24 STUDIES OF AMERICAN BARLEYS AND MALTS. 



per cent the nature of the protein constituents should be considered. 

 Both Regensburger a and Kukla & agree witfc Prior that the quality of 

 the nitrogenous constituents rather than the total nitrogen must be 

 considered in valuing the barley. 



Prinz c suggests that the points in the valuation of barley should 

 be, first, maturity of the grain, which he considers of greatest im- 

 portance; second, the protein content; then the uniformity, odor, 

 husks, shape, and damaged, grain, in the order named. Uniformity, 

 mellowness, and soundness are more important than color. Further- 

 more, in all commercial transactions both barley and malt should be 

 bought and sold on the basis of hundredweight rather than per 

 bushel. Hoffmann d advocates buying barley and malt on the dry 

 basis, as only dry grain is stable, it being less liable to damage and to 

 attack by mold, besides costing less for transportation. This is cer- 

 tainly a most reasonable proposition, just equally to buyer and seller. 

 It is no unusual occurrence for a grain to lose several per cent of 

 moisture in being transported from one locality to another as, for 

 example, from a humid to a dry climate. 



Regarding other criticisms of these European systems, Eckhardt e 

 considers the assortment factor obtained by means of the 2.2, 2.5, and 

 2.8 mm sieves as of the greatest importance, after the degree of meali- 

 ness and the amount of protein, as it shows how uniform the grain is. 

 Bleisch f suggests that the only criterion in the valuation of barley 

 is a malting experiment on a small scale. Biffen s regards a barley 

 of good quality if it is mature, mealy, free from broken and discol- 

 ored grains, germinates freely and uniformly, and has a good color 

 and a finel} 7 wrinkled surface. Heron * and Salamon * consider the 

 diastatic power of malt as an exceedingly useful determination. 

 Besides this, Heron generally estimates the percentage of extract, the 

 specific rotatory power, tintometer value, and moisture, all of which 

 give valuable information concerning malt. Hunicke > looks on the 

 physical character of the endosperm as the most important factor, 

 giving greatest weight to the extract content, while Wallerstein 

 considers the loss during malting as the most important determina- 

 tion. As regards the proteins, Wallerstein considers those formed 

 in malting and found in mashing as of greater significance than the 

 total protein. Kreichgauer A suggests that the weight per bushel in 

 connection with the biting test will give a good starting point con- 



Zts. gesain. Bramv.. 19n5, vol. 28, 1 Zts. gesain. Hnuiw., 1899, 22: 327. 



Xos. 35 and 36. g J. Inst. Brew., 1906, 12 : 345. 



Ibid., 1900, 23: 418. * J. Fred Inst. Brew., 1902, 8: 666. 



< Amer. Brew. Rev., 1907, 21: 589. * Ibid., p. 2. 



d Wochenschr. Brau., 1906, 23: r,:j4. i J. Amer. Cheiu. Soc., 1904, 26 : 1211. 



''Zts. gesam. Bramv.. V.MM;. 20: .",2:1. MVoclicnschr. Brau., 1905, 24: 171. 



