ROGER LARKEN CHANG, Ph.D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
NSABB June-July 2005 Meeting Agenda
First Meeting of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity June 30 – July 1, 2005 Hyatt Regency Bethesda 7400 Wisconsin Ave. Bethesda, Maryland, 20814 USA Hotel Phone: 301-657-1234 Agenda Webcast: To watch the live webcast of the meeting, click here. The webcast can only be viewed when the meeting is in session at 8:00am-6:00pm on June 30 and at 8:00am-1:30pm on July 1 Eastern Time. You will need RealOne Player to view the webcast. If you do not already have RealOne Player on your computer, download here. Presentation slides: To access the following PowerPoint presentations, click on the presentation titles below. June 30, 2005 Opening Remarks and Swearing in Ceremony Elias Zerhouni, M.D. Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Chair's Remarks and Agenda Overview Dennis L. Kasper, M.D. NSABB Chair Harvard Medical School Introduction of NSABB Members NSABB Structure and Operations Thomas Holohan, M.D. NSABB Executive Director, NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities Break Perspectives on Biosecurity in the Life Sciences NSABB Voting Members Impetus for NSABB: Enhancing Biosecurity on the Life Sciences Rajeev Venkayya, M.D. Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director for Biological and Chemical Defense White House Homeland Security Council Perspectives on Biosecurity in the Life Sciences NSABB Ex Officio Members Lunch Session I- The Development of Criteria for Identifying Dual Use Research and Research Results Introduction: Issues of Relevance to Criteria Development Arturo Casadevall, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Medicine and of Microbiology & Immunology and Chief of Infectious Diseases Albert Einstein College of Medicine National Research Council Perspective: Experiments of Concern Ron Atlas, Ph.D. -
Physiology of Highly Radioresistant Escherichia Coli After Experimental Evolution for 100 Cycles of Selection
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Recent Work Title Physiology of Highly Radioresistant Escherichia coli After Experimental Evolution for 100 Cycles of Selection. Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5bj102bg Authors Bruckbauer, Steven T Martin, Joel Minkoff, Benjamin B et al. Publication Date 2020 DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2020.582590 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California fmicb-11-582590 September 17, 2020 Time: 16:43 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 22 September 2020 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.582590 Physiology of Highly Radioresistant Escherichia coli After Experimental Evolution for 100 Cycles of Selection Steven T. Bruckbauer1, Joel Martin2, Benjamin B. Minkoff1,3, Mike T. Veling4, Illissa Lancaster1, Jessica Liu1, Joseph D. Trimarco1†, Brian Bushnell2, Anna Lipzen2, Elizabeth A. Wood1, Michael R. Sussman1,3, Christa Pennacchio2 and Michael M. Cox1* Edited by: Vasco Ariston De Carvalho 1 Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States, 2 DOE Joint Genome Institute, Azevedo, Berkeley, CA, United States, 3 Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Federal University of Minas Gerais, Health, Madison, WI, United States, 4 Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States Brazil Reviewed by: Bing Tian, Ionizing radiation (IR) is lethal to most organisms at high doses, damaging every cellular Zhejiang University, China macromolecule via induction of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Utilizing experimental Vera Y. Matrosova, evolution and continuing previous work, we have generated the most IR-resistant Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Escherichia coli populations developed to date. After 100 cycles of selection, the Medicine, United States dose required to kill 99% the four replicate populations (IR9-100, IR10-100, IR11- Suzanne Sommer, Université Paris-Saclay, France 100, and IR12-100) has increased from 750 Gy to approximately 3,000 Gy. -
The 7Th White Coat Ceremony at SSPPS by Binh Tran, Pharmd
The 7th White Coat Ceremony at SSPPS By Binh Tran, PharmD The White Coat Ceremony at the Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (SSPPS) on September 25th held special meaning as the University of California - San Diego celebrates its 50th Anniversary this year. SSPPS faculty, alumni, student pharmacists, the incoming class of 2014, their families and their friends listened to Dean Palmer Taylor’s welcoming address in the spacious Health Sciences auditorium modeled with panels made of eucalyptus wood. Dr Rita Shane, Director of Pharmacy Services at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and Assistant Dean of Clinical Pharmacy at the UCSF School of Pharmacy delivered an energizing speech on The Power of Differentiation: Will you be a Brand or Generic? Attributes mentioned were competency, responsibility and accountability, intellectual curiosity, being able to seize opportunities, and establishing credibility. Dr. Anthony Manoguerra, Associate Dean for Student Affairs, reported that the class of 2014’s grade point average of 3.71 broke the record set by the previous class which averaged 3.70. The White Coat hooding by Dean Taylor was a moving ceremony with Justine Abella being last due to a recent foot injury. The class recited the Pharmacist’s Oath, which brought back memories of our own experiences. The Student Welcome by second- year student, Ammar Zanial, was heartfelt and reminiscent of his comments during pharmacy conference class. Little did I know at the time that the student pharmacist who volunteered at many outreaches in the community and helped backstage during Cultural Fusion Night was the President of his class. In closing, Dean Taylor commented on the ingeniousness of the class when he observed them tacitly move their seats in order to step closer to the stage. -
Michael S. Brown, MD
DISTINGUISHED PHYSICIANS AND Michael S. Brown, M.D. Sir Richard Roberts, Ph.D. Winner, 1985 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine Winner, 1993 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine MEDICAL SCIENTISTS MENTORING Winner, 1988 Presidential National Medal of Science A globally prominent biochemist and molecular biologist, DELEGATES HAVE INCLUDED... Dr. Brown received the world’s most prestigious medical Dr. Roberts was awarded the Nobel Prize for his prize for his work describing the regulation of the groundbreaking contribution to discovering RNA splicing. cholesterol metabolism. His work laid the foundation for Dr. Roberts is dedicating his future research to GMO crops the class of drugs now called statins taken daily by more than 20 million and food sources, and demonstrating the effect they have on humanity. — GRANDg MASTERS — people worldwide. Ferid Murad, M.D., Ph.D. Mario Capecchi, Ph.D. Boris D. Lushniak, M.D., M.P.H Winner, 1998 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine Academy Science Director The Surgeon General of the United States (acting, 2013-2014) Winner, 2007 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine A world-renowned pioneer in biochemistry, Dr. Murad’s Winner, 2001 National Medal of Science Rear Admiral Lushniak, M.D., M.P.H., was the United award-winning research demonstrated that nitroglycerin Winner, 2001 Lasker Award States’ leading spokesperson on matters of public health, and related drugs help patients with heart conditions by Winner, 2003 Wolf Prize in Medicine overseeing the operations of the U.S. Public Health Service releasing nitric oxide into the body, thus relaxing smooth Mario Capecchi, Ph.D., a biophysicist, is a Distinguished Commissioned Corps, which consists of approximately muscles by elevating intracellular cyclic GMP, leading to vasodilation and Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Utah School of Medicine. -
A Review of J. Craig Venter's a Life Decoded
A peer-reviewed electronic journal published by the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies ISSN 1541-0099 17(1) – March 2008 A review of J. Craig Venter’s A Life Decoded Randy Mayes, Duke University Journal of Evolution and Technology - Vol. 17 Issue 1 – March 2008 - pgs 71-72 http://jetpress.org/v17/mayes.htm In the early 1980s, a number of researchers suggested sequencing and mapping the human genome to help the science community better understand diseases and evolution. Following the announcement that the human genome had been sequenced, scientists wrote in peer-reviewed journals that we are not as hardwired as was once believed, and that the sequencing of the genome was just the beginning. Today, researchers have a new set of goals. In popular journalism, however, the science was lost in the shuffle. The media focused more on the dynamics of the conflicting philosophies of the private and public projects. This emphasis is also clear in the titles of several books chronicling the Human Genome Project, all appearing prior to the recent release of Craig Venter’s autobiography, A Life Decoded: My Genome: My Life (2007). Readers will find that Robert Cook-Deegan’s The Gene Wars (1995) and The Common Thread by Sir John Sulston and Georgina Ferry (2002), both written by insiders, are biased towards the philosophy of the public project, a commons approach. Sulston is a socialist who grows runner beans and drives a second hand car. By contrast, Venter travels in Lear jets and conducts business from his yacht. Three other books are more objective. -
Are You an Invited Speaker? a Bibliometric Analysis of Elite Groups for Scholarly Events in Bioinformatics
Are You an Invited Speaker? A Bibliometric Analysis of Elite Groups for Scholarly Events in Bioinformatics Senator Jeong, Sungin Lee, and Hong-Gee Kim Biomedical Knowledge Engineering Laboratory, Seoul National University, 28–22 YeonGeon Dong, Jongno Gu, Seoul 110–749, Korea. E-mail: {senator, sunginlee, hgkim}@snu.ac.kr Participating in scholarly events (e.g., conferences, work- evaluation, but it would be hard to claim that they have pro- shops, etc.) as an elite-group member such as an orga- vided comprehensive lists of evaluation measurements. This nizing committee chair or member, program committee article aims not to provide such lists but to add to the current chair or member, session chair, invited speaker, or award winner is beneficial to a researcher’s career develop- practices an alternative metric that complements existing per- ment.The objective of this study is to investigate whether formance measures to give a more comprehensive picture of elite-group membership for scholarly events is represen- scholars’ performance. tative of scholars’ prominence, and which elite group is By one definition (Jeong, 2008), a scholarly event is the most prestigious. We collected data about 15 global “a sequentially and spatially organized collection of schol- (excluding regional) bioinformatics scholarly events held in 2007. We sampled (via stratified random sampling) ars’ interactions with the intention of delivering and shar- participants from elite groups in each event. Then, bib- ing knowledge, exchanging research ideas, and performing liometric indicators (total citations and h index) of seven related activities.” As such, scholarly events are communica- elite groups and a non-elite group, consisting of authors tion channels from which our new evaluation tool can draw who submitted at least one paper to an event but were its supporting evidence. -
Humankind 2.0: the Technologies of the Future 6. Biotech
Humankind 2.0: The Technologies of the Future 6. Biotech Piero Scaruffi, 2017 See http://www.scaruffi.com/singular/human20.html for the full text of this discussion A brief History of Biotech 1953: Discovery of the structure of the DNA 2 A brief History of Biotech 1969: Jon Beckwith isolates a gene 1973: Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer create the first recombinant DNA organism 1974: Waclaw Szybalski coins the term "synthetic biology” 1975: Paul Berg organizes the Asilomar conference on recombinant DNA 3 A brief History of Biotech 1976: Genentech is founded 1977: Fred Sanger invents a method for rapid DNA sequencing and publishes the first full DNA genome of a living being Janet Rossant creates a chimera combining two mice species 1980: Genentech’s IPO, first biotech IPO 4 A brief History of Biotech 1982: The first biotech drug, Humulin, is approved for sale (Eli Lilly + Genentech) 1983: Kary Mullis invents the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for copying genes 1986: Leroy Hood invents a way to automate gene sequencing 1986: Mario Capecchi performs gene editing on a mouse 1990: William French Anderson’s gene therapy 1990: First baby born via PGD (Alan Handyside’s lab) 5 A brief History of Biotech 1994: FlavrSavr Tomato 1994: Maria Jasin’s homing endonucleases for genome editing 1996: Srinivasan Chandrasegaran’s ZFN method for genome editing 1996: Ian Wilmut clones the first mammal, the sheep Dolly 1997: Dennis Lo detects fetal DNA in the mother’s blood 2000: George Davey Smith introduces Mendelian randomization 6 A brief History of Biotech -
On Jim Watson's APOE Status: Genetic Information Is Hard to Hide
European Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 17, 147–150 & 2009 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 1018-4813/09 $32.00 www.nature.com/ejhg LETTERS 15.6 (95% CI, 10.9–22.5) and 4.3 (95% CI, 3.3–5.5) for APOE e4 homozygotes and e4/e3 heterozygotes respectively, 6 On Jim Watson’s APOE compared to e3 homozygotes. The meta-analytic odds ratios in population-based Caucasian samples were 11.8 status: genetic (95% CI, 7.0–19.8) and 2.8 (95% CI, 2.3–3.5), respec- tively.6 In a large Rotterdam (Netherlands), population- information is hard to based prospective study of people aged 55 years or above, it hide was estimated that 17% of the overall risk of AD could be attributed to the e4 allele, with 3% (95% CI, 0–6%) of cases attributed to the e4/e4 genotype, and 14% (95% CI, 7–21%) European Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 17, 147–149; 7 to the e4/e3 genotype. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2008.198; published online 22 October 2008 A recent investigation of LD for 50 SNPs in and surrounding APOE in 550 Caucasians identified multiple SNPs in the TOMM40 gene B15 kb upstream of APOE, and The recent publication and release to public databases of at least one SNP in the other surrounding genes LU, PVRL2, Dr James Watson’s sequenced genome,1 with the exception APOC1, APOC4 and CLPTM1 were associated with LOAD of all gene information about apolipoprotein E (ApoE), risk.8 In particular, the C allele of SNP rs157581 in provides a pertinent example of the challenges concerning TOMM40 is in strong LD (r240.6) with the C allele of privacy and the complexities of informed consent in the rs429358 in APOE, which defines the e4 allele. -
Synthetic Biology - Mapping the Patent Landscape Paul Oldham 1,2 Stephen Hall 3 1
bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/483826; this version posted November 30, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. Synthetic Biology - Mapping the Patent Landscape Paul Oldham 1,2 Stephen Hall 3 1. Industrial Fellow, Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Alliance Manchester Business School, Manchester University. 2 Senior Visiting Fellow, Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, United Nations University 3. Information System Services, Lancaster University Abstract This article presents the global patent landscape for synthetic biology as a new and emerging area of science and technology. The aim of the article is to provide an overview of the emergence of synthetic biology in the patent system and to contribute to future research by providing a high quality tagged core dataset with 7,424 first filings and 71,887 family members. This dataset is intended to assist with evidence based exploration of synthetic biology in the patent system and with advancing methods for the analysis of new and emerging areas of science and technology. The starting point for the research is recognition that traditional methods of patent landscape analysis based on key word searches face limitations when addressing new and emerging areas of science and technology. Synthetic biology can be broadly described as involving the design, synthesis and assembly of biological parts, circuits, pathways, cells and genomes. As such synthetic biology can be understood as emerging from a combination of overlaps and convergences between existing fields and disciplines, such as biotechnology, genetic engineering, protein engineering and systems biology. -
