ASCB A P R I L 2 0 0 7 NEWSLETTER VOLUME 30, NUMBER 4 MBC: Eliminate Hogan, Meyerowitz Shapiro to the Printed Journal? Run for ASCB President Present Page 4 Brigid Hogan of Duke Medical Center and Elliot Meyerowitz of the California Institute Porter of Technology/HHMI are running for ASCB 47th ASCB President. The elected candidate will serve on the Society’s Executive Committee Lecture Annual Meeting as President-Elect in 2008 and as ASCB Lucy Shapiro President in 2009. of Stanford Program Brigid Hogan Duke Medical Eight candidates will compete for four three- University Page 8 Center year terms as Councilor. All those elected start School of service on January 1, 2008. Medicine has An email with a link to the Society’s been named NIH Director electronic ballot and candidate biographies Lucy Shapiro by ASCB Criticizes Bush will be sent to regular, postdoctoral, and President emeritus members. Bruce M. Stem Cell Policy The election closes on June 30. Results will Alberts to give the 26th Annual be announced in the July issue of the ASCB Keith R. Porter Lecture. Page 13 Elliot Meyerowitz Newsletter. Her lecture, “Spatial and California 2004 ASCB President Harvey F. Lodish Topological Components of Institute of of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Bacterial Cell Cycle Regulatory Inside Technology/ Circuitry,” will be presented HHMI Research served as Nominating Committee Chair; also serving on the Committee were during the 47th ASCB Annual Gary G. Borisy, Joanne Chory, Anthony P. Meeting in Washington, DC, President’s Column 2 Mahowald, Suzanne R. Pfeffer, Laura J. Robles, Pamela A. on December 4. ■ Call for Award Nominations 3 Silver, Masatoshi Takeichi, and Fiona M. Watt. ■

MBC and the Economics of Scientifi c Publishing 4 Candidates for ASCB Council

Annual Meeting Program 8

InCytes from MBC 10 Each regular, postdoctoral, and emeritus member will be sent a Dear Labby 12 link to the ASCB election site. Since spam fi lters may pre- Public Policy Briefi ng 13 Ueli Aebi Holly Goodson Kathleen Green Doug vent some messages from be- University of Basel University of Northwestern Lauffenburger University Massachusetts ing received, members are en- WICB Column 16 Notre Dame Feinberg School Institute of couraged to go to www.ascb. of Medicine Technology org to vote. Your member num- ASCB Profi le 18 ber (the same number used to Members in the News 22 access MBC) will enable you to vote, and ensure that each Grants & Opportunities 23 member votes just once. If you do not receive the link and/or Member Gifts 23 do not know your member num- ber, contact the ASCB at (301) Classifed Advertising 23 Aki Nakano Paul Sternberg Clare Waterman- Maria Elena RIKEN Discovery California Storer Zavala 347-9300 or ascbinfo@ascb. Research Institute Institute of The Scripps California State org. ■ Calendar 24 Technology/HHMI Research Institute University The American Society for Cell Biology PRESIDENT’S Column 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750 Bethesda, MD 20814-2762 Tel: (301) 347-9300 Fax: (301) 347-9310 The Real “Science for Society” [email protected], www.ascb.org Recently, Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer who the NSF, less than one-fourth of U.S. adults Joan R. Goldberg won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003 for her hu- were able to explain in their own words what it Executive Director man rights efforts, raised an important question. means to study something scientifically (NSF, Officers How, she wondered, can the U.S. be so short- 2006)? sighted and unwise in its foreign policies when Many scientists would probably answer such Bruce M. Alberts President it is so accomplished in its science? This is a dis- questions by putting the blame on others. But in Robert D. Goldman President-Elect turbing question: Why do we not apply a scien- my opinion, an important explanation for these Mary C. Beckerle Past President tific way of viewing the world paradoxes is our overly narrow Gary E. Ward Treasurer to a broader range of human view of the applicability of Jean E. Schwarzbauer Secretary problems? More narrowly, why scientific skills for society. This Council do we not even apply scientific view causes us to adopt attitudes thinking to the question of how that severely limit the spread of Kerry S. Bloom to teach science? science and its values beyond David R. Burgess our university (and science- John S. Condeelis Using the Tools of based industry) walls. Susan K. Dutcher D. Scott Emr Science Joan R. Goldberg, ex officio My 12 years at the National Making a Science Out Caroline M. Kane Academy of Sciences convinced of Science Education Sandra K. Masur me that the future success of our As a first step, can we make a Barbara J. Meyer complex human societies de- science out of science educa- Timothy J. Mitchison pends on using the tools of sci- tion? As scientists, we are all de- Erin K. O'Shea Anne J. Ridley ence much more broadly to Bruce Alberts voted to collecting and objec- Susan R. Wente create a knowledge base—re- tively evaluating data to build sembling the one that we have a powerful knowledge base in ASCB Newsletter in cell biology—that can be used to guide deci- our particular discipline, whether it is cell biol- is published twelve times per sion-making in many areas of human endeavor. ogy, organic chemistry, or astrophysics. But our year by The American Society for Cell Biology. Thus the National Academies have repeatedly reliance on data often stops there. Our disinter- addressed questions such as “How can we make est in collecting evidence on the learning of stu- Joan R. Goldberg Editor a science out of education?” and “How can we dents and using it to improve our own college John L. Saville Production Manager make a science out of sustainable development?” and graduate school teaching is legendary, and Nancy Moulding Production Assistant The answer is to embed research and research- it explains the current push from some farsight- Kevin Wilson Public Policy Briefing ers of the highest quality into a wide variety of ed colleagues for what they call “scientific teach- Ed Newman Advertising Manager ongoing efforts to improve the human condi- ing” (Handelsman et al., 2004). The ASCB has John Fleischman Science Writer Thea Clarke Editorial Manager tion. But thus far we have failed abysmally in had a major role in promoting these new efforts such tasks. through CBE—Life Sciences Deadlines for submission of There is clear evidence Education (www.lifescied. articles and advertising that our approach to teaching org). Led by Editor-in-Chief materials: science is ineffective. Why do we not apply William B. (Bill) Wood, this Issue Deadline According to the National a scientific way of pioneering, open-access ed- June May 1 Science Foundation (NSF), viewing the world to ucation journal has recently July June 1 more than five million people a broader range of expanded to cover the entire August July 1 in the U.S. work in careers human problems? range of biological sciences, requiring expertise in science and I encourage everyone to ASCB Newsletter ISSN 1060-8982 and technology, including both read it and contribute ar- Volume 30, Number 4 some 600,000 life and physical ticles. April 2007 scientists. How is it possible for such a science- Consider the area that I know best, K– rich society to produce high school graduates 12 science education in the U.S. For many © 2007 The American Society for Cell Biology who, in international comparisons, repeatedly decades, we have spent enormous amounts of rank near the bottom in their understanding time and money on all sorts of projects aimed Postmaster: Send change of address to ASCB Newsletter of science and mathematics? And how can we at improving science education in U.S. school The American Society for Cell Biology explain the fact that, in a survey conducted by districts, including some in San Francisco where 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750 Bethesda, MD 20814-2762 2 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 I have been personally involved. Along the Ph.D. training. I view this as a great opportuni- way, we have made many mistakes, from which ty. Can we begin to build a new type of scientif- we should have learned a great deal; instead, ic enterprise, one in which universities focus on failures are generally viewed as embarrassments seeding large numbers of highly skilled scientists and swept under the rug. As a result, those throughout society as future leaders in education working to improve education tend to make the research, pre-college teaching, journalism, busi- I am encouraged same mistakes over and over again in different ness, science policy, law, and politics? that we finally seem contexts. We should be ambitious in attempting to to have reached a There is a potential advantage to the highly demonstrate that our scientific way of viewing tipping point in the decentralized education system in the U.S.: It the world can have a profound, beneficial gives rise to a large number of varied approaches impact on a broad range of national and seriousness with toward a common goal. As scientists, we should international policies. A future article in this which most colleges be eager to treat these as “experiments” from series will suggest some possible strategies and universities which to collect data to build a sound basis of by which we might hope to address Ebadi’s are addressing knowledge on which to base future educational challenge. ■ the teaching of efforts. Only by honest, detailed research that —Bruce M. Alberts introductory college extracts the reasons for the many successes and science courses. failures can we hope to build continuously References improving systems of education—systems that Alberts, B. (2005). A wakeup call for science faculty. Cell 123, make continual progress, as we do in science. 739–741. But very little effort has thus far been devoted Handelsman, J., et al. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science 304, to this type of scientifically based research. As 521–522. a result, our nation’s schools continue to be National Science Foundation (2006). Science and Engineering driven by one simple “magic bullet” solution Indicators. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06. after another, as new leaders seek a quick fix to ongoing problems. Can we as scientists change enough to The ASCB 2007 Call for make a difference? Our introductory college courses provide a great, if largely unexploited, Award Nominations opportunity to give our citizens (including Norton B. Gilula Memorial Award our future political leaders) a sound basis for Who is Eligible: An outstanding graduate or undergraduate student who has excelled understanding and respecting the nature of in research science. Moreover, because introductory courses How to Apply: The student or advisor should submit a one-page research statement, a list of publications, if any, the abstract submitted to the current year’s Annual Meeting, set the standard by which all science teaching at and the advisor’s letter of recommendation. Duplicate applications from graduate stu- lower levels is judged, we cannot expect to teach dents may be submitted for the Gilula and Bernfield Memorial Awards. inquiry-based science at lower levels if we fail to Awards: The winner is presented a plaque. Expenses to attend the Annual Meeting are teach science as inquiry in Biology 1 and other paid. undergraduate courses (Alberts, 2005). I am Deadline: August 1 encouraged that we finally seem to have reached Merton Bernfield Memorial Award a tipping point in the seriousness with which Who is Eligible: An outstanding graduate student or postdoctoral fellow who has ex- most colleges and universities are addressing the celled in research teaching of introductory college science courses. How to Apply: The student or postdoc or his or her advisor should submit a one-page This proves that professors can indeed change! research statement, a list of publications, a copy of the abstract submitted to the current year’s Annual Meeting, and the advisor’s letter of recommendation. Postdocs may also submit the recommendation of their graduate student advisor. Duplicate applications Scientists Are a Resource from graduate students may be submitted for the Gilula and Bernfield Memorial Awards. There is a large, underutilized resource for spread- Awards: The winner is presented a plaque and will speak in a Minisymposium at the ing science throughout our societies: our scien- Annual Meeting and receives financial support to attend the Annual Meeting. tists. Because of the need to invigorate laborato- Deadline: August 1 ries with eager young minds, we are producing All applications and nominations should be submitted to: an excess of Ph.D.s for conventional scientific The American Society for Cell Biology careers. Many of these outstanding young peo- 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20814-2762 ple deserve and are demanding access to a much [email protected] broader range of career options as a part of their For names of prior awardees or more information, visit www.ascb.org, or contact the ASCB at (301) 347-9300, or [email protected].

