Omolayo - this sounds like a 'sad' outcome. However, it is a common one that probably could have been avoided. It is always best, within research/writing terms, to identify author order and rationale from the outset - before publishing (and certainly before manuscript submission) begins. Conventionally, the first author is usually the corresponding author as the first author is often the 'lead' researcher - whether that is as project leader and/or the person that has contributed the most i.e data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing etc. The 'lead researcher', for a few reasons, may hand over correspondence to another author i.e. they are project lead but feel that other team-members are more immersed in the main area that the article covers - especially where multiple articles come out of a single project.

Often, but not always, the last author is the 'consultant' i.e. the 'big, established name' that is god to have associated with the project - even if they have not contributed much/anything. With Higher Degree Research supervision, the supervisor (in my experience) is not usually last. They are ranked, after the student (as first author - as it is their data) according to contribution. It is expected, in this case, that the Principle Supervisor would be second author etc. That said, I have recently had an International HDR student who placed me last - as the consultant as this was the more common procedure in journals that are native to their home country.

So - it does vary - but what I have outlined is common. I go back to my original point though. To avoid any authorship conflict, the ground rules should be set early on.

The first author carry more weight because he/she is always regarded as the one who did a greater part of the work.

With regards to student and surpervisor publication, if the paper was extracted from the student's thesis then the student should be the first author. But I have seen cases in which the surpervisor is the first author which is wrong.

Omolayo - this sounds like a 'sad' outcome. However, it is a common one that probably could have been avoided. It is always best, within research/writing terms, to identify author order and rationale from the outset - before publishing (and certainly before manuscript submission) begins. Conventionally, the first author is usually the corresponding author as the first author is often the 'lead' researcher - whether that is as project leader and/or the person that has contributed the most i.e data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing etc. The 'lead researcher', for a few reasons, may hand over correspondence to another author i.e. they are project lead but feel that other team-members are more immersed in the main area that the article covers - especially where multiple articles come out of a single project.

Often, but not always, the last author is the 'consultant' i.e. the 'big, established name' that is god to have associated with the project - even if they have not contributed much/anything. With Higher Degree Research supervision, the supervisor (in my experience) is not usually last. They are ranked, after the student (as first author - as it is their data) according to contribution. It is expected, in this case, that the Principle Supervisor would be second author etc. That said, I have recently had an International HDR student who placed me last - as the consultant as this was the more common procedure in journals that are native to their home country.

So - it does vary - but what I have outlined is common. I go back to my original point though. To avoid any authorship conflict, the ground rules should be set early on.

Much appreciations to Prof. Dean Whitehead and Dr. Bahtilla Marinette for their insightful contributions in this discussion.

The first author is the student, the last author is the coach (the supervisor), the middle authors are the those who contributed to the work. Any of the authors could be the corresponding especially the first and the last.

Thanks so much to Engr. Dr. Ojo Philip Bodunde for your immense contributions.

Author order may vary. Naturally, the first author should usually be the one who does "most of the work" and/or the "most important work" (e.g. ideas, planning, discussions, laboratory experiments, theoretical development, theoretical modelling, writing, review process, etc.), but then note what is exactly most of the work and the most important work? For example, sometimes a very good idea may not require so much work, but may by far be the most important contribution to the work, e.g. in some cases even so important that it would have been no work or article without that idea. Then the authors have to discuss and agree about the author order. Usually the author order reflects the amount and/or significance of the work from the first author to the last author, with the last author often being the one who has done the smallest part of the work, however, there are exceptions to this and it is also rather common that many authors prefer to be the last author (often more visible except in referrals with truncated author lists, the "boss" author place) instead of an author in the middle among many authors (less visible).

The corresponding author will mean the author who handles both the article submission/review process and any communication with various scientists after the article is published, so care should be taken to select a corresponding author e-mail address that will probably last for many years.

Earlier, I posted the following in a similar ResearchGate question thread, especially related to students as authors of scientific articles:

"It is the contribution to the content of the article which determines the authorship. That is, both undergraduate and graduate students may very well become authors of scientific articles. In fact, and as it should be, there is no requirement to be “academic” in order to be an author. It is the significance of your contribution to the scientific content of the article (e.g. ideas, planning, discussions, laboratory experiments, theoretical development, theoretical modelling, writing, review process, etc.) which is important. In my opinion, PhD students should in most cases be both first author and corresponding author of their own main articles. In many cases undergraduate and graduate students may also become first authors, in many cases part of the author team which may also include several students, and in some cases depending on the circumstances (e.g. willingness, ability, availability after end of studies, etc.) also corresponding author. The possibility of becoming authors of scientific articles may often encourage students to do a much better work and grow scientificially in the process. It is also very rewarding for the supervisors to see the enthusiasm and rapid learning curve in these students. This may also be part of what we call research-based education."

There is no general/written rule about author order (listing) and who must be the corresponding author. However, a student/researcher who has undergone data collection, experimentation, etc is usually given the preference of being the first author and most time, he/she maybe the corresponding author as well. The main point is that an agreement about the author order must be reached prior to paper submission.

Thanks to Dr Olatunji Oladimeji Ojo , Dr Derek Pyne

Dear the most important thing is to agree on the author order.

Supervisor is by norm the corresponding author. The first author is the lead author who performs most of the roles. In order of magnitude, the first author carries the highest weight and in order of arrangement. But, one has to consider setting in answering this kind of question. In some places, student who often is the first author may not be put as number one in arrangement, in fact, it may be a great error, while in other places it is not so.

@Dean Whitehead, I do like your contributions always. You just nailed the points.

I think order of authorship depends greatly on the category of research. For Bachelors, most times the supervisor writes the manuscripts and is usually the first and corresponding author. For manuscripts that emanate from masters or PhD theses, the convention is for the student to be the first author. However, he/she may not necessarily be the corresponding author especially in situations where the supervisor obtained the grants for the research works. In order to solve this impasse, both the student and his/her supervisor addresses could be indicated for correspondence. I have done this before and it worked quite fine.

I really appreciate your immense contributions to this discussions. I must thank Dr. Abdulmojeed Yakubu , Dr. Paul Odeniran , Dr. Kamoru A. Adedokun and Dr. Emmanuel Ifeanyi Obeagu for your insightful contributions.

In most institution, First author has the highest assessment score.

Thanks for your contribution Engr. Dr. (Mrs) Imhade P. Okokpujie

Order of authorship largely depends on the mutual agreement from the outset among the authors. I know of a supervisor who had done more than 80% of the work and only told his PhD student to complete the rest and allowed the student to be both the first and corresponding author. So, I think mutual agreement is key.

Of course, most institutions place premium on first authorship in assessment.

However, first author does the most - particularly in data collection and first draft and thus often the corresponding author except where this is delegated for some reasons.

Thanks to Dr. Nirmala S.V.S.G

As @Dean Whitehead mentioned, I do second the opinion of clarifying this authors ranking and who is the corresponding author from the start of the project, and it should be documented such as in official communication / email to avoid any possible conflict or misunderstanding later on.