I think it is not a big deal. As what you wrote in Method part is some standard method for PCR, it may be developed by someone and you are just using it as a technique in the paper.
I suggest that reading some similar paper first, then discard them and write some of your own word, it should be sightly different. You can also citing some paper at the end. Hope this could help Zewei On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Cara Lin Bridgman <cara....@msa.hinet.net>wrote: > One of my students did a quick survey of 18 papers from 9 journals and > found a total of four ways of describing conditions for PCR reactions. I’ve > tried to standardize these examples for temperatures and times. > > Ten papers used this formula: “All PCR reactions included an initial > denaturation of 94*C for 30 s, 35 cycles of 94*C for 30 s, > 58*C for 45 s, and 72*C for 2 min, followed by a final elongation step at > 72*C for 7.” > > Five papers used this formula: “30 s denaturation at 95*C, 45 s annealing > at 58*C and 2 min extension at 72*C, a final extension step of 7 min at > 72*C.” > > Two papers used this formula: “PCR cycling conditions of an initial > denaturation step (94*C, 30 s), followed by 35 cycles at 94*C (30 s), 58*C > (45 s), 72*C (2 min) and a final extension step of 7 min at 72*C.” > > One paper used this formula: “The reaction was cycled 35 times with 94*C > (30 s), 58*C (45 s) and 72*C (2 min).” > > The question is this: When writing your own paper, does using (or copying) > one of these four ways constitute plagiarism? > > If it does constitute plagiarism, then are these papers plagiarizing each > other? Also, how does one go about describing methods for PCR reactions > without commiting plagiarism? My students and I agree that the ways are > rather limited--especially since there is not much diversity in these 18 > published papers. This is a real dilemma, because these conditions have to > be described in each paper that uses PCR--the details in terms of times, > temperatures, and cycle number change with every study and every experiment. > > If it does not constitute plagiarism, then how much of the descriptions for > other methods (statistical analysis, definitions for formula, figure > legends, table titles, etc.) can be copied before it constitutes plagiarism? > (My students and I can see a slippery slope here...) > > When writing her own PCR methods, my student tried going around this > problem by finding a paper that came close to doing the same things she did, > citing that paper, and adding a sentence to explain the changes in times or > temperatures to describe what she actually did. We do not find this a very > satisfactory solution because my student did not use the cited paper when > actually deciding how to do her PCR reactions or in any other part of her > thesis. In other words, citing that paper gives it undue credit for helping > her with her methods. > > Finding ourselves in an impasse, I told my students I'd ask you here at > Ecolog what you think and how you cope with these sorts of dilemmas. > > Thanks, > > CL > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Cara Lin Bridgman cara....@msa.hinet.net > > P.O. Box 013 Shinjhuang > http://megaview.com.tw/~caralin<http://megaview.com.tw/%7Ecaralin> > Longjing Township http://www.BugDorm.com > Taichung County 43499 > Taiwan Phone: 886-4-2632-5484 > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >
