460 EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 



liiit Mhont the sauu> as for llic yield for Fife and I'.lucstcin. It ro(|iiircil 1 lni. 

 and iis lbs. [of tho duriini \vli(>at (cstcdl 1o i)rodiKv a barrel of IJoiir." 



Tbo data obtained in tlie baking' tests at the station are briefly reported. 

 SaniitJes of dunnu llonr were sent (o bonsewives for testinjr. and Ibe rei"orts 

 received are quoted. 



" From the data thus far gathered with regard to the growing of durum 

 wheat, the milling of the same, and its value for bread produotion, we may 

 draw the following conclusions: 



•• It is claimed by the farmers that durum wheat, in the western part of the 

 State, yields nmcli better than otn* bard wheats for tlie same section of the 

 State, [and that it | is much more disease resistant than other wheats generally 

 grown in the State. 



" Durum wheat produces as much straight flour as either Fife or Bluestem in 

 tho experiments at the experiment station. The number of bushels required 

 to produce a barrel of flour is no greater than the average for other wheats. 



" It is claimed that it takes more power to grind durum than for the Fife or 

 Uluestem. It has been sliown that processes of tempering durum may have a 

 marked etTect on the flour-producing quality of the wheat. 



"Bread from durum flour is e(iual to that produced from the other flours as 

 found on the market. The bread is not so white as that from the average Fife 

 or Bluestem flour, having more of a creamy appearance. The consensus of 

 opinion is that the flavor of the bread is equal, if not superior, to that produced 

 from the best commercial flours, being slightly sweeter and having a more luitty 

 liavor. The bread from durum flour holds the moisture better than that 

 ])i-oduced from commercial flours." 



Bleaching flour, H. Rousset (Rev. Gen. Chim., 12 [1909), No. 19, pp. S08- 

 SKi flys. 7). — A summary and digest of data. 



Milling and baking' tests, F. D. Gardner (Roller Mill, 28 (1909), No. 5, pp. 

 20I-20.'f). — Tests were carried on under the auspices of tlie Pennsylvania Sta- 

 tion with Dawson Golden Chaff, Belial)le, and Fulcaster wheats. Of these 

 Dawson Golden Chaff has given a larger yield than the other varieties, accord- 

 ing to the tests summarized. According to the analytical data quoted, Ful- 

 caster contained a fourth to a fifth more protein than Dawson Golden Chaff. 



" Bushel for bushel, Dawson Golden Chaff and Fulcaster give practically the 

 same yield of flour. The flour of Fulcaster is highest in both protein and 

 gluten. Its gluten is also relatively high in gliadin. 



" The dough from Fulcaster is fairly tough and elastic : that from Dawson 

 Golden Chaff very short and brittle. From equal amounts of flour, Fulcaster 

 makes a loaf of larger volume and one that is lighter and of better texture. 

 In appearance and palatability the consumers reported in favor of Fulcaster. 



" This investigation, incomplete as it is, shows that the flour from the soft 

 white wheat is not efjual to that from the red wheat when made into ordinary 

 bread, but . . . [doubtless most will agree] that this does not settle the whole 

 (piestion. Flour is extensively used for purposes other than bread making, and 

 it is generally conceded that for pastry, crackers, and other purposes the flour 

 from our soft winter wheats is equally good if not superior to that of the 

 northwestern spring wheats. . . . 



"After all is done and said there is but little difference in the nutritive value 

 of flour from different A^arieties of wheat. Practically the only difference is 

 the way in which their products please the eye or tickle the palate. We need to 

 study bread making to determine the best manner of using flour made fron» 

 our soft winter wheats." 



Relation between the extent of dough fermentation and starch degradation, 

 IM. P. Neumann and K. Mohs {Z<iifl)l. Aijr. ('hem., 38 (1909), No. 9. /;/». (iS3~ 



