could wine help fight alzheimer's? - american society for ... · asbmb meeting office phone:...

w w w . a s b m b . o r g

Constituent Society of FASEB

A M E R I C A N S O C I E T Y F O R B I O C H E M I S T R Y A N D M O L E C U L A R B I O L O G Y

JAN UARY 2006JAN UARY 2006 w w w . a s b m b . o r g

Constituent Society of FASEB

Held in conjunctionwith EB2006

Could WineHelp Fight

Alzheimer's?

Could WineHelp Fight

Alzheimer's?See page 15


ASBMB ANNUAL MEETINGApril 1-5, 2006Moscone Convention Center,San Francisco, CA

CALL FOR LATE-BREAKING ABSTRACTS

Deadline for Submission:Wednesday, February 8, 2006www.asbmb.org/meetings

Late-breaking abstracts will be accepted for poster sessions to be scheduledon Wednesday, April 5, 2006. Late-breaking abstracts will be published in an

addendum to the meeting program.The addendum will be distributed atthe meeting. Late-breaking abstracts will NOT be published in The FASEB

Journal and are not citable.

Abstracts must be submitted at www.asbmb.org/meetings with payment of$90. Payment and abstracts must be submitted on or before Wednesday,

February 8, 2006.The submission site is now open.

Late-Breaking Abstract Submission Sitewww.asbmb.org/meetings

Abstract Submission Fee: $90ASBMB Meeting officePhone: (301) 634-7145

Email: meetings @asbmb.org

For information about the meeting, including preliminary program,housing, and registration information, go to www.asbmb.org/meetings

Save Money! Register online by February 3 and make your housingreservations by February 24.

f e a t u r e s4 House Fails to Pass HHS Funding Bill

6 FASEB Expresses Concern Over Proposed BiodefenseAgency

8 Founding Fathers of ASBMB

10 Bacterial Conversation Stoppers

12 How Some Antibiotics Kill Bacteria

13 Energy Management in Cells May Hold Key to Cancer Defense

14 New JLR Series on Lipid PosttranslationalModifications

16 NIH to Explore Cancer Genomics

19 Recommended Undergrad Curriculum forBiochemistry/Molecular Biology Degree

d e p a r t m e n t s3 From the Desk of the President

4 News From the Hill

5 Evolution Watch

6 Washington Update

16 NIH News

18 ASBMB Reminiscences

20 Biotech Business

24 Calendar


w w w . a s b m b . o r g

O N T H E C O V E R :

15 Could Wine HelpFight Alzheimer’s?

13

JANUARY 2006, Volume 4, Issue 10

10

BRONZE AWARD WINNER 2003

AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE:MOST IMPROVED MAGAZINE

COLUMNS & EDITORIALS

DESIGN & LAYOUT

http://www.asbmb.org

ASBMBToday JANUARY 20062

To the Editor:On page 5 of the October 2005 issue

of ASBMB Today, the first sentence“begs the question” and is exactly thewrong way to start out any discussionon “Evolution.”

I contend that Evolution is no morea “theory” than Mendeleev’s PeriodicChart or Henry’s Law of Gases. As longas scientists persist in calling this “atheory”, we are going to get ham-mered. I have been doing research inevolutionary biochemistry, geneticsand genomics, and gene nomenclatureof superfamilies since the late 1960s,and my work on evolution has noth-ing to do with theory. The radioactivedecay of fossils and sediments sur-rounding fossils, the molecular decay(mutation rate) of A,C,T,G in codingand noncoding regions of orthololo-gous, parologous and homologousgenes of various species, are all objec-tive experimental findings, hard data,and scientific facts.

Professor Daniel W Nebert, MDUniversity of Cincinnati Medical Center

Intel l igent Design?To the Editor:

Ah, Galileo. Suppose that 98% of thepeople of this great republic believedthe earth is flat. Should we argue? Thetheory of Universal Gravitation is atheory nonetheless, and even wrong inits details, and suppose 99% of peoplethought gravity did not exist. Wouldthe moon stop circling the earth?Would it require any less energy towalk uphill than to walk down? Wouldapples no longer fall? And if 99% or

66% of the people in this great landthink evolution is part of grand design,despite our appendix, despite our rem-nant of a tail, despite having our nosedirectly above our mouth, despite hav-ing a single orifice to both urinate andreproduce, despite all that, should wereally care? The data for evolution inits broadest form is stronger, has moresupporting data of more differentkinds that does the Law of Gravitation.Flatlanders believe in a flat earthdespite data to the contrary. Thosewho think evolution is the devils workwill think so despite data to the con-trary. It is only a pity that children andeducation are involved.

Arthur YuwilerProfessor emeritus UCLA

Chief, Neurobiochemisty Lab, USDVABrentwood (retired)

Research Scientist, USDVA, Washing-ton (retired)

Evolut ion Is No ‘Theory’

A S B M B C o u n c i l

OfficersJudith S. Bond PresidentHeidi E. Hamm President-electPeggy J. Farnham SecretaryKenneth E. Neet TreasurerMerle Olson Treasurer-elect

Council MembersWilliam R. Brinkley CouncilorJoan W. Conaway CouncilorRobert A. Copeland CouncilorLila M. Gierasch CouncilorFrederick P. Guengerich CouncilorWilliam J. Lennarz CouncilorPeter J. Parker Councilor William S. Sly CouncilorWilliam L. Smith CouncilorSuzanne Pfeffer CouncilorLinda Pike Councilor

Ex-Officio MembersDennis VoelkerChair, Meetings CommitteeGeorge M. CarmanLaurie S. KaguniCo-chairs, 2006 Program CommitteeJ. Ellis BellChair, Education and ProfessionalDevelopment CommitteeJuliette BellChair, Minority Affairs CommitteeWilliam R. BrinkleyChair, Public Affairs Advisory CommitteeAnthony E. PeggChair, Publications CommitteeHerbert TaborEditor, JBCRalph A. BradshawEditor, MCPEdward A. DennisEditor, JLR

ASBMB Todayis a monthly publication

of The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

Editorial Advisory BoardIrwin FridovichRichard W. HansonBettie Sue MastersJ. Evan SadlerRobert D. Wells

CommentsPlease direct any comments or questionsconcerning ASBMB Today to:John D. ThompsonEditor, ASBMB Today9650 Rockville PikeBethesda, MD 20814-3996Phone: 301-634-7145; Fax: 301-634-7126E-mail: [email protected]

For information on advertising contact FASEB AdNet at 800-433-2732

ext. 7157 or 301-634-7157, or email [email protected].

L E T T E R S

T e l l U s W h a t Y o u

T h i n k

We appreciate receiving lettersthat are suitable for publicationregarding issues of importance orcommenting on articles appear-ing in ASBMB Today. Lettersshould be sent to the editor, JohnThompson, at the address foundat left. Letters must be signedand must contain the writer’saddress and telephone number.The editor reserves the right toedit all letters.

JANUARY 2006 ASBMBToday 3

From the Desk of the Pres ident :

and India, are investing heavily in thegrowth of science and successfullydeveloping robust science institutes.Nobel laureate Richard E Smalley, pro-fessor of chemistry and physics at RiceUniversity, predicts that if presenttrends continue, 90% of all the world’sscientists and engineers will be living inAsia by 2010. It is clear we have to getthis message to decision makers whocan provide leadership in formulatingnational policies to improve science

education so thatAmerican sciencecan remain com-petitive in theworld. Innovativestrategies will benecessary, as in thedays of Sputnikwhen the USAfaced the competi-tive challenge ofthe USSR, toincrease the com-

mitment to homegrown science and

engineering. Industry too must step upto the challenge and invest in teachingand research for our future.

It is time for us all to identify meansto increase the pipeline for the futureof science. In that light, I wasimpressed with the quality of the stu-dents and postdoctoral workers inLatin America at a recent meeting ofthe Pan Ameri-can Associationfor Biochemistryand MolecularBiology (PABMB)and the Argen-tine Society forBiochemistry andMolecular Biol-ogy Research in

Pinamar, BuenosAires Argentina 3-6December 2005. The investigators andtrainees were bright, enthusiastic, hardworking, engaged in their projects, wellread and forward looking. The majorityof the participants at this meeting wereyoung scientists from Argentina, Braziland Chile with fewer numbers fromother Latin American countries. The sci-ence was of high quality, even thoughsome of these countries are experienc-ing political unrest and variableeconomies. The Latin American scien-tists and trainees are eager to interactwith scientists throughout the world,especially in the USA and Europe. Therewould be many benefits to more oppor-tunities for collaboration betweenNorth and South American scientists atall levels. Perhaps US Americans shouldlook south for untapped potential tal-ent. This may be one of many ways wecan increase the pipeline for healthygrowth in the sciences.

Best wishes for a happy and prosper-ous New Year!

Judith S. BondPresident, ASBMB

s we begin a new year, we canreflect on how fortunate wehave been as scientists working

at time when there has been such excite-ment about the potential of science,advances in fundamental knowledgeand promise for applications of thatknowledge in medical, industrial, envi-ronmental and social science. The NIHbudget doubled, there are increasing col-laborations globally and between acade-mia and the industrial sector, our

trainees are learning to participate effec-tively in interdisciplinary projects, andthe diversity of the workforce is increas-ing (although more slowly than wewould like). But as we enter 2006, thereare signs of doom and gloom as fundingstreams for research and trainingbecome tighter, mathematics and sci-ence education in our elementaryschools fails to sustain the interest of thestudents, many of our high school sci-ence and math teachers are not wellqualified in the discipline, and fewerdomestic students chose science andengineering degrees. The result is a pub-lic lacking a good understanding of sci-ence and one that is vulnerable topseudo-science claims. This is at a timewhen other countries, such as China

The Pipeline for the Future of ScienceUntapped Potent ial in Lat in America

A

George Kenyon, President-Elect IUBMB; Judith Bond; Ernesto Podesta,President of the Argentine Society for Biochemistry and MolecularBiology Research; Vito Turk, IUBMB Committee on Symposia.

Dr. Judith Bond

Right: Juan JoséCazzulo, Chairman of

the PABMB.

Below: Poster Sessionat the PABMB meeting,

Dec 3-6, 2006,Pinamar Argentina

N E W S F R O M T H E H I L L


billion, $1.4 billion lower than lastyear’s bill. It funded NIH at a total of$28.62 billion, an increase of just 0.5%, the smallest in 36 years, and wellbelow the 3.2% biomedical inflationrate expected in 2006. The bill alsoincludes no spending for programs tocombat avian flu, although the WhiteHouse had requested an additional $8billion for this purpose.

While Democrats were uniformlyagainst the measure because theybelieved it shortchanged importanthealth and education programs, the22 Republicans who voted against itoffered a variety of reasons for doingso. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), for example,routinely votes against most socialspending bills (he is a former Libertar-ian candidate for President). Otherreasons offered by GOP dissenterswere concerns about rural healthcarespending, as well as overall spendingpriorities. Some voted against the billbecause member earmarks wereremoved. Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA),Chairman of the Ways & MeansCommittee, voted “no” because the

bill blocked the federal governmentfrom paying for erectile dysfunctiondrugs, such as Viagra, for senior citi-zens under Medicare.

The bill’s rejection came against abackdrop of growing conservative dis-may at the amount of spending theAdministration and Congress haveapproved in recent years. The last strawappeared to be the White House plan tosimply spend an additional $52 billionon hurricane relief while making noeffort to trim other spending, whetherby proposing cuts in regular spendingbills, spending less in Iraq, or revisitingits tax cut policies.

This lack of fiscal discipline enragedHouse fiscal conservatives, andemboldened them to propose a seriesof offsetting spending cuts to help payfor the relief effort. As FASEB’s Retzlaffnotes, “Former Majority Leader TomDeLay (R-TX) actually apologized tothe Republican Study Committee (agroup of House fiscal conservatives) forallowing government spending togrow at a high rate while Republicanshave been the majority party.”

n an action variously charac-terized as “unexpected,”“stunning,” and “unprece-

dented,” the House of Representativeson November 17 rejected theLabor/HHS/Education funding bill,putting next year’s funding for a varietyof health and biomedical research pro-grams—including NIH—in limbo, if notin jeopardy. The vote was 224 – 209,with 22 Republicans siding with a uni-fied Democratic Party. This is the firsttime this funding bill has been rejectedby the House since the Republicansgained control of the chamber in 1994.

The immediate outcome of thedefeat was that the Senate, just beforeadjourning for Thanksgiving, went onrecord that the bill be returned to con-ference committee, and that $2 billionintended to subsidize heating bills forlow income Americans be designated as“emergency spending,” which meansthat the money would not countagainst the spending limits imposed bythe 2006 budget resolution. This is notjust an arcane budgetary shift; as FASEBLegislative Affairs Director Jon Retzlaffnoted, “We hope that this will mean anadditional $2 billion will be available tospend on L/HHS programs, includingNIH . . . we will have to wait and see how the House reacts.” Mostobservers, however, are not optimistic.

More to the point regarding NIH,the Senate also voted to instruct itsconferees to seek an additional $797million for NIH, thus returning theoverall total for NIH to $29.4 billion,the same as in the Senate version. It isvery uncertain how the House willreact to this proposal.

The bill approved by the House/Sen-ate conference committee totals $602

House Fails to Pass H HS Funding Bil l…What Now for N I H?I

by Peter Farnham , CAE , ASBMB Pub l i c A f fa i rs O f ficer

ASBMB members in Washington to visit congressional leaders are seen here with Senator KayBailey Hutchison (R-TX). From left are Bob Wells, Bettie Sue Masters, Senator Hutchison, William

Brinkley, and ASBMB President-elect Heidi Hamm.

According to the statement, “Whatdistinguishes scientific theories fromthese theological beliefs… is the scien-tific method, which is driven by obser-vations and deductions, leads to testablepredictions, and involves the formula-tion of hypotheses that can be refuted . . . “The Biophysical Society isstrongly opposed to any effort to blurthe distinction between science and the-ology by teaching or presenting non-sci-entific beliefs in science classrooms.”

The full statement is available bycontacting the Biophysical Society at301/634-7114, or on the web athttp://www.biophysics.org/pubaffairs/press.htm.

The ASBMB Public Affairs AdvisoryCommittee is currently working on astatement on the teaching of evolu-tion; look for it to appear soon inASBMB Today.

Don’t Forget the ASBMBSymposium on TeachingEvolution next April inSan Francisco

The ASBMB Public Affairs AdvisoryCommittee is sponsoring a symposiumcalled “Teaching the Science of Evolu-tion Under Threat of AlternativeViews” which will be held on April 4,2006, during the ASBMB’s centennialmeeting in San Francisco, California.An outstanding group of speakers willaddress the issue of teaching evolutionfrom a variety of perspectives, includ-ing the scientific, the theological, andthe political. Watch this space for moreinformation.

So Now What?Given that the House could not pass

this bill in its current form, the Senatehas urged the House to recommit theL/HHS bill to conference committeeand renegotiate the numbers to makeit more politically viable, but it is notat all clear that the House will do that.There are in fact several alternatives.

First, Congress could put more moneyin the bill. Although this would be thebest alternative for NIH and other pro-grams funded under the bill, there is noindication at this point that the Housewould agree to such an action.

Second, the House could agree tothe Senate’s move to designate $2 bil-lion in heating subsidies as emer-gency spending.

A third possibility is to attach the billto the Defense appropriations bill, onthe theory that no one would darevote against a bill funding Americantroops in time of war. On the otherhand, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) hasbeen quoted as saying that she expectsthis will happen, since the Defense billis a “must pass” piece of legislation.

A fourth possibility, the one beingtalked about most widely, is putting thebill under a long-term continuing reso-lution that would fund the bill at thelower of either the 2005 or 2006 levels.

In any case, as FASEB’s Retzlaff notes,“Reopening discussion on the L/HHSconference bill may be problematic forNIH because it is very unlikely thatadditional money will be provided tothe Committee. Therefore, the onlyalternative may be to redistribute themoney, which could reduce NIH’sincrease to fund programs thatreceived a cut or pay for certain mem-ber’s projects (earmarks).”

he inaugural meeting of theSubcommittee on Educatingabout Evolution took place

via teleconference on December 1.This new subcommittee of the FASEBScience Policy Committee will be coor-dinating the FASEB response to thegrowing problem of attacks on theteaching of evolution in the publicschools. It is chaired by Dr. MarnieHalpern, Carnegie Institution of Wash-ington, and a member of the Societyfor Developmental Biology.

The Subcommittee (of whichASBMB Public Affairs Officer PeterFarnham is a member) will in comingmonths be coordinating such activitiesas assembling a list of FASEB memberexperts on evolution; sponsorship ofevolution-related symposia at FASEBand other meetings; working withnon-FASEB groups also concernedabout evolution education; and devel-oping a FASEB-wide statement on evo-lution education.

B iophys ica l Soc ietyIssues Statement onEvo lut ion

On November 5, the BiophysicalSociety Executive Board adopted astatement on the teaching of evolu-tion in the public schools. The“Statement Opposing the Teachingof Alternatives to Evolution in K-12 Science Classrooms” stronglyopposes teaching the concepts of“intelligent design” and “biblical cre-ationism” in the public schools aspart of science classes.

EVOLUT ION WATCH

New FAS E B Group Formedto Deal with Evolut ion,Educat ion IssuesT



continuum from basic research to prod-uct development (Figure 1). In this con-tinuum, NIH, primarily through theNational Institute of Allergies andInfectious Disease (NIAID), is responsi-ble for the basic research and ProjectBioShield money is being used for thelatter stages of product developmentand procurement. In Senator Burr’sview, no one is addressing the middlesegment of the process, what he dra-matically terms “The Valley of Death,”encompassing the advanced researchand pre-clinical stages of research anddevelopment (R&D). Kadlec assertedthat ten percent of the ProjectBioShield money was intended to fillthis need. Because Congress gaveBioShield only $5.6 billion instead ofthe $10 billion originally requested, theDepartment of Health and Human Ser-vices (HHS) is choosing to spend themoney solely on procurement. Accord-ing to Kadlec, Dr. Tony Fauci, NIAIDDirector, is using his biodefense moneyto fill in the gap. Burr envisions BARDAas an opportunity to remove $1 billionfrom Project BioShield, shift it into“The Valley of Death,” thereby protect-ing NIAID’s basic research money

BARDA would be set up in the moldof the Defense Advanced Research Pro-jects Agency (DARPA). The staff cur-rently working on advanced R&D atboth NIH and HHS would be consoli-dated and moved under the leadership

on a new director, likely to be recruitedfrom industry. They would engage inproject oriented, high-risk advancedresearch, aimed at moving the funda-mental knowledge produced by NIHmore quickly to product development.FASEB has met with NIAID, who iscautiously supportive of the newagency, provided it appropriatelydefines “advanced” research, so as notto duplicate existing programs, andthat it comes with money attached,rather than burdening HHS with anunfunded mandate that could harmthe current research enterprise.

FASEB, too, is concerned over thecost of creating a new agency at a timeof constrained resources; it is question-able whether taking the money fromProject BioShield, as Burr envisions, isa sustainable funding source. What isthe likelihood of this bill going for-ward? There is little bipartisan agree-ment: the Democratic Senators on theHELP committee have introduced acompeting biodefense bill whichwould not create BARDA. Moreover, ifCongress agrees to fund the President’srequest to fight pandemic flu and aseparate bill on liability protectionsmoves in the House, it may removethe urgency to pass the Burr legisla-tion. However, Burr remains commit-ted to getting BARDA through, andplans to try to push it towards passageas early as January 2006.

The “Biodefense and Pandemic Vac-cine Production Act of 2005” (S.1873)was introduced with great haste in Octo-ber and quickly passed through the Sen-ate Health, Education, Labor andPensions (HELP) Committee, as the Sen-ate struggled to respond to growing con-cern over pandemic influenza. Thislegislation, the brainchild of SenatorRichard Burr (R-NC), has a number ofprovisions, including industry incen-tives, market exclusivity stipulations andliability protections. It would also movethe Armed Forces Institute of Pathology,destined to be eliminated in the mostrecent round of base closings, to theNational Institutes of Health (NIH).However, the largest portion of the bill isdedicated to creation of a new agency,the Biodefense Advanced Research andDevelopment Agency (BARDA).

The Federation of American Societiesfor Experimental Biology (FASEB) con-tacted the HELP committee, objectingto the swift movement of a bill, whichhas the potential to impact currentresearch programs without the input ofthe scientific community. FASEB wasinvited to meet with Robert Kadlec,M.D., sstaff director director of the sub-committee on bioterrorism and publichealth. In justifying creation of BARDA,Kadlec characterized biodefenseresearch (broadly described as protec-tion from infectious disease, chemical,biological or radiological attack), as a

FAS E B Expresses Concern Over Proposed Biodefense AgencyBy Carr ie D . Wo l i netz , Assoc iate D i rector for Commun icat ion , FASEB O f fice of Pub l i c A f fa i rs

NIH Funding “Valley of Death” No one in Charge BioShield Contract($1.7 B) $0 ($5.6 B)______________ __________________________________________ ________________________________________________

Industry Investment _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Basic Research “Lead” Discovery Preclinical Development Clinical Trials/FDA Approval Production(years) (6-24 mo.) (30-36 mo.) (54-60 mo.)

Investigational New Drug FDA Approval

F A S E B W A S H I N G T O N U P D A T E F A S E B W A S H I N G T O N U P D A T E


received a cut or pay for certain mem-ber’s projects (earmarks).

On the day after the Housedefeated the L/HHS conferencereport, the Senate voted 66-28 toinstruct its conferees to designate the$2 billion reserved for low incomeindividuals to help pay their energycosts as “emergency spending.” Wehope that this will mean an addi-tional $2 billion will be available tospend on L/HHS programs, includingNIH. However, we will have to waitand see how the House reacts to thisproposal.

N IH Speaks AboutReauthor izat ion

The President of the Federation ofAmerican Societies for ExperimentalBiology, (FASEB), Dr. Bruce Bistrian,President-Elect, Dr. Leo Furcht, andDirector of Legislative Relations, JonRetzlaff, met with Marc Smolonsky,Director, NIH Office of Legislative Pol-icy and Analysis to discuss how FASEBmay be able to work more closelywith NIH DirectorDr. Elias Zerhouni,NIH Director, regarding NIH Reautho-rization. Zerhouni is interested inestablishing (in statute) the newOffice of Portfolio Analysis and Strate-gic Initiatives (OPASI). The purpose ofOPASI is to provide the NIH institu-tionsInstitutes (ICs) with the methods

and information necessary toimprove the management of theirlarge and complex scientific portfo-lios. It also is charged with identifying(in concert with multiple inputs)important areas of scientific opportu-nities. During a recent town hallmeeting, Zerhouni remarked thatOPASI will help NIH become morenimble, dynamic and responsive. Hecompared OPASI’s role to a radar thatscans the environment.

In addition, Dr. Zerhouni is inter-ested in establishing a common fundat NIH. The common fund is not atransfer authority, but instead is a set-aside fund. Each year, NIH ICs insti-tutions would provide a percentageof their annual budgets to this fundto support research identifiedthrough the OPASI planning process.The common fund’s budget would be1.1 percent% of the total NIH budgetin FY2006. The goal is to grow thefund to 1.7% percent of the total NIHbudget by FY2008. However, this willdepend on the overall growth rate forthe NIH budget. Zerhouni would liketo see the common fund increase tofive percent5% of the total budgetover time, but this would happenonly if NIH’s budget increases (overmany years) by a greater amountthan the biomedical research infla-tion index.

resident Bush alienatedmany fiscal conservativeswhen he embraced what

appeared to be an open checkbookpolicy to pay for the aftermath ofHurricane Katrina. When the Presi-dent submitted to Congress a $51.8billion emergency supplementalappropriations request and neglectedto identify any corresponding spend-ing offsets, it emboldened fiscal con-servatives to take up the mantra offiscal responsibility. In a matter ofdays, House leaders found themselvesceding to the fiscal conservatives’concerns. Former Majority LeaderTom DeLay (R-TX) actually apolo-gized to the Republican Study Com-mittee (a group of House fiscalconservatives) for allowing govern-ment spending to grow at a high ratewhile Republicans have been themajority party.

This backdrop of information helpsexplain why the Labor, Health andHuman Services, Education andRelated Agencies (L/HHS) conferencereport was provided a FY2006 alloca-tion at $1.4 billion below last year’sspending levels. Factoring in inflation,the real reduction was approximately$5 billion. Furthermore, House confer-ees refused to designate any spendingas “emergency spending,” includingthe $7.8 billion the President pro-posed to fight avian flu.

Reopening discussion on the L/HHSconference bill may be problematic forthe National Institutes of Health (NIH)because it is very unlikely that addi-tional money will be provided to theCommittee. Therefore, the only alter-native may be to redistribute themoney, which could reduce NIH’sincrease to fund programs that

Inside ( the Beltway) ScoopBy Jon Retz laf f , FASEB

P

A number of our readers have expressed interest in learning moreabout the activity of FASEB’s Office of Public Affairs (OPA) in areasof particular interest to ASBMB members. Accordingly, we havedecided to provide space in ASBMB Today for a regular series ofnews reports and analyses by OPA staff concerning actions andtrends, in all three branches of government, that may have animpact on our membership. This is the first in this series.


cal chemistry at the Sheffield ScientificSchool, where he proceeded to applychemical approaches to his research andto persuade, at the same time, theauthorities at Yale to develop teachingand research programs in physiologicalchemistry. He was largely responsible forthe creation of a course in physiologicalchemistry in 1874, marking the begin-ning of the incorporation of physiologi-cal chemistry into the medicalcurriculum in America.

Johnson was also instrumental inestablishing the first temporary agricul-tural experimental research station atWesleyan University in 1875, and in cre-ating a permanent station at Yale underhis direction two years later. His manyaccomplishments in science and educa-tion include two books, “How CropsGrow” (1868) and “How Crops Feed”(1870) that were widely acclaimed inter-nationally. His lectures and publicationson soils, rotation of crops, fertilizers,methods of analysis, plant nutrition,food adulteration, and many other sub-jects exerted a great influence upon thedevelopment of scientific agriculture inAmerica. By initiating a systematicexamination of the chemical composi-tion of commercial fertilizers, he became

the founder of agricultural regula-tory work in America.

Johnson was President ofthe American Chemi-

cal Society (1878,three years after itsformation), theAssociation of Offi-cial AgriculturalChemists (1888)and the American

Association of Agri-cultural Colleges and

Experimental Stations(1896), a member of the

National Academy of Sci-

ences from 1866, and an associate fel-low of the American Academy of Artsand Sciences. Although Johnson him-self was not a member of the ASBC,which was formed shortly before hepassed away, his work in promotingbiochemistry in America and in men-toring many of the future leaders ofthe Society laid the foundation for theorganization of the Society by Abeland Chittenden.

John J . Abe lJohn Jacob Abel (1857 -1938), who

was born near Cleveland, Ohio, did hisearly training at the University ofMichigan where he received a Bachelorof Philosophy degree in 1883. Aftergraduation he spent a year in theDepartment of Biology at the JohnsHopkins University, studying with H.Newell Martin. He then went to Ger-many for a medical education. Thefirst two years of what turned out to bea seven-year stay in Europe were spentin Carl Ludwig’s Institute of Physiol-ogy in Leipzig. Abel then worked inOswald Schmiedeberg’s Laboratory ofPharmacology in Strassburg nearHoppe-Seyler’s Laboratory of Physio-logical Chemistry. After receiving hisM.D. at Strassburg in 1888, he went toVienna for clinical training and spent1888 to 1889 in Bern at the Biochemi-cal Institute of Marceli Nencki.

Upon his return to the United States,Abel became lecturer (then professor)of materia medica and therapeutics atthe University of Michigan. In 1893 hemoved to the new medical school atJohns Hopkins University to be profes-sor of pharmacology, with an obliga-tion also to teach the course inphysiological chemistry. He becameprofessor emeritus in 1932, but contin-ued his research work at Johns Hop-kins until his death in 1938.

he American Society for Bio-chemistry and Molecular Biol-ogy (ASBMB) was founded in

December 1906 as the American Soci-ety of Biological Chemists (ASBC).Interest in the formation of the newsociety came primarily from membersof the American Physiological Society(APS) who felt that the chemical side ofphysiology had attracted a significantand growing number of scientists and aseparate society would be desirable.Among the many people involved inthe creation of the ASBC, three menplayed central roles in laying thegroundwork for the founding of thesociety: Samuel W. Johnson, John J.Abel, and Russell H. Chittenden.

Samue l W . JohnsonSamuel William Johnson (1830-

1909) was an accomplished scientistand an individual of enormous impacton the shaping of biochemistry inAmerica in the latter part of the 19th

century. He was also a mentor to sev-eral of the Society’s early leaders,including Chittenden, Thomas B.Osborne, and Lafayette B. Mendel, andwas instrumental in inspiring them toform the ASBC.

Johnson was born in Kingsboro,New York and was a graduateof the Sheffield ScientificSchool at Yale University(1852). He spent sev-eral years in Germanycompleting hischemical educationunder Otto LinnéErdmann at Leipzigand Justus von Liebigat Munich. Afterreturning from hisEuropean studies in1856, Johnson wasappointed professor of analyti-

T

Samuel W. Johnson, John J. Abel, and RussellBy N ico le Kresge , Staf f Sc ience Wr i ter

Dr. Samuel W. Johnson


Chairman and WilliamJ. Gies elected Secre-tary. Abel thenaddressed the group,stating his belief that anational society of bio-logical chemists shouldbe organized at once.His address washeartily approved anda formal motion wasmade to organize, atonce and permanently,the society Abel sug-gested. The motion waspassed unanimously

and the ASBC was born. Chittendenwas then elected President (by motionof Abel), Abel, Vice-president, Gies,Secretary, and Lafayette B. Mendel,Treasurer. Abel later served as the Soci-ety’s second president in 1908.

Russe l l H . Ch ittendenRussell H. Chittenden (1956-1943)

was born in New Haven, Connecticutand obtained his bachelors degree inchemistry in 1875 from the SheffieldScientific School at Yale. He was a stu-dent of Johnson’s, and during hissenior year Johnson put him incharge of the course hecreated in physiologi-cal chemistry. He con-tinued to teach thiscourse after graduationbut then went to Hei-delberg in 1879 tostudy physiology andphysiological chem-istry with Willy Kühnefor a year. In 1880 hereceived a Ph.D. fromYale University and in1882 he was appointedprofessor of physiologi-

cal chemistry at Yale, a position heheld until his retirement as emeritusin 1922. He was Director of theSheffield Scientific School from 1898to 1922, and was also appointed Pro-fessor of Physiology in the MedicalSchool in 1900. During his twenty-four years as director, Chittendengreatly expanded both the faculty andthe physical facilities of the SheffieldSchool, as an entity largely indepen-dent of Yale College.

A prolific and influential author,Chittenden’s research focused primar-ily on various aspects of the chemistryof digestion, particularly proteolyticprocesses, and the intermediate prod-ucts and enzymes involved. As a mem-ber of the Referee Board of ConsultingScientific Experts, he carried out sev-eral investigations on the influence ofcertain agents on the normal processof the body, notably the influence ofsodium benzoate.

Chittenden had been both a chartermember and a past-President of theAPS and his selection as the foundingPresident of the ASBC assured goodinteractions between the two organiza-tions. In keeping with this attitude,arrangements were made for the two

societies to continue tomeet together, and,when they were shortlyjoined by the AmericanSociety of Pharmacologyand Experimental Ther-apeutics, which JohnAbel was also instru-mental in founding in1909, they formed thenexus for the eventualformation of the Federa-tion of American Soci-eties of ExperimentalBiology (FASEB) a fewyears later.

Abel was a great sci-entist with many majoraccomplishments dur-ing an active 50-yearcareer. Overall, hisresearch can be charac-terized as being primar-ily directed toward theisolation and characteri-zation of hormones. Heand his collaboratorsworked for more than10 years to describe theactive secretion of thesuprarenal gland thatraised blood pressure,epinephrine. He alsoisolated and crystallized insulin follow-ing its discovery by Banting and Best.

In addition to his scientific accom-plishments, Abel was notable as anorganization builder. In 1895 hefounded the Journal of Experimental Med-icine, and in 1905 he convinced Christ-ian A. Herter to finance and co-edit theJournal of Biological Chemistry (JBC). Abeland Herter served as the first Editors,and Abel, following Herter’s early deathin 1910, continued as the ManagingEditor for several years.

The first definite move for the estab-lishment of a society of biologicalchemists was made by Abel on October16, 1906, when he sent a letter to all24 members whose names were listedon the front page of the newly formedJBC. The letter contained a proposal toform an American society of biologicalchemists. The organizational meetingof the ASBC took place in the secondfloor parlor of the Hotel Belmont inNew York City on the afternoon ofWednesday, December 26, 1906.Twenty-nine individuals attended thisfirst meeting. Abel called the meetingto order and immediately made themotion that Chittenden be elected

H. Chittenden: the Founding Fathers of AS BM B

Dr. Russell H. Chittenden

Dr. John J. Abel


alone. Swelling populations triggertheir quorum-sensing apparatuses,which have different effects in differ-ent types of bacteria. One speciesmight respond by releasing a toxin,while another might cut loose from abiofilm and move on to another envi-ronment.

