---
name: est-figures-and-tables
description: Use when building figures, tables, and the mandatory Table of Contents (TOC)/abstract graphic for an Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) manuscript. ES&T requires a TOC graphic for Research Articles, Reviews, Features, Perspectives, and Policy Analysis, and figures/tables may count toward the word limit, so every exhibit must earn its space. It designs exhibits; it does not run the analysis.
---

# 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`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — plotting, structure-drawing, and mapping tools; TOC-graphic guidance
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — TOC-art mandate and word-limit policy