Willard G. Bixby, Baldwin, Nassau Co., N. Y.
That there are differences in nuts is apparent to everybody. The selecting of the best nuts out of a lot of two or three usually presents no difficulty, and, when the number of nuts to be judged amounts to a dozen or so, it is generally possible to pick out the best, but, when one has before him nuts from several hundred trees, the problem becomes a very different one, and the person who tries to pick out the best from such a lot soon becomes aware of his own limitations. If, in addition, he has sufficient respect for consistency to try to be so exact in his judgment as to be able to go over a large lot of nuts today, we will say, and several months hence go over the same lot again and render the same verdict on each one of them, he will doubtless give the matter up as an impossibility, and yet that is just what is wanted and expected of those who judge the nuts which are sent in to the annual contests, which contests have resulted in bringing to the attention of the nut growing world the nuts of so many fine trees.
The experience of the last two or three years in being one of the judges who passed on the nuts which were sent in to the contests convinced me, almost at the start, of the desirability of getting methods where it would be possible to go over a large lot of nuts now and several months hence, and render the same verdict on each one of them, but now how to do it was not at first apparent, and the methods for doing it which will be outlined are the results of much work, many attempts, and the discarding of many of the methods tried.
Considering the methods used in judging fruit, animals and fowl has helped to some extent, but this assistance did not go far. The beginning of improved methods of judging any of the above, is the establishment of a score card, as it is called, which is nothing more than an enumeration of the characteristics and a decision as to the relative value of each one. Usually the values assigned to each characteristic are such that when added up the total will be 100 points. Score cards of this character are in general use.
The first attempt to make a score card for use in judging the nuts to which the Northern Nut Growers' Association gives its attention, so so far as I am aware, was that of a committee of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, which reported at the Fifth Annual Meeting at Evansville, Ind., 1914, and which report will be found on page 20 of the report of that meeting. Prof. E. R. Lake was chairman of the committee. The score card for butternuts, black walnuts and hickories which it recommended is noted below:
| General Values | Points |
|---|---|
| Size | 10 |
| Form | 5 |
| Color | 5 |
| Shell Values | |
| Thinness | 15 |
| Cracking | 20 |
| Kernel Values | |
| Color | 10 |
| Plumpness | 5 |
| Flavor | 10 |
| Quality | 20 |
| ___ | |
| Total | 100 |
This score card has served as a basis for all the work that has been done in judging nuts since that work has largely fallen to me. It was early found desirable, however, to change the score card in one or two respects, and it has since been changed two or three times as the experience gained in judging nuts saw it was desirable. The score card now in use is noted below:
| General Values | Points |
|---|---|
| Weight | 10 |
| Form | 5 |
| Color | 5 |
| Shell Values | |
| Husking Quality | 5 |
| Thinness | 10 |
| Cracking Quality | 20 |
| Kernel Values | |
| Color | 5 |
| Proportion of kernel 20 | |
| Quality and Flavor | 20 |
| ___ | |
| Total | 100 |
The first time one attempts to judge a large number of nuts whether with the aid of such a score card as that proposed by Prof. Lake's Committee or without it, he gets into practical difficulties at once. These difficulties are not with the score card but in its use. Take for example the characteristic, size, the first one on Prof. Lake's score card. How can a person tell from the nuts of a hundred hickory trees which is the largest and which is the smallest and which are intermediate; in short how can he arrange them in order of size, the largest at one end of the line and the smallest at the other with a uniform graduation in between. Anyone who tries to do such a thing quickly finds that it is impossible to do this correctly if one has only his eye to aid him in determining size. The inability to do so quickly becomes apparent if a person tries to arrange such a lot of nuts in order of size at one time and then several days later tries to arrange the same lot of nuts in order of size again. It is almost certain that they will not get arranged the same both times. The differences between the nuts are usually so minute, and, what is more important, the difficulties of correctly estimating size by the eye alone are so great that it is practically impossible to do it. An expert on this point can do it of course much better than one who is not, but even the expert is only too well aware of his limitations and of the impossibility of properly doing the above. The same difficulty is apparent with every characteristic on the list and while judging by experts with the aid of a score card, is, so far as I am aware, the method used in judging fruit, farm animals, poultry, etc., the crudeness of this method is only too evident to the experts themselves. Two or three years ago it seemed very far inferior to what actually measuring these characteristics would be, although such measurement at first seemed difficult, not to say almost impossible. Much work has been done on this, and it is very gratifying to say that this measurement has been found possible to an extent that was not dreamed of before the work was started. Before outlining the methods worked out to do this a little discussion will be given on Prof. Lake's score card, the characteristics which it pointed out, and the reason shown for changing some of them.
Size is a characteristic which is apparent to everyone, yet the actual measurement of size in the case of a large lot of nuts presents difficulties which seem practically insurmountable. A serious attempt was made to measure the length, breadth and height of the nuts examined and gauges were made which should do this exactly and quickly. These were finely discarded and the characteristic "weight" adopted in place of size. This has to quite an extent replaced size in considering farm products. When we used to buy potatoes by the bushel we used to get a bushel basket full, now we get the legal weight of a bushel of potatoes and instances of this kind might be multiplied almost indefinitely. While weight and size are not exactly the same thing, yet they are so to a large extent in the case of a given commodity, such as nuts of one species, and weight can be accurately and rapidly determined.
Plumpness is another characteristic which we all understand as far as the difference between a nut with a plump well filled kernel is concerned, and one with a shriveled up kernel, but when it comes to arranging the kernels of a lot of nuts in order of their plumpness, the one who tries to do it becomes ready to give up before he really gets started. It was found that the ratio of the weight of kernel to the weight of the entire nut which is termed "proportion of kernel" was never large in the case of a nut with shriveled kernel. It was small in the case of a nut with a thick shell and a plump well filled kernel, but, as stated above it was never large in the case of a nut with a shriveled kernel and a good deal of work on the subject convinced me that the characteristic "proportion of kernel" could be very well substituted for plumpness.
There seemed at the present time little use for separating flavor and quality as there seemed to be some question as to what was intended by the terms separately and so they were considered together. I would like to state here that little consideration has so far been given as to whether the number of points awarded for each characteristic are such as to cause the nut that will ultimately be considered of most value commercially to get the first prize or not. The score card of Prof. Lake's seemed so good that it was thought far more important at present to develop methods of measuring these characteristics. A careful study of the nuts sent in to the contests, it was thought, would point out most parts of the score card where improvement could be made, and this has already proved to be so to a considerable extent. The methods of quantitatively measuring the different characteristics and determining the number of points to be awarded for each will be outlined one at a time.
Weight: This is determined by an accurate scale, one weighing to 1/10 gram was used, and the same scale was used directly or indirectly for determining six out of the nine characteristics considered. In determining weight, five average nuts (as far as could be determined by appearance) were weighed and the average weight determined. Having at hand the weights of the largest and smallest nuts of the species under examination, the largest nut was awarded 10 points and the smallest 0 and the nuts of intermediate weight were awarded intermediate figures. The method of doing this will best be seen by taking a specific instance e. g. the Lutz black walnut, the average weight of which is 26.4g. The Alley black walnut, the average weight of which is 10.0g is the smallest good black walnut which has come to our attention, while the Armknecht black walnut which weighs 28.9g is the largest one of which we know. The Armknecht black walnut would be awarded 10 points for weight and the Alley 0 points and a table would be made up for use in determining the number of points to be awarded for intermediate weights as noted below: