Apart from the abstract and conclusions, the first things I look at in a scientific paper are the maps, figures and diagrams (also called display items). I believe you can tell much about the overall quality of a paper by the quality of these things.
In my previous post I described how concise written English can be difficult and time-consuming to achieve. However, it is ultimately worth the effort and seeking help to achieve this because the result is clarity of language that facilitates dissemination of your research. The same can be said for maps, figures and diagrams. The more time spent on them to improve their clarity and ease of viewing, the easier it will be for your reader to see quickly what you are trying to show. Another significant advantage of having precise and clear display items is that it makes it easier to write about your study area and results, which will hopefully contribute to achieving written concision.
Among other things, I am a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analyst and have spent much time making maps, and conducting spatial analysis and presenting the results cartographically. All maps should have an indication of where the area they represent is located. For regional location maps you should always give an indication of the latitude (specifying northern or southern hemisphere) and latitude. This is often done through presenting a graticule (segmented frame) around the region, or sometimes using single latitude and longitude lines nearest to the study area (Figure 1). A scale bar should be used. More detailed maps must have a scale bar, north arrow and legend (sometimes called a key) to describe clearly all the elements depicted in the map (Figure 2). If you are presenting three-dimensional perspective images, you should indicate the distance along at least one of the horizontal dimensions to give an indication of scale, and also show a North Arrow (Figure 3).

These examples are from my own published work. I created all of them initially using ESRI’s ArcGIS software, which I used to do the basic cartography. I then exported the raw images to a drawing package for line work and text (I used CorelDraw, but any other graphics/drawing package would suffice such as Adobe Illustrator). This was because I found the drawing and text capabilities of ArcGIS to be less satisfactory than the specially designed graphics package.

I used Sigmaplot for most of my graphing work. Similar to my maps, I used the graphing software to produce the basic graph format (axis ticks and the plotted data themselves), and then exported the result to a drawing package, where I had most control over formatting lines, points and text. It was also easy to import other kinds of graphs from different software packages. Figure 4 is an example of a diagram where the axes and stratigraphic data were originally plotted in Sigmaplot, the two plant fossil graphs were produced originally in specific paleoecological data software (Tilia Graph), and both kinds were imported into CorelDraw to complete line work, shading and text.

Figure 4 Example of a combined diagram and graphs, using outputs from Sigmaplot and Tilia Graph that were imported into CorelDraw in which line work, shading and text were then completed.

In designing the layout of both maps and figures, I always size images according to the end use. For example, in my postgraduate theses I always sized the document to A4 size, taking into account margin widths. For journal submissions, I look at the Guide for Authors to determine the required image size (width), and if there is no image size information I literally measure with a ruler the typical full-size images in a published article, and use these dimensions. Having established my image size, I make the most of the space I have. I always print out the images to see if the labels and other text are legible at the intended size or final production. Usually journals will recommend or specify font types and sizes, and you should follow these instructions.

The above process can be time consuming, but is absolutely essential for two reasons: 1) to meet a journal’s requirements; and 2) to make it easier for you to write about your results. The more time you spend on perfecting your display items, the more you have thought about them. This should enable you to describe their main features in a clear, concise way so that the reader can easily and quickly see what you are writing about.

转载本文请联系原作者获取授权，同时请注明本文来自理文编辑科学网博客。
链接地址：https://m.sciencenet.cn/blog-288924-466420.html

上一篇：Simple is best
下一篇：引言：布局