i:;i 
BUREAU OF animal INDUSTRY. 
The Indiana results show that nothing was gained by the use of 
the prepared feed; in fact, there was indicated a decided disadvan- 
as more feed was required per LOO pounds of gain and the profits 
were \«-iv much Leas than with the lot not having the prepared feed. 
The [owa results show a saving in cost of 10 cents per LOO pounds 
gain for the pigs receiving Standard stock food and a del profit per pig 
of -•"• cents in favorof I ids lot as compared \\ i 1 b pigs onicorn meal alone. 
Ii is needless to point out that the results of these/two experiments 
Bhould not be too closely compared. In addition bo the stock food 
given one lot, all the Indiana pigs were on a mixed ration; whereas 
in tin- Iowa tost the stock food was the only variation from corn 
meal that was permitted. The results from adding any palatable feed 
to a straight corn-meal ration will be greater than the addition of the 
Same <>!• a similar feed to a mixed fat ion, because in tin- one case vari- 
ety is the greatest necessity of the ration, while in tin- other it is 
already present. The same, if not very much better, results would 
have been seen had pigs on a ration of corn meal and green or suc- 
culent feed or dairy by-products been compared with pigs on a ration 
of corn meal only; and oil meal would probably have had a similar 
effect. While some of the difference in results may have been due to 
a difference in the quality of the two stock foods, it would naturally 
be expected that not onty a better showing in rate and economy of 
gain for the stock food when conditions resemble those of the Iowa 
i<-st would be made, but it would also be expected that there would be 
a relatively greater showing from the standpoint of total feed eaten. 
Both of these results are manifest; indeed, in the Indiana test the 
stock food seems to have had no effect whatever on the appetite. 
Plumb" mentions a test by a student at Purdue University where 
Kauh's stock food was fed to 3 pigs for thirty-live days, after which 
they received Standard stock food for forty-nine days. They had 
equal pads of corn meal and shorts, and were compared with a lot of 
3 pigs On coin meal and shorts only. There was a total gain of 2.5 
pounds in favor of the prepared food first mentioned. The total 
balance was 21 pounds of gain in favor of the condimenial feed. 
The results were as follows: 
/■'. i ding pigs with and without stock food. 
Ration 
Average 
weight 
;it begin- 
ning. 
Total 
gain. 
X u n 
ber 
of 
Av.-r 
daily 
eaten. 
Peed p 
pounds 
per l'"' 
pounds 
gain. 
Total 
Grain. 
St.M'k 
Grain. 
si.K-k 
profit 
Stock t 1 
NO St.x-k f«M»«l 
68 
J',,u,t<ls 
Bound*. 
l :.t 
l i:, 
/'..)', Ills. 
1,858 
1 . B86 
LOO 

Pounds. 
B60 
Dollar*. 
4. l-.l 
Dollar*. 
I H 
.; .50 
[ndiana Expt Sta, 
