9 .0 k " A COMPARATIVE STUDY or THE moms QUALITIES 95 GREAT NORTHERN AND MICHIGAN PEA BEANS THESIS FOR THE DEGREE 0F hi. 3. , Marian A. Neidert '1933 _ ' {0"}! i it “MW MOP I‘Llfl 22222 2. ,2 :‘ ' '.I 4 flu.- 0".' ' . ‘ , ’ .' *a“ 454- 93-7 #- »- am' '. I ~ - _'_,‘f,_ . 12“ _f ' I “ ' " .1“ ' f \ V» t5: 9’} 3 ">25 3%? ‘1- :‘w ‘l 7 r J. t . “1““. . ‘ . ,‘v‘jf . : .l. 2 .. .14 I . , ‘ < .. . __ r . r s }. ‘ ~‘_’ _ A ' I ‘ , Q ‘ h I- I. < . v If.‘ ‘ : _ .a . , ‘ ‘., . _ , c ‘ : ' p '0 ¢, " . ‘I ' I . . ‘0 . . . — I ' .f ‘ ' .‘ -' ' c.’ A I - .I'.< . ' {I . ' l- l " ' L ' . v D . ’ h . ' :v V“ . .~ '- . - .‘ - " 3,. ' "a . . - . - ' . . ' ‘ , - I - . - - — _ . ‘.‘ . J.- .‘v .‘: "V > ‘ ...v .- llf :~' A t -V ' n ’. - I‘ .. ‘ ' ' r'.I ‘. .‘O_ - I . ‘ . \-| ., <. a -\ J. - I! ~ .. . _.¢- ... -l- _ . . o _ 'w "‘ I r- -..I ‘ ' . x o r_ ' ’ if A - ‘ V , n. k 5? _3‘ -¢‘ ‘ -. . .3“ '1“4 r, u ‘ n In I s'u'u ,l N" .4 o - ' I. 9' é 'v . 93.6 & V ' :‘ 13‘3-{3 .1 ;-..\,.‘M'- '3'.L.v .' .“ 7.1%:ng «3&3 315‘ I. '\ .l ' ’51 :"' . 4‘ V 4““. , J ~ ‘, ,. IL ~-‘k.’ . 'l" 3:.- a a». . ---" a “V; f?- ‘1’- :‘f'lt‘, ‘ 5‘ *- _: ‘. ”kg. #5”; g Ag: 41w; ' ‘l t 2» '. i. , my: ' w'fios ‘3 w , ~ wa 25L f" a l" . 1’: 3i» 3' - 2: J Ini'w . 339’."- '.9'.,-';.- r .- 2‘ 5‘4 my“ fit}: a»; 139,- .‘ ‘ Z ‘ ire. 1 ‘ - ‘. ,- ‘ ‘ ’ I ‘ ‘1‘. It" I' - l‘-- .. '- .."" t - ~r ‘2‘, "4' . .\ 3"! 'o | '- ." .~.’. 'Zivvfi, ‘ f I n 0. l I ,‘ p. v“_l'. V -’ 1r! ,, “4‘; - .-~_ ‘ .r‘ 2 ”- :é - , ;_ {p A”: I , _. A .\~ ., I V ' .f’u . “ 'q .5. ‘. . -.U -‘o'.- {.St‘, fl J ‘4". r’cd-‘JI. :‘V (”3' a. .N' .‘ I ._ I'. | .-“' J“ _{ a V " . ‘R -c-..:;ilru:4 A .. «w ' gem-rm» .w, ... ' - 5 ~ .;-1.J;.;'=.*.-' a)» -,I1~*n ..*- MFA“ f" ‘ ,' ' _.‘ 3- 5‘ w 1' ,"fi ’Ju' '.‘. v o 'I “41?“. ‘ - , ‘rfi’.l 7.!- . ‘v ' 'x‘: "" .D . - ~ ‘ - . ,’~.;!., .. 'I ‘3‘ ’ "flyfilflflh’v? ..‘\}r«" I y, . -“‘..-: tw‘ r v ‘i- I I 4““‘i ‘ .1 I ‘3. .1! ‘ l L .‘;;" . a D h. . A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF "HE COOKING QUALITIES OF GREAT NORTHERN AND MICHIGAN PEA BEANS 35.7. Marian A. fieidert m tug-m.“ I I I‘- Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science Department of Institution Economics Division of Home Economics Michigan State College 1955 AC Kl”? OZ"; LL DC—Iililfl" The writer wishes to express her appreciation and thanks to all who assisted in making this study possible; particularly to Lire. Liabelle S. Ehle 3, under whose supervision the work was directed, and to Dr. iIarie Dye who rendered valuable. assistance by her suggestive criticism. Aclmovledgment is made to I.Ir. Howard Kittie for his advice and suggestions on this st udy o 10: 1’78 I. II. III. IV. V. VI. Table of Contents Introduction A. Object of Study B. Review of Literature C. Importance of Beans as a Food D. Hethods used in Making the Study Production of Beans A. Areas of Production B. Quantities Produced Distribution of Beans A. Method Used B. Costs flar each Class Comparison of Cooking Qualities Summary and Conclusion Bibliography Chart Chart Graph Graph Graph Graph II II III IV CHARTS AL“ GRAPES Flow Sheet of Great Hortherns Distribution - - - - - - - Flow Sheet of michigan Pea Beans Distribution ----- PhOSphorus: Grams per Pound Edible Substance - and - Protein: Grams per Pound Edible substance ----- Iron: Grams per Pound Edible Substance - and - Calcium: Grams per Pound Edible Substance ----- Production of Great Northerns and Kichigan Pea Beans - - - Average Honthly Bean Jobbers Quotations to Trade for Lichigaa Pea Beans and Great Northern Beans for 1929-1930 and 1950-1951. ------- p.178. p.17b p. 6a p. 6b P0168. P0313 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table II III IV VI VII VIII IX - TABLES Acreage for Great Northerns and Michigan Pea Beans in important producing States -------- p. 16 Production of Great Northerns and Pea Beans ---------- p. 16 Total number of each class of beans reported by wholesale grocers July lQéO-June 1931- ~ - p. 19 Volume of Production of Pea Beans and Percentages of Total Production ----------- p.21 Volume of Production of Pea Beans and Percentages of Total Production ---------- - p.22 Freight Rates fer Great Hortherns and Michigan Pea Beans together with.cost per 100 pounds at important consumption points - pp.24-25 Bean Jobbers average monthly quotations ----------- p.31 Quality ratings of Boiled Beans - p.36 Scores on Boiled Beans showing Yield, Time, Number of Servings, Cost per Perving and Water Absorption ----------- p.37 Table Table Table Table Table Table K XI XII XIII XIV Percentage of Water Absorption in Boiled Beans ----------- Quality Ratings of Steamed Beans Scores on Steamed Beans showing Yield, Time, Nunher of Servings, Cost per Serving and Water - - - - Absorption - .......... Percentage of Water Absorption in Steamed Beans ---------- Quality ratings of Baked Beans - Scores on Baked Beans showing Yield, Time, Number of Servings, Cost per Serving and Wet er Absorption ----------- p.58 p.40 p.41 p.42 P044 p.46 I. IN ‘i‘RODUC BION A. Object of Study Since Great Northern and Michigan Pea Beans compete in the same markets in the Ifiddle West it would be of advantage to large consumers to learn whether one is superior to the other in any respect. In one of the largest cities in this region there is a decided preference for the Great Northern been among institution users. To discover whether this preference was Justified or not was the motive lead- ing to this study. The investigation was conducted along three lines: (1) volume and.areas of production of beans, (2) methods and costs of distribution, (3) cooking qualities in the processes of boiling,steam- ing and baking. B. Review of Literature. No material could be found comparing the Michigan Pea Bean with the Great Northern,but there is a small amount of infermation available on.the relative merits of the two classes of beans. They both seem to fill a very definite place in commerce and in the habits and tastes of consumers. While the Trinidad Bean and Elevator Company at Trinidad, Colorado, has issued several circulars, in the main these were written for advertising pur- poses only; hence the material therein is more or less biased. The Chamberlain Bean Company of Port -9- id Huron, Michigan, has introduced a pre-cooked bean on the market which they believe will not interfere with the canned bean or the home-baked prciuct. This will help advertise the Kichigan Pea Bean and create a greater desire for it on the part of the consumer: incidently, the surplus might thus be utilized. It is said that the pre-cooked bean requires much less time for cooking, and is more easily digested. Considerable experimental work has been done on the cooking of beans. One of the early writers on this subject was Kary Hinman Abel. In Farmers Bulletin Number 121, she quotes Strampell's experi- ments on digestion of legumes and his comparison of the use of distilled water with that of hard water for cooking. "Lentils cooked in distilled water took up nearly double their own weight of water and cooked soft in one and one-half hours. These that were cooked in hard water took up their own weight only of water, and after boiling the same length of tine the skins had swollen and lay in folds over the kernel, which remained hard."(1) The reason given by Bailey (2) for preferring soft water is that the lime of hard water forms insoluble compounds with the pro- tein of the legumes and then no amount of cooking will soften then. Abel (1) recommends a small quan- tity of soda to be added to fine water in which the beans are cooked, probably in.the prOportion of a -5- teaspoon of soda to one gallon of water. Since the chief mineral present in hard water is calcium carbonate, the soda would help to render the water less hard."Beans cooked in this water are easily softened but experiments show the flavor is apt to be injured." Since the cook does not usually have any way of knowing the degree of hardness of water and the exact proportion of soda to add, it is thought that the best method would be to boil the water before using and pour it away from the sed- iment, since boiling alone will precipitate the bulk of the calcium carbonate. When the hardness is due to the presence of the sulphate of magnesta, neither boiling nor the addition of soda will remedy the evil. Distilled water is best and should be used for soaking and cooking. Dominicis says the physical nature of protein changes during soaking and cooking. The change is from a granular state to a swollen state.The length of the cooking period of legumes depends upon the water absorption. They are cooked more tender and more easily when.there is a large amount of water absorbed. Acids seem to retard water absorption and alkalies seem to hasten it, but the latter do cause the proteins to be transfonned into a mixture of amino acids. Thus the food value is reduced and Dominicis advises that alkalies be dispensed with in preparing legumes. (3) Belle Lowe (4) gives -4- results, on the cooking of navy beans by the exper- imental classes at Iowa State College. Various methods were used. It was found that if soda was added to the cooking water, the beans became mushy on the outside while the center remained hard. A shorter cooking period was needed when the container was covered than when it was uncovered. It was also found that a minimum cooking time fer beans in tap water containing soda was shorter than the minimum time for beans soaked in distilled water containing soda, but their averages were reversed. Lowe thinks that this was due to difference of Opinion as to the time when the beans were done. C. Importance of Beans as a Foci. "The common bean is probably a native of South America and is undoubtedly of ancient origin. Many varieties were grown by the American Indians before they became generally cultivated in Burcpe." (5) There have been a number of classifications deve10ped for the varieties of beans. They may be classed according to their use such as those grown for the edible pod, or the so called string or snap bean,and those of the ripe shelled type as used in the dry state. They may be classed as field and garden beans. When the term "field beans" is used, it generally applies to those grown for drying and includes fear types, kidney, marrow, medium and pea. Some oifthe important varieties of the pea type are: Boston Small -5- Pea, Marrow Pea, Medium Pea, Snowflake, Navy and Hichigan Robust. (5) The latter was developed at hichigan State College and was registered as Strain Number 40520 in 1921. "It is immune to mosaic disease and.resistant to blight. It grows vigorously and gives a high yield. It is a few days later and lacks the uniformity of size found in most of the commercial varieties grown in the state." (6) The leading variety in Michigan is the White Navy which constitutes 90 percent of the Michigan cr0p with the red kidney bean second,making up 8 percent of the amp. The reminder of the crap is made up of Brown Swedish, ”White Kidney and Boston Yelloweye. The common white or navy bean is of American origin, and the name "navy" was applied to the been because of its use in the food supply of the navy'and the marine corps. (7) Beans are used more in some regions and under some circumstances than in others. In lumber camps, for example, beans are a very important part of the diet. In a camp in Maine a dietary study was made by C. D. Woods and E. R. Mansfield in 1904. They found that beans supplied as high as 20 percent of’the pro- tein and 10 percent of the energy of the food consumed by the lumbermen.‘ (8) Beans are a major army food because of their concentrated food value and because they can be easily shipped. Pound fer pound they are nearly as valuable as meat and do not require such -5- care in refrigeration.and.handling. Meat usually is high in price and there is a constant demand for a cheap source of protein. (9) Beans are rich in the food.elements, protein, iron, calcium and phOSphorus. "Cereal grains like wheat, corn, oat and rice kernels contain ll, 10, 15 and 9 percent protein respectively, while beans contain 25 percent." (10) Graph I shows the protein content of various foods. Dried beans, as purchased, rank third highest of the foods shown in the table, being excelled only by cheddar cheese and dried Split peas in amount of protein. They are higher than any of the lean cuts of meat in this important food constituent. Accord- ing to the table on page 376 in Sherman's "Food Products", beans, lentils and peas range higher in protein than any of the other vegetables. The composition of various foodstuffs in reSpect to calcium and iron are shown in Graph II. Beans are at the top of the calcium list even exceed- ing milk, the latter probably being recommended for young children more because of its ease of digestion. The graph on iron content reveals that beans have twice as much iron as do lean beef, Whole egg and prunes. In consulting the phosphorus chart, Graph I, it is noted that beans are third on the list, pre- ceeded only by egg yolk and cheese. Since beans are rich in protein and other food elements it would seem that they might appear more frequently in the American I | - I __ _4 -§——- —9 -+ -7 7+? : ; —-o-—f-¢ «rd-fi—o—4 . x 4- 1 —°,—--‘—0 l . ; " . , . -+——-‘-4 -—O—-§ -—?-~‘0-—-H I . i ‘ —-T—-¢--—o D ‘ —¢—o-——+ + “—4 «MM-— —-0 «o .4 —o -g-—q I I I — 4—4 ._, 4 1~ -¢——§——v “#4 —¢ +«- A I v - I . ‘ ‘ —_$.474 -0‘—O——+-4'--$ 0—044—444-4 , - c —4 --9 '0 -0-~ o—nc —§- ! .7 m5: «—o——o-—-$—~+ I—+——o —, o 3 ‘47+ +—§ o v i. 4—4 a— .o . -9—-¢*-—# -t 4—4 —4 -o o r¢—+—-—J 4‘ +-—-‘O—Q’f ,.._. 4 - 4-- 4., . _, _. ' '" HMS 7+ +i..,i,,_, v —+ a “'4‘" " 1120;! _I'_~. 1.4 w - ATAIAEXL; Wyam +wiv—«1—9-99 *- . I .7. . y o o a ,. Wars. -‘ 0 07+“ t , —-..__'_ ’“" . . I..- .‘ounud,u......onidandne‘d1d‘13‘14313i‘i! -7- diet. There has been little work done on navy beans to determine the vitamin content. Sherman, in his "Chemistry of Food and Nutrition" page 564, gives beans two plus for undifferentiated vitamin 3. They contain only traces of the other vitamins. "Although legumes contain a prOportion of pro- tein in excess of that of meat, a large amount of fat and considerable starch,they are less easily digested than animal foods."(ll) Abel (1) gives three reasons for the above statement. First, "as generally prepared and used the nutrients of vegetable foods are inclos ed in cells composed of cellulose or woody fiber,which is more or less hard and greatly interferes with their absorption." Second,"Vegetable food is prone to fermentation in the intestines, thus increasing the peristaltic movements, and if large amounts are eaten, hastening the food onward before there has been suffi- cient time for'the absorption of its contained nutrients." Third, "The cellulose present acts as a local irritant and produces the same effect.Beans are considered a 'hearty food' and.thought to be difficult to digest, perhaps due to the fact that a very small part of the digestion of the protein takes place in the stomach, because the medium or reaction of the stomach is acid, and the legumin is digested in an alkaline reaction."(l) Beans are made more digestible if the skins which contain much indigestible cellulose, are ~8- removed before cooking. (2) They are better digested in the puree form.as a greater part of the cellulose which interferes with assimilation is then removed.(12) "Strhmpell has shown that about 40 percent of the protein in cooked beans is left unabsorbed and that with a flour made from beans only 8.2 percent of the original amount of protein is left unabsorbed: so that when eaten simply cooked a much larger prOportion remains unabsorbed than.When divided into a powder." Proussnitz found that Whole beans often pass through the intestinal canal undigested. (l) The digestibility of beans depends largely upon the way in which they are prepared and the amount eaten. Woods and Mansfield (8) found that the average coefficients of digesti- bility for the total diet of Maine lumbermen were, protein 85 percent, fat 97 percent, carbohydrates 98 percent and ash 88 percent. If one assumed that the nutrients of the other material in the diet was digested to the same degree the coefficient of digest- ibility of the protein of beans would be 78 percent. Snyder (13) found that if the skins of beans were not removed 25 percent less protein was digested, and the loss was still greater if the soda was eliminated in the cooking process. He recommends that not more than four ounces of uncooked beans or six ounces of baked beans be consumed in the diet daily. He found that a higher degree of digestibility may be obtained When -9- beans are combined in a mixed diet. Snyder says that "at ordinary prices beans are one of the cheapest foods for supplying protein in the diet." Wait (14) believed a mixed diet gave more favorable digestion. Johns and Pinks (15) showed that, phaseolin, the principal protein of the navy beans should be cooked. They were able to Obtain good growth in rats when beans were supplemented with cystine in the prOportion of two percent of the protein by weight. McCollum, Simmonds and Pitz (16) found that a diet consisting solely" of navy beans for the protein was of low nutritive value. These peOple advise that "navy beans be supplemented by other proteins of better quality and because of digestive disturbances that they should be used in moderation." Pittman (17) found that the nitrogen balance was negative when the beans were eaten without the cystine supplement, and that a slight improvement of nitrogen retention was noticediwhen there was an addition of cystine of two percent of the protein by weight. "Navy beans are not entirely satisfactory as the chief source of nitrogen in the diet." Pittman.says that a healthy person can eat at least four ounces of navy beans, dry weight,daily. In general, beans are a valuable food, but small quantities should be eaten by persons in sedentary occupations, and should be taken in’a mixed diet with plenty of other foods. leople with -10- outdoor occupations doing hard manual labor may use beans up to one third of all their protein consumption in the diet and yet digest them to a reasonable degree. They should be taken advantage of more frequently by those with whom economy is a prime factor. llcCollum speaks of beans as a "Poor man's meat." D. Method Used in Making the Study. Statistics on bean production were obtained from the United States Department of Agriculture Year Book of 1932. A report on "Bean Dis tribution" published in April, 1952, by the Bureau of Agri- cultural Economics, Washington, D.C., listed areas and volume of production. Prices were obtained from the weekly Bean Market Review of the United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Bulletins published by Montana State College, Utah Experiment Station, and Michigan State College gave information on production and distribution. (ao,9,s,22) Bean jobbers, growers, and distributors were consulted in regard to their particular interest and phase of work on beans. Mr. Howard Kittie, Associate Marketing Specialist, in Lansing for the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, furnished further information to make this Stady P08311316 o The three processes of cooking which were used II. -11- in the experiments were that of boiling, steaming and baking. In half the experiments the beans were soaked fifteen hours before cooking. In the other half, the beans were cooked without soaking. The cooked beans were rated by judges for tenderness, general appearance, flavor and retention of fonn. Covered aluminum pans of the same size were used for the boiling experiments. The sectional steamer was used in the steaming experiments and earthenware pots were used fer baking. A record was kept of the time required to cook the beans until they were tender. The amount of liquid used during the process of cooking was re- corded and the percentage of‘absorption was cal- culated. The number of servings obtainable from.a definite amount of beans was tabulated and the cost per serving computed. PRODUCTION Beans are adapted to both dry farming and irriga- tion. Most of the beans grown in America are warm season plants. They will grow on practically all types of soil from light sandy loams to heavy clays. A heavy soil is not good for there is likely to be much more vine growth and not enough bean pods. The Civil War stimulated an increase in the production of beans during the years that immediately followed. The World War, with its insistent demands -12- for additional food production, resulted in a marked increase in the acreage of the bean crOp. The United States ranks sixth in acreage, fifth in production, and.is considered one of the world's principal been producing countries. (18) There are over twenty commercial classes of dry edible beans produced in the United States. In 19:50 the total quantity produced was 15,757,000 bags of one hundred pounds each. Most of this pro- duction is limited to definite areas in a few states. The Pea Bean grown in New York:is hardly distinguisable from the Michigan Pea Bean. iichigan normally pro- duces about 4025 of the entire bean crop in the United States. (19) The Great Northerns were first brought to the attention of white farmers by the Oscar H. Will Seed Company of Bismark, North Dakota, and.were secured ' from the Mandan Indians of Fort mentana about 1914. They came from the limited area in the Rocky MOuntain foothills. They are now extensively grown in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming and spread a little into Colorado. They are, however, definitely a mountain bean in that they do not do so well in the eastern humhi regions and do not succeed well in Michigan. The two beans are different in size. The pea bean is smaller, being only one-fourth inch to three-eighths inch in length, while the Great Northern averages three-eighths -13- to one-half inch. One important difference in the growing of Great Northerns and Michigan Pea Beans is that the weather condition in the Great Northern region is almost reliably dry at harvest time so that there is practically never any hand- picking to be done to prepare the beans for market. The crOp is reliable and.abundant when grown under irrigation.I A critical period in the growing of the Michigan Pea bean is after the beans have been pulled and are lying in the field either in windrows or piles so that they are exposed to fall rain damage. Field threshing is not always possible for the growers are not always able to get a threshing machine just at the time when their crop is ready. Often times the crop is danaged by weather while waiting. The Operators of been elevators in Michigan try to discourage field threshing, and urge that the growers haul the bean vines to barns where threshing can be done at the producer's leisure. In western states, where the danger of fall rains is not as serious as in Michigan, almost all of the threshing is done from the fields.The average field of beans on a Michigan farm does not exceed fifteen acres. A fifty or hundred acre field is exceptional. In the western states,particularly 'IT Letter from D. N. Shoemaker,Horticulturist,of United States Department of Agriculture. -14- California, individual growers may raise five hundred or a thousand acres. larger threshing machine equipment is used in the West than in the East: hence, the harvesting of beans is much simpler and the cost is reduced. Yields per acre vary from.year to year. The acreage planted is not an accurate indication as to the size of the crOp which will be harvested. Heather conditions, during the growing and harvest- ing season, are in the main the cause for the uncertainty of the size of the crOp. The western states with their irrigated land do have a higher productive cost. This is offset by the cheaper method of harvesting, namely, field threshing. Weather conditions being well under control in the West results in very little hand picking,which is another factor in lowering the production cost in the West. (19,20) Table I gives the acreage by states for the two classes of beans for a period of eight years. The acreage for Hichigan has been constant with little or no variation,while the states producing Great Northern have doubled and tripled their acreage. Idaho is the largest producing state and Yontana ranks second in the production of Great Northern beans. In 1950 the Great Northerns comprised about 14 percent of the total production -15- of beans of all varieties in.the United States. In the same year Idaho, Kontana and wyoming together produced over 96 percent of all the Great Eortherns grown in the United States, Idaho producing so), Montana 213 and Hyoming 20$. The remaining 4 percent was produced in Colorado and Nebraska. (20) Table II shove the production of the two classes of beans over a period of tine. Since 1924 Pea bean. production has not increased but has barely held its own, whereas Great Northern bean production has in- creased from 684,000 bags in 1924 to 2,006,000 bags in 1951.(21) Graph III gives a vivid picture of the in- creased production of Great Kortherns and tme poten- tial decline of the Michigan Pea bean. There was an increase in 1951 over the preceding four years, but from present reports of the 1932 crOp, that year undoubtedly showed a decline again. Even though 1931 did show a marked increase over 1930 the crOp was still not as great as that of 1926,Which was much smaller than 1925. -16.. TABLE I Aorcage, in thousands of acres, for Great Northern and Michigan Pea Beans in most important producing states. State 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1950 1951 Michigan 625 659 552 566 558 575 690 614 Montana 25 57 45 52 40, 47 49 57 Idaho 65 72 54 72 86 154 168 178 Wyoming 8 12 16 17 24 51 57 56 TABLE II Production, in thousands of bags of 100 pounds each, for Pea Beans and Great Northern. Class 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1950 1951 Pea Beans 5,799 4,684 5,729 2,750 5,268 5,505 2,825 5,709 Great Northern 684 918 815 1,549 1,229 1,744 2,066 2,006 1. "Bean Statistics" compiled by B. A. Stickle, Inc., Capital Bank Tower, Lansing, Michigan. 2. Report from 0.5. Department of Agriculture on "Distri— bution of beans by Commercial Classes as Reported by Wholesale Grocers." III. -17- DISTRIBU I'ION The principal difference between the handling of beans in.the western states and in Michigan is that the grading of Great Northerns is done by warehouses or the so called Transit Storage Holdings, who make that their entire business, while in Michigan the elevators dx>the elab- orating process. (19) Chart I shows the steps that the Great Northerns go through from producer to consumer. Chart II takes the Michigan Pea been through its detailed route. Contact with the trade is made between the bean jobber and the canner, broier, or grocery buyer. Often times the sales to the grocery trade are made through brokers. There is no bean exchange in the sense that there is a grain exchange. Bean prices are based on supply and demand, and each individual trader has to establish hhs own price daily. (19) Distributors for the Michigan Pea bean are as follows: 1.Michigan Elevator Exchange 2.Michigan Bean Company 5.Woolahan Company 4.321. J. Hart 5.J. B. Burroughes 6.Minor Walton Bean Co. ~17a- CHART— I F/ow Sheef of Greaf Norfhern Bean Dx'sfr/‘bu/ion Farmer Rec 9 /' viny SfOf/‘on Trans/f Sforoye HO/O’I'Dys Broker l Jobber R _ IDSf/‘rufl'Ofl-T efOI/er B uyer CODSumer ~17b- CHAR T’H F/ow Sheer Mic/Hg on Fe 0 aged/7 D/Sfribufion Farmer E/e vafor Jobber C anners Dry Bea/7 Trade Jobber Br o/rer Chain Stores Heidi/er I’gz’f‘g’fo” Jobber Cons u m e r F? e fat/e r I ”affair/M ConSumer -18- 7. B. A. Stickle Company 8. Ryan Grain Company 9. Christian Breisch Company Distributors for the Great Northern Bean are as follows: 1. Trinidad Bean Company 2. Fair Bean.Coapany 5. Denver Elevator Company 4. Buhl Seed Company 5. Mid-west Brokerage Company 6. Robinson Grain Company Table III gives the total numbers of bags reported for each class of beans Which was handled by wholesale grocers from July 1950 to June 1931. The figures show that approximately 25 percent of the beans handled by wholesale grocers during the period was Pintos, followed closely by Great Northerns with 21 percent. The Michigan Pea beans were third in importance representing 17 percent of the total. The three classes tOgether constituted 65 percent of the total beans handled by wholesale grocers. The two classes with Which this survey is concerned: namely, Great Northern and Pea beans constituted 38 percent of the total beans handled by whole- sale grocers. .This shows the importance of the two classes in the dry bean trade. -19- TABLE III Total number of bags reported for each class of beans handled by wholesale grocers, July 1950--June 1951. Number of bags Percent of total Class reported of all beans Pinto j:_ 1,557,990, ___fr 25.4 __ Great Northern 1,125,000 21.0 Pea Beans 898,000 16.9 Lima 489,000 9.1 __ Blapkeye ‘_ 525,000 _f 6.0 Baby_Limawvwv 290,000 5.4 Small White 187,000 5.5 Pink 160,909_ 5.0 Small Red 96,000 1.8 Cranberry_ 78,000 1.5 Red Kidney 76,000 1.4 Marrow 48,000 0.9 Yelloweye 58,000 0.7 White Kidney 57,000 0.7 Large White 54,000 __0.7 __ Other Classes 110,000 2.0 TOTAL 5,544,000 ,1 100,0 1. Report from U.S. Department of Agriculture on "Distri- bution of beans by Commercial Classes as Reported by wholesale grocers." -20- Tables IV and V show the relative importance of various states in the distribution of'the two classes of beans. (21) The tables give the number of bags of Michigan Pea beans and Great Hortherns which were reported for the state in 1950-1951. The percentage givm represents the total quantity handled in each state. For example, 116,679 bags of Pea beans were reported from Ohio. The quantity represented 45 percent of the total number of‘bags of all beans reported handled by wholesale grocers in that state. A study of Tables IV and V indicates that a large percentage of’the Great Northerns are being distributed in areas where Pea beans fonnerly were the principal class consumed. J. E. Barr of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, in his article "Changes in the Distribution and Consumption of Beans” in "The Bean Bag" May, 1952, makes the following statement: "Througi most of the northern great plains area and the upper iississippi Valley the shift in wholesale grocery sales has been almost entirely from Pea Beans to Great Northerns. There has also been an increase of sales of Great Northerns at the expense of Pea Beans in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, N. Y. aid New Jersey. In New York ani Pennsylvania there is a tendency for Great Northerns to replace TABLE IV Volume of Production of Pea Beans and Percentages of Total Production. Number of bags Percent of total of State reported all beans per state Ohio 16,679 45 Illinois 92,565 51 Indiana 84,969_ 45 New York 69,051 24 Pennsylvania 65,701 26 Missouri 52,586 14 Iowa 49,458 55 Kentucky 55,722 12 Massachusetts 55,898 55 Michigan 50,800 59 West Virginia 50,600 19 Louisiana 26,655 21 Wisconsin 25,810 75 Maryland 24,156 57 New Jersey 20,570 58 Virginia 20,258 15 Minnesota_ 19,179 51 Tennessee 10,675 4 North Carolina 30,172 7 Florida_r_ 10,145 ‘ l4 1. Report from U S Department of Agriculture on"Distri- bution of beans by Commercial Classes as Reported by wholesale grocers." -22- 1 TABLE V Volume of Production of Pea Beans and Percentages of Total Production Number of bags Percent of total of State reported all beans per state Missouri . 155,891 57 Tennesee 95,272 55 Illinois 87,418 27 Kentucky 85,545 28 Oklahoma 71,960 52 Iowa 64,874 46 Kansas 58,409 57 Arkansas 55,455 51 Indiana 55,279 27 New York f51,129 18 Pennsylvania 47,894 19 Ohio 45,954 16 Nebraska 55,849 ' 72 ___ West Virginia 27,445 17 Virginia .1 26,425 16 Texas 22,759 4 Maryland 17,555 27 NorthAQarolina 17,085 12 South Dakota 15,125 90 Minnesota 12,120 52 1. Report from U.S. Department of Agriculture on"Distri- bution of beans by Commercial Classes as Reported by wholesale grocers.” -25- also Narrows and Medium Whites." The increase of Great Northerns in Ohio and Indiana would seem to be a critical situation for Pea bean growers since these states border on Michigan, the most important Pea bean producing state. This increase might be due to the exten- sive advertising that is being done by Great Northern growers and distributors. This increase may be partially due to personal prejudice,either on the part of the retailer or the consumer. The size of the been no doubt has some influence on consumers' preference, some Great Northern con- sumers stating that they liked the larger bean. Tables IV and V reveal that during the year ending June 1951, Pea beans ranked first in volume in: Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Pea beans ranked second in Illinois, Iowa, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. States in which Great Northerns were first in importance were Iowa, Kansas,Missouri and Nebraska and ranked second in Arkansas,Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Freight rates from producing areas to large cities where beans are consumed may be one factor in determining which class of beans will be used in that certain section. Table VI gives the freight -24- TABLE VI Freight Rates forMichigan Pea and Great Northern Beans and Cost per 100 pound bag to Important Consumption Points in the United States Rate for Rate for Cost of Cost of Michigan Great Michigan Great ,Pea Beans Northerns Pea Beans Northerns Since Since Delivered Delivered July, 1952 July, on March on March 50, 50, 1955. 1955. $1.85 per $1.55 per 100 1b.bag 100 lb. bag Columbus, ' Ohio .25 1.05 2.08 2.60 Cincinnati? Ohio .26 1.05 2.11 2.60 ,_ Memphis, .65 r511 .96 2.48 2.51 Tennesee .55 barge 1.05 2.58 2.60 If.'Louis, _I lissouri .51 .97 2.16 2.52 Fiancafij —* Kentucky .55 1.05 2.18 2.60 fauisville, Kentucky .28 1.05 2.15 2.60 Chattanooga, —' Tennessee .64 1.05 2.49 2.60 Knoiviiie, Tennessee .60 1.05 2.45 2.60 UNETTestcn, A W. Virginia .29 1.05 2.14 2.60 Atlanta, Georgia .71 1.05 2.56 2.60 EPeenshorc, N. Carolina .65 1.05 2.48 2.60 NETIOIE, Virginia .44 1.05 2.29 2.60 BEITIMUre, Maryland .59 1.05 2.25 2.60 NEV’Yer, New York .59 1.05 2.24 2.60 'PTTTEBfifgh, Pa. .26 1.05 2.11 2.60 Scranton, Pa. .24 1.05 2.19 2.60 Rocheste?j New York .28 1.05 2.15 2.60 SYTFEUBE, New York .50 1.05 2.15 2.60 IIBEEy: New York .55 1.05 2.20 2.60 -25- TABLE VI continued Freight Rates for Michigan Pea and Great Northern Beans and Cost per 100 pound bag to Important Consumption Points in the United States Rate for Rate for Cost of Cost of Michigan Great Michigan Great Pea Beans Northerns Pea Beans Northerns Since Since Delivered Delivered July, 1952 July, 1952 on March on March 50, 50, 1955. 1955. $1.85 per $1.55 per 100 lb.bag 100 lb bag Boston, Mass. .58 1.05 2.25 2.60 F?3VIH§fiEe, R. I. .59 1.05 2.24 2.60 PEFfTand, 7 Maine .49 1.05 2.54 2.60 NE?“OrIeans, .86 rail .96 2.71 “2.51 7‘ La. .71 barge 1.05 2.61 2.60 Burmingham, Alabama .72 1.05 2.57 2.60 Little Rock, Arkansas .81 1.05 2.66 2.60 Dés Hoines, Iowa .55 ..97 2.58 2.52 Witcnita, . Kansas .77 .85% 2.62 2.40% JETTEPEBE—City “” Missouri .54 .97 2.59 2.52 tTfiCOlfi, Nebraska .67 .89 2.52 2.44~ Tulsa, Oklahoma .87 1.05 2.72 2.60 Nashfiille, Tennessee .58 1.05 2.45 2.60 Chicago, Illinois .25 1.05 2.08 2.60 1. Interview with Mr. Fry in B. A. Stickle's office, 1108 Capital Bank Tower, Lansing, Michigan. -25- rates and cost at consumption points for Great Northern and thhigan Pea beans. The freight rate from Alma, Michigan, sets the rate for all Michigan Pea beans. Twin Falls, Idaho, sets the rate for Great Northerns. However, there are a few exceptions: beans going from Montana to Iiinnesota have a cheaper rate, which is 75 cents per hundred, and all beans fron1Wyoming west of the Mississippi river go at 85 cents per hundred.l. The rate is given for 500 bag cars. Before the new rates came into use, July, 1952, there was a penalty on 500 bag cars; at the present time they are given a premium rate. Additional reductions have been prepcsed for both classes of beans and will probably be accepted. The railroads have taken the step toward the reductions in order that they might compete with the trucking companies. An examination of Table VI shows that there are only 6 cities on the list where michigan Pea beans cost more U131 Great Northerns. Consequently, it would seem.that there would be less demand fer the Great Northern, since its price is much higher but this is not the case. "The Michigan White Pea bean and the Great Northern bean are directly com- petitive with each other in the market. Both are 1. Interview with Mr. Fry in B. A. Sticklejs office, 1108 Capital Bank Tower,Lansing,LIichigan. -27- white beans and are used for canning, although the Ian bean has in.the past been much more extensively used for canned 'Pork and Beans' than the Great Northern bean, and both are used for home baked beans." (20) Formerly the greatest consumption of beans took place on the premises where they were cooked, as those prepared by the housewife or by chefs in public eating places. In the last feW'years there has been an increasing number of beans going into cans. This has probably been due to the advertising done by the National Canners Association stressing the food value, digestibility, healthfulness, and convenience of canned beans. There are two reasons why consumption of canned beans, by the American public, has increased; first, labor and fuel cost are eliminated: and, second, preparation tine is shortened. Beans may be canned with or without pork, with or without tomato sauce, and they may be even baked or boiled. Beans are easily divided into two groups, that of the whites and that of the colored beans. These two groups go to market in the dry state and as canned beans. Regardless of all the other classes which come under the two grea groups and appear on the market at the sane time, none of them compete with the Michigan Pea bean except the Great Northern. The -28.. reason for this is probably due to the fact that they are both white beans and can be used in the same manner. The Great Northern influences the price of the Michigan Pea bean since the fonmer is finding favor among the dry bean trade, thus re- ducing the demand for the Michigan product. It is fortunate for the growers of the Pea beans that the Great Northerns are not favored by the canners owing to its thin skin Which breaks easily under the canning process and prevents the well formed, whole beans Which canners prize in their product. (22) It is thought that 60 percent of the Michigan Pea bean crOp is canned and the other 40 percent is sold by Michigan bean dealers to Wholesale grocers and chain stores. {19) In 1926 the United States Department of Agriculture, through its Bureau of Agricultural Economics, prcposed standards for the grading of beans. The dealers in the Western area have not generally adcpted these standards. It has been diff- icult therefore for those dealers who were willing to accept the standards, to abide by them. Thus, there has been a delay in the progress of the Great Northern beans. A system of uniform grades, that 'would be generally accepted by all dealers, would help undoubtedly to deve10p a good future for the Great Northern beans. If beans are not graded -29- prOperly, they will not cook evenly, and canners give this as their reason for preferring Kichigan Pea beans for the canned product. Thus, one outlet is practically closed to the Great Northerns due to the failure of the dealers to accept better stand- ards of grading. (20) ,Only since July 1, 1951, has Michigan started to use federal grades. Previously, the hichigan Pea bean was graded according to the standards of the fiichigan Sean Jobbers Association. The standards could be interpreted a number of ways: hence, the grades were not always uniform and the product zas below standard. It is reasonable to assume that any wholesale grocer or any kind of bean shipper can not develOp a good bean business except with a quality product. "Just a Campbell, Heinz, Vancarp and other canners have increased their output year by year by packing a quality product, the grocery trade can increase its bean sales by marketing a quality pr oduct." (19) During 1932 the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company purchased from Hichigan producers more IBIL650 cars of 33a beans, or a sum total of 26,262,800 pounds. . These beans were distributed by the Atlantic and lacific to its millions of customers over the counter throughout the United 1. Detroit Free Press -30- States and Canada. The Atlantic and Pacific is not only one of the Iiichigan Pea bean's best customers, but also one of its greatest boosters. At one time a plan was being considered by some of the larger distributors, whereby demonstrations would be given in retail stores to bring before the consumer the various methods of cooking and preparing beans}. The plan was never carried out due to the financial condition of the country. A few years ago the Great Northern growers advertised in the Saturday Evening Poe t. Due to their distance from the central markets it was nec- essary for them to advertise in order to get their product before the consuming public. It is only recently, when competition became more evident that Michigan Pea bean growers have started to do some advertising of their product. Table VII shows the average monthly quotations as made by bean jobbers to the trade. Prices are quoted on a basis of 100 pounds net. The table covers a period of two years for both Great Northern and Michigan Pea beans. Prices were higher for both classes in 1930-1951 than they were in 1931-1932. Prices were abnormally low in 1931-1932 due to the financial situation of the country. However, a study of graph IV reveals that there are times during the 1. Interview with Michigan Elevator Company. .mowsonooma Hdhfipflfiuaawfi no semadm mcpwpm vegan: one no kmw>cm peaks: seem haste: .H N¢.H m¢.H om.H ¢>.H ow.H m¢.H m¢.H mm.H mm.H wv.H mw.H u>.H mmwao><4 l om.H m¢.H me.H mm.H mm.H Hm.a m¢.H ov.H m¢.H om.H mb.H mm.H swam mm.H mv.a ov.H mv.H m¢.H mwdfl mm.H mm.H mm.H mv.H «m.Hnmm.H Boa mmmHIHmmH vH.N mm.H ¢O.N b>.m >>.mlmm.m mm.m mo.m so.m mm.m mm.m bm.N. eweao>< wH.N mo.m Om.m mw.w mm.m oe.m mo.m mH.m mH.m nv.n om.» OH.¢ swam NH.N mu.a mb.H mm.m ou.m mm.w o>.N No.m Ho.m mw.m n¢.n ov.m tog..HmmHnOmmH mahonpaoz nacho . l. mv.H cw.H mm.a No.w mm.H mm.H mo.m mm.H 5m.H HH.N ¢H.N mw.m oweam>¢~ & om.H ¢>.H mm.H mH.N mm.H mo.m va.m OH.N mo.m ow.w mm.u mm.m swam ll ¢¢.H mv.H mu.a mm.H mh.a mm.H mm.H om.H vm.a mo.m oo.N ma.m son NanIHmmH «w.m o>.m mo.m wo.v um.m mm.m mo.v um.w mw.¢.mm.¢ bu.¢ mm.¢ omonba mu.m mm.m mm.m om.v o>.m oo.¢ om.w ov.¢ ow.v mm.v mm.¢ mu.v nmwm mm.m o¢.N om.m mm.» mm.m om.» oo.¢ ma.¢ mo.¢ mm.v mm.v mm.v Bog Hmmdlommfi .’oz .poo .vmmm .msa1HH5h cash.HcE HHHm< seams .nmh .nwh .omo pmz mwanom OOH mo ovens ow soapwpoad mamQQOH swam HH> .H mqmde eta nemaaoaa IV. year when the prices are at a peak and again when they are low. The months from January to August showed the highest price with a pronounced peak in August. These are the months in which to avoid the buying of dry beans. September and October showed the lowest prices. This probably is due to the fact that there are more beans on the market at that time since this is the harvesting season for the crop. By January the crop is beginning to be diminished, consequently, the price naturally goes up. The prices during the Spring months often are determined by weather conditions in the producing areas. If conditions are ideal and there is a good outlook for next year's crOp then there probably will be more beans sold and not such a large carry over for the next year. In i‘ebruary, 19.32,farmers sold freely in order to meet delinquent taxes which forced more beans on the market than were needed to supply the demand; hence, a decline in price followed as will be noticed on graph IV. COLIPARIS ON 051‘ COOKING QUJ».LITL$5 OI." ELIE 1.:ICiiILh‘tN PE; "3.5.1.7 AND 31-13 GL1“? 1110-112134le BERN. The value of dried beans depends solely upon whether they will cook soft. Abel (1), writing in 1916 about the principal requirements in the cook- ing of dry beans, says that the aims are: -53- "1. To so soften and dis integrate the cellulose that the nutrients that exist in close connec- tion with it are set free. 2. To cook the protein constituent so as to make it digestible and palatable. 5. To swell and burst the starch grains. 4. To combine the various flavoring matters, as salt, pepper, fat, herbs, butter or fat meat so that the results shall be a palatable dish." "It has been universally said that long cooking at a moderate temperature develops the flavor Of beans and, most important, does soften the tissues. This is illustrated by the delicious flavor’of the 'Old Fashioned Pork and Beans ' of New England which has been brought to perfection by baking for at least 12 hours in the slow-cooking brick ovens.The addition of fat and salt pork not only adds to the flavor,but also supplies needed ingredients to make a better balanced ration." The comparison of cooking qualities of the two beans was done in five series of experiments,using three methods of cooking, namely: boiling, steaming and baking. An equal weight of beam of each class was used. Half were soaked and half were used un- soaked. The time of soaking before cooking was fifteen hours. Both classes of beans used were of the crOp harvested in the fall of 1932.Soft water -54- was used in cooking them. Covered aluminum pans, of the same size with as nearly the same degree of heat as passible,were used. The boiling was done on an institution gas_ range with perforated t0p. The steaming experiments were conducted in a sectional steamer under a pressure of 15 pounds. In the baking experiments, the beansxwere steamed from 40 to 50 minutes,depend- ing on the length of time necessary to loosen the skins. When.the blow test was applied, the skins would break and curl up. The beam were baked in earthenware pots for 8 hours, the fellowing recipe being used: 10 pounds beans 10 pounds brown sugar 7 tablespoons salt 3 teaspoons mustard 22.5 quarts bean liquor The cooked beans were rated by three judges, all of Whom were members of the Institution staff. The score card allowed 25 points for each of the following: general appearance, tenderness, flavor, and retention of form; one hundred points representing a perfect score. General appearance is of importance tc>the person selling food over the cafeteria counter for, after all, the consumer selects his food chiefly with his sense of sight. -59- Tenderness and flavor are factors of prime impor- tance in determining quality. Retention of form is of value to the user in deciding which class of beans holds its shape best for long time baking periods, and which class would be likely to mush quickly for puree soups and similar dishes. The amount of liquid used during the process of cooking was recorded and the percentage of absorption was estimated. The length of the cook- ing period was noted for each type of experiment. The number of servings and the cost per serving we re calculated. Discussion of the Results of the Cooking Experi- ments. The cooking of the Iiichigan Pea beans and the Great Northerns showed very definite results which would be of value to users of beans. Each class seems to have its advantages and disadvan- tages which adapt it to a particular use. -35- Table VIII Boiling - Average Scores Kind General Flavor Tender- RetEfié Total— appear- ness tion ance of form Michigan Pea Unsoaked 22.4 2209 2202 2206 90;]. Great Northern Unsoaked 20.6 23.1 18.5 20.5 82.5 Michigan Pea Soaked 20.3 1904' 23.1 21.1 8509 Great Northern Soaked 1806 2208 20.3 19.1 8008 Table VIII shows the average scores of all the judges for the boiled, soaked and unsoaked beans. The unsoaked beans in both cases excelled the soaked beans in general appearance, flavor and reten- tion of form. The Great Northerns surpassed the/ Michigan Peas in flavor, whether soaked or unsoaked; however, the Michigan Pea beans were scored ahead of the Great Hortherns in all other respects. The Great Northerns cooked unevenly, which was the main factor in reducing their score. The soaked beans were more tender than.the unsoaked beans. In comparing the total scores of the experiments in boiling the Lfichigan Pea unsoaked beans were highest with a score of 90.1 out of a possible 100 points. The soaked Michigan Peas were second with a.score of 83.9 out of a possible 100 points. The Great'i-li'ortherns unsoaked ranked third,and the soaked Great Northerns fourth. -37- Table IX Boiling - Average Scores Quan- Yield Number Cost Time Water tity in of per in absorption used qts. serv- serv- minutes in quarts ings ing, Michigan Pea, Unsoaked 10Lbs 11.1 66 .0056 94 24.7 Great Northern Unsoaked 10Lbs 11.8 71.1 .0063 97 28.5 Michigan Pea Soaked lOLbs 11.5 68.8 .0054 56 30.4 Great ' Northern Soaked lOLbs 12.15 72.9 .0061 65 52.5 Table IX gives the average score of the five series of the experiments in boiling, for time, yield, water absorption and cost. The soaked beans cooked quicker than the unsoaked ones. The Michigan Pea bean cooked quicker than the Great Northerns whether soaked or unsoaked. The largest yield was obtained from the soaked.beans, the Great Northerns producing the larger yield whether soaked of unsoaked. Water absorption was highest in the soaked beans,the Great Northerns absorbing a trifle more than the michigan Pea beans. n —08- Table X Percentage Absorption of Water in Boiling Quantity Quantity Amount of Percentage of beans of water water of used used. . absorbedgg absorption Michigan Pea, Unsoaked 10 lbs. 34 quarts 24.7 quarts 72.54:; Great Northern, ppsosksa 10 lbs. 34 ggarts 38.5 quarts 83.63:; Michigan Pea, Soaked 10 lbs. 54 puerts 50.4 quarts 89.41 Great '— Northern, Soaked 10 lbs. 34 quarts 32.5 quarts 95.53:; The data in Table X indicate the percentage of absorption for the two classes of beans. The soaked Great Northerns hsd.the greater absorption with 95.5 percent. The Michigan Pea soaked was second with 89.4 percent. This greater absorption of the Great Northerns undoubtedly was reaponsible for their higher yield in.comparison with the lflchigan Pea beans, which has already been.noted in Table II. Probably the absorption percentages are not entirely accurate, however, for some of the disap- pearance of the cooking water would probably be due to slight evaporation losses even though boil- ing took place in covered pans. The beans which. showed the highest percentage of absorption also produced the highest yield in servings which would -39- indicate, that it is correct to assure that most of the disappearance of water was due to absorption and not to evaporation. it the time when this study was made the Great Northerns cost .045 cents per pound and the Michigan Pea beans .024 cents, the higher cost of the Great Northerns being due to the fact that they are foreign to nine territory. Two-thirds of a cup,cooked, was considered as an ample measure for a serving. Thhs is the standard size generally used on a commercial cafeteria counter. Cost figures were computed on a quantity of ten pounds. The Great Northerns yielded the largest number of servings. From a quantity of ten pounds of beans there was a difference of four servings between the two classes ahen.they were soaked and a difference of five servings when they were unsoaked. -40- Table XI Steaming - Average Scores General Flavor Tender- Retention Total appearance ness of fonn hie higan Pea, Unsoaked 23.3 20.8 22.3 22.6 89.0 Great Northern, Unsoaked 21.3 22. 19.8 21.3 85.0 Michigan Pea, Soaked 22.3 19.6 23.5 22.2 87.6 Great Northern, Soaked 1905 2202 22.5 1906 8308 Table XI gives the average scores of all the judges fer the experiments in steaming. In both cases the Michigan Pea bean was superior to the Great Northern.in general appearance, tenderness, and retention of fbrm. was superior to that of the Michigan Pea bean. The flavor of the Great Northern The flavor of the soaked beans of both classes was infe- rior to that of the unsoaked beans. The unsoaked beans of both classes had a better general appear- ance and held their shape better than the soaked ones. The soaked beans were more tender than the mmodmd mes. this respect. venly. The Great Northerns The Michigan Pea scored higher in cooked'very une- This uneven cooking was probably due to careless grading since the Great Northern dealers do not use Federal standards in grading.In comparing -41- the total scores, the Mic higan Pea unsoaked ranks highest with the Michigan Pea soaked ranking next. The Great Northern unsoaked was third and the soaked Great Northerns received the lowest score. Table XII. Steaming - Average Scores Quan- Yield Number Cost Time Water tity in of per in Absorption used quarts serv- serv- minutes in quarts ings ing Michigan Pea, Unsoaked lOLbs. 13.05 78.3 .003 103 8.2 Great Northern, Unscaked lOLbs. 13.75 82.3 .0054 108 18.7 Mic h fgan __ Pea, _ Soaked lOLbs. 14.02 84.1 .0028 53 8.55 Great Northern, §9aked 10Lbs. 14.85 89.1 .005 61 8.85 The average scores of all of the experiments in steaming fbr time, yield, water absorption, and cost are shown in Table XII. Less time was required to cook the Michigan Pea been whether soaked or unsoaked. The yield was greatest in.the soaked beans, the Great Northern bean yielding slightly more than the Michigan Pea bean. The water absorption in.the process of steaming for the two classes of beans was almost equal, the Great Northerns taking up a little more than the Michigan Pea beans. -43- Percentage Absorption of Water in Steaming Quantity Quantity Amount of Per cent age of beans of water Water of Absorp- used used Absorbed tion Michigan Pea, Unsoaked 10 lbs. 22.5 quart38.2gquarts 36.45 Great Northern, Unsoaked 10 lbs. 22.5 quarts 8.7 quarts 38.633 Liichi gen Pea, Soaked 10 lbs. 22.5 quarts 8.55quarts 38.0.3 Great Northern, Soaked 10 lbs. 22.5 quarts 8.85quarts 39.513 The data in Table XIII indicate the absorp- tion in percentages. The soaked Great Northerns had the highest absorption with a percentage of 39.3. The Great Northern unsoaked were second with a percentage of 38 .6 and the Michigan Pea soaked were a close third with a percentage of 38. From ten pounds of beans, five more servings were obtained from the soaked Great Northerns than from the ifichigan Pea beans. From the sans quan- tity of beans, four more servings were obtained in the case of the unsoaked Great Northerns than in that. of the Michigan Peas. Even though the Great Northerns did give a larger yield the cost per serving was more than that of the Michigan Pea been because of the fact that the price of -43- tl;e Crest Northerns was almost double that of the Michigan Pea beads. If the price of the two classes of beans were the same, then the Great Northerns would cost less per serving, since they give a larger’yield per given pound- age. The cost per serving of the Michigan Pea bean was .003 cents while the Great Northern was .0054 cents per serving at the price levels which existed when this study was made. In cal- culating the serving cost in the experiments in both boiling and steaming, only the cost of the beans was taken into consideration. There were no seasonings used such as salt pork, bacon or tomatoes. A study of Tables VIII and XI reveals that the general appearance, tenderness and retention of form were highest when the steaming process was used for cooking. However, the flavor was better when the boiling process was used. The data in.Tab1es IX and XII show that the time required for cooking was shorter in the boil- ing process; 94 minutes being required in boiling soaked Michigan Pea beans as against 103.minutes in steaming. In spite of the fact that boiling required less time, therexwas a greater water absorption when this cooking process was used than in the case of steaming. The greater absorption -44— was probably due to the fact that there was a great deal of evaporation in spite of the use of covered pans. beans were steamed instead of boiled. The yield was greater when.the A heavy sediment was detected in the bottom of the liquid when boiling was made use of, showing that the skins had burst Open, hence, a material loss of the bean solids which wouhi cause a decreased yield 0 Table XIV Baking - Average Scores 7 General Flavor Tender- Retention TotaI Appearance ness of ferm Michigan Pea, Unsoaked 2300 2106 2308 2505 9109 Great Northern, Unsoaked 2107 2205 25.2 2007 8707 Michigan f Pea, Soaked 19.3 21.3 24.3 l9£5 84.2 Great —" Northern, Soaked 17.3 22.1 23.6 16.2 79.2 Table XIV exhibits the average scores of all the Judges for the experiments in baking. The un- soaked beans in both classes had a higher rating in general appearance than did the soaked beans. The Michigan Pea soaked was higher than the soaked Great Northerns. The general appearance of the -45- Iiichigan Pea bean was highest in both cases, but the Great Northern unsoaked scored higher than the soaked I-.Iichigan Pea. The Great Northerns again exceeded in flavor as they did when boiled and steamed, and the unsoaked beans had a higher score than the soaked beans. There was no appreciable difference noted in the tenderness of the two beans after eight hours of baking. The unsoaked beans retained their form better than the soaked beans. The Michigan Pea bean,whether soaked or unsoaked, ranked higher thanthe Great Northern. The unsoaked Great Northerns ranked only slightly higher than the Michigan Pea soaked. The judges all remarked on the "mushiness" of me Great Northerns. The supposedly thin skin on the Great Northerns is probably the cause of the beans mushing so badly, thus resulting in a low score for both retention of form and general appearance. There was little difference noted in file flavor of the two classes of baked beans. This was probably due to the brown sugar and other seasonings that were added which would tend to mask the real flavor of the beans. The Great Northerns