Wheat Investigations. 



33 



Chemical Composition of Pure Lines of Wheat Grown at Aroos- 

 took Farm in 1918. — Concluded. 



MINNESOTA LINES. 



Accession 

 No. 



Selected from 

 Variety 



Moisture 



Ash 



Nitrogen 



Protein 

 (Nx5.7) 



Fat 



Crude 

 Fiber 



187 

 186 

 185 

 180 

 183 

 182 



Marquis 



Royalton (Red) 

 Royalton (White) 

 Haynes Bluestem 

 Velvet Chaff 

 Speltz Marz (durum) 



8.04 

 7.07 

 9.44 

 7.13 

 9.20 

 8.80 



2.01 

 2.08 

 2.02 

 2.05 

 1.97 

 1.93 



2.44 

 2.38 

 2.32 

 2.27 

 2.26 

 1.83 



13.91 

 13.57 

 13.22 

 12.94 



12.88 

 10.43 



2.85 

 2.74 

 2.31 

 2.74 

 2.46 

 2.50 



2.23 

 2.21 

 2.23 

 2.22 

 2.14 

 2.08 



Average 

 Average 

 except 



Eor Minnesota lines 

 for Minnesota lines 

 durum 



8.28 

 8.18 



2.03 

 2.03 



2.25 

 2.33 



12.83 

 12.30 



2.60 

 2.62 



2.19 

 2.21 



regard to which the crops of 1917 and 1918 differed. In 191 7 

 the wheat lines did not grow on typical Caribou loam but on a 

 darker soil with more abundant moisture and possibly more hu- 

 mus, which may have accounted for the higher protein content 

 in 1 91 7. Further, in 191 7 the wheat lines all grew in one two- 

 thousandth acre plots while in 1918 the area ranged from one 

 two-hundredth to one-fortieth acre. The smaller tract occupied 

 by the wheats in 1917 presented probably a greater uniformity 

 of soil conditions than the larger area in 1918 which possibly 

 accounted for a narrower range of variation in the protein con- 

 tent. 



It will now be of interest to study the relationship between 

 the protein content in 191 7 and 1918. Considering first the va- 

 rieties as a whole we note on consulting Tables 5 and 7 that not- 

 withstanding the comparatively small differences in their pro- 

 tein content the varieties rank practically in the same order with 

 respect to protein content in 1918 as they did in 191 7. This is 

 brought out more clearly by bringing together the average pro- 

 tein contents of the pure lines of each variety for each year as 

 shown in Table 8. While the difference between the averages 

 are small the data given in Table 8 indicate a tendency for the 

 varieties as a whole to preserve their respective rank with re- 

 spect to protein content. 



As the average of these varieties are determined by the val- 

 ues of their component strains it will be instructive to examine 

 the behavior of the individual lines with respect to their protein 

 content from year to year. It will be remembered that 99 lines. 



