Fully-funded PhD and Postdoc positions are available in The Zaidel-Bar Lab to study the regulation of the cytoskeleton during cell and tissue morphogenesis. We invite highly motivated students to apply.
The lab takes a multi-scale approach from single proteins to the organism and system level, using a variety of cutting-edge technologies, most notably advanced microscopy, both in organoids and in the nematode C. elegans. Its goal is to understand the molecular mechanisms cells and tissues employ to change shape, migrate, sense, and generate mechanical forces that are essential for embryonic development and go awry in many diseases.
The lab welcomes outstanding international students with a degree in life sciences or in quantitative sciences, with a passion for research and interest in the cytoskeleton. The lab provides full fellowships for all students and housing on campus is an option. Lectures and courses are in English. Ph.D. studies usually last 4 years. Postdocs will be hired on a yearly contract up to 5 years.
The Zaidel-Bar lab is located in Tel-Aviv University, which is the leading interdisciplinary research and teaching university in Israel. Importantly, the scientific environment is dynamic and collaborative, with state of the art facilities, and students will have numerous opportunities to meet, learn from, and collaborate with excellent scientists.
Tel-Aviv is the cultural and commercial heart of Israel. Situated on a beautiful coast of the Mediterranean Sea, it is a fun, young city that never sleeps, with great food and weather.
To apply: send your CV (including transcripts) and a cover letter detailing your research experience and interest to: zaidelbar@tauex.tau.ac.il. Review of applications will begin immediately, and positions will remain open until filled.
“It would take a further 1 billion years or so for life to emerge in the form of simple bacteria-like cells, but pretty soon after that, these early organisms figured out how to do something that would literally change the world. And that thing? Photosynthesis.”
Dr Kat Arney
In thelatest episode of the Genetics Unzipped podcast, we’re turning the lights on, looking back at the origins of photosynthesis and the mysteries of the chloroplast genome. From The King James Bible to The Great Oxygen Catastrophe, every lungful of air you breathe has a remarkable story.
This week (September 19-23) is Peer Review Week, and the theme this year is “Research integrity: creating and supporting trust in research”. This is a topic very close to Development’s heart – as a key journal for the community we recognise the importance in ensuring, to the best of our abilities, that our papers are trustworthy and we pride ourselves on publishing content that stands the test of time.
I thought it might be interesting for readers of the Node to find out a bit more about what we do at Development to try and protect the integrity of the scientific record. You can also hear more about The Company of Biologists’ activities on this front over on the Company twitter feed, where we’re spotlighting some of our activities and the people behind them.
Research integrity issues come in many flavours, from unreported conflicts of interest and authorship disputes through to plagiarism and data manipulation. And in the almost 14 years (wow, can it really be that long?!) that I’ve been in the publishing business, we’ve seen people trying to cheat the system in ever more elaborate ways – from papermills to fake peer review. It’s profoundly depressing that a publication can be so important to someone’s career that they might go to such lengths to fake one, but somehow this is the world in which we find ourselves.
Fortunately, we don’t encounter that many problems at Development, and those we do can generally be resolved without too much difficulty (though I have been threatened with legal action for libel on at least two occasions). So what are the main kinds of issues we do have to deal with, and what processes do we have in place? The vast majority of cases we handle are to do with data presentation – blots that have been cropped, spliced or otherwise altered, images that are duplicated between figures and so on. In most cases these are picked up by our in-house acceptance checks. Our production team screens all figures for potential issues – both by eye and using the Proofig software, which picks up full or partial duplications both within and between figure panels. Where potential issues are detected, these are passed on to our ethics team (production editors trained in handling ethics cases) who communicate with the authors to understand and – hopefully – resolve the problem. Fortunately, most of these issues are the result of honest error on the part of the authors and can easily be fixed prior to publication. Where the case is more complicated, this is usually where I get involved and where, as appropriate, we may need to communicate with the authors’ institution to initiate a wider investigation. We do not publish papers until we are as confident as we can be that the data behind them are trustworthy.
Dealing with ethics cases at The Company of Biologists
Of course, our processes are not perfect and I’d be lying if I pretended that Development has never published a paper with image integrity issues. Post-publication, we are sometimes alerted to potential problems by readers; we’re grateful for these reports and we do always investigate . This can, however, take a long time, particularly where we need the institute to investigate, and it’s not always possible to reach a definitive conclusion on the integrity of the work, especially in cases where the paper is very old and original records may not still be available. We generally try to alert readers to potential problems with a paper even before an investigation has concluded, and – where problems are confirmed – we then act to correct the literature or, in severe cases, to retract a paper.
While data presentation problems represent the bulk of the integrity issues we have to handle, they are not the only ones. We also screen all accepted papers for potential plagiarism using the iThenticate software – in most cases, any text copying is minor and we can work with the authors to ensure that the original source is appropriately cited. We occasionally have to handle authorship disputes, though we try to ensure that authorship is appropriately attributed at an early stage using the CRediT taxonomy and by requiring all authors to confirm any changes to authorship that might occur while a paper is under consideration with us. Fortunately, Development has not been a big target for papermill papers, but my colleagues at Biology Open have encountered their fair share of papermill submissions and now have rigorous processes in place to try and identify and exclude them.
Most of what I have outlined above relies on the work of our in-house staff. But this post was prompted by Peer Review Week, so how does peer review help to ensure research integrity? In some cases, referees alert us to issues such as possible image manipulation or inappropriate use of statistics and we’re hugely grateful to our dedicated referees who pick up these problems at an early stage in the process. But more generally, I would argue that the process of detailed peer review helps to identify potential flaws in and caveats with a paper, and gives authors the opportunity to address these prior to formal publication. I’m not going to claim that this process is anything close to perfect, but I do believe that most papers are improved by peer review and that the final product is often more rigorous, better controlled and hence more trustworthy than the initial submission. As we look to the future of publishing and consider new models, it’s worth remembering that – given the vast sums of taxpayer and charity money that go towards funding science – we need systems in place to ensure research is disseminated in a responsible way. Peer review and journal publication may not be the only way to achieve this, and for sure it has its limitations, but I have yet to be convinced that there is a better one!
It’s great to say thanks, but the fact that postdocs need to have a dedicated appreciation week suggests that they are often underappreciated in science. There are a plethora of reasons why this might be the case, going from the behaviour of individual colleagues right up to issues that are deeply ingrained in the academic system. Below we have included some links to resources that address (and suggest some solutions to) some of the issues that postdocs may face. Many universities and research institutes offer their own resources, events and courses for postdocs, so make sure to check what is available locally. And drop us an email at thenode@biologists.com with any additional links that we should add to our list.
General resources
The National Postdoctoral Association is a US-based organisation and while many of the resources are country-specific, they have a lot of information that will be useful no matter where you are working.
For a light-hearted look at postdoc life and the alternatives, check out ‘The Great Resignation‘ series from our friend Mole at Journal of Cell Science.
This week is #PostdocAppreciationWeek (#NPAW22), and we’d love to hear about the postdocs that contribute to your working life! Last year, we asked for shout-outs on our Twitter feed and this year we’d love to extend it to anyone that is not using Twitter. Email us at thenode@biologists.com and we’ll put together a post at the end of the week including your stories about what makes the postdocs that you work with such special people. You can check out our post from last year here: https://thenode.biologists.com/postdocappreciationweek-2021/discussion/
Of course, showing our appreciation to postdocs (and scientists at all levels) should extend beyond one week of appreciation. Please get in touch if you would like to write a blog post for the Node on how we can better support scientists in academia.
— The Struggling Scientists Podcast (@TheStrugglingS4) September 5, 2022
Funny but serious thoughts…
Peer review week
This week is also #PeerReviewWeek, with a theme of research integrity. Throughout the week, The Company of Biologists Twitter account will be sharing experiences of our staff on this important topic. We also have a number of excellent articles our archives covering getting involved with peer review, publishing peer review reports and anonymous peer review.
If you are interested in becoming part of the peer review process, then sign up for the Node Network, our global directory of developmental and stem cell biologists, which the community can use for searching for reviewers, speakers, panel members etc. You could also get involved with the ASAPbio Preprint Reviewer Recruitment Network.
Journals participating in the Preprint Reviewer Recruitment Network consider individuals with experience reviewing #preprints for reviewer or editor positions. Interested in joining? Find a link below 👇https://t.co/XjXV7HujNO Already a member? Update your profile by 9/30 pic.twitter.com/eRblq6zYPG
The International Society for Regenerative Biology, founded in 2020, to promote community, research, and education in the field of regeneration worldwide. Its core mission is to provide new opportunities for interactions, discoveries, and recognition for scientists at all stages who are interested in regenerative biology.
ISRB is now offering a webinar series with three webinars a month based in three different time zones around the world.
Zone 1: East and South Asia, webinar will be the first week of the month.
Zone 2: Europe, Africa, webinar will be the second week of the month.
Zone 3: the Americas, webinar will be the third week of the month.
More information on exact dates and times can be found on our website. We hope you will join us!
Mel White, a Principal Investigator and Lakshmi Balasubramaniam, a Postdoctoral Researcher, both attendees of EGGED 2022, provide accounts of their experiences at the workshop in July.
Dr Mel White on left and Dr Lakshmi Balasubramaniam on right
Dr Mel White is a Group Leader and ARC Future Fellow, based at The University of Queensland, Australia.
As a new PI who started my lab in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic, I was very excited to attend the inaugural EGGED 2022 workshop in Edinburgh, Scotland. Hosted by the Roslin Institute, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies & The Roslin Institute’s National Avian Research Facility (NARF). The Edinburgh Gallus Genomics and Embryonic Development Workshop (EGGED) brought together scientists working with or interested in using the chicken embryo as a research model. By combining seminars from invited speakers and practical hands-on demonstrations in the lab, EGGED 2022 showcased the power and versatility of the avian embryo.
The workshop opened with some background about NARF and the exciting transgenic chicken lines already created and in progress. For those new to the avian model, there was an introduction to the chicken embryo and its unique advantages for addressing questions of a spatiotemporal nature by renowned embryologist Claudio Stern. Over four days, further seminars highlighted an impressive range of avian research including teratology (Neil Vargesson), development of the eye (Joe Rainger), limb (Julia Oh) and neural tube (Ashley Libby), neuronal differentiation (Raman Das), determining gene regulatory networks (Ruth Williams, Tatjana Sauka-Spengler), development across scales (Ben Steventon), mechanobiology (Jérôme Gros) and recent advances in our understanding of the chicken genome (Jacqueline Smith, Hervé Acloque). Each day we also spent time in the Vet School teaching lab watching practical demonstrations and practising fundamental techniques such as embryo staging, ex ovo culturing, electroporation, grafting, bead application and organ slice culture. Additionally, there was a full day available to try personalised experiments using our new skills and the NARF transgenic lines.
The generosity of everyone involved in EGGED was truly amazing. As organisers, Megan Davey, Lindsay Henderson and their team worked tirelessly behind the scenes incubating thousands of eggs, setting up equipment and juggling logistics for all manner of experiments. A special mention goes to the indispensable Julia Oh who presented or demonstrated every day, cheerfully sharing her knowledge and answering endless questions. Many of the invited speakers also spent hours sharing their expertise in the labs and discussing science with us long into the evening at the social events afterwards. The attendees ranged from students to PIs, with all levels of avian experience and it was inspiring to see the free exchange of ideas and knowledge as people passed on tips and tricks and shared their specialist skills.
But perhaps even more important than the knowledge we gained were the connections we made. Thanks to the explicit intentions of the organisers, EGGED 2022 was a collaborative workshop where we not only came to learn, but also to join as a community to shape the future of avian research. Over a buffet dinner and drinks, we discussed ideas to enhance access and utility of the model and cooperation and exchange between avian researchers. After a traditional Scottish send-off of boisterous Ceilidh dancing, I returned home to Australia bubbling with ideas and excited to be part of this welcoming research community.
Group picture of EGGED 2022 participants, speakers and organisers outside of the National Avian Research Facility.
Dr Lakshmi Balasubramaniam, is an EMBO Postdoctoral Fellow in the Xiong Lab, based at The Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, UK.
Contrary to the name of this workshop, the aim wasn’t to be egged but explore the different techniques and build networks among those using avian embryo as a model system to study various biological questions ranging from transgenics, developmental biologists to viral production. The EGGED workshop gathered established researchers, early career researchers (postdocs, young PIs), and PhD students from varying stages of their career to discuss and share their knowledge, techniques and tips to get experiments working from the ground up. Expertise of participants varied from newbies (<1 month of experience) to those who have been working with avian embryos for several years. This was definitely a platform to accelerate one’s progress and discuss ideas with a group of likeminded individuals where problems were shared over meals while coming up with solutions during the practical lab sessions.
This 4 day workshop, was packed with networking, lab-based practical work and talks by invited speakers. With a participation of about 40 researchers, the first day started with an introduction to the workshop by organisers Megan Davey and Lindsay Henderson where they introduced the Roslin Institute, the transgenic facility and the home office regulations in place to regulate animal work in the UK. This was followed by a short introduction to the staging of chicken embryos and early development of chicken embryos by Claudio Stern. The afternoon was filled with lab-based practical sessions where we were introduced to various ways of embryo isolation, staging them and identifying the viability of embryos. This was followed by a practical session led by Neil Vargesson where he gave us an introduction to the use of beads to coat proteins/drugs in localized regions followed by free form lab work.
The second day started off with a talk by Mike McGrew who introduced his latest technique accelerating transgenic development by growing PGC’s in-vitro. Following this we had an overview of various early career researchers demonstrating the use of transgenics in different contexts ranging from eye development, limb regeneration and neural tube development. We then nosedived into a practical session led by Megan Davey and Julia Oh who demonstrated tissue grafting to trace tissue integration using transgenic embryos. While many of us failed to have embryos that survived overnight, a handful of embryos survived overnight culture demonstrating the power of this technique. Following this we had a session led by Raman Das who showed us explant cultures enabling us to live image inaccessible regions of the embryo at high resolution. The last session of the day had Ruth Williams demonstrating in-ovo and ex-ovo electroporation as a tool to genetically engineer chicken embryos. Many of us had the opportunity to test out both of these setups and get tips from Ruth on how they could be adapted for use in our labs.
Image from Mel on left, a windowed egg with an early-stage embryo. From Lakshmi on right, a GFP transgenic chicken embryo at approx. stage 26HH, under a fluorescence microscope.
The third day started off with a talk by Ben Steventon where he introduced the role of the node, which was followed by a free form lab session where we were left to play with the techniques we learnt. In parallel we were shown how to make tools, ex-ovo imaging of chicken embryos in a cup and tips on gene editing, CRISPR construct design, and PGC injections. This was followed by a session on clearing techniques and an introduction to Zeiss lightsheet. The day ended with talks by Jacqueline Smith who discussed the role of using avian embryos to study viral host interaction while Hervé Acloque introduced us to his initiatives to annotate avian genes, the FAANG initiative, Galdbase (genomics and sequencing data of avian embryos) and the VizFaDa (tool to visualize sequencing datasets). While the day of practical work and talks ended there, scientific discussions continued over at the “Brainstorming Buffet” where participants continued to discuss publishing, funding, ethics, science communication and a myriad of new ideas in small groups that swapped around the room.
The last day of the workshop started off with online talks by Tatjana Sauka-Spengler who discussed their work on generating single cell atlas during neurulation, and transcriptional activity during neurulation and neural tube closure. This was followed by Jérôme Gros who shared their latest work showing gastrulation to be mediated by signalling molecules like GDF1 with feedback from mechanics. He also described their efforts to develop various transgenic quail lines that are available for the wider community. Before continuing our last day of practical sessions, we were introduced to HCR as an alternative to RNA hybridization. We were walked through the different steps during HCR, with tips and how one goes about ordering and designing HCR probes. We were generously gifted with starter kits by Molecular Instruments kind sponsors of this workshop. The workshop ended on a high note with dinner that had us put on our dancing shoes to dance to Ceilidh followed by goodbyes at the end of this 4 day workshop, which was packed with information, tips and networking. To me, this was an opportunity to learn the different techniques used to study avian embryogenesis while building a network of researchers working on similar questions.
Had such a great time at #egged2022 this past week! Met so many talented researchers and learnt about some really cool techniques! Really excited to see where this all goes! Thank you so much @twobluechickens, @GlanceScience and all funders! pic.twitter.com/i2adcJFaJ4
Please join us for the next exciting ISRB webinar featuring Erin Davies, Ph.D., of the National Cancer Institute, USA and Samantha Joyce Hack, of Western Michigan University, USA. The Zone 3 talk will occur September 20 at 12pm East Coast Time. Theme: Planarian Regeneration.
Erin’s talk is titled “Embryonic origins of lifelong regenerative abilities“ Samantha’s talk is titled “Planar cell polarity signaling is required to terminate regenerative growth in the planarian Schmidtea mediterranea”
There will be time after each talk for live questions. For those who are unable to join live, we will post a link to the recording of the webinar in the #isrb_webinars channel of the ISRB slack. The recording will be available for 48 hours. The speakers have agreed to closely monitor that channel for those 48 hours to answer questions that you might have.
We will be holding these webinars monthly and will be alternating between time zones. Each month you should pay close attention to the time, because this will change. Each month we will choose two speakers around a new theme from similar time zones. The talk will take place around 4pm of the time zone the speakers comes from.
Please click here to add the ISRB calendar to your Google calendars. Upcoming webinars will be posted here. We will continue to send out email reminders and Tweet with speaker and Zoom details.
Please join us for the next exciting ISRB webinar featuring Chiara Sinigaglia, PhD of the Oceanographic Observatory of Banyuls-sur-Mer Sorbonne University/CNRS, France. And, Simon Blanched, PhD, Department of Biology, University of Fribourg, Switzerland. This month’s theme is invertebrate regeneration. The Zone 2 talk will occur September 14 at 4pm Central European Time.
Chiara’s talk is titled: To regenerate or not to regenerate? Chemico-mechanical regulation of body shape in wounded jellyfish. Simon’s talk is titled: Whole-body regeneration in Botrylloides diegensis.
There will be time after each talk for live questions. For those who are unable to join live, we will post a link to the recording of the webinar in the #isrb_webinars channel of the ISRB slack. The recording will be available for 48 hours. The speakers have agreed to closely monitor that channel for those 48 hours to answer questions that you might have.
We will be holding these webinars monthly and will be alternating between time zones. Each month you should pay close attention to the time, because this will change. Each month we will choose two speakers around a new theme from similar time zones. The talk will take place around 4pm of the time zone the speakers comes from.
Please click here to add the ISRB calendar to your Google calendars. Upcoming webinars will be posted here. We will continue to send out email reminders and Tweet with speaker and Zoom details.
Applications are invited for a Postdoctoral Research Scientist to join A/Prof Duncan Sparrow’s laboratory at the University of Oxford to work on a project using mouse models to investigate environmental influences on embryonic heart development that may lead to congenital heart disease in humans. This is a 5 year position funded by the British Heart Foundation. Applications are particularly welcome from women, black and minority ethnic candidates who are under-represented in academic posts in Oxford. tinyurl.com/2s387496
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
