338 



Journal of Comparative Neurology. 



TABLE II. 



Table II.— Giving for each specimen, arranged according to weight, (a) the 

 amount of the distal excess and the numbers from which it is determined (col- 

 umns I, 2 and 3) ; (b) the percentage value of the distal excess based upon the 

 sum of the two roots (column 4) ; (c) the number of the fibers comprising the 

 dorsal branclu-s, the nerve trunk and the ventral root (columns 5, 6 and 7). 

 The table shows first, that the value of the distal excess does not increase reg- 

 ularly with the increase in the weight of the animal ; second, that a relatively 

 large number of fibers in ihe dorsal branches as compared with the correspond- 

 ing nerve trunk does not increase the value of the distal excess, and third, that 

 in many cases the number of fibers constituting the distal excess is greater than 

 the number in the veptral root. 



In the first place the table shows that the increase in the 

 weight of the frog is not accompanied by a regular increase in 

 the percentage value of the distal excess. However, the simple 

 value of the dorsal branches (col. 5) increases more regularly. 



If certain architectural proportions are necessary regard- 

 less of the size of the frog, it is to be expected of course, that 

 the nerve roots, the trunk and the dorsal branches, should in- 

 crease in proportion. 



It should be noted, however, that while there is no indi- 



