Complete data were recorded each year from the samples just as they had been for the 1946 contest. The average weight of nut, recovery of kernel at first cracking, total kernel content, and per cent of kernel content were recorded.
From these data tables and charts were compiled to make a visual comparison between the various nuts. Walnuts other than the prize winners were not excluded from this five-year competition and quite a few were submitted. However, only one of them, the "Chamberlin" was of special merit and it was given a place on these charts. No samples or crop records were received from the Davidson (sixth prize) and the Jackson (tenth prize) nuts, and so they are not shown on all the charts. One sample from the 1949 crop of Penn walnuts was lost to a pilfering squirrel, and the 1949 data used on the chart for the Penn walnut was therefore the average of all other samples of this variety. The weight of total crop harvested in 1949, however, is actual.
Table No. 1 gives the average weight in grams of the sample nuts. The Duke, (first prize) was the largest nut of all, in 1945, averaging just over 27 grams; but the Orth, in 1948, averaged almost a gram more. The Kuhn, which was the smallest of the eight nuts in 1946 and again in 1950, was the largest nut in 1949, and its size in 1949 was exceeded only four times by any of the other nuts during the contest. The nuts were large in size during the off year when only a small crop was produced and they were small when there was a heavy crop.
In table No. 2 the weight in grams of the kernel recovered on first crack, secured without the aid of nut pick, is recorded. In this comparison the Duke, because of large size, might be expected to be an easy winner and it was in 1946 and in 1950; but in 1948, though second in average weight of nut for that year, it was in fifth place in recovery of kernel at first cracking.
Table No. 3 records the average weight in grams of the kernels. Here the Duke, due largely to its size, is a consistent winner in all three years it produced nuts. However, in 1949, a small crop year for the Kuhn, the nuts of this variety were large and contained more kernel than the Duke did in 1948 or in 1950.
The per cent of kernel in the nuts as recorded in table No. 4 is interesting. The Burson, which was the smallest nut in 1947, had the highest per cent of kernel and also had the highest total kernel content of any sample in that year. Evidently the per cent of kernel is higher in well-filled nuts and this is largely determined by the weather and available food supply late in the season.
A comparison of the numerical score of the various nuts, figured out according to the T.V.A. score system, is given in Table No. 5. By this system, no variety had a consistent high score, but each varied greatly from year to year.
The nut characters studied so far in charts 1 to 5 inclusive have varied so much from year to year that any judgment based on these characters for any one year could not be relied upon.
What characteristic of a black walnut, then, can be used in evaluating it? In table No. 6 the percentage of the total kernel that is recovered at first cracking is given. Oliver and Penn show considerable consistency in that they remain above 91 per cent in all samples, but look at the Kuhn. It was perfect in 1950 but in 1948 only 65 per cent of the kernel was recoverable in the first cracking and Duke was nearly as bad, varying from 69 to 98 per cent recovery.
After careful study of these six charts, I am sure you will have to admit that any judgment of a black walnut variety based on these characters only is none too dependable.