J Chem Ecol (2014) 40:222–223 DOI 10.1007/s10886-014-0395-3
COMMENTARY: REFLECTIONS ON 40 YEARS
Where Might We Go From Here? Jerrold Meinwald
Published online: 12 March 2014 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014 The time has come to celebrate the 40th Anniversary of the Journal of Chemical Ecology! Robert M. Silverstein and John B. Simeone, the founding editors, had an inspired vision. They set out to create a journal in which research dealing with the chemical interactions occurring between organisms in nature would be the central theme. This is an area of research that had come into its own only in the mid-20th century, enabled by critical advances in experimental techniques such as gas and high performance liquid chromatography for the separation of the chemical components in complex mixtures; mass spectrometry, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and X-ray crystallography for the structural and stereochemical characterization of naturally occurring compounds; and the electro-antennogram technique for identifying volatile bioactive signaling agents in the world of insects. As research in chemical ecology moved forward at an unprecedented pace, relevant publications were scattered about in a wide variety of chemical and biological journals. The Journal of Chemical Ecology was able to provide a valuable home for papers in this emerging field. Looking at its first volume (1974), I was reminded that Cornell University, represented by the presence on its Editorial Board of three faculty members plus one former faculty member (Wendell Roelofs, Thomas Eisner, Jerrold Meinwald, and Howard Schneiderman) played a role in launching this pioneering publication. While insect chemical ecology has always been particularly well represented in the Journal, there also have been excellent contributions, particularly in recent years, examining chemical interactions in the lives of organisms ranging from microbes to mammals (including humans). Nevertheless, the Journal today is not attracting the attention it deserves. Paradoxically, as the subject of chemical ecology has matured and become “mainstream,” the JCE has not always attracted high impact papers. One of the reasons for this is exemplified by my personal experience. When Tom Eisner and I had research results about which we were particularly excited, we were eager to have them seen by as wide a chemical and biological readership as possible. Consequently, dozens of our papers dealing with arthropod defensive chemistry, the relationship of plant defensive chemistry to the biosynthesis of insect pheromones, or the chemistry of mate
J. Meinwald (*) Cornell Institute for Research in Chemical Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected]
selection and parental endowment, went to Science or the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. We were certainly not unique in wanting our best work to be widely seen. Another complicating circumstance is that many of the biologists and chemists studying phenomena such as chemical defense and/or chemical signaling mechanisms among bacteria, fungi, higher plants, marine and terrestrial invertebrates, and vertebrates, do not see themselves as “chemical ecologists.” (It is noteworthy that the membership of the International Society of Chemical Ecology hovers around 500, while the membership of the American Chemical Society is over 160,000, and that of Society for Neuroscience is more than 40,000.) Typically, researchers seek out disciplinary journals close to their field of training in which to publish. Since chemical ecologists actually come from many different fields, this puts the J. Chem. Ecol. at a disadvantage. What can be done to improve this situation? For the JCE to thrive, it needs to attract the submission of some of the most important research papers, both fundamental and applied, contributing to our understanding and application of biotic chemical interactions. These papers may well come from authors who see themselves not as “chemical ecologists” but rather as scientists working in a wide variety of other primary fields (analytical chemistry, natural products chemistry, organic synthesis, biosynthesis, insect physiology and behavior, evolution, genetics, microbiology, medical entomology, parasitology, pharmacology, agriculture, forestry …). How might we attract these papers? Here is a radical suggestion: let us establish one or more substantial prizes (~$50,000) for the best papers to appear in the JCE on topics such as schistosomiasis, malaria, bark beetle infestation, etc., all considered broadly as the chemical ecological problems that they actually are! These prizes should be broadly publicized, not only within the scientific community, but to the general public. Might not pharmaceutical and chemical companies (or their related foundations), or, for that matter many other large corporations be interested in funding such prizes as a relatively inexpensive way to demonstrate their interest in supporting science related to health, the environment, and most generally the public good? Might not companies such as HoffmannLa Roche, P&G, Pepsi Cola, Tesla, Yamaha, Sony, etc. be intrigued? We could stress the importance of team work in modern science. And might the chance to win a major prize encourage authors to submit some of their very best work to the Journal of Chemical Ecology?
J Chem Ecol (2014) 40:222–223 It may not be difficult to recruit an Awards Committee from among the members of the distinguished JCE Editorial Board, which would seek corporate sponsors, and select awardees. Reviewers of manuscripts could be asked to call attention to those submissions that they feel deserving of consideration for an award. (This could even make the refereeing of papers more fun, and might help in recruiting badly needed reviewers.) Of course, this is not actually a novel idea (the Cozzarelli Prizes reward outstanding PNAS papers in a number of fields each year). Wouldn’t it be wonderful if
223 prizes of this sort were able to recognize (if not actually fund) research and publication on important problems, such as the control of Lyme Disease, which cry out for chemical ecological study? We need fresh, even radical, ideas to help the Journal of Chemical Ecology play the role it deserves on the international scientific scene. The upcoming 30th Anniversary Meeting of the ISCE might be just the right occasion to explore this approach to reinvigorating the Silverstein/ Simeone vision!
COMMENTARY: REFLECTIONS ON 40 YEARS
Where Might We Go From Here? Jerrold Meinwald
Published online: 12 March 2014 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014 The time has come to celebrate the 40th Anniversary of the Journal of Chemical Ecology! Robert M. Silverstein and John B. Simeone, the founding editors, had an inspired vision. They set out to create a journal in which research dealing with the chemical interactions occurring between organisms in nature would be the central theme. This is an area of research that had come into its own only in the mid-20th century, enabled by critical advances in experimental techniques such as gas and high performance liquid chromatography for the separation of the chemical components in complex mixtures; mass spectrometry, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and X-ray crystallography for the structural and stereochemical characterization of naturally occurring compounds; and the electro-antennogram technique for identifying volatile bioactive signaling agents in the world of insects. As research in chemical ecology moved forward at an unprecedented pace, relevant publications were scattered about in a wide variety of chemical and biological journals. The Journal of Chemical Ecology was able to provide a valuable home for papers in this emerging field. Looking at its first volume (1974), I was reminded that Cornell University, represented by the presence on its Editorial Board of three faculty members plus one former faculty member (Wendell Roelofs, Thomas Eisner, Jerrold Meinwald, and Howard Schneiderman) played a role in launching this pioneering publication. While insect chemical ecology has always been particularly well represented in the Journal, there also have been excellent contributions, particularly in recent years, examining chemical interactions in the lives of organisms ranging from microbes to mammals (including humans). Nevertheless, the Journal today is not attracting the attention it deserves. Paradoxically, as the subject of chemical ecology has matured and become “mainstream,” the JCE has not always attracted high impact papers. One of the reasons for this is exemplified by my personal experience. When Tom Eisner and I had research results about which we were particularly excited, we were eager to have them seen by as wide a chemical and biological readership as possible. Consequently, dozens of our papers dealing with arthropod defensive chemistry, the relationship of plant defensive chemistry to the biosynthesis of insect pheromones, or the chemistry of mate
J. Meinwald (*) Cornell Institute for Research in Chemical Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected]
selection and parental endowment, went to Science or the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. We were certainly not unique in wanting our best work to be widely seen. Another complicating circumstance is that many of the biologists and chemists studying phenomena such as chemical defense and/or chemical signaling mechanisms among bacteria, fungi, higher plants, marine and terrestrial invertebrates, and vertebrates, do not see themselves as “chemical ecologists.” (It is noteworthy that the membership of the International Society of Chemical Ecology hovers around 500, while the membership of the American Chemical Society is over 160,000, and that of Society for Neuroscience is more than 40,000.) Typically, researchers seek out disciplinary journals close to their field of training in which to publish. Since chemical ecologists actually come from many different fields, this puts the J. Chem. Ecol. at a disadvantage. What can be done to improve this situation? For the JCE to thrive, it needs to attract the submission of some of the most important research papers, both fundamental and applied, contributing to our understanding and application of biotic chemical interactions. These papers may well come from authors who see themselves not as “chemical ecologists” but rather as scientists working in a wide variety of other primary fields (analytical chemistry, natural products chemistry, organic synthesis, biosynthesis, insect physiology and behavior, evolution, genetics, microbiology, medical entomology, parasitology, pharmacology, agriculture, forestry …). How might we attract these papers? Here is a radical suggestion: let us establish one or more substantial prizes (~$50,000) for the best papers to appear in the JCE on topics such as schistosomiasis, malaria, bark beetle infestation, etc., all considered broadly as the chemical ecological problems that they actually are! These prizes should be broadly publicized, not only within the scientific community, but to the general public. Might not pharmaceutical and chemical companies (or their related foundations), or, for that matter many other large corporations be interested in funding such prizes as a relatively inexpensive way to demonstrate their interest in supporting science related to health, the environment, and most generally the public good? Might not companies such as HoffmannLa Roche, P&G, Pepsi Cola, Tesla, Yamaha, Sony, etc. be intrigued? We could stress the importance of team work in modern science. And might the chance to win a major prize encourage authors to submit some of their very best work to the Journal of Chemical Ecology?
J Chem Ecol (2014) 40:222–223 It may not be difficult to recruit an Awards Committee from among the members of the distinguished JCE Editorial Board, which would seek corporate sponsors, and select awardees. Reviewers of manuscripts could be asked to call attention to those submissions that they feel deserving of consideration for an award. (This could even make the refereeing of papers more fun, and might help in recruiting badly needed reviewers.) Of course, this is not actually a novel idea (the Cozzarelli Prizes reward outstanding PNAS papers in a number of fields each year). Wouldn’t it be wonderful if
223 prizes of this sort were able to recognize (if not actually fund) research and publication on important problems, such as the control of Lyme Disease, which cry out for chemical ecological study? We need fresh, even radical, ideas to help the Journal of Chemical Ecology play the role it deserves on the international scientific scene. The upcoming 30th Anniversary Meeting of the ISCE might be just the right occasion to explore this approach to reinvigorating the Silverstein/ Simeone vision!
