Connect with us

CivicSciTimes - Stories in Science

Fishing for Change: How Fish Tanks and Textbooks Taught Me to Fall in Love with Science (and Discover its Flaws)

Jeromy DiGiacomo: “I hope my story can highlight that in all its objectivity, the STEM community is not immune to prejudice or discrimination and that we have a lot of room to grow.”

CSM Lab

Published

on

Jeromy DiGiacomo
[su_boxbox title=”About”]After graduating with honors in chemistry from Williams College, Jeromy DiGiacomo now works as a research associate studying pediatric neuro-oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts. He is currently preparing to apply to medical school with the goal of pursuing a career in medical oncology and cancer research. Jeromy first became interested in STEM advocacy after realizing that the leaders of the STEM community fail to accurately represent the diverse populations their research aims to benefit. He hopes his story can serve as a catalyst for discussion about how racism and prejudice in the STEM community are not just ancient relics of the past, but modern problems that need to be faced with new solutions. In his free time, Jeromy enjoys reading scientific literature, creative writing, and playing the marimba (a type of percussion instrument; he was a proud member of Zambezi Marimba Band in college)! The story below was edited by Katelyn Comeau.[/su_boxbox]
ย 
[su_boxnote note_color=”#c8c8c8″]Key Points:

  1. Donโ€™t be afraid to follow your scientific questions, as they often lead to unexpected and interesting results.
  2. We can work to overcome scienceโ€™s inaccessibility to people without extensive scientific backgrounds by engaging with our personal scientific communities and welcoming new faces into our labs, classrooms, journals, textbooks, and more.[/su_boxnote]

Jeromy DiGiacomo

[dropcap]I[/dropcap] grew up in Fairfield County, Connecticut, one of the wealthiest counties in the U.S. It is also predominantly white. As I made my way through the school system, I fit in (at least racially) with the rest of the crowd. My teachers, friends, and classmates all looked like me. The books we read, documentaries we watched, and textbooks we studied portrayed protagonists that looked like me and told stories that could be my own.

In eighth grade, I took a real interest in biology when my science teacher encouraged me to work on an independent project where I investigated the social behavior of neon tetras, a type of fish. Although my experiments back then would be considered unscientific by even the least rigorous standards, I still graduated from eighth grade feeling empowered by my newfound scientific knowledge, curiosity, and research abilities. As I waited for summer to end and ninth grade to begin, I found myself juggling scientific questions in my head without the ability to conduct research or produce answers.

To feed my growing passion for science, my parents gave me a Campbell biology textbook for my birthday. At the beginning of each chapter, there was an image and brief description of a famous scientist credited with a major discovery in the field. After the chapter on evolution, I was presented with a picture of Charles Darwin. After genetics, Gregor Mendel. After DNA structure, Watson and Crick. These people had names like mine, skin like mine, and ancestors like mine. And at the time, I imagined myself as a scientist through these images of famous researchers. I knew that one day, I could be like them because we shared common traits and ancestry.

In most of Fairfield county, guidance counselors start preparing students to apply to college during their first year of high school. As I began my freshman year of high school with a deepening interest in STEM, my guidance counselor assured me that I could pursue science at college. However, there was a catch โ€“ I had to prove I was academically worthy. She pointed me in the direction of AP science courses and resumรฉ-building extracurricular opportunities that โ€œdemonstrated academic achievement and prestige.โ€ Eight years after those initial conversations and years of preparation, I can proudly say that I am the first person in my family to receive a bachelorโ€™s degree.

Luckily, at Williams College where I completed my undergraduate studies, I participated in the Summer Science Program to prepare for my tough transition into college-level classes. The Summer Science Program is an opportunity where incoming freshmen from disadvantaged backgrounds, including many students of color, can spend their summer living on campus and taking college-level science courses to prepare for their first Fall semester. Although I came from a competitive high school, I was invited because I was a first-generation college student; in fact, most of the students in this program were the first in their family to go to college. That meant that many of us were navigating a completely foreign landscape in one way or another.

Many of my peers and I had never worked on complicated problem sets or used high-tech lab equipment before. Many of us had families who could not financially, emotionally, or physically support us in adjusting to college.

Although we struggled, it quickly became apparent that the difficulty was not because we werenโ€™t smart enough or didnโ€™t work hard enough.

Rather, entering academia, and specifically the STEM community, presented us with a twofold challenge: not only did we have to excel at the course material (much of which other students had seen already), but we also had to learn to navigate academic and prestigious spaces that were completely foreign to us. We struggled with things like how to ask the professor for help, read and interpret lab protocols, use basic lab equipment, and study for college-level tests when other students already took prep courses. And importantly, we also struggled with how to communicate our science with our families and communities at home โ€“ a key feature of research.

Although the adjustment period was difficult, with a lot of hard work, I graduated with honors from Williams College with a degree in chemistry. I also left having learned quite a bit about myself and my relationship to the STEM community.

During my time at college, I decided that I wanted to pursue a career in both medicine and research, particularly in the field of oncology. This decision was in part sparked by my experience shadowing at Berkshire Medical Center in Pittsfield, MA. I had the opportunity to shadow in the emergency room, operating room, maternity ward, and more; I most memorably spent the first two weeks of the program shadowing in the oncology ward where medical oncologists worked alongside radiologists, pathologists, and surgeons to heal patients sick with cancer.

Following that summer, I took a course called โ€œSignal Transduction to Cancerโ€ in which we discussed how mutations in the Hedgehog signaling pathway can lead to cancer. The Hedgehog signaling pathway is a well-studied collection of molecules and proteins (called a โ€œsignaling pathwayโ€). Normally, this pathway is involved with normal organismal growth and development. However, certain mutations can cause the normal functioning of this signaling pathway to go into overdrive, leading to uncontrolled growth, a key hallmark of cancer. I was actually quite nervous to take this course because it was based solely on articles from the primary scientific literature, material I had little experience with at the time. After reading a binder full of research articles and teasing out the main takeaways, strengths, and weaknesses for each article, I left the semester with not only a greater understanding of the molecular basis of cancer, but also the basics of reading and interpreting scientific writing and data in the primary literature.

Explore Next:  Getting Started in Academia

Importantly, the papers we read in this course reminded me of my eighth-grade science class. They also reignited my desire to follow my interests and parse out my questions through research. I decided that while I still wanted to work with patients directly, I needed to continue exploring my questions in cancer biology through research.

For this reason, I applied to and was accepted to work in a pediatric oncology lab at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston as a research associate. I currently work in the Bandopadhayay lab where Iโ€™m involved with two projects working to find better treatments for 2 kinds of childhood cancers: pediatric low-grade gliomas and diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas. Gliomas are cancers of the glia, which are cells tasked with the vital job of supporting neurons in the brain and across the nervous system. Pediatric low-grade gliomas are curable, but current treatments leave children with devastating long-term neurological effects. Diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas are rapidly-growing and surgically inoperable tumors that grow in the part of the brain that controls vital functions like breathing and heart-rate. Virtually all children with this type of cancer do not survive. Therefore, children that are diagnosed with these cancers rely on our research to bring better treatments we discover in the lab to the clinic.

Years after my first attempt at scientific research in eighth grade, I have finally started working in a real research lab. I secured a seat at the table. Still, something isnโ€™t quite right. Although I am very happy professionally, I realize that Iโ€™m here because of the experiences Iโ€™ve been allowed as a privileged white man. When I look around the scientific community Iโ€™m working in now, I still see people who are predominantly like me; just like I saw in high school and the Campbell biology textbook. Most of these people have had access to some of the same opportunities that helped me succeed in the STEM community.

Cancer presents itself in diverse forms, with a virtually infinite number of mutations that can lead to cancerous growth. If we want to heal the diverse group of people affected by diverse types of cancers, we need our doctors and researchers to bring a similar diversity. Doctors and researchers from diverse backgrounds can approach these complex problems from new and impactful perspectives. Thus, patients should be able to see doctors and researchers that not only look like them, but also fight for them like family.

Over the course of my time at college, it became obvious that the famous scientists highlighted in the Campbell biology textbook I received after eighth grade were grossly misrepresenting the whole of the STEM community.

By highlighting only certain scientists, the textbook reaffirmed scienceโ€™s long history of only being accessible to wealthy white males. But these people are not inherently more prestigious or high-achieving. In fact, the most inspiring and tenacious scientists Iโ€™ve met were women, particularly women of color.

I remember taking a biology course with a professor of color in a tenure-track position. She was extremely well organized. On the chalkboard, she would meticulously draw and annotate the topic we were studying, describing each step as she drew it. Male students would often interrupt her to correct her spelling or other trivial mistakes, or to ask her to speak up or talk more slowly (she had a slight accent). This experience helped me realize why women of color often struggle to find footing in the STEM community, where they are excessively questioned and feel they must convince others they are worthy of being a scientist. Observing this over and over convinced me that the STEM community needs to continue inviting underrepresented scientists into the field to reaffirm that they belong in academia.

