NationalLibraryOfScotland/medical-history-of-british-india huggingface dataset:
N.
C.
DAS
GUPTA
207
TABLE XIV
Average milk yield of each animal during different treatments (lb.)
Period
Period I .
Period II
Period III
Total milk
yield
Grand total
Week
ending
8-1-40
15-1-40
22-1-40
29-1-40
5-2-40
12-2-40
19-2-40
26-2-40
4-3-40
11-3-40
18-3-40
25-3-40
1-4-40
8-4-40
15-4-40
Full concentrate
Hissar
Murrah
Group I
11.5
10.8
10.2
9.8
8.8
12.5
12.5
12.2
11.5
11.5
19.3
20.0
20.5
20.8
20.0
18.0
17.8
18.2
18.0
18.0
15.0
14.8
15.0
15.0
14.8
19.8
20.0
20.0
17.8
19.5
Group III
15.7
16.0
14.5
15.0
15.2
11.5
11.0
11.0
11.0
10.5
7.0
7.2
7.3
5.2
4.0
19.0
19.8
20.0
19.0
17.0
13.7
13.3
14.0
14.2
14.0
10.0
10.2
10.8
10.0
10.0
Group II
12.5
12.8
13.2
13.0
12.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
6.2
5.8
11.5
10.8
11.0
11.0
10.0
3659.6
16.0
15.8
16.0
15.8
15.7
9.7
10.0
10.2
9.8
8.3
11.0
7.5
8.2
10.3
9.2
4551.4
8211.0
50 per cent concentrate replaced by
bersweem
Hissar
Murrah
Group II
17.5
17.0
16.8
16.7
16.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.8
17.0
16.5
15.5
14.5
15.5
21.5
20.5
20.0
19.5
19.5
13.0
12.8
12.0
11.2
12.0
15.7
15.5
14.9
150
14.5
Group I
8.0
7.5
7.2
6.5
7.3
11.0
10.8
10.5
9.0
9.0
17.3
16.0
16.0
16.5
16.0
17.8
17.2
17.0
15.5
15.8
14.3
14.2
14.0
13.8
14.0
18.5
18.0
18.2
17.3
18.0
Group III
14.0
12.8
12.0
12.0
11.7
9.7
9.3
8.8
8.7
8.3
4.3
4.2
4.7
4.8
4.7
3509.8
17.7
17.2
15.8
15.8
15.7
13.3
130
12.0
11.0
11.0
7.7
7.5
7.3
6.8
6.8
4618.6
8128.4
75 per cent concentrate replaced by
berseem
Hissar
Murrah
Group III
16.5
16.2
15.5
15.5
15.2
16.0
15.0
14.0
13.0
12.0
8.7
8.5
8.0
7.2
7.2
21.7
19.8
20.0
19.5
19.0
15.5
15.2
14.3
13.8
13.7
12.0
11.7
11.0
9.8
10.0
Group II
15.0
13.8
13.7
13.8
13.7
7.0
6.8
6.5
6.7
7.0
14.3
13.0
12.5
12.2
12.3
17.3
17.2
16.8
16.0
16.0
11.3
10.2
10.0
9.5
9.5
13.7
12.8
12.0
11.5
11.5
Group I
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.5
9.0
8.8
9.0
9.0
9.2
16.0
16.0
15.5
15.2
15.0
3507.0
14.0
15.0
15.2
14.0
12.8
13.0
12.5
12.2
12.2
11.0
17.0
16.8
15.8
15.7
15.0
4442.9
7949.9
208 Green Berseem as Substitute for Economic Feeding of Dairy Cattle
The results obtained have been recorded in Table
XV. Each figure in the table is the average of 15
analyses except the figures for fat which are aver-
ages of 90 estimations.
TABLE XV
Per cent composition of milk as influenced by the
replacement of concentrate with green berseem
Breed
Hissar . . .
Do. . . .
Do. . . .
Murrah . . .
Do. . . .
Do. . . .
Treat-
ment
T 1
T 2
T 3
T 1
T 2
T 3
Total
solids
13.72
13.85
14.05
17.05
16.94
17.01
Ash
0.706
0.691
0.705
0.778
0.800
0.750
Protein
3.21
3.10
3.26
3.66
3.72
3.69
Fat
4.79
4.84
4.97
7.37
7.01
7.02
The common belief, that green feed decreases the
percentage of nutrients in the milk, is not evident
from the table. Results obtained show that when
the concentrates are replaced even to the extent
of 75 per cent by green berseem which necessitat-
ed, on an average, feeding of 36 lb. of green stuff
to a Hissar and 52 lb. to a Murrah per day, there
is no appreciable effect on the percentage composi-
tion of the milk.
Daily liveweight record of the animals showed
no difference due to the different treatments.
The food consumption
The average daily intake of the different feeds
on dry basis by an animal under each of the treat-
ments has been summarized in Table XVI and
their composition in Tables XVII and XVIII.
TABLE XVI
Average intake per day per cow under different treatments on dry basis (lb.)
Grass hay . . . . . . .
Grass silage . . . . . .
Berseem . . . . . .
Concentrate . . . . . .
Total .
Full concentrate
Hissar
11.7
3.9
..
8.0
23.6
Murrah
17.3
3.9
..
11.0
32.2
50 per cent concent-
rate replaced by
berseem
Hissar
8.6
3.8
3.9
4.0
20.3
Murrah
16.7
3.8
5.3
5.4
31.2
75 per cent concent-
rate replaced by
berseem
Hissar
11.1
3.8
5.8
2.0
22.7
Murrah
16.5
3.8
8.5
3.0
31.8
TABLE XVII
Per cent composition of feeds on dry basis
—
Grass hay
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Grass silage
Period I . . . . . .
Period II . . . . . .
Period III . . . . . .
Berseem*—
Period I . . . . . .
Period II . . . . . .
Period III . . . . . .
Concentrate mixture . . . . .
Organic
matter
90.17
88.20
83.37
84.59
85.11
88.08
88.76
94.12
Crude
protein
2.17
4.31
4.31
4.47
22.63
17.45
16.20
20.16
Ether
extract
0.85
0.89
0.87
0.84
1.91
1.98
1.67
4.63
Fibre
36.33
36.33
31.93
33.73
17.41
21.90
23.86
10.51
N. F. E.
50.82
46.67
46.26
45.55
43.16
46.75
47.03
59.82
T. C.
87.15
83.00
78.19
79.28
60.57
68.65
70.89
69.33
* Composition of oven dried sample
TABLE XVIII
Per cent protein content of fresh berseem
—
Average dry matter
Average protein
1-1 to
8-1-40
14.55
3.14
9-1 to
29-1-40
12.56
3.35
30-1 to
5-2-40
10.90
3.52
6-2 to
12-2-40
14.28
3.35
13-2 to
15-4-40
16.83
2.85
Digestibility of total feed under the three treatmen
A digestion test was carried out for ten days
towards the end of the experiment, with two Hissar
and two Murrah cows from each treatment, to
find out the comparation digestibility of the three
rations. The total daily intake and excretion and
also the digestion coefficient of the nutrients of
the total ration have been tabulated in Table
XIX.
N.
C.
DAS
GUPTA
209
TABLE XIX
The daily intake and excretion and the digestion coefficient of the total ration
Breed
Hissar . . .
Do.
.
.
.
Murrah . . .
Do.
.
.
.
Average digestibility . .
Hissar . . .
Do.
.
.
.
Murrah . . .
Do. . . .
Average digestibility . .
Hissar . . .
Do. . . .
Murrah . . .
Do.
.
.
.
Average digestibility . .
Organic matter
Intake
(gm.)
Excre-
tion
(gm.)
Digesti-
bility
Crude protein
Intake
(gm.)
Excre-
tion
(gm.)
Digesti-
bility
Ether extract
Intake
(gm.)
Excre-
tion
(gm.)
Digesti-
bility
Fibre
Intake
(gm.)
Excre-
tion
(gm.)
Digesti-
bility
Total carbohydrate
Intake
(gm.)
Excre-
tion
(gm.)
Digesti-
bility
N. F. E.
Digesti-
bility
Group I
7142
8330
11501
11116
..
2950
3119
4900
4800
..
58.69
62.56
57.31
56.84
58.85
694
951
1303
1139
..
346.9
382.7
591.2
535.2
..
50.00
59.74
54.67
58.91
55.83
164.7
222.4
310.1
273.8
..
42.73
49.91
56.90
54.41
..
74.09
77.56
78.41
80.71
77.54
2158
2036
3150
3231
..
