Thursday, July 28, 2011

Done!


The book is done! It's off to the printer and we should have copies by the end of August. Everyone who posts a comment will get a free copy.1









1. In some parallel universe.

47 comments :

  1. Well... just in case it's this universe...

    (perhaps it might be shown someday that there's only one universe and the multi- stuff gets ejected into the ether, who knows.)

    Anyway, good luck with the book!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This kinda makes me wish I was taking a biochemistry class!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Writing a book is said to be similar to having a baby, except that the gestation period tends to be longer.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow, it's pretty. Didn't expect that. Anyway, congrats.

    (Since I don't live in the lucky parallel universe, what's it go for in USD?)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Congratulations. This is the 5th Edition, I assume, even though I could not see that on the cover.

    ReplyDelete
  6. schneck says,

    This kinda makes me wish I was taking a biochemistry class!

    I could enroll you if you'd like. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. SQ says,

    Wow, it's pretty. Didn't expect that.

    I tried hard to make this edition more attractive than the previous editions. Thanks.

    (Since I don't live in the lucky parallel universe, what's it go for in USD?)

    If you have to ask ..... :-)

    I dunno what the price will be in US dollars. If we were to set the price today it would be around $150 (I think). But by next month that price could be closer to $300 depending on what happens in Washington over the next few days.

    ReplyDelete
  8. t_p_hamilton says,

    Congratulations. This is the 5th Edition, I assume, even though I could not see that on the cover.

    Oops. I posted the wrong cover. The latest one is now posted. It says "5th edition."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Just curious how it all works. Do authors' institutions (e.g., U Toronto) get any proceeds from sales?

    ReplyDelete
  10. DK asks,

    Just curious how it all works. Do authors' institutions (e.g., U Toronto) get any proceeds from sales?

    No.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Congratulations!!
    I can't wait to read the new edition.

    NM-5th

    ReplyDelete
  12. Congrats, Larry. I think there should be a Kindle version of all textbooks. Less weight, easier to reference, and more options for graphics.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I love getting free books, especially ones on biochemistry!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hah! I see you swapped first authors. Congrats. :)

    Nice cover, too.

    Deb

    ReplyDelete
  15. John Wilkins says,

    I think there should be a Kindle version of all textbooks. Less weight, easier to reference, and more options for graphics.

    It's a very complicated issue and none of the major publishing companies want to be the first one to experiment.

    One of the problems, as I understand it, is which format to use - kindle isn't the only choice.

    Graphics, especially color graphics, is another problem. We're not convinced that the figures can be rendered properly on some readers.

    My problem with "kindle"-like textbooks is that they aren't very good as reference texts. We have experience with web versions of our book and many students don't like them 'cause it's too hard to find things or to flip back and forth between two chapters.

    Think about the number of times you find a cross reference on a page and you keep one hand in that page while you flip through some other part of the textbook. You can do the equivalent with some electronic readers but it's not as easy.

    There aren't many textbook authors or publishers who think that electronic reader versions are going to be popular. Many don't even think that an online version is that great - although it does have some clear advantages.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Congratulations, Larry!

    It is pretty, which is very important; the ugly (and over-simplified) illustrations in Lewin's 'Genes' series ruin the book for me, but this new edition of your book looks magnificent.

    Also, I would've thought the academic publishers would be falling over themselves to publish e-books, since surely they could kill off the second-hand book market if electronic books replaced hard copies?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Outstanding job Larry. Look forward to reading it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Congratulations Larry, for me an appreciated reference base.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "The evolution of a complex enzyme" You used the word 'evolution'? WTF?! Are you trying to lose sales in Kansas?

    Congratulations!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Send instructions for picking up my free copy in that parallel universe. I've been practicing my parallel parking.

    ReplyDelete
  21. From the taxpayers' point of view, that does not sound like a fair arrangement. The employer should get a cut.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hi Larry,

    Congratulations! I'll get a copy as soon as possible (though, I too would like to have the Kindle version).

