METHODS OF HARVESTING GRAIN SORGHUMS^

OOP*

TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 121

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON, D. C.

LIBRARY R E; c F: I V E D

r^^ú^ n O *=lír

OF

AUGUST, 1929 U. 8. DfiuaiXuittHC of Acricnltur« |

AGRICULTURE

METHODS OF HARVESTING GRAIN SORGHUMS^

By JOHN H. MARTIN, Agronomist, Office of Cereal Crops and Diseases, Bureau of Plant Industry; L. A. REYNOLDSON, Associate Agricultural Economist, Division of Farm Management and Costs, and B. E. ROTHGEB, Assistant Marketing Specialist, Grain Division, Bureau of Agricultural Economics; and W. M. HURST, Assistant Agricultural Engineer, Division of Agricultural Engineering, Bureau of Public Roads

IN COOPERATION WITH THE KANSAS AND OKLAHOMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS

CONTENTS

Page Introduction ^ 1 The grain-sorghum crop 2

Classes of grain sorghums 3 Limitations of sorghum growing 4

Investigation of harvesting methods 5 Location and description of the area 5 Farm organization 5 Methods of harvesting 8 Comparison of harvesting methods 14 Power, labor, fuel, and oil required in

combining ___ _ 20

Page Investigation of harvesting methods—Con.

Rates of harvesting 21 Threshing harvested sorghums 23 Adjustments of machines 25 Costs of harvesting and threshing 27 Custom work with combines 30 Disposal of the grain 30 Quality and condition of grain 32

Summary __ 34

INTRODUCTION

The data presented here resulted from investigations conducted jointly by the Division of Farm Management and Costs of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, the Oíñce of Cereal Crops and Diseases of the Bureau of Plant Industry, and the Division of Agricultural Engineering of the Bureau of Public Roads, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, in cooperation with the departments of agricultural economics, agricultural engineering, and agronomy of the Kan- sas and Oklahoma Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations and the engineering experiment station of the Kansas State Agri- cultural College.^

The labor required for harvesting and threshing grain sorghums has been one of the chief objections to growing this crop. The combine (combined harvester and thresher) is the newest machine used for

1 The following men assisted in obtaining the data presented here: Roy Bainer, assistant in agricultural engineering, Kansas Engineering Experiment Station, and C; R. Enlow, formerly assistant agronomist, Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station; J. O. Ellsworth, formerly associate professor of agricultural economics, and R. W. Baird, assistant in agricultural engineering, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College; and C. D. Kinsman, formerly agricultural engineer, Division of Agricultural Engineering, Bureau of Public Roads, United States Department of Agriculture. The assistance of these men is gratefully acknowledged.

2 Some of these data have been published in the following bulletin: ELLSWORTH, J. 0., and BAIKD, R. W., THE COMBINE HARVESTER ON OKLAHOMA FARMS, 1926. Okla. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 162, 15 p. 1927.

1

2 TECHNICAL BULLETIN 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

harvesting grain sorghums. The proper adjustment and use of the combine promises to facilitate greatly the harvesting of grain sorghums where grown on an extensive scale.

The various methods used in harvesting grain sorghums in southwestern Kansas and northwestern Oklahoma were investigated by the United States Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the Kansas and Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Stations and the Kansas Engineering Experiment Station during the season of 1926. The chief purpose of the investigation was to obtain a comparison of the different methods of harvesting.

The varieties grown, the type of machines used, the quality of the threshed grain, and the cost, efficiency, and limitations of each harvesting method were determined. Most of this information was obtained from records supplied by 204 farmers and machine operators. The harvesting losses and the quality of grain obtained by different methods of harvesting and threshing were determined by field and laboratory experiments. The results here presented should serve as a guide in determining which method of harvesting grain sorghums is advisable under various sets of circumstances.

A brief survey of grain-sorghum harvesting in the same section in 1927 substantiated the conclusions drawn from the investigations of 1926.

THE GRAIN-SORGHUM CROP

The grain sorghums are grown chiefly where the climate is too dry or hot for profitable corn production. The leading area of grain-

FlGURE 1.—Oatline map of the United States, showing the distribution of grain sorghums in 1924. Each dot represents 5,000 acres

sorghum production comprises northwestern Texas, western Oklahoma, southwestern Kansas, southeastern Colorado, and northeastern New Mexico. Smaller quantities are grown in the territory surrounding this area and in Arizona and California. A map showing the distribution of grain sorghums in the United States in 1924 is presented in Figure 1.

HARYBSTIWO ôHAIW SOHOHUMS 3

The localities in which the harvesting investigations Were tnade included a part of the leading area of commercial gr&in-sorghum production. In most sections outside of this area, the grain sorghums usually are grown for feeding on the farm. Much of this feed is cut with a corn binder and fed in the bundle or as silage. Mile often is headed by hand and the unthreshed heads fed to stock either with or without previous grinding.

CLASSES OP GRAIN SORGHUMS

The commercial classes of the grain sorghums are kafir, milo, durra, feterita, darso, freed sorgo, brown kaoliang, shrock kafir, and shallu. The leading classes in production are kafir, milo, feterita, and darso, in the order named. Shrock, durra, freed sorgo, and shallu are grown less extensively, while brown kaoliang has been practically discontinued from cultivation. Kafir, milo, feterita, and darso are of sufiieient importance to be considered in the problem of harvesting

FiouBE 2.—Heads of leading yarleties of grain sorghum: 71, Blackhull kaflr; 34, Red kafir; 620, Dwarf hegari; 332, Dwarf milo; 182, feterita; 309, darso; 616, Slirock

methods. The kafirs have white, red, or pink seeds, erect heads, and juicy stalks which usually stand up well until some time after frost. The juicy stalks and green leaves often interfere with combining until after frost. All of the milos except the Straightneck variety have some recurved heads, and all have rather pithy stalks which may lodge at maturity or after frost. The milos have large soft yellow or white seeds. Feterita has large soft white seeds, erect heads, and tall rather pithy stalks which may lodge after maturity. Darso has loose erect heads, brown seeds, and juicy stalks which are not so likely to lodge. Shallu and durra shatter easily if permitted to stand until overripe, and shallu frequently lodges. Heads of some of the leading grain-sorghum varieties are shown in Figure 2.

The varieties of grain sorghums grown on the farms from which records.were obtained are shown in Table 1.

4 TECHNICALf BULLETIN 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGHICULTUKE

TABLE 1.—Varieties of grain sorghum and the number of farms, classified according to size, and acres grown of each variety in 1926

The number of reports upon which the averages are based is indicated by the figure in the small circle at the left of each average area recorded]

Farms Average area grown

Area cropped (acres)

Num- ber

Milo Kafir Other

Dwarf Yellow

Standard Yellow

Straight- neck

Standard BlackhuU

Dawn (Dwarf)

Other kafir

grain sorghums

Less than 200 41 84 35 29 15

Acres (§) 64 @ 74 (§) 99 @ 104 ® 81

Acres Acres ® 52 ® 67 0 59 ® 96 ® 106

Acres @ 28 (S) 45 @ 47 @ 50 ® 128

Acres ® 37 © 61 ® 54 ® 22 @ 550

Acres ® 23 ® 32 ® 57

Acres ® 18 ® 30 201 to 400 ® 68

® 70 401 to 600 ..... @ 26 601 to 800 801 and over __ ® 290

All farms 204 (0 58 ® 1 © 11 © 22 ® 16 ® 3 ® 1

1 Reports totaling 148 were received from 204 farms.

The milos are the most important grain sorghums in the section where these records were obtained. The 204 farmers reported an average of 70 acres of milo, 41 acres of kafir, and 1 acre of other grain sorghums. Dwarf Yellow milo is the leading variety of that class, and the Straightneck variety was second in importance. The Standard BlackhuU was the leading kafir variety, followed by Dawn (Dwarf). Other kafir varieties grown were Bishop, Red, Sunrise, and Pink. Miscellaneous grain sorghums grown included feterita, darso, and Dwarf hegari.

Of the 204 farmers, 85 grew only one variety of grain sorghums, 110 grew two, 8 grew three, and 1 grew four. Many of these farmers also grew one or more varieties of sorgo (sweet sorghum), broomcorn, and Sudan grass.

A considerable acreage of sorgo or sweet sorghum, especially of the Sourless variety, was harvested and threshed for seed. The data on sorgo harvesting are not presented in this bulletin.

LIMITATIONS OF SORGHUM GROWING

In spite of their greater productivity and their higher acre value, the grain sorghums are grown to a less extent than wheat and corn in many sections where the three crops are grown.

Wheat or other crops grown on land immediately following sorghums usually yield less than after corn, partly because the sorghums grow later in the fall and leave the soil drier and more impoverished and perhaps partly because of toxic material from sorghum. Thus the grain sorghums do not fit as well into a winter- wheat rotation as does corn. The acreage of grain sorghum per man which can be grown is less than that of wheat because of the necessity of cultivation and the labor of harvesting. The man labor required to harvest an acre of grain sorghum by the common method of hand topping is several times that required to harvest and thresh wheat with a combine. Unless the grain-sorghum crop can be harvested successfully by machine methods it can not compete with wheat except on very sandy soils where wheat is not successful.

HARVESTING GRAIN SORGHUMS 5

The average gross return per acre from grain sorghums in western Kansas and Oklahoma is greater than from either wheat or corn. If production costs can be reduced, grain sorghum should replace much of the corn now grown in this section. The amount of labor required to harvest and thresh grain sorghums by the older methods is about the same as the labor of husking and shelling corn. The combine offers a possibility of greatly reducing the labor of harvesting and threshing grain sorghum and eliminates the need for tran- sient labor during sorghum harvest.

INVESTIGATION OF HARVESTING METHODS

LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA

The methods of harvesting grain sorghums were studied, and records obtained, in Grant, Haskell, Gray, Ford, Clark, Meade, Seward, Stevens, and Morton Counties, Kans., and in Cimarrón, Texas, and Beaver Counties, Okla. The average annual precipitation in this area is about 20 inches, being greater in the eastern portion and less than 20 inches in the western portion. About three-fourths of the precipitation occurs during the growing season, April to September, inclusive. The average precipitation during the months of October and November, when most of the grain sorghums are being harvested and threshed, is only about 2 inches. The dry fall weather makes sorghum harvesting relatively simple in most seasons. The average date of the first killing frost in the fall is about October 10 to 15 in most of the area.

The soils in this area are referred to locally as '' hard land '' and sand. These two types have been classed by the United States Bureau of Chemistry and Soils as Richfield loam and Richfield sands and sandy loams. The Richfield loam is a brown silt loam which is cropped principally to wheat. Some grain sorghums are grown on this hard land, but they are not very successful in dry seasons. Wheat, corn, and sorghums, including broomcorn, are grown on the sandy-loam soils, which are intermediate ii texture between the hard lands and sands. The sandy soils are mostly too light in texture for successful wheat production and are devoted very largely to grain and forage sorghums, broomcorn, and corn. In general, wheat and combines were found on the hard lands and sorghums with little or no wheat and few combines on the sandy lands. Combines were used for harvesting grain sorghums mostly on the farms where both wheat and grain sorghums were grown.

FARM ORGANIZATION

Two general types of farming exist in the area in which the study was made, but minor differences in organization occur on many of the farms of each type. The soil type largely determined the type of farming followed in different localities.

Farms located entirely on the heavy soils grow little if any grain sorghum, except in years when wheat fails, when sorghum is grown as a catch crop. Farms on the sandy land usually do not produce wheat. Many farms have both heavy and sandy soils, or else sandy- loam soils, and produce both wheat and grain sorghums yearly on

6 s. DEPT. OF AGEICULTUEE

varying acreages. It was from these farms that most of the information was obtained.

For the area as a whole, wheat is the most important crop, followed by grain sorghums and broomcorn. Livestock, except on the larger farms, is relatively unimportant.

The principal crops and the average acres of each on farms with different numbers of crop acres are shown in Table 2.

For most of the farms the cropping system is closely related to wheat. In favorable years more wheat and less grain sorghum are grown. In years when part of the wheat is destroyed by drought or soil blowing during the fall, winter, or spring, more grain sorghums are grown, as they are planted on the abandoned wheat fields. Of the total farms studied there were 48, or about 24 per cent, on which no wheat was grown. These were the farms located on sandy land subject to soil blowing. All but two of these farms on which wheat was not grown had less than 400 acres in crops.

TABLE 2.- -Acreages of different crops on farms of different sizes in southwestern Kansas and northwestern Oklahoma in 1926

Farms Crop or farm acreage in—

Area cropped (acres) Num- ber

Winter wheat Milo Kafir

other grain sor-

ghums

Total grain sor-

ghum

Sorgo and

Sudan grass

Broom- corn

Less than 200 — ...- . 41 - 84

35 . 29

15

Acres 17

158 312 471 739

Acres 64 64 76 96 61

Acres 17 39 36 33

144

Acres 1

2 3

Acres 82

103 114 132 205

Acres 13 13 18 22 38

Acres 13

201 to 400 - - ..- 10 401 to 600 11 601 to 800 - 3 ROl and ovp.r

Total or avfirnffñ _ 204 243 70 41 1 112 17 9

Farms Crop or farm acr eage in- Num- ber of farms not

raising wheat

Area cropped (acres) Num- ber Corn

Miscel- laneous crops

Total other crops

Total other crop land

Total crop land

1

Area not

cropped

Total area of farms

Less than 200 41 84 35 29 15

Acres 13 12 21 25 61

Acres 1 1 5

13 4

Acres 40 36 55 63

103

Acres

n 1 16

79

Acres 139 297 492 682

1,126

Acres 121 174 161 365 358

Acres 260 471 653

1,047 1,484

31 201 to 400 15 401 to 600 1 601 to 800 801 and over _ _. i

Total or average 204 19 4 1

49 10 414 202 616 48

About 59 per cent of the cropped land of all farms, or an average of 243 acres per farm, was in wheat, the most important cash enterprise in the area. Grain sorghums occupied 27 per cent of the crop acreage, or an area of 112 acres per farm. This crop is the principal cash enterprise on many of the farms located entirely on the sandy land. For practically all farms, however, this crop furnishes the bulk


of the grain fed to livestock. In addition to these two important crops which occupied all but 14 per cent of the crop land there was an average of 19 acres of corn, used almost entirely for feed, 17 acres of sorgo and Sudan grass cut for hay, 9 acres of broomcorn, a cash crop grown on many of the smaller sandy-land farms, and 4 acres of miscellaneous crops. Some of the larger farms had summer fallow on a part of the crop land, but the practice of summer fallowing is not common among farmers of this area.

On those farms where the grain-sorghum crop was cut with a combine, this machine was being used to harvest nearly all of the other crops for which it was practicable to use it. As combines are purchased primarily to harvest the wheat crop, there were none on farms where wheat was not grown.

LIVESTOCK

The livestock enterprise on most farms visited, except those in the two larger crop-area groups, is relatively unimportant as compared with wheat, grain sorghum, and broomcorn. There were three farms that had no livestock, as the operators and their families moved to town or spent the winter in other localities. Table 3 shows the kind and number of livestock found on the farms with différent numbers of crop acres.

TABLE 3.- -Livestock on farms with different acreages in crops in southwestern Kansas and northwestern Oklahoma

Farms Horses Cattle

Hogs Chick- ens

Farms having no livestock Area cropped (acres) Num-

ber Work Other Beef Milk cows Young

Less than 200 _ 41 84 35 29 15

7 9

11 12 13

1 1 1 3 1

T 6 9

40

3 4 5 4 3

2 3 4 6 2

3 5 6

15 15

113 133 191 142 209

201 to 400 1 401 to 600 - 601 to 800 1 801 and over 1

Total or average — 204 10 1 7 4 3 7 146 3

The number of livestock for all farms increased gradually as the size of the farm increased, except for the number of cattle on the larger farms. This group of farms had nearly as many cattle as all the others combined. While the average per farm is high, however, most of these cattle were in a few herds on farms where large acreages of pasture were available.

There were five farms on which there were no horses. These farms were operated entirely by mechanical power. Four other farms had only one team of work horses, depending on tractors and autotrucks for the bulk of the power. The largest number of work horses on any single farm was 35 head.

MECHANICAL POWER

The number of tractors and trucks used on these farms to furnish mechanical power for different operations and the number of farms having neither are shown in Table 4.

8 TECHNICAL BULLETIN" 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

TABLE 4.—Mechanical power on farms of different sizes in southwestern Kansas and northwestern Oklahoma

Farms Tractor (drawbar horsepower) Size of truck Farms wUhout Farms with

more than 1

Area cropped (acres) Num- ber

12 and less

15 and 16

18,20, and 22

1 ton and less

Over Iton Tractor Truck Tractor Truck

Less than 200 41 84

2 13 14 11 4

1 13 11 17 9

3 6

3 15 11 7

13

i" 1 4

38 58 10 4 2

38 69 23 19

6

201 to400._

6 15

1

401 to 600 35 29 15

601 to 800 1 801 and over

Total

13

204 44 51 13 49 6 112 155 14 5

1 One farm had 3.

Only three of the smaller farms had a tractor, three had a truck, and comparatively few operators in the next-sized group had a tractor or a truck. A tractor is not necessary or practical on these sandy-land farms. No wheat is grown, much of the land is too sandy to plow, and the tractor wheels could not obtain sufficient traction for pulling a heavy load on this land. Ownership of trucks also is limited on these farms, as there is not enough hauling to warrant their purchase, and the roads are such that hauling by team is more economical. On two of the larger hard-land farms where considerable wheat was grown three tractors were owned, and on one farm there were three trucks. On nine farms where both tractors and trucks were owned little or no work was done with horses. Five had no horses and four had only one team.

MAN LABOR

All fanners who produced wheat used hired labor at harvest time, and practically every farmer had hired labor to help harvest and thresh the grain-sorghum crop. The farms on which broomcorn was grown employed a larger number of hired hands at harvest time than farms raising any other crop. To thresh and bale broomcorn for market with a large outfit requires a crew of 15 to 20 men.

The majority of farms were operated by one man with the help of hired labor during the spring and fall. A few were operated with the help of family labor plus a little hired help during the harvest season. There were five farms on which no hired labor was employed during the year and six farms on which there was no hired or family labor, the operator doing all the work.

Labor was performed for only part of the year on only three farms, and these were the farms that had no livestock.

METHODS OF HARVESTING

The methods of harvesting grain sorghums in the area studied included hand heading, row binding, cutting with the grain header, combining, and such miscellaneous methods as cutting with the wagon- box header and the grain binder. The method followed depended chiefly upon the expected disposal of the crop and upon the equipment available.

Records of harvesting and threshing were obtained from 204 farmers. Only 119 of these followed only one method of harvesting their grain

HABVBSTIIÍG GBAIif SOEQHUMS 9

sorghums. Of the remainder, 73 used two methods and 12 used three methods. Records thus were obtained from 301 harvesting operations.

HAND HEADING

FiouEE 3.—Knife used for beading grain sorghums by hand

The most common method of harvesting grain sorghums, especially mile, in the area studied was to cut the heads from the stalks with

FIGURE 4.—Heading grain sorghums by hand with a crew of three men and teams

a knife and throw the heads in a wagon. This method is called hand heading, topping, or picking. The type of knife generally used is illustrated in Figure 3. The wagons, equipped with a box and

FIGURE 5.—A rick of milo headed by hand

"bump board," or simply with header barges or hay racks, were drawn along the rows. A view of hand heading is shown in Figure 4. This method is somewhat comparable to husking corn from

43094—29 2

10 TECHNICAL BTTLLETIK 121, U. S. DEPT, OF AGEIOULTUBE

standing stalks. The head was grasped in one hand, and with the knife in the other hand the stalk was severed at a distance of 2 to 7 inches below the base of the head. Usually several heads were cut

FiauBE 6.—Harvesting kaflr with a row binder

Two off and held in the hand before being thrown into the wagon, rows usually were harvested in one trip across a field.

