Seed Wheat. 21 



Some evidence exists that the flour actually produced from large plump grains is of a 

 better quality than that from small plump grains derived from the same plants, for one 

 thing, the gluten content of the flour from the large grains being higher. 



Fig. 25. Natural size photograph of seven Fig. 26. Natural size photograph of eight 

 large plump grains of a Purple Straw small plump grains of a Purple Straw 

 wheat, used in the comparative exami- . wheat, used in the comparative exami- 

 nation described in the text. These nation described in the text. These 

 were compared in " fodder value" with were compared in " fodder value" with 

 the eight small grains removed ft om the the seven large grains removed from the 

 same spikelets, and shown in Fig. 26. same spikelets, and shown in Fig. 25. 



We may supplement these observations on the relative fodder value of large plump grains 

 and small plump grains by saying that shrivelled wheat has a fodder value as chick-feed 

 about equal to that of plump wheat, the fodder value of the shrivelled wheat being reported 

 as the better in some instances. If now we add to this scientific evidence of the good 

 fodder value of shrivelled grains and of small plump grains the well-known fact that the 

 market price of "chick-wheat" is often only a little lower than that of good milling 

 wheat, we see how little ground there is for using wheat tailings as seed on the score of 

 so-called "economy." 



II. Large and Plump versus Small and Shrivelled Seed. 



The Row System. 



THE tendency of agriculture is such that it must lead to the wider and wider adoption 

 of the row system of experiment. The keynote of agricultural progress is the lessening 

 of the cost of production by a wider and wider use of machines. These machines 

 work in straight lines, at least theoretically, from which it follows that the drill-coulter 

 and its product, i.e. a row of plants, conies to represent the unit of agriculture. Each 

 crop is simply so many rows of plants. The row represents the crop reduced to its 

 lowest terms. All the properties of the crop exist in the single row, broadly speaking, 

 and, of course, with exceptions. The exceptions are, however, so few as to exert no 

 great influence on the general statement. 



Most experiments are an inquiry into the properties of a small but representative crop, 

 and owing to the costliness of the work the size is reduced as much as is compatible with 

 the end sought. This leads always to a search for the element of which the ordinary 

 crop is simply a multiple. What is this element ? We answer " To-day for the best 

 agriculture it is the single row ; and what is true to-day of the best agriculture will in 

 the course of time be true of all agriculture. The wider and wider adoption of 

 machinery appears to make this inevitable." 



Though one may not easily find this idea expressed in so many words there is plenty of 

 evidence, in recent agricultural experiment work, of a more extended use of the row system. 

 In the United States it is coming into general use. I speak from personal observation at 

 nearly half the experiment stations in the United States. One needs, however, only to 

 look over the representative views given in the account of these stations as published for 

 the recent Paris Exposition, to see how generally it is adopted. Certain trials that have 

 been going on for many years are being continued on the plot system because they were 

 so begun, but otherwise than this there is^a strong tendency, and in my opinion a most 

 laudable tendency, to reduce field experiments as nearly as possible to single rows, and 

 to confine the comparisons to those that can be made between adjacent rows or adjacent 

 long and narrow plots, and to eschew other comparisons. This tendency and that towards 

 the wider introduction of pot" experiment work are, I should think, among the most 

 striking tendencies of recent agricultural experiment work. 



These remarks are in explanation of the methods adopted in the trials here reported, 

 with reference to the relative value as seed of large, small, and ?nedium-sized wheat 

 grains. 



It will be noted that in the tables the reader is directed to make comparisons only 

 between certain rows, these being in all cases rows that were' adjacent, and distant from 

 each other two -links or about sixteen inches. It may be asked, why not compare other 

 cases? What is the objection to making comparisons between rows two spaces, i.e., four 

 links apart? To these questions I should reply that it is in my opinion unsafe to make 

 such comparisons, because the conditions of growth are so variable. As a single instance 



