Download Article (PDF)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Download Article (PDF) Biol. Chem., Vol. 380, pp. 109 – 110, February 1999 · Copyright © by Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York Editorial Shoulder Hopping on Giants Before Max Birnstiel moved eastward (and upward – see structure determination of a small parasitic RNA molecule his Guest Editorial) to found the IMP in Vienna, I had the that was replicated in the test tube by bacteriophage Q␤ privilege to work with him in Zürich in his Institute of Mole- replicase, even made it into the Guinness Book of Records cular Biology II. Why II? Because there was also Molecular and helped to alert Max Birnstiel, who had shortly before Biology I, of course. One may wonder why there were, to founded his own Institute of Molecular Biology II, to my begin with, two Institutes of Molecular Biology in our rela- existence. He offered me a group leader position. tively small University. That had to do with two outstanding Equipped from the Weissmann lab with several up-to- scientists who had a great impact on the development date molecular biology techniques, an unquenchable en- of molecular biology in Zürich and far beyond: Charles thusiasm, and countless jokes, I thought that I had finally Weissmann and Max L. Birnstiel. Each one of them was re- captured the essence of successful research. However, cruited back to Switzerland by the renowned Zoologist with Max Birnstiel almost everything was different once Ernst Hadorn, and each one had his own vision of how to again. To begin with, he did not like the jokes. Max was do science – hence the unconventional solution of twin in- also not into any public showdown of wit and eloquence stitutes. Since I had done my diploma with Ernst Hadorn, that would redden your face and hoarsen your voice. the Ph.D. with Charles Weissmann, and later was a group Since Charles’s demanding presence could bring almost leader with Max Birnstiel, I may present here some of my anyone at times to the brink of mental exhaustion, I should recollections of exciting early years in research, which I have been glad to get a change of lifestyle with Max. In- presented in a similar form at the 1997 celebration of 30 stead, I developed serious Molbio-I-withdrawal symp- years of molecular biology in Zürich. toms. Max was so unbelievably quiet (everything being Anyone asking my mother about me in 1970, before I relative, mind you). He liked discussions in his office rather joined Charles Weissmann, would have heard the story of than in public, and often astonished us the next morning a great achiever, having completed studies in Zoology with elegant solutions that had occurred to him at home. with the eminent Professor Hadorn in the minimal time For example, one of the problems of frog oocyte injection with excellent marks. It was to no avail. Once in molecular was that the needle had to be inserted blindly due to the biology, it soon dawned on me that just about everything opacity of the yolk. Max simply introduced a short cen- was going to be different from the idyllic times I had en- trifugation step, after which the nucleus was floating on joyed before. The very first priority was no longer to do sol- the cytoplasm as a pale white spot. Now, even a half-blind id but low-budget research, evident from the seemingly in- beginner was able to inject hundreds of oocytes, giving his finite supply of materials in the stockroom, but to produce lab an edge over others. Furthermore, for Max’s studies of results, even more evident from the different style of the RNA processing, the separation of RNA from nuclei and new boss, who acted in a permanent 100000 Volt show. cytoplasm was a prerequisite but was also a major task. Charles Weissmann made absolutely sure that the tough Max, perhaps while eating his favored Nüsslisalat mit Ei training to follow in his lab started from the beginning. He (salad garnished with boiled egg), just thought of dumping would not tolerate any fault in thought or experiment, and the tube with oocytes into boiling water, which solidified anyone’s weaknesses were exposed pitilessly, be it with both nucleus and cytoplasm, trapping the RNA intact, and scolding or a sarcastic joke. For the latter he could draw hence the subsequent separation of the two compart- from an endless stock to comment on any situation, either ments was a piece of cake. However, I should add that in science or in ordinary life. Max did not boil any oocytes himself; for the realization of My first two thesis