86 



The "solids not fat" were all through well above the 

 standard, and are given in Table XXXII. 



It is important to observe that although the milk of lot 

 II. was very poor in butter-fat, it was, on the whole, very satis- 

 factory as regards the other solids, so that the food does not 

 appear to have affected the quality of the milk in this respect 

 to any appreciable extent. The morning milk of lot II. was 

 twice under the standard, but this might easily have happened 

 had the conditions been totally different. 



The live-weight of the cows. The cows were as usual 

 weighed at the commencement and at the end of each month 

 afterwards. The average live-weight for both lots is shown in 

 Table XXXIII. 



TABLE XXXIII. AVERAGE LIVE- WEIGHT (IN LB.) PER COW 

 OF EACH LOT. 



Commence- Average loss 



ment. . January 12. February 9. during experiment. 



Lot I. ... 1,156 ... 1,104 ... 1,114 ... 42 



Lot II. ... 1,132 ... 1,094 ... 1,111 ... 21 



The loss in live-weight took place, as will be seen, mostly 

 during the first month, when all the ten cows, with the excep- 

 tion of No. 59 in lot I., lost weight. Two cows in lot I. lost 90 

 Ib. and 92 lb., respectively, in the first month, and this 

 accounts in a great measure for the average loss in this lot 

 being so high. Lot II. gained a little more during the second 

 month than did lot I. 



EXPERIMENT J. 



As soon as the experiment just described was completed, 

 the rations were reversed, with the object of discovering 

 whether the brewers' grains would have the same effect on the 

 other lot of cows as they had on those to which they were 

 given originally. There was no interval at all between the two 

 experiments. The second experiment, here described as 

 Experiment J, commenced on February 10, and continued 

 till April 7, 1906. The results are given in the following 

 tables. Table XXXIY. shows the yield of milk in each lot. 



