During my years in New York, I unexpectedly experienced an interesting form of science outreach. I randomly met a film director at a party, Sasha Collington. This director explained to me that she needed the help a biologist to work on her new script. I accepted right away for three reasons. First, curiosity. Second, because just like many other experimental scientists, I get very frustrated with dead-end experiments and I regularly start questioning the meaning of my life. I liked the idea of being directly and immediately helpful to someone. Third I get angry a lot when I hear all the scientific none-sense or the misleading and condescending over-simplification of science in articles or movies. I was therefore tempted by this opportunity to get the science as accurate as possible.

Consequently, we exchanged several emails and met a few times. She began by explaining the story she was working on. The film, in production, is called “Love Type D”:

In her film, the outcome of relationships is governed by biology. We are either dumpers or dumpees. Therefore she was looking for ideas about what kind of biological concept could explain this, how could the characters experimentally test it and whether or not they could overrule it. I understood that she was not looking to double check the science in her script. She was not looking for technical or procedural details either. I rather felt that she was looking for general biological knowledge to nourish her artistic creativity. It was thus a broad discussion, very upstream in the film making process. After her description of her project, I started talking a lot. She had in mind to go for some king of genetic phenomenon, so I explained her the basics of genetics and epigenetics. What is a gene? What is the difference between a gene and an allele? What is chromatin? How is gene expression regulated? How are genes related to phenotypes and why is it much more complicated that we once thought? What are the classic techniques used to identify genes or to assess their level of expression? She was very active in the discussion. I could tell that she was trying to see how she could use those pieces of information to help her story. Indeed, she was asking a lot of questions about practical aspects: what kind of experiments could we use? Could a child perform that experiment? Would the reagents be accessible to a non-scientist? This is where it became really interesting because I perceived a bit better what it means to talk about science with non-researchers.

When it comes to discussions within the scientific community, I am personally very opposed to the storytelling approach. I feel that science is turning into a marketing activity and I really dislike that. It shifts the focus away from data and logic toward fancy tales. However, in this context of communication between an artist and a scientist, and between this artist and her public, I realized that storytelling was not hurting and, on the contrary, was necessary to convey the message properly. First, I understood that aesthetic is important. As an artist using a visual medium, her recurring worry was to know how a given experiment would look like. Would the result appear on a screen? On a paper? In a test tube? Does it have colours? Does it move? Does it make a sound? Does it have to be in the dark? Questions I never even thought of. We had to forget “unfilmable” or visually unexciting experiments such as western blots or ELISA. We were rather trying to imagine microscopy-based results that would visually make sense on the screen. I perceived the benefit of taking into account the visual content and not just the conceptual content. That is something I will keep in mind whenever I have to communicate with people from outside the academia.

Second, I understood the importance of analogy. Among the various scientific concepts we explored, she particularly liked the notion of chromatin compaction and decompaction during the epigenetic regulation. She liked it because it spontaneously evoked the idea of a book that someone closes or opens. It is something the public unconsciously knows very well and therefore they would almost emotionally connect with this scientific concept. I realized that making something “understandable by the public” did not mean “absence of complicated words”, or “not too many parameters”, it rather meant using concept people could relate to. Next time I have to interact with non-scientific people I will try to appeal to those “cultural images” they have instead of falling into the (condescending) trap of over-simplification.

Finally, I had expected that the biggest obstacle would be the knowledge gap between us. But it rather turned out that the main difficulty is the divergence of objectives. I wanted to get the script scientifically accurate whereas her prime goal was, understandably, to have a scientific element that would serve the story: something clear, coherent and pretty. Because of this divergence, we spent quite some time trying to come up with ideas that could be both scientifically and artistically satisfying. I felt a bit like a very annoying person, repeating things such as “well, not exactly…”, “no it’s more complicated”, “I guess we could say that only if…” and often “well, we don’t really know.” I guess that this is a common feeling among people who happened to serve as consultants. We may come off as dull, picky mood-killers. But that’s ok. We are here to give a scientific point of view to something. That is, to provide logical, accurate, fact-driven interpretations or ideas. When advising a film scriptwriter or director, it is important to keep acting as scientists, and not trying to anticipate or satisfy the artist expectation or vision. Even if we reinforce the image of nerdy researchers by doing so.

Overall, this experience was a lot of fun. I loved this opportunity to see how a script was being made and to experience the different perception of what is biology. I would gladly do it again, especially if it is at a downstream step, such as technical coaching during the shooting. Was my help useful? I like to think it was. At least to get her started on the scientific part of her script, to set some landmarks in her mind that would help her come up with that part of the story. Regarding the scientific accuracy, which was one of my objectives, I think it did not work out as well as I thought. There are other limitations in a film production (time, money, space, material, actors…). Seeing that your advice is not always followed must probably be frustrating for scientific consultants, but that’s the way it is. After all, it remains a piece of fiction.

This post is part of a series on science outreach. You can read the introduction to the series here and read other posts in this series here.

(2 votes)

Loading...

Evolutionary developmental genetics of reptile skin colour

In the context of evolutionary developmental biology analyses of reptilian skin colours and colour patterns, we offer one PhD position for an outstanding, highly motivated, and creative experimental wet-lab biologist with strong skills in developmental biology and cell biology.

Michel Milinkovitch’s group at the University of Geneva (UNIGE) integrates the expertise of developmental biologists, evolutionary biologists, computer scientists and physicists for an improved understanding of the mechanisms generating a diversity of skin colours and colour patterns in reptiles.

We have recently shown (Saenko et al. 2013) that the extensive variation of skin colours and patterns in Sauropsida reptiles is generated by precise co-localisation of interacting pigmentary and nano-structural elements. In this framework, we have also shown (Teyssier et al. 2015) that chameleons shift colour through active tuning of a lattice of guanine nanocrystals, which photonic effect is filtered by a layer of pigments. In addition, we have built extensive transcriptomic and genomic resources (Ullate-Agote et al. 2014; Tzika et al. 2015) for mapping colour mutations in our new model species of snakes and lizards. For example, we recently mapped and identified the mutation responsible for the amelanistic mutation in corn snakes (Saenko et al. 2015).

The successful candidate will (i) participate to linkage mapping of multiple colour and colour pattern mutations in snakes and lizards and (ii) use molecular/cell/developmental biology methods (microscopy, immuno-histochemistry, in-situ hybridisation, transcriptomics, in-vivo assays, ex-vivo cultures, etc.) to characterise the effects of these mutations on neural-crest cell migration, as well as on the physiology of pigmentary and structural-colour cells. The new PhD student will also interact with a physicist PhD student who is mathematically modelling the reaction-diffusion processes that generate colour patterns in snakes and lizards.

Candidates must have a Master in biology or biochemistry. Skills and experience with developmental biology and/or cell biology are mandatory. Skills in biophysics are useful. The successful candidate will have a genuine interest for organismal biology and will appreciate interactions with physicists and computer scientists.

The University of Geneva (UNIGE) is world-renowned for its research in Biology and Physics.  UNIGE is among the top 1% best universities in the world and the Faculty of Sciences is ranked 32^th world best (Shangai Academic Ranking of World Universities).

PhD students are remunerated according to the standards of UNIGE, which are very generous when compared to other international programs.

Geneva is an international city occupying a privileged geographical situation.

Candidates must send their application – in the form of a single PDF file including a brief letter of interest, a CV, as well as contact information (not support letters) of two persons of reference – to:

Prof. Michel Milinkovitch (Michel.Milinkovitch@unige.ch), Laboratory of Artificial & Natural Evolution (www.lanevol.org), University of Geneva, Switzerland.

Refs: Saenko, Teyssier, van der Marel & Milinkovitch. Precise colocalization of interacting structural and pigmentary elements generates extensive color pattern variation in Phelsuma lizards. BMC Biology 2013, 11: 105; Teyssier Saenko van der Marel & Milinkovitch. Photonic Crystals Cause Active Colour Change in Chameleons. Nature Communications 6: 6368 (2015); Tzika, Ullate-Agote, Grbic & Milinkovitch. Reptilian Transcriptomes v2.0: An Extensive Resource for Sauropsida Genomics and Transcriptomics. Genome Biol. Evol.  7: 1827-1841 (2015); Ullate-Agote, Milinkovitch & Tzika. The genome sequence of the corn snake (Pantherophis guttatus), a valuable resource for EvoDevo studies in squamates. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 58: 881-888 (2014); Saenko, Lamichhaney, Martinez Barrio, Rafati, Andersson & Milinkovitch. Amelanism in the corn snake is associated with the insertion of an LTR-retrotransposon in the OCA2 gene. Scientific Reports 5, 17118 (2015) .

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

A full 3-year ANR funded postdoctoral position is available at the Centre de Biologie Intégrative Toulouse to study mechanisms by which time is translated into a precise developmental sequence in the context of neocortex development. This position is part of the postdoctoral program of CBI Toulouse (http://cbi-toulouse.fr/eng/). Our research focuses on the role of local cell-to-cell communication via Eph:ephrin signaling in the specification of neural progenitors in the mouse. The specific aim of the proposed project is to identify the cellular and molecular mechanisms linking Eph:ephrin signaling to neural progenitor fate decisions, concentrating on the transcriptional response elicited downstream of Eph activation in neural progenitors.

The project includes genome-wide gene expression analyses (RNA-Seq and ChIP-Seq) to fully characterize the repertoire of genes downstream of Eph:ephrin signaling in cultured progenitors and the assessment of candidate genes in regulating the production of projection neurons in vitro and in vivo. The succesful candidate should have a PhD and a strong background in genome-wide gene expression analyses. Expertise in cell culture and/or mouse genetics would be a plus. The position is available from october 2016.

Highly motivated candidates should send a brief description of their research interests and career goals, their CV, and contact information for three references to Alice Davy (alice.davyatuniv-tlse3.fr)

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Each adult mammalian skeletal muscle has a unique complement of fast and slow myofibers, a consequence of cell-autonomous and non-cell-autonomous patterning decisions during development. Intriguingly, following either acute muscle regeneration or deinnervation/reinnervation, the proportionality and patterning of muscle fibers is largely preserved, suggesting a mechanism for ongoing maintenance of fiber type specification during homeostasis and regeneration/repair. We have recently reported that interactions between the repulsive guidance ligand ephrin-A3 [which is expressed on all and only slow (Type I) myofibers] and EphA8 [an ephrin receptor expressed by terminal Schwann cells at all and only neuromuscular junctions of fast (Type II) myofibers] promote and preserve slow myofiber identity by preventing stable innervation of slow muscle fibers by fast motor neurons [Stark et al, JCB 211:1077–91 (2015)]. Additional data from our lab suggest that variations on this mechanism may also direct slow fiber type-specific interactions with muscle satellite (stem) cells, and/or promote and preserve fast (Type IIb) myofiber identity during development and regeneration. The future potential of this work includes not only extending our basic understanding of muscle patterning during development, regeneration, neuromuscular disease, and aging but also has implications for targeted gene or cell transplantation therapies.

The Cornelison lab at the University of Missouri is recruiting 1-2 postdoctoral fellows to work on this NIH-funded project, addressing the significant unsolved question of how muscle fiber type is specified, maintained, and recapitulated in each muscle in that muscle’s unique pattern. The project will involve analysis of muscle fiber patterning in wild type, loss-of-function and gain-of-function mouse models during development and following muscle or nerve damage, using section immunohistochemistry, RNA in situ hybridization, timelapse videomicroscopy, flow cytometry, tissue culture and coculture, cell transplantation, and global gene expression and epigenetic profile analysis.

We are looking for highly motivated colleagues, ideally with a background in muscle and/or nerve development and regeneration, who are able to work both independently and collaboratively. A doctoral degree, strong background in cell and molecular biology, and proficiency in spoken and written English are required.

Columbia is a vibrant college town with a low cost of living that consistently appears on ‘Best Places to Live’ lists (Forbes, Livability, Outside). It is only two hours away from either St. Louis or Kansas City, and also has easy access to outdoor activities in-town (biking on the Katy Trail, rock climbing, camping) or nearby (climbing or canoeing in SW Missouri, boating on Lake of the Ozarks). The University of Missouri is a top-ranked public research university with the main undergraduate campus, the medical school, and the veterinary school all on the same campus, facilitating active collaborations in the life sciences. The Bond Life Sciences Center is a new multidisciplinary facility housing 38 labs from 14 different departments, as well as multiple University core facilities.

To apply, please send a CV, cover letter, and the names of three references to cornelisond@missouri.edu.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Gustafson, T., Wolpert, L. (1967) Cellular movement and contact in sea urchin morphogenesis. Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 42, 442-498.

Recommended by Thomas Lecuit (IBDM- Developmental Biology Institute of Marseille)

In the beginning of his famous 1969 paper on positional information, Lewis Wolpert states that “the central problem of the development of form and pattern is how genetic information can be translated in a reliable manner to give specific and complex multicellular forms and varying spatial patterns of cellular differentiation”. In considering this problem, Wolpert continues, it is important to distinguish between three different, but interdependent, aspects: molecular differentiation (i.e cell fate choice), spatial differentiation and morphogenesis. Most biologists’ first (and maybe only) encounter with Wolpert’s work will be his conceptual contributions to our understanding of spatial differentiation, i.e. “the process by which the individual cells within a population are specified to undergo a particular molecular differentiation, which results in a characteristic spatial pattern”. His solution was positional information, the idea that a cell will differentiate in a specific way by interpreting its position, most famously applied to the French Flag problem.

Wolpert did not centre his attentions exclusively on spatial control of differentiation though. In fact, just two years earlier, he published another work, in collaboration with Tryggve Gustafsson, where he focuses on morphogenesis. At 57 pages, one would assume this to be a long review on morphogenesis (and this is indeed how it is classified on PubMed). In reality, the article is somewhere between a review, a paper and a hypothesis. It is an overview of Gustafson and Wolpert’s thoughts on the mechanisms underlying morphogenesis, in the context of other work published in the field and their own careful and detailed observations of sea urchin development.

Gustafson and Wolpert explain their motivation in the introduction. By the late 60s much was already known about how information encoded in DNA is translated into proteins, as well as other biochemical processes in cells. But how do these processes ultimately determine and influence morphogenesis? Part of the problem was that both biochemistry and genetics were seen as separate fields from development. This paper attempted to bridge the gap. As the authors state “our purpose is to reduce the complex processes at the organ level to activities of the individual cells […] that may be more meaningful for the biochemist than concepts such as gastrulation, mesenchymal patterns and coelom”. To do this, they “reduce the complex morphogenic events […] into a question about the cellular forces involved.” They argue that much of early morphogenesis depends on only two cellular activities: adhesiveness and motility. They show how these determine each morphogenetic step of early development, using the sea urchin as their model.

Reproduced with permission of Wiley

By today’s standards this paper might be considered ‘too descriptive’. Gustafson and Wolpert are basically just using a microscope to observe sea urchin development. But this paper shows that you don’t necessarily need fancy techniques to provide ‘mechanistic insight’. With detailed observations and clear thinking, the authors argue that most of morphogenesis, regardless of organ or developmental stage, can be explained by a few simple mechanisms. In an age when labs dedicate decades of work to a single gene in a specific tissue system, it is surprising and refreshing to read a paper that tries to identify overall principles and puts the big picture at the forefront. Of course, this paper was just the beginning and, as the authors admit themselves, further work was necessary, e.g. more direct measurements of the forces involved and additional ultrastructural information. Maybe your own research is trying to fill some of these gaps? Either way, next time you come across Wolpert’s positional information paper, spare a thought (and some reading time) for his 1967 paper on sea urchin morphogenesis. As Thomas Lecuit put it, this largely unknown paper is “a must read […] [which] lays down the foundation of tissue morphogenesis in all animals”. In fact, why not read both? “Together these two papers cover most of the important concepts in morphogenesis, including cellular behaviour, physical forces and regulatory information.”

Further thoughts from the field

Gustafson and Wolpert’s 1967 paper was a landmark in the field of developmental biology. The paper summarized many of the cell behaviors that these two biologists described in a series of earlier publications (published in the 1950s and 1960s), all of which were based on time-lapse, light microscopic observations of transparent sea urchin embryos. The 1967 paper had a tremendous impact when it was published because it revealed a whole new world of remarkable cell behaviors that accompany embryonic development. The paper remains highly relevant today. It highlights the power of observing the behavior of living cells in intact embryos by time-lapse imaging. In fact, many of the cell behaviors Gustafson and Wolpert described are still being deciphered at the molecular/genetic levels. The paper also described simple mechanical models of tissue morphogenesis based on a small number of cell-level properties, such as cell adhesion, cell division, and cell contractility. These models remain relevant today, but more importantly they highlight the critical importance of integrating information at multiple levels of biological organization in order to understand morphogenesis.

Chuck Ettensohn (Carnegie Mellon University)

Wiley has kindly provided free access to this paper until  June 2016!

—————————————–
by Cat Vicente

This post is part of a series on forgotten classics of developmental biology. You can read the introduction to the series here and read other posts in this series here.

(10 votes)

Loading...

The laboratory of Jianjun Sun at the University of Connecticut Department of Physiology and Neurobiology is inviting applications for a postdoctoral researcher to work on a NIH-funded project.

Our group studies female reproductive organ formation and function. We recently developed a Drosophila model to investigate the conserved mechanism of ovulation and its contribution to ovarian cancer (Sun and Spradling, Curr Biol, 2012; Sun and Spradling, eLife, 2013; Deady et al., PLoS Genet, 2015; Deady and Sun PLoS Genet, 2015). We are working to identify the signaling network that control the spatiotemporal activation of matrix metalloproteinase in Drosophila ovary, which is essential for ovulation and cancer metastasis. Please see our website (sunlab.pnb.uconn.edu) for more information.

Ideal candidates will be accomplished, highly motivated, and creative scientists with a recent Ph.D. in the life sciences (less than 2 years of postdoctoral experience is strongly preferred), or who anticipate completion of their degree prior to starting the position. Previous experience in Drosophila genetics, cell biology, and/or developmental biology is desirable.

Applicants should email a brief cover letter describing research accomplishments and future research goals, current CV with list of publications, and contact information for 3 professional references to: Jianjun.sun[at]uconn.edu in one PDF file. Salary will be commensurate with appropriate experience according to NIH scale.

The University of Connecticut is an EEO/AA employer.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Are you interested in attending a meeting or course in a DMM-relevant field? Apply for one of our travel grants of up to £600 (or currency equivalent). The first application deadline is 29 April 2016.

Applicants will usually be PhD students and postdoctoral researchers at the beginning of their research careers, who will use the funding to support their travel to relevant scientific meetings. We also welcome applications from independent group leaders and PIs with no independent funding, seeking support to attend meetings, conferences, workshops, practical courses, PI laboratory management courses and courses to re-train.

For further information and to download an application form, go to our travel grant page.

(1 votes)

Loading...

University College London is one of the world top universities for postdoctoral studies owing to excellent training and its friendly, collaborative, multidisciplinary and scientifically outstanding environment. The UCL Cancer Institute is now recruiting post-doctoral researchers to work on ground-breaking projects in genetics and epigenetics of cancer, as well as ageing, signalling and metabolism as they relate to cancer biology. We offer several individual and collaborative projects led by Dr. Ivana Bjedov (Adv Genet. 2015;90:1-101; Biochem Soc Trans. 2011 Apr;39(2):460-5; Cell Metab. 2010 Jan;11(1):35-46) in collaboration with Prof. Stephan Beck (Nat Rev Genet. 2011 Jul 12;12(8):529-41; Nat Biotechnol. 2008 Jul;26(7):779-85; Nat Genet. 2006 Dec;38(12):1378-85) and Prof. Paolo Salomoni (Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jan 27;112(4):1059-64; Neuron. 2012 Apr 12;74(1):122-35). To address crucial questions in cancer biology, we use mouse and Drosophila model organisms, as well as a variety of mouse and human cell culture systems, including stem cells. The institute is equipped with cutting-edge equipment and core facilities for bioinformatics, flow cytometry and cell sorting, proteomics, genomics, imaging, in vivo biology and histopathology.

The aim is to select and train excellent scientists and encourage their independent future careers. Therefore, we seek high-achieving postdoctoral candidates, with less than 2 years of postdoctoral experience, who will be competitive in obtaining postdoctoral fellowships. Only candidates with published first-author papers in internationally recognised peer-reviewed journals will be considered. We are interested in hearing from talented PhD students near completion of their PhD that are eager to start their postdoctoral career in outstanding laboratories of the UCL Cancer Institute. This position is available to students having, or being near completion of, a PhD degree in a biological subject, and from any nationality or country. Candidates should have extensive experience in molecular biology techniques, microscopy and tissue culture. We particularly encourage students with Drosophila experience.

Please send one PDF document containing a letter of motivation and your CV, clearly stating all your previous laboratory experience and your supervisors, your publications, and details of 2 referees to CI.Vacancies@ucl.ac.uk with “Postdoc position Bjedov-Beck-Salomoni” in email subject. For any informal inquiries, please feel free to contact Ivana Bjedov (i.bjedov@ucl.ac.uk). For further information regarding the Institute please see: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cancer and http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cancer/research/department-cancer-biology

The deadline for applications is 20th March 2016.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

LM Escudero lab 

Cell Biology Department

Universidad de Sevilla

• We offer a full-time contract for one year (renewable) to do the PhD in our group. The deadline is Friday 11/03/2016.

• The candidates should have a Physics degree, Mathematics degree, Healthcare Engineering degree, Telecommunications degree, Informatics Engineering degree or Biological related degree with a wide programing background.

Project description:

We are focused in the analysis of biological and biomedical images using System Biology methods.

We combine Computerized Image Analysis and mathematical concepts to investigate different biological and biomedical questions. Extracting the defining signature of complex images we obtain objective and quantitative information that help to interpret biological processes in development and disease.

This project is related to the analysis of tissue organization. This is a funded project by the Fundación Asociación Española Contra el Cancer in collaboration with the lab of Dr. Rosa Noguera from INCLIVA (Valencia, Spain). The contract is cofounded by the Fundación Asociación Española Contra el Cancer and Seville University.

You can find more information visiting http://lmescudero.blogspot.com.es/

If you are interested, send me and email with your CV and background to lmescudero-ibis@us.es

In addition, it is necessary to officially apply to Seville University. I will send instructions to preselected candidates.

Thank you!

Luis M. Escudero

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...