I. P. SINGH, T. M.
PAUL
175
TABLE IV—contd.
Sample
No.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Mean
Sindhi
1
43.0
43.1
43.9
42.8
42.7
43.0
42.9
42.9
43.1
43.2
43.0
43.9
43.1
42.8
43.0
43.1
42.9
43.8
43.0
42.9
43.1
42.2
42.0
43.1
45.2
43.9
..
2
42.9
42.8
42.0
42.9
43.0
43.1
43.9
43.1
43.2
43.1
43.3
48.1
42.9
43.1
42.9
43.2
43.1
43.2
43.3
43.2
43.1
43.0
43.7
43.0
42.9
41.8
..
3
42.6
43.0
42.8
42.9
42.7
42.8
42.7
42.9
42.8
42.6
42.5
41.9
43.0
43.1
42.9
43.0
43.2
42.0
43.1
42.9
43.1
43.2
43.5
43.0
..
..
..
Mean
42.8
43.0
42.9
42.9
42.8
43.0
42.9
43.0
43.0
43.0
42.9
43.9
43.0
43.0
42.9
43.1
43.1
43.0
43.1
43.0
43.1
43.1
43.1
43.0
43.0
42.8
43.0
Gir
4
43.8
43.8
44.0
44.9
43.7
44.0
43.9
44.0
43.8
43.9
43.7
42.5
43.8
43.4
43.7
43.8
43.9
43.7
43.8
42.9
43.7
44.0
43.8
43.8
43.9
43.6
..
5
43.6
43.7
43.5
43.8
44.0
43.7
43.5
43.4
43.0
43.4
43.5
43.3
43.7
43.8
43.4
43.6
43.5
43.6
43.4
44.7
43.6
43.5
43.6
43.6
43.5
43.7
..
6
43.8
44.0
43.7
42.5
43.7
43.6
43.9
43.5
43.4
43.7
43.3
44.4
43.7
43.9
43.8
43.7
.4
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Mean
43.7
43.8
43.7
43.7
43.8
43.8
43.8
43.6
43.6
43.7
43.5
43.4
43.7
43.7
43.6
43.7
43.7
43.6
43.6
43.8
43.7
43.7
43.7
43.6
43.7
43.7
43.7
Tharparker
7
43.5
43.6
43.9
43.5
43.6
43.4
42.7
43.8
43.9
43.6
44.5
43.7
43.6
43.8
43.6
43.8
43.6
42.7
43.9
43.5
43.7
..
..
..
..
..
..
8
43.7
43.8
43.1
43.7
43.8
43.7
43.7
43.6
43.5
43.7
43.4
43.5
43.6
43.4
43.5
43.7
43.6
44.4
43.5
43.2
43.5
43.9
43.6
43.8
43.6
43.9
..
9
43.6
43.5
43.5
43.6
43.5
43.7
44.5
43.9
43.8
44.0
43.1
44.0
43.9
43.8
43.7
43.8
43.9
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Mean
43.6
43.6
43.5
43.6
43.6
43.6
43.6
43.8
43.7
43.8
43.7
43.7
43.7
43.7
43.6
43.8
43.7
43.6
43.7
43.6
43.6
43.8
43.7
43.8
43.6
43.9
43.7
Murrah
10
42.4
42.6
42.7
43.5
42.3
42.4
43.5
41.5
42.6
42.4
42.7
42.5
42.6
43.5
42.6
42.5
42.4
42.3
42.6
42.2
43.3
42.4
42.5
42.5
43.6
42.4
..
11
42.6
42.3
42.7
41.8
42.5
42.6
42.8
42.9
42.8
42.9
43.0
42.8
42.5
41.7
42.8
42.6
42.5
42.7
42.6
42.5
41.4
42.6
42.7
42.6
41.5
42.6
..
12
42.4
42.5
42.2
42.4
42.3
42.4
41.3
43.3
42.2
42.4
42.5
42.3
42.6
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
42.5
..
Mean
42.5
42.4
42.5
42.6
42.4
42.5
42.5
42.6
42.5
42.6
42.7
42.5
42.6
42.5
42.6
42.5
42.4
42.5
42.6
42.3
42.3
42.5
42.6
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
DISCUSSION
From Table I it is clear that there is a progressive decline in the R. M. value of ghee in the case
of all breeds as lactation advances. The R. M. value decreased from 29.3 to 25.2 in the case of Sindhi
cows, from 29.6 to 26.4 in Gir cows, from 30.5 to 26.0 in Tharparkar cows and from 32.2 to 26.7 in
Murrah buffaloes at the end of about nine months. The fall in R. M. is greatest in the case of Murrah
buffaloes which were all having a high R. M. initially. Even at the end of about nine months the
R. M. value was never below 24.0 in any of the breeds. This shows that stage of lactation does not
affect the R. M. value of the butterfat of cows or buffaloes to such an extent as to lower it below
the minimum standard of 24. This is of particular significance in the interpretation of the analytical
results of ghee. Plymen and Iyer [1921] have reported great deviation of the R. M. from the normal
during hot dry weather, and also large individual variations leading to the suspicion that the butter
was adulterated. In the present investigation climate does not seem to have produced any effect
on the R. M. value. This may possibly be due to the more or less steady weather of Bangalore.
None of the individual animals have at any time produced butterfat with an E. M. below 24.0. The
depression in the R. M. value, observed due to the advance of lactation, is gradual in all the breeds.
Another point noticed regarding the R. M. values of the ghee from different breeds is that the ghee