Figures, Tables & TOC Graphic (est-figures-and-tables)
Exhibits are where an expert reviewer checks whether the result is real, and at ES&T they also carry
two venue-specific rules: a mandatory TOC/abstract graphic, and a word budget in which
figures/tables may count as word-equivalents (historically ~300 for small, ~600 for large — 待核实
on the live page). Every exhibit must pull its weight.
When to trigger
- Designing the main results figures/tables
- Building the TOC/abstract graphic (required for most article types)
- Deciding what belongs in the article vs. the Supporting Information
- A reviewer found an exhibit unclear, mislabeled, or not self-contained
Principles
-
Self-contained. Each exhibit is intelligible from its caption, axis/column labels, units, n,
and notes alone — state the sample, conditions, and what the value is.
-
Show uncertainty. Error bars/intervals with the dispersion measure named; significance markers
defined; never bars without spread.
-
Accessible. Colorblind-safe palettes, legible in grayscale, no chartjunk/3D; vector output
(PDF/EPS) where possible for print.
-
The TOC graphic. A single clear visual abstract that illustrates the paper's core idea —
not a duplicate of an in-text figure. Legible at thumbnail size; follow ACS size/format specs.
Required for Research Articles, Critical Reviews, Features, Perspectives, and Policy Analysis;
not required for Viewpoints/Spotlights/Letters.
-
Article vs. SI. Keep the few exhibits that carry the argument in the article; move full
spectra, calibration curves, balance tables, and robustness grids to the Supporting Information
— this also helps you fit the word budget (see
est-reporting-and-reproducibility).
-
Reproducible. Each exhibit is generated by the master script; values match the deposited data.
Environmental-science exhibits
- Concentration/time profiles, kinetics and dose–response curves with fitted models
- Mass-balance / Sankey-style flow diagrams; reaction/transformation schemes (ChemDraw)
- Sampling-site and spatial-variation maps (
sf/tmap, QGIS); contour/heat maps
- Spectra (with insets), microscopy with scale bars, speciation diagrams
TOC graphic: required-by-type and what makes it pass
The TOC/abstract graphic is the exhibit most often mishandled at ES&T. Use this to decide whether one
is required and whether yours earns the slot (confirm size/format on the live ACS spec — 待核实):
| Article type |
TOC graphic |
Common failure |
| Research Article |
required |
clones Figure 1, not a concept |
| Critical Review / Perspective |
required |
busy multi-panel, illegible at thumbnail |
| Feature |
required |
decorative art, no scientific content |
| Policy Analysis |
required |
a table screenshot, not a visual |
| Viewpoint / Spotlight / Letter |
not required |
effort wasted building one |
A passing TOC graphic shows the paper's single idea — a process arrow, a before/after, a fate
pathway — readable at search-result-thumbnail size.
Worked micro-example (illustrative — LCA of a treatment technology)
A life-cycle assessment comparing granular activated carbon (GAC) vs. ion exchange for PFAS removal.
Exhibit choices (illustrative):
-
Main figure: grouped bar of cradle-to-gate global-warming potential per m³ treated, GAC vs. IX,
with error bars naming the Monte Carlo band (5th–95th percentile, n=1,000). Without intervals a
reviewer cannot tell whether a ~15% (illustrative) difference is real.
-
SI, not main text: full inventory, characterization factors, and per-category contributions.
-
TOC graphic: a two-box flow (feedwater → technology → treated water) annotated with the trade-off
(lower carbon vs. higher regeneration burden), not a shrunken bar chart.
The discipline separating a clean LCA figure from a rejected one: every bar names its uncertainty band
and the functional unit sits in the caption, so the exhibit is self-contained.
Referee-pushback patterns and the venue-specific fix
-
"Means without uncertainty." → Add intervals with the dispersion measure named and n stated.
-
"TOC graphic duplicates Figure 1." → Redraw as a conceptual visual abstract.
-
"Map has no scale bar / projection." → Add scale bar, north arrow, projection, and coordinates.
Anti-patterns
- Submitting without the required TOC graphic, or a TOC graphic that just clones Figure 1
- Bars with no error bars; undefined significance markers
- Cramming every spectrum/robustness panel into the main text (blows the word budget — use SI)
- Color-only encoding that fails in grayscale or for colorblind readers
- Maps/micrographs with no scale bar, north arrow, or units
- Exhibit values that do not match the deposited data
Output format
【Main exhibits】what each shows + why figure vs table
【TOC graphic】required for this type? designed as a visual abstract (not a clone)? [Y/N]
【Self-contained】caption + labels + units + n? [Y/N]
【Accessible】grayscale + colorblind-safe + scale bars? [Y/N]
【Article vs SI】split decided; word-budget impact noted
【Reproducible】matches deposited data? [Y/N]
【Next】est-reporting-and-reproducibility
Supplementary resources
