大、小鼠微生物检测质量控制探讨

实验动物质量直接影响科研数据的准确性,通过定期微生物检测,可对实验动物质量进行控制,因此对检测结果进行质量控制是对检测工作进行日常管理和监督的有效和必要的手段。实验室通过总结近年检测工作经验,对微生物检测质量控制工作进行探讨,为实验动物质量检测提供相关资料。     

Teaming up: from motors to people

When I reflect on how I became a cell biologist and why I love being one today, one thing that comes to mind is the many terrific collaborations I have had. The science I am most proud of from my graduate and postdoctoral training would not have been possible without working in teams with other scientists. Now, in my own group, much of our best work is being done collaboratively, both within the lab and with other labs. In this essay, I will highlight my experiences working in teams as a trainee, the role teamwork has played in my own research group, and how important I think collaborative science is for the future of biological research.     

A Developmental Journey and Lessons Learned Along the Way

A career in science is a journey of wonder and discovery. To succeed in science requires curiosity, perseverance, a good dose of luck, and wise guidance from those who have taken the journey ahead of you. We also need to use our science skills to contribute to public debate on complex issues of the day.Being honored by the 2009 American Society for Cell Biology Women in Cell Biology (WICB) Senior Award has provided me with an opportunity to look back and examine the importance of mentorship and role models, both female and male, in my career. I am fundamentally a basic biologist, driven by my curiosity about how the world works. The question that has fascinated me for over 30 years is one that we can all relate to: How is it that complex, rational organisms such as ourselves can arise from a single cell, the size of a speck of dust?Over the years my lab colleagues and I have explored many aspects of that question, using mice as our model system, and we''ve discovered more and more about the hierarchy of cell decisions that begins when sperm hits egg. Along the way we have contributed to the development of techniques for manipulating the mouse genome, helped identify key signaling pathways that control blood vessel development, and isolated novel stem cells from the mouse blastocyst. But I always return to the fundamental questions of lineage development in the early embryo, attacking the problem with new tools as they become available.     

Greenbeards in yeast: an undergraduate laboratory exercise to teach the genetics of cooperation

Recent years have seen a dramatic increase in our understanding of the social behaviour of microbes. Here, we take advantage of these developments to present an undergraduate laboratory exercise that uses the cooperative flocculating behaviour of yeast (Saccharomyces sp.) to introduce the concept of inclusive fitness and teach the genetics of cooperation. Students generate their own data using co-cultures of various yeast strains and perform statistical analyses to test whether kin selection or greenbeard effects determine the cooperative flocculating behaviour. The lab has run successfully for two consecutive years in a second year course with some 1, 200 students per year at the University of Toronto, Canada. We discuss the benefits of using microbes to teach social evolution, describe the set-up and learning outcomes of the laboratory exercise, and then outline possible extension and variants of the lab. In addition to providing students with the opportunity to use a model organism to study social behaviour, students are also taught common laboratory skills, such as replica plating and sterile techniques. Ultimately, while the genetics of cooperation has traditionally been taught through computer simulations and evolutionary games, this exercise demonstrates a way to experimentally introduce the topic.     

Integrin Signaling: Cytoskeletal Complexes,MAP Kinase Activation,and Regulation of Gene Expression

Members of the integrin family of adhesion receptors mediate interactions of cells with the extracellular matrix. Besides their role in tissue morphogenesis by anchorage of cells to basement membranes and migration along extracellular matrix proteins, integrins are thought to play a key role in mediating the control of gene expression by the extracellular matrix. Studies over the past 10 years have shown that integrin-mediated cell adhesion can trigger signal transduction cascades involving translocation of proteins and protein tyrosine phosphorylation events. In this review, we discuss approaches used in our lab to study early events in integrin signalling as well as further downstream changes.     

Implementation and use of cloud-based electronic lab notebook in a bioprocess engineering teaching laboratory

Background

Electronic lab notebooks (ELNs) are better equipped than paper lab notebooks (PLNs) to handle present-day life science and engineering experiments that generate large data sets and require high levels of data integrity. But limited training and a lack of workforce with ELN knowledge have restricted the use of ELN in academic and industry research laboratories which still rely on cumbersome PLNs for recordkeeping. We used LabArchives, a cloud-based ELN in our bioprocess engineering lab course to train students in electronic record keeping, good documentation practices (GDPs), and data integrity.

Results

Implementation of ELN in the bioprocess engineering lab course, an analysis of user experiences, and our development actions to improve ELN training are presented here. ELN improved pedagogy and learning outcomes of the lab course through stream lined workflow, quick data recording and archiving, and enhanced data sharing and collaboration. It also enabled superior data integrity, simplified information exchange, and allowed real-time and remote monitoring of experiments. Several attributes related to positive user experiences of ELN improved between the two subsequent years in which ELN was offered. Student responses also indicate that ELN is better than PLN for compliance.

Conclusions

We demonstrated that ELN can be successfully implemented in a lab course with significant benefits to pedagogy, GDP training, and data integrity. The methods and processes presented here for ELN implementation can be adapted to many types of laboratory experiments.

     

What we talk about when we talk with medical students

In this article, we review how we interact with medical students in our efforts to teach blood pressure regulation and systemic cardiovascular control along with related elements of respiratory and exercise physiology. Rather than provide a detailed lecture with key facts, we attempted to outline our approach to teaching integrative cardiovascular physiology to medical students, which includes five major themes. First, focus on questions versus answers and facts. We believe that this offers both the learner and teacher a number of advantages. Second, avoid teaching dogma in the name of clarity (i.e., heavy focus on teaching "facts" that have not yet been fully investigated). This is especially important because of the way knowledge evolves over time. Third, include laboratory-based experiences in human integrative physiology. Fourth, provide students with intellectual frameworks versus a list of "facts" to serve as a platform for question generation. Finally, focus on the role of integration and regulatory redundancy in physiology and the idea that physiology is a narrative that can help. In this article, we discuss the philosophy behind the themes outlined above and argue that questions, and not answers, are where the action is for both research and education.     

Enzymatic Processing in Microfluidic Reactors

Abstract

Microreaction technology is an interdisciplinary area of science and engineering. It has attracted the attention of researchers from different fields in the past few years and consequently, several microreactors have been developed. Enzymes are organic catalysts used for the production useful substances in an environmentally friendly way, and have high potential for analytical applications. However, relatively few enzymatic processes have been commercialized because of problems in the stability of enzyme molecule, and the cost and efficiency of the reactions. Thus, there have been demands for innovation in process engineering particularly for enzymatic reactions, and microreaction devices can serve as efficient tools for the development of enzyme processes. In this review, we summarize the recent advances of microchannel reaction technologies and focus our discussion on enzyme microreactors. We discuss the manufacturing process of microreaction devices and the advantages of microreactors compared with the conventional reactors. Fundamental techniques for enzyme microreactors and important applications of this multidisciplinary technology in chemical processing are also included in our topics.     

Joan Heath interviews Suzanne Cory and Joan Steitz: a female perspective of science in the swinging ‘60s

Prompted by the occasion of International Women''s Day, Joan Heath and DMM reunited Professors Suzanne Cory and Joan Steitz via Zoom to discuss their extraordinary careers and joint experiences in science. They also delve into past and present challenges for women in science, and discuss the role of scientists in a post-pandemic world.

