The Mankato free press., 1923-07-20

l0OLluH anu Uuyiu6 tccuUi bkooAt uS
Ing various types of cattle from the
his points. Nearly two hundrsU
breeders and feeders from over the
state were at University Farm for
the day. A feature was a corn fed
roast beef dinner at the college CAT.
eteria.
SEsuLTs or FaEpINo BABY
BEEF
Results Of feeding experiments In
.attening baby beef steers for mar
Iet were presented by Professor W.
II. Peters, chief Of the animal hus:
oendry division OF the University Of
Minnesota, at the annual Cattle
Feeders Day at University Farm
St, Paul. June 30. "The principal
object" he said. was to determine
the comparative suitability and ad-
vSntages OF several different rationa
for fattentng the calves from the
time they were weaned until ready
for market" Six lots OF purebred
Shorthorn steer calves, 10 calves
per lot, were fed the following "a
ton for 217 days: H.. H..
Lot. 1-Shelled corn, so per cent
whole oats, 80 per cent; linseed oil
meal. 10 per cent; corn silage and
clover hay. ~ =.
Lot AGround shelled corn. sC
per cent; ground oats, 30 per cent
linseed oilmeal, 10 per cent; corr
silaxe and cloyerhay.
Lot 3-Limited grain ration for
the first half of the feeding period
corn silage and clover hay.
Lot 4-Ground ear corn 80 per
cent; linseed oilmeal, 10 per cent;
corn silage and clover hay.
Lot 5-Ground shelled corn, 66M
per cent; ground oats, 33h pei
cent; corn silage and clover hay
mo protein supplement). ~
Lot 6-Ground shelled corn, 66M
per cent; ground oats, 1915 pei
cent; clover hay. mo silage and nc
protein supplement.)
Crediting at $3.50 the gains OF
hogs which were kept in the lots
with the cattle the profits shown
by the feeding experiment We're:
Lot /, 1882; lot 2, 1887; lot 8
lot 1, $3.50; lot s, $ls.61; lot o
The only difference between the
first two rations is that In lot l.
the shelled corn and oats were fed
ground. The calves In lot 2 made a
Slightly larger gain than the calves
in lot 1, but they also had little
more of all feeds except hay. The
two lots sold for the same price
per pound. The increased gains due
to the grinding Of the feed were
more than .overbalanced by the cost
Of grinding, and the hogs following
the steers In lot / made few
pounds more pork from the drop.
pings so that the steers in lot
made q total profit of $2.95 more per
head than those of lot 2.
BY comparing the figures for lot
8 with the figures for lot 2. 1t ID
seen that It did not pay to feed a
limited grain ration as In lot 3 for
the first half Of the feeding period,
BY comparing lot 4 with lot 1t Is
seen that so far as feed consuaSns
ton and gains made by the steers
are concerned, the corn and cob
meal gave almost identical results
with the ground shelled corn and
oats. The feed cost per steer for
the corn and cob meal lot, however,
was only $43.S4, while that for the
ground sheIled corn ana ground oats
lot was $51.07, making difference
Of $723 per head less feed cost for
the corn and cob meal lot. There
fore, even though the ground shell
ed corn and oats lot sold for 80
cents per hundred weight more than
the corn and cob lot. yet the latter
gave a profit Of $3.50 per head,
the ground shelled corn and oats
lot 1857 per head, leaving q differ
ence of $3.50 per head In favor Of
the corn and cob meal ration.
Lot 8 received the same ration as
lot 2 except that the linseed OIL
meal was omitted from the ration.
The principal effect of omitting this
protein supplement was to decrease
the gain per head per day tribe,
increase the feed required per hun
dred pounds of gain q little and de-
crease slightly the amount OF pork
made Der steer. The ration without
the unseed meal was $6.96 per steer
lower in cost than the ration In lot
2 containing linseed meal. The
steers receiving no linseed meal,
however, sold for 80 cents hun
dred lower than the steers In lot 2
that received linseed meal. 30 that
feeding the meal gave the larger
profit by $2.36 per head.
Lot receiving corn, oats, and
hay only, without either ltnseed
meal or corn silage, comapred very
closely to lot that received silage.
the principal effect Of the omission
Of silage and linseed meal was to
cause q noticeable larger consump-
ton Of corn, oats, and hay, g slight
ly larger daily gain, q slightly high
er feed cost, but the same selling
price per hundred pounds and ap-
proximately the same proit per
head.
The most important conclusions
drawn by Professor Peters from the
trials were:
/. When feeding well balanced
ration of shelled corn, oats, linseed
meal, corn silage, and clover hay, 1t
did not pay to grind the grain.
2. 1t did not pay 70 carry the
calves on q limited grain ration dur
ing the first half OF the feeding per-
iod. $3.50
8. Corn and cob meal proved ap.
proximately equal TO ground shelled
corn and ground oats In gains made
and decreased the cost OF gains SO
that q larger profit by S2.3S resulted
from the lot fed corn and cob meal;
1. The use of corn sllage and
linseed oilmeal In addition to corn.
oats, and clover increased the total
gain per steer 20.6 pounds and in !.
creased the profit per steer by $500
s. When corn silage alone was
fed in addition to corn, oats and
clover hay, 61s.2s pounds OF silage
replaced 2,155 pounds of corn, 7.84
pounds Of oats, and 127.l4 pounds OF
hay. With grain and hay high In
xh4 Gee ~ ed oa 1uAaaIA ronS1lt