est-figures-and-tables

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

1. 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.
2. Show uncertainty. Error bars/intervals with the dispersion measure named; significance markers defined; never bars without spread.
3. Accessible. Colorblind-safe palettes, legible in grayscale, no chartjunk/3D; vector output (PDF/EPS) where possible for print.
4. 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.
5. 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).
6. 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

• ../../resources/external_tools.md — plotting, structure-drawing, and mapping tools; TOC-graphic guidance
• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — TOC-art mandate and word-limit policy