Friday, July 3, 2009

Nobel Laureate: Leopold Ruzicka

 

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1939.

"for his work on polymethylenes and higher terpenes"




Leopold Ruzicka (1887 - 1976) won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his contributions to organic chemistry—especially the structures of polymethylenes and higher terpenes.

One of the structures that Ruzicka solved was that of muscone, the molecule responsible for the smell of musk. The perfume industry required large supplies of this molecule which could only be prepared from the musk gland of musk deer. The preparation of synthetic muscone probably saved the musk deer from extinction.

Ruzika was born in Austria-Hungary but he spent most of his career in Switzerland. Do to political circumstances in 1939, the prize was awarded at a special ceremony in Switzerland in January 1940. Ruzika attended another ceremony in Sweden at the end of the war. He shared the 1939 Nobel Prize with Adolf Friedrich Johann Butenandt.


The special award presentation describes the work on sex hormones.
THEME:
Nobel Laureates
When studying the natural odorants occurring in musk and civet, muscone and civetone, little known until then, Ruzicka obtained fundamentally new and surprising results during the years 1924-1926. He discovered that the molecule of muscone as well as that of civetone contains one single ring of carbon atoms, the number of which was considerably larger than that in all hitherto known cyclic molecules, larger even than had been considered possible. During his investigations of these odora he synthesized many kindred macrocyclic compounds, and drew attention to the plant-physiologically remarkable fact that these could be prepared from natural fatty acids.

Many interesting relationships exist between the polyterpenes studied by Ruzicka and a series of physiologically and medicinally important groups of compounds, viz. the bile acids, the sterols and the sex hormones. Among the many interesting results obtained by Ruzicka and his collaborators with sex hormones, the preparation of compounds with the same action as male sex hormones is of signal importance. It is his merit that by establishing preparative methods for androsterone and testosterone the technical synthesis of these two hormones has been made possible.

Moreover, the numerous new related compounds prepared by Ruzicka have contributed fundamentally to our knowledge of the physiologically so very important sex hormones, thus creating a sound basis for future investigations.


[Photo Credit (bottom): ETH-Bibliothek Zürich, Bildarchiv: Creative Commons License]

The images of the Nobel Prize medals are registered trademarks of the Nobel Foundation (© The Nobel Foundation). They are used here, with permission, for educational purposes only.

Nobel Laureate: Hans Spemann

 

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1935

"for his discovery of the organizer effect in embryonic development"

Hans Spemann (1869 - 1941) won the Noble Prize in 1935 for his contributions to developmental biology. He worked mostly with the eggs of newts and frogs and through careful observation of the developing embryo he was able to work out the fate of many cells in the early embryo.

Spemann reasoned that some cells in the early embryo were able to direct the fate of other cells. By transplanting parts of one embryo to specific locations in another embryo he determined which cells acted as organizing centers, presumably by secreting regulatory molecules [see Monday's Molecule #126 and The Spemann–Mangold organizer experiment in 1924].

Here's an excerpt from the Presentation Speech.
THEME:
Nobel Laureates
Much thought has been given to the nature of the forces and causality regulating this development. It is at this point that Spemann's researches begin. He used eggs of various animal species which differ in colour, and with his simple instruments transplanted small pieces of tissue in different stages of development. By this means he was able to establish that, for example, a cell mass normally destined to become ventral epidermis - Spemann calls it presumptive ventral epidermis -could develop into nerve tissue if it were put in the place where the spinal cord was to develop. Hence, the course of development of these cells was not laid down in advance or it could - if such was the case - be altered by transplantation; so that the transplanted portion adjusted itself to its new environment. When Spemann then transplanted the anterior lip of the blastopore of an embryo into the ventral side of another embryo it grew a new brain and spinal cord. This brain and spinal cord did not arise from the transplanted cell material, but from the presumptive ventral epidermis whose course of development was thus altered by the presence of the blastopore. From this Spemann could ascertain that the blastopore had an organizing influence on its environment. The cell material which was grafted into the ventral epidermis and caused the development of the new spinal cord was actually of the kind that, developing normally, would have given rise to the notochord. Further experiments showed that it is the notochord primordia which organize the development of the primordial spinal cord, while, on the other hand, the mesoderm in the head causes the development of a primordial brain. Near this arise the so-called optic vesicles which are the origin of the retina of the eye. Where these approach the ectoderm of the head they organize the development of the lens of the eye. Or, to take another example: the anterior end of the primordial gut (the oesophagus) organizes the development of a primordial mouth and primordial teeth inside it. Thus, we now see how cell masses originally undifferentiated have the course of their development laid down by the influence of rudiments of organs formed earlier. Thereafter, a cell mass such as this can assume the role of organizer in relation to its environment.

In this way we begin to understand how the laws of development work. We begin to perceive why a primordial head arises at the anterior end of the embryo, why a brain always arises in the head and never anywhere else, or why the mouth always has its place below the primordial brain and never elsewhere.


[Image Credit: E. M. De Robertis and Hiroki Kuroda (2004)]

The images of the Nobel Prize medals are registered trademarks of the Nobel Foundation (© The Nobel Foundation). They are used here, with permission, for educational purposes only.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Canadian Cynic Is Coming to Town

 
Don't forget that Canadian Cynic is giving a talk tomorrow night at CFI Toronto [Creationism, ID and the Douchebaggery of Really Bad Arguments: An Evening with the Canadian Cynic].

This is your big chance to meet the man behind the blog.

We'll be getting together for food and beverages before his talk. Email me if you'd like to join us.


Monday's Molecule #127: Winner

 
The molecule is muscone or [R]-3-methyl-cyclopenta-decanone. This is one of the main ingredients in the musk odor used in perfumes. The original chemical is the R-enantiomer shown below. It was extracted from the musk glands of musk deer (right). Modern perfumes are made from synthetic muscone, which is a mixture of the R- and S-enantionmers.

The Nobel Laureate is Leopold Ruzicka, who worked out the structure of muscone.

This week's winner is Dima Klenchin of the University of Wisconsin.




Today's molecule stinks.1 You have to identify it by giving me the common name and the IUPAC name.

There's only one Nobel Laureate whose name is linked to this molecule. The Laureate was responsible for determining its structure.

The first person to identify the molecule and the Nobel Laureate, wins a free lunch. Previous winners are ineligible for six weeks from the time they first won the prize.

There are seven ineligible candidates for this week's reward: Michael Clarkson of Waltham MA (USA), Òscar Reig of Barcelona, Maria Altshuler of the University of Toronto, Mike Fraser of the University of Toronto, Jaseon Oakley of the University of Toronto, Bill Chaney of the University of Nebraska and Ian Clarke of New England Biolabs Canada in Pickering ON, Canada.

Bill Chaney has donated his free lunch to a deserving undergraduate so I'm going to continue to award an additional free lunch to the first undergraduate student who can accept it. Please indicate in your email message whether you are an undergraduate and whether you can make it for lunch.

THEME:

Nobel Laureates
Send your guess to Sandwalk (sandwalk (at) bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca) and I'll pick the first email message that correctly identifies the molecule(s) and names the Nobel Laureate(s). Note that I'm not going to repeat Nobel Prizes so you might want to check the list of previous Sandwalk postings by clicking on the link in the theme box.

Correct responses will be posted tomorrow.

Comments will be blocked for 24 hours. Comments are now open.


1. Opinions may vary.

Genes, Phylogeny, and Orangutans: A Correction

 
In a recent posting I described how New Scientist devoted several pages to the idea that orangutans could be our closest relatives [Genes, Phylogeny, and Orangutans. Here are my exact words,
It's a lesson that New Scientist should have learned. They devote several pages to the Grahan and Schwartz paper thereby giving it much more publicity than it deserves [Could the orang-utan be our closest relative?]. The article is written by Graham Lawton who you might remember from the "Tree of Life" episode [see: Explaining the New Scientist Cover]. The editors of New Scientist knew full well that their decision would be controversial so they took a proactive position by writing a short editorial [In praise of scientific heresy ]. [my emphasis - LAM]
I've received an email message from Graham Lawton, Deputy editor of New Scientist and the author of the article. He points out correctly that the article was exactly two pages long and the editorial was 400 words. He thinks that this is significantly less than "several pages" and asks me to correct my "mistake."

So, for those who think that two pages and a short editorial don't qualify as "several pages," I apologize for my "mistake." I only wanted to make it clear that the coverage was not just a few lines in their weekly survey of press releases.



Does Teaching Science Lead to Atheism?

 
Does science lead to atheism? My short answer is "no" just like the answer given by John Wilkins and Matt Young. Their emphasis is on whether scientists are always atheists and whether those who are atheists became atheists because of science or whether they picked science as a profession because they were nonbelievers. Not all scientists are atheists, therefore science doesn't inevitably lead to atheism. That's their position.

Let's ask a different question. Would good science education in the public schools convert religious students to atheism? No, it is not true that exposing students to good science teaching will inevitably make them abandon their religion.

Is that all there is? No, the question can't be answered in such a simple manner. I think that a good science education will threaten most religious beliefs and in some cases will cause students to abandon those beliefs.

Let's imagine what a good science education would look like. The teachers would explain how science works. They would teach that scientific explanations require evidence and logic and that everyone should learn to be skeptical of all claims. Teachers would use examples like evolution, plate tectonics and cosmology to describe good science and how new ideas are incorporated into our understanding of the way things work. They would use astrology, homeopathy, and the deluge as examples of how some explanations do not conform to the expectations of science. The goal is to stimulate students to think and teach them how to do it in a scientific manner.

Imagine that there are religious students in the class. There seem to be three possible ways they could incorporate their knowledge about science into their religious worldview.

1. It will have no effect on their beliefs.
2. It will cause them to question and possibly abandon some of their beliefs.
3. It will reinforce and strengthen their beliefs.

I strongly suspect that more students will start questioning their beliefs when they are exposed to good science education but I admit I have no data to support that suspicion. Does anyone think that the net effect would be to strengthen beliefs or leave them unaffected?


Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Available online: BASP Vol. 43 (2006)

Contents
Naphtali Lewis (1911-2005)
Bagnall, Roger S.; pp. 5-8

Ostraca and Mummy Labels in Los Angeles
Muhs, Brian P.; Worp, Klaas A.; van der Vliet, Jacques; pp. 9-58

Un extrait du Psaume 90 en copte: Édition de P.Duk. inv. 448
Delattre, Alain; pp. 59-61

O.Col. inv. 1366: A Coptic Prayer from Deir el-Bahri with a Quotation from Tobit 12:10
Mairs, Rachel; pp. 63-70

Genealogy and the Gymnasium
Ruffini, Giovanni; pp. 71-99

The Modius as a Grain Measure in Papyri from Egypt
Mayerson, Philip; pp. 101-106

Mega Kankellon and Metron in Late Receipt and Expenditure Accounts
Mayerson, Philip; pp. 107-111

Ostraca from Western Thebes: Provenance and History of the Collections at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and at Columbia University
O'Connell, Elisabeth R.; pp. 113-137

What's in a Name? Greek, Egyptian and Biblical Traditions in the Cambyses Romance
Venticinque, Philip F.; pp. 139-158

[Book Review] Michael Gronewald et al., Kölner Papyri (P.Köln), Band 10. Abhandlungen der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Sonderreihe Papyrologica Coloniensia, Vol. 10. [...]
Papathomas, Amphilochios; pp. 159-164

[Book Review] Klaas A. Worp, Greek Ostraka from Kellis: O.Kellis, Nos. 1-293. With a chapter on the ostraka and the archaeology of Ismant el-Kharab by Colin A. Hope. Dakhleh Oasis Project, Monograph 13. [...]
Kraus, Thomas J.; pp. 165-168

[Book Review] William A. Johnson, Bookrolls and Scribes in Oxyrhynchus [...]
Kraus, Thomas J.; pp. 169-173

[Book Review] Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas (eds.), New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their Worlds. Texts and Editions for New Testament Study 2. [...]
Parker, David C.; pp. 175-177

[Book Review] Claudio Gallazzi and Luigi Lehnus (eds.), Achille Vogliano cinquant’anni dopo, Vol. 1. Quaderni di Acme 59. [...]
van Minnen, Peter; pp. 179-180

[Book Review] Ugo Zanetti and Enzo Lucchesi (eds.), Ægyptus Christiana. Mélanges d’hagiographie égyptienne et orientale dédiés à la mémoire du P. Paul Devos, Bollandiste. Cahiers d’orientalisme 25.[...]
van Minnen, Peter; pp. 181-182

[Book Review] Hans Julius Wolff, Das Recht der griechischen Papyri Ägyptens in der Zeit der Ptolemaeer und des Prinzipats, Erster Band: Bedingungen und Triebkräfte der Rechtsentwicklung. [...]
van Minnen, Peter; pp. 183-188

[Book Review] Ranon Katzoff and David Schaps (eds.), Law in the Documents of the Judaean Desert. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 96. [...]
Verhoogt, Arthur; pp. 189-191

[Book Review] Joseph G. Manning, Land and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The Structure of Land Tenure [...]
Verhoogt, Arthur; pp. 193-194

[Book Review] Arthur Verhoogt, Regaling Officials in Ptolemaic Egypt: A Dramatic Reading of Official Accounts from the Menches Papers. Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 32. [...]
Whitehorne, John; pp. 195-197

[Book Review] John Matthews, The Journey of Theophanes: Travel, Business, and Daily Life in the Roman East [...]
Keenan, James G.; pp. 199-203

[Book Review] Malcolm Choat, Belief and Cult in Fourth-Century Papyri. Studia Antiqua Australiensia 1. [...]
Bagnall, Roger S.; pp. 205-209

[Books Received]
pp. 211-213

Papyrological Summer Institutes Reports, 2003-2006
pp. 215-218

Thanks to Ioannis Kokkinidis.