(59) n E TEXAS AGRIUILTURAI, EXPERIMENT STATION. BULLETIN NO. 14, (H eid to compare dupliezxte tests and issued May 1891.) IN THE DAIRY RATION ravity and Centriiugaliflreaming of Milk. AGRICULTURAL AND IYIECIIANICAL COLLEGE 0F TEXAS. ‘...__- ->— ~>._.__._. .._._Z__.___.. ._. Bulletins of this Station are issued free. Any Qne interested in any branch of agricul- (‘re may have hIS name placed 0n our permanent mzuhng 11st, and secure future numbers, by phcataon to GEO. W. CURTIS, Drmacrwon. College Station, Brazos (To Tex reqvesting Bulletins, Write name zuui address plainiy. ‘ ’ ‘w-f h y If}, ,_ 1E1; MEI = ' ' a“ "E1 ‘Piiwirif, ,1 1 .|. Wgyuiibiiilniyi it"? Y ‘EX , 1...‘ ,,;’f_3e§~ i‘ in} i.._ “"“IE _ BRYAN, uwniuas: 30X, “THE NEAT IE’RIN’J‘}1JEI,” ]. 8 9 1. 0N e TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OFFICERS AND STAFF. GOVERNING BOARD. BOARD OF DIRECTORS A. AND M. COLLEGE. MAJ‘. A. J. RosE, President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Salado. Hon. JNo. E. HOLLINGSWORTII. State Com. Agr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin. HON. W. R. CAVITT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Brya11. “DR. J. D. FIELDS... .-... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . .Man0r. HoN. J NO. ADRIANCIC. .r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..C01urnbia. FINI ANCIAL OFFICERS . J. S. FQWLKEs, Fiscal Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Bryan. PREs. L. S. Ross, Treasurer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..C011ege Station. STATION STAFF. GEo. CURTIS, M. S. A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Agrieulturist. Director. H. H. HARRINGTON, M. Se. . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chemist. M. FRANCIS, D. V. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinarian. S. A. BEACH, B. S. ‘A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .r . . . . . . . . . .H0rtieu1turist. D. ADRIANCE, M. S . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . .Mete0r010gist, Asst. Chemist. J. W. CARsoN, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant to Director. J. M. CARSON,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Agriculturist. P. S. TILSON, B. S. A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Assistant in Chemistry. (61) TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. PBJCULIAItEIPFECTS OF COTTON SEED AND oorron sEEn MEAL AS FOOD STUFFS FOR THE DAIRY. (A ooNTnvrAqiiox or wont; REPORTED IN BULLETIN NO. 11, AUGUST, 1890.) (GEO. W. CURTIS, M. S. A.) (J. M. CARSON.) Immediately after the publication of Bulletin No. 11, Aug, 1890, from this station, we began the active conduct of experiments herein noted. continuing the work t0 the present time. The subject of cheap and effective cream raising is one of prime importance. In more north- ern latitudes, where ice is abundant and cheap, What have always been understood as “best” conditions couldbe easily secured at comparative- ly little expense ; and, with climate thus in their favor, northern dairy‘- men as a class have ushed ra -idl forward and lon since concluded 7 7 7 that cream raising by gravity succeeds largely in proportion to the increase in degree difference between temperature of milk when set ‘and temperature to which it can be rapidly reduced, and uniformly maintained for a given number of hours. In a southern climate, the _ question at once becomes broader, and of more immediate economic importance, since the known methods for reducing, and maintaining §at low temperature, depend upon ice, at from 3-4 to 1 cent per pound. Admitting that the conclusions above noted are founded on‘ general robservaltion, and are, therefore, supposably correct, we have sought to ,0 determine a suspected influence of cotton seed and cotton seed meal in the dairy ration on the facility with which cream may be separated by giigravity’. Incidentally’, also, we have carried the investigation further, find whether such effect was noticeable in separation of cream from tmilk by centrifugal force-the whole furnishing a basis for accurate ijudgment as to the most profitable method of creaming milk under all ijrconditions. T At the outset there appeared several difiiculties, most of which, it is ibelieved. are overcome bythe manner in which our tests were conduct- glyed. The known influence of individual variation, and of length of {time since calving, must be carefully eliminated, and outside condi- iltions adjusted so closely as to leave no room for doubt. The number igof cows in each set was never less than four nor more than five, except iias noted in one or two duplicate experiments, and each animal Was iicarefully watched throughout the entire test and at once withdrawn on tithe appearance of the least abnormal indication, Whether of appetite, general health or condition. The selections were made with special ’eference to length of time since calving, and to uniform individual puality, as determined by previous test, in order that each two sets of ‘,3. . fiuracy the actual food results. In order to divest the experiment of chances of error in churning, the testing for butter fat was conducted ows to be directly compared might indicate with a fair degree of ac? 62 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. by chemical analysis, both of whole milk and the skim milk corres~ pending. The whole milk from the cows in each set, as hereafter noted, was thoroughly mixed, and quickly and accurately sampled- the samples being submitted to Mr. P. S. Tilson, B. S. A, Assistant Professor of Chemistry, for accurate analysis. In the same manneri the skim milk, Whether from set or centrifugal process was thoroughly mixed and quickly and accurately sampled. All sampling was done by ourselves, and we guarantee its accuracy. In order that the analyst might be entirely free from bias, the samples were submitted under seal and by number only. We acknowledge with thanks the careful work of Prof. Tilson, and believe his reported results to be accurate and entirely reliable. In skimming for the gravity tests, great care was taken to get every particle of cream which had separated, skim- ming indeed much more closely than is done in ordinary practice. In centrifugal separation tests, the machine (a De Laval power, 600 lb. capacity) was run as it is run every day in our college creamery. the governor set to a speed of 6500 revolutions per minute. In a number of tests, the machine did not run perfectly, from various causes ; and results by this method are, therefore, not so good as might be expected by those closely familiar with separator work. In every case each cow or set of cows, for test, was fed continuously on the test food at leasttwelve (12) days before samples were taken. Cows selected for each set were as nearly’ uniform with cows in set with which compared as it was possible to determine. The peculiari- ties of each cow selected were well known to us both as well as her individual yield and quality of production. \Ve believe that the re- sults-so uniformly similar undervarying conditions——may be accepted as establishing an important and hitherto unknown-or at least un- verified-fact, regarding the value of cotton seed and cotton seed meal in the dairy ration. - For the information of those interested we may state that all zmztlyses of skim milk samples were made by the standard “Adams” method ; those of whole milk were by the Patrick test, mainly, checking up re- _sults occasionally by the gravimetric method, with ivhich the Patrick test was found to agree quite closely. GRAVITY CREAMING. In our work with the gravity process, the Fairlamb set cans wei'e used, the water being tempered by ice to the required degree. (dlhese are better known in this state as the “Davis and Rankin” cans, from the fact that this energetic Chicago company used them in the joint stock creameries worked up in the different parts of the state through their instrumentality——see Bulletin No. 5, from this station, “Cream- eries in Texas,” ,March, 1889, wherein our views in regard to these expensive plants are clearly set forth.) It was desired to test the effect of cotton seed and cotton seed meal on gravity creaming, first at the ordinary temperature of the best well and cistern Water in this latitude during summer ;—namely, about 70 degs. Fahn; and, second, to test the effect under so called “best” condi- tions, as already noted,—namely, by setting in water at 45 degs. F . In each case these tests were conducted with two sets of cows; one well along in milk since calving. the other comparatively fresh. tqee tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 following: FOOD STUFFS FOR THE DAIRY. 63 TABLE No. .1. BIPFECT ox GRAVITY CREAMING AT HIGH TEMPERATURE, (709 F.) WITH cows WELL ALONG IN MILK. ln every case, milk was set promptly after milking-temperature as given below-in Fairlamb cans, the temperature of water surrounding cans being , kept as nearly as possible at 70 9. FAHR. Length of time before skimming (12 to r24 hours) regulated by degree 0f acidity-alivays letting the milk get distinctly sour, but skimlming both sets together, in time t0 secure even, fluid samples of skim milk. SET I .-—( Without Cotton Seed or Cotton SET II .--( With Cotton Seed Meal.) Seed Meal.) ~ Five cows, selected for uniformity in compar- Five cows selected for uniformity in compar- Average length of time since calving, at be- ginning of test’ 124 day/x Average length of time since calving, at be- " Fed equal parts by weight, coRN AND eon ginning of test, 104 days. MEAL AND BRAN as bymfwd» Wllh hay and Fed same as Set I, except that the bye-food pasture. » v 1 _ . Y (Later Ensilage was substituted for hay and “ as made 11D 0f equa parts by weight, COTTQL pasture.) SEED MEAL AND BEAN. a - I ‘- l WHOLE MILK. SKI“ MILK. \VHOLE MILK. SKIM MILK. ! 1 . ;l +2 " . . e"*-’."¢.‘ ‘aw. as e'*“."=1.* l~=m 511' __ glgsgggsl . =52 .5258 . Z53 §915§galoq ‘gas: 5.5;; i glagd 3Q)»; "Goa ‘gga g M 55s 52,121 5K’. “s; :2 == is“ 3J5’ .3 ‘s1? @2263 c; = is“ 5Z5 l 0 ‘ 5'35 5w; -—1 ° ‘ ‘M! ' r-fl :- 2 éjglnsfifil s.‘ s55 733;; "a. >1 gjgsss sl s55 E13,, E ..-<»¢=—>.' s w». ~95 a e w» w». s l w». e": :3 ps5 s85} l 515s £55 s 5 52s s85 s . see 55a "'.'-' "'1 """ *"" " .7." ' ' """' ""T' 7 2, ss 4.2511 . l 1.17 l 27.0 . s s9 ss 4.40 10] 0.95 21.5 l5 40E 89 4.101) 17 l 1.39 "£19 16 2-33 89 5.55 181, 0.84 15.1 a 19 30§ 90 5.101 21.) 1.30 l 25.5 20 3 90 6.30 22} 0.89 14.1 27 40l 88 5.20M 29; 1.32 l 25.4 28 37 88 5.25 30'. 0.73 13.9 i‘ c a l a 4 I 5 4 a s , l 1v s ss, so 5.3041, ss 2.20 s) .0 s ss s9 7.10 ' s4. 1.81 25.5 i. s5 40 ; ss e251». s7 2.41 ss.0 ss s. ss 0.75 l s l 1.37 20s Liver-ages. . . . . 5.22 1.623 30.9 Averages. . . .. 5.89 1.10 18.4 .5’ " o F With cows far advanced in milk, it is very evident from the iigabove table (No. 1) that an addition of cotton seed meal to the ii-dairy' ration facilitates creaming by gravity at the ordinary summer "Qytemperature possible for southern dairymen Without ice at large ex- Qpeiise-giviiig an average of 18.4 lbs. of butter actually lost in the skim out of every 100 lbs. present in the milk set, as against 30.9 lbs. giactually lost from every hundred present when neither cotton seed lineal nor cotton seed was Lised. See also:——- . e4 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. TABLE No. 2. EFFECT oN GRAVITY CREAMING AT HIGH TEMPERATURE (709. F.) WITH cows LBss ADVANCED 1N MILK THAN IN TABLB 1, BUT NoT FRESH. (Milk handled exactly as in Table No. 1.) SET I .-—(W ithout Cotton Seed or Cotton Seed llleal.) Four cows, average length of time since calving at beginning of test, 93 days. Fed equal parts by weight coBN DIEAL AND BRAN as bye-food wlth sorghum and corn en- silage and pasture. SET II .—-(With Cotton Seed Jleal.) . Four cows, average length of time since calv- ing atbeginning of test, 88 days. _ Fed same as Set I, except that bye-food wa s made up of equal parts by weight COTTON SEED MEAL AND BRAN. WHOLE MILK. SKIM MILK. “TIOLE MILK. SKIM MILK. g .3135’. _' ‘Lg’. “.5..- 53 065,52 . g2 . “E? a 7-. or‘ I I: ‘M 0 a " b-‘w I s2 Q o w git-Jigs? O ggw 3w; c ‘J1 gq-ggow c 55w 33g». ‘A #4 as“. =9.“ Z s.“ “aw z #4 as; ‘"3 z =2“ “cw:- o t: 5'57‘ 23w“ o ma“ n33‘ o 2:. 33'“ new c; cps ,Q"":I z. e erases s. ass ~s~ s. e stasis a ass ~15- E <15 F118;», E $58k E i 55.5.1.5,» F: it"; g”?- Q-v-u "-1 "-4 ‘ " - q;- 5. e26 3”‘ 3 i?‘ fies 4i '3 E326 ti” e5 83*” 3E; 6 —a J 0 s - 0 . 1_ a P‘ 1 P t) 342 08 86 4.20 343 1.21 28.8 342 3 86 3.80 344 0.08 10.3 .345 38 80 4.10 347 0.98 23.9 346 31 80 4.40 348 0.93 ' 21.1 < 349 36 88 4.30 301 1.14 26.5 350 31 88 3.90 352 1.07 27.4 2-153 . 37 88 3.80 300 1.63 42.9 354 32 88 3.80 356 0.96 25.2 357 36 86 4.00 309 1.47 36.8 308 31 86 4.00 360 1.02 25.5 Averages. . . . . 4.08 1.28 31.8 Averages. . . . . 3..8 ~ 0.91 22.9 The averages show a result almost exactly indentical with that shown by Table No. L-giving an actual loss of 22.9 lbs. butter fat in the skim milk on cotton seed meal ration, as against 31.8 lbs. lost in skim milk out of every 100 lbs. actually present when no cotton seed or cotton seed meal was used. See also: TABLE No. .3. EFFECT ON GRAVITY (.‘REA)II.\'(} AT HIGH '1‘E;\'IPER.-\TUR1*1 F.) WITII COWS FRESH IN MILK. (Milk handled exactly as m Table No. 1.) SET I .