“Think Alike?” Episode 3: Joy and Curiosity

Episode 3: Joy and Curiosity

Introductions

Staci Bilbo: I would say that what I think I got from you more than anything and what I have tried to emulate in my own lab is your pure joy and curiosity in science and nature. Go after the important questions. Go after the questions that drive your curiosity and passion, really. And you really can't go wrong.

Podcast Narrator: Welcome to Think Alike?, a podcast from Neuronline that delves into the art and science of mentorship within the neuroscience community. Neuronline is the Society for Neuroscience's home for learning and discussion. Join or renew your SfN membership to be part of the premier neuroscience community that's pushing the field forward. Support your career and advance the field alongside your peers with year round unlimited access to expert led webinars, Neuroscience 2025 perks and many other benefits. Become a member of the Society for Neuroscience or rejoin today at sfn.org/membership. This episode's guests are mentor Dr. Randy Nelson and former mentee, Dr. Staci Bilbo.

Randy Nelson: Good morning, I'm Randy Nelson. I'm the uh, inaugural chair of the

Department of Neuroscience at West Virginia University.

Staci Bilbo: I am Staci Bilbo. I'm a professor of neuroscience, immunology and cell biology at Duke University.

Randy Nelson: So Staci can you remind me how we met? I know it was in, uh,

Baltimore at Johns Hopkins, but can you remember how we came to be, um, a mentor, mentee relationship?

Staci Bilbo: Uh, yes, we met because you invited me to interview for grad school, which I was thrilled to receive. I, um, came and interviewed there with you and Michaela Gallagher. And um, you know, that program was a little unusual for today in the sense that it was a more direct admission program. It wasn't the sort of rotation program that many, many people experience now. So it was directly interviewing with you and um, a couple of the other labs at Hopkins. And um, you accepted me, so I came. So yeah, that was how we met. And it was a long, long time ago now. Right?

Randy Nelson: It was a long time ago now. I was looking over some of the papers that we did early on and it was like, oh, these are 20 plus years old.

Staci Bilbo: Yes.

Joy and Curiosity in Science

Randy Nelson: So, uh, that's interesting. I never thought about what people's expectations were for me as a mentor. I just felt I wanted to guide people through a PhD and then beyond in most cases. And so what do you think your expectations were for

me as a mentor? And how does that, uh, inform you, serving as a mentor for trainees?

Staci Bilbo: Yeah, that's a, it's a great question. I was sort of thinking about that. I mean, I was so inexperienced when I came. I mean I had done undergraduate research as, you know, um, that's, I think, what got me into grad school. But, uh, other than that, I,

you know, I just. I came and said, you know, basically my expectations were turn me into a scientist, which is. Which is incredibly broad. Right. So I didn't have any very specific expectations. I would say that what I think I got from you more than anything and what I have tried to emulate in my own lab is your pure joy and curiosity in science and nature, like you have. You have from day one, conveyed that. Go after the important questions. Go after the questions that most, um, um, drive your curiosity and passion, really. And you really can't go wrong. Um, you've always done that, and that's what you do so well. I try to do that too, because, as you know, other than that, you have to sort

of tailor your mentoring to each person that comes in, because everybody's different.

So to have just one set of criteria, like, this is what we're going to do with every student. It doesn't work because every student is different. But to have that overarching sort of philosophy of I'm here because I am just so curious to know

00:05:00

Staci Bilbo: the answer to this question I think has served you well, and it definitely serves me well. So, yeah.

Randy Nelson: That's interesting because, well, thank you. Those very kind words. But

it was interesting because I just started teaching a pro seminar yesterday, and talking to the students about these sorts of, um, drivers for science and curiosity and wanting to be the first person to know the answer to a specific question that you formulated, I think is one of the greatest, um, highs associated with our business. And so I was trying to discuss. And I was thinking, you know, I've said this so many times year after year after year. It was just nice facing another six students about this topic.

Moving Labs and Admissions Processes

So one aspect of our early relationship that was a little strained was as soon as you got there, I told you, hey, I'm moving to Ohio State University, and would you like to come? And, uh. Uh, you did. Can you remember how we set that up? And what were the challenges, uh, and what were the benefits for coming?

Staci Bilbo: Yeah, so. Well, it wasn't that quick. It was two years in, so I'd been there at Hopkins and done. I was sort of all but dissertation at that point. So the question was, do I come or do I stay and work with someone else? And, um, yeah, not gonna lie, that was a hard time. But for me, it was not a question of whether I would go, um, because I loved the work I was doing. Um, and so, yeah, decided to go. And um, it was actually a pretty incredible experience in hindsight, because I got to set up a lab. I got to set up. I was sort only one there for a while. It was just me and you staring at each other for a few months. So, um, which. Which again, in hindsight was. Was great because, um, I think before then we had a very, very buttoned up, uh, professional relationship. And then after that we sort of became, you know, just much more, I guess, reliant on each other in a way.

Randy Nelson: That's true. And I think, uh, what I recall most of the early years at Ohio State was because the lab wasn't ready for us. Um, we were put out in the middle of field at a former primate center temporarily, although that temporarily went on for three years. Um, and so, yeah, we were out there and it was interesting because it was hard to get undergraduates to come out and, uh, work with us. It was hard to recruit other graduate students, but we managed it, recruit a good group of postdocs and so on there. So, um, was. It was interesting, that's for certain. Um, and. And I think in terms of mentoring at that point, we had a very interesting mentoring relationships. I'd like to go

back a little bit to something you said about the Direct Admit graduate, uh, process, because I'm a big fan of Direct Admit and I'm at a medical school, and I've been at medical school for, uh, some time now and, and rotations are, uh, the norm. And I still think it's. I don't know. I still think Direct Admit works better. Personally, I like the idea that we did in terms of rotating into a lab after you've been in a lab to learn a technique, to collaborate on a project with somebody else. So I remember you went and worked

for several months with Ferdis Debar, who's a wonderful, uh, scientist and, uh, in person to learn, uh, self sorting, because we didn't do that. And I always thought learning a new technique in the context of a project was much more valuable than just switching through labs every 10, 15 weeks. So I was wondering if you could talk about that a little bit, if you thought that was a good mentoring move or did you feel a little abandoned?

Staci Bilbo: No, I mean, for me it was great because I wanted to work with you. And so to be able to come straight in and work with you from day one and not be sort of uncertain where I would end up, um, was. Was a very good experience for me. Um, and exactly what you just said was the ability to then go to other labs, um, and learn other techniques and then bring it back was also really helpful. So, um, where

00:10:00

Staci Bilbo: I am now at Duke, I have a combination of recruiting students through both direct admit as well as rotations. And I see the sort of cost and benefits to each, for sure.

Focusing on Science

Randy Nelson: Uh, so you mentioned successes. Were there any adjustments or challenges other than the move or surprises along the way?

Staci Bilbo: Way, yeah, I mean, it's. That's a great question. I guess I would say, um, that, you know, the move was hard, but the move was ultimately an incredible learning experience and really shaped the future trajectory of my career because I became a neuroimmunologist at. At, uh, Ohio State because that they're so strong in that area. Um, not that Hopkins wasn't, but it just wasn't really a particular strength at the time. So the move was. Was, you know, ultimately incredibly. It was a good learning experience. I guess I'll put it that way. I think maybe the other challenge that I experienced in grad school, which is something everyone ultimately faces, is that another thing you did

really well when I was in the lab, I think, was just keeping us focused on our science. Like, try, you know, try not to worry about what everybody else is doing or not doing. Although the funny story is that you actually would often come into lab and be like, remember, you know, you're not just competing with everyone at Hopkins. You're competing with everyone in the whole world for jobs. So you did remind us in sort of,

uh, a funny way that it's competitive out there, right? And if you, if you want, um, at least what I wanted, which was an academic path, um, that you had to work really hard for it, you know, it's. It's not going to be easy, but, you know, put your head down and get your work done, basically. So when I was in grad school, I didn't worry too much about all the other things. I just. Every day I just focused on my science. And in hindsight, that is the most beautiful thing in the world. It's the most amazing time of your career to just focus on science. You're not worried about politics or, uh, all the things that can impact your ultimate success. As you get to the end of your graduate career, though, you start to realize there's a lot of other factors. Um, you know, there. There are, you know, just

other things you have to worry about. Grant funding, you have to worry about, you know, where you'll ultimately be able to live. And, you know, of course, if you're doing a

postdoc, it's usually moving somewhere new. So, so, you know, that's, that's an adjustment everyone has to make. Um, and now in today's world, it's way more complicated, right? Because there's industry, there's nonprofit work, there's all these other opportunities, uh, which is great. Um, and also it's more complicated. So I think people have that challenge maybe as an undercurrent as they're moving through now, a little bit more than I felt like I did anyway.

Randy Nelson: Right. So when you were in grad school, it was academia or alternative careers. Now academia is the alternative career because openings are fewer, I think. But in any case, if you're going into industry, one of the first selection criteria are papers and quality of papers. So it's the same sort of metric. Uh, I don't think some students realize that we often have speakers come in. We had one in from Abbvie recently saying, yeah, the first thing I look at is a quality and quantity of papers. And students were taken aback by, uh, that remark. Um, but I think the push to be productive for me came from a young faculty member, not a mentor of mine at Berkeley, Paul Sherman, who, ah, was looking for a faculty job. He had been, um, a fancy postdoc, a Miller postdoc there, which is a big deal. And then you go from there to apply for faculty positions. And he applied for all three faculty jobs available. It was a very tight job

market back then. He applied to Cornell, he applied Berkeley, and I think UW and, and he got interviews everywhere. And I remember seeing him and I said, wow, how, how'd you get, how'd you get, uh, interviews? Because I was in grad school at all on all three jobs. He says, Nelson, there are never any job shortages if you're best in your field. And so that struck me as, yeah, that makes some sense. And, and I think I took that and,

and tried to push on the students that,

00:15:00

Randy Nelson: you know, if you're productive, because publications are the coin of the realm even today, that you will stand out from the folks with whom you're competitive. Because neuroscience and all aspects of science is both a, uh, competitive and cooperative enterprise. And, um, when we're sharing reagents and we're helping people with advice and things like that, we still always have to remember we're competing for grants, we're competing for positions and things like that. So it's a very interesting, um, enterprise from that perspective, I think. And for me to try to convey

that you have to be helpful because we always tried to help other labs and other folks in the lab. But you also have to be focused on being competitive.

Guiding Mentees with a Passion for Science

Staci Bilbo: So for you, what. I guess if you think back to, ah, then, but also maybe now, what do you feel like are your expectations as a mentor? Like what. What are you most looking for for people that you recruit into the lab?

Randy Nelson: I'm looking. I still look for the same thing. I'm looking for a passion, um, people that'll sustain folks. Because you can't. You just can't be sustained without it. It's a, uh, very challenging in many ways. Occupation. And the enterprise of doing scientific research is, um, tough. And if you're not loving it, it's really tough. So I think passion is the main thing. Um, everybody who applies to graduate school, smart. So, I mean,

that's a given always. But what distinguishes among the folks and the people that I like to invite into my lab are the ones who are passionate. The other factor, and this is where you get from your letters or back in the day. I don't know that we even had mail.

We had telegraph maybe, uh, when I started. But Walt Wilzinski, with whom you worked as an undergraduate, he picked up the phone. Call me, hey. She's really hard worker

and super smart. Um, and, uh, easy to go, going. That's it. That's what I want to hear. My students, um, all my students super hard working, as you know. And so sometimes there are little tricks to learning this. Sometimes somebody just calls you and says, hey, this person really works good hours. But the kinds of folks that I find. Can I generalize. But folks who, uh, um, are college athletes because they have to be very disciplined with their time management to study. And they have, you know, so they have good grades and they also train in the morning or whatever. Those guys are great kids. Kids who grow up on the farm I love, uh, because they work hard. And they also understand something that many scientists have a hard time accepting. That is, not only do you have to work hard, you have to be lucky, right? So if you're a farmer, you have to be lucky. You have to have right weather conditions and right market conditions and so on to be successful. And scientists who are very rational thinkers don't want to think, oh, uh, I have to work hard. I also have to be lucky. I have to stumble onto something and recognize this is something important and then follow up on that.

Staci Bilbo: Yeah, I completely agree. And the discipline I also agree with. I have a, uh, former graduate student who was in the Navy before she came to me, man, I'll take them any day. They're so, you know, they're just so disciplined and they, they just understand, you know, you work hard, you get it done. Um, not that complaining is a

bad thing. It's okay to complain about, you know, conditions if they need to be improved. Um, that's, that's fine. Um, but in general, it's just this sort of like, no nonsense, um, approach. Um, but yeah, the passion. I, I agree with, um, and organization. Yeah. And that's, that's also really important. So. And that's the harder thing to teach. I think. Sometimes it's like people are super curious about everything and they want to do everything and they want to understand all the stuff, but they're really disorganized. And so it's like how to, how to get them to try to prioritize what is the most important thing, um, that they should be doing right now and then, you know, what's the next most

important thing, and so on. Um, so that, that for me, I think it is also a challenge as a mentor.

Navigating a Changing Career Landscape

Randy Nelson: So do you feel that things have changed? I mean, I hear this a lot of this new generation

00:20:00

Randy Nelson: that's been going on for 2,000 years, talking about the former generation of being, um, harder working than the previous generation or the current generations, things like that. I, I don't see that ever to be the case. I've been doing this for 40 years now, and, um, I don't see a huge change. But what about you? I've talked to people. They're, they're seeing what they, they claim to be, um, big changes in people's

attitudes when they are in graduate school. Do you see that too?

Staci Bilbo: I think that I see a little bit more, or maybe a moderate amount more of anxiety about what the future is. And I think that sort of, sort of filters down into, um, you know, a bit of paralysis. So I think people are just as hard working. I think people worry

a lot more about the future, and I think that's totally valid. I mean, the world is a bit crazy right now, let's be honest. Um, and I think it didn't feel that way for me. Um, although, again, I think it was just maybe you created an environment of just put your head down and get your work done. And I tell every single assistant professor starting their lab the same thing now, just put your head down and get your work done. It's like just. And the rest will sort itself out in a way. Um, you can't control the world. You can only control

what you're doing today, you can control how you set up your experiment. You can't control the outcome of the experiment. But, you know, that's the fun part. So, so I, But I do think there's more anxiety. And I also think that there's just so much more, um, sort. There's a lot more expectations in terms of, um, milestones. Uh, in a way, it's like you have to get this done now, and then you have to get this next thing done, and then you. It's like, for instance, when postdocs join the lab, they have to get, uh, a training grant very quickly so that if they want to get their transitional award, like a K99 to set them up for a faculty position, they're on a clock the moment they step foot in the lab. And that clock is kind of brutal. Uh, there's all kinds of discussion about that, about whether it's good or bad, do we extend it? But then they're going to be postdocs forever, and that's not good, you know. So I, I, I don't know if I have an opinion on that. Uh, honestly, I think that again, there's pluses and minuses to it, but I do know it is, it's, you know, it's a lot. So it's, they're sort of constantly worrying about the next step, and that's not great for thinking creatively and, um, you know, deeply about your, your questions. It can be, it can interfere. So I think that's the biggest challenge that I see for people right now and for myself. I mean, frankly, you know, it's like the minute you get one grant, you start thinking about the next one. It's like.

Randy Nelson: Well, I think that's very accurate. I mean, even, even I feel that often that I just need some time to think. I remember my mentor who. My birthday was Monday and he called me and I thought that was very sweet. He's in his mid-80s, I think, and, uh, called me and wished me a happy birthday. But I remember he used to tell me, You know what I do for a living, Nelson? I think. And he really did make it an art form. He would, he would, um, read mystery novels and he said that helped sharpen his thinking and, and, and I didn't get it at the time. I just thought, oh, geez, get in the lab. Um, but like me, his lab skills were, um, were not well developed. And so, um, thinking is such a wonderful aspect of this gig. But I think all the pressures of getting funding and

managing things, uh, a department chair, which is rewarding, but it also takes time. We all get 24 hours every day. And so something has to give. And I, I worry how often thinking comes. And I like going to talks still, because it'll trigger something. Oh, that would be cool to do, or this or that or whatever. And so that's, that's the still fun part, is to hear new,

00:25:00

Randy Nelson: um, perspectives that you don't get to do, I think like an industry, for example, um, that you get to do in academia.

Staci Bilbo: Um, yeah, yeah, I agree. It's a very creative discipline in a way. And I was just actually talking to my brother about this. My brother is in theater. He's a technical director of the theater department at his university. And he said that his creative process is 95% thinking about it and then 5% doing it. And I work a little bit the same way when I write a grant. I think about a grant for months and months and months, and then I, you know, and then I sit down and write it. Um, and I don't know how, you know, how typical that is. I know that my students are all terrified of writing. Um, I mean, writing is hard, but they're, they're, they're very terrified of sort of even starting. And, um, that's something you instilled in us very well as, as well. I mean, you were always like, what are you working on? What are you writing? If you're not writing, you know, then you're not, you know, you're not using your time effectively. Um, and so that's another thing I've carried forward into my own lab. It's like, at any given time, what's your writing project? And that could be your project in your head because you're

thinking about it, you're thinking deeply, but, you know, the next thing you're going to be writing, whether it's a paper or a review article or a grant, you know, but you're always working on something.

Randy Nelson: Right? But it should be joyful. That's the thing I try to convey to my trainees is that, um, it's work, it's hard work, but you should derive joy from it shouldn't be something that causes you anxiety, or it shouldn't be something that is something you dread. But in terms of just, I'm anxious about my career, sorts of ideas, or just

about how to get this project done, things like that. You know, my, my sense, particularly with writing, is that you just convey what you, you just said. Uh, basically is that you get better at writing. By practicing writing. And, uh, I would say I don't have very many strengths, but one that I think I do have is that I love to edit papers and I do it quickly, I turn it around quickly. So if someone hands me a manuscript, they get it back in 48 hours every time. And, um, I have all kinds of rules about writing and I have all kinds of writing guides and stylistic sorts of perspectives and training people to write in journales, as we said. Um, and so I, I think that aspect is good. And I think you have to just help teach your folks to manage their expectations. Right. Um, I don't ever push my

folks to publish exclusively in the CNS journals. I think people need a balanced portfolio. Yeah, publish in PNAS, publish in JNeurosci. Publish if you can in one of the Nature or the Cell or type journals. But that should not be your only goal because some people

get fixated on that and I think that causes a lot of anxiety, personally.

