other while cottoti seed ^fia-s in the ration; the last two columns 

 show the gain of milk occasioned by changing from one grain to 

 the other. When the corn meal gives the greatest yield the ex- 

 cess is put in column marked " corn meal," and when cotton seed 

 meal gives best results the gain is found in the column headed 

 " cotton seed meal." 



These five cows, when on corn meal, produced daily 108.55 

 pounds of milk, and when on cotton seed 110.74, again of 2.19. 

 pounds, which is .44 of a pound per cow per day. This is too 

 small an amount to be of any great value in getting at the relative 

 efficiency of the two rations, but it will be noticed that in only 

 one case is there an excess on the corn meal side, while in two 

 cases there is practically no difference, the two remaining cows 

 showing a very substantial increase due to the cotton seed. 



There is another point which should be considered, though 

 no definite correction can be applied. In four cases the corn 

 preceded the cotton seed, and in one case (that of Maramee) the 

 cotton seed came first, and as all of the cows were naturally shrink- 

 ing in milk yield, it follows, that in four cases the cotton seed is 

 shown at a disadvantage equal to this shrinkage, while in one 

 case the corn meal loses in the same way. Northboro Belle un- 

 questionably did better on the corn meal than on the cotton 

 seed, while Maramee and Gleam gave evidence just the opposite. 



The total digestible matter, that is, the sum of the Albumin- 

 oids and non- albuminoids, is somewhat less in the cotton seed 

 than in the corn meal ration ; the average for the five cows is 

 18.81 pounds daily with cotton seed, and 19.10 pounds with corn 

 meal, but it is also true that as the market averages the cotton 

 seed ration costs about three mills more per day than the other. 

 Taking all the facts as they stand, the following conclusions 

 seem warranted : 



First. Narrowing the nutritive ratio from the German 

 standard of 5.4 to 4.5 does not niateriaUy increase the amount 

 of milk. 



Second. It appears that under the conditions of the exper- 

 iment, a pound of digestible matter was slightly more efficient in 

 the narrow than in the wide ration. 



Third. We must not lose sight of the fact that the manure 

 from the cotton seed ration must have been more valuable, for 

 the reason that corn meal contains only one-half as much phos- 

 phoric acid, one-third as much potash, and one-third as much 



14 



