ASCB
AUGUST
2011
NEWSLETTER
VOLUME
NUMBER
7
Celldance Video Contest Kicks Off
Seventh Big Year
Talent
Management
in Academic
Research
Page 3
June MAC
Programs and
Events
Page 11
Cell Biology in
Canada
Page 23
Inside
President’s Column
34,
3
Dear Labby
7
Annual Meeting Program
8
Minorities Affairs
11
Online Job Board
14
Highlights from MBoC
16
Public Policy Briefing
18
WICB Column
19
iBioSeminars
22
Did You Know... ?
22
CLS Caucuses
22
International Affairs
23
Members in the News
25
Correction
25
2011 Half-Century Fund Donors 25
Calendar
25
In Memoriam
25
Members Gifts
25
Grants & Opportunities
26
Abstract Reviewers Wanted
26
“Celldance 2011” steps out in fake ballet shoes
with mouse ballerina, “Black Schwann,” as the
competition pirouettes into its seventh year. The
world’s oldest cell biology film contest returns to
its moving picture roots with cash prizes totaling
$1,000 to be awarded to the best cell biology video
and animated images. Opening the eyes of the world
to the wonders of cell biology is the contest’s goal.
Under the auspices of the ASCB’s Public
Information Committee (PIC), the Celldance judges
are looking for the best video, film, animation, or
other moving image that illuminates the structure
and function of cells. Entries can be descriptive
or experimental, newly created video, or classic
8/16mm black and white films remastered on video.
Animations, cartoons, and dynamic sequences from
electron microscopy are welcome. (The Celldance still
image competition has gone on sabbatical this year.)
First prize will be $500 in cash plus complimentary
registration for the 2011 Annual Meeting in Denver, CO, USA, December 3–7. All winners will
be announced, and second and third place winners will also receive cash prizes. A special $250
“Celldance Public Outreach” award will also be presented in Denver. Celldance 2011 is supported by
QImaging. For full details and the entry portal, go to www.ascb.org/meetings/celldance/index.cfm.
Ideal for posting on your lab bulletin board, the 2011 Celldance “Black Schwann” poster (and
all previous Celldance “movie” posters) can be downloaded for free from http://tinyurl.com/
CelldancePoster.
The deadline for Celldance 2011 entries is September 27, 9:00 pm EDT. The Celldance Awards
Presentation will be held on December 6, 2011, at the ASCB Annual Meeting in Denver. You must
be an ASCB member or member applicant to enter. You don’t have to be present to win, although
the adulation of your peers is not transferable. n
—John Fleischman
Are You Getting the Latest ASCB
Member Benefit?
You should now be regularly receiving our new biweekly email update, ASCB Pathways—
alerting you to the latest ASCB happenings and 2011 Annual Meeting updates. If you aren’t
seeing the e-newsletter in your inbox, please check your spam filter, and/or contact your system
administrator to whitelist *ascb.org. n
FEI Life Sciences
The premier provider of 3D ultrastructural
imaging solutions for the life sciences.
The Tecnai Spirit TEM
With the ease of a light microscope, The Tecnai™ Spirit TEM allows
for the imaging of biological systems with the resolution needed
to answer crucial biological questions. By automating 2D and 3D
image acquisition, reconstruction, and visualization procedures, the
Tecnai Spirit TEM ensures repeatable, high-quality results.
Visit FEI.com/TecnaiSpirit for more information and a list of
specific publications empowered by the Tecnai Spirit TEM.
Free Life Sciences Webinars
Learn about the latest tools for Life Science research and how FEI’s
electron microscopy solutions are being used around the world.
Current webinars: Bridging the Gap Between Light Microscopy and
Electron Microscopy, High-throughput 3D Cellular Imaging, Cryo
Transmission Electron Microscopy, and Introduction to Electron
Microscopy in the Life Sciences.
Visit FEI.com/Webinars for more information and to register.
Negative stain preparation of rota virus.
See Beyond at FEI.com/LifeSciences
© 2009 FEI Company. Photo credit (left) sample courtesy of Cynthia Goldsmith, Center for Disease Control, Altanta, USA. Photo credit (right) sample courtesy
of Dr. Wayne Moore and Ms. Susan Shinn, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Nerve bioposy from a patient with a peripheral
neuropathy.
PRESIDENT’S Column
Sink or Swim: Talent Management in
Academic Research
As a graduate student Jane was among the top
of her class. Thankfully, she had a creative and
conscientious advisor who assigned her a great
project—other students in her department were
not so lucky. Jane worked hard to generate lots
of interesting data, and together with her advisor
wrote and published several papers. This early
success made her competitive
for a prestigious postdoctoral
fellowship and hence an
independently funded position
in a large, big-name lab at a toptier research university.
As a postdoc, Jane needed
to establish her independence
and to identify a project that
she could take with her. Thus,
after she made a serendipitous
discovery, she began to work
independently. Jane was
Sandra Schmid
ambitious and in a hurry to
get a “real” job and to run her own lab. So she
focused on her own work and didn’t interact
much with others in the lab. In fact, Jane was
afraid that other postdocs, lost in a large group
and largely neglected by a busy PI, might jump
on her project; so she avoided sharing her ideas,
even with her advisor. Jane published a single,
high-impact paper and successfully landed a
coveted tenure-track assistant professorship at a
prestigious medical school (PMS).
Getting Started
As a “hot,” new assistant professor, Jane was
given a million dollar start-up package and
1,500 square feet of empty lab space. For the
first year, she could focus on equipping and
setting up her lab, hiring a technician, recruiting
a postdoc, and starting her own research
program. New graduate students, who are
attracted by shiny new equipment and a young
and enthusiastic faculty member, line up to do
rotation projects in her lab. However, in Jane’s
second year, just as her new student and postdoc
are starting, she would need to prepare and give
lectures to the medical students twice a week.
She would also need to begin participating
in department committees. She would have
to write grants that would provide operating
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
expenses for the lab, and salary support for her
students, postdocs, and technician. Eventually
she would also be expected to support at least
half of her salary. At her current burn rate, the
“generous” start-up package would be depleted
in less than three years. Lastly, Jane’s five-year
tenure clock starts ticking the moment she
enters her new lab.
Very little Jane learned as
a graduate student or postdoc
had prepared her to run a
small business, be a fundraising
entrepreneur, manage a budget,
hire and train employees,
negotiate with journal editors,
or teach. Certainly, there had
been no formal training in any
of these areas. Similarly, there
were no classes in lab or conflict
management, leadership, or
finance offered at her PMS:
few how-to books have been written. Jane’s
department chair is a nice guy, but he’s very busy
running his own lab and writing his own grants
and papers, and he travels a great deal. Jane
hardly sees him and, when she does, he only
wants to talk about her or his latest experiment.
She has been assigned a faculty mentor, but this
senior colleague is also very busy, and she feels
uncomfortable imposing on his time.
What’s Wrong with This Picture?
Embedded in this, albeit slightly exaggerated,
description of the current process for training,
recruitment, promotion, and tenure (i.e., what
businesspeople call talent management) in the
world of academic research are several areas
which, when viewed from the perspective of the
“real” world, seem flawed or even nonsensical. Is
there a better way?
One-Size-Fits-All Graduate Student/
Postdoc Training
Graduate student/postdoc training at major
research institutions is still largely geared toward
a single career path, i.e., to be an experimentalist
and conduct independent research. Yet, U.S.
statistics show that we train many more PhD
graduate students than there are ultimately
The American Society
for Cell Biology
8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750
Bethesda, MD 20814-2762, USA
Tel: 301-347-9300
Fax: 301-347-9310
ascbinfo@ascb.org, www.ascb.org
Joan R. Goldberg
Executive Director
Officers
Sandra L. Schmid
President
Ronald Vale
President-Elect
Timothy J. Mitchison Past President
Thoru Pederson
Treasurer
Jean E. Schwarzbauer Secretary
Council
David Botstein
Raymond J. Deshaies
Joan R. Goldberg, ex officio
Akihiro Kusumi
Inke Näthke
James H. Sabry
David L. Spector
Elizabeth Sztul
JoAnn Trejo
Fiona M. Watt
Susan M. Wick
Virginia A. Zakian
Yixian Zheng
The ASCB Newsletter
is published 11 times per year
by The American Society
for Cell Biology.
Joan R. Goldberg Editor
W. Mark Leader
Editor
Elizabeth M. Rich Production Manager
Kevin Wilson Public Policy Director
John Fleischman
Science Writer
Thea Clarke
Editorial Manager
Advertising
The deadline for advertising is the
first day of the month preceding the
cover date. For information contact
Advertising Manager Ed Newman,
enewman@ascb.org.
ASCB Newsletter
ISSN 1060-8982
Volume 34, Number 7
August 2011
© 2011 The American Society for Cell
Biology. Copyright to the articles is held
by the author or, for staff-written articles,
by the ASCB. The content of the ASCB
Newsletter is available to the public under
an Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike
Unported Creative Commons License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-sa/3.0).
Postmaster: Send change of address to:
ASCB Newsletter
The American Society for Cell Biology
8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750
Bethesda, MD 20814-2762, USA
3
When was the last
time you talked to
your trainees about
long-term strategies
and decisionmaking; about how
to look at your data,
formulate questions,
and generate a
testable hypothesis;
about the sources of
innovation? … good
teachers can more
quickly bring these
skills to fruition.
