AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. 



73 



The effect of the ensilage in the ration is more clearly seen per- 

 haps by comparing the production of milk for the last fourteen 

 clays before, and the first fourteen days after feeding ensilage, 

 and the last fourteen days before and the first fourteen days after 

 stopping the ensilage ration. 



YIELD OF MILK. 







Queen 









Jansje. 



Jjinda. 



Agnes. 



Ida. 





lbs. oz. 



lbs. oz. 



lbs. oz. 



lbs. oz. 



Last 14 days before feeding ensilage, 











Feb. 24th to March 9th. 



392 11 



353 8 



298 10 



167 6 



First 14 davs after feedins; ensilage, 











JJarcli lOth to Mar<-h 23d. 



429 12 



367 13 



.324 8 



174 9 



Last 14 da-\ s of feeding ensilage, 











April 2Sth to May Hth. 



360 



.•^3U 3 



329 3 



ISO 11 



First 14 days alter stopping ensilage ration, 











May i2th to May -5th. 



309 3 



30.5 7 



304 14 



178 6 



The somewhat favorable effect of the ensilage in the milk yield 

 is unmistakable. Did the milk change in quality, so that the ensi- 

 lage merely caused a larger quantity of milk with no increase of 

 milk solids? The evidence of the analyses in regard to this point 

 is conclusive. 



I Jansje. HQueen Llndall Agnes. |l Ida. 



Feb. 25tl) to March 1st. 

 Apiil 1st to April 1st. 

 April 29th to May M. 

 June 3d to June 7lb. 



Solids 



Fat 



Solids iFat | 



0/ 



/o 



0/ 



/o 



0/ 

 10 



0/ 

 /o 



12. ,0.5 



3.46 



12.62 



3 27 



12.58 



3.4^ 



12.87 I3.49: 



12.49 !3.43i 



12.69 3.421 



13.23 



3.71 



13.04 



3.44i 



Solids 



/o 



Fat 



/o 



15. 08 

 5.. 38! 

 15.19' 



;4.96j 



15.13 

 15.42 

 15.48 

 14.98 



Solids 'Fat 



0/ I 0/ 

 /o /o 



15.88 15.84 

 16.02 1 5. 93 

 16.04 j6.03 

 16.95 16.45 



It is seen that the millc had practically the same composition 

 while the ensilage was fed as before, the slight changes that did 

 occur, being generally in favor of the ensilage, so that we may 

 safely conclude that after March 10th there was an increased pro- 

 duction of milk solids. 



To what is this larger production due ? The grain ration re- 

 mained the same, so we need to iuquire whether hay alone con- 

 tained more or less digestible matter than the hay and ensilage 

 combined. 



The digestibility of the ensilage was ascertained by experiments 

 with sheep, ah-eady described. It was scarcely possible to obtain 

 the digestibility of an average sample of all the hay eaten for 

 nearly four months, so the best that can be done is to assume that 

 the hay fed to the cow^s, which was the earliest cut and was very 

 largely Timothy, liad practically the same digestibilit}- as the 



