Page 7 of 9

Biology, Art, and Technology – Interview with Allison Kudla

April 24, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Allison Kudla has an unconventional career: she has mastered a creative solution to work at the interface of three disciplines: biology, art, and technology.

We first met when she joined the Institute for Systems Biology (ISB) as an artist to make our work look as gorgeous visually as it was scientifically. I was amazed with her portfolio, and watched in fascination as she made changes to ISB’s graphic designs. She is certainly a talented artist, and incorporated so much technology and science into her work that she had me confused as to whether she was an engineer or a biologist! I had never imagined a job position like hers before. Naturally, I needed to understand more.

Allison didn’t set off early in her career knowing she would, or even could, blend all three disciplines. She pursued one interest at a time–art being the catalyst–and with each step in the journey more and more was revealed to her. She took on new ideas and new concepts along the way, working them into her ideal framework, and created a space for herself that incorporated her vision for her career. Her journey is not over; She still strives to reach that perfect ideal blend where all of her talents and education can be used. It just goes to show that you can create and accomplish amazing things during your hunt for the elusive career unicorn without getting discouraged that you haven’t yet “arrived”.

Allison’s career creativity is an example we can all follow. I hope you enjoy reading her interview below.

1. Were you first in to art, science or technology? Or were you in to all three at the same time?

I would say art first. In high school I set a goal of creating a portfolio of work that would get me into an art school. Indeed, I was accepted into a few and decided on the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC). While there, in my second year, taking a class on Conceptual Painting at the same time as a class on Digital Tools for Painting, I really began questioning why my medium was painting. My concepts were perhaps better conveyed with new media / digital media. From there, I switched to the Art and Technologies Studies program at SAIC and began working with interactive platforms such as: physical computing (sensors and micro-controllers), sound synthesis and graphic programming. I was so excited to be making works that were driven by data taken from the external world. When I finished my BFA, I felt I had only begun this work. After a short time, I was accepted into the first waive of a new practice-based PhD program in the arts at the University of Washington’s newly established Center for Digital Arts and Experimental Media (DXARTS). Here I was challenged again to question my medium, and my knowledge of the systems I use in my work, and there I began exploring the life sciences. This is where biology has its first direct emergence in my artistic work.

2. What led you into art and how did it evolve over time? Did you start out using a certain media and then evolve your preferences from there until you found your niche?

I suppose I am sponge, meaning if it is available to me as a medium, and I am interested in working with it, I soak it in and start using it! It wasn’t until I came to the arts as a graduate student at a research university (UW) that I realized that my medium could involve a greenhouse or a tissue culturing lab just as much as it did a fabrication studio, a machine shop, or a computer lab. I tried to be as imaginative as I could and really think in an interdisciplinary way to solve creative challenges and create visual art.

3. Can you remember your first art project that was at the interface of three disciplines: science, technology, and art?

Definitely. It is called “The Search for Luminosity”. It was a system that watched the circadian rhythm of the Oxalis plant and enabled it to control its light source. Oxalis is phototropic and has very broad and large leaves that seem to “open” and “close” when it is attempting photosynthesis. Because the opening and closing gesture is based on a bio-chemical memory of the plant’s previous routine or cycle, even in darkness the plant will lift its leaves. For this reason, I was able to create a robotic system that watched for the plant to lift its leaves, and when it did, it would turn its overhead light on. In short, a poetic framing for reversing the hierarchy of the biological and the physical world, The Search for Luminosity equips the phototropic plant Oxalis with the ability to communicate directly with the acting sun in its universe through the mediation of a technological system.

4. When did you realize, or decide, you could blend all those fields into a successful career? Did you have any idea at first that you’d end up using your artistry in the science world?

I didn’t have an idea. It really happened gradually and in part due to the people around me.

5. Who inspired you to investigate a path involving science and technology? What hooked you onto the sciences and technologies?

Shawn Brixey, my PhD advisor. Check out his work, it is so rad! He asked me a deceptively simple question:

“In art, what is the difference between simulation and emulation?”

This question prompted me to explore what the “operating system” for my work was. I realized that instead of it being Mac OS X drawing a picture to a screen of a representation of a plant or botanical form, I wanted to learn the operating system of the botanical form itself. I wanted to know what algorithms were running on biological systems, and to know this, one has to study biology.

6. Do you have a favorite type of science?

Accessible, breakthrough science that I haven’t heard about before! I am a visual person too, so I really love it when the sciences discover something that can be imaged or visualized in a way that is beautiful. I am really looking forward to seeing data visualizations over the next 10 years and hope to be a part of that work.

I am also fascinated by science that studies how species have evolved to adapt to climate change. I think we can learn a lot from organisms with faster evolutionary cycles and therefore shorter life spans.

Credit: Dr. Allison Kudla, Institute for Systems Biology, illustration featured on U.S. NIH website for The Cancer Genome Atlas Project.

7. What were some preconceived notions about art, artists, science or scientists and did that change once you explored your career in it?

I think when I was younger, I thought scientists were not imaginative. I really don’t know why I thought that because the more scientists I interact with, the harder it can be to tell them apart from artists. 🙂

8. What were some big compromises or struggles you experienced making a career out of this? Did you have any roadblocks (mental, emotional, physical) or did you feel supported along the way?

This is a really hard question. I have had a lot of support and interest, but I have also faced some serious challenges. If you think science is under funded in America, check out art! And if your art is living and temporal, something to be “experienced” but not necessarily bought and sold, then it can be even harder!! I still wonder if I will ever have a salaried job that takes advantage of every aspect of my education. At the same time, I think it is my responsibility to blaze this trail for others like myself — and it will take decades, likely. There are so many art residencies, but these opportunities force artists into being nomadic — moving from place to place every four months or year without knowing what the next year or two will look like or where they will be. This adds to the stress and struggle, and also can severely limit an artist’s ability to work on projects that are longer term, or involving science and technology. As you’ve heard before “science is slow” and so is art + science research.

