The global impact of science awareness has shown that active collaboration between science professionals, students, and the general population is key to sustaining scientific temper. This is the reason that IndiaBioscience Outreach Grant (IOG) found overwhelming support in its third edition.

The 3rd IOG, partially supported by TNQ Technologies and the Department of Biotechnology, tapped into this collaborative potential to award initiatives that promote scientific aptitude and informed decision-making in the community. The grant this year rewarded initiatives that blended the skill of communicators and the expertise of practicing researchers to reach a young audience within the country’s pockets. The researcher applicants were encouraged to team up with one (or more) professional science communicators to enable an environment of mutual learning and create an impactful and sustainable project.

Grants like IOG are both a monetary push and an encouraging nod to bootstrap science communication efforts. The IOG offers a monetary reward of 1 lakh to the grantees and guides them in the development of the initiative. IndiaBioscience and its community of students, faculty, scientists, communicators, funders, and institutes have provided much-needed visibility to these efforts. Shantala Hari Dass, Executive Director, IndiaBioscience and part of the screening committee says, “IOG activities and materials are shared on the IndiaBioscience website/ grantees network and through traditional media sources such as newspapers, adding to the popularity and reach of IOG.”

The popularity could be the reason why with each annual edition of the grant, there is an exponential rise in the number of applicants. The committee screened 98 applications this year. Shanti Kalipatnapu, Principal Technical Officer - Research Communication, IISER Pune, screening committee member says, “We assessed proposals based on their goals and feasibility within the promised time and funding.”

IndiaBioscience team considers this large number of applications a success not only for the program but also an impact of the work of the previous grantees. The work from previous grants has been a source of inspiration for the applicants. Manjula Harikrishna, Project Coordinator (Community Building), IndiaBioscience, screening committee member says, "It is wonderful to see many enthusiastic life scientists taking deliberate measures to communicate science to the society at large."

To ensure parity in accessibility, the evaluation committee ensured the work of winners spanned geographical and linguistic boundaries. The dissemination material would be produced in English, Marathi, Hindi, Tamil, and Telugu among other regional languages.

The winners include five First-time and two Extension grants (details below).

The First-time Grant Winners

Bittu K Rajaraman (Ashoka University)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant: Hansika Chhabra (Ashoka University), and Manisha Sinha (Neuromatch Academy)

Project: Discover Learning - scientific ways of learning and critical thinking

This platform will explain how the brain shapes who we are and how we think and feel. The initiative originated from an onboard discussion that Hansika and Bittu had on a flight to Delhi; Bittu’s expertise and online classes in psychology inspired Manisha to commit just over a phone call!

Their online workshops will host videos and activities to convey how the neural system influences learning, memory, and behavior. They hope to spark scientific inquiry by introducing the basics of decision-making. The objectives include training participants to ask questions, think critically, and discern facts from misinformation; much like the scientific method.

Rajaraman says, “Through this effort, we will focus on neuroscience-backed interventions for critical thinking. This can empower students to engage meaningfully in any discourse - even beyond the sciences - as students and citizens.”

Chandana Basu (Centre for Genetic Disorders, Banaras Hindu University)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant: Garima Jain (Centre for Genetic Disorders, Banaras Hindu University), and Nandini Chilkam (Learn with Comics)

Project: Genetiks4U

The team plans to create awareness about genetic testing through comics, illustrations, animation, and storytelling. Students enrolled in grade 9 and above will experience the concepts of genetics and the science of biological inheritance.

Basu and Jain, both trained scientists in the field of genetics, teamed up with Nandini Chilkam (co-founder of Learn with Comics) to present fun reading materials. They have chosen government schools in urban and rural Varanasi to organize events. This will help them reach about 1500 school students in the first leg of their initiative.

Dissemination will also include the release of comic books in English, Hindi, Tamil, and Telugu. Although the idea was simmering, Basu, the lead applicant, felt challenged by the illustrator’s fee. The Learn with Comics team offered relief, “She (Nandini) was inspired only to make learning fun and engaging, she took our fee worries away and bingo we teamed up!” says Basu.

“Our resource material will be freely available on the website so that more students can be benefitted,” adds Jain.

Ishwariya Venkatesh (CSIR–Centre For Cellular And Molecular Biology)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant:Sriram Varahan (CSIR–Centre For Cellular And Molecular Biology), and Vatsal Mehra (indx.ai)

Project: Let’s Talk Life - An integrated online platform to drive up student engagement in Life Sciences in India

“We were at the Open day at CCMB where we interacted with a stream of curious, interested students wanting to learn about our research,” says Venkatesh. This inspired her and Varahan to create multilingual content of 10 videos focused on the biological mechanism(s) common to all life forms.

She hopes the video series will catalyze an online community of graduate students and young school children sharing an interest in biology. Their platform also offers a chance for students to meet CCMB scientists and see biological research in action.

Additionally, they hope to see active participation in science writing exercises. “We expect to steer school children at an impressionable age towards sustained interest in life sciences,” says Varahan.

Mayuri Rege (Ramnarain Ruia Autonomous College)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant: Sachin Rajagopalan, and Mugdha Belwalkar (all from Ramnarain Ruia Autonomous College)

Project: Aamchi Prayogshaala

Aamchi Prayogshaala will bring students into the laboratories of the Ramanarain Ruia college for interactions with scientists and a tangible experience of a science laboratory. They hope to fill the gap in accessibility and deal with language barriers. This would ensure early exposure to careers in science and teaching.

Rege says, “Aamchi Prayogshaala is excited to embody the Sanskrit proverb स्वस्मै स्वल्पं समाजाय सर्वस्वं। (A morsel for me; a feast for society) and do our bit towards eradicating scientific illiteracy in India.”

Tuli Dey (Savitribai Phule Pune University)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant: Surat Parvatam, Anushka Banerjee, Kadambari Patil, and Kasturi Mahadik (All from Centre for Predictive Human Model Systems, Atal Incubation Centre-CCMB)

Project: Back to the Future! - A glimpse into emerging technologies in biological research

Tuli Dey and the team will take young scientists for a day in a virtual lab. The team will deliver the excitement of cutting-edge research to school and college students. They will tour the tools that scientists use to answer advanced questions in biology. Dey opines, “Nobody who looks at a live movie of a developing embryo can not be fascinated by biology. Lack of lab facilities and the pandemic has affected the enthusiasm of students, we aim to make the beauty of new technologies accessible to them.”

The tour will take the audience through organs growing on a chip and functioning organs in three dimensions. The lab session is replete with interactive quizzes and an incentive for a one-day visit to a close-by lab.

Parvatam’s previous collaboration with Dey on the Centre for Predictive Human Model Systems’ outreach activities molded her to channel students’ enthusiasm into a concerted initiative. She adds, “For our target audience, we are planning an interactive multi-pronged approach which includes interesting videos, open discussion platforms, quizzes, and in-person visits to labs.”

Extension Grants

Last year IndiaBioscience introduced the Extension grants as the second round of funding of INR 1.5 L to excellent IOG projects that have already received the First- time grants. “The First-time grant is a time for scientists to pilot their outreach project and the Extension grant is a chance for excellent IOG projects to become sustainable. We didn’t want good projects to fizzle out after one year of funding” Hari Dass explains. Every year up to 2 Extension grants are awarded.

Neha Jain (Indian Institute of Technology Jodhpur)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant: Harshita Agarwal (Indian Institute of Technology Jodhpur), and Shaheen Hasan (I love Jaisalmer)

Project: Engaging Youth to Fight Against Antimicrobial Resistance

Jain’s efforts from last year’s Seeing the Unseen award go the next step to sensitize youth towards understanding the concept of antimicrobials, their judicious use, and factors that lead to antimicrobial resistance among the rural population of Rajasthan.