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 3 MBC and the Economics of Scientific Publishing Should Molecular Biology of the Cell (MBC) to ASCB members, publishing such an article eliminate its print edition and use the cost sav- would cost the author $1,829. However, some ings to reduce author charges? The ASCB articles contain many color figures and cost a Council and the MBC Editorial Board have great deal more to publish, and some authors been confronting this question as they assess and Editorial Board members are concerned how the journal can best serve ASCB members that it is too expensive to publish in MBC. and others in the scientific community. The journal’s mission to provide an accessible venue for presentation of conceptual advances Journal Financing in cell biology is ill served by such barriers to The question of how much authors should pay publication. Should Molecular to publish their work in MBC is part of the larg- Biology of the er issue of how publication of a scientific journal Balancing Revenue Sources, should be financed. Scientific journals are usual- Cell eliminate Understanding Expenses ly sustained financially by some combination of Another important consideration in evaluating its print edition subscription sales, author charges, and advertis- business models for MBC is the role the journal and use the cost ing revenue. Different publishers have different plays in the overall financial health of the ASCB. savings to reduce business models. Some publishers charge high About 25% of MBC’s revenue is returned to author charges? institutional subscription rates and have low au- the Society and helps to support its many non- thor charges or none at all. But high subscrip- revenue-generating activities. So it is essential tion rates may limit access to a journal’s content that the journal’s revenues continue to exceed by the public and by scientists at institutions expenses as the ASCB seeks the fairest possible that cannot afford a subscription. This is espe- balance among revenue sources. cially the case if the journal has In seeking an appropriate a long embargo period before financial model for the journal, articles are available free. Council and ASCB staff have MBC’s institutional online also scrutinized the costs of subscription rate ($578) is low Print production publishing MBC. The second- and was increased this year accounts for 32% largest category of costs is for for the first time since 2002. of expenses even print production, including A low subscription rate is in though print sales printing, binding, paper, and keeping with the Society’s mailing. Print production goal of maximizing access to account for only accounts for 32% of expenses the scientific literature and is 4% of revenue. even though print sales account consistent with the fact that for only 4% of revenue. Thus the journal’s content is free print subscriptions do not pay after two months. Institutional for themselves. Rather, the cost subscribers and ASCB members of print is subsidized by other may also purchase a print subscription to MBC, revenue sources, such as color charges. So it is but only 4% of the journal’s income is from appropriate to ask whether the print edition of print sales, whereas 29% of its income is from the journal is necessary and whether it is worth online subscriptions (see figure, page 5). Reprint the expense of producing it. sales, royalties, and other sources of income But why not just increase the print make a minor contribution to MBC’s revenues. subscription price so that it covers the cost of There is no advertising income; the journal is printing the journal? The problem with that not attractive to advertisers because of its low approach is that the substantial, several-fold print run. price increase that would be necessary to cover Because subscription and other income is the cost of print would probably result in a not nearly enough to sustain the journal, MBC much lower renewal rate for print subscriptions. is also dependent on author page charges and Yet the cost of printing the journal would color charges. The average article published not decrease in proportion to a decline in the in MBC in 2006 was 11.7 pages long and print run because more than 85% of the cost included 2.9 color figures. With the 20% of printing is the so-called first-copy cost, the discount on page and color charges now offered expense that is incurred regardless of how many

4 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 copies are printed. So still-high costs would nisms in place to preserve online journals. These have to be borne by a smaller number of print mechanisms include LOCKSS (www.lockss.org) subscribers. Launching such a vicious cycle and Portico (www.portico.org). The LOCKSS of increasing prices and declining print runs (for “lots of copies keep stuff safe”) system, ini- would be tantamount to discontinuing the print tiated by Stanford University Libraries, provides edition. open-source software that enables librarians to maintain a local copy of an electronic journal. The Importance of Print Journals Accuracy and completeness of data are main- To help assess the importance of the print jour- tained by allowing LOCKSS computers at var- nal, the ASCB Council formed a special task ious institutions to compare data. Portico is a force in the summer of 2006. Council member nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving Kerry Bloom and Secretary Jean Schwarzbauer scholarly literature published in electronic form, served on the task force, which was chaired by with particular emphasis on migration of data one of us (Ward). On behalf of the task force, to new formats as they become available. In ad- ASCB staff surveyed MBC authors and Editorial dition, the complete contents of MBC are de- Board members about the importance of print posited with PubMed Central, where they will and about factors that authors consider when still be available even if they are no longer ac- they decide where to submit their manuscripts. cessible through the ASCB. The ASCB Council Among authors who responded to the will seek to determine whether these mecha- survey, only 5% said they read the print journal exclusively or read the print journal more often MBC Budgeted Revenues and Expenses, Fiscal than they read the online version. Sixty-nine percent never read the print version. Thirty- Year 2008 eight percent said they would be more likely to submit their papers to MBC if it eliminated the Revenues print version and reduced color charges. And Color charges yet 42% thought that it was important or very Online subscriptions 35% (library) important to publish their work in a journal that 29% has a print edition. Respondents to the Editorial Board survey gave similar answers. (Complete results of both surveys can be seen at www.ascb. org/files/mbc_survey_results.pdf.) Print subscriptions Why do some authors and editors believe and sales it is important to have a print edition of 4% the journal even though most never read it? Written responses to the survey and subsequent Reprints, royalties, discussions at the 2006 MBC Editorial Board Page charges and other 6% meeting focused on several concerns: 26% ■ Archiving: How can authors be sure that articles in an online-only journal will always be available? Expenses ■ Figure quality: Can an online journal offer figures of the same resolution as the print Other Cost of reprints 6% journal? 5% Copyediting, ■ Prestige: Will an online-only journal be typesetting, online perceived as inferior to a print journal? file preparation ■ “Browsability:” Can readers of an online 27% journal casually encounter interesting articles Salaries and overhead outside their field the way they might while 21% leafing through a print journal?

Addressing Concerns Online hosting The ASCB Council, the MBC Editorial Board, 6% and ASCB staff have been looking for ways to Submission and address these concerns. Some solutions may be peer review website at hand. Archiving of online journals, for exam- Print (printing, binding, 3% ple, has been a concern of librarians and pub- paper, mailing) lishers for several years, and there are mecha- 32%

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 5 nisms are appropriate and adequate to ensure probably inevitable. Thus it is important that that MBC’s content will continue to be available. scientist-run journals such as MBC pave the ASCB staff are also in discussion with HighWire way to ensure that the needs and concerns Press, which hosts the online version of MBC, of working scientists are addressed in this about figure quality and about transition. Assuming that the ways in which the online jour- problems discussed above can nal might be enhanced with re- be resolved, the disappearance spect to browsing. of print should be viewed as In assessing the importance a positive development rather of the print edition of MBC, Indeed, the than a loss, since the online it is important to note that the disappearance of journals that will replace print online journal is the journal of print journals is are a richer, more accessible, record. An article’s publication probably inevitable. and more cost-effective way to date is determined by the Thus it is important present research results. date of its appearance online In the meantime, in MBC In Press. The online that scientist-run the Council task force edition of MBC is already journals such as recommended that (1) the a richer and more useful MBC pave the way burden of color charges be research resource than the print to ensure that the partially ameliorated by version, because it includes needs and concerns providing authors who are everything that is in the print of working scientists ASCB members with a 20% edition plus supplemental data, are addressed in discount on color charges (in videos, and embedded links. addition to the 20% discount Additional enhancements this transition. on page charges that was are under consideration. already in place), and (2) the Interest in the print edition loss of revenue be offset by of MBC seems to be waning. increasing subscription rates Member and institutional and slightly increasing page print subscriptions have charges. The ASCB Executive declined 55% and 32%, respectively, since 2002. Committee concurred, and those changes are Indeed, the disappearance of print journals is now in effect. Although the task force did not recommend that the print version be abandoned last summer, it did suggest that the issue be revisited periodically. Council will do so at its May 2007 meeting, and we welcome your comments. The goal is to ensure that MBC continues to be an attractive and accessible venue for publication of important science. ■ —Sandra L. Schmid, MBC Editor-in-Chief —Gary Ward, ASCB Treasurer —Mark Leader, ASCB Publications Director

6 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007

The ASCB 47th Annual Meeting December 1–5, 2007, Washington Convention Center, Washington, DC Bruce M. Alberts, President ■ R. Dyche Mullins, Program Chair ■ John Hammer, Local Arrangements Chair

Keynote Symposium Minisymposia

Saturday, December 1 Apoptosis and Organelles Mechanics of Cytoskeletal Systems New Biologists for the New Biology—6:00 pm Seamus J. Martin, University of Dublin, Trinity College Margaret L. Gardel, The University of Chicago William Bialek, Princeton University Donald Newmeyer, La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Wolfgang Losert, University of Maryland, College Park Shirley Ann Jackson, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Immunology Mechanics of Epigenetic Regulation Assembling Complex Cytoskeletal Structures Gary Felsenfeld, National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Jacek Gaertig, University of Georgia Kidney Diseases/NIH Symposia Dave Kovar, The University of Chicago Cynthia Wolberger, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine/HHMI

Biological Oscillators Mechanisms of Membrane Trafficking Sunday, December 2 Jay C. Dunlap, Dartmouth Medical School Juan Bonifacino, National Institute of Child Health & Human Membrane Dynamics—8:00 am Hideo Iwasaki, Nagoya University Development/NIH Pietro De Camilli, Yale University School of Medicine/ Elizabeth Conibear, University of British Columbia HHMI Cell Biology and Disease Kit Pogliano, University of California, San Diego Lucy A. Godley, The University of Chicago Mitosis and Meiosis Kai Simons, Max Planck Institute, Dresden Timothy J. Mitchison, Harvard Medical School Sue Biggins, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Dean Dawson, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation Architecture of Signaling Systems—10:30 am Cell Biology of the Synapse Richard M. Losick, Harvard University Edwin R. Chapman, University of Wisconsin–Madison Molecular Motors: Alone and in Groups Tobias Meyer, Stanford University School of Medicine Graeme W. Davis, University of California, San Francisco Gijsje Koenderink, Institute for Atomic and Molecular Physics Pamela A. Silver, Harvard Medical School Daniela Nicastro, Brandeis University Cell Cycle Monday, December 3 Michael Glotzer, The University of Chicago Neuronal Cell Biology Cell Biology of Metazoan Development— Sue L. Jaspersen, Stowers Institute for Medical Research Michael D. Ehlers, Duke University Medical Center/HHMI 8:00 am Franck Polleux, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Kathryn Anderson, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Cell Migration/Motility Center Jeff Hardin, University of Wisconsin–Madison Nuclear Import and Export Marie-Anne Felix, Jacques Monod Institute, CNRS Irina Kaverina, Vanderbilt University Medical Center Charles N. Cole, Dartmouth Medical School Richard Harland, University of California, Berkeley Richard W. Wozniak, University of Alberta Chromatin Architecture and Remodeling Laura Rusche, Duke University Medical Center Nuclear Organization and Dynamics Unconventional Organelles—10:30 am Jerry Workman, Stowers Institute for Medical Research Sui Huang, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Martina Brueckner, Yale University School of Medicine Medicine Stephen Gould, Johns Hopkins University Cytoskeletal Dynamics and Polarity Susan R. Wente, Vanderbilt University Medical Center Yoshinori Ohsumi, National Institute for Basic Biology Ed Munro, Center for Cell Dynamics, University of Washington Prokaryotic Cell Biology Tuesday, December 4 William Saxton, University of California, Santa Cruz Zemer Gitai, Princeton University Geography of Signaling—8:00 am David Z. Rudner, Harvard Medical School Howard Chang, Stanford University Epithelial Morphogenesis Deborah Hogan, Dartmouth Medical School M. Thomas Lecuit, Developmental Biology Institute of Protein Folding Elly Tanaka, Max Planck Institute, Dresden Marseilles-Luminy Elizabeth Craig, University of Wisconsin–Madison Jennifer Zallen, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Suzannah L. Rutherford, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Force and Form in Cell Biology—10:30 am Center Dennis Discher, University of Pennsylvania Evolution of Eukaryotic Endomembrane Systems Michael P. Sheetz, Columbia University John A. Fuerst, University of Queensland Regulatory Roles of Lipid Microdomains Valerie M. Weaver, University of California, San Francisco Trevor Lithgow, University of Melbourne Barbara A. Baird, Cornell University Michael Edidin, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Extracellular Matrix as a Memory Storage Device Wednesday, December 5 Linda Gay Griffith, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Results of Working Group Discussion Single Molecule Studies—8:00 am Patricia Keely, University of Wisconsin–Madison R. Dyche Mullins, University of California, San Francisco, Steve Kowalczykowski, University of California, Davis Moderator Paul Selvin, University of Illinois High-Tech Cell Biology Michelle Wang, Cornell University Grant Jensen, California Institute of Technology RNA Silencing Mechanisms Kendall Knight, University of Massachusetts Medical School Natasha J. Caplen, National Cancer Institute/NIH Cell Biology in Ten Years—10:30 am Alla Grishok, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Benjamin F. Cravatt, III, The Host–Pathogens Interactions and Innate Scripps Research Immunity Signaling through Cell Adhesion Proteins Institute For more Joanne Engel, University of California, San Francisco David A. Calderwood, Yale University School of Medicine David Haussler, Jean Greenberg, The University of Chicago Masatoshi Takeichi, RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology University of information, California, Santa contact the ASCB: Intermediate Filaments and Nuclear Lamins Stem Cell Niches Cruz Pamela K. Geyer, University of Iowa Leanne Jones, Salk Institute for Biological Studies Stanislas Leibler, (301) 347-9300 Birgit Lane, IMB Singapore and University of Dundee Haifan Lin, Yale University Rockefeller www.ascb.org/ University Making ’omics Useful to Cell Biologists X-ylation and Cell Signaling meetings John D. Aitchison, Institute for Systems Biology Holly A. Ingraham, University of California, San Francisco Nevan J. Krogan, University of California, San Francisco Kim Orth, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

