ChemSemBlog

I thoroughly enjoyed Dr. Biak’s visit this past Thursday, not only can he hold an audience’s attention, but he can feed them too! I believe it is safe to say that food to a college student is as good as gold, so with some full stomachs in the audience he was off to a great start. Dr. Mu-Hyun “Mookie” Baik came to us from the Chemistry Department of Indiana University-Bloomington where he is currently the Associate Professor of Chemistry & Associate Professor of Informatics.  Biak received his Ph.D. in Theoretical Inorganic Chemistry at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill (Go Tarheels!).  It was easy to see from the get go that Biak was excited about what he does for a living in fact, he even admitted that he would do it for free! I am sure that all the other presenters enjoyed what they were doing too, but Biak really seemed excited about chemistry, and made graduate school very appealing.  Aside from his jokes (which were really funny) Biak’s presentation style was great, probably the best I’ve seen thus far.

In a nut shell the Biak group is focused on developing artificial photosynthesis, particularly water oxidation. Water is an ideal molecule because it is a natural source for electrons, and we have tons of it. Biak has devised a method that would use solar energy to free electrons from water by electrolysis and would then direct these freed electrons to another reaction that would fix them along with carbon from carbon dioxide into fossil fuels.

This seminar was very practical, although it would be a while before it could become mainstream, the future implications for energy and the way we use it could solve our energy crisis. Some new things I learned from seminar were 1. A field of chemistry based almost entirely on informatics, 2. How much more efficient fossil fuels could be, and 3. No matter how advanced our technology gets it is still very hard to mimic the way nature oxidizes water.

Question I have are 1. How long do you think it would take to make this a part of our everyday living? 2. What obstacles do you see in the way of achieving your goal? 3. are there other research groups that have come close to oxidizing water and harvesting its energy too?

Post This To My

Hide Sites

On January 25^th our chem seminar speaker traveled ALL the way from South Bend, IN to give us a very informative lecture on how unnatural amino acids & multivalent antibody aggregation is crucial to science research. Our presenter was Başar Bilgiçer, assistant professor in both the Chemical and Bimolecular Engineering Department and the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department at the University of Notre Dame. He completed his B.S. in Chemistry at Bogazici University, Turkey; he then went on to receive his Ph.D. in chemistry at Tufts University. Bilgiçer conducted his Postdoctoral Fellow at Harvard University.  Dr. Bilgiçer seemed very comfortable and relaxed during his presentation; he was very easy to follow and did a great job at explaining his research so that we could understand it.

The essence of Bilgiçer’s talk was multivalent antibodies and how important the number of bonds to its antigen is in eliciting an immune response to expel the foreign pathogen. In biology class we learn that anything that triggers an immune response is an antigen. When an antigen enters the body, antibodies attach to it forming an antibody-antigen complex that signals the immune system to come and destroy the invading substance. However the efficiency of this system is dependent upon several things, one of which is the valence of the responding antibody.

Antibodies can either be Monovalent or divalent. Bilgiçer easily explained the difference between the two by comparing the arms of the antibody to human body arms. If you are pulling something with your arms it is a lot easier to hold on to it with two arms than with one, this is the same concept with antibodies holding on to antigens. An antibody can hang on to an antigen better when both “arms” of the antibody are attached; this creates bonds that are stronger and tighter; therefore it is harder for the antigen to escape and an immune response can quickly be initiated.

Although this may seem thermodynamically unfavorable, surprising Bilgiçer discovered that it wasn’t; in fact, the entropy decrease for monvalent and divalent antibodies was equitant. This is because whether the antibody bonds with one “arm” or two they would occur that the same time. The multivalent nature of antibodies is advantages in that currently most drugs containing antibodies are monovalent, thus we can create more effective drugs by applying multivalent properties to these antibodies.

Overall I really enjoyed this presentation the only question I have left are: 1. I thought Immune response amplification corresponds with signaling molecules, and so although divalent molecules can hold on better, does the decrease in available antibody binding sites decrease the signal amplification?  2. Most of the antibody aggregates formed very complex arrangements; however, can all of the aggregates bind to the antibody? will a single molecule be just as efficient?  3. If these antibodies are able to elicit a better immune response will lower medicine dosages be required?

