Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
'Brain-on-a-chip': Engineering tomorrow’s breakthroughs today
A “brain-on-a-chip” technology might sound like science fiction, but it’s real-world hope. James McGrath, a biomedical engineer at the University of Rochester, leads a team that develops micro-scale tissue chips to study diseases in lieu of conducting animal experiments. The team’s “brain-on-a-chip” model replicates the blood-brain barrier — the critical membrane separating the brain from the bloodstream — to mimic how the barrier functions under healthy conditions and the duress of infections, toxins, and immune responses that can weaken it. Recent findings from McGrath’s team show how systemic inflammation, such as that caused by sepsis, can compromise the barrier and harm brain cells. The researchers also demonstrated how pericytes — supportive vascular cells — can help repair barrier damage, an insight that could guide new therapies for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The research culminated in a pair of recent studies published in Advanced Science and Materials Today Bio. “We hope that by building these tissue models in chip format, we can arrange many brain models in a high-density array to screen candidates for neuroprotective drugs and develop brain models with diverse genetic backgrounds,” McGrath says. McGrath aims to transform how scientists test drugs and predict neurological side effects before they occur — helping rewrite how we study, and one day safeguard, the brain. Contact McGrath by clicking on his profile
Taking discoveries to the real world for the benefit of human health
It takes about a decade and a lot of money to bring a new drug to market—between $1 billion to $2 billion, in fact. University of Delaware inventor Jason Gleghorn wants to change that. At UD, Gleghorn is developing leading-edge microfluidic tissue models. The devices are about the size of two postage stamps, and they offer a faster, less-expensive way to study disease and to develop pharmaceutical targets. These aren’t tools he wants to keep just for himself. No, Gleghorn wants to put the patented technology he’s developing in the hands of other experts, to advance clinical solutions in women’s health, maternal-fetal health and pre-term birth. His work also has the potential to improve understanding of drug transport in the female reproductive tract, placenta, lung and lymph nodes. Gleghorn, an associate professor of biomedical engineering, was named to the first cohort of Innovation Ambassadors at UD, as part of the University’s effort to foster and support an innovation culture on campus. Below, he shares some of what he’s learned about translating research to society. Q: What is the problem that you are trying to address? Gleghorn: A lot of disease has to do with disorganization in the body’s normal tissue structure. My lab makes microfluidic tissue models, called organ-on-a-chip models, that have super-tiny channels about the thickness of a human hair, where we can introduce very small amounts of liquid, including cells, to represent an organ in the human body. This can help us study and understand the mechanism of how things work in the body (the biology) or help us do things like drug screening to test therapeutic compounds for treating disease. And while these little microfluidic devices can do promising things, the infrastructure required to make the system work often restricts their use to high-end labs. We want to democratize the techniques and technology so that nonexperts can use it. To achieve this, we changed the way we make these devices, so that they are compatible with standard manufacturing, which means we can scale them and create them much easier. Gleghorn: One of the problems with drug screening, in general, is that animal model studies don’t always represent human biology. So, when we’re using animal models to test new drugs — which have been the best tool we have available — the results are not always apples to apples. Fundamentally, our microfluidic devices can model what happens in humans … we can plug in the relevant human components to understand how the mechanism is working and then ask questions about what drives those processes and identify targets for therapies to prevent the dysfunction. Q: What is innovative about this device? Gleghorn: The innovation part is this modularity — no one makes these devices this way. The science happens on the tiny tissue model insert, which is sandwiched between two pieces of clear acrylic. This allows us to watch what’s happening on the tissue model insert in real time. Meanwhile, the outer shell’s clamshell design provides flexibility: if we’re studying lung tissue and we want to study the female reproductive tract, all we do is unscrew the outer shell and insert the proper tissue model that mimics the female reproductive tract and we’re off. We’ve done a lot of the engineering to make it very simple to operate and use, and adaptable to common lab tools that everyone has, to eliminate the need for financial investment in things like specialized clean rooms, incubators and pumps, etc., so the technology can be useful in regular labs or easily deployable to far-flung locations or countries. With a laser cutter and $500 worth of equipment, you could conceivably mass manufacture these things for maternal medicine in Africa, for example. Democratizing the technology so it is compatible and useful for even an inexperienced user aligns with the mission of my lab, which focuses on scaling the science and the innovation faster, instead of only a few specialized labs being a bottleneck to uncovering new mechanisms of disease and the development of therapies. We patented this modularity, the way to build these tiny microfluidic devices and the simplicity of how it's used as a tool set, through UD’s Office of Economic Innovation and Partnerships (OEIP). Q: How have you translated this work so far? Gleghorn: To date, we've taken this microfluidic system to nine different research labs across seven countries and four continents — including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, France, Belgium and South Africa. These labs are using our technology to study problems in women’s health and collecting data with it. We’re developing boot camps where researchers can come for two or three days to the University of Delaware, where we teach them how to use this device and they take some back with them. From a basic science