102 THE CONNECTICUT AGRICULTURAL 



ticut rations are in so far incorrect as they differ from the German 

 staudard, nor on the other hand are we warranted in assuming 

 without question that the Connecticut rations are the best that 

 could be devised under the circumstances. The object of this 

 paper being chiefly statistical, it is not proposed to enter into an 

 elaborate discussion of this point, and still less to make any criti- 

 cisms on the methods of feeding practiced, but there are certain 

 fairly well established general principles concerning the feeding 

 of milk cows which may throw some light on the subject. 



In the first place, it may be remarked that Wolfi^'s standard 

 ration is unquestionably a good one, as has been shown by abund- 

 ant experience in Germany and to some extent in this country. 

 It is no theoretical deduction from chemical or physiological laws, 

 but rests on the firm basis of actual trial on the farm. 



In comparing the other rations with it, it is noticeable at once 

 that, with one exception, they contain a much larger proportion 

 of non-nitrogenous nutrients to nitrogenous (protein or albu- 

 minoids) than is the case with the standard, while in one case 

 there is also as compared with the standard a decided deficiency 

 in the amount of total digestible matter. It therefore seems 

 reasonable to conclude that if, in Mr. Norton's ration, the amount 

 of the several nutrients had been increased, without alterinor their 

 proportions, the result would have been a larger yield of milk.* 

 Furthermore, all experiments on milk-production have shown 

 that the most milk is produced on a ration containing a large pro- 

 portion of protein, and there can be no reasonable doubt that if 

 the relative amount of protein in these rations had been increased 

 and that of carbhydrates and fat decreased, so as to keep the total 

 amount of digestible matters the same, more milk would have 

 been produced. Of these conclusions we may feel vei-y certain. 

 Our figures, to be sure, rest on estimates of the digestibility of 

 the feeding stufis and in some cases of the live weights of the 

 animals and therefore are not exact, but they are probably exact 

 enough to show that in these rations with one exception the 

 nutritive ratios, viz: 1 : 7.6, 1 : 6.7 and 1 : 9.1, are much wider than 

 that adapted to the most abundant production of milk (1 : 5.4). 

 In Mr. Webb's ration the nutritive ratio is narrower, viz: 1 : 4.4. 

 We are therefore justified in regarding it as in the highest degree 

 probable, if not certain, that a narrowing of the nutritive ratio in 

 the three cases to that of the standard ration, by decreasing the 



* i. e. If the animals were not too far advanced in lactation. 



