Transitions in development – an interview with Chris Whitewoods

Let's start from the beginning, when did you first become interested in science, and plant science in particular?

I've always been interested in science as long as I can remember, especially the natural world. I've always wanted to understand how things work. I would do little experiments with my dad when I was in primary school and they made me realize that you can find a lot out just with some simple equipment. I didn't always want to research plants. I actually chose to do my undergraduate degree in Edinburgh, because they had the biggest selection of degrees in biology and I couldn't decide. When I was there I had some really good lectures on plant evolution from Richard Milne. They made me realize how many fascinating questions were still unanswered in plants. I did a project in a lab on plants and haven't stopped since.

You did your PhD at the University of Cambridge, UK, with Jill Harrison. What was your research about?

Jill had been publishing a few evo-devo papers as a postdoc with Jane Langdale in Oxford, and I found out that she was going to start her own lab in Cambridge. I chatted to her before she'd even started the lab and knew I wanted to work with her. My PhD project was about how moss meristems work. Meristems are a group of undifferentiated cells at the tip of plant stems. We know a lot about the genetic network that controls meristems in flowering plants, but at the time we had no idea if the same genes controlled meristems in other groups of land plants, or if the genes we knew were just a weird quirk of flowering plants. My project was trying to understand whether the same genes are conserved in flowering plants and moss, an early diverging land plant. Mosses only have one stem cell in their meristem, and the meristem has a characteristic division pattern. Knocking out meristem regulators called CLAVATA in flowering plants led to bigger and mis-shapen meristems, because there were too many stem cells. When we knocked CLAVATA out in moss, a striking phenotype was that the meristem division planes were completely wrong, suggesting that the same genes control meristem function in moss as well. We went back and looked in flowering plants, and showed that they have division plane defects too. I like that by looking at slightly strange plants like moss, we can also find out more about how the more ‘normal’ ones work.

After your PhD, you went to the John Innes Centre in Norwich for your postdoctoral research. How did you end up working with the aquatic carnivorous plant Utricularia gibba?

For my postdoc, I went to Enrico Coen's lab, which is famous for its work on snapdragons (Antirrhinum). I really wanted to do a forward mutant screen and, although they didn't have any snapdragon projects going when I joined, they had just got a grant to work on trap morphogenesis in carnivorous plants. Looking back, it was a slightly mad decision to work on a non-model plant, and it took a lot of effort to get it to work. A lot of the work was done by an amazing research assistant, Karen Lee. She grew different carnivorous plants in the lab and worked out that Utricularia gibba was the easiest and quickest to grow. It's small compared to the charismatic carnivorous plants like Nepenthes and Sarracenia, but this makes it easier to study development. Utricularia is small enough that you can grow it on a slide and do beautiful imaging under a confocal microscope to see the early stages of development fairly easily.

What were the research questions you were asking using Utricularia gibba?

The big question was how these traps evolved from flat leaves into cup-shaped, hollow structures. The even bigger question was how complexity evolves. We did a forward mutant screen, growing thousands of these carnivorous plants and screening them for defects in trap development. On the side, I was doing a reverse genetics project, looking at genes known to be involved in leaf development, trying to find out what they did in traps. Flat leaves have one class of genes expressed in the top half of the leaf and another class in the bottom half. The leaf grows in parallel with the orientation of the boundary between the two halves, making the leaf grow flat. It's been proposed that the inside of traps is homologous to the top half of a flat leaf. We messed up the expression of genes from the top half and saw that trap development was perturbed. We also found a shift in gene expression domains early on in carnivorous trap development, which changed the shape of the boundary. This, in turn, changed the orientation of growth, which switches development from making a flat leaf to a cup-shaped trap. I worked with some amazing computational modelers, who showed that, with the same set of growth parameters and different expression patterns, you get either a flat leaf or a cup-shaped trap.

In 2021, you started your own lab at the SLCU. How was your experience applying for an independent position?

I applied for a couple of jobs after I'd been in Enrico's lab for 5 years, just before we got the paper out on this switch in expression pattern in traps. I was planning to work on the next steps of that project and Enrico was happy for me to take that with me. I got interviews, but I didn't get a job, and my contract was running out. Enrico suggested that I apply to some small grants for an extra year's funding, but I had to think of something different to work on, which I could use as a springboard to apply elsewhere.

One of the side projects that I'd been ignoring was about air spaces inside leaves. In flat leaves, the air spaces are there for gas exchange and light scattering, making photosynthesis more efficient. In aquatic plants, the air spaces are bigger to help the plant float. When we were doing the mutant screen for traps, we found a Utricularia mutant that sank. When we cut the leaves open, the air spaces weren't there. I looked into the literature and found that we knew nothing about how air spaces are formed in leaves. So, I managed to get a 1-year fellowship working on air spaces and using Utricularia to do comparative work with Arabidopsis, the well-established model plant. I was working independently, setting up the project, working out how to image air spaces and making a load of genetic resources. Enrico was very supportive. When I applied again for independent positions, I wrote about the air space project and got a job pretty much straight away. It is a much more interesting project, and clearly different from what Enrico does. Looking back, that was definitely the best thing that happened to me scientifically – I was made to take a step back and think what big questions I could ask, where I could best apply my skills and find my own niche.

What were your most important considerations when looking for a group leader position?

The main consideration was being somewhere that is excited about my science. I enjoy fundamental developmental biology research. The Sainsbury Lab is great for that and has good resources and fun colleagues. It was also helpful that it was in the right place at the right time. My wife had just been promoted in her job in Cambridge, so we wanted to stay local.

The Sainsbury Lab focusses on plant development, which makes it a great place to discuss your exciting ideas, but it can be a bit insular. I have to keep going out into the real world and reminding myself what other people are interested in and justifying why what I work on is interesting.

You're also a teaching fellow at Sidney Sussex College. Were you looking for positions with teaching responsibilities?

I really like teaching. It's satisfying when you can help people get a concept and see them getting excited about science. My job at the Sainsbury Lab is research only, but because I'm associated with the university, I would teach small groups of students in the plant and microbial science course, and the cell and developmental biology course. I'd teach the students for a year, but then never see them again. I ended up being a teaching fellow because it lets me have prolonged contact with students through their entire degrees, to give advice and watch them grow. I also like teaching from a more selfish perspective. Students haven't been primed about what's interesting or what questions they can ask, so they'll ask questions that I hadn't thought about and make me realize what the big questions really are.

How did you find the transition to becoming a group leader?

One surprising challenge about becoming a group leader was how to let people know what I'm doing now. People either know me as someone who worked on moss or on carnivorous plant morphogenesis. When I started my lab, I would be invited to give talks about trap morphogenesis, but I had to tell people that I was not working on that anymore. It will be easier once the papers come out, but for the first few years, it's been a surprising challenge.

As for highlights, it's been great seeing people in my lab coming up with their own ideas. They have done experiments on areas that I never would have looked at. Those ideas have turned out to be some of the most interesting things we're working on now. We started off working on air spaces. Now we're looking at how plants sense high light levels and how they change the internal structure of their leaves in response to light. One of my PhD students is really passionate about this topic, and it turns out that's a whole interesting field that I would never have looked at on my own.

Can you summarise the research themes of your group?

We work on how the inside of leaves is patterned. There are two parts to that. The first part is about how the intercellular air spaces form and how they're patterned. Different species have different patterns. Even within a leaf, the top half has almost no air spaces, but the bottom half has many spaces, so we're trying to work out how that happens. The second part is about cell identity. How are the two main photosynthetic cell types in plants, the palisade mesophyll and spongy mesophyll, formed? We're trying to find out what genes control the formation of these two cell types. Then spanning both of these areas is the question of how plants modify these core developmental mechanisms in response to environmental change. We mostly look at how leaves can change cell identity and cellular spacing to adapt to very high or low light. We've started doing some computational modelling alongside developmental genetics and imaging to test some hypotheses.

What are the current exciting areas in your field?

It's exciting that we can now look at how the inside of plants develops. That's been ignored for a long time, because it's hard to image and get mutants. Now, with better microscopes and careful genetic screens, it's exciting to go beneath the surface and find out how the inside is developing. One specific thing I'm excited about at the minute is the data we have showing that chloroplasts are controlling the development of photosynthetic cells. We think the chloroplasts are responding to light and making different cells make different decisions about their growth and development. I'm really excited about seeing where that goes.

How do you approach hiring new team members?

I believe you can train people to do any technique, so I'm less worried about hiring people with experience in a certain technique or area. For me, the most important thing is they have to be enthusiastic about the work that we're doing. Science is hard; a lot of the time things don't work. You need people who can weather months of boring repetition to get that one exciting result. It's also important that people work together. We're a really small lab, trying to do a lot of things and to do that we have to help each other. For example, we're doing a mutant screen for genes that control photosynthetic cell identity. The research assistant working on that is doing an amazing job, but every so often, the amount of work is too much for one person. I'm really proud that everyone will always happily step in to help without me even asking.

What advice would you give to people thinking of starting their own labs?

Don't just pick a research question that is the sensible continuation of your postdoc project. Take a step back and ask yourself, what are the big questions in the field and beyond your field? Where can you best apply your scientific expertise to answer those questions? Alongside that, the more boring advice is, remember you have less time than you think when you start a lab. You need to really hit the ground running, write grants, get PhD students, get the data and write papers.

You've participated in a few public outreach events for the Sainsbury Lab. How were those experiences, and what are your views on science communication?

I like the type of outreach where it's very interactive. During lockdown, I had a Zoom call with the public about carnivorous plants while I was on the confocal microscope. That was filled with fascinating questions and conversations while the public asked me what we were looking at. I like having conversations that you wouldn't otherwise have, and thinking about big questions that you wouldn't necessarily be asking in your day to day. Sometimes it's surprising what the public are interested in. There's often a narrative that the public like to hear about research that is practical, especially with plants. When I talk to people, they'll ask those practical questions, but they also think it's great that we're looking at fundamental science and discovering new stuff. I'm always reassured by talking to the public that they are interested in the work we do.

You took time off when your two children were born. How did you navigate other responsibilities alongside an academic career?

I had one child during my postdoc and another as a group leader, and took a few months off each time. There are challenges of having kids while trying to do science, and I don't have anything new to add, but it's always been something that I've had to consider, especially now they're in school. I'm trying to go through an academic career while giving them enough stability. During my postdoc, I worked part-time for a year to look after my son and, scientifically, it worked out. I had my daughter when I started my lab and that was a challenge. I started my lab in March, hired a research assistant in August and went on leave in September. That was an absolute baptism of fire for the research assistant, but he was amazing and rose to the occasion. I was very fortunate to have good people I work closely with. I'd absolutely recommend taking time off with your children while they are small.

How important do you think mentorship is in navigating an academic career?

I think it's very important. Enrico, my postdoc supervisor, was massively helpful when I was applying for jobs. He would discuss potential projects with me, pick apart applications and help me with interviews. I wouldn't have got the job without his help. I've also had excellent advice from helpful colleagues, but I think it's important to find someone who is a good fit for you as a mentor. People often give advice on the most efficient way to be successful in your career, but just because something's the most efficient doesn't mean that it's right for you and your family. That's always been something I've struggled with, trying to take on board people's very well-meaning advice and then doing the thing which is right for me.

Did you ever consider an alternative career path?

Probably about once a week at the minute as my fellowship comes to an end! I've always loved science, and I've wanted to run my own lab for ages, but it's never guaranteed. During my postdoc, I did an internship at PLOS Biology as an editor for 3 months. I was surprised by how much I loved that. The amazing thing is, after that internship, I stopped worrying so much about career stability, because now I know that there is another career I could do, which would be equally fascinating. That also helped scientifically, because it means that now in my lab, I can do slightly riskier experiments, knowing that if it doesn't work out, I can do something else that's interesting.

Finally, is there anything Development readers would be surprised to learn about you?

I used to be called Chris White. When I got married, I combined my last name with my wife's last name: she was Woods, I was White, and now I'm Whitewoods. That caused some confusion initially, because for the first paper I published, I was White. Going to conferences, I had to explain to people that I changed my name. But now people are always surprised when they find out that I was called anything else!

Chris Whitewoods was interviewed by Joyce Yu, Online Editor at Development. This piece has been edited and condensed with approval from the interviewee.