94 
Colorado Experiment Station 
difference in the amount of cloudy weather and the distribution of the 
water. The amount of water received by the crop during the respec¬ 
tive seasons was the same, 19 inches, in 1913 we applied to most of the 
plots 12 inches of water and the rainfall was 7 inches (6.77), in 1915 
we applied 6 inches and the rainfall was 13 inches. This fact relieves 
me from the necessity of considering the quantity of water used as a 
cause of these differences, but if it were necessary to do so, I would 
take the ground that a variation in the amount of water from 12 to 
36 inches would not produce these results. We shall discuss this 
subject later. For the cases in hand, I shall consider the question of 
the effect of the amount of water eliminated by the fact that the water 
received during the months of May, June, July and the early part of 
August, or throughout the growing period of the crop, was so nearly 
the same that we are justified in neglecting the difference, especially 
as this difference pertains largely to the month of April, the time of 
seeding. The fact is that the total water received by the crop of 1915, 
was less than in 1913, the season when we obtained wheat of the best 
quality. These considerations justify us in dismissing the direct in¬ 
fluence of the climatic conditions as the cause of the poor quality of 
our 1914 and 1915, crops- It is not intended to deny that the climatic 
influences affect the quality of wheat crops in some measure, but it 
is intended to assert that the inferior quality of the crops here consid¬ 
ered was not due to the direct influence of climatic conditions. 
Rust Chiefly To Blame For Poor Quality 
I ascribe the poor quality of the wheat almost wholly to the effects 
of the rust that developed during the early days of August in 1914 and 
during the latter part of July in 1915. The earlier varieties of grain 
apparently escaped serious injury in 1914, when our maximum yield 
reached 55.5 bushels of wheat, weighing 64-5 pounds per bushel, and 
our next highest was 54.5 with the same weight per bushel. These 
two are given because they were obtained with different fertilizers. 
The rust appeared a few days earlier in 1915 and there was no question 
about its affecting the yield of each of the varieties. The Defiance 
was very seriously injured, the yield on one plot was reduced to less- 
than 9 bushels per acre and the kernels were no more than dried out, 
empty sacks, which, contrary to the statements that I have found on 
tins subject, were not remarkably high in protein, but were 20 percent 
lower than good kernels grown with the same fertilization on this 
ground the preceding year. I have found but one analysis of rusted 
wheat; this was published by Mr. F. T. Shutt, Chemist, Domijn^ion Ex¬ 
perimental Farms, ’ Canada, Abstract in Experiment Station Record, 
Vol. XVI, p. 585. Mr. Shutt gives analyses of rusted and rust-free 
straw and also of grain. The grain from rust-free wheat contained 
10.50 percent proteid, that from rusted wheat 13.69 percent. Mr. Shutt 
