Comparable works analyses:

Autoendoliths

Published by the journal of Geobiology, the academic paper, Autoendoliths: A Distinct

Class of Rock-Hosted Microbial Life, focuses on the background, the definition, the function,

and classification of organisms considered to be autoendoliths. Marlow begins with a short, basic

introduction to this topic and then continues to dive into more complex concepts, using diagrams

and photos to describe his work. Although in this academic paper he does not have a typical

abstract, introduction, methods, results, conclusion, and discussion format, it still follows a clear

direction utilizing more of an essay format. Contrary to this format, Marlow wrote for the blog,

Small Things Considered, and followed a drastically different format. The difference between the

academic paper and his journalistic post, Autoendoliths: The Architects of the Deep, was

clearly seen as the journalistic article had more of a casual approach. Beginning with an

anecdote, Marlow described his own experience on investigating a rock called Hydrate Ridge

and then connected this to the concept of autoendoliths. In the beginning of the article, he

includes a cartoon of a stone louse to intrigue the reader and provide a fun fact that relates to

the main study. With this approach, he is able to address and relate to a more general audience

by easing them into the main purpose of this study.

The language between the academic source and the definition of autoendoliths were very

similar. Both artifacts were concise with their diction, language, and format. The language in

these two artifacts were quite formal as they clearly stated the purpose with technical language. It

was noted that since the Wired article was a few sentence definition so the language had to be

quite concise. Especially with the academic paper, the diction was straight to the point and

added details describing findings when necessary. However, comparing the journalistic blog
post, the language and diction were more casual and easier to read. There were details and

descriptive language used throughout to describe Marlows research experience to the study of

autoendoliths.

Analyzing the various audiences between the artifacts, there were noticeable differences

as we researched each source. Published by the journal of Geobiology, the academic paper

caters towards readers with a background in biology or readers with a general understanding of

simple biological and scientific terms. The blog, Small Things Considered, welcomes a wider

range of people and specifically microbiologists to discuss, share, and answer questions

throughout the website. Wired magazine addresses an even larger audience as they center their

focus on not only science, but business, culture, design, transportation, and security.

Methane seeps

Jeffrey Marlow was kind enough to point us in the direction of his works on the topic of

methane oxidation rates within carbonate rocks at seafloor methane seeps. He wrote quite a few

works on this topic but it was decided that the two most comparable writings were two

concerning methane seeps at Hydrate Ridge, OR. The academic article is titled Microbial

abundance and diversity patterns associated with sediments and carbonates from the methane

seep environments of Hydrate Ridge, OR and was published in the journal Frontiers in Marine

Science. According to the journals official webpage it publishes rigorously peer-reviewed

research that advances our understanding of all aspects of the environment, biology, ecosystem

functioning and human interactions with the oceans. The academic writings comparable

journalistic counterpart, titled Deep Sea Methane Vents at Hydrate Ridge, was published on
The New York Times website. The New York Times is an internationally known media source

read by a broad audience of individuals.

The differences in the articles are evident immediately, from the format to the language

style the dissimilarities are striking. The academic article is formatted similarly to most, with

sections such as keywords, methods, and results and discussion while the journalistic article is

not divided into sections at all. The journalistic article begins with a photo and then an intro

about the history of the region of Oregon in which Marlow and others conducted their scientific

assault, as he put it in his article. The academic article on the other hand begins with an abstract

of the whole document and uses many technical terms and concepts that the layman would likely

have trouble deciphering. The introduction to the academic article is much the same as the

abstract in the use of technical language and unlike the journalistic article does not mention the

history of the region from which the samples were collected. The journalistic article uses

language this is more simple and playful, like metaphors, such as when he says that methane

has a P.R. problem, and images that are more visually enticing to most. The academic article

does have some visuals but they are mostly graphs and tables which are not as attention grabbing

as the images used in the journalistic article.

The academic article uses technical language and jumps straight to the point without

trying to add fluff, unnecessary visuals, or an attention grabbing opening. It is basically

guaranteed to be read by researchers and other individuals holding an interest in the topic and

having a high level of understanding for it, it does not need its introduction to grab their attention

it just needs to draw them in by proving that the article concerns research and data on the topic

they care about. The journalistic article on the other hand does focus on catching the attention of

the audience by offering visually stimulating images and mentioning other relevant topics that
may capture the interest of an individual that may not necessarily have an interest in methane

seeps. The journalistic article also focuses on keeping the readers attention by using simple and

even playful language. The academic article uses highly technical language because that is what

those reading it expect and that language proves to them that the article is written by someone

credible with a comprehensive and technical understanding of the topic. The approaches to the

two types of articles on very similar topics is fascinating, upon analyzing the choices that were

made for each article it seems they were extremely appropriate and wise for the specific audience

for which each article was intended.

Stable isotope probing metaproteomics

Jeffrey Marlow also pointed us in the direction of his works on Stable isotope probing

metaproteomics. The differences between Marlows academic and journalistic works on the topic

of microbial deep sea colonies, as presented in the peer reviewed paper Proteomic Stable

Isotope Probing Reveals Biosynthesis Dynamics of Slow Growing Methane Based Microbial

Communities and in Discover Magazine: The magazine of science, technology, and the future's

How Atomic Tracers Illuminate Microbial Dark Matter in the Deep Sea, can be roughly

categorized into 3 main areas - formatting, content, and rhetoric.

The format of a paper is the first thing a viewership sees, it shapes the way an audience

interprets the rest of the paper. Accepted conventions exist in both academic and journalistic

writing but differ between the two genre because each has a different intent and audience.

Generally, academic papers exist to provide the most information possible on a single area of a

larger topic; academic papers often are sourced from large databases that operate through search

criteria so the viewership of an article is likely specifically looking for the paper before they read
it. On the other hand, journalistic papers look to entice the layman reader of a magazine to read

about a specific topic they otherwise may not have been interested in. Journalistic papers provide

a contextualized view of a large topic so to best inform the general public and remain accessible

to the most people.

In formulating his two papers, Marlows respect to these conventions can be seen in his

choice of titles, visuals, and citation methods. When looking at How Atomic Tracers Illuminate

Microbial Dark Matter in the Deep Sea and Proteomic Stable Isotope Probing Reveals

Biosynthesis Dynamics of Slow Growing Methane Based Microbial Communities, there are clear

differences between the two titles. The journalistic article title is 57 letters while the academic

papers title is 101, nearly twice the length. The journalistic title averages around a 8th grade

reading level while the academic paper is collegiate. Length and complexity determine the

readability of the title, how easy the title is to understand for the average person. Given that the

average reading level of US Adults is around 7th-8th grade and that people are more likely to

read shorter titles than long titles, it must be concluded that the journalistic paper is more

readable. In the context of the conventions discussed before these differences in format make

clear sense. A journalistic article needs to be brief, readable, and attention-grabbing to the people

who are buying the media source. An academic paper sacrifices brevity for clarity, the audience

in case of an academic paper would be looking for specific information and generally

understands the concept a paper presents already. The audience in this case benefits more from

specific jargon which allows them to understand the synopsis of the paper quickly and with

greater specificity.

After opening each article, the visual impact of each paper continues to differ in picture

choice and text shape. How Atomic Tracers Illuminate Microbial Dark Matter in the Deep Sea
is prefixed by a large image, a picture taken by a deep sea submarine of methane seeps on

Hydrate Ridge - the area of Marlows research. This picture spans the breadth of the text,

separating the title from the body paragraphs. This single image does not advance the readers

understanding of the topic but exists to intrigue the reader and provide a text-free block to ease

the readers eye. In contrast, the images in Proteomic Stable Isotope Probing Reveals

Biosynthesis Dynamics of Slow Growing Methane Based Microbial Communities are mostly

pragmatic diagrams or data tables designed to clarify the information discussed in the text.

The visual representations of the textual content differ in terms of paragraph length and

headers as well. The journalistic article uses short paragraphs in a single article subsection while

the academic uses long paragraphs organized into many subsections. Having a single subsection

within the journalistic piece requires the audience to read the entirety of the article in order find

the information they are looking for, ensuring that they read about all aspects of the topic and so

can contextualize their information. In academic writing, this format is not needed and is more

labor intensive than necessary. Academics can reasonably be assumed to have a diverse

background of knowledge in order to contextualize information, this makes extensive

background redundant. Marlow can then remove these filler pieces and focus on the meat of the

research, however the research is dense and the writing must be long to include all data. To aid in

clarity, subsections divide the paper. These provide benchmarks to mark the readers place and to

help direct the reader to the information they are looking for.

Each audience may seek more information after reading their respective papers. Both

academic and journalistic articles use external sources and so cite their sources in some way. The

journalistic article used hyperlinks which directly lead to other papers; the academic article used

parenthetical citations. The academic article used much more frequent citations than the
journalistic article and the citations were often of other peer-reviewed articles. Journalistic

articles are often more quick news, they get published on a shorter time frame than academic and

so have a lower standard of rigor for publication. Hyperlinks can link to other journalistic articles

or some academic papers available online, the low quantity of sources allows this to be well

integrated into the article. Academic articles are different first because they require a

bibliography, where all sources are listed in full. Parenthetical citations do not directly link to

papers but rather provide a reference to the bibliography where the reader can see all the papers

at once for quick access. But why does the bibliography show citations instead of a master copy

of links? Bibliographies use citations because they have a history in print, links cannot be clicked

when in a paper media. Bibliographies provide all the information one needs to transfer from

electronic to paper to electronic again, and so can be read in any form. Further, many academic

papers are provided through paid services such as journals or paper databases. The quantity of

sources used in an academic paper makes it likely at least one source will be of this type in any

paper. Citations provide information about any external source but since they may be behind a

paywall it is impossible to easily link a viewer to the work.

Next we look at content - though the sets of papers are similar in content, the depth of the

content and the way it is presented differ. Academic papers are clearly longer and much more

content heavy - Proteomic Stable Isotope Probing Reveals Biosynthesis Dynamics of Slow

Growing Methane Based Microbial Communities was 17 pages while journalistic articles

generally only span 2-3 pages. Academic papers go into much more depth regarding any and all

data collected, journalistic only covers those pieces which are particularly interesting. The way

this information is presented changes depending on genre as well. In How Atomic Tracers

Illuminate Microbial Dark Matter in the Deep Sea, Marlow takes great steps to write with
storytelling language. Marlow begins with, Microorganisms are the base of the planets

biological pyramid, shaping the world we know today in innumerable unseen ways. This

develops intrigue in an unknown subject and provides warranting for why the audience should

care. This language is also somewhat fanciful. Marlow uses the first two paragraphs of his

article to provide background information and set up the image of microorganisms as a nebulous

unknown, they persist in the far reaches of the globe (freezing waters, acidic lakes, ocean

depths). The usage of persist creates a feeling of adversity, implying that microbes struggle in

face of difficult climates, their extreme habitats implying that they have taken refuge in areas

beyond human control. This makes the microbes seem mysterious. Marlow then plays off this

mystery by saying that he and his colleagues set out, a phrase readers most often would hear in

reference to heroes setting out on quests and implies a sense of grand adventure. This story

format makes the article exciting and draws the reader in. Conversely, the line Nucleotide-based

meta-omics studies outline community-wide metabolic potential, but expression patterns of

environmentally relevant proteins are poorly characterized inspires little romanticism. Marlow

does not inject himself or his colleagues into the dialogue and speaks about what scientific

processes achieve instead of what he has achieved. This is fairly expected, as prior analysis has

established - academic works focus more on the data than story.

Counterintuitively however, Marlow uses more complex, nontechnical, diction in his

journalistic article. In Proteomic Stable Isotope Probing Reveals Biosynthesis Dynamics of Slow

Growing Methane Based Microbial Communities terms such as ANME-1

methylenetetrahydromethanopterin dehydrogenase are occupational hazards, necessary to the

technical understanding of the subject. Marlow connects these technical terms simply - with

terms all his peers can be reasonably expected to know. In his journalistic article, Marlow
engages his vocabulary more actively. Using words such as precludingand milieus gives

Marlow Ethos, credibility, in absence of the raw data. Readers trust Marlow in academic writing

because he presents all the facts in their complexity, readers trust Marlow in journalistic writing

because his writing style supports his credentials as an academic.