As you’ve almost certainly heard, this year’s Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been awarded to Professor Sir John Gurdon and Professor Shinya Yamanaka. This is thoroughly deserved recognition for groundbreaking work that not only provided revolutionary insights into the nature and plasticity of the genetic material inside each cell, but has also opened up promising avenues for personalised stem cell therapies.

Here at the Company of Biologists, we’re particularly delighted that John has been honoured with this prize. He has been involved with CoB for many years, and was the Chair of our Board of Directors from 2000 to 2011 – this picture of him now hangs in our corridor…

During John’s time as CoB Chairman, the Node was launched – with his full support. Indeed, we even hosted our launch party at the institute that bears his name, as evidenced by the photo! For a man who, according to his science teacher, would never make a scientist, I think it’s safe to say that he’s not done badly… From personal experience, I can also divulge that, not only is he an outstanding scientist – still running a highly productive lab at the age of 79 – but he’s also a mean croquet player!

Many people have written much more eloquently than I could about John and Shinya’s contributions to the reprogramming field, so I’ll just add my voice to the chorus of congratulations!

(12 votes)

Loading...

The Hydra Summer School presents a unique opportunity to young scientists in the field of stem cell research to engage with leading experts and peers alike. Set on an idyllic Greek island, where you’re more likely to encounter the wrong side of a donkey than a bicycle or car, an intensive week-long programme of lectures, discussions, debate and discourse unfolds. The programme spans the fundamental paradigms that underlie stem cell systems through to the state-of-the-art in clinical practice, and covers the breadth of stem cell research in-between.

In relating my experience of the summer school, it is necessary to divulge my dirty secret: I’m not a biologist. My undergraduate degree was in Mathematics, and my Phd undertaken within a Computer Science department in a group that comprised physicists, engineers, computer scientists and mathematicians, all carrying out cross-disciplinary research in computational modelling of biological systems. Worldwide, we are an expanding group, and engagement with biologists is key to the success and value of the research we perform. Without formal biological training, it is vital for physical scientists to absorb information from biologists directly – it is quite difficult to have a conversation with a book, bordering dangerous to do so on the internet, and we are simply unarmed when it comes to discerning the quality of new biological research and publications. It is with this motivation that I set off to Hydra.

The breadth of research covered by the lectures was excellent, allowing the attendees to engage both in new topics as well as with their own specialisation. Some of the most interesting lectures illustrated the application of stem cell research in understanding disease onset and progression, as more often than not the focus can be on the fully developed disease itself, rather than understanding what is stable under normal, healthy conditions. By understanding a healthy system fully, only then can we isolate the aberrant changes, and discern how best to implement stem cell therapies.

Personally, I particularly enjoyed the recurring discussion on the definition of a stem cell, and how one must be aware of the language subtleties that exist between different researchers and sub-disciplines. Is a fertilised egg a stem cell? Perhaps, if you’re a developmental biologist. Relevant in this context is the concept of asymmetric division, which we were challenged to think more deeply about. Despite what may seem, there is little empirical evidence to support different models of division through lineage progression. Moreover, for asymmetric division to occur, at which point is the decision made by the cell? Is it intrinsic, and thereby a consequence of mitosis itself, or is it extrinsic, and thereby dependent on the extracellular environment into which one daughter cell is placed?

Supplementing the lecture topics were discussion sessions with the individuals PIs, a rare opportunity to engage with these scientists in a small group setting. The discussions that I participated in were accompanied by recent and not-so-recent-but-important papers, chosen by the discussion leader. I found it particularly useful to engage with biologists over these papers, to understand how a biologist reads a paper, and to learn a little more about how to be discerning in your reading. Another very useful supplement to the lectures was a session entitled, “Communicake!” (Regretful disclaimer: no cake was provided.) This was a session in which participants reviewed specific lectures in small groups, and in tandem with the lecturer themselves, drew up a list of the key points that were conveyed in the talk, and had a further opportunity to ask the lecturer more questions. I confess this gave me the opportunity to ask a couple of my more “stupid questions”, but it was extremely helpful to have focused discussion on specific lectures, and I am now a big advocate of review sessions such as these.

