664 journal of Agriculture , Victoria. [ii Nov., 1912. 



GENERAL NOTES. 



THE FLY PEST— 



A simple method of destroying house flies, which is well spoken of, 

 is described in the Agricultural Journal, Queensland. Formalin is the 

 agent employed. One ounce of commercial (40 per cent.) formalin is 

 added to one pint of equal parts milk and water. A trace of sugar added 

 makes it more attractive. The mixture is exposed in shallow plates, and 

 a piece of bread or blotting paper in each plate offers more space for the 

 flies to alight on. The preparation has been tried in cow houses, stables, 

 dairies, and dwelling houses, and in most cases seems to have been very 

 destructive. Mixed with syrup it was eaten by ants with impunity. 



COMPARATIVE VALUES OF FOODS— 



The unit-value system of ascertaining the prices of manures is 

 described by the Chemist for Agriculture in the January issue of this 

 Journal.. It is useful as showing whether the purchaser of manures 

 is getting value for his money according to current rates. From time 

 to time proposals have been made for the application of the unit system 

 to a comparison of food values, and Leaflet 7^ of the Board of Agri- 

 culture suggests the following method : — In a cattle food the ingredients 

 commercially important are the albuminoids (proteids), fats, and carbo- 

 hydrates. In working, multiply the percentage of albuminoids and fats 

 by 2h, and to- the product add the percentage of carbohydrates. The 

 result gives the number of food units in the material. Take an ex- 

 ample. If a food contains 32 per cent, albuminoids, 11 per cent, fats 

 or oils, and 34 per cent, carbohydrates, then 2^ (32 + 11) -I- 34 = 141 J 

 food units. If the price is ^g per ton then each unit costs is. 3|^d. 

 The same calculation may then be conducted for another food at another 

 price in order to see which is purchasable at the cheaper rate per unit. 

 In making this comparison between different foods it must be confined 

 to foods of essentially the same character, and where each is dietetically 

 suited to the purpose for which it is required. To compare, say, barley 

 meal with oaten chaff under this method would give misleading results. 



GOOD AND BAD PASTURE— 



In any stretch of comitry one, pasture establishes a reputation as good 

 fattening land, while another is known as only fit to carry store stock 

 or lambing ewes. The reason for those differences is often hard to 

 trace. In the Romney district of England there occur fields of per- 

 manent pasture capable of fattening six or eight sheep to the acre, while 

 immediately adjoining may be found others of apparently the same 

 character, which will only keep sheep in growing condition. In 

 the Jour. Agric. Sci., June, 19 12, Mr. A. D. Hall and Dt. Rus'sell, 

 of Rothamsted, describe some investigations of this subject. They 

 compared a good with an adjoining bad-feeding pasture at thrlee 

 stations. At each place both pastures were situated in flat silt 

 land, and appeared to ha\e been formed in the same way. There 

 was no regular difference in the water content of the good and bad soils, 

 and temperature differences were small. The ordinary chemical and 

 mechanical analyses of the soils revealed nothing to account for their 

 great differences in fertility ; the good soils generally contained rather 

 more total phosphoric acid, but not of citric acid soluble. Their inves- 

 tigations point to only one feature in which the good soils excelled in 



