A globetrotting researcher with a systematic mind

As we finish the interview, a realization dawns on Guillaume:

‘- I realize that now, while we are talking, the way I do music is really much like the way I approach a problem in science as well. So, I guess I didn't make a completely wrong career choice. It kind of makes sense. Yeah, it all fits together. ‘

I meet with Guillaume Ramstein in his office for the interview. Upon entering, I immediately notice a large whiteboard filled with numbers and equations that, to me, seems like a strange and unknown language. 

39-year-old Guillaume Ramstein is a tenure track researcher at QGG and is armed with a PhD in quantitative genetics analysis in switchgrass. He has, as of writing, over 20 publications behind him with more than 1100 citations. 

His main field of research at QGG is variant effect prediction to identify the DNA mutations which cause desirable changes in crop genomes, and he has received several prestigious grants to support his projects – including a grant from the Novo Nordisk Fund.

Guillaume grew up on the French tropical island, Reunion Island, close to Madagascar. 

‘- And then I moved around. I think the longest I've been a single place is five years, here in Denmark. I have always been on the move since I left my island. I went to mainland France, to different places like the Netherlands and India, then to the US, and then ended up in Denmark. I've been around.’ Guillaume explains. 

Growing up on a tropical island, Guillaume was surrounded by plants and agriculture, and it would seem only natural that he would develop an interest in plants. 

‘- I’ve always been interested in plants, and I’ve always wanted to go across species. I didn't mind too much the species really… Maybe it has to do with the environment I grew up in, where it's a big deal there. Agriculture and also nature are a big deal there on my island. But then I was interested in genetics for the problem-solving part of it.’ 

So, your career choice stems from your personal interest in plants?

‘- Yeah, at first, I was drawn to it because of the interest in plants themselves as a topic, as a subject, as well as agriculture. But I was not originally from an agricultural background, it took some time to actually really get into the specific problematics of agriculture.’ 

Can you tell more me about the process of getting there? 

‘- I think what really changed for me was working for the USDA in the US, doing actual work for an actual breeding program on switchgrass and then working in another breeding program for the USAID in Haiti on sorghum. That really connected me to agriculture and through plant breeding’. 

What made you choose genetic and genomic research as your specific field?

‘-I first started in agronomy, but what I did not like too much about agronomy was the lack of modelling. I really enjoyed going from agronomy to plant genetics because there was more of a modeling aspect, more conceptualization of the systems studied. For example, it's easier to connect genes with the characteristics of a plant than it is to connect all the decisions that a farmer can make to the ultimate yield in the field. And I was more interested in something that is concrete, that can be easier to model. That was what really drew me towards plant breeding.’

‘- The kind of modeling that was involved was at the right level. A bit abstract, but also easy to grasp. The models could still capture actual things that we could change in the world. So, it's in that middle ground between something mathy but also applied, with real implications in the world.’ Guillaume elaborates.

You talk about things that can be changed in the world and applying solutions that can have real implications in the world. Is that a motivational factor for you? 

‘- Yeah, the ultimate goal would be to read genomes and be able to tell which effect any change in the genome is going to have. We are very, very far from that actually. When you tell people that you work in plant genetics, they actually have that in mind, and that's why they are impressed. But in reality, we are not there. In the last 10 years we have made the fastest advance in that direction and that's really exciting.’ Guillaume enthusiastically explains and goes on to elaborate exactly what his part in achieving this ultimate goal is. 

‘- I'm working on what kind of methods we can develop to get there. The actual dream scenario is to really be able to say that “if I change that letter versus another then I will obtain these results on this trait and not that other trait.” Like the complete picture, being able to read the whole thing, interpret all the possible changes, with respect to all possible traits. That's really ambitious, of course, and I'm not going to get there myself, that's for sure. Even the whole community is not going to get there in the next 10 years. But we are moving towards that.’ 

And you’re contributing to the process of getting there. 

‘- Exactly. And just contributing to that process, that's fine by me’. 

Guillaume has recently sent in a new project application to GUDP – the Danish ministry for food, agriculture and fisheries -, where he collaborates with Nordic Seed, which he talks a bit about. 

‘- It would be a way of really implementing this kind of method in the private sector. I really want to work not only on model developments, but also on translating them, applying them in breeding programs - if possible, in Denmark. Nordic Seed is great for that. So, the idea is really to see the change happen. Ideally my research would be 50 percent method development – math stuff and new methods – and 50 percent translating methods that matter.’

This “math” is a perfect opportunity for Guillaume to further his ambitions and dreams of applying solutions that can have real implications in the world.

Going from being interested in plants to being a researcher within the field of genetics and genomics is a big leap – and not one Guillaume necessarily had seen coming. 

‘- I first wanted to work on wine, actually. So, my original plan was to do - not grape breeding for wine - but actually work on the process of making wine. And as I was taking an internship in a winemaking domain in France, in Burgundy, I was also reading that book [‘Full House’ / ed.] on evolutionary DNA from Stephen Jay Gould; he's an evolutionary geneticist – very interesting. At the time I was already considering more technical and “mathy” fields, and I remember that that's really when I thought that it would be really cool to work in genetics. Consistent with that interest in engineering stuff, it felt right to go for genetics: not necessarily too basic, too fundamental, but also towards making stuff. And so, plant breeding kind of felt right then.‘ 

But you don’t make wine anymore?

‘- No. And I was just an intern then. It was just a great domain though – most of the best wine I've ever had. But still, I decided not to go there. Maybe what I could do now is, with the right collaborations, even in Denmark, work on grape breeding for making wine. That's the great thing about plant breeding. You can look at different crops and with different applications.’

Guillaume’s desire to make ‘things’ – whether it be wine or crop varieties – also comes to show in his hobbies. 

When you’re off the clock and no genetics and genomics are involved, what do you like to do? 

‘- I do a bit of music; I play bass a little bit. And I go out with friends… I haven't had that much time since I started here, but otherwise I travel. Usually, I travel a lot to other countries for work, of course, but also about once a month I go to places with friends from other countries. Just these past three months I've been to France, Turkey and Austria. So that takes my weekends sometimes… Seeing friends, of course, and a bit of music or drawing when I can - but not as much as I wish, ‘ Guillaume says and goes on to explain that he once played jazz, funk and rock in a band.

Despite his globetrotting instinct, Guillaume seems to be content with living in Denmark and working at QGG. Earlier in his life he has been in various research positions around the world, including France and the US. He has always stayed within his field of plant genetics and breeding. He explains that he first heard about QGG from an animal geneticist he took classes with during his time at the University of Wisconsin in the US. When a position opened at QGG, he immediately applied and has been at QGG and living in Denmark ever since. 

What is the biggest cultural difference you’ve experienced while living in Denmark?

‘- Actually, not much to be honest. I was in the US before, and the US is very different as a whole, but I was an academic there, and academia in the US is a bit of a bubble. A bubble where you have the same kind of ideas as in Denmark, more or less. It was not a cultural shock, to be honest. What else? Well, it [Denmark / ed.] is a smaller country, and the language is something. I'm really struggling with the language. I'm taking classes right now.'

‘But I think that's the biggest thing. Even in the US or in France I heard about the Danish humor - and I think the humor is fine. I don't see any shock there. I don't perceive any shock from the way people think - it's mostly the language, you know.’

Your research endeavors have taken you around the world. Has there been any big cultural differences researching in Denmark? 

‘- Yeah, I think it's mostly about the way it's organized. It's very horizontal here. And more collaborative than I've experienced before. For example, in the US, everyone is doing their own thing. You would basically have your own group, your own lab, and you would be your own ecosystem. But here, we are connecting with each other, and it doesn't really make sense to consider yourself as your own group, instead you're connected to some extent with every other [researcher / ed.]. So, you do have your own research goals, your own research projects, but the other groups are definitely part of the picture. You're not alone, you’re connected. It's a good thing because you don't feel like you're on your own. But also, it means that your research is not just about you and what you want to do. It's also what other collaborators want to do. In France, it's another story altogether. It comes with more hierarchy. There [in France / ed.] it's even more in the direction of something very collaborative, but also it comes with more structure compared to Denmark. So, we have those two extremes, and Denmark is in the middle basically.’ 

Which do you prefer?

‘- I like the Danish system as a middle ground. Of course, you know, extremes are not awesome. There are issues with extremes typically and so having something kind of in the middle is usually the best way to go. At least in this case it is with Denmark.’ 

For the past 15 years, you’ve been moving around for work-related reasons. Have you been doing that by yourself?

‘- It's like the saying: “a rolling stone doesn't get moss”. I've been around, but I haven't settled down with a family. Of course, I have my parents and brothers, siblings all around, but I don't have a family.’

We’re nearing the end of the interview, when I recall his talk about enjoying drawing. So, I decide that I want to hear more about this. 

When you do have time to draw, what do you draw?

‘- It can be anything I think about. Or it can be usually faces. Just human faces with different expressions. It's just an exercise that I've been doing since I was very young. But it's really just doodling. It's not anything professional.’

You have these very creative hobbies; music and drawing. The genomic area of research is fairly creative itself, I would say. 

‘- Yes. But I have that technical approach to both. Even in music, I usually think about the scales and the chords and how to arrange them, rather than just having a pure creative mind where you just do whatever. I think there are big differences between people. And even though I really wish I had a very creative mind - that I would be able to go everywhere, I use some theory as a way to guide me in the creative process.’ 

Can you give an example of the creative process you go through when writing music? 

‘- Yeah, so usually I think of the chords and then what could be interesting ways of playing within each of these chords together. If I need to innovate, I would first think of “what would be a standard way of doing things” and then I try to deviate from that purposefully. So, for example, you could think that it's very typical to go for a succession of three different chords like; major one then major fourth and then major fifth. Then I'm gonna go and try to make some differences here, some unexpected things there. But before going there, I need to define what is expected and what is standard, and then deviate from it. I’m not going there straight away, through a completely free mind. That's the way my mind works. And that's also why I like models and concepts. So probably now you can see a little bit better about how I tend to think through models.’ 

I mention that, with that particular creative process, it makes sense he plays jazz music, which makes Guillaume enthusiastically continue:

‘- Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I mean, jazz is very technical, but it's also very conceptual. And even when it goes all free, like in free jazz, it's usually still guided by theory. Very, very cool stuff, like from the 60s and 70s. I think it's probably one of the most interesting periods in music ever, at least in such a short time period, because there was really a lot of concepts... probably the most scientific period in music, in my opinion. Very cool stuff.’ 

That systematic process seems to align well with your career choice. 

‘- I realize that now, while we were talking, the way I do music is really much like the way I approach a problem in science as well. So, I guess I didn't make a completely wrong career choice. It kind of makes sense. Yeah, it all fits together,’ Guillaume laughs. 

---

Contact: Tenure track assistant professor Guillaume Ramstein