9th Congress on Radiation Research

Continuation. Beginning in No. 44

The results of the work of 12 Sections of the Congress for our weekly were summed up by their Chairmen.

Co-Chairman of the Section "Theoretical radiobiology, microdosimetry and dosimetry" S. G. Andreev (Institute of Biochemical Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences): "Here, one might say, the best forces of theoretical thought in radiobiology have gathered. We all remembered its origins, yesterday, in my report I spoke about the first generation of radiobiological research in our country. We know these early works, quote them, today, they are continued and new areas have appeared. At the Section, I saw a lot of interesting calculations, ideas, thoughts. Interestingly, good work is done not only in the center, but also in the Urals, in the Far East, and, what surprised me, are young scientists. That's great! By the way, there are many studies where both theoretical and experimental parts are united in one work. Modern high level. Therefore, I am satisfied with the work of the Section. Many young people participated, among their papers we held a competition, young people should be encouraged. In short, everything was fine, as always, in Dubna."

Co-Chairman of the Section, Director of LRB A. N. Bugay emphasized: "What we saw today at the Section is, firstly, a wide range of reports and topics. A variety of mathematical problems were presented, one might say, from philosophical problems, the experimental verification of which is not expected for decades, to very practical things that already need to be met in medicine. This is the development of scheduling systems for working with modifiers, nanoparticles, radionuclides, with measuring the growth of tumors, predictive systems that are currently especially required in clinics. In addition, simulation is important not only in our Section, but also as a related result, when the work unites experiment and theory, in many other Sections. We can say that this topic is in great demand today."

I. A. Zamulaeva (MRNC named after A.F. Tsyba, Obninsk) headed, together with her colleagues, meetings of two Sections. She commented, "First in the Radiobiological Basis of Radiotherapy Section, we heard a series of reports on the united effects of proton and neutron radiation. This is an extremely relevant topic in the future of radiation therapy and in radiobiology. Right now, the foundations are laid for clinical use, and this is very promising. We do not yet know how to specifically use these two types of ionizing radiation - in what sequence, what contribution each component should have. Colleagues still clarify these issues in in vitro models, yet are gradually moving on to animal experiments. And the first report in the Section that was given by the famous scientist A.N. Osipov, concerned a very interesting approach to radiation therapy that has not yet been implemented that will become, as he called, a new frontier in radiobiology and radiation therapy - radiation with ultra‑high dose rate. In areas where ionizing radiation can be applied, we must understand the patterns and mechanisms of action. This Section is some kind of fireworks of new knowledge and a celebration of the soul.

The Section "Molecular cell mechanisms of radiation, mechanisms and prediction of the long‑term consequences of radiation" turned out to be very interesting, it was the mechanisms that were discussed there. Unfortunately, in practice, we first start using something, and then think about the mechanisms. This is the pain of radiobiology. I really liked the report of the young specialist S. A. Korneva, who spoke about simulating the kinetics of changing the number of repair foci, moreover, in mesenchymal stem cells that is very important. So, many effects actually depend on stem cells. When we see that differentiated cells do not survive, this is, of course, bad, because at the tissue level, this damage must be somehow closed. And who will close someone? Stem cells. And if stem cells are damaged, then the effects can be the most unfavorable, even catastrophic. Understanding what exactly happens in stem cells at the molecular, cellular level is very important. S. A. Korneva was engaged in the kinetics of DNA damage repairs. As a result of this simulation, it was found that there are three components of this repair: two components work in the case of gamma radiation and proton radiation, and in the case of neutron radiation, it is imperative to simulate differently. There are such damages that are repaired for a very long time. We have to remember it, to know, to understand the patterns, only then we will be able to develop effective radio protective equipment.

The Section can perhaps be divided into two parts, albeit highly interrelated. Some researchers worked on animal objects (as well as on human cells), others - on plant ones. There were a lot of interesting reports about plant objects. In particular, work on the mechanisms of adaptation of plants to low-dose chronic radiation. It takes place after the Chernobyl accident. Moreover, very deep molecular genetic mechanisms are clarified with the involvement of the latest technologies, with the involvement of sequencing of the latest generation and other technologies. Very interesting technologies have appeared recently, and in Russia they are gradually used. Dr. S. G. Andreev reported to us about the use of Hi-C and Micro-C technology. It allows you to see the interaction of groups of atoms after various influences or in a situation where we want to compare what happens in tumor and normal cells. Without it, we fundamentally will not move towards treating tumors. Until recently, there has been a large gap in understanding chromatin structure in tumor and normal cells. The technologies that S. G. Andreev spoke about promote our understanding of the situation. One can hope for a breakthrough in the near future.

I should emphasize that radiobiology has advanced greatly technologically in the past few years. Five years ago, at the last congress, we complained that specialists did not have the required equipment and competencies - after all, complex equipment must be able to operate. Now, I can't say it, fortunately, everything looks very harmonious - and modern technologies are used, and even new ones are developed, despite the financial difficulties that have always been, are and probably will be. It's nice when, regardless of the circumstances, we do interesting research. The only thing is that we lack Russian equipment. The sophisticated equipment we use is either Western or Chinese. We heard a wonderful speech by S. Yu. Taskaev ("Boron neutron capture therapy: fundamentals, current state and current research areas") that said that they had developed and supplied the equipment to some countries long ago. And now it is required that this equipment become a medical device. This is a requirement of Roszdravnadzor. This is serious, not quick, and it is right, because we are talking about the life and health of people."

Co-Chairman of the Section "Environmental problems of radiobiology" S. V. Fesenko (Kurchatov Complex of Radiology and Agroecology, RC KI, Obninsk) said in an interview for our newspaper, "Radioecology is a broad science, it studies the behavior of radionuclides in the environment and the effect of radiation at different levels biological organization - from genetics to ecosystems studied in the field. It also includes the use of radionuclides to study biospheric processes such as the global carbon cycle, dating of bottom sediments, the behavior of greenhouse gases in the environment, and more. These techniques are widely used in meeting various kinds of radiation technologies that are widely used in agriculture, medicine and industry. The Section presented a full range of all possible areas in radioecology. A large block of reports was dedicated to the radioecology of accidents - in the South Urals (Kyshtym), the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the evaluation of long-term effects, radio adaptation and related processes. A wide range of issues related to the release of tritium into the aquatic environment were considered that estimate the great concern of mankind related to emissions from the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant. It is an under-investigated radionuclide. It is important to highlight that tritium and carbon-14 are the two main radionuclides that in the global sense measure the doses of exposure to the population as a result of the functioning of nuclear power facilities. Reports were presented showing the relationship between carbon‑14 content and man-made radionuclides, which are of great importance for simulating the biospheric consequences of global warming.

Radioecology is engaged in ensuring the safety of the population living in areas of high radioactive background. In Russia, these are vast territories in the Komi Republic, the North Caucasus and Siberia. There are huge polluted areas around the world - in India, China, Malaysia. In addition, mining, including rare earth metals and tin, is always accompanied by a large amount of heavy natural radionuclides entering the environment. The radiation doses of the population and biota in such regions are an order of magnitude higher than the potential doses that astronauts can receive when flying to Mars."

Co-Chairman of the Section S. A. Geraskin (Kurchatov Complex of Radiology and Agroecology, RC KI, Obninsk): "First of all, I want to say that the organizers worked very well. It is difficult to ensure the work of the Congress that is held every five years. Organizing the professional work of each Section, discussion, giving the floor to everyone - they all succeeded. And many thanks to them for this!

Radioecology is a very broad science, and its different areas were presented at the Section. We managed to collect important representatives of this science that widely work today, can show interesting results. In radioecology, there has always been the leadership of Russian science. It just so happened that we have such sites that no one in the world has - the Chernobyl zone, the South Urals, Semipalatinsk and vast experience working with them. And if we remember the very beginning, then the founder of radioecology is V.I. Vernadsky, a great scientist who began with work on natural radioactivity.

In our Section, different areas of radioecology were presented. E.V. Antonova (Yekaterinburg) delivered two reports. She represents a scientific group that has been researching the South Ural radioactive trace for many years. They were able to fully describe it, track not only the first, but also the long-term consequences, develop a methodology for their analysis. In many ways, modern radioecology originated on the South Ural radioactive trace. The first mechanisms of adaptation of wildlife in these conditions were identified, and this was also described in the reports of Elena Valerievna. In the report of E. B. Grigorkina, properties on small mammals were highlighted. Animals can migrate from the track axis, where doses are large, to its outskirts, where conditions are different. Reports on radioecological studies at sites with increased natural radioactivity were presented. Near the current Institute of Biology in Syktyvkar in the 1920s there was a radium production of the Gulag system. Radium was extracted from underground sources. Production waste was dumped along the banks of the Ukhta River. In the 1950s, when the production of radium decreased, uranium ores began to be brought there for uranium mining. As a result, a mixture of natural radionuclides and heavy metals was formed in this place. I also worked there and I know that the levels of the natural background there reached 3000 μR/h, with standard background values of 10–12 μR/h. To investigate the processes that occur in such conditions in wildlife, as biological objects adapt - this is a separate area that was presented at the Section. Several reports were related to the analysis of databases on radiobiological effects, how to use them to evaluate permissible doses. This is a rather difficult area, its leaders,T. G. Sazykina, A. I. Kryshev, spoke at the Congress with the latest results and conclusions. The problems referring man-made pollution of various territories, in particular the Yenisei, were also highlighted. The online report from Krasnoyarsk by T. A. Zotina was very informative.

I cannot fail to note the wonderful reports on the analysis of the patterns of the occurrence of tritium in plants, in the air. The employees of our Institute S.N. Lukashenko and his young colleague A.V. Mikhailov showed on field data and in controlled experiments how much the tritium concentration changes during the day that contradicts the current prototypes. They found the same patterns on the burials of Semipalatinsk. This is a new phenomenon, there are no exact theoretical explanations for it now, there are only assumptions. Why wasn't it discovered before? No one was measuring tritium so carefully - every hour for a full day. Today, we should find new theoretical explanations.

If we talk about young people, then A.V. Mikhailov, one might say, fell into the good hands of his experienced mentor S.N. Lukashenko, and it was very pleasant to listen to how clearly he spoke, the amount of material was visible. An interesting report on the role of organic carbon in the accumulation and distribution of radionuclides in glaciers was made by D. S. Akhmetzhanova from Kazakhstan. This investigation is interesting in that it opens up new opportunities in long-term monitoring of radionuclide pollution throughout the territory. I note a very good poster by N. S. Shimalina on the research of the intra-annual and inter-annual variability of plant indicators growing in the East Ural radioactive trace. In comparison with the control populations, the difference in their reactions was clearly shown over time. This is a very important work that opens up new aspects of plant adaptation to chronic radiation exposure in the distant period.

M. V. Filimonova, Co-Chairman of the Section "Radiation aids" (A.F. Tsyba MRNC, Obninsk) said, "We always come to Dubna in anticipation of the happiness of communication. We know that we will be welcomed, provided with comfortable conditions, will be sincerely welcome, and this makes it good. You can read the report online, it is now simple and free. Communication is important. I speak not only on my own behalf, but also for my colleagues. We not only exchanged scientific knowledge, results obtained after our previous meetings here in Dubna, but also agreed on groundwork for the future. In particular, it can be joint or parallel, mutually useful research under a scientific cooperation agreement. When everyone does some part of the work, this translates either into obtaining new scientific data for joint publications, or it can become a reserve for a further serious project with a practical way out. We understand that fundamental science is now given less chances for existence and development than applied science. Therefore, with regard to me and my team, we try to plan our scientific life so that our research translates into practical results - methods, technologies or some more tangible things, such as drugs or medicines.

We tried to draw up a Section programme so that, on the one hand, there were luminaries offering us to focus on the results that you will not find on the Internet. They were obtained in the 1970s and before. In their heads, a global picture of the development of the main problems of applied radiobiology has developed that is more related to applied pharmacology - radioprotective substances, radio modifiers. On the other hand, there are young people whose eyes are burning. They themselves have not yet created anything serious, their potential is just beginning to reveal, but it is very important that they, through the efforts of this congress and mine, including, see, hear those luminaries who are next to them. What they say is really, critically important for the young. Firstly, in order not to reinvent the wheel, secondly, not to use only the data that can be found on the Internet, and thirdly, to evaluate yourself. It's very helpful.

Interestingly, in this Section, we have to choose the two best from young scientists. We choose together with my wonderful Co-Chairman Lev Mikhailovich Rozhdestvensky: he strictly evaluates, I have my own criteria, but our views largely coincide with him. I decided that at the end of my speeches I would read out a list of candidates and suggest choosing the best one so that young people could evaluate themselves. At the same time, the atmosphere has developed warm, young people see that the attitude towards all participants is very friendly."

To be continued

Olga TARANTINA, photos by Igor LAPENKO and Elena PUZYNINA