Summary 1. P.T.C. taste threshold data for 127 families have been given, of which one family has been rejected on account of illegitimacy. 2. A x2 test by the ‘2×2’ contingency table indicates that the matings in the families studied were random (x2= 097, P>0.3). 3. Analysis of the families by Fisher's method following Race & Sanger (1954) indicated a ‘good fit’ (P > 0.1) between the observed and the expected numbers of T × T as well as T×t (including t×T) families. 4. Fisher's test following Smith (1956) indicated a ‘good fit’ (P>0.1) for the totals of families of each of the types T×T and T × t (also t × T)–each family containing at least one non‐taster child. But a significant discrepancy (P<0.01) was found for the family size 4 of T × T type mating type considered singly. 5. Comparison of x2 calculated on the totals of the observed and the expected numbers of non‐tasters in sibships produced by T × T as well as by T × t (including t×T) matings, each of which contained at least one non‐taster indicated a significant discrepancy (0.05>P>002). 6. Discrepancies have been noticed between the observed and the expected numbers of non‐taster children in the combined family sizes 2 and 3 out of T × T matings, and the family size 4 out of T×t (and t×T) matings–each producing at least one non‐taster child (P<0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). 7. Totals of x2 values for families of all sizes (calculated separately for each size) in respect of the numbers of non‐taster children indicated a significant discrepancy (P< 0.02) for T×T families, but a satisfactory agreement (P>0.05) for the T×t (including t×T) families–each family containing at least one non‐taster child. 8. Summing up the x2 values calculated on totals under the four different tests following Smith (1956), a single x2 of 13–38 with 4 D.F. was obtained, which finally indicated a significant divergence (P< 0.01) between the theory and the data taken as a whole. 9. It has been suggested that an assumption of incomplete penetrance (say, about 90 %) of the dominant taste gene might interpret the entire P.T.C. data (including the sib‐pair data of Harris & Kalmus, and Das referred to already) more satisfactorily than the simple hypothesis as it stands to‐day.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
S.R. Das (1958) studied this question.