5 points.

Sample 7 of Spear and number 6 of Snyder were cracked November 4th when
only partly cured and show the importance of curing in obtaining an
accurate rating for a sample. The score of each variety was increased
materially in all characteristics and no shrivelling was apparent. As a
practical means of recovering the kernels in large pieces, cracking
before the nuts are dried out is a decided advantage provided the
kernels are cured before they are stored.

The duplicate samples of Eldridge check very closely and show no
significant differences.

In Table 2 are given the results of ten tests on carefully replicated
random samples of Snyder black walnuts. In making these samples the nuts
were spread in a single layer on the floor and lots of 25 cut off the
edges of this layer without selection of any kind. Even with such
selection there is a variation of 1.2 grams in the average weight of
single nuts from different samples. Per cent kernel first crack shows a
minimum of 21.8 and a maximum of 26.9 in the ten samples. This
difference is related mostly to the presence of 3 empty nuts in the low
scoring sample as compared with none in the high scoring sample. The
high score is also in part due to soaking. This variability is about the
same as with total per cent kernel indicating that cracking technique
was uniform. Comparing samples 1 and 2 in more detail it is found that
the difference of 11.6 points in the score is caused by the presence of
empty nuts in the sample. The average weight of kernels per single nut
in sample 1 is 4.9 grams. The difference in the weights of the kernels
of the two samples is 15 grams or about the weight of the kernels of 3
nuts. These empties also reduce the score by reducing the number of
quarters recovered. Where empty nuts are involved, it is doubtful if
random sampling will reduce variation unless the size of the sample is
greatly increased, a practice which is not a practical solution in that
a 25 nut sample is about as large as can be handled with any facility.
It would seem that this difference in scores was a fair indication of
the merit of the two samples. The scores of the other samples show a
fair degree of uniformity. The high score of sample 4 is probably
related to the soaking treatment though the scores of sample 3 also
soaked is lower than that of sample 6 which was not soaked. It seems
that when these conditions and with this variety stored in a fairly high
humidity,