2013 Faseb Science Research Conferences Advisory Committee Meeting

Proposal #: 15-19

2013 FASEB SCIENCE RESEARCH CONFERENCES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

TOPIC FOR CONSIDERATION

TOPIC NAME: MITOSIS: SPINDLE ASSEMBLY AND FUNCTION

PREVIOUS TITLE: Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function

SUBMITTED BY: Erich Nigg, Biozentrum der Universitat Basel Rebecca Heald, University of California-Berkeley

YEAR REQUESTED FOR 2015 SCHEDULING:

SITE REQUESTS: 1. Portugal 2. Nassau, Bahamas 3. Big Sky, MT

DATE REQUESTS: 1. June 21-27, 2015 2. June 28-July 3, 2015 3. September 6-12, 2015

YEAR(S) CONFERENCE 2007, 2009, 2012 HAS BEEN HELD:

NOTES: Avoid mid-to-late June dates if Gordon Conferences has similar conferences at that time.

FASEB SRC Proposal Instructions

Attached are the instructions and requirements for submitting a FASEB SRC proposal. Please complete sections 1-6 before submitting your information. Please submit your proposal by September 23, 2013 in order to be considered for the 2015 SRC Series.

Proposals will be reviewed by the FASEB Science Research Conference Advisory Committee in mid November. Shortly thereafter, you will receive a letter with the committee’s decision on your submitted proposal. By the end of January 2014 you will receive a second letter which will indicate the location and date for your conference as well as the name of your assigned Conference Manager. Once your conference is approved, your conference manager will schedule a kick-off conference call to discuss timelines, expectations, instructions on fund raising, and program management to help make your organization process successful.

Section 1: Organizer Responsibilities

By submitting a FASEB Science Research Conference proposal for consideration by the FASEB SRC Advisory Committee, the organizer(s) accepts the responsibility for producing a successful conference. These responsibilities include:

1. Anything related to the scientific portion of your conference. You will need to provide the Conference title and topics. The Conference title and topics should be timely and attractive.

2. Organizers must assist in recruiting no less than 100 participants to the conference.

3. All fundraising efforts are the responsibility of the organizers with support and guidance by the FASEB SRC Staff. FASEB will provide $10,000 for each conference to help defray a portion of travel and registration costs for speakers.

4. Organizers are responsible for contacting all speakers and session chairs and inviting and confirming their participation. Speakers should be informed that their expenses will be reimbursed after the conference and only to the extent that funds are available. We recommend you do not commitment to a speaker a specific amount of funds prior to the Conference. (Note: Invited speakers and session chairs are required to remain at the Conference for a minimum of three full days and three full nights in order to be eligible for reimbursement of any Conference related expenses.)

5. Organizers must include a “Meet the Expert” session in the program. This session is aimed at encouraging the younger investigators an opportunity to network with the more established and senior PIs in your field. This session can be scheduled during meals or at poster sessions.

6. Organizers must provide conference agenda for posting online.

7. Organizers must provide a final conference agenda. It is the organizers’ responsibility to provide the speaker abstracts (in presentation order), poster abstracts, and a poster listing of the submitted abstracts. The Conference Manager will prepare the cover for the program, the participant list and have the final packet of materials reproduced and shipped to the venue.

8. Organizers must provide conference agenda for posting online.

9. Organizers will participate in periodic discussions with their assigned Conference Manager. By doing so, this will eliminate any miscommunication or understanding of the policies and procedures that will needed to be followed.

Section 2: Conference Title & Organizer Information:

Please insert the title of the Conference as you would like it to be advertised in future publications. List the organizing committee below and complete contact information and attach a brief CVs (maximum 3 pages) in NIH format for each.

TITLE OF CONFERENCE:

# of EXPECTED ATTENDEES:

Preferred Primary Point of Contact for Proposal Questions:

Name:

Full Address:

Telephone #: Email Address:

Science Categories (select up to 3)

1) 2) 3) (see Attachment A - for marketing and audience generation purposes)

Organizing Committee: Organizer Chair: ______Title: ______Affiliation: ______Full Address: ______Phone: ______Email: ______

Organizer Co-Chair ______Title: ______Affiliation: ______Full Address: ______Phone: ______Email: ______

Committee member: ______Title: ______Affiliation: ______Full Address: ______Phone: ______Email: ______

Section 3: Program Submission Requirements & Outline:

Please insert program details in day order as requested below. Session titles should be listed with session chairs and affiliations. Indicate the proposed tentative talk titles within each session and list up to at least 4 speakers per session (not including short talks selected from submitted abstracts). Please remember to also include the required “Meet the Expert” session.

The FASEB SRC Advisory Committee requires all session chairs to be confirmed before the submission of the application. Be sure to indicate with a "C" if the session chair is confirmed, indicate with a “CS” if the speaker is confirmed, indicate with a "W" which session chairs and speakers are women, indicate with an "M" which session chairs and speakers are of a minority group and indicate with the word “NEW” which session chairs and speakers are new to the program. (Note: The committee defines new speakers as one that has NOT spoken at the last two (2) Conferences.)

Overview of Program Flow

# of Days:

# of Sessions per day:

# of Speaker per day:

# of Session chairs per day:

# of Breakouts per day:

# of Abstracts per day:

SUNDAY To include: Conference Registration 4 p.m. – 9 p.m., FASEB SRC Welcome Reception 5 p.m. – 6 p.m., Dinner 6 p.m. – 7 p.m.

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

MONDAY To include: Group photo during morning break

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

TUESDAY

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

WEDNESDAY

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

THURSDAY To include: Group activity 1 p.m. – 5 p.m. (optional)

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

Possible Group Activity:______

FRIDAY Option 1: Half-day session, departures at 12 p.m. w/box lunch Option 2: Breakfast, departures at 9 a.m.

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Additional Session Titles (if applicable):

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Title of Session: ______Session Chair & Affiliation:______

Speaker 1: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 2: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 3: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Speaker 4: ______Affiliation: ______Tentative Title of Talk: ______

Number of short talks selected from abstracts: _____

End of Conference

Section 4: Content Assessment:

Please complete the grid below which will assist the FASEB SRC Advisory Committee in assessing the requirements of the proposal. Positive reviews are given to proposals with confirmation of session chairs and invited speakers, new speakers to the program, a good representation of women, and a sufficient number of short talks from junior level investigators.

Indicate the number of session chairs that have confirmed their participation: Indicated the number of women included with the entire program: Indicate the number of session chairs/speakers of a minority group: Indicate the number of new speakers to the Conference: Indicate the number of speakers that have confirmed their participation in the Conference: Indicated the number of talks set aside for junior level investigators to present their work: Indicated the number of poster sessions that will be organized:

Please provide a brief description of the how the poster sessions will be organized:

Indicate (if known) if there is a potential of a conflict with any other FASEB SRC or any other society or industry meeting. If yes, please explain the conflict in detail.

Section 5: Scheduling & Location Preferences:

Select three (3) choices of dates that you wish to hold the Conference. Define the pattern flow, start date, and end date of your Conference

Week 1: ______Week 2: ______Week 3: ______

Select at least three (3) cities/venues for consideration. Venue #1 should be the most preferred. (Note: We will do our best to give you your first choice but it cannot be guaranteed).

Please mark the type of facility you would like to host the program.

Hotel Conference Center University, Academic Setting (summer only)

Cities/venues Preference 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

TRADITIONAL VENUES: Big Sky, MT Chicago, IL Saxtons River, VT (University setting) Snowmass, CO Steamboat Springs, CO Nassau, Bahamas (passport required, government funding may be limited)

NEW: Keystone, CO Liverpool, England (passport required, government funding may be limited) Palm Beach, FL Palm Springs, CA Reno/Las Vegas, NV

Locations are contingent upon group interest. Every effort will be given to the Organizer’s choice of venue and date choice. Due to limited availability and scheduling site and date preferences are not guaranteed.

For each conference year, a minimum of four (4) conference proposals should have interest in a potential venue in order for that venue to be used as a conference location.

Section 6: Justification:

The SRC Advisory Committee requires all proposals to include answers to the following nine (9) questions. In a separate Microsoft Word document, answer each individual question accordingly. Once completed, name the document the title of your Conference and attach this file to your email when submitting the final proposal.

1. Explain why this topic is of high current interest to the scientific community.

2. Is this a rapidly growing field?

3. Have there been previous Conferences of this topic? If so, where and when were the Conferences held? How many participants attended? (Additionally, consider whether or not another similar Conference /meeting is scheduled that might cause a conflict).

4. How many participants do you expect to attend the Conference?

5. What is the percentage of women have participated in this Conference in the past (if it has been previously held)?

6. How will you recruit young investigators to attend and participate in the Conference?

7. How will you recruit and select new speakers?

8. Who will attend the Conference? (Provide specifics).

9. Where will the Conference be advertised? What types of media will be used to advertise your Conference? (Provide specifics).

Section 7: Submitting Your Proposal:

Please read the directions below for submitting your proposal. Feel free to contact the SRC Office should you have any questions or need guidance in submitting your proposal.

Instructions for submitting your proposal:

1. Print or save a copy of this form for your own records. 2. Email Robin Crawford, CMP at [email protected]. 3. Enter the title of your Conference and the year of the conference in the subject line. 4. Attach the following items to your e-mail: • The file with the answers to the nine questions in Section 6: Justification • CVs (in NIH Format) for all Organizers and Co-Organizers (maximum of 3 pages).

Thank you in advance for your proposal submission! We look forward to helping you plan a successful Conference.

For more information, please contact:

Marcella Jackson, Director, Office of Meetings and Conferences 301-634-7010, [email protected]

Robin Crawford, Conference Manager, FASEB Science Research Conferences 301-634-7093, [email protected]

Kristen Hagy, CMP, Conference Manager, FASEB Science Research Conferences 301-634-7094, [email protected]

Trina Eacho, Conference Coordinator, FASEB Science Research Conferences 301-634-7206, [email protected]

Clay Pencek, Administrative Assistant, FASEB Science Research Conferences 301-634-7018, [email protected]

SECTION 6: JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain why this topic is of high current interest to the scientific community?

At the 2012 FASEB meeting on “Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function” there was unanimous agreement to hold another meeting in 2015, so we have strong perceived need in the community to continue this major conference on mitosis. This research area in fact continues to undergo rapid evolution, thanks to both conceptual advances (impact of systems biology and quantitative biology) and revolutions in technology (e.g. super-resolution imaging and mass spectrometry).

The development, growth and health of all living organisms require the ability of cells to reproduce and partition both their genomes (chromosomes) and organelles. Whilst cell division is intimately coupled to reproduction in unicellular organisms, division in complex multicellular organisms is required not only to produce the cells essential for the production of gametes and the development and growth of the organism, but also to replace cells as they die. The process of cell division, or MITOSIS, has been a major research interest of biomedical scientists since its initial description in the late 19th century.

For an adult human being, it has been estimated that - throughout life - millions of cells are dividing every second. Hence, mitosis represents a truly essential process. Chromosome segregation and cell division depend on a complex and dynamic structure, the MITOTIC SPINDLE, the assembly and function of which in turn requires exquisite regulation in time and space. Mitosis is traditionally subdivided into various sub-stages and processes that proceed sequentially (or sometimes concurrently) to segregate the chromosomes, partition cellular organelles and divide the cytoplasm. It is not surprising, therefore, that mitosis attracts scholars from a diverse range of disciplines. Research into mitosis involves technologies ranging from high-resolution 3D structural work on specific proteins and organelles involved in spindle function and mitotic progression, to live cell imaging of multiple spindle proteins tagged with fluorescent probes, to laser microsurgery of genetically engineered cells, to mathematical models. A popular saying in the community is that every basic biomedical scientist active in research will ultimately publish at least one paper during her/his career that deals with mitosis— simply because mitosis impacts every biomedical research discipline.

The topic of mitosis is of great interest to many scientists engaged in basic research, either because they are fascinated by the beauty of the process and/or because they are attracted by its fundamental importance to all life on our planet. Furthermore, understanding mitosis is also of great interest from a biomedical and clinical perspective. Problems with chromosome segregation during mitosis (or the related process of meiosis, i.e. the divisions leading to gametes) have long been recognized to cause the production of cells with aberrant chromosome complements (i.e. altered genetic configurations). This so-called “aneuploidy” is responsible for most spontaneous abortions in humans, and it is responsible also for syndromes known as Down’s, Turner’s and Kleinfelter’s. Additionally, aneuploidy is a hallmark of tumor cells and it is increasingly recognized that errors in mitosis represent a major mechanism underlying the chromosomal instability that characterizes most aggressive human tumors. From the clinical perspective, it is noteworthy that many commonly used anti-cancer drugs target mitotic processes; as a consequence, both biotech companies and the pharmaceutical industry show a considerable interest in developing new drugs that selectively disrupt cell division. Thus, there is strong confidence in the community that a better understanding of the complex process of mitosis will pave the way for the development of additional, clinically relevant applications.

Page | 2 Mitotic progression, notably spindle formation and function, involves a large number of cellular components that also play critical roles in other processes. These include enzymes (e.g. kinases/phosphatases) and regulatory pathways as well as structures (e.g. microtubules and centrosomes). Thus, many of the discoveries that stem from the study of mitotic processes (e.g. on microtubule dynamics) impact also on other research areas, ranging from developmental biology and neurobiology to nanobiology.

Advances in mitosis research continue to occur at amazing speed. Thus, there is a real need to continue to provide a meaningful venue for exchanging information among the various subfields that collectively define mitosis research. Much progress has notably been made in our understanding of microtubule dynamics, the wiring of the spindle assembly checkpoint, as well as the assembly, composition, function and regulation of kinetochores and centrosomes. Furthermore, computational approaches and quantitative measurements are becoming increasingly common in mitosis research. Thus, it is increasingly important to bring scientists from different disciplines together, thereby providing opportunities for exchange of information across the various sub-fields.

2. Is this a rapidly growing field?

Until the end of the 1960’s, research on mitosis, i.e. the questions of how the replicated chromosomes are equally segregated and how the cytoplasm is partitioned during cell division, was largely descriptive. Then, with the development of new technologies - notably protein isolation and immunolocalization - first glimpses relevant to a mechanistic understanding were obtained in the mid 1970’s and early 1980’s. Subsequently, progress has accelerated with the widespread use of GFP imaging and the refinement of video enhanced light microscopy. The pace of discovery was fuelled further by the completion of genome sequences for an ever increasing number of species, the increasing power of proteomics approaches, as well as the advent of RNA interference technologies and their use in genome-wide screens. Collectively, these developments ensure a rapid and impressive acceleration in the acquisition of data that are relevant to our understanding of mitosis. However, they also carry the inherent danger of an artificial fragmentation of knowledge. Whilst mitosis clearly constitutes an integrated (albeit complex) process, it is increasingly difficult for individual researchers and laboratories to keep track of the big picture. Thus, whilst most individual researchers traditionally focused on specific aspects of mitosis (e.g. individual spindle components such as motor proteins or kinases, or single events such as spindle assembly, checkpoint signaling, or kinetochore-microtubule interaction), it is increasingly important to introduce systems-level understanding into this field. Hence, the proposed meeting will not only be beneficial to the field by bringing together researchers from of its many sub-disciplines, but it will also emphasize the power of systems biology approaches for studying mitosis.

That this field attracts many researches and continues to grow rapidly can easily be documented by conducting simple literature searches in PubMed. For example, a search for “mitosis” produces 60,856 publications (in August 2013) and this number does not generally include work on the sub-structures that are relevant to mitosis (e.g., centrosomes, kinetochores, microtubules) and the sub-processes (e.g. nuclear envelope breakdown, chromatid disjunction, the spindle assembly checkpoint and cytokinesis) that define mitotic progression. Furthermore, the key term “cell division” produces 409,636 papers (August 2013), up from 359,271 in August 2010 and 214,708 in August of 2007, a near doubling in 6 years !

A periodic meeting on the topic of mitosis is crucial, as this provides a consistent forum for the exchange of ideas across the various sub-disciplines that are relevant to this fundamental

Page | 3 process. It is also important in providing a venue for both students and post-docs to meet leading experts in this rapidly expanding field.

3. Have there been previous conferences of this topic? If so, where and when were the conferences held? How many participants attended? (Additionally, consider whether or not another similar conference / meeting is scheduled that might cause a conflict).

The first FASEB meeting on “Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function” was held in 2007 at Indian Wells, CA. This was followed by a second conference held in 2009 at Il Ciocco (Italy) and a third at Steamboat Springs CO in 2012. Feedback from all these prior meetings was excellent. There are no major comprehensive meetings that would attract the same community as the three FASEB Conferences on “Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function”, that were held in 2007, 2009, and 2012. However, we are aware of sporadic meetings on related sub-topics, for example two meetings on “Aneuploidy and Chromosomal Instability” (CNIO Frontier meeting, Madrid; EMBO workshop, Breukelen, The Netherlands), as well as two meetings on “Centrosomes and spindle pole bodies” (Sussex, UK, 2013; Barcelona 2013). We do not know of any other meeting that focuses on “spindle assembly and function” that is planned for the near future.

4. How many participants do you expect to attend the Conference?

We expect some 120 – 150 individuals for the 2015 conference. In the past, this meeting has often been oversubscribed and attracted up to 175 people; however, considering the current economic climate in many countries we consider it prudent to plan on a somewhat reduced attendance.

5. What is the percentage of women have participated in this Conference in the past (if it has been previously held)?

The percentage of women amongst the participants has been ~45% for both the 2009 and 2012 meetings.

6. How will you recruit young investigators to attend and participate in the Conference?

The meeting organizers have worked for decades in the field of mitosis, and they are networked worldwide with labs working in this field. Having organized successful meetings in the past, we are confident that we have a pretty good understanding of what is required to recruit young scientists to the next FASEB SRC meeting on this topic. In all three previous meetings, approximately half the attendees were graduate students and/or post-doctoral level individuals, and we anticipate that the same will hold true for the 2015 meeting. As in previous years, we will widely advertise the meeting and ask the heads of labs to encourage and support attendance by young investigators. The meeting organizers and chairs will also actively recruit young scientists to the 2015 FASEB meeting during the numerous seminars they present on an annual basis, including at the ASCB and EMBO conferences. We will raise funds to help defray meeting costs for young investigators and present them with travel awards. Young and new investigators will also have an opportunity of being selected for platform talks by session chairs.

7. How will you recruit and select new speakers?

The organizers will work closely with the session chairs, all of whom are prominent in the field, to function as a group to ensure that active and rising scientists are chosen for the various sessions. Our recruitment focus will be on women, minorities and young investigators. All of the Page | 4 younger (Assistant Professor Level) speakers listed on the tentative program have already accepted our invitation. Of the 36 individuals that have already committed to attend the 2015 meeting as speakers, 20 had not been invited speakers at either of the two last editions of this meeting.

8. Who will attend the Conference? (Provide specifics).

This meeting will attract researchers from throughout the world, with the largest numbers coming from North America (USA & Canada), Europe, and Asia. Participants will be drawn from the various biomedical societies and disciplines that have historically impacted the field of mitosis including cancer, development, cell and molecular, biochemistry, biophysics, protein structure, chemical biology and pharmacology. Societies include, but are not limited to, the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, the American Society for Cell Biology, the Biophysics Society, the Microscopy Society of America, the American Society for Cancer Research, the Society for Developmental Biology, the Endocrine Society, American Society for Physiology, EMBO, etc.

9. Where will you advertise the conference? What types of media will you use to advertise your conference? (Provide specifics).

This meeting will be advertised as part of the FASEB meeting announcements in Science and in the FASEB Journal. If funds allow, we will also place ads in several widely-read publications, including Science and Nature. From our past experience in organizing meetings, chairing sessions, as well as extensive Editorial activities, we collectively command an extensive e-mail list of colleagues involved in all aspects of mitosis research, and this database will be used to advertise the meeting by e-mail. We will also promote our meeting at national and international meetings, and we will encourage (and expect) our invited chairs and speakers to actively promote the meeting in their institutions, societies and countries. As in the past, word of mouth will also play an important role in communication and we are confident in our ability to call attention to the meeting.

As for the first three meetings, we will invite the editors of several relevant and high-impact journals (Nature Cell Biology, Cell, PLOS, J. Cell Biology, J. Biological Chemistry, FASEB, etc) to attend the meeting. We will also invite relevant NIH and NSF administrators, particularly SRAs involved in the field of mitosis, to attend the meeting.

10. Are you planning on submitting a similar application to another organization for additional funding and sponsorship? If yes, please clarify.

We are confident that we can raise funds both from previous sources as well as from new contributors. Depending on the location that is assigned to this meeting, we plan to submit applications to NIH/NSF and/or EMBO. In addition, we will solicit funds from Pharmaceutical firms, Equipment manufacturers and vendors (such as Nikon, Zeiss, Applied Precision, etc), as well as publishers (Wiley Liss, Academic Press, Company of Biologists, etc), foundations and private benefactors. For the 2009 and 2012 meetings we successfully raised some $50,000 each. The breadth of tools and techniques noted above which underpin the work presented in the meeting translates to a wide number of technology and consumable vendors that will be solicited and who will see the marketing value in supporting the meeting. FASEB’s range of sponsorship levels means that we can tailor requests to different types of commercial organizations. Although the economic situation continues to be difficult, the range of opportunities has in fact increased, so we will seek to raise again a minimum of $50,000 and,

Page | 5 MITOSIS: SPINDLE ASSEMBLY AND FUNCTION Erich Nigg (chair) Rebecca Heald (co-chair)

Section 6: Addendum questions

11. What sources and resources will you use to solicit funds for the conference? (provide specifics)

We are confident that we can raise funds both from previous sources as well as from new contributors. We will solicit funds from the NIH, NSF, Pharmaceutical firms, Equipment manufacturers and vendors (such as Nikon, Zeiss, Applied Precision, etc), as well as publishers (Wiley Liss, Academic Press, Company of Biologists, etc), foundations and private benefactors. For the 2009 and 2012 meetings we successfully raised some $50,000 each. The breadth of tools and techniques noted above which underpin the work presented in the meeting translates to a wide number of technology and consumable vendors that will be solicited and who will see the marketing value in supporting the meeting. FASEB’s range of sponsorship levels means that we can tailor requests to different types of commercial organizations. Although the economic situation continues to be difficult, the range of opportunities has in fact increased, so we will seek to raise again a minimum of $50,000 and, ideally, $70,000. Our fund-raising committee is already organized and has discussed the meeting with different vendors.

12. What societies and disciplines will you attract to attend the conference? (provide specifics)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Provide the following information for the key personnel and other significant contributors in the order listed on Form Page 2. Follow this format for each person. DO NOT EXCEED FOUR PAGES.

NAME POSITION TITLE Erich A. Nigg, Ph.D. Director and Professor of Cell Biology eRA COMMONS USER NAME Biozentrum, Basel, Switzerland

EDUCATION/TRAINING (Begin with baccalaureate or other initial professional education, such as nursing, and include postdoctoral training.) DEGREE INSTITUTION AND LOCATION YEAR(s) FIELD OF STUDY (if applicable) Swiss Federal Inst. of Technology (ETH), Zurich Diploma 1971-76 Biochemistry&Microbiology Swiss Federal Inst. of Technology (ETH), Zurich Ph.D. 1977-80 Biochemistry University of California, San Diego, CA postdoctoral 1980-82 Cell Biology

A. Personal Statement The research of my laboratory is focused on cell cycle regulation, with a particular emphasis on mitosis. We study the assembly and dynamics of the mitotic spindle apparatus, as well as the mechanisms that govern the centrosome duplication cycle. A major emphasis of our research is on protein kinases that play important roles in the regulation of cell division and chromosome distribution. Over the past 20 years my laboratory has made several discoveries relating to the regulation and targets of mitotic kinases. In addition, we have successfully used proteomics approaches to identify a myriad of novel components of the centrosome and the spindle apparatus. I have acted as organizer or co-organizer of several international meetings or sessions, including the Jacob Monod conference on the Cell Cycle in Roscoff (France). I was co-organizer of the FASEB conference on “Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function” that was held in Colorado in 2012.

B. Positions and Honors

1982-1987 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zürich, Switzerland Institute for Cell Biology, 1987-1995 Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research (ISREC) Epalinges, Switzerland, Independent Research Group Leader 1988-1996 “Privatdozent” at ETH, Zurich, Switzerland 1995-1999 Professor of Molecular Biology University of Geneva, Switzerland 1999-2009 Director at the Max-Planck-Institute for Biochemistry Dept. of Cell Biology, Martinsried, Germany 2000-8/2009 Honorary Professor for Cell Biology Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany 2009-present Director and Professor of Cell Biology Biozentrum, Basel, Switzerland

Other Professional Affiliations and Memberships on Advisory Boards

1991-present Member of EMBO 1998-present Member of Academia Europea 2005-present Member of the German Academy of Sciences „Leopoldina“ 2009-present Fellow of the European Academy of Cancer Sciences 1991-2010 Editorial Board Member, J.Cell Science 1992-1994 Editorial Board Member, EMBO J.

1993 Herbert Rand Fellowship (MBL, Woods Hole, MA, U.S.A.) 1994 Volume Editor, Seminars in Developmental Biology 1994 Volume Editor, Current Opinion in Cell Biology 1995-1998 Editorial Board Member, Genes to Cells 1995-2005 Editorial Board Member, Biochim. Biophys. Acta (Reviews on Cancer) 1995-2008 Editorial Board Member, Current Opinion in Cell Biology 2002-2004 Editorial Board Member, Molecular Biology of the Cell 2003-present Editorial Board member, Molecular Cancer Research 2003-present Chief Editor, Chromosoma

Honors and Awards

1976 Medal and Prize of the ETH 1980 Medal and Prize of the ETH 1987 START Career Development Award (Swiss National Science Foundation) 1989 Award by the Huggenberger-Bischoff Foundation for Cancer Research 1992 Friedrich Miescher Prize 1993 R. Wenner Prize for Cancer Research 2004 Meyenburg Prize („Wilhelm und Maria Meyenburg Stiftung“ and DKFZ, Heidelberg)

C. Selected Publications

Most relevant to the current application:

Nunes Bastos R, Gandhi SR, Baron RD, Gruneberg U, Nigg EA, Barr FA. Aurora B suppresses microtubule dynamics and limits central spindle size by locally activating KIF4A. J Cell Biol. 2013 Aug 12. Jeyaprakash AA, Santamaria A, Jayachandran U, Chan YW, Benda C, Nigg EA, Conti E. Structural and functional organization of the Ska complex, a key component of the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Mol Cell. 2012 May 11;46(3):274-86. Chan YW, Jeyaprakash AA, Nigg EA, Santamaria A. Aurora B controls kinetochore-microtubule attachments by inhibiting Ska complex-KMN network interaction. J Cell Biol. 2012 Mar 5;196(5):563-71. Santamaria A, Wang B, Elowe S, Malik R, Zhang F, Bauer M, Schmidt A, Silljé HH, Körner R, Nigg EA. The Plk1-dependent phosphoproteome of the early mitotic spindle. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2011 Jan;10(1):M110.004457. Gaitanos TN, Santamaria A, Jeyaprakash AA, Wang B, Conti E, Nigg EA. Stable kinetochore-microtubule interactions depend on the Ska complex and its new component Ska3/C13Orf3. EMBO J. 2009 May 20;28(10): 1442-52.

Additional recent publications of importance to the field (in chronological order)

Sonnen KF, Schermelleh L, Leonhardt H, Nigg EA. 3D-structured illumination microscopy provides novel insight into architecture of human centrosomes. Biol Open. 2012 Oct 15;1(10):965-76. Kasahara K, Goto H, Izawa I, Kiyono T, Watanabe N, Elowe S, Nigg EA, Inagaki M. PI 3-kinase-dependent phosphorylation of Plk1-Ser99 promotes association with 14-3-3γ and is required for metaphase-anaphase transition. Nat Commun.2013;4:1882. Sonnen KF, Gabryjonczyk AM, Anselm E, Stierhof YD, Nigg EA. Human Cep192 and Cep152 cooperate in Plk4 recruitment and centriole duplication. J Cell Sci. 2013 Jul 15;126(Pt 14):3223-33. Fava LL, Kaulich M, Nigg EA, Santamaria A. Probing the in vivo function of

Mad1:C-Mad2 in the spindle assembly checkpoint. EMBO J. 2011 Jul 19;30(16):3322-36. Schmidt TI, Kleylein-Sohn J, Westendorf J, Le Clech M, Lavoie SB, Stierhof YD, Nigg EA. Control of centriole length by CPAP and CP110. Curr Biol. 2009 Jun 23;19(12):1005-11. Epub 2009 May 28. Chan YW, Fava LL, Uldschmid A, Schmitz MH, Gerlich DW, Nigg EA, Santamaria A. Mitotic control of kinetochore-associated dynein and spindle orientation by human Spindly. J Cell Biol. 2009 Jun 1;185(5):859-74. Santamaria, A., Nagel, S., Sillje, H.H. and Nigg E.A. The spindle protein CHICA mediates localization of the chromokinesin Kid to the mitotic spindle. (2008). Curr Biol. May 20;18(10):723-9. Neef, R., Gruneberg, U., Kopajtich, R., Li X., Nigg E.A., Sillje, H and Barr, F.A. (2007). Choice of Plk1 docking partners during mitosis and cytokinesis is controlled by the activation state of Cdk1. Nat. Cell. Biol. 2007 Apr;9(4):436-44. Thein KH, Kleylein-Sohn J, Nigg EA, Gruneberg U. (2007). Astrin is required for the maintenance of sister chromatid cohesion and centrosome integrity. J Cell Biol. Jul 30;178(3):345-54. Kleylein-Sohn J, Westendorf J, Le Clech M, Habedanck R, Stierhof YD, Nigg EA. (2007). Plk4-induced centriole biogenesis in human cells. Dev Cell. Aug;13(2):190-202. Elowe, S., Hümmer, S., Uldschmid, A., Li, X., and Nigg, E.A. (2007). Tension sensitive Plk1 phosphorylation on BubR1 regulates the stability of kinetochore-microtubule interactions. Genes Dev. Sep 1;21(17):2205-19 Jeyaprakash AA, Klein UR, Lindner D, Ebert J, Nigg EA, Conti E. Structure of a Survivin-Borealin-INCENP Core Complex Reveals How Chromosomal Passengers Travel Together. (2007). Cell. Oct 19;131(2):271-85 .

D. Research Support

Present Funding 1. Agency: Swiss National Science Foundation The centrosome duplication cycle: how do human cells build centrioles in correct numbers ? (31003A_132428; Principal Applicant): Funding: CHF 910’032.- (US$ 1’110’000.-). Starting December 1, 2010; originally for 3 years; May 2013; extended for 2 additional years: CHF 600’000.- (US$ 730’000.-) “Bonus of Excellence”.

2. Agency: Swiss National Science Foundation Elucidation of Centriole Structure by Superresolution Multicolor Imaging (316030_129339; Co-Applicant): Funding: CHF 450’000.- (US$ 500’000). Starting December 1, 2011; 2 years.

3. Agency: Swiss Cancer League Control of chromosome segregation fidelity by the Ska complex, a key regulator of stable kinetochore- microtubule attachments during mitosis. (KFS-02657-09-2010; Co-Applicant): Funding: CHF 194’400 (US$ 216’000). Starting July 2011; 3 years.

Previous Funding (past 3 years listed) 1. During the past 10 years, my research was generously funded by the Max-Planck Society.

