External review board

User proposals submitted to the BioF:GREAT User Facility are assessed by subject-matter reviewers from outside the University of Georgia. Seventeen reviewers are currently engaged, drawn on as the science of each proposal requires; the pool expands as user demand and proposal topics change.

The board spans the range of work the facility supports — intracellular glycosylation and O-GlcNAc biology, N- and O-glycoproteomics, mass spectrometry and software, glycomics and glycolipids, parasite and zebrafish models, congenital disorders of glycosylation, plant synthetic biology, spatial proteomics and commercialization — across universities, research institutes, a genetic centre and industry.

Reviewers

Lauren Ball

Medical University of South Carolina

Proteomics core · O-GlcNAc

Michael Boyce

Duke University

Intracellular glycosylation

Chris M. Colangelo

Agilent Technologies

Proteomics

Joe Contessa

Yale University

N-linked glycosylation

Solomon Tebeje Gizaw

Addis Ababa University

Glycomics · glycolipids

Junfeng Ma

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Proteomics core · O-GlcNAc

John Magnani

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Commercialization · N-linked glycosylation

Jim Morris

Clemson University

Kinetoplast biology

Nicki Packer

Macquarie University

Structure and function

Nick Riley

University of Washington

O-glycosylation · software · mass spectrometry

Nick Seyfried

Emory University

Quantitative proteomics

Chad Slawson

University of Kansas

Intracellular glycosylation

Richard Steet

Greenwood Genetic Center

Zebrafish · congenital disorders of glycosylation

Stephanie Olivier-Van Stichelen

Medical College of Wisconsin

Intracellular glycosylation

Ramon C. Sun

University of Florida

Spatial proteomics

Kristian Swearingen

Institute for Systems Biology

O-fucose · mass spectrometry · parasitology

Catalin Voiniciuc

University of Florida

Plant synthetic biology

How review works. Reviewers are matched to proposals by subject area and assess scientific merit, feasibility and fit to the facility’s capabilities. The user proposals page describes what a proposal should contain and how it progresses; the user flow chart shows where external review sits in the process. Reviewers serve as needed rather than on fixed terms, and additional reviewers are added as proposal topics require.

Serving as a reviewer

Researchers willing to review user proposals in their area of expertise are welcome to get in touch.

Contact the team   About user proposals