virion

I think I was trying to help troubleshoot the problem without actually thinking about what was being done. Why sequence the RNA (cDNA)? If it's simply point mutations you're looking for, sequence the genome. Only reasons I can think of would be if it's an RNA virus you're sequencing, or if you're looking for splice site junctions or something. Mistakes in transcription happen, but they don't happen clonally. Meaning, a few copies of mutant protein could be made but not in a way that would affect the system you're interested in. You want to look at the genome. I'm not sure if even deep sequencing techniques would pick up single mRNA variants (would be neat, though), but Sanger sequencing would certainly be useless in this task.

This probably isn't the best forum for technical questions, but oh well. Most of the cDNAs will not be full length. If you've just got a kit with random hexamer and oligodT primers, you'll have a mix of "all" cDNAs. But you could amplify selectively too if sequencing a single gene is your goal. If you need to amplify an entire gene, don't just use some random primers generated in the middle of the reading frame (was the web app doing it for qPCR?). As you seem to suggest, you'll only get the piece in the middle. 5000 kb is an extremely long PCR. There's no reason you can't just do it in pieces and sequence those. Unless you're using a polymerase like pfu or phusion, you're going to introduce mutations when amplifying, which would be counterproductive for your purposes.

You should talk to the dean.

True, though letters of recommendation can rank higher, in a way. It, along with your statement, validates the "research experience" which is otherwise just listed as a few lines on your CV.

At least this contestant won't walk away empty handed.

I am not sure I follow your situation. How many potential (or, in some cases, guaranteed?) awards are you speaking about. Perhaps I'm tired, but it sounds like: Accept award -> University award. Mid range $, Mid range prestige. Decline the above award -> Eligible for one of (and guaranteed not to get neither of): high prestige, high pay OR low pay, mid+ prestige. In the end, it's a summer project. Having any award to go along with it will look nice, and I'm not sure how much you need to worry about which one you get. I don't know much about summer research programs (I went the honors thesis and then technician route)I'd say unless one of these is going to really stand out to everyone in the field, I wouldn't be too concerned about how the admissions committee is going to respond to which exact award it is. Though it could very well look better coming from a source outside of your own university. In the end you should probably just do what you would do if you weren't applying for grad school. Do you think you stand a good chance for the better award if you turn down the university one? Enough so that it's worth the risk of losing $800? It sounds more and more like a game show, the more I think about it.

I had this problem last year. Had a low (I forget how low, maybe 60%?) ecology and evolution score, but my molecular score (relevant) was 96%. I found out that they do see the subscores, so I sent it and (hopefully not obnoxiously) noted the subscore in my CV. My application season went well. Whether or not the score had any effect, I have no idea.

Last year, my friend also applied to this program. He had a very similar application, with higher GRE scores. He got an interview, and is now in the program. He has since told me that there is a specific GRE score cutoff (I feel like he even told me roughly what it is, but I could be mis-remembering that), where they really don't look at applications with lower scores. I don't know if it's actually fully automated filtering, but probably only the applications which are truly exceptional in other areas outweigh this criterion.

I'm a Pitt student and, while the scores aren't great, I say you should still apply if it's somewhere you want to go. I had a good application with one somewhat ugly flaw which fortunately didn't totally screw me over. Good recommendations will get you far. Edit: different program, though. UW had a very early wave of rejections last year, which bummed me out as it was the first thing I had heard back about. Fortunately I heard back from Pitt the next day. The rest were a somewhat longer wait.

It's competitive, but not nearly as bad as med school (I don't know anything about psych). I feel that 15+ is way too much. I did 10, and it turned out to be just the right amount. In retrospect I would have probably dropped one reach (Ivy) that was no chance and, if I were honest with myself, I would have been miserable at. There was another that I declined the interview at, and would have only made sense if my application season was a complete bomb. But, of course, at the time I thought it could have been!

Many people probably don't. If it's a PhD program, and all goes as planned, it will be some years before you probably really need your CV again. By then, it should be strong enough that lab rotation details seem like buffering. If one were to leave after 2 years with an MS, it might be more reasonable to put lab rotations on there when job searching, etc. An exception might be mentioning a technique (perhaps not some trivial kit, but maybe NMR, EM, etc. Expensive hardware that they don't want you breaking? )that you got a lot of experience with during a rotation, but not in your thesis work, that is relevant to the position you're applying for.

I say ignore the non-research lab for the purpose of comparison, unless the salary difference is critical for you to get by (I figure you might not be asking if it were a deal breaker). Between the two research job possibilities, which will you get more out of? Generally, one would think the 40+ hour a week job would better prepare you for grad school than the 15 hour job, but there will be cases where that's not true. It's hard to get much done in a 10-15 hour work week. Will they just have you washing glassware and making media? What about at option #2? It can be helpful if you have experience in the same, or a similar field. But it's not necessary. If you mean cell bio vs. molecular bio, you will undoubtedly be using and learning molecular techniques in a cell biology lab. I wouldn't worry about any techniques you "miss out on" from option #1 setting you back in grad school. Everyone learns new techniques during rotations.

I think you're right that few people will be familiar with the program specifically (I'm not familiar with the field and their typical admissions process). I would speculate that this kind of bulk screening would not be necessary for a program receiving fewer applications. I doubt the big programs do it because they're 'super elite'. It's more likely that they simply can't look at every application in detail.

Google Drive is a really nice option as well. Works just like dropbox. And it's easy to share your files with any one that has a gmail account (everyone). 5 gb to start, and their paid upgrade plans are better than dropbox's. Google *also* has a plugin for MS Office which syncs your documents as you work on them in case your system crashes. Dropbox would still be better if you really max out your free storage by facebook spamming and such. I think I stopped at 5gb. (if this has been mentioned before in the thread, tl;dr)

There are two basic formats to adviser selection. I'm not sure they're typically called "formats", maybe that's why you're confused. But I'm not sure what else to call them. The first is as you're describing, where you contact a PI in the application stage and they agree to take you on. The other, more common format is to choose ~3 labs to rotate in during your firsts year, and select an adviser prior to the start of your second year. In this case, you may want to contact PIs prior to application, but it is not a requirement. They might be more inclined to respond as you're not actually asking to be sponsored at that stage.

Assuming you aren't being overly vague in your email subject field, and don't have a ridiculous email address (if you still have your .edu handle, use that), there's not too much more you can do. The content of your emails, as well as your credential should be enough to warrant a response. It's possible that so far you've contacted PIs who are not looking to take on more students. Most PIs are up front about their funding at interviews and certainly once you've joined. But they may not wish to announce their situations to a stranger. I can't speak for general bio (my understanding is that the pre-selected PI format is a bit more common there), but all of the molecular programs I applied to were rotation format for the first year. I am sure that there are some molecular programs out there without rotations, but I didn't come across any in my searches last year.

I don't know the details of the field/program you're applying to. For much of the biosciences, you do rotations your first year rather than solidify a PI before the admissions process is complete. Contacting a PI can be beneficial, especially if there are only a few faculty members you're interested in. I didn't end up contacting specific PIs before hand and things worked out great. I realize some fields don't have rotations. Evolutionary genetics may follow that model. If that's the case, check the deadlines for other programs of interest. You may have time to establish contacts and plan visits. In my last post I suggested an alternative to scrambling for a full load of applications this year. If this PI you're meeting with and her program are clearly your top choice, you could apply to a limited number of schools this year. I wouldn't apply to *only* this school, as the application/interview process can alter your decision. But if your top choices don't work out this year, you can still apply to a larger selection next year including "safer" schools.

So it sounds like you have two motivators for taking your year off. The first is, R&R, is something we can't really advise you on. If you need it, you need it. Either way, don't bring up this aspect of your time off decision with the PI. If you bring up the possibility of waiting a year, do so in the context of improving your CV, unless of course the PI brings up the importance of vacation time. Some certainly do this. As far as everything else, you're trying to prepare so that you've got a good shot at getting into grad school, right? If this meeting, and the fact that you are fresh in mind will help your chances, I say definitely go for it. You will get experience in researching and TA work when you get there. You'll have this year anyway. Maybe you don't want to apply to every school on your list this year. But it sounds like you've got everything else lined up, if you're entertaining the idea, go for it. Sometimes you can even defer for a year. I can't imagine doing that without some serious health or family related reason, though. I took two years off and worked as a research assistant. I found it rewarding, as I certainly wouldn't have gotten into half of the programs I did with just my limited undergrad research experience (in a slightly less relevant field). My technique and discipline in the lab improved quite a bit as well. As far as letting my mind relax after undergrad... maybe? It was a moderately stressful job. I had my time on the weekends generally, and had plenty of fun, but I didn't take six months off to travel or anything like that. A well-spent summer between undergrad and grad school could be at least as rewarding. She's not going to expect you to have project ideas. Prepare enough that you can carry on a good conversation and you can ask the types of questions that one would if they were thinking up projects. For all you know someone in their lab is already doing it, or someone else in the field has their tight grip on that question already. But you can at least show your ability to think critically. If you actually want to work for this person, ask practical questions about the scale of the lab, would you be working mostly with post docs, if she plans on taking on a new student next year (a polite way to ask if she thinks she'll have funding for you), and so on.

I agree, just get started in a lab, do some research. If you can't find a job in a plant bio lab, join another bio lab. Match it as well as you can to your interests, even if that means molecular biology of humans/animals/bacteria rather than plants. What's important is that you'll be exposed to a similar type of academic setting, similar kinds of research questions and dealing with the experimental approaches to answering those questions. As far as working for a "not too famous" PI: if you're getting research experience before grad school, you want a PI that will be able to write you an excellent, personal letter. A famous PI would be great, unless maybe the lab is so large you only interact with the PI once or twice a year, resulting in an impersonal sort of recommendation. On the other hands, I've had friends who were told to write their own letters and the PI simply signed them. When you get to graduate school, work for whoever you want. A huge lab with a famous PI may or may not be the best work environment for you, but you shouldn't worry about being overshadowed by them. When it comes to applying for post doc positions your work should speak for itself.

Fortunately my program has an extra educational stipend which can be used at any point for proper materials (no iPads allowed apparently). And as luck would have it, I own the text for this term. Most people seem to use their stipend on a laptop, or save it until their laptop breaks later on.

2500-3000 across the country with pod-type service and driving myself. Though I still lack a few pieces of not-technically-essential-but-normal-to-have furniture that are going to have to wait a month or two.

Of the fellow interviewees I met during my round of interviews this year, many who weren't current undergrads were working industry jobs (quite a few RA's in academia as well). I myself worked as a research assistant at a university lab which publishes, etc, but does not have a standard structure (no graduate students and basically never post docs). So I received a few questions from interviewers trying to make sure I was familiar with standard academic lab environment, had indirect exposure to 'grad school life', and so on. As an undergrad, I worked in such labs. This always seemed to put the interviewer at ease. So, I would say that it partially depends on your previous experience. The schools I interviewed with generally made a big deal about the fact that they are aware that no, most PhD graduates won't get traditional jobs in academia and yes, they're here to prepare us for other post-graduate job we may be seeking. So if the admissions committee reading your application has this "modern" type of attitude, the fact that you know you want to go into industry and have relevant experience to that may work for you. It's also possible that an old-timer (or whoever) that perceives a stigma associated with that type of work will read your application. But generally I think they'll like to see someone who knows what they want. This doesn't address the issue of networking you mentioned. If you would be working with people in the program you eventually want to join, it's an opportunity that would be difficult to pass up. Hopefully you're offered both jobs But if, for instance, you only get the biotech job there is absolutely no shame in that and you'll thank yourself in grad school for the extra money you've been able to set aside.

Most public universities I've seen have free on-campus access (memberships allow them to check out a small number of books). Certainly worth checking out. I read quite a bit of papers before interviews, and it turned out that most people I met had only read a few abstracts, maybe a paper or two. But while you're still basically screening universities, I can see why you'd want better access. Do you know anyone currently in school who would let you use their library login?

I usually notice a change in email signature over time. Dr. Franklin Lastname Franklin Lastname Franklin Frank

I don't think I understand what types of data or interpretations you want to develop from V for Vendetta. I do, however, happen to be a total geek and suggest that if you're researching this film you read the graphic novel of the same name. The film was adapted from this work (written by Alan Moore), so use that either alternatively or as a necessary supplement.