HARVEST METHODS.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20484, 10 December 1934, Page 7

HARVEST METHODS.

Binder, Windrow and Direct Heading.

During the harvest of 1933 comparative tests of harvesting barley* and wheat by the binder, windrow and direct heading methods were conducted on the Canterbury (N.Z.) Seed Company’s farm at Leeston by Messrs C. 11. Hewlett and J. 11. Hewlett, Canterbury (N.Z.) Seed Company, Ltd., and H. E. West, of the Wheat Re search Institute. To ascertain the effect of the different methods of harvesting upon the quality' of the grain, 101 moisture tests of the grain in the field at various stages were taken. Further, 117 analyses of the barley’s and wheats after threshing were made. The barley’s were malted and analyses made of the malt. The wheats were made into bread and the baking scores recorded.

Satisfactory' results regarding quality' were obtained from braley's and wheats harvested by' the binder and windrow methods, but the quality of the directheaded grain was not equal to that of the wheats harvested by the binder or windrowed. The windrowed grain dried faster than the stook-threshed. It would be preferable, adds the report, if four or five years’ results were available, but they are not, and, without entering into detail, conclusions based upon the one year’s observations are as follows:—Binder method- Satisfactory' for all grain. Windrow method: Satisfactory* for all grain; cheaper than binder method and very little more expensive than direct-head-ing. Direct-heading method: Unsatisfactory for barley; satisfactory for solid-straw Tuscan wheat only, provided suitable weather conditions prevail.