In January 1997, at a small cardiac clinic in Sonapur, Assam, an ambitious Indian surgeon performed what he described as the first pig-to-human heart transplant. The patient, Purno Saikia, was a critically ill heart patient who had exhausted all conventional options. Dhaniram Baruah, a cardiac surgeon from Assam, completed the 15-hour surgery. Although the surgery was initially deemed successful, the patient passed away after seven days due to acute organ rejection.

Outrage followed. The transplant was performed without any prior approval or ethical oversight. Assam police arrested the surgeon on charges of culpable homicide and violations of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994. He spent 40 days in jail before being released on bail. Protestors vandalised Baruah’s clinic, and a government committee condemned the transplant as unethical and unlawful.

This dramatic incident marked India’s first encounter with xenotransplantation, the transplantation of animal organs into humans. More importantly, it was a pivotal moment that highlighted gaps in India's legal and regulatory frameworks for emerging biotechnologies. In the absence of a dedicated legal framework, authorities stretched the existing transplantation law and criminal laws to address this crisis.

Xenotransplantation comes of age

Nearly three decades later, xenotransplantation is no longer a fringe experiment but an advancing clinical reality.

Advances in genome-editing technologies, especially the development of CRISPR-Cas9, have made genome editing easier, more effective, and more economical. Scientists now edit donor animals’ DNA by switching off genes that trigger human immune rejection and reducing the risk of transmitting animal-borne viruses.

Since 2020, there have been multiple transplants of genetically altered pig kidneys, hearts and even lungs into humans. In 2022, a genetically edited pig heart was transplanted into a human. Although the heart only functioned for a few weeks, it demonstrated feasibility in human patients.

The year 2025 saw significant developments in xenotransplantation. Scientists in China transplanted genetically modified pig lungs to a brain-dead human, who survived for nine days, showcasing viability. A United States national lived with a genetically altered kidney for 271 days before requiring dialysis, and a woman in China survived for 261 days before her body rejected it. Scientists now believe that patients' survival durations may continue to extend.

Today, xenotransplantation is not limited to organ transplants. It also includes the use of animal skin grafts and pig heart valves as replacements for human heart valves.

This shift from an experimental option to a viable lifesaving procedure puts pressure on legislation worldwide, including India.

Organ scarcity, xenografts, and India’s regulatory shortcuts.

Xenotransplantation’s appeal lies in its potential as an alternative to human organ transplantation. India faces a high demand for organ transplants, with its organ donation rate being 0.86 per million population. Studies estimate that only 2 - 3 per cent of demand is met in the country. For thousands of patients, genetically modified animal organs could represent a new practical solution.

While this shortage strengthens the case for alternative sources, India has taken a precautionary stand in the regulation and research of xenotransplantation. The country has not put in place any dedicated framework for the technology. Xenotransplantation was briefly addressed in the ICMR’s Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research on Human Participants, 2007. The guideline discussed the ethical and medical issues associated with the technology. It permitted only animal-to-animal experimental transplantation at the existing level of knowledge, while tasking ethics and advisory committees to oversee the experiments. However, the 2017 updated guidelines omit any reference to xenotransplantation.

India's primary transplant legislation, the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act (THOTA), 1994, is similarly limited. It regulates only human-to-human transplantation and focuses on allocation ethics, prohibition of commercial organ trade and consent. It does not offer any meaningful tools to address issues arising from animal-to-human organ transplantation.

India’s drug law approach to xenografts

In the absence of a dedicated framework, India has attempted to govern xenografts through its drug approval regime. The New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules, 2019 have categorised “xenografts intended for use as drugs” as a “New Drug”, thus subjecting them to rigorous clinical trial and approval processes.

In October 2025, the government proposed a draft amendment to the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. The amendments would add xenografts to its licensing and regulatory provisions. These Rules, along with the Drugs and Cosmetics Act of 1940, govern the manufacture, sale, and licensing of drugs. The proposed amendments seek to extend regulatory control beyond trials to market-stage production and commercialisation, which can be read as an indication that the government expects the technology to enter the market.

The conceptual problem that arises in regulating xenotransplantation through drug laws is whether xenografts can appropriately be classified as drugs. On a literal reading, certain xenotransplantation procedures, especially skin grafts, can fall within the definition of drugs because they are therapeutic and alter bodily functions. However, this approach is conceptually strained when applied to organ transplantation. Entire organs like the heart and kidneys cannot be coherently categorised as ‘drugs’.

Retrofitting this new technology into an existing regime provides a provisional regulatory pathway. However, this framework was originally designed for pharmaceutical drugs and is ill-equipped to address the novel challenges associated with interspecies organ transplantation, which involves the use of adaptive living organs.

What should xenotransplantation guidelines address?

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has adopted multiple resolutions regarding xenotransplantation. At the 57th World Health Assembly in 2004, Resolution WHA57.18 called on member states to establish national regulatory mechanisms for xenogeneic transplantation. It also called for international cooperation in developing standards to mitigate the risks of secondary transmission of xenogeneic infections.

Like any new technology, xenotransplantation is accompanied by challenges unique to it. Primarily, xenotransplantation risks cross-species pathogen transmission, which may emerge even years after transplantation. This is categorised as a public health risk associated with the technology since the pathogen can transform into an infectious disease affecting third parties.

Another major issue concerns animal governance. Safety in xenotransplantation is significantly enhanced by careful donor selection. Donor herds must undergo continuous pathogen monitoring and viral genome sequencing to detect emerging infections.

From an animal rights perspective, the country's existing norms governing the use of animals are not designed to accommodate xenotransplantation. The process requires long-term breeding alongside genetic modification, raising ethical concerns. The issue of using animals as expendable sources of organs must also be addressed. A dedicated law should align with the Prevention of Cruelty against Animals Act, and incorporate the norms issued by the Committee for the Purpose of Control and Supervision of Experiments on Animals, while taking into account the requirements of xenotransplantation.

Having specific guidelines for new biotechnologies is a regulatory logic that India has followed in the past as well. ICMR guidelines for stem cell research, as well as guidelines for gene therapy product development, reflect this approach.

Animal-to-human organ transplant is no longer science fiction; it is moving steadily towards clinical reality. Recent trials show patients surviving longer with gene-edited pig organs, yet India continues to rely on a patchwork of regulations rather than developing a dedicated, forward-looking framework. So, the question is no longer whether the technology will arrive in India, but whether India’s legal system will be ready when that moment arrives.

IIT Bombay

Mumbai, Maharashtra

Engagement

Fellowship

Hours

Full-time

Website

chem.iitb.ac.in/pdf-interviews →

Apply Online

chem.iitb.ac.in/pdf-interviews →

Project

Profile

Applications are invited for the post of Post Doctoral Fellow at IIT Bombay, Mumbai.

For more information click here

Duration

2 years with possibility of extension.

Qualifications

Candidates must have obtained their Ph. D. degree in the last two years or submitted their Ph. D. thesis and are awaiting the defense. Minimum eligibility criterion for candidates to be considered is to have at least three publications in journals with impact factor of 2.0 or more. The candidate must be a first author/ joint first author/ corresponding author in at least one of these papers. Exceptions may be made for candidates with a paper in a journal of impact factor of more than 5.5.

Experience

The candidate must have demonstrated experience in in-vitro transcription methods using E. coli RNA polymerase including running of sequencing (denaturing PAGE) gels, enzyme kinetics, protein purification and biochemistry and molecular biology (cloning). No knowledge of NMR is required for this project.

To Apply

Interested candidates can contact me at ishita@chem.iitb.ac.in with their detailed CVs.

• Documents needed:
• An updated CV.
• Consent letter from the prospective supervisor from department of Chemistry, IITB.
• Please find the application form Form-1
• Please arrange for two reference letters, one of which should be from the Ph.D. advisor, to be sent to ipdf_applications@chem.iitb.ac.in

Application form

For more information click here

Contact

Ishita Sengupta, Associate Professor

Lab 425B, Department of Chemistry, IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076

P ,91-22-2576-7167

E JavaScript is required to reveal this email address.

The 12th Annual Conference of the Society for Mitochondrial Research and Medicine (SMRM 2026) themed “Mitochondrial Continuum: Bridging Biology and Medicine”. This meeting is jointly organized by the Department of Neuropathology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru, SMRM and IndoUSrare. It will be held at the NIMHANS Convention Centre, Bengaluru from 19 - 21 November 2026. NIMHANS, an Institute of National Importance, embodies the vision “to be a world leader in the area of mental health and neurosciences and evolve state-of-the-art approaches to patient care through translational research”.

Over the past decade, mitochondria have emerged as central regulators of cellular homeostasis, extending far beyond their classical role as energy producers. Today, they are recognized as pivotal players in diverse biological processes, including cellular signaling, apoptosis, metabolic regulation, and immune responses. Notably, mitochondrial dysfunction is increasingly implicated in a wide spectrum of human diseases from rare inherited mitochondrial disorders to more common conditions such as neurodegenerative diseases, cancer, metabolic syndromes, and age-related pathologies.

SMRM 2026 aims to serve as a platform that brings together clinicians, basic scientists, translational researchers, and students from across the globe. The scientific program has been thoughtfully designed to reflect the breadth and depth of the field, encompassing cutting-edge advances in mitochondrial genetics, biogenesis, dynamics, diagnostics, and emerging therapeutic strategies. Through keynote lectures, panel discussions, young scientific presentations, flash presentations and poster sessions, we hope to facilitate meaningful exchange of ideas and foster new collaborations that will shape the future of mitochondrial medicine. In addition, a series of pre-conference workshops will provide hands-on learning opportunities in specialized areas, including enzyme histochemistry, respiratory enzyme assays, transmission electron microscopy, and bioenergetics analysis using the Seahorse analyser.

It is also a pleasure to host SMRM 2026 in Bengaluru, often referred to as the “Silicon Valley of India,” a city that uniquely blends scientific innovation with rich cultural heritage. Home to premier research institutions, academic communities, and a thriving biotechnology ecosystem, Bengaluru provides an ideal backdrop for a conference dedicated to bridging biology and medicine. Beyond the conference halls, the city offers a welcoming climate, diverse cuisine, and a dynamic cultural landscape, making your visit both professionally enriching and personally enjoyable.

For more information click here

EMBO and IndiaBioscience have joined efforts to provide the life science community in India with online courses to strengthen professional skills in scientific communication, fellowship writing, publishing, and career development under the umbrella of the EMBO-IndiaBioscience Online Courses 2026.

This interactive course will help participants strengthen essential scientific communication skills, including storytelling, slide and poster design, visual clarity, and effective research presentations.

Curated by Laura Moro-Martín, the course combines interactive learning with practical exercises and structured feedback sessions based on participants’ own presentations.

Workshop Structure:
1) Session 1: "Fundamentals" Session (4 hours)

An interactive session covering core principles of effective scientific communication, including structure, storytelling, slide design, and visual clarity. The session combines short theoretical inputs with practical exercises carried out individually and in small breakout groups.

2) Session 2: Practical presentation & feedback session (final duration depends on number of participants, with about 25-30 minutes allocated per participant).

A hands-on session focused on participants’ own presentations. Participants present their work (approx. 5 minutes each) and receive detailed, structured feedback from the instructor and peers. For optimal interaction and depth of feedback, this session is conducted in small groups of 6–7 participants. The number of practical sessions required will depend on the final number of participants. Each participant will be assigned to one practical session, either on September 9, 10, or 11.

For more information click here

In cells, when molecules meet, new functions emerge. Much of biology depends on these interactions - On proximity.

Looking back, my own journey into science feels shaped by a similar principle. It has not been a linear academic progression, but a series of intersections—between curiosity, opportunity and experience. Each step emerged from a moment where different ideas or influences came together, opening up new directions I had not planned for.

I come from Basti, a small district in Uttar Pradesh, and studied at the Kendriya Vidyalayas in Basti, and Noida. These deeply formative years taught me to adapt to change, to compete fairly and to dream without a clearly drawn map ahead. Looking back, they showed me that the environment shapes possibility. When people share space and opportunity, new ambitions take root.

My early fascination with science was not dramatic. It was quiet and persistent. During my undergraduate years, I had my first real encounter with research when I joined an ICMR laboratory — the National JALMA Institute for Leprosy and Other Mycobacterial Diseases in Agra. Walking into a research laboratory for the first time was both intimidating and exhilarating. The lab had its own rhythm — discipline, precision and accountability. My project involved working in a Biosafety Level-3 facility, an experience that left a lasting impression. Wearing protective gear, adhering to carefully controlled procedures and recognising the seriousness of infectious disease research instilled in me a deep respect for scientific responsibility. Handling clinical material and knowing that the results could directly influence diagnosis grounded my curiosity in reality. Research was no longer abstract; it was immediate, consequential and human.

Supported by a DBT fellowship, I pursued postgraduate training at WBUT, now Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology (MAKAUT), Kolkata. That financial support was pivotal — it provided both validation and opportunity. During my coursework, I joined a year-long research project under my mentor, Joydeep Mitra, who instilled in me a deep inspiration to continue in academia. His mentorship went beyond technical guidance. He encouraged me to think across disciplines, question assumptions we develop after years of working in a research area, and engage with biology through the lenses of physics and chemistry. This experience reshaped how I viewed science—not as compartmentalised domains, but as interconnected questions—and played a key role in my decision to pursue a PhD.

This philosophy led me to the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru (IISc Bengaluru) for my PhD, unexpectedly through the Department of Physics, to study protein crystallography—a subject that taught me that while discipline helps structure learning, discovery often demands their integration. Surrounded by physicists, chemists and biologists, I experienced first-hand what an integrative scientific environment feels like.

In Kanagaraj Sekar’s laboratory, I immersed myself in structural biology, particularly X-ray crystallography. Long hours were spent optimising crystals, collecting diffraction data and solving structures. There is something profoundly humbling about watching a protein’s atomic architecture emerge from electron density maps — a reminder that life’s complexity is built on precise geometry.

My doctoral work focused on enzyme catalysis and DNA repair pathways, using X-ray crystallography, molecular dynamics and computational approaches. Each method revealed a different layer of truth. Crystallography offered structural snapshots; molecular dynamics simulations added motion and context; computational analysis allowed hypotheses to be tested before stepping into the lab. Gradually, I began to see how structural insights could inform therapeutic strategies. Understanding enzyme mechanisms and DNA repair pathways naturally drew me towards questions of drug discovery.

That intellectual pull led me to the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard University, Cambridge, USA, for my postdoctoral research. The Broad Institute was a different scale of science — fast-paced, collaborative and deeply translational. There, structural biology, computation and chemical biology converged seamlessly to accelerate drug discovery. Projects moved from structural insight to small-molecule design with remarkable fluidity. It was exhilarating to be surrounded by experts from so many disciplines, each bringing their perspective, and to see how ideas could accelerate when they collided and merged. Within this environment, I became deeply involved in designing Phosphorylation-Inducing Chimeric Small molecules (PHICS), engineered to bring specific proteins together and induce targeted phosphorylation. Beyond the technical challenge, the project exemplified what I valued most about this collaborative ecosystem: tackling complex biological problems required integrating structural knowledge, computational modeling, and cellular experimentation. Watching a conceptual design translate into measurable changes in cell signalling revealed the power of working at the intersection of disciplines.

My postdoctoral years also allowed me to explore a range of chemical biology tools to address diverse scientific questions, but more than any individual technique, what I gained was an orthogonal perspective — the confidence to approach scientific problems from unconventional angles, integrating multiple strategies to control biological function. This experience sharpened my conviction that genes may provide instructions, but protein–protein interactions execute decisions. If we could precisely control those interactions, we could reshape cellular function dynamically rather than permanently rewriting DNA.

Returning to India as a Ramalingaswami fellow at UPES, Dehradun, was both exhilarating and demanding. I was aware that academic timelines in India—whether for fellowships or faculty positions—can stretch over months, sometimes close to a year. With that in mind, I applied early for re-entry opportunities while still in the US.

A key moment came through a recruitment drive organised by Sci-ROI in the United States, where a direct interaction with the hiring committee at UPES turned a distant application into a tangible possibility. It reinforced once again how proximity, being present, visible and engaged, can shape outcomes.

Dehradun may not be the most obvious destination for academic research, but I chose to accept the first opportunity that aligned with my vision rather than wait for a more conventional path. After years of training in well-established institutions, I felt a strong motivation to return and create something from the ground up and to strengthen the research ecosystem back home.

Setting up my own research group meant articulating a vision clearly enough that others could believe in and grow with. Our work focuses on understanding and shaping protein–protein interactions to influence cellular function—an approach rooted in the idea that bringing the right components together can reveal new biological possibilities.

This perspective also shaped how I mentor students. Today’s PhD researchers are more aware of possibilities than ever before. My role is to help refine their ideas, equip them with ways of learning and encourage them to stay curious while building strong fundamentals. Ultimately, I hope to create a space where they feel confident to explore, question and even engineer their own “intersections”—because it is often through such altered or induced interactions that genuinely new insights emerge.

Today, when I reflect on my journey, I see it as a story of integration. A humble beginning did not limit ambition; it grounded it. Early exposure to infectious disease research taught responsibility and discipline. Mentorship during my M Tech. instilled purpose and courage. Structural biology during my PhD cultivated precision and depth. Drug discovery and chemical biology training during my postdoc expanded perspective and ambition. And now, as a young investigator, I strive to create an environment where ideas and people come into meaningful proximity.

If there is a single lesson I carry forward, it is this:

Integration drives discovery: While subjects are taught in silos, real scientific progress happens when ideas meet.

My journey has not been defined by isolated milestones, but by the moments where different worlds met — and quietly reshaped its direction.

Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology is organising Three-day online workshop on "Next-Generation Drug Discovery: Network Pharmacology, Docking and Zebrafish Models" from 16th to 18th July 2026 at 'International Research Center of Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai through online mode.

This training is ideal for UG/PG students, research scholars, faculty, and industry professionals who wish to explore in silico computational analyses and Zebrafish models in their research.

Workshop highlights:
• Database introduction and compound selection, ADME/toxicity profiling
• Target identification, PPI network construction, STRING and Cytoscape
• Gene ontology and functional enrichment, molecular docking and visualization
• Introduction to zebrafish as a model, developmental stages, embryo toxicity, and survival analysis

Sometimes, minute incidents can profoundly shape a person's dreams; similar to a tiny, blood-seeking sandfly whose bite can define the path of a microscopic parasite like Leishmania, causing it to adapt and survive in the liver and spleen of a human.

