Accessibility

Career Development Subcommittee

Communications & Outreach

Community & Membership

Ikele Chinyere Mary-Cynthia, member
Graduate student, Osaka University, Japan
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Edward Pietryk, member
Graduate student, Baylor College of Medicine
Preferred pronouns: he/him/his

Haoran Cai, member
Graduate student, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Mahmoud Izadi, member
Graduate student, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Qatar
Preferred pronouns: he/him/his

Rebecca Arnold, member
Graduate student, Institute of Science and Technology, Austria
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Multimedia

Alex McElwee-Adame, co-chair
Graduate Student, San Diego State University

Debraj Manna, member
Graduate student, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru
Preferred pronouns: he/him/his

Faye Romero, member
Graduate student, University of Rochester
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Jevithen Nehru, member
Graduate student, University of Toronto

Kazeem Alayande, member
Postdoc, North-West University, South Africa
Preferred pronouns: he/him/his

Laetitia Chauve, member
Postdoc, Trinity College Dublin
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Policy & Advocacy

Bahaar Chawla, member
Graduate student, University of Michigan
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Maddelyn Harden, co-chair
Graduate Student, University of Southern California
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Montana Kay Lara, member
Postdoc, University of California, San Diego
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

Oluwabukola Mary Farodoye, member
Graduate student, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul

Rosty Brichko, member
Graduate student, University of California, Irvine

Ujani Hazra, member
Graduate student, Georgia Institute of Technology
Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers

We’re taking time to get to know the members of the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Committees. Join us to learn more about our early career scientist advocates.

Walid Mawass

Community and Membership Engagement Subcommittee

University of Arizona

Research Interest:

I am generally interested in evolutionary genetics. Specifically, my research centers on genetic variation and how it is shaped by evolutionary forces. The type of genetic variation I study is the complex type that underlies quantitative phenotypic traits, such as morphological, life-history, and behavioral. I use statistical and computational tools to elucidate how natural selection—and other evolutionary mechanisms—acts on this variation, leading to phenotypic adaptive change. Simultaneously, I use theoretical models to understand how mutational input maintains the complex genetic variation that allows for adaptive change to occur in the first place. I am also interested in processes arising from different phenomena (e.g., indirect genetic effects, genotype-environment interactions, etc.) that can modulate genetic variation, evolutionary potential, and the response to selection in natural populations.

As a PhD-trained scientist, you have many career options. What interests you the most?

Foremost, I am interested in generating knowledge to better the human condition. As a PhD-trained scientist (and with the current nature of the scientific enterprise), I know that I must specialize in specific questions. To counter this situation, I must contextualize the answers I extract using the scientific method around furthering our collective understanding of the natural world. I was drawn from an early age to episteme (knowledge or understanding). First, I felt a craving for it, wanting to consume it and let it construct my mental models of the world. Its effect was not slight. It helped build my value and belief system that I still use when interacting with the world. Then, I began wanting to create, generate, and engender knowledge. But at that point, I was not interested in doing so for my own sake. Instead, I wanted to generate knowledge for those around me and those who would come after me.

I am attracted to the academic environment because of its pedagogic and scholarly aspects. I enjoy thinking up questions to answer using the tools and methods I was trained for. I’ve realized that having others to share my ideas with is invaluable. I enjoy having them deconstruct and reconstruct my ideas again with me while adding their own. That is why I have so far felt suited to the academic environment.

My approach toward pedagogy also suits the academic milieu. I find immeasurable value in mentoring future students who want to learn new skills or develop their attributes to become researchers or industrious scientists. But, given my lack of direct experience in the industrial world where valuable research happens, I am wise to my bias toward the academic field. I am not preferring one over the other or purporting that one is better than the other. Instead, I am sharing that, through self-understanding and reflections on my attributes and preferences, being an academic who focuses on research while creating an environment of pedagogic and professional development is the career path where I can thrive.

In addition to your research, how do you want to advance the scientific enterprise?

First, it is fair to say that it took me a while to truly understand the scientific enterprise and all its parts. As with any human-driven enterprise, regardless of its many merits, the scientific endeavor is not without faults. Its merits are the most visible ones, the most impactful at all levels of social organization. Wanting to advance these merits is a given—or at least, should be. Of course, individually, as scientists, we can decide to focus on a few of the merits that should be continuously elevated and improved upon. I consider collaboration within the scientific enterprise a valuable element of its success. I think of the collaborative lines between different scientists as the supply chains that keep any economy afloat and running. Whether it is a collaboration between two (or more) researchers an office or a few continents apart, the connection formed always yields a net return higher than if the work were independent. That return can take any shape—intellectual, methodological, theoretical, or educational. With my work and philosophy, I aim to make collaboration an essential element. In terms of work, collaboration can mean having a colleague or peer look over the logic of your ideas, check the quality and clarity of the language, or assess the feasibility of the work. The outcome will always bring a net positive to my development. Philosophically, I assume that the human condition and societal progress can never materialize without implicit or explicit collaboration and cooperation between individuals. Allowing this view on life to guide me through my choices and actions within the scientific enterprise, I hope to strengthen the scientific community by fostering connections.

The scientific community is composed of individuals with diverse backgrounds and personalities. Some will choose to run their labs and groups differently than others. Academics should explore different approaches to productivity, management, and creativity within varied environments. Consequently, with a predefined set of goals, the appropriate strategies can be selected and spread across the community. With this context in mind, I believe the goals matter the most in this process. These goals can change across different cultures and institutions. Regardless, there should be universal goals that everyone can agree on. A few I want to advance within the scientific enterprise include empathy, honesty, inclusivity, equity, and accountability. These values represent crucial elements of human enterprise, and as such, it should also be that the scientific enterprise cannot operate without its human constituents. I aim to create an environment built on these values while disseminating them across the entire community.

As a leader within the Genetics Society of America, what do you hope to accomplish?

I joined GSA to exercise and develop my leadership skills. That is achievable through time spent making decisions, communicating efficiently with members, and completing a planned project. Since I am also the co-chair of my subcommittee, I have additional work assignments. The responsibilities of this position are crucial to maintaining the proper functioning of the subcommittee. I only started in this role at the beginning of this year, but from the start, I aimed to exercise my responsibility with the utmost care and empathy toward the members of my subcommittee. First, these members come from different backgrounds and countries, and they are all volunteering their time to advance the subcommittee’s mission, elevate the success of ECLP, and promote the mission of GSA. With this in mind, one of my goals is to support my fellow members, providing them with the aid they might need when it comes to their responsibilities or their inability to achieve their goals due to personal or professional reasons. Personally, it is vital to show my members and the members of GSA that leadership, at the level of a subcommittee, can be exercised with empathy and care while delivering project successes and membership engagement. Also, I make sure to communicate to my fellow members that I hold myself accountable for any failures that follow from my own decisions or shortcomings. At the same time, I expect my colleagues to hold me liable and push me to improve in my role. In other words, a positive and constructive feedback relationship is established between members and leveraged to achieve the aims established at the beginning of the year.

I also hope to elevate the value of society groups, such as GSA. These professional organizations hold a valuable role in the professional development of researchers, whether their career is in academia or industry. I have felt the impact of such organizations on my career development. For this reason, I wanted to play a chief yet time-limited role in an association such as GSA to promote its internal machinery to achieve valuable external success. One long-term goal would be to make it transparent to young scientists and geneticists that there is immeasurable value in joining a group such as GSA. The salient point of this goal is to show that taking up a role involving collaboration, commitment, and engagement is an indispensable step toward professional development. Coincidentally, this goal overlaps with the mission of my subcommittee, thereby validating my decision to join it and work toward implementing its mission in practice.

