Genetic Analysis: Genes, Genomes, and Networks in Eukaryotes

This was a required textbook for a class I took this past year. In terms of content, I thought that it was pretty good. I was taking a difficult class, and the explanations in the book greatly aided in my understanding of the material covered in class. The case studies included in each of the chapters were particularly useful when preparing for the exams.I did notice some mistakes, but my main complaint about this textbook is the index. It is the worst index I have ever seen in a textbook, and the classmates I talked to agreed with me. My professor would skip around between chapters during his lectures, and it was difficult to find the corresponding text in the book. I almost never found what I was looking for in the index which meant I spent a lot of time flipping back and forth through chapters trying to find things.Despite its flaws, I still think this is a pretty good textbook. I found the explanations easy to understand, and I don't think I would have done well in the class without them.

I think the book has a lot of great material, really enjoyed the balance between the basic and the applied portions of the subject.

Pros:Overall, I think this text reveals a broad amount of information about the current state of genetic analysis. It logically brings the user through historically significant methods to the present state of the field involving new methodologies, some on which are assisted by advanced computerized tools and technologies.Within each chapter, there are relevant and informative "text boxes" and "case studies". They unify some of the material and present an extra intellectual challenge to reader.Cons:There are lots of mistakes in figures. It needs proofreading.I believe author is colorblind. This is judged from his erroneous references to purples and browns and such that are characteristic of the genetic defect. This should give more reason to have his work proofread by someone else.Author is somewhat repetitive in figure descriptions and text. It often feels like you're reading a reworded version of what has been already said. This seems like an inefficient use of the reader's time.There sometimes seems to be "ambitious" use of analogies. It seems he's stretching the line between making something easier to remember and making conceptual matches with the actual subject.

as described