Table 20.Distribution of toe-types in the offspring of "good" extra-toed parents.

Serial No. Pen No. Mother. Father. Mating. Absolute numbers. Theoretical classification.
No. Gen. Races. No. Gen. Races. 4-4 4-5 5-5 5-6 6-6 Average. ss. sd. d'd'. d'd. dd. d't'. dt'. dt. t't'. tt. q't.
1 728 2271 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. 258 F1 Houd. × Wh. Legh. DD × DR 4 1 21 ... ... 9.65 3 ... 1 1 21 ... ... ... ... ... ...
2 728 912 F2 Do. 258 F1 Do. DR × DR 5 3 21 ... ... 9.55 5 3 ... ... 20 ... 1 ... ... ... ...
3 728 2248 F2 Do. 258 F1 Do. DD × DR 8 3 22 ... ... 9.42 8 3 ... ... 21 ... ... ... 1 ... ...
4 728 2272 F2 Do. 258 F1 Do. DR × DR 17 4 34 ... ... 9.31 17 1 ... 3 34 ... ... ... ... ... ...
5 728 174 F1 Do. 258 F1 Do. DR × DR 10 1 15 ... ... 9.19 10 1 ... ... 14 ... 1 ... ... ... ...
Totals (169) 44 12 113 ... ... 9.41 43 8 1 4 110 0 2 0 1 ... ...
Percentages 26.0 7.1 66.9 ... ... ... 25.4 4.7 0.6 2.4 65.2 ... 1.2 ... 0.6 ... ...
6 813 2271 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. 3904 F3 Houd. × Wh. Legh. D × D ... 2 32 ... ... 9.94 ... ... ... 2 32 ... ... ... ... ... ...
7 813 5113 F2 Do. 3904 F3 Do. D × D 2 1 32 1 ... 9.89 ... ... 2 1 32 ... ... 1 ... ... ...
8 813 377 F2 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 2 5 17 ... 1 9.68 2 2 ... 3 16 ... 1 ... ... 1 ...
9 813 5122 F3 Do. 3904 F3 Do. D × D 1 3 7 ... ... 9.55 1 3 ... ... 7 ... ... ... ... ... ...
10 813 935 F2 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 1 2 25 1 1 9.53 1 2 ... ... 25 ... ... 1 ... ... 1
11 813 2272 F2 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 5 2 18 ... ... 9.52 4 1 1 ... 18 1 ... ... ... ... ...
12 813 912 F2 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 4 5 11 ... ... 9.35 3 5 1 ... 11 ... ... ... ... ... ...
13 813 7320 F3 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 5 1 11 ... ... 9.35 3 1 2 ... 11 ... ... ... ... ... ...
14 813 5142 F3 Do. 3904 F3 Do. DR × D 2 1 4 ... ... 9.28 2 ... ... 1 4 ... ... ... ... ... ...
Totals (205) 22 22 157 2 2 9.70 16 14 6 7 156 1 1 2 0 1 1
Percentages 10.7 10.7 76.5 1.0 1.0 ... 7.8 6.8 2.9 3.4 76.2 0.5 0.5 1.0 ... 0.5 0.5

Table 21.—Distribution of toe-types in the offspring of "poor" extra-toed parents.

[A] No. 2016 has 4-4 toes and is a hybrid between a 5-toed White Leghorn × Houdan and a 4-toed Minorca × Polish.
Serial No. Pen No. Mother. Father. Mating. Absolute numbers. Theoretical classification.
No. Gen. Races. No. Gen. Races. 4-4 4-5 5-5 5-6 Average. ss. sd. d'd'. d'd. dd. d't'. dq'.
1 765 984 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. 1794 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. DR × DR 9 5 11 ... 9.08 9 3 ... 2 10 1 ...
2 765 1790 F2 Do. 1794 F2 Do. DR × DR 18 7 17 ... 8.98 18 6 ... 1 17 ... ...
Totals (67) 27 12 28 ... 9.02 27 9 ... 3 27 1 ...
Percentages 40.3 17.9 41.8 ... ... 40.3 13.4 ... 4.5 40.3 1.5 ...
3 769 492 F1 Wh. Legh. × Houd. 911 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. DR × DR 13 1 14 ... 9.04 13 1 ... ... 14 ... ...
4 769 4976 F2 Do. 911 F2 Do. DR × DR 11 3 9 ... 8.91 11 3 ... ... 8 1 ...
5 769 2254 F2 Do. 911 F2 Do. DR × DR 22 6 8 ... 8.61 22 4 ... 2 8 ... ...
6 769 1305 F2 Do. 911 F2 Do. DR × DR 12 1 4 ... 8.53 12 ... ... 1 4 ... ...
Totals (104) 58 11 35 ... 8.77 58 8 ... 3 34 1 ...
Percentages 55.8 10.6 33.7 ... ... 55.8 7.7 ... 2.9 32.7 1.0 ...
7 820 984 F2 Wh. Legh. × Houd. 4731 F3 Wh. Legh. × Houd. D × DR 2 3 27 ... 9.78 2 2 ... 1 27 ... ...
8 820 2255 F2 Do. 4731 F3 Do. DR × DR 6 1 10 ... 9.24 6 ... ... 1 10 ... ...
9 820 6479 F3 Do. 4731 F3 Do. DR × DR 12 2 16 ... 9.13 10 1 2 1 15 1 ...
10 820 2016 F1[A] Do. 4731 F3 Do. DR × DR 9 2 2 ... 8.45 9 2 ... ... 2 ... ...
Totals (92) 29 8 55 ... 9.28 27 5 2 3 54 1 ...
Percentages 31.5 8.7 59.8 ... ... 29.3 5.4 2.2 3.3 58.7 1.1 ...

But a more critical examination of the parentages of the 5 pens shows that they are not comparable. In matings 6 to 14 of table 20 the cock is almost certainly a dominant in respect to toes; whereas the cocks in table 21 are probably heterozygous. The heterozygous state determines two things: the imperfect nature of the extra-toe and a relative deficiency in the offspring of the higher toe-numbers. In our results we can not say that one of these things is the cause of the other, as Castle does; they are, rather, in all probability, due to a common cause. I think Castle's paper may justly be criticized for not giving sufficient data concerning the ancestry of the individual mothers used. Without such data the paper can not be said satisfactorily to demonstrate his conclusion.

Table 22.Summary of observed toe-numbers in offspring, percentages.

a. Parents have "good" extra toes. b. Parents have "poor" extra toes.
Pen No. 4-4 toes. 4-5 toes. 5-5 toes. 5-6 toes. 6-6 toes. Pen No. 4-4 toes. 4-5 toes. 5-5 toes.
728 26.0 7.1 66.9 ... ... 765 40.3 17.9 41.8
813 10.7 10.7 76.5 1.0 1.0 769 55.8 10.6 33.7
820 31.5 8.7 59.8
Average. 17.7 9.1 72.2 0.5 0.5 Average. 43.2 11.8 44.9

To summarize: "Potency," as measured by dominance of the extra-toed condition, is inherited, in the Houdan crosses at least. There is some evidence, derived from "pure-bred" Silkies, that differences in the degree of development of the extra-toes are inherited. But the average condition of the toes in the offspring of second or later generation hybrids can not be used as evidence of inheritance of the degree of parental development of the toes, since these are dependent on the same basal cause, namely, the hidden gametic constitution of the parents. Despite the obscuration of imperfect dominance, polydactylism in poultry proves itself to be a unit-character that segregates. 28

CHAPTER III.
SYNDACTYLISM.

A. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM.

In man, various mammals, and some birds two or more adjacent fingers are sometimes intimately connected by an extension of the web that is normally a mere rudiment at their base. Such a condition is known as syndactylism. A good introductory account of syndactylism is given by Bateson (1904, pp. 356-358). Taking a number of cases of syndactylism together, he says: "A progressive series may be arranged showing every condition, beginning from an imperfect webbing together of the proximal phalanges to the state in which two digits are intimately united even in their bones, and perhaps even to the condition in which two digits are represented by a single digit." He also calls attention to the fact that in the human hand "there is a considerable preponderance of cases of union between the digits iii and iv;" while in the foot the united digits "are nearly always ii and iii." The matter of syndactylism in birds has a peculiar interest because of the fact that among wading and swimming birds syndactylism has become a normal condition of the feet, and, moreover, just this feature is one that has become classical in evolutionary history, because Lamarck thought it well illustrated his idea of the origin of an organ by effort and use.

