I am a biologist hailing from a completely research-based academic background. My Bachelor’s degree in botany from the prestigious St Joseph’s College, Tiruchirappalli laid the foundation and created an interest in environmental studies and microbial ecology. However, at that juncture, a real passion for science and research had not yet blossomed in my heart.

My subsequent entry into the renowned and inspiring campus of the School of Biological Sciences, Madurai Kamaraj University, for my post-graduation created a deep-rooted dedication and passion for research. I am very confident and proud in reiterating that this transition towards a research mindset happened within a short time span of two to four weeks, through inspiration gained from observing the dedicated lifestyle of PhD scholars and motivation from my professors. Till date, I always cherish those initial days and share my recollections with my family, friends, and students.

Subsequently, for the past one and a half decades, I breathed in the research atmosphere at Madurai Kamaraj University, University of Cologne (Germany), Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, and University of Florida (USA). In all these places, I was surrounded by PhD scholars, post-doctoral fellows, masters students and professors. Stating that I breathed and lived research is not an exaggeration, as I spent around 18 hours per day in the lab and lab corridors.

Entry into a Hospital

After continuously working, breathing, sleeping, and living in academia, recently I joined as a Scientist in the KMCH Research Foundation affiliated with Kovai Medical Center & Hospital, Coimbatore (a NABH accredited multi-speciality private hospital) to establish my own independent research career. Here the environment is entirely different and I am surrounded by physicians, nurses, post-graduate medical students, and administrators.

Every day before entering the lab, I have to cross the sorrowful, worried, tearful faces of patients and their relatives. So, it is important that I have to be mentally strong to get back to my work after witnessing such distress. On the other hand, these moments had motivated me to do translational research along with basic science to relieve and counter their distress.

Hospitals and Research in India

The clinical set-up in India is entirely different from western countries. In the western world, research labs are largely linked with hospitals and it is quite common to see research faculty with an MD degree. But in India, the medical science and clinical research communities are rather separated and there exists little to no involvement of physicians in research.

As per my experience, the main contribution of Indian physicians to research is facilitating access to clinical samples and patient data. It is not that physicians in India do not have a passion for science; rather, except for a few, most of them lack sufficient awareness of science. But it is not wise to simply blame physicians for not getting involved in research. The total number of patients (emergency, inpatient, and outpatients) that Indian physicians have to take care of is very large and we cannot deny that their working time is dedicated almost completely to this noble lifesaving cause.

In fact, the number of physicians per citizen in India is still not comparable to developed nations. As per WHO data (2017) on health workforce, India ranks 136th in the world with less than one doctor per 1000 patients. It is unfortunate that medical institutes like All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMSs) and medical universities have less or no connections with scientific institutes like the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Indian Institutes of Science Education & Research (IISERs), Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and state and central universities. As I witnessed, even exceptional physicians with a real passion for science do not find time to read articles and perform research work. At this situation, it is the duty of the basic scientist to act as a bridge between scientific research and clinical practice in India.

Advantages of doing research in a hospital

The primary advantage of doing science in a hospital is the ease of access to clinical samples with complete patient data, which is a big challenge for researchers working in universities and research institutes. In addition, by direct interaction with the physicians, nurses, and patients as well as day-to-day observation, I understood some real problems associated with various diseases.

All over the world, there exists a strong barrier in taking the outputs from the lab-bench to the clinical bedside. This lapse can be rectified by combining basic research with the clinical environment. Hospitals often have huge manpower in the form of medical post-graduation students, nurses, and lab technicians and have good clinical biochemistry laboratories with sophisticated and automated instruments for clinical measurements. However, it is important that these resources are utilized sensibly for my research work in a way that does not hinder normal hospital activities.

Yet another advantage of doing science in a hospital is that there is no need to be completely dependent on government agencies for funding. Every pharmaceutical company has a mandate to provide funds for charity/ basic research that is unrelated to their products (to avoid conflicts of interest). It is far easier for the physicians (as compared to basic scientists) to get funds from these resources. For instance, I was recently denied an international travel grant from a national funding agency and got only a partial travel grant from another national funding agency for participation in an international conference. At this juncture, the physician and president of our research foundation acted immediately and managed to get funds from a Pharma company to cover my international travel.

Challenges of doing science in a hospital

There are many challenges and barriers to executing science in a hospital environment. Pursuing a scientific career in a private hospital is not at all possible without the support of administration and physicians. In my case, I am fortunate to have both the chief administrator and a group of physicians with real passion for research. In other places, it is possible that administrators may view research activities with a money-based profit mindset, which will not work for science.

Another important mandate for working in hospital is that the researcher must have moral and social values. Interactions and interventions with the patients, physicians, or nurses should in no way affect their day-to-day work, which may, in turn, reflect on the morbidity and mortality of patients. So, it is very important to make sure that none of my research activities disturb their medical efforts and duties.

The space required for a physician for consultation is relatively small in comparison to a research laboratory. So, getting lab space is the most challenging aspect of working in a hospital and it completely depends on my performance as assessed by the generation of data, publications and procuring of grants.

The protocols in a hospital set-up can be really complicated, weird, and unusual for an academic researcher. Among them, the funniest, as well as one of the most deeply troubling aspects, is that the time of work is allotted in shifts, as applicable for physicians, nurses and other hospital staff. An academic researcher usually works around the clock, thinking, writing and executing experiments.

In addition, words like “shift time”, “punching”, “HR”, “manager”, “income tax”, etc. still sound strange to me. Another peculiar challenge is that I often get requests from relatives and friends to get appointments and medical advice from physicians in our hospital. While this can’t be ignored completely, it has to be dealt with judiciously based on whether the patients are critically ill.

------

On understanding the advantages of doing science in a hospital, the challenges and hurdles seem tiny. I am very hopeful that in due course, all of these hurdles will either be solved or I will become more used to prevailing protocols in hospitals. Altogether, I am slowly acclimatising to the hospital-based research atmosphere and genuinely believe that I can play a small but significant role in bridging the gap between the lab bench and clinical bed.

Once the initial phase of selection and joining is over for a Young Investigator (YI), the major challenge they face is how to actually get going at the work place. By this, I mean finding ‘lab space’ where one can set up their work bench, instruments, equipment, and writing desk.

Most YIs don’t know beforehand how much space they will be provided with after joining an institute. In most institutions, there is difficulty in allotting space to YIs as most of it is already occupied for other departmental purposes. This is also a time when the YI’s mind may be preoccupied with the dilemma, anxiety, uncertainty and excitement of accepting an offer to start their scientific career.

Different host institutions have different norms for facilitating this transition for the YIs. For YIs who receive limited-term fellowships like DST-INSPIRE, Ramalingaswamy Fellowships, and Ramanujan Fellowship, the situation can be murkier. Many institutions try to pair such YIs with a ‘Mentor’ in the institution, so that it will be a little easier for YI to start working. Other institutions recognise these YIs as ‘Independent researchers’ and consider it the YI’s sole responsibility to get support, find space etc. Both situations, whether working with a mentor or working independently, have pros and cons, as mentioned below.

I am a DST-INSPIRE Faculty Fellow and I opted to work independently, so most of the discussion here is from that perspective.

One important factor to consider is the delay (can be up to 4 months) in fund sanctioning and release after joining a host institution. During this period, there may not be any salary or research grant support, which may make it really difficult to start working. The best options during this period are to carry out literature review, write research grant proposals, finish pending manuscripts, attend local conferences, and collaborate with faculties in the institution or places around. For these activities, the only requirement is a computer system/laptop, internet connectivity and a desk, which is usually provided by the host institution upon joining.

Collaborating with faculties in the host institution can also solve many of these issues. It is easy to find faculties working in similar research areas and locate common facilities that the YI may find useful. The host institution may also provide some temporary space to the YI based on availability, for which patience and consistent follow-up is required. YIs can also locate unused space in the institute and approach the appropriate authority with a proposal to use that place for starting their lab, even if it is as a temporary arrangement.

Here are some tips to follow before joining any host institution:

• Check the rules and regulations, as well as the recognition norms offered by the host institution, with regards to availability of individual working space, allotment of students/staffs, teaching responsibility, involvement in routine departmental administrative work, availability of accommodation on campus, etc. before joining. Many research institutes provide detailed information on their intranet, which is usually not accessible from external networks. Hence it might be advisable to ask the appropriate authority about obtaining the written norms.
• Check the probability of getting a regular/permanent position in the host institution, especially if you are on a temporary fellowship like the DST INSPIRE grant. YIs must look at this factor very carefully as the pressure of getting regular position builds up with time. Research areas, faculty requirement procedures, department/centre strength, courses offered, etc. are some of the factors to be considered while deciding whether or not to apply for a permanent position.
• Decide whether you want to work with a mentor or independently, perhaps once the host institute is finalised. One more point to note here is, it is really challenging to move on from ‘with mentor’ to ‘independent’ researcher, but vice versa is possible. Once a YI starts working with a mentor, the work environment, culture and association may begin resembling the relationship that exists between a PhD scholar and guide. As a result, once the YI moves on to working independently, there may be unavoidable, unexpected, unfortunate conflicts or disputes over various matters. So, it is better to be clear upfront about the level of independence and professional relationship.
• Accommodation is also an important factor that should be considered while choosing the host institution. Check whether the YI will be provided with accommodation on campus.

Here is some advice on how to get going once you join the host institution.

• Upload/send any required documents at the earliest after joining and follow-up with funding agencies on a regular basis to expedite the fund sanction and transfer process.
• Get acquainted to the formalities and procedures (intranet email domain, software interfaces for purchase, administrative applications etc.) in the institution. Enquire about the procedure of internal applications for the purchase of material, travel, staff recruitment in your project etc. Be nice with the administrative staff; this really helps speed up the procedures for you.
• Look for unused space and blind spots that can be converted into temporary work space. Don’t hesitate to consult the concerned authorities, but don’t do anything without getting the necessary approvals.
• Look for the collaboration opportunities in the institution or within the city or region. You may be able to start working in your collaborator’s work spaces until you get our own.
• Keep interacting with the other faculty in the institution and never get isolated. Learn about the work going on in the institution by attending conferences, talks, seminars, workshops, etc. Let everyone know about your work or progress, which may lead to a chance of collaboration or a new activity.
• Most importantly, get helping hands. Look for graduate students from your collaborators’ lab or recruit staff on your own project as soon as possible. Having others work on your project saves lot of time and doubles your productivity.
• Spend wisely on material, equipment, accessories, etc. Consult with other YIs about the process. Maintain your own stock-entry register and purchase records. Keep track of financial year ending etc. and accordingly plan your purchases and prepare your documents.

