5io 
Journal of Agricultural Research 
Vol. XXI, No. 8 
Table I.— Crushing points and protein content of 94 pure strains of Kansas-grown 
wheat —Continued. 
Serial No. 
Variety. 
Crushing 
point. 
Protein 
content. 
722 
1074 
678 
II52 
1073 
676 
I082—I 
Ghirka. 
Gin. 
IB 323 
11,328 
1 r , 43 ^ 
II, 444 
II, 489 
11, 554 
11, 567 
11, 702 
11, 712 
11, 8 77 
11, 912 
12, 429 
n ,994 
12, 442 
12,487 
12, 753 
12,873 
12, 905 
12,946 
Pea cent. 
11. 40 
11. 04 
12. 2 < 
11. 80 
Jones Fife X Red Winter. 
Red Winter. 
Turkey. 
Bart Gross-korniger. 
11. 92 
11. 42 
12. 48 
11. 80 
Red Winter. 
Turkey. 
1110 
.do. 
774 
1018 
An Australian hybrid. 
11. 83 
12 . OO 
Mareuil. 
IIII 
Turkey. 
12 . OO 
936 
II06 
Bucanera. 
IO. 60 
Banat. 
II* 35 
10. 76 
11.36 
11. 60 
1036 
889 
ti6t 
Romanella. 
Red Summer Kmmer.. 
U. S. Cereal Investigation No. 1787. 
1080 
U. S. Cereal Investigation No. 1543. 
13. 20 
12. 76 
II. 56 
1066 
Macaroni. 
1112 
Turkey. 
* 
Average*. 
9 , n 5 
II. 7 l 
1 1 ’ / v) 
The correlation between hardness (subject) and protein (relative) is 
shown in Table II. Table III summarizes the chief constants connected 
with the calculations. 
It is apparent that the correlation between hardness and protein is 
practically zero. Since this is contrary to common opinion, data from 
Fig. i. —Machine used at the California Agricultural Experiment Station for determining the hardness 
of grain (4). 
the California Agricultural Experiment Station and from the Kentucky 
Agricultural Experiment Station—the only existing data aside from those 
obtained in the present investigations—were examined. 
The method used at the California Agricultural Experiment Station 
for testing the hardness of wheat is that devised and described by Shaw 
and Gaumnitz (4). The apparatus consists simply of a pair of ordinary 
pliers, one arm of which is stapled to a wooden block (fig. 1). 
