When 45 biologists from eight countries were asked to critically read and amend the English in Discussion sections of three Dutch-authored draft research papers, many of their alterations impacted on the hedging. This article discusses these alterations. In particular, it focuses on the hotspots in the texts, i.e., the points on which several readers converged and made changes that affected the hedging. The possible motives for altering the hedging are proposed. Also discussed are the scientific establishment's attitude to hedging, and ways in which cultural background and competence in English might have affected the deployment of hedges. The paper concludes by noting some implications of the findings for research and teaching.