8 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007

INCYTES from MBC April, Vol. 18, No. 4 ERK Activity and G1 Phase Progression: Identifying Dispensable versus Essential Activities and Primary versus Secondary Targets Jessie Villanueva, Yuval Yung, Janice L. Walker, and Richard K. Assoian Cell cycle progression through G1 is, in large part, determined by the production of cyclin D, a downstream target of mitogenic signaling. Cyclin D is rate-limiting for the formation of cyclin D–cdk4/6 complexes. Active cdk4/6 and cdk2 in turn phosphorylate E2F transcription regulators and activate transcription of Skp2, an E3 ubiquitin ligase subunit that targets the cdk inhibitors p21cip1 and p27 for degradation. Cyclin A, another E2F-dependent gene, is also induced, and the formation of an active cyclin A–cdk2 complex triggers entry into S phase. Sustained activation of the MAP kinases ERK1/2 was known to be required for cell cycle progression in serum-stimulated quiescent cells, but its exact function in cell cycle signaling was unresolved. Here, using the simple yet elegant approach of temporally adding or washing out U0126, a specific and rapidly reversible ERK1/2 inhibitor, the authors show that the critical ERK signaling period is restricted to 3–6 hours after mitogenic stimulation of quiescent cells. Through a combination of forced expression and siRNA-mediated depletion, the authors further establish that cyclin D is the primary and essential cell cycle target of this mid-G1 ERK signaling.

Zic3 Is Required for Maintenance of Pluripotency in Embryonic Stem Cells Linda Shushan Lim, Yuin-Han Loh, Weiwei Zhang, Yixun Li, Xi Chen, Yinan Wang, Huck-Hui Ng, and Lawrence W. Stanton Embryonic stem (ES) cells derived from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst are able to undergo unlimited self-renewal and, after induction, can differentiate into cell types from all three embryonic germ layer lineages, ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm. The transcription factors Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2 are master regulators that function to maintain the stem cell phenotypes of self-renewal and pluripotency. Here, the authors identify the zinc finger transcription factor Zic3 as another key transcription regulator required to maintain ES cell proliferation and pluripotency. Zic3 is expressed in undifferentiated, proliferative ES cells but quickly repressed upon differentiation. RNAi-mediated knock-down of Zic3, a known downstream target of Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2, results in increased expression of endodermal lineage markers in both mouse and human ES cells. Interestingly, stable shRNA-mediated suppression of Zic3 in ES cells also results in repression of Nanog. Thus, Zic3 is a fourth critical component of the transcriptional network contributing to ES cell proliferation and pluripotency, and hence to their therapeutic potential.

Cornichon-like Protein (CNIL) Facilitates Secretion of HB-EGF and Regulates Proper Development of Cranial Nerves Hideharu Hoshino, Tsukasa Uchida, Toshiaki Otsuki, Shoko Kawamoto, Kousaku Okubo, Masatoshi Takeichi, and Osamu Chisaka Rhombomeres are segmented structures that appear transiently during development of the hindbrain and differentially direct the migration of cranial neural crest cells (NCCs). The EGF receptor family member ErbB4 is selectively expressed in odd-numbered rhombomeres (e.g., r3 and r5) and is involved in generating repulsive signals that prevent NCCs from entering the mesenchyme adjoining r3 and r5, thus establishing a segmented migration pattern. CNIL, a homologue of Drosophila chornicon (cni) and yeast Erv14p, is also specifically expressed in r3 and r5. Cni and Erv14p function to promote the incorporation of specific cargo molecules into COPII vesicles that bud from the ER. The authors report that CNIL interacts with and enhances secretion of the ErbB4 ligand HB-EGF (heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor). Expression of a dominant-negative, truncated CNIL or siRNA-mediated depletion of CNIL perturbs NCC migration and leads to defective cranial nerve development. Thus, CNIL-regulated secretion of the ErbB4 agonist HB-EGF in r3 and r5 ensures the spatially restricted activation of ErbB4 and establishment of a repulsive barrier that patterns NCC migration.

Apical EGF Receptor Signaling: Regulation of Stretch-dependent Exocytosis in Bladder Umbrella Cells Elena M. Balestreire and Gerard Apodaca Umbrella cells form the outermost layer of the uroepithelium that lines the bladder. As the bladder fills, and in response to mechanical stretch stimuli, the apical surface area of umbrella cells increases to maintain a tight barrier. This increase occurs in two phases, a rapid early phase due to exocytosis of subapical intracellular vesicles and a slower late phase, that together result in an ~50% increase in the apical surface area of umbrella cells, as determined by capacitance measurements. Here it is shown that in addition to stretch stimuli, the late phase increase in apical surface area requires activation of the EGF receptor (EGFR) on the apical/ mucosal surface and signaling through the MAP kinase ERK1/2 pathway. Sensitivity to cycloheximide and brefeldin A establish that EGFR- dependent increases in surface area require new protein synthesis and transport through the secretory pathway. Interestingly, activation of the EGFR occurs via an autocrine mechanism whereby HB-EGF, synthesized as a transmembrane precursor in umbrella cells, is cleaved on the surface by metalloproteinases to release the EGFR ligand. ■

10 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 11 DEAR Labby

Dear Labby, I’m a third year graduate student, and my professor and I have gotten into a squabble about a “revise vs. submit elsewhere” decision we must make on my first manuscript. It came back from a “prestige” journal with a flat rejection; the editor did not leave the door open for resubmission with new experiments and data. However, I think I actually can respond to the reviewers’ numerous problems with new experiments. It might take me another four to six months. (I am the only author other than my professor, so there are no complexities from other people weighing in.) But my professor is insisting that instead we “drop down a notch” (as she put it) and submit to a lesser journal. At first I thought I could convince her to let me do the additional work. But after two weeks of wrangling, she dug in her heels. (This is the first disagreement of any kind we have ever had.) Her argument is that there is no guarantee the new experiments I want to do will work, or that they will suffice to ensure publication in the “prestige” journal. On the other hand, this will be my first publication (wherever it appears) so don’t I have the final say? —Not a Dropdown

Dear Not a Dropdown, You and your professor are dealing with a decision that can be among the strategically most demanding of any that confront us in research. Not surprisingly, it is accompanied by a high level of anxiety. But your scenario may be more clear-cut than is often the case. First, and as a general principle, your professor has more experience than you have in recognizing how much the “door has been left open” by the first journal. You should recognize and accept that. From your description, the door sounds not only closed, but even locked. And your professor also makes a good point in arguing that there is no guarantee the new experiments will work. More importantly, this additional work may not improve the cogency or expand the overall gravitas of the study sufficiently to gain its acceptance. Finally, while, of course, it is admirable that you want your first paper to appear in the best possible journal, your professor may be under the contravening pressure of demonstrating productivity and completing grant renewals. These are not minor issues, especially now. Much looms in your characterization of submitting to another journal as a “dropdown.” While there are journals that are distinctly in a third tier, your discussions with your professor have presumably identified a journal that she feels good about. It’s probably one that is just a bit beneath the “beautiful” journals. For example, the ASCB’s journal Molecular Biology of the Cell has a superb reputation that balances an editorial demand for excellence with a fair-minded approach to review by true peers. (Hint!) What more typically confounds decisions about resubmission is that the “higher” journal has left the door quite open pending a few key experiments or new controls. In such instances the seductive belief that such additional work will win acceptance of the paper comes into conflict with the desire/need to publish soon, especially within a given calendar year or grant submission/ review cycle. In your case, the higher journal sounds like it should not be given much weight on this “seduction scale.” Bear in mind that most successful scientists do not publish their first paper as a student in one of the highest journals. Labby’s first was in Analytical Biochemistry. A cell biology undergraduate published her first paper in a journal like the one you consider a “dropdown.” But her next was in Nature, and she went on to become one of the most successful biological scientists in the world. The fact that as a third-year student you already have submitted a paper, with no other authors other than your professor, bodes very well indeed! ■ —Labby

Direct your questions to [email protected]. Authors of questions chosen for publication may indicate whether or not they wish to be identified. Submissions may be edited for space and style.

12 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 PUBLIC POLICY Briefing

Zerhouni Criticizes Bush Stem Cell Policy During a March Senate hearing on the funding study with the different methods that have crisis at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), emerged since 2001.” NIH Director Elias Zerhouni sharply criticized Opponents of embryonic stem cell research the current federal policy regarding federal fund- in Congress often cite adult stem cell research as ing of research with human embryonic stem a successful alternative to embryonic stem cell cells. The policy limits federally funded human research. In response to a question about the embryonic stem cell research to the use of stem role adult stem cells play in research, Zerhouni cells derived before August 9, 2001. said, “The presentations about adult stem In response to a question cells having as much or more from Sen. Tom Harkin (D- potential than embryonic stem IA), chair of the Senate Labor, cells, in my view, do not hold Health & Human Services scientific water, if you will. I and Education Appropriations think they are overstated. I think Subcommittee, Zerhouni said we do not know at this point that he thought that the cell where the breakthroughs will lines available under the current come from. I think scientists policy “will not be sufficient who work in adult stem cells to do all the research we need themselves will tell you that we to do for the reasons that need to pursue as vigorously you mentioned, but the most embryonic stem cells. My point “[I]t is clear today important one is that these cell of view is that all angles in stem that American lines have exhibited instability NIH Director Elias Zerhouni cell research should be pursued.” science would be from the genetic standpoint and Before concluding his it’s not possible for me to see questions, Sen. Harkin thanked better served and how we can continue the momentum of science Dr. Zerhouni for “a very profound and the nation would be in stem cell research with the cell lines that we courageous statement.” better served if we have currently at NIH that can be funded.” To view the entire hearing, including Dr. let our scientists Zerhouni continued, “So from my Zerhouni’s remarks on stem cell research, go to have access to standpoint, it is clear today that American http://appropriations.senate.gov/Media/2007_03_ more cell lines …” science would be better served and the nation 19_Webcast_of_the_March_19_Hearing_on_ would be better served if we let our scientists NIH_Funding.ram. ■ have access to more cell lines, so that they can —Kevin M. Wilson Brugge Testifies before Congress

Long-time ASCB member Joan Brugge testi- devastating impact on the trajectory of cancer fied at a Senate Labor, Health research.” & Human Services and Brugge also told the Education Appropriations “Four years of flat Committee that budget Committee hearing on the funding have had a cuts have had a significant effect on the approval of impact that reduced fund- devastating impact ing to the National Institutes grant applications. While the of Health (NIH) is having on on the trajectory of overall success rate for grant biomedical research. cancer research.” applications at the National Brugge told the Committee Cancer Institute is 20%, that recent budget reductions Brugge said that the average are severely affecting research. success rate for all first-time She said, “Four years of flat funding have had a submissions of new grants is around 10%.

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 13 During questioning from Sen. Tom Harkin labs to cut back, let staff go, and redirect efforts (D-IA), Brugge elaborated that to finding alternative funding the success rate for first-time and resubmission, it creates an submissions to the NCI of new environment of insecurity and grants from new investigators is anxiety that is anathema to the around 5% and that it is 17% conduct of creative, innovative for new grants from established exploration.” researchers. To view the entire hearing, Brugge said that “the vast including Joan Brugge’s testimony, go majority of scientists are subjected to http://appropriations.senate.gov/ to a lapse in funding and the Media/2007_03_19_Webcast_of_ negative consequences of this. Not the_March_19_Hearing_on_NIH_ only can a lapse in funding force Joan Brugge Funding.ram. ■ —Kevin M. Wilson

JSC Events Last month, the Joint Steering Committee for Public Policy (JSC) held a Capitol Hill Day that coincided with a Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus. Twenty-three JSC-member scientists traveled to Washington, DC, and met with Members of Congress or their staff to discuss the importance of U.S. funding for biomedical research.

Clockwise from lower left: Gary Small of the University of California, Los Angeles, presented the March 14 JSC Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus on Alzheimer’s disease: Early Detection and Intervention; left to right: Amy Stark, Mary Buschmann, and Sara Szuchet of the University of Chicago paused in front of the U.S. Capitol; Mark Sundrud of Harvard Medical School, Elaine Strass of the Genetics Society of America, Arthur Lustig of Tulane University, and Corey Morris of Harvard Medical School posed after a Hill Day meeting; Davis Mumbengegwi of the University of Iowa met with Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-IA); Eric Buck of the Medical University of South Carolina met with Delores DeCosta from the office of Rep. Henry E. Brown, Jr. (R-SC); and Small spoke during the Caucus.

14 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 The Upcoming Events Funding Joint Steering Committee Crisis for Public Policy How Has It Affected You and Your May 9 Research? Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus Biomedical research ■ Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes champions in Congress Speaker: Mitchell Lazar, University of Pennsylvania are particularly interested in knowing the impact May 23 limited budgets are having Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus on their constituents and ■ Synthetic Biology and the War on Malaria Speaker: Jay D. Keasling, University of California, Berkeley the American biomedical research enterprise. June 6 Have you been forced to Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus cut back on the number of ■ Budding Scientists: Students from the Intel Science Talent Search people in your lab? Have Emcee: Dudley Herschbach, Nobel Laureate, Harvard University you lost your funding? Has important research been slowed down or halted? www.jscpp.org Have you been unable to buy critical equipment? If the funding slowdown has adversely affected you Pollard to Become and your research, please take a moment to share Public Policy your story. Send your account to Kevin Wilson, ASCB Public Policy Committee Chair Director, at kwilson@ascb. ASCB President Bruce M. Alberts has an- org. Your name will not nounced the appointment of Thomas D. be used without your Pollard of Yale University as Chair of the permission. ■ ASCB Public Policy Committee, effec- tive May 1. He will replace Lawrence S.B. Goldstein, who chaired the Committee for the past three-and-a-half years and was The ASCB Thomas Pollard vice chair for three years before becom- Public Policy ing chair. Committee Pollard, an ASCB member since 1970, has served on the Public Policy, Nominating, and Needs You! WICB Committees; on the MBC Editorial Board; as Chair of the Congressional Liaison Committee; and as ASCB President from Lawrence 1987–1988. Goldstein Goldstein, of the University of California, San Diego/HHMI, has been an ASCB member since 1984. In addition to chairing the Public Policy Committee, he See www.ascb.org/public policy/project50/index.cfm has served as ASCB Secretary, Chair of the Membership or email [email protected] for Committee, and as a member of the MBC Editorial Board. ■ more information.

