21 



pounds for each acre of peanuts. This is an abnormally 

 poor retumi and due in part to the poor growi^h and 

 poor stand of peanuts. 



With live pork at 4 cents per pound this gives only 

 $3.03 as the returns per acre when no grain was fed, 

 a result entirely unsatisfactory. 



A much larger return was made when peanuts were 

 supplemented with a half ration of grain. With lot A, 

 the gain due jointl}^ to one acre of peanuts and to 791 

 pounds of corn was 423 pounds of live pork. Dividing 

 the amount of grain fed to this lot by 4.31, the amount 

 required per pound of gi'owth when nothing but grain 

 was fed, we have 184 pounds of live weight as apparently 

 due to the grain fed; subtracting this from the total 

 increase in live weight we have left 239 pounds as the 

 amount of growth that we may credit to one acre of 

 peanuts. AVith pork at 4 cents per pound this gives 

 $9.50 as the value of an acre of peanuts converted into 

 pork. 



An acre of chufas supplemented by 832 pounds of 

 grain produced 433.5 pounds of live pork and by the 

 same process as alx)ve Ave calculate that one acre of chu- 

 fas should be credited with 240| pounds of pork, or 

 $9.62. 



This experiment agrees with a previous one, reported 

 in Alabama Station Bulletin No. 83, p. 118, in showing 

 that it is more profitable to feed some grain to small 

 shoatiS grazing on peanuts than to require them to make 

 their entire growth from the nuts. 



The following table shows the daily gain per pig, 

 the grain consumed daily per 100 pounds of live weight 

 and the number of days of pasturage afforded by one 

 acre of peanuts or chufas. In calculating the last 

 two columns the average of the live weight at the be- 

 ginuiing and end of the experiment has been used. 



