Color is a key aspect of graphic design, but for many years was not relevant for scientific figures that were largely black and white. Falling prices for color print and electronic publishing changed this dramatically and scientists now frequently produce multi-colored figures. Using color functionally is not always straightforward but few rules exist: do not combine red and green!
Already in 1939 Willard Brinton advised his readers to not use red letters on a green background as they become invisible to color-blind people (and are hideous for the rest of us!). [his great book on data visualization is available for free here]. A century later, when browsing through figures in scientific periodical, this message has not reached everyone.
Red/Green line chart
Color-blind friendly
Direct data labels abolish color need
In charts, it is very straightforward to avoid mixing red and green. If you want to use red, combine it with blue or cyan, if you want to use green, combine it with magenta or orange. That way also color blind people can distinguish the data points. A side note: try starting a chart in black and white, and only add color if absolutely essential.
Overlapping data is problematic
Color-blind friendly
Alternative without using color
In laser-microscopy green and red fluorophores are widely used, often in combination. But: Simply because a wavelength of your fluorophore is 488nm this does not mean you have to use green for its display! The camera output doesn’t have color anyway, so you are at liberty to choose a suitable lookup table. Why not be color-blind friendly and choose colors visible to your entire audience. Options that still preserve a little information on the wavelength are green/magenta or cyan/red.
Red/green confocal image
Color-blind friendly version
Again, consider if two black and white images instead of a composite color. In fact, the contrast is usually higher in greyscale which benefits the display of structure details and subtle intensity differences.
More detail visible…
…in black/white images
*Rm62 RNA in Drosophila egg chambers part of my postdoc project, find more subcellular RNAs on the Dresden Ovary Table.
In this post, I would like to introduce to “The Node” our website, reviewercredits.com, launched last July by myself and my friend Robert Fruscio. We are both physicians (I’m in critical care, he is in Gynecological oncology) and several times we chatted about peer review: we always realized how this activity is poorly recognized, despite its invaluable role. As scientists we felt, often, hard to devote time and energies to something which has no metrics or repository or publicity. Of course, we are not so small-minded to deny that, as part of sciectific community we are all devoted to this “common effort”. At the same time it is tempting to spend an afternoon writing your own paper or preparing lessons or analyzing data (where you are more likely to get an “immediate” reward) rather than peer reviewing someone else’s paper. This is becoming more and more relevant, since scientist are increasingly “metered” in terms of productivity.
Scientist and researchers can subscribe to ReviewerCredits.com and get recognition for all the reviews they perform. ReviewerCredits keeps a history of all the reviews performed, assigns an Index and, in the future, will give tangible rewards!
Researchers, after subscribing to the website, can fill a claim for each peer review performed in the previous twelve months. We verify that the review has actually been performed by asking a confirmation from the journal. This step is essential in the process to create a solid and reliable history of reviews performed and is a feature unique to ReviewerCredits.com. Upon confirmation from the Editor, the review is added to the personal account of the reviewer.
We decided to create our own metric, the Reviewer Index, to appraise and quantify the work of reviewers. The reviewers are able to accumulate points towards their Reviewer Index. For each review performed, the reviewer will receive one point. The reliability of this Index is guaranteed by the fact that each single review is verified and certified by the Journals. A high Reviewer Index reflects a very active reviewer. This Index reflects and measures the value created by all the hard work performed with peer reviewing.
Furthermore, subscribers on their profile will be able to keep track of the reviews performed for any Journal, and will be able to download a pdf file with the list of all approved reviews.
Reviewers can also earn credits and redeemed these credits for tangible rewards. One review certified by the journal earns 10 credits for the reviewer (20 if the Journal has an account at reviewercredits.com). Credits can also be earned by inviting colleagues to join ReviewerCredits.
Our vision is to make credits convertible in real, tangible rewards. We would like to offer the possibility to choose between several alternatives, including, for example, discount on publishing fees for articles, free subscription to Journals, gift cards, small reseach grants, or others. The amount of this kind of reward will depend on you, on your activity, and on your willingness to change things that are, apparently, unchangeable.
So far, about 2400 scientists joined our community. This number is still very small, if compared to the total number of the scientist active in the field of peer review, but we need the word to spread, to grow more and more!
At the same time we aim to provide a service for journals, too.
Journal’s editors often struggle to find experts willing to review articles submitted or waste time chasing reviewers whose peer reviews are overdue.
There is the lack of any mechanism by which reviewers can be rewarded for their effort. Reviewercredits wants to become this mechanism to encourage and motivate reviewers easing the job on editors, journals and publishers. Reviewercredits wants to reward reviewer and help them create value for themselves by assigning a reviewer Index for the work performed.
Journals can actively participate in this new direction by opening a profile on our website. Registered journals provide twice the credits for each peer review. This will likely increase the involvement and efficiency of peer-reviewers for these journal.
We met, personally, by email and skype so many people, many liked the idea, others did not, but we always tried to get all the good suggestions to improve ourselves. We received many emails, some nice, some odd, some aggressive. Sometimes there is a natural difference toward new ideas, but we hope that the members of this community will like reviewercredits.com and decide to join us, so that, more and more, the efforts of peer reviewers get the reward which they deserve!
A postdoctoral position is available in the Cisse laboratory in the department of neurological surgery, the Brain and Mind Research institute and the Children Brain Tumor Project (CBTP) at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York city.
Our research interest is on the transcriptional control of cell fate in the immune system (e.g. Cissé et al., Cell 2008) and current projects will focus on the transcriptional regulation of brain tumor-associated immune cell functions using mouse models and human brain tumor samples.
We are looking for highly qualified and motivated candidates with strong backgrounds in immunology, developmental biology, molecular biology and/or genetics for a 2-3 year post-doctoral position. Experience with computational biology and bioinformatic tools would be advantageous for the position.
Please submit your CV and a cover letter outlining your research interests, career goals and the names of three referees with contact information to Babacar Cisse at the following address: CisseLab@med.cornell.edu
The environment plays a critical role triggering disease in genetically susceptible individuals. The goal of this project is to generate in vivo models to study the interaction between gene function and environmental factors during the initiation/resolution of intestinal inflammation. We have generated CRISPR mutant zebrafish lines targeting IBD-risk genes with unknown function. The successful candidate will characterize these mutants and validate her/his finding in mouse models and human organoids candidate will also generate IBD reporters to visualize immunological processes associated to IBD in the context of genetic susceptibility and environmental triggers.
Entry requirements: Our lab has an opening for a highly creative and motivated postdoctoral scientist with an interest in mucosal immunology. We look for a candidate with proficiency and documented laboratory research experience particularly in molecular biology, in vivo imaging and genetic manipulation in zebrafish. The candidate is expected to work with both zebrafish and mouse models of intestinal inflammation. Experience in bioinformatics and RNA-seq analysis would be an advantage. The position will require independent work at the laboratory as well as extensive collaboration with other experimental groups. Fluency in both oral and written English is necessary. Documented ability to analyze and present results orally and written is important.
Type of scholarship A scholarship for carrying out postdoctoral research can be granted for a maximum of two years within a four year period following the receipt of a doctoral degree or equivalent. This educational scholarship is tax-exempt. The amount is set for twelve months at a time and is paid out on a monthly basis. In exceptional cases, shorter periods may be acceptable.
Publications: Villablanca EJ et al., JLB, 2008; Villablanca EJ et al., J. Immunol, 2008; Peloquin JM., et al., Annu. Rev. Immunol, 2016; Villablanca EJ., et al., Gut, 2014; Gagliani N., et al., Cell, 2014; Huber S., et al Nature, 2012; Villablanca EJ., et al., Gastroenterology, 2011; Villablanca EJ., et al., Nat. Med, 2010
At Development, we are committed to making submission as easy as possible for our authors. We realise that submitting a paper to any journal can be a lengthy process: authors are asked to comply with detailed journal-specific guidelines without knowing whether the paper will be accepted or even peer-reviewed. We are therefore delighted to announce our new format-free submission policy.
Authors can now submit a paper to Development in any format. We will only ask what is absolutely necessary at submission. What this means is that as long as an article adheres to our guidelines on length and the text and figures are easily viewable by reviewers, we only require information that is necessary to confirm the identities of all authors. This does mean that other requirements, such as file formats and sizes, our submission checklist, and provision of funding information, will move to the revision stage – at which point over 95% of papers will be accepted for publication.
As part of this change, and recognising the importance of comprehensive Materials and Methods sections to aid transparency and reproducibility, we are also removing the Materials and Methods section from our length limit to an article. The aim is to allow authors the space they need to describe their methods in sufficient detail for readers to fully understand and replicate the experiments conducted. In exceptional cases where the Materials and Methods are particularly lengthy, more detailed experimental protocols, descriptions of computational analyses or lists of primers and other reagents may still be included as Supplementary Materials and Methods.
