Chiara Giorio is Assistant Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at the Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry of the University of Cambridge. Chiara graduated in Chemistry in 2008 from the University of Padua (Italy), where she remained for her PhD in Molecular Sciences (awarded in 2012). She was a postdoc at the University of Cambridge in the group of Professor Markus Kalberer until 2016, a researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in 2017, and tenure-track Assistant Professor at the University of Padua until the beginning of 2020, when she returned to Cambridge. She is now leading a multidisciplinary research group working on air quality and climate science. She is the recipient of the 2021 RSC Environment, Sustainability & Energy Division Early Career Award and a Fellow of the Community for Analytical Measurement Science (CAMS).
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on Aqueous-phase processing of atmospheric aerosol influences dissolution kinetics of metal ions in an urban background site in the Po Valley. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
I had the fortune to touch many different aspects of environmental science research during my career so far. My first paper concerned the environmental fate of systemic pesticides and exposure routes of honeybees. Back then I was already working on air pollution too. These two, apparently very distinct, research lines had something in common. One of the exposure routes for honeybees was through dust (containing pesticides) emitted in the atmosphere during sowing of corn fields. Now my work is mainly focused on air pollution, trying to understand the mechanisms of toxicity but also monitoring people exposure to air pollution.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I am part of collaborative research projects aiming at monitoring air quality in people’s homes and testing strategies to improve the quality of the air they breathe through available technologies but also behavioural change. I am really excited about this because I feel I can make a positive impact on people’s lives.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
We are on the verge of a climate catastrophe and current research is focusing on mitigation strategies. However, we don’t know how air pollution, currently killing more than 7 million people per year worldwide, is going to be affected by climate change. How can we improve air quality as well as mitigating climate change?
What do you find most challenging about your research?
My research is interdisciplinary and requires a wide range of expertises. It can be very challenging to put together the right team and promote a good communication between people with different backgrounds but at the same time it can be very exciting and rewarding.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I will be at the RSC “Analytical Research Forum 2022” in London in June and at the RSC “#EnvChem2022: Chemistry of the Whole Environment Research” in York in July.
How do you spend your spare time?
I love cooking, sports, and tv series but, right now, in my spare time I am mostly a mum of a lovely little boy.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
I am very happy to be a scientist, but if I had to choose another job I would probably be a chef in a small restaurant. I love cooking and I like small characteristic restaurants that base their menu on local products. They always have a unique flavour and unique atmosphere.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
My advice is to believe in yourself, in your ability to reach your objectives and to not get discouraged by people and events.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Chiara Giorio
Rachel Scholes is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of British Columbia, where she leads a research group in environmental engineering. Her research focuses on trace organic contaminants and their fate in treatment systems for water and wastewater. Currently, her group is investigating photochemical transformations of emerging contaminants and the formation of oxidized and nitrogenous byproducts, as well as the fate of trace organic contaminants in nature-based treatment systems. Her research aims to address the implications of trace contaminants for human health, ecotoxicity, and the development of safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals. Prior to joining UBC, she completed a postdoctoral appointment at the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Bioproducts Research Unit, where she conducted hazard analyses of emerging contaminants and evaluated safer alternatives to chemical antimicrobials. She earned an M.S. and Ph.D. in Environmental Engineering from the University of California, Berkeley, and a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Northwestern University, and she completed a Fulbright Graduate Student Fellowship in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Otago.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on Contributions of Reactive Nitrogen Species to Transformations of Organic Compounds in Water: A Critical Review. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
I was very fortunate to have opportunities to explore research as an undergraduate student, and I discovered a deep interest in environmental chemistry, particularly the fate of trace organic contaminants. Since then, I have approached trace contaminants from multiple perspectives. My first, first-author paper is from my Fulbright research in an environmental chemistry laboratory, which focused on the bioaccumulation of halogenated pesticides in trout from a large river system on New Zealand’s South Island. My studies in New Zealand allowed me to develop strong analytical chemistry skills and an understanding of contaminant fate and transport. I brought that background in environmental chemistry to my PhD research in environmental engineering. In my subsequent research, I queried the fate of pharmaceuticals and urban-use pesticides in engineered wetlands, and worked with green chemistry experts to assess lower-hazard alternatives to harmful chemicals. Each of these experiences has allowed me to refine my approach to addressing trace contaminants and their impacts. When I was studying open-water wetlands during my PhD, I became very interested in photochemical transformations, and reactive nitrogen species in particular. This most recent article builds on my PhD research by focusing on reactive nitrogen species and the resulting formation of toxic byproducts in water treatment processes.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I recently started my position as a faculty member at UBC and am very excited to develop my own research group. I really enjoy sharing the excitement of doing research with my students. I am most looking forward to working with them to further advance our understanding of trace contaminant transformations and mitigate the risks posed by toxic chemicals.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
Transformation products are increasingly being considered in environmental engineering research, especially as high-resolution mass spectrometry becomes more widely available in research laboratories. With hundreds of thousands of parent compounds, it is unrealistic to experimentally assess all of the possible transformation products. Even if we know which products will form, we often do not have sufficient information about their toxicity and fate. As advanced analytical tools enable us to better detect the plethora of chemicals present in the environment, we need methods to prioritize which ones are of highest concern. This is one reason why I am interested in reactive nitrogen species – because they result in the formation of nitrated and nitrosated byproducts, which are often more toxic and less easily degraded than the parent compounds.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
Being somewhere between an environmental chemist and engineer presents the challenge that my research often spans a wide range from fundamental to applied. My research requires that we expand our mechanistic understanding of contaminant transformations while studying realistically complex environmental systems. For example, when we look at constructed wetlands, we have multiple processes directly affecting contaminant transformation (e.g., sorption, biotransformation, photolysis) as well as design parameters that influence these processes indirectly, such as hydraulic retention time, flow paths, and redox conditions. As someone who loves to understand the underlying principles of a system and the practical implications, I am constantly trying to bridge the gap between fundamentals and applications.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I will be at the American Chemical Society meeting this August in Chicago, and I hope to be attending more in-person conferences soon.
