Interview with VICTOR DE LORENZO PRIETO

Research professor of the CSIC at the National Centre of Biotechnology since 1999. Graduated in Chemistry by the Complutense University of Madrid and Doctor of Sciences by the Autonomous University of Madrid. During the first years of his postdoctoral period, he took several stays in centres such as the Pasteur Institute (France), Berkeley University (U.S.A.) and the University of Geneva (Switzerland). His research group works on three work lines: the study of molecular mechanisms that connect environmental signals with bacterial physiology and transcriptional activation, the use of combinatorial chemistry/biology in environmentally relevant systems, and the modification of soil bacteria for the detoxification of environmental pollutants. From among his numerous awards throughout his scientific career, we highlight the Jaime I Award in Environmental Research (2001), the GlaxoSmithKline Award of the American Society for Microbiology (2008) and the Great Prize of the Academy of Sciences of the French Institute of Petroleum (2008).

This time I visited the CSIC Office in Brussels to hold an important follow-up meeting of a project of the H2020 Programme in which I am involved. In this specific case, the research over which the committee works is about the domestication of some environmental microorganisms for industrial applications through techniques of what is now called Synthetic Biology. The meeting had about 30 participants from 8 countries and we had distributed the time into presentations about the progress achieved in the last year, practical workshops about data management and a formal evaluation session conducted by scientific officials of the European Commission.

The CSIC embassy in Rue du Trône is really an excellent meeting place in every aspect, especially because of its location at the heart of the European Neighbourhood, its services and the equipment it provides for work meetings, and above all because of the remarkable professionalism of those who work there, i.e. the Director, the Manager and the entire assistant staff. As expected, the partners of the project that gathered here for a few days were very satisfied and they can´t wait to come back for other events. With these facilities at the heart of Europe, the CSIC offers the best side of Science made in Spain.

The first time I came as a project evaluator in 1989; it has rained since then! I was still working in Germany and the Framework Programmes were at the initial stage of development. Since then, I have come many dozens of times to the EC in Brussels for all sorts of activities: project follow-up, evaluations, expert committees, etc. For two years I shared with Anne Glover the co-presidency of the PSTAC (President’s Science and Technology Advisory Council) until Barroso left the presidency of the EC. After that, I don´t really know what other trouble I can get into in this city. I wish many of my Spanish colleagues also came here more frequently to defend and show their research.

For the general public, microorganisms have a very bad reputation because some of them (a very small minority) cause diseases. However, the environment is an infinite source of bacteria that carry out amazing chemical reactions. And they do so in a much more sustainable and environmentally friendly manner than the conventional chemical industry. One of these bacteria (which has the exotic name Pseudomonas putida) is particularly interesting because it has adapted to living in places polluted by toxic residues and it perfectly stands very hard living and working conditions. Our goal in the EmPowerPutida project is to domesticate and reprogram this microorganism to turn it into an intelligent catalyst in industrial processes.

After working many years with Pseudomonas putida we started to see the biotechnological benefits of all the research work performed to this day in order to understand the fundamental aspects of this bacterium. For the first time I see big chemical and pharmaceutical companies really interested in the potential of this microorganism to produce molecules of considerable added value, from biofuels to precursors of polymers and fine chemical products. In this project, we are solving the methodological problems that still limit these applications and, thereby, we are greatly increasing the level of industrial usability of these new technologies.

In several European projects, the presence of big companies tends to be purely testimonial, as a way of supporting the research conducted by a certain friend committee in a generic manner. However, in reality, they barely get involved in the work, mostly due to their concern about intellectual property. Many companies consider scientists to have big mouths, which is why they don´t share valuable information with them. Small and medium-size technological companies (spinoffs) are usually more inclined to work side by side with the academic world and move around in an Open Access environment. In EmPowerPutida, I must proudly say that the attitude of the companies that participate in this project has evolved from a very skeptic initial presence to a greater confidence, involvement and growing enthusiasm for the project. This is clearly due to the fact that we already have the results at the reach of our hands.

Former president Barroso, who was criticised for many other things, had the courage to skip the colossal system of queries about scientific issues that governed the EC when he arrived, and he search the direct advice of this group of scientist that were qualified and respected in their specialities. However, from the very first moment, the scientific stablishment of the Commission (particularly the JRC) considered it an insult that the president paid more attention to the PSTAC than to their respective departments. Unfortunately, those inside decided to boycott this initiative throughout his short period as president. In spite of this, the team led by the great Anne Glover (who was the Principal Scientific Advisor) managed to bring the culture of decision-making based on scientific evidence to the European Policy Agenda. I believe this has prevailed in the Commission even after the dissolution of the PSTAC. The final document of the group called The Future of Europe is Science is the heritage from this period of time of which I am most proud.

Although with considerably dull functions compared to the old PSTAC, the SAM is certainly better than having nothing. The scientist that make up its management group are very respected researchers and professionals; in fact, some of them were already in the old PSTAC (for example, the French mathematician Cedric Villani). However, its spokesperson is not the President of the EC (Juncker), but the Research Commissioner (Moedas), which filters, reduces and somehow tames the impact that scientific evidence may have on the maximum European authority. With the SAM we definitely go back to a system of scientific queries from bottom to top, for instance through the Academies and Agencies of the Member Countries, which usually represent their national interests and contaminate the opinions about delicate matters.

I have participated in European projects since the 4th Framework Programme (I believe the next one is the 9th!) and in each new scheme there is less Science and more administrative and managerial load (I don´t want to use the well-worn term bureaucracy). A research project, even if it is focused on a specific issue, cannot be formalised as a mere industrial development. It is preposterous that H2020 Projects must include an Impact section, in which a detailed business plan is expected. It is already a criterion that committees subcontract consulting companies specialised in writing those parts about which most scientists barely know anything. The result is a section about applicability that helps the success of the project, but it is mostly fictitious. I would like those who elaborate the new FP to be inventive in order to cling into reality their demands of project usefulness.

I hope that the next Work Programme recognises modern Biotechnology as one of the midwives of the 4th Industrial Revolution. However, in order for this to happen, we must wager for the development of foundational technologies (for example, Synthetic Biology) instead of insisting on an immediate application (which cannot take place without the former). I also expect that they lower the restraints to creativity, which were imposed by legislations and regulations about intellectual property. These come from the 19th century and they keep ignoring that we live in a time in which it is useless to put barriers on information. Finally, 21st century Biotechnology must adopt (and even impose in some cases) rigorous criteria that get the field and real Engineering much closer.

In a recent meeting of the World Economy Forum in Dubai in which I participated, nine developments of Biotechnology were identified to have transformative power in the next decade: [i] genome design, [ii] microbiome engineering, [iii] rejuvenation techniques, [iv] cryopreservation, [v] new biomaterials, [vi] bioprocesses on demand, [vii] genetic diagnosis, [viii] functionalised food and [ix] global bioremediation. There is no doubt that we will see amazing advances in these topics and I hope that Europe and Spain take part in this research work. However, I don´t want to stop highlighting that none of the developments from [i] to [viii] will be possible if we don´t intervene right now, not only to control but also to reverse the climatic change that is bringing our planet to a certain disaster. Thereby, I would like to dedicate the rest of my scientific career to development [ix]. Once again, environmental bacteria will be our great allies to tackle a problem that only they, due to their quantity and incredible functions, will be capable of solving.