Our aim is to build an expandable open-access atlas over brain morphogenesis – the digital Z-hindbrain atlas – containing data from gene expression, transcriptional dynamics, clonal growth, cell lineages, and definitions of anatomical regions. This open-access IT resource will help us to expand our knowledge on how the brain is functionally organized, and therefore for advancing brain research, medicine, and brain-inspired information technology.
The fellow will work in collaboration between two groups: Piella’s lab at Department of Engineering and Information and Communication Technologies (DTIC, Campus Poble Nou, https://www.upf.edu/web/simbiosys), and Pujades’ lab at Department of Experimental and Health Sciences (DCEXS, http://pujadeslab.upf.edu) that is located within the PRBB, a vibrant research park harboring several research institutions.
CANDIDATE REQUIREMENTS:
We are seeking for highly motivated and enthusiastic candidates with background in biological/medical image analysis and, in particular, in image registration, and spatiotemporal alignment techniques such as statistical atlases. Programming experience is required.
Candidates must have good English communication skills. The fellowship covers the salary for 1 year, with the possibility of being extended.
The fellow will benefit from working in two dynamic groups, at university departments that recently received the Maria de Maetzu Award for their scientific excellence.
Interested candidates are encouraged to send a letter of interest, CV, and contact details of 2 referees either to Gemma Piella (gemma.piella@upf.edu) or Cristina Pujades (cristina.pujades@upf.edu).
With 578 votes counted, a winner emerged with 40% of the vote –
4th Place (72 votes) – Clathria
3rd Place (136 votes) – Mice
2nd Place (138 votes) – Jellyfish
1st Place (232 votes) – Chicken
This planetary image is a Stage 10 chick embryo with noggin coated beads taken by Theodora Koromila (CalTech, USA), and will probably be the first Development cover to have been taken with a phone through the eyepiece of a microscope!
Congratulations to Theodora, and thanks to Shun Sogabe , Chiara Sinigaglia and Martin Minařík for the other beautiful entries.
The laboratory of Zebrafish Neurogenetics, led by Dr. Laure Bally-Cuif at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, is seeking an outstanding and highly motivated Postdoctoral Research Associate to contribute to our ongoing research on adult neurogenesis in zebrafish. Our lab is interested in the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying basic adult neural stem cell properties, including the control of their quiescence, their interactions with other neural stem cells of the germinal niche, and their recruitment towards neuron generation. The project will involve characterizing how the neurogenic activity of individual neural stem cells is controlled, and how neuronal identities are encoded and used to build a continuously growing but functional brain. Analyses will involve genetic approaches, whole-mount imaging and cell tracing in the adult animal, and will include tool development for conditional functional assays in adult neural stem cells.
Candidates must hold a Ph.D. in biology, and a strong interest and background in molecular and cellular neuroscience, in any model system. Previous experience with imaging and genomic techniques is preferred. Proficiency in English is required.
The position is funded by the European Research Council and Labex Revive.
The Bally-Cuif team is one of the 16 research groups of the “Developmental and Stem Cell Biology” Department of the Pasteur Institute, focusing on evolutionary, developmental and stem cell biology in various animal models. It is also co-affiliated with the Pasteur “Neuroscience” Department.
To apply, please submit your CV and the name of three references to:
In 2016, the BSDB introduced the Cheryll Tickle Medal, which is being awarded annually to a mid-career, female scientist for her outstanding achievements in the field of Developmental Biology. The BSDB is proud to announce the 2017 awardee Jenny Nichols. The medal was presented at this year’s Spring Meeting where Jenny gave the Cheryll Tickle Award Lecture (available on YouTube). A post-award interview with Jenny was published in Development. For further awards at that meeting, see this post.
Jenny’s main research interests are the mechanisms that establish and maintain pluri-potency in the early embryo and during the formation of embryonic stem cells in mammals. She also uses animal models to understand defects which lead to type 1 diabetes. Jenny started her career at Oxford University where she worked as a research assistant to Prof. Richard Gardner (1981-90). In 1990 she moved to the University of Edinburgh to carry out her PhD project in the group of Prof. Austin Smith. She obtained her PhD in 1995 for her thesis entitled ‘A Study of the Expression and Function of Differentiation Inhibiting Activity and its Receptor in the Early Mouse Embryo‘. She stayed as a post-doctoral research fellow in the group of Austin Smith in Edinburgh, until she became a group leader at the Wellcome Trust-MRC Stem Cell Institute of the University of Cambridge, where she has stayed since then.
