Inception and establishment of the International CCN Society (ICCNS) and of the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling (JCCS): A response to A. Leask’s Editorial entitled "Modeling the microenvironment special issue"

A little over a year ago, on January 25, 2021, the new Editor-in-Chief (EiC) of JCCS stated in his Editorial: “ICCNS and JCCS were the brainchildren of Bernard Perbal, and without his energy and drive, neither would exist, to the detriment of us who are driven to solve difficult problems in science, and not picking low-hanging fruit. All one has to do is examine all the editorials written in JCCS (and CCS!) to see evidence of this. It will be tough to fill those shoes.“I disagree with the assertion in the Editorial published on March 29, 2022 that G. Martin contributed “to the initial growth of the International CCN Society, and, ultimately, to the establishment of this journal.” My opinion is based on the evidence that the International CCN Society (ICCNS) and its official organ journal, the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling (JCCS), were created by myself. Over a span of 21 years until the present, and in spite of his contribution to the early history of CTGF, we never heard from G. Martin being involved or interested in any aspect of the ICCNS and its biannual meetings, nor in any aspect in the growth of JCCS.In order to further clarify the confusion stemming from the Editorial in question and to give credit where it is due, I provide below detailed evidence that undoubtedly ascribes the true inception of both ICCNS and JCCS, and merit to the efforts of all those who trusted and supported us during the initial difficult creative moments.I am of the opinion that the Editorial, and the implications that it carries do not justice to the efforts of those who were really involved in the creation of both the ICCNS and JCCS.In the name of respectful scientific integrity, I will provide the evidence that correctly attributes the inception of ICCNS and JCCS.     

The 11th international workshop on the CCN family of genes in pictures

The 11th International Workshop on the CCN Family of Genes organized in Nice from October 20th to October 24th, 2022, was the occasion to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the ICCNS meetings.

In order to mark this special event, and as a co-organizer of the workshop, I shot pictures to illustrate the nice days that we spent with all the scientists who accepted to participate in this new episode of the ICCNS workshop series.     

Editorial for Issue 1, Jan 2016 title of the editorial 2016 : A year for JCCS Editorial changes and CCN3 KO mice at ICCNS

The year 2016 will see significant improvements for the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling with the earning of an official Impact Factor and the merger of Springer Science + Business Media and part of Macmillan Sciences and Education. It will also be an important year for the International CCN Society (ICCNS) with the nomination of a new Scientific Board and reinforcement of interactions with other major scientific societies interested in various aspects of Cell Signaling. Starting this year the ICCNS will become an official provider of CCN3 knock out mice to ICCNS members. This first step in opening up access to certified reagents as a service for our CCN scientific community is part of our intention and efforts to attain the highest degree of assistance and enabler of scientific cooperation and communication in Science Communication.     

Another Step Forward to the understanding of Biological Signaling Networks

In this editorial I briefly review the new JCCS scientific directions that have emerged from the complicated situations created by the pandemics of COVID- 19, and by the internal audit of both Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling and International CCN Society, that were initiated since my proposal at the 2019 International Workshop on the CCN family of genes.I also welcome the distinguished members of our renewed JCCS Editorial and congratulate all those who have in many different ways participated to the consolidation of the 2021 JCCS Impact Factor attaining 5.908.     

Neuroscience and psychological studies sustain the cognitive benefits of print reading

On behalf of the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling Editorial board it is my great pleasure to present through this message of peace and love our warmest wishes of health, happiness and professional success. We sincerely hope that 2017 will be a peaceful year worldwide and that solutions will be brought to resolve the great tensions that crystalized last year into terrible acts of violence which reflected the inability of the political powers to bring satisfactory solutions to human dispair and fear. The year 2017 will be the time for celebration of the 10th JCCS anniversary and 9th International Workshop on the CCN family of Genes. Both events should allow us to meet in a productive interactive way. I have had the opportunity to express several times in these columns my deep belief in the power of communication at all levels of human biological and social interactions. Indeed, « Communication is the key » at large.     

Report on the 11th international workshop on the CCN family of genes,Nice, October 20–24, 2022

In celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the inception of the CCN society, and of the first post-Covid-19 live meeting, the executive board of the ICCNS had chosen Nice as the venue for the 11th International workshop on the CCN family of genes. On this occasion participation in the meeting was extended to colleagues from other cell signaling fields who were invited to present both an overview of their work and the future directions of their laboratory. Also, for the first time, the members of the JCCS Editorial Board were invited to participate in a JCCS special session during which all aspects of the journal « life » were addressed and opened to free critical discussion. The scientific presentations and the discussions that followed showed once more that an expansion of the session topics was beneficial to the quality of the meeting and confirmed that the ARBIOCOM project discussed last April in Nice was now on track to be launched in 2023. The participants unanimously welcomed Professor Attramadal’s proposition to organize the 2024, 12th International CCN workshop in Oslo, Norway.     

7th international workshop on the CCN family of genes: Nice to be in nice

In this Editorial, I would like to provide our readers with a brief mid-year update about our activities and efforts to bring together researchers working on intercellular signaling proteins at international meetings. The roots emerged about 20 years ago in the discovery of three genes originally designated cyr61, ctgf, and nov. The proteins encoded by these genes were first proposed to constitute a family of proteins (CCN) which now comprises 6 members (CCN1, CCN2, CCN3, CCN4-6) including the wisp proteins. These proteins were recognized to share a striking structural organization and a high degree of identity although they exhibited quite distinct biological properties. After historical considerations regarding the reasons for using the CCN acronym, and how the ICCNS publishing landscape that drove the ICCNS from Cell Communication and Signaling to the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling, this short update will focus on the 7th edition of the International Workshop on the CCN family of genes to be held in Nice, Oct 16–19, 2013.     

Is 2020 the year when primatologists should cancel fieldwork?

Year 2020 has brought the greatest global pandemic to hit the world since the end of the First World War. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and the resulting disease named coronavirus disease 2019 has brought the world to its knees both financially and medically. The American Society of Primatologists has postponed their annual meetings from the end of May 2020 until the end of September 2020, while the International Primatological Society have postponed their biennial congress from August 2020 to August 2021, which has also resulted in their 2022 meetings in Malaysia being pushed back until 2023. Here, I explore the potential dangers of pursuing any primate fieldwork during this pandemic on our study species, their ecosystems, and local peoples. I believe that the risk of bringing this virus into our study ecosystems is too great and that primatologists should cancel all field research until the pandemic ends or a vaccine/reliable treatment is widely available. This is the year we all must become One Health practitioners!     

Liberté, Liberté Chérie

As part of the Journal of Cell communication and Signaling publishing staff, we are very much attached to the freedom of expression given to our authors. This has been exemplified in our willingness to stimulate commentaries and open debates through the Bits and Bytes series published in JCCS.Without willing to take part in the debate regarding the nature of the drawings published in Charlie Hebdo, we recognize the worldwide response to the recent murdering of journalists as strong support of freedom of the press , however, we also felt that attempts to silence other forms of expression, which are numerous these days, should be reminded and fought against.In this editorial we pay homage to the victims of recent tragic events in Paris and to all who fight every day for freedom of expression.     

Focus on the patentability of computer programs

The Nuts and Bolts section of our Journal (mirrored on the ICCNS society web site), is meant to provide a very practical way to share useful information, that goes beyond the scope of cell signaling and basic CCN protein biology. Considering the number of requests we have had for information related to protection of Intellectual Property (IP), I am pleased to initiate what will be a series of articles that will focus on various IP topics. The inaugural topic is the protection of computer programs. Some colleagues may wonder how and why the patentability of computer programs is a topic of interest for scientists working on CCN proteins . . . As a matter of fact, to assist us in analyzing the potential involvement of CCN3 in human genetic diseases, we considered developing a computer program designed to analyze large amounts of data. Sharing the concepts and the computer program raised concerns regarding IP and protection of the software that we would handle. We believe that many colleagues have encountered similar problems. This article provides a short focus on computer program patentability. It is aimed to provide basic legal information, and to help our readers in understanding the process. It is not intended to replace IP counselors or technology transfer departments. Future articles will address other practical aspects of IP protection.     

