Washington

Microbiologist Thomas Butler has been sentenced to two years in prison for convictions that stem from a January 2003 bioterrorism scare.

The case began when Butler reported vials of plague bacteria missing from his lab at Texas Tech University in Lubbock. After being questioned by the FBI, Butler said he might have accidentally destroyed the vials.

Investigators charged Butler with 69 crimes related to the incident, including lying to them and defrauding his university. Butler was cleared of the most serious charges last December, but was convicted of fraud against Texas Tech and of mislabelling a plague sample he shipped to Tanzania.

Butler's two-year sentence is more lenient than that sought by federal prosecutors, who called for millions of dollars in fines and at least ten years in prison. Butler was told to pay more than $50,000 in fines and restitution. He has already resigned from Texas Tech and paid the university $250,000. Butler has also been stripped of his Texas medical licence. His lawyers plan to appeal.

Scientists have watched the Butler case unfold with dismay. Many believe that the federal government was harsh on Butler to create a public image that it is tough against terrorists. “Butler is going to federal prison, Texas Tech's reputation is in tatters, and no bioterrorism was even committed,” says Nobel laureate Peter Agre, a former student of Butler's who is now a biochemist at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland. “Everyone has lost,” say Agre.

Some researchers say that by making an example out of a 62-year-old, respected researcher the government has undermined its own cause. “This is guaranteed to have a chilling effect on pathogen research,” says Steven Block, a biophysicist at Stanford University in California. He cites examples such as that of Harvard University biochemist John Collier, who has said that he threw out his old stocks of anthrax bacteria for fear of running foul of new bioterrorism regulations.

Other researchers have denied any such problem. They point to the eager competition among many scientists for the billions of dollars in biodefence spending that have been made available to counter the threat of terrorism.