Jenny has an impressive portfolio of current funding with 3 BBSRC, a Wellcome Trust and a Medical Research Council grant, she has published ~70 papers so far, supervised 11 PhD students, and has editorial responsibilities at three scientific journals (PLoS One, Biol Open, Dev Biol), in addition to a number of local administrative tasks. She is active in university teaching and has been the co-/organiser of a number of international stem cell workshops and engages in science communication with the public.
Apart from the Cheryll Tickle Medal awarded this year, Jenny won the NC3Rs ‘3Rs’ prize (for research reducing refining or replacing the use of animals in biomedical research; 2009) and the Suffrage Science Award (2013), is an elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology (2010) and was an active member of the BSDB committee (2010-15).
The BSDB makes it a tradition to ask the Cheryll Tickle Medal awardees a number of questions concerning our field and its future. Please, read Jenny’s answers below.
What were the questions that inspired you to work in the field of Developmental Biology?
I was fascinated by the flexibility of the early mammalian embryo and curious as to how the lineages were specified and regulated. This is still my main research theme. The first questions were ‘when do the cells of the inner cell mass lose their ability to become troph-ectoderm?’ and ‘do they routinely supplement the developing troph-ectoderm?’ Most of all I just loved messing about with embryos. We had so few tools in those days and so many questions, but were quite restricted to using observation and grafting.
Why should young researchers continue to engage in Developmental Biology?
As someone spanning Developmental Biology and stem cell research I feel very strongly that studying Developmental Biology requires a rigorous and systematic approach that can often be by-passed by the stem cell biologists who work in vitro. Developmental Biology is necessarily a 3D system, so the questions of cell fate specification can be very tricky and exciting to tackle. One very satisfying thing about experimenting with embryos is that the final readout from any manipulation must measure up to the yardstick of normality.
Which were the key events or experiences in your life that influenced your career decisions and paved your path to success?
Firstly, having been in Richard Gardner’s lab surrounded by brilliant embryologists (Richard, Rosa Beddington, John West, Chris Graham) and having had the luxury of my own microscope and microinjection equipment and unlimited access to mice; secondly, joining Austin Smith’s lab and having the chance to work on embryonic stem cell derivation when it was such a mysterious process. Austin also gave me the chance to do a PhD and taught me how to think.
What advice do you give young researchers towards a successful career?
Go to a good, supportive lab and collaborate broadly.
The Waddington Medal, the only national award in Developmental Biology, is awarded for outstanding research performance as well as services to the subject community. The medal is awarded annually at the BSDB Spring Meeting, where the recipient presents the Waddington Medal Lecture (note that all awards of the 2017 Spring Meeting are listed here). The BSDB is delighted to announce the 2017 winner of the Waddington Medal: William Harris FRS FMedSci, Head of the Department of Physiology Development & Neuroscience at the University of Cambridge. Bill was awarded the medal for his pioneering contributions to the understanding of retinal development.
Bill is Canadian, but underwent his scientific education and early career in the U.S., where he did his B.A. in Biophysics (University of California, Berkeley; 1972), his Ph.D. on “Color vision in Drosophila” in the group of Seymour Benzer at the California Institute of Technology (Pasadena; 1972-76), carried out his postdoctoral research in the laboratory of David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel at the Dept. of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School (1976-80), and joined the faculty of the Dept. of Biology, University of California (San Diego; 1980). He remained in San Diego until 1997, when he moved to the UK to take on a position as Professor of Anatomy at the University of Cambridge and, since 1999, Head of the Department of Anatomy (which became the Department of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience in 2006).
Bills achievements are best summarised in the nomination letter put forward by Sarah Bray, Michael Bate, Nancy Papalopulu, Daniel St Johnston and Steve Wilson:
“Through his passion for science, his leadership and his mentoring of people at all career stages, Bill has made outstanding contributions to Developmental Biology. Working at the interface of Developmental Biology and Neuroscience, he has championed the field within Cambridge, across the UK and throughout the world. His deep interest and scientific enthusiasm have led to major insights in the field of neuronal specification and wiring.
