First, the basic data list At first glance, this kind of article has detailed data and rich content, which is quite "tall". But after careful study, it is found that the data of each part are basic, independent, irrelevant and simple. This is the most common mistake in the first writing. Scientific research papers are not simple parallel logic, but progressive logic or the deep connection between analyzing and summarizing data.

Taking an article about the stress of heavy metals on plants as an example, the author tested as many as five indexes and drew a chart, and finally obtained the concentration of heavy metals that plants can grow. How much research has been done on such an article? Quite a lot. But is the article well written? Not so good. This kind of article has no depth, because you are faced with so many basic data, why not further analyze it, or establish a stress dynamic equation, or optimize the data model? Just listing the basic data can not only improve the grade of the article, but also waste so much work.

Second, ambiguous scientific research is a rigorous, pragmatic and rational thinking process, and so is scientific paper. Unfortunately, however, in a large number of articles submitted, logical confusion is the most obvious problem. In the process of writing, many authors always want to explain the content of one sentence in the east and one sentence in the west, and the preface does not match the latter.

Taking the preface of an article describing plant senescence genes as an example, the author focuses on the process of chlorophyll metabolism in this part of writing. Theoretically, chlorophyll metabolism is related to plant senescence, but it is not directly related to the senescence-related genes studied in this paper, so this part of the description not only confuses the logic of the article, but also easily misleads editors and authors. In addition, in the conclusion and discussion part, we must discuss it according to the conclusion of this study, rather than discussing it in isolation from the study, otherwise readers will have questions about where this conclusion comes from and what is the relationship with the study itself.

Third, language description ellipsis In the process of many exchanges with the authors, except for a few cases, most authors can give quick and reasonable explanations to the problems arising from the research itself in their articles, but contrary to Kan Kan, this is not reflected in their articles. Can speak, do and write. Many articles seem to be rich in research content, but in fact they are obscure. Therefore, we should learn to write scientific papers with detailed, clear and easy-to-understand pronunciation.

As an author, your target group is readers. These readers may be elites in this field or newcomers. Therefore, you can't write an article with the individualism of "I understand", but try to explain the problem clearly. For example, in an article, English abbreviations are widely used to describe proper nouns in the study, but no relevant explanations are given. This kind of behavior is abandoned. The correct way is to use the format of "Chinese nouns (English full names, English abbreviations)" when English abbreviations first appear, which is not only clear but also easy to accept.

Fourth, research lacks innovation. Nowadays, science and technology are progressing rapidly, and most scientific research achievements are "standing on the shoulders of giants", which is based on previous studies. Therefore, it is very important to highlight the uniqueness and innovation of your own research in writing, which is also the biggest part of many inspection indicators. You need to emphasize the difference between yourself and others in your article. But many authors just repeat the methods and conclusions of previous experiments, which will question your research significance.

Taking the landscape of a certain place as an example, this paper studies the landscape layout of a commercial district, and provides suggestions and guidance for the landscape planning of this area. However, when reading, I found that the published methods were adopted in the analysis and investigation, and there was no innovation in the methods. At the same time, the research conclusion is only applicable to the local area and has no enlightenment to the landscape layout of other areas. Then this article is just an investigation and verification article, which is suitable for internal communication and far from publication.

If it is necessary to check the weight, it is recommended to use paperpp.