Preparation of Feeds 347 



As a general rule, the self-fed pigs ate more and made 

 faster gains than those which were hand-fed. In nine- 

 teen of the trials, the self-fed pigs gained the faster, 

 while in five the hand-fed pigs made the quickest gain. 

 According to the summary table, the average daily gain 

 of the self-fed pigs was more than 9 per cent faster than for 

 the hand-fed animals. 



There was more difference in the rate of gain from the 

 two methods of feeding than in the amount of feed re- 

 quired to produce a given gain. On the average, the self- 

 fed pigs ate 1.26 per cent less concentrates for a unit of 

 gain than the hand-fed ones. In these trials a smaller 

 proportion of tankage and shorts was eaten, also, by those 

 receiving their rations in the self-feeder, "free-choice" 

 style. 



These figures appear to supply rather convincing evi- 

 dence in favor of the self-feeder when it is the intention 

 to push the pigs for an early market. When the saving 

 of labor is also considered, the practicability of this 

 method of feeding would seem to be established, espe- 

 cially when the feeds offered are the same as those sup- 

 plied in the above experiments, corn, wheat middlings or 

 shorts, and tankage. 



With these feeds at least the self-fed pigs ate no more of 

 the expensive nitrogenous or protein supplements than 

 was necessary to balance the corn. Also, the gains 

 would indicate that their consumption of these feeds 

 was ample in satisfying their body needs. That the 

 appetite or instinct of the pig cannot always be depended 

 on, however, to insure the minimum consumption of 

 protein feeds for economy of gains, is also probably 

 true. When the grain or other carbohydrate feed offered 

 in a self-feeder is less palatable than the particular protein 



