A postdoctoral position is available at the University of California – Davis to study the molecular mechanisms, phylogenetic patterns, and functional consequences of transcriptome evolution in Drosophila. The project is based on the integration of RNA-seq, ChIP-seq, transgenic manipulation of gene expression and DNA-protein binding, and quantitative phylogenetic analysis to understand the roles of gene cooption, gene duplication, and de novo gene origin in the evolution of tissue-specific regulatory circuits. This work involves a collaboration between the labs of Artyom Kopp (developmental genetics and evo-devo), David Begun (evolutionary and population genomics), and Brian Moore (phylogenetic and comparative analysis). Additional aspects of this project may range from cell type specification to the evolution of enhancer sequences. Postdocs will be encouraged to develop independent research reflecting their own interests, within the broad field of developmental and evolutionary genomics.

Candidates should have demonstrated expertise in experimental molecular genetics and genomics, with an emphasis on RNA-seq and ChIP-seq analysis, genome annotation, and comparative genomics. Some experience in developmental biology and transgenic methods is also desirable. Initial appointment is for one year, extendable by mutual agreement. Our labs and the entire department provide a very supportive atmosphere. The broader research environment at UC – Davis offers postdoctoral fellows chances for collaboration with leading experts in fields ranging from cell and developmental biology to evolutionary genomics and phylogenetics. Northern California, where Davis is located, provides outstanding recreational opportunities. Interested applicants should contact Artyom Kopp (akopp@ucdavis.edu) with a CV, a brief statement of research interests and experience, and the names of three references.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

On March 18, 2015, 24 graduate student scientists from twelve graduate programs across the country descended on Capitol Hill. We represented the National Science Policy Group, a network of graduate students committed to promoting science research funding and interested in issues at the intersection of science and public policy. Last Wednesday was our Congressional Visit Day, the second organized by NSPG, and we had over 50 meetings scheduled with the Congressional staff of senators and representatives from across the country.

Our message was that funding levels for all scientific research disciplines should be increased. While absolute funding levels have increased slightly over the past decade, they are not keeping up with inflation, and investment in science research as a percent of GDP has declined (Figure 1). We know that investments in science increase the country’s economic prosperity and quality of life for people here and across the globe. Reducing science budgets affects everyone, not just scientists.

Figure 1. Science research budgets by country, as percent of GDP. From the Science Coalition “Science Matters” campaign (http://www.sciencecoalition.org/science-matters).

Convincing Congressional staffers

Articulating how science is foundational to our economy was crucial during our Congressional meetings. Most of our meetings were with legislative aides, often those who deal with science and technology issues. Realizing that members of Congress have diverse platforms, we tried to demonstrate to each staffer how science funding advances the interests of their Congressperson. For example, when talking with the LA for my state senator, Claire McCaskill (D-MO), I reminded the aide of specific examples of basic science research that produced an unexpected benefit for our armed forces – a major focus of Senator McCaskill’s platform. I talked about HemCon, a bandage that stops hemorrhaging in minutes and can save lives on the battlefield, a product that was developed by the US Army Medical Research and Material Command. I also talked about how research into the basic biology of mantis shrimp yielded unexpected insights into how to design better body armor for military vehicles.

Like many in Congress, my senator is also very concerned with jobs and the economy in Missouri and the nation. I spoke about how a large part of the human genome was sequenced at Washington University in St. Louis, the huge economic impact this project has had – a return of $65 for every $1 invested – and that many of the jobs created from this investment were created in St. Louis. My goal was to give the staffer specific examples that he and Senator McCaskill can use to justify to her constituents and to her peers in Congress why increasing science research funding advances the Senator’s platform and the welfare of our country.

NSPG represents graduate students from a wide array of disciplines. We believe that increased efforts in all fields are needed for our country to make sustained advances in our economy and human welfare. To this end, NSPG was advocating for funding increases in all scientific disciplines. When I spoke with the legislative aide to the senior senator from my state, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO), I knew that as a three-time cancer survivor Senator Blunt has supported biomedical research funding for much of his career. I hoped to expand his view to include all sciences, making the case that it’s unpredictable where the next breakthrough will come from, so we need to fund all curious scientists.

The National Science Policy Group: YOUR student movement

Our second message was that NSPG is a resource for our members of Congress. We want to be the constituent group they go to for anecdotes on how tight federal science funding hurts developing researchers, or to find a compelling story of unexpected advances from basic science funded in their district. We believe the message of how flat-lining funding levels and decreased purchasing power in the federal science budget impact research is important to come from graduate students, as we are the next generation of scientists already affected by the current funding situation.

NPSG is only two years old and growing fast. Working with this group has been extremely rewarding. I have met graduate students from across the country and across disciplines that share my sense of urgency that science can – and should – inform public policy. Realizing that my own science policy student group at Washington University in St. Louis is tapping into this nationwide sentiment is very gratifying. Anyone who is interested in learning more about the National Science Policy Group or joining our effort can find more information on the NSPG webpage. Please also feel free to get in touch with me through the comments section for more information.

Hope for the future

Finally, the most gratifying moment of my visit to the Hill came Tuesday afternoon during a pre-Hill Day training session by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retired Rep. Bart Gordon (TN-D), a long-time champion of scientific research, addressed the crowd of several hundred scientists across disciplines and generations. He told us of the science research and development cycle as he saw it: investments in basic science research generate new knowledge, which generates new technologies, products, and services, which increase the welfare of Americans when they take advantage of new products or health technologies. This activity boosts the economy, increasing money available to invest in science research and start the process all over again.

“He gets it”, I thought.

I traveled to the Hill just to hear our message spoken back to me before I even walked into a Congressional office building. This experience showed me that our message is taking hold and progress is happening, if very slowly. If we continue advocating for science, I believe that the prospects for federal science funding just might improve.

(4 votes)

Loading...

In our recent survey many of you told us that you like the Node to be even more a place where the community can discuss and share ideas. We totally agree, but to make this happen we need your help and participation!

To encourage more discussions we decided to launch a new feature called Question of the Month! Every month we will post a question on an interesting or controversial topic. We need you to join the discussion and share your thoughts by leaving a comment. With everyone’s participation, both in these discussions and in other posts and comments on the blog, we can make the Node an even better forum of ideas! So here is the first question:

In the current climate of budget constraints and political pressure there is a noticeable shift in the type of science preferred by funders, with funding increasingly going to projects with clear translational potential. Developmental biology is a basic science, but it feeds into our understanding of disease and regenerative medicine. But do funders recognise this? In other words:

Is Developmental Biology at risk because of the increasing emphasis on applied science?

Join the discussion- leave a comment below with your thoughts! You can comment anonymously if you prefer! And if you have any ideas for future questions please drop us an email!

(6 votes)

Loading...

Here are the highlights from the current issue of Development:

ActivinA-ting spiny neuron production from hPSCs

The medium-sized spiny neurons, the main projection neurons of the striatum, are generated in the lateral ganglionic eminence (LGE) and degenerate in the early stages of Huntington’s disease (HD) – for which no pharmacological treatment is yet available. Hence, an efficient way to derive striatal neurons is crucial for disease modelling, drug development and cell-replacement therapy. Striatal neurons have previously been generated from human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC)-derived neural progenitors treated with sonic hedgehog (SHH), or SHH plus Wnt pathway inhibition. Now, Meng Li and co-workers (p. 1375) report a more robust and efficient way to generate functional striatal neurons from hPSCs. They show that activin A induces LGE characteristics in hPSC-derived neural progenitors. This is independent of SHH but requires CTIP2, a transcription factor required for striatal neuron development. Furthermore, the activin-patterned neural precursors efficiently generate functional DARPP32⁺ GABAergic striatal neurons in vitro, and acquire striatal spiny neuron properties without overgrowth or teratoma formation upon engraftment in a rat HD model. Altogether, these findings uncover a novel role for activin A in striatal projection neuron specification and establish a robust protocol for deriving these neurons.

Cofilin the gap in neural tube closure

Neural tube closure occurs through highly orchestrated cell shape changes mediated by actin dynamics. Its failure results in some of the most common and severe human congenital malformations. Cofilin 1, an actin-depolymerising protein, is known to be involved in neural tube closure but its precise functions had not been elucidated. In this study (p. 1305), Joaquim Grego-Bessa and colleagues show that the absence of cofilin 1 in mouse leads to defective neural tube closure, reduced cell number, altered cell shape and cell cycle kinetics. The protein is enriched at both apical and basal domains of the neuroepithelium but, intriguingly, has opposing activities on either side of the cell. Apically, although localisation of the apical polarity complexes remains unchanged, phosphorylation of myosin light chain is impaired in cofilin 1 mutants. By contrast, basally, the absence of cofilin 1 leads to an accumulation of actin and phosphorylated myosin light chain, ectopic tight junction-like structures and disruption of the basement membrane and hence of epithelial organisation. Altogether, these results shed light on the cellular mechanisms of neural tube closure and reveal a dual role for cofilin that is presumably dependent on the intracellular context.

Preserving progenitor pools in the kidney: a balancing act

The nephrons are the filtration units of the kidney that excrete toxins, balance salt and water content in the blood and regulate blood pressure. Their number is determined during kidney development by the size of the nephron progenitor cell (NPC) pool, which exhausts in early postnatal life in mouse. Understanding the mechanisms that regulate the balance between NPC self-renewal and differentiation is a crucial endeavour. In this issue, two papers provide insights into the molecular cues controlling NPC self-renewal.

On p. 1228, Zubaida Saifudeen and colleagues report that the specific deletion of p53 in mouse NPCs leads to hypoplastic kidneys, reduced nephron number and elevated blood pressure. p53 is classically associated with restraining proliferation, but the observed phenotype suggests a positive role for p53 in progenitor renewal: in mutants, NPC proliferation is reduced while senescence, apoptosis and the levels of known regulators of NPC survival remain unchanged. Furthermore, using functional genomics, the authors find that p53 regulates factors involved in cell-matrix interactions and metabolism. They then show that mutants display aberrant ATP and reactive oxygen species levels in NPCs. Altogether, these results uncover an unexpected contribution of p53 to NPC self-renewal capacity, energy metabolism and niche architecture.

In the second study (p. 1254), Martin Kann and co-workers identify growth arrest-specific 1 (Gas1) as a direct target of Wilms’ tumor suppressor protein 1 (WT1), a transcription factor required for NPC self-renewal and differentiation. Phenotypically, the loss of GAS1 is similar to p53 depletion, with mutant mice displaying hypoplastic kidneys and decreased nephron numbers, stemming from reduced NPC proliferation. The authors further analyse the mechanism by which GAS1 acts in NPCs, finding that it modulates the response to fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signalling, a known regulator of NPC growth and proliferation, by specifically promoting the AKT pathway branch downstream of receptor activation. This study therefore links WT1 to FGF-mediated regulation of NPC proliferation, providing additional insights into the mechanisms by which this key transcription factor functions.

PLUS…

Positional information and reaction-diffusion: two big ideas in developmental biology combine

The two most influential ideas in the field of pattern formation are those of Alan Turing’s ‘reaction-diffusion’ and Lewis Wolpert’s ‘positional information’. Much has been written about these two concepts but some confusion still remains, in particular about the relationship between them. Here, Jeremy Green and James Sharpe address this relationship and propose a scheme of three distinct ways in which these two ideas work together to shape biological form. See their Hypothesis article on p. 1203

Cellular and molecular insights into Hox protein action

Hox genes encode homeodomain transcription factors that control morphogenesis and have established functions in development and evolution.Here, Yacine Graba and colleagues discuss the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the diverse and context-dependent functions of Hox transcription factors during morphogenesis and organogenesis. See the Review article on p. 1212

(1 votes)

Loading...

Heather Hendrickson (Senior Lecturer in Molecular Bioscience, Massey University)

I have had my personal ups and downs with live performance. I was 4 years old when, convinced I was a dance prodigy, my enthusiastic whirling became frenetic and I flung myself directly at my grandmother, landing in a humiliated heap at her feet. Despite the signs, it still took me years to recognize that dance performance was not to be my destiny. I was fortunate enough to find science.  Today I am a Senior Lecturer in Molecular Bioscience at Massey University in New Zealand. The research in my laboratory focuses on the evolution of bacteria, DNA replication and segregation and bacteriophage discovery. For the past two years I have also been the Chair of the Outreach Committee for my Institute. This position put me in touch with our campus External Relations team, the group that designs and implements strategies for university engagement with the public.

When a national TV station in our city came looking for a science news correspondent, our external relations team asked me if I was interested in trying this. As a result, I have made monthly TV appearances on a nationwide morning program in New Zealand for the past two years. We are very lucky to have this forum for a weekly science update, with five academics from around the country  talking to the public about science for 5 minutes each week, in a live interview format . This has been a huge learning opportunity for me and has opened up a wealth of other opportunities in science communication, including radio interviews, a podcast, public talks, other TV programs and filming for a documentary.

 In my natural environment, the bench.

What is it like to do science communication on Live TV?

The morning program, First Line, has a large share of the pre-work family viewing audience: young families, mature couples and singles who want a dose of news before heading to school or work. The goal of the station is therefore to provide viewing material that will keep them tuned in.

As with any science outreach, the audience comes first, so I choose my topics carefully. Perfect stories are those about recent science topics that both I and that the public find interesting.  The story should have an “aha!” factor. If the stories are good the rest is easy, as long as you have a store of natural enthusiasm for the topics. I read widely, check online sources like Science Daily Headlines, Twitter and even Facebook for recent trending science news. I am also subscribed as a journalist with the Science Media Center in New Zealand. This is an invaluable resource, as I receive updates about embargoed press releases that I can research in order to present the most “up to date” science news available.

Once I have chosen 3-5 stories, I send abstracts, articles on-line, videos and anything else that might be helpful to the producer, the day before we go on air. The producer and I choose three stories from my prescreened ideas. Selected stories have been everything from bacteriophage therapy and antibiotic resistance (close to my heart) to advances in robotics and climate change (very far afield). When in doubt I call on old friends or other experts to put things in context for me.

On First Line, TV3, New Zealand. Note the video monitor behind us has both kiwifruits and a zombie!

Once the topics are selected the task is to choose my big concepts and simplify, simplify, simplify.  I have about 1.5 minutes of discussion for each topic, and I must assume my audience has no knowledge of acronyms, techniques, or context. This changes what I choose to talk about. If the topic is relevant then the language should come fairly naturally. Complex ideas must be translated into normal language.

By the morning of the interview, I have in mind a summary of what the work is, why it is important and what comes next for this field. I have very rarely been given questions in advance, so I have to be ready to guide a strange or off topic question to a productive point.

I arrive at the studio 45 minutes before go on air, and head into make up for a 15 minute hair and make up session with the amazing professionals on staff. About 5 minutes before my segment I am invited on set, say hello to the hosts and get my microphone subtley installed.

Top Tips for going live:

1)      Don’t wear things that make noise, the mics are sensitive!

2)      Sit up straight but lean slightly forward to physically engage the interviewer.

3)      Avoid the temptation to look at the tele-prompters or the camera.

4)      Smile and maintain eye contact with the interviewer, even at the end of the interview.

5)      If a question seems strange, simply ask for clarification. This is a conversation!

6)      Keep things simple, engaging and light-hearted (where appropriate).

7)      Obstinate hosts can drive ratings so don’t take things personally. You are there for the audience (not the interviewer) so play along, but know your limits in advance.

 Me and Professor Steve Pointing doing the end of year wrap up, December 2014.

How is Live TV science outreach different?

The  biggest difference between TV-based outreach and classroom-based outreach is that when you do face to face outreach with students or the public you can see the effects immediately. Sometimes their faces light up with recognition or understanding, and other times you can hear expressions of awe. I think that for many of us this is one of the most rewarding parts of science communication. This does not happen when you do science communication on live TV.  When I walk out of the TV station after my five minutes on air, I don’t know who might have seen the spot or what they thought. I have occasionally received appreciative e-mails from viewers afterwards, but these are few and far between .

Should you get involved in live TV science outreach?

The public funds our work, so we owe it to them to tell them about discoveries and progress that are relevant to their lives. I also remind myself that there are little science nerds out there that don’t know it yet.  Maybe some of them even think that they are destined to be great dancers! I like the idea of inspiring the kids of today to be the scientist of the future.

So if you think that live TV outreach sounds fun, you should go for it.  Not sure if you can pull it off? Do a trial run with someone from your external relations or press team on campus. These groups will have direct experience with live television, live radio or print media, and they will have great tips and leads for you to make contact with journalists. They are also likely to know the local media personalities and can give you an idea of what to expect.

There are also great training sessions and resources online: http://sciencemediasavvy.org/

For a video of me on TV covering bacteriophages and human induced climate change follow this link: http://www.3news.co.nz/environmentsci/using-viruses-to-kill-harmful-bacteria-2013052909#axzz3UQ33Rp4a This was one of the first interviews I did and at one point, the interviewer asks if climate change wasn’t “getting better”, which surprised me.

You can find more links to my appearances on First Line in my Science Communication page: http://microbialevolution.massey.ac.nz/HHmedia.html

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.

(4 votes)

Loading...

1x Postdoc and 1x Research Assistant Positions:  Regulation of Cell Death and Cell Growth in Drosophila

One postdoc and one 50% research assistant positions are available in the laboratory of Dr Yun Fan in the School of Biosciences at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Current research in the laboratory is focused on 1) to identify and characterize key regulators of compensatory cell proliferation and tissue homeostasis in response to apoptotic stresses; and 2) to understand how apoptosis susceptibility can be modulated at the cellular level. Our approach is to combine Drosophila genetics with molecular, biochemical and imaging techniques (click here for more details).

Postdoc applicants must have a relevant PhD (or equivalent), while Research Assistant applicants must have a BSc (or equivalent) in Biological Sciences. Experience with genetics, molecular biology, immunohistochemistry, confocal microscopy and biochemical techniques would be preferred.

These are fixed-term appointments, available for up to 36 months. The posts will be available from 1^st June 2015.

Informal enquiries please contact Dr Yun Fan (y.fan@bham.ac.uk)

Apply online at http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/staff/jobs/index.aspx by searching for job posts 55150 (Postdoc) and 55128 (Research Assistant)

Closing date for applications: 05 April 2015

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Department/Location: Wellcome Trust – Medical Research Council Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge

Salary: £28,695-£37,394

Reference: PS04734

Closing date: 20 April 2015

Fixed-term: The funds for this post are available until 30 September 2017 in the first instance.

Applications are invited for a computational biologist to join the research group of Dr Paul Bertone at the Wellcome Trust – Medical Research Council Stem Cell Institute at the University of Cambridge. We are applying state-of-the-art experimental and computational methods toward the understanding of transcriptional regulation in pluripotent stem cells from rodents and primates.

We work closely with the groups of Dr Jennifer Nichols and Professor Austin Smith at the SCI, and seek to fill this position with a postdoctoral scientist who will join a new collaborative project funded by the BBSRC. This arrangement provides an excellent environment for research and career development, as the post holder will benefit from the resources and expertise of both experimental and computational environments to lead this multidisciplinary initiative.

The group applies large-scale gene expression profiling, comparative genomics and regulatory systems modelling to mammalian embryogenesis and stem cell biology. The post holder will have the opportunity to lead related computational projects, but will also work in partnership with experimentalists and contribute to the design and execution of collaborative studies. He or she will have a strong publication record, excellent communication skills, and enjoy working on ambitious projects at the frontiers of genomics and biotechnology.

Candidates will have a solid background in computation and current knowledge of eukaryotic genomics. Expertise in statistical methods and Unix scripting are essential. Additional experience with high-throughput sequencing data, numerical computing or regulatory systems modelling is desirable but not required. Applicants should hold a PhD in a relevant field (e.g. Bioinformatics, Applied Mathematics, Computer Science, Biomedical Engineering, or Biochemistry/Molecular Biology with a computational component). Previous experience in stem cell biology is not necessary.

Once an offer of employment has been accepted, the successful candidate will be required to undergo a health assessment.

To apply online for this vacancy and to view further information about the role, please visit: http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/5481. This will take you to the role on the University’s Job Opportunities pages. There you will need to click on the ‘Apply online’ button and register an account with the University’s Web Recruitment System (if you have not already) and log in before completing the online application form.

The closing date for all applications is the Monday 20th April 2015.

Informal enquiries about the post are also welcome via email: cscrjobs@cscr.cam.ac.uk.

Please upload your Curriculum Vitae (CV) and a covering letter in the Upload section of the online application to supplement your application. If you upload any additional documents which have not been requested, we will not be able to consider these as part of your application.

Interviews will be held towards the beginning of May 2015.

Please quote reference PS04734 on your application and in any correspondence about this vacancy.

The University values diversity and is committed to equality of opportunity.

The University has a responsibility to ensure that all employees are eligible to live and work in the UK.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

A PhD position available is available in my laboratory.

We are seeking a highly motivated PhD student for a project on somatic lineage reprogramming between liver and pancreas cells.

The main focus of the laboratory is to elucidate the mechanisms that pattern the embryonic endoderm in order to generate distinct organs, such as the pancreas and liver (Heinrich et al. Nat Cell Biol. 2015; Rodriguez-Seguel et al. Genes Dev. 2013; Petzold et al. Development 2013). To this aim, we perform comparative studies using both amphibian and mammalian model systems, including mouse embryos and embryonic stem cells. Future aims are directed towards applying developmental regulators of the fate decision between liver and pancreas to lineage reprogramming strategy in order to generate functional pancreatic beta-cells.

Applicants must have a Master in a relevant subject (i.e. Biology, Biochemistry, and Developmental Biology), experience in experimental laboratory research, and experience with stem cells or iPS cells would be preferable. Excellent organizational and record-keeping skills, a meticulous approach to practical work, the ability to work effectively and flexibly as part of a team, and ability to plan and execute experimental research independently are required.

Interested applicants should provide a CV, a statement describing career goals, and contact information for at least two referees. Additional information about our lab. and the Max Delbrueck Center can be found on our website.

Interested individuals can forward materials to:

francesca.spagnoli [a] mdc-berlin.de

Francesca M. Spagnoli, MD PhD
Group Leader
Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine
Robert-Rössle-Str. 10
13125 Berlin
Germany

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

End of March is the application deadline for the Gurdon Studentship scheme. This scheme provides financial support to allow highly motivated undergraduate students an opportunity to engage in practical research during their summer vacation. We look for students with a strong academic record and clear career vision, who have taken the initiative to establish contacts with a research laboratory where they can perform projects in the area of Developmental Biology. We expect this experience to enrich and complement their portfolio of expertise and to inspire them to pursue a career in research.

In 2014, 10 successful applicants spent 8 weeks in the research laboratories of their choices, and the feedback we received was outstanding. Please, read the student reports kindly sent to us by Benedetta Carbone, George Choa and George Hunt.

(2 votes)

Loading...

I’m reporting from the Drosophila meeting. You can read the post on days 1 and 2 here and on day 3 here.

Day 4 of the fly meeting was by far the most intense. Starting at 8.30 a.m., talks and poster presentations only really finished at 11.15 p.m.! However, the fly community takes their science very seriously, and you would be surprised by the number of people who stayed until the last talk!

The day had several sets of concurrent sessions, so I jumped around from ‘Regulation of Gene Expression’ to ‘Cell Biology & Cytoskeleton’ and ‘Stem Cells’. In the evening I attended the workshop on CRISPR-Cas 9, and a quick show of hands demonstrated how widely the fly community has embranced this technology.  Several speakers talked about how they are using CRISPR. For example, Hugo Bellen (Baylor College of Medicine) talked about how the MiMIC technology is being combined with CRISPR, while David Stern (Janelia Research Campus), is developing  CRISPR in a variety of Drosophila species. Indeed, David exemplified the generosity that the fly community is known for, by bringing with him several vials of fly lines expressing cas9 to give away. The floor then opened for questions, ranging from the specifics of how many kbs could be deleted to whether tissue-specific or mitochondria CRISPR had been attempted. I also attended the developmental mechanics workshop that followed, covering a variety of talks on the mechanical forces at work during development, from those applied by a corset of muscles around the eggs chambers to the system that anchors the wing during development.

Meeting t-shirt 

The last day saw a final plenary session, covering a variety of topics. For example, Christine Rushlow (New York University) talked about Zelda (named after the Nintendo game character), an important regulator of early gene expression following the maternal-to-zygotic transition. She proposed a model by which enhancers in these genes have high nucleosome occupancy, and that Zelda is able to lower this nucleosome barrier. Also in this session, Heinrich Jasper (Buck Institute for Research on Ageing) examined the relationship between proliferation and immune response in the intestinal epithelium. Normally, intestinal stem cells don’t proliferate much, unless they are exposed to damage or stimuli. The ageing epithelium, however, shows over proliferation, dependent on the presence of bacteria. This leads to the question of how stem cell homeostasis is related to immune homeostasis. Matthew Gibson (Stowers Institute) talked about the role of Decapentaplegic (Dpp) in the wing disc, but not before remind us of the contributions of T.H.Morgan, Turing and Wolpert to our understanding of morphogens. Matthew showed that the characteristic Dpp stripe observed in wing discs is required for patterning, but not growth, of this structure. The last talk of the meeting was by Ulrike Heberlein (Janelia Research Campus), who is using the fly as a model to study alcohol dependence. You can watch some videos showing the effects of ethanol vapours on flies here. Her lab is trying to understand how alcohol addiction is dependent on both environmental and genetic influences. For example, a few years ago they showed that male flies that have been rejected by females (because the females had already mated) are ‘courtship depressed’, and show a higher preference for alcohol (read their paper in Science here).

You may also remember how in day one (see post here) Allan Spradling called for fly researchers to play an active role in persuading the public and politicians that fly research is worth supporting. In the last session Andrea Page-McCaw provided a short list of how any of us can do this right now, and many of her suggestions are applicable for any scientist keen on encouraging funding in Biology:

How we can all support Drosophila research: Communications Chair Andrea Page-McCaw http://t.co/yavQI17zor #DROS2015 pic.twitter.com/B3V3krn2tw

— Genetics Soc of Amer (@GeneticsGSA) March 8, 2015

Overall it was a very enjoyable meeting. Great science was presented, and as Drosophila is a great model to study developmental biology on, there were a lot of talks relevant for the Node! In addition, the fly community is very active on social media, so not only could attendees follow talks in other sessions on twitter, but researchers who couldn’t make it to the meeting were also following the talks remotely!

If my posts encouraged you to attend the next Drosophila meeting then you are up for a treat! Next year the fly meeting will be combined with a variety of other model organism meetings in the Allied Genetics Conference! This epic endeavour by the Genetics Society of America will see a variety of model organism meetings taking place concurrently in a single location in Orlando. This means that you will be able to attend the fly meeting AND pop in and out of other model organism meetings next door! You can find out more information about this meeting here.

(2 votes)

Loading...