Glubokovsky Michael K.( Head of the Laboratory of the Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern Branch of the Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok.)
Comments for Glubokovsky Michael K.
Biography Glubokovsky Michael K.
Date of birth: 20 September 1948.
He graduated from Leningrad State University named after AA Zhdanov, a biologist.
In 1990 he defended his doctoral thesis on "Evolutionary biology of salmon".
Research interests: biology and evolution of the Far East salmon.
He considers himself an optimist and be in the life of the French proverb: "Man is never so happy or unhappy, as he thinks about himself."
Deputy DG of Vladivostok electoral district N 51, Primorsky Krai. Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Education, Culture and Science.
Upon completion in 1971, Biology and Soil Sciences LSU came to Vladivostok Institute of Marine Biology, USSR Academy of Sciences, where he is currently working.
Since 1986, directs the Laboratory of population biology.
From 1989 to 1992 he was Deputy Director of the Institute for Science.
Since 1991, working part-time professor in the Department of Hydrobiology and Ichthyology, Far Eastern State University.
Since 1992, co-chair of the Far Eastern Association of Scientists. He participated in scientific expeditions in Primorye, Sakhalin, Kamchatka, Chukotka, Taimyr.
One of the organizers and active participants in development in 1990-1992, "Long-term environmental program of the Primorsky Territory", which identifies measures to improve the environment and health of the population of the Primorsky Territory.
Since 1993, is developing a comprehensive program of revival of salmon farming.
Since 1993 - State Duma Deputy. Vladivostok district N51 Primorsky Krai. Nominated block "Yavlinsky - Boldyrev - Lukin '. Member of the Yabloko faction. Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Education, Culture and Science, a member of the subcommittee on Science.
In 1995, running for the State Duma 6-th convocation on the list of electoral bloc "Apple".
Glubokovsky supporter of the direction of reforms of the government of Russia after the collapse of the USSR. However, he categorically disagreed with the methods of reform, considering them a shock without therapy, noting their inconsistency and unpredictability.