Microsoft Word - Instructions for Authors .docx

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 1

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

Instructions*for*Authors*of*

L ab oratory*Reports**

*by*Janine*M.*LeBlanc-Straceski,*Ph.D.,*Department*of*Biology,*Merrimack*College,*North*An dover*M A*

All published scientific reports conform to a basic outline. Every report must

include elements of the following seven sections: title and authors, abstract, introduction,

materials and methods, results, discussion, and references. However, different scientific

journals require adherence to their own individual format. In the back of any scientific

journal appears a section called "Instructions for Authors" where the editors spell out the

requirements for submission of a paper. If an author submits a manuscript for review and

it does not conform to the guidelines, he or she runs the risk of having the manuscript

returned for revisions before it will even be considered for publication, or worse, having it

rejected outright.

Consider the instructions which follow as the format for submission of lab reports to

the journal for "MC Biology". Follow them closely. Although your grade for a report

never simply reflects how well you follow a format, it certainly is a valid starting point. A

well organized paper not only helps you think more precisely about your experiment, it

communicates to the editors that you have made a sincere effort to follow their

instructions. Having all the manuscripts submitted in the same format is less distracting

for the editor and allows him/her to focus on the data and its interpretation.

The*Seven*Sections*of*a*Scientific*Report*

I.##TITLE#&#AUTHORS#

The title should be short and succinct. It can either be a description, such as

"Photosynthesis in Spinach Under at Variable Wavelengths” or it can state a provocative

new finding - "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is caused by HIV".

In scientific publications, all the authors directly involved in the research described

in the report are listed in the order of their relative contribution. Your report will have

only one author. You are responsible for writing your own lab report. The other

members or your investigation group should be listed separately.

II.##ABSTRACT#

This is really a summary of the report. It should be a single, short paragraph. In a

few short sentences you should: 1) introduce the topic, 2) state the purpose of the

experiment, 3) give a brief statement of the methods employed, 4) concisely state the most

important findings, 5) and finally draw a general conclusion about the results. Abstracts

should be written last, after the rest of the report is completed

III.##INTRODUCTION#

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 2

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

The introduction should provide the scientific background from which you can

explain WHY you performed this particular set of experiments. You should refer to

previous works, citing them properly. Always progress from the general topic to the

specific phenomenon your experiment was designed to investigate. Describe the scientific

basis for procedures and techniques, but do not list all the details of the methods. State

your major findings clearly, giving specific values of significant data. (Do NOT summarize

all the data contained in your report.) Conclude with a sentence or two about what you

believe your results show.

IV.##MATERIALS#and#METHODS#

Describe the experimental procedures followed to obtain the data. Describe only

those that could influence the outcome of the data. State the theoretical reasons for

performing each major step. Divide this section into subsections based on the different

types of purifications or assays performed.

The most common errors made in writing this section are either that it is much too

long, or that key numerical values are omitted. Your guide should be that if a colleague (in

this case, someone who has completed the laboratory exercise at least once) reads your

Materials and Methods section, he or she should be able to duplicate the conditions of the

experiment. The materials and methods section of your lab report should be an exact

record of how you carried out the experiment. You should describe what you did in lab.

Do not simply copy what is written in your lab manual because parameters will vary. Even

if you did not make them up yourself and simply used solutions prepared by someone

else, you should list the molar concentrations for all ingredients and pH 's for all buffers.

These should appear ONLY in the body of the text and NOT (that’s NOT) in a big list at the

beginning or end of the materials and methods section. Finally, remember that this section

is not a lab manual. Do not list steps numerically, and keep to passive voice (see below).

It is imperative to be concise. It is very easy to get bogged down in trivial details

when writing the materials and methods section. DO NOT LIST EVERY PIPETTING STEP, but

generally state each major task. Try not to get discouraged. Although writing a materials

and methods section takes practice, once learned it is a skill you will always retain.

V.##RESULTS#

This is the most important part of any scientific report. Results often need to be

presented in multiple formats. First, you must always write a text for your results,

describing what you observed under each particular circumstance of an experiment.

Sometimes you will need to enhance the presentation of your results by adding figures,

graphs and tables. If you have a large quantity of numbers to report, you should present

the data in a table. If you put numbers in a table you must still explain the results in a text

format. This does not mean that you simply restate all the numbers that appear in the

table. Rather, you need to describe to the reader which of the data are significant and why.

