(You make me feel like) a chemistry professor

As many, many studies and articles have told us, there are not enough women in science, and in chemistry in particular. Similarly, those who are in the field are not getting the awards, opportunities, or promotions that they deserve. While a discussion of the reasons why this is happening would probably be redundant, I’m not sure that I have seen a discussion of simple ways to move forward. So, I would like to suggest a meeting of the minds to put forward some very simple ideas that we could start doing right now, and don’t require governmental funding or a revision of the tenure system, etc. I’ll kick things off with a couple of thoughts:

1. Although we probably know a lot of great women doing science, I wonder how often we talk about them. For example, I was recently at a conference and asked a fellow scientist who she knew in a particular field that was doing great work. She (note: a woman) gave me the name of a man (note: a man).* In retrospect, there are also some women doing great work in that field. The point is: keep tabs on other great women and help to spread the word. Great!

*Of course many situations are more complicated than just “I have two scientists that are relevant in my head and I picked the man”, but I think the general idea may hold.

1 (part 2). On a related point, the ‘word’ we should be spreading is not that they are really nice, or that they have a cute child, or that what is happening in their respective two-body problem, but that their scientific contributions are important, and that they have some profound insights into their field. Let’s get away from talking about women’s personal lives, as I can only hold so much information in my tiny brain, and it would be more useful to know about their professional interests and successes.

2. Nominate a woman for an award.

3. If you are a woman, ask questions at talks (and introduce yourself first).

4. In terms of getting opportunities to work with a journal (assuming that my experience holds true on a broader scale): if you are in a position where you might be expected to have a website, PLEASE put one together and keep it updated on a ~yearly basis (this actually holds for men too). While of course you can find out a lot about someone by their publications, having a clear, concise message about what you’re interested in really makes a big difference. After all, these days it’s not clear just by looking at a paper whether the topic is something near and dear to a particular scientists’ heart or whether they were perhaps just helping out with a technique, etc. Knowing what really drives someone makes it much easier for me to feel confident that you are the right person to ask to write a Review article, or to referee a paper, etc.

What else can we do?

Catherine (Associate Editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

Hard times for rubber farmers

I just got back from my holiday in Thailand, which was very nice apart from an unfortunate bout of food poisoning. Anyway, I thought you might be interested in seeing this article from the Bangkok Post, which highlights just how crucial chemicals are in the real world (not that you’ll need much convincing). In particular, it demonstrates the importance of fertilizers.

Thailand is the world’s leading exporter of rubber, but crop yields are expected to be lower this year. The reason? It seems that a lot of the fertilizers being supplied to Thai rubber plantations are fake or sub-standard, despite the fact that the costs of fertilizers have doubled over the past year. This is causing much hardship for Thai rubber farmers, and presumably could have a knock-on effect for global rubber supplies and prices.

Everyone is aware of the consequences of fake drugs flooding the pharmaceutical market, but I hadn’t realized that a similar situation existed for fertilizers. The implications for the rubber industry and for farmers in particular are made clear in the Bangkok Post article, but if the problem extends to food-crop farming in developing countries, then the effects could be even more dire. Has anyone else heard of this problem?

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

Reactions – Carsten Schmuck

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was always fascinated by nature as a child. I studied lake water and plants with a microscope, spent a lot of nights outside watching stars, built small electric circuits and, of course, I had a small chemistry lab in our cellar. I enjoyed all these experiments and what they told me about nature. Later in school I had a very good chemistry teacher who encouraged me to take part in the International Chemistry Olympiad (an international competition for high school kids). The first time I totally failed in our national selection rounds. But I guess that finally tipped the balance towards chemistry. I got ambitious and the more I got involved with chemistry, the more I loved it.

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

Most likely a medical doctor. As a teenager I started to work as a voluntary paramedic and I still do it from time to time. Being able to help people is a very gratifying job, even though it is a very tough job with a lot of responsibility. So I guess if chemistry or natural sciences were not my profession I would have ended up in medicine. Although as a child, to become a cook was also tempting for me. I still love to cook, even though I am probably not as skilled in the kitchen as I am in the chemistry lab.

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

First, as Ronald Breslow once put it, chemistry is the central science. Everything that goes on around us is somehow linked to chemistry. The more and more we learn about the molecular basis of life itself, the development of diseases or the function of drugs on a molecular level or how material properties depend on their molecular composition, the better we will be able to improve our life and deal with the upcoming challenges threatening our planet. Second, chemistry is the only natural science that not only tries to understand what is going on around us but also is capable to create. We can make new molecules, that never existed before; new molecules with new and much desired properties. Chemists create new drugs in order to improve our life and health. Chemists create new materials with improved properties for thousands of applications in our modern world. Chemistry can help to solve so many problems we are facing today: energy crisis, food and water supply, health issues or environmental challenges just to name a few.

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

Leonardo da Vinci. He was probably the most fascinating scientist that ever lived on our planet. It is amazing how much this one person accomplished and in how many different disciplines and fields: arts and sciences, chemistry and physics, medicine and biology, architecture and engineering and many more. He invented so many things that we still use today, even though in a modified and improved version, but still essentially going back to his ideas. And he achieved all this under really challenging and also sometimes life-threatening political circumstances.

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

Well, that was quite some time ago at least in terms of real scientific research. It was about six years ago when I just started my own academic career and when I had only three coworkers who just started to work with me for their diploma. It was a five-step synthesis of one of the building blocks, a guanidiniocarbonyl pyrrole derivative, we need for our research. Unfortunately, I do not have any time for lab research myself any more. And I guess by now my coworkers are much more skilled in the lab than I am due to lack of practice. However, I organize a chemistry day for high school students once a year. And on that day I also present some experiments like the classical nylon synthesis or gun cotton. It is always a “big show” also for my coworkers to see me in lab coat again and doing experiments.

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

Is there a book, how to make coffee from coconuts? That would be my first choice. Otherwise, perhaps the New York City telephone directory. That has so many pages which are good for making fire. As for a CD, does a CD player run on coconut oil? To be more serious, I could read the Lord of the Rings again and again, and a CD with music from Andrew Lloyd Webber would be nice.

Carsten Schmuck is in the Institute of Organic Chemistry at the University of Würzburg and works on supramolecular chemistry and its application in bioorganic chemistry (e.g., development of drugs and sensors) and material sciences (e.g., self-assembled nanostructures).

Journal journeys: Day 1, Swamped!

This will be brief, but it’s Day 1, and I couldn’t let it pass without a quick post…

The deadline for applications for the associate editor positions has now passed – and there’s an awful lot of paper strewn around my desk… and the floor around it… now, time to shortlist and get the right mix of expertise in the right locations.

Here’s a challenge for you – imagine you’re setting up a general chemistry journal and you have a total editorial team of four – how do you break down the areas of expertise? Along traditional lines, or something different? Anyway – now I have a data set to work with, I’ll be trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together…

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Chief Editor, Nature Chemistry)

Reactions – Tony James

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I see this as a two phase process, first why I chose chemistry and secondly why I decided an academic career was for me. The first one is straightforward, I decided to take chemistry at university because my teacher (Abraham Darby School) went that extra mile to make studying chemistry enjoyable. The reason I decided to become an academic is more diffuse, but does include being inspired by wonderful lectures by the late Donald J Cram (Pacifichem 1987), who sent a CPK model of a carcerand around the audience, and Sir J Fraser Stoddart (1990 Halifax, Canada) who used language and colours to convey difficult concepts. Special thanks also go to Professor Seiji Shinkai who polished my skills as a chemist and taught me that “even monkeys fall from trees”!

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

An artist – art has always been one of my greatest passions. I am particularly inspired by sculptures and 3D art. You could say the love of sculpture is why I am a chemist – since in chemistry we create art in the form of molecular sculptures.

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

I believe that what we do as scientists should be for the greater good. I also believe that it is your chemistry that should contribute and not you the chemist. In science, it is what has been achieved and not the individual which is important.

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

Richard Feynman – who was one of the most inspiring scientists of the 20th century. In particular his Horizon Interview in 1981 – “the pleasure of finding things out” sums up the way a scientist should live their life. One problem may be that during the meal he may have to be stopped from dropping O rings into everyone’s iced water. However, he could make this up by providing post dinner entertainment on the bongos.

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

I like to be involved in experiments as much as possible. This summer I helped a visiting Japanese student who is part of a Royal Society International Joint Project collect fluorescence data. This was a rewarding experience and resulted in a paper for the student (Jusaku Minari) and the academics involved (Kazuo Sakurai, John S Fossey, Steven D Bull and Tony D James). Finding time to do experiments can be difficult – but thanks to the JSPS, I will get 60 days (Short Term Fellowship) from the end of January as a visiting Professor in Kyushu University to spend time experimenting to my heart’s content.

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

I prefer listening to music than reading books, since I can listen to music while doing other things. Therefore, I would choose two CDs which contain songs that remind me of my time spent in Canada as a PhD student and one that reminds me of my postdoctoral research in Japan. The first is by Pink Floyd (The Dark Side of the Moon) containing the track ‘Time’ and the second is by The Boom containing the track ‘Shima Uta’. The one reminds me of camping on Galliano Island and the other of humid summers spent cycling around Japan

Tony James is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Bath and works in the area of supramolecular chemistry and in particular on the development of sensor molecules for saccharides.

Bringing something new to the table

Just a quick round-up to point you towards a couple of interesting pieces about the periodic table…

Thanks to Daniel for letting me know about a cool periodic table project where science and art collide – see his post at The Great Beyond for details.

This also reminded me of a post I saw not so long ago by David Bradley over at Sciencebase that gives us a tour of online periodic tables.

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Senior Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Journal journeys: Day -2, The long and short of it

Consider this a post for pedants, perhaps.

Here we are with a new journal on the horizon, Nature Chemistry, so one question we must ask ourselves is this – what do we abbreviate it to? Simple, huh? Surely it should be ‘Nat. Chem.’? But wait, what about ‘Nature Chem.’?

Well, let’s start by looking at other NPG titles. Some of those based in London, such as Nature Materials (Nature Mater.), Nature Physics (Nature Phys.) and Nature Nanotechnology (Nature Nanotech.), all use the full ‘Nature’ bit, but Nature Protocols (Nat. Protoc.) does not! Let’s cross the Atlantic to journals based in the States, such as Nature Chemical Biology (Nat. Chem. Biol.) and Nature Biotechnology (Nat. Biotechnol.) and you’ll see that they use the ‘Nat’ form as well… Is your head spinning yet?

Also, notice the difference in abbreviation between Nature Nanotech. and Nat. Biotechnol. – whereas ‘Nanotechnology’ is shortened to ‘Nanotech.’, ‘Biotechnology’ is trimmed – albeit only slightly! – to ‘Biotechnol.’… The copy-editing powers-that-be tell me that the word ‘Technology’ should be abbreviated as ‘Technol.’, because the word ‘Technical’ would be indicated by the shortened form ‘Tech.’ – still with me?

So, ‘Nature Nanotech.’ breaks all the rules… and it means we often see ourselves cited as ‘Nat. Nanotechnol.’, or ‘Nat. Nanotech.’ or ‘Nature Nanotechnol.’ – all of which are, technically, wrong.

Now, let’s get started on other journals. Here at NPG, we abbreviate Angewandte Chemie to Angew. Chem. Int. Edn (assuming we’re not talking about papers published before 1998, which still include the ‘Engl.’ bit…). This generally causes our more chemistry-oriented authors to correct their proofs by scoring through the ‘n’ of ‘Edn’ and telling us that it should be ‘Ed.’ not ‘Edn’. I agree with the authors, but I am told that we shorten ‘Edition’ to ‘Edn’ because ‘Ed.’ means ‘Editor’… anybody out there still reading?

My response to this argument is that we’re citing the name of a journal, not just a random collection of words, so we should use ‘Ed.’, but we don’t. At least we’re not alone in getting it wrong, ACS journals insist on putting a comma after the ‘Angew. Chem.’ bit..! Note in all of this, that there is no full-stop at the end of ‘Edn’ – that’s because ‘n’ is the last letter of ‘Edition’ and so we don’t need one. This, of course, creates confusion as well, because most people out there cite things like PNAS as ‘Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA’ with a full-stop after ‘Natl’. Of course, we don’t… we go with ‘Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA’ because ‘l’ is the last letter of… OK, you get it. No matter, authors still correct that one on their proofs too… (PNAS itself doesn’t even use full-stops…).

If you’ve made it this far – congratulations. I think we’re going with ‘Nature Chem.’ – but it won’t really matter as I’m guessing that ISI will index it as ‘Nat.’ Chem.’ anyway… they abbreviate Nature Nanotechnology to ‘Nat. Nanotechnol.’…

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Senior Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Flat-out carbon

Just a quick note to point out a couple of articles (subscription required) that Nature Nanotechnology has recently published on what is currently the trendiest of all carbon nanostructures – graphene.

Published online in advance of print, is a paper from Gordon Wallace and co-workers in Australia and the US, that shows how a simple chemical method can be used to produce stable dispersions of well-separated graphene sheets. This approach relies on maximizing the repulsive electrostatic interactions between the tiny one-atom-thick flakes of carbon – and, therefore, does away with the need for additional chemical stabilizers that can be a problem in applications where pristine samples work best. If you don’t have access to Nature Nanotechnology, you can still read the press release.

Also, back in our January 2008 issue, we had a News & Views article written by Rod Ruoff from UT Austin called, “Calling all chemists”. Although graphene has been a hot topic in the physics and materials communities, chemists are now beginning to start experimenting with the latest carbon nano-wonder themselves – and Ruoff chronicles the early stages of what he refers to as the ‘chemistry part’ of the graphene story.

As an aside, have you noticed how the interest in carbon nanomaterials has peaked in order of their dimensionality? First it was 0-D, when Kroto, Curl and Smalley presented us with buckyballs. Then came 1-D structures in the form of carbon nanotubes. Recently, there has been a shift into 2-D, with a focus on graphene. Watch this space, however, it won’t be long before 3-D is next… diamondoids are already receiving some attention.

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Senior Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Where the chemistry has no name

I’ve been looking at some JACS ASAPs today, and several of the entries got me to thinkin’. For example, this paper just wouldn’t be the same if they had been trying to make a Smith diode, or even a Schmidt diode, for that matter. And in this case, think how confused you’d be if you mistook their acid for a Lewis acid or a carboxylic acid! Finally, consider how happy Shvo will be to know that his catalysts have continued to provide interesting questions for scientists around the world, just like these folks.

After pondering these situations, I decided that although there are a multitude of reactions, processes, catalysts, numbers, and constants named after people, there really need to be more. Think of the increased recognition that people would get for their efforts, the increased ability to communicate with other scientists just by quickly throwing out a name or two, and the incredible difficulty of organic classes that require you to learn all of the named reactions. This is going to be great.

As a word of caution, however, this one points out that you have to be careful with what you pick, because you can’t then later pick something else.

(Just imagine the confusion:

“Can I borrow some Grubbs’ catalyst?”

“Yes, here you go.”

“No, I meant Grubbs’ catalyst!!”

and so on…).

Considering that I’m no longer in the lab, it’s going to be hard for me to lay claim on anything too useful. Perhaps I can pick putting nanoparticles in agar gels as ‘the Goodman method’, mostly because I can’t imagine that anyone else has ever bothered to do that. So, the question for you is, what do you want named after you? A reaction? A catalyst? A football stadium? Hurry up and pick, or all the good ones will be gone…

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)

Reactions – Angel Kaifer

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I always wanted to be a chemist. As a child I loved playing with my chemistry set and was always looking for supplies and reagents to run new experiments.

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

I love to write. If I had the time I would love to try my hand at writing fiction.

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

We have already made very important contributions, although most people are unaware of them. In the next few decades, chemists must play an important role at solving the energy problems that we will face as we run out of oil. We should also learn to publicize our efforts and success stories more effectively.

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

I have always been very intrigued by Hannibal, the Carthaginian general who could have changed history in unforeseen ways as he came very close to defeating Rome. But I am not sure that he would be a good dinner guest! I would also love to meet Santiago Ramon y Cajal, the first Spaniard Nobel Laureate in a scientific discipline. His impact in neuroscience has been very pronounced and he did all his research work without any support at all.

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

Just a few days ago I was helping in my own lab, testing a new design for a spectroelectrochemical cell. Unfortunately, I have little time to work in my own lab. About seven years ago, I did a lot of scanning electrochemical microscopy (SECM) experiments during my last sabbatical, in Al Bard’s lab, at UT-Austin.

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

This is an impossible question to answer. OK, I would take “One Hundred Years of Solitude” by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and The Beatles’ Abbey Road.

Angel Kaifer is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Miami and works on the electrochemistry of supramolecular systems.