Translational Plant Sciences Initiative
Second Year PPAC Review
Review panel: Karin Musier-Forsyth*, David Denlinger, Art Epstein
Summary of funding awarded: This TIE was initially awarded central funds totaling
$3,225,000 in cash and $156,500 in continuing funds for a 5-year period beginning July
2007. Two colleges are also making substantial commitments of continuing funds
towards the initiative: $377,000 from CBS and $319,100 from FAES, respectively. The
college’s commitments of cash are $1,580,000 from CBS and $1,393,250 from FAES.
Summary of Goals and Implementation Plans: The goal of this TIE is to promote new
and existing synergy between basic and applied plant science groups not only within
OSU, but also with other campuses, including international venues. Faculty hiring is a
major component of this plan. Staff hiring, instrumentation, programmatic activities, and
enhanced support for graduate training are other areas targeted for TIE funds.
In formulating responses to the 6 questions below, the TIE review panel reviewed the
second year written report and also met with Dean Joan Herbers and current TIE Director
Bob Tabita.
Responses to 6 Questions:
1. Are the accomplishments as expected and is there an appropriate trajectory for
success, especially in the area of faculty hiring?
The hiring of two new assistant professors in year one is a promising sign, but the
loss of Dick Sayre, a key senior faculty member, is a huge loss to this TIE. His expertise
and funding base from the Gates Foundation cannot quickly be replaced by junior faculty
members, regardless of their quality. A junior faculty member associated with the TIE
who was denied tenure also left OSU. It is unfortunate that the attempt to fill a senior
position this past year failed and that no new hires were made this past year. It is quite
likely that OSURF expenditures by faculty in this program will decline in the coming
years, rather than grow as one would have hoped. It is imperative that new faculty hires
be made in this critical area, including at the senior level.
Planning for new instrumentation and staff positions is underway, but funding for these
initiatives is not yet available.
Efforts are underway to enhance graduate training in TPS, including the establishment of
a new interdisciplinary TPS graduate program currently under review. BoR funds were
used to fund a PMBB graduate fellowship competition. Thus far one external student was
recruited in the first year and two students were recruited in year 2. This is a modest level
of success. An internal competition of OSU PMBB Ph.D. students resulted in award of 4
fellowships. A significant effort is underway to establish a tripartite graduate program
between OSU, Rutgers, and the University of Sao Paula, Brazil. This is an exciting
development and excellent opportunity to attract a diverse pool of students to OSU.
A Summer Undergraduate Research Experience Program has been established to attract
outstanding students to OSU and 9 interns have been selected to work in PMBB faculty
labs this coming summer. This is an excellent idea.
Other programming activities include a Summer Workshop in Genomics funded by the
OPBC to be held this summer and the annual PMBB Symposium on April 11, 12. An
annual retreat is tentatively considered but has not been scheduled yet.
2. Are there significant threats to success? If so, what might those be?
The loss of key faculty is the major threat to success. With the loss of Dick Sayre, hiring
at the senior level should be a priority (not necessarily funded by the TIE). The merger
between CBS and MAPS brings some uncertainty. It is imperative that the new college
structure continues to promote good interactions with Dean Bobby Moser, which are
critical to this TIE.
3. Are there opportunities to enhance success? If so, what might those be?
Following through with the proposed hires (1-2 junior hires in CBS and 1 in FAES) is
critical to the success of this program. It is not obvious that the current college
administrative structure optimizes success for this group. Success of this TIE might be
enhanced by bringing all of these faculty members together under a single administrative
unit. If the larger structure does not change, the proposal for the new interdisciplinary
graduate program is an attractive alternative.
4. Are there concerns regarding the projected allocation of funds for the next
academic year? Several searches have been halted within CBS during the past year, thus
there has to be some concern whether projected searches will indeed be permitted to carry
out their charge, especially with uncertainty of the new college structure.
5. Has the anticipated impact and influence of the TIE been achieved?
It is too early to say whether the full impact has been achieved. The faculty involved in
this TIE should be lauded for the fine scholarship (funding and publications appear to be
on an upward trajectory) they have produced. Obviously, one cannot attribute this
directly to the TIE because the plant scientists have been doing good work through the
years and have been quite interactive. Developments that can be traced to the TIE are the
establishment of the new Summer Course, the graduate fellowship program, and the
recruitment of undergraduate researchers through their intern program (SURE). The TIE
has also facilitated interactions with Rutgers and Brazil, and the effort underway to
generate this collaboration is a nice step that has the potential to blaze an entirely new
model for graduate education. We were also encouraged to hear about future plans for an
IGERT or other similar training grant.
6. Is release of the next fiscal year’s central funds recommended? If yes, why and
are there conditions associated with the release of those funds? If not, why not and is
remediation possible?
Yes, assuming the newly aligned colleges in the Arts and Sciences agree to uphold their
commitments.