Ration Experiments With Swine 
9 
with 11^2 pounds per head per week made by ‘the barley and alfalfa 
hay lot. 
1911 EXPERIMENTS 
Four lots containing 8 pigs each were fed. The pens averaged 
n6 and 117 pounds per pig at the start, and 163 to 178 pounds at the 
close of 8 weeks’ feeding. The pigs were uniform in breeding, age, 
and condition. The following table gives results: 
FEED FOR GAIN AND COST OF GAIN, 1911 
(8 Pigs in Each Pen) 
L,bs. of 
Grain 
replac- 
Cost of Stand- ed by 
Pen Ration Av. Gain Pounds of Feed for 100 lbs. Gain 100 lbs. ing of 100 lbs 
per head,- A - N Gain* Pens Alfalfa 
in 8 wlcs Corn Shorts Alfalfa Meal 
1 Corn and Shorts equal 
parts . 76.5 254 254 .... 5.72 4 
2 Corn 4 parts: Alfalfa 
Meal 1 part . 63.5 430 ... 107 4.84 1 73 
3 Corn 5 parts; Alfalfa 
Meal 1 part . 58.6 486 ... 98 5.35 3 22 
4 Corn 6 parts; Alfalfa 
Meal 1 part ...... 62.3 469 ... 78 5.08 2 50 
*Corn at lc per lb.; Wheat Shorts at l$4c per lb. ($25 per ton) ; Alfalfa Meal at $10 per ton. 
Corn and Wheat Shorts 
This ration was again used as a check ration, but in this series 
equal parts of corn and shorts were used. This ration was the least 
economical of any used in the series, costing $5.72 for ioo pounds of 
gain in live weight. 
Corn and Aeealea Meal 
Three lots were fed upon corn and alfalfa meal, Pen 2 getting 4 
parts of corn to one of alfalfa meal, Pen 3 getting 5 parts of corn to 
1 of alfalfa meal, and Pen 4 getting 6 parts of corn to 1 of alfalfa meal. 
The 4 to 1 lot made the best gains of the three,—and the cheapest 
gains, with corn at ic per lb. and alfalfa meal at $10 per ton, the cost 
of gain being $4.84 per hundred pounds. With corn higher or alfalfa 
meal lower in price, this ration would appear still better, as in this 
ration more grain was replaced by 100 pounds .of alfalfa meal than in 
any of the other corn-alfalfa meal rations. 
The lots on corn and alfalfa meal did not make as large gains in 
the eight week period as the corn and shorts lot, falling 13 to 18 pounds 
short on the average. But the gain was put on so much more econom¬ 
ically that one could afford to feed somewhat longer to get the same 
finish. 