Jain says, “Rajasthan has a low literacy rate with many issues that need attention. We will generate awareness about the proper use of antibiotics and the deleterious effects of misuse of antimicrobials.” She and her team found their reward in the amazement on the student’s faces when they saw microorganisms through Foldscope (portable microscope).

Jain says about her experience of working with Shaheen, “Through her, we could reach remote areas of Rajasthan and inspire young kids.”

Megha Kumar (​​CSIR–Centre For Cellular And Molecular Biology)

Collaborator(s)/ Co-applicant:Shweata N. Hegde (Regional Institute of Education), and Ruchi Malgunia (University of Zurich, Switzerland)

Project: IndiaAsksWhy: A Science Podcast

The team was successful in generating buzz about their curiosity-based podcast in their first season. The podcast features two fictional characters taking the audience on a journey and asking questions about the world. The team’s plan this year is to produce more seasons and translate the existing one into regional languages.

Along with the podcast, a close engagement with high school students and teachers is on the cards. Kumar says, “Students ask curious questions, but they go unanswered. That’s why we want to have a dialogue with students and teachers in-person and work together to improve the scientific temperament in youth.”

The team is passionate about science and collaborates well despite having never met in person! They view science as a dynamic entity outside textbooks, continuously evolving. Thus, they want to encourage the audience to ask questions about the life and environment around us.

Honorable mentions

Hari Dass says. “Every year we receive many excellent applications- more than we can fund. With increasing applications- it gets harder to narrow down to the top 5.” Here are some excellent applications that were given a shoutout:

1. CROSSTALK: A Conversation on Collaborations by Mohit Kumar Jolly (Indian Institute of Science) and Sounak Sahu (National Cancer Institute)

2. A Burst of Science: a mini-podcast series in Hindi and Kannada by Shweta Ramdas and Divya Uma (Azim Premji University)

3. An informal, safe and supportive outreach approach to bridge the Mental Health Gap in India by Reeteka Sud (Nimhans), Anant Bhan (Sangath Bhopal), Ankush Chakraborty (Project Encephalon), Vijay Nallawala (Bipolar India)

4. VIKAS (Visual Infographics, Knowledge, Awareness and workSheets) Project for Understanding Dementia by Thomas Gregor Issac, Abhishek Mensegere, Rajitha Narayanasamy, Meghana R, Meenakshi Menon (Centre for Brain Research, Indian Institute of Science)

Wrapping up the call for IOG 3

On the winners this year, Ratneshwar Thakur, Technical Officer (Science Communications), NIPGR, screening committee member says, “Majority of the outreach proposals are student-oriented. I believe this would encourage the students to consider pursuing a career in STEM, especially in the biological sciences.”

Hari Dass envisions, “IOG was launched as we felt a dearth of schemes that facilitate researchers to take science out of the lab. In the future, we hope that bigger agencies/ private sector will see this avenue as a meaningful way of engaging with the research community in India.

CONTINUUM – where have we come from, where are we going? was the theme of the third edition of the India Science Festival 2022 (ISF 2022), organised by FAST India and held from 8-23 January 2022. The online free-for-all event was designed to take the participants through the past, present and future of science and technology; to discover its vital and intriguing intersections with culture, history, politics and society through talks, panel discussions, and fireside chats, games, contests, workshops and demonstrations.

The annual event drew an overwhelming global response from more than 15000 registrants. For many, it was a first-time experience of a science festival. During the two weeks, the participants had the opportunity to interact with over 80 eminent international speakers from various fields and expertise. “This made for interesting events and different perspectives, many of which I would not have been exposed to otherwise,” said an attendee.

Here are highlights of a few popular events from the 50 diverse events organised at the festival.

The kids’ corner

Science festivals provide a unique opportunity for children to interact with scientists and get hands-on experience. Despite the limitations of a virtual medium, the ISF 2022 organised a plethora of imaginative and interactive sessions, creative workshops and popular science talks to whet the curious young minds.

The children had a field day decoding the mysteries of the human brain with Piyali Bhattacharya (Presidency University). They traced the birth and evolution of supernovas and stars with Aditi Chandra (Nisaba Education). While deciphering the good, bad, and ugly aspects of microbes with Karishma Kaushik and Snehal Kadam (of Talk To A Scientist) captivated their attention, a fun online puzzle hunt organised by STEM games experts Luma World tickled the young brains and left them wanting more.

The psychology behind magic

When an event starts with a person on the screen making a coin disappear, you know there’s magic unfolding ahead. Renowned psychologist and magician Richard Wiseman (University of Hertfordshire, UK) spoke about his research on understanding the psychology behind magic and performed magic tricks as he explained the science of visual illusions and their relevance in our daily life.

Robots at ISF

Haven’t we all wondered if robots will take over our planet? Sethu Vijayakumar (University of Edinburgh, UK) put our worries to rest as he unravelled the current applications and the future of automated robots in various industries. What’s more, the audience got to see a humanoid robot, a dual-arm unit, and a quadruped robot in action!

Spurring imagination

Isaac Asimov, a noted sci-fi novelist once said, “Science fiction stories are extraordinary voyages into any of the infinite supply of conceivable futures.”

As if on a cue, Spin Your Science, a science fiction writing competition, saw entries pour in from aspiring sci-fi writers from India, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, USA, and UK. Celebrated science fiction writers Shweta Taneja, Max Gladstone, Shiv Ramdas, and filmmaker Arati Kadav evaluated the entries and gave feedback to the finalists to help them hone their writing skills. “On reading these wonderful entries and after interacting with the finalists in the sci-fi writing workshop, it’s safe to say that the future of science fiction writing is in capable hands!” quipped Ramdas.

The festival also featured a curtain-raiser event with Ramdas and Kadav, which covered the key elements and process of science fiction writing and its representation in Indian literature and cinema.

Surely, you’re joking?

Who said science is serious and boring? ISF 2022’s Inquizitive India brought together the rare combination of quizzing and comedy. Author and comedian Kumar Varun hosted a fun science quiz that had the audience in splits. Each round was more exciting than the other. The audience was on the edge of their seats as computer scientist Manu Awasthi and microbiologist Mayuri Rege cheered the finalists and provided crucial clues at difficult moments.

Where there is comedy, improv (improvisation) and memes are not far behind. Mohit Kumar Jolly’s (Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru) Science Improv workshop discussed how improv could help scientists communicate science effectively.

Book talks

Popular science books help bring science out of academic journals into engaging stories. ISF 2022 featured an eclectic mix of talks on recently published science books. The topics covered deep tech, space science, human consciousness, the science of Indian cooking, the history of scientific racism and even the science of science.

The audience was drawn to the authors’ talks as they shared their experiences of the genesis of the ideas that shaped their book, their societal relevance, and the ups and downs of book writing.

Science and media

Science reporting is serious business. Keeping up with the latest trends in the coverage and representation of science in mass media, a diverse range of sessions with leading science journalists were held at the festival. They discussed science reportage, risk communication, fake news and related themes. In a fireside chat, author and journalist Angela Saini discussed gender, race, and caste-based discrimination in science and the role journalists can play in uncovering these unsettling realities and making science a more inclusive and impactful human endeavour.

Deborah Blum (Director, Knight Science Journalism Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA) spoke about the challenges of reporting science during a crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. Independent journalist Brooke Borel conducted a workshop on fact-checking and its relevance in science journalism.

Further, in a talk titled What Makes Us Believe In Fake News?, neuroscientist Sumaiya Sheikh (Editor of Science, AltNews.in) decoded the scientific basis of believing and debunking fake news.

Careers in science

ISF 2022’s events also exposed youngsters to careers in science and the key skills needed to pursue them.

An engaging session titled ‘How to Crack a Career in Science,’ organised in collaboration with IndiaBioscience, featured industry, media, academia, and government experts, highlighting the multiple careers in science. The session also included an exercise for the audience to reflect on their areas of interest to help determine their next career move.

