Errata in George Johnson, "The Living World", 7th edition
Chapter 1 Page 26: "The sequence of the human genome, 3 billion nucleotides long, was decoded in 2001"; but
Page 258: "On June 26, 2000, geneticists announced that the entire human genome had been sequenced." (Chapter 13)
Chapter 3 Page 64 is a blatant infomercial for Lipitor.
Chapter 5 Figure 5.4:
The illustration for an endergonic reaction on the left shows hydrolysis of a polymer into monomers;
this is usually an exergonic reaction as shown in the middle figure.
The left figure should show a dehydration synthesis of monomers into a polymer, something like this;
see Figure 3.3.
Similar change applies to the illustration for synthesis of macromolecules.
Chapter 9 Figure 9.8b:
"Chromosome duplication" may imply 4 -> 8 chromosomes. Use "DNA" duplication instead.
Chapter 10 Figure 10.7:
the darkened squares shown in this Punnett square seem to imply similar phenotypes.
The correct shading should be this,
where heterozygotes look like the homozygous dominant.
Chapter 11 The serious error with Figure 11.10
(formerly 12.11) has been half-fixed.
The mutation in the DNA is now corrected, but what about the mRNA? The real problem is that this topic
should be put AFTER the discussion of translation in the next chapter.
I will continue to use the figure from the 4th edition, and postpone talking mutations until after chap 12.
Chapter 13 The discussion of gel electrophoresis seems to have been deleted?
How can we explain technologies like gene sequencing, DNA fingerprinting, producing recombinant DNA?
Diabetes is a poor candidate for therapeutic cloning.
Most people with type 2 diabetes do not benefit from transplanting pancreatic islet cells.
Chapter 14 The discussion of punctuated equilibrium and gradualism seem to have been deleted.
How can we explain macroevolution without defining it?
Graph showing genome similarity on Page 299
It implies humans and birds share a more recent common ancestor (240 MYA) than monotremes, which are mammals
and should diverge from humans much more recently, maybe 120 MYA rather than 250 MYA as suggested by the graph.
the geometric progression curve should show a factor of 2 rather than 3,
to be more comparable to the arithmetic progression, which shows a difference of 2.
P. 305 Directional selection: these are fruit flies, not just flies.
Remove this or rephrase: “only flies that moved away from light were used as parents” –
eliminating flies that move toward light does not imply the rest are moving away from light.
Chapter 15 Figure 15.3
should show the same organisms at each level, adding more as we go up levels.
For example, at genus level we see 2 squirrels (gray and red?), but the red disappears at family level,
replaced by a chipmunk and flying squirrel?
Also, why show a “Subphylum” level? This level is not discussed in the accompanying text that describes a honeybee.
shows "No tail" as a derived character between gorillas and humans.
Lacking something should NEVER be used to establish cladistic relationships - trees and fungi have "no tail".
This is just as wrong as lumping Bacteria and Archaea together as a "prokaryote" clade simply because they
lack organelles, as the book correctly explains later in section 15.7, Figure 15.10.
I would not use "short tail" either - bobcats have short tails. Perhaps "opposable thumb"?
Also "bipedal" is not unique to humans (think ostrich), maybe "speech" which can spark discussion of what speech is.
does not explain which set of derived characters are shared among the archosaurs.
Chapter 20 Figure 20.15
shows bones within fins of a lobe-finned fish. The arrow pointing to rear 2 fins should point to the front fins (pectoral and pelvic) instead.
shows a "leathery skin" on the amniotic egg: the egg is covered by a shell, not skin.
Chapter 35 Illustrations for ecto- and endo-parasitism, brood parasitism seem to have been deleted?
More disappointing is deleting discussion of keystone species.
Chapter 38 Page 810 is an infomercial for ethanol as an alternative "cleaner" energy source, lobbying for "massive funding".
There is no mention of other unproven technologies such as algae and hydrogen fuel.
Ionic vs. Covalent Bonding:
This mentions valence electrons as well as octets, neither of which are described in the text.
Proofreading Function of DNA Polymerase:
The enzyme should be called "DNA Polymerase III" to be consistent with the text.
The illustration for a base pair mismatch shows a T - C mismatch, which almost never occurs:
two pyrimidines usually do nforMot form hydrogen bonds. More common are T - G and C - A.
Most of the errors inherited from the 6th edition seem to be still there; see below.