Search

The James B. Macelwane Medal for significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a young scientist of outstanding ability was presented to Terry Wallace at the 1992 AGU Fall Meeting Honors Ceremony on December 9, 1992. The meeting was held in San Francisco. The award citation, delivered by William Dickinson, as well as Wallace's response, are presented here.

PAGES 403-405 Michael Gurnis and David J. McComas were honored as recipients of James B. Macelwane Medals at the AGU 1993 Spring Meeting in Baltimore last May. The medal recognizes significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a young scientist of outstanding ability. Richard O'Connell pre­ sented Gurnis' medal, and James L. Burch presented McComas' medal. Citations and responses are presented below.

The James B. Macelwane Medal for significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a young scientist of outstanding ability was presented to David G. Sibeck at the 1992 AGU Spring Meeting Honors Ceremony on May 13, 1992. The meeting was held in Montreal, Quebec. The award citation, delivered by Thomas Potemra, as well as Sibeck's response, are presented here.

In December 1991, Thorne Lay was awarded the Macelwane Medal at the AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco. This honor is given in recognition of significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a young scientist of outstanding ability.

Steven M. Gorelick received the 1990 James B. Macelwane Medal, given in recognition of significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a young scientist of outstanding ability, at the AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco, Calif.

On that fateful day of Aug. 6, 1945, when the atomic age burst forth with such cataclysmic results in Hiroshima, I had mixed feelings of excitement and disappointment. Excitement, as a young scientist, at the news that the energy of the atom had actually been unleashed (we had heard rumors about such research but doubted its practical outcome so soon). Disappointment, because I felt that "we've been scooped!" By "we" I meant the large group of us who had been working for the past three years on another war-related research effort—synthetic rubber. I had then just completed my doctoral dissertation at McGill University in Montreal on a study of molecular-weight control in butadienestyrene emulsion copolymerization (the wartime GR-S system) and was well aware of the unique and largescale effort made by the U.S. to establish a synthetic rubber industry. This effort was, of course, classified as "confidential" during the war, and we had eagerly awaited ...

The ethical dilemmas posed by the increasing challenges to openness in science are particularly acute for young researchers. Institutional policies can enhance openness. A survey of the science and engineering faculty at Cornell University demonstrated that existing policies toward openness are not being carefully followed, perhaps because they are not well understood. Increased discussion of openness on campus may improve compliance, but the burden of setting standards remains heavily on the individual young scientist.

This paper combines insights from the Sociology of Science concerning the strong role of thesis advisors in shaping the attitudes of young scientists with an appreciation of Journal Citation Reports in identifying families of related journals. The result is a series of tools for the librarian to use in anticipating or confirming the journal purchase requests of this particular clientele. It is shown that checklists based on the individual master/apprentice relationship can be prepared prior to the first meeting of librarian and young scientist, can be used with confidence in negotiations, and are often superior to lists based on more generalized data. A successful test involving the case studies of 231 young biochemists and their advisors is offered as tentative validation of these procedures.

In this article I attempt to explain scientific revolutions with the help of economic concepts applying, in particular, concepts of the theory of com? petition. Scientists are seen as entrepreneurs, who take pains to maximize 'profits' by selling their 'products', e.g. new theories, textbooks, expert opinions etc. (I explain below what I mean by profit-maximization in this context). In this framework, a new theory can be interpreted as a product innovation, which for some time allows a monopoly profit to its inventor. After a while, however, other scientists will attempt to appropriate a share of this supra-normal profit. They can accomplish this by further devel? oping the theory, by writing new textbooks, by selling expert opinions that are theoretically 'up to date', and through other strategies. In this way, a school develops. Finally, however, the school becomes large and the 'prof? its' that a scientist can make by being a member of it are only 'normal'. That means that profits are on a competitive level. The theory has reached a state at which only marginal improvements are possible. An ambitious young scientist may already ask himself whether it is not more rewarding to 'invest' into a new promising theory, one which offers him greater opportunities for becoming famous. When this situation oc? curs, the theory in question has reached its maturity. Either it is left to itself as 'secured' or it is superseded by a new theory, that is, a 'scientific revolution' takes place. Ideas like these are certainly not new. Every scientific outsider who has witnessed the continuing growth of an adversary school, may have had similar thoughts. However, it suggests itself to proceed one step further and to apply economic theory to the incessant succession of scientific the? ories. This is, however, a daring step. One can hardly expect to be met with much enthusiasm by those who think of science as a noble quest for truth, unspoiled by low motives.

Methods of sociological enquiry using data on qualifications, performance indicators, conditions for research and social background were used to investigate aspects of behaviour in young natural scientists relevant to research careers. It was shown that mathematicians and physicists were essentially more intrinsically motivated than the other cadres in the fields of natural sciences and that this manifested itself in a high intensity of work and a greater involvement in activities.

No BIOLOGICAL DISCOVERY in this century, except perhaps the discovery of the structure of DNA, has had the implications of the discovery of how genes are able to determine hereditary characteristics. Most of the efforts of molecular biologists during the 1950's and 1960's were directed toward this discovery. The intent of this short paper is twofold. It will give the young scientist insight into the very methodical and logical sequence of events leading to the elucidation of the mode of gene action and will also serve to coordinate the events leading to the discovery, enabling teachers to relate the history to their students.

"Do not allow haughtiness to take you in possession," Pavlov advises the young scientist. But I'm middle-aged, not always a scientist, and if haughty can include those who draw incessantly on their own experience, I am that . I hope also that I'll be pardoned for taking in possession here the topic of my professorship in a college of education. As it happens, my subfield within educational administration — the politics of education — has all the vibrancy of a young adult; as a distinct area for specialization, it 's hardly 21 years old, and those of us in it seem to be getting old together with many things that we can never have again, like the shock of altogether new analyses or methodologies. This matter of age was brought home to me recently when I doddered into my fifties. Instead of starting my second half-century lovably and graciously, I found myself giving fiercely impossible "pop" exams, denying worth in others' community activities, pooh-poohing the research of certain others, and generally trying to devastate my targets. Those I lambasted were all considerably younger and, in one form or another, would be working effectively well after I'm gone. Before long, however, I stopped worrying about displacement by young rivals, an amiable support for the next generation returned, and I became more nostalgic than nettled about my relatively advanced stage of life. It was then that I started realizing that if the educator's tasks of his or her twenties through forties is to become established in the profession, the gray challenge by 50 is resignation. Thus I need to give up the last remnants of wishes for omnipotence; I need to gain a realistic perspective on my "place," however large or small that might be. Psychologists say that middle-agers like myself can be at a crisis point of growth or of regression. Regression can lead to no longer worrying about improving one's students, to wresting community power as reassurance against dread of waning capacity, or to crabbing research innovation if it does not spring from the self. Growth in teaching, on the other hand, can mean doing things well that one can do well — until one might take on greater things. Growth can mean pitching in more democratically in civic services, as opposed to being manipulative. And growth in research can mean realizing that even though one's conceptual and empirical capacities are quite finite, one still can hope ultimately to produce a modest study of worth. If with middle-aged fogeyism, one is resigned to such limits, one might flower into personal, social, and professional maturity — which is akin to wisdom.

Ernest Frederick Relf died peacefully in his sleep at his home in Addlestone, on 25 February 1970, in his 82nd year. His unexpected death was a shock to his many friends, for (apart from a tendency to lumbago and in his latter years failing eyesight due to glaucoma) he was always remarkably fit physically; but more remarkable was that to the last his intellectual sprightliness remained unimpaired. He never seemed to grow old. When at the age of 79, his deteriorating eyesight caused him to resign from his committee work, the young scientist who was Secretary of one committee remarked ‘That’s a pity: we will have lost our best ginger group’. But his intellectual ability and wide interests (especially in music) were matched by the depth of a warm personality which engendered a real affection for him, not only in his contemporaries, but also in those fifty years his junior. He was, indeed, a scientist and engineer of great ability and versatility, a very talented musician, and withal the friendliest of men.

I can think of few things more pleasurable than introducing a young scientist whose research has enhanced his visibility to such an extent that his or her image is clearly distinguishable from among the large number of young scientists publishing excellent research these days. Normally, the recipient of a young scientist award is in a state approaching shock, with mixed feelings of pride and humility and appreciation for all those who guided him or her on the way. For Ed Stolper, however, the situation is different, and he is sitting here quite calmly. Although he is only 33 years old, his image shines brightly enough that it has received attention previously—He was awarded the Clarke Medal of the Geochemical Society in 1985, and he shared the Newcomb Cleveland Prize in 1985 with Sally Rigden and Tom Ahrens for the best 1984 paper in Science. Today it is the Macelwane Award of the American Geophysical Union, and there are still several tomorrows before his age disqualifies him as a young scientist, making it necessary for him to start getting down to serious, mature research.

Ernest Rutherford, known all over the world as the greatest scientist of our time, was born in 1871 in the village of Brightwater near the town of Nelson in New Zealand. A man who received all the international prizes and distinctions that a scientist could ever gain, Rutherford began his life in a very modest way. He was the fourth child of a small farmer who had eight more children after him. His father, who was a modest flax grower, could not afford to send his 12 children to school, and Rutherford depended on scholarships from primary school to the university.

In 1856 the student Aleksandr Borodin passed his final examination with distinction and graduated from the academy with the school testimonial of good conduct and progress. Although he ranked first in his course, the reason that he did not receive the Gold Medal was a bad grade received on a junior course given by the teacher of theology, Cherepnin, because he had explained a text of Holy Writ freely, whereas its literal translation was needed.

A century ago, when a young scientist detected that a bacterium which Pasteur had thought to be a coccus was in fact a short rod, Pasteur’s comment was, “I wish I could convey to you how little that information excites me” (Duclaux, 1896). Obviously, Pasteur was interested in microorganisms mainly for what they do rather than what they are. Whereas this remains a legitimate interest today, early bacteriologists felt that, with the increasing diversity of organisms isolated, there was a need to arrange bacteria distinctly. The easiest way to do this was to put them into groups with common properties, to study the relationships of such groups and their role in nature, and to develop methods that would enable scientists to identify new isolates with already known groups.

Our traditional evening for graduates and senior students of the Moscow Physical-Technical Institute consists of two parts. The first part is of a solemn nature, and dedicated to the life and activity of our institute. During the second part we review our own activities, meet with old friends, and have a good time. I have to participate in the ceremonial part of the program, which is less attractive than the second part. But we must remember, dear friends, that in a good meal the nourishing dish always precedes the much-awaited dessert. As a cook I find it rather difficult to prepare a tasty dish for you within the 15–20 minutes placed at my disposal, and to discuss our matters in a serious but not soporific way. For we have a lot of matters to consider in connection with our institute.

To ascertain whether young investigators (those 35 years of age and under) receive equitable treatment in the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) peer review process, we analyzed recommendation and award rates for new traditional grant applicants for 3 fiscal years (nine cycles of review). The more than 4,500 applications studied showed markedly higher recommendation and award rates for younger investigators than for senior scientists; a peak award rate differential of 15% was reached. The study also revealed that young scientists submitted just one-fourth of all the traditional grant applications sent to NCI and received less than one-third of the funds awarded. These results were consistent throughout the National Institutes of Health. As a follow-up, survey results are reported that assess researchers' attitudes and perceptions of the young scientist's role in the current biomedical review system.

On behalf of the University of Washington, the City of Seattle, the sponsors and donors, and my co-organizers, I am delighted to welcome all of you to this Conference on Genetic Control of Environmental Pollutants. My only regret is that Dr, Alexander Hollaender, who has inspired so many of us as young scientists and stimulated so many trail-blazing conferences in environmental sciences and in genetic engineering, is ill and was unable to make the trip to Seattle. He sends his warm good wishes for an outstanding meeting and a fine volume.

The biological and social sciences used to be largely descriptive. They have become increasingly quantitative, with insistence that counting and measuring are essential to a proper understanding of the phenomena discussed. Statistical science is a discipline, and an evergrowing collection of methods, that aids the process of investigating quantitative problems in which inherent variability of material obscures simple relations. This is widely accepted in subjects as diverse as genetics, ecology, pharmacology and agriculture; in every field of pure or applied biology, however, to equip himself for his career a young scientist needs an appreciation of statistical ideas even if he is not prepared to become skilled in statistical practice. I write with special concern for any student of biology who developed a fear of mathematics when first introduced to quadratic equations, who struggled through school mathematics with ever-decreasing understanding, and who chose a biological science because he thought it non-mathematical. He will not read this book as easily as will a more mathematically able student, but he can understand almost everything important without dependence on other mathematical study. The aims and logic of mathematically-based statistical method can be appreciated with little mathematical skill. What is necessary is a willingness to think about problems with logical precision, and to read basic mathematical symbolism as part of the exact language of science.

If the Hominunculus was the seventeenth century's concept of a sperm, then the phage was surely the twentieth century's version. Much of the last 20 years has been devoted to disproving this model. At the first embryology meeting I attended, a molecular biologist describing fertilization said that the sperm attached itself to the egg by its tail. In the ensuing years, one of the most exciting discoveries has been that gene organization and the regulation of gene expression in eukaryotes differ from those in prokaryotes. The history of embryology and its change into developmental biology are instructive for anyone who cares about scientific progress. Embryology is a problem, a set of questions, not a discipline. It is like cancer or cystic fibrosis and unlike mathematics, physics, chemistry, genetics, and biochemistry. The problems yield and the field evolves each time a new method or principle is discovered in one of the allied disciplines. The progression is so obvious that it is possible to advise a young scientist to study the disciplines and then apply these new principles and methods to important but ignored questions in biology. Such new applications, as well as scientific collaboration across national boundaries, are essential to the advancement of science. The earliest embryologists, such as Morgan and Boveri, were great geneticists. Boveri rediscovered Mendel and showed that each chromosome is different; he discovered the first true mechanism of eukaryotic gene expression, chromosome diminution.

When I came back to work in the U.S.S.R. in 1934, I was deeply interested in the organization of science generally and of research at my institute in particular. I was well acquainted with the organization of science and research abroad. For many years I was director of an institute in Cambridge, the focus of scientific research in Britain. On the basis of this experience I felt that Western organizational patterns of research were not fully applicable here. I was convinced that we had to work out our own organizational patterns of scientific research at the institute and even more so for our science generally.

THE FIRST chair in pathological anatomy in Germany, the fourth in the whole world, was created in 1845 in Wurzberg and conferred upon Adam Bernhard Mohr. A few years later, after the death of Mohr, a man of 28 years got a call to this chair, a young scientist who had attracted the attention of the faculty by his "excellent achievements in the field of histology." His name was Rudolf Ludwig Carl Virchow (Fig 1), and when he came on Nov 1, 1849, from Berlin to Wurzburg it was not yet suggested that the man who began his work in the garden pavilion of the Juliusspital (Fig 2) was destined to become the world's greatest pathologist. Let us have a look at the course of Virchow's life before coming to Wurzburg. Rudofl Ludwig Carl Virchow was born on Oct 13, 1821, in Schivelbein, Pomerania, one of Germany's eastern regions. His

Each summer since 1966 the NCAR Computing Facility has conducted a Summer Fellowship Program to provide on-the-job training in computer programming and research for graduate students in the atmospheric sciences. A questionnaire was distributed to various participants in order to deduce whether any general trends or patterns had evolved during the first six summer programs. This report is a descriptive survey of questionnaire results and discusses the fellowship program, the students who attended from 1966 through 1971, and the subsequent academic progress, computer activities, research plans, and career goals of the participants.

Paul Walker was a research scientist who had worked for the Arctic Institute in the Arctic and the Antarctic. He was born in California and graduated from Occidental College, Los Angeles in 1956, majoring in geology. He had visited Alaska and already spent one summer in Greenland before graduating. On leaving college he took part in the work at Red Rock Lake, Greenland, helping to map shear zones in ice cliffs. In October 1956 he went to Antarctica to participate in the I.G.Y. program. Based at Ellsworth Station he worked on the Filchner Ice Shelf, and was selected to go with the traverse party, which covered 1,100 miles in 80 days in the area south and west of the base. Walker returned to the U.S. in 1958 to help with the compilation and analysis of glaciological and geological data from Antarctica that was being undertaken at Ohio State University. In 1959 he was appointed glaciologist with the U.S.A.F. Ellesmere Island Ice Shelf Project. He went into the field with the party in May and in early August was paralysed by a brain seizure. Flown out by light aircraft on August 10, 1959, he was taken to California. An operation brought only temporary relief and he died after great suffering, paralyzed and nearly blind, in hospital a few months later. Paul Walker was young scientist of great promise, a hard and careful worker in the field, and the best of companions. His death is a great loss in a very real way to the polar world he loved. The Canadian Board on Geographical Names has approved the name "Walker Hill" for the prominent l400-foot feature on Ward Hunt Island, named in commemoration of Paul Walker by his companions.

This volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering contains papers from the 12th Workshop of the European Microbeam Analysis Society (EMAS) on Modern Developments and Applications in Microbeam Analysis, which took place from the 15–19 May 2011 in the Angers Congress Centre, Angers, France. The primary aim of this series of workshops is to assess the state-of-the-art and reliability of microbeam analysis techniques. The workshops also provide a forum where students and young scientists starting out on a career in microbeam analysis can meet and discuss with the established experts. The workshops have a very specific format comprising invited plenary lectures by internationally recognized experts, poster presentations by the participants and round table discussions on the key topics led by specialists in the field. This workshop was organized in collaboration with GN-MEBA – Groupement National de Microscopie Electronique a Balayage et de microAnalysis, France. The technical programme included the following topics: the limits of EPMA, new techniques, developments and concepts in microanalysis, microanalysis in the SEM, and new and less common applications of micro- and nanoanalysis. As at previous workshops there was also a special oral session for young scientists. The best presentation by a young scientist was awarded with an invitation to attend the 2012 Microscopy and Microanalysis meeting at Phoenix, Arizona. The prize went to Pierre Burdet, of the Federal Institute of Technology of Lausanne (EPFL), for his talk entitled '3D EDS microanalysis by FIB-SEM: enhancement of elemental quantification'. The continuing relevance of the EMAS workshops and the high regard in which they are held internationally can be seen from the fact that 74 posters from 18 countries were on display at the meeting, and that the participants came from as far away as Japan, Canada and the USA. A selection of participants with posters were invited to give a short oral presentation of their work in three dedicated sessions. The prize for the best poster was an invitation to participate in the 22nd Australian Conference on Microscopy and Microanalysis (ACMM 22) at Perth, Western Australia. The prize was awarded to G Samardzija of the Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, for the poster entitled: 'EPMA-WDS quantitative compositional analysis of barium titanate ceramics doped with cerium'. This proceedings volume contains the full texts of 5 of the invited plenary lectures and of 23 papers on related topics originating from the posters presented at the workshop. All the papers have been subjected to peer review by a least two referees. January 2012 Acknowledgements On behalf of the European Microbeam Analysis Society I would like to thank all the invited speakers, session chairs and members of the discussion panels for making the meeting such a great success. Special thanks go to Francois Brisset and Luc Van't dack who directed the organisation of the workshop giving freely of their time and talents. As was the case for previous workshops, the EMAS board in corpore was responsible for the scientific programme. The technical exhibition, which occupied 130 sq.m of floor space, was outstanding. It was very encouraging to see new instruments on display, including a FEG electron microprobe as a first worldwide presentation. Moreover, almost all the companies that exhibited provided financial support, either by sponsoring an event or by advertising. Below, in alphabetical order, is a list of exhibiting companies and sponsors of the workshop: Ametek GmbH, Edax Business UnitGN-MEBA Bruker Nano GmbHJeol (Europe) SAS CamecaL'Oreal, Direction Generale Recherche et Innovation Carl Zeiss NTSNanoMEGAS sprl Commissariat a l'Energie AtomiqueOxford Instruments SAS European Institute for Transuranium Elements (Germany)Probe Software, Inc. ElexienceSAMx FEI CompanyTarget-Messtechnik Fondis Electronic SAThermo Fisher Scientific Gatan (France) Clive T. Walker EMAS President

Summary Here we present EpiGraph, an image analysis tool that quantifies epithelial organization. Our method combines computational geometry and graph theory to measure the degree of order of any packed tissue. EpiGraph goes beyond the traditional polygon distribution analysis, capturing other organizational traits that improve the characterization of epithelia. EpiGraph can objectively compare the rearrangements of epithelial cells during development and homeostasis to quantify how the global ensemble is affected. Importantly, it has been implemented in the open-access platform Fiji. This makes EpiGraph very user friendly, with no programming skills required. Availability and implementation EpiGraph is available at https://imagej.net/EpiGraph and the code is accessible (https://github.com/ComplexOrganizationOfLivingMatter/Epigraph) under GPLv3 license. Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

2nd edition. By W. I. B. Beveridge. (London : W. Heinemann, Ltd.). Pp. 166. Price 10s. 6d. Though this book is written by an eminent biologist, no excuse is necessary for bringing it to the attention of physicists; the principles with which Prof. Beveridge is concerned are common to all branches of science. In the preface he seems to imply that he is writing mainly for the benefit of the young scientist who is a beginner in research, but the book will be enjoyed by research workers and scientists of all ages.

The concept of what constitutes basic (or fundamental) research seems to depend upon the person involved, whether he be industrial executive, research director, legislator, director of a government bureau or agency, or the research scientist himself. Indeed, it varies greatly among scientists. A university professor may have one idea, a young scientist beginning his industrial career another, and the seasoned industrial scientist still another. To learn whether a career in basic research holds promise for the kind of life a man wants for himself and his family, he should inquire what this term connotes in each major kind of establishment in which he might be employed. It is also important to consider the avenues for advancement as well as the opportunities to transfer to other types of work in the event that he should desire to do so. A few people assume that basic research can be taken to mean work done by a research ...

Herbert F York Reading: WH Freeman 1976 pp 115 price £4.20 President Harry S Truman decided to go ahead with the development of the hydrogen bomb as an addition to the US atomic armoury in 1950. Herbert York, a young scientist in the atomic weapons programme at the time, but innocent of the deliberations going on behind closed doors, takes a retrospective look at how that decision was taken.