What is the structure of our infrastructure? -A Review of UK Light Microscopy Facilities

More than just 'added value': The perils of not establishing shared core facilities in resource-constrained communities

The accelerating pace of technological advancements necessitates specialised expertise and cutting-edge instruments to maintain competitive research in life sciences. Core facilities - collaborative laboratories equipped with state-of-the-art tools and staffed by expert personnel - are vital resources that support diverse scientific endeavours. However, their adoption in lower-income communities has been comparatively stagnant due to both financial and cultural challenges. This paper explores the perils of not supporting core facilities on national research enterprises, underscoring the need for balanced investments in discovery science and crucial infrastructure support. We explore the implications from the perspectives of funders, university leaders and lab heads. We advocate for a paradigm shift to recognise these facilities as essential components of national research efforts. Core facilities are positioned not as optional but as strategic investments that can catalyse breakthroughs, particularly in environments with limited resources.

Staying on track - Keeping things running in a high-end scientific imaging core facility

Modern life science research is a collaborative effort. Few research groups can single-handedly support the necessary equipment, expertise and personnel needed for the ever-expanding portfolio of technologies that are required across multiple disciplines in today's life science endeavours. Thus, research institutes are increasingly setting up scientific core facilities to provide access and specialised support for cutting-edge technologies. Maintaining the momentum needed to carry out leading research while ensuring high-quality daily operations is an ongoing challenge, regardless of the resources allocated to establish such facilities. Here, we outline and discuss the range of activities required to keep things running once a scientific imaging core facility has been established. These include managing a wide range of equipment and users, handling repairs and service contracts, planning for equipment upgrades, renewals, or decommissioning, and continuously upskilling while balancing innovation and consolidation.

Strategies for selecting and managing equipment in a light microscopy facility

Light microscopy facilities vary in the number of imaging systems and the scope of technologies they support. Each facility must craft an identity through the selection of equipment and development of staff in order to serve the needs of its local research environment. The process of crafting a light microscopy facility can be compared to curation of an art exhibition: great care should be given to the selection and placement of each object in order to make a coherent statement. Lay Description: Light microscopy facilities vary in the number of imaging systems and the scope of technologies they support. Each facility must develop an identity through the selection of equipment and development of staff in order to serve the needs of its local research environment. The process of crafting a light microscopy facility can be compared to curation of an art exhibition: great care should be given to the selection and placement of each object in order to make a coherent statement.

Innovating in a bioimaging core through instrument development

Developing devices and instrumentation in a bioimaging core facility is an important part of the innovation mandate inherent in the core facility model but is a complex area due to the required skills and investments, and the impossibility of a universally applicable model. Here, we seek to define technological innovation in microscopy and situate it within the wider core facility innovation portfolio, highlighting how strategic development can accelerate access to innovative imaging modalities and increase service range, and thus maintain the cutting edge needed for sustainability. We consider technology development from the perspective of core facility staff and their stakeholders as well as their research environment and aim to present a practical guide to the 'Why, When, and How' of developing and integrating innovative technology in the core facility portfolio. Core facilities need to innovate to stay up to date. However, how to carry out the innovation is not very obvious. One area of innovation in imaging core facilities is the building of optical setups. However, the creation of optical setups requires specific skill sets, time, and investments. Consequently, the topic of whether a core facility should develop optical devices is discussed as controversial. Here, we provide resources that should help get into this topic, and we discuss different options when and how it makes sense to build optical devices in core facilities. We discuss various aspects, including consequences for staff and the relation of the core to the institute, and also broaden the scope toward other areas of innovation.

Recognising the importance and impact of Imaging Scientists: Global guidelines for establishing career paths within core facilities

In the dynamic landscape of scientific research, imaging core facilities are vital hubs propelling collaboration and innovation at the technology development and dissemination frontier. Here, we present a collaborative effort led by Global BioImaging (GBI), introducing international recommendations geared towards elevating the careers of Imaging Scientists in core facilities. Despite the critical role of Imaging Scientists in modern research ecosystems, challenges persist in recognising their value, aligning performance metrics and providing avenues for career progression and job security. The challenges encompass a mismatch between classic academic career paths and service-oriented roles, resulting in a lack of understanding regarding the value and impact of Imaging Scientists and core facilities and how to evaluate them properly. They further include challenges around sustainability, dedicated training opportunities and the recruitment and retention of talent. Structured across these interrelated sections, the recommendations within this publication aim to propose globally applicable solutions to navigate these challenges. These recommendations apply equally to colleagues working in other core facilities and research institutions through which access to technologies is facilitated and supported. This publication emphasises the pivotal role of Imaging Scientists in advancing research programs and presents a blueprint for fostering their career progression within institutions all around the world.

Improving light microscopy training routines with evidence-based education

The low reproducibility of scientific data published in articles has recently become a cause of concern in many scientific fields. Data involving light microscopy is no exception. The low awareness of researchers of the technologies they use in their research has been identified as one of the main causes of the problem. Potential solutions have hinted at the need to improve technological and methodological education within research. Despite the pivotal role of microscopy core facilities in the education of researchers being well documented, facility staff (FS) often learn their trade on the job, without receiving themselves any structured education about the technology they teach others to use. Additionally, despite endorsing an important role at the highest level of education, most FS never receive any training in pedagogy, the field of research on teaching and learning methods. In this article, we argue that the low level of awareness that researchers have of microscopy stems from a knowledge gap formed between them and microscopy FS during training routines. On the one hand, FS consider that their teaching task is to explain what is needed to produce reliable data. On the other, despite understanding what is being taught, researchers fail to learn the most challenging aspects of microscopy, those involving their judgement and reasoning. We suggest that the misunderstanding between FS and researchers is due to FS not being educated in pedagogy and thus often confusing understanding and learning. To bridge this knowledge gap and improve the quality of the microscopy education available to researchers, we propose a paradigm shift where training staff at technological core facilities be acknowledged as full-fledged teachers and offered structured education not only in the technology they teach but also in pedagogy. We then suggest that training routines at facilities be upgraded to follow the principles of the Constructive Alignment pedagogical method. We give an example of how this can be applied to existing microscopy training routines. We also describe a model to define where the responsibility of FS in training researchers begins and ends. This involves a major structural change where university staff involved in teaching research technologies themselves receive appropriate education. For this to be achieved, we advocate that funding agencies, universities, microscopy and core facility organisations mobilise resources of time and funding. Such changes may involve funding the creation and development of 'Train-the-trainer' type of courses and giving incentives for FS to upgrade their technological and pedagogical knowledge, for example by including them in career paths. We believe that this paradigm shift is necessary to improve the level of microscopy education and ultimately the reproducibility of published data.