The PhD Program Booth, a three-part workshop organised with Cactus Communications, focused on upskilling PhD students in academic and popular science writing and networking, for their career development and advancement. Additionally, the Talk Your Thesis competition allowed PhD students to present their thesis in a lay-person-friendly and engaging format; they, in turn, received feedback from experts.

The one-of-a-kind science festival had something for everyone as it presented myriad ways one can explore, learn, and engage with science.

In 2019, before the arrival of coronavirus, tuberculosis (TB) was the topmost cause of death worldwide from a particular infectious agent. In fact, the mortality from TB has increased in 2020 due to the current pandemic affecting essential TB services and consequently, the years of global progress in ending the TB epidemic.

TB is caused by a rod-shaped bacterium Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The most common type of TB is pulmonary tuberculosis, which affects the lungs. If the infection is not contained by the immune system, it can spread to other organs resulting in extrapulmonary TB (EPTB).

“An accurate and timely diagnosis of EPTB remains a challenge that motivated us to develop molecular probes to detect EPTB,” says Avinash Bajaj, Professor at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB), Haryana.

Led by Bajaj, a collaborative research work was carried out by a group of researchers from RCB, Haryana; Indian Institute of Technology Mandi, Himachal Pradesh; National Institute of Immunology, New Delhi; and All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. They report on the development of a fluorescent probe to detect mycobacteria from human tissue samples.

Pulmonary TB is detected by analysing sputum samples. However, detecting EPTB is difficult as it is done on human tissue samples obtained by biopsy; these tissue sections often contain a very low number of mycobacteria. This count is further reduced due to the chemical processing (fixation) necessary to preserve the tissues. The existing diagnostic tests are not accurate to diagnose EPTB. Fluorescent probe-based newer diagnostic methods are more sensitive but these require specific enzyme activity of mycobacteria. This poses a problem in tissues where these enzymes lose activity due to fixation.

Recently, when antibiotic resistance has become a mounting concern, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have drawn attention as novel therapeutic agents. Produced by our immune system, AMPs target the cell membrane of invading microorganisms. A specific peptide–lipid complex is formed in this event, eventually killing the invader. One of the naturally-occurring bile acids that has structural similarity with AMPs is cholic acid (CA), and modified CA derivatives that mimic AMPs show broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity.

The mycobacterial cell membrane consists of distinctive lipids, and is a potential target. Thus, Bajaj’s team hypothesized that fluorophore derivatives of CA with suitable modifications could specifically bind those unique membrane lipids, thereby allowing accurate detection. They synthesized four probes of different molecular structures with varying binding capacities and tested them against different mycobacterial strains. After selecting the most effective probe (P4), they showed that it selectively binds mycobacteria over other bacteria in a polymicrobial culture as well as in mice or human tissue sections following fixation. Bajaj mentions that, “This probe can detect one mycobacterium in the presence of 10,000 other bacteria, depicting its sensitivity.”

In the near future, the team plans to modify these probes by coupling them to magnetic resonance imaging agents, so that these probes can also be used as a non-invasive method to detect mycobacteria. An inflammatory bowel disease that closely resembles GI-TB (gastrointestinal TB) is Crohn’s disease; it confounds diagnosis and treatment. Hence, the team will also work on differentiating GI-TB patients from Crohn's disease patients, and correlate its findings with clinical diagnosis, says Bajaj.

Commenting on this work, Raghunand R. Tirumalai, Principal Scientist at the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, who studies Mycobacterium tuberculosis, says, “EPTB represents an estimated one-fifth of all notified cases. Hence, this is a potential game changer for the accurate diagnosis and subsequent treatment of this class of infections. Although setting up fluorescence microscopy-based TB diagnostic facilities would be a challenge in resource-poor settings, the investment would be more than offset by the clinical benefits that will accrue from this new detection approach.”

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a serious medical condition that is characterized by a progressive decline in kidney function. Oxidative stress (often originating from infection, pollution, stress, and irregular lifestyle) plays an important role in renal damage; it is characterized by increased intracellular levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are free radicals generated as a by-product of oxidation. ROS is linked with tissue damage, inflammation and increase in the risk of degenerative diseases.

Mitochondria are called the ‘powerhouse’ of the cell and generate adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which helps to preserve the cell structure. Moreover, mitochondria function as an important regulator of ROS. The ROS-regulating mitochondria are highly susceptible to damage due to oxidative stress.

In order to maintain the cellular balance of these oxidative molecules, a safe, symptomatic, and effective therapeutic strategy is needed. A previous report suggests that metal oxide nanoparticles with electron-donating and accepting potential exhibit antioxidant activity by preventing the damage caused by free radicals to cells. In this context, the researchers of the current study were keen on exploring the therapeutic potential of citrate-functionalized manganese oxide (Mn₃O₄) nanoparticles (C-Mn₃O₄ NPs). The selection of this C-Mn₃O₄NP complex can be attributed to its role in redox regulation and prevention of mitochondrial damage.

Based on this, cellular studies were conducted using human embryonic kidney (HEK 293) cells. During in vitro studies, it was observed that the C-Mn₃O₄ NP complex preserved normal cell architecture by maintaining redox balance in the cells. Moreover, it helped to restore the mitochondrial membrane potential by inhibiting the stimuli that trigger apoptosis (cell death). This, in turn, increased the cell viability index.

Explaining the course of the research, the lead author, Aniruddha Adhikari, Department of Chemical, Biological and Macromolecular Sciences, S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Kolkata, says, “There is always a gap in the efficacies of a pharmacological agent tested between cellular and animal models. As limited bioavailability, non-specific biodistribution, or unwanted metabolism often restrict the in vivo use of a cytoprotective agent, we evaluated the potential of C-Mn₃O₄ NPs by conducting animal studies.”

In this regard, for in vivo studies, the cisplatin-induced C57BL/6j mouse model of CKD was used. The study results showed that the C-Mn₃O₄ NP complex exhibited a scavenging activity against ROS in the mitochondria. It inhibited opening of the mitochondrial permeability transition pore, and ATP depletion, thereby preventing mitochondrial dysfunction. As a result, the morphology and physiological function of the kidney were maintained. This was indicated by the fact that the levels of CKD markers (serum urea, plasma creatinine, increased blood urea nitrogen and glomerular filtration rate) returned to homeostatic conditions. Additionally, the nanoparticles efficaciously mitigated the severe inflammatory responses originating from CKD. While explaining the therapeutic mechanism of the nanoparticles, Adhikari indicates that, “The findings suggest that both the mechanisms (ROS scavenging and mitochondrial protection) take place simultaneously.”

On further exploring the therapeutic domain, it is seen that the NP complex can be developed as a nano-drug because of its biocompatibility and pharmacokinetic properties. The C-Mn₃O₄ nanoparticles are known to enter the kidney—crossing the glomerular filtration barrier, which is a highly-specialized size and charge filtration interface for blood—and reside there, exhibiting a therapeutic mechanism. However, understanding the internalization of these nanoparticles and their molecular mechanism within the cells is very important before clinical translation.

Adhikari states that, “As CKD is known to be caused due to redox imbalance in the mitochondria, our nanoparticle complex proves to be an effective redox medicine which improves renal function by preserving and maintaining mitochondrial integrity.”

Commenting on the relevance of this study, Prantar Chakrabarti, Director of Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplant at AMRI Hospital, Kolkata, says, “This research delves into a territory where there was limited success in therapeutics. Here, the researchers have looked at the problem from a different perspective. Therefore, this is novel research with great potential.” Further, about the future scope of the study, he adds that, “As physicians, we are concerned about the safety of the patients and therefore, it is crucial to determine the long-term effects on the haematological levels.”