    One short question - if it's not tedious, could you please write the date on which the most recent article / book cited in this new book of yours was originally published?

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  23. anonymous asks,

    One short question - if it's not tedious, could you please write the date on which the most recent article / book cited in this new book of yours was originally published?

    I'm pretty sure the most recent article was from March or April, 2011. Why do you ask? This is an introductory biochemistry textbook so I'm not very interested in the most recently published papers unless they have an impact on basic concepts and principles.

    ReplyDelete
  24. DK says,

    From the taxpayers' point of view, that does not sound like a fair arrangement. The employer should get a cut.

    Well, that's not how the system works. The university does not get a cut of any money or benefits earned through scholarly activity. This includes Nobel Prizes, novels by members of the English department, works of art, free trips to conferences in exotic places, honoraria, and symphonies. They also don't get a cut when a graduate student publishes a thesis or a professor gets paid for publishing a review article. They don't ask for a percentage of the fees earned by the doctors and dentist on the faculty.

    The university also doesn't get a cut from consultant fees earned by chemists, engineers, lawyers, and members of the Faculty of Management.

    Now, I suppose you could change the system but the ramifications would be profound.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Well, that's not how the system works. The university does not get a cut of any money or benefits earned through scholarly activity.

    Yes, taxpayers are a pretty generous bunch.

    Now, I suppose you could change the system but the ramifications would be profound.

    Indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Great!

    The prettiest cover for a biochemistry book I've seen so far.

    Sadly, for the time I get enough money to buy the book, you'll probably be releasing the next edition.

    I'll join ergaster: congrats for the first author swap!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Congrats! Did you resolve the 8 bases for the DNA molecule? Inquiring minds want to know!!! Best of luck with the new edition. Jim

    ReplyDelete
  28. James asks,

    Did you resolve the 8 bases for the DNA molecule? Inquiring minds want to know!!!

    I show five of the most common modified nucleotides—the ones that have been known for several decades—and I mention that at there are at least a dozen others.

    ReplyDelete
  29. DK says,

    Yes, taxpayers are a pretty generous bunch.

    I don't think I understand what point you're trying to make. Could you clarify?

    If you work for a private company do they get a cut of any money that you earn in the evenings and on weekends?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Congrats on the publication - I hope it does well,
    When will it be available in the UK ( Paperback )
    I miss the Monday's molecule

    Kind regards,

    Glyn

    ReplyDelete
  31. It would have been nice for "Evolution of a Complex Enzyme" to have explicitly made the point that the eukaryotic enzymes evolved from a historical proto-enzyme in exactly the same way the modern day bacterial enzyme did. The text as it current reads (particularly the labels on the figure) supports the canard that eukaryotes are "more evolved" than bacteria and that eukaryotes "evolved from" bacteria.

    ReplyDelete
  32. anonymous says,

    It would have been nice for "Evolution of a Complex Enzyme" to have explicitly made the point that the eukaryotic enzymes evolved from a historical proto-enzyme in exactly the same way the modern day bacterial enzyme did. The text as it current reads (particularly the labels on the figure) supports the canard that eukaryotes are "more evolved" than bacteria and that eukaryotes "evolved from" bacteria.

    Hmmm ... I can see how you might have reached that conclusion from the labels on the figure. It certainly wasn't my intention. What I meant to show is how we can infer the evolution of the fungal/animal form of the enzyme by looking at the other forms of the enzyme in extant species.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I'm pretty sure the most recent article was from March or April, 2011. Why do you ask? This is an introductory biochemistry textbook so I'm not very interested in the most recently published papers unless they have an impact on basic concepts and principles.


    That's an interesting sales pitch. If the basic principles are all that's in your book then why buy the new book? Shouldn't have changed much from the 1st edition ;)

    Good book though, congrats.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I don't think I understand what point you're trying to make. Could you clarify?

    The main point I am making is that the list of examples you provided is yet another indication of what happens when groups of people are allowed to self-regulate while spending other peoples' money. Politicians self-regulate into making the sweetest deals for themselves and college professors make rules for their sinecures. In both cases, the interests of the paying public come distant second.

