Apr 2005: ACCN, the Canadian Chemical News

The Intelligent Use of P E S T I C I D ES

ACCN APRIL AVRIL • 2005 • Vol. 57, No./no 4

l�actualité chimique canadiennecanadian chemical news

LABORATORY HEALTH AND SAFETY

GUIDELINES4th Edition

�The chemical Þ eld and profession

are built on a foundation of trust with

society . An integral part of that trust is

the safe operation of facilities including

laboratories , whether industrial, academic

or government. The education of

engineers , scientists and technologists

must reß ect that level of trust. We all

share in the responsibility for safe and

ethical research , chemical processing

and analysis. �

- Eric Mead, FCICFormer Chair

The Chemical Institute of Canada

Due Diligence recommended laboratory procedures

Lead by Exampleresponsibility for safety policies

Healthy Workplacetraining and information effective safety systems

Prevent Accidents and Illnessesemployer-employee relationships safety audits

An invaluable resource for all laboratory personnel

The latest edition builds on the experience gained

over 20 years since the Þ rst edition was launched

in 1982 by the Ordre des chimistes du Québec.

A team of chemical experts in health and safety

from industry, government and academia have

combined their extensive knowledge to cover a

wide and complete range of topics.

Subject Areas

� Responsibility for safety

� Recommended laboratory procedures

� Storage, handling and hazards of laboratory reagents

� Safety equipment and procedures

� Emergency procedures

� Accidental spills of hazardous products

� Management of hazardous wastes

� Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)

ISBN: 1-896564-00-394 pages

August 2003$29.50

1.8

88

.54

2.2

24

2LABORATORY

HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES

4th Edition

ACCN APRIL AVRIL � 2005 � Vol. 57, No./no 4A publication of the CIC/Une publication de l�ICC

R E M E M B E R W H E N

Under ScrutinyAre the inerts added to Canadian pest control products properly regulated?

Debra Conlon

Jumping on the BAN WagonOrnamental pesticide bans are popular today�but could they do more harm than good?

Kenneth Green

Protecting Plants Against Fungal DiseasesDiscovering inhibitors of unique metabolic processes occurring in phytopathogenic fungi

M. Soledade C. Pedras, MCIC

Pesticide PathwaysClose chemical consideration of the hydrolytic degradation of organophosphorus pesticides will lead to refined environmental risk assessment

Erwin Buncel, FCIC, Gary W. VanLoon, FCIC, and their graduate student co-workers

Cover/Couver tureCanadian experts advise on the safe and effective use of pesticide products. Recent developments, discussions, and alternatives.

Guest Column/Chroniqueur invité . . . . . . . . . 2

Food for Thought Lorne Hepworth

Letters/Lettres . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Personals/Personnalités . . . . . . 3

News Briefs/Nouvelles en bref . . . . . . . . . . 4

Chemputing . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Tips to Improve Your PM Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC

Chemfusion . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Risks—Real and Imagined Joe Schwarcz, MCIC

CIC Bulletin ICC . . . . . . . . . .21

CSC Bulletin SCC . . . . . . . . . 22

CSCT Bulletin SCTC . . . . . . . 24

Student News/ Nouvelles des étudiants . . . . . . 26

Careers/Carrières . . . . . . . . . 29

Events/Événements . . . . . . . . 36

10

12

14

Feature Ar ticles/Ar ticles de fond

16

18

T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s / T a b l e d e s m a t i è r e s

Editor-in-Chief/Rédactrice en chefMichelle Piquette

Managing Editor/Directrice de la rédactionHeather Dana Munroe

Graphic Designer/InfographisteKrista Leroux

Editorial Board/Conseil de la rédactionTerrance Rummery, FCIC, chair/président

Catherine A. Cardy, MCICCathleen Crudden, MCIC

John Margeson, MCICMilena Sejnoha, MCICBernard West, MCIC

Editorial Office/Bureau de la rédaction130, rue Slater Street, Suite/bureau 550

Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2613-232-6252 • Fax/Téléc. 613-232-5862

[email protected] • www.accn.ca

Advertising/Publicité[email protected]

Subscription Rates/Tarifs d’abonnementNon CIC members/Non-membres de l’ICC : in/au Canada CAN$55; outside/à l’extérieur du Canada US$50. Single copy/Un exemplaire CAN$8 or US$7.

L’Actualité chimique canadienne/Canadian Chemical News (ACCN) is published 10 times a year by The Chemical Institute of Canada / est publié 10 fois par année par l’Institut de chimie du Canada. www.cheminst.ca.

Recommended by The Chemical Institute of Canada, the Canadian Society for Chemistry, the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering, and the Canadian Society for Chemical Technology. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the official position of the Institute, or of the societies that recommend the magazine.

Recommandé par l’Institut de chimie du Canada, la Société canadienne de chimie, la Société canadienne de génie chimique et la Société canadienne de technologie chimique. Les opinions exprimées ne reflètent pas nécessairement la position officielle de l’Institut ou des sociétés constituantes qui soutiennent la revue.

Change of Address/Changement d’[email protected]

Printed in Canada by Gilmore Printing Services Inc. and postage paid in Ottawa, ON./Imprimé au Canada par Gilmore Printing Services Inc. et port payé à Ottawa, ON.Publications Mail Agreement Number/No de convention de la Poste-publications :40021620. (USPS# 0007-718)

Indexed in the Canadian Business Index and available on-line in the Canadian Business and Current Affairs database. / Répertorié dans la Canadian Business Index et à votre disposition sur ligne dans la banque de données Canadian Business and Current Affairs.

ISSN 0823-5228

www.accn.ca

The crop protection industry has always been challenged to connect with the beneficiaries of our effective products—especially consum-ers—whether they are preparing food in their kitchens or enjoying community parks with their children.

It is time for our industry to stand up and be proactive with those who wish to question us based on misinformation and untruths. In-forming the public about the true benefits our industry delivers to Canadians each and every day is a top priority for CropLife Canada.

CropLife Canada is the trade association representing the manufacturers, developers , and distributors of plant science innova-tions—pest control products and plant biotechnology —for use in agriculture, urban, and public health settings. CropLife members provide essential pest management tools for both agricultural and urban environments; tools that are best regulated using evidence-based risk assessments. We support a system that incorporates the latest, best available science and studies from experts in Canada and abroad, studies that have withstood the scrutiny of peer review. We support a regu-latory system that is adequately funded and resourced and that uses a precautionary approach to decision making.

Standard stuff. But all the science in the world may never convince the skeptics. Facts alone are never enough; as the old saying goes, people don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.

That’s why CropLife has embarked on the Food for Thought communications initiative . In a recent survey, we questioned the chief household decision-makers on food and nutritional matters and found that 73 percent have been left confused about the safety of foods grown using pesticides, as a result of information they have heard from various sources. Eighty-five percent said they want more factual and evidence-based information about pesticides, food, and human health.

The Food for Thought initiative contains a number of elements: advertisements that will run throughout this year in a number of family-focused magazines including Chatelaine , Canadian Living, Reader’s Digest , Today’s Parent and Canadian Family . There will also be a series of media announcements related to the science behind crop protection, and an informative and interactive Web component (www.croplife.ca/foodforthought).

Of course, words are not enough. We have to say what we do, do what we say, and be able to prove it. New advances in pesticide formulations and state-of-the-art application techniques are resulting in much more targeted and effective products, while at the same time further minimizing environmental impacts. Already, two-thirds of CropLife Canada’s spending is devoted to stewardshipfirst initiatives. And we support Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies that use a variety of techniques and all effective tools—including pest control products and plant biotechnology to maximize pest control benefits.

As an industry, we want to be clear as to what we stand for—safety and innovation. We believe in safety—protecting human health and the environment. And we believe in innovation through continuous research.

By informing Canadians directly, we aim to build confidence in our products and the system that regulates them. Through the efforts of industry and government, we want to continue earning and enhancing the public’s trust in our industry, serving Canadians from coast to coast.

In the words of John Seely, “A grain of knowledge, of genuine controllable convic-tion, will outweigh a bushel of adroitness.”

GUEST COLUMN CHRONIQUEUR INVITÉ

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

2 L�ACTUALITÉ CHIMIQUE CANADIENNE AVRIL 2005

Lorne Hepworth is president of

CropLife Canada.

CropLife Canada incorporates the latest, reliable research to debunk �junk� science and provide factual information on pesticides.

Lorne Hepworth

APRIL 2005 CANADIAN CHEMICAL NEWS 3

Government

The National Research Council (NRC) appointed Pierre Coulombe as president of the NRC. This appointment was reviewed by the Standing Committee on Industry, Natural Resources, Science and Technology. As part of the government’s policy of providing a greater role for parliamentarians in reviewing appointments, Coulombe appeared before the Committee on February 7, 2005.

“I am pleased to welcome Coulombe as president of the National Research Council ,” said the Honourable David L. Emerson , Minister of Industry. “With a wealth of experience in university, public, and private sectors , Coulombe is well equipped to support the commercialization of science, making Canada more innovative and competitive in the development, deployment, and use of new technologies. I look forward to the continued growth of Canada’s research base and the suc-cess of the NRC under his leadership .”

As former chair of the Board and CEO of the Centre de recherche industrielle du Québec , Coulombe developed strong experience as a leader of a research organization committed to commercialization. In addition , he was president and CEO of Infectio Diagnostic Inc., where he helped showcase Canada’s leadership in medical research and diagnostic technology, completing two rounds of private equity financing and negotiating major research contracts for the company.

DistinctionDavid Dolphin, FCIC, of The University of British Columbia received an NSERC Award of Excellence as well as additional research support. He was recognized for his groundbreaking research in porphyrins, the

PERSONALS PERSONNALITÉS

New NRC president, Pierre Coulombe

Dear Editor,

[In the January, 2005 issue of ACCN,] CIC chair Sundararajan wishes the CIC a happy 60th birthday—a year that is “ … an occasion to acknowledge the significant contributions of many eminent chemists over the years.” For a CIC chair to ignore what chemical technologists and chemical engineers have contributed is certainly outrageous. Thank goodness Glynn Michael, FCIC, sets the record straight in his historical review.

Gordon Thomson, FCIC

Just for thought—in chemistry itself, there is an extensive compartmentalization: organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry , analytical chemistry, bioorganic chemistry , bioinorganic chemistry, biochemistry, biological chemistry , medicinal chemistry , biophysical chemistry , computational chemistry, theoretical chemistry, quantum chemistry, polymer chem-istry, physical chemistry, surface chemistry, material chemistry, chemical physics, environ-mental chemistry, green chemistry, catalytic chemistry, protein chemistry, chemical toxi-cology, applied chemistry, engineering chemistry, etc.!

P. (Sundar) Sundararajan, FCIC

LETTERS LETTRES

David Dolphin, FCIC

In MemoriamThe CIC extends its condolences to the

family of Wendal A. Alexander, FCIC.

so-called “coloured pigments of life,” which include heme and cholorphyll. His research has resulted in the creation of the drug, Visudyne TM, the world’s first treatment for age-related macular degeneration—the most common cause of blindness.

Sajeev John and Geoffrey Ozin, FCIC, of the University of Toronto were presented with the Brockhouse Canada Prize. It was awarded for the first time for their breakthrough research in the synthesis of light-trapping crystals that could be key to the future development of optical computers. The prize, which hon-ours the last Canadian Nobel laureate and physicist Bertram Brockhouse, recognizes outstanding achievement by a team of researchers from different disciplines. The team shares the research prize.

M. Soledade C. Pedras, MCIC, is one of the latest Canada Research Chairs to be announced . The chemistry professor at the University of Saskatchewan is exploring new, targeted, and environmentally friendly crop protection products as the Canada Research Chair in Bioorganic and Agricultural Chemis-try. The work centres on canola and mustard models. For more detail on Pedras’ research, please turn to p. 16.

M. Soledade C. Pedras, MCIC

Chemistry Inclusive


Catch Some RaysA new study from University of Toronto at Scarborough has found that low doses of radi-ation could have beneficial effects on health.

The findings, published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, found that low chronic doses of gamma radiation at 50 to 200 times background levels had beneficial effects on the stress axis and the immune axis of natural populations of meadow voles. The paper provides evidence of hormesis —when low doses of a harmful agent have beneficial effects—from the only large-scale, long-term experimental field test ever conducte d on the chronic effects of gamma radiation on mammals.

Hormesis has been observed in a broad range of chemicals including alcohol and its metabolites, antibiotics, hydrocarbons, herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides as well as physical processes such as radiation exposure. The effects of hormesis have been observed in a wide range of organisms, from microbes and fungi to plants and animals . Hormetic responses are varied in form and include metabolic effects and increased longevity; growth, reproductive, and physi-ological responses.

