Hello there,Can you write (1-2) pages introduction and abstract for allopathic effects of pH in root length of germinated seeds experiment? Please use the anatomy of research paper and Pechenik (the other file) as guide. The method section and the references that you can use is in plant experiment file.
plant_experiment.docx
16_branson_2004_anatomy_of_a_research_paper__2_.pdf
a_guide_to_writing_research_reports_in_biology_general_rules__1_.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Alternate Hypothesis: If the pH of the sunflower extract is high (above 7) than less sunflower
seeds will germinate, and root lengths will be shorter.
Null Hypothesis: If pH level is altered than the germination rates and root lengths will not be
affected.
Materials: 14 Petri Dishes, 140 sunflower seeds, 5 fully grown sunflowers, pH tablets, 2 sets of
a Mortar and Pestle, Cheese Cloth, 40 filter paper, 4 jars to hold extracts, 5mL pipette and pipette
tips, light source, and a Caliper.
Techniques: Observing allelopathic effects of pH by measuring root length of germinated seeds
Methods Draft
Creating the Extract
To commence the experiment, the necessary materials were gathered. A total of 60
sunflower petals were used to create a sunflower extract. The sunflower petals were placed into a
mortar. Two hundred mL of distilled water was poured into the mortar. A pestle was used to
grind the sunflower leaves until the water changed its color to the same tint of the leaves. A clean
beaker was obtained, and a piece of cheesecloth was placed over the beaker. The extract was
poured from the mortar into the cheesecloth, so it was filtered into the beaker. This beaker was
then labeled “sunflower leaf extract” and set aside. The process was then repeated two more
times. One of the two new beakers was then labeled “acidic sunflower extract” and an acidic
capsule was opened and poured into the beaker and was mixed until it was dissolved. Then it was
set aside. The second of the two was then labeled “basic sunflower extract” and a basic pH
capsule was opened and poured into the beaker and was mixed until it was dissolved.
Setting Up the Petri Dishes
Twelve clean petri dishes were obtained. Three pieces of filter paper were spread across
the bottom of each petri dish. Twenty-eight lettuce seeds were placed within each of the twelve
petri dishes. Three of the 12 petri dishes were labeled “distilled water.” Another three were
labeled “sunflower extract.” Three more were labeled “acidic sunflower extract” and the last
three petri dishes were labeled “basic sunflower extract.”
Moistening the Petri Dishes
Using a clean pipette each time, five mL of each extract was placed into the
corresponding petri dishes. Each dish was moistened until the filter paper looked damp and all
seeds seemed to be covered with their assigned extracts.
Setting up for weekly Observation
Once all the twelve petri dishes were moistened with the correct extracts, they were then
place under a light where they were left to grow for one week. Four jars with lids were then
labeled “distilled water,” “sunflower extract,” “acidic sunflower extract,” and “basic sunflower
extract.” The excess extracts were then poured into their corresponding jars and put away in a
refrigerator for preservation. They were preserved for future watering through the week.
Data Analysis
The lettuce seeds were observed each day of the week and watered with the correct
extracts when necessary. Each day the number of seeds germinated in each dish was recorded
along with the condition of each plant. At the conclusion of the week, the root lengths of all
germinated seeds were measured and recorded. The lab was repeated one more week for more
data.
References:
Bower, D., Morgan, D., Phillips, K., & Roeth, B. (2005, May 20). The Effect of pH on the
Growth of Green Beans. Retrieved from
http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/nsfall05/LabpacketArticles/TheEffectofpHontheGrotwh
o.html
–
We were able to look at how another lab did a similar experiment with green beans. We
saw their thought process and their steps taken. Low pH values could create a nutrient
deficiency in the cells and could cause the plants to die.
Sripad, G., Prakash, V., & Narasing, M. S. (1982, June). Extractability of polyphenols of
sunflower seed in various solvents[Scholarly project].
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02702723#citeasv
–
We were able to see that there is a chemical called chlorogenic acid in sunflower seed
that helps to regulate pH values. This chemical can be extracted from the sunflower seed
with the assistance of another chemical.
Perry, L. (2003). PH for the Garden. Retrieved from http://pss.uvm.edu/ppp/pubs/oh34.htm
–
From this article the author posted several different pH of the soil of surrounding plants.
This can be used to compare natural soil type.
Raya-Díaz, S., Quesada-Moraga, E., Barrón, V., Campillo, M., & Sánchez-Rodríguez, A.
[email protected]. e. (2017). Redefining the dose of the entomopathogenic fungus
Metarhizium brunneum (Ascomycota, Hypocreales) to increase Fe bioavailability and
promote plant growth in calcareous and sandy soils. Plant & Soil, 418(1/2), 387–404.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-017-3303-0
–
They added different doses of EF and tested the affects on sunflower growth but also
found that it affected the pH levels in the sunflower.
Lasa, B., Frechilla, S., Aleu, M., González-Moro, B., Lamsfus, C., & Aparicio-Tejo, P. M.
(2000). Effects of low and high levels of magnesium on the response of sunflower plants
grown with ammonium and nitrate(1-2 ed., Vol. 225, Rep.). Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1026568329860
–
This focuses on the effect of different levels of magnesium on plants. This will help us
compare the effects of other chemicals that affect pH level in sunflowers.
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf049612j
–
A study on how heat and pH work hand and hand to affect growth on the sunflower.
https://homeguides.sfgate.com/ph-affect-plants-49986.html
–
How pH levels normally affect plants. It can affect the plants ability to absorb nutrients.
http://plantsinmotion.bio.indiana.edu/plantmotion/earlygrowth/germination/sunflower/sun.html
–
Video on seed germination (maybe for presentation)
Anatomy of a Research Paper
Richard D Branson MSc RRT FAARC
Introduction
The Title Page
The Title
Authors
Key Words
Corresponding Author
Financial and Equipment Support
Conflicts of Interest
The Abstract
The Introduction Section
The Methods Section
Subjects
Equipment
Interventions or Study Procedures
Data Analysis
The Results Section
The Discussion Section
The Conclusions Section
Acknowledgements
Summary
Writing, editing, and publishing the paper is the last step in the research process. The paper
tells the story of the project from inception, through the data-collection process, statistical
analysis, and discussion of the results. Novice authors often struggle with writing and often find
themselves with either nothing on paper or a weighty version of random thoughts. The process
of writing the paper should be analogous to the research process. This article describes and
provides a template for the essential sections and features of a scientific report (structured abstract,
introduction, hypothesis, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions), describes authorship guidelines that have been established by professional societies, and discusses the importance of adequate
and correct references. Key words: research; scientific method; writing; publication; manuscripts,
medical. [Respir Care 2004;49(10):1222–1228. © 2004 Daedalus Enterprises]
Introduction
Writing is a skill born from practice. The first step to
becoming a good writer is becoming an avid and careful
Richard D Branson MSc RRT FAARC is affiliated with the Department
of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Richard D Branson MSc RRT FAARC presented a version of this article
at the RESPIRATORY CARE Journal symposium, “Anatomy of a Research
1222
reader. A researcher’s early experiments in writing should
include multiple rewrites, with constructive criticism from
a mentor. Imitating a writing style that feels comfortable
Paper: Science Writing 101” at the 48th International Respiratory Congress, held October 5–8, 2002, in Tampa, Florida.
Correspondence: Richard D Branson MSc RRT FAARC, Department of
Surgery, University of Cincinnati, 231 Albert Sabin Way, ML #0558,
Cincinnati OH 45267-0558. E-mail: [email protected].
RESPIRATORY CARE • OCTOBER 2004 VOL 49 NO 10
ANATOMY
OF A
and reaches your intended audience may be a good way to
begin.
Publishing a paper is the logical result of any research
project. After all the effort required for design, implementation, data collection, and data analysis, publication is the
crucial end point. Publishing serves to share important
information with the scientific community and results in
personal satisfaction and professional advancement. An
author who routinely submits only abstracts without follow-up publication is revealing either a lack of commitment or lack of confidence in study design or results.
An important part of the publication process is scrutiny
of the design, methods, data collection, and statistical analysis used in the study. Careful review of the study leads
the investigator to discover flaws in the process and clarify
the original thought process. It is better to identify shortcomings yourself than to have them pointed out for you by
a peer-reviewer pre-publication or in a letter to the editor
post-publication.
The mechanics of writing a paper are typically spelled
out by each individual journal. RESPIRATORY CARE offers an
author’s guide online.1 In addition to helping authors meet
the journal’s formatting requirements, the author’s guide
also serves as a rough outline for the paper. Using an
outline to write a paper may seem like an undergraduate
exercise, but the outline is an important tool for organizing
your thoughts.
This article describes the anatomy of a research paper,
discusses common mistakes, reviews some science-writing rules, and provides some science-writing tips.
The Title Page
The Title
A good title is important for several reasons. The title
alerts the reader to the topic of your paper. A well written
or phrased title creates curiosity and draws readers to investigate the substance of your paper. However, the main
function of the title is to describe your research. Titles
should describe the research succinctly; long titles provide
no advantage. The title should avoid overstating what resides within and of course should avoid marketing themes.
As with any part of the research paper, research and
read other titles on a similar topic. Make note of the wording, length, and syntax. Be specific! The title should let the
reader know if your paper is a human, animal, or bench
study. As an example, if your title is “Moisture Output of
2 Humidification Systems,” it is incomplete. Give more
information; for example, “Moisture Output of 2 Humidification Systems for Use With Mechanically Ventilated
Patients,” or “Comparison of the Moisture Output of 2
Humidification Systems With a Lung Model.” The title
RESPIRATORY CARE • OCTOBER 2004 VOL 49 NO 10
RESEARCH PAPER
tells the reader what to expect in the paper and thus whether
the paper really pertains to his literature-search. If you are
looking for data on humidification studies with mechanically ventilated patients, the first title is more germane to
your topic. Respect the reader: briefly, but clearly, explain
the paper’s content in the title.
Authors
It may seem self-evident who the authors of a paper are,
but authorship has become an issue of concern in recent
years.2–10 Part of the issue is the complexity of medicine
and technology; completing a research project often requires experts from several fields. Research across disciplines has become a funding priority and also leads to
one paper having numerous authors. Unfortunately, politics also appears to play a major role.
In 1997 the International Committee of Medical Editors
published guidelines for authorship,11 which were recently
extensively revised:
Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial
contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data;
2) drafting the article or revising it critically for
important intellectual content; and 3) final approval
of the version to be published. Authors should meet
conditions 1, 2, and 3.
Interestingly, Durack found that 98% of papers published in the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal (predecessor of The New England Journal of Medicine) had
only one author. This contrasts sharply with today’s statistics, wherein only 5% of papers have only one author.2
The original articles section of The New England Journal
of Medicine averages 6 authors per article.3
Huth5 provided authorship guidelines that are based on
the contribution of the individual investigators. In that
system individuals responsible for data collection are not
justifiable authors. Many respiratory therapists begin their
forays into research as data collectors, and this can be the
start of a publishing career. Individuals who collect data
can earn authorship by participating in one of the other 4
activities in the aforementioned guidelines. Table 1
describes the principles and rationale for authorship.
From a practical standpoint, most papers are written by
1 or 2 primary authors. The remaining authors have reviewed the work and/or aided in study design or data
analysis. Frequently, other members of a research group
are included as authors because of their positions and the
pressure to publish in pursuit of promotion and tenure. It
is a good habit to agree to authorship only if you have met
1223
ANATOMY
Table 1.
OF A
RESEARCH PAPER
Principles and Rationale for Authorship
Principle
1. Each author must have participated sufficiently in the
research represented by the report to take public
responsibility for the content.
2. Participation must include 3 steps: (1) conception or design
of the research and/or analysis and interpretation of the data;
(2) drafting the report or revising it for critically important
content; and (3) final approval of the published version.
3. Participation solely in the collection of data (or other
evidence) does not justify authorship.
4. Each part of the report that is critical to its main conclusions
and each step in the research that led to its publication must
be attributable to at least one author.
5. Persons who have contributed intellectually to the report but
whose contribution does not justify authorship may be named
in the acknowledgements section and their contributions
described. You must obtain permission from persons you
wish to mention in the acknowledgements section.
Rationale
An author must be able to defend the content of the report, including the data
and other evidence and the conclusions based on them. The author must also
be willing to publicly concede errors of fact or interpretation discovered after
publication of the report and state the reason for the error.
Authors cannot publicly defend the intellectual content of the report unless they
understand its origins (conception) and can testify to the validity of its
argument (critical analysis of evidence). Authors must have sufficient
involvement in writing the report to be able to defend it as an accurate report
of the research that led to it.
Data and other evidence may be gathered by persons who know little or nothing
of the steps critical to the main intellectual substance. Such persons cannot
take public responsibility for the main elements of a report; they could testify
only to the validity of elements of evidence and not to how those elements
support the report’s arguments and conclusions. Persons for whom authorship
is not justified may be named in the report’s acknowledgements section.
Each element of the report that is vital to its conclusions must be publicly
defensible or the report’s validity is open to question. Therefore, the
authorship of a report must include one or more persons able to defend any of
its critical vital elements.
Unless solely responsible for all the report represents, authors should indicate
who provided intellectual assistance and the nature of that assistance.
Technical assistance includes building equipment, collecting data, locating and
abstracting literature, and work in preparing the manuscript that is not
intellectual work on its scientific content.
(Adapted from Reference 4)
the principles in Table 1. It is also a good habit to ask only
co-authors who have met those standards.
Determining the order in which to list the authors may
be simple or complex.6 Generally speaking, the individual
responsible for the majority of the work is the first author.
Authors are then listed in order of contribution. The exception to that rule is the last author listed; in many instances the senior author is listed last. The senior author is
often the most experienced member of the group, the administrative leader, and/or the person who directs or is
responsible for funding at the facility where the research
was done.
Key Words
The key words cannot be picked simply at the author’s
discretion; instead, they must be terms that appear in the
National Library of Medicine’s list of Medical Subject
Headings (at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/MBrowser.html).
However, in the near future it is likely that few journals
will list key words, because when conducting a MEDLINE
literature search, it is necessary to search all fields (ie, the
titles, abstracts, journal names, journal volumes/numbers/
page numbers) in order not to miss documents of interest,
and since (1) all the key words appear in the title and
1224
abstract and (2) the Medical Subject Headings list is very
incomplete, the key words are superfluous.
Corresponding Author
The title page should give the full name and affiliation
of each author and specify which is the corresponding
author; the corresponding author is the primary contact for
the journal’s editorial office and the contact person for
individuals who have questions about the research. If the
corresponding author is at a hospital or an academic institution, list his or her full name (including middle initial),
professional or postgraduate degree (eg, “MD”), title, department, hospital, university (if applicable), mailing address, telephone number, assistant’s name and telephone
number, facsimile number, pager number, and e-mail address. If the corresponding author is at a company, list his
or her full name (including middle initial), professional or
postgraduate degree (eg, “MD”), title, department (if applicable), company name, mailing address, telephone number, assistant’s name and telephone number, facsimile number, pager number, and e-mail address.
Financial and Equipment Support
The title page should also list specific information about
organizations, agencies, or companies that supported the
RESPIRATORY CARE • OCTOBER 2004 VOL 49 NO 10
ANATOMY
OF A
research, either financially or by providing equipment, services, or personnel. If the research was supported by a
grant, give the grant number.
Conflicts of Interest
The title page should also list and explain conflicts of
interest. The most common conflict of interest is that
one of the authors has a financial affiliation with a
company that produces one of the products tested or
discussed in the research. Explicitly state any affiliations or interests that could be perceived as creating a
conflict of interest. However, if there are no such affiliations or interests, there is no need to include a general
statement of “innocence” such as, “The authors have no
financial affiliation with any of the organizations or
products mentioned in this report.”
The Abstract
Nearly all journals require that research papers include
abstracts. The abstract appears following the title page.
Recently, the structured abstract (ie, an abstract that has 5
sections: introduction, objective, methods, results, and conclusions) has become the standard for most research articles (whereas reviews, case reports, and certain other types
of special articles have nonstructured abstracts). The abstract must accurately reflect the content of the pa …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