On top of this, as an on-going feature of the week, were the posters brought by all participants on their own research. Again, this provided the opportunity for interesting discussions, the odd stupid question, and for me personally, the chance to really engage with the research being conducted on a day to day basis by my peers. The poster prizes themselves were awarded deservingly (don’t worry, not by me – I made it safely into the “also-ran” category).

I am very grateful that I was given the opportunity to attend the Hydra Summer School, and am happy to give a brief report which gives a glimpse into the usefulness and breadth of the experience. So without hesitation, be you biologist, mathematician, physicist or engineer, I encourage you to apply for this opportunity if you are working in stem cell research. In the very least, you’ll like the donkeys.

(5 votes)

Loading...

In the middle of the worst political and financial turmoil Spain is experiencing since the return of its young democracy, the 1st Spanish Conference on the Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology of Drosophila emerges as an example of how science in Spain can and should be done. The history of Spanish Drosophila research started in the late 60s and has since then been very intense. In 1968 Antonio García Bellido started the first lab working on Drosophila where he set up a long term research project on the analysis of development in terms of genes and cell behaviour. Ideas and frameworks developed in his lab influenced the field of Developmental Biology across the world. Since then and for the last 45 years, the Spanish Drosophila research community has expanded both geographically and scientifically.

The conference, organized by Jordi Casanova and Tano González in the idyllic site of Aiguablava (Girona), gathered principal investigators from several parts of Spain (Alicante, Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid, Sevilla) working on very different research areas, all using Drosophila as a model system. Unfortunately, due to the brutal budget cuts that have taken place in the last years (a decrease of more than 30% in the public science budget in the last 2 years), a few groups using Drosophila as a model system could not attend the meeting. But most made it to be there (more than 40 research groups were represented) and made it clear that they are part of a very active and fruitful community that has lots to contribute to the global science and to society in general.

Topics discussed at the meeting covered several research fields including the analysis of the gene regulatory networks and signaling pathways underlying organ growth and regeneration, the emergence of collective behaviour during morphogenesis and organogenesis as well as evolutionary aspects to understand the generation of diversity. One of the major questions that was raised several times during the workshop is how organ size is controlled both in normal development and in disease. This question is being approached by different groups using a variety of experimental systems and from different perspectives. The group of Tano González (IRB, Barcelona) has a long-standing interest in understanding the basic principles underlying asymmetric cell division using neuroblasts as a model system and how failures in this process can give rise to malignant transformation. He presented novel results from his lab showing very dynamic patterns of gene expression during tomour growth. During neuroblast asymmetric division, Manuel Mendoza (CRG, Barcelona) is investigating how chromosome condensation adjusts to spindle length, a crucial process to ensure proper segregation that could be affected in malignancies. The control of tumour growth is also being studied by the group of Andreu Casali (IRB, Barcelona), who is using a model system for colorectal cancer by generating mutant clones for Apc and an activated form of Ras in the gut, while Manuel Calleja (CBM, Madrid) is studying cytoneme-mediated communication of tumour cells with their microenvironment. In the female germline, Acaimo González Reyes (CABD, Seville) is interested in the role of the physical environment in the control of germ cell proliferation and differentiation.

Using a different framework but asking the same basic question of how proper organ size is achieved, the groups of Antonio Baonza (CBM, Madrid), Ginés Morata (CBM, Madrid) and Florenci Serras (University of Barcelona) are studying the cellular and molecular mechanisms that regulate tissue regeneration in imaginal discs and how the balance between proliferation and differentiation is achieved in this situation. Ernesto Sánchez Herrero´s lab (CBM, Madrid) is also investigating how the final size of an organ is achieved and he presented data on how homeotic and sex-determination genes regulate the growth of sex-specific organs. From a more organismal perspective, the question of how the growth of different organs is coordinated in an organism to bring about well proportioned adult organs is being tackled by the group of Marco Milán (IRB, Barcelona), who reported a key role for bantam miRNA in both organ-autonomous and systemic growth. The control of systemic growth is very linked to the maintenance of the organismal homeostasis and this is being studied in the  group of Joaquín Culi (CABD, Seville) by analysing of the role of lipophorin receptors in the maintenance of the germ line, while the group of Rosa Barrio (CIC bioGUNE, Bilbao) focusses on how sumoylation regulates steroid hormone synthesis by regulating lipid intake in the ring gland and ovary and hence controlling animal size and viability.

