In Summer 2019, two years into a graduate program in Astrophysics, I applied to the IndiaBioscience science journalism internship. Despite being completely different from my field of research, I was happy and excited to get selected for a summer of reporting on the latest biosciences research in India. Working remotely over the next five months (while still juggling my grad school duties), I wrote and published three news and one feature articles - quantifying an output that only partially reflects my growth as a science writer during this period. Being my first introduction to the world of science journalism, I learnt its staples like finding and pitching ideas for stories, working with an editor to revise drafts and doing fact-checks to ensure accuracy. But when it comes to the actual craft of writing down a draft, here are my five biggest takeaways, which I hope would be helpful for any researcher wanting to write about science for the general public.

1. Identify your audience, and then identify the research they would really like to read

Communicating all research is important, whether it is to your peers, your funding agencies, aspiring students, or the general public (constituting the taxpayers who ultimately support you). For journalism, the audience largely involves the latter, and there are four broad reasons that can capture public interest in research. Examples of such research may be one that is

• timely, for instance, the outbreak of COVID-19.

• relevant to a local community, like the contamination of lakes in Bengaluru.

• revolving around daily life, like studies involving nutrition and improvement of public health.

• quirky, emphasizing the joy of doing science to unearth the gems that nature hides - examples include studying how singing crickets looking for a mate are prone to predation by spiders or what would happen if the Earth were made of blueberries.

• Lastly, every now and then, we embark upon scientific milestones, the 'Aha moments' defined by groundbreaking discoveries, like detecting gravitational waves or proving Fermat's last theorem.

No matter what you are writing or who you are writing for, do not forget that your audience is going to invest time in reading the content, and you need to make sure they get the most out of it. One of our most essential duties to honour this investment is to:

2. Get to the point early

Talk about the most significant takeaway, the most important finding, and the study results first! Academic writing builds up slowly, starting with an in-depth background and motivation, followed by a detailed description of methods, before finally getting to the results and analysis. This way of writing is okay when researchers present their work to their collaborators (folks who are used to ploughing through multiple papers written in this fashion, often over several mugs of coffee). On the other hand, journalists follow an 'inverted pyramid' model, where the crux of the story is presented first and given the greatest importance. The reader must be hooked to the story early on, at the stage where they decide whether they will invest time in reading the rest of the story.

With an overflow of research articles today in every sub-field of science, I have seen many scientists embrace the following philosophy in browsing through them: if the title and abstract catch their eye, they jump straight to reading the results and the discussion. As a journalist, you want to captivate the reader from the start and not want them to skim across the article. While laying out your story, you should:

3. Know what to leave out

As a science writer, you may not be the expert in the relevant area of research, but you ARE the expert in relaying the message across. In fact, I found that it is to your advantage not to be the expert on the study. As a beginner writer, I sweated over not understanding the details of work done in a field entirely alien to my area of expertise. For instance, I spent hours scraping through online literature in order to simplify and outline a step-by-step molecular process described in a research article – before I was told that none of it is important!

What's important is to be creative in giving your readers the big picture and not be afraid of leaving out unimportant details: even if you think you might not be doing complete justice to the study's authors. You may not be an author, but you have the authority to present parts of the research that are most relevant to your story and leave out the rest.

Now, your hook is good, and you have a solid grasp of the big picture. Your next job is to make the rest of the science flow. In doing this, remember to:

4. Write a narrative, not a Wikipedia article

Don't get me wrong, Wikipedia articles do a great job at explaining science. However, as a writer, your job is not just to deliver a dose of science nutrition but to present it as a hearty meal. Think of looking up the meaning of a new word in a dictionary as opposed to seeing it used in a sentence. The former helps you understand the word, while the latter makes you appreciate it.

Popular science articles are often referred to as science stories because they're precisely that: stories. Every research has an anchoring character: maybe it's the scientist or an organism they're studying, or perhaps it's an inanimate entity like a protein or an electron. The character is placed at the centre of an anchoring event, which, just like a movie, follows a set-up, a climax and a resolution — a time-tested technique to capture and hold on the audience's attention. While this kind of structuring should not stand out in an obvious way, it's an essential skill to be able to twist it into your tale. One of the most important things to aid this process is interviewing the scientists themselves. While doing so, keep in mind to:

5. Listen to experiences, not facts from the researchers

More often than not, you will find a story hidden not in the published research but in how the researcher(s) went about accomplishing their goals. For instance, I've heard interesting anecdotes from ecologists doing fieldwork, data scientists recollecting how quickly their hardware became obsolete, and my gravitational-wave physics colleagues tracking down noise in their detector to thirsty ravens pecking at the ice forming outside it. Such stories not only provide great quotes but can present you with a whole new way of crafting your narrative.

Note that this particular point does not apply to the other kind of source you would (and must) interview: an independent scientist not involved with the study in question. Independent sources should be asked to comment on the research's specifics and its potential advantages and drawbacks. Their quotes are essential to lend credence from the scientific community to the research being reported.

Given that this was a remote internship, I conducted all my interviews online (this was before talking to people on a screen became a daily chore), and skype was the preferred platform. Getting comfortable and confident at interviewing scientists to hear their stories is a skill that did not come naturally to me. Still, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to be able to practice it as an actual science reporter for those three months. In a relatively short period of time, I could learn the important tenets of the craft of science writing listed above through timely feedback and regular interaction with my editor, Shreya Ghosh.

All things considered, this remote science journalism internship was crucial in igniting my science writing career, which I have kept kindled throughout my graduate school. The experience in having written for IndiaBioscience also helps me pitch new articles to other outlets. Since that internship, my writing has been featured in Scientific American, The Wire, and Astrobites. You may find a complete list of my media clips here.

It would have been just another dinner a reputed cell biologist from the US was having with three young life sciences faculty members, on a typical Bengaluru evening in mid-December 2007. But that dinner sowed the seeds for the setting up of IndiaBioscience, which has now evolved into a platform for scientists and educators in the life sciences to meet and discuss ideas and challenges.

Ronald Vale was on a sabbatical at the National Centre for Biological Sciences – Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (NCBS-TIFR) in Bengaluru from the Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology at the University of California at San Francisco. Joining him at the dinner table at a trendy Chinese restaurant in the city were three faculty members of NCBS-TIFR – Mrinalini Puranik, Uma Ramakrishnan and Sandhya P. Koushika.

Koushika, an Associate Professor at the Department of Biological Sciences, TIFR, recalls that the dinner-table conversation covered a gamut of issues – about how to get a lab up and running, what were the kinds of challenges that people face and what had to be done to improve the lot of young scientists.

Having a wider conversation

“After that dinner,” says Vale, who is now Director of the Janelia Research Campus at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, “it struck me that the need was probably greater than these few individuals I had dinner with. There were probably similar conversations that needed to be held all over India.” The question was how to do them. If India was going to be successful and its ambitious life sciences programme was to move forward, the future was these young faculty members in different institutes in the country. The success of these young faculty was paramount to the success of the life sciences programme, and mentoring was critical for their success. The challenge was to have these mentoring sessions on a large enough scale nationally and empowering the young scientists.

He broached the idea with two others – K. VijayRaghavan, who was then Director of the NCBS and is now the Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, and Satyajit Mayor, who was the then Dean of NCBS and is now the director at NCBS. Both of them immediately jumped at the suggestion.

Vale, says VijayRaghavan, is an unusual person. Apart from being a top class scientist who publishes fantastic work, he is also deeply connected to the purposes of doing science and the different cultural contexts. What Vale suggested, recalls VijayRaghavan, was a series of meetings where young, starting faculty members from India as well as finishing post-doctoral fellows from all over the world and the best scientists from across the country talk not about what scientists had done, but about establishing laboratories and getting started.

“Apart from those at the dinner and a handful of others (who found the idea attractive), there was uniform opposition to this,” recollects VijayRaghavan. The whole opposition stemmed from, who is this person (Vale) to come from abroad and tell us how to organise our sciences.

“That was 2008-09. And today, more than 10 years later, all those critics have done 180 degrees,” says VijayRaghavan. The sceptics became believers. Typically, none of them seemed to remember their initial opposition to the idea.

An opportune period for science

It was also a period when a lot of things were happening globally and in India. Western Europe and the US had been devastated by the collapse of their financial and banking systems. A lot of Indians abroad, especially young post-doctoral fellows and those looking to land research jobs, were actively contemplating returning home. India was investing in and setting up institutes of science teaching and research. It was an active time, a lot of things started around 2009 – C-CAMP (Centre for Cellular and Molecular Platforms), an initiative of the Department of Biotechnology of the Government of India; India Alliance (the DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance), a public charity that funds research in health and biomedical sciences; and the IISERs (Indian Institute of Science Education and Research).

It was in this context that Vale’s initiative that was actively encouraged by both VijayRaghavan and Mayor gained significance. After VijayRaghavan and Mayor endorsed his idea, Vale sent out emails to the faculty members of NCBS broaching the subject of organising a meeting of young investigators.

