You are here

Leaf observation revised

Submitted by kheredia on Fri, 09/06/2019 - 15:24

In class, a green, unidentified compound leaf was given to each participant. With 3 rounded leaflets in total, two protuded in opposite directions, and the third sat vertically in the same direction as the red stem that connected them. All three were small and asymmetrical, with wavy margins and felt mostly smooth. Looking closely at the flat surface, one would notice the yellow veins and scaly etchings that coursed throughout the leaflets. Despite the beauty, there were some signs of decay marked by the brown spots and squiggles that ravaged the plant. Even with the imperfections, it seemingly did not hinder the plant's ability to produce a pleasant, earthy stench.



I don't think in scientific writing we are supposed to use words like "seemingly" or talk about "beauty." These are opinion based words and we are supposed to be writing analytically. It's something I struggle with too!

Not very important, but stench is associated with a bad smell, so it doesn't work with the description of the scent as 'pleasant.' The descriptions are very nice but a bit informal for a scientific description (words like squiggle and ravage)

In your second sentence, I think using 'sat' attributes some personification to your subject matter. I think using 'was positioned' or something along those lines would be better for scientific writing.