A section of a mouse juvenile brain (cerebral cortex) showing cell nuclei (blue), microglia (red) and the activation of a specific gene called Hes1 (white).
No parent wants to risk their child having a serious infection, least of all while still in the womb, but did you know that the immune response to a viral infection during pregnancy could also affect the development of the unborn offspring? Scientists from Harvard University in Cambridge, USA, have shown that immune reactions in pregnant mice are detected by a specific type of brain cell in the developing embryo and alter how genes are regulated in the brain – a change that persists in juvenile mice. Published today in the journal Development, this study provides new insights into how the maternal immune response might influence brain development in embryos and could help researchers understand the origins of neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism.
Scientists have long suspected that fetal exposure to infectious bugs may increase the risk of developing neurological conditions such as schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorders. There is also evidence that fighting infection while pregnant might affect the growth of offspring in the uterus, even if embryos do not become infected themselves. However, it has been unclear how embryos recognise their parent’s immune response and the exact consequences for their development.
In their latest study, a group at Harvard University led by Professor Paola Arlotta have identified a specific cell type in the mouse embryonic brain that responds to an immune response in the mother. The researchers used a compound that mimics a virus to stimulate an immune response in pregnant mice without causing an actual infection. They then characterised how cells in the embryonic brain respond by assessing which genes were turned on or off. Using this approach, the scientists showed that cells called ‘microglia’ can sense the maternal immune response. “Microglia are the immune cells of the brain. They play a critical role during inflammation and infection and also have fundamental functions in healthy brain development,” explained Arlotta.
Following the mother’s immune response, embryonic microglia change which genes are activated or inactivated, which also occurs in the surrounding brain cells, such as neurons. Interestingly, the change of gene regulation in neighbouring cells depends on microglia being present in the brain; when the researchers repeated the experiments using mice without microglia, the other brain cells did not react to the maternal immune response.
Although most viral infections are often short-lived, the scientists found that the changes that the maternal immune system causes in embryonic brain cells persist well after the immune reaction has subsided. “Based on previous studies demonstrating that microglia exposed to early infections respond differently to stimuli in adulthood, we hypothesized that the maternal immune response could induce changes in microglial gene regulation that persist postnatally” said Dr. Bridget Ostrem, co-author of the study.
This research enhances our understanding of the cellular basis of neurodevelopmental disorders in humans. “Our results suggest a potential role for microglia as therapeutic targets in the setting of maternal infections,” said Ostrem, although there is still more work to be done. Harvard researcher Dr. Nuria Domínguez-Iturza added, “next, it will be crucial to determine the long-term behavioral implications of the changes we observed in this study.”
Ostrem, B. E. L., Domínguez-Iturza, N., Stogsdill, J. A., Faits, T., Kim, K., Levin, J. Z. and Arlotta, P. (2024). Fetal brain response to maternal inflammation requires microglia. Development, 151, dev202252. doi:10.1242/dev. 202252
This is part of the ‘Lab meeting’ series featuring developmental and stem cell biology labs around the world.
Where is the lab?
Daniel Kierzkowski: Our lab is part of the Plant Science Research Institute (fr. Institut de Recherche en Biologie Végétale – IRBV) established through a partnership between the University of Montréal and the City of Montréal. We are located in the beautiful Montréal Botanical Garden.
Our group studies the fundamental aspects of plant organogenesis. We aim to understand how tiny primordia, composed of groups of undifferentiated cells, give rise to the amazing diversity of organs found in nature. Using model systems such as Arabidopsis and Physcomitrium, we seek to uncover how fundamental processes of cellular growth, patterning, and differentiation are controlled at the molecular, cellular, and tissue levels to produce specific shapes. We hope that our research will provide a foundation for future crop improvement.
Lab role call
Wenye Lin: I am a Ph.D. student in the lab since 2020. The tiny moss Physcomitrium patens is my best friend. I study the evo-devo aspect of organ development with a focus on the role of auxin in regulating moss leaf (phyllid) morphogenesis.
Elvis Branchini: I am interested in plant development, genetic editing, and synthetic biology. My Ph.D. project aims to uncover the growth dynamics and regulation of primordia initiation in Arabidopsis thaliana.
Amelie Bauer: I am a Post Doc investigating the mechanisms behind the initiation of the valve margin structure in Brassicaceae fruits.
Binghan Wang: My Ph.D. project focuses on studying the gynoecium development of Brassicaceae species. Specifically, I investigate the roles of hormones and mechanical forces in fruit shape establishment.
Benjamin Lapointe: I am a Ph.D. student working on the development of the leaf in Arabidopsis thaliana. I use genetics, novel imaging methods, and mathematical analysis to decipher the processes shaping leaf growth and morphology.
Xuan Zhou: I am a visiting PhD student from Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences. My project investigates the development of leaf shape during primary and secondary morphogenesis.
Sylvia Silveira: I spent four years as a postdoc in the lab and now transitioned into a research professional. While being involved in other projects from the lab, my focus is on exploring how organs get their 3D shapes using stamen as model system.
Rachelle Fontaine: I am a Master 2 internship student in the lab. I work on understanding shoot apical meristem growth in A. thaliana and how it is related to auxin.
Favourite technique, and why?
Daniel: No doubt: confocal microscopy! Our lab specializes in confocal time-lapse imaging, which allows us to follow organ development at cellular resolution for extended periods (up to two weeks of growth). When combined with image analysis software like MorphoGraphX, we can quantify cellular growth dynamics on the organ surface and, more recently, in 3D. This powerful approach helps us precisely understand how molecular and cellular behaviors translate over time into the final organ shape.
Apart from your own research, what are you most excited about in developmental and stem cell biology?
Daniel: Synthetic biology is fascinating. It’s amazing how animal stem cells can self-organize in vitro to spontaneously form early embryos or simple organs. I am also excited to see new model systems emerging in plants, which will allow us to answer important evolutionary questions in the near future.
How do you approach managing your group and all the different tasks required in your job?
Daniel: As a university professor, my job involves constant multitasking, from teaching undergraduates to managing the lab. I try to focus as much as possible on my research group. I want to be directly involved in all research projects while giving the people working with me enough freedom to pursue their own ideas. I strongly believe in teamwork and aim to create a collaborative environment that stimulates scientific interaction within the lab and with collaborators. Home office is not my thing; I try to be in the lab whenever possible. I am convinced that exciting discoveries can be achieved only when people work together to exchange ideas, troubleshoot problems, and support each other.
What is the best thing about where you work?
Benjamin: The multidisciplinary approach to biology, combining molecular tools, microscopy, and a biophysics perspective. Applying mathematics and modeling to extract new information is very exciting. To be at the edge of what has been done and what can be achieved in science.
Wenye: I love the location of the lab in a botanical garden, in our case, the largest one in north America. I am also spoiled by the amicable atmosphere between colleagues and supervisors.
Elvis: The best thing about where I work is the dynamic lab exchanges that keep us always thinking about the common patterns of development in general, how to make better experiments, and how to present it properly and succinctly. Also, the lab being at the Montreal Botanical Garden is a great perk!
Amelie: I like the effervescence of collaborative and interdisciplinary work that is at the root of our laboratory’s scientific dynamism. Fueled by a positive and friendly atmosphere, we can engage in multiple projects aimed at enhancing our understanding of plant morphogenesis.
Sylvia: I appreciate how collaborative everyone in the group is, and I love the inspiring location of the lab, within the Montreal Botanical Garden.
Rachelle: What is amazing in the lab is the collaborative and interdisciplinary work environment. Everyone is always willing to share their knowledge and help, leading to many exciting discussions and reflections.
Daniel: It is not so much about where but with who I work. I am super lucky to work with amazing people that are passionate about science.
What’s there to do outside of the lab?
Daniel: Montreal is a vibrant and multicultural city where everyone can find something interesting to do. We are privileged to have numerous festivals and cultural activities throughout the year, especially in the summer. The surrounding nature is outstanding. Although Canadian winter can be intense, there are plenty of outdoor and indoor activities to help us get through it.
Amelie: We are located in the Botanical Garden, a unique place where you can admire the diversity of the plant world. With its spectrum of sporting, cultural, and intellectual activities, Montreal reveals itself as a vibrant and surprising city. Close to immense natural parks, its location allows easy access to the great outdoors and an easy escape from the city.
Wenye: Montreal is a green gateway to nature. Besides having the Botanical Garden as our backyard, our lab is also within walking distance of the Olympic Park and the large Maisonneuve Park. The world-famous Niagara Falls and popular whale-watching spots are also nearby. Afraid of the long winter season? You will easily fall in love with the winter sports opportunities Montreal generously offers, such as downhill or cross-country skiing, ice skating, and snowshoeing. Montreal is also rich in cultural events, offering a variety of museums, concerts, and performances.
Binghan: Montreal offers several free public facilities, such as tennis courts in the summer, skating rinks in the winter, and indoor swimming pools available year-round. I appreciate how multicultural this city is, providing a fascinating exploration of diverse histories and food cultures from various nations.
Sylvia: Discover the diverse international culinary scene and local breweries. Go cycling, have picnics in the parks, explore museums, enjoy numerous festivals, hike in nearby national parks, and experience winter sports.
Development’s Deputy Editor Steve Wilson (UCL) hosts three early-career researchers studying brain development
Wednesday 5 June – 15:00 BST
Akanksha Jain (ETH-Zurich) ‘Unveiling the choreography of human brain development: Longterm lightsheet imaging reveals patterning morphodynamics in human brain organoids’
Noelia Antón-Bolaños (Harvard University) ‘Multi-donor human cortical Chimeroids reveal individual susceptibility to neurotoxic triggers’
Yuxiang Liu (UT Southwestern Medical Center) ‘Function of human CLOCK during embryonic development of neocortex’
At the speakers’ discretion, the webinar will be recorded for viewing on demand. To see the other webinars scheduled in our series, and to catch up on previous talks, please visit: thenode.biologists.com/devpres
Introducing the Node’s new search and filter function.
Just over a year ago, I was applying to become the Node’s Community Manager. One of the pre-interview tasks was to come up with ideas for the Node, so I wanted to look back at what’d been done already. While I enjoyed discovering random posts from the early days of the Node, I quickly realised that the search function was rather limited: I could only filter by date or category, and it wasn’t possible to filter by date and category.
Now, I’m delighted to introduce our brand new ‘Advanced search’ function, where you can search and filter by category, tag, author and date. Thank you to the team working behind the scenes to push out this new search tool!
As the Node approaches its 15th anniversary in 2025, we hope this new search function will allow long-time and new readers alike to enjoy all the weird and wonderful posts the Node has put out since 2010.
Have a go and let us know what you think! What else would be useful to you, our dear Node readers, to include in the search functionality?
Do you know
… we have a new Search button:
Click the Search button in the menu bar to go to the ‘Advanced search’ page.
… you can filter by category, tag, author and date:
For example, I wanted to search for ‘behind the paper’ stories that mention Wnt signalling, my favourite signalling pathway. I can type ‘Wnt’ in the search bar and filter in Tags by ‘behind the paper’.
… you can search for all the posts someone has written:
I found out the first ever Community Manager of the Node, Eva Amsen, wrote a total of 141 posts!
Authors: Sandra Franco-Iborra (ASAPbio Community Lead), Pablo Ranea-Robles (Postdoctoral Fellow, Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research at the University of Copenhagen), Lonni Besancon (Assistant Professor, Linköping University) & Jonathon Alexis Coates (Assoicate Director, ASAPbio; jonny.coates@asapbio.org)
Scientific publishing is experiencing a reckoning; scientists are resigning across a wide range of editorial boards, the dominance of traditional publishers has been successfully challenged, open access has revolutionized publishers’ business models, there’s a lack of trust in science and preprints are on the rise. Preprints (manuscripts shared prior to journal-organised peer review) offer an opportunity to transform scholarly communication into a system that places science and society first in addition to alleviating many of the issues we currently face.
Brief history of preprints in the life sciences
Although the fields of physics and mathematics are often credited as the origins of preprinting, the practice actually began in the 1960’s with biology focussed NIH information exchange groups (IEGs). However, this initiative faced opposition from publishers and scientific societies who effectively ended the IEGs by 1969. In 1991, arXiv launched and the physics community rapidly adopted preprinting. It was not until the launch of bioRxiv in 2013 that biology began to accept preprints. More recently, some funders such as the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have begun to mandate preprints. We’ve also witnessed governmental declarations that support a not-for-profit, no cost to authors or readers system of academic publishing; a system that has preprints at the beating heart. There are now over 750,000 life science preprints (Fig 1A), representing approximately 12% of the literature in 2023 (Fig 1B). Of these 750,000, over 220,000 are hosted on bioRxiv alone (Fig 1C) and have been downloaded over 150 million times (Fig 1D).
Fig 1. Preprints in the life sciences. A) Preprints indexed on Europe PMC. B) Preprints indexed on Europe PMC as a percentage of published articles on Europe PMC. C) Cumulative bioRxiv submissions since 2013. D) Cumulative PDF downloads for bioRxiv preprints. Thanks to Europe PMC for the code and data to produce panels A & B and Nicholas Fraser for the code used to produce panels C & D.
Preprints in Developmental Biology
With the launch of bioRxiv in 2013, Developmental Biology was quick to adopt this new method of scientific communication, posting preprints that same year. As of 2023, Developmental Biology sits in the middle of preprints on bioRxiv, as the 15th largest field with almost 6700 total preprints posted (Fig 2A). This is also true in terms of preprint downloads where Developmental Biology preprints are downloaded slightly less than the mean for bioRxiv. Approximately ~70% of bioRxiv preprints are eventually published, with our data showing that at least 54% of Developmental Biology have been published by the end of 2023 (though this number is likely to be higher due to issues linking preprints to the published version). Additionally, many Developmental Biology preprints are posted with restrictive licenses with only 17% having an open, CC-BY license (Fig 2B). However, this is very similar to the larger bioRxiv corpus where only 18% of preprints have a CC-BY license. Similarly, most Developmental Biology preprints are posted as a single version which negates the benefit of being able to iteratively update a preprint (Fig 2C). Within the field, the University of Cambridge (UK) is one of the largest contributors of preprints, having contributed over 100 Developmental Biology preprints to bioRxiv since 2013.
Interestingly, despite being in the middle of the pack in terms of preprint posting, Developmental Biology is the second biggest category for number of preLights posted (>350). preLights (a preprint highlighting service from CoB) is a platform in which ECRs write news & views style articles of preprints. This highlights the benefits of a strong community-led curation and demonstrates how this can work for other platforms.
Fig 2. Characteristics of Developmental Biology. A) Developmental Biology preprints in bioRxiv over time. B) Licences used for Developmental Biology preprints on bioRxiv. C) Number of versions for Developmental Biology preprints on bioRxiv. Data downloaded using the bioRxiv API.
Develop your use of preprints
Preprints serve multiple purposes. First, they help to shift the power dynamic in academic publishing, placing the power back in the hands of authors. This helps to accelerate the dissemination of scientific knowledge, free from the pressures and delays associated with publishing. The benefits of this open, accelerated system were highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic when almost 40% of the initial COVID-19 related research was first shared as preprints, directly leading to changes in policy and potentially saving lives. Preprints can appear online within 48 hours of submission, compared to months and years under traditional publishing routes. This also proves particularly useful to publicly rebut published research and avoid the long delays of scientific corrections or the rather unused platforms for post-publication peer review
Preprints also decouple the quality of research from metrics like journal impact factor, promoting fairer, better, evaluation. They also provide a platform for early-career researchers to showcase their work and gain recognition, fostering a more inclusive and diverse research landscape. Additionally, preprints can be used iteratively to share ongoing research and get feedback from the community. However, perhaps the most important benefit of preprints is that they offer a viable route towards meaningful change to scientific communication; one that is free from financial incentives and pressure and that is community-focussed.
