nitrogen, as does cotton seed meal. I'his becomes an important 

 matter when we consider the field work as well as our feeding. 



CORN MEAL COMPARED WITH SHORTS. 



From this table it is seen that the two cows produced daily, 

 when on the corn meal ration, 28.28 pounds, and on the shorts, 

 27.60 pounds, a gain of .68 of a pound in favor of corn meal, or 

 .34 of a pound for each cow. The dry matter in the rations is 

 sligh'ly less with the shorts than with the other, while the cost 

 of the ration is the same. In this experiment the cow Pink was 

 giving a very uniform quantity of milk and had been shrinking 

 very little for two months, while Princess Leto was so fed that 

 the shrinkage, provided it was uniform from period to period, 

 would not work to the disadvantage of either ration ; it is proba- 

 ble, therefore, that the shorts were actually of less feeding value 

 than the meal. 



TABLE V. 



♦Period 9 was of 21 days instead of 14. tPeriod 18 was for 7 days instead of 14. 



The experiment recorded in table V must be divided into two 

 parts, as there was an interval of four periods devoted to other 

 work with the same cow. 



Part I, 21 days on shorts, the yield was 587.03, or 27.95 daily. 

 Part I, 28 " middlings, " 766.34, or 27.37 " 



Daily e.xcess in favor of shorts, .58 



Part 2, 14 days on middlings, the yield was 332,25, or 23.73 daily. 

 Part 2, 21 " shorts, " 487.60, or 23.22 " 



Daily excess in favor of middlings. 

 Or averaging the two parts, the middlings gave 



The shorts gave 



•51 



25-55 

 25-58 



Shorts, 



Middli 



The composition of the two rations was : 



Non-Albu- 

 minoid.>. 



16.58 

 16.61 





Albu- 

 minoids. 



Part I, 



2.27 

 2.30 



15 



Total. 

 18.85 

 I8.9 I 



Nutritive 

 ratio. 



I : 7-3 

 I : 7.2 



