22 BULLETIN 79, HAWAII PLXPERIMENT STATION 
and the percent of grade 1 kernels (specific gravity less than 1) from 
6 to 100. This percentage likewise may vary between wide limits for 
the same tree throughout the year as does the average value from 
one year to the next. 
Samples from commercial shipments of nuts received at the factory 
from different orchards obviously show less fluctuation than those 
from individual trees. The variations are sufficiently great, however, 
to warrant their being taken into account in the purchase of the nuts. 
For example, the quality ratio of the crop from one location was 5.70 
during July and August, 3.75 during September and October, and 
4.22 for the remainder of the crop. Since quality ratio represents the 
pounds of nuts in the shell as received to produce 1 pound of grade 1 
kernels, these differences are of vital importance, the nuts of 3.75 
quality ratio having a value approximately double those of 5.70. 
Correspondingly greater differences result when nuts are purchased 
from different localities. It would seem sound commercial practice 
that some account be taken of these differences in quality ratio in 
fixing the purchase price for nuts harvested from seedling trees from 
different localities. 
The fact that the composite crop from an orchard of bearing trees 
shows a small fluctuation in quality ratio compared with individual 
seedling trees is of course no argument for seedling trees. It simply 
means that the high-quality trees neutralize the low-quality, the upper 
limit being determined by the relative proportion of desirable and 
undesirable trees present. 
The records on individual trees are of value chiefly in showing the 
nature and extent of variation in nut characters, comprising as they 
do representative trees from the principal orchards of the Territory. 
The study likewise has served to develop the tecnhique necessary 
in evaluating the nut characteristics. It has shown that records of 
nut quality should be made on a tree over more than one crop and 
during the entire bearing season if possible. If this is not possible, the 
samples should be taken during the peak of the nut drop over several 
seasons. 
The differences between nuts from different localities were obviously 
the resultant of such factors as origin of seed, climate, culture, and 
the like. There are same indications that location affects kernel 
quality both as to percentage of grade 1 kernels, and the color of the 
kernel and the epidermis of the basal portion. From the standpoint 
of nut quality the best locations appear to be the relatively dry, leeward 
sides of the islands. 
The results given herein would seem to show an inherent difference 
in nut qualities between the smooth-shell and rough-shell types of nuts. 
Horticulturally, the two types are distinct. They produce two dif- 
ferent curves when specific gravities of kernels are plotted against the 
corresponding percentages of oil. The flavor, texture, and roasting 
qualities are likewise different. The rough-shell type appears more 
prone to underfilling of kernels and appears to show greater variability 
in this respect than the smooth-shell type. Public preference is gener- 
ally for the smooth-shell type because of its mild flavor and crisp 
tender texture, although many prefer the more pronounced, sweeter 
flavor and firmer texture of the rough-shell type. The present com- 
mercial demand is almost entirely for the smooth-shell type and 