The research study employed a mixed-method design, using both quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interview) methods to collect data from early career researchers (ECRs), Heads of Institute (HoIs), suppliers of scientific equipment, and funding agencies. The participants for the interview were recruited via emails, networks of India Alliance, and snowball sampling using social media campaigns. A total of 24 interviews were conducted virtually. The final research study includes qualitative interviews conducted with eight HoIs, three funding agencies, and four suppliers of scientific equipment. Apart from this, the interviewers also spoke to four organizations (India Bioscience, C-Camp, InStem, and CloudKrate) that are important stakeholders in the Indian STEM community. Among the ECRs who participated in the survey, five agreed to provide insight on their motivations for leaving or planning to leave academia.

Early career researchers

The ability of researchers to continue their research during the pandemic was compromised due to attending multiple conferences and online workshops, and the subsequent lack of time for professional development. The decrease in attention spans and methodological challenges in their research; a lack of motivation and uncertainty; the loss of time due to lockdown-associated restrictions on movement, leading to lack of access to laboratories; and the decline in scientific output contributed to the strain in scientific productivity. In addition, family and household responsibilities, fear of losing their jobs, career-related stresses, delays in funding, fear for their health and their family’s well-being negatively impacted the mental health of researchers.

Leaving academia

The ECRs reported that the major reasons for leaving academia were reduced funding/money, retirement, increased work pressure and workload, child-care responsibility, lack of stability/security and not being able to do desired work. Some of these participants also expressed how teaching online in addition to administrative responsibilities and a feeling of being overworked contributed to their frustration with academia and negatively impacted their health as well. The increasing pressure of having to publish invariably emphasises the number of papers published rather than the quality of those papers.

Additionally, the ECRs who were thinking about leaving academia mentioned poor work culture and lack of support as reasons for their discontent with academia. Many women researchers made the decision to leave academia because of lack of stability and support by institutions that do not take into account the gendered division of labour in households, which was exacerbated during the pandemic. The increasing number of job opportunities with better pay in industry seemed like a better option over academia.

Heads of Institutes

Two hundred and fifty eight targeted emails were sent out to Heads of Institutes across the country, from which eight (seven men and one woman) agreed to be interviewed. These HoIs led Government-run and not-for-profit research institutions across the country, and most were based at teaching and research institutes. The HoIs echoed the findings from the ECR survey on major issues faced by scientists during the pandemic: lack of access to their research material and laboratories, delaying research.

For the HoIs, the prime challenges were in managing personnel remotely and then, on campus once restrictions were lifted. Scenario planning due to the uncertainty of the pandemic was the foremost challenge and a new responsibility that they had to take on. The regulation of administrative, supervisory, teaching, research, and personnel management tasks were impacted due to the virtual mode of work; the time allotted for each also changed for the HoIs. During the pandemic and lockdown period, their main role was providing research-based support to scientists, ensuring extension of grants, procuring additional sources of funding and making sure that current funding timelines were maintained. The mental health of staff and scientists within their institute and their own mental health were a challenge, even though some institutes provided counselling support.

Funding agencies

Of the 22 funding agencies approached to participate in the study, only three agreed to be a part of it. These three agencies fund research in India in the range of US$ 14 million, 108 million, and 344 million respectively (the last figure also includes global grants funded). Each agency operates at a different scale, thematic funding area, and in varying geographical contexts.

The current research by the organizations that the three agencies supported was either paused or COVID-19 related research took priority. The organizations were unable to utilize the funds set aside for field work/lab-based work due to lockdown restrictions, but other forms of virtual research took place. The committees and boards had to be consulted by the funders on the new challenges in funding timelines as presented by the changing nature of the pandemic; the research goals linked to funding were adapted according to the pandemic. In terms of deadline extensions, the funders provided cost and no-cost extensions, and eased the timelines for deliverables required during the funding period. They also supported virtual means of research dissemination including workshops, webinars, conferences and research podcasts for their scientists. This included virtual meetings with the supported organizations and regular newsletters on research findings.

Suppliers of scientific equipment

Forty suppliers of scientific equipment were approached to participate in the study, out of which only four agreed. The four suppliers conducted business in products such as high-end imaging lenses, equipment for clinical diagnostics, nuclear research supplies, and telescopes. Each supplier operated at a different scale, dealt with different products, and in varying geographical contexts.

They reported a delay in supply of material and equipment owing to lockdown-related restrictions on travel within the country and across national borders. The Government mandates on manufacture and supply of material that favour domestic production, especially during the pandemic, negatively-impacted suppliers due to increase in the permissions to be sought and bureaucratic procedures. The payments for transportation and delivery of scientific material and equipment were delayed since research institutes were closed during the lockdown. There were no changes in the type of primary market or target group during the pandemic, and the suppliers moved to virtual means of business through their website and online portals for transactions. However, management via a virtual medium was not easy as equipment needed to be tested by scientists/physical demonstration had to be done before purchase of an equipment.

The study provides several recommendations for different stakeholders within the STEM community in India in the wake of the pandemic. One of these is that universities and research institutes should minimize grant management and other administrative duties for scientists as it reduces their time spent on research. Furthermore, ECRs suggested that flexible working hours should be adopted by institutes for researchers to work independently especially during a pandemic when remote working arrangements are the norm. Developing standard operating procedures (SOPs) across domains of teaching and research is vital to alleviate any future losses in academia (in terms of human resources, for example).

IndiaBioscience continues and envisions to engage with independent life science researchers/faculty as they embark their journeys of being independent researchers, settle in, lead and build research groups across India. They have been our supporters, recipients of our work and experts to guide us in our journey.

In order for IndiaBioscience to continue serving the Indian scientific community, it is imperative that we make an effort to understand the critical needs and gaps that independent scientists in the Indian academic system currently face. For this, we have launched a long-form survey to be circulated to scientists working in life sciences across the country within our network as well as outside it. The survey contains questions on hiring and evaluation process, receiving and providing mentorship, funding, infrastructure and administrative support, and work environment.

The results of this survey will help us assess the current status of independent researchers as well as provide us with clues on what might be some pressing issues that IndiaBioscience can help address in coming years. This will also help us tailor our activities to the needs of the community and ensure that we are focusing our attention where it is most needed. The community's response is very important to us and we feel that this dataset would be a great resource to the Indian scientific community in the years to come.

The survey can be accessed here: https://bit.ly/Faculty_Survey_IndiaBioscience

Objectives of the survey:

1. To understand the issues/gaps faced by independent researchers in the current scientific ecosystem.

2. To gather suggestions on what can be done to fill these gaps.

3. To assess whether and how IndiaBioscience has been useful to the Indian scientific community.

4. To understand how IndiaBioscience can continue to serve as a platform to provide a voice to the scientific community.

Proposed outcomes:

1. Based on the analysis of the data obtained through this survey, a report will be put together which can be shared with the funding bodies and other decision making bodies. This may help guide policy decisions by these bodies.

2. The results of the survey will help us shape the direction of our activities at IndiaBioscience.

3. The survey and its results can be used as a starting point to understand and enquire about the status of independent researchers in disciplines beyond life sciences.

