THE UTILIZATION OF ENERGY. 483 
It need hardly be added that none of these results are directly 
comparable with those computed above, after another method, for 
the wheat gluten as a whole. 
Beet Molasses.—The results of the three experiments upon beet 
molasses show such great differences, as was noted in Chapter X 
and as is further apparent from the following table, that any dis- 
cussion of them would evidently be premature: 
DISTRIBUTION OF GROSS ENERGY OF BEET MOLASSES. 
. Work of 
ala ; In - Digestion, ; 
q | .¢ | In Feces. | In Urine. | Methane. | Assimilation,) In Gain. 
‘a | § | Per Cent. | Per Cent. | Per Cent.| and Tissue | Per Cent. 
4 Ay Building. 
Per Cent. 
Sample I.........| F} 6 26.87 3.92 —1.95 29.56 41.60 
« TT | H| 6 5.40 3.16 12.44 13.10 65.90 
eet J|6 14.45 2.67 10.18 36.20 36.50 
Average........[...]... 9.92 2.92 11.31 24.65 51.20 
_ Rice.—The two experiments upon swine by Meissl, Strohmer & 
Lorenz, when computed as on p. 454, show that.of the (estimated) 
metabolizable energy of the food approximately the following per- 
centages were recovered in the gain: 
Period Lois ve saecte tates cea eutears 80.7 per cent. 
He TD ek aor eins derres 75.2 & & 
AVEDA P Es Sie bclulig bana eee 78.0 “ « 
These results are notably higher than any obtained in experi- 
ments on ruminants. Like the results on barley and cockle below 
they are the expression in another form of the well-known supe- 
riority of the swine as an economical producer of meat. 
Barley—For the utilization of the energy of this grain the 
single experiment by Meissl, Strohmer & Lorenz gives 70.9 per cent. 
of the (estimated) metabolizable energy. 
Mixed Grains.—For mixed grains Kornauth & Arche’s results 
on swine give figures which do not differ materially from the result 
just computed for barley, viz.: 
Experiment IT..........-.0- eee sees 71.7 per cent. 
" Tiltined seen eae. ls 65.3 “ 
Digitized by Microsoft® 
