A few notes on science in Ukraine

Abstract

As a person who has had a long scientific career in Ukraine, both before and after its re-acquisition of independence thirty years ago, I would like to share my observations with the readership of this Special Issue. By no means are these observations meant to provide a systematic presentation, which requires a different format. Rather, they are highly personal notes, providing snippets of the past and present and a discussion of the future of Ukrainian science. They also allow me to acknowledge my wonderful colleagues and bright students. I am delighted to see that many of them have contributed excellent reviews and original manuscripts to this Special Issue. (I am also keenly aware of the fact that because of the brutal invasion and bombardments by our imperial neighbor, many of my colleagues have been unable to share their latest work). It will be up to this next generation of Ukrainian scientists to develop Biological Sciences in Ukraine in the future.

1. Biological sciences in pre-independent Ukraine, challenges and difficulties

1.1. Funding (or a lack thereof)

The funding of the fields of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Genetics in the Soviet empire (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, USSR) was rather miniscule, with the bulk of the funds going to military-associated research. In addition, the funding of science in Ukraine was in double jeopardy as the bulk of funding went to the institutions of imperial centers in the Russian Republic. As a result, the Institute of Biochemistry in Kyiv, where I started my academic career in the late 60s, and the Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics, where I worked since its inception in the 70s, lacked many basic tools and reagents, significantly complicating our research. For example, the lack of something as simple as a fraction collector meant that one would have to stay overnight manually collecting the elution of one's precious sample. (I am very grateful to my husband, also a scientist, who dragged a foldable recliner across the town to set me up for my night shifts).

Another example is the miracle of the Gilson pipetman, which we were only able to acquire by begging our East European colleagues in the late 70s. We ended up with one pipetman shared by half a dozen scientists. Those were really great, but alas they came with no more than one pack of tips! A common site in our labs was a homemade set up in which those “disposable” tips, worth their weight in gold, were washed and washed over and over, until any protective layer was stripped away.

1.2. Isolation from the international scientific community

One of the critical shortcomings of how the Soviet Union organized science was the almost complete absence of international cooperation. Exchange of scientists, internships, and post-doctoral work in foreign countries—especially Western countries—as well as bilateral and multilateral scientific projects were practically banned. Furthermore, for any international travel that did occur, the imperial center was prioritized, and scientists from Ukrainian Institutes were restricted in their travel. Few Ukrainian scientists managed to cut through the red tape in order to visit Poland or other Eastern European countries. It may be hard to believe, but in order to travel overnight by train from Kyiv to Prague, or Warsaw, Ukrainian scientists were required to first take a day trip in the opposite direction to Moscow to get all paperwork approved, and then take a two-night train ride from Moscow to the other eastern Europe location, passing through Kyiv on its way!

I underwent a bitter disappointment when I was ultimately unable to accept an invitation to join the laboratory of the member of the Académie des Sciences (and subsequently an Honorary Member of Ukrainian Academy of Sciences), Prof. Jen-Pierre Ebel, a world famous French molecular biologist, for a year of fully supported scientific research. After 2 months of ordeals and the submission of endless documents, my request was refused under the pretext of "expending the quotas" allocated for Ukrainians. My supervisor, Prof. Matsuka, a wise and honest person, “consoled” me by saying that they would never allow me to go because I was not a member of the Communist Party and, moreover, a woman. Thankfully, in recent decades I have been able to work in the USA, Germany, France and other countries. But after all, it was too little too late - young people need to see the scientific world as widely as possible and gain knowledge and experience!

I am delighted to say that with Ukrainian independence in 1991 the isolation of our scientific community has vanished dramatically, and young Ukrainian scientists gained the opportunity to study and work in the leading institutions in the US, EU, UK and Japan.

1.3. Personal level collaboration despite a lack of opportunities

Much of Ukrainian science in the 60–80s could be modeled by community cooking with everyone contributing what they can. Most of the time, this ended up with something that barely sustains life, but sometimes, it resulted in a real masterpiece, not dissimilar to the famous Ukrainian borsch. In general, collaboration at the personal level was an important part of everyday scientific endeavors, and I, personally, have received help from many researchers on both sides of the Iron Curtain. A vivid example is the help I received in my work with Prof. Matsuka. We discovered the phenomenon of functional adaptation of tRNA to the synthesis of specific proteins [1], one of the important regulatory mechanisms. We had put forward an interesting hypothesis, but to prove it, we needed radioactive glutamic acid, which we did not have. In those days, we had to order radioactive preparations a year in advance. Therefore we sent out a cry for help to many scientists. Fortunately, our colleagues in Kharkiv, Ukraine sent us a sheet of chromatographic paper with a spot of radioactive glutamic acid, which we eluted and concentrated. We proved our hypothesis and other scientists, outside Ukraine, further confirmed it in different species, including plants [2].

In recounting these examples, it is not my intention to paint all science prior to the fall of the Soviet Union as some sort of Dark Age. Many Ukrainian scientists made valuable contributions to the various fields of biosciences, but it did require hard work and special endurance beyond what is already required for science in general.

2. IMBG contribution to biomedical sciences in independent Ukraine

In the early 90s Ukraine went through a difficult period when it transitioned from a republic within the USSR to an independent Ukraine. Nevertheless, science in independent Ukraine grew substantially. This is evident from a significant increase in publications in leading journals and an increased participation in various international programs. For example, since then the Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (IMBG) has built up a record of cooperation with European colleagues, which has resulted in excellent training for our young scientists. This, in turn, improved the quality of our research programs and allowed IMBG scientists to successfully compete for a wide range of short- and long-term international cooperation grants, as well as grants supporting individual scientists (e.g., Horizon-Europa, FP, CNRS, NATO, STCU, SCOPES). Since Ukraine gained independence, the IMBG scientists have participated in joint research projects with colleagues from Germany, France, Great Britain, Poland, Italy, and other countries throughout the world – in all representing collaborations with about 80 different foreign institutions.

I do not wish to idealize the course of scientific development in independent Ukraine, which was indeed marred in many cases by old attitudes and failed opportunities that hindered rapid reform of both scientific infrastructure and society at large. The new mechanisms of funding and changing society came with struggle and many young scientists settled in leading European and US labs, to conduct excellent science, and developing their carriers in the West. However, many returned and engaged in building up the Ukrainian scientific potential. I take great pride and pleasure in recognizing that my students, both those who returned to Ukraine and those who stayed in the West, have made excellent contributions to this Special Issue.

A few words are warranted about the Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics and its role in developing biomedical sciences in Ukraine. It was founded in 1973, during the restoration of biological science in the USSR that followed an era of destruction of genetic research and geneticists, in the literal sense. At present, IMBG is the leading scientific center in Ukraine in the field of biosciences with research program focused on the central trends of molecular biology, genetics, and biotechnology. In molecular biology, the main achievements of the Institute's researchers are in the sphere of structural and functional proteomics and genomics in higher eukaryotes [1,[3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]]. The IMBG investigations in molecular genetics and genomics contribute invaluably to the advancement of biomedicine in Ukraine [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]. In particular these studies have significance for the creation of DNA-test systems allowing fast and differential diagnostics of severe hereditary and oncological diseases and identifying factors of hereditary susceptibility to complex disorders such as ischemic stroke and reproductive health disorders [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. Several research groups are involved in the development of gene therapy and stem cell therapy [19], [20], [21]. The scientists of IMBG are highly successful in the development of biosensors, including for rapid diagnostics “near the bed” of the patient as well as for food and ecological monitoring [22,23]. Deeper collaboration between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine on novel biomolecular electronics is supported by the EU through the BIONANOSENS Horizon 2020 project. Due to the leading role of the IMBG in biomedicine, the Institute was appointed as coordinator of the ERA-WIDE project "Strengthening Cooperation in Molecular Biomedicine between the EU and Ukraine.” The project was devoted to the development of the operational network of EU and Ukrainian scientists based on the different approaches to solve the problem of deciphering the molecular mechanisms of cancer and neurodegenerative diseases.

