t.ftevico State Co\\ege oracy, Nev1 "· " m4r 1Jtuiurrsity nf tliuursnta

AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 143

MINNESOTA INVESTIGATIONS SERIES III

COMPOSITION AND QUALITY OF SPRING AND WINTER

CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913

BY

C.H. BAILEY CEREAL TECHNOLOGIST, DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY

UNIVERSITY FARM, ST. PAUL SEPTEMBER 1914 AG RI CULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION

STATION STAFF A. F. WooDs, M.A., D.Agr., Director ]. 0. RANKIN, M.A., Editor HARRIET W. SEWALL, B.A., Librarian T. ]. HORTON, Photographer T. L. HAECKER, Dairy and Animal Husbandman M. H. REYNOLDS, B.S.A., M.D., D.V.M., Veterinarian ANDREW Boss, Agriculturist F. L. WASHBURN, M.A., Entomologist E. M. FREEMAN, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist and Botanist JOHN T. STEWART, C.E., Agricultural Engineer R. VI/. THATCHER, J\1.A., Agricultural Chemist F.]. ALWAY, Ph.D., Soils Chemist RICHARD WELLINGTON, M.S., Chairman of Horticultural Committee E. G. CHEYNEY, B.A., Forester A. D. vVILSON, B.S. in Agr., Director of Agricultural Extension and Farmers' Institutes L. D. H. WELD, Ph.D., Agricultural Economist A.]. McGi:;rnE, B.Agr., Superin_tendent, North Central Substation E. C. HIGBIE, M.A., Superintendent, West Central Substation C. G. SELVIG, l\LA., Superintendent, Northwest Substation CHARLES HARALSON, Superintendent, Fruit-Breeding Farm, Excelsior M. J. THOMPSON, 1\1.S., Superintendent, Northeast Substation

DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY R. W. THATCHER, M.A., Agricultural Chemist R. M. WEST, B.A., Assistant Agricultural Chemist C.H. BAILEY, B.S.A., Cereal Technologist CORNELIA KENNEDY, B.A., Assistant Agricultural Chemist ]. J. WILLAMAN, M.S., Assistant Agricultural Chemist TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Introduction 5 Methods employed 5 Factors of importance 7 Relation of composition to quality 9 Plan of the investigation 9 General characteristics of the 1912 crop 10 Varieties of wheat represented 11 Source of the samples 12 Results of tests of the 1912 crop samples 14 Spring wheats 14 Winter wheats 22 General characteristics of the 1913 crop 28 Results of tests of the 1913 crop samples 30 Spring wheats 30 Winter wheats 36 Averages of tests of 1911, 1912, and 1913 crop samples 43 Dates of seeding spring and winter wheats 45 Comparison of spring and samples 46 Bearded spring or velvet wheat 48 Marquis wheat 54 Bearded Bluestem, or Humpback wheat 55 Relation between the percentage of crude protein m wheat and 56 Summary 58

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1. Source of 1912 crop samples 13 Fig. 2. Source of 1913 crop samples 29 Fig. 3. Crude protein content of wheat and flour samples of 1911, 1912, and 1913 crops 57

MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913

By c. H. BAILEY

INTRODUCTION

The wheat grown in any section, even when of the same varieties, varies in quality and composition from year to year. These differences are principally attributable to the climatic conditions prevailing during the different seasons. The total quantity and distribution of the rain­ fall as influencing the moisture available to the plant at different stages of growth is one of the most potent factors affecting the composition of the wheat crop. Sunshine, temperature, wind, humidity, consistency of the soil and subsoil, drainage, and plant diseases also have a greater or less effect. In recognition of these facts it was deemed advisable to continue for a number of years the investigations of Minnesota wheats commenced in 1911, and reported in Bulletin 131 of this Sta­ tion. The studies have included the hard winter wheats of the crops of 1912 and 1913, as well as the spring wheats grown during the same seasons. The results of the tests and analyses of these .samples are presented in this publication. It is proposed to continue the investiga­ tions for· several years more, in order to observe the composition of wheat of the different types and varieties under varying conditions, and to trace the relation between environment and the composition and quality of Minnesota wheats.

METHODS EMPLOYED

The laboratory methods employed in these investigations were described in more or less detail in Bulletin 131. Certain of the methods were slightly modified, however, before the work of the second season was begun. A third pair of rolls was added to the experimental flour mill shown on page 12 of Bulletin 131. These rolls have 24 corruga­ tions to the inch, and are employed in making the fourth and fifth breaks during the process o,£ flour-production. The corrugated rolls 5 6 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS in the original equipment have 16 corrugations to the inch, and the first three breaks are made on them. The method of calculating the percentage of total flour has been changed since the completion of the work of the first season. The calculations were originally based on the total weight of material re­ covered, this being the practise in the flour laboratory before the in­ vestigations of the crop of 1911 were commenced. In computing the percentage of total flour obtained from the 1912 and 1913 crops, the calculations were based on the weight of cleaned wheat used rather than on the weight of material recovered. Since the percentages so calculated were necessarily lower, the results of the milling tests of the CFOP of 1911 were recalculated, and the figures used in compari­ sons between them and the data from later tests, shown in Table V, are computed in the same manner. The value of the results obtained through the use of ~ small ex­ perimental mill of the type employed in these investigations depends in large measure upon the manner in which the mill is handled. If an attempt is made to reduce the wheat to flour in two or three breaks and about twice as many reductions, it is probably true that little value can be attached to the results of the tests. The criticism directed against the use of this equipment has apparently resulted in large part from such use of it in the hands of inexperienced laboratory assistants having little knowledge of the technology of milling. The use of larger machines, but the same short system of milling, does not improve the situation. In fact, such an outfit is likely to be of even less value than the small mill, since it is usually made automatic in operation, which results in less flexibility. The stream of wheat must be reduced to flour in the few breaks and reductions provided, or a large portion of the floury material escapes reduction and is lost in the feeds. If, however, the wheat is reduced gradually with the small mill, fair yields of a relatively high-grade flour can be obtained which do not compare unfavorably with commercial manufactured in a merchant mill. The fact that there is no provision for purification of the middlings results in the flour containing small specks of branny substance which slightly affect the appearance of the dry flour, but are less noticeable in the baked loaf. In these tests at least five breaks were made on the two stands of corrugated rolls and from eight to eleven reductions (as computed in ordinary flour-milling practises) on the smooth rolls. This is a longer system of milling than is provided for in many of the smaller mills of the State. While somewhat superior flours can doubtless be produced with a long, automatic system, which includes middlings-purification, the results of the tests of the samples, reported CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913 7

· in this bulletin, are considered comparable with each other. Further­ more, when a white, clean flour which bakes into white of good texture and flavor can be produced with this equipment, it seems rea­ sonable to conclude that at least equally good flour should be produced from the same raw material in a large merchant mill. The weight of 1,000 kernels of the cleaned wheat was determined and in the tables following these data are substituted for the statement of comparative condition given in the tables published in Bulletin 131. In making this determination 500 kernels of .the samples of wheat, previo.usly freed from other grains ancl foreign matter, were weighed, i'he weight being multiplied by two. The acidity of the flour was determined in all cases, but the per­ centages were omitted from the tables. They were employed to aid in the elimination of unsound material, the results of tests of which might prove misleading. The flours reported in this bulletin were all milled from sound wheat, as shown by the usual inspection and the acidity test.

FACTORS OF IMPORTANCE

The factors of principal importance and the interpretation of the results of the tests are discussed at some length in Bulletin 131. A brief recapitulation follows, and the interested reader is referred to that bulletin for a more extended consideration of this matter. From the market standpoint the quality of wheat may be considered under two heads: ( 1) the milling quality and (2) the baking quality of the flour produced. Milling quality.-Since flour is the most valuable mill product, those wheats which yield the highest percentages of flour are more valuable than those from which lower percentages are obtained, assum­ ing the flours produced to be of the same value. The percentage of flour in wheat is not an absolute quantity. Careful separations of the different portions or structures of the average plump wheat kernel have shown that the or "floury" portion represents from 82 to 86 per cent of the whole kernel by weight.1 Only from 72 to 75 per cent of the kernel is recovered as flour in milling, however, and the lower grades of flour even contain fragments of portions of the kernel other than the endosperm. The other 10 or 12 per cent of the endosperm is lost in the feeds, since it is impossible to separate com­ pletely the or hull from the endosperm by mechanical processes.

1 Hunt, T. F. The Cereals in America. 421 pp. (Note particularly p. 36.) New York. 1908. 8 MINNESOTA WHHAT INVESTIGATIO:VS

The relative completeness with which this separation is made in milling depends in part upon the types of machinery and the length of the process employed, and in part upon the skill of the miller. The rela­ tion between the physical properties of the kernels and the relative quantities of flour which can he produced from them hinges princi­ pally upon three factors : (a) the plumpness of the kernels, ( b) the density of the endosperm, and ( c) the percentage of moisture which they contain. It is obvious that in plump kernels the ratio of endo­ sperm or floury material to hull or bran is greater than in shriveled ker­ nels. It follows, therefore, that, other things being equal, higher yields of flour can be obtained in milling plump wheat. The density of the endosperm is quite variable, and when wheats of equal plump­ ness but varying density are milled, the hard, flinty grain usually yields a higher percentage of flour than does grain which is soft in texture. With regard to the influence of the moisture content, it has been ob­ served that in milling damp or tough wheat it is n1ore difficult to separate completely the endosperm from the bran than in working with the same wheat properly dried. Moreover, the losses incurred through evaporation in milling are much greater when damp wheat is used. Baking quality.-In general. flour from which large loaves are obtained in testing can be made into bread of the highest quality when baked in the usual way. The loaf volume as given in the tables is therefore an. expression of the comparative "baking strength." or elasticity of the dough made from the flour. The ''absorption," or percentage of water used in making the dough, is of importance from the commercial standpoint since, other things being equal, the more water that can be employed to make a dough of normal consistency, the more pounds of bread that can be made from a given quantity of flour. In the home this is of less consequence than in the commercial bakery, since the water so used adds nothing to the nutritive value of the bread. This does not mean that no attention need be given to making the dough of the proper consistency, for this does hear a dis­ tinct relation to the quality of the bread produced. In these baking tests the dough was made as nearly of the same consistency in all cases as possible. White or faintly creamy tints are commonly regarded as most desirable in white flour from which an effort has been made to separate the fibrous portion, or hull, and the germ of the kernel. The crumb of the baked loaf was accordin<:;ly scored for color, the higher scores being assigned to loaves having the whitest crumb. The color of the average Minneapolis high-grade or patent flour was used as the standard, and assigned a score of 100. This accounts for the occa- CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913 9 sional score of more than 100, which was given those flours from which unusually white bread was produced.

RELATION OF COMPOSITION TO QUALITY

The composition of flour is commonly regarded as of importance only as it bears a relation to the quality of the flour and the bread baked from it. As a usual thing those high-grade middlings flours which contain a high percentage of will make the best bread. There are, however, frequent exceptions to this rule. Food for the yeast must also be supplied through the medium of sugars originally present in the flour or formed by hydrolysis. of the starch during fer­ mentation. A deficiency in these substances may be in part, but not wholly, corrected by the addition of ordinary cane sugar in making the dough. Various other substances affect flour quality either directly or indirectly, and the knowledge of these effects is increasing. It is becoming evident that the problem is more complex than was at first supposed. In consequence the baking test is still the best means for determining the comparative quality of , so far as its adaptability to bread-making is concerned. The percentage of crude protein, which is largely gluten, was determined in both wheat and flour in all of the s~mples examined, and is of consequence only because ·Of the general relation which it bears to baking strength, as indicated above. The formula N X 5.7 was employed in calculating the percent­ .age of crude protein in all cases.

