Issue 7 Michaelmas 2006

Issue 7 Michaelmas 2006 www.bluesci.org

• String Theory • Schizophrenia • Antarctica •• Science and Film • Teleportation • Systems Biology •

The Future of ScienceForeseeing breakthroughs in research

in association withCambridge’s Science Magazine produced by

Face RecognitionMind-reading computers and brain biology

Stem CellsWhat’s all the fuss about?

a-cover 19/9/06 00:45 Page 1

Your vision: Discovering fresh challenges.Our promise:The opportunity to explore new paths.

You’re innovative, talented and want to push yourself. You’re looking for anemployer with whom you can realize your greatest ambitions. Come to theDeutsche Bank Open House and find out what perspectives we can offer you:

Date: Wednesday, 11th October 2006Time: Drop in anytime between 6.00pm - 8.00pmLocation: University Arms Hotel, Regent Street, Cambridge

Sign Up: To guarantee your place and gain fast entry into the event, registeronline in the ‘Events’ section of www.db.com/careers

Expect the better career.

For details on our divisions and to apply online, visit www.db.com/careers

A Passion to Perform.

insidecover 19/9/06 12:52 Page 1

Focus ...................................................................................................................................In Brief ................................................................................................................................A Day in the Life of... ......................................................................................................Away from the Bench .....................................................................................................Initiatives ............................................................................................................................History ...............................................................................................................................Arts and Reviews .............................................................................................................Dr Hypothesis ..................................................................................................................

Tying It All Together Gemma Simpson connects string theory and QCD to the Theory of Everything...................

All in the Mind?Hannah Critchlow discusses schizophrenia: a disease of the brain, not the mind........................

Free-for-allLouise Woodley opens the door on free access to scientific information........................................

Face ValueFlora Greenwood and Gemma Simpson look at the recognition and interpretation of faces..........

Shedding Light On the BrainKatherine Bridge highlights advances in visualizing neurons.............................................................

Untangling TeleportationTristan Farrow explains how teleportation is not just science fiction............................................

All Systems Are GoSheena Gordon and James Pickett take a trip to the world of systems biology...........................

Features

Regulars 0408 202223242628

09

10

12

14

16

18

19

Mic

hael

mas

2006

Issue 7

contents

Front cover: ‘Hemisphere’ by Renny Nisbet, exhibited at Wysing Arts Centre. The installation was connected to live signal data fromsensing stations in the UK and Slovakia that monitor low frequency radio waves produced continuously by electrical storms around the Earth.The cover image shows one of several suspended polycarbonate units, which contain bass speakers emitting infrasound-generated standingwaves in water at frequencies of incoming signal data.Audio was also generated several octaves above as a direct expression of all lightningactivity on Earth.

Plus at www.bluesci.org...Tom Baden shows how to study ions in neuronsAna Vasiliu introduces the Journal of Spurious Correlations

01Mich06 19/9/06 00:47 Page 1

02Mich06 19/9/06 00:48 Page 4

From The Editor

From The Managing Editor

Happy Second Birthday, BlueSci!According to the US Department of

Health and Human Services, by the age oftwo a healthy toddler should be “increas-ingly more mobile and aware of himselfand his surroundings”.This principle mostcertainly applies to BlueSci.

During the last year, BlueSci team mem-bers have been as far afield as Belgium, forthe Communicating European ResearchConference, where we saw first hand sci-ence outreach initiatives in Europe. BlueScihas also teamed up with CambridgeUniversity’s Scientific Society (CUSS), tofilm the after-dinner speeches at the CUSSannual dinner.

Our “desire to explore new objects andpeople” is also increasing, with the recruit-ment of a team of news writers for BlueScionline. As part of Cambridge UniversityScience Productions (CUSP), BlueSci haspodcast interviews with the lecturers of theDarwin Lecture series; visit www.bluesci.org.

Looking ahead to the coming year, we arepleased to be continuing our relationshipwith Varsity Publications.We’d like to thankthe Varsity Business Manager, Chris Adams,and welcome his successor,Adam Edelshain.

Furthermore, CUSP has undergonesome restructuring. One of our aims is toprovide staff and students of the Universitywith opportunities to train in science com-munication. We have organized a series ofhands-on workshops for Tuesday evenings.Workshop topics will include editing shortfilms, writing and magazine production.

We are very much looking forward tothe “terrible-twos”—a time when BlueSciis expected to “experience huge intellectu-al and social change”. I hope that BlueScicontinues to provide material that you con-sider enlightening and entertaining. Pleasefeel free to email us with your feedback.

Louise [email protected]

Issue 7: Michaelmas 2006

Produced by CUSP &Published by

Varsity Publications Ltd

Editor: Sheena GordonManaging Editor: Louise WoodleyProduction Manager: Ryan RoarkSubmissions Editor: Ewan SmithBusiness Manager: Adam Edelshain

Web News/In Brief Editor:Michael Marshall

Web News Team:Hannah Critchlow, Peter Davenport,

Subhajyoti De, Lucy Heady, David Jones,Gurman Kaur, James Pickett, Aswin

Seshasayee, Gemma Simpson. Emily Tweed,Richard Van Noorden

Web News Photographer:Rita Kalra

Focus/Features Editors:James Pickett, Bojana Popovic, Margaret

Olszewski, Serena Scollen, Jonathan Zwart,Jon Heras

A Day in the Life of... Editor:Sheena Gordon

Away from the Bench Editor:Sheena Gordon

Initiatives Editor:Bojana PopovicHistory Editor:

Margaret OlszewskiArts and Reviews Editor:

Owain VaughanDr Hypothesis:

Rob YoungCopy Editors:

Brendan D’Arcy, Ryan Roark, Jonathan ZwartProduction Team:

Katerina Bilitou, Si-houy Lao-Sirieix, MaureenLiu, Lara Moss, Sasha Krol, Jo Sharp

Distribution Manager:Sheena Gordon

CUSP Chairman:Michael Marshall

ISSN 1748–6920

Varsity Publications Ltd11/12 Trumpington Street

Cambridge, CB2 1QATel: 01223 353422Fax: 01223 352913

[email protected]

luesci 03www.bluesci.org

The start of a new academic year brings withit a host of new BlueSci readers.At BlueSci,weaim to produce a popular science magazinethat is both informative and entertaining forall members of the University.The magazinecontains feature articles that have been writ-ten by undergraduates,graduates or postdocs.

Features articles in this issue coverdiverse topics.TYING IT ALL TOGETH-ER discusses how string theory might leadto a testable Theory of Everything, whileFREE-FOR-ALL introduces open-accesspublishing. For the more biologicallyinclined, SHEDDING LIGHT ON THEBRAIN, FACE VALUE and ALL IN THEMIND? deal with brain biology.

BlueSci also contains regulars that appear inevery issue. Members of the BlueSci teamcommission these articles. In INITIATIVESyou can read about the activities of CUTEC.

AWAY FROM THE BENCH gives insightinto what life as a scientist in Antarctica islike, while in A DAY IN THE LIFE… PeterStern chats about life as an Editor. HISTO-RY and ARTS AND REVIEWS both takeus back in time and trace the history of med-ical teaching and science in film, respectively.

The final regular section is FOCUS. Inthis issue, FOCUS features an opinionpiece by Professor Michael McIntyre,which I highly recommend, as well as aninterview with Professor Austin Smith.

In addition to the magazine, BlueSciproduces a website that contains addi-tional articles and is updated regularlywith news articles. I hope you enjoyreading issue 7 of BlueSci!

Sheena [email protected]

BlueSci is published by Varsity Publications Ltd and printed byWarners (Midlands) plc. All copyright is the exclusive property ofVarsity Publications Ltd. No part of this publication may be repro-duced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or

by any means, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Luc

kyTr

an

Next Issue: 19 January 2007 Submissions Deadline: 30 October 2006

03Mich06 19/9/06 13:15 Page 3

Focu

s

luesci04 Michaelmas 2006

When BlueSci asked me to identify themost promising scientific area formajor progress, I couldn’t help think-ing about my personal experience as aresearcher.As with others before me, Ifound that being in a hurry to answersuch a question is not as important asit might seem. Rather, what’s impor-tant is openness to the unexpected.

I was elected to the Royal Society formy part in discovering the ‘world’s largestbreaking waves’.These waves are found inthe Earth’s stratosphere and are essential tothe dynamics of the ozone layer. Seeingwhy they matter and how they work illus-trates what is typical of many scientificadvances—from the most modest all theway to the greatest and most far-reaching.Advances usually come from finding newviewpoints and from seeing connectionsbetween areas, experimental or theoretical,previously thought to be unconnected.

In my case there were on the one handsome clever space-based remote sensors,measuring infrared radiation from thestratosphere, and some well-establishedways to analyze the data. On the otherhand there were some esoteric bits oftheory about fluid motion that mostmeteorologists, including members offunding committees, tended to regard asacademic playthings irrelevant to the realworld. I remember one redoubtablemember of the UK Met Office dismiss-ing them as belonging in cloud-cuckooland. I had no reply, as I didn’t foresee thesubsequent developments, in which I

demonstrated how the bits of theory casta new light on the infrared measure-ments, in an unexpectedly simple way.

Still less could I have justified workingon the problem. I felt only a fascinationwith the various bits of theory for theirown sake, along with an admiration for thespectroscopic wizardry of the remote sens-ing and a vague feeling that new under-standing might be somewhere withinreach. The great mathematician J. E.Littlewood put it aptly: “Most of the bestwork starts in hopeless muddle and floun-dering, sustained on the ‘smell’ that some-thing is there.” No funding or foresightcommittee would listen to such talk.Thesame goes for everything else I’ve donethat’s turned out to have any importance.

Of course I can claim to be in goodcompany.The history of science is litteredwith just this kind of thing; stories begin-ning in cloud-cuckoo land and ending innew insight. It’s no accident that the greatgeneticist J. B. S. Haldane used to distin-guish four stages in the acceptance of ascientific advance:

1.This is worthless nonsense.2. This is an interesting, but perverse,

point of view.3.This is true, but quite unimportant.4. I always said so.

The structure of DNA and its biologicalsignificance was one such case, accordingto no less a luminary than Sir Aaron Klugin a recent interview on BBC Radio 4.Before the 1960s,“biochemists thought itwas a fancy, a figment of the imagina-

tion,” even after Watson and Crick hadnot only homed in on the structure, buthad recognized its obvious potential tounzip and replicate.

Foresight can be fun, as long as wedon’t take it too seriously. I’m as excitedas anyone by the vistas that seem to openup before us, some of which aredescribed so engagingly in this issue.Stem cells, for instance, quite plainly havehuge medical potential; systems biologyrecognizes the complexity of biochemi-cal circuitry, which might require quan-tum computing to emulate; and stringtheory might become a coherentdescription of all the forces of physics.I’m an optimist at heart and believe thatscience, while not the Answer toEverything, is on balance a good thingfor human societies. I’d argue this notonly on the purely scientific level butalso on the societal and cultural.

It’s easy to forget how far we’ve comein a mere few centuries, a mere flash ofevolutionary time.We no longer panic atthe sight of a comet, burn witches, norstone people to death. The GrameenBank of Bangladesh has released millionsof women from slavery.That such thingshave come to pass testifies to our aston-ishing potential and astonishing adapt-ability as a species—to our ability to keepopen minds and find new viewpoints thatwithstand experimental testing. This isthe power of open science and the atti-tudes that go with it.

Open science—what most scientists call‘science’—is the massively parallel prob-lem-solving process discovered in theRenaissance, the process that transformedalchemy into chemistry. It is the processrediscovered by today’s open-source soft-ware community and explicitly targetedby Microsoft’s notorious Halloween

Michael McIntyre is a Professor in theoretical fluid dynamicsbased at the University of Cambridge. He is a Fellow of the RoyalSociety and a Member of the Academia Europaea. He edited ofthe Journal of Fluid Mechanics for 10 years and was awarded theBartels Medal of the European Geophysical Union and the RossbyMedal, the highest award of the American Meteorological Society.

FOCUSe BlueSci identifies areas of promise in scientific research and learns that “the most interesting discoveries will be the unexpected ones”

On scientific foresight and why we need science

Nich

olas

Pinh

ey

04Mich06 19/9/06 00:50 Page 6

Documents.The process relies on the ‘sci-entific ideal’—giving primacy to thecoherence and self-consistency of theoryor software and, for the natural sciences,goodness-of-fit with experimental data.

Open science also relies on the scientif-ic ethic, aspired to if not always attained,which enables what anthropologists call a‘gift culture’.The scientific ethic balancescompetition with cooperation and putshonesty, openness, and the acknowledge-ment of others’ contributions abovefinancial or political reward.The scientistwho can get up at a conference and say,

“I was wrong; Dr X has shown that mytheory doesn’t fit the data’’ or, “I waswrong; this research didn’t pan out asproposed,’’ may displease a commercial orpolitical sponsor, but gains enormousrespect among peers. Putting the scientif-ic ideal and ethic first sends a powerfulmessage that you care more about goodscience than about short-term, worldlygain or personal feelings.

Open science is under threat, as neverbefore, from huge commercial, politicaland legal forces that put worldly gain firstand thus subvert the scientific ideal andethic and impede the solution of prob-lems—especially complex problems such

as those of software, medicine and genet-ic engineering. Such forces may explainwhy politicians keep demanding, andover-valuing, foresight exercises, as well astrying to micromanage science throughthe all-pervading audit culture.

What’s astonishing, though, and to meinspirational, is that open science has thepower to withstand such forces. An illus-tration is the story of the human andmouse genomes told by Sulston andFerry. John Sulston is one of my heroes,not only for being a superb scientist butalso for the way he and a small band ofcolleagues withstood the pressure of thecorporate world and kept the genomes inthe public domain.

It’s just as well that open science canwithstand the forces ranged against it.Open science is going to be a necessity, nota luxury, if we’re to maintain the hope ofmanaging our future in any reasonable way.

Assuming, optimistically, that techno-logically advanced societies survive at all,we’ll face a future dominated by complexsystems of various kinds, compoundingwhat are recognized by some systemsanalysts as the ‘wicked problems’ ofhuman societies. These could dwarf thekind of problem exposed by today’sinformation-technology disasters.Coping with them will call for massivelyparallel problem-solving on a huge scale,as systems biology has already recognized.

