Reflections from the 82nd SDB Annual Meeting

Attending the Society for Developmental Biology (SDB) Annual Meeting this July for the first time, I was blown away by the wide variety of approaches and model organisms employed to unravel all the fascinating questions in developmental biology.

As a developmental biologist by training who has been working in science communication for the past few years, it’s hard for me not to notice a common theme throughout the conference — communication, be it researcher-facing or public-facing. Science communication comes in many shapes and forms, and this SDB meeting demonstrated the importance of communicating clearly and accurately to different audiences about the exciting research happening in a field that is close to all our hearts.

Celebrating early-career science communicators

The nature of a conference is talks, lots of them. How does one convey the essence of their research and condense years of work down to 15 minutes? The SDB meeting was full of engaging speakers from different career stages, but a standout was Bonnie Kircher, who took home the Best Postdoc Presentation Award. Bonnie captivated the audience with her talk about female reproductive organ anatomy in the brown anole.

Another award given out each year by the SDB is the Science Communication Award. This year’s award recipient is Kevin Thiessen, the person behind the popular Twitter account @ZebrafishRock. We interviewed Kevin back in 2021 to find out more about him and ZebrafishRock. In his award talk at the meeting, Kevin revealed the reason behind the name ‘ZebrafishRock’ (hint: not the musical genre, but the Zebrafish inner ear structure), introduced the information ZebrafishRock puts out, and stressed the significance of supporting model organism databases (a shoutout to ZFIN — read their ‘Featured resource’ post).

As the Community Manager of the Node, Kevin’s talk made me think about how the Node can learn from ZebrafishRock’s success in community building. Could we do more in terms of highlighting early-career researchers and their work? Any thoughts or suggestions welcome in the comments below!

If you are an early-career researcher interested in science communications, do check out SDB’s SciComm Internship program.

Becoming a better writer: #DevBiolWriteClub workshop

To complement the scientific talks, the meeting also featured a few workshops, including a ‘Communication Workshop’ led by John Wallingford (Professor at University of Texas at Austin) and Pamela Hines (former Senior Editor at Science Magazine).

Through highly interactive and engaging activities, John and Pam took the participants through the questions of ‘what’ and ‘how’ to write as a scientist and provided an abundance of practical tips to become a better writer. From the five rules of #DevBioWriteClub to book recommendations about science writing, most of what John said during the workshop can be found on the Node. Head over to John’s author page to see a list of his #DevBiolWriteClub posts.

As I’m writing this post, I’m very self-conscious about you, the reader, judging this piece of writing, but as John said, there’s no shortcut — it’s all about practise, practise, practise. Let’s get writing and start using the hashtag #DevBiolWriteClub!

SciComm is not just about writing

A wonderful feature at the SDB meeting was the lunchtime theme tables, which allowed people to connect and talk about topics ranging from mentoring, grant writing, to managing a scientific career with disability.

One of the theme tables was on the topic of ‘Communications as an alternative career’. The table facilitator was Ana Beiriger, a scientist and medical illustrator, who communicates science through graphic design, illustration, animation, and 3D modeling. The table included PhD students and postdocs interested in SciComm, as well as Marsha Lucas, the Publications and Communications Director of SDB. Throughout the hour, we discussed the different approaches and pathways to a SciComm career, and the pros and cons of freelancing versus working for a company. Watch out for a SciArt post about Ana on the Node soon, but in the meantime, check out other scientists making amazing SciArt work.

Ethical issues special symposium: talking to the public about our research

It’s all well and good that we talk about our exciting findings to fellow scientists, but scientific research does not exist in a silo. With technology advancing rapidly and guidelines changing accordingly, how do we convey our exciting research to the public without overhyping and allowing the story to spiral out of control in the news? How do we keep the public’s expectations realistic? How can we use our research to inform and influence policies?

These are among the many questions raised during the special symposium on ethical issues in developmental biology research. With research continuing to push the boundaries of what is possible, it is vital that scientists put more thought into communicating our research to different audiences. A few suggestions by the panel include providing more media training for scientists and working with mediators from trusted organisations such as science museums.

A summary of the talks and discussion from the panel, which included viewpoints from bioethics, medicine and basic science, can be found in this Twitter thread (click on link to expand the thread).

Final thoughts

At the end of her Conklin Medal award talk, Lila Solnica-Krezel stated, “we are all ambassadors for developmental biology.” Indeed, it is up to us to talk about our research responsibly and spread our excitement for this field to others.

To the developmental biology community, how do you approach talking about your research to different audiences? Do you know any developmental biologists who are doing great things in science communication?

Comment below!

(1 votes)

Loading...

“When the first draft of the Human Genome Project was completed, I was thinking, “Oh great, we’re probably gonna now be able to cure cancer!” But of course, as soon as you get to a major scientific milestone, it just opens the door to another series of really exciting and enticing corridors“

Dr Cordelia Langford, Sanger Institute

In the latest episode of the Genetics Unzipped podcast, we’re going behind the scenes at the Sanger Institute with Cordelia Langford, Director of Scientific Operations, to find out what it takes to make Big Science happen, and hear the stories behind the sequencing.

Genetics Unzipped is the podcast from The Genetics Society. Full transcript, links and references available online at GeneticsUnzipped.com.

Subscribe from Apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Head over to GeneticsUnzipped.com to catch up on our extensive back catalogue.If you enjoy the show, please do rate and review on Apple podcasts and help to spread the word on social media. And you can always send feedback and suggestions for future episodes and guests to podcast@geneticsunzipped.com Follow us on Twitter – @geneticsunzip

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Working in academia can be a wonderful experience, being surrounded by highly inspirational people, full of excitement for science and working together to unlock secrets of the natural world. However, as a work environment, it is not free from challenges and difficulties that many workplaces face. The high prevalence of bullying, harassment and abuses of power has recently been a topic of several articles^1-3 which highlight the importance of addressing this issue, discussing it on a public forum and implementing real changes to the structure of our academic system with the goal of minimizing the tolerance for such behavior and the permissiveness of toxic environments. To address this important topic, we hosted a virtual seminar at the Center for Molecular and Cellular Bioengineering (CMCB) of the Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden) on the topic of “Bullying and harassment in academia – definitions, prevalence and consequences for our scientific community” on the 28.03.2023.

The first speaker was Dr. Petra Boynton (Twitter – @drpetra), a social psychologist who supports universities, charities, research organisations and government departments to undertake and use research in inclusive, accessible, ethical and safe ways, with a key focus on mental health and wellbeing. Her background is in International Health Services Research, and she has applied her work through working as an Agony Aunt (advice columnist) for print, broadcast and online publications. She discussed the reasons for the high incidence of bullying in academia and what bullying involves, as well as why it is wrongly assumed that it is difficult to record or measure the effects of such behaviours both on affected individuals as well as on research integrity and quality. An important point was made that anyone on any level of the University or Institute structure, be it students, administration, junior or even senior group leaders, can both be the victim or the perpetrator of bullying. Research shows that approximately 1/5 postgraduates and 1/3 academic staff record being bullied themselves and around 40% have witnessed bullying, and approximately 75% of staff are aware bullying is a problem in their university⁴. Interestingly, the internal poll of the participants in the virtual seminar showed similar numbers with 46% of respondents having witnessed bullying or harassment at the TU Dresden and 89% of respondents saying there is a general problem of bullying in academia (Figure 1).

As the poll indicated, many people could not exactly identify which behaviors fall into the categories of bullying (Figure 1). Dr. Boynton then proceeded to outline these in detail, for example verbal abuse, punishing trivial mistakes, humiliating, setting people up to fail, or intruding into people’s personal lives. Dr. Boynton then expanded on how victims can be affected by experiencing this, many of the aspects aligning with what many wrongly assume to be a “normal” part of doing a PhD – changes to mood and sleep patterns, loss of concentration, feeling muddled, reduced self-esteem, self-doubt, overworking, feeling hopeless. Additionally, bullying can lead to a reduced output caused by inability to focus, being more prone to making mistakes, being scared to take action or progress. Dr. Boynton then outlined the importance of self-care, but also the importance of taking action, including as a bystander.

We also discussed slides created by Anja Wiede who is the contact person of the Complaints Office in cases of harassment, discrimination and violence at the TU Dresden. This part of the session outlined the internal policies of the University, the regulations and guidelines that are in place as well as numerous counselling and support systems that the University offers in cases of bullying. Importantly, the TU Dresden Compliance Management System was introduced, which also includes the possibility to report incidents of scientific or personal misconduct anonymously. Although the system is relatively new and not fully integrated University-wide, it will in the future be a platform for building a trust-worthy tool for elucidating the legal foundations and TU Dresden regulations, prevention measures, reporting concerns and evaluation. Over 50% of respondents in the poll felt that bullying is taken seriously here at TU Dresden (Figure 1), which hopefully can be further improved by the implementation of these measures.

This meeting has been the first in hopefully a series of educational seminars and workshops that we will try to organise here at CMCB to lead the way in creating a professional environment where people feel respected, valued, and supported. Ultimately, an academic environment where mutual respect, good mentorship, professional conduct and healthy communication are prioritised will result not only in happier students and staff, but also more motivated scientists, higher research integrity and quality. I would recommend every university and scientific institute to organise this type of seminar and encourage all scientific staff (especially those in power – group leaders) to attend. Engage your local Equal Opportunity officers, Ombudspersons and Directors to discuss the availability of support measures as well as structures for compliance and official complaints. Here at TU Dresden, it was refreshing to see an academic institution actively implementing ways of tackling inappropriate behaviours and scientific misconduct and I look forward to seeing those in practice.

For more information on the topic please have a look at the following resources:

Boynton, P (2020) “Being Well in Academia: ways to feel stronger, safer and more connected” Routledge https://www.routledge.com/Being-Well-in-Academia-Ways-to-Feel-Stronger-Safer-and-More-Connected/Boynton/p/book/9780367186708

Network against Abuse of Power in Science – https://www.netzwerk-mawi.de/

TUD-specific links:

TUD anti-discrimination, complaints process and counseling options – https://tu-dresden.de/tu-dresden/universitaetskultur/antidiskriminierung/beschwerdestelle

TUD compliance management system – https://tu-dresden.de/tu-dresden/compliance-management#intro

TUD support and councelling – https://tu-dresden.de/studium/rund-ums-studium/hilfe-und-beratung?set_language=en

Psychosocial councelling – https://www.studentenwerk-dresden.de/soziales/psychosoziale-beratung.html

TUD CMCB Equal Opportunities – https://tu-dresden.de/cmcb/die-einrichtung/chancengleichheit?set_language=en

References:

1          End bullying and harassment in academia. Nat Hum Behav 6, 471-472, doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01349-z (2022).

2          Gewin, V. How to blow the whistle on an academic bully. Nature 593, 299-301, doi:10.1038/d41586-021-01252-z (2021).

3          Tauber, S. & Mahmoudi, M. How bullying becomes a career tool. Nat Hum Behav 6, 475, doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01311-z (2022).

4          Else, H. Does science have a bullying problem? Nature 563, 616-618, doi:doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-07532-5 (2018).

(2 votes)

Loading...

What is Zebrahub?

Zebrahub is a web-based platform that offers an integrated approach to studying and analyzing cellular lineages during zebrafish embryogenesis at both transcriptional and spatiotemporal levels. It combines single-cell sequencing time course data with lineage reconstructions facilitated by light-sheet microscopy. The scRNAseq gene expression across tissues and time points can be directly visually explored in a web browser.  Additionally, researchers can navigate the complex cellular flows and lineages derived from light-sheet microscopy data using Zebrahub’s online web viewer and desktop interactive tool, enabling exploration of whole timelapse datasets and virtual fate mapping experiments.

What inspired the development of Zebrahub?

When we initiated the project, it was clear that the community was missing a database combining systematic live-imaging-based cell lineages with single-cell sequencing during development. Traditionally these approaches have been used separately, thereby limiting the full understanding of development. We wanted to use the most advanced microscopy and sequencing techniques available to establish a multimodal baseline of zebrafish development.

How can scientists utilize Zebrahub in their research?

Many important discoveries in developmental biology originated from observations; therefore, from the beginning, we wanted to have a fully interactive website to empower scientists by making our data accessible and, more importantly, directly explorable, even to scientists without coding skills.  Thus, concerning our terabyte-scale high-resolution light-sheet imaging time-lapse dataset, we provide both an neuroglancer-based interactive viewer for entire multi-color time-lapse datasets and a napari plugin to perform in silico fate mapping experiments.  Similarly, we allow researchers to effortlessly search for specific gene expressions and the emergence of cell types using CZI’s cell-by-gene platform. Our commitment to accessibility led us to invest substantial effort in ensuring that our data, code, and blueprints are readily available and open source. By doing so, we anticipate an immediate impact on a wide-ranging community, spanning disciplines such as developmental biology, single-cell biology, advanced microscopy, computer vision, tissue morphodynamics, and computational biology.

Who are the people behind this resource?

Supported by the CZ Biohub San Francisco (CZB-SF), Zebrahub is led by Merlin Lange,  senior scientist in the lab of Loic Royer, and results from an interdisciplinary collaboration with CZB’s Data Science and Genomics Platforms, with key contributors among others: Angela Oliveira Pisco, Norma Neff, and Alejandro Granados. Overall, Zebrahub has more than 30 collaborators at CZB-SF collaborating institutions (see picture above). Many are early-career scientists who played a key role in the project. In the following, these young scientists introduce themselves and their contributions:

Shruthi : I am Shruthi VijayKumar, a research associate in the Royer lab. A significant part of my role involved developing and optimizing the single embryo single cell dissociation protocol for the various developmental stages in zebrahub along with Michael Borja (Genomics) and Merlin Lange. Additionally, I contributed to preparing the libraries required for sequencing and helped with cell annotations. This project has been an incredible experience, as it has provided me with the opportunity to work in a multidisciplinary and collaborative environment. This experience has not only given me a better understanding of the entire pipeline but also broadened my expertise through extensive interactions with different teams. The fact that Zebrahub is an expanding resource for the community makes this project even more special and rewarding to be a part of.

