376 XT. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES 



In feeding experiments with swine, Scott (1924) demonstrated 

 that fish meal as a supplement to corn in the ration was superior to 

 tankage and linseed meal. The tests indicated that corn alone is 

 not an economical feed for fattening purposes, while fish meal 

 proved to be a highly desirable supplement. In 1925, the same in- 

 vestigator in swine-feeding tests obtained an average daily gain of 

 0,7 pound on the corn and fish-meal ration and obtained only 0.42 

 pound of daily gain on the corn and meat-meal ration. Not only 

 that, but the amount of feed required per unit of gain was 50 per 

 cent greater on the corn and meat-meal ration than was required on 

 corn and fish meal. 



Ruifner and Curtis (1925) found that fish meal produced more 

 rapid and economical gains than soybean meal, in supplementing 

 corn for fattening pigs. 



Investigating fish meal and tankage as sources of protein in feed- 

 ing tests Avith swine, Helj'ar (1925) reported that the group fed tank- 

 age on rape pasture made an average daily gain of 2.06 pounds 

 while those fed fish meal made a comparative gain of 1.41 pounds. 

 But, in the dry lot, the pigs fed tankage made only 1.63 pounds of 

 average daily gain, while those fed fish meal under the same con- 

 ditions made a comparative gain of 1.96 pounds. 



In comparing the effect of fish meal and tankage on the rate of 

 growth and on the texture and quality of the carcass of swine 

 (Helyar, 1926). the results were found to be about equal. 



Scott (1927) fed the pigs in one group a ration of 9 parts of corn 

 to 0.75 part of fish meal. Another group received 9 parts of corn 

 to 0.75 part of cottonseed meal and 0.5 part of alfalfa meal. The 

 fish-meal lot produced an average daily gain of 0.65 pound per head, 

 against 0.3 pound per head for the other group. Furthermore, the 

 second group required about 2.2 times as much feed to produce 100 

 pounds of gain as did the fish-meal group. 



In an effort to find satisfactory supplementary feeds for swine 

 being fattened on pasture (de Ruyter de Wildt, 1928), two trials 

 were conducted using two lots of 12 pigs each, averaging 22.33 kilo- 

 grams (49.1 pounds) per head in the first test and 20.7 kilograms 

 (45.5 pounds) each in the second test. The basal ration consisted of 

 barley, whey, and dicalcium phosphate, and the experimental lot 

 received in addition to the basal ration 150 grams of fish meal in 

 the first test and 200 grams in the second test. The average daily 

 gains were 0.495 and 0.524 kilograms per head in trial 1, and 0.46 

 and 0.485 kilograms per head in trial 2 in the respective lots. In 

 the second test the value of the results was somewhat obscured by 

 the fact that 1 pig from lot 1, and 3 from lot 2 had to be discarded. 

 While the addition of fish meal increased the rate of gain, it also 

 increased the cost of gains to a point where it was not economical. 

 There was no significant difference in the quality of carcasses pro- 

 duced in the various lots. The cured hams had no off flavors or taste, 

 nor was there any difference in the fjuality of the hams from the 

 various lots. 



According to Templeton (1927), "marine tankage," a by-product 

 of the fish industry was compared with " digester tankage," using 2 

 lots of ICt pigs each, averaging 68.5 pounds per head. Corn and 

 " digester tankage " were fed in lot 1 and corn and " marine tank- 



