the number of halves
divided by two. In this score, it was considered that the crackability
of the sample was measured by the weight of the first crack; the yield,
by the total weight of kernels secured from the sample; the
marketability by the number of quarters and halves. From the use of this
schedule scores were secured ranging from 83.9 for the variety Thomas
grown in Maryland to 37.4 for the variety Huen, which is a small nut
giving relatively small kernel yield.

Analyses of the data to determine the percentage of the score that was
derived from each component showed that crackability as measured by the
weight of the kernels recovered in first crack gave an average of 54% of
the score with a range of 49 to 58 for the different samples; yield, as
measured by total weight of kernels divided by two, 31% with range of 27
to 34%; marketability measured by number of quarters divided by four 14%
with range of 10 to 22% and number of halves divided by two 1%. The
percentage of the score derived from the number of halves was so small
as to be negligible. It seemed better, therefore, to base the score on
only three elements, namely, the weight of the first crack, the total
yield of kernels and the number of quarters recovered from the sample.

On this basis the problem becomes that of deciding the weights that
should be given to these three components. The score as set up
emphasizes the crackability of the variety much more than its
marketability. This seems logical because the value of a variety is in
large part dependent upon the ease of recovery of the kernels on first
cracking. Several different combinations of the weighting of these three
components were considered and it was decided that the most logical was
to weight the elements as follows: 1) The weight of first crack in
grams. 2) The total weight of the kernels divided by two and 3) the
number of quarters recovered divided by 2. If there are halves, each
half would count as two quarters.

Table I. Average scores from 18 black walnut samples cracked by three
operators and computed by two scoring systems.

Scoring Systems[3]
--------------------
Variety Source Year I II
points points
Thomas Maryland '46 83.9 93.1
Snyder Ithaca, N. Y. (A) '46 81.