How to Write a Scientific Report or Research Paper in Ecology and Wildlife Biology

Research is not finished until it is written up and shared. A clear scientific report lets others understand what you did, judge whether your conclusions are justified, repeat your work and use your results in conservation decisions. This guide explains how to write a scientific report or research paper in ecology and wildlife biology, section by section, with examples, and how to take it through to publication.

The IMRaD structure

Most scientific reports and papers follow the IMRaD structure, answering four questions:

Around these sit the title, abstract, keywords, acknowledgements, references and supplementary material. Reports for funders or agencies may add an executive summary and recommendations.

Before you write

• Know your main message. Write one or two sentences summarising your key finding and why it matters. Everything in the report should support it.
• Know your audience and format. A university assignment, a report to a park authority and a journal article have different requirements. Read the guidelines or “instructions for authors” first.
• Make your figures and tables first. They are the backbone of the results; the text is built around them.
• Outline each section in bullet points before writing full paragraphs.

A practical writing order is: Methods → Results → figures and tables → Discussion → Introduction → Abstract → Title.

A realistic writing timetable

For a first paper from a finished dataset, a steady plan might look like this:

Title

The title should tell readers exactly what the study is about, and it is the most-read part of any paper. Include the species or system, the main variable or finding and the location.

• Weak: A study of leopards.
• Better: Leopard density and prey availability in a human-dominated landscape.
• Best (declarative): Leopard density declines with distance from protected areas in Nepal’s Terai.

Avoid abbreviations and question titles unless the journal favours them.

Abstract

The abstract is a stand-alone summary, usually 150 to 300 words. Many readers will read nothing else. Include:

1. Context: one or two sentences on why the topic matters.
2. Aim: the question or objective.
3. Methods: the key design and methods in brief.
4. Results: the main findings, with key numbers.
5. Conclusion: what the results mean and their implications, especially for conservation.

Do not cite references or introduce information not in the report. Some journals require a structured abstract with headings.

Example: Grassland birds are declining across South Asia, but the effects of grassland management are poorly known. We compared the abundance of grassland specialist birds in 40 plots that were burned before or during the breeding season in Shuklaphanta National Park, Nepal. Specialists were 2.3 times more abundant in plots burned before March (95% CI 1.6–3.2). Rescheduling burns to before the breeding season could benefit threatened grassland birds. (Hypothetical data for illustration.)

Keywords

Choose five or six keywords that do not simply repeat the title. They help search engines and databases find your work.

Introduction

The introduction moves from the general to the specific, like a funnel:

1. Broad context: why the topic matters (for example, the global decline of large carnivores).
2. What is known: key previous findings, with references.
3. The gap: what is not known or is contested. This is the most important part.
4. Aims, questions or hypotheses: exactly what this study does. Hypotheses should be testable, with predictions.

Keep it focused, usually three to five paragraphs. Every paragraph should lead to your aims. End with a clear statement such as: “Here, we test whether… We predicted that…”

Example introduction (condensed, hypothetical)

Large carnivores are declining worldwide, largely because of habitat loss and conflict with people (Ripple et al. 2014). Leopards persist in many human-dominated landscapes, but their densities outside protected areas are rarely measured. In Nepal’s Terai, most leopard studies have focused on national parks, leaving the buffer zones and farmland between them poorly understood. Yet these areas are where most conflict occurs and where management decisions are made. Here, we estimate leopard density inside and outside Bardia National Park using spatially explicit capture–recapture of camera-trap data. We predicted that density would decline with distance from the park boundary and increase with wild prey availability.

Methods

The methods section must allow another researcher to repeat your study and a reader to judge its validity. Use subheadings, such as:

• Study area: location, coordinates, size, climate, habitats and a map. Give coordinates of sensitive species only at an appropriate resolution.
• Study species or system: brief relevant biology.
• Study design: sampling design, sites, replication, controls, timing and effort.
• Data collection: exact procedures, equipment (with models where relevant), training and data recording.
• Data analysis: statistical methods and software, with versions and packages (for example, “occupancy models were fitted in R 4.4 using the unmarked package”). Explain how you checked model assumptions.
• Ethics and permits: animal ethics approval numbers and research permits.

Write in the past tense. Include enough detail, but move long protocols to supplementary material. Cite established methods rather than describing them in full.

Results

Present your findings objectively, without interpretation, in a logical order that follows your aims.

• Start with basic descriptive results (sample sizes, effort, number of detections), then move to tests of your main questions.
• Refer to figures and tables in the text, but do not repeat all their numbers. Highlight the key patterns.
• Report statistics properly: effect sizes, measures of uncertainty and test results. For example: “Leopard density was higher inside the park (4.2 per 100 km², 95% CI 3.1–5.6) than outside (1.8 per 100 km², 95% CI 1.1–2.9).” For hypothesis tests, give the test statistic, degrees of freedom and p-value, such as “t₃₈ = 3.21, p = 0.003”.
• Report negative and unexpected results too; they are results.
• Use the past tense.

Reporting statistics: a quick reference

Always report the size of an effect and its uncertainty, not just whether it was “significant”. The formats below are common in ecology; follow your journal’s style.

Tips:

• Give exact p-values (p = 0.03) rather than “p < 0.05”, except for very small values (p < 0.001).
• State which measure of spread you use (SD, SE or CI) every time.
• Report non-significant results with effect sizes too; they are informative.
• Describe any data transformations, excluded data and how assumptions were checked.

Figures and tables

Good figures are the most powerful part of a paper.

• Choose the right type: scatter plots for relationships between continuous variables; box plots or points with error bars for comparisons between groups; line plots for time series; maps for spatial patterns; bar charts for counts.
• Label everything: axis titles with units, legends and panel letters.
• Show the data where possible (individual points, not only means) and show uncertainty (confidence intervals or standard errors, stating which).
• Keep it clean: avoid 3D effects, unnecessary gridlines and chart junk. Use colour-blind-friendly palettes.
• Write informative captions that let the figure stand alone: what is shown, sample sizes, and what error bars represent.
• Use tables for precise values or many variables, and figures for patterns and trends.

Discussion

The discussion interprets your results and places them in context. A useful structure:

1. Summarise the main findings in one paragraph, answering your aims directly.
2. Interpret them: explain possible mechanisms, supported by evidence.
3. Compare with other studies: agreements, disagreements and possible reasons.
4. Limitations: be honest about weaknesses in design, sample size or detection, and how they might affect conclusions. Acknowledging limitations builds credibility.
5. Implications: what the results mean for theory, management and conservation. Be specific: “Rescheduling burns in blocks X and Y before March could…”
6. Future research: what should be done next.
7. Conclusion: a short final paragraph with your take-home message.

Example opening paragraph for a discussion (hypothetical)

Leopard density in Bardia’s buffer zone was less than half that inside the park, and declined steadily with distance from the boundary. Wild prey availability explained much of this pattern, while livestock density did not. These results suggest that maintaining wild prey outside protected areas may be as important as protecting habitat for leopards in the Terai.

Avoid overstating results. Correlation does not prove causation, a non-significant result does not prove there is no effect, and results from one site may not apply everywhere.

Acknowledgements

Thank funders (with grant numbers), permit authorities, field assistants, local communities, landowners, reviewers and anyone who helped. Recognise local collaborators properly, and consider co-authorship where contributions justify it.

References

• Cite sources for all facts, methods and ideas that are not your own.
• Use the referencing style required by the journal or institution, such as Harvard (author–year) or numbered styles.
• Use a reference manager such as Zotero (free), Mendeley or EndNote to store and format references.
• Prefer primary, peer-reviewed sources. Check that you have read what you cite.
• Avoid plagiarism: paraphrase properly and quote sparingly with quotation marks and a citation.

Supplementary material and data

Put extra tables, figures, detailed protocols, code and datasets in supplementary material. Many journals and funders now require data and code to be archived in public repositories such as Dryad, Zenodo or Figshare, or occurrence data on GBIF, with sensitive location data protected.

Writing style

• Clarity first. Short sentences, one idea per sentence, one topic per paragraph.
• Be precise and quantitative. “Numbers fell by 42 percent” rather than “numbers fell sharply”.
• Use active voice where appropriate: “We surveyed 40 plots” is clearer than “40 plots were surveyed”. Most ecology journals accept “we”.
• Tense: past tense for your methods and results; present tense for established knowledge and for what your results mean.
• Define abbreviations at first use, and use them sparingly.
• Scientific names: give the scientific name in italics at first mention of each species, for example “Bengal florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis)”.
• Units: use SI units with a space between number and unit (5 km, 20 °C).
• Numbers: follow the journal’s style.

Special types of report

Reports for funders and agencies

Reports for funders, park authorities and NGOs differ from journal papers:

• Begin with an executive summary of one page.
• Include clear, prioritised recommendations for managers.
• Report against the project’s original objectives and indicators, including activities not completed and why.
• Include a financial report if required.
• Use plain language, maps and photos, and consider translations for local stakeholders.

Student reports and theses

Follow your institution’s guidelines on structure and length, and check the marking criteria. Theses usually have a general introduction, several data chapters (often written as papers) and a general discussion.

Publishing your research

Choosing a journal

• Fit: read the journal’s aims and scope, and look at recent papers similar to yours.
• Audience: regional journals may reach the managers who need your results; international journals reach wider audiences.
• Open access: consider whether the journal is open access, its article processing charges and whether waivers are available. Many journals offer fee waivers for authors from low-income countries.
• Avoid predatory journals: be wary of unsolicited invitations, very fast “peer review”, unclear fees and journals not indexed in recognised databases. Check the journal against resources such as the Directory of Open Access Journals and “Think. Check. Submit.”

Examples of journals publishing wildlife and ecology research include Oryx, Biological Conservation, Conservation Science and Practice, Journal of Applied Ecology, Ecology and Evolution, African Journal of Ecology, Journal of Threatened Taxa, Mammal Review, Bird Conservation International and many regional journals.

Peer review

1. Submit with a short cover letter explaining the main finding and why it suits the journal.
2. The editor decides whether to send the paper for review. Desk rejections are common; they often mean a poor fit.
3. Two or more reviewers assess the paper. Decisions are usually accept, minor revision, major revision or reject.
4. Respond to reviewers point by point, politely, explaining changes made or why you disagree. Reviewers are usually trying to help.
5. Revision may go through more than one round.

Rejection is normal. Revise using the feedback and try another journal.

Sharing beyond the paper

Write plain-language summaries, share results with communities and managers in local languages, present at conferences, post a preprint where appropriate, and use social media and blogs such as The Conversation.

Weak and strong sentences

Ecology conventions and good practice

• Scientific names: italicise genus and species (Panthera pardus), capitalise the genus only, and give the full name at first mention. Follow a recognised taxonomic authority, such as the IOC World Bird List or the Mammal Diversity Database, and state which one you used.
• Common names: follow the journal’s rule on capitalisation (for example, “Bengal Florican” or “Bengal florican”).
• IUCN categories: write them as they appear on the Red List, such as “Endangered” or “Critically Endangered”.
• Dates: use an unambiguous format, such as 12 March 2026 or ISO 8601 (2026-03-12).
• Coordinates: give decimal degrees and the datum (for example, WGS84), and reduce precision for sensitive species.
• Units: use SI units and state sampling effort clearly (for example, trap-nights, transect km, person-hours).
• Sensitive data: generalise or withhold exact locations of species targeted by poachers or collectors, following guidance such as that from GBIF.

Statements journals now expect

Most journals ask for short statements at the end of the manuscript. Templates:

• Data availability: “The data and R code that support the findings of this study are openly available in Zenodo at https://doi.org/[DOI]. Precise locations of threatened species have been generalised to 10 km.”
• Ethics: “Fieldwork was approved by [authority] (permit no. [number]). Animal handling followed [guidelines] and was approved by [committee] (approval no. [number]).”
• Author contributions (often using the CRediT roles): “AB: conceptualisation, fieldwork, formal analysis, writing (original draft). CD: methodology, supervision, writing (review and editing). EF: fieldwork, local coordination, writing (review and editing).”
• Conflict of interest: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”
• Funding: “This work was funded by [funder] (grant no. [number]).”

A reproducible workflow

Reproducible research saves time and increases trust in your results.

1. Keep raw data read-only. Never edit the original data files; clean them with scripts.
2. Use a clear project folder structure, for example: data/raw, data/clean, scripts, outputs/figures, outputs/tables, manuscript.
3. Script your analysis in R or Python so that anyone can rerun it from raw data to figures.
4. Record software and package versions, for example with sessionInfo() in R.
5. Use version control, such as Git with GitHub or GitLab, to track changes.
6. Write a README and metadata explaining each file and variable, units and codes.
7. Consider R Markdown or Quarto to combine code, results and text in one document.
8. Archive data and code in a repository with a DOI when you publish.

Cover letters and responses to reviewers

Cover letter template

Dear Dr [Editor],

Please consider our manuscript, “[Title]”, for publication as a [article type] in [Journal].

[One or two sentences on the problem and the gap.] Here, we [what you did]. We found that [main result, with a key number]. These findings [why they matter for the journal’s readers, such as managers or ecologists working in similar systems].

This manuscript has not been published and is not under consideration elsewhere. All authors have approved the submission. [Suggested reviewers, if requested.]

Yours sincerely, [Name, affiliation, contact details]

Responding to reviewers

Copy each comment into a table or document, then respond to each one:

Be polite, specific and complete. Thank reviewers, make changes where you can, and give evidence when you disagree.

Posters and talks

• Posters: one clear message, a large title that states the finding, three to four sections, big figures and minimal text. Aim for readability from two metres away.
• Talks: one idea per slide, large visuals, and a clear story: question, approach, key result, implications. Practise to time.
• Plain-language summaries: write 150 words for non-specialists, and share them with communities and managers in local languages.

Using AI tools responsibly

Many journals and universities now have policies on generative AI. In general:

• AI tools cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility for the work.
• Disclose any substantial use of AI in writing or analysis, following the journal’s policy.
• Check everything: AI tools can invent references and misstate facts.
• Never upload confidential manuscripts you are reviewing, or unpublished sensitive data, into public AI tools.

Common mistakes

• No clear question, or a question that does not match the methods.
• An introduction that reviews everything except the gap.
• Methods too vague to repeat.
• Interpretation mixed into the results.
• Figures without units, sample sizes or explained error bars.
• p-values without effect sizes or uncertainty.
• Overstated conclusions, especially causal claims from correlational data.
• Missing limitations.
• Inconsistent or missing references.
• Ignoring the journal’s formatting instructions.

Final checklist

• ☐ The title states the system, main finding and place.
• ☐ The abstract covers context, aim, methods, results and conclusion, with key numbers.
• ☐ The introduction ends with clear aims, questions or hypotheses.
• ☐ The methods are detailed enough to repeat, including analysis and software.
• ☐ Ethics approvals and permits are reported.
• ☐ Results are presented without interpretation, with effect sizes and uncertainty.
• ☐ Every figure and table is cited in the text and has an informative caption.
• ☐ The discussion answers the aims, compares with other studies and states limitations.
• ☐ Conservation or management implications are specific.
• ☐ References are complete and consistent.
• ☐ Data and code are archived where required.
• ☐ Co-authors and local collaborators have approved the final version.
• ☐ The manuscript follows the journal’s instructions.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between a scientific report and a research paper? A research paper is a scientific report published in a peer-reviewed journal. Reports for courses, funders or agencies follow similar structures but may add executive summaries, recommendations or financial information.

How long should a scientific report be? It depends on the format. Student reports are often 1,500 to 5,000 words; journal articles typically 3,000 to 8,000 words; check the specific limits.

Should I use “we” or the passive voice? Most ecology journals now accept and encourage active voice with “we”, which is clearer. Follow your institution’s or journal’s guidance.

How do I choose between a regional and an international journal? Think about who needs to read your results. A regional journal may reach managers and researchers working in the same landscape, while an international journal may reach a wider scientific audience. Many researchers publish in both, for different studies.

What is a preprint? A preprint is a version of a manuscript posted publicly (for example on bioRxiv or EcoEvoRxiv) before peer review. It makes results available quickly. Check your target journal’s preprint policy first.

What software should I use for statistics and figures? R is free and widely used in ecology, with packages for almost every analysis and high-quality graphics (for example ggplot2). Python is also popular. QGIS is free for maps.

Related guides

• How to write a grant proposal
• Research grants, fellowships and training
• Field methods and study design
• Counting and monitoring wildlife