ybraty New Colleqe f Aqriculture University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign ACES UNIVERSITY LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN L h nl^T^ a L 9i ? 9 ! his . material is responsive for its journals. Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons he U P/ ti0n and may reSUlt in dismissal rn the University. Please note: self-stick notes may result in torn pages and lift some inks. 84fi 9fi9 V i^in ^ !Pn ne U6nter at 217 -333-8400, K)-2b2-1510 (toll-free) orcirclib@uiuc.edu Renew online by choosing the My Account option at- http://www.library.uiuc.edu/catalog/ $>$ m UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station BULLETIN No. 138 PASTEURIZATION AS A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER FROM CREAM SKIMMED ON THE FARM BY CARL E. LEE URBANA, ILLINOIS, SEPTEMBER, 1909 SUMMARY OF BULLETIN No. 138 1. In 1905, the comparisons represented by one tub of butter from each churn- ing and scored by only one judge, gave an average of seven-tenths (0.7) of one point higher score in favor of the butter made from the pasteurized cream. 2. During four months in storage the butter made from unpasteurized cream decreased in quality 0.3 and the butter from the pasteurized cream 0.45 of one point. 3. The 1906 butter inspected upon arrival in Chicago gave an average score of 0.5 of one point in favor of the butter made from the unpasteurized cream. Twenty-six days after the last lot of butter was made it was again scored by two judges, with an average of 0.97 and 0.27 of one point respectively in favor of the unpasteurized butter. 4. After the butter had been in storage another 101 days it was again ex- amined by the same men. According to one of these judges, there was no difference in the decrease of quality between pasteurized and unpasteurized butter, while the average of all the scores by the other judge showed that the butter made from the pasteurized cream decreased in quality 0.71 of one point more than the butter made from unpasteurized cream. 5. The 104 tubs of 1907 butter were scored by five judges 44 days after the first lot was made. According to three of these judges the unpasteurized butter scored higher by 0.56, 0.27 and 0.10 of one pojnt respectively. The other two judges scored the pasteurized butter higher by 0.3 and 0.41 of one point. Fol- lowing a period of four months in storage this butter was rescored by four of the former judges. According to three of them the unpasteurized decreased in quality 0.13.. 0.72 and 0.04 of a point more than the pasteurized butter, while the fourth judge scored the unpasteurized butter higher by 0.34 of one point. 6. The 1908 comparisons were represented by 160 tubs of butter shipped to both the Chicago and New York markets. The butter shipped to Chicago was scored by five different judges, thirteen days after the last butter was made with the following average results : Two of the judges favored the pasteurized butter by 0.2 and 0.1 of one point respectively. After six to seven months in storage this same butter was rescored by four of these same judges. The butter made from the unpasteurized cream decreased to the extent of 0.15, 2.02, 0.25 and 0.65 of a point respectively, more than did the butter made from the pasteurized cream. 7. The butter that was shipped to New York was scored by one judge before it was placed in storage with the result of 0.1 of one point in favor of unpas- teurized butter. According to this same judge the unpasteurized butter decreased in storage 0.35 of one point more than the pasteurized butter. The average of all the scores placed upon this butter after storage, by four judges, was 1.51 points in favor of the pasteurized butter. 8. Pasteurization does not affect the body or texture of butter. Curdling of cream by pasteurization increases the loss of fat in buttermilk. Pasteurization reduces the viscosity of sour cream and produces buttermilk of a watery appearance. Pasteurization does not improve the quality of butter made from sour farm-skimmed cream. 368 PASTEURIZATION AS A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER FROM CREAM SKIMMED ON THE FARM BY CARL E. LEE, ASSISTANT CHIEF IN DAIRY MANUFACTURES INTRODUCTION For the past four years the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion has been studying the problems relative to the quality of butter manufactured in our creameries from farm-skimmed cream. The change from the whole milk to the cream gathering system has resulted in a decline in quality of butter. There is some doubt as to the real cause of this deterioration, but it is needless to say that a greater effort should be exerted toward the improvement of a condition so important to the public. In this connection the following demand consideration. 1. Is there danger in allowing the farmer to keep cream until it deteriorates in quality before it is delivered to the creamery? 2. Does the age, flavor, and acidity of cream when delivered to the buttermaker, affect the quality of the butter? 3. What effect, if any, does the place where the milk is skimmed, have upon the flavor of creamery butter? 4. Is there anything that can be done in the factory, where this cream is churned, that might overcome the above mentioned defects? Naturally the benefit that might be derived from the proper handling of the cream on the farm has not been overlooked in this work. Pasteurization of farm-skimmed cream has been advocated in the past but no facts are available to show that butter made from such cream has been improved by pasteurization alone. PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS The first part of the work consisted in a preliminary study of the methods of handling cream in the creameries thruout the State. Facilities for studying pasteurization were found in many of the plants affording ample opportunity for a general survey of the systems now in use. Personal observations were made of the butter from factories where all the cream was pasteurized and this butter was compared with the product of creameries where pasteurization was not practiced. The cream at the various factories was in general of the same quality, but some butter made from pasteurized cream scored higher than that 369 370 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, from unpasteurized. The opposite was also true. From observations thus obtained, the following ideas were formed. 1. Pasteurized cream seemed to have the cleaner flavor. 2. Butter made from pasteurized cream was improved in quality from one to two points. 3. There was no apparent difference in the body of the butter made from pasteurized or unpasteurized cream. 4. Pasteurization curdled thin sour cream. 5. The curdling of cream by pasteurization increased the loss of butter fat in the buttermilk from 0.3 to 1.0 percent. 6. Where no curdling took place there was no greater loss in the buttermilk from pasteurized cream. 7. The amount of curdling varied with the make of pasteurizer used. 8. Curdling would increase on sour cream when the^ percent of fat was below 30. 9. The rapidity with which the cream was heated to a tempera- ture of 180 F. was an important factor in reducing curdling. 10. Factories in the same locality, making butter from unpasteur- ized cream sold their product for the same price per pound as did those factories making butter from pasteurized cream. 11. The quality of the butter decreased as the quality of the cream received at the factory decreased. 12. Pasteurization greatly increased the labor and expense of operation in the small creameries. After all these observations regarding quality of the butter there were still no data upon which to base conclusions. The writer had been the only judge of quality, and the butter in this comparison had not been made from cream of identical grade. Butter made from the same vat of cream one-half pasteurized and the other not, had never been submitted, side by side, to market inspection. The product made in two different factories or in the same factory on two separate days, was not comparable, for it could undoubtedly be said that the cream in one or the other might have had advantage in flavor. Investigational work in the manufacture of butter must be con- ducted with the utmost care. The factors that influence results are vefy numerous, complex, and difficult to eliminate. GENERAL PLAN Since the previous work was too general and not exhaustive to a conclusive degree, it was continued further, as follows : Quality of butter made from pasteurized sour cream was com- pared with quality of butter made from the same grade of cream not pasteurized. The two lots of cream for each day's comparison were handled in 2 2 y> 3 3 V* 4 5 S\4 7 Unpast. 5 5 8 4 2 1 1 Past. 3 10 7 3 1 1 New- Unpast. 3 14 4 1 2 2 man Past. 3 11 6 1 4 i Craw- Unpast. 10 11 3 ^ 2 ford Past. 11 10 3 1 1 Mittel- Unpast. 8 10 6 1 1 stadt Past. 6 9 5 4 i 1 Credi- Unpast. 5 1 6 6 i 3 1 1 1 cott Past. 9 2 2 4 3 3 2 1 After the scoring of July 25, the tubs of butter were again placed in storage at a temperature of 9 to 12 below zero. December 27, 1907, the butter was re-scored by four of the same judges who scored July 25. For this scoring the number on the top of the tubs was changed, while the original number remained on the bottom for identification, after scoring. 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 391 TABLE 14. RESULT OF SCORING THE 108 TUBS OF BUTTER DECEMBER 27, 1907 Unpasteurized Pasteurized Tub No. McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score 1st 4 1 92.5 92.5 91.5 91. not 2 No unpasteurized for comparison 92.5 89. 90.5 89. used in 3 92.5 90. 92. 93. general 4 92.75 89.5 92.5 91. average 5 91. 92.5 92. 92. 6 92.5 92. 92.5 94. 92.31 7 93. 92. 91.5 93. 8 92.75 93. 91. 91.5 92.17 9 93. 92.5 92.5 94. 10 93.25 92. 92.5 94. 92.87 11 92.75 91. 91.5 90.5 12 93.25 91. 91.5 93.5 91.87 "13 93.5 91.5 91.5 92.5 14 92.5 91.5 92.5 93. 92.31 15 92.25 93. 92. 90. 16 93. 92.5 92.5 92. 92.15 17 93.5 90. 92. 93. 18 92.5 90. 91.5 92. 91.81 19 92.50 92. 92. 93. 20 93.25 92. 92.5 90. 92.15 21 91.00 91.00 91.50 93.00 22 92.50 92.00 91.00 92.00 91.75 23 92.75 91.00 91.50 89.50 24 92.50 91.00 90.50 91.50 91.28 25 92.25 93.00 92.50 91.00 26 92.75 93.00 91.50 92.50 92.31 27 92.50 92.00 91.00 92.50 28 92.25 92.00 92.50 91.50 92.03 29 92.00 91.00 91.50 93.50 30 92.00 90.50 92.00 93.00 91.93 31 92.25 92.00 92.00 91.00 32 93.25 92.50 91.50 91.00 91.93 33 92.00 92.00 91.50 93.00 34 91.00 93.00 91.50 91.50 91.93 35 93.00 92.00 9.1 . 00 92.50 36 92.00 92.00 91.50 93.00 92.12 37 93.50 91.00 92.50 94.00 t 38 92.75 91.00 91.50 93.50 92.47 39 92.00 92.00 91.00 93.00 40 93.00 92.00 91.50 89.00 91.68 41 92.50 92.00 92.50 93.50 42 93.00 90.00 92.50 93.50 92.44 43 93.25 93.50 92.00 93.00 44 93.00 93.00 91.00 93.50 92.78 45 92.00 90.00 92.00 89.00 46 90.50 90.00 92.50 90.50 90.81 47 92.00 90.00 91.50 89.00 48 91.00 91.00 91.00 90.00 90.68 392 BULLETIN No. 138 TABLE 14 Continued [September, Unpasteurized Pasteurized Tub No.' McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score 49 91.00 90.00 91.00 90.00 50 90.00 88.00 89.50 89.00 89.81 51 92.25 90.00 91.50 91.00 52 92.50 89.00 91.50 90.00 90.97 53 89.00 88 . 00 88.50 93.00 54 89.00 89.00 91.00 91.00 89.81 55 92.00 92.00 91.00 91.00 56 93.50 93.00 90.50 92.50 91.93 57 92.25 93.00 92.00 91.00 - 58 92.50 93.50 91.50 89.00 91.84 59 92.75 89.00 91.00 90.00 60 93.00 89.50 90.50 92.00 90.47 61 92.75 90.00 92.00 92.50 62 92.50 91.00 91.50 93.00 91.90 ' 63 92.75 89.00 91.50 90.00 64 92.00 90.00 88.50 93.00 90.84 65 92.00 92.00 92.00 93.50 1 66 92.75 92.00 91.00 93.00 92.28 67 93.00 89.00 91.50 92.50 68 91.50 89.50 92.00 94.00 91.62 69 92.00 91.00 91.00 90.00 70 92.25 90.00 91.00 92.00 91.15 71 91.50 90.00 90.50 92.50 72 92.50 90.00 91.00 93.50 91.44 73 92.50 91.00 91.50 92.50 74 91.75 90.00 91.50 93.00 91.72 75 93.00 89.00 90.50 89.00 76 92.50 89.00 91.00 90.00 90.50 77 90.50 90.00 89.50 88.00 i 78 92.00 91.00 90.50 91.00 90.31 79 ^ 92.75 91.00 91.00 90.00 80 92.00 91.00 90.50 90.00 91.03 81 92.50 90.00 91.50 92.00 82 92.50 89.00 91.00 92.50 91.40 83 93.00 89.00 91.00 92.50 84 92.00 90.00 92.00 91.50 91.37 85 91.50 89.00 89.50 92.00 86 92.50 88.00 89.50 92.50 90.56 87 92.50 90.00 90.00 93.00 88 92.00 89.50 91.50 91.50 91.25 89 91.50 91.00 89.50 90.00 90 91.50 90.50 91.00 92.00 90.87 91 92.50 89.00 89.50 93.00 92 92.75 89.50 90.50 90.00 90.84 93 91.75 92.00 91.00 92.50 94 92.00 92.00 89.50 91.00 91.47 95 93.25 92.50 90.50 90.00 96 93.00 92.00 91.50 90.50 91.65 97 93.50 90.00 91.50 93.00 98 93.50 90.00 92.00 93.00 92.06 99 92.00 90.50 90.00 92.50 100 91.50 91.00 89.50 90.00 90.87 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 393 TABLE 14 Continued Unpasteurized Pasteurized Tub No. McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score McKay New- man Craw- ford Mittel- stadt Av. score 101 92.00 90.00 91.00 92.00 102 92.00 89.00 92.00 91.50 91.18 103 91.00 92.00 91.50 93.00 104 92.50 92.00 91.50 93.50 92.12 105 92.00 90.50 91.50 89.00 106 92.75 91.00 91.50 91.00 91.15 107 92.50 90.00 90.50 91.00 108 92.50 92.00 91.00 93.50 91.62 Av. 92.07 90 82 91 34 91 98 92 50 90 98 91 31 91 .54 Gain. 0.03 0.44 0.43 0.16 Result of McKay's Scoring. An average of 92.07 for the unpas- teurized butter and 92.5 for the pasteurized butter, or an average of 0.43 of a point higher for the pasteurized. The butter from 11 out of the 26 churnings of unpasteurized cream scored higher than the butter from corresponding churnings of pasteurized cream by one-eighth to one and three-fourths points. While from the 15 corresponding churnings of pasteurized and un- pasteurized cream the gain, was from one-eighth to three and three- fourths points in favor of the pasteurized. The variation in score on two tubs packed from the same churning was as follows : Unpasteurized butter : From 6 churnings, same score; 5, a variation of one-fourth point; 2, one-half point; 4, three-fourths; 5, one point; and 4, one and one- half points. Pasteurized butter: From 1 churning, same score ; 8, a variation of one-fourth point ; 4, one-half point; 4 V three-fourths; 6, one; and 3, one point. Result of Newman's Scoring. An average of 90.82 for the un- pasteurized and 90.98 for the pasteurized, or an average of 0.16 points higher for the butter made from the pasteurized cream. The butter from corresponding churnings of pasteurized and unpasteurized cream for one day scored the same. The butter from 10 out of the 26 churn- ings of unpasteurized cream scored higher by one-half to four points. From the other 15 comparisons the butter made from the pasteurized cream scored higher by one-fourth to four points. Variation in score on duplicate tubs packed from same churning of unpasteurized butter was as follows : From 8 churnings, same score; 6, a variation of one-half point; 10, a variation of one 'point; and 2, a variation of two points. The pasteurized butter from 10 churnings, the duplicate tubs, scored the same. From 9 churnings, a variation of one-half point; 6. a variation of one point; and 1, a variation of two points. Crawford's scoring gave an average of 91.34 for the butter from the unpasteurized and 91.31 for the pasteurized, or an average of 0.03 394 BULLETIN No. 138 [Septetnber, of a point higher for the unpasteurized butter. The butter from both the pasteurized and unpasteurized cream scored the same on two comparisons. The unpasteurized butter from 15 out of the 26 com- parisons, scored higher by one-fourth to two points than the butter from the pasteurized cream, while the butter from the pasteurized cream in the other 9 comparisons scored higher by one-fourth to one and one-fourth points. Scores on duplicate tubs were as follows : Unpasteurized butter: From 7 churnings, no variation ; 9, a variation of one-half point ; 6, one point; 3, one and one-half; and 1, two and one-half points. Pasteurized butter: From 3 churnings, no variation between duplicate tubs; 15, a variation of one-half point; 5, one point; 2, one and one-half; 1, three points. Result of Mittelstadt's Scoring. An average of 91.98 for the un- pasteurized and 91.54 for the pasteurized butter, or an average of 0.44 of a point higher for the unpasteurized. The butter from both the pasteurized and unpasteurized cream scored the same for two compari- sons. The butter from 16 churnings out of the 26 of unpasteurized cream scored higher than the butter from the pasteurized cream by one-fourth to three and one-fourth points. While from the other 8 comparisons, the gain was in favor of the pasteurized by one-fourth to two and one-fourth points. Variation in score on duplicate tubs as follow : Unpasteurized butter: From 3 churnings, no variation; 9, a variation of one-half point; 3, one point; 4, one and one-half points; 6, two points, and 1, three points. Pasteurized butter: From 2 churnings, no variation; 4, a variation of one-half point; 6, one point; 3, one and one-half; 3, two points; 3, two and one-half; 4, three points; and 1, four points. TABLE 16. VARIATION IN SCORE ON DUPLICATE TUBS DECEMBER 27, 1907 Extent of variation X H K 1 IK 2 2^ 3 3^ 4 McKay Unpast. 6 5 2 4 5 4 Past. 1 8 4 4 6 3 Newman Unpast. 8 6 10 2 Past. 10 9 6 1 Crawford Unpast. 7 9 6 3 1 Past. 3 15 5 2 1 Mittelstadt Unpast. 3 9 3 4. 6 1 Past. 2 4 6 3 4 2 4 1 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 395 TABLE 15. AVERAGE, HIGHEST AND LOWEST, OF THE EIGHT DIFFERENT SCORES ON THE SAME BUTTER DECEMBER 27, 1907 Unpasteurized Pasteurized p.m. a. m. Tub No. Av. Highest Lowest Tub No. Av. Highest Lowest 5, 6 9, 10 92.31 92.87 94. M. 94. M. 91. Me. 92. N. 7, 8 11, 12 92.17 91.87 93. Mc.M.N. 93.5 M. 91. C. 90.5 M. p.m. a. m. 13, 14 17, 18 92.31 91.81 93 . 5 Me. 93.5 Me. 91.5 N. C. 90. N. 15,16 19, 20 92.15 92.15 93. Mc.N. 93.25 Me. 90. M. 90. M. p.m. a m. 21, 22 25, 26 91.75 92.31 93. M. 93. N. 91. McNC. 91. M. 23, 24 27, 28 91.28 92.03 92.75 Me. 92.5McCM. 89.5 M. 91. C. p.m. a.m. 29, 30 33, 34 91.93 91.93 93.5 M. 93. N. M 90.5 N. . 91. Me. 31, 32 35, 36 91.93 92.12 93.25 Me. 93 . McM. 91. M. 91. C. p.m. a m. 37, 38 41, 42 92.47 92.44 94. M. 93.5 M. 91. N. 90. N. 39, 40 43, 44 91.68 92.78 93 . McM. 93.5 N.M. 89. M. 91. C. p.m. 45, 46 90.81 92.5 C. 89. M. 47, 48 90.68 92. Me. 89. M. p.m. a m. 49, 50 53, 54 89.81 89.81 91. Mc.C. 93. M. 88. N. 88. N. 51, 52 55, 56 90.97 91.93 92.5 Me. 93.5 Me. 89. N. 90.5 C. p.m. a m. p.m. 57, 58 61, 62 91.84 91.90 93.5 N. 93. M. 89. M. 90. N. 59, 60 63, 64 90.97 90.84 93 . Me. 93. M. 89. N. 88 . 5 C. 65, 66 92.28 93.5 M. 91. C. 67, 68 91.62 94. M. 89. N. p.m. a. m. 69, 70 73, 74 91.15 91.72 92.25 Me. 93. M. 90. N. M. 90. N. '71, 72 ' 75, 76 91.44 90.5 93.5 M. 93. Me. 90. N. 89. N.M. p.m. a. m. p.m. a m. 77, 78 81, 82 90.31 91.40 92. Me. 92.75 Me. 88. M. 89. N. 79, 80 83, 84 91.03 91.37 92.75 Me. 93 . Me. 90. M. 89. N. 85, 86 89, 90 90.56 90.87 92.5 Me. M 92. M. 88. N. 89.5 C. 87, 88 91, 92 91.25 90.84 93. M. 93. M. 89.5 N. 89. N. p.m. a m. 93, 94 97, 98 91.47 92.06 92.5 M. 93.5 Me. 89.5 C. 90. N. 95, 96 99, 100 91.65 90.87 93.25 Me. 92.5 M. 90. M. 89.5 C. p.m. a. m. 101, 102 105, 106 91.18 91.15 92. Mc.M. 92.75 Me. 89. N. 89. M. 103, 104 107, 108 92.12 91.62 93.5 M. 93.5 M. 91. Me. 90. N. Average 91.55 92.95 89.84 91.53 93.06 89.84 396 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 17. EFFECTS OF STORAGE UPON QUALITY AND EXTENT OF DECREASE Extent of decrease Y y* y* i ft .IH'IK 2M 3^ McKay Unpast. 5 2 9 7 7 4 4 3 2 Past. 9 10 3 4 6 2 7 2 1 Extent of decrease K 1 m 2 2J^ 3 SY* 4 4^ 4% 5 5 i -, 6 New- man Unpast. 1 2 3 10 5 10 1 4 7 1 2 3 1 Past. 4 1 68 9 3552 2 5 1 Craw- v ford Unpast. 6 4 5 11 5 11 3 3 ; 1 , 1 Past. 5 5 1 11 7 7 7 4 1 1 Mittel- stadt Unpast. 7 8 10 11 3 4 2 1 2 2 1 1 Past. 3 9 5 8 8 3 7 1 7 1 According to McKay, 9 tubs unpasteurized butter scored higher by one-fourth to one point, and 7 tubs pasteurized Gutter by one-fourth to one-half point. Newman scored one tub unpasteurized one point higher and one tub pasteurized one point higher. Crawford scored two tubs unpasteurized one-half and one point, and three tubs pasteur- ized one-half to one and one-half points higher for December scoring. 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 397 TABLE 18. COMPARING QUALITY ON BASIS OF AVERAGE OF ALL SCORES OF JULY 25 AND DECEMBER 27. ALSO INDICATING DECREASE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND SCORING Tub No. Unpasteurized Pasteurized Scores Decrease | Tub No. Scores Decrease July 25 Dec. 27 July 25 Dec. 27 5, 6 9, 10 93.5 93.66 92.31 92.87 1.19 0.79 7,6 11, 12 93.59 92.78 92.17 91.87 1.42 0.91 13, 14 17, 18 93.56 92.91 92.31 7 91.81 1.25 1.10 15, 16 19, 20 93.66 93.50 92.15 92.15 1.51 1.25 21, 22 25, 26 93.62 93.59 91.75 92.31 1.87 1.28 23, 24 27, 28 92.5 93.20 91.28 92.03- 1.22 1.17 29, 30 33, 34 94.37 93.5 91.93 91.93 2.44 1.57 31, 32 35, 36 93.09 93.15 91.93 92.12 1.16 1.03 37, 38 41, 42 94.15 94.00 92.47 92.44 1.68 J.56 39, 40 43, 44 93.69 93.93 91.68 92.78 2.01 1.15 45, 46 93.25 90.81 2.44 47, 48 93.07 90.68 2.39 49, 50 53, 54 91.62 92.5 89.81 89.91 1.81 2.69 51, 52 55, 56 92.47 93.22 90.97 91.93. 1.50 1.29 57, 58 61, 62 93.06 93.22 91.84 91.90 1.22 1.32 59, 60 63, 64 93.37 93.19 90.97 90.84 2.40 - 2.35 65, 66 93.09 92.28 0.81 67, 68 93.41 91.62 1.79 69, 70 73, 74 93.22 93.37 91.15 91.72 2.07 1.65 71, 72 75, 76 92.03 92.69 91.44 90.5 0.59 2.19 77, 78 81, 82 93.53 93.69 90.31 91.40 3.22 ; 2.29 79, 80 83, 84 r. 93.34 ! 93 . 5 91.03 91.37 2.31 2.31 85, 86 89, 90 92.94 92.72 90.56 90.87 2.38 1.85 87, 88 91, 92 93.34 93.06 91.25 90.84 2.09 2.22 93, 94 97, 98 93.44 93.87 91.47 92.06 1.97 1.81 95, 96 99, 100 93.25 94.22 91.65 90.87 1.60 3.35 101, 102 105, 106 93.66 93.50 91.18 91.15 2.48 2.35 103, 104 107, 108 93.19 93.09 92.12 91.62 1.07 1.37 Lverage 93.37 91.55 1.80 93.22 91.53 1.67 398 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 19. VARIATION IN SCORE ACCORDING TO EACH JUDGE ON 104 TUBS OF BUTTER BETWEEN JULY 25 AND DECEMBER 27 1907 Unpasteurized Pasteurized Tub No. McKay Newman Crawford Mittlestadt Tub No. McKay Newman Crawford Mittelstadt o a G Q V % i c V 8- i V o V la C i V Q V % V o c S V Q i ^ c I E O V 1 c c u a I V Q i V o V a u ! V Q V a u c V a C Q 9 N C 5 6 9 10 2M K % 2 3 2 2 N Cha IK K nge K 1 K N Cha O nge 7 8 11 12 1 1 N Cha 1 O nge 1 N Cha 2 O nge 2 2 2K K K 13 14 17 18 i M 2 5 2 2K iK K N Cha N Cha o nge o nge 15 16 19 20 M 2 2 3 1 K N Cha K O nge 4 2 K 4 21 22 25 26 i 4 2K 2 IK i * x2 x2 23 24 27 28 M K 3 1 IK N Cha K K o nge 3K IK IK 29 30 33 34 i IK 3 4K 2 K 3 1 /2 i 31 32 35 36 K M 1 N Cha 1 nge 2 2K 3 2K i IK 2 N Cha N Cha O nge nge 37 38 41 42 i N Cha nge 4 2 3 4K " /2 3 /^i i i N Cha o nge 39 40 43 44 No Change K No Change 2 3 3K 2 3 K 3 1 K 45 46 IK K 3 3 3 8 47 48 K 2 3 2K 3 3 3 49 50 53 54 IK IK 3K 3K 3 5 3 1 2 N Cha nge Chs 1 o mge 51 52 55 56 K N Cha 3 2 nge IK IK 2 IK 4 1 2 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 39$ TABLE 19 Continued Unpasteurized Pasteurized Tub No. 57 58 61 62 McKay Newman Crawford Mittlestadt Tub No. McKay Newman Crawford Mittelstadt a V Q I i! u c V 8 i Q u a i V Q i! u b U C u 8 1 V Q S a V c f*'"' u p G u a e c V 8 V u Q 1 o J3 a V ha e . 1 u O 5 u & O c V V O 8 g B H N Cha H O nge 1 A 1 1 4M 2K 1 K N Cha 1H O nge 2 4 1M N Cha nge 59 60 63 64 X IK H IK 5 5 5^ 3M N Cha 1M 2K IK nge 4 2 3 K 65 66 N*o Change No Change 3 2 N Cha 1 K Cha 2 2K 1H nge H N Cha nge 67 68 N Cha 2M nge 4K 2 2K 2 K K 69 70 73 74 H % 1 A % 3 4K 3 3K nge 4 1 1 y 2 71 72 75 76 IK M N Cha N Cha o nge nge N Cha ^A 3H nge 1 IK N Cha 2K 2 o nge IK i 4 2 77 78 81 82 iy 1 A iji 1 4K 2K 4K SK 4K 2K IK 2 6 3 2M 2 79 80 83 84 No Change 1 No Change IK 3 2 5 4M 3 2K 3 2 4 3 N Cha 1 O nge 85 86 89 90 1 H H i'H 4K 6 1H 2K 1% 2H 4) l Cha nge 1^ IH 3^i 87 88 91 92 N Cha IX K X nge 3J^ 5 2^ 1H 3 3K 3K K IK 3 IK 4 93 94 97 98 i X N Cha K nge 2 2M 5K 2 3^ 1H 2 1 3 1 1 95 96 99 100 H 1H K 2^ 5 4 1 IK 4 2 3K K 4 4K 3 2K 2K 4K 101 102 105 106 H H X 4K 5K 4 3 3 1 2K 1^ 2 2^ 5 2^ 103 104 107 108 i 1 A M IK K IK N Cha o nge IK K 2 1 400 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, 1908 This work was carried on at the University creamery, using all the butter fat delivered in both the milk and cream from May 2 until June 30. The milk contained a total of 3,614 pounds of butter fat. Deliveries were made daily by the patrons. The milk was skimmed and the cream was stored in the refrigerator until the churning days. The remainder of the butter fat was delivered in cream. During May, 65 patrons made 435 deliveries and in June, 71 patrons, 571 de- liveries. The cream patrons were asked to consider Tuesdays and Fridays the regular cream receiving days. A few of them did not comply with this request, but delivered when convenient. The cream delivered irregularly was stored with the cream from the milk. For example, cream delivered on Saturday was not churned until the following Tuesday. Wednesday's and Thursday's deliveries were, as a rule, churned on Friday. Since most of the cream was delivered twice a week, the acidity was comparatively high when received and the quality from day to day was very uniform. On the regular churning days, all of the cream in the refrigerator was placed in the receiving vat and mixed with that day's delivery. While the cream was being divided it was kept stirred, one-half flowing directly into the pasteurizer and heated to a tempera- ture of 180 F. This was collected from the cooler in 20 gallon ca'ns. While these cans were filling, cans of similar size were being filled with unpasteurized cream from the same vat. By this method it was possible to fill two cans at the same time with the same grade of cream, one of which was pasteurized. The smallest lot of cream handled for a single day's comparison was 2096 pounds. The average number of pounds of cream for the 20 churning days was 2848. In most cases as soon as a portion of the cream was in the ripener, the cooling was begun. The first three and the last one of the 20 comparisons of pasteurized and unpasteurized cream were held at churning temperature from 12 to 15 hours. Starter, thoroly mixed, then divided equally was added to both the pasteurized and unpasteurized cream for the first six, the eighth and the last eight comparisons. With the other five no starter was used on account of limited vat capacity. On each day after the cream had been divided both lots were again divided and churned in two different churns. Four 30 pound tubs of butter were packed from each churning, making a total of eight tubs each of pasteurized and unpasteurized butter. Two tubs from each of the 80 churnings were shipped to New York and the other 160 tubs stored in Chicago. The total amount of butter made for this experiment was 21,523 pounds. The following Table shows the days when the cream was divided, the percent of fat and acidity of the cream before it was divided, total pounds in the pasteurized and unpasteurized lots and pounds of starter added to each ; number of hours cream was heM at ripening temper- ature before cooled to churning temperature, also number of hours the cream was held cold before churning. 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 401 TABLE 20. RECORD OF HANDLING THE CREAM BEFORE IT WAS CHURNED IN MAKING THE 1908 EXPERIMENTAL BUTTER rp 4. -I Lb. Hrs. at TT l-^IJ Date lotal Lb. Percent Fat Acidity Past. lot. Unpast. lot Starter ripening temp. rlrs. held cold 5/6 2654 30.5 .36 1320 1334 169 2 hours 15-17 5/8 3045 31. .40 1530 1515 240 2 " 15-17 5/12 3112 31. .52 1555 1557 123 l /i hour 15-17 5/15 2827 31 J .52 1416 1411 245 At once 4-6 5/19 2881 33. .50 1448 1433 250 3-5 5/22 2990 33. .50 1430 1460 236 3-5 5/26 3363 31.5 .54 1689 1674 None 6-4 5/29 2879 31. .52 1458 1421 212 6-4 6/2 3224 32. .50 1615 1609 None 5-3 Yi 6/5 3322 32. .52 1651 1671 None 3-5 6/9 3525 32.5 .54 1759 1766 None 3-5 6/12 3402 32. .49 1721 1681 None 3-5 6/16 2754 33. .50 1386 1368 271 3-5 6/18 2234 31. .50 1121 1113 282 3-5 6/19 3054 29.5 .50 1548 1506 168 3-0 6/23 2904 31. .48 1476 1428 240 3-5 6/25 2096 32. .57 1095 1001 283 3-5 6/26 2505 29.5 .50 1255 1220 286 3-4 6/30 2136 31. .50 1068 1068 142 3-5 7/1 a.m. 2158 24.5 .50 108$ 1073 150 12-14 THE 1908 BUTTER WHICH WAS SHIPPED TO CHICAGO All of the butter shipped to Chicago was putin cold storage within twenty hours after it was taken out of the University Refrigerator. The temperature of the University refrigerator was about 32 F. Table showing when each shipment reached the Monarch Refrig- erators in Chicago^ and the age of the butter at that time is given below. Number of tubs Date placed in storage Date butter was made Age in days 24 May 16/1908 May 6, 9, 13, 1908 3 to 10 16 May 23, 1908 May 15, 19, 1908 4 to 8 16 ' May 28, 1908 May 22,26, 1908 2 to 6 16 June 4, 1908 May 29, 6, 2, 1908 2 to 5 16 June 12, 1908 June 5, 9, 1908 3 to 7 16 June 19, 1908 June 12, 16, 1908 3 to 7 24 June 25, 1908 June 18, 19,23, 1908 2 to 7 32 July 3, 1908 June 25, 26, 27 and 2 "to 8 July 1,1908 CHICAGO LOT The temperature of the Chicago storage room ranged from 8 to 12 below zero. July 13, all of the butter was taken out of the refrig- erator and placed in a tempering room where it gradually warmed to scoring condition. July 14, the 160 tubs of butter were scored by five judges, each working independently with no knowledge of what tubs contained pasteurized or unpasteurized butter, or which tubs were duplicates. 402 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 21. RESULT OF THE FIVE JUDGES WORK OF SCORING THE 160 TUBS OF BUTTER IN CHICAGO ON JULY 14, 1908 Pasteurized Unpasteurized Vat No. Churn No. Tub No. Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver ton Lee Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee 1 1 2 201 203 202 204 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 94.0 92.0 93.0 92.5 92.75 91.50 92.25 92.5 93.5 93.0 93.5 93.5 92.5, 93.0 93.0 93.0 3 4 205 207 206 208 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 94.0 93.0 93.0 91.5 93.0 91.0 92.25 92.75 94.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.5 93. 92.5 Av. 92.87 Av. 92.80 2 5 6 209 93.0 211 93.0 210 93.0 212 93.0 94.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 91.75 91.5 92.75 93.5 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 93 .-0 93.0 7 8 213 215 214 216 93.0 90.0 91.0 92.5 92.0 91.0 93.0 91.0 91.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92/0 93.5 93.5 92.0 92.5 92.0 92.0 Av. 92.85 Av. 92 . 10 3 9 10 217 219 218 220 92.0 91.0 91.5 91. r > 90.5 90.5 91.5 90.0 92.75 92.0 92.25 92.5 92.0 92.5 92.0 90.0 90.5 90.5 92.5 90.5 11 221 223 12 222 224 92.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.5 93.0 91.5 90.0 92.0 91.0 93.0 93.5 92.0 93.5 93.0 92.0 91.0 93.0 92.0 Av. 91.42 Av. 92 . 20 4 13 225 227 14 226 228 92.5 91.5 93.0 92.5 91.5 91.0 92.0 90.5 91.5 92.0 92.75 92.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 93.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 15 16 229 231 230 232 93.0 93.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 91.5 90.5 90.5 92.0 91.5 93.5 91.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.5 92.0 90.5 92.0 92.5 Av. 92.01 Av. 92 . 25 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER TABLE 21 Continued 403 Pasteurized Unpasteurized Vat No. Churn No. Tub No. Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee 5 17 18 233 235 234 236 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.75 92.0 93.0 92.0 93.5 92.0 93.0 92.0 90.5 ' 19 20 237 239 238 240 93.0 93.0 93.5 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 91.5 92.0 92.5 93.0 92.0 93.0 03 . 5 92.5 92.0 92.5 92.5 Av. 92.23 Av. 92.60 21 241 93.0 93.5 92.5 93.5 92.0 243 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.5 92.5 22 242 93.0 91.0 92.0 93.0 92.5 244 93.0 93.5 92.0 93.5 92.5 A 23 245 93.0 93.5 92.5 93.0 93.5 247 93.0 94.0 93.0 94.0 93.5 24 246 92.5 90.0 92.0 90.0 92.5 248 93.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 93.0 Av. 92.72 Av. 92.65 25 249 92.5 92.0 91.0 93.0 92.5 251 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 93.0 26 250 93.0 93.5 92.0 93.5 92.0 252 93.0 91.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 7 27 253 93.0 93.5 92.5 93.0 93.0 255 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 93.0 28 254 93.0 93.0 91.5 93.0 92.5 256 93.0 92.5 92.5 93.5 92.0 Av. 92.62 Av. 92.75 29 257 93.0 92.5 92.5 93.0 92.0 259 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 91.5 30 258 93.5 90.5 92.5 93.0 90.5 g 260 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 31 261 93.0 93.0 92.5 90.0 92.0 263 92.5 93.5 91.75 93.0 93.0 32 262 93.0 93.0 91.5 93.0 92.0 264 9*3.0 92.0 92.0 90.0 92.0 Av. 92.40 Av. 92.28 404 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 21 Continued Pasteurized Unpasteurized Vat No. Churn No. Tub No. Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee 9 33 34 265 267 266 268 92.0 92.5 91.5 92.5 93.0 92.5 91.5 92.0 91.0 90.5 92.25 92.75 92.0 92.0 92.5 93.0 92.5 92.5 92.5 92.5 35 36 269 271 270 272 92.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 91.0 92.25 92.75- 91.7* 88.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 Av. 92.17 Av. 92.18 10 37 38 273 275 274 276 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 90.0 93.0 92.0 91.75 91.75 92.5 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.5 92.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 92.5 '}) , 39 40 277 279 278 280 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 91.5 93.0 93.5 93.0 92.0 91.0 92.75 92.75 93.5 92.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 Av. 92.42 Av. 92.70 11 41 42 281 283 282 284 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.5 -91.5 92.0 91.5 91.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 93.0 92.0 92.5 93.0 - - 43 44 285 287 286 288 92.5 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.5 91.5 92.0 92.25 91.75 87.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.5 Av. 92.32 Av. 92.07 12 45 46 289 93.0 291 93.0 290 93.0 292 93.0 91.0 90.5 90.5 91.5 91.0 92.5 92.0 92.0. 90.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.5 47 48 293 295 294 296 93.0 92.5 92.0 93.0 93.5 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.5 92.5 91.5 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 91.5 92.5 Av. 92.07 Av. 92.65 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 405 TABLE 21 Continued Pasteurized Unpc'.steurized 'Vat No. Churn No. Tub No. Craw- ford New- man Mc- .Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee 13 49 50 297 299 298 300 93.0 92.5 92.5 93.0 91.5 93.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 91.5 92.0 91.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 89.0 92.5 92.0 92.0 92.5 51 52 301 303 302 304 92.0 92 5 93.0 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 91.75 91.5 91.5 89.0 87.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.5 Av. 92.05 Av. 91.96 14 53 54 305 307 306 308 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 90.5 90.5 91.5 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.5 86.0 90.0 92.0 90.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 55 56 309 311 310 312 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 91.0 92.5 92.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 93.0 Av. 91.90 Av. 92.57 15 57 58 313 315 314 316 93.0 93.0 93.5 93.0 92.0 92.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.25 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.5 59 60 317 319 318 320 94.0 94.0 93.5 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.25 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.5 90.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.5 93.0 Av. 92.68 Av. 92.68 16 61 62 321 323 322 324 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 91.5 93.0 91.75 92.0 92.5 91.0 92.0 92.0 93.0 87.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 92.5 63 64 325 327 326 328 93.0 93.0 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 92.75 91.75 91.5 92.0 93.0 92.0 87.0 92.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 Av. 92.08 Av. 92.35 406 BULLETIN No. 138 TABLE 21 Continued [September, Pasteurized Unpasteurized Vat No. Churn No. Tub No. Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee Craw- ford New- man Mc- Kay Wool- ver- ton Lee 17 65 66 329 331 330 332 91.0 91.0 91.5 92.0 88.0 86.0 86.0 85.5 90.5 91.0 91.0 91.5 87.0 87.0 86 :o 86.0 90.5 90.5 90.0 90.0 - 67 68 333 335 334 336 91.0 90.5 90.5 92.0 92.0 91.5 90.0 91.5 90.5 90.5 90.0 91.0 87.0 86.0 86.0 89.0 90.5 90.0 90.0 90.5 Av. 89.50 Av. 90.00 18 69 70 337 339 338 340 93.0 93.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.75 92.5 92.75 91.75 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 92.5 ' 71 72 341 343 342 .344 93.5 93.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 92.0 91.5 92.75 91.5 90.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 93.0 92.5 93.0 Av. 92.68 Av. 92.46 19 73 74 345 347 346 348 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 91.5 91.0 92.0 92.5 92.25 92.5 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 93.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 75 76 349 351 350 352 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.0 90.5 92.5 92.0 93.0 93.0 9,3.5 93.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 Av. 92.53 Av. 92.67 20 77 78 353 355 354 356 93.0 93.0 91.0 91.0 91.5 89.5 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.0 93.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 93.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 93.0 92.0 79 80 357 359 358 360 ** 92.5 93.5 93.0 93.0 92.5 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.5 92.5 93.0 92.5 92.5 87.0 92.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 92.0 92.0 Av. 92.15 Av. 92.37 Av. 92.7 91.8 92.1 92.1 92.2 92.8 92.6 91.9 92. 92.4 Gain 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.2 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 407 The butter had all been scored by Lee the day after each lot of 8 tubs were made. The score placed upon the butter at that time was the same as the scores recorded in Table No. 31, New York lot of butter. Tubs Nos. 201 and 203 for Chicago were packed from the same churning as 401 and 403 for New York, 202 and 204 Chicago and 402 and 404 New York from same churning, the two churnings taken from the same vat of pasteurized cream May 6, 1908. Table 22 is compiled from Table 21. Each of the twenty com- parisons was represented by four tubs. The average of the four scores on the pasteurized butter from Vat 1, according to Crawford was 93 ; Newman, 92.87 ; McKay, 92.25 ; Woolverton, 93.37 ; and Lee, 92.87. The butter made from the same cream unpasteurized received the following average scores. Crawford and Newman 92.87; McKay, 92.25 ; Woolverton and Lee, 93.00. On this day two of the judges a g 05 5 H w w fl < o il ***** ********** -1 * * * * - * * * * * * * 4 * * ***** ********* . * * * t^. CN in CN t--. !> ^r- 10 cs CN v> CN r- ^-.vOvO t~-^-c 00 408 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, favored the pasteurized, one the unpasteurized butter, while there was no difference according to the other two judges. This shows that the average of the 400 scores on pasteurized com- pared with the 400 on unpasteurized butter gave 0.15 of a point in favor of the unpasteurized. The average score for each day's make of the pasteurized butter for eight out of the twenty days is the same or higher than the average score of the unpasteurized butter. There were only two days that the butter made from the pasteu- rized cream, and one day butter from unpasteurized cream did not receive one or more scores of 93 or 94. A comparison somewhat similar can be made of the lowest score for each day. The judge who was responsible for the lowest score sometimes gave the highest score on a duplicate tub of the same day's make. Tables 24 and 25 are self explanatory, giving the result of scoring. SB o H H K 3 O y =< o . o o o. o C7\ xo \O ro O * ^ ON ON ON O\ s,,> ON ON ON OO ON ON ON 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 409 TABLE 24. VARIATION IN SCORE ON DUPLICATE TUBS, JULY 14, 1908 Mc- Kay Lee Craw- ford New- man Extent of variation M H M 1 1M 1^ 2 2K 3 4 5 5^ 6 Churn No. Past. 1 2 6 5 3 4 7 3 i 2 4 i i 1 1 1 Unpast. 1 2 4 2 1 1 4 9 2 3 6 3 1 2 2 Past. 1 2 6 9 10 6 4 2 2 1 Unpast. 1 2 5 7 11 11 3 2 1 Past. 1 2 9 12 8 6 3 2 Unpast. 1 2 11 11 8 5 1 3 1 Past. 1 2 4 4 7 6 4 4 1 3 3 1 1 2 Unpast. 1 2 . 4 3 9 6 4 5 1 4 1 1 1 1 Wool- ver- ton Past. 1 2 9 6 4 6 5 ' 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 Unpast. 1 2 2 5 2 6 8 5 2 1 1 1 TABLE 25. RESULT OF FIVE JUDGES, SCORING 160 TUBS OF BUTTER MAKING A TOTAL OF 800 INDIVIDUAL SCORES TABULATED ON THE BASIS OF LIKE SCORE 1 Judges i Score 94 93i 3 93 7 6 16 92| 8 6 92J 16 19 31 92i 5 4 92 91-] 91* 6 12 2 91 8 10 90^ 2 5 7 90 2 2 89^ 89 88 87 86 85J McKay Past. 23 11 22 20 5 5 Unpast. Lee Past. Unpast. 20 30 1 1 3 2 Craw- ford Past. 2 4 7 50 46 11 13 5 9 5 1 5 2 1 Unpast. New- man Past. 2 3 20 12 12 11 5 8 2 1 2 1 Unpast. 2 7 37 9 15 5 1 1 3 Wool- verton Past. 2 11 10 30 32 9 4 19 18 4 4 1 2 3 1 3 5 3 2 Unpast. Totals ! 8 | 45 264 14 154 9 154 10 37 31 33 19 1 2 8 7 1 410 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, Only one tub of butter received the same score from all five judges. Reading horizontally Table 25 indicates number of tubs for any given score. Ex. 8-94 scores and 45-93*/2 and so on. SUMMARY OF JUDGES' WORK, JULY 14, 1908 McKay, Pasteurised. 7 tubs scored 93; 8 tubs, 92%; 16 tubs, 92^; 5 tubs, 92^4; 23 tubs, 92; 5 tubs, 91%; 6 tubs, 91}^; 8 tubs, 91 ; and 2 tubs, 9Q l / 2 . Average 92.1. Difference between highest and lowest score 2 l / 2 points. Greatest variation between duplicate tubs 2 points. Unpasteurized. 6 tubs scored 93 ; 6 tubs, 92% ; 19 tubs, 92^ ; 4 tubs, 92%; 11 tubs, 92; 5 tubs, 91%; 12 tubs, 91^; 10 tubs, 91; 5 tubs, 90j/2 ; 2 tubs, 90. Average 91.9. Difference between highest and lowest 3 points. Greatest variation between duplicate tubs 2 points. Lee, Pasteurized. 16 tubs scored 93 ; 31 tubs, 92.5 ; 22 tubs, 92 ; 2 tubs, 91.5 ; 7 tubs, 90.5 ; 2 tubs, 90. Average 92.2. Difference between highest and lowest score 3 points. Greatest variation between dupli- cate tubs 2 points. Unpasteurized. 3 tubs scored 93.5 ; 20 tubs, 93 ; 30 tubs, 92.5 ; 20 tubs, 92 ; 1 tub, 91.5 ; 1 tub, 91 ; 3 tubs, 90.5 ; 2 tubs, 90. Average 92.4. Difference between highest and lowest score 3 l / 2 . Greatest difference between duplicate tubs \ l / 2 points. Crawford, Pasteurized. 4 tubs scored 93.5; 50 tubs, 93; 11 tubs, 92.5; 5 tubs, 92; 5 tubs, 91.5; 5 tubs, 91. Average 92.7. Difference between highest and lowest score 2 l / 2 points. Greatest difference be- tween duplicate tubs 1 point. Unpasteurized. 2 tubs scored 94; 7 tubs, 93 ^ ; 46 tubs, 93 ; 13 tubs, 92^ ; 9 tubs, 92; 1 tub, 91 ; 2 tubs, 90y 2 . Average 92.8. Difference between highest and lowest score Z l / 2 points. Greatest variation be- tween duplicate tubs \ l / 2 points. Newman, Pasteurized. 2 tubs scored 94 ; 3 tubs, 9Z l / 2 ; 20 tubs, 93 ; 12 tubs, 92y 2 ; 12 tubs, 92; 11 tubs, 91.5 ; 8 tubs, 90.5 ; 5 tubs, 91 ; 2 tubs, 90; 1 tub, 89.5; 1 tub, 88; 2 tubs, 86; 1 tub, 85.5. Average score 91.8. Difference between highest and lowest score 9 l / 2 points. Greatest variation between duplicate tubs 2]/ 2 points. Unpasteurized. 2 tubs scored 94 ; 7 tubs, 93^ ; 37 tubs, 93 ; 9 tubs, 92.5; 15 tubs, 92; 5 tubs, 91.5; 1 tub, 91; 1 tub, 90.5; 3 tubs, 90. Average 92.6. Difference between highest and lowest scores Zy 2 points. Greatest variation between duplicate tubs, 2 l / 2 points. Woolverton, Pasteurized. 11 tubs scored 93.5, 30 tubs, 93; 9 tubs, 92.5; 19 tubs, 92; 4 tubs, 90; 1 tub r 89; 3 tubs, 87; 3 tubs, 86. Average 92.1. Difference between highest and lowest score 7 l / 2 points. Greatest variation between duplicate tubs 6 points. Unpasteurized. 2 tubs scored 94; 10 tubs, 93.5 ; 32 tubs, 93; 4 tubs, 92.5 ; 18 tubs, 92; 4 tubs, 90; 2 tubs, 89; 1 tub, 88; 5 tubs, 87; 2 tubs, 86. Average 92. Difference between highest and lowest score 8 points. Greatest difference between duplicate tubs 5 l / 2 points. January 13, 1909, this lot of butter was again scored by four of the same men who scored the butter July 14, 1908. Mr. D. C. Wool- 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 411 verton was absent on account of illness. The original number on each tub cover was removed and the tubs re-numbered by Messrs. Jorgensen and Hepburn, as indicated by the number in the first column. Each judge worked independently, except that the man who acted as his secretary might at times examine the same trier of butter. TABLE 26. RESULT OF THE FOUR JUDGES WORK OF SCORING THE 160 TUBS OF BUTTER. HELD IN CHICAGO, JANUARY 13, 1909 Pasteurized Unpasteurized Judging No. Original No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 100 116 17 123 201 203 202 204 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 92.5 92.5 93.5 93.5 93.0 92.0 91.5 92.5 92.5 44 106 68 26 205 207 206 208 90.0 91.0 91.0 90.5 90.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 89.5 91.5 92.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.5 Av. 92.06 Av. 91.37 86 127 168 16 209 211 210 212 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.0 91.5 92.5 92.0 92.0 92.5 92.5 93.5 90.0 92.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 159 37 158 96 213 215 214 216 90.0 90.5 90.0 91.0 92.0 91.0 91.5 90.5 90.5 92.0 88.0 90.0 91.0 91.0 91.5 91.5 Av. 91.87 Av. 90.75 3 160 22 29 217 219 218 220 90.0 90.0 91.0 91.0 90.5 90.5 90.5 90.5 89.0 89.0 92.0 91.0 90.5 90.5 91.5 92.0 67 126 75 112 221 223 222 224 / 90.5 91.5 90.0 90.5 92.0 88.0 91.5 91.5 92.5 87.0 91.0 89.0 92.5 90.5 91.5 90.5 Av. 90.59 Av. 90.62 65 121 146 84 225 227 226 228 91.5 90.0 90.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 92.0 89.5 90.5 91.5 91.5 91.0 92.0 102 18 1 24 229 23l 230 232 90.5 90.5 91.5 90.5 91.5 91.0 92.0 92.0 91.5 91.0 89.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 91.5 91.5 Av. 91.18 Av. 91.18 412 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 26 Continued Pasteurized Unpasteurized Judging No. Original No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 83 233 i 91.5 91.5 93.0 91.5 98 235 91.0 91.0 92.0 92.5 88 234 90.0 92.0 91.5 92.0 28 236 89.5 91.5 9-2.0 92.5 99 237 90.5 91.0 91.5 92.0 90 239 90.0 91.5 92.5 92.0 59 238 90.5 92.0 91.0 91.5 119 240 90.0 91.5 89.0 91.0 Av. 91.56 Av. 91.09 70 241 1 90.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 71 234 90.5 91.0 92.5 91.5 51 242 91.5 91.5 91.5 92.0 56 . 244 91.0 92.0 92.0 92.5 130 245 i 91.0 92.0 90.0 91.5 151 247 90.5 92.0 91.5 91.5 63 246 91.5 91.5 89.5 88.0 74 248 92.0 92.5 91.5 91.5 Av. 91.56 Av. 91.12 69 248 91.0 91.5 91.0 91.5 33 251 91.0 92.0 89.0 91.5 165 250 91.25 92.0 91.0 91.5 161 252 91.0 -92.0 90.5 92.0 150 253 91.5 91.5 89.5 91.5 14 255 92.0 92.0 92.5 90.5 188 254 90.5 91.0 87.0 91.0 2 256 86.0 90.0 85.0 90.0 Av. 91.23 Av. 90.09 ' 53 257 91.5 91.5 91.5 92.0 - 9 259 91.75 92.0 90.5 92.5 143 258 90.0 92.0 88.0 92.0 60 260 91.5 92.0 90.0 92.0 101 261 91.0 92.0 87.0 91.5 50 263 90.5 91.5 90.5 91.0 148 262 91.0 92.0 88.0 91.0 91 264 90.5 91.5 89.0 91.0 Av. 91.29 Av. 90.56 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 413 TABLE 26 Continued Pasteurized Unpasteurized Judging Original No. No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 139 265 90.0 91.5 90.5 91.0 na 267 91.75 92.0 91.5 92.0 34 266 91.0 91.5 92.5 92.0 * 32 268 90.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 134 269 90.5 91.0 91.5 89.0 92 - 271 90.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 149 270 '90.0 91.5 89.0 91.5 10 272 91.0 92.0 87.0 92.0 Av. 91.45 Av. 90.78 55 273 92.5 91.5 91.5 92.5 31 275 90.5 92.0 91.5 92.5 19 274 92.0 92.0 89.0 92.0 12 276 91.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 57 277 89.0 91.5 90.0 9f.O 8 279 91.5 92.0 89.0 91.5 137 278 90.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 93 280 90.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 Av. 91.65 Av. 91.09 162 281 91.5 91.5 92.0 92.0 40 283 89.5 91.5 90.0 92.0 52 282 90.5 91.5 90.5 91.5 38 284 91.5 90.5 90.0 92.0 154 285 90.0 92.0 89.0 92.0 142 287 . 90.5 92.0 88.0 90.5 97 286 90.0 92.0 87.0 i 91.0 39 2SS 91.5 92.0 88.0 91.0 Av. 91.12 Av. 90.40 82 289 91.0 92.0 89.0 92.0 45 . 291 89.5 '91.5 90.0 92.0 167 290 90.5 91.0 91.0 92.0 80 292 91.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 132 293 90.0 91.5 90.0 92.0 114 295 89.5 91.5 89.0 92.0 49 294 90.0 90.5 89.0 92.0 170 296 90.0 92.0 89.0 91.0 Av. 91.06 Av. 90.56 414 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 26 Continued Pasteurized Unpasteurized Judging No. Original No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 42 124 46 81 297 299 298 300 92.0 91.0 90.0 91.0 91.5 92.5 91.0 92.0 92.5 90.0 91.5 91.5 92.0 91.5 91.5 - 92.0 47 72 169 211 301 303 302 304 91.0 90.0 90.5 91.5 91.0 91.0 92.0 92.0 90.0 91.5 88.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 91.5 91.5 Av. 91.47 Av. 91.06 76 107 7 6 305 307 306 308 90.5 90.0 92.0 90.5 91.0 92.5 92.0 92.0 91.5 91.5 92.0 92.0 91.5 92.5 92.5 92.0 155 105 35 103 309 311 310 312 90.0 92.0 91.5 90.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 91.5 91.5 91.5 92.0 91.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 Av. 91.62 Av. 91.55 166 13 79 128 313 315 314 316 91.5 91.5 91.0 91.5 91.5 92.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 90.0 90.5 89.0 92.0 91.5 92.0 91.5 125 78 4 23 317 319 318 320 89.0 89.0 90.5 92.0 91.5 91.5 92.0 92.0 88.0 89.0 91.0 90.5 91.0 92.0 92.0 92.5 Av. 91.31 Av. 90.84 144 113 21 . 