Archive for the ‘Editorial Board News’ Category

Daniel Nocera – our new Chemical Science Editor-in-Chief

We are delighted to announce Professor Daniel Nocera as the new Editor-in-Chief of Chemical Science. Daniel Nocera, the Patterson Rockwood Professor of Energy at Harvard University, has a diverse research programme and is recognised, internationally, as a pioneer and leading expert in the field of solar energy conversion.

Professor Nocera’s group has recently accomplished a solar fuels process that captures many of the elements of photosynthesis – he has now translated this science to produce the artificial leaf. This exciting discovery sets the stage for a storage mechanism for the distributed deployment of solar energy.

As we thank Professor David MacMillan for his valuable contributions to Chemical Science since its launch in 2010, we extend a warm welcome to Professor Nocera as he leads the journal towards continued success and excellence.

Professor Nocera joins us in inviting you to read Chemical Science’s first Open Access articles in Issue 1 for 2015 – one hundred cutting-edge articles showcasing exceptional research across the chemical sciences. For a limited time, these have been gathered under broad subject areas to show significant breakthroughs in each field:

Analytical Chemistry

Chemical Biology and Medicinal Chemistry

Organic Chemistry

Catalysis

Energy and Physical Chemistry

Materials

Nanoscience

Inorganic Chemistry

Chemical Science is the Royal Society of Chemistry’s flagship journal, publishing research articles of exceptional significance and high-impact reviews from across the chemical sciences. The journal’s latest (2013) Impact Factor is 8.6. Research in Chemical Science is not only of the highest quality but also has excellent visibility; this is reflected in our latest citation profile.

Submit your exceptional research to Chemical Science today!

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

A cut above the rest: the evolution and application of inteins

In this new Perspective, Chemical Science Associate Editor Tom Muir of Princeton University elucidates the biological role and evolutionary origin of inteins – a fascinating class of proteins which have the ability to “process”, or sever, their own peptide backbone. Usually, this type of post-translational modification is done enzymatically by proteases, but inteins contain a module which allows the spontaneous scission of peptide bonds with no external factor or energy source required. The only things needed are certain chemical functional groups in the neighbouring peptide residues, and the correct spatial folding of the domain.

Obviously, this is a truly interesting process, as the functions and actions of a protein are determined by its amino acid sequence and structure. By breaking peptide bonds and creating new ones, inteins essentially act as an on/off switch for the protein, the potential application for which is staggering.

The intein is flanked on either side by two exteins; during the “processing” reaction, the bonds between intein and exteins are broken, and a new bond between the exteins is created. Inteins share a common biochemical mechanism for this process, which is illustrated below. Crucially, all inteins must contain a cysteine or serine at their N-terminus which provides the nucleophile for the initial acyl shift. A subsequent trans(thio)esterification and an additional acyl shift forms the spliced product and the excised intein.

Mechanism of protein splicing

Mechanism of protein splicing

Muir and co-author Neel Shah investigate the evolutionary origin of inteins, which can be found in all domains of life – eukaryotes, bacteria, archaea and viruses. Although they are often found in proteins involved in genetic “housekeeping” – DNA replication, transcription, and maintenance – inteins have no obvious biological role, and do not provide any benefit to the host organism. As such, they are known as “selfish” genes. Despite the mystery of their purpose and origin, what is clear is that the future is bright for inteins.


The authors discuss a number of applications of inteins, the most exciting of which is conditional protein splicing (CPS) where inteins can be used as an on/off switch for the proteins they are splicing, even in vivo. CPS is currently achieved in a number of ways, shown below, in which the intein is kept in an inactive state – via (a) conformational distortion, (b) caging of the active site, or (c) the physical separation of a split intein – until activation is desired. Ligand binding, deprotection or dimerisation, respectively, then releases the active intein and triggers the peptide splicing. CPS is a promising tool for cell biology and should facilitate the development of “smart” protein therapeutics that are activated only at the target site.

All in all, this Perspective makes for an interesting read on a class of proteins with impressive potential. I think it’s a safe bet to predict that when it comes to future smart therapeutics, inteins will definitely make the cut.

Conditional protein splicing

Conditional protein splicing (CPS): a) Allosteric intein activation by ligand binding; b) Intein activation via deprotection of a photo-caged active site residue; c) Activation via chemically-induced dimerisation

For more, you can read Muir and Shah’s Chemical Science Perspective here:

Neel H. Shah and Tom W. Muir
Chem. Sci., 2014, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/C3SC52951G

Professor Muir serves as one of Chemical Science‘s Associate Editors, handling submission in chemical biology – read more about him and what useful advice he wishes someone had told him as an undergraduate.

Our Associate Editors Tom Muir and Ben Davis have highlighted their recommended chemical biology papers on Chemical Science – read their Editor’s Choice selection for FREE today!

Find many more excellent articles on chemical biology here: Online collection: Chemical biology

Ruth E. Gilligan is a guest web-writer for Chemical Science. She recently completed her PhD in the group of Prof. Matthew J. Gaunt at the University of Cambridge, and is currently pursuing an internship at Science Foundation Ireland.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

5 minutes with Haw Yang, Chemical Science Associate Editor

Haw-201308_px180.jpgHaw Yang is Associate Professor of Chemistry and Director of Graduate Studies at Princeton University, USA.  Haw and his experimental physical chemistry group work on single-molecule chemical dynamics and develop new single-molecule- and single-nanoparticle-based methods for the study of complex systems.  His team’s ultimate goal is to arrive at a level of understanding that affords a quantitative prediction of the dynamics and how they contribute to systems behaviour.

Haw serves as one of Chemical Science’s Associate Editors, handling submissions in physical chemistry.

Who or what inspired you to study physical chemistry?

Madame Curie.  I really didn’t know who she was until, as a kid, I watched a movie about her, based on her daughter’s autobiography.  That movie left a very strong impression on me because I saw her dedication and her passion for science.  And she did it, not for personal gain, but for humankind – for years, she used her discovery to cure cancer.  She went from doing fundamental research to helping humanity, and that left an enduring mark on me.

She was also very good at maths and physics and chemistry, and – because I’m a geek – this impressed me enormously, which is another reason why she became my heroine.

For you, what is the biggest and most important unanswered question in the chemical sciences?

The quantitative prediction of complex systems behaviour from first-principles understanding of atomistic and molecular actions.

Outside of science, what would your dream job be?

As I said, I’ve been a nerd, a geek, since I was a kid – I’ve never been any good at anything else.  So, if I hadn’t been able to get a job in this profession, I would have been doomed! (Laughs)

So this – what I’m doing now – is my dream job.  If I had to do it all again, I would do it exactly the same way – I would come to Princeton, and do what I’m doing right now. People pay me to do what I enjoy doing; not everyone can have this kind of career! I feel extremely lucky. This is the dream.

What do you consider the most fulfilling part of your job?

To see my students and post-docs do extremely well, do something really creative after they leave my group – and to have them still remember me!  (Laughs)  That’s really awesome.  Sometimes I get emails or postcards from former students out of the blue, and I’d say, wow, I did not expect this.

“For me, the cello is a fitting instrument – it would let me be alone and be quiet, and at the same time, do something creative” – Haw Yang (Image © Shutterstock)

Making new discoveries in the lab – I don’t often get to do that anymore, but when I was still in the lab, I knew I was the first in the world to see those results and interpret them – that was extremely fulfilling.  And these days, I take joy in doing experiments that people have been telling me are impossible to do.  (Laughs)  I love a challenge, I love to change the way people think.

Which musical instrument do you, or wish you could, play?

I wish that I could learn to play cello – it’s on my to-do list when I get the time.  I guess I’m hitting that age when I’d like something more quiet, more introspective, and the cello has that quality, especially if one can play Bach’s unaccompanied cello concertos – those are my favourites.  In this line of work, we’re alone most of the time, and we think a lot – that is, if we’re lucky, we get time to think.  So for me, the cello is a fitting instrument – it would let me be alone and be quiet, and at the same time, do something creative.

Fire, earth, water, or air?

Water.

Describe Chemical Science in three words.

Breaking status quo

Your personal message to Chem Sci authors and readers?

What always gets me excited is original physical chemistry, broadly defined. It could be a new and relevant physical chemistry problem that’s well articulated, an ingenious approach that definitely answers an outstanding question, an innovative technique that enables new experiments to solve problems that matter, or a conceptual breakthrough that inspires new thinking.

We scientists are in the business of breaking the status quo, and we should do so with high scientific rigour.  I strongly believe scientists must never do work which merely repeats what is already known, for the sake of hype, of joining the bandwagon, or aiming to please.

So, if you agree with me that ground-breaking substance and genuine originality are more important than hype, I invite you to submit your most creative papers to Chemical Science – your work could help define the future of physical chemistry!

Haw Yang and our dynamic international team of Associate Editors make direct decisions on the content of Chemical Science and actively drive its scientific development – submit your best and most innovative work to any of their Editorial Offices.

Read Haw Yang’s latest article in Chemical Science:

Harnessing thermal fluctuations for purposeful activities: the manipulation of single micro-swimmers by adaptive photon nudging
Bian Qian, Daniel Montiel, Andreas Bregulla, Frank Cichos and Haw Yang
Chem. Sci., 2013,4, 1420-1429
DOI: 10.1039/C2SC21263C, Edge Article

Our Associate Editors Haw Yang, Kopin Liu and Kazunari Domen have selected their recommended physical chemistry papers on Chemical Science read their Editors’ Choice selection today and find out why they think these are must-reads!

Online collection: Physical chemistry

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

5 minutes with Tom Muir, Chemical Science Associate Editor

050112-muir-tom-200x300.jpgTom Muir is the Van Zandt Williams Jr. Class of ’65 Professor of Chemistry at Princeton University, USA.  His laboratory investigates the physiochemical basis of protein function in complex systems of biomedical interest. By combining tools of organic chemistry, biochemistry and cell biology, Tom and his group have developed a suite of new technologies that provide fundamental insight into how proteins work.

Tom serves as one of Chemical Science’s Associate Editors, handling submissions in chemical biology.

What made you keen to specialise in chemical biology? When did you know this was THE research area for you?

I was indoctrinated into the wonderful world of proteins at a young and admittedly impressionable age. Once you have your eyes opened to the power of using synthetic chemistry to manipulate protein structure and function, well, there is really no going back. Like many, I was re-branded a chemical biologist in the late 1990s. I have come to terms with this now and even think I know what chemical biology is.

Name one useful tip you wish someone had told you when you were an undergraduate?

Buy stock in Apple computer!

If you could go back in time and be whoever you wanted, which scientific discovery would you want to have been part of?

Not sure whether this qualifies as a scientific discovery, but I think it would have been pretty wild to have been present when early humans first harnessed fire. Surely, that was the signal moment in our cultural evolution.

"Pirates are fun and fearless, which, funny enough, are qualities that I see in the scientists I admire most" – Tom Muir (Image © Shutterstock)

Morning person or night owl?

Depends on the week and the flavour of jetlag I am dealing with.

Your favourite thing to do on a Sunday afternoon?

I like to enter the deranged world of my young kids – this invariably leads to me being a pirate for a few hours. I have learned that pirates are fun and fearless, which, funny enough, are qualities that I see in the scientists I admire most.

Describe Chemical Science in three words.

Quality over hype

Your personal message to Chem Sci authors and readers?

The key thing I look for is rigour, whether in the chemical aspects of the work or the biology. I hate loose ends. Like all fields, chemical biology has a lot of noise associated with it, I am looking for papers that add to the “signal.” I am much less interested in whether a paper is in a “hot” area as opposed to whether it makes a solid contribution to the field generally and is reported in a manner that others can try to replicate if they choose to.

Tom Muir and our dynamic international team of Associate Editors make direct decisions on the content of Chemical Science and actively drive its scientific development – submit your best and most innovative work to any of their Editorial Offices.

Associate Editors Tom Muir and Ben Davis have highlighted their recommended chemical biology papers on Chemical Science – Read their Editor’s Choice selection for FREE today!

Find many more excellent articles on chemical biology here: Online collection: Chemical biology

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

5 minutes with Ben Davis, Chemical Science Associate Editor

Ben Davis is Professor of Chemistry at the University of Oxford, where he is a Fellow and Tutor in Organic Chemistry at Pembroke CollegeHis group’s research explores the exciting and rapidly expanding interface between chemistry and biology, with an emphasis on carbohydrates and proteins.

An Editorial Advisory Board member of Chemical Science since its launch in 2010, Davis now serves as one of the journal’s Associate Editors, handling submissions in chemical biology.

What excites you most about chemical biology?

I think it’s probably the unique position chemistry is now in, to be able to address the really fundamental questions about how biology works at a molecular level.  Not just static stuff or indirect, but a combination of strategies that will unpick what you might call mechanistic biology.  We’re at a real turning point in science, where biology now needs to be that detailed, and chemistry has now developed the tools to deliver that detail – the two fields are genuinely starting to shake hands properly.

If you could go back in time, which scientist would you most like to meet or work with?

They’re all so very different.  Probably Boyle.  Because he was mad, brilliantly mad, completely unfettered by convention.  Very creative.

What’s the best advice a mentor or supervisor has ever given you?

Probably the best advice I’ve ever had was from Brian Clough, who told me I should “smile more.”  But then I don’t think you can really count him as a mentor.  Probably the best mentorship advice I’ve ever had was that you need to pick interesting, big problems.  Life is short, so pick big stuff.  Pick things that matter and that excite you, and do it through passion, and don’t waste time worrying about what other people will do, and what other people might take from you.  If you don’t have enough ideas to keep moving forwards and testing fresh things, no matter what other people are doing, then you are probably in the wrong job.  It’s not about the individuals, it’s about the science.

What do you enjoy doing when you’re not in the lab, teaching, writing, or handling Chem Sci papers?

I row, basically.  Indoor/outdoor, whenever I can, however I can.  Pembroke College Boat Club (Head of the River) is a near utopian state.

If you were to be shipwrecked on a deserted island, which item currently in your pocket would be most useful to you?

I haven’t got anything in my pockets.  I have this habit of emptying my pockets when I go into a room – frees the soul.  I’m not really that dependent on the stuff in my pockets, to be honest (and I hate pod-zombies).  So, no, nothing really.

What makes a Chem Sci Edge article HOT?

Innovation.  Creativity.  Difference.

Describe Chemical Science in three words.

Challenging current chemistry.  I’d say, Chemical Science is making people think about the way chemistry is researched and published, putting out stuff that’s different and trying to break down the traditional routes of dissemination whilst maintaining the ethics of proper, rigorous peer review by experts.  Its freshness is powerful, and this is generating a powerful and unique group of authors, reviewers and readers, I think.

Your personal message to Chem Sci authors and readers?

What I’d love to be able to say to authors is that they should think really carefully about how they write papers and where they put those papers.  In an era when the value of publication is in danger of being eroded, it’s probably more important, rather than less important, to write quality papers and put them into a journal that’s going to mean something long-term, has a good audience, and has – impact is the wrong word – but has something that connects with people that matter (now and in the future).

There’s this increasing trend for not peer-reviewing, and not doing things with rigour, things just being posted up and being reviewed in real-time, and all of this stuff which is undermining the quality of science we publish.  We seem to have forgotten that over 350 years ago, we developed a sensible and intelligent mechanism of trying to ensure that quality wins out.  Expert peer review, in my experience, always improves the science if all involved are sufficiently open-minded and hungry to do better.  The idea of creating mounds of poorly evaluated data and analyses without any true advice or moderation is madness (and something we turned our back on as a community in the 17th century).  True scholars want to get better and do better by getting advice, not getting their stuff out at any cost (the latter are just blaggers or advertisers).

This quality is what will really matter in 50 years’ time, when we’re all probably dead and buried (at least some of us) – then the legacy will be the paper, and only the paper, and the science that’s in it.

And so it needs to be somewhere that’s going to have longevity and impact.  It’s even more important to put it somewhere that is rigorous in its process, that makes you do better, that tests you and pushes you to create better work.  Then you create something that you’re proud of, and then the paper will speak for itself; whereas if you go to journals that will just let you get stuff in (slop buckets), then it’s almost pointless.

Which means– publish less, but publish better.

Ben Davis and our dynamic international team of Associate Editors make direct decisions on the content of Chemical Science and actively drive its scientific development – submit your best and most innovative work to any of their Editorial Offices.

Read some of Professor Ben Davis’ recent Chem Sci articles today!

Glycomimetic affinity-enrichment proteomics identifies partners for a clinically-utilized iminosugar
Isa N. Cruz, Conor S. Barry, Holger B. Kramer, C. Celeste Chuang, Sarah Lloyd, Aarnoud C. van der Spoel, Frances M. Platt, Min Yang and Benjamin G. Davis
Chem. Sci., 2013,4, 3442-3446
DOI: 10.1039/C3SC50826A, Edge Article

Realizing the promise of chemical glycobiology
Lai-Xi Wang and Benjamin G. Davis
Chem. Sci., 2013,4, 3381-3394
DOI: 10.1039/C3SC50877C, Perspective

Conformational effects in sugar ions: spectroscopic investigations in the gas phase and in solution
Ram Sagar, Svemir Rudić, David P. Gamblin, Eoin M. Scanlan, Timothy D. Vaden, Barbara Odell, Timothy D. W. Claridge, John P. Simons and Benjamin G. Davis
Chem. Sci., 2012,3, 2307-2313
DOI: 10.1039/C2SC20341C, Edge Article

Methods for converting cysteine to dehydroalanine on peptides and proteins
Justin M. Chalker, Smita B. Gunnoo, Omar Boutureira, Stefanie C. Gerstberger, Marta Fernández-González, Gonçalo J. L. Bernardes, Laura Griffin, Hanna Hailu, Christopher J. Schofield and Benjamin G. Davis
Chem. Sci., 2011,2, 1666-1676
DOI: 10.1039/C1SC00185J, Edge Article

Site-selective chemoenzymatic construction of synthetic glycoproteins using endoglycosidases
Marta Fernández-González, Omar Boutureira, Gonçalo J. L. Bernardes, Justin M. Chalker, Matthew A. Young, James C. Errey and Benjamin G. Davis
Chem. Sci., 2010,1, 709-715
DOI: 10.1039/C0SC00265H, Edge Article

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

5 minutes with David MacMillan: Little-known facts about Chem Sci’s Editor-in-Chief

Dave MacMillan

Scottish-born David MacMillan is currently the James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of Chemistry and Chair of the Department of Chemistry at Princeton University.  His group’s research focuses on new concepts in synthetic organic chemistry and catalysis.

As Editor-in-Chief of Chemical Science since its launch in 2010, he has been instrumental in the journal’s rapid success for which it was recognised by the ALPSP as the Best New Journal 2011.

Describe Chemical Science in three words.

Non-traditional – Egalitarian – Quality

(and a bonus 4th Glaswegian word – Gallus)

Which is your favourite Chemical Science paper and why?

I really love the six-step synthesis of strychnine by Chris Vanderwal’s lab.  Almost all of the steps in the synthesis have been known for more than 50 years, yet it took the ingenuity of Vanderwal to come up with an extraordinary efficient synthesis of this famous benchmark molecule that so many people have worked on.  In many ways, it sets the tempo and pace for what the school of total synthesis should be striving towards.

If you were in charge of a million-dollar research fund but couldn’t use it for your own projects, which hot area in organic chemistry would you invest in?

I would invest in trying to define new questions for the field of organic chemistry, and thereafter (and only thereafter) in ways to execute solutions to these new problems.  As an example, what transformation could be the next olefin metathesis or Buchwald-Hartwig coupling?  This would exclusively focus on trying to identify new problems or questions, and not how to solve established questions within the field.  I see so many applications for assistant professor positions where people want to work on the problem, or in the field, of the day – it’s better to work on your own questions rather than someone else’s.

When you aren’t teaching, doing research, or hard at work as our EIC, where are you most likely to be found?

In good restaurants trying to expand my knowledge of grape derived beverages.

What’s the most stupid mistake– and thus the most valuable learning experience– you’ve ever made in your career?

It’s a mistake I continue to make to this day, which is to describe work in public that has yet to be published (not a smart thing to do).  That being said, one of the thrills of giving any research talk is to surprise the audience with new results – the instant feedback can be really valuable.  Moreover, by getting out on the road and presenting your new research, it often helps formulate the message of the accompanying manuscript.  But again, it’s still a mistake to do it.

Please tell us something that Chem Sci readers might not know about you yet.

I like to fly airplanes.

Dream with us for a bit – the year is 2025: give us your idea of a hot, exciting Chemical Science Edge article title.

“Development of Basis Set 6311+GHI**, a computational approach to accurate and predictive modelling of any known or unknown transformation in chemical synthesis

Your personal message to Chemical Science authors and readers?

The goal of Chemical Science is to do something different.  We hope to publish the most innovative chemistry research of our time and in doing so, create a new journal with a completely fresh outlook.  We are egalitarian and we feel strongly that all authors (young and old, famous or just getting started), should be treated equally and with respect.  Our journal will be a home for innovative and unique research that will appeal to aficionados of all subfields of chemistry.  We believe we have assembled one of the most high quality editorial boards in all of chemistry and we hope to earn the trust of readers and authors worldwide through thoughtful and deliberate handling of manuscripts.  We believe this substantial, egalitarian approach with an emphasis on innovation will drive the success of Chemical Science.  As such, I encourage you to try us out and submit an article to Chemical Science in the near future.

David MacMillan and his dynamic international team of Associate Editors make direct decisions on the content of Chemical Science and actively drive its scientific development – submit your best and most innovative work to any of their Editorial Offices.

Read Professor MacMillan’s Chem Sci articles:

Synergistic catalysis: A powerful synthetic strategy for new reaction development
Anna E. Allen and David W. C. MacMillan
Chem. Sci., 2012, 3, 633-658
DOI: 10.1039/C2SC00907B

A general approach to the enantioselective α-oxidation of aldehydes via synergistic catalysis
Scott P. Simonovich, Jeffrey F. Van Humbeck and David W. C. MacMillan
Chem. Sci., 2012, 3, 58-61
DOI: 10.1039/C1SC00556A

The intramolecular asymmetric allylation of aldehydes via organo-SOMO catalysis: A novel approach to ring construction
Phong V. Pham, Kate Ashton and David W. C. MacMillan
Chem. Sci., 2011, 2, 1470-1473
DOI: 10.1039/C1SC00176K

Total synthesis of diazonamide A
Robert R. Knowles, Joseph Carpenter, Simon B. Blakey, Akio Kayano, Ian K. Mangion, Christopher J. Sinz and David W. C. MacMillan
Chem. Sci., 2011, 2, 308-311
DOI: 10.1039/C0SC00577K

The organocatalytic three-step total synthesis of (+)-frondosin B
Maud Reiter, Staffan Torssell, Sandra Lee and David W. C. MacMillan
Chem. Sci., 2010, 1, 37-42
DOI: 10.1039/C0SC00204F

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Who’s who in Chemical Science

We have 17 world-leading Associate Editors working with Editor-in-Chief David MacMillan to ensure that Chemical Science represents the new thinking from across the chemical sciences. But can you match the faces with the names? Number 1, David MacMillan, is N – but what about the others?

Post your answers below – all correct answers will be in with the chance of winning a prize …

1. David MacMillan, Princeton University, USA
Editor-in-Chief
2. Chris Bielawski, University of Texas, Austin
Associate Editor: Polymer Science
3. Stephen L Buchwald, MIT, USA
Associate Editor: Organic Chemistry
4. Thomas Carell, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
Associate Editor: Chemical Biology and Bioorganic Chemistry
5. Benjamin F Cravatt, Scripps, USA
Associate Editor: Chemical Biology
6. Christopher C Cummins, MIT, USA
Associate Editor: Inorganic and Organometallic Chemistry
7. Kazunari Domen, University of Tokyo, Japan
Associate Editor: Physical Chemistry, Energy and Surface Science
8. Matthew Gaunt, University of Cambridge, UK
Associate Editor: Organic Chemistry
9. Hubert Girault, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland
Associate Editor: Analytical Science
10. David A Leigh, University of Edinburgh, UK
Associate Editor: Supramolecular Chemistry
11. Kopin Liu, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
Associate Editor: Physical Chemistry
12. Jeffrey R Long, UC Berkeley, USA
Associate Editor: Inorganic Chemistry
13. Wonwoo Nam, Ewha Womans University, Korea
Associate Editor: Bioinorganic Chemistry
14. Colin Nuckolls, Columbia University, USA
Associate Editor: Organic Materials
15. Teri Odom, Northwestern University, USA
Associate Editor: Nanoscience
16. Matthew J Rosseinsky, University of Liverpool, UK
Associate Editor: Inorganic Materials
17. F Dean Toste UC Berkeley, USA
Associate Editor: Organic Chemistry
18. Haw Yang, Princeton University, USA
Associate Editor: Physical Chemistry

Five prize-winners will be selected at random from winning entrants who have supplied a valid email address with their correct entry. Competition closes at 24.00 GMT on 30th April 2011. Winners will be notified by email.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)