Marie Sklodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship
The Max Planck Institut of Molecular Physiology congratulates Max Haase Postdoc in the lab of Director Andrea Musacchio on receiving the highly-coveted Marie Sklodowska-Curie (MSCA) Postdoctoral Fellowship funded by the European Commission. The objective of the fellowship is to help talented young researchers to expand on their knowledge and skills, to support their careers and foster excellence in research.
Max, could you please tell us about yourself, why did you become a scientist?
I grew up in Green Bay, a small industrial town in the northern United States, known mostly for its American football team. As a child, I didn't have a strong interest in becoming a scientist. The closest I came to scientific exploration was passing the factory in Wisconsin where Parafilm is made during family trips to Chicago. I attribute much of my journey to becoming a scientist to luck and chance. My introduction to research began serendipitously with an introductory genetics lecture that was mandatory for my pre-medical program at the University of Wisconsin. By chance this lecture would be taught by my future undergraduate thesis advisor. From there, one opportunity led to another, and I discovered a passion for working in my advisor’s lab, particularly enjoying the open-ended nature of basic research. My advisor recommended that I apply for a PhD program to continue my work, a path I hadn't considered before. Taking his advice, I pursued my studies further at NYU. So, for me it’s not why I became a scientist – that was mostly luck. But why I continue to do this work is I love finding the unexpected result and I enjoy exploring the unknowns in biology.
How did you get the idea to apply for the fellowship? Could you give us some insights into how you went about developing the proposal?
During my PhD in New York, I worked with a postdoc who was appling for the MSCA fellowship and I learned that it is a great opportunity for those moving eastward across the Atlantic Ocean for their postdoc. However, I initially wrote an application for the EMBO fellowship, which ultimately, I did not receive. I decided to expand upon and improve those initial ideas into the lengthier application for the MSCA fellowship. Many of the improvements and new ideas came out of informal discussions with my wife, who is an extremely creative scientist and whose sharp opinion helped hone my ideas. I then worked with my postdoctoral advisor, Andrea Musacchio, to get the application to a point where the proposed work was rigorous with a clear logic that was easy to follow and read well. Lastly, working with Roberta Palumbo in the grant office was essential for hitting all required administrative aspects of the grant. Roberta also connected me with Sunit Pal, who receive the MSCA fellowship a few years prior, and having his application as example was very useful for formatting purposes.
What is your project about? Can you describe it in one sentence?
My project focuses on how cells divide their DNA during division, looking at this process though biochemical interactions and the structures involved. In detail, I want to focus on determining the native molecular structure of the brewer’s yeast centromere-kinetochore complex, which represent the simplest organizational module of other eukaryotic kinetochores, such as humans.
How will you achieve your goals?
The project’s goals will be achieved through reaching our planned achievable milestones alongside regular progress reports to reflect and modify our approach as needed. Also, importantly the grant is comprised of three independent approaches to answer the same question – so if one method reaches a barrier, we will have the flexibility to maneuver around those issues.
Do you have tips for future applicants?
My most important advice is not to rely solely on the scientific merits of your proposal to secure a grant. The impact and implementation sections are equally crucial and should be as thoroughly developed and clear as the scientific part. A key aspect of this is understanding the resources available at your institution. Additionally, keep up-to-date with the formatting requirements and carefully review the technical guidelines, as they may change annually. For example, the main criticism of my proposal was its omission of 'potential administrative risks and appropriate mitigation measures,' which I overlooked, but was clear-as-day specified in the technical description guidelines.