566 EXPEKIMENT STATION BECORD. 



"The carbon bisulpliid is very effective in destroying insect life, but it is 

 evident tliat, if this material is to be used as a fuuiigant, all wheat or flour 

 must be removed from the mill before the fumigation is done." 



The author points out that precautions must also be exercised in the use of 

 the materials under consideration, owing to their poisonous properties. 



A preliminary note on the nutritive value of white and of standard bread, 

 L. Hill (Brit. Med. Jour,, 1911, No. 2627, pp. 1068, i()f).9).— White and so-called 

 "standard" bi"ead were compared in tests with rats (2 lots of 25 each) fed 

 exclusively on such breads or flour and water for 6 weeks. The total gain on 

 white flour was 114 gm. and on standard flour (i. e., flour containing sufficient 

 germ and bran products to make it represent 80 per cent of the original wheat 

 berry) 278 gm. Ten of the rats fed white flour, originally included in the test, 

 died, as compared with 5 fed on the standard flour bread. 



The author states that he fed another lot on white flour plus an amount of 

 wheat germ about equal to that in standard flour and obtained results as good 

 as those with such flour. 



When pancreatic digestion tests were made the standard flour gave the 

 Adamkiewicz reaction for tryptophane earlier, " showing that this essential 

 amino acid is split off earlier, and therefore is probably better absorbed in the 

 intestine and utilized in the body." 



Tests in which 15 individuals chewed a weighed quantity of 2 sorts of flour 

 for 2 minutes did not show any differences in acidity. 



According to the author, " it seems clear that either our standard flours 

 contained something essential to growth which was not in our white flours, 

 or that tne white flours contained something detrimental — for example, 

 improvers. . . . 



" It is highly probable that the germ, the growing part of the wheat grain, 

 would contain amino acid groupings essential for growth, and possibly bodies 

 which activate the enzyms engaged in the digestion of the proteins of wheat. 

 Treatment of the white flour may have destroyed these bodies. . . . 



" It seems clear that children of the poor, who are largely fed on bread and 

 margarine or bread and jam, ought to have the standard and not the white 

 bread tested by us. How far the results are due to treatment of our white 

 flours by ' bleaching,' etc., we are not able to say, and we can not therefoi*e gen- 

 eralize that all white flours are worse than standard." 



Comparative nutritive value of white and standard bread, E. S. Edie and 

 G. C. E. Simpson (Brit. Med. Jour,, 1911, No. 2628, p. 1151).— From tests with 

 pigeons, which are briefly reported, the conclusion was reached that standard or 

 whole meal bread is superior to white bread. 



The results are discussed in connection with the work by L. Hill reported 

 above. 



Comparative nutritive value of white and standard bread, C. Watson 

 {B7-it. Med. Jour., 1911, No, 2628, p. 1151). — In a critical discussion of the paper 

 by L. Hill, noted above, the author states that in experiments which he carried 

 on with rats fed white and standard bread no appreciable differences could be 

 observed which could be attributed to the kind of bread. 



The bread supply of France, B. F. Yost (Daily Cons, and Trade Rpts. 

 [U. S.], 13 {1910), No. 1J,6, pp. 1132-1134) .—Statistical and other data are sum- 

 marized in this brief discussion of the subject. 



The formation of albuminoses in meat products, Maurel and Arnatjd 

 (Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. [Paris], 70 {1911), No. 16, pp. 709-7ii ) .—Analytical 

 studies of pates and sausage showed that such goods often contained albuminose 

 when fresh. This is probably in part at least derived from gelatin and is due 



