ChemSemBlog

Our lecturer, Joseph Heinzelmann, product manager from Dendritic Nanotechnologies was able to give a presentation on not only dendrimers, but also on the chemistry industry and career options that is relevant for us. I enjoyed this presentation because he was able to explain clearly about the dendrimers.

His presentation focused on the PANAM dendrimer. He made a statement that dendrimers are carefully architectured polymers that consist of a core and several layers categorized by generations. In addition to that, dendrimers can have many different surface groups. It was named dendrimer for its treelike branching. Usually dendrimers are 1-10nm and built with some organic chemistry reactions. I learned that dendrimers do a variety of things. They can be crosslinkers, have suface modification, and carry drugs in their void spaces.

Overall, I enjoyed this seminar because I was able to learn more about the chemical industry. It seems like an interesting area of chemistry if you do not want to be stuck in the lab, as Heinzelmann put it. In this seminar we had an abundance of questions as we are winding down to only a few more seminars left. Because of this, I was able to learn a great deal more about dendrimers.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Professor Mu-Hyun Baik from Indiana University gave a refreshingly exciting presentation this past Thursday on his talk on using computational chemistry in order to tackle some tough questions regarding photosynthesis-like water splitting reactions, which also have potential in solving the energy crisis. Baik seeks to use computational chemistry to use transition metals like Ruthenium to serve as catalysts to reactions similar to that found in photosynthesis. Similar to how photosynthesis produces sugar, Baik hopes that in the near future such reactions can be used to solve the energy crisis through production of fossil fuels, without significantly changing the typical American lifestyle.

I felt this presentation was enlightening not only due to the chemistry involved, but because I was able to see what it is like to truly enjoy what you do for a living. He likened him and his million dollar super computer to a “kid in a candy store”, and given his energetic enthusiasm I never doubted the comparison. His energy seemed to be contagious as I was able to pay close attention without the typical blank look on my face halfway through the presentation when my note sheet is totally filled up. His anecdotes between chemistry points helped a lot in the pacing of his presentation, and gave it the feel of more of a narration than a research presentation. I believe Baik’s stories were relevant to the students, both high school and college level who are still pursuing their respective careers because it showed the importance of choosing a career which you enjoy doing.

Overall, I would say kudos to Professor Baik in his ability to deliver an exciting presentation in an area which I normally wouldn’t find all that interesting. Hopefully we have more seminars like this coming up, especially ones where they hand out freebies like key chains and water bottles.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

This week, for our regular Thursday seminar we had Assistant Professor Amanda Hummon from Notre Dame University. Her main topic was on cancer and proteomics, more specifically on colon cancer. Her presentation was interesting and she was able to present well. Her presentation was easy to follow and organized well enough so that the audience could remain attentive.

Hummon started with a brief overview of cancer and how cancer cells differ from normal cells. I learned about the six phenotypic differences between cancer and normal cells. Among these include increased, abhorrent proliferation; modification of equilibrium to prevent apoptosis; angiogenesis; and metastisis. Hummon continued her presentation continued as she described procedures and spectroscopic methods. I was able to learn more about spectral karyotyping and comparitive genomic hybridization. She then concluded her overview by stating her main goal which was elucidating the deregulated gene products that drive colorectal cancer.

It was interesting to see how her research progressed, and to learn about the new discoveries that she was able to find. We were able to see how some of the chromosomes were modified from the typical 46 to up to 58. I would say her whole presentation was very informative, despite not having as much chemistry content as we are used to seeing for seminar. Since she gave an easy to follow presentation, we were able to ask some thoughtful questions.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The past week speaker, Basar Bilgicer, is a faculty member from Notre Dame University. He came to give a presentation on peptide design and multivalent antibodies. More specifically, he was examining the IgG antibody. He first explained to us the basics of antibodies and how they have binding sites for antigens. The Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody had two binding sites for antigens. The antibody itself looks similar to a “Y” in shape and is composed of light chains and heavy chains.

So the purpose of his research was to examine monovalent and bivalent antibodies. It was interesting to see how entropy was payed off between the monovalent and bivalent because the antibody arms were linked together. Bilgicer then did further investigation where he used substrates that were linked together close enough so that they wouldn’t bind to the same antibody in different arms. He then did some chromatography with a column of beads where different sizes resulted in different rates of falling through the column. Large would fall first, while smaller one got caught inside the holes in the beads and took longer to pass through the column. He found that there were bivalent and trivalent formations of the antibodies.

Overall, I thought his presentation was pretty interesting. He spoke clearly and was able to deliver his message clearly without much confusion. He kept his information relatively easy to understand and follow so that students wouldn’t get too lost or disinterested. He finished well below the allotted time allowed which provided for ample time for the Q&A period, which was utilized well.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

To be quite honest, I didn’t really get much from Dr. Robert Minto ’s presentation on lipids. I don’t know what it was, but his presentation put me to sleep.  The dim and warm amphitheater combined with his presentation style and substance proved to be a potent formula for a one way ticket to slumber land. To be fair, I didn’t give Minto enough of a chance to catch my attention before I dozed off and I really didn’t get much sleep the night before.

Overall, I think while the content of his presentation had some points of interest, the majority of it went over my head. I think that the subject matter of his presentation could have been made more enjoyable if he delivered in such a way to appeal to the undergrads and high school students who were in attendance. From what I did catch from the earlier part of his presentation and the end questions was that he did have some interesting points like when he talked about cicutoxin and the diversity of lipids. One problem that I saw was that he had almost too much to say. Our seminar is only around 50 min, yet his presentation was geared more toward a longer time frame. I’m sure he did a decent job of highlighting the main points, but it seemed like he could of had better pacing as he somewhat appeared to be rushing toward the end.

It appeared that at least some people enjoyed his presentation from the amount and quality of questions that were asked toward the end of the seminar, despite having gone over the time limit a little bit. Being fully awake by this time, I was able to learn more about his presentation by the questions being asked.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The speaker this past Thursday was Ryan K Roeder, a professor from the University of Notre Dame’s Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering. His presentation was engaging both in topic and style. He was able to deliver the topic in such a way to appeal to students of chemistry despite having heavy engineering aspects to it, and was able to organize his presentation in such a way to keep the audience attentive by bringing to life the research he conducted.

We were able to learn the background of what spinal fusions are as well as the current implants that are being used. From there Roeder was able to illustrate the problems with current implants, and explain the motives for his own research. I found his research interesting because it was able to combine chemistry and engineering in order to accomplish the goals. We were able to learn more about PEEK and calcium phosphate and how they sought to combine them in such a way to make it similar to bone, also I was able to learn new things about spinal fusions as well as possible other applications for PEEK.

It seemed evident that other people thought the topic was interesting just from the amount of questions asked. If I were to describe this presentation to my non science friends I would say that it was about creating better materials in order to use for implants in interbody spinal fusion.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The speaker this past Thursday was Jeffrey A. Turk, Ph.D, and he gave an interesting presentation on fragrances. This was a new and unique area of chemistry for me, and it proved to be an engaging presentation. What added a lot to the entertainment factor of this presentation was definitely the smell samples that he handed out. It really added a hands on experience that served to enhance his already interesting presentation.

What made the topic so interesting was because of the familiarity with smells  as something that we all experience, but never really think about. This presentation gave us an opportunity to learn more about the process of smelling, which seemed to have a lot of unknown things about how it works, especially in regard to the receptor. For instance, we learned that the receptor has seven helices, that their are 400 kinds of receptors, and that single receptor can perceive multiple odors. It was interesting to learn more about the odor threshold and how that factors in to prices for industry.

Turk also talked a lot about the fragrance industry because of his prior work, and how it has helped him with his research. We were able to learn more about the difference between natural oils, nature identical, and synthetic.

Overall I would say that Turk was able to give a fascinating presentation  and that he was able to keep us at the edge of our seats. We were able to learn more about fragrances as well as his work with sandalwood. In addition he was able to provide us with good answers to the several questions we had for him.

If I were to describe this presentation to my non-science friend, i would say that it was about discovering new ways to synthesize smells and trying to make more efficient ways to produce them.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

For this past week’s presentation, we were fortunate enough to have Jylian Kemsley PhD, an associate editor for C&E News. Her presentation was unique and informative because rather than highlighting research like past seminars, she was actually able to give a talk on a career as a science writer. Working for C&E News, she has been able to utilize both her skills as a writer and her expertise in chemistry. Another interesting thing to note about this presentation was that it was in a video conference style, with her doing the actual presentation in California. This actually turned out better than I anticipated because it was almost like the presenter was their as we were able to follow along with her PowerPoint slide as well as see her face.

Throughout this presentation, she gave a lot of great advice and abundant information on a career as a science writer. I was able to learn many new things that would be of great use to anyone who is even remotely interested in this particular field of work. For example, she was able to describe some of the programs that are for science writing as well as getting started as a science writer. She then went on to describe the typical features of her job and the many tasks that she has to accomplish in order for a article to be written. From her presentation I was able to gather that there is a lot of stresses involved with this kind of work. For example, the staff has to stay on top of recent scientific papers and local/national news.

She did a great description on both the challenges and work opportunities for those interested in a career as a science writer. Being able to cope with unfamiliar territory and pressure, while also being pressured and critiqued shows the qualities of such a writer. Finally, we were able to learn the different workplaces that are involved with science writing such as news paper, magazines, online media, trade publication and newsletters, science journals, and freelance opportunities.

Overall, I would say that Kemsley’s presentation was rather interesting and unique because it was a change of pace from what we are typically accustomed to in seminars. She was able to thoroughly describe the aspects of her job, while not even being physically present. Also, she was able to give great answers to the many questions that we had in store for her. The scientific portions of this seminar did not required any specialized chemistry knowledge so an interpretation of it to a non-science friend is not needed.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Michael Velbel gave a rather unique presentation by giving a geologist’s perspective on chemistry with his presentation, “Rate and Rate-Determining processes in natural weathering of rock forming minerals”. I was pretty interested throughout the presentation, though the dimming of the lights did have a negative effect on my ability to stay awake. But, from what I was able to remember and stay awake for, it really did seem like an engaging presentation. It was also nice during the end of the presentation how he was able to thoroughly answer all the questions that we had for him, and from the end discussion I was able to learn about how geochemistry can play a role not only in our planet, but elsewhere like the moon or even mars.

I was able to learn several other things from throughout this lecture. First of all, how feldspar dissolves its products and precipitates after. Furthermore i learned that the microscopy constrains how reaction should be written, and studying minerals and their reactions with aqueous solutions improves understanding of the many phenomena on earth and elsewhere in the solar system and beyond. He also explained his SEM techniques and what he was looking for throughout his research. I was also able to learn more about the many things he did during his research.

Overall I thought the presentation was interesting given his clear presentation style and the unique topic being discussed. I would describe this presentation to my non-science friend by saying that through observing minerals and their reactions with aqueous solutions, we can gain further understanding that can help us in our explanations of certain phenomena.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Dr. Hisashi Yamamoto was able to give a rather fascinating presentation this past Thursday in his work with acid catalysts for cascade reactions. I found myself a little bit more hyped up than usual for the seminar this past Thursday particularly from reading his flyer which highlighted his many awards, publications, and patents. Coming into the seminar with pretty high expectations, I was not disappointed at all as he was able to give a captivating presentation that was both easily comprehensible and full of interesting chemistry.

I was able to learn several things during this lecture which were new to me. This idea of using Super Bronsted Acids and the benefits of them seemed really innovative, and it made me understand why Dr. Yamamoto was such a great chemist. No side products and very low catalyst load brought considerable benefits to the synthesis of complex molecules like polyketides. He was able to use one pot, while drastically cutting down the synthesis time. Other interesting things that I was able to get from this presentations were that since only a very small amount of catalyst was used, sequential basic reactions are able to be done in one pot. For example, a Grignard reaction was able to be done in the same pot.

Despite a softer speaking voice than past lecturers, Yamamoto was still able to take command of the audience’s attention. This was probably accomplished from the understandable and exciting research that he presented. He was able to answer the questions we had for him, and I was able to get more information from the questions asked as well. For example ,I found that their was Super Bronsted Bases, and that the acids were actually made from a battery making company. If I were to explain this presentation to a non-science friend, I would say that it was to use stronger acid catalysts which ultimately led to one pot and faster synthesis of complex molecules.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The speaker this past Thursday was Adam J. Metzger, a professor and researcher from the University of Michigan. The focus on his presentation revolved around his research with coordination polymers. I was able to learn many things from his presentation primarily because of his clear and easy to understand presentation style.

He opened his presentation by giving a background on the other porous materials used in adsorption such as active carbon, silica gel, zeolites, and carbon nanotubes. He then proceeded to explain what coordination polymers were and what made them unique. I was able to learn about all the research that is going on with them as well as information about some current ones such as HKUST-1 and MOF-5. His illustrations of these really served to enhance his own research because we were given a background of understanding. For example, his emphasis on uniform pore size and internal surface area really helped me to understand when he was talking about all the UMCM series of mixed linkers.

What I really appreciated about Metzger was how he was able to present his research in such a way to keep it informative and interesting. As he described his work with mixed linkers we were able to see his goals for real world application. Since we know that H2 storage systems are significant in our search for alternative energy and that CO2 emission is also a problem for power plants, Metzger was able to highlight the importance of such research in this field which made me more compelled to listen. Another aspect which made Metzger’s presentation so fascinating was how he kept the presentation simple and understandable with his occasional explanation of graphs and data.

Overall, I would say that Metzger gave a great seminar. He was able to highlight his research and we were able to learn new information about mixed linker coordination polymers. I was able to learn some new things as well such as gas uptake capacity in weight percent depending on pressure. I was also able to understand better how surface area related to higher uptake and how micro- and mesopores play a role in the uptake. Learning about that the best ratio of linkers wasn’t the stoichiometric ratio was also interesting because he said it could be explained through statistics.

If I were to explain this lecture to my non-science friends, I would say that Metzger’s goal would be to discover new and unique kinds of porous materials called coordination polymers in the hope that it could be applied to storing hydrogen gas and capturing carbon dioxide.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The speaker on October 8 was Sean Reed, a graduate student from  the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. His topic was about the functional group of allylic C-H, and how they can shorten reaction steps by using allylic C-H directly to make C-O, C-N, and other functional groups. Having been introduced to total synthesis before from one of our previous seminars (by Professor Silas Cook), I somewhat knew what was to be expected from Sean Reed’s presentation. Much like Professor Silas Cook, Sean Reed’s presentation was filled with slide after slide of reactions that were unfamiliar to me. While Cook did a great job on catering to our undergraduate-level understanding, Reed’s presentation left me disinterested and bored.

Despite my general inattentiveness, I was able to learn some new things from this lecture. I appreciated the handouts he had available so that we could read more about C-H functional group if we wanted to. I learned that they use total synthesis to find new pharmaceuticals as well as to tackle challenges for the 21st century. He said that anything that is found in nature could be synthesized and their goals were to increase yields and cut down on steps. That is where C-H comes into play because it is generally overlooked as a functional group. He then proceeded to show several different example of reactions with allylic C-H such as amination.

Though I’m sure the chemistry he talked about was interesting, it was difficult for me to understand and hard to follow. Because of this I did feel antsy as his talk went on past the allotted time. Aside from the content he did a great job on his presentation style and flow. If I were to describe this seminar to fellow nonspecialists I would say the goal of Reed’s presentation was to inform us on the many possibilities that can be obtained from a generally overlooked reaction type.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The seminar this past Thursday was on the synthesis of N-alkyl pyridones. The speaker was Professor Carolyn Anderson of Calvin College. Her presentation on the organic synthesis of these compounds was understandable and easy to follow especially when compared to the previous week’s presentation by Professor Silas Cook. I think it is safe to say that perhaps after viewing both presentations by Silas Cook and Carolyn Anderson, I can now see the contrasting differences between methodology and total synthesis (at least I hope I am on the right track). It was interesting to learn about both the methodology and mechanism of N-alkyl pyridone synthesis. I was able to see the steps taken in order to answer several questions about the mechanism such as the role of LiI and the other questions on intermediates.

I learned quite a bit from this lecture as she talked about the Hammett correlation equation and other interesting information regarding the practical applications such as its use in pharmacology. I also learned about the steps she took to optimize the reaction for example when she tested different solvents and heat. This reminded me a lot about the independent research projects I did for organic chemistry.

Overall, I would say this presentation was informative and entertaining. Anderson was able to deliver the presentation in a straight forward and easy to understand manner. Her topic was rather interesting and it never really got dull.  For my non-science friends, I would say that this seminar was about learning more about a particular organic chemistry reaction that may prove beneficial in the pharmaceutical industry.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

Just what in the world is total synthesis?

After listening to Professor Silas Cook, I think that I now have a better understanding of this area of organic chemistry, though I do admit I had to do a little Wikipedia search to fully comprehend what he was saying regarding total synthesis and methodology. Part of what confused me initially was the terminology he used. “Total synthesis” as well as “methodology” just sounded kind of ambiguous to me.  I mean I thought all organic synthesis was the same, right? You have the reaction and reagents that ultimately form a product. Well, apparently their are two main research areas in organic synthesis called total synthesis and methodology. As Wikipedia puts it, the former deals with “…complete chemical synthesis of complex organic molecules from simple, commercially available  or natural precursors”, while the latter focuses on getting good yield and pure product usually using reactions from the literature with less emphasis on “trying to reinvent the wheel”.

From his lecture I was able to gather that the goals of his total synthesis research was to synthesize needed molecules and demonstrate the limitations of current methods. He was able to illustrate very well the trials and hurdles associated with synthesizing these relatively complex molecules using commercially available precursors using total synthesis. He was so effective in fact that he could seemingly go on and on for hours about the complications that arose when making 11-o-debenzoyltashironin. After all, it did take 5 years and thousands of dollars to end up where they are now in the clinical trial phase. After viewing several slides of reactions, I found that I didn’t even remember what 11-o-debenzoyltashironin actually does. I could only remember the long epic journey of backtracking and climbing over mountains to find this novel way of synthesizing it.

Ok, so total synthesis is really complicated, what good can it bring us other than confusion and headache? Professor Cook was able to illustrate very well how the interests of his research team were a fitting match for total synthesis. He listed oncology, antibiotics, neurological disorders, and Third World ailments as primary choices of interest and gave justifications on how total synthesis can impact those areas for the greater good. He additionally reasoned that with organic synthesis the sky’s the limit on the areas of research you can do. I was able to learn a great deal from this lecture and found it quite interesting. I would advise my non-science friends that this presentation was about finding new and innovative ways to make complex, useful molecules.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

The speaker this Thursday, Wendell P. Griffith, gave a rather unique presentation in that he was able to blend an informal delivery style  with rather technical chemistry related ideas and terms. I give him props for his presentation style (though it may be considered rather crude in some respects) primarily because of the originality he displayed in his delivery approach. I can honestly say that I’ve never heard a chemistry lecture or seminar conveyed quite like this one. You could really tell that he was passionate in his research and enjoyed what he did by the way he acted. He talked in a fast pace, and kept on going and going even as time ran out.  Griffith’s unconventional style also served to keep the attention of the audience focused on him whether it be due to fear of being called upon (like me) or just sheer fascination with his research.

I was able to learn quite a lot from this presentation, especially on the subject of mass spectrometry. Being already familiar with mass spec from organic classes, I was able to refresh my memory on what it does as well as learn some new things that I may have missed or was never covered. Griffith gave an overview of how it works, as well as a brief description on how to read the mass spec graphs. It was pretty impressive to see all the information you can get just from mass spec data. For example, when he showed us the data on hemoglobin and how you could differentiate between all of hemoglobin’s intermittent states. I was also given a lesson about the characteristics of hemoglobin in that it is a tetramer with two alpha and two beta chains, which he went on to describe several distinguishing differences between alpha and beta chains such as chromosome location, stability, and mass spec identification. There were so many more things that I learned and little tidbits of information that I found interesting.

I think the most beneficial part of his presentation was when he talked about the practical application and usefulness of studying hemoglobin. I was able to learn about blood transfusion and its risks and drawbacks. Additionally, I was able to understand how hemoglobin functions in the blood and is encapsulated by red blood cells, and how that plays a function in its stability. Overall I thought this seminar was informative and entertaining, while the speaker was energetic and one-of-a-kind.

To the non-scientist: Griffith’s lecture gives an insightful look into the structure and function of hemoglobin in which he describes techniques of analyzing the composition of it and justifies this analysis as necessary through examples of  practical applications.

Post This To My

Hide Sites

I was able to learn a lot from the recent Chemistry Seminar when Matthew J. Allen gave a presentation about his research on lanthanides. The presentation was straight forward and easy to follow due to his descriptive dialogue and well illustrated slides. Furthermore, the lingering questions that I still had towards the end of the seminar were for the most part answered  when we were able to talk with him at the conclusion of his presentation. I appreciated the fact that he was able to address the uses of lanthanides as well as the benefits of doing further research on them, especially in the area of contrast agents for MRI.

Allen was able to explain quite clearly how contrasts agents worked and why the lanthanide series are effective paramagnets. I was learned that europium was ideal at higher field strength, while gadolinium became a poor contrast agent as field strength increased. This seminar was interesting because of his clear and direct presentation style and the use of a background introduction in the beginning that effectively set up the main bulk of his presentation. If I were to describe this presentation to the non-scientist I would say that it is mainly focused on a way to improve MRIs such that we can get higher resolution images inside our body with greater contrast.

A couple of thoughts that remain after the presentation:

1. I was unable to understand what made Ga(III) and Ca2+ similar, was it radius?

2. I still don’t get why with dendrimer encapsulation you wouldn’t get outer sphere H2O interaction because don’t the dendrimers break apart allowing outer sphere H2O to enter still?

Post This To My

Hide Sites