Between school biology, DNA sequencing, and a research career still waiting to happen

The first thing that surprised me when I returned to university was not a sophisticated laboratory instrument. It was the students.

Many of them were considerably younger than I was. I had already spent years teaching biology, preparing lessons, marking assessments, managing classrooms, and trying to help students with very different abilities. Suddenly, I was sitting among students who belonged to another generation, asking questions and trying to learn again.

For a moment, the distance between us felt enormous.

Then something unexpected happened. I began to enjoy being a student again.

I wanted to examine every instrument, understand how it worked, discover its limitations, and learn where mistakes could enter an experiment. I was curious in a way that reminded me of my earliest university years.

But I should explain why I returned in the first place.

The truth about why I went back

It would be easy to say that I pursued a Master’s degree because of my lifelong passion for science. That would be true, but incomplete.

I was also exhausted.

Teaching is a demanding profession, and much of its work is invisible to people outside the classroom. There are lessons to prepare, assessments to design, paperwork to complete, classrooms to manage, and students who need different kinds of support. You must challenge those who are doing well without leaving behind those who are struggling.

I had been teaching biology for years. I valued the work, but I could not ignore how tiring it had become.

Long before I became a schoolteacher, I had studied biology with a specialization in biochemistry. Like many students in my field, I had imagined a future in laboratories, research institutions, or scientific industries. Teaching was not the only career I had pictured for myself.

Returning to university was partly an attempt to recover that earlier ambition. It was also a response to a problem I had noticed in my classroom.

The biology we teach in schools has changed.

Students encounter increasingly sophisticated concepts, from cellular respiration and molecular biology to the principles behind DNA sequencing. A teacher may know how to explain the Krebs cycle or the Bohr and Haldane effects, but knowing the textbook explanation is not quite the same as understanding how scientists investigate the underlying processes.

I began to feel that my students deserved more than definitions and diagrams. I wanted to show them where scientific knowledge comes from.

And I knew I needed to learn more myself.

A laboratory that had changed its language

When I first studied at university, much of our laboratory work relied on manual techniques. Computers were not integrated into many of the instruments we used. Where they were available, their role was often limited to recording results or processing data in spreadsheets.

The laboratory I returned to was different.

Modern instruments could generate enormous quantities of digital information. Understanding their output required familiarity not only with laboratory procedures but also with software, databases, computational analysis, and statistics.

Learning to operate an instrument was no longer enough.

I needed to understand what happened to the data afterward. How were sequences compared? What assumptions did the software make? How reliable was an apparent match? What did the analysis reveal, and what could it not tell us?

From sequence alignment and biological databases to statistical tools and Oxford Nanopore sequencing, each answer seemed to produce another question.

It felt as though I was learning two sciences at once: biology, which I had studied for years, and the computational language through which so much modern biology is now understood.

There was a challenge behind every challenge.

Strangely, I enjoyed it.

When a sequence is not yet an answer

My Master’s research brought me into contact with questions of particular clinical importance: the potential use of DNA sequencing to investigate bloodstream infections in premature newborn infants.

The prospect was compelling. Sequencing technologies can detect microbial genetic material, including signals that conventional approaches may not readily reveal. But the excitement of seeing a microbial name appear in an analysis must be balanced by a more difficult question.

What does that result actually mean?

In low-biomass samples, where very little microbial DNA may be present, contamination and other technical factors can complicate interpretation. Detecting a sequence does not automatically establish that an organism was present in the patient’s bloodstream, much less that it caused an infection.

I came to appreciate that a sophisticated instrument does not eliminate uncertainty. Sometimes it gives us more information than we are immediately able to interpret.

That lesson matters far beyond any one sequencing platform. Technology can make observations possible, but scientific judgment is still needed to decide what those observations support.

I remain proud of the research and grateful for the people who helped me complete it.

Dr. Hadi Yassine and Dr. Fatiha Benslimane were among the academics whose support and encouragement I deeply appreciated during my scientific journey. I am grateful, too, to the colleagues, lecturers, and friends who helped make returning to academic study possible.