886
927
1464
1453
..
58.99
54.45
53.53
55.04
55.50
6283
7127
9888
9703
..
2595
2718.
4293
4278
..
58.69
61.87
56.46
55.91
58.23
58.47
64.82
57.87
57.14
59.53
Group II
8258
6748
12949
10123
..
3339
2658
4862
4371
..
57.88
60.60
62.81
56.85
59.53
1002
680
1365
1129
..
436.0
310.1
581.3
504.1
..
58.78
54.36
57.41
55.43
56.49
186.1
131.1
278.9
216.0
..
50.10
38.84
85.76
62.34
..
73.08
70.41
66.97
71.14
70.40
2545
2230
4088
3209
..
1008
899
1674
1512
..
58.98
59.69
55.95
52.89
56.83
7070
5937
11159
8734
..
2914
2332
4256
3551
..
57.78
59.06
66.82
53.43
59.27
57.90
61.39
71.41
53.70
60.85
Group III
7869
8967
10593
12628
..
3209
3503
4001
4864
..
59.21
60.94
62.24
61.48
60.97
835
1145
1184
1470
..
390.6
451.3
481.7
602.0
..
53.21
60.59
59.29
59.06
58.04
140.5
188.5
199.8
245.6
..
59.61
76.40
78.20
102.70
..
57.57
59.32
60.84
58.16
58.97
2601
2909
3558
4189
..
1074
1293
1498
1830
..
60.09
55.43
57.90
56.32
57.18
6894
7633
9674
10912
..
2785
3037
3471
4204
..
59.60
60.22
62.65
61.49
60.84
59.29
63.08
67.75
64.69
63.70
210 Green Berseem as Substitute for Economic Feeding of Dairy Cattle
Similar to the growth test, the digestibility of
organic matter, crude protein and total carbohy-
drates remained almost the same for all the groups
and ether extract was better digested when the
amount of concentrate, and hence the amount of
TABLE XX
Treatment
Group I . .
Group II . .
Group III . .
Amount
of
ether
extract
intake
(lb.)
242.8
203.0
193.6
Average
digesti-
bility
77.54
70.40
58.97
Digestibi-
lity
Intake
0.32
0.34
0.30
ether extract, was more in the ration. From
Table XX it is noticed that the ratio between
the digestibility and intake of fat remains nearly
the same for all the three groups irrespective of the
ration as observed in the case of growth test.
Comparative food value of green berseem for milk
production with Hissar and Murrah breeds
The average total intake of protein and starch
equivalent by an animal of the different groups
have been computed in Table XXI. The average
milk production of Hissar and Murrah animals has
been correlated with the intake of D. P. and S. E.
in Table XXII which shows that though there is
some difference due to breeds, the values of D. P
and S. E. are nearly the same for the treatments
for each breed.
TABLE XXI
Intake of total digestible protein and starch equivalent by the animals of different groups (lb.)
Breed
Grass hay . . .
Grass silage
.
.
.
Concentrate . . .
Berseem . . . .
Total protein . . .
Total digestible protein and
starch equivalent.
Group I
Protein
Hissar
26.63
17.44
163.80
..
207.87
112.9
Murrah
38.81
17.78
225.20
..
281.79
159.5
Starch
equivalent
Hissar
358.0
135.8
612.0
..
..
1105.8
Murrah
521.7
136.1
840.5
..
..
1498.3
Group II
Protein
Hissar
24.23
17.40
81.16
80.98
203.77
115.3
Murrah
38.13
17.55
110.90
110.90
277.48
156.6
Starch
equivalent
Hissar
325.8
133.1
302.7
226.8
..
988.4
Murrah
512.9
134.3
413.1
311.2
..
1371.5
Group III
Protein
Hissar
25.22
17.26
41.87
121.80
206.15
117.3
Murrah
7.39
17.20
57.53
167.20
279.32
165.4
Starch
equivalent
Hissar
388.9
132.0
156.3
341.2
..
968.4
Murrah
505.4
131.7
230.1
469.5
..
1336.7
TABLE XXII
Milk yield as affected by the quality of nutrients
Treatment
T 1 . . .
T 2 . . .
T 3
.
.
.
T1 . . .
T 2 . . .
T 3 . . .
Milk
(lb.)
D. P.
intake
(lb.)
