Wednesday, October 09, 2013
Waldorf graduate gets a Nobel prize
Autobiography – Thomas C. Südhof
When I was born in Göttingen in 1955, the aftermaths of the second world war were still
reverberating. I was born into an anthroposophical family. My maternal grandparents had
been early followers for Rudolf Steiner’s teaching, and worked for Waldorf schools when
Hitler assumed power and banned the anthrophosophical movement. Waldorf schools
were closed, and my grandfather was conscripted to work in a chemical munitions factory
– it was a miracle he survived the war. My uncle was drafted into the army right out of
school, and when I was born, he had just returned from the Soviet Union after 10 years as
a prisoner of war. My parents were physicians, with my father pursuing a career in
academic medicine, while my mother cared for our growing family. My father’s training led
him to the United States during the time I was born; as a result, he learned of my arrival by
telegram as he was learning biochemical methods in San Francisco, where in a twist of
fate I now live.
I spent my childhood in Göttingen and Hannover, and graduated from the Hannover
Waldorf school in 1975. I had been interested in many different subjects as a student, any
subject except sports. I did not know what to do with my life after school, except that I was
determined not to serve in the military. More by default than by vocation, I thus decided to
enter medical school, which kept all avenues open for a possible career in science or as a
practitioner of something useful – being a physician – and allowed me to defer my military
service. I studied first in Aachen, the beautiful former capital of Charles the Great, and then
transferred to Göttingen, the former scientific center of the Weimar republic, in order to
have better access to laboratory training since I became more and more interested in
science. Soon after arriving in Göttingen, I decided to join the Dept. of Neurochemistry of
Prof. Victor P. Whittaker at the Max-Planck-Institut für biophysikalische Chemie. I was
attracted to this department because it focused on biochemical approaches to probe the
function of the brain, following up on Whittaker’s discovery of synaptosomes in the two
preceding decades, his development of methods to purify synaptic vesicles, and his
increasing interest in the cell biology of synaptic vesicle exo- and endocytosis. As a lowly
‘Hiwi’ (‘Hilfswissenschaftler’ for ‘helping scientist’) in Whittaker’s department, I was
assigned the task of examining the biophysical structure of chromaffin granules, which are
large secretory vesicles of the adrenal medulla that store catecholamines and ATP.
Although my project developed well, I started exploring other questions in parallel as I
became more and more familiar with doing experiments, while simultaneously studying
medicine at the university. I am infinitely grateful to Victor Whittaker for giving me complete
freedom in his department in pursuing whatever I thought was interesting, and continued
working in his department after my graduation from medical school and my internship in
1982, until I moved to the US in 1983.
Among the studies I performed during my time in Whittaker’s department in Göttingen, the
most significant is probably the isolation and characterization of a new family of calciumbinding
proteins that we called ‘calelectrins’ because we had purified them from the electric
organ of Torpedo marmorata. ‘Calelectrins’ were among the first identified members of an
enigmatic and evolutionarily ancient family of calcium-binding proteins called annexins.
Annexins were at the same time discovered in sevaral other laboratories, and I am proud
of the fact that we contributed to the first description of this fascinating protein family,
although to this date their function remains unknown.
After I finished medical school, I thought that I wanted to be an academic physician, along
the mold of my father who had died when I was in high school. Although my time in
Whittaker’s laboratory had taught me to love doing science, I wanted to do something
more practical and immediately useful. The standard career for an academic physician in
Germany was to go abroad for a couple of years to acquire more clinically oriented
scientific training before starting her/his clinical training. Upon surveying the scientific
landscape, I decided to join the laboratory of Mike Brown and Joe Goldstein at the
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas for postdoctoral training. Brown
and Goldstein were already famous for their brilliant cell-biological studies when I made
this decision, and were equally renowned for using cutting-edge scientific tools to address
a central question in medicine, namely how cholesterol in blood is regulated. While in their
laboratory, I cloned the gene encoding the LDL receptor, which taught me molecular
biology and opened up genetic analyses of this gene in human patients suffering from
atherosclerosis. I also became interested in how expression of the LDL receptor is
regulated by cholesterol, and identified a sequence element in the LDL receptor gene
called ‘SRE’ for sterol-regulatory element that mediates the regulation of the LDL receptor
expression by cholesterol. Discovery of the SRE later led to the identification of the SREbinding
protein in Brown and Goldstein’s laboratory, which in turn identified new
mechanisms of transcriptional regulation effected by intramembrane proteolysis.
In 1986, I had the choice of resuming my clinical training, or trying to establish my own
laboratory. Much of what I know about science I learned in my three years of postdoctoral
training in Brown and Goldstein’s laboratory, and has guided me throughout my career.