PLAN OF THE INVESTIGATIOI\

The studies of the crop of 1911 were confined to the hard spring wheats, which represent more than 90 per cent of the wheat produced in this State. The samples examined were submitted principally by flour millers and represented the average of the wheat raised in the locality from which they came. Before the work on the crop of 1912 was commenced. a number of farmers agreed to cooperate and most of the samples tested were secured directly from them. In addition to the spring wheat samples, 47 samples of hard -winter wheat were se­ -cured in this manner. A number of milling companies also collected and sent in average samples of the spring wheat grown in the vicinity of their mills, the tests of which are included in this series. An effort was made to secure as many samples as possible from the vicinity of weather bureau stations, it1 order that the relation of the climatic con- 10 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS ditions prevailing during the growing season to the composition and quality of the crop might be traced. · Blanks were sent to each farmer who cooperated in these investi­ gations and certain information was reported on these. This included the name and source of the variety of wheat grown, acreage seeded, dates of seeding and harvest, soil and subsoil types, cropping sys­ tems, yields of grain, prevalence of plant diseases, and the methods of handling the grain after harvest. The mass of data secured in this manner is too great for publication, but certain relations observed will be made the subject of a later report after the investigations have been conducted for several more seasons. The results of the tests and analyses are divided into two groups, ( 1) spring wheats, and (2) winter wheats. These are further subdi­ vided according to the section of the State in which they were grown. The same arbitrary divisions of the State that were shown on page 20 of Bulletin 131 were used in compiling these data. These divisions are indicated on the maps in this bulletin which show the source of the samples.

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 1912 CROP

The general characteristics of the wheat crop of 1912 differed very markedly from those of the previous crop. In the case of the crop of 1911, the wheat kernels were generally more or less shriveled and pinched, reducing the percentage of flour which could be produced in milling, but yielding flour relatively high in gluten and possessing good baking strength. The average wheat of the 1912 crop was more plump than that of the crop of 1911, but exhibited the "yellow-berry" or soft condition to a marked extent. The protein, and consequently the gluten content, was materially lower, the average crude-protein content of the flour milled from the 1912 crop wheat being 11.15 per cent, while the flours from the 1911 crop contained an average of 12.09 per cent. There were corresponding differences in the baking strength, the 1912 crop flours producing loaves averaging 2,435 cubic centimeters in volume, while the average loaf volume of the 1911 crop flours was 2,545 cubic centimeters. This relation did not prevail, however, in the samples from all sections of the State. The 1912 crop samples obtained from the northwestern section were higher in the average percentage of crude protein, and were of better baking quality than were samples of the 1911 crop from that section. As in the preceding season there was considerable variation in the quality and compo'sition of the samples tested. The spring wheat~ CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913 11 examined contained from 10.09 to 14.93 per cent of crude protein, and the flours milled from them contained from 9.12 to 13.51 per cent. The winter wheats were generally inferior to the spring wheats, the crude-protein content varying from 8.49 to 13.22 per cent, while the flour contained from 7.66 to 11.80 per cent. It will be observed that there was no distinct line of division between the two classes of wheat, the better hard winter wheats being superior to the poorer samples of spring wheat in protein content and in baking strength. The reasons for these variations in composition and quality have been discussed briefly in the opening paragraphs of this bulletin. The climatic conditions are the dominant factors in producing variations, being, generally speaking, more potent in this regard than the fertilty of the soil. While the latter may, and usually does, affect the yield of wheat per acre, it is a curious and unfortunate fact that fertilizing produces little or no beneficial effect upon the relative quality of the wheat crop, and may even result in lowering it in certain respects. The idea seems prevalent, and it is frequently stated that the quality of Minnesota wheat is deteriorating, owing to the depletion of soil fertility. This statement does not seem to be supported by the facts observed in numerous experiments along this line. Wheat grown on old soil has actually proved superior in quality to that grown on virgin soil in an adjoining field. This should not be interpreted to mean that no attention need be given to returning plant food to the soil in the shape of manure or other forms of fertilizer. To fail to do so may seriously affect the yield of grain. A correspondingly beneficial effect upon quality should not be expected to result from such fertilizing, however, and the variations in the quality of wheat occurring from year to year should not be attributed to variations in the quantity of plant food in the soil, provided it is not depleted to the point where the soil will not support a normal growth of the plant.

VARIETIES OF WHEAT REPRESENTED

The spring-sown wheats are represented principally by the fife, bluestem, and velvet chaff groups, and the Marquis variety. The name "velvet chaff" is applied to a group of bearded spring wheats and not to a single variety. The term is a misnomer, since the majority of the wheat so classified does not have a velvety chaff at all. Minnesota No. 188 belongs to this group, be,ing the increase of Preston wheat obtained originally from the Central Experimental Farm at Ottawa, Canada. The bluestem and fife varieties are so well known in this section as to require no description. Minnesota No. 169 is a strain of Haynes 12 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

Bluestem, and Minnesota No. 163 is a strain of Glyndon Fife. Marvel is another strain of bluestem wheat. Marquis wheat is a hybrid of Red Fife and Hard Red Calcutta made at the Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, Canada. In appearance it resembles the fife parent most closely. These wheats all have a brownish red hull or seed coat, and are flinty in texture when grown under suitable conditions. The head and kernel characters are shown on pages 6 and 7 of Bulletin 137 of this Station, entitled Marquis Wheat. Turkey Red wheat is the principal fall-sown type grown in this State. In a number of instances where the varietal name was not given in the report received from the producer, this was apparently the type represented. It is a bearded wheat, with smooth chaff, introduced into Kansas from southern Russia, and is now the most widely grown hard winter wheat in the United States. Minnesota No. 529 is a strain of this type, as is also Minnesota Rdiable. The Red Fox (Laboratory No. C 271) and Bearded Fife (Laboratory No. C 248) mentioned in the tables are not known to the writer, but the samples submitted resemble Turkey Red very closely. Red Cross (Laboratory No. C 265) appears to be a soft winter wheat and may be identical with a variety bearing the same name which is grown to a considerable extent in Iowa.

SOURCE OF THE SAMPLES

An effort was made to secure the spring wheat samples in largest numbers from those localities which produce the most wheat. The majority of the winter wheat samples obtained were grown in the southern half of the State, although a few were received from the northwestern section. Figure 1 shows the manner in which the State was divided into sections and the source of the samples. The localities from which one or more spring wheat samples were obtained are indi­ cated by small circles and those from which winter wheat samples came are marked by crosses. A cross within a circle means that both types were secured from the same locality. Table I shows the results of tests of spring wheat samples of the crop of 1912, and Table II the results of tests of all winter wheat samples of the same crop. 'i9'T80N

i MARSHALL i -·.s:>·~-~-~---· i Q ! ~NINCTON r·-·-·-·1 I ! i., RED LAKE,_! i-· -.· - ... -·-·-J • L.-·-·-·' ~ ! j I POLK 1 • 0 \ j •HSCA ! -·-·-·-···-·-· •, I ..j ·-· I i : ~+--( -' \. N j NORMAN i tlo~y..~O~ j -·?, I f ! . . ~· ! ~--·-·-) BECKE~ +..) I . I -.,-i r·---i ~----- ;i l 0 i ! CARLTON Q/i, ! 1 / r AITKIN 1 ,. ! i (Jt-0~ ! i.----1

0 + @ 61"RIN5 WHEAT WINTER WHEAT ROTH TYPES

Fig. 1. Map of Minnesota Showing Sections into which the State Was Divided, and Localities from which 1912 Crop Samples Were Obtained.

13 TABLE l.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF

------

Southwestern Section ------~----

SOURCE 1 LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender -1 --____ , ______,______

C 389 Spring Valley Mr. Bratrud Bluestem I 2 C 379 Grand Meadow F. M. Higbie Bluestem 3 C 387 Dexter E. J. Naish Bluestem 4 C 374 Albert Lea Fted Romer Bluestem

5 C 377 IAlbert Lea Water Jensen Bluestem 6 C 273 Winnebago Joseph E. Hynes Minn. No. 169 7 C 275 Eagle Lake C. Schwarble Bluestem 8 C 319 St. Clair 0. 0. Juliar Bluestem 9 C_326 Mankato N. A. Door Bluestem 10 C)60 New Prague New Prague Flouring Spring Wheat Mill 11 C 347 Le Sueur Smith & Wilson Spring Wheat 12 C 284 Faribault Faribault Roller Mill Co. Velvet chaff 13 C 285 Faribault Faribault Roller Mill Co. Bluestem 14 C.309 Faribault John Derham Velvet chaff 15 C 310 Faribault John Derham Bluestem 16 C 381 Faribault G. S. Weston Bluestem 17 C 390 Farmington J. Weisbrick Velvet chaff 18 C 391 Farmington J. Weisbrick Bluestem

Southwestern Section

19 C 352 Jackson Jackson Milling Co. Spring wheat 20 C 346 St. James St. James Milling Co. No. 1 spring wheat 21 C 282 Pipestone E. R. McCurdy Bluestem 22 C 313 New Ulm A. A. Backer Minn. No. 169 23 C 305 Marshall N. C. Johnson Minn. No. 169 24 C 348 Marshall F. Mellenthin Velvet chaff

14 SPRING \\'HEAT S.-u!PLES, CROP OF 1912

Southwestern Section

TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR WT. PER i CRUDE I TOTAL 1.000 PROTEIN · FLOl'R KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN 'WHEAT I Volume Used Score Protein i Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct.

27.58 73.8 2,620 57.9 101 11.51 12.94

22.10 70.7 2,560 60.3 96 11.57 12.54 2

24.35 70.S 2,390 60.9 93 10.94 11.57 3

22.40 70.8 2,560 60.6 101 11.51 12.48 4

27.04 70.4 2,440 60.9 101 10.55 11.34 5

26.40 73.7 2,340 58.2 98 10.40 12.42 6

23.40 71.0 2,510 58.8 98 11.12 12.17 7

22.55 70.4 2,290 58.2 97 10.94 11.34 8

24.08 68.7 2,360 57.1 99 10.94 12.20 9

22.86 71.8 2,480 58.2 98 10.49 11.69 10

22.25 69.3 2,200 58.8 99 9.58 10.37 11

26.18 70.2 2,'350 55.9 96 10.20 11.51 12

21.54 67.1 2,330 57.1 99 9.52 11.25 I 13

26.18 71.6 2,200 55.9 98 9.52 11.34 14

23.00 65.3 2,250 57.9 98 10.20 11.51 15

24.05 71.6 2,480 60.3 98 10.72 11.29 16

20.48 69.9 2,280 54.1 96 9.80 11.34 17

16.56 69.4 2,290 58.8 95 10.32. 11.86 18

---·----- Southwestern Section

-·------

21.00 72.0 2,600 61.5 98 12.03 13.11 19

22.00 70.4 2,520 58.5 99 11.63 12.77 20

23.65 69.5 2,450 57.4 96 10.77 12.20 21

22.35 71.6 2,450 59.4 98 10.89 11.97 22

21.60 70.7 2,560 59.4 97 12.94 13.62 23

22.22 69.6 2,250 ' 55.0 80 10.03 11.63 24

15 TABLE !.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING

Southwestern Section-Continued ------

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

25 C 321 Lynd J. Stelter Velvet chaff 26 C 380 Tracy M. Suprenant 27 C 344 Redwood Falls Winn Bros. Minn. No. 169 28 C 361 Redwood Falls A. D. Stewart Velvet chaff 29 C 362 Redwood Falls A. D. Stewart Bluestem 30 C 373 Redwood Falls N. W. Cobleigh Bluestem 31 C 266 Granite Falls Henry Erickson Marquis 32 C 349 Canby Canby Roller Mills Average spring wheat 33 C 368 Clarkfield Clarkfield Roller Mill Bluestem 34 C 369 Clarkfield Clarkfield Roller Mill Velvet chaff

------·-~·------Central Section

35 c 290 I Traverse F. S. Wolf Bluestem I 36 c 293 ,Traverse J.P. Wright Bluestem i 37 c 314 '!Traverse S. H. Briggs Velvet chaff 38 c 306 St. Peter Robert Meyer Bluestem 39 c 357 Arlington Arlington Milling Co. Bluestem 40 c 280 IRenville T. O'Connor Velvet chaff 41 C 383 Bird Island W. Baumgartner Velvet chaff 42 C 392 Cologne Cologne Mill Co. Spring wheat 43 C 312 Glencoe B. A. Wolf Marvel 44 C 334 Glencoe O.Holcomb Bluestem 45 C 356 Glencoe Wm. Harpel Marvel 46 C 308 Hutchinson Wm. Urban Haynes Bluestem 47 C 330 New London W. C. Johnson Bluestem 48 C 358 New London New London Milling Co. Bluestem

16 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-Continued

====~ ------Southwestern Section-Continued ------

WT. PER _OF ______CRUDE TOTAL I_ ____!~sTs MrnouNGs-~F-Lo~u_R 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 29.84 73.0 2,500 56.2 98 11.80 13.11 25 25.54 73.0 2,620 60.3 98 13.05 14.14 26 21.70 70.3 2,500 60.9 97 12.26 13.91 27

21.82 71.5 2,490 58.8 96 11.69 12.94 28 22.56 67.6 2,510 59.1 97 11.57 13.40 - 29 23.84 69.3 2,500 59.1 99 12.54 13.28 30 25.22 68.9 2,490 55.6 100 11.97 12.88 31 24.74 70.4 2,480 55.6 97 10.60 12.31 32

22.66 69.9 2,440 59.7 96 11.23 12.08 33 22.56 69.2 2,380 55.3 98 9.80 11.34 34

======c-__ ==c~----=-=-~---===-.,~------=-==------Central Section ------·,I-··------30.35 72.9 2,480 57.4 97 10.49 11.97 35 27.02 71.2 2,440 59.4 99 10.66 11.62 36 23.50 73.4 2,480 57.9 99 11.91 12.31 37

24.54 69.5 2,480 60.6 96 10.66 11.86 I 38 19.38 70.6 2,440 58.8 97 11.12 12.37 39 22.84 71.2 2,400 52.4 96 11.00 12.37 40 24.05 71.8 2,450 57.4 96 10.26 11.23 41 24.30 71.9 2,480 59.4 96 10.60 11.46 42 21.75 70.8 2,320 58.8 99 10.66 11.46 43 27.40 68.9 2,060 60.6 97 9.35 11.06 44 25.40 72.0 2,350 59.4 97 10.94 13.17 45 26.24 70.6 2,440 59.7 99 9.69 10.37 46 21.10 66.4 2,350 59.7 96 10.89 12.20 47 21.40 66.2 2,380 57.4 98 10.55 12.71 48

17 TABLE !.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING

___-_- ___-_-_-_- __ - __-_ -______: ------_----~-'------~--__:--_:-.=_:=_--:_-:::.::_-~- -=--=---=----=----_-___ Central Section-Continued

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

49 C 359 New London New London Milling Co. Velvet chaff 50 C 367 New London P.A. Larson 51 C 355 Cokato M. Johnson (Mill) Spring wheat 52 C 278 Avon M. Reisinger Bluestem 53 C 288 Paynesville A.G. Borek Minn.'No. 169

54 C 365 Little Falls Northwestern Milling Spring wheat~ from east Co. side of river : 55 C 366 Little Falls Northwestern Milling Spring wheat from west Co. side of river 56 C 296 Round Prairie G. H. Pixley Bluestem 57 C 363 Long Prairie Aug. Stephen Bluestem

------·------__-_-_ - ___-_-_ ------__--_-_- _-_- Western Section

58 C 325 Milan S. T. Kleven Velvet chaff 59 C 342 Milan J. Anderson Velvet chaff 60 C 331 Montevideo Chas. Olson Velvet chaff 61 C 341 Montevideo A. N. Kohr Velvet chaff 62 C 351 Beardsley J. Zimbrick Velvet chaff 63 C 299 Morris Jos. Sauter Bluestem

64 C 322 Morris Paul Andert Blue~tem 65 C 279 Wheaton J. Anderson Velvet chaff 66 C 327 Osakis P. J. Fynskov Bluestem 67 C 333 Osakis Custard Bros. Bluestem 68 C 337 Osakis C. Anderson Bluestem 69 C 343 Nelson E. A. Olson Minn. No. 169 70 C 277 Alexandria C. J. Lindstrom Bluestem 71 C 276 Rothsay Frank Sha Minn No. 169 72 C 300 Breckenridge T. Holt Minn. No. 169

18 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-Co11tinued

C en tr al Section-Continued -·--

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 ---- PROTEIN FLOUR Crude KERNELS Loaf Water Color IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein I Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 22.10 69.1 2,300 57.6 92 9.98 10.94 49 28.54 66.5 2,280 57.4 96 9.80 11.00 50 22.45 67.6 2,490 58.5 96 10.09 11.40 51 24.96 71.4 2,120 55.9 98 10.89 12.85 52 18.35 61.3 2,400 56.5 98 10.66 11.97 53 22.22 64.2 2,220 58.2 96 9.12 10.09 54 25.16 69.3 2,480 60.9 97 11.29 12.48 55 27.96 68.7 2,260 60.3 99 9.12 11.23 56 11.57 12.31 57 22.62 I 67.4 2,530 60.3 97 Wes tern Section ------25.84 68.0 2,120 55.3 98 9.29 11.17 58 29.00 73.3 2,340 56.2 98 10.72 11.97 59 26.45 70.9 2,400 56.8 98 11.86 13.62 60 26.00 69.8 2,210 55.0 94 10.09 11.06 61 I 22.12 71.2 2,620 ' 58.5 97 11.00 12.20 62 21.12 70.5 2,550 57.9 98 12.65 13.68 63 19.02 67.4 2,580 62.9 96 12.83 13.51 64 31.15 75.2 2,250 53.5 96 11.34 12.29 65 27.20 67.9 2,110· 56.8 97 9.69 10.72 66 22.30 69.8 2,520 60.3 98 11.51 12.71 67 24.45 70.0 2,450 60.3 98 12.03 12.54 68 27.52 70.2 2,450 58.5 99 11.34 12.03 69 27.84 70.2 2,100 56.8 99 10.49 11.37 70 27.25 69.5 2,540 56.5 95 12.20 12.88 .71 26.55 69.7 2,580 59.7 99 12.26 13.53 72 I 19 TABLE l.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING ------Western Section-Continued.

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

I I 73 c 287 Fergus Falls ']. Easterday Bluestem 74 c 295 !Fergus Falls R. Dahlberg Minn. No. 169 75 c 303 Fergus Falls A. Knackendoffel Bluestem 76 c 317 Fergus Falls Wm. Wright Minn. No. 169 77 c 345 Perham Globe Flour Mill Spring wheat 78 c 350 Detroit B. L. Wheeler Bluestem and fife 79 c 370 Moorhead Dwight Flour Mills Bluestem 80 c 371 Moorhead Dwight Flour Mills Velvet chaff

---~------·--~------

Northwestern Section

.----~------81 c 292 Halstad M. Sether Bluestem 82 c 316 Halstad E. T. Stennes Minn. No. 169 83 c 318 Halstad C. L. Sulerud Bluestem 84 c 332 Halstad H. Holte Bluestem 85 c 291 Fosston C. Hasselton Minn. No. 169 86 C372 Fosston Hans Sorby 87 c 320 Angus John Oberg Bluestem and fife 88 c 304 Eldred G. H. Mariner Minn. No. 169 89 c 328 Crookston Substation Minn. No. 169 90 c 378 Thief River Falls Hansen & Brazen Mill- Spring wheat ing Co. 91 c 385 Thief River Falls D. P. O'Neill Minn. No. 169 92 c 294 Warren H. Beardmore Fife 93 c 298 Warren Munger & Son Minn. No. 163 94 c 354 Warren C.R. Wood Minn. No. 163 95 c 315 Hallock A. Anderson Minn. No. 169 96 c 340 Hallock P. Lindahl Bluestem 97 c 353 Roseau Roseau Milling Co. Average spring wheat 20 w HEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-Continued ------Western Section-Continued ------

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLouR Water Color KERNELS ~:;-~_I -- Crude IN WHEA1 Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 27.92 69.1 2,660 56.5 97 13.40 14.93 73 25.06 73.4 2,680 57.6 100 12.94 14.76 74 28.24 68.3 2,420 59.4 99 10.32 11.45 75 32.64 69.1 2,540 58.5 94 12.71 13.05 76 26.50 68.9 2,420 56.2 99 10.15 11.23 77 27.60 67.4 2,470 58.2 98 10.15 11.51 78 25.02 69.8 2,460 59.4 97 10.89 11.97 79 23.10 68.5 2,510 57.4 97 10.72 12.48 80

======--=--====---==----=------=--_--===------~~ Northwestern Section

------· ----.-----~---- ~--- - 24.42 66.5 2,560 55.6 98 11.97 13.08 81 28.44 69.0 2,570 58.2 101 12.20 12.60 82 26.24 71.3 2,480 57.4 101 11.12 11.68 83 27.72 69.0 2,450 59.4 99 11.46 13.05 84 28.82 69.0 2,590 58.8 99 12.65 13.40 85 32.24 67.7 2,420 60.0 100 9.41 10.77 86 23.40 68.8 2,560 59.7 97 14.14 14.76 87 23.10 68.8 2,540 59.7 98 12.88 13.11 88 28.00 71.8 2,540 57.6 99 12.43 14.14 89 22.56 69.9 2,580 61.8 99 12.03 13.00 90 27.00 69.8 2,460 58.8 95 10.94 11.91 91 27.75 69.6 2,650 58.2 98 13.11 14.02 92 27.95 72.3 2,620 60.0 98 13.51 14.59 93 23.77 71.0 2,650 59.4 98 12.60 13.79 94 23.04 70.6 2,500 56.5 99 12.26 12.54 95 28.45 70.2 2,480 57.6 98 11.86 12.26 96 28.92 69.7 2,320 54.4 97 10.20 11.51 97

21 TABLE l.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING

Northern Section

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

98 c 338 Clearbrook I. K. Berglund Minn. No. 169

·--- ··------·------Eastern Section ------99 c 397 St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 169 100 c 398 St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 163 101 c 399 St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 188 102 c 336 Pine City Dorr Bros. Minn. No. 169 103 c 393 Hinckley L. Bloomfield Bluestem 104 c 394 Hinckley I L. Bloomfield Fife 105 c 395 Hinckley i L. Bloomfield Velvet chaff 106 c 396 Hinckley I Mr. Mullins ------__I ___ ·----· ------

TABLE IL-RESULTS OF TESTS OF WINTER

------· ------Southeastern Section

------I I r· SOURCE LAB. ------VARIETY No. Town Sender --

1 c 246 Prosper F. E. Rollins Turkey Red 2 c 239 Austin Mrs. A. Ellis Turkey Red 3 c 323 Racine L. C. Scribner Turkey Red 4 c 250 Waseca Nels Breck Turkey Red 5 c 255 Waseca E. Turnacliff Turkey Red 6 c 339 Waseca Wm. Neumann

22 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-C ontinued ------Northern Section I WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR I CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 I PROTEIN FLOUR Color KERNELS Loaf Water Crude IIN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 2,080 59.4 97 9.75 10.94 98 33~_1 __ 68.8

Eastern Section

30..12 i --- - ~~~-i-;,~--59.4 96 12.08 12.88 99

31.76 I 70.4 2,500 61.5 97 11.63 12.88 100 30.00 68.8 2,420 56.2 94 11.12 12.71 1101 I 26.25 69.3 2,280 59.1 99 9.12 11.57 102 28.56 71.3 2,610 64.7 99 12.31 13.62 103 27.00 70.4 2,560 61.2 99 11.63 12.71 104 28.94 70.3 2,500 61.2 98 11.86 13.45 105

29.28 i 69.6 2,480 61.5 98 10.72 11.34 106

\NHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912

------Southeastern Section

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR Loaf Water Color Crude KERNELS IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 25.64 68.9 2,190 52.9 99 8.78 9.75 32.45 70.8 2,270 54.1 97 8.44 9.23 2 24.00 65.0 2,100 53.2 102 9.41 10.37 3 30.34 70.8 2,210 50.9 94 9.23 10.43 4 21.16 66.7 2,300 51.5 97 11.23 12.48 5 23.06 70.1 2,290 57.1 95 10.37 11.97 6

