Biology: The Scientific Manuscript 1
TheSciencManuscript
Biology
An Overview of the Scientic Manuscript
Students in 300- and 400-level Biology courses write scientific manuscripts,
just as scientists do. The manuscript’s structure follows the scientific method,
and the information within the manuscript responds to a hypothesis that
is clearly stated near the beginning of the manuscript. The purpose of the
manuscript is to communicate how you conducted the work and the results
obtained so that your audience can assess the veracity of the results and the
conclusion.
Audience
Your audience consists of your professor and classmates; however, you
should envision your audience as also including other scientists and
academics.
Tips for Your Writing Process
Consider the scientific manuscript a “write up” of your research
more than a process of generating new information. Much of
the creative and critical thinking work associated with writing a
scientific manuscript comes when you, the researcher, formulate the
hypothesis and conduct the research. Therefore, the first part of the
manuscript–from the introduction into the results section–situates
your study and describes the scientific process you followed.
Creativity comes to the fore in the discussion as you think about the
implications of your findings for future studies.
Assess your results and reflect on them within the context of existing
models in the discussion section.
In the results section of the manuscript, critical thinking is paramount.
Create a new or revised hypothesis that logically flows from your
results.
Manuscript Organization
Scientific manuscripts are written in a set format, with all sections and
headings the same across publications. Here are the sections of the scientific
manuscript; an (H) indicates that a heading should be used to title the section.
Title
Your title must communicate what is in the paper, indicating the hypothesis
and variables tested. Scientists often choose what to read based on the title; if
the title does not indicate the focus of the piece, the right people will not read
it. The title should be clear, informative, and straightforward. It should include
key terms related to your research to alert potential readers to its content.
•
•
•
•
Important Reminders
Write the abstract last.
Be sure the hypothesis is in the
introduction; make sure the same
hypothesis is addressed in the
discussion section (later in the
manuscript).
Your hypothesis will not change as
you work through the paper. Your
research examines the hypothesis,
and if the hypothesis needs to be
revised/tweaked, you do it during
the research itself–which comes
well before the write-up.
•
•
•
The purpose of the manuscript
is to communicate how you
conducted the work and the
results obtained so that your
audience can assess the
veracity of the results and the
conclusion.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.
Biology: The Scientific Manuscript 2
Abstract
An abstract is a brief overview of the manuscript and is typically the first thing
scientists read; the abstract helps readers discern whether the article is of
relevance to them and their research. In addition, the abstract determineshow
the piece will be indexed in databases. For those reasons, the abstract is
important and is written with a specific formula: write 2-4 sentences on each
section of your manuscript (the introduction, results, and discussion). The
abstract must include your hypothesis or objective. For more assistance, see
our handout on abstracts available at http://www.gvsu.edu/wc.
Process Tip: A draft of the abstract can be written as a
series of cut-and-pasted sentences from the manuscript
itself. Be sure, however, to revise the abstract so that
the sentences connect to one another and form a
complete, polished unit.
Introduction (H)
The introduction puts your study into context. Structurally, it is like the
introduction of most academic essays: it begins with a broad hook to orient
your readers to the general topic of your research and then narrows down into
your hypothesis. It includes quite a bit of background information, and
your instructor may ask you to complete a literature review section as part of
the introduction. A literature review is an overview of primary research articles
pertinent to the research you conduct.
To write a literature review, ask yourself these questions:
What are the common assumptions or findings among the articles you
read?
How do the articles build on one another, showing a trajectory of
knowledge about this particular scientific issue?
What is the connection between this primary research and your own
work? That is, how can your work be interpreted within the context of
the field?
What is your hypothesis? Does it flow easily from the literature review
you just wrote?
For more help writing a literature review, see our handout at http://www.gvsu.
edu/wc.
Process Tip: As you read articles related to your topic,
you might find it helpful to write a 3-5 sentence summary
of each one. Doing so can help you to think about
connections among the articles and save you time as
you draft your literature review.
The introduction, in addition to presenting and justifying the general problem
addressed and your hypothesis, should introduce the general methodological
approach used to test your hypothesis and a justification of that approach.
This should include a description of your study species.
Materials/Methods (H)
This section describes what you used to test your hypothesis and your
methodology in carrying out the research. It must be exact and precise so
the procedures can be replicated by other scientists. The information must be
written out in paragraph form and worded in the past tense. Materials can be
listed with semicolons between the items, but should not include bullets.
•
•
•
•
Tips for Your
Introduction
If you do not include a literature
review in the manuscript, your
introduction might include answers to
these questions:
What is the phenomenon you are
studying?
What is the signicance of this
phenomenon to your area of
research?
What is already known about
the phenomenon, and how does
your hypothesis ow from those
understandings?
What is your hypothesis?
•
•
•
•
As you read articles related
to your topic, you might find it
helpful to write a 3-5 sentence
summary of each one. Doing
so can help you to think about
connections among the articles
and save you time as you draft
your literature review.
A draft of the abstract can
be written as a series of cut-
and-pasted sentences from
the manuscript itself. Be sure,
however, to revise the abstract
so that the sentences connect
to one another and form a
complete, polished unit.
Biology: The Scientific Manuscript 3
It can be helpful to break this section down into sub-sections, both to keep
you organized as a writer, and to aid the reader in keeping track of your
procedures. It can be helpful for scientists to follow specific sections for
specific instruments or materials they need in their labs. If creating sub-
sections, label each with a header indicating the specific procedure you used.
Results (H)
Results must be written in two formats (Data Display and Written Text) and
must compliment one another.
1) Data Display: This section presents visuals that show the reader your
findings, such as graphs, tables, and photographs. Graphics need to be clear
and communicate well—they should look professional. Good data displays
are readable and clear, meaning that:
The font size is readable.
Pattern contrasts are sharp so that visual elements showing different
data are in strong contrast to one another and therefore easy to read.
If photographs are included, they are sharp and in focus.
If graphs are included, the correct type is chosen (bar, line, etc), with
each line/bar in contrasting patterns.
Labels are clear, easy to understand, and correctly positioned so that
readers are not confused about what they describe.
A legend, consisting of a table or figure number, a title, and an
explanation, must be provided. The legend allows graphs and
data display to stand alone. All figures and tables are numbered
separately but consecutively from the beginning of the paper,
regardless of section (introduction, materials and methods, etc.).
The title of the figure or table is usually in bold and like all titles need
not be a complete sentence (e.g., “The effect of calcium on toe
length”). Sometimes, the title can encapsulate the results illustrated
by the figure (e.g., “Calcium causes an increase in toe length”). The
explanation includes all abbreviations and symbols (including a key to
multiple lines or symbols on your graph, or multiple lanes in your gel)
used in tables and figures. It also includes what the values represent
(means, an indication of variability, the number of replicates). In
addition, an explanation of the statistical tests performed as well as
their results should be included (P values, significant differences,
etc.). Legends indicate magnifications, units, etc, as that information
helps other scientists to replicate methods correctly.
2) Written Text: This section should describe with sufficient detail what your
experiment yielded. Do not describe your results in great detail; instead, pull
out the results that are most important. Even though all your results should
be described in the data display you must annotate them by pointing the
reader to specific results that affect your conclusions. Stay descriptive; don’t
editorialize in your results section, as the significance of these findings and
implications for future research comes in the discussion section.
Discussion (H)
This section builds on the results and is the point in the manuscript where
you, the writer, get to editorialize about the results. It is the place where you
get to talk with other scientists about what you think your research means
within the context of other research. A few strategies for writing a good
discussion section include:
Discuss every result you described in the results section, being
careful to discuss each data display/figure. (If you don’t end up
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Take Notice of Voice/
Tone
A formal tone is necessary. Scientic
manuscript writing is academic and
professional.
Objectivity is paramount. Some
professors interpret this to mean
that there should be very few–if
any–references to the writer(s) in the
rst person (“I”, “we”). Avoiding
rst person pronouns can be difcult,
and often requires the use of passive
voice:
Active Voice: “We tested this
prediction by …”
Passive Voice: “This prediction was
tested by …”
The reality is that scientic writing
is changing. It has become more
common for scientists to write in the
rst person, particularly when passive
voice would get wordy or awkward.
Check with your professor on his
or her preferences when it comes
to using rst person and/or passive
voice. To learn more about how to
identify active and passive voice, see
our handout at http://www.gvsu.
edu/wc.
The writing–as well as the research itself–is
driven by a hypothesis.
A hypothesis is an underlying
statement of explanation about
how the world works. From it ow
predictions.
A scientist tests a hypothesis by
testing these predictions–and
“test” is the key word here. One
should not write about “proving”
or “showing” a hypothesis, as
those are biased words that
indicate an argument rather than
objective scientic discovery.
A typical hypothesis is written
in “If....then....” language–it is a
statement about how the world
works and a prediction about it
based on an underlying logic. This
underlying logic is the hypothesis.
•
•
•
Biology: The Scientific Manuscript 4
discussing a particular result, it may not be significant enough to have
included in the Results section.)
Ask yourself... “How does each result connect to what others have
found?” and “How does each result connect to the original hypothesis/
model?”
Include in the final paragraph a summary statement that indicates
whether the hypothesis is supported, and indicate a vision for what
might happen next, in further research conducted by yourself or
others.
Prompts for Writing Consultations
Is there a clear purpose to the research?
Are previous/related findings addressed in the introduction?
Is the hypothesis written clearly in the introduction?
Is the hypothesis addressed fully in the results/findings section?
Is the experiment replicable? (Are the methods easily understandable
to the point of completing the steps?)
Does the discussion section develop each finding in the order that
they were mentioned in the results section?
Does the writer clearly state whether or not the hypothesis was
supported by the results?
Are limitations clearly addressed?
Are visuals clearly labeled, appropriate to the content, and formatted
in such a way that they are easy to understand?
Does the writer adequately discuss findings within the text of the
manuscript, not just in the visuals?
Does the abstract match the overall manuscript? Should it be more
concise, or is anything missing that should be included?
Remember that brevity and concisness are most important.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
