Director of the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics  Make a Plea for the Young. (January 11, 2013)

Anthony Hyman (50) became one of the four founding directors of Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics in 1999. He is the current Managing Director for the institute. According to Wikipedia his lab is currently focusing on: asymmetric cell division in C.elegans embryos, spatial control of the microtubule cytoskeleton, issues related to size and shape of the mitotic spindle and positioning of the spindle.

In his editorial written for the January 11, 2013 issue of Science Dr Hyman makes a strong plea for considerably more support for "junior research group leaders" and points out that when he joined the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) as a young researcher 20 years ago: "I was lucky in joining... EMBL in Heidelberg, which was exploring alternative ways to organize science, with the aim of promoting innovation and research excellence. [It] had created a group leader system in which, apart from a few senior scientists to provide some stability, new researchers were directly funded for up to 9 years to do as they pleased, before being required to move on to a senior job elsewhere... this type of funding encouraged a focus on innovation, [and] provided a separate funding stream in Europe for starting scientists."

Dr Hyman then turns to the European Research Councils' funding "specifically targeted at providing additional opportunities for young investigators who are 'making the transition from working under a supervisor to being independent researchers in their own right.'" In 2012 the program received 4,700 applications. It funded 536 (11.4%) for 5 year terms some being awarded up €1.5 million per annum.

In the US the NIH currently supports New Innovator Awards. However, Dr Hyman notes that: "Although a Science editorial called for 500 of these grants in 2009, only 51 were awarded in 2012. I suggest that NIH move to a model where all starting principal investigators are funded through a New Innovator Award type of program before they compete in the normal system [and] a screen for excellence and innovation should be the only way in which new investigators get funded, through a separate funding stream, with no requirement for preliminary data."

And finally: "Experience demonstrates that innovation in science mainly comes from the young. Only by providing our new group leaders with real freedom to manoeuvre can we sow enough seeds to find the right way ahead."

Dr Hyman is hardly the first notable to plead for enhanced support for young researchers. To date we have seen pretty feeble support from public funders. It remains to be seem if his editorial gains worthwhile support.