Thank you very much for your letter of March 12 which I was very glad to get. I [ . . . ] the [ . . . ] you work[?] for.
I am very pleased you enjoyed the Nibenam[?] papers and would like to discuss the points you raise in detail but I don't
really think this can be done satisfactorily in a letter, and I am much looking forward to meeting you some time during your
visit here. The mannitol [?] v. formata [ . . . ] is to a large extent a mystery because although I quite [ . . . ] these
coli will grow on mannitol [?] and nor[?] formata as sole[?] C source, I don't think anybody has any clear ideas why.
What, for instance, do you mean by "sufficient energy source"? Formate will [ . . . ] O2 in insulate[?] in the [
. . . ] of [ . . . ] more rapidly than mannitol [?], therefore in one server[?] formata is a [ . . . ] sufficient energy source[?]
than mannitol [?] (or glucose). One is rather forced to the conclusion that formata cannot be synthesized into [ . . . ]
essential higher C compound, which mannitol[?] can. But I admit is might be, or you suggest, a protein[?] y energy relationships
if you make the hypothesis that the energy from formata [ . . . ] cannot [ . . . ] be utilized by the cells at all, or at
least not for the [ . . . ] of protein synthesis!
The point you raise about the [ . . . ] [ . . . ] [ . . . ] protein is interesting. I cannot say definitely that the [ .
. . ] is not acting on a [ . . . ] of assimilable[?] N, though I think it unlikely; but
[END PAGE ONE]
[BEGIN PAGE TWO]
I did not got into this point in detail and I can think of further experiments better planned to test your point that the
ones I did or [ . . . ] times[?]. I comes[?] hardly accept the difference of [ . . . ][ . . . ] in Table 7 of 50 to 17 or
evidence of mannitol [?] enzyme [ . . . ] since it worked the other way around with [ . . . ]! (the column 6[?]) You will,
I think, be interested to hear that [ . . . ] recently, in the [ . . . ]systematic search for subatomic[?] promoting [ . .
. ] [ . . . ] in the protein[?] of an [ . . . ] N [ . . . ] (but before the beginning of cell growth) I have found that certain
[ . . . ] a [ . . . ] have a ray pronounced [ . . . ] effect. The work is [ . . . ] [ . . . ] in the early stages and I do
not like to draw hasty conclusions, but the [ . . . ] to nucleic acid[?] nucleoprotein synthesis is obvious. If this time
proves [ . . . ] I hope to bring it up at the Copenhagen Congress in July.
Please let me know approximately when you will be in this country as I am much looking forward to meeting you.
P.S. Is Sereg[?] taken seriously in the U.S.? I have just been reading the "adaptive enzyme" section of his review
in the latest "Advances in Enzymology. I think this action has [ . . . ] a number of people here and I must confess I
feel rather annoyed myself. His objections, though superficially ingenious, do not bear shouting[?]; he is inconsistent and
often illogical, he ignores work that does not fit in with his own ideas and ends wit ha perfectly shattering misquotation
from Maxinie[?]Staplman's[?] paper on the adaptation of forensic[?] hydrogengase[?]. The way he dismisses [ . . . ] [
. . . ] wit ha wave of his hand in quick [ . . . ] and he does not even [ . . . ] own work or [ . . . ] in an otherwise [
. . . ] and respectable journal. I should be interested to know how he is held and what influence he has in the States.