JUDGING NUTS

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 ValuesPoints

Size10

Form5

Color5

Shell Values

Thinness15

Cracking20

Kernel Values

Color10

Plumpness5

Flavor10

Quality20

___

Total100

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 ValuesPoints

Weight10

Form5

Color5

Shell Values

Husking Quality5

Thinness10

Cracking Quality20

Kernel Values

Color5

Proportion of kernel 20

Quality and Flavor20

___

Total100

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:

Black Walnuts—Weight

Heaviest Armknecht 28.9 grams; Lightest Alley 10.0 grams.

Weight of nut. Points.

28gramsandlessthan30grams10

26""""28"9

24""""26"8

22""""24"6

20""""22"5

18""""20"4

16""""18"3

14""""16"2

12""""14"1

10""""12"0

After the average weight of five nuts of a given variety has been determined, an inspection of the table shows at a glance the number of points to be awarded for weight, which, in the case of the Lutz Black walnut, is 9. In case a nut should be entered which was very much larger or smaller than provided for, the table can be extended for use temporarily. The table, however, should be revised before being used the next year. For example, had a nut come in weighing 30.5 grams this might have been awarded 11 points, and had one weighing 8.5 grams come in this would have been awarded-1 point in order to give each nut full credit, for excellence in size or to penalize it for lack of it. It will be noticed that by the method outlined the size of a nut is determined exactly and the same number of points for size (or weight) would be awarded today, next week, next month, or next year, barring of course real changes, e. g. those caused by actual loss of moisture, etc.

Form: It was only recently that a method of measuring this characteristic has been suggested and this has been tried out only experimentally. By form is meant attractive appearing shape which has been held to be absence of hollows, ridges, angles, etc. A round, smooth nut would be held to have perfect form in distinction from nuts that are rough and full of ridges or edges. The only method of measuring that has been suggested and which it is believed will work out satisfactorily is to first select an average nut and weigh, then fill up the hollows in the surface of the nut with wax just covering the ridges till the surface is smooth, and weigh. This will give the weight of the nut plus the weight of the wax needed to fill up the hollows on the surface. As the specific gravity of the wax is 4/5 that of the nut the figure actually used is weight of nut plus 5/4 weight of the wax, which gives the weight of a nut of the size of the sample with the hollows in the shell filled up or the weight of a nut of perfect form of the size of the sample. The measurement of form is then the weight of the average nut divided by the weight of a nut of the same size of perfect shape, that is without hollows or ridges.

A measurement of form of a black walnut gave the following:

Weight of nut22.5grams

Weight of nut and wax24.6"

Weight of wax2.1"

Weight of 5-4 wax2.6"

Weight of nut and 5-4 wax25.1"

Form22.5÷25.1=89.7%

When a nut has perfect form there will be no hollows to fill and no wax will be needed and the weight of nut and 5/4 of the wax will be the same as the weight of the nut and therefore its form figure will be 100%. The number of points to be awarded for any measurement of form would be determined by making up a table as was made up for awarding points for weight, but such a table cannot be made up till after an examination of form values for a large number of nuts. This will be done later.

Color: The color of shell was measured by making up samples of water colors of all gradations of color between the lightest shell and the darkest. From these, five were selected as showing in five steps the differences noted, the lightest being marked 5, the next 4 and so on down to the darkest which was marked 0. With these color standards in front of the one judging, it was only necessary to take the nut to be judged and lay it on the standards of color and the figure on the shade which the nut most nearly matched was the figure awarded for color.

Husking Quality: This represents the ease with which the husk can be removed. In view of the well known fact that husks of all nuts do not come off with equal facility the need of such is apparent. Its measurement will be the proportion of husk removed by a standard husking operation.

Thinness of Shell: This was measured by providing a means for bringing two metal surfaces together, keeping them always parallel. The nut to be cracked was placed between these surfaces and an arrangement of scale levers provided so that the pressure exerted on the nut could be weighed. The surfaces were brought together till the nut was cracked and the pressure required was noted. This measures the thinness of the shell or more properly the strength of the shell, the weakest shell of course being the one that takes the least pressure to crack. This pressure was measured in kilograms for by doing so it was possible to utilize some stock apparatus. After the pressure required to crack has been noted a reference to the table below will tell the number of points to be awarded. We will take for an example the the same nut as taken to illustrate weight e. g. the Lutz black walnut whose average cracking pressure is 312kg and which therefore would be awarded 2 points for thinness of shell. In this connection it should be stated that this table would seem not to be made out on the plan followed heretofore by taking the thinnest shelled nut of which we know, the Alley, as the low limit of the table. While the Alley black walnut takes the least cracking pressure of any we know which we can identify as from a particular tree, one black walnut was cracked which I believe came from the Ten Eyck tree which had a cracking pressure below 80kg and hence the table was made of sufficient extent to include this. It is my intention to get additional Ten Eyck nuts this year and check the matter up.

