Synchronization of iPS-derived cardiomyocytes to visitor heartbeat in an interactive museum exhibit

Science museums play an important role in science education, both engaging the public with science concepts and building support for scientific research. Designing museum exhibits to meet increasing public interests in the life sciences is particularly important, yet remains challenging. In this report we describe Give Heart Cells a Beat, a permanent interactive science exhibit that allows museum visitors to synchronize the beating of live stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes to their own heart rate in real-time. Evaluation with museum visitors reveals that the exhibit engaged the public with the specimen and prompted curiosity in heart biology and, to a lesser degree, stem cells and electrophysiology. Give Heart Cells a Beat is the product of a close collaboration between a museum and a research laboratory, and, to our knowledge, the first example of the use of live human heart cells in an interactive exhibit. We hope this exhibit will serve as an example for the implementation of stem cell technology in the field of informal science education and encourage others to pursue close working relationships between academia and public science venues such as museums.

Sharing Credit

Recent work by the NCPH, OAH, and AHA has raised the profile of challenges in evaluating collaborative research during the tenure and promotion process.1 Although it is acknowledged that most public historians work in collaborative partnerships, few resources dissect the nature of those collaborations and how they should be credited. This article focuses on a single case study, the development of the history of science exhibit Imaging the Invisible, a collaboration among faculty, staff, and students (both graduate and undergraduate). It was also an interdisciplinary project with representation from at least seven different departments and programs in the humanities, social sciences, sciences, and engineering. This collaborative article reflects on the project, giving four perspectives on how credit can be shared. It also draws attention to the similarities and differences between the nature of collaborative projects in public history and in the physical sciences and considers what each discipline can learn from the other.

Ten years of science in Philosophical Transactions A : with the University Research Fellows

In this brief paper, I review my 10 years as the Editor of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A . I look at the content of the journal over the years, relating it to a full classification of the physical sciences based on the interests of fellows and research fellows of the Royal Society. I show that the journal has performed well in terms of downloads, citations and impact factors. Innovations such as the Millennium and Christmas Issues for young scientists have stimulated a close and enjoyable interaction with the Society's research fellows. In addition to authoring papers and organizing themes, they have always been keen to help with the refereeing processes. They provided exciting demonstrations for a Summer Science exhibit that I organized to highlight the work of the journal, and five of the research fellows now sit on the Editorial Board. Looking to the future, I describe the new subject clusters that are being introduced as the journal steps up its publication rate from one issue per month to two, starting in January 2008.