23 TABLE IL-RESULTS OF TESTS OF WINTER

--·------::~---·-·--- ~-- ______-_-._-_------·-- Southeastern Section-Continued

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

7 c 258 Stockton P. D. Leighton Hard winter 8 c 286 Rochester P. C. Riegel Turkey Red 9 c 251 Le Sueur T. J. Halloran Turkey Red 10 c 253 Le Sueur Jail. Ronayne "Bearded" 11 c 254 Le Sueur D. W. Burns "Bearded Red" 12 c 272 Kasota J. Q. Adams Turkey Red

Southwestern Section

13 c 270 Ceylon Frank Rave "Bearded" 14 c 388 Ceylon Geo. Clark "Bearded" 15 c 256 Jackson W. J. Benda Turkey Red 16 c 259 Worthington Saxon Bros. 17 c 324 Brewster Aug. Habeck "Bearded" 18 c 240 Luverne F. S. Barnhart Turkey Red 19 c 244 Butterfield A. C. Staxen 20 c 263 Mountain Lake J. Regier 21 c 269 Marshall M. Frederick Turkey Red

Central Section

22 c 247 St. Peter W. Schmidt 23 c 301 St. Peter A. Nelson Turkey Red 24 c 311 Glencoe B. A. Wolf Minn. No. 529 25 c 307 Hutchinson Wm. Urban Turkey Red 26 c 249 Spicer J. D. Nordeen Turkey Red 27 c 257 Cologne T. Sprengeler 28 c 260 Chaska L. Fetzner "Bearded"

24 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-Continued

Southeastern Section-Conttnued

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL PROTEIN 1,000 I I K FLOUR Loaf W'ltr,r 1 Color Crude ERNELS Volume Used Score Protein IN WHEAT ------1------1-----1------Grams Per ct. Cc. j Per ct. I Per ct. Per ct 24.76 66.6 2,210 I 52.1 99 9.75 11.12 7 24.90 65.2 2,150 . I 56.2 99 9.41 10.63 8 26.98 68.2 2,190 I 51.8 95 9.52 10.60 9 23.20 67.9 2,310 53.8 91 9.23 10.89 10 31.10 69.7 2,090 50.9 96 9.29 10.37 11 24.00 68.2 2,200 53.5 98 10.43 12.25 12

$outhwestern Section

27.95 68.7 2,220 51.5 97 9.75 10.87 13 22.21 69.7 2,490 58.5 97 11.46 13.22 14 23.16 68.3 2,060 52.4 96 9.80 10.51 15 26.25 70.8 2,170 50.0 97 10.15 11.97 16 24.56 70.4 2,420 55.0 99 11.80 13.11 17 26.70 69.6 2,210 54.4 97 9.41 10.55 18 20.65 67.5 2,220 54.7 98 9.52 11.51 19 26.60 67.8 2,520 55.9 97 11.69 13.17 20

~~ ___1_2.o ___ I _2,~~~--- -~-7c.~==-=-=-~10...,,1~~--=1=0.,__66-=,..,1=1,--.5_4_ I 21 Central Section

28.20 69.9 2,000 52.6 98 8.15 8.66 22 29.40 70.7 2,260 56.5 100 9.01 11.08 23 26.25 72.1 2,220 . 57.9 98 10.37 11.51 24 26.10 69.0 2,400 57.9 98 9.46 10.77 25 29.20 66.8 2,120 52.4 99 8.43 9.46 26 32.38 71.3 2,240 54.1 101 10.03 11.17 27 30.48 68.2 2,000 51.5 98 8.49 9.32 28 ------·-----·---- 25 TABLE IL-RESULTS OF TESTS OF WINTER

Central Section-Continued

SOURCE

I LAB. VARIETY I

__ j_:_ ___T_o_w_n ______s_e_n_d_er ______1 I 29 c 241 Cokato 0. L. Berg 30 c 267 Cokato Frank Stifter Turkey Red 31 c 283 Cokato J. Fagerlund • 32 c 289 Paynesville A.G. Borek Turkey Red 33 c 271 Ward Springs J. W. Ward Red Fox

------· ------Western Section

34 c 268 Perham J. Schlecht "Bearded" 35 c 248 Alexandria L. Thoreson "Bearded fife" 36 c 281 Alexandria J. Strandberg Turkey Red 37 c 302 Alexandria S. Erickson Turkey Red

------=--=-=-----~c=_-=--=--- Northwestern Section

38 c 242 Eldred G. W. Mariner Turkey Red 39 c 329 Crookston Substation Turkey Red 40 c 265 River Louis 0. Berg Red Cross

Northern Section

41 I C 2381 Wadena Carl Fischer I Turkey Red

Eastern Section

42 c 400 St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 529 43 c 243 Cambridge H. Steinbring Bearded winter 44 c 245 Ogilvie C. Johnson Turkey Red 45 c 335 Pine City Dorr Bros. Turkey Red 46 c 252 Hinckley Mr. Mullins 47 c 274 Hinckley L. Bloomfield Turkey Red ------.------·--··------·----- 26 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1912-Continued

Central Section-Continued

------~------

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 23.54 68.3 2,230 53.5 96 9.23 10.49 29 30.95 70.0 2,160 54.1 99 8.66 9.72 30 28.08 69.3 2,200 53.5 98 8.55 10.06 31 30.14 66.2 1,780 53.2 100 7.66 9.35 32

30.06 70.8 2,310 53.5 i 101 10.60 11.68 33 -----~-~-~'-'=====----~- Western Section

---~------~------~------29.24 71.0 2,160 58 8 98 9.35 10.72 34 31.20 69.3 1,990 51.5 91 8.32 9.01 35 32.00 71.0 1,960 52.9 99 8.38 9.57 36 29.15 67.5 2,240 55.9 99 9.80 11.23 37

Northwestern Section

26.20 68.0 2,220 53.8 98 9.98 10.55 38 28.90 '70.6 2,260 59.4 99 10.94 12.77 39 31.50 66.9 1,800 52.9 95 7.98 9.38 40

Northern Section

9.75 10.94 141 _29.96 __1 __ ~~.8 2,~-~5-- 98 ------Eastern Section

30.75 69.9 2,010 58.5 97 8.61 10.26 42 26.22 68.4 2,250 54.4 97 9.06 10.20 43 32.45 67.4 2,150 51.8 102 8.15 9.18 44 26.18 70.1 1,950 55.0 96 8.95 10.26 45

28.96 64.7 2,140 55.0 97 7.81 8.49 46 34.10 71.2 2,080 59.1 99 9.63 11.29 47

27 28 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 1913 CROP

The quality of the 1913 spring wheat crop of this State was in general the best of the three crops which have been studied. The wheat kernels were somewhat plumper, as indicated by the greater weight per 1,000 kernels, and the average yield of total flour was ac­ cordingly increased. The baking strength of the flour, as shown by the average volume of the loaves, was intermediate between the crops of 1911 and 1912. The same was true of the average percentage of crude protein in the wheat and flour. The samples obtained from the eastern section were higher in protein than during the two preceding seasons and the baking strength of the flour was better. The spring wheat samples examined contained from 10.63 to 15.73 per cent, and the flours from 9.75 to 14.31 per cent of crude protein. While the winter wheats of the 1913 crop were generally in­ ferior to the spring wheats grown in the same sections, the difference was less than in 1912. The average quality of the winter wheat was superior to that of the same type grown during the preceding year. In 1913 the average percentages of crude protein in the wheat and flour were 10.84 and 9.88 per cent respectively, as compared with 10.72 and 9.46 per cent during the previous season. The baking strength of the 1913 crop flour was also superior, the average loaf volume being 2,378 cubic centimeters, while that of the 1912 crop was 2,184 cubic centimeters. The percentage of crude protein in the 1913 winter wheat crop ranged from 9.23 to 12.85 per cent, while the range in the flour was from 8.32 to 12.28 per cent. It will be observed that none of the winter wheats contained high percentages of this constituent, while in certain instances the percentages were very low. Most of the spring wheat samples tested were of the velvet chaff, bluestem, and Marquis types or varieties. A few samples of fife wheat were received, and one sample each of Bearded Bluestem or "Hump­ back" wheat, and Gordon No. 46. The origin of the last-named va­ riety is not known to the writer. The Bearded Bluestem is a variety grown principally in the western section of the State, and the samples tested have been very inferior in quality. The winter wheat samples tested were principally of the Turkey Red type. One sample of Red Cross (Laboratory No. C 568), a soft winter wheat, was received. This was decidedly inferior in baking quality to the hard red winter wheat grown by the same farmer (Lab­ oratory No. C 569), and the results of the tests and analyses of it were omitted from the averages. A sample designated simply as beardless winter was received from \Varren, Minnesota, and proved so inferior to the Turkey Red wheat grown in the same locality that the results of the tests. of it were also omitted from the averages. i 8TTSON i ·-·-·--.L.-·-·-·

MARSHALL. -.iL,.-¥:_"'1_ __ _ j PEQJNOTON i-·-·-·-·1 i., RED LAKE·-! Q L.-,_,.__!

POLK

I i BECKER &-"Y i 0

-·7·..It-·-·-·-·-·-· i

--~r--·1-._i ov I I · ...~(.) I LYON i REDWOOD ! :j-·-·--L,-·-·c:;~'.'._~'.'._ TONE I MURRAY ! COTTON - l'i."fl'O j s.w. I WOOD i J\'11--4, ---i"- --r-·---,- -· ROCK ! NOBLES j JACKSON j 0 + $ .SPRIN$ WHEA7 WINTER WHEA7 807H 7YPES

Fig.. 2. Map of Minnesota Showing Sections into which the State Was. Divided, and Localities from which 1913 Crop Samples Were Obtained.

29 TABLE !IL-RESULTS OF TESTS OF

Southeastern Section

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

c 601 Mankato N. A. Door Bluestem 2 c 672 Eagle Lake Chas. Schwarble Bluestem 3 c 630 Le Sueur J as. Ronayne Minn. No. 169 4 c 681 Faribault John Derham Bluestem 5 c 682 Faribault John Derham Velvet chaff 6 c 689 Warsaw Henry Snyder Bluestem 7 I c 690 Warsaw Henry Snyder Marquis 8 I c 660* Red Wing Fred Meyer Gordon No. 46 ! Southwestern Section ------9 c 605 New Ulm A. A. Backer Velvet chaff 10 c 608 New Ulm Math. Walser Bluestem 11 c 603 Redwood Falls A. N. Hills Bluestem

------Central Section

12 c 671 Traverse S. H. Briggs Velvet chaff 13 c 606 Bird Island Wm. Leach Minn. No. 169 14 c 615 Bird Island R. S. Amberg Velvet chaff 15 c 685 Bird Island C. E. Dahlgren Bluestem 16 c 686 Bird Island C. E. Dahlgren Velvet chaff 17 c 584 Lester Prairie Burtman Bros. Minn. No. 169 18 c 585 Lester Prairie Burtman Bros. Marquis 19 c 667 Glencoe Wm. Harpel Marvel 20 c 600 New London J. A. Jensen Bluestem 21 c 614 New London Eddie Larson Bluestem 22 c 678 New London Wallace Johnson Bluestem *Omitted from average. tOmitted from average-smutty. 30 SPRING WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913

Southeastern Section

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude I IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 27.72 69.6 2,500 59.4 99 9.75 10.63

30.80 73.2 2,560 61.5 101 10.89 12.00 2

26.42 73.0 2,410 62.4 100 10.72 12.00 3

25.84 72.8 2,550 60.Q 101 10.20 11.29 4

24.44 72.4 2,580 59.4 100 11.12 12.71 5

24.32 70.7 2,380 62.6 102 9.92 10.83 6

29.84 71.2 2,500 57.6 99 11.17 12.88 7

22.20 69.0 2,240 54.4 94 11.12 12.26 8

Southwestern Section

25.88 71.7 2,500 57.4 100 10.86 12.08 9

27.20 73.1 2,520 62.1 99 11.48 12.43 10

24.68 73.0 2,480 I 61.5 95 11.03 12.08 11

------Central Section

22.00 73.4 2,460 61.5 99 11.40 12.68 12

22.98 70.1 2,540 60.0 98 11.63 12.60 13

28.00 73.5 2,510 62.1 98 11.00 12.00 14

22.80 69.5 2,440 63.2 97 10.52 11.88 15

25.20 73.9 2,500 60.3 99 11.09 12.97 16

29.40 72.9 2,520 58.8 99 11.23 11.60 17

29.30 73.0 2,600 58.8 100 11.37 12.40 18

25.92 73.1 2,520 62.4 98 11.51 12.40 19

28.54 69.5 2,490 60.9 96 9.75 10.66 20

29.44 72.0 2,490 58.8 98 11.34 12.77 21

24.40 72.5 2,580 63.2 90t 12.37 13.68 22

31 TABLE In.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING

------Central Section-Continued ------SOURCE

LA)l. ------VARIETY No. 1-- Sender Town _i __i I I 23 c 674 I Cokato John Henderson Marquis 24 c 675 Cokato John Henderson Velvet chaff I 25 c 612 I Long Prairie Aug. Stephan Bluestem 26 c 665 Long Prairie P. J. Pontius Bluestem I 27 c 666 I Long Prairie W.W. Brooks BJupstem I

Western Section

28 c 586 Montevideo Chippewa Milling Co. Average Blue~tem 29 c 587 Montevideo W. J. Evans Marquis 30 c 590 Montevideo Ole Skuttleberg Marquis 31 c 637 Montevideo H. P. Peterson Marquis 32 c 641 Montevideo W. A. Schulke Marquis 33 c 645 Montevideo H. W. Lawrence Marquis 34 c 651 Montevideo C.H. Olson Marquis 35 c 642 Montevideo Peter lngvaldson Velvet chaff 36 c 644 Montevideo Jos. V. Erickson Velvet chaff 37 c 646 Montevideo Carl Carlson Velvet chaff 38 c 649 Montevideo 0. N. Norman Velvet chaff 39 c 648 Maynard John Tibben Velvet chaff 40 c 650 Clara City E. Klinghagen Velvet chaff 41 c 611 Milan Stener Kleven Velvet chaff 42 c 643 Milan Ole L. Oddan Velvet chaff 43 c 647 Milan T. A. Klovstad Velvet chaff 44 c 604- Morris Paul Andert Bluestem 45 c 613 Morris Wm. Gausman Bluestem 46 c 623 Morris Jos. Sauter Bluestem ------*Omitted from average--smutty. 32 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913-Continued ______, ___ ------Central Section-Continued ------

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRVDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR Crude KERNELS Loaf Water Color IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein ---- I I Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. I 99 10.83 I 12.00 23 29.96 74.6 2,490 I 61.8 I 29.32 73.0 2,420 57.6 99 10.20 11.66 24 I 29.42 70.4 2,460 i 62.9 99 10.15 10.80 25 I 26.84 72.4 2,520 61.2 97 12.54 13.60 26 I 7.7.44 72.1 2,500 60.0 99 11.63 12.17 27 I I ------Western Section

25.10 73.5 2,550 57 6 97 11.69 12.31 28 33.08 73 6 2,560 59.7 99 11.43 13.14 29 29.94 72.8 2,490 59.7 97 12.05 13.85 30 30.56 .71.9 2,520 56.2 99 11.34 12.31 31 • 26.32 70.9 2,540 57.6 98 12.26 13.85 32 25.68 71.9 2,550 59.7 98 12.20 13.68 33 25.74 68.? 2,590 60.6 97 14.31 15.45 34 23.60 69.9 2,550 54.1 99 13.05 13.91 35 25.84 70.5 2,580 57.4 99 11.17 12.54 36 27.70 71.9 2,560 58.8 98 12.14 13.51 37 27.22 71.0 2,500 57.9 98 11.46 12.65 38 21.60 69.9 2,420 58.5 97 13.51 14.76 39 20.28 71.9 2,550 58.5 98 12.31 13.05 40 28.34 71.1 2,510 59.1 99 11.06 12.17 41 27.00 66.5 2,420 57.4 102 10.26 11.80 42 25.30 71.6 2,540 56.8 96* 11.23 12.17 43 26.36 71.3 2,560 61.5 95 11.40 12.37 44 23.15 73.2 2,450 62.6 97 12.31 13.08 45 23.66 70.6 2,630 63.2 99 12.00 13.05 46

------33 TABLE III.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING

Western Section-Continued ----- ·------

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

47 c 624* Morris Jos. Sauter Bearded bluestem 48 c 609 Alexandria C. J. Lindstrom Bluestem 49 c 680 Alexandria Otto Lund Bluestem 50 c 688 Alexandria S. A. Erickson Red fife 51 c 677 Osakis Chas. Anderson Bluestem 52 c 588 Breckenridge A. Danicourt Marquis 53 c 589 Breckenridge F. Tehle Marquis 54 c 607 Campbell Robinson Bros. Velvet chaff 55 c 618 Fergus Falls J. C. Easterday Bluestem 56 c 659 Fergus Falls Wm. Wright Bluestem 57 c 627 Kragness 0. E. Tangen Bluestem 58 c 593 Glyndon 0. A. Christenson Minn. No. 169 59 c 592 Glyndon 0. A. Christenson Marquis 60 c 634 Detroit B. L. Wheeler Marquis 61 c 635 Detroit B. L. Wheeler Fife and bluestem

Northwestern Section ------62 C676 Halstad L. W. Peterson Bluestem -63 c 668 Halstad C. L. Sulerud Scotch fife 64 c 669 Halstad C. L. Sulerud Bluestem -05 c 670 Halstad C. L. Sulerud Velvet chaff 66 c 664 Fosston Henry Hansen Bluestem 67 c 654 Crookston Substation Minn. No. 163 68 c 655 Crookston Substation Minn. No. 169 69 c 656 Crookston Substation Velvet chaff 70 c 657 Crookston Substation Marquis ------*Omitted from average. tOmitted from average-smutty. 34 \\!HE.\T SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913-Continued

--- -· Western Section-Continued ·---· ------·

WT. PER TESTS OF MID~LINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR ' KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEA1 Volume Used .Score Protein Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 29.18 75.1 2,010 57.4 96 11.23 12.45 47 29.38 71.S 2,510 64.7 98 11.34 12.23 48 26.84 73.8 2,480 63.2 100 11.29 12.83 49 28.36 72.9 2,500 62.6 100 10.83 11.74 50 25.20 73.4 2,520 61.5 85t 11.60 13.71 51 28.10 68.9 2,540 59.7 97 13.97 15.73 52 22.68 69.5 2;600 57.6 97 11.71 12.88 53 25.92 69.7 2,590 58.5 99 11.31 12.77 54 29;20 75.4 2,480 64.7 99 11.66 12.43 55 27.52 75.1 2,600 62.9 97 11.80 13.11 56 29.58 72.9 2,450 62.6 98 12.17 13.05 57 25.72 70.0 2,600 57.6 99 11.20 12.28 58 28.30 72.6 2,580 59.1 99 13.11 14.45 59 30.60 68.8 2,530 59.4 99 11.51 11.97 60 26.20 66.9 2,510 57.1 98 10.26 11.46 61 I ------·------Northwestern Section ------~--- 27.52 75.1 2,400 60.3 98 10.83 11.57 62 35.84 74.8 2,510 62.6 100 12.20 13.97 63 27.12 70.5 2,540 61.5 99 12.20 13.48 64 29.64 72.1 2,500 59.7 100 11.23 12.68 65 29.00 72.1 2,500 63.2 99 11.00 12.31 66 29.02 73.4 2,530 57.9 100 13.11 13.97 67 30.84 71.5 2.500 61.2 99 11.80 12.88 68 31.48 69.2 2,620 57.4 100 12.83 13.51 69 31.44 73.l 2,580 61.2 100 13.00 13.91 70 -----·-

35 TABLE III.-RESULTS CF TESTS OF SPRING

Northwestern Section-Continued

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender

~I C591 Crookston Jos. Ball Marquis 72 c 602 Thief River Falls Martin Berg Bluestem 73 c 653 Warren A. D. Vansickle Minn. No. 163 74 c 652 Warren A. D. Vansickle Marquis 75 c 599 Hallock Andrew Anderson Minn. No. 169 76 c 610 Hallock S. J. Boraas Bluestem

1 Bluestem ____j _P. Lindahl I

Eastern Section ------St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 163 St. Paul University Farm Minn. No. 169 ~: II ~ ~~: 80 c 621 St. Paul University Farm, Velvet chaff

81 I c 622 St. Paul University Farm Marquis 82 c 617 Ogilvie C. A. Johnson Minn. No. 169 831 c 683 Hinckley L. Bloomfield Bluestem 84 I c 684 Hinckley L. Bloomfield Velvet chaff

TABLE IV.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF

Southeastern Section

SOURCE LAB. VARIETY No. Town Sender ------

c 531 Mabel Nels Spande Turkey Red 2 c 631 Racine L. C. Scribner Turkey Red 3 c 636 Albert Lea H.P. Hanson Turkey Red

36 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913-Coutinued · ----- Northwestern Section-Continued

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN KERNELS . FLOUR Loaf Water Color Crude : IN WHEAT Volume 1 Used Score Protein ----.----I ------Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 33.30 75.5 2.510 60.6 98 11.54 12.54 71 29.28 70.8 2,510 63.5 98 10.74 11.97 72 35.28 72.2 2,570 61.8 102 11.77 12.83 73 35.30 72.5 2,640 60.6 104 12.31 13.79 74 29.62 71.6 2,610 62.4 98 11.83 13.17 75 31.84 72.7 2,450 63.8 97 11.06 11.91 76 29.76 2,450 60.3 98 10.55 11.40 77

Eastern Section

31.84 71.0 2,520 56.5 100 10.72 11.69 78

32.92 69.9 2,530 58.8 100 10.29 11.17 79 34.38 68.6 2,620 56.8 102 11.60 12.91 80 35.50 708 2,580 58.8 100 10.83 12.26 81 31.60 71.6 2,380 57.4 98 10 06 10.91 82

25.40 72.2 2,580 61.5 98 11.26 12.68 83

24.40 71.5 2,540 60.3 100 _I _10.83____ 1_3.02 84

WINTER WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913 ----- Southeastern Section ------

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein ----- I I Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. I 25.24 66.5 2,360 53.2 99 9.06 10.49 1 I 29.48 72.7 2,500 59.1 101 10.94 12.00 2 I 27.94 69.7 2,210 60 0 100 9.12 9.89 3

37 TABLE IV.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF WINTER

Southeastern Section-Continued

SovRcE LAB. VARIETY

__1~---T-o_w_n ______s_e_n_d_e_r ____, 1

4 c 521 Good Thunder R. L. Houk Turkey Red 5 c 626 Rochester P. C. Riegel Turkey Red 6 c 638 Rochester Mayowood Farm 7 c 640 Stockton P. D. Leighton Hard winter 8 c 528 Kasota J. Q. Adams Turkey Red 9 ' c 566 Le Sueur H. J. Doherty Turkey Red 10 c 625 Le Sueur D. W. Burns Turkey Red 11 c 629 Le Sueur Jas. Ronayne Turkey Red 12 c 5691 Le Sueur Jos. Meyer Hard red winter 13 c 568* Le Sueur Jos. Meyer "Red Cross" (Soft red winter) 14 c 522 Belleplaine W. J. Sharkey Turkey Red 15 c 527 Farmington Farmer Farm ------

Central Section

16 c 524 St. Peter C. P. Lomis 17 c 594 Chaska L. Fetzner Bearded winter 18 c 570 Hutchinson Frank Uherka Bearded fife 19 c 529 Cokato John Fagerlund Turkey Red 20 c 571 South Haven Hugo Nelson 21 c 532 Kimball And. Henrikson 22 c 523 Paynesville Robt. Weber Turkey Red

·--- --

Western Section

23 c 687 Alexandria S. A. Erickson Turkey Red 24 c 628 Kragness 0. E. Tangen Turkey Red

------···-'-====-=··-~~~~=-=-=·=---'-'·=·-·=·-======38 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913-Continued

Southeastern Section-Continued

------~-

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE 1,000 TOTAL PROTEIN KERNELS FLOUR Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEAT Volume Used Score Protein

Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 25.50 70.8 2,200 57.9 99 9.12 10.77 4 25.98 69.0 2,310 59.4 99 10.75 11.63 5 30.18 71.5 2,400 60.6 97 10.03 11.12 6 28.08 70.6 2,530 56.8 102 10.43 11.34 7 ! 26.80 70.0 2,320 54.4 99 8.32 9.29 8 I 25.60 67.6 2,390 55.6 98 8.69 10.17 9 29.80 70.1 2,220 59.7 100 9.55 10.63 10

28.82 I 71.7 2,280 60.0 97 10.03 10.74 1 1

28.20 69.7 2,440 52.4 I 98 9.04 10.17 12 I 31.84 68.8 2,050 52.4 I 97 9.23 9.86 13

25.20 70.6 I 2,140 57.6 97 10.35 10.60 14 I 28.30 69.6 2,450 55.0 98 10.26 11.40 15 I -·

Central Section

26.30 69.7 2,380 55.9 95 9.92 10.26 16 27.60 68.5 2,400 55.3 100 9.92 10.86 17 25.20 68.1 2,410 55.6 99 9.31 10.40 18 27.60 68.2 2,420 54.4 98 9.06 9.69 19 26.40 69.7 2,460 53.5 97 9.46 11.06 20 26.70 69.0 2,300 55.9 99 9.95 10.32 21 24.40 68.5 2,090 57.4 98 9.06 9.52 22 ·_--_------·==--=-==-=c'===="·'=·-=-=--=-

, Western Section

------·----·-·· ------··---- 27.20 67.8 2,400 60.0 102 9.95 11.51 23 26.66 71.1 2,380 60.3 99 10.55 11.40 24 . -·· -----=--=-=====-=-··--=------'-- 39 TABLE IV.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF WINTER

Northwestern Section

SOURCE LAB. ·------VARIETY No. Town Sender I -1 --1 ------25 c 530 Warren Johnson Bros. · Turkey Red I 26 c 661 Warren M. L. Warner Turkey 27 c 673* Warren I H. L. Palmer Beardless I Northern Section

281 c 5251 Park Rapids C. W. Jackson

Eastern Section

29 c 526 Cambridge Herman Steinbring 30 c 567 Pine City Dorr Bros. Turkey Red 31 c 616 Ogilvie C. A. Johnson Turkey Red

*Omitted from average.

40 WHEAT SAMPLES, CROP OF 1913-Continued

Northwestern Section ------

WT. PER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE TOTAL 1,000 PROTEIN FLOUR KERNELS Loaf Water Color Crude IN WHEAT Volume Usen Score Protein ------Grams Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 32.90 71.0 2,530 61.8 100 10.89 11.91 25 31.52 72.4 2,420 64.7 99 11.40 12.40 26 34.12 71.2 1,960 56.2 99 12.20 13.82 27

------Northern Section

------~- _I 2,350 58.5 97 30.3~ __ 1__ 8.49. ___9_.5_2_J ~8 ·--~= Eastern Section ------·--- 28.28 70.2 2,410 57.1 99 8.55 9.23 29 30.50 71.1 2,460 58.2 98 11.54 12.83 30 33.80 71.7 2,500 61.2 99 12.28 12.85 31 ·------

41 42 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

Table V presents the average of the results of tests of spring and winter wheats, but does not show properly the comparative quality of the two types. To do so correctly it was necessary to compare only those samples which were grown under similar conditions in the same localities. Table VII makes such a comparison. It will be observed that the winter wheats of the crop of 1912 were generally inferior in quality to the spring wheat samples grown in the same localities so far as protein content and baking strength were concerned. In certain in­ stances the differences were not great. This was particularly true when the spring wheat was poor in quality, as in case of the samples from Le Sueur, Glencoe, Hutchinson, Alexandria, and Pine City. The Minnesota-grown winter wheat samples were lower in average protein content and poorer in general quality than many samples of the same type examined by the author which were grown in sections of the southwestern states. For example, samples from central Kansas have been analyzed which contained from 14 to 15 per cent of crude protein and were correspondingly high in baking quality. It is evident, there­ fore, that Turkey type wheat grown in a more northern section is not necessarily of high quality, but that rainfall, humidity, and other cli­ matic factors are of more importance than latitude. The winter wheat samples of the 1913 crop tested were decidedly superior to those of the preceding season. Of samples grown by the same farmer at Ogilvie, the Turkey Red winter wheat was actually superior in every respect to the Minnesota No. 169. In other instances the dif­ ferences between the spring and winter wheats were not so great as in the 1912 crop samples. The average quality of the winter wheat was inferior, however, and it is therefore not reasonable to expect that it will be regarded by millers as of the o,ame value as spring wheat of the best varieties. The dates of seeding and harvesting the spring and winter wheats in the several sections of the State, as reported by a number of farmers who cooperated in this investigation, are shown in Table VI. TABLE V.-AVERAGES OF THE RESl:LTS OF TESTS OF WHEAT SA~IPLES GROWN IN THE SEVERA_r.J3EC12_0NS OF THE STA_'fE. CROPS 0]!_}9_!_1. 1912, AND 1913

Spring Wheat

TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR c RUDE SECTION Nt:MBEH WT. PER ------TOTAL PR OTEIN AND OF 1,000 Loaf Crude FLOUR Water Color IN CROP SAMPLEO' KERNELS Vol- Used Score Pro- ume tein w HEAT I ------Grams Per ct. Cc. iPer ct. Per ct. p er ct. Southeastern 1911 31 24.58 70.9 2,541 I 55.5 99.4 12.10 13.33

1912 18 23.49 70.4 2,385 58.3 97.8 10.55 1 1.73

1913 7 27.05 71.8 2,497 60.5 100.3 10.54 11.78 ------Southwestern 1911 20 22.54 70.2 2,617 55.9 98.7 12.88 14.06

1912 16 23.33 70.4 2,484 58.2 97.6 11.55 1 2.78

1913 3 25.92 72.4 2,500 60.3 98.0 11.12 1 2.20 ------Central 1911 24 22.42 69.6 2,564 54.5 99.2 11.94 13.14

1912 23 24.07 69.3 2,373 58.5 97.0 10.58 11.76

1913 16 26.94 72.2 2,502 60.8 98.3 11.16 1 2.24 ,_------Western 1911 18 20.11 65.5 2,491 56.7 95.2 11.69 1 2.97

1912 23 26.08 69.9 2,434 57.7 97.5 11.33 1 2.46

1913 33 26.67 71.3 2,532 59.6 98.3 11.85 13.04 ------Northwestern 1911 4 22.66 69.7 2,468 57.4 99.0 10.97 12.11

1912 17 26.58 69.1 2,528 58.4 98.5 12.04 1 2.90

1913 16 31.02 72.4 2,526 61.1 I 99.4 11.75 1 2.87 __I __ "'>' - --

Eastern 1911 I

1912 8 29.03 69.9 2,476 60.6 97.5 11.18 12.65

1913 7 30.86 70.8 2,534 58.6 99.9 10.80 1 2.09 ------State 1911 97 22.71 69.3 2,545 55.6 98.4 12.09 13.32

1912 106 25.16 69.9 2,435 58.4 97.6111.15 12.31 1913 82 28.03 71.8 2,521 60.2 98.8 11.47 12.63

------43 TABLE V.-AVERAGES OF THE RESULTS OF TESTS OF WHEAT SAMPLES GROWN IN THE SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE STATE, CROPS OF 1911, 1912, AND 1913-Continued

Winter Wheat ------·------·- ----

!TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE SECTION Ii NUMBER WT. PER .TOTAL PROTEIN AND ! OF 1,000 I ater I Color Crude IN CROP KERNELS FLOUR I Loaf w ISAMPLES Vol- u sed Score Pr.0- WHEAT ume tem

Grams Peret. I Cc. Perct. Peret. Per ct. Southeastern 1912 12 25.97 68.2 12,209 5 3.2 97.6 9.59 10.84

1913 14 27.87 70.3 12,345 5 7.3 98.9 9.70 10.73

Southwestern 19121 9 25.10 69.4 12,304 54.4 97. 7 10.47 11.83 19131 I __I__

1 Central 1912 12 28.73 69.4 12,160 5•. , "·' I '·'' ] 10." 1913 7 26.31 68.8 2,351 55.4 98.6 9.53 I 10.30 -i--i- Western 1912 4 30.40 69.7 2,088 54.8 I 96.8 8.96 10.13 I 1913 2 26.93 69.4 2,390 ~1100.56 10.25 ~

Northwestern 1912 3 28.87 68.5 2,093 55.4 ![ 97.3 9.63110.90 1913 2 32.21 71.7 2,475 6 3.2 I 99.5 11.19 12.15

1 ~ -i--1- Eastern 1912 6 29.78 68.6 2,0971 55.6 . 98.0 8.70 9.95 1913 3 30.86 71.0 2,4571 58.81 98.7 10.79 11.64

State 1912 47 27.64 68.9 2,184 ~:~--;:1~5 1913 29 28.00 69.9 2,378 51.8 I 98.9 9.881 10.84 ... . -- --

44 TABLE Vl.-AVERAGE DATES OF SEEDING AND HARVESTING THE SPRING AND WINTER WHEAT SAMPLES STUDIED

Spring Wheat

I CROP OF 1912 CROP OF 1913 I I I ! Seeding Harvesting Seeding Harvesting ------SECTION INum- Num-1 Num- Num- I her Aver- Aver- her Aver- her Aver- age age Re- Re- age I Re- ~;' age P.ort- Date P.ort- Date port- Date port- Date I mg I mg ing ing I Southeastern 9 !Apr. 8 9 1Aug. 7 4 Apr. 7 4 July 25

Southwestern 9 IApr. 2 8 IJuly 30 3 Mar. 30 2 July 25 Central 12 Apr. 12 13 [Aug. 1 12 10 12 July 31 I [Apr. Western 19 IApr. 9 17 [Aug. 6 26 10 26 July 31 I Northwestern 12 (Apr. 17 11 [Aug. 12 9 i'P'Apr. 18 9 !Aug. 12 I --- Winter Wheat

1911 I 1912 1912 1913 Southeastern 11 Sept. 9 9 ]July 16 13 Sept. 9 12 July 13 I Southwestern 7 Sept. 6 7 [July 1.5 I Central 12 Sept. 4 9 July 16 5 Sept. 11 5 I July 1 7 Western 4 Sept. 1 4 :July 25 1 1 July 25 1 I ISept. I Northwestern 2 Aug. 27 3 July 24 2 Sept. 9 2 July 21

Northern 1 Sept. 5 1 July 30 I 1 !Aug. 28 1 July 15 Eastern 3 Sept. 9 3 July 19 3 ISept. 4 2 July 20 I

45 TABLE VIL-RESULTS OF TESTS OF SPRING AND \VINTER \"iHEAT SAMPLES

Crop of 19r2 ------,_

\"iEIGHT PER SOURCE TOTAL FLOUR 1,000 KERNELS

------County Town Spring Winter Spring Winter Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Grams Grams Per ct. Per ct. Le Sueur Le Sueur 22.25 27.09 69.3 68.6 Jackson Jackson 21.00 23.16 72.0 68.3 Lyon Marshall 21.92 27.80 70.2 72.0 Nicollet St. Peter 24.54 28.80 69.5 70.3 Carver Cologne 24.30 32.38 71.9 71.3 McLeod Glencoe 21.75 26.25 70.8 72.1 McLeod Hutchinson 26.24 26.10 70.6 69.0 Wright Cokato 22.45 27.52 67.6 69.2 Ramsey St. Paul 30.42 30.75 69.1 69.9 Stearns Paynesville 18.35 30.14 61.3 66.2 Douglas Alexandria 27.84 30.78 70.2 69.3 Ottertail Perham 26.50 29.34 68.9 71.0 Polk Eldred 23.10 26.20 68.8 68.0 Polk Crookston 28.00 28.90 71.8 70.6 Pine Pine City 26.25 26.18 69.3 70.1 Pine Hinckley 28.56 34.10 71.3 71.2 Average, 1912 crop 24.59 28.47 69.5 69.8

Crop of I9I3

Le Sueur Le Sueur 26.42 28.82 73.0 71.7 Wright Cokato 29.64 27.60 73.8 68.2 Kanabec Ogilvie 31.60 33.80 71.6 71.7 Douglas Alexandria 28.36 27.20 72.9 67.8

