REPORT OF TEE CHEMIST 177 



SESSIONAL PAPER No. 16 



Analysis. 



Uveco. 

 Per cent. 



Moisture i)'T5 



Protein 8'94 



Fat 3'SO 



Carbo-hydrates 74.62 



Fibre 1'48 



Ash rd2 



100*00 lOO'OO lOO'OO 



Aqueous extract : 



Total solids, soluble in cold water 4'76 8'16 



Containing dextrine 4'51 6'13 



It will be observed that both Uveco and Flakerine contain somewhat less water than 

 com meal and this, of course, is in their favour. Uveco is considerably the drier o£ 

 the two. 



In protein and fat, the two most valuable nutrients, Uveco (notwithstanding its 

 higher percentage of dry matter) is practically identical witb corn meal, and the same 

 may almost be said with regard to the amounts of fibre and ash present. The only 

 difference of moment, therefore, between Uveco and Indian corn meal appears to be 

 that the former contains a larger percentage of carbo-hydrates (starch, &c.), a part 

 of which by the cooking process has been converted into dextrin, which, unlike starch, 

 is soluble in cold water. . 



Flakerine is considerably richer in protein than Uveco, though poorer in fat. Its 

 percentage of carbo-hydrate is very close to that of Indian corn meal, but a greater 

 proportion has been made soluble by cooking than in the case of Uveco, as evidenced 

 by the larger percentages of extractive matter and dextrin. 



While admitting the great palatability of these foods, it is very doubtful if their 

 real feeding value, so far as most classes of stock are concerned, has been enhanced by 

 the cooking process. Many experiments have been made to ascertain the effect of 

 cooking and boiling on foods, and the results show most decidedly that in the majority 

 of instances their digestibilty has not been increased. Very seldom have the practi- 

 cal returns in gains been suf&cient to warrant the necessary expense of cooking, and 

 consequently it can only be recommended when it is desirable to render the foods 

 more palatable. Henry in his work on Feeds and Feeding, sums up the discussion 

 on this matter in tnese words : ' As a general proposition, it may be stated that it does 

 not pay to cook food for stock when such food will be satisfactorily consumed with- 

 out cooking, for cooking does not increase the digestibility of feeding stuffs, but may 

 lower it, and there is considerable expense involved in the operation.' 



It is scarcely necessary to point out that neither Uveco nor Flakerine be- 

 long to that class of concentrated by-products which is characterized by a high pro- 

 tein content (Oil Cake, Gluten Meal, Cotton-seed Meal, &c.) and, therefore, cannot 

 be used with economy when the intention is merely to enrich the ration in this con- 

 Btituent. 



MEAT MEALS FOR POULTRY. 



Among the nitrogenous foods which we now find being used by poultrymen, the 

 various * meat meals ' take a prominent place. Their high protein content makes them 



•The analysis of corn meal (average of FF samples), taken from Jenkins & Winton's 

 tables, Washington, D.C., has been added in order to allow a comparison to be made be- 

 tween these feeding stuffs and corn meal. 



10—12 



