428 
Journal of Agricultural Research 
Vol. XXV, No. io 
There may be some doubt attached to the use of the Moulton formula, 
since it was originally derived from the empty weight of the animals. 
As stated previously (see Table IV), we changed the constant and applied 
it to the live weight. In order to make the comparison as rigorous as 
possible, we have applied the formula as originally devised to the empty 
weight of the steers described by Trowbridge, Moulton, and Haigh (14). 
These calculations appear in Table VI. 
Table VI .—Calculated surface areas of steers measured by Trowbridge, Moulton, and 
Haigh 
No. of 
steer. 
547 
541 
594 
532 
593 
504 
515 
Z 2 I 
527 
513 
501 
48. 
554 
550 
538 
503 
597 
523 
507 
526 
197 
502 
512 
558 
540 
531 
591 
592 
595 
525 
524 
509 
500 
Group and condition. 
I. 
I. 
I, fat. 
I. 
I, good. 
I . 
I, very fat.. 
I, fat. 
I, very fat. 
I, very fat.. 
I, very fat. 
I, very fat. 
II . 
II. 
II. 
II. 
II, maintenance_ 
II. 
II. 
II. 
II, good condition.. 
II. 
II . 
III . 
Ill. 
Ill. 
III, very thin. 
Ill, extremely thin. 
Ill, maintenance... 
Ill. 
Ill. 
III... 
Ill. 
Empty 
weight. 
Gm. 
171,448 
288,297 
247,517 
459,025 
317,909 
475,854 
671,917 
508,513 
786,005 
772,785 
814,914 
744 , 708 
78,071 
121,112 
158,911 
236,429 
302 ,793 
337,803 
418,896 
427,995 
444,750 
444,424 
493,877 
89,999 
137,726 
192,005 
190,043 
187 ,733 
230,275 
265,587 
322,234 
391,461 
407,833 
Surface 
as meas¬ 
ured. 
Sq. cm. 
27,692 
38,036 
32,850 
50,419 
38,884 
48,225 
58,846 
50,104 
66.343 
61,633 
64,635 
62,038 
17.343 
22,144 
29,211 
36,143 
42,78r 
46,827 
50,175 
54 , 75 i 
52,810 
51,038 
60,054 
20,189 
26,068 
34,083 
33,177 
34,345 
36,555 
39,955 
46,417 
49,701 
54 ,148 
Surface as calculated. 
S=.ii86 W 
Surface. Error. 
Sq. cm. 
18,067 
23,773 
28,171 
36,112 
42,150 
45 ,134 
51,630 
52,329 
53,599 
53,575 
57,226 
19,746 
25,761 
31,707 
31,502 
31,264 
35,521 
38,834 
43,822 
49,490 
50,770 
Per cent . 
+4-2 
+ 7-4 
- 3-6 
—o. 1 
— 1-5 
— 3-6 
+2.9 
—4.4 
+ 1-5 
+ 5 -o 
- 4*7 
+ 2.2 
— 1.2 
+ 7 *o 
- 5*1 
—9.0 
-2.8 
-2.8 
- 5*6 
-0.4 
—6- a 
S=.is8oO W>'». 
Surface. 
Error, 
Sq. cm. 
Per cent. 
27,532 
—0.6 
36 ,749 
33,759 
47,584 
— 3*4 
+2.8 
- 5*6 
38,800 
+0. 2 
48,546 
4-0.7 
58,801 
4-o. 1 
50,369 
4-0.5 
64,155 
— 3*3 
63,553 
- 3*1 
65,454 
— 1*3 
62,260 
4-0.4 
a This is given as 0.134 m the original paper. The author later substituted for 0.134 the constant o. 158. 
It is necessary to consult the original paper to obtain a detailed descrip¬ 
tion of the steers, but the following excerpt will explain the significance 
of the groups. “Group I was full fed and crowded. Group II was fed 
for maximum growth without laying on appreciable fat. Group III was 
fed for retarded growth—about one-half pound gain daily when year¬ 
lings.” (14, p. 6.) ' 
Since the formulae were derived from the weights of these animals, the 
circumstances are especially favorable for obtaining good results. The 
agreement between the calculated and observed values of the Group I 
animals is very close indeed. Groups II and III diverge somewhat more. 
Presumably, that is due to the fact that the steers in Group I were quite 
uniform, while those in Groups II and III varied widely in condition. 
In Group I the maximum errors are +2.8 per cent and —5.6 per cent. 
In Groups II and III the maximum errors are + 7.4 per cent and —9.0 
