The Miller lab is seeking a highly motivated, organized and enthusiastic postdoctoral fellow to study embryonic kidney development and its relationship to kidney pathologies, including cystic kidney diseases and cancer. We are interested in the role of Wnt signaling in shaping nephric tubules, utilizing Xenopus (frog) embryos and mammalian tissue culture as models. Current goals include: 1) Determining how junctions are formed during tubule formation; 2) Modeling how patient mutations result in human developmental kidney diseases; 3) Discovering novel components affecting nephron development; 4) Visualizing in vivo tube formation using advanced live imaging techniques; 5) Generating transgenic animals to visualize nephrogenesis in vivo

Current projects utilize developmental, molecular and cell biological approaches including imaging in living embryos. Applicants with a Ph.D., M.D. or equivalent and a strong background in Developmental Biology, Embryology, Cell Biology, Molecular Biology and/or Stem Cell Biology are highly encouraged to apply. Salary and benefits are commensurate with relevant experience. Review of applications will continue until the position has been filled.

Please send your CV, cover letter indicating current and future research interests, and the name/email address of three references to:

Rachel K. Miller, Ph.D.

Department of Pediatrics

The University of Texas Medical School at Houston

6431 Fannin Street, MSE R414

Houston, Texas 77030

Email: Rachel.K.Miller@uth.tmc.edu

https://med.uth.edu/pediatrics/miller-lab/

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Mate Palfy & Gautam Dey

In the summer of 2018, two commentaries from the Science Media Center (an open letter from Chief Executive Fiona Fox and a ‘World View’ in Nature news by Senior Press Manager Tom Sheldon) voiced concerns about how preprints in the life sciences could pose a potential threat to science reporting in the mass media. These articles initiated (often heated) debates within the scientific community, underlining the need for public discussions between researchers, press officers and journalists. Open Research London, a London collective of academics and librarians, and the Open Access team at the Francis Crick Institute, led by Head Librarian Frank Norman, collaborated to nucleate a platform for such discussions through an evening event at the Crick on the 6th of February.

Jane Hughes, Director of Communications at the Crick and chair of the event, kicked off the evening by asking a large audience whether they think preprints need to change or, instead, whether science reporting must adapt – with an overwhelming show of hands for the latter option.

This set the stage for Tom Sheldon, who acknowledged that preprints have been tremendously useful for science, but warned about unforeseen side-effects – such as a potential dismantling of the press embargo system. He made a strong case for preserving embargoes: for accuracy, as they give journalists time to assess claims and solicit expert comment, and for impact, ensuring maximal reach for important findings. In the case of a controversial study claiming that genetically modified maize and Roundup can cause tumours and early death in rats (since retracted), he pointed out that embargo policies gave journalists the time to consult experts, who were quick to identify significant flaws in the study. As a result, many articles in the mass media (e.g. BBC and Reuters) reported the scepticism surrounding the research. Sheldon noted that if the criticism had followed the breaking news, it would have been too late, buried by the next news cycle. In a second example, a major clinical trial showed that e-cigarettes are more effective than nicotine replacement therapies in helping smokers to quit. In this case, the embargo helped these findings make it to the front page of multiple newspapers simultaneously, maximising impact.

Sheldon then went on to envisage how such stories concerning human health might have been covered had the study been posted as a preprint. In the first hypothetical, he argued a journalist might have rushed to cover a study without consulting experts, thereby misinforming the public. In the second hypothetical, initial reporting on the preprint might have made an embargo pointless or incompatible with journal policies- meaning the story would never make it to multiple news outlets, leaving the public uninformed about important results. Sheldon then concluded that preprints necessarily disrupt the current system and – even though there have so far been no examples of preprints causing damage – we must ensure that the public understanding of science is not a casualty. In his opinion, we cannot expect journalists to change, and it is publishers, scientists and press officers who carry the responsibility to adapt.

Clare Ryan, Head of Media Relations at the Wellcome Trust, shared Sheldon’s view that we won’t be able to change journalism, and should aspire to influence press officers, scientists and journals instead. In her talk, she suggested that the focus of science news should shift away from journal papers. After using a clip from John Oliver’s popular weekly show to showcase some major issues with science news, she went on to explain her vision of science in the media. Instead of forcing each ‘new discovery’ into the spotlight of the daily news (which doesn’t reflect the gradual, self-correcting nature of scientific progress in real life), journalists could aim to include more personality, complexity, and also disagreement in their stories. ‘Science is more War and Peace than David Copperfield’, after all, and we should seek to give the public better insights into how science really works. She ended with some practical advice, including ‘stop writing so many press releases!’, a sentiment that resonated strongly with the audience. Later in the Q&A session, Fiona Fox also emphasized that press officers should never write a press release about a preprint.

Robin Lovell-Badge, Senior Group Leader at the Francis Crick Institute, shifted the discussion towards the values of preprints in his talk titled ‘Preprints are the future’. After calling out some limitations of traditional journal publishing (such as cost, speed, and a peer-review process that doesn’t work too well), he also gave several examples of big studies published in the top journals, which later had to be retracted (e.g. the fraudulent Wakefield study on the link between MMR vaccines and autism), arguing that just because something is peer-reviewed does not mean it is sound. Quoting Michael Eisen, ‘the biggest threat to the proper public understanding of science is not preprints – it’s the lie we tell the public (and ourselves) that journal peer review works to separate valid and invalid science.’

Lovell-Badge then listed numerous well-known benefits of preprints, contrasting it with journal publication. For example, data and methods can be accessed much earlier when preprinted, and these are usually of high quality; he reasoned  that since the work can be evaluated by the whole community, authors often take extra care to make sure what they post is valid. He suggested the rise of preprints gives us a good opportunity to create a new system that more rapidly, effectively and fairly engages the scientific community to assess the validity, audience and impact of published works. In such a system, it is also possible to review papers at any point, thereby contributing to an evolving understanding of the value and impact of the work. In contrast to the two speakers before him, he did think that journalists have a major responsibility in how science news is reported in the mass media.

The final speaker of the evening was Teresa Rayon, postdoctoral researcher at the Francis Crick Institute and member of the team of early-career researchers at preLights. She started her talk with a reminder that in our digital age, there are plenty of ways to communicate research transparently and get the society engaged with science (e.g. through blogging, social media). Recent data about the first five years of bioRxiv (also discussed here) highlights potential indicators (e.g. number of downloads) of preprint quality and impact, which could help journalists eager to report on preprints. She then introduced preLights, a community platform where early-career scientists highlight preprints they feel are important; taking the audience through her first preLights post as an example, she stressed the value of expert yet accessible opinion on a piece of work, and  of open correspondence with preprint authors. Gratifyingly, the authors acknowledged the discussion prompted by her preLights post in the open peer review report associated with the final published paper. Rayon went on to illustrate the preLighter community’s commitment to preprints and open science by summarizing the important points from their commentary on why preprints promote transparency and communication, rather than distortion and confusion. Finally, she proposed that initiatives like preLights can help science reporting by highlighting work to scientists, journals and journalists (without the use of jargon), having a community of experts who can give their opinion (similar to the community of experts at the Science Media Centre), and giving a voice to the new generation of researchers, who are eager to improve communication with journalists.

The prolonged, animated, and ultimately inconclusive discussion that followed these presentations highlighted just how essential it is to initiate and encourage conversations that bring together journalists, press officers, scientists and activists. There appeared to be a reasonably broad consensus that, pending further changes in the science publishing landscape, it might be necessary to have a self-imposed moratorium on mainstream reporting on preprints, giving the work time to accrue established modes of peer-review and community approval before its wider dissemination.

Given the tight deadlines of science reporting and the pressures of the newsroom, in the longer term it will be incumbent on advocates of preprints and publishing reform to familiarise journalists and press officers with the broader ecosystem around preprints. Ultimately, we believe that open community curation and peer review can provide a treasure trove of information that will complement and enrich the traditional reporting model consisting largely of a stamp of approval provided by 2-3 peer reviewers and journal editors.

Curious about the discussion? Take a look at #ORLFeb19 on Twitter!

We thank Teresa Rayon and Frank Norman for feedback on the post

(12 votes)

Loading...

Journal of Cell Science and its publisher, The Company of Biologists, are seeking to appoint a Community Manager, based in Cambridge, UK, to run a new microscopy resource website.

An extensive consultation told us that the microscopy community would welcome a trusted, curated and centralised site to connect people, resources and information. Our exciting new initiative is therefore intended to create a platform for the microscopy community to share news and techniques, discuss issues relevant to the field and read about the latest research and events.

We are now looking for an enthusiastic and motivated person to join us to develop, launch and maintain this site, which will be hosted by Journal of Cell Science but will be relevant to all of the Company of Biologists’ journals.

Core responsibilities of the position include:

• Creating and commissioning content, including writing posts and soliciting content from the academic community, societies, companies and other organisations.
• Providing user support and ensuring site functionality on a day-to-day basis.
• Providing creative and practical input into the design and development of the site.
• Maintaining and developing the site’s presence on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter.
• Developing and managing sponsorship, ads and commercial relationships.
• Representing Journal of Cell Science and the resource site at international conferences.

Applicants should have a PhD with research experience in a relevant scientific field and extensive imaging experience – ideally involving the application or development of new methods for microscopy or image analysis. The successful candidate will have proven social media skills and a clear understanding of the online environment as it applies to scientists. Applicants should have excellent writing and communication skills, and strong interpersonal and networking abilities – both online and in person. Experience with additional media, such as video or podcasting, and an eye for aesthetics, would be an advantage. We are looking for an individual with fresh ideas and a willingness to learn new skills, and who will contribute broadly to the Company’s activities.

This is an exciting opportunity to develop a hub for the microscopy community – in a similar vein to the Company’s established community site for developmental biologists, the Node – and to engage with relevant people at all levels: academics, developers, facilities, institutes and companies. The Community Manager will work alongside an experienced in-house team, including the Executive Editor of Journal of Cell Science, as well as with the journal’s international team of academic editors. Additional responsibilities may be provided for the right candidate. The Company of Biologists is based in attractive modern offices on the outskirts of Cambridge, UK.

The Company of Biologists (biologists.com) exists to support biologists and inspire advances in biology. At the heart of what we do are our five specialist journals – Development, Journal of Cell Science, Journal of Experimental Biology, Disease Models & Mechanisms and Biology Open – two of them fully open access. All are edited by expert researchers in the field, and all articles are subjected to rigorous peer review. We take great pride in the experience of our editorial team and the quality of the work we publish. We believe that the profits from publishing the hard work of biologists should support scientific discovery and help develop future scientists. Our grants help support societies, meetings and individuals. Our workshops and meetings give the opportunity to network and collaborate.

Applicants should send a CV along with a covering letter that summarises their relevant experience, and in particular their specific microscopy/imaging expertise, any links to online activities), current salary, and why they are enthusiastic about this opportunity.

Applications and informal queries should be sent by email no later than 22nd March 2019 to hr@biologists.com.

We may request written tests in advance of any interview.

Applicants should be eligible to work in the UK.

(1 votes)

Loading...

In this episode we’re looking at the genetics of failure – why we fail to lose weight thanks to our genes, and why ignoring genetic information and DNA diversity leads to billions of dollars being wasted on drugs that don’t work.

Cambridge University neuroscientist Giles Yeo talks about his new book, Gene Eating: The science of obesity and the truth about diets, explaining why weight loss is just physics, but the process of losing, gaining or maintaining weight is all about our biology.

Then we report back from the recent Festival of Genomics in London, UK, speaking with biomedical industry expert Paul-Peter Tak, Cecilia Lindskog from the Human Protein Atlas project, and Paul Matthews from Global Gene Corp, to find out why precision and personalised healthcare will only work if it’s based on the right information

Full transcript, credits and show notes here. 

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

The Turing Centre for Living Systems (CENTURI) wishes to attract talented postdoctoral fellows to the Luminy campus. To do so, CENTURI will fund up to 5 postdoctoral positions to start in 2019, for a maximum of two years. Postdocs will work in an interdisciplinary life science environment, and have backgrounds in any of the following fields: cell or developmental biology, immunology, neurobiology, biophysics, theoretical physics, computer science, bioinformatics, applied mathematics, engineering.

Candidates can either apply to one of the advertised CENTURI projects or submit their own project, providing that they meet the application criteria and that their application is supported by at least one host lab.

Students will be co-supervised by two or three supervisors from our community. Candidates can apply to a maximum of three projects.

Selection criteria

Candidates will be evaluated on the following criteria:

– Scientific level and publications

– Ability to work in a multidisciplinary research environment

– Ability to work on a collaborative research project

– Enthusiasm and communication skills

Duration: 2 year

Deadline for application: April 26, 2019

Interviews in Marseille (pre-selected candidates only): June 27 – 28, 2019

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

The Seifert lab in the Department of Biology at the University of Kentucky (UK) is seeking exceptionally creative postdoctoral researchers to join our group.  We utilize a diverse array of species to study the cellular and molecular basis for complex tissue regeneration in mammals.  To pursue this line of research we maintain and use our active breeding colonies of spiny mice in the US (Acomys cahirinus) and in Kenya (Acomys percivali and Acomys kempi).  Our US colony provides molecular tractability whereas our work in Kenya with wild-trapped rodent species (regenerating and non-regenerating) provides phylogenetic perspective to understand the distribution of regenerative ability.  Successful applicants will initially join an NIH funded project investigating how immune cells regulate the regenerative response to injury.  Specifically, the project investigates how specific macrophage phenotypes induce behavioral changes in local fibroblasts during blastema formation.  Ideal candidates will have a strong background in developmental biology, experience working with model or non-model organisms, expertise in microscopy and comfortability with bioinformatics. While these are funded positions, postdocs in the Seifert lab are strongly encouraged to develop their own projects and external funding portfolios as a pathway toward independence.  Salary follows NIH guidelines for postdoctoral researchers. Informal inquiries are strongly encouraged.  For additional information visit: http://www.ashleyseifert.com/opportunities.html

Review of applications will begin on a rolling basis and will continue until the position has been filled.  Ideal start date is summer 2019. Candidates will have completed their Ph.D. prior to starting the position but need not have defended their dissertation prior to applying.  Applicants should send a single pdf document to Ashley Seifert (awseifert@uky.edu) that includes their CV, names of three references, and a 1-2-page synopsis of their current research interests and how these complement our overall research program.

The Department of Biology houses a strong group of research labs interested in regenerative and stem cell biology using a diverse array of animal models (e.g., spiny mice, salamanders, planarians, lampreys, zebrafish) and in vitro systems.  Together, these labs create a vibrant atmosphere to pursue interdisciplinary projects across comparative genomics, developmental, regenerative and evolutionary biology.

(1 votes)

Loading...

On the 4th and 5th of February, the Crick hosted its first Developmental Biology Symposium in honour of Rosa Beddington FRS (1956-2001). Covering themes from embryonic growth to metabolism and aging, the symposium attracted more than 200 delegates from across the globe.

The symposium harnessed an impressive richness in diversity of topics and captured the raw excitement within the developmental biology field – a fitting tribute to Rosa, who was an outstanding embryologist, artist and mentor to many in the field.

The use of new interdisciplinary approaches was a recurring theme throughout the meeting. Sessions were “open plan”, drawing interesting parallels with the Crick’s research ethos, where different disciplines intermingle as an important driver for creativity and discovery. Advances in sequencing technologies are now providing unprecedented molecular resolution of how stem cells develop into the myriad of functional cell types within the body. Computer modelling techniques are providing striking predictions of how biological systems work and are helping to bridge the gap from single cells to whole tissues and organisms. Researchers are broadening our understanding of animal development and its relevance to health and disease using a veritable feast of model organisms (sea urchins, worms, crickets and killifish to name a few). And we are now beginning to develop an understanding of the complex processes that define our lifespan and, perhaps more importantly, our healthspan.

The Crick-Beddington symposium was a resounding success. With a strong focus on unpublished work, it highlighted that collaborative efforts across disciplines are accelerating fundamental insights into biological systems. An exciting future for developmental biology lies ahead.

Vicki Metzis and Alex Gould

Thanks to the Medical Research Foundation Rosa Beddington Fund and all sponsors of the Crick-Beddington 2019 event which can be accessed together with the full programme here.

(3 votes)

Loading...

A successful undergraduate science education includes teaching students science process skills, including critical analysis of primary scientific literature (PSL). Unfortunately, the use of PSL in the classroom remains limited due to several barriers. These include students struggling with the actual practice of science (as opposed to the purely linear scientific method presented in textbooks), the scientific jargon found in articles, and an inability to connect PSL to the broader context of the discipline. Additionally, most novice students are still developing the critical thinking skills needed to interpret the results and conclusions found in PSL. To complicate matters, some educators may be uncomfortable using PSL themselves due to concerns about student pushback or their sense that the material is too complex for their students.

Despite these barriers, a growing body of literature shows that PSL is a valuable and useful tool for STEM education. For example, closely analyzing PSL in a classroom setting engages students in discussion and debate around interpretations of experimental data while building their insight into both the nature of science and researchers themselves (Hoskins, Stevens, & Nehm, 2007). Teaching with scientific research papers has been shown to promote critical thinking, experimental design ability, and epistemological maturation as well as improve students’ positive attitudes to science and (Gottesman & Hoskins, 2013; Hoskins, Lopatto, & Stevens, 2011; Kenyon, Onorato, Gottesman, Hoque, & Hoskins, 2016; Murray, 2014; Round & Campbell, 2013; Stevens & Hoskins, 2014). PSL can also show students that even after a study is completed and published, there are still many unanswered questions for future scientists, and therefore promote the development of creativity through study design assignments (Gottesman & Hoskins, 2013; Hoskins et al., 2007).

Despite the diversity of positive outcomes resulting from incorporating PSL into classrooms, this method of teaching science remains relatively uncommon. Some reasons for this include: the amount of educator time spent in developing PSL lessons; difficulty with sharing and/or re-using PSL curricula because topics are often specific to particular scientific disciplines; and difficulty evaluating the higher order thinking skills involved with the use of PSL.

Annotated PSL is a promising example of a less-intensive intervention for including PSL into introductory biology courses at the undergraduate level. Annotated PSL is designed to help readers interpret complex science by overlaying additional information on top of the original PSL text: there is no modification or re-writing of the text itself. The “Learning Lens” tool is then used to selectively highlight different parts of the original text, and, when the highlighted text is clicked on, a pop-up box containing additional information will appear. Check out an example annotated PSL resource and try out the Learning Lens tool for yourself here: https://tinyurl.com/k7m329g

(Over 100 additional annotated papers covering a variety of scientific topics and disciplines can be found as part of the Science in the Classroom, a project supported by AAAS and NSF: http://scienceintheclassroom.org/)

Our lab has three main goals for incorporating annotated PSL into introductory biology courses:

1. Minimize the time investment for instructors
2. Minimize alteration to existing courses and plans of study
3. Increase student confidence in being able to deconstruct future PSL

In our first pilot study, published recently in PLOS Biology, we addressed goals 1 and 2 and aimed to develop an implementation protocol. For this study, we collaborated with seven different biology courses at Florida International University. We used the same annotated PSL for all in-class activities described in this study: “Caffeine in floral nectar enhances a pollinator’s memory of reward” (https://tinyurl.com/k7m329g, the same example we encouraged you to try out above). We chose this article because incorporated many different aspects of biology, including evolution, ecosystem interactions, basic botany, learning and memory, and animal behavior in a single study, making this paper applicable in a wide variety of undergraduate courses (goal #2).

Because this was the first time annotated PSL was examined as part of a scientific study, our methods were exploratory in nature. We started at the beginning with collecting baseline data on how students interacted with the annotations themselves. Specifically, we measured average time students spent interacting with the annotated PSL, asked students what they liked about using annotated PSL, and whether or not the topic of the annotated PSL related to their course. We are currently working on analyzing these data.

Regarding implementation, we had the most success when instructors introduced the annotated PSL to their class and allowed for ~20 minutes of class time for reading followed by a few clicker questions related to the science in the article. We consider a total of ~40 minutes to be a minimal time investment for instructors with minimal alterations to existing courses and plans of study.

Moving forward, we are currently analyzing data collected from annotated PSL given as homework assignments with accompanying iClicker questions given at the start of the next class. We are also collecting student self-efficacy relating to reading PSL as a part of this study.

We are always looking for more collaborators to expand the reach of annotated PSL beyond FIU. If you and your students would like to join one of our studies please let us know!

Melissa McCartney

mmccartn @ fiu.edu

References

Gottesman, A. J., & Hoskins, S. G. (2013). CREATE Cornerstone: Introduction to scientific thinking, a new course for STEM-interested freshmen, demystifies scientific thinking through analysis of scientific literature. CBE Life Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0201

Hoskins, S. G., Lopatto, D., & Stevens, L. M. (2011). The C.R.E.A.T.E. approach to primary literature shifts undergraduates’ self-assessed ability to read and analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemological beliefs. CBE Life Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027

Hoskins, S. G., Stevens, L. M., & Nehm, R. H. (2007). Selective use of the primary literature transforms the classroom into a virtual laboratory. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183

Kenyon, K. L., Onorato, M. E., Gottesman, A. J., Hoque, J., & Hoskins, S. G. (2016). Testing CREATE at Community Colleges: An Examination of Faculty Perspectives and Diverse Student Gains. Cell Biology Education, 15(1), ar8-ar8. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-07-0146

Murray, T. A. (2014). Teaching students to read the primary literature using pogil activities. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20765

Round, J. E., & Campbell, A. M. (2013). Figure facts: Encouraging undergraduates to take a data-centered approach to reading primary literature. CBE Life Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0057

Stevens, L. M., & Hoskins, S. G. (2014). The CREATE Strategy for Intensive Analysis of Primary Literature Can Be Used Effectively by Newly Trained Faculty to Produce Multiple Gains in Diverse Students. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 224–42. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0239

(4 votes)

Loading...

The Francis Crick Institute held the 1^st Crick-Beddington Developmental Biology Symposium last week, beginning on Monday the 4^th of February. The two-day meeting was held in honour of the memory of leading UK embryologist, Rosa Beddington FRS (right), head of the Division of Mammalian Development at the MRC National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR) from 1993 until 2001. The symposium promised to be an inspiring meeting full of fond memories and first-class science, featuring fifteen invited plenaries – many of whom were colleagues of Rosa Beddington.

In addition to her pioneering work on mouse embryology, Rosa is also widely known for her scientific drawings and lab-book sketches. Her artistic talents are immortalised in her design of the British Society for Developmental Biology’s Waddington Medal and the BSDB later used one of Beddington’s artworks featuring mice on a DNA helix for the Beddington Medal.

I always enjoy a visit to the Crick. Although I have never worked in the building, I studied my PhD at the NIMR in Mill Hill so in some ways the Crick feels the closest thing to home. It was great to see some familiar faces and catch up with old friends. This was also my first visit to the Crick as a Reviews Editor for Development, so I was also looking forward to meeting new colleagues for the first time and being inspired by talented speakers on a diverse range of topics.

Sessions were interspersed with lunch and refreshment breaks in the Manby Gallery, which featured a poster session of around 30 posters. Lunch also included an opportunity to look around the exhibits from sponsors and to stop and watch a slideshow of Rosa’s artwork, which had been collated together from archives, friends and colleagues.

The symposium began with opening remarks from organiser Alex Gould. Alex spoke of Rosa Beddington’s legacy both to science and community, and reminisced about his own history with Rosa, who had hired him to join the NIMR. Alex also introduced the official Twitter hashtag—#CrickBeddington2019—to use throughout the symposium. Take a look for more Tweets, summaries and discussion from the event.

“Often, when I have to make a difficult decision, I wonder what Rosa would have done.”
Alex Gould

The first plenary speaker of the symposium, Elizabeth Robertson, began by sharing her fond memories of working with Rosa. Although, initially, Liz thought Rosa was “really super scary” they became good friends while working as demonstrators at the Cold Spring Harbour Course 1986-1990. During their careers, Rosa and Liz collaborated on research projects during weekends and co-authored reviews, for which Rosa illustrated the figures. Liz discussed how Nodal signalling “makes heads and tails of the early mouse embryo” and regulates the fate of precursor primordial germ cells. Concluding her talk with a photo of Rosa that hangs in the Dunn School of Pathology, Liz provided a final sentiment to Rosa, stating that she “sees her every day”.

Rosa’s favourite model, the mouse, featured in a number of other talks during the symposium. Tristan Rodriguez, a former Post Doc in Rosa’s lab, discussed the role of p53 and mTOR signalling in eliminating unfit cells. Tristan demonstrated that cells are capable of sensing subtle differences in mitochondrial performance to determine cell fitness. Sally Dunwoodie showed that the human HAAO/KYNU phenotypes (genes that encode enzymes of the kynurenine pathway) are caused by NAD deficiency. HAAO/KYNU mutant mice are phenotypically normal unless fed a diet low in vitamin B3, providing a model for NAD deficiency and an example of gene-environment interaction in development. In the final talks of the symposium, Hironobu Fujiwara presented live imaging data used to identify the elusive hair follicle stem cell progenitors, which form concentric rings within the basal epidermal cells of the mammalian skin, and Kat Hadjantonakis shared data from carefully controlled single-cell sequencing experiments, revealing the extra-embryonic or embryonic origin of cells in the mammalian gut tube.

Far from being mouse-centric, however, a variety of other model organisms were showcased. Kate Storey began with what is possibly the only illustration of a chicken drawn by Rosa Beddington and described the chromatin dynamics that occur during chick neuromesodermal progenitor differentiation in response to FGF/ERK signalling. Steve Wilson presented beautiful confocal images of the zebrafish brain and demonstrated the role of the parapineal gland in establishing habenular asymmetry for light and odour response. Steve also advocated for the study of behaviour as a read-out for phenotype. In a second appearance from the Wilson lab, Rodrigo Young presented a project that “began with a mutant without a phenotype” and showed that tcf7l1a zebrafish mutants have prolonged proliferation to develop normal size eyes despite a 50% reduction in the eye field. Can Aztekin (a PhD student in John Gurdon‘s group) shared single-cell sequencing used to identify a new cell type termed “regeneration-organising cell” (ROC), which migrate to amputated sites and are required for Xenopus tail regeneration.

Human development also featured; Pierre Vanderhaeghen presented exciting new data that indicates mitochondrial dynamics influence the differentiation of neural progenitors to neurons in the human cortex and Ana Pombo discussed the advantages of using genome architecture mapping (GAM) to understand 3D genome topology at a single-cell resolution, explaining how the technology could be applied to interrogate human systems.

Highlighting new research in invertebrate systems, Roberto Feuda showed that the vast majority of genes expressed in the apical organ of the sea urchin are conserved with Drosophila brain. In addition, brain regionalisation genes are also expressed in restricted compartments of the sea urchin embryo. In addition, Géraldine Williaume (a PhD student from Hitoyoshi Yasuo‘s group) demonstrated how bimodal Ephrin/Eph signalling can integrate graded ERK and FGF signals to specify ascidian neuronal cells.

Regulation of developmental size was a recurring theme during the symposium. On the first day, Cassandra Extavour reminded us that all projects should start in the library. Her lab has used machine reading to compile a database for challenging long-held hypotheses about insect egg shapes and sizes. Ultimately, ecology is a better determinant of egg size and shape than developmental rate or “cost” ratios. On the second day, Jochen Rink shared recent data on mechanisms of size and scaling, exploiting the striking ability of planarians to increase and decrease up to 40-fold in size and concluding that size depends on the relationship between mass and the number of cells. Finally, Patrick Müller demonstrated how in vivo data and mathematical models can be used to understand rapid, proportional scaling of morphogen gradients during embryogenesis and entertained the audience with his “drunken sailor” analogy of morphogen dispersal.

Indeed, mathematical models were utilised by a number of speakers. Cerys Manning, a Sir Henry Wellcome Fellow in Nancy Papalopulou’s lab, revealed how mathematical models can be used to explore Hes-oscillations and determine the parameters for cells to transition into oscillatory patterns of gene expression. In addition, James Sharpe began his talk with a tribute to Rosa and the NIMR and revealed new approaches for the mathematical modelling of limb development, which included a detailed staging method for the mouse limb bud.

Finally, I was excited to hear about development “beyond the embryo” with two talks on ageing. In a fascinating talk, Scott Pletcher shared unpublished data revealing healthy flies have reduced longevity when visually exposed to other naturally deceased flies. These data suggest the existence of neural states that influence ageing and physiology through sensory perception. In addition, Dario Riccardo Valenzano introduced the benefits of using the short-lived turquoise killifish as a model and showed that as killifish age, the diversity in the microbiome and B-cell antibodies decreases. Interestingly, colonisation of the gut of microbiota from young fish can increase longevity in middle-aged animals.

Jean-Paul Vincent concluded the symposium by thanking the speakers, the Crick Events team, sponsors and co-organisers; Rita Sousa-Nunes from King’s College London, and James Briscoe and Alex Gould from The Francis Crick Institute. Finally, he announced that the 2^nd Crick-Beddington Developmental Biology Symposium will be in two years’ time, in 2021. I hope that the 250 attendees will join me in thanking the organisers for their effort in putting the symposium together, chairing sessions and making sure it was an enjoyable event for all. I also thank all the speakers for sharing their stories, both scientific and otherwise, to make this a personal and sincere tribute to Rosa Beddington.

(4 votes)

Loading...