Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:48:51.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some observations on the relationship between subjective and objective estimates of yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. Charlton  and
K. J. Whiteley
D. Charlton
Affiliation:
Australian Wool Corporation, 261 George Street, Sydney, N.S.W. 2000, Australia
K. J. Whiteley
Affiliation:
School of Wool and Pastoral Sciences, The University of New South Wales, P.O. Box 1, Kensington, N.S.W. 2033, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A comparison of objective and subjective appraisals of the yield of Australian greasy wool sale lots is reported.

Results suggest that although the overall agreement between the two systems of appraisal is good, the subjective estimate of an individual sale lot will only lie within ± 6% of the objective estimate in 95% of cases.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 85 , Issue 1 , August 1975 , pp. 53 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

David, H. G. (1968). Studies of the variability of some characteristics of Australian wool (AWB types 413 and 40) in auction lots. Journal of the Textile Institute 59, 513–22.Google Scholar
Douglas, S. A. S. (1965). Variability estimates of some measureable characteristics in Australian greasy Merino wool lots. Journal of the Textile Institute 56, T14–23Google Scholar
Douglas, S. A. S. & McIntyre, G. A. (1970). Subjective and objective appraisal of wool. Wool Economic Research Report, no. 20, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia.Google Scholar
Douglas, S. A. S., Whan, R. B. & Willett, H. (1970). The consistency of the valuations of greasy wool by six appraisers in a wool buying form. Journal of the Textile Institute 61, 108–15.Google Scholar
Lennox, F. G. (1938). Fleece Investigations. CSIRO Pamphlet No. 83.Google Scholar
Lipson, M. & Black, U. A. F. (1944). Review of analyses of some Australian fleece wools. Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of N.S.W. 78, 84–93.Google Scholar
Roberts, N. F. (1954). Errors in yield appraisal in buying wool. Wool Technology 1, no. 1, 77–83.Google Scholar
Roberts, N. F. (1964). Marketing problems and the moisture relations of greasy wool. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 11, no. 2, 39–45.Google Scholar
Sweeten, R. B. (1949). Further analyses of Australian fleece wools. Journal of the Textile Institute 40, T727–30.Google Scholar
Whan, R. B. & Fourlinnie, J. P. (1968). The consistency of a buyer's estimates of the yield of greasy wool. Quarterly Review of Agricultural Economics 21, no. 1, 15–22.Google Scholar
Whan, R. B. & Moffat, D. H. (1968). Some differences between estimated and tested yields for greasy wool sold in Australia. Journal of the Textile Institute 59, 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, S. S. Y. (1955). A survey of moisture content in some greasy wool from New South Wales. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 524–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar