11 



the above publications, some heretofore unpublished, and a few from 

 other sources. In order to give the best comparison between these 

 materials, only the analyses of water-free material is given and the 

 reader is referred to the above sources for complete data. 



Composition of Hawaiian feeds. 

 [Dry-matter basis.] 



Kind of feed. 



Guinea grass 



Para grass 



Water grass 



Rhodes grass 



Natal redtop 



Australian blue grass 



Johnson grass i 



Sudan grass , 



Tunis grass 



Rescue grass 



Chxtochloa verticillata 



Paspalum orbiculare 



Paspalum conjugatum 



Panicum crus-galli 



Bermuda grass 



Buffalo grass 



Pilipiliula 



Crab grass 



Pili grass 



Yard grass 



Clloris elegans 



Spanish clover 



Desrnodium triflorum 



Alfalfa 



Purslane 



Pualele 



Honohono 



Puaki 



Prickly pear: 



Young fronds 



Old fronds 



Ti leaves 



Cassava roots 



Algaroba: 



Whole beans 



Average pods, seeds removed 



Kentucky blue grass 1 



Perennial rye grass 1 



Italian rye grass 1 



Orchard grass i 



Protein. 



Per cent. 

 5.52 

 9. 10 



11.23 

 7.47 

 4. 69 

 6.31 

 8. 01 

 8.44 

 6. 27 



11.76 

 9.82 

 4. 96 

 4. 71 



12. 32 



6. 86 

 4. 12 



5. 02 

 10. 96 



4. 84 

 8. 41 



7. 82 



8. 82 

 14. 42 

 25. 28 

 21.66 



13. 82 

 13. 27 



6. 70 



8.19 

 7.25 

 13.85 

 3. 79 



10. 36 

 5.59 

 9.9 



11.7 

 8.2 

 9.0 



Fat. 



Per cent. 

 0. 87 

 1.11 

 2. 44 

 2. 08 

 1.99 

 2.00 

 2 33 

 1.89 

 1.53 

 2. 63 

 1.31 

 1.07 

 2. 30 

 2. 19 



.58 

 1.09 



.61 

 1.28 

 1.38 

 4. 58 

 1.45 



.76 

 4. 07 

 1.76 

 1.87 

 5. 82 

 2. 77 

 1.40 



1.30 

 1.11 

 3.04 

 8.21 



.18 

 4.9 

 2. 44 

 1.8 

 2.9 



Nitrogen- 

 free 

 extract. 



Per cent. 

 54. 59 

 42.92 

 42. 21 

 48. 86 



42. 09 

 41.20 

 51.1 

 43. 06 

 41.92 

 39.85 

 42.14 

 53. 48 

 54. 39 

 36. 66 

 59. 84 

 62. 33 

 61.15 

 48. 95 

 49.79 

 41.25 



43. 92 

 57.57 

 39.90 

 32.25 

 45. 41 

 45. 54 

 47. 62 

 61.06 



60. 33 

 58. 73 

 43.07 

 72.02 



54.76 



63. 10 



47.9 



47.1 



49.2 



45.5 



Crude 

 fiber. 



Per cent. 

 28. 17 

 35. 96 



34. 48 

 33. 30 

 41.99 

 43. 22 

 31.7 



36. 99 

 40. 27 



37. 29 



35. 09 

 31.84 



29. 93 

 38. 58 

 22. 93 

 28. 23 



27. 56 

 26. 55 

 32. 53 

 35.51 



32. 00 

 24. 89 



33. 40 



28. 85 

 11.04 

 19. 96 

 22. 24 

 22.28 



9.68 

 11.33 



30. 87 

 10.93 



28. 88 

 27. 29 

 29.2 

 29.5 



Ash. 



Per cent. 

 10. 89 

 11.06 

 9. 55 

 8. 29 

 9. 24 

 7. 27 

 6.8 

 9. 62 

 10.01 

 8.47 

 11.64 

 8.63 

 8. 25 

 10. 24 

 9. 83 

 6. 66 

 5. 47 

 10. 03 

 11.57 

 12. 23 

 11.94 

 3. 93 

 7. 92 

 11.23 

 20.00 

 15.00 

 13. 33 

 8.54 



20.85 

 21.00 

 9. 06 

 4. 07 



3.83 

 3. 81 

 8.0 

 9.2 

 7.5 

 6. 65 



Lime. 



Per 



cevt. 

 0.54 

 .29 

 .42 



.39 

 .26 

 .13 

 .25 

 .17 

 .03 

 .14 

 .47 

 .17 

 .22 

 .78 

 2.00 

 1.30 

 .62 

 .77 

 .54 

 2. 18 



3. 16 

 4.83 

 .53 

 .27 



.38 

 .36 



i Calculated from Henry's Feeds and Feeding. Madison, Wis., 1910, 10th ed., pp. 568, 569. 



Feeds must be compared by results. The successful production 

 of beef and mutton in Hawaii is proof of the nutritiousness of the 

 forage. However, there is a great difference in the value of feeds 

 which analyses do not reveal, due to palatability and digestibility. 

 No percentages of digestibility have been worked out by feeding 

 experiments conducted in Hawaii. 



It will be noticed from the table that the analyses of grasses of 

 Hawaii compare very favorably with the few analyses here given of 

 tame grasses on the mainland; that several of the grasses greatly 

 exceed others in their content of protein and fat; that honohono, 



