Negative Results

[Shirafune]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm currently the only one in my lab working on two paralogs with undefined roles in the development of some tissues they were found to be expressed in. Problem is that there's literally nothing on PubMed about potential novel developmental functions they may have. There's also a lot of functional heterogeneity within the protein family they are classified in, so extrapolation is not a great option.

So far, I've been doing a lot of in vitro functional assays which have been turning up negative results. I recognize it as a prevalent issue for those working in poorly understood fields, but it is still discouraging. Moreover, my PI wants to cut the project if the next functional assay I do also turns up negative results. I've been working on this project for ~6 months and nothing fruitful has come out of it (other than knowing I can get my controls to work...).

Just wanted to know how MD/PhD adcoms would view this kind of situation. I can't tell what's going to happen with the project, but if something publishable comes out of it, I would be 1st author. If not, I'll likely have ~2 years of work with nothing to show for it.

Any advice is appreciated!

 

[Neuronix]

This is very common for undergrads, and why I constantly post about how publications don't matter. If you're a PhD, you sit in the lab for years until you get something to work. If you're an undergrad, you very well may run out of time. The important things are understanding, experience, and relationships.

 

[dl2dp2]

Moreover, my PI wants to cut the project if the next functional assay I do also turns up negative results. I've been working on this project for ~6 months ...

Getting this project cut sooner rather than later is probably the best thing that can happen. When something doesn't work, it's not helpful to continue doing it. You should discuss with your PI to change the assay or the target to something that's more likely going to work as opposed to persist on a path of likely failure.

This is very similar to other exploratory endeavors like building a startup company or investing in a risky stock. Failure is not the problem. The problem is losing traction and not moving on when one fails.

 

[Elixir6]

Getting this project cut sooner rather than later is probably the best thing that can happen. When something doesn't work, it's not helpful to continue doing it. You should discuss with your PI to change the assay or the target to something that's more likely going to work as opposed to persist on a path of likely failure.

This is very similar to other exploratory endeavors like building a startup company or investing in a risky stock. Failure is not the problem. The problem is losing traction and not moving on when one fails.

Second that. Although 6 months is not all that long especially if you are only part time. Sometimes persistence is needed, but I would avoid repeating the same experiments over and over which is a trap that is easy to fall into.

As for Neuronix's comments it's true that publications shouldn't matter because it's all a crapshoot at the undergrad level BUT it definitely helps to have a publication. Unless it's a really interesting negative result it's highly unlikely to be publishable. On the bright side, whenever I interview people/read applications, when I see someone has persisted despite negative results and shown that they worked hard in the face of an uphill battle, I take that as a real positive. A lot of grad school is persistence through endless waves of negative/crap data.

Basically, don't try something else and don't sweat it. Try something else - try something where the technique is well developed in the lab so you don't waste time on technical troubleshooting as much.