Upon receiving a 4-year VIB International PhD Program grant, Mariya joined the lab of An Zwijsen in Leuven, Belgium to study the origins of amniotic stem cells and to dissect the unique extraembryonic defects of the Smad5 knock-out mouse embryos. SMAD5 is a downstream effector of BMP signaling, a major pathway involved in many processes in development and cancer. Mariya was fascinated by how entangled the development of embryonic and extraembryonic tissues during early development is, and appreciated the importance of understanding better these neglected parts of the conceptus. She contributed to the finding that Smad5 mutant embryos develop an ectopic primitive streak-like/tumor-like structure in their amnion due to defective signaling (Periera et al., 2012, Development 139(18)), and identified amnion-specific set of marker genes for mouse and human (Dobreva et al., 2012, Stem Cells Int. 987185). The culmination of Mariya’s PhD and postdoc work at Zwijsen’s lab was her most recent paper entitled “Amniotic ectoderm expansion in mouse occurs via distinct modes and requires SMAD5-mediated signalling” (Dobreva et al., 2018, Development 145(15)). This work impressed the judges of the Denis Summberbell Lecture award as a thorough study that sheds light upon both the origin of amnion and the molecular dynamics of its development combining cutting-edge, classical, and original techniques.
After a career brake, Mariya received a 2-year Marie Skłodowska-Curie fellowship and in 2016 moved to the UK to join the lab of Arkhat Abzhanov at Imperial College London. Expanding her research interests towards evolutionary developmental biology, she currently studies the developmental mechanisms underlying the rapid evolution and adaptive radiation of Darwin’s finches from Galapagos islands.
Lecture abstract:
Upon gastrulation, the mammalian conceptus transforms rapidly from a simple bilayer into a multi-layered embryo enveloped by its extraembryonic membranes. The embryonic-extraembryonic junction is a hot spot for dynamic cell rearrangements that drive early morphogenesis. The innermost extraembryonic membrane, the amnion, develops at the embryonic-extraembryonic interphase and gradually encases the developing conceptus. Impaired amnion development causes major embryonic malformations, yet its origin remains ill-defined. Mouse embryos, deficient in the BMP signalling effector SMAD5, show aberrant amnion and ventral folding morphogenesis and delayed closure of the proamniotic canal. I developed a microdissection technique and sequenced the transcriptomes of individual Smad5 mutant amnions isolated before the first visible malformations appear (E7.0-E7.5). I revealed two sets of defective amnions: one with a primitive-streak mesoderm signature and another one with unexpected chorionic ectoderm signature. Tetraploid chimera and immunostaining assays indicated that, in both cases, a deficit in the expansion of amniotic ectoderm results in inclusion of non-amniotic, non-squamous tissues in the amniotic microenvironment. Interestingly, the inclusions can be either of embryonic or of extraembryonic origin. To explain the different types of Smad5 mutant defects and to clarify the origin of mouse amnion, we related our findings to existing clonal analysis of early mouse embryos performed by Kirstie A. Lawson (University of Edinburgh). She traced the fate of single cells labeled before amnion formation. Four clone types contribute to the amniotic ectoderm with distinct growth patterns. Two main clone types were identified, with progenitors in the extreme proximal-anterior epiblast. Their early descendants initiate and expand amniotic ectoderm posteriorly, following the progression of the developing amniochorionic fold. Surprisingly, descendants of cells remaining anteriorly, later expand the amniotic ectoderm from its anterior side. The progenitor regions of all types are close to BMP sources in extraembryonic ectoderm and visceral endoderm. We attribute the two Smad5 mutant defect types to impairment of progenitors of the two main cell populations in amniotic ectoderm, and to compromised cuboidal-to-squamous transition of the anterior amniotic ectoderm. In both cases, SMAD5 is critical for expanding the amniotic ectoderm rapidly into a stretchable squamous sheet to accommodate exocoelom expansion, axial growth and folding morphogenesis.
The BSDB Archive covers 70 years of our society’s history, providing deep insights into its early years, its long trail of scientific conferences, workshops and committee meetings; it includes an almost complete collection of the many newsletters that have been published since issue 1 came out in 1979. A year ago, many of the archive’s documents were made digitally available (see box below) and described in a dedicated blog post by Andreas Prokop (LINK). The sheer number of >30,000 downloads from this digital archive within less than a year (LINK), clearly illustrates the wider interest in these historical documents, which hopefully help also some of our younger members to understand how Developmental Biology as a discipline became established in the UK.
The BSDB will likely not go further with the archive’s digitisation, but has taken an important alternative step to make its contents available to those taking a serious interest. Thus, Sarah Wilmot at the Historical Collections of the John Innes Centre (collections.jic.ac.uk) has kindly agreed to host and curate the BSDB archive, and we are most grateful for her outstanding professional support that now makes the collection fully accessible for further investigation. As Carsten Timmermann wrote from his perspective as science historian: “Your archive is a little treasure trove and will enable us to understand the history of Developmental Biology in this country much better. I wish other societies would follow your example. If we had a whole set of similar archives at our disposal, this would help us to study the way the life sciences overall have developed, comparing and contrasting sub-disciplines and understanding trends. For example, one could look at conference programmes in different fields within the life sciences and study how molecular methods have transformed biology.” In this context it is of particular interest, that the BSDB Archive will be accessible side-by-side with the one of the Genetics Society, thus providing an even greater opportunity to perform studies into the UK’s science history.
Hopefully, the “open source” nature of the BSDB Archive , be it in its digital form or as hard copy collection, will attract wider interest and inspire others to join in and help develop its full potential – be it biologists browsing around, or (hobby) historians making systematic scientific use of it. But if you do so, please be so kind to share any new insights, anecdotes that come to mind or any knowledge that complements the information currently available. Also, if you hold additional documents that might add to the collection, we have now means to archive it in appropriate ways. Just send a quick email to comms@bsdb.organd we will take appropriate action!
Hello there! This is Nora Braak and Nestor Saiz, we are based in Oxford and New York respectively and we study butterfly and mouse development. Last week we went to the BSDB Autumn meeting, which also happened to be the third workshop on Embryonic Extraembryonic Interactions. We enjoyed it so much that we wanted to share our thoughts with you [disclaimer: these thoughts don’t represent those of the BSDB, the organizers, nor, of course, our PIs’…]
– Hey Nora, do you know how many developmental biologists does it take to take over an Oxford University College…?
– Ha! Tell me… [eye rolls]
– Well, about a hundred apparently! Which is as many of us descended onto Corpus Christi College last week to chat about the most extra of all tissues: extraembryonic membranes…
– [Eye rolls, squared] ehhh… well, actually the Embryonic-Extraembryonic Interfaces ok…?? #bsdb2018EEI The third workshop on this piping hot topic already!
– Fine, fine… if you’re going to get all serious about it, do you want to tell us about some of the talks that you liked? It was a very exclusive meeting, I bet most readers did not get to go.
– It was a great meeting; it will be hard to pick highlights but it must be done. To start, it was the first extra-embryonic meeting where team Insect was properly represented and it was such a success we are thinking of getting t-shirts made for the next time #teamInsect. The meeting started off strong with a plenary talk from Liz Robertson. She gave us all a crash-course in early mouse development and all the essential genes in cell-lineage specification and TGFβ signaling. Their paper, still hot off the press shows how loss of both Smad2 and 3 alter the epigenetic landscape and activate extraembryonic gene expression in embryo-derived stem cells.
– After Liz’s keynote, I think Kristen Panfilio made it very clear to all of us mouse aficionados that #teamInsect was in the house. Turns out insects do have extraembryonic membranes, unlike what you might have heard from a certain famous fruit fly… She also showed some absolutely gorgeous movies of Tribolium‘s amnion and serosa breaking and retracting into the yolk to let the embryo develop further. You can see them and read more about their reporter and how the EE get themselves out of the beetle’s way in their paper.
– The rest of the Monday afternoon discussed how development meets bioinformatics; from Laura Banaszynski telling us about the function of the H3.3 histone variant to Sarah Teichmann, who wants to develop the ‘Google Maps Street View’ of the human body. The first day ended with a lovely drinks reception and a three-course sit down dinner in the beautiful hall of Corpus Christi, which made me wish I had dressed up a little. The dinner was followed for many by some more drinks in the Bear Inn, one of the oldest pubs in Oxford.
– Ah, the Bear Inn and its low ceilings… Shout out to Miguel Manzanares too (#teamMammal) talking about genome structure in the early mouse embryo and Federica Bertocchini, who is studying chameleon development, which is awesome because… chameleons?? Come on… Did you know chameleons take 200 days from laying to hatching? Did I say chameleon yet?
– Tuesday was mouse day (#mousetastic). In the morning Ayaka Yanagida and I got the honor to present after two of my favorite embryologists, Jenny Nichols and Claire Chazaud! Jenny discussed their latest look at the Pou5f1 (aka Oct4) mutant, which is very close to her heart, then Claire doubled down on the mutants showing what happens when you knock out both Nanog and Gata6 in early mouse embryos. All of my favorite transcription factors!
– Yes it was a great morning, but after this early embryo overdose I was glad to switch to the lightning round of 3 minute presentations from all 24 poster presenters. They really piqued everyone’s interest, the poster sessions were so well attended – and not only because of the pastries and beer provided!
– I agree, it is the first time I see this pitching of the posters at a conference and I thought it was a very neat idea – though it probably only works in small settings like this workshop. Brief presentations are hard, kudos to the organizers for giving everyone a chance to practice!
– In the afternoon we had great talks from Takashi Hiragii and Veronique Azuara. I personally really enjoyed Matthew Stower’s talk, who used light sheet microscopy to study visceral endoderm migration, the pictures and the data analysis were amazing! Again the day ended in a 3 course sit down dinner in the beautiful hall of Corpus Christi, this time I was more prepared and knew which bread roll belonged to me and which fork to use for which course.
– I still don’t know how Matthew managed to take some of us on a pub crawl after lunch and then go and deliver his talk. Matthew you’re a total star.
– What did you think about Wednesday? It was an intense day.
– Yeah, Wednesday was packed. It started with all non-mouse mammal models. Berenika Plusa and Ania Piliszek presented their work on preimplantation rabbit development, whereas Stephen Frankenberg and James Turner engaged in their own marsupial cutey contest – for all of you dunnarts, possums and opossums out there: if you are interested in being the next top model organism, being cute will take you far! Jokes aside, theirs were some of my favorite talks. They had really nice data and ideas on the evolution of extraembryonic tissues and X-Chromosome inactivation in mammals that made me consider if I should switch model organisms.
@preg_lab contrary to recent rumours this is actually Ros John’s lab twitter account. Follow away science geeks! #bsdb2018EEI
– I also really liked the talks about the placenta by Rosalind John and Myriam Hemberger. Their talks about the importance of the placenta in embryonic development and the influence it can have on the maternal behaviour were both thought provoking and well presented – here’s one of their papers.
The day ended with talks from Diana Laird, on the transgenerational defects of environmental damage, and from Elizabeth Duncan. She looks at bee and aphid reproductive control as a way to understand how animals respond to their environment. Did you know that aphids will change their mode of reproduction and development depending on the season?? Yet the embryos ultimately look the same!
– Elizabeth Duncan’s talk was so interesting! I think even Queen B would have agreed… (#RoyalJelly)
– Right… oh, in the evening we were welcomed in the Natural History Museum of Oxford, with bottomless gin and delicious bowl and finger food. The beautiful surroundings gave everyone a chance to mingle, share their enthusiasm about dinosaurs and admire a live bee colony which were even more of interest after Elizabeth Duncan’s great talk
– Finally Thursday came around. It started with two great talks by #teamInsect, from both Maurijn van der Zee and yourself, Nora. You both seem to enjoy poking insects with infected needles… I guess it’s an effective way to trigger immune responses by the serosa – one of the many critical roles of the extraembryonic tissues in insects, as we had learned from Siegfried Roth’s talk on the evolution of Toll signaling! I personally loved Di Hu’s talk, from Shankar Srinivas’ lab, she had done some beautiful imaging of the early post-implantation mouse embryo and delivered like a pro. We also saw Zofia Madeja, Vasso Episkopou and Jaime Rivera, who is doing “dunkin’ transgenics!”. Delivering Cas9 to do CRISPR into mouse zygotes by bathing them in media with virus is definitely a slam dunk.
– Yes. The day was finished by two phenomenal speakers, Mariya Dobreva, who won the Dennis Summerball Award and presented her work on the role of Smad5 in the amniotic ectoderm, and Ali Brivanlou who wrapped up the meeting with some absolute eye candy on their work in in vitro models of human development.
– After that, awards were given to the three best poster presenters, Peter Baillie-Johnson, Matthias Teuscher and Berna Sozen. Well done them!
Extremely honoured and appreciative for receiving the poster 2nd prize from BSDB Embryonic-Extraembryonic conference. My lovely prize is my favourite book, Origin of Species✨ A huge thank you to all organisers for such brilliant 4 days! Looking forward to next one! #bsdb2018EEIpic.twitter.com/qPNkoSma4s
All in all, a wonderful little meeting – science, weather and setting all came together to make for a truly great week. Thanks so much to the organizers, Susana Chuva de Sousa Lopes, Kat Hadjantonakis, Kristen Panfilio, Tristan Rodriguez and Shankar Srinivas for putting it together and we’re looking forward to 2022!!
This year, is the BSDB’s 70th anniversary, and this was clearly reflected at our Spring Meeting, 15-18 April 2018 in Warwick! Apart from an outstanding speaker list, and the award of most BSDB medals & prizes of 2018, we saw a very special event with many extras, as is well described here by Dillan Saunders. Dillan undertook his BSc Honours with Michael Akam studying centipedes, is currently performing his MSc in the lab of Megan Davey date-mapping the developing limb bud of chick with novel transgenic technologies. and will be returning to Cambridge later this year to begin The Wellcome Trust Developmental Biology PhD program. Dillan’s blog post aligns with a long-standing tradition of the BSDB to engage young members (see our archive blog), and we strongly encourage PhD students and postdocs to make their voice heard by writing reports or articles for our website and newsletter.
The British Society for Developmental Biology (BSDB) recently held its annual Spring Meeting at the University of Warwick. This was no ordinary meeting, though it is fair to say that BSDB meetings rarely are. This Spring Meeting celebrated the 70th anniversary of the BSDB and did so excellently, birthday cakes and all. With a retrospective look at the past of the society, and fantastic speakers showcasing present and ongoing work, the stage was set for a meeting that not only celebrated a strong history, but also looked forward, critically yet hopefully, to the future of Developmental Biology and of the BSDB itself.
The conference began with a career workshop for students and post-docs (see our blog post). In keeping with the celebration of the BSDB’s birthday, the focus of the workshop was on staying in academia. A variety of speakers and other group leaders fielded questions and shared details of the personal journeys to have brought them to their current positions. I had the opportunity to speak to Henrik Semb – whose example shows that not everyone follows a straight, let alone predictable, career trajectory. Judith Kimble shared her views on not seeing the lab as a place of work, and finally I got to hear Ottoline Leyser’s thoughts on work-life balance; a phrase which misleadingly implies that the two are opposed to one another. It would however be in our best interests, she explained, to see work and life as overlapping and complementary to one another.
The career workshop
After the careers workshop came the first plenary talk, in which Eric Wieschaus explained his recent work on mesoderm invagination in Drosophila and how one transcriptional activation can lead to a sequence of events (Weng and Wieschaus, 2017). Thematically paired with this talk was Maria Leptin’s plenary lecture, in which she discussed the development of in silico models for actin dynamics in order to recapitulate mesoderm invagination (Belmonte et al., 2017).
Emilia receives the Beddington medal from Simon Bullock
Following a short break, the Beddington Medal was awarded to Emily Favuzzi for the best PhD thesis in Developmental Biology of the year, which she performed on the transcriptional networks at play during interneuron development (see our blog post). She then gave a talk that illustrated how meticulous and comprehensive her work was (Favuzzi et al., 2017). This was followed up by a plenary talk from Marianne Bronner on the transcriptional networks of specific populations of neural crest cells, with attention to how her work with lampreys shows that the neural crest has acquired additional functions in the jawed vertebrates (Green et al., 2017). Unfazed by technical difficulties with the final slides of the presentation, Bronner took on the role of the lamprey and humorously indicated on herself the location of the neural crest cells.
The evening was capped off by three events that celebrated the history, and looked into the future, of the BSDB and Developmental Biology as a whole. First, came two talks from historians of science, Nick Hopwood and Tim Horder. Hopwood’s talk detailed the story of the crystallization of modern Developmental Biology in the late ‘40s and ‘50s. He described how the London Embryologists Club began in 1948 and how it then broadened both its geographical location and the field that it represented to form the BSDB (see also our archive blog).
Nick Hopwood’s lecture about DB’s history
Off the back of the historians’ view of the past, came a panel discussion of the future of the field. The panel was made up of Ottoline Leyser, James Briscoe, Maria Leptin, Jonathan Slack, Judith Kimble and Patrick Lemaire. They fielded several thought-provoking questions from the audience, which led to a lively discussion. As might be expected from a big anniversary meeting, there was much reminiscing on the early days of molecular Developmental Biology in the 1980s, often referred to as the ‘Golden Age.’ When asked what made this era such an exciting time for Developmental Biology, Jonathan Slack noted that it was a time when developmental biologists were becoming dissatisfied with the explanations of the previous heyday of embryology in the 1930s.
In the subsequent discussion, Ottoline Leyser pointed out that, what with the advent of new technologies and ideas, we are in fact in the midst of a golden age for Developmental Biology. Indeed, though there are still some who believe that certain areas of Developmental Biology hold no more secrets, recent years have shown new developments in, for example, the study of the anterior-posterior axis in Drosophila (Clark and Akam, 2016) and the C. elegans cell lineage (Sammut et al., 2015).
Other points of discussion included the importance of studying development within the context of time and the great potential of computational modelling. Discussed also were the logistics of maintaining an idea of the overall picture without becoming too focused on a single model system. The final event of the day was an informal round table discussion where the points raised previously, and many others, were discussed at length over much wine.
Monday began with a plenary talk from Matthew Freeman, amusingly titled ‘Confessions of an ex-developmental biologist’, in which he described his current focus on cell signalling and the pertinence of Cell Biology to the understanding of development (e.g. Christova et al., 2013). Following this, the two morning sessions covered ‘TISSUE AND ORGAN DEVELOPMENT’ and ‘DEVELOPMENTAL GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS.’ I listened to James Briscoe’s talk on the Sonic Hedgehog morphogen gradient in the neural tube and the interesting mathematical models that his lab has used to explore the time and precision of its patterning. Virginia Papaioannou then spoke about the role of Tbx6 in left-right axis establishment (Concepcion et al., 2017).
Also in this session were complementing talks from Eileen Furlong (Mikhaylichenko et al., 2018) and Mike Levine (Lim et al., 2018) on the relationships between enhancers and promoters and how chromatin architecture regulates gene expression. After a lunch poster session, the afternoon sessions began with talks on ‘MECHANISMS OF GLOBAL GENE REGULATION’ and ‘CELL BIOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT’. That afternoon, I caught a talk by Robb Krumlauf, in which he showed some fascinating lamprey experiments which supplied further detail on the ancient interactions between retinoic acid and Hox genes. Following this, Caroline Telfer demonstrated her impressive quantity of PhD work on the upstream regulation of the GATA genes, and then Pavel Tomancak showed a combination of beautiful live imaging and computational models for serosa closure in Tribolium castaneum embryos. The day’s closing plenary lecture was given by Janet Rossant, which included her work on dramatically increasing CRISPR efficiency in early mouse blastocysts.
The highlight of this first evening was the announcement of the Waddington Medal and the Waddington Lecture. The most prestigious prize awarded by the BSDB, the Waddington Medal recognises an individual who has made major contributions to developmental biology in the UK. The recipient of the award is, by tradition, kept a secret until the president of the society awards the medal. Ottoline Leyser introduced the awardee of the medal, after a short bit of suspense and the interesting insight that the last three winners of the prize have been accomplished artists. The medal was awarded to Richard Gardner for his pioneering work on various aspects of early mouse development from clonal lineage analysis and transplantation to axis determination (see our blog post).
In his subsequent lecture, Richard Gardner detailed some of the highlights of his impressive career, punctuated by humorous anecdotes and intriguing details. For instance, he commented on the four passions of Sydney Smith (who taught Gardner at university): Darwin, embryology, Ming dynasty porcelain, and wine (most developmental biologists can relate to at least three). Gardner also acknowledged his students, his mentor Robert Edwards, and collaborators such as Mary Lyon and Martin Johnson.
After the Waddington lecture, was the student and post-doc socialin which we were split into teams to create a development-themed piece of art. An hour of glitter, glue, and coloured card later, the products of our endeavours included a model of Waddington’s epigenetic landscape, an interactive and moving model of chick somite formation, and the winning entry, a performance piece showing the injection of labelled cells into a blastocyst.
On Tuesday morning, the opening plenary lecture was given by Sean Carroll. In a similar vein to Matthew Freeman, he described how pursuing his boyhood passion for snakes led him away from developmental biology and to interesting work on the evolution of proteins in snake venom. I then attended the ‘EVO-DEVO’ session in the morning, which ran parallel to ‘STEM CELLS AND REGENERATION’. In this session, I listened to many fascinating talks, which included Patrick Lemaire, on his computer models of ascidian cell fate determination, Karen Sears on the development of several unique aspects of bat morphology, and Miltos Tsiantis on the evolution of leaf form and the identification of a key regulator of leaf shape (Vuolo et al., 2016). Finishing off the session, Peter Holland covered his group’s work on the ParaHox gene, Pdx, in a variety of different bilaterian species.
A second lunch poster session followed, and then the afternoon programming kicked into gear. These were talks grouped under the themes of ‘POSITIONAL INFORMATION’ and ‘CELL FATE’. In the former, Lee Niswander gave a talk on neural tube closure defects (Li et al., 2018), and in the latter, Olivier Pourquie spoke about the importance of using cell culture and iPSCs, which his lab used to generate human pre-somitic mesoderm-like cells. In a talk that very much followed the themes of the conference, James Sharpe acknowledged the 50th anniversary of Lewis Wolpert’s proposal of the French Flag Problem and re-interpreted the potential solutions to the problem through his data indicating that digits are patterned by a Turing mechanism (Green and Sharpe, 2015).
The final order of business for the day was the BSDB’s annual general meeting. This was an interesting insight into the inner workings of the society, which involved the election of new members to the committee and the presentation of committee officers’ reports.
After the wrap up of the AGM was the conference dinner and party. This was a celebration worthy of marking 70 years of the BSDB – complete with balloons, good food, and plenty of wine. The dinner was topped off with cake, cut by four former presidents of the BSDB.
Also announced were the winners of the post-doc and PhD poster prizes (see our blog post), as well as the winners of the advocacy writing competition, which was initiated specifically for the 70th anniversary of the BSDB and saw submissions from students and post-docs on the history and future of the BSDB (see our blog post). Fuelled by the great atmosphere, and likely a bit of wine, the dancing began. It was a great experience to see everyone, at all career stages, let loose and enjoy themselves. Particularly popular were the Developmental Biology-themed raps, written and performed by Jerry aka Gerald H Thomsen PhD, and produced and mixed by Philip Larsen. Overall, it was an excellent and celebratory evening.
Gerald Thomsen, Josh Brickman and Philip Larsen
Rap 1: BSDB History (part I & II)
Rap 2: Morphogen Mix
The final morning of the meeting began with a plenary lecture from Ottoline Leyser. She spoke about her work with the plant hormone strigolactone, and its role in regulating the plasticity of branching, and the self-organising auxin network in plants (Ligerot et al., 2017).The enthralling lecture was enough to make anyone want to become a plant biologist. This was followed by two further plenary lectures from Connie Eaves, on the early haematopoietic cell lineage in humans (Sawai et al., 2016), and Edith Heard, on the role of X-chromosome chromatin architecture and its relationship to Xist and X-inactivation (Galupa and Heard, 2018). Then the Cheryll Tickle Medal was awarded to Christiana Ruhrberg (see our blog post) by Cheryll Tickle herself. The Cheryll Tickle Medal is given to a mid-career, female scientist for her outstanding achievements in developmental biology. Christiana Ruhrberg then gave a great lecture on her scientific career so far.
Of particular interest to me was how Ruhrberg neatly combined her early career work in neurogenesis and vasculogenesis to form the focus and direction of her group as a PI, working on the interplay between these two processes. Nicely linking in with the historical theme of the meeting, Ruhrberg noted that she was the first to have ever seen the current BSDB logo (which shows the progression of embryonic development), as the creator of the logo, Jeff Christiansen, was staying at her house when he designed it (see our blog post). The final lecture of the meeting was given by John Gurdon, on the stability and reversal of gene expression in development.
This was my first BSDB meeting and it was overall an excellent experience. It showcased cutting-edge science and a great community, the strength of which was demonstrated by the creation of a scientific genealogy, which used pins and thread to plot mentor and mentee relationships as part of a huge interconnected network of developmental biologists.
Weaving pedigree networks: Eric Wieschaus, David Ish-Horowicz, Claudio Stern, Austin Smith
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the BSDB for the conference grant that enabled me to attend. The meeting gave me a new appreciation for the history of Developmental Biology and strengthened my excitement to be a part of its future. Here’s to the next 70 years of the BSDB!
References
Note: where possible published work relevant to the text has been cited.
Belmonte, J. M., M. Leptin and F. Nedelec (2017). “A theory that predicts behaviors of disordered cytoskeletal networks.” Mol Syst Biol13(9): 941.
Christova, Y., C. Adrain, P. Bambrough, A. Ibrahim and M. Freeman (2013). “Mammalian iRhoms have distinct physiological functions including an essential role in TACE regulation.” EMBO Rep14(10): 884-890.
Clark, E. and M. Akam (2016). “Odd-paired controls frequency doubling in Drosophila segmentation by altering the pair-rule gene regulatory network.” Elife5.
Concepcion, D., A. J. Washkowitz, A. DeSantis, P. Ogea, J. I. Yang, N. C. Douglas and V. E. Papaioannou (2017). “Cell lineage of timed cohorts of Tbx6-expressing cells in wild-type and Tbx6 mutant embryos.” Biol Open6(7): 1065-1073.
Favuzzi, E., A. Marques-Smith, R. Deogracias, C. M. Winterflood, A. Sanchez-Aguilera, L. Mantoan, P. Maeso, C. Fernandes, H. Ewers and B. Rico (2017). “Activity-Dependent Gating of Parvalbumin Interneuron Function by the Perineuronal Net Protein Brevican.” Neuron95(3): 639-655 e610.
Galupa, R. and E. Heard (2018). “Topologically Associating Domains in Chromosome Architecture and Gene Regulatory Landscapes during Development, Disease, and Evolution.” Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol.
Green, J. B. and J. Sharpe (2015). “Positional information and reaction-diffusion: two big ideas in developmental biology combine.” Development142(7): 1203-1211.
Green, S. A., B. R. Uy and M. E. Bronner (2017). “Ancient evolutionary origin of vertebrate enteric neurons from trunk-derived neural crest.” Nature544(7648): 88-91.
Li, H., J. Zhang, S. Chen, F. Wang, T. Zhang and L. Niswander (2018). “Genetic contribution of retinoid-related genes to neural tube defects.” Hum Mutat39(4): 550-562.
Ligerot, Y., A. de Saint Germain, T. Waldie, C. Troadec, S. Citerne, N. Kadakia, J. P. Pillot, M. Prigge, G. Aubert, A. Bendahmane, O. Leyser, M. Estelle, F. Debelle and C. Rameau (2017). “The pea branching RMS2 gene encodes the PsAFB4/5 auxin receptor and is involved in an auxin-strigolactone regulation loop.” PLoS Genet13(12): e1007089.