Getting an opportunity to start a career as an independent academic researcher needs significant work and effort. Apart from scientific ideology and intellectual performance, there are lot of considerations in the beginning for a young researcher. YIs must think carefully about the points discussed in this article, as this may help them focus more clearly on the journey that they are embarking upon.

As a subject, biology was not my first love in school. Rather, it had always come a close second to mathematics and statistics. As I progressed through higher education, I realized that this wasn’t a particularly desired combination of subjects to love and pursue. With all the boxes drawn around education and career paths, the duo of math and biology seemed to ‘fit’ in very few of them, if at all.

I pursued BSc (Hons.) in Zoology at Presidency College, Kolkata (now Presidency University), one of India’s oldest and most prestigious colleges. Here my passion for life sciences blossomed. But thriving at Presidency and doing well in terms of grades had its own pitfall as I subsequently and somewhat mindlessly followed the herd of social expectations and ended up pursuing MSc in Biotechnology at Ballygunge Science College, University of Calcutta.

I soon realized that as a subject, biotechnology was not my cup of tea and I yearned for a way out. Soon afterwards, I got an opportunity to do a Masters in Zoology at Southern Illinois University Carbondale (SIUC), USA, with full financial support. Pursuing Zoology once again felt like coming home. It was here at SIUC that I was introduced to population genetics as an independent subject and research area. I was thrilled to find it an area of scientific inquiry that combined my two loves – biology and mathematics/statistics – and realized that this was likely the field in which I would want to base my future research endeavours.

Meanwhile, I got married and at the time my wife was working on her PhD in Pittsburgh, USA. I wanted to move to Pittsburgh for pursuing a PhD, but it proved to be tricky given the dearth of labs focussing on animal-based evolutionary and population genetics in the city. I found myself in a sticky spot but soon discovered the lab of Michael Jensen-Seaman at Duquesne University, a comparatively newer university at Pittsburgh, who had been working on primate molecular evolution and population genetics. I joined his group and both my thesis work and a wide array of coursework I undertook in biostatistics, human evolutionary bioinformatics and population genetics at Duquesne as well as the University of Pittsburgh fostered my interest in the area at large.

Post PhD, I moved to the UK, where I began postdoctoral research at the University of Sheffield, delving into human population genetics using a variety of biostatistical and bioinformatics approaches. I had always been keen on moving back to India to set up my independent lab. An opportunity appeared almost out of the blue about a year and a half into my postdoctoral work, when I received an offer from Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka. I accepted the offer and returned to India after almost eight years of life and education abroad, having imbibed the flavours of research and academic traditions of two continents.

I was thrilled at the prospect of beginning an independent research career in population genetics in India but soon realized that this was going to be an uphill task, since most scientists, as well as science/education administrators, were either unaware of the subject or appeared reluctant to offer it as a mainstream research branch under life sciences. And this is not country- or region-specific – I had encountered this even in course of my academic training. It is only in a few universities worldwide that population genetics exists as an independent discipline of investigation. A major reason for this is the lack of awareness regarding the impact of population genetics in healthcare, pharmaceuticals and biodiversity conservation.

The question I get asked all the time is: What is population genetics and which branch of biology does it fall under? Does it come under genetics, evolutionary biology, medical genetics, human genetics, or biodiversity conservation? The simple answer to this is that it can be included with and applied to almost any problem in biology. As a matter of fact, population genetics is the face of evolution at the population level, depicting genetic variation among populations both spatially and temporally. And as Theodosius Dobzhansky, a geneticist and evolutionary biologist famously said, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”

In the course of my academic training and during my independent research career, I have worked with scientific problems and questions looking at population genetics in various systems, including birds, non-human primates, humans and even insects. Given this, another question/criticism I face continuously is: What is your study system? Humans or primates or something else? The answer is that I am not restricted to any one model system. Being a population geneticist, I am open to working with any organism within the tree of life, as long as the research question and problem is interesting.

Needless to say, being products of a not-so-flexible educational system, where people are generally used to compartmentalizing, every subject including biology and science, in general, is usually confined to a predefined perimeter. As a result, I have struggled to convince other scientists, academicians and education administrators that my research may well include humans, apes, monkeys, and tigers at the same time, without diluting its depth, importance and utility.

In working towards finding my identity and feet as an independent researcher I have found my research area in population genetics also struggling for acceptance. While some clinical geneticists wanted to exclude it from their purview because in their opinion the field was too anthropological in nature, some biological science departments felt the contrary and found my research too focussed on human genetics. Some thought I had my fingers in too many pies working on multiple organisms. Overall, I was constrained by a myopic view of research that failed to envision the enormous possibilities in inter- and cross-disciplinary studies, and the tremendous prospect of combining population genetics with biomedical, pharmaceutical and biodiversity conservation research.

I strongly feel that this narrow-minded approach towards life sciences has increasingly become detrimental to the subject. Today in India and worldwide, biology is fast becoming synonymous to biochemistry, cell, developmental and molecular biology, and biomedical sciences. As a result, less highlighted areas of research such as population genetics (except perhaps human population genetics) are in many instances being pulled out of biological sciences and being grouped under environmental sciences. Our utilitarian outlook and the increased focus on encouraging and funding research that supposedly ask scientific questions with greater translational value (e.g. those offering to solve ‘important’ problems in healthcare and climate change/conservation) have disparaged the so-called more theoretical areas such as population genetics, without realizing the value the latter may have otherwise added to the some of the very problems we seek to solve.

Eclipsed by its ‘big brothers’ in biology, population genetics as a field also struggles with lack of takers. Students are often reluctant to join a lab focusing on a largely theoretical subject because of two major reasons. First, despite having immense potential in the realms of healthcare, population genetics research has remained largely at the fringe and does not seem immediately translatable in providing an overtly visible benefit to humankind. Second, till date, population genetics has not looked promising from a commercial standpoint when compared to other fields in biological and pharmaceutical sciences that have a higher potential to land students a better job.

However, it is not all grey and gloomy as a population geneticist. My personal attempt to survive and thrive has involved trying to bridge the theoretical core of the subject to more practical aspects, for e.g. variation of disease susceptibility across populations over time and space (for humans) and biodiversity conservation (for charismatic endangered animal species). One can also redefine the term ‘population genetics’ according to the research question at hand and the same subject can become human genetics or conservation genetics depending on where and how it is being used.

My journey as a population geneticist and evolutionary biologist has been one of following my heart, and despite its trials and tribulations, it has been enriching and rewarding. And recently I have joined Yenepoya (Deemed to be University) at Mangalore where I continue the process of setting up my research group in population genetics. I believe in a world without demarcations and constraints, in life as well as in scientific pursuit. And I believe that it is only through free thinking and applying ourselves to address questions that are meaningful to us without being curbed by pre-existing notions, shall we progress towards building greater knowledge.

When I started thinking about my career aspirations after completing my bachelors in Pharmacy, I was sure about getting into research. However, I would have never imagined running my own laboratory. As with most pharmacy students in India who are interested in research, I aspired to someday head the R&D department of a pharmaceutical company.

I completed my MS in Pharmaceutical Sciences from the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, and continued in the same laboratory to complete my PhD in Molecular Pharmacology and Toxicology. It was while doing my doctoral research that I came to appreciate the importance of scientific freedom and the ability to choose my own area of research.

At the end of my doctoral studies, I was hoping to catch a break from hard-core research, as I was exhausted from the daily grind of thinking of experiments day and night. As I was initially hoping to get into a pharmaceutical company, I had tried to develop some corporate pharma skills by taking courses in Regulatory Science during my PhD. This helped me easily find a job in a commercial ethics committee to help small clinicians and non-institutional researchers get their research proposals reviewed for following ethical guidelines while conducting human clinical research.

A year and a half in this position made me re-discover my love for research. My mind was itching for stimulating discussions and more complex problem-solving. I was looking forward to getting back into research with renewed vigour and excitement.

At this point, I got an opportunity to join Chest Research Foundation (CRF), Pune, who were looking for a basic research scientist to drive molecular research which would add onto their already accomplished clinical and public health research profile. This was a perfect fit for me given my basic research background in cigarette smoke-induced pulmonary impairment. I could test out my hypotheses in human clinical studies at CRF. 100% time dedicated towards research, scientific freedom to pursue research ideas and an opportunity to transform a primitive molecular research program [NJ1] into a pioneering one, were some of the most important considerations that led me to choose this opportunity. The institute being in my hometown, Pune, was the cherry on top of the cake.

When I tried to read and gather more information online on what I could expect while establishing my own research laboratory in India, I learned about some of the challenges associated with funding, resources, and bureaucracy, but none from a private research-dedicated institute perspective. I assumed most of these challenges would also apply to my position at CRF – which was true. But there were also other challenges, which I never thought about. Some of these were:

Delays in procurement of consumables

Planning research experiments is a dynamic process, which requires constant adaptation and change of plans. It may not always be possible to foresee the requirement of a chemical or a consumable. The vendors take anywhere between 4-12 weeks to deliver a product, once the order is released, as most of the consumables are procured from abroad. Adding to that at least a week to navigate your institutional process to get the order released, a sudden requirement of a consumable may set an experiment back by 2-3 months.

The only part in your control is minimising the institutional time required to place an order and following up with the vendor to ensure that they follow their promised timelines. Although this also applies to public-funded institutes, the problem there is mitigated by the fact that there are usually 2-3 groups working in similar research areas from whom you could borrow some consumables until your orders are fulfilled. Researchers from other institutes are mostly helpful in these cases, but it requires networking and effort to develop such relations.

Shared resources

Most of the research institutes in India and abroad with more than one basic science research laboratory have a shared resources facility so that each lab would not have to invest in capital equipment or instruments individually, along with their maintenance. These resources are usually shared, which not only helps in reducing costs but also allows for better utilization of the resources. As a single lab in a private research institute, these costs have to be borne alone which significantly adds to the budget. This could sometimes limit the number of available methodologies to interrogate a research problem.

Setting up collaborations

Another challenge for a researcher in a private institute is setting up collaborations with other research laboratories. Networking becomes all the more important for a researcher in a private institute given the smaller number of connections you can make through the institute or its researchers. Institutional policies may also direct which parties you can collaborate with and not.

Funding challenges

Applying for and generating funds is another serious challenge as some grant opportunities may only be open for government/public research institutes. I have had at least one grant proposal rejected for the fact that my institute did not have other basic science researchers who could help me in case I reach a dead end. Thus, collaborations almost always have to be multi-institute which may add to logistical costs.

Recruiting student researchers

Being in a university campus or a national research institute may make it easy to attract student researchers who can pursue masters and PhD degrees while working in your laboratory. Private research institutes require affiliation to universities to be eligible to recruit students. The research staff at the institute also need to conform to the university’s eligibility criteria to be PhD guides.

---------

I would like to advise other young researchers planning to move to India and/or starting a laboratory in a private research institute to network as much as possible. This is a one-stop solution to most of the above challenges. For YIs planning to move to India from abroad, it would help to inquire within your network abroad if they know any investigators in India who may be your potential collaborators. Attend local scientific meetings to meet senior investigators and get them excited about your research.

I would also suggest to the young researchers that they carry the best practices from wherever you move, be it from abroad or within India. From my personal experience, I realized that students in India do not take deadlines for presentations or reports seriously enough. However, students abroad usually have a midnight deadline for assignments and the first thing they get to learn is the strictness of this deadline. Building such systems could be daunting initially, but will contribute to the research culture in India and provide you with the satisfaction of helping transform the careers of those next in line.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below.

I am a developmental biologist and my happiest moments in the lab are when I am watching embryos develop with time. Embryos are such perfect creations, beautiful, intricate and dynamic. The communication between cells in the embryo is at its best and the most intriguing aspect of this field is how cells talk to each other and know their relative position and fate.

My interest in developmental biology originated during my undergraduate studies at the University of Delhi. I was keen to pursue an academic career in developmental biology using a vertebrate model system. My graduate training was in the US and then I moved back to India to pursue postdoctoral training. I was often asked, “Why do a postdoc in India?” Postdoc usually refers to an additional research training after PhD which is more often than not a stepping stone into academia and research. For most young researchers in India today, postdoc experience is typically attained in a lab outside India.

Postdoc culture is only just beginning to take shape in India with a number of postdoctoral fellowships slowly becoming available from the funding agencies. The number of postdocs has also increased over the past decade, although the majority of the PhDs undergo postdoctoral training in labs in USA, Europe and Japan. Many research organizations also offer postdoctoral training programs to encourage potential postdocs to remain in India.

I am a product of one such program, the DBT-Young Investigator (YI) award at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB), Faridabad. The YI program encourages intellectual freedom to pursue scientific questions to build your independent research program.

A popular belief is that postdoctoral training in Indian lab cannot get you an academic position. The truth is, getting an academic position is challenging in either case. Publishing high-quality scientific articles from Indian labs is not impossible. Postdoc training in India does not always mean low productivity; what matters is the scientific questions you ask and how you choose to answer them.

I see many advantages to pursuing postdoctoral training in India. It helps you network extensively and set up collaborations amongst your peers and colleagues. In my case, a collaboration with CSIR-Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology (CSIR-IGIB) was instrumental in pursuing the questions I was interested in seeking answers to during my postdoc training period. I could not have pursued that line of thought if I did not collaborate.

I do confess that it was physically exhausting to shuttle between two labs in two different regions of Delhi NCR, but it was all worth it. Collaborative projects also open up more job prospects in the same geographical region as well. One can move around and visit institutions and give job talks with more convenience. In my opinion, one learns to sustain oneself in the Indian academic environment faster and probably better as a postdoctoral fellow within the same system. On the flip side, one may not have as many “high impact factor” articles as compared to postdocs trained in leading labs in America and Europe.

Now, let’s move on to applying for jobs. Is there a good time to apply? The answer is yes. The time to apply is when you feel ready. When you feel confident enough of the skills you have acquired so far in your PhD and postdoc and have begun nurturing ideas which will form the basis of your future lab. When you feel ready to move on and take on a challenge of a very different nature – finding an academic position, joining the organization and setting up the lab.

The key is to apply everywhere. And I mean everywhere. There are a few fellowships available to transition into pursuing an independent research program such as DST-INSPIRE, The Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance fellowships and the Ramalingaswamy re-entry fellowship. The secret to success is finding a suitable host organization where you can begin your independent research program.

I began my independent research program at CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, nearly a year ago. I was fortunate enough to begin experiments on day one itself. So, seek help from your peers and colleagues and use their lab to begin your experiments. Don’t wait till you have set up everything in your own lab.

The lab will grow fast. The first few months are exciting as you have been dreaming of this for many, many years! It feels exciting and time seems short when you want to try it all. But a word of advice that I received from my senior colleagues and would like to pass on to you is – refrain from spreading yourself too thin and keep your focus on what you need to do to create a niche in your field.

Finding an academic position is initially a battle and being on the other side of the table as a PI does put immense pressure on you. Mentoring students, securing funding, writing papers, grants, paperwork and a ton of reading, together translate into a lot of work to do. The big change from postdoc to PI is less time spent on the bench but more on the desk. And yes, I do try to shuttle between the bench and desk. The balancing act is hard but I enjoy every moment of it – both sides are fun. Working at the bench keeps me alive and kicking. The desk gives me experience, it is where I get more time to read, write and reflect.

Mentoring students is another activity that is highly fulfilling, gratifying and critically important as they are the lab! Spending quality time with students and helping them learn how to do science is important to create a healthy lab ethos. As you set up the lab, stick to your passion, interests and strengths. The pure joy of doing experiments to seek answers to your questions is hard to put in words. So enjoy every moment of it!

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below.

Armed with a dual degree in Biological Sciences and Computer Science from BITS, Pilani (Goa Campus) and a fruitful stint at Microsoft Research India, I set out to do my PhD at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden, in 2010. I had great fun working towards my PhD and realized I loved cytoskeleton biophysics. I was part of a wonderful lab, made friends for life, and had an amazing PhD mentor who let me write and submit my thesis from home in India. It was during this time that I learnt of the various funding schemes available to early career researchers in India.

The DST-INSPIRE Faculty Scheme particularly caught my eye since I was eligible to apply – “It provides attractive opportunities to young achievers (in the age group of 27-32 years) for developing independent scientific profiles and intends helping them emerge as S&T leaders in the long term.” It was quite a revelation and a moment of epiphany to me that I could, in fact, embark on an independent research track without (what I had thought was mandatory) postdoctoral training.

What logically followed was a simple proposal application on DST’s online INSPIRE portal. After a rather painless round of interviews, and a wait of a couple of months, I received formal confirmation of having been awarded the INSPIRE Faculty Award.

I had applied through the regular route and did not already have a host institute in mind. But fortuitously, I had been selected to attend the Young Investigators’ Meeting 2014 which was to be held only a couple of weeks following the announcement of my award. True to its USP, the YIM gave me the opportunity to interact with several institute representatives and present my 5-year research plan as a part of the INSPIRE Faculty Award.

A direct result of my YIM experience was an offer from a soon-to-be independent Centre at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru, which was then only a PhD programme – the Bioengineering Programme. G. K. Ananthasuresh and Sandhya S. Visweswariah, who head the Centre, chose to take a gamble and support a fresh PhD Graduate. A fellow INSPIRE Faculty Fellow and I were given infrastructure and administrative support, and most importantly, complete research independence.

While I was forewarned by several well-meaning scientists about multiple issues including the differences between doing science abroad vs in India, my inexperience due to lack of postdoctoral training, limited exposure to the realities of pursuing research in India, and a host of other scientific and non-scientific issues, my (naïve) optimism did not wane. I sought to develop a research program centred around quantitative cell biology of the cytoskeleton, combining my expertise in microscopy, image processing and analysis, cell biology, and biophysics. I thus joined IISc in June 2014 with little more than the INSPIRE Faculty Award and a healthy dose of enthusiasm.

While I had proposed to use mammalian cell culture models in my research, I quickly understood setting up the cell culture lab in our Centre would take more time than I had bargained for. Hence my trusty friend, the fission yeast, which I had worked with in my PhD, was called upon. Preliminary experiments were done, and two other grants were applied to, both of which relied on the fission yeast model system. Thankfully, both of the grants (the Innovative Young Biotechnologist Award from DBT, and the Early Career Research Award from SERB) were funded.

I was glad to be doing a majority of the experiments alongside my first students. This is where the INSPIRE Award was a boon – while it gave me a shot at independent research at the level of an Assistant Professor, I was not required to fulfil the obligations of an Assistant Professor in her formative years, be it in faculty meetings, comprehensive exam committees or other administrative responsibilities. While this might be seen by some as a disadvantage, I was genuinely happy - I was free to concentrate solely on my research.

The first year zoomed past with setting up the lab, acquiring more funds, and performing the first set of experiments proposed. The second and third years were productive, with one review article and three research articles from my independent lab. On my third work anniversary as an INSPIRE Fellow, I gave a chalk talk following my formal application and presentation for an Assistant Professor position at the Centre for BioSystems Science and Engineering (BSSE), IISc. Finally, in October 2017, I officially joined BSSE as an Assistant Professor.

Of course, I made several mistakes (and still do), but the lessons I learnt would most likely be hard to come by being a postdoctoral fellow in a lab that has been established already. There were no illusions about doing science in an Indian setting and I am grateful to have had first-hand experience early on in my career. With the INSPIRE Award, I knew there were no guarantees regarding my future prospects at IISc or elsewhere, but I valued the opportunity to work on something that genuinely interested me.

For potential applicants for the INSPIRE Faculty Award, I have the following pieces of advice from my limited wisdom:

• Apply as soon as you know you would like to pursue an independent research career: The INSPIRE Faculty Award is ideal for candidates who are within 2 years of their post-doctoral training. Any longer, and the candidate is already eligible to apply for regular positions, defeating the INSPIRE Faculty Award’s purpose.
• Know what is expected of you: Institutes/departments differ in their policies when hosting INSPIRE Faculty Fellows. Be sure to understand what is offered to you as a Faculty Fellow and what is expected of you.
• Do not hesitate to ask for help: There is often a misconception that as the leader of a research group, one has to be independent in the truest sense and not rely on help from peers or seniors. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Reach out to people in your Department or Institute for sharing of equipment, consumables, or even just for advice. I am thankful to a number of people within IISc, across the country and abroad for having come to my rescue when I was in a pinch.
• Be open-minded: One might be required to do everything from reformulating the original research question due to unforeseen circumstances, to meeting changing expectations for a regular position at the host institute. Most of these issues are rather fluid, and at the risk of sounding clichéd, take things one day at a time.

While there are several structural issues that still need to be sorted with the INSPIRE Faculty Fellowship (the most prevalent among these being late disbursal of funds), I am not aware of any other fellowship that gives a newly-minted PhD Graduate the chance to head her own lab and to define her own research questions. I, for one, have benefitted immensely from ‘going solo’ just after my PhD.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below.

Conducting research in the laboratory is so much simpler than translating it to the clinic. And I say this because research in the laboratory is defined and dependent on fewer human variables than its translation to the clinic. I chose the path of translational research because of my training both as a clinician and basic researcher. While the former made me realize the gaps in our understanding of human biology (in my case the eye), the latter prepared me to address the gaps.

My journey started with training for four years to become an optometrist. During this time, I learnt about the optics and biology of the eye, as well as the diseases afflicting this small organ. I learnt ways to use both my observational skills and technology to diagnose diseases and treat some of them. It was a fascinating time and it made me realize a couple of things. First, a good clinician can have a huge positive impact on society, and second, very few clinicians practice evidence-based medicine (in fact, most practice eminence-based medicine). And the sad part is that most medical programs fail to give rigorous training to think critically, ask meaningful questions, and answer them in a scientifically sound manner.

This made me switch from the bedside to the bench and I landed at Indiana University (Bloomington, USA) where, for my PhD, I studied molecular mechanisms that could potentially drive a slowly blinding eye condition called glaucoma. My focus instantly went from the macro level (studying/treating the eye) to the micro level (teasing apart the cellular signalling pathways driving the contraction of a subset of cells in the eye). I used to wonder what was there to learn for 4 years (undergraduate) about the eye, an organ which is mostly filled with jelly, and here I was spending another 6 years studying the mechanism driving the contraction of a subset of cells in the eye. It was a humbling yet liberating experience.

The freedom of the lab, in terms of the work hours and schedule, was in such contrast to the clinic. The days were what you defined them to be, the atmosphere more relaxed, the timings more forgiving. When I was interning in a lab at the Ohio University, the senior research associate there took me to fly a plane in the time that it took to run a PCR. Now, this was something you could never dream of doing while in the clinic, where your schedule is defined by the patients.

My PhD was one of the most enjoyable periods of my life, where I learnt not just to think critically but also that there is nothing called the right question. Any question that is driven by curiosity and a fairly good hypothesis is worthy of asking, in my opinion. Knowledge from such curiosity-driven research is what has, and will, enhance our basic understanding of any mechanism. Such knowledge is also a pre-requisite for translation.

This is when my husband and I decided to return to India. Like most people returning to India, we were apprehensive about the job opportunities, funding, environment etc. It was not easy finding the “right place” because there are very few institutes in India that focus on the eye and fewer that do research, let alone translational research in this field. Fortunately for us, we found our match in the LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad.

Although a private not-for-profit set up, the institute, right from its inception, had incorporated basic research into its core functioning. The most important selling point though was the immediate access to the patients, clinicians, human samples and data. The icing on the cake was the community reach (through its network of clinics and hospitals) that this institute has, thus bringing each of the three critical pillars of translational research viz bedside, benchside and community, within easy reach of the scientist.

Having decided to join the institute, I spent my first 3 years as a post-doc dabbling in tissue engineering. And this is when my tryst with translational research began. I was involved in developing a synthetic material for delivering stem cells to the surface of the eye. The product was developed, tested in the lab, followed by testing in animals, and was ready for the clinic in under 2.5 years.

This is when I was exposed to the reality of clinical trials - the mounds of paperwork, the many presentations (and representations) and the delayed approvals. To cut a long story short, it took us 2 years to convince the regulators and receive approval to conduct our clinical trial and another year to do so. I will say this again, it is so much easier to perform basic research than to translate it to the clinic.

Following this, I started my journey as an independent researcher all fired up to do some translation. This is still work in progress and here are a few very important lessons that I have learnt along the way

1) Find a good clinical partner: This is of paramount importance. Unless you have a committed clinical partner who is invested in your ideas and product, the quest to translate your research is bound to fail. This is something that I have learnt the hard way. Also, it is important to recognize that the needs and focus of the clinic(ians) can be quite different from the lab. The best option is to engage with a clinical partner right at the beginning of product development so that the translation is smooth.

2) Hire a good regulatory consultant: Procuring approval for conducting a clinical trial requires a lot of paperwork to be submitted. And it is a lot of time-consuming work which an individual PI cannot manage. The best approach would be to get on board an experienced regulatory consultant who can help with navigating the complex web of regulations (which keep changing so often) and make it manageable. It is important to bear in mind that this can be expensive and it is better to allocate some funds towards the same.

3) Intellectual property: This is an important consideration to bear in mind, especially if the product is of commercial value. It again becomes important to hire someone that can help assess the value of the patent, look for available competitive products in the market etc. Many universities have this as a part of their administration and it might be useful to contact them before placing the information in the public domain. And again, filing a patent is a time-consuming and expensive process and therefore, should be given careful consideration.

4) Patience: It is of paramount importance to remember that clinicians in general (exceptions exist, of course) are an impatient lot. Probably the rush of the clinic contributes to this. They always want the product yesterday. I find this the most difficult task to balance but it is certainly something that can be worked out with a few sessions of open conversations.

While the bedside and benchside may seem like they are on parallel paths, connecting the two is not impossible and would greatly benefit society. A lot of patience combined with careful planning will certainly make the whole journey less stressful and more enjoyable.

Did you enjoy this article? Let us know in the comments below.

As in science, I believe that serendipity plays a key role in one’s life. It has not been a straightforward path arriving at where I am today. A cascade of events, sometimes fortuitous and sometimes planned, has allowed me to explore my own capabilities throughout my journey.

Last year I joined the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB) as a Ramalingaswamy fellow and after a couple of months, I was offered the position of an Assistant Professor. It is an immense honour for me to be a member of RCB. Now, I am working towards setting up my own lab as an independent researcher. My whole journey to reach here has made me believe in the saying that “Sometimes, the only way to discover who you are and what life you should lead is to do less planning and more living.”

Here, I wish to share some of the incidents from my life where the inadvertent decisions I made shaped my career to be the way it is now.

Determining the goal of your life or deciding what you want to be is the most challenging, confusing and erratic situation which everyone faces at least once and I was no exception to this. I remember when I decided to do a Masters in chemistry despite being interested in biology just to make myself more eligible for jobs, considering the high ongoing demand for chemists in industries. I felt that going into academia would mean a long time to reach independence, which I did not want to wait for. So, I decided to jump on the bandwagon and landed in a multinational pharmaceutical company, focusing on the development of libraries of therapeutically active compounds.

Stumbling into Academia

Things were going well initially and I thought that I had made the correct decision and reached the right place where I could build my career. But my feeling of happiness was soon followed by the realization of being stuck at a point. I realized that having only a master’s degree was not enough to progress higher in the hierarchy. It was time for me to analyse what could I do in order to take my career to the next level. Taking everything into consideration, I ended up deciding to go for a PhD, being completely unaware at the time that this decision was going to cause a complete turnaround in my life.

But making this decision led to more confusion than action as the next question which came to my mind was which research area I should go for? My prior work experience in the synthesis of pharmaceutically important compounds while I was in industry somehow helped me navigate this decision and pick a research direction. After all, that was the only reason for me to go for a PhD at the time and eventually I got an opportunity to join “Kongju National University”, Republic of Korea.

Joining a PhD program in an overseas university/institute is fascinating, but this is only one side of the coin as every great package comes with its own terms and conditions. And doing PhD abroad also has its own “pros and cons”. While providing advanced, updated infrastructure and facilities for contemporary research, the competition here is often too high such that you have to either shape-up or ship-out. Other than this, since you have become used to a different working style, it really makes it hard to adapt the new system when you are back in your home country. And of course, the lack of networking also narrows your employment and collaboration options.

Choosing a path

There were some uncertainties in my mind initially as I wanted to go back to industry after completing my PhD. Over and above that, I got an industrial job offer at the same time, which made me even more bewildered. I was on the fence, where I had to choose between a ready job in my hand or job uncertainty as a post-doc. But my experiences as a research scholar working on several projects independently built confidence in me and also helped me get a clear picture of my interests. I made up my mind to continue my career as a researcher and completing PhD was just the first milestone towards the destination.

Now that I had made this decision, I knew that to pursue a career in academic research and to match your pace with contemporary science it requires more than just reaching a decision. It was during the transition phase from a PhD to a post-doc, when it was again time for me to carefully weigh my decision against its consequences. I was about to switch to a completely different area of research rather than carrying over my PhD legacy, in order to expand my career prospects.

Well, the transition ended up not being very smooth as I had to start from scratch and rather than balancing the equation I added more variables to it. But instead of being an obstruction, it often helped me explore new concepts and ideas which would not have been feasible if I had stuck to only one area.

Gradually the boundaries between the different disciplines blurred for me and I got the flavour of multidisciplinary research from organic synthesis to “in cellulo” studies. While working as a post-doc in Japan, I was awarded the prestigious “Japan society for the promotion of science (JSPS) fellowship”. Besides working on various multidisciplinary projects, I got several opportunities to attend international conferences, seminars, interactive sessions with eminent scientists, as well as to organize workshops and at the same time train young minds, which gave me close insight into research and academics.

From post-doc to PI

After almost six years of post-doctoral experience, it was time for me to search for a regular academic position. However, getting an academic position in India is tough. But both Ramalingaswamy Re- entry fellowship and Ramanujan Fellowship provided me the way to get back to my home country and join RCB.

Well, the shift from a post-doc where you get fully-established, equipped labs with all the advanced facilities to work with, to a PI where you have to start with a big empty room, which you can later call as lab, was not smooth. But yes, I consider myself lucky to have such a supportive and encouraging environment in RCB. My colleagues really supported me throughout, whether it be with setting up my lab or handling administrative responsibilities.

Now I am working towards the establishment of my independent lab, I am looking forward to welcoming our young zigzag travellers, so that I can provide them the same insight which I came across during my journey. There is a lot more to uncover and there is still a long way to go as this is just the beginning of my new chapter, this time as a PI.

The point that I am making is that while one can easily debate on the necessity of having a clear and predefined path for a successful career, it is not always necessary to have a set-in-stone career map in your hand. Sometimes your zigzag trails can also lead you to your destination.

What I learnt from my experiences is that one cannot judge any decision as being right or wrong at a particular instant, as you never know what may hit your instinct and make you change your way in the future. And merely making a decision is not enough, you need to believe in yourself and embrace all the challenges associated with the decision. Be open to changes and be ready to step out of your comfort zone, as life begins where it ends.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below.

Imagine that you are returning from your postdoctoral lab in the US or Europe to start your own lab in a decent Indian institute. The joy and excitement of starting an academic career is accompanied by nervousness when we think about setting up our labs and arranging grants and materials. Especially in the Indian scenario, this nervousness is enhanced further due to an expectation of delays in getting consumables or grants on time, hiring proper personnel, limited infrastructure etc., and we fear that things can go wrong at any point.

Every one of us coming back to India assumes that it will easily take 6-12 months to get our lab set and to get the first results from the lab. I was no exception to this. After 5 years of postdoctoral research at Institute Curie in Paris, I moved back to India to start my own lab in the Biological Engineering Discipline at Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar (IITGN), nervous that there will be a temporal vacuum of 1-2 years in my publications and scientific research.

However, to my complete surprise, IITGN had anticipated these challenges and was already well prepared to welcome me into their open laboratory system at BioE laboratory. IITGN follows the open laboratory model where all faculties share their spaces, reagents and equipment. This was my first experience of an open lab system since I had always worked in individual labs during my PhD and Postdoc. To my complete surprise, this turned out to be the best model system to work in a scientific community.

I joined IITGN on Monday, 2^nd July. Friday of the same week, I was given my own space and enough storage space to host up to 6 students with full access to all equipment and facilities. The same week, I received my first grant from IITGN to kick start my research and most of the common reagents and biochemicals arrived within a week. My first PhD student joined me on the very same day that I joined the institute, and within three weeks, we were fully on the bench busying our hands with DNA Nanotechnology.

Each of my senior colleagues opened up their lab drawers and cupboards for me to take their chemicals, reagents, lab equipment to kick start my research right from day one.

The biggest help that came to me in this open lab system was the kind mentoring by existing BioE faculty members. Each of my senior colleagues opened up their lab drawers and cupboards for me to take their chemicals, reagents, lab equipment to kick start my research right from day one. In fact, two of my colleagues immediately gave me access to their ongoing grants to order the things I needed for my research. These memories of the first six months in IITGN will constitute one of the golden periods in my career.

Setting up your own individual lab in any institute in India these days is one of the biggest challenges any scientist can face. Given the crunch in funding from institutes, delays in arrival of grants from the government can be extremely frustrating. A bigger challenge is arranging huge sums of money to get the essential equipment for your lab to run on. The biggest piece of advantage that the open lab system offers that you don’t have to write separate grants to acquire all such equipment needed for research. This allows you to utilize more funds for your reagents and consumables.

The open lab system provides a strong advantage for consumables as well. Most experiments involve using some specific reagents in very small amounts only once or twice. Purchasing such chemicals for each individual lab could be costly and lead to wastage in the long term. Having an open lab system gives you access to such reagents if the neighbouring labs already have them and are willing to share small amounts.

The open lab system not only provides an opportunity for students to discuss experimental problems with other students for troubleshooting but also helps them come up with new ideas which could give rise to collaborative projects.

The open lab system also gives a lot of freedom to students from different groups to discuss science among themselves and get their problems solved. Many times, the faculty members are busy with teaching, administrative work, conferences, etc and are not easily accessible to their students for trouble-shooting. The open lab system not only provides an opportunity for students to discuss experimental problems with other students for troubleshooting but also helps them come up with new ideas which could give rise to collaborative projects between different groups. In my six months at IITGN, I already have collaborative projects up and running with each of the other faculty members in my discipline and some from other disciplines as well.

For me, the open lab system has turned into a daily journal club where not only my students, but students from other groups as well, come and discuss their ideas, new papers, and discoveries and suggest how we can further improve our existing system for better accommodation, arrangements for future in-coming students, visitors, scientists and science. In my nine months experiencing the open lab system at IITGN, I still feel that I am in a wonderland where my science is driving on auto-pilot mode with the best efficiency possible, and I hope that this dream does not break ever.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below.

If I have to tell you how did I hit upon my topic of research, I have to go back to my childhood.

I grew up in a small village called Bhawanipur in the district of Howrah, West Bengal. In my childhood, there was very little unhealthy competition amongst peers in the village. My family never imposed that sense of competition on me, nor did they ever compel me to choose a specific career path.

As a result, I enjoyed freedom – freedom to decide what I wanted to be. Freedom of speech was an added advantage. Irrelevant, you may think, but it definitely wasn’t so. My present strong sense of independence and freedom are the gifts of my childhood and liberal upbringing, which brought me closer to the scientific philosophy that I try to adhere to in my lab today and sowed the seeds of appreciating the importance of multi-disciplinary approaches in solving a problem.

A few blind men and an elephant

Among the many things that I owe to my childhood, I remember one story that I heard from my grandparents as well as from our science teacher. How do a few blind men perceive an elephant? There are many different versions of the story. Almost all versions, however, begin with a group of blind men who had never encountered an elephant before. Since they were blind, they had to figure out the shape of the elephant by using ‘touch’ alone. So, each of them touched a different part of the animal and declared their interpretation to the rest. The man who touched the trunk thought that the elephant was like a thick snake. Likewise, those who touched the ear, legs, body and the tail thought that the elephant resembled a fan, a pillar, a wall and a rope, respectively.

In some versions of the story, the men then started fighting each other and accusing each other of dishonest practices. In others, they listened to each other, respected different views, and after a collaborative effort arrived at a more accurate picture of the elephant.

I liked the story at that time without much thought; however, it kept coming back to me as I grew older, especially when I decided to be a researcher. I realized at almost every turn in the journey afterwards how significant the story was. As a researcher one has to deal with and tame the entire elephant, and examining just the tail or the leg would not bring any more insight than did the observations of the blind men at the beginning of the story.

I consider myself extremely lucky to have had extraordinary teachers at all stages of my development. Excellent teachers had taught us both at the BS and MS levels. It was while doing my MS in the Department of Biochemistry, University of Calcutta, that I first got attracted towards post-translational modifications (PTMs). Conformational changes caused by PTMs that lead to novel functionalities of a protein fascinated me. This term ‘conformational changes’ would keep reverberating in the classroom lectures, during conversations among friends, and even in my mind. At one point I felt I was entangled with the phrase.

I would receive a battery of responses when I asked around about what exactly did ‘conformational changes’ mean in chemical or physical terms, and how did such physicochemical changes translate to the biological effects downstream. Sadly, most of the responses I got made me feel that something was lacking in these descriptions. Since I couldn’t be satisfied with these explanations, I knew that I had to find about the subject in further detail, from some other source. But how?

The Calcutta University Biochemistry department had a tradition of inviting its ex-students (who were established and renowned researchers by then) to share their experience and insights with the current students. Such encounters were priceless. This was a time before YouTube, before the internet had become a part of our daily lives. It was not possible to witness the excitement of modern, cutting edge research just by the click of a mouse. Personal encounters were thus invaluable.

On one such occasion, we witnessed the beaming passion of Gourisankar Ghosh (University of California, San Diego (UCSD)) who had just published a seminal paper describing the structural basis of NF-kB inhibition by I-kBalpha in the journal Cell. This lecture was a gamechanger in my life. As I left the lecture hall, I knew that I wanted to be a structural biologist.

Understanding the interactions of p300

The course to reach there, however, was not as linear as I would have liked it to be. I joined Siddhartha Roy’s lab at Bose Institute, Kolkata, as a PhD student. I was given a couple of problems to tackle in order to come up with a thesis. One of the problems that I was dealing with aimed to understand the structural basis of stress-induced phospho-p53 recognition by its co-activator p300/CBP. NMR spectroscopy was the preferred method of choice, but we soon realized if we remained adamant about using NMR to understand this system we would either end up with the ‘rope’ or the ‘pillar’ but not the elephant.

p300 is a multidomain protein and many of these domains interact with the N-terminal Trans Activating Domain (TAD) of p53. These interactions were intricately connected to site-specific phosphorylation of p53-TAD. It would be an unfathomable task if we had to study each and every such complex by NMR. We would know a great deal about one or two such complexes, not all, and a comprehensive picture wouldn’t emerge.

This offered me the opportunity to embrace the possibility of employing a number of other experimental techniques and realize the importance of an open mind to appreciate the value of something that wasn’t my forte. We took help of chemical biology tools and fluorescence spectroscopy and studied almost all of those combinatorial complexes. We found that different domains of p300 differentially recognize differentially phosphorylated p53-TADs. It helped embolden the thought that different post-translationally modified p53 fragments may form transcription-initiating complexes of different configurations, leading to the activation of different promoters and hence different gene-expression programs.

Chasing the structure of IKK

After completing my PhD, I joined the field of NF-kB research in the Gouri Ghosh lab in UCSD. I was assigned a project aimed at unravelling the structural basis of IKK-activation, primarily by using X-ray crystallography. IKK-structure had remained an enigma since its discovery in 1998, despite its importance in metazoan biology. Even though it was recognized as one of the most attractive drug targets of that time, several big pharma companies and academic labs alike had failed to determine its structure. Ghosh lab was no exception.

Everything was new to me - the molecule, related biology, experimental techniques, the expression system, new society, new culture - everything! Gradually I realized what a beast the molecule was, and I readily sympathized with everyone else who had failed in this project in the past since its discovery in 1998. And, slowly but steadily I made a connection with the molecule and the project grew on me. I had taken on the challenge to conquer it.

It was a strange relationship with a strange molecule. Finally, in 2013, we managed to determine the first X-ray crystal structure of the human IKK2/beta. In the process, I discovered a number of seemingly disparate yet intriguing characteristics that made me look at the molecule differently. I was awestruck by kinase signalling and regulation, especially the pathways that behave differently depending upon the upstream signal, and often lead to devastating outcomes as they go awry.

During this period, I had the opportunity to work/collaborate with a number of renowned scientists: Inder Verma (Salk Institute, Cancer biologist), Alexander Hoffmann (UCSD and now at University of California, Los Angeles, Systems Biologist), and Dmitry Lyumkis (Salk Institute, Cryo-EM). Close encounters with a group of people with different expertise yet overlapping interests helped broaden my thought process tremendously. And it served my cause well - to describe the whole elephant!

And the story continues…

I remained focused on understanding the IKK-system, and that’s what we primarily do right now in the lab. I must tell you that IKK is no longer considered a lucrative drug target given that it is too important physiologically to be inhibited indiscriminately. In fact, the related biology is overwhelmingly complex. Context-independent, indiscriminate tweaking of IKK-activity often causes havoc. Still, IKK remains an interesting target as it is involved in so many pathological scenarios along with its protective and homeostatic roles. Any clue to the possibility of tweaking IKK-activity in a context-dependent manner (i.e., only in a pathological scenario when it has gone awry) will be invaluable, which makes it a highly intriguing problem.

So, a complex mixture of passion, personal entanglement, and the depth and complexity of IKK made me stay with the system. We use a number of techniques that come handy in finding a clue to solving the mystery. In addition, we are also dealing with a MAPK module that plays vital yet contradictory roles in neuronal degeneration as well as regeneration in worms.

We also deal with two other programs in the lab that are not related to kinase-biology. These non-kinase projects bring a different aura to the lab, give us opportunities to practice a different kind of science. It helps assess our abilities to move away from our comfort zone. I had not practised this kind of science ever before in my life, yet I believed that my present skill-set and thought process can be useful in dealing with those problems. More than anything else, these projects will allow us to learn something different.

So, how should a young investigator choose their research problem?

To be very honest, I don’t want to preach. Only thing I can tell you is that, don’t let others decide what’s going to be the focus of your lab. You are the master of your own research. Be resilient. Ask yourself: what is it that you are looking forward to the most when you start your own lab? What is ‘success’ according to you? Don't look around for an answer; the answer should come from within. Be true to yourself. This answer will tell you what problem should you deal with in your lab. I wish I could be more elaborate, but this is a very individual decision. Choose to do something that would excite you every morning and help you carry on no matter what happens. Personally, I enjoy the journey more than the destination. Do you? Cheers!

It is said that a house becomes a home not by the bricks, the doors, or the windows it is made up of, but by the people living in it and the bonds they share. Similarly, a laboratory with all its instruments and chemicals never comes to life without the PI, the scholars and the efforts they put in. Thus, it becomes their abode of creation - the creation of new information.

Last year I was offered the position of Senior Scientist and assigned a lab at CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (IICB), Kolkata. This gave me the pleasure of setting up my own lab and a chance to lead four young minds – four future fore-runners of basic sciences – to embark upon their voyage through the ocean of science, by virtue of my experience and guidance.

The post-doctoral tenure that I spent in the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), USA has unequivocally helped a lot in shaping my career as a scientist. An enormous amount of inspiration, motivation and advice was provided by my PI while I was starting this journey from scratch.

I still remember my first day at MUSC when my post-doc mentor and I had an hour-long discussion regarding my work, projects and goals. As I was leaving his office, he called me back and said “Your goal should be to reach this end of the table and sit in this chair I am on today. This might be the toughest journey you ever had, but plan your journey judiciously and you surely will succeed.”

Now that I am on such a chair, his wise words still appear as a ray of motivation in every step. Since postdoctoral tenure is an important transition phase from being a research scholar to a PI, a postdoc should consider a few things to put himself/herself ahead of others.

First, “write, write and write”. There should be a continuous effort of writing small research proposals which immensely helps in selling scientific ideas to funding agencies. I attended many grant-writing workshops and seminars during my post-doc that have given me an advantage for obtaining grants today. Another crucial point that I learnt from these workshops is that an idea must be nurtured well before being shaped into a proposal. If one is clearly convinced about his/her own idea, then only can he/she put it forward in the form of a proposal that is convincing enough for others as well.

Secondly, interactions with eminent scientists and sharing ideas with them was an experience from my post-doctoral life that has helped in shaping my scientific ideas as well as in acting as a source of inspiration for a budding scientist.

I remember a particular incident in this regard. During my postdoc, I was driving a particular project. Everything was going well initially, but suddenly, at some point, I got stuck. The experiments failed repeatedly. I was so frustrated by this repeated failure that I was about to quit the whole project. At that point, in a research meeting, I approached a professor, one of the big shots in our field, and discussed my problem. He simply suggested that I add one extra group along with my other experimental groups. That idea clicked and finally I got that work published in a reputed journal. This professor advised me to always start by answering small questions keeping the bigger picture in mind. When such experiments yield results, it can boost one’s confidence towards solving the bigger problem.

Thirdly, at my MUSC lab, I was assigned internship candidates whom I was to mentor and help prepare for a life in science. This experience has been fruitful in mentoring my own PhD scholars. Graduate students also used to approach me frequently with their problems. Listening to their discussions helped a lot in untangling the knots and advancing steadily towards the solutions. I try to practise this open discussion policy with my scholars too, and this helps us to clarify our problems to a great extent.

Last but not the least of the lessons that I learnt during my post-doctoral tenure was that building and maintaining good, cordial relationships with my fellow post-doctoral students from different disciplines, many of whom will also become PIs one day, can be very beneficial in long term by promoting a collaborative culture.

Adventures in setting up a scientific laboratory

Setting up the lab has not been an easy task. It came with tons of challenges which are still ongoing: the funding crunches, the administrative hassles, the standardisation of protocols and the huge responsibility of leading my scholars on the right track. The best part of being the PI has been the chance to infuse a scientific framework into the minds of my scholars, to motivate them to practise science more & more, to impart my knowledge to train them and set up their lab pro-actively, to encourage them to question, to wonder, to think logically, to do research, to fail, to learn from it, to try again and never give up.

I have never been an adventurous person but I must say that setting up my lab has been nothing less than an adventure. The day we ran our very first experiment successfully was a memorable day for our immuno-metabolism lab family.

This roller-coaster ride through science will bring its many ups and downs. But as a PI, I will definitely try to make the journey worth the effort and lead the lab and its members towards achieving our ultimate goal – to contribute in our own way for the welfare of mankind through our scientific explorations. Also, the bond that I share with my students, our joint ventures and struggles in this initial phase, is something that I will cherish and treasure in my heart for a lifetime.

Fernando T. Maestre writes in an article in Nature titled, ‘Seven steps towards health and happiness in the lab’ – “The key to running a healthy and productive lab can be summarized in a single word: happiness.” I believe the same and aspire to make our journey a happy, exciting and a successful one.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below

Like many of us, I grew up watching science fiction cartoons. I used to find it very fascinating to think that a scientist can solve any problem by doing crazy but exciting experiments. I got a stronger introduction to science and its wonders during my school life when I realised that agriculture is the largest source of livelihood in India.

In terms of farm output, India ranks second worldwide and contributes around 17-18% to the country's GDP. More than 50% of the Indian population depends on agriculture for employment. But the current economic health and the overall status of Indian farmers are highly degraded. Frequent news stories about farmers committing suicide due to various socio-economic reasons disturb me a lot. I always asked myself what are the reasons for this situation? What I can do to change this?

While searching for answers to these burning questions, I focused my graduation and post-graduation training in biotechnology in a way that will be applicable for agriculture. Very soon, I had my first encounter with the research environment while doing an undergraduate dissertation on micropropagation of medicinally important plants. This gave me an insight that biotechnological advancement can be applied for better solutions in agriculture and other related issues.

Training in biotechnology and willingness to work in the agriculture-related area drove me to pursue research in the area of crop protection. Initially, by looking at the proportion of the population depending on agriculture and its socio-economic impact, I expected that research and development in agriculture would be top-notch. However, slowly I realised that this is not the case.

Although serious efforts are being undertaken, it is often difficult to attract the best researchers to agriculture as most students and young researchers are inclined towards other ‘glittering’ research areas. There are enormous problems that farmers face today, including unavailability and the high cost of good seeds, biocides, fertiliser and manures. Global warming has led to changes in rainfall amount and its pattern; this has imposed new abiotic and biotic challenges for the crops. Due to illiteracy, many farmers are not aware of these changes and the reason behind them.

These problems are further aggravated by the lack of knowledge and inclination among young researchers to take up agricultural issues and research. I honestly think that we need to motivate and sensitise bright students, engineers and scientists to pursue and conduct quality research and affordable innovations to tackle burning agricultural issues. Use of sophisticated tools and advanced methodologies to understand these issues will surely provide hints toward a solution.

Working as a Research Scholar at CSIR National Chemical Laboratory, my motivation was to understand pest biochemistry and its bio-control for crop protection. After completing my PhD., I got the opportunity to join the Institute of Bioinformatics and Biotechnology, Pune University as an Assistant Professor. My friends, colleagues and my advisors were surprised when I opted for this offer and declined lucrative post-doctoral offers abroad, but I never regretted my decision to stay back in India.

While establishing my independent research group as a young investigator, I began to realise that even if one performs quality research in fields allied to agriculture, it’s very difficult to make an impact and to bring the attention of the community to this significant area. Furthermore, I found that many universities and institutes failed to conduct quality agricultural research and to inculcate its importance in the younger generations.

Initially, I thought that it would be difficult to flourish as an agriculture scientist in a conventional university, whose basic aim is providing quality education and developing skilled human resources at the grassroots level. Many times it has been observed that the research component often gets neglected in most of the Indian central or state universities. Fortunately, a few premier universities like Pune University give a lot of importance and encouragement to doing cutting-edge research.

After joining, I got enormous motivation from my seniors and peers to do high-quality research in my area of interest and expertise. A cherry on the cake is being among young students with their infectious positive energy, which helped me find and develop a teacher in myself.

Being a young faculty member in a place like Pune, where there is a cluster of institutes which provide leverage to initiate new collaborations and a platform to get expert opinions on various experimental and technical issues, is a valuable opportunity. The collaborative environment in and around Pune University is quite conducive and encouraging to tackle challenging problems as important research questions.

I also got an opportunity to visit the Technical University of Munich (TUM) as an EMBO fellow on sabbatical leave. The main focus of this visit was to acquire information about technological advances in agriculture-allied areas, which can be applicable to the Indian scenario. I must admit that some of the Indian institutes have research infrastructure at par with European labs, but their approach and attitude of doing science are different. My stay in Germany taught me about discipline, time management and how to appreciate good science.

After returning from TUM, I was awarded the SERB Early Career Research Award which provided me with an ample amount of funding for the progress of research activities and the establishment of an independent group. Currently, my group at IBB has students ranging from undergraduate to PhD levels working on various aspects of carbohydrate metabolism and chemosensation of agricultural insect pests. It is hoped that our efforts in understanding insect biology, devising new bio-control methods and insect enzymes engineering will be of great importance for basic studies of insects and also applicable for sustainable agriculture.

Thus as a young investigator, who is in the position to influence impressionable minds, I aspire to motivate young research students to choose to enter agricultural research and contribute to the betterment of the country’s agricultural scenario. I am quite encouraged and thrilled to take up the challenge to contribute fullest to make this country ‘Sujalamsuphalam’ through my research efforts along with nurturing younger generation through teaching. The first Green Revolution of India was nearly 60 years ago; it is now time to work towards a second.

Did you enjoy this article? Please let us know in the comments below

Contrary to what is perhaps the experience of many biologists, I was never awestruck with the life sciences as a child or a student in school. Conforming to the conventional scheme of education in our country, I was confused and struggling to embrace what I really loved as opposed to what I was seemingly good at as per my grades. I ended up going to the erstwhile Presidency College (now Presidency University), Kolkata and pursuing an undergraduate degree in Zoology.

And it was here that I discovered my passion for developmental biology; I found beauty in the orchestrated development of life from a single cell and was struck by how molecular entities could communicate and make sense in achieving form and symmetry. It was lyrical almost, and I knew I had found my calling.

After a postgraduate degree in Biotechnology from the University of Calcutta, I went to the University of Pittsburgh, USA, for my PhD and thereafter went on to pursue postdoctoral research at the University of Manchester, UK. My studies focused, so far, on early organismal development and patterning, in alignment with my core interests in developmental biology and genetics.

My academic training abroad was marked by a sense of idealism, perfection and a thrust on quality, which overpowered the idea of churning publications out in large numbers. Trained in the labs of basic scientists, I was honed not only in routine molecular biology but also in specialized strategies of working with fruit-flies, our model of choice. It was an arduous world of trial and error where things took time to refine and perfect. At the same time, people were committed to the same.

Married to an evolutionary biologist, I had always been open to the idea of returning to India. Initially, the reason was to be closer to family, but this was accentuated with the downturn in basic science funding as well as the increasing uncertainties in obtaining secure academic positions abroad. However, it was 2.5 years into my postdoctoral work that my husband was offered a position at Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal.

As a young couple who were training in science, we had lived, studied and worked apart for various bits of time that had collectively added up to several years already; it had weighed us down. So when I was also offered a position as Assistant Professor at the Department of Medical Genetics, Kasturba Medical College, MAHE, Manipal, it was hard to turn it down, even though it meant leaving my postdoctoral project, which was finally shaping up to yield meaningful results, mid-way.

I was also filled with trepidation because I was walking out of the comfort of state-of-the-art laboratories and a well-oiled research support machinery of my training days into a world that was completely unknown. After almost a decade abroad, I had been largely removed from Indian academia and its workings. So, suddenly, returning no longer felt like coming home. However, for all practical purposes, it made sense. I was also buoyed by having steered projects single-handedly during my postdoc. So venturing to go independent, and putting my skills and training to action with a faculty position next seemed feasible.

It was a position at a relatively new department that was focused on rare diseases and included only clinical faculty at the time. The University was keen to have me establish laboratory facilities in a primarily clinical setting and to complement their ongoing research. The prospect of doing so from scratch in an unfamiliar setting was a mix of both daunting and exciting.

I had started out in shared labs with serious constraints on budgetary spending for equipment, space limitations and long wait-times for any allocated funds. The department with its thrust on clinical genetics was beginning to identify new disease associated genes and was intent on me to have functional assays ‘quickly’ in place so as to validate and characterize them. Importantly, I was required to ensure that all of my research was directly and intrinsically related to rare disease biology.

Despite no prior experience in the nitty-gritty of lab set-up, I found myself navigating through the same reasonably well and about two years later we had most of the basic facilities in place. I also managed to submit a grant to study two novel disease-associated genes that had been identified in the department and was happy (and relieved) to find it sanctioned within a few months. These funds also allowed me to procure a couple of new equipments, which would help the research planned. On a personal level, this was also a time when my daughter was born and I was torn between doing justice to both fronts.

In the initial year and a half at my new position, aside from getting my lab off the mark, I was closely working with clinicians and staff on diagnostic testing for rare diseases. As part of the group, I witnessed clinical research at close quarters. It was an extended training and my first foray into the area of human disease genetics.

Like many basic scientists, my academic training so far had been enwrapped in blue sky research, which often tended to be fairly distant from having direct implications on healthcare. At my current position, it came as no surprise to me that clinicians were acutely pressed for time, given the sheer volumes of patients they saw daily.

Further many clinical scientists had limited formal laboratory training, not having undergone the rigours of obtaining a PhD, unlike some of their peers abroad. It was therefore, not easy to have them understand my concerns or have a sense of the challenges I was facing. It was even more difficult to convey how long experiments in a lab could sometimes take to design, frame and fine-tune in order to yield meaningful results.

However, to bridge the chasm I decided to approach things positively. Given the effort and dedication from their end to enrol patients in a research study, and provide samples sometimes by painful and invasive procedures, it was important to convey that as researchers we were respectful. It helped to be open, interested and attempt to grasp their concerns. Refraining from jargon in communication and simplifying ideas was also beneficial.

In addition to broader goals to be achieved over a longer term, I focused on facilitating the routine and seemingly simpler assays with the resources available, so as to enhance confidence-building while working with a clinical team. Importantly, I always tried to be realistic and transparent when collaborating together.

At heart, I remain a basic scientist and hope to never stop learning, regardless of my setting. So while I strive to define research goals that are congruent with what has always enthralled me, I also seek to extend and apply myself to meaningfully address other research problems that might resonate more with being within a largely clinical setup.

Almost three years into this journey, I look back feeling exhilarated. My journey so far may not have been perfect but has changed me in important ways. It has taught me to embrace the unknown with perseverance, fortitude, and grace. And to never cease being inspired.

I still remember the excitement that gradually grew from the time I first learnt about my new job back in Kolkata, India, till about a month before my departure from the US. I was returning to my home country after almost 8 years of postdoc. During those eight years, my only aim was to publish quality science and that too fast (which is easier said than done) and return to India.

Surprisingly, my “exponential” curve of excitement gradually died down with an almost parallel growth of anxiety and emotions in anticipation of facing the reality of being an independent PI in India. Amongst these, self-doubt was the most predominant. It is in human nature to desire success in whatever we venture towards, and uncertainty in whether or not we may succeed creates that element of doubt within ourselves. I was no exception.

The other aspect was that having completed my PhD in India, I knew that the “research terrain” in India is more “rugged” in terms of infrastructure, resource as well as funds, all three of which are somehow directly or indirectly related to each other. This knowledge only helped compound my self-doubt.

It was only after the next 8 years in India that I fully realized that my worries were not baseless. Here, I will try to share some of the experiences I had as an independent researcher from the time of setting up my lab till establishing (in the form of a peer-reviewed publication) a research problem of my own. Running a research lab in India made me realize the true worth of the age-old phrase “No Cross, No Crown”, and in spite of all the hardships and struggles we undergo as a young PI, the joy and satisfaction that accompanies the success of solving a scientific question is reason enough to return to India and head our own labs. There is no “magic recipe” for success, more so for a fresh YI who has just returned, but the following points may help make the transition smoother.

Overcoming the element of self-doubt: I would not worry much about this, and let it remain within myself. To me, self-doubt is necessary as it formulates a mechanism of "chronic" self-assessment. Without self-assessment we would be blind. So let the self-doubt remain within its own limits as long as it helps you perform better.

Setting up the lab : This is one of the most difficult phases in the career of a YI, and it needs minimal scientific ability and more management skills. Management includes handling the very limited resources of most Government Institutions, dealing with the lack of adequate infrastructure (in most places in India, a lab space is often not pre-designated and allotted, and the lengthy process of lab space handover happens only post-joining), getting the most out of the very limited funds you have been supplied with, and last but not the least, utlizing the restricted manpower (in the form of a few newly recruited JRFs) in setting up the lab and at the same time generating the very critical preliminary data for a possible grant, which may be one’s lifeline for the next 3 years. My take for this whole scenario is to take one day at a time, and avoid looking too far down the road.

Getting The First Grant : Quality science and research grants are the two "Lifelines" of a lab, and the two are interdependent. It is always advisable to find a basic scientific question (however challenging it might be), answering which might lead to significant insights into the vital processes of life, and which might be applied for societal benefit as well. This will expedite the chances of getting the first grant, without which a very good problem might fall short of being resolved. Another factor that might affect the funding of a proposal in the early stages is the researcher’s age. Starting early, preferably below 35 years of age, has its own advantages. Several extramural funding agencies have tailor-made opportunities for funding, specifically for YIs below the age of 35. So if you are an aspiring YI eager to return, return early.

Choosing the Scientific Problem : Choosing the correct scientific problem is key to one's success. More often than not, we are tempted to continue our independent career with the same problem where we left off at postdoc, either because of closer acquaintance with the subject, or because it is the easiest route. This might work for a few, but for many, this approach lacks originality and one may also end up competing with their own postdoc lab. Try to think of something new, perhaps related to what you might have pursued before, but not a continuation. Explore some new aspects which have not been studied before or may have been neglected.

Try finding a question which has a direct bearing on human health, as that scores hugely in terms of direct benefit to mankind. We must never forget that we use Government money to explore our independent ideas, and we owe it to the nation to return back with something that might directly/indirectly contribute towards societal improvement.

I believe that whatever we choose to do, we should study in-depth and not superficially, and complete a story. A story is something which everyone likes, remembers and hence presents an opportunity for us scientists to reach others easily, eventually providing a gateway to improve understanding of the subject.

Too much diversification may lead to De-focusing : As a YI, it is extremely important to identify one’s research area and draw a clear line in as far as diversification is concerned. Diversification in research is often necessary and important, but within a certain limit. Too much diversification may lead to unnecessary dilution of one’s original research problem. Keeping focus on the primary research area and carrying out in-depth studies ultimately also helps in getting noticed and recognized for contributions to a particular subject area, both nationally as well as internationally.

Opening the doors and windows of one’s mind to new ideas : As a YI, I have been open to new ideas from all avenues, be it my senior colleagues, younger colleagues and particularly students and post-docs. It often helped me open my eyes towards directions I may have never fathomed, and that have opened up a totally novel area of research in my lab. More often than not, fresh ideas emerge from students who are completely invested in their research, and this investment in terms of time, effort and passion provides returns in terms of new emerging ideas.

The other aspect of being open is to accept criticism in the most positive way – even if you feel that a critic is particularly harsh on your newly presented data, taking the positives from these interactions will ultimately benefit the YI. The quality of accepting criticism in a positive way should be embraced by every YI, as this would not only help in improving the quality of the work, but will also provide the necessary trigger to invoke challenge within the YI to further his/her research.

All this said, the success of a YI will ultimately depend on his/her motivation, determination, perseverance and willingness to dive deep into whatever he/she is pursuing. Quality science stems from in-depth and detailed studies, and quality science will be the ultimate basis for a scientist’s success – whether they be young or old.

As one transitions from being a graduate student to a post doc to an independent investigator, one does get opportunities to pick up some of the skills that are very essential to set up and establish a productive lab doing good work. The day you start the journey as an independent researcher, however, you realize that juggling all of these aspects simultaneously on a daily basis is an entirely different ball game and nothing could have prepared you for it.

There are also added administrative responsibilities that one may not apprehend. I soon realized that being the “Boss” basically meant that “from peon to PI”, every job was my job. Clearly the first couple of years were quite overwhelming and it took some time to find a stable footing. The constant deadlines associated with every aspect of the “peon to PI” role also never fell short of keeping me on my toes.

While meeting all the demands of being a PI, it is essential to not lose sight of an extremely important aspect of this job - mentor-mentee relationships. It is also the one aspect of your job that you are probably least prepared for. No amount of experience in training undergrads and juniors can make you apprehend the expectations that a graduate student has from their PI.

Becoming the custom-made and context-dependent support system that your graduate students need you to be and learning how to communicate effectively with them is not easy. It is a very demanding aspect of a PI’s job and when you are struggling with multiple important deadlines, finding the time and patience to provide the support and motivation to the mentee isn’t as easy as it sounds. In fact it won’t be an exaggeration to say that for every student who is awarded a PhD, the mentor should be awarded a degree in psychology as well.

I started my journey with a vision of building a “happy lab” with a group of people who were passionate about the science being done in the lab and for whom research was more “fun” rather than “work”. Building up this “people” part of the lab was much more challenging than I had expected and each day as a mentor has truly been an evolving experience. Over the years I have worked out a three-step approach to sustain my “happy lab” and here is what I learnt while developing this approach.

1. Making the right decisions about fellow recruitment: I believe that it’s crucial for every young PI to know exactly what they are looking for in a prospective graduate student. It’s equally important that every PI has the administrative freedom to make the recruitment choice simply based on intuition, if they so desire. When I joined as an Assistant Professor at the Department of Biochemistry, University of Calcutta, there wasn’t any structured procedure for recruiting research fellows at the department. This was a big advantage as it allowed me to create my own recruitment process.

The general norm of assessing a CV in isolation and judging the suitability of a prospective graduate student in a couple of meetings did not appeal to me. Instead, I asked the prospective student to volunteer for a month or two so that both of us really got to know each other before making things official. The main assessment was academic in nature, but it was important to judge the applicant’s temperament and tenacity. At the end of this period I asked them to make a presentation about a topic related to our research problem and end it with a section on the direction in which they think the work can go.

This part may seem too much to ask from a beginner and it really is tough for some of them. At the same time, I found that their ignorance about the difficulties of experimental research made them fearless about the ideas that they proposed. It gave me a very good understanding of the academic and analytical abilities of the student and helped me decide which of the projects in the lab would be better handled by this new student. Over time this system has worked quite well for me and 80% of the time both the fellow and myself have been right about our abilities to work with each other.

2. “It’s going to be all right”- Supporting and motivating the mentees: Most PIs are well aware of the fact that the journey towards a PhD degree can sometimes be equivalent to facing a wrecking ball on a regular basis. To either dodge these regular blows or to recover from them, every graduate student needs the support of the PI.

Some would need it almost everyday and some would need it on an annual basis. Some would demand this support and some would be hesitant about sounding needy and vulnerable. I realized that regular communication with the students was the key to identify their need for more attention at certain times. At the beginning of every month I put up a calendar on the lab notice board which specifies the schedule of meetings with them. These one-to-one meetings help them discuss their data in a less formal setting compared to the “data-club” and they feel free to discuss the issues they might be facing- failed experiments, access to infrastructure, personal issues, and sometimes the inability to deal with the demands of the job.

Some students would require a patient hearing and a pep talk while some would require a “not so polite” joke or remark to get them motivated and back on track. It’s crucial to identify who responds to what and use a “whatever works” approach to help them regain the required positivity. A good mentor would really care about providing this support.

It is equally important to know when to extend a helping hand and when to allow the student to be independent. To be their honest friend, you might also have to sometimes point out the bitter truth that they are in denial of. They are going to not like you for that and that’s a reality I learnt to accept. A student who held the PI’s hand all through the journey may not be ready to cope with the demands of a post-doctoral position.

The balance a PI strikes between the support and independence given to the graduate student is therefore very crucial for “raising” an independent and self –sufficient researcher. Striking this balance is often the most difficult part and the position of fulcrum on the weighing scale might require student specific adjustments.

3. Creating a productive work atmosphere: All work and no play make Jack and Jill very, very dull. Creativity and intelligence require a stress-free mind to thrive. I make sure that my graduate students get to have some fun in the lab as well. We often organize theme-based events in the lab. The themes are of course academic in nature and we just add a fun twist that not only helps us have a good time but also sometimes gives birth to very creative ideas about solving a particular academic problem.

Once, our theme included performing thought experiments where the experimental model would be a particular lab member and students were asked to present the expected outcomes of those experiments in the form of a research paper. One of the presentations described my presence in the lab as a “stress-signal” for changing the work pattern of a fellow lab mate who was described as a transcription factor in the paper. This paper went on to talk about experiments designed to test the effect of a combination of multiple stress signals (the other stress signals were related to infrastructural limitations of a state university lab) on this lab member.

I really liked the logic of one of the experiments that was suggested in this paper. Later, we actually did a similar experiment in the lab (of course, both the stress signals and the experimental model were changed!) On another occasion a student who always shied away from “writing” about her science, wrote wonderfully when the science part was masked in these themes and this made her realize that she was actually good at it.

We also have weekly tea parties where we customarily do not discuss science. Not all of these activities need to be pure fun though. Some can be purely academic. For example, I started a reading club in the lab where we choose papers for each other to read and there are monthly themes for the reading list. We then sit and discuss what we read. To rejuvenate the young minds (and “old” ones too) we make sure that these themes are a bit distant from what we work on.

I have found that flexible lab timings are also important for graduate students to strike a work-life balance and so I have never really judged them on the amount of time that they spend in the lab. I have found that for most dedicated researchers the flexibility to choose their work timings is rewarding.Of course there are work related deadlines that they must adhere to.

I also implemented an annual appraisal system for the students in my lab. At the end of every year I hand them a questionnaire that allows them to analyse and list their achievements, failures and targets and requires them to rate their development as a researcher on some specific aspects. They also get to mention which of their expectations I may have failed to fulfil. Some students are more candid in written communication and I have often discovered things about them through these questionnaires that I had otherwise failed to notice. I found that they really appreciate this opportunity for self-assessment.

These approaches worked for me and of course they are not part of a “formula” that will work for everyone. I feel that every young investigator should take this part of their job seriously and work out a method that works best for them.