TRANSMITTING ABILITY OF HOLSTEIN-FKLESIAN SIRES 
23 
Of the three sires whose daughters have a distinct correlation with 
their dams relative to butterfat yield, all have daughters with a 
greater average yield than their dams, though in the case of the 
daughters of sire P this average increase amounts to only 6.4 pounds, 
whereas the average milk yield of his daughters is somewhat less 
than that of their dams. The four sires whose daughters show 
evidence of correlation have daughters with rather a large average 
increase in both milk and butterfat yield over their dams, excepting 
in the case of sire R, whose daughters show a decrease in butterfat, 
owing to a lower percentage of fat in the milk. With sires whose 
daughters had smaller average yields of butterfat than their dams, 
the daughters show no correlation at all with their dams with respect 
to butterfat yield. 
Does the correlation coefficient indicate the relative influence of 
the parent on the offspring? Does the fact that the daughters of 
sire P show a correlation of + 0.90 to their dams in butterfat yield 
indicate that the dams had far greater influence on their producing 
capacity than did sire P? Where there is no significant correlation 
between daughters and dams, meaning that the size of a daughter's 
record does not have any particular relation to the size of her dam's 
record, does this indicate that the sire is exerting greater influence 
on the producing capacity of the daughters than are the dams? 
If so, what would a marked negative correlation indicate, a case 
where the lowest-producing daughters were from the highest- 
producing dams, and the highest-producing daughters from the 
lowest-producing dams? The daughters of sire N are the only ones 
showing any significant negative correlation, though the probable 
error is so great as to neutralize its significance. The relative rank 
of the coefficients of correlation of the daughters of each sire to 
their dams in butterfat yield is shown in Table 11, and in comparison 
is shown the relative rank among the 23 sires as given in Table 5. 
The sires are ranked in this table according to the size of the coeffi- 
cient of correlation without regard to the significance of the probable 
error. It should also be remembered that in ranking the sires in 
Table 5 milk yield as well as butterfat yield were considered. 
Table 11. — Rank of sires according to coefficient of correlation between daughters 
and dams with respect to butterfat production, and the comparative ranking of 
sires as in Table 5 
Sire 
Coefficient of 
correlation of 
daughters 
to dams 
Rank of 
sires in 
Table 5 
Sire 
Coefficient of 
correlation of 
daughters 
to dams 
Rank of 
sires in 
Table 5 
P.... 
+0.90 ±0.05 
+0. 71 ±0. 11 
+0.71 ±0.10 
+0.67 ±0.15 
+0. 66 ±0. 16 
+0. 60 ±0. 14 
+0.51 ±0.30 
+0.48 ±0.21 
+0.47 ±0.22 
+0. 43 ±0. 21 
+0.34 ±0.13 
+0. 17 ±0. 19 
18 
6 
10 
12 
20 
4 
17 
7 
9 
8 
11 
3 
E 
+0.15 ±0.27 
+0. 09 ±0. 25 
1 
F. 
, S. 
21 
L. 
w 
+0. 06 ±0. 16 
19 
K 
V . 
+0. 03 ±0. 25 
-0.09 ±0.30 
-0.15 ±0.20 
-0. 22 ±0. 26 
-0. 23 ±0. 24 
-0. 23 ±0. 18 
-0.27 ±0.24 
-0.39 ±0.19 
23 
R 
A 
5 
D 
Q 
14 

M 
16 
H 
U 
22 
I 
B— . 
2 
G 
T . 
15 
J 
N._ 
13 
C 
