For screening purposes only

In all the hubbub of attending a meeting last week, I forgot to point out that our August issue has gone live. This issue is jampacked with research, including the elucidation of enzyme endeavors, thiamin taken from treated turf, and Hsp90 and HuR having helpful or highly complicated roles in the cell (there are all your tongue-twisters for the month).

In addition, this issue includes several articles on high throughput screening, which are all free throughout August. In particular, a Commentary by Inglese, Shamu & Guy proposes guidelines for minimal information that should be included when reporting the results of small-molecule screens. For those of you involved in screening, what do you think of these suggestions? Is there anything you would do differently, or anything that’s lacking? Finally, what other fields could benefit from a discussion of publication guidelines?

We’d be very interested to hear any feedback you all have about the issue via posts or email, and about these guidelines in particular. Until then, happy screening!

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

Reactions – Pavel Anzenbacher

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I blame it on my parents: I was born when my father was in his 3rd year of college and my mom in her 2nd year. I am told I used chemistry books as a pillow, toys, maybe even food. It turned indigestible, though. Very frustrating, but I developed high frustration tolerance, something an organic chemist really needs.

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

I would be a sculptor. I would love to be one, actually, more and more. I don’t see a difference between a sculptor and an organic chemist sculpting from carbons, nitrogens, oxygens, etc. You just need an X-ray “diffractometer vision” to fully appreciate it. Otherwise, same thing.

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

This question almost implies that the most important impact a chemist has on the world is through his or her professional activities. I am, err, not sure that one makes the most impact by his work. To me that appears to be wishful thinking. Most chemists who are not blessed by inventing penicillin contribute best by being nice people, who are good examples for others, conscious of large problems (environment, global warming, energy situation) because they actually understand a little better these things than an average citizen. And, of course, for those of us who teach chemistry it is inspiring the future scientist, who will discover the new penicillin for sure! Why do I have the feeling I failed at this question?

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

That would be Carl Wilhelm Scheele, the discoverer of oxygen, nitrogen, manganese, molybdenum and tungsten and many other chemicals, including also chlorine (most likely before Sir Davy). The most surprising is, however, that he did all that without almost any professional training, as a small-town pharmacist! His talent and intuition must have been phenomenal – so the dinner would be a BLAST! I have one for you directly from the man himself:

“Oh, how happy I am! No care for eating or drinking or dwelling, no care for my pharmaceutical business, for this is mere play to me. But to watch new phenomena this is all my care, and how glad is the enquirer when discovery rewards his diligence; then his heart rejoices."

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

This summer. Synthesis of dichlorotetrazine from guanidine and hydrazine… That explains why I did it myself.

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

The most important book in the known universe, Winnie the Pooh! Duh! And as for a CD, that would be the Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd. And a CD player with solar power cells, please!

Pavel Anzenbacher is a faculty member in the Department of Chemistry at Bowling Green State University, OH, and works on the design and synthesis of photonic materials and investigates the photophysical processes as they relate to excited state energy migration and photonic energy processing. His group works on photonic materials focusing on optical sensing and organic electroluminescence (OLEDs).

Reactions – Lee Cronin

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

Pure curiosity – I have always wanted to be a scientist, but I kind of drifted to chemistry partly because biology seemed to be more about classification than science, and physics seemed unreal and only worked in special situations. Chemistry works, is messy, can be counted, and we can even help the physicists with some of our compounds which turn out to be quantum spin tubes now anyway as the result of some messy chemistry that’s being done in my laboratory…

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

I really could not conceive of doing anything else – being allowed to do science and getting paid for it is amazing. If I had to do something else I would probably like to have a go at being an artist specialising in modern art or a mathematician. Both are very different but creative professions and are only constrained by the limits of one’s imagination.

