290 REPORT OF COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



a. Experiments. 



In the course of the preceding experiments c^uite a large percentage 

 of the mutilated specimens had not regenerated the chelipeds by the 

 time the molt following the mutilation occurred. Now the degree 

 of mutilation in all these lobsters was exactly the same. Therefore 

 the molting periods of those specimens which did not regenerate 

 the chelipeds ought to furnish valuable data in regard to the effect 

 of the injury itself of mutilation. 



b. Tabulation of Data. 



In the preceding description of Tables II, III, and V it was stated 

 that, in series A^, A4, and C4 to Cjg, a distinction had been made 

 between those specimens which had, and those which had not, 

 regenerated the chelipeds. Accordingly, the right-hand columns 

 of these respective tables which show the results for the molting 

 periods of these latter specimens contain the data necessary for the 

 present purpose. 



c. Discussion of Results. 



An examination of the data for series A^ in Table II shows that, 

 out of the 21 lobsters which had been mutilated one day after the 

 molt, five individuals had not regenerated the chelipeds before 

 molting to the fifth stage. The average length of the molting 

 period for these five specimens was 12.9 days. On the other hand, 

 it may be recalled that the length of the corresponding period for the 

 regenerating specimens in the same series was 12.5 days, while the 

 normal molting period of the controls in this experiment was 12 days. 

 From this it may be seen that there is practically little difference in 

 the length of the molting periods for the regenerating and the muti- 

 lated non-regenerating lobsters. Accordingly it seems evident that, 

 just as in the case of the process of regeneration, so in the case of the 

 injury of mutilation, it is equally true that, if the mutilation is made 



