Scientific Drilling review files: PDF, short summary, and supplement checklist

A *Scientific Drilling* manuscript can be scientifically ready while its review package is still not ready for the portal. The current journal instructions separate several things that are easy to blur together during a final rush: the complete review PDF, the abstract pasted into the upload form, a short non-technical summary, and any justified supplement.

This guide answers one narrow question: what should an author check when assembling the review PDF, short summary, and supplement for a Scientific Drilling submission? The direct requirements below come from the current *Scientific Drilling* submission page and the Copernicus Publications manuscript-preparation instructions. Practical organization suggestions are labeled as such and should always yield to the live journal guidance.

Start with the Scientific Drilling preparation page and compare the stored requirements with the current official instructions for the intended manuscript type.

Confirm the manuscript type before packaging files

The *Scientific Drilling* submission page asks authors to choose the appropriate manuscript type during preparation. That choice should be settled before the upload folder is treated as final, because the manuscript type can affect what structure and supporting material belong in the package.

A practical check is to write the intended manuscript type at the top of an internal package inventory, then confirm that the title page, section structure, abstract, and any supplement all belong to that same submission. This inventory is an author-side organization aid, not a journal form.

Do not infer a manuscript type from an older paper or a reused template. Check the live journal options and let the authors make the submission decision.

Build the review PDF as one complete document

For peer review, the current instructions call for a complete manuscript PDF containing the title, authors, affiliations, abstract, text, tables, and figures. The PDF should use portrait format, embedded fonts, consecutive page numbers, and line numbers.

Figures, tables, and their captions belong in the main text near their first mention rather than collected at the end. Maps and aerials need the copyright statements or credits required by their providers. The instructions also say that assets such as data sets, model code, and video supplements should be placed in a reliable repository that issues a persistent identifier, cited in the manuscript, and included in the reference list.

The most useful final PDF check is therefore visual, not just textual:

1. Open the exact PDF from the upload folder.
2. Confirm that every page is portrait and numbered.
3. Confirm that line numbers are visible and continuous enough for review comments.
4. Check that each figure and table appears near its first mention.
5. Zoom into several figures and equations to confirm that fonts remain visible and embedded.
6. Reopen any map or aerial and verify the required credit is present.

These are packaging checks. They do not validate the research, the interpretation, the rights status, or the accuracy of a credit statement. Authors remain responsible for those decisions.

Keep the abstract and short summary separate

The instructions ask for the abstract as plain text in the upload form. They also ask for a short summary: a non-technical English paragraph of no more than 500 characters including spaces, without a list. The short summary should state the main conclusions and implications and, where possible, briefly convey why and how the research was done. Abbreviations should be avoided or written out.

That means the abstract and short summary are not interchangeable files with different labels. The abstract belongs to the scholarly manuscript and upload field. The short summary is a separate, compact explanation for a broader audience.

A conservative preparation sequence is:

1. Freeze the author-approved abstract in the manuscript.
2. Copy that exact abstract into the portal field when requested.
3. Draft the short summary from the approved manuscript without introducing a new claim.
4. Count all characters in the short summary, including spaces.
5. Read it once without the manuscript open to confirm that abbreviations and specialist shorthand do not make it unintelligible.

The authors should approve both texts. Formatting support can catch a character-limit overrun or a mismatch between the PDF and portal field, but it cannot decide which conclusion deserves emphasis.

Decide whether material is an appendix, supplement, or repository asset

Copernicus distinguishes among material that remains in the manuscript, material submitted as a supplement, and external research assets deposited in a repository.

Appendices are part of the manuscript. They can hold extra figures, tables, technical detail, or theoretical development that supports expert readers without being essential to the main narrative. The instructions use capital-letter appendix labels and appendix-specific numbering for equations, figures, and tables.

Supplements are reserved for material that cannot reasonably sit in the main text or appendices. Examples include short videos, very large images, maps, certain scientific file formats, and short code files. The instructions say that a supplement must not introduce scientific interpretations or findings beyond the manuscript. A justified supplement is uploaded as a single PDF or ZIP archive and has a 50 MB limit.

Data sets, movies, animations, and code that can live in a FAIR-aligned repository generally belong there with a persistent identifier, ideally a DOI, cited from the manuscript. The exact placement remains an author and journal decision.

A practical package review can use three columns—appendix, supplement, repository—and place every supporting item in exactly one column. If an item appears in two columns or none, stop and check the live instructions rather than guessing.

Check supplement structure before compressing it

When a supplement is justified, the current instructions describe specific numbering conventions: equations as (S1), figures such as Fig. S5, tables such as Table S6, and sections such as S3 or S3.1. Copernicus adds a supplement title page during publication, so authors are told not to repeat the title, author list, and correspondence email inside the supplied supplement.

Before creating the final PDF or ZIP archive:

• confirm that every supplement item is mentioned where the manuscript needs to point to it;
• confirm that the supplement does not contain a new conclusion absent from the manuscript;
• reconcile section, figure, table, and equation numbering;
• remove duplicate title-page information that the publisher says it will add;
• open every included file from the final archive; and
• check the combined file size rather than estimating it from the working folder.

Keep superseded exports outside the upload directory. A clean folder containing only the intended review files makes the final check easier and reduces the chance that an obsolete archive reaches the portal.

Reconcile the availability sections and references

The Copernicus guidance asks authors to place a data-availability statement near the end of the manuscript before the acknowledgements. When data are not publicly accessible, the statement should explain why. Software or model code deposited in a repository should be cited using its persistent identifier and described in a Code availability section, or a combined Code and data availability section where appropriate.

The same source describes additional sections for interactive computing environments and registered geoscientific samples when those materials apply. This does not mean every manuscript should contain every possible section. It means that any applicable asset needs a consistent trail across the manuscript text, availability statement, repository record, and reference list.

Use a final cross-check:

1. Locate every availability section in the PDF.
2. Follow each persistent identifier or repository reference.
3. Confirm that the cited record describes the intended asset.
4. Confirm that the reference list contains the corresponding citation.
5. Confirm that the upload folder does not duplicate a repository asset as an unnecessary supplement.

Do not upload private or restricted material merely to satisfy a checklist. Authors, institutions, and journals control the applicable privacy, ethics, licensing, and access decisions.

Run one final portal-readiness pass

Before registration and upload, reopen the package and verify:

1. The intended *Scientific Drilling* manuscript type is confirmed.
2. The review PDF contains the complete manuscript, embedded fonts, page numbers, and line numbers.
3. Figures and tables sit near their first mention, and maps or aerials carry the required credits.
4. The abstract copied for the portal matches the approved manuscript.
5. The short summary is a complete non-technical paragraph within 500 characters including spaces.
6. Every supporting item has a deliberate home as an appendix, supplement, or repository asset.
7. Any supplement uses consistent S numbering, opens cleanly, and stays within the stated file limit.
8. Availability statements, persistent identifiers, and reference-list entries agree.
9. The final upload folder contains only the author-approved files.

Recheck the live instructions on the day of submission. Templates, technical details, and portal requirements can change after a working draft begins.

Prepare the package without changing the research

The review PDF, portal abstract, short summary, supplement, availability statements, and repository records should tell one consistent story about the files being submitted. A careful final pass catches mismatched versions and packaging errors before the portal turns them into avoidable friction.

Articlo formats author-provided manuscripts and checks them against stored journal requirements. It does not write or interpret research, decide what may be shared, verify rights or scientific claims, submit on an author's behalf, or guarantee acceptance. Authors remain responsible for research content and submission decisions.

Run a free Scientific Drilling readiness check or revisit the journal-specific preparation page before upload.