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Last Thursday’s seminar was brought to us by Amanda Hummon, currently an assistant professor in the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department at the University of Notre Dame. She completed her A.B. in Chemistry at Cornell University and received her Ph.D. in analytical chemistry at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She then conducted her postdoctoral fellow at the National Cancer Institute, NIH. Hummon did a great job presenting her research on cancer, she was very personable, and seemed very interested in what she was doing and sharing it.

In a nut shell, Hummon is researching the transcriptome and the proteome in cancer cells to gain a better understanding of which genes, transcripts, and proteins are affected, ultimately hoping to identify an effective therapeutic intervention. Her focus is on colorectal cancer which she later explained should be referred to as two separate cancers since they affect two different organs. Hummon began by identifying the problematic chromosomes that contribute to colorectal cancer. She accomplished this by identifying the deregulated pathways that are contributing to the cancer phenotype, distinguished by aberrantly expressed genes, and analyzed their products, and the effect that they had on downstream targets.

From her very informative talk I learned that although colorectal cancer affects many people there is not a lot of research in this area due to funding and awareness, another thing I learned was that through special sampling mass spectrometry can be applied to cancer cells, and a person affected with colon disease has 58 chromosomes!

The only questions I have are 1. How do you get the cancer samples you use? 2. Of all the cancers, what lead you specifically to colon cancer? 3. What are your ideas of therapeutic intervention? Do they include gene therapy? And is this something that could be passed down to future generations?

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The Chemistry seminar presented to us on January 21 was presented by Robert E. Minto from the Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis chemistry/biochemistry department. His focus is on biological chemistry, a field that I thought was synonymous with biochemistry, until it was later clarified with the definition that biochemistry deals more with metabolism (photosynthesis, citric acid cycle) whereas biological chemists are more interested in the chemical side of biology outside of metabolism. Although Dr. Minto currently teaches at IUPUI he received his BS at the University Of Waterloo, Ontario, he then went on to the University of California, Berekley where he received his doctorate, and conducted his postdoctoral fellow at The Johns Hopkins University.

The core of his research, lipids, is not a topic highly researched outside of the diet/health industry, and even so their only concern is getting rid of it. Although studying lipid for health reasons is important, Dr. Minto taught us that there are many other practical uses for studying lipids. First of all since there is hardly any research in this field, many of the fungi genes aren’t mapped! Now this was something new to me, I thought everyone was obsessed with genomes, structure, and function in the biological world, but Dr. Minto was quick to point out that this only occurs where there is money, and since fungi genomes aren’t at the top of everybody’s list, well there isn’t much out there.

Specifically, Minto has focused his research on desaturase and acetylenase genes. The second reason why studying these genes and enzymes are important is because, we can uncover the way unsaturated acids conduct metabolism (he beat the biochemists to this one!). And finally the third reason, but certainly not the last reason (I am sure there are countless reasons for lipid studies) is that there are many medical uses (the pharmaceutical companies are doing cartwheels) such as antimicrobial and antiproliferative agents and HIV reverse-transcriptase inhibitors. Impressive.

Overall the basic ideas of his presentation were great. I got kind of lost in all of the mechanisms and the intricacies of what his research entailed, but I got the main point. Although there has been lots of negative feedback on his presentation style, I didn’t see a problem with it, I think the subject matter was just not as interesting and so people tuned him out. The only criticism I’d give would be to decrease the length of the presentation, and retract to a more basic knowledge level, so we don’t get lost in the details!

Questions I have are: 1.How difficult is it conducting research in a field that is not well studied? 2. Most of his studies were conducted in vitro but how well adjusted is that to predicting an in vivo replication of the experiment? 3. Have any pharmaceutical taken interest in your studies?

Post This To My

Hide Sites

A spinal fusion is something I hope to never encounter, but for some Americans it is an easy trade off for the pain they had been enduring due to continuing neck and back pain. Just as revolutionary spinal implants were originally, so is the need today for new innovative device materials that better fulfill the job of the implant. Currently used  biomaterials in orthopedic implants are: ceramics, metals, and polymers. Ryan Roeder, Ph.D.  faculty at the University of Notre Dame in the Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, has zeroed in on polymer implant and device design emerging with a novel new device and design.

The goal of osteointegration is vascularization( 70-90% porosity), cell adhesions, osteoinduction, and bioactivity.  Bioactivity means that the substance elicits a favorable response from the body. Also, a good material is one that is as stiff as bone so that the current bone does not degenerate when the new material is implanted, as is the case when metal is inserted into the spinal.

Polyetherketones (PEEK) used clinically for composite hip stems and interbody spinal fusion cages, is great because it can been seen radiographcially after surgery (as opposed to titanium) and its elasticity is similar to bone, unfortunately it is also very dense. Roeder and his research team created a method called the whisker Synthesis to combined whisker-shaped hydroxyapatite (HA) crystals with PEEK to create a new material possessing the best properties of both compounds singularly.

Summarizing their chemistry, the whisker synthesis is conducted by combining the compounds Ca(OH)2, H3PO4, and lactic acid (the carboxylic acid binds the Ca2+ which keeps it from precipitating too soon) with no agitation at a temperature of 200 degrees Celsius for two hours.  The morphology of the resulting crystals can easily be controlled by how the solution is heated. Quickly heating the crystals decreases the crystal length; a longer heating rate corresponds with long, thin crystals. Roeder’s team also tried another approach to the whisker synthesis, by using a powder form of HA and PEEK, however this method proved to not be as effective. Molding temperature has also proved to be very important in synthesizing an ideal material. At lower molding temperatures (350), polymers do not adhere well to each other; however, crystals on the whiskers containing phosphate are exposed, this is crucial because cells like phosphate and will attach to it forming new bone around the implant.  On the flip side, at higher molding temperatures (375) cell adhesion is improved dramatically, but none of the whiskers are exposed. Currently Roeder and his research team are determining a balance between the two that will be of optimal use.  Once the right combination of HA and PEEK was established Roeder then added salt crystals to the solution which would be washed out later, leaving a very porous material.

Thursday’s lecture was very interesting and informative! I learned the qualities needed for osteointegration, the need for newer spinal fusion technology, and the intricacies of the whisker synthesis. The only questions I have are #1. Where does he see his research going in 10 years? #2. Is it possible to either transform this into an injectable material or create one? And finally,  #3. is there a way to regulate bone growth around the implant?

We started off our seminar chemester (too good to pass up) with a bang, thanks Dr. Roeder for stopping by!

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Our presentation last Thursday was brought to us by Jeffery A Turk, assistant professor of Chemistry at Amherst College. His presentation was about Sandalwood and the need for making synthetic fragrance molecules for the benefit of saving on natural resources, expanding the palette for fragrance companies, and greater biodegradability, functionality, and sustainability of current molecules being used.  I liked Turk’s style of teaching; he used many different  media (black board, props, PowerPoint) to help us understand his presentation. He was very engaging, often asking questions and making jokes. But what I was most impressed about with his presentation was how well he knows his slides. Once or twice he would skip to the next slide without even looking and begin explaining what was on it!

Turk began his presentation with an overview of how smell works in our body. He thoroughly covered the works of the olfactory bulb and how we perceive what we smell through messages sent to the hypothalamus. I had never really sat down to think about how I smell, but it was very interesting to find out that it is a combination of functional groups like aldehydes, ketones, esters, etc. that our body is interpreting as a specific smell. Another concept that I learned was the Odor Threshold (OT). The OT is the smallest quantity of molecule needed to activate the receptor cells and thus relay smell to the brain. And finally, but certainly not the last thing I learned, I was fascinated by his short comment on a connection from the hypothalamus to the Limbic area of the brain signifying that you feel something when you smell!

The only questions I have are 1. With such a high demand for atom efficient reactions to create sandalwood, is there a high demand for chemists in this field? 2. In a society interested in multifunctionality, in what other areas of science and technology do you see fragrance chemistry affecting in the next 20 years,? and finally 3. Have you marketed any of your own fragrances to companies?

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Our weekly blog posts of seminar presentations have really helped me appreciate the value of science writing and the gift that these writers have. With a topic so close to home, I believe it is safe to say that everyone was looking forward and interested in the presentation brought to us by Jyllian Kemsley on Science Writing.  Broadcasting from California, Kemsley, an associate editor at Chemical and Engineering News, gave her presentation via web cam, a first for us and herself.  The presentation went very well; looking back, it is definitely one of the most memorable for me over the course of the semester.

Kemsley really gave us an insider’s perspective on what it’s like to be a science writer. I was fairly surprised when she told us that a bachelors of Science degree and a two year master’s degree of science writing is all it takes to become a writer. This was definitely something new to me, I previously thought that most science writers needed a doctorate to be a credible source, but in reality the organization publishing the article suffices as credible to the public.  Once a person becomes certified there are many areas of work available, they are hired by newspapers, TV New networks, science Journals, science focused websites, hospitals, government agencies, education institutes, etc.  I hadn’t realized how many different areas of the work force require people capable of interpreting science and being able to relate it in publications to the average person.  Of this partial list of jobs opportunities, the one that stood out the most to me, were the TV news networks.  I was shocked to find out that CNN had recently laid off 18 of its science writers, not because of the layoffs, but because they had so many working for them!  One other thing that I learned (although I could go on forever) was the short amount of time articles are written, edited, and published,  demanding that writers are creative at all times and allowing no room for mental blocks.

Towards the end of the presentation Kemsley told us the personal rewards gained and challenges faced in a career of science writing. She told us what good qualities make up the best science writers and finally gave us a detailed analysis of a typical week lived by a writer. A couple of questions I do have are 1. How reliable is a job in science writing going to be in the future? 2. Can you specialize in school after receiving your two-year master’s degree? 3. And finally what was your favorite story to cover?  All in all I believe this was the most informative presentation and really appreciate the time given by Kemsley.

Thanks again Dr. Kemsley for sharing your time and work with us!

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Hisashu Yamamoto, currently Professor of Chemistry at the University of Chicago, is the most influential chemist I have seen in person.  Even as a young man Yamamoto has never wanted to do anything other than Chemistry,  in fact he  had read several university chemistry textbooks before graduating from high school! He has since then dedicated his career to organic chemistry and has seen the proliferate results of his dedication to the field. I could write my entire blog on his accomplishments and still not have covered them all; however, what I was most impressed with was his humbleness, not once did he seem to boast about his achievements or treat us in a way that made us seem less important than his other lecture audiences. I am not a big fan of clichés but the only way to truly describe his presentation style is by the three C’s: cool, calm, and collected.

Yamamoto’s presentation was about designing asymmetric catalysis that would be utilized in a cascade reaction for polyketide synthesis.  The transition from multiple step reactions to cascade ones are becoming more and more evident in organic chemistry.  Although there are some disadvantages, such as losing as much as 50% of the materials to waste, the efficiency of moving from a 15-20 step process, which could take over a month, to synthesis just one molecule,verses one day, by far outweighs the negative aspects of the experiment.  Not only are cascade reactions efficient, but they are (everyone’s favorite) cost effective as well. Imagine how much cheaper drugs could be if they were all done in cascade reaction.  I’m sure the pharmaceutical industry has taken note of this and it probably won’t be long before all the synthetic organic chemists will be shifting from condensing reactions to 2 or 3 step reactions to pot reactions if they haven’t already.  All in all, it is evident that cascade reactions are “green” (what every government wants to hear) and are clearly the future of organic chemistry; so I am certain new discoveries with plenty of funding are coming our way.

I learned many things from Yamamoto’s presentation, however a few concept that stick out in my mind are that 1% of polyketides have biological activity, 5x the average for natural products! That acids discovered over 150 years ago for experiments are still being used today, and the importance that super Bronstead  acids play in chemistry today. If I could go back, I’d ask professor Yamamoto where he sees cascade reactions bringing us in 20 years. And then I wonder when one pot reactions do become dominate, if they will decrease the demand for chemists and lab assistants as they could probably be loaded by a machine; thus I guess the question is,  will we eliminate the need for ourselves? This is not to say chemists won’t be needed, but just how many will be?  Only time will tell, and hopefully Jesus will come before then!

Thanks Dr. Yamamoto for visiting us at Andrews University!

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Last Thursday I discovered a field of chemistry I had never known about: geochemistry. Because I haven’t had any previous exposure to this subject matter, almost everything presented to me was something new. Our presenter was Michael A. Velbel, professor of geological studies at Michigan University. I enjoyed his presentation; however, because he is a geologist and not a chemist, his presentation was a little lacking in the chemistry aspect. This is not to say that he did not show us the chemical aspect of his research, just that I would have liked to have heard a more in depth discussion about its chemistry. Nevertheless, Velbel did a great job at setting up the background and foundation of his research, and presenting it in a way that was easy to understand.

In a nut shell, Velbel examines the weathering rates of primary silicate minerals in metamorphic bedrock located in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Otto, North Carolina. His primary focus is to control south hardwood forest water sheds. He does this by measuring the amount of the water that goes over the veer, and analyzes that water every week. With this information, Velbel and his team are trying to find a system of equations that will tell them the input and output of minerals in a given area so that they can know how weather affects the natural minerals in a rock. One of their main focuses is on aluminum, present in feldspar, which is the most abundant and reasonably reactive mineral found in the Saprolite Regolith hill slope where their watershed is based. Through SEM and TEM analyses of the rock, they have discovered that weathering causes the feldspar to leave the environment in a dissolved form, thus leaving pits in the rock where the elements used to be.

Although Velbel spent a considerable amount of time discussing feldspar, other similar compounds, and mass balance equations. What I found most interesting was brought up in the last five minutes as he spoke about his partnership with NASA research on Mars. From Velbel I learned that NASA is quick to pass judgment, which becomes embarrassing five years later, that often part of this misjudgment is due to the fact that NASA compares footage of Mars to pictures that only look similar to what they have seen, and finally that we will never know for certain if water did exist on Mar because there is not one ounce of anything resembling water left on that planet, just ground formations.

Overall I like the presentation, the only questions I have are: what is the maximum distance minerals can migrate from the rock to make a reasonable difference in life of the surrounding environment? How much of their conclusions apply to other watersheds around the US? And finally, if interpreting data on Mars will help in his research on Earth in the Blue Ridge Mountains.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

When I think of adsorbing material I imagine the job being done by something big, but what if the material being adsorbed is something not visible to the naked eye, then what? Then I would suggest taking a look at Adam J. Matzger’s Ph.D. work.  Matzger’s group from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor is at the front of this cutting edge science. Why? Because Matzger’s research is focused on synthesizing nanoparticle crystals that are capable of adsorbing hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and other material that molecule is tailored to.

The many innovative ways nanoparticle porous materials are able to change our lives is giving them a lot of attention from scientists all over the globe; however, it is not enough to create a porous material, it must be energy efficient, durable, and (everyone’s favorite) cheap. This is what Matzger’s group has accomplished. After reexamining existing nanoparticle porous materials through a series of tests, Matzger attempted to synthesize a new crystal through coordination polymerization, by mixing two different linker systems. He was successful and in fact has synthesized the highest surface area of any material in the world!

What is truly amazing and the most impressive bits of information I learned from his lecture were that these molecules exhibit selective ability dependent upon their configuration, that by changing the pressure one is able to adsorb and desorb gas particles, and by utilizing their recyclability and selectivity they are capable of reducing pollution by power plants and may one day power hydrogen fueled cars. Thinking about the practical uses of these molecules, I begin to question how everything would work, such as,  how cars powered by hydrogen could utilize porous material effectively considering that hydrogen must be kept at very high pressures and very low temperatures, how “eco-friendly”  is porous material underground, how (if at all) metals found in the earth effect the same metal found in the porous material, or at what concentration natural occurring metals in the ground would begin to effect the composition of the crystal? And more and more questions pop into my head.

Over all Matzger’s lecture was entertaining, not only was I excited by the chemistry but he was pretty animated himself, very relaxed, open to discussion throughout his presentation, and finally to top it off he had a great sense of humor!  Thanks Dr. Matzger!

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Thursday’s presentation was brought to us by Sean Reed, one of the youngest presenters I’ve seen since attending Chemsem. Sean Reed is in his fourth year of graduate studies at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, studying under the direction of Associate Professor M. Christina white. He completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Iowa, with a degree in chemistry and psychology.  Although he is young, Reed has achieved many accomplishments and rewards early in his career, including research publications and 9 awards. It was plainly evident that Reed was very knowledgeable about his research and was able to give excellent answers to all the questions asked. Finally, one last thing I appreciated about his presentation was the introduction, although lengthy, it gave a good foundation for his presentation.

Reed’s research group at the university of Illinois is focused on shortening the assembly of molecules by utilizing the often looked over C-H bonds, thus making the synthesis more efficient.  I was quite surprised to find out what all their research entailed. The White group was successful in selectively functionalizing C-H bonds, not only is this amazing, but they are able to selectively control the three dimensional structure of the product by distinguishing between different C-H bonds using Palladium under special conditions! Now that’s impressive, it’s amazing how God’s creation can work! Reed’s specific contribution to the work of functional C-H bonds is the discovery of the first catalytic Bronsted base strategy for nucleophilic activation under the acidic electrophilic conditions of oxidative palladium (II) catalysis. Reed spent quite a bit of time discussing the mechanism of the catalysis. Although some of the research material conducted by former students should have been more concise, I am glad that Reed discussed the catalysis in depth. The catalysis diagram helped clench the pieces together, giving me a bigger picture of what the White group had accomplished. Because of the specificity of the Pd(II), Reed’s discovery enables reactions to successfully proceed with unprotected functional groups in the starting material; thus, unnecessary steps are cut out and reactions are able to proceed quickly and efficiently.

The content of Reed’s work was one of the most fascinating I’ve seen so far (although I must say I had to really focus to keep up); however, a more concise presentation might be more beneficial to his audience. In looking back over the presentation, I learned about the amazing potential of what I thought were ordinary C-H bonds, a new mechanism for metal catalysts, and the details of how catalysis works. If I could go back to Reed’s presentation I would ask him how the Pd(II) contributes to the mechanism? (i.e. what exactly is it doing, electron movement, etc.), considering that Pd(II) and Cr are not close on the periodic table, why is it that these two work? and if other metals besides Cr and Pd(II) can be used/or why they can’t be used in this mechanism.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

This thursday’s presentation was brought to us by our first female presenter of the year, Dr. Carolyn E. Anderson. Dr. Carolyn is currently an assistant professor of chemistry at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan. She received her bachelor’s degree in chemistry from the University of Michigan in 1998, and then completed her Ph.D. in organic chemistry at the University of California at Irvine in 2003.

Dr. Anderson leads her team of undergraduate researchers in developing the methodology and mechanism of the synthesis of n-alkyl pyridones.  n-alkyl pyridones are biologically important because they are similar in structure to steroids and also resemble amino acids; thus, they have the potential to be very useful in the pharmaceutical industry. Although the introduction and goals of her research were not very comprehensive, I came to understand that Dr. Anderson is not only interested in utilizing her methodology in a specific molecule, but rather her attention is focused also on determining the mechanism of her method.

Thursday’s seminar was unlike all the others I had seen before. Although I have listened to researchers involved in tedious research such as, total organic synthesis, I had not yet attended a seminar whose main focus was purely methodology.  The length, patients, and tediousness of methodology was far more intense than I had previously thought. Dr. Anderson showed us the results of several experiments they ran, such as, optimization studies and microwave and convectional heating studies; also, for every product obtained, they compiled physical data such as: density, weight, optimum pH levels, etc. In fact, Dr. Anderson had so much information that her quick paced presentation spanned the entire class period.

The result of Dr. Anderson’s research is the development of a new oxygen to N-Alkyl migration strategy for the preparation of N-benzyl and N-propargylic pyridones. She discovered, via cross over experiment, that benzyl migration is an intermolecular phenomenon that involves the splitting and recombination of the O-benzyl molecules. Her team of researchers also proved that the benzylic carbon is positive or partially positively charged by conducting Hammett correlation experiments.

Dr. Anderson’s presentation showed me how  electronic effects can be determined using Hammett’s correlation,  how to interpret positive and negative rho values for a particular reaction and the time and detail that goes into methodology.  If I could go back to lecture I would ask her what she plans to do next, what specific molecules pharmaceutical companies are planning to put this method into use in,  and how/if  they plan to use the new oxygen-iodide bond mechanism  in future experiments.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Dr. Silas P. Cook did his undergraduate studies at Reed College in Portland, OR After earning his B.A. in 1999, Cook took a position at the Genomics Institute of Novartis Research Foundation in San Diego, CA. In 2001, he began graduate studies in total synthesis at Columbia University in New York under Professor Samuel J. Danishefsky. Upon completing his Ph.D. in 2006, Cook did post-doctoral research with Professor Eric Jacobsen at Harvard University.

I must admit, after hearing his impressive academic career and upon seeing the presentation title  (11-O-Debenzoyltashironin) I was a little scared.  Not only does the molecule sound complicated, but I thought the lecture would be too. Fortunately this was far from being true! I successfully followed the entire presentation. Dr. Cook did a great job in explaining his research and actively engaged his audience by utilizing the blackboard and asking questions throughout his lecture.

In a nutshell, Dr. Cook explained that his lab focuses on four areas of interest, they include: oncology, antibiotics, neurological disorders, and third world aliments. The goals of his research, his interests,  were all clearly explained in the beginning of his lecture. Dr. Cook also explained the advantages of pursuing a degree in total synthesis organic chemistry, which I might add were very convincing. He then went into great detail into the methodology and total synthesis steps he developed for creating a cheap molecule that may one day lead to cures for neurodegenerative diseases.  He then ended his presentation with a few of the newer projects his team is tackling.

From Dr. Cook’s presentation I learned that 60% of pharmaceutical drugs used today are from total synthesis, how heavily favored total synthesis organic chemists are in the job market, and how even though your work may seem futile even in the last step of a synthesis, going back and starting over often makes things more efficient and better in the end. Although he did an excellent job in explaining his work, a few gray areas I have are, how he will convince drug companies to produce cheaper drugs and what inspires him to take on certain projects.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Yesterday’s presentation on Hemoglobin left me a little shocked.  The information in the presentation was very exciting; the prospective medical advances that are possible through Dr. Griffith’s research are quite fantastic, ways that I would have never thought possible… but then again I have much left to learn. Quite frankly however, I was almost unable to focus on the lecture itself due to the unnecessary amount of literal potty humor used. While the analogies I’m sure helped to better understand what he was explaining, I found them to be so repulsive to contemplate that I missed the point all together.  Besides his examples, the only other constructive criticism I would give would be to lose the curse words. Now enough about the negatives, Dr. Wendell’s research was fascinating!

Wendell P. Griffith, PhD., is the assistant professor of chemistry at the University of Toledo, OH.  He did his undergraduate work at Grambling State University, LA, he went on to earn his PhD in Analytical Chemistry at the University of Massachusetts, then completed his postdoctoral research at John Hopkins University School of Medicine (and soon hopes he will add tenure to his list of accomplishments:).

In a nut shell, Dr. Griffith’s presentation was a compelling one, convincing us of the advantage of using mass spectroscopy. His main argument is that when given a molecule to analyze, MS will analyze and graph every type of molecule individually, not an average of all the molecules. This is advantageous in possibly discovering the synthetic pathway of the molecule. Using MS, Dr. Griffith has been making many advances in the synthesis of Hemoglobin and is applying this knowledge to two specific biomedical uses. The first is attaching free heme groups to Hatpoglobin which will then be carried to the liver for destruction, thus eliminating the iron bacteria eat for breakfast. The second use is a haptoglobin- hemoglobin toxin that will stop bacterial meningitis- Impressive.

I learned a lot from Dr. Griffith’s presentation including: the major roles asymmetry plays in functional hemoglobin assembly, the importance of when a prosthetic group (such as heme) attaches to the polypeptide, and the intricate details of how MS works, and the most impressive is that the alpha and beta chains of hemoglobin are coded for by two different chromosomes!  The only questions I have are 1. What would redirect the haptoglobin from the kidneys to the liver, 2. How he plans to synthesize a toxin that will kill bacteria but not other cells, especially those that are involved in immunity and 3. Is there any way to know for certain which synthetic pathway is correct?

The only thing I have left to say is…Thanks Dr. Griffith for coming to Andrews University, good luck in your research, and God bless!

Post This To My

Hide Sites

I really enjoyed the chemistry seminar this week. This week’s presenter was Matthew J. Allen, assistant professor at Wayne State University; he graduated from Purdue University and completed his PhD  in 2003 at The California  Institute of Technology.  Professor Allen is a fairly young guy, I liked his style, he was very relaxed and easy to follow. I could tell he is a professor who is used to explaining things to college students, as opposed to some of the presenters who represent labs and are sometimes hard to follow.  His clear explanation was evident by the numerous questions asked at the end of the presentation.

Dr.  Allen’s research presentation was about lanthanide based MRI contrast agents. The majority of his presentation was about synthesizing lanthanide complexes and the mechanisms his group is using to control the relaxivity of protons, which in turn increase the capabilities of MRI to as a powerful imaging procedure.  Lanthanide complexes used as contrast agents enhance inherent contrast agents by altering the chemical environment. Contrast agents are important because wherever they go they make protons relax faster, the faster a proton relaxes the stronger its signal and the better the contrast image.

I also googled lanthanides to get a better understanding of their uses and was very surprised as to the diverse nature of their medical applications; they seem to be on the very front of the cutting edge in medical advances.  However, as substances not naturally found in the human body, I do have a few questions as to the toxicity levels of lanthanides.  For example, will they replace naturally occurring ions such as calcium or others  similar in atomic radii?  Also, what concentration of lanthanides will produce allergic reaction in persons with metal allergies?

Post This To My

Hide Sites