Staci Bilbo: Yeah, yeah, I agree. I think organization is, is really important, um, to try to just prioritize each day, each week, each month, what, what are the most essential things. And then beyond that, I have had more than one conversation with my trainees in, in the recent past, just reminding them, coming back to the beginning of our conversation, that ultimately what this is is that it's. We are in pursuit of discovery. Right? So it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what the end is, to be honest. I mean, it does it like if the experiment works or it doesn't work. As long as they've set it up to the best of their ability, um, and been careful in the execution, the end result of that should not matter. I mean, I know it does matter because productivity matters. But, um, I try to

remind people to just let go of the expectation of the result as much as possible. Because no matter what, you'll learn something from doing the experiment. And that's really exciting. Right? And even if it fails miserably, then they learn what not to do the next time. Right. And that's, I mean, especially, let's hope, right? I mean especially graduate students are just,

00:30:00

Staci Bilbo: you know, uh, their job is just to learn how to fail and then get back up again and do something else. Because so many experiments in science don't work out the

way you thought, the majority of them do not work out the way you thought. And I think we all lose sight of that. That of course we don't know what we're doing. We're working at the end or the edge of discovery. Uh, Right. And, um, so it's, uh. And we don't talk about that enough. I don't think we talk about the end result of it and the pretty paper and the pretty grant and the pretty talk. And we don't talk about all of the sort of

fumbling along the way that we all do because we have no idea what's going to happen. And that's the best part, in a way.

When a Mentee Should Move to the Next Stage

Randy Nelson: So I know the answer I have for you. I knew when you were ready to move on. So you have graduate student, you have postdoc. When do you know it's time to tell them, um, you need to move to the next stage.

Staci Bilbo: Yeah.

Randy Nelson: What's their tell? What's their tell?

Staci Bilbo: Their tell is when they start getting irritated with me in lab meeting. Because it's obvious. Yes, it's obvious to me that they think that they have a better answer than I do. Like, they're sitting there going, oh, uh, that's not what I would have done, or that's not how I would have managed that or I would do this thing. And you can tell they're just so annoyed. And it's like they're like the teenager wanting to leave the nest every time. I can tell they're, they're, they're done. They're. And so, uh, yeah. And those people all go on to successful, um, positions or, you know, it's the ones that are sort of a little too comfy and, you know, and not sort of, um, pressing against me in a way, you know, sort of getting annoyed that, that they would do it a different way. Those are the ones that you're like, m. I wonder if this person will ever leave.

Randy Nelson: So, yeah, for me, for me, I. Well, that what you said is true. And, and I find that the, the weaning, um, period is, fast lived. Once they get out on their own, suddenly the emails come. Oh, wow, you were a great mentor. I'm sorry I was such a pain in the butt. Now I get it that I have my own people. Um, I've gotten a couple of those recently. Made me chuckle. But, um, for me, it was when you proposed to do a study. It ended up being that paper on melatonin and fever. I think you published in Endocrinology. But you proposed it to me prior to that. A lot of the work you do, the first couple experiments somebody does is usually like Aim 2A of my grant application or something like that, where I sort of here do this, and then with their committee and me,

they come up with a plan for their dissertation or their postdoc project or whatever. But I know it's time for them to move on to the next stage when they propose something novel. And that was, for me, that was the step for you, was when you said, oh, I would really like to do this. And you set up all this. This. You accept your own apparatus with garage door openers or something in the cage to measure activity or. It was a very

sophisticated, not sophisticated approach that I. thought was very, uh, cool. Um, so for me, when students are ready to go, it's usually when they're starting to come up with their own ideas. And I think they could be doing this on their own. They don't need me to say yay or nay. Um, and so that tends to work for me.

Staci Bilbo: Yeah. Yeah. And changing the subject a little bit, one of the things that I've always thought. I've never forgotten this. I remember when I was in grad school, you said to me, and I guess you said to all of us, you know, I'm not your friend. I'm not your buddy. I am your mentor. Uh, you know, it's a different thing. But then, as you know, I've progressed in my career, I feel like, you know, you. You are my friend. Right? You've become really my confidant in a way, because every time I have any problem, as you know, I call you. So, um, that's. That's been really cool to have. You know, I think all of us, uh, continue to need mentors in our life no matter how far along we get. And just to see that this sort of transition there, um, and. And I hope I will be that for. For

00:35:00

Staci Bilbo: my former trainees as well. I mean, and I am for some of them as they are now in their assistant professor roles. And, um, so it just sort of changes, um, over time.

Randy Nelson: I think I recognized early on because, uh, I came from a really outstanding, um, mentor, Irv Zucker, who sort of has a reputation for being a great mentor, and he's mentored lots of folks. But he viewed mentorship as I do, as a lifetime commitment. And so, um, I remain engaged in folks careers. Sometimes maybe they don't want me to be, but I remain engaged in their careers throughout their careers. And I think, um, you have that perspective. Then any little hiccups or bumps in the road or

the weaning process or things like that, um, um, um, become trivial because it's a long,

long relationship for some, some of you folks, you know, it's going on 35 years, and I think of Lance and, and Greg and Sabra. Um, and it's just been, you know, it's the highlight of an academic career. You know, the discoveries, they're cool and they're fun and everything, but watching the people develop and um, look at the academic grandkids and great grandkids is really, really, uh, fun aspect of, uh, this gig.

Should Mentors and Mentees Think Alike?

So probably last question. Do you think that mentors and mentees should think alike or should they not think alike? What's your thoughts on that?

Staci Bilbo: Well, I will say, I think if you're, if you think alike, it's a lot easier to mentor someone. As a mentor, I have had to grow and learn in ways that, you know, have really pushed me. Having people in your lab that have really different life experiences and really different perspectives is really fun. Actually, I have one graduate student, um, an international student, and he is so blunt with me. Sometimes he will take. I, I'm taken aback by what he says, and sometimes I'm like, you know, a little bit offended at first sometimes, but then I, when I think about it, I'm like, you know what? I'm really glad he, he said that or he said, you know, he, he made me think about things in a different way. And I really, really value the, the honest. The honesty and the sort of pushing, um, is challenging. But, um, it's also really fun. Um, so. So yeah, I think thinking alike is easy, but. But I don't necessarily. I definitely don't think, uh, a good mentor mentee

relationship needs to be built on that. I don't know. What do you think?

Randy Nelson: I guess when I think about thinking alike, I think of it more from a scientific perspective of thinking alike. Not so much the life, um, experiences. Because

my life experiences were very different from virtually anybody who went to college because I didn't come from family that went to college. But from my perspective, I really liked having people in the lab who shared, I guess, levels of analysis and perspectives in biology. Neuroscience tends to be focused on mice, tends to be focused on molecular, um, and cellular levels of analysis. I liked having folks that could span these different levels, look at molecular perspectives, look at behavioral perspectives, even look at social grouping perspectives. I really, as you know, like to infuse people with understanding of evolution and natural selection and adaptations. And you coming from a lab that studied frogs and toads and things like that was sort of ideal for me. Or, um, I think some of the other students who came, you know, studied birds in the field or studied bugs or all kinds of different organisms, but they had a perspective of understanding the adaptive function of behavior and the brain and the sensory systems and that sort of thing. And so that was, uh, for me, that was important.

Staci Bilbo: Yeah, I agree with that. I think the big picture of, um, like I said, bring it all the way to the beginning of our conversation again, the passion, the curiosity. How do. How do animals and people navigate their world and what are the sort of adaptations that allow them to do so? And how does it work, basically, you know, and. And from there you can pretty much work on anything. Become passionate about whatever your project, wherever it takes you. Right. So that's. That's absolutely key. Yeah.

Podcast Narrator: This podcast is brought to you by Neuronline, SfN's home for learning and discussion, where you can find a variety of additional professional development resources and opportunities

00:40:00

Podcast Narrator: to connect with other neuroscientists. Check out the link in the show notes to learn more. Think Alike? is produced by Amanda Kimball, Adam Katz, Eiman Abdelgadir, Taylor Johnson, Emily O'Connor, Dominique Giles, and Marie Dussauze. Thanks for listening.

00:40:16