Special editorial in memory of John Spikes

John Spikes died peacefully at home in Salt Lake City on June 14, 2006. During his last declining days he was lovingly surrounded by his wife Anne, as well as by his 3 children, 6 grandchildren and 5 great grandchildren. Needless to say, all those who are involved in photobiology, carry out experimental and theoretical investigations in this field, and are fascinated by this so typically interdisciplinary branch of science, feel that they have lost a mentor and a source of inspiration. John can be certainly considered as one of the founding fathers of modern photobiology, having entered this field in the early fifties of the previous century, which was at a time when the emergence of molecular and cellular biology and the continuous progress in electro-optical techniques provided important tools for the interpretation and control of photoprocesses occurring even in complex biological systems. John devoted essentially all of his truly long scientific life (more than 50 years!) to pioneering research in specific areas of photobiology, as well as to the promotion of the discipline as a whole.

John received his education and biological training from the California Institute of Technology, where he completed his PhD in 1948 with a dissertation in plant biochemistry. Shortly thereafter, he moved to the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, where he worked as a professor and a research scientist receiving the Sigma Xi distinguished Faculty Lecturer award in 1962, as well as the Utah Academy of Sciences distinguished service award for outstanding teaching contributions in 1987. John's teaching at the University of Utah continued uninterruptedly until 1989, when he was appointed as Professor Emeritus of Biology. However, he still carried on an intensive research program until his final retirement in 2001. Overall, 20 PhD degrees have been awarded to students who worked in his laboratory. For various periods of time, John served as Head of the Department of Experimental Biology, Chairman of the Department of Biology, and Dean of the College of Letters and Science. He was also a visiting professor at the University of Padova in Italy and Faculty member in several photobiology-related Advanced International Schools. By unanimous recognition John was a top class teacher, combining the clarity of presentation of a subject with a distinctly perceivable (by students) enthusiasm for the peculiar features of light-driven biological processes. As far back as 1969 John gave an impassioned lecture at a NATO School showing how the promotion of an electron to a higher orbital can change the geometry and physico-chemical properties of a molecule, allowing one to pilot a reaction along otherwise impossible pathways and to achieve novel types of selectivity especially in cells and tissues. Quite a few young investigators sitting in the audience (including one author of this editorial) were definitely attracted to photobiology having listened to this presentation.

These heavy teaching loads did not prevent John from becoming engaged in equally productive research activities, in spite of the problems that he had to face at the beginning of his career in order to develop his research facilities to a high quality. For a few years in the 1950s, the only instrumentation available in his laboratory was the glorious Beckman model DU spectrophotometer, which had to be run on an automobile battery! John's interests were initially focused on selected aspects of photosynthesis, in particular the influence of various stress factors (including high-intensity light) on chloroplasts. He successfully collaborated with front-running scientists, such as R. Lumry, H. Eyring and N. I. Bishop (just to name a few). Highlights of this segment of his investigations are the paper published in Nature (1955) on cyanide inhibition of chloroplast photochemical activity and the review on photosynthesis that appeared in Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. (1960). However, starting with the late 1950s, John's attention gradually shifted to photodynamic action, that is, the combined effect of visible light, oxygen and photosensitising agents on biological systems. This field had been intermittently addressed by various authors after the introduction of the term “photodynamic” by von Tappeiner at the beginning of the 20th century. However, John must be given the full credit for having systematically and rationally organized this sector, whose scope and potential were fully exploited only about two decades later owing to the advent of innovative therapeutic techniques based on photodynamic processes. Most of all, John instinctively recognized the major role played by proteins in modulating the cell responses to photosensitisation; this was at variance with the common belief at the time that the effects of light on cells could be almost completely explained on the basis of DNA damage. During the last part of his scientific work, John also made some important contributions to the development and refinement of photodynamic therapies, again being among the first to indicate that PDT of tumours was just one of many other possible applications. For example, his thorough studies on the relationship between the chemical structure and the photosensitising efficiency of porphyrins and phthalocyanines played a pivotal role in the birth of antimicrobial PDT.

Last but certainly not least, John was an exceptional resource to many people due to his unrivalled knowledge of the photobiology literature. He succeeded in building a bibliographic archive where a large number of photobiology papers and data were classified according to the nature of the process, the substrates involved, the authors, and the techniques adopted. The files went back as far as the dawn of photobiology, namely the end of the 19th century. As a consequence, he wrote exhaustive and inspiring reviews, which were real milestones in their specific fields, since he was in the best position to identify the ideas that were common to different authors and connect them to build a solid basis for future advancements. The paper “Photosensitisation: from paramecia to photochemotherapy”, which John published in Photochem. Photobiol. (1997) perfectly exemplifies John's philosophy and approach to research. John wrote 31 reviews spanning from photosynthesis to molecular and medical aspects of photodynamic action and the photosensitised degradation of food and beverages. In addition, he published over 200 research papers and gave numerous plenary lectures at international congresses. His fundamental contributions to the development of photobiology were duly acknowledged by his peers: in 1989, John received a medal from the European Society for Photobiology for excellence in research; the American Society for Photobiology (of which he was a founding member and served as both President and Past-President) organized a symposium on photosensitisation in his honour in 1992, where he was given the Lifetime Achievement Award.

Interacting with John and enjoying his close friendship was a great privilege and an enriching experience. One of us became familiar with John's papers at least a couple of years before knowing him personally. And when he had the opportunity of meeting him (more than thirty years ago), he was literally amazed and fascinated by the grace and the humbleness of such a prestigious scientist, whom he imagined to be quite distant from “ordinary people”. Since then, whenever he had the privilege of spending time with him, he learned something important for his work; also when staying with him and his gentle wife Anne or during a meeting or dinner together, he discovered something precious for his own life. John was a real gentleman, whose conversation was particularly enlightening due to his truly vast education and memory. In particular, he was always ready to listen to other people, give his help and advice, and encourage younger investigators to appreciate the charm of science and persist in their research efforts even in the midst of difficulties. John deeply liked a line of the Latin poet Virgilio: “Beatus vir qui potuit veri cognoscere causas” (happy be the person who had the possibility to investigate the roots of truth). From this point of view John undoubtedly had a very happy life, and at the same time he pushed many other people to have a happy life. The results he obtained and the concepts he developed will become permanent components of the science of photobiology. His kind and friendly attitude will remain forever in our hearts.

Giulio Jori

University of Padova, Padova, Italy

Francesco Lenci

National Research Council, Pisa, Italy

---