For Budhaditya Mukherjee, it was when he attended a lecture by one of his school alumni delivering a research talk at his school. "I was in my seventh grade, and I heard him speak about radiophysics. Although more than science, the imagery of a scientist — intelligent, confident, ambitious, smart and knowledgeable — captivated me, and I wondered what it is like to be one. This one moment shaped the entire trajectory of my career and helped build my dreams".

Now an Assistant Professor at the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur (IIT Kharagpur) and a member of the EMBO Global Investigator Network (GIN), he reflects on his journey and finds it interesting how much we humans have in common with the life of a parasite. Much as we try to embrace the good, neglect the bad, and adapt to adversities, Leishmania modulates its chromosomal patterns and genetic makeup through a phenomenon known as genome plasticity to achieve drug resistance.

He found the concept so fascinating that it emerged as the core theme of his lab, and his team now focuses on understanding host-parasite co-evolution using Leishmania as the model pathogen. Drug resistance in leishmaniasis has remained a persistent challenge; so they ask a simple but critical question: instead of eliminating the parasite, how does drug pressure sometimes make it fitter and better adapted to survive? Despite the withdrawal of older drugs like antimonials, resistant parasites continue to infect humans and resist newer therapies too — does Leishmania's genome plasticity make this possible?

Growing up, he defied the usual "engineering vs medical" dilemma, and went on to pursue a BSc in Zoology and then MSc in Genetics. Amid a series of unplanned events, he eventually joined the lab of Syamal Roy at the CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (CSIR-IICB), Kolkata for his PhD. Budhaditya attributes this achievement to his parents, who never questioned his choices but rather supported whatever he wanted to study, and to his wife and best friend, Ankita, who, to him, is his "pillar of success".

However, the journey of a parasite that constantly struggles to survive the harsh conditions of the sandfly and the human immune system is as challenging as a human's. When asked about his PhD experience at the lab of Syamal Roy at CSIR-IICB, he reminisced about how the dynamics of drug resistance in Leishmania always bothered him.

As his initial proteomics-based research to decipher drug resistance failed to gain prominence, his side project on the anti-inflammatory molecule interleukin-10 (IL-10) response in Leishmania-infected immune cells gained traction. Eventually, his PhD research revealed that drug-resistant Leishmania parasites utilise host IL-10 to promote drug resistance, rendering the drugs ineffective for killing. His eagerness to know more about infection biology led him to the lab of Dominique Soldati-Favre at the University of Geneva, which significantly trained him in parasite cell biology and genome editing.

Having transitioned from bench to office, Budhaditya recognised substantial differences between being a mentor and a mentee. In his PhD, he was strongly encouraged to think critically and defend his ideas, but in a gentle, supportive way. While during his postdoctoral work, he was pushed through direct, probing questions, often without much cushioning. Apart from his work, the major challenge in his postdoctoral journey was the initial cultural transition in a completely new continent — "I doubted myself more than I expected. There wasn't a quick fix, just patience. Over time, adapting to a new environment, both scientifically and personally, became part of the learning process." It was challenging, but it shaped his independence, precision, and resilience. That shift proved crucial in shaping his current research identity.

Was he adapting and becoming more resistant like Leishmania does in adverse situations?

Contrary to the idea that the journey of a parasite is smooth, most of them actually die, and few emerge victorious. To counter the odds, some resort to manoeuvring human cells in a way that does not pose a threat to kill them. As a young scientist, Budhaditya had some compelling theories about how parasite factors can drive evolutionary changes in parasites' adaptation. Despite his attempts, subtle suggestions to choose a more global and lethal pathogen like the malaria-causing Plasmodium, rather than Leishmania, frequently arose during his interviews or personal interactions. Eventually, his ideas found a home when he received the opportunity to build an independent research team at IIT Kharagpur.

As Budhaditya was almost set to start with his first two PhD scholars on board, they were unexpectedly hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. His lab — fundamentally based on wet-lab experiments — faced multiple challenges with delays, uncertainty and lack of resources. But gradually, through persistence and perseverance, the work started taking shape.

Adapting to changes and evolving together as a group has been key. In many ways, this co-evolution mirrors the very systems we study in the lab. I believe this has taught me a lot, not only about science but things beyond that."

It is through both adversities and support that he transitioned from being a mentee to a mentor. Earlier during his supervision, he stayed closely involved with his PhD scholars, sharing failures and appreciating successes. Over time, he realised that each student is different, with unique motivations and goals.

The correlation between day-to-day experiences and scientific insights gave rise to another solid question in the lab — how adaptations influence where the parasite survives in the body. In conditions like post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis (PKDL), where parasites shift from internal visceral organs to the skin, creating long-term reservoirs for transmission, understanding what drives this change in their path or "tropism" is critical. The lab gradually aims to move beyond a drug-centric view of resistance and uncover the broader principles of pathogen adaptability and co-evolution under drug and host pressure, which can combat chronic and relapsing, resistant infections in pathogens with high genome plasticity.

Being a part of the EMBO Global Investigator Network, he admires its vision, which aims to address the fundamental questions of biology, regardless of the kind of model one uses. The ability to exchange unpublished ideas and get feedback from peers and mentors, often outside his immediate field, has the potential to bring fresh perspectives to the questions still unanswered by his lab.

For a complex problem like pathogen adaptation, this kind of cross-disciplinary thinking is invaluable. He also agrees that access to training and advanced facilities is equally important. Many of the questions raised in the lab require technologies and expertise that are not readily available in the institute setting. Through EMBO GIN, his students can gain hands-on experience in cutting-edge approaches rather than relying solely on outsourcing, which is critical for long-term capacity building.

To him, the best part of being one among all in EMBO GIN is the visibility and platform it offers, especially for the students, to connect with the global scientific community. Leishmania is a neglected pathogen, and there are not too many labs that are trying to understand the evolution of drug resistance in this highly adapting parasite. He sees EMBO GIN as an ecosystem that will not only strengthen his current work but also shape how he and his students grow as a lab in the years ahead.

With such a wonderful global initiative giving him confidence, he also feels the necessity for the Indian scientific ecosystem to flourish more. Compared with when he first started as a new PI in India in 2019, he feels the research ecosystem has improved considerably. Initiatives like the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) early-career grants have certainly helped, both in terms of increased funding and, importantly, more timely disbursement.

Now, as he slowly moves towards a more experienced phase of his journey as a scientist, he believes we should actively work towards making science more accessible, understandable, and meaningful to different audiences, even though we haven't been traditionally trained to do so. In an era marked by advanced scientific technologies, misinformation seems to be rampant too, and it becomes the responsibility of the scientists to ensure clear and trustworthy communication with the broader public. He also thinks that effective communication is a two-way process, where it becomes equally important to engage with the general public to listen to their insights and incorporate them to develop scientific advancements for real-world application, and ensure that science remains accessible, trustworthy, and relevant to society.

IAV

Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala

Engagement

Contract

Hours

Full-time

Profile

PhD Admission are opened at Institute of Advanced Virology, Thiruvananthapuram.

Qualifications

• MSc or an equivalent degree in Life Sciences OR MVSc /MBBS or an equivalent degree from a recognized university.
• Qualifying Marks – 60% or equivalent grade (5% relaxation for OBC(NCL)/SC/ST/PWD)
• Fellowship – JRF from CSIR/UGC / DST-INSPIRE/ DBT-/ICMR/other Govt. agencies having validity of five years.

To Apply

For detailed advertisement form log on to www.iav.kerala.gov.in

Link for online application- https://forms.gle/PPcdRTMWeqC9...

Shreya’s journey began in Ahmedabad, where she completed her bachelor’s degree in Biochemistry from St. Xavier’s College, Gujarat, in 2002. Soon after, she made a decision that was relatively uncommon for many students at the time — she left India to pursue a master’s degree in Biotechnology at the University of Queensland, Australia. Convincing her parents, she recalls, was not as difficult as one might assume. “I was very determined to explore new experiences, and my parents trusted my commitment. That’s how I convinced them.”

For Shreya, moving to Australia meant seeking a different ecosystem, one where scientific training extended beyond textbooks and laboratory work. She wanted exposure to systems where subjects like intellectual property rights (IPR), commercialisation and entrepreneurship were part of the curriculum, something still not widely integrated into Indian education back then. She describes those two years abroad as formative — learning new technologies, adapting to a new culture, and observing a well-developed startup ecosystem.

But soon after completing her master’s, she returned to India, largely because her parents wanted her closer to home. By then, her career direction was already taking shape.

Choosing the business side of science

While many of her peers gravitated towards traditional research pathways, Shreya found herself drawn to a different question: what happens after a scientific discovery?

She knew early on that she wanted to work at the intersection of biotechnology and commercialisation. “I was always interested in the business aspects of science,” she says. That curiosity led her to pursue a postgraduate diploma in Patent Law from NALSAR University, Hyderabad. Patent law, she notes, opens multiple professional routes. One could become a patent analyst — working on patent applications, prior art searches, or freedom-to-operate studies. Another path could be patent prosecution, supporting law firms with filing and managing patents.

Shreya chose patent analysis and joined a biopharmaceutical company. It was a large organisation with a broad portfolio including biosimilars, generics, and innovative molecules. Working in the IP team gave her a front-row view of how scientific knowledge becomes an asset. She was involved in building IP portfolios, analysing future products, and learning about patent strategies such as evergreening, concepts that were not widely discussed in India at the time.

Looking back, she sees this phase as a foundation. It gave her the much needed technical exposure along with a sharper understanding of how scientific progress is shaped by regulation, markets, and long-term strategy.

From academia to industry — and across the ecosystem

Shreya’s career journey spans about 17 years, moving steadily across different parts of India’s growing innovation landscape. After her early professional experience at Intas Biopharmaceuticals, she moved to Delhi and worked at the Biotech Consortium India Limited for about a decade. Then came roles at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology for a couple of years, followed by the Startup Centre at IIT Kanpur. Today, she works at Wadhwani Foundation. What stands out in her career trajectory is the diversity of systems she has worked within.

It’s interesting that I’ve been part of different components of the innovation ecosystem — industry, research institutions, incubators, and now a funding agency,”

she says.

This cross-sector movement has shaped her ability to see the same problem from multiple angles. “I understand the mind-set of a funding agency, the outlook of a startup, how an incubator works, and the challenges scientists face in translation,” she explains. “I bring that experience to my current workplace — knowing the perspectives of the stakeholders we are actually funding.”

The visible and invisible gender gaps across systems

Over the years, Shreya has witnessed a shift in the gender composition of the workforce. When asked whether she has seen more women entering the systems she has worked in, she responds thoughtfully: “Over the years, I’ve definitely seen more women in the workforce—colleagues, juniors, and early-career professionals.” She adds that she hasn’t seen a very strong or obvious gender bias in the institutions she has worked in. At the same time, she is careful not to oversimplify the issue.

Bias, she notes, does not always show up in blatant ways. It can be subtle, systemic, or even rooted in assumptions about competence. For her, navigating workplace dynamics requires more than talent alone. “You have to inculcate leadership, team bonding, and resilience so you don’t let office politics or biases bog you down. As family responsibilities increase, women tend to take up less work responsibilities or stop aspiring for the top jobs. There is a need to provide women the much-needed support system so that they have the confidence to break the glass ceiling” she says.

Leadership skills, resilience, trust-building, and relationship-building abilities are what help professionals — especially women — move through organisational structures with confidence.

Mentorship and ‘allyship’

If there is one factor Shreya returns to repeatedly, it is mentorship. But she prefers a different word. “I like to use the term ‘allies’,” she says.

It’s important to have people you can depend on — and who can depend on you.”

She considers herself fortunate to have strong support from her family, including her husband and in-laws, which she believes helped her navigate her career with greater stability. Professionally too, she has worked with mentors, colleagues, and seniors who supported her growth. But she also emphasises that mentorship is not a one-way arrangement.

If you expect guidance, you should also give back — through respect, support, or collaboration. It’s like any relationship — it thrives on mutual effort.”

She also brings up another aspect that is often left out: relationships should not be transactional. “You shouldn’t view people in terms of ‘what can I gain from them.’Build genuine connections. The benefits follow naturally.”

She shares a moment from an earlier leadership role, where her definition of allyship translated into action. “In a previous role, even though we had a biometric system, I would tell women with young babies, ‘It’s okay, go home and work from there.’ I would take their side to the organisation because it was essential.” For Shreya, that is what allyship looks like: practical support, offered without hesitation.

Research management and technology transfer: A growing community

Shreya has watched the broader ecosystem of research management and technology transfer evolve in India. She describes it as a relatively small community, but one that is gaining recognition. Earlier, she says, these roles were not fully understood or valued. Today, the situation has shifted. “Researchers and faculty increasingly seek support for commercialisation — whether it’s IP, regulatory pathways, or licensing,” she notes.