The loads of heads were pitched on the ground in long narrow ricks about 4 to 7 feet wide at the base and 3 to 4 feet or more in

r"' •

^J jTW-

H wmm )Êt .> J^Sê^MÊÊÊ^ÊÊÊ^ J

HI ̂ HE S^SHUIIí FiouEE 7.—Heading bundles of kaflr with a "cheese knife"

height. The ricks were left without protection, to dry until threshed. A nek of hand-headed mile is shown in Figure 5.

HARVESTING GBAIN SOEGHUMS 11

EOW BINDING

The use of the row binder (corn binder) for harvesting grain sorghum to be threshed was confined chiefly to kafir the stover of which was desired for feed. Much of the kafir and other grain sorghums harvested with the row binder is fed in the bundle. Grain sorghums cut with the row binder are set in shocks similar to corn shocks. A row binder in operation is shown in Figure 6.

Several methods of threshing grain sorghums cut with the row binder are practiced. Sometimes the whole bundles are fed into the thresher. At other times the head ends of the bundles are pushed into the thresher cylinder and held there until the grain is threshed off, when the butts of the bundles are withdrawn and thrown aside.

Sometimes the bundles are placed on a block and the heads chopped off with an ax or a heavy knife. A more common method is the use of the so-called "cheese knife," shown in Figure 7, which consists of a long blade and handle mounted on the side of a wagon. The wagon is driven beside the shock, and the bundles are placed under

FiQUEE 8.—Heading and threshing bound kaflr with a combine equipped with a yertical sickle attachment

the knife and the heads sheared off by a man standing in the wagon who pushes down the handle. The severed heads are hauled directly to the thresher or are piled in ricks before being threshed.

Some combines are provided with special sickles which operate with the sections in a vertical position for use in cutting the heads from sorghum bundles. (Fig. 8.) The sorghum bundles are held across the sickle, and the severed heads fall on the combine platform canvas, which carries them to the cylinder. Combines equipped with this sickle are pulled up to a sorghum shock, the heads are cut off and threshed, and the stover reshocked.

^ ■-■■■ . ■ ; Ï ■. : •:■■■ ñí!.-':mi MACHINE HEADING

The grain header has been used for harvesting grain sorghums, especially kafir, for many years. The heads are cut off and elevated

12 TEOHÍTIOAL BULLETIN 121, U. S. DBPT. OF AöKICTTLTUKE

into the barge and then hauled, dumped in ricks, and left until ready to thresh. The operation of curing and threshing sorghums cut with the header is the same as when they are cut by hand, except that there is more stalk to be handled. Eight to twelve inches of stalk usually are cut off with the heads. The use of the header in harvesting grain sorghums is illustrated in Figures 9 and 10.

.

^ i 4é Mffi ^ ë ^^ ¡KS^Ë ̂ ^ m ̂ Ï- *' > i^r if^^

k^'7 ̂ ,-:^^ / '.^ «»->Aíj '''. *^,«..

'■M ■^ fi! m Jk «MIB'WOTSSIB^BHIk-^ ■^^■^™ sssr ^É 1^

^.«»,%l-Ç#,-i,- ' i- -1- U V V .-.

^■^-fgff""-'^^ ft'JP.'r u ■>. í T'-wS .jt^í^ -^*a i^^ ■ ,■ ■ ■ • t í^ ■-t\ ■ ^ ■. j-

■SSJBIK K' ■HK«^ ' •V»' áj^gg&l ^¡ -•-rigí 1k m- , 1 .A \'

FisuBE 9.—Harvesting kafir with a grain lieader

FIOCBE 10.—A labor-saving method of unloading headed milo from a header barge. A slingis placed In the bottom of the barge and attached to the low side. In unloading, a horse is hitched to the free end of the sling, and the heads are rolled to the ground

COMBINING

The most recent development in the harvesting of grain sorghums has been the use of the combine. It had been thought that the combine would not be practicable, because the sorghum stalks contain so much moisture when the grain reaches maturity. A few farmers began using the combine for harvesting grain sorghums about seven years ago, and its use is increasing rapidly in spite of certain mechanical limitations of the machine in harvesting this crop and the disadvantages in handling or storing damp grain. (Fig. 11.)

HABVESTIKG GRAIN SOBGHUMS 13

There was little increased use of the combine on grain sorghums in 1927, because of the tallness and late maturity of the crop.

Most of the 53 combines studied had been used only one season. Of the 53 combines of which the year of purchase was mentioned, 38 were purchased in 1926, 4 in 1925, 10 in 1924, and 1 in 1921.

Little difficulty was encountered from side draft on combines even in harvesting heavy-stalked grain sorghums. Of 48 operators reporting, 33 observed no side draft. It has been found that the side draft of combines is practically eliminated when a grain tank is attached or a grain wagon pulled along by the combine.

All of the combines in the area studied were purchased for harvesting wheat. This made the interest, depreciation, and repair charges on the combine difficult if not impossible to allocate propor- tionately against the wheat and the grain sorghums. There was more breakage of equipment such as sprockets, belts, drive chains, and slats in harvesting grain sorghums than in cutting wheat, but these parts may have become badly worn during wheat harvest.

FiOüBE 11.—Harvesting milo with a combine

The corrugated surface of fields of lister-planted sorghums undoubt- edly caused greater strains on the combines than did the smoother wheat •fields. More than four-fifths of the operators considered the wear and tear on combines greater in harvesting sorghums than in harvesting wheat; the average estimate indicated that it was about 80 per cent greater.

MISCELLANEOUS METHODS

The oldest method of harvesting grain sorghums is to cut the stalks with a corn knife or similar large blade. This is the usual harvesting method in Africa and China, where labor is cheap, but it is not practiced in the United States except in very small fields where the purchase of harvesting machinery would not be economical. Several special grain-sorghum headers have been devised, and a few are in use. These headers are suitable only for an erect crop Uke kafir, and for best results the plants should be of uniform height. Their chief disadvantage is that they have no other uses and thus

14 TECHNICAL BUULETIN 121, XJ. S. DEPT. OF AGBICULTUEE

require a considerable investment for a single operation. Difficulty often is encountered in harvesting a crop with a two-row header which was planted with a one-row planter because of the variable distance between rows. A one-row kafir header attached to a wagon box is shown in Figure 12.

This machine costs about $75 and may prove to be more economical for harvesting kafir than heading by hand. This machine places a severe strain on the wagon.

FIOURE 12.—A one-row kaOr header attached to a wagon box

The grain binder is suitable for harvesting only light and'short crops of grain sorghum.

COMPARISON OF HARVESTING METHODS

The various applications and hmitations of the different methods of harvesting are discussed here. Following these data the economic and mechanical problems are considered.

ACREAGE HARVESTED

Records were obtained as to the methods used in harvesting 21,199 acres of grain sorghum in 1926. Of this acreage, 4,160 acres (19.6 per cent) were harvested with combines, 7,546 acres (35.6 per cent) with headers, 465 acres (2.2 per cent) with row binders, and 9,028 acres (42.6 per cent) by hand. These acreages do not represent true proportions of the methods used, as records of too many combines and too few row binders were obtained in comparison with the total number used in the area. Probably not more than 5 per cent of the grain sorghum in the area visited was cut with combines in 1926. The records show that hand heading is the most common method of harvesting and that cutting with the grain header is second in popularity.


The number of operators and the average acreage harvested by each method are shown in Table 5. The largest average acreage per farm was cut with the header and the smallest acreages with the row binder. The average acreages harvested with the combine and by hand were about the same. These data show that with the exception of row binding the method of harvesting used did not depend partic- ularly upon the acreage of grain sorghum to be harvested and that the chief reason for using the combine was not because of large acreages to be harvested. In 1927, however, a number of farmers cut as much as 160 acres of grain sorghum with a single combine, and one farmer cut 1,280 acres with four combines.

TABLE 5.—Relation between the method and the time of harvesting grain sorghums

Records ob-

tained

Crops harvested

Average acres

Acre yield

Average number of days—

Method of harvesting Before frost

After frost

Before and after frost

Of harvesting Lost

Total Net time

Combine 64 98 15

148

Number 33 47 14 72

Number 24 33

1 23

Number 7

18

53'

66 77 31 61

Bushels 16 16 14 20

4 6 5

16

3 5 5

14

1 Header. _ 1 Row binder.- Hand headed - 2

TIME OF HARVESTING

The relation of the method to the time of harvesting is shown in Table 5. About half of the fields harvested with the combine, the header, and by hand, and all but 1 of the 15 fields cut with the row binder, were cut before the frost on October 23,1926. The first frosts in both 1926 and 1927 were somewhat later than the average for the area. Many of the combine operators did not wait until after frost to harvest the grain-sorghum crop, but they did not start the combines until harvesting by other methods was well under way. Milo could be cut with the combine earlier than kafir because the stalks were drier.

VARIETIES

The methods of harvesting the different varieties of grain sorghum are shown in Table 6. About two-thirds of the growers of Dwarf and Standard milo harvested the crop by hand. Of the 31 growers of Straightneck milo, 13 (about 40 per cent) harvested this crop by hand. It is evident that kafir is well adapted to machine harvesting, because only 24 of the 119 fields were cut by hand. More kafir than milo was cut with the row binder, because the fodder was desired for feed and also because milo makes irregular bundles.

LODGING

The farmers were requested to name the classes of grain sorghum in the order of lodging. Most of the growers of milo and feterita indicated that these lodged badly, while kafir, hegari, and durra were reported as being less likely to lodge. Lodging probably is the most serious handicap to machine harvesting of grain sorghums. A frost followed by a high wind frequently breaks down the stalks so badly that hand heading is the only feasible method.


TABLE 6.—Methods of harvesting different varieties of grain sorghum

[The number of reports upon which the averages are based is indicated by the figure in the small circle at the left of each average area recorded]

Records obtained

64 98 15

148

Average area harvested

Method of harvesting

Milo * Kafir Other grain sor-

ghums

Average

Dwarf Yellow

Stand- ard

Yellow Straight-

neck Black- hull

Dawn (Dwarf)

Other kafir

of all types grown

Combine Acres ® 73 (§) 73 0 40 (1) 71

Acres ® 18 ® 60

Acres ® 89 @ 55

0

Acres (^ 59 0 69 0 35 0 29

Acres © 47 @ 115 0 23 0 36

Acres Acres Acres 65

Header _ © 78 © 25 0 12

0 30 77 Row binder... 31 Hand headed 0 66 ® 46 0 30 61

1 Reports of hand heading totaled 105.

SHATTERING

Few growers of milo reported that it shattered worse than other grain sorghums, but many of the kafir growers reported kafir first in shattering, and all growers reporting stated that feterita shattered worse than other sorghums. No reports were received regarding the shattering of durra and shallu, which are known to shatter very easily but which are seldom grown.

No appreciable shattering was observed in 1926. As a rule, milo will not suffer losses from shattering. Kafir will shatter if left standing too long after the grain is mature or after a hard frost.

HEIGHT OF CROP

Grain-sorghum crops varying from 1J^ to 7 feet in height were being harvested with headers and combines. Grain sorghums taller than 7 feet are too tall for the combine and header and usually are cut with a row binder. Data obtained regarding the height of stubble were rather indefinite, but in general the hand cutting left the highest stubble; the header the next highest; the combine the next highest; and the row binder the shortest stubble. The maximum height of cutting with headers and combines is about 48 inches after extra parts are added or readjustments made. Most sorghum fields were cut at a height of 2 to 3 feet.

Dawn (Dwarf) and Standard Blackhull kafir and Dwarf milo seldom are too tall to cut with headers and combines, but Standard feterita. Standard milo, and Sunrise kafir frequent^ are too tall to be harvested with these machines.

HARVESTING LOSSES

The average losses sustained in harvesting kafir and milo with combines and headers are shown in Table 7 and graphically in Figure 13. Loss counts were made in 107 fields. The average losses are higher with milo than with kafir, and higher with the combine than

HAEVESTING GRAII^- SORGHUMS 17

^s s¿/

with the header. The losses in combining kafir varied from 1 to 33 per cent and in heading kafir from 1 to 26 per cent. The loss in combining Dwarf and Standard milo varied from 4 to 51 per cent, and in heading these varieties it varied from 0.1 to 45 per cent. Corresponding ranges in losses in harvesting Straightneck milo were 5 to 50 per cent with combines and 7 to 27 //^^j<esr///<^ za^s-s r^^êc^/)/rJ per cent with headers.

The range in these losses shows that clean harvesting is possible with good operation under favorable conditions. The highest losses were in fields in which the crop had lodged badly or was very uneven in height. Three sources of loss are shown in Table 7. almost negligible but

/r,^^//z /2rî5?/%Ai»4ç/

FIGURE 13.—Average percentage losses of grain in harvesting kafir and milo with headers and combines

The losses from short stalks in combining are are slightly higher after the header because

of higher cutting. Considerable losses were sustained on account of lodged milo stalks. The milo cut with the header was cut earlier than that cut with the combine and, consequently, before so much of the crop had lodged.

TABLE 7.—Average losses in harvesting kafir and milo wiih combines and headers, showing losses due to short stalks, lodged stalks, and heads cut and dropped

Method of harvesting

Num- ber of fields

Harvesting losses of heads per acre

Per- Crop

Short stalks

Lodged stalks

Heads cut and dropped

Total

centage of loss

Kafir Combine . 30 18

1 28. 21

4 4

Pounds 9

17 16

9 21

4 30

Pounds 32 39

0 102 27 35 56

Pounds 134 69 58

285 225 78

221

Pounds 175 125

74 396 273 117 307

10.9 Do Header.

Wagcn-box header. Combine

6.4 Do .. . .. 3.5

Dwarf and Standard milo 25.9 Do _ Header _

Combine 13.5

straightneck milo. 9.9 Do Header 15.5

The greatest losses resulted from heads dropped on the ground after they were cut off. Most of these heads were jarred off the cutter bar, guards, or front of the canvas and dropped in front of the sickle. The bottom of the reel usually was too high to push many of the heads cut from the short stalks back on the canvas, because the reel was set high to catch the tall heads. Another important loss results from heads thrown up by the reel. When a sorghum head with its attached stalk was caught by a reel slat below the center of gravity after being cut off it usually was lifted from the platform. Most of these heads fell back upon the platform later,

43094—29 3


but many were carried into the reel and finally thrown out over the front or back of the platform.

Properly adjusted combines and headers will harvest dwarf, erect uniform grain sorghums with very little loss. Grain sorghums well suited to machine harvesting are now being developed.

The few loss counts that were made after harvesting with a row binder did not warrant tabulation. The losses from binding usually are small, most of the loose heads being found where the bundles were dropped by the binder or where the shocks had stood. No counts were made on fields cut by hand, as the losses were practically negligible. The heads left after hand harvesting were those that were considered either too green or too small to be worth gathering. Only an occasional good head was left. Hand heading when hired was paid for by the day rather than by the bushel or acre, so there was no incentive to do other than a clean job of harvesting by hand.

GLEANING

Replies were received from 41 combine operators and 58 header operators in regard to gleaning their fields (picking up heads left after harvesting). As shown in Table 8, 11 combine operators and 26 header operators picked up the loose heads in the harvested fields. About 2.5 bushels per acre were gleaned at the rate of 13 bushels per day per man and team. The value of the grain sorghum saved was somewhat more than the cost of the labor of gathering. Many of the fields that were not gleaned were pastured after harvest. Only slightly more grain was picked up from the combined than from the headed fields. Many of the heads that had been cut by the combine were crushed on the ground by the tractor or combine wheels and could not be picked up.

TABLE 8.—-Number of fields of grain sorghum gleaned and not gleaned after harvest ing with headers and combines, showing the time required and results of gleaning

Fields not

gleaned

Gleaned fields

Method of harvesting Number Average

Acre yield of grain

Time spent Results per day

Header___ __ ._ __ 32 30

Acres 26 80 11 62

Bushels 2.3 2.5

Days 14 12

Acres 5.7 5.2

Bushels 13

Combine __ 13

UTILIZATION OF THE STUBBLE

The number of farmers who pastured the stubble or stover from the grain-sorghum crop and the estimated value of the forage are shown in Table 9. About four-fifths of the fields were used as pasture for livestock. The average estimated value of grain sorghum stover for feed was less than $1 per acre. The value probably would have been higher if more livestock had been available. The value of the stover in kafir and milo fields headed by hand was less than in fields harvested with a combine or header, because less grain was left in the fields headed by hand.

HARVESTI^Í-G GRAIN" SORGHUMS 19

TABLE 9.—Utilization and value of sorghum stuhhle {including grain left)

Method of harvesting Records obtained

Disposition

Average acres

Value per acrei

Crop

Pastured Not pastured

Milo_ __. Combine ^ 31 31 39 41

116 21

26 26 33 33 93 18

5 5 6 8

23 3

75 55 71 96 67 31

$1.04 .99 Kafir . do.- _.

Milo Header 1 08 Kafir do .91 Milo _. Hand .73 Kafir -.-do ... 67

ÍOwners' estimates. POWER AND LABOR

The power and labor used on the combines of different sizes is shown in Table 10. The labor required for all methods of harvesting is shown later under ^^Rates of harvesting/^ in Table 14. Five of the combines were drawn by 10 horses or mules each. Seven of the 42 tractor-drawn combines were pulled with tractors of 12 drawbar horsepower or less. The predominating size of tractor was 15 horsepower. Tractors larger than this were advantageous only on hilly or sandy land. A few combines drawn by both horses and a tractor were observed in the area.

TABLE 10.—Power and labor used on combines of different sizes

Size of combine

Rec- ords ob-

tained

Size of tractor

Horses

Man iabor used

Source of power

12 and less 15 to 16 18 to 30

Combine operator

Tractor operator

Drivers i

Paid unpaid Paid Unpaid

Feet Í 12

15 [ 16

Í ^2 12 15 15 15 16 16 16

Number 2 1 2

1 4 1

12 2 5

10 7

Draw- bar

horsepower

Draw- bar

horsepower

Draw- bar

horsepower Number

10 10 10

1 1 1

I 1 9 2 4

10 7

1 Horse -_. 1 , 1

1 ......

1 4 5 4

1 2 1

11 1 1 5 3

4

Tractor 12 3 2

5 1 10

7

1 All of the drivers were paid employees.

OPINIONS OF OPERATORS

The opinions of farmers or operators in regard to the comparative merits of different methods of harvesting were reported. Replies were received from 37 regarding the combine from all standpoints as compared with other machines for harvesting grain sorghums. Of these, 21 considered the combine better than all other methods, and 11 reported that the combine was better than the header. Five of the 24 header operators reporting believed the header wâs superior to the combine, and 6 reported them equal, while 13 reported that the header was poorer than the combine for harvesting grain sorghums.

20 TECHNICAL BULLETIN 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTUEE

The chief advantage of the combine over other methods was considered to be in time and labor saved. In general the combine was considered no better, or somewhat poorer, than other methods in the quantity of grain saved.

POWER, LABOR, FUEL, AND OIL REQUIRED IN COMBINING

The number of horses or the size of tractor to pull the combines, the number of men required to operate the combines, and the average quantity of fuel and oil used both in tractors and in auxiliary engines were determined from the reports of 47 combine operators.

Four of the five horse-drawn combines were operated by the one man who also drove the horses. The remaining horse-drawn machines and all of the tractor-drawn machines on which records were obtained were operated b}^ crews of two men. A few 8-foot and 10-foot power take-off combines in the vicinity were operated by one man each. Most of the combine operators and more than half of the tractor operators consisted of unpaid family labor.

FUEL AND OIL

The average number of gallons of fuel (gasoline and kerosene) used in the tractor and combine engines while harvesting grain sorghums is shown in Table 11 for three sizes of combines. Gasoline was the fuel used in all combine engines and in about half of the tractors. The remaining tractors burned kerosene.

The horse-drawn combines required slightly more fuel per acre than the tractor-drawn machines, probably because the speed of travel was less. About a gallon of fuel per acre was required for the tractor and 0.6 gallon for the combine engine, or a total of slightly more than 1.6 gallons of fuel per acre. The quantity of fuel used per acre varied considerably, depending chiefly upon the size and condition of the engines and the rate of travel.

TABLE 11.—Average fuel consumption hy horse-drawn and tractor-drawn combines and tractors used in harvesting grain sorghums

T3

a

o to

C3 cu

<

.2

<

Average fuel consumed

Kind and size

Combine (gasoline)

Tractor Both motors

'S o

EH

o

'S

o

q?

©

O

fe M

o

2

o fe 'S o

es

© PH

m

Horse drawn: 12 feet 2

1 2

Acres 20

210 95

Bush- els

15 14 28

Gal- lons

25 170

70

Gal- lons 1.25 .81

74

Gal- lons

0.083 .058 .026

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

Gal- lons

15 feet 16 feet

Tractor drawn: 12 feet 15 feet 16 feet

5 15 22

70 77 69

13 16 15

40 45 48

.57

.58

.70

.044

.036

.047

15 57 25

42 22 42

57 79 67

0.81 1.03 .97

0.062 .064 .065

97 124 115

1.4 1.6 1.7

0.1 .1 .1

Total or average ^ 42 72 15 46 .64 .043 35 35 70 .97 .065 116 1.6 .1

1 Tractor-drawn combines.


The quantities of lubricating oil used are shown in Table 12. About 0.1 gallon of oil per acre was required by both engines of the tractor-drawn combines.

TABLE 12.—Average consumption of lubricating oil by horse-drawn and tractor- drawn combines and tractors used in harvesting grain sorghums

1

Average lubricating oil consumed

Combine Tractor Both motors

Kind and size

■^ £ •Ö % 'S ?

1 1 o C3 1 .a

3 Ö CS

1 « 1 1 CJ ^ (H 4f -M <o >• o O © S o © © o © © « < < H P4 P4 H P4 ^ EH P4 A^

Bush- Gal- Gal- Gal- Gal- Gal- öai- Gal- r?a/- Gal- Horse drawn: Acres els lons lons lons lons lons lons lons /ÖW« lons

12 feet 2 1 2

20 210 95

15 14 28

2 13

5

0.10 .06 .05

0.007 .004 .002

2 13

5

0.10 .06 .05

0.007 15 feet .004 16 feet .... 002

Tractor drawn.• 12 feet 5

15 22

70 77 69

13 16 15

3 2 4

.04

.03

.06

.003

.002

.004

4 3 4

.06

.04

.06

.005

.003

.004

7 5 8

.10

.07

.12

.008 15 feet .005 16 feet .008

Total or average L. 42 72 15 3 .04 .003 3 .04 .003 7 .08 .006

1 Tractor-drawn combines. RATES OF HARVESTING

The rates of cutting grain sorghums by machines of different types and sizes are shown in Table 12. The 10-foot combines cut 3 rows per swath, the 13-foot and 15-foot combines and 12-foot headers 3 or 4 rows, and 16-foot combines 4 or 5 rows per swath. The average number of rows cut and the average spacing of rows also are shown in Table 13. The row binders cut 1 row or an average width of swath of 3.5 feet. The spacing of rows in the combined fields varied above and below the standard width of 3.5 feet. Nearly all fields were planted with listers, many of them 1-row listers, and the rows varied in spacing from 3 to 4 feet. Double-spaced rows 6 to 7 feet apart were found in some fields.

It will be seen that the average number of acres cut per machine was not large and that on the average the combine was used only about three days for harvesting sorghums. The average acreage of sorghum harvested per day and per hour with combines is somewhat less than the average acreage of wheat cut by machines of the same size in the Great Plains in 1926, as determined by other investigations.^ This is due to working fewer hours per day, to more delays and breakdowns, and to a slower rate of travel in the rough sorghum fields. The average number of acres of sorghum cut per day per man was 13, 11, 6, and 3 acres, respectively, for 16-foot combines, 15-foot combines, 12-foot headers, and row binders. The differences in capacity per man between combines and other machines are actually greater than the figures indicate, because the combined grain is threshed while the headed grain is left in ricks and the bound crop in shocks.

3REYN0LDS0N, L. A., KiFER, R. S., MARTIN, J. H., and HUMPHRIES, W. R. THE COMBINED HARVESTER-THRESHER IN THE GREAT PLAINS. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 70, 61 p., illUS. 1928.

22 TEOHNIOAL BULLETIN 131, TT. S. DBPT. OB' AOKICULTUKK

TABLE 13.—jlcre» cut per hour and per fçot Of ÇMÎ 6y «fliAiHAA of diffàtànt types and sizes

Machis» |1 H O

M

° fe w Ê m 1

1 •Si

■f- B

5 1 i-s

&

n ï-

"a

r to P3 CS

Num-

m ■«! ■< ■^

P w Pi P4 ^ ^ s Num- Bvth- Btuh-

Feet ber ber inehet Aeret tl» eU AtTM Acres Acre /Icr« Combine . . 10 3 3.0 41 41 m 13 2.Ü 7 ao.5 2.9 0.29 10 2

Do 12 7 i 4 40 65 737 13 3.1 7 17.7 2.5 .21 9 2 Do 15 19 3. S 46 73 1,137 15 3.4 8 21.6 2.7 .IK n 2 Do 16 27 4.4 40 65 1,111 17 14 S 27.1 3.4 .21 M 2

Header 12 94 3.3 42 79 l,2g4 16 6.2 8 1S.2 1.» .16 6 •2.7 Row binder... ».5 15 1.0 42 29 503 17 S.0 8 5.8 .7 .2U 3 '2

I Includes men hauling, loading, and stacking. •Includes 1 man to shock the bundles.

The rates of harvesting; grain sorghums with combines of different sizes and with crews of different sizes for header heading and hand heading are shown in Table 14. The average acres of grain sorghum harvested per man per day was 12.1 acres with a combine, 5.6 acres with a header, and 1.8 acres by hand. Two men with four horses with a row binder cut and shocked an average of 5.9 acres per day. From 120 to 265 bushels of grain sorghum per man per day were harvested and threshed with the combines of different types and sizes. From 53 to 113 bushels per man per day were harvested by header crews of different sizes. The output per man was greater for the 2- man and 3-man crews than for the larger 5-man crews. The building of ricks of heads requires very little labor. From the records obtained it appears that two men, in addition to the header operator, can load, haul, and rick the heads in the field as rapidly as they are cut with the header.

^ll.^ i

V

■"■»"^ : : _

FiGUBE 14.—Threshing beaded mllo with a combine

One man with a team headed by hand and ricked an average of about 35 bushels of grain sorghum per day. The 5-man crews were the least efficient in« the amount harvested per man per day.

HARVESTING GEAIN SORGHUMS 23

TABLE 14.—Rates of harvesting grain sorghum hy hand, headers, and combines with crews of different sizes

HEADING BY HAND

Size of crew Rec- ords ob-

tained

Hours Aver- age

acres

Bush- els per acre

Acres Bushels

1 ¡ Men Horses

Days per day Per day

Per man Per day

Per man

1 1 2 2 3 4 5

2 2

t 8

10

37 5

32 26 17 4

15.6 12.2 15.9 13.9 13.7 17.8

9 8 9 9 9 9

31 38 56 80 90 98

16 18 20 18 23 22

2.0 3.1 3.5 5.8 6.6 5.5

2.0 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.1

32 56 70

104 152 121

32 28 35 35 38 24

A 1.8 34 i

HEADING WITH HEADER

Size of crew

Rec- ords ob-

tained

Days Hours Aver-

age acres

Bush- els per acre

Acres per day per man Bushels

Cut Haul

Cut Haul Per day

Per day per man Men Horses Men Horses

6 6 6 6 6

1 1 2 2 4

2 4 2 4 4

7 12

2 13

3

4.4 7.8 4.2 5.9

10.5

9 9 9 9

10

62 105 106 92

190

16 14 13 20 15

14 13 25 16 18

14 13 13 8 5

224 182 325 320 270

112 91

108 107 54

A vp.rntrp. i 1 6 99

COMBINING

Rec- ords ob-

tained

2 1 2

5 15 22

Size of crew

Days Hours

day

Aver- age

acres

Bush- els per acre

Acres per day

Acres per

man

Bushels

jf ower usea ana size of combine (feet)

Men Horses Per day

Per man

Horses

Tractor

Í 12 1 15 I 16

1 12 1 1^

16

2 2 2

2 2 2

10 10 10

1.2 6.5 5.0

3.8 3.3 2.5

8 8 9

7 8 8

20 210

95

70 77 69

15 14 28

13 16 15

16 32 19

18 23 28

8 16 9

9 11 14

240 448 532

240 368 420

120 224 266

120 184 210

Average 12.1 191

THRESHING HARVESTED SORGHUMS

Combines were used extensively for threshing grain sorghums that had been harvested by hand, headers, and row binders. Of the 142 threshing jobs shown in Table 15, 65 were threshed with combines and 77 with separators. All of the separators and 43 of the combines were hired by the farmers. The remaining 22 farmers threshed with their own combines. (Fig. 14.)

24 TECHNICAL BULLETIN 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGKICULTURE

TABLE 15.—Rates and methods of threshing harvested grain different sizes

sorghums with crews of

Size of

crew Records

obtained Method of threshing

Owned or hired outfit

Method of harvesting

Average grain

threshed Days Per day Per day

per man

3 men 1 i r 29 I 14 r 48 1 25

4

Combine do

Owned do.._

Hand Header Row binder... Hand

Bushels 1,295 1,675

469 1,312 1,259 1,711 1,677

492

1.9 2.7 .7

1.6 1.6 1.4 2.1 .4

Bushels 682 620 670 820 787

1,222 798

1,230

Bushels 227 207

do.... do.. do Separator do do

do.- Hired. _ do do._ do do

223 205 4 men.. Header

Hand-. 197 244

5 men.. 6 men..

Header Row binder...

160 205

^¿?/f^ iÄ/ACÄf>e -

//^^/?^/2-

The combines were operated with crews of 3 or 4 men, not including grain haulers, while the separators required 5 or 6 men. The capacities of the combines were less than those of the separators, but the number of bushels of grain threshed per day per man was not significantly different. Some combine owners not reported in Table 15 threshed small quantities of grain sorghum with crews of 1 or 2 men. Grain sorghums headed by hand were threshed more rapidly than those harvested with a header.

The combines were easily prepared for threshing grain-sorghum heads in ricks simply by removing the sickle and reel. The combines were then pulled up to the ricks and the heads pitched on the

platform canvases, />f^/^-yY¿?¿/jes y^^/z >^c/a^ the canvas serving

^ / ^ ^ ^ s—^ ^g ^ self-feeder for the machine. The combine was pulled from one rick to another and along the ricks by a tractor or by four or six horses. When a tractor was used the tractor motor frequently was allowed to run idle so the combine could be moved quickly. The combine was advanced along the

rick as soon as the distance between the rick and the combine platform was too great for easy pitching.

For hauling the threshed grain from the combine, 10 operators used one team and a wagon, and 17 used two teams and wagons. The grain from 17 combines was hauled by trucks. Seven of these combines required two trucks. Two operators used their tractors to pull the wagons from the machine to the edge of the field, where the grain was dumped in a pile on the ground. This grain was hauled by trucks later. One operator ran the grain on the ground at the end of the field directly from the grain tank on the combine.

A considerable number of combine operators did their own hauling ; that is, when they had threshed a load they would stop and haul it to the end of the field or to the bin. This practice saved the hire of an extra man or two.

CÂf^/jV^-

1 1 1 1 m 1 1 1

1

WM 1

v//m WA

I \//y4j^/<^s-r//y<?-

^^j rz/ye^s-z/z/^s- FIGURE 15.—Average man-hours per acre required to harvest and

thresh grain sorghums by hand and with a row binder, header, and combine

HAEVESTING GKAIK SOKQHUMS 25

The number of man-hours per acre required to harvest and thresh grain sorghums by different methods is shown graphically in Figure 15. Harvesting by hand, row binder, header, and combine required 5.0, 2.7, 1.5, and 0.7 man-hours per acre, respectively. For both harvesting and threshing the man-hours per acre were 5.7, 3.6, 2.6, and 0.7 for the four methods, in the order listed above.

ADJUSTMENTS OF MACHINES

The proper adjustment for harvesting and threshing grain sorghums depends on the condition of the crop and the type of machine used. Some of the changes and adjustments of a fundamental nature are known and followed generally, but much information still is needed for the development of machine methods for harvesting and threshing these crops. Combines and headers that were well adjusted did excellent harvesting.

HABVESTER ADJUSTMENTS

The row binder is well adapted without any changes to cutting and binding grain sorghums which are not more than 7 or 8 feet in

FIOVRK 16.—Extra reel slats and wire fencing on a grain header used for barTesting kafir

height. The one-row kafir header is especially designed for the crop on which it is used. The combine and the grain header are designed and equipped especially for harvesting small grains and require some alteration and adjustment for efficient harvesting and threshing of grain sorghums. The platforms of headers ordinarily can be raised nigh enough, without any mechanical changes, to cut sorghum plants not more than 4 or 5 feet in height. For narvesting most fields of kafir, however, the header platforms are raised by raising or inverting the arms that support the platform. Most headers used for harvesting grain sorghums were provided with double or extra-wide reel slats of wood or wire screen, to reduce the number of cut heads carried over and thrown on the ground by the reel. (Fig. 16.)


Many of the headers also were provided with high platform backs made of wire mesh, to prevent sorghum heads from being thrown over the back of the platform. A few machines were equipped with wire mesh across the outer end of the platform. These changes resulted in great savings of harvested sorghum.

Combines have been used for harvesting grain sorghums such a short time that there is no uniformity in the adjustments made. Of 50 operators reporting, only 8 changed the height of the combine platform, although the platforms of some types can be raised to a height of 42 inches or more by bolting on two short vertical pieces of heavy strap iron between the platform and its elevating arms. About one-third (17) of these operators left the reel just as it was used for harvesting wheat, while 23 of them changed its position either by raising it or by moving it forward or back (usually forward). Three operators reduced the speed of. the reel by changing a sprocket. Only seven operators changed the reel slats to reduce the harvesting losses from that source. It is very evident from these reports that much improvement in harvesting efficiency could be effected by properly adjusting all parts of the combine. If the combine platforms had been raised and the reel slats widened, and if screens had been placed at the backs and ends of the platforms, the losses in harvesting doubtless would have been no greater than with the header.

THRESHER ADJUSTMENTS

There was as great a lack of uniformity in adjustments for threshing as for harvesting grain sorghums. All grain sorghums are easily separated from the heads and most of them also from the chaff or glumes. The kernels are brittle and easily broken in threshing. Experienced thresher men have found that the speed of the thresher cylinder for threshing grain sorghums should be about half or two- thirds the speed for threshing wheat and that most of the concave teeth should be removed. Many of the combine operators were not familiar with the necessary adjustments or were not* able to make them.

A record was obtained of the changes made on the threshing mech- anism of 50 combines used for harvesting and threshing grain sorghums. Thirty-one operators made no change in cylinder speed from that used for wheat. Seventeen operators reduced the speed of the cylinder from an average of 1,070 revolutions per minute to an average of 845 revolutions per minute, or an average reduction of 225 revolutions per minute. Two operators increased the cylinder speed an average of 200 revolutions per minute.

The cylinder speeds used ranged from 750 to 1,400 revolutions per minute. The maximum reduction in speed effected was 400 and the minimum 50 revolutions per minute on machines on which adjustments were made.

The reduction in the speed of the cylinder was accomplished on most machines by slowing down the motor and consequently the entire machine. Only three operators reduced the speed of the cylinder by a change of sprockets and yet maintained the speed of the other parts. Most operators and some dealers were not aware that sprockets were available for this purpose. The speed of the combines driven by a power take-off from the tractor could not be reduced by slowing the tractor motor without a corresponding decrease in the speed of travel.

HARVESTING GEAIN SORGHUMS 27

Nine of the 50 combine operators made no changes in the concaves, 10 lowered the concaves, 2 raised the concaves, and 29 removed from 1 to 5 rows of concave teeth. Combines equipped with the rasp or bar type of cylinder and concaves were limited in their adjustments because of the absence of teeth that could be removed.

Several machines were observed before and after reducing the speed of the cylinders, and in some cases a marked reduction in the proportion of cracked grain was apparent at the lower speed.

About half of the operators adjusted the sieves, chaffers, or riddles for threshing grain sorghums, but there was no uniformity in the adjustments made. One of the chief troublés in threshing grain sorghums from the field was the overloading of the tailings elevator with pieces of the damp stalks. This chopped material, commonly called ''pomace,^' often was returned to the cylinder repeatedly, instead of being blown out, until it was ground fine enough to pass out with the grain. Some operators prevented this by placing a strip of sheet metal over the tailings trough so that the pomace was carried out over the rear of the machine. Little or no grain was carried out with the pomace after this change was made, and a great improvement in threshing resulted.

COSTS OF HARVESTING AND THRESHING

A careful consideration of the varying cost per bushel as affected by size of crew, method of harvesting, and method of threshing should enable many farmers to reduce their costs and increase their profits over those they may be making with present methods of handling the crop. This is important, especially when the margin of profit is small at the best. Many farmers who raise grain sorghum as their only cash crop should be able to increase their profits by a change in harvesting and threshing practices.

All of the combines and many of the headers used for harvesting grain sorghums had been purchased primarily for harvesting wheat. Row binders were, of course, purchased to cut corn or sorghums. No attempt has been made to allocate a portion of the fixed charges such as depreciation or interest, but the cash costs incurred by farmers using 16-foot tractor-drawn combines, 12-foot headers, row binders, and hand topping are compared in Table 16. This table gives a comparison of the average cash expenses actually paid out by those who harvested the 1926 crop by the methods specified.

TABLE 16.—Cash cost per acre and per bushel for the different methods of harvestings and threshing grain sorghums

16-foot combine 12-foot header Row binder Hand

Items of comparison Quan- tity Cost Quan-

tity Cost Quan- tity Cost Quan-

tity Cost

Hired labor _ hours.. Hired horses ._ do

0.2 $0.08 0.6 .09

$0.19 .03

0.8 $0.22 2.74 .003

$0.85 .001

Fuel - gallons.- 1.7 .12 .05

.34

.09

.01 Oil do Grease.- —._-. pounds._ Twine --do 3.1

18.0 .54

1.93 Threshing -—.bushels.. 18.0

.52

.03

18.0 1.21

1.43 .08

18.0 .88

Cash costs: Per acre _ 2.69

.15 1.731

Per bushel .. .10

28 TECHNICAL, BULLETIN 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGKICULTUEE

MAN LABOR AND HORSE WORK

Most of the harvest labor for each method of harvesting was done by the operator or by some member of the family or was exchanged labor. The cash paid out for hired labor ranged from an average of $0.08 per acre for sorghums cut with the combine to an average of $0.85. per acre for hand-topped sorghum. A comparison of the hours of hired labor given in Table 16 with those for total labor used by different methods given on page 22 indicates that the men who harvested with combines hired about 30 per cent of the labor, those harvesting with headers hired about 40 per cent of the labor, those using row binders hired about 30 per cent of the labor, while those heading by hand hired 55 per cent of the labor used.

Practically all of the horse work in connection with harvesting was done with horses owned by the operator. Except in a very few instances there was no cash expense for horse labor. On the average about 5 or 6 horse-hours per acre were used in harvesting with a header or row binder, and about 10 horse-hours per acre were used for hand topping. Some of the combines were pulled by horses.

