Category: Sci/Tech

By Hunter Grove, science and technology reporter

Fralin Hall at Virginia Tech, named for donors William and Ann Fralin. The Fralin name also represents the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute in Roanoke, home to Dr. Ryan Purcell’s lab. Blacksburg, Va. Feb 13 2026

For Dr. Ryan Purcell and his team at Purcell Labs, CRISPR is a key tool for understanding the genetic roots of psychiatric disorders. By engineering neurons with high-risk mutations, including the 3q29 deletion, the lab can see how tiny changes in DNA affect the developing brain, laying the groundwork for future discoveries.

CRISPR, a powerful gene-editing technology, allows Virginia Tech researchers to precisely modify DNA to uncover how it affects neurological disorders such as schizophrenia and autism. At the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute, Purcell and his team engineer human neural cells that mimic high-risk genetic mutations. This process allows them to directly observe how specific DNA changes affect brain development and function. One of the lab’s major projects focuses on the 3q29 deletion, a rare chromosomal region strongly associated with schizophrenia and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Photo of Dr. Ryan Purcell. Photo by Fralin Biomedical Research Institute

Purcell has been studying the 3q29 deletion since 2017. In late 2025, he was awarded the Seale Innovation Fund, created by Virginia Tech alumni Bill and Carol Seale to support high-risk and innovative biomedical research. The fund provided $275,000 to six projects studying the heart, memory, and mental health.

“We continue to study that in our lab,” Purcell said. “We have a mouse model that we use because they have the same set of genes on their chromosome 16, which is useful when studying the mammalian brain.”

Purcell discovered an interest in neuroscience during classes at Johns Hopkins University but didn’t begin working in psychiatric genetics until his postdoctoral work, when he started studying the 3q29 deletion.

Inside the lab, rows of incubators quietly house developing cells while researchers move between microscopes and computer screens analyzing genetic data. The work unfolds slowly as stem cells are edited with CRISPR and compared with healthy control neurons. The goal is incremental, but the work is transformative, helping build a biological roadmap of psychiatric risk for future research.

Patience and precision are essential. Each experiment builds on the last, helping the team determine what is working and what is not. Answers often take weeks or even years to emerge.

Without CRISPR, the process would take much longer. Its technology allows the team to isolate specific DNA changes much faster than traditional methods such as selective breeding or random mutagenesis. “It’s a major convenience for us,” Purcell said. “We can generate cells that have specific edits to the genome much faster, and it allows us to address questions more efficiently.”

Currently, Purcell Labs is studying the 3q29 deletion and another variant called the 22q11 deletion, which is more common and involves a larger DNA segment. The team is exploring how these deletions affect protein levels and how environmental factors influence outcomes.

“It’s a rare disorder, but we’re still probably talking about 10,000 people in the United States alone, which is a lot,” Purcell said.

Purcell emphasizes that the goal is understanding, not immediate cures. Each experiment adds to a growing foundation for future researchers to explore how genetic changes influence brain function and development. This work could one day guide more effective diagnostics and therapies for psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders.

“If we’re able to make progress in our cell culture work, it could translate into people having better outcomes and being able to live more productive, independent, and healthier lives,” he said. “That’s really the long-term goal.”

With continued support from initiatives like the Seale Innovation Fund, Purcell Labs continues to push the boundaries of what CRISPR can reveal about the brain. By modeling the 3q29 deletion in human stem cells and mouse models, his team is uncovering how missing DNA segments disrupt neuron growth, communication, and other cognitive and physical functions. Studying these mutations in detail contributes to shifting psychiatric diagnoses from symptom-based assessments to more biologically informed approaches, helping with early detection, risk assessment, and understanding how these disorders develop.

By Jacob Jenkins, science & technology reporter

After a year of design and preparation, the Virginia Tech Motorsports Formula SAE team is currently in the process of manufacturing their vehicle for the 2026 competition year. The student design team will soon face off against 120 teams nationally to try and prove their vehicle ranks highest in regard to dynamic ability, superior design, and reliable technology.

The Virginia Tech Formula team, which is based at the school’s Ware Lab, has been competing in Formula SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) competitions since 1985, which offers an incredible hands-on learning experience. Students across majors are tasked with designing, manufacturing, and racing a small formula-style race car. The Virginia Tech Formula team has consistently delivered since its conception, establishing itself as a powerhouse nationally. A strong performance last year earned the team 15th place in the ‘25 competition. With three months until the ‘26 competition, it is officially crunch time for the team as they ramp up their building phase in pursuit of first place.

What many might not know is just how much work goes into planning and developing a miniature race car. Eighty engineers and 10 business leaders work diligently throughout the school year to ensure final products will perform at competition and amplify Virginia Tech’s status as a premier team. There are strict timelines, various sub-teams, funding needs, and interdisciplinary work that make for a complicated and rigorous process.

Hank Pete, the Formula SAE ‘26 and ‘27 Chassis Lead, shed light on navigating the challenges of the competition and what it takes to keep Virginia Tech’s team at the forefront. “Our team runs a two-year cycle, so the ‘26 car was designed through the last year and is being built this year through 25 fall, 26 spring,” said Pete. “While that’s happening, the 27 car is also in tandem, being designed as the 26 is being built.”

It’s not as simple as working on one car at a time. The team is constantly balancing design and manufacturing, contributing to multiple projects at once. Since the ‘26 and ‘27 competition builds include internal combustion and electric variants, the team is essentially working on four different vehicles at once while modifying previous models for testing platforms. “We’re consistently having meetings trying to ensure that everyone stays on the same page,” said Pete. “It’s so much project management. That’s the one thing in engineering that they never really go over a lot. We’re consistently trying to get this car funded, make sure that our timelines align, and make sure that the weather is permitting [for testing].”

In the midst of all the hecticness and challenges, the team’s end goal is to achieve first place. Competition consists of three categories, including technical inspection, static analysis, and dynamic testing. Technical inspection ensures that the vehicle can operate safely in real-world conditions. There are three static events which involve a design portion, business presentation, and cost analysis. The dynamic events are where the vehicle is pushed to its limits, testing acceleration, cornering, speed/handling, and endurance.

“I feel confident. We got 15th last year [nationally] and are ranked 25th internationally out of about 370,” said Pete. With last year’s competition bringing unexpected hiccups, Pete believes the team can improve on last year’s placement. “The hope is a top 10 finish this year. Last year, because of some issues with testing and overall verification, the aerodynamics package was basically rendered useless by the time of testing. So we were the highest placed team without an aero package on our car.”

While the main focus is competition ‘26, the team is constantly reviewing past performances and learning how to best approach new vehicle design and development. Nick Carneiro, the suspension lead for competition ‘27, discussed the importance of intentional design and applying past experiences to improve at competition. “Leading a team through design, we start off the first semester mainly brainstorming and researching, looking at data from the previous years, seeing what could be improved, what could stay the same,” said Carneiro. “That’s the end goal, we are designing this car to win. What will make us the most points that we missed last year, right?”

These combined efforts across sub-teams to put the team in a position to succeed have created a strong community for Virginia Tech’s team. There is a collective passion that brings its members together even when presented with rigorous tasks and unexpected hurdles. “It’s definitely a labor of love, right? At the end of January, I had a week where I pulled 110 hours in the lab,” said Pete. “This is the stuff that I’m really passionate about.  I get to be on the cutting edge of technology that college students are able to work on.”

The team also acts as a second home for many of its members and serves as a place to make new friends over shared passions. “I made most of my friends on this team coming into tech,” said Carneiro. “There are new faces every year, new freshmen, new sophomores that come in, and we all have common interests in building this race car. It’s a massive community. We all have to support each other.”

The Virginia Tech Motorsports Formula SAE team is hoping for a stellar performance at this year’s competition in May. Along the way, the team will continue to overcome challenges, push the boundaries of Formula development, and build their community.

By Timothy Kwon, science and technology reporter

LewisGale Hospital Montgomery in Blacksburg provides in-person and telehealth services to patients across the New River Valley. Photo credited by Timothy Kwon.

For many residents of the New River Valley, a doctor’s appointment no longer requires a long drive through mountain roads or hours away from work. Telehealth has become a lasting part of rural health care, offering patients across the region more flexible access to medical and mental health services.

While telehealth use surged during the COVID-19 pandemic, local providers say it has evolved into a permanent tool for connecting rural patients with care. In communities such as Giles, Floyd and Pulaski counties, distance and transportation remain significant barriers to in-person visits.

At LewisGale Hospital Montgomery, telehealth is now integrated into outpatient workflows across the network. Rhonda Whaling, healthcare provider of LewisGale community outreach, said virtual care helps eliminate the burden of travel for many patients.

“Telehealth cuts out the long drive,” Whaling said. “For a lot of rural patients, it turns a half-day trip into a focused visit from home.”

Whaling said many telehealth appointments involve follow-ups, check-ins and specialty visits that do not require a hands-on exam. Patients still follow a structured process, checking in and joining secure video visits much like they would wait for a provider in a traditional office setting.

“The biggest benefit is simple access,” Whaling said. “It lowers the life cost of getting care..”

Taryn Wilson is a physician assistant who provides clinical assessments, tests, and prescriptions at Blacksburg Psychiatry. Photo courtesy of Blacksburg Psychiatry.

Mental health services have become one of the most common and effective uses of telehealth in the region. At Blacksburg Psychiatry, physician assistant Taryn Wilson said virtual visits help patients remain consistent with treatment.

“We use telehealth as a practical way to keep people connected to care,” Wilson said. “Telehealth helps us reach people who would otherwise skip care because the drive is too hard.”

Wilson said psychiatric assessments, medication management and routine follow-ups can often be handled effectively through video when clinically appropriate. That flexibility is particularly valuable in rural communities, where access challenges extend beyond provider availability.

“In the New River Valley, access isn’t just about whether a provider exists. It’s whether someone can realistically get to the appointment,” Wilson said. “It turns ‘I can’t make it’ into ‘I can show up.’”

For providers, consistency is one of the biggest advantages. When patients can attend appointments more regularly, treatment plans can be adjusted more quickly and progress can be monitored more closely.

“Better access usually means better follow-through and better outcomes,” Wilson said.

However, telehealth does not eliminate every barrier. Both providers emphasized the ongoing impact of the digital divide in rural communities. Spotty broadband access, limited data plans and lack of private space for appointments can still limit participation.

“The digital divide is real,” Whaling said. “Internet and technology are still the big challenges.”

Wilson also said that unstable internet connections can disrupt visits and that some situations require in-person care.

“Telehealth expands access, but it doesn’t erase broadband and privacy barriers,” Wilson said.

Clinically, providers stress that telehealth cannot replace all services. Physical exams, lab work and emergency care must still take place in person. In psychiatry, safety planning also requires careful attention during virtual sessions.

“We have to know where a client is located during a visit and have a plan if they’re in crisis,” Wilson said.

Telehealth policies continue to evolve at both state and federal levels. During the pandemic, reimbursement rules expanded to support virtual visits. In Virginia, Medicaid continues to update telehealth guidance, including provisions for live video and certain audio-only services in specific circumstances.

Whaling said telehealth has transitioned from an emergency solution to a long-term component of care delivery.

“Telehealth went from temporary fix to normal option,” Whaling said. “Now it’s about using it wisely.”

Looking ahead, both providers expect telehealth to remain part of a hybrid model that blends virtual and in-person services.

“I think telehealth will keep expanding, especially for specialties that are harder to access in rural areas,” Whaling said.

Wilson said the future of rural health care will likely focus on matching the format of care to the needs of the patient.

“Telehealth won’t replace clinics,” Wilson said. “But it will stay a key bridge between visits and help rural patients stay connected.”

In a region where geography has long shaped access to health care, that bridge may continue to narrow the distance between providers and the communities they serve.

by Hunter Grove, science and technology reporter

Over the past couple of years the popular social media app TikTok has become a “political football” among U.S. lawmakers and state governments. Now, with TikTok’s new ownership and Virginia’s new governor, Virginians might see some changes regarding regulation and app usage, but the future is still uncertain.

TikTok’s new ownership deal had been underway for a couple of years but was officially enacted on January 22nd, 2026. The app’s U.S. operations were transferred to a newly created company called TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC. The change was made in order to keep the app unbanned in the U.S. and to give lawmakers more domestic control. After suspicions arose of information being stolen and anti-American propaganda being fed through the app, it was important to the U.S. government to see the app banned if kept in foreign hands. 

With the change in ownership now finalized, attention in Virginia has shifted toward how the state’s new governor plans to approach TikTok and similar platforms moving forward. Governor Abigail Spanberger emphasized data security, transparency, and the protection of public institutions in the past, signaling that Virginia’s policies would likely coincide with federal suggestions. This could mean continued restrictions on government-issued devices and state networks, as well as an overall increased push for accountability. However, at this stage, not much is known about Virginia’s plans for mandating the app or what federal guidance might suggest.

For more information, I spoke with Dr. Megan Duncan, an associate professor in the School of Communication at Virginia Tech. The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

How has TikTok’s role changed in the U.S. political and cultural landscape over the years?

TikTok has become a political football in the sense that debates at the national and state level often aren’t really about the app itself. While the push for a U.S. buyer was initially framed as a national security issue, much of the discussion—especially early in this administration—shifted toward using TikTok as leverage in negotiations over things like tariffs or taxation. As a result, the focus among policymakers has drifted away from national security and toward broader political goals.

How does TikTok’s new owner and Virginia’s new governor change the conversation about the app’s regulations as a whole?

I think we have yet to see what Governor Spanberger is going to do specifically about TikTok. She’s addressing some other concerns first. But there are a lot of concerns about regulation and policy around TikTok, especially at public institutions like Virginia Tech, where it’s banned and where there’s related legislation.

There are also broader concerns because in Richmond there are many state employees, and in Northern Virginia there are many federal employees who are still banned from having TikTok on their devices. A lot of this policy directly affects Virginia residents, federal workers, and people who work and learn at places like Virginia Tech.

The laws Virginia passed regarding state employees don’t include any trigger that would lift the ban if TikTok were sold to a U.S. buyer. Even if legislators believe a sale resolves the security concerns, fixing that issue appears to be a low priority right now, as they’re focused on other matters at different levels of government.

That said, there’s an opportunity to raise awareness with Governor Spanberger and state delegates to address this at the state policy level. As for new ownership, lawmakers are likely to trust the president and the executive administration to determine whether it resolves the security concerns outlined in the law.

How does new ownership for TikTok matter to the US lawmakers, and what concerns do you think they might have with that? 

It seems like lawmakers are going to trust the president and the executive administration to say that the new ownership fixes the security concerns addressed in the law. There was a mechanism in the law that said Congress was supposed to determine whether a new deal resolved those concerns, but instead we got an executive order saying that it does.

Congress could push back and argue that certification is their responsibility, but it doesn’t look like they’re going to. At the same time, we could see other legislation depending on how international relations develop. Part of how we got the law in Virginia was increased awareness, especially after the surveillance balloon incidents raised broader national security concerns.

What kind of authority does Abigail Spanberger have to regulate this kind of thing for Virginians? 

In conjunction with the state legislature, she can issue some executive orders, but mostly we’ll have to wait for legislation. Reversing the ban at public institutions or for public employees would require going through the legislature because it was passed by the delegates and state senators and signed into law by Governor Youngkin. If it had been just an executive order, she could have undone it easily, but changing a law requires legislative action.

Do you think Virginia’s approach to TikTok at all is going to change within the next couple of years? 

In a couple of years, we might see a change. There are a lot of organizations that go state to state to influence social media policy and law. That’s how we got the ban that went into effect on January 1st, limiting screen time for users 16 and under to just one hour. One advocacy group focuses on reducing mental health harms and screen time for that age group.

Because federal policy can move slowly, a common strategy is to get multiple states to implement similar policies. That’s exactly what this group did—they coordinated a consortium of states to pass similar legislation. You could think of these advocacy groups as lobbyists, but without the negative connotations; they have a mission to change policy. When they can’t influence federal law effectively, they target several states to achieve similar outcomes.

By Timothy Kwon, science and technology reporter

Artificial intelligence is becoming a regular part of daily life at Virginia Tech, affecting how students complete assignments, how professors teach classes and how research is conducted. From AI-powered writing tools to software that generates computer code, the technology is increasingly used across campus and is raising questions about learning, ethics and the future of higher education.

To better understand how AI is changing everyday academic life and what it means for students, Chris North, a professor of computer science at Virginia Tech, discussed how AI is already being used on campus, how it is influencing teaching and coursework and why adaptability will be important for students entering an AI-driven workforce.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

How do you define artificial intelligence for people who use it every day but don’t have a technical background?

Artificial intelligence is a broad term, but in general it refers to designing computer systems that behave in intelligent ways. These systems rely on large amounts of data and past experience to guide how they respond to users.

A common example is large language models like ChatGPT. These tools are trained on massive amounts of text from across the internet, which allows them to produce responses that sound realistic. They work by learning patterns from how people communicate and then using those patterns to generate new responses.

How has AI changed everyday academic life for students and faculty at Virginia Tech?

It affects different people in different ways. One example from my own experience involves mentoring graduate students who are writing and publishing research papers. Many of those students are international students, and English is not their first language.

In the past, I spent a lot of time correcting grammar and improving the readability of their drafts. That was time-consuming and not really the main focus of my job, which is to evaluate the quality of the research. Over the past few years, language models have helped take on that proofreading role. Now, when students submit drafts, the writing is usually clearer, and I can focus more on the science rather than grammar.

From the students’ perspective, AI can also help them think more critically about their writing. Some students use AI tools to summarize their work. If the summary does not match what they intended to say, it shows them that their writing needs improvement before they submit it.

How is AI changing the way professors teach and design coursework in higher education?

AI has forced professors to rethink traditional assignments. Many quizzes, homework problems and programming exercises can now be completed easily using AI tools. That raises questions about what students are actually learning if the technology can generate answers on its own.

In computer science, it is still important for students to learn the basics of programming. AI can write good code, but it can also write bad code. Students need to understand how to evaluate code, fix problems and think about issues like security.

The challenge for educators is figuring out how to teach these skills in a way that feels meaningful. Some professors are experimenting with assignments that allow students to use AI for an initial draft and then require them to critique or improve the work. The goal is to use AI as a tool while still encouraging critical thinking.

How should universities balance innovation with concerns about academic integrity, privacy and bias in AI systems?

There are still many unknowns. Higher education is very much in a trial-and-error phase when it comes to AI. Academic integrity is a major concern, especially when students can submit AI-generated work without fully understanding it.

Creating assignments that encourage thoughtful use of AI is difficult, and grading that type of work takes more time. In the past, many assignments relied on automated grading systems that simply checked whether an answer was correct. Evaluating students’ reasoning and reflection is more subjective.

Bias is another concern. AI systems may push users toward certain ways of thinking or problem-solving that are not always ideal. Universities are still figuring out how to address these issues, and it will likely take time to understand the long-term effects.

What advice would you give students who are worried that AI might replace certain jobs or career paths?

Concerns about AI are understandable, but they are not new. Similar worries existed during the rise of internet search engines like Google. At the time, people feared those tools would destroy jobs or harm society. Instead, they changed industries and created new opportunities.

AI will likely change jobs rather than eliminate them entirely. Some roles may disappear, but new ones will be created. The most important thing for students is adaptability. Education should focus on helping students learn how to adjust, be creative and use new tools as technology continues to evolve.

That is why banning AI outright in education is not helpful. Students need to learn how to use these tools responsibly so they are prepared for an AI-driven world.

Looking ahead five to 10 years, how do you expect AI to further change college campuses?

I am not very good at predicting the future, but I think mindset matters more than specific predictions. Approaching AI with fear is not productive. Instead, students and educators should view it as an opportunity to do new and innovative things.

AI will continue to develop quickly, and success will depend on how well people adapt. Universities should focus on teaching creativity, critical thinking and flexibility so students can take advantage of new technologies as they emerge.