336 J. ARTHUR HARRIS 



Illustration 2. Absence of relationship between size of litter 

 and sex in swine 



PARKER and BULLARD (1913) have discussed the possible relationship 

 between the size of the litter and sex in the contents of 1000 uteri of 

 swine. From a simple percentage table they state that the relative num 

 bers of males and females are &quot;even in the extreme cases so nearly uni 

 form that we may conclude with reasonable assurance that there is no 

 intimate relation between sex and the size of the litters.&quot; 



The correlations between the total numbers of pigs in the litter, /, 

 and the number of males, m, and females, /, may be deduced from their 

 data. They are 



r lm -= .6833 .0114 



r tf = .6875 .0112 



From these and the three coefficients of variation one may deduce 



For males r te = -0177 - O2I 3 

 For females r lz = + .0177 .0213 



The correlation is sensibly zero, with regard to its probable error. 

 This method of analysis therefore fully confirms the conclusion drawn 

 by PARKER and BULLARD. 



Illustration 3. Proportion of pistillate and hermaphrodite flowers in 

 the inflorescence of the composite Homogyne 



LUDWIG (1901) has given data for the correlation between the num 

 ber of pistillate and the number of hermaphrodite flowers in the inflo 

 rescence of Homogyne. From his data we deduce 



For hermaphrodite flowers, h, 



h = 31.8333- == 7-398i, V h = 23.240 

 For pistillate flowers, p, 



P= I0 -537o, P = = 2.6460, V p = 25.112 

 For total flowers, f, 



/&quot;= = 42.3704, *f == 8.7749, V, = 20.7099 

 For hermaphrodite and pistillate flowers, 



r * P = -3899 -0449 

 For total flowers and hermaphrodite flowers, 



r fh = .9607 .0049, r fih = .2429 .0499 

 For total flowers and pistillate flowers, 



r fp == .6303 .0339, r fSf = .2429 .0499 



