| in Verhältniss gestellt: | ||||||||
| Generation | A | Aa | a | A | : | Aa | : | a |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | : | 2 | : | 1 |
| 2 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 3 | : | 2 | : | 3 |
| 3 | 28 | 8 | 28 | 7 | : | 2 | : | 7 |
| 4 | 120 | 16 | 120 | 15 | : | 2 | : | 15 |
| 5 | 496 | 32 | 496 | 31 | : | 2 | : | 31 |
| n | 2n -1 | : | 2 | : | 2n -1 | |||
| put in proportion: | ||||||||
| Generation | A | Aa | a | A | : | Aa | : | a |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | : | 2 | : | 1 |
| 2 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 3 | : | 2 | : | 3 |
| 3 | 28 | 8 | 28 | 7 | : | 2 | : | 7 |
| 4 | 120 | 16 | 120 | 15 | : | 2 | : | 15 |
| 5 | 496 | 32 | 496 | 31 | : | 2 | : | 31 |
| n | 2n -1 | : | 2 | : | 2n -1 | |||
put in proportion = in Verhältniss gesetzt Bateson has “Ratios”, Sherwood “Expressed in terms of ratios”; see p. 3, s. 8. Mendel could have filled in the formulas for the absolute number of individuals in the first three rows as well (“2(2n-1) -2(n-1)”, “2n” and “2(2n-1) -2(n-1)”). They are also lacking in the manuscript. Thanks to Michel Durinx for pointing this out.