VALUATION OF FEEDING-STUFFS 283 



and no simple process will solve it. If we were to deter- 

 mine what is the cost of one pound of dry matter through 

 the simple division of the price of a ton of feed by the 

 pounds of dry matter which it contains, and then declare 

 that all forms of dry matter have equal cost, we would 

 get as many prices for protein and starch as there are 

 commercial feeds, with no distinction as to the money 

 value of these nutrients. Such a method would be absurd. 

 It would be a bare assumption to declare that all the 

 compoimds of a food should have equal market cost. 



379. Valuation of feeds by method of least squares. — 

 An attempt was made in Germany, and to some extent 

 in this cotmtry, to calculate by the "method of least 

 squares" what should be considered the cost of protein, 

 carbohydrates, and fats as based upon the ton prices of a 

 variety of feeding-stuffs. Valuations so derived appeared 

 to find favor for a time, and some of our experiment 

 stations, following the lead of German chemists, pub- 

 lished potmd prices for the three classes of nutrients, 

 and calculated what commercial cattle foods should cost 

 when valued on a common basis. It was soon found, how- 

 evfer, that, mathematically as well as practically, most 

 absurd results were obtained. 



In the first place, it is already demonstrated that 

 the money valuations are often greatly influenced by 

 the choice of feeds which shall enter into the calcula- 

 tion. Penny, in New Jersey, using cottonseed meal, 

 bran, middlings, cob meal, corn meal, and oats, obtained 

 certain values for protein, carbohydrates, and fats. Hills 

 showed that if Penny had left out the cob meal the value 

 for fat would be only half that found, and the value of 

 the protein and carbohydrates would be a quarter more. 

 Woll obtained certain pound prices with a list of common 



