The past and future of a career in bioinformatics
September 5th, 2007
In response to a recent post, I had a few emails and comments asking general questions about a career as a bioinformatician. So to answer these all at once here are my thoughts on what I think the background and future of a bioinformatician is.
Past
The current senior bioinformaticians of today, had no formal training in bioinformatics. Twenty years ago, there was no field of bioinformatics, instead there were areas of biology that required substantial use of the computer. Crystallographers had to write code to transform x-ray diffraction data into molecular structure predictions; evolutionary biologists had to create databases to store protein and DNA sequences produced by the rise of sequencing technology. Arguably this is where the field of bioinformatics began, and is why structure and sequence analysis is in the majority, in bioinformatics research.
Now, students entering the field have formal training, and their backgrounds can be roughly divided into two categories: computer scientists who enjoyed biology at school and are interested in tackling biological problems, and biologists who are handy with computers and fancy taking this from a hobby to a profession. There are scientists with backgrounds in statistics, maths, and physics, but in my experience these are in the minority compared to biologists and computer scientists.
The usual entry to the field is via a masters degree, which most universities offer. A masters in bioinformatics is conversion course that teaches computer scientists the required biology, and biologists the essential computing skills, such as programming. Courses in statistics, microarray analysis, network analysis, and sequence analysis are also likely to be included. Since very few students have a strong understanding of both computers and biology, the aim these courses is to make sure they leave with a basic understanding of both, as well as familiarity with current topics in bioinformatics research. The structure of a bioinformatics masters is usually 6-8 months of lectures and practicals, followed by a large research project spanning the remainder of the course.
It is debatable which type of background, biology or computing science, is more advantageous. Biologists have three years of knowledge important for the understanding of biological problems and writing scientific papers. Computer scientists on the other hand, have the advantage of understanding all things informatics, which has a steep learning curve for the biologist who has never programmed before.
Regardless of background or education, many prospective students are attracted to bioinformatics by the hype that existed a five years ago, when the fusion of biology and computer science [was] the hottest of the hot [...] and with three to five years experience can expect to command a salary of $120,000.
Future
So once you have your master’s degree, and you’ve decided that bioinformatics is what you’d like to spend your immediate future doing, what can you expect? Given the hype, bioinformatics is still a job like any other, where over a long enough period of time, day-to-day work can border on the mundane. Also, as a scientist you’ll only spend about 40-50% of your time writing code or producing results, the rest will be reading, reviewing, and writing papers, and then there’s managing emails, attending meetings, and all the other bureaucracy that comes with the territory.
Personally, what makes me stay in the field is how interesting the problems are, and the independence I have in solving them. When I find a question I’m interested in, I can use my initiative to answer it the way I think best. I’ll usually then discuss the results with my colleagues or supervisor to get their opinion. The best thing for me is that, after specialising in data mining and statistics, I can start to do things that other people can’t, which means they approach me to ask for my opinion on their problem - which is quite satisfying.
Career path
When people refer to the field of bioinformatics, they’re usually referring to two overlapping areas. The first is what you would call “bioinformatics”, which is more technical, and examples are creating tools to analyse data for biologists, or specific databases to store and retrieve information. For example if you created a new tool that could analyse microarray data in a way that hasn’t been done previously, then this is bioinformatics. Many journals such as Nature and Bioinformatics, have sections purely for articles about new methods and tools.
The second path is what you might call “computational biology”, which is all about doing biological research, using a computer instead of a pipette. A strong understanding of biology is important, as well as the ability to phrase, then answer a research question. For example, if you believed that duplicate genes were less well conserved compared with non duplicates, and you tested this hypothesis across a set of genomes, then this would be computational biology.
These two fields are not distinct, and overlap a fair amount. Some universities have bioinformatics departments in both the computer science and life science faculties, indicating the type of research carried out in each.
Salary
Salary is the most over hyped part of a bioinformatics career. You’re never going to be earning six figures unless you do can something that very few others can, which also has some commercial application. As an example, if you have developed a new method that can predict molecular interactions in the human body, this can prevent wasted research and save a drug company a fair amount of money. However, being able to parse BLAST reports for orthologs to a candidate gene, while undeniably useful, does not have commercial potential.
Overall, searching around on the Internet shows that, in industry, bioinformaticians are relatively poorly paid compared to other IT professionals, while relatively better paid compared to life scientists. So it depends on which of those two you prefer to judge yourself by.
On the other hand, if you’re working in academia, then you’ll be paid a similar amount to scientists at your level, e.g. PhD student, post-doc, or professor. However, if you do work in academia then you’re probably not doing it to pay for your playboy lifestyle.
Industry vs Academia
This brings me to my last point, there are two different career paths for bioinformatics, working in academia or in industry.
In academia, the career path is something like PhD student, post-doc, fellow, principle investigator, and then professor. The numbers at each stage are dramatically reduced, and an indication of the attrition that takes place. The early part of a career in academia is judged on how many papers published, while later as you become a group leader, the amount of money brought in through applying for grants becomes equally important. An academic career is less secure, but you have the benefit of being able to work on whatever you want, as long as you’re successful.
In industry, you have less freedom to work on what you choose, you work on what your employer wants, but to balance this you have greater job security. The commercial nature of industrial research means that publishing papers is secondary, or prohibited in the case of sensitive material, which can make the move from industry to academia some what difficult.
Summary
So, these are my thoughts on a bioinformatics career. Bear in mind that I am only a lowly PhD student, having only been in the field three years.
In essence, if you like computers, biology, and solving problems, then bioinformatics is probably worth a go. Just try to be realistic about your expectations, and don’t pay too much attention to the hype.
Creative Commons
The photo used in this post is taken from riot on flickr and used under a creative commons licence.
September 6th, 2007 at 2:05 am
One point … there is no such thing as job security in the biopharma industry these days.
Second point … if I had to make the choice all over again, I’d choose industry over academia even more easily. I think academia can get more bogged down than industry. But in the end it’s about your particular mental make up. Here are some of the reasons I like my choice of industry
1. You work in cross disciplinary teams
2. You get a really good understanding of many aspects of drug development, even if you are not directly involved
3. In smaller startups, you tend to have a sense of ownership that is very satisfying
4. There can be a lot of pressure - to meet deadlines, to turn things around quickly. Some people thrive on that
5. You have the option, not always available, to move onto the business end of things like I did
The key part is realizing that you are working on someone else’s time, but many times you are also contributing to something very exciting and potentially difference making (depends on where you are)
Last point. You are right about the salaries. In the end it’s your skill and experience level, but you do end up earning a six figure salary in due time, just not when you get started, but that won’t be happening in most jobs in any field. My only beef is that the PhD does not get sufficient respect as a degree, compared to say an MBA.
September 6th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
I’m an American, so I’m not sure about pay scales in England. Caveat aside, I’ve worked in two medical institutions. One, I got paid about as much as a life science research assistant (read “poorly”). In the other, I got paid on the higher side of a software engineer. I think things can vary widely institute to institute.
September 7th, 2007 at 3:16 am
I am working in an academic institute in usa. It seems it better to strength your background in academic institute before get to work in industry side,cause you would have less time to do it in a company’s positions.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:46 am
Great stuff Mike, I read similar thread on Digital-Bio blog sometime back.
“There are scientists with backgrounds in statistics, maths, and physics, but in my experience these are in the minority compared to biologists and computer scientists”
Yes agreed, but some basic work of this field were done by those people. Some of the examples are,
Hardy-Weinberg principle [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardy-Weinberg_principle ], DNA Structure [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Crick ], Ramachandran plot [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopalasamudram_Narayana_Ramachandran ], Genetic Code [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gamov ].
Still many of these, are the guys who are making the major impact in the field. Like,
Karlin-Altschul [ BLAST STATISTICS, http://www-bimas.cit.nih.gov/blastinfo/KAstat.html ] and Eric Lander [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Lander ] keeps churning out good work. I would encourage people from these other fields to try out Biology as an application domain of skills they have acquired in their respective fields. Guys, biology really needs such people to explore biology.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
@Deepak
Thanks for your insight into industry. I have considered moving into industry after finishing my PhD. One of the reasons, is as you mention, you work in a team more. At the moment I am finding science some what lonely, and I wonder if this is something endemic in a PhD or academia in general. On the other hand, I would be worried about moving into industry, as it seems to be a one way street: if you don’t have a recent publication record you can find it difficult to move back into academia.
@Adouble
I accept your point, here in the UK I think it would difficult to get a six figure salary, while in America I think industry and academia is much more highly paid, compared with, say, Europe. I think that this is something worth considering, if you move to America, you may be paid relatively more.
@laser
I’ve heard this too. I’ve been told that if you don’t have a PhD there is only so far you can get before you have to move into an administrative position, or hit some sort of ceiling.
@Animesh
I based my statement on the numbers working in my department now, as well as the numbers in my master’s degree. I did not mean to cast aspersions. Certainly, quantitative research is very important, take for example the rapid rise of systems biology; which owes a lot to Mathematics and Physics. I completely agree that a numerical approach is where the greatest breakthroughs in biology will be made. Take this paper for example.
September 19th, 2007 at 10:53 am
I like your post and I’d like to add a bit more to your post.
I also feel kind of lonely working through my PhD because I am working in a biology lab where only I know programming skills. Even though I might (!) get some really interesting papers published, I don’t think I fit the skills criteria of any jobs currently advertising. And I disagree in your statement of engineer/mathematician/physicist -> bioinformaticians being a minority, because I think they are the majority and they are probably easier to get a job.
It’s also interesting that there is currently a decline of applications of MSc bioinformatics across the UK, so perhaps the hype is gone? It’s even more interesting that some computer biologist jobs are specific to the physical science audiences, so where would people like you and me fit into?
September 19th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
I always thought the career of academia being more financially secure (if you get a job) than industry. Why do you think the reverse?
Also, it is interesting how everyone has their own definition for computational biologists vs. bioinformaticists. I actually call computational biologists those people that develop primarily algorithms (i.e. computer scientists that work on biology problems). I then tend to group those people who seek to develop tools and those people who answer biology questions together into bioinformatics.
Anyway, I really enjoyed your post. I am also in that twilight of picking industry vs academia.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:49 am
I suppose I fall into the crusty old bioinformatician camp that you mention, originially coming to bioinformatics almost a decade ago from a background in evolutionary biology and sequence analysis. I also couldn’t supress a wry smile when I read the linked article about ‘hottest of the hot’ jobs in 2002. Sigh. I agree with your article - it is a good take on the subject.
While most ‘working bioinformaticians’ that I come across have one of the two traditional backgrounds, the increasing use of mathematics and statistics in biological data analysis has made the field attractive to numerate physics and mathematics PhD graduates. I can only speak from my own vantage point, but I’d recommend any MSc in Bioinformatics student to consume as much statistics as is practically possible during their course, even if it means reading outside the course syllabus. It will make you more competitive in a head-to-head comparison with these guys by potential employers.
I’d be so bold as to venture that in the not too distant future bioinformaticians without a numerate grounding will find themselves working with data management and pipelines (which can be very mundane, believe me), and those with numeracy/statistics skills will be doing the jucier downstream bioinformatic analysis.
September 25th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Hi,
I am newbie to PhD and quite passionate in knowing biology stuff. However, I came from Comp Science background. I am planning to move into bioinfo area. However, I am doubtful with the amount of tedious work than other computer science area which would not have steeper learning curve.
Besides, as mentioned above, it is hard to find a job for bioinformatics upon coming out. Most companies would not want to employ employee with area whihc unrelated to their business needs.
And besides, I am kinda doubtful as my programming is not really good. Should I be qualified to take the path of bioinformatics.
Please advise.
-Jason
October 4th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Hi Jason
I can’t really give you any advice on what career path you should take, I’m only a PhD student also. Ask me when I have graduated and found a job perhaps? You could discuss these worries with your supervisor, or other professors in your department. Try posting the same question on Nodalpoint.org too.
An interest in biology is always useful, as is programming. I would say that advanced programming skills are only useful if you’re building an application, otherwise a lot of the work involves building simple scripts to process the data - which doesn’t require to much know how. I used to use Java, but now I use Ruby. I would recommend Ruby or Python as they seem to be becoming more prominent in Bioinformatics, for me Ruby is also a pleasure to write.
As for studying metabolomics, or any other field, I think most of your knowledge will come from the literature. Reading plenty of papers at the start of your PhD is always a very good idea, as this help you understand the problem better as well as make you feel more confident. when discussing things with colleagues.
October 4th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
@paradoxus
Doing a PhD can definitely be lonely, especially when things aren’t going well. However I think there may be light at the end of the tunnel - I think or I hope? If people want to collaborate, and you both have a mutual interest this can make things quite exciting.
As for what you say about hype, Amara’s law states “We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.”. I think bioinformatics will become more important as time goes on, because of the amount of data being generated, and the need to analyse it.
@Morgan
I would say that in academia, certainly in the UK and US, I got the impression that if you’re not publishing enough, and pulling in grants, your position is somewhat in jeopardy. Industry on the other hand seems to offer the protection of a large company, and as long as you pull your weight, you’re secure. Of course, your job will be subject to the whims of the market, which could mean you lose your it because the company doesn’t do so well.
Anyway, this is my opinion, and I’m still a student as yet to make the choice between the two.
@Under caffeinated
I never mentioned crusty. In science I don’t think you need to be old to get a fair amount of crustiness either.
I couldn’t agree more about numerate skills. Statistics and data mining are certainly in demand. From my point of view though, I wasn’t interested in learning any of this during my masters - after all statistics comes across as a very dry subject. It was only when I had a lot of data that I felt the need to reeducate myself on the subject. I guess this could be the case for a lot of the more important skills?
December 26th, 2007 at 1:43 am
Hey i was just looking into websites that would guide me in the right direction about bioinformatics. I am a student from India doing my in the USA. I am looking into Bioinformatics as a career, since it is my current field of interest now-a-days. I definitely want to continue with biology and i am quiet interested in information technology. I really want a job that would secure my future and i wanna be able to help my family financially so I am not sure what i want to do. Could you please suggest something.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Excellent summary/observations… I have a MS in Bioinformatics and currently working in academia. You are indeed correct, the “hype” about Bioinformatics was simply a phase. I guess people (ie. scientists, investors, etc.) realized Bioinformatics is just another “tool”, it’s not the magic bullet that’s going solve all the problems. In the US salary varies depending on geographic region and industry vs academia. I would say starting salary is usually between $40-$50K (for MS) - towards the high end if you’re in industry and high cost of living area (mostly in coastal regions). It’s just like any other job, start low and build up. I am amazed there’s still a large amount of people (ie. students) who believe they’ll get six figures salary and pursue Bioinformatics. I did it because I enjoy both Biology and IT - a high salary (at the time I did my Masters) was a good incentive but not the primary reason. So all in all, I’m happy with my decision but it’s just like any other job and could be better…
April 17th, 2008 at 3:23 am
I stumbled accross this site while I was searching for salaries in Bioinformatics. Even though I might seem to be money minded to begin my post with salary, I’m actually interested in this field. However, I can not deny my interest in how much I’d earn in the future. It really boils down to whether you’d be satisfied working in an area that’d pay you enough.
I read pretty much all the posts, and probably two people posted the actual figures of how much a Bioinformatician could earn. Most shocking of all was the last post from “Ske”. Even though you have a MS in Bioinformatics you’d earn between $40K - $50K? That I reckon is really under paid. An intern completing his CPT/OPT in an IT industry could earn $40K/yr easily…correct me if I’m wrong. You don’t even need an undergraduate degree to be earning close to $70k, if you’re good at programming. So, why is the job market so cheap for Bioinformaticians?
April 22nd, 2008 at 7:54 pm
I am thinking about a career in bioinformatics and planning to do my masters from manchester, uk. I am a pharmacy graduate, I’d really be obliged if someone could guide me through the pros and cons of the same..regards..
April 24th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Soo,
As stated, I’m currently working in academia and the salary in academia is lower than the private/industry - after all the motivation is discovery and not money. If you’re just starting (0-2yrs of experience) it’s unlikely you’ll get paid $70K (I’m not sure which job pays that high without even an undergrad degree). I’ll be also surprised to find any internship in Bioinformatics that pays >$40K. Case in point, most post docs (in academia) get paid around that amount and it’s unlikely an intern or a temp would get paid high. But again, this is just for Bioinformatics, if you’re looking for a job as a software engineer in Bioinformatics things will be different…
May 1st, 2008 at 7:35 pm
I was going came across this post while searching for salaries in Bioinformatics.
There was question I had in mind while reading through the post and specifically after reading Soo comments. The question is open for all to answer and I will appreciate the response.
@Soo
You mentioned 40-50k$ for an industry profile after completing M.S degree in Bioinformatics. Doesn’t this profile depend upon the university from which graduation has been completed? What difference in profile does it make if one holds a degreee from national university or state university (US)? How competitive is the scenario for jobs currently and to what extent grades matter.?
July 1st, 2008 at 4:14 pm
[...] I wrote a post about my opinion of doing a career in bioinformatics I got the impression from the comments that this was something many people wanted more information [...]
July 18th, 2008 at 4:05 am
So where do you start looking for jobs in the field of bioinformatics? I live in orange county, CA
July 23rd, 2008 at 9:36 am
hi,
i m a student of M.Sc bioinformatics….my experience in this field is not very good….i have not seen jobs in this field yet……we have to struggle for doing training also.i dont know why people say that it is a good field……….if it is? then tell me about opportunities???
July 23rd, 2008 at 9:39 am
hey….. pls reply me through mail if you have some time…..
mail: jatbioinfo@gmail.com
August 1st, 2008 at 12:59 pm
i finds a useful time on u r review… i m preparing to undergo higher study in
m.sc bioinformatics . send me some useful commends
August 8th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Hi,
I have done my bachlors in microbiology and working in a software firm as a programmer,I am currently doing MCA, will that help me in furture to enter in the field of bioinformatics ?
August 19th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Thank you for this website….You have helped me tremendously in deciding on a career path.
Best wishes,
Sheila
August 25th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
I came across this post while looking for information on bioinformatics salaries. I’m currently working in academia, 6 months out of my MS program. Students graduating from my program received salaries from $55 - $75K, depending on whether they were entering academia or industry. It also depended what jobs were available when they were looking (several ended up at 454 sequencing, for example). $40K seems very low, especially if you are living on one of the coasts. I would be very surprised if a job requiring an MS didn’t have a salary allowing for comfortable (not luxurious) living.