projects, one after the other, never his ideas he always relied on skilled collaborators, includ- got anywhere, and I felt so low that I seriously started won- ing, at one time, even Hamilton O. Smith, with whom he dering why the automatic doors at the Hönggerberg Cafe- developed the Smith-Birnstiel technique of restriction site teria would still open for me. But I was determined to go mapping. on, to find new solutions, and with time the excellent In fact, I never saw Max do an experiment, in defiance of scientific environment began to have its impact. My third the myth that a good boss always has to keep his hands on project finally worked out well, namely a novel method for the pipette as much as on his office phone. Like Charles, determining protein in dilute solutions. Though Schaffner- he had a sense for the most worthwhile experiment and Weissmann never toppled the Lowry assay, it filled a niche went for it with the same uncompromising determination. and also allowed me to supply friends and relatives with Besides maintaining a scientific productivity second to the most exotic stamps from the more than 2000 reprint none, Max was a bonvivant with an impressive expertise in requests we received. The fourth project, the primary Bordeaux wines, French cuisine, and cigars. 110 Editorial My initial scepticism turned into unreserved admiration schedl demonstrated that the upstream promoter region (which I tried not to reveal to him). One of the memorable of the H2A gene could be inverted yet retain transcription- events I remember vividly was Max’s introduction of DNA al activity. Our own young group in Molecular Biology II, in- cloning into his lab. He and John Telford had managed to cluding Julian Banerji, Sandro Rusconi, Frank Weber, Di- isolate in pure form five clustered histone genes from a sea dier Picard and Jean de Villiers, followed a different route urchin, which represented the first protein-coding genes by working out transient mammalian cell transfection. In isolated from a multicellular organism, by repeated densi- parallel to others, including Pierre Chambon, we studied ty gradient centrifugation, a method perfected by them. the Simian virus 40 control region and thereby discovered But then, just when it looked like years of undisturbed rich the enhancer effect, i.e., the activation of transcription in harvest would lie ahead of them, DNA cloning arrived on cis over long distances by a segment of DNA termed the scene. Max realized at once the potential of this new- enhancer. We also found, in parallel to Susumu Tonegawa fangled method. Instead of lamenting and indulging in re- and Michael Neuberger, the first cellular, cell type-specific sentment, he called everyone to the coffee room. There he enhancer in the immunoglobulin heavy chain gene locus. disclosed to us that his own centrifugation technique, (The question of how a gene is activated has kept us busy even if it might later be referred to as the classical tech- since then). nique of gene isolation, was about to be superseded by In 1987, Max left Zürich in order to build, from scratch, a gene cloning, and that every effort of the lab had to go into new Institute of Molecular Pathology in Vienna – which adopting and exploiting this new technique. Many of the turned out to be yet another smashing success of his. And early studies on eukaryotic genes were subsequently what happened in Zürich? After turning down an offer from done with cloned histone genes. the Biocenter in Basel, I became Max’ successor and was Max sent me to Fred Sanger in Cambridge, UK, so I able to attract Markus Noll to Molecular Biology II. Re- could familiarize myself with that new DNA sequencing cently, the two Institutes were fused to a single Molecular technique, and later on baited me back from Cold Spring Biology Institute, and Konrad Basler will soon become Harbor Laboratory with an irresistible offer of an assistant Charles Weissmann’s successor. Thus it seems safe to professorship in his institute. After my return from the U.S. say that the two giants have made deep and lasting foot- in 1978, Max gave me all the freedom I needed to follow my prints. own projects, while sparing me from administrative duties. Walter Schaffner While Max and his group mainly used the oocyte injection Institut für Molekularbiologie technique to define Pol III promoters and RNA processing, Universität Zürich-Irchel they also did groundbreaking work on Pol II genes. His- CH-8057 Zürich tone genes, of course; for example, he and Rudi Gros- Switzerland.