Yet she believes growth requires individuals to remain adaptable. Even within a niche field, professionals cannot afford to stay confined to what they already know. She recalls a personal realisation around 2023, when she deliberately stepped out of her comfort zone. She began exploring areas like artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and mining ecosystems — fields that were not directly part of her earlier work but increasingly relevant to innovation. “Professionals need to continuously upskill and expand their horizons,” she says. “That’s how both individual careers and the community grow.”

The WomenLift Health programme and what it changed

One of the most significant experiences in her professional life was her participation in the WomenLift Health cohort, which she describes as a blessing.

For Shreya, the programme was as much about structured learning as it was about the relationships it created. “A one-year programme with residencies in three cities. We interacted with highly accomplished women professionals and learned from expert trainers,” she says. But what stayed with her the most was how her understanding of leadership evolved during this period.

The most important takeaway was that leadership is not about breaking glass ceilings — it’s about personal growth, mind-set, and supporting others.”

The cohort worked on communication, conflict management, and ecosystem thinking. Over time, the experience reinforced a lesson she believes many women need to hear: leadership is not only about individual progress, but also about lifting others along the way. “We’ve built strong peer networks, and we continue to support each other,” she says. “We built great friendships and now we motivate each other.” She explains how this support looks in real life: “If a friend has a problem with a boss, I can say, ‘I dealt with this years ago, try this.’ It’s a great peer group.”

On resilience and representation

When asked how she might have handled a challenge differently as an early-career professional compared to now, Shreya answers with honesty. She believes she could have benefited from more patience and stronger listening skills. With time, she says, self-awareness increases, and that changes how one responds to conflict or uncertainty.

“Resilience is about recalibrating your mind to new environments,” she reflects. Every new role, she believes, comes with a learning curve — in terms of tasks, people, organisational culture, and expectations. Looking back, she feels she would have done better in some situations if she had slowed down, listened more carefully, and responded with greater calm.

On whether challenges for women have improved across different systems, Shreya answers in the affirmative. She sees a gradual shift in organisational attitudes, especially towards working mothers. Flexible work options have increased, she notes, particularly after COVID. But she is clear that policies alone are not enough. Supportive leadership plays a major role in whether women feel empowered to continue and grow.

To early-career women professionals, Shreya’s advice is straightforward: don’t give up.

“Speak up when you face challenges. Communication is key,” she says. She also encourages women to take ownership of their careers. If an environment does not support them, they should not hesitate to explore other opportunities. “Your destiny is in your hands,” she adds.

Shreya also points out that research careers can be challenging, especially because of limited permanent positions and slower growth. “That’s why I strongly advocate alternative careers in STEM — like research management, startups, and innovation,” she says. For PhD graduates, she believes the landscape has expanded significantly compared to 15 years ago. Today, there are more than a thousand incubators and an emerging deep-tech ecosystem, creating opportunities in grant management, startups, and innovation-driven roles. These career paths, she notes, may not follow the conventional academic ladder, but they can offer meaningful impact and long-term growth.

As she reflects on what defines leadership today, Shreya describes it as multidimensional. But certain qualities, she believes, matter across roles and sectors: confidence, courage, resilience, agility, and strong interpersonal skills.

For Shreya, leadership is not a title. It is the ability to navigate complexity, adapt across systems, and bring people together while continuing to grow, learn, and support others along the way.

For anyone deeply embedded in the world of life sciences and biotechnology, the academic path is often seen as both a calling and a challenge. Yet, truly open and candid conversations about the realities of faculty life, such as the triumphs, trials, and wisdom gained, are surprisingly rare.

NaviClar, an initiative that supports the life science community in career navigation and progression, embarked on a unique series of interviews, aiming to amplify the voices of life science faculty and scientists from India and across the world to foster appreciation, enhance visibility, and spark meaningful dialogue that could inform policy.

NaviClar also recognised the immense value these insights hold for the next generation. Aditya Parekh, founder of NaviClar, said, “The experiences of seasoned academics offer a rich learning ground for early-career faculty and serve as a vital preparatory resource for postdoctoral researchers aspiring to enter the challenging yet rewarding realm of academia.”

In a series of 32 interviews, Sakshi Poddar (PhD,National Institute of Science Education and Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar) and Aditya Parekh (Founder, NaviClar) interacted virtually with faculty members, asking multiple questions to delve into the heart of their professional lives. Here is a glimpse into the responses to three vital questions:

1. What is the thing that satisfies you the most in your job?

Across the board, a resounding theme emerged: the joy of discovery and the impact on the next generation. Most of the faculty members’ faces lit up when they spoke about how seeing their students grow into the next stages of their careers made them fulfilled and proud. Many faculty members spoke passionately about the thrill of witnessing a student's ‘aha!’ moment, seeing their research flourish, or contributing to a deeper understanding of biological processes.

2. What is your biggest struggle as a faculty?

The challenges faced by faculty are diverse, but certain struggles resonated universally. Securing consistent funding and managing work-life balance were frequently cited as major hurdles. The relentless pursuit of grants, administrative burdens, and the pressure to publish often take a toll.

Most of the faculty members underlined that balancing teaching and/or research, along with administrative duties and other responsibilities, becomes a challenge. The pleasure of doing science often gets affected. These struggles underscore the intense demands placed on academics and the need for robust support systems.

3. What is one mistake you would advise young faculty to avoid early in their careers?

The wisdom and advice shared by faculty members offer invaluable lessons for navigating early academic careers. Prioritising careful recruitment and patient mentorship over immediate results was frequently cited as essential. The tendency towards isolation and the administrative burden often take a toll. Most members underlined that trusting intuition while managing productivity dips becomes a critical transition. These insights underscore the need for mental well-being and mutual respect.

Pathways to mentor satisfaction

There is more than one way in which STEM mentors derive satisfaction from their work and perceive their research to have an impact.

As mentors reflected and shared about the most satisfying moments of their professional lives, the joy of solving fundamental problems or asking “why” questions in their respective fields emerged as something profoundly fulfilling. These could require taking leaps to resolve big questions being debated within the scientific community or creating novel methods and developing cutting-edge techniques, both advancing knowledge and initiating new lines of inquiry. Engaging with the ‘unknowns’ gave a sense of purpose to their work and proved deeply motivating.

For me, one of the best parts of this job is figuring out puzzles. Some of the most exciting moments are when students or postdocs bring in data that are completely mysterious and new. Then you start putting the pieces together and discover a story that nobody has heard before. That’s one of the most exciting aspects of my work.”

- Piali Sengupta

Mentors also find gratification in impact measured by community uptake and continuity. The extent to which their discoveries, methods, or datasets are adopted by mentees, collaborators, and the wider research community feeds back into what mentors perceive as the impact of their work. The joy of discovery extends beyond individual breakthroughs into sustained use and evolution of their contributions, influencing future generations of scientists.

I get to talk with and engage with and watch the development of students and postdocs and even, you know, technicians and other folks who are working in the lab and watch them develop as scientists and interact with them as they kind of approach challenging problems. And that's by far the best thing about the job.”

- Erin Goley

The mentorship journey is often recognised for its intellectual significance. However, these pathways reveal that the impact most valued by mentors encompasses intellectual advancement, practical relevance, and an enduring legacy through community growth. This multifaceted sense of research impact is a central driver of mentor satisfaction, reinforcing their commitment to nurturing the STEM ecosystem.

Time management and prioritisation

The tension between pursuing ambitious research goals and the pragmatics of meeting the expectations of the academic calendar and institutional demands is faced by every mentor and can be alleviated through a well-thought-out balancing act.

Reflecting on the challenges faced at the intersection of multiple demanding roles, mentors felt that managing time more effectively was critical while juggling teaching, fulfilling administrative responsibilities, and conducting research. A faculty member or scientist is expected to frequently switch between tasks seamlessly, yet fragmented workflows disrupt focused work and hinder effective sequencing of activities.

I would advise everyone to be very mindful of their time management, not to agree to doing everything, and not get distracted by the noise around you.”

- Rejji Kuruvilla

The time one would want to spend on strategic thinking and intellectual exploration is often crowded out with responsibilities like grant writing, lab management, and other service commitments. While faced with such competing priorities, one needs to prioritise between high-risk, high-reward projects and incremental progress, all while navigating looming deadlines.

Mentors who also have caregiving responsibilities or personal life rhythms are forced to make sharper choices about how to allocate their time, a decision especially complex when they coincide with peak research periods.

One had to struggle to figure out how much time to give to research. That was always a challenge because, at times, I would devote much more than I wanted to, and then I would have to step back and restore some work–life balance before moving forward again. This continues to be a struggle for many women in science in India. But things have changed a lot, and today there’s far more support and opportunity to pursue research ambitiously.”

- Shobhona Sharma

Oftentimes, carving out protected blocks of time for focused work, prioritising ruthlessly, delegation to senior lab members, and batching administrative tasks helped with sustainable productivity at work and personal well-being.

Funding: Bureaucracy and administration challenges

Mentors also face significant challenges stemming from the intensity and inherent uncertainty of the research grant cycle.

Preparing grant applications demands extensive time and effort, often yielding low success rates. As a result, many applicants are required to submit multiple proposals in parallel and continuously revise them based on feedback. This cycle creates substantial rework and pressure.

Compounding the issue is the administrative load, which interviewees characterised as a growing burden of compliance, reporting, procurement, human resources, and other institutional processes that increasingly consume research time.

One of the biggest struggles is navigating administrative tasks that you are probably not used to doing as a postdoc and just making sure that everything is functioning smoothly and efficiently in the lab.”

- Gira Bhabha

These responsibilities fragment focus and slow momentum while performing core research and mentoring responsibilities. Mentors also encounter limits on allowable expenses, slow purchasing processes, and timing mismatches between available funds and project needs, all of which hinder research execution.

Some interviewees also shared that review panels often favour safer, short-term projects, requiring researchers to invest additional effort and time in framing risky or interdisciplinary proposals in ways that appear fundable.

I think my biggest struggle is one that many faculty in the Indian ecosystem share—the ease of doing science in India. It’s about having an idea and being able to execute it at the pace you’d like, without running into roadblocks that slow you down. For example, delays in the timely disbursement of funds or in ordering and receiving materials because of red tape. All of this cumulatively falls into the broader challenge of the ease of doing science. And it’s something I still struggle with, even after having done this for quite a while.”

- Vidita Vaidya

The purchase process was unbelievably difficult at the start and was a big learning experience; Over the years, things changed a little, and we probably just got used to it. It still remains challenging, though.”

- Dileep Vasudevan

Being more thorough with funding agency norms, creating templates for commonly used sections, building administrative scaffolds, and collaborating more extensively with co-principal investigators to share workloads were shared as effective coping strategies to meet grant submission challenges.

They also shared that institutions that centralise grant support and streamline procurement and recruitment processes free up significant burden, allowing PIs to concentrate on research and mentoring. They felt that funders can increase their impact by clarifying review criteria, reducing redundancies in proposal requirements, and providing iterative pre-proposal feedback.

The human-centric blueprint for academic success

The transition to a faculty role is often marked by the mistake of working in isolation. Experienced mentors emphasise that building a successful lab requires rejecting the "lone wolf" mentality and actively seeking guidance from those who understand the institutional landscape. By establishing a strong support network early, new PIs can avoid struggling in a vacuum, stay transparent about their learning curves, and leverage collective experience to navigate scientific and professional hurdles.

I think one of the things the young faculty should always be ready for is to go and talk to everyone and at different places wherever possible, without thinking what return that would fetch in immediate future.”

- Jomon Joseph

Effective lab management requires a strategic balance between administrative duties and core research goals. Faculty members warn against the pressure to over-commit to non-essential tasks or rush the establishment of a physical space. Success lies in selective participation, careful time management, and a willingness to collaborate locally to streamline logistics. By protecting their research focus and bracing for initial productivity dips, early-career researchers can build sustainable, efficient operations without succumbing to administrative burnout.

And one mistake I would advise young faculties to avoid, I guess, is failing to approach and find mentors actively and overcommitting to non-scientific administrative jobs.”

- Samraat Pawar

Building a successful laboratory requires prioritizing long-term team fit over immediate recruitment. Faculty members emphasize that being intentional about hiring passionate, respectful individuals is as vital as the science itself. Success stems from patient mentorship, fostering student independence through their own mistakes, and maintaining a secure, supportive environment that never compromises on mental health.

I think one of the things when young faculty start is they feel really eager to hire students and postdocs to create a team which makes sense but I've seen several instances where people hire too quickly and don't make sure they find the right person, right match and that leads to frustration for both, them and for the person they hired."

- Van Savage

Take your time to judge somebody else and try to find their strengths and weaknesses before they are judged."

- Roop Mallik

Overall, this interview series aims to be more than just that; it's a platform for shared learning. By bringing these diverse perspectives to the forefront, NaviClar not only celebrates the dedication of the life science faculty but also equips the next generation with the insights they need to navigate the exciting, yet challenging world of academia.

NaviClar is a global mentorship and networking platform for higher education students and early career researchers. Check out their website and their social media channels on Linkedin , X (formerly, Twitter) and Instagram

Watch the accompanying discussion/video related to this article here.

**Note - Quotes in this article have been lightly edited for clarity and flow while ensuring the original meaning and intent of the faculty mentors remain unchanged.

Acknowledgement

We sincerely thank all the faculty mentors who participated in this structured interview series with NaviClar. This article offers a glimpse into our discussions. A more comprehensive feature, exploring a wider range of themes in greater depth and featuring an expanded group of faculty, will be published soon

1. Radhika Nair (Centre for Human Genetics - CHG, Bengaluru, India)

2. Van Savage (University of California, Los Angeles - UCLA, USA)

3. Jomon Joseph (National Center for Cell Science - NCCS, Pune, India)

4. Chijioke Emenike (Dalhousie University, Canada)

5. R. Sowdhamini (National Centre for Biological Sciences - NCBS, Bengaluru, India)

6. Samraat Pawar (Imperial College London, UK)

7. Roop Mallik (Indian Institute of Technology - IIT Bombay, India)

8. Sandeep Robert Datta (Harvard Medical School, USA)

9. Umesh Varshney (Indian Institute of Science - IISc, Bengaluru, India)

10. Katherine Gundling (University of California, San Francisco - UCSF, USA)

11. Dileep Vasudevan (Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology - RGCB, Thiruvananthapuram, India)

12. Soma Chattopadhyay (Institute of Life Sciences - ILS, Bhubaneswar, India)

13. Sudarshan Gadadhar (Institute for Stem Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine - BRIC inStem, Bengaluru, India)

14. Gira Bhabha (Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, USA)

15. Shobhona Sharma (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - TIFR, Mumbai, India)

16. Jose Manuel Andreu (Margarita Salas Center for Biological Research - CIB-CSIC, Madrid, Spain)

17. Satyajit Rath (Indian Institute of Science Education and Research - IISER, Pune, India)

18. Kristin Michel (Kansas State University, USA)

19. Vidita Vaidya (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research - TIFR, Mumbai, India)

20. Palok Aich (National Institute of Science Education and Research - NISER, Bhubaneswar, India)

21. Anurag Agrawal (Ashoka University, Haryana, India)

22. Piali Sengupta (Brandeis University, USA)

23. Amrendra K Ajay (Harvard Medical School, USA)

24. Deepak Modi (NIRRCH, Mumbai, India)

25. Erin Goley (Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, USA)

26. Raghunand Tirumalai (CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology - CCMB, Hyderabad, India)

27. Poonam Thakur (Indian Institute of Science Education and Research - IISER, Thiruvananthapuram, India)

28. Nischay Mishra (Columbia University, USA)

29. Mohit Kumar Jolly (Indian Institute of Science - IISc, Bengaluru, India)

30. Rejji Kuruvilla (Johns Hopkins University, USA)

31. Aniruddha Datta Roy (National Institute of Science Education and Research - NISER, Bhubaneswar, India)

32. Ronald Vale (Massachusetts Institute of Technology - MIT, USA)

Type

Fellowship

Profile

The Postdoctoral Research Fellowships are designed for early-career faculty and researchers in India, offering an opportunity to enhance their research capabilities. Postdoctoral fellows will have access to some of the finest resources in their areas of interest and will help build long-term collaborative relationships with U.S. faculty and institutions. These fellowships are for eight to 24 months.

Qualifications

The applicant must have a Ph.D. or a D.M. degree within the past four years. They must have obtained Ph.D. degree between July 15, 2022 and July 14, 2026. The applicant is required to upload their Ph.D. or D.M. degree certificate/provisional on the online application;

To Apply

1. Applications must be submitted online at: https://apply.iie.org/fvsp2027
2. Please carefully review the FNPostdoc Applicant Instructions before starting your online application
3. Please refer to FNPostdoc Applicant Checklist before submitting the application
4. In addition, you must complete and upload the FNPostdoc Applicant Annexure and FNPostdoc Letter of Support from Home Institution on your online application (if applicable).

For more information click here

Funded By

JNCASR

Type

Fellowship

Website

jncasr.ac.in/academics/fandepr… →

Profile

Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research (JNCASR) announces the Summer Research Fellowship aimed at encouraging research in the Natural Sciences and Engineering among undergraduate and master’s students from the seven sister states of Northeast India. It is designed to promote research exposure and scientific engagement among talented undergraduate and postgraduate students by providing them with an opportunity to undertake short-term research projects under the guidance of experienced faculty mentors working in the fields of Natural Sciences and Engineering.

The programme enables the selected students to undertake an 8-week research internship under the guidance of faculty mentors from institutions across the Northeast, with possible collaborative exposure at JNCASR, Bengaluru. Students of the North Eastern region pursuing B.Sc., B.Tech., M.Sc., MBBS, or similar degree programmes in the country are eligible to apply.

Selected fellows will receive a fellowship of ₹20,000 upon successful completion of the internship, along with travel support (as per the eligibility) up to ₹5,000 per annum. Additional travel assistance will also be provided for students undertaking collaborative research work at JNCASR, Bengaluru.

Through this partnership between JNCASR & academic institutes of the North East, India, we aim to strengthen academic and research collaborations and thus create opportunities for young students to interact with active researchers and scientific communities.

Qualifications

Students fulfilling the following criteria are eligible to apply:

• Must be domiciled in one of the seven sister states of Northeast India.
• Must be currently enrolled in any one of the following programmes:

B.Sc./ B.Tech./ M.Sc./ MBBS or similar degree programmes.

• Must be available to undertake an 8-week research internship during the academic year.

To Apply

For more details click here