Sandhya Koushika and her colleague Mukund Thattai sent out mails inviting participation at the first Young Investigators’ Meeting, which was held in 2009. They did all the hard work, including selecting the venue in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala for hosting the meeting. “We picked the location, we had done all of that work. I had gone and visited it in advance to make sure it would fit our needs. We didn’t know until three days before whether we had the money or not,” recalls Koushika. The NCBS-TIFR became the mother organisation for conducting the meeting.

A successful first meeting and the birth of IndiaBioscience

The first meeting, in what is now referred to simply as YIM, was a resounding success. There was a mix of young scientists, post-doctoral fellows and accomplished mentors, each being paired with the other. All those associated with the event have fond recollections of the event, even after all these years.

If the Young Investigator Meeting started with a dinner, IndiaBioscience started with a social hour at the first Young Investigator Meeting. – Ronald Vale

According to Vale, the meeting included 40 young investigators, or junior faculty, from all over India. There were about 20 post-doctoral fellows, most of them from abroad as there were very few postdocs in the country then. “That was another part of the experiment. We mixed the junior faculty and the postdocs. It was a very successful experiment,” says Vale. On one of those social evenings during the first YIM, Vale asked a few of the postdocs for their feedback on the meeting. Should it be held again? The answer was a unanimous yes. The postdocs, Vale says, felt it was an incredible meeting. Many of them had been outside India for long. For them, it was hard to find any credible and relevant information on India and the first young investigators meeting was a big eye-opener. They really got a sense of how things work in India, says Vale.

Mayor says Vale and he had talked to people independently over breakfast asking for their feedback. Then there was a goodbye kind of gathering when they threw up the question whether such a meeting should be held again. “To be honest, I was hoping everybody would say, this is a great idea, but let good things come and go, because many other good things will happen.” “But,” he adds, “everybody said it should continue.” That is when he realised that a permanent structure would be required if the Young Investigator Meetings were to become a regular feature.

The obvious solution was to create a website that will provide all the information that those pursuing a career in the life sciences or intending to pursue could access. Vale recollects starting to work on developing a website with NCBS right after the YIM; it was meant to be a portal of information. This, he adds, they named IndiaBioscience. “If the Young Investigator Meeting started with a dinner, IndiaBioscience started with a social hour at the first Young Investigator Meeting,” points out Vale.

IndiaBioscience was born out of a desire to keep this Young Investigator Meeting going and create a structure that would knit the community of young investigators in India together. – Satyajit Mayor

The recipe that made the first YIM a success has been adopted for all the subsequent meetings. There was a mix of reputed international scientists, some bright young scientists who were looking to break out into a career in the biosciences or set up their own labs, and established scientists from India, who would not only mentor the young scientists but also walk them through the process of establishing institutions in the country. The senior scientists would talk about their struggles and how they overcame them. There were panel discussions that covered topics such as how to manage personnel in the labs and how to apply for grants. The young scientists engaged in lively discussions with the senior ones and their mentors. It was an honest and good conversation. “A lot of these ingredients from the first meeting proved to be so magical that we kept them going,” says Vale.

Being inclusive

According to VijayRaghavan, there was a fear at the first Young Investigators Meeting that since it was being organised by NCBS, the YIM would be an NCBS-centric activity and that it would not be inclusive. As subsequent YIMs have proved, this fear was misplaced. However, he says, there is a lesson whenever anything new is attempted: inclusiveness is important for any initiative to succeed. A lot of ice was broken at the first meeting.

There is nothing like textbook material for mentorship and leadership. – L. S. Shashidhara

He points out that the YIMs have expanded in structure and grown so well that a large number of people have benefitted from it in their careers. The first meeting itself was impressive as people, including Mukund Thattai and Sandhya Koushika, put in a lot of effort to make it succeed. Since then, the YIM has expanded in size and scope, becoming much bigger and better in terms of the quality and quantity of participation. It has become better managed and is absolutely stunning, says VijayRaghavan. The Young Investigator Meetings are now held in different parts of the country, making sure that there is greater institutional involvement.

Building the community and fostering partnerships through IndiaBioscience

The success of the first YIM sowed the idea for a website that would have a lot of information of relevance to the life sciences community – information on job openings, details about grants, articles by scientists and the like. As the website grew in depth and breadth, it morphed into a full-fledged organisation named IndiaBioscience, under the NCBS-TIFR. The community has grown over the years, as also IndiaBioscience’s activities. The YIM continues to be its flagship event; scientists, young and senior, look forward to participating in it and rubbing shoulders and brainstorming with the top brains in the field.

“IndiaBioscience was born out of a desire to keep this Young Investigator Meeting going and create a structure that would knit the community of young investigators in India together,” says Mayor. The young investigator was defined clearly as somebody who had landed his or her first job in India, one who was beginning to discover the ropes of doing research and science in the country. It was not defined by age.

From 2009 till about 2012-13, the NCBS and a few other academic institutions supported the whole initiative in terms of funding and functioning. By this time, IndiaBioscience had even recruited its first full-time employees. One of them, Swetha Suresh, who joined IndiaBioscience in May 2011 as its first employee and was with it for almost three years, says the initial years were exciting. Her mandate was to get the activities going before the organisation could look for longer term funding. There were targeted attempts to reach out to academic institutions in other parts of the country to build a strong life sciences community.

Around 2013, a proposal was sent to the Department of Biotechnology for funding, which got approved. This was the next stage in the development of the organisation.

L. S. Shashidhara, Dean of Research and Professor of Biology at Ashoka University and who joined the Board of IndiaBioscience in 2013, has been instrumental in establishing a strong community around IndiaBioscience. He says he has learnt mentorship skills simply by listening to people and that has been possible only because of IndiaBioscience. “There is nothing like textbook material for mentorship and leadership,” he says and adds that these have to be done only through dialogue.

The next stage of growth

It was in 2017 that IndiaBioscience saw its second phase take off. With funding from the DBT, the organisation’s focus, which till then was mainly networking of young investigators and mentoring them, expanded. The funding allowed IndiaBioscience to add a skill-building programme to its growing repertoire of activities and work with students and young researchers for their career development. The communication vertical grew leaps and bounds over the years bringing out the latest news, columns and opinion pieces along with relevant resources and skill building activities. With additional funding from the Human Resources Ministry, IndiaBioscience started working with educators, helping them hone their skills and build networks. With a plethora of new programmes and establishment of partnerships with both national and international organisations, IndiaBioscience established its niche well in the community.

IndiaBioscience has provided the ideal platform to help young investigators understand the wider life sciences ecosystem in India, according to Smita Jain, Executive Director of IndiaBioscience till June 2021. The YIM, which is still the organisation’s flagship programme, remains one of its kind initiatives in the world, says Jain. The YIM has moved from city to city, roping in many more institutions as partners, has set up regional networks to facilitate greater participation, and enlarged its outreach activities. Shantala Hari Dass, Associate Director, IndiaBioscience, says there has been a noticeable increase in the organisation’s work in the last two years. The conversations have also moved beyond the cities.

The growing number of perspectives and expertise has helped IndiaBioscience both increase the number of initiatives and diversify the initiatives that it drives. It now has five verticals – networking, communication, skill-building, education, and data and policy.

An objective assessment

Aurnab Ghose, Associate Professor, IISER Pune, says IndiaBioscience was an intervention on the brain drain and may have also helped encourage some amount of diversity. He participated in the first YIM in 2009 and presented his work in the form of a poster. “I was put next to a physicist from Bengaluru. He was interested in similar things, but from a different perspective. We have written papers together. That collaboration and, networking would have probably happened, but the YIM speeded it up by five years,” he says.

He agrees that IndiaBioscience’s contribution, although not much talked about, is to help break the silos in which scientists tended to work and bring about greater collaboration and networking.

We hope we will be able to build this community in a much more inclusive and wider manner. – Smita Jain

The YIM also helped postdoctoral researchers identify potential employees. Hari Dass is one such example albeit with a twist. She attended the young investigators meeting in 2017, when she was a mid-level post-doctoral fellow. She says her conversations at the meeting, especially with institutional heads and senior scientists helped clear her mind as to what she wanted to do. Later, in 2019, Hari Dass moved away from academics and joined IndiaBioscience as its Associate Director.

If Shashidhara were to assess IndiaBioscience’s impact, what more would he have liked it to have done in the last 10 years beyond being a networking and mentoring platform and providing a website with relevant information? He says that while the organisation is friendly and collaborative, what it has not been able to do is having an influence on the policymakers. He feels that IndiaBioscience’s expertise should have been used to communicate all developments regarding the Covid-19 pandemic to the general public. “Dissemination of information is easier for an organisation like IndiaBioscience. It was not used as a medium for disseminating news as much as possible. Or, even to conceive what kind of research can be done, how data can be generated from all parts of the country, how biologists right from undergraduate students can get involved. COVID was a glaring example that we have not been able to be so much in the consciousness of the authorities that they should think of why don’t you ask IndiaBioscience to do it,” says Shashidhara.