In STEM, we need to recognize that huge disparities in access to educational resources and opportunities across communities are inherently racially and socioeconomically coded. By using academic achievement and prestige as measures for an individualโ€™s capacity for entrance and success in the STEM community, we reaffirm the status quo whereby individuals who had access to myriad advantageous resources throughout their lives continue to outshine highly qualified and hard-working individuals from resource-poor settings, often who are also people of color. Furthermore, even people with high marks of academic achievement can be dissuaded from the STEM community if they donโ€™t look or talk like the scientists we see in textbooks.

When I was growing up in Fairfield county, most of what Iโ€™ve written here would have never even crossed my mind. But even now, I want to make it clear that Iโ€™m far from an authority on any of these issues. I hope that at the very least, my story shows how deeply it pains me to watch as the STEM community (which I revere) fails these communities time and time again. I hope my story can highlight that in all its objectivity, the STEM community is not immune to prejudice or discrimination and that we have a lot of room to grow. I believe anything is possible if we tackle these issues with the intent I had in eighth grade, when I was researching fish and reading biology textbooks with curiosity and ambition.

Metrics

Sessions

[analytify-stats metrics=”ga:sessions” analytics_for=”current” custom_page_id = “”permission_view=””]

Total number of Sessions. A session is the period time a user is actively engaged with the page.

Visitors

[analytify-stats metrics=”ga:visitors” analytics_for=”current” custom_page_id = “”permission_view=””]

Users that have had at least one session within the selected date range. Includes both new and returning users.

Page views

[analytify-stats metrics=”ga:pageviews” analytics_for=”current” custom_page_id = “”permission_view=””]

Pageviews is the total number of time the article was viewed. Repeated views are counted.

CivicSciTimes - Stories in Science

Unexpected Stories and Spindle Mistakes: Discovering that Wild-type Cells are Full of Surprises

CSM Lab

Published

on

By

Natalie Nannas

Natalie Nannas is an Associate Professor of Biology at Hamilton College in Clinton, NY. She teaches courses in genetics, molecular biology, and bioethics. Dr. Nannas graduated from Grinnell College with bachelor’s degrees in biological chemistry and French. She received her Masterโ€™s and PhD from Harvard University in molecular biology and genetics. Dr. Nannas conducted her postdoctoral research at the University of Georgia where she won a National Science Foundation Plant Genome Postdoctoral Fellowship. At Hamilton College, Dr. Nannas enjoys teaching and sharing her passion for microscopy with her undergraduate research students. When not glued to a microscope, she loves spending time with her husband and two daughters. The narrative below by Natalie Nannas captures the human stories behind the science from a 2022 paper titled โ€œFrequent spindle errors require structural rearrangement to complete meiosis in Zea maysโ€ which was published by her group in 2022 in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.

Science never works out the way we plan. As scientists, we ask questions, hypothesize and outline our goals โ€ฆ then reality of science occurs. The reality of science is often full of failed controls, endless troubleshooting, and sometimes strange findings that lead us in new and unpredictable directions. Our publications give the impression that we planned these scientific journeys from the beginning and do not tell the human side of the process with all of its twists and turns, dead-ends and U-turns. I want to tell you the real story behind my first publication as a faculty member with my own lab. It did not go as planned due to the COVID-19 pandemic. My lab was shut down in the middle of our investigation, and my students and I were unable to generate new data. In the beginning, it seemed like we were stranded with only control data and no story to tell, but the time away from the lab allowed us to spend more time looking carefully at wild-type cells. What seemed like a dead-end suddenly became its own story when we found something unexpected hiding within microscopy movies. Our wild-type cells were making mistakes, attempting fixes and changing directions, just like we do as scientists.

My scientific journey began with flickering green lights and a microscope (you can read more about it here). As an undergraduate, I was mesmerized by the beauty of watching living cells shuffle fluorescently labeled proteins throughout their cytoplasm. I followed this passion for microscopy into my doctoral dissertation research at Harvard University where I investigated how yeast cells build the machinery needed to pull their chromosomes apart. This machinery is a dynamic collection of long protein tubes called microtubules and other organizing proteins that help move and shuffle microtubules. I loved watching the delicate dance of chromosomes interacting with microtubules of the spindle, and I wanted to continue studying this process in my postdoctoral studies.

