222 
E. M. EAST 
He says: "Data which have been submitted, however, leave no room 
for doubt in my own mind that investigations on the inheritance of 
flower-size demand the recognition of certain definite criteria and that 
the results of such investigations are vitally influenced by inherent 
as well as externally induced physiological states peculiar to the plant. 
Thus it remains to be seen if as many as 800 plants are necessary to 
establish the validity of an expanded Mendelian notation in F2 of 
a flower-size hybrid, whether the 40,000 to 80,000 measurements, 
seemingly essential to a fair expression of results, can be accumulated. 
In other words, the experiment with which this paper deals has been 
a partially successful effort to measure many flowers on a few plants 
with the thought that the conception of flower-size would thus be 
approximately perfect for a few, rather than certainly imperfect for 
many plants. It is undeniably true that the number of plants is 
smaller than it should be, and it is perfectly evident that if the flowers 
on a larger number of plants cannot be correctly measured the attempt 
is not worth making." 
One could hardly find a better illustration of "accuracy without 
significance." These views are absolutely indefensible mathemati- 
cally. It has been shown that the method used by Goodspeed in 
making his records has only a fallacious claim to great precision; but, 
granting that the method is extremely accurate, it is an accuracy 
unnecessary to the end result. On the other hand, it should be clear 
that records in sufficient number to make probable errors significant 
is positively essential for a biometrical analysis. This end can only 
be attained by recording larger numbers of plants and not by over- 
refinement in the plant records. The plant records should have the 
precision required by the end result, but greater precision does not 
influence this result. 
Harvard University 
