Kay Wilson and the NIH Genetics Study Section

Corresponding author: James F. Crow, Laboratory of Genetics, University of Wisconsin, 445 Henry Mall, Madison, WI 53706-1574.

THE end of World War II brought massive changes to research in the United States. For science, it was a heady time. Vannevar Bush had written a book entitled "Science, the Endless Frontier" (BUSH 1945 ). For the first time, the Federal Government assumed a major responsibility for research support. Much of the early university support came from the military, which had come to realize the value of basic research. But before long the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation came to dominate the picture in biology. This was especially true of genetics.

The Division of Research Grants of the NIH started in 1946. Originally genetics was reviewed by the Morphology and Genetics Study Section, but by 1958 it was apparent that genetics was among the more rapidly growing areas, increasingly important as a basic health science. It needed a special section, both because of the volume of work and because of its specialized techniques and vocabulary.

Thus, on April 23, 1958, the Morphology and Genetics Study Section was renamed the Cell Biology Study Section, and the new Genetics Study Section became a separate entity. In announcing the change, Dale R. Lindsay, Assistant Chief of the Division of Research Grants, said that the new Study Section was established "to handle the increased number of research grant applications dealing with genetics and to give appropriate recognition to this important, rapidly expanding discipline." Katherine S. Wilson transferred from the Fellowships Section to become its first Executive Secretary. The Chairman, chosen to have both genetic and medical skills, was Dr. Walter Burdette of the University of Utah College of Medicine. He was an experienced member of the Morphology and Genetics Study Section, but he also brought special additional qualifications. Burdette had earned a Ph.D. in Drosophila genetics from the University of Texas and went on to get an M.D. degree, specializing in surgery. Jim Shannon, director of NIH, was eager to draw more MDs into genetic research, so Burdette with his two doctorates was a clear choice. He served from 1958 to 1961.

The first Study Section meeting was held at Stone House at the National Institutes of Health on September 25, 1958. In addition to Burdette, the members attending were Earl Green from The Jackson Laboratory, Walter Heston from the Public Health Service, Joshua Lederberg from Stanford, Walter J. Nickerson from Rutgers, Charles M. Rick from the University of California, Davis, and Wilson Stone from the University of Texas. Louis Baron represented the U.S. Army and Francis B. Gordon the Navy. By the September 1959 meeting, three more members were added, Gunther Stent from the University of California, Berkeley, Ray Owen from the California Institute of Technology, and James Crow from the University of Wisconsin, and the custom of making an official photograph began (p. 2). The ever-helpful grants assistant was Marie Blumenauer. Study section members received $50 per day honorarium. The NIH research budget in 1958 was $100 million, not much by today's standards. At the first meeting 31 applications were considered, of which 25 were approved, 3 disapproved, and 3 deferred. We don't know the exact numbers, but it is clear that at that time the great majority of approved applications were funded. In contrast, 20 years later and just before a second study section fission, about 250 applications were considered at each meeting, there were three meetings per year, and the proportion funded was considerably less.

Soon, the Genetics Study Section came to be regarded as exemplary and was often held up as a model for other groups. Most of the credit goes to one person, Katherine S. Wilson (photo on p. 3).

	KATHERINE S. WILSON

TOP KATHERINE S. WILSON THE GENETICS STUDY SECTION LITERATURE CITED

The pattern and tone of the Study Section were set by Katherine S. Wilson, known to everyone as Kay. She brought, in the alliterative words of Gerry Fink, service, sincerity, and sensitivity. Although the scientific decisions were made and priority scores assigned by the Study Section members, she was always on top of the situation. In her own quiet way, she made sure that each grant application received a complete and fair appraisal. There was no cutting of corners and no compromise with objectivity. Who was this remarkable woman who did so much to shape NIH policies?

Kay Wilson was born in Lorain, Ohio. She received an A.B. degree from Oberlin and an M.S. from Northwestern, both in botany. For 6 years she taught at Muskingum College in Ohio, during which time most of her publications dealt with biology teaching. She then returned to graduate school at Yale and received the Ph.D. in 1944. Her major professor was E. W. Sinnott, with whom she later wrote a textbook of botany (SINNOTT and WILSON 1963 ). For 8 years she was a visiting investigator at Yale, eventually being added to the faculty, where she remained for 3 more years. She was the first woman appointed to faculty rank in Yale's undergraduate college. She taught morphogenesis, plant physiology, and medical mycology. She also did research and worked on the book with Sinnott. During these years she published some 15 scientific papers, several of them co-authored with Victor M. Cutter. She wrote one quite different article, in response to Trofim Lysenko's claims of "graft hybrids." It was a solid, factual report of stock-scion relationships in tomatoes (WILSON and WITHNER 1945 ). In 1956 she moved to the National Institutes of Health as a biologist and Executive Secretary for Research Fellowships in the Division of Research Grants.

When she became the first Executive Secretary of the new Genetics Study Section, her previous teaching experience and genetic research with Sinnott provided a superb background for the new job. What did she do that was so great? In the first place, she did her homework. She made a point of getting acquainted with people applying for grants. She knew their CVs from the applications, and she learned their faces from regular attendance at society meetings and, often, site visits. She read all the research applications conscientiously and well in advance of the Study Section meeting. Often, if something was not clear she would call the applicant and straighten it out before the meeting, or she would call an appropriate person for additional expert advice. The Study Section members were instructed to have their reviews to her well in advance of the meeting, and those who were delinquent received a gentle but forceful reminder. The day before the meeting she met with the Study Section Chairman and sometimes others, and they went over each application. She had always prepared for this by flagging those that might create a difficulty, such as those having received conflicting reports from different reviewers or entailing an administrative problem. Thus, there were very few surprises for her or for the chairman during the meeting.

At the meeting itself, she said little. She regarded it as the chairman's job to run the show. But she sat at his side (see photo, p. 4) and, by whispered comments or penciled notes, called attention to points that needed to be brought out. These might be scientific or budgetary or administrative. She was constantly alert to any possibilities of nonadherence to NIH rules and procedures. She made sure that things that were supposed to be confidential stayed that way. One other feature: Study Section meetings can become tense. The body and brain become tired, and knowledgeable scientists sometimes have strong, discordant opinions (see CROW 1995 ). Somehow, Kay's quiet influence kept the meeting running smoothly and amicably. She always brought a basket of fruit to the meeting and this may have helped to maintain the atmosphere of informal, cordial good fellowship that prevailed.

Kay gave a great deal of thought to selecting Study Section members and inquired widely about the people she had in mind. Of course she sought people who were highly qualified scientifically, but she also paid attention to whether the person was conscientious, worked well with others, and could be counted on to do a full share of the work and do it on time.

She liked the idea of site visits and encouraged them. Often the idea was to get a clearer idea of the planned research when the application seemed promising but was obscure or the adequacy of the facilities was in doubt. She also regarded a site visit as an educational opportunity. Particularly with new investigators, the site visit became a way to sharpen up the research plan and the application, so that at the next meeting it could be approved.

Kay was particularly careful to look out for any possibilities of bias, improper influence, or conflict of interest. On site visits she made sure that there were no social contacts outside the visit itself. Site visitors were not to look up personal friends if there was even a remote possibility of this biasing the review.

In the early days of the Study Section, when the atmosphere was less frantic than it is now, the NIH was interested in having study sections take on responsibilities beyond reviewing grant applications. They discussed the direction of the field and where increased research might be productive. In those days, funds seemed always to be adequate, and there were moneys for various auxiliary projects. If an application was good enough to be approved, it had an excellent chance to be funded. Later, of course, the number of applications increased enormously and the amount of money by no means kept up. With increasing competition, Study Section meetings were less pleasant. Knowing that only a small fraction of good applications could be funded made the decisions more difficult.

Kay's husband, George Woodin, was a genial host famous for his raconteuring, his love of good food, and his potent cocktails. Meetings of the Study Section often ended in an evening with the Woodins.

Kay Wilson retired as Executive Secretary of the Genetics Study Section in 1977 after 20 years, the same year that the Study Section was split into two, general genetics and mammalian and human genetics. She received much recognition and a number of awards within NIH. The American Society for Human Genetics gave her a special award, including a silver salver, in November 1973, and the Genetics Society of America honored her at its meeting in August 1979.

At the time of her retirement in 1977 there was a tribute to her by Study Section members, organized by Rowland Davis. In addition to a "pink sheet," in which she received the highest priority, there were a number of testimonial letters. Here are a few excerpts:

You developed and established the principles of behavior that have characterized your tenure as Executive Secretary of the Genetics Study Section: thoroughness, attention to detail, careful preparation, impartiality, dependability, good sense and judgment, even-handed fairness, and, on top of all that, good humor. The geneticists I know have uniformly viewed you as their friend even when the news may have been distasteful, to them and to you.

The example you have shown me of how one can recruit, guide, and lead groups of independent (some are prima donnas) geneticists in such a manner that they love it. This is a skill few people have.

You have made the government personal. That's a small miracle.

Your concern about being as fair as possible to each and every applicant has been a constant reminder to us.

It is difficult to imagine a Genetics Study Section not managed by Kay Wilson.

My first meeting as chairman was a complete fiasco. The cab driver could not find the building and I was more than an hour late. Years afterward I was given a parting gift from the Study Section. It consisted of a brief case, inside of which was an alarm clock. I have always assumed that this was at your instigation.

A study section meeting without fruit baskets and George's martinis will lack a certain flavor.

My faith in the peer review system was born in GSS meetings.

You have brought to your position a loveliness and grace and intelligence that are unusual and, I am afraid, irreplaceable.

With you, fairness was an art form.

For me it has been a rewarding experience in the possibilities of constructive group interaction.

I'd hate to write one more review

But now that my writing is through

I recall with affection

My stint on the section

For the pleasure, my thanks, Kay, to you.

Your warmth and integrity, and high expectations of the members of your section made us all better than we really were. Your seriousness of purpose did not prevent the recurrent mutation at six thirty o'clock in the evening, when seriousness was cast aside and in your apartment with George as co-host the martinis clinked, and the good fellowship, never far below the surface throughout the most grueling of days, rose to crescendo heights.

After retiring from the Study Section in 1977, Kay was promoted to a position of greater scope, being responsible for 22 study sections in the Division of Research Grants, each with its own Executive Secretary. This lasted only a short time, after which she and George retired to Palm Desert, California. Now, she and George have returned to the Washington, D.C., area and live in Silver Spring, Maryland. She is in good health, but her eyesight is poor. Her handwritten letters come with the i's dotted and the t's crossed by George. But her zest for life and her enthusiasm for genetics and the Study Section remain, as does her continuing interest in the former members who served with her.

	THE GENETICS STUDY SECTION

TOP KATHERINE S. WILSON THE GENETICS STUDY SECTION LITERATURE CITED

Walter Burdette was chairman of the Study Section until 1961. He was succeeded by Ray Owen. Then in order came Ed Tatum, James Crow, Jack Schull, Al Knudson, Neil Kirkman, and Rowland Davis until, in 1977, the Study Section split into general genetics and mammalian-human genetics. The Study Section members, although too numerous to mention, should not go unrecognized. They were a conscientious and hard-working group, to say nothing of their scientific credentials.

Under the leadership of Walter Burdette and Kay's gentle support, the Genetics Study Section proposed that broader participation in genetics would be served by providing up-to-date surveys of how research is conducted in a field that ranged from microbes to humans. So they organized a series of symposia on the methodology of genetics. There were three, during 1960 and 1961: methodology in human genetics, in mammalian genetics, and in basic genetics. The papers were assembled and published in three volumes (BURDETTE 1962 , BURDETTE 1963A , BURDETTE 1963B ). In 1961 the Study Section compiled a directory of Geneticists in the United States and in 1966 it organized a symposium called "Goals in Human Population Genetics."

In September 1966, encouraged by Matt Meselson, the Study Section sponsored a 2-day symposium on chemical mutagens at The Jackson Laboratory. At the meeting the Study Section members wrote a report containing a number of recommendations. The report was presented to Jim Shannon, director of NIH. For reasons that were not clear then or now, he refused to publish the report under NIH auspices. Perhaps he felt that it would unduly obligate NIH. Eventually, the report was published under the individual responsibility of Study Section members (CROW 1968 ).

The report made recommendations that had grown out of the meeting. These were (1) that an up-to-date register of mutagenic chemicals be kept and the information made generally available; (2) that tests of mutagenicity be a routine part of the testing of chemicals that are used as food or drugs or to which a large number of persons may otherwise be exposed; (3) that research to develop more sensitive and cheaper assays of mutagenicity and chromosome breakage, or assays based on organisms more closely related to human, be encouraged and supported; and (4) that the feasibility of genetic monitoring of the human population for chromosome breakage and increased genetic disease be explored. The first three were almost immediately put into effect; the exquisitely sensitive systems developed by Bruce Ames are an example. It was the beginning of systematic tests for mutagenicity. The fourth recommendation turned out to be impractical.

For the most part, however, the work of the Study Section was reviewing grant applications, which became an ever more onerous task as the number of applications increased and the funding failed to keep pace. The carefree days when the number of requests was small and the amount of money adequate were soon over. Furthermore, problems of lobbying for research funding, funds earmarked for special diseases, and patents have added difficulties. Being a study section member is not as easy as it once was.

Although this report concerns the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation also played an important role in the history of genetics research. The cooperation between the two, for example by cross-visits to each other's meetings, was a source of strength to both. Herman Lewis was a pioneer who set high standards and was responsible for many of the precedents. DeLil Nasser, among a succession of NSF program directors, is remembered as a champion of promising research even in areas not yet fashionable (FINK 1998 ). The editors of Perspectives hope to include further notes of crucial contributions to genetics by other skilled administrators.

View larger version (165K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   The first official photograph of the Genetics Study Section, September 1959. Front row: Francis Gordon, Ray Owen, Marie Blumenauer, Walter Burdette, Katherine Wilson, Walter Heston, Gunther Stent. Back row: Wilson Stone, James Crow, Earl Green, Louis Baron, Charles Rick. Not present: Joshua Lederberg, Walter Nickerson.

View larger version (149K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Kay Wilson at a Study Section meeting, September 1968.

View larger version (153K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   A Study Section meeting in April 1964. From left to right: Adrian Srb, Eldon Sutton, Tom Anderson, Herman Chase, George Lefevre, Marie Blumenthal, Ray Owen, Kay Wilson, Gunther Stent, Marcus Rhoades, Dale Kaiser, F. Clarke Fraser, Norman Giles. The ever-present coffee dispensers and fruit baskets are evident.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Rowland Davis for helpful comments on an earlier version of this article. Our greatest debt is to Katherine Wilson, not only for her influence on our work in the Study Section, but as an invaluable source of material about the early days.

	LITERATURE CITED

TOP KATHERINE S. WILSON THE GENETICS STUDY SECTION LITERATURE CITED

BURDETTE, W. J., 1962 Methodology in Human Genetics. Holden-Day, San Francisco.

BURDETTE, W. J., 1963a Methodology in Mammalian Genetics. Holden-Day, San Francisco.

BURDETTE, W. J., 1963b Methodology in Basic Genetics. Holden-Day, San Francisco.

BUSH, V., 1945 Science: the Endless Frontier. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

CROW, J. F., 1968 Chemical risk to future generations. Scientist & Citizen, June–July, pp. 113–117.

CROW, J. F., 1995  Quarreling geneticists and a diplomat. Genetics 140:421-426[Medline].

FINK, G. R., 1998  Anatomy of a revolution. Genetics 149:473-477[Free Full Text].

SINNOTT, E. W., and K. S. WILSON, 1963 Botany—Principles and Problems, Ed. 6. McGraw-Hill, New York.

WILSON, K. S. and C. L. WITHNER, 1945  Stock-scion relationships in tomatoes. Am. J. Bot. 33:791-801.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. P. Wagner and J. F. Crow The Other Fly Room: J. T. Patterson and Texas Genetics Genetics, January 1, 2001; 157(1): 1 - 5. [Abstract] [Full Text]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Crow, J. F. Articles by Owen, R. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Crow, J. F. Articles by Owen, R. D.