Recommended publications
  • Genomic Misconception
    1 Genomic Misconception: A fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. a plea for a process agnostic regulation Klaus Ammann, University of Bern, [email protected] , Neuchâtel, Switzerland December 9, 2012 names. A shorter version has been published in New Biotechnology Ammann, K. (2014), Genomic Misconception: a fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. A plea for a process agnostic regulation, New Biotechnology, 31, 1, pp. 1-17, http://www.ask-force.org/web/NewBiotech/Ammann-Genomic-Misconception-printed-2014.pdf Abstract: .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1. The scientific basis of the process agnostic regulation ................................................................... 2 2. How the Genomic Misconception was evolving ............................................................................. 4 2.1. How the ‘Genomic Misconception’ was erroneously maintained in the European Regulation and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety ....................................................................................... 6 a) Europe, the development of the transatlantic divide with the United States ........................ 6 b) Legislative History of the Cartagena Protocol and its Genomic Misinterpretation of Transgenesis ................................................................................................................................ 8 3. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Steven Henikoff Position
    CURRICULUM VITAE: Steven Henikoff Position: Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Member, Basic Sciences Division Address: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Ave N. Seattle, Washington 98109-1024 Phone (206) 667-4515; FAX (206) 667-5889 E-mail: [email protected] http://blocks.fhcrc.org/~steveh/ Education 1964-68 University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. BS in Chemistry. Research on optical properties of biopolymers, Dr. G. Holzwarth, advisor. 1971-77 Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. PhD in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Dr. M. Meselson, advisor. Thesis: RNA from heat induced puff sites in Drosophila. 1977-80 University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Postdoctoral fellow in Zoology. Research on position-effect variegation in Drosophila, Dr. C. Laird, advisor, Leukemia Society of America fellow. Professional Experience 1981-85 Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Assistant Member in Basic Sciences. 1981- University of Washington, Seattle. Affiliate Assistant, Associate and Full Professor of Genetics/Genome Sciences. 1985-88 Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Associate Member in Basic Sciences. 1988- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Member in Basic Sciences. 1990- Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Current Research Nucleosome dynamics Transcriptional regulation Centromeric chromatin and centromere evolution Epigenomic technologies Honors (since 2000) 2001 Keynote, 13th International Arabidopsis Conference,
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Biology Using Purified Genes
    LASKER~KOSHLAND SPECIAL ACHIEVEMENT ESSAY IN MEDICAL SCIENCE AWARD Developmental biology using purified genes Donald D Brown Some history Control Anucleolate Magnesium From the NIH I went to the Pasteur Institute mutant deficient After three years of college I entered the in Paris to study bacterial gene regulation in University of Chicago Medical School in the 1959, the year after the Lac repressor had been fall of 1952 and discovered biochemistry and discovered. Before leaving Bethesda, by the research. Lloyd Kozloff, a member of the greatest luck I learned about a small research bacteriophage group in the Department of institution in Baltimore that was associated Biochemistry, guided my research. While in at that time with the Johns Hopkins Medical medical school I began searching for a future School called the Department of Embryology of research subject, thinking it should be an the Carnegie Institution of Washington. I con- important medically related problem but unex- tacted Jim Ebert, the director, and arranged an plored by what were then the modern methods advanced postdoctoral fellowship after my year of biochemistry. in Paris. It is hard to imagine two more diverse The field of embryology, newly named research institutions. ‘developmental biology’, caught my attention. The Pasteur Institute was at the forefront of Reproductive biology was barely discussed, biology, involved in the founding of molecular and descriptive embryology was taught in two biology. Every day at lunch Jacques Monod, lectures as a part of gross anatomy. In 1953, I François Jacob and André Lwoff presided attended a biochemistry journal club discus- over an exciting discussion usually augmented Figure 1 Comparison of control (left), anucleolate sion of the Watson-Crick Nature paper describ- by a prominent visitor.
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancers, Enhancers – from Their Discovery to Today’S Universe of Transcription Enhancers
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by RERO DOC Digital Library Biol. Chem. 2015; 396(4): 311–327 Review Walter Schaffner* Enhancers, enhancers – from their discovery to today’s universe of transcription enhancers Abstract: Transcriptional enhancers are short (200–1500 one had ever postulated their existence, simply because base pairs) DNA segments that are able to dramatically there seemed to be no need for them. Now that introns boost transcription from the promoter of a target gene. and enhancers are part of the scientific world, one cannot Originally discovered in simian virus 40 (SV40), a small imagine how higher forms of life could ever have evolved DNA virus, transcription enhancers were soon also found without the multitude of tailored proteins that can be in immunoglobulin genes and other cellular genes as produced by alternative splicing, or without the sophisti- key determinants of cell-type-specific gene expression. cated patterns of remote transcription control by enhanc- Enhancers can exert their effect over long distances of ers. Indeed, the complexity of an organism is primarily thousands, even hundreds of thousands of base pairs, determined by the variety of gene regulation mechanisms, either from upstream, downstream, or from within a tran- rather than by the number of genes. scription unit. The number of enhancers in eukaryotic genomes correlates with the complexity of the organism; a typical mammalian gene is likely controlled by several enhancers to fine-tune its expression at different devel- The holy grail opmental stages, in different cell types and in response In the fall of 1978, I returned to Zurich University from to different signaling cues.
    [Show full text]
  • Steven Henikoff Position
    CURRICULUM VITAE: Steven Henikoff Position: Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Member, Basic Sciences Division Address: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Ave N. Seattle, Washington 98109-1024 Phone (206) 667-4515; FAX (206) 667-5889 E-mail: [email protected] http://research.fhcrc.org/henikoff/en.html Education 1964-68 UniversitY of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. BS in ChemistrY. Research on optical properties of biopolymers, Dr. G. Holzwarth, advisor. 1971-77 Harvard UniversitY, Cambridge, Massachusetts. PhD in BiochemistrY and Molecular BiologY. Dr. M. Meselson, advisor. Thesis: RNA from heat induced puff sites in Drosophila. 1977-80 UniversitY of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Postdoctoral fellow in Zoology. Research on position-effect variegation in Drosophila, Dr. C. Laird, advisor, Leukemia SocietY of America fellow. Professional Experience 1981-85 Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Assistant Member in Basic Sciences. 1981- UniversitY of Washington, Seattle. Affiliate Assistant, Associate and Full Professor of Genetics/Genome Sciences. 1985-88 Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Associate Member in Basic Sciences. 1988- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. Member in Basic Sciences. 1990- Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Current Research Nucleosome dYnamics Transcriptional regulation Centromeric chromatin and centromere evolution Epigenomic technologies Ongoing Funding Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator 04/1/1990
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Methylation Patterns and Cancer
    restriction/modification system, which brought Werner Arber, Daniel Nathans and Hamilton Smith the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, and made restriction enzymes the primary tools of Charles Rodolphe Brupbacher Foundation molecular biology. Four decades have passed since then, but the role of 5-methylcytosine in eukaryotic DNA metabolism is still shrouded in mystery. We know that the sperm methylation pattern is largely The erased after fertilization and that methylation is gradually reintroduced Charles Rodolphe Brupbacher Prize during embryogenesis and differentiation, but the processes that for Cancer Research 2017 regulate the cell type- and tissue-specific methylation patterns remain is awarded to to be elucidated. We have also learned that DNA can be not only methylated, but also demethylated, and that aberrant methylation can lead to disease - including cancer. Again, how these processes are regulated remains to be discovered. However, we have learnt a great Sir Adrian Peter Bird, deal about 5-methylcytosine metabolism during the past three decades and much of our knowledge came from the laboratory of Adrian Bird. PhD Adrian spent his doctoral and postdoctoral time in Max Birnstiel’s for his contributions to our understanding laboratory, first in Edinburgh and then in Zurich, studying the amplification of ribosomal DNA in Xenopus laevis. In this organism, of the role of DNA methylation in genomic rDNA in somatic tissues is highly methylated, while the development and disease extrachromosomal amplicons are unmethylated. When he returned to Edinburgh to establish his own group, Adrian set out to study The President The President of the Foundation of the Scientific Advisory Board the methylation pattern of these loci using the newly-available methylation-sensitive restriction enzymes.
