222 
Contribution to a Statistical Study of the Cruciferce, 
were chorised while the other was only partially chorised* the latter would again 
be in position 1. 
Following on this it is at once seen that where both are normal or where both 
are equally abnormal it makes absolutely no difference which position we choose 
as 1. 
III. Examination of the data. 
1. Classification. 
Considerable difficulty was experienced in classifying the variations owing to 
these occurring in so many different forms yet with so few characteristics in 
common as to warrant their inclusion in definite classes. 
The total number of flowers examined was 1832, of which 1062 had the 
accepted normal structure (see page 218). The remaining 770 showed variation 
in different degrees of advance or regression, i.e. there was an excess or deficiency 
in the number and structure of the members of the various organs. Thus we see 
that there was a deviation from the accepted normal structure in over 42 per cent, 
of the individuals examined. 
The perianth has been selected as a basis for classification and Table A shows 
the sub-divisions which have been adopted. Amongst those flowers in which the 
TABLE A. 
Number 
Number 
Number 
Number 
Variations 
of 
in 
in 
in 
in the 
Variations 
Group 
Sub-class 
Class 
Class 
Class I. Perianth normal ... 
1687 
Sub-Class A. 
Gynsecium normal 
1680 
Group (rt). 
Androecium normal 
1 
1062 
Group (6). 
AndrcDcium abnormal ... 
57 
618 
Sub-Class B. 
Gynsecium abnormal 
7 
Group (a). 
GynaDcium one carpel ... 
2 
4 
Group (/)). 
Gynsecium reduplicated 
2 
3 
62 
Class II. Perianth abnormal 
115 
Sub- Class A. 
Calyx normal, corolla abnormal 
55 
Group (a). 
GynaBcium normal 
11 
54 
Group (b). 
Gynsecium a single carpel 
1 
1 
Sub-Class B. 
Both calyx and corolla abnormal 
60 
Group (a). 
Gyniccium normal 
11 
46 
Group (b). 
Gynsecium a single carpel 
6 
14 
29 
Totals 
91 
1802 
1802 
1802 
91 
* For the present we use the terms "chorised" and "chorisis" in the sense of the definition already 
given. 
