Is having no first author papers that aren't co-first a red flag?

[ChordaEpiphany]

I'm finishing up my PhD and we've got a big paper nearly ready for submission. I've been working on this full time for 4 years. It's my idea (not my advisor's), and 90% of the work in the paper is my own. We will likely submit to Nature/Science/Cell. However, I have a collaborator who is somewhat pushy and seems to be trying to take control of the project. He's not quite all there when it comes to working the system, and has found himself an instructor who is essentially a 10th year post-doc but effectively working as a tech. He does not have his own projects and instead publishes 5-10 papers per year usually as a middle author, but to try to advance lately he's been inserting himself into promising projects 3-6 months from submission and trying to take co-first authorship. He provides effectively no value aside from some animal techniques (that anyone could learn with a few weeks of dedicated practice). Basically his lab controls the animals, so he won't let you near the data. He'll do an injection of your cells/drugs according to your instructions, take measurements, and then hoard the data and present it as his own at lab meeting.

I have 2 first author papers (both co-first with 2 others, I am listed first on both). I am publishing another first author review, and I will have another lower impact paper that will likely wind up wrapped into this guy's scheme. Everyone is aware of the problem, but his PI wants him promoted, and it's politically difficult to call him out directly.

Obviously the right thing is to tell him to back off, but his PI could be an important letter for me down the line and I can't alienate him. Can anyone comment on how important it is to have your own work for something like PSTP? How hard should I fight this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Fencer]

You will be fine... PSTP directors will ask you about your first author manuscripts. If you know the science, you will be wanted...

 

[StIGMA]

If you think it would bother you some years from now, stand up for yourself. It sounds like this is the case. I had the same thing happen with a review article (I wrote 100% and suggestion was to add a postdoc to it who had published in the area before) and flatly said no way. Best of luck.

 

[ChordaEpiphany]

Thanks for the advice. I'm going to have a chat with him tomorrow. The first priority is my relationships and the quality of the work we produce, but I will say I'm not comfortable sharing first authorship and we'll see how that goes.

I'm just frustrated because it feels like every time I write a paper someone goes and inserts themselves (or gets inserted) as co-first author for political reasons. They're not bold enough to vie to be the first listed, because it's obvious I did more work, but it keeps happening. I had a first author paper come out about last month, and we couldn't even get my co-first author to sign the paperwork, let alone actually help with revisions.

Now I just want to know how I can find a mentor that will stick up for me so aggressively that I can pocket first author papers that normally require years of work in just a few months, especially one that will stick to their guns when I drop my email and peace out for the entirety of revisions.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Nah, co-first author and co-last authors are increasingly common. But that is a more reflection of the field of biomedical science than of the individuals. You'll be fine.

And, science is unfortunately very political at all stages. I wish it weren't, but there's a lot of nepotism, favors and back scratching. Unfortunately, you have to somewhat learn to play the game if you main interest is just doing the science.

As far as finding a mentor who will stick up for you, I hope you find it but it's a crapshoot. Realizing that they need to play the game too for self-preservation reasons, it's often not in the mentor's best interest to ruffle feathers. Actually, this goes beyond science and is true for most jobs. As you progress, you will find a good number of leaders, science and medicine, to be mostly inept.

As Simone once said, 1st rate leaders manage and produce 1st rate people, 2nd rate leaders manage and produce 3rd rate people.