410 



Artificial Farmyard Manure. 



[Aug., 



against 30.9 lb. and 46.51 as compared with 46.70 lb. in the 

 two cases respectively. 



No Cake. Cake. 





Total 



Indigest. 



Total 



Indigest. 



Nitrogen. 



or Fcecal 



Nitrogen. 



or Foecal 







itrogen. 





Nitrogen. 





lb. 



lb. 



lb. 



lb. 



Mangolds 



17-6 



4-0 



17-6 



4-0 



Hay 



21-3 



8-5 



21-3 



8-5 



Straw ... 



9-0 



1-7 



8-6 



1-65 {I taken 



Cake ... 









as food) 







42-8 



5-56 



Total Nitrogen minus nitrogen 



41-15 



14-2 



83-85 



19-71 



in live-weight increase. 











Ffeca] nitrogen 







Calculated. 







14-2 





19-71 



Straw 





7-3 





7-0 



Nitrogen fixed by litter 





10-2 





9-8 



Nitrogen found as ammonia... 





1-9 





10-0 



Total (^calculated) 





33-6 





46-51 



Total actually found ... 





30-9 





46-70 



The data referring to Professor Hendrick's experiments are 

 contained in the table below in a somewhat condensed form. 

 The total amount of nitrogen supplied to the animals as food 

 amounted to 613 lb., and of this it has been calculated that 4*2 lb. 

 were retained by the increase in live -weight of the animals, thus 

 making the total amount which should have been present in the 

 dung equal to 671 lb., whilst only 524 lb. were actually recovered 

 as organic and ammonia nitrogen. For the calculation, we have 

 taken the faecal nitrogen as given by Professor Hendrick as 

 276 lb., the nitrogen contained in the litter as 100 lb., and the 

 amount of nitrogen which would be fixed by the litter (equal to 

 146 cwt. with a dry matter content of 91 per cent., as 107 lb. 

 It will be seen that the sum thus obtained is 537 lb. by calcula- 

 tion, as against 524 lb. by analysis. It should be noted, how- 

 ever, that Professor Hendrick himself calls attention to the fact 

 that the cattle used in the experiment did better than mighfc 

 have been expected from accepted scientific standards of digested 

 litter, and raises the question as to whether the foods actually 

 used were not more digestible and of higher starch value than 

 is allowed in Kellner's tables. If this were the case, it would 

 simply mean that the amount allowed in our calculation as indi- 

 gestible or faecal nitrogen is somewhat too high, and would 

 consequently bring the totals of the analytical and the calcu- 

 lated amounts into still closer agreement. 



