Laboratory Report Format

Hypothermic Response of Rickettsia tsutsugamushi to Philippine Oregano

(Coleus aromaticus Benth) Oil Extract

Cruz, John Dale1, Rodriguez, Maritestes1, Starfriend, Nee Patrick1

1 BS Biology 4A, University of St. La Salle. Font size 10

Carl Errol S. Seran

BBIO111 Course Facilitator

Abstract

The abstract is a short summary of the main ideas found in the lab report.
This is usually the last thing written but the first thing presented in order
to grab the attention of the reader. It should include (1) the purpose of the
study or question being addressed, (2) the main procedures or activities
conducted, (3) the major results of the study, and (4) any conclusions
drawn by the author(s). The abstract should generally be between 100
and 200 words in length. No spacing, justified.

Keywords: provide five (5) keywords relevant for searches

Introduction
The introduction should provide the background information and state the scientific problem and
why it should be addressed. Your first sentence should answer the question: What is this all about? What
were the previous observations or prior knowledge used to come to these ideas? When examining an
article, it is crucial to focus on the first three sentences of the introduction. It should already capture the
idea. It is common to observe that the rationale is introduced with a premise of “what is known about the
topic”, followed by “however”. Try to avoid statements of the albums and platitudes in the first
sentences, as regrettably often used in journal papers. Keep your audience. With a few sentences, and set
it in perspective. If only applicable, a short historical review maybe a suitable, preferably with references
to overview articles, here, as elsewhere in the paper, meticulously, clearly and honestly state the findings
of referenced works. It is also easy to make several statements followed by a reference that appears to
support all of the statements, although it only underpins the last of them. Likewise, here as elsewhere, you
should know the field sufficiently well to credit those who so deserve, as most often it was, they who
made the discoveries.
Provide supporting literature RELATED to your investigation, and not just about citing the study because
it talks about the variables. If you are covering the influence of antibiotic residues on microbial
community structures in rivers and oceans, you don’t include those antibiotics that caused sepsis in birds.
FOCUS on the variables (antibiotic residues, microbial community structure, water ecosystems). State the
objective or hypothesis to be tested and how it will further the understanding of the issue. A report might
be an inquiry or investigation, but some are descriptive observations that do not require hypothesis
Laboratory Report Format

testing. It is important the the objectives should be SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic,
and time bound). Common mistake in formulating objectives is to use vague verbs that is difficult to
measure (understand, know, study). Be specific. End your introduction with an intended purpose
(different from objectives).
Pretend that you are a storyteller. the tone should be in standard prose, simple and direct. When
you use Quilbot or grammarly, it tends to lose the tone of scientific writing as its algorithm is strongly
influenced by social science. Scientific writing requires precise language and terminologies to convey
specific meanings and nuances. Quilbot's paraphrasing algorithms, while often impressive, can struggle
with understanding the complexities of scientific concepts and may introduce inaccuracies or ambiguities.
This can be disastrous in a lab report where clarity and factual accuracy are paramount.
Common format for an introduction in a scientific report follows OPILOT (Overview - Main
Problem - Importance - Main Literature - Objectives - Theoretical framework, if applicable). Observe 1.5
spacing, Calibri font, size 12. Same spacing should be observed with Materials and Methods, and Results
and Discussions. Always be guided with the rubric for your self evaluation. At least 1 - 2 pages, not
including the Tile and abstract.

Materials and Methods

This section is a little like a cooking recipe. The main steps taken should be summarized as a
standard prose in a manner that anyone could follow and repeat. Think of newspapers, textbooks, business
documents, and most online content - these are all typically written in standard prose. It's the kind of
writing we use for clear and direct communication, aiming for easy comprehension and avoidance of
ambiguity. Order: usually according to importance, or in logical order, starting with experimental animals
or test subjects (and approval by relevant ethics committees): species, number, gender, weights/ ages,
food, and drinks. Maybe designate the time of day of various interventions or operations. Manufactures
name, address and maybe batch number for biological materials. Donor’s name: "provided by Dr.
Hanson….” For a method previously described: cite! For modifications: at what and why different.
Maybe a subsection: "Mythological considerations" with methodological discussions.
It all set up must be described so the trials could be replicated by competent researchers in the
field at hand: materials and methods is a recipe book. Finish by giving an account of the statistical
methods under the heading statistics, if applicable. Provide a schematic diagram outlining your
methodology. You can use biorender app to utilize some accurate vectors: https://www.biorender.com/

