Open buggsley opened 8 years ago
Hi,
You are absolutely correct. This is indeed a typo. Thanks for pointing this out.
Chris
--90e6ba6e83d8d5f9ea049ef88992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hello
Following seems to be a typo in the book:
Page 35. Chapter 1 First paragraph under section 1.7.4 line 6 reads:
"Assuming initially that there are no CI or CII molecules, CII production is initiated from the P_RE promoter while CI production from P_R is only at a low basal rate."
I feel it should read the other way round:
"Assuming initially that there are no CI or CII molecules, CII production is initiated from the P_R promoter while CI production from P_RE is only at a low basal rate."
Kindly clarify.
Thank you. Regards Abhishek Murthy Department of Computer Science Stony Brook University (SUNY)
--90e6ba6e83d8d5f9ea049ef88992 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello
Following seems to be a typo in the book:
--90e6ba6e83d8d5f9ea049ef88992--
Hello
Following seems to be a typo in the book:
Page 35. Chapter 1 First paragraph under section 1.7.4 line 6 reads:
"Assuming initially that there are no CI or CII molecules, CII production is initiated from the P_RE promoter while CI production from P_R is only at a low basal rate."
I feel it should read the other way round:
"Assuming initially that there are no CI or CII molecules, CII production is initiated from the P_R promoter while CI production from P_RE is only at a low basal rate."
Kindly clarify.
Thank you. Regards Abhishek Murthy Department of Computer Science Stony Brook University (SUNY)