2. Agency: European Commission (FP6 Program) Experimental Network for Functional Integration (ENFIN; contract number LSHG-CT-2005–518254)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

NAME POSITION TITLE Heald, Rebecca W. Professor of Cell & Developmental Biology eRA COMMONS USER NAME rheald EDUCATION/TRAINING DEGREE INSTITUTION AND LOCATION YEAR(s) FIELD OF STUDY (if applicable) Hamilton College, Clinton NY B.A. 1985 Chemistry Harvard University, Boston, MA Ph.D. 1993 Cell Physiology European Molecular Biology Laboratory, postdoc 1993-1997 Cell Biology Germany

Positions and Employment 1985-1987 Research Assistant, UMDNJ- R.W. Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, NJ. Advisor: S.E. Hitchcock-DeGregori Ph.D. 1987-1992 Ryan Predoctoral Fellow, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, Advisor: F. McKeon, Ph.D. 1993-1997 American Cancer Society Postdoctoral Fellow, Cell Biology Program, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany, Advisor: E. Karsenti, Ph.D. 1997-2003 Assistant Professor of Cell & Developmental Biology, MCB Department, UC Berkeley 2003 Associate Professor of Cell & Developmental Biology, MCB Department, UC Berkeley 2006 Professor of Cell & Developmental Biology, MCB Department, UC Berkeley 2013 Chair, Division of Cell & Developmental Biology, MCB Department, UC Berkeley

Professional memberships and service Monitoring Editor, Journal of Cell Biology (2001-2006) Member, Cancer Research Coordinating Committee (2003-2008) Physiology Course Faculty, MBL Woods Hole (2004, 2005) Editorial Board, ACS Chemical Biology (2005-present), Cytoskeleton (2009-present) NSF Research Opportunities for Undergraduates Program for underrepresented minorities (2006-present) Co-organizer, CDB Symposium “Frontiers in Chromosome Research”, Berkeley (2006) Member, NIH study section NDT (2004-2008) Senior Editor, Journal of Cell Biology (2007-present) Program Committee, American Society for Cell Biology (2011) NIH Special Emphasis Panels/Scientific Review Groups (2010-2013) Editorial Board, Developmental Cell (2012-present) Organizer, EMBO Conference “Microtubules – Structure, Regulation and Functions” (2010, 2012) External Advisor, National Xenopus Resource Center (2012-present) Program Committee, Biophysical Society (2013) NIH NIGMS Council ad hoc member (2013) Member, ASCB Women in Cell Biology Committee (2013)

Honors and Awards Pew Scholar Award in Biomedical Sciences (1999-2003) Hellman Faculty Fund Award (2000) Alumni Scientist Medal in Biochemistry, Hamilton College (2005) American Society for Cell Biology, Women in Cell Biology Junior Career Recognition Award (2005) NIH Director’s Pioneer Award (2006) 46th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology, Symposium speaker “Mechanisms in Mitosis” (2006) 20th Anniversary, Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences, Plenary session speaker (2007)

Professorship, Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science (2009-2010) Outstanding Postdoc Mentoring Award, UC Berkeley (2010) Flora Lamson Hewlett Endowed Chair in Biochemistry (2011-present)

Selected peer-reviewed publications

1. Schlaitz A-L, Thompson J, Wong CCL, Yates JR, Heald R. (2013) REEP3/4 ensure endoplasmic reticulum clearance from metaphase chromatin and proper nuclear envelope architecture. Dev Cell, in press. 2. Wilbur J, Heald R. (2013) Mitotic spindle scaling during Xenopus development by kif2a and importin α. eLife 2:e00290. (PMC3576809) 3. Whitehead E, Heald R, Wilbur J (2013) N-terminal phosphorylation of p60 katanin directly regulates microtubule severing. J Mol Biol 425, 214-221. (PMC3540178) 4. Xiao B, Freedman BS, Miller KE, Heald R, Marko JF (2012) Histone H1 compacts DNA under force and during chromatin assembly. Mol Biol Cell 23, 4864-71. (PMC3521692) 5. Patel K, Nogales E, Heald R. (2012) Multiple domains of human CLASP contribute to microtubule dynamics and organization in vitro and in Xenopus egg extracts. Cytoskeleton 69, 155-165. (PMC3315288) 6. Halpin D, Kalab P, Wang J, Weis K, Heald R. (2011) Spindle assembly around RCC1 coated beads in Xenopus egg extracts. PLoS Biol 9, e1001225. (PMC3246454) 7. Kieserman EK, Heald R. (2011) Mitotic chromosome size scaling in Xenopus. Cell Cycle 10, 3863-70. (PMC3266116) 8. Loughlin R, Wilbur JD, McNally FJ, Nedelec F, Heald R. (2011) Katanin contributes to interspecies spindle length scaling in Xenopus. Cell 147, 1937- 1407. (PMC3240848) 9. Soderholm JF, Bird SL, Kalab P, Sampathkumar Y, Hasegawa K, Uehara-Bingen M, Heald W e is R.K , (2011) Importazole, a small molecule inhibitor of the transport - β.receptor ACS Chem importin Biol 6, 700-8. (PMC3137676) 10. Loughlin R, Heald R, Nedelec F. (2010) A computational model predicts Xenopus meiotic spindle organization. J Cell Biol 191, 1239-1249. (PMC3010074) 11. Levy DL, Heald R. (2010) Nuclear size is regulated by importin α and NTF2 in Xenopus. Cell 143, 288- 298. (PMC2966892) 12. Freedman BS, Heald R. (2010) Functional comparison of H1 histones in Xenopus reveals isoform- specific regulation by Cdk1 and RanGTP. Curr Biol 20, 1048-1052. (PMC2902237) 13. Blower MD, Feric E, Weis K, Heald R. (2007) Genome-wide analysis demonstrates conserved localization of mRNAs to mitotic microtubules. J. Cell Biol. 179, 1365-1373. (PMC2373496) 14. Brown KS, Blower MD, Maresca TJ, Grammer TC, Harland RM, Heald R. (2007) Xenopus tropicalis extracts provide insight into scaling of the mitotic spindle. J Cell Biol 176, 765-770. (PMC2064050) 15. Skop AR, Liu H, Yates 3rd JR, Meyer BJ, Heald R. (2004) Dissection of the mammalian midbody proteome reveals conserved cytokinesis mechanisms. Science 305, 61-66. (PMC3679889)

Ongoing Research Support

R01 GM057839 Heald (PI) 9/30/11 – 8/31/15 Studying Mitosis Using Xenopus Egg Extracts This grant is dedicated to elucidating mechanisms of spindle assembly and chromosome segregation using Xenopus egg extracts and focuses on the role of linker histone H1 in defining mitotic chromosome architecture and the role of microtubule- and membrane-associated proteins in the spindle.

R01 GM098766 Heald (PI) 8/01/12 – 7/31/16 Mechanisms of Intracellular Scaling This project investigates how a cell determines the size of its intracellular structures using Xenopus egg and embryo extracts.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Provide the following information for the Senior/key personnel and other significant contributors in the order listed on Form Page 2. Follow this format for each person. DO NOT EXCEED FOUR PAGES.

NAME POSITION TITLE Swedlow, Jason R. Professor of Quantitative Cell Biology eRA COMMONS USER NAME (credential, e.g., agency login)

EDUCATION/TRAINING (Begin with baccalaureate or other initial professional education, such as nursing, include postdoctoral training and residency training if applicable.) DEGREE INSTITUTION AND LOCATION MM/YY FIELD OF STUDY (if applicable) Brandeis University, Boston MA B. A. 1987 Chemistry University of California, San Francisco Ph.D. 1994 Biophysics UCSF, Postdoctoral Fellowship -- 1994-1997 Cell Biology Harvard Medical School, Postdoctoral Fellowship -- 1997-1998 Cell Biology

Please refer to the application instructions in order to complete sections A, B, C, and D of the Biographical Sketch.

A. Personal Statement During cell division, the two copies of a cell's genetic material are completely separated and delivered to a pair of new daughter cells. Proper chromosome segregation requires the formation of correct attachments between the genetic material, assembled into chromosomes, and ends of microtubules. Our research is focussed on establishing the molecular mechanisms that mediate and monitor the correct attachment of chromosomes to microtubule at a special structure known as the kinetochore. To achieve this, we make use of advanced tools for imaging the components of cell division, especially in living cells and specialised mass spectrometry methods to probe the molecular machinery of cell division. Recently, we used these tools to discover a new protein, Bod1, that plays a critical role in the formation of correct attachments between microtubules and chromosomes by modulating the activity of Aurora B protein kinase.

Like many cell biology labs, we generate large sets of image data. To manage, analyse and understand this data, we, long with our collaborators, formed the Open Microscopy Environment Consortium. OME develops data specifications, file format translators and data management software for imaging applications. OME tools are used in thousands of labs around the world.