MATERIALS USED

The quantities of fuel and lubricating oil used by the combines and tractors are given in Tables 11 and 12. The average cost of fuel for harvesting with a 16-foot tractor-drawn combine was $0.34 per acre, while the cost of lubricants per acre was $0.10.

Twine used by the row binder averaged 3.1 pounds and cost $0.54 per acre.

THRESHING

The rates used in Table 16 for threshing sorghum harvested by methods other than a combine are those charged by custom threshers using stationary separators. The rates per bushel vary according to the method of harvesting and were as follows : Headed sorghum, $0,067; row bound, including hauling of bundles and topping, $0,107; and hand topped, $0,049. When the cost of threshing an average yield of 18 bushels per acre is added to the other charges the total cash costs for combining are considerably less than the cash costs for harvesting and threshing by any other method.

CASH COSTS PER ACRE AND PER BUSHEL

The actual out-of-pocket expense for harvesting and threshing with a 16-foot tractor-drawn combine averaged $0.52 per acre. Cash costs are lower for the combine than for other methods of harvesting, but this low cash cost is made possible only through the purchase and upkeep of an expensive machine. Where the grain was harvested with a header and threshed at custom rates, the out- of-pocket expense averaged $1.43 per acre. Similarly, the cost averaged $2.69 per acre when the grain was cut with a row binder and $1.73 when the grain was topped by hand. If all man labor and horse work are included, the costs are as shown in Figure 17.

FIRST COST AND DEPRECIATION OF COMBINES

The use of a combine which has been purchased primarily for harvesting wheat is an economical method of harvesting and threshing

HARVESTIN^G GRAIN SORGHUMS 29

grain sorghums, but because of the high first cost of the combine and the difficulties of harvesting with a combine in some seasons, it is doubtful whether the purchase of one to harvest grain sorghums only would be justified for the acreages usually found on farms in this section. The average cost of all combines used for harvesting grain sorghum was $2,224. On the other hand, the first cost of a header or row binder is less than $200.

Estimates of the operators indicate that on the average the combines were expected to last about eight seasons. On the basis of these estimates the average annual depreciation on the combines would amount to $278, whereas the annual depreciation on a row binder or header would be between $10 and $20. The expected length of life of eight seasons is the same as the estimate obtained from 257 combine owners in the Great Plains area who used their combines for small grain only.

/ ^ 3

CÛAT3/A^£'

//^y4¿?^/e-

Jô/^ ^///^^^—

A/^/y¿?- T

rz/jess/z/z/o- FIGURE 17#- - Average costs of harvesting and threshing grain sorghums harvested by hand and

with a row binder, header, and combine

The total depreciation and interest charges on a 16-foot combine costing about $2,300, on the basis of an average life of eight years, are about $357 annually. The charges per acre for different acreages harvested annually would be those shown in Table 17.

TABLE 17.—Annual depreciation and interest charges per acre for a 16-foot combine cutting different acreages

Acres cut annually

Deprecia- tion and interest

charges per acre

Acres cut annually

Deprecia- tion and interest

charges per acre

100 $3.57 1.78 1.19 .89

500._. . $0.71 200 _ 600 .60' 300 700 51 400.— __ 800 I .45

Table 17 shows that the depreciation and interest charges would prohibit the purchase of a combine for harvesting only the small acreages of grain sorghum which usually were cut with the combine.

30 TECHNICAL BULLETIlSr 121, U. S. DEPT. OF AGKICULTURE

REPAIRS ON COMBINES

The cash expenses in 1926 for repair parts for the 47 combines included in the study averaged $48.73 per machine. In addition to this expense an average of three and one-half days of man labor was used in repairing the combine and fitting the machine for the season's work. Two and one-half days of this man labor was that of the operator and one day was that of a hired mechanic. The expense for repairs and the time spent in making them cover all the work done by the combines in 1926, the bulk of which was harvesting wheat.

CUSTOM WORK WITH COMBINES

In sorghum harvest custom work is rarely done except by a few men who own combines. When harvesting by other methods each farmer usually is busy with his own crop and has no time to do outside work.

Of the 47 men owning combines who were interviewed, only 9 (19 per cent) did any custom work. This work was divided between harvesting and stationary threshing. Of the 9 men, 7 did custom harvesting and 2 did threshing only. There were more opportuni- ties for doing custom work, but many felt that it was too hard on their machines.

Some of those who worked for others did so with the idea of increasing their earnings for the year. Some men who purchase a combine do so with the idea of doing custom work to help pay for the machine. The possibility of doing custom cutting on sorghum as a means of partially paying for a machine, however, should not be given much consideration.

The profit that may be made on custom cutting or threshing depends largely on the rate charged. As the use of a combine for sorghum harvest is comparatively new, there is no standard charge for the work. Some cutting was done on the acre basis, some on the bushel basis, and some on a combination of the two.

The rates usually charged were $3 an acre or 18 cents a bushel. Where a combination charge was made the rate varied from $1 an acre plus 5 cents a bushel to $2 an acre plus 10 cents a bushel. The threshing rate charged was 4 and 5 cents for hand-headed and 8 cents for machine-headed sorghum, which are the same rates as those charged by stationary thresher men. The use of the combine in stationary threshing for neighbors is more profitable than its use for cutting, although in 1926 it was used less for this purpose than for cutting.

DISPOSAL OF THE GRAIN

Reports concerning the disposal of 147 lots of threshed sorghum grain are summarized in Table 18. Of the 56 lots of combined grain, 14, or one-fourth, were hauled directly to the elevators. This was a larger proportion than for any other method and indicated the desire of the farmers to dispose of the grain before it went out of condition. Some combined grain from this area in 1926 and also in 1927 was damp when marketed and was sold at a discount in price. Some of this damp grain heated in transit before reaching the terminal markets.

HABVESTtNQ GBAIN SOEQHUMS

TABLB 18.—Method of handling threshed grain sorghum

31

Records ohtained

Number of growers who stored—

Growers

Method oí harvesting On

ground In bins On

ground and in bins

who hauled to elevator

56 24 2

6«

7 33 16 2

30

2 14 4

18 9 8

All 147 30 80 U 26

Nine lots of combined grain were dumped oh the ground and left to dry. A pile of combined milo grain is shown in Figure 18. Part of the grain threshed from ricks and shocks also was dumped on the ground, but this was done to save labor at the time rather than

FioVBE 18.—Milo threshed with a combine, piled on the ground to dry

because the grain was damp. The grain frequently was run from the thresher directly upon the ground and was hauled later.

The grain that was left in piles on the ground for a week or more was dry enough to ship or store, as there was no rain during that time. This was the most effective method of drying damp grain under these conditions. The piles were about 23^ to 3 feet high, sloped outward to a width of about 6 feet, and were any convenient length. The grain in these piles was well exposed to the sun and to drying winds. Farmers who had practiced this method for several years reported that they had never known grain to spoil when piled on dry ground.

The piling of grain on the ground results in some admixture of dirt in gathering the grain from the piles, especially on tilled sandy soil. The amount of dirt scooped up is small, however, if the grain is piled on a clean smooth patch of buiialo-grass turf. Much of the combined prain in the localities visited was püed on grassland. The proportion

32 TECHNICAL BULLETIN 121, V. S. DEPT. OF AGKIOULTURE

of sand and dirt is one of the factors determining the grade of grain sorghums. The combined grain sorghums contained sHghtly more sand, dirt, and foreign material than the grain threshed by other methods. Grain threshed from ricks sometimes was piled on the tilled land of the grain-sorghum fields and contained considerable dirt when hauled in.

The farmers who hauled their combined grain to bins left it in shallow layers whenever sufficient bin room was available. Grain will dry considerably under the semiarid conditions of the grain- sorghum area if not too closely confined or stored in too great bulk.

QUALITY AND CONDITION OF GRAIN

Samples of threshed grain sorghums were obtained direct from the combines or threshers and later in the season from carload lots in the terminal markets. Records were taken of the kind and make of thresher used, the time and method of harvesting, and the condition of the grain when sampled. A portion of each sample obtained was immediately put into an air-tight can for use in determining the moisture content, and the remainder was sent to the laboratory for a physical analysis. The determinations of moisture content, foreign material, and sand and dirt were made according to the Official Grain Standards of the United States. The percentage of coarse broken grain also was determined.

The data for kafir and milo harvested with combines before and after frost are shown in Table 19.

TABLE 19.—Average test weight per bushel and percentages of moisture, foreign material, sand, dirt, and broken kernels of kafir and milo harvested with combines in 1926

Time sampled Sam- ples

Test weight

Mois- ture

content

Foreign mate-

rial and cracked kernels

Sand, dirt, and

finely- broken kernels

Coarse broken kernels

Crop and time of harvest Before

clean- ing

After clean-

ing

Kafir; Before frost

Do At harvest After harvest At harvest After harvest

Num- ber

7 8

19 8

Pounds 56.8 56.7 55.0 55.2

Pounds 57.6 57.3 56.3 56.5

Per cent 14.1 13.7 13.3 12.0

Per cent 4.8 7.1 5.1 5.8

Per cent 1.1 .5 .6 .4

Per cent 6.2 9.0

After frost 6.8 Do .. 8.9

Total or average 42 55.4 56.7 13.0 5.5 .6 7.5

At harvest—- After harvest At harvest After harvest

At harvest-.- do

Dwarf and Standard milo: Before frost

Do- 12 7 5 2

1 4

56.1 55.6 55.0 56.8

51.5 55.0

56.7 56.2 56.3 57.0

56.0 54.9

15.4 15.7 12.2 18.7

20.4 13.3

8.8 9.4

13.0 15.9

10.2 13.7

1.6 1.4 .8 .3

.2 1.4

17.2 18.8

After frost 25.8 Do 29.8

Straightneck milo: Before frost.. 19.5 After frost 26.2

Total or average 31 55.5 56.3 15.1 10.7 IS 1 21.n

The moisture ranged from 11.3 to 29.2 per cent, foreign material from 1.3 to 21.5 per cent, sand and dirt from zero to 6.6 per cent, and coarse broken kernels from 5.6 to 34.1 per cent in Dwarf and Standard milo combined before frost.

