Dr. Eun-Deok Kim and Professor Keiko Torii from The University of Texas at Austin, USA, have recently published an article in Nature Plants. The article discusses how heterotypic cis/trans factors drive cell fate commitment during stomatal development. The Node asked us to provide a behind the scenes look at how the story came together.

Nature Plants: Dynamic chromatin accessibly deploys heterotypic cis/trans acting factors driving stomatal cell fate commitment.

How did you get started on this project?

One of the fundamental questions in the development of multicellular organisms is how cells with the same genomic content acquire distinct identities. Recent research has highlighted the importance of chromatin in regulating gene expression ^1-3. Nevertheless, the precise mechanisms by which combinations of cis-regulatory elements (CREs) and trans-acting factors interact to promote cell-fate determination remains unclear. Likewise, we still don’t fully understand the relationship between chromatin architecture and transcription factor binding, leading to cell fate specification during development remains unclear. To address this question, we are using plant stomatal differentiation as a model system.

Can you summarise your findings?

This study is a big step forward in understanding how stomatal cell lineages progress and differentiate, thanks to the use of a multi-omics approach, which includes epigenomics, genetics, and biochemistry. By uncovering the unique combinatorial cis/trans-regulatory codes that drive stomatal cell lineage progression, we’ve made a breakthrough in this field. The early stomatal precursor state is initiated by SPCH and terminated by MUTE, two sister bHLH proteins ^4,5. However, how these proteins switch the cell state from proliferation to differentiation has remained a mystery until now. Using specialized techniques such as stomatal-lineage specific ATAC-seq (INTACT-ATACseq), ChIP-seq, and unbiased transcription factor screens, we identified bHLH (E-box) and BBR/BPC (GAGA-repeat) motifs as unique Co-CREs that signify the early stomatal precursor state ⁶.

Figure 1. adapted from Kim et al. 2022, which is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License  

Additionally, we uncovered the exact mechanism by which MUTE drives stomatal cell-fate commitment. MUTE (with its partner bHLH, SCREAM ^4,5,7,8) binds to target DNA (E-box) and can act as a transcriptional activator. At the same time, MUTE directly associates with BPC proteins (binding to the nearby BBR/BPC GAGA repeat DNA motif of the Co-CREs), which recruit Polycomb Repressive Complex2 (PRC2) ^9,10and repress the SPCH locus via deposition of repressive histone marks. Depending on the cell stage, specific heterotypic transcription factor interactions drive the switch from proliferation to the commitment stage. We have shown through genetic, biochemical, biophysical, and in vivo functional evidence that the dysregulation of this mechanism leads to hyper-proliferation or lack of stomatal cell lineages. By integrating chromatin landscape dynamics with molecular mechanistic details, our work has shed light on the novel role of disparate pairs of cis- and trans-acting factors in shaping cell-fate commitment during specialized cell-type differentiation.

Do you think that versatile heterotypic transcription factor interactions are likely to play a key role in regulating differentiation in other systems?

A diverse set of heterotypic TF complexes has been observed during cardiogenesis, hematopoiesis, and myogenesis (the development of muscle tissue)^11-16 For instance, certain TFs like T-box TF TBX5, the homeodomain TF NKX2-5 and the zinc finger TF GATA4 form heterotypic interactions that coordinate cardiac gene expression, differentiation, and morphogenesis. These interactions also limit the potential of these TFs to bind to irrelevant regulatory elements in a given context. Myo-D, a myogenic basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) protein, and the myocyte enhancer MADS domain TF MEF2 can cooperatively regulate the initiation of myogenesis as another example of a heterotypic complex. I strongly believe that heterotypic interactions not only between transcription factors but also epigenetic regulators play a crucial role in regulating differentiation in many other biological systems.

When doing the research, did you have any particular result or eureka moment that has stuck with you?

Yes, upon observing the first inducible BPC phenotype and the interaction between MUTE-BPC but not SPCH-BPC. I collaborated with Bridget Fitzgerald, then a research technician, and Hyemin Seo, a graduate student in Keiko Torii lab, and we were all very excited to discover that the inducible overexpression phenotype of BPC suggested the repression of SPCH and a cell-state-specific interaction.

And what about the flipside: any moments of frustration or despair?

During the pandemic, like many others, I didn’t have enough time to work on this project. Additionally, generating multiple transgenics and crosses was time-consuming and demanding.

Where will this story take the lab?

Our next goal is to investigate how the combination of cis- and trans-acting factors, as well as chromatin dynamics, mutually impact gene expression to promote cell fate specification at the single-cell resolution. Furthermore, our study indicates that the timely upregulation of MUTE could play a critical role in driving the switch of the epigenomic landscape towards stomatal differentiation. Previous molecular-genetic research has suggested that the HD-ZIP IV family and other transcription factors may promote MUTE expression, but the direct mechanism of action has not been explored. Nevertheless, the future question to address is how heterotypic TF groups, complexed with epigenetic modifiers, differentially guide the developmental progression at the atomic level.

What next for you after this paper?

I am currently conducting research on the progression of stomatal lineage cells and the active role of chromatin dynamics in determining stem cell fate specification, differentiation, and maintenance. I am now seeking tenure-track positions to establish my own research group and continue to explore these topics further.

References

1. Cusanovich, D. A. et al. The cis-regulatory dynamics of embryonic development at single-cell resolution. Nature 555, 538-542, doi:10.1038/nature25981 (2018).
2. Cusanovich, D. A. et al. A Single-Cell Atlas of In Vivo Mammalian Chromatin Accessibility. Cell 174, 1309-1324.e1318, doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.052 (2018).
3.   Marand, A. P., Chen, Z., Gallavotti, A. & Schmitz, R. J. A cis-regulatory atlas in maize at single-cell resolution. Cell 184, 3041-3055.e3021, doi:10.1016/j.cell.2021.04.014 (2021).
4. MacAlister, C. A., Ohashi-Ito, K. & Bergmann, D. C. Transcription factor control of asymmetric cell divisions that establish the stomatal lineage. Nature 445, 537-540, doi:10.1038/nature05491 (2007).
5. Pillitteri, L. J., Sloan, D. B., Bogenschutz, N. L. & Torii, K. U. Termination of asymmetric cell division and differentiation of stomata. Nature 445, 501-505, doi:10.1038/nature05467 (2007).
6. Kim, E.-D. et al. Dynamic chromatin accessibility deploys heterotypic cis/trans-acting factors driving stomatal cell-fate commitment. Nature Plants, doi:10.1038/s41477-022-01304-w (2022).
7. Kanaoka, M. M. et al. SCREAM/ICE1 and SCREAM2 specify three cell-state transitional steps leading to arabidopsis stomatal differentiation. Plant Cell 20, 1775-1785, doi:10.1105/tpc.108.060848 (2008).
8. Ohashi-Ito, K. & Bergmann, D. C. Arabidopsis FAMA controls the final proliferation/differentiation switch during stomatal development. Plant Cell 18, 2493-2505, doi:10.1105/tpc.106.046136 (2006).
9. Xiao, J. et al. Cis and trans determinants of epigenetic silencing by Polycomb repressive complex 2 in Arabidopsis. Nat Genet 49, 1546-1552, doi:10.1038/ng.3937 (2017).
10. Wu, J. et al. Spatiotemporal Restriction of FUSCA3 Expression by Class I BPCs Promotes Ovule Development and Coordinates Embryo and Endosperm Growth. Plant Cell 32, 1886-1904, doi:10.1105/tpc.19.00764 (2020).
11. Cao, J. et al. Joint profiling of chromatin accessibility and gene expression in thousands of single cells. Science 361, 1380-1385, doi:10.1126/science.aau0730 (2018).
12. Luna-Zurita, L. et al. Complex Interdependence Regulates Heterotypic Transcription Factor Distribution and Coordinates Cardiogenesis. Cell 164, 999-1014, doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.01.004 (2016).
13. Ogata, K., Sato, K. & Tahirov, T. H. Eukaryotic transcriptional regulatory complexes: cooperativity from near and afar. Curr Opin Struct Biol 13, 40-48, doi:10.1016/s0959-440x(03)00012-5 (2003).
14. Glasmacher, E. et al. A Genomic Regulatory Element That Directs Assembly and Function of Immune-Specific AP-1-IRF Complexes. Science 338, 975-980, doi:10.1126/science.1228309 (2012).
15. Rothenberg, E. V. Encounters across networks: Windows into principles of genomic regulation. Mar Genom 44, 3-12, doi:10.1016/j.margen.2019.01.003 (2019).
16. Rothenberg, E. V. Logic and lineage impacts on functional transcription factor deployment for T-cell fate commitment. Biophys J 120, 4162-4181, doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2021.04.002 (2021).