What next for IndiaBioscience?

VijayRaghavan says the organisation has definitely grown the footprint of life sciences in the country. But his concern is that it is a closed loop and it has to build substantial connections with the broader society. While it may not be IndiaBioscience’s remit, in the larger interests of the life sciences field, it will have to take up this role. His suggestion would be for IndiaBioscience to broaden its footprint without compromising on quality. Besides, it has to make sure that communication improves, that language and context are not barriers.

Should it change its structure to attract funding from private trusts and corporate sponsors? VijayRaghavan says it definitely is a possibility, but the institutionalisation of funding is both a value and a problem. The value comes from the stability it brings to the organisation. But, he adds, the problem arises because unless you are directly connected to the user and dependent on that, it is almost a guarantee for decline in quality. Complacency sets in, yet without that security you cannot go forward.

In the coming years one of the top priorities should be to establish IndiaBioscience as a sustainable, long lasting entity. – Shantala Hari Dass

Mayor says the last five years under Jain’s stewardship and an excellent team, IndiaBioscience has taken a lot more activities, added more dimensions to its work and also become a major motivator of science communication. Creating networks, creating advocacy and communication have been established as the foundation stones of IndiaBioscience. In future, he hopes it will be instrumental in building the careers of young investigators – help them hone their skills or assist them in thinking to promote collaborative and interdisciplinary science among the research community along with promoting the meaning/joy of doing competitive research in the Indian context. One also needs to create a structure where IndiaBioscience begins to look at itself as an independent organisation. “That is where we are headed,” he adds. He says the organisation has just started looking at private funding.

The third phase of growth

The third phase of growth, according to Jain, may see IndiaBioscience raise funds from private and corporate trusts. It may consider changing its structure for this, without taking away the nature of the work it does. The additional funding will give greater stability to the organisation, help it increase its activities and enlarge the scope of work it does. As it is, IndiaBioscience has tie-ups with international organisations such as the European Molecular Biology Organisation (EMBO) and Human Frontier Science Programme (HFSP). There is exchange of ideas and workshops being conducted. “In phase three, we have asked for more resources. If we get that, we hope we will be able to build this community in a much more inclusive and wider manner,” says Jain.

"In the coming years one of the top priorities should be to establish IndiaBioscience as a sustainable, long lasting entity,” says Hari Dass. Diversifying monetary support, partnerships and stakeholders is one way to achieve this, she adds. The other things that are high on the to do list are to scale up operations in a manageable way so that one can continue the momentum that has grown over the last decade, and to continue to grow the community by making inroads into newer territories (physical and conceptual). “For both of these we must draw upon the engaged community that we have grown over the decade,” Hari Dass concludes.

Engaging communities, Enabling change

There were sceptics who questioned the need for creating something like IndiaBioscience. However, over time, even these sceptics were won over, thanks to the wonderful work done by the organisation, which functioned with its own staff on the supporting and nurturing campus of NCBS-TIFR.

It has got a beauty to it, an aesthetic, which is combined with a deep culture and content.
– K. VijayRaghavan

VijayRaghavan attributes the success of IndiaBioscience to a couple of factors, including the culture of the organisation and the leadership. The culture had to be established early, which was done in the case of IndiaBioscience. Thanks to the leadership, the organisation grew beyond the physical boundaries, started imbibing the views of the community at large, people from the community contributed a lot of time and effort to it, and all of this completely transformed the organisation. “It has got a beauty to it, an aesthetic, which is combined with a deep culture and content,” says VijayRaghavan.

Having established a solid foundation in the second phase, IndiaBioscience is all set to expand the scope of its activities across verticals. The vision and mission of ‘engaging communities, enabling change’ continue to stand tall and will continue to stay so.

One fine Friday morning in 2018, armed with an idea, I invited my then colleagues Lakshmi Ganesan and Shreya Ghosh for a cup of coffee. Little had I (or should I say we) known back then that we would end up creating something valuable for the community and receiving an overwhelming response.

Sitting in the canteen of the National Centre for Biological Sciences, Bengaluru, we talked about how the scientific ecosystem in India is growing and how more opportunities than ever are present today for those who wish to build their careers in science. We discussed how there is a dire need for professionally guiding students to navigate their careers and how more awareness needs to be created about diverse career paths that are available for students post their degree in science.

All three of us had transitioned into career paths of our choice post degrees in science and felt very strongly about this. Also, we were certain that there is nothing ‘alternate’ or ‘lateral’ about choosing a non-academic career path. We consciously took a decision to not use the word ‘alternate’ or ‘lateral' during our workshops but to call all possible career paths simply ‘science careers’.

We were in agreement that aspects like building skills, networking, preparing CVs/Resumes, researching career options, finding role models, displaying professionalism and developing a strong sense of work ethics are a few elements of crafting one’s career that are often missing from the curriculum in our formative years. Thus students struggle when they leave the safety nets of their alma mater and venture into the real world that is rife with tough competition and requires one to present their best self forward.

We consciously took a decision to not use the word ‘alternate’ or ‘lateral' during our workshops but to call all possible career paths simply ‘science careers’.

We also felt that it would be important for the young students to listen and interact with folks who have already navigated diverse career paths following their passion and therefore decided to have talks by various science professionals as part of these sessions.

We decided to put together a module that will touch upon the above-mentioned aspects of a career journey. Over the next 2-3 months, the three of us would sit down together every Friday morning, brainstorm ideas, and slowly, our module “Crafting Your Career” (CYC) began to emerge.

Before we realized it, we were ready with four hours’ worth of workshop material targeting participants right from the undergraduate to PhD/postdoc level, and covering the requisite tools, knowledge, and information that one must possess for navigating a career path in science.

We successfully delivered the first workshop at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB), Faridabad in 2019, and there was no looking back. Based on the feedback received, we continued to revise and evolve our module and travelled across the country conducting workshop after workshop, before the pandemic struck. We transformed the workshop into an online format post March 2020, delivered in the form of webinars. Till now, we have conducted 7 offline workshops and 6 online webinars.

One of the mandates at IndiaBioscience is skill-building within the scientific community in India. As a part of this, we also developed and distributed career resources for students and science professionals, using both online and offline means. The Crafting your Career (CYC) workshops and webinar series also have been one of our key efforts towards this direction. As a part of this vertical, we also developed and distributed career resources like Careers in Science, Disha - A Career Resource Book for Life Science and Biotechnology Students and Academia-Industry Transitions - 10 things to know before you make the move. We also recorded the essence and salient features of each module into conversation-style podcasts that were released under the IndiaBiospeaks banner.

Having completed the CYC workshops and webinar series in February 2021, we came up with a survey whose results (e.g., Fig. 1) are presented in the following document. Through this survey, we wished to understand whether these workshops and the webinar series have had an impact on the career choices, overall awareness, and/or professional development of the attendees. We also wanted to understand the specific ways in which we have made an impact and learn what we can do to further improve future editions of these sessions.

We were pleased to see the overwhelmingly positive response from the community of participants, many of whom felt that attending the “Crafting your Career” workshops/webinars had been a turning point in their career. As we move into the next phase of our activities, we hope to use the feedback and the insights from this survey to inform our future initiatives. We welcome you to read the report summarizing our main findings, which can be freely downloaded here. We thank all the participants of our workshops for their wholehearted engagement and we hope to continue working on increasing career awareness within the scientific community with our motto of “Engaging Communities, Enabling Change”.

Undeterred by the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Young Investigators’ Meeting (YIM) transitioned into a virtual format this year without compromising on its essence of enabling networking and mentorship within the research ecosystem in India. YIM 2021 - a flagship annual event of IndiaBioscience - brought together 53 Young Investigators (YIs) and 144 Postdoctoral Fellows (PDFs) from India and across the globe, connecting them to their predecessors, as well as to new mentors and advisors.

The meeting, held during 17-19 March, comprised mentor talks, panel discussions, special talks, and informal breakout sessions. The meeting allowed the attendees to gain a deeper understanding of challenges and changes faced by the scientific community with the help of experts brainstorming and sharing experiences to help the young researchers chart their career path. It also allowed the attendees to gain insights into India’s scientific ecosystem, network with the larger community, build informal mentorship relationships, and most importantly, develop a sense of belonging and ownership in the Indian science research ecosystem.

This year’s organisers were Imroze Khan, Ashoka University, Sonepat; Karishma Kaushik, Institute of Bioinformatics & Biotechnology, Savitribai Phule Pune University (SPPU), Pune; Vasudharani Devanathan, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Tirupati; Shantala Hari Dass and Smita Jain, IndiaBioscience, Bengaluru.

DAY 1: Inaugural note, a special message, mentor talks, and panel discussion

Satyajit Mayor, Director, National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Bengaluru, opened the meeting by appreciating the organisers for transitioning seamlessly to the online format. He mentioned that the purpose of this year’s meeting, besides community building, was to help science and researchers transcend borders to connect with many more like-minded people.