Milk
yield
per lb.
of
D. P.
(lb.)
S. E.
intake
(lb.)
Milk
yield
per lb.
of
S. E.
(lb.)
Hissar
1217
1171
1171
112.9
115.3
117.3
10.74
10.16
9.98
1106
988
968
1.10
1.19
1.21
Murrah
1517
1539
1481
159.5
156.6
165.4
9.51
9.82
8.96
1498
1372
1337
1.01
1.12
1.11
The rate of growth per unit of nutrients (Part I)
was found higher for Murrah and naturally it is
expected that for milk yield also the rate of
production would be higher for this breed.
Table XXII, which shows contrary figures, cannot
give a true indication of the rate of production as
a pound of milk from buffalo is not comparable
with a pound of cow's milk due to the difference in
the composition. The analyses of 54 samples of
milk from each breed gave the following average
figures (Table XXIII) for the two breeds. The
fat figures are averages of 324 estimations,
N. C. DAS GUPTA 211
TABLE XXIII
Percentage average composition of milk of Hissar
and Murrah breeds
Breed
Hissar . .
Murrah . .
Total
solids
13.93
16.92
Ash
0.69
0.77
Protein
3.18
3.80
Fat
4.87
7.00
TABLE XXIV
Average yield of fat per unit of starchequivalent
Treatment
T 1 . . .
T 2
.
.
.
T 3
.
.
.
T 1
.
.
.
T 2
.
.
.
T 3
.
.
.
Milk
yield
lb.
Per cent
fat
Yield
of fat
lb.
S.E.
intake
lb.
Yield
of fat
per lb.
of S. E.
lb.
Hissar
1217
1171
1171
4.79
4.84
4.97
58.3
56.7
58.2
1106
988
968
0.053
0.057
0.060
Murrah
1517
1539
1481
7.37
7.01
7.02
111.8
107.9
104.0
1498
1372
1337
0.075
0.079
0.078
Milk of buffalo is richer in all the ingredients,
specially in total solids and fat. When the amount
of fat produced per unit of nutrients is taken into
account it is observed that the production of fat is
also higher with the Murrah breed (Table XXIV).
To arrive at the figures for the yield of fat, the
actual composition of the milk during the experi-
ment has been utilized.
Economic value of berseem for milk production
The comparative cost of production of milk with
the three rations tested during both the experi-
ments has been calculated in Table XXV. The
average milk yield and the cost of the total feed
consumed by an animal in each treatment have
only been taken into account for arriving at the
following figures. Animal number 2 H in the first
experiment has not been considered as it behaved
abnormally and consequently the figures for the
corresponding animals, viz. 6 H and 9 H of the
other groups have also been left out. It is evident
from the table that the cost of production of milk
decreased with the increased replacement of con-
centrate by berseem, being Rs. 1.89, 1.67 and 1.47
under the three treatments tested during the first
experiment and Rs. 2.81, 2.14 and 1.88 during the
second test.
TABLE XXV
Average cost of production of milk due to the different treatments
Treatment
Full concentrate . . . .
50 per cent concentrate replaced by
berseem
75 per cent concentrate replaced by
berseem
Full concentrate . . . .
50 per cent concentrate replaced by
berseem
75 per cent concentrate replaced by
berseem
Hay
consu-
med
lb.
Cost at
Rs.
0.4573
per 100
lb.
Rs.
Grass
silage
consu-
med
lb.
Cost at
Rs.
0.1524
per 100
lb.
Rs.
Berseem
consu-
med
lb.
Cost at
Rs.
0.1716
per 100
lb.
Rs.
Concen-
trate
consu-
med
lb.
Cost at
Rs.
2.591
per 100
lb.
Rs.
Total
cost
Rs.
Total
milk
produ-
ced
lb.
Cost of
produc-
tion
per 100
lb. of
milk
Rs.
Experiment I
1641
1489
1414
7.50
6.81
6.47
1127
1114
1106
1.72
1.70
1.68
...
2584
3734
...
4.54
6.56
968.5
483.9
243.5
25.11
12.54
6.31
34.83
25.59
21.02
1816
1532
1428
1.89
1.67
1.47
Experiment II
1711
1661
1643
7.89
7.59
7.50
1137
1128
1113
1.74
1.72
1.70
...
3174
4756
...
5.57
8.36
1112.2
646.6
282.5
28.83
14.16
7.33
38.45
29.04
24.88
1367
1355
1326
2.81
2.14
1.88
N. C. DAS GUPTA 213
thanks Mr C. Maya Das, I. A. S., Director of Agri-
culture, U. P., for his sympathy and keen interest
and to the Deputy Directors of Agriculture,
Bundelkhand Circle, Jhansi, for providing all the
facilities and helpful suggestions. The author also
acknowledges, with thanks, the helps received
from Dr S. K. Mukerji and Dr R. R. Agarwal,
Research Assistants. Thanks are also due to
Messrs H. P. Srivastava and G. S. Dutta, Assist-
ants, for looking after the experimental animals
throughout the trials.
REFERENCES
Lander, P. E. and Dharmani, L. C. (1936). Indian. J.
Vet. Sci. & Anim. Husb. 6, 117
Prescot, J. A. (1920). Sultanic, Agric. Soc. Bull.
No. 5
Sayer, W. (1934). Agric. & Livestock in Ind. 4, 21
Sen, K. C. (1938). I. C. A. R. Misc. Bull. No. 25
Warth, F. J. (1930). Mem. Dep. Agric. in India 11,
78
A. J. MACDONALD 215
TABLE I
Percentage composition of foods
Feeding stuff
Groups 1 & 5
Parts
Basal mash . . .
Salt . . .
Group 2
Basal mash . . .
Salt . . .
Group 3
Basal mash . . .
Earthnut meal . .
Salt . . .
Group 4
Basal mash . . .
Soya bean meal . . .
Salt . . .
Chicks grain
Yellow maize . . .
Jowar . . . .
Cheena . . .
Growers gram
Yellow maize . . .
Wheat . . .
Paddy . . .
99.0
1.0
99.5
0.5
82.01
17.0
1.0
74.01
25.0
1.0
1
1 1
1
1 1
Moisture
10.7
10.6
10.2
10.2
9.5
9.5
Fibre
9.8
9.8
9.0
9.0
4.1
4.9
Crude
protein
10.9
11.0
17.3
17.4
9.8
9.8
Ether
extract
5.1
5.0
5.5
7.9
3.2
4.0
Nitrogen
free
extract
58.3
58.6
52.8
50.4
70.5
69.0
Ash
5.2
5.0
5.2
5.1
2.9
2.8
Rate of growth. The chickens were weighed
individually at each weighing and the average
weights of the males and females in each group at
fortnightly intervals are given in Table II. The
cockerels were removed from the experiment at
eight weeks.
TABLE II
Average weights in ounces
Group
Sex
Day-old . . .
2 weeks . .
4 weeks . .
6 weeks . .
8 weeks . .
10 weeks . .
12 weeks . .
14 weeks . .
16 weeks . .
18 weeks . .
20 weeks . .
1
Male
1.34
2.5
4.2
7.0
9.4
Female
1.37
2.6
4.3
7.2
0.9
13.7
17.3
20.7
24.3
27.9
30.4
2
Male
1.33
3.7
7.2
12.3
18.9
Female
1.34
3.6
6.8
11.4
17.0
22.9
28.6
32.3
36.0
39.6
43.1
3
Male
1.33
3.0
5.5
10.2
15.1
Female
1.36
2.9
5.6
9.9
13.5
18.6
23.0
20.8
32.8
35.8
38.1
4
Male
1.35
3.1
5.9
10.1
15.4
Female
1.33
2.9
5.6
9.4
14.0
17.5
20.8
28.1
31.3
32.8
36.3
5
Male
1.36
3.4
7.5
14.0
23.0
Female
1.33
3.4
7.3
13.2
20.4
26.7
32.7
37.3
41.1
42.8
44.0
216
Comparative Values of Proteins for Chickens
At eight weeks the average weights in ounces of
the males and females in groups 1—5 were 9.4, 9.9;
18.9,17.0 ; 15.1,13.5 ; 15.4,14.0; 23.0 and 20.4
respectively. At 20 weeks the average weights
in ounces of the pullets in groups 1—5 were 30.4,
43.1, 38.1, 36.3 and 44.0 respectively. At four
weeks and at each subsequent weighing, the birds
in group 1 were significantly lighter than those in
the other four groups. At six weeks and at each
subsequent weighing, the birds in groups 2 and 5
were significantly heavier than those in groups
3 and 4. At no period in the experiment was
there any significant difference between the
average weights of the birds in groups 3 and 4.
The average weights of the birds in group 5 were
significantly more than those in group 1 at eight
weeks and at each subsequent weighing to 16
weeks.
Food consumption. Table III gives the average
food consumption in pounds per bird for each
group for each period of four weeks and the cor-
responding food consumption figures in pounds
per pound of liveweight gain. For comparative
purposes the milk and meat offal consumptions
were brought to a dry matter basis and the figures
obtained added to the mash and grain consump-
tions.
TABLE III
Food consumption
Period
1. 0-4 weeks .
2. 4-8 weeks .
3. 8-12 weeks .
4. 12-16 weeks .
5. 16-20 weeks .
Av.food coaumption per bird (lb)
Group
1
1.36
3.14
3.68
4.62
3.86
Group
2
1.59
3.48
4.51
4.91
4.80
Group
3
1.37
2.90
3.96
4.56
4.36
Group
4
1.60
3.22
3.25
3.75
3.74
Group
5
1.36
4.34
5.91
5.97
603
Food consumption in lb. per lb.liveweight
gain
Group
1
7.95
9.41
7.84
10.40
10.00
Group
2
4.73
5.18
6.80
11.34
10.85
Group
3
5.85
5.95
7.38
7.86
11.82
Group
4
5.66
5.74
7.14
7.35
12.70
Group
5
3.56
4.80
7.74
11.34
31.82
The food consumption figures recorded for
groups 1, 3 and 4 were fairly similar throughout.
The average food consumption per bird in group 2
was somewhat higher during each period than in
the corresponding periods by groups 1, 3 and 4.
Except in period 1, the birds in group 5 consumed
more food in each period than those in group 2.
During periods 1 and 2, group 1 made considerably
poorer utilization of the food consumed than the
other four groups. The food utilization figures for
groups 3 and 4 show close similarity throughout.
Group 2 made better utilization of the food con-
sumed than groups 3 and 4 during period 1 and 2
but poorer utilization during period 4. Group 5
during period 1 made better utilization of the food
consumed than group 2, but in periods 2, 3 and 4
the food utilization figures were very similar.
During period 5, group 5 made very poor utiliza-
tion of the food consumed.
Protein consumption. Table IV gives details
of the protein prcentages contained in the foods
consumed by each group for each of the five periods
of four weeks.
TABLE IV
Percentage protein consumption
Period
1. 1-4 weeks . .
2. 4-8 weeks . .
3. 8-12 weeks . .
4. 12-16 weeks . .
5. 16-20 weeks . .
Group 1
10.6
10.6
10.5
10.5
10.4
Group 2
15.7
14.1
15.8
13.6
13.6
Group 3
15.5
15.6
14.7
14.4
14.2
Group 4
15.4
15.9
14.6
14.0
14.0
Group 5
16.1
16.7
16.8
14.2
14.0
218
Comparative Values of Proteins for Chickens
of feeding, since the milk fed group was fed on
dry mash, whereas the meat offal group was fed
wet mash. Until further experiments have been
carried out, it is only possible to conclude that
both separated milk and meat offal supplements
are very valuable in the ration of growing chicks
and that meat offal, which is normally cheaper
than separated milk, can be used more extensively
than it is at present.
CONCLUSIONS
(1) The feeding of chicks on a cereal diet with a
protein content of approximately 10.5 per cent
in conjunction with a supplement of salt and
adequate amounts of green food and calcium
results in poor growth especially during the early
stages.
(2) The addition of common salt to cereal diets
is very beneficial in improving the growth rate
and lowering mortality.
(3) In the absence of animal proteins, supple-
ments of soya bean meal and salt or earthnut
meal and salt can be used with fair success.
(4) Soya bean meal and earthnut meal are of
equal value as protein supplements in the ration
of chicks.
(5) Separated milk or meat offal are more valu-
able as protein supplements for chicks than soya
bean meal or earthnut meal.
(6) Meat offal can be used as an effective subs
titute for separated milk in the ration of chicks
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author acknowledges the valuable assis-
tance given him by Dr S. Bose, who carried out
all the analyses of foods used.
