Where are the chemists at the chemistry-biology interface?

There is a gap in the way scientists look at the chemistry-biology interface.

At present there are no authoritative, quantitative data on this burgeoning field of research. To counter this, the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) has commissioned public policy consultants People Science and Policy (PSP) to gather evidence on how to foster high quality research across the chemistry-biology interface. One of the aims of the project is to establish a better understanding of the role of chemistry and chemists in life sciences research.

The RSC survey is aimed at identifying factors driving research at the chemistry-biology interface

In an internet survey, PSP will seek the views of UK scientists in relevant disciplines on research at the chemistry-biology interface and the role of chemists in their teams. PSP will ask the participants what motivates them to choose cross-disciplinary research and for their opinions on the importance of chemistry in bioscience research. The survey will include questions about the future of such research and how it can be promoted, as well as about any barriers that researchers face.

The survey will take place in May this year and will be followed by more detailed case studies. Nicholas Westwood, who works at the chemistry-biology interface at the University of St Andrews, UK, is chair of the steering group for the report. In an interview he explained why he thinks the results will be important:

What attracted you to working at the chemistry-biology interface?

The simple answer is first hand experience. I was very fortunate during my undergraduate degree to do a research project at the chemistry-biology interface. I got hooked at that point. I then went on to do a chemical biology PhD - an interest in the ability of high quality synthetic chemistry to help drive forward biological understanding has been with me ever since and is the main motivating influence for my current research. 

As science becomes increasingly interdisciplinary, how do you see the future of science, and chemistry in particular? 

It is both exciting and very challenging. Whilst we have to maintain our strength in the core scientific disciplines, it is clear that to make real progress on the big questions, research has to be interdisciplinary. Unfortunately, it is difficult enough to reach the required level for genuine innovation in one scientific research area, let alone try and achieve this across two or more research disciplines. The key skills are to communicate well and to identify collaborators who have as much to gain (and lose) as you do from the outcome of an interdisciplinary research project. Chemists have a skill set that is central to many of the challenges ahead.

Where does this report fit in?

It is always a good idea to stop for a few minutes and assess where things stand. This is one of the main things that the RSC is looking to achieve with this report. By looking at the current situation in the UK, they are hoping to identify key factors that drive very high quality research at the chemistry-biology interface. For example, the report will examine the question of whether the full potential for cross-disciplinary research is being realised. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the UK is not exploiting this potential as effectively as the US, where such research is really thriving at present. This report could form the foundation for future work to address this.

What will the report offer the chemistry-biology interdisciplinary community?

We hope the report will improve awareness in government, funding agencies and academic management of the importance of chemistry in helping to drive life science research. We also hope it will influence university infrastructure to better facilitate research that crosses the traditional disciplines of chemistry and biology. Of course, the community will get out of it what they put into it. The success of the report is very dependent on the input from the community and I and the rest of the steering committee (Jeremy Nicholson, Kenneth Douglas, Alan Naylor, Florian Hollfelder, Emma Raven and Cameron Alexander) encourage everyone to get involved in making this a useful document (please do not just delete the internet survey!)