Research Paper – Characterization of Erythrocyte
Cytoskeletal Proteins by SDS-PAGE
When you complete the entire characterization
you will write up the study in a form that is used
by most journals in biosciences. Before you even
start the laboratory work please look over the
introduction and recommendations for the individual
sections. Doing so will help you understand the
context of the study. Knowing in advance what you
will need for the write-up should help you to make
sure that you obtain and record all of the necesary
information. This paper will require data from
blood and erythrocyte fractionation as well as
from analysis of protein gels.
Honor code policy
You may work together with your lab
partner(s) in acquiring data from your protein
gels, and may work together in making identifications
of protein bands. You may analyze one or more gels
that were prepared by other students, provided
that you acknowledge the source of the data and
that you include your own gels in your paper. Any
collaboration is limited to the acquisition of
information. All writing, preparation and labeling
of gel figures, preparation of tables, etc. is
to be done individually.
Introduction to the assignment
Technical writing may seem overly demanding to
the beginner, but adherence to the "rules" is
critical to the precise communication of facts
and concepts in the scientific community. To prepare
your research paper you must consult the recommended
web pages, examples, and resource materials. An
editor will require that you adhere to a specific
format when you submit a paper. The same policy
applies to this course.
For the first paper, very specific guidelines
are provided. Focus on clear, concise, well-organized
writing, appropriate style for each part of a
paper (and why), careful analysis and careful
reporting of quantitative data, and reasonable
interpretation of the results. Be prepared
to apply what you have learned here to the next
paper. The guidelines next time will not
be as specific.
Specific Recommendations
Title page
McMillan (4th ed.) p. 69-72 discusses
choosing a title for a paper, illustrating the
text with quite a few examples. You can quickly
draw the conclusion that "Biology
lab #1" is
really not an effective title. The title should
concisely describe the focus of the paper. What
is the primary goal of the study? See if you can
write a title that concisely sums up that goal.
Materials
and methods
Before starting on this first writing
assignment please go to the Policies
page and read up about how to submit papers.
See McMillan (4th ed.) pages 78-83 for advice and
examples. Give some attention to the discussion
of the difference between active and passive voice
(page 82). The general guidelines for writing research
papers are presented in writing/analytical resources
section. You might look over the entire
document to get
an idea of the general organization of a research
paper and specific recommendations for a materials/methods
section.
In Materials and Methods we document
the methodology that we used to accomplish our
goals. This section will be a lot
shorter than you think it should be. We include
only the barest essentials, omitting any unnecessary
information. After all, the focus of the paper
should be on the results and their interpretation,
not on the methodology itself. This section will
be a lot shorter than you think it should be.The
purpose is to permit a reader to judge the scientific
merit of the work and/or to reproduce all or some
of the methods. In the latter case the reader will
apply the methods to his/her own study, not yours,
so report a general methodology, not details that
were specific to your experiment.
To help you
get started, part of this first assignment has
been completed for you. It is your responsibility
to complete the section. Notice the general style
and content of this example and of the other examples
provided to you in the writing example package
and writing text. Notice that we do not use
informal lists. We write in normal prose, using
complete sentences.
Because you are documenting specific
methods that you applied to this completed study,
past tense is appropriate. As for voice, the choice
is yours. To use active voice you almost have to
write in first person. After all, a beaker doesn't
fill itself. Because the
reader's attention should be directed to the subject
matter itself rather than to the author, many authors
use the passive voice to avoid having to use first
person. Often, a passage reads more smoothly
in the passive voice, but if passive doesn't work
you may use first person. The important thing is
to communicate the information effectively.
Use the following section as a template
for the Materials and Methods for your first paper.
Your job is to write up the fractionation procedure,
starting with receiving the whole blood sample.
Methodology related to protein assay and SDS-PAGE
is complete. You may change the style of the second
part to be consistent with the part that you write,
but don't add anything.
Here are more suggestions for what NOT to do.
- Do not tell a story. The chronological
sequence of methods is implicit in the writing,
so you need not write that first you did this,
then you did that, etc.
- Do not report using nonspecialized
supplies and equipment such as pipettes, glassware,
inorganic chemicals, spectrophotometers, or electrophoresis
supplies; such use is implicit in the procedures
and need not be specified in methods.
- Do not report details that are irrelevant
to a third party, such as what knob to turn on
the microscope or what day the experiment was
conducted.
- Do not refer to the teaching lab, instructor,
students, team, etc. This is not a "lab
report." Published research articles only
list authors under the title and acknowledge
additional assistance at the end of the text.
