CRANFIELD: ON THE VALUES FOR BUTTER 439 ON THE RELATION BETWEEN THE REICHERT-MEISSL, KIRSCHNER AND POLENSKB VALUES FOR BUTTER. BY H. T. CRANFIELD. MUCH work has been carried out on the relation between the Reichert-Meissl and Polenske values for butter, and Polenskb’s original limits are now generally accepted. Many workers, however, have noticed that samples of genuine butter are often met with which do not give figures within these limits, and in fact would, in view of Polenskb’s table, point to adulteration with coconut oil up to 4 or 5 per cent.; con- versely butters often give values which would allow of considerable adulteration with coconut oil before PolenskB’s limits were exceeded.440 THE RELATION BETWEEN THE REICHERT-MEISSL Bolton, Richmond, and Revis (ANALYST, 1312, 37, 183), suggested that the rela- tion between the Kirschner and Polenskk values might be more sensitive than the rela tion between the Reichert-Meissl and Polenskk values now accepted.With the object of throwing more light on this question, I give the figures obtained for these three values, from all the samples of butter examined recently in my laboratory in connection with the Linseed Cake and Hempseed Cake experi- ments (see previous paper). The rations given were quite normal, therefore these samples can be taken as representing genuine average butter.The samples are arranged in ascending order of the Kirschner value. TABLE I. Kirschner Value. 19.12 19.33 19.65 19.85 19-88 20.14 20.17 20.19 20.22 20-24 20-26 20.27 20.37 20.45 20.63 20.65 20.70 20-73 20.82 20.92 20.93 21.02 21.05 21.12 21.12 21-63 21465 21 -72 21.77 21.88 22.00 Polenskh Value.1.4 1.4 1-4 1.7::: 1.4 1-5 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.9 2.2" 1.8 I -6 1.85 1.9 14 1.7 2.4 2.0 1.7 2.4 2-7 2.4 Rciclieit-Meissl Value. 22.76 23.10 23.37 24.20 22 88 23.65 23.87 23-98 24-20 94-31 23-49 23.54 24-20 24.75 23 98 24-09 24-42 24-64 27.17 25.85 24.97 25.52 25-73 25.19 25.41 27.50 27-61 26-18 28.38 28-16 27.94 Kirschner Value.22-05 22.19 22.23 22.24 22-37 28-40 2247 22 50 2353 22.53 22 64 22-65 22.66 22 *79 22.87 22 -95 22.96 23.98 23.00 23.11 23.25 23.27 23.38 23.46 23.51 23.59 23.63 23.68 23.97 24-20 24-40 Poleliskt Val I1 e . 2.2 2.3 2-0 2.5 1 . g ::: 2.8 2-5 2-6 2.7 2-7 2.6 2.5 2-2 2.3 2 -8 1.8* 2.5 2.9 2.5 2.6 2.3 2.4 2-55 2.2 2.5 2.2 2-4 2 3 2.6 2.7 2.6 From these figures the following relation can be drawn : Average of Limits of Polenslie Value.Polenskh Value. Kirschner Value. 19-20 1-46 1'4-1.7 20-21 I -65 1.4-2.2 21-22 2.05 1 07-2 * 7 22-23 2.43 1 -8-2 *9 23-24 2.41 2 *2-2.6 Reicher t-Meissl Value. 28.27 28.16 27.50 28.49 27.39 29.37 28.05 29.15 2 3-38 28.16 29.04 29-15 28-27 99-04 29 04 27.28 28.71 29-26 28.93 30.14 29.04 28.71 28.93 28.49 29.70 29.26 29-92 29.81 29.70 30.14 29.92KIRSCHNER AND POLENSKE VALUES FOR BUTTER 441 I t will be noticed that the average values agree very well with the relation given by Bolton, Richmond, and Revis (ANALYST, Zoc.cit.). There are several samples, however, giving Polenskt5 values much higher and lower than the average (Table I., *), and it appears to be a matter of difficulty to fix limits for the Polenskt5 value which would be narrower than those adopted by Polenskd in relation to the Reichert-Meissl value. I t seems to me that there may possibly be some definite relation, within certain limits, between all three values.I find that the figures representing the soluble volatile fatty acids other than butyric acid (Lo,, the difference between the Reichert- Meissl and Kirschner values) follow approximately the Polenskt5 values.Therefore the ratio X should be fairly constant. I have worked out this ratio for all the samples given in Table I., and the results are as follows : RM-K P. TABLE 11. Polcnskd Value. 1.4 1-4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1-5 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6 1-6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.85 1.9 1-9 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.2 R.M.-K. 3.64 3.77 3.72 3.00 3.70 3-51 4.07 3-27 3.83 3.79 3.98 3.23 3.72 4.04 4.35 4-30 3.35 3.44 4.29 446 4.93 4-07 4.33 4-50 3.91 4.68 5.02 5-96 5.27 6-35 6.22 R. M .-K. P. 2.60 2.69 2.66 2-14 2.64 2.34 2.71 2-18 2 -55 2.37 2.49 2.02 2.32 2.52 2.56 2.53 1-97 2-02 2.52 2-68 2-74 2.26 2-41. 2-43 2.06 2-46 2.64 2.98 2.63 2 089 2.83 - _.-__ Polenskb Value.2.2 2.2 2.2 2 3 2.3 2-3 2.3 2.4 2-4 2.4 2.4 2-4 2.5 2.5 2-5 2-5 2-5 2.5 2-55 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2-6 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 2-9 R.M. -K. 5.61 5-03 5-67 5.97 6.25 5.79 6.13 5-87 6-61 5.94 5.44 6.29 6.25 5-58 6.50 5 75 5.93 6.19 5.55 6.65 6.40 7.03 5.73 5-52 6.28 5.85 5.63 5.94 6.97 6.17 6.28 R.M.-K. P. 2.55 2.29 2.58 2.60 2-72 2-52 2 67 2-44 2.75 2-47 2-27 2.62 2.50 2-23 2.60 2.30 2-37 2.48 2.18 2.56 2.46 2.70 2.20 2.12 2.33 2.17 2-09 2 *20 2.49 2.20 2.17 -- It will be seen that the figure varies from 1.97 to 2.98 on this ratio, but the majority of the samples lie between 2.2 and 2.8. What would be the effect of adding442 ABSTRACTS OF CHEMICAL PAPERS small quantities of margarine or coconuf oil to butter is a matter of conjecture at present, but I hope in the future to investigate this point. I put forward this suggestion of a relationship quite tentatively, with the hope that other workers will apply it to their butter figures and offer their criticisms. MIDLAND AGRICULTURAL AND DAIRY COLLEGE. + B e * @ *