—( Without Cotton Seed or Cotton Seed flieal.) Three cows, average length of time since calving, at beginningof test, 51 days. (Fed same as Set 1, 1n Table No.2.) l I AgET II.---(Il’itIt 011.201.. Seed Jleal.) l Three cows, average legnth of time sine»: calving, at beginning of test, 49 days. (Fed same as Set II, in Table No. 2.) “TTOLICIBIILK. SKIM DIILK. \VHOLE MILK. SKHI MILK. . 23g $75.22 . $3.15 5E3 - g . s. s 55E» B 5% amiss? B 5s? 4e“ 2 z ga-sest 2 as? 4.4"- ; .. sssiti s 212:, see s .- eeszzisi 2:: 52-1" s s see sis a esp est s s ass e84; s“ 409 32 90 4.00 411 0.78 19.5 408 35 90 3.40 410; 0.27 7.9. 413 26 9L 4.40 415 0.58 1.3.2 412 30 92 4.60, 4141 0.48 10.4 425 31 95 “.70 427 0.89 24.1 424 33 95 5.00; 426? 0.82 16.4 429 31 95 4.50 431 0.40 8.9 428 36 95 4.80, 430§ 0.37 7.7 435 30 94 4.40 437 0.50 11.4 434 35 94 3.40} 436i 0.49 14.4. 439 29 92 4.40 441 0.75 17.1 438 28 92 3.30] 440i 0.41 12.4 447 38 90 5.40 449 0.54 10.0 446 33 90 4.801 448i 0.49 10.2 Averages..... 4.40 0.64 14.9 Averages..... 4.18 0.47 11.3 .§»~~i~‘" roon STUFFS FOR Tin: DAIRY. ‘ - 65 The figures speak for themselves. A loss of 11.3 lbs. butter fat in the skim milk on cotton seed meal ration, as against 14.9 lbs. lost out of every 100 lbs. actually present wheneno cotton seed meal was used. T0 summarize briefly, we find from tables 1, 2 and 3 that, when milk is set in Fairlamb cans at average summer temperature of best well and cistern water. without ice, in this latitude (70 9. F): lVlTHOUT COTTON SEED OR COTTON SEED ‘MEAL IN THE FOOD. (lows well along in milk (124 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in the skim __ milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .309 lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. Cows notquite so far along in milk (93 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in the skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31-.8 lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. (“lows comparatively fresh in milk (51 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.9 lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. Average without cotton seed or cotton seed - a meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.8 lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. ' wrrr-r COTTON SEED MEAL 1N rm: FOOD. (‘ows well along in milk (104 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18.4lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. (Tows not quite -so far along in milk (88 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.?! lbs. in every 100 lbs. laresent. (‘owl's comparatively fresh in milk (49 days at lweginning of test) the butter actually lost in skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11.?) lbs. in every 100 lbs. present. Average with cot-ton seed meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17.5lbs.in every 100lbs. present. Taking the average results in the three conditions above noted, we find an actual gain to dairyunen, or patrons of cream gathering cream- eries of 8.3 lbs. butter in every 100, which must be credited to cotton seed meal in the dairy ration. To bring the matter to a money basis, suppose a dairyunan to make 10 lbs. of butter per day, (which he sells at 25 cents per pound) through the year, WlthOUt cotton seed or cotton seed meal, under the conditions above noted; he could, by the use of cotton seed meal in proper proportion, make a clear increase of 302.9 lbs. butter in 12 months—or at 25 cents per lb-a yearly gain of $75.70. That the effect clearly shown by above tables is in no sense due to individual peculiarity of cows is proven, we think satisfactorily, the fact that different sets of cows were used in the tests represented by each separate table, as above given-the food condition showing itself uniformly the same with the different sets. Admitting the marked effect of cotton seed meal in gravity cream- ing at high temperature (70 9 F.) let us next turn our attention to . 0 66 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 3' ‘L’ ’TABLE No. 4. ~ v s» m1 GRAX'ITX"(1‘REAI\I’ING AT Low TEMPERATURE 459. F. wvrru cows WELL‘ EFPLCT J. p _ ._ ~ ALONG IN MILK. - a - w» .~ - 1....‘- Milk handled exactly as in tables 1, 2 and 3, except that it was set in water kept" as nearly as possible at 4592 Farm. by the use of ice at a cost 0f one cent per A pound. __--_- Length of time before skpmvni/rtg, 5241103413. (In skimming at 24 hours it was found that the milk wasuniformly just beginning to acidifyx; SET I .