Consider for instance, the biological‘programming language’ of genomes.Theanalogy with software may be imperfect,but it’ll do for now. Since we don’t havea complete understanding even ofEscherichia coli and how it functions,despite having known its genome forsome years, it seems safe to say that, in theanalogy, only a tiny fraction of the bio-logical programming language is known.By the time we know enough to makesophisticated genetic engineering a reali-ty, we’ll have massive debugging problemsjust as we do with today’s computer soft-ware. Instead of IT disasters, we couldhave medical or even ecological disasters.

The problem of debugging will alwaysbe with us, because every complex systemhas a combinatorially large number of waysto go wrong. The number of states andpathways scale not additively but multi-plicatively with the size of the system, likethe proverbial grains on the chessboard.

Combinatorial largeness is also part ofwhy it’s so difficult to foresee future

developments.When exploring unknownterritory, or trying to understand com-plex systems—say, roughly in order ofcomplexity, an atomic nucleus, a watermolecule, a protein molecule, a govern-ment computer system, a bacterium, aeukaryotic cell, a nematode worm, aninsect, a mammalian brain, an ecologywith or without artificial genomes,human society, the Earth’s climate sys-tem—we are confronted with an ever-branching tree of possibilities.Combinatorially large means unimagin-ably large; so this is a political problem aswell as a scientific one.

Science is an extension of ordinaryperception. Both science and ordinary

perception work by fitting models todata, though in the case of ordinary per-ception the model-fitting process iswholly, not just partly, unconscious. Asthe anthropologist and philosopherGregory Bateson once wrote, “Noorganism can afford to be conscious ofmatters with which it could deal atunconscious levels.”

Once again the reason is combinatori-al largeness. If we lacked the ability toreject most possibilities unconsciously,we could not function. That is why sci-entific innovation often comes fromexposing unconscious assumptions—again reminding us of the fallibility offoresight exercises. Scientific research islike driving in the fog—exposing uncon-scious assumptions about the road ahead,straining for new data and being pre-pared to fit new models when the roadforks or twists unexpectedly. In someareas, including climate change, we cansee the road beginning to slope down-ward, but we don’t yet know whetherthere’s a precipice ahead. Some of theforces ranged against open science arestill trying to make us shut our eyes andstep on the gas.

Focu

s


In this issue of BlueSci we wanted to identify an area of research that held greatpromise; an area where major progress was predicted in the near future. So, wewent to the experts.We asked some of the top academics in the University theiropinions.We received a variety of responses; from the imaging of neurones in thebrain to developments in ultra-cold atoms.We were particularly intrigued by thecomments of Professor Michael McIntyre, who claimed that our survey was“impossible to answer” as his seminal contributions to science “could not havebeen predicted in advance, let alone justified to a funding body”. He shares someof his views below. Stem cell biology (see over) also drew our attention, as it tiesin neatly with the opening of the Institute of Stem Cell Biology here in Cambridge.

eries will be the unexpected ones”

e need science

The history of science is littered with

stories beginning in cloud-cuckoo land and ending in

new insight

“

”

Foresight can be fun, as long as we don’t

take it too seriously

“”

Title picture credits: United States Fish and Wildlife Service; NASA/ ESA and J. Hester; Rocky Mountain Laboratories, NIAID, NIH;Wolfgang Beyer; NASA; Bruce S.Lieberman, University of Kansas; Paul B. Glaser and T. Don Tilley; US Army Photo, by K. Kempf; Jan Derk; STS-82 Crew, STScI, NASA; Ghim Wei Ho and Prof. MarkWelland, Nanostructure Center, University of Cambridge

04Mich06 19/9/06 00:51 Page 7

Focu

s


Stem cells possess the unique ability todevelop into many different types ofcell.When a stem cell divides to pro-duce two daughter cells, the daughtercells have the potential to remain stemcells or becomes cells with a morespecialized function such as musclecells, red blood cells or brain cells.

A stem cell can become a specializedcell, but a specialized cell cannot become astem cell. Specialized cells can also divide afinite number of times, while stem cellscan theoretically divide without limit.

There are two main types of stem cell;embryonic stem cells found in embryos

and adult stem cells found in adult tissues.Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, orcan form all the different types of cell inthe body, while adult stem cells are mul-tipotent, or limited to producing a fewspecialized cell types.

Embryonic stem cells can be obtainedfrom an embryo very early in develop-ment. After fertilization, the egg dividesto form a ball of undifferentiated cells,known as the blastocyst, from whichembryonic stem cells are extracted.

Adult stem cells can be found in theeyes, teeth, skin, bone marrow, bloodstream, brain, spinal cord, skeletal muscle,

liver, gastrointestinal tract and pancreas.Adult stem cells are rare and very difficultto identify. Scientists are still unsure of theprecise origin of adult stem cells; are theyold embryonic stem cells, or are theyformed in some other way?

Embryonic stem cells are thought tobe vital for the development of anorganism from an embryo. Adult stemcells, on the other hand, are required toreplace cells damaged by disease orinjury.Which tissues have such a repairmechanism, and why they have it whileothers do not, are key questions of stemcell biology research.

One of the promises of stem cell biol-ogy research is that stem cells may beused to produce organs or tissues fortransplantation in the treatment of dis-ease. Embryonic stem cells are thoughtto hold more promise for this applica-tion, as they are less specialized thanadult stem cells and can therefore pro-duce more cell types.

Early experiments, however, haveshown that embryonic stem cells maycause a massive immune response in apatient with the cells being recognizedas foreign.To avoid this, it is thought thatthe embryonic stem cells have to bederived from the patient into whomthey are going to be transplanted.Thereare several responses to this challenge,such as reprogramming adult cells oradult stem cells to be embryonic stemcells or using methods similar to thoseused for cloning animals.

In 2005, the South Korean biologistWoo Suk Hwang claimed that he was

able to generate patient-specificembryonic stem cells. His approach wasto implant the nucleus from an adultskin cell into an oocyte, which he couldthen stimulate to develop into an eggfrom which he could harvest patient-

specific embryonic stem cells. This wasan enormous leap towards realizing thepotential of stem cells in the treatmentof disease.

Later that year, however, concernswere raised about his results and anenquiry revealed that many of Hwang’s

data were fabricated. Professor AustinSmith comments:“Hwang’s gamble wasthat people were at first going to accepthis research. You can’t review a paperthinking it’s fraudulent. It’s obvious thatit could be done, so there was no realreason to believe that it wouldn’t bedone.The big prize was in coming firstand then other people would comealong and really do it.

“The impact of Hwang’s fraud onstem cell research in Europe and theUS is probably positive. It’s a realitycheck—this isn’t easy. However, theimpact on Korea, Korean science andpotentially Asia more widely is verydamaging for both its internal andexternal credibility.This was a guy whowas cheating.”

Hwang is on trial, charged with fraudand embezzlement of research funds. Hehas admitted broad responsibility for hisdeception and faces at least three years inprison if found guilty.

What Are Stem Cells?

A Recent Controversy

Sara

hSc

otta

ndTo

mW

alte

rs

It’s obvious that it could be done, so there wasno real reason to believe that

it wouldn’t be done

“

”

Stem Cells: “Useful, Not Just Fascinating”

04Mich06 19/9/06 13:28 Page 8

Focu

s


Barely a week passes without stemcells being in the headlines. Despitethe ethical controversy that surroundsthese cells, there is no doubt that theyare capable of some remarkable cellbiology and have the potential to pro-vide enormous benefit to mankind.The University of Cambridge has along and distinguished history in stemcell research including the pioneeringof in vitro fertilization treatment andthe discovery of embryonic stem cells.It seems fitting that the Institute ofStem Cell Biology, a brand new centrefor basic stem cell research, should beopened here in Cambridge. ProfessorAustin Smith is the Chairperson of thisnew hub of stem cell research.

Why are stem cells so interesting?The fascination with stem cells is root-

ed in how they multiply whilst alwaysmaintaining the capacity to differentiateinto a specialized cell.You can grow thesecells in a laboratory for years and yearsand make millions and millions of thembut as soon as you place them back in anembryo they immediately switch outfrom being a stem cell and behave likethey’ve never been taken out. They havethe capacity to integrate fully into anembryo, in a fully controlled way. Morerecently, as you begin to understand these

cells and have some control over them,you see they may be useful, not just inter-esting and fascinating.

How may stem cells be useful?They should certainly be useful for

transplantation of new organs and tissues,and also for learning and understandingabout cellular disease processes and in thescreening of new drugs.This may in turngreatly reduce the use of animals for lab-oratory experiments. Eventually it shouldbe possible to make every cell from anyother cell. This is a long-term goal ofstem cell research.

What is the most exciting discovery in stemcell biology?

The most exciting to date is still thedevelopment of embryonic stem cells in1981 by Evans and Kaufman, in

Cambridge.That set the scene for every-thing tht has followed, although some ofthe important biological questions wereput aside for 15 years. People becamefocused on using these cells for geneticengineering, which is a technology, ratherthan addressing biological questions.Now these questions have risen to theforefront of research once again.

Do you have any fears regarding the way stemcell biology is developing?

The problem at the moment is thatthere is a band-wagon in certain parts ofthe scientific and medical communitywhere you just stick the stem cells in andsee some kind of effect. They say this isdue to the stem cells, without any evi-dence that the stem cells themselves arereally contributing to any effect you see.For example, if you inject 1,000,000cells into a damaged heart, then they’llproduce all kinds of cytokines that willmodulate the inflammatory process andso may have a beneficial effect. If theyform new heart cells in the heart, thenin my opinion they’re likely to startinducing arrhythmias.

What we really want to understand is:is there a real effect and what is the basisfor that? Is it better to inject the cells oris it actually much more effective and safeto identify the molecules? There is a bit ofa problem at the moment as we do notknow the answers for some of the casesthat are currently being pioneered.

Austin Smith was interview by JamesPickett, a PhD student in the Department of

Pharmacology

Putting aside all ethical debates andcontroversies, stem cell biology researchhas featured heavily in the media as ithas heralded significant advances in thetreatment of many incurable diseasesand is predicted to continue to do so.

A current example of a stem cell tech-nology is bone marrow transplantationfor the treatment of leukaemia. Inleukaemia, the white cells of the bloodproliferate uncontrollably. These trouble-some white cells can be destroyed usingradiation or chemotherapy, but must be

replaced for normal functioning of thepatient’s immune system. Based on resultsfrom stem cell biology research, doctorsrealized that the bone marrow containshaematopoietic stem cells, capable ofgenerating healthy white blood cells torepopulate the blood. Bone marrowtransplants from healthy individualsresulted, and leukaemia is now a poten-tially treatable disease.

It is hoped that this principle of trans-plantation will be applied to many otherdiseases in the future. For instance,

Parkinson’s disease causes a gradual loss ofthe control of movement in sufferers. It iscaused by the slow death of neurons inthe brain, and there is no cure. Stem cellbiology research might make it possibleto differentiate adult stem cells from thebrain into neurons, which could then beimplanted into patient brains. Scientistsare currently faced with the challenge ofisolating and culturing adult stem cells, aswell as defining the specific factorsrequired to make stem cells become aspecialized cell type.

A Quick Chat with a Stem Cell BiologistAustin Smith is the Chair of the new Institute of Stem Cell Biology inCambridge. Previously, he was a group leader at the Institute of Stem CellResearch in Edinburgh. His work examines the processes that govern the abilityof stem cells to regenerate or differentiate into other cell types. Professor Smithis also a member of EuroStemCell, a European collaboration that aims to createthe platform for realising the therapeutic potential of stem cell technologies.

What Is All the Fuss About?

It should be possible to make every cell fromany other cell—this is a

long-term goal of stem cell research

“

”

Not Just Fascinating”

Professor Austin Smith is part of a collaboration that brings together researchers from all over Europe to try to lay thegroundwork for taking stem cells into clinical medicine.A short video entitled A Stem Cell Story has been produced and canbe streamed directly from www.eurostemcell.org

04Mich06 19/9/06 13:29 Page 9

InBri

ef


In Brief

Geneticists and zoologists at theUniversity of Cambridge have producedthe most accurate model yet of how mod-ern humans came to populate the planet.

There is a consensus amongst archaeol-ogists that the modern human popula-tion originated from a single populationsomewhere in East Africa between45,000 and 75,000 years ago. However,other questions such as the migrationspeed and the size of the original settle-ment are hotly disputed.

The model, developed by a team led byHua Liu and published in the AmericanJournal of Human Genetics, fits well with

current archaeological data. It suggeststhat the process of human colonizationmay not be as complex as first thought.

In the team’s model, a small group ofindividuals leave a settlement and estab-lish their own a short distance away.Once the new colony has grown to acertain size, the process repeats itself anda new settlement sprouts off forming achain of settlements.

Using the model, the authors estimate that the original settlement in East Africawas composed of about 3000 individuals,with the first migrants leaving it about56,000 years ago. LH

New Model of Early Human Settlements

Bigger Babies Hit Puberty Earlier

Cambridge University ScientificSociety has a busy term planned.

On 10 October, New Scientist editorJeremy Webb will be giving a talk. 23November sees Raj Persaud speakingabout science and the media. Otherspeakers include the science writerSimon Singh, robotics expert NoelSharkey and Anne Forde of Science.Anne MacLaren will also be speakingon the ethics of embryo research.

Talks are held in the PharmacologyLecture Theatre,Tennis Court Road.

www.scisoc.com

SciSoc Events

Coalitions in Capuchin Monkeys

Cambridge University Science Productions (CUSP) has pro-duced a series of webcasts from the BA Festival of Science.

The BA Festival is a week-long science festival that is heldin a different UK location every year.This year it was held inNorwich. The Festival brings together over 300 of the UK’stop scientists and engineers to discuss the latest developmentsin science and engineering with the public.The theme of theFestival was ‘People, Science and Society’. The address byFrances Cairncross, the BA president, explored the econom-ic impact of climate change and the ‘human’ context of sci-entific development.

CUSP has produced webcasts from the BA Festival for thesecond year running. The webcasts include coverage of thekeynote Award Lectures, several segments on the interfacebetween science and art, and a series of live studio debates.Themain presenters were Greg Foot (formerly of CUSP and now atthe BBC) and Matt Cunningham (from GMTV’s Toonattik).

The webcasts were produced in collaboration with studentsfrom Imperial College’s Science Communication course andtechnical staff from the University of East Anglia.The webcastsare available at www.sciencelive.org. MM

CUSP Covers BA Festival of Science

[email protected]

Weight gain in infancy causes children to start puberty earlier.In a paper published in the July issue of Molecular and

Cellular Endocrinology, researchers led by David Dunger fromthe Department of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, dis-cussed whether childhood obesity could be causing increas-ingly young children to enter puberty.

Once a child enters a pubescent age, weight will play a partin dictating when puberty will begin. For example, a malnour-ished child will start puberty much later.That seems logical, butthere is also growing evidence to suggest that your weight as ababy could program when you will hit puberty in later life.

Whether the increase in childhood obesity will lead to earli-er puberty is uncertain. It is currently estimated that the age ofonset of puberty will decrease by 6–12 months every 100 years.The paper calls for a long-term investigation into this figure.

The decreasing age of puberty has long been thought to beinfluenced by a variety of factors, including ethnic back-ground, geographic and socio-economic factors. A study inNorway and Denmark found that the onset of menstruationin young women had fallen rapidly since the nineteenth cen-tury, by up to 12 months per decade. GS

Capuchin monkeys protect the most sub-ordinate of the contestants in conflictsinvolving immature monkeys, accordingto a study conducted by the Universitiesof Cambridge, Sao Paulo and Stirling.

The team looked at instances when athird-party monkey intervened in sup-port of one participant in a fight.This isan example of ‘coalition’ behaviour.

The dominant male, known as the alphamale, was the most likely to intervene inconflicts.This may be a way of showing thefemale monkeys his protective abilities.Thealpha male projected his role as a ‘protector’in the group by favouring the most subor-dinate of the two immature contestants.

The study, led by Renata Ferreira andpublished in the American Journal ofPrimatology, looked at 20 capuchin mon-keys ranging in a semi-free state.

Whether or not the monkeys wererelated did not affect coalition behaviourduring a conflict. The tendency of themonkeys to remain close to each otherwas more important.The pattern of sup-porting the youngest combatant was notseen in a conflict amongst adults. GK

Ren

ata

Ferr

eira

08Mich06 19/9/06 00:55 Page 4


The Theory of Everything (ToE) soundsrather grand, but it is based on a rela-tively simple idea: it should combinewhat we know about the four funda-mental forces of the universe into a sin-gle theory. If we can achieve a ToE thenscientists will be able to model even fur-ther back in time, possibly to the begin-ning of the universe. A proposed ToEshould generate testable hypotheses. Arecently developed theory, which com-bines string theory and quantum chro-mo dynamics (QCD), seems to be themost suitable candidate thus far.

The four forces of the universe havedifferent qualities that must be consid-ered.The first force is electromagnetism,which is responsible for electricity andmagnetism. Similar to a long-jumper, thisforce acts with speed over a long range.The second force, known as the weaknuclear force, is a weak force with a shortrange which can change a particle’sflavour so that it appears in different guis-es, for example a proton could become aneutron simply by changing one of itscomposite ingredients. Thirdly, there isthe aptly named strong nuclear force,which is like a wrestler with tremendousstrength but only with a short range.Scientists are succeeding in combiningthese three forces into a single theory, butthere is the fourth stubborn sibling toconsider—gravity. Gravity holds us to theEarth, it holds the Earth in orbit aroundthe sun, and it wakes up scientists whohave fallen asleep under apple trees!

String theory has long been the top con-tender for realising a ToE. String theoryassumes that the smallest building blocks ofmatter are miniscule strings rather thanpoint-like particles. If you compare a lengthof string to a speck of dust you notice obvi-ous physical differences.The string can betied into a loop, made into a cat’s cradle orused as a skipping rope; the speck of dustjust sits there. Because of these physical dif-ferences, string theory avoids the problemsthat other theories encounter when tryingto describe particles, such as incorporating aparticle’s geometry into describing the fouruniversal forces.

But, despite hoping that string theorycould be tested with a set of rigorousexperiments, it remains a theory.Professor Emanuel Katz of StanfordUniversity points out that it is “highlyunlikely” that we could test string theoryexperimentally, “given recent develop-ments, which suggest that string theorymight allow something like 10500 differentsolutions to how the universe is com-posed.”The inability to test string theoryis its major drawback. However, by com-

bining string theory with other theoriesin the field, it may yet be resurrected.

Enter quantum chromo dynamics.QCD is the theory that the strong nuclearforce holds fundamental particles, calledquarks, together.The quarks form the larg-er particles found in an atom’s nucleus, thenucleons. The strong nuclear force alsoholds the nucleons together to form anatom’s nucleus. This can be pictured as abag of oranges—the quarks are the orangesegments, the oranges are the nucleons and

the entire bag is the nucleus. The nettedbag and the peel of the oranges are analo-gous to the strong nuclear force holding allof the components together.

One of the main differences betweenstring theory and QCD is the connectionwith gravity. QCD describes only thestrong nuclear force. String theory, on theother hand, relates to every possible particlein the universe, including gravitons, whichare thought to carry the force of gravity.

Despite this difference, Katz and his col-leagues have noticed a startling relationshipbetween QCD and string theory.The out-come of this relationship is that a theorycombining QCD and string theory can be

tested in the laboratory—and it has been.This was reported in a recent paper by Katzthat describes a theory of quarks and howthey combine to form atoms.This new the-ory predicts the masses of atoms that havebeen confirmed experimentally.The agree-ment between the theory and the experi-mental data represents a huge leap forwardtoward the development of a ToE. Katzcomments that this could be “one of themost exciting concepts to emerge inphysics theory in the last several decades”.

Dr Nick Evans of the University ofSouthampton, however,warns us not to gettoo excited too quickly.“I view it [the newtheory] like alchemy—from alchemy camechemistry... but there was a lot wrongtoo—you never know what is wrong untilafter the event. People always want to leapto the final answer, but we are very proba-bly hundreds of years from knowing whatit is.” Let us all hope that this new theorycontinues to be supported by the experi-mental data and that we have, in fact, devel-oped the true ToE.

Gemma Simpson recently completed a MPhilin the Cavendish Laboratory

String theory assumes that the smallest building blocks of matter are strings rather

than point-like particles

“”

Equ

inox

Gra

phics

Tying It All TogetherGemma Simpson connects string theory and QCD to the Theory of Everything

Electromagnetic ForceA strong, long-range force that acts on

charged particles

Weak Nuclear Force A weak, short-range force important in

beta decay

GravityA weak, long-range force that pulls

bodies with mass toward each other

Strong Nuclear Force A strong, short-range force that holds

elementary particles together

09Mich06 19/9/06 00:57 Page 11

Mental health, particularly schizophre-nia, was until the latter part of lastcentury heavily stigmatized, poorlyunderstood and in many ways sociallyignored. Such stigma is gradually dis-sipating as scientific knowledge, andthe public’s awareness, increase.Nevertheless, many people still thinkschizophrenia can be defined by hallu-cinations and delusions of grandeur, orbelieving oneself to be God. Whilethese traits are often seen in peoplesuffering from schizophrenia, theymake up a small percentage of thetotal symptoms of the disease.

Due to the many possible combina-tions of symptoms presented by schizo-phrenic patients, there is controversyover whether the term schizophreniaadequately describes the disease.Diagnosis is based on psychiatric find-ings, since there is still no clear-cut bio-logical test. It may be that the termschizophrenia actually represents anumber of disorders that have beenclumped together. Eugen Bleuler, the

eminent psychiatrist who in 1908named the disorder by combining theGreek words for split (schizo) and mind(phrene), was aware of the symptomvariation and described them in theplural, as the schizophrenias.

Schizophrenia is one of the mostdebilitating of psychiatric illnesses, with65 million people worldwide afflictedby the disorder. Over 40% of patientsattempt suicide, and approximately 15%succeed. Over 120 genes have beenimplicated in predisposing an individ-ual to the disease.These genes interplaywith environmental factors such asstress and cannabis smoking.

One of the puzzles surroundingschizophrenia is the consistent 1%worldwide prevalence of the disease, asthe majority of patients do not repro-duce. Does schizophrenia offer an evo-lutionary advantage? Professor TimCrow, Honorary Director of ThePrince of Wales International Centre

for SANE Research, presented his con-troversial theory on the evolution ofpsychosis as part of the Francis CrickGraduate Lecture series at theUniversity of Cambridge.

In 1976, Crow and colleaguesdemonstrated that schizophrenia wasnot simply psychological. The team

performed scans of patients’ brains andsaw enlarged cerebral ventricles. Crowstates that his group’s findings were“quite controversial at the time”, withprofessors at the Institute of Psychiatrywriting to say that “the data werewrong.” But, the data have held up,

although Crow stresses that the data are“quantitative and [that enlarged cere-bral ventricles are] not a discrete mark-er [for the disease], with there beingoverlap between patient and controlgroups”. These findings paved the wayfor further investigations by researchgroups around the world.

Crow went on to show that brainhemisphere asymmetry or brain torque—unique to humans—is abnormal in schiz-ophrenic patients. He hypothesizes thatbrain asymmetry evolved as a necessityfor humans to gain language skills, andthat psychosis arises when this asymmetryfails to develop properly. He is now

studying the genetics of how this asym-metry arose, focusing on the evolution ofthe chromosomes that determine gender.He has identified the gene protocad-herin, which is involved in cell adhesionin the brain, and is investigating how thisgene is regulated, what role it played inthe evolution of language and its influ-ence on psychosis.

Many of the genes implicated inschizophrenia are involved in neurode-velopment, communication within thebrain and metabolic regulation. Crowstates that such “genetic linkage andassociation studies [that find out whichgenes are mutated in patients] are incon-sistent. Candidate genes [those found tobe altered in schizophrenic patients] fadeaway as new studies come up where newcandidate genes take their place.” Crowpostulates that the “inconsistency of thegenetic data may be due to short termepigenetic control of genes [the regula-tion of genes without alteration in the


All in the Mind?Hannah Critchlow discusses schizophrenia: a disease of the brain, not the mind

Symptoms of Schizophrenia

A sufferer of schizophrenia can experience any combination of the followingsymptoms:

1. Cognitive deficits such as impairments in reasoning, memory, learning, flex-ible thinking and planning;

2. Negative symptoms such as apathy, social withdrawal, emotional unre-sponsiveness and a loss of feelings of reward;

3. Positive symptoms such as hallucinations, delusions and disorganizedthought.

A reduced number of connections between brain cells increases the likelihood of aberrant

communication within the brain, leading to delusions,hallucinations and cognitive deficits

“

”

Schizophrenia is not simply psychological.The team performed scans of patients’ brains and

saw enlarged cerebral ventricles

“”

10Mich06 19/9/06 00:59 Page 16

DNA] such that schizophrenia is gener-ated and dissipated throughout the pop-ulation all the time”.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging studieshave also shown that schizophrenicpatients possess not only larger ventri-cles but also smaller brain grey mattervolumes. This correlates with findingsof decreased dendritic spine densities inpatients. Dendritic spines are minutestructures that transmit messages withinthe brain. Therefore, it appears that areduced number of connectionsbetween brain cells increases the likeli-hood of aberrant communication with-in the brain, leading to delusions, hallu-cinations and cognitive deficits.

Intriguingly, a computer simulationdemonstrated that as the potential forcommunication between cells decreases,processing information becomes fasterand more accurate until a threshold isreached. The threshold is the pointwhere the model perceives stimuli wherenone was given. This can be interpretedas mimicking of the positive symptomsof schizophrenia, the hallucinations.Thisinformation ties in neatly with thedecreased connectivity observed inschizophrenic patients and provides acellular basis for the evolutionary conun-drum that surrounds the persistence ofschizophrenia in the population.

There are numerous drugs, termedantipsychotics, available for the treat-ment of schizophrenia. The first,haloperidol, was discovered serendipi-tously in the 1950s. It was originallydesigned as a pain reliever. Investigatingthe action of haloperidol on brainreceptors revealed it to be a dopaminereceptor antagonist, meaning it blocksthe receptor from activation. A largenumber of drugs with a similar mecha-nism (typical antipsychotics) were sub-sequently developed.These drugs, how-ever, blocked receptor activation in allregions that the receptors were presentand thus had significant side effects,often resulting in patient’s non-compli-ance in taking medication.

Atypical antipsychotics emerged laterand can treat the disease without thenegative side effects.This is largely dueto less dopamine receptor antagonismand high serotonin receptor antago-nism—the opposite pharmacology tohallucinogens such as LSD. However,these atypical antipsychotics are still nottruly effective in treating the disease.The alarmingly high suicide rateamongst schizophrenic patients is astriking indicator of the severe require-ment for new treatments.

Although schizophrenia has revealeditself to be a disease of the brain andnot of the mind, over the last 10 years,cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)has been used in combination withdrugs as a treatment for schizophrenia.Professor Philippa Garety, of theInstitute of Psychiatry, King’s CollegeLondon and the South London andMaudsley NHS Trust, speaking to the

Guardian said, “Medication often helpschange people’s acute psychotic experi-ences… but it doesn’t always help tochange how they felt about them at thetime.” Garety gave an example of aschizophrenic man who, after medica-tion, had stopped seeing things jumpout of mirrors at him, but was stillacutely troubled by the sense that hewas being watched. He thought therewere cameras on every street corner,above his bed and in his flat. Garetycomments that, “CBT was able to help

him because we looked at how he wasmaking sense of his experiences and athis triggers.” After 20 hours of CBTspread over a year, this man stoppedthinking that he was being watched.

So, the quest is on for scientists todevelop new and better antipsychoticswhich could be used in combinationwith therapies such as CBT. In anattempt to understand how the brain isaltered by the disease, scientists are imag-ing and profiling brains of patients.Confounding factors such as the med-ication, previous substance abuse and thedegree and type of schizophrenia fromwhich the patient suffers, make interpre-tation of the data difficult. Scientists arealso investigating rodents which, byusing genetic and behavioural manipula-

tion, exhibit certain aspects of the dis-ease. By and large, patient and animalstudies are being used to complementone another, to investigate the diseasemore fully and to help bring a drug totreat the disease onto the market.

An interesting result from recentpopulation studies is that schizophren-ics are much more likely to smoke thanare controls. Scientists have discoveredthat activating nicotinic receptors inthe brain by smoking a cigaretteenhances cognitive function, and thus it

appears that heavily smoking schizo-phrenic patients are in fact self-med-icating. Furthermore, in one study ofover 50,000 Swedish conscripts, ciga-rette smoking has been shown to have aprotective effect against developingschizophrenia in later life. Drug compa-nies are now in the process of develop-ing pharmacological agents to takeadvantage of this discovery. So, whilethe tobacco-puffing English may have adetrimental decrease in cognitive func-tion come the 2007 smoking ban, atleast there may be a new treatment forschizophrenia on the horizon.

Hannah Critchlow is a PhD student inthe Department of Physiology,Development and Neuroscience


Human brain torque; the right frontal regions are larger than the left, and left occipital regionsare larger than the right

Schizophrenia is one of the most debilitating of psychiatric illnesses, with 65 million people

worldwide afflicted by the disorder

“”

Cha

rlotte

Bru

ce

Right Frontal Left Frontal

Right Occipital Left Occipital

Meaning

Thought

SpeechPerception

SpeechGeneration

10Mich06 19/9/06 01:00 Page 17


One of the oldest practices in science isthat following their hard-earned Eurekamoment, scientists publish their findingsso that the rest of the scientific commu-nity may share in their discoveries, citetheir work and build upon it. This ishow scientific theories are disseminatedand adopted and how research reputa-tions are built or destroyed. In reality,this spawns fights for first authorship,secrecy to avoid being scooped and theultimate quest of having one’s materialpublished in the most prestigious jour-nal. Publishing papers is integral to theacademic lifestyle and the framework ofscientific publishing is undergoing amini-revolution as many scientists andmembers of the public are fighting foran open-access model of publication.Open access is the immediate publica-tion of articles on the Internet so thatanyone can access them free of charge.Only time will tell if this new model ofpublication will become a reality for allscientific journals.

Traditionally, scientific publications haveprofited by charging readers for access.This model disadvantages institutions andindividuals, from both the scientific com-munity and society at large, who cannotafford the expensive subscription costs.Onaverage, it costs over 80 US cents per pageto subscribe to a scientific journal.Furthermore, even at the most well-fund-ed research centres, the budget allocatedfor the purchase of journal subscriptionshas remained static for several years—despite the large increase in the number ofjournals available and the fact that the costof subscriptions has increased above therate of inflation for several years running.The result is a decreased access to literaturefor many scientists, despite more articlesthan ever before being published.This willultimately lead to misguided and possiblyduplicated research, which is a waste ofalready scarce research funds.

Unsurprisingly, academic librarianswith a passion to disseminate informationhave been among the strongest support-ers of the open-access model. Anotherkey driver of the movement is the oppor-tunity to communicate with anyone,almost anywhere, through the Internet.Online distribution is cost-effective andreaches an audience that print publica-tion never could.

As early as the 1990s, scientists werestarting to use the Internet as a freerepository of information with tools suchas Genbank listing gene sequences. It wasonly in the early 2000s, however, thatopen-access publishing gained momen-tum. A succession of high-profile meet-ings were held to discuss the definition,

implementation and financial implica-tions of open access. These resulted firstin a commitment to implement openaccess, for example via the BudapestOpen Access Initiative 2002, and then inmore precise definitions and strategies.The Bethseda Convention in April 2003released the following two criteria fordefining an open-access publication:

“1. The author(s) and copyright hold-er(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevoca-ble, worldwide, perpetual right of accessto, and a license to copy, use, distribute,transmit and display the work publicly

and to make and distribute derivativeworks, in any digital medium for anyresponsible purpose, subject to properattribution of authorship, as well as theright to make small numbers of printedcopies for their personal use.

2.A complete version of the work andall supplemental materials, including acopy of the permission as stated above, ina suitable standard electronic format isdeposited immediately upon initial publi-cation in at least one online repositorythat is supported by an academic institu-tion, scholarly society, governmentagency, or other well-established organi-zation that seeks to enable open access,unrestricted distribution, interoperability,and long-term archiving.”

Further, the Bethseda Convention sawthe formation of an agreement between agroup of institutions and funding agen-cies who pledged not only to set asidemoney to fund any shortfall thatresearchers might experience in pursuingthe open-access route, but also toacknowledge the researcher’s ‘service tothe community’ when considering futuregrant applications.This was a step towardspersuading scientists, understandablyconcerned by impact factor (a quantita-tive tool for ranking journals) and thusunlikely to abandon the traditional jour-nals without a serious, career-enhancingalternative, to consider publishing inopen-access journals.

Later in 2003, another meeting held bythe Max Planck Society in Berlin pro-duced the Berlin Declaration, another for-mal statement of open-access intentions.While the academics were forming bondsand strengthening their resolve, practicalinfrastructure was being established. TheDirectory of Open-Access Journals, themain resource for listings of all journalsthat operate an open access policy, waslaunched and PLoS Biology, the flagshipjournal of the Public Library of Science

Open access leads to papers being more

widely read and cited… itis changing the way people

can interact with theliterature, making it

more powerful

“

”

Free-for-allFree-for-all

Louise Woodley opens the door on free access to scientific information

Agn

esB

ecke

r

12Mich06 19/9/06 13:36 Page 16


(PLoS), was established. Now with a totalof six open-access journals, and offices inboth San Francisco and here inCambridge, PLoS is a successful publisheroperating under the open-access model.

While PLoS is probably the bestknown open-access journal, authorshave two broad options when open-access publishing.They can either followthe ‘gold route’, where they submitpapers to journals, such as PLoS, thatmake their articles accessible immediate-ly, or they can follow the ‘green route’,where they self-archive their papers inan open-access repository, usually sixmonths after publication.

In the UK, The Wellcome Trust, towhom the ideals of open access are notnew following their push for the humangenome to be freely available, commis-sioned two reports which came out insupport of open-access publishing. Thefirst report examined the financial impli-cations of traditional publishing, wherethe costs are incurred by the consumerand the publisher profits, while the authorand peer reviewer have the cost of timeand no payment. It concluded that this isessentially a failing market. Scientists areusing public funds to produce results andare freely authoring and reviewing papersupon which they are expected to spendmore public funds to read.

In contrast, the second report assessedthe financial implications of the open-access model where the author may berequired to pay a publication fee. The

results were surprising; the report pre-dicted a 30% reduction in costs duemainly to the reduction in variable costsincurred, like marketing and subscrip-tions management, and not, as expected,due to savings without a print edition.

After these two reports, The WellcomeTrust has pushed for the establishment ofUK PubMed Central, a local version of

the US site, where they insist that allresearch funded by The Wellcome Trustgrants must be deposited within sixmonths of publication.Although not openaccess in the truest sense, it claims that thisis the best way of managing the rapidlychanging situation in scientific publishing.

Putting aside the apparent financial ben-efits and the ethical argument that infor-mation should be free-for-all, why shouldthe scientific community embrace open-access publishing? Mark Patterson, theDirector of Publishing at Cambridge PLoS

argues that, “data now show that openaccess leads to papers being more widelyread and cited.Open access is changing theway people can interact with the literature,making it more powerful and allowing it tobe systematically searched.”

There have also been many criticismsof the open-access model. It remains tobe seen whether open access is financial-ly sustainable or if scientific integrity iscompromised by asking authors to pay tosubmit their work.There is concern thatopen-access publishing prejudices thepublisher in favour of those who canmeet the publication costs. Reputablepublishers can counter this by havingpeer-review policies.

The open-access movement has manysupporters and has made huge progressin a short period of time. By June thisyear there were 2273 peer-reviewedjournals listed in the Directory of Open-Access Journals. There are still regularconferences and debates on open access,with much to be done to make it aworkable option for all journals. From aphilanthropic viewpoint, the refreshingthing about the whole movement is thatit demonstrates that it is still possible in acommercial world to take a well-estab-lished system and change it on a notice-able scale, for mainly ethical reasons.Thishas to be positive for the image of sci-ence in general.

Louise Woodley is a PhD student in theDepartment of Biochemistry

It remains to be seen whether open accessis financially sustainable or if

scientific integrity iscompromised by asking

authors to pay to submittheir work

“

”

Varsity publishes THE MAYS, a col-lection of prose, poetry and non-fic-tion writing from students inCambridge and Oxford.

Past Guest Editors include StephenFry, Philip Pullman, Ted Hughes,Andrew Motion and Zadie Smith.

Applications are now open to editand design THE MAYS 15.

Email [email protected] fordetails.

12Mich06 19/9/06 01:03 Page 17

Face Value

You see someone on the street andcringe because you recognize theirface from a brief drunken meeting afew weeks earlier. The name is likelyto have been forgotten, but the face issomehow effortlessly locked insideyour memory.Whether we want to ornot, humans are likely to recognize orfeel familiarity with a face even if onlyseen once. How do we do this? Facesare generally highly similar, with onlysubtle variations, making us experts atthis particular form of visual memory.Moreover, we are astonishingly goodat judging emotion from facial expres-sion, even if we can only see the eyes.Do we have a specialized ‘face mod-ule’ in the brain that deals only withfaces? And if so, are we born with it,or does it develop during early life?

One of the most intriguing neurologi-cal conditions is prosopagnosia, which isan impairment of face recognition thatcan occur following brain damage.Patients with prosopagnosia can oftenrecognize other objects without difficul-ty, distinguishing the condition as a visu-al impairment specific to faces.The exis-tence of prosopagnosia makes a strongcase for a specialized face module in thebrain, although some researchers arguenot for a face module as such, but for amodule specialized for the discriminationof complex objects. Isabel Gauthier,Associate Professor at VanderbiltUniversity, has used neuroimaging toshow that neurons in the suspected facemodule are also used for discriminationof non-face categories, such as birds orcars. This suggests that the neurons spe-cialized for discrimination of the fine

details of a face may also discriminate thefine details of a bird, for instance.

However, Nancy Kanwisher, Professorof Cognitive Neuroscience atMassachusetts Institute of Technology,believes that there is a special area of thebrain just for face processing. She calls itthe ‘fusiform face area’. Whilst experi-ments by Gauthier and others have calledthis into question, one recent study pub-lished in Science using monkeys gave newevidence to support Kanwisher’s theory.Researchers found an area in the brainsof two monkeys in which an over-whelming 97% of neurons showed aselective response to faces.These neuronsdid not respond to other objects such asbodies, fruits, gadgets and hands. This isincredible when one considers the econ-omy of nature in many other areas, but isnot surprising as face recognition is cru-cial for social success.

Consistent with Kanwisher’s theory, arecent paper in Nature demonstrates acausal link between the activity of face-selective neuronal clusters and the per-ception of faces. In this study, monkeyswere required to categorize noisy imagesas face or non-face.The researchers foundthat if they stimulated clusters of prospec-tive face-selective neurons in the inferiortemporal cortex (the key area for com-plex object perception), they biased themonkey’s decision towards the face cate-gory. One can also imagine further spe-cialization within face-selective clustersto allow perception of different types offaces and expressions.

Are we born with this gift, or is itlearned through experience? Humans areexceptional in their ability for learning.

This means that human babies are farmore helpless than the young of otherspecies. Experiments done as early as nineminutes after birth suggest that babiesprefer to look at faces or face-like objectscompared to other objects.This is hardlysurprising when one considers the evolu-tionary need to study and learn aboutfaces around you. In addition, face mod-ules have been found in baby monkeys.So, it seems that we may well be bornwith some sort of ready-made neuralprocessor that has a particular affinity forfaces. It is likely that during early life thisprocessor improves its expert discrimina-tory abilities and nearby areas develop thehuman flair for analysis of expression.This has important implications for socialskills and the feeling of empathy.

An interesting question arising fromthese observations is whether these faceareas of the brain are somehow linked toautism.Autistic patients are known to paylittle attention to faces when comparedwith non-autistic controls and theirfusiform face area is not as active inresponding to faces in neuroimagingstudies. Perhaps a lack of attention paid tofaces during childhood causes underde-velopment of the fusiform face area.

While the human brain has an amaz-ing ability to acquire perceptual expert-ise for many objects, there is mountingevidence in support of one or multiplespecialized face-recognition regions.WJ, a farmer who developed prosopag-nosia after a stroke, is an intriguing casestudy, as he had difficulty recognisingfamily and friends but was able to rec-ognize individual sheep in his flock.Thequestion should no longer be if a spe-cialized region exists, but rather howthe activation of neurons in this regionworks in conjunction with other areasto allow face recognition and the per-ception of expression.

Flora Greenwood is a recent graduate inNatural Sciences, specializing in Neuroscience


Flora Greenwood reveals the importance of a part of the brain

Nine minutes after birth babies prefer to

look at faces or face-likeobjects compared to

other objects

“

”

Jon

Her

asan

dL

aksh

miH

arih

ar

How do humans recognize faces?

14Mich06 19/9/06 01:06 Page 16

The ability to read and decipher thefacial expressions of another humanbeing is vital to survival. In fact, inter-preting the facial expressions and ges-tures of others may be so fundamentalto human survival that we haveevolved a specialized region of thebrain to do it. In the age of the com-puter, the burning question becomes:can we program a machine to have thesame capability? The answer may wellbe yes, as image processing, and possi-bly Magnetic Resonance Imaging(MRI), may facilitate the creation of aformula for interpreting facial expres-sions and complex emotions.

Professor Peter Robinson, of theUniversity of Cambridge ComputerLaboratory, has recently unveiled an“emotionally aware” computer systemdesigned to read people’s minds by ana-lyzing their facial expressions:“the systemwe have developed allows a wide range ofmental states to be identified just bypointing a video camera at someone.”Todate, the machine is able to detect facialexpressions of agreeing, concentrating,disagreeing, being interested, thinking andbeing unsure with about 80% accuracy.

The computer processes images of aperson’s face captured by a camera. Thesoftware recognises 25 different areas ofthe face and analyzes how these areasmove with respect to one another. Usingmathematical models, it then works outwhat emotions the person is portraying.

The applications of such a mind-readingcomputer range from improving people’sdriving, to helping companies tailor theiradvertising to the prospective consumer’smood: “imagine a computer that couldpick the right emotional moment to try tosell you something, a future where mobilephones, cars and websites could read ourmind and react to our mood.”

Perhaps one of the most interestingapplications for such a device is that itcould alert an autistic user if the person towhom they are talking is showing signs ofgetting bored or annoyed. One of theproblems facing those with autism is theinability to pick up on social cues.“Failureto notice that they are boring or confus-ing their listeners can be particularly dam-aging for people with autism,” says RanaEl Kaliouby of the Media Laboratory atthe Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

“it’s sad because people then avoid havingconversations with them.”

El Kaliouby is currently constructing an“emotional social intelligence prosthetic”device, which consists of a camera smallenough to be pinned to the side of theuser’s glasses.The camera is connected toa hand-held computer with image recog-

nition software that can read the emotionsof the images taken. If the wearer seems tobe failing to engage the listener, the soft-ware developed by Robinson makes thehand-held computer vibrate.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging isanother technique that may facilitate thereading of emotions. A MRI scanningmachine passes a large magnetic fieldthrough a person, enabling the measure-ment of changes in brain activity. Whatthe scanner actually detects are changes in

the amount of oxygen that is being trans-ported in the blood to specific parts ofthe brain. When a part of the brain isactive, the neural activity associated withit requires more oxygen.

Using this technology, we are begin-ning to understand which areas of thebrain process certain emotional stimuli.For example, a fearful looking face acti-vates part of the brain known as theamygdale. People with brain damage inthis area often struggle to recognize emo-tions such as fear and disgust.

The ability of MRI to read minds wasdemonstrated when scientists were ableto determine which of two differentscenes from a movie people were watch-ing just by studying their brain activity.Despite this, the prospect of a hand-heldMRI scanner that you can point at peo-ple to decipher their inner thoughts andemotions is almost certainly science fic-tion. Socially intelligent prosthetics, how-ever, remain a viable possibility. Perhapssoon humans will not be the only oneswho can read your mind.

Gemma Simpson recently completed a MPhilin the Cavendish Laboratory


The machine is able to detect facial expressions of agreeing, concentrating, disagreeing, being interested,

thinking and being unsure with about 80% accuracy

“”

Gemma Simpson reveals how computers are trained to read minds

Can computers interpret faces?

Jon

Her

asan

dL

aksh

miH

arih

ar

14Mich06 19/9/06 01:06 Page 17

A hundred billion nerve cells are allchattering away to each other in yourbrain helping you to learn and forgetwhat you are told in your lectures, let-ting you feel happiness and telling youthat you like the taste of chocolate.Themost intriguing thing about theseactivities is that we still don’t reallyknow how the brain works. We hopethat technology will one day enable usto understand fully the development ofthis complex organ and what happenswhen something in it goes wrong.One reason why neurodegenerative dis-

eases such as Alzheimer’s disease remainpoorly understood is the difficulty ofvisualizing what is going on in the brain.Until recently, scientists have relied main-ly on post-mortem brain tissue and oncultured brain cells to understand howthe brain works, but because of short-comings of both approaches, many areasof this research are still unexplored.Whatis really needed is a way to look at whatis happening in individual nerve cells inreal life as the brain gets damaged.

The answer to this problem may comeunexpectedly from the scourge of theholiday-maker: the jelly-fish.There is onekind of jelly-fish that has turned out to bevery useful to neuroscientists. Aequoreavictoria is a bioluminescent jelly-fish thatliterally glows green. In the 1960s, OsamaShimamura discovered that the green

colour was due to a fluorescent proteinknown as green fluorescent protein, orGFP. Scientists soon realized that GFPcould be exceedingly useful. It is a verystable protein that does not require any-thing except oxygen to work and isencoded in the genome of the jelly-fish.It wasn’t until the 1990s that the fullpotential of GFP in scientific researchbegan to be realized, when scientists dis-covered that the GFP gene could be putinto other organisms to turn themgreen.Within a few years, green worms,green flies and green mice were pro-duced. By subtly altering the genetic

sequence of GFP it can be changed toappear many different colours.

Entirely green mice may be pretty, butunfortunately they do not really tell usmuch about the nervous system. But in2000, Guoping Feng and his colleagues atthe University of Washington in St. Louismade a breakthrough in the field of neu-roscience. Where and when genes are

expressed in the body is controlled bygenetic sequences called promoterswhich switch genes on and off. By put-ting fluorescent proteins under the con-trol of a promoter that switches genes ononly in nerves, they made 25 differentkinds of mice with just their nerveslabelled in green, blue, yellow or red. Allthese mice were different, some withalmost all nerves labelled and others withonly a few.These differences allowed sci-entists to look at specific nerves and evenfollow individual cells to discover howthey are connected to each other andwhat happens when they are damaged.

In the past few decades our under-standing of genetics has vastly improvedand has led to many human diseasesbeing reproduced, to varying extents, inmice. We cannot make a fluorescentgreen human or look into the brain as itgets damaged, so these mouse models ofhuman diseases are vital in increasing ourunderstanding of disease. In the brains of


The GFP gene can be put into organisms to turn them green...

green worms, green flies and green mice

“”

Katherine Bridge highlights advances in visualizing neurons

SSHHEEDDDDIINNGG LLIIGGHHTTOONN TTHHEE BBRRAAIINN

Equ

inox

Gra

phics

16Mich06 19/9/06 01:07 Page 16

patients with Alzheimer’s disease, proteinsthat are usually harmless to nerves canundergo changes that result in the forma-tion of harmful protein clumps known asplaques.At the University of Washington,Robert Brendza and his colleagues haveused genetics to replicate these plaques inthose of Feng’s mice that have theirnerves labelled yellow. By removing thebrains of the mice and examining them

under a microscope, they have shownhow individual nerves react. The nervesclose to the plaques swell up and die.

At the Babraham Institute inCambridge, Michael Coleman and col-leagues have used yellow fluorescent miceto examine how individual nerves breakdown when they are cut or damaged.They also investigate how in diseases, likemotor neuron disease, it is not just thebrain nerves that are affected, but also thenerves that connect to muscles and thatcarry signals up and down the spinal cordto and from the brain. This informationhas allowed scientists to begin to under-stand how and when nerves start todegenerate in these diseases.

Although exciting, this work stillrequires the brain or nerves to be takenout of the animal and imaged after death.Visualizing fluorescent nerves requiresthe use of a standard fluorescent micro-scope. In order to give off light, fluores-cent proteins must first be exposed to alight source at a slightly different wave-length; blue light for GFP. Some of thelight is absorbed by the fluorescent pro-tein.The rest is re-emitted with less ener-gy, appearing as a different colour fromthe incident light source. This light isdetected by the microscope, allowing apicture of the tissue to be created.

Fluorescence microscopes are suitablefor looking at slices of tissue but cannotbe used to image a live brain. Clearimages are produced by focusing themicroscope on the nerve in question. In aliving organism, this could be a long waydown, buried deep in the brain, and nor-mal microscopes are simply not powerfulenough to visualize deep into the tissue.However, new equipment is being devel-oped with lenses that allow scientists tosee much further, so that they can getimages of nerves buried deep in the body.Microscopes are also being developedusing fibre-optic technology to send andreceive light down tiny tubes that can beinserted through incisions to give greateraccess to the nerves.

Scientists are already starting to imple-ment this technology to image nerves inreal life. Martin Kerschensteiner, a neuro-biologist working at Harvard University,

has produced real-time video images ofnerves in the spinal cords of Feng’s fluo-rescent mice. When spinal cords areinjured, it is frequently the axon, thelong, middle part of a nerve cell, that isdamaged. In Kerschensteiner’s experi-ments he used a needle to cut a singleaxon while an animal was anaesthetized.He was able to record the axon ‘dyingback’ away from the site of injury within

hours of its being damaged. Furthermore,he imaged axons trying, and failing, togrow back over the next few days, pro-viding vital information on how nervesreact to injury that has never before beenpossible to obtain.

So, what about the future? These tech-niques are far from perfect but are alreadyallowing scientists to watch how nervesbehave in real life, and improvements arebeing developed. It is possible that thistechnology could open the door toobserving all kinds of other processes,since it is not just nerves that change in

damaged brains.Multiple sclerosis is a neu-rological disease in which nerve cells andthe cells that surround them are damagedby the body’s immune system.Many nervecells have a fatty coating called myelin thathelps them to transmit information moreefficiently and protects the cell. Thismyelin is produced by specialized cells inthe brain called oligodendrocytes. In mul-tiple sclerosis the myelin is attacked by theimmune system, leaving nerves naked andsusceptible to damage. Mice have alreadybeen made with labelled oligodendro-cytes. Thus it may be possible to watchhow different cells interact with nerves asthey get damaged and recover. It may notjust be whole cells that can be visualized,but also the smaller molecular componentsthat make them work. Could we watchnerves releasing the chemicals they use tocommunicate and thereby observe themchatting in real life?

As time goes by we are discoveringmore and more about how our brainswork. By using these fluorescent miceunder strict government animal welfarelegislation, scientists have already discov-ered how individual nerves react to dis-ease and injury. In the future we may evenhave videos not only of nerves but ofother cells in the brain.

Katherine Bridge is a PhD student in theBabraham Institute


Adult fruit fly expressing green fluorescent protein

Kle

bes

Lab

orat

ory,

Ger

man

y

Nerves from the spinal cord of a mouse labelled with yellow flourescent protein

Kat

herin

eB

ridge

,Rob

ertA

dalb

erta

ndSi

mon

Wal

ker

Equ

inox

Gra

phics

New equipment is being developed with lenses that allow scientists to get images of

nerves buried deep in the body

”“

16Mich06 19/9/06 01:10 Page 17


In Star Trek, all Captain Kirk has to dois say “Beam me up, Scotty” and hedematerializes from a desolate planetand reappears on board the USSEnterprise.Teleportation, however, is notso simple. A body cannot be disassem-bled atom by atom and rebuilt else-where. But, teleportation should not beconfined to the realm of science fic-tion, as it is in fact reality.

Information about the internal configu-ration of an atom, its ‘quantum state’, can beis teleported from one atom to anothersome distance away. Without any physicalcontact between the two, the quantum stateof the original atom is replicated exactly.For a particle, this includes its spin, a quan-tized parameter related to angular momen-tum, and for a photon, this includes itspolarization, the direction in which thephoton’s electric field oscillates.

Crucially, teleportation destroys thequantum state of the original particle andthus is not a facsimile or duplicationprocess, but a genuine quantum state tele-portation. Copying quantum objects suchas atoms or photons is forbidden byHeisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Themore accurately one tries to determine anatom’s properties, such as its position orkinetic energy, the closer one has to get toit, until the probing eventually alters theobject you are trying to measure. By meas-uring, say, the atom’s kinetic energy accu-rately, one can’t measure its position wellenough. So, one can never gather enoughinformation to reproduce anything exactly.

For this reason, scientists long believedteleportation to be impossible. Yet itworks. It can replicate, but not duplicate,quantum states with complete precision.The key lies in a loophole in quantumphysics called entanglement, which allowsinformation about quantum states to betransferred between atoms without anyneed for quantum measurements. Noquantum particle is ever duplicated, so theuncertainty principle is never violated.

Entanglement is a form of super-corre-lation between atom-sized particles thatmakes them sense each other’s presenceeven if they are literally worlds apart.Einstein found it so hard to believe that

he poked fun at it with the chimera“spooky action at a distance”. It is uniqueto the quantum world of tiny objects,with no counterpart in the world of largebodies. As objects grow larger, quantumeffects become more and more fragile asthe surrounding environment inter-feres—a process known as decoherence.

If two indistinguishable particlesbecome entangled, the quantum state ofone affects the state of its twin, but inexactly the opposite sense. They have“opposite luck”, to use the phrase coinedby Charles Bennett, who first proposed ateleportation scheme at IBM in 1993.This is true of quantum properties such aspolarization and atomic spin.

In 2004, two groups of quantum physi-cists, at the University of Innsbruck inAustria and the US National Institute of

Standards and Technology, announced inNature that they had successfully teleport-ed quantum states between charged atomsa few microns apart.The scheme works asfollows. Let’s say one wanted to teleportthe quantum state of an atom A across toanother atom B some distance away.To dothat, one needs a third messenger atom M,which you must first entangle with theatom B by holding them close in a mag-netic field and firing a laser at them.

Next, one performs a measurement onM and A jointly.The actual teleportationoccurs during this measurement, whenthe quantum information on A is trans-ferred across to B, via the messenger par-ticle M (which is entangled with B).Thisspecific operation does not reveal theactual state on teleportee atom A, so itdoesn’t violate Heisenberg’s uncertainty

principle. But it does let one knowwhether the teleported state on atom B isidentical to the original, or whether itneeds to undergo further transformationsat the target station to recreate an exactreplica of teleportee A.

Although the teleportation itself isinstantaneous, in a certain technical sense,there is no getting around Einstein’s pos-tulate that the overall operation cannotbe completed faster than the speed oflight.The origin of this law is not an arbi-trary constraint, but rather lies deeplyburied in special relativity. It ensures thatthe overall operation does not violatecausality: the result of the joint measure-ment on M and A has to be communicat-ed by conventional means such as a tele-phone, across to the target station, so thatatom B can undergo the appropriatetransformations (doing nothing, statechanges, or both), until it is an exactreplica of A. The teleportee is left com-pletely scrambled.

Experimental teleportation represents aleap towards building a quantum comput-er—a processor that promises to dwarf thepower of today’s supercomputers by usingquantum information instead of classicalbits. Physicists are very excited since tele-portation promises a realistic replacementfor large physical circuits. A quantumcomputer would only need ghost circuit-ry—links needed to teleport fragile quan-tum information, rather than directly rail-roading it via physical channels.And what’smore, with atomic teleportation, the out-come of each teleportation is determinis-tic. One of the major obstacles in realizinga quantum machine is decoherence.

As for teleporting humans, no funda-mental law of physics prevents us fromseparately analyzing the quantum states—all 1029 of them—of each atom in thehuman body, and teleporting those one byone into another host body somewhereon Mars. But teleporting anything of asize beyond a few atoms is impossiblewith today’s technology, if only because ofthe impossibly large amount of data.

Tristan Farrow is a PhD student in theCavendish Laboratory

Tom

Wal

ters

Untangling TeleportationTristan Farrow explains how teleportation is not just science fiction

Information about the internal configurationof an atom is teleported

from one atom to anothersome distance away

“

”

18Mich06 19/9/06 01:11 Page 11


Have you ever considered theUnderground network to be analogousto the immune system? Unless youhave been exposed to systems biology,probably not. Systems biology is a newapproach to biology that has developedalongside technological innovationsthat have enabled data collection at thelevel of the entire organism. Some pre-dict that systems biology is on track toreplace some of the more traditionalstyles of research within a decade.

The premise of systems biology is thatthe whole is greater than the sum of theparts.To a systems biologist, an organism isa complex network of interacting genes,proteins and biochemical reactions thatcannot be understood using the reduc-tionist approach.Attempts to understand asystem by splitting it into smaller parts,studying each part and then trying to putit all back together are destined to fail dueto the redundancy and complexity inher-ent in biological systems. Returning tothe Underground network analogy, tounderstand why the Tube at King’s Crossis late, one must not only consider thePiccadilly line, but all the intersectinglines such as the Central line.

Many critics of systems biology believethat this is not a new concept and thatuntil recently technologies were the lim-iting factor. They have a valid point, asthe automation of once tedious experi-ments has facilitated the global approachof systems biology. Scientists can nowdetermine the relative expression levelsof thousands of genes based on theamount of mRNA present, usingmicroarrays. With mass spectrometry,proteomics can also identify and quanti-fy all the proteins in a cell.The applica-tion of these high-throughput tech-niques in isolation, however, does notconstitute the systems biology approach.It simply creates a list—and a list of tubestation names without their order in thenetwork is somewhat useless.

Systems biology seeks to define a net-work by integrating data from differentbiological levels—from genes and proteinsto organelles and cells to physiological sys-tems and organisms. Consider thePiccadilly line as representing a proteinsignalling cascade that leads to the activa-tion of a transcription factor; the intersect-ing Central line could be the gene(s)switched on, while the intersectingVictoria line could have activated the cas-cade in the first place.This metaphor rein-forces that the entire network must bestudied to understand the true nature ofwhat is going on. Professor Seth Grant, asystems biologist at The Wellcome TrustSanger Institute in Cambridge, commentsthat “systems biology tries to take large sets

of proteins or genes and demonstrate somecommon features, or how they worktogether, to produce pieces of physiology.”

The primary goal of systems biologyis to combine data from all biologicallevels into a computer model that gen-erates testable hypotheses. The validityof these models can be tested iterativelyuntil the predictions accurately reflectthe biological reality. Such models couldsuggest the basis of a disease, identifypotential drug targets and predict possi-ble drawbacks of particular drugs.

It was realized early on that, in order tobuild holistic models, there must be astandardized method of data exchangeand organization. Systems BiologyMarkup Language (SBML) and SystemsBiology Graphical Notation (SBGN)were thus created. SBML is a machine-readable format that facilitates theexchange of data between different soft-wares, while SBGN is a visual representa-

tion of the data, much like the electroniccircuit diagrams used in engineering. Inthe absence of a universal notation, thedifferent lines of the Underground wouldbe drawn at different scales.

With these models at the cornerstoneof systems biology, it requires a multitudeof scientists with different skills: experi-mental biologists, computational biolo-gists, statisticians, mathematicians, com-puter scientists, engineers and physicistsare all required if the potential of systemsbiology is to be realized.

The next time you are waiting for theTube, marvel at what a complex system itis and hope that one day we have a tubemap detailing the activities of all biologi-cal organisms.

Sheena Gordon is a PhD student in theDepartment of Biochemistry

James Pickett is a PhD student in theDepartment of Pharmacology

All Systems Are Go

A Systems Biologist in Cambridge

Professor Seth Grant from The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute currently usessystems biology to elucidate the molecular basis of learning and memory. Byusing proteomics, genomics, disease studies, model organisms and computermodels, his group has recently identified a 200-protein complex essential fortransforming the electrical activity of neurons in the brain into biochemical sig-nals in the rest of the body. Nearly one third of the proteins in this complexhave been implicated in mental illnesses, reinforcing the importance of thismolecular machine to human health.

Sheena Gordon and James Pickett take a trip to the world of systems biology

The premise of systems biology is that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts

“”

Kat

erin

aB

ilito

u

19Mich06 19/9/06 01:12 Page 11

AD

ayin

the

Life

of…


A Science EditorPeter Stern takes us behind the scenes of a scientific publication and tells how he can “makea career, but not break a career”

How does a Senior Editor at Science passthe working day?

You have to read—you have to read allday long.You have to read all the manu-scripts that are being assigned to you; youalso have to read the major journals in yourfield. So, most of my time is spent lookingat the computer screen and reading.

What is the most challenging aspect ofyour job?

In a broad sense, the idea that youalways have to be ahead of the curve.Youhave to see developments even whenthey are not there yet.We try to be at theforefront of research, constantly scoutingwhere the new things are. Also when Ihave to say a certain field has matured andis no longer of note to Science.

What is the best part of your job?The best part is the opportunity to see

such a broad field—to see the develop-ment in my particular area many monthsbefore others will see it.

Another thing that I like is this: I havealways been interested in the sciences invery general terms; being in constantinteraction with my colleagues who areexperts in physics, chemistry, palaeontol-ogy; and being told by them what the lat-est paper is that they are accepting. Alsobeing told the context; why this particu-lar paper is really important and the dis-cussion that has been going on. It broad-ens your horizons immensely.

How do you ensure that you are alwaysaware of the hot topics?

Going to scientific conferences is veryimportant.You have to go to the plenarytalks and the symposia. I spend a lot oftime at the poster sessions where veryoften the hot stuff is being presented. It isvery often presented by the youngsters—so this is extremely enlightening for me.

There is another side to the meetings;the social aspect. It is important to get toknow many people on a personal basis.That improves your understanding ofhow they tick, in terms of what theirexperiments are, what their strategies areand when they are submitting theirpapers.Also when I ask people to reviewa paper for me it is often very good toknow the personality of the individual.

The other aspect is laboratory visits.

These give you a feel for what is going onand for what certain technologies canachieve.When people tell you about all theproblems they have and the many experi-ments that fail, it gives you some feel forthe effort and sweat that has gone in.

Do popular media influence what youconsider to be a hot topic?

In a way this is unavoidable because weare just part of the general discourse insociety. On the other hand, we try to bethe leaders in that we want to show wherediscussion should go in the future. Veryoften we try to publish the first papersthat really trigger an avalanche of furthersubmissions. To give you an example,some of the first papers on climate changewere with us.The media later jumped onthe band-wagon and elaborated and nowit’s in the public domain.

How does Science ensure equal coverageof all fields of research?

We have a general formula. Over thecourse of a whole year there should be 40%physical sciences and 60% biological sci-ences.We usually manage quite well to dothis. I have to say that I find it magic that itworks out because every editor has his fieldand you want somehow to serve your fieldand publish more papers from that area. Itmeans a kind of co-operative spirit; youhave to keep the benefit of the magazineand the benefit of the scientific communi-ty at large in the back of your mind.

Are the authors of rejected manuscriptsoften hostile towards you?

Of course there is a certain level of frus-tration when you (an author) are rejected.But if I try to make it clear that this is atransparent process—that it has not beendone by tossing a coin—that there is agreat deal of intellectual input that cameto that decision, very often people willaccept it. I also tell people that I can makea career but I can’t break a career.

What quality controls does Science imple-ment in the selection of a manuscript?

The first quality control is the Board ofReviewing Editors. They are high-profilescientists in their field.Their job is less to gointo the fine details of the manuscript,moreto step back and look at the broad develop-ments in the field and how this fits in.Aftertheir verdict,we send the manuscript out tothe in-depth referees, usually active scien-tists.This is the review process common tomany journals.You also discuss the manu-script broadly with your colleagues.

Imagine publishing a paper that turnsout to be wrong and dozens of postdocsaround the world try to replicate it.Theymay waste their time if you publishsomething that turns out to be a deadend, and resources get wasted.This is why

we try to be very conscientious when itcomes to ultimate decisions.

What prompted Science to pre-releasemanuscripts on the Internet?

Science is published by the AAAS, theAmerican Association for theAdvancement of Science, which is anon-profit organisation.We are there toserve the community; the slogan is“Advancing science, serving society”.

Any scientist trying to survive in the academic world will undoubtedly face the real-ities of the publish-or-perish philosophy. To begin and then sustain one’s researchcareer, results must be obtained and manuscripts must be published. Not only that,if one dreams of tenure or even a professorship, then these manuscripts have to bepublished in high-impact journals, journals like Science, which receives over 12,000manuscripts per year, of which fewer than 8% are published.These journals are mak-ing careers and guiding the focus of research. Peter Stern has been a Senior Editor,specializing in neurobiology, at Science for the last eight years.

Imagine publishing a paper that turns out to be wrong and dozens of postdocs

around the world try to replicate it

“”

Prof

esso

rJu

erge

nSa

ndku

ehle

r,M

edica

lUni

vers

ityof

Vie

nna

20Mich06 19/9/06 01:14 Page 20

AD

ayin

the

Lifeof…

So, time and again, we try to find outwhat our readers and the people pub-lishing with us want.

One of the important aspects hasalways been speed.A scientist wants to bethe first when they have a new result—they don’t want to be scooped.We triedto react to that by releasing the paperonline before publishing it in print. In themeantime, many other journals havecopied us and do similar things.

Has pre-release of manuscripts on theInternet altered the editing process?

No, the overall editing process has notchanged. We did not speed up thereviewing process because we still wantto have quality control. For example, Igive my referees two weeks to review amanuscript. I think this is fair to theauthors, as it is very unlikely that some-one else will do the right experiment injust two weeks.

Do you ever have the urge to advise scien-tists on what experiments need to be done?

I have this very often. I say, “Oh, this isthe question that I was asking many yearsago and here they are with their results.” Ialso see several papers, which may notcome in at the same time, that give a kindof broader picture. Many pieces falltogether like a jigsaw puzzle. I want to calleveryone and say, “Folks, this is what youhave to do here.” But, you don’t do this.

As an editor, whenever something is onmy desk I have to treat it with absoluteconfidentiality. No information is allowedto go out. You just don’t open yourmouth—end of story.

How easy do you think it would be for anEditor to return to the bench?

One of the problems in many fields isthat you have to have hands-on contactwith the machinery. There is a highturnover in technology. On the otherhand, with the broad background andoverview that an Editor has, an Editorcould easily fit in the laboratory environ-ment. An Editor knows much more onthe theoretical side.The biggest challengewould be going back to the bench andlearning to use the new equipment.

Do you communicate with the editors ofyour competing journals?

Not really.We have a friendly meetingwith our colleagues from Nature once ayear. There is the famous Nature versusScience cricket match and it always hap-pens here in Cambridge.

Of course after a while you get toknow most of your colleagues from other

journals because you see them at meet-ings. Some of them are really quite pleas-ant people. They have the same sort ofbackground and the same broad approachto things that we have. But, whenever apaper is with us, you stay ‘mum’.

How do you think your job has changedover the last eight years?

My job has changed enormously.When I started we were dealing withloads of printed paper. Everyday big

envelopes were arriving, sometimes con-taining four copies of a manuscript. Wespent a lot of time using the fax machineand also on the phone.

Now, everything is electronic. Themajority of scientists submit their manu-scripts through our website. In fact, thesedays I do not print out a manuscript untilit reaches the so-called ‘pre-edit’ stage.This is when I really sit in a quiet roomfor several hours and go through themanuscript line by line.

The editing process has also sped up. Inthe past, we sent the manuscripts to ourBoard Members by post. These days ittakes a mouse click and it will appear ontheir screen. In a way, it is all handling ofinformation.We also have a large databaseof the track record of scientists, their sub-missions and when they have reviewed apaper for us.

Does Science pay attention to impactfactor?

I personally don’t. I think at themoment impact factor is written toolarge.Too many committees, for examplewhen they are awarding tenure, put toomuch attention on impact factor. I knowthat Science at the moment has the high-est impact factor of all the general inter-est journals. But, I am happy to publish apaper that will only be cited a few timesif I feel that this pushes the field forward.The scientific quality is more important.

What is Science doing in response to thepush for open-access publishing?

At the moment, we are just followingthe traditional publishing system, the‘tried and tested’ way, but things maychange in the future.We are not dogmat-ic in any way. Initially, I had the feelingthat some of the open-access advocateswere behaving like zealots. They wanted

to change everything completely. So, inthat sense an organisation like the AAAS,which has been around for 150 years, seesthings a bit differently. In the meantime,we know that the open-access publishershave to increase their charges otherwisethey can’t keep their costs low.

At the moment everything published inScience is released for free after one year.There is some push that this should godown to six months from the grant-givingcommittees. I don’t think it will hurt us togo down because the impact of Science is itsimmediacy. We are quite relaxed, submis-sion numbers are still going up; it doesn’tdeter people to send their best stuff to us.

What advice would you give to a scientistwho wants to publish in Science?

Try to answer a fundamental question;dare to be innovative; be extremely criti-cal with your own data: make sure thatyou have done all the controls and becritical with your interpretation so thatwhat you see is what you really see andnot what you want to see.

I think the most important one is ‘dareto ask important questions’. Try to findout what is the big unanswered questionand then go for it.

What advice would you give to an aspir-ing editor?

Try to be as broad as possible within yourown field.Most of the editors at Science havedone at least two postdocs after their PhD,very often in different fields.They can judgeexperiments not only from what they haveread in the literature, but from their ownhands-on experience.

Try to be excited by scientific findings;and maintain this interest.

Love to be astonished by new things.Try

to always stay young-at-heart so that youget excited by new ideas that come around.

In what area of neurobiology do you thinkthe big discoveries are going to happen inthe next year?

The next 12 months are a relativelynarrow period of time.We are thinking inlonger terms. At the moment there is agreat deal of different experiments thatsomehow need to be synthesized to try tounderstand higher cognitive functions.How does it happen that our brainsexperience space and time; how do weintegrate all these different channels ofinput in a coherent picture of the world;how do we constantly update this withour memories? That is one of the bigthings that I am waiting for.

Peter Stern was interview by SheenaGordon, a PhD student in the Department

of Biochemistry

21luesciwww.bluesci.org

Dare to ask important questions… try to find out what is the big unanswered

question and then go for it

“”

I had the feeling that some of the open-access advocates were behaving like zealots

“”

20Mich06 19/9/06 01:14 Page 21

There I was, halfway through writingup my PhD thesis, when I began tothink about what I would do after Ihad finished. I had realized that Iwanted to do something different andI certainly did not want to be sittingin front of a computer. I found outthat the British Antarctic Survey(BAS) was looking for ElectronicField Engineers and, despite thinkingthat I had little chance of getting thejob, I decided to apply.

It is now one year on from when Istarting working for BAS and I can saythat it has been an amazing year. I havecompleted the first seven months of a 30-month stint at Halley base in theAntarctic. Halley, named after theastronomer Sir Edmond Halley, is thesurvey’s most southerly base and is actu-ally built on a floating ice-shelf that isflowing north at about 500 metres peryear. For 10 months of the year, Halley,the base where the ozone hole was dis-covered in 1985, is physically cut off fromthe rest of the world.

I arrived in Antarctica in the summermonth of December, aboard the supplyship, the R. R. S. Ernest Shackleton. Theship returned in February, taking with itthe summer staff, and leaving me and 15other winter staff to look after the baseand the scientific equipment for the next10 months. During the summer, the sunnever sets; in winter, however, we will notsee daylight for over four months. My jobis to maintain the Advanced IonosphericSounder (AIS), which is a powerful radarused to study the ionosphere.

The research carried out at Halley canbe categorized into upper or loweratmospheric science. The upper atmos-

pheric science is concerned with how thesun affects the Earth’s atmosphere. Thesun constantly sends streams of particlesthat slam into the Earth’s magnetic field.These collisions bend the magnetic fieldinto a tail behind the Earth, creatingspace weather. Particles and energy arealso dumped into the upper atmospherealong the magnetic field lines, resulting inthe beautiful aurora that we regularlyobserve at Halley.These particles can alsoaffect the lower atmosphere and climate.

The AIS bounces radio waves off chargedparticles and so measures how these solarevents affect the ionosphere.The SouthernHemisphere Auroral Radar Experimentworks in a similar manner to the AIS, butpoints towards the South Pole.Magnetometers at Halley and at remotesites further south measure the changes inthe magnetic field,while riometers measurehow radio waves from distant galaxies areabsorbed by the ionosphere. A number ofoptical experiments are performed tomeasure the chemical processes in theupper and middle atmospheres.

The lower atmospheric science studiesthe local climate in detail.Ozone observa-tions and measurements have been carriedout since Halley was constructed 50 yearsago.Automatic weather stations at remote

sites send data to Halley. A weather bal-loon is launched every day and continu-ous weather measurements are relayed tothe Met Office and input into global cli-mate models. A number of air measure-ments are also performed in the clean airsector of the base. Snow accumulation isalso measured; in the last six months, wehave had a metre of snow accumulate.Halley is part of a global network collect-ing monthly snow samples for theInternational Atomic Energy Agency.

The majority of the maintenance atHalley is due to the weather and snowaccumulation. Raising equipment out ofthe snow and repairing instruments dam-aged during blows takes up a great deal oftime.The temperature rose to 0.5ºC dur-ing the summer and has been low as–48ºC in the winter. For most of thetime, it is around –30ºC.The wind has onoccasion reached 70 knots.This all makesthe task of maintaining the scientificinstruments much more difficult.

On a more personal note, being so iso-lated means we have to make an effort toentertain ourselves. We organize varioustheme nights that involve dressing up, aswell as special dinners and trivia nights.Being on a nice flat ice-shelf means manyof us go kite-boarding or kite-skiing whenthe wind is right. Cross-country skiingand skijouring (skiing behind a skidoo) arealso popular. Everyone goes off base toexplore, abseil into and jumar out of cre-vasses with the base Field Assistant on pre-and post-winter trips. We are all lookingforward to the sun’s return, so we can visitour local emperor penguin colony.

www.bas.ac.ukhttp://bigjuli.blogspot.com

Julius Rix is an Electronic Field Engineerwith the British Antarctic Survey at Halley The view from the mast to which the AIS antenna is attached

Aw

ayfr

omth

eBen

ch

luesci

In AntarcticaJulius Rix and colleagues brave the cold for science

Juliu

sR

ix

22

During the summer,the sun never sets; inwinter we will not see

daylight for months

“

”

Julius Rix (far right) and colleagues

Juliu

sR

ix

Michaelmas 2006

22Mich06 19/9/06 13:48 Page 22

Cambridge is full of people withbright ideas: research that goes onevery day in the University could pro-duce new technologies that wouldrevolutionize our lives. There is a vastamount of potential, but unfortunatelymuch of this remains unrealized.

In response to this, in 2003 theCambridge University Technology andEnterprise Club (CUTEC) was estab-lished with the mission of enhancing theentrepreneurial spirit amongst both stu-dents and academics. CUTEC organizesa variety of speaker series and workshopswhich aim to develop the commercialinsight of members of the University.

CUTEC’s seminal event is an annualconference which was held inCambridge this year.The purpose was tobring together entrepreneurially-mindedstudents and potential sources of invest-ment and advice, in the form of venturecapitalists (companies which invest otherpeople’s money in new businesses), busi-ness angels (individuals who invest theirown money in new businesses), seasonedentrepreneurs and other business profes-sionals and academics.

Entitled From Science to Growth:Capturing Value from Innovation, the con-ference focused on trends in future driversof innovation and how entrepreneurs and

investors will capture value from suchtrends. There was a great mix of speakersand panellists, and each provided a differentyet complementary perspective.

The conference kicked off with akeynote address from Ray Anderson, therecipient of the Technology Entrepreneurof the Year 2006 award. Anderson is aserial entrepreneur in computing andtelecommunications. His presentationwas inspiring and reinforced the necessi-ty of foresight: one of his companiessponsored the first international confer-ence on the World Wide Web.

One of the more controversial presen-tations was by Carl Franklin, author ofthe book Why Innovation Fails. In frontof an audience of many optimistic, risk-taking entrepreneurs, Franklin focusedon the pitfalls and opportunities of fail-ure in the business world. He illustratedhis point using real innovations thatwere supposed to be certain to succeedbut went on to flop. His key message wasthat it is essential to understand the con-sumer’s needs: a program connecting afridge to the Internet such that items arepurchased when they are removed fromthe fridge, sounds like a wonderful ideauntil you realize that you don’t want toorder a pint of milk every time youmake a cup of tea.

Another highlight was a panel discus-sion on how innovations could emergefrom universities. A broad mix of panel-lists, from CEOs to professors, made for arange of perspectives and a lively, inform-ative and entertaining discussion.Complementary to this was a presenta-tion by Professor Chris Abell. With twosuccessful biotechnology companiesunder his belt, Abell is an academic whohas crossed the boundary between acade-mia and the marketplace.

There was also a technology showcase,where finalists from high-profile businesscompetitions presented posters outliningtheir business plans or fledgling compa-nies. The showcase gave participants anidea of the technologies that were beingdeveloped and forming the bases of newcompanies. There was also the potentialfor the companies to attract investment,with numerous venture capitalists andother potential investors present. There

were plenty of opportunities to network,including the compulsory ‘pitch andpunt’ trip and a cocktail party.

CUTEC, in collaboration with theCambridge-MIT Institute (CMI), is alsoinvolved in an initiative called i-Teams. i-Teams brings together university studentsfrom diverse disciplines, researchers whohave developed a potentially commercialinnovation or idea and mentors from thebusiness community. The students arearranged in teams, and over the course ofa term they assess the commercial feasi-bility of the researcher’s technology andbrainstorm applications and markets.Theteam is supported by their business men-tors and participates in a structured pro-gramme organized by CMI’s entrepre-neur-in-residence, Amy Mokady. Theprogramme concludes with each teamgiving a presentation of its recommenda-tions to the researcher.

CUTEC gives its members the opportu-nity to gain the knowledge,experience andconfidence required for survival in thebusiness world—it is like being involved ina start-up company! CUTEC is nowrecruiting members for next year.

www.cutec.org

Lucy Butler is a PhD student in theDepartment of Physiology, Development and

Neuroscience

Initiatives

luesci [email protected]

The Business of InnovationLucy Butler reports on the activities of CUTEC

CUTEC enhances the entrepreneurial spirit

amongst both students andacademics

“

”

The i-Teams product I worked on...

“…was visual tracking software. It wasdeveloped to track individuals on CCTVfootage. The teams are multidisciplinaryto stimulate a wide range of possibleideas during brainstorming.As a biologist,my immediate thought was that this soft-ware could be used for semen analysis orto track cells in microscopy. The inventor,an engineer, had not thought of this andone of my colleagues in the team hadtrouble to even pronounce the word‘microscopy’—as we discovered when hegave part of our final presentation!”

Ben

Jone

sB

enJo

nes

Ben

Jone

s

22Mich06 19/9/06 13:49 Page 23

Medicine is one of the most venerabledegree subjects at the University ofCambridge, and one that has trans-formed radically since its introductionin the Middle Ages. Like law and divin-ity, medicine has been a part of theUniversity’s curriculum in one form oranother since the thirteenth century.Although the earliest medical degreeof which proof survives was awardedto James Freis in 1460, the first evi-dence of medical teaching at theUniversity of Cambridge dates fromthe 1270s, when Nigel de Thornton,Doctor of Physic (medicine),bequeathed property to the University,including a medical lecture room.

Throughout its history, medical teachingat the University evolved separately fromthat of the town’s hospitals. Organizedmedical care began in Cambridge in 1169when the leper hospital of St MaryMagdalene was founded at Stourbridge,and a general hospital, dedicated to St Johnthe Evangelist, was established by thetownsman Henry Frost around 1195. Intime, the paths of the University and thehospitals intersected.A second leper hospi-tal was built on Trumpington Street in 1361by Henry Tangmere,one of the founders ofCorpus Christi College. In 1766,Addenbrooke’s Hospital was foundedthanks to a bequest left by a fellow of St

Catharine’s College. But there were noinstitutionalized links between Universitymedical teaching and the town’s hospitalsuntil the nineteenth century.

This early period of medical teachingwas considerably different from modernmedical programmes. Students of theCambridge medical faculty in the MiddleAges—of whom there were always sub-stantially fewer than in the faculties of lawand divinity—were first required to pass astandard seven-subject humanities syl-labus. Under the University’s Statutes,they then spent a minimum of five yearsreading and disputing the Articella, a stan-dard collection of Greek and Arabic texts.

After studying the humanities, manyprospective physicians travelled to conti-nental universities in Paris or Padua,where the reputation of medical teach-ing exceeded that at the University ofCambridge. On their return they wouldbe awarded a University of Cambridge

degree, enabling them to practise as doc-tors in England. In 1421, theUniversities of Cambridge and Oxfordsuccessfully petitioned Parliament torestrict that privilege to their medicalgraduates. The small number ofCambridge physicians trained followingthis—just 134 between 1500 and1589—made this a valuable privilegethat opened social and economic doors.Between 1200 and 1500, a third of allCambridge medical graduates becamecourt physicians in London and abroad.At the end of the sixteenth century,three Trinity College fellows in succes-sion acted as doctor to Ivan the Terrible.

The greatest sixteenth-century propo-nent of change was John Caius. A gradu-ate of Gonville Hall, Caius went to studymedicine in Padua in 1539, where helodged with the great Flemish anatomistAndreas Vesalius. Caius did not return toCambridge until 1557, but by that time hewas President of the Royal College ofPhysicians and had written the first med-ical treatise in English, a first-hand accountof an outbreak of sweating sickness (a dis-ease whose nature remains mysterious tothis day).After renaming his old college asGonville and Caius and becoming itsMaster, Caius instituted the first regularprogramme of dissections in Cambridge,formalized in 1565 by an annual grant oftwo cadavers to Caius College. Caius’ ownlectures on anatomy were attended by theyoung William Harvey,who first describedthe circulation of the blood. AlthoughHarvey left Cambridge and had no furtherconnections with the university, it is opti-mistic to ascribe his work solely to Caius’good influence.

The seventeenth and eighteenth cen-turies brought piecemeal progress tomedicine at Cambridge.The University’soutstanding medical minds—such asWilliam Heberden, whose Commentaries

His

tory

luesci24

Humble BeginningsNick Jackson traces the history of medical teaching in Cambridge

The medical requirements were so vaguely set out that twice in the 1600s petitions were brought against the

University for the poor quality of medical instruction

”“

Griffith Ward, Addenbrook’s Hospital old site, circa 1896 (above)Addenbrook’s Hospital old site, circa 1870 (top left) and as it stands today (top right)The site is now home to the Judge Business School

Jaso

nK

imm

ings

Add

enbr

ook’

sH

ospi

talA

rchiv

esA

dden

broo

k’s

Hos

pita

lArch

ives

Michaelmas 2006

24Mich06 19/9/06 13:04 Page 25

detailed a lifetime’s careful observation ofclinical cases and a rationalist’s debunkingof quack cures and superstitions—weremired in mediocrity. The number ofmedical students was still small (267between 1610 and 1658), and the medicalrequirements so vaguely set out thattwice in the 1600s petitions were broughtagainst the University—one by theMaster of Caius—castigating it for thepoor quality of medical instruction. Thedirector of medical teaching was theoccupant of the Regius chair of Physic,endowed by Henry VIII in 1540, but suc-cessive incumbents, even if noteworthymedics, spent little time attending to theirstudents.The most celebrated of the earlyprofessors, Francis Glisson, Regius chairfrom 1636–1677, was rarely inCambridge, and there is scant evidencethat his predecessors paid much attentionto lecturing or performing public dissec-tions. For almost the whole of the eigh-teenth century the chair was held by justtwo men, Christopher Green and RussellPlumptre, neither of whom publishedduring their tenure.

A chair of Anatomy was established in1707. Its first occupant,George Rolfe,wasexcused for negligence, though not beforeoccupying the post for 21 years. In Rolfe’sdefence, acquiring cadavers for dissectionwas difficult in the early 1700s. TheUniversity’s attempt to pass an act in 1723allowing it to appropriate the bodies ofexecuted criminals was defeated by cleri-cal opposition. Despite these setbacks, anew anatomical theatre was opened in1728. Conforming to the pattern of PeterPaauw’s celebrated 1597 Anatomiezaal atLeyden University, the building playedhost to the dissection of the bodies thatthe University was able to procure. Otherimprovements in facilities included theBotanic Garden, first planted in 1762 onthe north side of Pembroke Street, and“an elegant chymical laboratory” estab-lished by Trinity College in 1703. But ingeneral, “the Arts subservient toMedicine”, as Richard Dale of Queens’

College complained in 1759, had “noappointments [at Cambridge] to encour-age teachers in them,” until the turn ofthe nineteenth century.

Ultimately, it was the government thatacted as the catalyst for change when, in1850, a Royal Commission was appointedto assess the University. Despite the Regiuschair, John Haviland, testifying thatCambridge medicine was at a “very lowebb”, the Commission’s recommendationsamounted to little.But,wary of further stateinterference, the Senate house set up itsown commission to overhaul the medical

course. A Board of Medical Studies wasestablished and split the medical degree intothree parts covering every branch of medi-cine and related science.At the same time,with anxious glances cast towards theadvances of scientific facilities in Germany,a new suite of physiological laboratorieswas built, where lectures in embryologystarted in 1875.

The new Board faced a fundamentalproblem:should the University have a med-ical school that offered complete medicaltraining? The traditional route by whichaspiring medics did much of their trainingelsewhere was still followed, thoughLondon now replaced Padua or Paris. Butfull training in Cambridge would require asuitable hospital, and the only one availablewas Addenbrooke’s Hospital. Was it bigenough for the University’s needs?Haviland’s previous position as physician toAddenbrooke’s Hospital enabled him tostrengthen ties between the Hospital andthe University and to institutionalize wardrounds by students in 1841.

Nevertheless, by the 1870s the wide-spread opinion was that the Hospital didnot have enough clinical material for stu-dents to receive full training. This viewwas championed by The Lancet and byGeorge Humphry, Professor of HumanAnatomy from 1866. Proponents ofAddenbrooke’s Hospital were led byRegius chair, George Paget, who invokedthe spectre of Cambridge’s weakness inthe face of German universities with theirunified schools. The debate rumbled onthrough the 1870s, but Humphry’s fac-tion was stymied by the Board’s decision

in 1878 confirming that a completeschool was both desirable and feasible.Thus, despite The Lancet’s worries thatnew doctors would “quit the Universitymere theorists” without the breadth ofpractical experience they needed, in 1882the modern Cambridge medical schoolwas founded, with new chairs and lec-tureships endowed in physiology, pathol-ogy, surgery and midwifery. Humphrybowed to his defeat with good grace andpersonal sacrifice, accepting the chair ofSurgery without a stipend.

The course reforms prompted a surgein student numbers. In 1883–4, with 90freshers, the University of Cambridgehad the second highest intake of med-ical students. The degree requirementswere continuously tightened, withbotany being replaced in the syllabusfrom 1880 by pharmaceutical chemistry,and the Department of Psychologyemerging in the 1890s. The increasingprestige of Cambridge medicine wasconfirmed by the election of AlexanderHill, a lecturer in physiology, as Masterof Downing College. In 1900, the rela-tionship between the University andAddenbrooke’s Hospital was bolsteredwith the Hospital Governors’ decisionto make numerous academics ex officiopart of the Hospital staff, and a newbuilding for the medical school wasopened on Corn Exchange Street in1904. By the time of World War One,the intake of new students had reachedover 400 a year.

Medicine at the University ofCambridge leapt from behind its peers tothe forefront of both medicine and med-ical education in less than a hundredyears. Its humble origins in ancient textsand its leaders’ often wilful attachment tomediocrity were overshadowed by bothfresh discoveries and the demands of acompetitive medical market.

Nick Jackson is a second year PhD studentin the Department of History

Histo

ry


The Lancet worried that new doctors would “quit the University mere theorists” without the breadth

of practical experience they needed

”“

George Humphry (left) and George Paget (right) were instrumental in putting medical edu-cation in Cambridge on a proper footing

Add

enbr

ook’

sH

ospi

talA

rchiv

es

24Mich06 19/9/06 12:51 Page 26

At first sight, film and science may appear to have littleconnection.Yet it was through science that the technologyrequired for film was first developed. In fact, it was indirect response to scientific needs that a crucial moment inthe growth of cinema occurred.

Etienne-Jules Marey, a French physician, inventor and pho-tographer, was the first to use photographic materials in a cin-ematic way in the 1880s. However, Marey’s principle motiva-tion in developing the cinematic medium was a desire to studyanimal locomotion. In order to examine the details of animalmovement in terms of biomechanics, it is necessary to have acamera that can capture many images within a brief space oftime: Marey’s first cinematic recording device, the photograph-ic gun, met this need with the ability to record 12 images persecond. His subsequent invention, which built upon the workof photographers such as Eastman, Jansen and Muybridge, wasknown as the chronophotograph. It could capture up to 60images per second and the resulting strips of images could beshown as motion pictures.

This nascent technology was picked up by the Lumièrebrothers, who turned the focus of their family business fromstill photography equipment to the production of movie cam-eras. In order to demonstrate their combined movie cameraand projector they recorded short films that they showed atpublic screenings. The influence of Marey on Louis Lumière,the brother more involved in the production of these shortfilms, is evident in the nature of the early movies, many of them

documentaries, which initially focused on science and thenmoved on to scenes of everyday life. Marey’s first films, forexample, studied human locomotion, as well as the movementand development of other organisms.

Now, more than a century after the first movie camera wasused to break animal movement into its detailed constituentparts, film continues to be crucial in studying the motion ofliving creatures. For example, Adrian Thomas and his biome-chanics group at the Department of Zoology at the Universityof Oxford still use film to study insect flight.The group’s exper-iments involve passing a smoke trail over a flying insect andfilming what happens to the air around the insect’s wings andbody. This plays a crucial role in discerning unconventionalmechanisms of insect flight. Film is also used in contemporarystudies of animal behaviour and, perhaps most intriguingly ofall, in the detailed examination of cellular processes.

The initial interest shown by Marey and the Lumières infilming the life of marine organisms continued in the films ofFrench scientist Jean Painlevé, one of the fathers of the sci-ence documentary. Painlevé made over 200 films for scientif-ic purposes. However, his work also had important artisticconsequences. Captivated by what he was observing, he beganto make films departing from a purely scientific approach. Hefilmed a range of intriguing organisms with which most peo-ple would not be familiar, and added modern music and anarration that was both witty and educational. In this way hecreated short films for the layman that were both scientificand artistic. Most of his work for the general public has anaquatic theme, including Hyas and Stenorhynchus (1929), TheSeahorse (1934), Sea Urchins (1954), The Love Life of the Octo-pus (1965) and Acera and the Witches’ Dance (1972). ForPainlevé, science and art could come together in mostextraordinary ways: his films explore both the art that existsin nature and its life-forms and cinematic techniques that canconnect scientific documentary with art.

Painlevé pioneered the use of enlargement and microscopyto show the increasing levels of complexity in an organism’smorphology the closer one gets to it.The possibility of film-ing processes that take place under a microscope, in tandemwith the ability to label certain molecules using fluorescentmolecular markers of different colours, has resulted in a pro-found understanding of many cellular processes, such as cyto-plasmic trafficking of cytoskeleton movements. Film allowsus to observe what happens within a living cell in real time;we can also slow down or speed up the film in order to geta better picture of underlying cellular processes. One exam-ple of this can be found in the interactive CDs that comewith many cell biology text books. They often have shortclips of films made in research labs showing the relevant cel-lular processes. These educational films give students agreater appreciation of scientific ideas.

Animated educational films have also been used effectivelyto demonstrate the processes occurring within the body, evenon a cellular level. Of particular interest are the animated filmsthat combine scientific ideas with artistic personification ofcells and other structures, enabling storylines to be developed.These communicate basic scientific or medical ideas to theyoungest of audiences.A popular example of this use of film is

Arts

&Rev

iew

s


Science and the CinemaMico Tatalovic and Alison Frank review the relationship between film and science

Film is used in studies of animal behaviour and in the

examination of cellular processes

“

”

Cat

herin

eWill

iam

s

26Mich06 19/9/06 01:23 Page 27

the French animated series of the 1980s called Il était une fois...la vie.This cartoon series features recurring characters such asblood cells, hormonal messengers, bacteria, viruses, andimmune cells, shown as little humanoids within the bodygoing about their own business (that is, performing their cel-lular functions), and interacting in a variety of ways accordingto various external or internal influences.

Film has come a long way since Marey’s investigations andthe first efforts to use film as a way of sharing scientific factsand views. Today there are specific television channels, suchas The Discovery Channel, National Geographic and TheAnimal Channel, devoted solely to showing documentaryand science films. Although it is rare for science films to beproduced for general cinema audiences, there are exceptions,such as the recent March of the Penguins, which tracks the lifejourney of those hardy Antarctic inhabitants. Many peoplesee scientific documentaries in 3-D Imax theatres, wheremovies feature subjects such as coral reefs, insect microcosmsand outer space.

Interest in scientific film has led to a growth in the numberof courses offered in science communication and scientificmedia production. Meanwhile, the combined worlds of scienceand film are opening up to amateur enthusiasts: with the adventof relatively cheap, yet good quality cameras, and the ability ofmany digital still cameras and even mobile phones to recordmovies (the first feature-length film captured entirely bymobile phone was produced in 2006), access to the requiredtechnology is becoming ever easier.The result is that increasingnumbers of people are beginning to explore film as a mediumfor both the creation of art and for the study of science.

Mico Tatalovic is a PhD student in the Department of ZoologyAlison Frank is PhD student in the Department of Modern

Languages at the University of Oxford

Arts

&Review

s

A worm (left) filmed by Painlevé (right), circa 1930

A locomotion series captured by Marey, circa 1882

For Painlevé, science and art could come together in

most extraordinary ways

“”

©L

esD

ocum

ents

Cin

émat

ogra

phiq

ues

26Mich06 19/9/06 01:24 Page 28

Dr Hypothesis asked:

What colour is molten gold? Why?

One of our readers answered:

Molten gold can be a variety ofcolours because it is almost alwaysalloyed with other metals. If it con-tains copper it will be redder, ironmakes it blue, and aluminium makesit purple, while natural bismuth andsilver make it black. It may surpriseyou to know that gold, more oftenthan not, contains 8–10% silver.

Dear Dr Hypothesis,When I was on a trip to Italy overthe summer holidays, I heard agroup of Italian sparrows cheepingto each other. This got me wonder-ing: can birds from different coun-tries understand each other, or is itall pigeon to them?

Passerine Phil

DR HYPOTHESIS SAYS:Phil, this is quite a difficult question toanswer without being able to ask thebirds directly. I can tell you that ornithol-ogists—people who study birds—knowthat different species of birds can singcharacteristic songs, and it is thereforebelieved that different species cannotunderstand each other… just like wecan’t understand the languages of otheranimals. Bird song is also thought to varywithin a species in much the same waythat people can speak different dialects of

the same language. Continuing this anal-ogy, I suspect that birds of the samespecies, but in different countries, may beable to recognize the meaning of a for-eign bird’s chirping, even if they can’tunderstand every single word.

Dear Dr Hypothesis,I work as a postman, which is a fan-tastic job in the summer. It is not sogood in the winter, however, due tothe risk of ice and other cold-weath-er-related problems. In the darkmornings on my rounds, I have spenta lot of time wondering why I amable to see my breath at this time ofday, but at no other time. Can youhelp me figure this out?

Delivering Derek

DR HYPOTHESIS SAYS:You can see your breath because of thechemistry between air and water and thephenomenon of condensation. Conden-sation is the conversion of a vapour to aliquid. As you are no doubt aware, watercan be suspended in the air as vapour.Theconcentration of water that can be heldlike this decreases as the air cools down.You are able to see your breath as thewater in it condenses. The temperaturehas fallen to a level at which your breathhas more water in it than the air can hold.

Dear Dr Hypothesis,As the nights start becoming longer,I’m looking forward to getting mywoolly jumper on, filling up myThermos and getting back to myfirst love: astronomy. I pride myselfon being a bit of an expert on the

night sky. Despite this, I was stumpedwhen a friend asked me who hadnamed the planet Uranus. And, per-haps more importantly, were theyhaving a laugh? Can you please helpme maintain my pride?

Celestial Clive

DR HYPOTHESIS SAYS:Uranus was discovered by Sir WilliamHerschel on 13 March 1781. He origi-nally recorded it as a comet and named itGeorge’s Star, after King George III.Unsurprisingly, European astronomerswere not as keen as Sir William on thisname, and several discussions ensued as towhat the planet should be called. It wasthe editor of the Berlin AstronomischesJahrbuch who ultimately suggestedUranus, the Latin name for the Greekgod of the sky. Reluctant to give up theirsovereignty, the British continued to usethe name George’s Star until at least1850. So Clive, you can tell your friendthat the naming of Uranus was definitelynot a laughing matter for eighteenth-century astronomers.

Dr

Hyp

othe

sis


Dr Hypothesis

The Diophantine Dog House

Dr Hypothesis’ research assistant Tom Pugh challenges you to try your hand at thismathematical mystery:

Mr and Mrs Diophantine love dogs. Last year they had six, and a month ago MrsDiophantine bought more. On top of that they have kennels, which until yester-day contained four times as many dogs as there were in the house, plus two guarddogs Brutus and Bruno. Yesterday, the summer holidays began, and their neigh-bours dropped their dogs off at the Diophantine Dog House, adding a third againto the number of dogs in the kennel. Mr and Mrs Diophantine can only handlelooking after 50 dogs in total at any one time.

How many dogs are they currently looking after?

Visit www.bluesci.org for the answer

Please email your queries to [email protected] for your chance to win a £10 book voucher

Lak

shm

iHar

ihar

Lak

shm

iHar

ihar

28Mich06 19/9/06 13:54 Page 29

The Way to Visualize Life’s Secrets –Leica AM TIRF Leica’s new, innovative TIRF system features a

• dynamic scanner that can be used to

• precisely position the laser beam and determine the

• exact and reproducible penetration depth of the evanescent field.

The powerful Leica AF6000 fluorescence software offers full control of all TIRF system functions.

Widefield fluorescence image ofcaveolin-1/CFP labeled COS-1 cells

The same cells imaged in TIRF

Leica Microsystems (UK) Ltd., Davy Avenue, Knowlhill, Milton Keynes, MK5 8LBTel.: +44 (0) 1908 246 246, Fax: +44 (0) 1908 609 992www.leica-microsystems.com/AM_TIRF

Leica_AM TIRF_englisch_210x297 15.09.2006 10:59 Uhr Seite 1

Special Introductory Offerto Students and Postdocs

For a one year membershipin AAAS which includes a subscription to ScienceDigital edition.

Visit promo.aaas.org/p6xnj NOW totake advantage of this special offer!

Introductory AAAS Membership for Student and Postdocs

* less than £30 at current exchange rates

OnlyUS$50*

M6XPC

name

address

city

country postal code

phone

e-mail Required for receipt of Science Digital Edition

Post to: Science InternationalMembership DepartmentBateman House82-88 Hills RoadCambridge CB2 1LQ U.K.

! Student ! Postdoc (please check one)

Payment Method! Cheque enclosed in the amount of __________________

(payable to AAAS. Cheque must be in U.S. funds, drawn on a U.S. bank)

Bill my credit card in the amount of __________________

! VISA ! MasterCard ! American Express

Card No. Exp. Date

Signature Date

Price valid until 31 December 2006.

A4 BlueSci Advert 12/9/06 7:55 am Page 1