Techniques like Western blotting or mass spectrometry feel routine in the lab. But, behind each, are years of invisible labor. Before a technique becomes so widely accepted, countless hours of iterative research, testing and refinement must occur — and scientists like me are the ones who drive it.
I work as an application scientist for a small biotechnology startup called Mainline Scientific. The company designs robust scientific instruments that are both highly capable and intuitive to use. In this role, I use my biochemical and biophysical training to expand the range of our instruments’ applications. 
Our current focus is developing a plasmon waveguide resonance, or PWR, spectrometer, a tool that measures binding affinities without requiring ligands to be tagged or labeled. Molecular labeling can be time- and resource-intensive, and in some cases can even alter the native behavior of ligands. Skipping this modification step with PWR better preserves biological interactions, making it simpler and less expensive than some labeling-based methods for measuring binding affinity. Much of my time is spent designing and conducting molecular binding assays. I vary buffers, ligands and other conditions to test how well different experimental systems, from simple to highly constrained, perform on our instrument. Along the way, I characterize the technology — understanding and quantifying its limits — while looking for ways to improve it.
But, my role extends beyond the bench. Although my title places me on the application team, I work closely with research and development, engineering and manufacturing teams too. I test software releases, suggest modifications to microfluidic paths and build prototype units. An individual’s contributions are not limited by department or degree. Scientists can help make software more intuitive for the researchers who will ultimately use it, share pain points from other instruments so designs can avoid those issues, and even help ease production timelines while gaining hands-on understanding of the technology. Each team member brings expertise in different engineering and scientific fields — so we use that knowledge across multiple contexts.
This cross-disciplinary mindset allows us at Mainline Scientific to build analytical tools that, like our team, are greater than the sum of their parts. Though my daily work as an application scientist ranges from measuring dissociation constants for antigen-antibody pairs to debating microfluidic connector design, it all improves our instrumentation — instrumentation that can deeply benefit the biochemical community. One day, I may even be able to point back to my contributions as part of the invisible labor that helped make PWR a go-to technique in the biochemical toolbox.
Become a member to receive the print edition four times a year and the digital edition monthly.

Amanda Ratajczak is an early career biophysicist working as an application scientist at Mainline Scientific.
from the ASBMB career center
Enter your email address, and we’ll send you a weekly email with recent articles, interviews and more.
A postdoctoral researcher explains how a conversation with an established scientist reframed how scientific independence develops. He reflects on choice, mentorship and how early-career researchers shape their own paths.
Instructors explore how gamification and active learning transform student engagement and retention. They convey how emotion, interaction and design can make even rigorous subjects more effective and memorable.
A biochemistry educator reflects on mentorship through the Greek story of Telemachus, showing how embracing uncertainty, failure and curiosity can transform teaching.
A biochemistry educator reflects on the challenges of early faculty life, describing how evidence-based teaching, cross-disciplinary collaboration and classroom challenges shaped her growth.
Assistant professor reflects on how the shift to online teaching revealed gaps in points-based grading and led to a redesign centered on transparency and student growth.
Educator reflects on moving beyond lectures to create a biochemistry classroom centered on engagement, transparency and student ownership, showing how small shifts like “student hours” and active learning can transform understanding.