Previous leadership experience

During my tenure in Canada for my PhD program at the Université de Québec à Trois-Rivières, I was part of the student association of my department, serving as Chair of Scientific Events for two years. I organized seminars and workshops for the benefit of the students of our department. The seminars carried varying themes, and some involved inviting newly-arrived faculty members to present their work and lab to the students. The goal was to expose our students to different research and offer them opportunities to work with professors with aligning research interests. Another seminar invited leaders from industry to present opportunities and career paths outside of academia. Likewise, the workshops helped students gain skills in building their CV or resume, focusing on their mental health, and, for international students, navigating bureaucratic hurdles.

Currently, I’ve been successfully leading and maintaining a theoretical population genetics study group for undergraduate and graduate students of the EEB department at the University of Arizona. Our attendance has been consistent and has increased for the current semester. Though this appointment is in no way an official leadership position, it takes leadership skills to organize and handle logistics, reach out to past and prospective members, and lead the instruction of the weekly sessions. This experience has filled me with pride, and I aim to continue organizing workshops, seminars, and events like this at every institution I work at to directly benefit students and help with their development.

We’re taking time to get to know the members of the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Committees. Join us to learn more about our early career scientist advocates.

Daniel J. Gironda

Policy and Advocacy Subcommittee

Wake Forest School of Medicine

Research Interest: Metastasis, the spread of cancer from a primary tumor to a secondary organ site, is the number one cause of death among cancer patients. How can we monitor this process and prevent it from happening in the first place? My current research aims to explore the genetic mechanisms and identify genetic vulnerabilities in patients with peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM). PSM is an aggressive type of metastatic spread that presents as multiple tumors growing on multiple sites throughout the abdominal cavity. Given that each individual patient, as well as each individual tumor, is genetically unique, we can aggregate and compare PSM tumors across pre-treated patients to identify common pathways of tumor growth and potentially targetable genes of interest. Moving forward, we hope to accumulate large sets of sequencing information on these tumors to which we can utilize the newfound vulnerabilities for therapeutic applications.

As a second-year doctoral student, I aspire to become an expert in genomic and transcriptomic analyses for elucidating the biological pathways of PSM. To do this, our lab collaborates with the Wake Forest Organoid Research Center (WFORCE) to create patient-derived tumor organoids (PTOs) for individual tumor modelling. Because the cells used to create the PTOs are isolated from each individual tumor from each patient, the PTO is one of the most physiologically relevant tumor models for precision medicine to date. With our PTO models, we will perform drug screening assays, followed by sequencing techniques, to determine the biological mechanisms that select for chemoresistance, metastasis, and recurrence. Through the isolation and sequencing of these PTOs after primary surgery, we hope to identify novel gene clusters that can tailor treatment at the individual patient level.

As a PhD-trained scientist, you have many career options. What interests you the most?

Multiple areas interest me. However, given the instability of funding in academia, pursuing a career in science policy is of high interest. Despite improvements in the availability of resources for young scientists, the funding infrastructure is not well equipped to continuously promote innovation. With the current R01 (the primary and oldest grant offered by the NIH) acceptance rate of ~8%, we are narrowing the playing field for potentially transformative biomedical research due to the restrained budget. However, what if we were to reallocate resources from state or federal institutions with significant financial surpluses to create a better funded environment for prospective research? Instead of allowing the average taxpayer’s dollars to die with these surpluses, we could optimize the distribution of funds to support humanity-promoting research and education. As a playmaker in the fund allocation decision process, I hope to open a fountain of resources for up-and-coming scientists. By highlighting the importance of new research, as well as transparently showing how the funds will be distributed, more interest in the realm of research will be generated and will promote the relevance of game-changing projects.

If a position in science policy is not in my cards, pursuing a director role for clinical research and development (R&D) at a startup biotech company would be of high interest as well. Similar to academic faculty members, clinical R&D directors have a fair amount of freedom to direct their own research. Because this position is in private industry, there is much more flexibility for funding one’s research while still being free to collaborate with academic institutions. Of course, like any position, it is highly competitive, and one has to stay prolific in terms of patents, grants, and scientific publications. Yet, with the freedom to perform independent research with more access to resources, working in industry seems to be a great option for up-and-coming scientists. But hey, I am still early on in the process—you can never predict where you will end up next, you know?  

In addition to your research, how do you want to advance the scientific enterprise?

Actively communicating and exchanging with the general public is the most proactive way to advance the scientific enterprise. Generating interest, or sharing foundational knowledge as to why one should be interested, is the most important factor for selling an idea or product. Educating individuals who are opposed to new scientific endeavors is the best way to create confidence and trust around the field, as well as to better demonstrate the significance of new research. As an educator across multiple disciplines throughout my undergraduate career, I see no better way to give back to the general population as an academic than by educating through open dialogue. Science is only as powerful as the audience it reaches. Integrating non-scientists into the scientific thought process—as well as having open discussions about past beneficial discoveries, our current state of scientific progress, and our future—can expand their way of viewing science as a whole. Similar to TEDx and other platforms for sharing thoughts and ideas, I would want to go to underserved communities and organize town halls to have these conversations. More often than not, the disconnect between scientists and the average person is due to their lack of candid conversations—there is not much overlap between our day-to-day lives. However, this lack of human connection hampers our ability to reach out to the general public. As humans, we need to find a general understanding amongst one another before any progress can be made. We cannot unify scientists and non-scientists until we open the door and speak candidly. We not only wish to educate but also hope to inspire the average individual and open their mind as to what heights mankind can reach. As Johann Wolfgang von Goethe wrote, “Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do.” Through open and honest dialogue with the general public, I hope to expand general interest in the scientific community and enroll others to contribute to the field.

As a leader within the Genetics Society of America, what do you hope to accomplish?

First and foremost, I want to leverage the GSA platform by promoting better STEM education at the elementary, middle, and high school levels in my local community, as well as the greater state and country. Due to the pandemic, many young students have been deprived of a traditional education—one in which they can directly interact and converse with their educators. Hands-on instruction is crucial to the learning process, and educators across all age groups recognize that online schooling is not enough to meet these needs. As a member of the policy and advocacy subcommittee, I hope to speak with local politicians on how to improve our school systems through a hands-on approach. Educational reconfiguration has to start with how we train our teachers. This training may be done through a thought-out, rigorous, and standardized curriculum across the board for each subject type, in addition to increasing the number of resources given to these educators and students to facilitate the revamping. Educating young scientists and future members of the work force follows a pyramid structure—one is only as knowledgeable as the base on which one’s knowledge is built. By promoting stronger analytical skills from a young age, we would provide our kids with a framework that will build a better tomorrow.

Second, I wish to collaborate with and expand the current research network I am involved in. Collaboration is the key to validating strong science and keeping the scientific community liable. It is fine to have strong science and prestige as an independent force, but what is its true value if others cannot replicate and validate the legitimacy of one’s findings? As a leader within the GSA, I aspire to be a strong proponent in increasing scientific stringency, rigor, and accountability across multiple research disciplines.

I am always up for talking about science, politics, or general life questions with awesome people. Reach out to me with the links below to connect!

Previous leadership experience

Presidential member of the Genetics Society of America (2022–Present)

Co-chair for the Skin, Wound Healing, and Inflammation Scientific session, Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine International Society-Americas (TERMIS-AM) 2022 annual meeting

Recipient of the Outstanding New Member award, Rutgers University, New Brunswick: Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs (2018)

Lead tutor at the Livingston Writing Center of Rutgers University, New Brunswick (2016–2018)

Graduate of the Torch Academy, a goal-setting and leadership training program (2012)

You can contact Daniel J. Gironda on Twitter @DanielJGironda, or on LinkedIn @DanielJGironda, and read their publications here.