Representation of results in tables or by graphs? Now a days, graphs have been replaced by tables for representing enzyme activity. Which is the more appropriate method?
There is no "best" method; it depends completely on what you want the reader to perceive. Do you want your reader to quickly grasp the range of results and the trends, or is it more important for the reader to be able to see the details, the exact values?
Think in terms of what the reader needs to fix in mind in order to understand the text, and equally importantly, to understand what comes next in the paper.
Finally, pay no attention to "nowadays" or to what is trendy. Just think about the reader and what will best help that reader to understand what you have done and why.
I usually choose the method that fits best. This can be a table or a graph. In graphs it is easier to spot extreme values, but you can not read out the exact value.
It is personal preference. However, if there are so many data in one result and you want to show the change with time or treatments then graph maybe easier for readers. This is especially true when you use multi-colored graph.
There is no "best" method; it depends completely on what you want the reader to perceive. Do you want your reader to quickly grasp the range of results and the trends, or is it more important for the reader to be able to see the details, the exact values?
Think in terms of what the reader needs to fix in mind in order to understand the text, and equally importantly, to understand what comes next in the paper.
Finally, pay no attention to "nowadays" or to what is trendy. Just think about the reader and what will best help that reader to understand what you have done and why.
You can represent on either ways as per your result values in the paper. if there are values in points (0.001) other than digits (22), you can choose graph. Results can be reviewed based on the research. when the data is appropriate, no matter to worry about tabular or graphical presentation.