The best way to get started with preprints is to use them in your research by citing and reading them. The Node maintains “In preprints” which is a great series for discovering relevant Developmental Biology preprints each month. Going further, you could also discuss preprints in your journal club – or even review them on platforms like PREreview or hypothes.is with support from ASAPbio. For ECRs, preLights is an excellent opportunity to take your first steps into commenting on preprints.
Ready to develop how you share your research, amplify your voice, and contribute to a more open, Developmental Biology community? Grab our checklist (Box 1), explore resources, and join the preprint movement!
As biologists we work regularly with images to collect, interpret and communicate our data, findings and ideas. These days, however, images are almost entirely digital, and it is becoming increasingly uncommon to incorporate manually drawn pictures or 3D hand-crafted models into research, either during experimental observations or to communicate findings. Accurate scientific illustration is an important skill to record anatomical detail during an organism’s life, and realistic drawing was the main working method for early naturalists and anatomists, but drawing and modelling can also be used as a way to develop new ways of thinking about topics and processes from a different perspective1,2. We set out to explore how hand-drawing and 3D modelling could allow researchers today to engage with their research from new perspectives in a collaborative workshop guided by artist Dr Gemma Anderson-Tempini.
On the afternoons of Wednesday December 13th and Thursday December 14th 2023, we held a drawing workshop to bring together participants across three different research groups – (1) the ‘Molecular Marine Systems’ group of Dr Elizabeth Williams in the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences at the University of Exeter, (2) the ‘Micromotility’ group of Dr Kirsty Wan from the Living Systems Institute (LSI) at the University of Exeter, and (3) the ‘Algal Microbiome and Ecophysiology’ group of Dr Katherine Helliwell at the Marine Biological Association (MBA), Plymouth. Although focused on different research questions from different perspectives, the groups share an overlapping interest in understanding how microscopic organisms can sense, respond to, and move through their fluid environment.
Welcome to the workshop. We looked at planktonic larvae and discussed the potential of drawing: to infer or ‘draw hypotheses’, to ‘be like’ a biological process, to select salient information, to show and share understanding, and to constructively collaborate towards a processual view (Photo – Kirsty Wan).
Study organisms across the research groups include marine invertebrate larvae, microalgae, particularly diatoms, and protists. How these organisms transition between distinct phases of their life cycle in response to specific environmental cues is also of common interest across the different groups. We took inspiration from Maria Sibylla Merian, an entomologist, naturalist and illustrator (1647-1717) who was among the first to depict animal life cycles in the context of their specific environments at each different life phase3.
All research group members were invited to participate in the workshop and participants included group leaders, postdoctoral research fellows, graduate students and research technicians. Prior experience with drawing or art ranged from absolute beginner to confident regular practitioner. Workshop participants included scientists from both biology and mathematics backgrounds.
The first day of the workshop started with brief roundtable introductions and an overview of research topics by Liz and the practice of using drawing to represent dynamic biological processes by Gemma. As a drawing ‘warm-up’, we started with a group exercise on the ‘evolution of shape’, based on the drawing process developed by Gemma as part of her previous ‘Isomorphogenesis’ project, a drawing-based enquiry into the shared forms of animal, mineral and vegetable morphologies2.
Each participant was given a 3D object to make an observational drawing. This drawing was then passed to the next participant, who added a connected object with an alteration suggested by selecting an action word at random. We continued the process until everyone’s initial drawing was returned to them, and observed the evolution of our original shapes. This allowed everyone to start drawing without feeling inhibited by the need to draw something perfectly, or the lack of an idea about what to draw.
Examples from the ‘evolution of shape’ group drawing exercise. A trend emerged across the group in that various forms started to accumulate cilia.
After this exercise, each participant was asked to draw a depiction of their own current research project or scientific question, and explain what it is they wanted their drawing to show. Examples of topics discussed included trying to understand how a microscopic organism could coordinate multiple cilia for effective swimming, or finding a new way to depict an organism’s life cycle by using continuous line drawing to highlight the connectivity between different life phases and promote the idea of considering an organism as its whole life cycle.
To conclude the first day of the workshop, participants were then asked to complete a drawing exercise similar to the initial ‘evolution of shape’, in which we imagined our organism of interest as a 3D shape, using questions to guide and direct the drawing: ‘What developmental stage is your organism?’, ‘What kind of environment is your organism in?’, ‘What type of response does your organism show?’. These questions also related to our prior recommended reading on the experience of larvae in flow4. In this exercise participants were encouraged to generate a bold drawing that would take up all the space available on their A3 blank sheet.
The instructions for the final drawing exercise on Day 1 (left), with an example outcome drawing of ‘worm larva movement in light and flow’ demonstrating an attempt to fill all the space on the page (right).
