PROFESSOR K. PEARSOX AXD OTHERS OX 
?,0G 
Tlie actual frequency of prickles is given 1)Y ;—■ 
Series. 
0. 
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
G. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. 
12. 
1.3. 
Somersetshire (i.) . 
1 
0 
2 
3 
G 
6 
10 
8 
10 
24 
43 
74 
135 
276 
Dorsetshire (ii.)« . . 
0 
40 
21 
14 
18 
27 
31 
45 
G2 
84 
SG 
152 
219 
336 , 
„ (ii.)/j . . 
0 
IG 
19 
14 
18 
27 
31 
45 
G2 
84 
8G 
152 
219 
336 ; 
Total (i.) and (ii.)'( 
Total (i.) and (ii.)^> 
1 
42 
2.3 
17 
24 
33 
41 
53 
72 
108 
129 
226 
354 
612 
1 
18 
21 
17 
24 
33 
41 
53 
72 
108 
129 
226 
354 
612 
Series. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. 
24. 
25. 
26. 
Total. 
Somersetshire (i.) . 
3.35 
417 
407 
328 
2.35 
122 
79 
44 
0 0 
6 
3 
1 
1 
2600 
Dorsetshire (ii.)'t . 
350 
3.37 
311 
217 
128 
70 
31 
12 
8 
1 
0 
0 
0 
2600 : 
,, (ii.)/^ . . . 
350 
3.37 
311 
217 
128 
70 
31 
12 
8 
1 
0 
0 
0 
2574 , 
Total (i.) and (ii.)'? . 
G85 
754 
718 
545 
363 
192 
110 
56 
30 
/ 
3 
1 
1 
5200 ! 
Total (i.) and (ii.)i?> 
685 
754 
718 
545 
363 
192 
110 
56 
30 
t- 
1 i 
3 
1 
1 
5174 
The series is thus seen to be fairly uniform, the mode corresponding in the total 
result as well as the Somersetshire series to 15 prickles, while that of the Dorsetshire 
series is at 14, an even numl)er of prickles. Tlie holly leaf has clearly not the 
jnarked symmetry of ash or chestnut leaves. Thus, 16 prickles in the Somersetshire 
series are almost as frequent as 15, or since there is almost always a prickle at the tip, 
asymmetrical leaves must he very nearly as fretpient as symmetrical. 
Lastly, tin ning to the comparison of racial and individual variabilities, we have the 
tahlp ;— 
1 
Series. 
S. D. 
S. T). of array. 
Coefficient of 
variation. 
Percentage 
variabilitv. 
‘ 
1 
Somersetshire (i.) . . 
2■8655 
2 - 6680 
18-74 
93-12 
Dorsetshire (ii.)'t . 
3-7595 
2-8815 
27-98 
76-65 
„ (ii.)7 . . 
3-5661 
2 - 8282 
26-29 
80-11 
Mean (i.) and (ii.)^; 
3-3125 
2-7747 
23 - 36 
84-88 
Mean (i.) and (ii.)h 
3-2158 
2-7482 
22-52 
86-61 
Here again we see how great is tlie variability within tlie individual. Looking 
upon Tree (91) as so largely lhasing the complete Dorsetshire series that we must 
exclude it, we see that the individual possesses 80 to 90 per cent, of the variabilitv of 
the race. The variability of the otfspring of the individual will, of course, be larger 
still, even if we had merely uniparental rejiroduction. Thus we have still further 
evidence, if more were necessary, that variability is not a factor dependent upon 
sexual reproduction. For this character of the prickles it will be seen that the hollv 
leaf is more variable than those of the ash, chestnut, or beech. The following are the 
hmdamental tables of data :— 