“Exactly how low-level radiation causes a hormetic response remains uncertain because few laboratories have studied the pathology or physiology of mammals exposed throughout life to dose rates below those causing detrimental effects,” said Rudy Boonstra, professor of physiology and zoology at the Centre for the Neurobiology of Stress. “This study provides a potential mechanism to explain the benefical effects .”

In the study, Boonstra and colleagues studied the meadow vole populations at the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment at Pinawa, MB. The experiment was set up by Atomic Energy of Canada to test the effects of chronic gamma radiation on natural populations. In isolated populations, voles received one of three radiation treat-ments over a four-year period.

“Our findings suggest that a moderate increase in glucocorticoid levels, associ-ated with low-level radiation, could be an important factor underlying the increase in longevity that has been observed in other shorter studies on small mammals exposed to low-level radiation,” Boonstra said.

Karen Kelly, University of Toronto Bulletin

Low-level radiation could be good for mammals

Cinnamon Staves Off Skeeters As well as being a general nuisance, various species of mosquito are carriers for major diseases including dengue fever, the West Nile virus and, most notoriously, malaria.

Effective control of mosquito populations is therefore an essential public health strategy in tropical countries. Organophosphate insecticides and insect growth regulators are currently the favoured means of control, but their widespread use can prove harmful to humans . What is needed is a natural and safe form of mosquito control, and this is what a team of Taiwanese researchers has now discovered in cinnamon oil.

There are around 250 species of tree in the genus Cinnamomum and they are found throughout Asia and Australia. The oil derived from many Cinnamomum species possesses a range of antibacterial, antifungal, and insecticidal properties, prompting researchers from the National Taiwan University, Taipei, and Chang Gung University, Tao-Yuan, to wonder whether this oil could provide natural mosquito control.

Using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry , the researchers analyzed essential oils derived from the leaves of eight different trees of the species Cinnamomum osmophloeum found throughout Taiwan. They detected 54 different compounds in the eight oils and found that oils from different trees could differ greatly in their chemical content.

The researchers tested the oils for their ability to kill mosquito larvae and found that oils from two of the trees were the most effective . Within the oils they discovered that four—cinnamaldehyde, cinnamyl acetate, eugenol, and anethole—were more effective at killing mosquito larvae than the synthetic insecticide DEET. The team has only tested these compounds on mosquito larvae, but team leader Shang-Tzen Chang explained, “We think that cinnamon oil might affect adult mosquitoes by acting as a repellant.”

Jon Evans, reproduced by permission of

The Royal Society of Chemistry

Photo by Leba Jokuty


Prudent Pest ControlCropLife Canada is coordinating an inde-pendent, third-party review of a 2004 report by the Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) on pesticides. CropLife believes misleading statements were made that are unnecessarily frightening people.

CropLife notes that before a pest control product can be sold and used in Canada, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency must be satisfied that it represents no unacceptable risk to the public or the

Weed and Feed�Handle with CareThe BC Medical Association is calling on the Canadian Medical Association to urge federal Health Minister Ujjal Dosangjh to rescind registration of combined fertilizer and pesticide products. This would ensure that each be sold separately to consumers.

Products that combine a fertilizer with pesticides, commonly known as “Weed and Feed,” are convenient to use and are becom-ing more prevalent. However, the BC Medical Association believes using these products con-tributes to the unnecessary use of pesticides with the result that the toxic chemical com-pounds inherent in these pesticides can be harmful to humans, animals, and fish.

“Many consumers are unaware of the toxicity of these combined products and tend to spread them widely over their lawn when they should only be used in concentrated, problematic areas,” says Jack Burak, president of the BC Medical Association. “For the health of ourselves and our environment, pesticide use should be a measure of last resort , and should not be used indiscriminately or even unknowingly.”

Although a few local programs are in place nationwide with regards to pesticide use, no federal program has been implemented. The federal government produced a report five years ago that emphasized a need to change consumers’ attitudes about using pesticides, and recommended increased consumer edu-cation, but no action has been taken to date.

Camford Chemical Report

environment . That includes no unacceptable risk of cancer or any other disease condition, contrary to the suggestions made by OCFP.

“By its own admission, OCFP used a selec-tive and limited review of available scientific literature as the basis for its denunciation of the use of pest control products in agricul-tural or garden settings,” says Peter MacLeod of CropLife.

“The public is not well served when any-one draws conclusions about the safety of pesticides based on selective studies and incomplete data rather than the full scope of

available science,” adds Carol Burns, epide-miologist with Dow Chemical.

Members of the community signed a joint statement agreeing that pesticides provide many benefits for Canadian society when used responsibly. Scientists, academics, farmers , grower organizations, and pest management professionals joined CropLife in the support of pest management technologies and in Health Canada’s supervision of the regulatory system.

Camford Chemical Report

Photo by Gokhan Okur

NEWS BRIEFS NOUVELLES EN BREF

Research Park PlannedMcMaster University in Hamilton, ON, has finalized the purchase of land in the city’s west end for a research park. Created in partnership with the City of Hamilton, which has pledged $5 million toward development of a biotech incubator, the park will complement the university ’s research by providing opportunities for collaboration with government and industry, according to McMaster’s vice-president of research Mam-douh Shoukri. In a news release, Shoukri said the park provides “endless” possibilities for “expanding the intellectual and financial capital for Hamilton .”

University of Saskatchewan On Campus News

Skimming the SurfaceIt has the impressive-sounding title of Atomic Force Microscope (AFM), and one University of Saskatchewan professor describes it as “the world’s smallest record player.” But instead of producing beautiful music, this unique piece of equipment produces beautiful images.

Matthew Paige, MCIC, assistant professor of chemistry, explained that the AFM allows for a close-up look at the surface of various materials, mapping what he calls “the lumps and bumps” that are otherwise invisible to the human eye. Those lumps could be atoms (thus the “atomic” in the microscope’s name) or much larger features, with the colours in the images reflecting the various heights and depths of the surface. Being able to view the surface features of a material makes the AFM an important tool for, among other things, understanding the characteris-tics of both new and existing materials or for quality control, he said.

The AFM consists of an insulated box, about the size of a microwave oven on its side, a suspended platform to limit vibra-tion, and a removable cylindrical appa-ratus that holds the “turntable”—a metal disk. Paige explained the AFM can be used to examine “anything you can pin down or glue to the turntable within certain height limitation.” The tone arm is fitted with a

Phot

o by

Mat

thew

Pai

ge, M

CIC

Surfaces revealed�gold on glass

Matthew Paige, MCIC, with the atomic force microscope

Phot

o by

Col

leen

Mac

Pher

son

microscopic stylus that then scrapes over the material , creating an image by measuring the forces between the surface and the tip (this is where “force” comes from in the AFM’s name).

Paige said one particularly valuable aspect of the AFM is its ability to create images under liquid. This allows researchers to study, for example, “proteins that are doing something in a living organism.” The AFM can produce time-lapse images of the protein at work, “but at an atomic level.”

As if that’s not impressive enough, Paige is working to create an even more versatile tool. He is attempting to expand the AFM’s capability to include extracting chemical information from samples.

Colleen MacPherson, University of

Saskatchewan’s On Campus News


Calling All Bugs

Bed bugs, mosquitoes, moths, and other tiny pests that wreak untold misery, disease, and economic devastation on society had better beware. Gerhard Gries is now armed with a $2.5 million renewable grant over five years, enabling him to intensify his earth-friendly war on household, forest, and agricultural insect pests. The Simon Fraser University (SFU) biologist specializes in the chemical and bioacoustic communication of insects.

Gries is the first researcher at SFU to garner an Industrial Research Chair (IRC) from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council in 12 years. The award goes to Canadian university scientists working with industry to develop research that will fulfill important industrial and societal needs.

Gries and his team have identified chemical and bioacoustic signals that insects exploit to find food, fend off attackers, and entice mates. They have also discovered that insects pay attention to the presence and type of microorganisms on a resource when they decide where to lay their eggs.

“Many of the insecticides we use today have been linked to water contamination and cancers,” notes Gries. “Once we understand how insects communicate, we can come up with synthetic attractants that fool, lure, sterilize , and even kill bugs without using toxic insecticides.”

Gries’ IRC will enable him and industrial sponsors to fine-tune their understand-ing of how bioacoustic and semiochemical (message bearing) signals emitted by insects can be turned against them. Gries’ IRC will also enable SFU to hire a plant or microbial chemist who will accelerate discoveries in the field of chemical ecology by bridging chemical and biological research.

Simon Fraser University


NEWS BRIEFS NOUVELLES EN BREF

Mosquito LibidoMosquitoes can really take a bite out of summertime enjoyment, but a scientist at The University of Manitoba is looking to clamp down on the pesky bugs using biotechnology .

“For ecological reasons, we do not want to eradicate mosquitoes,” said Steven Whyard of the department of zoology. “All we are seeking to do is reduce the numbers.”

Whyard wants to apply the same steril-ization techniques he developed in Australia over the past decade in fruit flies and mosquitoes . Whyard was also involved in a project to sterilize Pacific oysters.

“By genetically altering the oysters, we were able to produce a 90 percent sterility rate,” he said, adding the oysters’ steril-ity was a repressed condition. “For the ten percent that leaked through, they would become fertile again, which was a level of fertility that was unsatisfactory for effective control. In our insect model, the fruit fly, we achieved 100 percent sterility.”

Whyard said there are several reasons why sterilizing insects using biotechnology is a good choice for controlling pest populations , including the fact it is environmentally friendly.

“It is a pesticide-free technique, and when the sterilized males are released into the environment , they still compete with the wild males for mates,” he said adding insects are very particular with whom they will mate and a female will not mate with a

Phot

o by

Rob

erta

Kos

ciel

ny

Just say no. Steven Whyard studies what turns mosquitoes on�and off.

Safety On-LineLambton College, in Sarnia, ON, has answered the call of industry and is making its flagship Chemical Production Engineer-ing Technology (CPET) program available in an on-line format.

The CPET program provides students with knowledge of the principles underlying the complex technologies used in today’s pro-cessing industries—oil and chemical, power generation, steel production, food processing, and pulp and paper, to name a few. During the program development stage, input from various industry representatives ensured that the program reflects the reality of the workplace . The courses cover regulations pertaining to environmental and health and

sickly male. “Sterilized males need to be just as active as their counterparts.”

Whyard’s research program aims to examine several aspects of male mosquito sterility, including examining the genes that determine sex and sperm production. With fruit flies, Whyard said that along with sperm, the male produces several pro-teins and one called the sex peptide has a strong influence on the female and can alter her behaviour .

“The sex peptide can cause her to rebuff other males thereby ensuring that particular male’s genetic line,” he explained. If mos-quitoes have similar sex peptides, it could open the door to designing molecules to resemble sex peptides. That would cause them to have an anti-aphrodisiac effect on females to convince them that they have mated when actually, they haven’t.

Some male-produced proteins also have other interesting properties such as antifun-gal and antibiotic protection. Whyard said it would be worth exploring to see if there could be possible medical applications.

Roberta Koscielny, University of

Manitoba Bulletin

safety legislation and also prepare students to write operating engineering examinations.

The on-line delivery provides a flexible and portable solution to employers looking for accessible training for their employees. Now, employees will be able to continue providing valuable skills to the company, while learn-ing new technologies and preparing to fill the serious shortage that is predicted to take place in the industry in the near future. On-line learning—bringing the classroom to you! Discover how Lambton’s on-line delivery of the CPET program can meet your training needs—on time and within budget!

For information on this learning opportu-nity, contact Lambton College’s marketing and recruitment office at (519) 541-2403 or e-mail [email protected].

Lambton College


Tips to Improve Your PM Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC

As a consultant, I work on projects with other groups. When those Word, Adobe, and Excel files start

to fly back and forth, my filing system does exactly what the second law of thermody-namics predicts: the entropy of an isolated system always increases during an irrevers-ible process. In this case, the filing system will become more and more disorganized. No project management (PM) manual or course instructor ever seems to suggest, as does the second law, that exerting a little extra energy at a project’s planning stage is the way to keep the entropy of the fil-ing system under control. All it takes is the establishment of a file naming system and ensuring that ALL members adhere to it. Many project managers consider this as a secondary consideration rather than a vital link in the communication chain.

It can be quite a challenge to think up meaningful ways to name the files. Although Windows may allow up to 255 characters, keep your file names below 64 characters as some CD burning software imposes that limit and you are going to back up your files, aren’t you? As you try to think up good names, con-sider how Windows Explorer operates. It can sort by name, date or even file size. If your file name is too long, there won’t be enough space to display it unless you hover your mouse over it to get the full name to pop up. If you name a file AprReport, you can safely assume that MayReport will follow it. Don’t be surprised when the JunReport follows April, but jumps ahead of May. It’s better to label the month numerically, but be careful. If you number the months from 1 to 12, they will come up as 1, 10, 11, 12, 2, 3, etc. Always

put the zero up front. That way they will go 01, 02, 03 … with 10 and 11 coming after 09.

I like to include the date in the file name. Avoid the British dd-mm-yyyy or American mm-dd-yyyy. Keep to the ISO-8601 yyyy-mm-dd format. You can use two or four digit years with dashes, dots, or nothing in between, but once you have made your choice, stick to it. Then your chosen format will always come up in the right order on any directory list sorted by name. The file name 050317Grn-EnergyRptMDSd02.doc tells you that it’s about a green energy report that was issued on March 17, 2005. My initials show that I prepared it and the d02 shows it is my sec-ond draft. Calling it GrnEnergyRptMDSd02.doc without the date isn’t good enough. If a blue report was issued after the green report, the blue would come up ahead of the green on the list, rather than in the order in which they were prepared. Some people may think that’s OK as the date is in another column and the list can always be sorted by date. While that does work, it’s much simpler to keep that date at the very beginning. Doing so ensures that everything will always appear in the order in which it was prepared.

Reports will be reviewed by others on the team and come back with suggested changes or comments. Whatever you do when you review a report, don’t just save it and send it back. Change the name on the reviewed copy to identify it as the reviewed version. The name 050317GrnEnergyRptMDSd01xyz-R01.doc identifies this is the first review of my green energy report by someone with the initials XYZ. A second reviewer with the initials ABC, would send 050317Grn-EnergyRptMDSd02abcR01.doc. I suggest

keeping upper case for the author and lower case for reviewers and listing the initials or whatever in sequence going from left to right as in 050317GrnEnergyRptMDSd02xyzR01-abcR01, which would identify this as ABCs review of XYZs review of my report. Which date goes on the reviewed copy? As this is a review of the original report issued on a spe-cific date, keep the date associated with the original report . All files related to that report will then appear together in the list.

If members of the team are also providing data analysis, spreadsheets and graphics images might be added to the list of files being sent around. These should be named with the same file naming conventions. It isn’t necessary to send everyone the entire spreadsheet when they only need to see the graphs. Graphs can be inserted into the appropriate places in the report. This will avoid sending out unnecessary files. Just be sure that the reports contain the actual graphs, not just a set of hot links to spread-sheet files that nobody has.

Every project is different. You will very likely come up with a set of your own ideas for naming files. Just don’t forget the second law. Invest that extra energy at the very first meeting or the entropy of your filing system will take off and it won’t be easy to it get back in line.

You can reach our Chemputing editor,

Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC, at Marvin Silbert and

Associates, 23 Glenelia Avenue, Toronto, ON

M2M 2K6; tel. 416-225-0226; fax: 416-225-2227;

e-mail: [email protected];

Web site: www.silbert.org.

CHEMPUTING


Risks�Real and Imagined Joe Schwarcz, MCIC

Pesticides have one indisputable effect. They cause emotions to boil over. That’s just what happened when a group of

golfers noticed that a chemical sprayer was out on the course. By the time they got into the clubhouse, several were complaining of headaches, rashes, and general malaise. They angrily approached the superintendent to pro-test what they believed was an irresponsible activity. The golfers linked their symptoms with the chemicals being sprayed because they were convinced that the use of pesticides is inherently unsafe. Are they right?

Asking if it is safe to use pesticides is like asking if it is safe to take medications. The answer is both yes and no because it depends on which medication, the dosage, how it is taken, by whom it is taken, and for what reason it is taken. Salt, vitamin B-6, vitamin A, and caffeine, on a weight for weight basis, are more toxic than many pesticides. Basi-cally, instead of classifying substances as safe” or “dangerous,” it is far more appropriate to think in terms of using substances in a safe or dangerous fashion. Two aspirin tablets can make a headache go away, but a handful of tablets can kill. Unfortunately, in rare cases, even two tablets can cause side effects. So it is with pesticides. While there are safe ways to use these chemicals, there can be no universal “guarantee of safety.” After all, pesticides are designed to kill their targets, whether these be insects, weeds, or fungi. The best we can do is evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of each sub-stance and make appropriate judgments.

In Canada, such judgments are made by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regula-tory Agency (PMRA). Before a pesticide can be registered for use, the chemists, toxicologists,

physicians, and agronomists of the PMRA have to be convinced that the substance can effectively handle the problem it was designed for and that its risk profile is acceptable. A registration is a long and involved process requiring acute, short-term and lifelong toxicology studies in animals as well as stud-ies of carcinogenicity and possible damage to the nervous system. Proof of absence of birth defects is required. Effects on hormonal changes have to be studied in at least two spe-cies, along with the effects of the pesticide on non-target species. All routes of exposure are assessed, whether via ingestion, inhalation, or skin contact. Cumulative effects are studied. PMRA also requires field-testing for environ-mental effects before a pesticide is approved.

Based on all the data, PMRA assesses the risk, taking into account exposure of children , pregnant women, seniors, pesticide applicators, and agricultural workers. The potential level of exposure can be no more than one one-hundredth of the dose that showed no effect in animals. Even once a pesticide is registered, there is a continuous re-evaluation system that includes the inert ingredients that are used in the formulations. Risk assessments are refined in accordance with new research findings. All the ways of reducing pesticide risk are examined, with great emphasis on Integrated Pest Manage-ment (IPM), which is aimed at reducing the reliance of pesticides as the sole approach to pest management. IPM is geared towards taking action only when numbers of pests warrant it and uses a mix of biological, physi-cal, and chemical techniques. Furthermore, PMRA has inspectors across the country to monitor the proper use of pesticides.

It is hard to imagine what more could be done to ensure that a pesticide has an acceptable risk-benefit ratio. But can even such a rigorous system ensure that we will have no consequences from the use of pesticides? Absolutely not. There may be subtle effects in humans that show up only after years of expo-sure. This can be revealed only by long-term studies, not by anecdotal evidence. Pesticides cannot be linked to cancer on the basis of a heart wrenching case that may appear in the media describing how a child who had repeat-edly felt ill after exposure to lawn sprays was later diagnosed with cancer. Long-term epide-miological studies are required. A number of such investigations have been carried out.

Workers in the agricultural chemical production industries are expected to have the highest exposures. They do not show any unusual disease patterns, but the number of subjects in these studies is small. A widely reported study of farmers who sprayed their fields showed a weak link between acres sprayed and various cancers, but overall, the farmers had fewer cancer cases than the general population.

One of the developing concerns about the use of insecticides and herbicides is a possible effect on the immune system. Labo-ratory evidence indicates impaired activity of immune cells after exposure, and at least one study has shown increased respiratory infec-tion in teenagers in villages where pesticide use is the heaviest. There is also the possibil-ity of neurobehavioural effects. In a Mexican study, children in areas where pesticides were extensively used performed more poorly on coordination and memory tests. But these are very different conditions from those seen when

CHEMFUSION


a dilute solution of 2,4-D is occasionally used on a lawn by trained applicators. On the other hand, home gardeners who purchase such chemicals and use them improperly can put themselves and others at risk.

It would be great if we could stop using pesticides. No exposure to pesticides means no exposure to risk. We can manage to do this at home. But we cannot feed six billion people without the appropriate use of agricul-tural chemicals. So we have to tolerate risks, both real and imagined, because they are out-weighed by the benefits on a global scale. And just what was the dastardly chemical that was being sprayed on the golf course that caused the reaction in the golfers? Good old H2O! Fear itself can be hazardous.

Popular science writer, Joe Schwarcz, MCIC,

is the director of McGill University’s Office

for Science and Society. He hosts the Dr. Joe

Show every Sunday from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. on

Montréal ’s radio station CJAD and on CFRB

in Toronto. The broadcast is available on the

Web at www.CJAD.com.

RE

ME

MB

ER

WH

EN

To celebrate the CIC’s 60th

anniversary this year, ACCN will

feature photos, articles, stories,

letters, and other memorabilia

related to the chemical industries .

This special retrospective will

appear in each issue in this

section called REMEMBERWHEN.

Submit YOUR memories to

[email protected].

RE

ME

MB

ER

WH

EN



Share your CIC memories

and memorabilia with ACCN.

Send your materials to

[email protected]

or mail them to the National Office.

Please label each piece

with your name, a caption ,

and your complete address

to ensure its safe return to you.

Pesticides are tools. Affordable, abundant food supplies and the control of rodents and roaches are just some of the benefits society enjoys through the use of pesticides. But misconcep-

tions are common, and the lack of information about “inerts” adds to the confusion.

Inerts, are substances added to pest control products in addition to the active ingredient. Inerts are called “formulants” by Health Canada. They will hereafter be referred to as formulants in this article. These formulants serve a purpose beyond the direct control of a targeted pest. Despite the rhetoric of anti-pesticide campaigns, inerts undergo exten-sive scrutiny before they are allowed to be in a pesticide product. In fact, inserts require more scrutiny when used in pesticide formulations than they do when used in common household products.

Pesticide regulation in Canada

Before you can appreciate the level of testing required for an inert, it is imperative to understand what Health Canada’s regulations require for putting a pesticide on the market in Canada.

Any product sold to control insects, weeds, or diseases must be registered by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA). The PMRA employs experts in the areas of health, environment , efficacy, and sustainability to carry out their man-date—to protect human health and the environment by minimizing the risks associated with pesticide use. No pesticide product may be registered in Canada unless and until it is found by the PMRA to pose no unacceptable risks to the health and environment of Canadians. There are no exceptions to that rule.

The PMRA requires extensive testing to identify and measure any potential risks posed to health or the environment. The studies mandated by the PMRA serve a number of important health and environmental purposes. Among other things, they serve to identify any possible effects on humans or other species, to determine any potential health hazards to applicators or other users, to determine any potential impact on wildlife and the environment, and to determine the best use of the product.

A product is subjected to more than 120 separate tests and studies to ensure that it will not present any unacceptable health or

UNDER SCRUTINY Debra Conlon

Are the inerts added

to Canadian pest

control products

properly regulated?

Here are the facts.

You be the judge.


environmental risk when it is used properly. The development, testing, and registration of a product will typically take an average of eight to ten years. It typically costs a reg-istrant about $300M on a global basis to do all of the necessary research, development, scientific tests, and studies necessary to develop and register a single pesticide with a new active ingredient.

The required studies are designed to assess the possible adverse health effects that may result from single, multiple, or lifetime exposure to a pesticide. All routes of exposure are assessed, including exposure through skin contact, eye contact, inges-tion, and inhalation . The PMRA also requires numerous studies to assess the environmental risk posed by any pesticide.

The total exposure to the pesticide, or “aggregate exposure,” is also assessed by the PMRA—namely through diet, drinking water, residential exposure, and exposure at school. The hazard component on the assessment includes “cumulative effects” from pesticides that may have a common mechanism of toxicity.

Registration of a pesticide is not the end of the federal regulatory process and nor is it the only role of the PMRA in the regulation of pesticides. The PMRA reviews registered products every five years or less for renewal. This evaluation confirms that the registration information for the product remains current.

Role and regulation of formulants in pesticides

Additional ingredients are required in the formulation of most pesticides to provide improvements in the physical properties of the pesticide such as sprayability, solubility , spreadability, stability, or solvency. Most formulants added to pest control products are common chemicals that are also used as formulants in a variety of household and industrial products such as cleansers, kitchen and bathroom disinfectants, shampoos, and soaps.

In the absence of information, opponents of pesticide use have claimed that formulants used in pest control products are not properly regulated. This is not true. In fact, the formu-lants used in pesticides undergo additional scrutiny to those used in common household products. All formulants contained in a prod-uct intended to control pests by a consumer,

farmer, or other professional must be identified and quantified by the registrant in the regis-tration process. For a company to be able to add a formulant to an active ingredient in a pesticide, they must provide data to support its human health and environmental safety. Besides this assessment of the formulant, the entire pesticide product—active ingredient + formulant(s)—is used in the safety testing and assessment procedure.

In contrast, if a company were to use a formulant in a common household product that is not a pesticide, it would be regulated under other health and environmental laws. These laws typically require much less data and government scrutiny when compared to pesticide law. For pesticides, the registration is a continuous process. If new information on any formulant indicates a concern, then the registrant is asked to reformulate the product. If the formulation is changed, the registrant must provide a safety and efficacy data pack-age to support any new formulation .

Pesticide labels

All pesticide labels require the approval of the PMRA. Pesticide labels include detailed information on the safe use, handling, stor-age, and disposal of the product. Use of any pesticide in a manner that is contrary to the product label is a violation of federal law, and subjects the user to civil and criminal penalties .

Unlike common household products, formu-lants are not typically required to be identified on the label of pesticides and are considered proprietary information and protected under the authority of access to information. This fact is often used by the anti-pesticide lobby to demonstrate a “secret element” to pesticides. But the truth of the matter is that a formulant must be identified only if the government determines that it is of a health or environmen-tal concern. The following statement must be added to a label, “This product contains x% of (substance name), which has been determined to be of toxicological concern.”

Future changes to formulant policies

Health Canada has recently updated its regu-latory process for formulants resulting in

increased harmonization with U.S. policies. All formulants have been assigned to several lists and specific actions are associated with this new scheme based on hazard and risk. Formulants determined to be of toxilogical concern are required to be discontinued as of December 2004. These new policies will also require formulants of health or environ-mental concern to be listed on pest control product labels by January 9, 2006. They will be subject to reassessment and possible data call-in, in accordance with the U.S. EPA reas-sessment activities.

Labelling will be required for formulation preservatives (anti-microbials) and for allergens known to cause anaphylactic-type reactions. The program also sets forth acceptance criteria for dyes, colourants, and fragrances and criteria for notifiable changes to product labels and formulations. Once the new Pest Control Products Act is in force, the identity and concentration of any formulant or contaminant of health or environmental concern on the list will not be confidential and will be available to the public on request .

Formulants are essential elements to make pest control products usable for farmers and consumers, and in some cases, they allow less pesticide to be used. It is important for people to understand that not only are the pesticide active ingredients well regulated to protect human health and the environ-ment, but so are the formulated products that contain formulants. CropLife Canada and the Urban Pest Management Council is commit-ted to providing Canadians with information about our products, their scientific basis, and how they are regulated, building on scientific understanding and featuring both risks and benefits. By informing Canadians, we aim to build confidence in our products and the system that regulates them.

For further information, visit www.croplife.ca.

Debra Conlon is executive director of the

Urban Pest Management Council and public

affairs lead at CropLife Canada.


An increasing number of localities in Canada and the U.S. have considered—or are considering—placing bans and/or restrictions on “ornamental” or “cosmetic” pesticide

use. These pesticides include the chemicals used to protect lawns, gardens , and trees.

Here in Canada, ornamental pesticides such as 2,4-dichlorophen-oxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and 2-(2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) propionic acid (MCPP) have been partially banned in Halifax, NS, and completely banned in Shediac, NB, and Perth, ON. Restrictions on the time of use and requirements to post notice prior to use have been emplaced in Caledon, ON. Various locales in Quebec have restricted the use of ornamental pesticides. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency has restricted or banned several ornamental pesticides , including Dursban and Diazinon (U.S. EPA, 2003). San Francisco, CA, and Maryland have also placed severe restrictions on the use of ornamental pesticides (Taylor, 2002).

Opponents of pesticide use, such as the Pesticide Action Network of North America (www.panna.org) and Canadians Against Pesticides (www.caps.20m.com/index.htm) claim that pesticides are hazardous to human health and the environment, and have ongoing campaigns calling for bans and restrictions on commonly used pesticides. Other analysts, however, have observed that banning ornamental pesticides used at parks and schools will expose people to higher levels of risk from disease-carrying pests, such as roaches and mosquitoes, or to stinging insects that can trigger lethal allergic responses, such as fire ants and wasps (Taylor, 2002).

Two questions are key to evaluating the attractiveness of ornamental pesticide bans. Are pesticide bans protective? Or might they actually be harmful?

Are pesticide bans protective?

Though proponents of pesticide bans imply that routine exposures to low levels of pesticides are harmful, evidence doesn’t back them up. In The Fraser Institute’s recently published “Misconceptions about the Causes of Cancer,” toxicologists Lois Gold and Bruce Ames point out that synthetic chemicals, such as pesticides, are no more toxic than natural chemicals

made by the plants we consume every day. Gold et al. use data from rodent tests to rank the cancer hazard of synthetic and natural pesticides, called the “HERP” index (Gold et al., 2003). The table below shows how a few synthetic pesticides stack up alongside some of the common chemicals in our foods, medicines, and in our environment.

Chemical HERP

Phenobarbital (1 sleeping pill) 12.0

Ethyl alcohol in beer (229 grams) 1.8

Caffeine in coffee (11.6 grams) 0.1

d-limonene in orange juice (138 grams) 0.03

Difocol (a pesticide) 0.00002

Lindane (a pesticide) 0.000001

Captan (a pesticide) 0.00000008

It is clear from the data above that pesticide exposures do not pose a significant risk when compared to the many other chemicals, both natural and synthetic, that we encounter every day. A single sleep-ing pill poses a cancer risk that is over 150 million times higher than routine exposures to pesticide residues.

Still closer to home, a 1997 report of the National Cancer Institute of Canada observes that “ … exposure of the general population to pesticide residues is minimal and below those levels already deemed safe by govern-mental regulatory agencies” (NCIC, 1997). The same report explains that, “The Panel did not find any existing evidence to suggest that crop protec-tion chemicals and lawn and garden products are likely to be a major cause of cancer.” A recent review of the safety of 2,4-D conducted by

synthetic chemicals, such as

pesticides, are no more toxic than

natural chemicals

Ornamental pesticide bans are popular today�but could they do more harm than good? Kenneth Green

JUMPING ON THE BAN WAGON

Photo by Jim DeLillo


Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency found that “the use of 2,4-D and its end-use products to treat lawns and turf does not entail an unacceptable risk of harm to human health or the environment (Pest Management Regulatory Agency, 2005).”

Could pesticide bans be harmful?

As many policy analysts have noted, measures to reduce risk are rarely pure in their impacts on risk—tradeoffs are the rule rather than the exception (Graham & Wiener, 1995). The same holds true for ornamental pesticide bans.

Four fairly obvious risk tradeoffs are easily apparent:1. Poorer is riskier As many policy analysts have shown, one’s

health is directly related to one’s after-tax disposable income (Chapman et al, 1992). As banning pesticides requires more ex-pensive and more manually intensive methods of controlling pests, the redirect-ing of household income toward lawn and garden care makes it unavailable for use in purchasing other forms of health pro-tection, such as better food, better medical care, safer housing, etc.

2. Pests and weeds are pests and weeds The reasons that people use pesticides

in their gardens and homes, as well in professional settings like tree farms, along highways and pipelines, and in sporting venues are pretty obvious—to reduce the quantities of insect pests and allergenic weeds in these environments. Insects are notorious carriers of many kinds of disease, and controlling them in the lawn and garden is an integral part of keeping them away from people. Allergic reactions to insect stings and bites cause a small number of deaths every year in Canada, and worries about tick-borne and mosquito-borne diseases are grow-ing. In addition, weeds can aggravate allergic conditions, aggravating asthma and other respiratory conditions.

3. Dangerous alternatives Various groups arguing against pesticides

are promoting home-brew alternatives, such as solutions made from rhubarb. One recipe calls for steeping rhubarb leaves in water. But as the Medline

Medical Encyclopedia points out, rhubarb leaves contain oxalic acid, a highly toxic chemical that can cause weak-ness, burning in the mouth, difficulty breathing , stomach or abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea , seizures, and coma (U.S. NIH, 2003). Conventional pesticides are sold in containers that are well labelled, with explicit instruc-tions about care, storage, and treatment for accidental ingestion . Bottles of home-brew pesticide will not have such safeguards, and it’s reasonable to presume that accidental ingestion would be more likely, rather than less. In the professional setting, the question that has to be considered is whether banning pesticides will lead to alternative meth-ods of pest control that might be riskier still. Manual methods involve machinery to control weeds or to alter terrain to reduce habitat for pests. These methods pose their own risks to workers .

4. Fruit and vegetable consumption As Gold et al. point out, fruits and

vegetables are important sources of health-protective, and cancer-fighting vitamins and minerals, including folic acid and vitamin C. According to an Ipsos-Reed poll, 44 percent of people in greater Vancouver, BC, live in households that grow some of their own food (Ipsos-Reid, 2002). Given the high cost of fresh produce, it’s reasonable to speculate that people might replace their home-grown fruit and vegetables with other foods that are less health-protective.

Conclusion

Bans and restrictions on pesticides seem to offer little or no health benefit, yet would reduce consumer choice, potentially increase their costs of home ownership and maintenance, hinder their ability to grow health-protective fruits and vegetables in their own gardens, and promote the use of toxic, home-brew alternatives of unproven effectiveness . In professional settings, shifting efforts from the chemical control of pests and weeds to physical control poses risks that are rarely discussed in considerations of whether or not a municipality should ban the use of pesticides. Instead, the focus of public attention is directed to the extremely

remote, hypothetical risks of chemical pesticides . This perceived threat consumes public resources that could be better used elsewhere. This shift in focus distracts people from addressing the real risk-reducing actions that require some willpower. Quit smoking. Stop drinking alcohol excessively. Eat enough fresh fruit and vegetables. These are proven methods of reducing our vulnerability to cancer and other illness.

References

1. Gold et al., Misconceptions About the Causes of Cancer (Vancouver, BC: The Fraser Institute, 2003). Available at www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=477.

2. John D. Graham and Jonathan Baert Wiener , Risk Versus Risk: Tradeoffs in Protecting Health and the Environment (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1995).

3. Ipsos-Reid, “Just Under One-Half of Vancouver Households Grow Food.” Available at www.ipsos-na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=1623.

4. James Taylor, “Pesticide bans put children at risk from roaches, rodents,” The Heartland Instititute’s Environment News, 2002. Available at www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=901.

5. K. S. Chapman et al., “Poorer is Riskier ,” Risk Analysis 21 (1992).

6. Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Health Canada, “Re-evaluation of the Lawn and Turf Uses of (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy ) acetic Acid [2-4-D],” 2005. Available at www.pmra-arla.gc.ca/english/pdf/pacr/pacr2005-01-e.pdf.

7. United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Restricted Use Products (RUP) Report ,” January 2003. Available at www.epa.gov/opprd001/rup.

8. United States National Institute of Health, Medline Health Information Library , “Rhubarb leaves.” Available at www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002876.htm .

The above Web addresses were accessed by the author on February 25, 2005.

Kenneth Green directs the Centre for Studies

in Risk, Regulation, and Environment at

The Fraser Institute in Vancouver, BC.


Share your CIC memories

and memorabilia with ACCN.

Send your materials to

[email protected]


Please label each piece

with your name, a caption ,

and your complete address


Plant diseases caused by microbial pathogens are responsible for enormous crop losses worldwide. Devastating fungal diseases causing complete depletion of staple crops such as potatoes,

rice, and maize have demonstrated the critical need to control phy-topathogenic fungi. Over the past 50 years, the control of plant pests and diseases has relied mainly on application of chemical pesticides. However useful and necessary, it is clear that sustainable agricultural practices demand control strategies other than massive application of pesticides. New approaches to control pests and diseases rely on more selective and environmentally friendly methods, which require a much better understanding of the ecological roles of secondary metabolites of plants and their pathogens.

In general, plants show resistance to a large number of fungal pathogens and susceptibility to a few others, suggesting that fungal infection requires a combination of favourable situations and an interplay of various metabolic processes. For example, plants produce a vast array of products with very diverse roles in defence against microorganisms and other pests, generally known as secondary metabolites. Frequently, however, successful fungal pathogens can overcome such plant chemical defences (phytoanticipins and phytoalexins ) through production of inducible detoxifying enzymes. In addition, to facilitate colonization of plants, some fungal pathogens

produce secondary metabolites known as phytotoxins, which dam-age the plant cells irreversibly. In a few instances, resistant plants can overcome the negative effect of fungal phytotoxins by producing selective detoxifying enzymes. In simple terms, the interaction of plants with fungal pathogens involves a variety of chemical reac-tions, which transform highly bioactive secondary metabolites into harmless products .

Chemical defences produced by plants of the family Cruciferae (oil-seeds canola, rapeseed, mustard, and vegetables such as cauliflower, broccoli, cabbage, rutabaga, turnip) show unique chemical structures not common to any other plant families. Interestingly, crucifers are the only plants known to produce compounds containing a dithiocar-bamate group, although some of the most important pesticides and herbicides developed in the 1960s were dithiocarbamates. Despite deploying multiple chemical defences, crucifers are susceptible to numerous pests and diseases. The susceptibility of crucifers to infec-tion by some fungi appears to be related to an effective detoxification of their chemical defences by such phytopathogens. Investigation of the reactions of cruciferous fungal pathogens to several phyto-alexins demonstrated that each species can metabolize and detoxify phytoalexins via different pathways. For example, the phytoalexins brassinin, cyclobrassinin, brassilexin, and camalexin were detoxified

PROTECTING PLANTS AGAINST FUNGAL DISEASESDiscovering inhibitors of unique metabolic processes occurring in phytopathogenic fungi M. Soledade C. Pedras, MCIC


by blackleg, stem rot, and root rot fungi via different intermediates. Furthermore, modi-fication of the chemical structures of these phytoalexins at specific sites prevented or slowed down the detoxification process. The much slower rates of transformation of some phytoalexin analogues were attributed to the specificity of the fungal enzymes involved in the detoxification steps. That is, such detoxification mechanisms indicated that the enzymes involved in those processes were substrate specific.

Considering the uniqueness of the chemical structures of cruciferous phyto-alexins, as well as the apparently specific detoxification processes used by crucifer-ous pathogens, it follows that inhibition of these detoxification reactions would be beneficial to the plant and detrimental to the fungus. With this concept in mind, the new term “paldoxin” was coined to desig-nate potential PhytoALexin DetOXification INhibitors. Paldoxins are envisioned to be non-toxic and to act synergistically with the natural disease resistance factors of plants. The chemical structures of paldoxins are designed to inhibit unique fungal path-ways and are based on the structures of the earliest metabolic intermediates generated in those pathways. These considerations in designing paldoxins are important to en-sure a minimal effect on non-targeted spe-

cies and to create compounds that are both effective and environmentally friendly crop protection agents. Furthermore, mixtures of these selective inhibitors can be used against a variety of plant pathogens, and can be optimized according to crop and location, and ultimately replace several of the broad spectrum fungicides.

In view of the current understanding of phytoalexin detoxification pathways in

some economically important crops, it is now possible to design a “first generation” of detoxification inhibitors to test the feasi-bility of the paldoxin concept. In addition, to understand the mechanism of action of these potential inhibitors, it is necessary to con-duct screenings using both fungal cultures and enzyme preparations. Toward this end, parallel studies carried out with crude and purified enzyme preparations obtained from fungal cultures have shown that phytoalexin

detoxification occurs via intermediates iden-tical to those observed in fungal cultures.

Furthermore, screening of a number of phytoalexin analogues against fungal cultures and fungal enzyme extracts suggested identical transformation reactions . These results indicate that it is possible to screen for detoxification inhibitors using fungal cultures, a step that will greatly facili-tate on going searches for paldoxins.

Although it is still much too early to fore-cast the outcome of these investigations , the degree of plant protection offered by paldoxins will eventually require more extensive studies, including field tests. These future enterprises are to be under-taken with partner agrochemical industries interested in producing novel crop protec-tion agents against fungal pathogens. From a more general perspective, crop protection agents against insects and invasive weeds are being devised similarly in both academia and industry, suggesting that sustainable agricultural practices are possible in the 21st century.

M. Soledade C. Pedras, MCIC, is a chemistry

professor at the University of Saskatchewan.

She was recently appointed a Canada Research

Chair in Bioorganic and Agricultural Chemistry,

Tier I. She won the Clara Benson Award,

Canadian Society for Chemistry in 2003.

Pesticide and crop protection facts • Pesticide is a broad term that defines all

chemical substances used to control insects ,

diseases, weeds, fungi, and other “pests”

on plants, fruits, vegetables , animals, and in

buildings. Fungicides , herbicides, sanitizers ,

growth regulators , rodenticides , soil fumi-

gants, and insecticides are all pesticides.

• Crop protection products are one of the

most strictly regulated products in Canada .

Health Canada’s stringent regulatory system

ensures pesticides are safe for human health

and the environment .

• Without crop protection products, it is esti-

mated that current world fruit and vegetable

production would decline by as much as

40 percent and fruit and vegetable prices

would increase by up to 70 percent.

Pesticide use in Canada• Modern pesticides allow Canadian farmers to compete with other agricultural economies,

ensuring the survival of one of our country’s most important industries.

• Pesticides are instrumental to North Americans having one of the lowest cost food supplies in

the world. Without them, food production in Canada would decrease by up to 40 percent, and

production costs would increase by over 30 percent.

• Due to climate, the crops produced, and relatively low infestation levels, pesticide use in Canada

is lower than in many other regions of the world. Canada applies only 6 percent of the total

volume of pesticides used in the U.S., 10 percent of the European Union, and 20 percent com-

pared to Latin America.

Farmers and other professional users aim

to minimize their use of pesticides for both

environmental and economic reasons.

In addition , increasingly sophisticated

application equipment and satellite imaging

technology is used to apply crop protection

products more precisely and only where

necessary in each field.

CropLife Canada

Worldwide use of pesticides


Anthropogenically synthesized pesticides constitute a number of different structural types—the principal ones being triazines, organochlorines, carbamates, and organophos-

phorus pesticides.2 A number of reviews, including structure-activity correlations, are available to the interested reader.2–5 This article is restricted to consideration of organophosphorus (OP) pesticides, which constitute the largest class of pesticides synthesized with 63 compounds currently in use globally. While less persistent in the environment than organochlorine pesticides, their usage in recent years is being restricted by government agencies in both Canada and the U.S. due to concerns about the effects of OP derivatives on humans and other organisms. In Canada, some of the most widely used pesticides employed for crop and forest protection are: azinphos-methyl, diazinon, fenitrothion, pirimiphos-methyl, trichlorfon , dichlorvos, and glyphosate.2,5

The majority of OP pesticides can be classified structurally into four groups (Figure 1): phosphate (1); phosphorothiolate

(2); phosphorothionate (3); and phosphorodithionate (4). Note that the first two groups contain the P=O moiety, while the latter two contain the P=S moiety.

Figure 1. Chemical structures representing the four most common groups of organophosphorus pesticides

PESTICIDE PATHWAYSClose chemical consideration of the hydrolytic degradation of organophosphorus pesticides will lead to refined environmental risk assessment Erwin Buncel, FCIC, Gary W. Van Loon, FCIC, and their graduate student co-workers

Photo by Kristofer Schwab


While the relative safety of biocides when applied to soil or aquatic environments depends on a variety of factors, knowledge of their environmental persistence is of critical importance for the purposes of environmental risk assessment.6 Environ-mental persistence is essentially the time period required for the degradation of the biocide in the environment (soil/water) at ambient temperature and pH, and is usually expressed as a half-life (t1/2). Among the factors that influence the t1/2 values are the presence of particular metals (either dissolved or present in soil as insoluble ox-ides/hydroxides), the organic matter (OM) content of the soil, its content of micro organisms , and exposure to sunlight.5

For many pesticides, widely different methodologies have been used, both in the laboratory and in the field, to perform degradation studies. Laboratory studies include investigations of aqueous (alkaline /acidic) hydrolysis, metal ion catalyzed hydrolysis , micellar catalyzed hydrolysis, enzymatic hydrolysis, microbial degradation, oxidation/reduction, and photochemical degradation. Laboratory studies conducted under both homogenous and heterogenous conditions have also been reported.

In addition to environmental persistence , another issue whose importance in the environmental risk assessment process is now beginning to be recognized is the need to iden-tify the products formed upon degradation of the parent compound.6 In some cases, the degradation product possesses a higher toxic-ity than the parent compound, as is seen in the degradation of triclorfon to form the more toxic dichlorvos. Although the degradation of OP pesticides has received considerable attention , information on the multiplicity of

available reaction pathways has, until recently, received less emphasis. Several case studies are highlighted herein, with proposed reaction pathways and mechanisms.

Hydrolysis of OP pesticides under environmental conditions, i.e., in soil/water systems, generally occurs at neutral pH. Laboratory hydrolyses have been conducted at pHs both above and below the neutral region . The reactive species are then HO-/H2O and H+/H2O, respectively, and reaction can take place at electrophilic (Lewis acid) and nucleophilic (Lewis base) centres on the OP molecule, respectively. While the phosphorus centre is the most commonly encountered electrophilic site, reaction can take place at other electrophilic sites, such as at carbon centres. Under acidic conditions , protonation can occur on phosphoryl-oxygen or -sulfur, or on nitrogen centres . The initial protonation, or interaction (Lewis acid/base) with metal ions is then followed (or is concurrent ) with reaction by the nucleophilic species present —normally H2O. Such a mechanism has been shown to be operative in the acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of diazinon.7

Fenitrothion

Reaction of the widely used OP pesticide fenitrothion (5) with a nucleophilic agent is

illustrated in Figure 2.1 As would be expected, the SN2(P) pathway at the electropositive phosphorus centre generally dominates and in fact is the only pathway detected with the OH-/H2O system. However, the SN2(C) path-way competes at neutral pH8 and with a “soft” nucleophile such as I- or Br-, and also in a cet-yltrimethylammonium (CTA) micellar system.1 In OH-/H2O, the SNAr pathway is indistinguish-able from SN2(P) since both produce identical products ; however, on changing the base/sol-vent to EtO-/EtOH, the SNAr route is observed as a minor (≤10 percent ) pathway.1

Quinalphos

A good example of an OP pesticide where a combination of different analytical methodologies has served successfully towards illuminating hydrolytic/catalytic pathways is quinalphos (6).9 In fact, in our laboratory, a combination of NMR (1H, 31P), MS and kinetics (UV/Vis and LC), in absence

and presence of metal ions (Ag+, Cu2+, Hg2+, etc.) has served to shed light on the catalytic mechanisms involved (Figure 3). This has led to the postulate of a 6-membered

despite the fact that

OP pesticides have

been heavily used for

decades, the mechanisms

whereby these

compounds degrade are

only now beginning to be

understood

Figure 2. Competitive reaction pathways for the decomposition of fenitrothion (5)1

Figure 3. An illustration of the catalytic complex formed between Mn+ and quinalphos (6) prior to lkaline hydrolysis 9


complex with coordination of Mn+ to both S and N, which increases the electrophilic character of P and thereby makes degradation via nucleophilic attack by OH-/H2O more energetically favourable.

Phosmet

The final case study is the alkaline degrada-tion of phosmet (7), which is of interest since it has four possible electrophilic centres.12 In fact, the preferred pathway in the reac-tion with OH-/H2O is not by reaction at the P centre or in SN2(C) processes but, rather,

at the carbonyl center (Figure 4). The phos-phorus-containing product of the reaction is O,O-dimethylphosphorodithioate (8) and the eventual organic product is the anion of phthalamic acid.

As the foregoing case studies illustrate, despite the fact that OP pesticides have been heavily used for decades, the mechanisms whereby these compounds degrade are only

now beginning to be understood. Through the use of a multitude of experimental techniques and analytical methodologies , our group is continually surprised as we uncover a rich diversity of competing reaction pathways and as we gain fresh understanding of how these pathways can be catalyzed. We believe that the knowledge to be gained by continuing these investigations will undeniably assist regulatory agencies to refine their environmental risk assessments and better balance the needs of agricultural productivity against those of environmental protection.

References

1. This article is part of a series on “Mech-anisms of abiotic degradation and soil-water interactions of pesticides and other hydrophobic organic compounds ,” authored by Gary W. Van Loon, Erwin Buncel and their graduate student co-workers *, based on the combined

approach of environmental science and physical organic chemistry; for example, see V. K. Balakrishnan, X. Han, G. W. Van Loon, J. M. Dust, J. Toullec and E. Buncel , Langmuir 20, 6586 (2004).

2. G. W. Van Loon and S. J. Duffy. Environmental Chemistry: A Global Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2000).

3. M. J. Pregel, E. J. Dunn, R. Nagelkerke, G. R. J. Thatcher, and E. Buncel, Chem. Soc. Rev. 449 (1995).

4. A. Blasko and T.C. Bruice, Acc. Chem. Res. 32, 475 (1999).

5. S. O. Pehkonen and Q. Zhang, Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32, 17 (2002).

6. J. P. Bound and N. Voulvoulis, Chemosphere 56, 1143 (2004).

7. D. C. Churchill, PhD Thesis, Queen’s University, 2004.

8. R. J. Maguire and E. J. Hale., J. Agric. Food Chem. 28, 372 (1980).

9. Abdelhamid Esbata, PhD Thesis, Queen’s University, 2004.

10. Wei Fang, MSc Thesis, Queen’s University , 2004.

Erwin Buncel, FCIC, is a professor

emeritus in physical organic chemistry

at Queen’s University in Kingston, ON.

Gary W. Van Loon, FCIC, is a professor

of environmental and analytical

chemistry at Queen’s.

* Contributing graduate students

include Vimal Balakrishnan, MCIC,

Erin Chambers, ACIC, Doreen

Churchill, MCIC, Abdelhamid Esbata,

Wei Fang, MCIC, Eric Kiepek, ACIC,

Olukayode Oketunde, Emegbero Omakor,

and Salma Shirin.

Figure 4. Reaction pathways observed in the alkaline hydrolysis of phosmet (7)10

The Chemical Education Trust Fund (CETF) has undergone a signifi-cant change. Indeed, as of January 2005, the CETF has been renamed the CIC Chemical Education Fund (CEF) and is now a registered chari-table corporation under the Income Tax Act, with an expanded role in areas such as Public Understanding of Chemistry.

The CEF will continue the work of the former CETF. Funding is made available from individual member donations and from earnings on trust fund balances accumulated from the generous contributions of the chemical industry over many years. The object is to advance education in science and technology, particularly in the areas of chemical sciences, chemical engineering, chemical technology, and related disciplines.

If you have an interesting science project with a strong educational component, maybe the CEF can help you realize it. The CEF directors are always looking for new ideas and new projects. Grant applica-tions should be submitted by December 15 for the following year’s approval. For more information about the CEF and the grant applica-tion form, visit www.cheminst.ca/funding/cic_cef__e.htm

The 2005 grant recipients include:• Youth Science Foundation’s Canada-Wide Science Fair;• Virtual Science Fair;• CSC’s four student regional conferences;• CSChE’s student program at the Canadian Chemical Engineering

Conference;• CSCT’s student symposiums and Career Symposium

at the Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference;• Banff Symposium on Organic Chemistry;• Public Understanding of Chemistry’s elementary school

marketing campaign;• EC4U, Simon Fraser University’s “Experimental Chemistry

For Us” project for grades 4–7;• Big Little Science Centre of Kamloops, BC, project to bring

hands-on chemistry experiments to the general public.

The NEW CIC Chemical Education Fund

Anne Alper, FCICH. Anderson, FCIC

M. T. Antoniades, MCICMargaret-Ann Armour, FCIC

Gordon Bates, MCICNeil Bays, MCIC

L. Bortolin, MCICAnthony Brown, MCICR. Peter Brown, MCIC

Walter Brown, FCICT. M. Callaghan, MCIC

James Carroll, MCICFrancis Chubb, FCICHoward Clark, FCIC

F. Cooper, MCICF. Crowne, MCIC

Amedeo De Rege, MCICPatrick Draper, FCIC

T. Eastwood, FCICChien Fong, MCIC

George Fraser, MCIC J. Grossert, FCIC

Ronald Haines, MCICJ. Hanson, MCIC

W. Harrison, FCICF. Harrison, MCIC

Owen Holmes, FCICT. Jacob, MCIC

W. David Jamieson, FCICFrank Jefferson, MCICHarry Krokosh, MCIC

Ulrich Krull, FCICE. Ladniak, MCICW. Larisch, MCIC

S. Liang, MCICJ. Matthews, MCIC

Murray McAndrew, MCIC

The CEF directors would like to thank the

generous donations to the Fund from the following members :

Archibald McCulloch, FCICEric Mead, FCICH. Meyer, FCICT. H. Glynn Michael, FCICD. Mutton, FCICE. Nenniger, MCICBrian Newbold, FCICW. Phalen, MCICJudith Poë, FCICHarold Quinn, FCICA. Ramella, MCICAllan Reddoch, MCICMaurice Ryant, FCICMichel Senez, MCICD. Shearer, FCICJet Sieh, MCICG. Skinner, MCICDonald Smith, FCICF. Southam, FCICR. Stewart, FCICS. Takahashi, MCICJosef Takats, FCICK. Thompson, FCICL. Tod, FCICClinton Waggoner, MCICMary Anne White, FCICAlfred Wikjord, MCICDavid Wiles, FCICH. Winnett, MCICTabitha Wood, ACIC

2005 CEF donors


CIC BULLETIN ICC


CSC BULLETIN SCC

The Canadian National Committee for IUPAC (CNC/IUPAC) established a program of Travel Awards for young Canadian scientists in 1982. These awards are financed jointly by the Canadian Society for Chemistry’s Gendron Fund and by CNC/IUPAC’s Company Associates (Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Inc., Merck Frosst Canada Inc., and Bruker Biospin Ltd.) The purpose of these awards is to help young Canadian scientists and engineers , who should be within 10 years of gaining their PhD, present a paper at an IUPAC-sponsored conference outside Canada and the U.S. Deadline for receipt of applications: Oc-tober 14, 2005. Details of the applications procedures can be found at: www.cnc-iupac.org.

Le Comité national canadien de l’Union internationale de chimie pure et appliquée (CNC/UICPA) remet des bourses de voyage aux jeunes scientifiques canadiens depuis 1982. Ces bourses sont subventionées par le Fonds Gendron (administré par la Société canadienne de chimie) et par les compagnies associées au CNC/UICPA (Boehringer Ingel-heim (Canada) Inc., Merck Frosst Canada Inc. et Bruker Biospin Ltd.) L’objectif de ces bourses est de venir en aide aux jeunes scientifiques et ingénieurs canadiens, qui sont à moins de 10 ans de l’obtention de leur doctorat, afin de leur permettre de présenter leurs travaux lors d’une conférence commanditée par l’UICPA à l’extérieur du Canada et des États-Unis. Date limite pour postuler : le 14 octobre 2005. Renseigne-ments supplémentaires : www.cnc-iupac.org.

CNC/IUPAC TRAVEL AWARDSBOURSES DE VOYAGE DU CNC/UICPA

Winners for 2005Hélène Lebel, MCIC, is an assistant professor of chemistry at the Université de Montréal. She received her BSc degree in biochemistry from the Université Laval in 1993. She then started her PhD in organic chemistry in the Université de Montréal’s chemistry department under the supervis ion of André B. Charette , MCIC, as a 1967 Science and Engineering NSERC Fellow. During her graduate

studies, she worked at the development of new methodologies for the stereoselective cyclopropanation of allylic alcohols and she performed the total enantioselective synthesis of a natural polycyclopropane, (+)-U-106305. In 1998, she joined the research group of Eric Jacob-sen at Harvard University as an NSERC Postdoctoral Fellow where she completed the total enantioselective synthesis of Taurospongin A. As an assistant professor, Lebel was the recipient of a University Faculty Award (1999–2004) from NSERC. She has also received the Boehringer Ingelheim Young Investigator Award (2001), the Synthesis-Synlett-Journals Award (2001), and the Research Corporation Award (2001–2002). The CNC/IUPAC Travel Award will allow her to attend the 13th IUPAC International Symposium on Organometallic Chem-istry Directed Towards Organic Synthesis in Geneva , Switzerland, in July 2005.

Cory Pye attended Cabrini High School and Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook, NL. He graduated from Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN) in 1992 (BSc Honours , chemistry and applied mathemat-ics), carrying out computational organic chemistry with Raymond Poirier, FCIC, and Jean Burnell , MCIC. Whi le pursuing his studies of geometry optimiza-tion for his doctorate at MUN,

he began collaborating with Wolfram Rudolph, MCIC, a Raman spectroscopist . During a two-year postdoctoral stint with Tom Ziegler, FCIC, in Calgary , AB, the COSMO solvation model was implemented in the ADF package and applied to the study of ion pairing in olefin polymerization catalysts. In September 1999 he accepted a position at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, NS. He was recently promoted to associate professor and currently sits on the university’s Senate and Board of Governors. His research includes the theoretical study of ion pairing in aqueous solution. Pye will use his travel award to attend the International Conference on Solution Chemistry in Portoroz, Slovenia, in August 2005.


CSC BULLETIN SCC

Kevin Smith is an assistant professor of chemistry at the University of Prince Edward Island . His research is focused on the synthesis and reactivity of paramagnetic organometallic chro-mium compounds of relevance to catalytic carbon-carbon bond forming reactions. Smith received his BSc from the University of Toronto , and completed his PhD in 1998, working with Peter Legz-

dins, FCIC, at The University of British Columbia. From 1998 to 2000, Smith was a Marie Curie TMR Postdoctoral Fellow in the group of Rinaldo Poli at the Université de Bourgogne in France. Smith will use his CNC/IUPAC Travel Award to attend the 13th IUPAC Symposium on Organometallic Chemistry Directed Towards Organic Synthesis in Geneva, Switzerland, in July 2005.

Yan Alexander Wang, MCIC, is an assistant professor of chem-istry at The University of British Columbia (UBC). He received his PhD in chemical physics from Indiana University at Blooming-ton in 1995 under the supervision of Ernest R. Davidson . He was a postdoctoral fellow at the Univer-sity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with Robert G. Parr from 1995 to 1997 and UCLA with

Emily A. Carter from 1997 to 2001. Since joining UBC in August 2001, he has been actively conducting his research in the three fronts of theoretical chemistry: fundamental theory; method development; and state-of-the-art applications including functional derivative, chemical potential, embedding method, orbital-free density functional theory, molecular simulation, and modelling of chemical reactions in biologi-cal systems and on nanomaterials. He will use his CNC/IUPAC Travel Award to present a paper about his research of nanotube chemistry at the IUPAC 40th Congress in Beijing, China, in August 2005.

REQUEST FOR READER RESPONSEWhat do you think of our name:L�Actualité chimique canadienne/Canadian Chemical News(ACCN)?

A publication of the CIC/Une publication de l�ICCACCN

Send your reply to

[email protected]

Does it suit the magazine? Does it represent our readers?

Would you change the name? Why?

What would you change it to?

Action will not necessarily be taken but your opinion counts!


CSCT BULLETIN SCTC

November 2004 completed my two-year term as president of the Canadian Society for Chemical Technology (CSCT), a constituent society of The Chemical Institute of Canada (CIC). This is my report on some of the CSCT’s accomplishments and challenges during those two years, as well as a glimpse, perhaps, of what the future may hold for us.

Governance and finances

In 2002, the CSCT Board adopted a strategic plan prioritizing some of the Society’s objectives. The CSCT Board has tried to take a port-folio approach to sharing the workload of implementing this plan, which has been moderately successful. One fact that CSCT members must keep in mind is that the Board of Directors consists entirely of volunteers. We all have “day jobs,” but are rewarded by a sense of contributing to the future of the chemical professions in Canada . One of the unfortunate developments in recent years has been the increasing reluctance of employers to allow, let alone support, professionals —of any sort—who work for them, to participate in the activities of their respective professional organizations.

The CSCT is on a more sound financial footing than two years ago. In November 2002, we had an accumulated debt to the CIC of about $5,000 (a significant amount for an organization of our size), which by the end of 2004 we have been able to virtually eliminate. Although this improvement happened during my watch, I will not take credit;

it was due to the efforts of all CSCT Board members and most espe-cially the constant assistance, advice, and efforts of CIC executive director, Roland Andersson, MCIC. However, continuing caution is required. One failed event is all that it would take to reverse this positive financial trend.

CSCT strengths and accomplishments

There have been a variety of student activities organized over the last two years. Student symposia held at the Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology (SIAST), the British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT), the Northern Alberta Institute of Tech-nology (NAIT), and Mohawk College were highly successful. However, these represent only a handful of the many colleges and universities in Canada where future chemical technologists are being educated. We need chemistry professors and student organizers in our colleges and universities to help to organize or sustain Student Chapters. This is often where future chemical professionals first hear of the CIC, and this is where the future of the CSCT will be built. Student symposia have been very useful in encouraging students to join the CSCT.

Professional development seminars and career symposia were also successful. Over 75 participants attended the 2003 Career Symposium in Hamilton, ON, and planning is underway for one in Toronto in October 2005 in conjunction with the Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference. Our Laboratory Safety and Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy courses continue to draw good attendance. There are major plans for in-house courses in 2005. Besides provid-ing a valuable service to our members, the modest registration fees for these seminars are an essential source of revenue for the CSCT.

The CIC has been taking more of a public position on science policy questions and scientific issues. The CSCT is proud to be a part of this effort and assisted at both the Partnership Group for Science and Engineering (PAGSE) and the Canadian Consortium for Research (CCR). A strong CIC helps keep the profile of Canadian chemical pro-fessionals high in Canada and around the world as was demonstrated at the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) Conference hosted in Ottawa in 2003.

I would also mention that I am proud to have had the opportunity to work with the CIC committee that produced the recent revi-sion of the Laboratory Health and Safety Guidelines. The book is of direct relevance to many if not most CSCT members, and has been

CANADIAN SOCIETY FOR CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGYPRESIDENT�S REPORT (2003�2004)


CSCT BULLETIN SCTC

a big seller for the CIC. No summary of the accomplishments of the CSCT and its parent organization the CIC would be complete without mention of the CIC’s superb publication, L’Actualité chimique canadienne /Canadian Chemical News (ACCN).

Challenges

The CSCT is surviving in challenging times, but must remain focused on who we are and how we can best serve our members. Some of the challenges we face:

1. Community colleges have been busily “re-branding” their chemical technology programs as environmental technology or biotechnol-ogy programs. Graduates of these programs have essentially the same skill sets as chemical technologists and are eligible to be members of the Society. However, the re-branding has created the false impression that the CIC, and in particular the CSCT, is “not for them.” What is the benefit for Canada of this extensive re-branding , given that there is projected to be a shortage of skilled chemical technicians and technologists in the near future?