Needless to say, the brutal colonial war waged on Ukraine by Russian Federation since 2014, and especially its latest “all‑but-nukes” phase which started a year ago, has severely impede the development of Ukrainian science. Many of our scientists went to the frontlines to defend our independence; many more had to flee the bombardments. It appears that the aggressor has been targeting research institutions, museums, and libraries, as well as hospitals and schools. The resulting disruption has jeopardized decades of dedicated research and the research infrastructure Ukraine has built up. The few scientists remaining at their posts have struggled to protect the libraries of unique strains and cell lines and other assets, often using their own money to purchase electric power generators to safeguard these assets. While we will rebuild every facility after our victory, the loss of life will be permanent and impossible to replace.

3. What the Ukrainian and the international scientific community must do after the Ukrainian victory on the battlefield

3.1. Decentralization combined with competitive funding models

We have largely missed the opportunity to introduce structural changes into the organization of Ukrainian science in the 90 s. Only in the last years were steps taken to develop a model based on decentralization and a competitive system of financing. The National Research Fund of Ukraine was established in 2018, and should direct its activities toward the comprehensive development of Ukrainian science. So far, the fund has organized several national competitions on current scientific issues and, importantly, with active participation of international experts. The National Academy of Science (NASU), in turn, began expert evaluations of the institutes’ activities, openings of multidisciplinary programs on a competitive basis, and new laboratories and grants to support young scientists. At present, financing of Ukrainian science is critically low, but the efforts detailed above should continue, nevertheless. We should not repeat our previous mistakes during the after-war reconstruction. The funding model should be competitive, which can only be assured by independent international committees of experts. We need to step up the funding in Ukraine and give it to those who are doing world-level research, and international donors will be well positioned to help Ukraine with both of these tasks. I am pleased that many Ukrainian scientists in European and American Diasporas have been active in contributing their time and expertise to review grants and fellowships aimed at helping Ukrainian scientists in need [24]. Their expertise is a valuable resource for the recovery and expansion of an excellent Ukrainian scientific environment.

The prevailing part of scientific potential of Ukraine is concentrated in near 170 scientific organizations of the NASU with 30 000 employees. Any hasty upheaval will lead to chaos and debilitating consequences. In my view, we need a serious modernization of NASU with a transformation into a structure similar to the CNRS in France. The CNRS makes effective use of its huge scientific potential based on a competitive system, and with a powerful institute of experts, including international ones. I hope my notes here inspire a careful discussion as this issue is so important for the country that it should be discussed and designed deliberately with inclusion and support of the broader Ukrainian scientific community.

3.2. Centers of scientific excellence

I think Ukrainian society has to learn from experience of other countries, as well as our own experience. One of the important features of science in Ukraine is that it has been driven to a large degree by the institutions of the NASU. This is different, for example, from the US system, where Universities constitute the main platform for research as well as education. This is not to say that no Ukrainian Universities conduct excellent research; several contributions to this Special Issue are evidence of that. Moving forward, it is important to use the potential of the NASU while rebuilding scientific infrastructure. One way of doing so, which also draws from the experience of other East European countries like Poland and the Czech Republic, is to create dedicated Centers of Excellence affiliated with a particular institution. Before the war, there was an idea to organize a Center of Excellence at the IMBG, and we will continue to work on its creation after the war. I believe the Centers of Excellence, when properly funded via EU donors and programs, can provide a platform for shared instrumentation and spread expertise by hosting scientists visiting from all regions of Ukraine through the support of short- to medium-term fellowships. It is also important that such centers are not exclusively located in the capital city of Kyiv but are spread geographically among the research-rich cities of Ukraine, like Kharkiv, Odesa, Lviv, and eventually my native city of Donetsk.

Slava Ukrajini!

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

• No data was used for the research described in the article.