How many research labs are you all in and how productive are you?

[northernlights15]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Just asking out of curiosity. It seems like people are in multiple labs.

I'm currently in one and to me that's enough. I couldn't imagine being in more than 1 and being productive at the same time.

I am staying with this one lab until I apply and will probably stay with them during my gap year as well. Do you think research powerhouses will prefer productivity from multiple labs? Seems like a lot of successful candidates are in more than 1 lab

 

[hoihaie]

just 1. being in multiple lab at the same time seems to be counter productive, and being in the same lab for multiple years allow you to be more in depth about the subject. There's a reason phd and postdoc training remains mostly in 1 lab.

 

[Long Way to Go]

I was in three labs. Never more than one at a time, though I very occasionally and still do perform some per diem work for my old labs to get some final papers out or to assist with things that I knew best.

 

[northernlights15]

I guess getting the experience from multiple labs (even at different times) is good because you get to acquaint yourself with new research, techniques, etc.

 

[Sterling Archer]

I was in three labs.

My first lab experience was at one of my university labs during the summer. Nothing really came out of it.
Second lab experience was another academic lab, but I was there for much longer and the post-doc trusted me to do more. I was able to get a pub out of it in a high tier journal.
Third lab experience was during my gap years (I've been out of school for two years). The work I did here was pretty independent and I was able to get a patent out of it.

I missed your second question.

How productive I am really depends on the day. Some days I'll be in lab for 18 hours straight because a lot of things I am working on are going well. For me, it is easy to continue to be motivated to keep kicking ass at work when everything is working. However, there are times where things don't work at all (even though the theory says it should) and having 6 variants (including 2-3 repeats to make sure it wasn't "experimenter" error) of the same experiment fail on you really eats away at your soul.

Also, failing in a lab doesn't mean you're not getting results. It just means that you're not getting the results you expected/wanted. In a sense, you are always learning. You just happen to be learning a lot of things that don't work.

 

[Lucca]

I have been a member of two labs, always one at a time.

It is extremely unwise to work in more than one lab at once. If you actually want to be productive it is simply not feasible to keep up with the responsibilities of two different lab gigs.

I spend about 10-15 hrs a week in lab. I have a presentation with an award, finalist for a national scholarship (didn't win though) and may have a paper by the end of the summer depending on how the project goes. I take my lab work very seriously and if I have a free moment that I don't want to spend relaxing and being human then I am in lab. Work hours are not often correlated with productivity in lab work, however. I spent basically a year in lab without much of anything and then had a really, really productive semester all of a sudden. The secret is just to know the direction that you are going. Ask all the questions even if they sound dumb to you, understand your experiments very well, and don't spend more than 30 seconds being upset about experimental failure. Pivot and move on or talk to your PI about next steps. As you get better you become more productive.

That being said, I'm an MD/PhD hopeful so there's no reason that you should pursue lab work with the same intensity but you should certainly not work in more than one lab at once to impress adcoms. If I was a researcher on the adcom I would be exceedingly suspect of someone trying to work in more than one lab at a time.

 

[NickNaylor]

Agree with the advice above in terms of staying with a single lab vs. being involved with multiple labs. Productivity is really a function of time and luck: sometimes you're stuck with a project that will take months if not years to net something productive. Sometimes you'll join a lab at the perfect time to commit something meaningful to a project as it's winding down. Sometimes you'll just work with another student, sometimes you'll have your own project.

Apart from working hard and doing everything you can to make a project hum along, "productivity" is a hard thing to predict will depend substantially on your PI, the type of work you're doing, and the lab.

 

[biodome92]

I work in one lab. There is so much that happens in a laboratory that committing to multiple would be exhausting. It is also worth pointing out that, in my experience, labs do not exist and operate solely on their own. The majority of the work I do is part of a collaborative effort between two or more labs.

As far as productivity goes, that is dependent on what stage of your project you're on. For example, I will spend 12+ hours per day in the lab doing DNA extractions, PCRs, and PCR clean-ups. When those samples are sent out for sequencing, I have more free time than I know what to do with.

One final note about working in multiple labs: don't do it. Your work does not end when you leave the lab. I spend some of my free time mulling over why an experiment went awry. Science doesn't always happen on the first try. Your performance in lab will suffer with the extra burden, and the additional commitment is not necessary or expected.

 

[xnfs93hy]

I think a good thing to remember is that it's not so much how many labs you are in or how many papers you manage to churn out; rather, it is the quality of the research being performed. Do you think you'd be able to work in multiple labs and still perform quality research? When I first started, I thought working in multiple labs was a brilliant idea; however, I soon found out how much time working at just one lab really takes. Like a previous user mentioned, lab work doesn't always stop when you hang up your coat and head home. I've spent a good deal of time looking over experiment results, crunching numbers and so on and so forth.

 

[Follow_my_blog]

I was only in 1 lab, I was plenty busy! Along with school work I had to balance anywhere from 8-30 hours a week in lab. It wasn’t always consistent with hours but I had a good time!

 

[HybridEarth]

1 wet lab, but working on 2 computational projects (clinical outcomes and comp bio). Those are much easier to handle because I can basically do them on my free time rather than do specific protocols on certain days like in wet labs. Long story short, working on multiple projects will feel like a full time job but it does increase the chances of you getting published if you work hard and get lucky.

Edit: queue daft punk lol

 

[NeuResurgens]

If you really want meaningful research outcomes (i.e. publications), you're only going to have enough time for one lab. It's pretty time intensive to actually be a productive researcher.

 

[mimelim]

2 labs, 3 first authors, 6 publications (including Nature and PNAS), didn't keep track of abstracts/presentations, probably 10-12.

 

[Goro]

Rock star!!!

2 labs, 3 first authors, 6 publications (including Nature and PNAS), didn't keep track of abstracts/presentations, probably 10-12.

 

[Sterling Archer]

2 labs, 3 first authors, 6 publications (including Nature and PNAS), didn't keep track of abstracts/presentations, probably 10-12.

Beast! Is all that from undergrad?

 

[mimelim]

Beast! Is all that from undergrad?

Yes. It is cheating if you include clinical research. My name is on at least 8 things from this year alone...

 

[Lawpy]

2 labs, 3 first authors, 6 publications (including Nature and PNAS), didn't keep track of abstracts/presentations, probably 10-12.

Pretty good stuff. Another good friend of mine managed to pile up a good 5-8 publications within 2 years of research, though i think that was in his gap years. Joining a productive research lab is always something to be deeply treasured.

Yes. It is cheating if you include clinical research. My name is on at least 8 things from this year alone...

But that's all residency with it's own research requirements 😉

 

[northernlights15]

2 labs, 3 first authors, 6 publications (including Nature and PNAS), didn't keep track of abstracts/presentations, probably 10-12.

A Nature publication as an undergrad? Did I just read that correctly?

 

[northernlights15]

So you all will have 1-2 projects by the time you apply?

 

[Lawpy]

A Nature publication as an undergrad? Did I just read that correctly?

Yeah, it's rare but several people have done it, including one person who got a first author

 

[northernlights15]

Man I was so elated when my PI said she was going to include my name on a paper because I edited it. I'm going to be like 2nd to last author.

 

[Lawpy]

Man I was so elated when my PI said she was going to include my name on a paper because I edited it. I'm going to be like 2nd to last author.

Publications are permanent, so regardless of authorship position, they are still noteworthy accomplishments. Congrats!

 

[WedgeDawg]

3 labs over 4 years (1 year, one summer, the next 3 years). Several posters, one pending publication.

 

[familyaerospace]

One lab. I have 1 book chapter, 3 journals (all sole authored), 4 other articles, and like 8 presentations. I think everything was a first author. I also have a thesis which I really feel like I need to dissect out and get more publications out of.

 

[hotrodsduo]

I don't mean to derail here. I just have a quick question: I am starting an REU position in June. The research will be in a bio lab working with worm mucus samples, although admittedly I have no clue what I will be doing. I am just wondering what to wear on day one? I am female and not sure if I should dress in business attire or in clothes I don't want to ruin (like in school lab)? Thanks for helping out a newbie.

 

[northernlights15]

I recommend the latter and bring your lab coat @hotrodsduo