Common writing issues
April 20, 2011
Zoo 511
General comments
• Answer the question!
• We didn’t grade too harshly on writing, our main focus was
whether you had all components. This will change.
• It was evident that some of you did not use your peer review
comments. This is a waste of our time and your classmate’s.
• Sentences that don’t say anything “Comparing between
different communities or populations of fishes is a way in
which many types of research can be done”.
• It was evident that some of you have not really read other
papers. Don’t read them just for facts, read them for style and
read them for context.
• “The” “These” This” “There was”… read your sentence
carefully –are these words needed? If you use this, this what?
Always qualify it.
General Comments
• We will not re-write your paper for you. If we give you
a suggestion, or you make one of the mistakes
identified in this powerpoint, FIX IT THROUGHOUT
YOUR PAPER!
• This was not an experiment
• “This study” does not expect, think, or do anything.
You do.
• Don’t capitalize common names
• No significance? Include multiple years!
• Only use relevant and important tables and figures
• Don’t repeat data from a figure in a table.
• Be very concise and clear in your writing.
• What is the scale/applicability of this study?
Quick Grammar Lesson
• What is a subject?
– Who or what the sentence is about. Find the verb!
“There was a slight correlation between brown trout
density and reach area”
“Clark et al. found that there was a correlation
between brown trout density and reach area.”
“Figure 1 shows the correlation between brown
trout density and reach area”
“Brown trout density was positively correlated with
reach area”
Title
• Concise and descriptive – should match with
main message of paper
• Can include scientific names, not absolutely
necessary here (do include them in abstract
and first time you mention a species in the
main body of the paper)
• Effect, Prefer, Influence, etc.
Abstract
• Not a random collection of sentences from your
paper!
• A sentence on why we should care (background;
relevance to the broader scientific community)
• A sentence of your goal/hypothesis
• A sentence on what you found / the news/ the
results
• A sentence on why your findings are cool / what
they mean / how they apply to the broader
scientific community
Introduction
• Not a random assortment of facts about your study
species.
• All paragraphs should lead reader to your
hypothesis/question, and all sentences in a paragraph
should follow from topic sentence.
• Hold the readers hand in a review of relevant literature
that sets up the foundation of why this work was done.
• Start with general/broad theory (I.e. Predator prey
dynamics or foraging theory)
• Why is your question important? Why should we care
about your species?
• Relate broad theory to your topic of interest
• Conclude with a statement of your objective (BE
SPECIFIC!). Set up what the reader should expect to
find in the rest of the paper.
Methods
• Site description: Where, watershed, temp, species
composition (maybe) ~ WDNR website and original
handout
• Appropriate level of detail:
Original: Then, starting at the point furthest upstream,
metal rebar was pounded into each side of the creek
bank where each of the geomorphic units would be
divided. After that, a net with weights along the
bottoms was tied to the metal rebar by 3 students,
stretching across the width of the river, preventing fish
from going downstream.
Suggested revision: Block nets were placed at the
boundaries between reaches to prevent fish movement
between reaches.
Methods
• Analysis methods
• Define geomorphic units
• Include calculation of area, cpue, etc. (Did you
use average depth of a reach?)
• What did you compare?
• What tests did you use to compare?
Results
• Don’t describe figures, and ecology as subject!
ORIGINAL: There was a slight correlation with an R2 value of
0.521 between brown trout density and reach area. This can
be seen in Figure 2.
SUGGESTED REVISION: Brown trout density was positively
correlated with reach area (Figure 2, R2 =0.52, p=??).
• Biological significance and trends –its okay to say density of
suckers was twice as high in pools as in riffles, although this
relationship was not statistically significant.
• Significant digits –0.1287498 not needed. 0.13 will be fine.
Results
• Remember to consider validity of statistical
tests
– Residual plots: mention they were used, but don’t
show them in paper
– Transformations?
• CPUE vs. CPUA vs. CPUV
Discussion
• Lead your reader to your conclusion. You must know what your
conclusion is to do this!
• Brief summary of findings in one or two sentences
• Why did you find (or not find) what you found (expected)?
– Sample size? Sampling Bias?
– Violation of statistical test assumptions?
• How does this compare to other studies?
– Review of similar finding or opposite findings
– Differences between our stream and their streams
– Within-stream differences vs. across stream differences
• Why are your findings or lack thereof relevant and important
– How do they fit into the larger body of scientific knowledge?
• Future studies, management implications.
Tables and Figures
• No title
• Error bars (say what they are in the caption!)
• Most tables are either completely
unnecessary or better as a figure
• Use symbols on figure to show significant
differences
• Stand-alone captions – need to be very
detailed
• Units on axes titles
a
LN(Ephemeroptera /m2)
4
2
b
0
b
-2
Cobble
Macrophyte
Habitat type
Soft
Predicted log density of
Ephemeroptera in
Sparkling Lake across
three habitat types.
Predicted density is
higher in cobble habitats
than either macrophyte
(p=0.01) or soft habitats
(p=0.02). Error bars
indicate 95% confidence
intervals, letters indicate
significant differences at
alpha=0.05.
Context
• Every paragraph in a section should lead reader to your
main point of that section.
• Every paragraph should begin with a topic sentence.
• All other sentences in that paragraph should relate to
your topic sentence
• Introduction: leading your reader to your hypothesis.
– Context = Why did you study what you did, and why should
we care? Some background on other studies.
– We don’t want to know everything that has ever been
written about your study species!
• Discussion: leading your reader to your overall
conclusion.
– Context = what have others found? Why are your results
the same/different? What are the broad ecological or
management implications of your results?
Be concise!
ORIGINAL: Likewise, a higher percentage of canopy cover
indicates more shading. Furthermore, this shading can help
control water temperature. This reduced water temperature
is generally indicative of more dissolved oxygen.
SUGGESTED REVISION: Canopy cover controls shading in
streams, which affects both water temperature and dissolved
oxygen.
Passive vs. Active
Original: It is a high productivity stream though
because of steady inflows of warm water from
wastewater treatment facilities in Verona.
Suggested Revision: The steady inflow of warm
water from wastewater treatment facilities in
Verona result in a higher level of productivity
in Badger Mill Creek.
Writing like a Scientist
Original: As Europeans began to colonize the New World, they
considered it a good idea to bring along some of the
organisms that they enjoyed in their homeland.
Suggested Revision: Many prevalent “native” species in North
America are actually native to Eurasia and were
transported overseas as Europeans colonized the New
World.
Original: Upon first glance at the data there seemed to be a
significant correlation between the density of white suckers
and the percent canopy cover, however running statistical
tests proved that percent canopy cover does not influence
density of white suckers (p-value =0.61; R2= 0.02).
Suggested Revision: No relationship existed between white
sucker density and percent canopy cover (p-value =0.61;
R2= 0.02; Figure 2).
Clarity
Original: These two groups of fishes should be
found in different geomorphic units because, but
not limited to, the threat of predation.
Suggested Revision: We hypothesized small prey
fish and brown trout would have significantly
different densities within geomorphic units due
to predator-prey dynamics.
Original: This study examines white sucker and
brown trout distributions with stream velocity.
Suggested Revision: In this study, I investigate the
relationship between stream velocity and the
length of brown trout and white suckers.
Using references effectively
•
•
•
•
Every fact needs a citation
No citations in abstract
Starting sentences with authors name
If you are studying the relationship between brown
trout density and flow velocity, and you find a study on
brown trout density vs. flow velocity, don’t write that
they studied it, write what they found!
EXAMPLE: “Latzka and Vennie-Vollrath (2010) found a
relationship between habitat type and crayfish
density”.
SUGGESTED REVISION: “Crayfish density is highest in
cobble habitats (Latzka and Vennie-Vollrath 2010).