192 THE MENDEL JOURNAL 



papers* from my laboratorj^ tried to emphasize) that 

 the somatic condition of a character is, generally speaking, 

 an unreliable criterion of its behaviour in inheritance, 

 yet I am very strongly convinced that the careful and 

 thorough study of somatic characters and their variation, 

 quite apart from the study of their gametic determinants, 

 is a very important, though distinct, branch of biology, and 

 one which at every turn may be of help to the student of 

 heredity. I am most heartily in s^^mpathj^ with that 

 point of view in biology lately so ably championed by 

 Prof. Wm. E. Ritter, which aims to investigate " things 

 as they are " in biology, not as they " might be " or 

 " ought to be " on this, that, or the other theory. 



It seemed to me that within the broad category of 

 " single comb " there might exist more than one gametic 

 type. Fully understanding (contrary to the intimations 

 of " Ardent Mendelian ") that the onlj^ way ever to 

 settle whether or not this was the case was by means 

 of the breeding pen and the individual pedigree record, 

 nevertheless I thought and still think it a useful and 

 valid piece of preliminary research to determine what 

 different kinds of combs actually occur in a " pure 

 bred "f flock of birds, particularly since I was using the 

 birds from this very flock in Mendelian experiments. 

 It seems to me that " Ardent IMendelian " virtually 

 admits this himself, since he picks out on the basis of 

 our figures alone four " possible gametic types " of 

 single comb. Hitherto in Mendelian writings I have 

 never seen any reference to more than one gametic type 

 of single comb, excepting for the suggestion as to the 

 different types of single comb base made by Bateson 

 and Punnett in Rep. Evol. Comm. 1908. To have so 

 successfully gained recognition for the idea that there 



* Cf. for ex.ample. Ztschr. f. Abst. u. Vererb.-Lehre, Bd. II., pp. 

 257-275. 1909. 



t " Ardent Mendelian" objects to our use of the terms "pure bred" 

 and " homogeneous." To set his mind at rest I will at once say that I did 

 use those terms in the much maligned " fanciers' " sense. On a strict inter- 

 pretation of the case such usage is, I admit, open to criticism, but just how 

 I was to describe the actual facts regarding the past history of the birds 

 at this Station without either the use of these terms or a long dissertation 

 on the subject I do not know. It would convey an utterly wrong impression 

 regarding the true breeding history of these birds to say that they were 

 heterogeneous or not " pure bred." 



