1. Suggestions for better papers What the judges look for in a paper Why judges reject papers

2. Suggestions for better papers What the judges look for in a paper: 1.Objectives that are clearly stated in the introduction 2. Concise methods that are logical and free from jargon 3.Results that relate to the objectives 4.Conclusions that are justified by the results

3. Organization Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion Conclusion

4. Introduction Include some background State your objectives Explain why the research is important If your research is similar to something published, explain how your work is different We often reject papers that are “copies” of published work

5. Materials and Methods Should be a logical description of what you did Make sure that a lay person would understand your methods Explain how your methods will allow you to meet your objectives Do not list materials used in your project

6. Results The most important section of your paper (and your presentation) Should be easy to interpret by all judges Emphasize the important points of your results (don’t make us guess)

7. Results: Figures Usually better than tables Make sure that figures can stand alone Make sure that the figures clearly indicate something important Each figure should be referenced in the text of your results

8. Discussion and Conclusion Should relate to the objectives stated in the introduction Should be clearly tied to your results and should not go beyond your data

9. Why judges reject papers Literature searches Work that is a repeat of something published and does not expand beyond the original work Poor study design If we cannot interpret your results If we do not understand what the figures are supposed to indicate

10. Problems in Study Design Sample size insufficient to indicate a trend Samples insufficiently distributed on the x-axis Samples should usually be randomly drawn and independent of one another

11. Not enough data to indicate a trend

12. Sample insufficiently distributed on the x-axis r 2 =0.78, F 1,4 =6.07, P=0.032

13. Balanced Linear Regression r 2 =0.89, F 1,38 =389, P=0.000

14. Sample insufficient across the x-axis r 2 =0.01, F 1,38 =.07, P=0.841

15. Independent Samples?

16. When are non-independent samples are OK? Multiple measurements on an individual to track a response Before and after measurements on subjects Can be dealt with statistically (repeated measures ANOVA or paired t-tests)

17. Statistical outliers What do we do with outliers? Do nothing when you can’t justify deleting In regression, conduct “robust regression” Delete if you can justify

18. Examples from previous speakers To illustrate some common problems

22. Rule 2: Avoid Jargon and be careful with abbreviations

24. (pos 173) (neg 11) (neu. 6647)

25. Radical scavenging activity (µ mole Trolox/mg dry leaf powder) and total polyphenol (g/100 g dry leaf powder) in the leaves of 60 sweetpotato genotypes High polyphenol accumulators Medium polyphenol accumulator Low pp accumulators Low PP accumulators

26. Linear correlations between the total polyphenol contents (g/100g dry matter) and radical scavenging activities (RSA;  mol Trolox/g DM) of sweet potato leaves

27. Photomicrographs A and B show crystals produced by 500 µM melamine and 500 µM cyanuric acid in H 2 0 (sample 11), at 400X magnification and 40X magnification, respectively. Photomicrographs C and D show crystals produced by 500 µM melamine and 500 µM cyanuric acid in artificial urine (Sample 6), at 400X magnification and 40X magnification, respectively.

28. Trial #3 Samples Solution Weight (in grams)Visible Pellet Pellet Weight (in grams) 10.8460Non/d 20.6832Non/d 31.0030No0.0021 40.9370No0.0033 51.0130No0.0029 60.8990Yes0.0136 70.9972No0.0100 80.8131No0.0001 90.7569No0.0055 101.0275No0.0010 111.0025Yes0.0016 Pellet weights for Trial 3 samples