New from the BiophysJ: Emerging Biophysical Technologies and New & Notable

You may have noticed some new things happening at Biophysical Journal. With each new issue, some papers are being highlighted as New & Notable or as an Emerging Biophysical Technology. These tags make it easy for you identify some of the groundbreaking and best research coming out of BiophysJ.

What is a New & Notable you ask?

This figure was published in Biophysical Journal as part of the article “Protein-Protein Interactions in Calcium Transport Regulation Probed by Saturation Transfer Electron Paramagnetic Resonance” by James et. al

New & Notables (N&N) are commentaries that are published about a current paper in the Journal. Papers are identified as N&N when reviewers are very enthusiastic about a paper and think it is one of the best papers they have read. Journal subscribers can view the latest N&N here.

And what about Emerging Biophysical Technologies?

Emerging Biophysical Technologies (EBT) are selected by editors and highlight new physics-based methods. Methods papers can be of great significance to the field of biophysics andBiophysJ highlights these with a two sentence description to give you, the reader, a quick overview of why this new method is important. Journal subscribers can view the latest Emerging Biophysical Technologies online here.

When asked, Les Loew, Editor-in-Chief of Biophysical Journal, had this to say about the

This figure was published in Biophysical Journal as part of the article “Cellular Response to Heat Shock Studied by Multiconfocal Fluorescence Correlation Spectroscopy” by Kloster-Landsber et. al

importance of highlighting these types of papers in the Journal –“N&Ns have been published in the past; the difference now is that the Editors and I are actively soliciting them when we see an exciting paper. We feel that these short (1-2 page) micro-reviews help the broad readership of the Journal appreciate important advances that may be outside their own area of expertise. Importantly, they are all written by acknowledged volunteer experts in the field of the paper, who can describe the impact of the paper within a broader biophysics context. They are not written by the authors of the original paper. I am really gratified by how readily it has been possible to secure these (on very short notice) from our volunteer contributors. EBTs are generally just two sentences long and are written by one of the Editors to appear in the Table of Contents. Because new methods can have such a broad impact on future research, we feel that innovative new technological advances deserve the special attention of the Biophysical Journal readership.”

————–

View the latest issue of Biophysical Journal online here – including highlighted papers that are available to everyone for free. Don’t forget–Society Members can publish in BiophysJ at a reduced cost and receive free online color figures!

STEM Teachers: Looking for Help With Lesson Plans?

STEM education is expected to play a vital role in the future of the US economy (and economies around the world), and with a new school year underway, many teachers are looking for ways to keep students enthusiastic about STEM-related topics.

The National Science Digital Library (NSDL) works to provide educators (K-12 teachers as well as college professors) with high quality digital resources to help educate and engage students. NSDL is supported by the National Science Foundation, as well as an extensive network of STEM companies and organizations who share NSDL’s goal of educating future generations in STEM topics. Network members help NSDL refine resources, ensuring the best possible information is available for teachers and students.

Educators can access NSDL resources online free of charge. For biology specific tools, check out the BEN portal (BiosciEdNet), managed by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The website offers access to more than 18,000 reviewed resources covering 75+ biological science topics. Most records are available for free. Users can also join BEN’s online community of science educators to collaborate and share teaching ideas.

Celebrating a Summer of Biophysics

Biophysics students enjoying ice creamThe 2012 Summer Course in Biophysics came to an end earlier this August with group trip to a local ice cream stand. The twelve undergraduate students had spent the day presenting their independent summer research projects to their TAs, lab supervisors, and PIs. The final symposium concluded a course filled with lectures, quizzes and independent biophysics-related research at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. The students lived together in a dorm, collaborated on weekly homework assignments, and participated in scientific seminars and poster presentations together.

The celebratory ice cream trip marked one of the last nights the students would spend
together in Chapel Hill before heading back home, whether to Detroit, Puerto Rico, or Connecticut. It also marked the start of a new beginning for many of the participants who spend the summer realizing just how exciting biophysics research can be.

 

Biophysics students“Looking back now, I would never have expected to grow this much, both as a research and as a person overall. Here I was, a hardcore biology major jumping into the fray of biophysics with almost no physics background, totally out of my comfort zone. Yet, as the uncomfortability subsided, I realized that perhaps it is occasionally stepping outside of your comfort zone that allows for learning and growth to happen—much like how the roots of a plant grow outward, yearning for more space and nutrients as the plant grows, that if the roots had stayed within their comfort zone, never growing out and looking for more nutrients, the plant would never give itself the opportunity to grow to its fullest potential.”

– Nawaphon Sittisawassakul, 2012 Summer Course participant, rising junior at SUNY Purchase

Learn Where Your Candidates Stand on Medical Research Funding

Research!America recently launched the 2012 edition of their survey, “Your Candidates. Your Health.” The survey aims to educate voters about where their candidates for presidential and congressional races stand on issues of medical research, particularly medical research funding.

Candidates are invited to fill out the survey, which is then posted on the Your Candidates. Your Health. website along with a tool allowing voters to easily compare the views of each candidate.

Get to know where your candidates stand on medical research, and encourage those candidates who have not yet participated to let voters know where they stand!

The Next Generation: Introducing High School Students to Biophysics

High school students are introduced to biophysics. The Biophysical Society recently sponsored a half-day event, “Introducing Biophysics to Highschools,” through the BPS mini-grant program. The event was organized by Marta Bunster, the Laboratory of Molecular Biophysics and the Center for Photonics and Optics at Universidad de Concepción.

Students and teachers were welcomed to the auditorium at the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Science by undergraduate and graduate students from the Molecular Biophysics Lab. They attended lectures concerning different applications of biophysical methods, from remote sensing from satellites looking for environmental parameters, the uses in biomedical devices for diagnosis and detection, to the analysis of single molecules.

The students were then divided into four groups to visit laboratories, where researches and graduate students guided them through the use of different techniques, such as molecule optical tweezers, spectroscopy and microscopy.

Students from various schools in the region were invited, all of them interested in physics. Several even had to travel two hours just to attend! It was a great opportunity to chat science with young people, and it should be continued.

-Marta Bunster

Attracting new biophysicists: UVA event discusses creating and maintaining graduate and undergraduate programs specific to biophysics

Discussion: attracting biophysicists in universities

Event attendees discussed options for attracting more undergraduate and graduate students to biophysics.

On June 15, we held a Biophysical Society regional interface meeting at the University of Virginia.  We had about 50 attendees from the Mid-Atlantic States joined us for what turned out to be a beautiful day in Charlottesville, Va.  In addition, we were delighted that Bridget Swartz and Ellen Weiss from the Biophysical Society office drove to central Virginia to join us. The meeting theme was “Creating Biophysics Undergraduate Majors.” We all know that there are very few college seniors or recent graduates that have specific interest in getting a PhD in biophysics.

The question of the day was: How can we improve the visibility of biophysics graduate programs or create undergrad programs that would attract majors? We had five talks from program leaders around Virginia, including Gina MacDonald from James Madison University, who told us about JMU’s efforts to set up a biophysical chemistry major, and Lou De Felice from Virginia Commonwealth University, who described how biophysics permeates throughout VCU in both the main and medical school campuses as well as in various centers. De Felice also described his methods of attracting students to VCU’s graduate program. Linda Columbus from the University of Virginia described the development of a lab-based undergraduate course in protein structure-function including the very important aspects of assessment. Will Guilford and Robert Bryant, also from UVA, discussed approaches and challenges to setting up a scientific major with specific considerations for biophysics. Our keynote speaker, Karen Fleming from Johns Hopkins University, gave us a wonderful overview of the biophysics major and the insights she has gained from directing the Johns Hopkins program.

There was lively discussion associated with all of the talks, including agreements that biophysics oriented programs and courses attract better students, experiential and active learning works extremely well in our field, and students are interested in learning a broad range of materials from the theoretical to the practical. There was emphasis that learning the basics such as Beer’s Law and how to make buffers may be among the most important lessons.

Biophysics students

Biophysics students presented research posters during the event.

At the concluding reception, several biophysics students presented research posters and there were many discussions about both research and education. It became clear that regional meetings offer tremendous value by allowing us to talk about issues that are unique to our area. There was a consensus to commit to holding similar gatherings every two years and to rotate the meetings among our campuses.

Dear Molly Cule: Negotiating a Postdoc’s Salary

Molly Cule is an Associate Professor in a medical school at a public university in the United States. Professor Cule is delighted to receive comments on her answers and (anonymized) questions at mollycule@biophysics.org, or visit her here on the BPS Blog.

Dear Molly Cule,
I’m about to finish my PhD and have been offered a postdoc position that I’m excited about. However, the PI won’t go above $38k for a salary. I recently got married and we’re expecting a child. Raising children is expensive and as somebody with a family I think I need more than what a single postdoc gets. What should I do?

–Poor, from Pennsylvania

Dear Poor,

Fixing a salary for a new postdoc can be a tricky process, both for the PI and the trainee. In the US, there is often some room for negotiation, although in other countries the system may be more rigid. Even in the US, the PI may be bound by institutional or department procedures. In my “administrative unit,” for example, PI’s are “encouraged” to pay at least 80% of the NIH scale, although some trainees make a lot more than this and some a little less.

One of the reasons fixing the initial salary can be difficult is that the PI and the potential postdoc often have different goals. The trainee is frequently trying to get the highest possible salary while the PI might be trying to pay the minimal amount required to recruit a new lab member. This is not necessarily because the faculty member is frugal (a polite word for mean). They could be trying to harbor their resources so that they can pay for a technician or a new piece of equipment to support the postdoc and help him or her to be successful.

There are many different strategies that you could adopt in your situation but my advice is to try and negotiate fairly and openly with your potential mentor. If the process goes well, there’s a good chance you’ll come to a reasonable compromise you’re both happy with. If, on the other hand, the negotiation is emotionally difficult and overly tense, you might want to think carefully about whether or not you really want to work closely with this person for the next few years. Remember also that they will be thinking the same thing. It takes two to tango!

When you negotiate, try not to fixate on a specific number. In the long run, your “relative” pay may be more important. For example, a $38k salary will go a lot further if your postdoc position is at the University of Nebraska than if you’re moving to Columbia University and have to live in or close to New York City. Some institutions will offer you low-cost health care while others may require that you pay more out of your own pocket. You may also be eligible for retirement packages at some institutions but not at others. Being new parents will almost certainly change your tax situation, too—consult an expert about this to make sure. Bear these things in mind because they can make a big difference in the long run. Recognize also that if you’re offered $38k and other postdocs in the department are averaging $36k, you are already ahead of the pack. (Salaries at public universities are often available online, so do some comparison shopping. Check http://www.collegiatetimes.com/databases/salaries or the websites for local newspapers etc. for the information.)

If you’re left behind the eight ball and really can’t agree on a number, try to be (politely) creative. Perhaps your PI can offer your spouse a part-time position, or you can negotiate a bonus if you get a grant or when you publish a second Nature paper! If nothing works, you may just have to walk away, recognizing that you’ve priced yourself out of your PI’s market.

Finally, let me comment on “postdocs with families deserve higher salaries.” I’ve heard this idea before and I have some sympathy with it. After all, you’ve been studying and training a long time and it’s a pity that you’re not being better rewarded (financially) for your advanced skills. Nevertheless, you knew that being a biophysicist was unlikely to win you a Wall Street salary when you got into this game. You therefore shouldn’t be surprised that you’re not yet a millionaire. Moreover, having a spouse and family was a personal choice and, in my opinion, it’s not appropriate to suggest that it should influence your salary. You would probably be upset if your potential mentor had discriminated against you and recruited a single postdoc who would “spend more time in the lab because he or she wouldn’t be distracted.” Paying you more than a single lab member is equally discriminating against them.

In summary, my advice is to negotiate reasonably and fairly with your potential mentor and try to come to a reasonable compromise. Walk away if you have to, but recognize that if you’ve walked away from three jobs in a row, you’ve probably overestimated your perceived value.

Good luck and best wishes.
–Molly

Behind the Cover: Q&A with BJ Author and Cover Artist Jennifer Ross

The image on the cover of the May issue of Biophysical Journal, released Tuesday, was created by Jennifer Ross, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physics at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Ross, a Biophysical Society member, has agreed to provide some insight on how the image came to be, on her research, and on her lab.

May 2011 BJ Cover Image

Q: How did you compose this image?
Ross: We made the image using Illustrator. The background was made by using an image on the internet and overlaying blocks of color to replicate the shapes in the dojo. The dragons were drawn by hand and scanned after looking online for images of Japanese-style dragons. The head was colored and shaded in Photoshop and sent to Illustrator. The body was opened in Illustrator, where we used ovals to overlay the entire body to represent the scales of the dragon. The ninja Drosophila flies were drawn directly in Illustrator. It took about two days of work, but it was a well-deserved reward for the acceptance to the Biophysical Journal.

Q: What prompted you to submit your image as cover art?
Ross: A colleague and my office neighbor just got the cover of Physical Review Letters (PRL), and he hung the image on his door. That made me think that this would be good publicity for our lab, so when Biophysical Journal asked for an artistic cover, we decided to try.

Q: How does this image reflect your scientific research?
Ross: The entire image is an allegory for our paper in Biophysical Journal! The ninja flies are wielding Japanese “katana” swords. Our protein is named “katanin” after these swords, and the construct we use is a Drosophila version, hence the flies. This concept of Japanese swords prompted the entire style of a Japanese ninja dojo. We needed the swords to cut the microtubules, as they do in our assays, but plain microtubules were very boring. So, we decided to make the microtubules into red dragons. We found in our study that the katanin cut at lattice defects, or protofilament shifts, in the microtubule lattice.
We represent these shifts as a change int he number of scales in a given row. We also found that the katanin preferentially severed from the plus-end of the microtubules. We represented that as the flies with katana swords to cut the heads off the dragons. In the background of the dojo are representative two-color images from our paper. They are hanging as posters. In the center, the Japanese kenji say “katana.”

Q: Where do you see the artistry in your image? How did you come to see this?
Ross: As described above, the entire artistry was prompted by the data itself and the name of the protein, “katanin.” Interestingly, many people told us that the image was too outrageous for the cover. But, we had looked at over a year’s worth of Biophysical Journal covers, and we had seen several of this style. We weren’t confident we would be picked, but we decided to give it a try. We figured, if it didn’t get selected, we would just print a high-gloss version to frame for ourselves.

Q: How does it feel to have your image chosen as the cover of an issue of Biophysical Journal? What is the significance of this for you?
Ross: We were ecstatic to have our cover chosen! Achieving the cover of the Biophysical Journal is a nice cherry on top of having the paper accepted to the premier journal in the field of biophysics. Especially as a young investigator who is still pre-tenure, having the exposure of the cover of the Biophysical Journal is a big deal for me and my lab.

Q: Do you consider yourself an artist as well as a scientist? Any ideas or aspirations for your next science-as-art submission?
Ross: I definitely love art and the idea of marrying art with science is very exciting to me, but I have never really been an “artist”—at least not professionally. The union of art and science has the ability to transcend the difficulties associated with science for many people. When you can represent your results in a single cartoon, people can take that away with them. In addition to art, my lab makes a music video every summer. We have three on our website posted from YouTube. The first we did was a 90’s rap, “This is How We Do It.” The second was science spoof of the heavy metal classic, “Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap” by AC/DC called, “Physics Deeds Done Dirt Cheap.” The most recent was a spoof of the Lady GaGa and Beyonce hit, “Telephone,” we called “Microscope.” Most of these videos highlight our biophysical methods and microscopies in the new lyrics. We will be doing a new one this summer, but we haven’t yet picked the genre or topic.

Additionally, as an educator, I focus on training interdisciplinary students at the life science-physical science interface. I just finished teaching “Optics for Biophysics,” a course where interdisciplinary sets of students learn optics to build a microscope.  In the course this spring, I had five life science students, and I was always thinking of new ways to describe the material.

Q: Do you have a website where our readers can view your recent research?
Ross: I have a website for my laboratory where you can find my publications and our science spoof videos: http://www.people.umass.edu/rossj/Ross_Lab.html.

BPS Members on the Hill

In early April, Biophysical Society members Craig Jolley, Montana State University, Erin Sheets, University of Minnesota, Duluth, and Sabina Kupershmidt, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, joined with more than 250 scientists, engineers and business leaders who made visits on Capitol Hill as part of the sixteenth “Science-Engineering-Technology-Congressional Visits Day (CVD).”  The purpose of the visits was to express support for funding federal research and development programs and to discuss the important economic impacts on our economy of such programs.  The participants also had the opportunity to learn about the federal budget for science agencies and the appropriations panel from a panel of speakers that included representatives from the White House, Capitol Hill, and the AAAS.

Participant Craig Jolley agreed to share his perspective on the day:

“For me, the biggest surprise was how nice people were.  I’d honestly expected to get blown off by a bunch of impatient, uninterested people, but the staffers we met with were all very positive and gave us their undivided attention, even if the meetings were short.  In some cases, we talked to people who really seemed to have a deep understanding of the role of the federal government in American science; the staffers who were newer to these issues still seemed eager to learn about how the government’s commitment to research affects their districts.  The atmosphere on Capitol Hill is very different from the more laid-back environment of a university research lab– the culture at Montana State is fairly egalitarian and it was eye-opening to spend time in a place where the efforts of thousands of people were dedicated to supporting and influencing the decision-making process of a much smaller group.  I also really enjoyed the panel discussion with former Rep. Sherwood Boehlert; he put things in a longer-term perspective (as only a retired politician can) and motivated us to make dialogue between scientists and elected officials a long-term habit.  I suspect that the combination of exposure and practical advice will affect the way I think about and approach the science/government relationship for some time to come.”