Profile
Pavel Kovarik is the Project Leader of the Collaborative Research Project ‘Control of stress and interferon regulated gene expression by transcription factors, histone modification and nuclear compartmentalisation'
1. You are a Project Leader in the EUROCORES Programme EuroDYNA, which focuses on nuclear architecture and chromatin function. Why did you become involved in this area of research?
I have a long-standing interest in regulation of gene transcription where nuclear dynamics and chromatin play an essential role.
2. Do you think cell biology research is getting the attention and respect that it deserves in Europe? Why or why not? If not, what needs to be done?
More medium/small scale programmes like the EUROCORES programme would be very helpful since they usually require less paperwork compared to EU calls and yet provide an excellent opportunity to establish new connections to people with similar interests but often different backgrounds.
3. What, in your opinion, is the added value of the EuroDYNA Programme to cell biology research in general and to you and your CRP members specifically? How do you think EuroDYNA differs from other Collaborative Projects?
EuroDYNA is a medium-scale initiative that supports the development of new and broad networks in contrast to the consortia for EU calls which are put together for the purpose of a particular call, and then such a consortium acts as an insulated unit throughout the duration of the project. The links between different consortia are in fact not developing. For me personally, the rather generous funding of the networking activities within EuroDYNA has turned out to be very useful. Although I still maintain close links with the original members of my CRP, I have now made several links with members of other CRPs which are also relevant for my future research.
4. As an expert in your field, what do you think is the potential impact of the EuroDYNA Programme and its projects?
It is difficult to estimate the impact of a project that is still ongoing and in fact rather limited in its duration. Although a three year funding period is the usual standard of funding, the possibility of a perhaps slightly modified extension (after re-evaluation) would be very useful. The extension would not necessarily have to rely on the same configuration of the CRPs. In fact, it would be beneficial if the composition of the CRPs were reorganized in such a way that all the new links became more apparent, and those without real value vanished, allowing for new participants to join in.
5. How do you see the future of scientific collaboration?
With several members of different CRPs we will try to put together a topic for the next ESF Call for Themes since we believe that the scope of the ESF funded collaborations is a very reasonable one (both in size and paperwork). We believe that collaborations on this scale are more efficient, and that they are more about science than larger efforts (e.g. EU consortia). Besides that, there is inherently much more flexibility in the medium-sized programmes.
6. Any motto you could share with us on how you do your job? What are your passions in life? What ambition would you still like to fulfill?
First allow me one correction: science is not a "job", science is a "roller coaster" (once you are on board you cannot get off regardless of fun or pain). Ambitions: getting more fun and less pain despite producing good and decent science. Other goals: to make a contribution to the improvement of the therapy of autoimmune diseases.
