10 



Bl'LLETIX 960, U. S. DEPAETMEXT OE AGEICXJLTUEE. 



to 1.2 per cent of the volume of either lot of the berries in the test. 

 If the difference seems small, it should be remembered that the lots 

 were identical and their treatment the same, except that they were 

 placed in the drying crates somewhat differently. Moreover, during 

 the early part of the test, the weather conditions were so favorable for 

 drying that even the carelessly handled lots dried very quickly. 



The injury resulting from permitting cranberries to remain wet 

 after picking is more clearly shown by two tests in which the berries 

 were kept wet for several days. In the first test one lot of berries 

 was dried as soon as possible after harvesting; a second lot from the 

 same section harvested on the same day (September 17, 1920) was 

 kept wet over night, then dried in good condition; a third lot from 

 this section was kept wet for three days. The third lot showed more 

 than three times as many rotten berries as the first. A similar test 

 was carried out the following week. Three lots of berries harvested 

 on September 25 from the same section were handled as follows: 

 One lot was dried as soon as possible, the second lot was permitted 

 to remain wet in the picking crates over night, and the third lot was 

 left in the picking crates for two days. In this test, as in the pre- 

 vious one, the lot which remained wet for the longest time showed 

 markedly inferior keeping quahty. The results of these tests are 

 given in Table VI. 



Table YI. — Average Tieeping quality of cranberries from the same section, treated in 

 different ways after water-raking. 



Treatment. 



Spoiled berries 

 (per cent). 



Nov. 5-6, 

 1920. 



Dec. 14, 

 1920. 



liOt 1, September 17: 



Dried as soon as possible 

 Kept wet over night . . . . 

 Kept wet three days 



liOt 2, September 25: 



Dried as soon as possible 

 Kept wet over night . . . . 

 Kept wet two days 



4.5 

 11.9 

 15.8 



10.0 

 11.0 

 15.0 



16.0 

 21.7 



Long-distance shipments, to Washington, D. C, and to San Jose, 

 Calif., of commercially handled water-raked and hand-picked berries 

 from Beaver Brook, Wis., gave somewhat conflicting results, but in 

 general confirmed the results of the more careful tests that under 

 the conditions in 1920 there was very little difference in keeping 

 quahty between hand-picked berries and those which had been 

 water-raked and dried under favorable conditions. 



One comparative test of hand-picked and water-raked berries was 

 made in which the water-raked berries were dried in the storehouse. 

 In this case the water-raked berries showed inferior keeping quality, 



