Japanese Researchers Take Spotlight In International Biomedical Program

Tokyo proposed the Human Frontier Program; now its scientists are among the first to take advantage of it STRASBOURG, FRANCE -- Biomedical researchers from around the world will have a second chance next month to participate in Japan's Human Frontier Science Program now that Tokyo has led the way in the first round of funding. The program was first proposed in 1986 by former Japanese Prime Minister Yosuhiro Nakasone at a summit conference of the seven leading democratic industrial nations - the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, West Germany, Italy, and Japan. It was seen as a response to his country's reliance on the U.S. and other nations to train and fund its current generation of basic researchers in the life sciences, and its name conveys the grand hope to push back the frontiers of knowledge in the field. But Nakasone's billion-dollar scheme was whittled down by his successors until finally, last August, it began as a $2 million initiative (The Scientists, June 12, 1989, page 7). The recent depreciation of the yen relative to the dollar resulted in even further cuts, shrinking by nearly 20 percent both the overall budget for the program and its $500,000 ceiling on project grants. Japan has contributed the bulk of the funding, with France having chipped in with the first of what is expected to be a $1 million annual contribution, and Italy is expected to donate $800,000 next year. So far the U.S. has not put any money into the program. MARC LAMPHIER, the only United States graduate student who chose Japan as the site for a postdoc fellowship under the new Human Frontier Science Program, will be spending the next two years working under molecular biologist Tadatsgu Taniguchi at Osaka University. But Lamphier isn't doing it simply for the science. "There's no particular reason for Americans to go to Japan to study molecular biology," says the 34-year-old Lamphier, who is finishing up a Ph.D. degree in biochemistry at Harvard University. "But I was a Japanese studies major as an undergraduate, and I spent a year after college working in a biology lab at Tsukuba University before I went to graduate school." Lamphier's status as the only one of nine U.S. fellows who chose to work in the country that launched the research initiative highlights the obstacles that continue to stand in the way of scientific collaboration between the two countries. The barriers of language, culture, and high cost of living are daunting. For scientists just starting their careers, there is also the problem of distance. "You can't be actively looking for a job in the U.S. if you're spending two years as a postdoc in Japan," says Joseph Varner, a professor of biology at Washington University and one of two U.S. scientists on the program's Council of Scientists. "That means you're going to need another postdoc in the U.S. so that you have time to look for a job." For his part, Lamphier doesn't think that he'll be at a disadvantage at the end of his fellowship. "I'm fairly fluent in Japanese," he notes, "and I'm certainly not sacrificing anything by working with Taniguchi in his lab. But to be honest, you have to have a special reason for doing it. Most Americans just aren't going to put out the extra effort that's required." --Jeffrey Mervis Officials from the seven summit countries have expressed pleasure in the outcome of that first round, which culminated April 4 in the awarding of 29 project grants and 78 two-year fellowships. The deadline for the second round of funding is September 12. But several important questions must be resolved if the program is to succeed in making a significant contribution to international progress in the fields of molecular biology and the neuro- sciences. Those issues include the level of contributions to the program from other governments, the extent of participation by scientists from those other countries, and the geographic distribution of funding in future rounds. Also looming large is the question of whether the scientific community will accept Japan as a full partner in supporting basic biological research. The demographics of the first round of awards reflects that uncertainty. Japanese scientists came out on top in both the number of applications and the number of awards made. They are the principal leaders in nine collaborative projects, followed by the U.S., with eight; the U.K., with five; France, with three; and Canada, West Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands, with one each. Japanese graduate students also received the largest single number of postdoctoral fellowships, with 18. They were followed by students from the U.K., with 17; the U.S. and France, with nine each (see story on page 32); Canada and Germany, with five each, and a total of six distributed among the other countries in the 12-nation European Community. Nine fellowships were awarded to the rest of the world, with Israeli scientists receiving four, the Chinese two, and one each to Argentina, Singapore, and Austria. Scientists from other nations say that such a distribution is not surprising. "It is understandable that each contributing country more or less recovers its marbles," says Claude Amiel, an official of the French Ministry of Research and Technology and a member of the program's board of trustees. Nor is it undesirable, says Joseph Varner, a biologist at Washington University in St. Louis and a member of the program's Council of Scientists. "I think that the whole thing is working beautifully," says Varner, one of the 16 scientists from nine countries who serve on the panel that makes the final selections. "The largest number may have gone to the Japanese, but you have to remember that there is heavy international collaboration in each of these projects. It's also significant, I think, that 45 of the 80 new fellows will be doing their research in the United States. And we will get the benefit of that work." At the same time, a few science administrators have openly opposed the program as a brain-fishing expedition by the Japanese. Edith Cresson, France's minister of European affairs, said earlier this year that "Japan is an adversary who doesn't play by the rules. It has an absolute desire to conquer the world." But hers is decidedly a minority view. More typical is the comment of biologist Francois Gros, former director of the Pasteur Institute and a member of a so-called wise men's committee that is advising the frontier program. "We are afraid of the Japanese, and we should be," says Gros. "But cornering them into isolation is not a solution. I believe firmly that the Japanese should be integrated into the mainstream of science. We must play the game with them." At the same time, he acknowledges that it isn't always easy. "The cultural background is very different," says Gros. "The way of life, the high cost of living, and the language problem explain in large part why so few Western scientists are willing to work in Japan." That isolation, he adds, has led the West to underestimate the capacity of the Japanese to do first-rate basic science. The program operates with a small staff from offices located here. Its general secretary is Sir James Gowans, former director of the Medical Research Council in Great Britain. He is assisted by Satoru Ohtake, a Japanese physicist on leave from the Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology (ERATO) project within Japan's Science and Technology Agency. Raymond Bahor, an official in the division of research grants at the National Institutes of Health, is serving as a temporary adviser to the program as well. The fledgling program has already endured a rocky start. The original plan to locate its office in Geneva was dropped after protests from the other "summit" nations. In the ensuing competition, France's offer of office space and $1 million in support won out over Japan's preference for London and Italy's bid for Rome. After the Strasbourg office opened last fall, some records were destroyed in a fire caused by faulty wiring. Japanese officials hope that other countries will assume a share of the financial responsibility for the program. But the U.S. is unlikely to volunteer anytime soon. "I think that the U.S. would be well-advised to put some money in," says Joseph Rall, director of intramural research at NIH and a member of the Council of Scientists. "And I'm sure that if we put in $2 million, for example, we would undoubtedly get more than $2 million back. But you need to remember that NIH already awards some $50 million in grants each year to foreign scientists, as well as more than $30 million in contracts. And some members in Congress already think that's too much." Rall said that fiscal 1992 would be the earliest possible date for NIH to contribute. The Human Frontier Program is meant to expand scientific knowledge in the areas of brain function and biological function on the molecular level. Its neuroscience initiative covers perception and cognition, movement and behavior, memory and learning, and language and thinking; its molecular biology component includes the expression of genetic information, morphogenesis, molecular recognition and responses, and energy conversion. Most of the research grants range from $200,000 to $400,000 annually and are renewable for a total of three years. Project scientists are expected to work mainly in their own labs, although collaborations typically include as many as 10 scientists in several countries. The fellowships are for roughly $40,000 a year, which includes relocation expenses and up to $10,000 in bench fees. The announcement of the second round of proposals and fellowships is due out in early June, and the deadline for applications is September 12. For more information, contact the Human Frontier Science Program, 20 Place des Halles, F-6700 Strasbourg, France. 011 33 88 328833. Alexander Dorozynski is a freelance writer in Paris and associate editor of Science et Vie.

Japanese Researchers Take Spotlight In International Biomedical Program

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of