Research may depend on instruments and data, but it also depends on people willing to share their knowledge.

The result I did not expect to find in a classroom

Something changed when I returned to teaching.

I had been explaining some biological concepts since 2013. The subjects were familiar, and I knew how to present them. But after my laboratory experience, I noticed a difference in the way I spoke about science.

When I introduced a technique, I could describe the instrument behind it. I could explain what happened to the sample, why a researcher performed a particular step, and where difficulties might arise.

I was no longer relying solely on descriptions I had learned from books. I could bring my own experience into the explanation.

And the students seemed to notice.

When I described an experiment step by step, I could see them becoming more attentive. They followed the procedure with curiosity. They seemed to imagine the instruments, the samples, and the researcher making decisions along the way.

For a few minutes, I felt I could transport them from their classroom desks into a university laboratory without anyone leaving the room.

That was one of the most rewarding surprises of my Master’s degree.

The laboratory had made me a different kind of teacher.

But I do not want to turn that observation into a sentimental ending.

The dream I have not abandoned

Almost two years have passed since I completed my Master’s degree.

Sometimes I still look at the cover of my printed thesis.

I feel an enormous sense of pride.

Not because I believe the research answered every question, or because earning the degree made me an expert in everything I wanted to learn. I feel proud because I returned to university after many years, faced unfamiliar technologies, and completed a demanding scientific project.

And yet, there is another truth I do not want to hide.

If I were offered a stable position in a research laboratory, with the opportunity to grow professionally and contribute to meaningful scientific work, I would seriously consider leaving teaching.

That does not diminish my respect for my students or for education. It simply acknowledges something I have felt for a long time: teaching is important, but it is not the only future I want for myself.

I still hope to pursue a PhD in bioinformatics. I continue working to strengthen the skills that might make that possible.

I am older than I was when I first imagined a career in research. I know that returning to the laboratory permanently may not be easy. There are practical questions about opportunity, stability, and finding a place where I can contribute.

But I have not stopped looking.

Perhaps the most unexpected part of this journey is that research helped me become a more engaging teacher, even as it reminded me how much I still want to be a researcher.

I am proud of what teaching has allowed me to give.

But I am not ready to give up on what I still hope to become.

You can find me on LinkedIn.

This summer, I was able to gain insight into where evolution and development meet during my time working in the laboratory of James DiFrisco. My project focused on understanding the evolution and development of the avian hypoblast and investigating the role of gene expression in its organisation and development.

The hypoblast is an embryonic cell layer that gives rise to extraembryonic tissues. Despite not directly forming the embryo, the hypoblast formation is an essential step before gastrulation – the process which forms the 3 germ layers (endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm). These germ layers give rise to major tissues and organs in our body. Therefore, understanding the role the hypoblast plays in early development can provide insights into potential causes of developmental failures in the chick and early human development.

A question in evolutionary developmental biology is whether the hypoblast is conserved. This means asking whether there are key characteristics that are maintained during evolution. These characteristics could include signalling pathways or gene expression patterns. We are trying to understand, in this case, whether the hypoblast shares similar molecular signatures across vertebrates.

The early stages of endoderm development are closely assoicated with the hypoblast and can be split into two waves. The first wave begins with cells becoming specified as primitive endoderm prior to gastrulation. This has a role in axis and yolk sac formation. The second wave occurs as a result of gastrulation, allowing cells to form the definitive endoderm.

With R, we used UMAPs to see how cells are organised into clusters based on gene expression similarities. This visualisation was done by condensing single-cell RNA data from chick embryos into a 2D format for easier visualisation. After obtaining UMAPs for several markers, we chose to focus on two well-known endoderm markers Gata6 and Sox17. These markers play key roles in early embryonic development, and their activity as transcription factors allows endodermal identity to be maintained.

Using existing data sets, I first used spatial data to get an idea of how we would expect the expression of our chosen markers to look. My first step was the collection of chicken embryos after incubation at 38°C. HCR-FISH was then carried out, where probes bind to the RNA of a gene of interest during detection. These embryos were then mounted, imaged using spinning disk confocal microscopy to see exactly where the gene expression was and analysed using Fiji to give our final images (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1: HCR data images to visualise gene expression at stage EGK XI. Images obtained after completing HCR-FISH on chicken embryos and imaging using spinning disk confocal microscopy (a) Gata6 (b) Sox17 

Fig. 2: Expression of Gata6 and Sox17 shifts from the area opaca to embryonic regions in later developmental stages. a.o: area opaca, hyp.: hypoblast, p.p.s: pre-primitive streak. (a) Stage EGK X: area pellucida consists of an upper layer and clumps of cells (hypoblast islands) which indicate a developing lower layer. (b) At stage EGK XI, there are high levels in the area opaca and the hypoblast islands which are moving anteriorly to later merge to form the hypoblast (c) Stage HH 1: Sox17 and Gata6 expression is reduced in the area opaca, shifting to the pre-primitive streak. Timepoints are from post-egg laying, growing in 38 °C incubator.

In the end, I was able to successfully visualise gene expression of markers Gata6 and Sox17 in the chick embryos and to trace the progression of these endodermal signatures to see how it shifts between different regions of the embryo (Fig. 2). In future, this project would benefit greatly by including more replicates and timepoints for validation. Extending this research to other vertebrates such as fish and frog would allow comparative work to begin allowing us to test the hypothesis that the hypoblast is conserved across vertebrates.

I would like to give a huge thank you to the DiFrisco Lab as well as the Briscoe Lab, where I was warmly welcomed and given a space to further enrich my knowledge in developmental research. I am especially grateful to my supervisor, Arsham Nejad Kourki, and to Sumit Garai for their invaluable guidance over the 9 weeks. Furthermore, I would like to thank the Francis Crick Institute for providing this insightful experience, and to the Rosa Beddington Fund for funding my project.

Last month, we held our 2026 writing challenge. We had 14 entries in total, and it was great to see so many people from our community share their diverse perspectives on topics that matter to them. We really appreciate the effort all our contributors put into sharing posts on the site, and we hoped the challenge would help motivate and encourage writers to share their ideas. The Node is a community for all, regardless of experience, background, skills or career stage. For this reason, we decided to award the prize by randomly selecting the winner rather than using a competitive format. We hope this approach reassured authors to share on the Node without apprehension that their work would be judged. The winner of our writing challenge was Billy Hinchen, who wrote the post ‘The little beach hopper that could’. Billy celebrated the beach hopper, Parhyale hawaiensis, and taught us how it went from a mundane beach critter to a lab celebrity. We’ll feature an interview with Billy in a post soon. 

Several of our community members used this challenge to report on meetings and events that brought our developmental biology and stem cell communities together. The FlyPower team recounted their experiences at the Brazilian Society for Cell Biology (SBBC) meeting, showing how fruit flies continue to push the boundaries of biomedical science. Zainab Afzal reflected on attending the Society for Developmental Biology (SDB) meeting in Las Vegas, comparing her first meeting from 10 years ago to her experience today through two lenses: her scientific lens and her camera lens. Liliana Piñeros and Diego Sainz de la Maza shared insights from The Company of Biologists’ Workshop ‘Revisiting metabolic fundamentals’, while the Root Anatomy and Architecture Working Group of the International Society of Root Research (ISRR) reported on the “Rooting” conference on the Adriatic coast of Southern Italy, where many members of the group met in person for the first time.   

Our community members also shared research stories throughout the challenge, which took us on a journey across different research organisms, from cnidarians and fruit flies to plants and beach hoppers, tackling an equally diverse mix of research questions. Katarina Kurtović explored her fascination with the magic and beauty of plant developmental biology, while Vangeli Geshkovski discussed how ULTRAPETALA1 shapes plant development. Drawing on examples of cnidarians, Ian Velloso Randolph explored how embryogenesis may have emerged and evolved. Our challenge winner, Billy Hinchen, taught us about the beach hoppers’ meteoric rise to fame across different areas of science, while Saurabh Chand Sagar explored the story of Drosophila Malpighian tubules and the role caspase-3/Drice plays in their development and function beyond apoptosis. 

