The Pioche record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1908-1925, 1911-09-30
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
lnter-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, |
We're obtained. The wheat was milled |
In our experimental -four mill and the |
yield of bran. shorts and -four re-
corded The bran, shorts and flour
were submitted to chemical analysis
and the flour was made into bread I'M
! Ter standard conditions. The results
obtained are reported In bulletin No.
l13 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 -four produced.
The yield of -four obtained from the
Turkey variety cut with the harvester
In 1910 was 1856 per cent. of the
wheat while the yield of flour OBJ
tanned from the wheat cut with the
binder and stacked was 1877 per cent.
The yield of -four obtained from the
Kofod wheat cut with the harvester in
1910 was 72.17 per cent, while the
yield of -four produced from the wheat
cut with the binder stacked was 72.12
per cent. 1t is thus readily seen that
with respect to the yield of the flour
the method of harvesting has no in
flnence 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 -four pro-
duced from the Turkey wheat would
be classed as high grade -four, while
only about forty per cent. of the -four
produced from the Kofod would be
classed as high grade.
In case Of the chemical composition
of the flour obtained, no conclusion
can be safely drawn regarding the in
fuence 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
that of the -four 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 a 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 he good cattle feed.
The volume of the loaf produced
from the Turkey variety cut with the
harvester was 1866 &C. and 1863 &C.
in 1909 and 1910, respectively, while
the volume of loaf Of the bread made
from the flour produced from the Tur-
key which has been cut with the
binder and stacked was 1867 &C. In
case of the Kofod variety, these num-
bers become 1876 &C. and 1,450 &C.,
respectively, for 1909 and 1910, and
bn vuhn iol, -
been stacked. The flour was all treat
ed under uniform standard conditions
and 1t is thus seen that If any infiu-
ence can be ascribed to the harvester
: at all 1t must be favorable influence
While the investigation did not
show any influence of the harvester
on the bread-making value of the flour
produced, 1t did demonstrate the value
! Of Turkey Red wheat for -four produc-
ton. The Turkey Red wheat produces
uniform -four of high grade which
7 has the strength to produce 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 flour 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-mountafn
west still insist that the harvester has
| detrimental influence on the value
| Of the wheat. This claim may be justi-
| ned when the wheat is stored in
/ larger quantities as was done with the
: wheat cut with the header or binder
/ and stacked. 1t is quite probable that
wheat cut with the harvester must re-
ceive different storage treatment. 1t
!. may be that wheat cut with the har-
!. vester and stored In lots of 10000
: bushels wiR not produce good flour,
but this cannot be charged against
i he harvester, but is a special stor-
e age proposition which merits investi-