STUDIES IN THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF SEX. 463 
nahern volligen Reduktion der Daumenschwiele.” This 
result, which is quite insufficiently supported by Nussbaum’s 
experiments, is altogether at variance with our experiments 
Nos. 15 and 16, in which frogs were castrated in autumn, and 
after 51 and 4 months respectively showed no reduction of 
the thumb-pads, while sections revealed the presence of marked 
papillae (see figs. 28, 29). Meisenlieimer gives drawings of 
the thumb of a male which had been castrated in September, 
1909, and killed in October, 1910, but the drawing only refers 
to the thumb in October, 1910, and shows as a matter of 
fact the presence of small papillae a year after castration, 
but no drawing is given of the same frog’s thumb in 
September, 1909, to prove that the papillae were really any 
larger then and that they had undergone reduction as the 
result of castration. 
The same objection applies to the other experiments, 
and we are entirely unconvinced, especially when we take 
into consideration the results of our own experiments, that 
the result of castration in autumn or winter is to induce the 
complete reduction of the pad and its papillae. This being 
the case, Meisenheimer’s other results, namely, that in frogs 
castrated in autumn or winter the re-development of the 
thumb with its papillae may be induced to some extent by the 
implantation of testes or ovaries, entirely fall to the ground. 
This supposed re-development of the papillae is never, accord- 
ing to Meisenheimer, a complete one, and since no satis- 
factory evidence is produced to show that the papillae ever 
disappeared as the result of castration, the presence of 
moderately developed papillae in the castrated frogs when 
killed, after treatment with testes or ovaries, in the following 
autumn, may equally well be interpreted as the persistence of 
the original papillae, as of the re-development of new papillae 
under the influence of the testicular or ovarian transplan- 
tations. 
It is interesting to observe that the figures given by 
Meisenheimer to support his contention fit in with our inter- 
pretation equally well as with his own. 
