You have months of notebook records, a folder of half-sorted results and no draft, so how to write a bioscience research paper comes down to sequence: plan, pick a journal, build figures, then write.
Quick answer: Choose a target journal and read its author instructions first. Turn your records into ordered figures, draft the body in IMRaD form, and write the abstract and title last. Check the manuscript against the journal’s own checklist before you submit.
If you are still deciding which outlets suit your work, browse our bioscience journals hub. If you are unsure where your project sits in the field, start with what is bioscience research. Once drafting begins, the structure of a bioscience research paper covers each section in more depth than this workflow does.
Plan before you write
The cheapest step on the ladder is also the one most often skipped: decide what the paper is for and where it is going before you type a sentence. Writing too early usually means rewriting later.
Choose the journal at the start
A guide to writing a scientific manuscript on PubMed Central says the target journal should be chosen at the time the scientific work is conceptualised. The reason is practical. Each journal has a scope and its own “instructions to authors”, and these have to be followed while the manuscript is prepared. Picking a journal after the draft is finished means reformatting, and possibly restructuring, to fit rules you could have followed from the beginning.
The same guide advises keeping one or more backup journals in mind in case of non-acceptance. Choose backups with a similar scope so that a rejection costs you formatting time rather than a rewrite. If you are writing for a course rather than a journal, the equivalent first step is to check your syllabus or assignment description to see what is expected, as the Centenary University science research guide advises.
Protect time and read first
A life scientists’ writing guide warns against starting to write too early and says most of your effort should go into planning and brainstorming rather than typing. Pair that with the PubMed Central guide’s advice to delegate time for thinking and writing at regular intervals. A fixed, repeating writing slot suits a lab schedule better than waiting for a free week that rarely arrives. Use the early sessions to read recent papers from your target journal and to outline what your results can and cannot claim.
From lab notebook to ordered figures
The notebook is raw material, not a first draft. Work through it in stages, and turn the records into figures before you turn them into sentences.
- Gather the records. Collect notebook pages, instrument exports and analysis files for the experiments that bear on one question. Leave out side experiments that belong to a different paper.
- Separate method from result. Pull procedures, reagents and conditions into a methods list. Keep the measured outcomes in a separate working file for the results.
- Decide the story. The hellobio guide recommends arranging your figures in the way that tells the best, most interesting story. Lay the candidate figures out in order and ask which sequence leads a reader from question to answer with the fewest gaps.
- Build the figures. Make each one in your analysis software, then check that it can be understood on its own.
- Cut what does not serve the story. A result that does not support the question can be saved for another paper or removed.
This ordered figure set becomes the backbone of the Results section. You can now draft from something fixed rather than from memory.
Draft the body in a workable order
Most bioscience manuscripts follow IMRaD: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion, described by the PubMed Central guide as the most widely used method for writing a manuscript. The order in which a reader meets the sections is not the best order in which to write them.
| Section | Where it sits in the manuscript | When to draft it | What it has to do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Results | After the methods | First, straight from the ordered figures | Present the information your figures contain |
| Materials and Methods | After the introduction | Second, from the notebook | Record what was done, with conditions |
| Introduction | After the abstract and keywords | Third, once the results show what needs setting up | Set the context for the question |
| Discussion and conclusion | After the results | Fourth | Interpret what the results mean |
| Abstract and keywords | After the title and author identity | Fifth, when the findings are settled | Summarise the whole paper |
| Title | First on the page | Last | Name the work accurately in a glance |
Section positions follow the IMRaD description in the PubMed Central manuscript guide and the front-matter order in the BIOS author guide, which runs title, author identity, abstract, keywords, then Introduction, Methods, Results and Analysis, Conclusion, Acknowledgements and References. The drafting turns are an editorial recommendation for sequencing the work.
Write results first, then methods
Results are the part you can write with the least interpretation, so they make a low-risk starting point. Each paragraph should open with a sentence that defines its context and close with a sentence giving its conclusion, which is the paragraph pattern the hellobio guide recommends. Methods then follow naturally from the notebook sorting you did earlier.
Introduction and discussion
The hellobio guide describes the introduction as the place for setting the context, and the results as the place for presenting the information. Writing the introduction after the results keeps it honest: it only needs to set up the question your data actually answer. The discussion then returns to that question and states what the results mean, no more and no less.
Abstract and title last
The abstract summarises finished work, so it is easier once the findings are fixed. The PubMed Central guide notes a limit of 250 words for abstracts in the majority of journals, and describes a structured abstract as having Background, Aim, Materials and Methods, Results and Conclusion sections. Check which form your journal wants. The same guide observes that a reader spends less than 2 seconds on the title, which is why it deserves a final, careful pass rather than a first guess.
Manage citations from the first paragraph
Set up a reference manager before you insert your first citation. The BIOS author guide recommends one such as Mendeley or EndNote, and a Jacksonville State University biology library guide notes that bibliographic tools such as RefWorks let you organise and manage citations. Retrofitting citations by hand after a long draft is where errors creep in.
Revise the draft
Revision is the next rung up: instead of adding text, you test whether the text does its job. Read the whole manuscript against your figure order and ask whether each paragraph advances the story.
- Check each paragraph’s first and last sentence. If the opening does not define the context or the closing does not state a conclusion, rewrite it.
- Match text to figures. Every claim in the results should point to a figure or table, and every figure should be discussed.
- Align the discussion with the introduction. The question posed at the start should be the question answered at the end.
- Get an outside reader. A colleague outside your immediate project will find gaps that you can no longer see.
If these checks keep turning up large structural problems, go back to the figure order rather than polishing sentences. If they turn up only wording fixes, you are close to the last stage.
Final checks against the journal’s rules
Before you submit, reread the instructions to authors for your chosen journal. The PubMed Central guide notes that author guidelines may change over time and should be consulted at regular intervals, so a version you saved when planning may be out of date.
Journals differ in how they want a manuscript delivered. The BIOS guide, for example, asks for manuscripts typed in Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer using its template, submitted online through OJS with every author entered, and it provides a Submission Preparation Checklist to complete before sending. Your journal’s own checklist will name its specific requirements, so work through it item by item rather than assuming another journal’s rules apply.
When to stop and submit
A manuscript is ready when it passes these checkpoints:
- Format: it follows the journal’s template, section order and abstract form.
- Story: the figures, results and conclusion tell one consistent story.
- Citations: every reference in the list is cited in the text and every in-text citation has an entry.
- People: all authors are agreed and entered, and any required declaration is prepared.
- Checklist: the journal’s pre-submission checklist is complete.
If any item fails, fix it before you submit. If all pass, further polishing has diminishing returns, and the manuscript is better served by peer review than by another solo read-through.
Frequently asked questions
Can I send the same manuscript to two journals at once?
Generally not. The BIOS author guide states that authors will not submit the article to other journals unless it has been declared rejected. Check the policy of your own journal before submitting.
What happens after I submit?
The manuscript goes through peer review. The PubMed Central guide advises being prepared for minor or major revisions to the original article, and even for rejection, which is another reason to have a backup journal in mind.
Who should be listed as an author?
Most journals follow the authorship criteria defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, according to the PubMed Central guide. Some journals also require authors to declare their individual contributions to the research and to preparing the manuscript.
How many references do I need?
It depends on the journal. The BIOS author guide asks for a minimum of 5 references, all of which must be cited in the text. Your target journal’s instructions set the figure that applies to you.