54. 



been the better lot throughout, whether on the heavy or 

 moderate ration. Judged from this point of view, it would 

 appear that the moderate ration has been the more economical. 



The state of the " solids not fat " in each lot very nearly 

 agrees with the results of Experiment C. There is here a 

 slight advantage in favour of lot I., showing that the milk 

 of this lot was of somewhat better quality generally during 

 this experiment than that of lot II. The noon milk was the 

 best in both lots in " solids not fat," which was also the case 

 in the previous experiment. The quality, on the average, 

 is so equal in the two lots that there is hardly much reason 

 to infer from the above figures that the heavy ration is to be 

 recommended on economical grounds. 



On the main points of inquiry, Experiments C and D con- 

 firm the results of the first series, and it is brought out very 

 clearly that heavy rations of concentrated food do not pay as 

 compared with moderate ones for dairy cows. 



Table XVIII. shows the effect of the two rations on the 

 live-weight of the cows in Experiment D. As in Experiment 

 C, the cows were weighed monthly during the period of the 

 trials. 



TABLE XVIII. -AVERAGE LIVE- WEIGHT PER COW FOR 

 EACH LOT (IN LB.). 



During the experiment, there was an increase on the 

 average of 66 Ib. per cow in lot I., and a loss of 9 Ib. per cow 

 in lot II. This loss of weight in lot II. is again largely 

 due to two cows, Xos. 79 and 103, the former having lost 61 Ib. 

 <luring the second month, and the latter 86 Ib. during the 



