FromtheArchive.PDFVIP

1706fta Page 864 Wednesday, August 31, 2005 10:55 PM Published September 12, 2005 From the Archive “Porterplasm” and the microtrabecular lattice eith Porter was to many the 1977), giving shape and rigidity to cells, contamination in critical point drying father of biological electron and even perhaps possessing information caused the soluble, hydrophilic proteins in K microscopy (EM) and even of for cellular organization (Porter, 1978). the cytoplasm to glom onto the insoluble cell biology. He helped instigate the cytoskeletal filaments (Heuser and founding both of this journal and of the Skeptics weigh in Kirschner, 1980; Ris, 1985). The result- American Society of Cell Biology, and But critics soon voiced concern that the ing cytoskeleton, overdecorated with gooey was a key figure in defining the structures lattice might simply represent a fixation protein, looked like a microtrabecular of intact and sectioned cells. artifact of condensed soluble components meshwork. The latter stages of Keith Porter’s of cytosol. Cytoskeletal components But Porter’s basic idea that the cyto- eminent cell biology career began with had just recently been identified, and plasm is structured still holds true, although the installation of a 1-MeV high voltage many cell biologists still struggled with what it “looks like” in a live cell is still electron microscope (HVEM) at the changing their concept of the cytoplasm up for discovery. “If Professor Porter Molecular, Cellular, and from “soup” to “scaf- were alive today, he would still defend Developmental Biology At the end of a long, fold.” Until the Porter the concept of a nonrandomly organized department at the Uni- distinguished career, studies, investigators cytoplasm,”