264 Rerort oF THE First AssIstaANT OF THE 
Rations Containing Different Proportions of Total Protein. 
Two mixed lots of capons were fed to observe the effects of 
rations differing somewhat in the proportion of nitrogenous con- 
stituents. Lot “A” had a mixed ration with wheat bran added — 
and lot “B” had a similar ration with corn meal added in place 
of wheat bran. 
The fowls in the lots contrasted were entirely comparable being 
selected from the same lots of chicks, and alike in condition and 
development. Each lot was composed of Light Brahmas, Indian 
Games, and Indian Game — Light Brahma, Indian Game — Buff 
Cochin and W. P. Rock—B. Minorca crosses. Feeding was not 
begun with these two lots until some time after the birds had been 
caponized. 
Sweet skim-milk was fed instead of water. With lot “A” skim- 
milk constituted an average of 64.6 per cent. of the total food 
and 183 per cent. of the water-free food and with lot “B” an 
average of 54.1 per cent. of the total food and 12.2 per cent. of 
the water-free food. In the ration for lot “A” wheat bran con- 
stituted on the average 26.5 per cent. of the total grain food and — 
with lot “B” corn meal constituted 34.8 per cent. of the total 
grain food. The ratio of protein to total carbohydrates in the 
wheat bran ration was that of 1:3.6 and in the corn meal ration 
that of 1:4.4. With the fats multiplied, the ratios would be those 
of 1:3.8 and 1:4.8 respectively. 
There was not any great difference in growth made, although 
the total gain in weight made by lot “A” slightly exceeded that 
made by lot “B” during the trial. The gain made by lot “B” 
was, however, somewhat the more profitable, although the corn 
meal cost twenty-two dollars per ton and the wheat bran twenty 
dollars per ton. During most of the time that the feeding lasted 
the capons in lot “B” could have been sold at a little better 
profit than those in lot “A”— but on the whole the difference was 
of little consequence. The gains made by each lot were profitable 
at the prices quoted. | 
The results of this feeding experiment are given in the follow- 
ing tables and shown in comparison on chart IV, opposite. As~ 

