diff --git a/wiki/pages/engineering-design2.html b/wiki/pages/engineering-design2.html
index 6a4aae3b92a33a7f1bdf10a3a6e78451439f3864..4e0b27aff547bf02d44e0f20e5082332a0b67443 100644
--- a/wiki/pages/engineering-design2.html
+++ b/wiki/pages/engineering-design2.html
@@ -194,10 +194,6 @@ We have also done project <a href="{{ url_for('pages', page='model') }}">Modelli
         <p><h3>NUPACK CspF Mutants</h3</p>
         <center><iframe src="https://static.igem.wiki/teams/4303/wiki/nupack-cspf-mutants.pdf" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe></center>
         <br> 
-        <br>
-        <p> <h5>We tested these sequences out in two strains of E. coli: Dh5alpha, a cloning strain and BL21(DE3), an expression strain. The analysis suggests that there is not much of a variation in the F/OD values. This suggests that probably in some cases, changing just one nucleotide does not change the expression. This may have structural correlations. <br></p>
-        <p> We have correlated it with NuPACK. However, while calculating the relative performance with respect to cspF, we realised that if a G/C in the original sequence GGAATTTTT was changed to an A/T then the F/OD values went lower. Whereas, if the vice versa was done, the F/OD value increased. We already have an experimentally validated library that gives a range of expression with respect to just the RBS (negative control). Our further designs will be based in learnings and developments from this experiment. </h5><br></p>
-        <br>
         <p><h3>NUPACK ANALYSIS</h3></p>
         <p><ul><li>From this, the least performing UTR SDM23 clearly has a very different structure. SDM10 has a similar structure but an Relative Performance 0.21 times higher than SDM23. This could be probably because of the GC content of it being different?</li><li>
 SDM27 has the best expression and Relative Performance of 1.3. It’s structure is very different from the other UTRs. We need to perform 3D corrations.</li><li>
@@ -206,6 +202,8 @@ SDM3 and SDM5 have a similar structure and a similar Relative Performance.</li><
 </p>
 <br>
 <p>We wish to modify the GC content of cspF by making multiple mutations in one sequence while maintaining its structural scaffold in the third engineering cycle. The next aspect that we wish to check is that keeping the structural scaffold of the cspF intact we wish to add additional structural complexities of different levels to it through our sequence and see how the gene expression changes.<br></p>
+<p> We have correlated it with NuPACK. However, while calculating the relative performance with respect to cspF, we realised that if a G/C in the original sequence GGAATTTTT was changed to an A/T then the F/OD values went lower. Whereas, if the vice versa was done, the F/OD value increased. We already have an experimentally validated library that gives a range of expression with respect to just the RBS (negative control). Our further designs will be based in learnings and developments from this experiment.<br></p>
+        <br>
   </div>
 </div>