The Raymer enterprise., 1911-09-21
WHEAT ON DRY FARM
influence Of Combined Harvester
on Value Of Crop.
Results Obtained by Utah Experiment
Station Indicate That Machine
Does Not Affect Quality Of
Flour Produced.

This question has recently been
studied by the chemical department Of
the Utah experiment station. The In.
PRODUCTION Of the combined harvester
Into the dry farming operation Of the
lnter-mountain west has resulted In =
reduction of the cost Of operation on
The larger dry farms. The claim was
soon made by the millers Of certain
sections Of the state that wheat cut
with the harvester could not be con.
verted into flour Of good quality.
In studying this question. samples
of Turkey and Kofod wheat cut with
the harvester In 1909 and 1910. to-
yether with samples Of the same
wheat cut with the binder and stacked.
were obtained. The wheat was milled
In our experimental flour mill and the
yield Of bran. shorts and -four re-
corded The bran. shorts and hour
were submitted to chemical analysis
and the flour was made into bread un.
der standard conditions. Tho results
obtained are reported In bulletin No.
lib OF tho Utah experiment station
and indicate clearly that the combined
harvester does not have influence.
either unfavorable or favorable, upon
the milling. chemical or baking quail.
ties Of the fiour produced.
The yield OF -four obtained from the
Turkey variety cut with the harvester
In 1910 was 72.65 per cent. Of the
wheat while the yield of -four OBJ.
tained from the wheat cut with the
binder and stacked was 7277 per cent.
The yield Of -four obtained from the
kofod wheat cut with the haryestes in
1910 was 72.17 per cent. while tho
yield Of flour produced from the wheat
cut with the binder stacked was 72.12
per cent II Is thus readily seen that
with respect to the yield of the nour
the method Of harvesting has no In.
auence whatever. 1t is interesting to
note, however. that greater per cent.
OF high grade -four may be obtained
from the Turkey variety Of wheat.
About eighty per cent. Of the flour pro-
duced from the Turkey wheat would
be classed as a high grade flour. while
only about forty per cent. Of the nour
produced from the Kofod would be
classed as high grade.
In case Of the chemical composition
Of the -four obtained, no conclusion
can be safely drawn regarding the In.
fluence Of the harvester. In case Of
the Turkey variety Of wheat. the flour
produced from the wheat which had
been stacked is slightly higher than
that OF the flour produced from wheat
cut with harvester. In case OF the
Kofod variety Of wheat, however. this
is not true. The Kofod wheat cut
with the harvester In 1910 has slight
ly lower protein content than the
same wheat cut the same year with
the binder and stacked. However, the
wheat cut with the harvester in 1909
has higher protein content than that
cut with the binder and stacked. The
chemical composition OF the bran and
shorts indicate only that these mill
products are rich In protein and would
probably be good cattle feed.
The volume OF the loaf produced
from the Turkey variety cut with the
harvester was 1866 &C. and 1853 &C.
In 1909 and 1910. respectively, while
the volume Of loaf Of the bread made
from the -four produced from the Tur-
key which has been cut with the
binder and stacked was 1867 &C. In
case OF the Kofod variety. these nun.
bers become 1876 &C. and 1850 &C..
respectively. for 1909 and 1910, and
1894 &C. for the wheat which had
been stacked. The -four was all treat.
ed under uniform standard conditions
and II Is thus seen that II any infiu.
ence can be ascribed to the harvester
1t all II must be favorable influence.
While the investigation did not
show any influence Of the harvester
on the bread-making value Of the -four
produced. II did demonstrate the value
Of Turkey Red wheat for -four produc-
ton. The Turkey Red wheat produces
uniform flour Of high grade which
has the strength to produce a loaf Of
bread OF good volume. The -four pro.
duced from new Turkey Red wheat
seemed to make as good bread as
-four produced from old Turkey Red
wheat. while the -four produced from
new Kofod wheat produced loaf Of
bread very much inferior In quality
and yet the year.old Kofod wheat
produced a good -four. Actual photo
graphs Of the bread made are given in
the original publication.
The millers Of the inter.mountain
west still insist that the harvester has
a detrimental influence on the value
Of the wheat. This claim may be justi
aed when the wheat Is stored In
larger quantities as was done with the
wheat cut with the header or binder
and stacked. II Is quite probable that
wheat cut with the harvester must re
ceive different storage treatment. II
may be that wheat cut with the har
ycster and stored In lots Of 10000
bushels will not produce good -four
,ut this cannot be charged against