|
|
|
© Jon Enoch
|
As a graduate student at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom,
Amanda Fisher says she was incredibly naïve. "I thought science was just great fun.
And it is. But I was very unworldly." So her thesis advisor, Geoff Brown, suggested
that she do a postdoc in a lab that might expand her horizons: Robert Gallo's at the
National Institutes of Health. It was 1983, at the height of Gallo's race with the
French to isolate the virus that causes AIDS. "Now that was bang-on worldly!" she
says.
Fisher got the experience she needed—and then some. "It was a tough lab,"
says Fisher, who was "shocked," for example, by Gallo's encouragement of competition
within the lab. "It was very different from what I was used to. But it was a
fantastic experience. I left there a very much more confident person, because I knew
I could hold my own with the Americans. I knew I could cut it in a very tough
lab—because I survived."
Judging by her publications, she did more than survive; in three years,
Fisher racked up three papers in Science and another three in
Nature. She then returned to England, where she's uncovered key
molecular mechanisms in cell differentiation and cell fate, finding a zone within
the nucleus where silenced genes are sequestered, and determining which genes are
crucial for nuclear reprogramming.
"I think she's among the leaders of British biological sciences," says Rick
Young of Whitehead Institute at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "It's because
of people like Mandy that the British, despite having a much smaller collection of
scientists, can stay competitive with a much larger group of Americans working on
the same problems."
Honed on HIV
Fisher's foray into HIV research was largely accidental. She went to Gallo's
lab hoping to work not on HIV, but on the viral oncogenes Myc and Myb to understand
how they influence proliferation and differentiation in hematopoietic cells. Gallo
was disappointed, she says, "but he had so many postdocs arriving, he let me do more
or less what I wanted."
To do what she wanted, Fisher first had to figure out how to get those genes
into human T cells. "We were using electric shock to deliver genes into cells back
before there were machines to do it, so we had to build our own," she says. Using
protoplast fusion, which involves loading bacteria with the DNA of interest,
stripping off their cell walls, and coaxing them into fusing with T cells, Fisher
was able to introduce Myc and Myb. She thought it might be worth trying the same on
the HIV clones that were floating around the lab.
"I think she's among the leaders of British biological sciences." —Rick
Young
"People at the time thought it was a mad idea," she recalls. Her labmates had
been trying to get whole, human proviral sequences into T cells, without much
success. Until Fisher gave it a go with a new clone of HIV. "Lo and behold, we were
able to recover replicating, cytopathic virus. That was really important," she says.
"Because it meant that you had the virus in its entirety, and it was biologically
active and capable of being transmitted." It also provided her colleagues with the
material they needed to begin dissecting the functions of individual viral genes.
It was an exciting time, says Fisher, "but HIV research was so cutthroat and
political. I just wanted to come back to England and go back to doing straight cell
biology." But she brought back with her the enthusiasm she picked up in the United
States. "If you talked about an experiment in the States, people would say, 'Yeah,
go for it!' But if you talked about the same experiment in England, you'd get, 'Ooh,
that's going to be terribly difficult.' It was incredibly frustrating," she says. "I
wanted to keep up the pace and the excitement of doing high-risk experiments."
New model, new findings
After a three-year stint at the Pierre Chambon Institute in Strasbourg,
Fisher and Matthias Merkenschlager, her partner in the lab and in life, were offered
an opportunity to set up shop at the fledgling MRC Clinical Sciences Center (CSC).
They decided to use their partnership to approach the question of cell fate in a
unique way. "I'm a cell biologist, interested in cell commitment and lineage
decision-making," says Fisher, who is now CSC's director. "Matthias is an
immunologist. We wanted to find a way to combine those two interests, so we started
using lymphocytes as models for cell biology."
That's part of what makes their results so powerful, says Thomas Jenuwein of
the Max-Planck Institute in Freiburg, Germany. "They know their system inside and
out. They have a deep understanding of the steps that lead to the commitment of B
cells and T cells. They also have a full catalog of target genes that are activated
or repressed as lymphocytes differentiate. So they have the right tools to do the
sharpest analysis" of the genetic programs—and epigenetic changes—that drive cell
fate.
One of their first big discoveries was that genes that are silenced during
differentiation get sequestered in a sort of transcription-free zone within the
nucleus. "We were working on a protein called Ikaros, which was known to be required
for lymphocytic development," she says. The discovery that silenced genes are
physically ushered into areas high in heterochromatin, the form of DNA that is
transcriptionally silent, "came from very simply looking at where Ikaros bound."
Using a technique called 3D immunofluorescence in situ hybridization, Fisher and her
colleagues found that genes which bind Ikaros were located in different places in
the nucleus depending on whether they were actively expressed. Genes that were
permanently shut down during lymphocyte development were tied to heterochromatin.
"That was a real breakthrough in nuclear cell biology," says Martin Raff from
University College London. "It showed that there's a whole geography inside the
nucleus that we knew very little about. That field has just exploded in last five
years or so. And Mandy was at the forefront."
Those pioneering observations also suggested that cells have yet another
level at which they can regulate gene expression, particularly during
differentiation, says Luis Aragon, one of Fisher's CSC colleagues. "So when cells
commit to a particular lineage, they might put genes in different compartments,
depending on whether or not they're going to use them."
Epigenetics + Origami = ...?
For Fisher, putting away genes is just as interesting as using them. "We're
really interested in lineage restriction," she says. "So, an [embryonic stem] cell
keeps open all its options, a hematopoietic stem cell has limited options, and a
lymphocyte has only one option." Understanding how this happens raises the
possibility that scientists could learn to reverse the process, reprogramming
differentiated cells into regaining their former potential.
To that end, Fisher and her lab have been making heterokaryons—fusing
together mouse ES cells and human B cells. "Lymphocytes are wimps, so in that
situation, the ES cell dictates what the B cell is going to do," says Fisher. Within
days, the hybrid cells switch on a suite of genes associated with pluripotency, and
turn off the genes that make a lymphocyte.
Now Fisher is using those cells to determine exactly which genes are
responsible for that nuclear reprogramming. So far she's found that pluripotent stem
cells need Oct4, but can do without Sox2—factors that US
scientists have used to induce pluripotency in human fibroblasts. "It's a nice
system for asking, 'Is gene A important for the reprogramming process, is gene B
important?'" says Young. And it's another example of how "Mandy is always taking a
unique angle on things;" in this case, using heterokaryons to determine which genes
are key for nuclear reprogramming.
"She also has the courage to follow new ideas, even when they go against
popular wisdom," says Fisher's postdoc Helle Jorgensen. For example, biologists
believed that the genes that replicate early during the cell division cycle are
those that are being actively expressed. But when postdoc Veronique Azuara observed
the opposite, she and Fisher decided to pursue it. In following up, the team
discovered that regulatory genes that are going to be used later in development—but
that are not actively expressed in ES cells—are replicated early. What's more, they
sport a special kind of chromatin marking, which includes histone modifications that
signal both activation and repression. In the stem cell's progeny, "if the gene is
going to be actively expressed, it will lose the repressive marks. And if it's going
to be silent, it will lose the other marks," says Fisher. "So in ES cells, these
very important regulatory genes are essentially poised to be expressed later on."
Fisher's results, along with similar findings from Young and another group in the
United States, were published in 2006.
"This is an entirely new kind of mark that simply hadn't been seen before,"
says CSC colleague Niall Dillon. "It has the potential to confer plasticity on these
key genes." And it allows them to be transcribed quickly when needed. In fact, RNA
polymerases are lined up on these genes "like a queue of London buses"—primed and
ready for the signal that will tell them to go, says Fisher.
It's that attention to the visuals—like the image of a backup of buses—that
"marks Mandy out as being a good scientist and a good communicator," says former
postdoc Julie Webb, who recruited Fisher to work on an exhibit designed to get the
public excited about, and in some cases involved in, genome sequencing. The two set
up a sequencing lab at the Institute for Contemporary Art in London, where visitors
could speak with researchers—recruits from Fisher's real lab—who were demonstrating
how to sequence a gene thought to be involved in language impairment. They even got
to help read the sequence and try to identify the mutation in children affected by
the disease. "It got an amazing response from the public," says Fisher. "I had
people coming up to me on the bus saying, 'Did I get it? Did I get the mutation?' It
was wonderful."
"It got me thinking about how to explain my work to people outside my field,"
says Jorgensen, who was part of the exhibit. And some of Fisher's projects even
provide ready-made ways to explain that work. For example, the Fabrics of Life
workshop, which paired design students with life scientists, produced "epigami"—a
way to use origami to explain epigenetics. "The unfolded piece of paper represents a
naïve cell that hasn't made any developmental decisions," says CSC's Brona McVittie,
who helped Fisher bring the project to life. "Once you make a fold, it limits the
other folds you can make. And if you uncrease the paper, the memory of the fold is
still there—just as mature cells retain the memory of their developmental
decisions."
Fisher is "really interested in flying the flag for scientists," says
McVittie. Especially when that flag is a folded square of paper that tells a story
about cell determination and fate.