Whereas the Title can only make the simplest statement about the content of your article, the Abstract allows you to elaborate more on each major aspect of the paper. The length of your Abstract should be kept to about 200-300 words maximum (a typical standard length for journals.) Limit your statements concerning each segment of the paper (i.e. purpose, methods, results, etc.) to two or three sentences, if possible. The Abstract helps readers decide whether they want to read the rest of the paper, or it may be the only part they can obtain via electronic literature searches or in published abstracts. Therefore, enough key information (e.g., summary results, observations, trends, etc.) must be included to make the Abstract useful to someone who may to reference your work.
How do you know when you have enough information in your Abstract? A simple rule-of-thumb is to imagine that you are another researcher doing a study similar to the one you are reporting. If your Abstract was the only part of the paper you could access, would you be happy with the information presented there?
Style: The Abstract is ONLY text. Use the active voice when possible, but much of it may require passive constructions. Write your Abstract using concise, but complete, sentences, and get to the point quickly. Use past tense. Maximum length should be 200-300 words, usually in a single paragraph.
The Abstract SHOULD NOT contain:
Strategy: Although it is the first section of your paper, the Abstract, by definition, must be written last since it will summarize the paper. To begin composing your Abstract, take whole sentences or key phrases from each section and put them in a sequence which summarizes the paper. Then set about revising or adding words to make it all cohesive and clear. As you become more proficient you will most likely compose the Abstract from scratch.
Check your work: Once you have the completed abstract, check to make sure that the information in the abstract completely agrees with what is written in the paper. Confirm that all the information appearing the abstract actually appears in the body of the paper.
Here are detailed instructions, advice, suggestions, examples to generally improve your ability to compose papers for courses within the Biology Department. For simplicity, the sections of a scientific paper have been broken down for you, allowing you to navigate between different sections of the paper.
Function and importance of the title: Your paper should begin with a title that succinctly describes the contents of the paper. Use descriptive words that you would associate strongly with the content of your paper: the molecule studied, the organism used or studied, the treatment, the location of a field site, the response measured, etc. A majority of readers will find your paper via electronic database searches and those search engines key on words found in the title.
Format: The title should be centered at the top of page 1 (DO NOT use a title page - it is a waste of paper for our purposes); the title is NOT underlined or italicized.
The authors' names (PI or primary author first) and institutional affiliation are double-spaced from and centered below the title. When more then two authors, the names are separated by commas except for the last which is separated from the previous name by the word "and".
For example:
Ducks Over-Winter in Colorado Barley Fields in Response to Increased Daily Mean Temperature
Ima Mallard, Ura Drake, and Woodruff Ducque
Department of Wildlife Biology, University of Colorado - Boulder
The title is not a section, but it is necessary and important. The title should be short and unambiguous, yet be an adequate description of the work. A general rule-of-thumb is that the title should contain the key words describing the work presented. Remember that the title becomes the basis for most on-line computer searches - if your title is insufficient, few people will find or read your paper. For example, in a paper reporting on an experiment involving dosing mice with the sex hormone estrogen and watching for a certain kind of courtship behavior, a poor title would be:
Mouse Behavior
Why? It is very general, and could be referring to any of a number of mouse behaviors. A better title would be:
The Effects of Estrogen on the Nose-Twitch Courtship Behavior in Mice
Why? Because the key words identify a specific behavior, a modifying agent, and the experimental organism. If possible, give the key result of the study in the title, as seen in the first example. Similarly, the above title could be restated as:
Estrogen Stimulates Intensity of Nose-Twitch Courtship Behavior in Mice
Function: The function of the introduction is to:
Style: Use the active voice as much as possible. Some use of first person is okay, but do not overdo it.
Structure: The structure of the Introduction can be thought of as an inverted triangle - the broadest part at the top representing the most general information and focusing down to the specific problem you studied. Organize the information to present the more general aspects of the topic early in the Introduction, then narrow toward the more specific topical information that provides context, finally arriving at your statement of purpose and rationale. A good way to get on track is to sketch out the Introduction backwards; start with the specific purpose and then decide what is the scientific context in which you are asking the question(s) your study addresses. Once the scientific context is decided, then you'll have a good sense of what level and type of general information with which the Introduction should begin.
Here is the information should flow in your Introduction:
Function: In this section you explain clearly how you carried out your study in the following general structure and organization (details follow below):
Organize your presentation so your reader will understand the logical flow of the experiment(s); subheadings work well for this purpose. Each experiment or procedure should be presented as a unit, even if it was broken up over time. In general, provide enough quantitative detail (how much, how long, when, etc.) about your experimental protocol such that other scientists could reproduce your experiments. You should also indicate the statistical procedures used to analyze your results, including the probability level at which you determined significance (usually at 0.05 probability).
Style: The style in this section should read as if you were verbally describing the conduct of the experiment. You may use the active voice to a certain extent, although this section requires more use of third person, passive constructions than others. Avoid use of the first person in this section. Remember to use the past tense throughout. The Methods section is not a step-by-step, directive, protocol as you might see in your lab manual.
Strategy for writing the Methods section.
Describe the organism(s) used in the study. This includes giving the source (supplier or where and how collected), size, how they were handled before the experiment, what they were fed, etc. In genetics studies include the strains or genetic stocks used.
Describe the site where your field study was conducted. The description must include both physical and biological characteristics of the site pertinant to the study aims. Include the date(s) of the study (e.g., 10-15 April 1994) and the exact location of the study area. Location data must be as precise as possible: "Grover Nature Preserve, " mi SW Grover, Maine" rather than" Grover Nature Preserve" or " Grover". When possible, give the actual latitude and longitude position of the site (the WWW has sites which provide this service). It is most often a good idea to include a map (labeled as a Figure) showing the location in relation to some larger more recognizable geographic area. Someone else should be able to go to the exact location of your study if they want to repeat or check your work, or just visit your study area.
Describe your experimental design clearly. Be sure to include the hypotheses you tested, controls, treatments, variables measured, how many replicates you had, what you actually measured, what form the data take, etc. Always identify treatments by the variable or treatment name, NOT by an ambiguous, generic name or number (e.g., use "2.5% saline" rather than "test 1".) When your paper includes more than one experiment, use subheadings to help organize your presentation by experiment. A general experimental design worksheet is available to help plan your experiments in the core courses.
Describe the protocol for your study in sufficient detail that other scientists could repeat your work to verify your findings. Foremost in your description should be the "quantitative" aspects of your study - the masses, volumes, incubation times, concentrations, etc., that another scientist needs in order to duplicate your experiment. When using standard lab or field methods and instrumentation, it is not always necessary to explain the procedures (e.g., serial dilution) or equipment used (e.g., autopipetter) since other scientists will likely be familiar with them already. You may want to identify certain types of equipment by brand or category (e.g., ultracentrifuge vs. prep centrifuge). It is appropriate to give the source for reagents used parenthetically, e.g., "....poly-l-Lysine (Sigma #1309)." When using a method described in another published source, you can save time and words by referring to it and providing the relevant citation to the source. Always make sure to describe any modifications you have made of a standard or published method.
Describe how the data were summarized and analyzed. Here you will indicate what types of data summaries and analyses were employed to answer each of the questions or hypotheses tested.
The information should include:
Here is some additional advice on particular problems common to new scientific writers.
Problem 1: The Methods section is prone to being wordy or overly detailed.
Avoid repeatedly using a single sentence to relate a single action; this results in very lengthy, wordy passages. A related sequence of actions can be combined into one sentence to improve clarity and readability:
"The petri dish was placed on the turntable. The lid was then raised slightly. An inoculating loop was used to transfer culture to the agar surface. The turntable was rotated 90 degrees by hand. The loop was moved lightly back and forth over the agar to spread the culture. The bacteria were then incubated at 37 C for 24 hr."
Improved Example: Same actions, but all the important information is given in a single, concise sentence. Note that superfluous detail and otherwise obvious information has been deleted while important missing information was added.
"Each plate was placed on a turntable and streaked at opposing angles with fresh overnight E. coli culture using an inoculating loop. The bacteria were then incubated at 37 C for 24 hr."
Best: Here the author assumes the reader has basic knowledge of microbiological techniques and has deleted other superfluous information. The two sentences have been combined because they are related actions.
"Each plate was streaked with fresh overnight E. coli culture and incubated at 37 C for 24 hr."
Problem 2: Avoid using ambiguous terms to identify controls or treatments, or other study parameters that require specific identifiers to be clearly understood. Designators such as Tube 1, Tube 2, or Site 1 and Site 2 are completely meaningless out of context and difficult to follow in context.
Problematic example: In this example the reader will have no clue as to what the various tubes represent without having to constantly refer back to some previous point in the Methods.
"A Spec 20 was used to measure A600 of Tubes 1,2, and 3 immediately after chloroplasts were added (Time 0) and every 2 min. thereafter until the DCIP was completely reduced. Tube 4's A600 was measured only at Time 0 and at the end of the experiment."
Improved example: Notice how the substitution (in red) of treatment and control identifiers clarifies the passage both in the context of the paper, and if taken out of context.
"A Spec 20 was used to measure A600 of the reaction mixtures exposed to light intensities of 1500, 750, and 350 uE/m2/sec immediately after chloroplasts were added (Time 0) and every 2 min. thereafter until the DCIP was completely reduced. The A600 of the no light control was measured only at Time 0 and at the end of the experiment."
FIND US ON