A Study of Colorado Wheat 
27 
wheats for 1913 and a sample of Red Fife to be given in a subsequent 
table, all grown in 1913 under identical conditions of weather and ir¬ 
rigation and within less than 100 feet of one another on two contiguous 
and uniform plots of land. We have in'the first pair, Red Fife, ^protein 
17.143; Marquis, protein 15.998. The third one is a sample'of Red 
Fife with 13.442 percent of protein. The differences in the amounts 
of phosphorus and •potassium present are, again, big, and roughly, in¬ 
versely proportional to the protein present. I shall endeavor to explain 
these differences in the proper place. 
It becomes a question what the value of an analysis of a general 
sample of wheat, as a representative of the product of a county or a 
state, may be. It is only by the intelligent selection and analysis of 'a 
very large number of samples that a reasonably accurate estimate of 
the quality of the product of a good-sized county can be obtained. In 
our table of general samples of spring-wheats, rejecting the Egyptian, 
we have a range of protein from 8.224 tO’ 17.143 percent and of true 
gluten from 4.001 to 11.593 percent. These figures represent different 
varieties, but w^e find for the same variety a range from 4.001 to 9.723 
percent of true gluten calculated on the air-dried wheat. These differ¬ 
ences correspond to a wide range of conditions of climate, soil, and 
very probably of cultivation. In the San Luis Valley, for instance, 
we have an altitude of 7,500 feet with its own peculiar climate and 
soil, and at Fort Collins we have an altitude of 5,000 feet with its cli¬ 
mate and soil. While the San Luis Valley is 2,500 feet higher than 
Fort Collins, it is about 200 miles further south. The San Luis Valley 
has a rainfall of about 7.0 inches and the Fort Collins section one of 
14.9 inches. Neither section as a rule can grow spring-wheat without 
irrigation. The wheats produced cannot be compared in regard to 
composition unless all of the conditions are given with the samples. 
The Minnesota samples, analyses of which are given in the pre¬ 
ceding table, were kindly sent to me, on request, by Mr. G. H. Tunell of 
the Minnesota Grain Inspection Department. I desired to see samples 
of their grading and also to have our own analyses of these wheats, 
because the high quality of their flours, made from hard spring-wheats 
is, I believe, universally recognized, I, however, know nothing of the 
conditions under which they were grown and we dO' not know to what 
extent these samples are comparable to ours, or are representative of 
Minnesota wheats. I am not certain about the variety, but I would 
jud(ge thisi to be Red Fife. So far as analytical results are concerned 
these samples are not equal to the majority! of the Colorado samples. 
We have only two of the general samples of Colorado wheats which 
appear to be of materially lower quality than these Minnesota samples, 
