and 10 percent salmon waste meal^ was not particularly adapted to production 

 uses because of its unbound character. For this reason and because it was 

 thought that salmon eggs would not produce any undue mortalitv if orooerly 

 supplemented with beef liver and hog liver, salmon eggs were tested in various 

 cont)ination diets. 



Salmon eggs, derived from pink salmon (0. gorbuscha ) vjere substituted for 

 salmon viscera in the meat- viscera combination to make up iJiets 6 and 7o The 

 components of these two diets during the first 12 weeks were 22.2 percent each 

 of beef liver J hog liver, and hog spleen, and 33«Il percent of salmon eggs. 

 During the second 12 vreeks, meal was added to change the components of Diet 7 

 to 20 percent each of beef liver ^ i Liver, and hog spleen, 30 percent sal- 

 mon eggs, and 10 percent of vacuum-dried salmon viscera meal, Salmon eggs 

 were also substituted for salmon viscera in a previously untried combination 

 to make up Diets 12 and 13. The components of these last two Hiets during 

 cold water were 30 percent each of beef liver, hog liver, and salmon eggs, and 

 10 percent salmon milt. During warm water. Diet 13 was changed to 27 percent 

 each of beef liver, hog liver, and salmon e^gs, 9 percent of salmon milt, and 

 10 percent of vacuum-dried salmon viscera meal. 



The mean lot ".reight produced by salmon viscera in the meat-viscera mix- 

 ture of Diet 2 was significantly less th^n the mean lot weight produced by 

 salmon eggs in the meat-egg mixture of Diet 6 at the end of the cold-water 

 period and the warm-water period (Table 1, Diets 2 and 3, 6 and 7). The 

 addition of 10 percent of vacuum-dried salmon viscera meal to Diet 7 during 

 the 12 weeks of the warm-water period resulted in a Ul percent increase over 

 the gain of the diet xd.thout meal, (Diet 6), 



Contrary to the differences achieved by eggs over viscera in the pre- 

 ceding diets, the combination of salmon eggs, salmon milt, beef liver, and hog 

 liver did not ■oroduce any consistent weight differences over the salmon viscera 

 control during the cold-water period (Table 1, Diets 10, 11, 12 and 13). The 

 mortalities during the cold-water period in this salmon egg diet were signif- 

 icantly greater than those of the comparable diet containing viscera (Table 1, 

 Diets 10, 11, 12, and 13). Despite the mediocre growth and high mortality rates 

 during the cold-water period, -l^iets 12 and 13 proved to be satisfactroy diets 

 during the period of warm Wc-ter, At the conclusion of the experiment Diets 

 12 and 13 had exceeded their viscera controls vjith a significant difference 

 in mean lot weights (Table 1, Diets 10, 11, 12, and 13). In addition, the 

 total gains in these salmon egg combinations were equal to or better than those 

 of other diets which included salmon eggs ■ — the meat-egg and meat-egg-meal 

 combinations (Table 1, Diets 6, 7, 12, and 13). 



The addition of meal to Diet 13 during the w^rm-water period provided only 

 a 33 percent gain over the comparable control, ^iet 12, This relatively low 

 increase is explained, in part, by the rapid growth rate of the diet without 

 meal, ^ieb 12. which was used as the basis for comparison. 



It may be concluded from these and previous experiments that during warm- 

 water periods salmon eggs produced more growth than salmon viscera, and, if 