2. The CSCT has been involved in the accreditation of chemical technology programs at colleges in Canada, through the Canadian Technology Accreditation Board (CTAB) and its parent body, the Canadian Council of Technicians and Technologists (CCTT). In conjunction with colleges from across Canada, CTAB organizes accreditation teams to compare technology programs against national standards. Two of the CSCT Board members are lead assessors. The re-branding discussed above has in part been addressed by our participation in reviews of chemical, environ-mental, industrial and pulp and paper programs. The tie between CTAB and CSCT ensures our members entering the professional field are qualified. Industry recognizes graduates from programs with accreditation status. Why list this otherwise successful effort under “challenges?” The CCTT and CTAB include provincial tech-nologists’ associations that have been competing with the CSCT for membership, and the whole effort has been plagued with rather vicious internal politics of late.

3. Compared to many not-for-profit membership-driven organiza-tions, the CSCT is relatively small. Even the CIC that we form a part of can only be considered a medium-sized organiza-tion of 6,000 members. It is incumbent upon all not-for-profit

organizations to structure themselves in the most efficient man-ner possible, and I believe that the current governance structures can improved to allow greater efficiency allowing for more time to conduct programs and activities. A much-needed discussion on the structure and governance of the CIC, and the CSCT within it, has begun but it will be difficult to produce a consensus. We must all remember that this question will not go away and members can expect to hear more of it in the future.

4. The CSCT needs to thoroughly re-evaluate and make better use of promotional tools, including the prized CSCT designation of “Certified Chemical Technologist” (cCT), Fellowships in the CIC, awards, prizes, and student competitions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to remind all CSCT members that the CIC and the CSCT belong to you. Get involved! It is my hope that CSCT members will take an interest in, and participate actively in, one or more of the Subject Divisions they can join. From purely scientific and technical discussions to process safety management and green chemistry, there should be a Subject Division of inter-est to every member. There are many activities you can support, such as National Chemistry Week. There are Local Sections in many parts of the country that you can be join. Perhaps you would like to help guide your Society—if you are interested in serving on the CSCT Board of Directors, contact any one of the present directors and discuss it with her or him!

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my fellow CSCT Board members: Tom Sutton, FCIC, Murray Watt, MCIC, Cathy Cardy, MCIC, Joffre Berry, MCIC, Kevin Ferris, MCIC, Grant Stephen, MCIC, Aminmohamed Hirji, MCIC, and Ovie Ekewenu, MCIC, for their sup-port and assistance during my term as president. On behalf of all CSCT members, I welcome incoming CSCT president Tom Sutton. He knows that I stand ready to support and assist him in fulfilling his office. I would also like to particularly thank Roland Andersson, and all of the staff of the CIC National Office, who work constantly for the benefit of all CIC members and whose achievements, with limited resources , are nothing less than amazing. Without their efforts , I could not have successfully completed my term. Thank you to every-one, it has been an honour to have served you.

Brian Kohler, MCIC, cCT

January 2005

26 L�ACTUALITÉ CHIMIQUE CANADIENNE AVRIL 200526 L�ACTUALITÉ CHIMIQUE CANADIENNE AVRIL 2005

The CIC is proud to announce the 2004 Silver Medal winners. The medals are awarded on behalf of each Society.

CSC Silver Medal winnersThe Canadian Society for Chemistry encourages undergraduate students in chemistry and related subjects by offering an award to the student with the highest marks, entering his or her final

year of studies at each chemistry and/or biochemistry department in Canada . The CSC Medal consists of an engraved medal and a

certificate of merit. The Society offers its congratulations to those students who received the CSC Silver Medal.

Gagnants de la médaille d�argent de la SCCLa SCC souligne les efforts des étudiants de premier cycle en chimie

ou autres matières connexes en décernant un prix à l’étudiant(e) qui aura obtenu(e) les meilleurs résultats scolaires à son avant-

dernière année d’études dans un programme canadien conduissant à l’obtention d’un diplôme en chimie ou en biochemie. Le prix de

la SCC comprend une médaille gravée, accompagnée d’un certificat de mérite. La Société tient à féliciter les étudiants suivants qui ont

mérité cette médaille.

Acadia University (chemistry)Megan Layne Brown and Cara Elizabeth Davies

Carleton University (chemistry)Graydon Snider

Dalhousie University (chemistry)Thomas Tran

The King’s University College (chemistry)Samuel Zondervan

McGill University (biochemistry)Idy Wan Ting Ko

McGill University (chemistry)Yoshihiro Ishihara

McMaster University (chemistry)Hitesh Bhanabhai

McMaster University (biochemistry)Adeel Mahmood

Ryerson University (chemistry)Nirojini Sivachandran

Sir Wilfred Grenfell College (environmental chemistry)Candace Ford

St. Francis Xavier University (chemistry)Michael M. Mohareb

Université de Moncton (biochimie)Catherine Thériault

Université de Moncton (chimie)André Pelletier

Université du Québec à Chicoutimi (chimie)Carole Grenon

Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (chimie et biochimie)Josée Provencher-Mandeville

University College of Cape Breton (Bachelor of Technology, chemical science)Lori Lee Jessome

The University College of the Cariboo (chemistry)Sachiko S. Takahashi

Silver Medalists Honoured

STUDENT NEWS/NOUVELLES DES ÉTUDIANTS

Geoffrey Rayner-Canham, FCIC (left), and Lois Bateman, head of science at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, present the silver medal to Candace Ford (centre).



University College of the Fraser Valley (chemistry)Lisa Ego

University of Alberta (chemistry)Robbie Nissen

The University of British Columbia (combined honours chemical physics)

Gerald Li

The University of Calgary (chemistry)Jeffrey Francis Van Humbeck

University of Guelph (chemistry)Melissa Ballantine

University of Guelph (applied pharmaceutical chemistry)Patricia Taylor

The University of Manitoba (chemistry)Laina Michelle Geary

University of New Brunswick (chemistry)Amanda Finn

The University of Regina (chemistry)David Ruettger

University of Saskatchewan (chemistry)Grant Bare

University of Toronto (chemistry)Matthew Graham

University of Toronto–Mississauga (biological chemistry)Juliane Kitevski

University of Toronto–Scarborough (chemistry)Grace Shen-Tu

University of Victoria (chemistry)Katie Mary Beleznay

University of Windsor (chemistry)Aaron Rossini

University of Windsor (biochemistry)Erica Scratch

York University (chemistry)Christopher Godbout

CSChE Medal winnersIn addition to the medal and certificate of merit offered by all the societies, the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering awards an additional prize of $50 and a one-year membership to the CSChE. Winners have achieved top marks in their third year of a chemical engineering program. The Society wishes to congratulate those students who received the CSChE Medal.

Gagnants de la médaille de la SCGChLa SCGCh décerne comme toutes les autres sociétés des médailles et certificats de mérite. Cependant, elle désire accorder un prix additionel de 50 $ et un inscription de la SCGCh, aux étudiants qui auront obtenu les meilleurs résultats scolaires à leur avant-dernière année d’études dans une programme approuvé de génie chimique. La Société désire féliciter les étudiants suivants qui ont mérité la médaille de la SCGCh.

Dalhousie UniversityJeffrey MacDonald

McMaster UniversityKerry Shaw

Royal Military College of CanadaChrstopher Patrick Oldroyd

Ryerson UniversityAleksey Tabachnik

Université de SherbrookeMarie-Ève Marquis University of AlbertaThulasy Balasubramaniam

University of CalgaryVictoria Jane Rasmuson

University of SaskatchewanCraig Twardzik

University of TorontoPeter Messih


CSCT Medal WinnersThe Canadian Society for Chemical Technology extends

congratulations to those students attending community college or CEGEP, who received the Society’s medal. The students

listed have achieved top marks in a CSCT accredited chemical, biochemical, or chemical engineering technology program.

Gagnants de la médaille de la SCTCLa SCTC tient à féliciter les étudiants suivants qui se sont vu

décerner la médaille de la Société. Ces étudiants des au colleges communautaires ont obtenu les meilleurs résultats scolaires tout

au cours de leur programme de technologie chimique, biochimique ou technologie génie chimique, approuvé par la Société.

British Columbia Institute of Technology (chemical technology)Heather White

Centennial College (biotechnology)Amrik Dhaliwal

Collège Ahuntsic (technologie chimique / biochimique)Patrick Côté et Annie Thibault

Dawson College (chemical technology)Bradley Sabat

Durham College (food/drug technology)Lara Bailie

Durham College (chemical engineering technology)Caroline Lee

Durham College (environmental technology)Caroline Lee

Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning (chemical engineering technology)

Bernard Osei

Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning (chemical laboratory technology)

Partinder Bhalla

Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology (chemical engineering technology)

Melanie Poole


Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology (environmental technician)Melissa Miller

New Brunswick Community College (chemical technology)Jeff Landry

Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (chemical technology)Amanda Niederhaus

Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology (chemical engineering technology)Michael Strantzas

Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology (pharmaceutical technology)Angela Carruthers

Sheridan College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning (chemical engineering technology–environmental)Rehab Khashif

Sheridan College (chemical engineering technology)Ryan Draper

csche scholarship deadlineThe Edmonton Chemical Engineering

Scholarship and the Sarnia Chemical

Engineering Community Scholarship

deadline for submissions is April 30, 2005.

For details about each of these scholarships,

visit www.chemeng.ca/students/awards/

csche_termsofref__e.htm.


CAREERS CARRIÈRES

Share your CIC memories and memorabilia

with ACCN.

Send your materials to [email protected]


Please label each piece with your name,

a caption , and your complete address


R E M E M B E R W H E N ? SHARE YOUR MEMORIES!


Call for Nominations to the Canadian Science and Engineering Hall of Fame

The Canadian Science and Engineering Hall of Fame was created in 1991 and is now part of the Canada Science and Technology Museum in Ottawa, ON.

The objectives are to honour Canadians who have made outstanding contributions to society in developing science and engineering ,and to promote role models that will help attract young Canadians to careers in science, engineering, and technology.

Nominations for induction to this Hall of Fame can be made by individuals and organiza-tions. Nominations of exceptional chemists, past or present, will be considered. Two or three inductees are selected every year. Inductees will join the ranks of Gerhard Herzberg , HFCIC; J. C. Polanyi , HFCIC; Raymond Lemieux, HFCIC; and Michael Smith, HFCIC.

Nominations should include as much supporting documentation as possible . The Inductee Selection Committee consists of people from various disciplines , and hence the nomination should be prepared with utmost care and details . Details about the Hall of Fame and the nomination process are available at www.sciencetech.technomuses.ca/english/about/ hallfame/u_main_e.cfm.

CAREERS CARRIÈRES

www.

chem

jobs.c

a

www.chemjobs.ca

LOOKING for the right

CHEMICALPOSITION?End your

SEARCH NOW!

The Chemical Institute of Canada Career Site

2006 AWARDS


Important ... Submission deadline is July 4, 2005

The Chemical Institute of Canada Medal is presented as a mark of distinction and

recognition to a person who has made an

outstanding contribution to the science

of chemistry or chemical engineering

in Canada .

Award: A medal and travel expenses.

The Montréal Medal is presented

as a mark of distinction and honour to

a resident in Canada who has shown

significant leadership in or has made

an outstanding contribution to the

profession of chemistry or chemical

engineering in Canada. In determining

the eligibility for nominations for the

award, administrative contributions

within The Chemical Institute of Canada

and other professional organizations

that contribute to the advancement of

the professions of chemistry and chemical

engineering shall be given due consid-

eration. Contributions to the sciences

of chemistry and chemical engineering

are not to be considered. Sponsored by

the Montréal CIC Section.

Award: A medal and travel expenses.

The Catalysis Award is awarded

biennially to an individual who,

while resident in Canada, has made a

distinguished contribution to the field

of catalysis. Sponsored by the Canadian

Catalysis Foundation.

Award: A rhodium-plated silver medal and

travel expenses to present the award lecture.

The Environmental Improvement Award is awarded to a Canadian com-

pany, individual , team, or organization

for a significant achievement in pollution

prevention , treatment, or remediation.

Sponsored by the Environment Division.

Award: A plaque and travel assistance.

The Macromolecular Science and Engineering Award is awarded to

an individual who, while resident in Can-

ada, has made a distinguished contribution

to macromolecular science or engineering.

Sponsored by NOVA Chemicals Ltd.

Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize

of $1,500, and travel expenses.

The CIC Award for Chemical Education (formerly the Union Carbide Award) is

awarded as a mark of recognition to a person

who has made an outstanding contribution

in Canada to education at the post-secondary

level in the field of chemistry or chemical

engineering . Sponsored by the CIC Chemical

Education Fund.

Award: A framed scroll, $1 000 cash

prize, and up to $400 travel expenses

to the annual conference .

