Want to meet the undergraduates behind the upcoming MSURJ issue? Check out the profiles below and attend the MSURJ Launch on March 30th, 2023!
- At Once Friends and Foes: Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection
- The Role of Iron in Epidermal Healing and Infection & Uncovering the Regulators of CRISPR-Cas Immunity
- An Enduring Controversial Story in the Human Brain: Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis in the Dentate Gyrus
- Description and Exploration of Mean-Gauss Surfaces
- Comparison of Small Molecule-Responsive RNA Aptazymes for Applications in Gene Control
- A Review of Pumice Raft Formation Environments, Saturation, and Dispersal Mechanisms
- Bacterial Mediation of Chemotherapy Resistance
- Rho GTPase regulatory proteins contribute to podocyte morphology and function
At Once Friends and Foes: Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection
Author: Angela Nelson (she/her), U3 Microbiology and Immunology
Can you give a brief summary of the work/review you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
I wrote a review about the dual role of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) in chronic Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infections. MDSCs are a group of innate immune cells that arise in periods of prolonged inflammation. There is a neutrophil-like subset (polymorphonuclear MDSCs, PMN-MDSCs) that are proposed to promote tolerance, that is, balancing preventing spread of the infection with limiting immune-induced damage to the host. The monocyte-like subset (monocytic MDSCs, M-MDSCs) are thought to possibly alter their metabolism to stimulate the pathogen Mtb’s growth. With the impending post-antibiotic age, these cells could be an interesting host-directed therapeutic venue in the treatment of Mtb.
What prompted you to conduct research/ write a review article on your selected topic?
This was originally an assignment for WCOM 250 that I got increasingly invested in the more I learned about MDSCs.
Why do you think it is important to conduct research/reviews as an undergraduate?
The lab work is only one side of the story, and actually completely meaningless without subsequent interpretation and communication. So I think it’s paramount for aspiring scientists to sharpen their reasoning and writing skills through research.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
Don’t give up. It can be disheartening to be rejected (especially when you’re starting out), but I promise if you persist you will eventually get your foot in the door somewhere.
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
It made me think about the experience of reading my writing from a different perspective. It pointed out gaps that I’m blind to, as the author, and I think this will serve me in my future writing endeavours.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
I have a lot of respect for my current Principal Investigator, Professor Jonathan Kimmelman. He’s a scientist with strong principles.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I would like to thank Dr. Richard Cooper for his input on the earliest versions of this paper and for helping me improve my writing.
The Role of Iron in Epidermal Healing and Infection & Uncovering the Regulators of CRISPR-Cas Immunity
Author: Idia Boncheva (she/her), U3 Microbiology and Immunology
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
I submitted two papers, both of which are review papers. The first one I wrote last year and it’s about the role of iron in epidermal healing and in infection control, specifically how we can use certain chelation therapies to help heal or treat infections. The second paper is about the regulation of the CRISPR-Cas system in model bacteria that are often used to study this system. In terms of the importance I think that most of the knowledge that I summarized in the first paper was kind of already established, but for the second one, I think that it was more important because regulation is kind of the grey area in terms of CRISPR-Cas systems.
What prompted you to conduct research/ write a review article on your selected topic?
The first paper was an assignment for a class-I had to take a course to do it so I didn’t really get to choose the topic, but as I was reading I thought “oh this is really cool”, so I figured that since I was writing the paper anyways, I should do it properly, I want to do this for real, and maybe I went a bit overboard- I just kept working on it even after the class was over for a few months. Since I didn’t get that much feedback on the first one I tried to reach out to a professor and do this project on my own, independently, outside of class. Dr. Chahal agree to supervise me and she helped me out a lot.
Why do you think it is important to conduct research/reviews as an undergraduate?
I think that it’s a good way to distinguish yourself, because we’re all being trained for the same thing and if you don’t take the initiative to do things outside of solely your program, you’re kind of at a disadvantage. So I think that doing any research, even if most people are doing research, is a good way to set yourself aside from the rest, since the projects that you’re working on are specific to you.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
At first, I had a really hard time finding supervisors, because I think I limited myself a lot in terms of needing to find someone in immunology, because that’s what I’m interested in. But then I went to a big professor-student mixer and had a great conversation with a PI, who accepted me into her lab within a week. Just keep your options open and try not to limit yourself and the research that you can do; there’s no point [in doing that] so early in your career.
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
I think it was beneficial in the sense of introducing me to how publishing works because I had no idea. I didn’t know that you had to get specific licenses, I didn’t know that so many people had to review it, I didn’t know that you had to sign specific forms; it’s a whole process. I think that will be invaluable because it’s a head start to the complicated publishing world. And obviously, improving the papers that I had already written and getting more feedback from more experts is always really helpful.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
I love Neri Oxman. She is a scientist at MIT and she studies the coolest things because she is at the intersection of a bunch of disciplines. It’s art but also architecture, biology, and design. It’s all this science that has no purpose but that’s the whole premise of it, it’s entirely experimental and there’s no point to it. When I was introduced to it, she was working on this 3D sculpture made from silk from larvae. It was an exhibition of sculptures made by little larvae and from there it was a really cool application because we could harvest the silk that way instead of killing all the larvae. I think she’s really cool.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I think that, prior to this experience, I also considered my class assignments as “oh it’s only going to be the class professor who reads this, whatever”. But you’re already putting in so many hours into researching and writing, just take it a step further and try to publish it somewhere. You already have the paper, it’s already done, there are so many publications in school. Just try to send it in to one or two and see what happens.
An Enduring Controversial Story in the Human Brain: Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis in the Dentate Gyrus
Author: Zhipeng (Steve) Niu (he/him), 2022 Graduate of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Minor in Psychology.
Can you give a brief summary of the review you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
The review article was written during my last year of my undergraduate degree on the topic of Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis (AHN), which is the process of generating new neurons in the hippocampus, responsible for cognitive functions. Its existence and persistence in humans have been debated due to inconsistent post-mortem markers. A review of 143 relevant studies highlights current understanding, methodological variabilities, and potential implications for treating neurological disorders. The correlation between AHN and diseases like mood disorders and Alzheimer’s is not well-established, and standardization of transcriptomic methodologies and increased availability of human brain samples are necessary for further research. Overall, this review is important since it emphasizes the need to further explore the fascinating and controversial world of fundamental AHN and its potential therapeutic applications.
What prompted you to conduct research/ write a review article on your selected topic?
The review article was inspired by my undergraduate project conducted during my third year on Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis (AHN) supervised by Dr. Naguib Mechawar. It was an exciting and fun experience to work within this lab and conduct molecular experiments on post-mortem human tissues. I reviewed a lot of literature when I started the project, and found the controversies and debates within academia surrounding AHN to be fascinating. This piqued my personal interest in the subject and motivated me to delve deeper into the topic. As a result, I ended up writing this review article synthesizing the current understanding and methodological challenges of studying AHN, drawing on my personal experiences and interest in the neuroscience field.
Why it is important to conduct research/reviews as an undergraduate?
For myself, conducting reviews as an undergraduate helped significantly when it came to critical thinking skills, since we are not only required to analyze and synthesize complex information from multiple sources, but also add our own perspectives into the paragraphs to expand and push the interpretations/findings when writing reviews. Engaging in this process helped me develop important technical and research skills, such as literature analysis and scientific writing, which will be very valuable in future academic or professional pursuits.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
Your interest matters a lot! I found neuroscience as my cup of tea, but this field may not be the source of passion for others. I worked in cancer research but I did not feel as passionate as I did when taking my first neuroscience course. I believe it is important to think about the subjects and topics that interest you the most and explore research opportunities within those areas.
Be brave to talk to faculty and research staff. It was very difficult in the beginning to secure an opportunity to conduct research at McGill since since I did not have experience and the COVID pandemic began. It took me a while to find the lab that suited me and my interests. Talk to your professors, and reach out to researchers in your field of interest to learn more about their work and potential opportunities.
Be committed and professional. Once you secure a research position, be committed to the project and the team. The research process can at times be very laborious and repetitive but great results will be gained in the end. Be professional, reliable, independent and communicate regularly with your mentor or supervisor. Try to think about every task as a challenge to overcome and learn from how you can improve.
Aside from learning from your mistakes, use your research experience to gain valuable skills, knowledge, and insights into your field of interest. For instance, I reflected on all my undergraduate projects as well as my one-year employment and decided upon pursuing a master’s degree at JHU [John Hopkin’s University] in the US. Use it to guide your future academic or professional goals- [this] helped me a lot.
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
This is not the first time I have participated in peer review process, but I have benefited a lot [from the publishing process] since peer reviewers offers views that I was not able to address (such as detailed explanations to expand the conclusion). and identifying errors or weaknesses in the article (e.g., addition of search criteria). This process improved the overall quality of my work and improved the clarity of the ideas I was trying to express.
How did your research benefit from collaboration?
I was in charge of mainly the manuscript writing and literature search as well as critical thinking, while my beloved colleague Tanya is responsible for editing the manuscript. I appreciated her effort a lot and she always ensured that the ideas I wish to express are as professional as possible. This led to a more thorough investigation of the topic and increased productivity so that I was able to dive in deeper into research articles.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
Santiago Ramón y Cajal is definitely the most talented neuroanatomist and the father of modern neuroscience. He is known for his ground-breaking work on the structure of the nervous system, particularly the development and organization of neurons in the brain. His hand drawing of the brain’s microstructure is inspiring and continues to highlight the beauty of neuroscience research today.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I want to appreciate the support from my best friends, fabulous colleagues from both the Flores lab and Naguib lab, my wonderful PIs at Douglas Research center as well as my parents. Without them, I would not have made it this far in research and I am grateful for what I have learned and things that I have accomplished with their support.
Description and Exploration of Mean-Gauss Surfaces
Author: Alexander Naazeer (he/him), Graduate of Honours Pure and Applied Mathematics at Concordia University.
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
My paper focuses on trying to answer a question relating to curvatures of surfaces and manifolds, specifically Gaussian and Mean curvatures. When dealing with the two types of curvatures we generally consider them separately as they describe different aspects of surfaces. This paper attempts to answer “Are there any surfaces where they are scaled versions of each other?”
As with most math research papers, the relevance is often difficult to describe or even to know. Mathematicians famously ask and answer questions simply for the love of the process. As Richard Feynman put it:
“mathematicians prepare abstract reasoning that’s ready to be used.”
We do not require knowing the use case. Of course I hope my research leads to new classifications of surfaces or inspires the discovery of a family of surfaces, but in the end it need not be so concrete. It is important in the sense that now we know something we did not previously.
Why did you/how did you come to decide to conduct research as an undergrad?
I was at a sort of education crossroads during my final year. I did not know whether I wanted to continue on to become a mathematician or join the workforce as someone with a math degree. Up to that point I had not done any mathematics research, as such I had no framework for deciding if I wanted to be a research mathematician.
I also love a good challenge and putting skills to use. It would have been a shame to go through all the hard work of completing my undergrad then just leave such an incredible opportunity behind. While at university we are surrounded by some of the most brilliant minds in every field. Now is the time to ask questions, make mistakes, and get to know our fields.
What prompted you to conduct research on your selected topic?
The article I submitted is an excerpt from my honours thesis which began as a completely different question. I was looking for specific solutions to the prescribed mean curvature equation, a well researched problem. This problem deals with looking for surfaces whose mean curvatures match some prescribed function, this made me wonder if that function could be the Gaussian curvature. I looked into it and to my surprise I could not find any reference to the question anywhere. When I spoke to my advisor about it, they also had not seen any research into this. Naturally, I could not leave such an interesting question unanswered and dove in headfirst.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
Go for it! It is an incredible opportunity to learn and really push yourself. It is no secret that imposter syndrome runs rampant in STEM fields, my advice is to not listen to it. You are perfectly capable and your questions do deserve answers. Science builds on itself and without curiosity and perseverance (the words, not the martians!) we would not be where we are today. It will be difficult! Likely it is the first time you are solely responsible for every aspect of a project, just handle it one thing at a time and keep going. It has been one of the most important experiences of my life and I would absolutely recommend it to everyone.
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
I was lucky in this aspect, most of the corrections that needed to be made and feedback I received were typographical in nature. Nonetheless, it was a huge learning experience and really reinforced the importance of rigour in our work. You can read your own paper hundreds of times and still miss things. Having someone else look over it for errors and who will question your assumptions is an essential part of what we do!
I enjoyed every second of the process, of course the positive feedback feels great but just as importantly, if not more so are those “well that’s an embarrassing mistake” moments. Those mistakes and subsequent corrections are how we learn and what pushes us to be better.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
My differential geometry professor (and honours supervisor), Dr. Alina Stancu is hands down at the top of that list. Her passion and guidance put me on the path I am now. I cannot express how incredible the field of geometry is, while it is one of the oldest branches of math there is still so much left to discover! I am incredibly fortunate that I took her class, without it I doubt I would be where I am now.
As an honourable mention, Richard Feynman whose outlook on understanding I carry with me everyday. For those of you who are not familiar, the Feynman technique tells us to attempt to explain complex things as if it were for a 12 year old. Nothing exposes gaps in your understanding faster than trying to be simple.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I want to thank the McGill Science Undergraduate Research Journal for this incredible opportunity, Dr. Stancu for her help and guidance, and my partner Andrea for always being supportive and listening to my ideas enthusiastically despite not understanding a word.
Comparison of Small Molecule-Responsive RNA Aptazymes for Applications in Gene Control
Authors:
Janeva Shahi (she/her), U2 Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Maureen McKeague, Assistant Professor, Departments of Chemistry & Pharmacology and Therapeautics
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
The work I submitted is a project on RNA aptazymes, “The Comparison of Small Molecule Responsive RNA Aptazymes for Applications in Gene Control” and it’s important because we want to be able to use these switches that we’ve developed for measuring and tracking temporal and spatial aspects of gene control [in order to measure] animal development.
How did you come to decide to conduct research as an undergraduate student?
I graduated high school right at the peak of the COVID pandemic and started my undergrad fully on Zoom, [and at the time], I didn’t really know much about research, since in high school you don’t really learn about academia. So, transitioning to university you can sometimes forget that professors are both teachers and researchers. At the beginning of all my courses in my first year, a lot of the process would give an introduction about what they’re working on in their labs, [which] I found really cool. Prof Maureen McKeague, who’s a co-author of this paper, taught my general chemistry course so when she introduced her research I became super interested and I sent her an e-mail in 2021, right after the course was complete. She introduced me to all her research, so after I decided that I wanted to conduct research with her, we figured out a project which I started last summer – this [paper] is the product of that project.
Why do you think it is important to conduct research as an undergraduate?
Again [this ties back to the] transition from high school, where in university it sometimes feels like it’s a memorization game, [and you’re just trying to] absorb as much information as possible reproduce it on the test and then forgot about it. But what I found with engaging in research is that you are able to see all of that theory that you learn in your courses and actually apply it hands-on. Although we are given applications in our courses and we understand how they can be applied, applying this theory and combining information from multiple different subjects to a project made me understand processes that before I didn’t fully understand. Bringing it all together in this way, I’m able to really see how everything integrates. It’s also noticeable how research is different from coursework, so where courses segregate different topics, in research we often use approaches and think about where a lot of topics are mended together and it works to be able to produce stuff in the real world.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
My first suggestion is don’t be scared to approach professors. Especially as a first year you can kind of feel like there is some sort of “food chain” and you’re at the bottom, so it can be intimidating to interact with professors and peers who have 10+ years of research and academic experience, and on top of you and you’re just starting out and you feel like you know nothing. But approaching professors, expressing your interest and integrating your interest with the type of research that professor is doing as well as engaging with their work before approaching them can help give you the best chance of working with a professor or being offered a position. As well, try to personalize emails to the professors you’re interested in working with- I think that really ties back again with engaging with the professor’s work before reaching out to them .
A second suggestion is to be proactive, so you may need to send a lot of emails and approach a lot of different professors before you get an opportunity. I was lucky since I was given the first opportunity that I was really interested in with Prof McKeague, but I have a lot of friends where it’s taken a few years for them to be able to find a lab that works for them and find topics that they are interested in. Also, knowing that there’s no one answer and no one path is also an important thing to remember.
How was the publishing/ peer review process beneficial to you?
Managing the back and forth emailing and communication [with the editors and peer reviewers] while also doing my coursework, and making sure that communication was clear and in a timely fashion, was really helpful for my time management because I wasn’t just dealing with school and extracurriculars and research, so I had to be sure that I was managing my time well to get everything done well and in time.
A second thing was that it helped me in being very diligent in the writing process. Writing a research article very different than handing in an assignment since, although you’re obviously trying to do well on [assignments], you can accept some mistakes and it’s alright if the paper isn’t perfect, but for a research article you’re really trying to really make sure there are no mistakes and everything is clearly communicated
The third thing also is that the publishing process helped with developing my communication and management skills, since I was working not only with the peer reviewers and editors, but also collaborating with coauthors and relaying information to them, which was tricky at times.
How did your research benefit from collaboration?
Because I have a really good relationship, both professional and personal, with the members of the lab and my coauthor [Prof McKeague], the collaboration was really beneficial. Most noticeably, collaboration was in getting things to be done quickly and efficiently.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
The person I look up to most is Dr. McKeague, the coauthor of this paper, because she really wants to support everyone and she’s not picky on the students she accepts into her lab. It’s moreso that she wants to help people who are interested in her work and who are driven. So she’s very open to everyone and always willing to support students, not just in research but in the courses she teaches as well.
The second reason I look up to her is that she’s always providing mentorship even though she has a lot on her plate as a professor with two labs. Despite her busy schedule, she always tries to take some time to individually talk to students on top of emailing. She really provides that personal aspect and one-on-one time which can be hard to find with professors who have so much going on.
Something else that I really like that she does is that she’s always trying to incorporate cultural aspects- the lab often has cultural days, so for instance we would have a cultural food day where each student would bring in a food which is common in their culture, which is super fun. She also tries to organize lab excursions and more social things outside of the lab so overall she’s really great on a professional level in helping you through your research and also just as a mentor outside of research.
A Review of Pumice Raft Formation Environments, Saturation, and Dispersal Mechanisms
Author: Nathalie Redick (she/her), U3 Major in Computer Science, Minor in Earth and Planetary Sciences
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
I reviewed the existing literature about the formation mechanisms of pumice rafts. These are floating expanses of pumice created by volcanic eruptions. Pumice is very porous and light, so the rafts float and drift for long periods of time. They may facilitate the migration of biological life and can get so big that they impede shipping activities.
How did you come to decide to conduct research as an undergraduate student?
I chose to write a review article after a field trip to California with my volcanology class, which inspired the topic of my final paper. Even after I turned in the paper, I still had a lot of questions and a desire to keep learning about the subject.
Why do you think it is important to conduct research as an undergraduate?
In the process of writing a review article and in the research I have conducted in my undergrad, I have learned a lot about myself, my interests, and what direction I want to take after I leave McGill. Research in the EPS department has changed the entire course of my time at McGill, and after.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
Don’t be shy, and don’t underestimate what you know. Research is, by its definition, a learning process. Anyone who is vaguely interested in research should reach out to related profs at McGill, very few research opportunities are actually advertised!
How was the publishing/ peer review process beneficial to you?
It really challenged me to put my best foot forward and there were honestly sources that my reviewers found that I did not after several weeks of research, sometimes it takes someone who is familiar with the field to point you towards relevant but (maybe) not-so-well named papers.
Bacterial Mediation of Chemotherapy Resistance
Author: Miss Jenni Chambers (she/her), Human Biology BSc, University of Derby, 3rd and final year
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
[This work is] a review of three different chemotherapy drugs and how their effectiveness was impacted by bacteria. As the side effects of chemotherapy can be uncomfortable and distressing for the patient, it is essential to ensure the right conditions are present for this treatment to be effective. Improving our understanding of this helps to select the most suitable treatment plan for the patient; it also helps to avoid lost time and cost implications of administering unsuitable medications, particularly given the aggressive nature of some types of cancer.
What prompted you to write a review article on your selected topic?
I was tasked to write an investigative essay into cancer research as part of some oncology coursework. A journal article about bacterial links with chemotherapy resistance sparked my interest and the more I read around the subject the more questions I had. I realised a lot of people were asking the same questions! So I decided to do a comparison of different drugs to see if there were any themes arising.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
Follow your interest or passion and you will naturally find yourself asking questions and wanting to know more. It will feel more like an adventure or an exploration, rather than work, if you are genuinely interested and curious about your area of research!
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
It helped me view my writing with a fresh pair of eyes and think about how my messages were ‘landing’ and being perceived. It was useful for identifying areas of repetition, writing more precisely, and providing more clarity for the reader. The comments were very helpful and constructive.
Is there a scientist that you look up to?
This is a tough one, so many to choose from! I think any scientist who is passionate and knowledgeable about their area of focus is worthy of looking up to…it is their daily dedication to keep going and pushing for answers that I find inspirational.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I decided to study and retrain for a career in cancer research as a mature student, with no previous scientific background – although it was daunting it is the best decision I have ever made, and I am energised knowing that there is always something new to discover! It’s never too late to try something different.
Rho GTPase regulatory proteins contribute to podocyte morphology and function
Author: Emily Foxman (she/her/elle), U1 Anatomy and Cell Biology
Can you give a brief summary of the work you submitted to MSURJ and its importance?
As part of a broader project addressing the role of Rho GTPase regulatory proteins in kidney epithelial cells, I studied four guanine nucleotide exchange factors (ECT2, ARHGEF2, ARHGEF26, and ARHGEF40) in their regulation of actin cytoskeletal dynamics and cellular functions. Using CRISPR-Cas9 knockouts of these proteins, functional and metabolic assays (G-LISA), as well as morphological landscaping, (I) generated intriguing preliminary results on the protein interactome of Rho GTPases within the actin cytoskeleton. In this way, an understanding of the mechanisms of the glomerular filtration barrier and its associated pathological variations is improved. There are now expanding opportunities to analyze these Rho GTPase regulatory proteins to identify and develop novel therapeutic agents against proteinuria.
How did you come to decide to conduct research as an undergraduate student?
I first conducted research in high school as a summer student at McMaster University’s Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute (TaARI). This opportunity was a recommendation based on my career aspirations at the time and an honest leap of faith. While working at that laboratory, I began to grasp what scientific research was like, and I became captivated with the idea of continuing throughout my undergraduate degree. Since then, I have done just that, though I discovered my true interest after migrating to the field of kidney research. Overall, in gaining myriad perspectives in three different laboratories, my passion for research has been solidified and is tracing a clear path for my future educational and professional endeavours.
What prompted you to conduct research/ write a review article on your selected topic?
This research article was written as part of a PHGY 396 Undergraduate Research Course, but continues to flourish as a long-term project.
Why is it important to conduct research/reviews as an undergraduate?
One benefit in conducting research as an undergraduate is that the topics you investigate are almost always an expansion of something you learn in class, which gives you a considerable advantage thereafter. For me, learning the basic theory behind molecular biology techniques in BIOL 200 did not mean much; however, a few weeks later, I performed those techniques in the lab and finally grasped why they work. The value of seeking curricular-enriching opportunities is greatly understated.
What advice would you give to an undergraduate interested in getting research experience?
To an undergraduate interested in getting research experience, my greatest piece of advice is to be sure that you can handle the commitment, as well as the rollercoaster of success and failure. Showing up to volunteer in a laboratory 2-3x a week is one thing, but making meaningful contributions to the scientific community requires a great deal of integrity and dedication, especially as a newcomer. Be prepared to make mistakes, admit to them, and take the time to reflect and improve. Research is a lengthy process, but the achievements are worth it.
How was the publishing/peer review process beneficial to you?
The peer review process was incredibly useful in critically assessing the legitimacy and clarity of my research article. It revealed of areas of improvement that would have otherwise been masked by internal bias, allowing me to address weak points and enhance the quality of writing. Furthermore, a set of alternative perspectives brought intriguing points of analysis to the table, which will help guide further investigations into the broader research project.
The Abstract 