Sept., 1920] IN-SPECTION of feeding stuffs. 9 



must be said that there are a number of reliable firms placing 

 good compounded feeds upon the market. 



How to Use Table No. 3. 



Only the digestible nutrients are of value and so in compar- 

 ing two feeds we should compare just the digestible nutrients. 

 Suppose we had a cottonseed meal which analyzed 38 per cent 

 protein. The table shows cottonseed meal protein to be 84 per 

 cent digestible. We then would have 84/100 of 38 lbs., or 

 31.9 lbs. of digestible protein per 100 lbs. If a wheat bran 

 analyzed 15 per cent protein, we see from the table that it is 

 78 per cent digestible and we would have 78/100 of 15 or 11.7 

 lbs, of digestible protein. The cottonseed meal would then 

 have 31.9 lbs. compared with 11.7 in the wheat bran. 



How to Figure the Comparative Value of Feeds from the CJhemical 



Analysis. 



Because such factors as palatability, digestibility, etc., play 

 an important part in determining the value of feedstuffs it is 

 difficult to make exact comparisons in their value from a 

 chemical analysis. The analysis will, however, serve as a very 

 valuable guide. Since the farmer can usually raise carbohy- 

 drates cheaper than he can purchase them he is chiefly inter- 

 ested in buying the concentrated feedstufi^s for their protein 

 and fat content. 



Feeds may be compared upon the basis of the number of 

 pounds of protein and fat which one dollar will buy. An ex- 

 ample is as follows: Feed number 1 sells for $2.65 and is 

 guaranteed protein 15.00- per cent, fat 4.00 per cent. If it 

 contains 15.00 per cent protein there are 15 lbs. of protein in 

 100 lbs. of feed costing $2.65. Then one dollar buys 15-^2.65 

 or 5.6 lbs. of protein and 4.00-^-2.65 or 1.5 lbs. of fat. 



Feed number 2 sells for $4.10i and is guaranteed 17 per cent 

 protein and 3 per cent fat. Then one dollar buys l7-f-4.10 

 or 4.1 lbs. of protein and 3-4-4. l€i or 0.7 lbs. of fat. 