Each species of bacteria has a privatelanguage, but most also share a molec-ular vernacular that Bassler’s lab dis-covered about 10 years ago. A chemicalsignal called autoinducer-2 (AI-2), orig-inating from the same gene in all bac-teria, is released outside the cell toannounce the cell’s presence. Nearbybacteria take a local census by moni-toring AI-2 levels and conduct them-selves as the circumstances warrant.

Researchers have speculated that AI-2 is a universal language, and the new

study from Bassler’s lab is the first toshow those conversations takingplace—and producing consequences—between co-mingling species.

Postdoctoral fellow Karina Xaviermixed E. coli, beneficial bacteria thatlive in the human gut, with Vibrioharveyi, a marine species that natu-rally glows in the dark in the pres-ence of a crowd.In the test tube,AI-2 productionby either speciesturned up themarine bacteria’slight and turnedon the quorum-sensing genes inE. coli. That confirmed what the sci-entists already suspected: the linguis-tic versatility of AI-2.

But this common language does notguarantee the correct message getsthrough, the researchers discovered. Inearlier work, Xavier had found that E.coli both produces and consumes AI-2.In this study, she set up an experimentwhere multitudes of E. coli first pro-duced then devoured enough AI-2 todim the lights of the marine bacteria,essentially fooling the thriving oceanicgang into thinking its members werefew, thereby terminating its quorum-sensing behaviors.

In a more realistic encounter, Xaviermixed E. coli with V. cholerae, thecholera-causing bacteria that mixeswith E. coli in human guts. Whencholera bacteria sense a quorum, they

While a chattering crowd ofvarious species of bacteria isessentially a microbial tower

of Babel, certain snippets of theirchemical conversation are almost uni-versally understood. HHMI researchershave found that bacteria of differentspecies can talk to each other using acommon language—and also thatsome species can manipulate the con-versation to confuse other bacteria.

The interspecies crosstalk and misdi-rection could have important conse-quences for human health, saidBonnie L. Bassler,* an HHMI investiga-tor in the Department of MolecularBiology at Princeton University whosestudy was published in the September29, 2005, issue of Nature. “The abilityof cells to communicate with oneanother and the ability to interferewith the communication processcould have consequences in nichescontaining competing species of bacte-ria or in niches where bacteria associ-ate with humans,” Bassler said. “In thegut, you can imagine how the normalmicroflora might interfere with cell-cell communication to thwart bacterialinvaders.”

Using a chemical communicationprocess called quorum sensing, bacte-ria converse among themselves tocount their numbers and to get thepopulation to act in unison. A syn-chronized group of bacteria can mimicthe power of a multi-cellular organism,ready to face challenges too dauntingfor an individual microbe going it

W

“Bac t e r ia cancommunicate be tweenspec i e s , and they haveevo l ved mechani sms toin t e r f e re w i th thecommunicat ion .Probab ly th i s i s butone o f many cunnings t ra t eg i e s they have f o rmanipu la t ing chemica lcommunicat ion . ”

—Bonnie L . Ba s s l e r

Say What? Bacterial Conversat ion-Stoppers

Dr. Bonnie L. Bassler


tion of the signal could be a mecha-nism that allows one kind of bacteriato block another kind of bacteria fromcounting how many neighbors theyhave and, in turn, properly controllingits behavior.”

“This study moves us closer toreally understanding how these inter-actions happen in nature,” Basslersaid. “Bacteria can communicatebetween species, and they have

evolved mechanisms to interfere withthe communication. Probably this isbut one of many cunning strategiesthey have for manipulating chemicalcommunication. You can imaginethat, in niche one, the bacteria weconsider good guys might be usingAI-2 and winning. And unfortunately,in niche two, the bad guys might beusing AI-2 and winning.”

*ASBMB member.

turn off their toxins and excrete anenzyme to cut themselves loose fromthe intestine, so they can move out ofthe body where they can infectanother person. Here, E. coli squelchedmuch of the quorum-sensing responseof the cholera bacteria, although theeffect was not as dramatic as with themarine bacteria.

“The real take-home point is theinterference,” Bassler said. “Consump-


terial resistance. “There is a volun-tary restriction on the use ofrifamycins in treating infectionsother than tuberculosis and menin-gitis due to the fear of spread ofresistant mutations,” said VladimirSvetlov, a study co-author and aresearch associate in microbiology atOhio State. “Those mutations couldrender these antibiotics ineffectiveagainst most of the serious healththreats that they are being used tomanage,” he continued.

All rifamycins belong to one of twostructural classes. The researchers usedtwo clinically important rifamycins,rifapentin and rifabutin, that representeach structural class. They obtainedsamples of the antibiotics in theirrespective crystal structure form.

The researchers used X-ray crystallog-raphy to determine where individualatoms are located within a crystal struc-ture. From this information they thencreated high-resolution computer mod-els of each antibiotic, approximatingwhat each substance looked like on theatomic level and exactly how each bound to and affected a RNA

polymerase. Withrecent advancesin X-ray crystallo-graphic studies ofRNA polymerase,the researcherscould determineexactly whereand how bothantibiotics boundto RNA poly-merase in E. coli, and what it did tothat polymerase as a result.

The study showed that rifamy-acins inhibit pathogenic bacteria byremoving the crucial magnesium ion(Mg2+) from a bacterium’s RNApolymerase. The higher-resolutionimages also showed that rifapentinand rifabutin each bind just a littledifferently to E. coli RNA poly-merase, but still bring about thesame results.

“From these findings we can suggesthow rifamycins that are currently used intherapy can be improved to be effectiveeven against existing resistant strains ofbacteria,” Artsimovitch said

*ASBMB Member

esearchers have uncoveredhow members of one familyof antibiotics kill bacteria. This

new knowledge may help drug develop-ers make slight changes to these antibi-otics to make them more effectiveagainst drug-resistant strains of bacteria,said Irina Artsimovitch,* a study co-author and Assistant Professor of Micro-biology at Ohio State University.

The antibiotics studied belong to therifamycin family. Until now,researchers believed that these antibi-otics and their derivatives (there are atleast a thousand) all killed bacteria inthe same way.

But the new study used recentadvances in X-ray imagery to obtainthe highest resolution informationever available of how rifamycins bindto their targets. With these images, theresearchers found that these drugsremove a key component of the bacte-ria they attack. The researchers alsofound that different rifamycins do thisin slightly different ways.

“This is a major revision of how wethought these antibiotics functioned,”Artsimovitch said. “The new moleculardetails help explain why bacteria thatare resistant to one kind of rifamycinantibiotic might still be sensitive toanother. That may help to narrow downthe search for new synthetic derivativesto conquer resistance altogether.”

The study appeared in the August2005 journal Cell.

Ryfamycin antibiotics are one of thefirst-line treatments for tuberculosis, adisease that is on the rise worldwide.The drugs are also relatively inexpen-sive to make, have a long shelf life andare nearly non-toxic to cells other thanthe pathogenic ones they target.

The problem with them, though,is the rampant development of bac-

R

Researchers Find How Some Ant ibiot icsKil l Bacteria

PITTCON TO HOST “BRIDGING THE SCIENCES” SYMPOSIUMCoalition Seeks Federal Funding for Advancing Research for theEnabling SciencesPittcon (The Pittsburgh Conference on Analytical Chemistry and AppliedSpectroscopy) announced today that it will host a special symposium, FundingU.S. Research: Challenges and Opportunities, arranged by the Coalition forBridging the Sciences, at Pittcon 2006, March 11 – 17, 2006, Orlando, FL. TheBridging the Sciences Coalition represents more than 250,000 university andindustry scientists from 16 research societies seeking federal support for researchat the interface between the biomedical sciences and the physical and computa-tional sciences. The Symposium will be held at the Orange County ConventionCenter, Thursday, March 16, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. and will include speakers from theNational Science Foundation, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging andEngineering, as well as academia, industry, and government.

Dr. Irina Artsimovitch


years. Kinases encompass a large fam-ily of enzyme proteins that play keyroles in the workings of most animalcells. He has focused much of hisresearch on the AMP-activated kinase(AMPK) which responsible for manag-ing energy within cellular pathways.

“A cell’s energy level is critical to itssurvival,” explained Witters, who likensa low-energy cell to a car with no gas inits tank. “In a previous study, we foundthat the cellular ‘gas gauge,’ AMPK, canturn around and alter any deficits inthe cell if it is turned on by the kinaseLKB1. In this study, we wanted to see ifAMPK could also be turned on bysomething other than LKB1.”

“We decided to work with cervicaland lung cancer cells because LKB1 isabsent from the cellular pathway,” saidRebecca Hurley, lead author of thestudy and a graduate student in theMolecular and Cellular Biology Pro-

gram at Dartmouth. Working closelywith scientists at St. Vincent’s Institutein Australia and Duke University, theDMS team concluded that two kinasesin these cancer cells, CaMKK· andCaMKK‚ are able to regulate AMPKindependent of LBK1.

“With the addition of these twokinases, we think we have all nearlythe players responsible for energy regu-lation within the cell, which shouldoffer new opportunities in cancer treat-ment,” said Hurley. “If we can stifle acancer cell’s ability to adapt to anenergy deficit, it might lose its growthadvantage.” “You need to know howall these proteins interact before youcan make truly significant advances,”echoed Witters “It’s like poker; notonly do you need to know what eachcard signifies individually, but in orderto win you must have an understand-ing of how they play off each other.”

In addition to cancer-fighting poten-tial of AMPK regulation, the enzymealso responds to changes in insulin orglucose and mediates impaired energymetabolism, a hallmark of type 2 dia-betes. “This indicates that AMPK is avery tempting target for the treatmentof some forms of diabetes and evenobesity,” said Witters.

As Witters’ laboratory continues tozero in on the central role of kinasesin the treatment of disease, heacknowledges that this research isbecoming more complex and multi-ple approaches are needed to findsolutions. He believes that significantbreakthroughs in science can only beachieved through open collaboration,citing partnerships between facultyand students, and between otherinstitutes outside the Dartmouthcommunity .

*ASBMB Member

n an ongoing effort to fightdisease by manipulatingenergy regulation of cells, a

collaborative study led by DartmouthMedical School (DMS) has demon-strated that cells lacking a tumor-sup-pressing kinase called LKB1 can stillmaintain healthy energy levels whenthey become stressed. This energy reg-ulation is essential for keeping cellsfrom dying off too quickly. The study’sresults could signal new advances forcombating cancerous tumor growth,and also may lead to new treatmentsfor type 2 diabetes and obesity.

The study, published in the August12, 2005 issue of the Journal of Biologi-cal Chemistry (JBC), was headed by Dr.Lee Witters,”* Eugene W. Leonard1921 Professor of Medicine and Bio-chemistry at DMS and of BiologicalSciences at Dartmouth College, whohas researched kinases for over 25

Energy Management In Cells May HoldKey To Cancer DefenseI

Dr. Lee Witter, at left, and Rebecca Hurley, lead author of the study. Photo by Mark Washburn.


