DAIRY FARMING- — DAIRYING. 801 



DAIRY FARMING DAIRYING. 



Feeding- experiments with milch cows, 1900-1901, F. Friis {53. Ber. Kgl. 

 Yd. Landho}u>jskol('s LaJi. Landokon. Furtiijg \_Cupenhageii], 190J, pp. 30). — This is a 

 l)reliiiiinary report on the results of the cooperative feeding experiments with niil(;li 

 cows conducted by the Copenhagen experiment station during the year 1900-1901. 

 The plan of the experiments was similar to that of earlier work (E. >S. R., II, p. 

 780). The subject studied was the value of I'oots in comparison with grain. Four 

 lots of 10 to 12 cows each were formed on 6 different dairy farms, and these were fed 

 similar rations during a preparatory feeding period of 40 to 50 days. During the 

 experimental period proper lot A received 7 lbs. grain (barley, rye, or oats, mixed) 

 and 1.T lbs. cotton-seed meal; lot B, 4 lbs. grain and A\ lbs. cotton-seed meal; lot C, 

 4 lbs. grain and I2- lbs. cotton-seed meal; and lot D, 1 lb. grain and 4^ lbs. cotton- 

 seed meal. In addition lots A and B were fed 4^ lbs. dry matter in mangel-wurzels 

 and lots C and D Ih lbs., all 4 lots receiving 65 lbs. hay and 10 lbs. straw. The 

 nutritive ratios of the rations fed to lots A and C were between 1:8 and 1:9, and those 

 of the rations fed to lots B and D between 1:5 and 1 :5.5. 



The average daily yield of milk per head for the different lots was as follows: Lot 

 A, 22.4 lbs.; lot B, 23.7 lbs.; lot C, 22.5 lbs.; and lot D, 24.2 lbs. The average per- 

 centage of fat in the milk produced by the different lots during the experimental 

 period proper was as follows: Lot A, 3.11; lot B, 3.16; lot C, 3.11; and lot D, 3.10 

 per cent. The fat content of the milk was not therefore appreciably influenced by 

 the character of the rations fed. 



The results show that 3 lbs. of grain and 3 lbs. of dry matter in roots had very 

 nearly the same feeding value undei- the conditions of the experiments. Lots B and 

 D were fed richer rations than lots A and C. In either case, however, grain and 

 dry matter in roots were found to possess a similar feeding value whether the nutri- 

 tive ratio was 1:5 or 1:9. 



In the comparison of oil meals and grain feed the results of a series of experiments 

 with milch cows conducted during 1891-92 (E. S. R., 4, p. 601) showed that oil-cake 

 meal (rape seed, palm nut, and sunflower-seed meal mixed in equal parts) possessed 

 an appreciably higher feeding value than similar amounts of mixed grains. By 

 methods of calculations it was found that the feeding value of 1 lb. of grain was 

 e(|uivalent in feeding value to ;i lb. of oil meals. In the same way the experiments 

 of 1900-1901 furnished data showing that | lb. of cotton-seed meal was equivalent 

 to 1 lb. of grain. This ratio appeared to hold good whether a heavy or a light root 

 feeding was practiced. Lots B and D therefore received | lb. more cotton-seed meal 

 than the equivalent of 3 lbs. of grain; hence the increased production of these lots. 



The position of the experiment station on certain mooted questions in animal 

 nutrition, particularly as to the value and applicability of the results of the coopera- 

 tive Danish cow-feedingexperiments to everyday conditions on the farm is explained 

 and the practical value of the experiments maintained. The value of calculations of 

 food eijuivalents, the use of data obtained by averaging the results for different farms, 

 chemical analysis of feeding stuffs, and nutritive ratios are among the subjects dis- 

 cussed. It is argued that the feeding value of a fodder can not be establislied by 

 means of chemical analysis with even approximate certainty. In practice, moreover, 

 it is not possible to have chemical analyses made of the feeding stuffs employed, and 

 the farmer must content himself by using figures for the average composition of feed- 

 ing stuffs. Chemical analyses and nutritive ratios are looked upon as useful aids in 

 contiolling the composition of the feed rations rather than as means of determining 

 their value. The relative valuation of food materials must be made by the farm ani- 

 mals themselves, and this finds expression in the figures of food equivalents, as sug- 

 gested liy Fjord. For ('(mditions similar to those under which the exijeriments were 



