ANIMAL PRODUCTION. 497 



lots 20 animals. In the 210 days covered by the test the gains ranged from 376 lbs. 

 per head with the calves to 430 lbs. with the 3-year-old steers. The greatest range 

 in the grain required per pound of gain was also found with these 2 lots, being from 

 5.44 lbs. to 7.94 lbs. A pound of gain was most cheaply made by the yearlings, 

 costing in this case 5.03 cts., and was most expensive with the 3-year-old steers, 

 costing 5.95 cts. 



A lot of 10 2-year-old steers was fed corn silage, alfalfa hay, corn, and Kafir corn 

 and a similar lot Kafir-corn stover, corn, and Kafir corn. With the former lot the 

 total gain per head was 447 lbs. and with the latter lot 361 lbs., the grain eaten per 

 pound of gain in the 2 cases being 6.7 lbs. and 10.1 lbs., and the cost of a pound of 

 gain 4.91 cts. and 6.68 cts. 



The author notes that with all the lots mentioned 4 lbs. of grain per 1,000 lbs. 

 live weight was fed at the beginning of the test and the amount very gradually 

 increased, the steers being on full feed in about 5 weeks. "There seemed to be no 

 difference in the various lots as to the time required to get on full feed." All the 

 animals were sold and slaughtered, data regarding the shrinkage in weight, dressing, 

 etc., being recorded. 



"The ensilage lot sold for the same price [$4.95] as the 3-year-olds, which is 25 

 cts. per hundredweight higher than the 20 2-year-olds fed without ensilage, but 

 which were of the same class and quality when placed in the feed lots, and 45 cts. 

 per hundredweight higher than the lot receiving Kafir-corn stover." The 3-year- 

 olds showed the greatest shrinkage in hides, and the calves next. The shrinkage of 

 hides in the other 4 lots was exactly the same. The carcasses of the ensilage lot 

 contained the largest percentage of fat and, according to the author, were of good 

 quality. The carcasses of the lot fed Kafir corn resembled those of grass-fed cattle. 

 "They were fairly well fleshed, but not well covered with fat." Taking into account 

 the total cost the calves were considered more desirable than the yearlings, though 

 neither lot was fat enough. The 2-year-old steers were considered in very fair 

 market condition. 



The results of the test, as a whole, show that, " by feeding plenty of nitrogenous 

 roughness (like alfalfa) and plenty of succulence (most cheaply obtained in corn 

 ensilage), it is possible to make rapid gains and at the same time put the steers in 

 prime condition for market. 



"The results further emphasize the superior and economic value of alfalfa hay. 

 Corn or Kafir-corn stover does not contain the nutrients required by the steer in 

 securing best results unless the grain ration is supplemented with nitrogenous con- 

 centrates like oil meal or cotton-seed meal, which is usually costly. 



"Since alfalfa is such a splendid feed, is a heavy yielder and a good drought resister, 

 its growth can not be urged too strongly as an economical producer of beef, as well 

 as other classes of stock which relish and thrive upon it. Alfalfa and ensilage com- 

 bined furnishes a feed that can almost invariably be depended upon, no matter what 

 the season is, and when grain fails will keep stock in good condition; and when 

 grain is available will enable the feeder to put on gains rapidly with a comparatively 

 small allowance of grain." 



Feeding- cattle with different quantities of concentrated foods {Mark Lane 

 Express, :>1 (1904), No. 3799, Hup., pp.. VII, VIII). — Brief notes are given regarding 

 a test at the University College of North Wales of the comparative value of limited 

 and liberal rations of grain (maize meal and decorticated cotton-seed cake or linseed 

 cake) in addition to pulped swedes, hay, and straw. 



On the more liberal ration the average daily gain in the 50 days of the test was 

 2.55 lbs. per steer as compared with 2.37 lbs. on the limited ration. Taking into 

 account the cost of food, the conclusion was reached that the extra gain did not 

 compensate for the extra feed. Though the animals receiving the more generous 

 ration were somewhat better in appearance than the others, the difference between 