Our community members used this challenge to expand beyond the traditional research stories. Julia Ibe taught us how to start exploring single-cell data, making it accessible through publicly available datasets. Likewise, Friedrich Bliem reflected on the role of patterns as bridges between scientific, cognitive and artistic processes of understanding the world.  

Finally, authors turned their attention beyond the research itself and had honest conversations about the human side of science and academic life. Stefanie Williams recounted the burdens that first-generation students face and the importance of reminding them that they belong in academia. Alyssa Paparella highlighted the work of DisabledInSTEM and examined the gatekeeping of science, much of it invisible to everyone except those who are being kept out. Cherene de Bruyn reflected on one of the hardest stages of the PhD, the last 6 to 8 months, and the perseverance needed to cross the finish line.  

My favourite part of reading the entries was seeing each person write about their research, thoughts and experiences through their own unique lens. Each post had its own voice and flair. One phrase from Katarina has echoed in my mind as I was reflecting on this challenge: ‘Every seed matters’. I like to think the same is true for our community. Every member matters. Your science matters. Your experiences matter. Your words matter.  

The Node is always here if you have any research, thoughts or experiences that you would like to share. We also welcome audio or visual communication, including images, illustrations and videos. Challenges like this one remind us that anyone can write for the Node. You don’t need an invitation, just a story that you would like to share. 

You can find all the blog posts that were entered in the writing challenge here: https://thenode.biologists.com/tag/2026-writing-challenge/.  

The Loke Centre for Trophoblast Research (Loke CTR) offers fully-funded 4-year PhD studentship for home or overseas students

The Loke CTR provides a dynamic environment for PhD training in placental biology and reproductive science. Founded in 2007, it brings together 30 Principal Investigators with a shared interest in the scientific study of the placenta, early development and maternal-fetal interactions during pregnancy.

See our listing for more details and how to apply

PhD Studentships | Loke Centre for Trophoblast Research

I wrote this a few years ago… and then a lot of stuff happened including PhD programs in my field retracting offers. But I still think the basic advice holds. And assuming the pendulum swings the way it’s looking, the timing now might even be good.

Developmental biology is coordinated in multi-dimensional space. This sometimes make it hard to describe with just text and easier to explain with accompanying diagrams and pictures.

In recognition of this, Development publishes a citable review article type called ‘Development at a glance’. These articles comprise a short text document highlighting the fundamental aspects of a developmental biology topic, alongside a large poster schematic that illustrates all you need to know ‘at a glance’.

Development has published a number of these articles over the years, ranging on topics from spermatogenesis to vertebrate endoderm development, from histone modification to stem cell-based models of early human embryogenesis. The full collection can be found here.

Some of the most recent, free-to-read articles are included below. To download the high-resolution image, click on the link in the ‘High-resolution poster’ or ‘Supplementary Information’ section of the online article. If you’d like your own physical copy of a poster to hang in your lab or office, look out for Development’s Online, Reviews and Executive Editors at a future conference (our conference attendance calendar can be found here) – we normally bring a selection with us for researchers to pick up.

Happy browsing!

Gene expression programs in mammalian spermatogenesis

Chunsheng Han

This Development at a glance article gives an overview of mammalian spermatogenesis, a multi-step developmental process involving many cell types and regulated by intricate gene expression programs comprising signaling molecules, transcription factors and epigenetic modifiers.

Stem cell-based models of early human development

Lizhong Liu, Jun Wu

Stem-cell-based embryo models provide a powerful tool with which to study early human development, partially mimicking peri-implantation stage embryos and offering insights into lineage differentiation, self-organization and morphogenesis.

Histone modifications in development

Yu-Hao Liu, Robert Schneider

This Development at a glance article provides a summary of the role of selected histone modifications during development..

Development and diversity of astrocytes

Michael R. Williamson, Sanjana Murali, Benjamin Deneen

This Development at a Glance article provides an overview of astrocyte ontogeny and morphogenesis, highlighting mechanisms that regulate the development of astrocytes, the most abundant glial cells in the central nervous system.

