The Society's Annual Meeting is almost upon us again, and I would like to take this opportunity to invite your participation in what promises to be a Scientific Extravaganza. This is the second (and last) time for me to chair the scientific program. The first time was the Chicago meeting in 1993; then I was a tyro and was somewhat overawed by the task. Second time around one feels more relaxed and devil-may-care about it all. Such feelings have encouraged me to be a little more daring in setting up the program. Long-time attendees will be noting a few differences from earlier years.
The first difference is that the meeting will be one day longer, finishing on Thursday noon, instead of the traditional Wednesday noon. This was done to decrease the level of busy-ness that has marked recent meetings and to increase the possibilities of visiting symposia outside one's own research area. This there will be four, not five, parallel sessions. Another major change is that this year the meeting will open with a Keynote Address at 5 p.m. on Saturday afternoon. This will give us all an opportunity to gather prior to the reception and to have a noted speaker address the whole group. The said noted speaker is still being identified. Some of the more "connected" Society members are trying to rope in a political figure. If this fails, maybe we can hire a comedy act (did I get that the right way round) Other new items are a set of four perspectives Lectures in which noted Photobiologists will attempt to bring us up-to-date on what is the state of the art in various segments of our Science, and inform us what major questions need to be addressed in the future.
These things apart, ASP '95 will be recognizable as a typical Society meeting. There will be 24 symposia, 7 contributed paper sessions, 2 poster sessions, 1 short courses, 4 Photobiology Schools, and 2 workshops. In addition there will be 2 Research Award lecturers and President Nick's lecture. On the social side, there will be a Banquet, a Reception, and a Commingling. All in all, it promises to be an extremely stimulating event.
The venue for the meeting is Washington, D.C., and the conference hotel is hard by the Capitol building. This has been purposely selected so that the Society will have an opportunity to interact with policy makers and analysts in their own backyard. To assist this, Frank Gasparro is organizing a Workshop titled "What is Photobiology" to occur on Saturday morning and designed for Congressional aides, science writers, and the like.
Some of us will also relish the fact that the Capitol Hill Hyatt is just a few short blocks away from the National Gallery of Art and the Smithsonian complex. For the gastronomes among us, two of our favorite Washingtonians, Frances Noonan and Ed De Fabo, are working up a list of near-by restaurants that will tempt our palates but not empty our wallets.
The Washington meeting, ASP '95, promises to be a feast of science, culture, and gastronomic pleasure.
I hope to see you all there.
Sincerely,
Michael A. J. Rodgers Program Chair
Approximately 360 manuscripts are submitted to Photochemistry and Photobiology each year for peer review and possible publication. These manuscripts include full-length regular papers, short Research Reports, and Rapid Communications. The Editor, an Associate Editor, and two or three expert reviewers all contribute to the review process. A balance is sought between obtaining thorough and intelligent reviews and responding rapidly to authors.
The Editor assigns each manuscript to the Associate Editor most appropriate for the specific topic covered. The Editorial Board consists of 13 Associate Editors who represent a broad range of expertise in the responsibility for obtaining fair and informed reviews. Upon receipt of a manuscript, the Associate Editor sends a copy of the manuscript to each reviewer. Before sending the manuscript, the Associate Editor frequently contacts possible reviewers by phone or Fax to obtain their agreement to complete their review within three weeks.
Once the Associate Editor receives the reviewers' comments and compares them with the manuscript, the manuscript will follow one of three paths: (1) the Associate Editor may recommend to the Editor that the manuscript be accepted with no changes; (2) the Associate Editor may send his/her own recommendations for revision, along with the reviewers' comments, to the authors; or (3) the Associate Editor may send a recommendation to the Editor, based on the reviewers' comments and his/her own evaluation of the manuscript, that the manuscript not be accepted. The average time for the initial review of the manuscripts was recently calculated to be about 28 days.
When an Associate Editor sends a manuscript to the authors for revision, he/she generally advises the authors about the length of time expected for revisions. If only very minor revisions are needed, the authors may be asked to either send their revised manuscripts directly to the Editorial Office, or to return their revised manuscript to the Associate Editor, who will review the changes made before making a recommendation to the Editor. For manuscripts requiring significant revision and/or very minor additional data, the Associate Editor decides whether or not to send the revised manuscript again to the reviewers. Once the revisions are complete, the Associate Editor sends his/her recommendation and the revised manuscript to the Editor. The average time between submission and acceptance of a manuscript is about 3.3 months; the time for the authors' revisions is usually the longest single component of this period.
Manuscripts containing data that should be published by Photochemistry and Photobiology but that require extensive and/or significant new experiments are not accepted. Authors are strongly encouraged to complete the changes necessary to correct the major flaws and to resubmit a new manuscript to the Editorial Office. The resubmitted manuscript is usually assigned to the same Associate Editor, who may or may not send it to the previous reviewers.
A manuscript may also be rejected if (1) it lacks new information or techniques; (2) only preliminary studies are reported; (3) observations are reported without investigation of the underlying causes; (4) it is written so poorly that its scientific content cannot be judged; or (5) its content is not appropriate for this journal. The final decision on each manuscript is made by the Editor.
If you would like to be a reviewer for the Photochemistry and Photobiology, please send me a letter to me describing your areas of expertise. This information will be distributed to the appropriate Associate Editors.
Detailed information on the format for the manuscripts to be submitted are also available from my office. A summary of this information was printed in January 1994 issue. I look forward to receiving manuscripts from you and your colleagues.
The European Society for Pigment Cell Research held its 5th meeting in Vienna, Austria from October 19 - 22 October, 1994. Although the meeting centered mainly on development and differentiation of pigment cells and on various aspects of melanoma, several presentations were of interest to photobiologists. Dr. Guiseppe Prota of the University of Naples presented a lecture on the Reassessment of the Photoprotective Role of Melanin taking into consideration the fact that a number of studies indicate that melanin under some circumstances can do more harm than good. Dr. Barbara Gilchrest from Boston University School of medicine reported that melanogenesis is stimulated by DNA repair in vitro. In guinea pig skin, liposome encapsulated pTpT causes tanning. Dr. Antony Young, an ASP Council member, co- chaired a session on Photoprotection. His introductory lecture again pointed out that melanin alone is not always photoprotective. Helene Hill, another ASP Council member reported on the differential effects on survival of Cloudman melanoma cells by different UV wave lengths. The least pigmented cell line was less sensitive to killing by polychromatic FS20 radiation. Anthony Thody's group using high tyrosinase and low tyrosinase B16 melanoma cell lines showed that tyrosinase -- which is synthesized after UV exposure -- may protect the skin from cytotoxic reactive oxygen species by using superoxide -- produced by UV -- as a substrate in the synthesis os melanin.
A key feature of ESPCR meetings is always the farewell dinner. It is traditional that each host city organizing committee outdoes the preceding ones for special effects.This meeting was no exception. The dinner (with dancing) -- a Heurigen Evening -- was held at a local wine-tasting restaurant. We were elegantly served and entertained by costumed Viennese and by the end of the evening it was clear again, as always, that one of the most delightful, most intellectually stimulating, friendliest and most entertaining meeting on the international circuit is that of the ESPCR.
On Tuesday afternoon (June 20) Janus Z. Beer will chair a workshop to discuss the current clinical utilization of UV therapy for HIV-infected patients, their photosensitivity and the related questions of safety. The discussion will be led by a group of HIV experts, both clinicians and laboratory scientists. A related symposium organized by Barbara Zmudzka will review progress in research related to the use of dermatological therapy for HIV-infected patients (Monday June 19).
The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will hold an open Forum on Scientific Issues Related to UVA-emitting Sunlamp Products immediately after the ASP meeting in Rockville, MD at the Parklawn Building (5600 Fisheržs Lane, in Conference Room E, 3rd floor). There will be two sessions: Thursday, June 21 2:30-6:00 PM and Friday, June 22 9:00- 1:00 PM).This forum is being convened because recent epidemiological and laboratory findings suggest a possible link between UVA exposure and the induction of malignant melanoma. The Thursday session will be devoted to expert reviews of the bioeffects of UVA and the molecular mechanism underlying these effects. The Friday session will be organized as a working session to discuss the mounting evidence for the adverse health effects that result from UVA and/or sunlamp exposure. For additional information contact Howard Cyr, PhD at phone: (301) 443-7179, fax: 301 594-6755, or E-mail: HWC@FDADR.CDRH.FDA.GOV. The Parklawn Building is within walking distance of the Twinbrook Metro Station (Red Line).
American Society for Photobiology| Photobiology Online | |