FIELDS G-l and G-2 

 Columns 27 and 28 



In such cases, these conditions are subsidiary factors of the test preparation being treated and are 

 properly coded in Field G. If. however, these deficiencies or excesses represent the pathology which 

 is affected by the test compound, the condition is to be coded in Field E. 



Field G is not used to record an experimental procedure used to bring about a pathological 

 condition coded in Field E. For example, if an endocrine gland is removed to bring about an endocrine 

 deficiency which is to be experimentally treated, the endocrine deficiency is coded in Field E, but the 

 gland's extirpation is not coded in Field G (with Symbol B), because this operation is not incidental 

 but is (or brings about) the condition treated. 



9. Symbol F of Field G is used to distinguish two code lines representing collective data from 

 more than two tests using several test organism strains 



(Refer to Part I, Division 4, under the special section on Specific Directions and Explanations 

 for the Taxonomy Code of Field E. ) The CBCC has used Symbol F in a special way somewhat contra- 

 dictory to the definition which states that its use is restricted to indicating that a special taxonomic 

 strain has been used in the test: it is used in the situation when a number of strains (either taxo- 

 nomically or physiologically distinct) have been tested by the identical test method with a given test 

 compound for a given response and some strains have responded while some have not, or some strains 

 have given a positive response while others have given a negative response, or some strains have 

 given a positive response of another level, etc. A single code line is customarily constructed for all 

 those strains showing the response and a single, second line is constructed for all those strains show- 

 ing no response or the opposing response. In the second of these lines, Field G is coded with Sym- 

 bol F as a standard means of distinguishing the two lines and explaining the difference between the 

 two in their evaluation fields. If responses of all of the responding varieties (coded by the first line) 

 fall within the same range of effectiveness (i. e. , all their evaluations are coded by the same symbol 

 in Field Y), Field Y will be coded with that symbol, but if they do not all fall in the same range of 

 effectiveness, code only the response of the strain that seems most significant (if that can be deter- 

 mined) or code Field Y only with Symbol 0. 



A single symbol can distinguish no more than two lines: Symbol F can be used only to distinguish 

 (1) two lines, the first coding responding strains vs. a second coding non- responding strains, or (2) 

 two lines, the first coding strains responding positively (i. e. , an increase over normal) vs. a second 

 coding strains responding negatively (i. e. , a decrease over normal). It is for these two purposes that 

 the CBCC uses Symbol F as a distinguishing symbol. Symbol F might also be used in a third or fourth 

 way: to distinguish (3) two lines coding strains responding at two distinct positive levels (i. e. , 

 increase over normal of 8 1 - 90% , coded by Symbol 8 in Field Y vs. increase over normal of 41-50%, 

 coded by Symbol 4 in Field Y) or (4) two lines coding strains responding at two distinct negative levels; 

 however, relative to the last two possible uses of Symbol F, the CBCC has always coded data of strains 

 responding positively at two levels (or negatively at two levels) by combining them in a single line with 

 Symbol or 1 in Field Y, merely as a means of saving coding time and space. In any case, those third 

 and fourth uses of Symbol F could be made principally when only two strains are involved, simply 

 because when several strains are tested, their responses seldom are so obliging as to fall in only two 

 distinct scales of evaluation (although it is possible that they may and in that case Symbol F might be 

 used to distinguish them); there is no way of distinguishing results which are at three or more distinct 

 levels--i. e. , falling in three or more evaluation scales (e.g., 81-90%, 41-50%, and 1-10% re- 

 sponses): to combine two of these in a second line with Field Y coded with Symbol would be meaning- 

 less as a coding distinction from the first line and to code three lines with Symbol F in Field G of two 

 of the lines would be equally meaningless. 



The two facts, (1) that the first line, of such pairs of lines, does not have coded in Field G 

 that the test organism is a special strain and (2) the lack of any means of indicating in either line (nor 

 on either IBM punched card) that it has a companion code line (or a companion IBM punched card) is no 

 problem largely because any search in the files will retrieve both IBM cards which will lead to both 

 code lines with the information about the strains responding. 



An alternative to this use of Field G for distinguishing strains in a non-specific way would be 

 the addition to Field E of specific strain designations, thus permitting a code line and an IBM punched 

 card for each test using a special strain. The infrequency of the CBCC's need for distinguishing 

 special strains justifies not distinguishing strains in Field E and contending with occasional coding 

 of non-specific strain designations as described above. 



- 52 - 



