What would you do in this situation??

[libraryismyhome]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have been doing research for past 2 years and finally have obtained the data that is publishable as the first author in a respectable journal. I am about half done with paper so far.

However, my fellow grad student who was working with me has obtained the data which could make this paper look better. However his part is only a minor one so the paper is publishable without his.

Since he is a struggling grad student, my PI was saying that giving the first author to me could hurt him. He is willing to give me the first author position if I want to have it.

Should I be a generous guy and give him the first author or just claim what I deserve to help my chance for med school? If my PI writes in his LOR that I was the real first author and was such a nice guy that he yielded his achievement for another person, would adcoms believe this and give me the same recognition as the first author?? 😀

 

[LRAccord624]

I don't have much research experience, so not too sure how the etiquette works. However, if I had worked my butt off for two years, I wouldn't give what should be my publication to someone else. I would say, yes, I want to be the first author, because I worked the hardest and had the most integral role in the project. Your colleague should get 2nd author.

Plus... even if I was struggling as a grad student, I would never want to be GIVEN a first author position for a publication when I knew I didn't deserve it.

 

[Kuune]

First author should go to whoever actually WRITES the intro and discussion.

 

[mspeedwagon]

Take the first author and run with it. I don't think giving up first author is ever a good idea.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Tell your PI you are ashamed of him/her for suggesting such a thing, and offer a pp presentation on the ethics of authorship.

Unfortunately I'm sure this type of stuff happens often, as PIs know they can boss the undergrads around and the undergrads are scared of their PI. THe LOR situation can be tricky, but I would rather have a 1st author pub in a good journal than an LOR if it comes to that.

 

[nopressure]

can you not be co-first authors?

 

[Narmerguy]

can you not be co-first authors?

This was my suggestion as well. If not...eek, that's a tough situation. I'd talk to the grad student about it and see how he feels. It may be that he doesn't want to be given 1st author this way anyway.

 

[rHinO1]

I find it hard to believe that this situation is real... whoever contributed the most intellectually to the project should get to write it ----> first author.

If you use the grad students data and he contributed intellectually ----> second author.

I consider myself a generous guy, but I would never let someone else take credit for my work so they could further their career at my expense. The grad student will remain a grad student until he publishes his own work... so he has time.

If your situation is real you now have an ethical dilemma to discuss for your secondary essays 😀

 

[NickNaylor]

I find it hard to believe that this situation is real... whoever contributed the most intellectually to the project should get to write it ----> first author.

If you use the grad students data and he contributed intellectually ----> second author.

I consider myself a generous guy, but I would never let someone else take credit for my work so they could further their career at my expense. The grad student will remain a grad student until he publishes his own work... so he has time.

If your situation is real you now have an ethical dilemma to discuss for your secondary essays 😀

+1

This is very straightforward, even if it's real. Your PI's "comments" don't really make much sense at all.

 

[ShinyDome19]

There is somewhat of a ethical problem to this if the PI is suggesting that you give up first author to someone else who didnt do the work to earn that position...especially if its a graduate student and your doing all of the writing. However, I would consider giving the GS first author if:

1) this project is based off of the work of the graduate student and your work is an offshoot of the GS's main project, hence he/she put down the ground work for the project you did...Since a lot of times GS projects produce small little projects on the side, and the GS's often deligate those out to UG's who need something to do...I would feel wrong not atleast offering first author to the GS if the offshoot project turned in to something...simply for the fact that you would have had nothing if the GS didnt provide the base study for you...But, I would definately expect them to write.
2) If the GS spent the first year(s) of his/her grad. studies troubleshooting the protocols that were to be used in their study, then you came along and used those protocols not having to worry about all the problems associated with them...collected some data and got a paper...I would feel pretty bad not offering 1st author to the GS...but would still expect them to write.
3) the GS ran all of the stats, did the majority of the literature reading up front and just laid out a project for you to follow (unlikely if your writing the paper though)

Other than those three cases...keep first author..you earned it.

 

[austinap]

I have been doing research for past 2 years and finally have obtained the data that is publishable as the first author in a respectable journal. I am about half done with paper so far.

However, my fellow grad student who was working with me has obtained the data which could make this paper look better. However his part is only a minor one so the paper is publishable without his.

Since he is a struggling grad student, my PI was saying that giving the first author to me could hurt him. He is willing to give me the first author position if I want to have it.

Should I be a generous guy and give him the first author or just claim what I deserve to help my chance for med school? If my PI writes in his LOR that I was the real first author and was such a nice guy that he yielded his achievement for another person, would adcoms believe this and give me the same recognition as the first author?? 😀

How about going starsies on it? E.g., "these authors contributed equally to this work."

 

[Danlee07]

dude, i don't know if you're undergrad or grad but if some undergrad is doing the work while i didn't help much...

so yeah i'd take that first authorship

 

[GoSpursGo]

Clearly, the paper means a LOT more to him than it does to you; med schools are going to be impressed just that you got your name on a publication in undergrad, while he really needs to be getting some publications out there to justify his stipend.

However, that's just it: he should have to justify his stipend, and ultimately his degree when he gets it. So to me, while at the end of the day it probably makes little difference to you whether you are first or second author, if the paper is more your intellectual property than his, then that is how it should read on the manuscript, IMHO. The second authorship will still help the grad student more than having no publication at all, but I do think he should have to work just as hard as his peers if he's aiming for a first-author paper.

 

[libraryismyhome]

thank you for your replies. So this grad student person is a struggling one and he isn't intelligent enough to teach me anything. This project is about an enzyme kinetics and the major contribution he made would be just a purification and visualization of the structure.

The project given to me was designed by PI, and I brought him the unexpected outcome which disproved his hypothesis.

The reason that I am somewhat reluctant in helping him out is because I think he is a spoiled person who thinks that he deserves alot. One day, he broke his chair because he was overweight then next day he took my chair without even asking.

 

[rHinO1]

thank you for your replies. So this grad student person is a struggling one and he isn't intelligent enough to teach me anything. This project is about an enzyme kinetics and the major contribution he made would be just a purification and visualization of the structure.

The project given to me was designed by PI, and I brought him the unexpected outcome which disproved his hypothesis.

The reason that I am somewhat reluctant in helping him out is because I think he is a spoiled person who thinks that he deserves alot. One day, he broke his chair because he was overweight then next day he took my chair without even asking.

Sounds like your PI is very generous. If he designed the experiment then it is his intellectual work and you did the leg work. This may be why he feels like he should assign credit.

Edit: However, that doesn't mean the grad student should get credit for your work.

 

[austinap]

thank you for your replies. So this grad student person is a struggling one and he isn't intelligent enough to teach me anything. This project is about an enzyme kinetics and the major contribution he made would be just a purification and visualization of the structure.

The project given to me was designed by PI, and I brought him the unexpected outcome which disproved his hypothesis.

The reason that I am somewhat reluctant in helping him out is because I think he is a spoiled person who thinks that he deserves alot. One day, he broke his chair because he was overweight then next day he took my chair without even asking.

Could you clarify what you mean by "he did a purification and visualization of the structure?" That's a bit vague... do you mean that he got you a crystal structure of the protein? If so, that's a pretty large contribution.

Also, I'm not saying this is specifically the case with your situation, but this comes up a lot so I think it's worth mentioning: authorship is primarily based on intellectual contribution, and not necessarily based on who did the most experiments or who wrote a draft of the paper. Those things all count, but it's the ideas that get papers. In the case of SDN, there are a lot of premeds who feel they deserve first authorship because they did a lot of work. It comes up every week or so. While I don't doubt that they did work, in my experience it is very rare to find an undergrad that truly understands the relevant science to the extent where they are designing entire research projects. Just something to keep in mind for all the undergrads browsing these forums, as well as for med students looking to pick up a research project.

 

[KPCOFGS]

How about going starsies on it? E.g., "these authors contributed equally to this work."

"Starsies" may well be my new favorite word! 👍

 

[libraryismyhome]

Sounds like your PI is very generous. If he designed the experiment then it is his intellectual work and you did the leg work. This may be why he feels like he should assign credit.

Edit: However, that doesn't mean the grad student should get credit for your work.

Could you clarify what you mean by "he did a purification and visualization of the structure?" That's a bit vague... do you mean that he got you a crystal structure of the protein? If so, that's a pretty large contribution.

Ok, so the crystallography is a difficult experiment and he indeed succeeded it with a reliable resolution after spending about a year. The project is about the kinetics of enzyme and his data would only make the paper look better and cannot be the main importance.

I don't know. I wouldn't feel too bitter only if he didn't take my chair without even asking. and this was during the lowest point in my life too. I found it extremely disrespectful, so perhaps I am oversensitive about him taking my credit.

 

[JoshUNCW]

Ok, so the crystallography is a difficult experiment and he indeed succeeded it with a reliable resolution after spending about a year. The project is about the kinetics of enzyme and his data would only make the paper look better and cannot be the main importance.

I don't know. I wouldn't feel too bitter only if he didn't take my chair without even asking. and this was during the lowest point in my life too. I found it extremely disrespectful, so perhaps I am oversensitive about him taking my credit.

I wouldn't base this off a chair. That all sounds extremely immature and petty. If you would give it to him had it not been for the chair incident, give it to him. If you want it. Take it. But seriously, it was just a chair. The dude sounds fat, he needed a chair. Could your department not afford another one lol? But yeah, since your PI designed the whole experiment, he probably feels you owe him for the chance to get first author, so he asked you a favor. I would try to co-first author it. Otherwise, do what you want. But don't make your decision based off something as petty as a chair.

 

[RemoteDoc]

A similar situation happened to me.

I came into a research project that was in it's very beginning stages of development. The project required constant IRB revisions within my university and another federal institution. I did all the IRB revisions. Additionally, I spend about 15 hours a week recruiting the subjects. I did the data collection (which had to be done at a government office, because the government protect study subject sensitive information) and data analysis. As I was writing my [university] honors thesis, the PI was dictating that I submit an abstract under her "account name" to a prominent journal, to get the opportunity to present a poster at their conference. I knew by submitting under her name, she would be considered first author. She vague said, "On the poster, you will first author, but for conference reasons, since I will be presenting on several other topics, It's 'easier' to just submit under my name." Being weary, I secretively and successfully created an account name and registered for the conference under my own name to see how 'tedious' the process was; it took a matter of 5 minutes. However, in the end, I still submitted under my PI's name.

Later I was asked to submit another abstract to a different journal. I typed a manuscript's Intro, Discussion, Methods, and did all the tables for the extensive data I collected and analyzed. The PI did the written analysis and conclusion. After all was said and done, the paper was edited and all the sections were compiled, and I was the 3rd author (1st author was original PI, 2nd author was a "PI" required within the government institution that was only responsible for referring subjects to us).

I think about the outcome of not receiving first author for my research, and for a while it really bothered me. Still, it bothers me some. However, because of my PI's mentorship, I have been given the opportunity to present at other conferences and do a video interview and presentation of my research for a sports academic network. And though I am currently out of country, I have seen that the PI continues to put effort towards the completed research and there are always new abstracts written and presentations given to other conferences with me as the 2nd/3rd author.

All in all, you have to ask yourself if you are going to rewarded more for being a 1st author, or a 2nd? If I would have argued for the 1st author, I might have never had the opportunities to display my research on such a national and [with the video] international level.

**vagueness for for anonymity

 

[austinap]

A similar situation happened to me.

