8 89.2
Ohio Maryland '46 79.5 88.9
Thomas Ithaca, N. Y. (A) '46 76.4 85.5
Norris Tennessee '45 76.1 83.9
Stambaugh Ithaca, N. Y. (A) '46 75.9 81.0
Stambaugh Ithaca, N. Y. (A) '46 74.0 83.2
Thomas Tennessee '45 71.5 79.6
Thomas Ithaca, N. Y. (B) '46 65.7 74.6
Cornell Ithaca, N. Y. (C) '46 59.3 67.6
Stabler Maryland '45 56.9 64.5
Cresco Ithaca, N. Y. (A) '46 55.8 65.2
Seedling No. 1 Geneva, N. Y. '46 52.7 62.2
Seedling No. 3 Geneva, N. Y. '46 50.6 59.0
Brown Ohio '45 49.7 59.4
Stabler Tennessee '45 47.5 51.4
Seedling No. 2 Geneva, N. Y. '46 44.4 52.2
Huen Iowa '46 37.4 44.9
Least significant difference (5%) 6.3 6.6

[Footnote 3: Score I=Weight (grams) 1st crack + Total weight (grams) +
--------------------
2

Number quarters + Number halves
--------------- -------------
4 2

Score II=Weight (grams) 1st crack +

Total weight (grams) +
--------------------
2

Number quarters
---------------
2 ]

Calculating the percentage of each component in the total score on this
basis gives crackability 48%, yield 27%, marketability 25%. This
schedule gives relatively more weight to marketability as against the
other two components. The average scores of 18 samples cracked by three
operators and calculated on both the above described schedules are given
in table I.

The table shows that the rank of the different samples was not changed
materially by using only the three components, except in a few cases in
which there were an appreciable number of halves. The Stabler has many
one-lobed nuts which increase the number of halves recovered. It is to
be noted that with both schedules the least significant difference at
the 5% level is about 6 score points.

Table II gives the score calculated by schedule II for five samples,
each cracked by six operators. The difference between operators is not
signif