25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      siRNA Immunological Fishing Training (SIFT) Experience as a Novel Research Education Tool for Students Studying Immunology†

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          INTRODUCTION The siRNA Immunological Fishing Training (SIFT) experience was created in response to: (i) the Vision and Change initiative (1) and (ii) works by Kuldell et al. on RNA interference (RNAi) methods employed in undergraduate student research (2). The SIFT research education experience is largely built on the immunological genome project (3) and knockdown strategies as a means to investigate novel genes in immune cells. The chief goal of SIFT is to provide students with a training experience that strongly exposes them to meritorious studies in immunology. In our approach, the students’ independent research project is centered on characterization of novel genes uniquely and/or strongly expressed in dendritic cells (DC); notably, similar approaches can evaluate other immune cell subsets (i.e., T cells, B cells, or macrophages) using methods described in this report. Using the immunological genome project database (3–5), students work with the instructor(s) to sift through expression profile datasets and identify a novel gene for mentored-independent investigations. After candidate genes are identified, students then use RNA interference (RNAi)-mediated approaches to knockdown their chosen gene and characterize the underpinning role. The innovation lies largely in providing students with the ability to search wide-screen expression profiles in immune cells and concomitantly investigate functional outcomes experimentally through RNAi-mediated approaches, thereby bridging bioinformatics studies with wet-lab experimentations. The activities provide students exposure to modern investigative approaches and an exciting means to engage in research education, as well as reinforcing concepts learned in the classroom. Success of the SIFT experience has been realized with a recent peer-review publication (6). PROCEDURE We have divided the SIFT experience into six major sections (Appendix 1). A flow chart is available in Appendix 2 and an instructional guide in Appendix 3, which also contains: (i) suggested experimental approaches (along with coursework integration), (ii) a timeline, (iii) biosafety guidelines, (iv) anticipated costs, (v) examples of student-generated datasets, (vi) materials and methods, and (vii) references. In Section 1, the instructors work hands-on with the students to explore the immunological genome project’s database (www.immgen.org). This microarray databank, provided as a public resource, was created as a large-scale effort to provide a repository of gene expression profiles in immune cells (3). Students can explore gene expression profiles and regulatory networks in various immune cell subsets (4, 5). This exposes students to the breadth of bioinformatics and provides an avenue for them to use their learned knowledge of cell biology to evaluate functional profiles. Under the instructor’s guidance, each student identifies one or two novel genes highly expressed in DC and that have not been well characterized in the literature. In Section 2, students learn to isolate bone marrow cells (from mice) to generate DC in vitro; alternative approaches can be used to isolate or generate other immune cells. All research described should be approved by IACUC and performed in BSL2 conditions following the ASM guidelines for biosafety in teaching laboratories. After successful in vitro preparation of DC, students next perform RNA isolation, cDNA preparation, and PCR analyses to confirm mRNA expression of their specific gene. This exposes and trains students in the use of NCBI Primer-BLAST to design DNA primers and perform gel electrophoresis. After confirmation of expression, students transition into Section 3, where they generate lysates and perform western blots to assess protein expression (of their candidate gene). For Section 4, students are trained to design target specific siRNA oligonucleotides using online design tools (i.e., www.sirnawizard.com). Importantly, students are also taught the science behind RNAi and other methods of knockdown used for research studies. Next, they treat the DC with siRNA and measure successful knockdown (by western blot and flow cytometry). For Section 5, students investigate altered fates of DC upon gene-specific knockdown. Immunophenotypic analyses include: a) measuring changes in maturation/differentiation markers (by flow cytometric analyses) and cytokine profiles (by enzyme-linked immunosorbant assays). Students learn to correctly use readout indices to qualify and quantify the presence of target molecules. They begin to understand differential expression patterns and relate altered profiles to immune governing responses. Finally, T cell responses are evaluated in Section 6. These studies utilize naive CD4+ T cells isolated from OT-II transgenic mice. Studies employ knockdown vs. control DC to evaluate cognate T cell responses, which include: (i) early activation (i.e., CD69, CD25, CD62L changes); (ii) proliferation (i.e., CFSE dilution); and (iii) T helper-associated cytokine profiles. In conclusion, students have an exciting opportunity to well characterize the role of their candidate gene and measure potential alterations in governing of immune responses. CONCLUSION The promise of the SIFT experience as an educational tool for preparing students for careers in biological research enterprise is vibrant. The authors have found that being able to take a project from inception-to-completion serves to expand and reinforce students’ interests in the sciences by providing a sense of ownership, motivation, and continuity. The approach also provides opportunities for laboratories to screen candidate genes of interest while concomitantly exposing young trainees to the wealth that science has to offer. With the breadth of transcriptomics datasets, SIFT can be applied to other biological disciplines (i.e., neurobiology, cancer biology, and plant sciences). In conclusion, we highly recommend educators employ the elements described in this report as an innovative tool to excite, expose, engage, and train students in immunology. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS Appendix 1: Table illustrating measurable objectives Click here for additional data file. Appendix 2: Flowchart of the SIFT experience Click here for additional data file. Appendix 3: Instructional guide Click here for additional data file.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Deciphering the transcriptional network of the DC lineage

          Although, much progress has been made in our understanding of DC ontogeny and function, the transcriptional regulation of DC lineage commitment and functional specialization in vivo is poorly understood. We performed a comprehensive comparative analysis of CD8+, CD103+, CD11b+, and plasmacytoid DC subsets and the recently identified Macrophage DC precursors and Common DC precursors across the entire immune system. Here we characterize candidate transcriptional activators involved in myeloid progenitor commitment to the DC lineage and predicted regulators of DC functional diversity in tissues. We identify a molecular signature that distinguishes tissue DC from macrophages. We also identify a transcriptional program expressed specifically during steady-state tissue DC migration to the draining lymph nodes that may control tolerance to self-tissue antigens.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Immunological Genome Project and systems immunology.

            Immunological studies of single proteins in a single cell type have been complemented in recent years by larger studies, enabled by emerging high-throughput technologies. This trend has recently been exemplified by the discovery of gene networks controlling regulatory and effector αβ T cell subset development and human hematopoiesis. The Immunological Genome Project (ImmGen) aims to decipher the gene networks underpinning mouse hematopoiesis. The first phase, completed in 2012, profiled the transcriptome of 249 immune cell types. We discuss the utilities of the datasets in high-resolution mapping of the hematopoietic system. The immune transcriptome compendium has revealed unsuspected cell lineage relations and the network reconstruction has identified novel regulatory factors of hematopoiesis. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Vision and Change in Biology Undergraduate Education, A Call for Action—Initial Responses

              INTRODUCTION Last July, as a culmination of a year of conversations among biology faculty and students, university administrators, and biology professional societies, more than 500 biologists met to discuss the needs of undergraduate biology in light of the exciting changes in the discipline itself and what we are learning about how people learn (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 2009; Woodin et al., 2009). This effort had major financial support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and input from representatives of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and the AAAS, the convener of the meetings. On February 20, at the 2010 annual meeting of the AAAS, the executive summary of the findings of the conference, Vision and Change in Undergraduate Education, A Call to Action (AAAS, 2010), was released at a session highlighting the recommendations from Vision and Change (V&C), presented by Carol Brewer, 1 the cochair of that event (George, 2010). Brewer set down the challenge to the community: “We all have work ahead of us to ensure that the transformations we make in undergraduate biology classrooms around the country reflect the biology we do in the twenty-first century. I am confident our community is up to the challenge. Because, after all, if not now, when? And if not us, then who?” 2 Keith Yamamoto 3 presented the principle findings of the New Biology committee (NAS, 2010) within the context of V&C: the increasingly interdisciplinary nature of research within the biological sciences and attention to its societal context, the growing complexity of the data generated and the need for computational and modeling skills to deal with that complexity, and the amazing power new technologies have brought to the discipline, allowing new questions to be posed and new approaches designed that were not possible before. He noted that the confluence and synergy of the V&C and the New Biology reports is striking and that “each will strengthen the impact of the other.” Joann Roskoski (Acting Assistant Director of the NSF Directorate for Biological Sciences) set out next steps contemplated by NSF, many of them in concert with other principal funders such as NIH and HHMI. Among NSF's efforts to “move the agenda forward,” she mentioned the following: increased support for existing programs to support course reform (NSF, 2010) and to encourage formation of networks of people funded to work on similar aspects of educational change (NSF, 2009b); and establishing initiatives to support institutional reform and to create an online resource of well-tested educational materials (to be done in concert with HHMI and NIH). Below, we highlight six of the key findings in the V&C Executive Summary, note some of the recent documents that resonate with those findings, and give a few examples of actions under way to implement these findings. KEY CONCEPTS AND COMPETENCIES The report notes that “to be scientifically literate, students need to understand a few overarching core concepts: evolution; pathways and transformations of energy and matter; information flow, exchange, and storage; structure and function; and systems;” and that undergraduates should master the following competencies: “understand the process of science, the interdisciplinary nature of the new biology and how science is closely integrated within society; be competent in communication and collaboration; have quantitative competency and a basic ability to interpret data; and have some experience with modeling, simulation and computational and systems level approaches as well as with using large databases.” These recommendations mirror those for revision of Advanced Placement courses and exams (College Board, 2009) and for the preparation of future physicians (AAMC-HHMI Committee, 2009; Long, 2010). As part of the next steps, we are currently contemplating convening a meeting of the various biology professional societies to discuss how their views of important concepts and competencies fit within the overarching goals given above. ENGAGING STUDENTS IN THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS “Students should have opportunities to participate in authentic research experiences and learn how to evaluate complex biology problems from a variety of perspectives, not just recite facts and terminology.” Historically, research scientists have welcomed undergraduate students into their laboratories to be part of their research teams. Recently, these efforts have been expanded to serve more students by incorporating authentic research experiences directly into student laboratories (e.g., see Lopatto et al., 2008) or engaging students in both introductory and upper-division courses in an in-depth discussion of research articles (Hoskins and Stevens, 2009). In the past 3 years, within its Transforming Undergraduate Education in STEM (formerly Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement Program), NSF has funded 29 classroom-centered undergraduate research projects. The institutions involved are as varied as Finger Lakes Community Colleges (Hewlett, 2008) and Stanford University (Simoni, 2009). HHMI has established an exciting undergraduate laboratory experience that unites students across the country in a joint effort to identify and characterize phage from soil bacteria, generating new findings and at the same time producing a set of engaged undergraduate students knowledgeable in the ways of science (HHMI, 2009). COMMUNITY BUILDING—CULTURAL CHANGE “The ultimate goal for biology departments should be to develop and grow communities of scholars at all levels of the educational process—from undergraduates to faculty to administrators—all committed to creating, using, assessing, and disseminating effective practices in teaching and learning. This kind of department-wide implementation requires cultural changes by all stakeholders and a commitment to elevate the scholarship of teaching and learning within the discipline as a professional activity.” This need for a community approach, including senior research scientists and science educators, was echoed by Keith Yamamoto in his discussion of twenty-first century biology. A relatively new program within NSF, Research Coordination Networks-Undergraduate Biology Education (RCN-UBE), established in response to early V&C conversations, supports such collaborations. Since its inception in 2009, four full projects (up to $100,000/year for up to 5 years) and seven incubator projects ($50,000 for 1 year) have been funded, with more in progress. Projects range from a large consortium of ethnobiologists working to combine their various information bases and to tailor them for use in undergraduate courses (Harrison, 2009) to an incubator-level effort to establish communities to address the need for useful instruments and techniques to assess conceptual learning (Fisher, 2010). DEVELOPING COMPUTATIONAL COMPETENCE “To be current in biology, students should also have experience with modeling, simulation and computational and systems-level approaches to biological discovery and analysis, as well as with using large data bases.” A recently established NSF program (NSF, 2009a) supports projects that involve teams of mathematics and biology majors and their professors in courses and research projects that emphasize the application of mathematical techniques to the solution of biological problems. That program is beginning to reap results: in a cadre of students who are comfortable with interdisciplinary approaches to biology, a series of peer-reviewed articles describing research results, and a new approach to biology education on many of the participating campuses. During the recent mathematical/biology symposia at the 2010 AAAS annual meeting, the organizer challenged each speaker to elucidate the way in which their research projects had been incorporated into undergraduate education, and each had activities in progress (Gross, 2010). FACULTY DEVELOPMENT Several initiatives have emerged in response to the need to help present and future faculty develop effective approaches to undergraduate biology education. The Scientific Teaching Institutes at the University of Wisconsin–Madison (UW) work with UW postdoctoral fellows and graduate students during the academic year and with teams of research university faculty during an intense 1-week summer institute for this purpose (Pfund et al., 2009). The Science Education Initiative at the University of Colorado, Boulder (www.colorado.edu/sei) uses Science Teaching Fellows as the vehicle to help interested and committed departments change their teaching approaches to be more student centered, interactive, and assessment-based (www.visionandchange.org/wp-content/themes/simpla_widgetized/files/William%20Wood_V&C%20PPT.ppt). The NIH Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Awards help postdoctoral students develop teaching skills and pedagogical knowledge as they work with established faculty in minority-serving institutions with the aim of facilitating the progress of postdoctoral candidates toward research and teaching careers in academia (NIH, 2010). DEVELOPING A WEBSITE IN RESPONSE TO V&C “One recommendation consistently emerged to help in this effort: the need for a consolidated resource of research and classroom experiences documenting what works and why. This biology education database could disseminate effective practices and provide a centralized location of resources for faculty and others to advance biology education.” A partnership with representatives from NIH, NSF, and HHMI is currently exploring the feasibility of such a site, and we welcome your advice (send suggestions to twoodin@nsf.gov). SUMMARY The executive summary provides an overview of some of V&C's key recommendations regarding next steps in the effort to mobilize the biology community. It is, in essence, a call for national service. A publication discussing these recommendations and action items in more depth will be available later this year. Meanwhile, we highly recommend reading the Executive Summary of V&C, the NAS report (NAS, 2010), and a seminal article by Labov et al. (2010) summarizing the synergy created by these several reports on the changing nature of studies in biology and concomitant need to change biology education. Then, take action! Our hope is to see the formation of a community of biologists, similar to that forming in geology (Manduca et al., 2010): one that will advance biology undergraduate education so it truly reflects the discipline it serves.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                JMBE
                Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
                American Society of Microbiology
                1935-7877
                1935-7885
                April 2017
                21 April 2017
                : 18
                : 1
                : 18.1.110
                Affiliations
                Department of Biology, Howard University, Washington, DC 20059
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Mailing address: 415 College St. NW, Department of Biology, Howard University, Washington, DC 20059. Phone: 202-806-7939. E-mail: michael.lipscomb@ 123456howard.edu .
                Article
                jmbe-18-26
                10.1128/jmbe.v18i1.1288
                5410758
                a22341c7-520b-47cc-82aa-8e3a9d993b63
                ©2017 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

                History
                : 15 December 2016
                : 04 January 2017
                Categories
                Tips & Tools

                Comments

                Comment on this article