Looking back on a life of unacknowledged privilege and a call to action

The year 2020 provided a wake-up call about the role systemic racism plays in shaping our nation and shaping science. While hard work and great mentors helped bring me a long way from a farm in Minnesota, it’s become much clearer that the privilege of being white and male and the accumulated advantages that began there played powerful roles. It’s time for white scientists like me to listen, think, and take action.

We all have personal stories that we use to describe our trajectory in life and science. For the past five decades the narrative I told myself was a simple one of good luck, hard work, support from my community, and mentors at pivotal times. However, in many important ways, this was just a small part of the truth, ignoring the role unperceived privilege played. The many underlying injustices that were laid bare in our nation this past year began to open my eyes, prompting me to look back at the roles hidden privilege played in my career and the power that these have given me. This challenged me to use the power of that privilege to speak and act to try to change the system in which engrained advantages benefit some but not all. I am telling my story in hopes it will encourage my white colleagues to examine their own.     

The rattan trade of Northern Myanmar: Species, supplies, and sustainability

Although Myanmar exports millions of dollars of rattan cane each year, the last systematic treatment of rattans in this country was done over 100 years ago, and virtually nothing has been written about the collection and trade of this important forest resource. Here we report the results from a study of rattans in the Hukaung Valley Tiger Reserve in northern Myanmar. A total of 15 species of rattan were encountered; seven species are new records for Myanmar and two species are new to science. Inventory transects revealed that the density of commercial rattans in local forests averages 40.5 canes ≽4m long/hectare. Populations of all species appear to be actively regenerating. The current pattern of rattan exploitation, however, is largely uncontrolled and will eventually lead to resource depletion unless some form of management is implemented.     

Diversifying the biological sciences: past efforts and future challenges

I am honored to receive the E. E. Just Award for 2010. In my invited essay, I have opted to discuss the state of diversity in the biological sciences with some recommendations for moving forward toward a more positive and inclusive academy. The need to develop cohorts of minority scientists as support groups and to serve as role models within our institutions is stressed, along with the need to ensure that minority scientists are truly included in all aspects of the academy. It is imperative that we increase our efforts to prepare for the unique challenges that we will face as the United States approaches a "majority minority" population in the next 50 years.     

Pointer years revisited: Does one method fit all? A clarifying discussion

The identification of pointer years is central in tree-ring studies, for example, for crossdating or describing growth responses of trees to extreme events. Various methods exist to define pointer years. To these methods, a presumably new method was recently added, i.e. the standardized growth change (SGC) method (Buras et al., 2020; 2022), which was claimed by the authors to outperform existing methods. In this Communication, we perform a concise method review and compare the SGC method with existing pointer year detection methods using simulated tree-ring data that contain diverse signal patterns. We not only provide evidence that the SGC method has already been proposed in 1994, but furthermore show that each method for pointer year detection, including SGC, has its own strengths and weaknesses. Given that each method highlights different aspects of extraordinary growth, we repeat our conclusion from Jetschke et al. (2019), namely that no method can be substituted by others completely, and thus be claimed as being ‘best’. As applies to all methods for pointer year detection, SGC is a complementary but certainly powerful method. We request the dendro-community to provide clear explanations in future studies on how the term pointer year was used to prevent unnecessary confusion and misunderstanding.     

The EU Biocidal Products Directive and the consequences for Dinsinfectants

The title of my presentation suggests or at least anticipates that the EU legislative process, to provide a harmonised regulatory platform for biocides in the EU, has been finalised when this symposium takes place.When adapted and subsequently implemented in the EU member states (estimation Q3 1999), this directive will have a major impact on the market of disinfectants for both the suppliers of active substances and formulators supplying disinfectant products to customers and consumers. This presentation will focus on (technical) regulatory consequences rather than economical or business effects.

• • scope: which products will fall under the regime of this directive, which are excluded?

• • principle: one product—one authorization and mutual recognition; lead times involved?

• • procedure: how will the simplified procedures foreseen (hopefully) help the disinfectant supplier?

• • data requirements: why do the dossier requirements for products and particularly actives need to be so excessively costly and what is the role of risk assessment?

• • transitional arrangements: what can and can't disinfectant suppliers do to keep their products on the market or to introduce new products?

• • review programme: what will happen to the availability of active substances?

The directive itself will not give sufficiient answers to all issues mentioned above to allow a harmonised interpretation across the EU. A number of technical guidance documents is therefore being developed covering Common Principles, Data Requirements and Conditions to include an Active Substance on Annex I. The workability of the whole directive will very much be dependent on the practical details to be dealt with in these documents.Disinfectant suppliers also do recognize the merits of the directive (improved protection of man and the environment, harmonisation across EU, etc.), provided however that it does not undermine the efforts of our industry to deliver better hygiene with safe, effective but also affordable disinfectants.     

Island colonisation and the evolutionary rates of body size in insular neonate snakes

Island colonisation by animal populations is often associated with dramatic shifts in body size. However, little is known about the rates at which these evolutionary shifts occur, under what precise selective pressures and the putative role played by adaptive plasticity on driving such changes. Isolation time played a significant role in the evolution of body size in island Tiger snake populations, where adaptive phenotypic plasticity followed by genetic assimilation fine-tuned neonate body and head size (hence swallowing performance) to prey size. Here I show that in long isolated islands (>6000 years old) and mainland populations, neonate body mass and snout-vent length are tightly correlated with the average prey body mass available at each site. Regression line equations were used to calculate body size values to match prey size in four recently isolated populations of Tiger snakes. Rates of evolution in body mass and snout-vent length, calculated for seven island snake populations, were significantly correlated with isolation time. Finally, rates of evolution in body mass per generation were significantly correlated with levels of plasticity in head growth rates. This study shows that body size evolution occurs at a faster pace in recently isolated populations and suggests that the level of adaptive plasticity for swallowing abilities may correlate with rates of body mass evolution. I hypothesise that, in the early stages of colonisation, adaptive plasticity and directional selection may combine and generate accelerated evolution towards an ‘optimal'' phenotype.     

Influence of connectivity, wild prey and disturbance on occupancy of tigers in the human-dominated western Terai Arc Landscape

Occupying only 7% of their historical range and confined to forested habitats interspersed in a matrix of human dominated landscapes, tigers (Panthera tigris) typify the problems faced by most large carnivores worldwide. With heads of governments of tiger range countries pledging to reverse the extinction process and setting a goal of doubling wild tiger numbers by 2022, achieving this target would require identifying existing breeding cores, potential breeding habitats and opportunities for dispersal. The Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) represents one region which has recently witnessed recovery of tiger populations following conservation efforts. In this study, we develop a spatially explicit tiger occupancy model with survey data from 2009–10 based on a priori knowledge of tiger biology and specific issues plaguing the western TAL (6,979 km²), which occurs in two disjunct units (Tiger Habitat Blocks; THBs). Although the overall occupancy of tigers was 0.588 (SE 0.071), our results clearly indicate that loss in functionality of a regional corridor has resulted in tigers now occupying 17.58% of the available habitat in THB I in comparison to 88.5% in THB II. The current patterns of occupancy were best explained by models incorporating the interactive effect of habitat blocks (AIC w = 0.883) on wild prey availability (AIC w = 0.742) and anthropogenic disturbances (AIC w = 0.143). Our analysis has helped identify areas of high tiger occupancy both within and outside existing protected areas, which highlights the need for a unified control of the landscape under a single conservation unit with the primary focus of managing tigers and associated wildlife. Finally, in the light of global conservation targets and recent legislations in India, our study assumes significance as we identify opportunities to secure (e.g. THB II) and increase (e.g. THB I) tiger populations in the landscape.     

基于CA-Markov模型的石羊河流域生态承载力时空格局预测

生态承载力是区域可持续发展的重要物质基础。为了探讨我国干旱区内陆河流域未来生态承载力的时空格局变化,以石羊河流域为研究区,基于该流域1992、2002年和2012年3期Landsat TM遥感影像,选取10个影响生态承载力变化的主要驱动因素,利用元胞自动机-马尔科夫模型(CA-Markov),以土地利用预测为切入点,对该流域2022年的生态承载力时空格局进行了模拟预测。首先基于1992—2002年数据预测了2012年石羊河流域土地利用状况,并与当年实际土地利用状况进行对比和验证,结果显示:Kappa系数为0.7956,说明本文所选用的预测方法预测结果可靠,可以用于该流域土地利用预测;其次,以2012年为起始年,模拟预测了2022年土地利用空间数据,并计算生态承载力时空格局,结果显示:2022年石羊河流域单位面积生态承载力与1992年、2002年和2012年相比整体空间分布格局变化不大,但区域内部变化却呈明显的空间分异特征;1992—2022年流域生态承载力总量以2002年为拐点呈先减少后增加的趋势,其中建设用地的生态承载力增加最为显著;预测可知,较2012年,2022年流域上游山区的林地、中游绿洲的建筑用地生态承载力均增加较快,且呈现较明显的斑块聚集,而中、下游绿洲区耕地、草地生态承载力增、减变化复杂,斑块分布较为离散和破碎;2012—2022年土地利用类型将发生频繁转换,导致流域生态承载力结构组成变化较大,其中未利用地的转出对2022年流域生态承载力的增加贡献突出。研究结果表明自2002年以后,该流域实施的退耕还林还草、关井压田等生态工程已经并将继续对该流域生态效益的提高起到积极的作用。     

Selected papers from the Fourth Annual q-bio Conference on Cellular Information Processing

This special issue consists of 11 original papers that elaborate on work presented at the Fourth Annual q-bio Conference on Cellular Information Processing, which was held on the campus of St John's College in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, 11-14 August 2010. Now in its fourth year, the q-bio conference has changed considerably over time. It is now well established and a major event in systems biology. The 2010 conference saw attendees from all continents (except Antarctica!) sharing novel results and participating in lively discussions at both the oral and poster sessions. The conference was oversubscribed and grew to 27 contributed talks, 16 poster spotlights and 137 contributed posters. We deliberately decreased the number of invited speakers to 21 to leave more space for contributed presentations, and the attendee feedback confirmed that the choice was a success. Although the q-bio conference has grown and matured, it has remained true to the original goal of being an intimate and dynamic event that brings together modeling, theory and quantitative experimentation for the study of cell regulation and information processing. Funded in part by a grant from NIGMS and by DOE funds through the Los Alamos National Laboratory Directed Research and Development program, the conference has continued to exhibit youth and vigor by attracting (and partially supporting) over 100 undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral researchers. The associated q-bio summer school, which precedes the conference each year, further emphasizes the development of junior scientists and makes q-bio a singular event in its impact on the future of quantitative biology. In addition to an increased international presence, the conference has notably diversified its demographic representation within the USA, including increased participation from the southeastern corner of the country. One big change in the conference this year is our new publication partner, Physical Biology. Although we are very grateful to our previous partner, IET Systems Biology, for their help over the years in publicizing the work presented at the conference, we felt that the changing needs of our participants required that we find a new partner. We are thrilled that Physical Biology is publishing the q-bio proceedings this year. It has been a great collaboration, as evidenced by the high quality of this special issue. What's next for q-bio? We are happy to report that NIGMS has recently extended the q-bio conference grant for the next three years, ensuring strong support for junior researchers who need financial assistance to participate in the event. The conference will retain its emphasis on cellular information processing, but will also build connections to other areas of modern biology and biotechnology, focusing specifically on ecology and evolutionary biology next year. Indeed, to fully understand biological information processing systems, they must be studied in their ecological contexts. We will continue to honor distinguished contributors to the field in our opening banquets; the tradition started with Howard Berg, Bruce Alberts and Michael Savageau in previous years, and continues with Dennis Bray at the upcoming 2011 event. Starting in 2011, the conference will also venture into exploration of the social aspects of science. The future is bright for q-bio! We will see you at the Fifth Annual q-bio Conference on 10-13 August 2011, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA and at the Sixth Annual q-bio Conference in early August 2012.     

Inclusion: an individual pursuit requiring organization-level investment to sustain it

If this was not happening in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, I imagine that I would be speaking these words instead of writing them on my laptop. Even so, I am so jazzed for this opportunity! No word or phrase describes what I am feeling in this moment in receiving the 2021 American Society for Cell Biology Prize for Excellence in Inclusivity. It is certainly an honor to be recognized in this way. I am grateful to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute for awarding me additional resources to keep on keeping on. My approach to finding the connection between people and their science certainly could use the monetary support. Resources open doors. At the same time that I am grateful for the attention, I am not exactly sure what to do with the spotlight. Importantly, there are a host of other folks out there also doing amazing things who have never been recognized. Let’s work to ensure that their contributions are supported, appreciated, and recognized. Instead of focusing the spotlight on me, I would rather redirect it to recognize my foundational influences. I also hope to encourage the need for institutional approaches beyond celebrating individual accomplishment.

O. A. Quintero‐CarmonaJo Rae Wright was my graduate advisor and the model for how I have tried to work with my students and colleagues to support their opportunities while also “doing science.” I wanted to start graduate school as soon as I could after graduating college, so after letting the Cell and Molecular Biology Program at Duke University know that I was accepting their offer, I started thumbing through their program booklet looking for labs with interesting research projects (a web presence wasn’t even really a thing for departments in 1996). I worked alphabetically and contacted a handful of labs one at a time to see whether anyone was willing to take on an early-rotation student. It was an unusual request for the way that the program had operated previously, and Jo Rae was the only person to agree to it. I don’t remember exactly, but she said something like, “We accepted you into the program, so I would be happy to host your first rotation.” The sense that I got was that, within the limits of her time and resources, she was willing to become my mentor because I needed one. She trusted the admissions process, so why not bring an eager student into the lab. I spent the summer settling in to the life of a graduate student—sort of.At first, I was bad at graduate school. I am curious about all sorts of things, which means I am also easily pulled in too many directions. In that first year of school I spent way too much time simply visiting other students in my cohort to see what it was that they were up to each day. I cannot imagine how distracting I must have been to them and probably extremely irritating to their PIs as well. If you were in Cell Biology at Duke in 1996–97, I am sincerely grateful that you tolerated my shenanigans. Where others might have taken me to task, Jo Rae looked for opportunities to redirect my energies more productively. She and another professor, Dan Kiehart, guided me toward participating in the Physiology Course at the Marine Biological Laboratory, where I learned what I needed to do to be a scientist in a way that would not have been possible otherwise. While there, I saw PIs working with students chasing the joy of discovery, and it felt like it was purely for the sake of a deeper understanding of biology and preparing the next generation of scientists to do the same. Resources gave us the liberty to focus on scientific discovery with minimal concern for where would be the highest profile place to publish. Although I acknowledge that the summer course environments may not be the most representative of the daily life of a scientist at a home institution, such an opportunity left a mark—I wanted to come as close as I could to emulating that environment when I got back to Duke and (eventually) when I had the chance to run a research group and teach students.Along the way, Jo Rae made sure to include me and my fellow lab mates in all aspects of the science. At national meetings she included us at every step, introducing us to her contemporaries and putting us in spaces where we would rub elbows with luminaries in the field. When we were in those environments, she made sure that I felt like a junior colleague. I cannot recall ever feeling like a “trainee.” Back home at Duke, I had opportunities to do everything that a scientist might do in addition to “sciencing.” Sure, I would write papers, contribute to grants, and be part of her review of papers. I was also encouraged to mentor undergraduates, teach, advocate for federal funding at the time of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) doubling, and plan events for Duke’s summer undergraduate research program, if I so chose. Similarly, when I expressed an interest in focusing on science with undergraduates, she was 100% on board with finding ways to combine my graduate school commitments with teaching and mentoring opportunities. Importantly, at a time when expressing interest in an “alternative career” was not always supported by faculty mentors, Jo Rae encouraged me to seek out only those potential postdoctoral mentors who would actively support my goals. Not only that, she went out of her way to find out what options I might have, which led to her learning about the NIH-funded Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award postdoctoral programs in their first year of existence.In a sentence, because Jo Rae was 100% invested in including me in science by finding the framework that best suited my interests and potential, I grew into my success. This was a form of success that wasn’t decided by someone else; I had defined it for myself with Jo Rae serving as a true advisor in every sense of the word—she was in it for me. She helped to build the crucial foundations that helped me find the opportunities that matched my goals. As a result of her influence, I have also had the strength to make some critical, nontraditional choices along the way. Her mentorship style was tailored to each individual’s needs. She invested the time to figure out our strengths, and also learned which levers would motivate us to meet our potential. The members of her lab became successes because she helped all of us to both define success and achieve our own version of it. Such a personal approach is extremely powerful. Jo Rae passed away in 2012, and with her passing I lost the most important influence in my professional life. Duke University and the pulmonary physiology community lost an example for inclusive mentorship and a significant amount of capacity for such an approach. Since her passing, multiple awards have been established to honor Jo Rae’s legacy as an outstanding woman in science. I would argue that mentoring of junior colleagues may be a more significant legacy than her scientific output. Jo Rae is deserving of this award.Recognitions such as this one are an important way to amplify examples of what we often say we hope to achieve as a department, an institution, or a scientific society. However, if our focus is solely on the efforts of individuals, we are missing an opportunity. While I am humbled to be considered in the same league as the previous award recipients, we are each in our own way scrambling to do what we can while we can do it. When individuals have some positive outcomes, our institutions and organizations will celebrate what these folks have done as they have played some role in supporting these opportunities. Although what we do is worthwhile, it is really hard to do it successfully and sustainably without proper institutional support. We each face hinderances that can undermine the work that we want to take on. Burnout is a real outcome of doing the work that we care about and that our organizations publicly state is important. This is especially true in environments where that work is undervalued and underresourced. You do not have to do a very extensive internet search to identify where the institutions that have supported my work also have exclusionary legacies and current negative influences that continue to hinder their potential for broader, more meaningful progress. In many instances inclusion has yet to be baked into institutional culture in a way that impacts how organizations operate. Although I have had some institutional support to develop a career modeled on what I experienced under Jo Rae’s mentorship, the students and faculty at these institutions know that what gets headlines can often be an exceptional situation, rather than a typical everyday experience. Rather than showcasing the good work of individuals in their ranks, an organization should devote itself to furthering the idea that it is willing to make significant institutional investments in that good work. By building the internal infrastructure and capacity to support inclusion efforts, organizations would demonstrate that inclusion is an essential component of the institutional standard practice. The positive outcomes that this award is intended to highlight would then be a shared characteristic of the community. A shared vision paired with shared effort and resource-support might cut down on burnout of those currently carrying more than their share of the load.I imagine that the idea for these awards is to celebrate good work while also demonstrating to other individuals what is possible. With that in mind, if institutions worked at using the example of those in the vanguard as a way to build structures that value and support inclusive approaches, they would increase their own ability to serve their constituents. They may also influence other institutions to do the same. My graduate institution benefited from Jo Rae’s work while she was present and was beginning to institutionalize her view of inclusion in the last years of her life. As Dean of the Graduate School, the model for how she ran her lab informed her vision for graduate education campus-wide. She wanted to build a structure that would identify, recruit, and retain talent. She wanted to provide that talent with opportunities to become expert in how they wanted to contribute to the world. By ensuring that they had access to the relevant experiences and skills, she hoped to support them as they set themselves up for success as they defined it.I accept this award in honor of Jo Rae Wright, and on behalf of the students who have trusted me. All I have ever wanted was to be able to recreate for my undergraduates what Jo Rae had done for the people under her wing. I am building a career around that goal as part of a department keenly supportive of these efforts. My hope is that other individuals will develop their own approaches to inclusion because they find themselves in supportive institutional environments. More importantly, I would like to see organizations begin to truly prioritize inclusive approaches through funding and through policy. Institutions could make sufficient resources available to support inclusive efforts and allow creativity in how faculty mobilize those resources. Just as Jo Rae had the flexibility to adjust to our needs, institutional efforts will benefit when limited resource access is not a hindrance to inclusive excellence. Additionally, it will be critical to acknowledge the time and effort that such endeavors require in evaluating faculty contributions. It can no longer be the icing on the cake of a portfolio—developing inclusive capacity has to be recognized as an essential component of our work. Until these changes take root at the institutional level, this kind of work may shine brightly, but will continue to be stochastic and short-lived. All those efforts “will be lost in time, like tears in rain.” It is on all of us to prevent such a tragic ending.