Lim, B., T. Heist, M. Levine and T. Fukaya (2018). “Visualization of Transvection in Living Drosophila Embryos.” Mol Cell70(2): 287-296 e286.
Sammut, M., S. J. Cook, K. C. Q. Nguyen, T. Felton, D. H. Hall, S. W. Emmons, R. J. Poole and A. Barrios (2015). “Glia-derived neurons are required for sex-specific learning in C. elegans.” Nature526(7573): 385-390.
Sawai, C. M., S. Babovic, S. Upadhaya, D. Knapp, Y. Lavin, C. M. Lau, A. Goloborodko, J. Feng, J. Fujisaki, L. Ding, L. A. Mirny, M. Merad, C. J. Eaves and B. Reizis (2016). “Hematopoietic Stem Cells Are the Major Source of Multilineage Hematopoiesis in Adult Animals.” Immunity45(3): 597-609.
Vuolo, F., R. A. Mentink, M. Hajheidari, C. D. Bailey, D. A. Filatov and M. Tsiantis (2016). “Coupled enhancer and coding sequence evolution of a homeobox gene shaped leaf diversity.” Genes Dev30(21): 2370-2375.
Weng, M. and E. Wieschaus (2017). “Polarity protein Par3/Bazooka follows myosin-dependent junction repositioning.” Dev Biol422(2): 125-134.
At the 2018 Spring Meeting in Warwick, the PhD and PostDoc representatives organises a series of events for young researchers. These ranged from asking questions such as “What is the secret to success?” through to some crafty synthetic biology and ending with the award of the 2018 BSDB writing competition.
Career workshop
The career workshop kicked off the BSDB 70th birthday celebrations, with a topic focused on ‘building resilience and overcoming obstacles’. The idea was to utilise the knowledge and experience of the successful developmental biologists attending the meeting to give plenary and session talks. In total we had 18 tables, lead by Ottoline Leyser, Jordan Raff, Robb Krumlauf, Maria Leptin, Steve Wilson, Matthew Freeman, Fiona Watt, Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz, Jan Traas, Judith Kimble, Henrik Semb, Anne Ferguson-Smith, Patrick Lamaire, Jean Paul Vincent, Kate Storey, Austin Smith and Yohanns Belliache.
We wanted to have honest and open discussions about how to succeed in academia. ‘What is the secret to success, if there is any?!’. It is not very often you get to have opportunity to pick the brains of the leaders in your area of interests. This led to an afternoon of lively discussions.
Student/postdoc social
The format of the last couple of student/postdoc socials have been designed to get people to interact with people other than their lab mates! This year was no exception. This year’s activity was for randomly assigned teams to build models, within 1 hour, of any one of the following themes: fertilisation, plant development, somitogenesis, cell-fate determination and evo-devo.
We will let the pictures do the talking, but we were blown away by how amazing the models were and how much effort people put into making them. Megan Davey and Rita Sousa-Nunes judged the competition but had a hard time choosing winners since the models were excellent.
We are grateful to all the exhibitors who kindly donated prizes: Abcam, Class Learning, Proteintech, Philosophical Transactions B and Biographical Memoirs, The Company of Biologists, Stratech, 2BScientific and Indigo Scientific.
2018 BSDB Writing Competition
Finally, the student/postdoc events ended with the announcement of the 2018 Writing Competition. As part of the BSDB 70th anniversary celebrations, we initiated a writing competition where first prize was
a trip to the 77th Annual Society of Developmental Biology meeting (Portland, Oregon, USA). Katherine Brown, Aidan Maartens, Ottoline Leyser and Jonathan Slack judged the competition, selecting Daniyal Jafree as the winner.
So this year, is the final year for us organising these events. It has been a blast. Thank you all for making it such a wonderful and memorable experience. Please don’t forget to contact your future student (students@bsdb.org) or postdoc (postdocs@bsdb.org) reps for any comments or suggestions regarding the British developmental biology community.
See here for more pictures of the student/postdoc events.