DeadlinesThe deadline for all CIC awards is July 4,

2005 for the 2006 selection, except the

Catalysis Award, the deadline for which

is October 3, 2005 for the 2006 selection.

Nomination ProcedurePlease submit your nominations to:

Awards Coordinator


130 Slater Street, Suite 550

Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2

Tel.: 613-232-6252

Fax: 613-232-5862

[email protected]

Nomination forms and the full Terms

of Reference for these awards are avail-

able at www.cheminst.ca/awards/

cic_index_e.html.

2006 AWARDS

The Canadian Society for Chemistry

Important ... Submission deadline is July 4, 2005

The Alcan Award is awarded to a scientist residing in Canada who has made a distinguishing contribution in the fields of inorganic chemistry or electrochemistry while working in Canada. Sponsored by Alcan International Ltd. Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $2,000, and travel expenses.

The Alfred Bader Award is presented as a mark of distinction and recognition to a scientist who will not have reached the age of 60 by January 1 of the year of nomination, for excellence in research in organic chemistry carried out in Canada. Sponsored by Alfred Bader, HFCIC.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $3,000, and travel expenses.

The Award for Pure or Applied Inorganic Chemistry is awarded to a Canadian citizen or landed immigrant who has made an outstanding

contribution to industrial or academic inor-ganic chemistry while working in Canada, and who is within ten years of his or her first professional appointment as an independent researcher in an academic, government , or industrial sector. Sponsored by the Inorganic Chemistry Division.Award: A framed scroll, travel expenses for a lecture tour, and the registration fee to the CSC Conference in the year of the award to enable presentation of an award lecture at the conference.

The Boehringer Ingelheim Award is awarded to a Canadian citizen or landed immigrant whose PhD thesis in the field of organic or bioorganic chemistry was formally accepted by a Canadian univer-sity in the 12-month period preceding the nomination deadline of July 4 and whose doctoral research is judged to be of out-standing quality. Sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $2,000, and travel expenses.

The Clara Benson Award is presented in recognition of a distinguished contribution to chemistry by a woman while working in Canada. Sponsored by the Canadian Council of University Chemistry Chairs (CCUCC).Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $1,000, and travel expenses.

The Maxxam Award is awarded to a scientist residing in Canada who has made a distinguished contribution in the field of analytical chemistry while working in Canada . Sponsored by Maxxam Analytics Inc.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $1,000, and travel expenses.

The R.U. Lemieux Award is awarded to an organic chemist who has made a distin-guished contribution to any area of organic chemistry while working in Canada. Spon-sored by the Organic Chemistry Division.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $1,000, and travel expenses.

The Merck Frosst Centre for Thera-peutic Research Award is awarded to a scientist residing in Canada, who shall not have reached the age of 40 years by April 1

of the year of nomination and who has made a distinguished contribution in the fields of organic chemistry or biochemistry while working in Canada. Sponsored by Merck Frosst Canada & Co.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $2,000, and travel expenses.

The Bernard Belleau Award is presented to a scientist residing in Canada who has made a distinguished contribution to the field of medicinal chemistry through research involving biochemical or organic chemical mechanisms. Sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb Canada Co.Award: A framed scroll, $2,000 cash, and to cover travel expenses to present a lecture at the annual conference.

The E.W.R. Steacie Award is presented to a scientist residing in Canada who has made a distinguished contribution to chemistry while working in Canada. Sponsored by Sciex Inc., Division of MDS Health Group.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $2,000, and travel expenses.

The Fred Beamish Award is awarded to an individual who demonstrates innovation in research in the field of analytical chemis-try, where the research is anticipated to have significant potential for practical applications. The award is open to new faculty members at a Canadian university and they must be recent graduates with four years of appoint-ment. Sponsored by Eli Lilly Canada Inc.Award: A framed scroll, a cash prize of $1,000, and travel expenses.

DeadlineThe deadline for all CSC awards is July 4, 2005 for the 2006 selection.

Nomination Procedure Please submit your nominations to:Awards CoordinatorThe Canadian Society for Chemistry130 Slater Street, Suite 550Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2Tel.: 613-232-6252 Fax: [email protected]

Nomination forms and the full Terms of-Reference for these awards are avail-able at-www.chemistry.ca/awards/csc_index_e.html.

Canada

May 9–11, 2005. 9th Annual Advanced Process Control Appliance for Industry Workshop: APC 2005, Vancouver, BC. Contact: Guy Dumont; Web site: www.ieee-ias.org/apc2005.

June 16–19, 2005. 32nd Conference of College Chemistry Canada , St. John’s, NL. Contact: Ian McMaster; E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: www.c3.douglas.bc.ca.

July 31–August 4, 2005. 18th Biennial Chem Ed Conference, the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. Web site: http://nobel.scas.bcit.ca/chemed2005/welcome.htm.

August 16–19, 2005. 12th Canadian Semiconductor Technology Conference, National Research Council Canada and the Electronic Materials and Processing Division of the American Vacuum Society, Ottawa, ON. Web site: www.canadiansemiconductor.org .

August 19–26, 2005. 20th International Symposium on Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds (ISPAC 20), Toronto, ON. Contact : Chris Marvin; Tel.: 905-319-6919; E-mail: [email protected].

August 19–26, 2005. 25th International Symposium on Halogenated Environmental Organic Pollutants and POPs (Dioxin 2005), National Water Research Institute, Toronto, ON. Contact: Mehran Alaee; Tel.: 905-336-4752; E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: www.dioxin2005.org.

October 17–18, 2005. CSCT professional development course—ICPES–Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy. Toronto, ON. Web site: www.cheminst.ca/profdev.

October 17–18, 2005. CSCT professional development course—Laboratory Safety. Toronto, ON. Web site: www.cheminst.ca/profdev.

U.S. and OverseasJune 20–24, 2005. 2nd International Conference on Green and Sustainable Chemistry and the 9th Annual Green Chemistry and Engineering Conference, Washington, DC. Contact: Robin Rogers ; E-mail: [email protected].

July 10–14, 2005. 7th World Congress of Chemical Engineering, Glasgow, Scotland. Contact: Sarah Fitzpatrick; E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: www.chemengcongress2005 .com.

August 13–21, 2005. IUPAC 43rd General Assembly, Beijing, China. Contact: IUPAC Secretariat; Tel.: +1 919-485-8700; Fax: +1 919-485-8706; E-mail: [email protected].

EVENTS ÉVÉNEMENTS


Chao-Jun Li, MCICMcGill University

“Developing Asymmetric C-C Bond Formulations via C-H Activations”

Dennis Hall, MCICUniversity of Alberta

“Lewis Acid Activation of a Lewis Acid and Electrophilic Boronate Activation: New Concept for a Green and Practical Catalytic Enantioselective Carbonyl Allylation”

Enantioselective Synthetic Chemistry Research Program

Programme de recherche en chimie de synthèse énantiosélective

Each winner will receive $30,000 per year for a two-year period and will have the opportunity to apply for matching funds from NSERC’s Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) grants.

Chaque gagnant recevra 30 000 $ par année pendant deux ans et aura la possibilité de faire une demande de subvention d’un montant équivalent auprès du Programe de recherche et développement coopérative (RDC) du CRSNG.

Winners � Les gagnants en

Enantioselective Synthetic Chemistry Research ProgramCall for ApplicationsApplications are invited for the Enantioselective Synthetic Chemistry Research Program. It is the intention of the Enantioselective Synthetic Chemistry Research Program to support the development and application of methods for enantioselective synthetic organic chemistry and related fields such as the development of catalysts for chiral transformations, and more specifically, research projects directed to:

1. the development and application of methods for enantioselective synthetic organic chemistry and related fields;

2. the development of novel catalysts for the formation of carbon-carbon bonds and the creation of chiral centres through functional group manipulation;

3. the development and application of novel and efficient chiral auxiliaries for functional group manipulation, alkylation, oxidation, carbon-carbon bond formation;

4. novel uses of enzymes and biosystems to perform chiral transformations;

5. kinetic resolution technologies.

Funding will normally be provided up to $30,000 per year for a two-year period.

Applicants must be Canadian citizens or permanent residents and must be researchers at a Canadian university. Joint applications from investigators with different areas of expertise (e.g. organic synthesis and polymer or organometallic chemistry) are encouraged.

Applications will be accepted until May 31, 2005, for the year 2005.

This program, sponsored by AstraZeneca Canada Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. and Merck Frosst Canada & Co., and administered by the Canadian Society for Chemistry (CSC), will provide grants to support research in chemistry and related fields.

It is expected that proposals should have potential to fulfill NSERC requirements for industrial-oriented research matching grants, and applicants are encouraged to submit their proposals to the NSERC Collaborative Research and Development Grants Program in order to obtain additional funding. The sponsoring pharmaceutical companies will support these applications.

How to apply

Please provide form 100 part I and Appendices – Personal Data – and form 101 part I – Application for a Grant (the same as a normal NSERC application). These forms are found at www.nserc.ca/forms/formtable_e.htm. Seven (7) copies of your submission, signed by your department head, are required for the peer review committee. Form 183A (ex-form 120), Information Required from Organizations Participating in Research Partnerships Programs, will be requested later only from the successful applicants.

For additional information, please contact:

Awards CoordinatorCanadian Society for Chemistry130 Slater Street, Suite 550Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2E-mail: [email protected].: 613-232-6252Fax: 613-232-5862

or visit:

www.chemistry.ca/awards/csc_index_e.html

Programme de recherche en chimie de synthèse énantiosélectiveAppel de candidaturesLa présente est un appel de candidatures pour le Programme de recherche en chimie de synthèse énantiosélective. Ce programme a pour objet d’appuyer le développement et la mise en œuvre de méthodes applicables à la chimie organique de synthèse énantiosélective et aux domaines connexes, comme le développement de catalyseurs pour les transformations chirales et, plus spécifiquement, les projets de recherche ayant pour objectifs :

1. l’élaboration et la mise en œuvre de méthodes applicables à la chimie organique de synthèse énantiosélective et aux domaines connexes;

2. l’élaboration de nouveaux catalyseurs pour la formation de liaisons carbone-carbone et la création de centres chiraux par l’entremise de la manipulation de groupes fonctionnels;

3. l’élaboration et la mise en œuvre d’auxiliaires chiraux nouveaux et efficaces pour la manipulation de groupes fonctionnels, l’alkylation, l’oxydation et la formation de liaisons carbone-carbone;

4. les utilisations nouvelles d’enzymes et de biosystèmes dans les transformations chirales;

5. les technologies de résolution cinétique.

Le financement accordé pourra normalement atteindre 30 000 $ par année pendant deux ans.

Les demandeurs doivent être des citoyens ou des résidents permanents du Canada et doivent effectuer leurs recherches dans une université canadienne. On encourage la présentation de candidatures conjointes de chercheurs de spécialités différentes (par exemple synthèse organique et chimie des polymères ou chimie organométallique).

Pour l’année 2005, les candidatures seront acceptées jusqu’au 31 mai 2005.

Ce programme, parrainé par AstraZeneca Canada Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltée. et Merck Frosst Canada & Co., et administré par la Société canadienne de chimie (SCC), accordera son soutien financier à la recherche en chimie et dans les domaines connexes. Les candidatures devraient avoir le potentiel de respecter les exigences du CRSNG pour des subventions similaires en recherche à vocation industrielle, et l’on encourage les demandeurs à soumettre leurs proposi-tions au Programme de subventions de recherche et développement coopérative du CRSNG afin d’obtenir un financement supplémentaire. Les compagnies pharmaceutiques qui parrainent le programme appuieront ces candidatures.

Comment soumettre sa candidature

Les demandeurs doivent fournir le formulaire 100, Formulaire de renseignements personnels – Partie 1 et annexes, et le formulaire 101, Demande de subvention – Partie 1 (comme pour toute demande au CRNSG). Ces formulaires se trouvent à l’adresse www.nserc.ca/forms/formtable2_f.htm. Vous devez fournir sept (7) exemplaires de votre demande signés pas le directeur de votre département pour le comité d’évaluation par les pairs. Le formulaire 183A (anciennement formulaire 120), Renseignements requis des organismes participant aux programmes de partenariats de recherche, sera exigé ultérieurement des demandeurs qui auront été acceptés.

Pour obtenir plus de détails, veuillez communiquer avec :

Coordonnatrice des prixSociété canadienne de chimie130, rue Slater, bureau 550Ottawa (Ontario) K1P 6E2Courriel : [email protected] • Tél. : 613-232-6252 • Téléc. : 613-232-5862

ou visitez :

www.chemistry.ca/awards/csc_index_e.html

ADVERTISEMENT �For information/comments please see www.chem.ucalgary.ca/csc2000/milestones.htm

PM40021620

Documents

Apr 2005: ACCN, the Canadian Chemical News