For example, do you really think it is necessary to define systolic blood pressure if your readership consists of physicians or cardiovascular physiologists?Technical writing differs from the writing of fiction, opinion pieces, scholarly English papers, etc. One way is in the use of superlatives and subjective statements in order to emphasize a point. For example, in your discussion you might write, "We felt that the fixative was bad, because we had difficulty finding flagella on our Chlamydomonas." Another researcher is unlikely to risk time and resources on the basis of your "feeling." On the other hand, you might write, "The percentage of cells with flagella was inversely proportional to the time they spent in fixative, suggesting that the fixative was causing cells to shed flagella." This is information that another scientist can use.We found that protein synthesis in sea urchin embryos treated with actinomycin D was considerably less than in untreated embryos.
Please start your work early enough so that you can proofread it.
Check spelling of scientific names, names of people, names of compounds, etc.
Imagine the difficulty faced by a non-native speaker who learns proper English and then reads the local rag or tries to make sense out of reports by "talking heads" on new shows.
Incomplete sentences, redundant phrases, obvious misspellings, and other symptoms of a hurriedly-written paper can cost you.
With every new lab protocol, you folks come up with the darnedest ways of messing up a perfectly good paper.
However, if you heed the comments here your reports stand a much better chance of being mistaken for professionally written research papers.In some cases omission of anecdotal information is unfortunate.Papers in the older literature tend to be a lot more exciting and often more informative for those not 'in the know,' because the researcher could report how a conclusion was reached, including the reasoning and various sidetracks that led him/her to conclusions.Use present tense to describe generally accepted facts.We sought to determine if mating behavior in Xiphophorus helleri is related to male tail length by placing combinations of two male fish with different length tails in the same tank with a female fish.Publication costs are too high to permit printing of superfluous information. are not appropriate, nor is it appropriate to refer to "the lab." If you state facts or describe mechanisms, do so in order to make a point or to help interpret results, and do refer to the present study.If you find yourself writing everything you know about the subject, you are wasting your time (and that of your reader).On student papers, there is no reason at all to include direct quotes, except in the case when the student doesn't understand the concept and uses the quote to avoid having to explain it his/herself.Obviously, this doesn't go over too well with the grader.We simply do not use such writing styles in science. Superlatives include adjectives such as "huge," "incredible," "wonderful," "exciting," etc.For example, "the mitochondria showed an incredibly large increase in oxygen consumption when we added uncoupling agent." Your definition of incredible might be different from that of someone else - perhaps a five fold increase is incredible to you, but not for the next person.