• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Main
 Introduction
 Scope of investigation
 Map showing location of oranges...
 Methods of analysis
 Summary by localities
 General summary and averages
 Weather conditions
 Conclusions
 Recommendations
 Tables of analyses






Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Agricultural Department
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00077083/00028
 Material Information
Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Agricultural Department
Uniform Title: Avocado and mango propagation and culture
Tomato growing in Florida
Dasheen its uses and culture
Report of the Chemical Division
Alternate Title: Florida quarterly bulletin, Department of Agriculture
Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture
Physical Description: v. : ill. (some fold) ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Dept. of Agriculture
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: Tallahassee Fla
Publication Date: -1921
Frequency: quarterly
monthly[ former 1901- sept. 1905]
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Agriculture -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Agricultural industries -- Statistics -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: -v. 31, no. 3 (July 1, 1921).
General Note: Description based on: Vol. 19, no. 2 (Apr. 1, 1909); title from cover.
General Note: Many issue number 1's are the Report of the Chemical Division.
General Note: Vol. 31, no. 3 has supplements with distinctive titles : Avocado and mango propagation and culture, Tomato growing in Florida, and: The Dasheen; its uses and culture.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00077083
Volume ID: VID00028
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 28473206
 Related Items

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
    Introduction
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
    Scope of investigation
        Page 14
    Map showing location of oranges analyzed
        Page 14a
    Methods of analysis
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Summary by localities
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 24a
        Page 25
        Page 26
    General summary and averages
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
    Weather conditions
        Page 32
    Conclusions
        Page 33
        Page 34
    Recommendations
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
    Tables of analyses
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
Full Text





VOLUME 23 NUMBER 2

FLORIDA QUARTERLY

BULLETIN

(PART TWO)


APRIL 1, 1913

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY.


R. E. ROSE, State Chemist.


The Chemical Composition
of Florida Oranges.

---From--
OCTOBER 1. 1912, TO JANUARY 31, 1913.
--B---
A. M. HENRY, Food and Drug Chemist.

Entered January 31, 1003, at Tallahassee, Florica, as second-
class matter, under Act of Congress of June, 1900.

These Eulletins Are Issued Free to Those Requesting Them

T. J. APPLEYARD, State Printer.
Tallahassee. Fla.
I -M~













TABLE OF CONTENTS.



Introduction ........ .................. ............ 5
Scope of Investigation ................. ........... ...... 14
Methods of analysis ....................................... 15
Preparation of sam ple ................................ 16
Juice .......................... ...................... lt
Total acid as crystallized citric ........................... 1
Total sugar as invert .................................. l;
R atio of acid to sugar ................................. 1!
Sam pling ...................... ... .................... 20
E extraction of juice ..................................... '20
Summary by localities and varieties ................... ..... 21
Alva, Lee County. seedling .................... ........ 21
Clearwater, Pinellas County, seedling ................... 2
Tavares, Lake County, seedling ......................... 22
Lake Helen, Volusia County, seedling ................... 22
Winter Haven, Polk County. seedling ................... 23
Lake Weir, Marion County, Parson Brown ............... 2)
Punta Gorda, DeSoto County, seedling ................... 2:
W auchula, DeSoto County, seedling ..................... 2-1
Tildenville, Orange County, Valencia .................... 24
Tampa, Hillsboro County, seedling ...................... 25
St. Petersburg, Pinellas County, seedling ................. 25
Lakeland, Polk County, seedling ......................... 25
Manatee. Manatee County, seedling ..................... 2(;
Orlando. Orange County, seedling ....................... 2;
Buckkingham. Lee County, seedling ....................... 2(;
Mt. Dora. Lake County, seedling ...................... 27
Orange Lake, Alachua County, l'iuea:pple ................ 27
generall summary and averages .......................... 27
Sugar .............................................. 29
A cid .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. 2
R atio of acid to sugar ........................ ....... 30
Maturity by tentative standard ........................ 30
M aturity by field test ................................ 31
Maxima and Minima ................................ 31
W weather conditions ....................................... 32
Starch ................. ............... ................ 38
Conclusions ........................... ....... ............ 34
IPecommendations ........ .................................. 35
Standard ............ .... ....... ...................
Selection of sample ................................. 5
F ield test ................................. ........... 36
Laboratory method ............... ....... ........... 37
T ables of analyses ............ ................ .......... 3S

IL 1.1STIlATIONS.

PLATI: 1. Map showing localities from which orange samples
were received, opposite page. .................... 15
PLAT'T: II. Chart showing average chemical composition of
oranges from nine localities, opposite page ......... 2,















LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.


Hon. 11'. A. McRac,
('oinl issioner of Agriculture,
Tallahassee.
Sir:
The following study of the anaylsis of two hundred
and fifty-nine samples of Florida oranges, involving sam-
ples from seventeen localities in the State, has been made
for the purpose of determining the chemical composi-
tion of mature oranges, and to show the chemical changes
during the process of ripening.
These samples were systematically taken by responsi-
ble growers, and forwarded at regular intervals each
week to the State Laboratory at i.ll ri ....
The analytical work and compilation of results liis
been done by A. M[. Henry, B. S., Food and D)rug Analyst
of the State Laboratory. The conclusions drawn by Mr.
Henry will be acknowledged by any one who will study
the results, as fair, logical and fully justified by the data
obtained.
That a "standard maximum acid content" for mature
.ranges can be fixed is apparent. Such a maxininn acid
content" can he readily ascertained by ; single field
test, which, while simple, is still accurate, inexpensive,
and quickly applied, a test requiring no expensive appar-
atus nor costly reagents, one that can be applied by any
intelligent person ifter a demonstration by any ine
familiar with rudimentary chemistry.
* A standard involving a "ratio of acid to sugar," though
doubtless of value in making this study, would in lhe
opinion of the writer, involve considerable unnecessary
argument and discussion, great loss of time, considera-
ble expense, and accomplish nothing that would not be
accomplished by a "standard maximum acid content."













The analyses, tle dates, the gradual decrease i;i i'
and increase in sugar, though not tiblsolulely Ilil',r':
and differing as to variety, all gi 1,,o fiow lhar '; -
clusions drawn by ihe commission ilappointed Liy i it Hihn.
W. A. M\cRae, Commissioner of Agriculture. i,, Vr,,i,!-
i.lend a standard, and the action of the Citrus Gronwers
Convention, at Gainesville, in adopting the standard of
"1.25% maximum citric acid" and a "ratio of one of
citric acid to seven of total sugar as invert" was correct.
as is confirmed by the studies of the various labim-ratn-,ries
that have continued the study during the -{fasi nf
1912-13.
That a chemical standard is the only fair stadllard-
variety, date of maturity, season, soil, and treatment ,ni-
sidered. Iiat can be devised will, I believe, he conceded.
The position assumed by the writer, as expressed at
ihe Convention of Citrus Growers at Tampa, and again
at Miami, has been sustained by this year's study.
No arbitrary date of maturity can he fixed for all varie-
ties of oranges. Color i3 no index to maturity.
I would suggest, thai \n case nf further legislation in
the subject, or agreement among growers. that a "stan-
dard maximum acid content of 1.2.5'" he fixed, that any
orange having more than 1.25% citric acid as crystal-
lized acid) be considered immature. that all oranges show-
ing not more than 1.25% of citric acid be considered
mature-without respect to date. color or variety. that
the number of average oranges for the composite sample
le fixed, that the method of preparing tlie sample be
fixed and uniform, that the chemical terms, factors, and
methods be also fixed and uniform.
I would recommend that not less than twelve average
oranges, fairly representative of the fruit under consider-
ation, be taken for a "field" or "house test," that they be
peeled and the juice extracted by ordinary pressure.
mixed and strained, that a representative sample rof this












jnice be titratedd" against a standard uniform alkaline
solution, equivalent to exactly 1.25% of crystallized cit-
ric acid that the grower shall have the right to appeal,
in case he is not satisfied with the Inspector's decision,
1,1 the Stale Chemist, (the fruit under investigation to
he hlid pending the result of the appeal to the State
Chemist) that the only determination to be made by the
State Chemist shall be the percentage of "crystallized
citric acid" in the sample submitted, which shall be prima.
facie evidence of the maturity or immaturity of the fruit
under consideration, the sample sent to the State Chemist
in be twelve average oranges, fairly representative of
the fruit in question, drawn and sent by the grower and
the Inspector, the samples to be verified by the signatures
of the grower and the Inspector, and witnessed by two
witneisess. A commission of five consisting of three grow-
ers. one attorney, and one chemist, should prepare any
bill. or memorandum of agreement among the growers,
in order that legal procedure, correct uniform methods of
sampling, uniform methods of analysis, and terms, and
standards satisfactory to the grower, should be approved
and adopted.
Very respectfully.
R. E. hPSE.
State ('hmisT.

Florida Department of .! rieulture.
DT'ision of (hcmi i.ri/,
Tallahaf'. scc. [Marc 19, 1913.


















The Chemical Composition

of Florida Oranges

FROM
October 1, 1912, to January 31, 1913

BY

A. M. HENRY, Food and Drug Chemist



INTRODUCTION
lThe oijevt of this investigation was to obtain data
upon whici to base a standard for ripe, or mature oranges.
(-wing to a general demand of the orange growers of
Florida the Legislature of 1911 passed An Act which is
known as the Iimmiature Citrus Fr-il Law and is as fol-
lows :-

"CilATi l";2:;i-(-No. 117 ).

"\AN ACT !0 i',ii ilit ('ertaiin disposition of (;it".r
F'uiits W'i .li Arv :iimtiire or Otherwise L'nfit for
('onsunilpti i l. aind i : 'r: !iing of Citrus Fruits.

He i i I E;n l d l( "; 1?,/; ,/r .r t,'r, c ;, /t ( ".f !.'ljoridui:

c( ion 1 '"thi;t it shIl! he nnlawf'! for ;ny ine lo
sell, offer for s!e. ship or deliv", for uiunnin l iany citrus
fruits which are immitulre or otherwise ~ lnfit for consump-
iion. ;io foir :;ii one to receive any such fruits under a













contract of sale, or for lihe purpose ii] sale. or if ,I, rigL
for sale, or for shipment or delivery for shipienui. This
section shall not apply to sales or contracts fr ;ale Of
citrus fruits on the irees under this section: nir shall
it apply to common carriers or their agents who artt 1it
interested in such fruits and who are merely receiving,
the same for transportation.
"Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any one to mi-lira:n
any package or ar1y wrapper containing citrus f'!:-!rs:
and all citrus fruits shall be deemed. misbranded if lhe
package or wrapper shall bear any statement. design ,
device regarding the fruit therein contained whie! is
false or misleading either as to the name. size. quality, ,;
brand of such fruit or as to the locality in which ir i.,.
grown.
"Sec. 3. Whoever shall violate uany of the provisions If
this Act shall be punishe,d by a fine nor exceeding 1,-e
Thousand dollars er 1b imlrisoniment for not more ithai
six months, or by both sclh fine and implri the fruit, whether immature or ot! wisee unlit for con-
sumption or misbranded shall be subject to seizure and
disposition as in le case of adulterated or iti foods and drugs.
Approved June 5, 1911."

The following is lhe opinion of the Florida Silupreme
Court ws to the conslitulionality o; the above law.

S. J. SLIGH. Phluinii ini, Error. v. JA.MES A. KIRKIwooD.
As SHERIFF OF ORANGE COUNTY. Defendant in Error.

TA.YLon, J.-The Florida legislature at its session in
the year A. 1). 19ll, enacted the following statute:
Chapter 6236-entitled an Act to prohibit certain dis-
positions of citrus fruits which are immature or other-
wise unfit for consumption, and the misbranding of citrus
fruits.













