8 BULLETIN 522, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
wheat has more than kept pace with this increase. Because of its 
relatively greater importance, a far more complete study has been 
made of Turkey winter than of the other wheats. 
In shape of kernel and physical characters the Montana-grown 
Turkey wheat resembles that grown in Kansas, Nebraska, and other 
hard winter-wheat States, except in size of kernel. Usually the 
kernels are a little larger and quite often more plump. In this 
latter characteristic, however, there is as great a variation as in 
other sections. Plate I compares a typical sample of Montana-grown 
Turkey with two samples representing the usual variations of the 
Turkey wheat of the Central States. . 
* The results of the milling, baking, and chemical studies with the 
samples of this variety or type are presented on the following pages 
in a series of tables and figures (Tables IT and IIT and figures 3 to 13). 
Table IT gives the results upon a limited number of samples of wheat 
of this type secured during the years 1908 and 1909, arranged accord- 
ing to the crop year, followed by a more comprehensive study that 
was made of the wheat of the three succeeding years. 
It will be noted from this table that a very wide range in quality 
existed each year. The tests of the limited number of samples se- 
cured the first two years indicated that this wheat did not differ widely 
in quality from the hard winter wheats of other sections. 
The tests for the three following years, 1910, 1911, and 1912, rep- 
resenting as they do a much larger number of samples, are far more 
interesting and suggestive. Certain striking variations were noted in 
the wheat of each crop year. That of 1910 was most uniform in qual- 
ity. The samples secured were of about a uniform plumpness and were 
hard and glutinous. The results of the milling tests were likewise 
quite uniform. In absorption, the flour from the wheat of 1910 was 
lower than that of the two succeeding years; in the matter of strength, 
as indicated by loaf volume and texture, the flour was superior. 
The wheat of the 1911 crop was not so uniform in quality as that of 
1910. Many of the samples were more or less shrunken, and many 
were badly bleached and otherwise damaged in the field. Several 
samples, mostly from Fergus County, showed an abnormally high 
moisture content, due to rainy weather during harvest. These various 
factors are responsible for the much wider variation in milling results 
with the wheat of this year. Taken as a whole, the baking results 
with the flour did not differ greatly from the preceding year. The 
absorption was a little higher, and in strength there were no samples 
that ranked so high as those of the preceding year obtained from Yel- 
lowstone County. Two samples proved to be poorer than any that 
were obtained the previous year. The wheat of this year showed 
much greater range in crude protem. ‘The variation, however, did 
not appear sectional and could probably be explained only by a study 
of local weather conditions. 
