BISC 219/F10:Questions to Guide Your Reading1

Questions to Guide Your Reading 1

You can download and print a pdf file of Ch'ng et al's research report, Indentification of Genes that Regulate a Left-Right Aymmetric Neuronal Migration in Caenorhabditis elegans published in Genetics 164: 1355-1367 (August 2003). at: | http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/full/164/4/1355. Please bring a pdf copy of this paper and of the Handout "The Structure of Scientific Writing" to LAB2. The Handout can be downloaded here: Media: Structure_of_Scientific_Writing219.doc

Use the following questions to help you focus on the structure of the paper as opposed to the content. We realize that it will be very difficult for you to understand the terminology and to follow the experiments, results, and conclusions found in this study since you are not neuroscientists and you are just beginning genetics students. Don't get bogged down or overwhelmed by the technical information. We are using this paper to model scientific writing in the format of the journal Genetics. As with just about any paper, this one is imperfect as a model. There are some great "do's" to follow and some things about it's format that deviate from the instructions in your handout "The Structure of Scientific Writing". Keep in mind that the general guidelines found in your handout are not "rules" that are universally followed. There are many "correct" ways to organize and present information in a research report. During our discussion in Lab2, we will focus on some of things the authors did when writing this paper and why they may have made choices that deviate from common structure.

Questions To Guide Your Reading:
1. Does the title to the paper give you the main conclusion or the main research goal. Which is preferable and why?

2. Does the abstract include all of the following: general topic and significance of the topic; general outline of experimental design (methods); specific results; conclusions that address the experimental question or goals; broader context of this study's findings? If so, are they in this order? If not, what's missing? Why might the authors have failed to include one or more of element the reader's expectats to find in an abstract.

3. The introduction is not labeled as such, but we know which part is the introduction by it's position and content. Does the author include all the elements listed in your Structure of Science Writing Handout and in the expected order? Does the background information move from old to new and broad to narrow? How so? All material that isn't "common knowledge" should be cited at the end of any sentence where someone's else's published findings are mentioned. What does "common knowledge" mean? Do these authors cite everything that is attribitable to specific investigators? If not, point out a sentence that needs a citation. (Keep in mind, if you include a proper citation in a sentence and continue to refer to that cited work in the next sentence, you need not repeat the citation, IF it is obvious in the second sentence to which paper you refer. If it's not obvious, you should repeat the citation to avoid confusion and to give credit to those who made the discovery you mention.) Are the methods summarized or outlined at the end of the introduction? These authors have chosen to summarize their main findings and conclusions in the introduction. Do you like that structure? Why is it more common to end with a summary of the experimental design and omit findings and conclusions?