We started the second afternoon of the workshop with a short visualization exercise followed by discussion, to help bring participants into the present, and focus on their research questions. Participants lay or sat in comfortable positions with their eyes closed while Gemma guided them on a journey in the plankton as a microscopic organism, slowly dropping down deeper and deeper into the sea in search of a place to settle down on the sea floor. The effect of this exercise on participants was fascinatingly variable, with responses ranging from finding the experience stressful, busy and complicated, with many organisms jostling for position in the plankton, and the added complications of moving in a big 3D space, with different types of flow that could take an organism anywhere, and the ever-present threat of predators from every side. Other participants found the experience relaxing, due the perceived reduction in the types of decisions and actions they could take as a microscopic member of the plankton – sink or swim? The overall effect was to bring the group closer together and focused on the shared topic of marine microorganisms’ development and navigation.
Following the visualization exercise, participants were offered a choice of activities including free-drawing with or without tracing paper, a paper folding origami activity, or the use of a circular maze template that could be converted from 2D circle into a 3D cone. These activities provided a basis from which participants could develop their own ideas about their research project or question. Examples of projects included using transparent layers to add information about environment and different life stage priorities to a coral life cycle, mapping the settlement journey of planktonic larvae through a circular maze, using the maze to demonstrate the carbon capture process during diatom sinking, or to develop an anatomical map of cell types in a marine larva. Origami structures were used to explore the life cycle of a marine worm, incorporating research goals into different sections, to explore environmental effects on marine larvae with changeable combinations of environmental factors, or to demonstrate biodiversity and morphology of diatom species.
Mapping the planktonic journey of larvae using a maze template (left), and developing an interactive marine invertebrate life cycle in 3D with origami (right).
Following the independent work, we ended the second day with presentations and discussion of each participant’s work in progress. Consensus across the group was that drawing provided a useful way of thinking about research. There was strong interest in finding ways to incorporate drawing more into our research papers or use it as a tool to start thinking about and discussing new projects by drawing what the results could look like, the experimental plan, or the overarching question. This workshop showed us that drawing can be used to stimulate discussion, think about research projects, generate new ideas, images and hypotheses/questions, promote lab group interactions and understanding and collaboration between different research communities. Common themes that emerged from our discussions were the usefulness of drawing and paper craft as a tool for teaching and communicating, and to remind us of the bigger picture and broader impacts of our research.
Overall, it was useful to have some templates designed by Gemma to work with, such as mazes, games, or origami structures, which helped those unfamiliar with creative work or processual drawing, as these provided an initial framework from which to develop ideas. Representing biological phenomena such as metamorphosis, behaviour and movement as a process is not easy, but through the workshop interesting ideas emerged regarding both ways to represent a process dynamically, as well as ways to think about the process itself. For example, one participant developed a carousel model or zoetrope with which to demonstrate marine larval behaviours in response to changes in oceanic pressure, while another developed a diatom ‘teaching wardrobe’ with interchangeable layers allowing the demonstration of a diatom’s response to different environmental conditions.
Planning a zoetrope to demonstrate planktonic larval behavioural responses in action (left), and development of a ‘teaching wardrobe’ to demonstrate environmental effects on diatoms (right).
New ways of thinking about life cycles also emerged, in particular the representation of a life cycle as a spiral instead of the classic circle. This idea has an interesting synergism with the recent reflections by Sarah and Scott Gilbert on the prevalence of spiral forms in nature, and the possibility of thinking about the animal holobiont as two interlocking spirals, one representing the microbiome and the other the animal – ‘Circles are complete and perfect; life isn’t. Mathematically, the circle is merely the bounded collapse of the spiral. It is complete, but life goes on’5.
Developing new ways to think about coral (left) and jellyfish (right, digitally inverted for clarity) life cycles, with use of layering, spiral shapes or continuous line drawings.
A final take-away from the workshop was that the process of drawing and expressing ideas with paper crafts also allowed participants to incorporate their own identities and personalities into their work. We generated a space for participants to step away from the regular routine of lab work, experiments and computational data analysis, and take the time to think more deeply about their research questions. Participants were encouraged to leave phones and social media behind, although we allowed their use to access relevant images and videos online, promoting a focused atmosphere throughout the workshop. Slowing down, reflecting and sharing imaginative time with colleagues through drawing, creating and discussion, has strong potential to lead to new insights into scientific questions. Workshops such as this could be one tool to help researchers actively engage with the often microscopic life they are studying, enabling a process-oriented approach to ‘flow, attend and flex’, as recently proposed by James Wakefield6. We recommend this style of workshop to other scientists searching for artistic ways of thinking about and communicating their work.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the University of Exeter Living Systems Institute, for allowing us to host the workshop in their boardroom space, which was an ideal light-filled environment. This workshop was funded as part of a BBSRC David Phillips Fellowship (BB/T00990X/1) to Elizabeth Williams. We also thank each workshop participant for their valued contribution to this collaborative drawing workshop, which was in itself an experiment. Additional thanks to Dr Luis Bezares Calderónfor helpful comments on the text.
References
Anderson, G. 2014. Endangered: A study of morphological drawing in zoological taxonomy. Leonardo 47(3): 232 – 240.
Anderson-Tempini, G., 2017. Drawing as a Way of Knowing in Art and Science. Intellect Books.
Merian, M.S., Brafman, D. and Schrader, S., 2008. Insects & flowers: the art of Maria Sibylla Merian. Getty Publications.
Hodin, J., Ferner, M.C., Heyland, A., Gaylord, B., Carrier, T.J. and Reitzel, A.M., 2018. I feel that! Fluid dynamics and sensory aspects of larval settlement across scales. Evolutionary ecology of marine invertebrate larvae, 13, pp.190-207.
Gilbert, S.R. and Gilbert, S.F., 2023. “Process Epistemologies for the Careful Interplay of Art and Biology: An Afterword”, in Anderson-Tempini, G. and Dupré, J., 2023. Drawing Processes of Life: Molecules, Cells, Organisms, pg. 295.
Wakefield, James G. 2023. “Flow, Attend, Flex: Introducing a Process-Oriented Approach to Live Cell Biological Research”, in Anderson-Tempini, G. and Dupré, J., 2023. Drawing Processes of Life: Molecules, Cells, Organisms, pg. 280.
Open microscopy projects are flourishing with researchers contributing new technology and accessible workflows with the hope of democratising access to microscopy. In our upcoming webinar on Thursday 16 May at 15:00 BST, we’ll be hearing from Richard Bowman, Jan Huisken and Dumisile Lumkwana about three very different projects, OpenFlexure, Flamingo and VP-CLEM-KIT.
Richard will speak about OpenFlexure Microscopes, which are open-source optical microscopes that are built using 3D printed components and off the shelf components. You can read about the OpenFlexure microscope here.
Jan will discuss the Flamingo project. Flamingos are modular light sheet microscopy setups, which flip the concept of core microscopy facilities allowing the team to move custom advanced microscopes to the samples instead of taking samples to a core facility.
Dumi will discuss VP-CLEM-KIT, a new low-cost pipeline to support users to access high resolution volume correlative light-electron microscopy.
The deadline for entries for the FocalPlane-elmi204 has been extended until 21 May 2024. We would be delighted to receive entries from all imaging modalities, and you don’t need to be attending elmi2024 to enter. The winning entry, which will be selected by public vote following shortlisting by the elmi2024 organising committee, will be featured as the cover image on an upcoming issue of Journal of Cell Science.
When I was 25 and having a particularly bad day, crying to my mum about how exhausted and in pain I was during my studies, she recalled a passing comment made about my 10-year-old self by a homeopath who was treating my brother. The homeopath looked at me inquisitively, and then asked me if I could walk up and down the corridor at a comfortable pace. His response: “She’s just running on nothing, absolutely no energy reserve”. This man identified an issue 10 years prior to any diagnosis, and a further 10 years to being properly assessed.
And I am still an incredibly slow walker.
I have spent the past year, and indeed, my first-year postdoc salary, going through the private medical system in order to be diagnosed for a myriad of conditions, some of which I’ve had my whole life. This includes, but undoubtedly is not limited to: repetitive strain injury in both wrists, chronic migraines, fibromyalgia, hypermobility syndrome/EDS, degenerative lumbar spine, hip sclerosis, autism and anxiety. I am now a clinical trial comorbidity nightmare, a badge I wear with pride, if only as gallows humour. Over this time, I’ve had the opportunity to reflect on how on Earth I have managed to get through the education system, as well as work in multiple academic institutes. Now, in a far more supportive environment than I have ever worked in, I feel secure enough in my position to say my piece about why the current structure of wet lab science is nigh-on impossible for people with energy-limiting conditions or mobility issues, never mind the two.
I am not one to be afraid of ruffling feathers, and as such can say that having worked or studied at now six universities and institutes, some of which are the best in the UK, not one has shown significant change to improve the state of wet lab science’s innate ableism despite proclaiming “inclusivity”. I have worked on stem cells in one capacity or another for almost 10 years now, and I have yet to find one lab that is disability-accessible even for minor difficulties, even in recently built buildings. Lab benches have a top shelf that is so high up that I need to climb onto a chair, then the bench and then lean up to simply retrieve a DNA extraction kit. I’m 5’6 and one of the taller women in our lab; I am almost certain the standard lab benches were designed by the same individuals who forgot women wear seatbelts. The benches are non-adjustable and are often too narrow to fit a chair in, never mind a wheelchair. Ergonomic pipettes are regularly not available, and heavy lifting and copious bending is expected, just to simply collect what you need. I’ve lost count the number of times I have scooted on my bum on the floor to organise a drawer or to find a reagent in a freezer, like a dog that needs to go to the vet. A large amount of arm strength is required to open -80 freezers and lift cell storage shelves out of liquid nitrogen. Last time I checked, powerlifting was not an essential requirement on the job description. And don’t even get me started about requiring a cane in the lab. Despite the infrastructure remaining steadfastly unchanged, many colleagues have provided kind words and helpful hands over the years, but when discussing the sheer commitment of lab work, well, everybody seems to think we are all in the same boat.
Spoiler: we’re not.