--( l/Vitltout (lotion Sg4gd m» (lotion SET II .—( With Cotlon .5234 M ml.) Seed Meal.) Five cows, selected for uniformity in com- Ilflzsgtsilsgelfcllited 1'0!‘ UIIlYOPIIIitY ill will“ parisou with set H" _ l _ _ p Averagelength 0f time since calving at he- Average length of time since calving, at be- ginning 0f test 132 days, - ginning 0f test 152 days._ Fed same as Set I, except that bye-food was Fed equal Part5 bYWOIght CORN BIPIAI» AND made up 0f equal parts by weight, coTTok BEAN as bye-food, With ensilage and pasture. 3mm) MEAL Ayn Blmy, wnoma MILK. A SKIM MILK. wnomv, 3111.1; it y sum mm. '7 —M‘m—w 71-77.” V—~— ‘a _ 7 l ‘we! W-A7LAZQT7“, 77777711 77-72;.‘ . _-' *3 ‘f ‘lc- 33>‘ 2+5 ~+d.li-"3.l at». 1 E C. d s’ 533 o-l ‘5155725-5 d, 35-;- z/ m ‘éisfli .63” Z P553 “me 1Z1‘ n: §5Ei”‘=8>-l :41 *°'a:’$-i‘g¥ p-q '4'“ "'4 wgwq gwqfl) p-q Fqn-qhbQ r-ll l ggui l ~14‘) <1» c: 3.3m» w we 9449-4 =>%-:. $>1==~===1 =>= wed». 4 -4 £11= i i _ . ‘ 1 ,_,---u '5' '7- “1531353 a 3&5 E152 '31 7. |°§==1r355 '5» 33'? sin‘ s .3 3:333» E ~3= 31.: s 31533133» s. ‘iswsts: £3 .4 e2‘: 01*’ <3 5%“ e528 53 i .4 laEQfi-H-"Qi , 51*“ gs-WE 79 24.5 86 3.55 81 0.86 24.2 80l26.5l 86 5.4031 0.81 15.0 s7 2s . ss 4.30 s9 1.59 33.0 ss!27 l ss 2 5.10! 00f 1.45 T 23.4 9126 87 4.45 93 2.12 ‘47.t‘ ; 87 , 4.60 $145 1.03 i 22.4 95 29 90 4.20 97 1.93 i 45.9 f 96§27.7, 90 4.80; 98§ 1.26 26.3 99 28 91 4.45 101 0.89 20.0 l 10026 j 91 . 4.30% 102? 0.55 12.8 103 27 90 4.60 105 1.85 i 40.2 l 104i26.5, 90 l 4.355 1061 1.15 g 26.4 11129 88 4.45 113 2.11 47.4 I 112127 l 88 Y 4.60; 114,3 1.33 f 28.9 ' 115 27 90 4.45; 117 1.72 38.5 I 116i25 i 90 5 5.001 l18f 1.45 ‘ 200 119 30 .3 4.10 121 1.21 ; 29.5 120531 . 86 4.90: 122E 0.87 l 17.4 123 33 86 4.45 125 1.43 32.1 l 124630.55 86 4.80% 0.85 , 17.7 127 29 85 5.70 129 2.19 l 38.4 l 128,31 85 4.5.31 130? 1.20 ' 26.4 13130 s5 4.35 133 2.19 1 50.3 ,= 132.20 i a .105‘; 13» 1.40 2:315 Averages. . . . . 4.34 1.67 37.6 Averages. . . . . 4.86 1.1.1 22.9 A. loss of 37.6 lbs. in every hundred present, without cotton seed or cotton seed meal, as against 22.9 lbs. lost when cotton seed meal. was used: agreeing closely with results shown in previous tables, although a somewhat greater loss-"due, possibly. to the greater length of time since calving, and showing very little plwrfit resulting from the use of ice when handling the product of cows t'ar zulvanccd in milk, whether cotton seed meal be used or not. As the proper length of time before skimming has been subject to differing opinions we insert here a number of tests (See Table No. 5) from the same cows used in Table No. 4; the only difference being , l that in the following, skimming was done at 12 hours, when the milk Was always distinctly sweet: a roon srurrs ion THE DAIRY. ' 67 TABLE- No. 75.- 111411101: ON usAvrrr (TREAIHLNG AT LOW TEIVIPERATURPJ (459 F.) WITH cow's WELL ALONG IN 111111;. Mil/c handled just as in Fable 4. (Length of time before skimming 12 hours.) SET I .-—( Wlitlto/ui (lotion Seed or (ilotton lSET II .—-—( W/itlt CotlolvzvSeed Jlleal.) Seed Zlleal.) - . . l 1 Same cows used in Set I of Table No. 4. l‘ l Same cows used in Set II of Table 4. Average length 0f time since calving at be- ginning 0f test 125 days. ' Fed same as Set II, Table 1. Average length 0f time since calving at be- ginning 0f test, 145 days. Fed same as Set I in Table 4. ____, SKIN 1111.14. ' ' WHOLE MILK. Q SKIM MILK. 1 1 WHOLE MILK. i I I _ Hm-“ “m- f : -_ ii. ___~-_~ _-__- . " . i a l . " V: l E" l H“ i; §3§“+'='°al +5cvl l E logs-T 3:)‘ l v '- r4 g gq-q o guy-q 1 . 7 bag-u p-l"‘~p-\;j 0 l U2 prpqd 5 5P1 Wg) ,_q F; - A. y l CJaQ :2 _.,, egg-Qgfi, F .052, t: ='-_~ F E a Sgtsngill 2*"; 5'c-;:3_=1. ~ E51 Bu" A +-=‘-"-' 5E Q’ ~' A ? --- 5555-1 uiHr-‘g’ A Z a-Q-Zi $3,210 q, -- ,.qs e n...¢-~;~. cz- . --.,. 0.. ,__ w Q>ww P; ,2 q“: 19w g #1 1-: .»>.Q*-".-¢|; Q9, i". 9+: a. a °“’°I>°’°3 s:- “~63 -—°". :35 "* Q~"”19’=I'§":' "Eli @831‘ -—*“"-~ 5 r/I 8-=“°’§:: g in? $3“ l :1’ fififiFHtfll g l~Z¥=E 553i‘ s ~° ‘Wm wen a e85‘ ma“; ‘ I -'-’ 911m 58.5%? s 3 @8325 923'" 1'12 .4 e8 on“ w n. at... ,1; t: i=1: n. 5; u; y o. =~=._E! "—— “Mr " i g *'-—-— ——-1— I u) ( s (f l o a f 9 url t I 9 y! » r 1 .);— ' 43 40 91 4 40 45 2.28 01.8 44 .20 91 £4.11 1; 46 1 1.00 l 52.4 47 40 ss 4.55 1 49 2.65 5&2 l 4s 135 1 st .440 50 1 1.ss l 31 32 92 410 l 53 1.85 . 45.1 52 $31.7; 92 14.60 ii 54 l 1.47 31.9 05 3s s0 s75 ; 57 l 2.10 g 56.0 5s es p s0 14.15 l! 5s ! 1.70 41.0 s9 32.5 02 14.50 g s1 j rs.) 4 42.0 : 00 132 l 02 ass 5,1 s2 1.74 | .250 63 37 89 53.60 g 65 i 2.40 ,2 66.6 64 F32 g 89 54.40 f, 66 i 1.56 : 245.5 67 29.5 88 13.65 ‘ 69 I 1.38 i 38.0 68 :30.51 88 §4.40 Q3’ 70 j 1.18 26.8 71 86 1 8.) 15.35 l 73 '1 2.65 l 49.5 72 .82 85 54.07 74 1.02 25.. 75 29 ‘ 86 ‘435 5 77 1 1.62 547.2 . 76 '26 x 86 4.20 78 5 0.81 19.8 1 a, . . Averages... 42'? 2.07 49.1 Averages.... 4.34 1.8.’ 31.7. The same marked effect of cotton seed meal, as noticed throughout, is here shown: a loss of 49.1 lbs. in every' hundred present Without cotton seed or cotton seed meal, as against 31.7 lbs. lost when cotton seed meal was used. Incidentallyf we notice also, that the skimming at 24» horn-s, when cans were set in ivater at 45 9., gave quite materially better results than the 12 hour skimming, even though the cows were a little far- ther along in milk when the 24 hours skimming was practiced. The (lifferenee observed is nearly’ the same for both sets—the _yield of but- ter without cotton seed or cotton seed meal lbeing 11.5 lbs, and with cotton seed meal 8.8 lbs. in every hundred actually-tpresent, grzvztcv“ '7./Jh6'7t smwvrning 0ft 24 titan tub/en sir/interning at 12 hon/rs. m’ t/ 68 TABLE TEXAS AGRICULTURALlEXPERlhIENT STATION. No. 6. EFFECT on GRAVITY CREAMING- AT LOW TEMPERATURE (459 F.) WITH cows FRESH 1811411111. JI/illc ltandled just asivz Table 4. (Length 0f time before skimming 24 hours.) SET I .—( Without Cotton Seed or Cotton Seed Meal.) Four cows, selected for uniformity in com- parison with Set II. _Av_erage length of time since calving, at be- ginning of test, 33.5 days. Fed same as Set I, Table 4. * SET II.—( With (751151148125 11551. ) Four cows, selected for uniformity in com- parison with Set I.. Average length of time since calving, at be- ginning of test, 29.5 days. Fed same as Set II, Table 4. ‘VHOLE MILK. i 1 I 1..__. .__ _.__ 4 I WHOLE 111111;. _ SKIM MILK. A, . +5 '. I Eel , 14-113..‘ ,',,: 1E8» 5 E @5252‘ 5 22.2; $55.2 5135 z. .44 §¢>°~*-'°5>Z. Z Qg?» 32¢ {l fi ; .8: igghfllneil l €EZ§ lSHZ - -'= es“ “*7; . are hi.’ a? 31 = ~~=~=+*i""'e2» e l ‘F's i === "i ‘i’. "i 25...,» "it '7? "Z-l £51? 3 4 52.8 5 55s 514-1 ll 5815481848»; 2152184 ~11 A r48 n4 4w 44*’ {-155 w, 411245 @477“ 8.11:4“. 354-25 155 8. 88 4.20 157 1.07 25.5 150i 81 88 48.80 g; 1584 0.20 i 5.8 159 87 80 4.80 101 1.04 24.2 Ail 1001 41 g 80 4.10 5, 102i 0.18 f 4.4 108 80 85 5.20 105 0.45 8.7 z! 104i 8 4.80 1110: 0.18 1 8.8 107 88 85. 4.80 109 0.72 10.8 l; 108 80 l 85 4.20 Fl 170? 0.28 % 0.7 171 89 85 4.80 178 1.89 , 28.9 M 172E :14 . 85 4.851 174% 0.78 f 15.1 175 88 85 4.45 177 1.08 1 87.7 170* 48 1 ,4.8.'5 4 178: 0.09 i 15.8 188 88 88 4.40 185 0.01 L 18.41 184 :45 ; 88 £4.80 180, 0.17 ; 187 41 4.00 189 1.04 . 22.5 i; 188; 41 1.8.5 5.20 ” 190 0.57 10.9 191 41 87 14.40 198 1 14.8 192, 89 = 87 p400 194; 0.27 7.? 1.95 89 88 14.00 .197 0.98 20.2 4 190; 42 88 44.00 198 0.19 4.8 Averages... 4.53 0.9(' 21.3 Averages... 4.27 0.54 7.9 The difference is here even greater than l0efore-a loss of 21.3 lbs. without cotton seed or cotton seed meal, as against (mly 7.9 lbs. in every hundred actually present when cotton seed meal WttS used. Summarizing loriefly, tables 4 and 6. we find. that when milk is set in Fairlamb cans surrounded by water at F? Fahr; \\'l'l‘1I()iU'1‘ L‘O'1"1‘Ol\' 515E!) 0R C0'l"l‘().\' SElil) MEAL lN THE F001). Cows well along in milk (152 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in the skim milk amounts to . . . . . o o o o o n n u n u a o a u 337.6 Lbs. in every 100 present. Cows fresh in milk (233.5 days at beginning of ’ test) the butter actually lost in the skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Average, vnthout cotton seed or cotton seed meal - u - Q ¢ - I I ¢ - v a c a ¢ o o . . . ¢ u u . . . - - - . 8 . . . . . . . IJbS. in every 100 present. in every 100 present. 29.4 Lbs. \\'ITH COTTON SEED HEAL IN THE FOOD. Cows well along in mi1k,( 1.32 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in the skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . .. 22.9 Lbs. in every 100 present. Cows fresh in milk 29.5 days at beginning of test) the butter actually lost in the skim milk amounts to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Average, with cotton seed meal . . . . . . . A clear gain under so-called “best” temperature conditions of l4 lbs. 7.9 Lbs. . > - u n 5 I in every 100 present. 15.4 Lbs. in every 200 present. FOOD STUFFS FOR THE DAIRY. 69 in every 100 actually present,which must be credited to cotton seed meal in the food. While not exactly in line with the subject under investigation we cannot refrain from noticing a very great observed decrease in efficiency of gravity creaming, as the length of time since calving increases. Statements are commonly made, apparently’ in perfect can- dor, regarding the effectiveness of some particular make of can for setting milk, or other apparatus for creaming, and figures are fre- quently given as proving the statements made. Our experiments herein reported-and which _are fully borne out by a practical experi-_ ence of some 1O or 12 years-show conclusively that with gravity creaming this effectiveness is limited strictly to milk from compara- tively fresh cows. If we could alivays keep a dairy herd fresh in milk, say not to exceed three months, the loss of butter in skim milk might be comparatively slight under good conditions as to tempera- ture-our setting of fresh milk in water at 45 F? F., resulting in get- ting out 92.1 per cent. of the total butter fat—but it is an indisputa- ble fact that a cow soon passes over this limit of easy creaming, and thata dairy herd must always have a greater or less number of cows well advanced in milk; for such our tests show emphatically that gravity creaming labors under difficulties, to say the least. \Vhether the mixture of milk from fresh and advanced milkers, affects creaming of the Whole any more than proportionally we are now planning to determine. Also whether the addition of warm, or of cold water, direct to the milk in setting will favor gravity creaming of milk from advanced cows. There are many other things yet to solve in this connection, and we shall bend our energies to their practical solution in the hope that the farmers and dairymen, not only of Texas, but of other states as well, may receive some benefit from our work. We strongly urge that when statements are made as to the efficiency of any particular method of creaming, or make of apparatus for creaming, the actual analysis of the skim milk be given, as in this way only, can we know exactly the amount of butter fat which any method or apparatus fails to secure. WHOLE COTTON SEED AND COTTON SEED HEAL HAVE SAME. EFFEC/l‘. The preceding tables (Nos. 1 to G) deal with the effect of cotton seed meal to the exclusion of whole cotton seed, not from any omis- sion or oversight on our part, but because we have found that cows, as a rule, eat the meal better and can be held at better yield than is possible on a whole seed diet. More than this, we have found from long experience that the peculiar effects noticed in cotton seed meal feeding are equally noticeable on a whole seed ration: in proof of which see our Bulletin No. 11, Aug., 1890, and the following Table (No. 7) representing an average few of the many tests here made: 7O TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. g TABLE No: 7. WHOLE COTTON "SEED . EFFECT ox GRAVITY CREAMING AT Low TEMPERATLTRPI (4592 Farm.) wrrH cows amass IN MILK... i. ' l ‘ - ' 8 i (Compare Table No. 6,showing effect 0f cotton seed meal under same conditions.) ‘ Milk handled exactly as in Table 6. Length of time before skimming 24 hours. SET I .-—( Without Cotton Seed or Cotton SET II .—-( W "ith Cotton Seed.) Seed illeal. - . Two cows selected for uniformity in compar- Two cows selected for uniformity in compar‘ ison with Set II. - ison with Set I. Average length of time since calving at be- Average length of time since calving at be- ginning of test, 45 days. ginning of test, 38 days. Fed same as Set I. Table 4. Fed same as Set II, Table 4, except that the cotton seed meal there given, was withdrawn, and three times its weight of whole cotton seed substituted. The seed was fed boiled and raw, to suit the appetites of the cows in test, mostly boiled. a ll \\~'1io1.i: 1111.14’. SKIM MILK. ‘ WHOLE MILK. ll sKm 31111.1(. ~ ~— a eeee ~ e . - a... 3 ivdsieigs‘ has 445:5: 3 Eifizsiégvzi #255 i =45: o "1 ==,=K=="al s ==ws ewe c? '11 w: esai 5w ==a~ 131E i l +9 .. >4 l y we ‘i; ' r +3 Q3 IQ r l p ‘ p Q > l ‘ A d caewpagl A 8422* gar-G; Z 5 so“ “$3 A I Haj“ I i=3 C) i: s: die“? Q) GHQ 33m O L: 3's _ Clad‘. 0 1 94-153 kill‘; P" A g3woezfl; -—~ ass 4,, —~ a g3wc>esl '-l 0:21» 4-. i“ U; ~.=<:=Ol?°"‘°$l *1 are sea Q‘ .