October 2026: Author or Acknowledgement?
You collected the images, analyzed the data, and now you’re getting ready to submit your manuscript. But wait—what about the core staff who helped make those experiments possible?
Should they be listed as an author, or should they be included in the acknowledgments?
The answer depends on the contribution, not simply on whether you paid for the service.
_______________________________________________________________
Acknowledgment: When technical assistance is the main contribution.
Core facilities are built to provide researchers with access to specialized instruments, technologies, and technical expertise. If a staff member provides routine technical assistance—such as instrument training, standard imaging, sample loading, or following an established imaging protocol—an acknowledgment may be the appropriate way to recognize their contribution.
A simple acknowledgment can go a long way toward recognizing the expertise and resources that supported your research. It also helps demonstrate the impact of core facilities and the value they provide to the research community.
You should ALWAYS list the core facility in the acknowledgements, even when the staff are listed as authors. The SCOPE RRID is SCR_022721.
_______________________________________________________________
Authorship: When the contribution goes beyond routine service.
Sometimes, the role of a core scientist is much more than simply operating a microscope.
If a core staff member makes an intellectual or experimental contribution to the work, authorship may be appropriate. This could include:
- Helping design or develop the imaging experiment.
- Developing or significantly modifying an imaging or analysis method.
- Troubleshooting complex experimental challenges.
- Contributing specialized scientific expertise to experimental interpretation.
- Performing substantial image analysis or data processing.
- Helping interpret microscopy data or draw scientific conclusions.
- Contributing to the writing or critical revision of the manuscript.
In these situations, the core scientist is contributing as a scientist—not simply providing access to an instrument
_______________________________________________________________
But we paid for the service. Doesn't that change things?
Not necessarily.
The Royal Microscopical Society emphasizes that payment for core services should not, by itself, determine whether someone qualifies for authorship. Core facilities must charge for the services they provide, but a fee for microscopy does not turn a scientific contribution into a simple transaction.
Think of it this way: you are paying for access to expertise and resources, but payment doesn't erase intellectual contribution.
If a core scientist makes a substantial contribution to the research, they should have the opportunity to participate in the relevant portions of the manuscript and review the final interpretation of the work, just as other contributing scientists do.
_______________________________________________________________
Why does this matter?
Giving appropriate credit isn't just about adding a name to a paper.
Core facility staff are scientists, and recognition of their contributions helps support their careers and demonstrate the scientific impact of the facility. Publications and acknowledgments also provide important evidence of the value of core facilities when institutions and funding agencies evaluate their impact and continued support.
Perhaps most importantly, involving core scientists as authors when they have made substantial contributions can help ensure that specialized microscopy methods, analyses, and results are accurately described and interpreted.
_______________________________________________________________
Working on your manuscript? SCOPE is here to help!
When you are working on your manuscript, please reach out! The SCOPE will provide you with the correct text to cite the facility and any applicable funding sources for the instrumentation you used. We are happy to guide you when selecting the correct level of credit for our staff.
SCOPE staff are happy to review all light microscopy imaging methods and image anlaysis methods to ensure all necessary information is included for reproducibility, regardless of authorship or acknowledgement.
At the SCOPE, our goal is to help design experiments, optimize imaging strategies, troubleshoot challenging samples, analyze data, and get the most meaningful information from advanced microscopy technologies. We want to make your imaging experiments go smoothly from planning all the way to publishing.
_______________________________________________________________
Sources:
Royal Microscopical Society. (2026). Publication policies & guidelines. https://www.rms.org.uk/resources/publication-policies-and-guidelines.html
Stark, C., Schober, M., & Wenzel, D. (2020). Imaging methods are vastly underreported in biomedical research. Nature Communications, 11, 3687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17413-7