Investigation of Iron (III) desferrioxamine B oxalate ligand exchange by UV-vis spectroscopy: the next step in developing a quantitative analytical method for measuring bioavailable iron in marine ecosystems

To date there are no analytical techniques designed to exclusively measure bioavailable iron in marine environments. The goal of this research is to develop such a technique by isolating the bioavailable iron using the terrestrial siderophore desferrioxamine B (DFB). This project contained many challenging aspects, but the specific goal of this study was to develop a robust analytical technique for quantification of Fe(III)-DFB complexes at nanomolar concentrations. Past work showed that oxalate (Ox) promotes photodissociation of Fe(III)-DFB to Fe(Il), and we are specifically interested in the mechanism of this process. A model was developed using known thermodynamic constants for Fe(III)-DFB and Fe(III) oxalato complexes and adjusting for ionic strength. The model was confirmed by monitoring the UV-VIS absorbance of the system at a variety of oxalate concentrations and pH. The model did not include ternary complexes. Next., the rate of Fe(1I) production during UV irradiation was examined. The results showed that the rate of Fe(II) production was based entirely on the [Fe(Ox)?]3- speciation, and that reoxidation of Fe(II) occurred via reactive oxygen intermediates. This reoxidation could be avoided by either decreasing the oxygen concentration or by adding a Fe(II) stabilizing reagent, such as ferrozine. Further studies need to be done to confirm that these results apply at sub nanomolar concentrations, and the issue of Fe(II) reoxidation at lower Fe concentrations needs to be addressed.

Therapeutic Discourse and the American Public Philosophy: On American Liberalism's Troubled Relationship with Psychology

I explore the main currents of postwar American liberalism. One, sociological, emerged in response to the danger of mass movements. Articulated primarily by political sociologists and psychologists and ascendant from the mid-fifties till the mid-seventies, it heralded the "end of ideology." It emphasized stability, elitism, positive science and pluralism; it recast normatively sound politics as logrolling and hard bargaining. I argue that these normative features, attractive when considered in isolation, taken together led to a vicious ad hominem style in accounting for views outside the postwar consensus. It used pseudo-scientific literature in labeling populists, Progressives, Taft conservatives, Goldwaterites, the New Left and others "pathological," viz. mentally ill. Hence, "therapeutic discourse." I argue that philosophical liberalism, which reasserts the role of political theory in working out norms and adjudicating disagreement, is a more profitable way of thinking about and defending from critics liberalism. I take the philosopher John Rawls as the tradition's modern representative. This inquiry is important because the themes of sociological liberalism are making a comeback in American public discourse, and with them perhaps the baggage of therapeutic discourse. I present a cautionary tale.