Suzanne Cory, Joan Steitz and Joan Heath (from left to right) As one of Australia''s most eminent molecular biologists, with a school in Melbourne bearing her name, Professor Suzanne Cory has been both Director of The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in Australia (WEHI) and President of the Australian Academy of Science. She earned her PhD at the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, UK, with postdoctoral training at the University of Geneva. She continues her research at WEHI as an honorary distinguished research fellow, investigating the genetics of the immune system in the development of blood cancers and the effects of chemotherapeutic drugs on cancer cells.Joan Steitz – currently Sterling Professor of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry at Yale University, and for 35 years the recipient of a Howard Hughes fellowship – is best known for her seminal work in RNA biology. She was the first female graduate student to join the laboratory of James Watson at Harvard University and proceeded with her postdoctoral training at the MRC LMB in Cambridge. Her pioneering research delved into the fundamental mechanisms of ribosome and messenger RNA interactions, as well as RNA splicing, heralding the phenomenon of alternative RNA splicing. A recipient of many awards and honours, she is also involved in international projects aimed at supporting women in science.Host Joan Heath heads a laboratory at WEHI in Australia. She received her undergraduate degree from the University of Cambridge, followed by her PhD at the Strangeways Research Laboratory also in Cambridge, then just across the road from the MRC LMB. After postdoctoral positions in bone biology and osteoporosis research, Joan joined the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research where she became a laboratory head, and changed her focus to cancer research using zebrafish to identify genes that are indispensable for the rapid growth and proliferation of cells during development. She joined the WEHI in 2012. There she showed that the same developmental genes are also required by highly proliferative, difficult-to-treat cancers, including lung, liver and stomach cancer, paving the way for translational research targeting these genes in novel cancer therapies. Joan H: How long have you two known each other? Suzanne: I was calculating that this morning and I was astonished because it seems like only yesterday, but it has been 55 years since we met in Cambridge. It has been a voyage in science and a voyage in the world because we have always made a point to meet up in beautiful places and go hiking. That is how we''ve been able to renew our friendship over all these years. Joan H: Where were you when you first met? Joan S: We both were working at the MRC LMB in Cambridge, England. Suzanne was doing her PhD and I arrived slightly later for a postdoc.Suzanne: We had a pre-meeting in the sense that Joan, Jerry Adams (my future husband) and Tom Steitz (Joan''s husband), were all graduate students together in Harvard. So, when Joan and Tom came to Cambridge, it was natural that we would all start doing things together. And Joan and I ended up sharing a lab bench.Joan S: The reason that I did a postdoc in the mecca of X-ray crystallography was that I had married a crystallographer – and there was no other place that he could possibly go. They very much wanted to have my husband at the Cambridge MRC lab, but there wasn''t a clear plan for me. Francis Crick suggested that I do a literature project in the library, but I knew that theory was not my forte in comparison to experiments. I started talking to the many people working in the lab and found a project that no one wanted, because it was so challenging. But it was a very interesting problem, so I decided to take it on – and it turned out to be a great project.Joan H: That''s amazing. You were obviously determined to overturn other people''s expectations of you.Suzanne, even now, it''s extremely unusual for a young person to leave their home country to do their PhD. It''s still a brave thing to do but all those years ago it was really courageous. You told me that you ended up there because you wrote a simple letter, which was a complete shot in the dark.Suzanne: It certainly was. During my master''s degree at the University of Melbourne, I became more and more interested in doing science and decided I would do a PhD. But I had a counteracting desire to travel and see Europe. So I decided that I would do my PhD overseas to give myself the opportunity of travelling. I had fallen in love with DNA during my undergraduate studies. So, I wrote a letter to Francis Crick in Cambridge, and asked if he would take me on as a PhD student. Much to my amazement, I eventually got a letter back saying yes. I think that my professor of biochemistry might have also visited Cambridge while he was travelling and spoken up for me. However, I was still extraordinarily fortunate that Francis had agreed because there weren''t many PhD students in the LMB at that time. It made such a difference to my entire life. I look back on that letter and think, “How did you have the audacity to write that letter and aim to go to that laboratory?”. I think it was partly naivety.Joan H: That''s a lesson for everyone, to go for your dreams, and don''t assume people won''t take notice of you. It is more difficult now, when scientists receive hundreds of e-mail applications from prospective PhD students in their inbox. You would have written a letter with a stamp on it that probably took three weeks to arrive, but it just shows you that you should be audacious. Did you have a different experience to Joan when you arrived? Was there a proper project already lined up for you?Suzanne: I was interviewed by Francis Crick and Sydney Brenner, who were the joint directors of the department. They decided that I would work on the structure of the methionyl-tRNA that puts methionine into internal positions in polypeptides. After they described the project – which involved doing counter-current distribution fractionation of bulk tRNAs, in which I had no experience whatsoever – Sydney in his very characteristic monotone said, “Do you think you''re up to it?”. I sort of gulped to myself and said, “Yes, I think I could do that”. I then went to Brian Clark''s laboratory, who was going to be my PhD supervisor, and started the project. Like always in life, if you learn from people and just go from one day to the next, you actually get there in the end.Joan H: So, persistence was key. Were there many other women at the LMB at the time?Suzanne: I don''t remember any female scientists who had official senior positions. There were certainly some strong female scientists there, but I don''t think they were given the recognition or the status that they actually deserved.Joan S: Later, some were given more recognition, crystallographers in particular, but not so much the molecular biologists.Suzanne: I think, as women, we both pioneered in that department.Joan H: Given the fact that you both agreed to take on projects you had very little previous experience with and that the male supervisors thought you weren''t going to have the mettle to carry it through, once you were there, did you feel that you had to work the whole time? Or did you still manage to have lots of fun and partake in opportunities that Cambridge had to offer at the time?Joan S: We certainly partook in a lot of those things. My husband and I got interested in antique furniture, antique paintings, and used to scour the countryside for little antique shops. We saw lots of England, then a little bit of Scotland and Wales. It was wonderful. A real adventure.Suzanne: I worked really hard most of the time that I was in Cambridge, as the work was very exciting. But I would take holiday periods, camping and youth hostelling all over Europe with a girlfriend from Melbourne and later, travelling with Jerry. We also would go to London for the opera and looking for amazing clothes on Carnaby Street and Chelsea Road (this was the Beatles era, late 60s). Jerry once came back with a purple velvet suit, which was his prized possession for many years. There was lots of fun but also lots of work.Open in a separate windowJoan Steitz, Tom Steitz, Jerry Adams and Suzanne Cory (from left to right) in the Swiss Alps, 1970. Image courtesy of Mark Bretscher. This image in not reproduced under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. For permission to reproduce, contact the DMM Editorial office. Joan H: Can you remember the first moment in that part of your career that gave you the most pleasure? Joan S: I worked on a project for about a year, and it turned out that I was doing the wrong fractionation method to get the material that I needed to analyse. Then I had a conversation with Sydney Brenner telling him that I was going to give this one more try with a new method, and then I was going to give up. I remember Sydney saying, “Sometimes, like with a bad marriage, you have to give experiments one last try before you give them up.” Then I tried again, and it worked. This is often the case in science, that you try something new, that''s a little bit different, and it makes all the difference. Then you''re running.Suzanne: The same thing happened to me. I was labouring away on the counter current distribution machines fractionating methionine tRNA, with the goal of sequencing it by the laborious procedure recently published by Robert Holley. However, Fred Sanger, in the department upstairs, had invented a totally new method for sequencing using ³²P-labelled RNA. I desperately wanted to try this, so I managed to persuade my supervisor that we should change techniques. That change was key to my future because the approach was successful. I still remember to this day exactly where I was in Cambridge, walking on a Sunday afternoon, when the last piece of the puzzle dropped into place in my mind, and I had the entire sequence. In that moment, I was extremely joyful, because I knew I had my PhD and that I had succeeded. So that was my eureka moment.Joan H: Obviously, these were extremely productive years, and you''ve mentioned several Nobel Prize winners in your midst. It must have been the most inspiring environment, which I''m sure had a big impact on what you did next. By this stage in your career, were you already feeling ambitious or was it still your scientific curiosity that was driving your path?