REFERENCES
Macdonald, A. J. (1941). The Indian J. Vet. Sci. and
Anim. Husb. 11, 207
Macdonald, A. J. (1942). Indian J. Vet. Sci. and Anim.
Hush. 12, 190
Prentice, J. H. and Baskett, R. G. (1932). J. of Agric.
for N. Ireland 3, 1
Prentice, J. H. (1933). J. Agric. for N. Ireland 4,
1
Robertson, G. Scott, Orr, J. B., Prentice, J. H. and Mac-
donald, A. J. (1930). The Scottish J. Agric 13, 1
B. C. RAY SARKAR AND K. C. SEN 221
there was a tendency for the R.M. and Polenske
values and iodine number to increase, whilst the
saponification number remained more or less
constant. These results agree with those of Das
Gupta [1939] who determined the Reichert-
Wollny and iodine values and partly with those of
Dean and Hilditch [1933] who determined only
iodine values. The increase in the unsaturation
might be attributed to the large intake of unsatu-
rated carotene or to the fatty constituents
of green feed or to the lower plane of nutrition
[Davies, 1939]. It is also noticed that under
similar feeding conditions, the young animals
(Nos. 70 and 64) secreted fat with higher R.M.,
Polenske and saponification values and lower
iodine value than that from older animals (Nos. 42
and 21).
TABLE I
Effect of berseem feeding on the chemical composition of milk
Period
I
(Berseem-nil) . . . .
II
(Berseem-60 lb.) . . . .
III
(Berseem-120 lb.) . . . .
Animal
No.
70
42
Average
70
42
Average
70
42
Average
Dry
matter
consump-
tion per
day
lb.
30.5
24.7
27.6
18.3
15.2
16.8
14.9
14.9
14.9
Milk
yield per
day
lb.
19.0
14.0
16.5
21.0
14.0
17.5
12.5
8.5
10.5
Fat
produc-
tion per
day
gm.
396.8
311.4
254.1
445.0
297.0
371.0
280.9
289.3
285.1
Fat
(per cent)
4.60
4.90
4.75
4.85
4.85
4.85
4.95
7.50
6.23
Total
solid
(per cent)
13.03
13.05
13.04
13.29
13.21
13.25
13.60
15.79
14.70
Solids.
not-fat
(per cent)
8.43
8.15
8.29
8.44
8.36
8.40
8.65
8.29
8.47
Protein
(per cent)
3.16
3.30
3.23
3.27
3.46
3.37
3.20
3.23
3.22
Ash
(per cent)
0.75
0.77
0.76
0.78
0.74
0.76
0.79
0.76
0.78
TABLE II
Effect of oat grass feeding on the chemical composition of milk
Period
I
(Oat grass-nil)
.
.
.
.
II
(Oat grass-60 lb.) . . .
III
(Oat grass-120 lb.) . . .
Animal
No.
64
21
Average
64
21
Average
64
21
Average
Dry
matter
consump-
tion per
day
lb.
29.4
22.7
26.1
20.8
17.2
19.0
16.4
16.4
16.4
Milk
yield per
day
lb.
23.0
11.0
17.0
23.5
12.0
17.8
22.5
7.5
15.0
Pat
produc-
tion per
day
gm.
605.6
239.7
422.7
544.0
272.0
408.0
531.2
170.3
350.8
Pat
(per cent)
5.8
4.8
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.0
5.1
Total
solid
(per cent)
13.90
13.32
13.61
13.73
13.77
13.75
13.23
14.00
13.62
Solids.
not-fat
(percent)
8.10
8.52
8.31
8.43
8.57
8.50
8.03
9.00
8.52
Protein
(percent)
3.24
3.08
3.16
3.32
3.20
3.26
3.30
3.01
3.16
Ash
(per cent)
0.80
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.78
0.79
0.72
0.79
0.76
It will be observed that, with the three different
levels of carotene ingestion in the case of animals
of group 1 (Table IV—berseem feeding) namely
24136.0 I.U., 2504608.0 I. U. and 2740228.0
I.U., the carotene potency varied from 725.8
I.U. to 2825.0 (average) I.U. under the same
conditions, the vitamin A potency increased from
5835.2 I.U. to 11370.0 I.U. (average) per pound
of butter fat. With this change in the levels of
carotene intake, the percentage activity due to
carotene varied from 12.4 to 26.5. In the case
of animals of group 2 (Table V—oat grass feeding),