f\ll'f' 7 
 
 L/ 
 
 Issued March •">. 1910. 
 
 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
 
 BUREAU 01 PLANT l\l'i-Tl:Y Circular No. 50. 
 
 B. T. GALLOWAY, Chief of Bureau. 
 
 THREE MUCH -MISREPRESENTED 
 SORGHUMS. 
 
 CARLETON R. BALL, 
 
 Agronomist in Charge of Grain-Sorghum 
 Investigations. 
 
 24491 10 
 
 WASHINGTON : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1010 
 
 
 UNIV OF Fl Lip. 
 DOCUMENTS DEPT 
 
 
 1 
 
 r\ rt try 
 
 
 
 U.S. DEPOSITORY 
 
 
BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY. 
 
 Chief of Bureau, Beverly T. Galloway. 
 Assistant Chief of Bureau, G. Harold Powell. 
 Editor, J. E. Rockwell. 
 Chief Clerk, James E. Jones. 
 [Cir. 50] 
 2 
 
II. p. I 
 
 fHREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS." 
 
 SHALLU -CALIFORNIA WHEAT"). 
 
 The following exl racts arc from lei ters received on November 1 and 
 8, 1909, respectively* from a well-known seed firm. They indicate 
 thai attempts arc being made to sell seed of shallu, a variety of sor- 
 ghum, at exorbitant prices, by unwarranted claims of enormous 
 yields. 
 
 We inclose a sample of grain which an Oklahoma man i- selling under the name of 
 "California wheat," al 50 cents a pound. He claims it will produce from 200 to 100 
 bushels per acre. * We corre ponded with him and bought a pound of the 
 
 Beed i" investigate. We have it over his own signature thai this grain will produce 
 from 200 to 100 bushels per acre. He sell the seed it 50 cents a pound, or 40 cents in 
 and lots. Of course, may be sincere in thinking that he has a 
 
 wonderful new grain, but we think the public ought to be guardi d against the repeti- 
 tion of the Alaska wheal excitement of lasl year. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE VARIETY. 
 
 The writer has had this variety under experimental cultivation 
 since the season of 1905. It has been grown at different stations in 
 the Great Plains area and also at the Arlington Experimental Farm, 
 near Washington, D. C, under Agrostology No. 2650 and drain 
 Investigations Nos. 85, LOO, 125, and 165. It has also been tested by 
 a few of the state agricultural experiment stations, particularly 
 Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Its known history in this 
 country may be related briefly. 
 
 " Numerous van sties of sorghums have been broughl to this country during the past 
 hundred years i e, grain, or sugar crops. Many such importations are 
 
 soon discarded from general cultivation as being inferior, unsatisfactory sorts, but 
 remain in limited usi ed localil ies. From time to time these localized crops 
 
 are di anew by persons unacquainted with their history and habits ami are 
 
 broughl topublii wonderfully desirable varieties. Sometimes they oe 
 
 little more trouble than a burdensome corre pondence on the pari of those handling 
 Buch crops. In other instances thi ploited for profit by individuals whose 
 
 • in- are misleading, though often made without such intention. The great need 
 for profitable drought-resistant crops in the dry regions of the West leads many 
 farmers to invest in such over-advertised seeds. This paper gives the known facta 
 
 ning three varieties of sorghum about which much confusion of ideas exists and 
 some misleading statements are being made.— B. T. Gallowai Bureau. 
 
 [Clr.50] 3 
 
4 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 It was imported directly from India by officers of the Louisiana 
 State Experiment Station, about 1890. By them it was known as 
 "Egyptian wheat," and was found to be an inferior variety of sor- 
 ghum, as the following quotations will show. 
 
 Recently introduced; stalk small; panicle open and spreading; not equal to other 
 kinds given here. 
 
 Low growing, inferior kind, nonsaccharine. Has seeds in open panicle. Inferior 
 to yellow and white milo and kafir corn; should not be used with expectation of best 
 results. & 
 
 We grew it for many years at all three stations and abandoned it as inferior for 
 forage to other sorghums. "Egyptian wheat" was imported directly from India by 
 us and corresponds to your description of shallu. Our farm managers well recognize 
 it from your description. <" 
 
 Though discarded by the Louisiana station, small lots of the seed 
 had been taken from time to time by visitors. In this way the 
 variety was carried to other localities, principally westward into 
 Texas and Oklahoma. Early in 1905 it came to the writer's atten- 
 tion in Texas, under the name "California wheat." Through field 
 investigation and the aid of agricultural papers it was found growing 
 at scattered points in Oklahoma and Texas. Many names, mostly 
 somewhat misleading, have been applied to it in the past five years. 
 Among them are "California Rice corn," " California wheat," "Chicken 
 corn," "Chinese Golden sorghum," "Eg\^ptian rice," "Egyptian 
 wheat," "Mexican wheat," and "Rice corn." 
 
 RELATIONSHIPS AND DESCRIPTION. 
 
 Shallu belongs to a group of sorghums entirely distinct from any of 
 the other groups grown in this country. Botanically, it belongs to 
 the variety roxburghii Hackel. This variety is found commonly in 
 some parts of India and also in Africa, especially in the Sudan 
 and in central East Africa. It seems to be the leading variety 
 in the island of Madagascar. Recent importations are represented 
 by Seed and Plant Introduction Nos. 16856 and 18192 from 
 German East Africa, 23422 from Natal, 23714 to 23716 from Portu- 
 guese East Africa, and 24339 and 24340 from the Transvaal. Other 
 recent numbers belong probably to this variety, but the plants have 
 not matured, and this fact can not be certainly determined from the 
 seed alone. 
 
 As found in Africa and India the group possesses the following 
 characters. The steins are tall and slender, 6 to 12 feet in height. 
 They stool freely, producing a large number of suckers. The pith is 
 neither juicy nor sweet, but dry. The heads or panicles (fig. 1) are 
 
 " Bulletin 19, second scries, Louisiana State Experiment Stations, 1892, p. 538. 
 6 Bulletin 53, Louisiana State Agricultural Experiment Station, 1898, p. 12. 
 cDr. W. C. Stubbs (formerly director of the Louisiana State Experiment Stations), 
 in a letter to the writer, March 27, L906. 
 
 |('ir. 50] 
 
I ill: I.!. MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 large and loose, usually conical, that is, broad al the base and pointed 
 at the top, like those of typical Early Amber sorgo. The long and 
 slender branches of the head arc spreading and drooping at the tips. 
 This group, comprising the variety roxburgMi, is separated easily 
 from all other groups of sorghums by the shape and position of the 
 glumes ai maturity. The two glumes, or hulls, are broadly lance- 
 olate or ovate in shape and closely surround the young seed, as in all 
 sorghums. As the seed ripens, however, these glumes gradually 
 
 Fig. l rwo heads of shallu. (One-fourth natural size.) 
 
 open or spread widely apart, complete^ exposing the seed. At the 
 same time the edges of each glume begin to curl inward and become 
 quite involute. In different varieties the glumes varj from pale 
 yellow i" black and the seeds from white to buff, pale red, and red- 
 dish 1'i'ow n. 
 
 <>iil\ one varietj is found in this country. It grows from 5 to 8 
 feet high, according to elevation, soil, and moisture. It produces 
 from 2 i" 5 suckers. The stems hear from 1 I to 15 leaves of medium 
 size, 13 being the average number. The heads are of the shape 
 
 [Clr.50] 
 
6 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 described above, 8 to 15 inches long, and of a pale-yellow color. The 
 glumes are a pale-straw color and the oval seeds whitish to pale buff 
 and about the size of the kafir seed. 
 
 CROP CHARACTERS AND PROBABLE VALUE. 
 
 Strong claims are being made for shallu by some of those who are 
 growing it. Five ways are commonly stated in which the growers 
 believe it excels all other sorghums. These are (1) in drought 
 resistance, (2) in yields of seed to the acre, (3) in the feeding value 
 of the grain, (4) in the tonnage of fodder produced, and (5) in the 
 feeding value of this fodder. These five claims may be discussed in 
 their order. 
 
