I am usually pretty verbose in my writing. I am finding it hard to quite understand all the points that the book makes about how a great scientific paper is created. I want to remember that this is not a list of instructions but just me recording the process I undertook to get my particular results.
It looks redundant and boring to start each sentence with "I". I am finding it difficult to use words to start the sentences. I am struggling with over thinking the draft of my paper. This is most notable with panel D, as the map used had to be stretched in the original, but appears to have been fine for use in the replicate. If the photos were not taken or imported with the same dimensions and resolution, then compression, stretching, or other quality issues may have occurred. Some compositional errors may have occurred due to the differences in the camera’s used. I had not given much thought to the equipment used to take the photo, or the objects used in the photos. The large contributing factor was likely due to the difference in equipment available.
Control spacing on a multipanel figure how to#
This is caused by an unforeseen interpretation of how to keep the hand out of the photo. The hand is also under the card as opposed to gripping the edge.
Control spacing on a multipanel figure full#
This shifted the photo to allow the full view of the card. In panel C the frame of the photo has shifted slightly, which was likely due not specifying only the edge of the reference card was visible. The ring and pinky finger were not specified, and were not close to the original position in the photo, as well as how much of the hand was present and what angle it was at. In panel A the parts of the hand that were specified were close to the positions in the original photo. Most other differences were likely caused by issues with specificity and clarity of the directions. As the photographs are the main component of the figure, the destruction of the experimental area caused differences over a much larger area of the total figure. This destroyed the integrity of the weed changing elements such as the neighboring uninfected leaves, the color of the weed as it lay dying, and total viewing area of the weed which originally obscured the environment behind it. The hose was likely dragged to whatever location it was used in, and was likely pulled over the weed. The weed was located in the center of a loosely coiled garden hose. The most notable change in the recreation is the health of the plant, and the background of the experimental area. The boxes are much smaller, however, it is likely that either one box was used and quartered, which would be consistent with the letter size change and still look pleasing aesthetically, or that a different unit was used. While the lettering boxes were smaller, with smaller lettering, the size of the lettering was incorrectly specified at 25% of the original value. The figure was recreated in a similar manner with three minor differences, however, the differences were largely caused by an error in documentation rather than the interpretation of the reader. The most detailed section of the methods was creation of the overall figure, and very specific elements of certain panels. It appeared that while specificity was important, the careful construction and preservation of the experiment, and experimental area, was far more important. The replicate figure was an interesting blend of similarity and differences. The number and focus of the photos that are to be taken. The factors I considered in trying to facilitate the recreation were the location of the specimen, the appearance of the plant. The factors I sought to control in writing my methods were the size and location of the photos, the spacing between the photos, drawing the eye to certain aspects of the multipanel figure with arrows and labeling with letters. My thinking behind selecting it was that there weren’t a ton of other specimens around. The subject is a leaf that has been molested by leafminer activity. Write a scientific report (probably leave this part out.īrief overview of subject selected. Have someone reconstruct what you did to recreate that multipanel figure and create a similar imageįind the differences between the two images and speculate on what caused them To recreate a multipanel figure of a leaf that has been eaten by a leafminer I wanted to see how easy it might be to have someone create a multipanel figure showing that they had found tracks from a leafminer. These brown tracks make it easier for people to find where there has been leafminer activity. Leafminers are known to leave distinguishing marks on the host leaf. These insect larvae survive by burrowing within the leaf feeding on mesophyll. This foliage can serve as a host to new life. Birds are singing, flowers blooming and trees produce new foliage.
During the spring and summer months new life begins all around us.
0 kommentar(er)
