29] 



RATE OF REGENERATION— ZELENY 

 TABLE 19 (Continued) 



29 



Series 



VIII 



IX 



X 



XI 



XII 



Average 



Regen- 

 eration 



1 



Total 

 length 



28.7 



32.0 



31.8 

 33.0 



29.8 

 26.9 



26.5 

 29.4 



32.1 

 32.4 



32.7 

 30.0 



30.9 

 30.1 



31.1 

 32.4 



28.0, 

 26.3 



24.4 

 28.5 



32.7 



33.4 



Tail 

 length 



18.5 

 21.5 



21.1 

 22.0 



19.1 

 17.0 



17.0 

 19.0 



21.5 

 21.5 



22.4 

 19.8 



20.9 

 20.2 



20.8 

 21.8 



18.0 

 16.4 



15.4 

 18.1 



21.4 



21.8 



Length 



re- 

 moved 



10.0 

 8.5 



13.2 

 11.7 



10.1 

 10.7 



9.6 

 8.7 



12.0 

 10.1 



10.2 

 9.4 



9.2 

 8.9 



11.0 

 10.4 



8.6 

 8.7 



10.6 



10.9 



Length 

 regen- 

 erated 



2.1 



2.2 



2.4 

 2.7 



2.3 

 2.3 



2.5 

 2.0 



2.3 

 2.0 



2.0 

 1.8 



1.6 

 1.8 



2.2 

 2.1 



2.7 

 1.9 



Specific 

 length 

 regen- 

 erated 



0.21 

 0.26 



0.18 

 0.23 



0.23 

 0.22 



0.26 

 0.23 



0.19 

 0.20 



0.20 

 0.20 



0.17 

 0.20 



0.20 

 0.20 



0.31 

 0.22 



Aver- 

 age 

 length 

 regen- 

 erated 



2.17 



2.55 



2.30 



2.25 



2.15 



1.90 



1.70 



2.15 



2.30 



2.01 



2.18 



Aver- 

 age 

 specific 

 length 

 regen- 

 erated 



0.235 



0.205 



0.225 



0.245 



0.19E 



0.200 



0.185 



0.200 



0.265 



0.194 



0.205 



The data as a whole show an advantage in favor of the second 

 regeneration as compared with the first. This is seen not only when the 

 direct regenerated lengths are taken but also when the specific amounts 

 are used. Elsewhere it is shown that the specific amount of regeneration 

 is independent of the level of the cut and therefore a constant within 

 the limits of removal as used in this experiment. The specific amount 