I came into a research project that was in it's very beginning stages of development. The project required constant IRB revisions within my university and another federal institution. I did all the IRB revisions. Additionally, I spend about 15 hours a week recruiting the subjects. I did the data collection (which had to be done at a government office, because the government protect study subject sensitive information) and data analysis. As I was writing my [university] honors thesis, the PI was dictating that I submit an abstract under her "account name" to a prominent journal, to get the opportunity to present a poster at their conference. I knew by submitting under her name, she would be considered first author. She vague said, "On the poster, you will first author, but for conference reasons, since I will be presenting on several other topics, It's 'easier' to just submit under my name." Being weary, I secretively and successfully created an account name and registered for the conference under my own name to see how 'tedious' the process was; it took a matter of 5 minutes. However, in the end, I still submitted under my PI's name.

Later I was asked to submit another abstract to a different journal. I typed a manuscript's Intro, Discussion, Methods, and did all the tables for the extensive data I collected and analyzed. The PI did the written analysis and conclusion. After all was said and done, the paper was edited and all the sections were compiled, and I was the 3rd author (1st author was original PI, 2nd author was a "PI" required within the government institution that was only responsible for referring subjects to us).

I think about the outcome of not receiving first author for my research, and for a while it really bothered me. Still, it bothers me some. However, because of my PI's mentorship, I have been given the opportunity to present at other conferences and do a video interview and presentation of my research for a sports academic network. And though I am currently out of country, I have seen that the PI continues to put effort towards the completed research and there are always new abstracts written and presentations given to other conferences with me as the 2nd/3rd author.

All in all, you have to ask yourself if you are going to rewarded more for being a 1st author, or a 2nd? If I would have argued for the 1st author, I might have never had the opportunities to display my research on such a national and [with the video] international level.

**vagueness for for anonymity

Out of curiosity, what field was this in?? It's pretty bizarre for a PI to take first authorship on a paper, they're almost always last authors (or joint last authors if the work was done with more than one PI).

 

[austinap]

Ok, so the crystallography is a difficult experiment and he indeed succeeded it with a reliable resolution after spending about a year. The project is about the kinetics of enzyme and his data would only make the paper look better and cannot be the main importance.

I don't know. I wouldn't feel too bitter only if he didn't take my chair without even asking. and this was during the lowest point in my life too. I found it extremely disrespectful, so perhaps I am oversensitive about him taking my credit.

Leave the chair out of it, how do you feel about the research itself? I think you're grossly underestimating the importance of a crystal structure--they can be extremely difficult to get, and they offer an opportunity to obtain useful insight into the behavior of a biological system that other techniques can't always give. Depending on the structure, a single crystal structure can represent an entire graduate career. Entire scientific careers have been built off of a single crystal structure.

I'm also extremely curious what sort of enzyme you're studying where the kinetics of it can make for an entire paper, where the crystal structure is ancillary, no less. Usually kinetics gets tossed into the supplemental. Depending on the exact reaction in question, a skilled grad student could get the kinetics of an enzyme nailed down in a few weeks of solid work. How much of the time that you spent in the lab was just figuring out which way was up?

In the end, if you really feel that your intellectual contribution to this project was equal to the other guy's, talk to him about doing a joint first authorship on it.

 

[sustentacular]

I have been doing research for past 2 years and finally have obtained the data that is publishable as the first author in a respectable journal. I am about half done with paper so far.

However, my fellow grad student who was working with me has obtained the data which could make this paper look better. However his part is only a minor one so the paper is publishable without his.

Since he is a struggling grad student, my PI was saying that giving the first author to me could hurt him. He is willing to give me the first author position if I want to have it.

Should I be a generous guy and give him the first author or just claim what I deserve to help my chance for med school? If my PI writes in his LOR that I was the real first author and was such a nice guy that he yielded his achievement for another person, would adcoms believe this and give me the same recognition as the first author?? 😀

Can you stretch this project into two papers? Make yourself 1st on one make him 1st on the other.

 

[sustentacular]

Should I be a generous guy and give him the first author or just claim what I deserve to help my chance for med school? If my PI writes in his LOR that I was the real first author and was such a nice guy that he yielded his achievement for another person, would adcoms believe this and give me the same recognition as the first author?? 😀

Also, if you end up having the other guy as 1st author it would be in poor professional taste for your PI to write in your LOR that he asked you to make someone else 1st author, and that the other person didn't deserve the 1st author credit.

 

[bamtuba]

First, I think there tends to be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes 1st authorship of a paper, and from what I've noticed people who have done clinical research tend to be of the camp "the writer is 1st author" whereas those referring to basic science research tend to go with "1st author is the primary intellectual contributor."

As someone who has been published in basic science research, and will soon have a 1st authorship, my opinion is that you have earned the primary position and it is really not up for debate.

Your PI is (in my opinion) acting unethically really. I mean since when did "having a need to get published" qualify as a good reason for leap-frogging those who did the lion's share of the thinking/work?

This type of thing happens all the time, sure, but there are also a LOT of people who get to the post-doc level just to find that they really don't have "what it takes" to get going on their own. As a result the field is saturated with unproductive professional students who divert attention (not to mention funding that could be better spent) from research that is actually meaningful and productive. If this student can't earn their publications, why does your PI think the person can do so later?

Think about it, the whole point of getting published for grad students is for them to develop a background that shows they are ready for eventual self-funded research on their own with their own horsepower.

Is the PI really doing this student any favors if the person gets a job and can't get funding past their start-up money, especially when there is so much deserving competition waiting in the wings to take their spot when the deadlines pass and Johnny hasn't brought home the bacon (so to speak 😳)?

It is not my intention to sound harsh here, but you really have to take what you earn, no more, no less. While it is true that "science" is a VERY political field, you shouldn't help someone politically by acting as a doormat when you (likely) have so little productive time left before you move on to YOUR next level of training. An LOR from your PI to any school will almost certainly NOT mention how great you were for "being a great person and taking one for the team." Also, I highly doubt offering co-authorship (if warranted) would demote you in the eyes of your PI, unless they are an unfair person to begin with.

That aside, I could MAYBE see co-1st authorship IF the student did an equal amount of intellectual contribution to your paper.

OP!

 

[235009]

Absolutely do not "help" this grad student out. Nothing your PI can say in a LOR will look as good as a first author pub in a respected journal. It sounds from your first post that you are entitled to the first authorship without contention so you should see that through. You don't owe this grad student anything, he should earn his degree on his own without your help.

A word of caution though...absolutely do not frame this as "it will look good for med school apps"! you are a scientist and you want to be recognized fully for your contribution, period. Med school should have nothing to do with this at all and bringing it up cheapens your argument.

First author should go to whoever actually WRITES the intro and discussion.

what? that's not how it works.

can you not be co-first authors?

what?? have you ever seen a scientific paper??

 

[austinap]

what?? have you ever seen a scientific paper??

Have you? It's actually pretty common. Look closely-- there will be a little asterisk after each of the first two names, and a little note somewhere on the page saying "these authors contributed equally to this work".

 

[nopressure]

what?? have you ever seen a scientific paper??

i'm involved in one right now 🙄

 

[235009]

Have you? It's actually pretty common. Look closely-- there will be a little asterisk after each of the first two names, and a little note somewhere on the page saying "these authors contributed equally to this work".

i've seen plenty and published a couple and have never come across this. i'm quite sure very few journals allow this.

 

[nopressure]

you should look harder.

 

[austinap]

I'm still not convinced that the OP is being 100% open about the situation. While I've seen failing grad students (it's sad), there are very few PIs that would give such a student an undergrad to work with. On top of that, the grad student in question solved the crystal structure of the enzyme they're working on, which is a significant feat. The OP has been doing kinetics, which can be a significant amount of work, but can also be mind-numbingly simple. I have a very hard time believing that any PI would be planning to publish a paper with nothing other than some kinetics data. Unless it violates every known principle of kinetics, that isn't very interesting in itself.

I'm also somewhat doubtful that the story is the whole truth because from my experience, most undergrads have an overinflated view of their importance to a project. There's a lot that probably is going on behind the scenes that the OP is not aware of: he likely spends ~20 hrs/wk, at most, in lab doing research, while the grad student in question likely spends 60+ hrs/wk in lab. The OP has been working in the lab for ~2 years, but I can all but promise that the first year of that was him learning WTF was going on. It's no fault of his own, that's just how it works. It's unlikely he was contributing in a meaningful way to the project in that time though. The fact that the OP considers the crystal structure to be a minor contribution also indicates to me that he doesn't have a good sense of what goes into various experiments, and that he may be overestimating his contibution.

Sit down and really think about it for a while, think about the big picture of the research you're doing, and think about the intellectual contribution you've made to it. If you can honestly say that you've been the biggest intellectual contributor to it, then step up and take first author on the paper. If you feel that the two of you have been more or less equal in your contributions, go joint-first author. If you still don't understand the big picture, you probably shouldn't be first author. Keep in mind that there's an important difference between standing up for yourself and knowing your place in the pecking order.

 

[austinap]

i've seen plenty and published a couple and have never come across this. i'm quite sure very few journals allow this.

...most allow this. I'd estimate that somewhere between 1-5% of recently published articles have joint first authors.

Edit: added "recently", as this probably isn't true of all articles of all time. I expect this trend to increase as research between different fields becomes more and more prominent.

 

[libraryismyhome]

I'm still not convinced that the OP is being 100% open about the situation. While I've seen failing grad students (it's sad), there are very few PIs that would give such a student an undergrad to work with. On top of that, the grad student in question solved the crystal structure of the enzyme they're working on, which is a significant feat. The OP has been doing kinetics, which can be a significant amount of work, but can also be mind-numbingly simple. I have a very hard time believing that any PI would be planning to publish a paper with nothing other than some kinetics data. Unless it violates every known principle of kinetics, that isn't very interesting in itself.

For this project, the grad guy obtained a crystal for one mutant form of this enzyme and there are already crystal structures for five other mutants which are only differ by one side chain from this one. So the structure was completely predictable.

The kinetics experiment was previously tried by many other people but it was repeatedly unsuccessful. I got extremely lucky on this one.

 

[ShinyDome19]

I'm also somewhat doubtful that the story is the whole truth because from my experience, most undergrads have an overinflated view of their importance to a project. There's a lot that probably is going on behind the scenes that the OP is not aware of: he likely spends ~20 hrs/wk, at most, in lab doing research, while the grad student in question likely spends 60+ hrs/wk in lab. The OP has been working in the lab for ~2 years, but I can all but promise that the first year of that was him learning WTF was going on. It's no fault of his own, that's just how it works. It's unlikely he was contributing in a meaningful way to the project in that time though. The fact that the OP considers the crystal structure to be a minor contribution also indicates to me that he doesn't have a good sense of what goes into various experiments, and that he may be overestimating his contibution.

👍+1

I also find it difficult to believe that unless you have designed studies and published them before, how do you know if the GS's contribution is minor and that the paper can stand alone without it...I dont know a whole lot about chemistry research, however I do know that in my field, it has become almost impossible to publish a manuscript that contains only In Vitro data...we are more or less expected now to show that the same concepts that we apply to cells in a flask also hold true in some animal model. I can see this being similar for something dealing with enzymes...where their 3D-conformation could potentially say a lot about their function.

i've seen plenty and published a couple and have never come across this. i'm quite sure very few journals allow this.i've seen plenty and published a couple and have never come across this. i'm quite sure very few journals allow this. Today 07:39 PMi've seen plenty and published a couple and have never come across this. i'm quite sure very few journals allow this. Today 07:39 PM.

Its fairly common...But, its easy to overlook as Austin said, its generally denoted by a asterik by the authors names similar to how they do the superscript to identify each author's associated school/facility.

 

[austinap]

For this project, the grad guy obtained a crystal for one mutant form of this enzyme and there are already crystal structures for five other mutants which are only differ by one side chain from this one. So the structure was completely predictable.

The kinetics experiment was previously tried by many other people but it was repeatedly unsuccessful. I got extremely lucky on this one.

Ok, sounds like a boring structure, but I'm not sure that makes the kinetics somehow more interesting. No offense, but kinetics are boring unless they give you something extremely unpredictable, and they usually give you little-to-no information about how something actually behaves in a biological system. That's usually why they're thrown in the SI: people expect you to do the experiments, but nobody really trusts that the results will be relevant in the enzyme's natural setting, as many confounding factors can come into play. It's good to be able to do these experiments, and it sounds like you've gotten your hands dirty, but unless you can give more information about why this is cool, I don't see performing enzyme kinetics experiments as a significant intellectual contribution on its own.

I'm also not sure exactly what you mean by "the experiment was ... repeatedly unsuccessful." Did you not have an assay for product concentration? Were previous people not able to express / purify the enzyme?

 

[libraryismyhome]

it was not possible to obtain with other mutants because the enzyme simply denatured.
Geez enough with this. I will just go with what the PI will say.

 

[austinap]

it was not possible to obtain with other mutants because the enzyme simply denatured.
Geez enough with this. I will just go with what the PI will say.

I'm really not trying to insult you, I'm just trying to figure out what the actual project was. Really, you need to talk about this. Talk to the grad student you're working with. See what his feelings on the subject are. Obviously he's going to be biased as well, but he might be able to give you more information that you don't have now. I recommend you talk it through with him before you go to the PI in any case. No PI wants to deal with lab conflicts, or with either one of your overstepping your bounds. If he gets that impression, it will show up in your letter. Your letter matters more than the publication. The publication is a nice touch, but if your LOR for your advisor sucks, it doesn't matter. This is an excellent opportunity to show your ability to work with others and to deal with conflicts.

In my lab, if an undergrad felt that they deserved first authorship on a paper that they were working on with a grad student, they'd best talk with the grad student first. If one went to our advisor behind the GS's back (e.g., without talking to the GS about it at all), my boss would, with high probability, kick them out of the lab immediately. Not for research purposes, but because it would show that they weren't able to work with someone that was in an authoritative position. As an undergraduate in at a major research institution, a position in a lab is a an opportunity and a privilege. You're expensive, and you rarely produce the results you think you do. It takes a lot of work to train you, and you're not productive for at least the first year of it. Materials are expensive, and you're usually inefficient with them. Talk to the GS you're working with first.

 

[RemoteDoc]

Out of curiosity, what field was this in?? It's pretty bizarre for a PI to take first authorship on a paper, they're almost always last authors (or joint last authors if the work was done with more than one PI).

I have sent you a PM to maintain anonymity.

 

[libraryismyhome]

I appreciate your advice and think I should go with it. I definitely do not want to harm this grad student and need to find a good compromise. I knew that you were not insulting me. I just preferred to not to share more detail about this project.

 

[PeachyPhd]

I agree with ShinyDome.

Also, you don't want to burn ANY bridges, especially this early in your career.

If there is so much debate, I agree that equal contributors is fair.

Who purified the enzyme that you are using for your kinetics experiments? If the grad student did, I'd vote for him as first author. If you are the one purifying the enzyme, then I'd support you. Also, I wouldn't call crystalization an "experiment". It's more significant than that.

Sounds like a lab meeting needs to be arranged where all parties involved meet and make a battle plan.

 

[austinap]

I appreciate your advice and think I should go with it. I definitely do not want to harm this grad student and need to find a good compromise. I knew that you were not insulting me. I just preferred to not to share more detail about this project.

Understandable. Just be a little careful not to step on the wrong toes, that never does anyone any good.