Milo combined after frost ranged in moisture from 11.5 to 12.8 per cent, in foreign material from 3 to 25 per cent, in sand and dirt

HAEVESTING GEAIN SORGHUMS 33

from 0.3 to 1.4 per cent, and in coarse broken kernels from 16 to 37.9 per cent. Straightneck milo varied in moisture from 10.2 to 15.9 per cent, in foreign material from 4.7 to 23.8 per cent, in sand and dirt from zero to 4 per cent, and in coarse broken kernels from 14.1 to 44.1 per cent. The moisture content of both kafir and milo at harvest time was lower when harvested after frost than before the frost of October 23. This was due partly to the grain being more mature, but chiefly to the drying of the leaves and stalks after the frost and thus preventing the wetting of the grain by the plant juice during threshing. There was an appreciable decrease in the moisture content of kafir sampled from one to three days after harvesting with the combine as compared with that sampled during harvest. The milo samples did not show any reduction in moisture content during this short interval after harvest. The average moisture content of all kafir samples, 13 per cent, would not cause the crop to be graded down, but the milo would fall into grade 3 because of an average of 15.1 per cent of moisture.

The milo samples contained appreciably larger percentages of cracked and broken kernels than the kafir samples. Milo kernels are larger, softer, and more easily broken in threshing than kafir kernels. There was no significant increase in the percentage of cracked and broken kernels of kafir harvested after frost, but there was a decided increase in the milo. Apparently milo kernels rapidly become more brittle after frost.

A comparison of kafir and milo grain harvested and threshed with the combine, headed and threshed later with the combine, and headed and threshed later with the separator is shown in Table 20. There was a distinct decrease in the moisture content of milo threshed from the rick with combines and separators as compared with that harvested and threshed with the combine. Kafir showed only a slight decrease in moisture, probably because of later harvesting and of more juicy stalks which dry more slowly.

TABLE 20.—Average test weight per bushel and percentages of moisture, foreign material, sand and dirt, and coarse broken kernels of kafir and milo harvested and threshed by various methods in 1926

Crop and method of harvesting

Type of threshing machine Samples Test

weight Moisture content

Foreign material

and cracked kernels

Sand, dirt, and

finely broken kernels

Coarse broken kernels

Kafir: Combined Combine

Number 42 11 6

31 24 29

Pounds 55.4 55.5 57.3

55.5 56.9 57.3

Per cent 13.0 12.9 12.2

15.1 11.5 11.1

Per cent 5.6 5.4 2.2

10.7 7.7 7.7

Per cent 0.6 .4 .1

1.3 .6 .5

Per cent 7 5

Headed do 5 5 Headed Separator. 4 3

Milo: Combined __ Combine 21.0 Headed _.._do 16 1 Headed Separator. 14 8

Both kafir and milo threshed from ricks of heads contained lower percentages of foreign material, dirt, and cracked and broken kernels than when harvested with the combine. This was the result of better adjustment of the machines and a better separation of dried-plant portions from the grain than was possible with green leaves and stalks. The slightly lower moisture content of milo and kafir threshed with

34 TECHNICAL BULLETIN" 121, IT. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

separators than that threshed from the ricks with combines may have been due to the separator threshing being shghtly later than the combine threshing. In general there was less foreign material and cracked and broken grains from the separators than from the combines, this being due to the better adjustment and the more experienced operation of the separators.

There was no consistent difference in the quality of the grain threshed by different makes and types of combines. The wide variation in operation, adjustments, and the condition of the crop prevented an accurate comparison of the different machines.

The use of the combine for harvesting results in grain of a higher moisture content being marketed. Grain of good quality can be marketed by allowing it to dry before hauling it to the elevator. The climatic conditions during most seasons will permit the threshed grain to dry rapidly in piles on the ground or in shallow layers in bins.

Grain sorghums can be combined successfully so far as condition and quality of the threshed grain are concerned. The poor condition of much of the combined grain appears to be due to either the condition of the crop or to the lack of proper adjustment of the combine, or to both.

SUMMARY

These investigations of the methods of harvesting grain sorghums were conducted in southwestern Kansas and northwestern Okla- homa in 1926.

Milo and kafir were the principal grain sorghums grown. Dwarf Yellow was the leading milo variety and Blackhull the leading kafir variety.

The labor required for harvesting grain sorghums has been one of the chief objections to growing the crop.

Two general types of farming are found in the area investigated, viz, wheat growing on the heavier soils and grain sorghum and broomcorn growing on the sandy soils. Some overlapping of the types of farming exists. Very few livestock except work horses are kept on the farms.

Nearly half of the farmers owned tractors, and about one-fourth of them had trucks.

Much of the milo and some of the kafir was headed by hand. The machines used for harvesting grain sorghums included row binders (corn binders), grain headers, combines, special kafir headers, and grain binders. Nearly half of the farmers used two or more methods of harvesting in 1926. The largest average acreage was cut with grain headers and the smallest acreage with the row binder. Kafir is better adapted than milo to machine harvesting.

More than half of the grain sorghum was harvested before frost. The average percentages of losses from heads left in the field were

10.9 and 6.4 for kafir cut with the combine and the grain header^ respectively, and 25.9 and 13.5 for Dwarf and Standard milo cut with the combine and the grain header, respectively. The losses in harvesting with the row binder were small, and those in harvesting by hand were inconsequential. Many of the farmers picked up the loose heads, getting an average of about 2.5 bushels of grain per acre and gathering it at the rate of 13 bushels per day with a man and team.

HARVESTING GEAIK SORGHUMS 35

Most of the combines were drawn by tractors. The combines with a cut of 12 to 16 feet required about 10 horses or a tractor of about 15 drawbar horsepower to pull them. About 1.6 gallons of fuel and 0.1 gallon of oil per acre wêre used in harvesting with a tractor-drawn combine equipped with an auxiliary engine. A gallon of fuel (gasoline or kerosene) per acre was consumed by the tractors, and 0.6 gallon of gasoline per acre was used by the combine engines.

A man with a team headed by hand and ricked an average of 1.8 acres of grain sorghum per day. Two men with a grain header and 8 or 10 horses harvested an average of 13 acres per day. Two men with a 15-foot combine harvested and threshed an average of 23 acres per day. Two men with a row binder and four horses cut and shocked an average of 5.9 acres per day.

Three or four men with a combine threshed an average of 200 bushels or more of headed grain sorghums per man per day. Five and six men with a separator threshed about the same quantities per

Headers, combines, and separators require considerable adjustment for the proper harvesting .and threshing of grain sorghums.

The average cash or out-of-pocket costs per bushel for harvesting and threshing grain sorghums were 3 cents with the combine, 8 cents with the header, 15 cents with the row binder, and 10 cents when harvested by hand. Cash costs are lower for the combine than for other methods of harvesting, but this low cash cost is made possible only through the purchase and upkeep of an expensive machine.

Of 147 growers of grain sorghums harvested and threshed by all methods, 30 piled the grain on the ground, 80 stored the grain in bins, 11 piled the grain on the ground and later stored it in bins, and 26 hauled the grain directly to the elevator. Piling on the ground was the most effective way of drying the grain before marketing or storing it.

Combined grain sorghum contained more moisture, foreign material, cracked grain, sand, and dirt than that headed and then threshed from the ricks.

The average moisture content of grain sorghum harvested with a combine before frost was slightly higher in kafir and considerably higher in milo than that in grain harvested after frost.

The best method of harvesting for a farmer depends upon the equipment and labor available and the use for which the crop is intended. Dwarf erect uniform grain sorghums can be harvested satisfactorily with properly adjusted combines. Grain sorghums well suited to machine harvesting are now being developed.

ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

July 24,1929

Secretary of Agriculture ARTHUR M. HYDE.

Assistant Secretary R. W. DUNLAP.

Director of Scientific Work A. F. WOODS.

Director of Regulatory Work . WALTER G. CAMPBELL.

Director of Extension Work C. W. WARBURTON.

Director of Personnel and Business Adminis- W. W. STOCKBERGER.

tration. Director of Information M. S. EISENHOWER.

Solicitor R. W. WILLIAMS.

Weather Bureau CHARLES F. MARVIN, Chief, Bureau of Animal Industry JOHN R. MOHLER, Chief. Bureau of Dairy Industry O. E. REED, Chief. Bureau of Plant Industry _ WILLIAM A. TAYLOR, Chief. Forest Service R. Y. STUART, Chief. Bureau of Chemistry and Soils H. G. KNIGHT, Chief. Bureau of Entomology C. L. MARLATT, Cte/. Bureau of Biological Survey PAUL G. REDINGTON, C/ite/- Bureau of Public Roads THOMAS H. MACDONALD, C/iief. Bureau of Agricultural Economics NILS A. OLSEISI, Chief. Bureau of Home Economics LOUISE STANLEY, Chief. Plant Quarantine and Control Administration- C. L. MARLATT, Chief. Grain Futures Administration J. W. T. DUVEL, Cte/. Foody Drug, and Insecticide Administration-. WALTER G. CAMPBELL, Director of

Regulatory Work, in Charge. Office of Experiment Stations E. W. ALLEN, Chief. Office of Cooperative Extension Work C. B. SMITH, Chief. Library CLARIBEL R. BAHNETT, Librarian.

This bulletin is a contribution from

Bureau of Plant Industry. WILLIAM A. TAYLOR, Cte/. Office of Cereal Crops and Diseases CARLETON R. BALL, Principal

Agronomist, in Charge. Bureau of Agricultural Economics NILS A. OLSEN, Chief.

Division of F arm Management and Costs. C. L. HOLMES, Principal Agricul- tural Economist, in Charge.

Grain Division H. J. BESLEY, Principal Marketing Specialist^ in Charge.

Bureau of Public Roads THOMAS H. MACDONALD, C/iie/. Division of Agricultural Engineering S. H. MCCRORY, Chief.

U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1929

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. - . Price 10 cents