9. What keeps you motivated when you’re feeling the drudgery? Do you ever hate it? What keeps it fun for you?

Any long process that involves precision, technique, conceptual robustness and creativity is going to involve drudgery. I think I hate it most when I am not sure if it will be a success, or I try to explain it to someone else and I don’t see any sparkle in their eye. Then I have to just hope it was a failure in my words and they will get it when they experience the work.

Working with other people keeps it fun. Being in a feedback loop with the finished product keeps it fun. Having a plan as to where it will be presented also keeps it fun.

10. Who are some personally inspirational people in this field?

There are so many. First three that I hadn’t already mentioned: Natalie Jeremijenko, Daisy Ginsberg, and Paul Vanouse.

11. What are some key points of advice you wish you knew before you set out?

Geometry is incredibly important in art and visualization. And in general Math is a universal language and key to understanding operating systems in biology, computation and technology. It’s okay if you forget formulas because the internet can help you. However, understanding the concepts are essential for success. If something isn’t making sense in class, talk to your peers and mentors. There may be other angles you need to see some of these concepts from in order to understand them better.

Screen Shot 2015-04-23 at 10.14.42 PM

Fast Facts

Exhibitions & Publications
BFA from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.
Srishti School of Art, Design and Technology in Bangalore, India.
PhD from the University of Washington’s Center for Digital Arts and Experimental Media (DXARTS)
Communications Designer at the Institute for Systems Biology.
Her full work can be viewed at here.
All Figures were taken from her dissertation which you can read in full, here.

Share this:
by

Oceanography Cruises: Boats and Acids

April 9, 2015 / Allison Cusick

My Easter Sunday was unusual.

Sure, I ate the traditional spiral ham for dinner, but I was at sea and my family was nowhere in sight.

I was with eight strangers aboard the R/V Clifford A Barnes cruising around the Puget Sound for six-days of research monitoring ocean acidification, referred to as OA for short.

In honor of the sea and the nature of the project, I feel I should have been eating oysters for Easter dinner!

What is this Ocean Acidification you keep talking about?

If you’ve never heard of this term, and want to know more about it (which you should want to), I will redirect you to the links found on the University of Washington’s College of the Environment’s host website. Spend some time here familiarizing yourself with the globally important terms and what it means to our environment’s health:

What is OA?

What about OA in the Pacific Northwest?

Below are some great graphics illustrating the important fluxes occurring in the environmental system. Take a good look at all the arrows and think about your personal experience with each. Images are from NOAA PMEL.

Changing Oceans, Changing Biology

It is easy to think of the ocean as a big vast body of empty water that doesn’t need much attention. Maybe you’ll think of a couple animals that live there like whales, sharks, and coral reefs. You’ll easily identify with currents and tides washing up on the beach if you’re a tide-pool lover or beach comber. The beauty of the oceans is that there is so much more than that. What most people take for granted is all of the intricate dynamic exchanges occurring between land, air, and water which perfectly tie biology, chemistry and geology together!

Currently, a lot of attention is being directed to a particular exchange: atmospheric carbon dioxide with the oceans. The carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere (yes, predominately due to human needs for fuel) is absorbing into the oceans. This absorption into the ocean is a natural process as the gases in the ocean below like to be in equilibrium with the gases in the air above. However, once that carbon dioxide gets into the water it reacts with the water molecules setting off a whole chain of chemical reactions which lowers the ocean’s pH, termed ocean acidification. This rapid change we are seeing, which has been calculated to be escalating since the time of the Industrial Era, has us concerned about the chemistry and life in the oceans.

“If carbon dioxide continues to rise unchecked, computer models show that acidification will deplete carbonate ions in much of the ocean by 2100, turning the waters corrosive for many shell-building animals.”

From The Acid Test www.nationalgeographic.com

Why are we doing this cruise? … Because oysters.

No seriously, the reason us scientists are out here monitoring the waters comes from the birth of the Blue Ribbon Panel in 2011. This was enacted because, as in Governor Christine Gregoire’s own words, “Our shellfish industry employs thousands of people, and brings in millions of dollars to our state on an annual basis. Continued success depends on healthy ocean water.” The Blue Ribbon Panel is “a panel of science and policy experts to address the effects of ocean acidification on WA’s shellfish resources.”

Science will save the oysters!

In 2013 the Blue Ribbon Panel spawned the Washington Ocean Acidification Center (WOAC, sounds like ‘whoa-wack’) . The legislature requires the Center to execute five priority actions. The cruise I am currently on exists in response to the second bullet point listed within the actions. We are not directly dealing with oysters but monitoring the health of the Puget Sound builds upon our knowledge of the areas which are pivotal for successful oyster growth and harvesting:

Establish an expanded and sustained ocean acidification monitoring network to measure trends in local acidification conditions and related biological responses. This monitoring will allow detection of local acidification conditions and increase our scientific understanding of local species responses.

Read more about progress on this priority action.

Below is a photo map of all the stations we will be visiting on this trip. The stations highlighted in pink are the specific locations my boss is interested in (more about that below). The ‘P’ indicates these are stations included in PRISM , the Puget Sound Regional Synthesis Model which sends biannual cruises within the greater Puget Sound to collect oceanographic time-series data. The network NANOOS was created as a place to hold more detailed scientific information and comprises over forty entities researching the Puget Sound as part of the ocean observing system.

All Hands on Deck – How We Sample

The contraption to the left is referred to as a CTD. This is a little package of sensors that measure Conductivity Temperature & Depth. It rides on the metal frame lined with gray Niskin bottles which we call a rosette.

The CTD comes up on deck full of sea water collected from different depths in the water column and we begin sampling for many different variables:

oxygen

dissolved inorganic carbon

nutrients

chlorophyll

RNA/DNA

Rachel is the first to crack open the Niskin and takes a sample of seawater for oxygen measurements. It is important to get the sample stored into the bottle as soon as possible to limit the amount of time the sea water from depth is exposed to the atmosphere.

These two bottles, pictured below, contain sea water from Hood Canal. Chemicals are added which grab on to the oxygen within the water and create a precipitate (the orange color). The left sample is from the surface and has more oxygen which creates more precipitate making it orange. The right sample is from depth and has less oxygen which creates less precipitate making it less orange (whitish).

Next, the plankton nets are deployed. On this cruise we run three types of tows: vertical, horizontal, & oblique.

Plankton net tows give back valuable information about the biological community of zooplankton. One species of particular interest are the pteropods, endearingly known as sea butterflies who’s shells are visibly suffering from increasing CO2 conditions:

The smooth shell of a healthy pteropod is seen at left. The pteropod in the center was exposed to elevated CO2 conditions in a laboratory, to mimic conditions researchers saw in the wild. And at right, a shell with holes and pits, also produced by laboratory conditions, corresponds to some of the most extreme damage scientists expect to see with elevated CO2. From The Seattle Times SEA CHANGE stories.

I am a research technician on this ship representing my Principal Investigator, Monica Orellana, with the Institute for Systems Biology. A portion of her research aims to understand ocean acidification effects on the phytoplankton community at a genetic level using next-generation sequencing tools. When I am not collecting my own samples, I help out collecting samples for the head technician, Rachel Vander Giessen.

Feature Woman – Physicist/Oceanographer Rachel Vander Giessen

On this cruise I would like to highlight the lady in charge: Rachel Vander Giessen. She is the technician for the head scientist, Jan Newton, and was on the ship running the science show. She has a bachelor’s degree in physics, spent time on chartered yachts as a naturalist, wanted to become a captain through the Maritime Academy, was a bartender and a barista, and is now a research technician in oceanography. She is the epitome of someone who is highly involved and doing cool shit without having a PhD. You have to read more about her in her interview (link coming soon).

Want more photos of the trip aboard the R/V Clifford A Barnes?

Click here for Spring 2015 and here for Fall 2015.

Want to know even more about Ocean Acidification? Click any of the easy-follow links listed on WOAC’s site:

20 Facts About Ocean Acidification (updated November 2013)
Ocean Acidification in the Pacific Northwest
Ocean Acidification Center Another Example of State Leading the Nation
Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification

NANOOS/APL

Share this:
by

The Invisible Forest Hiding Under Water

April 3, 2015 / Allison Cusick

We’ve all gone swimming in the lakes and in the seas. We’ve all choked on that accidental gulp of water while swimming carefree.

But have we all looked under a microscope to see what these waters hold?

What you just saw were three plant-like organisms called diatoms, and the moving thing: a small larval crustacean called a nauplius. Makes you think differently about that next gulp of water you’ll take, doesn’t it?

I had previously never given much thought to the invisible marine world until I was employed to work on a project researching the effects of climate change on micro-algae, particularly the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana.

What a beaut!

Who is this Thalassio-whatchamacallit and why should I care? Let me ask you a question:

Where does the earth’s oxygen come from? Humans, as the terrestrial beings we are, will easily shout out, “The trees!” But did you know the trees are only responsible for producing about 30% of that oxygen? The algae and phytoplankton living in the water are responsible for the other 50-70%! That is more than half!! In addition, these amazing silicified (glass) microorganisms make up the base of the food web and are responsible for 40% of the ocean’s primary productivity. What an incredible hidden forest.

I will never look at the ocean in the same way.

Phytoplankton can be identified by NASA satellites through their chlorophyll

Phytoplankton as Art

I learned of a man named Klaus Kemp, nicknamed The Diatomist, who also doesn’t look at the ocean in the same way. He sees magnificent beauty in the Invisible Forest and has spent his life mastering the Victorian art of creating kaleidoscope-like arrangements of diatoms.

I don’t think I could have the patience or attention span to do such painstaking technical arrangements under a microscope but don’t get me wrong, I do love a good microscope session attempting to photograph some of the world’s smallest organisms.

Capturing Invisible Things

The best way to collect a large abundance of phytoplankton is to do a tow with a net that has a good funnel-shaped collection cylinder called a cod end. Some nets are huge and require winches to lower into the water. Others are more manageable and can be done by hand, towed behind a row boat.

Phytoplankton can range in size from 2 – 1000 microns. What does that even look like? If you run sea water through a mesh filter that had a 333 micron weave, you could see Coscinodiscus wailesii by eye; It looks like tiny grains of sand. Does that help the visual reference at all?

Unannounced Changes

For three weeks, from March 17, 2015 until April 3, 2015, I worked up in the Pacific Northwest’s San Juan Islands at the University of Washington Friday Harbor Labs. My boss and Co. were running ocean acidification experiments on our lab strain diatom, Thalassiosira pseudonana, but we wanted to also collect the wild plankton living in the harbor. Weekly we would take the row boat out to do a tow. I attempted to photograph what I saw using only an iPhone through the microscope:

Week 1: We saw many different types of diatoms: Thalassiosira, Melosira, Coscinodiscus, Chaetoceros, Ditylum, Thalassionema, Skeletonema, Cylindrotheca, & Corethron

Week 2: The diatoms had mostly been replaced with dinoflagellates (Protoperidinium, Dinophysis) and zooplankton, such as the crustacean copepods.

Week 3: The waters were teeming with copepods and tiny little jellies: Cnidaria and Ctenophora.

Week 4: Ctenophores had disappeared and a diverse collection of diatoms and dinoflagellates floated amongst a gazillion copepods. (Diatoms: Thalassiosira, Coscinodiscus, Ditylum, Chaetoceros, Odeontella, Thalassionema, Skeletonema, Bacillaria, Cylindrotheca, Triceratium; Dinoflagellates: Ceratium, Protoperidinium.)

While I would not spend hours arranging any of these into beautiful mosaics, I would spend hours trying to photograph them as they are.

Lab Diatoms Go Wild

What experiments are we doing with these critters at the Friday Harbor Labs that we can’t do back at the Institute’s labs in Seattle? Mesocosm Experiments. Mesocosms are a bridge between controlled laboratory experiments (which use artificially made sea water) and the more variable and uncontrolled field environment (which use natural sea water coming from the harbor). In 2011 the University of Washington invested money from grants, and private donors to build an amazing Ocean Acidification Environmental Lab with pimped out coolers that have the ability to monitor and control experimental conditions.

The sea water in this area is naturally more acidic due to freshwater river run-off, coastal upwelling and anthropogenic practices. The pH of the average ocean is said to be around 8.1 reflecting the average atmospheric CO2 levels at 400ppm. The pH of the waters at Friday Harbor is 7.8 with a recorded dissolved carbon dioxide level of 650ppm. We are using this water with all its organic goodies to test how our lab strain of Diatom will respond genetically to future predicted decreases in pH (due to increases in dissolved carbon dioxide).

Thalassiosira pseudonana is an algae that creates a silica glass shell. Because of this, they do not have the same need for calcium as corals, oysters and other shellfish do. This means when carbon dioxide dissolves into the sea water, snatching up available calcium, this particular organism doesn’t seem to suffer. In fact, with increase CO2 this diatom is able to relax its carbon concentrating mechanisms, passively allowing CO2 to dissolve through its glass frustule. In the process of photosynthesis, the ability for the plant to sequester much of the increased CO2, is referred to as CO2 fertilization. To read the final publication on what we found in the laboratory experiments click the paper below:

Breathe

Next time you take a deep breath, thank these under-appreciated organisms which make up the Invisible Forest and give us the oxygen we need to survive.

Want more?

To see more photos of the entire spring trip to Friday Harbor, click here:

To see photos from a previous fall trip taken in September 2014, click here.

Photo Credits:

Hsiao-Ching Chou: Allison wearing gloves holding net; Gloved hand holding cod-end; Mesocosms.

Spiro Jamie: Allison holding smallest net.

Allison Lee: All other photos except NASA chlorophyll distribution image and TEM image of Thalassiosira pseudonana.
Share this:
by

A sassy entrepreneur and philanthropist.

March 27, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Eighty year old Stephanie Shirley’s story is incredibly inspirational to women who want to make change in the world.

You may wonder why I think a TED talk about successful entrepreneurial business women would be within the scope of the WOMAN SCIENTIST site; I use a lot of examples of business entrepreneurs because I think the same strategy and passion they’ve found can absolutely apply to careers in the scientific world. I’m trying to encourage you ladies to be creative about how you weave your passion for science into a career. There are sooooo many alternative choices we don’t hear about in college. Hopefully this video will tune you in to your gut and inspire you to make something for yourself. Thats what it did for me.

Without further adieu, please take 14 minutes to watch this sassy straightforward woman talk.

Dame Stephanie Shirley is the most successful tech entrepreneur you never heard of. In the 1960s, she founded a pioneering all-woman software company in the UK, which was ultimately valued at $3 billion, making millionaires of 70 of her team members. In this frank and often hilarious talk, she explains why she went by “Steve,” how she upended the expectations of the time, and shares some sure-fire ways to identify ambitious women …

She challenged so many conventions of her time even to the point of changing her name to Steve just to get through the door before anyone realized “he” was a “she”!

Stephanie believes that young women of today have “got it dead easy” compared with those of her own generation. Women have nothing to complain about, as all the legal obstacles holding them back have been removed; it is their own reluctance to fight in the workplace that is the real problem.

My favorite part is at 8:12

“When I started my company of women, the men sort of said, ‘How interesting, because it only works because it’s small.’

And later, as it became sizable they sort of accepted, ‘Yes it is sizable now, but of no strategic interest.’

And later, when it was a company valued at over $3 billion and I’ve made 70 of the staff into millionaires they sort of said, ‘Well done, Steve.'”

“If it were easy to be successful, we all would be.”

“It’s one thing to have an idea for an enterprise, but as many people in this room will know, making it happen is a very difficult thing and it demands extraordinary energy, self belief and determination. The courage to risk family and home. And a 24/7 commitment that borders on the obsessive.”

What do you envision for your career in science? What do you spend your time doing? What key elements of your being does it include? Really listen to yourself. Write it down! Keep it folded in your pocket. Refer to it often. Change it up! It exists for you. Make it happen. If you keep this bigger vision in mind of what you want to accomplish then it will be easier to understand how different opportunities will help build your tool set and keep you on course.

And for gosh sakes if anyone tells you you can’t do what you are thinking of doing just give ’em the finger and keep going!

My family loves birds.

More follow up reading here at ‘Success has a cost. Women today are so naive’

Visit her home site here.

Read more about her struggles with raising an autistic son and the charitable trust fund,The Shirley Foundation, she started because of it here.

To the outside world, my life was to be hugely envied, and I was an unmitigated success. Those who knew me, however, would not have swapped places with me for the world.

Needless to say, I would have traded all the wealth and professional accolades for Giles to have been an ordinary child, with a happy, uncomplicated existence.

Share this:
by

Interweaving The Inner Artist & The Inner Scientist

March 26, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Ellen has experience in anthropology, medical illustration, exotic animal care and stop motion animation and entrepreneurial endeavors. She has found what seems to be a lucrative way to weave her art with her academic biological interests….synthetic taxidermy!

Talk about blending your diverse interests; Check out Ellen Jewett‘s work!

“Over time I find my sculptures are evolving to be of greater emotional presence by using less physical substance: I subtract more and more to increase the negative space. The element of weight, which has always seemed so fundamentally tied to the medium of sculpture, is stripped away and the laws of gravity are no longer in full effect.”

Her sculptures are dreamlike. She states that the unconventional look and feel of her work is a phenomena arising from the desire to avoid using toxic materials which are the most commonly available to artists. She is conscious to “source the natural, the local, the low impact and, always, the authentic.”

How does she do it?!

“Each sculpture is handmade and painted with no more tools than fingers and a paint brush. By virtue of this primal process, each creation is completely unique and produced in a fluid and intuitive manner. The process begins with a handmade metal armature over which light weight clay is sculpted. The painting is executed with acrylic, mineral and oil pigments and the embedded eyes are glass. When complete the whole piece is glazed to intensify colour and strength. With inspiration derived from animal physiology and a love of the fantastic, grotesque and absurd, each sculpture is unique and personable. The detailed craftsmanship is rich and thoughtful and never cast molded or replicated.”

You HAVE to check out her site to read more. Perhaps I’ll also pick her brain and interview her on blending art and science for this site!!

all images via Ellen.

I found some of her older work shown on Visual News here and Laughing Squid here.

Other Talented Science Artists I know:

Nina Arens – blending art, science, and museums

Allison Kudla – blending art, science and technology

Ellen Jewett – blending sculpture, art, science and animal physiology

Arie van ‘t Riet – blending nature with X-Rays
Share this:
by

Dont get a PhD right away. Its OK to take time off.

March 25, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Disclaimer: This post is a personal musing about the last decade that I have spent being a biological technician and why I haven’t yet wanted a PhD. For now, I hope you enjoy the read and take comfort in knowing you don’t HAVE to get a higher degree until you want to.

Over the past ten years I have managed to fulfill my passions for experiencing many diverse biological projects without having a PhD. I know a lot of other people who have as well. If you’re just out of undergrad and wondering what to do in life, I’m here to tell you that you CAN take time “off” and explore the science world without going directly into a doctoral position. In my 10 years of experience I would say, if you are waffling over whether or not you should get a higher degree, just go explore in the work force. You won’t regret it and graduate school will always be there for you.

Since 2006, I have been a busy worker bee buzzing around the world. I love doing research related to animals, nature, and the environment. I especially love being a field-biologist when I get the opportunities. I love terrestrial ecology and I’ve discovered I really love oceanography and marine biology. I’m fascinated by the rain-forests as well as the polar regions. I want to understand all the biospheres! How am I suppose to blend these all into one career?

I knew I didn’t want to go to graduate school right after college. I knew that maybe some day I might go, but that time wasn’t then or any time in the near future. What would I go for? There are so many things I’m interested in. Seemed like a waste of time and resources if I didn’t have a clear reason. So, I chose to be a technician, year after year, after year. It has now been 10 years since I graduated with a Bachelor’s. I value the experiences I’ve gained along the way and I am now also starting to see the ceiling in my current position. Looking forward, going back to school may be the next beneficial career move.

Even though most of my positions have been as a technician, I don’t think of myself as “just” a tech. I think technicians, or “associates” as we are sometimes respectfully referred to, are pivotal to the progress of research. We cost less (I wish I could make more than $43,000 a year in the not-for-profit world), and we’ll do anything you tell us to–or at least, we’ll try! As an example, the institute I have worked at for the past 5 years showed us their statistics on the majority of positions that made up the institute. I’m working off memory, but I noticed there were 48 research associates, 5 graduate students, 46 postdocs, 20 senior scientists, 12 faculty, and probably 100 or so administrators. Clearly, post-docs and research technicians made up a bulk of the research work-force. The point is, technicians are just as important as any other position needed to get the science job done!

Luckily I’ve never married my worth and competence in science to the type of degree I hold. We all have to decide for ourselves what success looks like and what truly matters to us. I know I can do cool science and go all over the world without having a PhD. I’ve been happy with that decision so far.

It is true that if you want to be in certain fields, or at certain levels within a field, you do have to play by certain rules …. But, I also believe you can create something unique for yourself and have some awesome experiences along the way.

Why being a tech has outweighed going to graduate school so far:

A mix of conscious decision and subconscious psychological excuses:

1) I don’t want to commit 5+ years to something if I just sorta like it. That seems like a waste of time. If I’m going to go to graduate school to become an expert at something I want to have a damn clear vision on what I intend to do with that degree. In the meantime, I’ve been interested in so many things I felt being a technician was the most responsible choice. Plus, I’m holding out for the Right project and the Right mentor at the Right time. If they don’t exist, then I don’t want to do it just to say I have a PhD.

2) This might be a myth, but it feels like there are far more employment opportunities as a biology technician than there are for those with higher degrees who might be seen as being “over qualified” for a lot of the position that I have been attracted to. The only downside to this is you get stuck in a certain pay bracket only having a Bachelor’s even as the years pass and you gain more experiences.

3) I want the flexibility to jump ship if a position or project is no longer working for me. As a technician, I can put in the hard work, stay the long hours, and commit as much of my energy to project as I see fit. If one day comes, and life sends me on another course, I can say its time to move on and leave. Obviously there are proper etiquettes on how to go about doing this, which I always adhere to (no use in burning bridges), but I like knowing I have outs and an infrastructure won’t collapse because I’ve left. That sounds like I don’t want to be relied on. Thats not what I’m saying. Rely on me all you want while I’m your tech, but if I need to get out or mix it up, I have allowed myself that freedom.

3) I don’t think I’m a good enough writer. Most higher academic degree holders spend 90% of their time writing grants to get research and salary money. I don’t want to be writer, I want to do the actual grunt work. I like the execution process involved in progress. Plus, my thoughts are always jumbled and I am no good at professional talk. Why can’t we just talk to each other like normal people? Why do we have to be so stuffy when it comes to the scientific professional world? I’ve never worn that well. Not that I’m NOT professional. I am, completely, I just don’t like to be forced to sound that way and put a barrier between my real self and the work I want to do in the world. Can’t I just be me?!

4) I don’t want the responsibility of finding funding. What I mean by that is I don’t want to have to take my work problems home with me unless I truly love thinking about them. I like being the one who executes the plans, not the one who has to come up with all the plans in the first place to be funded. Why don’t I want to be the one who comes up with the plans? Its intimidating! Sometimes you may just not feel creative. Or maybe I’m still struggling as a human being to find my voice and that’s how it manifests itself in my professional life. I haven’t delved too deep into that psychological nuance of mine. As I mature and grow in my science career I think these skills come over time and truthfully I do ultimately think the ability to write your own grants and come up with your own ideas is a sign of independence as a scientist. Someday I do hope to get there.

There are cons to being “just a tech”

1) What if you have a crappy boss. (A: Suffer or find a new one.)

2) What if you hate the project? (A: Watch your soul slowly dissolve or find a new one.)

3) What if you want more money? (A: Go into biotech, NOT into environmental projects, non-profit or academia.)

4) What if you’re seen as disposable and get laid off? (A: Keep your skill set diverse.)

5) What if no one treats you with respect? (A: Don’t work for people who act like that.)

As I get older I find myself wondering if I am “growing out of” the tech position. With ten years experience behind me, I am now 32. I feel I’m getting close to the line of intentionally sandbagging. I will admit the last two years I have even been toying with the idea of heading off to graduate school.

GASP! I know.

I still have no clue what exactly I’d go for. This paralysis comes from the collision between big vision, desire for interdisciplinary work and a lack of clarity on who or where to get that mentoring from.

Currently, I am finding three things frustrating about where I am at in my scientific career: 1) My last exposure to formal education was 10 years ago. There are areas of science I am craving exposure to and going back into formal education would provide the deeper understanding and new connections that I’m looking for. 2) The lack of being able to make justifiably more money than I made ten years ago just out of college (this could simply be due to the fact I work in the non-profit/academic world), at some point it would be nice to get paid more for the experiences I have gained, 3) I’m starting to have ideas of my own and develop my own style of progress which can sometimes be de-railed when you ultimately have to answer to “The Boss” in charge of you, and 4) The fear I may not be able to make as big of an impact in the world as I’d like to if I remain a technician for another decade. Live big.

Either way, my aspirations are no longer matching the reality of my current employment opportunities.

What do I want to do next ? Find a higher position at a new job with more opportunities to grow, go to graduate school or start my own business. Or a blend of all three!

Why limit myself?

I honestly don’t have a good answer but I take comfort in knowing it’s worth thinking creatively about.

At this point, I feel like I’m part of a freelance industry.

“Can the very paradigm of how we do science research be changed to […] a new paradigm that reflects the diversity of individual capacity and offers the opportunity for genuine life choices.” – Sharon Bell

Share this:
by

Algal biologist takes a look at the whales.

March 18, 2015 / Allison Cusick

You ask me if I want to leave my day job to escape dreary Seattle and spend vacation observing whales in the sunny Bay of Loreto, Mexico?

“Ummmm DUH!!!!”

I booked my flights immediately.

You see, I actually love macrofauna but somehow I’ve managed to spend the last five years working with microfauna – algae – phytoplankton. The invisible ocean forest. Estimated to be responsible for over 50% of the Earth’s Oxygen production.

What a beauty! Glass shelled plant cell, a diatom, called Thalassiosira pseudonana.

I have learned so much about the importance of these little creatures. They are plant AND animal, and make up the base of the food chain indirectly supporting nearly all other forms of life. Pretty important little guys, in my opinion. I’ve grown very fond of them over the years. But this post isn’t about them, it’s about the whales, so let’s keep moving!

Phytoplankton are eaten by Krill.

And Krill are eaten by Baleen whales. One large family of Baleen whales includes the Rorquals (such as Blue Whales, Finback whales, Minke Whales, and Humpback Whales to name a few)!

Blue Whales happen to be the largest of the whales and also happen to be the largest animal EVER to exist on earth. You’d think to be that big you’d have to eat some pretty big food.

But they don’t. They survive solely on krill. Tiny tiny little things. HOW?! WHY!?

Luckily RadioLab answered this question and did an amazing bit on the whole cycle. You HAVE to read it here.

Kinda makes ya wanna get your hands on some of that whale poo, doesn’t it?

I spent days feasting my eyes on blue whales and humpback whales. I got to spend 5 magical seconds petting a gray whale mother and on two occasions got caught in a pod of hundreds of common dolphins leaping on the bow waves.

Magnificent Blue Whale pigmentation and the mouth of a Humpack Whale.

Allison petting the Gray Whale mother on the snout in the Pacific Ocean side of Baja. Gray Whales are baleen whales but are not part of the Rorqual family. They are the only living species in its genus and family Eschrichtius robustus.

Snapshot of some of the hundreds of common dolphins swimming under our boat.

I was there to identify visiting whales by performing marine transects above and below the water. Gathering this scientific data is important to help better understand the present environmental and biological conditions of Bay of Loreto Marine Park.

World Heritage Site

Bay of Loreto Marine Park was created and approved on July 19, 1996 and in 2005 was inscribed by the United Nation’s list as a 2,065 square kilometer protected World Heritage Site in the Sea of Cortez. There are over 800 species of marine life inhabiting the sea, many of which are currently endangered.

Because of many political dramas and lack of resources in Mexico, enforcing any rules and regulations for the park is something that still needs attention. Even with decline in fish stocks and the re-routing of the Columbia River (which used to feed the Sea of Cortez) many animals exist here and I feel so lucky that I got to see so many whales on a daily basis.

These whales travel up to 10,000 miles a year just to get to the breeding grounds! This whale is a Gray Whale on the Pacific Ocean side of Baja. Gray Whales are baleen whales but are not part of the same family as Blue Whales. They are the only living species in its genus and family Eschrichtius robustus.

We didn’t do any tagging but the ways in which we did collected data included the following:

Photographing and filming above and below water – helps identify individuals using pigmentation, fluke tears, and scars and see who returns year after year.

Collecting sound recordings using hydrophones.

Collecting data on water and air environment.

Helping update museum identification catalogs.

Collecting plankton samples for studying available micro-fauna.

Assembling skeletons and other display pieces for a small museum.

Recording whale sightings and how frequently they came to the surface to breathe became difficult once there were more than 4 whales in one area!

My micro-fauna and microscope skills came into good use once we took plankton tows of what was floating around in the water column. We used an 80 micron net which is still pretty big for collecting any phytoplankton. Back in Seattle we use 15 micron nets and I work with algae that would even slip through a 10 micron net!

Every day we kept pulling up these mysterious gel balls. At first we thought they might be fish eggs but as the days passed no vertebrate like structures developed. At one point we noticed some of them had little tentacles poking out and they squirt propelled themselves forward, so we got our hopes high that they might be Humboldt Squid eggs! I spend hours back in the museum trying to photograph these invisible mysteries.

Along with other pleasant microscopic treasures

Microscopic sea shells

copepods

As well as not so pleasant not so microscopic creatures

Definitely decaying. Perhaps a Moray Eel.

I had posted some of the mystery gel photos online and some of my more knowledgeable marine friends suggested they might actually be marine gelatinous creatures called Salps. Whats?! Salps. Barrel-shaped planktonic tunicates that moves by contracting, pumping water through its gelatinous body. Apparently salp jet propulsion is one of the most efficient in the animal kingdom. Who knew!

The verdict is still out and what exactly these gel balls are still remains a mystery!

The trip was amazing and I was privileged to hang out with such amazing creatures.

My abode and view

I forgot to mention I spent a day in a small town called Agua Verde where I also got to hold baby goats
Share this:
by

Pigeon holing is a lie — There’s no such thing as picking the wrong degree in college.

March 11, 2015 / Allison Cusick

I remember being completely overwhelmed in junior high school when the teacher announced we had to do a career focus project and pick careers we were interested in.

Even at that young of an age I was constantly taking those personality tests trying to figure out what I might enjoy.

And now, those pesky teachers were pushing us to think about how we wanted to get paid to do what we enjoyed!?

I felt like I was all over the board, agreeable to a lot of things, unable to pick just one and the tests never helped narrow it down for me.

I knew I loved traveling and I would always joke with my friends that one day I would go to the moon and bring them back moon rocks. I was under the impression that astronauts traveled a lot and they got to go to the most extreme places, to outer space! I chose to do my high school career report on astronauts and that’s when I found out they only spend 1% of their career up there, if that!

Well that crossed itself off the list for me right then and there — no traveling to the moon?! I quit!

When the time came senior year of high school to start thinking about University and Majors, I remembered my little astronaut dream and went on NASA’s website to look up what degrees they got. I saw a lot of science and math and physics.

When the time came to declare a major at the University of Washington, I proudly marched in to the office and said I am getting a double degree in Biology AND Geology.

At this point in time I felt I liked them both equally.

Getting a double degree would be tricky credit-wise, as I would eventually go over 260 and have to petition for staying at school past four years. Okay so a little paperwork would get in the way, no big deal.

The first year I had to take all of the foundational chemistry and mathematics courses before I could start my second year in biology and geology. In my second year, during one of the biology classes, we were learning about plant growth at the cellular level and my heart started beating faster as I felt incredibly giddy learning about life. It became obvious that what I felt my heart doing is what we call Passion and it was clear I wanted biology to be the path I traveled.

So I dropped Geology to a minor (at that time it was called Earth & Space Sciences) and carried on with the Biology degree.

Phew, so I’ve narrowed it down! Biology. That is what I will do.

But wait!? Even then they want you to specify what type of Biology degree to get:

B.S. General Biology

B.S. Ecology, Evolution, & Conservation Biology

B.S. Molecular, Cellular & Developmental Biology

B.S. Physiology

B.S. Plant Biology

The decision paralysis set in as I floundered to figure out which sub-type to choose! All of them?! Not possible.

A little voice in my head started chiming in that it would look bad to go with the general category and that I should make a decision and pick a specialty.

But I didn’t want to choose.

I liked them all: plants, physiology, conservation…

I was so terrified of pigeon holing myself, or choosing the wrong one, that I picked the General Biology degree. There was this fear that it would be looked down upon in the working world. “Look at this Generalist!” “Can’t even pick a type of Biology.” “She’s no good!”

But during my 10 years out of college I have found this is an absolute myth.

The fear they instill in you about making sure to pick the right degree is paralyzing to those of us who buy in to the false message of pigeon holing.

This day and age its much easier to hop around or switch if something is not right for you. Heck, you can even become an entrepreneur and do your own thing!

I’ve never regretted or had any issues with having completed my B.S. in General Biology. One phrase Ive heard numerous of times from professors, family, and friends haunts me to this day is: Don’t be a “Jack of all trades, master of none“.

But why is that a bad thing? Are they mutually exclusive?

In the back of my mind I’ve always wondered why you couldn’t be competent with many skills AND find something to be an outstanding master in.

If I look back on my working life I’d say that just because I’ve been a Jack weaving a seemingly random path picking up Trades in the theme of science, doesn’t mean that some day I can’t be a Master of SOME.
Share this:
by

Conservation Field Biologist — Interview with Annie Hawkinson

March 9, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Photo courtesy of Tambopata Macaw Project Facebook Page

I met Annie while volunteering at the Tambopata Research Center in the Amazon jungles of Peru and was to be her roommate for the duration of my stay.

I was worried that I’d be cramping her style by moving in to the room she had enjoyed by herself but she immediately helped get me set up.

Every morning the alarm went off at 4:30am, just before the howler monkeys started up their thunderous wind-storm-like territorial roars.

We would lie motionless in our mosquito-net-enshrouded beds listening for rain. If there was no rain, or just a drizzle, we had to get up and get to the boats to start the days work.

One morning, it had been down pouring on and off up until the alarm. The alarm went off and we listened for the boss, Gustavo’s voice indicating if we had to get up to work or not. We were tired and secretly hoped we could go back to bed and sleep in until 7:30am breakfast.

“Andele!” Gustavo says its a go. Time go get up!

Annie grumbled and started crawling out of her mosquito net.

I didn’t want to get up either, so I put on my sarcastic happy voice and in an overly chipper tone said, “But Annie, isn’t it fun to be out in nature?!”

“I hatechoo…” she sleepy mumbled in an unenthused response.

It was that moment I knew Annie and I would get along great. She is also the perfect young aspiring woman scientist to interview, so let’s begin:

What type of science do you love (if you could categorize the topic e.g., psychology, neurobiology, conservation, wildlife, chemistry, molecular, physiological, etc.)?

I have always loved working with animals and working outside. I really enjoy learning how something fits into it’s environment. Over the years that has lead me to pursue a lot of macrobiology, and I particularly love studying evolution and conservation biology.

Annie Hawkinson: Head full of blonde curls. No shortage of hairdressers here!

What kind of scientist do you consider yourself?

I consider myself to be a field biologist, because the greatest skill I have developed working in the Amazon is how to deal with a demanding environment. The elements have me at their mercy! For example, at 5:00 in the morning I found myself shoveling mud off an observational site that had been buried from the flooding river.

What is your earliest memory of being hooked by science?

I would say when I got to dissect a shark in 4th grade science class. Being from Minnesota, the ocean is pretty far away and as a kid it seems impossibly far. I think my teacher showed me that it was possible to study something foreign at a really close range and it opened my world.

Who inspired you to go down the path of science?

Indirectly, my parents. They have encouraged me to do whatever makes me happy and since I have always been an animal lover I ended up pursuing biology.

What were some preconceived notions about science or scientists and did that change once you explored your career in it?

I sometimes got intimidated by the belief that “real” scientists have some natural ability making them experts in their work. In reality, although having an intrinsic passion for ones field is beneficial, it takes a lot of hard work, sacrifice, and time to be successful in the science community.

What have been some big compromises or struggles you’ve experienced?

The hardest thing I had to do was accept that this once in a lifetime opportunity I was being offered might end my current relationship. Being in such a remote part of the world for months at a time (with slow and unpredictable internet) has often strained my relationship with my boyfriend, and in general I often feel disconnected from the lives of the people I care about. Thankfully those important people in my life are incredibly supportive, and just a month ago my boyfriend and family came to visit me! They were able to see what I do everyday and why it means so much to me- why I left them! I’m grateful for them in so many ways.

What keeps science FUN for you when you’re feeling the drudgery? Do you ever hate it?

There’s no doubt that it’s challenging working at Tambopata Research Center. The team can go for months without any days off, doing physically demanding work, and sometimes it is absolutely exhausting. I have learned the importance of taking breaks, but when a siesta doesn’t do the trick, I have to remind myself where I am- that I live in one of the last untouched environments on earth. It may take a long time before I truly appreciate the significance of that, but while I can, I think it’s crucial to believe that our work is contributing to the conservation of tambopata. No matter what though, if I’m having a bad day, all I need is to see one if the macaw chicks.

Scarlet Macaw Baby

Do you have any advice you’d tell youngsters? Some key points you wish you knew before you set out?

My advice for anyone interested in working in the field is prepare to fail! I found it really stressful not being able to do everything perfectly when I first started facing setbacks from weather and other complications. Those experiences taught me that failure will happen and all you can do when it does is learn and move on.

Share this:
by

I didn’t win but I’m not a loser!

March 6, 2015 / Allison Cusick

My last post was about the 8-week online business training course created by Marie Forleo that I entered to win a $2000 scholarship for.

I had once won a $5000 grant from Travelocity to do research in the Amazon so I figured in all my confidence that I couldn’t not win this one too.

Well.

I didn’t win.

You’re going to think I’m an idiot when I tell you that I just bit the bullet and spent the $2000 to take the online program anyway.

I actually haven’t told anyone that I did that. So keep it our little secret.

I don’t have $2000. And there are damn sure better ways to use that much money. I just went in to debt (a practice I do not recommend) to pay for a trip to Africa doing Big Cat Research and a trip to Baja Mexico to do Whale Monitoring Research (can’t seem to scratch that wanderlust itch enough). But I had done the calculations and figured I could definitely pay it all off by June if I eat lentils and ramen until then, so it wasn’t totally foolish from that standpoint.

So why did I do that?

Why did I just potentially blow $2000?

You may think I am a sucker for good marketing. Marie Forleo is damn good at it, so that’s a possibility. And she gained my trust through it.

The reason I really did it is because there is this small strong voice within me (I call it intuition) and every time an email came in from Marie Forleo about B-School the little voice said, “Do it. Just. DO. It.” And every time that little voice cheered me on another inner cynic voice cried, “NO. You have no money.” “NO! You’re a fool to fall for online gimmicks!”

But I have this vision stirring within. It feels like there are some big ideas to make a positive impact on this world to inspire people (especially you women-folk) to better steward it through research but those ideas feel so blocked. I’ve been in limbo land for a decade now. And that is incredibly frustrating.

It doesn’t feel like I am naively hoping B-school will be the key that unlocks these ideas. It feels like I’m trusting my intuition that this IS the key that unlocks these ideas.

(I’ll throw in a mix of other magic potions for good measure).

In this instance of battle I put my rational voice aside, which has often been overly dominating, and I just did it. And you know what? After I clicked “Enroll” the little voice inside my heart actually went, “SQUEEE!!!! I’m SO excited for the next 8-weeks!”

So I knew it was a good decision. I’m already flooded with a ton of information from her website and the beauty is, I have access to it all FOR LIFE.

In the future when I’m famous running some science business conducting eco-tours around the world and inspiring women to BE scientists and change the world for the better, I can tell you, “I knew what I was doing! I told you so!”

Or at least, I can be happy knowing I didn’t make an impulsive decision, I made a heart decision.
Share this:
by

« Older posts Newer posts »

Follow Me

Categories

Recent Posts