3i8 Maine; agricui.turai, experiment station. 19 12, 



C. With 3 ? ? indicated to be of class 3 = fUl.. FIJ.. 

 $ Progeny 



Winter Production: Over go Under so Zero 



Observed 2 i o 



Expected 1.5 1.5 o 



Mean winter production of ? 2 

 in indicated class 35-50 eggs 22.00 eggs 



All 2 Progeny 



Winter Production: Over 30 Under 30 Zero 



Observed 302 i6i 2 



Expected 30.5 18.5 



Mean winter production Si-O/ eggs 13.06 eggs o eggs 



In this case the two zero birds are without much question to 

 be reckoned as somatic rather than genetic zeros. Unfortu- 

 nately neither of these birds were bred, so that precise infor- 

 mation on the point is lacking. Assuming this to be the case the 

 agreement between observation and expectation in the large 

 progeny is perfect. The matings under C got so few 9 pro- 

 geny as to be without significance one way or the other. 



The mean winter productions again show the distinctness of 

 the separation between the 'Over 30' and 'Under 30' fecundity 

 classes. 



B.P.R. $ j^4. Indicated constitution = //iL=. fhL-.. 



This bird, like $ 552 was used in the breeding pens two 

 years. He was hatched in 1908 and bred in each of the two 

 following years. His breeding history was as follows : 



Matings: A. With 8 ? ? indicated to be of class i = fL.L.. Fkk. 



5 Progeny 



Winter Production: Over 30 Under 30 Zero 



Observed 12 12 i 



Expected 12.5 12.5 



Mean winter production of ? ? 



in indicated class 47.67 eggs 15.58 eggs o eggs 