Vertebrate endoderm development

Bailey A. T. Weatherbee, Scott A. Rankin, Aaron M. Zorn

This Development at a Glance article summarizes current research into the cellular and molecular mechanisms controlling the development of the vertebrate embryonic endoderm into digestive and respiratory organs.

Did you know that Development publishes ‘Perspective’ articles that cover the intersection of developmental biology and stem cell research with society, including some useful resources for science communication with the public and discussions of research ethics? Some of the recent articles include:

Speaking science in a fractured world: making truth land when facts alone cannot
by Rebecca Calisi-Rodríguez, Kevin Alicea-Torres, Jamy Peng, Nicole Theodosiou and Crystal Rogers

How can scientists communicate more effectively in an era of misinformation? This Perspective draws on insights from ‘Truth Matters: Strengthening Science Communication to Counter Misinformation’, a scenario-based workshop delivered at the 20th International Congress of Developmental Biology in Puerto Rico in June 2025. The authors share practical strategies for culturally responsive and emotionally attuned communication, alongside a broader message: for science to inform society, it must be communicated in ways that people understand, trust, and find relevant to their lives.

Frozen potential: embryo research at the crossroads of ethics, regulation and scientific opportunity 
by Mina Popovic, Catello Scarica, Susana Chuva de Sousa Lopes and Marta Shahbazi

Why does improving medically assisted reproduction remain such a pressing clinical challenge? This Perspective explores the inherent inefficiencies of human reproduction and makes the case for a more nuanced global conversation on embryo research. Rather than framing the debate as a choice between permissiveness and prohibition, the authors advocate for governance frameworks that enable ethical, transparent, and responsible scientific progress.

From bench to business: translating academic advances into industry innovations
by Oscar J. Abilez, Alok Javali, Jacob Jones, Rubén Rellán-Álvarez, Rosangela Sozzani and Eldad Tzahor

What does it take to turn scientific discovery into commercial success? In this Perspective, six researchers reflect on their transition from academia to industry, sharing their experiences helping to build four bioscience companies. From navigating patents and intellectual property to working with investors and biotech start-ups, they offer insights into the challenges and opportunities involved in translating discoveries from the laboratory to the marketplace.

Adventures in involving and engaging the public in human developmental biology research
by Naomi Clements-Brod and Emma Rawlins

What can researchers learn from experimental approaches to public engagement? In this Perspective, the authors reflect on the successes and setbacks of a unique initiative designed to connect the public with fundamental research through the Human Developmental Biology Initiative. Their experiences offer practical insights for others looking to build meaningful public involvement into their own work.

Past and future of human developmental biology
by Nick Hopwood

How has the study of human development changed over time and what challenges does it face going forward? In this Perspective, science historian Nick Hopwood explores whether research on human development will be facilitated or frustrated.

Human developmental biology – a global perspective
by Amander Clark, Mubeen Goolam, Jacob Hanna, Katie Long, Dianne Nicol, Sophie Petropoulos, Mitinori Saitou, Patrick Tam and Hongmei Wang

How is human developmental biology perceived around the world? This Perspective brings together researchers from eight countries to reflect on the factors shaping human developmental biology. Responding to Nick Hopwood’s view that the field has experienced cycles of attention and neglect, they discuss how local legal, political, societal, regulatory and technological contexts are influencing its future direction.

The art of observation: bridging science and art to see the unexpected
by Lauren Gonzalez, Haoyang Wei, Valentina Greco and Linda Friedlaender

What can scientists learn from artists? In this Perspective, the authors show how art-based training can strengthen observational skills, revealing insights that might otherwise be missed in scientific data. They share practical lessons on collaborative observation, interpretation, and creativity, offering a framework that other research groups can adapt to enhance their own scientific practice.

In this SciArt profile, we meet Wen Lu, a Research Assistant Professor in the Department of Cell and Developmental Biology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. The eight pieces shown in this profile show how Wen uses different visual styles and tools to highlight the beauty of biology, communicate scientific concepts, and promote research and scientific events.

