Talk:Biotechnology

137.205.171.85 (discuss) 17:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC) After reading through the topic described as 'Biotecnology', it is difficult to understand how this can be described as a book. It appears to be more of a collection of poorly explained, random, vaguely-scientific phrases. The 'chapter' on High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) for instance is not at all informative and is very misleading. HPLC is not 'easy', it is a complex technique that requires expensive, sensitive, and complex equipment as well as extensive method develpoment specifically suited to each type of metabolite/compound and each application; detection, purification, etc.

this whole text needs rewriting as it is of less than no help to anyone reading this. It is certainly not for students and professionals or 'to bring a new student or new hire up to speed.' The way that things are explained metaphorically in this text is more suggestive of a complete lay person reading this for leisure.

To point out a few of the more obvious problems with this document: The laboratory skills section is hopelessly muddled and again appears to be loosely connected phrases, strung in a random sequence. For example what is meant under the pH section by 'Store in buffer not H20'? Does the author mean that the pH probe should be stored in 3 Molar potassium chloride solution?

And in this section: 'Three point calibration pH's 4, 7 and 10 Calibrate W/I range you going to use' Does the author mean that before using a pH probe and meter, a three point calibration of the pH probe is required. To do this the probe must be introduced in turn to standard solutions set at pH 4, then pH 7 and then pH 10. making sure to wash the probe in between each different pH solution? If so, what about a pH meter that calibrates using pH 9.2 solutions? Or a pH meter that only requires a two point calibration?

Under the 'Genetic Engineering section', rather than an explanation of what this is and when is was started, how it has developed etc. there is simply an opinion about Steve Young's desire to change the genetic code single leter codons from A, C, G, T, to H, Y, P and E without any explanation of what the point is. Or even what any of those letters stand for. As to his claims that "technologies like genetic engineering will never be as powerful as is popularly believed", what relevance does this have to biotechnology and how does it explain in any way what genetic engineering is?

Finally, What does the section on employee traits contribute about biotechnology? To answer that question simply, it Does not contribute anything. it is meaningless and should be removed entirely.

To summarise, there are more errors that correct information in this whole piece. The level of detail is also poor. The text uses acronyms, and technical nomenclature without defining them first. There are numerous spelling and grammatical errors, as well as missing words in sentences. the text also jumps from full sentences to notes to unaccompanied and unexplained lists (e.g. the 'Agar section'). Lastly, this piece has a heavily Americanised bias when phrase such as '6th grade', 'CFR58' and 'CFR11' are used. None of these items are clearly explained and so the relevance is lost on the international reader. 137.205.171.85 (discuss) 17:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)