Introducing Shreya Pramanik – one of the SciCommConnect three-minute talk winners

In June, the Node, preLights and FocalPlane hosted SciCommConnect, a science communication event focussed on learning new scicomm skills and networking with like-minded researchers. As part of the day, we hosted a three-minute research talk competition, and we were treated to 12 fantastic talks on a range of topics. We had two competition winners, Oliver Anderson and Shreya Pramanik. Here, we highlight Shreya’s wonderful talk and learn more about her current work, her career so far, and her interest in the field of scicomm.

Congratulations on winning the short talk competition at SciCommConnect with your fantastic talk about the molecular origin of life and the creation of protocells (watch it below)!

What inspired you to focus on this research topic?

I have a Master’s degree in chemistry and I was actively looking for PhD opportunities that bridged the gap between chemistry and biology. I became intrigued by how proteins are integral to biological systems and how you can’t talk about biology without involving proteins. This excitement led me to the Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, where I found a project (and in fact an entire graduate school, Matter to Life) that focused on the origins of life and the creation of protocells.

What are the key challenges in creating synthetic cells?

With synthetic cells you’re trying to create a ‘simpler’ version of a hugely complicated, intricate system. There are two primary approaches to creating synthetic cells: the top-down and bottom-up methods. The top-down approach involves simplifying a real cell by removing components to reduce it to a minimalistic form, potentially resembling the earliest forms of life. On the other hand, the bottom-up approach involves combining basic components to build a synthetic cell from scratch. This approach suggests that prebiotic or early cells might have been different from current cells, requiring a fresh perspective on how to assemble them.

One major challenge is integrating the findings of different labs. Often, the use of different buffers and experimental conditions make it difficult to combine separate research findings into a cohesive synthetic cell. This is a key challenge I face in my research as well.

What future directions or questions in the field of synthetic biology excite you the most?

I am particularly fascinated by the real-world applications that synthetic biology can bring. The potential for groundbreaking solutions, such as new ways to combat diseases or develop advanced vaccines, is what excites me most about the future of this field. For instance, there are groups developing fascinating approaches to tackle antibiotic resistance. Instead of using traditional chemical methods to attack bacteria, they’ve designed molecular motors that act like a tiny drill, physically penetrating the bacterial cell wall and killing them. It’s truly amazing work!

You are currently a postdoc in Oregon – how did your career path lead you there? And where would you like it to go?

After completing my PhD, I moved to the Oregon Health and Science University, USA, for my first postdoc. I’m focusing on membrane protein interactions on real cell membranes, shifting from synthetic biology to a more biological perspective. Up till now, I have treated proteins merely as chemicals, but I’ve always been fascinated by their biological roles because proteins seem almost magical – they are so versatile. I would like to understand their functions in real biological contexts.

Looking ahead, while an academic career is a possibility, my passion lies in science communication. I find great interest in reading scientific papers and explaining complex ideas to others. I believe I’m good at simplifying concepts and engaging with people, so a dream career for me would be to become a science communicator.

You won the three-minute research talk competition with a wonderful talk – how did you decide what key points to include to make such a complex topic accessible and engaging?

In preparing my three-minute talk, I took inspiration from watching similar short talks on YouTube and other events. I noticed that as an audience member, I don’t retain much when presentations are overloaded with data and graphs, especially if it’s my first exposure to the topic. To avoid this, I try to convey just one key idea in the talk because three minutes is such a brief amount of time. If I can get that one idea across clearly to the entire audience, I consider it a successful talk.

I practiced extensively, even testing my presentation on my landlord here, who has no background in my field. This was crucial because most of my friends, who are also scientists, can grasp the concepts more easily. My landlord’s feedback helped me ensure that my talk was understandable and engaging to someone unfamiliar with my work.

What for you was one of the main takeaways from SciCommConnect?

One of the key takeaways from SciCommConnect that really resonated with me was Jamie’s advice to focus on your breathing. This wasn’t direct feedback to me but a general tip he shared, and it struck a chord because it’s an area where I struggle, especially when I get really excited. I’ve received feedback many times in my life to slow down and breathe, which is crucial because when I’m excited, I tend to rush through my points.

Jamie also suggested a practical trick: take a sip of water every now and then while speaking. This not only gives you a moment to breathe but also helps pace your presentation. I do often have water with me on stage, but the challenge is to remember drinking it…

Your slide was absolutely beautiful. Can you tell us more about how you designed it and what you aimed to convey through its visuals?

I’ve always had a preference for hand-drawn visuals. There’s something powerful about the simplicity of hand-drawn images; they can make complex ideas seem more approachable and understandable.

When designing my slide for this talk, which was actually my first three-minute presentation, I aimed to keep it as straightforward as possible. I didn’t want to overwhelm the audience with data, so instead, I opted for a simple and relatable visual. I included a light-hearted joke—the “cell-fie”. I felt it added a touch of humour and made the content more engaging. My goal was to convey the concept in a way that was both informative and enjoyable, showing that science can be both understandable and fun.

Do you have any tips for other researchers on creating impactful slides for their presentations?

My genuine tip for creating impactful slides is to put yourself in the shoes of your audience. Think back to a time when you were in high school or perhaps during your undergraduate studies. Imagine if this presentation was being given to you at that stage—would you have understood it? If the answer is no, then it’s important to simplify your content further and go back to the drawing board. By doing this, you ensure that your message is easily understood and engaging for everyone.