In Summer of 2019, as part of a Junior level scientific writing class, I conducted a project to assess my skills in communicating scientific information to a fellow student. I created a multipanel figure of leafminer activity and another student recreated the multipanel figure by following my METHODS section. The differences were catalogued in my DISCUSSION section.
I am still feeling somewhat unclear about how to go about writing our scientific proposal. I feel like this stuff is almost too vague to me. I don't know why writing has become such a chore for me. Maybe it is just because more is expected of us now. This is no longer ENG 101. I guess I tend to freeze up when stuff isn't easy. I am looking forward to collecting the data and using the software program to make sense of it all. I liked how the panel of graphs we created in class worked. It was interesting to see the arrangement of the axes. I am not as crazy about the topic of leafminers. I hate bugs and have no interest in them. But we were given choices as to what we wanted to do. So it's my own fault that this is what my proposal will be about. I am very glad to have a group to collaborate with though! That is such a good help. I am also interested in revisiting stats again in a more concrete and useful situation. When I took that class, so much of it was theoretical.
I am feeling overwhelmed about figuring out how to revise my rough draft of the methods paper. I always used to feel like I was a fairly decent writer but I no longer feel that way. This reminds me of my class I took for ENG 112 at GCC. There was a paper that I had to write about a story that I wasn't that into. I was allowed to redo one paper. The first time around that I did my paper I got a C as my grade. This was after getting solid A's in my last english course so I was surprised to get such a lackluster grade. But not the end of the world. I just redid and resubmitted the paper. Well I also got a C on my second time around and it was very frustrating to me. The professor had very high expectations. My following grades were better but I still didn't see an A. The last writing assignment also included doing some research. I spent DAYS going over this paper. Much of that time was spent sitting paralyzed at my computer trying to figure out where to begin or how to get my point across. The professor looked at my rough draft and said,"Yes!! This is exactly the kind of work I am looking for!". Well it was good to know that there was a way to impress this guy! But the time I needed to perfect that paper was out of the scope of what is usually doable for me. I don't think I am going to be able to make this Methods paper what it needs to be. I actually hate writing classes at this point although I do see their value and the reasons why I need to do them. But math and physics so much more straightforward. I think I prefer that.
INTRODUCTION
Leafminer tracks appear as white or brown stria on plant vegetation. They can take on a swirled or drizzled appearance. These stria are from the leafminer burrowing inside the leaf. The leafminer eats the mesophyll within the leaf and eventually exits to pupate. This makes the leafminer larvae less susceptible to being eaten by animals that might just pluck the leafminer from the surface of the leaf. The purpose of this project was to create a multipanel figure of a leaf specimen that had been affected by leafminer activity and to create a METHODS section that another student or person could follow in order to recreate the same multipanel figure.
During the spring and summer months new life begins all around us. Birds are singing, flowers blooming and trees produce new foliage. This foliage can serve as a host to new life. One such lifeform is the leafminer. These insect larvae survive by burrowing within the leaf feeding on mesophyll. Leafminers are known to leave distinguishing marks on the host leaf. These brown tracks make it easier for people to find where there has been leafminer activity. 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.
Goals of METHODS project:
To recreate a multipanel figure of a leaf that has been eaten by a leafminer
Have someone reconstruct what you did to recreate that multipanel figure and create a similar image
Find the differences between the two images and speculate on what caused them
Write a scientific report (probably leave this part out.
Brief overview of subject selected. Explain what it is.
The subject is a leaf that has been molested by leafminer activity. My thinking behind selecting it was that there weren’t a ton of other specimens around. 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.
The factors I considered in trying to facilitate the recreation were the location of the specimen, the appearance of the plant. The number and focus of the photos that are to be taken.
I am struggling with over thinking the draft of my paper. I am finding it difficult to use words to start the sentences. It looks redundant and boring to start each sentence with "I". 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. I am finding it hard to quite understand all the points that the book makes about how a great scientific paper is created. I am usually pretty verbose in my writing. I feel like writing is kind of like painting a pretty picture with words so this is much different to me. I am also trying to avoid using extra scientific or intelligent sounding words. I want so badly to say "utilize" rather than "use". I guess perhaps I feel like my content isn't 'sciencie' enough. I kind of relate these methods to what I learned in a class years ago in elementary school about good journalism. That you simply report your findings and leave all the other shit out of it. Science has been more zen than I ever anticipated. Just observe and report, Stefanie.
For the in-class activity I have researched how to submit a manuscrpt to Advanced Robotics. The first thing that stuck out to me was that it must be an original work that you submit. It can not be under consideration, peer review, or accepted for publication or publsihed by another journal. There are also limits on word counts. An abstract must be included in written as well as image form. You must use consistent spelling. Single rather than double quotation marks should be used. No changes can be made to the submission unless there is an approval for a co-author. The manuscript must have author details. Up to 5 key words must be included to make the manuscript easier to find for interested parties. There must be funding details included. A biographical note shoould be included for each author. Must include supplemental online material. Figures, tables, equations, and units are required. You must pay for colored figures.
Using labels can make a multipanel figure easier to follow. I selected the text tool to mark each panel of the figure with a letter. Using the letter 'a', I created a label for the first panel in my figure. To create labels 'b' through 'd', copy and paste were used next. A font size of 144 was used to make my labels visible on my panels. I used the fill and stroke tool to create a black outline around each letter. The internal color was white. Starting in the upper left corner, I labeled each photo 'a' through 'd' moving in a clockwise direction. I positioned each letter flush with the corner and used the shift and arrow keys to move them two spaces to the right and two spaces down.
Differences Between Two Multipanel Figure:
My first observation between the two different multipanel figures is the arrangement of the photos. In my multipanel figure, the image of the entire plant is in the upper left hand corner. In the recreation, the image of the entire plant is on the right. Photo A represented my entire plant in my multipanel figure. In the recreation photo B is the whole plant.
I am also observing that the placement of the arrow is different in both multipanel figures. The arrow in my multipanel figure is pointing to the affected leaf in relation to the entire plant in photo A. In the recreation, photo B, the arrow placement is pointing to the leaf miner tracks on the individual affected leaf. In the original multipanel figure, there is also no hand included in the photo. The penny to show scale in simply laid upon the affected leaf. In the recreation, the person doing the recreation is holding the penny rather than laying it on the leaf.
Another difference between the figures is the area covered in the image of the maps. In the original, the map that is included in the multipanel figure covers a much larger portion of the campus. In the recreation, the map is pretty much zoomed into the exact area that is being looked at.
The last difference that I am observing is the case of the letters used to label each piece of the multipanel figure. In my multipanel figure I used lowercase letters and in the recreation uppercase letters were used.
Differences for photo of entire plant:
Concrete walkway is visible in the recreation but not in the original
Mulch walkway is visible in the original but not the creation
Angle of the lily is different in both photos
Arrow is pointing to the affected leaf of the plant on the original but not the recreation
There are purple flowers that are further right on the original rather than closer to the center in the recreation.
The curvature and positioning of the leaves are different in each photo
In the original photo the whole plant is denoted as letter A, in the recreation it is B.
Differences for photo of individual leaf in both photos:
The positioning and appearance of the leafminer track is different in each photo
There is damage on the leaf in the recreation that is not evident in the photo of the original.
The recreated photo is larger than the original
There are more leaves in the background in the original rather than the creation.
There is an arrow in the recreation that is not in the original.
In the original photo the individual leaf is letter B, in the recreation it is A.
Differences in the picture to show scale:
A hand is in the recreation but not the original.
The leafminer tracks in the recreation are different than the tracks in the original.
The photo of the leaf in the original is at a different position than the leaf in the recreation.
You can see blacktop in the recreation photo that is not visible in the original.
There are more leaves visible in the original than in the recreation.
The letter on the original photo is c and lowercase. On the recreation it is an uppercase D.
There are brown marks on the leaf with the leafminer tracks on the recreation but not the original.
You can see blacktop in the recreation that is not visible in the original.
Differences in the map picture:
There are more buildings visible in the original map compared to the recreation.
There are more roads visible in the original map compared to the recreation.
The letter on the original map is a lowercase d and on the recreation it is an uppercase C.
Inferences Made for photo of entire plant:
Photo was taken further away in the recreation or plant is larger.
Photo is of a different plant.
The instructions on how to notate each photo with a letter were unclear or not followed correctly.
Inferences made for photo of individual leaf:
They are different leaves
The recreation photo was taken from a closer distance than the original.
I either instructed the person doing my recreation to place an arrow on the wrong photo or they made a mistake in reading my directions.
The instructions on how to notate each photo with a letter were either unclear or not followed correctly.
Inferences made for photo showing scale:
The photos are not of the same leaf or plant.
I did not instruct the recreation person to remove their hand or they did not follow the directions properly,
The angle of the camera when taking the photo is different or this is a different plant in the recreation that is closer to where the blacktop starts.
Inferences made for map picture:
Map is cropped differently or zoomed in closer.
Collecting the specimen:
Head over to the permaculture garden. On the far right side there are a row on lilies. Towards the center of the column of lilies, there is a plant with white drizzled looking tracks on it. Take 3 photos of the plant. The first should be a picture of the whole plant. The second should be a picture of just the affected leaf. The last photo should be a picture of the affected leaf with a penny for scale.
Upload your photos into inkscape. Shrink them to the size you want by using the shift key and the magnifying glass icon. Upload a map from openstreetmap.com. You can crop and shrink the map to the area you want. You want this cropped map to be a part of your multipanel figure. Arrange the 3 pictures and the map into a windowpane configuration. The lower right corner should be the map and the lower left should be the photo with a penny to scale. The upper left should be the whole plant and the upper right should just be a photo of the affected leaf.
Arrange them so that there are five spaces between all of them.
You are going to want to create an arrow pointing to the affected leaf. Use the line tool to create a line and then add a marker to the tip of the line you created. You are also going to want to use the text tool to label each photo with a letter distinguishing each one. Use the text tool to do this. You are going to want to make the font big enough to be noticeable. You are also going to want to use fill and stroke to make the font stand out. Starting in the upper left hand corner and going in a clockwise direction, label the photos “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d” respectively.
Use the “group” command to make the picture just a single image. Go into the file menu and select Document properties. Select the option to size the image to the page. Make sure to make the opacity 255.
Recent comments