Draft #6, week 5, Hofmann Chapter 13 cont.

Submitted by vvikhrev on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 10:35

- summarize experimental approach very briefly on your poster, you can talk more about it when you present
- maybe you could use a flowchart or schematic to display the experimental approach instead to make it more "visual" and easier to grasp than describing the approach in words
- the results section is the most important part of the poster
- most if not all of your findings should be presented in the form of figures and tables in a consistent order b/w your results and conclusion
- conclusions are usually brief, mention only 2-4 main points here
- if written as bullet points, these findings will be more visually pleasing than a whole paragraph of text!
- because all the figures and tables should be self-explanatory as well, make sure to include a legend and a title
- if possible, use graphics instead of tables
- if you need to emphasize things, use highlighting, circles, arrows, etc
- if you are going to present at a conference, you usually need to send in an abstract first that would be reviewed by a committee
- if your abstract is accepted, review THEIR poster guidelines before beginning the poster
- don't use the abstract that you sent them on your poster too, because the abstract that goes on your poster is much shorter
than the one you sent them
- when presenting, prepare a 5-10 minute talk, always be present at your poster, if you want, you can practice in front of other peers or professors
- use poster as a visual aid and not something to read off of!!!!!
- pg. 202 provides a sample poster that is well-designed and a checklist to follow on pg. 203

Draft #5, week 5, analysis of review article

Submitted by vvikhrev on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 10:20

This article comes from a book called "Forty Studies that Changed Psychology" and is found in chapter 1, reading 4. The article reviews a study done by E. J. Gibson (et al.) on depth perception and avoidance in very young children. It begins with an introduction that provides some background information. This essay isn't critiquing the research, instead, it is providing a summary of the purpose, methods, results, a conclusion, and some real-world applications. I believe that it has done a decent job of doing so. However, it would have been helpful to include some visuals from the research paper itself. This isn't a review article because it doesn't evaluate the "primary source" and doesn't include other sources to support their opinion. Instead, it's purpose is to convey a single piece of information that is most important for the reader and their context. For instance, if someone is trying to learn more about how humans understand depth perception, they would read a summary article such as this instead of the entire research paper. The reader should not cite this article if they were to write a review article, instead they should find the primary source and use that instead. This is because, the author of this article has summarized what they think is most important. I think this goes along with the reason why you would cite a research poster if you were to write a review article because it just provides an orverview of what the author thinks you should know the most.

The evolution of terrestrial birds

Submitted by drosen on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 07:07

Flight, the defining characteristic of birds, is typically only seen as an advantageous strength and I suspect this is related to human bias given it took our race thousands of years to achieve this feat through technology. However,  there are several species of birds that have appeared to sacrifice their ability to fly, yet they have retained similar vestiges in the from of their underdeveloped wings. This is suggestive that these birds did not struggle to every evolve flight, but instead, evolved flightlessness. Again, human bias may lead one to ask why this would ever occur as flying appears to be such a strong advantage. While true, flight is also associated with several costs including the high relegation of energy during wing development, the morphological trade offs necessary to have a body that can efficiently flight and the increased metabolic needs to sustain flight. In other words, for flight to be an advantage, the species in question must be able to achieve a net positive after factoring the massive expenses that are necessary.  This most often occurs on island settings with either low levels of predation or competition as well as in environments with open apex predatory niches. These roles require different developmental priorities to fully exploit resources they allow one to access.

Pavlischek on abortion p. 3

Submitted by liamharvey on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 05:39

-        Pavlischek’s Focus: Pavlischek states that his focus in his argument is on child abandonment and neglect. More specifically, Pavlischek focuses on child abandonment and neglect. He argues that a man should be able to opt out of child care if a woman has the free will to opt out of a pregnancy (342).

 

1.      Analysis of Thomson’s View: Pavlischek examines Thomson’s analogies in the context of his argument for male choice in parental care.

-        Violinist Example: Pavlischek refers to Thomson’s violinist example where a woman wakes up to find herself providing life support for a famous violinist against her will. Pavlischek then points out 5 major components of the pro-life argument. With the pro-life argument in context, Pavlischek points out that Thomson does agree that a fetus is a person from the moment of conception. However, with the violinist example, Pavlischek shows that Thomson does not agree that a person’s (fetus’s)r right to life outweighs a woman’s right to choice (343).

 

Methods Draft 1

Submitted by mkomtangi on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 02:15

The plant I chose to photograph was the Camellia-Japonica Debutante, I photographed this plant in the Durfee Conservatory located across from Morrill 4 and is open from 10am to 4pm, Monday through Friday. The plant can be found in the Bonsai-Camellia house towards the right side of the room facing the window. The flower is a singular white plant surrounded by bushels of leaves and soil, similar to the structure of a grown tree. The photo was taken at 2:36pm when the sun was at the highest point for the day casting a ray of light across the room, the photo was taken in portrait form, with my hand gracefully holding the flower stem to capture the flower in its wholeness. I also captured the name of the plant which is labeled below the plant on a bench-like structure. To capture the name, I held my phone camera sideways to capture more of a landscape portrait and I stood above the label getting a top view of the name to capture everything in one shot.

 

Abstract

Submitted by mrmoy on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 01:17

This experiment focuses on an essential part of any experiment being conducted: the methods section. In this particular experiment, students were tasked with creating a multipanel figure consisting of three pictures, one picture of the entire plant, a close-up of the flower, and a map of the origin of the species. A methods section would be written to describe how the multipanel figure was created. From there another student would follow the procedure and post a replicate multipanel figure. The overall results are pretty similar in the orientation of the individual figures. However, as expected there are some differences between the two figures. When writing a procedure everything should be described as clearly as possible, including time of day the picture was taken, the type of font being used, and the figure size.The differences found in this experiment show that every detail is crucial and essential when describing how a procedure should be replicated.

 

results draft 3

Submitted by mrmoy on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 00:44

In figure 1B, the scale shows the width and length of the flower, with a width of 2.5 inches. In figure 2B, the scale only shows the width of the flower, which had a width of 3.8 inches. The center of the flower in figure 1B also is pointing downwards, while in figure 2B the center of the flower is pointing upright and towards the camera. The flower in figure 2A appears smaller and has less layers of petals than the flower shown in figure 2B. In figure 1C, the map is smaller than the map shown in figure 2C. The upper half of the map and lower half of the map shows more of Antarctica and Greenland in figure 2C.

 

Results draft

Submitted by jonathanrubi on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 00:27

DIfferences were observed between the original figure and the figure replicated by following the given methods. Structural differences between the two figures were noted. In the replicated figure, there was no blank white space in between the separate panels, which was seen in the original figure. The letters labeling the different panels (A,B,and C) in the replicated figure are slightly larger and bolder as well as above and below the panels as opposed to on the sides. Differences were also seen between the content of the panels in the figure. In terms of differences in angles and distances of the panels, the flower shown in panel A of the replicated figure encompasses a larger surface area of the plant and is taken from a position lower and further to the right. The color of the flower in the replicate figure is also beige and appears to be more creased and drier as opposed to the yellow and pink flower color in the original. In panel b of replicated the replicated figure, more plants and pots are present in the background of the photo than the original. Also, the photograph was taken from an angle further to the right than the original. One of the flowers is also completely wilted and the two large leaves protruding from the stem of the plant appear to be resting at a lower angle and a lighter tinge of green than in the original figure. Panel C of the replicated figure does not include Brazil, Peru, and Bolivia as native countries of the Rhyncattleanthe Momilani species, while the original figure does.

results draft 2

Submitted by mrmoy on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 00:24

In figure 1A, the picture of the entire plant, is a plant that has multiple branches stemming from the bottom of the plant and has many pink flowers on its leaves. In figure 2A, however, the plant has less branches that are visible and it does not have any pink flowers on its leaves. Also in figure 1A, the scale is shown as a blue line segment. In figure 2A, the scale is shown as a light green bracket. Figure 2A is also less clear and seems to have a noticeable glare on the top left. Lastly, the picture in figure 1A does not show the pot the plant is in and cuts off where the trunk of the plant ends. In figure 2A, the picture shows the pot the plant is in.

Methods Introduction

Submitted by jonathanrubi on Fri, 02/23/2018 - 00:24

The Methods section of a scientific paper allows for the reproduction and verification of any given experiment. In order to do so, a carefully thought out narrative must be developed with clear explanation of materials and subjects, as well as experimental design including variables and controls and procedure. In this study we examined how to write an accurate methods section by having a peer follow a set of methods detailing the construction of a figure and subsequently comparing the two figure in order to determine the clarity and accuracy of the provided methods section.  Our findings show that small details, variables and controls not accounted for in the methods section of a paper can lead to deviations in the reproducibility of a given experiment. This is important for any scientific paper and provides it with legitimacy.

 

Pages

Subscribe to Writing in Biology RSS