812
TURNER
Table 3—-SOME STATISTICAL ATTRIBUTES OF SYNTHETIC POPULATIONS OF 1000 INDIVIDUALS
GENERATED BY A PROBABILISTIC MODEL OF #1] FOOD-CHAIN TRANSFER (MEAN,
MAXIMUM, AND MINIMUM INDICATE NANOCURIES OF '4!] IN THYROIDS OF HERBIVORES)
_
Area
D+days
Mean
Groom
Valley
5
10
15
25
20
Penoyer
Valley
Currant
Area
Standard
error
Population
of mean
Maximum
585.4
479.1
295.7
487.3
364.4
205.8
15.4
11.5
6.5
4611.4
3785.7
1359.2
52.1
31.6
23,5
4559.3
3754.1
1335.7
1.2
2.6
1.9
99.6
71.5
2.3
511.3
5.6
505.7
2.1
399.8
311.9
1.5
0.7
174.1
124.5
3.9
54.2
39.4
99.7
79.6
62.6
46.5
2.0
1.5
413.3
319.7
13.5
7.8
20
29.0
16.1
8.8
18.4
10.4
5.9
0.6
111.8
2.2
5
10
15
20
25
30
43.9
35.0
21.9
12.7
71
3.9
19.1
16.9
11.3
7.0
4.1
2.3
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.08
136.4
121,06
79.9
51.1
28.4
15.9
5
25.0
16.1
0.5
117.0
7.0
4.3
0.1
29.0
10
15
20
25
30
50.1
19.3
12,1
3.9
2.1
31,1
11,7
7.4
2.5
1.4
1.0
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
0,08
0.04
330.0
5.3
5
10
15
1,2
1238.6
Minimum Range
exceeding three times
deviation
30
25
30
Railroad
Valley
Standard
240.8
74,1
58.7
3.5
1233.3
326.5
the mean, &
1.4
2.0
2,8
238.0
1.4
0.9
72,7
57.8
1.4
1.0
7.2
5.7
3.0
2.0
0.9
0.5
129,2
115.3
76,9
49,1
27.5
15.4
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.2
1.3
1.5
115,5
1.5
1.0
28.0
1.2
77,5
47.7
2.3
1,1
16.8
10.0
0.3
0.2
109,6
75.2
46.6
16.5
9.8
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.0
1.3
1.3
““k is slightly skewed. Libby’ cited these last two papers, as well as
work by Palmer and Queen” with 7**Ra in human bone, and data pertaining to Sr in bones of stillborn children in Chicago. Libby stated:
“All these data show a normal frequency distribution... ,” and “It is
completely clear,..that the distributions agree with one another in
general shape... .” Langham’ repeated these contentions in considering worldwide hazards from *™Sr in fallout.
From four of the distributions discussed above, normal]distribu-
tions with means and variance equal to those of the samples considered
have been constructed (the 7**Ra data were taken from a later paper by
Palmer and Queen’‘), The observed distributions have been compared
with the theoretical ones, and the results of X’ tests are shown in
Table 5.
The data of Turekian and Kulp have already been reviewed by
both Dahl’® and Neuman.°® Dahl compared the observed distributions with
appropriate normal and lognormal distributions and showed that the
observations were in much better accord with the latter. The X° test
shown in Table 5 confirms that the observed distribution is not nor-
mal. About one-third of the total X’ for the “°K distribution was due to
a few unusually high values, reported to have been caused by surface
contamination during periods of tropospheric fallout.”/ Hence the nature of this distribution is unclear, There is no reason to conclude