did score about one point ahead of the Michigan Peas. -45- Table XV Baking7- Average Scores Quan- Yield Number Cost Time Time Water tity in of per of of Absorp- used cups serv- serv- par- bak- tion in ings ing boil- ing cups ing during parboil- j!!!) Hichigan Pea, gnsoaked lOlbs.56.00 84 .0091 65 min.8 hrs. 28.5 Great Northern, Unsoaked lOLbs.58.30 87.45 .0112 65 min.8 hrs. 29.6 Kichigan Pea, Soaked lOLbs.59.00 88.5 .0086 50 min.8 hrs. 36.1 Great Nor the m, Soaked lOLbs.60.1 90.1 .0108 50 min.8 hrs. 37.6 Yields, cost per serving and water absorption for the two classes of beans when baled are shown in Table XV. The Great Northerns absorbed more water than the Michigan Pea beads. The yield was greater in the soaked beans, the Great Northerns yielding more whether soaked or unsoaked. The soaked Great Northerns produced about one and one- half more servings than the Iiichigan Pea beans.T unsoaked Great Northerns produced about three serv- ings more than the unsoaked IIic higan Peas. The iiichigan Pea bean was cheaper per pound,thus making the cost per serving .009 cents which was less than that of the Great Northern, as the latter averaged .011 cents per pound. Regardless of the extra yield V. -47- derived from the Great Northerns, they are not economical to serve in the Kichigan Pea bean territory when their price is approximately twice that of the Hichigan bean. In purchasing beans the institution user must decide what qualities he expects them to have and choose the bean accordingly. If he were buying for flavor than he would select Great Northerns; if fer general appearance, retention of form or tenderness he would decide on the Iichigan Pea been; if he is buying fbr price, as had been stated above, whenever the price of the two classes of beans is approximately the same he would buy Great Northerns since the number of portions per given quantity was somewhat greater. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Since the United States ranks sixth in acreage and fifth in production of beans, it is evident that this commodity is of greater importance than is generally realized. hichigan usually produces about 40 percent of the entire bean crOp CT the United States, while the Great Northerns comprise only 14 percent of the total. The production of the Great Northern bean in the past four or five years has been increasing, while the michigan Pea bean has shown a potential decline. Of all the dry beans ~48- handled by wholesale grocers throughout the United States in the year 1931, Great Northerns comprised 21 percent while the Michigan Pea beans comprised only 16 percent. Great Northerns are being distri- buted in areas where pea beans were formerly the principal class consumed. In Spite of the handicap of the Great Northern been due to poor grading, it is giving the Michigan Pea bean increased competi- tion, partially due, no doubt, to the national advertising done by the western growers. Michigan Pea beans are preferred by canners while the Great Northerns are preferred by the dry bean trade. September and October appeared to be the best months for the purchase of dry beans by the institution buyer. Dry beans have many advantageous qualities which make them a useable product for every menu maker, regardless of the type of institution which he is managing. As is the case with other commo- dities, the two classes of this one have specific uses for which each is superior to the other. The comparative study of the cooking qualities of the two beans showed the following results: 1. The steamed beans were superior to the boiled in tenderness, general appearance and reten- tion of form, but the flavor of the boiled beans was preferred to that of the steamed ones. -49- 2. The baked beans were more tender than those boiled or steamed. 3. Less time was required fer cooking the beans when.they were boiled than when they were steamed but the yield was greater when the beans were steamed. 4. The unsoaked beans excelled the soaked beans in general appearance, flavor and retention of form when cooked but were less tender than the soaked beans; 5. The soaked beans cooked more quickly than the unsoaked and also gave a larger yield. 6. Water absorption was greater in the soaked beans and the Great Northerns absorbed more than the hichigan Pea beans. 7. In boiling and steaming the Great Northerns were superior to the Michigan Pea beans in flavor but the two classes showed little differaice when baked. 8. The Michigan Pea beans ranked higher than the Great Northerns in general appearance,tende r- ness and retention of form when boiled, steamed or baked. 9. The Michigan Pea beans cooked more quickly than the Great Northerns whether soaked or unsoaked, but the Great Northerns produced a.larger yield. 10. The Michigan Pea beans used in this study -50- cost less per serving than the Great Northerns. If the two classes of beans had been priced the same per pound, the Great Northerns would have cost less, since they produced a larger yield thm did the LIichigan Peas. ll. The Michigan Pea beans are recommended for either baking or boiling while the Great Northerns are better for purees and soups. VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY l. Abel, Mary Hinman, Beans, Peas and Other Legumes as Food, Farmers Bulletin Number l2l,(1916). Bailey, E. H. 8., Food Products; Their Source, Chemistry and Use, 3rd Edition (1928). Dominicis, A. De., , Ann. Scuola Agri. Portici; 16:51 (1920). Abstracted Chemistry Abstract; 17:5588 (1925). Stoz. Sper. Agrorital; 54:446 (1921). Abstracted Chemistry Abstract; 18:151 (1924). Lone, Belle, Experimental Cookery (1952). Thompson, Homer. 0., Vegetable Crops (1951). Down, E. E. and Brown, H. M., Investigations with Strains of Beans, Special Bulletin Number 156 Agricultural Experiment Station, Michigan State College (1926). Hughes, H. D and Hanson, E. R., Crop Production (1930). Woods, C. D. and Mansfield, E. R., Studies of the Food of Maine Lumberman, United States Department of Agricultural Office of Experiment Station Number 149 (1904). Stewart, George, Field Beans, Utah Agricultural College, EXperiment Station, Circular Number 57 (1919). 10. NcCollum, E. V. and Simmonds, Nina, The Newer Knowledge of Nutrition, 4th Edition (1929). 11. Friedenwald and Ruhruh, Diet in Health and Disease, 6th Edition (1926). 12. Lorand, Arnold, Health and Longevity Through Rational Diet (1928). 15. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 25. 24. Snyder, Harry, Human Food Investigations, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experi- ment Station, Bulletin 74 (1902). Wait, 0. E., Studies of the Digestibility and Nutritive Value of Legumes, United States Department Agriculture, Office of Experiment Station, Bulletin Number 187 (1907). Johns, C. O. and Finks, A. J., The Journal of Biological Chemistry; 41:579 (1920). McCollum, E. V.; Simmonds, N, and Pitz, W., The Journal of Biological Chemistry; 29:521 (1917). Pittman,Martha, S., The Journal of Nutrition; 5:277 (1952). Hardenburg, E.V., Production and Marketing of Field Beans, Cornell University Extension, Bulletin Number 98 (1924). Stickle, B. A., Growing, Harvesting and Marketing of Domestic Beans (1928). Renne, R. R., The Economics of Bean Production and Marketing in Montana, Bulletin Number 258, Montana State College (1952). Distribution of Beans by Commercial Classes as Reported by wholesale grocers. Published by United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, April (1952). Hedrick, Wilbur, 0., Marketing Michigan Beans, Michigan State College, Agricultural Experiment Station, Special Bulletin Number_2l7 (1951). Barr, J. E., » Changes in the Distribution and Consumption of Beans, The Bean Bag; 14:22 (1952). Sherman, H. C. Food Products (1927). 25. Rose,Hary Swartz, A Laboratory Handbook for Dietitics, 5rd Edition (1929). 26. Bean Statistics, Compiled by B. A. Stickle, Inc., (1952). 27. United States Department of Agriculture Year Book(1952). 28. Weekly Bean Market Review, United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics (1950-1952). .5. .5 ‘ _ 3:45., 3"“ " ”Ska/7,. AW” D 29 '99 assume!) a. 800' “Clo-mo I. Imu- W SEP 2 7 r. mmurn I non. JAN 2 7 ’49 _ MAR 22., 1949 APR 2 :94: Eh/ars JUN 1 8 1947 0 Nov 12 WMKL ASSI~I§IS 1.19.3123 ROOM '”'TITI'IllfitLfijfilllMIBWLHM)(hill)?‘5 7629