During postdoctoral studies at the University of Georgia, I won a fellowship from the National Science Foundation to develop a new technique in microscopy. No one had ever watched plants building their spindles in meiosis, the specialized cell division that produces egg and sperm. Other scientists had performed beautiful microscopy studies observing how mitotic spindles function inside of plant cells, but due to the technical challenges, no one had ever observed live plant cells building spindles in meiosis. I was thrilled to take on this challenge by using version of maize that had fluorescently labeled tubulin, the protein that makes up microtubules of the spindle. With this line of maize, spindles would glow fluorescent green, allowing me to image if only I could extract the meiotic cells.

Dr. Natalie Nannas

We were so busy collecting data and prepping for our mutant studies that we never really took time to analyze the wild-type cells.

After almost a year spent dissecting maize plants, I finally managed to develop a method to isolate these tiny cells and keep them alive in a growth media long enough to image them. This new method of live imaging was going to serve as the foundation of my new lab at Hamilton College, a primarily undergraduate institution. With my students, I planned to investigate the pathways governed spindle assembly. Most animal mitotic cells have a structure called a centrosome that dictates how spindles are formed; however, female animal meiotic cells lack these structures and must use other pathways to direct spindle assembly. Plants also lack centrosomes, and I wanted to inhibit these known animal pathways in our plant live imaging system.

Explore Next:  Unexpected Stories and Spindle Mistakes: Discovering that Wild-type Cells are Full of Surprises

As I set up my lab, my students and I collected live movies of wild-type maize cells building their spindles. I told my students and myself that these movies were not the main event, they were just the control cells so we would have a baseline comparison for our experimental conditions. We were so busy collecting data and prepping for our mutant studies that we never really took the time to analyze the wild-type cells. At the surface level, they built spindles and segregated chromosomes in a generally expected amount of time, so we focused on preparing for our upcoming experimentsโ€ฆ. then March 2020 occurred.

The pandemic forced us to slow down and look more carefully at our wild-type data, and I am grateful for the detour.

My students headed home for spring break with a warning that there may be a delay in coming back to campus due to the spread of COVID-19. None of us were prepared for the shutdown that followed. Like many colleges and universities, our campus was closed for the remainder of the spring 2020 semester and the summer of 2020. My students and I began meeting on Zoom, trying to make a new plan for our research. The only data we had to work with were the microscopy of wild-type maize cells, so we decided to spend time digging more deeply into these movies. Originally, we had only measured the total time it took to build a spindle as it would be a baseline for comparison to our mutants. We had not looked carefully at any of the intermediate time points in the assembly process. When my students looked more closely at our movies, they discovered that wild-type cells built an incorrectly shaped spindle over 60% of the time!

We found that maize meiotic cells often built spindles with three poles instead of two, and they had to actively rearrange their spindle structure to correct this mistake. We also found that in these cells, there was a delay in meiosis as cells refused to progress until this correction had been made. This is an exciting discovery as it showed that plants are error-prone in their spindle assembly, much like human female meiotic cells. Our findings also suggested that meiotic cells were monitoring their spindle shape when determining if they should move forward in meiosis. Previous work has shown that cells monitor the attachment of chromosomes to the spindle to make this decision, but our work adds a new dimension, showing that they also monitor spindle shape. As we continued to analyze our videos, we also learned that cells corrected their spindle morphology in a predictable way. They always collapsed the two poles that were closest together, creating a single pole and resulting in a correct bipolar spindle.

The image shows the first page of the paper which can be accessed here.

My students and I had begun our scientific journey planning to breeze over wild-type cells, moving on to what we envisioned would be a more exciting story of spindle mutants. The pandemic forced us to slow down and look more carefully at our wild-type data, and I am grateful for the detour. I rediscovered my love of closely watching flickering green fluorescent lights, the dance of microtubules sliding into place or making missteps and shuffling into new arrangements. Watching life attempt a complicated process, make mistakes, and try again, is a lesson that never grows old. It reminds me that our scientific journeys are just the same, they start in one direction but are fluid and constantly changing, and hopefully, they end with a functional spindle!

Read the Published Paper

Weiss, J.D., McVey, S.L., Stinebaugh, S.E., Sullivan, C.F., Dawe, R.K., and N.J. Nannas. 2022. Frequent spindle errors require structural rearrangement to complete meiosis in Zea maysInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23 (8):4293โ€“4312.

โ€”

ABOUT: Stories in Science is a special series on the Civic Science Times. The main aim is to document the first-hand accounts of the human stories behind the science being published by scientists around the world. Such stories are an important element behind the civic nature of science.

SUBMISSION: Click here to access the story guidelines and submission portal. Please note that not all stories are accepted for publication. After submission, we will let you know whether we have selected the story for the review process.

Continue Reading

Upcoming Events

Trending