February 8, 2017

In biology, formal and informal

communication are key to effectively relaying
scientifically valid information
Christian James
Advanced Writing in the Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA

INTRODUCTION
In studying the natural sciences, communication is key in advancing the
various disciplines. Whether it be physiology, psychology, or paleontology,
studies are conducted using the scientific method, and the results are
presented to the public in the form of a scholarly article. However, a formal
paper is only the final step in the scientific process. Communication also
takes place in an informal manner within the communities behind the
composition. In many ways, how individuals communicate within their
community is what defines that body and makes it, in what Swales describes,
a discourse community.
In the biological community, the goal of a scientific paper is to relay new
information. The intended readers, an example of a discourse community,
can range from fellow researchers to anyone interested in the biology of the
natural world (A. Roth, personal communication, January 26, 2017). In order
to present the information in a precise and effective manner, the study in
question must be conducted using the scientific method. Using the scientific
method ensures validity, and new discoveries are not all that great unless
they can be proven.
Short-term success of a translocation of Otago skinks (Oligosoma otagense)
to Orokonui Ecosanctuary, (Bogisch et al. 2016) is an example of a formal
scientific study, and here it is analyzed to show what exemplifies an
academic paper.
Informal communication is also necessary to provide a basis for the formal
studies, allowing for discussion, criticism, and peer review, again ensuring
validity. Here, the use of informal communication is analyzed to exhibit its
significance

RESULTS FORMAL PAPER

The Abstract
The abstract provides a summary of the academic paper, providing a brief
description of the purpose of the study, the procedure, and the results, as
well as a concluding statement on the future of the topic. The abstract
intends to let the reader know what they are getting into. In the biological
community, the abstract serves as a quick glimpse into current research,
allowing todays biologists to stay up-to-date without having to read an
entire scientific study. The purpose of the paper Short-term success of a
translocation of Otago skinks (Oligosoma otagense) to Orokonui
Ecosanctuary, (Bogisch et al. 2016) (henceforth referred to as Short-term
success) is to show the sustainability of translocated skink populations, in
a conservation effort.
The abstract is truly brief; for example, Short-term success contains only
4% (160 words) of its word count in the abstract (Figure 1.) The abstract also
generally contains no citations or figures, being only a summary of ideas.
The Introduction
The introduction provides the necessary background that readers need to be
acquainted with in order to understand the significance of the study. The
information is also vital for the researchers, as they need a reason to even
perform the study. In Short-term success, the introduction discusses the
Nationally Endangered classification of the skinks, serving as the reasoning
behind translocation of a captive-bred population into an ecosanctuary. The
introduction also expands upon the abstracts general description of the
study, noting the time frame of the study and what the scientists
hypothesized, based upon the aforementioned background information.
The introduction generally has the most citations, because all the necessary
background information comes from previous studies. These previous studies
are referenced in order to legitimize the scientific paper, providing a strong
foundation of knowledge. In Short-term success, 28 of the papers 61
citations are found in the introduction (Fig 2.). The introduction is also
significantly longer than the abstract, containing 556 words, or 15% of the
papers word count (Fig 3.) In some cases, the introduction may contain a
graphic in order to emphasize the findings of a previous study, however that
of Short-term success contains none (Fig. 3)
The Material/Methods
The materials and methods section of a scientific paper provides a highly
detailed description of how the experiment was conducted. Being so specific
in the details allows any other researcher to employ the scientific method
and replicate the experiment to a very similar degree. In Short-term
success, this section describes the location and appearance of the
ecosanctuary the skinks were placed in (including an image), as well as the
origin of the skinks and the method of translocation. The method of
identification is also detailed, in this case each skink placed in the habitat
were photographed from both sides. The paper does mention that the skinks
placed in the habitat do not necessarily reflect the optimal demographic for
a translocation (Bogisch et al. 2016). This specific line reflects proper
scientific method, documenting potential errors in the experiment. How and
when the skinks were observed is also documented, and even the exact
position and facing direction of a time-lapse camera is detailed.
The materials and methods section of an academic paper is usually one of
the longest sections in the paper. In the case of Short-term success, this
section contains 1314 words, or 35% of the total count (Fig 1.). Despite the
hefty length, this section contains relatively few citations (compared to the
introduction), at 11 total citations (Fig. 2). These citations represent the
researchers using practices and techniques that were developed or used in
previous studies. For example, the researchers determined if any of skinks
were pregnant by palpitations of the abdomen, a technique cited from Cree
1994 and Cree 2006 (Bogisch et al. 2016). The methods section also contains
one of the three figures found in Short-term success, an image of the
ecosanctuary (Fig 3.). Including this particular image reinforces the
replicability and validity of the study.
The Results
While the materials and methods section of a scientific paper is the basic
framework for the study, the results section is the meat of the study. The
results section also does not aim to draw any conclusions from the data; it
merely states the information gathered in a systematic fashion, and
mentions the statistical significance of the data. In Short-term success,
the results section outlines the number of skinks detected via visual
observations under various conditions, including the time of day, weather,
the temperature of a copper model (representing the internal temperature of
the basking skink), and the temperature of the ecosanctuary. Having
different variables reinforces the validity of both the data and of the scientific
method as employed in the study.
The results section is generally straight to the point (though this paper is not
a prime example of that), as evidenced by it constituting 14%, or 518 words
of Short-term success (Fig 1). The results should also have the most
figures out of all the sections, again reinforced by having two of the three
figures in the selected paper (Fig 3.). This section will also likely have a small
number of citations, as all of the information is raw data collected from the
study in question. Short-term success exemplifies this by having zero
citations in the results section (Fig 2.).
The Discussion
The discussion section of scientific literature serves as the interpretive part
of a study. Conclusions are drawn from the data, and the researchers
hypotheses are either confirmed or rejected. In the case of Short-term
success, the researchers hypothesized that more skinks would be visible on
warm, dry days. The evidence in the results section affirmed this hypothesis
(Bogisch et al. 2016). The section may also act as a conclusion, including
statements about future efforts and studies in the field. The skink
researchers propose that future research study the long-term survival of
captive-raised skinks, in order to prove that translocated populations can be
self-sustaining.
The discussion section will likely include multiple citations in order to explain
why the results are the way they are, and to offer further conclusions. For
example, Short-term success contains 22 of the papers 61 citations (Fig
2.). As a result of the information analysis, this section may also be longer
than most, as evidenced by the selected studys section containing 1189, or
32% of the total word count. The discussion also may not contain any figures
(Fig 3.).
RESULTS INFORMAL
Outside of formal scientific studies, information is still relayed between
researchers and members of the biological community. Less formal
communications are largely a way for members of a community to simply
talk. These intercommunications are sometimes intended to discuss how to
approach new problems, and determine what information is to be presented.
Discussions may lead to the creation of new research methods and
techniques. Discussions also allow researchers to get an idea of what other
members of the community want to see studied.
Emails and Facebook groups are common methods of informal
communication. Professor Roth, for example, is a member of various
Facebook groups that aggregate information, specifically an ornithology
group where people can post their special findings and milestones.
Informal communication also allows for peer review, which in turn ensures
that formal papers do their job. According to Prof. Roth, peer review ensures
persuasiveness, and makes sure that researchers dont assert conclusions
that havent been proven.
DISCUSSION
As shown by the analysis above, Short-term success is a great example
of a study employing the scientific method appropriately, thus making it
effective in relaying information correctly, as intended. The papers structure
in terms of length and citations makes sense in terms of the purposes of
each section, and is representative of academic papers in the field of biology.
As Professor Aaron Roth puts it, there are no flourishes in biology; everyone
writes the same, and in terms of publishable methodology, primary research
articles follow the scientific method.
In addition, informal communication is the framework of information
gathering and presenting. Individuals of a community must network together
in order to determine what information is to be presented in formal writing,
as well as to ensure that the information is relayed effectively and accurately.
Informal communication is even a way to show one another small findings
that may not be journal-worthy.
Altogether, the point of science is to discover and share new information that
is accurate and reliable. Both formal and informal writings are ways to share
this information and ensure its validity.
REFERENCES
M Bogisch, A Cree & JM Monks (2016) Short-term success of a translocation
of Otago skinks (Oligosoma otagense) to Orokonui Ecosanctuary, New
Zealand Journal of Zoology, 43:2, 211-220, DOI:
10.1080/03014223.2015.1122638
Roth, A (2017, Jan 26). Personal interview.
SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURES

Words per Section

Abstract; 160; 4%

Discussion; 1189; 32%

Introduction; 556; 15%

Materials/Methods; 1314; 35%

Results; 518; 14%

Abstract Introduction Materials/Methods

Results Discussion
Figure 1. Distribution of words per section. Word count includes citations,
but not figures.

Number of Citations per Section

30

25

20

15

10

0
Abstract Introduction Materials/Methods Results Discussion

Figure 2. Distribution of in-text citations. Maximum of 28 citations in

Introduction, minimum of 0 citations in the results.
 Number of Figures per Section
2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Abstract Introduction Materials/Methods Results Discussion

Figure 3. Distribution of figures. Maximum of 2 figures in Results, minimum

of 0 in Introduction and Discussion.

Publishing Date of References

2010-present

2000-09

1990-99

1980-89

1970-79

1960-69

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Publishing Date of References

Figure 4. Range of publication dates of references. Earliest date was 1968,

latest date was 2015. Data collected but not used in paper.