The same practice applies to figures. Simply drawing a picture and labeling the observable

structures is not enough. It is a good beginning, but you must also describe what you

observed in the text of the results section.

Tables and Figures must be numbered sequentially in the order in which they

appear, and they must all have a TITLE and a LEGEND describing exactly to which

experiment the numbers or figures pertain. When you refer to a figure in the text, write

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 3

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

"As can be seen in Fig. 1, ..." or " The data in column 3 of Table 2 indicate a trend

toward...". Never include a table or figure without referring to it in the text.

Legends for figures and tables should briefly describe the manner in which the data

was obtained. Do not confuse legends with keys. Legends should resemble a mini-methods

for the particular experiment which generated the data depicted in the figure or listed in

the table. Legends should never describe the data: reserve that task for the text portion of

the results section. Legends are separate from the figure, placed either below them or on a

separate page. Keys simply define symbols used on graphs or charts and are integrated

into the figures. They are sometimes helpful but never sufficient. To reiterate, all figures

and graphs require legends.

Remember, in the results section you are simply describing the data collected. You

should not draw general conclusions. For example, you might observe that the movement

of an unknown cell was similar to a ciliated protozoan, but you would not conclude that

the cell was a ciliate until you had discussed all the data in relation to past observations in

the DISCUSSION section of the report.

VI.##DISCUSSION#

The goal of this section is to describe WHY you got the results you did. This is the

part of your report where you must relate your data back to all those other scientific works

you described in the introduction. For each of your key findings (results) you should

indicate how they corroborate or refute the body of scientific data that has been

accumulated up until now. This section should be several paragraphs long because you

trying to convince the reader of a reasonable explanation of why you obtained the results

reported in the previous section. In order to relate your data to the body of scientific work,

references should be cited throughout this section, properly and appropriately.

VII.##REFERENCES#

Incorporate what you learn from your readings into your introduction and

discussion sections to bolster your arguments. At least two references other than your

textbooks and other than the internet should be cited. These should be primary research

articles. This means that you will have to go to the library and find books and journal

articles. Encyclopedias are not acceptable references. Although they do not count as one

of your two references, you may cite information you retrieve from textbooks and from the

internet. However, it must be meticulously referenced (see below for format). The list of

references given at the ends of the chapters in your textbooks are excellent places to begin

looking for primary source material.

Whether material is paraphrased or included as a direct quotation it must be

referenced. Direct quotes must appear bracketed by quotation marks - otherwise it is

considered PLAGIARISM (see below).

Results or claims from other works must be properly referenced when included in

any section of your report. Any work you cite in the text, whether it is a book or a journal

article, is referred to by the authors’ last names and the year of the publication. The full

reference is typed in the list of references at the end of the report. This list should include

only the works which you cited in your report, not all the books and articles you have ever

read on the subject. See instructions in section 5 under the STYLE AND FORMAT below for

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 4

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

exactly how to punctuate citations in the text and in the list of references at the end of the

report.

PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism is the taking of ideas or direct copying of text or figures without giving credit to

the original authors. Often in lab you will be working in groups, discussing your data with

colleagues, even writing oral presentations as a group. However, when it comes time to

write your reports to hand in, you must do this all on your own. Any infractions that violate

the code of academic conduct will be dealt with severely, according to the policies of the

individual instructors.

Specific*Instructions*for*Style*and*Format*

1. All reports must be typed and double spaced using a font size of at least 12 point. The

text portion (excluding title page, figures, tables and the list of references) may not exceed 5

pages.

2. The following sections should appear in this order and they should be have these labels:

Title and authors (you shouldn't label this section)

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS and METHODS

RESULTS

DISCUSSION

REFERENCES

3. Use the passive voice, and the third person throughout your manuscript. Write:

"Spinach disks were exposed to different wave lengths of light at a distance of 10 cm. "

NOT "We shone different colors of light onto spinach leaves..." NOR "Shine different

wavelengths of light on spinach...".

4. Tables and Figures must be A) NUMBERED sequentially in the order in which they

appear, and they must all have a B) TITLE and a C) LEGEND describing exactly to which

experiment the numerical data or figures pertain. Labels on data table columns and rows,

or graph lines, should have meaning. If they are labeled numerically or alphabetically, a

key should be provided in the legend. Remember to label the axes of graphs and include

all units of measurements on both graphs and in tables. Legends should describe the

method used to obtain the data. Interpretation of the data should be reserved for the

discussion section only. Figures and tables should include enough information so that they

can be completely understood if read separately from the rest of the manuscript.

5. References must be included in your report in two ways. First, you must CITE the work

in the body of the text, when you refer to an idea stated in that reference. IF YOU COPY

TEXT DIRECTLY FROM ANY SOURCE, THOSE WORDS MUST BE SET OFF BY

QUOTATION MARKS. A citation in the text should look like this:

(Smith and Jones, 2005)

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 5

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

where 2005 refers to the year the reference was published.

Second, you must list all of the works cited, and only the works cited at the end of

your report in alphabetical order according to the last name of the first author. If you read

an article, but do not cite it in your report, do not include it in your list of references. The

reference section must be properly punctuated. Follow the examples given below.

For a journal article appearing on pages 10-15 of the 100th volume of the Journal of

Genetics published in the year 2007 write:

Smith, J., Brown, H., Jones, P. 2007. The construction of a plasmid

suitable for teaching the principles of genetic engineering.

Journal of Genetics. 100, 10-15.

Please note that if you access a journal article on line, for example through PubMed, the

reference should follow the format for a journal (see above).

For a chapter entitled “Construction of Plasmids” from a book of 550 pages entitled

“Teaching the Principles of Genetic Engineering”:

Jones, P., Smith, J., Brown, H. 2009. Construction of plasmids. in

Teaching the Principles of Genetic Engineering. A. B. West and C.

D. East, eds. North Andover: Merrimack Press. 550pp.

Finally, internet references must include the name(s) of the author(s) if available, the

date it was retrieved, title of the work, a description of the format, the name of the

organization providing the information and name of the home page, and the complete

URL number.

Chisholm, R. (7/19/1999). Dictyostelium aggregation in myosin light

chain mutants. (video and text). Cellular Slime Mold home

page. http://...(etc.)

Some*Final*Words*on*Writing:**Examples*and*Editing*

Examples are the best teachers. Go to the periodicals room of McQuade Library and

examine a recent copy of the Journal of Cell Biology or the Journal of Biochemistry or the

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (some of these may be on microfiche).

Although you will undoubtedly have some difficulty understanding the scientific concepts

at first, you should be able to pick out the seven sections of a scientific report, get some tips

on how to cite references, and how to present figures and refer to them in the text. The

more articles you read, the more you will pick up. Eventually, you will be able to

understand the science as well as the format.

The best way to improve your writing is to READ what you write! Learn to become

your own editor. If something sounds awkward, or doesn’t make sense – fix it. Writing is

re-writing, especially when you are learning. If you are having trouble explaining a

complex thought, move away from the keyboard and pretend you are explaining it to your

mother, or your high school English teacher. Then write it down in simple terms. Working

hard to improve your writing skills in academic field will yield better results in all your

subsequent endeavors, regardless of the academic discipline.

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 6

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

Check*List*for*Lab*Reports*

Peer review (evaluation of experimental data by colleagues) strives to maintain the integrity of all

published scientific data. Editors of scientific journals make certain that the articles published in

their journals conform to the correct style and format. All basic reporting of scientific results

conforms to the format set out in the “Instructions for Authors”. Having all the information from a

individual studies presented in an orderly fashion helps scientists to evaluate the work on the basis

of its scientific merit. The checklist below contains most of the basic points for which your editors

(instructors) look as they read and evaluate your papers. Use this as a guide when you edit your

own work before passing it in.

ABSTRACT – A one-paragraph summary

1) Is the entire abstract a single, short paragraph?

2) Are each of the following covered in at least one sentence:

statement of introduction

statement of the problem/objective

brief statement of the method followed (not materials)

results

conclusions drawn

3) Was past tense, third person and passive voice used throughout?

INTRODUCTION – Follow the inverted pyramid model. Progress from the general scientific issue

to the specific problem being investigated.

1) Did the author clearly define the scientific problem being investigated

2) Was enough scientific background given to allow the reader to interpret the results?

3) Were there references cited? (follow instructors directions)

4) Were the citations given in standard format?

5) Were the references cited properly (Avoid direct quotations. Lack of proper citation results in

plagiarism, even if it was the result of neglect or laziness.)

6) Were the references cited appropriately (They should bolster the theoretical claims made by the

author. Were they unrelated to the topic?)

7) Was the specific, scientific problem being addressed outlined?

8) Was the hypothesis clearly stated?

9) Was there a brief outline of the experimental approach?

10) Was the theory supporting the techniques briefly described?

11) Were the final results clearly summarized, giving pertinent data values?

MATERIALS AND METHODS – A record of how the experiment was carried out. List all things that

could influence the data. Eliminate extraneous details. Be concise.

1) Do NOT include a list of reagents used.

2) Were reagents listed properly when a particular technique was mentioned?

3) Did the authors keep to past tense, third person and passive voice throughout?

4) Were important details omitted? (e. g. calculations or specific formulas, concentrations of

solutions, incubation times and temperatures, etc.)

5) Omit trivial details! (e. g. how tubes or plates were labeled, which pipette was used)

6) Was this section as concise at it should be or was it too long?

LeBlanc-Straceski Instructions for Authors of Laboratory Reports p. 7

Department of Biology, Merrimack College 8/17/17

RESULTS – A description of the data. Describe in appropriate detail the data collected in the

experiment. Be careful not to include raw data. Refer to figures and tables in a meaningful way.

Direct the reader to notice specific significant results.

Text – State the hypothesis or purpose of the experiment. DO NOT FOR GET THE TEXT‼!

1) Are the data presented in clear and ordered fashion? (This does not have to be in the order in

which they were obtained, but rather the order in which they make sense scientifically.)

2) Do lists of numbers appear in the text when they should be in a table? (Never repeat a list of

numbers in the text that is and should be in a table. Only some of those numbers will be important

to take note of.)

3) Are figures and graphs referred to in the text properly?

4) Is the significance of key data points explained in the text,?

5) Is the significance of high and low values explained specifically?

6) Is the significance of trends and correlations explained in the text?

7) Did authors comment on statistical significance correctly? Did they define “standard error” or

“standard deviation”. What does overlap of “error bars” mean?

8) Did the writer avoid drawing conclusions (to be saved for the discussion section)?

Tables & Figures – Should be able to stand alone. The information in the legend should

describe the details of the experiment, not evaluate the data.

1) Does each figure and table have a NUMBER?

2) Does the number assigned to a figure or table correspond to the order of its first mention in the

text (i.e. is the first figure discussed in the text Fig. 1)?

3) Does each figure and table have a TITLE?

4) Does each figure and table have a LEGEND?

5) Do the legends describe HOW (by what method) the data was obtained? That is, do the legends

resemble a "mini methods"? Legends should not describe the data.

6) Do tables contain only processed and not raw data? (unless otherwise instructed)

7) Do tables include statistical data when appropriate?

8) Are sample calculations given?

9) Are rows and columns of tables and data points and lines on graphs given meaningful labels (not

“Tube #1”, but “550 nm”, for example)?

8) Are the axes of graphs labeled? Are the units of measurement given?

9) Are figures appropriately labeled, pointing out special features as appropriate? (Base pairs of

DNA, contents of a lane on a gel, where the nucleus is in a cell, etc.)

10) By reading just the information provided with the figure or graph, can you understand the data

that is presented without referring back to the text (i.e. can each figure “stand alone”)?

DISCUSSION – Why is the data important or significant? What is the scientific explanation for

these results? (This section should NOT be a list of what you think went wrong with the

experiment.)

1) Was the objective of the experimental study re-stated in the first few sentences?

2) Was all of the data adequately discussed in light of the theory described in the introduction?

3) Were specific data points, trends and correlations mentioned to support a hypothesis?

4) Was the significance of the data related to the scientific theory outlined in the introduction?

5) Were references quoted?

6) Were they quoted appropriately and correctly?

7) Remember that results can never prove a hypothesis, they can only support a hypothesis.

REFERENCES - List of Works Cited – Make sure you understand what a primary source is!

1) Are all the references cited in the text listed in this section? (Follow instructor’s directions for

type of reference required.)

2) Are the references actually cited in the report?

3) Is the format listed in “Instructions for Authors...” carefully followed?