the title and the objectives which can be separated by several paragraphs. However, although separated by space they are not separated by intent or reason for doing the work. The abstract, introduction and materials and methods are bound by the reason for doing the work. The abstract is to be begun with a sentence that indicates why it was important, or necessary, to do the work. This is to be a specific response to the title. That is followed by what was done and what was determined. All of which is to be summarized with a statement of why the results are important. All of this is designed to aquatint the reader on why the work was done. Often during a search the only thing that a reader will encounter is the abstract, this is all the information provided in the full manuscript reduced to 250 words or less. The abstract is a stand alone component of the manuscript that is designed to provide the relevant information to the reader.
What follows in the introduction is constructed to tell the reader what is the problem and sufficient relevant background on how the problem is important. The important information that supports what is being done, or which is contrary to what is being undertaken, is to be presented. What often occurs is that the beginning of the introduction is consumed by a volcanic flow of words that detail how much of whatever is the crop is produced in the world and/or the country in which the work was undertaken and how much the crop is worth. This often has no relevance to what is described in the title.
The Materials and methods absorbs the rationale for doing the work and describes how the work was done. This section supports the title without changing its meaning, or deviating from what was implied in the title and introduction. It is designed to allow the reader to repeat, or change the methods used to undertake future research. The results describe what the Materials and methods explained. Finally comes the Discussion. This section tells the reader why the results occurred and how the results are important to the body of knowledge. This section takes all that has gone before and relates them to the title and objectives without deviating from the importance of the entire content and original intent of the manuscript. This is not the time to speculate on the reason for the results unless that speculation can be supported by data or citations. From beginning to end the aim is to tell a coherent and flowing story that began with a reason to do the work and ends with the importance of the work.
Reviewers of submitted manuscripts
In addition to the Editorial Consulting Board, I extend my gratitude to the voluntary reviewers who provide their time and efforts to assure that the quality of the manuscripts meets the standards expected by the journal and its readers. They are: D. Ahmed, M. Arghavani, M.J. Atif, R. Beyaz, E. Cober, J.C. Diaz-Perez, K. Hayat, K.M. Khokhar, D.S. Kim, G.C. Koc, Y. Ma, A. Nabavi, and W. Wadas.