Scientific Reports figure legends and editable tables: a checklist

Figures and tables often reach the end of manuscript preparation through different tools: plots from analysis software, composite panels from an image editor, and tables copied from a spreadsheet. For a *Scientific Reports* submission, the final check is not just whether each item looks finished. The manuscript callouts, legends, table objects, and upload files need to describe one consistent set of display items.

This guide answers one narrow question: what should authors check when preparing figure legends and editable tables for Scientific Reports? The requirements below come from the journal's current submission guidelines. The cross-file checks are conservative preparation steps, not additional journal rules.

Start with one display-item inventory

The journal's guidance limits the main display items to eight figures and/or tables. For an Article of 2,000 words or fewer, it suggests including no more than four. Before adjusting captions or file names, list every main-text figure and table in its intended order.

For each item, record:

• the number used in the manuscript;
• the first callout in the text;
• the legend or caption location;
• the source or editable file;
• whether it contains multiple panels; and
• whether a separate upload file will be supplied.

This inventory is a working aid. It helps expose a skipped number, an old panel label, or a table that appears in the manuscript but not in the upload set. It does not decide which results belong in the paper; authors remain responsible for that decision.

Check figure legends as a sequence

*Scientific Reports* asks authors to provide figure legends in numerical order after the references. Each legend should begin with a brief title sentence for the figure as a whole, followed by a short description of what appears in each panel. Symbols should be introduced in sequence, methodological detail should be minimized, and each legend is limited to 350 words.

A practical legend review can therefore move in the same order as a reader:

1. Read the brief title without looking at the figure. Does it identify the display item without trying to restate the entire result?
2. Follow the panel descriptions from the first panel to the last. Do their labels match the figure exactly?
3. Trace symbols, abbreviations, colors, and line styles in the order they appear.
4. Confirm that any necessary explanation of error analysis is present where the journal requests it.
5. Check the total legend length against the journal's current limit.

The goal is not to turn the legend into a compressed Methods section. The journal specifically advises minimizing methodological details in figure legends. If a legend contains a long procedure, compare it with the Methods section and decide, as the author, what information truly belongs in each place.

Match figure callouts, legends, and files

The journal says figures should be numbered separately with Arabic numerals in the order they occur in the manuscript. That creates three surfaces to compare: the in-text callout, the legend, and the figure file.

For every figure, verify that:

• the first manuscript callout follows the intended numerical order;
• the legend uses the same figure number;
• panel letters in the legend match the panel letters in the image;
• the upload file name clearly maps to that number; and
• no replaced draft or alternate panel remains in the package.

At initial submission, authors may incorporate figures into the main article file or group them at the end, provided they are clearly legible. The submission guidance also calls for individual figure files. A useful preparation approach is to keep the review copy and the separate upload files synchronized from the same approved figure set.

For a multi-panel figure prepared for publication, *Scientific Reports* asks for the complete figure as one image file rather than separate uploads for panels a, b, c, and so on. Before export, confirm that the assembled file and its legend still use the same panel sequence.

Keep main tables editable

The journal instructs authors to submit tables in the main article document in an editable Word or TeX/LaTeX format, not as images. A screenshot or pasted bitmap may preserve appearance while removing the structure needed for editing and typesetting.

Open each table in the manuscript and test the object itself. Can a cell be selected and edited? Do rows and columns remain separate? If the table came from analysis software or a spreadsheet, make sure the manuscript contains an editable table rather than only a visual export.

The guidance also states that tables containing statistical analysis should describe their standards of error analysis and ranges in a table legend. Compare that explanation with the values and notation in the table. This is a consistency check, not statistical verification; the authors remain responsible for the analysis and interpretation.

Check table size and reading order

*Scientific Reports* states that tables should have a maximum size of one page. A table that runs beyond that boundary may need an author decision: simplify the main table, reorganize it, or move appropriate material to Supplementary Information under the journal's current rules.

Before making that decision, check for preventable layout problems:

• duplicated headers;
• unnecessary blank columns;
• notes that belong in the legend;
• inconsistent decimal or unit presentation; and
• a width created by manual spacing instead of table structure.

Do not remove substantive data simply to make the page look cleaner. Formatting can reveal the problem, but the responsible authors must decide how the information should be presented.

Separate main and supplementary numbering

The journal uses separate numbering for supplementary figures and tables, such as Supplementary Figure S1 and Supplementary Table S1. Supplementary Information should be combined into a single separate file, preferably PDF, and cited explicitly in the manuscript.

Run two independent sequences:

• main figures and tables in the article; and
• supplementary figures and tables in the Supplementary Information file.

Then compare the manuscript citations with the supplementary file. A main Figure 2 and a Supplementary Figure S2 are different items and should remain distinguishable in callouts, legends, and file organization.

Review permissions and source notes before upload

The journal's general figure guidance places responsibility on authors for permissions needed to publish protected figures or illustrations. It also asks authors to state the source of images and, for software, provide the name, version number, and URL.

Treat this as an author-controlled content and rights check. A formatting service can flag a missing source note or an inconsistent figure label, but it cannot determine ownership, grant permission, or replace the author's review of the journal's current policies.

Run a final connected-package check

Immediately before upload, review the manuscript and files as one package:

• main figures and tables appear in numerical order;
• every callout maps to one display item;
• legends appear in the requested location and order;
• figure titles, panel descriptions, symbols, and error-analysis notes agree with the image;
• main tables are editable objects, not images;
• statistical table legends include the author-supplied error-analysis and range information where applicable;
• multi-panel figure files are assembled consistently;
• separate figure files match the manuscript version;
• supplementary items use S-numbering and are cited correctly; and
• old exports, duplicate drafts, private notes, and placeholders are removed from the upload set.

This pass is valuable because most mismatches are not visible when each file is reviewed in isolation. The upload set should make it obvious which legend, table, and figure belongs together.

Prepare the package without changing the research

Articlo formats author-provided manuscripts and checks them against stored journal requirements. It does not write research, verify references, make submission decisions, resolve permissions, or guarantee acceptance. Authors remain responsible for the content, analysis, declarations, rights, and current journal instructions.

Review the Scientific Reports preparation path or run a free readiness check to identify packaging and formatting issues before upload.