onance flowmeter which measures liquid flow without any moving parts or electrodes in the flow stream. Britain's B. Rhodes & Son, Ltd., introduced to the U.S. the first turbine-type transmitter with the propeller cartridge outside the flow stream. What seems so simple as measuring liquid flow through a pipeline is often a problem which chemical engineers bemoan. Many metering devices, which operate in the flow stream, disturb the fluid dynamics of the stream, cause pressure drops, and become coated with suspended matter from the process stream. Badger's new flowmeter completely eliminates such interference with its nothing-in-thestream design. Rhodes' new flowmeter minimizes such interference with its only-the-propeller-in-thestream design. Badger's flowmeter can measure the flow rate and volume of chemical process streams with hydrogen or fluorine as a major constituent. Such streams include all aqueous liquids, hydrocarbons, and fluorocarbons. As a process stream enters the ceramic tube of the flowmeter, a magnetic field surrounding the tube magnetizes the nuclei of either the hydrogen or fluorine. A radio-frequency field is applied to cause the magnetic vector to precess, or wobble, at a high rate of speed, thus producing a strong resonant signal. Then, the magnetized fluid is "tagged" by using a modulating signal to upset the magnetic orientation in small segments or "windows" of the fluid. A receiver downstream detects these demagnetized "windows." Signals from the modulator and receiver run through a phase comparator and into a frequency controller, which operates the flow instruments. Price: about $5500. Rhodes' new flowmeter is based on the simple design innovation of housing the transmitter cartridge at a 45° angle to the line of flow so that only the propeller is exposed to the process stream. This design allows rapid access to the cartridge for repairs with down-times of only a few minutes.
THE ELECTION:
HHH on Federal Science Should Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey upset political odds-makers and win the Presidential election, the scientific community can look for significant changes in the Government's managerial setup for science, particularly in the President's science advisory apparatus. In the most comprehensive position paper on science policy advanced to date by any of the three major Presidential contenders,
Democratic nominee Humphrey The theme—making science a true servant of social purpose
Democratic hopeful Humphrey also told the nation's scientists and engineers that they could look for a greater federal effort to put U.S. scientific and technological resources to use in furthering national social objectives. In the area of federal science management, Mr. Humphrey said specifically that he would give "serious consideration" to combining the Office of Science and Technology and the Marine Science and Space Councils. These are the three policy planning bodies in the White House science advisory apparatus. The purpose of combining the three, Humphrey explains, would be to "gain a greater effect on their policy-level directors and the strength of a combined multidisciplinary staff." Humphrey also proposes to upgrade the Federal Council for Science and Technology, mainly by having the Vice President, rather than the director of OST, serve as its chairman. The council—which provides the principal coordinating mechanism for the total federal effort in science and technology—is composed of the toppolicy-level representative from each of the federal agencies involved in science and technology. But lest anyone get the impression that he proposes to downgrade the role of the director of OST, Mr. Humphrey hastens to add that, if he is elected President, the director of OST would be asked to attend every meeting of the Cabinet and of the National Security Council "to be sure that considerations of science and technology are brought into every issue." In addition to these managerial changes, other specific Humphrey proposals include: • Establishing a set of multidisciplinary technological institutes on urban science, transportation, and environmental management. • Doubling of "ocean-related activities" over the next four years.
• Providing more funds for basic research—"substantially greater support for the National Science Foundation . . . including support for behavioral sciences, and new contract and grant programs in other civilian mission-oriented agencies." • Tying R&D growth to that of the gross national product. Meanwhile, Republican Presidential candidate Richard M. Nixon was stepping up his attack on the JohnsonHumphrey Administration for allegedly contributing to what he calls a crisis in American science and technology. "Today, the U.S. is shortchanging its scientific community," Mr. Nixon says. "We are risking the opening of a research gap between our effort and that of the Soviet Union. Faced with the dynamic possibilities for science, the current Administration is hobbled by the static philosophy that technological potentialities are limited—that we have reached a technological 'plateau.' " This attitude, he says, is "particularly perilous" in the realm of defense. Mr. Nixon is particularly critical of the Administration's "wavering attitude" toward R&D support. "Scientific activity cannot be turned off and on like a faucet," he points out.
FEDERAL LABS:
Interagency Use Pushed "Our interest in effective use of federal laboratories is not just a shot in the dark," a staff member of the House Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development tells C&EN. This comes in the wake of the subcommittee's highly critical report, "Utilization of Federal Laboratories." Assuming the political complexion of the committee won't change next year, the science group, headed by Rep. Emilio Q. Daddario (D.-Conn.), plans to follow up on the issues raised in NOV. 4, 1968 C&EN
19
THE CHEMICAL WORLD THIS WEEK
Yale's medalist Onsager The relations bear his own name
THE NOBEL PRIZE: Hornig and Daddario Nay and aye on a general policy
the report, explains the staff member. The report, based on six days of hearings in March and April, points out alleged shortcomings in the operation of federal laboratories and makes a number of recommendations to "increase the efficiency and capabilities" of such labs. Specifically, the Daddario committee recommends greater interagency research and criticizes federal laboratories for not being more responsive to solving national problems such as crime, transportation, and pollution. The report explains that the massive national investment in federal laboratories (about $3.5 billion of the $17 billion obligated for all research and development for fiscal 1969) coupled with current budget restrictions makes it even more important that these labs be used effectively. "No longer can we afford an automatic response of 'Let's build another laboratory' when a new agency is created," the report argues. As an alternative, the subcommittee calls for expanded interagency use of existing laboratories. Accordingly, the report recommends that the Office of Science and Technology and the Bureau of the Budget pull together in one policy statement the laws, orders, and bulletins on cross-agency work. The report concludes that the present policy for interagency sharing of federal laboratories is "generally passive" and is not widely encouraged. "No one federal office has a working responsibility for the utilization of government laboratories. The Office of Science and Technology, the Bureau of the Budget, and the Federal Council for Science and Technology have exhibited only low-priority interest." The report notes that OST director Dr. Donald F. Hornig does not favor general federal policies (which his office would be primarily responsible for developing and implementing) for cooperation among federal agencies. 20 C&EN NOV. 4, 1968
Chemistry-It's Onsager U.S. scientists are making a clean sweep of the Nobel Prizes. As C&EN was going to press last week, word was received from Stockholm that Dr. Lars Onsager, 65, of Yale University had won the prize in chemistry and that Dr. Luis W. Alvarez, 57, of the University of California, Berkeley, had won the physics prize. U.S. chemists have already won the prize in medicine. Dr. Onsager, J. Willard Gibbs professor of theoretical chemistry at Yale, is cited for "the discovery of the reciprocal relations bearing his name which are fundamental for the thermodynamics of irreversible processes." ACS member Onsager is the 16th American to receive the chemistry award, which now consists of a gold medal, a citation, and a cash award of $70,000. The physics prize has been awarded to an American 28 times. Dr. Alvarez is cited for his pioneering work with subatomic particles. Dr. Onsager, a native Norwegian, is renowned for his theoretical contributions in statistical mechanics. He used the principles of detailed balance to show that cross coefficients in linear equations describing the various fluxes in simultaneous irreversible processes are simply and predictably related to each other. This work has initiated a new area of scientific study—irreversible thermodynamics.
AMINO ACIDS:
Linking Cows and Peas The proteins histone IV from calf thymus and histone IV from pea seedlings have an almost identical amino acid sequence. This drab-sounding finding has far-reaching implications in the evolution of life itself. It implies that all plant and animal life may have had a common ancestor. If nothing else, the finding underlines the highly important and extremely specific function of the histones, proteins that are attached to the deoxyribonucleic acid of chromosomes.
Reported at the autumn meeting of the National Academy of Sciences at California Institute of Technology last week, the research was a collaboration between scientists at Caltech and at the UCLA medical school. Dr. James Bonner and Dr. Douglas Fambrough of Caltech isolated and purified histone IV from the two sources, whereas Dr. Robert Delange and Dr. Emil L. Smith of UCLA did the amino acid sequencing. There is much evidence that the histones, which are very basic proteins, can attach themselves to the chromosome^ DNA in such a way as to block off specific information in the genes, such as how to make a certain protein. This may explain why one cell in an organism is very different from another one even though they both contain the same bank of hereditary information. Dr. Bonner, who has done much work on histones at Caltech, has previously found that there are eight types of histones and that these same types exist in a variety of plants and animals. Thus, a given histone, such as type IV, from the cow has its homologue in the pea plant and both have similar chemical properties and similar amino acid analyses. He decided to concentrate on these two organisms and on histone IV for a more detailed study. He and his coworker had to germinate some 20 tons of pea seeds to get enough seedlings for an eventual yield of 2 grams of pure histone IV. The animal work was easier, requiring only about 20 kg. of calf thymus glands. For the analysis, Dr. Bonner turned to Dr. Smith ("a master of amino acid sequencing") and his colleague Dr. Delange at UCLA. The results described by Dr. Delange last week show an amazingly close structure for the histone IV from the animal and plant sources. Both are made up of 102 amino acids, and both have the same N-terminal and C-terminal amino acids. Both have a methionine residue at position 18 from the Cterminal, and cleavage at this point yields a peptide with identical amino acid sequence. The latest results show that the two proteins are identical all along the line except in two places. In one position, a lysine residue in cow histone IV is replaced by an arginine in peas. In another, valine in the cow is replaced by isoleucine in peas. From these results, it appears that the functions of histones in chromosomes are quite specific and require a specific amino acid sequence. The findings also imply that the gene responsible for making histone IV was around by the time the ancestor for higher plants and animals evolved.
