Falling Numbers for CWRS

[charliep]

Rosco

Low falling number is the result of sprouting (or at least the beginning of sprout activity) in a kernel. Historically, our visual has captured this but increased testing/better techniques have pushed this issue forward more. It is a customer requirement in many cases.

The only things a farmer can do is manage their crop to get the best quality possible. Again, I have to seek others thoughts as to whether there are varieties that generally have better resistance to spouting at harvest.

[rosco]

Because fallling number is an excellent indicator of the baking quality of HRS wheat. Mills want to know this value so their flour is the same with every bag and the baker knows each loaf is the same every day. Flour with a low falling number makes bread that won't rise, like a brick. Canada can usually supply milling wheat that has a consistantly good falling number,boat load after boat load, year after year.
Lee, that #2 shipment out of Vancouver, was that low falling number caused by some Grandin wheat that got in as CWRS?

[mbgrainfarmer]

Hello again, what I was originally asking was, is there any information available to compare falling numbers of lets say Superb vs Barrie or Harvest etc. It would be valuable tool to able to compare these varieties, first with them all being graded (KVD)a #1 13.5 protien, and then show the results as the same percentage of sprouts or weathering is being added to the sample, I'm hoping someone did this in a lab while they were checking for sprouting resistence before the varieties got registered. What I am trying to find out is if Superb consistently has a poorer falling number under all the different conditions, then then maybe it is not the variety for my farm in the future.

[Lifer]

Just because some one may not know how to manage their falling number doesn't mean we can't.

The focus has been off supplying what a customer needs. We change our mindset we will be looking at more variables in our production that can improve customer demand qualities.

Variety difference may be one.
What abut different fertility? different harvest methods?
different handling?

What factors affect falling number?

Also a farmer who harvests #3 wheat vs one who harvests #1 isn't automatically lazier.

[rosco]

Charlie, if sprouting leads to a poor falling number, it should be as simple as selecting a variety that shows good resistance to sprouting? According to the Alberta ag site, AC Majestic, Harvest, and McKenzie are some of the best choices for Alberta. By using good varieties, together with good farming practices to protect quality, we are doing all that we can to guard against producing wheat with poor falling numbers. Mother nature kinda takes over from there.
P.S. Makes me glad I bought some Harvest wheat seed last month!

[TOM4CWB]

Hard White and sprout tolerance;

The CGC report we got in Canmore last week was as follows:

Standards;

CWRS 40% downgrade from frost, 30% CWHW
CWRS 52% downgrade green inmature 46% CWHW
CWRS 5% downgrade Fusarium CWHW 2%
CWRS 7% downgrade Sprout CWHW 5%

In Alberta many growers with CWHW got #3, where CWRS was feed on account of Sprout.

Falling numbers were much better on Snowbird CWHW as well.

We had a neighbour who had Superb that was harvested (Straight Cut) the 4th of December... which was ready to combine the 1st of October... and he still got a 2CWRS off the Combine, no sprouts, from this December harvested Superb.

Warm wet weather makes wheat sprout.

Columbus had some of the strongest sprout resistance ever... and held against bleaching as a superior Variety.

It does look like Snowbird CWHW does set a new standard in weather resistance... as experienced by many in the fall of 2004.

[Vader]

As Tom stated earlier severely sprouted wheat can have up to 1000 times the alpha amylase content of a normal kernel. There is an exponential increase in alpha amaylase content in sprouted and severely sprouted kernels.

Since the alpha amylase is measured by falling numbers we must be aware of the non linear relationship.

You cannot blend equal parts of wheat with 200 falling numbers with wheat that has 300 falling numbers and get a blended result of 250. Instead the blended result might be 210 or 220.

Small quantities of serverly sprouted wheat blended in with sound wheat can have a serious impact on falling numbers. Ten bushels of severely sprouted can drag down the falling numbers of a 5000 bushel bin.

Think where this might happen in normal operations. If you swath then every where that the swath is driven on can have severely sprouted kernels.

If grain is exposed to rain and then blended into sound grain it can be a disaster.

If we move toward a system where falling numbers becomes a grading factor we will all have to be aware of the factors that impact most on this quality factor and manage accordingly. In fact we should make ourselves aware of the impact of sprouting, alpha amylase, and falling numbers now and improve our management practices to protect Canada's reputation for quality wheat.

Ultimately we should have payment grids based on falling numbers just like we do for protein and reward good management.

[ianben]

Here in UK falling number is tested as grade to milling. Our trial result give varital scores and resisance to sprouting does not always seem to corolate See www.hgca.com.
Warm wet weather is what causes the drop in numbers and harvesting as soon as poss the best way we find to hold numbers even harvesting before quite dry and running through the dryer.

The numbers hagberg sure drops here before appearance, we have some beautiful Consort with 120 feed, cut early sometimes you just cant win

The variety Malacca has only had 19% pass this year but fails equally spread between protien hagberg and bushel weight.

If farming is poker with the weather the right variety can be an ace!!

[TOM4CWB]

Mbgrainfarmer,

http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/Quality/tests/fnumber-e.asp

This site shows exactly what happens.

[mcfarms]

Vader
Have I told you lately how smart you are, because I agree with you completely, not only as it applies to wheats but all grains. It may allow targeted marketing by producers that could open up whole new possibilities. Perhaps a potentially positive thing is that alot of these changes are being discussed and are in certain stages of implementation as I suspect you are well aware of. Including moving towards falling numbers testing for sprout damaged wheat and sooner(hopefully) than later as a grading factor replacing the visual grade determinant especially in the lower grades.
I have been privy to some discussion about quality based payments on other grains and hopefully they are not too far off either, of course being like the rest of us on here if what is done isn't exactly as I envision it ,then changes which may be introduced might need some reworking.haha
I guess we should be somewhat pleased that changes are coming to payments on some types of grains and grading that reflects quality because I believe that it's in quality that we have to hang our hat in regards to future development and sustainability of the canadian grain industry.
depending on each of our points of view we may have a little ways or along ways to go but there is movement and thats a change in some respects for the better.
And as far as different varieties having different falling numbers they all have to be equal to or better the the standard variety for the class of wheat to be registered by the registration committee, (alsen is a painful example to some of one that wasn't) And the falling number does tend to vary from variety to variety dependant on heritage. From my observations anyways, I've been trying to research it a bit between checking cows........ which would explain why I'm sitting here at 12.37 am damn heifers,speaking of which.