Concerning the cause of syndactylism little can be said. Both in mammals and birds the digits are indicated before they are freed from lateral tissue connections. The linear development of the fingers is in part accompanied by a cutting back of this primordial web, in part by a growth beyond it. In syndactylism growth of the web keeps pace with that of the fingers. From this point of view syndactylism may be regarded as due to a peculiar excessive development of the web.[5] In some human cases adhesions of the apex of the appendage to the embryonic membranes has stimulated the growth of the interdigital membrane, resulting in syndactylism. But it would be absurd to attempt to explain syndactylism in general on this ground. The more "normal" forms of syndactylism, as seen in poultry, still want for a causal explanation.

Most of the cases of syndactylism whose inheritance is about to be described arose in a single strain of fowl and can, indeed, be traced back to a single bird. This ancestor is No. 121, a Dark Brahma hen described in a previous report.[6] It was only in the search for the origin of the exaggerated forms of syndactylism observed in some of her descendants that an unusually great extension of the web in her feet was noticed. The syndactyl condition of my birds did not, thus, arise de novo, but had its origin antecedent to the beginning of the breeding experiments. In addition to this main strain a slight degree of syndactylism has appeared among some of my Cochin bantams.

Table 23.Ancestry of syndactyl fowl and the results of various matings involving syndactylism.

[Abbreviations: Abα, Abβ, etc., types of syndactylism (p. 32); F, father; FF, father's father; FM, father's mother; M, mother; MF, mother's father; MM, mother's mother; M × P, hybrid of Minorca and Polish races; Synd., syndactyl (type unknown). f, foot. In Nos. 24 to 42 two cocks (Nos. 242 and 3116, and 5399 and 4562, respectively) were at different times used.]

