228 



Journal of Agriculture. 



[lo April, 1909. 



On the otlier hand, the farmer growing the Yellow Moruva and ob- 

 taining a return of 56 tons to the acre, secured a yield valued according 

 to its nutritive ratio, when contrasted with bran, as follows: — 



Reckoning the protein as worth twice as much as the carbo-hydrates, 

 and the fats as worth three times the carbo-hydrate: — ■ 



Bran. 



= 22,4 



— 42.2 



7-5 



Maize. 



Protein, 11.2 x 

 Carbo-hydrates 

 Fats, 2.5 X 3 



Protein, 1.3 x 

 Carbo-hydrates 

 Fat, 0.6 X 3 ... 



2.€ 



13-5 



17.9 



One ton of bran at is. per bushel (20 lbs.)=;^5 12s. per ton, there- 

 fore 72.1 lbs. of bran will cost 5s.. as against 17.9 lbs. of maize 

 costing IS. 3d. 



Hence, as it requires 4 lbs. weight of maize to be equal in feeding 

 value to 1 lb. of hran, the growing of this particular quantity of maize 

 would save the farmer purchasing 14 tons of bran, and would there- 

 fore be one of the most profitable crops he could grow. 



The great contrast in the yields of the different varieties of maize 

 crops grown last season, as against the old methods of broadcast culti- 

 vation still practised by some dairymen is of such a convincing nature 

 as to convert the most sceptical. In the foregoing pages, I record the 

 results of this season's work with the variety and distance between rows 

 of maize as against broadcasting seed on the farms selected by the De- 

 partment in the area under my supervision. The testing of these two 

 factors in the production of a suitable forage maize is of the most funda- 

 mental importance, as is evidenced by the difference in yield of different 

 varieties when grown practically side by side, on the same class of soil, 

 with identical cultivation and fertilization. 



If carefully conducted experiments, such as the ones recorded, te 

 carried out for about three years in succession there will be no difficulty 

 in stating which would be the most advantageous distance between the 

 rows with the varieties most suitable for early or late sowing, quickness 

 of maturity, drought-resisting properties, and the ultimate value as a 

 fodder of each variety; farmer > generally would be induced to grow the 

 most i)rofitable varieties, and material assistance will have been rendered 

 in increasing the area of this im])ortant forage crop throughout the State. 



