office refrigerator - you might not have seen it in your local supermarket, but it's a new version of Diet Coke that contains several vitamins and minerals:

Each eight-ounce serving of Diet Coke Plus provides a good source of Niacin (vitamin B3), vitamins B6 and B12, zinc and magnesium (15% Daily Value [DV] for Niacin, B6 and B12, 10% DV for zinc and magnesium).

Great news, no? Now you don't have to take that pesky multi-vitamin every day. Just have a few cans of Diet Coke Plus and you'll be all set...

Not a fan of Diet Coke? Not a problem: PepsiCo is responding with the launch of Tava this fall, which will contain "vitamins B3, B6 and E, and chromium." (Chromium?)

I'm just waiting for them to combine soft drinks with OTC medication: "have a hangover and can't stay awake at your morning meeting? Try new Coke NSAID - it comes in two flavors: cherry aspirin and vanilla ibuprofen..." Yum...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 02:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (1)

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)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 01:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

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)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

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)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 12:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

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)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 10:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

Though Lake Michigan is quite beautiful, it's pretty tough to appreciate the view when you're in the back of a stalled bus in the middle of Lakeshore Drive. Luckily, it only took 15 minutes for a replacement bus to arrive...

Despite this minor setback, I made it to the conference center in time to see most of the symposium in honor of Dave Evans. Evans talked about a few recent total syntheses from his group, including Oasomycin A, which was recently completed (see also these two papers). He's a great speaker who really holds your attention for the whole talk: he only discusses the most interesting reactions/transformations (and not every single step of the synthesis) and he uses some color (but not too much) to draw your attention to key atoms and/or newly formed bonds.

Later on in the afternoon, I made my way over to see Regan Thomson's talk on his recent synthesis of (+)-symbioimine. I really enjoyed his talk - I've known Regan for years and it's always exciting to see people you know publish interesting work... But the chair of the session really didn't bring her 'A' game today - she had trouble pronouncing his name (calling him 'Dr. Thomas' twice), fumbled through the word 'osteoclastogenesis,' and completely mis-pronounced the name of the molecule. OK - I agree that 'osteoclastogenesis' isn't a very common word, but I think it's pretty important to get the names of the people in your session correct. (Maybe I'm just overly sensitive about names, as so many people have trouble pronouncing mine...)

Well I'm bushed and it's not even 10 PM - it's amazing how exhausted you can get by running around from session to session... For those of you who are here in Chicago, how's your meeting going? What session/talk/event has been the most enjoyable for you? What are you looking forward to seeing tomorrow?

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 09:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

I made it in to Chicago late last night (only two hours late, which for isn't that bad for O'Hare...) There must have been a few chemists on my flight, as I wasn't the only person who chuckled when they announced that our pilot's name was Dave Evans...

I got up early this morning to check email, plan my day at the conference, and make a few last minute adjustments to an iPod playlist (it's a 20-25 minute bus ride from my hotel to the convention center). When traveling for work, I usually create a playlist to 'match' the location of the conference: Radiohead works well if you're heading off to an RSC conference, but a meeting in Chicago really calls for some Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters... (This isn't always easy - I'm not sure what I'm going to do for the 2009 ACS meeting in Salt Lake City. Any suggestions?)

Anyways, this morning I saw a great talk from Dennis Dougherty - most of the talk focused on cation-pi interactions in ligand-gated ion channels (for example, the Cys-loop superfamily) and how his laboratory has used unnatural amino acid mutagenesis to dissect how nicotinic acetylcholine receptors work (click here for his Nature paper from 2005 - I think it's a great demonstration of how organic/physical organic chemistry can be used to reveal how a biological system works...)

After grabbing a quick (and remarkably expensive) bite to eat, I went to Linda Hsieh-Wilson's and Jotham Coe's talks, both of which were great. Coe talked about Varenicline/Chantix, which looks like it'll really be able to help people who want to quit smoking.

If you're blogging from the conference, please let us know/please feel free to mention it in the comments section - so far, I know that

Richard from Chemistry World

Egon from chem-bla-ics

Kyle from The Chem Blog

are here (I'm not sure if all of them are blogging, though...) As Katharine mentioned, her news@nature blog posts can be found here.

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 06:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

As you probably guessed, several editors will be attending the spring ACS meeting next week - you might remember that we created special conference websites for the spring and fall ACS meetings last year. This year there's been a major overhaul to our Chemistry Portal - in addition to the list of recent content from Nature, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Materials, Nature Methods, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Protocols, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, and news@nature.com, there's a new section entitled "Looking Back."

The "Looking Back" page contains a list of Nature chemistry papers that 'caught our eye' for one reason or another and were published between 1950 and 2000 - there are a few 'classic' Nature papers (for example, Watson & Crick's Molecular structure of nucleic acids: a structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid and Kroto et al.'s C60: Buckminsterfullerene) and a few you might recognize from courses you took in college or graduate school (for example, Jones et al.'s paper Stereochemistry of phosphoryl group transfer using a chiral [16O, 17O, 18O] stereochemical course of alkaline phosphatase and Nicolaou et al.'s Total synthesis of taxol). There's even a 1950 paper from RB Woodward (Structure of chlorodesoxypatulinic acid) and a 1969 paper from EJ Corey (Biological activity of synthetic prostaglandins)... Have a favorite? Think we missed a key paper? Please let us know...

As Katharine mentioned yesterday, we've also put together a special issue of Nature - the issue is packed full of chemistry, so if you're at the meeting, swing by the NPG booth and pick up a free copy...

There's a News & Views Q&A on C-H activation from Bob Bergman, a review article from David Gorin & Dean Toste on relativistic effects in homogeneous gold catalysis, a Careers and Recruitment piece in our Naturejobs section, and several primary research papers:

Total synthesis of marine natural products without using protecting groups by Phil Baran et al. (click here to read the N&V)

Biasing reaction pathways with mechanical force by Charles Hickenboth et al. (click here to read the N&V)

BluB cannibalizes flavin to form the lower ligand of vitamin B12 from Michiko Taga et al. (click here to read the N&V)

We'll be adding blog entries throughout the conference, so please check back frequently to see what we’re writing about...

See you at the meeting!

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 01:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

We’ve decided to create a chemistry eTOC (an "electronic Table of Contents") that will highlight recently published chemical & biochemical papers from Nature, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Materials, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Methods, and Nature Protocols.

For now, the chemistry eTOC will include ‘back half’ content (primary research and review articles) from all eight journals and ‘front half’ content (editorials, news features, news & views, etc.) from Nature. (Our long-term goal is to include ‘front half’ content from the research journals as well…) In addition, the eTOC will contain recent blog posts from this blog, highlight several chemistry jobs from our NatureJobs website, let you know about other developments from NPG in chemistry, and will occasionally include content from other NPG titles (for example, the recent Nature Reviews Microbiology review entitled "Microfabrication meets microbiology" and the 2006 Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology review entitled "A chemical toolkit for proteins – an expanded genetic code").

We’re hoping that this eTOC will make it easier for chemists who only read one or two NPG journals find interesting papers/reviews/etc. that are published in other NPG journals (for example, ones that they rarely/never read from cover-to-cover).

The first eTOC will go out during next week's ACS meeting (on Monday, March 26th) and future eTOCs will be sent out twice a month - so please sign up today!

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)
Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 08:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I was just talking with Catherine, and we can't remember if "a week in the library will save you a day in the lab" or if "a week in the lab will save you a day in the library"? I guess if you're starting a new project, maybe it's best to set up a whole bunch of experiments to see what works (steering clear of the dogma you’d find in published papers). But if you're nearing the end of a total synthesis, you probably want to play it safe with your milligram/sub-milligram quantities of your natural product and spend a bit more time in the library trouble-shooting problems...

What about other quotable quotes? Was RB Woodward right ("A scientist has to work very hard to get to the point where he can be lucky.") or was Ralph Waldo Emerson right (“Shallow men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect.”)? (The Google fight results are closer than you'd think...) Is time on your side or does time pass more quickly as your Ph.D./post-doc progresses?

What do you think/what's your scientific philosophy? Does it match up with the prevailing philosophy of your lab? What other quotes (or song lyrics) come to mind when you think about the last six months of your scientific research?

Unfortunately, we aren't able to set up a poll on the blog, so we'll have to do it the old fashion way - please leave us a comment with your thoughts...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 03:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

I must admit, I really enjoy riding the bus to work - it's not just because of the unusual people you tend to meet on public transportation (though that's half the fun), but because the rides are long enough for me to skim through various journals to see if there's anything I want to read later on in the day. Normally there are a few things that catch my eye, and I'll set them aside for a lunch break (or while I'm waiting for the bus at the end of the day). But my plan to quickly skim through this week's Science failed completely - it's jam-packed full of interesting articles, and I needed to set aside a few hours to read through them all.

It's a special issue focused on 'Sustainability and Energy,' two topics that are obviously important these days - it starts out with a few 'Profiles' of major players in the field (I especially enjoyed reading the ones on Dan Nocera, Jay Keasling, and James Dumesic) and then there's a number of 'Perspectives' (I'd recommend starting with the ones by Whitesides & Crabtree and Stephanopoulos).

Reading through this material made me feel like (somewhere along the way) I should have had a class or two that focused on the chemistry/biochemistry of energy research. Before I started working at Nature, I hadn't really been exposed to this topic in much detail, despite taking (what felt like) dozens of classes in my undergraduate days. Those classes tended to focus on 'pure' chemistry/shy away from applications, and the graduate classes I took were fairly specialized/on completely different topics...

One of my undergraduate physical chemistry classes had both chemists and civil engineers in it, and I remember that the questions asked by the civil engineers ("Is this why cement dries on the outside first?") generally annoyed the chemists - is this a clash of the two cultures (i.e., science vs. engineering), or were my experiences the exception and not the rule?

Do you think we are doing enough to make sure that future generations of chemists are prepared to tackle important problems in energy research? Sure - you could argue that applied chemistry is the domain of the chemical engineers and that chemists shouldn't learn this sort of stuff at the undergraduate level. But shouldn't we be doing more to expose undergraduate chemists to important topics involving applied chemical research (for example, by requiring chemistry majors to take a chemical engineering class or two)?

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 12:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Looking for something to read while you're waiting for the rotovap to free up or the PAGE gel to finish running? You might want to take a look at yesterday's issue of Nature, which has a number of chemistry/chemical papers. In addition to the paper by Serreli et al. that Katharine and Stuart mentioned, there's a News & Views piece from Steven Nolan on Craig Forsyth's recent ACIE paper and a paper from Stern et al. that describes miniature, ultra-sensitive sensors that can detect unlabeled antibodies at concentrations below 100 femtomolar (and can monitor the cellular immune response in 'real-time').

There's also a cool paper involving the TRPA1 channel - TRP channels respond to "temperature, touch, pain, osmolarity, pheromones, taste, and other stimuli," and the TRPA1 channel specifically responds to a range of structurally-diverse compounds, including mustard oil, acrolein, and icilin.

In Macpherson et al., the authors used 'click chemistry' to show that derivatives of mustard oil and cinnamaldehyde covalently bound to the TRPA1 channel. They used mass spectrometry to identify fourteen TRPA1 cysteine residues that reacted with iodoacetamide, three of which were required for normal channel function. From a chemical standpoint, this might not seem all that surprising, but this is apparently the first ion channel known to be activated by this mechanism, and I think it's interesting to see how "tuning TRPA1 to respond to covalent modification by reactive compounds ... [enables the nervous system to] directly assess the noxious environment of sensory neurons." For those of you teaching biological/bio-organic chemistry courses, this might make a good test question - it's a nice 'real world' example of how understanding basic organic chemistry can be used to explore how an enzyme works...

Joshua

Joshua Finkelstein (Senior Editor, Nature)

Posted by Joshua Finkelstein at 02:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I saw an amazing BBC documentary a few years ago called "Bad Medicine" - the documentary focused on Dora Akunyili, the Director General of Nigeria's National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), and her efforts to eradicate fake pharmaceuticals/counterfeit drugs in Nigeria.

Before Akunyili took over her post in 2001, a staggering 80% of the medications sold there were deficient in one way or another. Some contained less of the active ingredient than was specified on the label. Others were past their expiration date. Some were filled with inert lactose or powdered chalk.

The stories she told were astonishing: after cracking down on the counterfeiters, they "fought back ... [burning] down Nafdac's offices and threaten[ing] to kill her and her children"; "snipers opened fire on her car ... [and] a bullet pierced through [her] head scarf and grazed [her] scalp"; when the International Children's Heart Foundation visited Nigeria to perform heart surgery on children, four died because someone had replaced the adrenaline with water. It was a heart-wrenching documentary about how far some people will go to make money, and how hard it is to stop them: the World Health Organization "estimates up to 25% of medicines consumed in developing nations are counterfeit or substandard" and this problem isn't restricted to countries in the developing world.

So I was excited to read a recent news@nature.com story by Katharine Sanderson about a paper that just came out on Analytical Chemistry's ASAP. The authors used spatially offset Raman spectroscopy (SORS) to examine ibuprofen and paracetamol (acetamino