A structured professional development curriculum for postdoctoral fellows leads to recognized knowledge growth

Postdoctoral training enables research independence and professional readiness. National reports have emphasized professional development as a critical component of this training period. In response, many institutions are establishing transferable skills training workshops for postdocs; however, the lack of structured programs and an absence of methods to assess outcomes beyond participant satisfaction surveys are critical gaps in postdoctoral training. To address these shortcomings, we took the approach of structured programming and developed a method for controlled assessment of outcomes. Our program You3 (You, Your Team, Your Project), co-designed by postdoctoral fellows, focused on discussing specific management and leadership skills agnostic of ultimate career path(s) in a structured manner. We then measured outcomes in a controlled manner, by systematically comparing perceived knowledge and growth as indicators of awareness and confidence in participants against that of non-participants as the control group. You3 participants self-rated greater growth in targeted competencies compared to non-participants independent of the number of years of training. This growth was shown by multiple criteria including self-reporting and associative analysis. Correspondingly, You3 participants reported greater knowledge in 75% of the modules when compared to controls. These data indicate that structured learning, where postdocs commit to a curriculum via a cohort-structure, leads to positive outcomes and provides a framework for programs to assess outcomes in a rigorous manner.

I Am Here: It Took a Global Village

The saying “It takes a village to raise a child” has never been truer than in my case. This autobiographical article documents my growing up and working on three different continents and my influencers along the way. Born in a village in Nigeria, West Africa, I spent the first 12 years of life with my grandmother living in a mud house and attending a village primary school. I walked barefoot to school every day, learned to read, and wrote on a chalk slate. At the age of 13, I moved to my second “village,” London, England. In secondary school my love of science began to blossom. I attained a double major in chemistry and human biology from the University of Hertfordshire and a PhD in biophysics from the University of London, with a research project aimed at designing anticancer agents. I was mentored by Terence Jenkins and Stephen Neidle. For my postdoctoral training, I crossed the ocean again, to the United States, my third “village.” In Michael Rossmann's group at Purdue University, my love for viruses was ignited. My independent career in structural virology began at Warwick University, England, working on pathogenic single-stranded DNA packaging viruses. In 2020, I am a full professor at the University of Florida. Most of my research is focused on the adeno-associated viruses, gene delivery vectors. My list of mentors has grown and includes Nick Muzyczka. Here, the mentee has become the mentor, and along the way, we attained a number of firsts in the field of structural virology and contributed to the field at the national and international stages.

Cluster Preface: Modern Nickel-Catalyzed Reactions

Ruben Martin is a professor at the Institute of Chemical Research of Catalonia (ICIQ), Tarragona, Spain. He received his Ph.D. in 2003 from the University of Barcelona under the guidance of Prof. Antoni Riera. In 2004, he moved to the Max-Planck Institut für Kohlenforschung as a Humboldt postdoctoral fellow with Prof. Alois Fürstner. In 2005, he undertook further postdoctoral studies at MIT with Prof. Stephen L. Buchwald as a MEC-Fulbright fellow. In 2008, he began his independent career as an assistant professor at the ICIQ (Tarragona). In 2013, he was promoted to associate professor and shortly after to ICREA Research Professor. Ruben Martin has focused his career on designing synthetically useful Ni-catalyzed methodologies for streamlining the preparation of added-value chemicals from simple precursors without losing sight of mechanistic considerations, when appropriate. Gary A. Molander is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States. He completed his undergraduate studies in chemistry at Iowa State University under the tutelage of Prof. Richard C. Larock. He earned his Ph.D. at Purdue University under the direction of Prof. Herbert Brown and undertook postdoctoral training with Prof. Barry Trost at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He began his academic career at the University of Colorado, Boulder, moving to the University of Pennsylvania in 1999, where he is currently Professor of Chemistry. His research interests have focused on the utilization of organolanthanides, Pd-catalyzed cross-coupling reactions with trifluoro­borate salts, and the merger of photoredox catalysis and Ni catalysis for tackling a priori uphill transformations under visible-light irradiation for accessing valuable scaffolds in both academic and pharmaceutical laboratories.

Short- and Long-Term Adaptation to Altered Levels of Glucose: Fifty Years of Scientific Adventure

My graduate and postdoctoral training in metabolism and enzymology eventually led me to study the short- and long-term regulation of glucose and lipid metabolism. In the early phase of my career, my trainees and I identified, purified, and characterized a variety of phosphofructokinase enzymes from mammalian tissues. These studies led us to discover fructose 2,6-P2, the most potent activator of phosphofructokinase and glycolysis. The discovery of fructose 2,6-P2 led to the identification and characterization of the tissue-specific bifunctional enzyme 6-phosphofructo-2-kinase:fructose 2,6-bisphosphatase. We discovered a glucose signaling mechanism by which the liver maintains glucose homeostasis by regulating the activities of this bifunctional enzyme. With a rise in glucose, a signaling metabolite, xylulose 5-phosphate, triggers rapid activation of a specific protein phosphatase (PP2ABδC), which dephosphorylates the bifunctional enzyme, thereby increasing fructose 2,6-P2 levels and upregulating glycolysis. These endeavors paved the way for us to initiate the later phase of my career in which we discovered a new transcription factor termed the carbohydrate response element binding protein (ChREBP). Now ChREBP is recognized as the masterregulator controlling conversion of excess carbohydrates to storage of fat in the liver. ChREBP functions as a central metabolic coordinator that responds to nutrients independently of insulin. The ChREBP transcription factor facilitates metabolic adaptation to excess glucose, leading to obesity and its associated diseases.

Obtaining a faculty position in STEM at a research-intensive institution

Progressing from postdoctoral training to a STEM faculty appointment at a Research Intensive Institution (RII) is a daunting transition, and may be especially challenging to those who have followed a less-than-conventional path or whose peers have lost interest in academic careers. This article describes how to prepare for and progress through the application process for institutions in the USA, which takes approximately 1 year, including what to expect at each step and recommendations for a successful transition. The odds of success for any individual application are low, making good preparation and careful planning the more important, as does managing expectations to avoid becoming discouraged early in the process. The rewards of landing the faculty appointment at an institution that matches your professional and personal needs and for which you are best suited more than exceeds the effort required to attain it.

A Brief Early History of Plant Science in St. Louis and the Partnership between Washington University and the Missouri Botanical Garden

Since the founding of the Missouri Botanical Garden (MBG) in 1859, the emphasis on research and the distribution of research findings in botany has been, and will remain, one of the central components of the garden’s mission. Likewise, Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL), the MBG’s partner in graduate programs since 1885, has had a continuous and similarly strong emphasis on research and the dissemination of research findings in plant science through publications. Since the beginning of this partnership, the ongoing extension of common research themes has been critical, through the early focus on traditional botanical studies (1885–1930) at the MBG, the move toward a focus on physiology and the emerging field of ecology (1930–1960), and eventually the shift to the study of biochemistry, molecular biology, and genomic studies in plant science (1960–present), primarily at WUSTL. For more than 135 years (1885–2020), this St. Louis–based collaboration has had a prominent place in the region’s rich history in plant science. In recent years, collaboration with and contributions from other St. Louis–area degree-granting institutions in the field (such as Saint Louis University [SLU] and the University of Missouri–St. Louis [UMSL]) have steadily increased. Couple this with the addition of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center (Danforth Center) in 2000, which, like the MBG, has undertaken research and training in plant science, and you now have impressive depth and diversity within St. Louis’s plant science offerings. As a result, both organizations train students and carry out peer-reviewed research funded by the same agencies (i.e., National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Agriculture) as the region’s degree-granting institutions. Every year, a significant number of master’s degree and Ph.D. graduates in this consortium comprise an impressive pool of talent available for postdoctoral training, research, and teaching positions, as well as employment in government entities and private and public life science corporations. To this end, St. Louis has one of the largest concentrations of plant science Ph.D.’s in the world (with more than 1,000 such individuals residing in the region [BioSTL, 2018]), as well as a broad diversity of disciplines represented. In addition, the faculties at both the Danforth Center and MBG frequently serve as adjunct members of university departments and as advisors to graduate students, and greatly increase the breadth of topics offered in the St. Louis plant science community, particularly in areas not directly supported by the universities. Both organizations contribute to an increasingly important part of this ecosystem. Below is a short history of the relationship between the MBG and WUSTL, and how this collaboration, primarily through graduate research education, has been foundational for the St. Louis area’s impressive plant science ecosystem. This is not a detailed review of the science generated by these organizations, but rather an account of the initial events and leaders that led to the region becoming the present-day hub for plant science.

Factors that Influence Career Choice Among Different Populations of Neuroscience Trainees

Enhancing the diversity of the scientific workforce is critical to achieving the mission of NIH: "To seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce the burdens of illness and disability." However, specific groups have historically been, and continue to be, underrepresented in the biomedical research workforce, especially academia. Career choice is a multi-factorial process that evolves over time; among all trainees, expressed interest in faculty research careers decreases over time in graduate school, but that trend is amplified in women and members of historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups (Fuhrmann, Halme, O'Sullivan, & Lindstaedt, 2011; Gibbs, McGready, Bennett, & Griffin, 2014; C. Golde & Dore, 2004; Roach & Sauermann, 2017; Sauermann & Roach, 2012). Neuroscience as a discipline has characteristics that may exacerbate the overall trends seen in the life sciences, such as a greater growth in the number of awarded neuroscience PhDs than in other life sciences fields (US National Science Foundation, 2016b). This work was designed to investigate how career interest changes over time among recent neuroscience PhD graduates, and whether differences in career interests are associated with social identity (i.e. gender and race/ethnicity), experiences in graduate school and postdoctoral training (e.g. relationship with advisor; feelings of belonging), and personal characteristics (e.g. confidence in one's potential to be an independent researcher). We report results from a survey of 1,479 PhD neuroscientists (including 16% underrepresented (UR) and 54% female scientists). We saw repeated evidence that individual preferences about careers in general, and academic careers specifically, predict current career interest. These statistically significant preferences mostly had medium to low effect size that varied by career type. These findings were mediated by social identity and experiences in graduate school and postdoctoral training. Our findings highlight the important influence of the advisor in shaping a trainee's career path, and the ways in which academic culture is perceived as unwelcoming or incongruent with the values or priorities of certain groups. For women, issues of work/life balance and structural issues of academia, and for UR women in particular, lower confidence in their ability to be an independent researcher, affected their interest in academia. Both women and UR men in our study report a lower importance of autonomy in their careers. UR respondents report feeling less like they were a part of the social and intellectual community. However, they have formed beneficial relationships with faculty outside their PhD institutions that, particularly for UR women, are associated with increased interest in academia. Our findings suggest several areas for positive growth, ways to change how we think about the impact of mentorship, and policy and programmatic interventions that extend beyond trying to change or "fix" the individual and instead recognize the systemic structures that influence career choices.