* a .9
NEE? fiat"? t‘
721.. .tW‘IV L. ‘ 1‘
~‘“'{" 3,. :4;

I J V‘

J?)
. J“
' 1

:J
I: A

f

"(I
; 331‘“
r I

I

firm

.- s. ....
uar. t.- L

 

 

 

 

 

FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE PICK

OF FIELD BEANS

FACTORS WHICH IKFLUEECE THE PICK

OF FIETD BEATS

Respectfully submitted in partial fulfillment

for the degree of Master of Science
at

hichigen State College of Agriculture

and Applied Science

Edward J. Graubau
/__../

llllllll‘ lull ||||I‘ '1'}
'I'

TABLE OF COHTEKTS

I INTRODUCTION

1. The meaning of pick
2. Partial recovery methods
a. xechanical
b. Electrical
C. By hand
d. Cost

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A.

Diseases

1. Bacterial blight

2. Bean anthracnose

3. Other diseases

Insect pests

l. The bean weevil

2. The bean maggot

3. Dimple blemish of beans
4. Hexican bean beetle
Varietal variations

1. Disease resistance

2. Pick to weight of vine
Soil conditions

1. Drainage

2. Fertility

Climatic conditions
Planting and Cultivating

(zr*-:¢r{
L2“ R 2" LU

OJ

(0 CD \7 '0 \1 (D 03 U1 OP rp-

#4 t4 F1 +4 t4 F‘ 94 i4 H1 s4 r4 F‘ F4
01 .s a» (N o: (n u) {D F1 r4 P‘ C) ¢3

III

IV

VI

G. Harvesting
H. Storing
I. Threshing
MATERIAL
A. Source
1. 1928
2. 1930
3. 1931
4 1932
B Soils

METHOD OF PROCEDURE IN THE PROBLEK

A. In the field and laboratory

1. Planting

2. Harvesting
3. Pick

4. Moisture
5- Yield

6. Soak

OBSTACLES EKCOUNTERED
A. Weather

8. Disease

C. Soil Fertility
RESULTS

A. Factors that influence Field
Damage

page

VII

1. Variety and pick
a. Pick of uoiers and lowers
3. Soak and pick of varieties
4. Ioisture and pick
5. Frost and pick
3. Weight of sods and sick
7. Time of harvest and 310k
8. Ripening periods of varieties
DISCUSSION AND SUXLARY
CONCLUSIONS
ACCNOWLEDGIEHT
LITERATURE CITED

'7
l

\J

('23 C0 0-:
19 C23 0

CC]
01

-1-
I IIITRODUCTICZT
Tracy (25) The American Indians were growing
beans at the time Columbus discovered America. Bot—

anists are agreed in that the three varieties, Phase—

 

w P.\ . \ ‘0 \~ \r‘ R‘L' P’ t‘ .
lus u1;aris P. cnccrneds and P. lugiyus are native

—-—. d...-———- , — _

O

 

to our country. Since the discovery of America, bean

production has grad ally increased. The earlie est
plantings by white folks were made from foreign stock,

namely, broad beans. These beans were not ataotaoie to
our country.

As a vegetable oxr common been (Phaseolgg vul arts)

 

ranks next to the ootato in imdcrtance ii the United
States. In “ichigan the thite oea been is the spebialty.
As resorted in the Xichigan Annual Crow Reiort (5)

for 1931 there were 343,000 acres of White pea beans
wit ‘1 a total nroduction of 5,030,000 bushels. Large
whites, light red ki ineys, dsrk red kidneys and other
varieties together had an acrea e of or 1y 33,000 acres
and a total production of 433,000 bushels. In the
United States for 1931 (Year Book of A gricwil ure 1932),
3,913, 000 bushels of white pea beans were produced.
This credits Hichigan with wroducing over 73% or the
white pea bean crow of the United States. There are
more than tvice as many vhite oea beans oroduced as any
other class. Other classes produced that have a

regular market are given in order of imiortance:

-v y

.IV-ga \ J- \ - J-‘fi -- -' .~ '- ”a. 4, ‘ ' “:\ ‘. -r..- l‘wv A“. -T- ‘
‘E'Y gab 1‘4‘JI‘ L‘At—‘fll’ LlALILrS, rlton’ .‘L‘TKJ. IX]. xii/1':- “. , flil:us’, her;-

F

Eexican, Large White, Yellow Eve, Cranberry, and White
Kidneys. Other states that oroduce a considerable

O ‘

quantity of wni“e pea beans are California, new York,
Idaho, aid Wis0onsin.

The average yearly value of the dr} been crop
for Richigan from 1921 to 1933 inclusive was 7,393,300
dollars. The average price per bushel for the sane
period was 3.14 dollars.

1. The Meanin: of Pick

Esans are ens11y dfi.ageu by 'arious agenCies
CfiuSlfl” wgat 1: called uy L48 Dean trade "pica."

J-.-‘-—~ Ema ~ .- ‘-— ’-~ I‘ —L< , J_'.,.‘ A ‘:~ . ---"\_‘ .—‘,r-
Of r“ as 0:838 a e u’au.nt to t“: elevator any] 81:

0 A I

net uniforn in quality. The beans may contain dis-

‘

colored, shrunken, broken, erSted, wet or miss are"

A

seeds to at er W13; litt e stones, bits or dirt, stiCks,

yr ".ierial. Ho elevator man desires to

(D
H.
D-
p...
E
C:

- 1-. .0
E‘IIU. LUGI‘ 1’31”

pay for this waste so he picks or docks than according

l

’50 Curl-LICIOL'I. 3:68.118 1.480 C3016 Cg) b1." E‘lEVE‘JCUl‘ 111 SL103
COIICLICIO‘I 13.163 110 1310:: IS TLCC‘?SS€..1Y IS S€?.lC‘- CO 053 EL

cualitv croo It 18 With the idea in mind : lessen—
A E .L .

441‘ ~ --‘ . .p 1 wq-Q . - . n ‘ -~. I- «.0‘ O “V ~., ‘,
bAlS pica and prenueing a o:t er Quullof CIUP and
Lflt’.' “ " Q"‘r4.’:. f 1""..:. W's”? 2. °~‘ y‘w“'-" "‘ ‘ -'.__'1"'u "at.“
bCuéLlIl"; Odl; pUJlu- U U1; . In C-LLA J v 111. ‘DLkaAdCl-lic U (\LLS UAAC-L}
'Lhfi . J- -"‘\ ~ 1“ -v‘\‘9‘ A. ‘— ’41 rx-c. o N :1, - r~ . > . -
the writer has undertaken a study ul ii: a AngHG in

beans and its causes.

The pick may not be a total loss for cull bians

are utilized as food for Stool. Ortines a farner is

net equipped nor nas he the time to pick iis own beans.

‘)

v.7»

If tnis is tge case tne beans are ten n to tne elevator

f

and processed. TLe farmer is docked for pi h and does

a

not even get his cull beans beck. This represents quite

a loss to tne farmer. Not to have any pick is ideal

but a goal one can hardly expect to reach as a beneral

rule. For this reason it is desirable tLat the per

pt to a minimum. Since there is suc;

C)

O
H)

.- .,-* .,..1
cent QICi be a

Q)

a bre t variation in the per cent of pick from year to

year a study has been made by the writer to determine
some of the causes that produce so much damabe to the
bean crop.

The method used by elevator men to determine pick

is as follows: After tne load has been screened to

q

remove straw, sticks, Stones, or weeds, a pound of beans

..
l

' .p\ 'A 9-»- 4-1,- 1“,,“ r 4'-" q A ‘j- «A -‘ a ,. . :2 4'—
is Lanrn and one unnarletable beans and torsion mater-

ial removed and wei ned. Ine ratio of these cull beans

t the pound sample is found and the per cent fifiured.

1

If the pics of a pound sample is one ounce, the 310k

on

ch

ratio 1:16 or set or e

U’
‘ J
‘1
c!-
if
C)

would be desiQnated

pounds per hundred. The accom-

cw

pounds pick meaning 6

F

panying graph shows the .riation in pick in this state
for the years 1919 to 1952 inclusive. Dr. ?edrick (11)
reports tiat there is a great range in pick in different

purchases by elevators. In the season 1928-2; four

-4...

neighboring elevators reoorted:

21.5% of all nurchases without pick
14-47 of all aurcheses with 1% pick

x. A -. . p/f . .
lu.;o or all ourcnases With op oicn

12.4fl of all ourchases with 3% pick

fl

10.5é or all ourchases with 4% pick
7.5% of all ourchaees with St oick
4.1% of all purchases with 6% pick
2.6% of all ourchoees with 73
2.3% of all purchases with at pick

of all ourchases with over 40% oick

,1
t“; :‘rn
U

L)”

The farmer is charged for removing the culls and also
looses the culls.
2. Partial Recovery Methods

e. As ordinary dry beans come into the elevator
they are not ready for shipment until they are processed.
They are first out through a cleaning mill. If there
is very much dirt oresent they may be out throutn the
niE-srveral times. Many beans need no further treatment
but others go directly to the machine dickers of which
there are several tyaes. Two of these types will be
described briefly. aired rubber rolls about two
inches in diameter and two feet long are arranged so
they slope to the outside from a common center much
like the evokes from the hub of a wheel placed in a

horizontal oosition. The unclean beans are fed to the

I
U“-
I

rclls at the center or hub. The clean smooth beats

41*:
.L

t the outer

F
9)

keep ridht on going until they drog 0
end of the roll. Dirt, many discolored beans, pebbles,
and broken beans are caught between the novin: rolls

and pass through underneath tne machine. This machine
does not do an absolutely clean job, but helps consider-
ably in lessening the labor of handpickina.

b. A machine known as the "EleCtric Eye" Bean
Picker designed by Hammerslas and Tinkham in associa—
tion with the General Electric Company is the latest

in bean sorting machinery. Mr. Hugo B. Hammerslag,
bean broker, reports that this new develOpment will be
of extreme value to the canning industry. He writes
that the best possible grade of beans available for the
canning industry today contain 1%; discolored beans

and foreign material. These beans are sorted by hand
and it is impossible to secure a better pick by this
method. Therefore, when these beans are purcnased

by the canners it is necessary for t.em to pick out
this 1&5 of objectionable beans and foreign material

nd even tLen there is a definite opportunity for
error. He says, "We are now in a position to offer

the canning trade a grade of beans txat is absolutely

free from any objeCticnable beans or foreiyn material,

eliminatin; the necessity of resorting at the canneryfl'

b~ k§&\*u~\\ Koo“ kkokutx Kekb

 

fldOIZI Unfidfifill 00.. 40,3.

LII?!

F.

'1')» .

-~ "~

1—. ‘0...“

.- -av,

-5-
The first electric bean picks of this type has
been erected at Lowell, Michigan. In the September
1931 issue of the Bean Bag, Little Publishinb Company

fl

Lansing, Michi

an, the following description is given
"The beans are forced in front of the phOto—olectric
cells in a single line. The SlightGSt discoloration or
imperfection caused by a different light reflectio;5

so sensitive is the cell, causing a break in the cur-
rent which forces the undesirable into the channel for
culls." A thyratron tube is used to eliminate the use
of a relay thus speeding up the apparatus.

c. With the first machine described, after the
beans pass over it they immediately to to the hand
pickers where women pick out any discolored beans or
foreign material that might be left in order to qualify
for .he particular grade desired.

d. According to Hedrick (11) the hand pickinb
operation is the most eXpensive part of the processind
requiring slow and tedious labor, if well done.
Elevators usually pay we en seven cents for every pound
of culls ani dirt picked out. Recently, due to much
cheap labor and low prices of beans, elevators have
been paying at the rate of five cents per pound of

culls oicked out.

-7-
II REVIEW CF LITERATURE

A. Disease

Spragg and Down (21) Disea e in beans not only
affects the yield but also the quality of the product.
It is a crOp very sensitive to its surroundings. A
brief description of bacterial blipflb, anthracnose and
mosaic and a few other diseases or molds as they
affect the bean seed follow.

1. Bacterial blight. thtcmonas phaseoli.

—-J-

 

Bacterial blight of beans as reported by Plant
Disease Reporter (25) is universal wherever beans are

‘.
.0

grown. nichigan recsrds losses from 10 to 15 per cent

(

in the year 1985, 8 per cent in 1427, and 5 per cent
in 1930.

According to Zaumeyer (29) The disease affects the

p

bean seed through discoloration and cessation of grOWth.

Seed beans that are affected by the or anism may appear

‘
\4

brown or yellow in color or nay even rot away. Eean

N f‘ 4

blight arzeccs the vascular system of the bean plant

A

partially or wholly, causing many seeds to be uneven

a.

I“

in size. Burknolder (a Hewly formed seeds may not

grow at all or remain shall and shriveled. elder seeds
may become colored brown and Semen at s riveled.
Muncie (16) In case of a blight atzack on the seed,

.rltub')‘ 1 -~ ~- - r‘ "‘4‘ " ‘K'p- . " 1 I. . B“‘
libnt yellow slotc es tit out dtllnlot na1;ins a e

produced. Zaumeyer (

-8—
cannot be detected at all in the seed, yet the disease
be present within its tissues. If the infection is
severe the discoloration may be deep and the germin-
ation injured. Muncie (16) Under normal conditions
one half of the pick is made up of diseased beans.
Thirty per cent of this half is caused by bacterial

blight.

 

2. Bean anthracnose--gplletotrichum

lindemuthianum.

This disease is caused by a parasitic fungus
plant. During some years it is difficult even to se-
cure specimens while in others 100 per cent of a field
may be affected. From the Plant Disease Reporter very
little damage by anthracnose was reported for the United
States for the years 1929 and 193 . In the year 1928
Michigan's lcss was 1.5% of the total crop (95,000 bu.)
and for the United States 1.8% or 209,000 bush ls. Th
damage that results from this disease varies consider-
ably. It depen s upon the Conditions that influence
the spread of the causal organism. In the years when
the disease is severe the damage to the bean is due
to the following factors:

1. Poor germination of seed
2. DestruCtion of affected seedlings

3. Injury to the seed.

r)

Muncie (16) If infected seed is ulanted many
vacant olaces aapeer in the row. Either the seed
rots before germination or the young seedlings de—
cey at the surface of the ground. This disease may
also affect older growing olants and may spread from
plant to plant by soores. After the mycelium has
worked its way through the tissues of the bean nod,
the seed beans themselves beo m affected. In case
of young oods the seeds may not even form. Barrus (1)
In older oods the seeds may become discolored. The
discolored saots usually 39083I black with a brown or
tan colored border or, if entirely diseased, it may
be of the latter color. huncie (16) In years when
the disease is prevalent about 70% of the 50% due to
pick in beans in caused by bean anthracnosel

5. Other Diseases

.10

0’]
03

.i0, brown rot, dry root rot, Rhizoctonose

‘-

ceehalothecum roseum may affect the bean seed directly

 

or indirect y. Nelson (17) says about mosaic:
“Associated with excessive branching is the delayed
maturity that results from over stimulation of vege—
tative activity. Diseased slants are still green in
the fall after mosaic-free ulants have ceased vege-
tative activity aid ripened their seeds." This de-
layed ripening may cause further damage through adverse

weather conditions. The damage that results from too

-10-
much moisture may be caused by several mold oroducing
fungi. These may cause the seed to become discolored
or rotten.

Little information concerning he causal organisms
for ordinary field danage of beans due to adverse
weather conditions has been found. Muncie (16) reports
an increase in dick from anthracnose of beans for years
when there is a greater orecipitation, less sunshine,
and more rainy days for the groring months of June,
July, and August.

3. Insect Pests

There are a few insects that may attack the been
or been olant; among these are the been weevils, been
maggots, hexican been beetles, and a soecie of a bug

called Adelphocorus ravidxc. All of these insects

 

exceot the Hexican bean beetle and bean maggots attack
the seed and may cause more or less damage.
1. The Bean Weevil

Pettit (19) The been weevil, Xylabris obtectus

 

is a beetle that may live over winter in stored beans.
In the saring it flies to young bean plants and feeds
off them until the new nods are formed. At this time
the eggs are laid in the nod and the new grubs enter

the young seeds. In time the gruas develoo into adult
beetles and are ready to start another generation im-

mediately unless 0rotective measures are taken. They

-11-
continue this until the beans are all used up or a
mere shell left.
2. The Bean Maggot
Pettit (19) The bean maggot is the larva stage

of a kind of fly called Ellemyia cilicrura. It passes

 

the winter in the maggot stage in the roots of clover
plants and in fresh manure. In the spring it goes
directly to the newly sprouted beans. If the conditions
are right for the maggot, severe damage may be done to
the newly planted crOp. Some of the sprouted beans are
killed and others stunted in growth. This causes the
crOp to ripen unevenly and the new beans to vary much

in size.

3. Dimple blemish of Beans

A "bug" called Adelpnocorus rapidus was discovered
by Dr. I. M. Hawley of Cornell University to cause the
characteristic dimple beans. The insect injures the
pods while they are green. The beans within the pod
grow some after the injury, producing a sort of ragged
depression.

4. The M xican Bean Beetle.

The Mexican bean-beetle has been in this state
only a comoaratively short time. It is a beetle be-
longing to the ladyhird grouo. The adult beetle has
sixteen irregular black spOts on its back. Tnese are

arranged in three rows across the back. The writer

-12-
discovered some at work on the hichigen State College
exoerim ntal bean plots just south and east of the Vet-
erinary Clinic. The larvae and adults both eat the un-
der side of the leaves. The damage done to the bean
plant is to stunt it in growth thereby producing many
small uneven beans.
C. Varietal Variations

1. Disease Resistance

Pettigrove and Oviatt (18) There are a few var-
ieties of beans that are more or less resistant to
disease. The Robust bean, he most outstanding variety
of the white navy bean, was develoned by the late Pro-
fessor Spragg at Michigan State College. It was selected
from a commercial lot of pea beans. Besides being
resistant to blight, anthracnose and mosaic, it with-
stands the sumner heat well. It has proved its high
yielding characteristics in competition with nany ver-
ieties of white pea beans. Spregq and Down (81) Its
leaf development remains profuse until a few days before
harvest when most all leaves turn yellow and drop off.
This allows for hurried ripening of the variety. Its
freedom from mosaic aids in the setting of pods. Lore

pods will be set at the same time nd the plants will

0.)

not take on that "green" apieerance near harvest time.
That is, only a short time will be necessary to dry the

vines and shorten the period of risk during adverse

-15-
weather.

Gloyer (9) In New York, Wells Red Kidney, Geneva
and York varieties of red kidney beans were develooed.
Reddick (20) found Wells Red Kidneys and White Imperial
to be practically immune to aloha and beta races of
anthracnose but Burkholder (2) found strain gamma would
affect both varieties. Gloyer (9) developed the two
varieties Geneva and York from a cross of white and
re kidley beans. These varieties were not only select-
ed for disease resistance, but also for yield, cooking
ouality, ouality of seed coat, behavior under various
weather and soil conditions, color, soak, and taste.

8. Pick to Weight of Vine

Thomnson (24) in his thesis for the degree of
Easter of Science (1950), Lichigan State College, states
that in years with average ra nfall during harvest, the
varieties with large vines will have less sick. The
smaller and weaker vines lie closer to the ground there

they may be discolored by moisture and molds. Robust

C.)

Q.

.n Mexican Tree were large vined varieties and

Pliter, Greiner, and Vermont,snall vined with the highest
pick.

D. Soil Conditions

1. Drainage

Pettigrove and Oviatt (18) Beans grown on T811

drained fields grow better, yield better, ripen better

-14-
and the plants and beans are less subjeCt to water
injury.

2. Fertility

Gloyer (9) at Geneva, New York, found that soils
with higher fertility produced better beans, less sub-
ject to bean blight. As previously Stated. Thompson (24)
discovered that beans with larger vines produced less
pick than smaller vined varieties. He obtained larger
vines by the application of 500 pounds of 4—16—4 fer-
tilizer per acre. Pettigrove and Oviatt (18) A bal-
anced plant food made up of wisely cnosen commercial
fertilizer with green or barnyard manure will hasten
maturity, promote uniformity of ripening and increase
the yield per acre. Care must be exercised in applying
commercial fertilizer as it may injure the germination
of the seed if it gets in contact with it.
E. Climatic Conditions

Harter (10) Temperature may affect the beans
directly or indireCtly. Due to high temperature the
ripening process may be started too soon, causing the
bean pods to shrink and tighten about the seed causing
difficulty at threshing; viz. splitting of the bean
seed. Low temperature and plenty of moisture causes
bean anthracnose to become more severe. Zaumeyer (88)
High temperature with rain, hail, dew, old bean straw,

surface drainage, insects and irrigation all are con-

-15-
ducive to the spread and success of blight in a bean
field.

F. Planting and Cultivating

Pettigrove and Oviatt (18) Under Michigan con-
ditions beans should be planted between May 28th and
June 8th. At this time moisture and temperature are
usually right for best germination. If the beans grow
and develOp steadily the crOp should mature uniformly
and be ready for harvest early in September. To de-
crease the damage by disease, clean seed from disease—
free stock should be used. Plant at the minimum depth
in order to avoid damage by the bean maggot, yet have
enough coverage to secure sufficient moisture for ger-
mination.

Muncie (16) Beans should not be cultivated while
the field is wet with dew or rain, as this helps to
epread blight and anthracnose.

G. Harvesting

There are several good bean harvesters made. The
writer is indebted to the following manufacturers for
description and best operation of bean harvesting
machinery: Donaldson BrOthers, {cunt Clemens, Michigan:
Lehr Company, Fremont, Ohio; Wiard Plow Company, Batavia,
New York; Caledonia Bean Harvester Works, Caledonia, New

York, and others.

There are two common types of been harvesters, the

~16—
two row and the four row. The two row is for hors
power and the four row for tractor attachment.

The bean harvester looks like a riding cultivator
eq11pped with two large knives. These knives should be
run as shallow as possible, throwing the two rows of
beans together. The knives are easily adjusted with
levers and should be set so that they go two, to two
and one-half inches under the ground in front and just
showing through the ground at the heel. The iron
divider rods at the rear may be bent by hand to suit
conditions. If they are set too close the beans will
bunch under the machine and thresh out some. The rods
should be placed so that when the beans are 28 inches
between rows, they will pass over the knives at about
two-thirds of the distance down. Almost every
machine can be made to do good work with a little
trying and adjusting.

The harvesting should be done when the beans are
just ripe, but not so ripe that they shatter. Next
they are forked into snall piles or placed in a
windrow by use of a side-delivery rake.

John Deere (13) If a side-delivery rake is used,
the teeth should be set as high as possible and still
pick up the beans. This adjustment leaves the windrow
loose, permitting free circulation of air and thereby

hurrying the curing urocess.

-17-
Cox and Pet igrove (4) After several hours of drying
the beans are next placed in small narrow cocks. Then
after a day or more of curing, depending upon weather
conditions, they may be thrashed, stacked or hauled to
the barn.

In case of adverse weather conditions the "McNaugh-
ton System" of curing beans is recommended. t is de-
scribed by H. R. Pettigrove of Michigan State College
in a Special circular. Tall, narrow stacks of beans
are built on a straw base. This takes the beans away
from soil and allows for better aeration. By using
this system, the most high-quality beans are obtained.
H. Storing and Storage

Hedrick (ll) Beans deteriorate slowly and not
very expensive storage facilities are necessary. In
the elevators they are sometimes placed in bins loose;
or cleaned, sacked and stored in the warehouse ready
for shipment.

In Farleman's (8) bean storage eXperiment, thirteen
samples of picked and like number of unpicked samples
of beans were stored in air-tight containers at room
temperature that ranged from 700 to 850 F. for nearly

five months. His results were as follows:

At the start Av. % moisture unpicked Beans 18.36
‘Av. % moisture picked Beans 11.89

Difference in Av. % moisture .47

-18-

After 5 months storage Av. % germination picked 87.31
After 5 months storage Av. w germination unpicked 73.38
Difference in Average p germination 12.93

This would so to show that picked beans have a

little lower per cent of moisture at the beginning of
the period but a higher per cent of germination alter
five months of storage.
I. Threshing.

Beans are threshed by a special bean separator.
Two cylinders are used. The first cylinder is run at
a low speed to thresh the riper and drier beans. The
second cylinder is run at a higher speed to thresh
out the unripe or tough podded beans. By this method
fewer split beans are obtained. Good bean separators
are also equipped with stone pickers and rubber rolls.
The stone picker picks out stones from the tangled
vines, and throws them into a box. The ru ber rolls
crush clods of dirt thereby helpinb to keep the beans
clean. (Th Huber Manufacturing Company, Marion, Ohio;
American Grain Separator Company, Minneapolis, MinneSOta;
and others.)

III MATERIAL

The material for this problem was furnished by
Alfred Whitehead and the Farm Crops Department of
Michigan State College.
A. Source

The original sources of varieties used in this

-19-
problem were as follows:

1. The seed for 1928 was obtained frgm Alfred
Whitehead, Mount Pleasant, Michican, on whose
farm the experiment was run.

a. 1200 to 1. It is not known where the seed
was secured.
b. Robust. Certified seed obtained by Grace
POpe in 1927 from the Coleman Elevator.

2. No experiment was run in 1929. The seed for
1930 was secured through the Farm Crops Depart-
ment of Michigan State College. The growing
season was so dry that the eXperiment was aban-
doned for the year.

In 193l-—there were six varieties:

OJ

No. 1. Great Northern
No. 2. Red Kidneys
A variety of dark red kidneys that were
grown at the E periment station.
No. 3. Michigan Pea
A variety of .hite pea beans sent to th
station by Rosenbrock Auburn.
No. 4. Early Wonder
A variety of whi e pea beans sent to the
experiment station by Meinath Killin
No. 5. White pea Beans

This variety was sent to the station by

-29-
by Huni Foster
No. 6. Robust
4. In 1932 Great Northern, Red Kidneys and Robust
seed were used from 1931 exaeriment and eighteen
different strains from the Experiment Station.
In addition to the above the checks at the Ex-
aeriment Station from the Exteriment on the
hethods of Planting and Dates of Harvest
was used.
3. Soil
Kerr and Trull (l4) I810It the soil types that
were used as follows: Berrien sandy loam in 1928,
Brookston sandy loam in 1931, and Brookston loam in 1932.
The Berrien sandy loan was tile drained and rich
in organic matter. The Brookston sandy loam was rich in

organic matter and 13d fair surface drainage. The
Brookston loan was not so rich in organic matter and
lacked drainage.' A hard crust would form over it upon

drying after rain.

-21-
IV KETHOD OF PROCEDURE IN THE EXPERIKEHT

A. In the Field

Different methods of procedure were used. This
deoended uuon the size of the exoeriment and uoon con-
ditions that were uncontrollable, such as, weather,
seed, and the land available.

1. Planting

In 1923 the two varieties of beans 1200 to l and
Robust were planted side by side in two plots with a
grain drill. Every fourth hole of the drill was left
open and the drill wheel was allowed to follow its own
track and return. This made the rows just 28 inches
aoart. The Robust plot contained one acre and the 1200
to 1, two acres. Both varieties were planted in June
at the rate of 20 quarts to the acre. Weather conditions
were favorable for the SIOWth of the beans, and good
results were obtained for the relationship of precipi—
tation to pick and moisture content.

In 1930 the beans were planted with a bean planter.
Due to adverse weather conditions during the growing
season he yield and pick were so small that no results
could be obtained.

In 1931 the six varieties, as mentioned under
material, were planted June 11 with the use of an or?
dinary grain drill. The four varieties of the white

pea beans were planted at the rate of twenty quarts

per acre. The Red Kidney and Great Northern were
planted at the rate of five peeks per acre. To avoid
mixing the bean varieties in the grain drill, only

one variety was planted at a time. Where there wasn't
enough seed for three rows, eighty rods long, the seed
was shifted over to one side so that only two rows
would be planted. The number of rows of each variety,

eignty rods long, is as follows:

No. 1 Great Northern 2 rows
No. 2 Red Kidney 8 rows
No. 3 Michigan Pea 6 rows
No. 4 Early Wonder 6 rows
No. 5 White Pea Beans 8 rows
No. 6 Robust 12 rows

In 1932 the beans were planted with a grain drill
at the rate of twenty quarts to the acre. The "Great
Northern" and "Red Kidneys" were clanted at five peeks
per acre. The quantity of eacn variety varied so much
that no measurement was taken. There were twenty-one
varieties altogether. The Robust variety was planted
at three different places in the plot.

2. Harvesting

In 1928, one square rod or one-hundred six-
tieth of an acre of each of the varieties was measured
out. The beans were harvested as they ripened. Pods

were considered ripe when they turned yellow and felt

-23-
dry to the touch. The ripe node of both varieties
were picked by hand every hird day, exceot when rain
interfered. The pods up above the ground, and those
touching the ground were heat separate and shelled by
hand. The beans above the ground hereafter shall be
designated as "unders" and those touching the ground

.‘

as “lowers". The weights of all of these were deter-

CI

mined and recorded. All ‘eans were saved until mois—
ture and 010k were detern‘ned.

In 1931 the sane orocedure was followed with six
varieties, with the exceiticn that L0 single square
rod, block was used, but 115% feet of row of each
variety was selected for the experiment. These 116%
feet of row were not continuous but taken from various
parts of the rows of each variety. his was done to
get a good average sample of 1/160 of an acre.

In 1932, instead of harvesting the oods every
third day, only two harvests were made. The first
harvest was made when the beans showed a number of
ripe pods, and the second aft r some varieties were all
ripe and others frozen. Also in 1932 an extra or
complete harvest of Robust beans was made after

all beans were ripe.

In 1938 the dick was determined by taking the

entire weight of each harvest and sorting out all

 

 

hmmH N

 

-24-

 

Beans showing Condition of Seed. 1938

No. 379 Uppers second harvest, pick. 3.6%
No. 424 Uppers second harvest, pick121.0fl
Robust Uppers one harvest, pick 3.0% ,
No. 427 Uppers first harvest, pick 8.0%

e25—

 

 

\

 

—\
Fig. 3. Beans Showing Condition of Seed, 1931
5. Michigan Pea, Uppers and Lowers mixed, pick 8.55%

6. White Pea, pick Uppers and Lowers mixed

-23-
unmarketable beans and weighing them. The weights of
the cull beans was then divided by the original weight
of either "uppers" or “lowers” as the case may be.
The total Dick for each variety for the season -ss ob—
tained by adding the weights of cull beans of all

‘

harvests, both "upiers" and”lowers" by dividing by the
total weight of beans of that variety. In a similar
way the total nick of either "unpers" or “lowers"

for each variety was determined.

In 1931 and 1932 the pick for each harvest of
"upcers" or "lowers" (as determined by taking 100 gram
samoles and oicking out the culls. In this case he
weight of the cull beans in grams represented the per
cent of culls or Dick. To obtain the per cent pick of
"upaers" or "lowers" or both, the total weight of beans
was divided into the total weight of culls.

4. hoisture

In 132? and 1931 moisture tests for both "uppers"
and “lowers" of each picking and for each variety were
determined by use of Brown Duvel hoisture Tester and
by the usual method.

5. Yield

In 1923 all beans were weighed on a regular
laboratory been scale. These weights in grams were
then changed to equivalent avoirdupois weight by

(‘13 F7

dividing by 2e.35, the number of grams in an ounce.

-27-
The weight for ”upjers", "lowers", and total for each
variety was then determined by dividing the number
of ounces by 16 to get uounds and the number of pounds
by 60 to get the number of bushels oer square rod and
the number of bushels was multiulied by 160 to get the
yield per acre in bushels.

In 1931 ana 1932 a regular grain beam-balance
scale that gave the weights direct in pounds, ounces
and one-tenth ounces was used. The yields oer acre
were determined in the regular way.

The yield oer acre in each case was determined
by correcting the moisture to 17% and subtracting the
nick. f the moisture was above 17% as many pounds as
would correct the sample to 17% moisture was subtracted.

‘

This was necessary as in 1983 some of the harvest
tested as h'gh as 36S moisture. In 951 there were a
few cases where a snall addition had to be made to
the weight of the sample to nake the beans correct
to 17$ moisture.
b. Soak
In 1332 a ”soak" test of twenty—one varieties of
beans was included in the exoeriment in order to ascer-
tain if a relationshio existed between "soak" and "nick."
A one hundred gram sample of each one of the

varieties of beans was taxen ani alaced in small tin

soil cans. A count of the beans in each samole was

-23-

made. A bean was considered soaked when the testa or
seed coat became ouchered. Counts of the beans soaked
after beina covered with :ater were made at stated in-
tervals. A consilerable difference in soak in some of
the varieties was noticed. A few beans of some of the
varieties did not even soah after being covered with
water for 72 hours. The beans were keot at a temnera—
ture of 700 F. Previous to soaking the beans were
stored in the basement of a hot—air furnace heated
home.

V OBSTACLES TIICCJ' IITERED
A. Weather

As the pick and field dtnage of beans is largely

*4
{‘0
0

due to weathe‘ conditions, suc. as rainfal 21d frost,
the results obtained were variable. In 1922 there was
a fair anount of urecioitation during the harvest sea-
son. In 1930 there was no nick, thus the exueriment
was abandoned for that year. In 1931 the rainfall
uring the harvest season was less than during the
harvest season of 1228. Similar results were obtained
in 1932. The rainfall for tie growing and harvest
neriod of 1923, -931, and 1932 (August lst and October
1st) may be found in table one. In 1932 there was

A

s ne frost dawag to a few OI the later varieties

of beans.

-29-

B. Disease

huch of the pick of 1931 was due to bacterial
blight of beans. Some varieties of beans are more sus-
ceptible to this disease than others, and the effect
of this would increase the pick in those beans mater-
ially. Some varieties are also more susceptible to
mosaic causing them to ripen unevenly, and to extend
the ripening period. The "Robust" beans were freer
from disease than any other variety and the pick of
them was due to weather conditions and contact with
the soil.
C. Soil Fertility

The plot used in 1923 was a very fertile soil.
The Robust field was treated with an application of
250 pounds of 2-16-2 fertilizer. In 1931 the soil in
the xperimental plot was practically the same. It
was a fertile 10am reinforced with ten loads of barn-
yard manure per acre. No fertilizer or manure was
added to the plot used in 1932. The soil lacked humus
and its water-holding capacity was not so great. The
greatest obstacle encountered was a condition brought
about by a combination of some of the factors that
cause pick in beans.

VI RESULTS

A. Factors that Influence Field Damage

Those conditions which affect beans in the

-30-
field are so variable from year to year that it is most

difficult interdret the results from the several ex—

c+
O

periments.

1. Variety and Pick

There are various reasons why some varieties of
beans nick more than others. Table No. 2 shows the
average nick of the 1200 to variety as 1.08% and the
Robust as 1.193%. The Robust beans howed a hirner
per cent of unner sods than the 1200 to l variety. The
per cent weight of nods to beans was also greater in
the Robust variety. The ripening neriod of the 1200 to
l variety was longer. The longer rinening period
causes some of tne beans to become spoiled. This shows
up esvecially in the "lowers" of the first harvest of
both varieties. Under noraal weather conditions the
earliest beans to nature have a longer period in which
to become damaged before harvest time. Disease was not
much of a factor in sick this year.

In 1951 the results were not so good as several
varieties tested were badly diseased. Table No. 5)
The varieties ouite free from disease were the Great

.4
,0 ’

Northern, Robust, and hichigan Pea. They picked 2.59
2.91%, and 3.11% resnectively. The Red Kidney and
White Pea varieties were diseased and nicked 5.13e%
and 9.55% respectively. The early wonder showed a

pick of 6.11%, but this was due largely to a higher

-31-
per cent of lower beans with a comnaratively heavy
pick.

The average sick for the beans tested in 1938
varies from 1. o for the Great Northern to 19.9% for
variety No. 424. No. 434 was badly diseased and late.
(Tables 18, 15, and 14) The Robust Variety was a
close second to the Great Northern, with a nick of

.9lfi. The avera ge sick for all the varieties for
1952 was 5.550%. The Robust beans from another area
in the field harvested only once on Seatember 88,
DiCK€d 3. 1p.

2. Pick of "Upiers" and "Lowers”.

Table 2 shows the pick of "upoers" and "lowers",

k0
U)

l ‘9 for both 1800 to 1, and Robust for each harvest
date. The highest nick for the "losers" of 1800 to l
variety was 4. 4a and of the first harvest Aude t 23.
This was probably due to a few oods that rioened early
and laid on the ground. The "uoiers“ for the same har-
vest oicked only 0.95%. The lowest nick from the "lovers"
was 1.5% on September 5, and the ”uppers nicked 0.89%
for the same harvest. The average for the seven harvest
dates of 1300 to l beans we 8 1. 59a. The average pick
for the "lowers" was 2.95% and for the "uppers", 1.13%.
The highest nick for the "lower” Robust was 5.5% on
September 17. The yield for that harvest was 0.939

bushels per acre. The lowest pick was only 0.11% and

-32-
the yield the same as on September 17. The "uppers"
for corresponding dates picked 0. 959 and 0.047%
respectively. The average 3ick of "lower” Robust was
.159 and 0.737% for "upoers" for the six 1arvest dates.
The average pick for all Robust in 198 3 v.°as 1.199'.

Six varieties were compared in 1931 as to the
extent of dauage to beans in uover and lower pods.
(Table 3, page 40) Not such good results were obtained
as in 1983 due to dry weather, low yield, and disease.
Three varieties showed a greater per cent pick in the
"lowers" t1an in the "upoers". The three varieties that
showed results contrary to the above were the Red Kid—
ney, Mich'gan Pea, and White Pea. The yield of the
Red Kidney "lowers" was so small that accurate results
were difficult to obtain. The pick of hichigan Pea
was made up larg ely of diseased beans. This probably
accounts for a slightly greater per cent pick in the
"uppers" than in the "lowers" as disease affects both.

In 1938 data on pick of "uppers" and "lowers" of
81 varieties was obtained for two harvests. (Tables
18, 13, and 14) All mature beans were harvested for
the first time on September 13 EDL 14. The average
pick of all up3er seen was 8. 991%a m1 for the lower
beans it was 3. 95355-3. The "up3ers" picked less by

nearly one per cent. In a few cases results contrary to

the average here obtained. This was probaoly due to

too small a sample to tork vith. The results for Robust
beans compared well with the results of 1931. In 1938
at the first harvest the pick of Robust "uppers" was a
trace and of the Iflowers" only 3 per cent. The average
pick of both "uppers" and "lowers" of Robust was 1.4%.
As with the Robust, the Great Northern variety behaved
about the same. The lower Great Northern picked 1.19
more than the upper in the first harvest. In 1931

the total lover Grea t Northern beans picked 0.989 more
than the upper. In 1938 they pick ed 1.3301nore than
the upper. This higher per cent pick in 1938 may be

1

due to fewer harvests and also to a later harvest, oe-
cause more beans had tine to become damaged.

In 1931 the total lower Robust picked 4.149 more
than the upper. In 193 8 tvo harvests of the upper Robust
beans picked 1.689, and the loxver Robust 3. 749, ma.king
the lower pick 1.189 greater than the upper pick. In a
different area harvested only once in 1938, the lower
Robust picked 19 more than the up3er Robust. 0f the 81
varieties harvested in 1938, only four of the 31 showed
contrary results, and tlr-at is where the "uppers" showed
a higher pick than the ”lowers

3. Soak and Pick of Varieties.

A test for soak or he rdshell W8 8 condu cted in

1938. (Table No. 5) As all the beans were planted

,,
-04—

tne same day, the soil conditions were similar, one

‘

would exoect favorable results. The average oicn of
Great N3rthern was 1. 4% and the per ceru It of hard

shell after one hour of soaking was 83. 75.9 and after

43 hours of soakinc 21.7%. Robust nicked 1.91? and
the hardslxell, after one hour of scaling, was 15.83fi.
At the end of 24 hours, all Robust beans were sow ed.
Bean sample 294 picked 4.54%, and all beans were soak-
ed in 30 minutes. Bean sample 434 picked the highest
(19.3%) and after one hour of soaking had 6.64% of

Q1],

hard shell. Sample No. 557 oi cked 3.89” and had 55.8 o

.. I /
hardshell after one hour soaking. No. 379 picked
5.36% and had 85.9% hardshell after one hour soaking

and 13.94% hardshell after soaking for 48 hours.

4. moisture and Pick

Moisture for every harvest was determined in the
years 1928 and 1331. In referri n5 to Tables No. 9 and
10, no relationshio seems to exist. As all nods were
harvested as they ripened, there we s little tile for
infection of the bean seed. In some cases bean sam—
ples with a high mois ure content have a low pick

and other cases the reverse is true. These conditions

‘35-

were also shown in Table No. 11 This work was done
on the Station EXperimental Grounds in 1 32.

5. Frost and Pick

No definite results were obtained from the
relationship of frost and pick. All beans ripened
before frost in 1928 and 1931. In 1932 a few late
and low yielding varieties were frozen. The beans
from the frozen plants showed a characteristic ven—
ation in the testa. The canner objects to this as it
detracts from the appearance of the cooked product.

6. Weight of Pods and Pick

Table No. 7 SAOWS the per cent weight of pods to
beans. These results were obtained in 192 , but
nothing further was done with them until 1933 when
they were tabulated. The upper Robust picked 0.737%
and the pods weighed 26.3% of the beans. The upper
1200 to 1 variety picked 1.18% and the pods weighed
25.1% of the beans. The lower 1200 to 1 beans picked
2.83% and the Robust, 3.15% respectively. The pods
weighed 23.1% of the beans in each case. The average
per cent weight of gods to beans in 1200 to l variety
was 24.5, and for Robust .5.5. Some relationship
seems to exist between weight of pods and pick. More
experimental data is, however, necessary before any

definite conclusion can be formed.

-35-

7. Time of Harvest and Pick

Tables 12, 13, and 14 show that there is a greater
oick in beans if left too long in the field before her—
vesting. One lot of Robust beans vere harvested Septem-
ber 14, and again Se3temoer 23. The average pick for
the first harvest was 1.4%, and for the second harvest
2.13%, ana the average of both harvests, 1.912. Another
lot of Robust beans was harvested on September 29 only,
and the average 3ich was 3.1}. This goes to show that
a delayed harvest does affect the pick, depending more
or less uoon weather conditions.

Table No. 11 shows the results of the exoerimental
work conducted at hichigan State College. Four differ-
ent checks were used in different methods of planting.
29

The harvest dates were Sentember 14 23 and Oct-
, )

’
char 8 resoectively. Sample No. l nicked 4.34%, 4.24%,
6.72%, and 8.03% at the different harvest dates, named
in order. Sample No. 4 picked 3.75%, 3.02%, 6.723,

and 5.28% respectively. Only sample Ho. 13 showed con-

trary results between the first and last harvest. The

JJ

first harvest picked 5.26% an the last one 4.77%.
Sample No. 16 shows the greatest difference in pick,
viz., 5.25% for the first harvest and 13.9% for the
fourth harvest, making a.difference of 7.05% in a

twenty-five day delay in harvest.

ONKKUW

  

mcnnzn 5:32;: 00.. c:5>no-2wfi. 40:? 20. uuo

SPONSH CZnHVJHS PC: 02:...KEGcS—mxx. FORK. NO. ~Mo

A; _._R_ a .._.-,....i

_ fl . .

m , ,.
0...» I..-“ ”VX4001“ 1. ,
I" . r N W
_ , i

              

 

    

my. .Ww0

.
1

.

 

_ . .
l......w_.0n..

 

., WEW / Jr

a
a
._
hi

1
I.

1
l.

 

.974» tmy / J

  

 

..
_
.
_
u
. .. .r
~
.
a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8. Ripening Periods of Varieties

In figures 4, 5, and 6 the ripening periods of
six varieties of beans were compared to the ripening
period or Robust beans. The first harvest of the 1200
to 1 variety was made August 28 and yielded 4.27
bushel per acre for the "uppers" and 3.53 bushels for
the "lowers." Six days later, the first harvest of
the Robust was made with a yield of 1.62 bushels per
acre for the "uppers" and 0.49 bushel for the "lowers."
On September 17, just twenty days after the first har—
vest of the 1200 to 1 variety, the last harvest was
made with a yield of 1.47 bushels per acre for the
"uppers" only. The "lowers" were all gone three days
previous. The last of the Robust were harvested
September 20, three days later than the last of the

200 to 1 variety, and just 17 days from the first
harvest date of the Robust beans. he period of
greatest yield can easily be seen by referring to the
graph.

In 1931 (Figures 5 and 6) there was no difference
in the fertilization treatment of the six varieties.
The ripening periods are as followsifRobust, 11 days;
Early Wonder, 5 days; Michigan Pea, 17 days; Red Kid—
ney, 18 days; White Pea, 20 days; and Great Northern,

23 day . 0n the last harvest date, Sept. 23, a few

blossoms were discovered on the Great Northern.

MN 1,. a s .0\ .3 «x Q m. .m ,Kxuwu x333?
.3» N‘\ 1 , , , , , >, 1
in. 1

$Nm1..-

«w?

3w ,,

as: 1 ,1 1
as“ ,

$3,, Sn m§u¥k§ 13%;.

 

.,.,.,.. 1mm 111,. $111..“ .,,,1,, 1,, 1mm,
..... 1 xmeoéx amt w Se
likwfiwsskemfiw 58¢
---- kw§§x \EQm. «3%

II 538. ,ms‘ >33 wévmfi KG ,
, 4w. bettfi ngmnqax wé\%$§u {Maegm baa,

143...... ._1 151.... ,. p.111
31.1.11... A0115? 70.7.

x1?

 

”DC—1.11;. .12mhzwfis .10.. n1.=_C<.»C.$—:F 1.3—;

 

 

.m 31.1.1
1 ,.1.r,1.¥r

J
1.1..1..n._u..r

J

#5

 

Q.

spa/.11., ._

1.

- ...._.//mr11..111.

 

4/4.?»

,1. 1.211

011:1).

.
I! ”(1 ..

.1...»

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:1
1 .
1
11,7. ... 1
I 1 I10J'VI,AI. eu/ Wu all-X, _ 1
he. 1 _ 1 .11
M ...1.. 1 “1.._ 1 . .fl 1, ._ 1
. . .m ,1 W 1.. ,1.. . u . _ .
_1.. .A......,. AIh _, ,1,
aw-__.1../.v :0. .1... .1... 11. 1.0.0 , - 1 - -
1.11 . . .1 1, 1. ,
. . 1
. 1. 1 1 1
.Ju.;.,r~.u..—fl 1.! 1 pin! WI! 1
1 . 1. ,. 1
, _ _ 1.
GD4 ‘0 W , _ _ . .
A: 1..-.1! . . i r. .1 .q x I q. I. | . 1iV LI, .7. r»
1 , 1
. 1 1 1
11 . 1 _
"1.1.... .31.;1 2 51.55.1311) -.. .. 11.3.... . -s 1.1.1.5....1 x.-- z
. 1 _ 1 ,
.1 _ _ . \
.p. 1 , 1 , , .
”H.511. M T. u ,1... u .H : . - 1:1. .
1 . , . m 1.
1 1 ,
v...» 1.., 1 1 1. .1 .
1 , , 1
”91¢ 1”. V m «r G .M o . 11" .I111\.>.\
1. .
, 1. 1
Wu .1 1. ,
1..-..-1... .1. . 1 _ .- 1,.
1 1 1 1 a.“ -
It’d?“ H W . 1s ¥K\\M\
r11. .11! 0 ytT . r .! 1 . . . w
._ 1 M \\\\..1.|\.\u\
,1 1 m 1‘ V‘. .\
1

g 1.1

 

. .. . 3.115.»... I....|..(u.

«.

1..

.1
1

. 00.11.!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

,1

.1, .....

.1
1
1. _ ._
1 1 1
1 1

.3.“ .1..M.. v _

 

'60:” Uigfll 8.. Gang; #0;

7...)...Y5511. 1 T
1

‘1‘!

.L“
1‘.
1‘1.

 

1
1
1..—:1...

It.
I
i
.
1
I
2
‘v
1
x
s
‘.
. 111111.
E
3 1
\
1
l
1
.r—
\
§
1
n
.J:;~ .
.
I
1 ‘I
.
l
‘u
‘1..-"
.”f
14”.
/' ‘
'3
a
1....»
1 I
‘ ‘1‘
l
I .
1
.
l
t -
X
‘
_— I

 

. .
.
1 . 1 .
1 r.
_
9...
....x... _ .
. .5.
-tl?!
1
I l at,
.. .. .. \1\
_

I.
I
a
.
._- 1
t
.
n
.
1
.11’1.
-4 —
5
.
\
1
V
‘ .
~ .
I \\ ‘
‘7.
I ‘ .4
’1‘ ’K.
.
\
t

|‘-’
OCDCDflmUltPCJJFOH

FH4
1U+4

FH4
UMPCR.

16

FHAFJ
coarfl

20

Table No. l

PRECIPITATION
1328 1931 1932
Aug. Sept July Aug. Sept. July Aug. 599%
.12 .67
.18 .04 .58 .03
2.00 .34 .07 .11 .37 .11
.05 .07 .38 1.00
.09 .47
63 01 .03 .6?
.17
2.02 .03
.24 .66
.49
.10
37 .03
1.56
.48 .03
.48 .02
.18 .01 .02
.07 1.09
10 .09 1.04 .19
.31
.11
10
.59
.69
.04 . O .21 .07
.1? .37
.09 .03 .18
.56
.03
3.48 2.13 1.04 2.77 4.51 3.09 3.37 .79

The above data was taken from the COOperative Observers'
Meterological Record, U. S. Department of Agricu ture,
Weather Bureau.Station, Mount Pleasant, Michigan,
COOperative Observer, E. T. Oberg

Discussion on oage 59 and 61

{71
0)

ID

O)\]

.05
.16

.38

.03

.54

a

\

.10

43

.17

C“. Q
\/ LI

.21

Harvest Date

Sept. 10
Sept. l3
Sept. 17
Sept. 20

AVERAGE

Uppers

70
O
[.4

F‘ F4
(0
on

_39_

Table NO.

9

‘8)

PER CENT PICK IL 1988

1200 to l

Lowers

4.4 8.8

2.3 ' 1.32
1.6 89
8.58 . .87
2 99 2 23
2.2 l 7

1.93
2 83 1.68

Average Uppers

Robust
Lowers

.
'U
H

0

01)

O)
(3
(0

Discussion on pages 30 and 32

Average

 

 

 

 

, .— f. 4 r -. A r ‘ . . " A »._ ' ‘ 4 a 7 V ‘3 ’2 A ‘ ‘7 I 75 ." I; \ “ "7 "‘ .5. . ,_ 1:"; L 1. V j A 7 .7); fl ” .
» "J / .56 :C ., or, 1 . 2 $9 ,' o . it: 2 .2 . 1.1 55701; . .Ll ,., . 1 ”—9: . .1..- 061.13 . .L( «D a» \‘. 1 ,1 JG ) ’0 . .11; Sf? .13. " S AVCfar.e
«0- .. . . .A . , _ fl -
cl‘cc‘i‘ 1 1". .GTH
7. . w 9 s
U yer 7. : .J ‘ r.u4
Lower :.L4 3.?9 (ft -¥*3 - “ 11.‘ 3.F3
l . .m- h . - ,4. .-
Avera a .. “ e,;l .81 ..l . 11.3 {-59
PL? 11; E '
, _. i . r" F 7' '7 - r " ‘r’
3 0:1. 67' , , 5,0 4 . cu _ . 3., .2. o. a. 00
. a, . n V ,. ,» . f‘r"
rfl're'r) 4;. 6/ 3 .. '1; ‘ 1-1 ‘JJ v.00
I .. ~ v'. v 1-! f v *- r I7r‘ r, 2
Avere.a Z./. 3. 4,-/ ..10 4.35 3. 3 ..136

die i_3n Pea

Uflper . 10.3. 4.0% 1.0: 1.05 2.50 3.3%
Lower 2‘ — - ,: :- ’
. :5 4.74 .95 1.95 2.50 3.11

Average ”.3

marl? Wonder

1 A 0.89
1.11 5.09

Upper
Lower
Average

{1) 0)
C23

\7

q

H

“5

CS!

O\

H

3.:

c
.

LG ()1 \J
.23 H C)

7.78

{:1
E
H ~
CD
’1‘!
(D
Q

Wooer 0.00 11.44 17.0? .23 4.15 0.0? 8.00 8.67
ibGér v 20 3 55 14,13 :.JQ 4.76 10,09 8.18

V.» [1.2] —'- h n ff. C I” 4: ,7? F _ q C'
Average ;.~a 10.9: 1c.0» ”-54 '°~ 6'00 8'LO 8'53

 

1.38 1.86
6.00
1.38 2.91

U]

no)
CO

Upper -.
Lowe ..83
Average

UTLU
H
(NASH-J
DJU‘li—J
(FF—4C“
CUM?-

[.1
(0

discussion on pages 31 and 33

 

 

 

 

 

 

tin» Dates
, 1; ounces;
‘ot51
44 “ (1 4 1 1 ‘1, 1 ‘ A . "a w F1 J—r .7,
A . 1 > . ‘ G, a bf .0 / 3. J J J 3 39:1,.) 31 .J 7-,. > 53‘ , 1/ ‘1) , '1 315-) '14,, DFJV. U IOUcl -5

      

1 .- , T ’1 2.’ PC
‘-. ‘.:c 11. .50 47_Q
. ,1 u -,. a CF
4. .,¢ lo..o .JJ _ 51. J
. .. 4 a I. »- .~ :‘ (a
14. a 11.24 ~e./J -h.;¢ “ , , 1wm.7d

   

J
1
1.1
V_J
/
1
‘1
H

 

     

     

   

7 g L; - 38 ‘-,
.J. T. a J 7 ‘ “
. g ' ’ , 19. 4
. . _ .t u u / V A 7 r : 1’3!- 1 :f' -~.9
. 1._ Ln...) 1aJd.Uv
l7 . f _ r . ‘ J 1 5. . ,
1.11 0.119811 PJB
UD'5” 18 97 “O 01 70.50 10.06 132.5 74.0
a. fix/.1. '- .4 <. . ~.' ‘7 0": F
Lows“ 5 ' 11.00 51~ 45.0 50.0
‘ V. >~ V ,7. x {*1
r’l—L : '9 'w") 'f‘ [-6 9U.50 10.15”.) 1.05.5
1131,1844. .L . 1 47L]. .IJ * -

 

3 D. 7.01 67.75 07.75

   

T1? 3- —~ 1 A '/ * V ‘

L "D. E I. . . a , , n ,. '7 -.
L5%er 3 f6 3-50 08‘00 Qb'é
TOthl 93.'5 “O 10.60 7.00 106.35

   

. ._ . .. -, - 7.50 104.50 75-1
TTOPT C ._ 17 m. d.-u 6 '
“1’1"“ -.J. «a .. n —v ’ 34.48 4:11.51
LO‘VQI’ [L 7,?" / (j) Z , NJ ,. l“ ,..

m 43] 1":N 44'1” 2'30 168'68

loba. 3.3 4-.0p

   

Robust

T . , 20 fin 79 — 14 50 118 00 74-7
1117. . ,‘J , uu.~J‘v 3.150 n . _
poer In “J 8.0J 17.50 40.00 30-3

Lower . :f'.9 47,00 50.00 14.50 158.00

77' Q n: - ~"i... Y 7 ‘
Discussion on 05; s 53 and .9 ‘ ”o moisture or pick deducted 10t~1 Avelwge .ooer ;: Z
(120 ft. of row) Total Average Lower t8'0

 

 

 

 

sgle no.
u 3’1““ w - 1 w .. :x 1:1: ‘r‘ 7 “'H '; 3 " 7‘. ' r“ is“ 'i s r?
C j‘uJ .1111 :7L‘-. -; blurb: A1513 II 1.. Jul-1;. 3 7.1711112?) 1.19....
of 91C .3 ,2 ’3‘ TV . .9 1" F“ «9 DIV After
' _ - . ' x =‘ v. 1:1 “J- . r» '4... ‘- ..
ls . 1L...1J . 1 .a-. 4- ._1n. 1 1*: 4 -19 ; firs. 1v‘1ifS. 44 51s 4%. Hrs. 4%: HUulEB Beak

   

 

 

   

«1uc pug 7.5 354 74 4 2?.5 s 1 3 :5.5 34.45 39.45 99.45 .55
Pefl Kid 67 5.‘ " g 11.7 1:.7 “ .‘ 71.; 194 3. “ ‘4.u ’1.4 100 00

Eras- J;r1-€:r 1.4 SD? 4.:6 1/ L lU-L “' 47'? “ ’3? 3'1 70'? 78.8 Pl 1?
1'0 A ’ “.77 :71 :1’;}.? .3 21?.7 :9- 77-; 1U”

‘70. 4.54 L4- : 9:}. ‘ lO/J

11.-27 8.23 .1* 32.5 99.5 1,.5 99 5 '*3‘ 109

10.553 -.9 3:. 35., 94.1 90.5 7-3 90-9 ”9'5 130

 

 

' ' , ' ’ \ *1 m r “W .I‘ '7 r L
“0.4.33 9.8 7(‘.LI .10.;- U... 33>”.k I .o 7:1. . 11.2K).O
1 ~ . r r? ; 0
1 A 7 V .— t 9 ' ‘3 0‘: H ' '7 ,1 4 "o L L) a?)
4-10. EC? 3. ENJE- />4.(J LV.7 434.: L . in. 1 . .. )7. Q < u I o o
, V a A! O 1
, ’ Q s so a- 97 v: 1 so 2 a? 4.1
‘7 ‘ 7 ' 7 ‘7' :3 7 r: l f L; 1.x.) ’) J J 4 J _' Av . 1.. u (4 n v
10 ’96 7 J 4*. ”/1 1U. ~31 ’JQ 00 J42. C1. ' ~ ‘

 

 

l‘Jv.BO7 [3.43 4.718 JEN.) :. 4‘

No. 335 7_gg Ad} 07. 5 9,3.q 99.c ;’.76 93.76 ”9.76 99.76 107.00

No.4ul 3.33 451 83.31 BE.& 93.0 93.11 i .5 $8.0 98.1 98.67 88.67 98.67 1.53
No.5’9 E.Ct £09 .97 10. 8 11.76 14.91 ‘R.85 51.76 68.7 5.3 81.41 86.06 15.94

Q.)
.
L

k5
’4
O
}_|
1
C)
Q)
C ‘
,vfx
K
O
01

r:
O
H
O)
H
u
1
b1
4 1
0\
OJ
\3
”.C
C _
('1
01
)1
\1
H
hr;
03
\7
01
R3
( fl
‘ \1
Lu
\1
LO
0:}
L0
H
g;
(D
O)
r
(:3
;_.1
C0
LO
0
.Q
H
(O
\1
CO
C3
‘.\)
H O
m

1...:
C 1
H
CL
.\
u)
\.
LT’
C
C W
.‘3
CO
0]
W
1.7“
()3
03
C»?!
(1‘8
C10
hr;
fl
\1
{T‘
\j
CO
L 7
”)1
DJ
(‘2)
CO
LO
Q

LO
”3
CO
CD
LO
\3
\j
u )
\J
\F _
(0
q
(0 LO
LO
\3‘
OJ

NO.47O 10.95 471 51.3 78.3 87.9 91.2 '3.9 W.

‘\)
U1
LO
\‘t
(D
#5
LO
CO
14>-
H
03

10.424 19 8 437 86.27 32.67 0? 76 95.71 94-7 95-19 . 76-1 97-

L/ O . a)

Discussion on pages 97 and 54

 

 

 

 

Table No. 6

WEIGHT OF BEAN PODS IN GRAMS IN DIFFERENT HARVESTS IN 1928

1200 to l Robust

Harvest Date Upper Lower Upper Lower
August 28 247.0 180.5
August 31 317.0 167.0
September 3 317.5 121.0 86.5 28.4
September 6 182.0 70.0 201.0 38 1
September 10 178.5 52.0 623.0 155.0
September 13
September 17 123.5 282.0 52.0
September 20 78.0 27 0
Total 1375 5 600.5 1281.5 281.5

7 Table No. 7

PER ENT OF PODS TO BEANS 1828
1200 to 1 Robust

Harvest Date Upper Lower Average Upper Lower Average
August 28 28.8 23.8 26.5
August 31 25.6 21.8 24.1
September 3 22.1 22.3 22.11 28.3 21.1 27.0
September 6 22.5 24.1 22.8 31.8 22.4 30.0
September 10 26.7 26.3 26.5 25.3 24.4 25.2
September 13
September l7 30.3 26.6 27;4 26.7
September 20 23.2 20.8 22.6
Average 25.1 23.1 24.5 26.3 23.1 25.6

Discussion on page 35 and 60

-44-

Table No. 8

WEIGHT OE BEANS IN GRAMS IN EACH HARVEST 1928

1200 to 1 Robust

Harvest Date Upper Lower Upper Lower
August 28 856.0 787.0

August 31 1242.0 765.0

September 3 1438 6 542.0 328 134.0
September 6 853.6 280.3 631 170.3
September 10 668 5 187.5 455 634.0
September 13 613.0 88.0 2330 487.0
September 17 407.5 1060 148.0
September 20 340 128.5
Total 6080.2 680.8 7205 1713.8
Per cent of Total 68.46 30.54 80.8 18.2

Discussion on pages 58 and 58

-45_

Table No. 8

MOISTURE CONTENT HARVEST PERIOD 1928
(In per cent)

1200 to l Robust

Picking Date Uppers Lowers Uppers Lowers
August 28 30.3 36.0

August 31 27.5 27.0

September 3 31.0 36.0 33.0 34.0
September 6 21.8 21.3 25.4 25.7
September 10 20.0 18.0 23.0 24.0
September 13 24.5 26.0 28.0 30.0
September 17 23.7 18.5 18.5
September 20 18.0 18.0

Discussion on page 34

 

 

Taple No. 10

QKELE OF LOISTURK 1931

.F""'»€So
“. __ ,. w. , . , m i- - w .—. 1" r ,- 1' (H ». 1 , 2 "tr 4» ’ ‘ .47 7' .1 '9 "“8 " 7 ’ 1‘ ' '“ "f " F '7 “a ‘ 3 ’ ‘ '
JLUC‘S till-1‘ "I“ CC}! J. ,7 0‘6”“. Q S»: );J_ K Q‘: 1 > . gt [0.1-3 $639.11 , ,1 ..L' 0%“ J 5.1- .58 ...l/ C)?‘ jb.lI,J» SQLJD.1J se_-}‘J.;’_E) AVSI‘ae

m-.. _.A. ,. *7 ._ ,, ,.
J1ECL -. (Tchelfl

   

 

 

,pjer ‘f.: l .3 18.34
Lover 23.4 1,.4 . 13, 20,9
x — i , m 2 «l ,
AVE-{LL94 :b.‘./ 1-../J ~« 15.0 12.78
Ree Kidnev
UpDEI :1.b 10.4 . 07.1 Eb,u 77.0 3 .5
-_ fl "'7,’ - d 1 f r'r m
Lover 31.0 CL«U ' “”" 05‘35
’« ,- ,- ,- , ,~. H r ,n ‘ I '," .3; pi ,‘ ,- 4 2' .
AVEljdrtj': :1 .1 Wu . L-LU ‘ - ”'4" '~- 2. l " 'V'L" - U 2:? ' O L]. - 52’
mchl,en Pea
. -- _ .fl 7. A. W“ A m.
D“)l),\z‘r , £/‘ “1 1:). O L’IJ. U LJLJ. U l J. L} (.5. 6
”I “ t w is r mp «.
Lower 51.3 18.0 3—.1 2/.56
~ . r!“ 1“ a c r . . -
26 Q 5.0 /.71 uU.U 19.0 H5.Q

Early Wonde

Upper 21.; 16.2 18.0 30.0 22.0 20.11
Lower 23,9 10.3 18.5 30.0 19.9
5207 11.23 18.22 30.0 22.0 19.72

Average

White Pea
16.0 26.0 20.0 20.20

I50. O

HH4F4

(Du1k

000
H
C
(I

Upper 18.0
Lowe 13.1
Average 18.06 2

 

20.0 20.90

FJFJH
OO O
{\J
J
(D
00

CC) 13.] :J1

0 21.0 24.23
0 25.90
7 21.0 84.65

'\1 O)
C

(N '7).

Upper .1 ,
Lower X ,1
Average

31) L0 1).?

U D
’3
O U}

‘1“

(

Precipitation (Table 1) Aug. 38, Sevt- 1, 9.12' Sept. 4, O-HRIPJt. 7, 0.10; Sept. 14, 1.56; Sept. 1:, 0.05; Sept. 16, 0.48;Sept.20,1,04

Discussion on page 34

 

 

-47-
Table No. 11
SHOWING WEIGHT, MOISTURE AND PICK AT DIFFERENT HARVEST DATES 1832

First Harvest September 14, 1832

No. of Sample 1 4 7 10 13 16
weight in gms. 555.0 475.0 1225.0 450.0 471.0 202.0
4 moisture 15.9 18.4 17.2 16.3 18.0 25.8
4 pick 4.55 5.75 7.54 5.57 5.26 5.85

Second Harvest September 23, 1832
Weight in gms. 787.0 510.0 1272.0 578.0 567.0 371.0

% moisture 31.7 27.8 24.8 40.3 33.2 80.8
4 pick 4.24 3.02 7.87 2.7 3.18 10.82

Third Harvest September 28, 1832

Weight in gms. 664.0 567.0 1170.0 405.0 470.0 180.0
% moisture 38.2 18.8 23.1 44.1 22.8 28.1
4 pick 6.72 6.72 5.86 4.1 5.54 12.75

Fourth Harvest October 8, 1832

Weight in gms. 585.0 486.0 1158.0 462.0 480.0 215.0
4 moisture 36.3 22.1 20.3 40.3 22.7 27.3
4 pick 8.08 5.28 10.09 5.58 4.77 15.9

Precipitation in Inches

September Total 3.04 Inches
Dates 3 13 16 17 18 2O 21 22 26 27 3O
Ppt. 2.0.13 T .01 T .20 .02 T .40 .28 T

OctOber Total 15 days 2.85 Inches
Dates 1 3 4 5 8 10 11 12 13 14
Ppt. T .03 1.43 .02 .01 1.24 .04 .02 .05 .01

Discussion on pages 36 and 61

Upper
Lower
Total

Upoer
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

—48-

Table NO. 12

First Harvest

Weight of Beans

Ounces

DJ
0

UlrFeI-J
01010

IX)

D)
$0114
000

DO

.4 2
snow»
CDUHfi

F4 :4
oaHHu
CDCHD

Weight clean

Beans
Ounces

NO. 307

Blue Pod

20.58
2.88
23.46

Robust
42.0
5.33
47.33
No. 461
13.72
2.81
16.63
No. 442
7.24

.47
7.71

Red Kidney

11.16
.80
12.06

COMPARISON OF YIELD AND PICK 1832

(H'QI-P-

F40N€
tP-O

\70’1CD

NrPLU

NOJLU

(AUTOS
03001

Pick
Per cent

01010 01010

LUOO

l-‘OO

Date of
Harvest

Sept.
Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.
Sept.

Sept

Sept.

Sept.

Sept

Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.
Sept.

Sent.

Sept.

l4
14
14

14
14
14

l4
14
14

14
14
14

14
14
14

14
14

14

14
14
14

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

YIELD AND PICK (continued) 1832

-49-

First Harvest

Weight of Beans

Ounces

16.0
20.0

11.0
13.0

5.5
4217

64.0
10.0
74.0

H
:51th

(510 U]

H

’1)

(0030‘)
01001

3‘0

Weight clean
Beans
Ounces

No. 286

15.2
3.88
19.08

No. 424
8.8
1.74
11.64

No. 470
3.3

.38
3.68

Great Northern

63.42
9.8
73.22

No. 305

25.65
3.28
30.93

No. 576

8.32
2.0
10.32

No. 378

10.70
3.68
14.38

No. 558

’30

C0 03 C11

(00'!)
KID-Q

TX)

Pick

Per cent

PC1301
(3)00

10.0
13.2
10.4

42.0

Date of
Harvest

Sept .
Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept .

Sept.
Sept.

Sept .
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.

Sept.
Sept.

14
14
14

14
14

14
14

14
14

14
14

14
14

14
14

14
14

_5o-
YIELD AND PICK (continued) 1932

First Harvest

Weight of Beans Weight clean Pick Date of
Ounces Beans in Harvest
Ounces Per cent
No. 427
Upper 46.0 43.24 0.0 Sept. 14
Lower 8.0 7.56 5.5 Sept. 14
Total 54“ 50.80 5.8
No. 161
Upper 17.0 16.92 .5 Sept. 13
Lower 7.5 7.42 1.0 Sept. 13
Total 24.5 24.34 .65
No. 284
Upper 35.5 35.15 1.0 Sept. 13
Lower 7.0 6.82 2.5 Sept. 13
Total 42.5 41.87 1.24
No. 458
Upper 58.0 57.97 1.00 Sept. 14
Lower 6.5 6.37 2.00 Sept. 14
Total 64.5 64.34 1.40
No. 158
Upper 4.0 3.84 4.0 Sept. 13
Lower 2.0 2.0 T Sept. 13
Total 6.0 5.84 2.66
No 435
Upper 15.0 14.7 2.0 Sept. 14
Lower 2.6 2.5 4.0 88, 14
Total 17.6 17.2 2.27
A11 Uppers 477.00 448.83 2.8816
All Lowers 85.77 82.38 3.8535
Total 562.77 531.31 3.1025

Discussion on pages 35 and 53

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

-51-

Table No. 13

COMPARISON OF YIELD AND PICK 1932

Weight of Beans

Ounces

(gene
acne:
OCfiU1

24.0
25.2
49.2

135.0

Second Harvest

Weight clean
Beans
Ounces

No. 307
18.35
13.78
33.14

Blue Pod
33.84
5‘.44

No. 557
20.52
22.81
43.33

Robust
75.56
12.86
18.52

Robust

All One Harvest

130.95
15.25
146.20

No. 461
14.88
15.75
30.41

NO. 442

8.7

4.77
13.47

Pick
Per Cent

H
i—J(£)r¥b
(00101

H

HOO

DJrPN
CD

0343-03

O¥3c>

H
(1)003
000

13.0
13.2
13.0

Date of
Harvest

Oct. 8
Oct. 8

Oct. 14
Oct. 14

Oct. 13
Oct. 13

Sept. 28
Sept. 28

Sept. 28
Sept. 28

Oct. 13
Oct. 13

Oct. 13
Oct. 13

-53-

YIELD AND PICK (Continued) 1832
Second Harvest

Weight of Beans Weight clean Pick Date of
Ounces Beans Per Cent Harvest
Ounces
Red Kidney
Upper 18.6 18.85 3.3 Sept. 28
Lower 4.5 4.16 7.5 Sept. 28
Total 24.1 23.11 4.08
No. 286
Upper 42.0 36.86 12.0 Oct. 7
Lower 23.0 22.25 11.0 Oct. 7
Total 65.0 58.21 11.6
No. 424
Upper 37.5 28.62 21.0 Oct. 13
Lower 20.6 15.76 23.5 Oct. 13
Total 58.1 45.38 21.88
No. 470
Upper 28.5 25.65 10.00 Oct. 13
Lower 18.0 15.84 12.00 Oct. 13
Total 46.5 41.48 10.7
Great Northern
Upper 22.5 22.05 2.0 Sept. 28
Lower 4.5 4.32 4.0 Sept. 28
Total 2710 26.37 2.3
No. 305
Upper 35.0 31.85 8.0 Oct. 8
Lower 18.2 17.08 11.0 Oct. 8
Total 54.2 48.83 9.7
No. 576
Upper 8.5 8.38 11.8 Oct. 13
Lower 12.0 10.02 16.5 Oct. 13
Total 21.5 18.40 14.4
No. 378
Upper 85.6 82.50 3.6 Oct. 13
Lower 48.0 44.38 8.4 Oct. 13
Total 134.6 126.88 5.73

-53-

YIELD AND PICK (continued) 1832
Second Harvest

Weight of Beans Weight clean Pick Date of
Ounces Beans Per cent Harvest
Ounces
No. 558
Upper 35.3 33.18 6.00 Oct. 14
Lower 20.0 18.40 8.00 Oct. 14
Total 55.3 51.58 6.8
No. 427
Upper 61.5 56.58 8.0 Oct. 13
Lower 22.0 18.21 14.5 Oct. 13
Total 83.5 75,38 8.7
No. 161
Upper 51.2 48.01 4.3 Oct. 7
Lower 36.0 34.92 3.0 Oct. 7
Total 87.2 83.83 3.75
No 284
Upper 35.0 32 37 7.5 Oct. 7
Lower 18.5 18 26 6.5 Oct. 7
Total 54.5 50.63 7.1
No 458
Upper 34.0 32.47 4.5 Oct. 13
Lower 18.5 17.11 7.5 Oct. 13
Total 52.5 48.58 5.8
No. 158
Upper 17.2 14.81 13.3 Oct. 7
Lower 12.5 11.44 8.5 Oct. 7
Total 28.7 26.35 11.28
No. 435
Upper 46.5 40.45 13.0 Oct. 13
Lower 25.5 23.08 8.5 Oct. 13
Total 72.0 63.53 11.7
All Upper 880.0 818.52 6.886
All Lower 422. 382.77 8.286
Total 1302.0 1201.28 7.735

Discussion on pages 36 and 58

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

COIPARISON 0F YIELD AND PICK

14

1832

All Upver and Lower Pods

Weight of Per cent

Beans
Ounces

in

of
Total

Wt.

Red Kidney

Beans
Ounces
No. 161

65.83
42.34

108.27
N0. 158
18.75
13.44
32.18
No. 284
67.52
24.08
81.60

No. 296

52.16
26.13
(78.28
No. 305
57.50

22.36
79.86

30.11
5.06
35.17

Clean Pick

Average

Per cent

3.33

11.79
3.22
7.89

5.20

Dates
of

Harvest

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Sept.

13

7

13

13

14

14

14

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Weight of
Beans in

-55-

All Upper and Lower Pods

Per Cent Wt. Clean

of Beans
Total Ounces
Robust
86.3 117.56
13.7 18.28
135.85

Robust (CK)
One Harvest

89.4 130.95
10.6 15.25
146.20

Great Northern

85.6 85.47
14.4 14.12
88.58
No . 307
68.0 38.25
32.0 17.85
57.20
Blue Pod
65.0 47.64
35.0 24.80
72.54
N . 557
61.5 41.10
38.5 25.68
66.78
No. 442
74.5 15.84
25.5 5.24
21.18

COMPARISON OF YIELD AND PICK 1832

Pick
Average
Per Cent

038503
I—‘OO

1.19
2.62
1.40

7.65

10.25

8.48

8.91

12.66
8.87

Dates

of

Harvest

Sept.
and
Sept.

Sept.

only

Sept.
and
Sept.

Sept.

and

Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

Sept.
and
Oct.

14

52

(J '4

28

14

14
14

14
13

13

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

-50-

COMBARISON 0F YIELD AND PICK 1932

Weight of

Beans in
Ounces

107.5
30.0
137.5

Per Cent
of
Total

No.

78.2
21.8

1171; o C l e an

Beans
Ounces

461
28.38

18.66
47.04

lb
CO
513

39.52
17.50
57.02

470
28.95
16.22
45.17

576
16.70

12.02
28.78

93.20
48.07
141.27

558

O O
CHIP-H
03003

LU {‘0 UT
0 H CO

427

99.82
26.37
126.19

All Upper and Lower Pods

Pick
Average
Per Cent

4.12
9.00

8.30

18.51
22.57
19.80

9.53
13.12
10.85

9.73
14.14
11.63

4.02
8.36
5.86

4.27
6.96

5.00

7.14
12.10
8.23

D813 8 S
of
Harvest

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and
Oct. 13

Upper
Lower
Total

Upper
Lower
Total

All Upper
A11 Lower
Total

COLPARISON 0F YIELD AND PICK

Weight of Per Cent

Beans in
Ounces

l—J R110
£10121)
OCDCD

(paam
(Omi—J
0+401

1357.0
507.77
1864.77

-57-

1932

All Upper and Lower Pods

of
Tota

68.
31.

72.
27.

Discus

Wt. Clean
Beans
1 Ounces

458

6 80.44
4 23.48
113.82
No. 435
6 55.15
4 25.58
80.73

8 1281.20
2 464.15
1745.3

sion on page 58

Pick
Average
Per Cent

Dates
of
Harvest

Sept. 14
and

Oct. 13

Sept. 14
and

Oct. 13

-58-
VIII DISCUSSION A30 SURLARY

1. Since "pick" is such an important factor
in the production of field beans in fiichigan, any of
the factors which influence field danage is important.

2. This investigation was outlined to determine
the extent of damage and some of the factors which
influence the "pick" of beans.

3. The factors dealt with in this investigation
were: varieties, uooer nods, lower nods, disease,
soil, precipitation, soak, weight of nods, time of
harvest, ripening period, and pick.

4. Robust beans were used throughout the inves—
tigation. They were compared with several other varie-
ties in their aoility to withstand damage.

5. Robust beans had a greater per cent of upper
oods in 1923 than the 1200 to 1 variety. In 1931 the
Red Kidney beans had the highest per cent of "uppers"
and the White Pea beans a slightly greater per cent of
"upuers" than the Robust. Due to blight in 1932, the
yield of Red Kidney oeans was very low, but the per
cent of "upoers" compared well to hat of 1931. In
1932 Robust beans led all other varieties in oer cent
of "upoers" as well as in total yield. Two different
areas of Robust beans were harvested. The area harvested
at two different times had 88.5% “upoers” while the area

I.

harvested only once after all beans had matured had

-59-
89.4% "uppers." or all beans harvested in 1923, 75.2
were "uppers"; in 1951, 71.7%; and in 1932, 72.89.

Other varieties tested in 1932 (table 14) that
have a high per cent of "uppers“ are: Great Northern
(85.6%), Red Kidney (82.5%), No. 453 (73.6%), and ho
427 (78.2%). The varieties with a low per cent of
”uppers" are No. 576 (57%), No. 161 (61.1%), and ho.
461 (59.1%).

The yield of No. 379 is slightly greater than the
Robust where two harvests were made and lesser than the
Robust where one harvest of another area was made. The
pick of No. 379 is greater in both cases and lesser in
per cent of "uppers." Robust beans loose their leaves
at harvest time more than other varieties. This aids
greatly in drying the pods, and thus prevents an in—
crease pick.

6. During a harvest period when there is very
little precipitation and the ground remains dry, the
difference in pick between "uppers" and “lowers" re-
mains about he same. This was shown in the Great
Northern variety (1931). There were more "lowers"
than “uppers" and the bulk of the crop was harvested
during a comparatively dry period. The difference in
per cent pick between "uppers" and "lowers" was small.
In other varieties, both for 1951 and 1932, similar

results were obtained.

—00-

In a few cases that apaear contrary to the above
much of the dadage done was due to disease. Beans
whose pods touch the ground during a rainy period may
become discolored by stains from the soil, and the
pod itself. A few soil organisms may also help to
increase the pick.

7. The above is a good reason for using the
thaughton system for harvesting beans. If weather
is threatenin" and beans are mature they could be
pulled and stacked the same day. This gets them off
the wet ground so that they may dry quickly and be
ready for threshing during fair weather. By using
this system of harvesting further pick in beans will
be prevented.

8. The eXperiment of 1932 seems to show no
definite relationship between soak and pick. Robust
beans nicked 1.91% and 100% of them were soaked in
24 hours. Of the twenty-one varieties tested, four-
teen had a greater per cen 010k than Robust. Four
of these showed the sane soak in 24 hours as Robust,
and the remaining ten showed from 0.25% to 18.94%
hardshell after 43 hours of soaking.

9. The results of 1923 show that the heavier
pods seem to offer greater protection to the beans
within. Tables 2 and 7 show that Robust upper pods

weigh 35-3% and lower pods 23.1% of the total weight

-51-
and the beans pick 0.737 and 3.15 per cent respectively.
The upper pods of 1300 to 1 variety weigh 25.14 and the
lower pods 23.1% of the total weight, and the beans pick
1.18 and 2.83 per cent respectively. The average weight
of Robust oods is 35.64 of the total weight, end the
pick of beans is 1.198%, while the average weight of
1200 to 1 variety is 24.5% of the total weight and the

e.

pick of beans is 1.683. The beans with tne greatest per
cent weight of pods have the least pick.
10. A definite relationship exists between time
of harvest and pick, but not as much as one would ex-
pect. Early maturing pods show a considerable amount
of pick even though the pods were gathered before the
plants would normally be harvested. If the harvest is

delayed, as was the case in 1932, the pick is increased

11. The time of the ripening period is important.
Of the six varieties tested in 1931, the Robust had
the shortest, and the Great Northern the longest ripen—
ing period. he bulk of the Great Northern variety was
harvested during fair weather and the Robust, during a
period of frequent rains.

In 1932 Robust and Great Northern were harvested
first on Seat. 14 and then on Seat. 28. DurinC ten
days previous to the first harvest, there was 0.03

inch precivitation and for a like deriod before the

-52-
second harvest the precipitation was 0.63 inch. The
average pick of the Great Northern was 1.05 per cent
in the first harvest, and 2.3 per cent in the second
harvest. For the same harvest dates Robust beans

picked 1.4 and 2.18 percent respectively.

1. Any variety of beans that is least sus-
ceptible to the factors which cause pick, and yet
produces an excellent yield of beans, should become
a favorite among bean growers.

8. Varieties of beans with a larger per cent
of upper pods suffer less damage during adverse
weather conditions.

3. Varieties whose leaves drop off during the
ripening period tend to dry easier and prevent fur-
ther damage.

4. The most advantageous time for harvesting
is more evident when the ripening period is short.
Excluding all factors except moisture, beans with a
short ripening oeriod have less pick.

5. Varieties with a higher oer cent weight of

‘ d
o
p.
to

to beans, pick less.
a. Damage to beans by disease deoends upon the

disease, how severe it is, and the suscep-

Fl;

kind 0
tibility of the variety.

7. No definite relationship exists between
soak and pick.

3. Robust beans have fulfilled the foregoing

)

factors better than any other variety. They should

0

continue to be a favorite among bean growers.

ACKIOWLEDGXEKTS

In cenclusion, I wish to thank Professor
H. R. Pettigrove for his personal interest and
helpful guidance throughout this problem, and
Professors C. R. Megee and H. C. Rather for

their assistance in its final review.

01

10.

ll.

12.

13.

-34_
LITERATURE CITED

Barrus, Mortier, Bean Anthracnose, Cornell Uni-
versity Agriculture Experimental
Station, Ithaca, N. Y., Memoir 42:—-l921

Burkholder, W. H., The Bacterial Diseases of the
Bean. Cornell Agricultural EXperimental
Station. Memoir 127:1930.

Caledonia Bean Harvester Works. Literature on
Bean Harvesters. Caledonia, N. Y.

Cox and Pettigrove, Bean Growing in Michigan.
Michigan Agricultural Experimental
Station. Special Bulletin, 129:15-15,
1924.

Crop Report for Michigan 1931 and 1932: 18, 12.
U. S. D. A. and M. D. A.

Donaldson Brothers, Literature on Bean Harvesting
Machinery, Mount Clemens, Michigan.

Fajardo, T. J., Studies on the Mosaic Disease
of the Bean. Phytopathology, June 1930.

Farleman H. G. Bean Storage Experiment.
) 3‘ n t; 1
June 23, 19o0.

Gloyer, W. L., Two New Varieties of Red Kidney
Beans: Geneva and York. N. Y. Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, Geneva,
V. Y., Tech. Bulletin 145, 1928.

Harter, Leonard, Thresher Injury a Cause of Bald—
head in Beans. U. S. D. A. Journal of
Agricultural Research. Vol. 40, No. 4:
370,384. Feb. 15, 1930.

Hedrick, Wilbur 0., Marketing Michigan Beans.
Michigan Agricultural Experiment
Station., Special Bulletin 217: 16—23,
1931.

Huber Manufacturing Company, Marion, Ohio.
American Grain Separator Company,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.

John Deere, Bean hachinery. Moline, Illinois.

14.

17.

18.

19.

20.

23.

’24.

25.

-85-

Kerr, J. A. and F. Trull, Soil Survey, Isabella
- County, Michigan. U. S. D. A. No.
36: 1194, 1198, Series 1923.

Lehr Company, Bean Machinery, Freement, Ohio.

Muncie, J. 5., Experiments on the Control of Bean
Anthracnose and Bean Blight. Michigan
Agricultural Experiment Station, Tech.
Bulletin No. 38: 1917. 1-45.

Nelson, Bay, Investigation in the Mosaic Disease
of Beans. Michigan Experimental Station
Tech. Bulletin No. 118:11. 1932.

Pettigrove, H. R. and Oviatt, C. R. Producing
Beans in Michigan. M. S. C. Extension
Bulletin 113: 3—9. 1931.

Pettit, R. H. Common Pests of Field and Garden
Crops. Michigan Agricultural Experiment
Station, Special Bulletin 183.
Reprint July 1931, 35, 39, and 43.

Reddick, Donald, Building up Resistance to Disease
in Beans, Cornell University Agricultural
Experiment Station. Memoir, March 1928.

Spragg and Down. The Robust Bean. Michigan
Experiment Station, Special Bulletin
No. 108. 1923.

The Bean Bag. The Electric Eye. Bean Picker.
Vol. 14, No. 4, Sept. 1931.
Little Publishing Co., Lansing, Mich.

The IRlant Disease Reporter by Division of Mycology
and Disease Survey, April 1, 1932, Leaflet.
Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A.,
Compiled by Jessie I. Wood.

Thompson, Judson A., Some of the Factors Influencing
the Yield of Some Varieties of White
Pea Beans in Michigan. Thesis for M. S.
Degree. M. S. C. 65-86, 20-22, 1930.

Tracy. W. W., American Varieties of Garden Beans.

U. S. D. A. Bureau of Plant Industry.
Bulletin No. 109.

-55-

28. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Weather Bureau,
NeteIOIOgical Record. East Lansing,
Michigan.

27. Wiard Plow Company, Literature on Bean Machinery
Batavia, New York.

28. Zaumeyer, W. J. The Bacterial Blight of Beans
Caused by Bacterium phaseoli.
U. S. Technical Bulletin, No. 188,
U. S. D. A. July 1930.

 

a, 2333 R005: ONLY

W6

    

 

   

"111114111111! WI “WW 0111111111 W5
31293 03061 7181