Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Japanese, 2 Americans win Nobel in chemistry

KARL RITTER AND MATT MOORE

Associated Press Writers

Latest comment posted at 9:41 PM EST 10/10/08

They discovered and developed green fluorescent protein, GFP, a widely used laboratory tool. ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Joe Smith from Canada writes: This is a great choice for the Chemistry Nobel -- for years I've been thinking that Tsien was a top pick. He turned GFP and its cousins from a curiosity into an enabling tool that has fuelled a lot of major discoveries in protein chemistry, molecular biology, development, etc. Congratulations to these three.
  2. Joshua Pelletier from Timmins, Canada writes: I must agree that this is a great selection for the chemistry nobel prize. I am just curious to know if the GFP protein is used in the "FISH" technique?
  3. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    Congratulations to all involved. This fluorescent protein is a particularly excellent tool for peering in to the workings of cells, as they move and change during development and disease.

    Some additional information for layperson readers: Before this tool was developed, it was sometimes for some scientists (who looked at tissue and animals under the microscope) as if they were looking at a satellite photo of a mystery city, from above, in black and white.

    Back then, sure, you could see the outlines of the roofs on houses and you could see the roofs on factories. But it was hard to be sure what was going on inside those buildings, and it was hard to figure out where a truck was going that left the factory, or where the trucks were coming from that entered the factory.

    This fluorescent tool changed all that. Now scientists can label the items of interest so they glow bright green or glow bright red. And now, instead of looking at a crummy satellite photo, the scientists can watch over hours, like a moving movie, where the trucks go (labeled green) leaving the factory, and where the trucks are coming from (labeled red) before they get to the factory. And even, in some ways, to see the trucks while inside the factory under the roof, right through the roof.

    So now it is much easier for the scientists to figure out how things work.

    (In answer to the fellow's question above, this protein is not typically used in FISH. That technique usually uses smaller labels, based on organic chemistry (such as alexa fluor dyes), that are easily tagged onto the needed small molecules, and used on sections of killed material, rather than in living cells as is often the case with GFP.)
  4. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    Incidentally, from the perspective of journalism, I had to laugh at the way the Associated Press (AP, which is American) is wording its headlines.

    And it appears to be amusingly non-uniform, in terms of recognizing nationalities!

    This week it has been, for headlines for two different prizes:

    "One Japanese, Two Americans win Nobel chemistry prize"

    and yet

    "Nobel physics prize goes to Two Japanese, One American"

    Hello?

    Is there some kind of AP politeness rule that says that if Japanese folks are involved in a prize, they are always to be mentioned first in the headline?

    I can see the logic in naming the nationality of the two before the one, in the case of physics. But if there is a two versus one rule, why were the Americans not named first for chemistry?

    I could also see the logic in naming the one before the two, in the event that the news report made clear that the Nobel committee, or a consensus of scientists, felt that the one had done far more seminal work for the development of the application than the other two. But that possibility is certainly not spelled out in the chemistry case.

    Perhaps the AP, in subjective efforts to not appear nationalistic on behalf of the home country, is opting for headlines that place other countries' involvements foremost.

    If so, wow, some other media outlets sure do not play by that code when writing their own headlines and openers (Hello CBC! Hello Globe and Mail!)

    : )

    .
  5. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    And, but of course, hello Fox News!

    : )

    .
  6. Joe Smith from Canada writes: Joshua, FISH is indeed a fluorescence-based technique but it uses small-molecule (synthetic) fluorescent dyes and quenchers rather than proteins. (The proteins would large enough to interfere with the binding of the DNA fragments FISH uses.)
  7. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    Joe Smith from Canada writes: "FISH uses small-molecule fluorescent dyes rather than proteins - the proteins would large enough to interfere with the binding of the DNA fragments FISH uses."

    Actually, no, that explanation (size interference inhibiting annealing of strands) is not the reason that GFP is not used for FISH (which is why I worded my answer the way I did).

    FISH for research purposes is often done using secondary and tertiary labeling, in which the actual polynucleotide probe is labeled with some other small molecule (biotin or digoxin), and the actual fluorescent molecule is incorporated in later steps, either through deposition (CARD amplification) or through sandwiching (labeled antibodies and/or labeled avidin steps).

    It is in those later steps that GFP becomes problematic, largely due to its relatively more low quantum yield for size of carrier moiety and due to its higher cost for production and purification per label (not due to any interference in strand annealing during previous steps).

    .
  8. Alex Yaxmos from Canada writes: THe Japanese scientist was the person who made the discovery so he gets named first.
  9. Joe Smith from Canada writes: I wasn't aware that FISH uses secondary labelling, Tyler. Thanks for correcting me.
  10. Ricky Bobbie from Canada writes: Great news for basic research! This was curiosity-driven and took 50 years to have wide-spread application (GFP and its many spectral derivatives are widely used in biological and pharmaceutical research). Makes you wonder if the current worldwide focus on research that has clear economic or health benefit would ever support such efforts today. You want to study a glowing jellyfish? The short term return, applied research bent of our governments will waste more money than ever. If we could predict future utility, it wouldn't be research would it?
  11. Thomas Morris from New York, NY, United States writes: stupid americans.......
  12. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    JS: Yes, for research purposes, FISH often uses secondary labeling as a way of amplifying the signal of small stretch targets. For some routine diagnostic purposes, such as patient chromosome identification, large probes are often used that have a primary label incorporated.

    AY: Actually, to what you said, historically, the Nobel commonly emphasizes the development and application of an entity rather than the entity's discovery, so your explanation is not satisfying. For example, the Nobel Prize for the commonly used PCR method went to the person who developed the application, not to the person who discovered the needed molecule to make work (the heat resistant polymerase). I am not pointing that out to downplay the contribution of any member awarded the current prize, I am merely pointing out that the present article itself does not clearly indicate any reasoning underlying the chosen order of contributors in the headline.

    .
  13. The Iconoclast from Canada writes: It is clearly Roger Tsien that opened up the whole field. Note also that Roger's brother is also Nobel prize material. Richard Tsien, a Rhodes Scholar, is a very prominent neuroscientist at Stanford.
  14. Mikey Gault from working at the car wash blues, Canada writes: I was totally hoping that these guys would win.
  15. Joe Smith from Canada writes: Me too, I've been betting on Tsien (not literally betting...) for years.
    He did a lot of important work in fluorescence sensing and organic photochemistry as well.
  16. Atheist . from Canada writes: Roger Tsien is an American born Chinese. Both of his parents were from mainland China. His father is a cousin of the "Father of Chinese Rocketary", Tsien Hsue Shen aka Qian Xuesen.

    Here's an article from Aviation Week back in January 2008 that talked about Tsien Hsue Shen in detail:

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/aw010708p1.xml

    ----------------------------------------------------------

    The Iconoclast from Canada writes: It is clearly Roger Tsien that opened up the whole field. Note also that Roger's brother is also Nobel prize material. Richard Tsien, a Rhodes Scholar, is a very prominent neuroscientist at Stanford.
  17. Ms. Dolittle from Canada writes: Tyler Williams, the headlines are written by the Globe and Mail editors, not AP writers. News agencies usually don't provide headlines.
  18. umberto umeboshi from COTU, Canada writes: I congratulate the recipients of this year's chemistry Nobel, and do not wish in any way to detract from their accomplishment; they do deserve a Nobel. However, perhaps the chemistry prize could from time to time go to people who practice chemistry and not biology? There is also a medical Nobel prize, for which biological work is eligible. Yes it's tu troo, I'm a disgruntled non-biological chemist!
  19. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: .

    MD: No, to the contrary, Ms. Dolittle , the headlines were indeed written by the AP writers and not by the Globe and Mail - you can go to the official AP website and see them there for yourself.

    Individual newspaper do have the option of modifying the AP headline, and often do. But the headlines I quoted are straight off the AP press.

    UU: I hear your pain, dude, and I think you have a valid point.

    .
  20. Li Cha Dah from La la Land, Canada writes: Why were not any of these guys CFA structured product theorists (specializing in mortgage backed securities/MBS)? I gues they messed up on the correlations! Oh well, back to drawing board (while western hegemony vapourizes!).

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top