DAIRY FARMING DAIRYING. 



627 



Comparison of peanut cake and retch seed on cows. 



Peanut cake. 



Period 1. 1 Period 2. 



Shrink- 

 age I Vetcli 

 between seed, 

 periods 1 Period 3. 



and 2. 



3.30 

 .32 

 .56 



64.2 



14. GO 

 20. 60 

 50.41 



283.4 

 329.6 

 790.1 



Slirink- | 

 age(— )or 

 gain ( r) ! 

 between [ 

 I)eriods2 i 

 and 3. 



Peanut 



cake. 



Period 4. 



' Shrink- 

 i age 

 , between 

 ' period.s3 

 ! and 4. 



2,96 



.28 



2.37 



— 87.8 



— 7.7 

 •f 14, 9 



11.10 

 14.17 

 47.04 



228.3 

 279.2 

 756.4 



3.50 

 G.43 

 3.37 



55.1 

 50,4 

 33.7 



Cow No. 388, which was in the thirteenth month of lactation, shrunk 

 the most and suffered from an attack of indigestion in the intermediate 

 period between periods 2 and 3. The author conchides that '-the vetch 

 seed gave either a real gain or a diminished shrinkage over the peanut 

 cake in the preceding or subsequent periods." The live weight was 

 maintained on the vetch ration. The cows with calf showed no ill 

 effects from the vetch seed, contrary to tradition. 



Incidentally, the Soxhlet aerometric method was compared with the 

 Babcock test, the former being stated as the more exact. 



Winter feeding experiments with dairy cows, F. B. Linfield 

 ( Utah Sta. Bui. 43, pp. 35-5fi). — These experiments were made with 2 

 lots of 5 cows each, fed in 8 jjeriods of 3 weeks each. During the 

 first 7 periods lot 1 received alfalfa hay and lot 2 mixed hay ad libitum. 

 In addition both lots received a grain mixture of equal parts by 

 weight of wheat and bran, of which G lbs. per head daily was fed dur- 

 ing the first period. 10 lbs. during the second, 12 lbs. during the third 

 and fourth, 10 lbs. during the fifth, 8 lbs. during the sixth, and 6 lbs. 

 during the seventh. In some cases the cows refused to eat these 

 amounts of grain. In the eighth period the cows were at pasture and 

 received no grain. The milk was weighed morning and evening and 

 composite tests were made. The data are fully tabulated for each 

 animal, with averages by lots, showing amounts and cost of food eaten 

 and the yield and composition of the milk; and these data are fully 

 discussed. 



The author's summary follows: 



"(1) This ti'st adds hut another item to the fairly well established fact that an 

 increase in the quantity of concentrated food in the ration of a cow does not 

 increase the richness of the milk, provided the cows are well fed to start with. 



"(2) An}' increaso in the grain fed over 6 lbs. per day, increased the cost of the 

 dairy products almost without exception; and the test indicates that, with the 

 fodders used, 8 lbs. of grain is the highest limit for the greatest profit. 



"(3) Considered from the ]ioint of price, alfalfa hay and grain seem to be a more 

 economic ration than one of mixed hay and grain, but considering the weight of 

 food, there i.s very little difference, though the results are sliglitlv in lavor of 

 alfalfa. 



"(4) It is evident from these tests that, with the price of alfalfa as reported 

 ($3.75 per ton), cows may be fed at a food cost in winter of less than it cts. a day 

 per 1,000 lbs. live weight, even with cows that will ])roduce 1 11). of butter or more 

 a (lay. 