Sarah: My name is Sarah Ancheta, and I am an associate Data Scientist. As part of the Zebrahub team, I worked on data processing and analysis of inter-individual transcriptomic variability. Since Zebrahub has single-cell transcriptomic datasets from individually resolved embryos, I was able to dissect the embryo-to-embryo variability by developing a framework to investigate the differences in gene expression between sibling individuals over time. I feel fortunate to work with data of such high quality and resolution and excited to have been among the first to analyze Zebrahub’s data and explore new biological insights into zebrafish development. It has been a wonderful experience to work with such an interdisciplinary team and learn to conduct analyses from both a biological and data-driven perspective.

Mike: My name is Michael Borja, and I am a Senior Research Associate for the Genomics platform. My main role and responsibility is to oversee lab activities regarding Single Cell and Spatial Transcriptomic experiments. When Zebrahub initially started, I was tasked with selecting which single-cell transcriptomic assay to use for our initial experiments. From there, I led the early efforts of processing cell dissociations and library preparation of individual embryos. In addition and in partnership with Shruthi VijayKumar, we developed a robust zebrafish single-cell dissociation protocol from single embryos that is independent of the developmental stage. Being part of this multidisciplinary and innovative team has helped me see how large-scale projects within the realm of science can be idealized and completed. As I continue with my personal growth and path in the field of Genomics, I will absolutely continue to seek large-scale collaborations such as Zebrahub so that I may be able to apply what I’ve learned through this experience. 

Jordao: My name is Jordao Bragantini. I am a software engineer in the Royer lab. My primary focus revolves around image processing, cell segmentation, and tracking. The Zebrahub project exposed me to the fascinating world of terabyte-scale microscopy images as well as to the mysteries of Developmental Biology. Handling this vast amount of data acquired on our advanced light-sheet microscopes required implementing specialized algorithms, ranging from GPU-friendly approximate morphological operators to our own distributed tracking software. These analyses require the full capacity of our available computational resources. I could not have wished for a better way to engage with machine learning in the biology domain than working with this multidisciplinary team, where we can learn from each other’s expertise.

What are the next steps for Zebrahub?

We want to expand Zebrahub with more developmental stages, novel multiomic modalities, and more lineage-specific imaging to ultimately reconstruct a digital multimodal embryo. We are also working on integrating existing datasets, including those from diverse species, to create a comprehensive atlas of vertebrate embryogenesis. This ambitious endeavor heralds a transformative era for the fields of developmental and evolutionary biology.

You can read more about Zebrahub in the BioRxiv preprint.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

To showcase the variety of interests and artistic talents among the developmental biology community, the Node and the British Society for Developmental Biology (BSDB) will jointly host a virtual art exhibition, accompanying the upcoming European Developmental Biology Congress (EDBC) in September.  

You may wish to submit a scientific image generated in the lab, craft or artwork inspired by your scientific work, or something completely unrelated to science!

The three categories in the exhibition are:

1. Scientific images
2. Science-inspired art
3. Art by Scientists (artwork unrelated to science)

Laser-cut wooden coasters by Helen Weavers

Entries in each of the three categories will have the chance of winning one of Helen Weavers’ laser-cut wooden coasters depicting BSDB medal designs.

Submission is open to anyone from the developmental biology community, even if not registered to attend EDBC, and the art exhibition will be free and available for anyone to view.

To submit your images, please:

1) Complete this Google form, where you can indicate which category your images are in, and provide a title and short description for each image. Each person can submit up to 5 images. 

2) Email the images to thenode@biologists.com. Please save the images under the same image titles indicated in this Google form. If the sizes of the images are too large to attach to the email, use https://wetransfer.com/ and provide the link to the files in your email.

Deadline for submissions: Sunday 27 August 23:59 BST

Please note that the exhibition organisers reserve the right to select or reject images for the exhibition.

(3 votes)

Loading...

Lab website: The Blood Engineering Lab (riosugimura.com)

Where is the lab?

Hong Kong

Research summary

Rio: We work at the intersection of bioengineering, immunology, and stem cell technology to invent new tools for understanding and treating cancers. The mission of The Blood Engineering Lab (BEL) is to define fundamental principles of anti-cancer immune cells and apply these insights toward improving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) technology and checkpoint immunotherapy. We apply cutting-edge approaches including single-cell RNA sequencing, molecular barcoding, organoids, and stem cell differentiation. The goal is to invent new tools for understanding and treating cancers.  

Can you give us a lab roll call?

Yiming: PhD Candidate. Computational biologist in training at Cambridge University. She is a wizard of single-cell and spatial data analysis.

Sanxing: PhD Candidate. Tissue culture veteran. Cannot think of any cell type he cannot culture. Becoming a synthetic immunologist.

David: PhD Candidate. Chromium, Visium, Multiomics… He became a guru of 10X Genomics techniques. Organs-on-chips and myeloid checkpoint.

Shihui: PhD Candidate. Another computational wizard of BEL. Machine-learning to predict cell fate.

Sophronia: Master student leading an international team within a lab. CAR-macrophages from human pluripotent stem cells.

Alex: Master student. Studying myeloid checkpoint in assembloids.

Daniel: Visiting postdoc. Expert in AAV and gene editing.

Theo: Visiting medical student from Heidelberg, Germany. Making Super-CAR.

Patrick: Visiting PhD Candidate from Pavia, Italy. Expert in antibody engineering.

Favourite technique, and why?

Rio: I grew up with flow cytometry. Still watching FACS plots is the most FAVE time of mine. Used to finish my postdoc day enjoying drinks at my go-to bar with catch-of-the-day FACS plots (I had to stop this nerd habit after having babies…). Now I am shifting my addiction to single-cell data.

Apart from your own research, what are you most excited about in developmental and stem cell biology?

Rio: Engineering stem cell biology. Reconstruction and the endowment of new function.

How do you approach managing your group and all the different tasks required in your job?

Rio: I have two labs. It is an extra challenge as well as joy. I put most of my effort into two labs communicating smoothly. I shuttle myself between two labs. Very busy, but sitting down with students and discussing data is a rewarding part of my job. Zoom and Slack are great. I cannot imagine how I would operate my labs without these. Besides labs, I always spot myself in a grant-writing seat, namely Starbucks, Pacific Coffee, and Coffee Academics.

What is the best thing about where you work? 

Yiming: The lab is always encouraging knowledge exchange and collaboration inside and outside Hong Kong. Everyone has lots of chances to talk to other people and get feedback on the projects. These are very important for junior students to learn how to do research.

Sanxing: I think our lab combines many different directions and is a big fan of collaboration, which inspires me a lot.

David: I am very lucky to be in Dr. Rio’s lab due to my strong connection with various experts in different labs. I enjoy the FACS machine, BioRad PCR & qPCR machine as well as the services provided by the HKU-Med leaders, and technicians.

Alex: At HKU, the supportive culture encourages shared insights and vibrant discussions about grand theories and passions. Being part of this large institution promotes intellectual cross-pollination with other labs, and the plethora of free seminars and lectures further bolsters our academic growth.

Sophronia: I like the collaborative culture the most in our lab. We don’t solve problems alone, we solve problems together. We also engage with people from different labs with different expertise, and that’s how we come up with new ideas.

Theo: Working at Hong Kong University’s BEL research laboratory is an amazing experience. The lab is a great environment for research, and Rio is one of the best PIs I’ve worked – academically, and also personally. The research topic is fascinating, and our collaborative projects are exciting. However, the best thing about working at the BEL is the outstanding atmosphere with my co-workers. Everyone is friendly and supportive, making it a great place to work. The lab’s culture of collaboration and teamwork is what makes it stand out from other research labs. It’s inspiring to see how everyone works together to achieve common goals and how everyone is willing to help each other out. Additionally, the lab’s location in Hong Kong is a great advantage, as it provides access to a diverse range of resources and opportunities for research and collaboration. Overall, working at the BEL has been an incredible experience, and I feel fortunate to be part of such a dynamic and supportive research team.

Patrick: 1) The lab’s dedication to groundbreaking science. This is amazing from the point of view of the challenges inherent to translational stem cell biology and it’s relevance to cancer therapies 2) Regular meetings. The weekly science meetings to my opinion is an important moment to discuss and share ideas, points of view and strategies about different experiments. This enforces the conception and science methodologies to different experimental protocols, and allows for a solid foundation of the lab’s self-approach in tackling problems 3) The extensive network of collaborations, international seminars, meetings and conferences, to which lab members regularly take part.

What’s there to do outside of the lab?

Yiming: Endless mountain and sea!

Sanxing: Hong Kong is a wonderful city. There are lots of hiking mountains such as Dragon’s Back, Sunset Peak, and Victoria Peak surrounded by beautiful seas and relaxing landscapes. We usually go hiking or swimming to have fun at the weekend

David: I enjoy the hall life, for example, joining Spartan Running, High Table Dinner, and K11 MUSEA with tutors/masters. Now, I, together with an engineering friend, lead the hiking club in the Jockey Club Student Village III. As a captain of the club, I can not only experience a lot of nice sea views but also meet new friends here.

Sophronia: Hong Kong is a food paradise, so tasting food would definitely be one of the best thing to do. The night life in Hong Kong is also really nice where you can hang out with friends, go grab a drink, meet new friends and socialize.

Alex: Outside the lab, Hong Kong presents an abundance of activities. Prime among these is hiking, with the city’s varied landscapes offering everything from rugged peaks to tranquil beaches. Additionally, the Faculty of Medicine houses a nearby swimming pool, a regular haunt of mine. Both provide excellent avenues for unwinding after intense lab sessions.

Theo: Living in Hong Kong is an experience like no other. The city is a perfect blend of chaos and color, making it a fantastic place to live. First, the city is surrounded by nature, with many outlying islands, country parks, and hiking trails. So, there’s always something new to explore. Second, the food here is amazing, with everything from dim sum to noodle shops to oven-baked pizza. Third and last, the skyline and the city vibe are breathtaking. The view from The Peak is one of the most iconic in the world, and from festivals to cultural landmarks, there’s always something to see and do. Overall, whether you’re a nature lover, a foodie, or a culture enthusiast, there’s always something new to discover in this vibrant city.

Patrick: Hong Kong is an amazing City, with beautiful landscapes, and many places to visit. There are always many places to visit, good food to discover and sports to practice around

Rio: gosh, I should do hiking…

(2 votes)

Loading...

In recognition of the Genetics Society of America 24th International C. elegans Conference at the end of June 2023, Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM) celebrated worm research with specially commissioned open-access articles, including an Editorial from DMM Editorial Board member Guy Caldwell, an interview with Piali Sengupta and a Review from Julián Cerón. The GSA worm meeting was exuberantly welcomed by the C. elegans community, who had been deprived of an in-person meeting since 2019. The meeting was kicked off with a plenary session that was sponsored by DMM and included a fantastic talk from Julie Ahringer on how the genome directs development. The engaging plenary and break-out sessions journeyed through a wide range of topics from genomics and epigenetics to the cytoskeleton and intracellular trafficking, to metabolism and neuronal cell biology, many in the context of development and human disease. The attendees were entranced by a keynote address from Oliver Hobert, aptly titled ‘Why C. elegans remains special’, and many whole-heartedly embraced the Scottish Ceilidh dancing at the conference dinner. The conference maintained an energic buzz throughout, with animated discussions following speaker sessions and clustered around the posters. It was wrapped up with a thought-provoking ‘Inclusivity Session’ led by organiser Miriam Goodman and others, and in the closing remarks organiser Sander van den Heuvel left us with the fitting statement that C. elegans is “not just a model system, but a pioneering system”.
Sander’s comments, along with the energy at GSA worm, echoed Guy Caldwell’s editorial that highlighted the model organism as a robust and translational model of disease. Guy discussed advances in genomic data and the progress of the model over the past 15 years, highlighting the power of genetic screens and CRISPR gene editing. He expanded by stating that the use of this technology in cell-based or invertebrate models have not been supplanted but are instead joined by voluminous datasets of human genomic variation. C. elegans researchers are now increasingly able to face the staggering task of parsing function from human disease-associated variants. Away from genetic screening, Guy continues by highlighting that C. elegans studies have also been applied to deep phenotyping, where research has provided a higher level of detail of disease characterisation.

DMM’s focus on C. elegans also featured ‘See[ing] elegance in sensory biology: an interview with Piali Sengupta’. Piali is a prominent researcher in the field of sensory biology and in this interview emphasises the use of C. elegans in neurology, stating that the model is ideal to assess the role of specific neurons in behaviour. She also states that, “Forward genetic screens are also very easy because most of the worm population in the lab are hermaphrodites. If you have a mutant hermaphrodite, you just put it on a plate, and it reproduces”

“You can kill most neurons in the worm, and they will normally survive in the lab”, Piali Sengupta

The final piece of literature that DMM included in this C. elegans focus, was a review by Julián Cerón; ‘Caenorhabditis elegans for research on Cancer hallmarks’. Julián emphasises the use of C. elegans as a robust translational model of cancer that can recapitulate ten of the major hallmarks of cancer. Julián emphasises how C. elegans can be used to study hallmarks ranging from the regulation of apoptosis to the activation of invasion.

DMM is honoured to support the C. elegans community by publishing cutting-edge science that provides mechanistic and translational insights to benefit human health and welcome your next C. elegans paper to wriggle into their dedicated collection. We hope you enjoyed #Worm23 and we look forward to the next C. elegans conference in 2025!

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Last week, I attended the LMB-VBC Graduate Life Sciences Symposium in Cambridge, UK. Besides its wonderful academic programme, this symposium also included a workshop and panel discussion that touched on the societal impact of science. During the workshop, participants were challenged to think about different ways to connect with (non-specialist) communities, enthuse audiences and create memorable engagement experiences.

This ‘Public Engagement’ workshop was led by Dr Jamie Gallagher, an award-winning engagement professional specialising in impact narratives and evaluation. The fact that Jamie is also a comedian became quite clear when he took the stage – as well as his love for the fantasy genre! In an engaging and entertaining workshop, Jamie used pop culture references – including the Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones – to introduce and guide us through the four key questions you need to consider when setting up any public engagement activity. In short, these where the following:

• What would you like to achieve with your proposed activity?
• Who would you like to get on board to reach your goals?
• How will you make sure that you achieve your goals?
• What does success look like?

And to answer these for Frodo Baggins of the Shire (spoiler alert!)

• I’d like to destroy the One Ring.
• I’ll join a fellowship of skilled individuals to get me to Mount Doom.
• I’ll take the shortest road through Middle Earth (and will go through the mines of Moria).
• I’ll throw the one ring into the fiery chasm from whence it came, so that Sauron can never rule Middle Earth again.

Perhaps a bit silly, but I would argue that the use of analogies and metaphors greatly helped Jamie to get his message across. The power of different presentation techniques was something we analysed further by watching the winner of FameLab 2019: Tim Gordon. We discussed the many ways in which Tim managed to captivate his audiences with his story on climate change and its effects on coral reefs. It turns out Tim used a combination of humour, enthusiasm, analogies, imagination, stories, pop culture references, questions and more to claim his prize – and all of that in just a 3 minute talk! Perhaps take a look at the video yourself and see whether you can spot even more tricks and presentation techniques.

The careful analysis of Tim’s successful talk at FameLab led to one more analogy from Jamie that stuck with me: if your scientific data are raw vegetables, you can imagine that most people don’t want to digest it that way. You will have to clean, process and chop things up before cooking it and making it palatable. Not only this, but to make things really memorable, you need to add spices and flavourings – just like Tim in his FameLab final. So if you’re thinking about setting up a public engagement project, let’s get cooking!

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

“I think it’s really important we have to do science that serves all. Because otherwise we’re not going to provide betterment for all, which must be of course, the goal with our science.”

Dr Cecilia Lindgren

In the latest episode of the Genetics Unzipped podcast, we’re chatting with two of this year’s Genetics Society award winners – Cecilia Lindgren, who’s an expert on the genetics of obesity and metabolic disorders, and Lucy van Dorp, who has spent the past three years tracing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 around the world.

Genetics Unzipped is the podcast from The Genetics Society. Full transcript, links and references available online at GeneticsUnzipped.com.

Subscribe from Apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Head over to GeneticsUnzipped.com to catch up on our extensive back catalogue.If you enjoy the show, please do rate and review on Apple podcasts and help to spread the word on social media. And you can always send feedback and suggestions for future episodes and guests to podcast@geneticsunzipped.com Follow us on Twitter – @geneticsunzip

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

One of the most fascinating observations that comes from comparing mammalian development is the difference in developmental tempo across species (Ebisuya & Briscoe, 2018). Mice and humans develop through a series of stereotypical events requiring conserved molecular pathways. Yet, embryogenesis takes around 60 days in humans and 20 days in mice. How mice generate similar-sized embryos containing the same structures as humans in only half the time remains unknown. Moreover, for other unconventional mammalian species, our knowledge is even more limited.

The Ebisuya lab has been addressing this question using the segmentation clock as a model system. The segmentation clock is the oscillatory gene expression found in the cells of the pre-somitic mesoderm (PSM) that controls the periodic formation of vertebrate body segments. These oscillations are cell-autonomous, and their period differs across species: around 30 min in zebrafish, 90 min in chicken, 100 min in snake, 2 hours in mouse and 5 hours in human (Matsuda et al, 2020b; Gomez et al, 2008). In our past study, in vitro recapitulation of the segmentation clock using mouse and human pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) revealed that differences in the biochemical reaction speeds, including protein degradation rates and gene expression delays, are responsible for the 2-3 times slower tempo of the human clock compared to that of the mouse (Matsuda et al, 2020a). However, whether this constitutes a general mechanism of developmental time control across mammals remained to be determined. In this study, we used PSCs to recapitulate in vitro the segmentation clock of four novel mammalian species in addition to the mouse and human: marmoset, rabbit, cattle and rhinoceros. We then used this “stem cell zoo” platform to systematically investigate the general mechanism behind the interspecies differences in developmental tempo (Lázaro et al, 2023).

The bigger the better?

Based on the results obtained comparing mouse and human developmental time, our first hypothesis was that the slower tempo of human was due to its bigger size. Several biological processes such as metabolic rates or gestation periods are known to scale with body weight. Larger animals tend to have slower metabolism, longer gestation, extended lifespan and scale most of their physical and biological properties to match their big size. Therefore, initially it made sense that developmental tempo could be regulated by similar rules. For this reason, to extend our zoo we wanted to have the largest mammal we could possibly get stem cells from. This animal turned out to be the southern white rhinoceros.

