Dec. i6, 1918 



Bacteriological Studies on Alfalfa Silage 



581 



mated. By the use of small dilutions and more tubes, the results are 

 probably more accurate than those obtained from the usual method of 

 counting the liquefying colonies on gelatin plates. 



EXPERIMENTAL DATA 



The silos were opened on December 20, 191 5, six and one-half months 

 after being filled. The silage from all silos was of much better quality 

 than that obtained the previous year. This was due, no doubt, to the 

 greater care taken in packing and filling the silos {15, p. 13-15) and also 

 to the supplements used. The strong offensive odor common to the silage 

 produced in the first year's work was present only in the alfalfa and in 

 the alfalfa-and-rye silage. The palatability test as determined by the 

 Dairy Department demonstrated the feeding quality of the silage to be 

 as follows: Alfalfa and molasses 20 to i, alfalfa to molasses 10 to i, 

 alfalfa and com chop, alfalfa and sweet-sorghum butts, alfalfa and rye, 

 alfalfa alone, and r3'e alone. 



The data obtained by the Chemistry Department, published by Swan- 

 son and Tague (77), failed to show the relative differences between 

 the different kinds of silage. The alfalfa silage, like that in the previous 

 year's work, exhibited the lowest acid content. The greatest, and prac- 

 tically the only characteristic difference observ^ed from the chemical 

 data was the total amount of acid produced. The acidity of alfalfa 

 silage, calculated as lactic acid, on the last day examined, when 211 

 days old, was 1.72 per cent; alfalfa and molasses 20 to i, 208 days old, 

 2.89 per cent; alfalfa and molasses 10 to i 206 days old, 3.55 percent; 

 alfalfa and com chop 10 to i, 204 days old, 3.36 per cent; alfalfa and 

 sweet-sorghum straw 6 to i, 198 days old, 2.19 per cent; alfalfa and rye 

 2 to I, 198 days old, 2.5 per cent; rye alone, 198 days old, 1.95 per cent, 



The calculated percentage of amino nitrogen failed to exhibit any 

 characteristic difference between the various types of silage. 



The bacteriological results are tabulated in Table II. 



Table II. — Microbial content of various kinds of silage — Experiments of igi^ 



ALFALFA 