Results and Discussions

This section is descriptive of what was observed. Figures and tables serve as a summary of the
results to illustrate the data. They also serve as guides to outline the text of the section. Slowly describe
each figure or table. Expand these points into sentences and paragraphs. Do not repeat numbers listed in
Laboratory Report Format

tables or appearing in figures, but described trends and courses (such as with table or figure in
parentheses). Preferably state how large the changes are, such as about 25% larger than the control. No
real discussion in the results section, but some interpretations and explanations are often necessary. You
might start results with a documentation of certain terms. State the uncertainty of the locale is Asian
parameter and/or the effect measure (mean plus minus standard error of the mean (SEM), median with a
95% confidence interval I'll). Now and then the variation with of the measurements like standard
deviation, coefficient of variation or quartile interval is stated, but often is better place in materials and
methods. State the P values, number of replicated measurements, number of trials, preferably in
connection with tables and or figures, only if applicable. Present the data as fully as possible, including
stuff that at the moment does not quite make sense. This is written in the past tense and 3rd person.
Conclusions are not provided in this section as they are made from analyzing the information and
synthesizing the results. To make it simple, the Results DESCRIBE what you observed, not
INTERPRETATION or ANALYSIS of the findings. Be guided by this https://www.bibliography.com/apa/
apa-table-guidelines-made-simple/#goog_rewarded for APA table format. See the format below.

Figure Format APA

Check this website for APA formatting.
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/
apa_tables_and_figures.html
Laboratory Report Format

For the discussion, briefly point out the principal findings, in relation to the approach of the
introduction. Interpreting results: preferably several possibilities open (references), how reliable are the
results? Do they agree with the findings of others? Transfer of value or generalizability? Why have no
others found this? Accurate references! Maybe something on the conditions for a successful result. An
answered questions any future test. Relate your findings with relevant literature. At this time, you will be
able to re-emphasize the original hypotheses made in the introduction. Indicate whether or not the
hypotheses were demonstrated sufficiently. If this is not the case, offer alternatives and interpretations.
Can you improve or modify your hypotheses? Explain how multiple lines of evidence corroborate each
other and help to further the understanding of the problem.
Ending preferably in the form of conclusions (last paragraph of Results and Discussion, not
separated from RAD) in which you summarize what is important, put forth your own opinions and
preferably include unanswered questions and future task. Your conclusion ANSWERS your objectives.
Last part of conclusion should provide an implication.
Laboratory Report Format

Literature Cited (instead of References)

Prior knowledge requires demonstration of strength or validity. The references should be from
primary sources and should illustrate the point of the statement. The section is presented in numerous
formats as a bibliography, but citations are inserted near the text where knowledge or statements are
displayed. Use a reference Manager to insert citations and format the bibliography. An excellent free
reference manager with a plug-in to common word processors is Zotero or Mendeley. APA format, 6th
edition. PEER REVIEWED, preferably with High Impact Factor Journals. 70% of related literatures
should be up to date (2018 - 2022). NO WEBSITES and NO NEWS ARTICLES. See example below

Literature Cited

Doe, J. K., & Smith, A. B. (2022). Exploring antimicrobial resistance in urban wastewater: A
phylogenetic approach. Environmental Microbiology Journal, 30(4), 215–230. https://doi.org/
10.xxxx/emj.2022.98765

Lee, C. D., & Martinez, R. P. (2021). The impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs on hospital
infection rates. Journal of Public Health Research, 18(3), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/
jphr.2021.12345

Nguyen, L. T., & Chandra, S. (2023). One Health approach to combating antimicrobial resistance in
Southeast Asia. Global Health Perspectives, 12(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/
ghp.2023.54321

Standard APA 7 Formatting Rules for References:

• Indentation: Hanging indent of 0.5 inches (1.27 cm)
• Spacing: Single-spacing with extra space between references (for scientific paper only)
• Order: References are listed alphabetically by the author’s last name

The last part would be your Declaration on the Use of Artificial Intelligence.