How do you spend your spare time?
I spend as much of it outdoors as possible. I love trail running, backpacking, and exploring the Pacific Northwest. I am also a musician. On stormy days you’ll likely find me playing my French horn or reading a novel.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
When choosing an undergraduate major, I pretty seriously considered becoming a music teacher. In fact, I started out in a dual degree program majoring in music education and chemical engineering. If I was not a scientist, I would probably be directing music groups and teaching kids to play musical instruments.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
Spend the time to forge strong relationships and learn from your peers. Learning about research directions adjacent to your own can spur new ideas and building strong relationships with other students and postdocs can help you create a network of support in your future career. I keep in touch with friends from graduate school both inside and out of academia. Being in touch with other new faculty members has provided me with an incredibly helpful support system.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Rachel C. Scholes
Dr. Mohamed (Moha) Ateia Ibrahim is a Group Leader and Environmental Engineer at the US EPA. Moha is an expert in the areas of emerging contaminants and the assessment of various separation and destruction technologies from lab-scale to Superfund sites. Inspired by the realization that conventional water treatment techniques will not be able to treat these problems, Moha have devoted himself to developing practical remediation solutions that draw on his expertise in engineering and chemistry. He focused on the assessment of conventional methods, the development of new materials and/or composites to adsorb/degrade micropollutants, and the mobility of new classes of contaminants in the environment (e.g., microplastics). He has initiated and led over a dozen of research collaborations with researchers across the world to target micropollutants in a practical way.
Read Mohamed’s Emerging Investigator Series article “Microplastics Sources, Fate, Toxicity, Detection, and Interactions with Micropollutants in Aquatic Ecosystems – A Review of Reviews” and read more about him in the interview below:
Recent progress in analytical chemistry has made it possible to detect a growing number of emerging contaminants (ECs) in natural and engineered water environments. Inspired by the realization that conventional water treatment techniques will not be able to treat these problems, I have devoted myself to developing practical remediation solutions that draw on my expertise in engineering and chemistry. Specifically, I have focused on the assessment of conventional methods (e.g., GAC, IX resins), the development of new materials and/or composites to adsorb/degrade ECs (e.g., PFAS, DBPs, PPCPs, illicit drugs), and the mobility of new classes of contaminants in the environment (e.g., microplastics). I have a multidisciplinary research background with hands-on experience in environmental engineering, materials chemistry, and agricultural engineering. I believe that solving global environmental challenges will require diverse expertise. Towards this end, I have initiated and led over a dozen research collaborations with researchers across the world to target ECs in a practical way.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
The most exciting and motivating aspect about my work is the positive impact on human health by contributing in protecting and treating water sources.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research? & 4. What do you find most challenging about your research?
The field of “emerging” contaminants is always challenged by the lack of information about detection methods and their sensitivities as well as comprehensive toxicological assessments. Once we can detect a contaminant and verify its toxicity, then we need to find its fate in a water/wastewater treatment plant and find novel solutions for the persistent contaminants. However, the magnitude of the problem is huge because the estimated number of chemicals and chemical mixtures is more than 350,000. Therefore, in addition to the experimental challenges/questions above, modeling efforts are needed more than ever before to deal with such large and branched problems.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I will be attending multiple meetings in March including ACS Spring Meeting and Water Environment Federation Summit.
How do you spend your spare time?
Before the pandemic, I used to travel a lot. Now, I like cooking and watching movies and documentaries.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
I would work for an NGO.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
Establishing a strong network of connections is a key factor for success and it should start at the stage of graduate school. This network should include mentors and collaborators who give guidance and support. In addition, the network of early career scientists has a bridge with junior students and researchers as a way of training and knowledge transfer.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Mohamed Ateia Ibrahim
Jennifer Apell is an Assistant Professor of Environmental Engineering in the Department of Civil and Urban Engineering at NYU. She earned her PhD in Environmental Chemistry from MIT in 2017 and completed her postdoctoral research at ETH Zurich in the Department of Environmental Systems Science. Her research focuses on the environmental fate of manmade organic pollutants, specifically characterizing the mechanisms that control the equilibrium and kinetics of partitioning between environmental media and on light-driven degradation pathways.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on Quantifying the Impact of Cloud Cover on Solar Irradiance and Environmental Photodegradation. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
If you put this article next to the very first one I published during my master’s degree, you would probably be surprised they were from the same person. My first research was in water treatment engineering and focused on bench-scale testing of an ion exchange treatment processes for a small utility in Florida. This article uses machine learning models and publicly available data from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Make no mistake, I am still an experimentalist, but the COVID-19 pandemic required a lot of adaptation from early career faculty. There was some precedent for this work as it builds off some of my postdoctoral research on modeling clear sky irradiance spectra to quantify “best-case scenario” photodegradation rates. This new research tries to make those values more realistic by considering the effects of clouds. With the messiness of real world data, machine learning models proved to be a powerful tool to find overall trends hidden within tens of thousands of data points.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
Learning some data science approaches during the lockdown was fun. However, many of these approaches are most useful for large datasets, which are pretty rare for the research I normally work on. I’m now looking forward to learning how advances in data science can be applied to analyze the sparse data sets that are typical when investigating the environmental fate of manmade chemicals.
I have also been focusing on having environmental justice concerns and community engagement guide and inform the research questions I address. New York City might be one of the best places for this. It is a new area for me, and the interest and engagement from the community that I have experienced so far is truly inspiring.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
That is a difficult question; there are so many questions that still need to be answered about pressing environmental concerns. Instead I would suggest that in our attempts to answer these questions, we give extra consideration to understanding the mechanisms—the ‘why?’—of the process. There are just too many chemicals and too many human-impacted environments for us to be investigating them on a case-by-case basis. Although our research may be focusing on a single pollutant or a single location, we should always try to put our results in a broader context so that the insights gained from our efforts can be translated to other situations.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
There are still so many things we don’t know about environmental processes and the impact that humans have on different environments. I’ve struggled with focusing on just a few research questions now that I have the freedom of a principal investigator. I find so much of the research in the field to be very exciting and important. I have a sign in my office that reminds me to stay focused on my currently chosen research questions.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I am co-organizing the Aquatic Photochemistry session at ACS this spring in San Diego. It looks like it is going to be amazing – so many good talks! I will unfortunately have to attend virtually. I’m also hoping to make it to AEESP and the Gordon Research Conference on Environmental Sciences: Water during the summer.
How do you spend your spare time?
My dog, Lumen, and I spend some time in the dog park, and I try to keep plants alive with varying success. I like to take the extra time to walk to places to get to know the neighborhood. I occasionally volunteer as a participant in other people’s research. I’ve been doing this since graduate school. Social science studies are particularly interesting because the research questions have always been hush-hush, so the tasks seem very random sometimes.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
Well I was a practicing engineer for a while before returning to school for a PhD. But let’s say if I weren’t any kind of scientist or engineer, I think I would want to be a detective. The use of reasoning and the long time required for something to be concluded seems like it would be similar between the two professions.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
Work on research questions that excite you. Equipment failure and inconclusive results are generally unavoidable, and being excited to answer the question can help get you through those hard times to the much happier times of contributing new data and knowledge to the field.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Jennifer Apell
Greg LeFevre is an assistant professor of environmental engineering and science in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering and IIHR—Hydroscience & Engineering at the University of Iowa where he started in 2016. He did his BS at Michigan Tech, MS and PhD at University of Minnesota, and Postdoc at Stanford University all in environmental engineering. The LeFevreLab focuses on elucidating biotransformation products and pathways of emerging organic contaminants with the goal of informing improved design of ‘engineered-natural’ treatment systems for non-point pollutants, like urban stormwater and agricultural drainage, and transform wastes into resources, protecting people and ecosystems. Greg has received multiple sources of recognition for his work, including the National Science Foundation CAREER Award, the University of Iowa Early Career Scholar of the Year award, the American Chemical Society Editor’s Choice award and ACS Best Paper award, the Royal Society of Chemistry Environmental Sciences ‘Best Paper’ and multiple ‘HOT’ articles, National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering fellow, the AEESP Best Dissertation, amongst others.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on Municipal Wastewater as a Year-Round Point Source of Neonicotinoid Insecticides that Persist in an Effluent-Dominated Stream. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
In some ways, my work has changed greatly through time, and in others it is very consistent. I did my PhD at the University of Minnesota focused on the fate and biotransformation of organic contaminants from stormwater in bioretention cells, and my postdoc was at Stanford focused on emerging contaminants in stormwater as well as plant metabolism of emerging contaminants during water recycling. Since starting at University of Iowa as a faculty member, we’ve been continuing in these areas and are also very interested in the fate and transformation of so-called ‘target-specific’ pesticides like the neonicotinoids. These compounds are so interesting and important because, although the parent compounds are explicitly designed to be less toxic to many non-target organisms, only very slight alterations to the chemical structure can dramatically alter the toxicity, reactivity, and fate of the transformation products.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I am really interested in how complex chemical exposure mixtures occur and change in the environment and could lead to unanticipated effects to biota. Complex mixtures are important because of the potential for interactive effects on organisms (e.g., drug-drug interactions); when mixtures change in space and time, so can the risk profile. New collaborative work that we’ve been doing at the field study site featured in this paper has been probing some of the spatiotemporal drivers of complex mixture evolution, as well risk patterns. Mixtures are how chemicals occur in the real environment.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
I believe that we are standing at the verge of multiple big-data “omics” revolutions, with a huge opportunity to converge high res mass spec with biological applications (transcriptomics, genomics) to link chemical exposures with effects to biota—which is ultimately why we care. This will be critical to being able to evaluate complex chemical mixture effects on organisms, which is very much a grant challenge—and difficult.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
I think that there is always a push-pull struggle between working at the interface between the fundamental but realistic and the more applied but less controlled. Navigating that is always a challenge, and I think that it’s important to be able to—and for journals to value—work across that spectrum. Field studies can be more ‘messy’, but are so important!
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I usually am at ACS once a year, often at SETAC, AEESP, EmCon, and Gordon Env Sci Water. Of course, during the pandemic, that has been really disrupted.
How do you spend your spare time?
I have two little kids (4 and 2 years old), so not much spare time, but I like to do outdoors activities as much as possible. Fortunately, my girls love fishing (at least when we are catching fish), catching bugs, and exploring in the woods. A new creek is an all-day itinerary.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
I honestly never really considered doing something that was not “a scientist” at least of some sort. My dad’s influence was really big on me; he was a woodworker by trade and taught me angles, planning, and precession—but his passion (and now retirement occupation) has always been ecological restoration. He took me with him to weekly volunteer workdays since I was four, and all of my jobs, internships, and education have been around the environmental sciences.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
This might be both the worse and best advice to early career researchers during the pandemic: Make friends before you need them. By that, I mean reach out to folks across your university who might be of potential connection or collaboration before you ask them for something or want them to join on a collaboration or proposal. The first year I was at UIowa, I met with someone new every or every other week, from Public Health to Chemistry to Education to Water Resources, etc. and mostly listened, but also got to share a little of what I do and my interests. Totally pull the ‘new person’ card, people will give you an hour. It totally makes coming back to people later with an idea less awkward, and some have resulted in great collaborations—and it’s much better than people only coming together to rally around a proposal (assuming they even know who you are). Getting to know folks is even more important during COVID, but harder.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Gregory LeFevre
Li Li is an Assistant Professor leading the Health & Environment Assessment Team (HEAT) at the University of Nevada, Reno since 2019. He obtained his BSc and PhD degrees from Nankai University in 2012 and Peking University in 2017, respectively, and received postdoctoral training at the University of Toronto Scarborough between 2017 and 2019. His research seeks to understand the accumulation, transport, transformation of synthetic chemicals (e.g., flame retardants, plasticizers, pesticides, and surfactants) and materials (e.g., nanomaterials and microplastics) in a nexus comprising the human socioeconomic system, environment, and food webs, as well as the resulting adverse environmental and health effects. He strives to establish, foster, maintain, and promote a variety of mechanistically sound and computationally effective models, to advance our thinking and understanding of the behavior and processes of synthetic chemicals and materials and meanwhile to inform decision making.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper reviewing the role of chemical properties in human exposure to environmental chemicals. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
I research various chemical substances manufactured and commercialized by humans and but found to be hazardous to humans and other organisms. For the past years, I have been striving to develop a holistic, mechanistic modeling framework to describe the complete continuum from the production of these chemical substances to their occurrence within the human body. This modeling framework integrates various components such as production, environmental releases, environmental concentrations, exposure, and risks. It allows exploring how human exposure to chemical substances responds to industrial and consumption activities, physicochemical properties of chemicals, features of the environment of interest, and human behavior. I first managed to bridge chemical production, environmental releases throughout the lifecycle, and multimedia environmental concentrations through my doctoral work (compiled as a book entitled “Modeling the Fate of Chemicals in Products” published by Springer). This work was then expanded, during my post-doctoral training, to include the exposure of humans and various ecological receptors, leading to the birth of a comprehensive exposure model named “PROduction-To-EXposure (PROTEX)”. During the most recent year, I continued to extend the chain of models to include toxicity and health outcomes to support assessments of health risks and impacts. This ambitious modeling framework now enables scientists, industrial users, and policymakers to predict what would happen to our environment and health if we decide to manufacture a certain amount of a certain chemical substance; it also allows linking the adverse environmental and health impacts at the current moment back to the regrettable decisions decades ago.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
The interdisciplinarity of my work is the most fascinating. The quantitative characterization of the continuum from chemical production to environmental and health impacts, requires synergistic leveraging of the knowledge and successful experience in environmental chemistry, exposure and health sciences, and industrial ecology. We need systematic understandings of how chemicals move, change, and accumulate in the human socioeconomic system, the physical environment, and the bodies of humans and other organisms. An example is this Emerging Investigators article, which discusses how properties of partitioning, dissociation, reaction, and mass transfer (concepts in environmental chemistry) govern and impact external and internal exposure to various chemical substances (concepts in exposure science). Both environmental chemists and exposure scientists can benefit from reading this paper. I am proud that I am one of the pioneers seeking to fuse these independent research areas and make them interdependent and interconnected.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
I think the most important question is to understand how human activities (manufacturing and consumption of chemical substances, behaviors related to chemical intake, measures for mitigating health risks or impacts, etc.) and chemical properties (tonnage, partitioning, reaction, dissociation, mass transfer, etc.) interactively determine human exposure to chemicals and associated health outcomes. Especially, we need a better understanding and characterization of how variabilities in these two aspects (e.g., interindividual variabilities in toxicokinetics, behavior, and toxicological susceptibility, as well as inter-chemical variabilities in partition ratios, half-lives, and mass transfer coefficients) shape the varied human exposure and health outcomes.
Such a systematic understanding is of vital importance because we are exposed to a myriad of chemical substances present in the multimedia environment, released from multiple lifecycle sources, through multiple exposure routes – it is close to impossible to investigate every single chemical case by case. And we also need to identify the most vulnerable and susceptible subgroups of people with disproportionate chemical exposure if we want to protect every single person in our community for environmental justice and fairness.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
The interdisciplinarity also brings about challenges. There has long been a lack of communication and dialog between scientists from these different disciplines. Knowledge and experience are largely compartmentalized and fragmented. For instance, while environmental releases “remain the least understood part of the research” to environmental chemists, industrial ecologists already have a wide range of well-established, mature methodologies on hand for estimating the lifecycle releases of chemical substances. However, since data of environmental releases are not directly measurable or observable, they cannot be evaluated or validated without being converted to concentrations in environmental compartments, which often plagues industrial ecologists due to the lack of fate and transport modeling techniques in industrial ecology. In addition, a common language or knowledge is also missing in many cases. An example is the biotransformation of chemical substances inside the organism body: while its important role in determining bioaccumulation and human dietary ingestion of chemical substances has been very well recognized and characterized by environmental chemists, as reviewed in this Emerging Investigators article, it has yet to be widely accepted by most exposure scientists and/or toxicologists. Also, terminologies and nomenclatures vary among these different disciplines, which adds difficulties to communication and dialog between these research areas. For example, just ask ourselves: what are we talking about when saying “bioavailability”? When using this word, are we really referring to the same thing as an environmental chemist, a toxicologist, an exposure scientist, or a pharmaceutical scientist does?
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I usually attend the annual meetings of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry in North America and Europe. I am also a frequent attendee of the annual meetings of the International Society of Exposure Science.
How do you spend your spare time?
I spend my spare time with my wife, hanging out, watching films and variety shows, and exploring various food and fun. I am also a nice photographer!
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
I may choose to become a journalist, as I love to investigate the truths beneath the surface and share intriguing stories with others. To me, a scientist is quite similar to a journalist, as they both relay something unknown to the audience through their efforts of exploration.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early-career scientists?
It is important to understand both the big picture of the research area and the detailed, fundamental technical skills (e.g., laboratory, modeling, fieldwork, observational methodologies) required in the research area. Vision is crucial to success, but bringing vision into reality is more important. After all, “talk is cheap, show me the data”.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Li Li
Rachel received her Ph.D. from UC Berkeley in Allen Goldstein’s group and then carried out two postdocs, one at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the other at MIT. She started a faculty position in the Chemistry department at William & Mary in 2017 where she is now entering her fifth year. Her research focuses on complex organic mixtures found in aerosol particles and on indoor and outdoor surfaces. With a team of undergraduates and masters’ students, she probes details on the chemical composition and investigates how the mixtures change as they age under natural conditions. Collaborations are a key component of her research, and she is so happy to have had the opportunity to take part in the HOMEChem field campaign to investigate questions in indoor chemistry.
Your recent EmergingInvestigator Series paper focuses on Chemical and Physical Properties of Organic Mixtures on Indoor Surfaces During HOMEChem. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
During my PhD, I explored the chemical composition of aerosol particles using soft ionization and ultra-high resolution mass spectrometry. In my first postdoc I worked on imaging individual aerosol particles using microspectroscopic techniques. During my second postdoc, I helped develop a method to atomize very small sample volumes into an Aerosol Mass Spectrometer. This most recent article is built on all these research skill sets. To fully understand the chemical composition and physical properties of complex mixtures like the ones we look at here, you need a range of different techniques. I’m so fortunate to have had the opportunity to combine my group’s main skill set (chemical analysis) with work from our collaborators to build a full picture of the chemical and physical properties of these indoor films.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I’m really excited about the aging work that we are doing for complex organic mixtures from biomass burning, secondary organic aerosol, and indoor surface films. Our ability to track chemical changes over longer periods of time is providing some really interesting data sets.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
In indoor chemistry I think we really need to understand the chemical mixtures we have both in the surface films, but also in the air. In addition to that, we need to understand the variability that is present since no two houses or workplaces will be the same. With the Pandemic, many of us are spending more time indoors and this begs the questions: what are we breathing and what are we exposed to in these environments? Once we understand all this, we can better design aspects of the built environment, like ventilation and building materials, to improve our health and the quality of our daily life.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
The data sets we generate are complicated and can take long periods of time to analyze. As a pre-tenure faculty member, the slower pace for this can be a bit stressful. But the time we spend pays off in the detailed information we can generate.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I will be at AAAR this fall, and I’ll be attending AGU remotely.
How do you spend your spare time?
I don’t find that I have a lot of spare time, but what I do have I spend with my husband Jeremy. I hope to get back into swimming again once things open back up after the Pandemic.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
If I weren’t a scientist, I would want to run a ranch focusing on beekeeping with lots of fields of different native flowers combined with wine fields.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
Find good people to work with: people who both encourage you and provide good feedback. Science is a great field to work in when you have a community of fantastic collaborators and mentors to share your journey.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Rachel O’Brien
Pieter Bots received their MSc in environmental geochemistry at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, and their PhD in environmental mineralogy from the University of Leeds. After this they moved to the University of Manchester for four years and two postdocs in actinide geochemistry. During this time, they worked on uranium and neptunium geochemistry in geological disposal scenarios. In 2016 Pieter joined the University of Strathclyde (in Glasgow, Scotland), on the Little Forrest Legacy Site (LFLS) immobilization project. On this project they worked on Sr and Cs geochemistry at legacy waste sites and how engineering materials impact on their speciation and mobility. Since November 2019, they are a Research Fellow and Co-I on the EPSRC funded NNUF facility: Plasma Accelerators for Nuclear Applications and Materials Analyses (PANAMA).
Read their Emerging Investigator Series article, ‘Emerging investigator series: a holistic approach to multicomponent EXAFS: Sr and Cs complexation in clayey soils’, here: https://doi.org/10.1039/D1EM00121C
Watch their video abstract below:
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on EXAFS of Sr and Cs. How hasyour research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
During my PhD my research focussed on the formation of calcium carbonate minerals in marine settings. During this time, I really learned the value of really thinking about the experimental design, but also about the analytical side of research, and that investing time in understanding the basics of the analytical techniques used in my projects has been incredibly valuable. I learned this through having to (re)develop ion chromatography methods for samples with high salinity for my first publication from my PhD. My PhD was also when I was first introduced to synchrotron radiation techniques. During my PhD, I mainly used small angle X-ray scattering techniques to investigate the formation and crystallization of calcium carbonate. Then when I joined the University of Manchester on a project on actinide (uranium and neptunium) geochemistry, I was introduced to contaminant mobility and X-ray absorption spectroscopy techniques. This was also the time that I realised that with XAS techniques, the data analysis is not always very straight forward, and that often you’ll have to think outside of the box in order to get the information you need (which is also true for other techniques, like SAXS and electron microscopy), specifically if the samples are complex and the XAS data represents multiple possible geochemical species. Because of this realisation, I have always tried to use the best, or developing and adjusting existing (data analyses) procedures to get the (geo)chemically most meaningful information. I used all this experience during my postdoc at the University of Strathclyde. For example, my experience in XAS analyses enabled me to get XAS beamtime awarded, at Diamond Light Source, on Sr and Cs geochemistry. Next, to get the most chemically meaningful information out of the XANES and EXAFS spectra I collected during the beamtime, I quickly realised I had to think outside the box again, which led to my publication in the Emerging Investigators series.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I am very happy that during my career so far I have always such an approach that values the analytical as well as the experimental side of research, including thinking outside of the box. At most places, this has been valued and given me the opportunity to collaborate many academics from different research fields like geoscience, chemistry, physics, environmental and even archaeology. This now means that my research plans are relatively broad; and have a wide range of research ideas in mineralogy and geochemistry which I am developing and writing up as research proposals. Hopefully I will be able to submit soon.
One of these proposals is on the mineralisation of phosphate biominerals through biomimicry and how different mechanisms of mineral formation impact on contaminant (U, Sr, Pb) mobility. At the moment, I am excited about collaboration (as Co-I) with a colleague at the University of Strathclyde; we have two RWM funded PhD students starting soon on the hydrothermal aging of cement, and how (we analyses for) the mineralogical and geochemical changes impact on the microstructural characteristics and the longevity of cement, how such materials will behave in geodisposal settings to keep radioactive wastes safe for generations to come.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field ofresearch?
There are two very important questions that I think are very important in my area of research. The first is that we really need to understand the dynamics and reversibility of mineralisation processes and the mobility and geochemistry of contaminants in the environment at a fundamental level in order to develop evidence-based engineering strategies based on mineralisation processes, for example, to deal with contaminated land or for waste water treatment. For example, many bioremediation strategies rely on biomineralisation. Much effort has been made into the microbiology side of biomineralisation, but the mineralisation process itself is still a so-called “black box”, even though the mechanisms of mineral formation impact the stability of the mineral phases, and the mechanisms of contaminant sequestration (including how stable or reversible is the sequestration). In my opinion, understanding such dynamic processes is essential in determining whether such biomineralisation processes can actually be utilised within environmental engineering strategies.
The second is that in most research to date, we tend to only investigate one or possibly two contaminants at the same time. While real wastes, waste water and contaminated environments, will almost never be dominated by a single (type of) contaminant. The behaviour and geochemistry of contaminants in such more complex environments can change drastically due to the presence of other contaminants and this is rarely simply the sum of the behaviour of the contaminants separately, so it is important to try and understand the geochemistry and speciation of such different contaminants and different types of contaminants (e.g. heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, nanoparticles), and how their geochemistry and mobility changes in the presence of different contaminants, such as through competition for surface complexation sites, or potential mobilisation of heavy metals by microplastics.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
What I find most challenging in research, but also most rewarding, is working with people. It can be frustrating when collaborators, supervisors or students are non-responsive or even dismissive or biased. But when the communication works well (especially after initial struggles), it is incredibly rewarding to see something beautiful come out of it, like a student getting better (or more surprising) results than expected, a research project that is successful, a mentee getting offered a postdoctoral position, or former supervisors or students saying that they can’t wait to collaborate more.
Scientifically, it is trying to make sure that whatever I do has environmental implications. We can never mimic nature in the lab 100% accurately, and there are many different variables in the environment that can impact on the process we’re trying to investigate. So we need to make sure that we design the experiments and analyses in such a way that we will actually investigate and analyse the processes we intend to investigate, that we’re able to understand/determine the variables that impact on these processes, and make sure that all of this is relevant to the processes in the environment or any environmental engineering strategy. Also, there are so many analytical techniques with specific requirement for the samples. For example, with EXAFS, the concentrations of specific elements needed for valuable information are generally at least one order of magnitude higher compared to environmentally relevant concentrations. So, we need to be careful generalising results at such elevated concentrations to draw overarching environmental conclusions (which is why I included experimental results on trace concentrations in my paper in the Emerging Investigator series).
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
As a member of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion committee of the European Association of Geochemistry, I am heavily involved in this year’s virtual Goldschmidt conference (4-9 July). For Goldschmidt, I am organising an early career workshop on “Hidden Histories – Towards Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in Geoscience” and the Diversity and Inclusion session. Outside of all the amazing science and DEI talks/sessions, I’ll be hanging around on Spatial Chat for socialising and networking opportunities, but also to be approachable as member of the DEI committee.
After this, I will present at the virtual XAFS2021 conference (11-13 July). Though, I’m not sure yet how present I can be for any of their social events as the conference will be held in the Eastern Australian time zone.
How do you spend your spare time?
When I moved to Glasgow for my job at the University of Strathclyde, I wanted to make sure I met people that had no connection to my work. So I decided to get back into arts, and I joined a life drawing class in Glasgow. Since the pandemic, I have also been drawing outside of class more, for example during walks/hikes. For the rest, I enjoy sewing my own shoulder bags and face masks, and I enjoy playing games, both board games (with friends) and computer games.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
Besides the geo- and chemical sciences, the only thing I’ve always been interested in is the arts, both performing arts and visual arts (drawing/painting). When I was still at college, I was even thinking about going to theatre school, but I opted for earth sciences instead. So, if I were not a scientist, I’d probably be in the arts.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early careerscientists?
Advice is almost always given based on the advice givers’ own experiences and how they succeeded (and their impression that because they succeeded in that way, everybody should), this is specifically true for unsolicited advice. In my case, as a genderqueer and gay man, such advice usually involved advice on how I should not be myself / how I should change to “fit in” instead of how I should “shine” or “stand out” as myself. So trying to follow such advice actually was completely counterproductive, and even aggravated mental health issues. The only advice that I have been given and found truly helpful with whatever I was trying to achieve was to “just be myself” or variations of that advice.
So, based purely on my own experiences, my advice would be to not listen to advice that doesn’t make you smile or that doesn’t make you feel you can do it (because you can do it, and you’re perfect the way you are).
Finally, two small observations from having worked at several academic institutes and with many students, postdocs and academics. In research, you hardly ever get the results you want or expect, but you always get the results you deserve. With this I mean that if you pay attention to all the experimental results (specifically the results that make no sense), the input from your supervisors or collaborators, and try to understand what the data you produce actually mean, and then refine the experiments or the analytical approach, you will get a lot more out of the research and are a lot more likely you’ll discover something completely new. The second observation is that, often you can design an experiment or research program in a way that it will appear to prove your hypothesis (even if the hypothesis is wrong), because of this, what I think would be a much more interesting and useful approach is to try and disprove your hypothesis.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Pieter Bots
Dr. Garrett McKay joined the Zachary Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at Texas A&M University in September 2019 as an assistant professor. Dr. McKay’s research focuses on the fundamental chemistry occurring in natural and engineered systems, including aquatic photochemistry, dissolved organic matter characterization, and treatment of emerging contaminants. After graduating with his BA and MS in chemistry at California State University Long Beach, Dr. McKay completed a PhD in Environmental Engineering in 2017 at CU Boulder. Dr. McKay is looking forward to contributing to the growing Environmental Engineering program at A&M by sharing his passion for chemistry with undergraduate and graduate students through his teaching and research.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on a Critical review of photophysical models for the optical and photochemical properties of dissolved organic matter. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
During my PhD, my research mostly focused on the formation of reactive oxidants during light absorption by organic matter, which is one way that organic matter dissipates the energy of absorbed photons. As our studies progressed in this area, they revealed that there was a need to investigate how it is that organic matter absorbs and emits light in the first place.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
We have just started synthesizing some quinone-hydroquinone complexes to test whether these model systems exhibit optical properties similar to dissolved organic matter. We are looking forward to getting back in the lab, when it is safe to do so due to SARS-CoV-2, and performing some reactions on these complexes.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
The three-dimensional structure of organic matter is really important for a lot of processes, not just light absorption and photochemistry, such as pollutant sorption. Knowing more specific details about organic matter’s three-dimensional structure (e.g., hydrophobic surface area, whether the structure is static or dynamic) will help address some of the knowledge gaps identified in this review.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
The biggest challenge is the complexity of dissolved organic matter, which really hinders obtaining a molecule-by-molecule understanding of the material. Fortunately, this complexity is also fascinating to me.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
The International Humic Substances Society biennial conference is scheduled for August in Estes Park, CO in August, which I am planning to attend. I am usually at the spring ACS meeting each year to participate in the Aquatic Photochemistry session in the Division of Environmental Chemistry.