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 15 WOMEN in Cell Biology Creative Approaches in the Current Funding Environment Funding for research is not available for all the funded immediately to provide continuous good science being proposed to federal and pri- salary coverage. Indeed, frugality in research vate agencies. Most new and renewal appli- spending should start immediately upon cations are not funded the first time around, receiving a grant award; in this funding climate, and resubmissions have become the norm (see it is useful to have monies remaining at the end “Revising your NIH grant application,” ASCB of the grant period since a no-cost extension Newsletter, January 2007). Hence anxiety is high request to the funding agency allows use of these about how to continue to maintain the momen- unexpended funds across the next few months. tum of a research group and provide salaries for Such a request must be made prior to the end of research personnel. a given funding period. There is much debate about the causes for To bridge a shortfall while applying this funding situation, for this funding crisis, for funds, start by talking with your grant actually. This article will focus on what to do in administrator(s). Occasionally federal agencies the face of this reality. What are some alternative can provide such bridging funds, but they must approaches to funding in the short- and long- be requested. Some campus departments may term? The suggestions offered have been gleaned be able to support research on a small scale for from senior scientists as well as a short period of time, and a from short articles published in few institutions (usually those a variety of media. with substantial endowments) If you are not awarded an The current may have funds earmarked anticipated grant, persistence situation, with specifically to maintain in re-applying, and in sometimes a research groups over a short applying to multiple sources, 5–10% payline, period. None of these funds are is essential. Since persistence is is discouraging, volunteered; a strongly justified a characteristic of those doing frightening, and request must be made. research, this practice will stressful. Taking an Salaries for graduate presumably come naturally students and postdoctoral even in the face of discouraging active role in turning fellows might be covered reviews. Unfortunately, this around, e.g., via by fellowship applications … frugality in persistence alone will not pay the Congressional to a variety of professional research spending the bills. Websites are available Liaison Committee societies and philanthropic should start that list grant opportunities, or Project 50, organizations (e.g., American immediately such as the AAAS Grantsnet is strongly Society for Microbiology, (http://sciencecareers. encouraged. American Heart Association, upon receiving a sciencemag.org/funding?C American Cancer Society, etc.). grant award … FID=422590&CFTOKEN Some of these societies and =50081533) and a Stanford organizations are listed on the University site (http://med.stanford.edu/rmg/ above-cited websites. You should also ask your funding/). There are also sites by subscription own professional societies about such funding (e.g., http://gtionline.fdncenter.org/). Readers opportunities. Many of these will be short-term are encouraged to send ASCB information on (e.g., 12 months); some will be shorter, covering sites they have found useful in the search for a summer or travel to a meeting or course. Each funds; these will be posted on the WICB page of request takes time to write, but success may the ASCB website at www.ascb.org). allow continuity for the research group and/or support for a given young professional. Preparing for Funding Gaps Some institutions require scientists or faculty Planning ahead is, of course, critical. No longer to obtain a large proportion or all of their can previously funded researchers reasonably salaries from grant funding. Most institutions assume that the next grant application will be also allow their personnel to use personal time

16 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 for consulting, a potential salary supplement in ence and technology needed a shot in the arm. a funding shortfall. Investigators who assume Since then, there have been peaks and valleys institutional administrative positions have their in the funding graphics. The current situation, salaries paid from institutional rather than with sometimes a 5–10% payline, is discour- research funding, and research supervision can aging, frightening, and stressful. Taking an ac- continue while in such a position. This is not tive role in turning this around, e.g., via the an advertisement to seek an administrative post, Congressional Liaison Committee (www.jscpp. albeit institutional leadership can be a positive org/clc.cfm) or Project 50, is strongly encour- experience, but rather a possibility to consider. aged. In the meantime, being creative and bold Of course, if the PI has personal resources, about taking strategies to keep the research go- these can be brought to bear in the short- or ing might include some of the suggestions here, long-term. In earlier centuries, research was unorthodox as some of them may seem. ■ supported by the wealthy (e.g., Charles Darwin’s —Caroline Kane for the father subsidized his research career at the start), Women in Cell Biology Committee or research was done inexpensively (e.g., Gregor Mendel’s garden). Unfortunately, most cell biology research entails more than growing and counting peas. Celebrating the Family of Collaboration is also a good strategy. Supply funds can come from collaborations with other Science research groups, on- or off-campus, whose work is closely related. Sharing equipment and service OneOne of the best partsparts about being a contracts on equipment with other department cell biologist is the opportunityopportunity to members can also free up money for supplies. visit univuniversitiesersities acracrossoss the countrcountryy and talk with graduate students Recruiting Undergraduates, and postdoctoral fellows about their experiences. During such Economizing on Supplies visits, members of the WWomenomen If at an academic institution, another way to in Cell BBiologyiology ((WICB)WICB) keep one’s research on the move during a person- Committee nel salary shortfall is to recruit talented under- graduates into your lab. These students are en- thusiastic, intelligent, and interested in research experience. They are fun to train, and they of- ten can receive course credit in addition to vol- Sandy Schmid and family unteering in the research effort. The experience, when productive for the undergraduate volunteer as well as for the research group, is a win–win sit- uation that can keep the science progressing. Frugality was noted earlier as a way to provide carryover funds in a no-cost extension during the grant re-application process. Economizing strategies are very group- Esther Verheyen and family dependent, but could be as modest as limiting learned that a large number of the number of “kits” purchased or bundling younger scientists are feeling a orders with other research groups to enable desperate need to see real-life discounted pricing on such kits. Surprisingly, examples of cell biologists who small but essential laboratory supplies such as have children and still do great gloves, aluminum foil, paper towels, plastic science. wrap, etc., can often be obtained more cheaply With this goal in mind, Raul Andino and family at large outlet stores than at one’s institutional we’ve created a photo gallery warehouse. Even these “small-fry” economies to celebrate the families of cell can add up, and they may become essential if a biologists and their children (www.ascb.org/wicb/index.html). The funding hiatus extends longer than anticipated. WICB-sponsored careers lunch at the ASCB Annual Meeting provides an opportunity, for those interested, to discuss issues of life balance and career Encouraging Advocacy choices. The WICB Committee is working hard to try to make it easier for Funding for research exploded in the ear- members with children to participate fully in ASCB activities. If you have ly 1960s with the awareness that American sci- suggestions, please let us know. Contact Cheryl Lehr at [email protected]. ■

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 17 ASCB Profile Christian Sardet Christian Sardet says he is old enough to re- Véronique Kleiner made Exploring the Living member cell biology meetings before the inven- Cell, a conventional, put-it-in-the-player, 180- tion of the poster. “There were thousands of minute DVD featuring lab visits with leading these little five-minute talks,” Sardet recalls with researchers including Paul Nurse, Kai Simons, a shudder. “Then came the poster session and and Eric Karsenti. Reviewing Exploring the it was a revolution.” But now a new revolution Living Cell last June in Nature Cell Biology, is needed in the way science is presented, says Thoru Pederson singled out a novel use for the Sardet, and he doesn’t mean more PowerPoint DVD in wooing donors. Pederson wrote that slides. when addressing lay audiences “for eleemosy- Sardet studies the role of calcium pulse nary purposes,” words go only so far. “There signaling at fertilization in controlling the cell comes a point when the layperson just has to cycle and embryonic polarity. He leads the see the real thing. One can troop a small do- BioMarCell group at the Station Zoologique, nor group into the lab, but for larger audiences, Villefranche-sûr-Mer, a historic marine research some of the segments in this DVD will be terrif- station on the Mediterranean that is supported ic,” Pederson continued. In fundraising for “our Christian Sardet by the French national research agency, the glorious profession,” according to Pederson, is Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique “where this attractive DVD may have its greatest (CNRS), and administered by the Université ultimate value.” Pierre et Marie Curie in Paris. Outside of Stanford University’s David Epel says that molecular and cellular embryology, Sardet is best Sardet’s strong aesthetic sensibilities have always known as a tireless agitator for cell biology to go made him stand out in their field. “Christian visual, to go public, and to go online. just revels in beautiful images of science,” says In 2001, Sardet started the Cinema of the Epel. He remembers a Sardet platform talk on Cell video contest at the joint European Life pronuclear movement in ctenophores (comb Scientist Organization (ELSO) and French cell jellies). The work was great, Epel recalls, and the biology society (SBCF) meeting in Nice and visuals were stunning. “Christian is captivated established a site called BioClips to webcast the by movement within cells. He’s drawn by best films (www.bioclips.com). The selected aesthetics to these beautiful movements in shorts on BioClips are a mixture of scientific phenomena, but then he goes on to find out sobriety and whimsy. The 2004 winner, Twisted fundamental things about what’s going on Sisters, by Alex McDougall and colleagues, in early cell division, axis determination, and features stunning computer-enhanced video polarity.” of homologous chromosome separation plus a Epel’s favorite Christian Sardet story comes Outside of molecular heart-throb soundtrack of an old Jacques Brel from Sicily when the two were team-teaching and cellular torch song, “Ne me quitte pas” (“Don’t Leave a summer short course there. “Christian and I were walking in the streets of Palermo. There embryology, Sardet Me”). The result is both funny and beautiful. Somehow, the computer animators got the was an ice cream cone upside down on the is best known as a chromatid ends to wave good-bye tragically. street, melting and making this little pattern tireless agitator for For Marius Explores the Cell, a cartoon about around it. And Christian said, ‘Ah! Street cell biology to go organelles that is squarely aimed at kids, Sardet art!’”—proof, Epel believes, that, “Christian visual, to go public, himself provided the voice track of Marius, a is someone who sees art and beauty in the and to go online. friendly virus inhaled by the sleeping Fabrice. biological world and in the real world.” (“He’s human,” says the virus, “and a little complicated.”) Cinema of the Cell will return Microscopes and Jimi Hendrix this September at the 2007 ELSO meeting in If Christian Sardet is a biologist with the eyes of Dresden, and Sardet is expecting a new crop of an artist, he is also a Frenchman who is almost BioClips submissions. a one-man trans-Atlantic bridge. Sardet was born in Melle, a village in a still-rural region Seeing the Real Thing of western France near Poitiers. Sardet grew up Off the Web, Sardet has been making biology fascinated by microscopes and the wonders they films since the mid-1980s. In 2006, with back- revealed in pond water. His fascination with ing from CNRS Image Production, Sardet and things American came from late-night radio.

18 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 “Every night at 10:00 pm, there was this show approaches to receptor protein structure. His that had all this fantastic jazz,” Sardet explains. work on bovine rhodopsin sparked his interest “This was also the beginning of rock ‘n’ roll, and in membrane dynamics, Sardet recalls. “I got so from the radio I knew about the Beatles and a good sense of the three-dimensionality of Jimi Hendrix.” macromolecules while I was in Gif.” But his true After taking a degree in biochemical scientific calling arrived in 1975 on the back of For Marius Explores engineering in Lyons, Sardet took off for the a holiday postcard. It was from a British postdoc the Cell, a cartoon States in 1968. (“So I missed all that stuff in in the Luzzati lab who was vacationing on the France,” he says, about “les événements de mai,” Côte d’Azur. He’d written to tell Sardet that about organelles the student strikes and government crackdown he’d been walking on the beach at Villefranche that is squarely that marked his university contemporaries at when he ran into someone from the marine aimed at kids, home.) Sardet was bound for Philadelphia, station there, “who was looking for someone just Sardet himself where he found his first U.S. post as a lab like you.” It was Jean Maetz, a fish physiologist provided the voice technician for George Rothblat at the Wistar studying the cellular mechanisms that govern track of Marius, Institute. In Philadelphia, Sardet got a second fresh-to-saltwater adaptation. Maetz needed a friendly virus author credit on a paper about cholesterol a biochemist with a strong cell biology slant uptake and a push toward graduate school from to look at chloride permeability in fish gill inhaled by the Rothblat. Sardet also met his wife-to-be, Dana epithelium. This was indeed someone just like sleeping Fabrice. Rosen, then a Bryn Mawr undergraduate. They Sardet. married in 1970. She is a filmmaker who has Sardet had little notion of the marine station’s worked on projects in both France and the U.S. history when he first went to Villefranche in Their two sons, Noë, 28, and Nico, 27, who 1976. The main building started life as a naval are both computer graphic and multimedia arsenal for the Kingdom of Savoie and was used designers, have dual citizenship. Nico lives in as a prison for captured Turkish galley slaves. In San Francisco and Noë is moving to Montreal. science history, it was where Hermann Fol, the Christian Sardet’s other American first to witness the penetration of a starfish egg connections include his 1972 doctorate in by sperm, started a scientific station to more comparative biochemistry from University fully explore marine embryos. (Fol disappeared of California, Berkeley, where he did his under mysterious circumstances on a collecting thesis with Rosemary Ostwald on cholesterol trip off the coast of Libya in 1891.) Maybe exchange between plasma lipoproteins and red Fol’s ghost was an influence, but at Villefranche cells. Sardet was back in California in 1983 Sardet’s interests moved from chloride for a sabbatical year at Stanford University’s permeability in fish gill epithelial cells to Hopkins Marine Station. After that, Sardet chloride permeability in sea urchin eggs. From was a summertime regular at the Marine there, the study of fertilization was a logical step. Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole. He also served as a “scientist-in-residence” at the San Echinoids, Protists, and Tunicates Francisco Exploratorium when he worked on its The 1980s were an exciting time in embryonic interactive imaging installation. And despite all physiology as new molecular and imaging tools those pre-poster, five-minute talks, Sardet has revealed free calcium as a driving force in em- been an ASCB member since graduate school. bryonic activation, cell cycle control, and dif- In Philadelphia, ferentiation. Much of this work was done in the Sardet got a second A Career at Home humblest of marine creatures, including sea ur- Although his American connections are strong, chins, protists, and tunicates, but the excite- author credit on Sardet made his scientific career in France. ment doubled with the discovery that the path- a paper about Besides his leadership of the CNRS cell biology ways elucidated in lower organisms are highly cholesterol uptake unit at Villefranche, he was the president of the conserved and have analogs in mammalian em- and a push toward French cell biology society from 2000 to 2003 bryonic development. In 1985, Sardet became graduate school from and the local organizer for the 2004 and 2005 chief of a new CNRS marine cell biology unit [George] Rothblat. ELSO/SBCF meetings in Nice. He also serves at Villefranche that focused on fertilization, the on a long list of French and European academic role of calcium in sperm motility and chemo- advisory committees. taxis for setting axis polarity and shaping the cell Sardet admits that it took him a while to cortex. find his research focus. On his return to France, Sardet says he was influenced by Lewis his first postdoctoral post was with Vitorrio Tilney’s visit to Villefranche and his sabbatical Luzzati at the Center for Molecular Genetics, work with David Epel and Dan Mazia at the a CNRS facility in the Paris suburb of Gif-sûr- Hopkins Marine Station. He also cites his Yvette. The emphasis there was on biophysical summer work on ascidian eggs with Lionel

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 19 Jaffe and Annelies Specksnijder at MBL, where the abundant planktons along the coast near they discovered calcium wave pulsing during Villefranche. meiosis. But the man who first converted him Sardet has put his marine location to to ascidians, according to Sardet, was a Croatian prime scientific use, says Michael Whitaker, a scientist visiting at Villefranche, Marko Zalokar. physiologist at Newcastle University in England Ascidians, which are commonly called sea who has collaborated with Sardet and has squirts, belong to the most distant evolutionary visited the station many times. “Christian has “Christian is the group that still shares several common chordate developed an extraordinary biological resource most zoological of characteristics with vertebrates. “In fact, it has at Villefranche that he’s been using to look the physiologists been shown recently by Delsuc and Chourrout at a range of different subtle physiological who work on [Delsuc et al. (2006). Nature 439, 965–968] that phenomena related to development in a number fertilization. He’s they are our most direct invertebrate ancestors,” of different marine species.” According to the person who says Sardet. “Much of what we’ve learned about Whitaker, “Christian is the most zoological of has the broadest calcium signaling [in ascidians] has turned out the physiologists who work on fertilization. He’s to have direct application in mammals. It is the the person who has the broadest understanding understanding of perfect model for exploring my present interests of the diversity and variety in marine the diversity and in how embryonic axes are set up and in the organisms.” variety in marine structure and role of the cortex.” Sardet is also the person with the broadest organisms.” understanding of the power of images, declares An Extraordinary Resource Whitaker, who was in the audience at ELSO Aside from the oceanfront scenery, one great ad- for the 2005 session of Cinema of the Cell. An vantage of working in a marine research station excited crowd packed the large auditorium to is that you can shop around for model organ- overflowing, Whitaker remembers. “The people isms. Sardet has worked on a long line of ma- who’d entered obviously put a lot of effort into rine creatures from sea urchins to ctenophones their films. It was brilliant.” ■ to chaetongnaths (predatory marine worms) to —John Fleischman

20 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 FEI MEMBERS in the News

Michael Brown of the University of Texas Southwestern Pascale Cossart of the Institut Pasteur, an ASCB Medical Center, an ASCB member since 1980, received member since 1993, will receive the GlaxoSmithKline the Builders of Science Award from Research!America. International Member of the Year Award from the American Society for Microbiology. ASM honors Cossart for her remarkable research in the molecular and cellular bases of bacterial pathogenesis.

Ilene K. Gipson of Schepens Eye Research Institute, Joseph Goldstein of the University of Texas an ASCB member since 1974, will receive the 2007 Southwestern Medical Center, an ASCB member since Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 1980, received the Builders of Science Award from Friedenwald Award for eye research. Research!America.

Ira Mellman of Yale University, an ASCB member since Craig R. Roy of Yale University School of Medicine, an 1981, has joined Genentech in South San Francisco as ASCB member since 2000, will receive the Eli Lilly and Vice President of Research Oncology. Company Research Award from the American Society for Microbiology. He will present an award lecture at the ASM meeting in May.

Mitchell L. Sogin of the Marine Biological Laboratory Raphael. H. Valdivia of Duke University Medical Center, and Brown University, an ASCB member since 1988, an ASCB member since 2000, is one of the recipients will receive the USFCC/J. Roger Porter Award from of the Merck Irving S. Sigal Memorial Award presented the American Society for Microbiology. Sogin is being by the American Society for Microbiology. Valdivia and honored for his research in environmental microbial Dennis Kim of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology diversity. will receive the award at the ASM meeting in May.

22 ASCB NEWSLETTER APRIL 2007 GRANTS & OPPORTUNITIES MEMBER NIAID Biodefense Fellowships. The NIH National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is soliciting applications from biodefense training and development researchers in the areas of prevention, detection, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases caused by potential bioterrorism agents. Grants, fellowships, and career development awards are available. Gifts Multiple deadlines. www.niaid.nih.gov/biodefense/research/funding.htm. The ASCB is grateful to the NIGMS Grants. The NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences is accepting applications for funding research following members who have in which several interdependent projects offers significant advantages over support of these same projects as individual recently given a gift to support research. Standard NIH application dates apply. See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-07-030.html. Society activities: NIH Grants. Veronica M. Morandi Da Silva ● Large-Scale Collaborative Project Awards. Deadline: June 21, 2007. http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR- 04-128.html. John R. Pringle ● Predoctoral Research Training in Biostatistics. Deadline: October 12, 2007. http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa- Robert L. Trelstad files/PAR-04-132.html.

NIH Re-entry Program. The NIH and Office of Research on Women’s Health announce a continuing program for facul- ty who have taken time out for family responsibilities. Deadline: July 9, 2007. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/ PA-04-126.html.

NIH Study Sections. Center for Scientific Review has cell biology study sections available for grant applicants. The two study sections will hold their first meetings in June 2007 for applications received in February and March. http://cms.csr. nih.gov/PeerReviewMeetings/CSRIRGDescription/CBIRG/.

NRSA Awards. The NIH Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is accepting applications for the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards. The predoctoral fellowships promote diversity in health-related research. Application deadlines are May 1 and November 15 through 2009. http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-481.html#SectionI. SCORE Awards. The NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences is accepting applications for its Support of Competitive Research (SCORE) developmental awards designed to increase faculty research competitiveness at minori- ty-serving institutions. The program announcement, as well as three other program announcements (PAR-06-491, PAR- 06-492, PAR-06-493), can be found at http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-06-490.html#PartI. ■

POSTDOCTORAL POSITIONS are available to study the molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in brain immune responses and the formation and function of immunological synapses in vivo and their impact on the development of novel immuno-therapeutics for brain cancer. (See: The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 203:2095-107, 2006; Cancer Research, 65:7194- 7204, 2005; Nature Biotechnology, 19:582-585, 2001; Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97:7482-7, 2000; Nature Medicine, 5:1256-1263, 1999). A strong background in immunology, cell biology, virology, neuroanatomy, image analysis, and confocal microscopy techniques is desired.

Our Institute is located at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center campus and is part of the Depts of Medicine and Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA. It offers state-of-the-art facilities in an exciting research environment. Applicants should have a Ph.D. and/or an M.D and under 5 years postdoctoral experience. Salary is dependent on education and research experience; range: $36,000-$45,000. E-mail cover letter, curriculum vitae, summary of research experiences, and contact information of three references to Pedro R. Lowenstein, MD, PhD ([email protected]) or Maria G. Castro, PhD ([email protected]), Dept of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd., Davis Bldg., Room 5090, Los Angeles, CA 90048.

APRIL 2007 ASCB NEWSLETTER 23 MEETINGS Calendar

April 28–May 5. Boston, MA July 1–6. New London, NH 59th American Academy of Neurology Annual Meeting. Colby Sawyer College. Gordon Research Conference www.am.aan.com. (GRC) entitled “Cell-Cell Fusion.” www.grc.uri.edu/programs/2007/cellcell.htm. April 29–30. Washington, DC. Histochemical Society Annual Meeting, jointly with July 8–12. Glasgow, UK ASCB American Society for Investigative Pathology. Life Sciences 2007, incorporating BioScience2007, Annual Meetings [email protected]. the British Pharmacological Society, the Physiological Society at the SECC, Glasgow. www.lifesciences2007. 2007 May 23–25. Charlottesville, VA org. Washington, DC Morphogenesis and Regenerative Medicine Symposium at the University of Virginia. July 15–20. Cairns, Queensland, Australia December 1–5 www.morphogenesis.virginia.edu/index.htm. GLYCO-19—XIX International Symposium on Glycoconjugates. www.glyco19.org. 2008 June. Cancun, Mexico San Francisco 2007 Pan-American Society of Developmental Biologists August 5–8. Boston, MA Congress—A joint meeting between the Latin American Engineering Cell Biology II. www.engconfintl.org/7ak.html. December 13–17 Society for Developmental Biology and the Society for Developmental Biology. August 23–26. Vienna, Austria 2009 www.niob.knaw.nl/isdb/meetings.htm. EMBO workshop in Molecular Medicine, Drug Action and Chemical Biology in the Post-genomic Era. San Diego June 16–20. Naantali, Finland http://cwp.embo.org/w07-27/. December 5–9 The 7th International Workshop for Chromosome Segregation and Aneuploidy. September 1–4. Dresden, Germany www.congress.utu.fi/chromo2007/index.php. European Life Scientist Organization Annual Meeting. 2010 www.elso.org. Washington, DC June 27–30. Dijon, France December 11–15 ASCB-European Cytoskeleton Forum Summer Meeting. September 17–20. Chicago, IL Dynamic Interplay between Cytoskeletal and Membrane 47th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents Systems. www.ascb.org. and Chemotherapy. 202-942-9348, www.icaac.org. ■

8120 Woodmont Avenue Non-profit Suite 750 Organization Bethesda, MD 20814-2762 US Postage PAID Bethesda, MD Permit No. 356