A published figure can communicate a result efficiently, but it carries two distinct responsibilities: establishing an appropriate basis for reuse and representing the experiment accurately. A figure that is available to read online is not automatically available for every subsequent use.
Check the figure rather than only the article
Locate the article’s licence statement and the figure caption. Check whether the figure is original to the article or credited to another source with different terms. Keep the relevant rights information with the editorial record.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 permits sharing and adaptation, including commercial use, subject to its terms. Those include appropriate credit, a licence link and an indication of changes, without implying the licensor endorses the reuse.Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International deed (opens in a new tab)
That description applies when the material is actually covered by that licence. It should not be extended to every figure in an open-access article without checking for exclusions or separate credit lines.
If the permitted basis is unclear, use the publisher’s rights information or seek clarification before reproducing the figure. An original explanation can often proceed without embedding the image while the reuse question is unresolved.
Preserve the experiment around the image
| Element | What can go wrong if omitted |
|---|---|
| Model and material | A result appears to concern a different system or construct |
| Axes and units | Magnitude or direction becomes misleading |
| Control definition | The reader cannot identify the comparison |
| Uncertainty and sample information | A point estimate appears more definitive than reported |
| Panel labels and legend | The image is detached from the explanation needed to read it |
For a hypothetical multi-panel figure, selecting only the panel with the largest apparent response can distort the study if the omitted panels explain a limitation or a conflicting result. State why the chosen panel is relevant and retain necessary context.
Do not describe a microscopy image as a quantitative effect estimate unless the paper provides the relevant quantification. Likewise, a schematic pathway represents an interpretation or model, not a photograph of a measured molecular event.
Check the current publication record before reuse. A corrected legend or replacement panel may alter the meaning of a figure saved earlier in the writing process.
Make adaptations explicit
Resizing, cropping, relabelling and redrawing can have different effects on meaning. Record what was changed and make sure the final caption identifies the adaptation appropriately under the applicable terms.
If a figure is simplified for a general audience, preserve the distinctions needed for its scientific interpretation. Replacing several experimental groups with a single “treated” label may remove the very comparison that supports the finding.
Keep the original and the edited working copy distinguishable in the project record. That allows a reviewer to verify that the visual explanation has not acquired an unsupported label or omitted an essential scale.
Write a caption that stands on its own
Identify the source, the experimental context and the figure’s role in the explanation. Include the required credit and licence information in a form readers can actually find, rather than hiding it in an unrelated page footer.
Explain what the figure shows and what conclusion it does not establish. A cell-based result should not be captioned as proof of an outcome in another system simply because the article discusses that possibility.
Test readability in the intended layout. If labels become too small or the caption is separated from the image on mobile screens, a technically correct figure may still fail as communication.
Responsible reuse preserves both attribution and meaning. The finished visual should help readers understand a particular piece of evidence, with enough context to avoid treating it as a broader claim than the study supports.
Sources and further detail
- Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International deed (opens in a new tab)
Official licence summary inspected. No published figure is reproduced here; the context checklist is original and individual reuse decisions require checking the actual material’s terms.
Sources checked 20 September 2026. Editorial examples are illustrative unless a supplied document or published study is explicitly identified. This article has not undergone independent scientific peer review.