We are attending the American Society of Human Genetics conference in Houston, Texas from October 15-19. Stop by booth #1047 and meet our PLOS colleagues Kaelyn Lemon, Niamh O’Connor and Eileen Clancy. Meantime, get to know one of our Academic Editors for PLOS ONE, Dr. Shubhabrata Mukherjee
Q: Can you tell us a little about yourself?
I am a statistician by training. I came to the University of Washington (UW) School of Medicine, Seattle as a Senior Fellow and delved into psychometrics and then into genetics. Currently, I am Research Associate Professor at UW School of Medicine.
Q: How many years have you been an Academic Editor for PLOS?
For about one year and 3 months.
Q: Why is PLOS Genetics important to you and the community?
PLOS Genetics showcases state-of-the-art original research in all areas of biology. From human studies to model organisms to bacteria, this journal covers the full breadth and multidisciplinary research currently going on in this area. This helps connect complementary research groups with unique and diverse perspectives to solve outstanding research problems.
Q: What is your area of study and why is it important?
My substantive areas of research as of now are genetics of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and neuropsychological/neuropathological endophenotypes in aging humans. There are many unanswered questions in dementia research and understanding some of those will lead to better therapeutics, clinical care, and services for individuals living with dementia, their caregivers, and families.
Q: What first drew you into the field?
My background is in Mathematics and Statistics. I always wanted to apply my knowledge to real life world problems and when the opportunity came to join UW and perform aging research it was a no-brainer for me.
Q: Are there any trends in your field right now?
There is a lot going on in AD genetics research right now including multi-omics approaches in genetics, precision medicine, transethnic analyses, resilience to AD, and exploring modifiable risk factors via polygenic risk scores.
Q: Why do you believe in Open Science?
Open science has not only led to reproducible research but it has also made researchers more visible to the world, which has had direct/indirect impact on networking and funding. Widespread adoption of open science has not yet been achieved but researchers have started to notice significant benefits compared to more traditional practices.