 (1) Drought resistance. — Little is known concerning the absolute 
 drought resistance of shallu. In just what characters drought 
 resistance resides is an open question. Statements as to the relative 
 resistance of different varieties must always take account of the 
 stand of plants, as well as of differences in the soil, in the fertility, 
 and in the water content of the plats or fields. Experiments so far 
 do not indicate that shallu is more drought resistant than other sor- 
 ghums. In unfavorable seasons it suffers in the same way and in 
 the same proportion, apparently, as do other grain sorghums; that 
 is, on many stalks the heads fail to push completely out of the boot, 
 or upper leaf sheath. 
 
 (2) Yields of grain. — Farmers growing this crop for the first time 
 commonly estimate that their fields will yield from 75 to 100 bushels 
 to the acre. They are misled by the large size of the heads in com- 
 parison with those of milos and kafirs. The heads of shallu are, 
 however, loose and open and usually do not weigh as much as those 
 of the other grain sorghums. Besides this, the shallu heads do not 
 contain as high a percentage of seed in proportion to the weight of 
 the head as do the other grain sorghums. 
 
 The advertiser mentioned in the extracts at the beginning of this 
 circular claims a yield of 200 to 400 bushels to the acre. Such claims 
 are simply preposterous. The best of the grain-producing sorghums 
 ra rely exceed a yield of 51 1 bushels to the acre. Their average yields in 
 favorable seasons lie somewhere between 35 and 40 bushels to the 
 acre. In unfavorable seasons the yields are, of course, much lower. 
 The average yields of inilos and kafirs for all seasons in any ten-year 
 period are not likely to be much above 30 bushels. There is yet no 
 evidence that the average yields of shallu will exceed those of such 
 crops as the milos and kafirs. 
 
 At the experimental farms of the Office of Grain Investigations of 
 
 the Bureau of Plant Industry comparatively Low yields of grain have 
 
 been secured in the experiments with shallu. In the year 1906, 
 
 which was a very favorable season for grain sorghums in the Pan- 
 
 [Clr. 50] 
 
THREE MUCH-MISREPRES1 N I ED SORGH I MS. . 
 
 handle region of Texas, 2 plats at the Charming Experimental Farm 
 yielded at the rate of I! 1 ', bushels to the acre. On the same farm 
 milo yielded as bigh as 16 bushels, Blackhull kafir 35, and Red kafir 
 17. In 1906 the yield of shallu at the Amarillo Experimental Farm, 
 from seed grown in thai vicinity, was only 25.2 bushels. At the 
 same time Blackhull kafir yielded from 13 to 54 bushels and a plat of 
 Red kafir, 15.9. Most of the milo was destroyed by bail. In the 
 years succeeding L906, shallu has never done quite as well in compari- 
 son with the other grain sorghums as it did in that year. 
 
 A considerable correspondence with farmers who are raising this 
 crop has brought t o light only one high yield in \\ Inch actual weighing 
 or measuring of the thrashed grain is claimed. 'This yield is said to 
 have been 60 bushels to the acre, figured at 56 pounds to the bushel. 
 It was secured in the favorable season of 1908, in the southern part 
 <>f the Plains region, where the season is comparatively long and the 
 ele\ at ion less than 2,000 feet . 
 
 Feeding ruin, of t\< grain. No experiments in feeding shallu 
 grain have been made by any of the state agricultural experiment 
 st at ions, so far as known. Other grain sorghums are known to have 
 a feeding value about 90 per cent as great as that of corn. It is with 
 them t hat shallu must he compared. The chemical analysis ,>\' shallu 
 does not indicate a different composition in any particular. One 
 
 grower has published the statement that as ;i feed for milch cows he 
 
 finds shallu superior to cottonseed in the production of milk and 
 butter. This opinion i- no doubl honestly entertained, hut such a 
 general statement is likely to lead many to believe that the starchy 
 grain sorghums, rich in carbohydrates, can he used a- feeding sub- 
 stitutes for bran, cottonseed, and other products rich in protein. 
 
 This, of COUrse, is Hot t he cave. 
 
 (4) Yields of forage." From the forage standpoint shallu does not 
 make any better showing. At the Channing farm in 1906, the 2 
 grain plats yielded an average of 3,227 pounds of forage to the acre, 
 including the weight of the seed. On the same farm, the 12 grain 
 plats of milo averaged aboul t,800 pound- of forage, the 5 plats of 
 Blackhull kafir about 6,300 pounds, while l plat of Red kafir yielded 
 7,800 pounds to the acre. On the Amarillo Experimental Farm in 
 t he same season, the grain plat of shallu yielded at t he rate of 7,100 
 pound- of fodder to the acre, including the seed. In comparison. 6 
 grain plats of milo averaged 9,000 pounds of fodder to the acre, and 
 17 grain plat- of Blackhull kafir and 6 grain plats of Red kafir aver- 
 aged over 10,000 pound- each to the acre. In the plats grown 
 
 " The forage plats of sorghums on the Amarillo Experimental Farm were maintained 
 
 by ih'- < »ili I Forage-Plant Investigations of the Bureau of Planl Industry. Mr. 
 
 C. V. Piper, agi I in chargi in the conclusions drawn regarding the 
 
 value of shallu, and the figures presented in this connection. 
 
8 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 especially for forage, Blackball kafir averaged over 12,000 pounds, 
 Red kafir over 13,000 pounds, and the two best sorgos, a or sweet 
 sorghums, over 15,000 and 17,000 pounds to the acre, respectively. 
 
 (5) Value of the forage. — There is also no reason for believing that 
 the quality of the forage is better than that produced by kafirs and 
 sorgos. The. stems are dry and pithy, like those of corn, milos, and 
 the kowliangs. The kafirs have somewhat juicy stems, while the 
 sorgos are both juicy and sweet. The average number of leaves to 
 the stalk is very close to 13, which is slightly lower than the average 
 for kafirs and all sorgo varieties except the Amber group. These 
 facts concerning the dry stalks, the ordinary number of leaves, and 
 the comparatively low tonnage of forage do not indicate a variety of 
 high forage value, either in quantity or quality. 
 
 OBJECTIONABLE CHARACTERS IN SHALLU. 
 
 While growing shallu on a small scale in 1905 and more exten- 
 sively in 1906, some serious faults were found in it. The four most 
 prominent of these are stooling, lodging, retaining the base of the head 
 in the boot, and shattering. Experiments with shallu in recent years 
 have been largely directed toward getting rid of these undesirable 
 characters. 
 
 Stooling, or producing suckers at the base of the main stalk, is not 
 desirable in grain sorghum, however it may be regarded in forage 
 varieties or in small grains generally. The heads borne on suckers 
 are always later in maturing than those on the main stalk. More- 
 over the suckers are not usually of the same height as the main stalks. 
 This lack of uniformity in ripening and in height causes difficulty in 
 harvesting the grain, especially with any type of header. While a 
 smaller quantity of seed may be required in sowing a freely stooling 
 variety, so little seed is used for any of the grain sorghums that this 
 small saving is not worth considering. 
 
 Its habit of lodging is one of the most serious objections to shallu. 
 Just at the time when the heads are heavy with the green seeds the 
 stalks begin to lodge. In the writer's experiments it has happened 
 more than once that by the time one-tenth of the heads were ripe 
 fully one-fourth of the stalks were down in a hopeless tangle. 
 
 The failure of the heads to come completely out of the boot is often 
 a serious matter to the grain grower. On a considerable proportion 
 of the stalks the base of the head remains inclosed by the sheath, even 
 in favorable seasons. No seed is produced on this included portion, 
 and the yield is reduced to that extent. This basal part of the head 
 also becomes infested with plant lice and worms and usually becomes 
 
 aSorgo i^ tin- name which has been adopted for the group railed variously Bweet, 
 Baccharine, or sirup sorghums, and commonly, but erroneously, "sugarcane." 
 [CIr. .".oj 
 
THBEE MUCH MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 9 
 
 moldy and rotten. At thrashing time this mold} material is scat- 
 tered through the good seed and causes further loss. 
 
