TRANSMITTING ABILITY OF HOLSTEIN-EEIESIAN SIRES 
17 
daughters. Sire I ranks ninth in prepotency among the 23 sires as 
measured in Table 5. The daughters of sire E, who ranks first in 
prepotency for production capacity in Table 5, show a greater 
coefficient of variation than do their dams. This is also true of the 
daughters of sue B, who ranks second, but the daughters of sires 
C, D, and A who rank third, fourth, and fifth, respectively, in Table 
5, all show a smaller coefficient of variation than do their dams. 
Thus it will be seen that greater or less uniformity of production of a 
sire's daughters as compared with that of their dams is no indication 
of the sire's prepotency for producing capacity. 
The smallest variation of production in butterfat in any group of 
daughters is found in the daughters of sire U, that have a standard 
deviation of only 30 pounds butterfat and a coefficient of variation of 
6.68 per cent. Sire U ranks twenty-second in the 23 sires for pre- 
potency, according to Table 5. Sire I's daughters show the greatest 
variation — standard deviation 170 pounds butterfat — in any group 
of daughters, as well as the greatest increase in coefficient of variation 
as compared with that of their dams. The daughters of sire G show 
the second greatest standard deviation among the groups of daughters, 
with 161 pounds. Sire G ranks eighth among the 23 sires. Neither 
the greatest nor the least variations among the groups of daughters, 
nor the amount of variation among daughters as compared with that 
of their dams, is indicative of the prepotency of the sire in trans- 
mitting producing capacity. This will probably be true as long as 
the sires and dams that are mated are heterozygous in their hereditary 
factors controlling producing capacity. 
Table 7. — Standard deviation and coefficient of variation of butterfat records of 
the daughters of each of the 23 sires, and of the dams of the daughters; also the 
increase or decrease of coefficient of variation of the daughters of each sire as com- 
pared with that of their dams; and the rankings of the sires as in Table 5 
Sire 
Daughters 
Dams 
Increase or 
decrease in 
coefficient 
Standard 
Coefficient 
Standard 
Coefficient 
of 
deviation 
of variation 
deviation 
of variation 
variation 
Pounds 
Per cent 
Pounds 
Per cent 
90.9 
13.81 
85.0 
18.20 
-4.39 
131.9 
17.69 
80.6 
13.85 
+3.84 
100.8 
12.81 
113.4 
17.50 
-4.69 
95.6 
13.88 
128.9 
22.94 
-9.06 
103.1 
13.15 
25.6 
3.85 
+9.30 
144.7 
19.03 
92.6 
14.22 
+4.81 
161.9 
20.34 
110.5 
11.54 
+8.80 
68.7 
10.42 
78.5 
13.84 
-3.42 
170.3 
26.91 
62.7 
11.56 
+15. 35 
158.0 
21.48 
217.7 
33.05 
-11.57 
107.4 
17.25 
91.2 
16.63 
+0.62 
99.0 
15.88 
86.1 
14.87 
+1.01 
47.0 
8.98 
72.7 
14.73 
-5.75 
76.3 
12.57 
148.7 
25.22 
-12. 65 
136.7 
24.58 
142.9 
26.31 
-1.73 
95.7 
17.98 
66.9 
12.70 
+5.28 
95.8 
16.35 
80.3 
13.61 
+2.74 
51.5 
11.90 
63.1 
14.25 
-2.35 
61.0 
12.09 
64.3 
12.00 
+0.09 
71.2 
11.22 
35.5 
5.16 
+6.06 
30.2 
6.68 
78.0 
15.28 
-8.60 
48.5 
9.55 
77.7 
13.66 
-4.11 
89.4 
14.39 
61.6 
8.59 
+5.80 
Rank of 
sires 
A. 
B. 
C. 
D. 
E. 
F. 
G. 
H. 
I_. 
J.. 
K. 
L. 
M 
N. 
0_ 
P. 
Q- 
R. 
S. 
T. 
U. 
V. 
w 
