Writing ManuscriptsWriting Manuscriptsfor Publicationfor Publication
First, General AdviceFirst, General AdviceGetting Started Getting Started
ExerciseExercise Finally, Specific Finally, Specific
AdviceAdvice
Is Writing Easy?Is Writing Easy?Don’t make it harder than Don’t make it harder than
necessary!necessary!
Make it EasierMake it Easier Know your audience. Choose Know your audience. Choose
your journal before you write.your journal before you write. Know your message. Don’t Know your message. Don’t
report irrelevant information.report irrelevant information. Make an outline. Write only Make an outline. Write only
what you need.what you need.
Make it EasierMake it EasierBefore you begin to write:Before you begin to write:Find the best question to go Find the best question to go with your answers. with your answers. It may not be the question you It may not be the question you had in mind when you started!had in mind when you started!
Choosing the QuestionChoosing the Question
Results: Stream and soil N concentrations were high after harvest.Mineralization rates were not higher than in the control!High nitrification results from the lack of uptake by trees, not from higher gross mineralization rates.
Original Question: What factors explain high N mineralization rates after forest harvest?Objectives: We measured soil moisture and temperature, gross and net N mineralization, …
Choosing the QuestionChoosing the Question
Results: Stream and soil N concentrations were high after harvest.Mineralization rates were not higher than in the control.High nitrification results from the lack of uptake by trees, not from higher gross mineralization rates.
Better Question: What factors explain high N rates of N export after forest harvest? Is it true that N mineralization rates are increased, or is increased N availability explained by the absence of tree uptake?
Another ExampleAnother Example
Results: Volume of CWD was not closely related to cutting intensity.It was lower when fuel costs were high, because firewood was removed.It was high after the particle-board factory closed.It was high after a wind storm.
Original Objective: Our goal was to describe volume and nutrient content of coarse woody debris (CWD) as a function of silvicultural treatment in the Catskill Mountains of New York.
Another ExampleAnother Example
Better Question: What factors are important to predicting volume and nutrient content of CWD? Is harvest intensity sufficient?
Results: Volume of CWD was not related to cutting intensity.It was lower when fuel costs were high, because firewood was removed!It was high after the particle-board factory closed.It was high after a wind storm.
Getting Started Getting Started ExerciseExercise
3. Describe the results of your work, in a small number of bulleted phrases.
2. Write a statement that identifies the problem you were trying to solve in your research.
1. Briefly explain why this research is important. To whom does it matter?
4. Write the conclusions to your paper.
You know now how to check that the question goes with the results
Getting Started Getting Started ExerciseExercise
1. Briefly explain why this research is important. To whom does it matter?
4. Write the conclusions to your paper.
Now, how do we choose the context for the study and the conclusions?
N Mineralization N Mineralization ExampleExample
1. We had an opportunity to measure gross and net N mineralization and nitrification in a clearcut in northern hardwoods.
Who cares? Why do we need to know?
3. Stream and soil N concentrations were high after harvest.Mineralization rates were not higher than in the control.
2. What factors explain high N rates of N export after forest harvest?
N Mineralization N Mineralization ExampleExample
2. What factors explain high N rates of N export after forest harvest?
1. The belief that decomposition and nutrient mineralization increase following disturbance pervades calculations of local and global C and nutrient budgets, but this belief is not based on direct observation.
4. It is true that nitrate losses increase after harvesting, but this is not due to increased N mineralization.
3. Stream and soil N concentrations were high after harvest.Mineralization rates were not higher than in the control.
This is a result! What should we tellthe audience we addressed in #1?
N Mineralization N Mineralization ExampleExample
3. High nitrification results from the lack of uptake by trees, not from higher gross mineralization rates.
2. What factors explain high N rates of N export after forest harvest?
1. The belief that decomposition and nutrient mineralization increase following disturbance pervades calculations of local and global C and nutrient budgets, but this belief is not based on direct observation.
4. Ecosystem N budgets should not assume that mineralization increases after disturbance. Carbon budgets, too, may be in error if decomposition is assumed to increase after forest harvest.
CWD ExampleCWD Example1. Pools and nutrient concentrations of CWD have not been described in the Catskill Mountains...
This sounds like Objectives (#2).Who cares? Why do we need to know?
3. Volumes of CWD depend on cutting intensity but also on markets for wood products and recent storms.
2. Is harvest intensity sufficient to predict volume and nutrient content of CWD?
CWD ExampleCWD Example1. Predicting carbon and nutrient content of CWD over time after forest harvesting is important to managing forests for non-timber values. Therefore, we need to know what factors are important to making those predictions.
3. Volumes of CWD depend on cutting intensity but also on markets for wood products and recent storms.
2. Is harvest intensity sufficient to predict volume and nutrient content of CWD?
4. CWD volume is not readily predicted from harvest intensity. This is a result! What should we tell
the audience we addressed in #1?
CWD ExampleCWD Example1. Predicting carbon and nutrient content of CWD over time after forest harvesting is important to managing forests for non-timber values. Therefore, we need to know what factors are important to making those predictions.
3. Volumes of CWD depend on cutting intensity but also on markets for wood products and recent storms.
2. Is harvest intensity sufficient to predict volume and nutrient content of CWD?
4. CWD volume should be measured for accurate assessment. Nutrient contents, on the other hand, can be estimated from measured volumes and published concentrations.
In Small GroupsIn Small Groups Is #1 general enough? Does #4 relate back to #1? Do results (#3) answer the question in
#2? If you find results in #4, move them to #3.
You can also help by asking questions if the author’s meaning wasn’t clear.
Getting Started Getting Started ExerciseExercise
3. Describe the results of your work, in a small number of bulleted phrases.
2. Write a statement that identifies the problem you were trying to solve in your research.
1. Briefly explain why this research is important. To whom does it matter?
4. Write the conclusions to your paper.
Sequence of Section Sequence of Section PreparationPreparation
1. Results2. Methods4. Introduction
3. Discussion
5. Title and Abstract
ResultsResults
Table or Figure or Text?Table or Figure or Text?
ResultsResultsFigure Figure vs.vs. Table Table
0
500
1000
1500
2000 Maximum
Mean
Typical
January
0
500
1000
1500
2000
PP
FD (u
mol
m-2
s-1
) April
0
500
1000
1500
2000
0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 0:00
Time of Day (h)
July
Time of Day Max Mean Typical Max Mean Typical Max Mean Typical0:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 900 100 07:00 400 0 0 500 0 0 1500 700 08:00 700 300 100 1200 400 0 1700 900 09:00 800 400 200 1550 750 50 2000 1200 60010:00 850 450 250 1700 900 200 2100 1300 30011:00 900 500 300 1850 1050 350 2150 1350 35012:00 950 550 350 2000 1200 500 2200 1400 50013:00 900 500 300 2000 1200 500 2200 1400 50014:00 850 450 250 1950 1150 450 2150 1350 75015:00 800 400 200 1800 1000 300 2000 1200 40016:00 600 200 0 1650 850 150 1800 1000 017:00 350 0 0 1400 600 0 1700 900 018:00 100 0 1 900 100 1 1200 400 019:00 0 0 0 200 0 0 500 0 020:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 021:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
January April July
Modified from Lewis et al. 1999
ResultsResultsFigure Figure vs.vs. Table Table
Low Mid High Low Mid HighPin cherry leaves 260 50 7 0.44 0.11 0.02Pin cherry wood 290 50 2 0.17 0.03 0.00Sapling leaves 230 210 50 0.28 0.26 0.10Sapling wood 320 480 120 0.15 0.21 0.08
Seedling leaves 110 50 20 0.15 0.07 0.04Seedling wood 80 50 10 0.06 0.04 0.01Shrub leaves 150 110 70 0.21 0.23 0.01Shrub wood 150 40 270 0.11 0.05 0.25
Rubus 320 70 30 0.37 0.09 0.06Wood fern 50 50 11 0.10 0.11 0.42
Other herbs 150 170 80 0.05 0.07 0.12Total 2110 1330 670 2.09 1.27 1.12
Biomass (kg/ha) P Content (kg P/ ha)Elevation Elevation
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Bio
mas
s (k
g/ha
) Low Mid High
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Pin ch
erry l
eave
s
Pin ch
erry w
ood
Sapling
leav
es
Sapling
woo
d
Seedlin
g lea
ves
Seedlin
g woo
d
Shrub l
eave
s
Shrub w
ood
Rubus
Wood f
ern
Other h
erbs
Total
P C
onte
nt (k
g P/
ha)
Modified from Yanai 1998
ResultsResults
Figure Figure vs.vs. Table Table vs.vs. Text Text
Modified from Yanai 1999
The harvest removal ratio was highest for P (5.4 ), lowest for N (2.7) and intermediate for K (3.9).
Harvest removal ratio
N 2.7
P 5.4K 3.90
1
2
3
4
5
6
N P K
Har
vest
rem
oval
ratio
ResultsResults Describe results with reference to Describe results with reference to
hypotheses.hypotheses. Tell your readers what they should Tell your readers what they should
see in your tables or figures.see in your tables or figures. Don’t repeat information available Don’t repeat information available
in tables or figures.in tables or figures.
MethodsMethods Support data presented in ResultsSupport data presented in Results Tell enough to allow another Tell enough to allow another
scientist to replicate your studyscientist to replicate your study Don’t give information not Don’t give information not
needed to understand your needed to understand your results or replicate your studyresults or replicate your study
Examples: Examples: What’s Needed?What’s Needed?
Samples were digested in nitric Samples were digested in nitric acid. acid.
Plots were marked with orange Plots were marked with orange flagging at the northeast corner.flagging at the northeast corner.
Procedures followed Bickelhaupt Procedures followed Bickelhaupt (1986).(1986).
IntroductionIntroduction Describe the general problem to Describe the general problem to
be solved.be solved. Review the relevant literature, just Review the relevant literature, just
enough to orient the reader to the enough to orient the reader to the problem.problem.
Pose the specific questions to be Pose the specific questions to be answered in the Results and answered in the Results and DiscussionDiscussion
DiscussionDiscussion Interpret your results.Interpret your results. Place them in the context of other Place them in the context of other
work.work. Address limitations to your approach.Address limitations to your approach. Suggest future work.Suggest future work. Draw conclusions. Point out Draw conclusions. Point out
applications. Address your opening applications. Address your opening questions. questions.
AbstractAbstract Problem to be solvedProblem to be solved Objectives or HypothesesObjectives or Hypotheses Methods or ApproachMethods or Approach ResultsResults ConclusionsConclusions
TitleTitle
Should Represent Paper’s ContentShould Represent Paper’s Content
Keywords Facilitate Retrieval in Keywords Facilitate Retrieval in IndicesIndices
Make it Brief but Meaningful (Don’t Make it Brief but Meaningful (Don’t waste words)waste words)
Picking the Best TitlePicking the Best Title
1.1. The effect of mycorrhizal association on The effect of mycorrhizal association on seedling uptake of nitrate versus ammoniumseedling uptake of nitrate versus ammonium
2.2. The effect of mycorrhizal association on The effect of mycorrhizal association on nitrogennitrogenuptake by uptake by Eucalyptus canadulensisEucalyptus canadulensis
3.3. Mycorrhizal association improves nitrate but Mycorrhizal association improves nitrate but not ammonium uptake by not ammonium uptake by Eucalyptus Eucalyptus canadulensiscanadulensis
Literature CitedLiterature Cited Follow journal formatFollow journal format Errors cast doubt on the author’s Errors cast doubt on the author’s
attention to detail in researchattention to detail in research Bibliographic software helps Bibliographic software helps
prevent errors and saves timeprevent errors and saves time
If at first you get rejected,If at first you get rejected,
Try, try again!Try, try again!
http://www.esf.edu/for/faculty/http://www.esf.edu/for/faculty/yanai.htmyanai.htm
Reasons Not to Reasons Not to Change your QuestionChange your Question
You worked so hard on it. You pasted it in from your original research
proposal and haven’t read it since. It’s not historically true.
Save the original question for your autobiography. Your journal audience doesn’t care about your history. They want to know the importance of your findings.
