How to prepare good research for publication and my own experience

How to prepare good research for publication and my own

experienceBy

Anupun TerdwongworakulDepartment of Agricultural Engineering

Faculty of Engineering at KamphaengsaenKasetsart University

Journal

• What is the journal to publish?• What is the impact factor? • What is the database on which the journal is

based?• Journal quartile or journal ranking

ISI Web of Science

• ISI: Institute for Scientific Information

Science Citation Index (SCI)

สกว รั�บรัอง

ISI database

• Powered by ISI Web of Knowledge, the Web of Science database is a collection of cross-searchable databases:– Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)– Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)– Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI)– Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S)– Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Sciences & Humanities (CPCI-SSH)– Book Citation Index - Science (BKCI-S)– Book Citation Index - Social Sciences & Humanities (BKCI-SSH)

• You can search one or more of these databases from the ISI interface.

Journal (cont.)

• How to search for impact factor – Mostly available at the journal website

Journal (cont.)

• How to determine the database of the journal in question.

http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/

http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/

http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/

http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/

http://www2.rdi.ku.ac.th/newweb/

Journal (cont.)

• How to determine what quartile the journal is in

• Q1 = highest level• Q4 = lowest level

http://www.scimagojr.com/

http://www.scimagojr.com/

Information of paper prior to submission

• Any page charge for excessive page (<= 21 PDF)• UK or USA English (word counts)• Reference and citing style• Topic style• How long between acceptance and publication

– Advisor concern

• Impact factor, Quartile ranking, Database

Common files to prepare

• Cover letter• Graphical abstract• List of suggested reviewers• Main texts (title, author and affiliation and texts)• Figures (.tiff, .doc etc.)• List of figure legends• Tables

How to make our research work more interesting

• Title name– Attractive– Direct to the point

• Content– Novelty– Well presented– Clear illustration– Good and robust discussion showing your deep

knowledge on the subject

Title name

• Good knowledge on the common title names• Try to make it to be different• Bring out the interesting point in our research

Prediction of …………………. Using ………

Effect of ….. On ……

Content

• Have your research topic in mind• Thorough literature reviews• Read a lot of good papers

– Gain knowledge on the quality of such good papers

– Learn how much work and theoretical understanding required in such good papers

• Decide what is the name of your research topic with helps from your advisor

Content (cont.)

• Assess your ability and also facilities you have• Consult your advisor and have an agreement

Content (cont.)

• Spend as much time as possible in planning so that there will be less wasteful time

• Planning the research (methodology)– Think hard what to do and what not to do– Based the plan on previous research– If not, you have to have good reason why you set

up such experiment– Every steps must be explainable, not just I love to

Writing manuscript

• With experiences, ordinary research results could be made interesting

• Good English style is needed in addition to good grammatical English

• Author instruction must be read comprehensively and be followed– How to write: number, unit, reference, item, UK or USA

English etc.– Fail to comply with the instruction may lead to early

rejection without reviewing

Writing manuscript (cont.)

• Useful steps of composing a manuscript:– Abstract written last– Introduction

• Importance of the topic and the reason for conducting the research

• Previous research• Technique to use i.e. new, never done before• Objectives: short, clear straight to the point to be

answered at the end of the research


• Useful steps of composing a manuscript:– Introduction (cont.)

• Previous studies should be ordered in interesting fashion

• Point out history of development• Each previous studies must be related and led to your

research• Make new paragraph to separate content or to point

out the new sub story


• Useful steps of composing a manuscript:– Material and methods

• Itemized the procedure• Preparation of samples• Conditions and controls used in the experiment• Variation in treatment with backup reason using

reference or past research• How to carry out experiment (equipment with name of

manufacturer)• Statistical analyses


• Useful steps of composing a manuscript:– Results and discussion

• Itemize the results in correspondence to the items in material and methods

• It is good practice to prepare all figures and tables before writing

• Visual inspection of the figures and notice of the interesting points in the figures



• Explain the results• What causes what?• Try to explain the reason why you have such kind of result• Look for change in variable with respect to factor• Compare results as affected by factor• Add discussion and show your deep knowledge• Should not say just what is going on? Say more on why

and how?

• Four variables increase with time. (not good enough )

• Yellow variable rises at higher rate than others and red variable is least changed. (Fair )



• Always support significant change or difference with hypothesis tests (ANOVA: p < 0.05)

• Comparison must be backed up by T-test.• The results should be compared with previous

published papers• The results needed explanation or support from other

published papers

Conclusions

• Brief your results• State the importance findings in your research• Suggest further investigation to answer what

is left uncovered in your research

Abstract

• Objective + Concise method + Conclusion

Recommended Font

• Times New Roman• Double spacing• Page numbering

Reviewers’ comment

• Late answer better than rapid answer from the editor

• Quick response from the editor means:– Your content is not in the scope. Able to resubmit

to other journals– Rejected. Sad

Reviewers’ comment

• Waiting for the answer is killing and very nervous but good for those who love excitement.

• Preparation for rejection is useful.• Do not be discouraged by being rejected• This will toughen your patience.• Answers from reviewers are valuable comments.• Reviewers are just like examination committee.

Normally, more strict.

Personal background

• Never published a paper for PhD• Dream of publishing a paper• Always feel the quality of the research must

be recognised at international level• Feel inferiority if there has been no record of

international publication• First publication 10 years after PhD graduation

Personal ambition

• All authors being Thai– However with foreigner authors included,

international collaboration will be recognised

• One paper per year• Focusing on publishing for high impact journal• High impact research work

Road to the first publication

• First paper rejected• Receiving helps from Prof. Bundit• Learning from renowned Professors• Studying the quality of the published papers in the

field• Knowing what skill to improve• Opportunity• Take chance in order to force ourselves to write

the first paper (accepting 1st PhD student)

Personal steps

• Make a list of journals sorted by impact factor– Higher impact first– Then step down if rejected

• Suggest reviewers who are:– Authors of a paper with quality we feel we could

repeat (Asian, Europe and USA)– Authors who cited our papers

• Always declare our paper has been edited for English language with a name and e-mail address of the editor

Characteristics to be successful

• Love reading international research article– Continue literature reviews after PhD (AIT)

• Love conducting research• Have innovative idea in the field of study• Want to be a part of research university• Long for extra bonus with acknowledgement

from KU

My first decision letter

My first decision letter

Example of acceptance letter

Reviewer#1- the paper is difficult readable due to big number of different abreviations; I advice to prepare list of symbols and abbreviations with detailed desciption, values etc.,

The introduction has been adjusted and rearranged as suggested. The nomenclature has been added after “Abstract”.

there are some small errors in the paper, like in line 92 (....660 mm ??),that have to be taken into account during the paper revision.

I revised the paper carefully by following your advice.Line93.

Reviewer#21) Keywords: "PCA & PLSR" should be deleted.

Already deleted.Line 49.

2) Line 56: full stop is missed Already corrected. Line 56.3) Line 61: "et al." should not be italic. We have rearranged the introduction as

suggested by reviewer#1 as a result “Jarimopas et al., 2008” has been deleted.

4) Line 69: "Kitthawee" is different than that in ref. list.

Already corrected. Line 71.

5) Line 75: same as above. Already corrected. Line 85.6) Line 88: "Dangkanit" is different than that in ref. list.


7) Line 89: better to mention the name of fruit

The sentence has been adjusted to “growth of guava (Mercado-Silva et al., 1998) and mango (Saranwong et al., 2004). Line 69.

8) Line 128: " L, a, & b"?where do they come from? Are they your classification? What colors are they introducing? Please write clearly.

A sentence “The Hunter L, a, b color scale was used to indicate the fruit color. The L value (lightness) is scaled between 0 (black) and 100 (white). The a value is from –a (greenness) to +a (redness) whereas the b value changes from –b (blueness) to +b (yellowness).”has been added.Line 127 - 130.

9) Line 131: "L" symbol is already used for color classification. One of them should be changed.

The “Major (L) and minor (D)” has been changed to “Major (X) and Minor (Y)”.Line 134.

10) Line 134: What about moisture absorption? Please give explanation.

The time taken for each immersion was quite short (about 5 seconds) and normally the fruit peel is covered with natural wax which prevents rapid loss or absorption of moisture. Additionally the method has been well established as written in Mohsenin (1986).

11) Line 137: "was weighed" is correct. "expressed as" is correct.

Already corrected.Line 140.

12) Line 138: multiplication symbol is not correct.

Already corrected as suggested.Line 135 and 141.

13) Line 139: different spelling for "Babpraserth" than ref. list.


14) Line 143: compressed from which side? Inside fruit or outside?

Compression was made from outside. We added “with cut surface downward was slowly compressed on the peel surface” in the relevant sentence.Line 146.

15) Line 143: what was the average diameter of fruit? Standard says it should be 10 times of probe.

Average diameter of fruit was .Line 149.

16) Line 222: "firmness" must be deleted.


17) Line 224: "Sugiyama" is missed in ref. list.

Already added.Line 422 - 424.

18) Line 226: "produce" is correct. Already corrected.Line 231.

19) Line 241: full stop? Already corrected.Line 246.

20) Line 255: Please make sure all terms have been defined already in the text for example Rp.

We have added the definition of Rc2 and Rp2 as suggested.Line 181 and 182.

21) Line 282: "parameter" and "weighed" are correct.


22) Line 284: full stop? and PC1? Already corrected.Line 289.

23) Fig. 2b: Color Lab? It has been changed to “Color value L, a and b” in Fig. 2b.

24) Figures: Please check all of them for capital letter, parenthesis, and so on.

The capital letter and parenthesis have been adjusted in all figures.

25) References: please double check all of them. For example ref. N.8 you mention to the year two times.

We have checked all references and corrected where appropriate as suggested.





























































































Ms. Ref. No.: JFOODENG-D-12-00116Title: Non-destructive classification of durian maturity of 'Monthong' cultivar by means of visible spectroscopy of the spineJournal of Food Engineering

Dear Mr. Anupun Terdwongworakul,

Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.

For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.

If you decide to revise the work, please indicate the changes in the text by using colored letters and submit a rebuttal against each point which is being raised when you submit the revised manuscript (copy each remark and provide your reply or describe action done).

Please note that revisions must be supplied within one month; please ask the editor for an extension of this time if you find it is necessary. Should the new version not be supplied in time, your paper will be removed from the system and your article will have to be treated as a new submission.

To submit a revision, please go to http://ees.elsevier.com/jfoodeng/ and login as an Author. Your username is: anupunIf you need to retrieve password details, please go to: http://ees.elsevier.com/jfoodeng/automail_query.asp

On your Main Menu page is a folder entitled "Submissions Needing Revision". You will find your submission record there.

Yours sincerely,

Milan HouskaEditorJournal of Food Engineering

http://ees.elsevier.com/jfoodeng/

http://ees.elsevier.com/jfoodeng/automail_query.asp

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: In their manuscript, the authors present an interesting approach to classify the maturity stage of durian fruit by statistical analysis of visible spectroscopy data. This topic certainly fits the scope of Journal of Food Engineering. It might be possible that this classification method may be practically applied to identify the state of fruit ripeness in future.The manuscript is generally well written and easy to understand. The results are clearly and convincingly presented. On the other hand, the discussion is supported by a very limited number of references.Most important, the given and in length discussed hypothesis that the increase in scattering with increasing surface roughness specifically affects absorption in the wavelength range from 510 to 640 nm seems improbable (only Mie-scattering is wave-length-dependent), is highly speculative and lacks any confirmation. The authors should either present some confirming references, or show some confirming experiments; otherwise they better delete this part. In this context, information on the variation in the anthocyanin content would be interesting (see Merzlyak et al. and other durian specific references). Furthermore, the reference base seems not to be really complete.

Consequently, I can only recommend publishing this manuscript in Journal of Food Engineering after major revisions and when the authors could solve the above identified problems.

Some special commentsAlthough not being a native English speaker, I learned from both British and American colleagues that in correct scientific English (botanical and figurative senses) fruit is strictly used as a singulare tantum if fruit of the same species (e.g. several apples) are meant. In contrast, "fruits" is reserved for reference to different species i.e. apples, pears and cherry are all fruits. See also http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fruit. I assume this also applies to "food engineering" English :-).

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fruit

Special commentsL35L34 < absorbance of chlorophyll a and > The <a> is not written in quotes.L35 < In addition, changes in the visible range from 510 to 640 nm were assumed to be a result of the roughness of the spine surface.> That is all you can write. You did not present any confirming results on this mere and improbable speculation.L53 < There are a number of studies published that investigated > There is no need for the use of present perfect.L71-74 This sentence is strange. Please rewrite and improve.L107 < DH-2000 Ocean Optics,>L204 What is < the optimal sequence of spectra with increasing > Not clear, be precise.L208 How could the <spectra based on DAA > be <improved. >? Be precise. It comes closer to what you expected.L211 < In the short wavelength region >L212-213 < On the contrary, with fruit maturation, less light was absorbed in the longer wavelength region.>L279-293 The story of the wavelength dependent effect of scattering in the visible range from 510 to 640 nm due to increased surface roughness seems improbable, is highly speculative and lacks confirmation. Either present some true confirming references, show some confirming experiments or better leave out.L303-313 Repetition of the hypothesis in this chapter does not increase its probability.

Reviewer #2: The following are my recommendations1. The first author has listed 3 addresses. Please list only the primary address of the author.2. In keywords "spine" seems to be a very general term. Please think of other relevant key words. e.g. partial least squares discriminant analysis 3. line 56, mention how much was the accuracy when you state "good accuracy"4. lines 57-61, what were the accuracies obtained by the researchers when microwave and acoustics were used? what were their major findings?5. line 88-90, were the fruits harvested from the same trees every week? How many trees were selected?6 Figure 1 and 3 text, remove the text box lines7. For figure 4, on the Y-axis and X-axis, please mention how much of percentage of variation does PC1 and PC2 represent

[Line 73, "... soluble soilds content (SCC) ..."]The "SCC" should be "SSC".

[Line 211, "In theshort wavelength ..."]Insert a space between "the" and "short".

[line 211-214]According to Fig. 3(b), the absorbance in the range from 510 to 640 nm, which was not contribute to either chlorophyll and carotenoid, decreased with DAA. You metion that this decrease was caused by an increase in spine's surface roughness (Line 279-282, Line 303-313). On the other hand, according to Fig. 3(b), the spine absorbed more light in the short wavelength region from 350 to 510 nm as the fruit matured (Line 211-214). You mention that the carotenoid was the dominant plant pigment with absorption in the region of 400 to 550 nm (Line 187-192). Does the spine's surface roughness have no influence on the absorptions in this region? Even though the carotenoid concentration was increased, there might be the effect of dilution of the pigment color. You should make mention of this effect in this region (highly suggested).

How to prepare good research for publication and my own experience

Documents