RESULTS IN THE SOUTH. 129 



In what quantities throughout the feeding period shall we feed 

 sitege? Our experience clearly shows that silage should be fed 

 very heavily in the early part of the feeding period to insure most 

 efficient results. The grain at this time may be somewhat lim- 

 ited. We put our steers upon a, full feed of good quality silage 

 the very first day and have never had any difficulty. Silage is 

 a roughage arid may be so handled without danger. To Insure 

 quick and economical finishing, the silage is best decreased some- 

 what at the close of the feeding period and the grain increased 

 accordingly. Cattle, when nearly finished, tend to eat too much 

 of the bulky, watery, palatable silage, thus leaving too little room 

 for concentrated grains, a consumption of which is highly im- 

 perative at this time. 



The shrinkage of silage fed cattle is not heavy as is ordinarily 

 supposed. Silage fed cattle do not shrink any more than dry hay 

 fed ones. Our results clearly indicate that cattle receiving both 

 silage and dry roughage during the feeding period, shrink less 

 than those fed on either dry feed or silage alone." 



The Texas Station has conducted two experiments recently in 

 which the valu,jj of cottonseed meal and silage was tested for 

 fattening cattl6i>The results of these experiments, and those ob- 

 tained by other Stations and commercial feeders along the same 

 lines, indicate this combination to be one of the most profitable 

 rations that can be used for feeding cattle in Texas. 



The first experiment covered a period of 119 days during the 

 winter of 1911-12. 40 head of range-bred three- and four-year 

 old, grade Shorthorn and Hereford steers were used. The silage 

 fed was about 75 per cent. Milo Maize, 15. per cent. Indian corn, 

 and 10 per cent, sorghum. During the last 20 days of the test 

 the percentage of Indian corn was increased. The test showed 

 that a ration of cottonseed meal and silage may be used far more 

 profitably than a ration of cottonseed meal and cottonseed hulls 

 for fattening cattle. Silage was a much cheaper feed than cotton- 

 seed hulls and yielded slightly larger gains. The silage fed steers 

 showed considerably better finish and brought 20c a hundred- 

 weight more on the market than the hulls-fed steers. The net 

 profit on the silage-fed steers was $10.40 a head and the net 

 profit on the hulls-fed steers was 67c a head. 



The second experiment, during the winter of 1912-13 lasted 

 139 days. 28 head of well graded steers were used, divided into 

 four lots. A summary of results showed that the ration of cotton- 

 seed meal and silage was considerably more profitable than either 

 the ration of cottonseed meal and hulls or the one of cottonseed 

 meal, hulls and silage. It was found that 1 2-3 tons of silage was 

 equivalent to one ton of cottonseed hulls in feeding value. Silage 

 realized a value of $8.16 a ton. Cottonseed meal at $27.00 per 

 ton was more profitable than cottonseed at $17.00 a ton in supple- 

 menting the silage to form a fattening ration. The shrinkage in 

 shipment to market was much greater in the hull-fed lots than 

 in the lots fed silage as roughage. During the first 107 days of 