They treat the study on its own merits. Who did
what is not relevant.
- Do not deviate from past tense.
- Do not list materials or provide outlines.
Stick strictly to prose.
- Do not provide explanations, definitions, or
background of any kind.
Materials and Methods
Fractionation
***It is up to you to write up this part. Write
up the methodology only, as none of the materials
is specialized so as to require noting a source.
Try to be concise without sacrificing clarity and
accuracy. Please do not turn in the section on
assay and characterization that I wrote for you
below. Just indicate where in your materials and
methods section it should be inserted.***
Assay and Characterization
Bovine serum albumin (BSA), dyes, acrylamide,
dithiotheitol, and molecular weight standards were
purchased from the Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis,
MO.
A Bradford assay (Bradford, 1976) using BSA
as standard was used to estimate protein concentrations.
Aliquots were stored frozen without denaturation
for up to a week.Samples were denatured within
an hour of electrophoresis by diluting to 2 mg/ml
protein in 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate, 10% glycerol,
1 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 160 mM dithiothreitol,
0.1 mg/ml bromophenol blue dye, and 10 mM Tris-Cl,
pH 6.8, followed by heating at 80C for 10 min.
Electrophoresis
was conducted by the method of Laemmli (1970) on
3 1/4 x 4" gels prepared from 30%T, 2.5%Cbis
stock. Gels were stained with 0.1% Coomassie
blue dye in 50% methanol, 10% glacial acetic acid.
Would be included in Literature Cited
Bradford, MM. A rapid
and sensitive for the quantitation of microgram
quantitites of protein utilizing the principle
of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry
72: 248-254. 1976.
Laemmli, UK. Cleavage of structural proteins
during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage
T4. Nature 227: 680-685. 1970.
Results
Please examine pages 83-89 of McMillan (4th ed.).
Summarize your findings in text, and illustrate
your results with an appropriate figure and table.
The results section is a writeup, first and foremost.
An effective writeup describes the major findings
in the context of the objectives of the study.
For example, for a study on the effects of a new
drug on blood pressure one might write, "To
determine if the testing process itself raised
the subjects' blood pressure, ten subjects were
treated with a placebo. A paired t test revealed
no significant change in blood pressure within
this control group following treatment (Table 1)." Recall
that your results are history (past tense), and
they are certainly not generally accepted truths,
as would be implied by the use of present tense.
Rather than write a bare minimum of text, think
of useful observations that you might add. For
example, are any of the observations that you made
during the centrifuge runs worth noting? Were there
any difficulties or complications that might compromise
one's attempt to reproduce this work? How many
well-resolved bands showed up in the membrane fraction
of lower density gel and what MW range was separated?
How many additional bands were resolved by the higher
density gel (beyond the range of the first gel)?
Your writeup
should certainly describe the major findings
that are illustrated by figures and tables. Your
text should complement the figure and the table
rather than serve as an alternative source of information.
You might report quantitative information that
is not directly revealed by figures and/or tables,
point out the most important findings, and/or
draw direct conclusions from the data. There is
no point in repeating the same quantitative information
that is presented in the table.
Do not include interpretation in the form of explanations,
and do not include background information. Only
the results of the current study should be presented
here, that is, just report
the facts.
Results to include
Manuscripts require that
figure and tables be prepared in publishable form.
You don't have the latitude that you might have
when preparing a talk or poster. See chapter three
of McMillan, "Using Tables and Figures." Pay
particular attention to numbering, and content/placement
of captions and titles, and to the use of separator
lines in tables. Keep all parts of a figure or
table on the same page, using a separate page if
you find it awkward to incorporate the item into
the text.
All measured quantities or derived
values that are based on measurements are uncertain
quantities. As with the abstract, or in ANY part
of any type of communication, report ALL uncertain
quantities to an appropriate degree of precision.
This includes quantities reported anywhere, including
the results and abstract of a paper.
Fraction yields. It may be
valuable for an investigator to know how much of
a specific protein or mix of proteins can be obtained
from a given amount of whole blood, using your
fractionation procedure. Perhaps he/she wants to
study hemoglobin, and wants to know how much can
be obtained from your fraction 3. See the web page
on tissue fractionation for the concepts of protein
yields and how to obtain and report them. It is
customary to report yields in a table with (for
each fraction) name of fraction, protein concentration,
volume of the fraction, and total protein.
The gels themselves are your most
important result, of course, and since the paper
focuses on analysis from the gels you should include
reproductions of the gels that you analyzed. They
must be neatly
and properly labeled, and numbered with captions.
Photos, graphs, drawings, etc. are simply figures
(figure 1, 2, etc.) and are to be presented as
figures in a paper. Figures should be capable of
standing alone. For example, when you refer to
a protein band in the discussion, there should
be no question as to which gel photo shows the
band, where it is in the photo, with what fraction
it is associated, and what percent gel resolved
it.
As a basis for discussion, you will
need to describe the bands. The study focuses on
membrane associated bands, of course, although
the disibution of hemoglobin should also be discussed.
Distinguishing features of protein bands include:
fraction with which the band associated, apparent
MW, intensity of staining, unusual associations
such as being part of a doublet (two bands close
together of near equal staining intensity), unusual
shape. There will be a lot of data here. While
reading the discussion, a reader will want to be
able to access specific information quickly. Therefore
such data are best represented in one or more tables.
Remember to report only pertinent data, not intermediate
calculations.
Discussion
(no more than five pages)
In addition to the materials
provided during the analysis session, you may wish
to make use of the information on structure of
the red cell membrane posted on this web site.
An article
on membrane proteins has been posted
as well. It is essential that you use the information
in the article on the organization of the red cell
membrane. A cell biology text might also make a
useful general reference. See McMillan (4th ed.)
p. 89-94. Pay particular attention to the very
first bulleted point. Make an outline of what you
plan to discuss. A suitable outline might go like
this.
This is just one of many outlines
that might work. Make whatever modifications you
feel are appropriate, as long as you include all
of the pertinent interpretation. Discussions are
evaluated mainly on the basis of completeness,
precision and accuracy of language, and depth of
interpretation. For all conclusions that you draw
or suggestions that you make, provide your reasoning
and support your reasoning with evidence from the
laboratory and/or from the literature.
Abstract
An abstract is a concise summary of the major
points of the paper. Many times a reader will read
the abstract to a paper and not go any farther,
so it is necessary to pack the most important information
into a relatively short passage. Most abstracts
are written as single paragraphs, and that is how
they are to be submitted for this course. See McMillan
(4th ed.) p. 72-76 for guidelines and examples.
What was the objective of the study? You should
be able to summarize the objective in a single
sentence. It is not necessary to defend the objective
or provide any additional background. The focus
is to be on the results and conclusions. As suggested
by McMillan, a good abstract uses very specific
language. We do not dwell on specific methodology,
although the general approach to the problem should
be summarized, again very briefly. See the examples
of abstracts that are too general and too wordy,
respectively, in the McMillan text. Summarize the
results of the entire study, completely and accurately,
in both qualitative and quantitative terms. Don't
forget to express quantities with appropriate precision.
A trick for being
concise is to incorporate two bits of information
together. For example, "to reproducibly separate
and identify proteins of the coat of bacteriophage
T4, phage proteins were denatured in an SDS buffer
and separated on discontinuous polyacrylamide gels."
One sentence sums up the objective and the general
method, allowing the writer to focus the rest of
the abstract on the findings and conclusions. ***NOTE***
The single most common mistake in student abstracts
is to omit specific findings. Reporting findings
is the most important purpose of an abstract. In
particular, students frequently omit quantitative
information (mean values, errors, statistics, etc.
for key findings).
Introduction
(maximum two pages)
So why write the introduction last?
Many students have commented that they really didn't
understand the full context of the study until
after they wrote up the discussion. We'll try it
this way and see what happens.
Describe and defend the study, so that the rest
of the paper makes sense to the reader. See McMillan
p. 76-78 for guidelines and examples. .
- The overall plan is to describe and defend
the overall goals of this area of research, the
specific objectives of this experiment, how the
experiment was designed, and how it accomplished
its objectives.
- Provide factual information only to make a
point. There is no need to tell the reader everything
you know about blood, for example.
- Provide a context. What is the relationship
of this study to our overall research?
- Why did we choose this particular experimental
model? There were practical reasons for using
this starting material.
- What, precisely, was the experimental objective?
- Describe
how the experimental design accomplished its
objective, without providing excessive detail
on the methodology itself.
Some authors use future tense in an introduction,
but since the work will have been completed at
the time the paper is completed, past tense is
most appropriate. Of course, we reserve present
tense strictly for established facts and concepts,
and do not refer to specific results, conclusions,
decisions, past events, etc. using present tense.
|