Clay Kragness 29.58 26.66 72.9 71.1

Marshall I Warren 35.24 32.21 72.4 71.7 Average, 1913 crop 30.14 29.38 72.8 70.8 ======-=-=-=--=--=------=--='----=--=------=-----c-_-_-_-=-----=------46 GROWN IN THE SAME LOCALITIES, CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913

Crop of r9r2

TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOl:R CRUDE PROTEIN I I Loaf Volume Water Used Color Score Crude Protein IN WHEAT

Spring I Winter Spring Winter Spring I Winter ' Spring I Winter Spring IWinter Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat ~ ~ Per ct. Per ct. ------Per ct. Per ct. I Per ct. Per c~ I 2,200 2,197 58.8 51.5 99 94 9.58 9.3511 10:37 10.32

2,600 2,060 61.5 I 52.4 98 96 12.03 9.80 13.11 10.51

2,405 2,460 57.2 I 57.4 97 101 11.49 10.66 12.63 11.54 I 2,480 2,130 60.6 54.6 96 99 I 10 66 8.58 11.86 9.87 2,480 2,240 59.4 54.1 96 101 10.60 10.03 11.46 11.17 2,320 2,220 58.8 57.9 99 98 10.66 10.37 11.46 11.51 2,440 2,400 59.7 .57.9 99 98 9.69 9.46 10.37 10.77 58.5 53.7 10.09 8.81 10.09 2,490 2,197 96 98 i 11.40

2,460 2,010 59.4 58.5 96 97 12.08 I 8.61 12.88 10.26

2,400 1,780 56.5 53.2 98 100 10.661 7.66 11.97 9.35

2,100 2,063 56.8 53.4 I 99 96 10.49 8.83 11.37 9.94 2,420 2,160 56.2 58.8 99 98 10.15 9.35 11.23 10.72

2,540 2,220 59.7 53.8 98 98 ! 12.88 9.98 13.11 I 10.55 I 2,540 2,260 57.6 59.4 99 99 112.43 10.94 14.14 12.77 2,280 1,950 59.1 55.0 99 I 96 9.12 8.95 11.57 10.26

2,610 2,080 ~~-9_9_1_9_9_1~~1~~ 2,423 2,152 59.0 55.7 97.9 I 98.0 110.93 9.44112.03 I 10.68

Crop of I9I3

I I 2,410 2,280 62.41 60.0 100 97 10.72 10.03 I 12.00 I 10.74 I I ! 2,455 2,420 59.7 ! 54.4 99 98 10.51 9.06 11.83 9.69 I 2,380 2,500 57.4 ! 61.2 98 99 10.06 12.28 10.91 12.85 I I 2,500 2,400 62.6 60.0 i 100 I 102 10.83 9.95 11.74 i 11.51

2,450 2,380 62.6 60.3 98 99 12.17 10.55 13.05 ! 11.40 I I 2,605 2,475 61.2 63.3 103 100 12.04 1u4 13.31 I 12.15 ------,------,--- 2,467 2,409 -,-1-61.0 I 59.9 99.7 99.2 I 1i.05 10.50 , 12.14 : 1u9 ---- 47 48 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

BEARDED SPRING OR VELVET CHAFF WHEAT

The relative quality of bearded spring or velvet chaff wheat has been studied in this laboratory during the past three seasons. As stated in an earlier paragraph the term velvet chaff is a misnomer, since most of the varieties included in this group do not have a velvety chaff or pubescent glumes. The term has been used very loosely, and at times in the commercial markets of the Northwest any spring wheat which apparently did not resemble the old and well-known varieties would be classed as velvet chaff. The group thus came to include at first a number of varieties which were of inferior quality. The exact origin of the strain of velvet chaff which is most ex­ tensively grown is not known. The A. H. Berry Seed Company, of Clarinda, Iowa, sold wheat under this name to farmers in Renville County several years ago, which was subsequently widely distributed. While this firm could not give the .Pedigree of the variety, the writer is of the opinion that it was probably a selection of Early Java, a spring wheat grown in Iowa. Another bearded spring wheat was dis­ tributed by this Station in 1906 and 1907 under the name of Minnesota No. 188. This was the increase of Preston wheat, a hybrid variety produced at the Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, Canada, by cross­ ing \Vhite Fife on Ladoga. It is believed, however, that the increase of this strain constitutes but a small proportion of the velvet chaff or bearded spring wheat produced in this State. The bearded varieties have responded to variations in environ­ ment just as the bluestem and other varieties have. In Bulletin 131, page 34, attention is called to the range of from 10.55 to 16.02 per cent in the crude-protein content of velvet chaff samples of the 1911 crop which were tested. In this instance the flour from the samples lowest in protein yielded a loaf of but 2,410 cubic centimeters in volume, while that from the high-protein wheat produced a loaf of 2,690 cubic centi­ meters in volume. Table VIII shows the results of tests of non-bearded spring wheats of the crops of 1911, 1912, and 1913 in comparison with the bearded wheats raised in the same localities during the same seasons. It was .beJieved that such a comparison would show in the fairest possible manner the relative qualities of the two types. By comparing only those samples which had been grown in the same locality, and in cer­ tain instances on the same farm, the variation due to environment would be reduced to a minimum. The non-bearded group included bluestem, fife, and Marquis wheat, although wherever a comparison with the latter is made, attention is called to the fact in a footnote. The averages of the tests of samples of the 1911 and 1912 crops show CROPS OF 1912 AND 1913 49 that the bearded wheats were slightly inferior to the non-bearded in percentage of protein and flour strength. The difference was not great, however, and in certain instances the bearded wheat samples were actually superior in baking quality. The same remarks apply with respect to the yield of total flour from samples of the 1911 and 1913 crops. The bearded wheats of the crop of 1912 gave a higher av­ erage yield of flour. The velvet chaff or bearded spring samples of the 1913 crop showed some improvement over those of the two pre­ ceding years, in four cases out of nine being actually superior in baking strength to the bluestem samples with which they were compared, in four instances inferior, and in one case, viz., the several samples from Montevideo, there was scarcely any difference between the averages of the two groups. In general, the bearded varieties of the three crops have not been found markedly inferior to the fife and bluestem wl1eats when pro­ duced under the same conditions. The non-bearded varieties have given somewhat higher average yields of flour, and in the majority of instances slightly larger loaf volumes. The differences are neither great nor always in favor of the non-bearded types. The bearded wheats are deceptive in a sense, in that they do not give the high yields of flour that would be inferred from their relatively high weight per bushel. Numerous instances have been observed in which the bearded wheat sample weighed about 2 or 3 pounds per bushel more than the bluestem sample with which it was compared, and yet did not yield a higher percentage of flour. It is evident, therefore, that the weight per bushel is not an index of milling value, and that difficulties may arise in estimating milling quality on this basis when bearded wheats are mixed with bluestem and similar varieties. With regard to the market grading of the bearded or velvet chaff wheats, attention is called to the fact that in numerous instances sam­ ples of this type were actually superior to the average of the other types. It would not be reasonable to discriminate against the bearded wheats as a whole because certain samples have proved inferior. The individual lots should be treated on their merits, and when of poor quality should be graded accordingly, just as in grading other types of wheat. Many of the bluestem samples reported in the tables in this bulletin were decidedly poor in quality, due to the conditions under which they were grown. When provision is made in the grading of wheat for a separate classification of this inferior, soft spring wheat, the poorer bearded-wheat samples can be treated similarly and thus eliminated from the contract grades. TABLE VIII.-REsULTs OF TESTS oF NaN-BEARDED SPRING WHEAT SAMPLES BEARDED SPRING OR "VELVET CHAFF" \V°HEAT ------=------=------Crop of l9II

WEIGHT PER SOURCE TOTAL FLOUR 1,000 KERNELS

------Non- County Bearded Non- Town Bearded Bearded Bearded

Grams Grams Per ct. Per ct. Scott Shakopee 22.96 23.64 67.6 67.4 Faribault Blue Earth 23.62 29.54 72.1 71.2 Lac qui Parle Madison 19.90 20.10 66.5 65.4 Yellow Medicine Echo 19.89 20.68 69.9 68.9 Redwood Morgan 22.88 23.76 70.9 69.6

Brown New Ulm 22.82 25.51 71.7 71.6 Brown New Ulm 23.88 25.98 70.6 71.6 Pipestone Pipestone 21.88 20.26 73.0 68.7 Kandiyohi New London 20.68 16.40 69.3 65.8 Renville Sacred Heart 18.96 20.78 71.4 69.3 Sibley Henderson 23.52 24.52 70.7 72.0 Traverse Wheaton 22.52 18.80 66.0 63.7 Average, 1911 crop 21.96 22.49 69.1 68.8

Crop of l9l2

Rice Faribault 21.54 26.18 67.1 70.2 Rice Faribault 23.00 26.18 65.3 71.6 Dakota Farmington 16.56 20.48 69.4 69.9 Redwood Redwood Fallsl, 22.56 21.82 67.6 71.5 Yellow Medicine Clarkfield 22.66 22.56 69.9 69.2 Nicollet Traverse 28.69 23.50 72.0 73.4 Kandiyohi New London 21.40 22.10 66.2 69.1 Clay Moorhead 25.02 23.10 69.8 68.5 Average, 1912 crop 22.68 23.24 68.4 70.4

50 OF THE FIFE, BLUESTEM, AND MARQUIS VARIETIES COMPARED WITH SAMPLES GROWN IN THE SAME LOCALITIES

Crop of I9II

TESTS OF' MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE PROTEIN Loaf Volume Water Used Color Score Crude Protein IN WHEAT

--~--- 1------·------~--- Non- B d Non- B d Non- B d Non- B d Non- B d B ear d -ear d - B ear d -ear d - B ear d -ear d - B ear d -ear d - Beard- ear - ed e ed e ed e ed e ed ed I Cc. · Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Peret. 2,540 I 2,530 54.4 55.9 100 99 11.57 12.26 12.94 13.97 ' 2,460 ' 2,410 52.9 51.2 101 102 10.09 9.80 11.74 10.55 2,540 2,590 57.4 58.8 98 99 11.12 12.26 11.91 13.74 2,620 2,590 55.0 53.8 98 99 13.05 13.00 14.19 14.19 2,740 2,700 53.8 54.4 98 101 14.02 12.08 14.54 13.11 2,610 2,690 56.2 55.9 99 97 12.71 13.91 13.91 16.02 2,670 2,660 53.5 56.5 97 99 12.20 12.14 13.40 13.22 2,720 2,670 60.3 57.1 99 100 14.08 12.26 15.28 13.62 2,490 2,440 54.4 50.3 98 97 10.72 10.37 11.63 11.63

2,500 2,460 53.2 52.9 97 98 i 12.08 10.60 13.45 11,91 I I 2,640 ! 2,620 56.2 55.3 98 97 I 13.28 13.28 I 14.25 14.59 . I 2,580 I 2,410 ~~ 100 _9_5_1~~ 1 ~ 10.94 2,593 I 2,5641 54.9 I 54.4 98.6 98.6 I 12.12 11.77 I 13.26 13.12

Crop of r9r2 I 2,330 2,350 57.1 55.9 9.52 10.20 11.25 11.51 2,250 ' 2,200 57.9 55.9 :: I :: 10.20 9.52 11.51 11.34 2,290 I 2,280 58.8 54.1 95 96 10.32 9.80 11.86 11.34 2,510 ! 2,490 59.1 58.8 97 96 11.57 11.69 13.40 12.94 I 2,440 I 2,380 59.7 55.3 96 98 1i.23 9.8o 12.08 11.34 ! 2,460 2,480 58.4 57.9 98 I 99 10.58 1i.91 1i.80 12.31 1 1

2,380 I 2,300 57.4 I 57.6 98 92 I 10.55 9.98 12.71 10.94

2,460 1· 2,510 59.4 57.4 97 II 97 110.89110.72 11.97 12.48 2.390z:m--1Ss-.J156.6 ~1%.Si1M1!1M3112.01 11.78 51 TABLE VIII.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF NON-BEARDED SPRING WHEAT SAMPLES SPRING OR "VELVET CHAFF" WHEAT SAMPLES

======-"-==~------=====cc=====-= Crop of I9I3

WEIGHT PER SOURCE TOTAL FLOUR 1,000 KERNELS

______, ------·--~--- Non­ Non­ County Town Bearded Bearded Bearded Bearded

Grams Grams Per ct. Per ct. Rice Faribault 25.84 24.44 72.8 72.4 Brown New Ulm 27.20 25.88 73.1 71.1 Renville Bird Island 22.80 25.20 69.5 73.9 Wright Cokato 29.96* 29.32 74.6 73.0 Ramsey University Farm 32.92 34.38 69.9 68.6 Pine Hinckley 25.40 24.40 72.2 71.5

Chippewa Montevideo 28.06t 26.09t 70.9 70.8 Norman Halstad 27.12 29.64 70.5 72.1 Polk Crookston 30.84 31.48 71.5 69.2 Average, 1913 Crop 27.78 27.87 71.7 71.2 Average, 1911, 1912, and 1913 23.97 24.37 70.1 70.0

*Marquis wheat. tAverage of 7 bluestem and Marquis samples. tAverage of 4 velvet chaff samples.

52 uF THE FIFE, Bu:EsTEM, AND MARQi.:Is V ARIETIEs COMPARED WrTH BEARDED GROWN IN THE SAME LocALITIEs-Co11ti11ued

Crop of I9I3

TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR CRUDE PROTEIN Loaf Volume Water Used Color Score Crude Protein IN WHEAT

Nond- I Beard- BNond- ! Beard- I BNond- ~eard- BNond- Beard-I BNond- Beard- Bear - , d ear - d ear - 1 ear - d ~ar - d ;:. : :c-. -i;~'~ L, -"'--" .p::~, -;~:, I P:d -;:"~ 2,550 2,580 I 60.9 59.4 , 101 100 10.20 11.12 11.29 12. 71 2,520 2,500 • 62.l 57.4 99 100 11.48 10.86 12.43 12.08 2,440 2,500 63.2 60.3 97 99 10.52 11.09 11.88 12.97 2,490 2,420 61.8 57.6 99 99 10.83 10.20 12.00 11.66 2,530 2,620 58.8 56.8 100 102 ' 10.29 11.60 11.17 12.91 2,580 2,540 61.5 60.3 98 100 11.26 10.83 12.68 13.02

2,543 2,547 58.7 57.1 97.9 98.5 I 12.13 11.95 13.51 13.15

2,540 2,500 61.5 59.1 99 100 I 12.20 1i.23 13.48 i 12.68 __:,500 2,620 1 ~,~-9_9_~1~~:_~1~~ 2,521 2,536 I 61.1 ! 58.4 ! 98.9 99.8 I 11.20 11.30 12.37 12. 74 2,ill 2.So3/----:si8f56.31~igs.-3-lll.41 W6j12.6612.74

53 54 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

MARQUIS WHEAT

Marquis wheat was made the subject of special study in this lab­ oratory during the past season, and the results of the study were pub­ lished jointly with the Division of Agronomy and Farm Management as Bulletin 137. Since this bulletin went to press two additional sets of samples were tested, Laboratory Nos. C 674 and C 675, Marquis and velvet chaff respectively, from John Henderson, Cokato, Wright County; and Laboratory Nos. C 689 and C 690, bluestem and Marquis, grown by Henry Snyder, Warsaw, Rice County. The results of tests of the latter have been included in Table IX which gives the results of tests of fife and bluestem, and of Marquis wheat samples grown in the same localities during 1913. This table accordingly differs slightly from a similar table on page 14 of Bulletin 137. The Marquis wheat samples tested have been quite consistently superior to the bluestem wheats grown under similar conditions, with which they were compared. This was true even of samples grown in an environment not conducive to the production of wheat of the highest quality. The samples grown at Warsaw, Rice County (Laboratory Nos. C 689 and C 690), substantiate this statement. The bluestem sample yielded 70.7 per cent of total flour, the middlings flour contain­ ing 9.92 per cent crude protein and producing a loaf 2,380 cubic cen­ timeters in volume, while the Marquis sample yielded 71.2 per cent total flour and the middlings flour contained 11.17 per cent crude pro­ tein and produced a loaf 2,500 cubic centimeters in volume. It there­ fore appears reasonable to conclude that so far as can be judged from a single year's tests, and while there are exceptions t!=> the general rule, Marquis wheat is generally superior to the bearded or velvet chaff wheats and will command higher prices, both because it has usually proved slightly superior to the bluestem samples with which it was compared, while the bearded wheats were often slightly inferior, and also because of the millers' unfavorable opinion of the latter group.

TABLE IX.-AVERAGES OF THE RESULTS OF TESTS OF THE FIFE AND BLUESTEM SAMPLES, AND OF THE MARQUIS SAMPLES GROWN IN THE SAME LOCALITIES, CROP OF 1913 -· CRUDE NUMBER TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR TOTAL PROTEIN VARIETY OF FLOUR Loaf Water Color Crude IN SAMPLES Volume Used I Score Protein WHEAT Per ct. Cc. Pf'r ct. Per ct. Per ct. Fife and 10 71.10 2,521 59.0 99.6 11.20 bluestem I 12.10 Marquis 14 71.94 2,555 59.3 99.1 12.02 13.32 I I I ------CROPS OF 191'2 AND 1913 55

BEARDED BLUESTEM OR HUMPBACK WHEAT

Bearded Bluestem or Humpback wheat apparently originated on a farm in the vicinity of Kensington, Douglas County, Minnesota, and its culture has been principally confined to that section of the State. It was reported to have been selected from a field of bluestem wheat, and since the glumes bore long awns or beards, it was named Bearded Bluestem. Because of the peculiar humped or curved shape of the back of the kernel, it was dubbed "Humpback" wheat on the trading floor of the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce, and is now commonly known by that name to the of the State.. Soon after its appearance in the grain market it was found poor in baking qualities. This fact was so generally recognized that in 1911 the State Board of Grain Appeals ruled that it would not be graded better than No. 3. The tests of this variety made in this laboratory support the opinion commonly held in regard to it, that while it may, and frequently does, yield a high percentage of flour, the baking qual­ ity of the flour is very poor. It fails to rise properly during the fer­ mentation with yeast, and the resulting loaf is small and has inferior crumb texture. Table X shows the results of the tests of .a sample of this variety grown by Mr. Joseph Sauter at Morris, in comparison with bluestem wheat raised by him. The average results of tests of three samples of Humpback wheat submitted during the past season by the Duluth Board of Grain Appeals is also included in the same table. This shows that the volume of the loaf produced was very low for spring wheat and the color inferior to that of flour milled from bluestem wheat.

TABLE X.-RESULTS OF TESTS OF BEARDED BLUESTEM OR HUMPBACK WHEAT IN COMPARISON WITH BLUESTEM WHEAT

CRUDE VARIETY TESTS OF MIDDLINGS FLOUR I SAMPLE TOTAL i PROTEIN OR FLOUR Loaf- Wate; : Color NUMBER GRADE I Crude I IN Volume Used Score Protein WHEAT

Per ct. Cc. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. I c 623 Bluestem 70.6 2,630 63.2 99 12.00 13.05 c 624 Humpback 75.1 2,010 57.4 96 11.23 12.45 I * Humpback 73.l 2,003 54.7 96 12.03 13.39 I

*Average of three samples submitted by the Duluth Board of Grain Appeals. TABLE XL-RELATION BETWEEN THE PERCENTAGE OF CRUDE PROTEIN IN THE WHEAT AND IN THE FLOUR

WHEAT FLOUR NuMBER OF ------·- SAMPLES Minimum Maximum Average Average

Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 1911 3 fo.oi 11.00 10.77.. 9.75 12 11.01 12.00 11.65 10.60 ,... ' ~ - .... ' 23 12.01 13.00 12.48 11.31 i;;~4 30 13.01 14.00 13.52 12.32 20 14.01 15.00 14.35 13.10 9 15.01 16.02 15.56 13.81 1912 7 10.01 11.00 10.60 9.60 38 11.01 12.00 11.50 10.28 34 12.01 13.00 12.51 11.38 20 13.01 14.00 13.37 12.21 7 14.01 15.00 14.48 13.23 1913 5 10.01 11.00 10.77 9.93 18 11.01 12.00 11.72 10.70 35 12.01 13.00 12.59 11.34 22 13.01 14.00 13.50 12.21 2 14.01 15.00 14.70 13.31 2 15.01 16.00 15.59 14.14

56 CROPS OF 1.9.12 AND 1.913 57

,.. V I: 11

'· ·-- _L---r ,,.. A I'' I f\/ / N

i ! I I I I l-!-~_j_---l-~-l---l-~-l---l-~-1--+~-+-~!~-+--+l~-+--+~-f--/~11----+---i~-+---+--

, .~ I I• 1'•1 ! i I ~ - - 'J ! _/ I _) . r I - I i ' ..+--,lf"l/_\,-Aff\.o!-7+1 'V_+-i --+--!---+---+_j J\ ,_ j'l-J\~hA'v11; rv I 'V ! I . I 1913 L-l~-1--t--~,~-'---+---

Fig. 3. Percentage of crude protein in spring wheat, and flour produced from it, of the crops of 1911, 1912, and 1913. The mean protein content of the wheats of the three crops being 12.63 per cent, a heavy line has been drawn across the three curves at that point to show the relative proportion of the samples analyzed which contained more or less than 12.63 per cent. This shows graphically the differences in protein content among the three crops studied, as well as the variations in each crop. It is evident from this chart that the relation between the percentage of crude protein in the wheat and in flour produced from it is not at all uni­ form. There is, however, a general increase in the percentage of pro­ tein in the flour as that in the wheat increases. This is shown by Table XI in which is given the average percentage of protein in all samples of flour milled from wheat samples which were arranged by groups accord­ ing to their protein content. The maximum and minimum limits in each group of wheat are shown in the second and third columns of the table, while the third column gives the average percentage of protein in the wheat samples of each group. The average ratios of protein in wheat to protein in flour were 1 :0.908, 1 :0.906, and 1 :0.908 for the crops of 1911, 1912, and 1913 respectively. 58 MINNESOTA WHEAT INVESTIGATIONS

SUMMARY

The average quality of the spring wheat samples of the crop of 1912 was inferior to that of the crop of 1911 so far as protein content and baking strength were concerned. The kernels were plumper, how­ ever, and yielded higher percentages of flour. The samples of the 1912 crop grown in the northwestern section were generally superior in baking quality to those grown in the same section the preceding year, and in this regard averaged higher than those from the other sections of the State. The samples from the central section averaged lowest in baking quality, followed closely by those from the southeastern section. The average baking quality and protein content of the spring wheat samples of the crop of 1913 were about intermediate between those of the two preceding crops. The relative plumpness, accom­ panied in most instances by a relatively dense endosperm, resulted in a higher average yield of total flour. The difference in the average baking quality of the flours milled from wheats obtained from the several sections of the State was slight. The samples grown in the· southwestern section were poorest in that regard, while those from the western, northwestern, and eastern sections averaged about the same. The winter wheat samples of the crops of 1912 and 1913 were in­ ferior in baking quality to the spring wheats grown under the same conditions in almost every instance. The difference was less in the crop of 1913 than in that of 1912. Many of the winter wheat samples were decidedly poor in quality, while others were equal to the average of the hard spring wheats. The variations in the composition and quality of wheat of the same varieties and types grown in different seasons, or in different localities the same year, are attributable principally to varying climatic condi­ tions rather than to the fertility of the soil. The bearded spring or velvet chaff wheat samples tested were slightly inferior on the average to the bluestem samples with which they were compared, so far as baking strength was concerned. In many instances individual samples were superior to the average of the bluestem samples. On the other hand, the Marquis wheat samples were, in most instances, superior to the bluestem samples, and, it is therefore concluded, to the bearded spring wheats as well. Instances, however, have been noted where these relations did not prevail. Bearded Bluestem or Humpback wheat was decidedly inferior to wheat of the other types grown in this State, and in no instance of good baking quality.