B. Positions and Honors

Positions & Employment 1987-1994 Doctoral research with Dr. David Agard, University of California, San Francisco. Supported by Howard Hughes Medical Institute Internal Fellowship. 1994-1998 Postdoctoral research dissecting the mechanism of chromosome condensation in Xenopus egg extracts with Dr. T. J. Mitchison, University of California, San Francisco and Harvard Medical School. 1998-2002 Lecturer and Wellcome Trust Career Development Fellow. School of Life Sciences, Wellcome Trust Biocentre, University of Dundee. 2002-2005 Lecturer and Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow. School of Life Sciences, Wellcome Trust Biocentre, University of Dundee. 2005-2007 Reader and Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow. School of Life Sciences, Wellcome Trust Biocentre, University of Dundee.

+ PHS 398/2590 (Rev. 05/01) Page ______Biographical Sketch Format Page + Program Director/Principal Investigator (Last, First, Middle): Swedlow, Jason R. 2007-present Professor and Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow. College of Life Sciences, Wellcome Trust Centre for Gene Regulation and Expression, University of Dundee,

Other Experience, Positions, and Memberships 1996-2002 Optical Microscopy and Imaging in the Biomedical Sciences. Woods Hole, MA. Member of Course Faculty 1997-present Analytical and Quantitative Light Microscopy. Woods Hole, MA. Member of Course Faculty. Appointed Course Co-Director starting May 2009. 2011-present NCBS Bangalore Microscopy Course. Course Faculty 2005-present CEO & President of Glencoe Software, Inc.

Honors 1988-1994 Howard Hughes Medical Institute Internal Fellowship 1994-1997 Damon Runyon-Walter Winchell Cancer Research Fund Postdoctoral Fellowship 1998-2002 Wellcome Trust Career Development Fellowship 2002-2009 Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship 2005 Nikon Fellowship, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, USA 2006 The Laura and Arthur Colwin Endowed Summer Research Fellowship, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, USA 2011 BBSRC Social and Overall Innovator of the Year 2012 Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh

C. Selected Peer-reviewed Publications (Selected from 49 peer-reviewed publications) 1. Swedlow JR, Hu K, Andrews PD, Roos DS, Murray JM. Measuring tubulin content in Toxoplasma gondii: a comparison of laser-scanning confocal and wide-field fluorescence microscopy. (2002) Proc. Soc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 2014-2019. 2. Swedlow JR, Goldberg I, Brauner E, Sorger PK. (2003) Image informatics and quantitative analysis of biological images. Science 300:100-102. 3. Trinkle-Mulcahy L, Andrews PD, Wickramasinghe S, Sleeman J, Prescott AR, Lam YW, Lyon CE, Swedlow JR, Lamond AI. Time-lapse imaging reveals dynamic relocalization of PP1g throughout the mammalian cell cycle. (2003) Mol. Biol Cell. 14:107-117. 4. Andrews PD, Ovechkina Y, Morrice N, Wagenbach M, Duncan K, Wordeman L, Swedlow JR. Aurora B regulates MCAK at the mitotic centromere. (2004) Dev Cell 6:253-268. 5. Goldberg IG, Allan C, Burel J-M, Creager D, Falconi A, Hochheiser HS, Johnston J, Mellen J, Sorger PK, Swedlow JR. (2005) The Open Microscopy Environment (OME) Data Model and XML File: Open Tools for Informatics and Quantitative Analysis in Biological Imaging. Genome Biol. 6:R47. 6. Wilcock AC, Swedlow JR, Storey KG. (2007) Mitotic spindle orientation distinguishes stem cell and terminal modes of neuron production in the early spinal cord. Development 134:1943-1954. 7. Gillespie P.J, Khoudoli GA, Stewart, G, Swedlow JR, Blow JJ. (2007) ELYS/MEL-28 Chromatin Association Coordinates Nuclear Pore Complex Assembly and the Replication Licensing System. Curr. Biol. 17:1657-1662. 8. Wheatley SP, Andrews, PD, Medema RH, Swedlow JR, Lens SMA. (2007) Phosphorylation of Survivin by Aurora-B Kinase Reduces its Affinity for Centromeres and Negatively Regulates Survivin Function at These Sites. Cell Cycle. 6:1220-1230. 9. Porter IM, McClelland S, Khoudoli GA, Hunter C, Andersen J, McAinsh AD, Blow JJ, Swedlow JR. (2007) Bod1, a Novel Kinetochore Protein Required for Chromosome Biorientation. J Cell Biol. 179(2):187-97.

OMB No. 0925-0001/0002 (Rev. 08/12 Approved Through 8/31/2015) Page Biographical Sketch Format Page Program Director/Principal Investigator (Last, First, Middle): Swedlow, Jason R. 10. Platani M, Santarella-Melwig R, Posch M, Walczak R, Swedlow JR, Mattaj I. (2009) The Nup107-160 nucleoporin complex promotes mitotic events via control of the localisation and modification of the chromosome passenger complex. Mol Biol Cell. 24:5260-5275. 11. Jaqaman K, King EM, Amaro AC, Winter JR, Dorn JF, Elliott HL, Mchedlishvili N, McClelland SE, Porter IM, Posch M, Toso A, Danuser G, McAinsh AD, Meraldi P, Swedlow JR. (2010) Kinetochore alignment within the metaphase plate is regulated by centromere stiffness and microtubule depolymerases. (2010) J. Cell Biol. 188:665-679. 12. Posch M, Khoudoli GA, Swift S, King EMJ, DeLuca JG, Swedlow JR. Sds22 regulates Aurora B activity and microtubule-kinetochore interactions at mitosis. (2010) J. Cell Biol. 191:61-74.

13. Allan C, Burel J-M, Moore J, Blackburn C, Linkert M, Loynton S, Moore WJ, Neves C, Patterson AJ, MacDonald D, Tarkowska A, Loranger B, Avondo J, Lagerstedt I, Lianas L, Leo S, Hands K, Hay RT, Patwardhan A, Best CH, Kleywegt GJ, Zanetti G, Swedlow JR. (2012) OMERO: flexible, model-driven data management for experimental biology. Nat Methods. 9:245-253. 14. Beck J, Maerki S, Posch M, Metzger T, Persaud A, Scheel H, Hofmann K, Rotin D, Pedrioli P, Swedlow JR, Peter M, Sumara I (2013). Ubiquitylation-dependent localization of PLK1 in mitosis. Nat Cell Biol. 15:430-439. 15. Moser SC, Bensaddek D, Ortmann B, Mudie S, Blow JJ, Lamond AI, Swedlow JR, Rocha S. (2013) PHD1 links cell cycle progression to metabolic state through hydroxylation of the centrosomal protein Cep192. Dev Cell, 26:381-392.

D. Research Support Ongoing Research Support

2010-2014 BBSRC Project Grant. “Proteomic and functional analysis of mitotic chromosome organization” (with Prof JJ Blow) £1,308,127 2010-2013 BBSRC BBR Fund Grant. “Intuitive Large-scale Image Processing for Biologists” (with Dr J van Hemert). £350,064 2011-2014 Wellcome Trust Strategic Award. “The Open Microscopy Environment: Image Informatics for the Biological Sciences”. £4,230,140. 2013-2017 MRC Next Generation Optical Microscopy Award. Dynamics of Fundamental Cellular Processes by Live Cell and Tissue Imaging. £1,063,835.

Completed Research Support

Programme Grant. Swedlow (PI) 10/1/08 – 9/30/11 Wellcome Trust “The Open Microscopy Environment: Towards the development of a scientific data management system” Role: PI £1,305,516

BBSRC Research Grant Ref: BB/H002340 “The flagellum and cell fate determination” (co-PI with Dr N Stanley-Wall) 1 February 2010 – 31 January 2013 £361,015

OMB No. 0925-0001/0002 (Rev. 08/12 Approved Through 8/31/2015) Page Biographical Sketch Format Page Program Director/Principal Investigator (Last, First, Middle): Swedlow, Jason R. BBSRC BBR Grant Ref: BB/G022585 The Electron Microscopy Data Bank (Co-PI with Dr. Gerard Kleywegt et al) Project Grant BB/G022585/1 £269,150 1 July 2009 - 30 June 2012

BBSRC Research Grant Ref: BB/G01518X/1 “Dissection of the Function of Microtubule Depolymerases in Mitotic Kinetochore Dynamics” 1 March 2009 - 28 Feb 2012 £308,454

Equipment Grant. Lamond, AI (PI) 10/1/07-9/30/12 Wellcome Trust “Quantitative Mass Spectrometry analysis of Gene Expression and Protein Dynamics” Role: Co-PI £494,492

Strategic Award. Lamond (PI) 10/1/07-9/30/12 Wellcome Trust “Centre for Gene Regulation & Expression” Role: Co-PI £4,968,596

Programme Grant Storey, KG (PI) 10/1/07-30/9/12 Wellcome Trust “Cell behavour and signaling dynamics during vertebrate neurogenesis” Role: Co-PI £838,506

OMB No. 0925-0001/0002 (Rev. 08/12 Approved Through 8/31/2015) Page Biographical Sketch Format Page Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function http://faseb.planion.com/Planion.Evals/ZZHWPBUU4Z?ACCOUNT=FA...

Course Evaluation 2012 Summer Research Conferences Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function Print presented 08/05/2012 Forms 62 forms submitted

Section 1 - Scientific Content

General Sessions

The most important areas of current active research were adequately discussed. 4.5

There was a sufficient amount of unpublished research presented. 4.4

The conference helped you generate new ideas for research. 4.4

There was adequate time provided for invited presentations and short talks selected from submitted abstracts. 4.6

The discussion periods were utilized effectively. 4.7

Poster Sessions

The time allocated for poster sessions was effective. 4.5

I am satisfied with the contribution of the poster sessions to the conference. 4.4

Scientific Content - Overall

Overall, I am satisfied with the scientific content. 4.7

What kinds of sessions would you like to see included at future conferences?

I would have enjoyed a wider diversity in the invited talks (in topics, age of investigator, approaches, etc. . .)

no need to change, it will evolve naturally

I would like to see some sessions on APC/C activity and regulations included.

I would rather see more short session presentations (15 min) and fewer longer presentations (30+). The opportunities for postdocs and grad students to present at the mtg was limited.

1) Moters in mitosis, 2) Spindle positioning and orientation

The balance present at this meeting was excellent. no suggestions.

More model organisms. I feel that the topics are very focused on mammalian cell mitosis.

I thought that the talks were much too clustered around certain topics, such as aurora kinase. It would have been better to have broader areas of mitosis represented. The cytokinesis section was too limited.

Some sessions on technological advances in the field. I also really enjoyed the historical sessions.

(1) Imaging & Quantitative Analysis (2) Clinical Studies

1 of 5 10/9/2012 4:51 PM Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function http://faseb.planion.com/Planion.Evals/ZZHWPBUU4Z?ACCOUNT=FA...

A broader range of topics relating to mitosis, including different model organisms.

more on mitotic spindle architecture and variation

Could be more on cytokinesis and centromeres

More inclusion of areas of mitosis that is not heavily studied such as the spindle assembly checkpoint. This include spindle orientation, the role of cell division in aging and dieseases.

One possibility would be to increase contributions from chemical genetics - but this is just an idea.

The nuclear envelope

Mitotic defects and how it contibutes to development of Cancer & other diseases, in addition clinical application of mitotic inhibitors

Checkpoint regulation

a session on spindle checkpoint, and/or cohesion

Section 2 - Management

Program Management & Organization

How satisfied were you with the coordination and organization of the scientific program? 4.6

How satisfied were you the representation of international scientists in this field participating? 4.7

How satisfied were you with the conference materials provided? 4.6

Did you feel the length of conference sessions were too long, just about right, or too short? 2.5

(3=Too long; 2= Just about right; 1=Too short)

Logistics Management & Organization

How satisfied were you with the registration and abstract submission process? 4.5

How satisfied were you with the information found on the FASEB SRC website and from emails sent by the FASEB SRC Office? 4.1

Overall Management & Organization

The conference was well organized. 4.6

Conference onsite staff member was helpful and courteous. 4.6

Overall, I was satisfied with the conference facilities. 4.5

Where would you like to see future SRCs take place?

Next one should be at a European site, as agreed overwhelmingly by the attendees (this meeting had an exceptionally strong international attendence)

europe

New Mexico, Texas

europe

This was discussed and voted for during the meeting

I think it will be good to have them switch between locations in Europe and in USA so that researchers/scientists from both countries can benefit in terms of traveling time (by taking turns traveling to different country). That way the Europeans are not always forced to travel to the US and the Americans are not always forced to travel to Europe.

Locations closer or better connected to major airports

Bahama

Europe, Asia?

2 of 5 10/9/2012 4:51 PM Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function http://faseb.planion.com/Planion.Evals/ZZHWPBUU4Z?ACCOUNT=FA...

A place that does not involve such a long drive from the nearest international airport.

Many participants like myself are from Europe. Therefore an alternation between conference sites in the US and Europe would be very beneficial to bring about a most efficient exchange between the leading research groups through the world.

Alternatives to USA could include Japan or Europe. Delegates from Japan/Asia and Europe made up a large fraction of the conference.

more conference sites available in Europe. Just skip Chicago- who wants to go to a city. Niagra Fall is also TackyTown USA- not ideal.

at any places that are easier to access than current ones

Seoul, KOREA

In a city where there is easier access to general stores.

Crete, Lake Tahoe

close to a major international airport.

West Virginia, North Carolina, Vermont mountains, Spain

Europe

alternating with europe (crete sounds great!)

Europe

In Europe.

bahamas

creete

Europe

San Francisco, USA or Europe (Scotland, Spain or Italy)

I liked the Bahamas idea...

Yes, alternating between Europe and the US

Italy

I think the meeting should alternate between europe and US locations. In addition it might me nice to alternate between moutainous locations and beach locations.

Which months are more convenient for you to attend a conference?

June - August: 42 (72.4%) September - November: 10 (17.2%) March - May: 6 (10.3%) December - February: 0 (0%)

Overall, how would you rate the FASEB SRC Staffs' professionalism and responsiveness to your questions and concerns? 4.5

Comments:

I think the FASEB website can be more user friendly. It has a lot of information and I had to search around a lot before I found what I needed to know.

The friday morning session was canceled due to travel arrangements. As a result, I moved up my flight out and paid a transfer fee. It would have been nice if this was accounted for in advance. Check the travel times (bus shuttle times etc) while setting up the seminar schedule.

There were a number of issues with rooms, and the FASEB staff should have been more aggressive in dealing with the hotel staff.

It was strange to see short talks were selected from the invited speakers' labs. It was a wrong decision to remove the last session because of many canceled talks. It would be better to give opportunities to others to have short talks.

Like the free times during the afternoon

I did not like the fact that the schedule was changed substantially during the conference, this could have been done before so as to allow people to arrange their travel accordingly.

Section 3 - General Information

3 of 5 10/9/2012 4:51 PM Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function http://faseb.planion.com/Planion.Evals/ZZHWPBUU4Z?ACCOUNT=FA...

Approximately how many conferences of this type do you Do you plan to attend this conference again in 2 or 3 years? attend annually? Yes: 59 (98.3%) 1-2 per year: 44 (72.1%) 3-4 per year: 15 (24.6%) No: 1 (1.7%) 5-6 per year: 1 (1.6%) More than 6 per year: 1 (1.6%) Don't usually attend 0(0%) conferences:

Would you recommend this conference to others? How would you rate this conference compared to other conferences of this type that you have 4.5 Yes: 59 (95.2%) attended? No: 0 (0%)

Not Sure: 2 (3.2%)

No response: 1 (1.6%)

How did you learn of this conference? If other, please specify:

By Invitation: 22 (35.5%) and be being present at Mentor: 1 (50%) previous conferences on this 1 (50%) Co-Worker: 20 (32.3%) subject: Internet: 10 (16.1%) FASEB Emails: 5 (8.1%) FASEB Mailings: 4 (6.5%) Other: 1 (1.6%) FASEB Journal: 0 (0%) Experimental Biology/Neuroscience/Cell 0(0%) Biology:

Please indicate your age group:

20's: 8 (12.9%) 30's: 22 (35.5%) 40's: 18 (29%) 50's: 11 (17.7%) 60's: 1 (1.6%) 70's: 2 (3.2%)

In what ways could this conference be improved?

better food, and facilities where all attendees could dine in the same space, but overall the organisers did an outstanding job.

Hotel was too cold, particularly the meeting room. Dining area was too broken up.

Broader topics on mitosis. Over representation of Kinetochores. More labs represented (some of the leading groups were missing).

Fewer talks

I think more notification by email or by sending posters to universities or institutes with various FASEB conferences listed will be great. cold spring harbor does that for various conferences every year and that is very useful.

For meals, we were in two separate rooms and a patio. It would be better if meals could be held in a common space.

I would like an index in the back with the authors in alphabetically order and the page of their abstract.

I feel it is a little bit long. It was great to transfer the Friday's morning sessions to the other days. I would like to thank organizers.

FASEB should provide sufficient space so that all posters can hang for the entire conference. We were told that posters would be displayed in three separate session. This would have been a disservice to all. Fortunately, there was enough room that we were able to share space and keep the posters up throughout the meeting.

It was overall great. The poster space was a bit cramped.

Its almost perfect.

less air conditioning in the rooms

It is a bit too long (6 days). Could be 4 or 5 days.

The posters should be presented as every other number so there's more space to walk between the 4 rows. More talk opportunities

4 of 5 10/9/2012 4:51 PM Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function http://faseb.planion.com/Planion.Evals/ZZHWPBUU4Z?ACCOUNT=FA...

should be given to students and postdocs because they need a chance to practice in front of a real audience, and they are more likely to present truly unpublished work.

Select venues that are easier to get to. In Colorado, for example, the ski resorts in the Breckenridge area are at least an hour and one-half closer than either Steamboat or Snowmass, and they are not so high as Snowmass, removing the problems of altitude adjustment for the flatlanders.

By regular alternation of the conference between sites in the US and in Europe

The poster sessions need to be better organized. The conference site limited the number of posters and yet there was room for all of them. This meant that there were too many presentations in a small space so it was crowded.

Bulletin board or screen display announcing schedule change or group activity will be helpful.

I would appreciate if the organizers give more chance to Asian participants.

The talks need to be shorter. More postdocs and graduate students should present rather than P.I.s.

No session on last day (Friday).

The poster session was too crowded. It would be better to do "odd" or "even" numbers than "1-21" or "22-43".

cheaper drinks, or another open bar session

A broader scope of mitosis

some of the meals (last dinner for example) would have been better if everyone was in the same room

Evening sessions are good, but having travelled from the UK, I found it very challenging the first 3 evenings because of my jet-lag making me extremely tired. Would it be possible to transfer these sessions to the afternoon?

A bit shortened program would be favorable.

- shorten time of talks (like 20mn instead of 30) - more talks for students and postdocs

Maybe sending the abstract book or at least the final program in advance: I was a bit disappointed to hear at the very last that some of the invited speakers were not attending.

5 of 5 10/9/2012 4:51 PM

FINAL REPORT NOT AVAILABLE

Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function Past Conference Organizers

Year Name Affiliation 2007 Conly Rieder Wadsworth Center Robert Palazzo Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst

2009 Conly Rieder Wadsworth Center Claire Walczak Indiana University

2012 Claire Walczak Indiana University Erich Nigg Biozentrum, Basel, Switzerland Mitosis: Spindle Assembly and Function Comparison of Previous Conferences

ATTENDANCE FUNDING # of # of Non- Year Applicants Participants Commercial Commercial Government Total Raised 2007 136 132 $ 19,500.00 $ 23,200.00 $ - $ 42,700.00 2009 177 171 $ 20,900.00 $ 25,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 51,400.00 2012 125 125 $ 41,778.00 $ - $ 12,500.00 $ 54,278.00 Federation of American Societies

for Experimental Biology — Quality Life Through Research — Member Societies

The American Physiological Society American Society for Biochemistry and November 19, 2010 Molecular Biology American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

American Society for Investigative Pathology Dr. Claire Walczak

American Society for Nutrition Indiana Univ. Medical Sciences

The American Association of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Immunologists 915 E 3rd St., Myers Hall 262 American Association of Anatomists Bloomington, IN 47405 The Protein Society

Society for Developmental Biology Re Proposal #: 12-13

American Peptide Society Dear Dr. Walczak: Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities The American Society for Bone and We would like to thank you for submitting a proposal for the 2012 FASEB Mineral Research Summer Research Conference series. After careful consideration by the American Society for Clinical Investigation Advisory Committee, the proposal entitled, "Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function" has been approved and congratulations you and the past Society for the Study of Reproduction organizers on organizing such a successful conference. Teratology Society The Endocrine Society The committee requests that you make every effort to include young The American Society of Human Genetics investigators (poster presentation or a short talk) as early as possible within the conference agenda. This will have an enormous impact on one’s Environmental Mutagen Society experience at the conference. This will also allow other participants to learn International Society for Computational Biology early on about their work and will then greatly increase interaction.

American College of Sports Medicine

Biomedical Engineering Society During the recent review of the submitted proposals, the members of the Summer Research Conferences Advisory Committee recommended all Genetics Society of America conferences incorporate a “Meet the Experts” session into the program. This American Federation for Medical Research will allow the young investigators the opportunity to interact and network with the experts they admire. Planning details will be shared with you as we get

further into the organizing of your conference

We will soon begin the process of developing the conference schedule and will let you know the location and date of your conference as soon as this ______has been decided. Please keep in mind, location and date preferences are Guy Fogleman, Ph.D. not guaranteed however we do our best to give you your first choice. In Executive Director February, an Organizer Manual will be posted at our website Office of Scientific Meetings and Conferences (www.faseb.org/SRC) to assist you in your conference planning efforts.

Marcella D. Jackson, CMP Director Please be aware that by agreeing to be an Organizer/Co-organizer of a 9650 Rockville Pike FASEB Summer Research Conference, that should you decided to cancel Bethesda, Maryland 20814-3998 Telephone 301-634-7010 the conference for any reason, you will be held responsible for any fees FAX 301-634-7014 related to the cancellation (i.e., fees charged by the host location). E-mail: [email protected] http://www.faseb.org/meetings Dr. Walczak Page 2

The Summer Research Conferences have been very successful over the years due to the commitment and dedication of the Organizers. On behalf of the Federation and the Summer Research Conferences Advisory Committee, your efforts in contributing to the success of the program are sincerely appreciated. A copy of this letter has also been sent to your co- organizer(s).

Please do not hesitate to contact me by telephone at (301) 634-7010 or via email [email protected] should you have any questions. We look forward to working with you on this project over the next few years.

Sincerely,

Julie Levin Conference Manager FASEB Summer Research Conferences

Federation of American Societies

for Experimental Biology — Quality Life Through Research — Member Societies

The American Physiological Society American Society for Biochemistry and November 19, 2010 Molecular Biology American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

American Society for Investigative Pathology Dr. Erich Nigg

American Society for Nutrition Biozentrum, Univ. of Basel

The American Association of Klingelbergstr. 50/70 Immunologists CH-4056 Basel American Association of Anatomists Switzerland The Protein Society

Society for Developmental Biology Re Proposal #: 12-13

American Peptide Society Dear Dr. Nigg: Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities The American Society for Bone and We would like to thank you for submitting a proposal for the 2012 FASEB Mineral Research Summer Research Conference series. After careful consideration by the American Society for Clinical Investigation Advisory Committee, the proposal entitled, "Mitosis: Spindle Assembly & Function" has been approved and congratulations you and the past Society for the Study of Reproduction organizers on organizing such a successful conference. Teratology Society The Endocrine Society The committee requests that you make every effort to include young The American Society of Human Genetics investigators (poster presentation or a short talk) as early as possible within the conference agenda. This will have an enormous impact on one’s Environmental Mutagen Society experience at the conference. This will also allow other participants to learn International Society for Computational Biology early on about their work and will then greatly increase interaction.

American College of Sports Medicine

further into the organizing of your conference

Sincerely,

Julie Levin Conference Manager FASEB Summer Research Conferences