perspective, there is high enthusiasm for the power of what it can tell you and its ease of use. As engineers, we think it's pretty cool that many other people are using our innovations for new discoveries. Q: What support and guidance have you received from the UD innovation ecosystem? Gleghorn: To do any of this work, you need partners that have various expertise and backgrounds. UD’s Office of Economic Innovation and Partnerships has built a strong team of professionals with expertise in different areas, such as how do you license or take something to patent, how do you make connections with the business community? OEIP is home to Delaware’s Small Business Development Center, which can help you think about business visibility in terms of startups. Horn Entrepreneurship has built out impressive programs for teaching students and faculty to think entrepreneurially and build mentor networks, while programs like the Institute for Engineering Driven Health and the NSF Accelerating Research Translation at UD provide gap funding to be able to do product development and to take the work from basic prototype to something that is more marketable. More broadly in Delaware is the Small Business Administration, the Delaware Innovation Space and regional grant programs and small accelerators to help Delaware innovators. Q: How have students in your lab benefited from engaging in innovation? Gleghorn: Undergraduate students in my lab have made hundreds of these devices at scale. We basically built a little manufacturing facility, so we have ways to sterilize them, track batches, etc. We call it “the foundry.” In other work, graduate students are engineering different components or working on specific system designs for various studies. The students see collaborators use these devices to discover new science and new discoveries. That's very rewarding as an engineer. Additionally, my lab focuses on building solutions that are useful in the clinic and commercially viable. As a result, we've had two grad students spin out companies related to the work we've been doing in the lab. Q: How has research translation positively impacted your work? Gleghorn: I started down this road maybe five years ago, seriously trying to think about how to translate our research findings. Being an entrepreneur, translating technology — it's a very different way to think about your work. And so that framework has really permeated most of the research that I do now and changed the way I think about problems. It has opened new opportunities for collaboration and for alternate sources of funding with companies. This has value in terms of taking the research that you're doing fundamentally and creating a measurable impact in the community, but it also diversifies your funding streams to work on important problems. And different viewpoints help you look at the work you do in new ways, challenging you to define the value proposition, the impact of your work.
University Communications Needs a Bigger Role in the Research Conversation
While attending the Expert Finder Systems International Forum (EFS), several notable themes emerged for me over the 2-day event. It's clear that many universities are working hard to improve their reputation by demonstrating the real-world impact of their research to the public and to funders, but it's proving to be a challenging task - even for the largest R1 universities. Many of these challenges stem from how institutions have traditionally organized their research functions, management systems, and performance metrics. Engaging faculty researchers in this process remains a significant challenge, despite the need for rapid transformation. While this EFS conference was very well-organized and the speakers delivered a great deal of useful information, I appeared to be one of the few marketing and communications professionals in a room full of research leaders, administrative staff, librarians, and IT professionals. There's a certain irony to this, as I observe the same phenomenon at HigherEd marketing conferences, which often lack representation from research staff. My point is this. We can't build better platforms, policies, and processes that amplify the profile of research without breaking down silos. We need University Communications to be much more involved in this process. As Baruch Fischhoff, a renowned scholar at Carnegie Mellon University, notes: Bridging the gap between scientists and the public “requires an unnatural act: collaboration among experts from different communities” – but when done right, it benefits everyone. But first, let's dive in a little more into RIM's and Expert Finder Systems for context. What are Research Information Systems (RIMs) Research Information Management systems (aka Expert Finder Systems) are the digital backbone that tracks everything researchers do. Publications, grants, collaborations, patents, speaking engagements. Think of them as massive databases that universities use to catalog their intellectual output and demonstrate their research capacity. These systems matter. They inform faculty promotion decisions, support strategic planning and grant applications, and increasingly, they're what institutions point to when asked to justify their existence to funders, accreditors, and the public. But here's the problem: most RIM systems were designed by researchers, for researchers, during an era when academic reputation was the primary currency. The game has fundamentally changed, and our systems haven't caught up. Let's explore this further. Academic Research Impact: The New Pressure Cooker Research departments across the country are under intense pressure to demonstrate impact—fast. State legislators want to see economic benefits from university research. Federal agencies are demanding clearer public engagement metrics. Donors want stories, not statistics. And the general public? They're questioning whether their tax dollars are actually improving their lives. Yet some academics are still asking, “Why should I simplify my research? Doesn’t the public already trust that this is important?” In a word, no – at least, not like they used to. Communicators must navigate a landscape where public trust in science and academia is not a given. The data shows that there's a lot of work to be done. Trust in science has declined and it's also polarized:. According to a Nov. 2024 Pew Research study, 88% of Democrats vs. 66% of Republicans have a great deal or fair amount of confidence in scientists; overall views have not returned to pre-pandemic highs and many Americans are wary of scientists’ role in policymaking. While Public trust in higher education has declined, Americans see universities having a central role in innovation. While overall confidence in higher education has been falling over the past decade, a recent report by Gallup Research shows innovation scores highest as an area where higher education helps generate positive outcomes. Communication is seen as an area of relative weakness for scientists. Overall, 45% of U.S. adults describe research scientists as good communicators, according to a November 2024 Pew Research Study. Another critique many Americans hold is the sense that research scientists feel superior to others; 47% say this phrase describes them well. The traditional media ecosystem has faltered:. While many of these issues are largely due to research being caught in a tide of political polarization fueled by a significant rise in misinformation and disinformation on social media, traditional media have faced serious challenges. Newsrooms have shrunk, and specialized science journalists are a rare breed outside major outlets. Local newspapers – once a reliable venue for highlighting state university breakthroughs or healthcare innovations – have been severely impacted. The U.S. has lost over 3,300 newspapers since 2005, with closures continuing and more than 7,000 newspaper jobs vanished between 2022 and 2023 according to a Northwestern University Medill Report on Local News. Competition for coverage is fierce, and your story really needs to shine to grab a journalist's attention – or you need to find alternative ways to reach audiences directly. The Big Message These Trends are Sending We can’t just assume goodwill – universities have to earn trust through clear, relatable communication. Less money means more competition and more scrutiny on outcomes. That's why communications teams play a pivotal role here: by conveying the impact of research to the public and decision-makers, they help build the case for why cuts to science are harmful. Remember, despite partisan divides, a strong majority – 78% of Americans – still agree government investment in scientific research is worthwhile. We need to keep it that way. But there's still a lot of work to do. The Audience Mismatch Problem The public doesn't care about your Altmetrics score. The policymakers I meet don't get excited about journal impact factors. Donors want to fund solutions to problems they understand, not citations in journals they'll never read. Yet our expert systems are still designed around these traditional academic metrics because that's what the people building them understand. It's not their fault—but it's created a blind spot. "Impact isn't just journal articles anymore," one EFS conference panelist explained. "It's podcasts, blogs, media mentions, datasets, even the community partnerships we build." But walk into most research offices, and those broader impacts are either invisible in the system or buried under layers of academic jargon that external audiences can't penetrate. Expert systems have traditionally been primarily focused on academic audiences. They're brilliant at tracking h-Index scores, citation counts, and journal impact factors. But try to use them to show a state legislator how your agriculture research is helping local farmers, or explain to a donor how your engineering faculty is solving real-world problems? There's still work to do here. As one frustrated speaker put it: "These systems have become compliance-driven, inward-looking tools. They help administrators, but they don't help the public understand why research matters. The Science Translation Crisis Perhaps the most sobering observation came from another EFS Conference speaker who said it very plainly. "If we can't explain our work in plain language, we lose taxpayers. We lose the community. They don't see themselves in what we do." However, this feels more like a communication problem masquerading as a technology issue. We've built systems that speak fluent academic, but the audiences we need to reach speak human. When research descriptions are buried in jargon, when impact metrics are incomprehensible to lay audiences, when success stories require a PhD to understand—we're actively pushing away the very people we need to engage. The AI Disruption Very Few Saw Coming Yes, AI, like everywhere else, is fast making its mark on how research gets discovered. One impassioned speaker representing a university system described this new reality: "We are entering an age where no one needs to click on content. AI systems will summarize and cite without ever sending the traffic back." Think about what this means for a lot of faculty research. If it's not structured for both AI discovery and human interaction, your world-class faculty might as well be invisible. Increasingly, you will see that search traffic isn't coming back to your beautifully designed university pages—instead, it's being "synthesized" and served up in AI-generated summaries. I've provided a more detailed overview of how AI-generated summaries work in a previous post here. Keep in mind, this isn't a technical problem that IT can solve alone. It's a fundamental communications challenge about how we structure, present, and distribute information about our expertise. Faculty Fatigue is Real Meanwhile, many faculty are experiencing serious challenges managing busy schedules and mounting responsibilities. As another EFS panelist commented on the challenges of engaging faculty in reporting and communicating their research, saying, "Many faculty see this work as duplicative. It's another burden on top of what they already have. Without clear incentives, adoption will always lag." Faculty researchers are busy people. They will engage with these internal systems when they see direct benefits. Media inquiries, speaking opportunities, consulting gigs, policy advisory roles—the kind of external visibility that advances careers and amplifies research impact. And they require more support than many institutions can provide. Yet, many universities have just one or two people trying to manage thousands of profiles, with no clear strategy for demonstrating how tasks such as profile updates and helping approve media releases and stories translate into tangible opportunities. In short, we're asking faculty to feed a system that feels like it doesn't feed them back. Breaking Down the Silos