M. A. Lbwenz and M. A. Whiteley 
359 
Dr Pfitzner may be extended on wider material and for other races*. But there 
is no doubt that the hand is a most interesting study, and the results already 
reached serve to indicate a variety of new problems to be studied in other digits 
than those of man, problems which will, if answered, help to throw light not only 
on the sources of efficiency in such organs, but probably also on the nature of their 
growth and evolutionary development. 
In the first place we see that local relationship influences the variability and 
the correlation of the hand bones. There is a correlation between the part of the 
organism at which the homologous part is produced and its chai'acters and rela- 
tionships to other parts. In other words the relation of digits is organic and not 
homotypic. 
(i) Considering first size, we note that the bones of the right hand appear 
to be on the whole larger than those of the left. In this respect we liave agree- 
ment with Dr Warren's results for measurement of the humerus, radius and ulna 
which are larger on the right side, while the leg bones, femur, tibia and fibula are 
less on the right-f*. It would be interesting to know whether in this the bones of 
the foot resemble those of the hand or the other bones of the leg. 
(ii) There is no significant difference in either absolute or relative variabilities 
between right and left-hand bones. This agrees with Dr Warren's results for the 
long bones of the skeleton |. 
(iii) There is a slight, but we cannot say definitely significant, preponderance 
in the correlations of the right-hand bones over those of the left. 
(iv) The highest correlations occur between corresponding bones of the right 
and left hands. These are as high as any right and left-hand relations between 
parts of the human skeleton yet investigated. 
(v) The next highest correlations are between lateral and not between longi- 
tudinal neighbours. Each bone being on the average more nearly related to the 
corresponding bone on the next digit, than to the adjacent bone on the same 
digit. 
(vi) Dividing the hand into marginal members, i.e. thumb, index and little 
fingers, and central members, i.e. middle and ring fingers, and the bones into 
" lower bones," i.e. distal and middle phalanges, and " upper bones," i.e. meta- 
carpal bones and proximal phalanges, the correlations roughly speaking are highest 
for the upper bones of the central members and become less as we move out 
from this upper centre towards the lower and marginal parts of the hand. This 
is true whether we take pairs in lateral or in longitudinal series. 
* It is almost impossible to overestimate the importance of the work done at Strassburg at Professor 
Schwalbe's initiative. Tlie raw material already published is of the highest value. Unfortunately the 
statistical methods adopted are occasionally inadequate and some of the conclusions reached demand, 
even if true, far more elaborate statistical demonstration. 
t Phil. Trans. Vol. 189, B, pp. 146, 157, 162, 165 and 169. 
t Ibid. p. 190. 
