DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY 231 



SESSIONAL PAPER No. 16 



Oats, Laboratory Nos. 11526-7. — These are from the crop of 1911, grown in Alberta 

 and graded as ' Extra Feed ' and ' No. 1 Feed,' respectively. They were forwarded 

 to the laboratory and analyzed in May, 1912. Extra feed weighed 33 pounds per 

 bushel; No. 1 Feed 34 pounds. The analysis was made to learn if these oats con- 

 tained an excessive amount of moisture (as was reported) and to ascertain what 

 differences there might be between the two grades as to nutritive value. 



The moisture-content of the cereals depends not only on their ripeness when 

 thresbed, but also on the conditions under which they have been subsequently stored. 

 Thus, not infrequently we have found fully-ripened wheat to lose from 2 to 4 per 

 cent moisture on storage for a few weeks in the winter season in cotton bags stacked 

 in the warm dry air of the chemical building at Ottawa. Much of this may Ve 

 regained during the following summer, when the air is more moist than in the winter 

 The present samples have a somewhat higher moisture-content than is usually met 

 with in oats on the market, but the amount is not excessive, and we are incline! 

 from the appearance of the grain and certain other considerations, to attribute it to 

 the grain not being thoroughly ripe when threshed. 



The proportion of hull to kernel is an important consideration, for the hull ha< 

 a very low feeding value. This fact was well brought out in our work on the Banner 

 oat, published in the Annual Report of this Division for 1903. The data for the 

 present samples, together with those from Banner oats grown on the Central Experi- 

 mental Farm, 1902, inserted for comparison, are as follows: — 



Kernele. Hulls. 

 Per cent. Per cent. 



Extra Feed, Alberta, 1911 69-84 30-16 



No. 1 Feed, Alberta, 1911 65-77 33-23 



Banner, C.E.F., 1902 71-92 28-08 



These results clearly indicate the superior quality of the grade Extra Feed, as 

 compared with No. 1 Feed, though evidently it is not equal to the sample of Banner 

 oats previously examined. 



The protein and fibre data confirm the statement as to the relative feeding value 

 of these two grades; Extra Feed contains 1 per cent more protein and 1.21 per cent 

 less fibre. The slightly higher percentage of ash in No. 1 Feed indicates a larger 

 proportion of hull. 



The weight of 1,000 kernels of oats of Extra Feed was 29-14 grams, that for No. 

 1 Feed, 27-96 grams. These results follow the respective weights per bushel and 

 serve to support the contention that the heavier oat contains the larger proportion 

 of kernel and has the greater feeding value. 



Oats, slightly damaged, Laboratory No. 1207Jf. — A correspondent in Castor, 

 wrote us in June, 1912, ' As doubtless you know, the West this year has thousands of 

 bushels of damaged oats and we in this neighbourhood would feel obliged if you 

 would inform us as to their feeding value. If useful for cattle feed we would obtain 

 cattle for feeding next winter. A ropi'esentativc sample is sent herewith.' 



These oats, as received, had a somewhat damaged appearance and were consider- 

 ably discoloured, but they were not damp nor were there appearances of mould. 



The data indicate that there has not been such an impairment as to render them 

 useless as feed, though they are from 2 to 3 per cent lower in protein than well- 

 matured, sound oats. A further feature lowering the feeding value, as compared 

 with first-class oats, is the higher fibre-content, due to th^ larger proportion of hull. 

 Their feeding value would probably be about three-fourths that of good quality »ats. 

 Provided these damaged oats were dried before any fermentation had taken place or 

 mould appeared, they should prove suitable for cattle feeding. 