Can you tell us about your background and what you work on now?

My name is Wen Lu, and I am a Research Assistant Professor in the Department of Cell and Developmental Biology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. I received my bachelor’s degree in Biological Sciences from Peking University and my PhD in Genetics from the University of Chicago.

My research focuses on how the cytoskeleton is organized and regulated by molecular motors in neurons and oocytes, which are among the longest and largest cells in animals, respectively. I use Drosophila melanogaster, commonly known as the fruit fly, as a model organism, and combine genetics, optogenetics, pharmacological perturbations, and high-resolution microscopy to address these questions.

Outside the lab, I also work as a freelance designer, helping with logo design, graphic illustration, and other visual communication projects.

Were you always going to be a scientist?

From a very young age, I was curious, good with my hands, and always trying to solve puzzles. I enjoyed finding my own way to approach different problems, which I now realize are useful qualities for a scientist.

Besides dreaming of becoming a scientist, I also dreamed of becoming a farmer. In a funny way, raising hundreds of thousands of fruit flies in the lab has fulfilled that childhood dream too. I suppose I did become a farmer after all — a Drosophila farmer.

And what about art – have you always enjoyed it?

I would call myself a microscopy enthusiast, which means that anything beautiful captured through a microscope can make me excited. I also enjoy arranging and montaging microscopy images into visually appealing pieces that highlight the beauty of biology.

Beyond microscopy, I am also interested in graphic design. I enjoy creating logos, flyers, scientific illustrations, and other visual materials, especially when they help promote scientific research and make science more engaging and accessible to a broader audience.

What or who are your most important artistic influences?

My artistic influences come from a somewhat unusual mix of styles. I have always been drawn to the elegance, simplicity, and expressive lines of traditional Chinese painting, as well as the softness and fluidity of watercolor. At the same time, I also love the bold colors, playful energy, and visual storytelling of pop art and animation.

It may sound like an odd combination, but I think that contrast often leads to interesting artwork. In my SciArt pieces, I enjoy bringing these influences together to make biological subjects feel both beautiful and approachable.

How do you make your art?

I mainly use Adobe Illustrator for 2D artwork and Blender for 3D artwork. For videos and animations, I use Filmora for editing and assembling the final pieces.

Most of these tools are self-taught. I learned them gradually through YouTube tutorials, online resources, and a lot of trial and error. Often, I start with a scientific idea, microscopy image, or biological structure, and then explore how to translate it into a visual form that feels clear, engaging, and aesthetically pleasing. Depending on the project, the final piece may be a clean vector illustration, a 3D-rendered scene, a microscopy montage, or a short video designed for science communication.

Does your science influence your art at all, or vice versa, or are they separate worlds?

For me, science and art are deeply connected, but the art often serves as a way to communicate and promote the science. Many of my artistic ideas start from my research, especially microscopy images, cellular structures, or biological concepts that I find visually beautiful or scientifically exciting.

I see art as a bridge between scientific discovery and broader audiences. A microscopy image may be meaningful to scientists because of the data behind it, but with thoughtful visual presentation, it can also capture the curiosity of people outside the field. In that sense, my art helps me share not only what I study, but also why I find biology so fascinating.

At the same time, making art has also influenced how I think about science. It trains me to look more carefully, pay attention to visual patterns, and think about clarity, composition, and storytelling. So while my art is often created in service of science communication, the creative process also feeds back into how I observe and present my scientific work.

What are you thinking of working on next?

I would like to continue creating microscopy-based artwork that reveals the beauty of biology, while also becoming more involved in the SciArt community and using visual art to promote Drosophila research. Fruit flies are such a powerful model system, but they are not always perceived as visually appealing by the broader public. I hope my work can help change that by showing how beautiful, elegant, and scientifically valuable they are.

More specifically, I am currently working on a piece featuring two Drosophila brains. The microscopy images themselves are already visually stunning, so my goal is to build on that natural beauty and transform them into an artwork that feels even more striking and emotionally engaging. Looking ahead, I would also love to create more pieces that combine microscopy, illustration, animation, and storytelling to make developmental biology more accessible to a broader audience.

How/ where can people find more about you?

People can find more about my previous work on my portfolio website:
https://wlu7da7.myportfolio.com/

I also regularly share new microscopy images, SciArt pieces, research updates, and announcements about scientific events on LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/wenlu2023/

Development, host of the Node, invites you to submit your latest research to our upcoming Special Issue – Human Development. This issue will be coordinated by Guest Editor Hongmei Wang 王红梅 (State Key Laboratory of Organ Regeneration and Reconstruction, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China) alongside our team of research-active Editors.

As a journal, Development has a long history of supporting the field of human developmental biology. Since launching a series of dedicated meetings – the first of their kind – Development has published two special issues dedicated to human development, the first in 2015 and the second in 2018. Nearly a decade later, we’ve witnessed a revolutionary change in techniques and conceptual approaches for studying human development. Organoid systems have advanced significantly, with sophisticated multi-lineage and assembloid systems that better recapitulate organogenesis and enable the study of complex cell interactions. Similarly, stem cell-based embryo models grant unprecedented access to the earliest stages of human embryogenesis. This latest special issue, announced in conjunction with the Human Development: Stem Cells, Models, Embryos meeting co-organised by Development and the Human Developmental Biology Initiative, aims to build on that legacy and capture these exciting advances in our understanding of how our species develops. We value studies that cover developmental and regenerative principles at any scale, from genetic regulation to signalling and tissue–tissue interactions and across the human lifespan, from fertilisation, implantation and gastrulation, to organogenesis and postnatal processes such as nervous system refinement, puberty, pregnancy and the maintenance and regeneration of adult tissues by resident stem cells. We welcome comparative studies using non-human systems that improve our understanding of human evolution and developmental disease. We seek to showcase research spanning the full breadth of available experimental systems, including primary tissue, human stem cells and their derived 2D and 3D models, alongside emerging approaches in bioengineering and computational biology that seek to develop new or improved in vitro systems with which to uncover principles and mechanisms of human development and regeneration.

The deadline for submitting research papers is 1 March 2027.

If you have been working with data science tools, Python, and R for a while, you know the struggle of working with multiple dependencies for each library/package. I recently found myself staring at a massive, cluttered work/ directory full of Nextflow environments. It felt like my system was groaning under the weight of gigabytes of stale dependencies. That is the exact moment I decided to completely get rid of Conda from the system and switch to Pixi.

Pixi is a modern, blazing-fast package manager built in Rust.
Instead of managing global environments that inevitably bleed into one another, Pixi manages dependencies purely on a per-project basis.
Before you take the plunge, here is a breakdown of what makes Pixi great, where it falls short, and exactly how to migrate your existing Conda setups.

Pixi vs. Conda: The Pros and Cons

The Pros of Pixi
True Project Isolation: Pixi stores your environment in a hidden .pixi folder directly inside your project directory. This means no more global environment pollution, and deleting a project safely deletes its environment, meaning no leftover cache eating up your hard drive.
Lightning Fast: Because it uses the rattler engine (built in Rust), resolving dependencies and downloading packages is significantly faster than standard Conda.
Built-in Reproducibility: Pixi automatically generates a pixi.lock file every time you change a dependency. If you share your repository with a colleague, they are guaranteed to get the exact same package versions, down to the system libraries.

The Cons of Pixi
No “Base” Environment: If you are used to just opening a terminal and typing python using your base Conda environment, you will have to adjust. Pixi requires you to be inside a project or use global installs cautiously.
Not a big problem though, just some behavioural change required
Disk Space Duplication: Because environments are local to the project, if you have ten projects using the same massive libraries (like PyTorch or Seurat), you will use more disk space unless you configure global package caching effectively.
Easy to overcome this using global packages
The Learning Curve: You have to learn a new pixi.toml configuration syntax, and managing specific channel priorities (like conda-forge vs. bioconda) requires explicit setup rather than relying on a global .condarc file.
Again can be learnt very easily. In fact, most of the times, you’ll not even need to open the pixi.toml file.