Black Walnuts—Thinness of Shell

Weight required to crack: Thinnest, Alley 110kg; thickest, Triplett 348kg.

Weight in kg.Points

50 and less than 8010

80 and less than 1109

110 and less than 1408

170 and less than 2006

200 and less than 2305

230 and less than 2604

260 and less than 2903

290 and less than 3202

320 and less than 3501

350 and less than 3800

Transcribers note: Point 7 was missing in the original document.

Cracking Quality: This characteristic is perhaps the one which seems to most people the most difficult to measure, but, while it was some time before methods of measuring it did occur to anyone, its measurement is effected very easily. In cracking nuts a part of the kernel will usually drop right out, some times it is a large part, occasionally all, and sometimes it is but a small portion. A perfect cracker is one where the entire kernel drops out after cracking. This would have 100% cracking quality. When 4/5 of the kernel drops out after cracking and the remaining 1/5 can be extracted only by recracking or by picking out, the nut is said to have 80% cracking quality. In other words, the cracking quality is the ratio of the weight of the kernel which drops out after cracking to the entire kernel. The operations of determining cracking quality in practice are first, selecting five average nuts; second, cracking them and weighing the part of the kernels which drop out after cracking; third, extracting the balance of the kernels and getting the weight of all the kernels; fourth, dividing the weight of the part of the kernels which drop out after cracking by the total weight of the kernels, and the result is the cracking quality. After an examination of the figures of a large number of nuts, the table below was made up from which the number of points to be awarded for any given cracking quality is readily obtained. Taking the Lutz black walnut as an example again we find that the weight of the kernels which dropped out after cracking was 24 grams while the total weight of kernels was 32.5 grams which gives a cracking quality of 73.8% which would be awarded 13 points for cracking quality.

Black Walnuts—Cracking Quality

Percentage of kernel that drops out after cracking. Highest, Alley[4], 100%; Lowest, Butler, 22.9%.

Cracking Quality. Points.

100% 20

96%and all higher percentages under100%19

92%and all higher percentages under96%18

88%and all higher percentages under92%17

84%and all higher percentages under88%16

80%and all higher percentages under84%15

76%and all higher percentages under80%14

72%and all higher percentages under76%13

68%and all higher percentages under72%12

64%and all higher percentages under68%11

60%and all higher percentages under64%10

56%and all higher percentages under60%9

52%and all higher percentages under56%8

48%and all higher percentages under52%7

44%and all higher percentages under48%6

40%and all higher percentages under44%5

36%and all higher percentages under40%4

32%and all higher percentages under36%3

28%and all higher percentages under32%2

24%and all higher percentages under28%1

20%and all higher percentages under24%0

Color of Kernel: This is determined in the same way as the color of the shell by comparing with a standard color scale, and the step of the scale whose color most nearly matches the color of the kernel being examined gives the figure to be awarded.

Proportion of Kernel: This is the ratio of the weight of the kernels of five average nuts to the entire weight of such average nuts. After this has been determined a comparison with the table below which was made up after an examination of the proportion of kernel of a large number of nuts, the number of points to be awarded is readily determined. If we take for example the Lutz black walnuts again we find the weight of five average nuts 132.0 grams and the weight of the kernels of these nuts 32.5 grams which gives for the proportion of kernel 24.0% which would be awarded 8 points.

Black Walnuts—Proportion of Kernel

Ratio of weight of kernel to weight of entire nut (without husk) Highest, Ten Eyck 36.4%; Lowest, Seefeldt, 16%.

Percent of Kernel.Points

36% and less than 37%20

35% and less than 36%19

34% and less than 35%18

33% and less than 34%17

32% and less than 33%16

31% and less than 32%15

30% and less than 31%14

29% and less than 30%13

28% and less than 29%12

27% and less than 28%11

26% and less than 27%10

25% and less than 26%9

24% and less than 25%8

23% and less than 24%7

22% and less than 23%6

21% and less than 22%5

20% and less than 21%4

19% and less than 20%3

18% and less than 19%2

17% and less than 18%1

16% and less than 17%0

Quality and Flavor: Absolutely no progress has so far been made in measuring this characteristic or more correctly these characteristics for, strictly speaking, there are a number of them instead of one and the only method available at present is tasting by experts. It is very much to be desired that methods for measuring this be worked out and several lines on which to work in order to accomplish it have been thought of but as yet no definite progress has been made.