Frequently Asked Questions:

1. Who can participate in this survey?
   Independent Indian life science researchers or faculty members working in the area of life sciences can participate in the survey.
2. Is it mandatory to complete the survey within a single go?
   We recognize that this is a fairly long survey, and made a conscious decision to create a single survey instead of a multiple short surveys in order to gain a holistic view of the environment that an independent researcher functions within in Indian academia, and the challenges that they face. In case you are unable to complete the survey in a single go, you can choose to submit it with partial responses, and edit it later. After completing a section, you can save your work by submitting the form and coming back to edit it at a later time. Upon submitting the form, you will receive an email confirmation which will contain the link that will allow you to edit your responses. PLEASE DON'T DELETE THIS EMAIL as it will not be possible to edit your responses without it.
3. How can I retrieve back my unfinished responses and complete the survey?
   You can re-commence filling or editing responses using the edit link received via the email. On retrieving the form, keep clicking “next” (you should be able to see your filled in responses in these sections) until you reach the section where you breaked. Here, change the answer to the last question (“Would you like to submit the form now and come back to fill the rest later? You will need to click the link in the email you receive after submitting the form in order to edit”) to “No, I would like to continue taking the survey” and then click “Next.” Thereafter, you will be redirected to the subsequent section.
4. I have filled a few sections of the survey, will these responses be counted in?
   No, such responses will fall under incomplete data. We strongly urge you to fill in the complete survey for the responses to be incorporated in the analysis.
5. Is the survey open for faculty working only in the area of life sciences or biological sciences?
   Yes
6. Can students (undergraduate, masters, PhD), postdoctoral fellows or science professionals participate in the survey?
   No, this particular survey is only for independent researchers or scientists who have their own labs and are leading research groups in India.
7. Will I be quoted or my answers used verbatim?
   Please be aware that we take your privacy seriously. Any personally identifiable information collected through this survey (names, email ids etc.) will be kept confidential and not be shared outside the organization. For the purpose of analysis, the survey data will be both anonymized and aggregated. We will not sell, rent or exchange any personal information supplied by you with any third party.
8. How much time will it take to complete the survey?
   We estimate that it will take about 20-30 minutes to fill.
9. Why is the survey so long?
   We made a conscious decision to create a single survey instead of a multiple short surveys in order to gain a holistic view of the environment that an independent researcher functions within in Indian academia, and the challenges that they face. Hence, the survey is long.
10. I think this survey is a great idea, how can I contribute beyond filling in the answers?
    We encourage you to share the survey within your network, publicize it within your institutions by putting up posters (we will be happy to provide you with these), discussing at events/meetings and giving small talks on it.
11. I have queries about the survey, where can I write?
    If you have any questions or concerns about this survey, please email us at data@indiabioscience.org

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a dramatic loss of life across the world, and continues to present unparalleled challenges to the world of work. This includes drastic changes in the work and personal lives of scientists. For instance, mandatory physical distancing led to unexpected roadblocks for early career scientists, such as facility closures, reduction in funding and networking opportunities, and changes in the job market. The pandemic’s impact on science and scientists in various countries were also felt unevenly; women scientists and those from marginalised groups suffered disproportionately. Those who lacked digital literacy or access to different technologies and research tools were also affected more.

To examine how COVID-19 affected STEM scientists and stakeholders across India, Monk Prayogshala conducted a survey, which was funded by the DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance. Using a mixed-method approach, early career researchers (ECRs), institute heads, funders, and other stakeholders were interviewed.

The survey was conducted between August and November 2021. It explored specific issues that researchers faced due to the pandemic, such as the impact on funding, scientific productivity, teaching, institutional/social support and mental health. To make it accessible to a wide-range of individuals, the survey was made available in 10 Indian regional languages along with English.

There were 618 participants in total, out of which 300 had a PhD or were in postdoctoral positions, and 318 had graduate or postgraduate degrees. Among the PhDs/postdocs, 150 identified as men and 141 as women; none as non-binary. In the graduate/postgraduate group, 175 identified as men and 134 as women. Findings of the data collected from early career researchers (ECRs, those who had a PhD or were in postdoctoral positions) are reported in this article.

Impact on research

About 51.43% (108 participants) of the respondents reported experiencing greater core research issues, such as difficulty in data collection and dissemination. ECRs with existing mental health issues reported facing a greater frequency of core research issues in terms of data collection, dissemination, methodological challenges, decrease in staff, and inability to continue research work on university campuses. However, individuals with a graduate/postgraduate degree encountered greater levels of core research issues due to financial insecurity and disruption in grant disbursals.

Given the shift to virtual platforms, the survey suggests that increased digital literacy led to an increase in the number of working hours for professional development – such as hours spent on skill development, online courses, webinars and workshops.

More than half of the researchers (55.47%; 71 participants) reported facing greater difficulty in obtaining grants to continue their research activities. These disruptions in grant disbursal led to a slowdown in procurement of lab supplies – an issue faced by graduates and postgraduates as well – among male scientists, and contributed to poor mental health among women scientists. Given these findings, streamlining grant disbursal and developing contingency plans for procuring scientific supplies should be developed by funding agencies and institutes in such situations.

Impact on teaching

Approximately 62.5% of academicians (80 participants) with teaching duties reported a negative impact on their work during the pandemic. For those who supervised PhD students, the disruption in procuring lab supplies was associated with a significant negative impact on supervisory duties, especially for women scientists. This highlights the gender-variegated impact of the pandemic on female scientists who juggle teaching, supervisory and research roles.

Thus, there is a need for universities to develop standard operating procedures across teaching and research domains to alleviate losses in research and academics.

Impact on scientific productivity

The susceptibility of researchers to increased core-research issues, such as difficulty in data collection, led to an adverse change in their scientific productivity. A similar general trend was also observed among graduates and postgraduates. The scientific productivity of men was affected by external reasons such as greater research dependency on interactions with individuals participating in the study, while the productivity of women was affected due to personal financial instability and low mental health during the pandemic.

Some participants provided recommendations to improve researchers' experience in academia and also increase scientific productivity – a reduction in administrative duties, flexibility in working hours, provision of growth opportunities, training, and provision of support to women in terms of childcare and transport.

Impact on mental health

About 47.88% of the ECRs (79 participants) noted experiencing a negative impact of the pandemic on their mental well-being being in terms of deteriorated work–life balance, increased stress levels, unhappiness, and poor mental health. Better mental health was enabled by lower difficulties in receiving grants, better university and social support, and fewer disruptions to scientific productivity. Among graduates and postgraduates, good mental health was a result of greater support received from the university.

Gender differences were observed in terms of the effect on mental health. Among men, receiving more support from the university and social groups led to better mental health. On the other hand, receiving higher social support from family, relatives, and peers led to better mental health in women. Additionally, women scientists reported having poor mental health when they faced disruptions in receiving grants and adverse changes in their scientific productivity. These differences bring to light the differential needs and challenges faced by men and women scientists. An important inference from the study is normalising talking about mental health and providing necessary resources to academicians to improve mental well-being, especially institution-wide.

The study provides a detailed understanding on the various challenges faced by researchers in the STEM community. It also illuminates the needs of these researchers (such as social and university support) in order to increase their scientific productivity and improve mental health during the pandemic. Even though the survey was made available in regional languages to reach as many Indian scientists as possible, it was not possible to recruit a representative sample, and there was inadequate representation of oppressed castes and other gender groups. As only digital tools were used to disseminate the survey, only a select group of scientists having access to a device, internet connection, and possibly belonging to an urban area were able to participate in the survey.

The next part of this article series will deal with findings from interviews with multiple stakeholders in Indian STEM, such as administrative heads of institutes, funding agencies, and suppliers of scientific equipment, among others. Subsequent studies can include a larger and more representative sample to obtain an understanding of the severity of the impact of COVID-19 on Indian scientists belonging to different caste and gender groups.

Science communication (SciComm) has gained tremendous momentum in recent times. Primarily initiated by governments and the scientific community, SciComm is used to make scientific research accessible to non-specialist audiences and responsive to societal needs, values and aspirations. Different regions in the world are at distinct stages of building socially-engaged science and technology ecosystems, which provide a significant opportunity for cross-learning and resource-sharing at a global level.

The field of science communication is undergoing rapid evolution in India and, therefore, requires its practitioners to stay up-to-date and continually upskill themselves to do relevant and impactful work. Motivated by these developments, the Foundation for Advancing Science and Technology India (FAST India) organized The SciComm Huddle on 15–16 December, 2021 as part of its India Science Festival (ISF2022).

