June 8, 1955

Dr. Thomas C. Selson
Institute of Microbiolozy
Rutgers University

New Beunswick, NJ.

Dear Toms

Your last letter was ost disturbing<= I hope you have been able to mace
“@ respectable deal with Wy though I ednine yqur tehacity in going after what
yqu want and deserve, I hope you wilt kedp place for a Mmited enomt of pro-
dence as well,

At last I have been able to get to your ms.— 4% was indecent to tale so
long, but believe me it waa not for wayt of the wish, so you can Judge unat
a pileup there is. Matters should imppeve over the stmmer (T hopel§. The ms.
definitely does not belong in *ftle 13%='T world think eitheb J Bact or JCCP
will be slad to have it after it is polished a bit, which I aswme is the
main thine you vant zrom me, Since you were able to provide tvo copies, the
easlest course for me was to make pencilled comments on one. Could you let me
have this back when you send any revision, so i can refresh my menorg on my
first resctions?

On the whole your style is good, commendabiy condensed-- in iact you are
one of the few people that I would have to urge to expand e lit itle at the right
places, Most of my comments are on deteils, as marked, Don't tae atylistic
substitutions too seriously, especially my versions: this seamed only the most
economical way of stating a criticism and you will probably do better in your
owl words.

By way of general comment, I would recommend that you richt this paper as
entirely precedent to the microscopic studies, which the work was. There will
be time when this is puhlished to refer back to your kinetic wors, In particular
I would be very cautious about "male" and "female", and would prefer myself that
you not use these expressions (for which you have no direct justizication) in
nis paper, In fact, to be precise, Hfr is not synonymous with mole, Afr is herma~
phroditic, while 7+ can only functiong as female (4n terms of the definition that
male is equivalent to migratory gamete). Your discussion might vent to say sometitin-
on the bearins of your findings on the detailed norpgo logical mechsaisn of symcenly
I do not see any statement that would rule out Hayes! old notions (he has fully
recanted, at least privately), and there is really no reed to nace any special
assumptions to present your deta. I have not gone over your authematies, as T
thought I could save time if you would simply send me your cerivetions, botli pt. le
ead, for the diffusion calculations, 1.33, wich I will cnec. over care.ully, as
deserves to be done. Well, the rest of my comment is on tre taxt,

Ere. etc.,
Tatle and introd, paragpaph:

Either physiology or mechanism, not both.

low abouts: Physiological studies of genetig recombination in EB. coli
or eeoeene sexual. eeeee

since "venetic recombination" now sovers 2 lot of territory.

ist para, is especially awkward, you were impatient to get 1t over with.
Surgest alonz followine Lines:

_ Most studies of reaombination in bacteria have emphasized genetics

rather than physiology, (1 & esp. discussion there with Westergaard),

although mating types ( ) and abemical ad physical infkuences(

have been examined ((f shudder to put these in the same gente: ace!)).

((I don't think you particularly have to mention “ana, which came to notrine,
especially if your first paper does; if you do, tag it oute this lust seatenc e).
A previous kinetic analyais { ) gave experimental results which agreed wit,
sacond order kinetics, that is
_@ theoretical model of. rahdom obllisons of two species of particles, tes parent
cells. .