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

By doing fundamental science and following our curiosity. I think that the pressure to do relevant things is so high nowadays that we risk completely missing some truly amazing discoveries that could change the world. Having said that, it is also becoming increasingly true that chemistry and chemists can help address some of the biggest issues facing us today – access to clean water, energy, global warming – in fact solving the energy problem and global warming appear to me to be one and the same thing. Why not set out to design a material that fixes carbon dioxide with water and drive the process with photons and then, hey presto, you have access to hydrocarbons to burn without the carbon dioxide hangover. Of course, nature has already been doing this for us, but we need to speed up the kinetics to produce hydrocarbons in real time as it were. Actually, I would favour making methanol since we could burn it and use it in fuel cells.

Chemistry can also help examine some of the most interesting problems in science today relating to complexity, emergent systems and even asking where we came from in terms of the origin of life. This is a big question – I think it may be possible to go from a chemical soup to primitive chemical cells that could be considered to be alive in a matter of a few hundred hours rather than millions / billions of years. I am also looking forward for the chemist / materials scientist than can produce infinitely long carbon nanotubes so we can make a space elevator, then we can all get to become a space tourist without the need for a big rocket.

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

There are so many people I would like to have dinner with. Can I not just have a part in Bill and Ted’s excellent adventure and bring them all to my house for a dinner party using the phone box time machine? It would be interesting to see how Newton and Einstein would get on with each other.

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

A couple of weeks ago where I was trying to understand the self assembly of a nanoscale transition metal cluster using cryospray mass spectrometry – it was amazing since it worked. When I come into the lab normally my group dive for cover…

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

I would take Ben Okri’s The Famished Road – it’s an amazing book – I have read it many times and it is so rich I think I would never get bored of reading it. I am not sure what CD to take – maybe one that is reflective enough so I could signal to a passing vessel and get rescued from the island? If I had batteries or a solar panel for the CD player maybe I would take some Coldplay or some Philip Glass depending on my mood.

Lee Cronin is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Glasgow and works on the design and assembly of complex functional molecules and materials and has interests in inorganic clusters, ligand design, complexity and emergence in chemistry.

Talk talk

This is my final blog from the RSC symposium on synthesis in organic chemistry, and it’s been great. The undoubted highlight came last night, when Ian Fleming (now an emeritus professor) gave a brilliant overview of his career, describing all the influences that culminated in his famous work on the use of silyl groups in organic synthesis.

Starting from his work as grad student, he presented the highs (and occasional lows) of his career with wit and candour. He began his working life in the 1950s, at a time when state-of-the-art spectroscopy meant IR and combustion analysis was often the linchpin of your analytical data. NMR had only just been invented and was only to be used “if you were desperate”, as he put it. And if you did get an NMR, you needed good eyesight, because the resulting spectra were smaller than dollar bills. Even a couple of decades later, 10 g of sample were still required for a carbon-13 NMR experiment.

It was a fascinating story, peppered with amusing anecdotes – for example, as a grad student, he had to cover all his samples with watch glasses, to stop his PhD supervisor from absent-mindedly tipping ash into them from his pipe. And it was fascinating to get the inside story of some of the historic achievements in organic chemistry – such as Woodward’s synthesis of vitamin B12.

Fleming spoke for 90 minutes and was rewarded with a standing ovation – not something that I’ve ever seen before at a chemistry conference. It was an evocative description of a bygone era, delivered by one of the last remaining gentleman chemists, and I felt privileged to witness it.

So, thumbs up to Cambridge. The next meeting in this series will be in two years time – I heartily recommend it, and I hope I’ll see you all there!

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

Glasses, glasses everywhere, but not a drop to drink

WARNING! This blog entry contains a joke with chemical content! Those of a nervous disposition may want to look away.

For those who didn’t read my last entry, I’m currently at an RSC symposium on organic chemistry, held in Cambridge (UK, not MA). It’s traditional for UK conferences to be held at universities, apparently so the delegates can be shocked at the quality of the food. Last night was particularly cruel, because all the tables were laid out with wine glasses, creating an expectation of alcohol. Sadly, no wine was actually forthcoming, so the delegates had to face the evening lecture unfortified.

