592 



cotton-seed meal, linseed meal, wheat bran, and corn meal. The amount 

 of each constituent fed and digested in each ration and the co-efiQcient? 

 of digestibility found are tabulated. 



Aniotmt of dung voided doily. — A tabular statement is given of the 

 ainounts of fresh and water-free dung and of urine voided by each of 10 

 animals daily, and analyses of the dungs and valuation per ton for fer- 

 tilizing purposes. = 



Dairy experiment. — A reprint of Bulletin No. 18 (new series) of the 

 station (See Expcrimen: Station Record, Vol. I, p. 269) recording the 

 exi)eriinent with different breeds from April to October, 1889. 



Relative feeding value of certain grain rations. — One Jersey cow was 

 fed from December 11 to February 22 a ration of bay, silage, and 2 

 pounds of wheat bran per day, to which was added in period 1 (12 days) 6 

 pounds of corn meal, in period 2 (21 days) 6 i)ouuds of gluten meal, in 

 period 3 (20 days) 5.5 pounds of linseed meal, and an extra 1.1 pounds 

 of wheat bran. The averages of food consumed and milk produced per 

 day during the last 10 days of each period and the average composition 

 of the milk for the last 4 days of each period are tabulated. 



The milk yield gradually fell off during the corn-meal period, but the substitution 

 of au equal weight of gluten meal for corn-meal caused an increased flow of milk, 

 which was well maintained through the period. The substitution of crushed oats for 

 gluten meal failed to maintain the quality of milk during the third periotl, and in 

 the fourth period the linseed meal, poorly eaten, maintained nearly the same yield 

 as the oats for the whole period, but for the last 4 days the falling off was greater, 

 since very little meal was taken when it was attempted to adjust the ration to cor- 

 respond with the other periods. * * ' It is interesting to note that while the milk 

 yield under gluten meal for 3 days averaged 26.7 ounces more iier day than for the 

 previous period with corn meal, yet there was a loss of 1.48 ounces of fat per day. 

 This confirms what has been indicated before, that gluten meal increases the flow of 

 milk without proportionately increasing the solids or the fat, which, in butter-mak- 

 ing is the object sought. With crushed oats the milk fell off per day 55.3 ounces, 

 while the fat fell but .72 ounce, and the quality of the butter was much better than 

 that made under gluten-meal food. Linseed meal failed to give as good results as in 

 previous trials, although there was slight increase in fat and a falling off in yield of 

 milk. A part of this effect may be attributed undoubtedly to the small amount 

 eaten. * * * From the trials made with this animal it is evident that gluten 

 meal was a superior food for milk production. 



In another experiment siuiilar to the above, also with one Jersey cow, 

 the effects of adding corn meal, liuseed meal, palm-nut meal, and 

 " starch waste" from starch and glucose manufacture to the ration, iu 

 separate periods, were tested. No analyses of the milk were made. 

 The average amount of food eaten per day and data relative to the 

 churuing of the cream are tabulated. 



Taking only the last 10 days of each period, we have indications that with the cow 

 under experiment 3.8 pounds of linseed meal and 3.5 pounds of wheat bran are just 

 about equivalent to 8 pounds of corn meal for maintaining the milk yield, but we find 

 that 5.1 pounds less milk was required for 1 pound of butter [with the former feed]. 

 In period 3, under palm-nut meal, there was a falling off in milk of 2.6 pounds per 

 day. Under dry feed (starch waste) Ihis decrease iu milk was arrested, and the 



