Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Extended abstract (MICROPLASTIC IDENTIFICATION) | Abc Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

1. please follow the outline, rubric, extra infor and the Guid to microplastic documenst before you start it 2. this is a abstract about microplastic identification, but still include other information 3. I will upload the pic from lab for extra infor later
extended_abstract_outline__1_.docx

extra_intruduction_about_extended_abstract__2_.pptx

rubric_for_assessing_extended_abstracts_1___1_.docx

guide_to_microplastic_identification_meri_2_.pdf

processing_water_samples_2__1_.docx

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Extended Abstract Outline
Your Name
ENVS-260-section number
TA: Jenna Wiegand
3 March 2019
*Insert Title here*
Keywords:
• Place between 3-6 terms here that you think the reader of the abstract might not know
off the top of their head
• Definitions can come from non-scholarly sources, no Wikipedia please!
Introduction:
• Necessary background information
o Ecosystem services, importance of trees
o Try and make sure these sources are relatively local to the DC area!
• This is where you can tie in some of your scholarly sources. Tie in information about the
importance of trees, green space etc
• Make your last sentence your hypothesis (if/then statement)
o If you need examples of hypothesis let me know!
Methods
• Well- written in paragraph format, all experimental details are covered, but not in as
much crazy detail.
• Appropriate controls or replication are present and explained
• Should not be longer than a short paragraph
Results, Data, Figures, Graphs
• All figures are made correctly, with all axises labeled and a clear title.
• Small caption after the chart explaining what the graph is showing. NO ANALYSIS!
• Data is relevant, and contributes to the abstract
• NOTE: Figures do not go towards your page count, so if you have a lot of relevant
graphs, send them all in.
Discussion
• All important trends and data comparisons have been interpreted correctly and
discussed, conveying an insightful understanding of the results
• Limitations of the experiment described
o Things like human error, bad weather, crazy stuff that shouldn’t have happen
• Future studies based on your results
• You can have outside sources here if you think it benefits your discussion!
Conclusion
• A sentence or two wrapping up your paper.

Make sure this is labeled as a conclusion somehow.
o Either place it under a conclusion heading or end your abstract with “in
conclusion” or something similar.
References:
• Have a references or works cited section, if you don’t your paper will be counted for
having plagiarism.
• Use whatever style of citation you want except for footnotes.
NOTES:
Style
• Good grammar, correct spellings
• All sections are complete and show notable effort
Overall Aim
• You show that you understand the lab fully
• You demonstrated scientific understanding and reasonsing
Writing Scientific Abstracts
Modified from Prof. Almin Dapo
Some conferences ask for an extended abstract.
What are the differences among “abstracts,”
“extended abstracts,” and “full papers”?
Generalized: The answer could be conference
specific but generally a full paper is about 10-15
pages long, an extended abstract would be 1- 4 pages
long (generally 1 or 2 pages with figures and
explanations) and an abstract is generally a few
hundred words long.
An extended abstract and a full paper are nearly the
same; the primary difference is that an extended
abstract tends to be somewhat shorter than a full
paper.
An extended abstract is not simply a long
abstract. The extended abstract should
contain references, comparisons to
related works and other details expected
in a scientific paper but not in an
abstract.
Extended Abstract

Written version of conference talk
 usually very short
 should summarise all important points
 introduction
 critical points of method/analysis
 main results
 conclusions
 include diagrams/plots if essential to
support argument
 write in standard scientific style
informative
title
authors’ names
and institutes
short abstract
introduction
motivating
study
standard
scientific
writing style
(formal)
citing necessary
reference
the critical
figures and
plots
brief
description of
method
all the
important
numerical
results
conclusion
references
Summary

Do include:






Introduction and motivation of the study
critical or innovative aspects of methodology
numerical results
necessary plots and diagrams
references
Don’t include:


technical details of method
diagrams which are not strictly necessary to prove your point
References
Philip Koopman, 1997, How to Write an Abstract.
Carnegie Mellon University, October, 1997.
Chittaranjan Andrade, 2011, How to write a good
abstract for a scientific paper or conference
presentation. Indian J Psychiatry. 53(2): 172–175.
doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.82558
THE TITLE
• Is this a good title?
• What do you expect from this article?
• Is it specific enough to tell you what the article is
about?
• Is it concise enough to generate your interest?
• Your opportunity to attract the reader’s attention.
• Keep it informative and concise.
• Avoid technical jargon and abbreviations if possible.
The abstract
In general an abstract tells the readers what you
did and what were the important findings. It is
like an advertisement of your article. So it
should be interesting, and easy to be understood
without reading the whole article
A clear abstract will strongly influence whether
or not your work is further considered.
Keywords
The key words are mainly used for indexing and
searching
TIP: Search for your keywords online. Would
readers find YOUR article using these keywords?
Due next week…


Extended abstract due 11:59 pm on Sunday

One section sent to me by 11:59pm on Wednesday for comments

Office hours will get more detailed notes
Group Presentation due at the beginning of class


Tell me about your experiment, what you found in your data, the process, what
software you used relevant articles etc
Lab Notebook due in Class for hard copy or submitted on Blackboard by
11:59pm on Sunday. DO NOT SHARE A GOOGLE DRIVE LINK WITH ME.

You should have entries for every day you did something for your project. This
includes the GIS lab (with no data chart)
RUBRIC FOR ASSESSING extended abstracts
Criteria
Points
Introduction
(5 pts)
Content knowledge is
accurate, relevant and
provides appropriate
background for reader
including defining critical
terms.
Hypothesis clearly stated
and testable
Points
Materials and
Methods
(5 pts)
(5 pts)
B
Accomplished
C
Developing
D
Beginning or incomplete
5
4
3
2
Introduction complete and
well-written; provides all
necessary background
information
Introduction is nearly
complete, missing some
minor points
Some introductory
information, but still
missing some major points
Background information is
missing or contains major
inaccuracies
Primary literature
references are relevant,
adequately explained and
indicate an in depth
literature search
Primary literature
references are relevant and
adequately explained but
few
Primary literature
references, if present are
inadequately explained or
indicate a superficial
search
Primary literature missing
or irrelevant
Hypothesis clear and
testable
Hypothesis clear and
testable
Hypothesis untestable,
vague, trivial or unclear
No hypothesis is indicated
5
Materials and Methods
are detailed and
repeatable
Well-written in paragraph
format, all experimental
details are covered
Appropriate controls
(including appropriate
replication) are present
and explained.
Appropriate controls or
replication are present and
explained
Points
Results:
data, figures,
graphs,
tables, etc.
A
Exemplary
Data are summarized in a
logical format. Table or
graph types are
appropriate. Data are
properly labeled including
units. Graph axes are
appropriately labeled and
scaled and captions are
informative and complete.
5
4
Written in paragraph
format, important
experimental details are
covered, some minor
details missing
Appropriate controls or
replication present
4
3
2
Written in paragraph
format, still missing some
important experimental
details
Missing several important
experimental details or not
written in paragraph format
Controls/replication
inappropriate or absent
Missing appropriate
controls or replication
3
2
All figures, graphs, tables
are correctly drawn, are
numbered and contain
titles/captions.
All figures, graphs, tables
are correctly drawn, but
some have minor problems
or could still be improved
Most figures, graphs,
tables acceptable, some
still missing some
important or required
features
Figures, graphs, tables
contain errors or are poorly
constructed, have missing
titles, captions or numbers,
units missing or incorrect.
Data are comprehensive,
accurate and relevant.
Minor errors in accuracy or
relevancy of data
Data exhibit errors in
accuracy or relevancy
Data are incomprehensive,
inaccurate or irrelevant.
Criteria
Points
Discussion
(5 pts)
A logical chain of
reasoning from hypothesis
to data to conclusions is
clearly and persuasively
explained.
Conflicting data, if
present, are adequately
addressed.
Limitations of the data
and/or experimental
design and corresponding
implications discussed.
Points
Style and
Effort
Spelling, grammar,
sentence structure
A
Exemplary
B
Accomplished
C
Developing
D
Beginning or incomplete
5
4
3
2
All important trends and
data comparisons have
been interpreted correctly
and discussed, convey an
insightful understanding of
results
Almost all of the results
have been correctly
interpreted and discussed,
only minor improvements
are needed
Some of the results have
been correctly interpreted
and discussed; partial but
incomplete understanding
of results is still evident
Very incomplete or
incorrect interpretation of
trends and comparison of
data indicating a lack of
understanding of results
Limitations of experiment
and future studies
described in thoughtful
detail
Discuss limitations of
experiment and future
studies
Limited discussion of
limitations of experiment or
future studies
Fail to discuss limitations of
experiment or future
studies
1
0.5
3
All grammar/spelling
correct and very wellwritten
Completeness
(3 pts)
All portions are complete
and demonstrate notable
effort
Points
Overall aims
of the report:
(2 pts)
2
2
Less than 3
grammar/spelling errors,
mature, readable style
Occasional
grammar/spelling errors,
generally readable with
some rough spots in writing
style
Expected responses are
Directions not followed well
complete and demonstrate or minor areas are not
moderate effort
complete; or completed
portions demonstrate
minimal effort
1
0.5
Frequent grammar and/or
spelling errors, writing style
is rough and immature
A number of entries are
not complete or completed
portions demonstrate
minimal effort
0
Successfully learned what Successfully learned what Makes a connection
the lab is designed to
the lab is designed to teach between lab and learning
teach
goals
Makes a minimal
connection between lab
and learning goals
Does not make connection
between lab and learning
goals
Demonstrates clear and
Demonstrates clear and
thoughtful scientific inquiry thoughtful scientific inquiry
Demonstrates limited
scientific inquiry
Fails to demonstrate a
clear and thoughtful
scientific inquiry
Comment
Demonstrates scientific
inquiry
GUIDE TO MICROPLASTIC
IDENTIFICATION
a
a
INDEX
 
I  –  Microplastic  Characteristics  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  2  
II  –  Equipment  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  2  
III  –  How  to  Read  a  Filter  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  2  
IV  –  Identifying  Microplastics  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  3  
A  –  Microscope  Inspection  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  3  
B  –  Prodding  Pieces  and  Texture  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  3  
C  –  Examining  Filters  with  High  Debris  Loads  …………………………………………………………………………………………………  3  
D  –  Alternative  Identification  Methods  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  4  
i  –  The  Hot  Needle  Test  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  4  
ii  –  Compound  Microscope  Inspection  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….  4  
E  –  Variations  to  Look  for  When  Using  the  Hidalgo-­‐Ruz  Rules  …………………………………………………………………………  5  
i  –  Rule  1  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  5  
ii  –  Rule  2  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  6  
iii  –  Rule  3  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  6  
F  –  Other  Materials  You  May  Find  on  Your  Filter  …………………………………………………………………………………………….  6  
i  –  Algae  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  6  
ii  –  Salt  Crystals  and  Sand  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  8  
iii  –  Animals,  Animal  Parts  and  Shells  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………  9  
iv  –  Metal  Paint  or  Aluminum  Foil  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  9  
V  –  Categories  of  Microplastics  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  10  
A  –  Categories  Used  to  Describe  Microplastics  ……………………………………………………………………………………………..  11  
VI  –  Contamination  Considerations  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  11  
A  –  Methods  to  Reduce  Contamination  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  11  
B  –  Contamination  Examples  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  12  
VII  –  References  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..  13  
VIII  –  Appendix  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………  13  
A  –  Microplastics  Data  Sheet  ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………   13  
 
 
1  
 
This guide is intended as an introduction to microplastic identification. It is not meant to be
a guaranteed reference for each and every piece, as microplastics are extremely diverse and
can vary tremendously. When identifying, use your best judgment and try to identify as
many plastic characteristics as possible. If you are unsure about a piece, do not count it as
plastic. While counts should be as accurate as possible, it is better to have a conservative
estimate. Further reading of scientific articles is recommended.
I.
Microplastic Characteristics (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2012)
1.
2.
3.
4.
II.
Small size (largest dimension <5mm) No cellular or organic structures visible Fibers should be equally thick throughout their entire length Particles should exhibit clear and homogeneous color throughout (Please see Section IV for rule variations) Equipment 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Dissecting microscope, compound microscope, slides, cover slips, filters (ideally gridded) Petri Dishes (ideally glass) Tweezers and probe for prodding pieces Clean working area with no contamination (See Section VI) Data Sheets III. How to Read a Filter 1. Examine the fragments within the filtration perimeter. The perimeter will be defined by the shape of your filtration piece and by varying intensities of coloration (i.e: brown, yellow, green, or slightly discolored white). Some are easier to see with the naked eye than others. Underneath the dissecting microscope, even light colored perimeters are easily distinguishable.   (a)   (c)   (b)   Figure 1: Different colored filters: (a) Brown; (b), (c) Yellow. 2. If filters are curved and too difficult to examine under the microscope, glue them directly to the petri dish using two or three very small drops of glue on the filter edges. (b)   (a)   Figure 2: Glue procedure: (a) Curved filter; (b) Glued filter. 2     3. Read each filter from left to right, then move down one row, and read from right to left. A grid is helpful to ensure pieces are not double counted. Figure 3: Filter reading procedure.   IV. Identifying Microplastics A. Microscope Inspection Inspect filters under a dissecting microscope at 4.5x magnification. Filters need to be dry, as wet filters reflect the light of the microscope. Typically, covered filters will dry after 24 hours at room temperature, but depending on the moisture of the filter and temperature in the lab, it may take longer. B. Prodding Pieces and Texture Most plastic pieces are somewhat flexible and will not break when prodded. Tweezers and probes will allow you to poke at individual pieces. Plastic pieces will often bounce or spring when prodded. If a piece breaks when touched, do not count it as plastic. C. Examining Filters with High Debris Loads Detritus and salt piles may cover or make it more difficult to see microplastic pieces underneath them. Carefully pick through and move aside debris in order to make sure you don’t miss any microplastics. Figure 4: Detritus on filters. 3     D. Alternative Identification Methods i. The Hot Needle Test (based on De Witte et al., 2014) This test is useful in cases where you are not able to distinguish between plastic pieces and organic matter. In the presence of a very hot needle, plastic pieces will melt or curl. Biological and other non-plastic materials will not. The hot needle test works well when your fragments are spread apart. However, when many pieces are in close proximity ... Purchase answer to see full attachment

error: Content is protected !!