    If you work for a private company do they get a cut of any money that you earn in the evenings and on weekends?

    Of course not. But you once said that your primary scholarly activity is writing textbooks. This doesn't sound like evenings and weekends. And even if it does in your case, we both know very well that as a rule for profit books by faculty are not written in the evenings and on weekends.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Congratulations, and of course much success. I look forward to reading it. I'm quite certain that it will bring new dimensions to my world. I'm lacking some details.

    Thanks, and good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Well done - takes me back to my first week at University and my tutor, the splendid Paddy Phizackerley recommending "comprehensible Biochemistry" by Yudkin and Offard. I think they were his mates !

    ReplyDelete
  37. Congratulations! I guess it requires lots of work and ambition. I hope one day I will be able to publish a book as well.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Congratulations! We used the 4th edition of this book in the introductory biochemistry class I took a few years ago. This text always stuck out to me as one of the best (of the books used in the classes that I took) for its simple readability, clarity, and the quality of its diagrams.

    While studying from this book one night, I decided to google Dr. Moran's name on a whim, which brought me to the atheist/science blog circles. These resources were of much comfort while I was going to school in the Bible belt as a newly "converted" atheist. Fortunately, I'm now moving to the northeastern US for medical school.

    Anyway, please keep up the good work, Dr. Moran!

    ReplyDelete
  39. "Just curious how it all works. Do authors' institutions (e.g., U Toronto) get any proceeds from sales?"

    I imagine that the institution(s) get to sell themselves as employing world-class faculty, some of which produce world-class textbooks. I imagine that this boosts/stabilizes prestige and enrollment which redounds to the benefit of the tax payer by enhancing local economic viability.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Looks beautiful! I guess it's time for an upgrade - I still keep my copy from the time I had to study from it back in 1994.

    ReplyDelete
  41. If you believe that parallel universes exist, why couldn't there be a parallel universe where you promised a free copy to someone in this universe? More specifically, where's my copy?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Many years ago I bought the spanish edition of Horton's Bioquímica. It was the worst edition I´ve ever seen of a textbook. Black & white (not even grayscale) illustrations, bad translation, a lot of errors... I hope they don't translate this new edition. By the way, I'm taking a biochemistry course now. Does México qualifies as a parallel universe? :-)
    ¡¡Saludos, Larry!!

    ReplyDelete
  43. @anonymous earlier: Eukaryotes ARE derived bacteria. The Three Domains where [eu]bacteria form a monophyletic clade apart from Euks + Archaeans has very little actual support still. I'm highly suspicious of phylogenetic analyses at that depth, especially given the story with the eukaryotic tree around the 90's (the SSU tree showing unicellular "stem" and multicellular "crown" groups, which is unarguably wrong now), and biological common sense (as well as patterns of shared genes, etc) is strongly in favour of euks+archaeans being derived bacteria.

    I wish people stopped blindly accepting the Three Domains as dogma and actually examined the bloody thing sometime. But Koonin et al. shoot down any theory deviating from that story (best seen in Biol Direct open reviewer comments), and have enough influence to block good science in that area, whether intentionally or not.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Psi Wavefunction says,

    ... (the SSU tree showing unicellular "stem" and multicellular "crown" groups, which is unarguably wrong now), and biological common sense (as well as patterns of shared genes, etc) is strongly in favour of euks+archaeans being derived bacteria.

    On the other hand, a lot of other trees suggest that the primary split in the tree of life is between eukaryotes and prokaryotes. In that case it's not correct to say that eukaryotes are derived from bacteria. (It's also not correct to say that bacteria are derived from eukaryotes.)

    Fact is, we aren't certain about the early history of life so it's best not to make any statements about the origin of prokaryotes (and eukaryotes).

    ReplyDelete
  45. Hope i'm not late to the party! Loving your website and hopefully i'll be able to dig into your new book! Congrats!

    ReplyDelete