DERMATOGLYPHICS IN PRIMATES 143 



agree in hand and foot in being the digits of least distal reach. 

 It is not impossible that this likeness of two marginal digits 

 has morphological significance inasmuch as a similar rela- 

 tionship reappears in comparisons involving hair distribution 

 on middle segments of digits and pattern intensity in inter- 

 digital areas. 



Danforth ('21) has presented observations concerning the 

 digital distribution of hair. He points out that the basal 

 segments commonly present hair and that the terminal seg- 

 ments are invariably devoid of hair, while the middle segments 

 vary with respect to its presence and amount. Only four 

 digits, of course, are available for the full comparison. The 

 maximum hair-bearing is on digit IV of the hand and digit 

 III of the foot (fig. 599B). Comparison of the hand and foot 

 not only shows that these two digits correspond as sites of 

 maximum hair representation but it demonstrates also an 

 almost exact agreement in three other couplets of digits : III 

 and II of the hand and foot, respectively, IV and III of hand 

 and foot, and V and IV. Perhaps as significant as this is the 

 agreement of the index finger and little toe in their nearly 

 complete suppression of hair. The relationship may be likened 

 to that of digital lengths, where digit I of the hand and digit V 

 of the foot, the marginal elements in the seriation, show 

 minimal values. On the basis of these observations on hair, 

 as well as the muscular relations which alone often are thought 

 of in connection with the anatomical axis, and the more 

 frequent occurrence of syndactyly in digits III and IV of 

 the human hand and digits II and III of the foot, Danforth 

 properly concludes "that the individual fingers and the indi- 

 vidual toes are not serially homologous". M. T. Newman 

 ('36) has drawn attention to a like finding in the apical pat- 

 terns of fingers and toes in man. He points out that pattern 

 distributions on individual fingers and toes indicate "that if 

 the foot is to be compared with the hand, the foot as a whole 

 must be shifted one digit tibialward". Thus, for example, 

 tibial loops (equivalent to radial loops of the hand) have 

 their maximum frequency on the great toe (M. T. Newman; 



