ACS: Like a virgin

I have a confession to make – this is my first time. Even though I’ve been to conferences all over the world, somehow I’ve never made it to a national ACS meeting, until now. For the benefit of newbies everywhere, here are my first impressions.

This is certainly the largest conference that I’ve ever tackled, and the choice can be confusing. My pre-planning involved checking out the schedule online, but I didn’t cope very well with the ACS search engine, so I eventually just decided to wait until I had the printed version to browse through. Even then, it was difficult to know where to start. With hindsight, perhaps if I’d arrived in Chicago early enough to register yesterday, that would have give me more time to browse the technical program before things got under way.

Of course, choosing which lectures to attend is only part of it – finding the lecture theatre can be a task in itself. And if you have any plans to hop between sessions to cherry-pick lectures, think carefully – the lecture theatres can be distant from each other, so you might end up missing chunks of the talks.

Some of the lecture theatres are huge, which oddly enough was a problem sometimes. I saw some excellent talks today, with respectable attendances, but when the audience is scattered across a vast room it can seem as if there’s only a few people there. It’s only when you find yourself joining the throng trying to get lunch that you realize just how many people there are.

A conference this size must be a logistical nightmare to organize, and barring a few niggles (more restaurants perhaps? And a hotel room that actually had its own bed would have been good last night – don’t ask) it’ s been a great day. I can’t wait for tomorrow. How was it for you?

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back from hiatus…

Hello, fellow readers and bloggers. I’m back from a blogging break and just wanted to share some exciting chemistry-related papers from the March issue of Nature Methods.

From Ruedi Aebersold and colleagues, we have a paper that compares the three most popular enrichment strategies for analyzing the phosphoproteome by mass spectrometry. Using an unbiased approach, they discovered that none of these strategies alone was sufficient for comprehensive analysis of all phosphorylated proteins in the proteome of cells from a fruit fly. Also in the mass spectrometry arena, we have a Perspective from Steven Gygi and Joshua Elias that provides a guide to researchers using the target-decoy database search strategy to increase confidence in peptide identification.

Peter Schultz and company now present a method to genetically incorporate unnatural amino acids into proteins in mammalian cells, which could open up a whole new range of exciting biological experiments in mammalian systems. And finally, we even have some nanotechnology! Michelle Wang and colleagues describe a method to reproducibly fabricate quartz nano-cylinders, and use them to measure DNA twisting in an angular optical trap.

Thanks for reading!

Allison Doerr (Associate Editor, Nature Methods)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *