Format figures 4 & 5 to focus attention on means

[ewallace]

In figures 4 & 5 (RT-qPCR results of motif cosntructs), @j-aux raised a concern that the mean bars are not visually important enough compared to the raw data spots.

Suggestions to address this:

• Make the figure taller to create whitespace between lines
• Make the spots smaller
• Play with the size/weight of the lines

[ewallace]

I think this is fixed?

[ewallace]

Requesting review from @j-aux and/or @DimmestP : I tried to address this. Is it good enough yet, or what changes still need to be made?

[DimmestP]

Certainly there doesn't seem to be any issues with pixelation any more. The only thing I'd like to raise is the construct names are in bold in the plots but not in the table. Also, I am not sure if the shade of grey used for WT is the same for the plot and the table.

[DimmestP]

I also think the promoter names at the top of each plot needs to be moved up slightly as the bottom of the small p is getting cut off.

[DimmestP]

I will add my changes (as discussed 6th July)

[ewallace]

@DimmestP while you're editing the figures with the promoter names at the top of each plot, including figure 1, could you also change the mTurq to mTurq2 in the facets for consistency? Or is that too much of a pain?

[ewallace]

Currently I fixed the manuscript text so it abbreviates to mTurq (not mTurq2) for consistency with the figure axes. Any change we should do consistently.

[DimmestP]

Struggling with figure 1 and 6 as they are so big and the captions so long that they expand beyond the normal page margins and overlap with the page number. I can't make them smaller either else they become difficult to read.

[ewallace]

Figures 1 and 6 page setting is not ideal, but can we not deal with that yet? I created a separate issue #191 for it.

[DimmestP]

I have added all of Edwards comments and my own. I shall leave issue #191 open for further discussion on page formatting but will close this issue.