Nominations open Monday for the first Kavli prizes in neuroscience, astrophysics and nanoscience. One $1,000,000 prize will be awarded for each of the three fields in Norway next year. Sound like another Scandanavian award? Unlike Nobel prizes, which tend to reward scientists at the ends of their careers, the Kavli Prize will recognize innovation, according to a recent article in Time magazine. Fred Kavli, a Norwegian physicist/business mogul/philanthropist, has been funding giant awards for (the odd mix of scientific pursuits) neuroscience, astrophysics and nanoscience research at universities, like Caltech, Harvard, MIT and Cambridge. So, if you know of a deserving neuroscientist, the application deadline is 15 December.

If you think managing chemical waste in your lab is like throwing money down the drain, imagine how Daniel Storm feels. According to the Seattle Post Intelligencer, rather than paying $15,000 to properly dispose of 5 cans of ethyl ether, the professor of pharmacology at the University of Washington took an axe to them and poured them down the drain. According to Nature, Storm falsified waste manifest sheets in an attempt to cover up the crime. Storm was sentenced to 3 years of probation, 80 hours of community service and a $5,000 fine in U. S. District Court and is undergoing university disciplinary review.

Like most people who have had to sit through the courses and fill out the monthly paperwork required to dispose of anything other than water, I can understand Storm’s frustration. Do people in hazmat suits really need to close down a building over a broken thermometer? However, you don’t have to be an environmentalist to realize that pouring an extremely flammable liquid into university pipes isn’t a terribly smart thing to do.

That’s what Gary Lynch said of the physiological mechanism of memory in 2005 when L. A. Times reporter Terry McDermott asked to visit Lynch’s University of California, Irvine lab. McDermott returned repeatedly, and his findings were featured last week in an epic four-part series in the L. A. Times.

The series reads like engrossing Greek drama, complete with a misunderstood hero and the tragicomedy of high stakes science. Lynch is painted as the lone wolf battling evil editors and competitors to get the truth out. Although it’s over-dramatized and Lynch’s role is perhaps a bit overstated, the science, aimed entirely at the lay person, is quite good. According to a recent report from the Pew Research Center, few Americans (19%) follow science news, so if it takes high drama to sell science stories to the public, I’m all for it. McDermott should be congratulated for getting neuroscience on the front page.

It’s been a tough month for parents. Open a newspaper, and you are virtually guaranteed to read about the latest environmental toxin seeping into children’s blood and endangering neuronal or reproductive development. Mattel recalled toys that may be coated in lead paint. Meanwhile, a committee at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) declared ‘some concern’ that a compound in many plastics, bisphenol A (BPA), affects neuronal development. And finally, the University of California at Davis announced a several million dollar study of possible environmental triggers for autism.

If you are a parent and also a scientist, what is the proper response to the conflicting urges to protect your children and evaluate the data? Rebecca Roberts, a biochemist who studies BPA, writes in PLoS Biology:

The mother in me still waits anxiously for the regulatory agencies and the legislature to catch up with the research on BPA that the scientist in me appreciates. I have switched my brand of sippy cups to one that doesn’t contain BPA (a quick internet search will yield many sites describing these and other BPA-free baby products). Nevertheless, while I feel proactive as I watch my daughter happily drink her water, I still cringe a little bit when she drops the sippy cup, toddles over to her toy bin, and starts to gnaw on her plastic turtle instead.

Keeping the commoners happy is easy when you have pharmacology on your side. Complex caste systems exist throughout the animal kingdom, but is it purely social feedback that keeps us all in our places? Vergoz, Shreurs and Mercer report that a pheromone prevents worker honeybees from forming aversive associations while they serve the queen in a recent article in Science.

In the honeybee society, the females do all of the work. Young females attend to the queen and her hive. Later in life, they leave the hive to collect nectar and pollen (the average honeybee lifespan is 4-6 weeks). Queen mandibular pheromone (QMP), which is produced by the queen and transferred to the rest of the hive by her caretakers, prevents the ovarian development of other females.

Honeybees show both appetitive (positively reinforced) and aversive (negatively reinforced) learning. In response to odors, honeybees can be trained to extend their tongues in anticipation of a sweet reward or extend their stingers in anticipation of a shock. Octopamine and dopamine are important in appetitive and aversive learning, respectively. QMP alters brain dopamine levels. Does QMP affect aversive learning?

The authors found that QMP blocked aversive, but not appetitive learning in 6-day-old female bees. However, QMP had no effect on aversive learning in 15-day-old female bees.

How does QMP affect aversive learning? The QMP component homovanillyl alcohol (HVA) blocked aversive learning, whereas another QMP component hydroxybenzoate (HOB) did not. HVA is similar in structure to dopamine, so HVA may be responsible for the QMP-mediated reduction in brain dopamine and the decline in dopamine-mediated aversive learning.

Why block aversive learning in subordinates? The authors speculate that QMP prevents young attendants from forming aversive associations with the queen and therefore promotes loyalty and diligence. Perhaps the age-dependent decline in QMP’s effect on aversive learning induces older honeybees to leave the hive.

It is highly unlikely that humans have an Orwellian pheromone mediating subservience. However, there probably is a QMP keeping us in our societal places: the Quantity of Money in our Pockets.