208 Lefi-fcatlicr'Dtfi in Poiiltiji 



below, was recorded as clean-logged. Fi birds with feathered legs 

 were mated together in Pen 7, 1914 and 1915, Pen 14, 1915, Pen 6 

 and Pen 7, 1915. Of the 148 birds produced 117 had feathered and 

 31 had clean legs — expectation being 111 and 37. F^ birds were also 

 mated with pure Hamburghs in Pen 7, 1915, Pen 14, 1915, and Pen 6, 

 1916. They gave 93 offspring of which 37 were feathered and 56 

 were clean in the leg, the latter class Ijeing more numerous than was 

 expected. 



One Fo bird, % 250/13, was mated with a Hamburgh cock and gave 

 7 chickens, all with feathered legs. Probably she was homozygous for 

 the character'. Of her sons, one, ^ 35/15, was mated with % 487/13, 

 an F., bird from the Langshan-Leghorn cross (cf. p. 204). Two birds 

 from tins mating were tested in Pens 10 and 20, 1917. Both proved 

 to be heterozygous. (/ 271/16 was mated with % 454/13, an F^ 

 Langshan-Hamburgh hen. The result, 18 feathered and 8 clean-legged 

 chicks, is close to the expected 3 : 1 ratio on the assumption that he 

 was heterozygous. Further, with $ 210/16, a hen of mixed Hamburgh- 

 Sebright-Leghorn origin, he gave 12 chicks with feathered and 9 with 

 clean legs — a proportion near the expected eipiality of the two cla-sses — 

 J" 44/16, a brother of ^ 271/16, was mated with a sister of ? 210/16. 

 The 36 chickens produced are nearly equally distributed between the 

 two expected classes. 



So far the results of the Langshan-Hamburgh crosses may be said 

 to have borne out those derived from the cross between the Langshan 

 and the Leghorn. There is however the aberrant case above referred 

 to where a clean-legged bird, $ 64/12, came from the Langshan- 

 Hamburgh cross. This bird beiiaved as though she had feathered 

 legs; with her brother she gave (in Pen 18, 1913) 55 chickens of which 

 those with and those without feathered legs were almost exactly in the 

 proportion 3:1. In the following year she was mated with a pure 

 Hamburgh (Pen 5, 1914). Of the 25 chickens produced 13 had 

 feathered and 12 had clean legs. One of her daughters, $ 250/13, has 

 already been referred to as being in all pi-obability homozygous foi- the 

 feathered leg. 



Occasionally therefore a heterozygous bird may fail to put up an}' 

 leg- feathering. Sometimes the leg-feathering may be reduced to one 

 or two small feathers at the base of the outermost toe. In two cases 

 chicks on hatching were recorded as clean-legged though subsequent 



' She was also mated with j 44 in Pen "20, 1917, a bird known to be heterozygous. 

 Here again, though only tive cliickens were hatched, all liad feathered leps. 



