FIELD CROPS. 



769 



The average percentage of protein in the samples from the first cut- 

 ting was 14.85, but exchuling the immature sami)les (;ut May 5, i;3.98; 

 from second cutting 11.43, and from third cutting 13.0."). Samples taken 

 from the ordinary farm crop shoM'ed similar relations, the averages 

 being 14.01*, 13.91), and 13.47 for the 3 cuttings. 



"ludgiug })y the amounts of ])rotci(Ls in the '^ ditterent ciittingH, tlio first and sec- 

 ond cuttings stand very ch)se to each other in value with the ditfercnce in favor of 

 the first cutting. In the farm samples, . . . the iirst cutting is materially the best 

 of the 3. I would here remind the feeder who prefers the second or even the third, 

 crop for certain feeding that the amount of proteida ijresent is not the only measure 

 of good. hay. Not only is the quantity of proteids greater in the first cutting, but 

 the yield is also greater and. the hay cut just at the beginning of bloom is richer 

 in this constituent than when cut later. From beginning bloom to half bloom the 

 amount of proteids seems to be nearly stationary and the crop is also probably at 

 its maximum. . . . 



"If the plant continues to store up organic matter after this period is i)ast, I am 

 inclined to think that the loss by the dropping of leaves, due to the niuturiiig of the 

 plant and the action of the fungus common on our alfiilfa, more than compensates 

 for the gain. ... If the very early cutting be rejected from the series ... it 

 changes the results in favor of the second cutting. . . . 



" [The results] show an increase in the crude fiber as the plant matures, but there 

 is a considerable variation in the samples, with a few apparent contradictions, 

 which is to be explained by differences under which the samples were grown and 

 taken. . . . From the beginning of bloom to half bloom the increase is not very 

 rapid and the averages obtained for the hays of different cuttings are nearly equal, 

 at least not so far apart as public judgment assumes; for the first, 35.21 per cent; 

 for the second, 34.15 per cent (laboratory sample), 34.47 per cent (farm sample) ; and. 

 for the third cutting, 37.01 per cent." 



A comparison was made between alfalfa hay exposed to warm, sultry 

 weather for 15 days after cutting, during which time 1.76 in. of rain fell 

 in 3 showers, and hay from the same field cut the same day but imme- 

 diately dried in an air bath. The results appear in the table below: 



Comparison of alfalfa hay cured with and without being rained on. 



Hay cured in an air bath. 

 Hay expo.sed to rain 



Ash. 



Per cent. 

 12.18 

 12.71 



Crude 

 fiber. 



Per cent. 

 26.46 



38. 83 



Crude 

 fat. 



Per cent. 

 3.94 

 3.81 



Crude 

 protein. 



Per cent. 

 18.71 

 11.01 



Niirogen- 



freo 

 extract. 



Per cent. 

 38.71 

 33.64 



The author believes such damaged hay to be worth about one-half as 

 much as good hay, the damage being due to mechanical losses and loss 

 of "general qualities recognized as essential to good hay," as well as to 

 loss of proteids and nitrogen-free extract. 



Comparative analyses are also tabulated of alfalfa and clover hay, 

 and of silage made from alfalfa, from clover, and from pea vines. 



Ash analyses of the i^lant and its parts are tabulated, and the 

 amounts of fertilizing ingredients removed by a ton of alfalfa hay at 

 each of the 3 cuttings and by a ton of red clover are calculated. The 

 latter data are shown on page 770. 



