Chemical spiders, agriculture and the next generation of bioscientists
I blog fairly regularly about the scientific opportunities opened up by the online digital availability of huge amounts of interesting stuff. One very useful set of stuff concerns the properties of small molecules, that may be of interest in general or, more particularly, because of their possible use in chemical biology/genetics (also known as chemical genomics), especially using fragment-based methods, and the possibility of mining such data using the powerful methods of chemometrics and cheminformatics. This week I learnt about the progress being made by the Chemspider operation that is a fully open access portal for small molecules and their properties, recently acquired by the Royal Society of Chemistry. The utility and number of users are growing apace, and the increasing availability of its features via Web Services will enable software programs to interrogate it when they need to explore chemical space automatically. The academic cheminformatics community in the UK is currently rather small, and there are consequently considerable opportunities for those who would invest in expanding it.
The Food Security agenda is recognised as a global issue, and with colleagues from NERC we had a very useful discussion with counterparts at INRA, the French National Institute for Agricultural Research. While global warming is likely to affect more quickly countries such as France that are closer to the equator than is the UK, there was a very close consonance of view as to the necessary drivers to which funders need to respond to ensure that agricultural yields are increased over time, especially when water may be in short supply.
This week also saw the awarding to BBSRC-funded researchers of several Queen’s Anniversary Prizes for Further and Higher Education. Two were for research that had delivered improved plant varieties, in IBERS at Aberystwyth University and at Lancaster University – see also a previous blog – while the third was for ageing research at Newcastle University. All of these areas are significant strategic priorities for BBSRC.
Another strategic priority involves bioenergy and industrial biotechnology, an area we are beginning to scope out more fully. Bioenergy has been an important area for us since the eponymous review of 2006 (pdf), and there is increasing recognition that we need to develop photosynthetically derived sources of chemicals as well as of energy (as does INRA – pdf). Earlier in the year, the Industrial Biotechnology Innovation and Growth Team (IB-IGT) published a report (pdf) setting out the opportunities, along with a series of recommendations to which the Government responded (pdf). The first of these was that an Industrial Biotechnology Leadership Forum should be established, and this week I attended its first meeting, co-chaired by Ian Lucas MP, the Minister for Business and Regulatory Reform, and Ian Shott (previous Chair of the IB-IGT Report). This very useful meeting helped considerably in developing some of our ideas and strategies, and introduced me to a number of new areas such as the starch products of Roquette and the oleochemicals of Croda. With many important science drivers to assist innovation, there is a wealth of opportunities in industrial biotechnology, fermentation, biocatalysis and enzyme engineering (especially here, where the UK needs to grow its enzyme industry) that we are well placed to exploit.
A significant contribution to any exploitation will come from the next generation of young scientists, and BBSRC organises an annual event for our students and postdocs. This year’s was held in Newport, Gwent, and involved a series of presentations and activities, including an excellent after-dinner speech from Professor Tim Wess, an unusual and informative stand-up demonstration of networking skills from Rob Brown, and short and effective pieces on entrepreneurship (Jo Daniels of Q-chip) and spin-outs (Tim Hart of Zyoxel). The hubbub of discussion during the tea breaks, and the evident level of enthusiasm from the 100 or so delegates, made it clear that these programmes are very much appreciated for exposing folk to ideas they may not normally see, thereby helping them to think effectively about their careers.
Much of science advances through the development of novel methods, and while reading through the Annual Report of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute I was struck by one particular paper with a title that highlighted the importance of getting these right.
This coming week I have several meetings about digital research information, including with the Research Information Network. Ensuring that the necessary tools and available data – such as those at Chemspider – are effectively joined up will be a recurring theme. We have long recognised the importance of funding data resources, and an editorial in the latest Nature states “A good model to emulate would be the United Kingdom’s Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, which allows databases and other such resources to apply for ring-fenced funding, saving them from having to compete with hypothesis-driven grants, which are the agencies’ mainstay”. In the immortal words of Afferbeck Lauder, “Egg wetter gree”.
- Anon (2009) Access denied? Nature 462, 252
- Lauder, A. (1968) Fraffly well spoken: How to speak the language of London’s West End. Ure Smith/ Wolfe, London.
- Quail, M. A., Kozarewa, I., Smith, F., Scally, A., Stephens, P. J., Durbin, R., Swerdlow, H. and Turner, D. J. (2008) A large genome center’s improvements to the Illumina sequencing system. Nat Methods 5, 1005-1010
Related posts (based on tags and chronology):

Data, dancing, development sciences and innovation
22 March 2010

Biotechnology, food security, pharma and spam
01 October 2012

Biotechnology for fuels and chemicals
08 May 2012

Science, society, plant breeding and bioinformatics
23 May 2011

Governments, science strategy and industrial biotechnology in the KBBE
29 November 2010
You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments RSS feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.
2 comments to 'Chemical spiders, agriculture and the next generation of bioscientists'
Speaking as you were of Afferbeck Lauder, the BBSRC also has its own strange diction. Just take a look at your latest consultation paper about North Wyke. Farmers are meant to be one of its main readerships. Of course, farmers come in all types, from postgraduates to the barely literate, but it’s a fair bet that your average busy farmer will not be prepared to plough through the guff in ‘Open consultation on the North Wyke Farm Platform: a national infrastructure for agri-food research.’
It starts with this 65-word sentence:
‘As part of its Strategic planning with its Institutes BBSRC is intending a significant investment in a farm-based platform for collaborative research at North Wyke underpinning key strategic areas both in food security, especially in sustainable agricultural systems, and in agri-ecosystems services and the effects of the environmental change on agriculture which intersect both the Food security and Living with environmental change programmes.’
The paper then uses terms like ontologies, methodologies, instrumentation, elucidation, complementarity, over-arching research challenges, infrastructure, sequestration and non-exclusive models.
I don’t entirely blame the author. Every large organization needs to get its best communicators to rework the raw material prepared by specialists before it goes out to the public. And a commitment to clear language is needed from the top.
It might be OK for you to use terms like ‘proximately’ and ‘eponymous’ when speaking to your own staff in this blog, and specialized language is essential in some scientific writing, but when BBSRC is communicating to people on the outside it needs to put clarity first.
This consultation paper is a worthy recipient of our Golden Rhubarb for the worst piece of public gobbledygook in 2009.
Martin Cutts
Research director
Plain Language Commission
http://www.clearest.co.uk
BBSRC would like to thank Martin Cutts for his comments. We acknowledge the points made and are pleased to receive feedback on the work that we do*.
We recognise that we have a variety of stakeholders and that means we must sometimes communicate the same information in several different ways. To this end, the key points for consultation were highlighted to various communities via appropriate media, including page 16 of the 1 December edition of Western Morning News and on the Farmers Guardian website (http://www.farmersguardian.com/news/bbsrc-invites-views-on-%C2%A31m-farm-research-centre/29174.article)
We hope that our press release (http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/media/releases/2009/091126-consultation-investment-agricultural-research-facility.html) makes the opportunity to contribute to this consultation clear to a number of different audiences.
*NB// Those wishing to comment on BBSRC activity more widely than responding to the points made in the Chief Executive’s blog are kindly requested to contact the appropriate person within the organisation or email: external.relations@bbsrc.ac.uk
Douglas Kell
Leave a comment