PLANT Cotors IN Maize 85 
A more conclusive reason for throwing out the first genotype is the 
fact that the plant had some seeds with colored aleurone, which would 
have been impossible if it were rr. The second genotype is discarded 
because of the extremely poor fit of observed numbers to the 12:3:1 
‘relation. There is an almost inconceivably small chance that the observed 
deviations may be due to errors of random sampling, z* equaling 180. 
(When n’=3 and x =29, P=0.000001. Higher values of z? when n’=3 
are not listed in Pearson’s tables.) The comparison follows: _ 
5 Dilute. 
Color types Sun red aun ed Green ‘Total 
avo lV; IVg 
MDccinucdmemer tk eet 114 23 57 194. 
Seeley ied) ee 146 36 12 194 
Ti#enoiies, ee Bae Sea es, 0 
The elimination of the first two genotypes leaves the third genotype 
as the only one that can be concerned here. The fit of observed numbers 
to the 36:9:19 relation is very close, x* equaling 0.84. (Values of P are 
not listed in Pearson’s tables for values of ~ less than 1; when #=1 
and n’ =3, P=0.61.) The comparison follows: 
; Dilute 
Color types Sun red Saree Green Total 
Ila, g War Vee Vala, ic 
CIISGINTEGLE ok Sas eee 114 23 SS 194 
Palemiated ae tk oe Pa ee 109 Zi 58 194 
MOI ERCUCOM iis fhe ce yee oe +5 —4 —1 0 
This comparison leaves little doubt that the genotype of the F2 plant 
concerned is AaBbR’r’. There are, moreover, other considerations 
which go far toward identifying the genotype as given here. The fact 
that some sun red plants of F; had green and others pink anthers is evidence 
for the constitution R’r’. Since dilute sun red plants appeared in Fs, 
there can be no question as to Bb. The F, plant showed a 9:7 aleurone- 
color segregation, and therefore, in addition to Rr, it must have been 
