UC Davis seeks fundamental neuroscience faculty for neurology-linked research and teaching
The University of California, Davis Health System is recruiting an assistant or associate professor in fundamental neuroscience, a faculty role split across the Center for Neuroscience and the Department of Neurology. The position is built for a scientist who can move comfortably between molecular mechanisms and clinical relevance, with the stated goal of understanding brain function and dysfunction at the molecular, synaptic, circuit, or cognitive level.
This is not a narrow hire. It is a request for a researcher who can think from bench to bedside and then back again.
The appointment carries an academic home in the School of Medicine’s Department of Neurology, while also contributing to undergraduate teaching and to the University-wide Neuroscience Graduate Program. UC Davis is making clear that it wants a faculty member who can do more than publish papers: the candidate is expected to sustain an active research program, teach well, build collaborations, and attract extramural funding. Those expectations are standard for major research universities, but the structure of this post makes the local environment part of the offer. The Center for Neuroscience houses more than 20 laboratories, and the institution emphasizes close interaction between basic scientists and clinical faculty.
A role designed for translational reach across brain research
The scientific brief is broad, but not vague. Investigators are being sought who use cutting-edge approaches to define how the brain works and how it fails, whether the question sits at the level of molecules, synapses, circuits, or cognition. That range matters because modern neurology increasingly depends on mechanistic explanations that can connect a patient’s symptoms to a disrupted biological pathway rather than to descriptive diagnosis alone.
A faculty member in this role would be positioned to interrogate the machinery of neural signaling in a setting where clinical questions are nearby rather than distant. In practical terms, that could mean studying how synaptic dysfunction contributes to disease phenotypes, how circuit-level changes shape behavior, or how molecular defects accumulate into cognitive impairment. The department’s explicit interest in collaboration with research and clinical faculty suggests a program that values mechanistic depth with clinical adjacency, not separate silos.
The university also describes its neuroscience community as broad and tightly integrated across campus, schools, colleges, departments, and graduate programs. For a scientist building a new program, that kind of density can matter as much as core facilities or space. Grant competitiveness in neuroscience often depends on access to collaborators who can supply complementary expertise, from imaging and electrophysiology to behavior, computation, and human disease insight.
Tenure-track expectations are paired with teaching and funding pressure
The posted salary range runs from $97,500 to $157,500, with room for off-scale compensation when qualifications, experience, and market conditions warrant it. Salary is only one part of the package, though the posting makes plain that the institution is looking for senior academic value rather than an isolated laboratory technician profile.
Candidates are expected to hold a Ph.D., an M.D., or equivalent training, along with postdoctoral experience in an appropriate discipline. The combination signals a preference for investigators who have already moved beyond apprenticeship and are ready to carry independent responsibility for scholarship, mentoring, and academic service. The successful applicant is expected to show evidence of innovative research and a commitment to teaching that supports development into a future leader in the field.
A single sentence in the posting carries real institutional weight: the candidate will be expected to have the potential to attract extramural funding. In neuroscience, that requirement is never merely administrative. Research programs in this field often depend on sustained NIH support or comparable external funding to cover personnel, equipment, and the long runway needed to connect a mechanistic hypothesis to meaningful biological insight. Early-career or mid-career investigators who can demonstrate funding trajectory may therefore read this opening as a serious invitation rather than a generic academic advertisement.
Application materials signal a search for program fit, not just credentials
UC Davis is asking for a one-page cover letter that explains interest in the position and how the applicant’s work would complement existing programs at the Center for Neuroscience. That requirement reveals an important part of the search logic: scientific originality alone will not be enough. The institution wants a clear account of fit, synergy, and future contribution to the local intellectual ecosystem.
Applicants must also submit an updated curriculum vitae, a three-page statement of research accomplishments and future plans, a one-page teaching statement, an authorization to release information form, and three to five reference letters. Those materials paint a complete picture of the candidate’s trajectory, not only recent productivity. The emphasis on both research plans and teaching philosophy suggests a full academic appointment rather than a narrowly defined laboratory slot.
One deadline is firm and another is open-ended. Materials must arrive by December 1, 2026 to be assured consideration, while the search will continue until the position is filled through June 30, 2027. In recruitment terms, that creates a long runway for applicants but also rewards early submission. Candidates who wait risk entering a pool after the strongest cohort has already been reviewed.
For UC Davis, the hire appears aimed at strengthening the interface between fundamental neuroscience and clinical neurology. For applicants, the opening sits squarely in the space where mechanistic science, teaching, and departmental collaboration intersect. It is a faculty post for someone prepared to build an independent program inside a large, integrated academic environment—and to justify that space with rigorous science, competitive funding, and a visible commitment to education.