For alleged violations of this statute the plaintiff in
error was informed against in the criminal court of
record of Orange County by three several informations
each of them containing two counts, the first count in each
of them charging him with the shipment to parties in
another State of immature oranges the same being citrus
fruit: the second count of each of them charging him with
the delivery to an agent of a common carrier for ship-
ment to the same parties in another State of the same
alleged immature oranges, which oranges are therein al-
leged to be citrus fruit and to be immature and unfit for
consumption.
The plaintiff in error was arrested upon three several
warrants issued from these informations and detained in
custody by the Sheriff, and applied to the Circuit Judge
of Orange county for and obtained a writ of habeas cor-
Ius. In his petition for the writ he alleges that the
statute above quoted upon which said prosecutions and
arrests are based is in conflict with section 8 of article 1
of the Federal Constitution, and seeks within itself to
govern and control commerce between the State of Flor-
ida and other States in tle United States, which is be-
yond the power and jurisdiction of the State legislature
of Florida to do.
On hearing the habeas corpus proceedings the Circuit
Judge remanded the plaintiff in error to the custody of
the Sheriff and dismissed the petition for the writ. For
review of this judgment the plaintiff in error brings his
case here by writ of error.
In the exhaustively considered case of Southern Rail-
way Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana, ren-
dered by the Supreme Court of Indiana on January 3,
1913, mnd. 100 N. E. Rep. 337, the following general pro-
positions are said ito be regarded as settled:
"First. That the power of regulating commerce among
the States is in Congress, and the subject of exclusive
Federal control.













'Second. That when Congress does act. and its action
covers the subject matter, its action is exclusive as to
interference.

'*Third. Until, and unless Congress does act, and tLe
action covers the subject matter, the States may act.

"Fourth. That so long as the action of the States is
not repugnant to, or does not interfere with, or place
burdens upon, or undertake to regulate, interstate com-
merce, or are mere police regulations, Their action though
in aid, or if in aid, of interstate commerce. is not invalid.
unless it is a direct interference.

"Fifth. That it is not enough to render the State la.v
invalid that is it similar to the Federal act upon i!he
same subject. It must in operation interfere direclyI
or s bst;ntially with interstate commerce, and nir lie
an incidental (o casual interference or rermotiv u't'erl it
hurtfully.

"Sixth. That where h)1h the acts .1' ,'on:t-- ;:.1i
the Stale make a defined act an .- :,. hie ciminia,i. .f
the act may be an offense .,-: ;ii- each, and piii -hal.!e
by each." See the cited case for the inii cmrnis c;asc i.hli
Feder:il an'1 l ia" sU'p mtin lloe (u11i -e; proplsitrirns.

In the case of Savage v. Jones. State Ch(mi-ii r f In-
diana, 22.- S. 01, i i it s held: -"That while the a -;, 1in-
not, under cover of exerting its police rowvr. ir,-Tly
regulate (cr burden interstate commerce, a 'oldi,. ret uIla-

I : e.ie. :;>1 is i'e;s;.a le in its :erius, and ,lie- not
conflict with any valid act of Congress, is not uncinsri-
tutional because it may incidentally affect interstate conm-
merce. And that no State statute which even affects i;-
eildejtaily interstate commerce is valid if it is re!pugnant
1o Iel Federal Food and Drug Act of June 30. 1906. the
object of which is to prevent adulteration and misbrand-
ing and keep adulterated and misbranded articles out of











interstate commerce. And that ivhere an act of Congress
relating to a subject on which the State may act also,
limits its prohibitions, it leaves the subject open to ine
State regulation as to the prohibitions that are unenumer-
ated. And that the intent of Congress to supersede ihe
exercise by the States of their police power will not he
inferred unless the act of Congress, fairly interpreted, is
in actual conflict wilh the law of the Stare."

We do not think that the Florida Statiute is a !ir lct
interference with interstate commerce or a burden u':pon
or prohibition against, the legitimate subjects ,!' s(cl
commerce. It does incidentally affect such commerce by
prohibiting immatre citrus fruits produced .viliin !,,,I
borders from becoming subjects of shipment or sale and
this in obedience to the police duty and power to protect
the public health. Except thus incidentally we di, it1,
think that the act under discussion is an un\varr~lanled
interference with or burden upon interstate cnommer"e.

Does the Florida statute in anywise conflict with the
food and drugs act of Congress of June 30, L9 ? vBy he
sixth subdivision of section seven of the last named act,
the prohibitions against vegetable substances, which as
we interpret it would include citrus fruits, i~i that if it
is in whole or in part filthy, decomposed or putrid, then
it is debarred as a subject of commerce. Green or himi-
ture fruit may be as deleterious to health as the s-ame
fruit in an overripe or decomposed state. The act of
Congress debars the latter, but says nothing as to the
former, thus leaving the field of deleterious imlIatrrit!
of fruit open to be dealt with by the States. We do not
think that the act in question conflicts with the inter-
slate commerce clause of the Federal Constitution or with
any of the provisions of acts of Congress passed in pur-
suance thereof that have come to our attention, and the
judgment of the Circuit Court is. therefore, hereby affirm-
ed at hle cost of the plaintiff in error.











The question of what is a ripe. or mature ri'ange. hav-
ing arrisen under the Immature ('ilru< Fruit Law. and
not being defined in it, Hou. W. A. Mchae. Commissioner
of Agriculture, in June, 1912, appointed a commission
to recommend a tentative standard for mature oranges.
The Commission consisted of Dr. E. R. Flint. Professor
of Chemistry, University of Florida: lion. R. E. Rose.
State Chemist; P. H. Rolfs, Director. Florida Agricul-
tural Experiment Station: H. Harold H ume. a promi-
nent horticulturist and authority on the production ot
citrus fruit; and E. R. Collison, Chemist. Florida Agri-
cultural Experiment Station. After several meetings
and arduous work in the study of the analyses and other
data concerning oranges, both mature and immature,
the Commission reported to a convention of orange grow-
ers held in Gainesville on August 13, 1912- The tenta-
tive standard recommended by the Commission and ad,,lT-
ed by the convention was as follows:-

"One. All round oranges showing a field test
of one and twenty-five hundredths (1.25) per cent
or more of acid, calculated as citric acid, shall
be considered as immature.

"Two. Provided, however, that if the grower
(or shipper) consider the fruit mature he shall
have the right to appeal from the field test.
to the State Chemist for a chemical analysis.
and if this chemical analysis shows that the
percentage by weight of the total sugar, as in-
vert sugar, be seven times or more than the weight
of the total acid as citric acid, the fruit shall be
deemed mature.

"Three. That the juices of not less than five
average oranges shall be mixed from which a
composite sample shall be drawn for the field
test.











"Four. That the juices of not less than twelve
average oranges shall be mixed, from which shall
be drawn a composite sample for laboratory
analysis."

The following resolution in regard to the time of appli-
cation of the standard was also adopted by the con-
vention:-
"Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that
the report of the Commission shall be adopted, and shall
obtain until the 5th day of November in each and every
year; Provided, That after the 5th day of November in
each and every year the standard shall be that if eaci
orange is two-thirds its total area colored yellow it s'!;ii
be considered as mature and fit for shipment.
"That no variety of oranges or grapefruit shant be
allowed to be shipped before October 1st of each ye (v that
has bloomed during that calendar year."

The following, taken from the report of the Commis-
sion, by R. E. Rose, State C hemist, shows why a chemical
standard in preference to any other standard, was re-
commended:-
"This subject-A Chemical Standard for Immature (or
mature) Citrus Fruit-has very properly been the sub-
ject of much discussion among the parties interested.
"That it is an important subject is evidenced by the
great interest shown by the discussion, pro and con, 1by
the press and in all gatherings of citrus growers.
"That there is a general demand to prevent the ship-
ment of immature oranges is evident to any one who has
been familiar with this industry, particularly since The
crops have assumed large proportions. No one, I believe,
will deny the damage done to the industry as a whole,
by the shipment of sour, immature oranges from 1lhis
State. This, T believe, will be conceded by all.












SThie problem then, is, can a standiar.d ii. fi k",. ;,, i h
an immature orange can be distinguished from i : !':::e
or ripe one? If so, what shall the s:nard ie.

"By whom shall the srandarl bLe fi-ed? Ai;l -
are fixed by the persons directly inter:'eswi,. i.. ;!:
duction and sale of commodities. I kiow nt ,::
Standards iwhe, fixed by lhe iperMS n:s ii,.. i; -- -
ness of prohucinci:' mlanufactirel1'n2 o' :: a :
are the standards accepted by the Legislative and Ex--
tive ..* *, regul' tii g the trade th'i:-, ;i : ,
in all con'trove rs' or tlhe ,ettlenjn-, i T,
either bv arbitration lv r? ;e eo : r. '. I. .'., .'
only persons who canu nilke a stan:.r:l ,i r -.nmar :e
the growers :and shipi),'s ;f i;:-ange.

"TA his was evidenTly le i position i r' i
lature, when e'lneting the Tnnmature Citnru s Frii \ v.
The demand was for a law jprevenf,)ig' the shi;! :' .f
immatilre frui. The inquiry was man-l-w!:t cl.:-' .
im'nmaturity? and fnll discussion was had. The i
by n large majority leavi n', however,. h, ixi ;
dard or definition, where if belongs-r ':. -' .-. m
and shippers of citrus frrit- the on1, i .ly ns- in,. .. -,..1
and to be protected by the law.

"Shail co',or be the sandard? This i nuswred :"
ly by a nw!g'alive, as `0 it iw vell known lti:it certain v:-r:s
are green in color iwh'e hMio are at 1' i.ir Niet n:: 'i-
desiralle stage of natmrity. Other Ime varietir,- ;:e
beautil'uly colored montl s I're-io s t:- ri'niin,2 .. ;:h
still .sonI li unfit for cnsls mp1io n. i ,]n; h i1 .
no proper standard for rieness.

"Shall different dates i'e Efixe-1 or l he shiinle' '-;i
ous varieties? 11 is needlOes to say to (on T:;ar i: ,a:-
minialle confusion would follow when locality., -.i!. x-
tude, season, culture an r ferlilizing :are ;Il flnii.;a < i
11'c 1li'c of imnat rivy.













"If color or datil be eliminated, what ireiiin'; by which
1 diiistiiingish a ripe orange-one tit for consumption?
Texinre (:annot h1 e use in delermilig lle maturity of
;ni orange. Mellow, soft (r lelner oranges en not lie
shiiled. mnr would Iley lie desirable for consumption.

"\\e are liwerefore forced to examine hlie fruit clihei-
.a lily, to aiscertain whlt lie sugar and acid content is.
\\When it is iplaitable and desirable as a fruit. When the
(consume, is pleasid with its taste, and desires to repeat
Ihe pleasure c(i' caligi it.

"'An a chemiiiicAl standard e fixed? One 1hat will do no
injustice to tlie early orange. Will insure excellence in
the s needling, a lnd project the late orange from condenina-
liin by fhe co(nslner?

"Youv (Commission is convinced lihat such a standard
CMa lie iixei and li:i\,e ulanlimousll v recommended such
a standard. A slalnard Ihat will work no hardship on
Ihe grower. That will protect the consumer; eliminate
the speculator and joblber, and secure for the industry
fair prices or the entire crop during the entire shipping
season, which, as yon know, extends from October to
.lu1ly."

The following resolution was passed by ihe Commis-
sion andC convlention:-

'The Comnuission recognizes the fact that the analy-
tical data regarding the analyses of inmmat-re citrus fruit
is limited.

"We recommend thiat analyses of iimmatuie grape fruit
and round oranges be made during the months of Septem-
ber, October, November, and December.
"We recommend that the State Chemist, the Chemist
of the Experiment Station, and the Chemisi of the Uni-
versity be earnestly requested to make such analyses
during the ensuing shipping season.
2-Or. Bul.














"The Commission further recommends that the convei-
tion of citrus growers make every possible effort to as:.ir
these various officers in securing the necessary fruit aii
also aid them in securing the necessary funds 1, empl!.
the assistance needed to carry out this work."

As a result of the nature Citrus Fruit Law. ;ei,
resolutions of the Citrus Fruit Standard Commission a nd
tl e re-collClnendatioins of the Citrus (Gl(roers Convenllijni.
this investigation was undertaken.

SCOPE OF1 INVESTIGATION.

With the fact in view that a standard for orange..
he effective, must be one that could be applied in the
grove, by both the grower and the Inspector, an examlnJi
lion of the literature of the work that had been dilnte ,
oranges was undertaker. After a study of the literarnr.l
it was decided that the only determinations thli wmild
likely be of value and lhat would le practicablle nwer iti-
determination of total acid, as crystallized cirric ;i.
total sugar as invert, and the ratio ,if rotal acid 4to -ia'
sugar.

These determinations were made on the juice as i, \
would then be more applicable to field condiriiins insir'ca
of on the pulp. Ineidently, determinations were miitl
of the average weight of the orange, of the specific lr;iTXir
of the orange, and of the percentage of the juice exi; a.-
ed. Owing to fhe lantre number of analyses iunatib ini 'li-
early part of ihe season no comllprehenlsivi e aind Al '1111
notes were imde upl)on the 1phy sical Tln'1por'Ti ;IaI1 n1!: 1 i-
copical appearance of tlie oranges, such a, colors. nllital1l
of seeds, etc. The taste of the juice was i-.corldd ,i,, ;i'
samples.
It was proposed to analyse weekly on average -a elipii
of twelve oranges from seventeen different localiti(-. Tl'e
weekly samples we'r to lie analyzed fl.(ri (hilOe I-T















~~~~ _1~~~~~ ~ 'N-1-~1_ ._ -- 1_. _- 1-_
I >,


'- --1'



rl
/ 1 4





IV L 'i EN y

i y,`, L' -' D > ",'



F !;Si"'yM; \






.-. / ,,


o n PiNr ri soiicA 1

3 V-- K-- IGH- A M








MAP SHOWVUNG LOrCATiCN OF

ORANGE 5 ANALYZED


'N P
N,1












S''











to January 31st. ()nly nine of thle seventeen localities
sent the samples in regiuarly for the entire time. The
localities, growers, and varieties are as follows:-

Alva, Edward Parkinson-Seedling.
Clearwater, Mairshal, Brandon I& ]iass Seedling
(Sweet Seville).
Tavares Woodlea Company-Seedling.
Lake telen, Mace & Son-Seedling.
Winter Haven, Boyd Brothers-Seedling.
Lake Weir, Carn ey Investment ('omlpany- Parson
Brown.
Punta Gorda, J. M. Weeks-Seedling.
Wauchula, S. B. Hogan-Seedling.
Tildenville, L. W. Tilden-Valencia.
Tampa, Eugene Holtsinger---Seedling.
St. Petersburg, G. 0. Osborln-Seedling.
Lakeland, (;. P. Quaintan ance-Seedling.
Manatee. I. T. BTlennett--S-eedling.
Orlando, ('. W. Town-send-Seedling.
Buckinghamn, 1). S. Borland-Seedling.
Mt. Dora, Charles Edgerton--Seedling.
Lake Oranrge, (. B. Crosby--Pineapple.

The first nine were received regularly ''or fhe entire
time.

The accompanying map shows ile localities from which
they were received.

The varieties were chosen io represent the different
time of malurin.g of oranges.; IhNe Parson Brown, early;
the Pineapple, medium; ie Valencia, the late; and the
Seedlings matured at various times from early to late.

METHODS OF ANAL YSTI

The preparation of the sample, extraction of juice, and
determination of acid, were praeticaly lv e same as the











lield test adopted. The methods used were Thliue ut the
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. with slight
modifications to fit them to 1lie work and are as folln s:-

P'rcplration of < tjample.

Twelve oranges are used f o analysis. The -welve
fruit are weighed. I'eel lhe twelve fruit. Halve by cu.-
linhi across' s segtmenlts, and squeeze with a lemon .-iquee
into a porcelain or porcelain lined vessel thru ;I pie-ce oi
cheese cloth placed over it. The cheese cloth is ilwn
squeezed out with gentle pressure and thrown awiVa Tli
juice is now ready for analysis.

I ioc.
Junicre.

The juice is weighed. The weight of juice divided bi,
the weight of lie fruiI gives the percentage of iui,. in
the fruit.
Ti/.ui l joid <" Cfrisialli:
Weigh 10 grams of the juice and place in a 2i51i ce
baker. diluit with recently boiled distilled waler It
about 100 cc.. add phenolpthatein and titrate witilh itii
normal sodium hydrate solution, free fromi sin din ,;l -
boni te. Eacih cc of tlie tenth lnorlmal sodium !i i;:.
when using ten grams of juice, is equivalenT t I (l.T -r
cent of total acid as crystallized citric acid. aid Ahli iI'm,
i)(r of cc of tenth normal sodium hydrate taken multi-
plied by 0.07 gives the percentage by weight or tla] a nid
acid as crystallized citric acid (lhnuanu if ('hwnisiirv l-in
lelin 107. Revised).

Total Sugar as Invert.

(a) Preparation of reagents.

I ( Copper Sulfate Solution. Dissolve .4.6:V ,,rIasn
or, CuRiSO. -5H2 in water and dilute to 500 cc.









(2) Alkaline Tartrate Solution. Dissolve 173 grams
of NaKCIHiO.411-O and 50 grams of NaOH in water and
dilute to 500 cc.

(3) Mixed Solulion. Mix equal volumes of solutions
(1) and (2) immediately before use.

(4) Standard Sodium Thiosulfate Solution. Prepare
a solution of Na=S- .51LO containing 19 grams of pure
crystals to 1,000 cc. Weigh accurately about 0.2 gram of
pure copper foil and place in a flask of 250 cc capacity.
Dissolve by warming with 5 cc of a mixture of equal
volumes of strong HNOs and HO0. Dillute to 50 cc. boil
to expel the red fumes, add 5 cc of strong Br water, and
boil until the Br is thoroly expelled. Remove from the
heat and add a slight excess of strong NIHOH-7 cc is
about the right amount. Again boil until the excess of
ammonia is expelled, as shown by a change in color of
lhe liquid, and a partial precipitation. Now add a
slight excess of acetic acid (3 or 4 cc of 80% acid) and
boil for a minute. Cool to room temperature and add
10 cc of a solution of pure KI containing 300 grams of
KI to 1,000 cc. Titrate at once with the thiosnlfate
solution until the brown linge has become weak, then
add sufficient starch liquor to produce a marked blue
coloration. Continue the titration cautiously uilit the
color due to free iodin has entirely vanished. The blue
color changes toward the end to a faint lilac. If a thiis
point the thiosulfate he added drop by drop and a little
time be allowed for complete reaction after each addi-
tion there is no difficult in determniing the end point
within a single drop. One cc of the thiosulfate solution
will be found to (correspond to about 0.005 grain of cop-
per.

(5) Potassium lodid Solution. Dissolve 30 grams of
KI in water and dilute to 100 cc. (It is best to have a
fresh solution every day).









(6) Eighly Ic!( cent Acetic Acid. )ilu e .lii <, IT!;e
9S.75i per ceial acelic acid to 1,10l) cr.
(7) L.ea Ac ciale Solution. Prepare a cit i ':.d
solution of Pi'i '_i;, i _..i in vefr hly ',iled ,li 'i i
whaler, aiml dilua e 1i a speilic gravity f 1.'. wh ri
boiled distilleii w\-atl l.

Sb) I lete'lniiiil tolln.

Weigh 27 glrailn oif thle iirange juire ;! a t plac !uL a
li) cc flask. AdOd ce of thle lead acetale slutiin. make
ip to 100 cc, wilh water and filter hitru a dry double
fitler. Treat the tiltrate with ahtiydroils sodium sulfate
in excess and l!ler t1hrl a dry double filler. l:n.err .l5
cc of the fillrate in a 1(10 ce flask lby adding. Htile 1x
little, whiile i'olaiin,.t lhe 1lask, cc of 11CL, containing
::S.S% of tle acid. Allow to stand over night aT a eit
1'erature of 210 to 25 C, nearly neutralize with conien-
Iraled NaOH solution, using phenoltlialein as indicaritr.
being careful not to get a local excess if Na(O l. DIi!nu
with water to 100 c.. Prepare a series ,f solutio>ins in
laige lest tubes by h .adding 1 and 2 cc of this s ,lmi in til
eachi tube successively. Adid cc, of the mixed -oppier
reagent to each, heat to boiling, boil 2 inuliltes. and
filtcr. Note tle 'volniu e of suiiar solulin wh' iic'l gives
the lill'ate ligltest> in lint, blut still distinctly blue.
Lace twenly- times ll1is \'oluiie of sugar solution in a
I00 cc fla;sk, dilute Io l;ark, and lliX well. PIlae lH (.c
Ai' the mixed copper ragel and 0.' li oif lie sular solu
lion ~ n a be1aker ox' ':' c apacily. Ieat The i iixItret
at such a rate thi approximately fur minutes arte re-
quired to bring it tif the boiling points. and lt il for exacl-
Vly two minutes. Add, !00 '; of cofld, recently boiled. dis-
lilled waler. File, iniediatlely thru aslhestos and wash
the copper oxid well w\illi wvalr. Cver lie gooch with
ta watch glass and dissolve the copper oxid with 5) cc of
a miixture of equal volilumes of strong nitric acid and w;itR










poured under !e watch glass with a pipette. Catch tihe
liltrate in a; !iisk of "'50 cc capacity, wash watch !lass
,'i ;ooc free if copper; 30 cc of water will be sifl!-
cilet. Iioil t," expel rei fumles, add 5 cc of strong Br
walker, and boil until the 11r is thoroly expe! ed. lRenio,
Ifrti the ieit an!ii add a sliglit excess (f strong NH1VH-T
