A38-322-15M-L TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS W. B. BIZZELL, President BULLETIN NO. 294 MARCH,‘ 1922 - DIVISION OF AG RONOMY AGRICULTURAL 8L MECHAIQICALE s}? TEZXAS LI2aR;I21*‘~¥ SHELLING PERCENTAGE IN GRAIN SORGHUM B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS STATION STAFFT ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S , Ph. D., Director CHARLEs A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE. Secretary A. D. JACKSON, Executive Assistant CHARLEs GORZYCKI. Technical Assistant M. P. HQLLEMAN, JR., Assistant Chief Clerk VETERINARY SCIENCE *M. FRANCIS, D. V. M., Chief H. SCHMIDT, D. V. S., Veterinarian J. J. REID, D. V. M., Veterinarian CHEMISTRY G. S. FRAPs, Ph. D., Chief; State Chemist S. E. AsBURY, M. S., Assistant Chemist S. LOMANITZ, B. S., Assistant Chemist J. B. SMITH, B. S., Assistant Chemist WALDo WALKER. Assistant Chemist HORTICULTURE H. NEss, M. S.. Chief W. S. HOTcHKiss, Horticulturist ANIMAL INDUSTRY J. M. JoNEs, M., Chief; Sheep and Goat Investigations R. M. Sherwood, B. S., Poultry Husbandman G. R. WARREN, B. S., Animal Husbandman in Charge of Swine Investigations I. E. CowART, M. S., Superintendent No. 2. Troup, Smith County W. S. HOTCHKISS, Superintendent No. 3. Angleton, Brazoria County V. E. HAFNER, B. S., Superintendent No. 4. Beaumont, Jefierson County A. H. PRINcE, B. S., Superintendent No. 5. Temple, Bell County D. T. KILLOUGH, B. S., Superintendent No. 6. Denton, Denton County C. H. McDowELL, B. S., Superintendent No. 7. Spur, Dickens County R. E. DICKSON, B. S., Superintendent TAs of March 1, 1922. ENTOMOLOGY - M. C. TANQUARY, Ph. D., Chief; State Entomologist . J. REINHARD, B. S., Entomologist L. R. Watson, A. M., Apiculturist C. S. RUDE, B. S , Entomologist A. H. ALEX, B. S., Queen Breeder W. P. TRIcE. B. S., Assistant Entomologist AGRONOMY A. B. CONNER, B. S., Chief; Crops ' A. H. LEIDIGH, B S., Agronomist, Soils E. B. REYNOLDS, M. S., Agronomist, Small Grains E. W. GEYER, B. S., Agronomist; Farm Superintendent **PEARL DRUMMOND, Seed Analyst PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY J. J. TAUBENHAUS, Ph. D., Chief COTTON BREEDING G. F. FREEMAN, D. Sc., Chief FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS A. B. Cox, Ph. D., Chief SOIL SURVEY **\V. T. CARTER, JR., B. S., Chief H. W. HAWKER, Soil Surveyor H. V. GEIB, B. S., Soil Surveyor FEED CONTROL SERVICE B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Director F. D. FULLER, M. S., Chief Inspector I J. L. LUsH, Ph. D., Animal Husbandman s_ D. PEARCE, Inspector Wmem“) J. H. ROGERS, Inspector L. M. MURPHY, Wool Specialist W. H. WOOD, Inspector SUBSTATIONS ‘No. 1- Beeville. Bee County No. 8. Lubbock. Lubbock County R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent No. 9. Pecos, Reeves County V. L. CORY, B. S., Superintendent No. 10. College Station, Brazos County (Feeding and Breeding Substation) L. J . McCALL, Superintendent No. 11. Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County G. T. McNEss, Superintendent **No. 12. Chillicothe, Hardeman County A. B. CRON, B. S., Superintendent No. 14. Sonora. Sutton-Edwards Counties E. M. PETERS, B. S., Su erintendent D. H. BENNETT, V. M. ., Veterinarian *In cooperation with School of Veterinary Medicine, A. and M. College of Texas. **In cooperation wi-th United States Department of Agriculture. BULLETIN No. 294 MARCH, 1922 SHELLING PERCENTAGE IN GRAIN SORGH__IJM BY A. B. CONNER AND R. KARPER. A With the production of sixty million bushels of grain sorghum an- nually in Texas, a considerable portion of which is marketed in the head, and the development of the market for the surplus product, there has arisen a demand for information as to the turn-out of grain from the heads as harvested- Data on this point have accumulated at Sub- station No. 8, Lubbock, as a by-product of the variety and rate of seed- ing experiments with grain sorghums. They embrace a period of six years, and it is believed are reliable as to the grain content of heads in the different classes and varieties and under varying seasonal con- ditions. These data are presented here in the hope that they may prove of value to producers, consumers, and dealers in grain sorghum. METHOD USED. The data presented in this paper, in most cases, where a comparison of varieties is made, have been obtained from the average of two single- row plats 132 feet long. In a few instances only have the percentages relating to different varieties been obtained from plats as large as one- tenth acre. All the data for a period of six years accruing from the rate of seeding plats have been obtained from one-sixteenth-acre plats, comprising seven rows 132 feet long, the two outer rows of which have been discarded, leaving a net five rows, or one-twenty-second-acre plat, from which these records have been obtained. The heads in the plats involved throughout have been harvested promptly each season as soon as the basal stems were yellow, or at most within a week of this time. All heads were harvested by hand and cut with stem lengths from 2% to 3% inches, which may be slightly shorter than the lengths cut by the average farmer; however, it may be stated that the writers believe them to be fairly representative of hand-harvested heads. The harvested heads were cured ‘in each case until the stems were entirely dry and at that time each lot was weighed and threshed, and the net grain Weighed. The weight of the net grain obtained divided by the weight of the heads gives the percentage of grain to head. THE DATA. The shelling percentages given for the different varieties for dif- ferent years are the average of duplicate determinations, being the entire product of the plat in each case. The percentages for the milo and kafir grown at different thicknesses in the row are from single deter- minations. A p, p Shelling Percentages of Different Varieties. The following table shows the percentage of grain to head in the different varieties for a period of six years, 1916 to 1921, inclusive. TEXAS AGRICULTUILAL EXPERIMENT STATION. do? v5 mo v3.8» on» wowwohonm was 6353.8» nmwhm .843 us.» omE 5 wfiwumfin woow wonflowowuano k382i? D11. fi 053m as; w, a w. w W‘? 5M‘?! a‘ ' y“: w ‘a Q3 yéi kqv SHELLING PERCENTAGEIN GRAIN SORGHUM. . . . . . . . . . 000w Nw.0w ........................0000v00.00>>m0 0NN0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. N0.0w 00.Nw 00.0w 00.ww N000 i. w} . . . . ~ . . . . . . . - - - - . . . . . u - - o ¢ . - . . . - - - ~ . . . . - . . . . . . . - . . . - - - . ~ - - ...... 00.0w 00.00 00.0w 00.Nw 00.ww 0w.00 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...=0...m..m .00 0.0000000 0w0 . . . . . . . .. 00.0w 00.ww 00.0w 00.ww N000 00.00 0.0w 00000>? 0N00 . . . . . .. 00.00 N0.N0 00.0w 00.0w 00.00 00.00 0.N0 ................£~m.m.m 0.30.0000 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . - - . . . .. .......... -m 0N.00 w0.0w 00.0w. 00 0w 00.00 N000 0.0w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000M 05000.0 wN00 . .. 0N.0w N0.0w 00.0w 0N.0w Nw.Nw 00.0w 0.0w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0000 .0000 0003C 0w0 N0.0w 00.ww 00.0w 00.0w 00.Nw 00.0w w.0w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000M 0.00300 w000 . . . . . . . .. 00.0w 00.ww 00.0w 00.0w 00.0w 0N.N0 0.0w .0000 0.00300 00 . . . . . . . . .. 00.ww 00.0w 00.ww 00.00 00.ww 00.00 0.00 .0000 0000000 0000 .. 0N.ww 00.00 00.ww 00.0w 00.0w 00.0w 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0000000 0.00300 0000 . . . . .. 00.0w 00.00 00.0w 00.0w 00.0w 00.00 0.00 0005,? 0000 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ffiwflh®>< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00 00 00.w0 0w.0w 00.0w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..0_00>0000_0>?.000>>Q 00N0 . . . . . . . .. 00.0w 00.0w 00 0w 00.0w ww.0w 00.w0 0.00 00050? 0.00300 0N00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00.Nw 00..0w 0w.0w 00.00 0.0w .........................0000>0000n>? 0000 1.100002 00000>? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00.Nw 00.00 00.ww w0..00 0.0w ........................0000>000000>? 0000 . . . . . .. 0N.0w N0.N0 00.0w 00..ww 00.0w 0w.0w 0.0w ........................0000>000000>? 0000 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lnwwflhw>< - - . - . . - - -. -...............-»mgd.i.ofim . . . . . . . . .. 00.0w N0.0w 00.ww ww.N0 00.0w w0.N0 0 .Nw ..............0=2_¢§ 000000 .0 .00 0000 .....0=2:am . . . . . . . . .. 00.0w 00.00 00 0w 00.0w 0N.0w 00.N0 0.ww ................m000000v0 0000 0.00300 0000 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00.00 .....I..............000.~000.00.00BD 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0w.0w .....................0000000~0.000>>n0 w0N0 . - . . . - . - . . . . - . - - - - -. 0100:0000: .-..-... .-....-.-.....-.-now5i-%uiumk@%dvg - - - . . . . . . . - - - - - . - . - . -uo--|-- ---..-.. .......-.-...-.--..ood§vio%uivho%gam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00.00 .....................000.0000..0000>>m0 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 00.00 0.0w ........................0.E=m0000:w 000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0w ................\...........0000000n0 0000 .......000.0000n0 . . . . . . . . .. 0N.0w 00.00 00.0w 00.0w 0N.0w 00.0w 0.0w ...........................0000000.m N000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ww.0w 0.0w ...........................0000000~0 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00.0w 0.0w ...........................000.0000~0 0000 . . . . . . . . .. 0N.ww 0N.0w 00 0w 00.ww wN.ww 00.ww 0.0w ..................000.0000h 03/000000 00wN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00.00 0.0w ...........................0000000~0 w000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. NN.00 0N.0w 00.ww 0.0w .....................000._000~00003m0 000N 0000000 0.000% .00 x00 .000 0N00 0N00 0000 0000 w000 0000 00000.00? .070 00000 00000004 0000.000 00 . .0 .0. 000.0030 000000000» 80000000 000.00 0o 0000000000 000000000. _,TEXAS .AGRICULTUBAL_ EXPERIMENT STATION. 6o==$coU||wo$oiu> Eanmuow 32w mo owmwcoohoa 3:65 \ omSu mmrmwu wmgww . . .. . ...........................woo.~h 3f ..........woo.wm ..-...... . . - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . - .. . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . ...hw>oom ......¢Ho>oom - . i ~ . . . - - . . - . - . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . , . . . . . - . . . . . . . . - . -.... ." . - . . . - . .. . - . - - 4.0.0 - - . . . - . . . . . - . . . . . .. N@.£§‘ .....-.. .....-.-....-.-.‘..........¢-.=é%“£w .......»»-H.-.i.?fl£m . . - - . . . . -. - . . . . . - . . . . . . . . - - . . - - - . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. hwéw omdu ofiow 31mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........:.wvuv~ xfim mmmm . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. Qm$w mméw oméh mad“. wwdm mfliww wfio 43m mv L Gui aim J - . . . . - . . . - - . . . . . - . - - . . - -..-¢ - - - . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..L.....OW..NHQ>< . ... ~ noun u o ¢ - - - - » u - 000 - n u o o o Q u no 00000 - - . Q - ¢ - - - - - ¢ - - ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ o o .bboouolOhwdm . fllww Q6» 34h NW8 “m? M33 06H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IEQMA xgazw mfl: fiofiom 000000 a -.¢ J - - - . - - | .- . . - . , . . . - . - - - - -...J ¢ ¢ - ¢ - . - - - -.¢ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...-.@w.&pfi@><. . . . . . .. mud“. 9.3. cod.» owfifi fiméw 39mm “Emu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....ow._,wQ hmwm . . . . . . . . IowbwQ wads . .. wwbu hmdw W and“. wmfiou mmjéo. wéu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....omm.~o>< . . . . . . . . . .. mfifi 35 2:5 3.3. Qwrfi wfi .3 9E. .............. .2M21Bo__@> “ERG wx: i . x . . . . . . . . .. .. oméw Ehww mwhu omdw w,.¢w .................o:§,Bo:v>i~BQ Cb. 1.612 Bozo? . . . . . . . . .. .89. 3E 3E 5% 2v; $45 was 30:0? HHQEO Q5 . . . .. . . . . . . mma» and“. 3% 5.? mo ..$ Nja i? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .222 aszw Ewfisfiw fin . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . - . . . .. .-.,..-.... ........- . ..-..... .........................B€_@M..€Q.m_ ., . . . . . . . . . .. 4.... . .. . ..-....... ..H@Nm@mvm . . . . . . . . .. mfimh mwéw ooflu Hmdw. oméw mmdw mifi. .........................fiwwvm.wofl.3? . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .Tx . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . ..¢ . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , % A L . j 1 % éfim AQSEUEQQV - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...Y. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . momma? ma? . ; . . W f . . I'll .3 in .8“ 32 0N2 22 W23. n23 $2 >$u~>N dZ $20 om96>< ¢c~wbm mo _ . . a . .w. Q. omfi8>< . . _ SHELLING PERCENTAGE IN- GRAIN-SORGHUM. '7 It should be .stated that the relatively low-shelling percentages of the later-maturing varieties in 1917 was due in part to immaturity, as the season was a dry one, and theselate varieties failedto properly mature seed. This afiected not only the percentage of grain to head, but the yield of grain. The same was true in the season of 1918, but » to a lesser extent. The appended table on page 11 shows the monthly rainfall from 1916 to 1921, inclusive, ;.-and ;the_- dates of; {killing frost each Ytar. e~ T, f" j ’ .1; " It is seen from the abovetable thialt;theiy...shel1ing{percentagevaries in the different classes of grainsorghum,‘ ranging, yfoiflexample, from 75.23 per cent. in feterit&-,.to'69.53 per centiin Pinktiktafir. Feterita, Kowliang, and Blackhul kafir,‘ and’ White mile-frank high in shelling percentages, and White milo has consistently shown higher turn-outs of grain than Yellow milo. l a p t? It is evident that there is almost as wide variation indifferent strains within a class as in, the classes. themselvegindicating‘ the possibilities of developing higher grain-bearing astrainszsa“. Inffact,“thisidisiwell illus- trated in the casevof, thej Blackhul“kafirr_class,~f in] whichgtwo strains, Nos. 1845, Dwarf kafir, and 1939, Early‘ Blackhulkafir, l“ both highly improved strains, have a shelling percentage of '77,7while"No. 44 Stand- ard Blackhul kafir, unimproved, has a shelling percentage of 69. The following table shows several classes of grain sorghums and their shelling percentages, based on the averages taken from the detail table. It also shows the rank of each-Iclassbased‘ on..she lling percentage and the net grain turn-out per ton of heads based son? these :percentages. sshelling.bercentagesofgrain sorghums. If, l’ ' a > 1>'_-"_ " ‘ ‘ ' Bounds Class ' * a Shelling Rank gram to the percentage ton of heads Feterita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~ . ._. , . .. 75.23 1 1504 .Kowlian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._=. ~. . 1 . . . . ;_. . 74.50 _ -. 2 1490 White ilo . . . . . . . . . . 73;95@. 1479 Blackhul Kafir..........".. 1 753.13 5 , »~_4 1462 Red Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . 72_;68~ _ 3~ 5. _ x1453 Yellow Milo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70.96 F = _6~* ' 1419 Darso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _. . j.‘ . . . . . , . ., s 70-. 65 y - 7" ‘ i 1413 Schrock Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . l.69.87_ . Y8“ 1397 Pink Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; .1 . v ~69J53 ‘ 9 1390 It will be seen that as between 75.23 per cent. and 69.53 per cent. the two extremes in the classes shown, there is , a difference of 114 pounds of grain to the émn~ of» heads, _ -. g It should be stated thatthe lshélling~.percentage in milog perhaps slightly lowered as compared to feterita iandkafir,becausexdf the fact that the seed are held more securely; by thieiglume or hull}, This would, naturally, lower its shelling percentage,-l7as=morev of the seed would pass through the machine with the “pummies.” Such loss, however,- would not be encountered if the crop were utilized in the head. This tendency for miloheads to hold their seed iwouldpactually be advantageous when the heads are handled excessively before threshing, as less shattering would take place than in feterita undergoing the same treatment. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. SHELLING PERCENTAGE IN GRAINY SORGHUIVIQ-i 9 Shelling Percentage as Afiected by Environment. With the knowledge that different classes and strains ofgrain. sor- ghums show different shelling percentages there arises the question as to the effect varying seasonal conditions may have on the shellingsperé. centage or turn-out of grain.~ Some light is given on this point, by the following tables, showing the shelling percentages from year to year when milo and kafir are planted at varying thicknesses, and hence, subjected to varying opportunities for development. Shelling percentage yellow milo spacing test, 1916-1921, inclusive. Distance in inches Shellingpercentages Shelling between plants per cent in row 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 average 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 84 7O 69 78 56 25 65.81 65 00 7O 95 68 74 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 81 80 64 40 67 85 65.62 72 0O 73 64 70 88 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 78 50 68 46 76 71 45.77 73 00 72 09 69 08 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79 4O 69 69 52 50 64.25 72 00 71 56 68 23 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8O 70 71 68 64 28 75.06 72 00 65 74 71 57 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82 0O 82 85 59 O9 72.87 70 00 7O 51 72 88 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82 30 71 08 63 81 67.71 67 00 68 55 70 O7 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 77 10 72 61 64 65 66.04 70 00 70 90 70 21 27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 80 60 72 43 63 12 66.859 69 00 69 13 70 14 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79 50 73 78 67 64 66.74 68 00 70 42 71 01 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82 70 73 25 69 00 69.29 70 00 73 85 73 01 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 80 10 75 00 71 18 66.58 7O 0O 72 98 72 64 Average . . . . . . . . . . 80. 78 72. 08 64. 67 66.02 69.83 70. 86 70. 7O Shelling percentage blackhul kafir spacing test, 1916-1921, inclusive. Distance in inches Shelling percentages Shelling between plants per cent in row \ 1916 1917 ' 1918 1919, 1920 1921 average 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 0O 7 73 74 14 76.48 86 00 79 89 76 54 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 72 00 66 36 . . . . . . .. 77.63 76 00 74 25 73 24 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 00 72 44 . . . . . . .. 78 7O 77 0O 80 45 75 91 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 00 74 63 74 70 75.85 77 O0 79 79 75 49 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 00 73 88 78 07 77.38 76 O0 80 12 76 07 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 O0 75 38 75 14 75.11 75 00 77 73 74 89 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 00 75 47 73 83 76.88 76 O0 76 95 75 02 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 O0 73 45 73 83 75.82 75 00 78 26 74 56 27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 64 O0 75 31 74 02 77.62 74 00 8O 39 74 22 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66 00 74 21 75 88 75.00 74 00 80 08 74 19 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66 0O 77 94 76 66 68.97 75 O0 77 88 73 74 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 65 00 72 81 75 00 73.57 75 00 79 79 73 52 Average . . . . . . . . .. 69.16 73.63 75.12 75.75 76.33 78.79 74.78 The above tables, covering a period of six years, in which milo under varying conditions each year and frornyear to year is directly compared to kafir, show an average shelling percentage of 74.78 for kafir and 70.70 for milo. With the year 1918 eliminated in each instance on account of missing data in the kafir series in that year, the remaining years show an average shelling per cent. for kafir of 74.73 as com- pared to 71.91 for milo. The evidence here is very closely in line with the shelling percentages of these two classes as shown inthe variety data, both indicating a higher turn-out ‘of grain from. Blackhul kafir than from milo heads. - A _ In the milo data presented above there is only a slight correlation (—|-.1348i—.0780) between the amount of space allowed and the shell- 1O Texas . AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. ing percentage. Similarly, in the kafir spacing test the correlation between the amount of space allowed and shelling percentage is very slight (—v-.1602i.0786).' It seems questionable whether there is any relation between the thickness of seeding and the shelling per cent. within the limits of this spacing test. There is, however, an indication, since these two crops have reacted in opposite directions with respect to turn-out of grain from the different seeding rates, that kafir is better adapted to thick seeding than milo, in so far as shelling percentage of grain is concerned. The variation in shelling percentage of grain from year to year in either milo or kafir is much greater than the variation of the shelling percentage from different spacings within a single season, as shown by the following coeflicients of variability: Yearly variation—milo: 7.29 % Yearly variation—kafir:4.14% Seasonal spa.cings—milo: 2.15 % Seasonal spacings—kafir:1.45 % Further, it would appear from these data that milo is much more variable from year to year or from different spacings within a season than is kafir, further indicating that kafir is more constant under vary- ing conditions than is milo. SUM MARY . Inasmuch as the grain sorghum market is being rapidly extended, in- formation as to the shelling percentages of heads is of increasing im- portance to growers, consumers, and dealers. Data extending over a period of six years show that the grain content of heads varies according to class from 69.53 to 75.23 per cent., or, in other words, from 1390 to 1504 pounds to the ton of heads, a range of 114 pounds. Individual strains within a class show considerable variation empha- sizing the value of certain improved strains from the standpoint of shelling percentage. The data relating to the influence of rate of seeding on turn-out, of grain show that the rate of seedings embraced in these experiments had little effect on the percentage of grain contained in heads. The fact that kafir and milo have reacted in opposite directions with respect to shelling percentages of grain when each was grown at varying thickness in the row, indicates that kafir is better adapted to thick seed- ing than milo, in so far as shelling percentage is concerned. The milo class, which predominates on the market, shows much wider s variation in shelling percentage from year to year than kafir. It would seem that the determination of shelling percentages from the different classes for a locality any given year would form a reasonably safe basis for the shelling percentage ratings during the same year. SHELLING PERGENTAG-E IN GRAIN SORGHUM. 11 Monthly rainfall at Lubbock 1916-1921, inches. 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 .35 .84 . 12 . 9O . 14 February . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .00 .05 .58 .25 . 11 .45 Marc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.15 .21 .05 3.39 .24 1.47 April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.63 .58 .72 3.53 .15 .24 May . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .39 - 1 07 1.67 2.10 2.91 .43 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.52 64 2.95 '3.52 3.66 7.71 July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .36 1 42 .53 2.28 2.19 .84 August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.45 1.16 79 2.83 2.64 .92 September . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.79 3.03 79 5.70 1.63 4.50 October . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 2.91 .14 .51 7.34 1.43 .02 November . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 .08 .69 .36 2.21 .00 December . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 . 00 2.03 . 19 . .09 . O0 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.03 8.73 12.15 31.61 18. 16 16.72 Dates of first killing fr0st———1916——October 19 1917——October 19 1918—N0vember 9 1919—N0vember 12 1920—November 2 1921——N0vember 9