The question most people ask is: how did you manage to get rhinoceros cells? This is thanks to the work of Prof. Thomas B. Hildebrandt and colleagues in trying to save the northern white rhinoceros from extinction. For this, they have derived high quality embryonic stem cell lines of rhinoceros which can now be used for different studies (Hildebrandt et al, 2018). The first thing we did for this project was to obtain the rhinoceros stem cells and differentiate them into PSM. To our surprise, despite rhinoceros being much larger than human, their PSM cells showed a faster tempo. We then thought that maybe the slower tempo of human was due to a primate specific feature. Therefore, we searched the primate literature and found studies describing the very slow development of the common marmoset monkey. Common marmoset is a very small primate with a longer embryogenesis length than human. We obtained marmoset PSCs and, after differentiating them to PSM, we confirmed that their tempo was indeed slower than that of human. With the examples of rhinoceros and marmoset, it started to be evident that early developmental time could be uncoupled from the animal body weight, proving wrong our initial hypothesis.

We completed the zoo with rabbit and cattle cells to have a more complete phylogenetic representation of our species. Overall, our zoo contains species with adult body weights spanning from 50 grams to 2 tonnes, and gestation lengths ranging from 20 days to 17 months. These species belong to three distinct phylogenetic clades: Primates (marmoset and human), Glires (mouse and rabbit) and Ungulates (cattle and rhinoceros), constituting a diverse sampling of mammalian species unprecedented for developmental studies.

The stem cell zoo

Advancement in PSC technologies opens up new possibilities for broadening our understanding of mammalian development beyond traditional human and mouse models. The utilization of in vitro models representing various species poses a unique opportunity to conduct interspecies comparisons of cell- and tissue-autonomous processes (Figure 1). By recapitulating the segmentation clock of six mammalian species, we observed that the oscillatory period did not scale with the animal body weight but with the embryogenesis length. The biochemical kinetics of the core clock gene HES7 displayed clear scaling with the species-specific segmentation clock period. However, the cellular metabolic rates did not show an evident correlation. Instead, genes involving biochemical reactions showed an expression pattern that scales with the segmentation clock period.

A zoo of possibilities

In this study, we have focused on establishing correlations between developmental time and the different cellular parameters across species. In the future, we would like to test our hypothesis by establishing causal relationships between these processes, trying to better understand the genetic control of species-specific tempo establishment. Additionally, the stem cell zoo opens up possibilities to investigate a plethora of developmental processes across species. Other projects we have ongoing in the lab are the study of interspecies differences in brain development or heart beat rate determination. The use of stem cells allows us to study animals that are normally inaccessible in a lab but have particular features that make them interesting. We hope that the expansion of the stem cell zoo will spark further comparative studies across species.

Access the article

Jorge Lázaro, Maria Costanzo, Marina Sanaki-Matsumiya, Charles Girardot, Masafumi Hayashi, Katsuhiko Hayashi, Sebastian Diecke, Thomas B. Hildebrandt, Giovanna Lazzari, Jun Wu, Stoyan Petkov, Rüdiger Behr, Vikas Trivedi, Mitsuhiro Matsuda, Miki Ebisuya. – A stem cell zoo uncovers intracellular scaling of developmental tempo across mammals. Cell Stem Cell. 2023 Jul 6; 30: 938-949.e7

References

Ebisuya M & Briscoe J (2018) What does time mean in development? Dev 145

Gomez C, Özbudak EM, Wunderlich J, Baumann D, Lewis J & Pourquié O (2008) Control of segment number in vertebrate embryos. Nature 454: 335–339

Hildebrandt TB, Hermes R, Colleoni S, Diecke S, Holtze S, Renfree MB, Stejskal J, Hayashi K, Drukker M, Loi P, et al (2018) Embryos and embryonic stem cells from the white rhinoceros. Nat Commun 9: 1–9

Lázaro J, Costanzo M, Sanaki-Matsumiya M, Girardot C, Hayashi M, Hayashi K, Diecke S, Hildebrandt TB, Lazzari G, Wu J, et al (2023) A stem cell zoo uncovers intracellular scaling of developmental tempo across mammals. Cell Stem Cell 30: 938-949.e7

Matsuda M, Hayashi H, Garcia-Ojalvo J, Yoshioka-Kobayashi K, Kageyama R, Yamanaka Y, Ikeya M, Toguchida J, Alev C & Ebisuya M (2020a) Species-specific segmentation clock periods are due to differential biochemical reaction speeds. Science (80- ) 369: 1450–1455

Matsuda M, Yamanaka Y, Uemura M, Osawa M, Saito MK, Nagahashi A, Nishio M, Guo L, Ikegawa S, Sakurai S, et al (2020b) Recapitulating the human segmentation clock with pluripotent stem cells. Nature 580: 124–129

(3 votes)

Loading...