Wow, I haven’t posted on this site for a LONG time. Sorry about that, I’ve been very busy as usual! But I have something for you today that I wanted to share…
In the course of my day job at the University of Warwick, I compile a weekly ‘Arabidopsis Research Round-up‘ of recently published, UK-based scientific articles in the area of Arabidopsis research. (FYI: Arabidopsis thaliana is a small weed used as a model organism for plant research – you can find out more about it here: http://youtu.be/hWAb30Ggl5o.) This involves reading lots of abstracts of new papers and condensing them into easy-to-read summaries, which we then publish on the GARNet website, blog, and on the Arabidopsis Information Portal.
Today’s Round-up will include this article, led by a Chinese team but also involving a British scientist from Rothamsted Research: Yang L, Zhao X, Paul M, Zhu H, Zu Y and Tang Z (2014). Exogenous Trehalose Largely Alleviates Ionic Unbalance, ROS Burst and PCD Occurrence Induced by High Salinity in Arabidopsis Seedlings. Frontiers in Plant Science, DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00570.
As someone without extensive lab experience, it’s not unusual for me to sometimes get a little stuck when reading complex scientific papers. But, with a a little effort, and the help of Google, I’m pretty good at unpicking the terminology to work out what the paper is really about so I can translate it into plain English. This paper, however, took a little more unpicking than most; in fact, the abstract didn’t even make sense in places!
Here is my copyedited version of the manuscript’s abstract:
Although
Ttrehalose (Tre) has been reported to play a critical role in plant response to salinity,andtheinvolvedmechanismsremaininvolved have yet to be investigated in detail. Here, the putative roles of Tre in the regulation of ionic balance, cellular redox state, and cell death were studied in Arabidopsis under high salt conditions. Our results found that the salt-induced restrictions on both vegetative and reproductive growth in salt-stressed plants were largely alleviated by an exogenous supplywithof Tre.The mMicroprobe analysis of ionic dynamics in the leaf andstem ofinflorescence stem highlightedtheTre‘s ability to retain the K and K/Na ratio in plant tissues to improve salt tolerance.TheIn flow cytometric (FCM) assays of cellular levels ofROS (reactive oxygen species (ROS) andPCD (programmed cell death (PCD),displayed thatTre was able to antagonizedsalt-induced damagesin both the redox state and in cell death.and sSucrosedid not play the same role with Trewas not shown to have the same effect.By cComparing ionic distributioninbetween the leaf andIS (inflorescence stem (IS), we found that Tre largely improvedwas able to restrict Na transportation to IS from leaves since thatthe ratio of Na accumulation in leaves relative to IS.was largely improved due toThis shows that Tre was able to restrict Na transportation to IS from leaves. The marked decrease of Na ions, and the improved sucrose levels in IS, might account for the promoted floral growth observed when Tre was added to the saline solution. At the same time, endogenous soluble sugars and the activity of antioxidant enzymesactivitiesin the salt-stressed plants were also elevated by Tre to counteract high salt stress. We concludedthat Tre could improve Arabidopsis salt resistance with respect to biomass accumulation and floral transitionin theby means of regulating plant redox state, cell death, and ionic distribution.
I contacted Frontiers in Plant Science about this via Twitter, and they assured me that this is a provisionally accepted manuscript that has not yet gone through the copyediting and typesetting process. Still, if I’d been reviewing this manuscript, I think I’d have pushed for a pre-acceptance copyedit – especially as one one of the authors on this paper is English himself!
I would always recommend authors to have a native English speaker read through and comment on a manuscript before submission – even if the author him or herself is also a native English speaker. Of course, I would love that editor to be me (contact me for copyediting and proofreading at a very competitive price!) but it could just be a friend or colleague who has not worked on the document.
Minor mistakes such as inconsistent formatting or mixed use of British and American English can be ironed out by the publisher’s in house team (if they offer this service – not all do!), but, in my opinion, it just doesn’t make sense to submit something that doesn’t make complete sense or which is full of errors. As an author seeking to have your work published, you’ll want to make the review process as easy as possible for the editors and reviewers. Not only will this speed up the process, but it could make the difference between getting published in a low impact journal when you were aiming for a higher impact one, or even getting published at all.
Perhaps I am being pedantic and impatient with the publication process – what do you think?
Constructive criticism for Freelancer.com
3 04 2012No whinging or complaining here please, only constructive criticism and helpful suggestions
I’ve received many a comment on my blog posts, The Trouble with Freelancer Part 1 and Part 2, and it seems that a lot of people have a lot of say about the way that Freelancer.com is run. Fair dues – the reason I wrote that post in the first place was to have my own little rant about my experiences with the site.
Recently however, I’ve had a number of emails and comments from people who don;t just want a whinge and a moan – they want to help make the world of online freelancing a better place. From other, rival companies to Freelancer.com wanting to make their own sites better, to individuals wanting to set up their own sites, it seems that everyone loves the idea of being able to find work online, but the perfect business model has yet to be found.
So, I present this new blog post to you as a platform to post your constructive criticism of Freelancer.com (and other similar sites) and to make suggestions as to what you think could be done differently, done better, or even to applaud the things that you like about Freelancer. I’m hoping that one of our more technogically and entrepreneurially-minded friends will take these ideas on board and help to develop the online freelancing marketplace for the greater good.
I must absolutely stress that the comment space on this post is NOT for complaints about Freelancer – to do that, please comment on this post, or even better, take up your umbrage with the company concerned. I moderate all comments on this site, so please make sure that any comments here are only of the helpful kind.
Over to you…
Share this post!
Comments : 16 Comments »
Tags: comments, constructive criticism, feedback, freelance, freelancer, Freelancer.com, praise, scam, suggestions, trouble
Categories : All Blog Posts, FAQs, Freelancer.com, Freelancing