338 



BOTANICAL GAZETTE 



NOVEMBER 



The first four of these families were produced by self-fertilizing 

 4 individuals of pedigree number 08115, and the rest by self- 

 fertilizing 6 individuals of number 08119. Most of these families 

 were too small to show obvious differences in the genetic compo- 

 sition of the different parent plants, or between them and the 



hermaphrodite mutants tested 

 under case II. The small size 

 of the families is due to the 

 comparatively poor develop- 

 ment of the ovaries and stig- 

 mas in most hermaphrodites, 

 and the consequent difficulty 

 of securing large quantities 

 of seeds by self-fertilization. 

 Most of the attempts to self- 

 fertilize the hermaphrodites 

 resulted in failure, and only 

 in a small proportion were any 

 Q >< ^A seeds produced. The total 



-+ Hh O ^ Mutant ' result agrees with results 



secured from the observation 

 of larger families, and it is 



(Mutant) 



147 101 3 



FIG. 3. Model pedigree for case III 



fair to assume that the rela- 

 tively large differences shown by some of these families are not 

 significant because of the smallness of the progenies. This con- 

 clusion will be fully justified I believe, when it is observed under 

 case IV that the very same plants, which produced the somewhat 

 variable progenies shown above, gave uniform results when they 

 were crossed with an unrelated female. 



CASE IV 



WHEN HERMAPHRODITES FROM THE PROGENY OF A SELF-FERTILIZED HERMAPHRODITE 

 MUTANT ARE CROSSED WITH AN UNRELATED FEMALE 



The families 09133 to 09142, inclusive, resulted from pollinat- 

 ing different flowers of a single female, 08114(4), with the pollen from 

 10 different hermaphrodites taken consecutively in family 08115, 

 and the remaining 19 families were produced by pollinating the 

 same female, 08114(4), with pollen from 19 different hermaphrodites 



