Dr. Dee, a postdoctoral fellow in biochemistry, has just completed a manuscript detailing the results of the first project in which she has taken a leading role. The focus of her project has been to identify the ways in which humans metabolize sulfites, a class of chemicals commonly used to preserve wines and dried fruits. Although she developed the rough outlines of the project on her own, she owes much to people both inside and outside of her lab. The assistance she received from others includes the following:

1. A colleague at another university, a toxicologist specializing in food additives, shared with Dee his previous work on the in vivo activity of sulfites, information that permitted Dee to choose the ideal animal model for the experiment - the Abyssinian field mouse. While at a meeting that Dee also attended, this colleague read the first draft of Dee's manuscript and made suggestions that were instrumental in helping Dee articulate the interpretation and evaluation of her results.
   
   
2. A friend of Dee's, who happened to be a wildlife specialist, provided Dee with much advice on rearing and maintaining a colony of Abyssinian field mice such that she would have a stable pool of animal subjects.
   
   
3. A highly experienced technician in the lab gave Dee advice on modifying an assay he had been using, which finally allowed him to measure successfully sulfate metabolites in mouse urine. This technician also assisted in writing up the methods section of the paper.
   
   
4. The number of assays that Dee had to conduct was quite sizable and more than she could manage on her own, given other demands of the project. Thus, she hired an undergraduate college student who collected most of the urine samples and conducted the assays yielding the data.
   
   
5. A senior researcher-the principal investigator in a neighboring lab who took an interest in Dee's career-offered to review the initial drafts of Dee's paper. By the end of the writing process, this researcher had helped Dee outline the paper, had suggested a few additional experiments that strengthened the paper's conclusions, and had made a number of editing changes in the penultimate draft that enhanced the paper's clarity.

1. Who is an author?
   
   
2. Who is not an author?
   
   
3. Who should receive acknowledgment, and for what?
   
   
4. How and when should the issues of author ship and order of authorship have been addressed?