iris@hort.net
- Subject: Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- From: L* M* <l*@lock-net.com>
- Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 13:44:11 -0500
Thanks Chuck.I suspect I knew that at the time, just so far back in the dim past I didn't remember. My main memory of that whole process was the horror of cutting little bits off the edge of each mouse's ears, tho they didn't seem to mind all that much, and the challenge to the eyes of being able to see thru the microscope with one eye while seeing the paper with the drawing using the other eye, getting the two images to merge into one in order to make the drawing. Following orders, not having to think much for that particular job.
On 3/3/2013 10:16 AM, Chuck Chapman wrote:
The hand drawing, substitutes for the many layers of focusing required. Not needed now when you can merge photos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- From: C* C* &*
- Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- References:
- Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- From: L* M* &*
- Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- From: C* C* &*
- Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- Prev by Date: Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- Next by Date: Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- Previous by thread: Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots
- Next by thread: Re: Re:Auto-tetraploid versus amphidiploid was Hyb spots