Scientists Create Cell Based on Man-Made Genetic Instructions
25-5-2010 Scientists create cell based on man-m… Scientists create cell based on man•made genetic instructions By David Brown Friday, M ay 21, 2010; A03 Scientists reported Thursday that they have created a cell controlled entirely by man•made genetic instructions •• the latest step toward creating life from scratch. The achievement is a landmark in the emerging field of "synthetic biology," which aims to control the behavior of organisms by manipulating their genes. Although the ultimate goal of creating artificial organisms is still far off, the experiment points to a future in which microbes could be manufactured with novel functions, such as the ability to digest pollutants or produce fuels. Some ethicists fear that the strategy could also be used to produce biological weapons and other dangerous life forms. In a paper published online by the journal Science, researchers from the J. Craig Venter Institute described using off•the•shelf chemicals and the DNA sequence of Mycoplasma mycoides's genes to make an artificial copy of the bacterium's genome. The scientists then transplanted that genome into the cell of a different (but closely related) microbe. The donor genome reprogrammed the recipient cell, which went on to replicate and divide. The result was new colonies of Mycoplasma mycoides. "We think these are the first synthetic cells that are self• replicating and whose genetic heritage started in the computer. That changes conceptually how I think about life," said J. Craig Venter, 63, who gained fame a decade ago as the co•sequencer of the human genome. His institute has laboratories and offices in Rockville and San Diego. -
Your Scientific Reputation Class Slides
Your Scientific Reputation and Being a Responsible Member of Society Peter D Sottile, MD October 2020 • Silence personal devices. • Stay muted when not talking. • Set up in a quiet location. Housekeeping: Zoom • Remain attentive. Avoid checking Etiquette: email/phone/web. • Use the Chat function to ask questions or get technical help. • Use your full name, not an alias. Receiving credit for attendance: To satisfy the NIH Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research, the following are required in order to receive credit for attendance: Attend the full 90 minutes of the training. Attending any 8 out of the 9 RCR seminars we offer will satisfy the NIH requirement. Keep your video camera on throughout the session. NIH requirements for RCR training specify face- to-face discussion. Participate interactively throughout the session. Participate in discussions, respond to polls, and sign the attendance sheet (link will be distributed in the Chat). Raise your Hand to participate in discussions: In order to participate in discussions, raise your hand. Try it now! • Click “Participants” at the bottom of your screen. • Click “Raise Hand” in the popup window. • Click “Lower Hand” to stop raising your hand. 3 Objectives: • Explain why a good scientific reputation is important in academia • Describe the factors that contribute to a good scientific reputation • Identify the components to being a responsible member of the scientific community • Describe threats that may harm one’s scientific reputation, and responses to challenges -
Annual Scientific Report 2011 Annual Scientific Report 2011 Designed and Produced by Pickeringhutchins Ltd
European Bioinformatics Institute EMBL-EBI Annual Scientific Report 2011 Annual Scientific Report 2011 Designed and Produced by PickeringHutchins Ltd www.pickeringhutchins.com EMBL member states: Austria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom. Associate member state: Australia EMBL-EBI is a part of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) EMBL-EBI EMBL-EBI EMBL-EBI EMBL-European Bioinformatics Institute Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton Cambridge CB10 1SD United Kingdom Tel. +44 (0)1223 494 444, Fax +44 (0)1223 494 468 www.ebi.ac.uk EMBL Heidelberg Meyerhofstraße 1 69117 Heidelberg Germany Tel. +49 (0)6221 3870, Fax +49 (0)6221 387 8306 www.embl.org [email protected] EMBL Grenoble 6, rue Jules Horowitz, BP181 38042 Grenoble, Cedex 9 France Tel. +33 (0)476 20 7269, Fax +33 (0)476 20 2199 EMBL Hamburg c/o DESY Notkestraße 85 22603 Hamburg Germany Tel. +49 (0)4089 902 110, Fax +49 (0)4089 902 149 EMBL Monterotondo Adriano Buzzati-Traverso Campus Via Ramarini, 32 00015 Monterotondo (Rome) Italy Tel. +39 (0)6900 91402, Fax +39 (0)6900 91406 © 2012 EMBL-European Bioinformatics Institute All texts written by EBI-EMBL Group and Team Leaders. This publication was produced by the EBI’s Outreach and Training Programme. Contents Introduction Foreword 2 Major Achievements 2011 4 Services Rolf Apweiler and Ewan Birney: Protein and nucleotide data 10 Guy Cochrane: The European Nucleotide Archive 14 Paul Flicek: