A COST STUDY OS“ CERTAIN COLE CROPS: AS SERVED EN A COLLEGE CAFETERM 'Fhesis fur film Dames of M. S. MiCHiGAH 5‘3" TE CQLLEGE Marmara? Maw Chiids This is to certify that the thesis entitled A Coat Study of Certain Cole Crops as Served in a College Cafeteria presented by Margaret Mary Childa has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Mdegrce inmtion Admin-— istration MW Major professor Dme Feb. 1 ll 0 0-169 . q); q r..'1'11 1f-_A ”A. . _ *3!!! -.<-. np-u,: !'o§‘-!‘ P 11- .qr. "I _" f -fl l‘,,_...‘-.‘gm- -‘!-.' 't ' ”in“. ‘ 7-5-9. ‘1 5—~1~ 3‘1 "3: A COST STUDY OF CERTAIN COLE CROPS AS SERVED IN A COLLEGE CAFETERIA BY Margaret Mary Childe A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Institution Administration 1950 THESIS CHAPTER I II III IV VI TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODIJCTIONOOOOCOO0.0.0.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0...... EVIW OF LITERATUEOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO... THE BRA-8810A FALHLYCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOIOOOOOOO A Histow...0.0.0.000...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.... B Production in the United States..................... PROCEDUEOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.000...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO mULTS AND DISCUSSIONOOOOOOOOOO000......0.00.00.00.00... A . Varieties anthmounts of Vegetables Used in this studyCOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOO0..OIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOO00...... variation of waste Among Individual Samples......... Comparison of Per cent of waste Found by Other workers...00.00.00.000.0.0.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Comparison Of Servings Per Pmlndooo......o.......... Comparison of thte of Different Vegetables......... Comparison of Servings Per Pound and Per Cent of waBtGCOOOOOOOOOOOO...0..CO.00....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Comparison of Cost Per Pound and Per Serving........ Possible Substitutions of Vegetables Studied........ Availability and Wholesale Price of Vegetables studiedOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIO...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SUMMARY MID CONCLUSIONSOOOOOOQOO0000.0.e.0000000000000... HTEMTUEE CITEDOIOOOOOOOOOOOO...00......OOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOO APPmDIXOOOOOO000,000.00...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOCOOOOOOOOOOOCOCO 53?}! @341. ii PAGE 1 4 ll 26 28 28 30 33 34 37 3B 39 41 44 48 51 53 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author wishes to express her grateful appreciation to Mrs. Mabelle Ehlers for her con- sideration, patience, guidance and encouragement; to Doctor Marie Dye for her constructive criticism; to Miss Katherine Hart for her encouragement and to Mrs. Evelyn Drake for her kindness in allowing this study to be made at the Union Cafeteria. ********** ******#* ****** ##1## I“? * iii TABLE II III IV VII LIST OF TABLES PRODUCTION SEASON FOR CABBAGE.................... PRODUCTION SEASON FOR CAULIFLOWER................ DATA ON THE FOUR VEGETABLES STUDIED.............. COMPARISON OF PER CENT OF WASTE.................. COMPARISON OF DATA............................... SERVINGS PER POUND............................... WHOLESALE PRICES AT NEW YORK AND CHICAGO - 1948.. iv PAGE 20 24 29 33 35 38 44 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Cabbage Production in the United States, 194B............... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Ninter Season.. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Early Spring... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Late Spring.... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Early Summer... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Late Summer.... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Early Fall (dom68t10)............................................... States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Early Fall ~(Danish)................................................. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. Late Fall...... Cauliflower Production in the United States, 1948........... Cauliflower Production by States, 1948. 'Winter Season...... Cauliflower Production by States, 1948. Spring Season...... Cauliflower Production in the United States, 1948. Summer Season................................................... CaulifIOWer Production in.the United States, 1948. Fall seasonOOCOOO00....O0......._.OO0.00.00.00.00...00.0.0.0... Kale Production in the United States, 1948.................. variations in.Per Cent of waste in Cabbage Samples.......... variation in Per Cent of Waste in Cauliflower Samples....... Variation in Per Cent of'Waste in Brussels Sprouts.......... Variation in Per Cent of waste in.Kale...................... Comparison of Waste......................................... Cost Per Pound, as Purchased, as Edible Portion and Per SeminEOOOOOOOOOOCO0.0.0....OOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0... PAGE 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 22 23 23 25 31 32 32 33 37 39 Tl CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In the last two decades the.American public has become more and more food conscious. many changes have come about since the day that meat and potatoes were the standby of the American diet. This change has not been sudden. It has been brought about by a gradual accumulation of knowledge of the nutritive elements sup- plied by different foods, by better methods of preparation which retain food values as well as attractive appearance and by slowly but surely acquainting the public with the results of research in the food field. Better methods of transportation, improvements in packaging, conservation and storage have all increased the variety from which the menu planner may choose. ‘With an abundance from which to choose it became more essential that the person re- sponsible for planning the menu and purchasing the food be well informed as to relative food values and cost. Cabbage and its relatives represent vegetables that are generally well liked and frequently used. The present study was undertaken to provide in- formation regarding certain members of the cabbage family. The vegetables included in this study were cabbage, cauli- flower, Brussels sprouts and kale. Broccoli was not used because it was felt that frozen.broccoli# gave a more nearly standard ‘#Not all food service units on campus agree, however, as some do use fresh broccoli. -1- product with no preparation involved. Kohl-rabi was not served because it was not available and because of lack of popularity. Several attempts were made to serve red cabbage but it was not popular. Very small amounts were sold and there was a high pro- portion of leftovers, since this vegetable had to be cooked in advance. The purpose of the study was to determine the per cent of preparation waste, the cost per pound of edible material and the cost per portion of the four members of the cabbage family as served at the Union Cafeteria at Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan. Since there is little data available concern- ing waste and yield of these vegetables the study was undertaken to provide practical information for those in the food service business, especially since some of the cole crops are available the year around and are low'in cost. Even the more expensive varieties such as cauliflower and broccoli have a definite place in the menu since they add variety. The vegetables used in the study were prepared by the regu- lar vegetable preparation women at the Union Cafeteria, were cooked by the vegetable cooks and served oy'the counter girls with- out any supervision other than that ordinarily given. In other words, it was desired to discover the waste, yield and servings that were being obtained normally on a large quantity basis rather than to set up a special procedure for the vegetables under scru- tiny. The preparation women had been trained on.the job in the cleaning of vegetables as routinely carried out in this institu- tion. The vegetable cooks had also been trained to cook vege— tables to the degree most conductive to the retention of flavor and food value and the counter girls were usually students who 'were taught the standard portion of all vegetables served. It was wdth this organization as set up that the study was made to deter- mine the waste, edible portion and number of servings. The cost per pound of edible portion and the cost per portion were then computed. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature available on the cole crops deals almost en- tirely with the horticultural or the nutritional aspects of the subject. There seems to be no good reason for reviewing litera- ture on those aspects. Harris and Need (11) give the following data: Product Average Serving Size per waste per lb. serving, A.P. buttered Brussels sprouts 33% 4 to 6 2%-to 3 oz. Cabbage 30% 4 zz-to 3 oz. Cauliflower 56% 2 3 oz. or é-cup m These authors did not list kale. George L. Wenzel (17) lists the following data: Product Unit Portions Number Size Brussels sprouts 25# drum 120 2% oz. Cabbage 50# sack 150 4 oz. Cauliflower 6 dz. crt. 85 2%; oz. Kale 20# bu. 100 2 oz. -4- The Encyclopedic Cook Book (4) contains the following infor- mation: lb. A.P. Servings Brussels sprouts 1% 6 Cabbage 2 6 Cauliflower 3 6 to 8 Kale 4 6 to 8 11“ 1.— *=== West and Wbod (18) give the following data: lb. A.P. Servings Brussels sprouts 12 50 Cabbage 12 50 Cauliflower 28 to 30 50 Halliday and Noble (10) give the following: 1 A.P. E.P. me Servings Brussels sprouts 10§ oz. - 300 gm. 240 gm. 4 Cabbage-- Loose, green 27 oz. - 750 gm. 450 gm. White, compact 9%— oz. - 270 gm. 240 gm. Cauliflower 23 oz. - 650 gm. 325 gm. .>.>.h These authors approach the subject from the standpoint of the cooking time for a given quantity of vegetable rather than on a waste and yield basis. However, it was possible to compute per cent of preparation waste from.their figures, table V, page 35. The New York State Restaurant Association publication "How to Cut Food Costs" (12) gives the following information: Product Size Unit pack Remarks Brussels sprouts Cabbage white-old white-new Cauliflower Medium Medium Large 40# drum 50% bag Ctn. Hard, green, Califor- nia. Approx. 50-60 small sprouts to a 1b.; some places sold by the quart which holds 1%,- 1b. Yield: 1 1b. cooked and trimmed about 3 cups. Serves 4 to 5. Hard white head Hard green head Yield: 1 1b. cabbage yields approx. 3% cups finely shredded cabbage for salad or 2% cups when out and cooked. makes 3 serv- ings cooked. White, hard. The outer leaves should be green and fresh. Yield: From a head 'weighing 2 1b. a rea- sonable yield is 3 cups cooked cauli- flower. Serves 4 to 5. -5- CHAPTER III THE BRASSICA FAMILY A. Histozz The cole crops, cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, Kohl-rabi, kale, collards, the turnips and the mustards including Chinese cabbage,(2) belong to the genus Brassica, the largest vegetable family.(l3) Cabbage has a tendency toward mutation which accounts for all the variants of this group. The Brassica family includes both annual and biennial plants. The wild parent, Brassica oleracea, is a biennial with a tough, woody root. It has large, thick lobed, glaucous leaves of green or red- dish color. The members of the Brassica family are botanically confused especially in.the cultivated species.(3) Some of the confusion has probably arisen because of the names in the differb ent languages as illustrated below.(3) French English American Chou cabus Cabbage ' Cabbage Chou de Milan Savoy Cabbage Savoy Cabbage Chou de Bruxelles Brussels sprouts Brussels sprouts Choudvert Borecole or kale Borecole or kale Chou-rave Kohl-rabi Kohl-rabi Chou-nave Swede or Swedish Rutabaga turnip Turnip rooted cabbage Chou-flour Cauliflower Cauliflower Navet Turnip Turnip -7- From the original wild cabbage stock have apparently sprung all the forms of cabbage, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts and kales. The English language has no generic name for this family or group. The French include them all under the term Chou, the Germans Kohl. The Latin names, especially in the Brassica oleracea-campestris group, have been used so interchangeably that it is almost impos- sible to use them.accurately.(3) The word cabbage which is the Anglicized form of the French word “cabocho” meaning head has been used to refer to the loose heading or non-heading forms of Brassica oleracea as well as to the modern hard heading type, Brassica oleracea variety capitata.(5) The wild cabbage, Brassica oleracea, is now found growing in places on the seashore of Great Britian, on the coasts of Denmark and Northwestern France, in various other localities from Greece to Great Britian. It has been known for centuries and was probably in general use 2000 to 2500 B.C. It supposedly was worshiped by the Egyptians and was highly regarded by the ancient Greeks and Romans as a food and as a medicine. Phythagorous and Cato mention its good qualities.(15) Although it appears that cabbage originated on the eastern Mediterranean shores and in Asia Minor the Celts who invaded the territory re— peatedly from.600 B.C. to the beginning of the Christian era prob- ably had much to do with its introduction into Europe. The Latin word Brassica is apparently derived from the Celtic word "bresic" meaning cabbage.(5) The introduction of cabbage into Europe is -8- usually credited to the Romans but it was probably carried through- out Europe by the Celts who invaded Britian in the fourth century B. C. Cabbage was first known in European gardens in the 9th cen- tury and was brought to the United States by the early colonists. (16) All cole crops are hardy and grow best in cool weather. Since they are so closely related many of the same diseases and insects attack them. In this study we are concerned only with those members of the cabbage family which are of commercial importance in the United States. The most important members from.this standpoint are cab- bage, cauliflower, kale, broccoli, and Brussels sprouts, all of which are Brassica oleracea. The early cabbage developed by the peoples along the Mediterranean'was the non-heading type which thrives in warm climates while the hard-heading type was developed later by the northern Europeans in the cooler parts of the conti- nent. White or hard-heading cabbage was not known.until after the time of Charlemagne who died in 814 A.D.(5) Although references are found to hard-heading cabbage it is not until 1536 that clear descriptions are found. A loose-heading form called romance and later chou d'Italie and chou de Savoys was grown in England in the 1500's. The round headed form.is the oldest type; the flat-headed and egg-shaped varieties appeared in the 17th century, while the pointed or conical kinds did not appear until the 18th century. Jacques Cartier introduced cabbage into Canada in 1541-42 and it was probably brought over by the early English colonists but the first written record mentioning it in the English colonies is in the year 1669. Most of the varieties grown in the United States originated in Germany and the Low Countries, the latter still supplying a great deal of seed for export to the United States. Some foreign seed is imported because cabbage tends to revert to an older type in.the United States and hence needs renewal from time to time. Cauliflower, Brassica oleracea, var. botrytis, and sprouting broccoli, Brassica oleracea var. italia, are two closely related members of the cabbage family, cauliflower being a descendent of broccoli. Broccoli has two distinct forms, Heading broccoli or cauliflower makes a dense white "curd" like that of cauliflower. The green form is known as sprouting broccoli. It grows as a branching cluster of green flowers on top of a green flower stalk. Smaller clusters form like sprouts from.the stems at the attach— ment of the leaves. Cauliflower and cauliflower broccoli appear alike. The winter cauliflower on the market is cauliflower broc- coli, which is hardier and slower growing than cauliflower.(5) Although both.broccoli and cauliflower have been known for about 2000 years they have only recently become popular in the United States. Both of these plants, which are the aristocrats of the cabbage family, are milder in flavor than cabbage. They are dif- ficult to raise, requiring a long, cool growing season and there- fore command a higher price on.the market. -10- Brussels sprouts, Brassica oleracea, var. gemmifers and Kohl-rabi, Brassica oleracea var. caule—rapa, are both descendents of the wild cabbage of ancient times but they are comparative newb comers since they have been.known for only 400 or 500 years.(5) Brussels sprouts which have been known in.America since about 1800 are not of great commercial value but they are becoming more popu- lar. Kohl-rabi is easily grown in a cool climate but is of com- paratively little commercial value because of lack of demand. Kale and ccllards, Brassica oleracea var. achephals are two "greens"‘Which differ in little more than the shape of their leaves. They are primitive forms of the wild cabbage plant and have been retained down through the years because of their value as garden.vegetables. Kale is so well liked that it is one of the cabbage family much grown for commercial purposes. Collards is chiefly used in the south but can be found in markets in negro areas in northern cities. B. Production in the United States Cabbage is the most important member of the genus Brassica grown in the United States. It is, in fact, one of the most popular vegetables, ranking first in tonnage among the twenty-five most important truck crops, exclusive of potatoes, produced in 1948.(8) In that year there were 179,500 acres planted to cabbage for use on the commercial fresh market, with a production of 1,334,100 tons having a value of $38,806,000. It is grown by market gardeners, by -11- special vegetable growers, by general farmers and by home gardeners in all sections of the country. Cabbage grows best in a relatively cool, moist climate. This crop is grown in the South and in Cali- .fornia during the winter and early spring. The main or late crop is grown almost entirely in the northern states, where the summer temperatures average relatively low. Cabbage grown.between the northern and the southern regions is not of commercial importance, being largely grown in home gardens and used locally. The moisture supply during the growing season seems to be the most important factor in governing the yield. Cabbage will grow on all types of soils but while early cabbage is usually grown on sandy soil, heavy soils are preferred for the late crop where heavy yields are ex- pected, since they retain moisture and are richer. Tons by seasons Winter Spring Summer Fall ‘—'l 462,700 155,100 208,900 507,400 2mm 3 25,000 Tons Figure l. Cabbage Production in the United States, 1948. -12- As shown by figure 1, cabbage is on the market at all seasons of the year.(8) The heavy winter and fall production provides a cheap fresh vegetable at a time when the supply of other fresh vegetables is less abundant and therefore high in price. (Winter season Tons Cal. Ariz. Texas Fla. D=DI 95,900 16,500 205,000 145,300 2 mm a 25,000 Tons Figure 2. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. The winter producing states are shown in figure 2.(8) The period of most active harvest starts in December in.Arizcna, Alabama and Texas, table I, page 20. Florida produces heavily through January to the middle of April. The California harvest lasts from February through April. It can be seen from table I, page 20, that the sup- ply is fairly ccnstant through this season of the year. Early Spring Tons La. Nfiss. Ala. Ga. S. C. =31:l_!::==v 20,000 29,400 6,500 27,900 10,400 2 mm = 25,000 Tons Figure 3. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. -13- The tctal production for the early spring season in 1948 was only 94,200 tons, figure 3, page 13. However, during this period storage cabbage from.the fall crop was still available and usually cheaper than.the new cabbage. Some consumers prefer the storage cabbage since it is blanched, sweeter in flavor, finer in.texture and cheaper. The new cabbage is stronger in flavor, coarser in texture, greener in color, richer in vitamins and more expensive. Some of the states producing the winter crop continue to harvest during these months, table I, page 20, so that there was more cab- bage available than the chart indicates. Louisiana leads the early spring season by beginning the most active harvest period about the middle of march and continuing through may 10th, table I, page 20. Late Spring Tons N.C. Va. Md. Tenn. Ky. Ohio no. wash. 12,000 11,200 6,000 17,000 1,600 4,400 4,500 3,600 2 mm c 2000 Tons Figure 4. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. -14- The total production for the late spring season in 1948 was any 60,900 tons, figure 4, page 14. Virginia and Tennessee come into heavy production in.May and continue through June but the other states yield heavily only during the month of June.(8) During this period cabbage is in short supply and the price rises accordingly. Early Summer Tons NeJe NeYoLoIe Ga. Ind. Ill. 10“ ._.|:]l:|_ I: 27,600 11,000 5,000 3,000 22,400 7,600 2 mm : 2000 Tons Figure 5. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. The early summer production begins in New Jersey in.June and continues through July.(8) The other states in this group reach the peak of production during July and August, table 1, page 20. The total production for this season in 1948 was 78,600 tons, figure 5, with a continuing rise in price due to a short supply. -15.. Late Summer Tons Colo. Utah N. Mex. Minn. Ohio Penn. Va. N.C. .___. '::::l c:::3 [III] IIIII ,.___. [::1 ____ 18,700 5,800 1,400 2,300 9,400 54,200 10,000 28,500 2 mm 2 2000 Tons Figure 6. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. The total production rises in the late summer and in 1948 was 130,300 tons, figure 6. At this time of year there is a pronounced decline in price because of the abundant supply. Production for this season is greatest during August and September, table I, page 200 -15- Early Fall (Domestic) Tons N.Y. N.Y. L.I. Other N.J. Mich. Wis. Wash. :3_ _s_.__ 9,000 39,000 13,100 35,000 45,000 10,800 2 mm 2 2000 Tons Figure 7. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. The total production for the early fall season was 157,900 tons, figure 7, with a slight fall in price. Michigan which is the first state to come into production for this season begins active harvesting in August and continues into September, table I, page 20. The other states in the group yield heavily in September and October.(8) The total production of Danish cabbage for the early fall market in 1948 was 307,700, figure 8, with a sharp decline in price.(8) The period of heavy harvest runs from September to October for most of the states in the group but continues through November in New York, table I, page 20. -1 7- Early Fall (Danish) N. Y. Penn. Ohio Ind. Mich. “H5. Minn. Colo. _ 4: Us 157,800 27,000 9,000 2,100 16,800 38,000 15,300 42,000 2 mm = 2000 Tons ' Figure 8. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. -13- Late Fall Tons Ore. Va. I. C. S. C. Norfolk ._ u __1 15,400 1,200 16,200 9,000 2 mm.: 2000 Tons Figure 9. States Leading in Cabbage Production, 1948. The total production for the late fall was 41,800 tons, figure 9, with a noticeable rise in price.(8) All the states in this group yield heavily during November and December, table I, page 20. As shown by the seasonal production chart, figure 1, cabbage is produced at all seasons of the year with the heaviest production occuring during the fall and winter months at a time when.other fresh vegetables are in short supply and high in price.(8) There is an overlapping of production from season.to season. As one season's crop wanes the states producing in the following season are beginning to harvest, table I, page 20. -19- PIODVCTIC. ‘7 tr} CABBACE A’ 137,0 .5 , Kt... AU June July Aug. Sept Oct. Nov. Dec. BROKEN LINES LIGHT PRODUCTION SOLID LINES HEAVY PRODUCTION m 41 q a -J- L.‘ “1 nI\r rn-nwrflr.‘ I. r .t .4311. 1,. at; bit 03.". IE. qrw WE“) .. t) a 3"?” Cole Penn. EARLY FALL — N Y other-'— EARLY FALL - WAY ‘v. Chic Ind. Vich. 1 L so I, H ”inn. Colo. TATE FALL 0116. lira- Sect veg The only other cole crops listed among the twenty-five vegetables of commercial importance are cauliflower and kale.(8) Winter Spring Summer Fall 69,763 81,344 38,905 38,924 2 mm = 2000 Tons Figure 10. Cauliflower Production in the United States, 1948. The 1948 acreage of cauliflower was 38,300 which produced 228,900 tons, valued at $17,277.(8) For the ten.year period from 1937 to 1946 inclusive, cauliflower was cheapest during the winter season and gradually increased in price each succeeding season, reaching a peak in the fall. It would seem that the increased -21- production during the spring, figure 10, would lower the price. However, this is the season when other fresh vegetables are scarce and when jaded appetites demand a change from the storage vegetables, which are diminishing in quantity and in quality. Winter season Spring season Cal. Ariz. Ore. Texas Fla. Cal. Wash. ,_ __ :I I: 51,041 13,616 555 2,886 1,665 2 mm 2 2000 Tons 76,294 5,050 2 mm 2 2000 Tons Figures 11 and 12. Cauliflower production by States, 1948. Summer season Fall season N.Y. N.Y. N. J. Other Colo. L.I. Mich. Ore. ————- ,____ 4,588 18,037 16,240 '—"I 2 mm : 2000 Tons 25,252 4,791 8,880 2 mm 3 2000 Tons Figures 13 and 14. Cauliflower Production in the United States, 1948. As shown in figure 11 and figure 12, California is the larg- est producer of cauliflower. The fact that cauliflower requires a cool temperature and moist air limits its production almost en- tirely to those states lying near large bodies of water, either coastal or inland, or those having a cool climate because of ele- vation. This coupled with its difficulty of culture makes it one of the higher priced vegetables. The production of cauliflower continues throughout the year, figures 13 and 14. California, the leading state, produces heav- ily for six months, from.November through April. New York, the second in yield, is in heavy production for the five month period from June through November. The other states in the group produce a comparatively small part of the total over a heavy production period of from one to two months each, table II, page 24. California Arizona Oregon Texas California washington NeW'Jersey New York washington Colorado New York, L.I. Michigan Oregon tons, figure 15, valued at $375,000. commercial purposes is grown during the winter season.(8) TABLE II PRODUCTION SEASON FOR CAULIFLOWER Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.Oct. Nov. Dec. 1 l Winter season l Fall season I J I Spring season --- - - light production hoary production -24- In 1948 there were 1,300 acres of kale which yielded 4,700 All the kale produced for Winter season 4,700 2 mm : 2000 Tons Figure 15. Kale Production in the United States, 1948. Although Brussels sprouts and broccoli are also produced for the commercial fresh market they are not of great enough importance to be listed by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics bulletin "Commercial Truck Crops for Fresh Market--1948 Annual Summary".(8) -25- CHAPTER .IV PROCEDURE The vegetables in this study were purchased by the Food Stores of Michigan State College and used in the Union Cafeteria. The samples were chosen at random. On the whole, the quality was good. There was no spoilage due to storage or careless handling. The vegetable was weighed in.the container in which it was purchased, the container was weighed and the weight of the vege- table as purchased was found by difference. After the vegetable was prepared for cooking the waste and the prepared vegetable were weighed, the latter being weighed before it was washed to prevent error because of moisture absorbed or adhering to the material. The per cent of waste was computed. The number of servings was counted as sold by the counter girls dishing the vegetable to the customers in the Union Cafeteria. These girls always used the same size spoon but because of inexperience some of the girls served a larger portion than was intended. Since student help was used regularly there was always the chance of variation in the size of the servings. After the number of servings was obtained the cost per serving was computed. The vegetables were cooked as needed for service on the cafe- teria counter, care being taken to stagger the cooking so that the vegetables were ready when needed. This method avoided the neces- sity of holding the cooked vegetables for any length of time before -26- serving them. It also avoided the loss of servings through left overs. The number of servings was so planned that the entire unit prepared was used at a meal if possible. Whenever the entire lot was not used at the first meal the remaining raW'vegetable was kept under refrigeration.until the next meal. The vegetables were cooked in water and served buttered. The cost of the butter was not taken into consideration since the purpose of this study was to determine the cost of the vegetable per so without regard to sauces or types of service which might add to the cost. -27- CHAPTER V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Varieties and Amounts of Vegetables Used For the study of cabbage four cases and three bags of the vegetable were used totaling 343é-pounds as purchased, as shown in table III, page 29. Of this amount l42§~pound5‘were lost through preparation waste, leaving 211% pounds of edible material. The aver- age per cent of preparation.waste was 41.51%. The total number of servings of cabbage was 863. The total cost of the cabbage was $15.50 which was an average of 80.0454 per pound as purchased, $0.0733 per pound of edible material or $0.0179 per serving. The average number of servings per pound was 2.5. The average size of a serving was 3%-ounces. Seven crates of cauliflower were used in this study as shown in table III, page 29. 0f the ZIBE-pounds as purchased there were 156 pounds or 71.3% preparation waste leaving 63 5/8 pounds of edible material. The total number of servings was 338. The cauliflower cost $24.90 which was 80.1133 per pound as purchased, $0.377 per pound of edible material or 80.0739 per serving. The average num- ber of servings per pound was 1.54. The average size of a serving was 3% ounces. Eight drums of Brussels sprouts were prepared and served as shown in table III, page 29. There were 220E~pounds as purchased. -23- TABLE III DATA ON THE FOUR VEGETABLES STUDIED “‘iyp‘e‘bi—“ Weight of Height Weight of L’Teig‘i Amount '-.-‘Ieight of Number of Cost per Cost}; Cost per Cost Per Servings Container ‘Vegetablo of Vegetable of of Vegetable Servings Unit Serving Pound Pound Per Lb and Container A P - by waste Waste E P Purchased A P E P A P Container Vegetable Date »»_ ’E‘m’hw_fim -}P§:-----ei}§§:- .}P§:1._ lbs. Percent lbs. Dollars Dollars Dollars EEEEEEE N0. Cabbage 5—4-49 Crate 51' 8;; 44% 14%.: 52.40 50%:— 145 1.75 .0122 5—8—49 Crate 6173* 8 557;? 19 55.54 44;; 148 1.75 .0118 5—10—49 Crate 551 5%; 48 24 50.00 24 105 2.85 .0257 5-10—49 Crate 583; 5 50—2: 20 59.50 50%; 105 5.00 .0291 8—8—49 Bag 50 49%? 25, 50.25 243-116 2.15 .0185 8-9-49 Bag 48; i 453:» 16%; 58.02 295; 150 2.10 .0181 6—J—49 Bag so}g :— 50 255 47.00 282 120 2.10 .0175 Average 41.51 .0179 .045 .073 2-5 Est. Actual Cauliflower 1-12-49 Crate 39 8%- 30% 18% 59.8 12% 4 oz. 62 62 4.15 .0653 1-12-4.9 Crate 41,3 8: 327}? 19% 60.7 124,4 12 oz. 87 60 4.15 .0691 1—17—49 Crate 54; 82? 28 21 75 7:7 6 02- 4O 56 2.90 .0805 1_29_49 Crate 56% 81 28 21 75 74,4 4 oz. 45 45 5.90 .0866 2_19_49 Crate 45,33. 10 35.7%. 27 76.5 87:: 4 02. 4:5 5.45 .0766 Crate 4 a- .1 53: 24 72.1 9., 4 oz. 51 52 5.90 .0750 Average 71.3 .0759 .115 .577 1.54 Brussels Sprouts 1—12—49 Drum 32.1. 64; 26 8; 51.7 17 108 8.10 Drum 55,: 87. 27 ' 7 ~ . 2-4—49 Drum 5511 :7 29:; 9% 51'0 18% 129 8-40 2—9—49 Drum 55?: 7 28% 9 55-6 17% 77 4-95 2—11—49 Drum 52% 3 28% 91 51-1 15% 82 4-95 2-25-49 Drum 55:3 8:. 2 7: 87: 29-9 185” 115 '7-10 3-1549 Dmm 56;; i 29.: 8 28.8 21—;- 119 8.00 Average 51.4 .0845 .255 .3958 5-97 Kale 2-19-49 Bushel 2553» 8%; 19 10 52,5 11 100 2.25 .0225 224-49 Bushel 26 4 22 10 45.2 11%: 85 2.10 .0255 2-25-49 Bushel 50%,; 5~ 24% 10 41,05 15% 125 2.00 .0154 Bushel 295; 7 217;: 103:» 47.12 1232‘ 96 1.90 .0197 5-14—49 Bushel 2 17,: 6 151—; 5;} 41, 2 e a 57 1. 75 . 0502 3-16-49 Bushel 25 5%.: 17%.; 7;; 44.28 7%— 59 1. 75 .0296 5-21-49 Bushel 28% 412— 25; 9;} 39.67 14 140 1.75 .0125 5-1-49 Bushel 28: 5% 255 10 42.12 15—1— 138 2.00 .0144 4 - a, 4. 0 Average 42.39 .022 .104 .188 4’6” M__________....._ -29- Of this amount 31.4% or 70% pounds were lost through preparation waste, leaving 142% pounds of edible material. The total number of servings was 877. The total cost of the Brussels sprouts was $56.50. This averaged 30.2599 per pound as purchased, $0.3958 per pound of edible material, or $0.0645 per serving. The average number of servings per pound was 3.97 as shown in table III, page 29. The average size of a serving was 3%-ounces. In this study eight bushels of kale were used, totaling 167% pounds as purchased. There was 42.89% or 73g-pounds of prepara- tion waste and 92%-pounds of edible material. The total number of servings was 786. The kale cost $17.50. The cost per pound as purchased was $0.104, per pound of edible portion, $0.188 or $0.022 per serving. The average number of servings per pound was 4.69 as shown in table III, page 29. The average size of a serving was 5% ounc 98 o B. variation of waste Among Individual Samples The crate waste in these samples'was so small as to be in- significant so no data were obtained on such losses. The varia- tion in the per cent of preparation waste is quite high in the different samples of the same vegetable, table III, page 29. For instance, for cabbage the lowest per cent of waste was 32.4% while the highest was 52.25%, figure 16, page 31. -50- 50 40 /\/\/ 30 20 10 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 Figure 16. Variations in per cent of waste in Cabbage samples There are several factors which could account for this varia- tion; the quality of the vegetable, the skill of the workers, and the speed at which they worked. In general, the quality of the vegetables was good but occasionally a case would be less good. Another variable, the skill of the worker, could also result in greater or less waste depending on the carefulness of the worker, since different women prepared the various samples used. The time element could also have caused considerable variation since the vegetables for this study were prepared as part of the routine work regardless of whether there was much or little work to be done or whether the preparation crew was short handed or not. These vari- ables were not controlled in this study because the purpose was to find the actual per cent of waste and the yield as obtained in this institution. Another important factor which could cause a great variation in the per cent of waste was the amount of trimming done by the packer when the vegetables were sacked or crated. -31- 80 7O 60 50 4O 30 20 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Figure 17. Variation in percent of waste in cauliflower samples As shown in figure 17, the variation in per cent of waste in the cauliflower samples ranges from 59.8% to 80%. There were several crates of very small cauliflower used. This would be another factor in increasing the per cent of waste since the amount of foliage in comparison with curd would be greater. 80 7O 60 5O 40 20 10 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Figure 18. Variation in per cent of waste in Brussels Sprouts The drums of Brussels sprouts used were all of very good qual- ity and of practically the same size so that there was little vari- ation found in the per cent of waste, the least being 26.9% and the greatest 33.2%, figure 18. -33- 70 60 50 30 20 10 12345678 Figure 19. Variation in per cent of waste in kale The range of per cent of waste in the samples of kale was from.39.67 to 52.5, figure 19. Stems were always removed and the percentage of stem to leaf varied considerably. C. Comparison of Per Cent of Waste Found by Other‘Workers TABLE IV COMPARISON OF PER CENT OF WASTE m Vegetable Harris- Halliday Cornell Aids This & & to marketing Study wood Noble Cabbage 30% 40% loose, 8.3 to ran/3% 41.5% green 11.1% white compact Cauliflower 56% 50% 75% 71.3% Brussels sprouts 33% 2 n 31.4% Kale -- -- 42.89 The average per cent of waste for cabbage was found to be 41.5% in this study as compared to 30% by Harris and'Wood (11), 11.1% for -33- white compact heads and 40% for loose green heads by Halliday and Noble (10), and 3.3% to 33 1/3% by the Cornell study.(l) The Harris and wood and the Cornell figures are on a large quantity basis while the Halliday and Noble figures are computed from data, table V, page 35, obtained regarding the length of time required to cook a four serv- ing sample. The latter being a smaller sample was probably more care- fully controlled than would be possible in large quantity preparation. Furthermore, the vegetables for the small quantity study were probably purchased on the retail market where much more trimming is done than on.the wholesale market, which would result in less waste. Both Halliday and Noble (10) and the Cornell study "Aids to marketing",(l) give separate figures for early loose green cabbage and winter white compact heads. As would be expected the loose green cabbage has a greater preparation waste. The 40% preparation waste found by Halliday and Noble for loose green new cabbage is comparable to the 41.5% found by this study for the same type of cabbage. D. Comparison of Servings Per Pound As seen in table V, page 35, there is a great variation in the number of servings per pound as found by the different authorities cited. Halliday and Noble lead in.the number of servings of cabbage per pound. 'Their number of 6 per pound for white compact cabbage seems high but their figure for loose green cabbage is only 2.3 servings per pound. The cabbage used in the present study was loose green new cabbage and the number of servings per pound of 2.5 compares well fl TABLE V CC‘Y'FPNKISOT‘? OF DATA «- . __--.-..--, i . . M» -722" y ' Dahl Bryan This —----—-—.»-~~.~- -----l-.-.- -.. _~--~ “up _ ~ 1 _ . , ’v Halllaay‘ Nest EEC}, Clopedlc e H r ‘ Nenzel hen York Cornell 77. c‘ W 1: Study agrls Restaurant Aids to .. 8r We d COL}: BOO I d. I’iSSOCe Tflarlxeting NObl? V00] (4) (Q\ (e) .100\ \ f :- ,l\‘ (10) (16) -.-.:- ‘-/ (11,} < 17111-1---“ L13)“ __“_,,,__,_,_i__/-M__——~ 1 1-.-. mm...”- “W Cabbage llffi—white, compact 7 41 so? P t t 53,, 40% loose, green 31030 4 3:4” repara ion was ’6 :34. 9, Size of serving — oz. 2’: to 3 4 NO’ servings per 3 6.6-white, compact 4 5 4 4 2'5 lb‘ A‘P‘ 4 3 2.3 loose, green 0 ‘ 1. YA . an 1flojer 351:: if ribs usEd 50,4 60% 71.39: 2 "‘57 /"O /‘ l , Preparation waste 56% 1 ’5'” :5 75 Size of serving - oz. 3 2%? NC» servings per 1 2 2,7 1.6 to 2 2 to 2.6 2.5 1.54 1b. A.P. 2 2.4 2 to 2? Brussels Sprouts 7 3‘ 20% 12 a 1i - Preparation. waste 33% 1 5 3f Size of serving — oz. 2% to 3 2E“: 07 No. servings per 6 4 4 4 4 3W 1b. A.P. 4 to 6 4.8 4 to 5 4 to 6 Kale 42 89% :1‘ -.A I.‘//) Preparation waste 5:3 22 Size of serving -- oz. 2 . .0 No. servings per 5 2; to 5 1.5 to .4 6 4.6. lb. A.P. 9' with the Halliday and Noble study. The other studies do not state the type of cabbage used but the number of servings per pound falls within the extremes listed by Halliday and Noble, the number most frequently given being 4 per pound. The size of a serving varies from 2:3;- to 4 ounces which would partially account for the variation in number of servings per pound. The variation in per cent of prep- aration waste would be another factor which would influence the number of servings per pound. The number of servings per pound of cauliflower ranges from 1.54 found by this study to 2.7 given by Halliday and Noble, the most frequent number being 2 servings to the pound. Again we find a variation in the size of serving, ranging from 2% to 3%- ounces, table V, page 35. The per cent of waste for cauliflower and'Brussel sprouts fol- lows the same trend as that for cabbage, Halliday and Noble showing the smallest, Harris and Wood somewhat greater and the results of this study being the largest of the three, but less than the figure found by the Cornell study, table V, page 35. A As shown in table V, page 35, the number of servings of Brussels Sprouts per pound varies from 3.97 to 6. The results found in this study was 3.97 which is approximately the same as the smallest number of servings shownin table V, page 35. The number of servings per pound of cauliflower listed the greatest number of times is 4, which is approximately the number found by the present study. The number of servings of kale per pound as shown in table V, page 35, varies to such an extent that these figures lack signifi- cance. Wenzel (17) lists 5 servings per pound, Aids to Marketing by Cornell University (1) lists 2% to 3, and the Encyclopedic Cook Book (4) 1.5 to 2. The results obtained in this study was 4.69 which is reasonably close to Wenzel's 5 servings. The workers mentioned give no information on.the number of samp ples run, the supervision given the employees, whether the vegetables were random samples as in this study or especially selected for the purpose, or whether the vegetables were purchased on the retail or the wholesale market. Since there is much more trimming done on the retail market this factor alone could account for a wide range in per cent of waste. Over half of the studies listed do not give the size of the servings. Therefore, it is difficult to compare the re- sults of this study with data given.by the workers mentioned. E. Comparison.of waste of Different Vegetables Cabbage Cauliflower Brussels Kale Sprouts ‘ 'I A ”WW waste waste waste 41.5% 31.4% 42.8% waste Figure 20. Comparison of waste -57- According to the results obtained in this study figure 20, above Brussels sprouts had the smallest per cent of waste, 31.4, cabbage averaged 41.5%, kale, 42.8% and cauliflower 71.3%. The high per cent of waste in the latter is due to the fact that only the white "curd" was used. Some food service units serve some of the more tender wrapping leaves as "cauliflower greens" in.a variety of ways. The per cent of waste can be out to 33 1/3% by serving the ribs and green leaves.(l) This would, of course, cut down on the per cent of waste and also reduce the cost per serving. F. Comparison of Servings Per Pound and Per Cent of waste TABLE VI SERVINGS PER POUND Servings Per cent cf‘Waste Cabbage 2.5 41.5 Cauliflower 1.54 71.3 Brussels sprouts 3.97 31.4 Kale 4.67 42.89 The number of servings per pound as found by this study are given in table VI. We do not find a direct correlation between the per cent of waste and the number of servings per pound in all cases. The per cent of waste of cabbage was 41.5% with a yield of 2.5 serv- ings per pound while the waste for kale was 42.89 with 4.67 servings per pound. The greater yield per pound in the case of kale might be due to the difference in the amount of shrinkage in cooking. -38- Brussels sprouts with 31.4% of waste averaged 3.97 servings per Pound. In this vegetable a smaller per cent of waste yielded fewer servings per pound than was the case with kale where a higher waste was found. The difference between these two vegetables might be in size and shape since the Brussels sprouts were served whole and the kale in its natural leafy state. The small number of servings in the case of cauliflower can easily be accounted for by the high per cent of waste. .06 .045 AP G. Comparison of Cost Per Pound and Per Serving 395 .377 .255 .188 .113 .104 .073 .073 .064 F_— l l .021 ~ ° - 1:: EP Per AP EP Per AP EP Per AP EP Per Serv- Serv- Serv- Serv- ing ing ing ing Cabbage Cauliflower Brussels Kale Sprouts Figure 21. Cost per pound, as purchased, as edible portion and per serving. -39— As shown in figure 21, the price per pound for the vegetables used in this study was least for cabbage followed by kale, cauli- flower and Brussels sprouts in the order listed. Kale was $0.059 higher per pound as purchased than cabbage and $0.115 higher per pound of edible portion.but since the number of servings per pound as purchased was only 2.5 for cabbage and 4.69, for kale, table III, page 29, it was found that the cost per serving was practically the same, being $0.0179 for cabbage and $0.021 for kale. In the comparison of cabbage and cauliflower it was found that there was a difference of only $0.078 per pound as purchased but per pound of edible material the difference was $0.304, figure 21. The percentage of waste of cauliflower was high, 71.3% as against 41.5% for cabbage, table 111, page 29. This accounts for the greater dif- ference in.the cost per pound of the edible material. The difference in cost per serving was only $0.055 or less than the difference in the cost per pound as purchased. This situation was brought about by the fact that the number of servings per pound of cauliflower was found to be only 1.54 as compared to 2.5 for cabbage, table III, page 29. A.siudlar comparison of cabbage with Brussels sprouts shows a difference of $0.21 per pound as purchased and $0.32 per pound of edible material, figure 21. The closer correlation in these two vegetables is due to the fact that the waste percentages of 41.5% for cabbage and 31.4% for Brussels sprouts, table III, are more nearby alike than those for cabbage and cauliflower. Since the number of servings per pound as purchased was greater for Brussels sprouts, being 3.97, than the 2.5 servings per pound as purchased for cabbage it was found that the difference in cost per serving was only $0.047, figure 21, page 39. The comparison of the cost per pound as purchased, per pound of edible material and cost per serving clearly shows that because of variation in per cent of waste and number of servings per pound a vegetable may or may not be a better buy than.another vegetable. In this study cauliflower at $0.113 per pound as purchased cost more per serving than Brussels sprouts at $0.25 per pound as purchased, figure 21, page 39. The data for this study were collected froananuary to June 1948. The prices for the vegetables studied are given for that per— iod of the year 1949, table III, page 29. There would undoubtedly be some variation for different seasons of the year'and for abnormal crop or weather conditions. H. Possible Substitutions of the Vegetables in this Study Wenzel (17) states that not more than 65 cents (65%) of the in- come dollar should be paid out for food cost and payroll, the two biggest items of expense to a food service unit.. He recommends that a reasonable division of the two would be 40% spent for food and 25% for labor. If the food cost is higher the payroll should be less. In these days of high labor costs it is practically impossible to reduce the Labor payroll percentage so it is essential that the food .41— cost be watched carefully. For the sake of variety an operator might decide to serve cauliflower instead of cabbage since they are similar in flavor. The following figures ShOW’What would happen to the food cost per cent if such a substitution were made in a speci- fic meal. The costs of cabbage and cauliflower are the averages found in this study, table III, page 29. The costs to the operator are as follows: No. 1 No. 2 Meat $0.20 Meat $0.20 Salad .05 Salad .05 Cabbage .018 Cauliflower .073 Potato .03 . Potato .03 Bread & Butter .03 Bread & Butter .03 Dessert .05 Dessert .05 Beverage .04 Beverage .04 Total Cost 50.418 Total Cost $0.473 mark up to mark up to allow 40% 2% allow 40% 2% food cost food cost Selling Price $1.05 Selling Price RSI .T‘ez In this instance his loss would be $0.13 on each meal served, if he charged $1.05 for the meal and served cauliflower instead of cabbage. Looking at the situation from the food cost angle we see that when the operator sells a meal costing him.$0.47 for $1.05 he is allowing himself a mark up of 2.22 instead of the 2%-which gives him.a 40% food cost. The 2.22 mark up gives him a food cost of 45%. In other words, he has raised his food cost by 5%. If a food service manager planned to operate on a 50% food cost he would price his meals by multiplying the cost of the food by two. -42- In the case of these particular meals the following figures illus- trate the procedure. Meal No. 1 Meal No. 2 Cost $0.418 $0.473 50% Mark up 2 2 Selling price $0.836 $0.946 If cauliflower were substituted for cabbage as in Meal No. 2 without an increase in price the operator would be losing $0.11 per meal. Instead of a 50% food cost with a mark up of 2 he would be receiving a mark up of 1.76 which would mean that his food cost was 56%. These figures show that since the cost of a serving of cauli- flower is 80.055 higher than a serving of cabbage the former vege- table cannot be substituted for the latter in a meal selling at a price originally including cabbage without substantially increasing the food cost per cent. The operator has two alternatives in this situation; he can in- crease the price of his meals if he can do so without pricing them. out of the range of his clientele or he can'try to reduce his payroll or other expenses. If he succeeds in neither solution he.mnst face a reduction in his per cent of profit. . It would be possible to use cabbage and kale interchangeably since the price per serving of both vegetables is about the same, as found in.this study, table III, page 29. In the higher priced meals cauliflower and Brussels sprouts could be used interchangeably. -43- I. Availability and Wholesale Price of Vegetables Studied According to table VII, domestic cabbage is available every month of the year on both the Chicago and the New York wholesale markets. Danish type cabbage is on the New York market from October through January and on the Chicago wholesale market from October through January. This type, which reverts easily must be renewed by imported seed. It is the northern grown.winter storage cabbage. The states shipping Danish type cabbage to the New'York market are New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the Long Island section of New York state. Michigan and‘Wisconsin ship this type of cabbage to the Chicago market. TABLE VII WHOLESALE PRICES AT NEW YORK AND CHICAGO - 1948 Brussels Cabbage Cauliflower Sprouts Kale N.Y. Chi. N.Y. Chi. N.Y. Chi. N.Y. Chi. :55 Do Da Do Jan. .043 .045 .041 .055 .053 .16 .167 .08 .09 Feb. .034 .032 .08 .074 .24 .247 .118 MRI'Ch .03 .038 .07 .066 016 019 .07 April .057 .062 .068 .059 .22 .056 May .019 .034 .084 .069 .04 June .024 .038 .08 .06 .045 July .018 .026 .07 .056 .03 Aug. .011 .019 .07 .06 .13 .024 Sept. .018 .024 .07 .065 .13 .204 .018 Oct. .018 .019 .017 .019 .053 .069 .15 .186 .018 Nov. .014 .02 .016 .049 .05 .058 .12 .192 .015 Dec. .017 .033 .015 .023 .061 .058 .11 .195 .029 .077 *Da - Danish Do - Domestic -44.. The New York wholesale market is supplied with domestic cab- bage by.Arizona, Texas, California, Florida, Georgia, Virginia, New York, North and South Carolina and Pennsylvania (19). Domestic cabbage from the following states is found on the Chicago wholesale market: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and'Wisconsin. The price of cabbage varies, being cheapest in the late summer and fall and gradually increasing as the stored fall crop is de- pleted and the new, green cabbage from the South comes on the mar- ket. In general the price of cabbage is about the same on the New York and the Chicago markets, table VII, page 44. Cabbage is sold on the New York market in at least seven dif- ferent types of containers, for most of which there is no legal weight established. Standards are set up for dimensions or volumes of certain containers but they are of little help in determining the number of pounds. For instance, legally a bushel contains 2150.42 cubic inches but a bushel of cabbage weighs from 40 to 50 pounds de- pending on the type of cabbage, the pack and the trim. .A lé-bushel hamper weighs 50 pounds. The dimensions of a Los Angeles crate are 13'x18x21g. The poney crate 8%x18121 5/8 inside measurement, the Long Island crate 13%x15éx23 inches (7). These are some of the con- tainers in which cabbage is sold, as well as in 50# sacks. On the wholesale market cabbage is sold by the container rather than by the -45- pound. Large food service units profit by purchasing fruit and vegetables wholesale, but it is essential that the food service manager know something about types and sizes of containers since price per pound and number of servings per pound are of vital im- portance to successful operation. Cauliflower is available on both the New York and the Chicago wholesale markets throughout the year, table VII, page 44, at similar prices. Cauliflower is priced by the container on the wholesale market. Crates from.the western.states and some of the crates from the eastern states contain a specified number of heads.(16) On the New York market there also appears a Long Island 1 3/5 bushel box Iand a New York Catskill section crate. Neither of these containers have a specified weight or number of heads. There are a variety of Catskill containers which have no definite standards. The western poney crate contains 12's or larger, 12 referring to the number of heads per crate. There is also a New York crate containing 6's while the Michigan crate contains 9's to 12's. When.buying cauli- flower a food service manager would need to decide the size of head which would give the particular food unit the kind and number of servings desired per head of cauliflower. For instance, some units serve broken up florets, others serve whole florets, while still others buy small heads and serve the whole head. After deciding on the size of head desired the manager would specify the size when ordering. -46... Brussels sprouts are not on the New York wholesale market from April through July. They are not available on the Chicago wholesale market from.May through August, table VII, page 44. The prices are similar on these two markets during the early part of the year. 1 However, sprouts are much cheaper on the New York market during the late summer and fa11.(19) This is true probably because Long Island and the Catskill sec- tion are in production at that time. At the same period all sprouts on the Chicago market are grown in California. There is less varia- tion in.the containers used for Brussels sprouts, the most common being the 25 lb. drum, the bushel and the quart.(7) The drum and the bushel contain approximately the same amount. A quart varies from 1 pound to 1% pounds. Kale is on the New York market throughout the year but only during January and December on the Chicago market, table VII, page 44. Long Island produces this crop from.May through December at a very reasonable price. Since it is produced locally it is much cheaper on the New York market than on the Chicago market, table VII, page 44. The early crop from.January to march comes from.Virginia, (19) Indiana and Virginia are the only states shipping to Chicago. Kale is sold on these markets in bushel baskets and 1 3/5 bushel boxes.(19) Here again there is no federal regulation on.the weight of product in the container but by common.usage a bushel is supposed to contain 18 pounds. -4 7.. CHAPTER'VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In a study of four members of the vegetable family, Brassica oleracea, the per cent of preparation.waste, the cost per pound of edible portion, the number of servings per pound and the cost per portion were determined for cabbage, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts and kale. It was found that Brussels sprouts had the lowest per cent of waste and that cabbage, kale and cauliflower had increas- ingly greater waste in the order listed. The cost per pound of edi- ble portion was lowest for cabbage, more than double for kale while both cauliflower and Brussels sprouts were slightly over five times more expensive than cabbage. The number of servings per pound was lowest for cauliflower and showed a gradual increase for cabbage, Brussels sprouts and kale. Although there was a direct correlation between the highest waste and the lowest number of servings per pound for cauliflower such correlation between.waste and number of servings per pound did not appear to exist for the other three vegetables studied. Other factors such as size, shape, texture, and amount of shrinkage during cooking, as well as preparation.waste apparently have a bearing on the number of servings per pound. Cabbage was the cheapest per serving, followed by kale, Brus- sels sprouts and cauliflower, in the order given. Kale was 1.1 times higher than cabbage, Brussels sprouts 3.8 times and cauli- flower 4 times more expensive than cabbage. Kale could be substi- tuted for cabbage but the other two vegetables could not be used -43- economically as a cabbage substitute. Cauliflower and Brussels sprouts, although too expensive for low cost meals, do have a place in food service where the traffic will bear the extra cost. They add variety at a time of year when appetites are jaded and other fresh vegetables are scarce. There are many factors affecting the price per serving of the vegetables studied. Some of these are crop conditions, source of supply whether'local or otherwise, season of the year, kind and amount of trim, type of market whether retail or wholesale, condi- tion of vegetables at time of purchase, care and facilities for storage of vegetables not used immediately, skill and training of workers preparing the vegetables, amount of supervision given the workers, the type of food service and the type of clientele to which it caters, the skill of the vegetable cook, the size of the serving and the training and carefulness of the employee serving the vege- tables. Some of these factors are beyond the control of the food ser- vice manager but by buying good quality produce in season at a price on.which a reasonable mark up can be realized and by rigid control of the factors involved after the food arrives at the unit it is possible to serve good food to satisfied consumers. -49- LITERATURE CITED 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. LITERATURE CITED Aids for Marketigg. New York State College of Home Economics, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University. Bailey, Liberty H., The Principles of Vegetable Gardening. New York: Macmillan Co., 1921. Bailey, Liberty H., Standard Cyclopedia of Horticulture. II, 541-44. New York: Macmillan—Co.,‘1914. Berolzheimer, Ruth, Encyclopedic Cookbook. Chicago: Culinary Arts Institute. 01948. Boswell, Victor R. and Bostelmann, Else, "Our Vegetable Trav- lers," The National Geographic Magazine, August 1949, 145-217 pp. Bryan, Mary de Garmo, The School Cafeteria. New York: F. S. Crofts & Co., 1936. Containers for Fruits & Vegetables. Farmers Bulletin No. 1821, U. 3. Dept. of Agri., washington, D. 0. April 1939. Commercial Truck Crops. 1948. Annual Summary. Bureau of Agri- cultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture. washington, D. C. 1948. Dahl, J. 0., Chefs and Stewards Handbook for Cookery Profits. ‘Whitlock Press Inc., 1945. Halliday, Evelyn G. and Nbbel, Isobel T. Hows and Whys of Cookery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,II946. Harris, Katherine'W. and'Wcod, Marian A. Meals for Many. Cornell Bulletin for Homemakers. Ithaca, New'York: Cornell University, 1942. How to Cut Food Costs. New York: New York Restaurant Assoc- iation, 1946. McSelf, Albert James, A Concise Dictionary of Gardening. New York: Garden City Puinshing Co., Inc., 1940. Parker, Clarence O. and Royston, Reginald, Usual Dates of Planting and Harvesting Commercial Truck Crops foerresh Market. United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Crop Reporting Board, washing- ton, D. C. July 1945. -51.. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Sanders, T. W., Vegetables and Their Cultivation. London: W. H. and L. Collingridge, 1940. Thompson, Homer 0. Vegetable Crops. New York: McGraw Hill, 1939. Wenzel, George L. Handbook of Restaurant Costs. 1947. West, Bessie Brooks and Wood, LeVelle, Food Service in Institu- tions. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1945. Wholesale Prices of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables and Auction Prices of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables at NewAiYork and Chicago and F. O. 8. Prices at Leading Shipping Pofits by Months, 1948. United States Departme'fit— of Agricul: ture, Production and Marketing Administration, Fruit and Vegetable Branch, Washington, D. C. Work, Paul, Vegetalie Production and Marketing. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1945. -52- APPENDIX Taken from Planting and Harvesting Commercial Truck Crops for fresh market, U. s. D. A., B. A. E. (13) DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS The data as presented relate only to those truck crops and areas of production covered by the official estimates of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics under’the caption "Commercial Truck Crops for Fresh Market". The "Group and State" is the grouping used by the Bureau in pre- paring official estimates of acreage, yield, and production to show the seasonal sequence of supplies. The chart on the opposite page shows approximate periods covered by each seasonal group and sub- grouping. The "Usual Dates" are intended to indicate that period in which the main part of the crop is planted and harvested in most seasons, but may exclude exceptionally early or exceptionally late dates of light planting or harvesting. It is not intended to include unusual extremes inindividual seasons. The "Planting" period shown covers the time when crops usually are planted in the field. In the case of crops grown from seed with- out transplanting, it is the period in which the seed is planted. "Seed" is used in a broad sense and includes tubers, bulbs, etc. For transplanted crops, the planting period shown is the period when they are set in the fields. The "Harvesting" period designated is the period when crops are picked, cut, pulled, dug, or otherwise harvested. For commodities -55- temporarily stored in the field following harvest, the period does not include field storage. In the case of most crops, the harvest- ing period coincides closely with the marketing period. For storage crops such as beets, cabbage, carrots, celery, and onions, the mar- keting season in some areas may extend several months past the har- vesting period. The "Most Active Harvesting" period has been set up to show when the bulk or the major part of the season's harvesting occurs. It is in substance the entire "harvesting" period less the usual periods of light harvestings at the beginning and at the end of the crop season. C A B B A G E (For Market and For Kraut) : U:§ U AT. D We s GROUP AND STATE : : Harvesting : Planting :Begins Most Active Ends WHNTER: "C'aTlTemla...... July 1 - Nov. :50 Oct. 1 Feb. - Apr. June 30 Arizona......... Aug. 25 - Dec. 31 Nov. 1 Dec. - Mar. Apr. 30 Texas........... Aug. 25 - Jan. 15 Nov. 10 Dec. 15 - Apr. 30 May i15 Florida......... Sept.l5 - Jan. 31 Dec. 1 Jan. 1 - Apr. 15 may glO Alabama......... Sept. 1 - Oct. 10 Nov. 20 Dec. and Jan. Feb. 15 EARLY SPRING: Louisiana....... Aug. 15 - Feb. 15 Nov. 1 Mar. 20 - May 10 June 30 Mississippi..... Jan. 15 - Feb. 15 Apr. 25 May May 31 Alabama......... Dec. 1-31 Mar. 20 Apr. and May may 10 Georgia, south.. Dec. 15 - Jan. 15 Apr. 1 Apr. 15 - May 15 May 31 South Carolina.. Dec. 1 - Jan. 15 Mar. 15 .Apr. and May June 15 LATE SPRING: North Caroline.. Dec. 1 - Feb. 28 Apr. 15 May June 15 Virginia........ Nov. 20 - Feb. 28 Apr. 20 May 5 - June 15 June 30 Maryland........ Mar. 1-31 May 25 June June 25 Tennessee....... Mar. Apr. 25 May and June June 25 Kentucky........ Mar. May 1 June JUly 31 Ohio, S. E. .... Mar. 15-30 June 10 June July 15 Missouri........ Mar. 25 - Apr. 10 May 25 June July 31 'Washington...... Feb. - Apr. May 1 June July 31 -5 .4- C A B B A G E (For Market and For Kraut) : U S U A L D A T E S GROUP AND STATE : . : Harvesting_ : Planting :BAegins : Most Active : Ends EARLY SUTMHER: New'Jersey...... mar. 25 - Apr. 30 May 25 June and July Aug. 20 New York, L.I. . Apr. - May June 1 July and Aug. Aug. 31 Georgia, north.. May 1 - June 30 July 1 July and Aug. Sept.3O Indiana......... Mar. - May June 15 July and Aug. Oct. 31 Illinois........ Apr. 15 - May 10 June 20 July and Aug. Sept.15 Iowa............ Apr. 15 - June 30 June 20 July and Aug. Oct. 15 IATE SUMMER: Colorado........ Apr. 15-30 July 15 Aug. and Sept. Oct. 15 Utah............ Apr. 20 - May 10 Aug. 1 Aug. and Sept. Sept.30 New Mexico...... May 1 - June 20 Aug. 15 Aug. 20 - Sept.30 Oct. 15 Minnesota....... May 1 - June 10 July 15 Aug. Aug. 31 Ohio............ Apr. 1 - June 30 July 1 Aug. and Sept. Oct. 31 Pennsylvania.... Apr. 15 - June 15 June 25 Aug. and Sept. Oct. 15 Virginia, S.W} . Apr. 15 - July 25 June 25 Aug. 1 - Sept. 15 Oct. 31 North Carolina.. May 15 - July 15 July 15 Sept. Oct. 10 EARLY FALL (Domestic) New York, L.I.. June 1 - Aug. 10 Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 New York, other. May 15 - June 30 Aug. 15 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 New Jersey...... July 1 - Aug. 10 Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Nov. 5 lfichigan........ Apr. 1 - June 15 July 1 Aug. and Sept. Sept.30 Wisconsin....... may 1 - June 20 July 1 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 ‘Washington...... May 1 - July 31 Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Nov. 15 EARLY FALL (Danish) ‘53} York........ May 15 - July 51 Sept. 1 Oct. and Nov. Nov. 30 Pennsylvania.... June 1 - Aug. 15 Sept. 15 Sept. and Oct. Nov. 30 Ohio............ June Sept. 15 Sept. and Oct. Nov. 10 Indiana......... May 1 - June 30 Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 Michigan........ June 10 - July 10 Sept. 25 Oct. Oct. 31 Wisconsin....... June 10-30 Sept. 20 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 Minnesota....... May 20 - June 20 Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 Colorado........ May 1-15 Aug. 15 Sept. and Oct. Oct. 31 LATE FALL: Oregon.......... June 15 - July 31 Sept. 1 Nov. and Dec. Jan. 31 Virginia........ July Oct. 15 Nov. 15 - Dec. 15 Jan. 10 North Carolina.. July 15- Aug. 31 Nov. 1 Nov. 10 - Dec. 15 Dec. 31 South Carolina.. Aug. 1 - Sept.15 Oct. 25 Nov. and Dec. Feb. 28 -55- C A U L I F L O'W E R : U SU A L D T TuE-"S GROUP AND STATE : : Harvesting 3 Planting :Begins : Most Active : Ends RENTER: California...... July - Sept. Oct. 1 Nov. - Jan. Feb. 28 Arizonaooeeoeeeo Aug. 15 - Sept. 30 NOV. 15 Dec. and Jan. Jan. 15 Oregon.......... Aug. 1-31 Jan. 1 Feb. and Mar. Apr. 30 Texas........... Sept. 1-30 Dec. 1 Jan. and Feb. Feb. 28 SPRING: California...... Oct. - Dec. Feb. 1 Feb. - Apr. June 30 washington...... Feb. - Mar. May 1 June June 30 SUMIER: New Jersey...... Apr. 1 - May 1 June 10 June and July July 25 New York........ Mar. - June June 1 June - Oct. Nov. 30 7N&Shi%tonoeeeeo Apr. "’ May July 1 JUIy Aug. 31 COlomeOOOOOOO. APP. "’ June Jilly 1 Aug. and Sept. NOV. 30 FALL: ‘ New York, L. 1.. July 1 - Aug. 10 Oct. 1 Oct. and Nov. Dec. 31 Michigan........ June - July Sept. 1 Sept. and Oct. Dec. 31 Oregon.......... May 15 - July 31 Sept. 1 Oct. and Nov. Dec. 31 New JerSWeeeeee July 1 " Aug. 10 Sept. 15 Get. NOV. 15 ‘Washington...... June - July Sept. 1 Oct. Oct. 31 K A L E WINTER: Vlrglniagooooooo Jilly 20 - sept. 10 0013. 15 D60. - Mar. Apr. 30 -55- commRCIAL TRUCK CROPS FOR FRESH lunar (7) SEASONAL GROUPS (On basis of most active harvesting period) JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. L Winter I l STmmer ] I Spring j I Fall I SUBGROUPS FOR MOST CROPS LEO. rly Wi nt e'r Early Summe rj [Late Winte} fate Summelj I Early Spring [Early Falfi LLate Spring [Late Fall ] SUBGROUPS FOR SHORT SEASON CROPS Early Spring Early SummeI r Midspring' Midsummer I Late Spring Etc Summ‘pr JAN: FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. -57- Roch USE ONLY: . \ ._ l 1‘ v I -I . l ‘ h ‘. i . 1 . . . VI \. - ’ 1‘ , . r . . _ I A m / e 7 I 5: .- h r . - ‘ a - f . ’ I , \ . i A t x , . r H . I - \ ,\ _ v It ."i . . . H t ,I.' “ V "I -,4 x. , . ‘ . ~ I a ~ l l ,‘L \I WIN 1 2 3 6 4 o 3 0 3 9 2 1 3