Bill has made many important contributions to our understanding of visual system development, which has been his focus throughout his career. Time and again, he has pioneered new fields of research. His early discoveries in the USA helped establish basic principles underlying axon guidance in brain wiring and revealed key mechanisms regulating cell differentiation in the retina. Starting with the identification in Drosophila of the sevenless gene (with Seymour Benzer), he went on to discover ways that axons in the brain are guided to the vicinity of their appropriate targets in the absence of neural activity, being one of the first to suggest there might be local chemotactic cues that guide retinal axons from a distance (see Figure 1; Dingwell et al., 2000, J Neurobiol 44, 246ff. – LINK). He used the developing Xenopus visual system to find the first vertebrate homologues of genes that influenced fate choice in Drosophila, including Notch, ASH, and ATH, leading to a new and fruitful research direction for Developmental Biologists.
After moving to Cambridge in 1997, he built on these earlier observations. He established the retinal ciliary marginal zone as a powerful model to study not only retinal development per se, but also mechanisms controlling stem cells and the pathways regulating differentiation. Perpetually self-renewing and proliferative, this neuroepithelium at the perimeter of the retina in amphibians and fish gives rise to cells that are spatially ordered with respect to cellular development. Combining in vivo lipofection strategies in Xenopus retina with genetic approaches in zebrafish, Bill has uncovered roles for the cell cycle, metabolism and stochasticity in fate determination. A pioneer in the field of live imaging in developing systems, he made the very first time-lapse movies of axons growing in the brain. He has harnessed emerging technology to distinguish between different hypotheses. For example, by watching lineages evolve in vivo he ruled out the idea that their variance was due to random cell death. Through such cutting-edge studies he has shown how cell divisions, cell lineages and cell polarizations contribute to the process of retinal neuron specification (Fig. 2; Agathocleous & Harris, 2009, Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 25, 45ff. – LINK). In doing so, he championed the establishment of the Cambridge Advanced Imaging Centre, whose main focus is on techniques that enable gentle deep imaging of cells in developing animals, and has forged strong links with physicists to develop powerful models.
Bill has made important contributions to the community. He is an enormous presence in Cambridge, heading one of the major biology departments and taking a lead in the Cambridge Neuroscience initiative. Under his leadership and long-term vision, the Departments of Anatomy and Physiology were merged, establishing “PDN” where the letter D stands for Development. Bill is on the Advisory committee for the Gurdon Institute, and has also been instrumental in the establishment and renewal of the Wellcome Trust 4-year PhD Programme in Developmental Biology. As well as training first-rate researchers in his own lab (23 of whom have PI positions around the world), he has, as Department Head, nurtured many developmental biologists at different stages in their career, housing early researchers (e.g. Fiona Wardle), recruiting talented lecturers (e.g. Clare Baker, Benedicte Sanson, Kristian Franze) and supporting established leaders (e.g. Andrea Brand, Magda Zernicka-Goetz). Despite the burdens of being Department Head, Bill has retained a major teaching role throughout, with lectures and practicals introducing fundamentals of neural development to undergraduates at all stages. As organizer of a number of international conferences, he has included significant themes in Developmental Biology. He is also editor in chief of “Neural Development” and on the editorial boards for “PLoS Biology”, “Cell” and “Molecular Neuroscience”. Among his many other talents, Bill is an artist who also communicates his scientific vision through his paintings, as illustrated by his impression of a young zebrafish retina (see Figure 3).”
To add to this, the high quality of Bill’s work is reflected in his many honours, fellowships and awards which include being a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences (2007), Fellow of the Royal Society (2007) and Member of EMBO (2012). With respect to translational biology, he was founder of the drug discovery company DanioLabs (2002), which was successfully sold to VASTox (now Summit) plc, a leading UK biotechnology company [LINK]. Furthermore, for many of us, Bill has become an inspiring teacher, especially through his textbook Development of the Nervous System (Sanes et al., 3rd edition, 2011, Academic Press – LINK) which was a true eye opener: a highly entertaining read laying essential foundations for conceptual thought about the field and its many facets and directions.
Finally, Bill’s passion for ice hockey deserves mentioning (Fig. 4). He decided to share it with the Cambridge community by founding the Cambridge Leisure and Ice Centre as a community-led initiative in 2001, which he still chairs today. The Cambridge Ice Arena will be the key result of the initiative and is scheduled to open late 2017.
The BSDB would like to congratulate Bill for his life achievements and for being the well-deserved awardee of the 2017 Waddington Medal. The Waddington Medal lecture is available on the BSDB YouTube channel and website, and an interview with Bill was published in Development.