144 is) Bs aOR 
TABLE 14 
Weekly growth of the young of the first generation subjected to the same conditions as 
their parents 
| 
| 
| a ae |e le le Blea En ces tere | aM 
by H lo | Be IH Velie ele S| oe mn i i 2 
2 2 See IAs Sie el) Se mie se Se 
AA eI bp | aA Be eS ee aSs BD aaa ae ae 
Fool Fan leo) Eo |FE/FFIFRIE.| & Bay | (es) | ere 
LINE ase lage | Flag. |aajaclaziap| af a a8 a & 
aa az /e2) goa S| on ml > 4 > 5 
ow o Bo) OR |S BISBIGRiGo| oF oh OB og 
ae <a8 asl 3° p |<0/se\saise| 46 <n <4 <A 
Be<|a&<|2b ago iacgegiagad ag Be Be Be 
Pom | fon |5F) Bs |B <b qe aie) o< Bl sue alc 
< si la | = eo ee iets) ae < < < 
grams | grams grams \gm..gm.gm.igm.| grams | grams | grams | grams 
Control..22 2 s.. | 24:8 | 2027.) 07124912 714.015, G16 so tO eatn 14 16)! 1570 | oes 
Alcohol...........| 30.6 | 24.5 | 26) 1.20 8 15.0\6.49.7| 12.0 | 14.0 | 16.4 | 17.5 
Nicotine..........| 27.4 | 22.2 | 32) 1.35 |8.14.2/5.58.0) 10.5 | 18.0.) 12.5 | 1o.1 
smokedians. alee) e2an6 | 31] 1.23 |2.9/4.016.08.2|) 10.5 | 13.3 | 14.9 | 15.3 
Catieimes eee: 27.9 | 22.2 | 27] 1.30 |3.04.2)5.3/7.7) 10.1 (OE ee yaar | 13.9 
} } 
TABLE 15 
Weekly growth of the young of the second generation subjected to the same conditions 
as their parents 
| 
| 
a Bh g 
& Helo |e iol @) BS | oe | BE | Be | Be 
g Caz Ors |\SglSa| Ca ie oA Oi oA 
Lele eS -B alae) ae eas aS as AE 
F 2 ip Fas a Fe EB/| EE ae are z a as 
LINE | ase [aa Q QAlao| wz gp olel g Q 
G84 |e aie Sl coe lozlek oH | oo oF oh oe 
ae 8 (<S/Bo) <98 [<oleu| <6 4& 48 20 zi 
B&<lecize| eof lacies| af | af | af | ae | ag 
pom IS BIBF| <4 |e a5) 53 Sa -< ss So 
e epee | 4 |< ™ 4 < e a 
al 
grams gm. \ grams |\gm.gm.| grams | grams | grams | grams | grams 
Gontrol 2-555-252-0129") 25/14) e471 3204:-0) 629 Goll 9.9 | 10.9 | 14.0 
INGO. 5545456050545) Sock || 2A 13}) 1.5 2.84.9 6.75 | 9.6 2520 140 620 
. . | } | 
INM@OWUNE > caso0e can aaah Wess || AAW IO] Tbs PAE ta yy tS COO) | TO) 4] TB Odes 15), (0) 
Smoked...............| 20.0 | 20) 261.2 (2.44.5) 5.3 ee WO) |) TPA TE, e385 
} | | 
One hundred and thirty-three young mice of the first genera- 
tion and 63 of the second were subjected to the same conditions as 
their parents. Although there was much variation in the same 
line or even in the same litter, on the whole the five lines in both 
generations grew at about the same rate. The alcohol young 
excelled all the others. 
There seems to be no constant correlation between the weight 
of the parent and growth of the young. For instance the alcohol 
adults are large in the first generation and the controls are small, 