“I expected that I would go back to the United States and be a research associate in some man''s lab […]. Then it turned out that people were more impressed than I thought and started offering me junior faculty jobs.”

Joan S: I had gotten a lot of recognition for having sequenced a piece of mRNA, using the same methods that Suzanne used to sequence tRNA. However, I had no expectations, because I had never seen a woman as a science professor, or head of a lab. I expected that I would go back to the United States and be a research associate in some man''s lab, and maybe they''d let me guide a graduate student. Then it turned out that people were more impressed than I thought and started offering me junior faculty jobs.My husband had already secured a junior faculty job in Berkeley before we even went to England, so we went back there after two years. My husband went to the chair of the department in Berkeley and put down letters on his desk of job offers that both of us had received for independent, junior faculty positions from several universities. The Chairman then said to Tom, “But all of our wives are research associates in our labs, and they love it”. This tore at my pride, as there had been a couple of universities that offered us both faculty jobs, and Berkeley was only offering one. So, we didn''t stay at Berkeley, and we came to Yale, which was wonderful.Suzanne: It''s really amazing to think that they gave you up. How foolish they were.Joan H: They''ve lived to regret it a million times over. Suzanne, at that point were you ready to climb this very difficult ladder?Suzanne: Like Joan, I didn''t have any expectations. For me, it was a matter of being able to continue discovering things in science. Jerry had already arranged to start a postdoc in Geneva. So, I applied for a postdoctoral fellowship, and obtained one. We went off together to Geneva to start our married life, and that was the beginning of us doing science together, which we''ve done ever since. I think without Jerry guiding me at that stage in my life, I would have probably drifted out of science. I don''t think I had the scientific confidence to ever think that I would be running a lab. For me, it was just continuing a voyage of discovery; and being lucky to end up in a wonderful scientific partnership and, through that partnership, my confidence grew over the years. Joan H: How many years after your postdoctoral training was it before you looked around your environment and had the confidence to think that you could be a lab or department head or could run an Institute? Joan S: I would say that confidence just grew. Tom and I were part of a departmental overhaul that involved hiring about six new people at Yale. We all stuck together, supported each other and were very collegial even though we worked in different areas. I think the collegial nature of the department in Yale helped me gain confidence. It was very scary at first because I didn''t know if I could write grants or direct people.Suzanne: Cambridge had an incredible influence, certainly over me, and I''m sure over Joan, Tom and Jerry, too. We looked around and saw all these amazing Nobel laureates, but also all these very ambitious, talented postdocs from around the world. I don''t think anyone thought about being the head of a department at that stage. We were simply striving to make discoveries and we gave each other mutual confidence, and stiff competition, too.The other thing that Cambridge gave us, was a new technology. For Joan and me, it was RNA sequencing. Being able to do that technology opened doors all around the world. I now always advise young people to go to the best place in the world to train in your chosen subject and acquire a new technology, because that will open the door to many opportunities in the future.Jerry and I made some excellent discoveries in Geneva, which were published in front-rank journals. Then it was time to move to full independence. I really wanted to go back to Australia but, as Jerry is an American, it was not at all obvious that he should take the big leap of moving to the bottom of the world and starting a lab there. I owe him a tremendous debt because he decided that he would take that risk.Earlier, whilst on our honeymoon, we had visited various labs in Australia. Although WEHI was an institute for immunology, a field we knew little about at that stage, it had the same atmosphere as the LMB in the sense that everyone was striving at the frontiers of science and competing with the rest of the world. We decided this was the only place in Australia that we would work at and that we would attempt to persuade the new director Gus Nossal that he needed molecular biologists. We had an interview with him in Switzerland and he offered us jobs as postdocs. Again, we were probably very naive and audacious but we told him we didn''t want to be postdocs – we wanted to run our own lab. And he agreed and we launched our fledgling lab together in 1971. What drove us was always discovery, rather than career ambitions.Joan H: You''ve both described these amazing sets of circumstances that were challenging but, nevertheless, very satisfying. However, a lot of things have since changed. What do you think are the main remaining barriers to women in science?Joan S: There is an important phenomenon called social identity threat, or stereotype threat, that I think still impedes women in proceeding in their careers. The phenomenon is described by cognitive psychologists as a reaction that all people experience if they feel that they are part of an undervalued minority. And so, by definition, since there are fewer women in science than there are men, women are being subjected to stereotype threat. Cognitive psychologists have studied the physiological manifestations of this, including increased heart rate and perspiration but, psychologically, they''ve also documented that cognitive learning and memory are impaired when one has these feelings.I first learned about this in 2007 and I looked back and realized why, for 30 years, when I''d been on committees as the only woman amongst ten men, I wouldn''t dare say anything – because I was frightened stiff. Men undergo this response, too, if they''re put into the situation of being undervalued. If you understand why you''re reacting the way you''re reacting and know that this is a normal human response, I think it helps you to overcome your own feelings of insecurity and allows you to go ahead. I always tell young women who I''m rooting for in science about this, because I want them to know that they will very likely end up feeling this way, and it''s a normal human response.

“One thing I sometimes get frustrated about is that we often need men to change things […] but what we really need are women in those high-level positions, so that they can be the champions of change.”

Joan H: There are other terms describing other relevant phenomena, such as unconscious bias, imposter syndrome and champions of change. One thing I really relate to is imposter syndrome. I''ve listened to webinars on this topic and they all reach a similar conclusion that we all feel the same. On the one hand, at the end of the webinar, you do feel somewhat elated to know that it''s not just you, and that it''s normal. But, on the other hand, it doesn''t really change things. It''s a recognition of what we feel, and we all get some help from that, but you really need opportunities to change things at a higher level. One thing I sometimes get frustrated about is that we often need men to change things, leading to this concept of male champions of change. I admire those men; but what we really need are women in those high-level positions, so that they can be the champions of change. Not having 50% of university departments and medical research institutes run by women still limits our full potential.Joan S: I certainly agree with you, Joan. It''s very important to have realistic role models. Suzanne being head of the WEHI for all those years has engendered all sorts of admiration.Joan H: During that period, Suzanne not only did fantastic science but our Institute doubled in size.It''s transformative when you have women making up 50% of people around the table. It''s no help just having a token female because that poor person''s not going to be able to change everything on her own. In American scientific institutions, are there any firm quotas for female scientists and other people that are underrepresented in science?Joan S: In recent years there has been a push in that direction. Sometimes it''s successful and sometimes it''s not. It is very different now compared to when there was no consciousness that this was unfair or that things could be better if we had real representation.Suzanne: I agree with both of you in everything that''s been said. While reflecting at this moment, what it says to me is that what''s really needed is societal change, and that we need to give courage to girls from the very earliest age. It should come naturally, they shouldn''t feel inferior, and others should not look at them as inferior. They should expect to have careers as well as families, be able to manage both and have somebody alongside them who helps them manage both.I think that affirmative action for women in science is necessary because the pace of change has been so slow. However, I also think quotas can be detrimental to the cause of women, in the sense that it''s then possible for people to say you only made it because there was a quota – which is very destructive. If I look back on our careers in science, it is clear that things have changed tremendously. Today there are more opportunities for women because many universities and institutes are bending over backwards to equalise things. The downside of this is that talented men may miss out on positions because of this policy and the pendulum could swing back.Joan H: The evidence shows that when more women are involved in things, those things go better. For instance, boards that have more women on them are more productive. Obviously, what you alluded to is there are lots of fantastic male scientists as well. The real issue here is there''s not enough funding to go round to support all the great men and women. But there are clearly enough good women around to be represented at the 50% level, without disproportionately disadvantaging male scientists.Joan S: Men and women are now operating on a more even playing field, which doesn''t mean that the men are missing out. They''re just in a more-competitive situation – as they should be. Joan H: Suzanne previously covered the specific advice she would give to young female researchers. Joan, do you have any other suggestions? Joan S: I encourage them to try lots of different things in science, and when they find something that really grabs them, then go for it and be persistent. We all know that science is very up and down. But if you keep pushing when you''re in a trough, it will always go back up again and you will succeed. That''s harder for a young person, who hasn''t experienced these troughs, to understand.Joan H: Yes, and the period when women scientists start having children is the hardest part. It''s still a choice that some women make, to take some years off and come back with a less ambitious plan for their career. Obviously, things like maternity leave payments and so on are improving but there''s no question that, in most circumstances, the research will slow down during that period.Suzanne: What I say to young women at that stage of their careers is that you have to be very focused, you must spend the time that you do have in a very focused manner, so that you can be the most productive you can be. But you have to be supported at home by your partner. If you''re both scientists it''s easier because you can appreciate why the other person is rushing into the lab late at night, for example, but for most people, that''s not true. So, what is really important is equal sharing of responsibilities from both partners when young families are around. And I think employers need to give both of those partners a longer time to achieve the kind of papers that they need to progress in their careers. That''s a period when it is much harder to be productive, and we need to continue to support people during that difficult phase of their careers because we''ve invested so much in them. They have so much to offer to science and to society, so to let them slip out at that stage is a great waste.Joan H: Let''s change tack a little bit and think about some of the broader challenges in science. What do you think the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us about the importance of clear scientific communication and real engagement with the community?Joan S: Whenever I talk to people about this, I very clearly make the point that it was decades of fundamental research that led to the development of the COVID-19 vaccine. If it hadn''t been for those fundamental discoveries in how cells and mRNA work, it would never have only taken 63 days from sequencing the virus to phase one clinical trials at Moderna. I try to point out to people that all the different discoveries coming in from different angles made that possible. I personally find it absolutely remarkable that all that knowledge could be harnessed, so very quickly. I''ve been doing fundamental research my entire life and I never expected to see it materialise in the way it has. It''s a wonderful reward. Joan H: Do you think this has resulted in the community appreciating scientists more? Joan S: I don''t think we''re far enough downstream to know that. In the US, there has been a congressional vote to abandon our maintenance of vigilance and preparedness for future pandemics – which seems ridiculous. Now we have all these procedures set up, all we have to do is maintain them for the next one. Whereas, if we just let go of these procedures, we''ll have to start over again for future pandemics. I guess we''re not good enough at communicating some of these things at this point.Joan H: Millions of people died from the virus and yet, if we hadn''t had the vaccines, the scale would have been even more horrific. If we were able to convey this information effectively to the public, then, hopefully, people would recognise that – as well as spending a fixed percentage of the gross domestic product on defence, for example – we should spend at least the same amount on science. Not only for pandemics but for tackling climate change and other pressing issues. I like to think this is an auspicious time but I don''t know whether we are really taking advantage of it.Suzanne: The pandemic has brought science and scientists to the forefront, and there has been a period of great respect for scientists having developed the vaccine. It''s an absolute miracle that it was done so fast and effectively. We''re very fortunate but, as Joan said, that was not luck. It was through investment in basic science for decades. We have to keep conveying this message, to our politicians in particular, so that they will keep supporting all kinds of scientists, because we never know what''s around the corner.Joan H: Certainly, people like Anthony Fauci in the US and Catherine Bennett in Melbourne, spoke eloquently and had a real talent for communicating things clearly and in a nutshell. That''s not something we''re all good at and it''s not something that is easy to train into people either. I think we all need to try to capture the attention of the community at large, by speaking plainly. I don''t think people understand that scientists are underfunded and could do so much more if funding was more generous.

“All I can say to young people is, if you really love science and have a passion for it, keep trying – because you will succeed if you put your whole heart and soul into this career path.”

Suzanne: I think the general public has no appreciation of how tenuous the life of a scientist can be, and how we are losing so many great minds entering the field because young people just finishing their PhDs look with dismay at how hard it is to support a career in science and get enough funding. There''s a tremendous waste of talent. All I can say to young people is, if you really love science and have a passion for it, keep trying – because you will succeed if you put your whole heart and soul into this career path.Joan H: This has been an absolutely fantastic discussion and it''s such a delight to talk to women who, after all these years, are still as passionate as ever and are pursuing their scientific subjects with the same vigour as they have all along.Suzanne: It''s been wonderful to talk with you, Joan, and I hope that we see each other soon, no matter what continent. And thank you, Joan Heath for getting us together and giving us this opportunity.     

Smart de novo Macromolecular Structure Modeling from Cryo-EM Maps

The study of macromolecular structures has expanded our understanding of the amazing cell machinery and such knowledge has changed how the pharmaceutical industry develops new vaccines in recent years. Traditionally, X-ray crystallography has been the main method for structure determination, however, cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM) has increasingly become more popular due to recent advancements in hardware and software. The number of cryo-EM maps deposited in the EMDataResource (formerly EMDatabase) since 2002 has been dramatically increasing and it continues to do so. De novo macromolecular complex modeling is a labor-intensive process, therefore, it is highly desirable to develop software that can automate this process. Here we discuss our automated, data-driven, and artificial intelligence approaches including map processing, feature extraction, modeling building, and target identification. Recently, we have enabled DNA/RNA modeling in our deep learning-based prediction tool, DeepTracer. We have also developed DeepTracer-ID, a tool that can identify proteins solely based on the cryo-EM map. In this paper, we will present our accumulated experiences in developing deep learning-based methods surrounding macromolecule modeling applications.     

A path to the powerhouse: systems‐to‐structure approaches for studying mitochondrial proteins

The young investigator award from the Protein Society was a special honor for me because, at its essence, the goal of my laboratory is to define what obscure proteins do. Years ago, I stumbled into mitochondria as a venue for this work, and these organelles continue to define the biological theme of my laboratory. Our approaches are fairly broad, reflecting my own somewhat unorthodox training among diverse scientific fields spanning organic synthesis, chemical biology, mechanistic biochemistry, signal transduction, and systems biology. Yet, whatever the theme or the discipline, we aim to understand how proteins work—especially those that hide in the dark corners of mitochondria. Below, I recount my own path into this arena of protein science, and describe how my experiences along the way have shaped our current multi‐disciplinary efforts to define the inner workings of this complex biological system.     

Progressing a human embryonic stem-cell-based regenerative medicine therapy towards the clinic

Since the first publication of the derivation of human embryonic stem cells in 1998, there has been hope and expectation that this technology will lead to a wave of regenerative medicine therapies with the potential to revolutionize our approach to managing certain diseases. Despite significant resources in this direction, the path to the clinic for an embryonic stem-cell-based regenerative medicine therapy has not proven straightforward, though in the past few years progress has been made. Here, with a focus upon retinal disease, we discuss the current status of the development of such therapies. We also highlight some of our own experiences of progressing a retinal pigment epithelium cell replacement therapy towards the clinic.     

From a crisis to an opportunity: Eight insights for doing science in the COVID‐19 era and beyond

The COVID‐19 crisis has forced researchers in Ecology to change the way we work almost overnight. Nonetheless, the pandemic has provided us with several novel components for a new way of conducting science. In this perspective piece, we summarize eight central insights that are helping us, as early career researchers, navigate the uncertainties, fears, and challenges of advancing science during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We highlight how innovative, collaborative, and often Open Science‐driven developments that have arisen from this crisis can form a blueprint for a community reinvention in academia. Our insights include personal approaches to managing our new reality, maintaining capacity to focus and resilience in our projects, and a variety of tools that facilitate remote collaboration. We also highlight how, at a community level, we can take advantage of online communication platforms for gaining accessibility to conferences and meetings, and for maintaining research networks and community engagement while promoting a more diverse and inclusive community. Overall, we are confident that these practices can support a more inclusive and kinder scientific culture for the longer term.     

“Community Work” in a Climate of Adaptation: Responding to Change in Rural Alaska

We draw on our research experiences with municipal workers in Alaska, where the impacts of climate change are already extensive, to examine adaptation and related concepts, such as resilience and vulnerability, which have become widely used in science and policy formulation for addressing climate change despite also being subject to multiple critiques. We use local people’s experiences with environmental challenges to illustrate limitations of the climate change adaptation paradigm, and offer the additional concept of “community work” — analogous to niche construction — as a counterpart to the adaptive process at the community level. Whereas climate change adaptation insinuates active and purposive change, the reality we have repeatedly encountered is that people in these communities focus not on changing but on building and maintaining capacity and achieving stability: keeping aging and overtaxed infrastructure running while also working toward improving quality of life and services in their communities. We discuss how these findings are congruent with recent calls to better situate climate change adaptation policy in the context of community development, and argue that scientists and policymakers need to understand this context of community work to avoid the pitfalls that potentially accompany the adaptation paradigm.     

Science Educational Outreach Programs That Benefit Students and Scientists

Both scientists and the public would benefit from improved communication of basic scientific research and from integrating scientists into education outreach, but opportunities to support these efforts are limited. We have developed two low-cost programs—"Present Your PhD Thesis to a 12-Year-Old" and "Shadow a Scientist”—that combine training in science communication with outreach to area middle schools. We assessed the outcomes of these programs and found a 2-fold benefit: scientists improve their communication skills by explaining basic science research to a general audience, and students'' enthusiasm for science and their scientific knowledge are increased. Here we present details about both programs, along with our assessment of them, and discuss the feasibility of exporting these programs to other universities.     

An introductory biology lab that uses enzyme histochemistry to teach students about skeletal muscle fiber types

One important goal of introductory biology laboratory experiences is to engage students directly in all steps in the process of scientific discovery. Even when laboratory experiences are built on principles discussed in the classroom, students often do not adequately apply this background to interpretation of results they obtain in lab. This disconnect has been described at the level of medical education (4), so it should not be surprising that educators have struggled with this same phenomenon at the undergraduate level. We describe a new introductory biology lab that challenges students to make these connections. The lab utilizes enzyme histochemistry and morphological observations to draw conclusions about the composition of functionally different types of muscle fibers present in skeletal muscle. We report that students were not only successful at making these observations on a specific skeletal muscle, the gastrocnemius of the frog Rana pipiens, but that they were able to connect their results to the principles of fiber type differences that exist in skeletal muscles in all vertebrates.     

From irreversible thermodynamics to network thermodynamics

Whenever the subject of the thermodynamics of irreversible processes TIP is brought up among biologists, there seems to be a very polarized reaction: some have found it a useful tool, others reject it utterly, and for some reason which I do not understand, even fervently. For the present school, Professor Aharon Katchalsky had suggested that we try together to point out some ways in which TIP has been useful, to discuss limitations and shortcomings, and, finally, to show the direction and first results of present efforts, mainly in network thermodynamics¹. It would have been my task to show you the darker side of the coin, but now Aharon is not with us to show you the shining side in his unique way, to carry you along with his enthusiasm. I believe it is in Aharon's spirit that I do not attempt to evaluate or commemorate his contributions and achievements, but just talk science and try to convey a little of what was at the center of his interest during the last years.     

Involving undergraduates in the annotation and analysis of global gene expression studies: creation of a maize shoot apical meristem expression database

Through a multi-university and interdisciplinary project we have involved undergraduate biology and computer science research students in the functional annotation of maize genes and the analysis of their microarray expression patterns. We have created a database to house the results of our functional annotation of >4400 genes identified as being differentially regulated in the maize shoot apical meristem (SAM). This database is located at http://sam.truman.edu and is now available for public use. The undergraduate students involved in constructing this unique SAM database received hands-on training in an intellectually challenging environment, which has prepared them for graduate and professional careers in biological sciences. We describe our experiences with this project as a model for effective research-based teaching of undergraduate biology and computer science students, as well as for a rich professional development experience for faculty at predominantly undergraduate institutions.     

Teacher candidates in the garden

Recent science education reform has led to an increased emphasis on engaging students in inquiry and science practices rather than having them simply memorize scientific facts. However, many teachers of elementary science may themselves have had more traditional science learning experiences, and may therefore be unsure about inquiry-based teaching methods. One way to enhance preservice teachers' comfort with and desire to teach science using a hands-on approach might be to engage them in science learning experiences alongside children during their educator preparation program. The purpose of this article is to share how one faculty member and a cooperating teacher from a partner school involve teacher candidates in working with children in the school's garden, allowing them to personally experience inquiry while witnessing firsthand the potential benefits to children of authentic science learning through garden based activities.