Another important question raised in the meeting is how the collective behaviour of tissues emerges from the coordinated activity of individual cells. The molecular, cellular and mechanical basis of epithelial sheet movements is being investigated using a variety of experimental systems such as the embryonic epidermis, in Marta Llimargas’ lab (IBMB, Barcelona), who showed a role for the apical determinant Crumbs in cell shape and tissue organization. Nicole Gorfinkiel (CBM, Madrid) and Jerome Solon (CRG, Barcelona) are using Dorsal Closure to understand the interplay between cell activity and mechanics during morphogenesis. Collective cell migration is a process that also receives very much attention. Enrique Martin-Blanco´s group (IBMB, Barcelona) has undertaken a multi-scale analysis from signaling pathways to cell behaviour and tissue mechanics applied to the growth and expansion of the histoblasts nests of the abdomen. Lola Martín-Bermudo’s (CABD, Seville) lab is interested in cell migration and showed impressive movies of the collective movement of the follicular epitelium which depends on the composition of the extra-cellular matrix. The extra-cellular matrix is also important for both the formation of muscle-tendon junction and for the maintenance of muscle viability throughout adult life, as shown by Beatriz Estrada (CABD, Seville). Sara Ricardo (IBMB, Barcelona) is using the migration of the primordial germ cells to understand the complex interactions between the cells and their substrate for proper directed migration to occur. The genetic basis of cell migration, pathfinding and branching in both tracheal formation and axon guidance is being approached by the group of Sofía Araújo (IBMB, IRB, Barcelona). Jordi Casanova’s lab (IBMB, IRB, Barcelona) has been also studying tracheal formation for several years with the aim to understand the link between genes, cells and tissues. He presented new data showing the existence of a novel epithelial-mesenchymal transition pathway driven by the activity of the Serpent GATA factor that impinges directly on apico-basal polarity. How cell polarity influences signaling is being studied by Sonsoles Campuzano’s lab (CBM, Madrid) who showed data on how apico-basal polarity determinants controls intra-cellular trafficking and thus signaling in the follicular epithelium. Alberto Ferrús (Instituto Cajal, Madrid) presented novel data on the non-muscle functions of Troponin as a nuclear polarity marker.

The genetic basis of pattern formation and differentiation is being studied in different organs such as the wing imaginal disc where Jose Felix de Celis lab (CBM, Madrid) is identifying new genes involved in mediating the activity of the main regulators of the wing morphogenesis. In the nervous system, the group of Fernando Díaz-Benjumea (CBM, Madrid) is investigating the genetic combinatorial code that generates neuronal diversity and the mechanisms that control the entrance into quiesence of embryonic neuroblasts. Ana Carmena’s lab (Instituto de Neurociencias, Alicante) focusses on the function of Canoe, a key protein that integrates the different signaling pathways in the nervous system, while Francisco Tejedor (Instituto de Neurociencias, Alicante) studies the role of the gene minibrain in controlling the balance between cell proliferation and differentiation in the same system.

The molecular and biochemical mechanisms of trascriptional control during development are being investigated by Gerardo Jiménez´s lab (IBMB, Barcelona) who showed data on how Capicua, an effector of the RTK-Ras-MAPK pathway, represses its downstream genes. Natalia Azpiazu (CBM, Madrid) showed data from his group on the molecular basis of the transcriptional activity of the Hth/Meis family of proto-oncogenes and Fátima Gebauer’s lab (CRG, Barcelona) uses Drosophia to understand translational control. Whole genomic analysis presented by Montserrat Corominas and Roderic Guigó are starting to reveal unexpected chromatin arrangements at the level of house-keeping and developmental regulated genes, which may have strong implications for the understanding of epigenetics.

