THE EFFECT OF DELAYED HARVEST
ON THE YIELD OF CERTAIN VARIETIES
0F OATS AND BARLEY

THESIS FUR TEE DEGREE OF M. 8.
Walter Frank Russow
I932

   

fllgmvvflfd‘ 721“

I.
OI'ODAflV n’ I I" [1'
US [I I}! J ‘

 

THE EFFECT OF DELAYED HARVEST ON THE YIELD OF CERTAIN

VARIETIES OF OATS AND HARLEY.

THE EFEECT OF DELAIED HARVEST ON THE YIXLD OF

CERTAIN VARIETIES OF OATS 55D BARLEY

A Thesis Prepared by
WALTER FRANK‘QEEEOW
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements fbr the
Degree of Master of Science

Department of Farm Crops

KICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SC EHOE
1932

THEEIS

 

 

 

ACI‘S‘TOWLEDGMEIIT

The author is indebted to Professor
H. 0. Rather under whose general supervision
the work was conducted. To Professor C. R.
Megee for'his helpful advice and to all others
who tendered valuable suggestions the author

Wishes further to express his appreciation.

! 4*: . r“,- s 'I
. A" — ’~'d :
E \)U . Luv-a

II.

III.

IV.

V.

TABLE OF COFTENTS

INTRODUCTION

HISTORICAL

EXPERIEEETAL
A. Oat and Barley Varieties Used
B. General Experimental Procedure

C. Tables and Charts

DISCUSSION
A. Effect of Delayed Harvest on the
Yield of Certain Barley Varieties
B. Effect of Delayed Harvest on the
Yield of Certain Oat Varieties

SUE I'IARY AND CONCLUSIONS

LITERATURE CITED

Page

12
20

28

28

34

39

41

RTRODUCTION

The increase in numbers of combine harvesters in
iichigan is a factor to be considered by those interested in
the agriculture of this state. According to Sauvg (19%? and
1931), in 1927 there were seven combines in use in Kichigan;
by 1928 this number had been increased to thirty-three; 1929
to fifty-four; 1930 to eightybnine and 1931 the total had
reached one hundred and seventeen.

The use of the combine under suitable conditions
significantly reduces the cost of harvesting small grains.
Calculated on a basis that two hundred acres of grain will be
out each year, the harvesting costs for a combine are app-
roximately $2.50 per acre compared to an expenditure of about
$4.00 for cutting, binding and threshing (eauvé 1930). As a
general rule, the harvesting costs of the combine and the
binder-thresher are about equal for an area ranging from one
hundred to one hundred and fifty acres.

The combine, as has been the case with.many other
modern implements, has brought up newtproblems. Under average
conditions, eight to fourteen days elapse from.the time the
grain may be harvested with the binder, until it may safely
be harvested with the combine and put into storage.

During this period the grain must resist lodging,
crinkling and shattering if it is to maintain as high a yield

as could be secured by use of tie binder.

Early eXperimenters were primarily concerned with
soil and climatic factors in relation to the time and duration
of the'harvest period, but investigations carried on in more
recent years have demonstrated that methods of culture, and
varieties oi‘grainggrovn, must be considered as materially in-
fluencing the nethod, tire and duration of harvest.

The work of investigators in the past two years has
tended to show somewhat of a variation between varieties
and their ability to maintain a maximum.yield over the duration
of the combine period.

This problem was then inaugurated to deternnne,
under hichigan conditions, the effect of delayed harvest on
the yield of certain varieties of oats and barley adapted to

this State.

5.

HISTORICAL

Changes occuring in the composition of

the kernel during the ripening period.

Although this problem.is concerned largely with
the effect of delayed harvest on the yield of grain, the changes
that occur in the composition of the oat, barley and wheat
kernel as they approach maturity are of considerable importance
and are briefly reviewed here.

Kedzie in (1882) and.(1895) was one of the first to
publish data of this kind. Working;with Clawson wheat, he
found the carbohydrate content to increase gradually reaching
its maximum.when the kernels were in the hard dough stage and
then remaining constant. The crude protein content decreased
to a minimum.in the milk stage, with little change thereafter.
The onide fiber reached its minimum.in the latter part of the
hard dough stage, with little change afterwards. The fat
content remained fairly constant throughout the ripening
period.

Le Clerc and Breazeale (1908) in studying the effect
of rain and dew on plants found that as the plants ripened,
the salts held in the sap of the plants have a tendency to
migrate from.the dying to the living tissue. The salt exuded

on the surface of the plant is then washed off and back into

4.

the soil by rain. They also found this migration to be
upward and not downward, there being, in fact, little
evidence to show excretion through the roots into the soil.

Brenchley (1912), working with the development of
the grain at Bothamsted, found the weight of the whole plant
to increase steadily until desiccation sets in about three
weeks before harvest, after which a fall in weight is evident.
The nitrogen, ash and phosphoric acid content increase until
a maximum.is reached about the time at which desiccation begins.
Then while the nitrogen and phosphoric acid remain fairly
constant, the ash decreases somewhat in quantity. The long
growing period of barley gave a prolonged period of desiccation,
during which certain maturation changes were evident.

Keitt and Tarbox (1912), studying the cat plant as
it approaChed:maturity, feund that the increase in.the total
dry matter was very rapid during the first few days of the
maturity of the plant, previous to that time the increase was
regular, but not rapid. The protein in the seed increased
until the milk stage, after which time the decrease was quite
rapid. The water remained high and rather constant during
the bloom.stage, decreasing suddenly at the beginning of the
milk stage, and remaining very constant until the cat start-
ed to mature, when there was another decrease in moisture
content. The percent of sugar decreased during the milk
stage, but increased slightly as the plant approached matur-
ity.

Harlan (1920), studying daily develOpment of the

I.

I‘.

 

 

 

5.

barley kernel from.flowering to maturity, found the in-

crease in dry matter in the kernel to be very uniform through-
out the period of growth. The percentage of water decreased
uniformly from.flowering to maturity. During growth carbo—
hydrates increased most rapidly and the ash least rapidly.

Harlan and Anthony, in the same year, found the
increase in dry matter of both normal and clipped spikes to
be continuous throughout the period of growth, although the
clipped spikes had a lower weight and smaller volume than do
the normal Spikes.

Harlan and POpe (1923), working with the water content
of barley kernels during growth and maturation, found the
average water mantent of the ovaries at flowering time to
be about eighty'per cent and that the per cent of water in the
growing kernel decreases uniformly day by day until the
average of a spike is about forty-two per cent, when all deposit
of dry matter is interrupted and the kernels dry with great
rapidity. This is the average of all kernels on the spike
and not an exact point.

Bradken and Bailey (1928), in a study of the weight,
volume and density of Kanred Wheat harvested at ten day periods
after ripe, show that the weight of a kernel does not change
when dried to a uniform.moisture content after wetting.

Wilsie (1930), in hichigan found the moisture
content of wheat to decrease gradually up to the time of
maturity. Kiesselbach (1931), working in Nebrasca confirmed
these results. Burnett and Bakke (1930), found the same to

be true under Iowa conditions.

6.

The effect of premature harvest.

A large amount of information has been published
in regard to the effect of premature harvest of wheat, oats
and barley.

Georgeson and Cottrell of Kansas (1890), working
with oats made three different harvest cuttings, namely;
dough stage, hard dough stage and ripe. They obtained the
highest yield and weight per bushel when the grain was in the
ripe stage. Working at the same station in 1891 Georgeson, et
a1, obtained the highest yield in the dough stage, a contra-
diction to the previous years results, heavy rainfall at
maturity probably accounting for the variation.

A continuation of the studies published in 1894 by
Georgeson, et a1, gave results comparable to 1890, tending to
show that results may vary from year to year with varying
climatic and environmental conditions.

Bedford of Canada (1890), working with two wheat
varieties, obtained the highest yield when the grain was in the
ripe yellow stage. The weight per bushel was also correSpond-
ingly highest at this stage.

Arny of Minnesota (1926), in studying the influence
of time of cutting on the quality of the crop, found a large
number of factors must be considered. Among these are yield,
quality, weather conditions at harvest time and differences
in cliratic and soil conditions in various locations. He

states that harvesting crops grown for grain or seed before

7.

they have reached approximately full maturity does not im-
prove the quality of the product.

Arny and Sun (1927), found in experiments with the
premature harvesting of wheat and cats that the highest yield
was obtained when the grain was mature. Lower weight per
bushel resulted from.premature cutting.

Zavitz of Canada (1927), in reporting work carried
on with wheat for twenty-nine years, states that it is ad-
visable to allow the crop to become fully ripened in order to
secure the highest yield of grain. Cuttings of grain made
when fully ripe also gave the highest wei hts per bushel.

Wilson and Raleigh (1929), studying the effect of
premature harvest on Karquis wheat and Victory oats, feund
that both the quality and quantity of grain were greater
when die phants were allowed to mature. Straw yields de-
creased toward maturity.

Kiesselbach (1931), summarizing eleven years work
on wheat and ten years work on the premature harvesting of
cats, states that the highest yield of wheat was obtained
when the grain was in the ripe stage. The highest yield and
test weight of cats were also obtained when the grain was
ripe.

McDowell of Nevada (1895), working with wheat
cutting at different dates, found that the maximum yield was
obtained when the grain was in the hard doug stage. He
sunrests cutting in the stiff dough stage when the yield is

Q3 C.)

nearly to the maximum that was obtained in the hard dough stage.

8.

The effect of delayed harvest.

Schwantes, et a1, (1930), carried on experiments
with the combine harvester to settle questions regarding the
ability of the different crops and recommended varieties of
each crop to withstand lodging, crinkling and shattering, for
varying periods after becoming dead ripe. The experiments
were conducted at three different stations in Minnesota. The
results secured at the different stations were not the same
and their findings seemed to show that under Kinnesota con-
ditions there was little difference between the varieties of
grain used in their'ability'to maintain a maximum yield
through a delayed harvest period.

Wilsie (1931), working with fine effect of delayed
harvest on American Banner wheat, at the MiChigan Station,
found the yield to decrease as the harvest period lengthened,
this loss in yield being largely due to shattering.

Burnett and Bakke (1930), carried on a very
comprehensive study of the effect of delayed harvest on the
yield of wheat, cat and barley varieties. 0f the barley
varieties studied, none seemed to have a sufficient length of
harvest period to warrant a recommendation for combine harvest-
ing under Iowa conditions. With the cat crop, varietal
characteristics appeared to be among the chief factors con-

trolling the time and.length of the profitable harvest period.

EXPERIMENTAL

Barley and Cat Varieties Used.

Four barley varieties and four oat varieties, either
established or being tested for possible use in Kichigan, were
selected for the test on delayed harvest. In order to present
a clearer picture of the effect of delayed harvest on yield,

a brief history and description of each of the varieties in

the test is given below.

Spartan Barley.

Spartan barley which, according to Rather, et a1,
(1929), was developed from.a cross between Michigan two-row
and Michigan Black Barbless, is white, two-rowed, smooth-
awned, stiff-strawed, and early in maturity. Its smooth beards
thresh off the kernels easily. During the 1931 season a
premium was paid for Spartan barley by commercial firms using
it for melting purposes and the manufacture of other barley
products. It is susceptible to loose smut and net blotch,

but somewhat resistant to stripe and scab.

Wisconsin Pedigreed Barley Ho. 9.

Wisconsin Pedigreed barley KO. 9 (Leith 1930),
a strain of Hanchurian, was found growing on the University
Farm.at Madison, Wisconsin in 1900 under the name Mandscheuri.
It gives a high yield, is six-rowed and stiff-strawed, and

has good melting qualities. This variety is now being

lO.

replaced by Pedigreed Ho. 5 (Oderbrucker) which is the same
as No. 9, except that Oderbrucker is slightly more resistant
to stripe. The main criticism of this variety, as shown in
this test, is that the heads crinkle over and, as the combine
harvester period lengthens, break off and fall to the ground,
resulting in a considerable decrease in yield. The straw of

Wisconsin No. 9 was the weakest of the varieties in the test.

Glabron Barley.

GLabron barley, as reviewed from Arny and Wilson
(1930), was developed from a cross made at the Kinnesota Station
between a smooth-awned selection and Manchuria. Glabron
barley is six-rowed, hulled, smooth-awned and stiff-strawed.

It is susceptible to scab and loose smut.
Wisconsin Pedigreed No. 58.

Wisconsin Pedigreed barley No. 38 (Leith 1931), is
a selection from a hybrid made at the Wisconsin station in
1926 between Oderbrucker and Lecorrynchum.black, smooth barley.
Repeated selections have brought forth No. 38,‘which is six-
rowed, smooth-awned, bearded and white. It is very resistant
to stripe disease, someWhat resistant to scab and susceptible

to loose smut.
Wolverine Oats.

The Wolverine variety of cats (Down 1931), which was

developed as a plant selection from an unknown variety, is a

11.

tall, erect, stiff-strawed, Open panicle white cat. Though
a typical mid-season oat, it usually matures a few days
earlier than most varieties of its class. The Wolverine variety

is adapted to the upland soils of Kichigan.

Worthy Oats.

The Worthy variety of oats (Down 1931), which was
developed as a plant selection from American Banner, resembles
Wolverine in appearance, with the exception of a slightly
coarser and stiffer straw. It is best suited to the heavy
mineral soils of Michigan where lodging is a factor to con-

Sidero

Markton Oats.

The Markton oat, as described by Stanton, et a1,
(1924), originated as a pure line from an unnamed cat (0. I.
No. 357) at Oregon in 1911. It is a common type, mid-season cat
with yellowish white grain and a large, Open, drooping panicle.
The straw of this variety is midlong and as illustrated in this
eXperiment not quite as stiff as the Wolverine and Worthy
_varieties. The outstanding characteristic of the Markton cat
is its high degree of resistance to covered smut and varies

from.the other three oat varieties of this test in that respect.

Iogold Oats.

The Iogold oat, according to Burnett (1928), is the

result of a single plant selection from the Kherson variety

1‘

’1

2'1

 

12.

made at the Iowa station in 1911. It is an early, short,
erect, open-panicle, yellow oat with a stiff straw and a
notable resistance to stem rust. This characteristic was very
noticeable in 1931 when the Markton, Worthy and Wolverine
varieties growing beside Iogold suffered severe infections of
stem rust, whereas legold was unaffected. This was probably
one factor that gave Iogold the advantage in yield. The logold
oat (Chniphill 1931), is recommended for use in the Upper
Peninsula of hichigan where stem rust attacks are common and

quite severe.

General Expe ri rented. Pro eedur e .

 

The plats were planted April 9th. on a very uniform
area of Conover loam soil. The seed bed was compact and very
well fitted before planting. Two hundred pounds per acre,
of a 2-12-2 fertilizer was applied broadcast and worked into
the soil.

The cat varieties were sown at the rate of two
bushels per acre. Glabron, Wisconsin Pedigreed barley No. 9
and 38 were sown at the rate of one and one-half bushels per
acre and Spartan.at the rate of two. The rate ofsseeding
Spartan was increased when a count made on the number of kernels
per bushel revealed Spartan to have about twenty-five per cent
less kernels than any of the other three varieties. The
appnoximate twenty-five per cent increase in rate of seeding
for Spartan should then place all the varieties on the same

basis in regard to rate of seeding.

15.

The planting was done with an eleven hole drill
leaving an alley-way of fourteen inChes between each plat.
Each variety was replicated three times to decrease inter-plat
competition to a minimum. (Fig. 1) When the varieties were
nearing maturity the three replications were divided up into
three series, as illustrated in Fig. 2, making in all, eleven
replications on each date of harvest for each variety.

The grain was harvested at intervals of four days,
conditions permitting. An area of fourteen square feet was
harvested on each date, making a total of one hundred and
forty-eight square feet for each variety on the six different
dates that cuttings were made. The plat technique followed
in making the harvestings is shown in Fig. 3. At the time of
harvest, material for moisture determinations was taken from
each replication. The harvested grain from.each replication
was capped with a heavy paper sack and shocked, as shown in
Fig. 4, to avoid any further loss in handling. The first date
of harvest for all the varieties was made when, from.ebserva-
tion, the grain was considered to be in.the hard dough or
binder harvest stage.

Moisture determinations on each date of harvest
was determined from.the composite sample taken at the time of
cutting. A Brown-Duvel moisture tester was used for the
determination. The resilts are shown in the following tables.

After capping and shocking, the grain was allowed

to stand until after the last date of harvest, it was then

Series A

1...!
#5
C

Series

 

Tdfe

'1'

- r“
wcwe
2.4 K:

.. \

_;LL

 

iTolver

‘—

11‘

1
Q

8-,.5“

‘rr
3;.)

’Wolverine

A. 01V?) 1"]. L8

 

5
11

Fourt
Rep.

0:015

Iowa
{

-T , "w .- I] “‘
.1. Q j \L«‘ .4- L1.

 

'\ "t' "
LI. 1 I"- E O :1!

TL l)“"l;"+ r.

r
‘-\AJ-J~U l...

.12, _.
laud: _ . ‘J'J L1

 

i
u—
‘
J
v
V

fortify

I.,Olw'tMJ-.~ «r;-

Lortyv

 

golverine

- . \
'iiOiV'i'J 1"] :ie

Tolvari

EEG

 

d

iir

IOIKDld

IOfUld

 

ortiy

we re-

Infield

 

-.--1'--—-'-.
”thn

 

 

 

 

 

. I ' ,_,‘ ~.
.‘4 [LI W LAL...J() - 2"-
_‘ ‘ 1 . "‘ ‘ - .
[olve 1 e folver ;e .oly97' e
- 4.x -. 1" L a, if;
(caj 01‘ L! l.‘ yr ”(I OI“?- U A A £{I l C) l t i , \r
5.1 0 ° 4’
f\ 7' I l' Yn‘ " ‘ r“ ~ '- (7‘ 'V‘I fif‘l‘ f - l . 7.” J‘ ‘— 1'1
0 5J4 1.14.412011 ;.'-LJ.-xu')r’l ,_\_.-._... _ ".LL
0 (D ,_, " '— " T - " J
(D {3" *Ogu',01(.i I _:)5 5.1.2.1 01L}.

(:1
.V)

 

Tolverine

”elveri: :e

 

rst

.
Q;

‘.~ 1.0-;- 'A
_ Girls. 0011

 

 

IOIOld

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-‘f‘

tic;

.H 82 .v'OI'ti‘.:/'. fiftfly. “IOECJGLy
h. ”elverine ”olfa;ine ;oiverihe
inixygpartan £d_e :E e
:Sgi;d.s eonsin ETSS ”iseorsin‘fi38 Liseonsin f 38
ape Flabro Claoron Glaoron
8’“ .inleonsinl F 9 -ubSCOnSiIl 7 9 niscrun 911.4? 9
$1 Spartan Spartan Spartan
giseonsin f'ES “i eonsii f‘JS Hiseonsi; f 33
'ESA'Jisconsin :9 Liseoisin , i Jiseonsin_§ 9
t1? Clabron G abron Clabron
lrh.v . .
E4 L"Qrtu1 pplitan _3_arta1
@ . hisconsin'? 9 Iiscozsin £f9 Uisco;sin_j 9
EggVfilabron elabro; Glahron
OLE iseo ns 1 £738 Uiseohsiu £733 Tiseonsin E 38
(:13 Iii-{181‘ tan 3136173131213 Ellartan
#,, Clabron Slabro; Claban
m p4.iseo:.in f‘ES 'TISConsin 3 38* Jisco:sim j 38
:3g Tiseensin 7 fiseonsin f 9 Wisconsin 7 9
”* Spa tan Lpartun ' Spartan
Tkire Elise Ihlfe
Tig. l;—— The varieties were arranged in the three
replicati ns to eliminate inter-plat competition as
much as p ssible. The series arra::e ement is illus
ed in fig 2 on the follow ng page.

1;.

l5.

.pmo>nwn mo opmu mambo no
hpofinwp gone now mqofiprfiHmoH no>oao wqfixwa mmahom eons» oan as do
Icabfio.oama mpuam on» canvas hanwmn mm: madam can nong.ll .m .wam

}L".i..y-lul' est... .

 

 

 

 

16.

 

.cmpmnpmsaafi omaw ma mnfipmobnwn QH on

nsoaaow oswfiqnoop one .pmmbnwn no opac sowo How humanw> Mom pmou

wnwsam pnmaonhpnow dam omhcndn one mo pr0p m wcfixaa pwam some
Bony umpmobnwx mag pmou agenda nmopnsom mo menu n4.ll..n .wam

.In...

. l

.«o .
.0 .e.

I .1

 

 

 

17.

.mmfipmo>awn ampuw adooo canoe
mmoa on anp on coxoozm cam mxomm Momma spas cmmmco .opmummom
pmox mwe quprHHmmn some scum awwnw ampmobnwn oneull .¢ .wfim

 

 

 

18.

thrashed with a small experimental plat threSher and the
yield in grams was recorded for each replication of a variety,
on the six different dates of harvest. Moisture determina-
tions were also made at this time for each date of harvest
on all varieties. The yield from.each replication was kept
separate in order that the probable error might be determined.
The final yield in bushels per acre was determined from the
mean of the eleven replications. The yields, as presented
in the following tables, are calculated on a twelve per cent
moisture basis.

The probable error of each date of cutting was

determined through the use of the following formulas:

 

 

Standard Deviations 3 £5? - NMZ
N - 1
P. E. of Mean 2 .6745 x Standard Deviation

 

Jfi'

The probable error of the mean was determined in

 

grains and, by the formula P' E? or Kean , the probable error in
per cent of the mean was deteggiied. The probable errors as
reported in the following tables were then calculated by multi-
plying the probable error in per cent of the mean by the mean
yield in bushels per acre.

All data are presented in the following charts and
tables. The various tables show the yield, in bushels per acre,

moisture content in per cent and the test weight in pounds

per bushel, on any particular date of harvest. The reliability

19.

of the yields are indicated by their probable errors.

The relationship between yield, moisture content and
date of harvest is presented graphically on the charts.

moisture content is shown by connecting up the
moisture percents on various dates of harvest in the form of
a "curve".

Yields per acre are presented by a straight line
of best fit as determined from.the "law of averages". The
maximum.yield of each variety was used as a basis for the start
of the trend line. When the maximum yield did not fall on the
first date of cutting or binder harvest period, the result has
been a break in the trend line. The maximum yield is taken to
be the point Where the superiority of the yield obtained is
not due to chance alone. As a result, the highest yield for
any particular variety was not always considered to be the
maximum yield for that variety. "Breaking" the trend line at
the second date of harvest, in the case of Spartan and Wisconsin
Pedigreed barley No. 38, may draw some criticism, but in view
of the fact that the break is so apparent it was deemed

advisable to do this in.the proper analysis of the data.

Table

l.

20.

Moisture, yield and test weight of Spartan
barley on different dates of harvest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moisture Bu. per Acre Test
Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight
July 9, 1931 33.5 47.0 t .74 47.2 lbs
14 20.9 51.8 t .73 46.9 "
17 14.0 50.3 3 .77 47.1 "
21 15.9 48.4 t .74 47.3 "
25 10.8 44.6 ‘1.05 47.0 "
29 10.2 47.1 t .50 46.8 "
60
55
, 50
<2 /’
S
a
g340
CD
2355
YIELD
E; \ MOISTURE -----
#130 a
U ‘4
tg§ \
“‘25 as
0320 a:
H ‘b
l: \\ "‘ ‘
U ‘ ’p \\
#\\
10: 3”——fi"" “-
9 13 17. 21 25 29
DATES 0F HARVEST IN JULY
Chart 1. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Spartan barley to date of harvest.

21.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 2. Noisture, yield and test weight of Wisconsin
Pedigreed ho. 9 barley on different dates of
harvest.

Moisture Bu. per Acre Test

Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight

P.E.

July 11, 1931 27.0 44.3 t 1.49 40.4 lbs

15 15.9 41.2 3 1.00 38.2 "

18 13.2 41.6 t .93 39.5 "

23 10.3 30.3 3 1.18 39.1 "

27 10.3 29.3 3 1.47 36.9 "

31 10.7 29.5 t 1.26 38.8 "

50
F11 t:
(I, 4v,
m 0
E3. 4 ‘\\
U)
.4
a 3 \4
a)
533 \\“~\_
9 ‘1’ \
a \+
2 ‘X
E4 \
U 1‘
g 2 “
m \\ YIELD ——
E 1 km MOISTUFE------
1‘“
~a.~

23 “n-
E1 ‘ ““nfirn “"4

1 15 , 1 3* 27 *1

DATES 0F HARVEST IN JULY

Chart 2. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Wisconsin Pedigreed No. 9 barley to
date.of harvest.

22.

Table 3. Koisture, yield and test weight of Uisconsin
Pedigreed No. 38 barley on different dates of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

harvest.
Koisture Bu. per Acre Test
Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight
P.E.
July 13, 1931 33.9 54.4 3 1.26 40.0 lbs
17 15.8 59.4 t .98 40.4 "
21 14.9 58.9 1 .84 39.9 "
25 10.0 56.1 1 1.02 39.8 n
29 9.4 51.7 1 1.30 39.2 "
Aug. 1 11.5 53.0 t .70 39.1 "
65
5g 60 w
'\ O
E§50 3 L-‘fir
U)
:1
m
35
\\
E3130 \\
“ \ YIELD
\ I.IOISTUPE-----
25
e: \
Es \
$3 20 \
\
an
-15 —-
23 fi“
(0 q~‘\‘ 4"
5:10 ffi___- ’44
5
0
13 17 21 25 29 2
DATES 0F HARVEST IN JULY AND AUGUST
Chart 3. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Wisconsin Pedigreed No. 38 barley to
date of harvest.

25.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

()1
()1
rr

Table 4. Moisture, yield and test weight of Clabron
barley on different dates of harvest.
Moisture Bu. per Acre Test
Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight
P.E.

July 11, 1931 33.7 52.3 1 .84 42.0 lbs
15 17.9 50.1 t .74 42.0 "
18 14.4 53.5 1 1.31 42.3 "
23 11.1 46.9 3 .73 40.9 "
27 11.0 46.5 1 .75 39.6 H
31 10.6 42.5 3 .72 40.7 "

60
5

a; o

<45 fit

0: \+\

[:1

{1.

034” ~““;

,4

El. ~

€340

m

E?

111

E:

E
25‘
’/

 

 

YIELD ——J'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MOISTURE -----
O ‘
\
E \
““25
m \
\
E x
0120 \
H \
$2
or-lé \“
15 '=“‘
~~~ ‘~~
10 L t""“+-- “-5
11 15 19 23 27 31
DATES 0E HARVEST IN JULY
Chart 4. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Glabron barley to date of harvest.

24.

Table 5. Moisture, yield and~test weight of Wolverine

oats on different dates of harvest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moisture Bu. per Acre ‘Test
Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight
PhEE
July 21, 1931 26.7 90.1 3 2.28 32.1 lbs
25 12.0 82.4 3 1.59 31.1 "
29 9.8 76.7 3 2.35 31.9 "
Aug. 1 13.9 78.6 3 2.59 31.5 "
6 13.1 76.1 a 2.46 30.7 "
10 14.8 70.1 t 2.51 30.7 "
903~
hfla5j~““~_
s \
fl {\“\
g 80 \x
h fi‘\‘~‘(‘\
$3 75 $ \1
3 fi“‘
% ~\‘\~
t>
c070 ~“‘+
E2
‘fl30
F? YIELD
E; $ MOISTURE------
€325 -
\
Q \
\
E20 ‘.
‘1
m ‘s
H \
€215 \
n1: \ p—-,_- -— 0‘
\ ” --‘ ---T—-'
10 VAN“- ~=¥
5
25 29 2 6, 10
DATES OF HARVEST IN JULY AND AUGUST
Chart 5. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Wolverine cats to date of harvest

25.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 6. Yoisture, yield and test weight of Uorthy
oats on different dates of harvest.
Moisture Bu. per Acre Test
Harvest Date Percent Yield Weight
P. 2.
July 21, 1931 27.2 81.0 t 2.17 31.9 lbs
25 12.6 76.8 1 1.46 31.5 "
29 9.3 71.9 1 1.72 32.5 "
Aug. 1 2.6 72.4 t 2.20 32.4 "
6 12.4 63.0 1 1.51 30.6 "
10 14.4 59.7 t .63 30.6 "
85—
80 .17
m 75 l
a:
5.3: o
m 70 ~11
a \\
a 65 \\
E?
Q:
a 60
55
P YIELD
Q 30 IOISTUPE -----
25$-
5* \
E3 \
m
p120 %\
.'--1 \
s3 \
9?; 15 \\
E“ ’an"
U) ‘ k-h---dI--+‘
H \‘ ”
P. 10 "5 :’
5
0
21 25 29 2 6 10
DATES 0E HARVEST IN JULY AND AUGUST
Chart 6. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of Worthy oats to date of harvest.

26.

Table 7. Hoisture, yield and test weight of Iogold

oats at different dates of harvest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Koisture Bu. per Acre Test
Harvest Date A_Percent Yield Weight
P.E.
July 15, 1931 24.7 160.4 1 2.08 31.5 lbs
18 12.2 100.2 1 1.19 31.0 "
23 11.9 90.4 3 1.31 31.1 "
27 12.2 92.1 1 1.16 31.7 "
31 10.0 84.7 3 1.50 30.8 "
Aug. 4 14.2 83.6 1 1.38 30.0 "
105
10 __2
Efi95 ~“‘:rr
“90
2
£585
:3
(n
E380
YIELD
E425 1‘10 ISTURE-- ---
E51
:9 \
hi \
420 ‘
E} '\L\
E; 4“
9415 \‘
(Ii-i) ~\ I
9 \ -—‘F-- ~ ’I
15 19 23 27 3 4
DATES 0E HARVEST IN JULY AND AUGUST
Chart 7. Showing the relationship between moisture and

 

 

yield of Iogold oats to date of harvest.

27.

Table 8. Noisture, yield and test weight of Iarkton
oats at different dates of harvest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noisture Bu. per Acre Test
Date of Harvest Percent Yield Weight
P. E.
July 19 ,1931 24.6 83.3 t 1.22 31.4 lbs
23 10.6 81.6 i 1.59 31.2 "
27 10.6 80.9 1 2.22 31.0 "
31 8.8 85.1 3 1.82 31.8 "
Aug. 4 14.0 82.4 I .95 29.2 "
7 14.0 82.2 3 1.51 29.2 "
90-
2
£385 A
$80
tn
,4
E1
5575
:3
{n
E25
4 \ YIELD
Er! \\ I‘TOIS'I'UPdE-----
ffizo \
g \
3315 P‘, ‘
£11 \ —--I-
ea \ L/f
£3 ‘“~«V’
$3
'” 5
0 A
1‘ 23 27 31 4 7
DATES 0E HARVEST IN JULY AND AUGUST
Chart 8. Showing the relationship between moisture and

yield of fiarkton oats to date of harvest.

DISCUSSION

The following discussion gives the relative merits
of the varieties in regard to shattering, crinkling and
lodging, and the increase or decrease in yield during the various

harvesting periods.

The effect of delayed harvest on the yield of th

 

barley varieties tested.

 

Spartan Barley.

Spartan barley held its yield fairly well over the
entire harvest period of twenty days and gave promise of being
a variety adapted to combine harvesting. An increase of three
bushels in yield was secured from the time the grain was in the
hard dough or binder stage to the time when the grain con-
tained about fourteen per cent moisture. At this point it is
considered that grain may be safely combined and stored. A
loss of five bushels occurred from the fourteen per cent moist-
ure stage to the end of the delayed harvest period.

The straw of Spartan barley withstood lodging better
than any other variety. (Figs. 5 and 6) Eight days after the
first date of harvest the straw began to crinkle at a point
twelve to fifteen inches below the head. The heads, however,
did not break off, but remained supported by the other plants.
The heads remained in dais position during the remainder of
the harvest period and could be combined with very little loss

twenty days after the hard dough or binder harvest period.

29.

. m emonmaema afimeoomsm Ho swap use»

one sowsonpm ma proa

\

/ , A .-,./,:,.U..,,..
11 .\waw_

v

seamen qunwmm

 

.Apamsnv stages on
wsfimcoa op pswpmflmmh whoa
mo Bwnpm QQB.II .m .wam

 

I . .
\t7o ‘ O - _ ..§.

 

 

Sodom 93 pa 03.3.30
was omeoa on museums» cocfiomc muo> w msonm “pawfinv awaken ampnmmm
on 8829500 3.33 morass m . coohwgom qfimqoomfi... .II .0 .mg

 

 

 

Wisconsin Pedigreed No. 9 barley.

The maximum.yield of Wisconsin Pedigreed No. 9
barley was obtained When it was cut at the start of the binder
harvest period, and a loss of seventeen and one-half bushels
occurred fnmm then until the end of the delayed harvest period.
At the fourteen per cent moisture stage the yield had decreased
about five bushels from that oi‘the first cutting. The loss fnam
the fourteen per'cent moisture stage to the end.of'the delayed
harvest period was about twelve bushels.

The straw of Wisconsin No. 9 barley was the weakest
of the varieties tested. (Fig. 6) The straw crinkled badly
at a point Just below the head, and shortly after the binder
stage the heads began to drop off resulting in a material

decrease in yield.

Eisconsin Pedigreed No. 38 barley.

The variation in yield during the entire harvest
period of Wisconsin No. 38 barley was quite similar to that of
Spartan. An increase of three and one-half bushels was secured
idem.the binder harvest period to the fourteen per cent moist-
ure stage. A less of about seven bushels occurred from the
fourteen per cent moisture stage to the end of the delayed
harvest period.

In strength of straw Uisconsin No. 38, as shown in
Fig. 5, is slightly'weaker than Spartan. The straw has
somewhat of a tendency to crinkle at the head in a fashion
however, was not

similar to Wisconsin No. 9. The crinklinp

o)

32.

as pronounced and the heads did not break off and fall to the
ground as in Wisconsin No. 9. If cut with a binder under very
dry conditions the chances are that there would be quite a

loss in shocking and handling preparatory to threshing. The
combining loss would, under the same circumstances, be decidedly

less.

Glabron Barley.

Glabron barley decreased about thirteen bushels in
yield during the entire harvest period with a decrease of
about four bushels from.the binder to the fourteen per cent
moisture stage. The loss that took place from the fourteen
per cent moisture stage to the last date of cutting was about
nine bushels, and can only be traced to shattering in the head.

In strength of straw Glabron is quite similar to
Spartan, possessing a fair amount of stiffness and lacking the
characteristic head crinkling of the Wisconsin barleys. (Fig. 7)
If it would be possible to combine a grain as soon as it
reached fourteen per cent moisture, Glabron would be a very
commendable variety for the combine user. It is necessary at
times, with weather conditions we cannot control, to postpone
combining for quite a number of days after 3115 point has
been reached. It is during this period that the yield of

Glabron would decrease.

35.

.msfinoppmnm 0p cepSQanpw ma hawhdpaa Hmpmw hedges sonnwam

Mo caofim sH mmoa one .msoHpHUQoo Hwahoa Hades cwooa on hosoesop

mappfia macaw saw cassava cufipm sanfiah ms “pawfinv stages a .om
omohmficom sfimsoomfim op cohwgaoo “puoav madman nonpmac II..> .mfim

\.r
n. ‘ I‘l 1 )QI\VI. i|
\

.

 

 

 

54.

The effect of delayed harvest on the yield of

the cat varieties tested.

 

Wolverine Oats.

The decrease in yield of Uolverine oats after the
binder harvest stage was quite rapid. At the fourteen per
cent moisture period a loss of three bushels had occurred over
the maximum.yie1d secured at the binder harvest stage, and on
the final date of cutting a loss of about seventeen bushels was
recorded. The loss occurring from the fourteen per cent
moisture period to the end of the delayed harvest period was
fourteen buShels. The rapid decrease in yield is considered to
be due primarily to shattering.

In strength of straw, Wolverine is slightly inferior
to Worthy. (Figs. 8 and 9) The difference in lodging,

however, was quite small this season.

Worthy Oats.

The loss in the yield of Uorthy oats over the entire
harvest period was greater than Wolverine, the total decrease
amounting to twenty-one bushels. The decrease from the binder
harvest period to the fourteen per cent moisture stage was
also slightly greater, amounting to about four bushels. The
loss from.the fourteen per cent moisture period toithe end of
the period was seventeen bushels.

The straw of Worthy oats was the most resistant to

35.

.swnpm Mo amonwmfipm ma humans» oanwcHGSEOo
hao> a omaw cobonm Apnmfinv mpwo caomoH .pmop nouns weapofinw> esp
ho Begum pmowsonpm on» wommmmmom Anyway mpso mnphoa.ll .m .wfim

 

 

55.

 

.Bwnpm no
npwsmnpm ca caomOH op oapaasmsoo ma Apmoav osflno>aow .omcoa op
housenmp coefiooe sno> a macaw Apzmwnv mpwo nOpMHwE.II .m .wflh

.Ot

. . ...%...l,t1«uwrw

 

 

lodging oi'all.vaideties tested, and would be a desirable
variety for coxbining in this reSpect. (Fig. 8) The rapid
decrease in yield, as in the case of Wolverine oats, was due

primarily to shatterhig.

Iogold Oats.

Iogold oats decreased five bushels in yield from the
binder harvest period to the fourteen per cent moisture stage.
The total loss for the entire period was nearly seventeen bushels.
The period was, however, about two days longer for Iogold than
for Wolverine or horthy. The decrease from.the fourteen per
cent moisture stage to the end of the delayed harvest period
was twelve bushels, the loss being attributed to shattering.

In lodging resistance, Iogold (Fig. 8) is about mid-

Y

way between Holverine and Worthy.
karkton Oats.

Markton oats gave surprising results, in that prac-
tically the same yield as obtained at the binder harvest period
was maintained throughout the combine stage and through the
remainder of the delayed harvest period.

From the standpoint of maintaining a maximum yield
over a delayed harvest period, Earkton is a very promising
variety. However, when stiffness of straw is considered, hark-
ton literally fell by the way-side, as it lodged severely.

Fig. 9 clearly demonstrated the one drawback of’harkton oats as

a combine variety. It is realized, however, that the eXperimental

38.

plats were located on a very productive soil favorable to
lodging, and that Karkton oats grown on different soils and
under different conditions might not lodge as badly as it did
in this experiment.

Being somewhat in the nature of a variety test, the
problem has raised a very pertinent question in regard to plat
technique used in variety testing work at the present time.

It is a connon plat practice to harvest a variety test usually
when the latest varieties in the test are mature. Let us then
assume that we are conducting a test on the relative merits

of Wolverine and Iogold oats in regard to yield. We harvest
the plats when Wolverine, thich is about six days later in
length of growing season than Iogold, is mature. By a survey
of the charts on pages 24 and 26, we see that the yield of
Wolverine at maturity is approximately ninety bushels and the
yield of Iogold on.the same date, as Shown by the trend line,
is about ninety-five bushels. However, if we look back to

the time When Iogold was in a.nature state we find the maximum
yield to be one hundred bushels. By this method of’harvesting
the ten per cent advantage that Iogold had over Wolverine was
decreased to five per cent. This discrepancy in variety testing

work seems worthy of further shidy.

l.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

39.

SUTEL‘LRY AND CONCLUSIONS

In the study of the effect of delayed harvest, a
variation was noted among the oat and barley varieties in
their ability to maintain a maximum yield over the delayed

harvest period.

This variation is associated with the amount of

crinkling;and shattering of’each variety.

The straw of Spartan and Glabron was most resistant

to lodging of the barley varieties.

Wisconsin Pedigreed barley No. 9 crinkled very badly
at a point just below the head; these broke off and
resulted in a decided remiction in yield during the delayed

harvest period.

The yield of Spartan and Wisconsin No. 38 barleys
decreased least of all varieties over the delayed harvest

period 0

The quite rapid decrease in the yield of Glabron
barley during the delayed harvest period is attributed

to shattering in the head.

Of the oat varieties tested Worthy was the most
resistant to lodging. Its variation from Wolverine and

Iogold, in this respect, was small.

8.

9.

10.

ll.

40.

Though Markton.oats lodged very badly in this
experiment, this characteristic may vary under different

soil and seasonal.conditions.

The yields of Wolverine, Worthy and Iogold oats
decreased rapidly during the delayed harvest period. The
decrease amounted to approximately twenty-two per cent for
Wolverine, twenty-six per cent for Worthy and seventeen

per cent for Iogold.

Markton oats maintained practically the same yield
through the delayed harvest period. In view of its

decided tendency to lodge the results were surprising.

Before final reaammaidations can'be made in regard
to the proper oat and barley varieties for combine harvest-
ing under Michigan conditions, the experiment should be
conducted over a period.of years, and under varying

climatic and environmental conditions.

41.

LITERATURE CITED

Amy, A. C.
1926. The influence of Time of Cutting on the duality
of Crops. Jaur. Amer. Soc. Agron., 18:684-703.

and Sun, C. P.

 

1927. Time of Cutting Wheat and Oats in Relation to
Yield and Composition. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron.,
19:410-439. .

Bedford, S . A.
1895. The Cutting of Wheat at different Stages of Ripe-
ness. Cent. Exp. Farm (Canada) Rpt3254.

Burnett, L. C.
1928. Iogold Oats. Iowa Agr'l Exp. Sta. Bul. 47.

Burnett, Lu C. and Bakke, A. L.
1930. The Effect of Delayed Harvest Upon Yield of Grain.
Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 130.

Bracken, A. F. and Bailey, C. H.
1928. Effect of Delayed Harvesting on Quality'of Wheat.
Cereal Chemistry. 2:128-145.

Brenchley, Winifred, E.
1912. The Deve10pment of the Grain of Barley. Ann. Bot.
26: 903-928.

Churchill, B. R.
1951. Investigations with Oat Varieties and Diseases in
the Upper Peninsula. Mich. Agr'l Exp. Sta. Spec.
BU]... 213 0

Down, E. E0
1931. Information on Oat Varieties in Hichigan. Private
Communicatimn.

Georgeson, C. C. and Cottrell, M. S.

 

 

1890. Experiments with Oats. Kansas Agr. Exp. Sta.
3111. 150
, Burtis, F. C. and Shelton, W.
1891. Experiments with Oats. Kansas Agr. Exp. Sta.
Bul. 29.
’ , and 01:13, D. H.
l894. BXperiments with Oats. Kansas Agr. Exp. Sta.
131.110 540

Harlan, H. V.
1920 Daily Deve10pment of Kernels of Hannshen Barley
from Flowering to naturity at Aberdeen, Idaho.
Jour. Agr. Hes. 19:393-450.

and.Anthony, Stephen.

 

1920.

1923.

Kedzie, R. c.
1895.

Development of Barley Kernels in Normal and
Clipped Spikes and the Limitations of Awnless
and Hooded Varieties. Jour. Agr. Bes. 19:451-
472 g

and Pope, M. N.
Water Content of Barley Kernels During Growth and
Maturation. Jour. Agr. Res. 25: 555-560.

Composition of the Grain and Straw of Wheat at
Different Periods of Ripening. Mich. Exp. Sta.
Bul. 101.

 

1882.

Keitt, T. E.
1912.

Kiesselbach,
1951.

Le Clerc, J.
1908.

Leith, B. D.
1931.

McDowell, H.
1895.

Rather, F1. Co
1930.

Sauve, E. C.
1950.

The Ripening of Wheat. Rpt. Michigan St. Bd.
Agr. l:255*2390

and Tarbox, F. C.

Changes in the Composition of the Oat Plant as

it approaches maturity. South Carolina Agr. Exp.
Sta. Bul. 165.

T. A.
Effect of Harvesting Wheat and Oats in Different
Stages of Maturity on Yield. Private Co munication.

A. and.Breazeale, J. F.
Plant Food Removed from Growing Plants by Rain or
Dew. U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook: 589-402.

Inforration on Barley Varieties in Wisconsin.
Private Communication.

H.
Wheat Cutting at Different Dates. Nev. AST-
Exp. Sta. Bul. 30.

, Down, E. E., Brown, H. M., and Clark, F. H.
Barley for'Michigan Farms. Mich. Agr'l Exp.
Sta. :3le 290

Combine Harvester Thresher in Kichigan. Mich.
Agr'l Exp. Sta. Spec. Bul. 198.

 

1951.

Information on the Increase of the Combine Harvest-
er in Hichigan. Private Communication.

I.

1‘

I.

Schwantes, A. 1., Pond, G. A., Arny, a. C., Bailey, 0. H.
Black, R. H., Reynolds, L. A., and Humphries, W. R.
1929. The Combine Harvester in Kinnesota. Minn.
Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 256.

Stanton, T. R., Stephens, D. E., and Gaines, E. F.
1924. harkton, An Oat variety Immune from Covered
Smut. U. 8. Dept. Agr. Cir. 524.

1711318, CO PO
1950. Test Effect of Delayed Harvest on Wheat. Mich.
1181‘. EXP. Sta. Quart. 31.11. 13:87-89.

Wilson, H. K. and Raleigh, S. M.
1929. Effect of Harvesting Wheat and Oats at Different
Stages of Maturity. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron.,
21: 1057-1078.

and Arny,.A. C.

1950. Small Grain Varieties in Minnesota. 'Minn. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 264.

 

zaVitZ, Co A.
1927. Forty Years' Experiments with Grain Crepe.
Ontario Agr. COlo BUlo 3520

'.' I . "
II .UI.‘ '
1“ '.
D‘

-' ~44

‘ . :0 ' I} I V \a'
«L. “ I I-.‘ I III I‘vfl'g
' 'x

\
\Ir '
,.q§. afieg

. 4‘: -
,2» " s: .5
‘3 , ‘
ms.-
Il-I‘

"e ‘ -- -' '.I:"~.‘I.x A‘C‘drgnq‘.

. a I. . .vk”
:5 If: ‘1‘} I“ g ' I II‘TI‘II..

7-
.4
Ii
\-
1‘
'i‘
“-k
V-
’2‘...

. ‘IY. .' I .. . ' . - ,au .-
, ' - I. . I. . . '.° \ . , ,. ‘ _, .II _ .. : v . . I " I .‘ . .
.’,‘ ) .VIJIIIV l,.. \'J ." - . a. a ‘ .t‘ < _‘ | I ' t - .H A _‘. . --.I 0' a I - . _ I'tf‘b x... ,
I. "h .’V'. 'I I (‘H '.I ' I ‘ ', L ,- I’. ‘. I' \ v , "I .- .‘ .‘f ‘3‘ ’ 5
O IV?" 1"; w‘ . . j‘ " LI '7,' O - u . Y ‘ .v’ ' . .7 _ 'I I L ”gs-d. V,
| 9“, -t‘_ - ‘ ,".Ik'I ’ s I. ',I " ‘ f 1 . . .tI ' ~ ‘ ‘3 K, ”K . ‘ . ' ‘. , .v ‘ -.' ‘- ' . ‘.‘. a. .53. ';_ , f
. 'I' '1 I > ' ' . , I I‘., I - ‘ -I~I V ‘ I " . . '. I I I ‘
J. ‘1 .' . .I u ‘ : , ' - ,v . . l .-: . . c . Ia. . .. 4” 'I' . - .-‘ -' _’ '~ . . n - . . I’ ‘I, . I‘: ' ’. . I- “ n
um.» “v t r .-.....~g* 3‘" ' ‘ 7- “ . -. . , .. w. L; 5’ '- My ,--
1 .q ..v ' ’V '\ I, I. ,II‘,.. 1' ' ‘ ' "‘. . . - ' '. ' .' - v
r 1'. O't“,‘ , . ..“_1 ‘. . 4 "‘ " ‘ ' .. ~IY .H. 4' ’ . . I,, " \.'." .' . ‘. u. ‘
.‘ I 4' ‘ _‘ ‘ A. t ‘ I ', Q. ' - . “1 ’ ‘0 I '-‘ f I" \. L" _' ‘h‘ I.' ~ ‘ . \ ’ ‘ ' I t . '
.‘gI'I- 4~I I I ‘i I “ I I I . I’II. V I II

I oIII‘. IoI-a‘fII A'r ." I ' 1:qu (y- ff". ’WMQ‘SW'E‘F‘? --‘44I_r.". ' -
v .I ,I \‘.’ II... " . ~. . . ' ' ' _ n. __ I... (‘0 :‘ '..o J . ;\"‘I .‘ ' a
. . ,n‘ "'...'.-. L,” by}: .> cg? - . . .' - ' 297W '.-¢.?"~ :"h‘r‘i w ‘5'; n
‘. *s 533:3. 1:, a; 1'5; '4‘“ ‘ A '3 i‘.;€g&;,fi'§§¥?5§;'h~‘
I ".II‘I‘IHfiI V '1': . . ‘ ,f'.‘ .1, . ‘ .1 Si? '91; ' . F;-
«C;I"\;':,y¥i r}. .‘ . . '._I '.‘ fifi‘..,‘{i_,: 7 .! I:§',¥'. !
y... ~ . . a. 5, new ""1 y
. . 9

I

_ L
. '3 ‘P

. .III" L "‘I:“- ‘ a
, ‘ 1'} 6%“.ng 3', ((I .0, w- -
.I 'I If . 1 .'I '. ISL-” . ‘ I I. ‘
I? ‘ 'Ii'fle'A .“ 3 .‘ ,-"3?'I.ij‘ .’7 ‘l
. I“ '- .

. ~ ‘ $.IIv " ‘fi‘I .Il‘rII v t ' .' ‘
\ ff,“ - I‘x ‘. ~. a -

' ~ 1,»... .1»... 4

'1 gm. ‘ r

. .I‘ .

-I$'.-‘;w\--

I

. I" £5. '91. ‘ — a]. '.
,1". 3:13 fig. I ‘I " 9 _0.-‘ An I“:
_. ' 1:2‘; I I .‘.2 ‘II. . II 'I:_~ A s_‘ .0
1 . I' “(1

     

Ii
} a I“ I I I II 2 ”I I ' ' .5” II v- . I . I 'I. ‘. I ( ' .1

.
n

\ l, -
. :I . . I
. ‘( - J'g' '1 . , kl n! '
a - ‘ . 4‘ . r . . ‘ .“ .'
. 0'" *I' ’L t_
‘ ‘. .5 ,'I Hg.“ ‘_‘ \‘
. .‘ - ..~._C ‘ I“'
M - I g' ‘I- ‘fF‘g I
I5 . -‘._-.‘,‘ -
.' _ 41:33.33: 3, . )I'II
v. .‘ I""AI'|.I". I‘ 2'. II .. .‘ _ _
,2. 1..., . “Va 271..” .. ,‘L 33‘ . ‘ ._,- -\.‘l III;"II v
’I‘. : .‘g':" '1“ . ' I . t. ‘4.“ ." 4" .-\.\ I.“ [I fi‘ , . . '
A l ‘I , r n ‘a . . ~ h4df _ II'. II\';_I‘3 t , ~‘ -
. I ' 4 I H.‘ ’.' .‘ .II‘I’..:;;;II".4\ III- .“II

- 1. s Ni“ ~ 4
0‘. ‘ ‘0"; ,I ". R‘J‘Qz‘l‘I} 'I“ U '. I, l.
I t .'| .‘ k .14! . I.‘ n', .
S ( 1 V‘ .', v \ .‘1 v ‘ -| . .
'IJW tIJ ‘e'I)'Ib.I5'.I .I .. .
“~-- " . ‘ ’ '; 0‘ ‘4' ' . ‘. - ' ‘ . ' [r 'u’fi‘ s. ‘ I. a. ".
. _ _,. 1... . J I , r . . x ' _ . ‘ _ - ,.,‘ l , I ‘ Jul . ‘ .
_,_-’V_I ' ‘. 'I‘ u» . I ‘ ~ ~. .ItkI ‘ ‘ . I ‘II ' I' ' a. . I‘.‘I. " ' :1 .‘ 0., ”IV"? “i I '.'.
.' OK, .‘.I ' ~. 1.. I" . v- ‘ "I A - .u ,- I,_ . .. , 1 g. ,- .. .' , , ‘ .., v - ~y ‘I. V, pl". : ' - l 0‘1 . -; ' \ ) .l
‘ . -" . , I I r' ' I I I I‘ .

. .- ..
1 _‘ ,— ‘ I
, . . . .‘t

f ‘0‘
1
.4.

.Id“
‘A V

, _
\c
L.

‘I .r

‘v
-"

’ 1’
' “II It"...‘II.
MI ‘3‘5‘ KAI Iv!
. ' g
-: 'y\.'.. ‘3):
.h. I'
I‘ J “N!
d 1

..
.
. ‘4

uI--;‘4'III
- 14 ’ - . "

\
3"
.vh‘ ‘

a. ’ ‘4
|
L;u

“-Ii“'\'Ir
\ V ‘ I
i?" 2“ t‘v “

\I :‘1
Q
I.
O
3",; ‘J
J ) . I“.
I
K A‘
A
t?!

1
2.: I-.'. _
l IIfI‘
.( ‘12.;"
“Z

If“ ‘-. I I III III .I II“ ~‘II 'I\ l : ‘ v ' I
I‘III ' A?“ II I I'lf‘fi I":Ir‘rr.I'II ‘ .1
I-o’d".._‘I‘ in. ~ " . -'. I ' '
I ' a i': 1“ III E" I I W v‘I-I‘v .mj‘.‘ II x. .I; >3
'-)".'IIIII‘-, "_ , , t‘"‘~-' .
‘;= .rn-‘M- ._ . . . - . . ~ ' - . v - v if; a a. ,5
,_v.,* t u} v.‘;.§'g‘ ‘ 1 ., . .' . -_ I . - _- ’ ‘. ‘ I . ._ _ _. . m r.) k y‘n ‘ _
\ ' ‘3 . |‘* w.‘ 'I . ~ . . Iv ' ' . . < . . , ,'. . - a 1 _: ‘ .“ 'l b. ‘ '
3r;‘-‘I J”*."( I I I ‘ 4 . '0‘ k.
.. {lIVII- )yfgf‘év I ',' . -.. . .. ,
vf ‘ ‘y': .- r, . y- D '. . '(
,f I ; ' -I ‘: I
u ’7‘; J???" or}
I'1fiyIv, 5"} I.
I- ' iIL; . t ..":
I ‘ I I C‘ .' \
a z .

2“, III: I. II I III " II I I‘rII '. I I'.III . 'II‘ . II I I I I I o 1 I a II‘ I . . I I. IIII'I'I I. ‘ . I I r ' ' x " ‘ \ I I A .' ' ‘I I'".I .
:: IT" ‘ '. . -,. -., . -.. . '-.. . ' .. ,I I‘ . v ‘0 . . .. , I. y ' .,‘ . ‘ ‘ . . I ‘. ' , ‘ IAIII ("‘1 ‘ .“- I
L; . m7 :n :uIil-fir-Ir' .; r '.I . ‘ w I . ‘ 2 .l‘ ‘1‘, ‘.‘ 2" [.9 ‘ u ‘ t} . ‘ v- ' .‘ . ,1 . ‘t": ‘ ‘ .. . t ' .0 ‘ 6‘ 'fin ‘I'n .3 .‘ Lfi'.‘
'Il'.fI-$. ILII "I, . III II I‘I s' ‘ - I ' ' .I'I II I I- I ' I I I ' -III 'I' ‘ - ' 'u I “‘I I ‘I I V "9 I; ‘ I) II” .I ‘ .1 " “‘Ai'fi % I I
~ - o\ s - ~ .~ -' , - - ,' ‘ I . ‘ . - » _ ‘ ' . _ ‘ l I ' V ' >- . .\
I II vi]: f I I ' ‘ . I I . I,I 0 1 II ,I . I. ‘r t _ I . I I ,I *I \ III- I .J . I; 3. ’ KI ’ ‘ “‘3dt-Tg‘ "I, . If ’I. 'Y.

-. , ‘ '. .7 .I‘-". .7 I .. , - - ' ., ._I _ .._ .. .- r . t - ,W . ‘ .- ., - ‘* £14, '-.II. .35

c ‘

x

" '. I ' . ' -
. .v. .3 II. .I .. I . ‘ .‘ . : .-' I I . H ' . . .. , .
-' . . L 0\_‘. - - . A. _ _. . _ . ‘ \ > f: .
_' '. . 9. . A.‘ . I_I . ’4. M4 . .. . -. -.I I. v . - I ' y . I . . ‘ ~ ‘ . II. 3“ ‘ fl

0

0, s}
- o
s - f . U . , o k

( 4 J I. ‘_ ‘ I’I. V .. v w ' ‘ . . ' ‘, , . . ‘ ' ,

_. .I,, . I . t . . . ‘ . ' - -. . ‘ . . I . , . _|‘ a . -' f' §.1 $1 ’
i I d i. 5‘ ~I'\In 1 I I ‘1'. «I. I. In I . I ‘ I .‘ 'II I' I ‘ .‘. I . I It. ‘.;IV‘I" ‘ y Q’fi

I; ‘\‘1‘ ‘-- u . 3 . ‘. ,- . « . , , _ . _.~ .0 .. ' ‘1 W n,. .— .1
a... v . ~ -. - - ~ -. . w.
(3‘ 1 HI" ' I ‘
3 r‘._ I‘ ‘~ ' .-

. 2' a.