II. A COMPARISON OF THE VALUE OF COTTONSEED 
HULLS, CORN SILAGE, AND A COMBINATION OF COT- 
TONSEED HULLS AND CORN SILAGE FOR FATTENING 
STEERS (MISSISSIPPI EXPERIMENT). 
INTRODUCTION. 
The results of the cooperative experiment between the Bureau of 
Animal Industry and the Alabama Experiment Station, reported in 
Part I of this bulletin, were very satisfactory in every way, but fol- 
lowing the policy of the bureau in all experimental work it was 
decided to duplicate the experiment before publishing the results, as 
conditions under which a feeding test is conducted vary greatly from 
year to year, due to climatic conditions, variations in the feed used, 
conditions of feed lots, fluctuations in the buying and selling prices 
of cattle, feed, etc. As the cooperative cattle-feeding work was 
transferred from Alabama to Mississippi before the test could be 
duplicated, it was decided to conduct another test in Mississippi 
under conditions as nearly similar as possible. 
There are a few points which should be borne in mind in compar- 
ing the results of the two tests in order to do the work justice in 
each case, namely, (1) The steers used in each test were of almost 
the same grade and breeding, but the Alabama steers were a little 
better in quality. (2) Good bright cottonseed meal and cottonseed 
hulls of the same grade were used for both experiments and were 
therefore similar. (3) The corn silage used in the Alabama test 
was excellent, having a large amount of grain in it and keeping 
splendidly, but owing to a bad season for corn the silage used in 
the Mississippi experiment was much below the average, as it had 
very little grain in it and did not keep so well as it should. (4) The 
feeding pens became muddy each winter, but the sheds used in the 
Alabama experiment were kept well bedded, while in the Mississippi 
test after the sixth week bedding was very scarce and the feeding 
pens became very deep in mud, the steers having no choice but to he 
in the deep mud. (5) The Alabama test covered a period of 84 
days, while the steers in this experiment were fed 143 days. 
OBJECT AND PLAN OF THE WORK. 
This test was to be a duplication of the feeding experiment re- 
ported in Part I of this bulletin, namely, a study of the compara- 
91654°—19——2 9 
