*or Albuquerque

Dr. E, L, Tatum
Department of Biology
Stanford University
California

Dear Eds:

Thank you for your note of the 24th, The Amherst Symposium was a
very pleasant affair: I wish we could look forward to the same leisurely
pace at Déebboit, but it seems otherwise,

Esther and I have been thinking very seriously about the chances of
packing off to Stanford, At first, we weighed our thoughts dow with all
the day to day entanglements at home and the lab. , but if we insist on
waiting until these have evaporated, we never will get away. Instead, we
shall have to make a plan, and adjust our other affairs to it, Just yet
it is not certain that next Spring (1956) will be possible, but let us
try to make a concrete plan as if it were, and we can settle precise dates
layer, What are the problems? First here, then at Stenford,

U.W. 1. Leave. We can get leave (without pay) practically any time. I
an scheduled for a course from Sept~Jan, 20 which I would prefer not to
disturb too violently, but this 1s adjustable too.

2. Transportation. I assume we would drive. If we manage the spring
quarter, would this be February-March-April? Assuming so, is there any special
difficulty driving thoeugh Sante Fe*in late January? or would we have to go
further south?

3. Home and Lab. No time is much worse than any other. Spring quarter
might be the most convenient compromise,

S tanford: 1. When is spring quarter? Would any other interval be fwasible?
2. Teaching-- I would be glad to give my course, if expected, at
whatever level of advanvement your curriculum would accomodate, At Madison, I
alternate yearly between an advanced genetics course and a more elementary one

. for bacteriology majors, However, I have not done e lab., but would try to

copperate if you've had one going.

3. Housing. What are the prospects? (I don't think we'd plan to
rent our house for the short intervel, though we might try to get someone to
look after it).

4. Salaries, I suppose this would be the toughest nut! We can take a
month as vacation time to cover our travel time, but can you handle us for our
actual residence at Stanford? Esther's position here is Project (i.e,,Researct)

Associate which ranks and pays about equivalent to a S¢®8tang assistant profes-
sor, If you can't manage ofherwise, could try to get a research leave fron

WARF h committ would be redigtable, andrprobably incon”
ersten ASE eect bus t gears know if oe eee tat ee ands be Bop
It is probably too late to get any help from that source for spring 1956,
but if necessary, I might stezt the wheels turning for the following year.

5. Research, This one's easy— the problem we talked about, the
mycelial fragments, has lots of possibilities. Would it hejp to have a
written project outline? Have you made one up? Should I send some notes
with my own ideas on it? I an assuming you're not going to be too
preoccupied not to be the senor active working partner withvEsther and me
on this. Otherwise, there'd be no hope of getting anything done in a short
visit, and theretd be no fun to it anyhow. Has anything been published on
the fragments at all? Is there any quantitative information on viability from
your ow notes? In my own mind, so far, there are three main aspects to
look into:

a, The fragments themselves; what is the smallest unit capable

of vegetatave (or sexual) viability. (This may take sone micronanipulation),

b, Using fragments as possible recipients, e.g., of transduction
or other genetic effects that may depend on relutively exposed nuclei,

c. The effect of fragmentation itself (which may possibly include
some nuclear fragmentation) an genetic stability, especially in heterokaryons,
I am surprised noone has done mich since Newcomer on cytogenetic sequelas of
ultrasonics in higher plants.

We imow that there nay be many difficulties in your way, and that until
it is sealed, anything you (or I) may say will have to be tentative. At the moment,
we have no alternative conflicting plans fof next spring/ I probably will be more
urgent for you than for us to settle the plans reasonably in advance,
ERE

The Detroit symposium has me worried, since I am not sure either why I was
asked, or why I accepted, I have done too little work on gene-enzyme relationships
in the last five years to be able to anything very concrete from my ow experience,
so that about all I have left is 2 certain anqunt of pessimistic criticism, and
this may be all I'll do, on the basis of the papers as I hear them, It might be
better to give up going. But I really haven't hast the leisure ob the energy to
give much thought te it,

As for the organization, since you asked, I would admit some regret that
the afternoon session did not concentrete more effectively on the stated topic
of gene enzyne relationships, for which Hershey and Hotchkiss seem to me out
of place. Is it too late to translocate them? Don't misunderstand mez Itd go out
of my way to hear Hershey under any pretext, And Hotchkiss gives a nice story,
but I think it has only the color of biochemistry, because DNA is isolated by
chemical procedures, while adding no more by itsemf to the story of genes and en-
zymes, than would any random example of genetic recombination, e.g., eye color in
fishes, If it were the connecting pathway that was to be discussed, I would have
to suggest Crick or Watson instead, for all of the speculativity of the latter's
proposals, If there were than some more time for the ist afternoon session, I
would like to hear Yanofsky's story on tryptomphane deemmiease deamolase, which
I hear*is one of the most detailed anayyses ever done on the enzymatic functions
of a gene, and Itano on the genetics of the hemoglobins in man, If noone else
brings up fhe latter, I may, from the point of view of how many loci (1 ?) are
involved, On this last point, the literature confuses me— most of the inferences
are drawm from the abnormal status of heterozygous compounds rather than proper
recombination tests, and the reasoning may be circular,