powder, albuminized as i t comes on t h e market, is directly compared with a non-egg powder as manufactured. This is really unfair, as t h e two powders used m a y differ in their effects, aside from t h e egg albumin in one of them. T h e most striking failure of egg albumin t o improve a given powder is shown TABLEIV-AVERAGE SPGCIFICVOLUMEOF BISCUITS-SERIES No. averaged
Baking No.
4
A................. B................. c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Time baked Min. 10 10 10 11 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 10 10 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 10 10 10
4 A 2nd h a l f . . . . . . . . . 5 A 1st half. . . . . . . . . . B 1st half C 1st h a l f . . . . . . . . . . 5 B 2nd h a l f . . . . . . . . C 2nd h a l f . . . . . . . . . 6 A 1st h a l f . . . . . . . . . . B 1st half .......... C 1st h a l f . . . . . . . . . . 6 A 2nd h a l f . . . . . . . . . B 2nd h a l f . . . . . . . . . C 2nd h a l f . .
..........
10
.......
10
Temp. baking O F .
495 495 470-1 47 1-4 465 465 465 450-5 455-60 460 458-60 458-60 458-60 430-5 430-5 430-5 443-5 443-5 443-5 45 5 455 455 460 460 460
111 Kind P e r cent sp. of egg vol. bk. Ddr. alb. 0.17 2.79 C. 0.0 K. C. 2.54 0.0 K. C. 2.60 0.17 C. 2.75 0.0 A. 2.71 0.17 C. 2.63 0.0 G. 2.53 0.0 G. 2.66 0.17 C. 2.63 0.0 A. 2.70 0.0 G. Lost 0.17 C. 2.20 0.0 A. 2.15 0.0 I. 2.96 0.2 I. 2.96 0.5 I. 2.90 0.0 I. 2.56 0.2 I. 2.54 n.... 5 I. 2.57 0.0 G. 2.65 0.2 G. 2.65 G. 1 .o 2.59 0.0 G. 2.27 0.2 G. 2.25 G. 1.0 2.26
Av.
Average (weighted mean) of 271 biscuits with egg. . . . . . 2 , 6 2 7 Average (weighted mean) of 238 biscuits without e g g . . . 2.593 Difference
.................................
__
2.63 2.59
0.034
in Bakings j a n d 6, where t h e same powder was used first without egg, second with 0 . 2 per cent added egg, a n d third 0 . j per cent added egg in Baking j. I n t h e first half, which was baked a t once, t h e sp. vol. fell from 2 . 9 6 with n o egg a n d with 0 . 2 per cent egg, t o 2. go with 0 . 5 per cent egg. I n Baking 6, 0.0 per cent, 0 . 2 per cent, a n d I . o per cent egg were present in a second can of Giant powder. T h e sp. vol. fell from 2 . 6 5 with no egg, a n d 0 . 2 per cent t o 2 . jg with 1 . 0 per cent egg, a n d in both Bakings 5 a n d 6, these figures are t h e averages of 2 0 biscuits. RESULTS OF Temp. baking B a t c h 495 B
SUMMARY O F
Baking hTo. (1)
..........
( 3 ) , . . . . . . . . . 465
.
450-60
(4) 2nd h a l f . ,
458-60
(5) 1st h a l f . .
.
430-35
(5) 2nd half.
.
443-45
.
455
(6) 2nd h a l f . .
460
(4) 1st half..
(6) 1st half..
IO01
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Dec., 1914
C
B A C B A B
C
A C B A
c
B A
c
B A C
n
A
BAKINGTZSTS O N BISCUITS-SERIES 111 Bk. REMARKS pdr. 7*alb. K . C. 0.0 Better in looks, taste, odor (judgment of four persons) 0 . 1 7 Looks better t h a n A. (K. C . 0.007,) no difference in smell o r taste G. 0.0 Best C. 0 . 1 7 2nd A. 0.0 Poorest G. 0.0 Best C. 0 . 1 7 2nd A. 0.0 Poorest C. 0 . 1 7 Best G. 0.0 2nd A. 0.0 Very poor I. 0.5 Quite good I. 0.2 2nd I. 0.0 Very poor 0.5 Best I. 0.2 Poorest I. 2nd 0.0 Best G. 1 .o G. 2nd 0.2 G. 0.0 All good a n d all G. 1 .o G. 0.2 G. 0.0
J UD G M E NT
When biscuits are judged b y looks much greater differences are noted t h a n b y measurement. It appears t h a t a fine looking, large biscuit may have n o greater sp. vol. t h a n a smaller a n d poorer looking biscuit. This is due t o t h e fact t h a t t h e larger biscuit is heavier, a n d t h e sp. vol. works out about t h e
same as for smaller biscuits. Just why this is so h a s not been determined. This difference in judging by looks a n d measurement is strikingly shown in Baking I , when batch B (0.0 per cent) was given t h e preference in looks, taste a n d odor, b y four bakers, separately, although A (C. 0 . 1 7 per cent) proved t o be larger in sp. vol. b y o . 2 j i n 2.79. I n Bakings 4, j a n d 6 t h e bakers awarded t h e honors very uniformly t o t h e biscuits baked with albuminized powder. T h e differences were so marked t h a t anyone could not fail t o see them, yet, these differences do not show in t h e sp. vol. These were all baked a t too low a temperature, a n d t h e 2nd half of a bake was always carried out after t h e dough h a d stood about five hours.
c 0 pic I. u s 10 N It is t h e opinion of t h e writer t h a t when bakings are carried out under normal conditions his work has not demonstrated t h e usefulness of egg albumin in baking powder, a n d especially in t h e very small quantity usually present, i. e . , from 0 . I t o 0 . 2 of one per cent. When t h e temperature of t h e oven is too low for baking biscuits properly, egg albumin seems t o aid in producing a better biscuit. When t h e dough is allowed t o stand several hours before baking, a much better biscuit is produced b y t h e powder t o which egg albumin has been added. OFFICE
THE STATE CHEMIST BOISE, I D A H O
OF
IRON IN TOMATOES By C. A. BRAUTLECHT AND G. CRAWFORD Received September 5, 1914
Tomatoes have become of much importance as a garden vegetable during t h e last decade a n d present evidence indicates t h a t t h e y will become of greater importance. From t h e view-point of t h e food, physiological a n d agricultural chemist more knowledge of their chemical composition is therefore desirable. Tomatoes are used as a food in many ways. While fresh, t h e y are eaten raw or cooked; tremendous quantities are canned; they form t h e basis of many soups; large quantities of tomatoes, or their products, are used as sauces for meat or fish foods; in desert regions, or where good drinking water is scarce, canned tomatoes are used largely because of t h e water a n d vegetable acid t h e y contain. Considering t h e exchange in soil elements, there seems t o be a general agreement t h a t t h e tomato plant uses relatively little phosphoric acid, b u t more potash a n d nitrogen. Much of t h e potash remains in t h e vines a n d roots. In comparison with t h e amount of crop produced, t h e tomato does not remove much plant food from t h e soil. T h e acidity of t h e tomato is supposed t o be due t o citric acid. A small amount of a n alkaloid is also supposed t o be present in t h e juice a n d this decreases a s t h e fruit ripens. D:ring ripening there is a progressive increase in t h e organic acids, sugars, starch a n d nonq.
I002
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N G I N E E R I N G C H E M I S T R Y
protein nitrogen a n d a decrease in protein nitrogen a n d cellulose. T h e proportion of other constituents remains practically unchanged. The amount of sucrose in fresh a n d dehydrated tomatoes differs, due probably, t o inversion resulting f r o m ferments a n d organic acids. About 0.5 per cent of ether extract is obtainable from t h e dry m a t t e r of t h e t o m a t o , this amount being reduced, however, b y previous alcohol extraction. Passerini' states t h a t t h e pulp of t h e t o m a t o contains two coloring matters, a yellow amorphous a n d a red crystalline substance. These are insoluble in water, soluble in amyl alcohol a n d very soluble in ether. Both are decolorized by chlorine a n d bromine water, while hydrochloric acid has no action on t h e m . T h e yellow substance is much more soluble in alcohol t h a n t h e red. R. Willstatter a n d H. H. Echer2 s t a t e t h a t lycopin, t h e coloring m a t t e r of t h e tomato. differs in several respects from carotin. E. H. Jenkins a n d W. E. Britton3 reporting results on two varieties of tomatoes f o u n d no difference between t h e m in water a n d potash content, percentage limits f o r water a n d potash on eight samples being respectively 93.41 t o 94.81 a n d 0.287 t o 0.356. H. Snyder4 found no chemical difference between three varieties. He reports analytical results on three samples: Water, 93.6 t o 93.9; protein, 0.80 t o 0.86; carbohydrates, 3.79 t o 3 . 8 j ; a n d ash, 0.54 t o 0.69 per cent. W. B. Alwood a n d W. Bowman5 found in four samples of one variety: Water, 91.2 t o 94.0 per cent; protein, 0.78 t o 1.25; carbohydrates, 3.60 t o 4.07; f a t , 0.33 t o 0.47; a n d ash, 0.34 t o 0.73 per cent. mT. 0 . Atwater a n d A. P. Bryant6 report on analysis of t w o samples of canned tomatoes: Water, 94.0 a n d 94.3 per cent; protein, 0.9 a n d 1 . 2 ; carbohydrates, 3.9 a n d 4.0; f a t , 0 . 2 a n d 0.4; a n d ash, 0 . j a n d 0.6 per cent. One sample of ash contained 5.8 per cent lime, 8 . 7 per cent phosphoric pentoxide, 68.1 per cent potash a n d 3.7 per cent magnesium oxide. A number of other investigatorsRicciardelli, A. F . Bacon a n d P. B. D u n b a r , a n d Albanarg-report similar results of a few analyses of tomatoes. I t is our intention t o report t h e quantity of water. ash a n d iron in eleven samples of Florida canned tomatoes f r o m different parts of t h e state. I n t h e literature available we have found no figures showing t h e amount of iron in tomatoes. T h e tomatoes were c u t up a n d canned without a p preciable loss of pulp or juice. When received a t t h e laboratory t h e y were c u t u p in a meat chopper without loss of juice a n d t h e water was determined by loss o n evaporation of 150 g. samples a t 110' t o constant weight. T h e residue or t o t a l solids was ashed in thick porcelain dishes in a muffle furnace, a t t h e lowest possible temperature, yielding a fine gray, white or buff colored ash. This was weighed, pulverized a n d iron determined in duplicate samples of a b o u t 0 . 2 g. T h e ash was t h e n digested in hydrochloric acid a n d Stag. Sper. Agrar., 18, 545. Zlschr. physiol. Chem., 64, 47. * Conn. Agr. Expt. S a . . A n n R p f . , 1895. 4 Minn. State Bull., 6 3 . 5 Va. S t a t e Expt. Sta., Bull. 4 . 6 U. S. Dept. Agr., Bull. 23. 1
2
Vol. 6, No.
12
again in sulfuric acid. T h e solution, free from hydrochloric acid, was reduced with hydrogen sulfide, t h e excess of hydrogen sulfide removed, t h e solution cooled a n d t h e iron t i t r a t e d with s t a n d a r d potassium permanganate solution. PERCENTAGE OF WATER,ASH
AND
-Location
Sample No. Town 1 Lake City, 2 Ponce de Leon. 3 Live Oak, 4 Dover, 5 Greensboro, 6 Pensacola, 7 Paxton, 8 Tallahassee. 9 Summerfield, 10 Green Cove Springs, 11 Tallahassee,
IRON IN FLORIDA TOMATOES Iron as FelOa(a) 7
Water 94.0 93.0 91.3 92.6 94.6 94.6 92.6
Ash 0.39 0.58 0.58 0.53 0.53 0.55 0.56
95.3 95.3 89.3
0:63 0.64
whole ash tomatoes soil 11.53 0.046 3.03 4 . 3 8 0.026 3.29 8 . 0 9 0.046 3.83 20.68 0.106 .. 18.62 0 . 1 0 0 .. 22.25 0.123 .. 6 . 0 9 0,034 ,. 7. . 7.5 .- n - , n17 ., 21.45 0,083 12.21 0.077 3:i2 8.47 0.054 , ,
Average . . . . . . ... . . . .. . 9 3 . 4 (a) Average of closely agreeing duplicates
0 53
12 87
County Columbia Holmes Suwanee Hillsboro Gadsden Escambia Walton Leon Marion Clay Leon
9.5 ... n . n .. 49 .. 0 38
-
~
_
_
0 Ob6
3.32
SUMNARY O F RESULTS
I-The tomatoes from t e n counties in Florida contained from 89.3 t o 9 j . 3 per cent of water. Geographical location of plot on which t h e tomatoes were grown did not affect t h e water content. T h e average amount of 17-ater mas 93.4 per cent. 11-The ash varied from 0.38 t o 0.64 per cent, averaging 0.j3 per cent. There was no fixed ratio between t h e water a n d ash or iron a n d ash. 111-The iron in t h e ash varied greatly from 1 . j 3 t o 7 , 7 8 , average 4.50 per cent. Calculated t o ferric oxide this would represent 4.38, 2 2 . 2 5 a n d 12.87 per cent, respectively. Iron was present in about t h e same a m o u n t in widely separated counties. IV-Iron in tomatoes, calculated from t h e iron in t h e ash, ranged from 0 . 0 1 2 t o 0.037 per cent, averaging 0.023 per cent, Calculated t o ferric oxide, this would represent 0.034, 0.123 a n d 0.066 per cent, respectively. V-In soil on which these tomatoes were grown (four samples), there was from 1.06 t o 1.3 per cent iron, equivalent t o 3.03 a n d 3 . 7 2 , or a n average of 3.32 per cent ferric oxide. CHEMICAL LABORATORY
FLORIDA STATECOLLEGEFOR W O ~ I E S TALLAHASSEE
BLOOD-CHARCOAL AS A PURIFYING AGENT FOR ARSENIC SOLUTIONS PREVIOUS TO TITRATION' By ROBERTM. CHAPIN Received September 3, 1914
Whenever possible, arsenic is estimated by t h e highly accurate a n d convenient method of titration with iodine. As necessary conditions, t h e solution must be free from other substances capable of absorbing iodine during t h e titration a n d from coloring m a t t e r t o obscure t h e e n d points. This laboratory has been required t o examine very many samples of t h e arsenical dipping bathsZ now s o largely used for ridding cattle of Texas-fever ticks. The important insecticidal ingredient of these baths is a n alkaline arsenite, a n d i t is in this form t h a t t h e arsenic is introduced when t h e b a t h s are prepared. 1 2
Published b y permission of t h e Secretary of Agriculture. Compare Farmers' Bulletin 603, U. S . Dept. of Agric.
~