How do you spend your spare time?
I enjoy spending time with my wife and playing with our 10 month old son. When I have spare time I try to get out for a run or round of golf.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
Potentially an attorney. I think I would like the analytical nature of their work.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
Invest the time to develop a fundamental understanding of what you are studying, whether it is a new experimental or analytical technique, fundamental concept, or data analysis tool. With the pressure of getting research “done,” it can be tempting to gloss over details. Taking the time dig deeper is beneficial in the long-run.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Garrett McKay
Marlene Ågerstrand is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Environmental Science (ACES) at Stockholm University. She received a PhD from the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm in 2012, and did a post doc at Stockholm University 2012-2016. Her research concerns regulatory (eco)toxicology, with a focus on the assessment and management of chemicals. Aspects of interests include the use of expert judgment and science in hazard and risk assessments. The aim of her work is to improve the understanding of the decision-making process in chemicals regulation.
Your recent Emerging Investigator Series paper focuses on use of behavioural studies in chemicals regulation. How has your research evolved from your first article to this most recent article?
I started my career evaluating the importance of voluntary environmental initiatives from the pharmaceutical industry, and then moved on to evaluating chemicals regulation. Through various collaborations throughout my career I have had the opportunity to broaden my knowledge and research field. Currently, I look forward to continue the collaboration with the group of ecologists and ecotoxicologists I meet when writing this paper on the use of behavioural studies in chemicals regulation. It has been extremely rewarding to be introduced into this research field. It is such a privilege to have a work that constantly offers the opportunities to learn new stuff, and animal behaviour is such a fascinating field.
What aspect of your work are you most excited about at the moment?
I have two PhD-students that are starting just now and I look forward to working with them. They both have valuable experiences from experimental work and human health assessments that I think will benefit our joint projects. We will continue evaluating the European chemicals regulation, focusing for example on the REACH regulation. When doing my PhD I had a really supportive supervisor and I look forward to developing my tutor skills.
In your opinion, what are the most important questions to be asked/answered in this field of research?
Research on regulation of chemicals has largely focused on how science is used in decision-making but we also know that other factors, like value judgements and economic considerations, can influence how decisions are made. To fully address and understand the complexity of decision-making natural science researchers need to collaborate with social science researchers. I look forward to doing that.
What do you find most challenging about your research?
Since my research to a large extent is based on literature studies, lack of transparency in the regulatory system is a limiting factor. One of my overarching research goal is to understand how science is used, or not used, in decision-making. If hazard and risk assessments (i.e the basis of chemicals management) and the underlying studies are not publicly available it limits the possibilities to perform the research. But I sense that change is coming. Everywhere in society we see demands for increased transparency, and also in this field.
In which upcoming conferences or events may our readers meet you?
I usually attend the SETAC Europe meeting but I will unfortunately not go to the meeting in Dublin. I am trying to reduce my CO2-emissions so flying is not an option at the moment. I have travelled by train to several meetings in Europe and it works surprisingly good so I will stick to that for a while. It helps to have a department that supports environmental friendly choices, e.g. by paying the difference between the flight ticket and the train ticket.
How do you spend your spare time?
With family and friends, preferably doing outdoor activities. Climbing, orienteering, mountain biking, cross-country skiing and skating are preferred sports. Eating Vietnamese food is also prioritized. I have always prioritized my spare time (and sleeping) and I think that has been important for my health and thereby my continued career in academia.
Which profession would you choose if you were not a scientist?
I need to feel strongly motivated to do a good job, so if I worked outside academia it would have to be something within sustainable development. We only have one planet.
Can you share one piece of career-related advice or wisdom with other early career scientists?
The best thing I did in my early career was to start networking. It has opened so many doors and resulted in interesting and rewarding research collaborations. I also think it has contributed to making my research more relevant for stakeholders, and thereby increased the societal impact of my work. I started by attending meetings, emailing people I wanted to get to know, and organising sessions and other events. This is time-consuming in the beginning but after a while it gets self-generating and you can enjoy the fruits of your labour.
Comments Off on Emerging Investigator Series: Marlene Ågerstrand
Chiara Giorio is Assistant Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at the Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry of the University of Cambridge. Chiara graduated in Chemistry in 2008 from the University of Padua (Italy), where she remained for her PhD in Molecular Sciences (awarded in 2012). She was a postdoc at the University of Cambridge in the group of Professor Markus Kalberer until 2016, a researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in 2017, and tenure-track Assistant Professor at the University of Padua until the beginning of 2020, when she returned to Cambridge. She is now leading a multidisciplinary research group working on air quality and climate science. She is the recipient of the 2021 RSC Environment, Sustainability & Energy Division Early Career Award and a Fellow of the Community for Analytical Measurement Science (CAMS).