Still, we’ve had some cracking talks. Today, Varinder Aggarwal presented some powerful chemistry for homologating boronic esters; this allows carbon chains to be ‘grown’ with control over the relative and absolute stereochemistry. This work has yet to be published, but he reckons the paper will be ready later this year – so keep your eyes peeled.

Shu Kobayashi discussed various topics in catalysis, ranging from scandium complexes that enable carbon-carbon bond formations to be performed in water (click here for an example), to lab-on-a-chip hydrogenations that are performed in channels coated with polymer-encapsulated palladium. And Dean Toste gave an overview of his work on gold catalysis – a truly amazing lecture, delivered with such aplomb and rapidity that it was difficult to tell when he drew breath.

So who told the chemistry joke? It was Amos B. Smith III, at the evening lecture last night. Dithiane groups feature heavily in his work, and he was questioned about the best way of removing them. This prompted the following gag:

Why are there 32 methods for removing dithianes?

Because none of them work…

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

No room at the inn

I don’t seem to be having much luck at conferences recently. At the ACS meeting in Chicago earlier this year, I was given a hotel room without a bed. Yesterday, I turned up for an RSC symposium on organic synthesis and there wasn’t even a room for me. At this rate, I’m assuming that when I arrive in Boston for the autumn ACS meeting I’ll discover that my hotel doesn’t exist.

Anyway, once the small issue of my accommodation was sorted out, I had a fun evening catching up with some familiar faces until very late in the night. I’m now experiencing that familiar conference feeling of being very tired but totally wired on coffee.

The lectures this morning kicked off in fine style with Steve Davies. You could hear the scratching of pens on paper coming from all around as he described lots of useful synthetic organic chemistry reactions (including an amazingly stereoselective variant of the Horner-Wadsworth-Emmons reaction – I’ll post the details of the paper once it gets published). Incidentally, I’ve commented before that chemists often seem to have splendid hair, but Steve’s must surely win all the prizes…

Another highlight was Ben List’s talk on new strategies in organocatalysis, including some very neat ideas on chiral Bronsted acid cataysis using phosphoric acid derivatives – see this paper for an example. Contributing to the truly international flavour of the symposium, Goverdhan Mehta from the Indian Institute of Science presented some of his total syntheses of biologically active natural products. Worryingly, he began by defending total synthesis, which he thinks is being marginalized – does anyone agree with him?

OK, that’s plenty for now, but I’ll update you on other interesting stuff tomorrow.

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

Reactions – Heather Carlson

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I had a terrific chemistry teacher in high school, who let me do an independent study project. Also, my Pchem Professor in College was very good. I loved math and chemistry, but thought of them as two separate areas. When my Professor showed me that the two come together in theoretical chemistry, I was hooked!

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

If I had the talent, rock star! But since I don’t, I would have probably pursued statistics. That was my other consideration for graduate study. At the time, I was told that all statisticians could do was actuarial work, but there are so many new opportunities in informatics. I am happy to say I get to dabble a little now… in statistics, not as a rock star.

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

In my subfield, we work on teams with other scientists to develop new drug molecules. I think that is a very noble pursuit.

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

Maybe Howard Hughes. He was very gifted, and it is such a shame that treatments were not available to help him with his mental illness. For the same reason, maybe Abraham Lincoln. They had such great success while dealing with untreatable and, at times, debilitating illnesses.

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

A few months ago, I did some de novo structure-based design to improve a potential inhibitor of HIV-1 protease. A student has been using the design to run dynamics simulations. We are completing the paper now.

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

The CD would have to be U2’s “The Joshua Tree” or the Black Crowes “Shake Your Moneymaker”. Classics! The book would have to be a photo album of my family. I would miss my husband and son very much.

Heather Carlson is in the College of Pharmacy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor and works on theoretical chemistry and computational modeling of protein-ligand interactions. She studies bioinformatics, the basic biophysics of molecular recognition, and applied drug discovery.