Serial No. Pen No. First mating. Second mating.
Ancestry. Offspring. Ancestry. Offspring. Average
per cent
syndactyl.
M's No. MM. MF. F's No. FM. FF. Syndactyl. M's No. MM. MF. F's No. FM. FF. Syndactyl.
2f. 1f. 0f. 2f. 1f. 0f.
1a, b 627 302 [1]121 [2]8a 180 [1]121 [2]8a 0 0 34 302 [1]121 [2]8a 242 [1]121 [2]8a 3 0 29 10.3
2a, b 627 280 121 8a 180 121 8a 0 0 23 280 121 8a 242 121 8a 2 0 21 9.5
3a, b 627 181 121 8a 180 121 8a 0 0 20 181 121 8a 242 121 8a 3 0 33 9.1
4a, b 627 354 121 8a 180 121 8a 0 0 24 354 121 8a 242 121 8a 1 0 37 2.6
5a, b 627 178 121 8a 180 121 8a 0 0 20 178 121 8a 242 121 8a 0 0 42 ...
6a, b 627 190 121 8a 180 121 8a 1 0 24 190 121 8a 242 121 8a 0 0 6 ...
7a, b ... 353 121 8a 180 121 8a 0 0 13 353 121 8a 242 121 8a 0 0 22 ...
8a, b ... 300 121 1a 180 121 8a 0 0 23 300 121 1a 242 121 8a 0 0 37 ...
Totals (182) 1 0 181 Totals (236) 9 0 227
Percentages 0.55 0 99.45 Percentages 3.81 0 96.19
[1] No. 121 is a Dark Brahma. [2] No. 8A is a Tosa fowl (Game).
[3] (White Leghorn × Rose Comb Black Minorca) × Dark Brahma. [4] Dark Brahma.
[5] See supra. [6] 121♂ Dark Brahma × 8A Tosa.
[7] F2 (White Leghorn × Dark Brahma).
Serial No. Pen No. Mother. Father. Offspring.
No. Bred in pen No. Toes. No. Bred in pen No. Toes. Syndactyl. Classification.
  2f.     1f.     0f.     P. ct.     Aaα.     Abα.     Abβ.     Abβ´  .   Bbα.  
9 747 2526 [3]658 Normal. 1888 [3]658 Normal. 9 0 9 50.0 ... 2 16 ... ...
10 747 2831 658 Do 1888 658 Do. 6 0 6 50.0 ... 7 5 ... ...
11 747 2652 658 Do. 1888 658 Do. 3 0 25 10.7 ... 6 ... ... ...
12 747 3541 658 Do. 1888 658 Do. 4 0 41 8.9 1 4 3 ... ...
13 747 1892 658 Do. 1888 658 Do. 4 0 47 7.8 ... ... ... ... ...
14 747 1872 658 Do. 1888 658 Do. 0 0 28 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
15 747 1874 658 Do. 1888 658 Do. 0 0 28 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
26 0 184 12.4
16 703 2353 D. Br. Do. 122 D. Br. Do. 1 0 6 14.3 ... 2 ... ... ...
17 703 2030 D. Br. Do. 122 D. Br. Do. 2 1 12 20.0 ... 5 ... ... ...
2 1 12 20.0 ...
18 754 3126 [4]627 Normal. 871 [4]627 Normal. 12 1 30 30.2 ... 13 12 ... ...
19 754 3175 627 Do. 871 627 Do. 3 0 8 27.3 ... 3 3 ... ...
20 754 873 627 Do. 871 627 Do. [2] (?) (?) (?) ... ... 4 ... ...
21 754 1052 627 Do. 871 627 Do. 0 0 17 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
22 754 853 627 Do. 871 627 Do. 0 0 19 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
23 754 862 627 Do. 871 627 Do. 0 0 27 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
15 1 101 13.7
24 767 2526 [3]658 Normal. 3116 D. Br. Synd. 5 0 22 18.5 1 1 6 ... 2
25 767 872 [5]627 Abβ 242 [5]513 Normal. 1 0 1 50.0 ... 1 ... 1 ...
25a 767 872 627 Abβ 3116 D. Br. Synd. 7 1 30 21.0 3 5 3 ... 4
26 767 2104 [7]608 Normal. 3116 D. Br. Do. 3 0 18 14.3 ... 2 2 ... 2
27 767 2831 [3]658 Do. 3116 D. Br. Do. 3 0 32 8.6 ... 6 ... ... ...
28 767 181 [6]513 Do. 242 513 Normal. 1 0 22 4.4 2 ... ... ... ...
28a 767 181 513 Do. 3116 D. Br. Synd. 1 1 60 3.2 ... 1 1 ... 1
29 767 190 [5]520 Do. 242 513 Normal. 1 1 28 6.7 1 ... ... ... 2
29a 767 190 520 Do. 3116 D. Br. Synd. 4 ... 49 7.6 ... 3 4 ... 1
Syndactyl (242 ♂) 3 1 51 7.3
Syndactyl (3116 ♂) 23 2 211 9.4

Table 23.Ancestry of syndactyl fowl and the results of various matings involving syndactylism—Continued.

Serial No. Pen No. Mother. Father. Offspring.
No. Bred in pen No. Toes. No. Bred in pen No. Toes. Syndactyl. Classification.
  2f.     1f.     0f.     P. ct.     Aaα.     Abα.     Abβ.     Abβ´  .   Bbα.  
30 801 4569 767 Abα 5399 747 Abα 2 0 0 100.0 1 0 3 0 0
30a 801 4569 767 Abα 4562 767 Normal. 0 2 2 50.0 ... 1 1 ... ...
31 801 6843 767 Normal. 4562 767 Do. 1 3 2 66.7 ... 2 2 1 ...
32 801 872 627 Abβ 5399 747 Abα 12 4 11 59.3 3 9 11 ... 5
32a 801 872 627 Abβ 4562 767 Normal. 7 1 12 40.0 2 8 4 1 ...
33 801 5515 767 Bbα 5399 747 Abα 4 0 7 36.4 ... 2 6 ... ...
33a 801 5515 767 Bbα 4562 767 Normal. 1 2 5 37.5 2 1 1 ... ...
34 801 7528 767 Abβ 5399 747 Abα 1 0 0 100.0 ... 2 ... ... ...
34a 801 7528 767 Abβ 4562 767 Normal. 2 1 7 30.0 ... 1 4 ... ...
35 801 6861 767 Normal. 4562 767 Do. 1 0 3 25.0 ... 2 ... ... ...
36 801 6869 767 Do. 5399 747 Abα 0 1 3 25.0 1 ... ... ... ...
36a 801 6869 767 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 1 0 4 20.0 ... ... 2 ... ...
37 801 2831 658 Do. 5399 747 Abα 3 1 18 18.2 ... 4 ... ... 3
37a 801 2831 658 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 2 1 11 21.4 ... 2 ... ... 3
38 801 2526 658 Do. 5399 747 Abα 0 0 5 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
38a 801 2526 658 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 1 0 2 33.3 ... 1 1 ... ...
39 801 4570 767 Do. 5399 747 Abα 0 1 5 16.7 1 ... ... ... ...
39a 801 4570 767 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 0 2 17 10.5 1 1 ... ... ...
40 801 1892 658 Do. 5399 747 Abα 0 0 9 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
40a 801 1892 658 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 1 0 3 25.0 ... 2 ... ... ...
41 801 4263 767 Do. 5399 747 Abα 0 1 4 20.0 ... 1 ... ... ...
41a 801 4263 767 Do. 4562 767 Normal. 0 0 10 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
42 801 6872 767 Do. 4562 767 Do. 0 0 6 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
Syndactyl (5399 ♂) 22 8 62 32.6
Syndactyl (4562 ♂) 17 12 84 25.7
43 776 2291 Coch. Normal. 2732 Coch. Normal. 2 0 6 25.0 ... 2 ... ... 2
44 776 2574 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do ... 2 9 10.0 ... 1 ... ... ...
45 776 2570 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. ... 1 11 8.3 ... 1 ... ... ...
46 776 2297 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. ... 1 12 7.7 ... ... ... ... 1
47 776 2299 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. 1 0 16 5.9 ... 2 ... ... ...
48 776 2904 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. 0 0 6 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
49 776 2937 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. 0 0 7 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
50 776 2300 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do. 0 0 15 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
51 776 2736 Coch. Do. 2732 Coch. Do 0 0 18 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
3 3 100 5.7
52 816 121 D. Br. Abα 122 D. Br. Normal. 3 1 10 28.6 ... 1 ... 2 4
52a 816 121 D. Br. Abα 4912 M × P Do. 0 0 13 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
53 816 5835 D. Br. Normal. 122 D. Br. Do. 1 0 6 14.3 ... 2 ... ... ...
54 816 2353 D. Br. Do. 122 D. Br. Do. 0 0 7 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
54a 816 2353 D. Br. Do. 4912 M × P Do. 0 0 4 0.0 ... ... ... ... ...
Syndactyl ( 122 ♂) 4 1 23 17.9
Syndactyl (4912 ♂) 0 0 17 0.0

The types of syndactylism which have appeared in my flock form a rather extensive series. First, (A) the single web, which, in my specimens, always occupies the interspace between digits iii and iv. This is the same interval which is most apt to show the web in syndactylism of the human hand, and, it is suggestive to note, it is this interval that is filled in those wading birds that have the single web only between the toes (e.g., Cursorius, Glareola, Vanellus, Squatarola, Charadrius, Limosa, Machetes, Himantopus); second, there is (B) the double web, one-seventh as common, which always occupies the interspaces between the digits ii-iii and iii-iv.

On another basis, the syndactyl feet may be classified as: (a) toes adherent, web small in extent, and (b) toes distant, web broad. I have found the narrow web only between digits iii and iv. It is one-eighth as common as the broad-webbed type. The broad, double web approaches closely to the type found normally in swans, geese, and ducks.

Finally, the syndactyl feet may be classified as: α, straight-toed, or β, curve-toed. Class α is to class β in frequency as 2:1. In the typical curve-toed syndactyl foot the web between iii and iv is complete to the nails of each; in fact, in extreme cases the nails of the two toes are more or less fused together. From the fused nails the middle toe, being the longer, passes in a curve to the distal end of the metatarsus. The D-shaped interspace between the curved iii and straight iv toe is filled with the web. In other cases the nails are merely approximated and the middle toe is slightly curved. In three instances (4 per cent of all) the outer toe (iv) is curved toward the (straight) median toe (class β´).

As stated, the polydactyl offspring trace back their ancestry to No. 121; her feet both show the double, broad, straight-toed type (Bbα). We shall attempt in the following paragraphs to trace the heredity of her type of polydactylism and of the others that have subsequently arisen.