Provide a short, descriptive title that conveys the objectives or hypothesis of your study. Your title should include keywords that reflect the important aspects of the study. Why say “Nutrient Lab” when you can say “The Effects of Essential Nutrient Deficiencies on Algal Growth Rates.” Try writing this last, once you know the story of your lab.
The hypotheses are clearly and concisely presented at the end of the Introduction. Good hypotheses will be:
-focused (will test one variable)
-testable (will contain the units of measure that you will use)
-predictive (reflecting the biological mechanisms outlined in the preceding introduction)
The last paragraph of Introduction should set up the hypotheses. You might even start with the hypotheses so you know where you are going!! Dr. Briggs said that using “I” statements are ok. (Avoid passive voice.) It is good to explicitly say “I hypothesize” so that they are easy to identify by your TAs!
Phrases/sentence structures to help you get started:
Diversity will be higher in _________ forests than _________ forests because [variable] will lead to… [biological mechanism].
For lab report #1 there are two hypotheses
Is there a difference in biodiversity between primary and secondary forests? (Ex. biodiversity will be higher in secondary forests because….)
How does the students one factor differ between forests? (ex: Soil pH will be more acidic in primary forests than in secondary forests because...)
Background context should be included in the first paragraph of the introduction. All of this information should be leading to the hypotheses.
Key ideas and definitions can be sandwiched between the big picture and the hypotheses.
In 102, avoid using your lab manual as a primary source. There are lots of peer reviewed articles and databases on forest ecology. Find primary sources within textbooks; do not use actual textbooks as a primary source.
SAMPLE HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT:
The herbaceous layer can contain up to 90% of the plant diversity in temperate forests due to (....) (Gilliam 2007).
This section provides the “why” of the study by presenting the background and context for the work and by providing rationale for the predictive hypotheses that will be stated later in this section. In providing background and context for the work, you bring the reader up to speed on the state-of-knowledge about the subject and explain the theoretical or practical framework in which your work is set. From this broad background, you then need to explain where your work fits into this contextual framework. In doing so, you will be providing the rationale for your hypothesis. The information that you present to build the rationale for your hypothesis should convey the biological mechanism supporting your predictive hypothesis. For our purposes these introductions will not consist of extensive literature reviews. One or two well-crafted paragraphs with appropriate literature citations will suffice.
Think about this as the funnel method! Start with the big picture and why it matters. Define key terms/ use primary sources, then context (background, other sources, facts, definitions), then hypothesis.
