Analytical sciences – an endless horizon

Paul Bohn, incoming Chair, Analyst Editorial Board, reflects upon how much there is still to be learned within modern analytical science, and that, as ever, it is a community effort that brings the greatest chances of success for the discipline. Anyone who has driven through northern Illinois in winter surely has faced the dilemma that boredom does not have a fundamental unit – as the scenery changes from soybean stubble to corn stubble and back again. Thus, it was in the late 1990s that I found myself driving to Chicago engrossed in a public radio discussion over a then-recently published book with the provocative title, The End of Science: Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age, by John Horgan, the central thesis of which was that ‘…the great era of scientific discovery is over’. Laying aside for the moment the author's seeming definition of science as a small set of questions surrounding particle physics – as well as the obvious need to be provocative if you are writing about science to a general audience! – the question merits serious reflection. In the same vein, I vividly remember the first semester of graduate school when James Taylor told us that Young and co-workers had just published the first detection of single atoms¹ and then wondering if I had chosen an obsolescent, or even moribund, field for my career. Yikes! In the 30-some years since that day, of course, we have been treated to a veritable cornucopia of transformational discoveries in the analytical sciences. Taking just those developments recognized by the Nobel Prize that are integral to chemical measurement science, we recognize the development of scanning probe microscopy (Physics – 1986), the discovery of fullerenes (Chemistry – 1996), MALDI and ESI mass spectrometry (Chemistry – 2002), development of the polymerase chain reaction for DNA amplification (Chemistry – 1993), magnetic resonance imaging (Medicine – 2003) and the discovery of green fluorescent protein and especially its use in bioimaging (Chemistry – 2008). Numerous other Nobel-worthy discoveries made prior to 1977 but recognized since – radioimmunoassay, ion channels, electron transfer theory, DNA sequencing methods, giant magnetoresistance, ion traps, FT and coherence transfer techniques in NMR, to name a few – are also now well integrated into the portfolio of modern analytical science. It is not too bold to assert that these discoveries and other advances (e.g. the human genome) have individually and collectively changed the way we think about the world of measurement science and what its potential boundaries are. In contrast to the thesis put forward by Horgan, it appears that the horizon is as far away now as ever.

So now, pulling our heads out of the clouds, what exactly does any of this have to do with Analyst at this juncture in the history and development of our discipline? First, those who have come before us are indeed giants with sturdy shoulders. Analyst has been the recipient of incredible good fortune in the form of the leadership of Professor Lisa Hall over the past four years. We frequently apply the term ‘transformational’ when we really mean ‘better than average’, but Professor Hall's tenure as Chair of the Editorial Board at Analyst really does qualify as transformational in every sense of the word. Not so long ago, Analyst was a journal with a very different portfolio and understanding of itself. Through a combination of Lisa Hall's vision and the inspired leadership provided by Editor Dr Niamh O'Connor, the journal has totally remade itself into a pre-eminent global journal focused on the leading edge of interdisciplinary detection science.² Citation counts, impact factors, immediacy indices, and papers published all tell the same story – one of well-managed growth and a future where much can be accomplished. They set a very high standard for those who follow.

The second lesson we can take home from our preamble and its look over the last 30 years of detection science is that we are always called to look for the horizon. In this venture we are indeed fortunate to have the aid of an extraordinarily accomplished and visionary team of regional Associate Editors. Professor Steve Soper, who began his post as Associate Editor for the Americas in January, is a leading figure in the development of high-sensitivity analytical determinations and the application of microscale integration to multidimensional chemical analysis. Professor Boris Mizaikoff of the University of Ulm is a pioneer in the development of nanoscale probes for chemical and physical mapping, especially applied to systems of interest to chemical biology. Professor Mizaikoff assumes the new position of Associate Editor for Europe. Professor Xinrong Zhang of Tsinghua University is an exceptional talent in biomedical and environmental analysis, whose research combines analytical methodologies for elemental speciation coupled to the study of toxic effects of trace elements and their metabolites on human health. He will cover Asia and the Pacific. Finally, we are fortunate that old friend Professor Duncan Graham of the University of Strathclyde will continue to bring his energy and expertise in inelastic light scattering, especially of nanoscale materials and biological systems, to the coordination of reviews in Analyst. All of the editors and I benefit, in addition, from the wise counsel of Pavel Matousek of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Justin Gooding of the University of New South Wales, Graham Cooks of Purdue University, Vicky Wysocki of the University of Arizona and Takehito Kitamori of the University of Tokyo, and, of course, from that of our new Editor, Dr May Copsey. This remarkable group of scholars, who along with the distinguished members of our Advisory Board are exploring the boundaries of their respective research areas, will provide vision and leadership for the journal as we push to realize the mandate handed us by our predecessors. This is a group that is well-poised to redefine the shape of the Analyst portfolio geographically, by making it truly international, and intellectually by continually reassessing the boundaries of our science. I am confident that the boldness these scholars have shown in their own work augurs well for continued expansion of the intellectual content of the journal.

Now, we turn to the last lesson learned from our trip through three decades of breath-taking advances in analytical sciences, namely that the advances are made by a community of researchers. Consequently, our best understanding of the role of a leading journal, especially a scientific society journal, recognizes that it is a public trust held by the Editorial Board on behalf of the entire community. In the case of Analyst it is a trust belonging to the global community of analytical scientists and researchers pushing the analytical sciences from outside the discipline. The notion of a trust is important insomuch as the specific group of scientists with responsibility for overseeing the journal at any given point in its history has a responsibility to the community at large to ensure growth and return. Growth occurs in numerically quantifiable terms, but also in terms of impact on the thinking and the plans of the community. Return is realized in the quiet minutes spent in quiet reading and reflection that are repaid through new ideas fostered. Surely all of us have experienced the moment of inspiration – ‘if these authors observed that, then I should be able to…’ – over a good journal article, and it is incumbent upon us to ensure that we pass to our successors a vehicle advanced qualitatively, as well as quantitatively, over that which we received. So, how do we accomplish these worthy goals? The journal will certainly continue the very successful initiatives of the recent past: encouraging Critical Reviews from emerging authors, publishing carefully selected themed issues focused on coherent themes of broad interest, working hard internally to continue to reduce the time from submission to publication, and emphasizing the value added through the RSC publication process, especially through enhanced publication features such as RSC Project Prospect. We also stand to gain from the regional editorial system, where authors from any part of the globe can now have a ‘local’ editor looking out for the careful shepherding of their paper through the review process.

In closing, I would like to recall another automobile trip, this one at a much younger age with parents and sibling across the great American prairie for the first time. The trip through parts of South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and eastern Colorado gave graphic evidence that the term ‘big sky country’ is not hyperbole – the sky really is bigger when viewed without the impediments of small hills and forests, and the horizon seems to stretch forever. The effect, I would like to think, is not unlike what we are striving to achieve at Analyst. With an abiding appreciation for the accomplishments of those who have preceded us, with confidence in the team assembled to carry us forward and keenly aware that we hold the journal, and all it represents, in trust for the whole community, we look forward eagerly to once again setting out for the horizon.

Paul Bohn, Chair, Editorial Board

References

1. G. S. Hurst, M. H. Nayfeh and J. P. Young, Appl. Phys. Lett., 1977, 30, 229–231.
2. E. A. H. Hall, Analyst, 2010, 135, 211–214.

---