Blog – Genetic Mystery Solved: The Importance of Collaboration

We all know, at a cognitive level, that collaboration is the key to excellent science. Collaborating with other neuroscientists is the bread and butter of research. Collaborating with members of the public is a pivotal step to ensure our findings remain relevant. Often we reach out further to the computer scientists and mathematicians, perhaps the engineers and chemists, or even the occasional physicist. But how many of us have reached out even further to explore the history of the diseases that we spend our lives studying? And could it be that by exploring the past of these conditions, we encounter new approaches to treating them in the present?

“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your [science].” – Hamlet(ish)

At the first in-person annual Brain Conference this month I had the pleasure to hear a number of excellent talks about a wide range of neuroscientific topics from sleep to stroke, but perhaps one of the highlights was a talk by Professor Astrid Iversen who shared the results from her recent Nature paper on the genetic risk of multiple sclerosis (MS). I am not a geneticist, nor do I have a particular interest in multiple sclerosis, but the way this research was carried out truly caught my attention.

MS currently affects more than 2.5 million people worldwide and is an often debilitating autoimmune condition that causes problems with vision, and movement. The risk of MS varies considerably depending on your ethnicity and geography, with the highest prevalence rates occurring in Northern European countries such as Denmark, Sweden, and the UK. The reason for this has long been a mystery, but was hypothesised to be the result of a shared genetic ancestry. In the study the authors aim to track this genetic ancestry in order to ascertain the reason these geographical difference exist. Using the largest ancient genomic dataset on record, they went back thousands of years to the first instances of MS risk genes appearing. Authors from around the world in the fields of genetics, statistics, neuroinflammation, anthropology and epidemiology. And they found what they were looking for.

When tracking migration from the Mesolithic period to the Bronze Age they found evidence that the genetic risk for MS was associated with a particular group of people known as Steppe pastoralists. From this they reasoned that the increased MS risk may have survived the test of evolution as it increased the chances of surviving infections in the years when population density was exploding due to the invention of farming. By increasing neuroinflammation, this gene set was able to battle pathogens more effectively even in the presence of parasites which often led to an anti-inflammatory response in the body. In the 21^st century and without a large concern for parasites, these genes increase inflammation to unhealthy levels resulting in the autoimmune condition we call MS.

In present day, these findings provide us with new therapeutic and methodological avenues to explore. Firstly, knowing the reason for this risk opens up potential pathways to shut it down. Some researchers are even exploring the possibility of strategically introducing parasites into people with MS in order to trick the body into producing the anti-inflammatory response which may have balanced out inflammation in the days of stone and metal. Secondly, with genetic risk forming a large part of so many neurological conditions, could it be possible to use these ancient genomes to learn more about diseases that have left us stumped for years? Could it be that looking to the past could provide new avenues for the future?

Collaboration across subjects and countries is the only way to make ground-breaking research like this happens. From personal experience, opening discussions with people in different parts of the world has been incredibly educational. Talking to people from the field of mathematics has taught me how to model my data. Giving talks to philosophy students has led me on engaging thought patterns about the technical definitions we use in research. And discussions with the public remind me to never lose sight of why I do what I do.

I left from that talk truly inspired by the prospects of neuroscience and a new appreciation for just how broad the field can go. It left me wondering what else might be possible in a room filled with the right people. It’s certainly encouraged me to think beyond the usual scope when considering potential collaborations. When discussing the topic of creativity recently I emphasised to students how important teamwork was when trying to solve problems and think out of the box. If one brain has 100 trillion connections, imagine just how much the space of potential ideas opens up when you multiply it by another brain and another. By introducing ourselves to new people and new ideas, we can often get more out of ourselves and our science.

So, when you’re stuck at your desk, hammering your head against a problem you can’t quite crack, or when you’re looking for your next big grant proposal, let’s not forget the power of talking to each other. Unlike in the movies, mysteries are never solved by one particularly brainy chap with a violin, they’re solved by a big group of meddling academics.

Rebecca Williams

Author

Rebecca Williams is a PhD student at the University of Cambridge. Though originally from ‘up North’ in a small town called Leigh, she did her undergraduate and masters at the University of Oxford before defecting to Cambridge for her doctorate researching Frontotemporal dementia and Apathy. She now spends her days collecting data from wonderful volunteers, and coding. Outside work, she plays board games, and is very crafty.

Follow @beccasue99

Goodpods Top 100 Life Sciences Indie Podcasts


Listen now to Dementia Researcher Blogs podcast