Review Series along with brief sum-maries of the review topics and howthese topics relate to the pathogenesisof human disease.

The remainder of the series consistsof eight reviews. The first threereviews will cover farnesylation andthe inhibition of farnesyltransferaseinhibitors. Young, along with LorenFong of the University of California,Los Angeles, and Susan Michaelis ofJohns Hopkins University, will lead offthe reviews with an article on a hotfield of research—the posttransla-tional processing of an abundant far-nesylated protein in mammalian cells,prelamin A.

Next, Robert Bishop of the Scher-ing-Plough Research Institute willreview the current status of farnesyl-transferase inhibitors and summarizethe basic biology of farnesyltrans-ferase inhibitors, the antitumor activ-ity of farnesyltransferase inhibitors inpreclinical models, and the currentstatus of human clinical trials withfarnesyltransferase inhibitors. The

final article on farnesylation will beby Michel Gelb of the University ofWashington who will review the pos-sibility that farnesyltransferaseinhibitors might be effective agents infighting parasitic diseases.

Miguel Seabra of Imperial College,London will review the geranylgerany-lation of the Rab proteins, which arecritical for vesicular transport withincells, in his article, the fourth in theseries. Then, Lorena Beese of DukeUniversity will tie the topics of farnesy-lation and geranylgeranylationtogether in her review on the structural biology of protein farnesyl-transferase and protein geranylgeranyl-transferase type 1. These structureshave clarified the specificities of thetwo enzymes for farnesyl diphosphateand gernanylgeranyl diphosphate andhave defined how the enzymes areblocked by specific inhibitor drugs.

The final three reviews in the serieswill cover several additional topicspertaining to lipid modifications ofproteins. Mark Philips of New YorkUniversity will write a review on thetargeting of isoprenylated proteins tomembrane surfaces and Robert Desch-enes of the Medical College of Wis-consin and Maurine Linder ofWashington University, St. Louis, willreview protein palmitoylation. Thefinal installment of the thematicreview series will be written by SandyHofmann of the University of TexasSouthwestern. She will review theremoval of lipid modifications inlysosomes.

The current and upcoming thematicreviews can be found both on the JLRwebsite (www.jlr.org) and in the jour-nal itself.

ecember marked the start of anew Thematic Review Seriesfor the Journal of Lipid

Research (JLR). The series, titled “LipidPosttranslational Modifications,”focuses on the posttranslational modi-fication of proteins with lipids. Thereviews are scheduled to run throughJuly 2006 and will cover a variety oftopics from the farnesylation ofprelamin A to the removal of lipidmodifications in lysosomes.

More than a dozen years ago, PatrickCasey of the Duke University MedicalCenter wrote a review for the JLR on afledgling area of lipid biology—the bio-chemistry and enzymology of proteinprenylation. His article and others onthe same topic stimulated interest inthe posttranslational modification ofproteins with lipids. Since then, therehave been many advances in under-standing lipid modifications of pro-teins. These advances have spannednot only the enzymology and bio-chemistry of lipid modifications, butalso genetic and pharmacologic studieslinking lipid modifications to thepathogenesis of human disease, andeven to therapeutic strategies. As aresult, JLR Associate Editor Stephen G.Young of the David Geffen School ofMedicine, University of California, LosAngeles, thought that it was a goodtime for the JLR to consider a thematicreview series on lipid modifications.He was able to recruit several leaders inthis field to write reviews on topics oftheir choosing.

The first article in the series was aneditorial written by Stephen G.Young, who is also editor of the series.Young’s editorial provided anoverview of the upcoming Thematic

D

New J LR Themat ic Review Series to Focuson Lipid Posttranslat ional Modif icat ions

By N ico le Kresge , Staf f Sc ience Wr i ter


However, eatinggrapes may not be acure for Alzheimer’sdisease. “It is difficultto know whether theanti-amyloidogeniceffect of resveratrolobserved in cell cul-ture systems can sup-port the beneficialeffect of specific dietssuch as eating grapes,”cautions Marambaud.“Resveratrol in grapesmay never reach the concentrationsrequired to obtain theeffect observed in ourstudies. Grapes andwine however con-tain more than 600different components,including well-charac-terized antioxidant molecules. Therefore,we cannot exclude the possibility thatseveral compounds work in synergy withsmall amounts of resveratrol to slowdown the progression of the neurode-generative process in humans.”

Following up on their studies,Marambaud and his colleagues are try-ing to figure out how resveratrol exertsits effects in order to develop similarcompounds to use in fightingAlzheimer’s disease. “Our long-termgoal is now to elucidate the exact mole-cular mechanisms involved in the ben-eficial properties of resveratrol as anecessary prerequisite to the identifica-tion of novel molecular targets andtherapeutic approaches,” says Maram-baud. “The observation that resveratrolhas a strong anti-amyloidogenic activ-ity is a powerful starting point for

screening analogues of resveratrol formore active and more stable com-pounds, a task in which our laboratoryis actively involved. We have alreadyobtained analogues of resveratrol thatare 20 times more potent than the orig-inal natural compound. We are nowaiming to find more stable analoguesand to test them in vivo in mice.”

Additional good news is that resver-atrol may also be effective in fightingother human amyloid-related diseasessuch as Huntington’s, Parkinson’s andprion diseases. Studies by a group atthe Institut National de la Santé et dela Recherche Médicale in Paris, Franceheaded by Christian Néri haverecently shown that resveratrol mayprotect neurons against amyloid-likepolyglutamines, a hallmark of Hunt-ington’s disease.

study published in theNovember 11 issue of theJournal of Biological Chemistry

(2005, 280: 37377-37382 ) shows thatresveratrol, a compound found ingrapes and red wine, lowers the levelsof the amyloid-beta peptides whichcause the telltale senile plaques ofAlzheimer’s disease.

“Resveratrol is a natural polyphenoloccurring in abundance in severalplants, including grapes, berries andpeanuts,” explains study authorPhilippe Marambaud. “The polyphe-nol is found in high concentrations inred wines. The highest concentrationof resveratrol has been reported inwines prepared from Pinot Noir grapes.Generally, white wines contain 1% to5% of the resveratrol content presentin most red wines.”

One of the characteristic features ofAlzheimer’s disease is the depositionof amyloid-beta peptides in the brain.Philippe Marambaud and his col-leagues at the Litwin-Zucker ResearchCenter for the Study of Alzheimer’sDisease and Memory Disorders inManhasset, New York, administeredresveratrol to cells which producehuman amyloid-beta and tested thecompound’s effectiveness by monitor-ing amyloid-beta levels inside and out-side the cells. They found that levelsof amyloid-beta in the treated cellswere much lower than those inuntreated cells.

The researchers believe the com-pound acts by stimulating the degra-dation of amyloid-beta peptides by theproteasome, a barrel-shaped multi-protein complex that can specificallydigest proteins into short polypeptidesand amino acids.

Compound in Wine Reduces Levels ofAlzheimer’s Disease-Causing Pept ides

By N ico le Kresge , Staf f Sc ience Wr i ter

A

develop and test the complex scienceand technology framework needed tosystematically identify and character-ize the genetic mutations and othergenomic changes associated with can-cer. The pilot will involve a few typesof cancer that will be chosen for theirvalue in helping to determine the fea-sibility of a possible larger-scale project.The process for determining the typesof cancers to be studied is currentlyunderway.

Cancer is now understood to includemore than 200 different diseases. In allforms of cancer, genomic changescause disruptions within cellular path-ways that result in uncontrolled cellgrowth. TCGA will delve more deeplyinto the genetic origins leading to thiscomplex set of diseases, and, in doingso, will create new discoveries andtools that will provide the basis for anew generation of cancer therapies,diagnostics, and preventive strategies.

“The goal of studying the humangenome has always been to improvehuman health. The Cancer GenomeAtlas Pilot Project represents anotherbold step in that direction,” saidNational Human Genome ResearchInstitute Director Francis S. Collins.“Such an ambitious venture requiressignificant planning. Given the geneticcomplexity of cancer, we are certain toface many daunting challenges in thispilot. But by pulling together some ofthe best minds in the cancer andgenomics research communities, I amconfident that the pilot will succeed,


and we will go on to develop an atlasthat will accelerate cancer research inways we cannot even imagine today.”

In the TCGA Pilot Project, a HumanCancer Biospecimen Core Resourcewill support the collection, processing,and distribution of cancerous andhealthy, control tissue samples to Can-cer Genome Characterization Centersand Genome Sequencing Centers. Thegenes and other genomic targets iden-tified will be sequenced by the CancerGenome Sequencing Centers usinghigh-throughput methods similar tothose employed in the HumanGenome Project. The Cancer GenomeAtlas Pilot Project seeks to identifygenetic mutations in the DNA codethat are specifically associated with thetype of cancer being sequenced.

These data from TCGA Centers willbe deposited in public databases sup-ported by NCI’s cancer BiomedicalInformatics Grid (caBIG™) and theNational Library of Medicine’sNational Center for BiotechnologyInformation.

The Cancer Genome Characteriza-tion Centers, Genome SequencingCenters, and Biospecimen CoreResources will be selected in 2006.Applications and proposals will bereviewed by experts in the field, andawards will be based on merit and pro-grammatic needs of The CancerGenome Atlas Pilot Project.

For more details about The CancerGenome Atlas, go to http://can-cergenome.nih.gov.

N I H N E W S

he National Cancer Institute(NCI) and the NationalHuman Genome Research

Institute (NHGRI) have launched acomprehensive effort to accelerate theunderstanding of the molecular basisof cancer through the application ofgenome analysis technologies, espe-cially large-scale genome sequencing.The overall effort, The Cancer GenomeAtlas (TCGA), will begin with a pilotproject to determine the feasibility of afull-scale effort to systematicallyexplore the universe of genomicchanges involved in all types ofhuman cancer.

“Now is the time to move forwardwith this pioneering initiative. Thanksto the tools and technologies devel-oped by the Human Genome Projectand recent advances in using geneticinformation to improve cancer diag-nosis and treatment, it is now possibleto envision a systematic effort to mapthe changes in the human geneticblueprint associated with all knownforms of cancer,” said NIH DirectorElias A. Zerhouni, M.D. “This atlas ofgenomic changes will provide newinsights into the biological basis ofcancer, which in turn will lead to newtests to detect cancer in its early, mosttreatable stages; new therapies to tar-get cancer at its most vulnerablepoints; and, ultimately, new strategiesto prevent cancer.”

NCI and NHGRI have each commit-ted $50 million over three years to theTCGA Pilot Project. The project will

T

N I H Launches Comprehensive Effort to ExploreCancer Genomics; Cancer Genome AtlasBegins With Three-Year, $100 Mil l ion Pilot

Macromolecular Structure and DynamicsAndrej Sali, UCSF

Proteomics and Bioinformatics Michael Snyder, Yale UniversityDavid S. Eisenberg, UCLA

Chemical Genetics and Drug DiscoveryChaitan Khosla, Stanford University Kevan Shokat, UCSF

Glycobiology and Extracellular MatrixCarlos B. Hirschberg, Boston University Goldman School of Dental Medicine

Genome Dynamics: Replication, Repair, and Recombination Laurie S. Kaguni, Michigan State Univ.

Chromatin: Structure, Expression, and RegulationSharon R. Dent, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center

RNA: Structure, Metabolism, and Regulation Alan D. Frankel, UCSF

Protein Synthesis, Folding and TurnoverWilliam Merrick, Case Western Reserve University

Metabolic RegulationRichard W. Hanson, Case Western Reserve UniversityDaryl K. Granner, Vanderbilt Univ.

Signaling in Growth and DevelopmentMichael B. Yaffe, MIT

Signaling in Aging and Disease Natalie G. Ahn, University of Colorado at Boulder

Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Lipids George M. Carman, Rutgers UniversityChristian R.H. Raetz, Duke University

Structure, Function, and Biogenesis of Cell MembranesWilliam Dowhan, University of Texas-Houston Medical School

Juliette Bell, Fayetteville State Univ.

Issues in Breast Cancer Among Minority Populations K.V. Venkatachalam, Nova Southeastern University

Minorities and the HIV/AIDS Epidemic Juliette Bell, Fayetteville State University

EPD/MAC Symposium – Under-graduate Student/Faculty ScienceJoseph Provost,Minnesota State University-Moorhead, Mark A. Wallert, Minnesota State University-Moorhead and Phillip A. Ortiz, Empire State College

EPD/MAC Symposium – Outreach and Public Education Neena Grover, Colorado College

William R. Brinkley, Baylor College of Medicine

Teaching the Science of Evolution Under the Threat of Alternative ViewsWilliam R. Brinkley, Ken Miller, Don Johanson, Eugenie Scott, Ted Peters

Focus on the Future, Shape the Debate J. Ellis Bell, Univ. of Richmond

Undergraduate Poster Session and Plenary Lecture: My Life in Science Edmond H. Fischer, University of Washington School of Medicine and Edwin G. Krebs, University of Washington School of Medicine

Current Themes in Molecular Evolution Michael M. Cox, University of Wisconsin – Madison

Plenary Lecture: Integrity and Independence of Scientific Thought Elizabeth Blackburn, UCSF

Matching Expectations: Employers and Education in the Molecular Life Sciences Joy A. McMillan,Madison Area Technical College

The Classroom of the Future J. Ellis Bell, Univ. of Richmond

Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics Al Burlingame, UCSF andSue Weintraub, UTHSC, San Antonio

Surface Plasmon Resonance and ProteomicsEileen Lafer, UTHSC, San Antonio

How to Publish in the JBCPresented by Associate Editors of JBC

• Herbert Tabor/Journal of Biological Chemistry Lectureship

• ASBMB-Amgen Award• ASBMB Award for Exemplary

Contributions to Education• ASBMB-Merck Award• Avanti Award in Lipids• FASEB Excellence in Science Award • Herbert A. Sober Lectureship• Howard K. Schachman

Public Service Award• Schering-Plough Research

Institute Award• William C. Rose Award

• Opening Centennial Celebration Reception

• ASBMB/JBC Birthday Bash, A Taste of San Francisco

• ASBMB 5k Fun Run• An Evening with the

San Francisco Symphony

ASBMB Centennial Clara Benson Travel Fellowship AwardGraduate Minority Travel AwardGraduate or Postdoctoral Travel AwardUndergraduate Student Travel AwardUndergraduate Faculty Travel Award

10th Annual Undergraduate Student Research Achievement Award Poster Competition, Saturday, April 1, 2006ASBMB Graduate Student and Postdoctoral Travel Award Symposium, Saturday, April 1, 2006ABRF/ASBMB SymposiumMinority Scientists MixerWomen Scientists’ Mentoring/ Networking Session and ReceptionGraduate Student and Postdoctoral Mentoring/Networking Session and ReceptionASBMB Business Meeting

Abstract Deadline: November 2, 2005

History Comes Alive...Register Now!

Program Co-Chairs: George M. Carman, Rutgers UniversityLaurie S. Kaguni, Michigan State University

Abstract Deadline: February 8, 2006

AS BM B Reminiscences


Fourth, the projects you pick to workon are very critical. I have always triedto do basic research on things thathave real applications. You will have togo after the “big fish” and not settle for“incremental science.” You have toattack difficult projects, but they dohave to be workable.

Fifth, avoid distractions, which aresure to come your way. You have to setboundaries and learn to say no. Defi-nitely stay out of department politics.Do not get any bright ideas about start-ing a company in your spare time.Time-consuming hobbies are notadvised. As a corollary, a stable per-sonal life helps.

Sixth, have high standards for peo-ple when you bring them into yourlab. This may seem difficult when youstart and feel desperate to get anyonein. If you expect high performance and

treat people as professionals, your labwill be better in the long run.

Seventh, look around and see whomyou should use as mentors on the fac-ulty. Some will be good models andalso give you advice. Others are exam-ples of what you should not do.

Eighth, be wary of collaborations atthis stage. Some can be extremely valu-able but others will be a waste of time.Your tenure decision will be focusedmainly on what you have done oryour role in any collaborative efforts.

Ninth, try to work in the lab asmuch as you can. You are highlyskilled and, at your stage, should bemore efficient than most of the peoplewho enter your lab. I have tried tokeep doing this, although the pressureshave increased over the years.

Tenth, take care of your equipment.Replacing equipment is very expensiveand getting items approved on yourgrants is hard.

Eleventh, start writing your grantsearly. You need time to prepare and re-evaluate everything. Also, if you wantinput from other faculty, get it early.You are facing serious competition, andjust like pro football, everythingdepends on preparation and execution.

Twelfth, never forget the excitementof discovery and why you do this.

There are more points but these are afew that may help. It was definitely allworth it.

was asked to submit an articleafter I received the ASBMBWilliam C. Rose Award last

year. My early life and training aredescribed briefly in IUBMB Life 57,705-707 (2005), so I thought I wouldreflect on my early years on the fac-ulty, in the hope that this advice is use-ful. In retrospect, I had not been soldon an academic career and could havegone into the pharmaceutical industry,but I probably made the best decision.I started at Vanderbilt when I was 26and became a full professor when I was34. I would not advise anyone to try todo exactly the way I did, but I havesome general advice.

First, this is not an easy business andnot for everyone. You will have tocommit to a heavy workload. I camefrom a farm and had no problem withwork ethic. You can take consolationthat long hours are also required forsuccess elsewhere.

Second, I tell my students that thereal issue in your lab is not money. Thescarce resources are time and people. Ifyou have reasonably good ideas andcan master time and people, moneyshould not be a problem.

Third, you have to write and com-municate well. I hope you havelearned this by now. In retrospect Iwas fair but not great due to myyouthful aversion to studying Englishand languages.

I

Surviving Early Li fe in Academic BiochemistryFred Guenger ich , Department of B iochem istry, Vanderb i l t Un ivers i ty Schoo l of Med ic ine

As part of our Centennial Celebration, we recently asked members to contribute reminiscences of their early thoughts about becoming ascientist, their experience as postdocs, their first paper published, their first lecture at an ASBMB Meeting, the friendships and connectionsthey formed with other ASBMB members, their impressions of the first ASBMB meeting they attended, and anything else they thought perti-nent. Here is another contribution. We believe you will find it interesting, and we look forward to receiving and publishing more reminis-cences. Please send to them to [email protected].

Dr. Frederick Guengerich (right) receiving 2005William Rose Award from Dr. Minor J. Coon.


Education 2003 31: 223-224, EllisBell, Biochemistry and MolecularBiology Education 2003 31: 225-227,John A. Boyle , Biochemistry andMolecular Biology Education 200331: 283-285, James K. Zimmerman ,Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyEducation 2003 31: 375-377, MarkWallert, Ellen Brisch, Chris Chastain,Michelle Malott, and Joseph Provost,Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyEducation 2004 32: 146-150, Bobich,Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyEducation 2004 32: 1-2, Joan L. Slon-czewski and Rosemary Marusak, Bio-chemistry and Molecular BiologyEducation 2004 32: 151-155), focus-ing on how various types of Universi-ties and Colleges have implementedthe ASBMB Curriculum.

As indicated when the new curricu-lum was published, it was not meantto be proscriptive but rather a continu-ing evolution and discussion amongsteducators as to how to best preparestudents for their futures. During thecoming months the Education andProfessional Development Committeeweb site, and the Undergraduate Affili-ates Network newsletter, Enzymatic,will post a series of editorials on issuesfacing educators implementing theASBMB recommended curriculum andon how schools wishing to start a Bio-chemistry and Molecular Biologyundergraduate program can make useof the recommendations to construct acurriculum that will both challengeand excite students interested in themolecular life sciences.

wo years ago, after a threeyear review of the curriculum,the Education and Profes-

sional Development Committee cameout with a new set of curriculum recommendations for Biochemistryand Molecular Biology undergraduateprograms. The recommendations,which can be found at (http://www.asbmb.org/asbmb/site.nsf/Sub/UndergradCurriculum?Opendocument)focused on content and skills ratherthan being proscriptive about numbersor names of courses. The focus onskills is an increasingly importantaspect of the recommendations. As hasbeen discussed in several journals andpublications (Bell, Nature Reviews,2:221-225, 2001, Bio2010, 2002, Bialek& Botstein, Science, 303:788-790,2004, Alberts, Cell, 123: 739-741,2005) as students are educated for thechallenges of the 21st century it is criti-cal that they are taught in a mannerthat fosters independent learning aswell as quantitative and analyticalthinking skills. It is no longer accept-able to “teach” students content, thecurriculum must educate students tobe aware of both underlaying conceptsas well as the challenges of the future.

Since the publication of the newcurriculum recommendations in2003 (Judith G. Voet, Ellis Bell, Rod-ney Boyer, John Boyle, MarionO’Leary, and James K. Zimmerman,Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyEducation 2003 31: 161-162) therehave been a number of articles in Bio-chemistry and Molecular Bioogy Education (Rodney F. Boyer, Bio-chemistry and Molecular Biology

The Recommended Undergraduate CurriculumFor a Biochemistry & Molecular Biology DegreeT

Heather 337897 1 sc

BOS465696e

FASEB CAREER RESOURCES

4.75 x 3.625

January 1, 2005

n/a

MIN0692 n/a

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR ENGINEERED BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS

The Biological Engineering Division invites applications for a tenure-track faculty position at the assistantprofessor level in Engineered Biological Systems, to begin July 2006 or thereafter. Applicants shouldhold a Ph.D. in a science or engineering discipline related to biological engineering. In special cases, amore senior faculty appointment might be possible. The candidate is expected to integrate strongexpertise in molecular/cellular bioscience with an engineering design perspective; example areas ofapplication might include stem cell technologies, vaccine development, biomolecular materials, and tissueengineering or synthetic biology broadly. We especially encourage minorities and women to apply,because of MIT's strong commitment to diversity in engineering education, research and practice.

Interested candidates should send application materials to [email protected]. Each applicationshould include: a curriculum vitae; the names and addresses of three or more references; a strategicstatement of research interests; and a statement of teaching interests, specifically in the context of theBiological Engineering graduate and undergraduate educational programs at MIT(http://web.mit.edu/be/education/ and http://web.mit.edu/be/education/ugrad.htm).

We request that each candidate arrange for the reference letters to be sent directly to [email protected],with a copy mailed or faxed to the following address: Professor Paul Matsudaira, Chair, Faculty SearchCommittee, Biological Engineering Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Bldg NE47, Room223, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307. Fax#: 617-258-7226. Responses by 1 February 2006 will be given priority.

web.mit.edu/hr

B I O T E C H B U S I N E S S N E W S


Taiwan’s claim to be Asia’s leader inbiotechnology dates back to a Novem-ber 2001 report by the Singaporeoffice of the brokerage division ofFrench-based Societe Generale Group.That report; entitled Asia’s Biotechnol-ogy Dawn, identified Taiwan as thetop biotechnology nation in Asia,reporting that it had in place many ofthe elements for a winning strategy.Second after Taiwan was Singapore,followed by Hong Kong/China, Korea,and India.

Biotechnology is generally under-stood in Taiwan as, the applicationof technological principles in life sci-ences. As such, Taiwanese viewbiotechnology as including thepharmaceutical industry. Further-more, because of its ethnic Chineseheritage, Taiwan’s pharmaceuticalindustry has always included theChinese medicine industry. As aresult, many manufacturers of West-ern pharmaceuticals in Taiwan arealso producing Chinese medicinalingredients and formulations. Simi-

Taiwan has achieved remarkable eco-nomic success, having transformeditself in a few short decades to thetechnology-driven economic power-house that it is today. Over the past 20years Taiwan has concentrated ondeveloping its high-tech industries,and is now a world leader in the devel-opment and production of electronic,information technology (IT), computerand semiconductor products. Now,Taiwan is on course to achieve thesame kind of success and global stand-ing in biotechnology according toBioTech East, a Taiwan-based firm thatprovides news and analysis of thebiotechnology industry.

Over the past 20 years, Taiwan hastransformed itself into the technology-driven economic powerhouse that it istoday. The island has done this by con-centrating on developing its high-techindustries, with the resullt that it isnow a world leader in the develop-ment and production of electronic,information technology, computer,and semiconductor products.

According to BioTech East, Taiwanhas a variety of strengths that can giveit an edge over its Asian competitors. Itlists these strengths as including:❖ Expertise in high technology that is

easily transferred to biotechnology❖ Strategic location; close to China

and straddling Northeast andSoutheast Asia

❖ Strong legal framework❖ Highly educated workforce, particu-

larly in IT and biology❖ World-class research facilities ❖ Abundant capital and a vibrant ven-

ture capital industry❖ Herbal medicine knowledge and

experience

Will Biotech Be Taiwan’s Next High-Tech Success Story?

Novartis has stopped develop-ment of NKS104 (pitavastatin), alipid-lowering agent in Phase II forthe treatment of elevated totalcholesterol, after data from recentinvestigational trials showed thecompound was no longer competi-tive enough for Novartis to investfurther resources.

As a result, Novartis recorded animpairment of $266 million in thefourth quarter of 2005 to fully writeoff the remaining value of this asset.

The European rights to this com-pound were acquired under a licens-ing agreement from Kowa. Novartisalready recorded an impairment of$66 million in the third quarterrelated to the acquired and capital-ized marketing rights for NKS104.Despite these charges, and barringunforeseen events, Novartis said itexpects to report record group oper-ating and net income for the fullyear based on continued favorablebusiness developments in 2005.

Novart is Curbs Development of N KS104

by John D . Thompson , Ed i tor

larly, many new biotech startups areconducting research on modernmedical uses of traditional Chineseherbs and medicines.

The government’s Promotion Planfor the Biotechnology Industry, identi-fies these major goals: ❖ To establish Taiwan as the center for

genomic research and developmentin Asia.

❖ To establish Taiwan as the leadinglocation for human clinical trials inAsia

❖ To establish Taiwan as a worldwidesubtropical floriculture center

❖ To establish in Taiwan the mostvibrant biotech-focused venture cap-ital industry in Asia.

❖ Reach US$4.5 billion in newbiotech/pharmaceutical industryinvestment by 2010

❖ The establishment by 2010 of atleast 18 international-standardbiotech companies in Taiwan,either locally owned, or mixedlocal-overseas joint ventures or col-laborations.

Each consortium will put together aprotytype IP-based network prototypeduring the coming year. These networkswill include patient identification andinformation services combined withuser authentication and security fea-

tures. When the prototypes are fin-ished, the results will be given to theAmerican Health Information Commu-nity, an advisory committee to the HHSand focused on digitizing and network-enabling healthcare records.

Accenture, Cisco, IBM, Microsoft,Northrop Grumman, Oracle, and Sunare among a wide range of technologyand consulting companies tapped todesign an $18.6 million NationwideHealth Information Network (NHIN)for the U.S. Health and Human Ser-vices (HHS) Department. The NHIN isHHS’s plan for an internet-based net-work that links disparate healthcareorganizations, such as local clinics, cityhospitals, universities, and govern-ment health agencies to share andhave secure access to clinical data.

“This effort will help design an infor-mation network that will transformour healthcare system resulting inhigher quality, lower costs, less hassle,and better care for American con-sumers,” HHS Secretary Mike Leavittsaid in a statement.

The NHIN will be designed and rolledout through four consortia, each con-sisting of several IT, consulting, security,and healthcare companies and organi-zations. The four consortia, each ofwhich are responsible responsible forNHIN coverage in specific areas of thecountry, are Accenture, Computer Sci-ence Corporation (CSC), IBM, andNorthrop Grumman.

IT Vendors Join to Design Healthcare Network Prototype

B I O T E C H B U S I N E S S N E W S

Medidata Picked for E DCin Cancer Trials

After a grueling two-year vendor-selec-tion process, there is a winner: Medidataof New York City. That’s the word fromBritain’s National Cancer Research Net-work (NCRN), which is hoping to sim-plify processes for 500 staff membersthroughout the UK. The NCRN is theBritish counterpart to the National Can-cer Institute (NCI) in the U.S.

G E Healthcare, Saneron to CollaborateOn Umbil ical Cord Blood Processing

GE Healthcare, a unit of GeneralElectric Company (NYSE: GE), andSaneron announced an R&D agree-ment to optimize GE Healthcare’sFicoll-Paque for the isolation of stemcells from umbilical cord blood. Thiscell population contains stem cellswith the potential to be used to treatmore than 80 malignant, genetic andacquired diseases, such as leukemia,lymphoma, sickle cell anemia, tha-lassemia and immunodeficiency.

“Umbilical cord blood is playing anincreasingly important role in the useof cell therapy in the successful treat-ment of human disease,” said NigelDarby, Vice President of Research andDevelopment, Protein Separations atGE Healthcare. “Saneron and GEHealthcare are working together toprovide a solution for a sterile densitymedium manufactured under GMPconditions to meet the growing needfor processing umbilical cord blood sothat it may be used in cell therapy.”

Ficoll-Paque, a sterile densitymedium, has been used for 30 years toisolate high yields of mononuclear cellsfrom peripheral blood and bone mar-row. However, the cell composition inumbilical cord blood, being signifi-cantly different from peripheral bloodand bone marrow, demands different

separation characteristics. The versionof Ficoll-Paque being developed by GEHealthcare and Saneron will specificallyprocess stem cells from umbilical cordblood. The new Ficoll-Paque will bemanufactured under GMP standards .

“Saneron has developed a propri-etary processing technique for the iso-lation of a heterogeneous populationof cells from umbilical cord blood thathas shown promising results in pre-clinical studies of stroke, myocardialinfarction, spinal cord injury, and ALS(Lou Gehrig’s disease). The cell separa-tion media from GE Healthcare alreadyprovides exceptional gradient separa-tion of cells and the new version ofFicoll-Paque will be extremely valuableto Saneron in the completion of proofof principle studies prior to the initia-tion of future clinical trials,” said Dr.Cyndy Davis Sanberg, vice president ofresearch, Saneron. “This represents animportant milestone in Saneron’s cordblood stem cell processing.”

The new Ficoll-Paque is being devel-oped at GE’s Global Research Centerin Niskayuna, New York, and tested atSaneron’s facilities at the University ofSouth Florida’s research park. GEHealthcare will commercialize thefinal product. Financial terms werenot disclosed.



F o r Yo u r L a b / F o r Yo u r L a b / F o r Yo u r L a bThe information in For Your Lab has been provided by manufacturers and suppliers of

laboratory equipment. For further information about any of these products l isted

contacts are l isted at the bottom of each panel. When contacting any of these

companies, please mention that you saw their product in AS BM B Today . Please note

that a l isting in AS BM B Today does not imply an endorsement by the American Society

for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology or by any of its members or staff.

Manufacturers and suppliers, to include your products in For Your Lab contact

Molly at [email protected] or 301-634-7157 (direct) or 1-800-433-2732 ext. 7157.

OLIS, INC.

For more information, call 1-800-852-3504, write [email protected], or visit www.olisweb.com.

On-Line Instrument Systems, Inc.The Olis DB 620 absorbance spectrophotometer is optimized formicrosecond kinetics as well as lengthy thermal melts andequilibrium studies. This modern digital dual-beam, double-grating optical bench collects data at rates to 50 ns with andwithout associated scanning. The 7-sided DeSa subtractivedouble-grating monochromator uses two 40 x 45 mm gratingsblazed for UV/Vis, Vis-NIR, or NIR regions; detectors are a pair ofphotomultiplier tubes or InGaAsdetectors. Powerful 2D and3D data acquisition andanalysis software isincluded.

M A T R E Y A L L C

Contact Customer Service at 800 342 3595 or visit www.matreya.com

Cell Signaling and RegulationHigh purity phosphatidylinositol phos-phates and inositol phosphates for cellsignaling research are available fromMatreya. Phosphatidylinositol mono,di and triphosphates are offered inboth sodium and ammonium saltforms to meet for your specific solubil-ity requirements. Enantiomeric purityis evaluated by 1H and 31P NMR. Over 50 fatty acid, modified LCB, orenantiomeric variants of Sphingosine, Phytosphingosine,Ceramide and Phytoceramide are offered as well as phosphory-lated derivatives. Fluorescent derivatives are also available.

2 1 S T C E NT U R Y B I O C H E M I C A L S

For more info, please call 877.217.8238/508.303.8222, e-mail us [email protected] or visit us at www.21stcenturybio.com

Custom/Bioactive Peptideswith FREE PEPTIDESEQUENCING!Not all peptides are created equal! 21stCentury Biochemicals is the ONLY com-pany that sequences every high purity cus-tom, bioactive (beta amyloid, substrates,inhibitors) and antibody peptide we make! This guarantees thatyour peptide is correct. All of our peptides are manufactured inour Marlborough, MA facility by a staff with over 70 years ofcombined experience in chemistry, immunology, biochemistry,and cell biology. Contact us for information on custom anti-bodies and ask how we achieve over 90o/o success rate!

S I L K S C I E N T I F I C , I N C .

Silk Scientific, Inc. / Tel: 1-801-377-6978 www.silkscientific.com/scangel

UN-SCAN-IT gel Quantify SoftwareThe UN-SCAN-IT gel softwareturns your scanner into a highspeed digitizer/densitometersystem that converts scannedgraphs and gels into digital data.UN-SCAN-IT gel works with anyscanner to automaticallydetermine (x,y) point locations,peak heights, band densities, bandlocations, molecular weight values, and other graphical and gelparameters. The data can be stored in ASCII format for use inother software programs. Windows and Macintosh versionsavailable for under $450.


This competitive program willenable outstanding young Chinesepostdoctoral researchers to obtain afurther three years training at a leadingCancer Research UK institute.

The successful students will be basedat the Beatson Institute for CancerResearch, Glasgow; CambridgeResearch Institute, London ResearchInstitute, and the Paterson Institute forCancer Research, Manchester.

Dr. Hunt explained, “We hope tobuild strong partnerships betweenleading cancer researchers in the UKand their counterparts in China.Cancer is a global problem and mustbe tackled on a global scale, so bring-ing together some of the mostpromising researchers in four of the

world’s most renowned cancerresearch centres offers a tremendousopportunity for discovering moreabout the disease.

“This is a new approach to recruitingpostdoctoral fellows coming to the UK.The best universities and institutesacross China are excellent. Inevitably,those who reach the top of such amagnificent education system servinga population of 1.3 billion people areoutstanding.

“Critical to the long term success ofthe programme will be the provisionof research support for these postdocson their return to China. CancerResearch UK looks forward to workingwith the Chinese authorities to organ-ise this.”

ancer Research UK’s Dr. TimHunt, a Nobel Prize winnervisited Beijing in November

with colleagues from Cancer ResearchUK and leading Chinese cancer expertsto award up to 10 fellowships to thetop young cancer scientists in China.

Cancer Research UK is the world’sleading independent organisation ded-icated to cancer research, funding over3,400 scientists, doctors and nursesbased throughout the UK. The char-ity’s total research spend for last yearwas £217 million ($384 million).

The charity has introduced the Can-cer Research UK China FellowshipsProgramme as part of its ongoing mis-sion to help foster the next generationof leaders in cancer research in China.

Cancer Research U K to Offer Fel lowshipsTo Chinese Cancer ResearchersC

M IT Professors Receive Nat ional Medal of SciencePresident Bush has presented the

2004 National Medal of Science, thisnation's highest science honor to twoMIT faculty members: Stephen J. Lip-pard, the Arthur Amos Noyes Professorof Chemistry, and Institute ProfessorPhillip A. Sharp* are among eight hon-orees selected for the award.

Lippard was cited "for pioneeringresearch in bioinorganic chemistry,including the interaction of metalcompounds with DNA, preparation ofsynthetic models for metalloproteins,and structural and mechanistic studiesof methane monooxygenase."

"I am very pleased to receive thishonor for it recognizes the work of themany wonderful graduate students

and post-doctoral associates who havecontributed to the science that wewere able to accomplish," Lippard said."It was most unexpected."

Sharp said, "I am greatly honored toreceive the National Medal of Science.It is the highest honor this countrybestows on a scientist and the leg-endary names of previous winnersmake the recognition very special. Iwant to thank MIT and my colleaguesfor creating such a productive environ-ment for education and research."

Sharp's current research includesinvestigations into RNA interference(RNAi), a method of turning off genesusing short pieces of RNA. In 1993 heshared the Nobel Prize in physiol-

ogy/medicine for discovering thatsome of the genes of higher organismsare "split," or present in several distinctsegments along the DNA molecule.

The National Medal of Science wasestablished in 1959 to be given to indi-viduals "deserving of special recognitionby reason of their outstanding contribu-tions to knowledge in the physical, bio-logical, mathematical or engineeringsciences." In 1980 Congress expandedthis recognition to include the socialand behavioral sciences.

The two join 43 other current andpast members of the MIT communitywho have been awarded the NationalMedal of Science.

* ASBMB member.

C a l e n d a r o f S c i e n t i f i c M e e t i n g s


G Protein- Coupled Receptors: Evolving Concepts andNew Techniques

February 12-16 • Keystone, ColoradoFor information contact:Ph.: 800-253-0685 / 970-262-1230Email: [email protected]://www.keystonesymposia.org/Meetings/ViewMeetings.cfm?MeetingID=807

M A R C H 2 0 0 6

Gordon Research Conference (GRC) on NewAntibacterial Discovery & Development

March 5-10 • Ventura Beach Marriott, Ventura, CaliforniaFor Information: Email:[email protected]: www.grc.org/programs/2006/antibact.htm

DNA Structure, Genomic Rearrangements, and HumanDisease

March 12-14 • Institute of Biosciences and Technology,Houston, TexasOrganizers: James R. Lupski, Baylor College of Medicine andRobert D. Wells, Institute of Biosciences and TechnologyKeynote Lecturer: Dr. Evan Eichler, University ofWashington, SeattleThis three-day symposium will focus on DNA structure and howatypical DNA conformations result in human genetic disease.More detailed information including program and registrationinformation can be found on the ASBMB website,www.asbmb.org/meetings

RNAi2006: Advances in RNA Interference Research

March 22-23 • St. Anne’s College, Oxford, UKConference Organizer: Muhammad SohailBiochemistry Department, University of OxfordTel: +44 1865 275225; Fax: +44 1865 275259Email: [email protected]: http://libpubmedia.co.uk/Conferences/RNAi2006HomeMay2005.htm

American Chemical Society 231st National Meeting

March 26 – 30 • AtlantaContact: Charmayne Marsh; Ph: 202-872-4445Email: [email protected]; Website: www.acs.org/meetings

Compartmentalization of Cyclic AMP Signalling

March 29-30 • King’s College, Cambridge, UKContact: Meetings Office, Biochemical Society, 3rd Floor, EagleHouse, 16 Proctor Street, London, WC1V 6NXEmail: [email protected]: www.biochemistry.org/meetings

J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 6

Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing

January 3-7 • Wailea, MauiFor information contact: http://psb.stanford.edu/Email: [email protected]; Phone: (650)725-0659

Building Bridges, Forging Bonds for 21st CenturyOrganic Chemistry and Chemical Biology

January 7-9 • Pune, IndiaTel.: 202-872-4523; Email: [email protected]: http://www.ncl-india.org/occb2006/index.htm

Gordon Research Conference on Biology Of Aging

January 29 - February 3 • Ventura, CAChairs: Monica Driscoll, [email protected] J McCarter, [email protected] more information: www.grc.uri.edu/06sched.htm

F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 6

The 11th Annual Proteomics Symposium

February 3-5 • Erskine on the Beach, Lorne, AustraliaEmail: [email protected] www.australasianproteomics.org.au/lorne.htm

The 31st Lorne Conference on Protein Structure andFunction

February 5-9 • Erskine on the Beach, Lorne, Australiaemail: [email protected]; www.lorneproteins.org/

Third International Conference on Ubiquitin,Ubiquitin-like Proteins, and Cancer

February 9-11 • The University of Texas M. D. AndersonCancer Center, Houston, Texas This meeting will celebrate the Nobel Prize awarded to AvramHershko, Aaron Ciechanover, and Irwin Rose for their discov-ery of the ubiquitin pathway and the 10th anniversary of thediscovery of SUMO/Sentrin and NEDD8Application and Abstract Submission Deadline: Friday,November 11, 2005; For information contact: Amy HeatonProgram Manager, Department Of CardiologyUniversity of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer CenterTel: 713-745-6826; Fax: 713-745-1942 Website: www.sentrin.org

ABRF 2006—Integrating Science, Tools andTechnologies with Systems Biology

February 11-14 • Long Beach, CaliforniaFor Information: www.faseb.org/meetings/abrf2006

J U LY 2 0 0 6

Gordon Conference on Enzymes, Coenzymes &Metabolic Pathways

July 16 -21 • University of New England, Biddeford, MaineFor information contact:Email: [email protected]: 401-783-4011 ext 100Website: www.grc.uri.edu/06sched.htm#GRC

Bioscience 2006: Bioscience for the 21st Century andBiochemical Journal Centenary Symposium

July 23-27 • Glasgow, UKFor more information: www.biochemistry.org/meetings

S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 6

The 33rd Annual Conference of the Federation ofAnalytical Chemistry and Spectroscopy Societies(FACSS)

September 24–28 • Disney’s Contemporary Resort, LakeBuena Vista, FLContact: FACSS, PO Box 24379, Santa Fe, NM 87502Phone: 505-820-1648; Fax: 505-989-1073Email: [email protected]; Web Page: www.facss.org

O C T O B E R 2 0 0 6

International Conference of Immunogenomics andImmunomics

October 8-12 • Budapest, HungaryA joint meeting of 2nd Basic and Clinical Immunogenomicsand 3rd Immunoinformatics (Immunomics) ConferencesEmail: [email protected] Website: www.bcii2006.org

O C T O B E R 2 0 0 7

34th Annual Conference of the Federation ofAnalytical Chemistry and Spectroscopy Societies(FACSS)

October 12–18 • Memphis Convention Center, Memphis, TNContact: FACSS, PO Box 24379, Santa Fe, NM 87502.Phone: 505-820-1648; Fax: (505) 989-1073Email: [email protected]; Web Page: www.facss.org

Biochemical Society Annual Symposium The Cell Biologyof Inositol Lipids and Phosphates

March 29-31 • University of Birmingham, UKOrganizer: Michael Wakelam, University of BirminghamEarly registration deadline: February 28, 2006 For more information: www.biochemistry.org/meetings

A P R I L 2 0 0 6

American Society for Biochemistry and MolecularBiology Centennial Meeting in Conjunction withExperimental Biology 2006

April 1–5 • San FranciscoFor information contact: www.asbmb.org/meetingsEmail: [email protected]: 301-634-7145; Website: www.asbmb.org/meetings

Recomb 2006 - The Tenth Annual InternationalConference on Research in Computational MolecularBiology

April 2-5 • Venice, ItalyFor information contact:Email: [email protected]: +39 0415238995; Website: http://recomb06.dei.unipd.it/

47th ENC Experimental Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

April 23-28 • Asilomar Conference Ctr., Pacific Grove, CAContact: ENC, 2019 Galisteo Street, Building I-1Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505; Ph: 505-89-4573Fx: 505-989-1073; Email: [email protected] page: http://www.enc-conference.org

M A Y 2 0 0 6

CSBMCB International Meeting on Membrane Proteinsin Health and Disease

May 31- June 4 • Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, CanadaThis Canadian Society of Biochemistry, Molecular and CellularBiology sponsored meeting, held in Canada’s wine countryclose to Niagara Falls, will feature cutting-edge sessions onStructural Biology of Membrane Proteins, RegulatingMembrane Permeability, Dynamics of Membrane Proteins,Transporters and Disease, Trafficking Defects in MembraneProteins, and Assembly and Disassembly of MembraneProteins. Meeting organizer: Dr. Reinhart ReithmeierEmail: [email protected]: www.csbmcb.ca/e_index.html

could wine help fight alzheimer's? - american society for ... · asbmb meeting office phone:...

Documents