4
imagine how much more effective corporations
positions for. According to a study by the U.S.
and government would be if more scientifically
National Academy of Sciences,1 61% of life
scientists who received their PhDs in 1963–64
trained, critically thinking professionals were
eventually acquired tenured faculty positions.
in leadership roles. Yet we expect our graduate
This number dropped to
students to focus on and
54% for the 1971–72 cohort
become experts in a single
and 38% for the 1985–86
area of research, and to make
…we expect our
cohort. Even when academe,
an independent, high-impact
graduate students
government, and industry
discovery. Fulfilling these latter
to
focus
on
and
are combined, the respective
expectations, which often takes
fractions of PhDs in permanent
six years or more, is important
become experts
U.S. research positions declined
if one is to pursue an academic
in a single area
from 89% of 1975 graduates
career. But it may even be
to 61% of 1995 graduates.
counterindicative for success in
of research,
And it continues to decline.
other arenas. Moreover, smart
and to make an
The consequence is a logjam
and talented PhD students
before the constriction point
slow to fulfill these expectations
independent, highof permanent employment.
become discouraged and lose the
impact discovery.
Young scientists pile up in lowself-confidence they should have
paying postdoc positions, which Fulfilling these latter as potential leaders in society.
provide neither retirement
expectations…
benefits nor long-term security.
Training for Success
may even be
The morale and, therefore,
While we provide ample
motivation levels among
opportunities for discovery, too
counterindicative
postdocs stuck in this holding
few of us as mentors explicitly
for success in
pattern can be low. Jane’s hard
train our students and postdocs
work, ambition, and luck
for success. We give our students
other arenas.
allowed her to be hired into a
the “freedom” to learn from
tenure-track position by age
their mistakes. We think that,
33. Today, the average new American assistant
as Efraim Racker famously said, “Troubles are
professor will be closer to 40.
good for you.” One often hears advisors proudly
This situation is discouraging many bright
recalling that their students fumbled around for
young undergraduates from pursuing careers
a few years learning from their own mistakes and
in academic science. It is also preventing
then suddenly “got it” before proceeding more
diversification of our academic ranks.
linearly to completion of their thesis research.
Economically disadvantaged minorities and
Perhaps we could increase the efficiency and
others might understandably think twice
effectiveness of this training if we were more
about the time commitment (more than 10
directive and more explicit and by helping our
years postgraduate) and hurdles that must be
students learn from the mistakes we have already
overcome before the possibility of permanent
made. When was the last time you talked to your
employment. Because this holding pattern
trainees about long-term strategies and decisionoccurs during prime childbirth years, women are making; about how to look at your data, formulate
also more likely to seek alternate careers.
questions, and generate a testable hypothesis;
Equally troubling, the system of one-sizeabout the sources of innovation? While some of
fits-all training wastes talent. As recent college
these abilities are innate, I believe good teachers
graduates, entering PhD students are among the
can more quickly bring these skills to fruition.
most educated, highest-potential young adults
We also do not train our students/postdocs to
in society. Further education in the scientific
be effective lab managers. Typically, a new faculty
method, in critical thinking, in research and
member will no longer be performing his or her
communication, only serves to increase the
own bench work within approximately three
recipients’ potential value to society. Such training years of appointment. In well-run businesses, the
provides transferable skills that would ensure
highest-potential employees are typically required
students’ success in whatever occupation matches to partake in management and leadership
their innate talents and passions. I can’t help but
classes, because they are aware that “the greatest
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
transition of all—from doing the work to seeing
that it is done by others, from being motivated
to motivating others, from being developed to
developing others, from managing our work to
managing the work of a unit, from working to
delegating,”2 is also the most difficult. Yet, in
academic research, we hire assistant professors
and then set them loose to run a lab without any
previous experience or training.
The consequences of this sink-or-swim
mentality are: 1) unnecessary and preventable
failures, 2) perpetuation of poor practices of
lab management, 3) re-inventing the wheel, by
repeating others’ mistakes until stumbling onto
formulas that work, and 4) inefficient training,
lower motivation, and, consequently, reduced
productivity of lab personnel. More directed
training could eliminate or at least reduce each
of these consequences.
Winds of Change
The U.S. National Institute of General Medical
Sciences has recently published a strategic plan
for biomedical research training,3 which repeats
many of the conclusions and objectives of a U.S.
National Academies study on graduate education
published in 1994.4 Why has progress been so
slow? In part, it is because established investigators
continue to train their students the way they were
trained. They have no other models and, after all,
it worked for them. One suggestion is for PhD
programs to collaborate with business schools to
create courses on management and leadership
skills that are applicable not only in the laboratory
but in any career.
I would also suggest that graduate students
begin to focus more on their specific and
individual career objectives, to think more
broadly about how they can apply their skills,
and to identify what they are passionate about.
Individual development plans (IDPs) are available
from numerous sites on the Web to serve as
templates. Students must share this vision for
their career objectives with their advisors and
committees to create an IDP and expectations
commensurate with that vision. One ought to
be able to obtain the training and transferable
skills needed to succeed in virtually all endeavors
in four years. The singular discovery and
demonstrating the persistence to see it through
could, depending on luck, take longer. However,
although accomplishing this research objective
may be a necessary prerequisite for a research
scientist, it is not a prerequisite for success in
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
the many other worthy endeavors toward which
individuals can apply their PhD experience.
Certainly in most European countries, four years
is the maximum for completing a PhD, and
our European colleagues are making significant
contributions in science and other important
arenas. Given today’s realities, we need to help
all of our graduate students and postdocs, who
constitute an incredible pool of young talent,
achieve success.
Epilogue
Jane submits and receives her first R01, aided
in part by the clear mandate of the U.S.
National Institutes of Health to fund early
investigators. Although stumbling at the
outset, her first graduate student publishes
two excellent papers in Molecular Biology of the
Cell (MBoC ), successfully defends his thesis,
and begins a career as a science technology
writer. Her first postdoc co-authors the
MBoC papers and takes a position as an AP
Biology teacher at a local private high school.
Although she runs a small lab, Jane continues
to make creative contributions in the research
area she’s passionate about, thanks in part
to interdisciplinary collaborations with her
colleagues at her PMS. She is on a path toward
tenure. Mostly, despite the pressures and
problems, she loves her job and the excitement
of discovery. And she helps her students and
postdocs to achieve their goals too. n
I would also suggest
that graduate
students begin to
focus more on their
specific and individual
career objectives, to
think more broadly
about how they can
apply their skills, and
to identify what they
are passionate about.
Comments are welcome and should be sent to
president@ascb.org.
References
National Academy of Sciences, National Research
Council. (1998). Trends in Early Careers of Life
Scientists. Report of the Committee on Dimensions,
Causes, and Implications of Recent Trends in Careers
of Life Scientists. http://books.nap.edu/catalog.
php?record_id=6244.
1
Lombardo MM, Eichinger RW (2006). The Leadership
Machine: Architecture to Develop Leaders for Any
Future, 3rd Ed., Lominger International: A Korn/Ferry
Company, p. 31.
2
Investing in the Future: NIGMS Strategic Plan for
Biomedical and Behavioral Research Training. http://
publications.nigms.nih.gov/trainingstrategicplan/
Strategic_Training_Plan.pdf.
3
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineers, Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reshaping the
Graduate Education of Scientists and Engineers. www.
nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=4935.
4
5
© Leica Microsystems, Inc. 07/2011 BNA#630
Starting a New Lab?
Leica Microsystems’ New Investigator Program can save you thousands!
If you are starting up a new lab or beginning a new research project, contact your Leica Microsystems
representative to learn about our New Investigator Program. You can qualify for thousands in discounts on
live cell and fluorescence microscopes, stereomicroscopes, digital cameras, imaging software, and more . . .
Visit www.leica-microsystems.com/newresearch for more information.
Living up to Life
DEAR Labby
Do I Have a Conflict of Interest?
Dear Labby,
I have the sense that your column is for students and postdocs, i.e., career
development stuff, so I never thought I would be writing, but have been
encouraged to do so. I am a professor of cell biology at a state university
medical school in the Midwest. I’ll be brief. Two years ago I made an
invention and started a company. My institution supported the patent filing
and licensing to the start-up but did nothing else. Meanwhile, I scrambled
around like a prairie dog on speed and got things going. My university has a
consulting rule: one day a week. That was not going to work so I asked for,
and got, permission to serve as the company’s interim CEO at 50% effort.
A year later my Dean now says the part-time CEO position is over and I have to decide—company
full-time or back to the university full-time. I say baloney. If I continue as interim CEO the chances
that the company will make money for the university increase. What am I missing in this picture? I
have talked to some business people and lawyers, but this whole thing seems to come down to my
university’s conflicts of interest policy. I am told I signed some invention agreement when I took this job.
Just the other day a graduate student down the hall, who heard me complaining, said, “Ask Labby.”
I am an ASCB member so I have seen your column. I told the student that Labby was not likely to know
anything about my problem. But she did not relent, saying, “Just try her.” So here I am with my case.
—Split
Dear Split,
Not knowing the conflicts of interest policy of your institution—or the details of the invention
agreement you signed—Labby can only offer some general principles that are in play across the land.
The invention agreement you mentioned is called an assignment of rights. It means for employment
you assigned your intellectual property rights to the university. This is standard and you get something
back—an allocation of patent-related income. The one-day-per-week consulting policy is intended to
allow faculty to pursue advisory roles in keeping with the academic tradition (we are called professors
because we have something to profess). If our knowledge as scholars can help people, improve the
quality of life, save Earth from destruction, why not?
A general policy that has evolved is that a faculty member should not serve as an officer of a
company indefinitely, and most institutions have put a time limit on this. One reason is that such a split
allegiance inevitably shifts to the company’s favor with time, catalyzed in part by financial incentives
of founder’s stock or stock options. A second factor is that a university has the legal right, as the
employer, to require that a faculty member not be unduly distracted from fulfilling contractual terms of
the job description. The one day/week consulting policy in wide use is intended to recognize the value
of a degree of entrepreneurial effort by faculty members. But the fact that these policies are not more
liberal (two days or more) is based on the notion that the primary duty of the faculty member is to the
institution. This is a particularly enabling feature of such policies at state universities, such as yours, at
which the taxpayers’ perspective expects professors to primarily serve the university.