To understand how the architecture of gene regulatory networks controls organ architecture Fernando Casares (CABD, Seville) is developing software to quantitatively analyze protein expression levels with single nucleus resolution using confocal stacks in imaginal discs. A quantitative approach to infer the gene regulatory interactions has also been presented by Yogi Jaeger (CRG, Barcelona), whose lab is interested in understanding how the wiring of the gap gene network evolved accross different species of dipterans. Evolutionary approaches are also been undertaken by Xavier Franch-Marro’s lab (Institut de Biologia Evolutiva, Barcelona), who is interested in how the signaling pathways underlying organ formation evolve to generate morphological innovations during evolution. The study of gene regulatory networks that lead to organ formation done in James C.-G. Hombría’s lab (CABD, Seville) revealed that tracheal and endocrine organs arose through divergent evolution of a common segmentally repeated precursor. Finally, the genetic control of insect metamorphosis is being explored by David Martin (Institut de Biologia Evolutiva, Barcelona) with an emphasis in how this key process to insect success evolved accross the insect group.

Examples of translational research projects were presented by María Domínguez (Instituto de Neurociencias, Alicante), who is using genetically modified Drosophila as a tool to prescreen anti-cancer drugs in vivo and Mar Ruiz (CBM, Madrid), who has set up the Garland nephrocytes as a system to study the function of the filtration diaphragm in vertebrates. David Gubb (CIC bioGUNE, Bilbao) presented recent results on the function and specificity of the serpin family of proteins involved in the regulation of the immune response, that can have broad implications for the function of these proteins in humans.

On a different note, Matthieu Louis (CRG. Barcelona) showed data from his lab on how flies compute odorant stimuli and make decisions at the level of motor behaviour, in a very integrative project that uses genetics and optogenetics, and automated and high-resolution quantification of olfactory input and behavioural output.

The meeting has confirmed that the Spanish Drosophila community has very much grown in strength since it has first been established more than 40 years ago and that it has much to contribute to the global scientific project. There are now several active and innovative research hubs spread accross the whole Spanish geography showing that research in Drosophila is an extremely powerful tool to study basic biological processes that are at the basis of the advances in biomedicine. It would be of great interest if the Spanish government and policy makers understand that basic research in the fruitfly is one of the driving forces for biomedical reseach in Spain and lead them to design long-term scientific policies supporting and encouraging this global project.

(7 votes)

Loading...

I would like to express my gratitude for the travel fellowship I was awarded this year for a visit to a laboratory in Helsinki University. During my trip to Yka Heliarutta’s lab in Helsinki, I learned three new histological techniques: plastic embedding of plant root tissue followed by cross-sectioning, in situ hybridization with such tissue and sectioning of samples stained for assays of gene reporter expression. I now have the confidence to practice these techniques in Cardiff where I am researching in developmental genetics in plants for my PhD, and I already have several experiments lined up that will utilize them. I also have some exciting results from the experiments I used to practice these techniques in Helsinki. We detected a new subtle phenotype in a cell cycle mutant that doesn’t have any general growth defects, as far as we can tell. These direct benefits of visiting the lab were accompanied by other benefits, such as networking with other plant scientists carrying out research within the institute I was based in. Members of the team I worked with were very familiar with plant vascular development; I learned a lot from them and had some stimulating conversations. I also set up a new collaboration with a different lab, which will hopefully allow me to address some questions I’ve been asking for some time. The lab focuses on secondary growth in plants, one area of the research I am carrying out for my PhD, so I am likely to get good advice on the conclusions I can draw on results I obtain, and what experiments I should perform next. The trip has also allowed us here in Cardiff to finalize a manuscript we have been preparing for several months now. We hope to submit this to the journal Current Biology in October.

(1 votes)

Loading...

The last two days of the EMBO meeting were quite busy, with lots of interesting plenary talks, concurrent sessions, and special symposia.

On Monday evening two interesting non-biology talks were happening at the same time: one about Women in Science, and one about Science Policy & Publishing. I attended the Women in Science talk.

The Women in Science talk was given by Brian Nosek – an associate professor of psychology at the University of Virginia. He studies stereotypes and social judgment, and he let the audience take part in some common tests to identify gender bias. Even though the audience (of predominantly female scientists) knew what they were being tested on, the bias was still apparent when it came to quickly assigning groups of words to work, family, male or female. It’s a bit difficult to explain the test, but you can see it in this video (starting at the 1:17 minute mark) and similar tests are also on Nosek’s site Project Impact.

If the prejudice that “science is for men” is so engrained, as Nosek showed with examples from several studies, is there anything that can be done to change it? The prejudice comes from two sides: those making decisions (e.g. hiring people in academic positions), and those on the receiving end of the prejudice. For the first group, education, blinding (selecting interview candidates from CV’s without names) and comparative assessment were all listed as ways to combat prejudice. For the second group – women themselves – Nosek suggested: role models, confidence building, and removing identity threats. He gave a great example of how confidence building helped female college students perform better on science tests.

Of course there were also many talks about biology these last few days. Linda Partridge’s Monday morning lecture on the effect of diet on lifespan had several people regret their large servings of French cheese the evening before. I interviewed her later in the day, so will summarize that in a separate post.

It was once again difficult to choose between concurrent sessions these last two days, but I settled on “Genes to Shape”, “Genetic Diversity” and “Animal Germline”. I won’t be able to cover all those talks, but here are a few of the talks that Node readers might be interested in:

Enrico Coen talked about cell polarity in the “Genes to Shape” session. He compared cells to people waiting in a queue at an airport gate. (I took a similar picture of people waiting to board the plane to Nice from Heathrow – see left). These people are all facing the same direction, determined by the location of the gate and airplane, but they’re already polarized (with a front and back) before they join the queue. Likewise, Coen suggested, cells can be polarized before they group together, and cell-cell interaction or signals just coordinate (not cause) the polarisation. He showed a few simulations that demonstrated that such behaviour could then shape a leaf in plants. In the same session, Floris Bosveld showed how detailed image analysis of fly embryos revealed how the Fat/Dachsous/Four-jointed PCP pathway mechanically controls morphogenesis and Markus Affolter demonstrated how blood vessels are formed from unicellular tubes through cell rearrangement.

The germline session on the last day of the meeting was very interesting. Ruth Lehmann, who was chairing this session, used her talk to outline the three main threats to the germline (somatic differentiation, transposable elements, and pathogens) and how germ cells are protected from them. Saadi Kochbin talked about epigenetic guidance of male genome programming. Specifically, he showed how the bromodomain-dependent factor Brdt drives meiosis and haploid cell differentiation.
Some other talks in this session were about unpublished research that I can’t mention yet, but keep an eye out for Mitinori Saitou’s upcoming Science paper – it will be out soon!

The meeting closed with a plenary session on “oxygen sensing, vasculogenesis, and disease”. I noticed that all three speakers in this session – Peter Carmeliet, Anne Eichmann, and Kari Alitalo – who each covered one of the three main topics in the session, had either collaborated with, or directly worked with each other at some point. I suppose that shows that the field of vascular research is as interconnected as the vascular system itself.

All in all, this was an interesting and very varied conference. It was impossible to be at all the talks I wanted to be, but the organisers had done a great job at planning the sessions. Thanks to everyone who dropped by the Company of Biologists stand (and to the people at the career table for promoting my Leaving the Lab article!)

(2 votes)

Loading...

We recently learned that Mike Gaze passed away last month. In addition to running a research group working on the development of the visual system in Xenopus and heading up the NIMR‘s Division of Developmental Biology for many years, Mike was Editor of The Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology in the ’70s and ’80s, and was deeply involved in re-branding and re-launching JEEM as Development in 1987. He retired from Development the following year, but his support of the journal in its early years is still remembered and appreciated by all at the Company of Biologists.

For a summary of Mike’s life and work, please see this article by Frank Norman at the NIMR.

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

September is “back to school”-month in a lot of countries, and “back to the lab” for those lucky few who had time off. We saw this reflected on the Node with a lot of varied content and several job postings. Here’s a summary.

EMBO meeting
The annual EMBO meeting took place in Nice from September 22-25, and Eva was attending the meeting as official conference blogger. Several of her posts are still to come – including interviews with speakers – but you can see them all under the “EMBO” tag on the Node. Aside from writing summaries of conference talks, Eva had a chance to ask some of the plenary speakers for presentation tips.

“All three of them gave the same two basic tips:
1. Spend time preparing your slides. Don’t put too much information on them.
2. Always keep your audience in mind. They don’t know as much about your field as you do.
What they did not agree on was whether or not you should practise your talk.”

Node readers can share their views on practising talks in the poll in the post. Most of you do diligently practise your presentations!

Speaking of conferences: don’t forget to add upcoming conferences to our calendar! You will need an active Node account to do so, and you can register here.