In a brief address, Smita Jain presented the mandate and various activities of IndiaBioscience, whose motto is “Engaging communities, enabling change”. IndiaBioscience acts as a catalyst in order to bring positive change in the life science ecosystem in India by engaging with the government, industry, and academia at various levels, she said.

Renu Swarup, Secretary, Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Govt. of India, emphasised nurturing future leaders in her special talk. She bade the attendees not view difficulties and challenges as pitfalls. Instead, she asked them to forge them into opportunities by building capacity and bringing strengths forward.

Taking the example of the pandemic, Swarup stated, “It gave us an opportunity to identify our leaders – to identify our young scientists who have taken on this task upon themselves to be able to deliver, who actually took on very important leadership positions during the last year.” She said this demonstrated that we can do a lot in other areas too. She added that there has been a great emphasis on building teams and collaborations in the past years, moving from single institutions and agencies to multi-institutional collaborations following an inter-, multi- & trans-disciplinary approach.

Swarup also encouraged the YIs to evaluate their leadership capabilities and the qualities they need to respond to challenges. At the same time, she urged senior researchers to take on the responsibility of nurturing the next generation of leaders.

Bushra Ateeq, Associate Professor, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur, presented the first mentor talk of YIM 2021. In her opening remark, she quoted Nobel laureate Thomas Cech: “…although you have been hired for your scientific skills and research potential, your eventual success will depend heavily on your ability to guide, lead, and empower others to do their best work.”

Ateeq said that her approach has been to lead her mentees by identifying their strengths and aspirations in a stepwise fashion, both in formal and informal settings. She suggested that one should start with the resources at hand, and as the results start coming in, plan to move to better facilities while collaborating and networking with others. She also noted that a mentor should also have informal peer mentors who can help them get through challenges and give honest feedback about their work and what can be done.

Ateeq’s talk was followed by a panel discussion on the impact of the pandemic on different aspects of research. The panellists included: Satyajit Mayor, NCBS; Ron Vale, Janelia Research Campus, USA; Sandhya S. Visweswariah, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru and Shahid Jameel, Ashoka University. Rashna Bhandari, Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad, moderated the session.

A mentor should also have informal peer mentors to help them get through challenges and give honest feedback about their work and what can be done

The experts reviewed the array of challenges faced by the scientific community due to the pandemic. They highlighted some of the difficulties faced at the individual level, such as the shrinking funding opportunities and uncertain career progressions. They also brought forth the changes that now await the community beyond these challenges.

Illustrating the impact of COVID-19 on changing research priorities and directions, Mayor discussed how the pandemic led to increased impetus upon the scientific community to respond to specific public needs arising due to COVID-19. He highlighted how the scientific community moved quickly, responding to the needs of the hour.

Jameel pointed out that the pandemic impacted both COVID and non-COVID research funding. To bring a balance to the situation, he suggested measures such as:

1. Ring-fencing a fund (restricting its use for a particular purpose) for a systemic change as the scientific community emerges from the pandemic

2. Developing partnerships to take research from discovery to deployment

3. Reforming funding processes to make them more agile, responsive and capable of dealing with surges

4. Improving the sustainability of the research ecosystem

Visweswariah pointed out how the pandemic disrupted university studies, research projects, and career progression. She said that while extending scholarships can help students, tenure extension can help researchers.

The world has now realised that it faces many international challenges, and science is a viable path to tackling these global problems.

Vale spoke about the impact of COVID-19 on global scientific collaborations and agendas. He highlighted how the pandemic created a spirit of public sharing of data among scientists with an enormous boost in pre-print publications. Moreover, the world has now come together on digital screens facilitating the representation of diverse voices in decision-making practices. He highlighted how the world has now realised that it faces many international challenges, and science is a viable path to tackling these global problems.

DAY 2: Leveraging the local, first-hand experiences and turning ‘pain points to gain points’

The second day of YIM 2021 began with a mentor talk by Aurnab Ghose, Associate Professor, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, on “Leveraging the local”. Ghose pointed out that the global and regional environments are profoundly interconnected, and awareness of local conditions influences and enables one to do better science. He added that to uncover the universe’s workings, the researcher should first ponder about their local circumstances and the people they talk to or work with. These can shape the nature of the questions one asks and attempts to answer. Citing his example, he said that the connections forged in a Regional YIM helped him source materials and take on interdisciplinary research projects.

In the panel discussion, researchers from various types of research institutes and organisations shared their first-hand experiences in building a research group. The panellists included Bodhisatta Nandy, IISER Berhampur; Deepa Agashe, NCBS; Roop Mallik, IIT Bombay; Urmila Kulkarni-Kale, SPPU, Pune. Imroze Khan moderated the session. The panellists used their personal experiences to present some critical points that can make or break a research laboratory. They helped attendees understand the nuances of managing both institutional and human resources to bring out the best results.

Nandy discussed the importance of setting up the team with the right kind of people at the initial stages and calibrating one’s expectations accordingly. He added that understanding the system one works in, balancing the duties of being a faculty and leader, and keeping the mind open for brainstorming are essential factors that allow one to work efficiently.

Agashe then discussed the importance of having a team with diverse skills that helps the Principal Investigator (PI) create a lab environment where people learn from each other. Additionally, setting the right expectations as a mentor, calibrating one’s mentoring style according to one’s scientific vision and plans of mentees, and having a feedback mechanism in the laboratory are helpful strategies.

Mallik discussed the need to be adaptable while progressing from a new lab to a well-established lab. He said that it is important to note how one is different from others and strive to do things in one’s own way during this journey.

Setting the right expectations as a mentor, calibrating one’s mentoring style according to one’s scientific vision and plans of mentees, and having a feedback mechanism in the laboratory are helpful strategies.

Kulkarni-Kale shed light on the different hurdles one would face in setting up a laboratory in a state university instead of a research institution. In such situations, her advice is to “turn pain points into gain points”. While high teaching demands require a lot of time investment on the researcher’s part, they also give the opportunity to work with a pool of enthusiastic students. She emphasised the need to reward both teaching and research contributions in university ecosystems.

Sarah Iqbal, DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance and Shane Rydquist, Impact Science, Cactus Communications, gave the special talks of the day. They pressed upon the need for inculcating and practising effective communication skills.

Iqbal emphasised how crucial it is to communicate effectively, purposefully, and empathetically. She highlighted the importance of communication in strengthening links between different stakeholders to foster science and make it more public-centric. She said that communication should help the public make sense of science based on their cultural context, religious beliefs, level of scientific knowledge, and language. She also added that the present age of digital communication allows the swift exchange of information. However, there needs to be an effort to ensure that the correct information reaches people in the right way.

Rydquist underlined the importance of avoiding jargon in written communications, as it prevents the discovery from reaching people other than those within the scientist’s sphere of influence. He also explained the importance of presenting science in the form of a narrative, which helps take science from traditional journals that provide limited interaction with the audience to increased publication impact and reach peers, the public, and policymakers. Alternative content formats such as infographics and videos also help here. He recommends creating at least one social media account and getting into the habit of summarising one’s research.

The special talks were followed by a panel discussion by A.V. Balachandar, Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB); Meenakshi Munshi, DBT; Sanjay Mishra, Department of Science and Technology (DST); Vasan Sambandamurthy, DBT/ Wellcome Trust India Alliance. Vasudharani Devanathan moderated the session. The discussion focused on the Indian and International funding scenarios & opportunities.

Munshi spoke about the various funding schemes offered by DBT India, such as the Ramalingaswami Re-entry Fellowship, the DBT-CREST Award, the BioCARe program for women scientists, the National Bioscience Award for Career Development, and the TATA Innovation Fellowship. She detailed DBT’s initiatives to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship, including the BIRAC and Biotechnology Ignition Grant. Sambandamurthy discussed the different fellowships offered by India Alliance for researchers at different stages in their careers. On the other hand, Mishra talked about DST’s SYST, NIDHI program, INSPIRE fellowship, and KIRAN fellowship for women. Balachandar brought forth the different schemes offered by SERB, such as the National Postdoctoral Fellowship and the overseas fellowship programs. SERB also provides start-up and core research grants, SUPRA scheme for high-quality proposals, and SERB-POWER scheme for women.

DAY 3: University ecosystems, ethical research practices, and equitable evaluations

Day 3 began with a mentor talk by Sharmistha Banerjee, Professor, University of Hyderabad. She spoke about balancing research aspirations with teaching responsibilities in a university ecosystem. Drawing parallels between her research and her teaching responsibilities, she highlighted the importance of building a strong collaborative network to become a better educator and researcher. She stressed how universities also allow one to be more inclusive in their thought process and evolve as teachers, researchers, and mentors. Banerjee says she finds solace and happiness in working with students, guiding them, and helping them understand their strengths.

In his special talk, Reinhard Jahn, Professor at Georg August University Göttingen, Germany, guided the attending researchers on carefully treading the landscape of ethical research conduct. He highlighted the difference between good scientific practice and scientific misconduct by explaining three fundamental research misconduct types: fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. He added that scientific misconduct could be prevented by referring to rules and regulations laid out for good scientific practice by institutions and scientific journals, by educating students, and by having open discussions. He reiterated that the impact factor of a journal does not indicate the quality of a paper.

The day’s panel discussion moderated by Mayor took on the issue of ‘equitable evaluation and assessment of research'. The panellists included: Anna Hatch, DORA (Declaration On Research Assessment) & Community Manager at the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB); K VijayRaghavan, Principal Scientific Adviser, Govt. of India; Rahul Siddharthan, the Institute of Mathematical Sciences (IMSc); Satyajit Mayor, NCBS; and Shahid Jameel, Ashoka University. Satyajit Mayor moderated the session. The panel called for a systems-level change in how research and researchers are evaluated presently. They acknowledged the need to move on from purely metric-based systems of evaluation.

Hatch began the discussion with an introduction to DORA and a call to action in which researchers are assessed on their research merit instead of only metrics. With the help of its funders, discussion group, and resource library, DORA aims to bring a revolution in the way research and researchers are assessed. To date, more than 19000 individuals in 145 countries have signed DORA, including 25 institutes from India. She stressed that to bring actual changes in evaluation methods, instead of focusing on point interventions, we need to recognise this as a systemic challenge.

VijayRaghavan posited that the value of science should be assessed using context-dependent measures. Scientific outcomes impact society, stimulate creativity and hold cultural value. Hence, the evaluation should depend on dynamic feedback loops (between the public and scientists) where qualitative aspects also come into play. He added that purely metric-based evaluation is not desirable when science is funded via public money. Informing the public and assessing the potential impact becomes a must.

Drawing insights from his first-hand experience as a researcher who worked across disciplines, Siddharthan remarked how the current assessment system presents much scope for improvement. He said that with the stratification of journal publications and hard-to-read journals, scientists need to identify alternative ways to communicate their science. He called for systems-level changes in the assessment system that will improve reviewing processes. Also, he stressed the need for the scientific community to engage with each other actively and to publish research that is reproducible.

A purely metric-based evaluation is not desirable when science is funded via public money

Jameel put forth the assessment ideologies followed at India Alliance, a signatory to DORA. He said that the institute has put guidelines to practice by assessing research in terms of questions, potential, strengths, weaknesses, and track record of individual researchers and fellows. The review board also considers submissions to platforms such as bioRxiv as valid research contributions. Jameel emphasised that cultural changes need to come from within the institution, from those who sit on hiring and assessment committees.

Forging Bonds

Over the three days of the meeting, IndiaBioscience provided several virtual networking opportunities for the attendees on platforms like Zoom, Wonder, Slack, and WhatsApp. The participants could interact with each other and the mentors on these channels, which proved to be as beneficial as in-person interactions. These sessions gave the participants unique opportunities to network and benefit from the mentor’s insights.

There were two breakout sessions where the attendees discussed how to steer research and mentor students. Mentor talk speakers along with B Nagaraj, IISER Pune; Lolitika Mandal, IISER Mohali; and Vidita Vaidya, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai participated in the sessions. Each session had 20 YIs/PDFs conversing with one mentor. The discussions included topics such as how to be a good mentor, work etiquette that fosters a work-life balance and encouraging practices in students such as taking the weekends off, or not responding to work emails beyond a certain time in the day, to name a few.

The mentors also shared nuggets of wisdom and personal mantras for a holistic approach to a research career. Mandal and Nagaraj emphasised the importance of having a work-life balance, urging the YIs to chalk out time for hobbies, arts, and family. They said it allows one to step away from the never-ending race of diverse academic, teaching, administrative, and research responsibilities. Above all, the time away from mainstream work responsibilities is helpful in the long run to avoid ‘burnout’ and losing enthusiasm somewhere in the middle.

The meeting concluded with closing remarks by Mayor. He commended the extraordinary engagement of the community and remarked that the meeting will serve as a stepping stone for many of the attendees for where they wish to go. He then thanked the organisers for their brave enterprise in conducting the event successfully on an online platform.

How did you decide to join the YIM2021 organizing team and how has your experience been?

Imroze: I received a call from Smita and the offer was too good to refuse. It has been an enriching and exciting experience to be a part of a fantastic team working closely to organize one of the most coveted events for Indian biology.

Karishma: Sometime late last year, Smita called me and shared plans for YIM 2021. When she asked me if I would like to be an organizer, I was thrilled. Soon after that, we had our first meeting. As the planning started, we met every week and systematically tackled tasks one after the other. The organizing committee meetings were productive and focused, but fun at the same time, with lots of banter and laughter. When making decisions, the discussions and conversations were honest and positive, and everyone had a voice at the table. It was a wonderful experience organizing a big meeting like this in a planned and stress-free manner while working as a team that had each other’s back.

Vasudha: Around the beginning of November 2020, I received a call from Smita and was pleasantly surprised when she invited me to be a part of the organizing committee for YIM 2021. Would anyone refuse such an offer? I had always wanted to reach out to IndiaBioscience, but there was usually some inhibition or lack of time which did not allow me to do so. I was really excited and immediately grabbed the offer.

Shantala: It was through the YIMs that I first got to know about IndiaBioscience. When I joined IndiaBioscience in 2019, one of the responsibilities given to me was to be a part of the team organising the YIMs. While I got my toes wet with a smaller role behind the scenes last year, I am thrilled to be a part of the organising committee for YIM 2021. It has been an exhilarating experience. Imroze, Karishma, Vasudha, Smita and I spent many hours brainstorming how to breathe life into our vision for a virtual networking meeting. As many of us had benefited from previous YIMs, we felt strongly about capturing the essence of the national YIM as best as possible in a virtual format for this year’s participants, who have already had to undergo a challenging year. It was a very rewarding process to work with a set of organisers who were completely invested in getting the outcome correct. We felt like giddy children when the announcement of the meeting went out in January. With the meeting right around the corner that feeling is back again!

Smita: YIM is the flagship networking meeting of IndiaBioscience and being a part of IndiaBioscience, my involvement was automatic :). Beginning with YIM 2016, which was my first YIM, each YIM has helped me gain a richer understanding of the research ecosystem in India and the issues pertinent to young researchers. I have made some great friends over these years and grown my professional network manifold. We have also been successful in bringing many positive changes to the format of the meeting based on the feedback that we receive every year. YIM 2021, being our first virtual meeting, has been a completely new experience with no template to follow, but very enriching. With excellent support from Shantala, my colleague at IndiaBioscience, and three energetic young investigators from diverse backgrounds - Karishma, Imroze and Vasudha - the journey of planning YIM 2021 has been amazing and very fulfilling.

This is the first time that YIM is being held in a virtual format. Have there been any challenges associated with moving the meeting online? Conversely, are there any advantages?

Imroze: While figuring out ways to ensure effective and meaningful networking in the virtual format was a big challenge, the biggest advantage is perhaps the increased reach and participation that we could afford this time. We are delighted that we have more participants this time than any of the previous editions.

Karishma: The major consideration in the virtual format was recapitulating the in-person networking component of the meeting, known to be a huge factor in the success of previous YIMs. Given this, the YIM 2021 program was designed to provide several opportunities for virtual networking, including breakout sessions, a virtual lounge, Slack and WhatsApp groups, and an informal networking session. We hope that these numerous channels will enable conversations among young investigators and PDFs, and lead to more connections and collaborations in the life science ecosystem in India.

While enabling effective networking in a virtual format is a challenge, the biggest advantage of the online medium was the ability to leverage it to increase reach, access and participation. Further, in the absence of logistic considerations of travel and accommodation, the virtual format has included a range of speakers, mentors, and panellists from all over India and outside the country.

Vasudha: The charm of YIM is its personal interactions, so I was a bit apprehensive about the virtual format. But after a few meetings with the team, I recognized its potential. Working with a wonderful team of organisers, the challenges were ironed out really well. We decided to put in our best efforts to make it as effective as an in-person meeting. There were also several added advantages, like being able to invite many more postdocs to be a part of the meeting, using newer virtual platforms like Slack and Wonder for networking etc.

Shantala: The personal interactions and networking opportunities are the hallmarks of the YIMs. It is a platform to build a supporting and fostering community for current and future Young Investigators in India. It was a tough call but after much deliberation, we decided to go ahead with a virtual meeting because such a meeting is much needed at this juncture. The challenge then was, of course, to capture the magic of the in-person YIMs. We designed shorter sessions to avoid ‘Zoom fatigue’ as well as set up multiple avenues for participants to interact with each other as well as mentors/speakers/panellists. I hope that since this is a journey we are making together with the participants, they feel a sense of ownership for this platform and go the extra mile in making the most of this meeting!

On the other hand, a virtual meeting has eliminated a huge chunk of the logistical preparation that normally accompanies a YIM - venue, travel and finances. This stripped-down approach has given us a chance to revisit the basics of the YIMs. A virtual meeting has also enabled us to have more participants. With the ability to join the meeting from their homes/offices, I think it might have thrown the door open for senior and mid-career scientists to participate more easily in the meeting.

Smita: Any new exercise comes with its own challenges and pains! Moving YIM online has been no different. However, it has been a great experience. The pandemic has not only taught us many newer ways of working but also made us more resilient and capable of thinking differently. This definitely helped in bringing a mindset-shift that allowed us to conduct a networking and mentoring meeting like YIM in the online mode. I would like to add that the success of this meeting has always been in the hands of the participants. The same applies to the online meeting, where perhaps a slightly higher level of effort would need to be made by each participating individual to make the most of what the virtual platforms have to offer.

What do you think the participating Young Investigators (YIs) and Postdoctoral Fellows (PDFs) can hope to gain from this YIM?

Imroze: Undoubtedly, this is one of the best platforms to understand the research ecosystem of biology in India and become an integral part of it.

Karishma: I would give participants a 3-part toolkit for YIM 2021.

• Understand the science ecosystem in India from a YI perspective: Leverage YIM 2021 as an opportunity to understand the rewards and challenges of being a YI in India. Be informed of what the road ahead might look like – it will be different from doing science in India as a PhD scholar or doing science outside India as a postdoctoral fellow. As a YI in India, you will need to find solutions that are specific to your situation. For this, the best place to start is to learn more about the ecosystem.
• Network among your large community of colleagues: While the journey of a YI is undoubtedly exhilarating, it can also be a lonely path to walk on. For the first time in your scientific career, you are running the entire show! Know that you are not alone, but have a large community of YIs across India as colleagues. YIM 2021 is an opportunity to forge networks with such colleagues. This will be hugely rewarding, for you and your research group.
• Seek to build informal mentorships for yourself: The YI phase of our career is a time when we are not only learning to be mentors ourselves, but also a time when we ourselves need mentoring on various fronts. A wonderful way to get inputs is from the vast pool of more-experienced colleagues in the country. They have worked within the system to grow their research groups and build their professional paths. YIM 2021 is an opportunity to get to know them and build relationships that can lead to informal mentorships.

Vasudha: For both categories, here are a few points to focus on during the meeting.

• Excellent networking opportunity: I left India as a young graduate. When I came back, I noticed a vacuum in me, having no idea about Indian academia. This forum will help fill such a vacuum in any new investigator currently in India or planning to return to India. Participants will have the opportunity to directly interact with several academicians and learn from them.
• Informative sessions: Thoughtfully designed panel discussions on topics such as building research groups, funding opportunities and research integrity will help young researchers become experts in their field.
• Mentor talks: Scientists from various institutions sharing their research stories will motivate young scientists. As a YI, there are a million questions that pop up in one’s mind every day. I am quite positive that the mentor sessions will answer a lot of those queries.

Shantala: My hope would be that both the YIs and PDFs attending YIM 2021 would:

● Build a (supportive) community of peers

● Forge and seek mentorships

● Better understand the diverse and changing landscape of the research ecosystem in India

● Develop a sense of belonging and ownership for the life science research ecosystem in India

● Find an ally in IndiaBioscience and our vast diversity of initiatives

Smita: The participating YIs and PDFs will get to virtually meet their peers coming from all over the world and India. This is a great way to grow their network, learn from each other, find collaborators, and importantly, make new friends for life. They will get not just an opportunity to interact with some of their future colleagues but also a chance to mentor them during the meeting and afterwards. The mentor talks, carefully planned panel discussions on pertinent issues, and breakout sessions will give them a chance to learn more about many new and relevant topics. It would also allow them to pick up some new skills, ideas, and practices that help bring a positive change in their own workspaces.

Our PDF colleagues are preparing themselves to enter the research ecosystem in India in an independent role. YIM will provide an excellent platform to explore and gain knowledge about this ecosystem and the road that lies ahead of them. It would also give them an opportunity to meet YIs, mentors, institutional representatives and people from funding agencies. These interactions would give PDFs a first-hand perspective of the ground realities. Trust me, each interaction is helpful and one should make the most of it before, during, and after the YIM.

Have you attended a YIM before? How was your experience?

Imroze: Yes! I attended both as a PDF as well as a YI, and YIM has never failed to surprise me with its functional importance, positive and enthusiastic atmosphere, and wonderful people around. It is one of those rare platforms of Indian academia where people can freely forge academic links and build long-standing collaborations and friendships.

Karishma: Yes, I had the opportunity to attend YIM 2019 at Guwahati as a YI. It was a turning point in my professional journey as a YI. The first year of my return to India journey (2018-2019) was tough and isolating, professionally. I left India as a doctor, and when I returned as a scientist, I felt like an ‘outsider’ in Indian science. I knew no one and no one knew me. YIM 2019 changed all of that. The colleagues I met, the networks I built, and the camaraderie I experienced, reinstated my commitment to do science in India. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I was also seeking a new host institute, and meeting a colleague at YIM 2019 led to an interview and my current position. We have always heard of the importance of attending conferences in academia, but I have lived this first-hand.

Vasudha: No. This is my first time both as an organizer and a participant. I am really lucky to be a part of the vibrant ecosystem and team.

Shantala: YIM 2021 is the third YIM that I will be a part of. I participated in YIM 2017 as a PDF, YIM 2020 as part of the organizing team, and YIM 2021 as a part of the organising committee. I have seen the YIM from different perspectives and the YIMs have seen me at different stages in my career. All the experiences, while varied, have left me with a similar feeling – the comfort of being amongst supportive mentors and peers who are genuinely interested in your career advancement. I have come away feeling inspired, motivated and more confident.

Smita: It is one of the most enriching meetings I have ever been part of or known in the scientific ecosystem. YIM 2021 is my 5^th YIM as an organizer and 6^th as a participant. It has been a marvellous journey – I have made many new friends, met some wonderful people, grown my network and learnt a lot about the opportunities and challenges that the Indian research ecosystem throws at researchers. The most rewarding part is to know how a large number of researchers have benefitted from the YIMs as well as the IndiaBioscience platform and how this has served as a stepping stone for them to get into their desired career paths. It feels truly satisfying to be part of this journey.

Which session (s) are you looking forward to the most?

Imroze: While I look forward to all the sessions, Panel Discussion 4 is something that I am eagerly waiting for. The discussion on DORA might be extremely important for what the future of Indian biology would look like. Stay tuned for this session!

Karishma: Most certainly, the mentor talks across all three days. The mentors are not only well-known for their professional achievements but also their contributions to the wider science ecosystem in India. Importantly, their stories represent the challenges and gains of doing science across diverse situations in India. They exemplify the fact that while the path of an independent investigator in India is not easy, it is most certainly possible to build world-class research groups in the country.

Vasudha: Since I have never been a part of YIM previously, I am both an organizer and a participant this time. There is no favourite session for me; I am super-charged to listen to each one of them! In general, I am curious to learn more about DORA (Panel Discussion 4) and excited about the “Building a research group” discussion (Panel Discussion 2), being a YI myself.

Shantala: As an organizer, the question almost feels unfair – it’s like trying to pick a favourite child! On a more serious note, while I am genuinely looking forward to seeing how the entire package comes together, I am also really looking forward to the sessions where the participants get to interact with the mentors/panellists. These include the breakout session, informal networking sessions, or even the many Q&A segments. If a lot of conversations get initiated on Slack or in the Lounge, that would be the icing on the cake!

Smita: The entire course of three days of deliberation at YIM 2021 – new people, new interactions, new ideas and a new format (this year)! I am not only curious about how the event will unfold but also confident that it will be a successful meeting. A lot of effort has been put into bringing the best to the participants of this meeting, and we are hopeful that everyone will feel enriched at the end of the meeting.

Do you have any advice for the participants for making the most of this YIM?

Imroze: More than anything else, make friends and try to captivate people with the cool stories that you have been brewing in the lab all these years.

Karishma: YIM is the opportunity of a lifetime! Speaking from personal experience, it can prove to be a turning point in your career journey. To make the most of this YIM, I would say being proactive is the key. Reach out, discuss, ask questions, make connections, build relationships, and be present. Make every minute of the meeting count.

Vasudha: Attend every session, because they are all different and feature carefully selected mentors, speakers and panellists. Stay tuned and participate actively. This is a rare opportunity to gain a highly beneficial start-up kit for kickstarting an academic career in the life sciences in India.

Shantala: An advice my PhD supervisor gave me before I left for my first conference was, “Be the first at breakfast and the last to leave at night”. In short, make the most of the meeting. While we have set up multiple opportunities for interaction and networking, the onus to make the maximum use of them lies on the participants. I would say attend all the sessions, strike up conversations with your peers, ask questions, discuss with mentors/speakers/panellists, share your journey - do all of this even if it means stepping out of your comfort zone! But also remember to enjoy the meeting. From my experience, it is a rare opportunity to have a meeting where you have scientists from across career stages who are passionate about science at large and who have come together to support and celebrate the next generation of Young Investigators.

Smita: It is very easy to get distracted in a virtual meeting. My very sincere advice for the participants of YIM 2021 is to make the most of this carefully curated meeting by not only attending every session but also by engaging effectively. This is a great platform to connect with several bright minds of the life-science research ecosystem in India. IndiaBioscience and the organizers have tried their level best to bring to you a program that would offer you all the flavours that the traditional YIM has to offer.

Disha is a comprehensive e-book that provides career guidance to Indian life science and biotechnology students. Suman Govil has a long experience of working in human resource development programmes of the Department of Biotechnology (Govt of India). IndiaBioscience has been acting as a facilitator in the life-science ecosystem in India. Skill building is an important vertical at IndiaBioscience, with one of the key activities being to create awareness about different career opportunities that exist for life-science graduates. This book, a result of combined efforts of Govil and the IndiaBioscience team, is a good addition to ongoing efforts to create awareness about different career opportunities and advising them on the key skill-sets that are required to craft a successful career.

Choice of career is difficult and perplexing situation for the young students and their parents in India. This is primarily due to the prevailing concepts about what is a ‘career’. Conventionally, most parents and school teachers advise a ‘bright’ student, who is on the threshold of selecting the subject combination for final school years, to study ‘Science’ and within that domain, engineering or medicine are presented as mutually exclusive career options. If any of these are not attained after the marathons of numerous entrance tests, the student reluctantly joins a Bachelor of Science course. The restrictive and fixed choices of subjects and the uncertain future career options at this stage add to the frustration of the young child (and parents).

Most students join Masters and Doctoral programmes following their Bachelor’s degree as a matter of routine without any clear idea of what may lie ahead. The near-complete absence of career counselling for students and the generally poor teaching-learning in most classrooms result in students coming out of the academic institutions with a degree, but without any idea of what can be done with it. Not only their subject training remains subcritical, they do not get any opportunity to become aware of the skill sets needed for different careers. Consequently, in most cases, the academic institutions or the industry which want young students to join for academic research or a corporate career, find round pegs in square holes.

The advent of Biotechnology courses a few decades ago appeared to provide a better alternative to young students for their career options and this led to a mushrooming of Biotechnology courses (and variants with all kinds of luring names) at all levels across the country. However, the promise with which such academic programmes were initiated remained largely unfulfilled. One of the reasons for this failure, besides the poor course content of most such courses, was the complete lack of clarity about what these students can do with the degree they obtain, often at huge costs to their parents. Thus a need for career guidance to young students and parents has long been felt. In this context, the present book Disha is a welcome compilation. This book is aptly named ‘Disha’, a Sanskrit word which means direction. As expected, the book is ‘meant to provide guidance to life science and biotechnology students on choosing a career direction and embarking upon it’.

This freely downloadable e-book has chapters on (i) Careers in life science and biotechnology: An introduction, (ii) Implementing job search strategy, (iii) Career options for life science and biotechnology students, (iv) Selecting an appropriate course and institute, (v) Indian biotechnology industry: Status, opportunities and challenges, and (vi) Learn from the leaders. Each chapter has subsections for specific issues which help the reader to conveniently refer to a specific issue. A further useful feature is the list of other relevant available online resources at the end of each section. The introductory chapter discusses expectations of different career paths and how an informed choice about the career can be made. It provides useful advice about career options to students and teachers, and, importantly, also to parents. Practical details about strategic and informed decision by understanding of the requirements and expectations of different career paths are provided, so that, the young aspirant can acquire appropriate qualifications, necessary skills and training. Comprehensive guidance on preparing curricular vitae and facing the interviews etc. are included with sample questions and answers.

Joining the academia seems to be the obvious, and often the only, choice to most Indian students since other careers are generally considered secondary and termed ‘alternate’ or ‘lateral’ careers. It is good to note that Disha refrains from using such terms, but actually emphasizes that a larger proportion of students coming out of the higher educational institutions are absorbed in careers outside the academia. During their master’s and doctoral training, students are rarely enlightened about career options and how to prepare for the diverse options that are available. This book fills this void with useful information that would greatly help them in deciding where they want to be. The chapter on Indian biotechnology industry covers the current trends and skills required in each sector that is useful for students in appropriately preparing themselves to become industry-ready by understanding the scope and expectations of that sector. The last chapter on ‘Learn from Leaders’ is an interesting compilation of interviews of some of the established academic and industrial leaders and thus it provides unique insights from personal experiences of those who have made it successful in the biotechnology field.

Layout of this e-book, written in simple conversation mode language, provides a ready reckoner for diverse sets of information. The illustrations are apt and capture readers' interest, so that the message is effectively conveyed. It would have been useful if the different sub-sections listed on the contents page of this e-book were hyper-linked to the given page.

I compliment Govil and the IndiaBioscience team for taking up this much-needed initiative and preparing a freely downloadable e-resource book for the benefit of student community. It would be good if they can periodically update and expand the factual information. This book should be read not only by students and teachers, but also by parents of the young students, so that everyone concerned is well aware of the diverse possibilities and requirements.

One of the chief mandates of the Young Investigators’ Meetings (YIMs) has been to enable in-depth discussions on issues related to the culture and practice of doing science in India. In addition to talks, seminars, and poster presentations, YIM 2020 also included four panel discussions and two breakout sessions, each of which saw active and enthusiastic participation by the attendees. Here is a brief overview of some of these sessions.

Panel Discussion 1: Translational Research

Moderator: Taslimarif Saiyed, C-CAMP, Bangalore

Panellists: Jugnu Jain, Sapien Bio; Guhan Jayaraman, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Madras, Chennai; Anil Prabhakar, IIT Madras

This discussion focused on several routes that can lead to effective translation of basic research, including industry partnerships, entrepreneurship, and collaborations. Both Jain and Prabhakar emphasized the importance of robust processes and consistent, repeatable outcomes for effective translation and broader application of research. The panellists added that for successful entrepreneurial ventures, it is important for researchers to come out of their comfort zones and take risks. One suggestion from the panel was to set up technology transfer offices in institutes that value industry partnerships. Finally, multiple panellists drove home the point that academicians should view industry partnerships not just as a source of funding, but also as a source of knowledge, expertise, and ideas.

Panel Discussion 2: Funding for science in India

Moderator: Aravindhan Vivekanandhan, University of Madras, Chennai

Panellists: Meenakshi Munshi, Department of Biotechnology (DBT); Shahid Jameel, DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance; Balachandar Venkatesan, Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB); Maitrayee DasGupta, University of Calcutta, Kolkata

The panellists discussed the need for funding agencies to be accessible and the grant evaluation process to be transparent. It was suggested that funding agencies should participate in capacity building in scientists, particularly young researchers, for grant-writing. Drawing on her experience of setting up a lab within the Indian university system, DasGupta advised researchers who had just started their labs to try and write small grants at first to survive while parallelly gathering data to write bigger proposals later. Many of the panellists agreed that funding agencies want to fund good ideas and good science, irrespective of the field of study or whether the ideas are basic or applied. It was also discussed that 5-year grants, which have a longer vision and longer turnaround cycles, should be prioritised over 3-year grants. Finally, the panellists recommended creating age and gender-neutral fellowships to bring back scientists who have breaks in their careers.

Panel Discussion 3 - Science Outreach & Communication

Moderator: Gautam Menon, Ashoka University, Sonipat & The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai

Panellists: Shakila H, Madurai Kamraj University; Elisabeth Knust, MPI-CBG, Germany; Kollegala Sharma, CSIR-Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI), Mysuru; Dinabandhu Sahoo, University of Delhi; Priyanka Pulla, Freelance Journalist

The panellists for this panel hailed from different reaches of the science communication field and began the discussion with a quick overview of their individual contributions towards carrying out science outreach or reporting on science for the general public. The panellists pointed out that incentivizing science outreach for researchers is important and it should not be viewed as a waste of the researcher’s time. One way to do this can be including outreach activities in a researcher’s work evaluations. It was also pointed out that one of the key communities that should be targeted to improve scientific temper in society are teachers, and through them, their students. Finally, the panellists urged the attending researchers to be willing to go out, engage with the community, and address their concerns in their language.

Panel Discussion 4: Breaking Barriers in Science

Moderator: Rashna Bhandari, Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad

Panellists: Sudipta Maiti, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai; AK Munirajan, University of Madras, Chennai; Anna Akhmanova, Utrecht University, Netherlands; Mónica Bettencourt-Dias, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Pirtugal; Usha Vijayraghavan, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru

The panellists discussed three types of barriers for individuals pursuing careers in science - socio-economic, language, and gender. Regarding socio-economic barriers, the panellists agreed that while affirmative action may sometimes be necessary, it is not a long-term solution and the actual impact of such schemes should be carefully assessed over a period of time. It was also discussed that there is a hierarchy between state universities, central universities, and premier research institutes when it comes to funding. Funding agencies can step in to minimize this gap, while institutes with more funding can open up their labs and share their resources. To address language barriers, the panellists suggested a more uniform syllabus across the country to reduce the gap in quality between English and vernacular medium education. However, they also cautioned against losing out on diversity in this process. Coming to gender barriers, the panellists agreed that this is a global issue – particularly with respect to the leaky pipeline. It was suggested that PIs and institutes should offer full support to those who need time off for maternity/paternity or childcare.

Breakout Sessions

The breakout sessions were designed to allow participants to discuss and brainstorm issues of interest in an informal, semi-structured setting. During these sessions, the participants were divided into three groups, each consisting of a mix of YIs, PDFs, mentors, organisers, and special invitees. Each group was then given a set of topics to discuss and come up with actionable suggestions on.

Two breakout sessions were held during the meeting, focused on the overarching theme of ‘Getting Started’ as a young researcher. Some of the key takeaways that emerged from these sessions are outlined below:

1. People: For young PIs just starting their lab, it is very important to choose mentors who can help them through the process. At the same time, students are the lifeline of the lab, and a PI should give students space to develop their own style and take mental health seriously. An easy way to attract students is to teach well and maintain a good website. YIs can also apply for programmes such as the EMBO Lab Leadership course to learn lab management. Finally, it is important to build one’s own niche, before reaching out for collaborations.
2. Grants/funding: YIs and PDFs should push for the creation of a Research Development/Grants office in their respective institutes. At the same time, funding agencies need to introduce flexibility in grant usage, allowing money to be transferred between overheads and utilized as need arises. Some other suggestions that emerged for new PIs were to build long-term relationships with funding agencies and to look for industry-tie ups, as well as to opt for an open-lab system (if possible) to share resources. It was also pointed out that databases of equipment funded by government grants (such as SAHAJ) need to be popularized and opened to external users.
3. Selecting a research question: PIs need to balance long-term impact with short-term needs and pursue exploratory and ambitious lines of research in tandem with safe and quick projects that ensure a steady output.
4. Research assessment: It emerged during the discussions that research assessment methods and publication requirements set down by bodies such as UGC should be re-evaluated with respect to ground realities. Preprint servers can enhance the visibility of researchers and overcome many of the challenges associated with long publication cycles. It was suggested that YIs and PDFs champion the cause of institutions being a part of the DORA declaration, which precludes the usage of journal impact factor in research assessment. While opting for open access publications, YIs should distinguish between predatory and non-predatory journals and funding agencies should help cover publication costs.
5. Research Ethics: Training in ethics and research methodology should be an early part of science training for students and researchers across all disciplines and career levels.

EMBO Grant Awareness Session

This interactive session was part of the International Research, Training and Mobility Grants Awareness Sessions, launched by IndiaBioscience earlier this year in partnership with India Alliance. Shahid Jameel, India Alliance, provided an overview of the numbers showing low participation of Indian researchers in EMBO schemes. Next, Gerlind Wallon, EMBO, discussed some of the EMBO schemes available for Indian researchers and their aims. This was followed by short talks by two of the past recipients of these schemes - Vaishnavi Ananthanarayanan, who was selected for the EMBO Young Investigators Programme in 2018 and Santosh Chauhan who was selected for the EMBO Global Investigator Programme in 2019. Ananthanarayanan and Chahuan discussed the application process in detail and shared insights from their own experience with these programmes.

PDF Satellite Meeting

The last one and a half days of the meeting consisted of the PDF satellite meeting, wherein the forty post-doctoral fellows attending the meeting got a chance to directly interact with institutional representatives and pitch their scientific ideas to them. Each PDF was given the opportunity to present their science in a 5-minute lightning talk, followed by a poster session. The institute representatives each gave a presentation highlighting the key characteristics of their respective institutes, along with a quick overview of the hiring process and the candidate profile they are looking for. The satellite meeting also featured a moderated open discussion between institute representatives and PDFs where various issues were raised, including the rate of absorption of recipients of re-entry and transitional fellowships, recommendation letters, age limits on hiring, need for mentorship during the hiring process, and the need for more transparent hiring and evaluation procedures.

Closing

Smita Jain presented the vote of thanks on behalf of IndiaBioscience and the organisers. Satyajit Mayor provided the closing statements for YIM 2020, summing up the proceedings in a few words and thanking the organisers, attendees, and speakers.

What a year this has been! It made us witness a time of which we neither had any experience nor had ever imagined. Global activities came to a grinding halt across sectors, economies slowed down, unemployment increased and mental health took a major hit. However, the situation also strengthened the belief of the masses in science and technology, a sector that mobilized massive resources in no time at all to learn more about the unknown enemy - the novel coronavirus - and provided the world with ways to fight against it.

Here, I would like to share with you how the year 2020 unfolded for IndiaBioscience and how, even while working remotely, we remained a cohesive and productive team.

The IndiaBioscience team was in the thick of preparing for YIM 2020 at Mahabalipuram when the news about COVID-19 started to trickle in. With the situation still under control in India, we went ahead with our plan and had a very successful meeting. Post YIM 2020, it was just a matter of time before the situation changed and the country went into lockdown. By this time, we had made several big plans for new projects that were to unfold in the coming months and we were quite unsure of bringing these to realization with the team working remotely. However, each one of us rose to the occasion and made the best possible use of technology that allowed us to stay connected as a team. Regular online coffee meetings have been particularly helpful in maintaining our cohesiveness. And with all that was going around the globe, we remained constantly aware of how privileged we were.

The stringent lockdown also helped foster both national and international collaborations. Many of these involved the coming together of diverse teams which we were fortunate to become part of. We could also establish timely partnerships that helped us in reaching out to the larger life science community across India.

We got the opportunity to be part of a multi-institutional effort, COVID-Gyan, which was created under the aegis of Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) and Indian Institute of Science (IISc) with the aim of disseminating scientifically curated content related to the virus which had, by then, taken the world in its clutches. The IndiaBioscience team played a crucial role in strategizing for and planning the website, as well as in creating relevant content.

Also, an idea that we had discussed over coffee at YIM2020 with folks from the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO), an international organization that stands for excellence, took shape into a concrete plan over multiple online calls during the lockdown. It resulted in the launch of the EMBO | IndiaBioscience Online Seminars. We delivered two very successful grant writing workshops under the banner. The third session, which will focus on oral communication in science, has recently been announced.

A little later in the year, IndiaBioscience was chosen by the International Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS) as the publicity partner and host for the first talk in its centenary lecture series that intends to bring the best of all disciplines to discuss evolution, taxonomy, ecology, biodiversity, and other topics that represent unified biology and the topics of prime importance to address contemporary problems such as climate change, endangered species, food and nutrition, health etc. This talk was delivered by Rattan Lal, The Ohio State University, USA, who was the recipient of the World Food Prize 2020.

It has been a year of multiple new initiatives at IndiaBioscience. We rolled out the first-of-its-kind IndiaBioscience Outreach Grant (#IOG) for our YIM and Regional-YIM alumni to help strengthen and integrate outreach activities as part of research programs. We kickstarted the International Grants Awareness Program (#iGAP) to create awareness about international grants that are accessible to Indian life science researchers and equip them to apply for these with full confidence. For this, we received the Research Management Grant under the IRMI program of India Alliance and became part of its first cohort of awardees.

During this time, we also moved our in-person Crafting Your Career (#CYC) workshops to online mode. We conducted four sessions this year with an overwhelming response from the community. We also conducted a few other skill-building workshops in conjunction with CACTUS communications. The first season of our podcast IndiaBiospeaks also covered various aspects of crafting ones’ career and featured informational interviews with science professionals from diverse sectors and roles.

IndiaBioscience launched some useful resources for the community this year. Disha: a comprehensive Career Resource Book for Life Science and Biotechnology Students was launched at YIM2020 while Means to a Beginning: Funding opportunities for PhD Students and Postdocs in India was launched in November 2020. Both resources have received an overwhelming response from the community and are available to download for free on our website. We are currently working towards a grants-related information booklet for young investigators as well as working on a compendium that would provide insights about academia-industry transitions to those who wish to take that route. Our news and columns articles, as well as special series, continued as always. The “Researchers in lockdown” and “Mental Health” series were a few highlights of this year.

This was just a glimpse of what we achieved in this amazingly exceptional year. Thank you for patiently reading this. IndiaBioscience has come a long way from its inception and one of the major reasons for its success is the support we have received from each one of you. We hope that you will stay connected with us, continue to support us, and be our brand ambassadors, helping us reach the deepest corners of our country. We hope that together we will bring out the triumphs and tribulations of our journeys and make this ecosystem a better place for us and for the generations to come.

We wish you a very happy and successful New Year 2021. Stay engaged in order to enable change!