Now I did not get into academia thinking it was rosy. Academic careers are famous for the dedication required, so much so that it puts off even the most privileged and enthusiastic of individuals. Similarly, stem cells are renowned for being needy: weekends, holidays, anniversaries, Christmas. This would wear down anyone, but for those with energy-limiting conditions, this spirals into a whole different beast leading to professionally difficult conversations. I’ve tried my best to be open about my energy limitations to my superiors in the past and been met with disdain masquerading as advice, being told that I was lying or that I should keep quiet as it makes me sound “weak”. I’ve had my conditions leveraged as a means of bribing for loyalty, and even had my pleas for consideration misinterpreted as vying for sympathy to get deadline extensions or funding, rather than just asking for basic human compassion. I’ve collapsed in the lab on multiple occasions, slumped on the floor from sheer exhaustion trying to meet unobtainable demands, secretly thinking that if I end up in hospital at least I’ll have “a valid excuse” to rest. The irony was I was in hospital at one point, and was still asked if I could attend a scheduled meeting. Although this very much was an extreme case of a toxic work environment, to a lesser extent I’ve observed similar behaviours in most institutes, either to myself or others, where the fear of backlash about disclosing or indeed managing one’s health issues is valid and can come with very real consequences.
All I can do is keep what advocation available to me small-scale, within my limits, just so I can still do my job.
So how do we tackle this issue, and indeed, support both current and new generations of scientists? I don’t know and nor do I feel it is the total responsibility of myself and the people who are affected by this multi-faceted, systematic monolith of an issue to resolve it, because we’re already tired. There are those who are sounding the horn plenty and still are ignored despite putting their all into it (and good on them!). For me, I’ve gained a surprising amount from being vocally open about all the weird and wonderful aches, pains and idiosyncrasies that I experience to colleagues and seniors, being unabashedly afraid to talk about it. What began as me just being honest about my life at one institute has snowballed into me being the local disability sign-poster at each institute I frequent. I have had so many wonderful interactions with people with similar or indeed completely different difficulties, asking for advice on deadlines, how to handle management, how to get accommodations, and frankly the most important, just having a sympathetic ear. On reflection, these interactions have paved a road for me to not feel immense guilt about my limited engagement and advocacy on a grander stage. Plus, I have a crumbling spine, pounding migraines, diminished energy and a shot nervous system, and have eventually admitted that I need to cut myself some slack.
What people don’t realise is that this is not an inspirational underdog story, because I live in constant fear there could be no happy ending. My academic career could end just as it’s begun, because I don’t know if my body can continue working in the lab for another 10 years until I’m office bound. I go home after a 9-5 day in the lab and can spend 2 hours in a bath just to be able to sleep that night. I take entire medical kits with me to conferences to make it through and still collapse at the end. I have got stuck at my desk because my legs have stopped working after being on my feet for 9 hours. If I don’t have lab work, I have to work at home, because open office spaces are not conducive to productivity when you are stimuli-sensitive. Like many postdocs, I am expected to maintain the juggling act of being both a full-time lab researcher and a trainee PI. The problem lies when you wake up already at 40% rather than 100%; this no longer is a “difficult period in one’s career that everyone goes through”, it’s the marathon from Hell and, as I mentioned, I’m a slow walker.
Even by writing this article and attaching my name to it, this could be found by committees and unconsciously (or indeed consciously) used to exclude me from funding opportunities.
My greatest fear is that those who called me weak were right, that I will not make it physically. However, I am not paving anything by being quiet, so this seems as accessible a vessel as I can manage. In short, if I were to provide some advice to others with a long list of chronic and acute conditions, it would simply be to be defiant. I won’t deny that I haven’t had an impeccable support network of friends and family, but even as a child, I have always vocally refused to believe that just because something is the way that it is does not mean it is right. Additionally, the best motivation you could give me is to say that I can’t do something. I often feel I should write some apology letters to my school teachers who were not expecting such defiance from an 8-year-old. This tenacity, however, is the only thing I feel got me to this point and is my advice to everyone, regardless of your situation. Demand your space, be seen, and be unafraid of how it will affect your career, because, for some such as myself, you may not even have one if your accommodations aren’t met.
Just keep reminding yourself that you are worth the effort and that you deserve to be in the room.
And For Managers, Principal Investigators and Senior Staff….
For PIs wishing to be more supportive and inclusive, I’d advise taking a leaf out of my current mentor’s book. This individual once said “I care more about the people than I do the cells” and shows it by their actions. They will come in on weekends to cover tissue culture, finish experiments if any of us call in sick, is happy to cover for me experimentally for any doctor’s appointments, if necessary, all while juggling their own childcare responsibilities. I am not afraid in the slightest to talk about how I really am, if I’m struggling, or if I require any additional help, although it took me almost a year to truly instil this trust. I had been upfront about my conditions prior to even applying for my position, and they have pushed for every accommodation I asked for from the get-go. Although I am aware of my sheer luck at finding such a considerate leader, this should not be the case. I honestly believe the only way attitudes will change is from the inside and by senior individuals supporting and advocating for those they are responsible for. After all, it takes a village to build a lab.
Although I’d be factually incorrect to say no progress has been made, what facet of academia do you think has grown the most in terms of disability inclusivity, and what leaves much to be desired?
The School is designed for Master’s students, PhD students and Postdocs who work in the field studying the Transcriptional Control of the Genome during Embryonic Development, Cell Differentiation, and Disease, or for those who would like to approach it.
One of the primary focuses will be to discuss how to combine “wet” and “dry” technologies to address computationally demanding, important biological questions.