The event brought together science communicators, engagement experts, educators, creatives, media professionals, researchers, and students from around the world to share skills, knowledge and experiences towards bridging the science and society gap. Through various knowledge-sharing sessions and discussions led by experts, the event explored local as well as global trends, practices and formats in science communication, and deliberated upon innovative and actionable ideas to enhance science and society engagement, which is critical for building a healthy and sustainable future for all. Banya Kar (Science Communicator) and Suchitha Champak (Founder of SciRio) served as facilitators on Day 1 and 2 of the event, respectively.

Day 1

Science and Society: Global Trends and Perspectives

The first discussion explored the evolution of science communication and current trends in the respective countries of the speakers.

Marina Joubert, Senior Science Communication Researcher at CREST, Stellenbosch University, South Africa traced the evolution of science communication in South Africa and its interplay with social and cultural histories, present-day politics, and governance of science and technology. Siuli Mitra, Communications Associate, Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, laid out the evolution of science communication in India through its rhetoric in government science policy documents and people science movements, which started with educating the masses to now recognizing them as key stakeholders in the science and technology enterprise.

Jenni Metcalfe, Director, Econnect Communication and President, Public Communication of Science & Technology Network shared the positive transformation of the science communication landscape in Australia: from science communicators in most research labs now to more courses in science communication, increased research in science communication, and the non-scientific public increasingly looking up to scientists instead of politicians for explanations for current challenges.

Speaking from the United Kingdom (UK) context, Iain Stewart, Professor of Geoscience Communication at the University of Plymouth, UK, and Director of its Sustainable Earth Institute, UK, raised the issue of an instrumentalized view of science communication wherein “scientific knowledge is seen as a product to sell to the public that hasn’t asked for that particular knowledge, in the expectation that knowledge will somehow trickle down and somehow be useful.”

The discussion touched upon the need for expanding and refining the scope, repertoire and purpose of science communication and that of its practitioners. The speakers impressed upon the importance of a two-way dialogue between science and society and the need for humanising science to make it more relevant and relatable.

Art and science collaborations

The first ‘Show and Tell’ session, themed around art and science collaborations, traced the path of creative, new-age science engagement projects, from their ideation to execution.

Argha Manna, artist, talked about his comics project ‘From Droplets to Cloud’, a collaboration between a scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), United States of America (USA), and himself that was triggered by research questions around respiratory disease during the pandemic.

Abraham Mamela, a public engagement professional from Botswana, talked about science engagement through creative art projects ‘Genome Adventures’ and ‘Arting Health For Impact’ and the process of forming interdisciplinary and community collaborations for effective science engagement.

The brief presentation by Lewis Hou, Founder of Science Ceilidh, Scotland, on ‘Exploring Equitable Community Science Engagement’ showcased the tremendous potential of traditional arts in making science more accessible and relevant, particularly for marginalized communities, and in building science capital.

The speakers also addressed questions such as “What are the starting steps for conceptualizing a science and art project?”, and “What are some key considerations in embedding science in culture?”.

Building Communities of Practice in Science Communication

The next discussion was a reflection on the status of science communication in India and the need for building communities of practice in this field. It was led by Subhra Priyadarshini, Chief Editor, Nature India, and Siddharth Kankaria, Communications and Program Coordinator, NCBS, India. They pointed out that science communicators, including science journalists, not only convey scientific information to the public but also act as knowledge producers themselves and can influence the process of science by providing new insights and relaying feedback from the public and communities to researchers.

“It's only when we start listening to and working with people together, building a community of practice together, that we can really get to a place where we can make new novel discoveries and insights and push science further.”, said Kankaria.

Citing the example of the newly-formed Science Journalists Association of India (SJAI), Priyadarshini shared that creating such communities of practice can be challenging on many fronts – legal, professional, and financial.

The Engaged Campus: Public Communication by Research Institutions

This session showcased how various institutions and universities, through bespoke strategies and activities, incorporate public engagement in research, knowledge exchange, teaching, and social responsibility.

The speakers—Rajesh Gopakumar, Director, International Centre for Theoretical Sciences, Bengaluru, India, Priyanka Dasgupta, Communication and Marketing Fellow, European Council for Nuclear Research, CERN, Switzerland, Namrata Sengupta, Program Manager for Scientific Public Engagement, Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, USA and Yukti Arora, Senior Manager, Academic Communications, Ashoka University, Haryana, India—presented vastly different motivations and pathways for public communication that largely dependent on institutional mandates, available resources and local socio-cultural contexts. However, they unanimously demonstrated institutional commitment as a key driver for public engagement with science.

Leveraging Research Communication for Impact

Brian Lin, Director, Editorial Content Strategy, EurekAlert! American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), provided an engaging overview of how institutions can leverage research communication to improve their visibility and impact. Lin talked about the basic functions of an institutional communications office and its staff and the evolution of these institutional roles and structures with the changing information communication landscape globally.

Day 2

Science communication in 21st century: The Challenge of Language

T. V. Venkateswaran, Scientist and the National Coordinator for Vigyan Bhasha, Vigyan Prasar, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, traced the evolution of the science communication agenda in India in line with the aspirations of a newly-independent country. He pointed out various challenges for science communication today including misinformation, distrust in science, and faith-based world views.

Engaging Communities

The second ‘Show and Tell’ session on engaging communities traced the path of innovative projects that involve working in and with communities to make science more accessible.

Mary Chambers from Oxford University Clinical Research Unit (OUCRU), Vietnam shared her project YAAR, which brought together young people from four countries in the Global South to help address the challenge of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) or drug-resistant infections. Mohamed Soliman Daoud of American University in Cairo, talked about his project The Funlab: Reaching the Unreachable, which uses edutainment-based hands-on activities to ignite curiosity and interest in young children about science.

Edward Duca described the nuts and bolts of putting together a science festival in Malta and adapting to virtual mode during the pandemic. Sarah Jenkins, Director & Principal Consultant, Jenesys Associates Ltd, UK, unpacked the why, what and how of evaluating science engagement practices and emphasized on embedding evaluation in a science communication project right from the very outset and to use it for ‘reflection and learning’ and not merely ‘judgement’.

“The general public generally perceives science as a beneficial force in human affairs. At the same time, public knowledge of the details of scientific knowledge is extremely low (in Egypt). There are barely any talk shows that invite scientists, and no science TV shows. When they depict scientists in the movies, they are usually wearing white coats with big fuzzy hair or it is a Breaking Bad version of scientists. But recently, I can see that there is tendency to bring scientists to the front lines especially with current pandemic as the media started to value science and scientists in general.”, said Mohamed Soliman Daoud, American University in Cairo, Egypt.

Lessons From a Crisis: Has the pandemic rewritten rules for SciComm?

This discussion with Sean Ellis, The COVID Vaccine Group, The Jenner Institute, Oxford University, UK, Anastasia Koch, Eh!Woza, South Africa and Madhushree Kamak, Science Gallery Bengaluru, India, deliberated on how the COVID-19 pandemic offered new lessons for science communication and may have redrafted some rules for communicating scientific evidence and public engagement during peacetime.

The speakers shared how their existing capacity and community networks helped them in communication and engagement efforts during the pandemic, though engagement via digital channels was challenging as it was not a preferred or frequently-used mode of public engagement before the pandemic.

Key ideas that emerged from The SciComm Huddle

• The science communicator, scientist and institution should identify a clear ‘purpose’ for science communication and public engagement.
• Science communication can humanise science and support two-way dialogue between science and society.
• Need to recognize the variety of roles and repertoires of science communicators.
• Interdisciplinary, creative collaborations make science communication and public engagement inclusive and effective.
• Embedding reflexive evaluation practices enhance the impact of science communication.
• Communities of practice in science communication can promote cross-pollination of diverse ideas, perspectives and expertise, thereby, improving its quality and influence.
• Institutionalization of science communication can potentiate the impact of science and technology on society.

The videos of the various sessions at the Huddle can be watched here. The first edition of The SciComm Huddle was designed to provoke reflections and cross-learning in science communication and public engagement through the exchange of ideas, perspectives and knowledge among its practitioners. In the coming years, we hope The SciComm Huddle becomes a vibrant, participatory platform to catalyze new ideas, learning and collaborations to advance science communication and public engagement practice, research and policy in India and globally.

The extended lockdown of 2020 saw a surge in the Indian scientific community dipping their toes in science communication. Given the surge of misinformation and lack of resources in regional languages, some scientists took to social media, creating videos of themselves describing the biology of the coronavirus, the rationale behind precautions and advocating for science as much as possible.

The same year, the 1st IndiaBioscience Outreach Grants (IOG) were announced to add momentum to the wave of scientists taking up outreach. “From our interactions with the scientific community, we found that many were keen to take up outreach but were lacking the final nudge - either in terms of monetary support or a framework. At the same time we were very cognizant of the absolutely talented and growing community of science communicators, illustrators, artists and journalists who have been striving to make science more accessible”, shares Shantala Hari Dass, Associate Director, IndiaBioscience.

The winning projects of 1st IOG inspired collaborations to create curiosity and glee in their audiences. “With the projects funded under the 1st IOG, we saw that the outreach activities helped inculcate belief, awareness, excitement and hope in science in the broader society as we as individuals and a country grappled through the second wave of COVID-19”, opines Zill-e-Anam, Program Coordinator, Outreach at IndiaBioscience. Following the success of the first edition, IndiaBioscience launched a call for the 2nd IndiaBioscience Outreach Grants (2nd IOG) in September 2021. The grant invited applications from young scientists in India for science outreach, in collaboration with students, science communicators, educators and independent organizations. This time, the call was open under two categories - First-time grants and extension grants (to previous IOG awardees) to young investigators across India, for 1 lakh and 1.5 lakh respectively to support outreach initiatives for over a year. We take a look at the awardees for 2nd IOG here.

Talk to A Scientist (TTAS)

TTAS is a second time winner of the IOG. Karishma Kaushik (Assistant Professor, Savitribai Phule Pune University) and Snehal Kadam, (PhD student, Hull York Medical School, UK) started the project in March, 2020, soon after the first lockdown was announced. They organized webinars for students aged 6 -16 about a range of topics. Since then, 90 sessions have been conducted with scientists and communicators as hosts.

With the 2nd IOG extension grant of 1.5 lakhs, the team hopes to create a repository of their content and increase it’s reach. “We look forward to leveraging this opportunity for the scale up and sustainability of TTAS. For this, we will be hiring new team members and expanding the scope and reach of the program through archived video content”, they describe. With the 2nd IOG, the team also plans to focus on reaching new audiences with limited internet access and connectivity. For this, collaborations with schools for in-person sessions and archived content will be key steps.

The other five winning proposals were the first time-winners of IOG. They were selected among 62 applications- a doubling in number of applications received last year. Choosing five projects was a tough call. The applications were scrutinized for uniqueness, clarity and rigor of approach, nature of the audience and interaction, awareness about similar pre-existing ventures and the applicants’ experience in science outreach. “We had so many outstanding candidates that we ended up debating about 30% of the applications for many hours”, shares Rashna Bhandari (Lead scientist, Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics, board member of IndiaBisocience and review committee member of 2nd IOG). “Projects reflecting the passion & enthusiasm of the group tended to be harder to dismiss”, Chitra Ravi (Faculty at Azim Premji University and a review committee member of 2nd IOG) said.

“A majority of the outreach caters to 8th standard and above students. It takes a lot more effort to work with younger kids or older citizens”, continued Bhandari. “We looked for diversity and inclusion in approach and target audiences. Audiences outside of urban students with internet access who are already engaging in online learning and have access to informal learning”, she adds.

Project RAKSHA (Reach and Advocacy for Autistic Kids’ Sexual Health & Safety Attitudes)

Project RAKSHA hopes to address an important gap in outreach on reproductive and sexual health. The highlight of this project is the inclusivity in approach and audience. Dr Reuben Varghese, scientist and Pradyuma Murali, speech pathologist at All India Institute of Speech and Hearing (AIISH), Mysuru will lead the creation of a resource booklet that guides parents and caregivers in communicating about reproductive and sexual health and safety to children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

The team has Pradyumna Murali and Mansi Karnad, who are speech pathologists at AIISH, Ridha Farmeen and Hema Nair, budding speech-pathologists, responsible for storytelling and digital design, and Manali Naik, an illustrator. Naik has experience illustrating therapy resources for children with developmental disabilities, making her a good fit for the project.

The team took note of the need to make a resource booklet engaging for children. “Most autistic individuals are reported to be visual learners. Illustrations allow us to present the information in a form most suited to the needs of individuals with ASD. Additionally, children perusing illustrations can be a shared experience (with an adult), normalising having a conversation about sexual health and safety. Illustrations can guide an adult on how to put forth information in an effective manner, while allowing space for customization according to social rules and maintaining interaction throughout the activity”, Varghese explains.

The review committee also looked closely at collaborating partners and similarity of pre-existing initiatives. “Sustainability of the project was one of the key metrics for evaluation. I was also looking for their openness and willingness to connect with similar groups as they should mutually supplement and complement each other in the long run”, Shanthi Krishnamoorthy (CDO, TNQ Technologies and a review committee member of 2nd IOG), reflected.

Seeing the Unseen

Seeing the Unseen takes a grassroots-level approach. Neha Jain (Assistant professor, IIT Jodhpur) and co-applicant Shaheen Hasan (Project Manager at ‘I Love Jaisalmer’) will introduce 6th - 10th grade students to microbial diversity. “Through our workshops we plan to address various issues related to health and hygiene. We want to show that most microbes are beneficial in general, but some may cause infections. Cholera, malaria and dengue will be discussed because of the lack of clean drinking water in some of these regions”, Jain describes.

The team will be visiting schools in rural Jaipur, Jodhpur, Bikaner, Nagaur and Jaisalmer. Hasan’s work at I Love Jaisalmer, a community-centric organization with education, entrepreneurship, conservation as its focus areas, would be instrumental in making a connection with the local schools and students.

The Science Stage

Formulated by a team of theater enthusiasts and performers, The Science Stage will write and perform stage plays and street plays on themes like misinformation, vaccine hesitancy and journey of a scientist. Sonia Sen (Senior Scientist, Tata Institute for Genetics and Society (TIGS) and Aditya Vijaykumar (PhD student, International Centre for Theoretical Sciences (ICTS) - TIFR) co-applied for the 2nd IOG.

“I’m a fan of theater and using it because it can be class and language agnostic. Currently, the most common form of science communication is written, which has limited accessibility. Theater at its core is about entertainment value! It can be a wonderful solution to communicate science, due to its core appeal”, Sen shares.

The team also includes Manal Shakeel and Rohit Dey (PhD students at National Centre for Biological Sciences - TIFR), Chandrakant Redican (Project Manager at Centre for Cellular and Molecular Platforms) and a science communicator) and Ann Vinod (Communications Coordinator at TIGS).

The team is excited to practice science communication and outreach at this scale. “We’ve certainly wanted to do scicomm, some of us have in the past, but we’ve never got paid to do it. With the support of this grant, we can take the production outside of our host institutes”, shares Vijaykumar, co-grantee.

Zill-e-Anam emphasized the importance of experience, “if an applicant shows within their application that they have performed a pilot project or a sample of the activities they wish to carry out if awarded, it makes the application stronger.”

The other parameters for selection included novelty and market-needs, a measure of relevance to a particular audience segment. The following two teams impressed the review committee with their selection of topic and approach.

Mind Gala

Mind Gala is a collaboration between a young student-led initiative, Project Encephalon, and Poonam Thakur (Assistant Professor, IISER-Thiruvananthapuram), that will be communicating neuroscience.

The Mind Gala team has planned on having a variety of activities - webinar series, a science communication workshop, virtual lab tours and a resource booklet for beginners. The webinar talks will be by science communicators and neuroscientists in a jargon free manner. “Most of the scientific resources for Neuroscience are full of technical jargon and are difficult for beginners. We intend to make it completely beginner friendly. For this, we will discuss neuroscience topics relevant in our daily lives such as vision, dreams, emotions, etc”, explains Thakur.

They also plan on having a science writing workshop for undergraduate and postgraduate science students. The audience for each of these formats – the webinars, the workshop and the booklet will be distinct. “The webinars are designed to bring out the enticing aspects of neuroscience hidden in plain sight. The workshop, on the other hand, will explore and nurture the research skills of the participants with some scientific background. The outcomes of the entire initiative will be collated in the booklet wherein the neuroscience snippets written by the workshop participants, along with the take-home points of the webinars will be published”, Thakur explains.

IndiaAsksWhy: A science podcast

IndiaAsksWhy podcast hopes to connect with teenagers 12-17 years old. The project is a brainchild of Shweata N Hegde (student, Regional Institute of Education, Mysuru) and Ruchi Malgunia (Doctoral researcher, University of Zurich), under the mentorship of Megha Kumar (DST-INSPIRE scientist (CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology) and IndiaBioscience.

The team is collaborating with different scientists who are keen on science communication and outreach. In the season trailer, Utsuka and Jigyaasa, two fictional characters, ask interesting questions that are answered by various scientists. “We ask scientific questions, out of the regular science textbooks, often about the environment, surroundings and everyday life. The podcast is meant to encourage students to ask questions, be curious and seek answers. The hope is to not limit education and science to textbooks and exams'', shares Kumar. The first two episodes are out!

Special mentions

The review committee also had some special mentions for the applications that came very close to winning.

1. Nobody Thought - A neuroscience learning venture by Mallika Chatterjee and Rachna Mehta, (Assistant Professors, Amity University, Noida)
   

2. Tales of co-existence: Motivations for conserving urban biodiversity by Bishwarup Paul (Research Associate, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER) Kolkata) and Kushankur Bhattacharyya (PhD student, IISER Kolkata)

3. The Urban Naturalist Project: Reconnecting with the Naturalist inside Citizens, through Participatory Storytelling by Pankaj Koparde (Assistant Professor, MIT World Peace University, Pune) and Debangini Roy (False Trail, Guwahati)

4. Joining hands to Inspire: Taking Scientists from Lab to Schools by Rajalakshmi Srinivasan (DST-INSPIRE Faculty Scientist, Institute of Bioinformatics and Applied Biotechnology) and Brawin Kumar (N-PDF Fellow at IISER, Tirupati)

Closing up the 2nd IOG call

What’s next for the India Outreach Grants? The IOG team hopes to announce the call for 3rd IOG awards in September 2022. On being asked if subsequent calls will have a theme, Hari Dass, said, “One of the aspects of IOG that we hold close to our hearts is that it has a ‘non ring fenced’/ restrictive approach wherein we don't specify themes or types of outreach to be done. The sky's the limit!” In the past two editions, IOG awards have supported projects across mediums and concepts.

Since its conceptual inception in 2020, IOG has witnessed increasing enthusiasm and interest in the community for these grants. The motivation for these grants is to encourage more researchers to take up outreach and catalyze collaborations between science communication practitioners and scientists. A possible long term impact is also to inspire more science outreach grants.

This push for outreach reflects the essence of scientific social responsibility. There is a wave of community-wide awakening about the need for science communication. The IOG is proof that the community is eager to collaborate and share subject knowledge and research findings in their fields, in accessible and creative ways- graphical abstracts, Twitter threads, short videos and even comix!

IndiaBioscience is an active platform for the life science community for researchers, communicators, artists, educators and other professionals. Binding them is the newfound responsibility of breaking out of institutional silos. With the IOG awards’ push towards science communication and public engagement, this responsibility can be addressed by a few researchers and relished by hopefully many participants across initiatives.

Lipids are water-insoluble molecules found in living cells. They are of many kinds, and include fats, oils, hormones and waxes. These molecules are essential structural and functional components of cells and are required for their survival and functioning.

The building or degradation of lipids (lipid metabolism) has been thought to happen through fatty acyl-CoA. This is a molecule formed in two steps: (i) A fatty acid gets activated by adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the energy currency of a cell, and forms fatty acyl-AMP. (ii) Fatty acyl-AMP reacts with an abundantly-available molecule called Coenzyme A (CoA) to make fatty acyl-CoA. This was known to happen in a class of enzymes called FACLs, which bring the fatty acid, ATP and CoA together.

In an earlier study, however, scientists found that some FACL-like enzymes could not form fatty acyl-CoA. They attempted the reaction outside cells in test tubes, and found that the reaction stopped at fatty acyl-AMP even in the presence of CoA. This group of enzymes formed a considerable number and were called FAALs. The latest study, published in eLife journal, has discovered the reason behind this difference in functions of FACLs and FAALs.

The scientists teased apart the structures of both these enzymes. The two enzymes have three pockets on them; each to attach a fatty acid, ATP and CoA. The study found that the CoA-binding pocket was sealed in FAALs by bulky residues. Mutants were engineered to remove these residues on the protein. It was seen that the modified FAALs could form fatty acyl-CoA. The researchers concluded that FAALs differ in their function due to inaccessibility to this pocket.

Moreover, a novel pocket was found about 20–30° away from the sealed pocket in FAALs. This pocket does not allow CoA but offers entry to a part of another molecule called holo-Acyl Carrier Protein (holo-ACP); it shares a region identical to CoA. “Holo-ACP and CoA both have an arm attached to a head-like region. Despite the tails being identical, the difference in head group makes CoA incompatible. Holo-ACP has a much bulkier head than CoA. But the arms are identical, and it is only these arms that enter the pockets of FAALs or FACLs,” says Priyadarshan Kinatukara, one of the researchers and Project Research Associate at the Centre for Cellular & Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad.

The designs of the pockets are different in these two kinds of proteins. “FACLs have a promiscuous pocket. Our experiments show that CoA, holo-ACP and oxygen can enter it. On the other hand, the pocket on FAALs is very specific. Every FAAL allows docking of only holo-ACP and not CoA, based on the differences of their head regions,” explains Kinatukara. “Through a detailed structural analysis combined with mutational study, the team has unravelled an elegant mechanism of specificity of FAALs for holo-ACP rather than the ubiquitous CoA,” comments Saikrishnan Kayarat, Professor at the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Pune, who studies the functions of complex proteins.

FACLs and FAALs are present in all life forms across evolution. Why do cells have two such structurally-similar molecules? Rajan Sankaranarayanan, the lead researcher and Group Leader at CCMB, states, “We think FAALs are important for cells to make lipid-containing bioactive molecules, only in select situations. These include a cell’s defence mechanism against an attack or its decision to attack another cell. Mycobacterial lipids, fatty acid-containing antibiotics and signalling molecules are good examples of these. On the other hand, FACLs help in the daily grind of making and degrading lipids for a cell’s survival. Our studies suggest that both these classes of proteins have evolved in parallel.”

“Bioactive lipids serve many important roles in living systems, both in normal cellular functions and also in the context of infectious, metabolic and neurological diseases. Understanding the function of enzymes that make these lipids is an essential pre-requisite for the design of molecules that inhibit their activities. Such chemical inhibitors could be very valuable for the treatment of human diseases where bioactive lipids play a critical role in human cells or in micro-organisms such as mycobacteria,” explains Raghu Padinjat, Professor at the National Centre for Biological Sciences, Bengaluru, who studies lipid biology.