JAMES M. TIEDJE, Editor

Dept. of Crop & Soil Sciences

Michigan State University

APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY East Lansing, Mich. 48824

 

A publication of the American Society for Microbiology . Area 517 353 9921

 

“>

Date. July 23, 1974 Manuscript No.__AM_439

 

' Editorial Board Member Dr. J. Lederberg

Kelley,Lee M. et al., Stereoisomeric specificity and soil gas disequilibria...

a -p.6. discussion. I don't follow why the authors are surprised to find the
' results they did. They were empirically anticipated in ref. 5; and, theoretically,
we have no information on the intensity of racemase action that would suggest that
the rates of catabolism would be equalized thereby. The basic interest of this paper

'

is in the exhibition of another, and in some respects simpler, method than in (5) for
detecting metabolic activity of soil; and I suspect readers of Applied Microbiology
would prefer to see a more detailed analysis of the respective methodologies, their
strengths, weaknesses, and reliabilities, than this belaboring of the obvious. I do not

knaw how interested this audience will be in detailed discussions of policies for exobiological -
research. Surely they would like to hear more about possible applications in terrestrial
contexts, although they could readily use their own imagination therefore. The paper would
be of great interest, as written, for Space Life Sciences or a similar journal; for the
present vehicle, I would some thought be given to revision for the actual readership of
Applied Microbiology, which should not be difficult/

The statistical analysis on which muth of the argument rests is not fully
explained except by reference to a computer program not available to the reviewer. Without
knowing more clearly just how the .99 confidence limita were calculated, it is not possible
to verify the authors' assertions. This may be more than needs to be in the final paper;
but a professional statistician should have access to these sadditional detaits for review

purposes.

p-5 Did the authors make their own determination of the viable bacterial éount
in the Antarctic soil sample? Perhaps it should also be pointed out that there was surely subst
tial proliferation:during the incubation period.

Fig 1. Is there any explanation for the decresaes observed at day 5? Are they
“statistically significant"?

 

Further comment from a collgague:

I would like to know more about the gas measurements (p.3). What were the

relative strengths of the sipnals? reproducibility? How were the gas samples
transferred to the spectrometer?

Low resolution rapid scans were used, How rapid? Rapid scans will introduce
ion statistical errors especially in the weak signals, When were HRMS scans

necessary?

To which data do they contribute?

D/Iddy

—,
—

C-

2

"TA. AAD