PDF file: Annual Report 2002/2003 - Scottish Crop Research Institute

Director’s Report
tion from dismissal; and vouchers for food, clothing,
shelter, and household goods. Eligibility for social
protection was an issue in some countries sensitised by
debates over immigration, illegal aliens, refugees, and
asylum seekers, which together with efforts to combat
terrorism, heightened the level of debate over compulsory
national identity cards and sophisticated surveillance
measures which could extend to the workplace.
In the UK, of the £456 billion total Government
spending, social protection accounted for £133 billion
– the largest slice; followed by the National Health
Service at £72 billion (other health and personal social
services cost an additional £17 billion); education £59
billion; law and protective services £27 billion;
defence £26 billion; debt interest £22 billion; housing
and the environment £20 billion; and industry, agriculture,
and employment £16 billion. Other spending
amounted to £49 billion.
Peer Review Peer assessment of scientific research
was called into question in September 2002 when J.
H. Schön was dismissed by Bell Laboratories, New
Jersey, USA, following accusations that he falsified
data in scientific papers on nanotechnology published
from 1998 to 2001 in high-impact refereed journals.
Coverage of science-related issues in the publishing
and broadcast media has been unduly influenced by
lurid stories and scaremongering on such matters as
human cloning, nanotechnology, the MMR (mumps,
measles and rubella) vaccine, genetically modified
(GM) crops and foods, climate change, species extinction
etc., without the claims having been subjected to
rigorous review by independent scientific experts in
the relevant area of study i.e. ‘peers’. A noteworthy
example of flawed science being reported worldwide
before peer review was the research reported by A.
Pusztai on GM potatoes. From time to time, it is to
be expected that a limited amount of inadequate or
fallacious work will slip through the reviewing system
as a result of overworked referees and editors, usually
acting voluntarily, trying to operate within tight deadlines.
Criticism of the use of anonymous referees on
the basis of either ‘if they are independent and knowledgeable,
why should they wish to remain anonymous?’
or ‘are the scientific or political establishments
wishing to retain the ability to suppress unorthodoxy?’
has been stated for many years, but it is generally
recognised that the system is infinitely better than a
low- or no-standard free-for-all. My view is that the
reviewing system should be transparent and that
anonymity is no longer justified. Yet, underlying the
debate are the intrinsic integrity and objectivity of the
scientist(s) (for without these assets science is doomed)
and the ability of other scientists to check and take
forward the observations, discoveries, concepts, conclusions,
and products. Peer review is used as a selfregulating
quality-control mechanism, and is regarded
as a part of a system that ensures the published literature
is as accurate and balanced as possible, in so
doing providing constructive advice and observations
on raising the standards of the submitted work. It is
also used to apportion research funding. There are
dangers in creating citation and grant-awarding cartels,
bandwagons, and an attitude that fails to appreciate
that not all science is or should be
hypothesis-driven; there is a substantial need for
curiosity-led exploration and inadvertent discovery,
activities that the conventional peer-review system
tends to downplay, as it does to applied research.
Genomes Determination in 2001 of the complete
DNA sequence of the human genome was a prime
driver in sequencing the genomes of other organisms,
including pests and diseases, and developing the tools
and concepts needed to understand gene function and
regulation. In 2002, the physical map and draft
sequence of the 2,800 million base mouse genome was
published, sharing a remarkably high degree of conserved
synteny between mouse and human. Also in
2002, the full genome DNA sequence was published
for the protozoan parasite responsible for the most
severe form of human malaria, Plasmodium
falciparum, as well as for the rodent-infecting P. yoelii
yoelii, and for the malaria vector, Anopheles gambiae.
Other organisms sequenced in full during 2002
included the 160 million base sea squirt Ciona
intestalis. One of the six chromosomes of the motile
slime mould, Dictyostelium discoideum, was also
sequenced. In 2003, the draft genome sequence for
the 42.9 million base bread mould, Neurospora crassa,
was published; as a result of repeat-induced point
mutation removing duplicated sequences, there is little
redundancy in its genome. In the same year, it was
possible to compare the completed genome sequence
of Bacillus anthracis, the cause of anthrax, with other
important Bacilli. Although virulence factors in the
Bacilli have been localised to genes on their plasmids,
B. anthracis is distinct from its close relatives by the
existence of a pathenogenicity island on one of its two
plasmids, pXO1, as well as for genes for several of the
virulence factors carried on the chromosome.
RNAi RNA interference (RNAi) as a mechanism for
gene regulation is of special interest in the research
programme of SCRI, as well as research elsewhere on
13