An Albany innovator was shocked to learn of a Massey University shake-up threatening the jobs of scientists who've helped his company design a mobile testing device for coronavirus.
Ubiquitome Bio executive chairman Dr Paul Pickering is at a major molecular medicine conference in San Francisco this week to showcase his just-launched, hand-held device, Liberty16.
It's designed for mobile, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing – and there's growing interest from around the world in it being used to diagnose to coronavirus infections.
Pickering has already tried it on Covid-19 sequences validated by the United States Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.
He ultimately hopes to see it play a role in curbing the spread of Covid-19, through rapidly deploying it at schools, hospitals and workplaces – and returning positive or negative results to suspected cases in as little as 40 minutes.
"We have a vision of being able to run 1000 different tests at 1000 different locations – and all simultaneously being reported back in real time," Pickering told the Herald.
"When you're dealing with something like coronavirus, you've got to have a dynamic response to it."
But he is concerned some of the scientific expertise that's underpinned the Liberty16 device may be about to be lost in a radical restructure at Massey University.
The university is looking to stop offering science degrees from its Albany campus – a move that could see about 50 Auckland scientists lose their jobs.
Among them is senior genetics lecturer Dr Nikki Freed, who has been part of the small Massey team working with Ubiquitome Bio for the past three years.
Freed, whose office is just 3km away from the company premises, has provided expert advice throughout Liberty16's design.
That included developing functional assays to test Liberty 16 prototypes, as well as contributing to software functionality.
"This work underscores the technical expertise at Massey University in Auckland that was critical for the rapid launch of this molecular biology device," Freed told the Herald.
Having worked as a contractor for the US Department of Defence developing similar style test kits for viruses, Freed was well qualified for the collaboration – which is still ongoing.
"This work establishes the small group of scientists at Massey as a valuable partner for industry and was made possible due to [the] Albany campus proximity to the growing biotech sector located in Albany."
Pickering echoed that point, adding he couldn't say enough about the "world-class" support he'd received from Massey scientists.
"We have been shocked by the proposal, and it's very close to us, given how we've been working with these people over the past few years," he said.
Losing that support, he said, would mean having to build completely new relationships with scientists at other institutes, who may not be as helpful or as qualified as Freed's team had proven.
"That's an important consideration, as it's challenging for us to re-establish relationships."
Incidentally, Massey's just-released consolidated university plan for the next two years singled out among its projects "rapid diagnostic testing for application in public health, primary production and biosecurity".
That included using "in-house capacity and innovation to develop rapid, cost-effective DNA diagnostics that can be carried out anywhere, any time, without the need for high-end laboratory equipment or highly trained operators".
It wasn't the only way the Massey shake-up could affect New Zealand's science response to Covid-19. Leading infectious disease modeller Professor Mick Roberts has also told the Herald of his worries for his job.
Albany scientists have responded angrily to the proposed restructure, which included cutting staff costs in the College of Sciences by $11.7 million, or 15 per cent.
They argue science at their campus is important and growing, and are outraged at being given just three weeks at a busy time of the year to give their formal feedback.
Massey has said no decisions have been made, and while consultation on its discussion document was still underway, it wouldn't be commenting about potential outcomes.