1018 EXPEP.IMENT STATION RECORD. 



like araonnts of food from Jane 8 to Soptember 4. The food for lot A 

 was mixed with 2 or '5 time.s it weight of water and allowed to stand 

 24 hours before feeding, while that for lot B was fe<l dry. It consisted 

 of corn meal and a mixed grain, which was varied as the feeding 

 advanced. Water was kept before both lots. The results for each lot 

 are tabulated, based on the average per day per 100 lbs. live weight. 



"The total gaius made by each lot for the whole trial were almost exactly the 

 same — 549 lbs. for lot A and 548 lbs. for lot B. The total food consumed was the 

 same for each lot. Considerable more water was taken by the lot having the wet 

 food. . . . 



"The wet food for lot A was always eaten very much faster. . . . 



"The average loss in dressing for market was 22.8 per cent for lot A and 22.2 per 

 cent for lot B — practically no difference." 



The lot on dry [jod made the steadier gain. 



Second trial (pp. 222, 223). — In this 2 lots of 8 pigs each were used, 

 averaging 133 lbs. in weight, and including Poland Chinas, Borkshires, 

 Durocs, Chester Whites, and a Berkshire-Cheshire cross. The iood 

 consisted of corn and a mixture of wheat bran, cotton-seed meal, lin- 

 seed meal, and middlings, and was fed ad libitum. The trial lasted from 

 February 9 to April 13. The results are tabulated as for the first trial. 



" The hogs in lot D having the food which was mixed with water and soaked about 

 24 hours ate a little more than those in lot C having dry food, and made a slightly 

 more economical gain, the cost of the gain in weight being 4.7 per cent less than for 

 the lot having dry food. Lot D took a very little more corn meal in proportion to 

 the mixed grain than did lot C, and the nutritive ratio of their ration was very 

 slightly broader in consequence. 



"There was an excessive quantity of food taken by the hoga in both lots, and 2 

 hogs in lot D suffered from indigestion, etc., after the close of the trial, and 1 (Duroc) 

 died from congestion of liver following indigestion. The increase in weiglit, as in 

 the first feeding experiment, was less regular with the lot having wet food. . . . 



"After the close of the feeding trial the average loss in dressing 5 hogs from lot 

 D was 24.2 per cent, and the average loss in dressing the 8 hogs in lot C was 22.9 

 per cent." 



Horse feeding, R. Warington {Jour. Bath and West of Eng. Soc. 

 ser. 4, 4 {1893-''94), pp. 188-196). — In this article the author gives a con- 

 cise review of the experiments by A. Miintz on the horses of a tramway 

 comjiany in Paris, those by Grandeau and Leclerc (still in progress) on 

 the horses of a cab company, and those of Wolff at Hohenheim, upon 

 which ''nearly the whole of our exact knowledge of horse feeding 

 depends." 



Some of the difficulties in the way of arriving at certain fixed data 

 to guide in horse feeding are enumerated. 



"Horses are not so generally alike in their powers of digestion, nor in the use they 

 make of food, as a flock of sheep or a herd of cattle. This is, perhaps, partly because 

 the sheep and cattle are always in repose, while the horse being worked to the full 

 extent of his powers any individual weakness becomes apparent. The horse, too, is 

 kept in work till old ago, and we consequently have to deal with him both in strength 

 and feebleness. Baudement placed 168 of the Erench cavalry horses on the same 

 rations and studied the alterations in weight of each horse; he found that horses 

 which were above the mean height, above the mean weight, and below the average 

 age gave the best return for the food consumed." 