As regards your specific issue, there is among many universities a policy (often unwritten) that
allowing a faculty member to sit 50:50 in both worlds is unhealthy. At Labby’s institution we have a
case such as yours; the faculty member and the university have reached the constructive agreement
(in this case) that her first love is the company. So after a year of the same 50:50 effort you have
been doing, she will join her company full-time.
A final point you may want to consider is that biotech companies that have started out with a
scientist CEO have often done poorly. The critical need here is to get a business-based CEO lined up
with whom your university can work. n
—Labby
Direct your questions to labby@ascb.org. Authors of questions chosen for publication may
indicate whether or not they wish to be identified. Submissions may be edited for space and style.
Got Questions?
Labby has answers. ASCB’s popular columnist will select career-related questions for
publication and thoughtful response in the ASCB Newsletter. Confidentiality guaranteed if
requested. Write us at labby@ascb.org. n
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
7
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY
FOR CELL BIOLOGY
December 3–7, 2011 l Sandra Schmid, President l Jan Ellenberg, Program Chair
Symposia
• Consecutive sessions showcase increasing
complexity.
Molecular Mechanisms
Sunday, December 4, 8:00 am–9:30 am
Member-organized
Special Interest
Subgroups
Saturday, December 3
12:30 pm–5:00 pm
Session titles,
organizers, and
speakers to be
announced in the fall
Jennifer A. Doudna, University of California,
Berkeley/HHMI
Judith Frydman, Stanford University
Thomas Surrey, Cancer Research UK London
Research Institute
Function of Multi-Molecular Machines
Sunday, December 4, 10:30 am–12:00 pm
Raymond Deshaies, California Institute of
Technology/HHMI
Melissa Moore, University of Massachusetts Medical
School/HHMI
David Drubin, University of California, Berkeley
Cellular Networks and Information Processing
Monday, December 5, 8:00 am–9:30 am
KEYNOTE
SYMPOSIUM
Saturday
December 3
Molecules and
Systems: Our Quest
for a Physiology of
the Cell
Michael Elowitz, California Institute of Technology/
HHMI
Christine Jacobs-Wagner, Yale University/HHMI
Chris Marshall, Institute of Cancer Research, London,
UK
Self-Organization of Cellular Structures
Monday, December 5, 10:30 am–12:00 pm
Gaudenz Danuser, Harvard Medical School
Benjamin Glick, University of Chicago
Francois Nedelec, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Minisymposia
• Stimulating, interactive sessions, December
4–6, 4:30 pm–6:35 pm, and December 7, 8:30
am–10:35 am
• Additional presentations selected from
abstracts
Actin Dynamics
Marie-France Carlier, French National Center for
Scientific Research (CNRS), Gif-sur-Yvette, France
Rong Li, Stowers Institute for Medical Research
Bioengineering and Mechanobiology
Adam J. Engler, University of California, San Diego
Celeste Nelson, Princeton University
Cancer Cell Biology
Franziska Michor, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Michael Yaffe, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cell Biology of Micro-Organisms and the
Evolution of the Eukaryotic Cell
Sean Crosson, The University of Chicago
Joel B. Dacks, University of Alberta, Canada
Cell Biology of RNA
Xavier Darzacq, Ecole Normale Superieure, France
Leemor Joshua-Tor, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory/
HHMI
Cell Cycle Dynamics and Checkpoints
Frederick Cross, The Rockefeller University
Silke Hauf, Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max
Planck Society, Germany
Complex Cellular Functions: Linking
Networks and Structures
Tuesday, December 6, 8:00 am–9:30 am
Kristin Baldwin, The Scripps Research Institute
William Bement, The University of Wisconsin–
Madison
W. James Nelson, Stanford University
Mechanism of Multicellular Functions
Tuesday, December 6, 10:30 am–12:00 pm
Marc Kirschner
Harvard Medical
School
Darren Gilmour, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Arthur Lander, University of California, Irvine
Jennifer A. Zallen, Sloan-Kettering Institute/HHMI
Design Principles of Cells and Tissues
Wednesday, December 7, 11:00 am–12:15 pm
Linda Griffith, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Wallace Marshall, University of California, San
Francisco
Cell Migration
Diane Barber, University of California, San Francisco
Alex Mogilner, University of California, Davis
Cell Polarity
Thomas Lecuit, Institut de Biologie du Développement
de Marseille-Luminy (IBDML), France
Lesilee Rose, University of California, Davis
Cell-Cell and Cell-Matrix Interactions
Josephine Adams, University of Bristol, UK
Kris DeMali, University of Iowa
8
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
Complete details at www.ascb.org/meetings
Cell-Pathogen Interactions (Viruses and
Bacteria)
Nihal Altan-Bonnet, Rutgers University
Olivia Steele-Mortimer, Rocky Mountain Laboratories,
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases, NIH
Cellular Functions of Ubiquitin and Ubrelated Proteins
Claudio Joazeiro, The Scripps Research Institute
Frauke Melchior, German Cancer Research Center
(DKFZ), DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Germany
Mitosis
Tarun Kapoor, The Rockefeller University
Béla Novák, University of Oxford, UK
Modeling and Simulation of Cellular
Functions
Hana El-Samad, University of California, San
Francisco
Ewa Paluch, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell
Biology, Dresden, Germany
Motors and Microtubule Dynamics
Jonathon (Joe) Howard, Max Planck Institute of
Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden,
Germany
Patricia Wadsworth, University of Massachusetts
Nuclear Organization and Control of Gene
Expression
Orna Cohen-Fix, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIH
Yaron Shav-Tal, Bar-Ilan University, Israel
Organelle Biogenesis and Autophagy
Cellular Mechanism of Disease and Aging
Craig Blackstone, National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke, NIH
Coleen Murphy, Princeton University
Chemical Biology: Probes and Therapeutics
Lisa Belmont, Genentech, Inc.
Alice Ting, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Chromosome Structure and Epigenetics
Sue Biggins, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research
Center
Job Dekker, University of Massachusetts School of
Medicine
Cilia and Centrosomes
Anne Simonsen, University of Oslo, Norway
Gia Voeltz, University of Colorado at Boulder
Signal Transduction Networks
Philippe Bastiaens, Max Planck Institute of Molecular
Physiology, Germany
Wendell Lim, University of California, San Francisco/
HHMI
Federica Brandizzi, Michigan State University
Rainer Pepperkok, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Meiosis and Oogenesis
Laurinda A. Jaffe, University of Connecticut Health
Center
Marie Verlhac, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research
in Biology, CNRS/INSERM, Collège de France,
Paris, France
Membrane Fission and Fusion
Marko Kaksonen, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Alex Merz, University of Washington School of
Medicine
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
October 13
Late Abstracts
(for poster consideration
only)
Pamela Silver, Harvard Medical School
Ron Weiss, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Working Groups
Intracellular Sorting and Trafficking
October 3
Discounted Early
Registration
Synthetic Cell Biology
Collective Cell Behavior and Morphogenesis
in Development
Caroline Kane, University of California, Berkeley
Susan Wick, University of Minnesota
DEADLINES
September 1
Regular Abstract
Submission
(for poster consideration
only)
Fernando Camargo, Children’s Hospital Boston and
Harvard University
Leanne Jones, Salk Institute for Biological Studies
The Nuclear Periphery
Innovations in Cell Biology Graduate
Education
Meeting registration,
abstract submission, and
hotel reservations are now
available at www.ascb.
meetings/meetings.
Stem Cells and Pluripotency
Ingrid Hoffmann, German Cancer Research Center
(DKFZ), Germany
Meng-Fu Bryan Tsou, Memorial Sloan Kettering
Cancer Center
Ryoichiro Kageyama, Kyoto University
Denise Montell, Johns Hopkins University School of
Medicine
IMPORTANT
DATES
Brian Burke, Institute of Medical Biology, Singapore
Valérie Doye, Institute Jacques Monod, France
• Interactive “town hall” for “big questions,”
December 4–6, 4:30 pm–6:35 pm, and
December 7, 8:30 am–10:35 am
• Co-chairs present and select speakers
Using Large Data Sets as Tools to Understand
Cell Biology
Lani Wu, University of Texas Southwestern Medical
Center
Wolfgang Huber, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Learning from Heterogeneity and Stochastic
Cell Behavior
Johan Paulsson, Harvard Medical School
Lucas Pelkmans, Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology Zurich (ETH)
Imaging Cellular Structure across Scales
John Briggs, European Molecular Biology
Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
Melike Lakadamyali, Institute of Photonic Sciences
(ICFO), Spain
9
Minorities Affairs
MAC Busy in June!
Hosting its annual workshop, conducting its summer meeting, and running several programs—
the ASCB Minorities Affairs Committee (MAC) was quite busy in June. MAC Chair Renato
Aguilera stated, “Yes, the MAC is busy in the summer!” The MAC is committed to furthering career
development for minority students and early-career scientists. Please see highlights below on these
programs/meeting:
n MAC Summer Meeting
n MAC Mentoring Program (New)
n MAC Sixth Annual Junior Faculty and Postdoctoral Fellows Career Development Workshop
n Linkage Fellows
n Visiting Professors
n Marine Biological Laboratory Students
n Friday Harbor Laboratories Students
MAC Summer Meeting
Ongoing activities and grant financial management were the focus of the MAC annual summer
meeting, held this year in Atlanta, GA, on June 12. The Committee, under the leadership of Chair
Renato Aguilera, discussed programs funded by a U.S. National Institutes of Health/National
Institute of General Medical Sciences Minority Access to Research Careers (NIH/NIGMS/MARC)
grant. The MAC discussed all of its programs and agreed that the MAC has to focus more on
marketing and advertising its programs during the next fiscal year.
“MAC program evaluations for the past few years have been outstanding,” reported MARC
Grant PI David Burgess. This shows that MAC programming is fulfilling the grant’s goals.
MAC ASCB Annual Meeting programs were discussed as the MAC gears up for the ASCB
Annual Meeting in December. The MAC is expecting a great program, at least 100 travel awardees,
and excellent evaluations!
MAC Chair Renato Aguilera at the
Career Development Workshop
Participants Selected for ASCB MAC
Mentoring Program
Two junior scientists were selected to participate in the MAC’s new Mentoring Program. Tama
Hasson, MAC Mentoring Program Subcommittee Chair, stated, “I am pleased that the program
is under way as it has long been in the planning stages; and I am happy to announce that both
mentees and mentors have been selected for our first application cycle.”
The objective of this program is to assist newly independent investigators from groups
underrepresented in the sciences as they write their first research grant. This program includes
$1,000 funding for travel for the mentee to visit the mentor’s institution. Minority professors and
professors in colleges and universities with a high minority enrollment are especially encouraged to
apply for this program.
Participants selected and their mentees are listed below:
n Mentee: Joaquin N. Lugo, Baylor University
Mentor: Thoru Pederson, University of Massachusetts Medical School
n Mentee: Carlita Favero, Ursinus College
Mentor: Anthony DePass, Long Island University
The MAC would like to thank the mentors for volunteering their time to mentor!
The ASCB MAC Mentoring Program is supported by an NIH/NIGMS/MARC grant.
For more information on this program, please visit the ASCB website at www.ascb.org and click
on “Committees,” then “Minorities Affairs.” The application deadlines are September 15, 2011, and
April 15, 2012.
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
11
MAC Sixth Annual Junior Faculty and
Postdoctoral Fellows Career Development
Workshop
“I think this is the best workshop ever,” stated
Aguilera. MAC’s Sixth Annual Junior Faculty
and Postdoctoral Fellows Career Development
Workshop, designed to provide information
on publications, grant writing, mentoring,
time management, professional development,
lab management, and other topics critical for
junior faculty and postdoctoral fellows, was
held in Atlanta, GA, June 10–11, 2011. There
were 24 attendees. Based on evaluations, the
Junior Faculty and Postdoctoral Fellows Career
Development Workshop is one of the MAC’s
finest programs.
Speakers and planners this year included
Aguilera, Professor and Director of the
Graduate Program in Biology, University of
Texas, El Paso; Burgess, Professor of Biology,
Boston College; Andrew Campbell, MAC
member and Associate Professor of Medical
Science, Brown University; Franklin Carrero-
Martinez, MAC member and Assistant
Professor, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez;
Anthony D. Carter, Program Director,
Division of Genetics & Developmental
Biology, NIGMS, NIH; Deborah Harmon
Hines, MAC member and Vice Provost and
Professor, University of Massachusetts Medical
School; Michael Leibowitz, MAC member
and Executive Director of Graduate Academic
Diversity, University of Medicine and Dentistry,
New Jersey Graduate School of Biomedical
Sciences; Veronica Lopez, MAC member and
Research Assistant, The Pennsylvania State
University; Sandra Murray, MAC member
and Professor, University of Pittsburgh School
of Medicine; Richard Rodewald, Program
Director for Cellular Processes Cluster, U.S.
National Science Foundation; and MariaElena
Zavala, MAC member and Professor of Biology,
California State University, Northridge.
Attendees, speakers, and staff at the
ASCB MAC Sixth Annual Junior Faculty and
Postdoctoral Fellows Career Development
Workshop in Atlanta, GA
Workshop attendees participated in group discussions throughout the two-day workshop.
12
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
What Some Attendees Thought about the MAC Workshop
Raphyel Rosby
“The ASCB MAC 6th Annual Junior Faculty and Postdoctoral Fellows Career Development Workshop was
excellent in every aspect. I assumed there would be some things that I would know already. However, even when
presenting information that I was familiar with, the presenters often gave alternative approaches that I found
extremely useful. The workshop gave insight into aspects of getting a faculty job and the tenure process that I
had never heard. The networking opportunities were very helpful in that the group had a focused interest. In
the end, I am very glad that I was able to attend, and have already recommended it to several of my peers.”
—Raphyel Rosby, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Brown University
“As a result of attending this workshop, I am better prepared to successfully transition into a junior faculty
position. Not only am I better informed about the challenges involved in joining the professoriate and
attaining tenure, but I now have access to strategies and advice to tackle them. Furthermore, when a difficulty
arises that I do not know how to overcome, I now have new contacts and colleagues who are willing and able
to provide good advice and support.”
—Veronica A. Segarra, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Miami
Nelson NunezRodriguez
Veronica A.
Segarra
“The 2011 MAC workshop provided me an opportunity to reinforce my professional priorities by sharing
experiences with minority faculty from other institutions. It was a mentoring experience providing useful
tools to manage the daunting task of devising teaching, research, and service duties in my teaching-intensive
institution. Overall, this workshop has empowered my commitment to integrate scholarship work with my
teaching duties. I look forward to participating in future MAC opportunities.”
—Nelson Nunez-Rodriguez, ASCB MAC Linkage Fellow, Hostos Community College, CUNY
MAC Linkage Fellows Selected
The MAC is pleased to announce that 10
scientists have been selected to serve as
Linkage Fellows for 2011. Funding for this
program is provided for Fellows to support
outreach and activities that promote cell
biology at their home institutions. The
major goal of this program is to increase
participation of faculty from minorityserving institutions to “serve as a link”
between the institution, its students, faculty,
administration, and the ASCB MAC. The
Linkage Fellows Program is supported by an
NIH/NIGMS/MARC grant.
The Linkage Fellows Program
acknowledges all past Fellows as alumni/
alumnae. Alumni/alumnae are encouraged to
remain in the MAC community and continue
to serve as that important link between their
institutions and the MAC. Alumni/alumnae
are also eligible to apply for MAC Travel
Awards to the ASCB Annual Meeting.
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
The 10 scientists selected for 2011 funding are:
Manuel A. Barbieri, Florida International
University
n Tracie Gibson, University of Texas of the
Permian Basin
n Triscia Wharton Hendrickson, Morehouse
College
n Lalitha Jayant, Borough of Manhattan
Community College
n Patrick Martin, North Carolina A&T State
University
n Fran Norflus, Clayton State University
n Nelson J. Nunez-Rodriguez, Hostos
Community College, CUNY
n Janet Rollins, College of Mount Saint Vincent
n Oluseyi A. Vanderpuye, Albany State University
n Velinda Woriax, University of North
Carolina, Pembroke
Applications for the 2012 MAC Linkage
Fellows Program will be available on the ASCB
website in January 2012.
n
13
MAC Summer Visiting
Professorship Awardees
Selected
MAC Awardees Supported at
Marine Biological and Friday
Harbor Laboratories
The MAC is pleased to sponsor six scientists for collaborative
research with host scientists this summer. The MAC Visiting
Professors program is supported by an NIH/NIGMS/MARC
grant. The program’s major purpose is to provide research support
for professors at minority-serving institutions to work in the
laboratories of members of the ASCB for an eight- to 10-week
period during the summer.
The six 2011 Visiting Professors and their Host Scientists are
listed below:
n Visiting Scientist: Oluwole Ariyo, Allen University (2nd year)
Host Scientist:
Lewis Bowman, University of South
Carolina
n Visiting Scientist: Jacqueline Jordan, Clayton State University
(2nd year)
Host Scientist:
Gary Miller, Emory University
n Visiting Scientist: Kenneth Ndebele, Jackson State University
(2nd year)
Host Scientist:
Roya Khosravi-Far, Harvard Medical
School
n Visiting Scientist: Thomas Onorato, LaGuardia Community
College/CUNY (2nd year)
Host Scientist:
Gary M. Wessel, Brown University
n Visiting Scientist: Teresa Shakespeare, Fort Valley State
University (1st year)
Host Scientist:
Sandra Murray, University of Pittsburgh
School of Medicine
n Visiting Scientist: Caroline Telles, Southern University and
A&M College (1st year)
Host Scientist:
M. Mitchell Smith, University of Virginia
Health System
Applications for the 2012 MAC Visiting Professors Program
will be available on the ASCB website in January 2012.
Supporting participants in programs at the Marine Biological
(MBL) and Friday Harbor Laboratories (FHL) is an important
aim of the ASCB MAC. The MAC works with the MBL
and FHL to strengthen the training of underrepresented
minorities and provide valuable networking opportunities.
These opportunities frequently translate into future professional
opportunities, including postdoctoral fellowships, career
positions, and scientific collaborations. The MAC MBL and FHL
programs are supported by an NIH/NIGMS/MARC grant.
The 12 students selected for funding in 2011 are:
Marine Biological Laboratory
n Evan Archer, University of Texas-Austin (Methods in
Computational Neuroscience)
n Oscar Cabrera, Florida State University College of Medicine
(Physiology)
n Victor Cazares, University of Michigan (Neurobiology)
n Sindy Chaves, University of Nevada, Reno (Molecular Mycology)
n Bianca Jones, New York University School of Medicine (Neural
Systems and Behavior)
n Aracely Lutes, University of Kansas Medical Center (Embryology)
n Mitra Miri, Yale University School of Medicine (Neural
Systems and Behavior)
n William Munoz-Miranda, New York University School of
Medicine (Neural Systems and Behavior)
n Valerie Virta, National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development, NIH (Embryology)
n David Vuono, Colorado School of Mines (Microbial Diversity)
Friday Harbor Laboratories
n Kristin Andrykovich, Carleton College (Genomics)
n Paul Hausch, Ripon College (Genomics) n
—Deborah McCall
ASCB Highlights Positions: Have One To Fill? Want One?
Did you know that the ASCB Online Job Board offers a variety of options for those recruiting or seeking postdoctoral fellowships
and academic and industry positions? You don’t have to be an ASCB member to take advantage of these opportunities, but ASCB
members do enjoy significant discounts. Visit the ASCB Online Job Board at http://jobboard.ascb.org.
For Job-Seekers
n
n
n
Post your résumé/CV at no charge, search job announcements, apply for jobs listed, and receive email alerts when jobs matching
your criteria are posted.
Currently, 304 active CVs/résumés are available for viewing.
In 2011, the ASCB job postings have received 13,818 page views to date.
For Employers
Post your position and receive emails daily with qualified candidates.
n Increase your exposure with Featured Job and Featured Employer options.
n Receive a 50% discount for job postings if you’re an ASCB member.
Write careers@ascb.org if you have any questions. Consider expanding your search with ads in the ASCB Newsletter. Contact
enewman@ascb.org. n
n
14
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
Growth
Confocal
© Leica Microsystems, Inc. 09/2010 BNA#626
Room to Grow
Get Started with Confocal ... with an Entry-level Budget!
The Leica TCS SP5 II Growth Confocal imaging system for entry-level budgets offers high sensitivity and
superb resolution, plus it is fully upgradable as your research demands grow. The growth possibilities are
endless: add options for deep tissue imaging, high-speed cellular dynamics, and even super-resolution. Save
more as you add features, functionality, service coverage, and lock-in future savings.*
Room to Grow for the Future of Your Science.
Visit www.leica-microsystems.com/growth for package pricing and more information today!
*This special offer is valid in the U.S. and Canada only.
Living up to Life
HIGHLIGHTS from MBoC
The Editorial Board of Molecular Biology of the Cell has highlighted the following articles from the
July 1 and 15, 2011, issues. From among the many fine articles in the journal, the Board selects
for these Highlights articles that are of broad interest and significantly advance knowledge or
provide new concepts or approaches that extend our understanding.
Mitochondrial protein turnover: role of the
precursor intermediate peptidase Oct1 in
protein stabilization
F.-N. Vögtle, C. Prinz, J. Kellermann, F.
Lottspeich, N. Pfanner, and C. Meisinger
An increasing number of mitochondrial
preproteins are sequentially processed upon
import by the presequence mitochondrial
processing peptidase (MPP) and the
intermediate peptidase octapeptidyl
aminopeptidase 1 (Oct1). This study shows
that Oct1 removes destabilizing residues from
import intermediates generated by MPP. Oct1
therefore acts as a quality control system,
preventing premature substrate degradation.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (13), 2135–2143
The two domains of centrin have distinct
basal body functions in Tetrahymena
T. Vonderfecht, A. J. Stemm-Wolf, M.
Hendershott, T. H. Giddings, Jr., J. B. Meehl,
and M. Winey
Straight cortical rows of basal bodies in wild-type Tetrahymena (left) contrast with the misoriented
cortical row basal bodies in a cell containing a centrin-1 mutant allele with perturbed calcium binding
in the two N-terminal EF-hands of the protein (right; green: anti-Sas6a, which labels basal bodies
and has a background signal from fibers that run alongside basal bodies; red: centrin). (Image: Tyson
Vonderfecht, Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado
Boulder)
The basal body is a microtubule-organizing
center responsible for organizing the cilium.
A widely conserved basal body component is
the Ca2+-binding protein centrin. A mutagenic
analysis of the Tetrahymena centrin shows
that its two domains have distinct basal body
functions and that Ca2+ is necessary for both
functions.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (13), 2221–2234
Vimentin intermediate filaments modulate
the motility of mitochondria
O. E. Nekrasova, M. G. Mendez, I. S.
Chernoivanenko, P. A. Tyurin-Kuzmin, E. R. Kuczmarski, V. I. Gelfand, R. D. Goldman, and A. A. Minin
The vimentin N-terminal domain contains the sequence responsible for the interaction with mitochondria.
The interaction of vimentin intermediate filaments with mitochondria causes the inhibition of their
movements and contributes to their anchoring in cytoplasm.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (13), 2282–2289
The LC3 recruitment mechanism is separate from Atg9L1-dependent membrane formation in the
autophagic response against Salmonella
S. Kageyama, H. Omori, T. Saitoh, T. Sone, J.-L. Guan, S. Akira, F. Imamoto, T. Noda, and T. Yoshimori
When Salmonella invade mammalian epithelial cells, some populations are surrounded by the autophagy
protein LC3. This study shows that LC3 is recruited in proximity to Salmonella independently of both Atg9L1
and FIP200, which are required for formation of autophagosomes. The dynamics of the ULK1 complex and
Atg9L1 are dependent on one another.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (13), 2290–2300
Exposed hydrophobicity is a key determinant of nuclear quality control degradation
E. K. Fredrickson, J. C. Rosenbaum, M. N. Locke, T. I. Milac, and R. G. Gardner
The yeast nuclear protein quality control ubiquitin ligase San1 recognizes exposed hydrophobicity in its
misfolded substrates. San1 recognition is triggered by exposure of as few as five contiguous hydrophobic
residues, which defines the minimum window of hydrophobicity required for San1 targeting.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (13), 2384–2395
16
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
Bundle-forming pilus retraction enhances enteropathogenic Escherichia coli infectivity
E. E. Zahavi, J. A. Lieberman, M. S. Donnenberg, M. Nitzan, K. Baruch, I. Rosenshine, J. R. Turner,
N. Melamed-Book, N. Feinstein, E. Zlotkin-Rivkin, and B. Aroeti
Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) and other pathogenic bacteria use dynamic type IV pili to
adhere to the host. This study shows that the capacity of the EPEC type IV pili to retract is required for the
breakdown of the host epithelial tight-junction barrier, efficient actin-pedestal formation, and translocation of
effectors via the type III secretion system.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2436–2447
A contractile actomyosin network linked to adherens junctions by Canoe/afadin helps drive convergent
extension
J. K. Sawyer, W. Choi, K.-C. Jung, L. He, N. J. Harris, and M. Peifer
Coordination of adhesion and the actin cytoskeleton is critical in morphogenesis. Drosophila germband
extension is a model for convergent extension. Canoe/afadin is found to have a novel role in this process.
It helps to coordinate a contractile apical actomyosin network with cell shape change and regulates apical
polarity protein localization.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2491–2508
A mechanism of Rap1-induced stabilization of endothelial cell–cell junctions
J. J. Liu, R. A. Stockton, A. R. Gingras, A. J. Ablooglu, J. Han, A. A. Bobkov, and M. H. Ginsberg
Rap1 stabilizes cell–cell junctions by directly binding to KRIT1, displacing it from microtubules and enabling
localization at the junctions.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2509–2519
The CSC is required for complete radial spoke assembly and wild-type ciliary motility
E. E. Dymek, T. Heuser, D. Nicastro, and E. F. Smith
Structural and functional analyses of artificial
micro RNA (amiRNA) mutants reveal that the
CSC plays a role not only in generating wildtype motility, but also in assembly of at least
a subset of radial spokes. This study also
produced the unexpected finding that, contrary
to current belief, the radial spokes may not be
homogeneous.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2520–2531
Caenorhabditis elegans SNAP-29 is
required for organellar integrity of the
endomembrane system and general
exocytosis in intestinal epithelial cells
M. Sato, K. Saegusa, K. Sato, T. Hara, A.
Harada, and K. Sato
Caenorhabditis elegans SNAP-29 is required
for the proper morphology and functions of the
Golgi and endosomes and general exocytosis.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2579–2587
CDK promotes interactions of Sld3 and Drc1
with Cut5 for initiation of DNA replication in
fission yeast
M. Fukuura, K. Nagao, C. Obuse, T. S.
Takahashi, T. Nakagawa, and H. Masukata
Study of the essential roles of CDK in initiation
of DNA replication in fission yeast indicates
that CDK phosphorylates Sld3 and Drc1/Sld2
and promotes their interactions with Cut5,
which are required for origin loading of Cut5.
Thus CDK regulates assembly of replication
factors onto origins by promoting ternary Sld3–
Cut5–Drc1 complex formation.
Mol. Biol. Cell 22 (14), 2620–2633 n
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
The green alga Chlamydomonas has two flagella, as can be seen in the false-colored differential
interference contrast microscopy (DIC) image (background). DIC images of single cells with overlaid
waveform diagrams show that flagella beat in synchrony in wild type (top left) but out of synchrony in the
calmodulin- and spoke-associated complex mutant 6E6 (top right). Cryo-electron tomography of the 6E6
mutant flagella, shown here as graphical 3D model (center) and tomographic slice with overlaid model
(bottom), reveals defects in the flagellar structure: Radial spoke 2 (yellow) is frequently missing (red
dots), while radial spoke 1 (blue) is unaffected. Occasionally, misplaced spokes are observed (green).
(Image: Thomas Heuser and Daniela Nicastro, Department of Biology, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA)
17
PUBLIC POLICY Briefing
Congress: They Signed on the
Dotted Line—But Will It Matter?
One hundred and seventy-one members of the
U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate
have signed their names to letters supporting the
work of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
(NIH). The question remains, however, will
anyone listen?
Members of the House and Senate routinely
indicate their support for programs or legislation
by signing group letters to congressional leaders
and committees. It is a way for individual
representatives to show their support, and a way
for congressional leaders to gauge support for
specific legislative initiatives.
Unlike previous years when similar letters
included requests for specific budget increases, the
letters this year do not make specific requests for
funds. Also, in past years, support for the NIH was
bipartisan. Unfortunately, unified support for the
NIH has fallen victim to the hyper-partisanship
that has gripped Congress in recent years.
Whether congressional leadership will pay
attention to the support of 171 members of
Congress won’t be clear until this fall.
To read the letters of support for the NIH, go
to http://tinyurl.com/FederalSupportofScience. n
—Kevin M. Wilson
FY12 NSF Budget: A Sign of Things
to Come?
The U.S. House Appropriations Committee has
produced its budget proposal for the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and, while the news
isn’t good, it could have been much worse.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee
on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies has approved the FY12 Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Appropriations (CJS) bill, which includes
funding for the NSF and several other federal
science agencies. While none of the agencies in
the CJS bill received increases in funding, the
NSF was the only agency to be funded at the
FY11 level.
In remarks during the Subcommittee
meeting, both the full House Appropriations
Committee Chair and the Subcommittee Chair
commented on the impact scientific research
has on U.S. economic growth. Subcommittee
Chair Frank Wolf (R-VA) said, “Despite a 6
18
percent lower allocation in fiscal year 2011,
this bill increases funding for research accounts
at NIST [National Institute of Standards and
Technology] and NSF. Investments in scientific
research are critical to long-term economic
growth and job creation.”
The flat funding for the NSF, and the
recognition by U.S. House of Representatives
leaders of the economic importance of federally
funded scientific research, may be an indication
of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH)
FY12 budget.
A frozen budget is not good for any federal
science program. In fact, any increase less than
the annual rate of biomedical inflation (BRDPI)
is, essentially, a cut. However, with Congress
focused on cutting the federal budget’s domestic
portion, budget increases of any size are hard to
come by. n
—Kevin M. Wilson
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
WOMEN in Cell Biology
The IRADCA Program Helps Launch
Careers in Research and Teaching
If you are a recent PhD graduate interested in
a career that combines research and teaching,
the Institutional Research and Academic Career
Development Awards (IRACDA) program may
be of value to you. The objective of the program
is to build partnerships between researchintensive universities
and minority-serving
institutions (MSIs)
in the U.S. that
will simultaneously
develop student
and faculty talent,
promote institutional
change, and leverage
diversity.
National
IRACDA
Program
Network
Olivia George
The IRACDA
program was
launched just over
10 years ago through
the vision of Clifton
Poodry, Director
of the Minority
Gloriana Trujillo
Opportunities in
Research programs at the National Institute
of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), with
input from institutional training directors
across the country. Recently, Shiva Singh
assumed responsibility for heading the
IRACDA program at NIGMS. There are now
17 programs supporting 192 postdoctoral
trainees and 37 MSI partners. Eight IRACDA
program directors are women, and two are
present or former ASCB Women in Cell
Biology (WICB) Committee members. Each
IRACDA institution has a unique flavor based
on location, number of fellows, whether the
research emphasis is interdisciplinary or focused,
and the nature of its MSI partner. (MSIs
range from community colleges to research
universities.)
A list of the currently funded IRACDA
institutions with website links is available on
the NIGMS IRACDA homepage (www.nigms.
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
nih.gov/Training/CareerDev/MOREInstRes.
htm). IRACDA programs1 include several that
emphasize cell biology:
n Academic Science Education and Research
Training (ASERT; University of New
Mexico)
n IRACDA Scholars
in Science
(University of
California, San
Francisco)
n Training in
Education and
Critical Research
Skills (Tufts
University)
Triscia Hendrickson
Skill
Development
IRACDA aims to
leverage diversity
to increase the
number of highly
qualified science
faculty and stimulate
undergraduate
interest in, and
access to, researchAngela Wandinger-Ness
oriented science
careers through targeted skill development.
IRACDA fellows formulate individualized career
development plans that include customized
research training plus classroom teaching
experience at a partner MSI.
The program allows fellows to spend about
25% of their time enriching their educational
skills, including receiving:
n Training in pedagogy
n Hands-on experience developing courses and
curricula that emphasize student-centered
learning
n Training in linking learning objectives to
assessment
n Practical experience in classroom teaching
and student mentoring
Educational training may occur through local
resources/workshops/classes and in partnership
with education mentors at the MSIs. Some
IRACDA fellows have competed to participate
Each IRACDA
institution has
a unique flavor
based on location,
number of fellows,
whether the
research emphasis
is interdisciplinary
or focused, and
the nature of its
[minority-serving
institution] partner.
19
in the National Science Foundation Faculty
face and sharing contact information, IRACDA
Institutes for Reforming Science Teaching:
fellows make lasting friendships so that exchange
Focus on Postdoctoral Scholars program and
can continue in spite of distance.
in Howard Hughes Medical Institute/National
Academy of Sciences faculty development
Perspectives of IRACDA
programs that emphasize undergraduate biology Participants on Landing a Job and
curriculum development.
Career Impact
Fellows spend the remaining 75% of
Several scientists who have participated in
their time developing their research skills,
IRACDA programs report that the experience
through work in cutting-edge
has been important for their
research areas with programcareers. Nicole Gerardo is
affiliated research mentors of
currently an assistant professor
IRACDA fellows
their choosing. Training in
in Biology at Emory University.
responsible conduct in research,
formulate
She states that IRACDA
communication skills, grant
training at the University of
individualized
writing, scientific writing, and
Arizona Postdoctoral Excellence
job hunting are among career
career development
in Research and Teaching
development opportunities
program helped her while
plans that include
offered by most programs.
interviewing and meeting
customized research with prospective colleagues
Networking with a
with interests in teaching,
training plus
Community of Peers
research, or a combination of
classroom teaching
the two. Gerardo explains, “My
at Local and National
experience
at
a
combination of postdoctoral
Levels
teaching and research
IRACDA programs offer the
partner [minorityexperience gave me some way
opportunity to forge new
serving institution].
in which I could relate to
partnerships with program
everyone that I met with during
faculty at the home institution
the interview process.” Once
and at partnered MSIs through
in the new position, Gerardo
formal mentor interactions,
says
she
had
a
lot
to learn to get started, but she
annual retreats, and career symposia, among
felt
less
nervous
about
the teaching process than
other joint activities. But training is not limited
colleagues who did not participate in IRACDA.
to local interactions. Networking with faculty
Laurie Krug is currently an assistant professor
and peers can also extend to other IRACDA
at Stony Brook University in the Department
programs, conferences, and workshops. For
of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, and
example, IRACDA fellows receive funds for
travel to research meetings, faculty development Sarah Stabenfeldt is an assistant professor
at Arizona State University in the School of
workshops, and the annual IRACDA
Biological and Health Systems Engineering.
conference.
Both participated in the FIRST program at
The annual IRACDA conference is hosted
Emory University, and both had multiple
by a different program each year and provides
interviews and job offers. They attribute their
important opportunities for demonstrating
competitive edge to excellent mentoring, likeresearch and education scholarship and for
minded peers, a strong teaching portfolio, and
learning about job prospects and new research
knowledge about new pedagogical techniques
and teaching strategies. The poster session is
and active learning developed through their
a great venue to network among peers and
IRACDA training. They will be using these
faculty from other institutions; the atmosphere
skills in their classrooms.
is conducive to exchanging ideas and sharing
knowledge. The benefits of networking are
How to Apply for IRACDA
many, from sharing ideas and knowledge to
making important connections that may lead to Postdoctoral Fellowship Positions
the next career step. Networking among peers
Most IRACDA training programs require
can also be a key source of valuable advice and
applicants to provide a curriculum vita,
support, which can help increase the chances
recommendation letters, and a personal
of finding funding and job opportunities and
statement that details career goals and research
building new collaborations. By meeting face-to- and educational experiences. In some cases,
20
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
the programs encourage prospective fellows
to contact potential research mentors before
applying to the program, while other programs
assist fellows in finding a research lab once they
are accepted into the program.
Candidates go through a competitive
evaluation process, which usually includes
interviews with the program director and
research and teaching mentors and a seminar
presentation. The IRACDA training programs
solicit applications annually from recent PhD
graduates, usually in the spring with a fall start
date. Fellows who are selected for the program
receive full stipend support as well as a modest
sum for research and/or teaching supplies.
Individuals seeking to achieve excellence as both
educators and research scientists, women, and
those from disadvantaged or underrepresented
minority groups are strongly encouraged to
apply. n
—Olivia George, University of New Mexico;
Triscia Hendrickson, Morehouse College; Gloriana
Trujillo, University of New Mexico; Angela
Wandinger-Ness, University of New Mexico
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
Notes
Olivia George and Gloriana Trujillo are ASERT
fellows. Triscia Hendrickson participated in the
FIRST program at Emory University. Angela
Wandinger-Ness is PI of ASERT.
The other IRACDA programs are Fellowships in
Research and Science Teaching (FIRST; Emory
University); Houston Education and Research Training
Program (Baylor College of Medicine); IRACDA New
Jersey/New York for Science Partnerships in Research
& Education (University of Medicine & Dentistry of
New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School);
Medical University of South Carolina IRACDA;
Mentored Experiences in Research, Instruction, and
Teaching (University of Alabama at Birmingham);
Northwestern University Select Teaching and Research
Training Program (Northwestern University);
PENN–Postdoctoral Opportunities in Research and
Teaching (University of Pennsylvania); Postdoctoral
Excellence in Research and Teaching (University of
Arizona); Professors for the Future (University of
California, San Diego); SPIRE (University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill); Stanford University IRACDA;
University of Kansas–Haskell Indian Nations University
IRACDA; University of Minnesota IRACDA; Virginia
Commonwealth University IRACDA.
1
Several scientists
who have
participated in
IRACDA programs
report that the
experience has
been important
for their careers.
