BREAKING: Sauvage, Stoddart and Feringa are 2016 Nobel Prize Laureates in Chemistry

Here's the Nobel Prize citation on the website.

I look forward to our future with molecular machines - it will be interesting to know where they first show up in commercialized products, and what they look like (and how much they look like the machines of Sauvage, Stoddart and Feringa.)

Fun Nobel nominations database

Credit: C&EN

I have been remiss in not telling you all about this neat little database of the Nobel nominations from 1901 and 1950 from Chemical and Engineering News. Here are the methods and all the people from C&EN who worked on it.

From it, I learned that Lise Meitner (a hero of mine) was nominated 19 times, but never won. I also learned that the United States had 78 people nominated (would not have expected that - did not know what the state of American chemistry was, pre-1950.) Pretty neat!

It's Nobel week, so I guess that if anyone wants to predict who is going to win the Biology Chemistry Nobel this year, put it in the comments. I have zero predictions, other than this: it will not be CRISPR. Between the patent fight and the Shuailiang Lin story, that's too much controversy for the Nobel Committee. (This post guarantees, of course, that Doudna, Charpentier and Zhang will be sharing the stage in Stockholm.)

Congratulations to Professors Karplus, Levitt and Warshel

Last night, (thanks to both Per-Ola Norrby and a whim), I tweeted right before bed:

I am down for some hot Karplus action. That is who I am rooting for. #chemnobel

I'm stunned to find that Professor Karplus won. Congratulations to him, Professors Levitt of Stanford and Professor Warshel of USC for winning the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Here is the initial NPR report on the computational chemistry Nobel Prize; listen as host Steve Inskeep and science report Richard Harris attempt to explain this work. (Here's a more detailed story from NPR.) Inskeep is known for his jokey demeanor, so I won't get too bent out of shape about his professions of ignorance; that said, it's hard not to take it as a sign of how far chemists have to go in communicating their science. 

Joe Palca comments on reporting on the palladium Nobel Prize

I commented a number of times (and so have others!) on the good job that NPR's Joe Palca did with tough live on-air conversations on last Wednesday's Nobel Prize in Chemistry. I submitted some questions through NPR's website and Mr. Palca graciously answered the questions on the record. (I'll note that I have edited the questions to make them make a little more sense. Edits are made with [brackets])

CJ: How much lead time did [you] have for the Morning Edition conversation with Steve Inskeep?

Joe Palca: I was able to download the Nobel press material at approximately 5:50 a.m. ET. I had arranged to speak with Joe Francisco at 6:15. I had to write an Intro and questions for Steve Inskeep by 6:30. We did our chat live at 6:40.

CJ: Did [you] listen to the press conference?

JP: No. I listened to the Negishi/Purdue press conference…but I can tell you that there was not a single question about the science.

CJ: When [you] did the live feeds with Craig Windham, how many hours had [you] known about the story? (Note: NPR's top of the hour news updates often feature a live conversation between the anchor and a reporter.)

JP: I only did one live chat with Windham. That was at 7. I finished with Steve at 6:45, so I had a few more minutes to review the press materials. The other newscast piece you heard from me was prerecorded around 7:15.

CJ: Who did [you] consult with to understand palladium catalysis?

JP: Joe Francisco. But truthfully, as someone who enjoyed organic chemistry in college, I felt confident that I could explain a palladium catalyzed reaction that “makes new molecules” without too much difficulty…I would have needed more advice if I had wanted to get into the specifics of the reactions.

CJ: What could the chemistry community do to help reporters like [you] do a good job?

JP: The American Chemical Society has now joined the American Physical Society in being proactive in providing experts…it is extremely useful.
 
(CJ here again.) I'll stick to my previous analogy: the science Nobel Prizes must be the science reporter's equivalent of Iron Chef. Palca had about 50 to 60 minutes to prepare for two live conversations on palladium catalysis. It took me about an hour to write up my thoughts on the palladium Nobel; organic chemistry is my daily life, and I'm not sure I did much better. It's also good to know that ACS is willing to help on chemistry's (hopefully!) one big day each year.
 
Thanks again to NPR's Joe Palca for his willingness to comment about his reporting process.

Who started the 'matchmaker' palladium meme?

Sharon of Icanhasscience (check it out!) notes in the comments that the AP's other report on the palladium Nobel prize used the analogy of a singles bar for palladium-catalyzed cross-couplings. That article is one of the few in the media that didn't seem to use the "matchmaker" meme to describe the reaction.

I'm terribly curious -- who was the first reporter or news outlet to use this analogy? I've never heard metal cross-couplings described this way; I have to admit it's a fairly accurate picture to describe the reaction mechanism. With the help of Google, I see that on October 6, USA Today, Scientific American, New Scientist, Agence France-Presse, NIKKEI.com, Christian Science Monitor, Science Now and MSNBC.com all used the "matchmaker" meme. Is it the quoted Jeremy Berg? Inquiring minds wish to know.

P.S. Has any other chemist heard Pd reactions described this way? Am I the only crazy one who hasn't?

A guide for reporters on the 2010 Nobel Prize in Chemistry

Somewhere in the good ol' US of A, USA (DON'T HAVE TO CREDIT CHEMJOBBER):

3 chemistry professors, Richard Heck (formerly of the University of Delaware), Ei-ichi Negishi (Japanese descent, of Purdue University) and Akira Suzuki (Japanese descent, of Hokkaido University) were awarded the 2010 Nobel Prize in Chemistry "for palladium-catalyzed cross couplings in organic synthesis" by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. These are techniques for bonding (or connecting) smaller carbon-based molecules together to make larger carbon-based molecules.

Creating carbon-carbon bonds can be difficult and can sometimes involve using dangerous, impractical or environmentally unfriendly reaction chemistry; the techniques pioneered by Suzuki, Heck, and Negishi make these reactions simple enough for novice chemists to perform and practical enough that they can be run on multi-ton scale. Since their introduction in the late 1970's, palladium-catalyzed chemical reactions have touched every part of the field of chemistry, including life-saving drugs, plastics and organic LEDs. The modern pharmaceutical industry would not be able to produce many of their products without palladium-catalyzed reactions.

The prize has been long-awaited by many chemists. "It's about damn time", said Chemjobber, a very junior synthetic organic chemist. "I don't know what it took to get those Swedes to finally get their thumb out." It is believed that part of the reason is the rules of the Nobel Prize: there can be no more than 3 awardees at one time, and they all must be living. Many chemists contributed to the field of palladium-catalyzed reactions. Professors Sonogashira, Tsuji, and Kumada could have all been part of this award, and the chemistry Nobel committee is notoriously controversy-shy.

Professor Heck has retired and currently lives with his wife in the Philippines. Professor Negishi is still teaching and research at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. Professor Suzuki is still teaching and researching at Hokkaido University in Sapporo, Japan.