cc is aoin th1ie right amount. Agail bol il util ie exc-:s
oti' anlilIonia is e'xpl'led as shown by a cda;niia in! di '
of the liquid, and a pam lial precipitation. Now 'i :
slight excess of acetic acid (3: or 4 cc of SC'; acii aiid
ioil for a minute. Cool to room tempera ture and add
10t cc of a solution of pure K[ contailniin :;')0 gras o
KI to 1,000 cc. Titrate at once with the thiosulfate solu-
lioln itil the brown l inge has become w-eak, then add
sffliciieii starch liquor to produce a marked blue colora-
lion. Coninue 1he lil!ration cautiously uniil the color
;d!e to r'ee iodin has entirely vanished. Thle blie color
changes i toward ithe end to a faint lilac. If it this point
lie iliosulfate lie added drop by drop and a little lime
he allowed for complete reaction after each addition there
is no difliellty in determining the end point within a sin-
,le drop. Tli equivalent amount of copper is multiplied
by Ithe nlnniier of cc of Ihe thiosulfate solution 1:ken
anwl. tfli, ;esni divi'led by the weighlit of the original
Juice, c;r! es ,,;i;iiig to ihe portion takenn for thl" copper
redueclion, which gives the copper in milligraiiis. ii
corresponding' Ilmount of inveirt sugar is obtained fr'mii
the ilaie given f;:. lthis Inrl-ose on pap ,(s It ripM 1; i,.f
!Bulletin 107, Revised. Bureau of Chemistry. The
niumbier of iiillii-'is lhelre f'i'iii divided by 10 piveh s he
p]ercennlae of Totao Suhgar as Invert. Isureau of hienm-
istiry. 'Hulletin T10. rlivisel f.

Ratti i.f .I -i ,0; Nquir.

The lpercenl g'e of lital sugar as invert divided by the
lpercvnite of total :'id as crystallized citric gives the
atiio.










ni l> ii i (/.

Carefull alld cll.llale sampling are very important. The
instructions to the samplers to select a tree froln which
all the samples should le taken, and to take twelve aver-
age oranges for each sample each week. were implicit.
That careful and accurate sampling were important is
shown in ihle following table, which shows the analyses
o'f iwel\ve vIC'erae oran1-ges taken respectively fr'llm the
North ast, Soutlh. ;a d l Wcs side.\ of (' e re,. all at
tlie same time:-

Total Total
Number. Side of Tree 'Sugar. Acid. Ratio.
1295 NorIl T.17' 1.69 1 to 4,24
1296 EasI 7.70 1.32 1 o .5-.:1
1297 Soutih 7.96 1.22 1 o G.o :
1298 W est 7.*1 1.47 1 TI, ;.
Average 7.54 1.4.5 1 .


E.rlrel io( of J ice.

The, same as in thle ex(rac(io ofd joice I' -roiil anil. '
oilier things: ihe less 1hie pressure and the quality ..f
juice extraeed, ille groater ihe soluble solids. suli. ;
ncid and sugar. in lhe juice: and consequently the grear-
erI the I t(1 mure ;i, il cx ra li iion il1e l wer The ;Iii ] and
sugar in llie juice. This is concretely shown by the analy-
sis of a sample of oranges in which three separate extrac-
lions of juice wereer made, each sneeeding one with greater
pressure.














I
l'Pres"11ir.



1085 First 8.39 1.03 1 to 8.15
1080 Second 8.13 0.94 1 to 8.65
10T7 Third 8.33 0.S8 1 to 9.47
IISS ( 'oniposite of above 8.13 0.94 1 to 8.65
Average of above 8.28 0.95 1 to 8.72

The method olf using an ordinary wooden lemon squeezer
'or extractionn of Ihe juice, makes these analyses com-
parable to samples ihat will be tested in the field and
Ior which use conclusions can be drawn from this work.

SI-MMAIRY BY LOCALITIES.

ira. Ir' ('ciiojnty- edlian. Samples were received
I'rom Sepl. 2S, Io oJan. 24, making seventeen samples.
This orange was ripe Ihe latter part of October bolh
in chemical composition and taste, the acid cnienit ifll-
ing heloehv 1.25';( on October the 261t. The acid began
with 1.85%, the maximum, on Sept. 2Sth. fell rapidly
during October, more slowly during November and i)e-
cember, and remained practically constant throughout
January. The minimum acid was 0.74% on Jan. 11th.
The sugar began with 6.25' and increased gradually to
9.5'(/; on January 241h. T'M, increase in sugar was rapid
in (October, slo\werv ini November amd IDecember, and again
rapid during Jlanuarl. The average sugar content of
this orange throughout the season was higher than any
other of the studies. The ratio of acid to sugar increased
from 1 to 3.38, or sour on Sept. 28, to i to 12.10, or ver
sweet, on Jan. 24. The percentage of juice did not vary
materially from the average during the season.











( If fffitf,!FO T P. IwI~t'1f. I' o '4 >1 I.' Stitijilks w .
!'o1 CXt-ffi 111jp. -'A), tfo jon. ". mia~lJI1[2' ttig teei saint
jpltS Ii 2111. I '. ff1ng it4Ciip oeo early Hi fIX einler. h
"-;a co ni i g yellow I 20n' (m Ti Nvember 12. The
avidi Iaian X'itli Lily?, eli mafi ll duOiug Omotuel ana]

.tnif3 en~kld Nvi Iih 1 1c sugar beganl Aith 5.0 2'
ouvi'inlii Ole .son. Tihe rain) off acid, to sugal began at
I in i.. very sfIX and1I Arrease itICSfIn I( to 12.65. or


ill 11ff J .1 1(1 II it'le of ji1cCe wtS lie sealnsoni advlanlcedI.

7," C a -cs, ,,I 1abe ( 'omua h ,'cc('i~tlifly. SaliiiiJ fI wer"' C
fe-k (11 friini (hi. 4, t(1 .11111 24, Iimikin" seN enlCef main-
111'' ill 1 fM itilu(,rng didI 11f ripen until in JannriIyl

T ho( av id t Nyll i 22-10 6 ,14m 1.2.)'; ons Jan.ii 17.if Fe in





(It'l 1Imp-a tii on ial- i IXIIf l and,!'(' lif cl. I



St~tt tif. 1, l






ralooty Mi i PP 112 P WAY di n ingt0 IN r, oft
ttit i l92 il hfll w lu t 1 tP;, f T 1c with' I
!), 11 I' it I lftiltii f f!i *fd fflcreast'd voii if l apfit


Hf1 lithIX Ji1 l ld C11iflyt all elf50' 'le Th w i tt t ; Iti'le ai(

of we.if In sv-f I~m ai lt tIi. in M or\ vp so, afwl il Pff












1., the ratio was above 9.001; and( the taste sweet. The
percentage of juice did not vary considerably from tile
average during the season.

lIinter ]Iaren Polk Coin .- I. .inmg. Samples were
received from Oct. :' to .lan. 28, making eighteen in all.
This orange ripened the latter part of November, the
acid falling below 1.25("/o on November 2f;th. The acid
began with 1.67% and ended with 1.12 I'alling very
gradually throughout the season. The variation in max-
imum and minimum acid in this orange was only 0..'/,
a very small decrease in acid for four monihs-less than
the decrease in any other sample except the Parson
PBrowns, which were rip' before the study was begun.
The sugar began at 5.7.5% and increased to 8.45.'
gradually. The ratio of acid to sugar began wi1h 1 to
:3.44, or sour taste, and increased to 1 to 7.54, or tart
taste. There was a small decrease in percentage of juice
during tle season.

Lake Weir, Marion County-Parson It-ow?. Samples
were received from Sept. 28, to Jan. 27, making eighteen
in all. This orange was ripe when the analyses were be-
gunl, the acid content at no time being higher than 1.05c%.
The acid content began with 0.9,' I and ended with
0.41%, with a very small gradual decrease during the
season. The sugar began with 6.54% and ended with
S.G65-, increasing during October and November and run-
ning nearly constant throughout December and January.
The ratio of acid to sugar began with 1 to 6.67, tart, and
ended with 1 to 21.10, very sweet, with most rapid increase
in January. The percentage of juice decreased consider-
ably during the season. This was a very dry orange, the
percentage of juice being less Ihan that of any other
orange.
Punta Gorda. DeSoto County Seedling. The samples
were received from Oct. 3 to Jan. 30. making eighteen in
all. This orange ripened during the latter part of Octo-












ber, the acid falling below 1.2.5'; on )Oct. 24. The acid
began at 1.74% and ended with (.78',' decreasing mist
rapidly during October and very slowly the rest of the
season. The sugar content began with 4.*'; and ended
with 9.01';, the increase being gradual during the sea-
son. The average sugar content for the season was very
low in these oranges. The ratio of acid to sugar began
at 1 to 2.85, taste very sour, increased gradually thlru the
season and ended at 1 to 12.34, taste very sceet. The 1per-
centage of juice did not vary but very slightly during ec
season. The fist two samples receive ed were frimn a dif-
ferent tree from the samples during 1he l'remlinder of
the season. This orange had a very ihick and heavy
rind and altho the percentage of juice in the whole orange
was low, the pulp was very juicy.

\Wa'ahuhla, lcsoto (' .,ihl/ Rccdlif. Samples w\\ire
received from Oct. 4 to Jan. 30, making eighteen in al.
This orange ripined during the latter part of Novemlier..
the acid content falling below 1.25', on, Novemihe 27.
The anid began wilh 2.13% and ended wilh 0.97', de-
creasing very rapidly during (ctober anol much 1n111 ,
slowly for the rest of the season. The sugna began wili
5.19' i; and ended with 10.00' increasing during the til'.
three months and remaining nearly constan( during .an-
uary. O(n January 1Sthi, the sugar wnas 10.07('. th hiigh
est found during the 'sudy. The ratio of acid to sillgir
began will to 2.44, iaste very sour. and ended with 1
to 10.31, taste sweet, ii!crease nheing very gradual 1hiru;giigl-
out tlie season. The percentage of juice increased slightly
during Oc(obee and Novembier, wilth slightly grealer i, d