141 321 323 322 324 90.0 89.5 91.5 91.0 91.5 91.5 91.5 90.0 91.0 90.0 91.0 91.5 91.5 92.0 92.5 92.0 145 129 140 136 325 327 326 328 91.0 89.5 91.0 90.5 92.0 90.0 92.0 91.5 91.5 89.5 89.0 92.0 91.5 92.0 91.5 89.5 Av. 91.12 Av. 90.87 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER TABLE 26 Continued 415 Pasteurized Unpasteurized Judging No. Original No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 64 66 62 152 329 331 330 332 90.5 90.5 87.0 89.5 90.5 91.5 89.0 89.5 87.0 87.0 88.0 87.0 91.0 89.0 89.0 89.0 133 135 36 164 333 335 334 336 90 . 0'' 91.55* 87.0 89.0 90.0 90.5 89.0 89.0 87.0 87.0 86.0 87.0 91.5 89.0 89.0 89.0 Av. 89.06 Av. 88.97 94 54 25 156 337 339 338 340 91.5 92.0 91.0 91.0 92.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 92.5 92.0 92.5 90.5 92.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 109 ' 147 111 117 '341 "343 342 344 91.5 90.5 92.5 91.0 92.0 92.0 '92.5 91.5 91.5 90.0 91.5 88.0 91.0 92.0 92.0 89.0 Av. 91.81 Av. 91.15 122 87 131 30 345 347 346 348 90.5 90.5 91.0 91.5 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 92.0 88.0 92.0 92.0 91.5 91.5 92.5 104 11 153 115 349 351 350 352 91.5 92.0 91.0 91.0 92.0 92.0 92.5 91.0 89.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 91.0 Av. 91.37 Av. 91.18 157 163 20 110 353 355 354 356 91.0 91.0 92.0 91.0 91.5 91.0 89.0 89.0 89.0 91.5 86.0 88.0 90.5 91.5 89.0 91.5 95 73 58 89 1 357 359 358 360 89.5 88.0 87.0 89.5 91.0 90.0 88.0 88.0 86.0 85.0 84.0 86.0 92.0 91.0 86.0 87.0 Av. 90.15 Av. 88.0 Average 90.89 91.47 90.84 91.71 90 . 44 91 41 89 62 91 18 Gain. . . . 0.45 0.06 1.22 0.53 416 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, TABLE 27. COMPARISON OF PASTEURIZED AND UNPASTEURIZED BUTTER AFTER STOR- AGE, BASED UPON SCORES OF JANUARY 13, 1908, CHICAGO Pasteurized Unpasteurized Vat No. Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee Mc- Kay Craw- ford New- man Lee 1 91.50 91.75 90.37 92.12 90.62} 91.67} 91.12| 92.12* 2 91.37 92.00 92.12 92.00 90.37* : 91.25f 90.12} 91. 25} 3 90.50 90.50 90.25 91.12 90.62-j 90.75f 89.87} 91.251 4 90.87 91.50 90.87 91.50 90.75- 92..62f 90.87* 91.50* 5 90.50 91.50 92.12 92.12 90.25; 91.50* 91.00} 91.62} 6 91.75. 91.50 92.12 92.00 91.25- 92.00f 90.62- 90.62} 7 91.06 91.87 90.37 91.62 90.00: 91.12} 88.50; 90.75} 8 91.18 91.87 90.00 92.12 90.75: 91.75} 88. 62} 91.12} 9 90.81 91.75 91.50 91.75 90.50 91.62} I 89.87} 91.12- 10 91.62 91.87 90.87 92.25 90.37: 91.87* 90.50} 91.62- 11 90.75 91.25 90.62 91.87 90.50 92.00-J- 88.00- 91.12- 12 90.50 91.37 90.37 92.00 89.87} 91.37* 89.25: 91.75" 13 91.00 91.75 91.37 91.75 90.75| 91.50} 90.25: 91.75* 14 90.75 91.87 91.75 92.12 91.00f 92.00-f- 91.62: 91.50: 15 91.37 91.75 90.37 91.75 90.12} 91.75* 89.62; 91.87- 16 90.50 91.12 90.87 92.00 90.50* 91.37t 90.501 91.12- 17 89.37 90.12 87.50 89.50 89.37* 90.00} 86.75} 89.75- 18 91.37 91.87 91.87 92.12 ! 91.37* 92.00t 90.25} 91.00- 19 90.87 92.00 90.75 91.87 91.37f 91.87} 89.75} 91.75: 20 ! 91.25 90.12 88.62 90.62 88.50} 89.25} 85.25} 89.00: *Butter made from both the pasteurized and unpasteurized cream after storage, received the same average score. iHigher score for the pasteurized butter, tfllgher for unpasteurized butter. The above table is compiled from Table 26. The average of the scores on the four tubs of butter made from the pasteurized cream, Vat 1, by McKay, was 91.50; Crawford, 91.75; Newman, 90.37; and by Lee, 92.12. ' The butter made from the same cream unpasteurized, received the following average scores: McKay, 90.62; Crawford, 91.67; Newman, 91.12 and Lee, 92.12. Two of the judges placed a higher average score on the pasteurized, one on the unpasteurized but- ter, and the fourth judge placed the same score on both lots. 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 417 Q 2 S S w <; >< 5 t-H bo B rt 3 De- crease ^ ,-( r-K,-l O - 1 55 -^ ^?5 J3 O * X- | ^o X &*" \\N CS CN rt\i-t\ * ^ rt In- crease - x| d ,3 ^ X ^ eJ -?\CN "-^ 10 CN >-K r<5 IH\ \^ ** CN CO ^^^^ fOCN^ 1 tn rt a, TJ c. 1 In- crease (U M d 3 jB P & 3 u , <2 si S"^ -^5? o O Tjl ^ ^4 a 5-x \\\ CS) t-K-i\r^\ ^H^ r-i\ S M In- crease 0) to a oi q X 0) 0) be bo B B rt rt ^2 ,C o a 0> , sl u v\^< ff) O 1 - < N- H N g-rs _ \^_ *^ r-\^ *? u u -00^ ^^ N^NNNC^ fSJ rH\rH\f^\ T-l -l CN ** :P H in t- <3 OO O O O O cs r^cs cs ro i^) ^< O N CN CN CN '-t fO CN TJ< CN CN CN CN CN CN CN (N O O CN CN fO fO fO CN CN CN CN t^- O OO O CO CO (5 TJ< CN CN CN CN l/ t^ \O OO CN CN CN CN 8 u B co 1 1 )-< o a> M a j . ^^o^ \- \r|.\^ \ CN "-Ki-iX CN ^ f-l o 0N^ ^ M *- s- :P HZ M fO (M rj< I O O O O CS CS CN (N 1 O O CN o CN CS CN (N 1^- O OO O CN CN CN CN to i^ \O OO CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN fO >o *" *O ro fO fO fO CN CN CN CN * CN T*< * <* rj< rj< CN CN CN CN 420 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, _4> V 3 bo bo <8 i-t CN *-< *J- -.xxs - O CN *-KrR -1^ 55 ^ I'*" c In- crease TJ 0) 2 o fc O co 5 Nfl \ff< i-K^n fs J\ <*< * vo : * ^, X I f I HH Wi O Xi-l CN CO * O ^^ XS-- *;*- -*- In- crease * a a o ^1 -*-* f^ ^Jg^ H ^^ CN H o !? ?f)if> *& \O -i CO CN ^ O rt O CN It^ ON 00 O lo t^ \O OO co tf) ^1" sO -H CO CN * H^5. CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CNCNCNCN CN CN CN CN CN CN CS CN CN CN CN CS s In- crease bo^ * r ^N. bo ^-H fJn rj fl M V bo C OB q 5 0) ^ c^ -*** O O O 5xcs o o O * - I - * ** - 1 i J CN CS CN 5- * - ^ CN ; x 2 ^ ^ ri^ S-S- ^^ X ?x S^XX -xx Xo*^ Q b | In- crease 1 a ? * p bfi c rt _q So c i bo bo S c cd J3 r rj o 4J o -*x - 2^ 3- O o ^ CO JH CJ ^^^55 g| ON *-i O CN TJ< LT) IO XO CN CN CN CN t^ ON OO O 55 l *-& 55*x \N \^2* CO M x-^ o O^! O ^H O R v*1 CO "SvO CO :P o ON H O CN t^ ON 00 O to r^ \O 00 CO UT^ NO H to CN Tj ON '-i O CN I--. O> OO O CO CO to CO CO CO to to to 1 555* O & 5*** *... ^~~~ :P to r^ \o oo O O O O CO CO CO CO co IO ^ vO fO CO CO r vo oo CO W1 Tj< VO to co to co 422 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, RESULT OF SCORING NEW YORK LOT OF BUTTER, DECEMBER 31, 1908. As soon as the butter had been tempered after coming out of storage it was scored by four judges working independently. Accord- ing to Kieffer, the butter made from the cream which was pasteurized received an average score of 90.52, while the butter made from cor- responding lots of cream not pasteurized, received an average score of 89.77 ; an average of 0.75 of a point in favor of the pasteurized butter. According to the scores placed upon the same butter by Smarzo, the butter made from the pasteurized lots of cream received an aver- age score of 91.12 and the butter from unpasteurized cream, an aver- age score of 89.68, or a difference of 1.44 of a point in favor of the pasteurized. Crawford's average score of the butter made from the pasteurized cream was 91.27 and the unpasteurized 90.69, an average of 0.58 of a point in favor of the butter made from pasteurized cream. Lee's average on the same butter was 91.15 for the pasteurized and 90.67 for the unpasteurized or 0.48 of a point in favor of the but- ter made from pasteurized cream. The average of the scores placed upon the four tubs of pasteurized butter for each day compared with the average of the four tubs of cor- responding butter from unpasteurized cream gives the following daily data. ! KIEFFER'S DAILY COMPARISON There was no difference in quality between pasteurized and unpas- teurized butter for two days; thirteen days from 0.5 to 3 points in favor of the butter made from the pasteurized cream, and on the other five out of the twenty days the average score was higher by one-fourth to one and one-fourth points for butter made from the cream that was not pasteurized. Comparing Kieffer's score on the eighty individual tubs of pasteurized butter with the corresponding tubs of butter from the unpasteurized cream the following results were obtained : 13 tubs compared, same score; 18, one point in favor of pasteur- ized; 14, two; 6 three; 6, four; 1, five; and 1, seven points. In 9 tubs compared, the butter made from the unpasteurized cream scored higher by one point; 8 tubs higher by two points; 1, three points; 2, four, and 1, five points. The variation in score on duplicate tubs was as follows: There was no difference in the score on duplicate tubs of butter packed from 11 churnings of pasteurized and 5 churnings of unpasteurized cream; 15 pasteurized and 10 unpasteurized, one point variation in score; 4 pasteurized and 15 unpasteurized, two points; 6 pasteurized and 7 un- pasteurized, three points ; 1 pasteurized and 2 unpasteurized, four ; 2 pasteurized and 1 unpasteurized, five points. SMARZO'S DAILY COMPARISON There was no difference in quality between pasteurized and unpas- teurized butter for one day. On only two days out of the other 19 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 423 did the average score on the four tubs of unpasteurized butter range higher than the butter made from the pasteurized cream. Comparing individual tubs of pasteurized with unpasteurized butter, we find that 7 out of the 80 comparisons show no difference in quality. In 66 of the comparisons the butter made from the cream which was pasteur- ized scored higher by one-half to 6 l / 2 points while the other 7 scored higher in favor of unpasteurized butter by one-half to three points. Smarzo's variation on duplicate tubs as follows: No difference in score on duplicate tubs of butter packed from 15 churnings of pasteurized and 8 of unpasteurized cream. 14 pasteurized and 7 unpasteurized, one-half point variation; 6, pasteurized and 14 unpasteurized, one point; 2, pasteurized and 1 un- pasteurized one and one-half; 2 pasteurized and 7 unpasteurized, two; 1 pasteurized and 1 unpasteurized two and one-half ; 1 unpasteurized, three points ; and 1 unpasteurized, four points. CRAWFORD'S DAILY COMPARISON Both the pasteurized and unpasteurized butter scored the same on two of the 20 days. The butter made from the pasteurized cream on 14 of 20 comparisons scored higher by 0.12 to 2.37 of a point, while on the other four days the butter made from the unpasteurized cream scored higher by 0.12 to 0.38 of one point. Comparing the individual tubs of each lot, it will be noticed that 17 comparisons showed no difference. Forty-seven out of the 80, scored higher for the pasteurized by one-half to four points, while in the other 16 the pasteurized scored higher by one-half to two and one- half points. The variation in score on duplicate tubs was as follows : The tubs packed from 14 churnings of pasteurized and 14 of un- pasteurized cream, no variation. 12 pasteurized and 13 unpasteurized, one-half points; 5 pasteurized and 7 unpasteurized, one point; 9 pas- teurized and 1 unpasteurized, one and one-half; 2 unpasteurized, two and one-half ; 2 unpasteurized, two ; and 1 unpasteurized, three points. LEE'S DAILY COMPARISON On two out of the 20 days there was no difference in the average scores placed upon the 4 tubs of pasteurized butter as compared with the average of the 4 tubs of unpasteurized butter.! The butter made from the pasteurized cream received on the other 18 days an average score of 0.12 to 1.87 points higher score than the butter made from the unpasteurized cream. Comparing the individual tubs, there was no difference in 24 out of the 80 comparisons. Forty-seven pasteur- ized tubs scored higher than corresponding unpasteurized tubs. The other 9 comparisons scored higher for the unpasteurized butter by one- half point. Variation on duplicate tubs as follows : 15 pasteurized and 15 unpasteurized, no variation. 18 pasteurized and 12 unpasteurized, one-half point variation; 7 pasteurized and 8 424 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, unpasteurized, one point; 1 unpasteurized, one and one-half; 3 unpas- teurized, two; and 1, two and one-half points. As previously stated the first eight tubs of butter were made May 6, and the last eight July 1. The first 40 tubs shipped to New York were not placed in the regular storage rooms as soon as intended on account of Mr. Kieffer's absence from the city. The following table shows when each shipment reached New York City, also when the tubs of butter were scored by Kieffer and then placed in storage. Date Reed, by No. When When Date Reed, by No. nf When When Gude Bros. tubs scored stored 1908 Gude Bros. tubs scored stored, 1908 May 20 June 1 32 24 June 5 June 5, 5, June 24 July 1 32 24 June 25 July 3 June 25, July 3, 8 16 " 12 " 12, 7 16 9 9, " IS 16 " 25 " 25, 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 425 03 (U t^ to O o G 3 O ON ON -H ON 00 00 ON 00 ON -C r-t *-H 00 ON ON ON O ON O CM O CN ON ON ON ON T-H ON p d Jj N to O to n*'E PH ^ +j 00 ON O ^ 00 00 ON ON ON oo O O CM O ON ON ON ON O ON 03 0) nS si \o vo to O Jo OOOO O O O O >0 00 || CS CS C< (N ON ON ON ON cs ON ON ON ON ON co ON co co co CS ON ON ON ON ON 0) J ,| OOOO OOOO O 18 1 CO CO CO CO ON ON ON ON ON co co co co ON ON ON ON co ON &* rH CO CM Tj< (N CM CS (N to r~ NO oo $ 3 -d to to 03 ,N _J O -H ON 5; ON ON 00 O ON ON ON O ~4 00 OO ON ON ON 00 OOOO ON ON ON ON d ON 1 $ ^ < Si to to to o CN NO O O to O CM J ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON - 11 CS CS (S Cl ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON i| O O O O O oj 'C ro "5 PO fO O ro ro fO PO ro PH ?3 ON ON ON ON ' ON ON ON ON ON * ON >, .0 ^.rocSTj< "1 NO CO ^ ON .H O PO"T* NO l^ ON 00 O ^ * NO NO NO NO NO t"** r~^ t^ ^^^^ ^^^^ i TJ O cvr C4 (N . *s> O IJ 0^5:5:5: O 00 O\ ON ON O ON ON ON ON ON CO 00 00 00 ON 00 *n O m IO a-c ^S ON ON ON ON c*5 ON ON ON ON (S ON < > J -d J,S O O O 10 oo toOOO 2 O vo O O < ^ ^J IO t^* vO CO ON ~* O i/^ CO m *& O 1^- ON OO O to ID VO \O H^ *-*^"* ^^.^.^ ^^^^ ^TfTj.^ 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 427 in O O O rt N a'C C 3 (N CS (N CN cs ON O O O O ON ON ON ON O ON OOOO ON ON ON ON O ON u. ^ 3J M ^ < | < 3 T3 o o in N P-i 3 0000 ON ON ON ON ON O O OO ON ON ON ON o ON 2 > > j^ ts i T) tn a) rt N O to to to to to &' C n M c- CNJ (N 04 tS cs ri CS CO co co co co 0) 4a ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON * 00 OC 00 OO IO t~- NO OO OO 00 OO 00 ON ^ O <^ 00 ON ON ON co to # NO ON ON ON ON t^ ON 00 O ON ON ON O H^ ^^^Tj. ^^^^ -t^^^ 5t< '*'*"* "> 428 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, 2 t> O O to 00 g^S ON! fN CN - NO 00 ON ^H O CM to to to to t^. ON 00 O to to to NO "ell j to to 10 10 to to to to to to to to IE 1 CO [/I 0) O O C3 c8 N 3 C^'C CM CM CM CM cs CM CM CM CM c^ H 31 ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON V ^J ^\ * "^ *^ 5 T3 i 4) O O O rt 'H PM 3 OJ CN fN fN CM ON O CM O CM ON ON ON ON ON CM CM CM CM ON ON ON ON CM ON w > 5 | 09 D O O fc-e G ^ CM CM CM CM ON ON ON ON s ON O O O O ON ON ON ON O' 3 T3 0000 O O O O O O _, 10 -2 (N (N (N (N * O ON ON ON ON ON CO co co co ON ON ON ON CO ON So -i CO (N * to r^ NO oo ON rt O CM CM CO co co CO CO CO CO t- ON 00 O co co co "^ H^ 10 10 to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 429 These 160 tubs of butter were taken out of the cold storage rooms December 26, and placed in a tempering room. December 30 the butter was judged by Lee and Crawford in the presence of one of the employees of the firm of Gude Bros, and on the following day scored by Messrs. Kieffer and Smarzo. Previous to the scoring, the helper removed the number which had been placed on each tub cover at the time it was made. The number which had been placed on the bottom of the tub was left for identification. Each tub was given a new number, running from 1 to 160.1 The tubs were not identified until all scores had been placed. In no case did a judge know what score had been given by another judge until his score had been re- corded. The result of this scoring is as follows : 430 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, o J in -idd ON ON ON ON to to 00^ ~ ON ON ON O\ \ c ON -H O ON CO ON ON iurizec ^"2 2o o to ON ON ON ON CN O o> ON ON ON ON CC r^. O do ON ON ON ON ir. l>. ON 1 a a j-j Smarzo IO ON o ON ON oo ON oo oo ^ to O -* <5 i V 3 O (N O ~ 00 ON ON ON O\ i 04 O OO ON ON ON r^ i ^H ON 00 ON ON 00 V V to tr> to in O O -H -H ON 00 O ON 10 10 to 10 to O O -H ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON j-o 2S u~ to IO O ON -H O O\ 00 O\ ON ON S to (D ^ -^ C3 ON ON ON ON ON NO d o IO -I i CO CN ON ON ON ON (N CN -a 8 'H Smarzo to O O -H ON ON ON ON < to to >o to c ON O ' ON 00 ON ON > < 10 to to to ON ON ON ON < V In a P* Kieffer ^ O O ON ON ON ON O O <-H ^ ON ON ON ON i CN ON -H ON ON CO ON 1^ voi^NOoOON- < to ON CO 00 ON oo oo oo oo 4 to ON t^- l^ "H 00 00 00 ON < Kieffer H CN < ON ON ON ON 00 ON 00 t^ O CO 00 00 ON to CO OO ON OO OO OO CO V 2 to ON ON ON O\ to to ON ON ON ON O! to do ON ON ON ON & i- 2 to to CS -H CN " ON ON ON ON to vo ON ON ON ON CN d d ON ON ON ON CN d T3 4) N 'C Smarzo to (V) ,-1 r-l -H ON ON ON ON ^ to to to to ON ON ON ON > < to O ON O ON 00 ON ON < (U i Hi Kieffer - O ON O ON ON 00 ON OO-i ON ON ON ON O O ON O ON ON 00 ON 3 if^CN^iOt-^vOOO ON-nOCNfOtorfNO ^ONOOO POCN'i 1 H2 T^ ^ ^ ^ T^ ^* ^ ^< Tf-^-^T^TjCTt'*-!* "* JN rOOONOONOrOPOvO ^-csr^(NPO-H.ON to to CS to t- rf) 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 431 u u J ON ON ON ON If) in in If) ' O i O ON ON ON ON ir>ir>v> ON ON ON ON surizec *T3 t; k- O 10 m 10 ON ON ON ON CN in in 1-1 < --i 00 ON ON ON 00 # ON 00 IO IO -" CN rt CS ON ON ON ON ^ O a & a a Smarzo in CN -H -H -H ON ON ON ON > < 00 00 O O 00 00 OO O >' < -" -! O 00 ON ON ON OO > < Kieffer -i CN 00 CN ON ON 00 ON OO t^ 10 00 O 00 00 O -i .-1 ON ON ON ON 10 IO CN i < IO O i CN *-H ON ON ON ON ^ m in 10 in ON ON ON ON < i Hi Kieffer r-H ^H 1 CN ON ON ON ON ON -H -H CN 00 ON ON ON CS t^ CS ON ON 00 ON 00 3 roin^vOt-^ONOOO .-irOCNTj ON 00 ON ON >-H > ( O 1 O ON OO ON IO J o ^ ON ON ON ON T3 O N 'u 3 *"2 2 o OO ON O ON ON 00 ON IO ON to IO ON ON OO O\ O IO - < IO IO ON ON ON ON > <3 Kieffer ON t^ CN CN 00 00 ON ON 00 ~-t O CN 00 ON ON ON ^H (N ^ O ON ON ON ON V J in C O -H ON ON ON ON IO IO O _' J o ^ ON ON ON ON IO ON ON ON ON *"H 2 o o"" IO IO ^0-^0 ON ON ON ON * O ON IO IO O ON O CN ON 00 ON ON CM NO ON IO IO IO ON ON ON ON t^ 00 T) V N c Smarzo 10 in ~* ( CN --^ ON ON ON ON < m !J O ON ON ^H ON 00 00 ON < IO 10 1 1 -H O 1 ON ON ON ON > << V) rt OH Kieffer CN O CN O ON ON ON ON ^ -- CS O ON ON ON ON 00 < O < OO ON ON ON & ON-HOCNromr^NO ^t< in in in in in 10 in J^ONOOO CN-* ir> to 10 ^O O O NO NO lOt^NOOOON-^OCN vONOONONOr^t^-r U 'Jl** cococN'-iinNOoONO ^ ro * -HtN^Oior^ONOO TT'TjtOONOOOlOf^OO OONCS ir^oot^t^ ^moONOr t-~oOTi< 432 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, V 3 to to vr> O-H o o o> ON ON ON to to O O 00 ON ON ON 00 OO to to O O ON ^ O> ON OO ON jurizec *T3 rt * i- O CJ- to to to ON ON ON ON NO OO O 00 OO 00 ON 00 00 t^. CO 00 to to to O ~H oo O ON ON OO ON es t^ ON in & a 3 Smarzo O\ -H O OO 00 O ON 00 ji ON OO t ON OO OO OO 00 < OO ON ON -l OO OO OO ON > < Kieffer i-( t-~ ON ON O 00 00 00 NO NO ON OO OO OO OO 00 t^ O ON H 00 ON 00 ON II 3 IO IO ^-H ^-H O *-l ON ON ON ON to *-H O ON ON ON ON CM t 1 O to to t-H H t-H CS ON ON ON ON oo TH -a 8 n Smarzo to o ON--iO -H -H -l ON ON ON ON pazuiu -0 2S p* *O I CS CN tN ON ON ON ON < ff IO IO CN -H (N i ON ON ON ON 4 to to T-I fN '-i CS ON ON ON ON < en 3 PH Kieffer ^ CN t-c ON 00 ON ON 00 CS (N i (N ON ON ON ON ^H ^H CS T* ON ON ON ON Sri t^ONOOO'-'fOCNr}' XOt^NOOOON-*Or'3OOt^ O'-'tNrOTfTfio oi OOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO do 10 vo n 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 435 TABLE 35 DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY OF BUTTER MADE FROM PASTEURIZED AND UN- PASTEURIZED CREAM, ACCORDING TO EACH JUDGE Vat No. Kieffer Smarzo Crawford Lee Past. Unpast. Past. Unpast. Past. Unpast. Past. Unpast. 1 0.75 1.25 [0.88 0.25 2 * 2.0 2.88 0.75. 0.73 3 1.75 1.50 2.25 1.87 4 Same 1.35 0.37 Same 5 Same 0.12 0.38 0.25 6 1.25 2.75 1.12 0.75 7 1.00 3.25 1.00 0.62 8 0.75 1.00 0.25 0.62 9 1.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 10 0.50 Same 0.25 0.25 11 3.00 2.37 0.87 0.37 12 1.00 1.50 0.12 0.38 13 1.00 0.38 Same Same 14 1.50 0.75 0.12 0.12 15 1.50 1.75 0.13 0.50 16 2.00 1.87 Same 0.38 17 1.75 1.75 2.37 1.12 18 1.25 2.50 1.38 0.75 19 0.75 2.62 0.13 0.12 20 0.25 1.00 1.25 0.25 This Table differs from Table 33 in that the extent of difference is shown in place of average score. According to Kieffer, for two comparisons the average score of the four tubs of pasteurized was the same as the average score of the four tubs of unpasteurized butter. Average for thirteen comparisons was in favor of the butter made from the pasteurized cream and the other five were in favor of the butter made from the unpasteurized cream. According to Smarzo, for two comparisons the average score for the butter made from both the pasteurized and unpasteurized cream was the same; 17 days in favor of pasteurized and two in favor of TABLE 36 VARIATION IN SCORE ON DUPLICATE TUBS DECEMBER 30-31, 1908 Extent of variation H 1 1^ 2 2^ 3 3^ 4 ^A 5 Kieffer Past. 11 15 7 4 1 2 1 Unpast. 5 10 15 7 2 Smarzo Past. 15 14 6 2 2 1 Unpast. 8 7 14 1 7 2 1 1 1 Crawford Past. 14 12 5 9 Unpast. 14 13 7 1 2 1 Lee Past. 15 18 7 Unpast. 15 12 8 1 3 1 436 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, unpasteurized butter. According to Crawford, two days the same, 14 in favor of pasteurized and four in favor of the unpasteurized butter. According to Lee, two days the same, and all the other eighteen com- parisons received a higher average for the butter made from the pas- teurized cream. According to Lee, two tubs of the pasteurized butter scored the same at both scorings. One tub of the pasteurized butter and two of the unpasteurized, scored one-half of a point higher after storage. Two tubs of butter Nos. 533-535 packed from the same churn- ing June 16, scored 90 June 17, and 90.5 December 30. Tubs Nos. 534-536 packed from churning No. 2 from same vat of unpasteur- ized cream, scored 90, June 17, and January 30, 88-89 respectively. The remaining 153 tubs (Nos. 534-536 included) scored lower Decem- ber 30, to the following extent: 6 tubs pasteurized and 2 unpasteu- rized, one-half point; 12 tubs pasteurized and 9" unpasteurized, one point; 15 pasteurized and 11 unpasteurized, one and one-half; 20 pas- teurized and 23 unpasteurized, two points; 12 pasteurized and 11 un- pasteurized, two and one-half; 5 pasteurized and 11 unpasteurized, three; 5 pasteurized and 3 unpasteurized, four and one-half points; 3 unpasteurized, four points, and 5 unpasteurized, four and .one-half points. The following results were obtained by comparing KiefFer's score on this butter before and after storage : 20 tubs pasteurized and 15 tubs unpasteurized, did not change; 15 tubs pasteurized and 16 unpasteurized, decreased one point ; 5 tubs pas- teurized and 10 unpasteurized decreased two points; 8 tubs pasteurized and 7 unpasteurized, decreased three points ; 5 tubs unpasteurized, de- creased four points ; 2 tubs pasteurized and 5 unpasteurized, decreased five; 6 tubs unpasteurized decreased 6 points; 7 tubs unpasteurized, decreased 7 points, while 19 tubs pasteurized and 9 unpasteurized, in- creased one point; 8 tubs pasteurized and 5 unpasteurized, increased two points; 3 tubs pasteurized and 4 unpasteurized increased three points and 1 tub unpasteurized, increased four points. There was a greater variation between Lee's and Kieffer's score on the butter before storage than after. This in a measure accounts for the number of tubs of butter, that according to Kieffer did not change or else received a higher score after storage. September 14 and 15, 1908, the creamery located at Morrison, Illinois, was visited for the purpose of making a comparison of the butter made from pasteurized and unpasteurized cream. September 14, a total of 1858 pounds of cream were received. All of the cream when mixed in the receiving vat, contained 0.43 per- cent acidity and 23 percent of fat. The flavor of the cream was de- cidedly bad, indicating age and poor care. Much of it was lumpy when delivered, a natural condition for cream from three to five days old which had not been thoroly stirred and containing such a low per- cent of fat. One-half of this cream was pasteurized to a temperature of 180 F. and the remainder was cooled at once to 50 F. and one and one-half hours later it was churned. The pasteurized cream was also 1909] PASTEURIZATION A FACTOR IN MAKING BUTTER 437 cooled to 50 F. and held at that temperature for 12 hours. The cream curdled when pasteurized. Loss in buttermilk from the pasteurized cream was 0.55 and for the unpasteurized 0.20. A few small particles of curd were noticeable in the butter made from the pasteurized cream, but there was no noticeable difference in the flavor of the two lots of butter. The 2893 pounds of cream delivered September 15 contained nearly the same degree of acidity and percent of butter fat as that delivered the previous day. The flavor and condition of this cream was poorer than that of September 14. The two lots were treated the same as on the previous day except that the pasteurized cream was held only four hours at churning temperature. Loss in buttermilk from the pas- teurized cream was 1.0 percent and unpasteurized, one-tenth of one percent. The butter made on this day from the pasteurized lot seemed to have a cleaner flavor than that made from the unpasteurized cream. One 30 pound tub of butter was packed from each churning, marked A unpasteurized, B pasteurized, for September 14, and C unpasteurized, D pasteurized, for September 15. These four tubs were shipped by express, September 16 to Mon- arch Refrigerating Co., Chicago. i Federal Inspector Credicott examined this butter before it was placed in storage and gave each tub the following score : A unpasteurized 91, B pasteurized 92, C unpasteurized 89, D pas- teurized 87. One 5 pound box of butter was also packed from each of the two churnings of August 15 and submitted to three other butter experts. In each case the unpasteurized butter was given from one to three points higher score. January 13, when the regular 160 tubs of experimental butter were scored, these four tubs were distributed promiscuously and given the numbers as indicated in the following Table: New number Original number Scores by McKay Craw- ford New- man Lee Unpasteurized 85. 77. 5. 120. A B C C 88. 90.5 86. 86. 88. 88. 87. 90. 86. 86. 85. 87. 89. 87. 86. 87. Pasteurized Unpasteurized . . Pasteurized. . These tubs could not by appearance be distinguished from the 160 storage tubs. i January 4, 6, and 8, 1909, six tubs of butter were made at the University creamery representing pasteurized and unpasteurized but- ter from the same grade of cream. This cream was handled the same as in previous experiment. The butter made January 4, was packed in tubs marked E, pastuerized and F, unpasteurized. January 6, G pas- teurized and H unpasteurized. January 8, I pasteurized and J un- pasteurized. 438 BULLETIN No. 138 [September, These tubs reached Chicago January 12, and the butter was scored with the regular lot January 13. The tubs were of the same appearance as the other 164 tubs. The day previous to shipping this butter it was decided by the men who made it that tub E should score 94, and the other five 93, since no difference in flavor could be detected. The tubs received the following score January 13. New number Original number McKay Crawford Newman Lee 27 E pasteurized 91.5 93. 94.5 94. 61 F unpasteurized 87.5 93.5 88. 93. 138 G pasteurized 91.5 93. 88. 93.5 48 H unpasteurized 89. 91. 87. 93. 43 I pasteurized 91. 90.5 94.5 93. 15 J, unpasteurized 91.5 91. 91. 93. The work recorded for 1905 and 1906 may be considered as a preliminary study, since it was not only an indication of what we might look for in studying butter, but also a means of working out a system for carrying on such investigation. The average for these two years makes it apppear that some conclusions had been reached. How- ever, when individual scores are compared it is apparent that the aver- ages are the result of one judge scoring high and another scoring low on the same tub or one judge scoring a comparison high on one day or correspondingly low on the following day. This led to the system fol- lowed during the years 1907 and 1908, when each churning was repre- sented by duplicate tubs and the scoring done by several judges work- ing independently. During the whole period the work was done on a large enough scale to eliminate outside influences. In looking over the records of judging for 1907 and 1908, single instances might be selected which would lead one to believe that judging is very inaccurate. Such in- stances should not be used to condemn the whole system of judging. Judging butter by this or similar methods is an accurate means of es- timating quality. Speaking collectively the work of the judges in this experiment is notably uniform and consistent. In any comparison dealing with quality, the following facts must be observed: 1. The experiment must be conducted on a large enough scale to eliminate outside influences affecting flavor. 2. Any comparison of unlike conditions must be secured by using cream of identically the same grade. This means that a lot of cream must be first thoroly mixed and then divided to suit the comparison. 3. Uni- formity must be followed in manipulation of churns. 4. Butter must be represented by two or more packages for each churn. 5. Quality should be determined by three or more judges, working independently, with no knowledge of the identity of the tubs or the nature of the experiment. This should be applied not only to experimental work, but to any contest where contestants are competing for a prize. ^^K^SI