292 



TWENTY-SEVKNTH AnNUAIv REPORT 



the laying season, after which the eggs laid by her were much smaller. 

 In 1916 the eggs from this hen were more comparable in size and ap- 

 pearance with those that were laid the year before the injury. This 

 partly accounts for the greater increase in the average weight of eggs 

 laid by this hen in 1916 over that laid by any other hen. Table XIX 

 gives the ranking of the birds according to the average weight of eggs 

 laid by each hen during the two years. 



TABLE XIX. HENS ARRANGED ACCORDING TO AVERAGE VV^ElGHT OF EGGS 



FOR TWO YEARS 



Tlic iccight of eggs laid by each hen, igi6: There was a great 

 range in the total weight of ggs laid by each hen. Thus hen No No. 

 gave 25,360 grams of eggs, while hen 2292 laid 61,234 grams. This is 

 a difference of 142 percent between the eggs laid by the hen that gave 

 the lightest weight of eggs and the one that laid the greatest weight. 

 Between these extremes the hens range close to the average, which was 

 46,330.3 grams or 102.3 pounds. Table XX ranks the different hens 

 according to the total weight of eggs laid. 



TABLE XX. HENS ARRANGED ACCORDING TO TOTAL WEIGHT OF EGGS, 1916 



Effect of breed: Again, it was noted that the South African eggs 

 are distinctly smaller than the Nubian or cross-bred eggs. They are 

 more deeply pitted on the surface and have not the gloss shown in 

 the Nubian or cross-bred eggs. With the exception of one bird, 2305, 



