12 BULLETIN 522, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
(2) Montana hard winter (Turkey) wheat, plump to a little shrunken, bleached, 
and a small percentage sprouted (Table III, group B). 
(3) Montana hard winter (Turkey) she plump to fairly thin, badly bleached, 
and a small percentage sprouted (Table III, group C). 
(4) Montana hard winter (Turkey) wheat, badly bleached, and sprouted or badly 
shrunken (Table IIT, group D). 
An attempt is made in Plate II to illustrate these groupings by 
reproducing photographs of typical samples from each group. 
Each of the samples was also submitted to two or more persons 
acquainted with commercial practices, who were asked to give their 
opinions as to the proper grading and classification of the samples. 
This grading and also notes on “Condition” appear in the table. 
A study of Table III reveals a number of interesting facts. As 
might be expected, the plump and sound samples falling in group A 
were of a uniformly high weight per bushel, a marked decrease occur- 
ring between each group. The grading followed this arrangement 
only roughly. In group A none of the samples were graded lower 
than No. 2 hard winter, though in one instance sample No. 1049 was 
graded No. 1 western red. In the succeeding groups there is consid- 
erable disagreement in the grading but not in the classification. 
That the samples which are plump and sound are of highest quality 
from the standpoint of milling yield is clearly shown by a comparison 
of these groups. The average percentage of flour obtained from the 
samples falling in group A was 73.2 per cent, and in the three groups 
following, 71.7, 70.7, and 67.2 per cent, respectively. In the matter 
of flour quality, and especially in the factor of strength, however, 
the reverse is true, there being a marked increase in volume of loaf 
where there was a decrease in flour yield. This is in confirmation of 
the general observation that high baking strength 1: is not generally 
found in wheat of extreme plumpness. 
