Undergrad spending a lot of time (20 hrs/week) in lab, but with few results :(

[stannislaus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Going into my fourth year of undergrad and thinking of applying to MSTP/MD-PhD programs next summer.

I worked in one lab from summer of my freshman year to spring of my junior year. After completion of my last project, I decided to move to another lab to get more experience (my supervisor was very supportive of this). I've been working in this new lab since then.

I love lab and I love research and I would love a career in academic medicine and research.
Ever since I've started working in a lab, I've devoted 20-25 (often more) hours a week to lab work and achieved a good amount of independence on my projects. Often, I'd come in at night after I'm done with classes and EC's and stay from 7 pm until 2-3 am.

The issue is: in these past few years, after working at both labs, I've noticed that even though I spend a lot of time on research, I really don't think I've accomplished very much. My projects have pretty much ended anticlimactically. Results don't make sense or are not useful, or it turns out that a paper published in 1996 did the exact same thing with the exact same results, or we just give up because it hasn't been working out. the exception would be the publication of one paper in PLoS One, in which I am the fifth author - but that was an entirely different project than the one's I've truly had independence on).

This is frustrating, both for me and the people who supervise me. One of my supervisors even told me once: "you've done several projects this year, but haven't carried many out to completion. don't confuse activity with accomplishment".

I try to think about how much I'm helping the researchers I work for, and I start to feel like more of a burden rather than a helpful undergraduate research assistant. I'm someone to teach and supervise, someone who uses reagents and money on failed experiments.

I don't think its because I "suck" in lab. I have good technique. I carry out experiments well. I don't often make mistakes. It's just that my results haven't been ideal for the past two years. This is been frustrating and made me question a few things - how my letters of recommendations will sound, how I will look in front of admission committees, but more importantly, whether MD/PhD programs are really for me. Was I meant to do research?

I'm wondering if this feeling is typical of research. If I was really meant to do research, wouldn't my experiments be working by now? Should I still apply? (It's still something I really really want - I think). If I do apply, would I still be competitive as an applicant for MSTP programs?

Please advise!

 

[Xcited392]

Don't feel bad about yourself.

I think your lack of "results" is probably indicative of your PI or mentor's poor guidance with your project.

I had the same issue as you a while ago. I came into lab and invested so much of my time on a project. Despite numerous westerns and RT-PCRs, my data didn't make sense. My PI started nitpicking my technique and was convinced that my samples were contaminated with something. He also said I should come in on weekends since I wasn't dedicated enough. I spent almost a year going in circles with him and constantly repeating experiments.

Feeling frustrated, I discussed with people in nearby labs. All of them said that my mentor was crazy and not a good designer of experiments. I then had a chance to work with another person for a short time, and I realized that they were right about my previous mentor having poor guidance.

Since this is your last year, maybe you can join another lab? You didn't say when you were planning on applying, but I don't think lack of results will hinder your application. Many students don't publish or have amazing results. The good thing is that you have tried your best to learn the techniques.

 

[Ruminate]

Don't get discouraged.

If you've been repeating the same technique over and over, that won't tell you a different side to the story, would it? So if you're getting a different data result with two or three techniques, then maybe something's wrong with your planning or technique. If you're getting a similar story with all the techniques, because it doesn't make sense may lead to a new idea...but that's really where creativity comes in and advisors would really help out. Keep reading papers to try and keep up so you don't run into someone publishing first and knowing what kind of approach people use in your field.

 

[uniqenam]

Don't be discouraged. It took me something like 2.5 years in the same lab before I finally got a project to work, with marginal success. I think the feeling that "Do I belong? I can't do anything right" is pretty normal (at least in my experience), I felt that way forever about science.

 

[stannislaus]

Don't feel bad about yourself.

I think your lack of "results" is probably indicative of your PI or mentor's poor guidance with your project.

I had the same issue as you a while ago. I came into lab and invested so much of my time on a project. Despite numerous westerns and RT-PCRs, my data didn't make sense. My PI started nitpicking my technique and was convinced that my samples were contaminated with something. He also said I should come in on weekends since I wasn't dedicated enough. I spent almost a year going in circles with him and constantly repeating experiments.

Feeling frustrated, I discussed with people in nearby labs. All of them said that my mentor was crazy and not a good designer of experiments. I then had a chance to work with another person for a short time, and I realized that they were right about my previous mentor having poor guidance.

Since this is your last year, maybe you can join another lab? You didn't say when you were planning on applying, but I don't think lack of results will hinder your application. Many students don't publish or have amazing results. The good thing is that you have tried your best to learn the techniques.

Thanks everyone! It's good to hear that I'm not the only one.
There were times when I felt like I disagreed with my mentor (my previous, not current) on the approach and what the proper controls might be, but in the end it worked out. He's a great scientist and teacher. My first and only publication is with him too!

My current mentor is very results-driven and does a lot of good work. His other undergraduates seem to be doing well too. I think what's happened is that since I'm more familiar with a lot of the basic molecular biology stuff and relatively new to the group, I get handed a lot of stuff like tricky knock-outs (swapping promoters on essential genes) and strain construction.

I'm worried that my LOR's wouldn't sound good. Does the LOR for a competitive application typically say "this undergrad completed this and this and this which helped lead to our discovery of this this and this"? My LOR would probably sound like "this undergrad is hardworking and willing to spend a lot of hours. He assists with stuff and is always trying to be helpful." :/