 There lias also 1 n trouble with the shattering of the seed. This 
 
 results especially where the crop is allowed to stand in the held until 
 pasl fully ripe. It also occurs where the crop is cut when ripe and 
 allowed to remain in the shock through the fall. When these shocks 
 are taken u|> for thrashing or feeding, the seed shatters verj rea lily 
 and much i- lost m spite of careful handling. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 It i^ not claimed that shallu is without value for the sorghum- 
 growing regions. It- alleged superiority to other well-known and 
 quite satisfactory varieties has not been proved, however. On the 
 contrary, there i- strong evidence that it i- somewhat inferior to 
 milos and kafirs. In any case it should he tried only on a small scale 
 at first. For grain production a seeding of 2 to 4 pounds to the acre 
 will he (piite sufficient, the quantity varying with the soil, elevation, 
 and latitude. There is no reason w hatever for paj ing an exorbitant 
 price for the seed in either la rire or small quantities. 
 
 The following statement by Prof. A. M. Ten Eyck, of the Kansas 
 Agricultural Experiment Station, published recently in the Kansas 
 Farmer, is to the point ; 
 
 The testa of the crop at this station indicate that ii is do! so valuable as sorghum 
 or kali r cum either for fodder or for seed. The yields of the grain have been less than 
 the yields of kafir com, and the cmp is objectionable because the stems are usually 
 very slender and the< rop lodges badly and is hard to harvest - Inn ent seeds- 
 
 men arc selling ii at a high price simply because it is a novelty or not well known. 
 
 -I MMAUY. 
 
 Shallu is a variety of sorghum first introduced aboul 1890 by (ho 
 Louisiana State Experiment Station, and soon discarded. 
 
 It has latch reappeared under such misleading name- a- "Cali- 
 fornia wheat," '' Egyptian wheat," and several others. 
 
 Shallu belongs to a group of sorghums quite distincl from the other 
 groups L r row n in t In- country . 
 
 It i- easily distinguished hy the loose conical panicle with slender, 
 drooping branches and t he lanceolate glumes which spread wide apart 
 and become inrolled at maturity, completely exposing the oval seed. 
 
 Shallu i- claimed h\ -mne to he superior to all other sorghums in 
 droughl resistance, yield and value of the grain, and tonnage and 
 quality of the forage. These statements arc misleading. 
 
 It i- now being advertised and sold al exorbitant prices as a drought- 
 resistant \ ariety capable of yielding 200 to 100 bushels of graiD to the 
 aciv. Such claims are absurd. 
 [Cir. ."."| 
 
10 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 Experiments conducted by the writer and by the Office of Forage- 
 Crop Investigations, as well as the observations of numerous farmers, 
 indicate that shallu is rather inferior to milo and kafir varieties as a 
 grain crop and to kafirs and sorgos as a forage crop. 
 
 Those who purpose growing it are advised to do so on a small scale 
 and not to pay exorbitant prices for the seed. 
 
 All farmers who test shallu in the season of 1910 are requested to 
 report their results to the writer of this paper. Report sheets and 
 envelopes for this purpose will be furnished to all who request them. 
 
 "CHOCOLATE CORN.'' 
 
 In October, 1905, the brief letter reprinted below was published 
 in one of the daily papers of the eastern United States. 
 
 In your department "II. II. " asks for information concerning what she or he calls 
 "chocolate corn. " Quite a number of years ago Isaac Newton, first Commissioner of 
 Agriculture under James Buchanan, sent my father a pint of chocolate corn, requesting 
 him to plant it and report the results to the Department. It resembled broom corn very 
 closely — only darker and ranker. In color it was a dark brown. I suppose the crop 
 of seed, which was thrashed out with a flail on the barn floor, was twenty times greater 
 than broom corn; I think the crop yielded fully 200 barrels to the acre. Everything 
 to which it was fed ate ravenously, gaining in flesh rapidly. For fattening purposes 
 I never saw its equal. 
 
 Horses and cattle would eat every particle of the stalk after it had been thrashed. 
 The stalk grew to a great height. 
 
