86 SHEEP HUSBANDRY. 
It will be noticed, first, that the relative increase was re- 
versed during the after experiment, that is, during the sub- 
sequent period of grazing. In the 112 days of the experi- 
ment proper the wethers in lot two made an aggregate 
increase of 269 pounds or 7.2 pounds per month of 30 days 
and the wethers in lot one made an aggregate increase of 
168 pounds or but 4.5 pounds per month. In other words 
the wethers in lot two gained 60 per cent more than the 
wethers in lot one. In the 77 days of the continuance of the 
after experiment the wethers in lot one made a gain of 112 
pounds or 4.4 pounds per month of 30 days. While the 
wethers in lot two gained but 72 pounds or 2.8 pounds per 
month. In other words the wethers in lot one increased 50 
per cent more than the wethers in lot two. Second, the in- 
crease during the fifth period of very hot weather is so slight 
as to be scarcely worth mentioning, and third, the increase 
during the last period was also small, owing to the fact 
probably that the wethezs had reached that point when 
rapid gains could not be incurred without feeding grain 
heavily. 
Cost of Increase.—The cost of increase cannot be ac- 
curately ascertained owing to the difficulty of properly 
valuing the pasture consumed, but the result from feeding 
grain to the lambs in lot two can be ascertained at least 
approximately. During the experiment proper, the wethers 
in lot two consumed 560 pounds of oats which at 21 cents 
per bushel, the market value at the time, amounts to $3.69. 
As they gained 101 pounds more than the wethers in lot 
one, the cost of making 101 pounds extra of increase was 
$3.63, and this cost would probably be still further reduced 
by some saving effected in the consumption of pasture, be- 
cause of the grain fed. This, however, could not be certainly 
ascertained, as under the circumstances there was no means 
of determining the relative amount of pasture consumed by 
the wethers of either lot. Since, however, the cost of the 
extra increase made by the wethers in lot two was less than 
the market value of the same at the time, and since the 
wethers in this lot were in a better condition for marketing 
at the close of the experiment proper than those of lot one. 
