Organizer of the event:
University of Szeged
Faculty of Science and Informatics
Institute of Biology
| Address: | 6726 Szeged, Közép fasor 52. |
| E-mail: | biologia.ttik@szte.hu |
| Website: | https://www.bio.u-szeged.hu/ |
Section website address: https://u-szeged.hu/otdk37biologia
Section e-mail address: OTDK37Biologia@szte.hu
Date of the event: 15–17 April 2025.
| Chair of the Organizing Committee: | Prof. Dr. Attila Fehér |
| University Professor, Head of Department, Deputy Director of the Institute | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662546962 +3662546962 | |
| E-mail: feher.attila@brc.hu |
| Co-Chair of the Organizing Committee: | Zsuzsanna Dr. Kolbert Ördögné |
| Habilitated Associate Professor, Deputy Head of Department | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662546964 | |
| E-mail: ordogne.kolbert.zsuzsanna@szte.hu
|
|
| Co-Chair of the Organizing Committee | Dr. Péter Poór |
| Habilitated Associate Professor | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662544236 | |
| E-mail: poorpeti@bio.u-szeged.hu | |
| Secretary of the Organizing Committee | Dr. Ágnes Szepesi |
| Assistant Professor | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662544236 | |
| E-mail: szepesia@bio.u-szeged.hu
|
|
| Deputy Secretary of the Organizing Committee | Dr. Zsuzsanna Hamari |
| Associate Professor | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662544849 | |
| E-mail: hamari@bio.u-szeged.hu | |
| Staff member responsible for online presence | Dr. Attila Ördög |
| Assistant Professor | |
| Faculty of Science and Informatics | |
| Phone: +3662544236 | |
| E-mail: aordog@bio.u-szeged.hu |
| Student delegate: | Noémi Regina Sebők |
| BSc student | |
| E-mail: sebok.noemi024@gmail.com |
| Deputy student delegate: | Gábor Fejes |
| PhD student | |
| E-mail: gafej10@gmail.com |
The National Association for Student Research (OTDT), the Biology Section Committee of the OTDT and the organizing University of Szeged hereby announce the Biology Section of the 37th National Student Research Conference under the conditions of the following call.
The conditions for participation and registration in the Biology Section of the 37th OTDK are set out in the General Call of the 37th OTDK and in this Call of the OTDT Biology Section Committee.
In the 37th National Student Research Conference (OTDK), TDK papers and authors (in the case of multi-author TDK papers, all authors) may participate that meet the conditions specified in the General Call for the 37th National Student Research Conference. Details are provided in Supplement 2 of the General Call for the 37th OTDK.
Each TDK paper can have up to two authors. If a TDK paper has two authors, it can only be presented if both authors are registered for the 37th National Student Research Conference (OTDK) and both participate in the presentation (exceptions may be made with special permission from the Section Committee.)
Study circles from cross-border universities and colleges can participate in the 37th OTDK under the same professional conditions as those in Hungary. Details are available in the General Call of the 37th OTDK.
Supplement 1 to the Section Call includes:
Supplement 2 to the Section Call includes:
Supplement 3 to the Section Call includes:
Supplement 4 to the Section Call includes:
During the application process, students must indicate which session would be the most suitable for presenting their TDK paper, as well as a second session that could also be appropriate.
The fundamental rules for the establishment of the final session assignment are included in the General Call of the 37th OTDK. The Biology Section Committee may, based on the number of TDK papers received and their topic, merge some of the planned sessions/topics or create additional ones, so that the TDK paper may be assigned to a different session than the one indicated by the author(s) during registration. The organizing institution, with the agreement of the Section Committee, reserves the right to redirect submissions with content that does not align with the Section’s field of study to another session of the National Student Research Conference that is more appropriate for the topic.
The final decision on the sessions and the classification of the TDK papers will be made by the Biology Section Committee. Students will be informed of this decision via the OTDT online system by 3 February 2025 at the latest. Students may object to their classification until 10 February 2025 by sending a detailed, justified letter addressed to the Chair of the Organizing Committee at the Section’s e-mail address (OTDK37Biologia@szte.hu). The student will be notified of the decision on the objection by 28 February 2025.
Details of the steps of registration for participants are given in Supplement 2 of the General Call of the 37th OTDK.
Registration period for the Biology Section: 15 November 2024 – 15 January 2024 (Wednesday), 16:00 (CET)
After the registration deadline for students (15 January 2025), it will no longer be possible for students to upload application documents in the OTDT online system.
In addition to the steps described in Supplement 2 of the General Call of the 37th OTDK, the “Author Contribution” signed by the applicant(s) and at least one supervisor must be uploaded before finalizing the registration.
Tasks of the TDT Chairs are given in Supplement 2 of the 37th OTDK General Call.
Deadline for institutional and faculty TDT Chairs to upload documents to the OTDT online system: 20 January 2025 (Monday) 16:00 (CET). After the deadline it will no longer be possible to upload application documents in the OTDT online system.
We are unable to accept TDK papers that do not meet the requirements outlined in the Section Call; such applications will be rejected.
Applications submitted individually are invalid.
The registration fees for the 37th OTDK will be determined at a later stage, subject to the availability of funding.
A certificate of recognition will be awarded to all authors and supervisors attended in the OTDK and presented their TDK papers. In addition, a maximum of one third of the papers presented may be awarded one of the first, second and third places per section, taking into account that a maximum of one application per session may be awarded first place. The Section Panel may award a special prize to those TDK papers that do not achieve ranking but are judged by the Session Panel to be worthy of recognition on the basis of their professional merit, and which are judged to be immediately behind the winning applications. The authors of the winning papers and those of the papers receiving the Special Prize of the Session Panel will each receive a certificate for the ranking or the Special Prize of the Session Panel.
The total number of winning TDK papers and TDK papers awarded the Special Prize of the Session Panel may not exceed 50% of the total number of TDK papers presented in a section. Further rules on prizes are set out in Supplement 3 to the General Call.
Submission of Pro Scientia Gold Medal application
The authors of TDK papers that have been awarded first place at the national conference may apply for the Pro Scientia Gold Medal, provided they meet the additional criteria set out in the call. Details are given in Supplement 5 of the 37th OTDK General Call.
We invite and welcome all interested students and their masters!
Budapest, 9 April 2024.
| Dr. Viktor Müller | Dr. Attila Fehér |
| Associate Professor | University Professor |
| Chair of the Biology Section Committee |
Chair of the Organizing Committee of the 37th OTDK in Biology |
[1] abstract = overview/excerpt/summary
Note: If any interpretational issues arise between the Hungarian call and its English translation, the Hungarian version shall prevail.
In the Biology Section TDK papers can be submitted in Hungarian and English. The language of the TDK paper, the abstract, the author’s contribution and the presentation must be the same.
It must be clear from the TDK paper what the applicant’s own work is, therefore, for each TDK paper a statement (Author’s Contribution) by the author(s) and the supervisor (in case of multiple supervisors, one signature is sufficient) on the author(s) own scientific achievements must be uploaded to the OTDT online system at the time of the application. The mandatory sample for the statement on the Author’s contribution to be used is given in Supplement 2 to this Section Call.
All TDK papers submitted to the OTDK are subject to a plagiarism check, which is evaluated by a three-member special committee set up by the Biology Section Committee, which reviews the results of the plagiarism check one by one. Please note that plagiarism in any form is not allowed: chapters that do not present new results (e.g. Introduction, Evaluation/Discussion) must also follow the rules of ethical citation. If a full sentence or several sentences are taken over verbatim, the beginning and end of the quoted part must be indicated by quotation marks, and the quoted text may not be modified. If the author refers to previous results in a newly formulated (or rephrased) text (indirect citation), the reference of the scientific publication that reports the results must be included in the text and the publication must be listed in the bibliography. Also, you may cite your own earlier works (including earlier OTDK papers) only if you follow the above rules and clearly and accurately indicate the original source or verbatim quotation. The original source must also be indicated if you take over any figures.
TDK papers that are proven to infringe copyright will be excluded from the OTDK by the OTDT, with simultaneous notification to the nominating institution.
According to the OTDT Biology Section Committee, ChatGPT is a tool that can be used for good and bad. The use of ChatGPT (and similar text and content production applications, AI tools) is allowed for the preparation of TDK papers (and presentations), but the fact and extent of this must be indicated in the description of the methods[1]. Please note that by submitting a TDK paper, authors accept responsibility for the originality and authenticity of the results presented and for all words in the TDK paper (including text written using ChatGPT). Particular care should be taken when checking literature references provided by ChatGPT.
General requirements:
Time for uploading the TDK paper to the OTDT online system: within 30 days after the acceptance of the student research conference, as described in Supplement 2, point 4 of the General Call of the 37th OTDK. Students who qualify with their TDK papers at a student research conference held within 30 days before the registration deadline for the Biology Section of the 37th OTDK must upload their TDK papers to the OTDT online system by the registration deadline at the latest.
TDK papers that exceed the maximum length specified by the Biology Section cannot not be uploaded to the OTDT online system.
TDK papers must be uploaded in editable (non-protected) PDF format. The maximum file size is 10 megabytes. If the size of the TDK paper exceeds 10 megabytes, please contact the OTDT Office.
General formal requirements:
Font: Times New Roman or Calibri
Font size: 12 pt
Line spacing: 1.5
Margin: 2.5 cm
By way of derogation from the general rule, the font size of text in tables and figures and of references should be at least 10 points and the line spacing minimum single.
Compulsory supplementary document (to be uploaded at the time of registration): Author’s contribution
Section-specific requirements:
Minimum number of pages for the TDK paper: –
Maximum number of pages for the TDK paper: 40 (including any Appendices)
Number of authors: up to 2
Number of supervisors: up to 2
Method of referencing: As appropriate to the field.
Additional section-specific rules for the TDK paper:
The proposed structure of the TDK paper: Cover page, Table of contents, Introduction, Objectives, Materials and methods, Results, Discussion, Acknowledgements, Bibliography + Appendix (if relevant).
The cover page of the TDK paper must include: “37th OTDK Biology Section”, title, name of the author(s), field of study, year, name of the submitting institution (e.g. Babeș-Bolyai University); if the paper was not written at a university research center, the name of the institution in addition to the name of the nominating institution, and the name(s) of the (up to two) supervisors.
You do not need to submit a hard copy of your TDK paper.
At the conference, you will have 12 minutes to present your TDK paper, followed by a discussion of up to 8 minutes (in the same language as your presentation). At the end of the presentation, the result obtained after the completion of the TDK paper can be presented on (up to) two slides. It is mandatory to display the Author’s Contribution in the presentation (this information should be displayed on the last slide in the presentation).
As a general rule, a co-authored TDK paper may only be presented if both authors of the TDK paper are named and participate in the presentation (exceptions may be made with the specific permission of the Section Committee).
Only the main text needs to be uploaded to the OTDT online system (the other data: names of authors, institution, supervisor, etc. are generated by the online system).
Language of the abstract: the same as the language of the TDK paper.
Length of the abstract: minimum 500 and maximum 2500 characters (including spaces).
The abstract should include a short summary (maximum 500 characters) of the student’s own results.
The uploading of the presentations will be done online during a specific period before the conference, according to the technical instructions given by the Biology Section organizers, thus helping the sessions to run smoothly in terms of time and technical aspects.
Submitted TDK papers will be evaluated in writing by two reviewers, the evaluation criteria are set out in Supplement 3 to this Section Call. In the written evaluation, the maximum number of points that can be awarded to a TDK paper is 100 (based on the average of the points awarded by the two reviewers). Evaluations will be published by the Biology Section organizers via the OTDT online system. Written evaluations will be published 7 days before the conference.
The presentation will be evaluated by a Session Panel of recognized members of the field. The evaluation criteria for the presentation are set out in Supplement 3 to this Section Call. During the presentation evaluation, the Section Panel of 3 members can award a maximum of 100 points (based on the average of the three panel members’ scores) for the oral presentation of the TDK paper.
The evaluation of the TDK paper is made by summing up the scores of the paper and its presentation.
[1] Examples: “In the Introduction chapter, I prepared the first version/some parts of the literature review using ChatGPT”. “I prepared the first version of the Summary/Abstract based on the text of the TDK paper using ChatGPT and then edited it to a minor/major extent.”
I, the undersigned (name of the student submitting the paper to be filled in here), declare that I have participated in the following work processes for the paper submitted to the 37th OTDK (title of the paper to be filled in here)[1]:
[1] Please do not list the parts of the research project in which you were not involved at all.
| Subtask[1] | Extent of participation (on a five-point scale#) |
| Collection of animals/plants to be studied in one of the three study yearsm1 | 3 |
| Preparation and processing of the preparations to be tested | 5 |
| Design of PCR primers for 3 of the 5 cases described in the TDK paperm2 | 4 |
| Optimization and performance of the western blot reactions described in the TDK paper, evaluation of the results3 | 3 |
| Statistical processing of datam4 | 1 |
| … | … |
[1] The following list is a sample, which can be freely modified and extended.
Date: <Place>, <Date>
(Please replace or modify the parts marked with an asterisk as appropriate).
|
_________________________ |
For two-author TDK papers:
_________________________ |
I confirm that the information contained in the declaration is correct:
__________________________
Supervisor (name, workplace)
signature
#Explanation:
Please rate your extent of involvement in the work process on a five-point scale. The meaning of each value on the scale:
5 – After preparation, I completed the whole task independently, to the extent required for the project.
4 – After preparation, I completed more than half of the whole task independently, to the extent required for the project.
3 – After preparation, I completed more than half of the subtask independently, to the extent required for the project.
2 – After preparation, I completed less than half of the subtask independently, to the extent required for the project.
1 – I completed the subtask with continuous assistance to the extent required for the paper.
m1 The student author participated in one year of the 3 years of fieldwork. This year, together with their partner, they carried out the fieldwork, during which they independently collected materials related to the species forming the basis of the TDK paper for one half of the area/study period. The rest of the collection was done by others.
m2Of the 5 primers used, the student designed three himself, the others were ready-made.
m3The design (e.g.: sample order+quantity) and theoretical setup of the western blot reactions was completed by the participant, however, the “wet” part of the work was largely done by the laboratory assistant. The evaluation was carried out by the participant.
m4The statistical processing of the data was carried out by the participant, with the continuous assistance of their supervisor.
| Evaluation criteria: |
Maximum score |
| Evaluation of individual chapters of the TDK paper | |
| 1. Evaluation of the introduction
Criteria: Does the theoretical introduction provide sufficient theoretical background for the reader to understand the scientific work done and see its significance? In the introduction, how well did the applicant put their work into a broader context to justify the objectives set? |
15 |
| 2. Evaluation of the material and the methodology
Criterion: is the description precise enough to allow the given method to be reproduced? |
5 |
| 3. Evaluation of the results
Criteria: How accurate and easy to follow is the description of the results? Does the presentation of the figures and tables accompanying the results (e.g. correct captioning and description of figures) comply with international publication standards? Evaluation of the quality and the standard of the graphical material. |
15 |
| 4. Evaluation of the discussion | |
| Criteria: Is the interpretation of the results adequate? Was their relevance demonstrated in the context of current knowledge? Was the discourse been done in sufficient depth? |
15 |
| Evaluation of the TDK paper as a whole | |
| General evaluation of the research carried out
5. Criterion: Assessment the work done and the amount of results achieved[1]. Has the objective been achieved? |
20 |
| 6. Criterion: The professional significance of the research carried out by the author(s) |
15 |
| 7. General formal assessment of the TDK paper
Criterion: assessment the logic of the overall essay structure, the correct use of style and terminology, the quality and professionalism of the presentation of the results. |
10 |
| 8. Evaluation of the literature quoted
Criteria: Does the bibliography of the literature quoted conform to an accepted form of citation of scientific publications? Are the citations relevant in their context? |
5 |
[1] In the case of a two-author proposal, we recommend that the amount of work per author is taken into account.
Each criterion is scored on a scale of 1 to 5, and then multiplied by the multiplication factors set out on the next page before summing up the sub-scores.
| Criterion |
Scale |
Multiplier factor |
Possible values |
| Introduction (1.) |
1-5 |
3 |
3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 |
| Material and methodology (2.) |
1-5 |
1 |
1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 |
| Results (3.) |
1-5 |
3 |
3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 |
| Discussion (4.) |
1-5 |
3 |
3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 |
| Quantity (5.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |
| Significance (6.) |
1-5 |
3 |
3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 |
| Form (7.) |
1-5 |
2 |
2 / 4 / 6 / 8 / 10 |
| References (8.) |
1-5 |
1 |
1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 |
Criteria for the evaluation of the presentation
| Evaluation criterion |
Maximum score |
| 1. Introduction to the topic Did the presenter give a clear, comprehensive picture of the background, purpose and significance of the research? |
20 |
| 2. Methodology, presentation of results Did the presenter adequately present their research methods, results and conclusions? |
20 |
| 3. Professional knowledge How is the presenter’s professional confidence in the subject? Assess the speaker’s debating skills. |
20 |
| 4. Formal evaluation of the presentation Evaluate the participant’s presentation style, correct use of technical language, appropriate use of time, clarity and technical quality of the presentation. |
20 |
| 5. The individual contribution of the TDK presenter(s) to the results described in the application The panel members should form an opinion, based on the presentation and through the questions, on the credibility of the author contribution and the contribution of the presenter(s) to the research results presented. If the performer convinces the panel jury members, their questions are answered satisfactorily in all respects and the panel members consider the performer’s work to be outstanding, they should award maximum points. This is where the participant’s intellectual contribution to the research design can be assessed, where relevant. |
20 |
Each criterion is scored on a scale of 1 to 5, and then multiplied by the multiplication factors set out in the following table before summing up the sub-scores.
| Criterion |
Scale |
Multiplier factor |
Possible values |
| Introduction (1.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |
| Presentation of the research (2.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |
| Discussion (3.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |
| Form (4.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |
| Individual contribution (5.) |
1-5 |
4 |
4 / 8 / 12 / 16 / 20 |