 I remember we ground some of it in the coffee mill and used it as a beverage at the 
 table. It was fairly good, but not as clear as the prepared chocolate which comes in 
 cakes. 
 
 I never heard it called "chocolate corn, " nor did it resemble popcorn in the least. 
 There was no ear or husk — just the seed growing on the tassel, which was literally 
 covered . 
 
 I think it can be obtained at the Agricultural Department in Washington. It is a 
 wonder that poultry raisers do not cultivate it. I presume its value as an article of 
 diet for all kinds of poultry can not be equaled. 
 
 M. D. 
 
 Some of the statements made in this letter naturally attracted 
 attention in many quarters. This was (•specially true of those state- 
 ments concerning the yield of the grain, its feeding value, its use as a 
 beverage, and the source of the seed. It scarcely need be said that 
 the estimates of the yield and feeding value are greatly exaggerated. 
 
 The letter just quoted was rather widely copied by newspapers and 
 periodicals of all classes. The result was a Hood of Letters directed to 
 the Department of Agriculture, asking for seed and information. All 
 such inquirers were answered and given the known facts. Apparently 
 the same letter has been republished recently, and the matter of 
 "chocolate corn" is being agitated anew. The following statement 
 lias therefore been prepared for the information of those interested : 
 
 (1) The Department of Agriculture has for distribution no seed of 
 any plant called "chocolate corn. " 
 
 [Cir. 50] 
 
THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 11 
 
 The plant once known and used under that name was -nine one 
 ol' the manj \ ariet ies of sorghum. 
 
 (3) From the brief descriptions given bj differenl writers il is cer- 
 tain that the variet} was \m similar to the Early Amber sorgo 
 to-daj . 
 
 The writer of the letter quoted does not saj under what name t ho 
 seed was sent to his father. He do< - stat •, however, thai he never 
 heardit called ''chocolate corn." So far as recorded, the only sorghum 
 seed distributed !>> the United States Patent Office during President 
 Buchanan's administration was that of the Chinese sorgo. This was 
 sent to a very few selected persons in 1855, and 175 bushelsof mostl} 
 home-grown seed were distributed in 1857. It was undoubtedly this 
 Chinese sorgo which the correspondent recall-. The description 
 quoted tallies very well, as far as it goes, with the Chinese sorgo. 
 It was verj similar to our Earlj Amber sorgo. In fact, the Ajnber 
 sorgo variel ies are supposed \>y main to have been derived by selection 
 from the ( Chinese sorgo. 
 
 It is interesting to know, however, that a sorghum variety called 
 "chocolate corn," and used as a beverage, was known at a much 
 earlier date. The following quotation from a paper 6 on Sorghum 
 saccharatum, or ( hinese sorgo, written in 1S57, is sufficient to indicate 
 the use of such a variety about 1830: 
 
 It i~ by some supposed to bave been cultivated i<> a Limited extent in western 
 Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio, and perhaps in other Localities, twenty-five or thirty 
 yearn since, for the Beed or grain, which was then used, in Borne instances, as an 
 
 article "i t 1 by farmers who experimented in its cultivation. There were at 
 
 the time mentioned two varieties cultivated, one having black panicles under the 
 name "chocolate,' 1 and tin' other, having white panicles, was called "rice." The 
 "chocolate" or black varietj was prepared for use by browning the seeds, still con- 
 tained in the panicles, in the manner of coffee, and then making a coffee, w hich, with 
 the addition of cream and BUgar, resembled chocolate in appearance and somewhat 
 also in taste, and was quite palatable. 
 
 Since i he Chinese sorgo was not known t>> Europe until 1851, and 
 to this country until L853, it could not have been the "chocolate 
 corn" of L830. But a black-panicled varietj was introduced to 
 Europe in the first century A. I)., and was known to many European 
 herbalists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It was grown 
 and described in Ital\ by Arduino in L786. That it was imported to 
 the United States is the natural conclusion. Johnson grass was 
 brought from the Mediterranean region aboul 1830. 
 
