www.acsnano.org
Redefining the Experimental and Methods Sections
Downloaded via 109.94.175.92 on July 18, 2019 at 02:57:10 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
T
wice each year, the ACS Nano team of editors meets formally to discuss various aspects of the journal and the fields that we cover. One theme that always comes up is how we can best serve our community by bringing together diverse groups of researchers across the large number of fields that nanoscience and nanotechnology impact. At our most recent editors’ meeting, which took place just prior to the start of the ACS National Meeting in Orlando, we held breakout sessions in several topical areas. Here, we brainstormed and discussed forward-looking initiatives that would be most useful to our broad community of researchers and readers. A recurring theme across all topical areas is the need for reproducibility, so that we can build on each other’s work and thereby move the field forward; it was the reason that we started ACS Nano and it was discussed on our very first published page.1 These ideas have also been noted by others.2−5 For research to have longevity and the greatest impact, others must be able to replicate it so that they can build on it and take it in new directions. Reproducibility is important across all areas of research, and it includes (but is not limited to) synthetic protocols, characterization methods, property testing, device fabrication, data analyses, calculations, and simulations.
There are several aspects to reproducibility. For example, are the experiments reproducible efficiently? Are the experiments reproducible safely? Efficient reproducibility encompasses that the written procedure yields the expected products, but it can also be interpreted more broadly. For example, for the vast majority of reported procedures, there are significant numbers of (usually unreported) failures and troubleshooting efforts. Why not have experimental sections of manuscripts include distinct “troubleshooting” components, wherein the authors share common pitfalls and known solutions to make reproducing the results not only possible but more efficient? Just this small change will have far-reaching impact. Including common challenges encountered in the experiments adds scientific depth to our conception of the work itself. Highlighting possible pitfalls also saves researcher time and resources and accelerates the ability to build on the advances reported.
Why not have experimental sections of manuscripts include distinct “troubleshooting” components, wherein the authors share common pitfalls and known solutions to make reproducing the results not only possible but more efficient?
For research to have longevity and the greatest impact, others must be able to replicate it so that they can build on it and take it in new directions.
Likewise, a safety perspective is of paramount importance for researchers to be able to replicate a procedure safely, including being fully aware of hazards and being armed with advance knowledge of any unusual concerns or potential problems.7 Highlighting unique safety concerns is especially important for new researchers, such as undergraduate and graduate students, or researchers who are new to a field, as they may not yet have developed the skills necessary to identify the risks of various procedures. Even these brief examples highlight the power hidden in rethinking how we conceptualize and report our materials and methods. A growing number of papers dedicated exclusively to elaborating on methods and protocols are appearing in the literature. As one example, Chemistry of Materials recently published a Special Issue on Methods and Protocols in Materials Chemistry,8 which included a collection of papers by experts showcasing “insider information” and helpful tips for successfully and safely carrying out cutting-edge research.9 Papers such as these dive deeper into the methods needed to reproduce work that is deemed to be important and of sufficiently broad interest, and they are an extremely valuable resource for researchers seeking to understand, to implement, and to replicate these
ACS Nano publishes comprehensive articles, which are more extensive in scope and/or depth than shorter communications. One benefit of this Article format is the ability to include full experimental details in the main body of the paper rather than relegating them to the Supporting Information. The Experimental Section or, more broadly, the Methods Section, is a central part of the paper and it is an important part of the overall effort presented. The goal of any Methods Section is to describe, completely and in detail, everything that is necessary to reproduce the work described in the manuscript. As a result, there are standard components of a Methods Section. A list of chemicals and key supplies is included to indicate details such as where the specific materials used in the research can be purchased, their purity, and how they were handled or modified. Step-by-step and detailed descriptions of procedures are included to indicate how reactions are carried out, characterization is performed, data are analyzed, properties are tested, and, for computational papers, which methods and codes are used. These components of a Methods Section are all necessary and useful. However, is this information sufficient for a researcher in a different laboratory to reproduce the work?6 © 2019 American Chemical Society
Published: May 28, 2019 4862
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b03753 ACS Nano 2019, 13, 4862−4864
Editorial
Cite This: ACS Nano 2019, 13, 4862−4864
ACS Nano
Editorial
concerns, as well as citations pointing readers to specific safetyrelated resources, are particularly helpful.
procedures. But, imagine the added impact if an expanded scope of procedural information was included within an original research article when it was published, rather than years later as a stand-alone contribution that covers only a limited set of topics. We and our collaborators have spent countless hours trying to reproduce published proceduresincluding our own!only to find out that a detail that was not recognized at the time ended up being key to implementing it successfully. In most cases, even though such details were not recognized at the time and therefore were not included in a published Methods Section, they were known in the sense that day-to-day navigation and troubleshooting hinted at them, implicitly if not explicitly. Capturing the researchers’ logic flow, including their hypotheses and troubleshooting strategies, within the Methods Section would have signaled to other researchers (and ourselves!) that there were otherwise unknown parameters impacting the reported results. In addition to enabling reproducibility on a larger scale, such knowledge and details will become increasingly important as machine learning and artificial intelligence are developed to optimize experimental procedures and to develop new methods and materials. Enhanced Experimental and Methods Sections, which more fully capture the wealth of information that may be important for reproducibility, whether known or not, will be increasingly important. At ACS Nano, we imagine a (near) future where a Methods Section can be more valuable to the proliferation of interdisciplinary research by including additional insight in the form of tips, thoughts, observations, pitfalls, and safety considerations than is currently mainstream. We encourage authors to include more information in their Experimental and Methods Sections, including a distinct “troubleshooting” component, to help colleagues across fields understand and build from their work, as well as be better positioned to reproduce it efficiently and safely. In particular, we encourage authors to think creatively about how they can best achieve these goals, and we envision these additions in two ways: additional scientific commentary and new presentation formats. From a scientific perspective, authors may consider concisely outlining the rationale behind their choices of materials and methods (e.g., reagents, reaction conditions, spectral ranges, property testing parameters) to help demystify and to make more transparent otherwise opaque procedures. Authors may consider including common troubleshooting tips to share key observations when things did not go as planned. For example, perhaps a certain reaction temperature and time led to the synthesis of a desired type of nanoparticle, but for unknown reasons, the temperature and time may be slightly different when carried out by other researchers in a different laboratory. Including brief descriptions about what the authors observed at lower or higher temperatures or shorter or longer reaction times could be the exact information that is necessary for others to reproduce or to extend the work. Authors could also consider finding prominent ways to describe both obvious and nonobvious hazards and safety considerations, as such information is especially useful to new researchers seeking to reproduce the work. These warnings can include chemical hazards such as air sensitivity, reactivity, stability, and byproduct formation issues, as well as potential issues that could arise during characterization and property measurements, in addition to safety considerations that are now required components of every paper. Descriptions of approaches that the authors implemented to mitigate safety
At ACS Nano, we imagine a (near) future where a Methods Section can be more valuable to the proliferation of interdisciplinary research by including additional insight in the form of tips, thoughts, observations, pitfalls, and safety considerations than is currently mainstream. All of these components may benefit from including schemes, images, and/or videos in this manuscript section. For example, images of reaction setups and/or videos of key procedures, which can easily be linked to and included in the Supporting Information then discussed within the Experimental Section of the main manuscript, help other researchers see exactly what was done and how the products of each step appear, while also visualizing details of techniques and sample handling, among other factors. These details may not otherwise be conveyedor the authors may not even appreciate that they are non-obvious to others or know that they are critical to the successful implementation of the procedurebut could be the most important information needed to reproduce the work. As many nanomaterials syntheses are brought into teaching laboratories, such details will be helpful to students in getting the most out of their experience. The examples we have described are just the tip of the iceberg, and the list is neither prescriptive nor exhaustive. Yet, they highlight the hidden power latent in our concepts of how to report our scientific procedures. Stay tuned for more advances and ideas for redefining the Experimental and Methods Sections in ways that help to bridge fields, to enable deeper understanding of the methods and safety issues involved in projects, and ultimately to help others be successful in not only reproducing, but building on, published methods. As always, we welcome input from authors, reviewers, and readers on ideas for new and creative ways to include an expanded scope of useful information in the Experimental and Methods Sections that benefits the broad nanoscience and nanotechnology communities.
Jill E. Millstone, Associate Editor
Warren C. W. Chan, Associate Editor
Cherie R. Kagan, Associate Editor
Luis M. Liz-Marzán, Associate Editor 4863
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b03753 ACS Nano 2019, 13, 4862−4864
ACS Nano
Editorial
Z.; Carril, M.; Feliu, N.; Escudero, A.; Alkilany, A. M.; Pelaz, B.; del Pino, P.; Parak, W. J. Selected Standard Protocols for the Synthesis, Phase Transfer, and Characterization of Inorganic Colloidal Nanoparticles. Chem. Mater. 2017, 29, 399−461. (7) Miller, A. J. M.; Tonks, I. A. Let’s Talk About Safety: Open Communication for Safer Laboratories. Organometallics 2018, 37, 3225−3227. (8) Buriak, J. M. Preface to the Special Issue on Methods and Protocols in Materials Chemistry. Chem. Mater. 2017, 29, 1−2. (9) Buriak, J. M. Methods/ProtocolsA New Article Type in Chemistry of Materials. Chem. Mater. 2017, 29, 475−476.
Nicholas A. Kotov, Associate Editor
Paul A. Mulvaney, Associate Editor
Wolfgang J. Parak, Associate Editor
Andrey L. Rogach, Associate Editor
Paul S. Weiss, Editor-in-Chief
■
Raymond E. Schaak,* Associate Editor AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Jill E. Millstone: 0000-0002-9499-5744 Warren C. W. Chan: 0000-0001-5435-4785 Cherie R. Kagan: 0000-0001-6540-2009 Luis M. Liz-Marzán: 0000-0002-6647-1353 Nicholas A. Kotov: 0000-0002-6864-5804 Paul A. Mulvaney: 0000-0002-8007-3247 Wolfgang J. Parak: 0000-0003-1672-6650 Andrey L. Rogach: 0000-0002-8263-8141 Paul S. Weiss: 0000-0001-5527-6248 Raymond E. Schaak: 0000-0002-7468-8181 Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the authors and not necessarily the views of the ACS.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Weiss, P. S. Welcome to ACS Nano. ACS Nano 2007, 1, 1. (2) Collins, F. S.; Tabak, L. A. Policy: NIH Plans To Enhance Reproducibility. Nature 2014, 505, 612−613. (3) Björnmalm, M.; Caruso, F. Robust Chemistry: The Importance of Data and Methods Sharing. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2018, 57, 1122− 1123. (4) Faria, M.; Björnmalm, M.; Thurecht, K. J.; Kent, S. J.; Parton, R. G.; Kavallaris, M.; Johnston, A. P. R.; Gooding, J. J.; Corrie, S. R.; Boyd, B. J.; Thordarson, P.; Whittaker, A. K.; Stevens, M. M.; Prestidge, C. A.; Porter, C. J. H.; Parak, W. J.; Davis, T. P.; Crampin, E. J.; Caruso, F. Minimum Information Reporting in Bio−Nano Experimental Literature. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2018, 13, 777−785. (5) Buriak, J. M.; Korgel, B. The Experimental Section: The Key to Longevity of Your Research. Chem. Mater. 2014, 26, 1765−1766. (6) Hühn, J.; Carrillo-Carrion, C.; Soliman, M. G.; Pfeiffer, C.; Valdeperez, D.; Masood, A.; Chakraborty, I.; Zhu, L.; Gallego, M.; Yue, 4864
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b03753 ACS Nano 2019, 13, 4862−4864
