IRP Scientists Sound Off in Three-Minute Talks
Annual Competition Tests Researchers’ Communication Skills
On June 27, 11 IRP researchers gave short, engaging talks about their research in the hopes of winning NIH’s annual Three-Minute Talks competition.
Many scientists say that English is the international language of science, but if it is, it’s a form of English that many fluent English speakers might have trouble understanding. From ‘allosteric modulator’ to ‘zinc finger nuclease,’ the words that scientists use to talk about what they do can sound like a foreign language.
Fortunately, many current and upcoming scientists are making it a priority to learn how to communicate with people who don’t share their deep knowledge. As part of this effort, NIH’s annual Three-Minute Talks (TmT) competition brings forth dozens of IRP postbacs, graduate students, and postdocs to talk about their research to an audience of peers outside their own labs. On June 27, this year’s 11 finalists delivered clear, engaging, and — most importantly — short talks on topics ranging from skin bacteria to saliva.
As always, the TmT finals were moderated by public speaking coach Scott Morgan, who has long worked with NIH researchers to improve their communication skills. This year’s event also featured a guest speaker, Allison Coffin, Ph.D., an associate professor of neuroscience at Washington State University Vancouver. She is also president and co-founder of the Association of Science Communicators, so naturally she had plenty to say about the importance of building relationships between scientists and the general public.
Dr. Coffin particularly emphasized that science communication should not solely be about delivering facts to those who lack knowledge, but also establishing trust and stimulating scientific curiosity. She cited research that suggests that even the most informed members of the general public accept facts that confirm their pre-conceived beliefs and discard those that don’t, but individuals who are more curious about science are more likely to have beliefs that accurately reflect science’s best understanding of the way the world is. Dr. Coffin also stressed that people are more likely to accept scientific knowledge when it is provided to them by people they trust.
“Communication isn’t a one-way street — it’s a two-way connection,” she said during her presentation. “As scientists and science communicators, it’s incumbent on all of us and everybody listening to build relationships — to talk about our science in ways that build curiosity and to be the faces of a diverse scientific community so that more people not just understand science, but can see themselves in science as well.”
IRP postbaccalaureate fellow Ryleigh Griffin was awarded the top prize in this year’s Three-Minute Talks competition.
When it comes to connecting with her listeners, the first-place winner of this year’s competition has an easy in. After all, everybody goes through puberty, and even if they haven’t experienced the existential terror of waking up with a huge new pimple on their face, they were probably worried about the possibility during their teenage years. Postbaccalaureate fellow Ryleigh Griffin has been working in the lab of IRP senior investigator Heidi H. Kong, M.D., to investigate how the bacteria and other microbes that live on human skin — known as the skin ‘microbiome’ — change throughout puberty and how that affects the development of acne. The study is a collaboration between Dr. Kong’s lab and researchers led by IRP senior investigator Julie Segre, Ph.D., including Regina Abotsi, Ph.D., a postdoctoral fellow in Dr. Segre’s lab.
In Ryleigh’s talk, she compared sequencing the DNA of the skin microbiome to the way the U.S. census tells the government the demographics of our nation’s towns and cities. Just as the census counts the number of women in a city but not how many of them are named ‘Emma,’ microbiome sequencing needs more information to pin down the exact subspecies, or ‘strain,’ of each type of bacteria on someone’s skin. Consequently, after her colleagues swab adolescents’ skin to collect samples for their studies, Ryleigh grows the bacteria present on the participants’ skin. This will enable the IRP team to figure out the specific strain of each type of bacteria that its microbiome sequencing identifies.
“We believe the skin’s microbiome has an important role in immune system function and skin health,” she says. “Our research has shown that the skin microbiome changes as children develop into adults. We want to have a better understanding of what these specific changes are because then we can study how changes in the skin microbiome might influence diseases like acne. If skin microbiome changes contribute to diseases, there is hope that we may be able to develop potential treatments.”
Ryleigh says she was “excited” when she first heard about the TmT competition. She is “always looking for opportunities to practice being concise” when she talks about her research, she adds, given her tendency, like many scientists, to “want to include every single detail when discussing my work.” She certainly packed a lot of information into her brief talk, yet conveyed it in a way that the event’s judges felt deserved the competition’s top prize.
“I worked hard to present a talk that brought some excitement and intrigue to the work I do every day, so I was proud to have won,” Ryleigh says.
IRP graduate student Ivan Alcantara was awarded second place.
The runner-up to Ryleigh was graduate student Ivan Alcantara, who spoke about his studies on feeding and parenting behavior in mice. Under the guidance of IRP senior investigator Michael Krashes, Ph.D., Ivan has shown that mice producing milk eat more calories than those that are not and that certain neurons related to hunger are more active in lactating mice. What’s more, lactating mouse moms will feed their newborns rather than themselves if forced to make the choice. However, Ivan can reverse their priorities by inhibiting a particular part of the brain called the medial preoptic area (MPOA).
“By studying these processes, we can understand how the brain adapts to a life-changing event such as giving birth,” he says. “Now that we’ve identified critical brain nodes for appetite and attachment toward offspring, translational scientists can take these findings and help develop therapeutics to improve maternal mental health. More than one in ten women develop postpartum depression within a year of giving birth, during which time it’s also common to see a relapse of eating disorders. My research can therefore deepen our understanding of what could be going awry in postpartum-related disorders.”
Ivan chose to participate in the competition because he didn’t want his scientific thinking to be confined within the four walls of this lab. He thought crafting a short talk about his research would help him “zoom out” and see how his research “fits in a larger context.” He also notes that scientific trust is at an all-time low and wants to help reverse that concerning trend.
“We also need to strengthen the trust between scientists and the public, particularly in this climate, and we can achieve that by encouraging more scientists to relay their work to a lay audience,” he says.
As good as it felt to win second place, it was that larger goal that remained most prominent in his mind as he listened to his competitors speak.
“I watched the other talks and they were all amazing, so it really is an honor to get recognized,” he says. “I’m especially pleased to see so many young scientists, like postbacs, participate in the competition.”
Third place went to IRP postdoctoral fellow Yu-Ying Chen.
In contrast to Ryleigh and Ivan, the third-place winner of this year’s competition has significantly more scientific experience under her belt. Yu-Ying Chen, Ph.D., is a postdoctoral fellow in the lab of IRP senior investigator Humphrey Yao, Ph.D., where she is studying how certain immature cells in the developing ovaries of a female fetus determine what type of more specialized cell they will ultimately become. Through a process known as ‘differentiation,’ those cells can gain the ability to produce sex hormones and provide structural support to the ovaries or they can become nurturers for growing egg cells — two roles that are vital to the baby’s future reproductive health.
“Proper differentiation of these cell types lays the foundation for future ovarian function and fertility as an adult,” Dr. Chen explains. “Conversely, defects in cell type differentiation can lead to diseases including polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), primary ovarian insufficiency (POI), androgen producing tumors, hyperandrogenism, and infertility in women.”
Dr. Chen tossed her hat into the TmT ring because she “thought it’s a great opportunity to practice public speaking and science communication to a general audience,” she says. She also enjoyed the challenge “to make my research interesting and approachable, and having to explain it within such a short period of time.” As it turned out, she met that challenge more effectively than even she thought she could, describing her third-place finish as “unexpected.”
“I thought all the other participants did incredibly,” she says. “I really enjoyed all the talks, and seeing how people apply different methods to deliver their science effectively is just such a treat. I am really grateful for this opportunity.”
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest breakthroughs in the NIH Intramural Research Program.
Related Blog Posts
This page was last updated on Friday, July 26, 2024