772 EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. [Vol. 43 



responsible for red calves, and that the common practice of blaming one or the 

 other must be abandoned. 



Feeding tests [with sheep], W. H. Fairfield {Canada Expt. Farms Rpt. 

 1919, p. 16/f). — In a comparison between barley and oats (1:1) and screenings 

 for Iamb feeding at Lethbridge, Alta., it was found that 1.06 lbs. of screenings 

 was approximately equal in value to a pound of the mixed grain. 



[Pea straw for feeding sheep], H. Hackedorn {Washington Sta. Bui. 155 

 {1920), pp. 8-10). — A lot of 6 lambs fed an average ration of 3.49 lbs. of pea 

 straw gained 30.8 lbs. per head in 120 days, beginning December 18, 1918, and 

 produced fleeces averaging 10.17 lbs. A similar lot fed an average ration 

 of 3.42 lbs. of alfalfa hay gained 43.7 lbs. per head during the same period 

 and produced fleeces weighing 10.41 lbs. Each of the lambs in both lots re- 

 ceived 1 lb. of grain per day. The lower price of the pea straw made it a 

 more profltable roughage than the alfalfa. 



During an average winter period of 80 days, pregnant ewes receiving pea 

 straw and grain required 0.16 lb. more grain per day than ewes on a standard 

 ration of alfalfa hay and 0.5 lb. of grain. After lambing, a group of 7 ewes 

 and 9 lambs were continued on each of the roughages, the amount of grain 

 being varied to secure an equal growth in both groups of lambs. During the 

 first 60 days of the suckling period the alfalfa hay lot consumed 1.9 lbs. of 

 grain per ewe daily, while the pea straw lot consumed 2.93 lbs. 



[Feeding experiments with hogs], R. H. Williams and W. S. Cunningham 

 {A7-izona Sta. Rpt. 1918, pp. 325-328). — Experiments are reported to show that 

 garbage is an economical feed for hogs, and that well-fed hogs grow better 

 than those given only ordinary care. 



[Swine feeding investigations], L. A. Weavek {Missouri Sta. Bui. 112 

 {1920), pp. 16-19). — Brief progress reports are made of several swine feeding 

 projects. 



Hominy feed v. corn for fattening swine on forage (pp. 16, 17). — During an 

 86-day period on bluegrass pasture, a lot of 10 pigs fed hominy feed, shorts, 

 and tankage (9:2:1) made an average daily gain of 0.9 lb. per head and con- 

 sumed 4.77 lbs. of feed per pound of gain. A similar lot on the same pasture, 

 and fed ground corn, shorts, and tankage (9:2:1), gained 0.97 lb. per head 

 daily and required 4.58 lbs. of feed per pound of gain. Hogs receiving the 

 hominy-feed mixture and grazed on alfalfa or rape also made satisfactory 

 gains. 



Semisolid buttermilk v. tankage as a protein supplement in rations for fat- 

 tening swine (pp. 17, 18). — Forty fall pigs, divided into 4 lots, were fed for 49 

 days beginning March 11, 1919. Lot 1 received corn, shorts, and tankage 

 (9:2:1), made an average daily gain of 1.93 lbs., and required 4.1 lbs. of 

 feed per pound of gain, Lot 2 received corn, shorts, and semisolid buttermilk 

 (9:2: 1.5), made an average daily gain of 1.94 lbs., and required 4.24 lbs. of feed 

 per pound of gain. Lots 3 and 4 were fed like lots 1 and 2, respectively, with 

 barley substituted for corn. Lot 3 made an average daily gain of 1.85 lbs. 

 per head and required 4.27 lbs. of feed per pound of gain. Lot 4 made an aver- 

 age daily gain of 1.87 lbs. and required 4.34 lbs. of feed per pound of gain. 

 It is concluded that 1.5 lbs. of semisolid buttermilk may be used to replace a 

 IX)und of tankage without substantial influence on the rate or economy of gain. 



Barley v. cwn for fattening swine (p. 18). — From the results of the preceding 

 experiment it is concluded that barley is slightly inferior to corn for swine 

 feeding. 



Fishmeal v. tankage as a supplement to corn in rations for fattening stvine 

 (pp. 18, 19). — A lot of 10 spring pigs, fed for 49 days, beginning September 21, 

 1918, on corn, shorts, and fishmeal (9:2:1), made an average daily gain of 



