In its June Editorial, Nature Chemical Biology (5, 365; 2009) calls for mechanisms to initiate, develop and support emerging research communities that cross traditional scientific and geographical boundaries.

Some extracts from the Editorial:

Over time, scientific societies, journals, conferences and funding mechanisms are formed to disseminate new findings, to provide forums for recommending standards and nomenclature, and to facilitate collaborations. However, establishing this research infrastructure typically requires significant time and resources. As science becomes increasingly dynamic and interdisciplinary, new and more effective ways to nucleate and support emerging communities are required.

In practice, bringing together scientists from diverse backgrounds may not be so easy. In a commentary in this issue, Peter Seeberger outlines the challenges in bringing together carbohydrate researchers (p. 368). In particular, the diversity and complexities of these molecules, the difficulty in accessing synthetic samples, and the different languages used to describe the compounds in the chemical and biological communities have hindered communication and scientific progress. As Seeberger discusses, the most important initial steps in bringing together carbohydrate researchers included the creation of a shared set of technological resources and a shared vision for priorities in advancing the field.

The creation of an organized community was enabled in part by taking advantage of a focused funding initiative—a US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Glue Grant. Taking a page from the earlier proteomics and genomics efforts, these grants provide short-term funding for large-scale collaborative projects, offering services and resources that individual scientists can use to advance their own research at a scale that would not be possible for an individual laboratory or even a single university or institute.

Beyond financial support for research, communities need forums for sharing information and results and for discussing community standards. The publication of Essentials of Glycobiology in 1999, the first comprehensive book in the field, was an important step in uniting the carbohydrate community. The second edition of the book, reviewed by Nicola Pohl (p. 373), is freely available online through the US National Center for Biotechnology Information at the request of the authors and with agreement from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Online communities are now a particularly effective way for scientists to communicate in real time without geographical barriers.

The Editorial describes some further research communities, and some online partnerships with Nature Publishing Group which help to foster these interactions.

Nature Chemical Biology website.

Functional Glycomics gateway.

US federal agencies are scrambling to prepare for a wave of research proposals from scientists eager to win funding offered in the nation’s economic stimulus package, as reported in an online Nature News story on 16 March. White House officials fear that the number of applications could overwhelm the country’s online grant-application system, Grants.gov, if immediate action is not taken. From the News story: "The Grants.gov system, which went online in 2004, was intended to streamline the grant process by offering a central electronic application portal for all federal grant-making agencies. But it was designed to handle only about 65,000 applications a year, says Sheila Conley, acting deputy assistant secretary in the office of grants at the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) in Washington, DC, which manages the system. “We’ve blown that out of the water,” she says. The system received 200,000 applications in 2008; that’s expected to jump to 275,000 this year."

Various researchers and research administrators have described their experiences with this system, and compared it with other application procedures, both in the News story and in online comments at the Nature News website. In view of the complex procedures, technical hitches and bureaucracy, tight deadlines and number of applications, researchers planning to request funding need to be well prepared. Let’s hope that is enough.

Nature Materials starts the new year with a rousing editorial in its January edition (Nat. Mater. 8, 1; 2009) on the importance of innovation: “we cannot afford reductions in fundamental research or to be complacent on issues such as the energy crisis. The lesson from the recent financial meltdown seems straightforward. If we do not understand the risks we are exposed to and cover ourselves against them, the long-term implications might be grim. Unlike the banks and their complex financial instruments, which even proved too complex for sophisticated risk-assessment computer models, the gamble we are taking with our planet is painfully clear.”

According to the editorial, the energy crisis and global warming need immediate action if we are to avoid significant costs and serious implications. “Even though public budgets are badly strained, it is clear that we have to take a long-term approach and cannot afford to reduce our spending on fundamental research. Budget cuts and hiring freezes are anything but a solution. We must equip our academic system with sufficient funds to push ahead fundamental research in areas such as clean energy technologies.” The journal hopes “that 2009 will mark a turning point, not only for the economy, but also in our approach to science policy and science funding.”

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