These four, together with Joe Howard(currently at the University of Washingtonin Seattle), will be the directors of the newinstitute, with approximately 20 other,non-tenured staff members runningfurther research groups, many of whomhave already been appointed. The locationof the MPI-CBG makes it an ideal resourcefor researchers from central Europe, andclose cooperation is intended with thosein the Czech Republic, Hungary, Polandand Slovak Republic. The beautifullocation of Dresden will also benefitgreatly from the generous gift from GünterBlobel following his award of the 1999Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine.Blobel made a large donation to theFriends of Dresden, an organizationdedicated to the reconstruction,restoration and preservation of Dresden’shistoric architecture. [D.S.]

Junior group leaders getEMBO support

The European Molecular BiologyOrganization (EMBO) has launched a‘Young Investigator Program’ that aims toselect young group leaders in Europe andboost their careers. Selected scientistswithin the first three years of starting anindependent laboratory will be awarded anannual grant of Eu15 000 for a period ofthree years. EMBO’s recognition of theresearcher’s scientific merit willdistinguish him or her by labelling theirgroups as EMBO Research Groups, whichis likely to facilitate their grant hunt bothlocally and internationally. One of thelonger-term aims of the scheme is toestablish a network of EMBO YoungInvestigators and Research Groups aroundEurope that will have close collaborativeties with the centrally funded laboratory inHeidelberg. This will be achieved at least inpart by annual meetings at EMBL-Heidelberg. The EMBO-instated scientificelite is being created ‘to make Europe abetter place for young scientists and toconsolidate the concept of EuropeanScience’, according to EMBO. Further

information can be obtained at:http://www.embo.org/YIAtoppage.html[J.d.B.; D.S.]

It takes two to tangoAcademic science and industry becomeincreasingly entangled as companiessponsor academic research and scientiststake financial interest in companies. Theadvantages of this trend are clear for bothsides. Corporate money will spill over intonon-sponsored research of theinvestigator’s group, and companies canpresent their products in the light ofindependently obtained scientificevidence. However, conflicts of interestcan arise especially in the latter case. Areport in the New York Times (1 November2000) describes how a California-basedcompany, Immune Response Corporation,tried to block a publication claiming that itsHIV vaccine Remune was not effective andhas claimed $7 million from theinvestigators who published the finding.The company paid for the study and statedthat the data belonged to it. Theresearchers say, however, that the contractgave them the right to publish the datawithout the company’s permission. Withongoing commercialization of academicresearch, more problems of this calibre areto be expected, and the scientificcommunity might have to decide on clearguidelines to optimize the symbiosisbetween industry and academia. [J.d.B.]

Public library of science winssupportMany leading researchers have recentlysigned an online petition stating theirfuture intention to publish in, review forand serve on the Editorial Board only ofthose journals that make manuscriptsfreely available through ‘public’ archivingsystems six months after publication.Journals such as Molecular Biology of the Cell already make publishedmanuscripts available throughPubMedCentral in this way. The site(www.publiclibraryofscience.org) was set up by Patrick Brown of StanfordUniversity School of Medicine and Michael Eisen of the Lawrence BerkeleyNational Laboratory and University ofCalifornia at Berkeley to coordinate theefforts of scientists around the world topromote an online public library ofscience. Although gaining considerable

support from many influential scientists,such dramatic action has also met withskepticism in many groups, includingscientists and publishers. Many feel thatmaking such demands is counter-productive to the natural evolution frompaper-based publishing to electronicmedia. [D.S.]

EU research guidelines underspotlightIn October 2000, the European Unionpublished its new document outlining aproposed European Research Area.‘Making a reality of The European ResearchArea: Guidelines for EU research activities(2002–2006)’. The document addressesmany questions of value to cell biologists,but, while committing to increase publicand private sector research spending,particularly ‘large targeted researchprogrammes’, it does not address theissues of investigator-led research socrucial to life-sciences research. There is aconspicuous absence in the EU fundingportfolio of suitable ‘Career Development’-type grants for researchers towards the endof their postdoctoral career who wish toestablish their own, independent researchprogrammes. There is also considerableconcern over the complexities of puttingtogether an EU-funded research network,particularly in terms of who can and cannotbe included and how any award might bespent. These, and other points, will beaddressed by the newly formed EuropeanLife Scientist Organization (ELSO) duringlobbying and consultation prior to therelease of the EU Sixth FrameworkProgramme, due in February 2001.Meanwhile, the new document containsmany interesting ideas towards greaterintegration and cooperation of Europeanresearch resources. [D.S.]

TRENDS in Cell Biology Vol.11 No.1 January 2001

http://tcb.trends.com

17News&Comment

This month’s ‘In Brief’ articles

were written by Jan de Boer

(deboer@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk),

Sean Lawler

(seanyboyoboy@hotmail.com),

David Stephens

(david.stephens@embl-heidelberg.de)

and

Matthew Thorne

(matthew.thorne@biomednet.com).

EMBOYoung InvestigatorProgramme