myhairtiebroke

Accepted into UW-Madison's MDTP (top choice!)
I did ask about the political+funding situation during my interview. The program (microbio department in general) is well insulated from funding cuts (they even increased the stipend this year), and professors that would have left have mostly done so by now - but it doesn't hurt to ask the ones you are particularly interested in. This is not the case for every department, so if Madison is on your radar then be sure to ask - the information was practically volunteered by a few people.

Accepted into UW-Madison's MDTP (top choice!)
I did ask about the political+funding situation during my interview. The program (microbio department in general) is well insulated from funding cuts (they even increased the stipend this year), and professors that would have left have mostly done so by now - but it doesn't hurt to ask the ones you are particularly interested in. This is not the case for every department, so if Madison is on your radar then be sure to ask - the information was practically volunteered by a few people.

Accepted into UW-Madison's MDTP (top choice!)
I did ask about the political+funding situation during my interview. The program (microbio department in general) is well insulated from funding cuts (they even increased the stipend this year), and professors that would have left have mostly done so by now - but it doesn't hurt to ask the ones you are particularly interested in. This is not the case for every department, so if Madison is on your radar then be sure to ask - the information was practically volunteered by a few people.

So I'm sure this would be more appropriate in a thread dedicated to interview prep, but because there has been a lot of very useful advice here on the subject (I myself being on the receiving end) I thought I would share something I just discovered. I searched for my interviewers on YouTube to see if they had any publicly available seminars, and turns out most of them do! I watched the most recent for each faculty and I found it extremely helpful for the ones I'm really interested in working with. I also feel like I almost know them a little better and don't feel as nervous about talking to them in person??? I guess I'll know for sure whether it helped tomorrow after my first interview takes place, but just thought I would share in case anyone is feeling a little stressed about reading and not processing very well!

If you refer to the flight itinerary, I think you should call... If you mean the interview schedule, then don't worry.

I have one that starts tomorrow and I only received my itinerary last night so I wouldn't be too worried, but I do find it odd that they wait so long to let students know what their schedule is!!!

Did you mention this sentiment in your SOPs? Because that seems like a boner killer for adcoms. Additionally, expecting your program/lab to generate, or already have, data for you is an incredibly entitled mindset.

Alongside this, talk to the professors you're interested in working with to make sure they're not about to disembark to another university. I've had several friends who got screwed by professors leaving right after they joined a program.

You should absolutely feel free to ask tough questions about a program or university during your interview weekend. These interview weekends exist in part for you, the candidate, to evaluate the program and university. When asking about this, I would be general and ask something like, "How has the situation with Gov. Walker and the state legislature affected things here at the University of Wisconsin?" Most current graduate students will likely be fairly candid in their responses to questions, while professors may be a bit more strategic. It also may be worthwhile to ask the program coordinator(s) about this subject during your visit.
I suggest being general and also asking administrators this question because of my experience with a similar (though less extreme) situation at the University of Illinois. Gov. Rauner and the state legislature have been at an impasse over the state budget for a long time now, and this has resulted in significant cuts in state funding to the University of Illinois. These cuts have been passed along to the university administration, which has had not-too-obvious effects on graduate research.
For example, the way PIs spend money from their grants is now being scrutinized at an excruciating level. (Remember that most grants are awarded to PIs' home institutions, not PIs themselves, so the home institution gets a say in how the grant money is spent.) PIs have had difficulty purchasing expensive equipment for their labs because they have had to convince administrators (who obviously have little to no background in science) that the purchase is absolutely necessary for them to conduct their research. At the same time, some of the better administrators have left the university to find more hospitable work environments, which has made dealing with the administration even more difficult.

they squeezed me in! The Michigan coordinators are so nice and helpful. 

No. I didn't mention this in my sop or anywhere else in my application. I didn't highlight my wet lab work because its not what I expect to be doing in grad school. I'm not sure why it is entitled. There are many public data sources upon which we can create new computational methods and publish research. It is easier if the data is private as fewer people have had the chance to analyze that data. If the methods used to analyze the data constitute novel research then great, that is a paper.
This is dealt with in many labs. It depends on whether the novel aspect is the biology/hypothesis or the computational methods used. If the answer is one or the other, the first authorship is easy to figure out. If it is both, sometimes there are dual first authors (increasingly common) and sometimes there are 2 papers one focusing on the method and one focusing on the results.

It still feels early in the application season, so I wouldn't be too down yet. However, I completely understand your feelings - this is my third time trying! I don't know what you're situation is, but if you qualify (graduated undergrad in the last two years), I would definitely look into postbac positions at the NIH. Or anywhere, but I went through the NIH fellowship and recommend it if you don't get in, or don't feel ready for grad school.

It still feels early in the application season, so I wouldn't be too down yet. However, I completely understand your feelings - this is my third time trying! I don't know what you're situation is, but if you qualify (graduated undergrad in the last two years), I would definitely look into postbac positions at the NIH. Or anywhere, but I went through the NIH fellowship and recommend it if you don't get in, or don't feel ready for grad school.

Jeans are absolutely fine for events like welcome dinners or trips to any bars/house parties that students may take you to. That said, wear a nicer pair of jeans.
Most men that I interviewed with wore a tie to their interviews. During my last interview, I decided that I didn't care anymore and stopped wearing a tie - it didn't impact the decision on my application (I also wore some interesting colored clothing on this interview because I had run out of clean clothes after three interviews in one week). Generally, people wear more neutral colors/navy blue because that sums up business casual. Honestly, I don't think it entirely matters - the program administrator at Duke gave me a high five because I wore "Duke blue" pants to the first day of interviews.
In general, if faculty are expected to be present (interviews, dinners/cocktail hours with faculty), I would go with trousers (not jeans), a button down shirt, and a sweater or blazer (a tie is up to you). The great thing about blazers is that they're easy to take off and hang up if the situation is more casual. For events with students, a pair of nice jeans and a more casual shirt (button down but not necessarily a dress shirt) will usually suffice. This is more or less what I saw from those that I interviewed with as well.

