The University of Minnesota Biocatalysis/Biodegradation Database: emphasizing enzymes

The University of Minnesota Biocatalysis/Biodegradation Database (UM-BBD, http://umbbd.ahc.umn.edu/) provides curated information on microbial catabolic enzymes and their organization into metabolic pathways. Currently, it contains information on over 400 enzymes. In the last year the enzyme page was enhanced to contain more internal and external links; it also displays the different metabolic pathways in which each enzyme participates. In collaboration with the Nomenclature Commission of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 35 UM-BBD enzymes were assigned complete EC codes during 2000. Bacterial oxygenases are heavily represented in the UM-BBD; they are known to have broad substrate specificity. A compilation of known reactions of naphthalene and toluene dioxygenases were recently added to the UM-BBD; 73 and 108 were listed respectively. In 2000 the UM-BBD is mirrored by two prestigious groups: the European Bioinformatics Institute and KEGG (the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes). Collaborations with other groups are being developed. The increased emphasis on UM-BBD enzymes is important for predicting novel metabolic pathways that might exist in nature or could be engineered. It also is important for current efforts in microbial genome annotation.

Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry

The most productive (“star”) bioscientists had intellectual human capital of extraordinary scientific and pecuniary value for some 10–15 years after Cohen and Boyer’s 1973 founding discovery for biotechnology [Cohen, S., Chang, A., Boyer, H. & Helling, R. (1973) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 70, 3240–3244]. This extraordinary value was due to the union of still scarce knowledge of the new research techniques and genius and vision to apply them in novel, valuable ways. As in other sciences, star bioscientists were very protective of their techniques, ideas, and discoveries in the early years of the revolution, tending to collaborate more within their own institution, which slowed diffusion to other scientists. Close, bench-level working ties between stars and firm scientists were needed to accomplish commercialization of the breakthroughs. Where and when star scientists were actively producing publications is a key predictor of where and when commercial firms began to use biotechnology. The extent of collaboration by a firm’s scientists with stars is a powerful predictor of its success: for an average firm, 5 articles coauthored by an academic star and the firm’s scientists result in about 5 more products in development, 3.5 more products on the market, and 860 more employees. Articles by stars collaborating with or employed by firms have significantly higher rates of citation than other articles by the same or other stars. The U.S. scientific and economic infrastructure has been particularly effective in fostering and commercializing the bioscientific revolution. These results let us see the process by which scientific breakthroughs become economic growth and consider implications for policy.