FOODS — ANIMAL PEODUCTION. 875 



lowing': When the ration contained an a])undaiu"(^ of protein and was 

 of a character which was suita})le for production, asparagin generall}"- 

 exercised no favorable effect as regards gains in protein. When the 

 ration was vary deficient in protein, or when a maintenance ration 

 containing little protein was fed and no work was done, asparagin 

 exercised a beneficial efi'ect as regards gains in protein, though the 

 effect was small. 



Methods of steer feeding, G. C. Watson and M. S. McDowell 

 {Pennsylvania Sta. JhiJ. 'iJ, j>j>. H; Pennsyl'vanla Dept. Agr. JjuJ. 67^ 

 2>}). IJi). — This bulletin I'eports a cooperative experiment made by the 

 station and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. The com- 

 parative merits of feeding in pens and stalls was tested with 3 lots of 

 5 steers each, fed hay and corn stover in addition to a grain ration of 

 corncob meal and wheat bran, 6:1. Lot 1 was fed in a large pen while 

 the steers in lots 2 and 3 were confined in separate stalls. The steers 

 in lot 1 were fed in a common manger and supplied with drinking- 

 water b}" means of an automatic water basin. The same device was 

 used in supplying water to lot 2, while the steers in lot 3 were watered 

 once a daj' in a j^ard adjoining the building where they were kept, one 

 of the objects of the test being to stud}- the effects of the different 

 methods of supplying water. The average daily gain of the 3 lots 

 was 12.16, 11.65, and 11.26 lbs., respectively. 



"So far as any conclusions are warranted from a single experiment with a few ani- 

 mals, *the above results would seem to indicate that dehorned steers can be fed in 

 pens, in the manner practiced with lot 1, with at least as satisfactory results as 

 regards gain as when handled in the more common way, while there is a very con- 

 siderable saving in the amount of work required to properly care for them. The 

 self-watering device also saved considerable work and possibly effected some econ- 

 omv in the amount of grain consumed per pound of gain, although the unavoidable 

 differences between the lots render this conclusion far from certain." 



Sheep-feeding experiments in Nebraska, E. A. Burnett 



{SSraxJiia Sta. Bui. GG.j^p. IG). — The value of different com])inations 

 of corn and other grains with alfalfa hay and prairie ha}' was studied. 

 The grade lam])s used in the test were divided into 3 lots of 16 animals, 

 -1 of 8, and 1 of 20 each. After a preliminary period of 2 weeks on 

 poor quality alfalfa hay and a light ration of shelled corn and oats the 

 test l^egan November 2i)., and covered 11 weeks. Lots 1, 2, and 3 were 

 fed alfalfa hay and shelled corn, lot 2 receiving oats and lot 3 wheat 

 bran, in addition. Lots 1, 5, 6, and 7 were fed shelled corn and prai- 

 rie ha}', lot 5 receiving linseed meal, lot 6 oats, and lot 7 wheat bran, 

 in addition. All these lots were fed in sheds. For purposes of com- 

 parison, lot 8 was fed in an open vard, the same ration as lot 3. The 

 gains ranged from l!> ll)s. per lamb in the case of lots 6 and 7 to 34 

 lbs. in lot 8; the cost of a pound of gain from 2.2 cts. in lot 1 to 3 cts, 

 in lots 5, 6, and 7. The greatest profit per sheep ($2.05) was obtained 

 with lot 1; the least (11.30) with lot 7. 