creaseo, d(iuring1 December and *ainuary.

Tildc( rille, Oraifc C'ouanl-- i (i criiii. Sanimples \\(w'e
received from October 7 Io .anuary 27, making S'aven-
teen in all. This is a very late orange, not hIcinii ripo
at 1he end of the study and the acid content having
'alleit only to 1.27", The acid hegan with 2.0;;i', and

























ix:

:1 .
'V

*- 0' ~- r



7 L~..i.. __

I /

41


/r*- 7

~ .3~~/i /


F__5^,/ I


i I


-~ 4


---~----------------
-1- -9- CIr--- ---------I { I--Cl --i- 1 -
fI


/ r-INE -*j AUTTL I1 ,A\ M *-U E T M Y3


I :


1
j


L' A v L CHANF ,













ended with 1.271/, the decrease being mucli slower during
January than the rest of the season. On Oct. 14 the acid
was :.ir~,., the maximum acid found during the study.
The sugar began with 4.81% and ended with 9.29; in-
creasing gradually throughout the season. The ratio of
acid to sugar began with 1 to 1.68, very sour taste, and
ended with 1 to 7.31, tart taste. The percentage of
sugar on Oct. 7 was -1.57%, tile lowest found during the
st iudy. The percentage of juice increased considerably
during the season, this being the jucies- orange of the
study. The samples up to Dec. 23 were all received I'rom
one tree, after which a change was made to another tree.

Tampa, Hillsboro c'omity-Seedlings. Samples were
received from Oct. 4 to Jan. 17, making fifteen in all.
This orange ripened during the latter part of December.
the acid falling below 1.25% on Dec.21. The acid began
with 2.13%'/ and ended with 1.16%, there being a very
constant decrease during tlhe first three months and prac-
tically constant during January. The sugar; began wit h
5.200/r and ended with 9.74' increasing gradually. The
ratio began at 1 to 2.4.5, very sour taste, and ended with
1 to 8.40, tart taste. The percentage of juice varied very
little from the average during the season.

St. Pctcrslbur P'incl ls ('Cont! --Scrldling. This orange
ripened during December, the acid falling below 1.25-.,
on Dec. 17. The acid began with 2.15"C and ended with
1.13%/, decreasing very rapidly during ()cober and much
slower during November and December. The sugar began
with 5.11% and ended with 7.67(, with a gradual in-
crease. The ratio of acid to sugar began at 1 to 2.38. a
very sour taste, and ended at 1 to 6.79, a tart taste. The
percentage of juice decreased considerably during the sea-
son.
Laikehltid. Pol'o ('oint i-Rec ceived from Oct. 3 to .Jan. 2, making thirteen in all. This
o;w!nie was not ripe at the time samples quit coming.













11e ;cid at the eid being 1.31';, allth on I)ec. 2t' the
a;iid was 1.12'.;, and Nov. 2S, 1.1s';. whiich may have
been due to careless :.amplnllig or other cause. The ;cid
legau ;ii 2.01't and e'led vilh 1.!31 The (iei(,t se v-;o
very sin;ll aniid i!t.f',; lar ,ir'ing) Ihe l ii.ic sm;l e s we'-e
reco'lhve Thi o ,! r ]e,'I1 a; t ...1 i', :n;i (n ded wilh
8. '/,, inc'easin em!lsinni(ly H throinl hotl the sasm(n. Tihe
ralio of i aid to snulIr L 0 eo'ii ai 1 to L 2.-,5, very sour ta ite.
aind elned at I to 6..7, tart tasise, tli increase being very
irregular. The pertenli ige of juice did not vary lut little
during tlihe season.

1[un(tcr, ][n aotr ( c.,ot- r edllilq. S;mpiles w ere ro-
e'ived from Oct. to Dec. 'S, makiniig tI-lve samples in
all. This orange ripe ned during" Octiber. the acid falling
below 1.25'/, on Oct. IS. The acid IbeTan at 1.43)' and
endIed at 0.73:r'C, decreasing' very rapidly during October
anil remaining' nearly constant during November and
Decemnier. The sugar began at .81 and ended at
9.24'/ increasinii graduallyy during the season. The ratio
of tnid to sugar began at 1 to 4.70, a sour taste, and
ended at I to 12.(;(. a very sweet taste. The increase was
nearly coisliant duringii thee season. The reicenlaae of
juice did not vary lperceltably from the average.
Or.lindo, OraI (ln County-- Scrllihng. Samples were re-
ceived from Oct. 1, to Dec. 4, making ten samples in all.
This orange had not ripened on Dec. 4, the acid then
being I HO',. The acid began at 1.76% and ended at
1.40A;, decreasing irregularly during the two months.
Sugar began at 7. -'i and ended at 7.',.:' increasin,
gradually. The ratio of acid to sugar began at 1 to
2.95, very sour taste, and ended at 1 to 5.66, sour iaste.
increasing irregularly. The percentage of juice did not
vary perceptibly from the average.
Bfuckingham, Lee Cotnnty-Seedlingy. A particularly
acid trees was selected for the samples. Samples were
received irregularly from Oct. 7 to Jan. 24, making ten











samples in all. The oranges ripened during the early
part of November, the acid falling below 1.25% on Nov.
8. The acid began at 2.05% and ended at 0.97%, falling
rapidly during October and slower for the rest of the sea-
son. The sugar began at 6.21% and ended at 9.84%, in-
creasing rapidly during October and much slower during
the balance of the season. The ratio of acid to sugar be-
gan at 1 to 3.03, a sour taste, and ended at 1 to 11.31, a
sweet taste. The percentage of juice in the orange de-
creased considerably during the season.

if/. n'ra. !,aic ('o':tnh/ eclH. Samples were re-
ceived from Oct 7. to Nov. 30, making nine in all. Thisi
orange w '.vs s ill green on Nov. 30, the ,cid being 1.49%.
The ecid began at :l2'; and ended at 1.49%. Sugar be-
g'n it 5.1!<, and ended ai 7.-'' The ratio of acid to
sa'r l(rb'ai) wilh I to 2.52. very sour taste, and ended
with 1 to 4.87. ,o!r taste. The percent lge of juice re-
mlinihe practiea!ly constant.
}n(,,'.p /k'c. lie(,'ah Coui',ti- Pincupplc. Samples
were Ireei\ved from Oci. 3 to TDe. making nine in all.
This ,)ora1Iie ripened in iDecember, the acid falling below
1.25'i' on Dec. 5. The acid began at 1.37%: and ended at
0.97:. Tl:e snuar began at 6.50% and ended at I
The ratio Iez'n :at 1 o 4.77,. ;i sour taste, and ended with
1 io 9.07, a sweet taste. The percentage of juice remained
practically constant.

GENERAL SUMMARY AND AVERAGES.

Averages each week of the samples that were received
during the entire season are shown in the table that fol-
lows. The nine localities were:-
Alva,Lee County-Seedling.
Clearwater, Pinellas County-Seedling (Sweet Seville.)
Tavares, Lake County-Seedling.
Lake Helen, Volusia Countmy-Seedling.
3-Or. Bul.












Vi ter iH:ven, Polk County-Seedling.

Lie ;cWeir, Marion County-Parson Brown.

PuIa (Gorda, I)eSoit County-Seedling.

Wauchula, DeSoto County-Seedling.

Ti'lenvihule, Orange County-Valencia.


The accompanying chart
ically.

The averages are:


nOt


Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Octl.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Lee.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.



Jan.
Jan.
Jan.


shows these averages graph


Total Acid
Week Total Sugar as Crystallized
Beginning (r ) Citric Acid
(per ceint.)

1912

1 5 1 92


8
13
22
29
5
12
19
26

10
17
24
31
191:


..

.......



.. .

.......
.. .


5.92
6.42
6.50
6.67
6.78
6.97
7.45
7.54
7.84
7.8 9
8.18
8.05
8.36



8.69
9.08
8.97


1.76
1.51
1.42
1.20
1.30
1.38
1.25
1.15
1.07
1.09
1.01
1.03
1.01



0.93
0.95
0.92


Ratio of Acid
to Sugar.


2.93
3.36
4.25
1 .55
5.13
5.22
5.05
5. 0
. 56
7.33
7.24
.210
7.S2
8.28


to 9.34
to 9.56
to 9.75


I












Sugar.

The average sugar content of these nine samples dur
ing the season is:

Locality. Variety Sugar

(per cent.)
Alva ................ Seedling 8.08
Lake Weir ...........Parson Brown 8.04
Lake Helen .......... Seedling 7.87
Wauchula ........... Seedling 7.66
Tavares ........... S tedling 7.60
Winner Haven ....... Seeding 7.17
C(learwater .......... Seedling 7.0S
Punta Gorda ........ Seedling 7.02
Tildenville ........... V, ioencia 6.92


A cid.

The average acid content of these nine samples during
the seasons is:

Locality. Variety Acid
(per cent.)
Tildenville ............Valencia 1.90
Tavares ............. Seedling 1.52
Winter Haven ....... Seedling 1. 0
Lake Helen .......... Seedling 1.25
Wauchula ........... Seedling 1.25
Clearwater .......... Seedling 1.13
Punta Gorda ......... Seedling 1.05
Alva ................ Seedling 1.03
Lake Weir ..........Parson Brown 0.72












Ratio of Acid to Sugar.

The average ratio of h:iese nine samples during Ihe
season is:


Locality.


Variel y


Lake Weir ..........l u'rs I4ruown
Alva ................ Seedling
Punta Gorda ....... Seedliii
LUke Helen .......... Seedling;
Clearwater ......... Seedlinl
W an clhula ........... Se(-:!ini
Winter Haven ....... .See, in:_
Tavares ............. Scl i!
Tildenville ........... .V.;Ii, ii;


Ratio of Acid
to Sug&:r.
1 It 11.32
1 to 7T.-4
1 to (.6.0
1 1o f.- ,
1 10o ;.27


1 t '3
1 to 01.):


Maturity by Trti;iltive Standard.

The earliest date at which the ratio of acid 1o su,,a"
reached 1 lo 7 for each of these nine localities was:


Localily. Varieyv.
Lake Weir ........... PI' son Brown
Alva ............... Seedling
Lake Helen .......... Seedling
Punta Gorda ........Seedling
Clearwater .......... Seedling
Wanchula ........... Seedling
Winter Haven ....... Seedling
Tavares ............. Seedling
Tildenville ........... Valencia


(cI.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Dec.
Dec.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.


Time.

S, l. i]2
2G. 1912
2S. 1912
2. 1912
7, 1912
7. 1912
17. 1913
27. 1913











For other localities:


Manatee .............Seedling Nov. 4, 1912
Buckingham ......... Seedling Nov. 22, 1912
Orange Lake ........Pineapple Dec. 5, 1012
Tampa .............. Seedling Dec. 21, 1912
St. Petersburg ....... Seedling After Dec. 31, 1912
Lakeland ............ Seedling After Jan. 2, 1913

Maturity by Field Test.

The earliest date at which the acid content fell to 1.25
per '.'i or below for each of these nine localities was:

Locality. Variety. Time.
Lake Weir ...........Parson Brown Before Oct. 1, 1912
Punta Gorda .........Seedling Oct. 24, 1912
Alva ................ Seedling Oct. 26, 1912
Wauchula ........... Seedling Oct. 30, 1912
Clearwater .......... Seedling Nov. 1, 1912
Lake Helen .......... Seedling Nov. 19, 1912
Winter Haven ....... Seedling Nov. 26, 1912
Tavares ............. Seedliiig Jan. 17, 1913
Tildenville .......... Valencia After Jan. 31, 1913

For other localities:

Manatee ............. Seedling Oct. 18, 1912
Buckingham ......... Seedling Oct. 25, 1912
Lakeland ............ Seieling Nov. 28, 1912
Orange Lake ........Pineapple Dec. 5, 1912
St. Petersburg ....... Seedling Dec. 17, 1912
Tampa .............. Seedling Dec. 21, 1912

MAXIMA AND MINIMA.

There were 2'i9 analyses of oranges made for this study.
During the same time and incident to this work, 88 mis-












ceilaneolls analyses of oranges from various localities,
were made, and also 10 analyses under the Pure Food
and D)rug Law, making a total of 357 analyses of Florida
oranges.

These 98 other analyses \Nere published in the report
of the State Chemist of Florida for 1912. Below the
waxima and minima of these 357 analyses, are give,
altl h ii is of little practical value as the analyses were
begi while some of the orn;iges were very immature and
were not continued until they had reached over ripenesK.


Juice (per cent.)......




Total Acid as Crystal-
lized Citric Acid. (per
cent.)




Total Sugar as Invert
sugar. (per cent.)


Ratio of Total
Total Sugar.


Maximum. 55.12
Alva. Seedling, on Oct. 1X. 1912.

Minimum... 26.52
Manatee, Seedling, on Dec. 13. 1912.
U Maximum. 3.09
Tilderville. Valencia, on Oct. 14. 1912.

Minimrrum.. 0.41
Lake Weir, Parson Brown. on Jan. 27,
I 191::.

( Maximum. 14.43
Sanford, Seedling, on Jan. 18. 1912.

SMVinimum... 4.55
Sarasota, Seedling, on Oct. 12, 1912.


rMaximum.. 1 to 22.31
Ad t Sanford, Parson Brown,on Ja:-. 18. 1912
Acid to
Minir.aum. .. 1 to 1.48
Tildenville, Valencia, on Oct. 14. 1912.


WEATHER CONDITIONS.

A careful study of the climatological data for tempera-
ture and rainfall for the orange section, was made, but no
conclusions could be drawn from one season only.

The study began in October after a very heavy rainfall
for the orange section for September, over 11 inches, with
decreasing amounts for each succeeding month. The fail











and winter have been unusually warm. with the warmest
January since 1,892.

It would take analyses from numerous localities for
several seasons to draw conclusions of any value in re-
gard to the influence of seasonal variations; cn the com-
position of the orange.

An attempt vwas made to correlate tie irregular increase
of the acid colmntel of the orange with the rainfall hut
without success.

'The obiervaltions oi the location. in the extreme Nonih-
ern part or the extreme Southern part of the orange sec-
tion. did not show that the difference in climate had any
effect as to the dale of maturing. The peculiarity of indi-
vidual varieties of the orange is the only influence that
was noted to have an effect on the date of maturity.

STARCH.

Numerous qualitative tests were made for starch
throughout the season, particularly on i rmanttre orange
early in the season. At no time was any starch found in
any orange.
('(NCII'SI ONS.

The conclusion thai aun he drawn from this study, while
brief, is important.

iAter a carefull examination of the data obtained and
that relating to the composition of the orange, the conciu-
sion is that a chemical standard is the only fair one for
an orange. )f course, even in applying an automatic
chemical standard, common sence will have to be used.
Anlv of the physical standards that may be suggested, such
as color of rind, color of pulp, appearance of seed, taste,
(l.. or even combination of all, could nevlir be practi-
can!ly applied with Hiiny ijstice, hvb different inspectors in











different locations, on account of the dni1erences between
man and man and the impossibility of preparing concrete
standards to which the different oranges could be com-
pared.

A careful examination of the facts in this study wiill
show the injustice of setting definite date on which to
begin shipping, or even a different date for each variety.
While there are a few well defined varieties, the large
majority of oranges in Floridt; vary from each other by
such minute physical l'i;. .-..- that it would lie impos-
sible to diffllerenliate between vlarieties, p1rlticiular'y fN r
the oran-ces were removed fri'om the trees.
Fi is evident that for scientific curi'acy and ease of
practical application, the che!,ical standard should '*ic a
simple as possible. While the ra io of acid to sugar can be
so fixed that oranges thal are evidently immature will
fall on one side and those evidently mature will fall on
the other side; it is as accurate, if nl more so. and 2 !:'!
easier lo fix percentage of :nid that will divide ioie:-e
evidently mature an:l immature inio two classes. Of
course, whatever standard, chemical o o otherwise is used.
there will always he casess where the question of 'iatnuilt
w1'! have to be left ift the standard, rather than to the
senses. It is our corclusiou that standard of 1.25 per
cent of total acid is scientifically accurate, fair and just
to tile producer and consumer like. and of the rfreatorst
ease of practical application to the orange industry.
While oranges that con tai not more than 1.25 per ern-:
of total acid will vary from sweet to rather tart in taste
and probably will have a greater variation in flavor and
taste than those with a greater ratio of acid to sugar than
1 to 7, they will always be edible and desirable fruit. Of
course, there is occasionally freak fruit that would pass
any standard adopted and still be inedible and undesira-
ble; but such eases call for the application of common
sense with the standard.











1:E '- ( -M M E NDATI (ONS.

While it is not in the province of this study to recom-
miend a law fixing the maturity of oranges, it is, however,
the object to recommend a standard for oranges to be
embodied in whatever law Florida has, or will have, on
the maturi ty of citrus fruit. It is also recommended
that the method of obtaining a fair and accurate sam-
ple, the procedure of the field test, and laboratory mn-llod
for lie determinationn of acid should be made a part of
t li lawi in order that uniform methods, terms, and defi-
nilions be lived in all cases for the enforcement of the
law by officers ohlareed with the execution of the law.



The standard reconmmended is:
Or(ntric,. nr-cl oran/r', is the ripe. mature fruit of Citrus
ordtinin L .. the juice of which contains not more than
one :md 1wenty-five Iihndredths (1.2r5) per cent by weight
or total aci.l, determined as crystallized citric acid.

R4lc'tionr onf ample.

Two samples of twelve average oranges each. fairly re-
presentative of the fruit to be tested, should be selected
by the inspector in the presence of the person in charge.
One sample should be sealed and set aside, and the field
test applied to the other. In case the person in charge
should appeal from the result of the field test, as applied
by the inspector, the duplicate, sealed sample should be
packed. sealed, and signed by the inspector, in the pre-
sence of the person in charge and two witnesses. The
person in charge and the two witnesses shall witness the
package by signing their names after that of the inspector.
The package of oranges shall then he sent by parcel post
or by prepaid express to the Division of Chemistry, of
the Florida Department of Agriculture at Tallahassee.












/ ield Test.


Apparatus au(ld Uh(emicals:
One two-quart granite-ware cup.
One wooden lemon-squeezer.
Cheese cloth strainers, 18 inches square.
One white porcelain tea-cup.
One pocket knife.
One pipette, 25 cc.
One eight t-ounce graduated bottle.
One box Farrington alkaline tablets.

Preparation of llkaline Nolution. Place 96 of the Far-
rington alkaline tablets in an eight-ounce graduated bot-
lie, lill up to eight ounce mark with pure distilled or rain
waler, stopper well, and shake frequently for i; least
hree hours before using solution. The solution will have
a pink color with a \white sediment.
Method. I'eel twelve otangts, selected as directed, cut
