WINNIPEG, 1909. 797 
rately as possible; while it perhaps does not represent the yield that would 
be obtained in a large baking, the figures are comparative. The volume of 
the loaf was carefully determined by displacement of fine seed and is given 
in cubic centimeters. The comparative colour and texture of the bread and 
general appearance of the loaf are represented by figures; the No. I. samples 
of the different kinds of wheat being assigned the full 100 points and the 
others were scored in percentage of this :— 
Tasre IIl.— Weight, Size and Quantity of a Loaf of Bread from 340 grams 
of each kind of Flour. 
Per Per | | Weight Volume| Quantity of Bread 
Grade of Wheat gens. cent. a a o of enh Phy ec Nile 
| of : of Wet ABaosbed Loaf. Loaf Tex- |Appear- 
| Protein| Gluten Grams| cc. (Colour, 41.6 | ance 
SPRING WHEAT, | | | | 
| Winnipeg sample: | 
| No.I. Northern | 9:98 | 33:10 672 | 511 | 2,540 | 100°0 | 100-0 | 100:0 
| No. II. iF 10:02 | 31:20 67:5 503 | 2,520 |102°0 | 98:0 | 98-0 
lpeovo; ELE, ,, 10:08 | 30:17 68:0 496 | 2,770 |102:°0 | 96:0 | 96:0 | 
Cargo lots: | 
No. I. Northern | 10-97 | 33:83 | 67:2 | 510 | 2,630 | 100-0 | 101:0 | 101-0 
No. I. Hs 10:32 | 32:87 | 675 | 504 | 2,600 | 100-0 | 102:0 | 1000 | 
No. Ill. _,, 10°88 | 3379 | 67:5 | 510 | 2,540 |100:0 |100:0 | 990 | 
WINTER WHEAT. | 
Alberta Red : | | 
No. I, ; - 969 | 3753 | 556 , 491 | 1,990 | 100-0 | 100-0 | 100-0 | 
No. fl. : 9:54 | 32°83 55°6 481 | 1,900 95:0 | 96:0 | 100°0 
No. III. . -| 9:20 | 32:07 | 56:9 492 | 1,880 | 93:0 94:0 | 98-0 
Alberta White: | 
No. I. Z - | 831 | 27°97 | 503 472 1,480 |100:0 | 1000 | 100-0 | 
i ogg U are : 8:74 | 29:07 | 51-6 471 | 1,470 95:0 85:0 en] 
No. Ill. . . | 8:88 | 27:90 51:6 482 1,600 | 970 104-0 108-0 
As might be expected, the results show a great similarity in the quality 
of the bread obtained from the two lots of spring wheats. The samples 
representative of cargo lots are more uniform in quality than those obtained 
from the Chief Grain Inspector; this is doubtless due to the more thorough 
mixing of wheat produced from different localities and grown under varying 
conditions, thus obliterating the influences of environment. 
The flour from the Alberta Red wheats contained as much gluten as 
the spring wheat flour, No. I. sample even exceeding all others; but they 
are much lower in water absorption, yield of bread and size of loaf. The 
volume of the loaf was approximately only 75 per cent. of that of the 
spring wheats. In our work with flour we have always found that, 
generally speaking, the small loaf was a heavy one, doubtless due to the 
lesser surface for evaporation of water. No attempt was made to.compare 
the quality of the bread with that from the spring wheat, as they are quite 
different ; the texture particularly was not so good, the bread was darker, 
and the loaf had not that bold, fine appearance characteristic of the bread 
from the spring wheats. In general it was more like that obtained from the 
Durum wheats. 
The Alberta White wheat flour seemed to be very similar to that made 
from the same variety—7.e., the Dawson’s Golden Chaff, grown in Ontario; 
but it is not equal to the flour from the amber wheats or many other 
varieties produced in the older provinces. No explanation of the fact that 
the third grade of Alberta White wheat produced the largest and best loaf 
of bread is necessary, as these are not mixed samples. 
