Search for: All records

Abstract Contaminated drinking water is an important public health consideration in New England where well water is often found to contain arsenic and other metals such as cadmium, lead, and uranium. Chronic or high level exposure to these metals have been associated with multiple acute and chronic diseases, including cancers and impaired neurological development. While individual metal levels are often regulated, adverse health effects of metal mixtures, especially at concentrations considered safe for human consumption remain unclear. Here, we utilized a multivariate analysis that examined behavioral outcomes in the zebrafish model as a function of multiple metal chemical constituents of 92 drinking well water samples, collected in Maine and New Hampshire. To collect these samples, a citizen science approach was used, that engaged local teachers, students, and scientific partners. Our analysis of 4016 metal-mixture combinations shows that changes in zebrafish behavior are highly mixture dependent, and indicate that certain combinations of metals, especially those containing arsenic, cadmium, lead, and uranium, even at levels considered safe in drinking water, are significant drivers of behavioral toxicity. Our data emphasize the need to consider low-level chemical mixture effects and provide a framework for a more in-depth analysis of drinking water samples. We also provide evidence for the efficacy of utilizing citizen science in research, as the broader impact of this work is to empower local communities to advocate for improving their own water quality. 

In-person undergraduate research experiences (UREs) promote students’ integration into careers in life science research. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted institutions hosting summer URE programs to offer them remotely, raising questions about whether undergraduates who participate in remote research can experience scientific integration and whether they might perceive doing research less favorably (i.e., not beneficial or too costly). To address these questions, we examined indicators of scientific integration and perceptions of the benefits and costs of doing research among students who participated in remote life science URE programs in Summer 2020. We found that students experienced gains in scientific self-efficacy pre- to post-URE, similar to results reported for in-person UREs. We also found that students experienced gains in scientific identity, graduate and career intentions, and perceptions of the benefits of doing research only if they started their remote UREs at lower levels on these variables. Collectively, students did not change in their perceptions of the costs of doing research despite the challenges of working remotely. Yet students who started with low cost perceptions increased in these perceptions. These findings indicate that remote UREs can support students’ self-efficacy development, but may otherwise be limited in their potential to promote scientific integration. 

The COVID-19 pandemic shut down undergraduate research programs across the United States. A group of 23 colleges, universities, and research institutes hosted remote undergraduate research programs in the life sciences during Summer 2020. Given the unprecedented offering of remote programs, we carried out a study to describe and evaluate them. Using structured templates, we documented how programs were designed and implemented, including who participated. Through focus groups and surveys, we identified programmatic strengths and shortcomings as well as recommendations for improvements from students’ perspectives. Strengths included the quality of mentorship, opportunities for learning and professional development, and a feeling of connection with a larger community. Weaknesses included limited cohort building, challenges with insufficient structure, and issues with technology. Although all programs had one or more activities related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice, these topics were largely absent from student reports even though programs coincided with a peak in national consciousness about racial inequities and structural racism. Our results provide evidence for designing remote Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs) that are experienced favorably by students. Our results also indicate that remote REUs are sufficiently positive to further investigate their affordances and constraints, including the potential to scale up offerings, with minimal concern about disenfranchising students.