Points to consider when selecting best table/chart/graph

Clear title
Limit total items/columns
Minimum decimal place
No vertical lines
Do not overload with headings
Use captions/footnotes for definitions
Do not leave data empty, write NA

Example of badly presented table

Table 4.1: Species of Sarcophagidae flies

Number of flies
Sampling time
(MeanSE)
Total
MeanS Morning
Evening
E
Sarcopha 35
5.832. 7.674.6 4.001.5
ga dux
33a
3a
3abc
Sarcopha 30
51.84a 6.673.5 3.331.3
gaprince
2ab
3abc
ps
Sarcopha 15
2.51.1 4.001.7 11.00bc
gamisera
8ab
3abc
Sarcopha 15
2.51.1 4.002.0 1.000.5
gataenio
2ab
8abc
8bc
nota
Amobiae
0.000b 0.000.0 0.330.3
rythrura
0c
3bc
Species

How to improve this

table?

1.

Example of badly presented graph

250

How to improve this

graph?

200
150
100
Mean number

1.

50
0

Figure 4.1: The mean number of flies

Points to consider for methods and materials

Must answer "What did you do? and How did you do it?.
Describe the materials used in the study and how they were prepared
Describe the research protocol in a logical order.
Explain how measurements were made and what calculations were
performed
State which statistical tests were done to analyze the data
The writing should be direct and precise and in the past tense.
Compound sentence structures should be avoided, as well as descriptions
of unimportant details.
If you have used well known methods, just give their reference, but if any
changes were made, then these should be explained.

For human study : Describe the basic demographic profile of the sample
population, including age, gender, and possibly the racial composition of
the sample. The selection criteria and rationale for enrolling subjects into
the study must be stated explicitly
For animals : list species, weight, strain, sex, and age.
For Plants and other species, use accepted taxonomical nomenclature
and write them always in italics
For chemicals, use the conventions of the International Union of Pure and
Applied Chemistry and the official recommendations of the IUPACIUB
Combined Commission on Biochemical Nomenclature
For survey and agronomy/breeding : Description of site

Bad example of materials and method

In preparing the catecholase extract, a

potato was skinned, washed, and diced.
30.0 g of the diced potato and 150 ml of
distilled water were added to a kitchen
blender and blended for approximately two
minutes. The resulting solution was filtered
through four layers of cheese cloth. The
extract was stored in a clean, capped
container.

How can the above materials and

method be improved?

1.

labeled

Four
individually
spectrophotometer tubes were prepared
using different amounts (as represented in
Table 1) of the following reagents: a buffer of
pH 7, a 0.1% catechol substrate, and
distilled water. The wavelength of the
Spectronic 20 spectrophotometer was
set at 540 nm. To calibrate the
specrophotometer at zero absorbance, a
blank control tube prepared with no catechol
substrate and labeled "tube 1" was
inverted
and
inserted
into
the
spectrophotometer.

..

3
It is important to note that the extract to
be tested was added to each tube ..
immediately before placing the tube into the
spectrophotometer. 1.0 ml of catecholase
extract was pipetted into tube 2. Tube 2 was
immediately inverted and placed in the
spectrophotometer. The absorbance was
read and recorded for time zero (t0),
the ten minute mark (t10), and each minute
in between. Tube 2 was removed from the
spectrophotometer
and
the
same
measurements were taken for tube 3 and
tube 4 using the same protocol.

..

Results and discussion

Last Exercise
You will receive copies of previously published papers. Analyse these papers,
looking at each with the following questions in mind:

Does the paper report new, significant and innovative work?

Is the title accurate and informative?
Does an introduction describe the background and objectives of the work?
Are the methods explained clearly enough for reader to repeat the work?
Are the results valid and properly presented and described?
Is any criticism or review well though out , supported and researched?
Do any parts of the paper need to be shortened or lengthened?
Is the paper adequately referenced?
Are all figures, tables and photographs necessary?
Can the paper be improved in any other way?

Can the paper be:

Accepted as it stands?
Accepted conditional on recommended revisions? if so, list the revisions
Submitted for reconsiderationafter recommended revisions?
Rejected?