While the characteristic as yet unmeasured is one of the most important and most difficult even for experts to estimate correctly when there are large numbers of nuts to be examined, the fact that it is possible to measure the other eight is a matter of a good deal of satisfaction and this satisfaction is the greater because with the methods that have been worked out it is possible for any ordinarily careful person to do the work about as well as it is for an expert and, as the work of judging a large number of nuts is very considerable, the elimination of a large part of the need for expert services is very gratifying. The services for example of such experts as Dr. Morris and Capt. Deming are obtainable only occasionally and for a short period. Now that the nuts sent in are rapidly increasing, it would have been impossible to have handled the contests without some improvements in the methods used.

While the same score card has been used for butternuts, black walnuts, and hickories it seemingly can be used quite well for English walnuts, Japan walnuts and pecans also, in short, for all nuts belonging to the botanical family Juglandaceae and perhaps for hazels. Separate ones will evidently be required for beechnuts, and chestnuts. The tables for determining the number of points to be awarded for a given value of any characteristic are likely to vary for each species. Inasmuch as there are fourteen species of hickories exclusive of the pecan that have to be considered and apparently even more species of walnuts not to mention beechnuts, chestnuts and hazels, one might think that nearly 100 tables would be required. A study of the matter, however, has shown that the number really needed is very much less, and the more that nuts are examined the more it seems possible to make one table answer for a number of species and have the number of points a nut receives indicate to a certain extent its value as a nut to grow, and not simply the value of a given variety of a certain species.

The hickories and the walnuts require a word in passing. There are at least nine species of hickory either native in the northeastern United States or that will grow there and it is quite possible that further study of the hickories will add to this number. Seven of these belong to the scale bud class, Eucarya, the shagbark, Carya ovata, the shellbark, Carya laciniosa, the scaly bark, Carya Carolinae-septentrionalis, the mockernut, Carya alba, and the close-bark pignut, Carya glabra, the loose-bark pignut, Carya-ovalis, and the pallid hickory, Carya pallida; while two belong to the open bud class, Apocarya, the pecan, Carya pecan, and the bitternut, Carya cordiformis. Hybrids between many of these species are found occurring naturally and seemingly hybrids between any two are possible, and the fact of many of them being hybrids is not evident on an inspection of the nuts. It is a noteworthy fact that quite a proportion of fine hickories that are being propagated are evidently hybrids and the number of our fine hickories which are evidently hybrids increases as they are studied more carefully. In many ways it would be desirable in the contest to offer prizes for the best nuts of each species of hickories, but the difficulty of determining the species from the nut alone, and the fact of such a proportion of our finest nuts being hybrids is sufficient to discourage the attempt. What was done in the 1918 contest, and what would seem to be the best thing that can be done is to offer the prizes for hickory nuts simply. Most of the prizes are taken by shagbarks but when a nut not a shagbark gets into the prize winning class, we make a class that would include it. For example, in the 1918 Contest, three shellbarks and one mockernut came into the prize winning class, whereupon a special lot of prizes for shellbarks and mockernuts were given. This enables us to do what would be accomplished in offering prizes for best nuts of each species of hickories. The same score card and tables therefore are used for each of these species. It is convenient, in judging nuts, to differentiate between the pecan on the one hand and the other hickories on the other, although study recently put on the matter would seem to show that this distinction is not exact and that some nuts, for example, which apparently are pure pecans are really pecan hickory hybrids.

The differences between the structure of the shell of the nuts of certain of the walnuts is greater than between the shell structure of the hickories and the walnuts may be divided into three classes. Hybrids between a number of species are found which have been formed naturally, and seemingly hybrids between all species are possible. It is convenient in judging nuts to differentiate between English walnuts, black walnuts, and butternuts, which nuts are representative of the three walnut classes and to include with the butternuts, the Japan walnuts. This will strike many people as a strange classification, i. e. to include the butternut and Japan walnut, but I feel sure that no one who has given the matter much study will so consider it. Whenever the two grow in proximity they hybridize so freely that one may be almost certain of not getting pure species if he plants nuts and raises seedlings. Indeed I have received many such hybrids which have been called either butternuts or Japan walnuts. As a matter of fact the same difficulty exists in distinguishing butternuts and Japan walnuts that exists in distinguishing hickories. There is no name which includes the butternut and Japan walnut as there is to include the various species of hickories, and, as such a name is urgently needed, I have used the word "butterjaps." This includes butternuts, Japan walnuts and hybrids between them. While it doubtless will be convenient to continue the names butternut and Japan walnut it should be understood that usually they will mean simply nuts which, as far as appearance is concerned, would seem to be one or the other, but very likely may be hybrids between the two species and might be more properly called by some name e. g. "butterjaps," which would include the two species and hybrids between them.

At this point the Convention took a recess to enable a photograph to be taken and immediately after reassembled for a business session.

FOOTNOTE: