Reactions – Klaus Theopold

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

Actually, the first thing I remember wanting to be was an astronomer. However, as I grew older I got to thinking that there were very limited employment opportunities for astronomers. Fortunately, the father of my best friend in high school was a chemistry professor (Prof. Wolfgang Walter, at the Universität Hamburg), and he supplied us with glassware, chemicals, and some initial demonstrations. Pretty soon I was hooked on ‘making things’. Those were the days when a kid could go to the drug store and buy some serious chemicals. My favorite chemical memory is the preparation and distillation of elemental bromine on a rather large scale in our kitchen. To this day I love chemical synthesis.

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

I would want to be a glassblower or work with glass in some capacity. Glass is an absolutely fabulous material with incredible chemical and physical properties. The transformation of molten glass into intricate solid structures has always fascinated me, and I love the feel and look of glass objects. The fragility only adds to the allure.

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

That depends on what kind of chemist you are. As a professor, I think my contribution to the world are the people I train. In a more general sense, the most important problems humans are facing involve chemistry. Renewable energy, environmental protection, and pharmaceuticals are some of the obvious challenges that will keep chemists busy.

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

Jesus Christ – the real historical person, that is. My father (a psychotherapist by profession) spent much of his life trying to understand this man, and the subsequent development of Christianity. He had some interesting conjectures about Jesus’ life, and I would like to ask him about those.

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

About three months ago. I helped a graduate student measure the amount of gas given off in a reaction, using a Toepler pump. We don’t use this apparatus very often, and I always seem to be the only one in the lab who remembers how to operate it.

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

Hmmm – a desert island with amenities like CD players? I love the music of Charlie Parker – so a compilation of his best songs would be my choice. If I had to be there for a really long time, an alto sax would be nice, to practice playing along. As for the book, I would take Darwin’s ‘The Origin of Species’. I firmly believe in evolution, but I have never taken the time to read his book. Besides, I gather it has some tips about survival on an island.

Klaus Theopold is currently Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Delaware and works on the synthesis and characterization of transition metal compounds with interesting structure and reactivity.

Prospective Professor: The Employment Pages

Posted on behalf of the Prospective Professor

Once you have figured out where the jobs are (see previous post), the next major hurdle in the process is preparation of the application materials. Upon reading the first job postings, it seemed pretty obvious. “Please include a cover letter, CV, a brief description of proposed research and arrange for three letters of reference to be sent directly to the department.” Got it. Then you sit down at your computer to start typing… Wait, do they care what font I use? Or how small the margins are? Forget that, how long is this thing supposed to be?!?!

I polled a number of people who have recently gone through this process. The answers left me more confused and unsure than when I started. I received many different responses to the question, “How many proposals should I submit, and how long should each be?”

“You must submit 3 proposals, no more, no less. And they cannot be longer than 2 pages.”

“Anywhere from 2-4 proposals, each between 2-4 pages.”

“5 pages each proposal, at least 2 proposals.”

I applied a complicated algorithm to average and weigh each answer (read as: fretted for endless hours) and eventually decided to go with the most conservative answer. 3 proposals, 2 pages each, 6 pages total. But then I read more ads. “Please submit a 3 page description of your proposed research…” “Include a one page summary of future research plans…” Humph. All told I needed a 6, 3, 2, and 1 page version of this thing.

I seriously contemplated submitting the following:

“Dear Search Committee,

1 page version: I want a job.

3 page version: I really want a job.

6 page version: I really, really want a job.”

Instead, I plodded on, carefully crafting each version (i.e., making margins smaller and smaller until the 3 page document suddenly fit onto 2 pages!). And cursed at the printer at 2 am when it ran out of magenta ink.

The next task on my list was to figure out that darn cover letter. Which person did I believe – the one that told me, “The cover letter is critical. It’s your one chance to get someone’s attention. You need to summarize your career up until now and your future plans all in one page.” Or the other that said, “In our department, they ripped off the cover letter and threw it away.” Sigh…

Rookie Rocky: About teaching

Posted on behalf of the Rookie Rocky

It seems that teaching is something that everyone is trying to get away from in a major research institution. When a young scientist freshly out of his/her training considers an academic job, one of the concerns is, “how much do I have to teach?” The common answer to this question seems to be “the less, the better”. After all, research is the foremost factor in determining how well you do in such an institution. And in most of the hard science departments, and all medical schools, the investigator’s salary is dependent on research funding but hardly, if at all, on teaching.

However, I recall that in high school and college, my excellent teachers successfully woke up the little curious genie deep inside me. Thanks to them, I decided to pursue a career in science. Also, the main reason I stayed on the academic pathway is because I enjoyed teaching a lot (as a TA, tutor, etc.). Do I still like teaching now? The resounding answer is “yes, very much”. I had so much fun with my motivated, knowledge-hungry, lovely students in my first semester as a course instructor. Furthermore, I learned much about science and about life from this teaching experience.

However, if I could find some way to circumvent my teaching duty, I think I would most probably go for it.

(ed’s note: Hubert and I have decided we are living in parallel universes. For our thoughts on this topic, check out our recent editorial.)

Reactions – Paul Low

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

It’s a bit sad really, as I more or less followed my nose and ended up being a chemist – that being said I certainly do not regret it! I was in the maths/physics/chemistry line of things at school, so a BSc at university was the obvious route. After my first year I realized that I wasn’t a particularly gifted mathematician, and with an older brother and father both physicists the choice was clear – I had best become a chemist! I was really hooked by Michael Bruce’s organometallic chemistry course in my third year, and from then on my course was set.

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

The “could” is a big part here – I would have happily been a 100-Test cricketer for Australia, although my talents on the cricket field have rarely seen me play much above fourth grade. A television commentator on the game would be a close run second!

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

I think the energy game has to be bit of a catch-all, with short term goals of CO2 capture, storage and activation leading to carbon recycling being huge challenges. Longer term, in an increasingly unstable global political and environmental climate we’d all better start looking at managing our carbon reserves. After all, fossil fuels are also our sources of raw materials for the chemical industry and it seems a shame to be burning such a useful resource and polluting the planet in one fell swoop. Sadly, unless we go nuclear on a major scale I can see little prospect of an alternative energy economy to carbon until we can master solar energy conversion.

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

Not an easy one, but like a few others I think I have to come down to Leonardo da Vinci. I would insist on dinner being served on a table stocked with plenty of beer mats and pens…after all, the very best ideas originate from discussions whilst being illustrated on beer mats!

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

If you asked my students, they might say, “When was the last time you ruined an experiment.” I’ve got a horrible habit of wanting to get my fingers wet in the lab, and my students have to be careful not to let me play too much when I see something exciting going on! My last genuinely new experiment was Friday afternoon – the synthesis of an acetylide complex from trans-RuCl2(dppe)2. Other than that, we were trying to rescue a batch of OsO2, formed inadvertently from ethanol reduction of 50g of OsO4 whilst trying to make the dodecacarbonyl. It’s rarely dull in the lab!

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

The CD is easy – any compilation of middle of the road rock ‘n’ roll. The book is a much harder choice, and of course would depend on how long I was expecting to be there! That being said, it’s time I did something about learning some French, so a decent language tuition book could be a good way to pass a few hours.

Paul Low is in the Department of Chemistry at Durham University, UK, and has interests in the synthesis of conjugated organic and organometallic compounds, and their electronic structures as a function of redox state.

Materials Girl: Why not?

Posted on behalf of Materials Girl

I never had chemistry, biology, or magic sets growing up, but still ended up aspiring to work in the field of science. Before the specific concept of “maxillofacial surgeon” was coherent to a 7-year-old, my calling in life was to perform surgery of some sort. Dissecting a myriad of formaldehyde-infused specimens in high school reinforced this idea (horrible fun, literally).

Then, the realities of med school – or horrors, if you will – became apparent, along with the recognition that mild squeamishness and fear of causing damage are characteristics that hardly behoove a surgeon. I realized that extreme mental strain is only justified for a passion (or a necessity, such as certain GE classes) – a category that medical school did not fall into, despite a potentially lucrative career on the far-off horizon.

So, I suppose this suggests the question that many of us have mused over: Why am I a chemist (or a materials engineer)? It’s generally safe to say that the motivation is not money, hours of writing proposals, the “thrill” of sitting around lab waiting for a reaction to complete, needing to redo that 57-step process, or whatever else plagues the followers of chemistry. A genuine thrill does exist, however. Why else would we subject ourselves to something that the general public may react poorly to? (“I abhorred high school chemistry and never took it again!”, “Is ‘mat sci’ mathematical sciences?”, “I could never work in a smelly lab all day!”, etc…)

Currently, as a lowly chemist in the making, my thrills primarily lie with the daily influx/deluge of information. In the future, I hope to turn that knowledge into innovative discoveries, or to pass it along to other generations to do the same. More recently, since becoming more aware of the publishing world, I’ve also pondered whether being an editor for a scientific journal would be a satisfying career choice. There are many options, but I’m not sure yet where my current path will take me.

Nature Chemical Biology is coming to town

Ho ho ho! Meeeeeeeerry DNAzymes!

That’s right, good people of the scientific community: it’s time for the December issue of Nature Chemical Biology. You may think it’s a bit early for the holiday theme, but our local junk food store is already selling green and red M&Ms, candy canes, and other highly-sulfated sugars, so I’m just jumping on the bandwagon…

Anyway, in honor of this momentous occasion, I have composed a little ditty (ok, I have butchered the words of the perennial favorite ‘the 12 days of Christmas’):*

On the 1st day of the issue, my advisor gave to me: a paper on N2O3.

On the 2nd day of the issue, my advisor gave to me: 2 folding tags, and a paper on N2O3.

… I assume you can build the rest with these items?

3 News & Views

4 serine mutants

5 days of fun

6 teaching jobs

7 kinase binders

8 advertisements**

9 graphite sizes

10 years making progress

11 voltage readings

a 12-month subscription

… and a paper on N2O3 indeed! Hope you enjoy the issue.

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

*For those of you who do not believe in/support/enjoy this holiday, please feel free to sing these alternate lyrics as loudly as possible whenever anyone tries to advocate the event by singing the real words. Actually, that goes for those of you that do go in for Christmas, because who doesn’t want to sing about our journal?!

**Lame, I know. Sorry. There wasn’t anything else that was 8!!

Reactions – Frank van Veggel

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I had some great teachers in the natural sciences at high school in The Netherlands, and they and we did some crazy experiments. Somehow I was, and still am, fascinated by the fact that we can make molecules without actually seeing individual ones. I was trained as a chemical engineer, but I always liked the chemistry part of it most.

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

I would be seriously tempted to become a biochemist to be part of the incredible revolution that is happening there in genomics and proteomics. The chemistry in there is truly intriguing. Or breeding quarter horses.

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

From an academic point of view I would like to say to train the next generation of responsible chemists who will make better and safer products and drugs, and find new ways to minimize our pressure on the environment. In my research I try, for example, to make better and more potent contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), so that patients are better diagnosed with less (toxic) materials.

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

Darwin. Why? It is quite amazing that he was so right in his theory on evolution.

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

If an experiment is helping one of my co-workers in the lab with a measurement counts the answer is, some weeks ago. A real experiment by myself was in the summer of 2005 when I worked for 2 months in Dr. M. Andrews’ lab at McGill, Montreal, Canada.

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

I cheat a bit, but I would take a series of 6 books about the Roman empire by McCullough and a CD by Gidon Kremer “Hommage to Piazzola”.

Frank van Veggel is in the Department of Chemistry, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada and works on luminescent nanoparticles for lasers, optical amplification and biolabels. Nanoparticles are also developed for MRI (magnetic resonance imaging).

ChemPod the third

Time to put your fancy new iPod/iPhone through its paces and download the new chemistry podcast from Nature, which can be found here.

In this show, find out about an exciting new approach to mass spectrometry, how tiny graphite particles replace biological membranes to couple redox enzymes and we speak to Nobel prize winner Richard Schrock about metathesis.

