RESEARCHES INTO ANTHROPOLOGICAL HEREDITY 



203 



cussed. I am only able to explain the peculiarity by supposing both 

 parents in this case to be heterozy^gotes: BM X BM ::= 1 BB + 2 BM + 

 1 MM, where B indicates a brachycephalic biotype and M a mesocepha- 

 lic. A segregation following the Mendelian laws has at any rate taken 

 place here. In this case 75 % of the offspring should be of the brachy- 

 cephalic type, which has been found already to be dominant to the 

 mesocephalic type. Of course, we do not know to which biotype an 

 individual belongs by knowing its cephalic index. An individual with 

 an index 80,6 may as well be a + variant of a mesocephalic type as a 



« TABLE 5. 



Index cephaliciis of the offspring varies strongly from that 

 of the parents. 



Average ind. 

 cephalic. 



Of the offspring are the following of ttie M type: nos. 1. 4. 6. 12 78,8 



» » » » » » » » B » : » 2. 3. 5. 7. 8. 9. 10. 



11. 13. 14. 15. 16 83,8 



-f- variant of a brachycephalic type. There are, however, only few 

 such doubtful individuals in the offspring. At the bottom of table 5 

 I have placed the offspring of the different types by themselves. The 

 average index of the offspring of the M-type is in this case 78,8, that 

 of the B-type 83,,s. These values have to be reduced with V2 à 1 index 

 as the offspring in both cases for a greater part was children. This 

 table favours the belief that there are at least 2 biotypes with regard 

 to the cephalic index in these districts. If determinants are delivered 

 from both these biotypes a segregation takes place in the offspring 

 in accord with the Mendelian principles. The cephalic indices of the 

 two biotypes ar& supposed to come very close to 83 and 78 respectively. 