21
Now Available: Two
New iBioSeminars
We continue to add to the collection of full-length biology
seminars available from iBioSeminars. As always, the
seminars are available to all, free of charge. Check out the
newest videos at www.ibioseminars.org.
Alfred Wittinghofer from
the Max Planck Institute
for Molecular Physiology,
Dortmund, Germany, describes
the 3D structure of G-proteins,
what the structure tells us about
G-protein function, and about
the link between G-proteins and disease.
Kai Simons of the Max Planck Institute of Cell Biology
and Genetics, Dresden,
Germany, explains how lipids
act as key organizers in cell
membranes, from lipid rafts
to glycolipid-rich apical
membranes in epithelial cells.
In addition, iBioMagazine
Issue 4 is now live at www.ibiomagazine.org. n
Did You Know...?
September 1 is the regular abstract submission deadline
(for poster consideration only) for this year’s ASCB Annual
Meeting; the meeting will be held December 3–7 in Denver,
CO, USA. The meeting is the place to get expert feedback,
meet collaborators, and discuss your research. There’s also
no better place for postdoc and other interviews—and career
development guidance.
n Sponsorship of abstracts is required.
n All current members and member applicants may sponsor
their own abstract.
n All regular, postdoctoral, and emeritus members
may sponsor another person’s abstract if they are not
submitting one themselves.
Are There Nonmembers in Your Lab
Who Want to Submit Abstracts?
Now is the time to encourage them to join ASCB. Not only
will they be able to sponsor their own abstract, they will be
eligible for the discounted member-only registration rate
too. For more information, go to www.ascb.org and click on
“Membership.” n
CLS Congressional Biomedical Research
Caucuses Illuminate Science, Showcase Need
for Federal Funding
The Coalition for the Life Sciences (CLS), co-founded by the ASCB, sponsors timely and thought-provoking briefings for the
Congressional Biomedical Research Caucus (CBRC). Left: In June Keith Flaherty from the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer
Center briefed the CBRC on the latest breakthroughs in melanoma therapies. Flaherty (left) is shown with Congressman Rush Holt
(right, D-NJ), a co-chair of the CBRC. Far right: Joanna Wysocka of Stanford University School of Medicine spoke on ”Making a Face:
What Epigenomics Can Teach Us about Human Development.” The CLS videotapes the briefings, which are available at
www.coalitionforlifesciences.org.
22
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
Canadian research has made numerous
important contributions to cell biology. James
Till and Ernest McCulloch at the University
of Toronto helped identify stem cells. Yoshio
Masui, also at the University of Toronto,
contributed to the discovery of cell cycle
regulators. Nahum
Sonenberg at McGill
University revealed
how the cell controls
translation initiation.
The invention of sitedirected mutagenesis
by Michael Smith
at the University of
British Columbia
revolutionized how we
use molecular biology Amy Shaub Maddox
to study cells. Many
others have made groundbreaking discoveries in
cell biology and its interface with developmental
biology, cellular signaling, cancer, immunology,
neurobiology, and systems biology.
Research in Canada
Canada’s largest research communities are in
its major cities: Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver,
Calgary, and Edmonton. These communities
are centered around public universities with
associated research institutes and hospitals, and
are as large as any in the U.S. Smaller universities
also make important contributions to research
and training, and are located across the country.
As in other countries, the major centers are more
research-intensive, and teaching contributions are
considerably greater at the smaller universities.
Canadian biomedical research makes a broad
range of fundamental and clinical contributions,
and government programs are promoting
increased translational research.
Funding in Canada
Recently, there has been major growth in the
biomedical research community in Canada.
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
This expansion was spurred by the Canada
Research Chairs program, which was initiated
by the Canadian government in 2000. These
and other salary grants from federal and
provincial sources have recruited many young
cell biologists to Canada as PIs. Alongside this
salary support, the
Canada Foundation
for Innovation (CFI;
another federal
government agency)
has equipped the new
labs and provided
funds for state-ofthe-art microscopes
and other “big”
equipment items.
Operating
Tony J.C. Harris
funds are available
from two major federal sources and other
more specialized granting organizations.
The Canadian Institutes of Health Research
(CIHR) has a mandate comparable to that
of the U.S. National Institutes of Health and
provides operating grants for three to four lab
personnel, with a success rate of approximately
17% in the last competition. The Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada (NSERC) is the counterpart of
the U.S. National Science Foundation and
provides smaller operating grants for one to
three lab personnel, with a success rate of
approximately 57% in the last competition.
Both of these agencies also offer special
funding opportunities, as does Genome
Canada, which mostly funds large projects in
high-throughput genomics. Grants are also
available from specialized foundations such
as the Cancer Research Society, Heart and
Stroke Foundation, The Foundation Fighting
Blindness, Canadian Diabetes Association, The
Terry Fox Foundation, and others, including
provincial government agencies like les Fonds de
la recherche en santé du Québec (FRSQ).
nationa
r
e
t
fai
l Af rs
Cell Biology, Eh! Yes, It’s Great in
Canada.
La Biologie Cellulaire au Canada—
Oui, Ça Marche!
In
INTERNATIONAL Affairs
Prestigious
fellowships,
including the
Banting, awarded
by the CIHR, have
been initiated to
attract the best
scientists from all
over the world.
23
multicultural, safe, fun, and livable. This
allows researchers to live relatively close to
work, in a neighborhood with convenient
shopping, parks, and good public schools.
We also enjoy universal healthcare and
community services (including affordable
daycare in Québec). Although our winters are
colder and longer than in most of the U.S.,
we are well equipped to weather them and
Training in Canada
Graduate training in Canada is distinct from that embrace the chance to practice winter sports.
Because Canadian domestic and international
in the U.S. and Europe in that most students
policy tends to be financially conservative,
initially pursue a Master’s of Science (MSc)
we fared relatively well in the
degree. All major universities
recent financial crisis. In some
have MSc and PhD programs.
ways Canada is quite distinct
Students who decide to pursue
from the U.S., but we are
research typically transfer into
The main challenge
close enough for convenient
the PhD program after one to
facing Canadian
travel to our neighbor to the
two years, and complete their
south.
PhD in five to six years of total
scientists is the
graduate training. Students who
same facing
decide to pursue nonacademic
Challenges
our colleagues
biomedical positions,
The main challenge facing
professional schools, or related
Canadian scientists is the
all around the
work can finish their MSc degree
same facing our colleagues all
world: securing
in two to three years.
around the world: securing
Graduate students and
operating funds. Two factors
operating funds.
postdoctoral fellows are eligible
specifically impact our
for trainee fellowships from all
struggle. First, the recent burst
the major federal and provincial
of new hires stimulated by
funding agencies (CIHR, NSERC, etc.), as well
the creation of the Canada Research Chair
as from some foundations. Similar to eligibility
salary awards added many new investigators
in other systems, eligibility for postdoc
to the pool competing for operating grants.
fellowships is limited to a set amount of time
Also, a rearrangement within the major
after receipt of the PhD. A typical proportion of cancer agency (the Canadian Cancer Society
trainees holding independent funding at major
Research Institute) recently eliminated its
research centers is 30%.
basic science operating grant program. This
Canadian departments tend to have a smaller has forced many researchers to find alternate
cadre of postdocs versus those in the U.S.
funding sources. To help address funding
Prestigious fellowships, including the Banting,
challenges, the Canadian equivalent of the
awarded by the CIHR, have been initiated
ASCB, the Canadian Society for Biochemistry
to attract the best scientists from all over the
and Molecular and Cellular Biology, promotes
research advocacy and encourages members to
world. The small postdoc population is in part
lobby government officials for investment in
due to the fact that many Canadians go to the
basic research.
U.S. (and elsewhere) for postdoctoral training
Another challenge to Canadian research is
(they can be identified by their classic “out” and
the geographic separation of the major centers
“about” pronunciation, or when asking for a
of our large country. Nonetheless, the Canadian
“serviette” instead of a napkin). Many return to
cell biology community is vibrant, strong, and
Canada to start their independent career, but
as tight-knit as our tuques. n
many new PIs in Canada are Americans and
Amy Shaub Maddox, Institute for Research
other nationalities.
in Immunology and Cancer and Department
Life in Canada
of Pathology and Cell Biology, University of
Life in Canada is great. In the cities of major
Montreal; and Tony J.C. Harris, Department of
research centers, the downtown areas are
Cell and Systems Biology, University of Toronto
Interestingly, in Canada, faculty salaries can
never be taken from operating funds. Instead,
they can be garnered independently in the
form of salary awards and/or are provided by
the professor’s university department. After
tenure, this salary is typically guaranteed by the
university.
24
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
MEMBERS in the News
Four ASCB members were among the
15 scientists from across the U.S.
selected by Howard Hughes Medical
Institute (HHMI) and the Gordon and
Betty Moore Foundation (GBMF) as
HHMI-GBMF investigators:
Simon Chan
Joseph R. Ecker
University of California, Davis
First became a member in 1997
The Salk Institute
Member since 2001
MEETINGS Calendar
A complete list of upcoming meetings can be found at http://ascb.org/
othermeetings.php. The following meetings were added since the last
issue of the Newsletter:
September 17–20, 2011. Chicago, IL
51st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and
Chemotherapy. www.icaac.org.
October 24–26, 2011. Knoxville, TN
National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis Workshop
on Mathematical Modeling of Intracellular Movements.
www.nimbios.org/workshops/WS_intracellular_mv.
February 2–5, 2012. Florence, Italy
International Congress on Personalized Medicine: Up Close and
Personalized. www.upcp.org.
March 21–24, 2012. Dresden, Germany
35th Annual Meeting of the German Society for Cell Biology.
www.zellbiologie2012.de.
May 18–23, 2012. San Francisco, CA
2012 American Thoracic Society International Conference.
www.thoracic.org/go/international-conference.
Elliot Meyerowitz
Keiko Torri
California Institute of Technology
First became a member in 1993
University of Washington
Member since 2010
ASCB Annual Meetings
Correction
December 3–7, 2011. Denver
Newly elected 2012 Council member Sue Biggins’s correct
affiliation is: Full Member, Division of Basic Sciences, Fred
Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. n
December 14–18, 2013. New Orleans
December 15–19, 2012. San Francisco
2011 Half-Century Fund
Donors
The ASCB is grateful to the following donors* whose
contributions support Society activities:
Gold
Kenneth Yamada
Sandra L. Schmid
December 6–10, 2014. Philadelphia
December 12–16, 2015. San Diego
In Memoriam
We note the recent passing of ASCB emeritus member Betty
Clark Moore, and express our condolences to her family,
friends, and colleagues. n
MEMBER Gifts
Sustainer
Jim Clegg
Paul Forscher
Jani Lewis
Maryanne McClellan
Rita Miller
The ASCB is grateful to the following members who have
recently given a gift to support Society activities:
Dorothy E. Croall
Marvin J. Fritzler
*As of July 19, 2011
Maryanne C. Herzig
Peter Hornbeck
Elizabeth C. Raff
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
25
GRANTS & OPPORTUNITIES
Enhancing Zebrafish Research with Research Tools and Techniques (R01). The National Institute of General
Medical Sciences encourages applications designed to exploit the power of the zebrafish as a vertebrate model for
biomedical and behavioral research. Applications due: September 19, 2011, 2012, and 2013.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-11-131.html.
High-Throughput-Enabled Structural Biology Research (U01). The National Institute of General Medical Sciences
(NIGMS) encourages applications to establish partnerships between researchers interested in a biological problem
of significant scope and researchers providing high-throughput structure determination capabilities through the
NIGMS PSI:Biology network. Applicants should propose work to solve a substantial biological problem for which the
determination of many protein structures is necessary. Expiration: September 8, 2014.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-11-176.html.
Mentored Quantitative Research Development Award (K25). The purpose of these National Institutes of Health
(NIH) awards is to attract to NIH-relevant research those investigators whose quantitative science and engineering
research has thus far not been focused primarily on questions of health and disease. Expiration: January 8, 2012.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-09-039.html.
Minority Access to Research Careers Undergraduate Student Training in Academic Research National
Research Service Award Institutional Research Training Grant (T34). The National Institute of General Medical
Sciences will award these grants to eligible institutions as a means of supporting undergraduate academic and
research training for students underrepresented in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. Applications due: May 25,
2012. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-10-119.html.
Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Biology and Medicine (R01). The National Institutes of Health encourages
applications from institutions/organizations that apply nanoscience and nanotechnology approaches to address
problems in biology and medicine. Expiration date: May 8, 2014.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-148.html.
The National Academies’ Research Associateship Programs administer postdoctoral (within five years of the
doctorate) and senior (normally five years or more beyond the doctorate) research awards sponsored by federal
laboratories at over 100 locations in the U.S. and overseas. Quarterly application deadlines.
www7.nationalacademies.org/rap.
National Centers for Biomedical Computing (R01). This funding opportunity is for projects from individual
investigators or small groups to collaborate with the National Institutes of Health Roadmap for Medical Research
National Centers for Biomedical Computing (NCBCs). Collaborating projects are intended to engage researchers in
building an excellent biomedical computing environment, using the computational tools and biological and behavioral
application drivers of the funded NCBCs as foundation stones. Expiration: September 8, 2011.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-08-184.html.
National Centers for Systems Biology (P50). The National Institute of General Medical Sciences invites grant
applications from institutions/organizations proposing to establish Centers of Excellence in Systems Biology. Letters of
intent due: September 28, 2011. Applications due: October 27, 2011.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-10-200.html.
The National Science Foundation Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences Investigator-initiated Grants.
The National Science Foundation has implemented a new eight-month cycle for proposal submission and review in
response to its solicitation 11-545. Deadline: September 6, 2011. www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=MCB.
Pathway to Independence Award. The primary purpose of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pathway to
Independence Award (K99/R00) program is to increase and maintain a strong cohort of new and talented NIHsupported independent investigators. The program is designed to facilitate a timely transition from a mentored
postdoctoral research position to a stable independent research position with independent NIH or other independent
research support at an earlier stage than is currently the norm. Expiration: January 8, 2012.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-09-036.html.
Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-related Research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH)
and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have announced to PIs holding specific types of NIH research
grants that funds are available for administrative supplements to improve the diversity of the research workforce by
supporting and recruiting students, postdoctoral researchers, and eligible investigators from groups that have been
shown to be underrepresented. Expiration: September 30, 2011.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-08-190.html.
26
ASCB NEWSLETTER AUGUST 2011
GRANTS & OPPORTUNITIES
Research Supplements to Promote Re-entry into Biomedical and Behavioral Research Careers. These
supplements are intended to encourage individuals to re-enter research careers within the missions of all National
Institutes of Health (NIH) program areas. This program will provide administrative supplements to existing NIH research
grants to support full-time or part-time research by individuals in a program geared to bring their existing research skills
and knowledge up-to-date. Expiration: September 30, 2011.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-08-191.html.
SHIFT Awards: Small Businesses Helping Investigators to Fuel the Translation of Scientific Discoveries (SBIR:
R43/R44). These National Institutes of Health awards are intended to foster research that is translational in nature and
to transform academic scientific discoveries into commercial products and services. They require that an investigator
who is primarily employed by a U.S. research institution at the time of application transition to a small business
concern (SBC) and be primarily employed (more than 50% time) by the SBC by or at the time of the award. Expiration:
January 8, 2013. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-10-122.html#SectionIV3A.
Structural Biology of Membrane Proteins (R01). This National Institutes of Health funding opportunity is for
research that will lead to the determination of membrane protein structures at high resolution. In addition to the
structures of integral membrane proteins, the structures of the complexes formed between these proteins and their
biological partners are of interest. Expiration: September 8, 2013. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-10228.html.
Supplements for Functional Studies Based on High-resolution Structures Obtained in the Protein Structure
Initiative. The National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) announces the availability of administrative
supplements to provide funds to enable investigators interested in protein function to capitalize on the information
and material products of the Protein Structure Initiative (PSI). These supplements are available for 1) NIGMS-funded
research grants (R01, R37, and P01) as well as 2) investigators with peer-reviewed research grants not funded by
NIGMS, through the PSI research centers. www.nigms.nih.gov/initiatives/PSI/supplements.
Support of NIGMS Program Project Grants (P01). The National Institute of General Medical Sciences encourages
innovative, interactive program project grant applications from institutions/organizations that propose to conduct
research that aims to solve a significant biological problem through a collaborative approach involving outstanding
scientists who might not otherwise collaborate. Expiration: September 8, 2014.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-10-266.html. n
Make Science News—Help the ASCB
Public Information Committee!
If you think top research in cell biology deserves more positive attention by the public, here’s
your chance to contribute. The Public Information Committee (PIC) needs some sharp
minds and tireless eyeballs to screen abstracts submitted for the ASCB Annual Meeting. The
Committee’s mission is to select top-breaking science in cell biology for inclusion in “Cell
Biology 2011,” the ASCB’s press book for journalists covering the meeting in Denver. Here’s
how you can help… Starting August 11, PIC members and PIC Associates will quickly winnow
the roughly 1,200 abstracts submitted for panel presentation at the 2011 Annual Meeting
down to a dozen. The top abstracts will be highlighted in the press book and promoted to press
outlets worldwide.
There are lots of ways to promote the importance of cell biology, but we can’t do it without
you! Contact PIC Chair Simon Atkinson (satkinso@iupui.edu) or ASCB Science Writer John
Fleischman (jfleischman@ascb.org) for details. n
“ASCB,” “The American Society for Cell Biology,” “iBioSeminars,” and “Molecular Biology of the Cell” are registered
trademarks of The American Society for Cell Biology. “The Cell: An Image Library” is a common law trademark of The
American Society for Cell Biology.
AUGUST 2011 ASCB NEWSLETTER
27
8120 Woodmont Avenue
Suite 750
Bethesda, MD 20814-2762
USA
Non-profit
Organization
US Postage
PAID
York, PA
Permit No. 356
Wanted: Teachers,
Scientists, Students,
Parents, and Science
Enthusiasts
Help contribute to a collection of engaging, inexpensive
experiments for students from kindergarten through high
school. The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Lab
Challenge is looking for experiments that:
n Are geared toward grades K to 12
n Use safe, easily available, inexpensive materials
n Take 90 minutes (or less) of class time
n Have at least one clear learning objective
n Are related to health and life science
The submission deadline is December 1, 2011. For more
details (and to find out what you can win!) visit http://LAB.
challenge.gov. n
Annual Meeting Hotel
Savings and Perks,
Just for You
Through our official housing partner, onPeak, we have
secured the lowest rates, most amenities, and best hotels for
your stay in Denver for the ASCB 2011 Annual Meeting.
Book now for the best selection and
lowest rates available. When you are ready to make a
reservation, we offer multiple ways to
book:
n Online: www.ascb.org/meetings
n By phone: 800-220-9540 U.S. toll-free / 312-527-7300
international
n By email: ascb@onpeakevents.com n
A Note to Our International Annual Meeting Attendees
Have you applied for your visa? Because the application process may take three or more months, please register immediately for
the 2011 ASCB Annual Meeting at www.ascb.org/meetings. On the registration form, please request a letter of invitation for
use in your visa application. Visit www.ascb.org/meetings/visa_passport.cfm for more visa and passport information. See you in
Denver! n