The Ordway new era., 1911-09-22
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.

By DR.. ROBERT STEWART. Chemical
| Laboratory. Utah Experiment Station.
| 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
tnter-mountain west has resulted in a
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-
gether with samples OF the same
wheat cut with the binder and stacked.
were obtained. The wheat was milled
In our experimental -four mill and the
yield OF bran. shorts and flour re-
corded The bran. shorts and flour
were submitted to chemical analysis
anG the -four was made into bread un-
der standard conditions. The results
obtained are reported in bulletin No.
lib Of the 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 flour produced
The yield OF -four obtained from the
Turkey variety cut with the harvester
In 1910 was 1866 per cent. Of the
wheat while the yield Of flour OBJ
tained from the wheat cut with the
binder and stacked was 72.77 per cent.
The yield Of -four obtained from the
kofod wheat cut with the harvester In
1910 was 72.l7 per cent. while the
yield OF flour produced from the wheat
cut with the binder stacked was 72 IL
per cent. 1t Is thus readily seen that
with respect to the yield OF the flour
the method Of harvesting has no In
duence whatever. 1t Is interesting to
note. however. that n greater per cent.
Of high grade -four may be obtained
from the Turkey variety OF wheat.
About eighty per cent. OF the -four pro-
duced from the Turkey wheat would
be classcd as high grade -four. while
only about forty per cent. of the flour
produced from the kofod would be
classcd as high grade.
IN case OF the chemical composition
Of the flour obtained. no conclusion
can be safely drawn regarding the in
lucnce OF the harvester. In case of
the Turkey variety OF wheat. the -four
produced from the wheat which had
been stacked is slightly higher than
hat OF the -four produced from wheat
tst, L., xxf kn
Kofod variety OF wheat. however. this
is not true. The Kofod wheat cut
with the harvester in 1910 has n slight.
ly lower protein conten, than the
same wheat cut the same year with
he binder and stacked. However. the
wheat cut with the harvester In 1909
has n higher protein content than that
ut with the binder and stacked. The
hemical 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
rom the Turkey variety cut with the
harvester was .G66 &C. and l.G53 &C.
N 1909 and 1910. respectively. while
the volume OF loaf OF the bread made
rom the flour produced from the Tur.
key which has been cut with the
binder and stacked was .5G' &C. In
ase of the Kofod variety. these mum.
hcrs become 1876 &C. and 1850 &C.
respectively. for 1909 and 1910. and
1894 &C. for the wheat which had
been stacked. Tn" -four was all trca'.
I'd under uniform standard conditions
and Il Is thus seen that II any infiu-
ruce can be asrrib"d TO the harvester
A. all II must be a favorable influence.
While the Investigation did not
show any influence Of the harvester
m the bread making value of the -four
produced. It did demonstrate the value
,f Turkey Red wheat FOR -four produc.
ION. The Turkey Red wheat produces
, uniform Nour Of high grade which
las the strength to produce loaf OF
bread OF good volume. The -four pro
IIced from new Turkey Rcd wheat
-ccmed to make as good bread as
cuur produced from old Turkey Red
wheat. while the -four produced from
ncw Kofod wheat produced n loaf OF
bread very much inferior in quality
md yet the arold kofod wheat
produccd n good -four. Actual photo
,raphs of the bread made are given In
We original publication.
The millcrs OF the in'ermounta'n
NCst still insist that the harvester has
detrimental, influence on the value
II the wheat This claim may be jusi!-
Ncd when the wheat il stored in
arger quantities ~ was done with the
heat cut with the hend"r or binder
md stacked. It is Quit" probable that
Wheat cut with the harvester must re
Give different storage treatment. II
may be that wheat cut with tho hnr-
,Cster and stored in lots OF 10000
bushels will not produce good -four.