3. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate.

4. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.

5. As you can see in Figure 1, … Figure 1 shows …
Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
Present tense!
As you can see in Figure 1, …
Figure 1 shows …
The results for the average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna were summarized in Figure 1.

6. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The average percent change in heart rate for nicotine was much higher than that for caffeine (Fig. 1).
The application of 1% nicotine led to a large decrease in heart rate (Fig. 1).

7. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The average percent changes in heart rate of the Daphnia magna exposed to nicotine was much greater than the changes in heart rate experienced by the Daphnia exposed to caffeine and alcohol.

8. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The average percent change in heart rate of the Daphnia magna exposed to 1% nicotine was -35%, which was greater than the changes in heart rate recorded for the Daphnia exposed to 0.1% caffeine (-0.5%) and 4% alcohol (-21%) (Fig. 1).

9. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The standard deviations for the caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol data sets were 4.0%, 9.3%, and 8.2% respectively.
The error bars of the caffeine and nicotine data sets did not overlap, but those of the nicotine and alcohol data sets did.
The error bars of the nicotine and alcohol data sets overlap. Thus, these data are insignificant.

10. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The average percent change in heart rate of the Daphnia magna exposed to 1% nicotine was -35%, which was significantly greater than the change in heart rate recorded for the Daphnia exposed to 0.1% caffeine (-0.5%) (Fig. 1). The change in heart rate of the Daphnia when exposed to nicotine was also greater than the change recorded for these organisms when they were exposed to 4% alcohol (22%), but this difference was not significant (Fig. 1).

11. Figure 1. Average percent change in heart rate of Daphnia magna exposed to 0.1% caffeine, 1% nicotine, and 4% alcohol. Error bars are +/- 1 S.D.
The average percent change in heart rate of the Daphnia magna exposed to 1% nicotine was -35% (Fig. 1). Thus, nicotine decreased the heart rate of these organisms, a result that supports my hypothesis.
Caffeine slightly decreased (-0.5%) the heart rate of Daphnia magna (Fig. 1), which is opposite of its effects in other organisms.

12. Fig. 2. Average percent change in weight of Nereis virens placed in different salinities at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes.

13. Fig. 2. Average percent change in weight of Nereis virens placed in 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%, and 120% saltwater at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes.

14. Fig. 2. Average percent change in weight of Nereis virens placed in 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%, and 120% saltwater at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes.
The percent change in weight of the Nereis virens placed in 40%, 60%, and 80% saltwater increased steadily over the course of 90 minutes (Fig. 2).

15. Fig. 2. Percent change in weight of Nereis virens placed in 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%, and 120% saltwater at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes.
The percent change in weight of the Nereis virens placed in 40% saltwater increased from 6.7% to 26.2% over the course of 90 minutes. Similarly, the percent change in weight of the worms placed in 60% and 80% increased over the same time period (60%: 3.1% to 18.2%; 80%: 2.7% to 9.5%) (Fig. 2).

16. Results Just the facts – data
No interpretation or conclusions
Mention the organism used and its scientific name
Reference figures
(Fig. 1)
Figures must stand alone

17. Results Significance Non-overlap of error bars
Statistical tests – p values