in half across segments, squeeze the halves with a lemon-
squeezer into the granite-ware cup1 through a piece of
cheese cloih pl aced over it. Squeeze oul the cheese coihh
gently and throw a\way. Then stir the juice in the cup
well but gentile. i inse the pilpetite with tile alknline sol-
ulion, ';llly it. then fill to mark with the alkaline solution
and empty into teai-clp. Then rinse the pipette with 1he
orange juice, and empty, iill to mark with orange juice,
and while revolving the tea-cup let the orange juice run
slowly from the pipette into the tea-cup. Mix the orange
juice and alkaline solution thoroly.

If the rangee is immantur'e iind contains more thaiI 1.25
per rc.ett of r(id( the ni.i'tue i in the tea-culp tiill he more or
less dcel)lt. orange colored.
If ihic oi,'a !;e is miiatir' (,and contains not more lhan 1.25
"- pint of a,.cd th'c !iirtl're inl the fuIp will he more or less
/,'';' ;' ft'd.( 0 '.











,Luboratory Method.

Peel Itwelve oranges, selected as directed, cut in half
across segmnents, squeeze the halves with a lemon-squeezer
into the granite-ware cup through a piece of cheese cloth
placed over it. Squeeze out the cheese clolh gently and
then throw away. Stir the juice in the cup well but
gently. Weigh 10 grams of the juice and place in a 250 cc
beaker, dilute with recently boiled distilled water to about
100 cc, add phenolpthalein and titrate with tenth normal
sodium hydrate solution. free from sodium carbonate.
:;Eacli c of tenth normal soliunm hydrate, when using ten
grams of juice, is equivalent to 0.07 per cent of total acid
as crvysallized citric acid, and the number of cc of tenth
normal sodium hydrate taken, multiplied by 0.07, giveA
the percentage by weight of total acid :;i crystallized
citric acid.













Seedling OrangesI from Ahla, Lee County.

Grown by Edward P'arkinson.

Trees 25 Years Old.


1103 Sept. 28 Oct. 2
1173 Oct. 1 S Ot. IS
1187 Oct. 18 Oct. 22
1228 Oct. 20 Oct. S3
1206 Nov. 2 Nov. 7
1280i Nov. 8 Nov. 14
10(9 Nov. 16 Nov. 20
1090 Nov. 22 Nov. 27
1308 Nov. 29 Dec. 3
1323 Dec. 6 Dec. 10
1340 Dec. 13 Dec. 21
1353 Dec. 20 Dec. 28
1363 Dec. 28 Dec. 31
-1013--
1367 Diec. 28 J0n. 13
-1913- 1913-
1367 Dee. 28 Jan. I
--1913--
1380 Jan. 4 Jan. 9
1388 Jan. 11 Jan. 14
1402 Jan. 18 Jan. 21
1421 Jan. 24 Jan. 30
Average Iec. 1, 1912 ....


*Very Sweet.


o
-.




42.81
55.12
45.02
40.57
44.33
39.12
40.80
45.81
44.79
39.13
43.60
45.22

43.07

40.46
41.65
41.02
38.58
41.35


-



(;.25 1.,5
7.05 1.44
7.12 1.30
7.67 1.21
7.45 1.15
S.02 1.13
7.70 1.13
8.14 1.07
7.82 0.99
8.23 0. S9
s.30 0.82
,.44 ( 1.S
s.20; 0.


---^


1 to 3.38 smor
1 to .4.2 S'1our
I to t .4''8 ;i
1 to C.-4T 1i

1 to 7.]0! TLir
1 to (;.S !'T;irT
1 to 7.01 0T;irt
I to 7.90[ '1;rt
I11o 9.241 Sweet
1 to 10.21 Swel
I to 9.l1 s el
1 to 9.9', Sw':t


0.84 1 to 10.321Sweet

0.75 Ito ll.60 Sweet
0.74 1to 11.54 Sweet
0.78 1jto12.09 *V. S.
0.79 I1 to12.10 S.
1.03 11to 7.84'Tlrr


|I










39

Seedling Oranges (Sweet Seville), from Clea water, Pinellua
County.

Grown by Marshal, Brandon and Bass.

A Very Slow Maturing Tree. Trees 28 Years Old.


1107 Sept. 30 Oct. 2
1133 Oct. 7 Oct. 9
1105 Oct. 15 Oct. 17
1189 Oct. 21 Oct. 23
1220 Oct. 28 Oct. 30
1205 Nov. 5 Nov. 7
1284 Nov. 12 Nov. 14
1070 Nov. 18 Nov. 20
1099 Nov. 20 Nov. 29
1310 Dec. 2 Dec. 5
1320 Dec. 9 Dec. 11
1337 Dec. 17 Dec. 20
1350 Dec. 24 Dec. 27
] --1913-
13(;) 0 Dec. 31 Jan. 2
S-1913-
1379 Jan. 7 Jan. 9
1309, Jan. 14 Jan. 17
1405 Jan. 21 .J:i. 24
1425 Jnn. 28 J;n. 31
Average Nov. 29, 1!12 ...

-Very Sour.
'Very Sweet.


43.72 5.02 1.97 to 2.55 tV. S.
49.12 5.21 1.73 1 to 3.01 Sour.
45.79 5.(4 1. 1 Ito 3.50 Sour
43.50 0.05 1.47 1 to 4.12 Sour
40.70 5.88 1. -7 1 to 4.00 Sour
39.54 (.10 1.27 1 to 4.SO Sour.
45.57 0;.94 1.15 1 to G.03 1Trt
41.45 7.11 1.19 1to 5.97 Sour
43.10 7.07 1.06 Ito 6.67 Tart
44.05 7.50 1.01 1 to 7.43 Tart
42.40 7.72 1.84 1 to 9.19 Sweet
41.5, 7.70 0.74 1 to 10.49 Sweet
43.75 7.71 0.87 l to S.80 Tart

41.16 8.31 0.90; Ito 8.OioTart

39.14 8.02 0 80 to 10.02 Sweet
33.98 8.24 0.75 1 to 10.0 Sweet
35.37 S.53 0.80 1 to 10.i00 Sweet
30.42 q8.00 0.0(8 1to 12.<5**V. S.
41.53 F 7.08 1.13 11 to f.27'Tart














Seedling Oranges from Eastl hore of Laokc HFarri, N\ er 7'ira' er.

Lake ('ounty.

Grown by The Woodle (Comipany.

Trees 5 Years. OlIl.


Z
a a,



-1912- -19(12-
1124 Oct. 4 Oct. 7
1151 Oct. 11 Oct. 14
1183 Oct. 18 Oct. 21
1217 Oct. 25 (,Ot. 28
1255 iNov. ] :v. 4
1279 Nov. 8 Nov. 11
1300 Nov. 15 Nov. 19
1084 Nov. 22 Nov. 25
1305 Nov. 29 Dec. 2
1321 Dec. 6 Dec. 9
1334 Dec. 13 Dec. 17
1344 Dec. 20 Dec. 23
1359 Dec. 27 Dec. 30
-1913- -1913-
1376 Jan. 3 Jan. 6
1380 Jan. 10 Jan. 13
1401 Jan. 17 Jan. 21
1419 Jan. 24 Jan. 30
Average Nove. 29, 1912.

fVery sour.


-C.
ac


45.2, 0.16
44.91 :. 40
43.20 7 0 :
40.03 .(; .!2
4 ,.28 7.;1
4.5.2' 7. 1

42.43 7.55
45.04 ; 7.5{;
4(.27 I7.90
4'.19 8.33
44.44 S.05
44.63 S.08
46.04 7.79

47.25 S.09
43.62 S.14
42.24 S.'34
41.2S q.5(;
44.51 7.60


C-





2.29
1 l

I .: r _
1 .71

1 .5 (

1 .6i
1. 4:
1.4'>
1 .45
1.45
1 .36
1.27
]. :!4

1.34
1. 1S
1.19
1.52


1 rto _..' V S.


1 -!.14'.Sii:
1 i 4.-4 s,-i


1 i 4.44 S.

1 In "i.:14 S nn

1 to 5. 51 Sour
1 to 5.94 Sour
1 to ..13'Tart

3 to ;.04 Tiart
1 to 6.07 Tart
1 to 7.07 Tart
Ito 7.19'Tart
1 to 5.00 Sonur














'5' edling Orenii c" from Lake Hllin. Iolu.'iat C(ouIntY.

Grown by Mace & Son.

Trees 20 Years Old.


-1912-
1114 Oct. 1
1140 Oct. .S
1172 Oct. 15
1200 Oct. 22
1230 Oct. 29
1272 Nov. 5
12-S Nov. 12
107,8 Nov. 19
1097 Nov. 2|i
1315 Dec. 3
1332 Dec. 11
1341 Dec. 17
1354 Dec. 24
-1913--
1373 Jan. 1
13S3 J;an. q
1395 Jan. 14
1400 Jan. 21
1424 Jan. 28
Average Nov. 30,

t~ery sour.


--112-
-1912


Oct. 4 44.6(i
Oct. 11 45.40
Oct. 1 ;8 44.47

Nov. 1 : 4,.'22
Nov. 8 4!!.41;
Nov. 1.) 4.57 .5
Nov. 2:, 42.:::
Nov. 29 4'.42
Dec. | 45.1!9
Dec. 17 43.12
Dec. 21 44.25
Dec. 2S 44.27
-1913 -
Jan. 4 43.95
Jan. 11 43.07
Jan. 17 39.72
Jan. 24 36.94
Jan. 31 44.89
1912 ... 44.29


'22


7.04


7.954
,5.11

7.77
(. 87
8.19


9.02
9.21
I9.;9
9.34
7.7S7


1 .s I to 2.S7
1.5o 1 to 4.1.5
1.3 i to 4.1;0
1.44 1 I ) 4.5.~;
1 .2N 1 to 5.50
1.35 1 to 5.14
1 .4] 1 to 4.S !)
1.1 I 1to (;.91l
1 .I01 I to S.3'
1.10 1 to 7.06
1.2i 1 lo G.98
0.99 1 to R.76
1.09 11 to 7.51


7-



;v. S.
Sour
Sour


Siur
Sorii
iTarl
Tart
Tart
Tart
ITart
!Tart


1 to 7.09 |Tart
'1 toll.45 Sweet
1 to 9.12 Sweet
1 to 8.08 Tart
1 to 7.47 Tart
Ilto 6.30 Tart











42


Seedling Oranges from Lake Iowrard, IWVinter Ihar n. Pol!: C(',u ty.

Grown by Boyd Brothers.

Trees 2N Years Old.


u T-
F' 5
tl 5) ~
:i % ~ i C:
i
II.
"-- :--; -_I


'-3
3 yo




-1912-
1121 Oct. 3
1139 Oct. S
117.5 Oct. 15
1195 Oct. 23
1239 Oct. 30
1271 Nov. 5
12.S7 Nov. 12
107( Nov. 19
109S Nov. 2!;
1318 Dec. 3
1331 I De. 10
1842 'e,. 17
18 o'. 26

1370 Doo. 31
-1913-
331 I Jan. 7
1396 Jan. 14
1409 Jan. 21
1420; Jnn. 2
Averi-nea Nov. :'0o,


-1912-
Oct. 7
Oct. 11
Oct. 41
Oct. 25
Nov. 2
Nov. S
Nov. 15
Nov. 22
Nov. 29)
TIec. (;
I)ec. 14
liec. 21
I ce. 20

.Tan. 3

J.T; 1. 10
Ja;). 17
Jan. 24
Jin. 31
1912 ...


45.4:;


4.192
47.20)
9. 11tl


-12. I'
4:). .


-1.34

42.20
39.0-1
39.71;
42.71
!l.,00


5. 7-4









7.21
.4.1




7.27
7i.17







7. 9

9.12


1 .1i;7

1.-47
1 .::9

1.29)
1.47
1 .41;
1.21


1 1

1 I '


3.44 >itur
:1.44 8


4.';1 ."' ir
4.*' : Sinr




T. "" +'
,l.>' or,!

p17 +J" '7


] .11
1.10)
S1.03
1.12
1 .30


Tarn
Tart
Tar;
1:'rt
< ;:r


1.17 t to, (;.T! T;,rt













I'arson Browu' Orange.e from Lake Welir, Marion Couinti.

Grown Iy Carney Investment Compiany.

Trees 12 Years Old.


-112
1101 Sept. 28
1130 Oct. 7
115,3 Oct. 14
1188 Oct. 21
1219 Oct. 28
1259 Nov. 4
1280 Nov. 11
1OC, Nov. lS
108S9 Nov. 25,
130! Dec. 2
1324 Doo. 9
1335 Dec. 1(;
1349 De1c. 23
13(4 1 Dec. 3()
-1913 f
137 7 Jan. (
13 9 Jan. 13
1405 1 Jan. 20
1423 i Jan. 27
\Aernze Nov. 28.
* Vcrt Sweet.


-1912-
Sept. 30
Oct. S
Oct. 15i
Oct. 2:3
Oct. :30
Nov. v.5
Nov. 12
Nov. 20
Nov. 27
Dec. 5
D)ec. 10
Dec. 17
Dec. 27
Dec. 31
-1913-
Jain. 9
.Tin. 1
Jan. 21
Jan. 30


43.07
41.74
44.92
35.(;9
39.4.S
44.00
45.50
4i ..-,0

41.5,9
39.329
44.1CS
19.39
41.50
42.9.S

38.74

37.52
37.24


0.54
ci.ti2
;.85
7.25




S.39
S.2S
S.24,
8 24

8.77
S.74

9.,S3 '
9.2(; [
9.74
8S.95


1912 ... 1 40.75 8 .04


0.9S
1.05
0. .7
0.79
(0. T3
0). :(;
0.si;

0.7:8
0.04
0.0;;
0. :4
0.507



0 4S
0.55
0.41
0.72


Ito i.9;7 'Trt
1 to 0.35 Tart
I to 7.87 Tart
1 to ().1s Sweet
'] to 11.92 Sweet
1 to 10.01 ISweet
i to 9.22 Sweet
1 to 9.22 Sweet
1 o 11.49 Sweet
1 to 12..4 *Y. 8.
Sto( 1,.0 '*V. S.
1 to 12.4; *V. S.
I to l3.09 *V. S.
1 to l3. ;i*V. S.

I to 17.,55V. S.
1 to 17.211 *V. S.
1 to 17.71 *V. S.
1 to 21.10!*V. S.
1 to 11.321 Sweet


4-Or. Hul.













secd1liuii Orangts from l'unta Gorda. De Soto Countl.

G rown by J. M. Weeks.

Trees 25 Years Old.


-1912- --1912-
117 Oct. 3 ct. 05 3 ).32 J4.69
1146 Oct. 10 Oct. 12 40.(j 5.15
Changed to another tree.
1180 Oct. 17 Oct. 19 41.74 I.T 7
1201 Oct. 24 Oct 2( 42.44 5.89
1245 Oct. 30 Nov. 2 44.92 6.22
1273 Nov. 7 Nov. 9 43.14 0.26
1291 Nov. 13 Nov. 1S 38.6SS (i.37