Which brings me to my main takeaway: we need more marketing and communications professionals in these conversations. The expert systems community is focused on addressing many of the technical challenges—data integration, workflow optimization, and new metadata standards — as AI transforms how we conduct research. But they're wrestling with fundamental communication challenges about audience, messaging, and impact storytelling. That's the uncomfortable truth. The systems are evolving whether we participate or not. The public pressure for accountability isn't going away. Comms professionals can either help shape these systems to serve critical communications goals or watch our expertise get lost in translation. ⸻ Key Takeaways Get Closer to Your Research: This involves having a deeper understanding of the management systems you use across the campus. How is your content appearing to external audiences? —not just research administrators, but the journalists, policymakers, donors, and community members we're trying to reach. Don't Forget The Importance of Stories: Push for plain-language research descriptions without unnecessarily "dumbing down" the research. Show how the work your faculty is doing can create real-world benefits at a local community level. Also, demonstrate how it has the potential to address global issues, further enhancing your authority. And always be on the lookout for story angles that connect the research to relevant news, adding value for journalists. Structure Expert Content for AI Discoverability: Audit your content to see how it's showing up on key platforms such as Google Gemini, ChatGPT. Show faculty how keeping their information fresh and relevant translates to career opportunities they actually care about. Show Up at These Research Events: Perhaps most importantly, communications pros need to be part of these conversations. Next year's International Forum on Expert Finder Systems needs more communications professionals, marketing strategists, and storytelling experts in the room. The research leaders, administrators and IT professionals you will meet have a lot of challenges on their plate and want to do the right thing. They will appreciate your input. These systems are being rapidly redesigned - Whether you're part of the conversation or not. The question is: do we want to influence how they serve our institutions' communications goals, or do we want to inherit systems that work brilliantly for academic audiences but get a failing grade for helping us serve the public?
By Steven Lazarus Like many coastal regions, Florida’s Space Coast faces significant climate resilience challenges and risks. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Florida has over 8,000 miles of shoreline, more than any other state in the contiguous U.S. In addition, the 2020 census indicates that that there are 21 million Florida residents, 75-80% of which live in coastal counties. This makes our state particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels, which are directly responsible for a host of coastal impacts, such as saltwater intrusion, sunny-day (high-tide) flooding, worsening surge, etc. There is growing evidence that storms are becoming wetter as the atmosphere warms— increasing the threat associated with compound flooding, which involves the combined effects of storm surge, rainfall, tides and river flow. Inland flooding events are also increasing due to overdevelopment, heavy precipitation and aging and/or inadequate infrastructure. The economic ramifications of these problems are quite evident, as area residents are confronted with the rising costs of their homeowners and flood insurance policies. As the principal investigator on a recently funded Department of Energy grant, Space Coast ReSCUE (Resilience Solutions for Climate, Urbanization, and Environment), I am working with Argonne National Laboratory, Florida Tech colleagues, community organizations and local government to improve our climate resilience in East Central Florida. It is remarkable that, despite its importance for risk management, urban planning and evaluating the environmental impacts of runoff, official data regarding local flooding is virtually nonexistent! Working alongside a local nonprofit, we have installed 10 automated weather stations and manual rain gauges in what was previously a “data desert” east of the Florida Tech campus: one at Stone Magnet Middle School and others at local homes. “We think that a ‘best methods’ approach is proactive, informed and cost-effective. The foundation of good decision-making, assessment and planning is built on data (model and observations), which are critical to adequately addressing the impact of climate on our communities.” – steven lazarus, meteorology professor, ocean engineering and marine sciences Data from these stations are available, in real-time, from two national networks: CoCoRaHS and Weather Underground. The citizen science initiative involving the rain gauge measurements is designed to document flooding in a neighborhood with limited resources. In addition to helping residents make informed choices, these data will also provide a means by which we can evaluate our flood models that will be used to create highly detailed flood maps of the neighborhood. We are working with two historic extreme-precipitation events: Hurricane Irma (2017) and Tropical Storm Fay (2008)—both of which produced excessive flooding in the area. What might the local flooding look like, in the future, as storms become wetter? To find out, we plan to simulate these two storms in both present-day and future climate conditions. What will heat stress, a combination of temperature and humidity, feel like in the future? What impact will this have on energy consumption? The station data will also be used develop and test building energy-efficiency tools designed to help the community identify affordable ways to reduce energy consumption, as well as to produce high-precision urban heat island (heat stress) maps that account for the impact of individual buildings. The heat island and building energy modeling will be complemented by a drone equipped with an infrared camera, which will provide an observation baseline. We think that a “best methods” approach is proactive, informed and cost-effective. The foundation of good decision-making, assessment and planning is built on data (model and observations), which are critical to adequately addressing the impact of climate on our communities.
Expert Research: The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Artificial Intelligence and Domestic Conflict
Artificial Intelligence is often framed as a driver of innovation. But it also has the power to disrupt the very foundations of our societies. In a recent study, experts Craig Albert, PhD, and Lance Hunter, PhD, from Augusta University explored how AI, as part of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, could reshape economies, politics and security within states. Here are three key takeaways from the research: AI brings breakthroughs in health care, logistics and engineering, but also disrupts jobs and economies. Unmanaged disruption can fuel instability, widening inequality and increasing risks of unrest or domestic conflict. Governments must act now with retraining, adaptive policies and strong governance to harness AI’s benefits while reducing risks. Lance Hunter, PhD, is an assistant professor of political science with a background in international relations. His research focuses on how terrorist attacks influence politics in democratic countries and how political decisions within countries affect conflicts worldwide. Hunter teaches courses in international relations, security studies and research methods. He received his PhD in Political Science from Texas Tech University in 2011. View his profile here. Craig Albert, PhD, is a professor of Political Science and the graduate director of the PhD in Intelligence, Defense, and Cybersecurity Policy and the Master of Arts in Intelligence and Security Studies at Augusta University. His areas of concentration include international security studies, cybersecurity policy, information warfare/influence operations/propaganda, ethnic conflict, cyberterrorism and cyberwar, and political philosophy. View his profile here. The question we face is not whether AI will transform society (it already is!) but how we will manage that transformation to strengthen rather than destabilize. What steps do you think policymakers should prioritize to prepare for this future? Here's the abstract from the paper in Research Gate: An emerging field of scholarship in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and computing posits that AI has the potential to significantly alter political and economic landscapes within states by reconfiguring labor markets, economies and political alliances, leading to possible societal disruptions. Thus, this study examines the potential destabilizing economic and political effects AI technology can have on societies and the resulting implications for domestic conflict based on research within the fields of political science, sociology, economics and artificial intelligence. In addition, we conduct interviews with 10 international AI experts from think tanks, academia, multinational technology companies, the military and cyber to assess the possible disruptive effects of AI and how they can affect domestic conflict. Lastly, the study offers steps governments can take to mitigate the potentially destabilizing effects of AI technology to reduce the likelihood of civil conflict and domestic terrorism within states. Read the full report here: Looking to know more? Let us help. Both Albert and Hunter are available to speak with media. Simply click on either experts icon now to arrange an interview today.
MSU researchers develop wood-based material that improves safety and life of lithium-ion batteries
For consumers worried about the risks associated with using lithium-ion batteries — which are used in everything from phones to laptops to electric vehicles — Michigan State University has discovered that a natural material found in wood can improve battery safety while also improving the battery’s life. Chengcheng Fang, assistant professor in the College of Engineering, and Mojgan Nejad, an associate professor in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, collaborated to engineer lignin, a natural ingredient of wood that provides support and rigidity, into a thin film separator that can be used inside lithium-ion batteries to prevent short circuits that can cause a fire. “We wanted to build a better battery,” said Fang. “But we also wanted it to be safe, efficient and sustainable.” Inside a battery, the positively charged cathode and negatively charged anode electrodes help the flow of electricity. To keep these electrodes apart, a commercial separator is typically made from polyethylene and polypropylene plastic materials, which can shrink at temperatures near 100 degrees Celsius. Without the protection of the separator, the cathode and anode sides of the battery have the potential to touch, causing an accidental short circuit and possible fire or explosion. In contrast, the lignin-based separators developed remained stable and didn’t become smaller in size up to temperatures of 300 degrees Celsius. Fang and her team tested varying thicknesses of lignin and found that films measuring 25 micrometers, which is thinner than one quarter of a human hair, were the most effective at keeping the inside of the battery stable and keeping the anode and cathode from connecting. Using the lignin film inside the battery had another benefit: the increased stability inside the battery also resulted in an improved cycle life, or how many times the battery can be charged and used. “We were surprised to see that the lignin film also improved the battery’s cycle life,” said Fang. “We increased the battery’s cycle life by 60%.” A third advantage of this research is an environmentally friendly one. The team was able to manufacture the lignin separators using a low-cost dry processing method. This meant that the team was able to produce large quantities of the lignin film, on demand, while avoiding the use of harmful solvents commonly used in traditional separator manufacturing, which can be harmful to the environment. In this case, the researchers were able to use lignin and other materials that provided a 100% raw material conversion to create a film without creating any waste or pollution. “Lignin, particularly lignosulfonate, is naturally abundant and it doesn’t need any further treatment to function in batteries,” said Fang. “This work demonstrates a new design pathway to improve both the safety and manufacturability of battery materials.” This research was published in Advanced Materials, and the technology is patent pending through the MSU Innovation Center.
Michael McClure, Ph.D., associate professor from the Department of Biomedical Engineering and affiliate faculty in the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and in the Institute for Engineering and Medicine, has been named chair of the Orthopaedic Research Society’s (ORS) newly launched Skeletal Muscle Section. The section began in August 2025, building on research interest groups and symposia to create a dedicated home for skeletal muscle studies within ORS. Its mission is to advance collaboration, innovation, education and translation in this field. Skeletal muscle disorders cause disability, chronic pain and high health care costs. Severe injuries and degenerative diseases, such as muscular dystrophies, remain difficult to treat. The section will strengthen research in muscle development, aging, trauma, disuse and disease. This work will expand the basic understanding of and identify therapeutic targets to restore function. In its first year, the section will measure success through increased skeletal muscle abstracts at the 2027 ORS Annual Meeting, growth in ORS membership and active participation in section programs. “We are thrilled to launch the Skeletal Muscle Section,” McClure said. “This home for translational muscle research will build on ORS progress over the past 10 years, help recruit new members and foster an environment that connects multiple areas of orthopaedic science.” McClure’s commitment to this work is shaped by his family’s experience with neuromuscular diseases, witnessing the impact of war-related injuries on patients’ quality of life from the Richmond Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the momentum of translational discovery. Learn more about the ORS Skeletal Muscle Section.
Professor Roslyn Bill selected for the inaugural cohort of the Big if True Science accelerator
Professor Roslyn Bill is the director of Aston Institute for Membrane Excellence (AIME) The Big if True Science (BiTS) accelerator aims to bridge the gap between cutting-edge lab science and multi-million-dollar collaborative projects Professor Bill’s research is focused on the brain’s plumbing system and developing drugs against traumatic brain injury and cognitive decline. Professor Roslyn Bill, director of Aston Institute for Membrane Excellence (AIME), has been selected as an inaugural fellow of the new Big if True Science (BiTS) accelerator. BiTS was set up by a non-profit organisation, Renaissance Philanthropy, to support its scientist and innovator fellows in developing groundbreaking research initiatives and equip them with the tools, skills, and networks needed to design high-impact, collaborative research programmes and technical projects with multi-million-dollar budgets beyond their own laboratories. The first cohort of 12 fellows was selected after a highly competitive process. The cohort represents diverse fields including neuroscience, environmental engineering, biomedical research, and materials science. Over a 15-week period, they will transform their breakthrough concepts into fundable eight-figure R&D programmes, before pitching their ideas to funders on 10 December 2025. Professor Bill’s research focuses on the glymphatic system, the brain’s ‘plumbing’ system, which facilitates the movement of fluid and clears waste products. Water moves in and out of brain cells through tiny protein channels in the cell membrane called aquaporins. Uncontrolled water entry, for example, after a head injury, can cause catastrophic swelling and severe brain injuries of the type suffered by racing driver Michael Schumacher after a skiing accident. When the flow is impeded, for example, as we age, waste products can build up, leading to diseases like Alzheimer’s. In 2020, Professor Bill was lead author on a paper published in the prestigious journal Cell on how the flow of water through aquaporin-4 is controlled. She is now researching drugs to affect this process, which could have a huge impact on the treatment of traumatic brain injury and cognitive decline. Professor Bill said: “Every year, tens of millions of people are affected by injuries to their brains. Every three seconds, someone in the world develops dementia. There are no medicines that can fix these terrible conditions. Being an inaugural member of BiTS is a great honour, and I am delighted to be in the company of truly inspiring people. This exciting programme offers hope to patients for whom no medicines are available!”
