38 STORRS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. 
wide ration group was 44.2 pounds and that of the narrow ration 
group was 46.1 pounds. If it is assumed that the animals at the 
start were all similar to 1 and 2, there would be an average in- 
crease of 13.7 pounds of dressed weight in the wide ration group 
and of 15.5 pounds in the narrow ration group. 
The average weights of the lungs were practically the same in 
the wide ration group as in the narrow ration group, but it will 
be noticed that the lungs weighed nearly twice as much in the 
animals butchered at the end of the experiment as in those 
butchered at the beginning. 
There was also a decided increase in the weight of the liver in 
both groups over that of the sheep butchered at the start. The 
average weight of the livers in 1 and 2 was 1.05 pounds, and in 
the wide and narrow ration groups 1.49 pounds and 1.58 pounds 
respectively. 
There was also an increase in the weight of the heart and 
casing. ‘The heart of 1 and 2 weighing .47 pounds and the wide 
and narrow ration groups each averaging .56 pounds | 
The weights of the kidneys in the two animals butchered at the 
beginning and in those of the wide ration group at the end were 
practically the same. In the narrow ration group there was an 
average increase of .o5 pounds or one-fourth of the entire weight 
of the kidneys. One important function of the kidneys is to ex- 
crete the nitrogenous portions of the food in the form of urea and 
other compounds. ‘The wide ration group had a small quantity 
of protein (nitrogenous substance) in the ration and hence had a 
smal] amount of nitrogen to eliminate. The narrow ration group 
had an excess of protein and hence much nitrogen to dispose of. 
In this case, as was to be expected, the organ that was called 
upon to perform the extra work was developed so as to adapt 
itself to the demands upon it. 
The animals slaughtered at the beginning of the experiment 
had practically no fat upon the intestines. The animals of each 
group (with the exception of No. 9) gave an average develop- 
ment of about 1.4 pounds intestinal fat, there being, with the ex- 
ception noted, very little difference in the averages of the two 
groups. . 
Sheep No. g is omitted from this average and from those 
of the two following tables as the results are so very differ- 
ent from those of the other four animals of the same group. 
This sheep never became reconciled to the solitary confinement 