(2 votes)

Loading...

Latin-America is well-known as one of the largest hotspots of biodiversity, inspiring a generation of important naturalists during the emergence of comparative developmental biology in the 19^th century. One of these naturalists, the German Johann Friedrich Theodor Müller (Fritz Müller), named the “Prince of Observers” by Charles Darwin, produced seminal work on the evolution of animals and plants in their natural environment¹. The reciprocal admiration of Fritz Müller for Darwin can be seen in the name of the amphipod Chelorchestia darwini (Müller, 1864) (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Talitridae – Figure 1) and in the large number of letters exchanged between them.

Figure 1: The amphipod Chelorchestia darwini (Müller, 1864) (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Talitridae. Left – a male of C. darwini. Right – Fritz Müller showed that adult males from this species display two types of morphology in the gnathopod 2.

In Für Darwin² (1864, For Darwin or Facts and Arguments for Darwin), Fritz Müller chose the crustaceans, a diverse and well-established taxonomic group at that time, to develop a theory of phylogenetic (genealogical) relationships among crustacean families, genera and species, particularly taking into account observations on embryonic and post-embryonic development in the natural environment.

Figure 2: Parhyale hawaiensis in laboratory culture, embryonic observation and manipulation.

Two hundred years after the birth of Fritz Müller³ (1822), I had the great opportunity to join a vibrant laboratory specialized in crustacean regeneration and evo-devo using the emerging model species Parhyale hawaiensis⁴. Interestingly, between 1888-1890 Fritz Müller studied the complete limb regeneration of Ayoida Potimirim (Crustacea; Multicrustacea; Decapoda; Atyidae) in their natural environment and found that several molts are required before the limbs acquire their original size. Müller stated “here [in limb regeneration] ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” in an allusion to Haeckel´s biogenetic law⁵. The Averof laboratory⁶, at the Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle de Lyon⁷, in France recently showed that the transcriptional signal from molting makes more difficult to study transcriptional profiles of regeneration⁸, but whether regeneration is dependent or controlled by molting is currently unknown.

Our group in Brazil has been interested in studying the evolution of early embryonic patterning, particularly of non-conventional arthropod models such as the kissing bug and the bovine tick, among others, but we particularly lacked crustacean representatives, thus far. In Lyon, I was exposed to a very friendly and productive group and was able to learn the laboratory routine of this emerging model system for development and regeneration (Figure 2 and 3).

Figure 3: Parhyale hawaiensis two cell-stage white-eggs display more intense auto-fluorescence at the green channel than purple eggs. It is also possible that the purple eggs absorbs the energy at this channel. No auto-fluorescence was observed at the red channel.

During these six months, I also started to investigate the role of the pioneer transcription zelda (zld) factor in this amphipod species. In fruit flies, zld is required for the maternal zygotic transition (MZT) and regulates hundreds of genes during the genome zygotic activation (ZGA) process. Interestingly, zld´s phylogenetic roots dates to the common ancestor of Pancrustacea (the monophyletic group including insects and crustaceans)⁹. Since my host lab had already developed genetic tools for transgenesis and transcriptional profiling in Parhyale (bulk and single-cell datasets for Parhyale leg development and regeneration)¹⁰, I could profit from these resources and start to draw hypotheses on the putative roles of zld in this amphipod. I plan to further develop these ideas now back in Brazil!

 In Brazil, I was very lucky that Professor Gisela Umbuzeiro, a well-established ecotoxicologist, has already established a large colony of Parhyale¹¹, and that Prof. Luciano Fisher from NUPEM-UFRJ and Cristiana Serejo from the National Museum-UFRJ had recently published a guide on naturally occurring amphipod species¹² with the rocky shore fauna of Brazil. Although Parhyale hawainesis was not identified in this survey, other amphipods of the same family (Infraorder Talitridae, Hyalidae) are present and associated with different habitats. The rocky shore fauna of Macaé, Rio de Janeiro is a particularly interesting spot for biodiversity, since it is in the most prominent area of oil exploitation in Brazil and harbors the largest protected sandbank park in the country . Thus, the CNPq/FAPERJ/ERC grant provided an opportunity to start an integrated Eco-Evo-Devo approach, connecting laboratory experiments with field work. If alive, I guess Fritz Müller may have been interested to follow these experiments.

Rodrigo Nunes-da-Fonseca (https://nunesdafonsecalab.com/) is an Associate Professor at the Institute of Biodiversity and Sustainability – NUPEM (https://nupem.ufrj.br/english-version/) of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. He is a Scientist of Our State FAPERJ and CNPq researcher. He was awarded with an ERC/FAPERJ/CNPq scholarship to join Averof´s team for six months during the second half of 2022.

Acknowledgments: I would like to thank Michalis Averof and all the members of the laboratory for the remarkable six-months I spent in Lyon, France, during my sabbatical.

References/Further Reading:

1. WEST, David A.., Darwin’s Man in Brazil – The Evolving Science of Fritz Müller. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, FL., 2016316p. ISBN: 9780813062600.

2. Müller F (1864) Für Darwin. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig, 91 p.

3. Leonardo Augusto Luvison Araujo, Fritz Müller: 200 years of a pioneer evolutionist, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, Volume 137, Issue 4, December 2022, Pages 737–739, https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/blac124

4. Paris M, Wolff C, Patel NH, Averof M. The crustacean model Parhyale hawaiensis. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2022;147:199-230. doi: 10.1016/bs.ctdb.2022.02.001. Epub 2022 Mar 14. PMID: 35337450.

5. Müller, Fr., Haeckel’s biogenetisches Grundgesetz bei der Neubildung verlorener Glieder, in: Kosmos. 8. Bd. p. 3S8. *Note that the the fact that Fritz Müller cited Haeckel here does not assume that Haeckel was correct  in the current knowlegde.

6. https://www.averof-lab.org/

7. https://igfl.ens-lyon.fr/

8. Sinigaglia C, Almazán A, Lebel M, Sémon M, Gillet B, Hughes S, Edsinger E, Averof M, Paris M. Distinct gene expression dynamics in developing and regenerating crustacean limbs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 5;119(27):e2119297119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2119297119. Epub 2022 Jul 1. PMID: 35776546; PMCID: PMC9271199.

9. Ribeiro L, Tobias-Santos V, Santos D, Antunes F, Feltran G, de Souza Menezes J, et al. (2017) Evolution and multiple roles of the Pancrustacea specific transcription factor zelda in insects. PLoS Genet 13(7): e1006868. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006868

10. https://www.averof-lab.org/pages/2923-resources

11. dos Santos, A. Botelho, M.T et al., The amphipod Parhyale hawaiensis as a promising model in ecotoxicology, Chemosphere, Volume 307, Part 2, 2022, 135959,ISSN 0045-6535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135959.

12. Intertidal Rocky Shore Fauna. Vol 1. Crustacea Decapoda and Peracarida, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369021929_Intertidal_Rocky_Shore_Fauna_Vol_1_Crustacea_Decapoda_and_Peracarida_Rio_de_Janeiro_Brazil

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

On Thursday 23 February I visited the Crick Institute in London to see their new exhibition, Cut + Paste, and to meet the organisers. Cut + Paste is an interactive exhibition that invites attendees to learn about applications of genome editing currently being implemented or those that are being investigated as potential solutions to environmental, food supply, or medical problems facing 21^st century humanity. Equally importantly, the exhibition aims to engage visitors, make them think about potential risks in the technology, and ask them for their own opinions.

The exhibition was organised by creative consultancy ‘The Liminal Space’ in collaboration with the Crick’s public engagement team, with Professor Robin Lovell-Badge and Dr Güneş Taylor, researchers at the Institute, serving as scientific advisors.

The exhibition is small, engaging and informative, and is designed to appeal to as wide an audience as possible, in terms of age but also familiarity with the topic. After giving visitors a brief tour of the DNA and its information storage unit, the gene, the exhibition introduces gene editing as a method to introduce precise edits to the genome, both large-scale as well as single-‘letter’ edits. The exhibition then gives an overview of the various applications of genome editing that are already in use and those being investigated with the aim of solving some of the world’s pressing problems. Among some of the topics explored by the exhibition are the editing of plant genes to make plants more nutritious; modifying the genes of livestock to make them emit less methane, a greenhouse gas; curing or treating human diseases such as sickle-cell anaemia; or ‘enhancing’ humans with new characteristics, such as making them resistant to HIV infection or curing deafness.

The best thing about the exhibition, in my opinion, is the high degree to which it invites viewers to contribute their opinion. Early on in the exhibition, viewers are asked which traits they’d want to pass on to their children (Science whizz? Sense of humour? Compassion?) and to combine their selection into a ‘gift.’ Later, attendees can read arguments on the potential pros and cons for each of the applications of genome editing and are invited to show how keen they are to see this application come to life by throwing a ping-pong ball into one of five ‘bins.’ Interestingly, but perhaps unsurprisingly, applications directly associated with human genome editing seemed to be more controversial. I had the opportunity to do a bit of my own research on visitors’ attitudes by calculating how popular each application was. At the end of the exhibition, visitors can record their thoughts into a microphone or write their opinion on a note card and hang it up on a ‘web of ideas’ along with others’.

I was able to talk to some attendees on the day and ask their opinion. Jaz and Chloe mostly agreed with genome editing for the treatment of diseases and the improvement of human health but disagreed about the risk of gene-edited crops or animals potentially altering the ecosystems they are released into. They both loved the interactive/game-like element of the exhibition. Clearly the exhibition provides a lot of food for thought!

I also had the opportunity to talk with Dr Taylor about the exhibition in more detail, and their involvement with public engagement in the context of scientific research.

For the Cut + Paste exhibition, could you take us through the process from the initial conception to the final exhibition?

Cut + Paste was first conceptualised before the pandemic. When the Crick was first started in 2017, [genome editing] was put forward as a good subject to cover soon [in the Crick’s exhibition space], because it’s timely and it matters. The idea at the time was to have a small trial exhibition, where we tried different concepts to see how the public responded to different ways in which this information could be presented. Then the pandemic put everything on ice. So as we were coming out of the pandemic, it was decided that we would re-engage the project, and develop it into a full-sized, full-year exhibition.

The important point of the starting phase is to have conversations that capture all the things that you think are important and to have some dialogue about “Which of these many different things should we be talking about as a biomedical research institution?” Importantly, one of the big things that happened in the course of this was [that] it went from just being, “Here is an exhibition just explaining what genome editing is,” to becoming not really an exhibition per se, rather a space to engage with difficult ethical questions stemming from genome editing. So you’ll notice that it’s not really pictures of Cas9 and CRISPR everywhere. It’s deliberately designed to be more about those questions than about the technology in itself.

Absolutely. Ok, so, in that vein, how did you choose which specific genetic modification ‘case studies’ to highlight in the exhibition?

There are six case studies, scenarios, and of them, one is about plants, one is about livestock, one is about pests that carry diseases that affect humans, and the other three are all about humans directly. That’s a reflection of the fact that we’re a biomedical research institute. We don’t actually study plants or even livestock [at the Crick]. But it was important to flag them, because we were keen to get across this idea that anything on Earth that has DNA can now be edited using this technology. The potential ramifications of this technology are all-encompassing, and we really wanted people to understand that.

Also people feel quite differently, and much more strongly, about the human scenarios. So, it also functions to bring people into the right headspace to think about it. It’s one thing to think about a plant: “How does that affect food and food supplies?”, and then thinking about livestock, there’s a bit more ethical concern, “What about their welfare?” There’s a bit of a sliding scale, naturally, in that.

What are you hoping will be the major messages and takeaways of the people who attend the exhibition? Do you plan to track responses to questions in the exhibition to assess what attendees’ opinions are and how they may have changed as a result of attending the exhibition?

Exactly. The key information that we’re hoping to get across is that genome editing is a technology for changing DNA, and there are different contexts under which you can use this technology, but the main thing that we wanted was for people to engage. Often people initially think “I’m not a scientist, I don’t know.” We wanted to overcome that, such that people feel empowered and have a sense of agency about these conversations.

The second thing [we wanted to get across] is, of course, an immediate appreciation for the fact that there is a diversity of opinion on, and value in, each of the scenarios that we present. You’ll notice that the scenario cards [in the exhibition, describing pros and cons of each potential genome editing scenario] deliberately have opposing opinions, and that’s important to remember, in this context especially. It’s to make people comfortable to engage, but also comfortable and aware of the fact that some people disagree.

And then of course the final thing is that we have this ‘make your mark’ section where we invite people to vote and write things down and record their thoughts, and as a research institute we will be keeping record of that, and it will potentially feed into statements we will make in the future regarding genome editing and future policy decisions.

You’ve been involved in science communication for several years. What about it do you find exciting and important? What about science communication would you like both the scientific community and members of the general public interested in science to know?

I think that many scientists still think that it’s pointless, and I obviously disagree with that. I was always raised with this idea of the Victorian scientist who does the experiments and then gives the public lectures, so I thought that was completely normal. It wasn’t until I started the PhD that I realised people are very hierarchical in academia, like “Who are you to go out and talk to the public? You don’t have a Nobel prize, who cares?” But, on principle, we are publicly funded. I felt very seriously that I am funded by the public, it’s charity money that’s giving me my salary to do this, so if the public want to know about something, they have a right to know.

Actually, whether I’m talking to a biochemist, or an engineer, or an electrician, there’s not really that much difference. I would classify [all] as public engagement. You talk to anyone outside your field, it’s basically public engagement, because most people don’t know about the finer nuances of your field. It’s been real training for me in how to communicate clearly. And I didn’t go into it for that, but since realising that that’s a side effect, I’ve encouraged as many people as I can to get comfortable doing that. The true challenge in trying to demonstrate mastery of something is to be able to accurately transmit that information in simple terms. And there is no better context under which to do that than public engagement.

The last thing to say about it is, at least in my experience, academia is extremely hierarchical, and that can corrode one’s self-confidence a lot. For me, science communication has been an antidote to that. A different context under which I can practice remembering that I am an expert, of sorts. That’s more of an amorphous benefit, but I think it’s really important because we don’t get much gratification in our line of work. It’s not often that a big experiment works. But it can be so satisfying to have that moment of being able to say “You didn’t understand what DNA was when we started this conversation, and now you asked me a really smart question, so I know you understand.” And that immediate gratification, at least for me, has been really helpful.

Do you have any short- or longer-term plans for public engagement events on any other topics?

I don’t actively plan them. If I get invited to do something, or if somebody wants my opinion, I will give it. I value ‘engagement’ with a little ‘e,’ if that makes sense. For me, the way to have a tangible impact comes from the personal interactions that you have with people. It’s just engagement with a little ‘e’ rather than with a capital ‘E.’ It’s not in the context of an institution, but those are the moments that for me never stop. Someone says “What do you do?” and you say “I’m a scientist,” and then almost inevitably they say “I didn’t do well at school at science,” or “I’m really bad at maths.” For me that’s an opportunity to engage and say “Yeah, me too, but I just really like it.” And to normalise that conversation about science is really timely. The pandemic, if nothing else, proved that there is a moment right now where people really see that science is important, but maybe don’t know how to engage or still feel very much like science is something that scientists do. [But] the reality is, the scientific method – the ability to observe, hypothesise, and rationally interrogate information – is not something that only scientists do. And for me, that’s the heart of any of these things.

The Cut + Paste exhibition is open to visitors Wed 10:00-20:00 and Thurs-Sat 10:00-16:00 at the Crick Institute until December 2^nd 2023.

(2 votes)

Loading...

One of our favourite giveaways here at the Node is our collection of postcards. With our supplies dwindling (they are a crowd-favourite at meetings!), we are planning to reprint the series and we would love to take this opportunity to add some more #devbio favourites to our collection. If you have an image that you think would be make a great addition to the Node postcard collection, submit it to our competition! As well as selecting images for postcards, one lucky winner will be featured on the cover of a ‘Development’ issue in 2023.  

There are a few model systems missing or underrepresented in our current collection, so we would especially love to see submissions from featuring in vitro models, plants, teleosts and Xenopus as well as some of the emerging model organisms that will take centre-stage at our ‘Unconventional and Emerging Experimental Organisms in Cell and Developmental Biology‘ Journal Meeting in September.

Thanks to all the researchers that have given us permission to use their images in our current series: we hope you love the set as much as we do!

Deadline: Tuesday 11 April

Competition details:

• Email your image to thenode@biologists.com with ‘Postcard competition’ in the subject line.
• You can submit up to three images.
• In the email, include a description of the image and imaging modality used to acquire the image or software used to reconstruct or analyse it.
• There is no theme and no restriction content-wise; it can be a raw, reconstructed, filtered or analysed image of any type of sample.
• The postcards are A6 portrait and images may be cropped to fit our design (logo on bottom right).
• Development cover guidelines on dimensions require a high-resolution file 23cm width by 24cm height, some cropping might occur in adapting the winning image.
• Submitted images should not have already been published elsewhere unless under a CC-BY license (and please let us know if this is the case).

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Now that we have a technology that allows us to alter DNA, it means that we can have an impact. We have a choice in the matter of health and bodies of plants, animals, and humans. And so now here is the question: think about anything that you want to in the world about health or about bodies, and now know that we can change that should we wish to. What would you do? What do you think is worth doing? What do you think is not worth doing?

Dr Gunes Taylor

In the latest episode of the Genetics Unzipped podcast, we’re exploring the history and ethics of genome editing, tinkering with the genetics not only of this generation, but potentially generations to come.

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...

We are pleased to announce that the Avian Model Systems Meetings are back after COVID. The 11th meeting will take place on 11-14 September 2023 at the University of Portsmouth, UK. The conference will bring together scientists from across the world whose research focuses on birds. The conference website is now open for registration and abstract submission.

Session topics include:

• Dynamics of development, morphogenesis, organogenesis
• Stem cells and differentiation
• New technologies and resources
• Pharmaceutical and medical applications
• Comparative genomics, evolution and conservation
• Avian immunity, disease resistance, animal welfare

We have lined up exciting keynote speakers. Further speakers will be selected from abstracts, and all attendees will be able to present posters. We will have a plenary discussion with funders and stakeholders on the future of avian models and avian research, and we have set time aside for a PI meeting to discuss the development of resources for the avian research community.

Besides the science, Portsmouth is the attractive waterfront city at the South coast of England, known for its maritime heritage and the Portsmouth Historic Dockyard, with quick links to the Isle of Wight and the South Downs National Park. Portsmouth is also known for its shopping opportunities. Portsmouth can easily be reached via London Heathrow and Gatwick airports and Southampton airport. It also has ferry links with the Channel Islands, France and Spain.

The Organising Committee look forward to welcoming you to Portsmouth!

(4 votes)

Loading...

Hi everyone, my name is Laura Hankins and I’ve recently joined Development as a Reviews Editor. I haven’t moved far, as I initially joined The Company of Biologists back in 2021 as their Science Communications Officer. That role gave me the opportunity to work with lots of different teams within the company and provided me with an insight into how publishing operates behind the scenes. I’m excited to build on this experience as I settle into the Development team.

Before joining The Company of Biologists, I completed a PhD at the University of Oxford via the Wellcome Trust’s four-year DPhil in Chromosome and Developmental Biology. After rotation projects with Paul Riley and Neil Brockdorff, I settled in Jordan Raff’s lab where I worked on centriole biogenesis in early Drosophila embryos. This involved plenty of microscopy! During this time, I was lucky enough to be awarded a place on the 2019 Physiology Course at Woods Hole, MA. This was a fantastic experience that exposed me to even more microscopy and various quirky organisms, as well as allowing me to meet many wonderful scientists from a range of career stages and research backgrounds. This sense of community was something that I really missed when the pandemic struck towards the end of my PhD.

I’m therefore delighted that I get to stay in touch with the scientific community in my new role. I’m looking forward to working with authors to produce front section content for the journal, and to getting to know the community better as I start to attend meetings and workshops. Please feel free to contact me via email or LinkedIn, and hopefully I’ll get the chance to meet some of you in person over the coming months!

(3 votes)

Loading...

Our sister community site preLights is celebrating its 5th birthday! 🎉

To mark the occasion, a festive webinar has been organised that features talks given by preLights alumni who have all made significant contributions to preLights, and have since taken a range of career paths. In these talks, they will tell us how they have managed to identify and navigate the challenges, opportunities, and obstacles they faced as early-career researchers and how these have all led them to where they are today. Also, they will tell us a bit about their current position and future goals and ambitions.

Following a brief presentation by each speaker, there will be a Q&A session.

The webinar is free and open to all, and a link to the recording will be made available to registrants.

Register now

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

In our latest SciArt profile we hear from Robin Cassady-Cain, a professional artist based in Canada. Robin’s scientific background is in immunology and many of her artworks are inspired by the human immune system. As well as creating stunning jewellery, Robin uses her artwork as educational tools.

Where are you originally from and what do you work on now?

I was born in Barrie, Ontario, but mostly grew up in Toronto. I did my undergrad in Biochemistry at University of Waterloo, then a Masters in Immunology, and my PhD in Immunology at University of Cambridge.  My last research post was at the Roslin Institute, University of Edinburgh, working with Professor Mark Stevens.  I was a core-funded Research Fellow, so I worked on large animal models of bacterial enteric infection (the big 3-Campylobacter, Salmonella and various pathogenic E. coli) part of the time, and part of the time directing my own research looking at the molecular mechanisms, biophysical and structural characteristics of a bacterial toxin homologue, Lymphostatin, known to block lymphocyte activation in vitro/ex vivo.  In 2018, I moved back to Canada, giving up my research career to become a professional artist.

Were you always going to be a scientist?

 Yes! The exact time that I decided that I wanted to be a scientist is lost to the sands of time, but it was somewhere in middle school, doing all those science fair projects.  I had dreams of being a professor, it seemed so glamorous to me (how little I knew!!). The idea of being a scientist really cemented itself in high school, particularly as I had several supportive and influential science teachers. Science held an endless fascination for me, and although I could imagine doing other things, I felt that research was where my mind and heart were leading me.

And what about art – have you always enjoyed it?

Yes!  I’ve enjoyed looking at art and making things since I was very young. My earliest memory is making clothes on my child’s Singer machine for my Barbie dolls (the only thing I thought they were good for!) Over my life I have done photography, wet and needle felting, papier mache sculpture, quilting, collage, Scottish kiltmaking and, of course, jewellery.

What or who are your most important artistic influences?

I love impressionism, and abstract art, but if you want to know about jewellery/metal arts, Wendy Ramshaw, an iconic British goldsmith had a huge influence on how I viewed jewellery and the art of making jewellery.  From her early paper jewellery, her stacking rings that come with their own unique tower storage, and her whimsical story-telling pieces, I love the breadth of her work and particularly some of the geometric lines that she used. 

How do you make your art?

I work primarily out of a shared jewellery workshop in the west end of Toronto called Jewel Envy.  Since I’ve switched to primarily working as a professional artist, I have found community there, which is invaluable. I have an ongoing obsession with immunology and cell forms and concepts clearly influence my personal art jewellery, but I do a lot of work with clients to help them realise their own concepts in jewellery form, and more collaborative work, like some of the pieces showcased here.  I worked with an old friend and colleague who wanted to have some jewellery created that reflected some of the cell work that they do with stem cells, and myometrial cells.  The end result were two sculptural cell forms—one representing the embryonic stem cell ball, complete with felty nuclei, taken from fluorescence microscopy images.  The other is modelled after a schematic of myometrial muscle cells, again with felted nuclei.  I do a lot of jewellery incorporating felt, patterned textured, and incorporating semi- and precious gemstones, using the traditional methods of metal fabrication and lost wax casting.

Does your art influence your science at all, or are they separate worlds?

My art used to influence my science, in the sense that it provoked me to think more deeply on some topics, and how things connected together.  I found it almost a meditative process that would quiet the part of my mind that was always actively thinking about my science, and allowed insights to float to my conscious mind more easily.  Conversely, I’ve carried through so many skills and thoughts that I had about my science through to my professional artist practice.

What are you thinking of working on next?

I continue to explore the themes of the immune system in my jewellery, and I can’t see me ever exhausting my ideas there.  I love the fact that every major piece that I do is a potential conversation about immunology and/or opportunity for education.  I am also embarking on a collaborative series of mixed media art pieces with another artist that is centred around the concept of herd immunity.  It’s just at the very early formative stages, but I can’t wait to see where it takes us!

Instagram: HOCassady_jewellery_and_kilts

Website: houseofcassady.ca

Thanks to Robin and all the other SciArtists we have featured so far. We’re looking for new people to feature in this series – whatever kind of art you do, from sculpture to embroidery to music to drawing, if you want to share it with the community just email thenode@biologists.com (nominations are also welcome!)

(1 votes)

Loading...