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Senior Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Reactions – Neil Champness

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

Although I always had some ability as a chemist, I only really became interested in pursuing chemistry as a career when I was doing my PhD. I particularly enjoy the moments when you make a molecule for the first time or discover something new, and this first struck home when I was doing it for myself during my PhD. Although I rarely go into the lab any more, I still get that buzz when my research group makes that step forward.

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

I’m afraid I would be a politician. I know this will surprise many people, but I have a strong sense that we should use our gifts for the benefit of other people and I have always felt that politicians have the potential to make more of a difference than most, even if what they do doesn’t always work! I have strong political views and have probably been interested in politics for longer than chemistry. I also think more scientists should become involved in politics, after all we have a lot to contribute.

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

As you can tell from my previous answer, I feel that it is extremely important that chemists use their abilities for the wider benefit. Chemists already make a huge contribution to the world-at-large through new drugs and many new technologies. Almost everything we come across in the modern world has been improved by chemists in some way. One area where chemists will make a huge difference over the coming years is in controlling the effects of climate change. If you think about it, chemists are the only people who understand the problems and also know how to overcome them.

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

Robert F. Kennedy. Although he isn’t as famous as his older brother, JFK, he was a remarkable man who had a real vision for reaching out to the less fortunate in our society. Politically he has been extremely influential and was the real thinking behind what is called the Third Way which people would recognize in Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. If he hadn’t been shot whilst campaigning for the democratic nomination in 1968, he may well have beaten Nixon to the presidency, pulled out of Vietnam and I am sure that the world would be a very different place today.

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

Apart from in the teaching labs it has been some years, I’m struggling to remember! I used to give demonstration lectures with bangs and flashes and that was probably more recent than any research oriented experiment.

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

It depends whether we have the Bible and Shakespeare? If I don’t have them I would have to take the Bible. If I already have that, then it would be far harder as I read a lot of different books. For fiction, I would probably take “Norwegian Wood” by Haruki Murakami, for non-fiction I would take “Make Gentle the Life of This World” which is a collection of speeches by Robert F. Kennedy. My CD would have to be “Blonde on Blonde” by Bob Dylan, even though it was made before I was born, it doesn’t get better than that.

Neil Champness is in the School of Chemistry at the University of Nottingham and works on all aspects of molecular organization, including nanoscale surface supramolecular assembly and organization in the solid-state via crystal engineering.

Interview with a chemist

What’s the worst thing about interviews for chemistry jobs? With recruitment for the Chief Editor of Nature Chemistry in full swing, I’ve been thinking about this recently – and no, that doesn’t mean that I’ve applied for the job…

In particular, I was thinking about one of the most contentious and feared aspects of chemistry interviews (in the UK at least) – the technical questions. This is where interviewees are grilled about any aspect of chemistry; for organic chemists this usually means that you’re presented with a target molecule and asked to come up with one (or more) synthetic routes on the spot. In many respects, this is fair enough. But the whole thing can be very arbitrary.

As regular readers may know, I was unlucky enough to work at an industrial site that was closed down, so my colleagues and I suddenly found ourselves going through lots of technical interviews. Several trends immediately became apparent. The first was that we would always be asked about the pKa values of acids and bases. We’d also frequently be asked to write out mechanisms of reactions such as the Swern oxidation. Many people felt that this sort of thing had no bearing on how they performed in a lab, it was just a memory test.

But the worst thing was when interviewers were inflexible on synthesis questions. One company in particular asked people how they would make a certain diamide. There are, of course, many ways to do this, but if the hapless interviewee didn’t suggest an Ugi reaction, they were deemed to have got the answer wrong. Now the Ugi reaction is a wonderful thing, but it certainly wouldn’t be the first option that springs to my mind for such a target.

So, what do you think – are technical questions a reasonable way to assess chemists for jobs? Or should candidates just be asked to put on a lab coat and do a recrystallization? And what’s the most bizarre thing that you’ve been asked at an interview? The most random question I got was about redshift and the expansion of the universe…

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)