News and events archive

Bringing a life-science perspective into an informatics environment, she studies how genetics and external environment influence the process by which the information encoded in a gene turns into a function. Mariateresa Mazzetto has recently joined the Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, working in Monika Čechová’s group within the Systems Biology and Bioinformatics Lab (SYBILA). Having worked in the US, she also shares an insider view of how political decisions can ripple into everyday research life—especially for international scientists. She is also a scientific illustrator, using visuals to help people think and talk about science. On the occasion of the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, which we celebrate on 11 February, we spoke about her work and ideas, to see what happens when biology, computation, and art meet in one career.

Pathway into science

Let’s start with your early career. How did you end up in science? Was there a clear “this is it” moment, or did it happen gradually?

Actually, it was a professor that made me fall in love with science. It was during middle school, and this professor used to give us assignments and essays to present to the class, like selecting a species and giving a talk on their biology. I particularly remember this assignment I chose to take on fireflies, it was really illuminating, and it made me want to learn more about how we functioned, and what made organisms different from one another!

Looking back, what shaped you most: one mentor, one lab culture, or one failure that turned into an important lesson?

I think it was a mix of all of them: I have learned a certain work ethic by my mentors, I have learned the joys (and sorrows) of collaboration in different labs, and most importantly I have learned valuable lessons from my past failures, like being able to let a project go without regrets if it doesn’t work out.

For readers outside your area, what’s your research about—and why should we care?

I study how the physical organization of DNA and chemical marks layered on top of it influence when genes are turned on or off over time. In particular, I focus on repetitive and structurally complex regions of the genome that are often ignored, even though they can play an important role in regulating how cells function, age, and respond to disease. This matters because these regions—such as palindromes and amplicons on the Y chromosome—are hotspots for instability, variation, and disease, yet we still understand very little about how they are regulated and maintained.

What are you trying to understand right now?

Right now, I’m trying to understand how DNA methylation is distributed across these repeated structures and why it varies so strongly between seemingly identical copies. DNA methylation is a small chemical “tag” that cells can add to their DNA. It doesn’t change the DNA sequence itself, but it helps control how the DNA is used. Think of it like sticky notes on a book: the words stay the same, but the notes tell you which pages to read carefully and which ones to skip. By adding or removing these tags, cells can turn genes on or off at the right time, helping them develop, adapt, and age properly. 

What’s the main puzzle you keep coming back to?

What I keep coming back to is the puzzle of asymmetry: how regions that are nearly identical at the sequence level can show distinct epigenetic states (i.e. the “tags” mentioned earlier - author’s note). I’m especially interested in whether this variability reflects underlying sequence rearrangements, structural integrity, or adaptive mechanisms that protect these regions from recombination and genomic instability.

At its core, my work asks how epigenetic regulation interacts with genome architecture—and whether epigenetic differences are a consequence of structural change, a response to it, or part of the mechanism that keeps these fragile regions functional.

You’ve worked with a tiny worm C. elegans and the turquoise killifish (Nothobranchius furzeri). What does each organism let you test or observe that would be very hard in humans? 

Working with C. elegans and Nothobranchius furzeri lets me probe fundamental principles of aging and genome regulation that would be extremely difficult to test directly in humans. For example, C. elegans offers exquisite experimental control and it’s really easy to handle. The turquoise killifish, on the other hand, combines vertebrate complexity with an unusually short lifespan, allowing me to study aging-related epigenetic changes, regeneration, and cancer-relevant processes on a realistic but accelerated timescale.

In what way these models can mislead us if we’re not careful?

These models can mislead us if we treat them as scaled-down humans. C. elegans lacks many tissues, cell types, and regulatory layers present in mammals, and some chromatin mechanisms are wired differently or have been repurposed (for example, this nematode lacks DNA methylation). Killifish, while closer to humans, have evolved extreme life-history strategies that may exaggerate or compress aging pathways in ways that don’t generalize. I tried to use these systems to identify principles and constraints—rather than direct analogies—and to ask which features of genome regulation are robust across evolution, and which are context-dependent.

From Yale to Brno

You’ve experienced a top US research environment at Yale University, where you held a postdoc position in a genetics lab working on the C. elegans epigenome and germline development, combining computational and experimental approaches. What did a “normal week” look like—what did you do day to day?

It’s funny to think about my work routine at Yale, because I arrived just a month before the start of the COVID lockdown, and that period deeply changed how we thought about office work versus remote work. My schedule became very flexible and was largely shaped by my worms: I often had weekdays free from bench work, which I used for computational analyses, and weekends in the lab to check on the worms or carry out experiments I had designed weeks or even months earlier!

What did Yale teach you that you want to keep doing here at FI MU? 

US institutions place strong emphasis on activities that run in parallel with research, such as scientific writing and presentation for diverse audiences, mentoring, teaching, and effective data visualization. My time there allowed me to train in active learning strategies and to make my computational work more accessible. At the same time, conference participation can be challenging due to costs, and networking is not always straightforward. Here, I want to build on what I have learned by actively seeking opportunities to communicate my results, receive feedback from colleagues, and expand my professional network. 

Photo: the SYBILA lab

Why join a Faculty of Informatics as a life scientist? What kinds of research questions do you think become possible here precisely because you’re surrounded by informatics and machine learning?

Coming from a hybrid background, I have always been deeply aware of the power that informatics and machine learning bring to the life sciences. The ability to analyze large datasets, generate predictions, and prioritize candidates for experimental testing through mathematical models can dramatically reduce bench time. I believe that leveraging these approaches at FI would be particularly impactful.

What courses are you teaching? Where can our students meet you?

I am not currently teaching formal courses, but I plan to be involved in workshops for high-school students and in teaching at this year’s city summer school. I am also very happy to discuss ongoing projects in the group, particularly with Bachelor’s students—feel free to find me in office B417!

You don’t only do science, you also draw it. When does scientific illustration become more than “nice visuals”? 

For me, scientific illustration goes beyond “nice visuals” when it becomes a tool for thinking rather than just for showing. Drawing helps me clarify complex concepts, identify gaps in my understanding, and communicate ideas that are difficult to express with words or plots alone. 

What inspires you?

I am inspired by the challenge of translating abstract biological processes into clear, intuitive images, often influenced by both classic scientific plates and contemporary data visualization. 

What techniques do you use? 

Technically, I sketch my figure panels after brainstorming computational analyses, then combine digital illustration with vector graphics and data-driven elements, aiming to balance accuracy, aesthetics, and narrative so that figures can guide the reader through the science rather than overwhelm them.

Are you planning to use art in your research or classes here at FI MU? We will be happy to have you in our science communication team!

Wow, yes, I would be happy to contribute for sure!! 

Picture: Barbados tortoise by Mariateresa Mazzetto

Science and politics

The last year has been quite turbulent for science in the US. From your perspective, how did policy shifts under the Trump administration affect research in practice?

Not in headlines—more in everyday life: funding mood, international mobility, collaboration, what people felt safe to say, what topics felt risky.

From inside the lab, the impact was less about sudden disruptions and more about a slow change in atmosphere. Funding conversations became more cautious, long-term planning felt less secure, and some topics—especially those linked to diversity, climate, or public health—were discussed more carefully than before. For international researchers, uncertainty around visas and mobility added an extra layer of stress that affected both recruitment and collaboration. While day-to-day science continued, there was a palpable sense of hesitation about speaking openly and committing to ambitious or politically adjacent projects, which subtly shaped how research priorities were framed.

Have you been affected personally?

Yes—like many international researchers on visas, I was personally affected. That period was difficult and the treatment felt unfair, particularly given how much international scientists contribute to U.S. research. At the same time, those challenges ultimately led me to Masaryk University and Brno, an outcome for which I am genuinely grateful, both professionally and personally!

Women in science 

Finally, the community side of research. How do you feel as a woman in science? 

I’ve experienced science as both an empowering and a demanding space. I’ve been fortunate to work with supportive mentors, but I’ve also had to navigate subtle expectations about confidence, availability, or “fitting in.” 

What small behaviors of colleagues in meetings, feedback, or research authorship decisions quietly push women out? And what habits actually fix it? Do you have any personal experience – positive or negative?

Small things accumulate: being interrupted, having ideas acknowledged only when repeated by someone else, feedback that focuses more on tone than content, or being left out of informal decision-making. On the positive side, clear authorship discussions, active moderation in meetings, credit given in real time, and mentorship that includes advocacy—not just advice—make a tangible difference. I’ve experienced both, and the contrast is really striking.

Do you have a role model?  

Apart from famous Italian female researchers such as Rita Levi Montalcini and Margherita Hack, my role models are women who lead without flattening themselves—scientists who combine rigor with generosity, and who make space for others while staying intellectually bold.

At what stage do you see women leaving most often, and why is that stage so hard? What’s one thing that would help? 

I most often see women leave at the late PhD to early postdoc transition, when precarity, mobility demands, and expectations of constant productivity collide with personal life decisions, like marrying or having a child. What would help most is structural stability: transparent career paths, realistic timelines, and leadership that normalizes different trajectories rather than rewarding only endurance.

I hope you will find a suitable environment here at FI. How did you settle here so far? We haven’t greeted you with the best weather – with endless fogs in December and freezing January!

Despite the fog and the freezing winter, I’ve felt very welcomed at FI. The environment is intellectually stimulating and collaborative, and Brno has been surprisingly easy to settle into. The weather and language have sometimes been a challenge—but they also make the warmth and cordiality of the community stand out even more.

Thank you for the interview and good luck at FI MU.

Author: Marta Vrlová, Office for External Relations and Partnerships at FI MU