First scientific paper on 3I/ATLAS interstellar object
When the news started to spread on July 1, 2025, about a new object that was spotted from outside our solar system, only the third of its kind ever known, astronomers at Michigan State University — along with a team of international researchers — turned their telescopes to capture data on the new celestial sighting. The team rushed to write a scientific paper on what they know so far about the object, now called 3I/ATLAS, after NASA’s Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System, or ATLAS. ATLAS consists of four telescopes — two in Hawaii, one in Chile and one in South Africa — which automatically scans the whole sky several times every night looking for moving objects. MSU’s Darryl Seligman, a member of the scientific team and an assistant professor in the College of Natural Science, took the lead on writing the paper. “I heard something about the object before I went to bed, but we didn’t have a lot of information yet,” Seligman said. “By the time I woke up around 1 a.m., my colleagues, Marco Micheli from the European Space Agency and Davide Farnocchia from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, were emailing me that this was likely for real. I started sending messages telling everyone to turn their telescopes to look at this object and started writing the paper to document what we know to date. We have data coming in from across the globe about this object.” The discovery Larry Denneau, a member of the ATLAS team reviewed and submitted the observations from the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope in Chile shortly after it was observed on the night of July 1. Denneau said that he was cautiously excited. “We have had false alarms in the past about interesting objects, so we know not to get too excited on the first day. But the incoming observations were all consistent, and late that night it looked like we had the real thing. “It is especially gratifying that we found it in the Milky Way in the direction of the galactic center, which is a very challenging place to survey for asteroids because of all the stars in the background,” Denneau said. “Most other surveys don't look there.” John Tonry, another member of ATLAS and professor at the University of Hawaii, was instrumental in design and construction of ATLAS, the survey that discovered 3I. Tonry said, “It's really gratifying every time our hard work surveying the sky discovers something new, and this comet that has been traveling for millions of years from another star system is particularly interesting.” Once 3I/ATLAS was confirmed, Seligman and Karen Meech, faculty chair for the Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawaii, both managed the communications flow and worked on getting the data pulled together for submitting the paper. “Once 3I/ATLAS was identified as likely interstellar, we mobilized rapidly,” Meech said. “We activated observing time on major facilities like the Southern Astrophysical Research Telescope and the Gemini Observatory to capture early, high-quality data and build a foundation for detailed follow-up studies.” After confirmation of the interstellar object, institutions from around the world began sharing information about 3I/ATLAS with Seligman. What scientists know about 3I/ATLAS so far Though data is pouring in about the discovery, it’s still so far away from Earth, which leaves many unanswered questions. Here’s what the scientific team knows at this point: It is only the third interstellar (meaning from outside our solar system) object to be detected passing through our solar system. It’s potentially giving off gas like other comets do, but that needs to be confirmed. It’s moving really fast at 60 kilometers per second, or 134,000 miles per hour, relative to the sun. It’s on an orbital path that is shaped like a boomerang or hyperbola. It’s very bright. It’s on a path that will leave our solar system and not return, but scientists will be able to study it for several months before it leaves. The James Webb Space Telescope and the Hubble Space Telescope are expected to reveal more information about its size, composition, spin and how it reacts to being heated over the next few months. “We have these images of 3I/ATLAS where it’s not entirely clear and it looks fuzzier than the other stars in the same image,” said James Wray, a professor at Georgia Tech. “But the object is pretty far away and, so, we just don’t know.” Seligman and his team are specifically interested in 3I/ATLAS’s brightness because it informs us about the evolution of the coma, a cloud of dust and gas. They’ve been tracking it to see if it has been changing over time as the object moves and turns in space. They also want to monitor for sudden outburst events in which the object gets much brighter. “3I/ATLAS likely contains ices, especially below the surface, and those ices may start to activate as it nears the sun,” Seligman said. “But until we detect specific gas emissions, like H₂O, CO or CO₂, we can’t say for sure what kinds of ice or how much are there.” The discovery of 3I/ATLAS is just the beginning. For Tessa Frincke, who came to MSU in late June to begin her career as a doctoral student with Seligman, having the opportunity to analyze data from 3I/ATLAS to predict its future path could lead to her publishing a scientific paper of her own. “I’ve had to learn a lot quickly, and I was shocked at how many people were involved,” said Frincke. “Discoveries like this have a domino effect that inspires novel engineering and mission planning.” For Atsuhiro Yaginuma, a fourth-year undergraduate student on Seligman’s team, this discovery has inspired him to apply his current research to see if it is possible to launch a spacecraft from Earth to get it within hundreds of miles or kilometers to 3I/ATLAS to capture some images and learn more about the object. “The closest approach to Earth will be in December,” said Yaginuma. “It would require a lot of fuel and a lot of rapid mobilization from people here on Earth. But getting close to an interstellar object could be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.” “We can’t continue to do this research and experiment with new ideas from Frincke and Yaginuma without federal funding,” said Seligman, who also is a postdoctoral fellow of the National Science Foundation. Seligman and Aster Taylor, who is a former student of Seligman’s and now a doctoral candidate in astronomy and astrophysics and a 2023 Fannie and John Hertz Foundation Fellow, wrote the following: “At a critical moment, given the current congressional discussions on science funding, 3I/ATLAS also reminds us of the broader impact of astronomical research. An example like 3I is particularly important to astronomy — as a science, we are supported almost entirely by government and philanthropic funding. The fact that this science is not funded by commercial enterprise indicates that our field does not provide a financial return on investment, but instead responds to the public’s curiosity about the deep questions of the universe: Where did we come from? Are we alone? What else is out there? The curiosity of the public, as expressed by the will of the U.S. Congress and made manifest in the federal budget, is the reason that astronomy exists.” In addition to MSU, contributors to this research and paper include European Space Agency Near-Earth Objects Coordination Centre (Italy), NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech (USA), University of Hawaii (USA), Auburn University (USA), Universidad de Alicante (Spain), Universitat de Barcelona (Spain), European Southern Observatory (Germany), Villanova University (USA), Lowell Observatory (USA), University of Maryland (USA), Las Cumbres Observatory (USA), University of Belgrade (Serbia), Politecnico di Milano (Italy), University of Michigan (USA), University of Western Ontario (Canada), Georgia Institute of Technology (USA), Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago (Chile) and Boston University (USA).
LSU, FUEL, Syngenta Partner to Develop Low-cost Digital Twins for Chemical Processing Facilities
Derick Ostrenko and Jason Jamerson, faculty in the LSU College of Art & Design, along with engineering advisor David Ben Spry, are pioneering a new approach to industrial innovation using digital twins. The effort is supported by a $217,403 use-inspired research and development (UIRD) award from Future Use of Energy in Louisiana (FUEL). Digital twins are highly detailed, virtual replicas of physical assets. The technology is used in engineering to enhance efficiency, safety, and training; however, their creation often requires costly specialized hardware, proprietary software, and engineering-intensive workflows. “This initiative not only advances digital twin technology but also highlights the interdisciplinary power of design and engineering,” FUEL UIRD Director Ashwith Chilvery said. “By applying creative tools in an industrial setting, we’re demonstrating new ways to lower costs and expand access to advanced digital infrastructure.” The collaborative effort between LSU, FUEL, and Syngenta aims to reduce costs by applying techniques more commonly used in the entertainment industry, leveraging free and open-source software and consumer-grade hardware, such as gaming PCs and digital cameras. Most of the work will be conducted by digital art students skilled in 3D modeling and video game production, offering a cost-effective alternative to traditional engineering services. “3D artists and game developers bring both technical expertise and creative vision that can add significant value when paired with traditional engineering approaches,” Spry said. “We’re eager to demonstrate how this talent pool can help accelerate digital transformation in industry.” “Working with an innovative company like Syngenta to advance digital twins for chemical manufacturing is an outstanding opportunity for our researchers and students, and we’re proud of the techniques and talent we’ve developed at LSU. FUEL’s support of digital twin development for the energy and chemical sectors helps build this technology and unique artistry in Louisiana, for our industries, and for the rest of the nation.” - Greg Trahan, LSU Assistant Vice President of Strategic Research Partnerships In addition to producing a high-fidelity digital twin of a process unit within an active chemical manufacturing facility, the project will deliver a virtual reality application that allows immersive interaction with the 3D model. Future extensions may include augmented reality overlays of physical equipment or integration of live process data for real-time monitoring and troubleshooting. The ultimate outcome of the project is a validated workflow that reduces the cost of producing digital twins by a factor of at least five compared to conventional engineering methods. This breakthrough has the potential to redefine digital infrastructure for the chemical processing industry, making it more accessible, scalable, and adaptable to future needs. Learn more about LSU's digital twin work with Syngenta as well as NASA: About FUEL Future Use of Energy in Louisiana (FUEL) positions the state as a global energy innovation leader through high-impact technology development and innovation that supports the energy industry in lowering carbon emissions. FUEL brings together a growing team of universities, community and technical colleges, state agencies and industry and capital partners led by LSU. With the potential to receive up to $160 million in funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation through the NSF Regional Innovation Engines program and an additional $67.5 million from Louisiana Economic Development, FUEL will advance our nation’s capacity for energy innovation through use-inspired research and development, workforce development, and technology commercialization. For more information, visit fuelouisiana.org. About Syngenta Syngenta Crop Protection is a global leader in agricultural innovation. It is focused on empowering farmers to make the transformation required to feed the world’s population while protecting our planet. Its bold scientific discoveries deliver better benefits for farmers and society on a bigger scale than ever before. Syngenta CP offers a leading portfolio of crop protection technologies and solutions that support farmers to grow healthier plants with higher yields. Its 17,700 employees are helping to transform agriculture in more than 90 countries. Syngenta Crop Protection is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, and is part of the Syngenta Group. Read our stories and follow us on LinkedIn, Instagram & X.