Research – the Tamura lab’s earthquake experience
This summer, Tohru Yano, from Koji Tamura’s lab, published a paper on zebrafish fin development, but he had to overcome a few unusual obstacles to finish the work: Their lab was damaged in the 2011 earthquake in Japan, destroying some equipment, and leaving the fish without easy access to fresh water. Read his post about what happened behind the scenes.

“When our water tank for fish became depleted of water after two weeks, we filtered water from a well at a place far from our fish room (the only place to obtain water in the campus) and we carried heavy plastic containers filled with water to the fish room. We were able to keep all of the fish lines alive (I had maintained the fish lines with tender care for six years from when I was an undergraduate student without the assistance of any fish technicians).”

“(…) We returned the fluorescence microscopes and DNA sequence analyzer back to their original positions, but they all fell onto the floor again when a big aftershock occurred.”

Luckily, they had help from several organisations to get them back on track within just a few months.

Images
The Glasgow Science Centre is looking for images depicting early embryogenesis in various organisms. If you have some, get in touch with them, and your images might end up in a museum exhibit!

Rachael highlighted the developmental biology images amongst this year’s Wellcome Image Award winners. Both images were taken by Vincent Pasque.

Finally, Node users voted for another Development cover from four images taken by Woods Hole Embryology course students. This was the last batch from the 2011 students, but the 2012 students took some great images as well, and we’ll have those on the site later.

Also on the Node:
–Several new job ads
–Stem cell map of Europe
–Update on Node tech updates

(3 votes)

Loading...

International Stem Cell Awareness Day is October 3, 2012, so on this day please help spread the word about the importance of stem cell research!   For more information on this day (and free wallpapers and downloadable stem cell images), visit StemCellsOfferHope.com, which is affiliated with the Sue & Bill Gross Stem Cell Research Center at the University of California, Irvine.  In celebration of this day, I just created a post on my blog at AllThingsStemCell that includes a summary of stem cell history and recent research breakthroughs and highlights.

(2 votes)

Loading...

At the EMBO meeting earlier this week, I had the opportunity to ask a few of the plenary speakers how they prepared for their talks. These speakers all had clear presentations that were easy to follow, even if you didn’t know much about the background of their field. It turns out that that was no coincidence: they consciously designed their talks that way.

I asked Ingrid Grummt, Jiří Friml, and Linda Partridge how they prepared for their talks, and if they had any tips for people who are due to give a conference presentation.

All three of them gave the same two basic tips:

1. Spend time preparing your slides. Don’t put too much information on them.
2. Always keep your audience in mind. They don’t know as much about your field as you do.

What they did not agree on was whether or not you should practise your talk. Linda Partridge is a proponent of practising, while Ingrid Grummt said she doesn’t practise her presentations. It comes down to your personal preference. Do you practise?

Friml said that he also considered his slot in the day’s conference programme. As EMBO Gold Medal winner, he was scheduled as the last speaker before dinner, so he tried to make his talk entertaining at points. One memorable quote from his lecture: “Plants also undergo embryogenesis. Keep that in mind next time you’re eating peanuts, please.”

Finally, the EMBO Meeting YouTube channel also has a video with useful presentation tips from Jon Copley. You’ll notice a lot of overlap with the advice collected above:

With these tips, your next talk is going to be amazing!

(Full interviews with Jiří Friml and Linda Partridge will appear on the Node later, as well as a summary of the last few days of the meeting.)

(3 votes)

Loading...

It was a close race at times, but the bat embryo was able to maintain its lead to become the winner of the latest Woods Hole image competition. This bat will appear on the cover of Development soon:

The image shows an Alcian blue staining of a Stage 17 bat (Carollia perspicillata) embryo, and was taken by Lingyu Wang and Ketty Lee. Congratulations!

In second place is a skeletal preparation of red-eared slider (turtle) by Megan Martik, Jane Yu, John Young, and Eric Brooks. The mouse embryo staining by Juliette Petersen and Rachel K. Miller came in third, followed by the 3D reconstruction of zebrafish embryo head vascularisation by Meghan Morrissey and Lynn Kee.

These were the last images from the 2011 course, but the students who took the course this past summer have also produced some stunning images, which will be vying for a cover spot later.

(4 votes)

Loading...