Properties oe Coeorado Wheat 
21 
Crude Protein Wet Gluten Dry Gluten 
Variety 
Locality 
Percent 
Percent 
Percent 
Turkey Red 
Fruita 
13.21 
37.60 
15.49 
Kharkov 
Ft. Collins 
11.98 
25.40 
9.72 
Kharkov 
Ft. Collins 
15.30 
38.67 
14.00 
Jaroslov 
Ft. Collins 
15.97 
40.73 
15.04 
Jaroslov 
Ft. Collins 
14.99 
48.83 
18.15 
Red Cross 
Fruita 
14.15 
28.30 
11.13 
Red Chaff 
Eckert 
10.05 
21.53 
8.57 
Red Chaff 
Eckert 
8.04 
17.63 
7.20 
Fultz Mediterranean 
Ft. Collins 
14.00 
42.00 
16.00 
Fultz 
Ft. Collins 
16.33 
42.23 
14.96 
Big Frame 
Ft. Collins 
16.25 
42.50 
14.63 
These samples show that our wheat, whether spring or winter, 
varies in quality very greatly indeed even for the same variety. 
In collecting these samples we were surprised and disappointed in 
finding that the average miller, and the farmer too, took no interest 
in this matter and occasionally we found a man who demanded 
pay for the few pounds of wheat making a sample. A greater 
difficulty was to obtain reliable information concerning the condi¬ 
tions under which the samples were grown. The reasons for this 
were many; it was seldom possible for the millers to give them 
and the farmers were but little better able to do so, because they 
do not understand the things that we want to know about the soil, 
the weather, the irrigation, the crop grown on the land the previous 
year, and the treatment that they had given the land and crop. 
The great importance attaching to these data, made it evident that, 
so far as the problems that we were studying were concerned, 
general samples would not serve any good purpose, so we made 
no attempt to collect such after the first year. 
The samples given, however, serve to show that the same 
variety of wheat grown on different land in the same general 
section of the State, Turkey Red for instance grown near Fruita, 
varied from 9.65 to 13.21 percent of crude protein. These samples 
wlere grown the same season and it is only from my personal 
knowledge of certain conditions which existed in these cases that 
it is possible to account for the difference in the amount of protein 
in the wheat. The difference was that there was more nitric nitro¬ 
gen in one piece of land than in the other. These wheats were 
irrigated, probably once each. When we consider the Defiance 
jWe see that this may be a very good wheat or a very poor one 
when grown in different sections of the State; for instance, the 
Del Norte sample contained only 8.05 percent crude protein while 
a sample grown the same year at Fort Collins contained 14.92 per¬ 
cent, or almost twice as much; the dry gluten is twice as much 
and a little more. The season of 1913 was a good one for wheat 
in all sections of the State and yet we have these great differences 