1080 Nov. 21 Nov. 23 41.02 1.83;
1301 Nov. 28 Nov. 30 45.i 1 7.28
1.320 Dec. 5 Dec. 7 48.25 7.14
1330 Dec. 12 Dec. 14 42.31 7.37
1343 Dec. 19 Dec. 21 43.34 7.31
1356 Dec. 26 Dec 28 45.37 7.47
--1913- -1913-
1372 Jan. 2 Jan. 4 43.43 7.70
1384 Jan. 9 Jan. 11 35.13 8.38
1399 Jan. 16 Jan. 18 42.06 8.56;
1410 Jan. 23 Jan. 24 33.SS '.57
1427 Jan. 30 Jan. 31 35..2 9.01
Average Dec. 1,1912 .... 41.50 7.02

tVery sour.
SVer~y s\'ttl.


N ^

Q-




1.74 1 to 2.S5 S.
1.95 Ito 2.64 fV. S.

1.46 1 to 4.02 Sour
1.24 1 to 4.75 Sour
1.04 1 to 5.9S|Sour
1.0( 11 to 5.91 Sour
1.09 1 to 5.S4 Sour
1.05 1 to 6.50i Tart
0.98 1 to 7.43 Tart
0.SC0 Ito 8.30 Tart
0.90 Ito 8.19 Tart
0.76 1 to 9.62 Sweet
0.84 1 to 8.89 Tart

0.80 1 to S.62 Nweet
0.85 1 to 9.86 Sweet
0.77 1 to 11.12 Sweet
0.7S 1 to 10.99 Sweet
0.73 1 to 12.34 *V. S.
1.05 Ilto 6.69ITart












N'rcdll iHl OIra0l(ys fror l IWa uchlt. N CDlt Soo ( !t.

Grown Iy S. 1. H [ogan.

Trees 30 Years Old.


5-01

S-1912
1113 Oct.
1142 O<(1.
1174 Oct. 1
1202 Oct. 't
1232 Oct. :
1270 Nov.
12.9 Nov. 1
1075 Nov. 2
109a Nov. ;
1316 Dec.
1329 Dec. 1
1339 )ec. 1
1348 Dec. 2
1371 Jan.
1382 Jan.
1397 Jan. 1
1408 Jan. 2
1422 Jan. 2


a-.


--1912-
Oct. 4
Oct. 11
Oct. 18
Oct. 2(i
Nov. 1
Nov. 8
Nov. 15
Nov. 22
Nov. 29
Dec. I;
Dec. 13
Dec. 20
Dec. 27
Jan. 3
Jam. 10
Jan. 17
Jan. 24
Jan. 30


Average Nov. 30, 1912 ..

tVery sour.


42.04
43.70
44.91
46.11
45.48
45.75
44. 5
44.67
47.01
49.21
44.28
42.57
35.51
43.66
40.07
37.08
37.08
37.48
4r S-


5.19
5.71
0.3(0
0.5);
',;.30
i ;.75

S7.45
I 7.05
7 *0
7.l67
S.10
8.12
4..12
10.07
(30.00
| 9.74
'10.00
1| .74


.42 I. to 4.2 Sour
1.23 1 to 5.12 Sour
1.29) Ito 5.23 Soou
1.4 1 to 4.(1 So;ur
1.33 to 5.10 Sour
1.22 1 to 5.75 ,Sonu
1.05 1 to 7.43'Tart
1.17 1 to (.5i0 Tart
! .04 1 to 7.85 Tart
0.9(; ito 8.46 Tart
0.93 1to 8.73 Tart
0 ,98 1 to 10.28 Sweet
0 16 Ito 10.42Sweet
0.9i I to 10.15 Sweet
0.97 1 to 10.31 Sweet
1 .25 11 to 0.1,3 Tart


~ I













t'ilencia Oitmt,.ff from1 'Tildenrilc, Oranr!l Countit

Grown ly L. W. Tilden.

Trees 10 Years Old.


112- 12-
1132 Oc1. 7 Oct. 9
11(;1 Oct. 14 Oct. l(
1100 Oct. 21 O 23
121S Oct. 2, Oet. 30.
1204 Nov. 4 Nov. 0
1251 Nov. 11 Nov. 1:3
1071 Nov. 18 Nov. 20
1093 Nov. 25 Nov. 2S
1311 Dec. 2 Dec. 5
1327 1 te. 9 lDe. 11
1330i Itec. 1( ]Dec. 20
1351 lDe. 2:; Dec. 27
--1913-
13(00; De.. 30 JaTn. 1
1913-
1377 Jan. 0 Jan. 9
1394 Jan. 13 Jan. 17
1404 Jn. 20 Jan. 21
1420 Jan. 27 Jan. 30
Average Dec. 2, 1912.
tVery sour.


;-- -- ^


I40.4S 4.S1 2. 8 1
42.13 4.57 3. (0 I1
43.95 5.31 2.3, !1
42. (4 5.13 2.51 1.
46.05 5.94 2.01 11
44.95 5.51 2.05 11
42.0i; G.l:11 2.1A ,1
S45.03 1;.52 t. 0 1
40.20 ;.!.1" 1 .7S 1
I 47.S7 7.i 3 1..2 1
45.01 7.31 1 ..5i 1
11.14 N .4 G 1.3i 1i
CIflhanlcl to another t
47.22 i S.01 1.48 1

4!9.i!9 S.20 1.50 1
4Z.44 i 09.01 1 .30 1
45.51 I S.78 1.3S 1I
48.70 9.29 1.27 i1
1 44.S2 I 0.92 1 .90 I1


1.4S f V.
2.24 iV.
2.04 iV.
2.!ii| V\ ?'
2.11 V.
3.2s| Sour
.1)0 Sour
4.71 Sour
4.721Sour
.O)il T'airt

5.l o So

5.47 Sonr
0.97 '|Trt
0.3' Tart
7.31 Tnar
3.04I Sour











47

secodlinU Oraungys f'romn Tampal, fillsbor.v County.

Grown bIy EngKene Holtsinger.



2
IL '





-1912- 1912-
1122 Oct. 4 O()ct. 7 42.07 ..20 2.1 Ito 2.45 V. 8.
114s Oct. 31 Oct. 14 43-.2, 5r,.4 1.3 1 to 2.71. .
1182 Oct. ]S Oct. 21 47.30t r5. 2 1 ,S to 3.]i Sour
1212 Oct. 25 Oct. 28 41.84 6.15 1. i4 Ito 3.75 Sour
12-4) Nov. I Nov. 4 42.92 .78 1 (;t; 3 to 4.0S Sour
1277 Nov. S Nov. 11 47.09 5.i0 1 .49 1 to 4.00 Soul .
12! 3 Nov. 15 No. 18 39.31 7.53 1 .55 l1 to 4.Siour
10t3 Nov-. 22 -Nov. 25 42.83 7.S 1.(3 1 to 4.s3 Somr
1304 Nov. 2' Dor. 2 44.10 7.12 1.i 1H 4.72
1322 Dec. G 1| Dec. 9 45.(C0 7.89 1.3-5 1 to 5.84 Soir
1347 D1ec. 21 Dec. 27 40.13 S.89q 1 .21 1 to 7.35:'TnLrt
1357 Dec. 27 Dec. 30 42.22 8.53 1.3A) 1 to (.5fiITart .
-1913- -1913- I
1375 Jan. 3 Jan. (i 40.10 I .!)7 1.13 1 to 7.94' Trt r
3I85 Jan. 10 Jan. 13 41.11 1.00 1.31 1 to 7.(0!Tart
1400 Jan. 17 Jan. 21 35.93 7.74 1.10 1 to 8.40 'Trt
Average Nov. 24, 1912. 42.54 7.4(t 1 1.53 1 to 4.8; iSour
fVery sour.

I *














,edrrdlinoi Oraiiiry- fr'run St. ]'rlrsbrUi, Pinrlhl." ('ounttu.

( rowi by GeUor e U0. O sbor.ii.

Trees 30 Years Old.


';3 --






-1912- -1912-- t
1130 Oct. 8 Oct. 10 48.31 .1i 2.15 ] to 2.3 1
1164 Oct. 15 Oct. 17 46..7 5.03 1.94 1to 2.5,i
1197 Oct. 22 Oct. 25 46.92 5.(i l.; ilt" 3.39t


1240 Oct. 29 Nov. 2
1269 Nov. 5 Nov. 7
1283 Nov. 12 Nov. 14
1072 Nov. 19 Nov. 21
1094 Nov. 26; Nov. 28
1313 Dec. :1 Dec. 6
1328 Dec. 10 Dec. 13
1338 Dec. 17 De'. 20
1352 Dec. 24 Dec. 28
-1913-
1368 Dec. 31 Jan. 2
Average Nov. 19, 1912.
tVery sour.


47 .tii
48.17


44.18
45.!)5
45.09
40.37
41.52

32.39
44.14


5.67 1.5 G
5.3 3 .55
6.14 1.41;
6.47 1.51;
f l.77 1.41
6i.70 1.34
6.8S 1.28
7.03 1.22
7.31 1.28

7.67 1.13
; .31 1.51


1 ro
1 to(
I to

I to
1 to
1 to
Ito
I to
jl to
1 to
1 to
11 to


.-.4 S>our

4.21 Sour
4.1 'Sour
4.p S)>ur

5.3s Sour
5.7' 40our
5.71 Sour
6.79 TFirl
4.181 Sour


;v. s.













,,'''dllinlt!s froii Lakeilaind. Pulk Cot ityi/.

Grown by G(. PI. Quainteinan e.

Trees 17 Years Old.


-1912- -1912-
Oct. 3 Oct. 4
Oct. 10 Oct. 12
Oct. 17 Oct. 19
Oct. 24 Oct. 20
Oct. 31 Nov. 2
Nov. 7 Nov. 9
Nov. 14 Nov. 18
Nov. 21 Nov. 23
Nov. 28 1 De. 3
Decc. 5 Dec. 7
Dec. 20 i Dec. 27
Dec. 27 Dec. 2S
-1913- -1913-
Jan. 2 Jan. 4


42..1
47.4.S
10.04
45.17
45..S7
4(.43
47.22
41 .S0
44.41
44.39
41.95
I 4 5.1"

I 46.16


5.13
4.87
5.09
5..52
5.53
5.95
(;.75
(;.70
7.0 5
f;..%
7.41
S8.0.

s 8.C2
I 6.52


4 "





2.01 'Ito 2.551tV. S.
2.0(; Ito 2.321 V. S.
1.71 Ito 2.9s tV. S.
1.74 1to 3.17 Sour
1.9.4 1to 2.S5 tV. S.
1.6i 1 to 3.54 Sour
S1.1l to 4.12;Sour
1. 7 1 to 4.05 Sour
1.18 1 to ;.48 Tart
1.43 1 to 4.88 Sour
S1.12 1 to (.97 Tart
1.80 1 to 6.22!Tart

1.81 1 to 6.58 Tart
S1.69 1 to 3.86 Sour


1118
1145
1181
1199
1244
1274
1290
1079
1307
1319
1340
1355

1374


Average Nov. 16, 1912.. 45.00

'Very sour.



















Grown by II. T. ienmnett.

Trees 1.0 Y:ears Old.


1,12-1 -1912-
C.j C N





1123 0,1. 3 (t. 7
1149 Oct. 10 ()t. 14
1177 (1Oct. 1N (O1l. 21
1214 ()ct. 25 ) t.
124S Nov. 1 Nov. 4
127(; Nov. S Nov. 11
1292 Nov. 15 Nov. 1
1081 Nov. 22 Nov. 25
130( Nov. 29 Dec. 3
1333 Dec. 13 De. 17
1345 1)ec. 20 Dec. 23
13(i2 Dec. 2Q I Dec. 31
Average Nov. 13, 1912.

*Very sweet.


44X.43
45.11
-45.24
4-1.,1

41.1
34.411
45.4,s
2(;45.52

43.20;
44.32
42.27


"-







i., 1! .45 1
1. S3 I 4 ,
7.24 .22
7.3: 1.1: 1
7 7.5> .(i, 1
7.70 4 02 1

S.4:1 .7 1
S..5,0 0. 50 1
2 0.7 '1
SI!.01 0l.7', 1
'0.24 0.73 1
7.4 17(1 I 1


4.711)
I 4.


.t1 71 1
to .-
to 7.1' 0 t






to 12.: V. S.
to 7.72 Tart
to 7.'7 Tart


Socdlini Orang's f'romn Minallt(r. Manat( IoiIIItYu














Beedling OranUes from Orlando. Orayc countyy .

Grown by C. W. Townsenl.

Trees 20 Years Old.


102- -1912-
1111 Oct. 1 Oct. 3 48.7 5.20
1135 Oct. 8 Oct. 10 48.30 5.2G;
11(;2 O Oct. 1 Oct. 17 43.87 5.i;4
1193 Oct. 22 Oct. 24 41.73 5.87
1231 Oct. 30 Nov. 1 45.42 (.20
1261 Nov. 5 Nov. ( 42.2; .5
1285 Nov. 13 Nov. 14 44.69 6.03 3
1074 Nov. 18 Nov. 22 38.12 7.25
1302 Nov. 29 Dec. 2 42.20 7.56
1314 Dec. 4 Dec. 0 45.92 7.93
Average Nov. 2, 1912. 43.63 16.35
;Very sour.


1.7 1 to 2.95 v. S.
.




L.ic; Ito 2.95 fV. S.
1.85 Ito 2.S4 \. S.
1.!)8 Ito 2.5 ?V. S.
1.i0 11 to 3.47 Sour
1.45 1 to 4.2S Sour
1.55 i1 to 4.25 Sour
] .(5 1 to 3.65 [Sour
1.24 '1to 5.S51Sour
1.27 ilto 5.95 Sour
1.40 Ito 5.66 Sour
7 .5S 1 to 4.02!Sour















Sedlimiy Oranqcs f from RHckin.plmni. T.ce Cosintil.

Grown by D. S. Borland.

A Particularly Acid Tree Was Selected.


1 to 3.03 Sour
1 to 3.A'i Sour
1 to .'.15 So-,ur
1 to C,.0< Tart
1 to 5.42 Sour
1 to i;. Tart
I to P. ; Tart
1 to 7.04 Tart

I] to 11.44 Sweet
.1 to jl.31'Sweet














Sicdlitn Oran/es. from Mt. Dora, Lake tCointy.
Grown by Charles Edgerton.
Trees 25 Years Old.


C is





1126 Oct. 5 Oct. 7 46.42 5.11
1152 Oct. 12 Oct. 14 52.09 5.59
1184 Oct. 19 Oct. 21 46.30 6.39
1216 Oct. 26 Oct. 28 40.34 5.36
1256 Nov. 2 Nov. 5 48.24 6.19
1278 Nov. 9 Nov. 11 49.55 I 5.99
1299 Nov. 16 Nov. 19 41.40 6.80
1082 Nov. 23 Nov. 25 48.55 7.34
1303 Nov. 30 Dec. 2 43.83 7.26
Average Nov. 2. 1912. 45.19 6.23
+Very sour.


2.03 1to 2.521V. 8.
1.74 1to 3.21 Sour
1.55 1to 4.12 Sour
1.34 1 to 4.00 Sour
1.53 1 to 4.05 Sour
1.40 1to 4.28 Sour
1.29 Ito 5.27 Sour
1.37 Ito 5.36 Sour
1.49 Ito 4.87 Sour
1.65 1to 3.781Sour


I'ineapplf (Orn !l from East Shore of Oranig Lake. Alach1w
County.

Grown by G. B. Crosby, Island Grove.


-1912- -1912-
1115 Oct. 3 Oct. 4 35.20 6.50 1.37 11 to 4.74! Sour
1143 Oct. 10 Oct. 11 44.07 6.86 1.50 1 to 4.57 Sour
1179 Oct. 17 Oct. 18 41.08 7.84 1.20 1 to 6.53 Tart
1196 Oct. 24 Oct. 25 40.89 i 7.77 1.27 1 to 6.12 Tart
1241 Oct. 31 Nov. 2 42.50 8.02 1.68 1to 4.77 Sour
1275 Nov. 7 Nov. 9 41.60 7.83 1.40 1to 5.59 Sour
1294 Nov. 14 Nov. 18 40.10 8.36 1.54 Ito 5.43 Sour
1077 Nov. 21 Nov. 23 40.77 7.88 1.34 Ito 5.88 Sour
1317 Dec. 5 Dec. 6 43.84 8.80 0.97 Ito 9.07 Sweet
Average Nov. 1, 1912.. 41.12 17.79 1.36 Ilto 5.73[Sour




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs