nature = auto admit?

<p>first author nature / nature genetics paper (3 authors total). conducted research, wrote paper manuscript, reviewed manuscript, analyzed data, helped design theoretical framework of experiment. paper submitted -- if accepted, auto-admit to physics, chemical physics, systems biology phd?</p>

<p>it's a good sign, but nothing is a guaranteed admit ... unless you're chums with the admissions head, or something like that.</p>

<p>Nothing = auto admit.</p>

<p>That said, I think this will impress any admission committee and provided that you aren't grossly deficient in some other area, you should be fine. Congrats on your paper, when was it accepted? What is it on? What month will it be out?</p>

<p>A first author pub in nature or science is pretty huge and will carry equal weight accordingly. As for auto-admit? probably not as I've heard of applicants with 5-10 publications in top tier journals still get rejected.</p>

<p>I've never heard of anyone with a CNS first-author who was rejected. There would have to be some pretty serious kitten-eating in an interview for that to happen, in my opinion.</p>

<p>Of course, it's not entirely the CNS pub that's the tipping factor. People who have that sort of research background tend to have pretty outstanding profiles with or without the actual fact of the publication.</p>

<p>But for my part, I had a Cell paper in review during interviews (6th author), and it was discussed in a very positive light in every interview. It was mentioned in my NSF application review. I feel it was a big asset to me during the application process.</p>

<p>Is there any particular significance of "6th authorship", mollie? I mn, isnt it counted as a co-authorship?</p>

<p>I'd be very surprised if someone with a nature paper gets rejected!! Having a first author nature paper is a big achievement even for well established researchers at any top research institutions!!</p>

<p>Kitten eating?</p>

<p>I'm just saying it wasn't anywhere close to first author.</p>

<p>And belevitt, don't you know that's why they have interviews? To weed out the kitten-eaters? ;)</p>

<p>That sounds delicious</p>

<p>well, what's the general protocol for talking about your work before it's published? i know some are very secretive and others post their diagrams, etc. online on personal websites. broadly speaking, it has to do with systems biology and metabolic networks.</p>

<p>Unless your interviewers are taping your conversation (which they shouldn't be, and would be highly disturbing anyway), I don't think they'll be able to pull enough out of the conversation to scoop you on your research. After all, they're interested in seeing how well you can talk about your research and how passionate you are for your subject -- it's not necessary to carry around a poster presentation with you at interviews :)</p>

<p>And FWIW, most of my interviewers allowed me about 2-3 min talking about my own research before they would happily launch into their own. The majority of my interviews had me struggling to stay awake while listening to them talk ...</p>

<p>(wise advice for traveling -- plan red-eye flights well in advance, and be sure to include recovery time.)</p>

<p>oh, well i will be applying next year. looking into physics, mathematics, chemical physics and systems bio programs.</p>