Dr. Bruce W. Grant and
Dr. Itzick Vatnick
return to main Bio401 page,
return to Bio401 assignments page
Department of Biology,
Widener University, Chester, PA, 19013
BWG office Loveland Hall # 9, ext. 4017, IV office Kirkbride # 516, ext. 4245
grant@pop1.science.widener.edu and
vatnick@pop1.science.widener.edu
This page was last modified 2 December 2003, and has been accessed
times since 1 September 2003.
| ||||||||
Abstract:
Introduction:
Materials and Methods:
|
Results:
Discussion/ Conclusions:
Acknowledgements:
Literature Cited:
|
Additional notes on the ABSTRACT:
1). The Abstract contains a short summary of every section in your report. Cover the main points only without dwelling on details of your methods or results. In reality, the Abstract will be the only part of your paper that will be read by the majority of those who get past the title; therefore, tailor the prose for maximum speed, simplicity and impact, 2). Summarize your Introduction, Methods, Results (including key numerical results and stats), and Discussion sections separately in a couple of tight sentences devoted to each. Fell free to lift good sentences from these sections to build your Abstract, 3). Length = 250 - 300 words, font size at least 18 point 4). General suggestions on your writing:
|
Additional notes on the INTRODUCTION:
1) Introduce the general topic of the report - this is your BIG QUESTION. Work especially hard at getting a good opening sentence. Why is the general topic of the report of any interest to you and to the reader? USE THE LITERATURE. Your job is to MOTIVATE INTEREST in the reader, 2) State the specific question that is the subject of the report. You may use a sentence such as "We investigated the effects of ...... {describe the environmental difference} on ...........{describe what you will look at}, 3) Briefly explain the hypothesis(es) that may offer an answer to your question. Be thorough, yet concise in explaining your hypotheses. A common oversight is to state an hypothesis and presume that a reader will immediately see why you have stated it. DO NOT MAKE THAT MISTAKE! Why do you think you might find what you hypothesize? 4) There may be alternate hypotheses that may answer the same question. If so, they should be mentioned and your studies must be designed to distinguish among competing hypotheses, if possible. If not, save these issues for your Discussion and Future Directions sections, 5) If there are other questions that you address, then repeat steps (2)-(4) for each one, 6) Many feel compelled to offer an overview of the kinds of data they will collect as a set-up for the Methods section, but I consider this to be optional, 7) Length about 5-8 paragraphs, font size at least 18 point, 8) All of the above suggestions on your writing apply, especially - write clearly, use good English, proofread, spell check, explain all terms you use or don’t use them, correctly use all terms you do include, and make sure all text belongs here. |
Additional notes on the MATERIALS AND METHODS:
1) This section describes the procedure you used to address your research question, and you are encourages to use sub-headings to subdivide this section (e.g. “Lab Methods Set 1”, “Lab Methods Set 2”, etc., “Data Analyses”, etc.), 2) Briefly describe the study species for your research. Give the reader an idea of their basic ecology, 3) Include all of the necessary and sufficient detail for the reader to be able to duplicate your lab methods exactly. Distinguish between essential detail and extraneous detail (e. g., studies were carried out on Earth by Homo sapiens) and omit the latter. For every experimental design there are important implicit assumptions. Be sure to address the critical ones. Comment on the accuracy of your measurement techniques, when relevant. E.g., to how many significant digits did you measure things (e.g. ± 0.001 gm or ± 5 mm)? 4) Specifically address the issue of sample replication. How did you replicate your samples for the purposes of finding statistics (averages, 1 SD, etc.)? Always replicate your measurements. How confident you are in your conclusions depends upon the amount of "experimental error" you have been able to avoid. There are two sources of error (excluding mistakes!). One source is measurement error, which corresponds to the resolution of your equipment (e.g., did you measure distance with a tape measure or micrometer?). But, the second source of error is due to "inherent variation" in whatever you are measuring. Always design your experiments so that measurement error is much less than this inherent variation. The best way to estimate "experimental error" is to replicate a given treatment as many times as possible. We will discuss the appropriate means to estimate variation for your project, 5) There are specific means by which experimental error, statistical confidence, and hypotheses testing are to be worked into the design of your project, depending on your particular question. We will discuss specific methods of statistical analyses appropriate to your project beginning with the labs before you collect any data and continuing throughout the semester. 6) Length about 5-8 paragraphs, font size at least 18 point, 7) All of the above suggestions on your writing apply, especially - write clearly, use good English, proofread, spell check, explain all terms you use or don’t use them, correctly use all terms you do include, and make sure all text belongs here. |
Additional notes on the RESULTS:
1) This section contains all of the results of the experiments and other measurements you made, 2) Present the results from each of the sets of data you said you would collect in the Methods Section in the same order as in the Methods, 3) Any statistical tests are reported in your Results; however, this section contains minimal interpretations of your results. Simply state the results and the statistics to back up your statements (which may be placed in parentheses). Only use the word "significance" when discussing a statistical test. Do not say "our results were significant" in any other context, 5) For every data set there exists an optimum format for presentation. This format may be a combination of tables and figures (e.g. scatterplots, bar graphs, etc.) that are (a) well documented and easy to read, (b) illustrate the data with a minimum of redundancy, and (c) enable the reader to quickly perceive the results. Poorly conceived graphs will obscure the data and leave readers unconvinced. Combine figures if needed, 6) All Tables and Figures should be numbered in order (i.e., Table 1, Table 2, etc.) and referred to by number in the text, 7) For each Table and Figure, include a legend at the top or bottom. The legend should briefly state using complete sentences what the Table or Figure shows, what the units of the axes are (if appropriate), what the error bars represent (if appropriate), and other information to enable that Table or Figure to STAND ALONE. A reader should be able to look at any Table or Figure in your ms and be able to understand what’s in it without consulting the text of the ms. Thus, you are encouraged to duplicate text in the legend and ms to facilitate clarity. A typical legend should be about 3-5 sentences, 8) Clearly explain every Table and Figure in the Results using text very similar if not identical to text in each Table or Figure legend, 9) Clearly indicate whenever possible the variation in any average you present (graphically on each figure or numerically on each table). Specifically explain replication as needed to explain any measures of sample variation you present (e.g., error bars on your figures, + SD in tables, etc.), 10) Length about 2-5 paragraphs, font size at least 18 point (except for figure and table captions which may be printed slightly smaller), 11) All of the above suggestions on your writing apply, especially - write clearly, use good English, proofread, spell check, explain all terms you use or don’t use them, correctly use all terms you do include, and make sure all text belongs here. |
Additional notes on the DISCUSSION:
1) Re-introduce the general topic of the report. Work especially hard at getting a good opening sentence. Why is the general topic of the report of any interest to you and to the reader? Reconnect readers to your Big Question and to your Project Question. Your job is to MOTIVATE INTEREST in the reader, but keep it brief (1-2 sentences) unlike in the Introduction (where 1 paragraph was needed), 2) This section contains your interpretation of your results. Discuss your hypotheses. Re-connect to the themes of your paper that you laid out in your Introduction (USE THE LITERATURE). Do your data support your hypothesis(es)? How "confident" are you in your findings? However, note that can never prove an hypothesis by experiments. All you can do is accept or reject hypotheses with a finite, numerical degree of "confidence" (e.g. 95% or 99%). No scientist can ever be 100% sure. Feel free to suggest new hypotheses for future work, but do not present new data. Be conservative in your assessments, but do not make excuses, 3) Following an opening paragraph, briefly re-state your 2-3 main conclusions in a list form (consider 24 point bold), 4) Never over-extend yourself beyond your database. Abstain from speculations that your data do not specifically support. Work at making the text in the Discussion flow effortlessly, 5) Conclude your Discussion with a “Future Directions” sub-section in which you should comment about what would be the next thing you would do for this project. In what direction would your future research take you after this project? Lay out the future directions for your project that hopefully an interested Biology 401 student research group will read, become excited about, and pick up where you left off, 6) All of the above suggestions on your writing apply, especially - write clearly, use good English, proofread, spell check, explain all terms you use or don’t use them, correctly use all terms you do include, and make sure all text belongs here. |
Please Read This Comment.
Please send comments or suggestions to Bruce W. Grant: grant@pop1.science.widener.edu. Copyright - Bruce W. Grant and Itzick Vatick, 2003. |