A key feature of this course will be the low ratio between participants and teachers/speakers. This will allow each participant to come in close contact with successful scientists and learn how they developed key technologies to respond to pressing questions in their field.
The course will include talks, group discussions and group activities.
In addition to subject matter-specific topics introduced by professors, you will also benefit of hands-on analytical and computational sessions on:
Barcode-based Lineage Trancing
Understanding the 3D Genome
Transcription Factors and Peak Calling
in situ hybridization combined with scRNAseq
An important innovation of this year is that previous summer school participants, on the wave of their current scientific successes, have been selected to teach.
Participate and candidate yourself to being the next generation teacher!
The school will also include a short course on scientific writing for developmental and cancer biologists.
In this SciArt profile, we meet Philipp Dexheimer, who combines his research background and love for art to effectively communicate complex ideas in science to a broad audience. As an artist at heart and a scientist in mind, Philipp’s creations are inspired by the concepts and molecular aesthetics of nature. He works with diverse techniques and media, from Molecular Graffiti to scientific illustrations and videography.
C. elegans Graffiti in Vienna
Can you tell us about your background and what you work on now?
As a scientist, I have always been fascinated by the beauty and complexity of life. During my PhD at the IMP Vienna, I focused on RNA Biology, studying the functions of microRNAs in early animal development using C. elegans as a model system. For my Postdoc, I stayed with the nematodes but shifted my focus to research protein aggregation in the context of myopathies. Our results put protein misfolding on the map as a critical contributor to certain myopathies and suggest that caloric restriction is a promising treatment strategy in this context. My postdoc paper is about to be submitted, and I very recently left the lab to go all-in with Science Art, so it’s the beginning of an exciting new professional chapter for me.
Journal Covers for Molecular Cell, Genome Research and Embo Journal
Were you always going to be a scientist?
I always had a love for biology – Life is, after all, the most fascinating phenomenon in the universe – and the decision to study Molecular Biology after school came very intuitively without having to think about it much. Once I set foot in the lab for the first time as an undergrad, I figured that this is what I want to be doing. Next to the intellectual joy of being a detective investigating the intricacies of nature, the scientific community is just great company; one gets to meet so many inspiring people from all over the world. That’s what made me really feel at home in the institutes of this world, and I would not want to miss a single day of my time as an active researcher.
Re-imagining Francis Cricks’ DNA sketch using Ink and watercolor
And what about art – have you always enjoyed it?
In school, I always liked to doodle around when class wasn’t particularly interesting, but things didn’t start moving until I ended up picking up a spray can at the age of 15. I spent a lot of time at the skatepark and on basketball courts which, together with a general interest in Hip Hop culture, led me to start my artistic development by painting Graffiti. Since then, urban art continues to be a passion of mine. Once I got into the lab, I started to draw my inspiration more and more from biology, and by now the main topic of my creations revolves around nature.
Heart organoids drawn in Leonardo Da Vinci’s style
What or who are your most important artistic influences?
My style has definitely been influenced a lot by urban art. In addition, I love comics and animated cartoons; they continue to be a source of inspiration for my work. More recently, I started to get into watercolor and ink drawings, which I love because the medium is very organic – just like biology itself. David Goodsell is one of my science art heroes; his paintings of the molecular world in scale are to me the most outstanding drawings of the molecular world.
Ubiquitin Graffiti in Vienna
How do you make your art?
When I don’t hold a spray can in my hand, I love working with Photoshop to create digital artwork for journal covers, scientific posters, or biotech homepages – finding a way to illustrate complex concepts in a way that resonates with the human mind & soul never fails to excite me. More recently, I also started to experiment with video creation and editing. Short videos are a great medium to make science accessible to a large audience, and I am convinced that they will become a more important part of the science communication toolbox in the future.
In addition, I think that AI tools are in the process of revolutionizing the way we design illustrations and other art forms – my digital workflows have become increasingly complex and by now involve hopping back and forth between many different programs. I would never take the direct output of any AI tool and use it as a final artwork, though. I want to have a personal touch in there, otherwise it just doesn’t feel like my own creation. AI-generated designs are mostly somewhat generic and lack the certain edge that makes art so interesting after all. My belief is that the interplay of AI prototyping and “classic” manual editing is the future of digital artwork.
Infographic depicting biodegradable spectral conversion films
Does your art influence your science at all, or are they separate worlds?
Both science and art draw a lot from the ability to extract the abstract essence of reality that manifests itself in concrete forms in the world surrounding it. While there is no direct influence of my artistic endeavors on the science I do in the lab, I think that training the cognitive ability of abstraction comes in handy when contemplating biology. In the end, great science aims not at describing a particular phenomenon in a certain organism which happens to be the subject of our studies, but rather at finding the bigger concepts behind the workings of Life.
What are you thinking of working on next?
There are many projects in the pipeline at the moment; my personal favorite goal for the upcoming years is to travel the world and paint large-scale murals on the walls of research institutes and public buildings. I think Molecular Graffiti represents a unique way of porting scientific concepts into public space and has a lot of potential to spark curiosity about the life sciences among a large audience, rendering biology accessible also to non-experts. So if you, dear Reader, happen to have an idea for a wall that could use a beautiful science mural, feel free to reach out!
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
(2 votes)
