Read Full Report

Date:  Sept. 17, 2009

Contacts:  Jennifer Walsh, Media Relations Officer

Alison Burnette, Media Relations Assistant

Office of News and Public Information

202-334-2138; e-mail <>


for immediate release


National New Biology Initiative Offers Potential

For 'Remarkable and Far-reaching Benefits'


WASHINGTON -- A report released today by the National Research Council calls on the United States to launch a new multiagency, multiyear, and multidisciplinary initiative to capitalize on the extraordinary advances recently made in biology and to accelerate new breakthroughs that could solve some of society's most pressing problems -- particularly in the areas of food, environment, energy, and health. 


The report was requested by the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, and U.S. Department of Energy, which asked the committee that wrote the report to look at how best to build upon recent scientific developments such as the Human Genome Project. 


Advances in many technologies have allowed biologists to observe life at levels of detail that were once thought impossible.  Interpreting the vast amounts of data being generated by these innovations and developing practical solutions to major challenges will require collaboration among scientists and engineers from many disciplines.  And despite the potential of these recent advancements, the committee said that the design, manipulation, and prediction of complex biological systems needed for practical applications are "well beyond current capabilities."  


The committee used the term "new biology" to describe an approach to research where physicists, chemists, computer scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and other scientists are integrated into the field of biology to create the type of research community that can tackle society's big problems.  "'The new biologist' is not a scientist who knows a little bit about all disciplines, but a scientist with deep knowledge in one discipline and a 'working fluency' in several," the report says.  To be sure, biologists are already working successfully in many instances with other scientists and engineers.  But for collaborations to take advantage of advances in imaging, high-throughput technologies, computational science and technology, and others, a major new initiative is needed, the committee concluded.


The national new biology initiative should have a timeline of at least 10 years and funding in addition to current research budgets, and it should be an interagency effort to reflect the interdisciplinary approach to research, the committee emphasized.  The report also underscores the importance of making information technologies a priority in the initiative given that information is the "fundamental currency" of the new biology.


"A new biology initiative would be a daring addition to the nation's research portfolio, but we believe the potential benefits are remarkable and far-reaching," said Phillip Sharp, co-chair of the committee that wrote the report and Institute Professor for the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.


The report describes four broad challenges where the new initiative could accelerate the emergence of an integrated approach to biology and bear its "first fruits."  For starters, it could meet food security challenges by developing the capacity to quickly adapt plants to any growing conditions.  The initiative also could be used to address environmental issues by making it possible to monitor ecosystems and diagnose and repair ecosystem damage.  On the energy front, the new biology initiative could speed the development of alternatives to fossil fuels by optimizing systems for turning plant cellulose into biofuel.  A fourth goal should be to advance so-called personalized medicine by making it possible to monitor and treat a person's health in a manner that is tailored to that individual, the goal being to provide individually predictive surveillance and care.


"We need to set big goals, and let the problems drive the science," said committee co-chair Thomas Connelly Jr., executive vice president and a member of the office of the chief executive for E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. 


The report says that by targeting society's major challenges, the initiative would provide an opportunity to attract students who want to solve real-world problems to scientific fields.  The initiative will need to devote resources to interdisciplinary education to support the training of new biologists, the report adds.


The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies.  They are independent, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under an 1863 congressional charter.  Committee members, who serve pro bono as volunteers, are chosen by the Academies for each study based on their expertise and experience and must satisfy the Academies' conflict-of-interest standards.  The resulting consensus reports undergo external peer review before completion.  For more information, visit  A committee roster follows.


Copies of A New Biology for the 21st Century: Ensuring the United States Leads the Coming Biology Revolution are available from the National Academies Press; tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at  Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above). 

#       #       #


[ This news release and report are available at ]



Division on Earth and Life Studies

Board on Life Sciences


Committee on New Biology for the 21st Century


Thomas M. Connelly Jr. (co-chair)

Executive Vice President and Chief Innovation Officer

E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co.

Wilmington, Del.


Phillip A. Sharp1, 2 (co-chair)

Institute Professor

Koch Institute of Integrative Cancer Research

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



Dennis Ausiello2

Jackson Professor of Clinical Medicine

Harvard Medical School; and

Physician in Chief

Department of Medicine

Massachusetts General Hospital



Marianne Bronner-Fraser

Albert Billings Ruddock Professor of Biology

Division of Biology

California Institute of Technology



Ingrid C. Burke


Haub School and Ruckelshaus Institute of Environment and Natural Resources, and


Department of Botany

University of Wyoming



John E. Burris


Burroughs Wellcome Fund

Research Triangle, N.C.


Jonathan A. Eisen


Genome and Biomedical Sciences   Facility

University of California



Anthony C. Janetos


Joint Global Change Research Institute

University of Maryland

College Park


Richard M. Karp2,3

Senior Research Scientist

International Computer Science Institute; and

University Professor

University of California



Peter S. Kim1, 2


Merck Research Laboratories

North Wales, Pa.


Douglas A. Lauffenburger 3

Whitaker Professor of Bioengineering and Head

Department of Biological Engineering

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



Mary E. Lidstrom

Vice Provost for Research, and

Professor of Microbiology

Office of Research

University of Washington



Wendell Lim


Howard Hughes Medical Institute; and

Professor of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology

University of California

San Francisco


Margaret Jean McFall-Ngai


Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology

University of Wisconsin



Elliot M. Meyerowitz1

George W. Beadle Professor of Biology and Chair

Division of Biology

California Institute of Technology



Keith R. Yamamoto1, 2

Executive Vice Dean

School of Medicine, and


Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology

University of California

San Francisco




Ann Reid

Study Director



1 Member, National Academy of Sciences

2 Member, Institute of Medicine

3 Member, National Academy of Engineering