The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1906-09-18
CATTLE FEEDING.
Value Of Wheat Bran, Oil Meal, Cot
ton Seed Meal and Alfalfa.

ton Seed Meal and Alfalfa.
Experiment ii, as described i'm Bulle-
tin SO, recently issued by the Nebraska
experiment station, by Fl. r. Smith,
deals with the feeding Of wheat bran,
OIL meal, cottonseed- meal, and alfalfa,
each with corn and prairie hay, to test
their relative efficiency as supplement
tary foods.
The cattle were 2-year-oId grade
Shorthorns and Herefords, averaging
about 1850 pounds each. They were
in half fat condition owing to their
having been used in an earlier expert
ment where grain was fed sparingly
Tor three months, The lots were redi-
vided to- give uniformity throughout
The rations fed were as follows:
Lot 1-Shelled corn and prairie hay.
Lot 2-Shelled corn rs per cent, bran
20 per cent, and prairie hay
Lot 3-Shelled corn 80 per cent, oil
meal 10 per cent and prairie hay.
Lot 4-Shelled corn so per cent, cot
.tonseed- meal 10 per cent, and prairie
hay.
Lot 5--Shelled corn and equal parts
of alfalfa and prairie hay
1t may be said in explanation of Lot
6 that this ration was introduced in
order to secure data on the value of
corn and-cob meal as compared with
shelled corn.
AS the cattle in the experiment had
previously been fed as high as seven
teen pounds of grain per day, they
were started on that amount in Ex-
pertinent II, Feb. Is, 1906 Near the
close, eight weeks later, the steers in
the several lots were each receiving a
daily allowance as follows: Lot /, 22A
pounds; Lot 2, 81 pounds; and Lots 8,
4, 3, and 6, each Is pounds. All lots
except l and 6 could have been fed 81
pounds. The steers in Lot /, given
corn and prairie hay, We're not as hearty
feeders as others, which has also been
true in former experiments, no doubt
because of the one sided nature of the
ration. The presence of ground cob
in Lot 6 seemed also to prevent that
lot from eating as much corn as they
might otherwise have done. The bran
lot was purposely fed two pounds per
day more than Lots 3, 4, and 5, be-
cause the larger proportion of bran, %
per cent of the ration, would have re-
duced somewhat the actual amount of
corn fed that lot had all been fed the
same number of pounds of the mix
ture.
The largest daily gain was made
with oil-meal, 2.52 pounds per day,
while the smallest was made on corn
and prairie hay without a supplement
tary food, 1.27 pounds per day. Lots
"A and 5, the former cottonseed- meal
and the latter alfalfa, each gained 2.29
pounds per day, while the lot fed bran
gained 1.9S pounds per day and that
fed corn and-cob meal gained 1.95
pounds per day. While a smaller daily
gain was made on corn-and- cob meal
than on shelled corn. less of the for
mer was consumed for each pound of
gain. The corn fed as corn and cob
meal proved in this experiment to be
worth 212 cents per hundred more than
shelled corn, not enough difference to
pay for the grinding.
with wheat bran costing SIS per ton,
OIL meal and cottonseed- meal each $32
per ton, and alfalfa and prairie hay
each Sc per ton, with all other ex-
penses except labor included, the net
profit or loss on each steer by lot is
.as follows: &'.t3.''''
Lot | Corn and prairie hay. loss,
as cents
Lot Corn Is per cent, bran 25 per
cent, and prairie hay, profit 81 cents.
Lot Corn 80 per cent. oil-meal 10
per cent, and prairie hay, profit $1.43
Lot Corn 80 per cent, cottonseed-
meal 10 pei. cent, and prairie hay
profit AZ cents.
Lot 5-Corn and equal parts of al
falfa and prairie hay, profit $3.50.
Lot Corn and cob meal and equal
parts of alfalfa and prairie hay pro-
fit $2.05. a''.
1t should be stated in this connection
that the cattle were worth $4.15 per
hundred weight at the beginning and
all lots except Lot / $4.60 at the close,
eight weeks later The market value
of Lot l was $3.50 per hundred.
In comparison with corn and prairie
hay without protein supplement, the
bran returned a value of $20.SO
per ton, the oil-meal $780, and the
cottonseed-mail s45.6O The fact that
oii-meal returned a value nearly three
times as great as bran may be partly
accounted for by the higher protein
content of oil-meal which amounts to
nearly that difference. On the other
hands a'cottonseed- meal is richer in
protein than is oil-meal and in tests
elsewhere 1t has sometimes proved
the equal of oil-meal. In this expert
ment the pigs behind the cottonseed-
meal lot made much smaller gains
which accounts. for a part. of the diff
ference in favor of oil-meal, inasmuch
as the pork was included in the net
profit on all lots.
This. experiment, as has been true
with former tests, emphasizes the i'm
portance of using a protein supple
ment with corn and prairie hay, but
1t indicates in very pronounced man
ner that alfalfa at its present market