    [Show full text]
  • A1983qz35500002
    — — — CC/NUMBER 31 This Week’s Citation Classic AUGUST 1,1983 [irown I) D & Dawld I B. Specific gene amplification in oocytes. I Science 160:272-80, 1968. IDepartment of Embryology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Baltimore, MD) The genes for 18S and 28S ribosomal RNA are “An international meeting on the nucleo- amplified specifically in oocyte nuclei of amphib- lus was held in Montevideo, Uruguay, in iarss forming more than a thousand nucleoli in each nucleus. These extra genes support enormous 1965. Without a doubt, the highlight of that rates of ribosomal RNA synthesis during meeting was Birnstiel’s demonstration of oogenesis. [The SCI® indicates that this paper has how he had used physicochemical tech4- been cited in over 530 publications since 1968.1 niques to isolate the ribosomal RNA genes. At that conference I heard Oscar Miller, then a staff member at the Oak Ridge Labo- Donald D. Brown ratories, describe the presence of circular chromosomes in the many nucleoli of frog Department of Embryology 5 Carnegie Institution of Washington oocyte nuclei. I knew instantly from the Baltimore, MD 21210 previous correlations of ribosomal RNA genes and the nucleolus that these must be July 7, 1983 extra copies of ribosomal RNA genes. lgor Dawid, a fellow staff member at Carnegie, “This paper and one published indepen1 - and I set out to prove this idea. dently at the same time by Joseph Gall “A key experiment described in our Sci- were the first to demonstrate specific gene ence paper depended upon the isolation by amplification — an event programmed into hand of ten thousand nuclei from Xenopus the development of a cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Career Jump for Professor Kim Nasmyth
    Press Release March 24th, 2004 Career jump for Professor Kim Nasmyth Prof. Kim Nasmyth, Director of the IMP Vienna, Boehringer Ingelheim’s Basic Research Institute, to take up prestigious Oxford Chair. The Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP) which belongs to the international pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim has already served as starting point or stepping stone for several internationally outstanding scientific careers. Now a call from one of the best Universities in Europe has reached IMP Director Kim Nasmyth. In January 2006 he will take over the Whitley Chair of Biochemistry at the University of Oxford from Edwin Southern. One year later he will follow Raymond Dwek as Head of the Department of Biochemistry. He will then lead one of the largest departments of Biochemistry in the western world with approximately 850 employees and students. The Whitley Chair has an excellent reputation: founded in 1920, the position has been held by a succession of outstanding scientists, including Nobel laureates Hans Krebs and Rodney Porter. “The appointment certainly honours me personally but is also proof of the IMP’s excellent reputation in the scientific world” says Nasmyth. Prof. Kim Nasmyth Director of the Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP) (Foto: IMP). Dr. Dr. Andreas Barner – vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of Boehringer Ingelheim and responsible for the corporate divisions Pharma Research, Development and Medicine, sees Prof. Nasmyth’s appointment as confirmation of the internationally- recognised outstanding research performed at the IMP: “The Research Institute of Molecular Pathology is a major contribution from Boehringer Ingelheim to basic research at the highest level and has achieved world renown with outstanding scientists working there under Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nucleolus
    Downloaded from http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/ on September 30, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press The Nucleolus Thoru Pederson Program in Cell and Developmental Dynamics, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts 01605 Correspondence: [email protected] When cells are observed by phase contrast microscopy, nucleoli are among the most conspicuous structures. The nucleolus was formally described between 1835 and 1839, but it was another century before it was discovered to be associated with a specific chromo- somal locus, thus defining it as a cytogenetic entity. Nucleoli were first isolated in the 1950s, from starfish oocytes. Then, in the early 1960s, a boomlet of studies led to one of the epochal discoveries in the modern era of genetics and cell biology: that the nucleolus is the site of ribosomal RNA synthesis and nascent ribosome assembly. This epistemologically reposi- tioned the nucleolus as not merely an aspect of nuclear anatomy but rather as a cytological manifestation of gene action—a major heuristic advance. Indeed, the finding that the nucle- olus is the seat of ribosome production constitutes one of the most vivid confluences of form and function in the history of cell biology. This account presents the nucleolus in both histori- cal and contemporary perspectives. The modern era has brought the unanticipated discovery that the nucleolus is plurifunctional, constituting a paradigm shift. FIRST SIGHTING a monumental monograph on the nucleolus was published by Montgomery (1898), with an as- t is likely that some of the few lucky enough to tonishing 346 hand-drawn color figures of nuclei Ihave a microscope in the 18th century saw the and nucleoli from avast array of biological mate- nucleolus if they examined thin specimens of rial.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 IMP Research Report
    RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY VIENNA BIOCENTER 2012 CONTENTS Introduction ..............................................................................2 The reluctant heretic..............................................................4 Working together, even at a distance ..............................6 ReseArcH GroUPS Meinrad Busslinger .................................................................8 Tim Clausen ............................................................................ 10 Carrie Cowan ...........................................................................12 Barry Dickson ......................................................................... 14 Christine Hartmann ............................................................. 16 Wulf Haubensak .................................................................... 18 Katrin Heinze .......................................................................... 20 David Keays .............................................................................22 Krystyna Keleman ................................................................. 24 Thomas Marlovits ................................................................. 26 Jan-Michael Peters ............................................................... 28 Simon Rumpel .......................................................................30 Alexander Stark ..................................................................... 32 Andrew Straw .........................................................................34
    [Show full text]
  • Genetics in the United Kingdom — the Last Half-Century
    Heredity7l (1993) 111—118 Genetical Society of Great Britain Genetics in the United Kingdom — The Last Half-Century J. R. S. FINCHAM Thisyear's 16th International Congress of Genetics in Birmingham is the first to be held in the United Kingdom since the 7th (Edinburgh) Congress in 1939, just before the outbreak of war. This historical essay is an attempt to chart the most important developments in U.K. genetics between these two Congresses or, more precisely, during the post-war period. I have tried to identify the institutions and schools that have had the greatest influence on the growth of our subject, and to trace the connections between them. I must to some extent be biased by my own partial view of the field, and I apologize for any serious omissions. University, and establishing the fungus Aspergillus The early post-war scene nidulans as a model microbial eukaryote for genetic In1945therewere only a few centres in the U.K. for studies. The Cambridge University Botany School was teaching and research in genetics. There was the John another growth point for fungal genetics; Harold Innes Horticultural Institution (now the John Innes Whitehouse had already completed his Ph.D. work on Institute), then located in Merton, South London, with Neurospora sitophila and David Catcheside was about C.D. Darlington as Director. There were three institu- to import Neurospora crassa from CalTech. In R. A. tions concerned with plant breeding: the Plant Breed- Fisher's Genetics Department, L. L. Cavalli-Sforza was ing Institute in Cambridge and the Welsh and Scottish starting the work on the genetics of E.
    [Show full text]
  • Interview with Adrian Bird.Pdf
    Interview with Adrian Bird University of Edinburgh, May 28, 2018 Adrian Bird is a molecular biologist focusing on the biology of the genome and genomic regulation. He graduated in biochemistry from the University of Sussex and obtained his PhD at Edinburgh University. Following postdoctoral experience at Yale University and the University of Zurich, he joined the Medical Research Council's Mammalian Genome Unit in Edinburgh. In 1987 he moved to Vienna to become a Senior Scientist at the Institute for Molecular Pathology. Since 1990, he holds the Buchanan Chair of Genetics at the University of Edinburgh. Adrian Bird and his working group identified CpG islands in the vertebrate genome, i.e. genomic DNA that is full of CpG sequences that are not methylated and that became understood to be near promoters. He discovered proteins that read the DNA methylation signal to influence chromatin structure. Mutations in one of these proteins, MeCP2, cause the neurological disorder Rett syndrome, and he discovered that the resulting severe neurological phenotype is reversible. Early career; research on gene amplification and methylation in Xenopus UD: I understand that you graduated in biochemistry and later became a molecular biologist dealing with RNA. In the early 1970s, when you were a post-doc with Max Birnstiel at Zurich, you worked on ribosomal RNA genes and started to work on DNA methylation. That was at the same time that Aharon Razin worked on methylation in bacteria. Which organisms or cells were you working on when you started to work on methylation? AB: I was working on frogs – Xenopus laevis – which is a South African clawed frog.
    [Show full text]