Starting from Scratch: Installing Pixi and Initializing a Fresh Project
If you do not have a Conda environment to export, or if you simply want to start with a completely clean slate, getting Pixi up and running takes less than a minute. First, you need to install Pixi system-wide. Open your terminal and run the official standalone installation script. This will download the Pixi binary and automatically add it to your system’s PATH.
Refer to this for more details from the official developers: https://pixi.prefix.dev/latest/installation/
curl -fsSL https://pixi.sh/install.sh | bash

Once the installation finishes, either restart your terminal or refresh your shell configuration (for example, by running source ~/.bashrc or source ~/.zshrc) so your system recognizes the pixi command.
Next, let’s create a brand-new project without relying on any old YAML files. Navigate to your desired workspace directory and initialize the project from scratch:
# Initialize a new Pixi project
pixi init my_fresh_project
# Move into the new directory
cd my_fresh_project
Unlike Conda, which builds a heavy environment immediately, this initialization command simply generates a lightweight pixi.toml configuration file. The actual .pixi environment folder is not created until you add your first package. To kickstart your data science setup, you can declare your core languages and libraries directly from the command line:
# For a Python-based project:
pixi add python jupyter pandas
# Or for an R-based project:
pixi add r-base r-irkernel r-ggplot2
As soon as you run the add command, Pixi reaches out to the repositories, resolves the dependencies using the lightning-fast rattler engine, locks the specific versions in a pixi.lock file, and builds your isolated environment on the fly. From there, you simply type pixi shell to activate the environment, and you are ready to start coding—no messy base environments required.

Migrating from an existing Conda environment
Step 1: Exporting Your Conda Environment and Initializing Pixi
If you have a working Conda environment, you can export it and use it to seed your new Pixi project.
First, export your existing environment to a YAML file:
# Activate your old conda environment
conda activate my_old_env
# Export it to an environment.yml file
conda env export > environment.yml
# For clean environment.yml export use this:
conda env export --from-history > environment.yml
# this ensures only explicitly installed libraries are listed unlike the system packages which can cause conflict
Now, let’s create a brand new Pixi project using that file:
# Initialize a new Pixi project by importing the yaml file
pixi init --import environment.yml my_new_project
# Move into your new project directory
cd my_new_project
This command automatically translates your Conda dependencies into a pixi.toml file and creates the isolated .pixi environment directory.

Step 2: Testing, Adding, and Removing Packages
To interact with your new environment, you need to enter the Pixi shell (which replaces conda activate).
# Activate the local project environment once inside the my_new_project directory
pixi shell
# Verify that Python or R is running from the local .pixi path
which python which R
# the paths should be inside .pixi/...
Managing packages is incredibly straightforward. It updates your pixi.toml and lockfile automatically.
# Add a new package from conda-forge
pixi add pandas
# or use the shorthand:
pixi a pandas
# Remove a package you no longer need
pixi remove pandas

Connecting to a tmux kernel

One of the best workflows for heavy data processing is starting your Jupyter server or R session inside a tmux session, so it survives network disconnects.

1. SSH into your server, start tmux new -s project-name, and navigate to your project.
2. Run your kernel (e.g., pixi run jupyter notebook --no-browser or simply start an R script). Copy the link with hash (localhost).
3. In VS Code, open your notebook (script.ipynb).
4. Click the Kernel Selection button in the top right.
5. Instead of picking a default environment, look for the Existing Jupyter Server and add the link that you copied at step 2.
6. From next time onwards, choose the specific active kernel (it will often be labeled kernel(script.ipynb) or match your project name like pixi_r_proj1).

By selecting the kernel tied to your tmux session, you can open multiple scripts in VS Code and connect them all to the exact same memory block. You define a variable in script A, and you can instantly read it in script B, all safely contained within your isolated Pixi environment.

Migration takes a bit of cleanup, but once you experience the speed and cleanliness of a purely project-based environment, you will never look back at global Conda environments again.