The dress code is typically business casual/formal. Most men wore suits for my interviews. However, there are events where jeans are fine, just not the actual interview haha

I wore the same thing to every interview: casual dress pants (I have a casual pair of slacks), comfortable dress shoes, a white button up, and  a sweater. 
Remember, you will likely be walking a lot, so you need to be prepared for that. I also interviewed in really cold places (Minnesota, Chicago, Boston, Denver), so I had to wear clothes that would go well with a big coat. 
A suit is not necessary. My Harvard invitation specifically said to dress for comfort. 
I would pack nice jeans or pants for nights out, nice pants (slacks or chinos) for the interview, comfortable shoes that look good but can be worn while walking a lot, button ups, and maybe a sweater or two. 
Finally, know that will not be denied an offer of admissions based on what you wear. Honestly, any school with that philosophy is not worth your time. Dress nice, but be comfortable. 

I wholeheartedly second this. I wanted to go into immunology and epigenetics, maybe with some cancer biology. I joined a lab where now I work on metabolism and heart disease, and I'm so glad I did. I focused on my fit with the school as a whole when I applied an interviewed, and then in rotations I focused on my fit in the lab and how well I thought the PI would mentor me. My dream project? Last thing on my list. Now I can't believe I ever wanted to limit myself to just immunology and I plan to stay in metabolism when I graduate, but I think I'll grab some epigenetics when I go to post doc. Please message me if you want to talk more one-on-one about it.

For what it's worth, I think you should be relatively flexible in your research.  Shoot for general areas that aren't a specific topic simply because 100% of PhDs I've met changed their research from grad school into the rest of their career.  You want to look for interesting questions that will produce publishable data with a good mentor.  But just my thoughts!

The more, the better! But also never limit yourself to your "PI list." I ended up going the lab of a PI that was nowhere near on my radar; in fact, he wasn't even a PI at the school yet when I applied.

I mean, it's up to you but I wouldn't email them again.  Most people have email on their phone (my PI currently has his synced to his watch) and therefore see it when you email them.  Of course, there can be circumstances like traveling and whatnot.  If you are really interested in the lab and haven't gotten a reply from them, I might try emailing the graduate students.  They'll be really honest and also can tell you if the PI is traveling or not.
I think that as long as you don't ask, "So what would I be doing if I were to join your lab?"  you should be fine.  Ask about future directions, sure, but the question about projects that you could do is kind of misplaced.  They can't tell you because they might have students joining this year that might want to work on the project so they don't want to promise anything.
I shot for 10 at the bigger programs.  If it was a smaller program, say for instance Rockefeller, I didn't really pay attention that much because I knew how amazing the research was there and also I knew there were only about 10 people total (maybe) that did anything in my field, so it was obviously going to be reduced.  Also worth considering, I was open to researching a topic that wasn't in what I thought I wanted to do (immunology) so I counted those people.  But if you're committed to your research topic, then I think you interest count will obviously be lower.

You don't have to look for 10, but the more the merrier. 

I simply mean that in a week, if they haven't gotten back to you, there is a good chance that the email is buried in their inbox.  I mean, it's possible they'll clean it out and see it if they've been gone at a conference.  
Also, it's grant time now, so some of the less-well-funded professors won't be able to say whether they are taking students or not.  I'm just worried that it might be a bit presumptuous to ask what you might be working on in their lab.  I guess if what you are working on is so specific you can't find 10 ish faculty in the program you might be interested in, then emailing is a good idea.

How long has it been since you emailed them?  If it's been over a week, it's not a lost cause but it doesn't look good for affecting your application.  Also, I believe that emailing faculty does not in any way help you get an "in"  into a program. Unless you're going to be a direct admit, but those require more of a relationship and also aren't common in the biological sciences.  I mean look at it this way, faculty want to choose their grad students from a pool of qualified people and so use the admissions committee as a filtering mechanism so they know in general everybody in the program is academically qualified and has a demonstrable aptitude/interest in science.
So my point is, email faculty if you have a valid question about the institution, the program, or their research, not if you're looking to get a leg up in the competition (not that you are, just PSA).
Have you looked into microbiology programs at University of Iowa, University of Tennessee, university of Utah, or other similar schools?  They have great research but aren't necessarily University of Wisconsin-Madison competitive in microbiology.

Okay, but you shouldn't have been straight up rejected from every school you applied to, especially with 3 good letters and a first author publication and good statistics.  The problem is that theoretically, you should have gotten something and that says to other people that you aren't seeing something about your application.  And your LoRs will probably be exactly the same... professors are as lazy as regular people, unless something new has happened with them and you in the past year.  You should definitely ask to see them, although you want to be careful because it could come off like you're saying that they might have been the reason for your rejection last year.
Maybe change the way you're approaching choosing grad schools?  Something isn't clicking with your profile and the schools you applied to.  I think you should apply to them and also about 5 more programs that aren't as competitive.  If I remember correctly, you wanted to do host-microbe stuff?  That's really common (which is a good thing) meaning that you should be able to find some schools with a strength in it.

@myhairtiebroke You mentioned that you also reached out to some professors. How did that go? If they seem to be interested, they might be able to provide some insight on why you were rejected previously and may be able to help with your application.