Probably the best advice Brown and Goldstein gave me, however, was now: they
suggested I forego further clinical training and do only science, and they backed up this
advice by providing me with the opportunity to start my own laboratory at Dallas. This I did,
and I ended up staying in Dallas for another 22 years, interrupted only by a short guest
appearance as a Max-Planck-Director in Göttingen (see below).
When I started my laboratory at Dallas, I decided to attack a question that was raised by
Whittaker’s work, but neglected: how do synaptic vesicles undergo exocytosis, i.e., what id
the mechanism of neurotransmitter release which underlies all synaptic transmission? In
1986, Whittaker’s work had shown that synaptic vesicles could be biochemically purified,
but nothing was known about the mechanisms of synaptic vesicle exocytosis in particular,
and membrane fusion in general. Our approach, initially performed in close collaboration
with Reinhard Jahn whose laboratory at that time had just been set up in Munich, was
simple, namely to purify and clone every protein that might conceivably be involved, and
worry about their functions later. This approach was more fruitful than I could have hoped
for, and has arguably led to a fairly good understanding of membrane fusion and
neurotransmitter release. In the 25 years since the start of my laboratory, our work,
together with those of others, led to the identification of the key elements of the membrane
fusion machinery, to the characterization of the functions of these proteins, to the
mechanisms of regulating this machinery, and to the description of synapse-specific
molecules that bestow the specific properties of neurotransmitter release onto synapses
that render synapses so fast and precise, as required for brain function. Some of the
proteins whose function we identified are now household names and have general roles in
eukaryotic membrane fusion that go beyond a synaptic function, while other proteins are
specific to synapses and account for the exquisite precision and plasticity of these
elementary computational elements in brain. I feel fortunate to have stumbled onto this
overarching neuroscience question at a time when it was ready to be addressed, and it
has been tremendous fun to work our way through the various synaptic proteins and their
properties that shape their functions.
It is important to note, however, that the nature of our studies was not revolutionary. There
was not a single major discovery that all at once changed the field, as usually happens for
the development of tools (e.g., monoclonal antibodies, patch clamping, or shRNAs, to
name a few). The closest our work came to a radical change in the field was probably the
identification of synaptotagmins as calcium-sensors for fusion, and of Sec1/Munc18-like
proteins (SM-proteins) as genuine membrane fusion proteins, but both hypotheses took
more than a decade to become accepted by the field – in fact, the SM-protein hypothesis
was only recently adopted by others, 15 years after we proposed it. Thus, our work in
parallel with that of Reinhard Jahn, James Rothman, Jose Rizo, Randy Scheckman,
Richard Scheller, Cesare Montecucco, Axel Brunger, and many others produced a steady
incremental advance that resulted a better understanding of how membranes fuse, one
step at a time. As a result of this combined effort, we now know that SNAREs are the
fusion catalysts at the synapse, first shown by the discovery that SNAREs are the
substrates of clostridial neurotoxins, that SM-proteins in general and Munc18-1 in
particular are essential fusion proteins for all membrane fusion events, that a
synaptotagmin-based mechanism assisted by complexin underlies nearly all regulation of
exocytosis, and that synaptic exocytosis is organized in time and space by an active zone
protein scaffold containing RIM and Munc13 proteins as central elements.
Ten years after I started my laboratory, while the work described above was progressing, I
was offered the opportunity to return to Germany and to organize a Department of
Neuroscience at the Max-Planck-Institut für experimentelle Medizin in Göttingen, my home
town. I enthusiastically took on the challenge, planned and oversaw the building of a new
animal facility, hired scientists, and organized the renovations and equipment of a suite of
laboratories. However, despite of strong local support, it soon became clear that the new
leadership of the Max-Planck-Society, which had recently changed, developed doubts
about my recruitment, and began rebuilding the institute that I was recruited into in
directions that were quite different from what I had been told and what I had envisioned. In
a personal discussion, Prof. Markl, then the president of the Max-Planck-Society,
suggested I resign my position at the Max-Planck-Institut and look for a future in the US,
which I did. I have never regretted my work for the Max-Planck-Institut in Göttingen, which
laid the foundation for much of what happened there subsequently, including the
recruitment of one of my postdoctoral fellows as a new director who has done a much
better job than I could have done. However, I have also never regretted following the
suggestion of the president of the Max-Planck-Society, and returning my attention and
future to the US, where the breadth and tolerance of the system allowed me to operate in a
manner that was more suitable for my somewhat iconoclastic temperament. Overall, my
work as a director at the Max-Planck-Institut in Göttingen was a very positive experience
that shaped my thinking when I subsequently had the opportunity to help build the
Department of Neuroscience at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in
Dallas. Contributing to establishing a neuroscience department at Dallas was a lot of fun,
and the free-flowing and unbureaurocratic environment of a state university was extremely
supportive – it was a pleasure to hire young people, and see them develop!
The currently final chapter in my career began when I moved my laboratory from UT
Southwestern to Stanford University in 2008. After 10 years as a chair of a Neuroscience
Center and then Department in Dallas, I felt that I wanted to devote more of my time to
pure science, and to embark on a new professional direction, with an environment that was
focused on academics. Moreover, I decided to redirect a large part of my efforts towards a
major problem in neuroscience that appeared to be unexplored: how synapses are formed.
Thus, in this currently last chapter of my life, I am probing the mechanisms that allow
circuits to form in brain, and to form with often near magical properties dictated by the
specific features of particular synapses at highly specified positions. I am fascinated by the
complexity of this process, which far surpasses the numerical size of the genome, and
interested in how disturbances in this process contribute to neuropsychiatric diseases such
as autism and schizophrenia. This is what I would like to address in the next few years,
hoping to gain at least some interesting insights.
Throughout my career as an independent scientist, I have been generously supported by
the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the National Institute of Mental Health. I am
grateful to both for their unflinching support. I have received several recognitions, all of
them unexpected, among which I particularly cherish the Alden Spencer Award from
Columbia University in 1993, the von Euler Lectureship from the Karolinska Institutet in
2004, and – of course - the Kavli Award in 2010. I am not sure I deserve any of these
awards, as conceptual advances in science always represent incremental progress to
which many minds contributed. The conceptual advances we made were no different in
this regard, they do not constitute a single discovery of a particularly revolutionary method
or phenomenon but a continuous postulation and testing of hypotheses. Moreover, our
discoveries on how membranes fuse and how calcium regulates fusion would have been
impossible without the coincidental findings by others, to whom I am grateful for their
contributions. Finally, I feel indebted beyond words to my family, without which I would be
barren and rudderless, and which has been more considerate of me than I deserve.
Wednesday, October 02, 2013
Tilda Swinton speaks on Steiner Education
Tilda Swinton supportive of private Steiner schools
Updated on thePublished 01/10/2013 10:38
TILDA Swinton today defended parents’ rights to opt out of state education in favour of the Steiner Waldorf education system which her own twin kids attend.
The Oscar-winning star, who lives in Nairn, said an Oxford professor had told her that state education was so under question the top university “longed” for Steiner pupils who still have a love for learning.
Swinton, 52, spoke out as she mixed with teachers, pupils and visitors at an open day for the Moray Steiner School and the recently-opened Drumduan Upper School in Forres, Moray.
Ms Swinton, 52, is a trustee of both schools and a co-founder of Drumduan. Xavier and Honor, her 15-year-old children with artist John Byrne, are pupils at Drumduan.
The London-born actress said promoting the schools, which take a holistic approach to education, is her only current project, adding that there was “a misunderstanding” about Steiner education as people think it’s ‘flaky’ or ‘woolly’.
Ms Swinton, who won an Oscar for best supporting actress in 2008 for her performance as a ruthless corporate attorney in the legal thriller ‘Michael Clayton’, said: “When I went into the Steiner school for the first time, I was struck not only by the trusting and familial atmosphere for younger children, but mainly by older children, because I had never walked into a school before where teenagers had been so welcoming and self-possessed and kind.
“The older children play with and care for the younger children.
“There is, very often, a misunderstanding about Steiner education, because of the emphasis on the arts, and the children seem so carefree.
“A misunderstanding that the education might be ‘woolly’ or ‘flaky.
“As my children go through education, I am continually more impressed by how rigorous and engaged all the learning is.”
She added: “I heard of a student who got a double first in physics from Edinburgh University, who said that all he was ever interested in was science and if he had an education other than Steiner then he would have been another ‘geek’ - unable to do anything other than his subject.
“But through the Steiner system he had to learn other crafts. The Steiner had nurtured him to become a fully functional person.
“The new upper school, which has only recently started here, has a 100 per cent success rate in placing students at universities, including Oxford and Cambridge.
“A don at Oxford, who sits on the interview board for applicants, said that state education is so under question that they long for Steiner pupils who still have that love for learning.
“Until Steiner education is taken on board by the government, it remains a private education.”
Ms Swinton cut short promotion of her 2011 Oscar bid ‘We Need to talk about Kevin’ to do a cleaning shift at the Moray Steiner School.
The mum-of-two jetted back from Spain to scrub floors and wash windows at the Forres school.
Taking her role at the school very seriously, she said at the time: “There is a regular rota.
“In order to keep the fees down it’s necessary for parents to take part in cleaning the school on a regular basis.”
Steiner schools are based on the philosophy of Austrian philosopher Rudolph Steiner who founded the first in Germany in 1919. There are now 1026 independent Steiner schools across 60 countries.
The schools concentrate on educating the “whole child” with a strong emphasis on creativity.
The educational philosophy’s overarching goal is to develop free, morally responsible, and integrated individuals equipped with a high degree of social competence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)