Ricardo Gouveia has an academic background in biology and biochemistry. He has experience in stem cell research and developing biomaterials. His current research focuses on how the rigidity of tissues affects cells, using novel instrumentation. His objectives are gaining fundamental understanding to enable new medical treatments and tissue engineering applications.

1. Scientist of the
Month
RICARDO GOUVEIA INSTITUTE OF
GENETIC MEDICINE, NEWCASTLE
UNIVERSITY, UK

2. CAN YOU PROVIDE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOURA
CADEMIC BACKGROUND SO FAR?
I studied Biology at the University of Lisbon and
then moved to the highly multidisciplinary Institute of
Technological Chemistry and Biology (ITQB) from
NOVA University of Lisbon, to perform post-graduate
research. There I was able to incorporate my initial
biotechnology-oriented education towards
investigating fundamental aspects of cell biology, in
particular the role of cell adhesion molecules and
bioactive surfaces in neuronal stem cell differentiation
and function. My work was supported by a fellowship
grant from the Portuguese Foundation for Science
and Technology, allowing me to complete my Ph. D.
in Biochemistry.

3. CAN YOU PROVIDE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOUR A
CADEMIC BACKGROUND SO FAR?
It also allowed me to establish important collaborations
with Cancer Research groups in Germany. I then started
working as a post-doctoral researcher in the fields of
Materials Science and Tissue Engineering. I used my previous
knowledge on cell-cell and cell-surface interactions to
develop innovative smart biomaterials capable of directing
cell adhesion and elicit tissue bio-fabrication with subsequent
self-release in physiological conditions. More recently, I have
developed an interest in mechanobiology and the role of
physical cues in organogenesis.

4. COULD YOU TELL US A BIT ABOUT THE RESEARCH
FIELD YOU WORK IN NOW AND HOW YOU GOT
WHERE YOU ARE?
After a brief period as a post-doc in Portugal, I felt
the need to gain some international experience. As such, I
moved to the UK, where I started working with Dr Che
Connon, first in the University of Reading, and since 2014
in the Institute of Genetic Medicine, Newcastle University.
My work in focused in two main areas; first, investigating
the role of substrate stiffness on stem cell behaviour,
namely in the human cornea; and second, the creation of
cell culture substrates and systems that better emulate
the conditions on the live organ. I consider these two
areas to be interconnected and that a discovery in one
area reciprocally provides clues to better understand the
other.

5. WHAT OBJECTIVES ARE YOU AIMING TOWARDS WITH
YOUR RESEARCH?
The development of better biomaterials and new,
innovative treatments that can be translated and applied
to the clinic constitutes a particularly important target in
my research. However, I am convinced that, to have a
suitable treatment or treat a disease, foremost attention
should be drawn towards understanding their action at a
molecular level. As such, I am currently working in a
project aimed at understanding how the rigidity of
tissues can affect their resident cells.

6. WHAT OBJECTIVES ARE YOU AIMING TOWARDS WITH
YOUR RESEARCH?
To this purpose, we established an important
collaboration with Dr Carl Paterson from the Department of
Physics from the Imperial College, London, to build a new
type of instrument – a Brillouin spectro-microscope – capable
of analysing the mechanical properties of live biological
tissues with unprecedented accuracy and resolution. The
information collected with this technique can then be
coupled with more traditional methods, such as
immunohistochemistry, to correlate tissue stiffness with the
behaviour of cells in health and disease

7. WHAT LIKELY CHANGES CAN YOU FORESEE WITHIN
YOUR FIELD THAT WILL IMPACT FUTURE DISCOVERY
IN THE BIO INDUSTRY?
As our knowledge on the inner workings of biological
systems grows, so does our ability to modulate, regulate, and
control these same systems. This can be clearly illustrated by
the treatment of certain cancers, where the concept has
changed from “can we ever find a cure?” to “can a cure be
found quicker”? Equally, in my field, the bio-fabrication of
human tissues in a dish can represent an important source of
transplant material within one or two decades. But this
greatly depends on a proper institutional and commercial
investment, as well as strong collaborative efforts between
industry and academia. In this perspective, I think scientists
must be savvier in attracting local, national, and global capital
“currents” to invest in new technologies and methodologies
with biological and medical applications.

8. WHAT IMPROVEMENTS WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE
FROM YOUR LABORATORY MATERIALS AND
REAGENTS SUPPLIERS?
I would like to see a more stringent standardisation of
reagents. Antibodies in particular have sometimes important
variations in terms of stability, and reproducibility. This can be
very problematic, both in terms of waste of time and
resources, as well as of possible incorrect conclusions it may
lead to. In addition, the dynamism of the bio-industrial
market, where merges and concentration seem increasingly
frequent, sometimes results in the interruption or even
discontinuation of specific supplies that may be crucial to a
particular line of research.

9. AS A RESEARCHER WHAT RESPONSIBILITIES DO YOU
THINK YOU HAVE TO VALIDATE YOUR RESOURCES
VS THE COMPANIES THAT MAKE THEM?
I do feel a very strong responsibility to validate my
results. I think that being funded by public funding
means we have to be accountable to the wider public,
and not just the scientific community. The interconnected
nature of scientific research means that we all compete to
contribute the most to everyone’s work. This means we
all have the responsibility to provide reliable information
the most accurate way possible, even if it contradicts,
apparently or not, previous knowledge. Achieving the
targets of our projects and delivering results is also
important, and we work a lot to make sure that those
results are validated in the most robust way possible. I
usually trust the products provided by a company;
nevertheless, I always try to validate them prior to any
specific experiment, to avoid later waste. It is
fundamental that we make the most of the available
resources, and be sure that what we are doing is
worthwhile.

10. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE CURRENT
LANDSCAPE OF THE BIOTECH INDUSTRY?
My perception is that in the early 00’s there
was a bit of disenchantment with so many promises
that couldn’t be delivered. The 21st century was
initially heralded as the biotech century, but a lot
failed to be delivered. But I believe scientists are
especially suited to learn from their mistakes,
possibly in a way no other professional can. It is how
scientists operate: they observe, formulate a
question, perform a test, find an explanation, and
then formulate a new question. Now there is a
comeback, where the analysis of previous failures
resulted in a better understanding of the biological
systems being addresses, and the formulation of
entirely new approaches.

11. WHAT DO YOU THINK RESEARCHERS SHOULD BE
DOING TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF THE SCIENCE
WITHIN THEIR RESEARCH?
Be frank with other researchers. Entertain open
discussions instead of owning your results defensively.
Facts should stand by themselves. Perform conscious
peer review. Critical reading of other’s research also
comes to mind. I understand that sometimes is very
difficult to have the time, to manage the time to read
papers, but that is fundamental. Every researcher should
also interact more with other scientist working in
different fields, get out of their comfort zone. In my
experience, reaching out for other’s opinions or
contributions can be very constructive, especially when
they come from people with a different background or
point of view.
We all speak Science, even if with different dialects.

12. Scientist of the Month
Contact: info@stjohnslabs.com
@StJohnsLabsSt John's Laboratory Ltd
St John's Laboratory Ltd St John's Laboratory Ltd