 Most descriptions refer to tin- sorghum and to the Chinese sorgo 
 a- having black -ceil-. \\> sorghums having black seeds are known. 
 
 oSorgo i- the name adopted for the sweet or saccharine group of sorghums, often 
 erroneously called "sugar cam 
 
 bJohn II. Klippart, corresponding secretary, Ohio State Board "i Agriculture. 
 Rep |>. 109. 
 
 [Cir. 50] 
 
12 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 The Chinese sorgo and the Early and Minnesota Ambers have shining 
 black glumes, which closely surround the reddish-brown seed and 
 often remain attached after thrashing. In such cases the spikelet is 
 often described instead of the seed. 
 
 Nothing is known of the nutritive value of the seeds of this and 
 other sorghums in the preparation of household substitutes for coffee, 
 chocolate, etc. Some of the grain sorghums may be found to have 
 value as the basis of new cereal drinks comparable to those now 
 made from wheat preparations. Tannin is present in larger or smaller 
 quantities in the seed coats of all the brown and reddish-brown seeds. 
 There are, however, white-seeded varieties of kafir, kowliang, and 
 milo. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 Attention has been recently called to a crop under the name of 
 "chocolate corn" by a widely copied newspaper paragraph. 
 
 The statements regarding its high yields of grain, its use as a sub- 
 stitute for chocolate, and the possibility of securing seed from this 
 Department have caused a great deal of correspondence. 
 
 The Department has no seed of any crop known as "chocolate 
 corn" for distribution. The plant mentioned was a sorghum variety. 
 
 Some variety of sorghum was cultivated in this country under the 
 name of "chocolate corn" as early as about 1S30 and, sparingly, for 
 some time thereafter. It was probably similar to Amber sorgo. 
 
 The value of the seeds of the various sorghums in the preparation 
 of a beverage is not known. It may be possible to use them for this 
 purpose, as other grains are used in preparing cereal drinks. 
 
 GOOSENECK SORGO ("TEXAS SEEDED RIBBON CANE"). 
 
 There exists among farmers and seedsmen at the present time a 
 great deal of confusion concerning the plant known as Gooseneck 
 sorgo, and also passing under other names. The trouble has been 
 largely caused by the use of the name "Seeded Ribbon cane" for a 
 sorghum. A brief statement of facts gathered during the past five 
 years may serve to make the matter clear. 
 
 In order to understand how the use of this name has caused t rouble, 
 the following preliminary facts must be kept in mind: (1) The true 
 sugar cane (Saccharum officinarum) is commonly known as "Ribbon 
 cane" in the Gulf States where it is grown. (2) It does not produce 
 seed in this country, and fields are always started by planting the 
 stalks, .which is a comparatively laborious and expensive process. 
 (3) Sugar planters would eagerly welcome a true sugar cane which 
 could be grown from seed. (4) Sugar cane requires a subtropical 
 climate, and therefore can not be grown very far from the Gulf States. 
 
 [Cir. 50] 
 
THREE MUCH MISREPRESENTED S0RGH1 VIS 
 
 L3 
 
 Beginning about six years ago, a planl was much advertised and 
 its seeds widely sold at high prices under the name of "Texas Seeded 
 Ribbon cane." It was claimed to be a form of true sugar cane which 
 nol only produced seed, bul could be grown true from seed, thus doing 
 away with the labor of preserving and planting the stalks. 
 
 It was said to grow successfully as far north as northern Oklahoma 
 and Arkansas. It was further claimed that the United States De- 
 partment of Agriculture had pronounced it a true sugar cane. This 
 last st atement was, of course, prompt ly 
 denied. 
 
 Brief invesl igal ion showed thai t he 
 plant was a sorghum and the firsl sea- 
 son's trials identified it as the < roose- 
 neck sorgo (fig. 2). This was probably 
 one of the African imphees obtained in 
 Natal by Leonard Wray in 1851 and 
 introduced to Europe in L85 1 and to 
 the United States in 1857. It was a 
 well-known variety during the days 
 when sorgos were grown for sugar pur- 
 poses, hut had largely disappeared from 
 cultivation after those experiments 
 w ere discontinued." 
 
 As soon as these facts were learned 
 a brief statement was given to the agri- 
 cultural press and a great many in- 
 quirers informed by letter. In the 
 mean t ime. many farmers w ho had pur- 
 chased and planted seed recognized the 
 crop as the old Gooseneck sorgo. They 
 reported t heir belief both to t his De- 
 partment and to their agricultural 
 papers. However, the sale of seed as 
 that of a true sugar cane was continued 
 under the impetus of skillful advertis- 
 ing. The warnings of the farmers firsl humbugged seemed with- 
 out effeel . 
 
 At the close of the Second season a new complication appealed. 
 
 Many farmers reported that their crop, while clearly a sorghum, was 
 not t he Gooseneck variety hut some other. An examination of many 
 samples submitted for idem ifical inn showed that Sumac, ( )range, and 
 Planter sorgos, all varieties with erect beads, were being grown under 
 
 the name of "Seeded Ribbon cane." 
 
 Fig. 2.— A head of Gooseneck sorgo. (Oue- 
 thinl aatural si i 
 
 " At ih'' presenl time it is know a t" !»• of great value as a sirup and fodder i - 
 
 the Southern State.-. 
 [Cir. 50] 
 
14 THREE MUCH-MISREPRESENTED SORGHUMS. 
 
 From these facts it was a natural inference that, when their available 
 supply of the seed of Gooseneck sorgo was exhausted, growers and 
 dealers had substituted the seed of these other sorgo varieties rather 
 than lose sales at very profitable prices. When attention was called 
 to these facts the buying public was assured by some of the growers 
 and dealers that .there were two strains of "Seeded Ribbon cane," 
 one "Gooseneck" and the other "Straightneck," and the substitution 
 was continued. Recently a fourth variety, having erect heads, has 
 been offered by a grower as "Straightneck Seeded Ribbon cane." 
 This time it is the Sapling sorgo, once well known under the name 
 "Link's Hybrid." 
 
 It is gratifying to note that the leading seed firms handling sorghum 
 seeds in the Southwest, while still using the name "Seeded Ribbon 
 cane," use also the correct name, "Gooseneck sorgo," as an additional 
 title in describing this crop. This is helping much to clear up the 
 matter in the mind of the public. It will be still better when the 
 misleading name "Seeded Ribbon cane " is dropped entirely and this 
 variety sold under its true name, "Gooseneck sorgo," alone. It is 
 to be hoped also that the advertising and sale of other old and well- 
 known sorgo varieties, as "Straightneck Seeded Ribbon cane," will 
 be stopped. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 True sugar cane (SaccJiarum officinarum) is commonly known as 
 "Ribbon cane." In the past few years a variety of sorgo has been 
 widely advertised and sold as "Texas Seeded Ribbon cane." 
 
 It was at first claimed that this was a true sugar cane (Ribbon 
 cane) which could be grown from seed and cultivated much farther 
 north than other forms of sugar cane. 
 
 Investigation showed that the plant was the once well-known 
 Gooseneck sorgo, a true sorghum, and this fact was made known by 
 publication and through correspondence. 
 
 The seed continued, however, to be advertised and widely sold at 
 high prices, and when the supply ran short seeds of other sorgo varie- 
 ties, having erect heads, were substituted for the Gooseneck sorgo. 
 
 Complaining growers were then assured that there were two strains 
 of "Seeded Ribbon cane," one "Gooseneck" and the other "Straight- 
 neck." The sorgo varieties thus sold were Sumac, Orange, and 
 Planter. Recently a fourth, Sapling sorgo, has been offered by a 
 grower as "Straightneck Seeded Ribbon cane." 
 
 During the past two years leading seed firms in the Southwesl have 
 hccn explaining that the plant offered as "Seeded Ribbon cane" is 
 ( i'Hi^eneck sorgo. 
 
 Approved: 
 
 James Wilson, 
 
 Secretarij of Agriculture. 
 
 Washington, D. C, January 8, 1910. 
 
 [Cir. 50] Q 
 
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 
 
 3 1262 08928 9739