Abstract
Dear Colleagues,
We continue with our nanotechnology focus in this issue of IB. Our colleagues Drs. Hongda Chen and Norman Scott have secured another set of interesting reviews and original research stories on the role of nanotechnology in agricultural development. Whether it is the development of nanoparticles for detecting microbial pathogens or biomarker-based nanotechnology for improving reproductive performance of cattle, the recurring theme is development of robust analytical tools that allow researchers and developers to gain rapid and unprecedented resolution of key molecular mechanisms that are the basis for a number of agricultural biotechnology applications.
We also continue in this issue with our discussion on interpreting DNA. In our December IB issue we offered a Catalyzing Innovation piece on the use of nanoscale technology of zero-mode wave guides to increase the speed and reduce the cost of DNA sequencing, thus accelerating the pace of DNA sequencing and interpretation for a diverse group of important biological systems. This ability to interpret DNA cost effectively is enabling scientists to push the boundaries of genetic engineering, systems biology, and synthetic biology and is driving biotechnology innovations. In this issue, we introduce our readers to some of the exciting innovations and insights coming out of Gen9, a synthetic biology firm based in Cambridge, MA. Dr. Martin Goldberg, Chief Operating Officer, provides us with a compelling Catalyzing Innovation feature on recent breakthroughs in DNA synthesis and synthetic biology. Gen9 is exploiting silicon chip technology for highly parallel, multiplexed, and error-correcting approaches to DNA synthesis that could result in the cost of DNA synthesis following Moore's law. Such a development is a game changer that will accelerate the pace of gene synthesis and synthetic biology innovation.
Within the pages of the previous issue of IB and this issue, we have provided a number of examples in which nanotechnology, or more specific nanobiotechnology, are enabling broader technological revolutions in the life sciences and biotechnology. This is the “moving onward” theme of this editorial. For example, the highly parallel, multiplexed, and error-correcting lab-on-a-chip (LOC) approach that Gen9 has developed for DNA synthesis is also being deployed to develop robust molecular ecology tools for studying complex natural and man-made microbial ecologies. These tools are being used for detection of plant pathogens in waste water, environmental monitoring of endocrine disruptors, elucidating key microbial interactions in biofilms, and a broad spectrum of food safety challenges, just to name a few applications. I am particularly excited about the potential of deploying LOCs for exploring microbial interactions in poly-culture systems. A number of old and familiar poly-culture technologies, ranging from anaerobic digestion for the production of methane to soil bioremediation, could benefit from the chip-based sensor and laboratory. These evolving LOCs will allow more quantitative probing of microbial interactions in poly-culture systems and hopefully lead to a set of mathematical and analytical tools that will enable the design of more predictable and controllable poly-culture processes. This is part of the effort to move onward in deploying good science and good engineering to industrial biotechnology to meet the challenges of human development.
This bottom-up and onward approach to industrial biotechnology is also captured in this issue in the commentary entitled “Strategies for Growing the Biobased Economy Must Address Needs of New Customers and Challenges of Building a Sustainable Supply Chain,” authored by Jack Huttner of Huttner Strategies, LLC. In his commentary, Jack provides us with a brief history lesson and valuable insights into how a group of six companies created a vision and served as catalysts to drive onward a national industrial biotechnology initiative. For those of us who have been swept up in the evolution of the industrial biotechnology sector, this history lesson reminds us of the tremendous efforts that have been exerted by our IB community to integrate scientific breakthroughs in the life sciences with technological advances in such fields as material sciences and nanofabrication and good national policy to generate the impetus for a national bioeconomy. The Industrial and Environmental Section of BIO has and continues to play a vital role in generating this impetus. Jack also highlights many of the challenges in the onward development of the industrial biotechnology sector, including the need to ramp-up sustainable agriculture development and the agricultural nanotechnologies presented in this issue's IB IN DEPTH special research section, which will play an important role in meeting this goal.
We are also moving onward with our mission to inform our community on the science and technology that are catalyzing industrial biotechnology innovation. A little over a year ago, I wrote to inform you that changes were underway at IB and that these changes were implemented to expand our role as communicators reporting on scientific advances and telling exciting stories about the industrial biotechnology developments driving the global bioeconomy. At the time of my letter, the leadership at IB felt that expanding peer-reviewed content was the biggest challenge we faced in providing the added-value service to the industrial biotechnology community. We felt that revamping and expanding the Editorial Board was necessary to increase peer review content effectively, and this has proven to be the case. Since the beginning of the year, we have seen the peer review content of the journal expand from one or two papers per issue to five. This has occurred in part because members of the Editorial Board either recruited authors for the journal or led special issues such as the IB IN DEPTH special research section that Dr. Brian Davison served as Guest Editor of in the August issue. Special issues have proven to be an effective way of generating peer-review content as demonstrated by the nanotechnology research articles published in this issue and the December 2012 issue. Moving onward, two of our Editorial Board members—Drs. Nathan Price, Institute for Systems Biology (Seattle, WA), and Scott Baker, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Richland, WA)—have agreed to lead special issues focusing on system biology and fungal biotechnology, respectively, that will be published in 2013 issues. We are also in a dialogue with an Editorial Board member and others to develop a special issue on algal biotechnology.
In 2012, we implemented our Catalyzing Innovation feature as a vehicle to share with our readers the insights and perspectives on innovation that are essential to building even more productive and robust innovation ecologies for driving the global bioeconomy. The article in the December issue of IB from Pacific Biosciences and this month's feature from Gen9 represent two examples of how the journal can provide our readers with much added value. We will continue to seek and publish biotechnology innovation insights from a diverse set of biotechnology leaders from academia, industry, NGOs, and government. In addition, we have published interviews and policy forum pieces from a number of government and industrial leaders including Thomas Hicks, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy; Joanna DuPont-Inglis, Director, Industrial Biotechnology, EuropaBio; Anna Lavelle, Ph.D., CEO, Australia's Biotechnology Organization; Ricardo Camargo Mendes and Caio Jacon, Prospectiva Consulting, São Paulo, Brazil; and Dr. Jennie Hunter-Cevera, Chair, National Research Council Committee on Algal Biofuels Sustainability.
IB has been moving onward in part because of the commitment and energy that Vicki Glaser has brought to the Executive Editor role. Vicki has done an excellent job of developing featured commentaries and policy forums, and shepherding our feature section Catalyzing Innovation. We are also moving onward through the continue leadership and support of Dr. Glenn Nedwin who has agreed to continue for another year as Co-Editor-in-Chief to help us with networking in the industrial biotechnology community. Thank you, Glenn, for your continued support. We are also fortunate to have the continued support and participation of Brent Erickson, Executive VP of the Industrial and Environment Section of BIO as Consulting Editor. Brent has been a major conduit to key contributors for our featured pieces, and Vicki, Glenn, and I very much appreciate his continued involvement and leadership.
There is nothing more rewarding than working on noble causes with noble people, and we in the IB community have a number of noble and innovative individuals moving us onward.