0

I am writing a scientific paper and am unsure if I should be using "mean" or "mean of" each time I refer to a calculated mean number.

For example, should it be:

A) The samples had a mean of 54.1 reads

B) The samples had a mean 54.1 reads

Or how about:

C) A mean of 54.1 reads were generated

D) A mean 54.1 reads were generated

After reading through a few scientific articles it looks like both are used, but is one more correct or preferred? Does it change the meaning?

Thank you for your help.

  • 3
    To me (British English) "a mean of 54.1 reads" looks, reads, and sounds better. – Greybeard May 5 at 19:52
  • 1
    I’m voting to close this question because the examples are all very poor, to the extent that the posted question can't be answered. The Q also lacks context and evidence of effort. While not the intent of the question, it amounts to proofreading/writing advice since the sentences need to be rewritten. – Phil Sweet May 6 at 0:59
0

Mean of is idiomatic in the scientific literature, as are value of, mass of, weight of, length of, duration of, etc.

No one would use your C) and D) in a scientific paper. You didn't generate the mean. Rather, you generated (that is, made or conducted) a set of observations, and you then calculated the mean of the values of the resulting set, which happened to be 54.1 reads. You wouldn't a priori generate a set with a mean of 54.1 reads.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.