What We Would Have Done Differently Now That It Is Too Late

We might as well begin on a note of candor by admitting the worst error we ever made, for of all the things that we would have done differently this surely heads the list. On the errata page of volume 8 appears the note: Volume 4, p. 309, n. 1. The man wrongly identified as Robert Brown Elliott [a black man] was actually William Elliott, a white man. The letter to BTW, Apr. 25,1898, was from Rev. G. M. Elliott of Beaufort, S.C. Not only had we confused a black man with a white man and another black man, but in a display of erudition we gratuitously had mentioned a letter that Elliott-the wrong Elliott-wrote to Booker T. Washington fourteen years after our own annotation indicated his death date. And they say that dead men tell no tales. At least there were no errata in our erratum. Such a compounding of errors could only have been achieved by a committee. For most of our annotations, we are able to trace back responsibility by checking the raw data notes, but in this case these had mysteriously disappeared. It all reminds us of the famous Nast cartoon about the Tweed ring. It shows a circle of bloated politicians. The caption reads, Who Stole the People\u27s Money? Each man is pointing his finger at the man on his left. That is our worst error yet, but we still have to do the cumulative index with its infinite possibilities. Without trying to explain away an error that gross, we can only say that it is the kind of error that occurred only once, and occurred in spite of our editorial method rather than because of it. Most of the other outright errors were less egregious: misspelled names; failure to annotate at first mention-we now have a system for that; and attributing to the A. M. E. Church what should properly be credited to the A. M. E. Zion Church-there is a man in Atlanta who reads our volumes apparently for no other purpose than to catch any slighting of his church

What We Would Have Done Differently Now That It is Too Late

Without trying to explain away an error that gross, we can only say that it is the kind of error that occurred only once, and occurred in spite of our editorial method rather than because of it. Most of the other outright errors were less egregious: misspelled names; failure to annotate at it appeared in the original, though we doubt that history was changed by the omission of that particular punctuation. We would still continue to correct obvious typographical errors in typewritten or printed documents. Maybe a type does reveal something deeply hidden, but is it deeply hidden in the author or the stenographer? Only a psycho-historian can analyze all the typos of a lifetime and reach conclusions as to their psychological significance, and for that he would surely want to see the originals, to see if the typist was agitated enough to punch out all the O\u27s

In Memoriam

Beverly Runge--Larry I. Bland--John Y. Simo

Watercress and amphipods Potential chemical defense in a spring stream macrophyte

We investigated the potential role of defensive chemicals in the avoidance of watercress ( Nasturtium officinale ) by the cooccurring amphipod, Gammarus pseudolimnaeus at two spring brooks: Carp Creek, Michigan and Squabble Brook, Connecticut. We conducted observations and laboratory experiments on the consumption of watercress, the toxicity of damaged (frozen) watercress, and the toxicity of damage-released secondary chemicals. Field-collected yellowed watercress typically lacked the bite and odor characteristic of green watercress and was consumed by G. pseudolimnaeus. G. pseudolimnaeus strongly preferred yellowed watercress to green watercress despite the higher nitrogen content of the latter (2.7 vs 5.4%), and usually consumed five times more yellowed watercress (>50% of yellowed leaf area vs. <8% of green leaf area presented). Fresh green watercress contained seven times more phenylethyl glucosinolate than yellowed watercress (8.9 mg/g wet vs. 1.2 mg/g). Cell-damaged (frozen) watercress was toxic to G. pseudolimnaeus (48-hr LC 50 s: ca. 1 g wet/liter), and the primary volatile secondary chemicals released by damage were highly toxic. The predominant glucosinolate hydrolysis product, 2-phenylethyl isothiocyanate had 48-hr LC 50 s between 0.96 and 3.62 mg/liter, whereas 3-phenylpropionitrile was less toxic, with 48-hr LC 50 s between 130 and 211 mg/liter. These results suggest that live watercress is chemically defended against consumption. The glucosinolate-myrosinase system, recognized as the principle deterrent system of terrestrial crucifers, is also possessed by N. officinale and may contribute to defense from herbivory by aquatic crustaceans. This system may be just one of many examples of the use of defensive chemicals by stream and lake macrophytes.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/44877/1/10886_2005_Article_BF01021282.pd

Blood platelets and sepsis pathophysiology: A new therapeutic prospect in critical ill patients?

Beyond haemostasis, platelets have emerged as versatile effectors of the immune response. The contribution of platelets in inflammation, tissue integrity and defence against infections has considerably widened the spectrum of their role in health and disease. Here, we propose a narrative review that first describes these new platelet attributes. We then examine their relevance to microcirculatory alterations in multi-organ dysfunction, a major sepsis complication. Rapid progresses that are made on the knowledge of novel platelet functions should improve the understanding of thrombocytopenia, a common condition and a predictor of adverse outcome in sepsis, and may provide potential avenues for management and therapy