Finding Order: Jane Richardson

A Westinghouse finalist learns how to calculate a satellite's orbit, then launches a career drawing illuminating protein structures

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

FINALIST YEAR: 1958

HER FINALIST PROJECT: Measuring the orbit of a satellite called…Sputnik

WHAT LED TO THE PROJECT: Like many young people growing up in the 1950's, Jane Richardson veered into science in part because of Sputnik—though in her case, the connection was quite direct. Deeply interested in astronomy, she and her friends in Teaneck, N.J., used to stake out spots in a field in the days after the Soviets launched their satellite. They recorded where in the stars the light had passed; Sputnik wasn't hard to find. "These days there are lots of satellites, but there was only one at that point," she says. She managed to spot the satellite two days in a row, and the slight difference in positioning allowed her to calculate the orbit. She wrote up her findings, entered them in the 1958 Westinghouse Science Talent Search, and was named a finalist.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


THE EFFECT ON HER CAREER: It was a conventional start to a scientific career, but Richardson soon left the usual orbit. She went to graduate school in philosophy, bounced around to different things, and finally landed in a research lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where her husband David* was finishing his PhD. That's when she became fascinated by the protein crystal structures and RNA he was studying. Like the stars, she describes proteins as a "modern version of natural history." Their form reveals a lot about evolution, and how our world came to be.

To make their structure more understandable, she eventually began to create colorful drawings that showed these twisting ribbons in their three-dimensional glory. The first image appeared in the journal Advances in Protein Chemistry in 1981, after the couple had moved to Duke University, where she became a professor of biochemistry.

The bright ribbons instantly captivated viewers. The slightly exaggerated perspective in Jane's drawings enabled her to emphasize the proteins' three-dimensional quality. She showed how their complex chains twist around on themselves, and consequently provided a way for people to visualize these molecules that hadn't been available before.

Richardson had no idea the drawings would be as popular as they were. "I hoped they would be useful," she says.

In fact, aside from appearing on the covers of numerous journals, the "Richardson diagrams" broke open the study of these complex molecules. "Jane and David's work allowed us to reveal the form of proteins, and from there it was easier to understand their function," 2003 Nobel Prize in Chemistry co-winner Peter Agre recently told Duke Research, a university publication.

WHAT SHE'S DOING NOW: Jane's work earned her a MacArthur fellowship in 1985 (an experience she calls "dumbfounding"). In 2006 she was elected to the Institute of Medicine in Washington, D.C.—quite an honor for someone who has neither a PhD nor a medical degree.

The couple still teaches at Duke, where the Richardson lab creates 3-D computerized images of molecules and attempts to design new proteins. Jane recognizes that her career has been full of serendipity. "I think most people starting out are better off going in a fairly traditional path, but also remembering that you don't have to," she says. "If you want to change direction, or go off for awhile and do something different, that's not impossible." As she points out, "the conventional routes have lots of stumbling blocks, too."

*Correction (5/30/08):  David Richardson was originally identified as John Richardson.

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe