<p>This will sound neurotic, but this is my very first time, so bear with me.</p>
<p>I emailed a professor at the nearby BIG Public University (I go to a private liberal arts college) about a research position this summer and he responded within 2 days. He told me to email him after a certain date for an interview date because he was out of the country. It's been 5 days since I sent the second email and he has not replied.</p>
<p>I think I was a little spoiled from the quick reply the first time. Even though I know that professors are extremely busy and I'm lucky to have a chance at an interview, I'm getting fidgety about the longer wait on this one. What is a reasonable amount of time to wait before sending another email? Taking into consideration that he may have been on vacation and the fact that the university will open again in about a week.</p>
<p>To be honest, you should be emailing professors in groups of 10. I generally got about 3 out of every 10 professors I emailed to actually respond. Out of those 3, maybe 1-2 had a lab position open and was willing to interview. Unless you're especially attached to this guy, I'd just email more professors.</p>
<p>Well, the problem is that it's been extremely hard for me to find research that I'm interested in. I've been following this person's research for a while now and I finally had some lab experience to offer along with 12 hours a week. I'm not trying to be unrealistic or cocky when I say if this doesn't work out, I won't be doing research this semester because I know just how low my odds are. He had no information about his lab or whether any positions were open when I contacted him. In my email I bluntly stated that I understood that I may not be qualified and sent him my resume, but he offered an interview anyways.</p>
<p>I am guessing that means he will consider me, so I was just wondering how long I should wait for the next email before emailing again or how long it took other peopler to receive replies.</p>
<p>And though I appreciate</p>
<p>You can always just email him again. Professors are busy and forget to email all the time. It's not a big deal.</p>
<p>Although, I'd say that you're probably too picky if, as an undergrad, you can only find one professor whose research matches your research interests.</p>
<p>why'd you tell him you may not be qualified? let him tell you that...don't say it yourself.</p>
<p>and ncg is right, there have to be more professors out there whose research interests match yours. especially in biology -- there isn't much variation in the type of research that people do.</p>
<p>i say, email him again. professors are forgetful. they get tons of emails a day...make the subject line creative or something.</p>
<p>Honestly, "research interests" are almost irrelevant at this early point in the game in my opinion (like NCG said). As a grad student or a post-doc, it might make some difference; as an undergrad, virtually none. Any type of biology research becomes interesting once you delve into it deep enough; like MolSysBio said, there isn't a lot of variation.</p>
<p>My only real criterion while searching for a prof was "not plants"... and today I'm interviewing with a biochem prof whose work involves plants. All the other profs I've spoken to do not have room for another undergrad in their labs. I'll just be happy if I can get into a lab; being picky would not work in my favor, and I imagine it's similar at other colleges as well.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>arabidopsis genetics?</p>
<p>also, there is a bit of choice that comes into play when you're trying to decide what work to do. if you have the skillset, you can choose to do computational/theoretical research as opposed to experimental work. of course you can sit on a bench and pipet all day if that's what you want... :-)</p>
<p>Thanks for all of the replies. On the advice of a professor, I called his office today, and he called me back to set up an interview. </p>
<p>Haha it could go well or he might say no, but this is my first time so I can only learn from this!</p>
<p>
[quote]
arabidopsis genetics?
[/quote]
Yes, as a matter of fact... specifically, cell wall related enzymes and pathways regulated by MUR2 and MUR3 genes.</p>
<p>i think it shouldnt matter too much whether the model organism is a plant or yeast or mouse or what not, since DNA is still DNA and the method you use to study genes are the same.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>wrong. the second half of that statement is precisely the reason why quants are leaving pure biologists in the dust.</p>
<p>well i mean the way you extract the DNA is different for different organism, but once you get the DNA, you still use Real time PCR with your designed primers or if you are doing transformation, its the same. mostly it depends on what your doing too?</p>
<p>same thing for like doing western blots, the way you extract protein may be slightly different for different organisms.</p>
<p>Plus for computational, you end up using NCBI and genbank to do most of the work? unless you are creating a program to help predict putative targets and stuff- that i would think is quite hard.</p>
<p>In additional, i dont see how doing theoretical/computational research makes you any better? If anything, most students end up doing both computational and experimental work. Without the experimental, how would you confirm if your theoretical work is correct. w/e you have your opinion and i have mine.</p>