- ambv?""=°l °i| we was; F. -= 523155;. é 56s 5m 5 s’ we 555-? El 552- 4 32E c0 Q 2-1.: in.“ ' m :4“ 5-188 u: .4 a8 m“ r w é c4 "‘ '24:: 455 22 e5 i400‘ 457 1.97 34.2 454 24 95 4.00 450 0.55 s." 459 22 92 340i 461 0.60 17.6 458 33 92 3.60 460: 0.43 11.9 467 27 85 3.40= 469 1.59 46.8 466 31 85 4.80 468? 1.24 2-3.8 475. 27 as 44.501 477 1.59 34.7 474, 501 ss 4.50 470: 0.01 i m." Averages... 3.85 1.29 2315.3 Averages... 4.25 0.75 17.x .__,_ A loss of 3 .3 lbs. without cotton seed or cotton seed meal d> against 17.8 lbs., in every hundred actually present when whole cotton seed formed a part of the dairy ration. The results as (zom- pared with Table No. 6, are somewhat higher on both sides, doubt- less due to the fact that our conditions were not quite so uniform on account of difliculty in obtaining ice at proper time. The compari- son, however SllOWS beyond question, what our practical experience has already demonstrated:--tha.t there is practically no difference Whatever between effects of cotton seed and cotton seed ineaL-so far as gravitycreaming is concerned. - (YENTRIFUGLAIJ URIEADIINW}. The next important question naturally suggested is: Does the feed- ing of cotton seed and cotton seed meal have-a similar effect on creaming by centrifugal force? lVe have used and recommended the separator for a number oi years, and let it be understood that our use and recommendation was based on no theory of eflective- ness, but on what we actually knew of its work. We consider it a duty to the public to advise in these matters according to our best judgment, and shall therefore continue to recommend what we have long known to be the best-because most effective and therefore cheapest—method of creaming milk under any and all conditions. FOOD STUFFS FOR THE DAIRY. i 71 Our experiments above noted show clearly the difficulty of cream- ing by gravity after cows become some what old in milk. No one disputes that gravity creaming with fresh cows, and under bestcon- ditions as to temperature will give most excellent results-some times equalling the separator in effectiveness; but it is equally cer- tain that these "best” conditions necessary to secure efficient work- ing of the gravity method, will not exist in one dairy herd out of a thousand, and then only for a short time at most. In view of a pop- ular lack of information as to the real status of centrifugal force as compared with gravity, and to settle at thesame time the question of food effect on machine creaming, We present herewith results of our tests with the separator (a De Laval power, 600 lbs. capacity) under differing conditions as to 100d and length of time since calving -exactly as tested for gravity creaming. We may state also that the separator was not working perfectly in a number of cases for the reason that the upper bearing was considerably worn, and permitted therefore, too much lateral movement for proper speed (6500 to 7000 revolutions per minute). lVe may also state, as a matter of infor- mation, that we have checked up work time and again with the De Laval Hand separator, “vertical,” and have found that it docs its work just as effectively as does the power machine. TABLE No. 8. EFFECT 0N (JENTRIBWJGIXIJ CREAMING WITH CO\\'S WELL ALONG 1X MILK. Milk taken direct to the separator (a De Laval power, 600 lb. capacity machine) as soon as milked, temperature when separated as noted in each case-not less than 84 nor more than 92 degrees Fahr. v Samples taken from both whole and skim milk for analysis-as already described. .S‘ET I .—( Without Cotton Seed or Cotton SET II .-—(Witlz Cotton 190M? Meal.) Seed 111 eal.) Four cows selected for uniformity in com- Four cows selected for uniformity in compar- parison with Set II. ison with Set I. _ Average length of time since calving, at be- Average length of time since calving, at be- ginning of test, 210 days. ginning of test, 211 days. _ Fed equal parts by weight CORN 11112.41. AND Fed same as Set I, except that bye-food was BRAN as bye-food, with sorghum and corn en- made up of equal parts by weight COTTON SEED silage and pasture. QIEAL AND BRAN. . SKIM MILK. ‘VIIOLE HILK. SKIM MILK. \\'HOLE MILK. ‘ C. is '22“ .4. ,1}; . .5; F4 5'5. gevsa=9rl Z n32 35g; Z .-‘i_ gessfifi‘; '4 ; .483‘ 3.9.23 2 E's; -"‘5”ss§l 2 52S see 2 '52, “E9522; B; 5s? Pee 35s 3:21 s sss s gssse s; 2312:, sis s83] s see s5 see; 243-5 25's 20.1; 22 s4 4.s0l 205 0.11 2.3 a 20423 s4 4.50; 20s; 0.12 2.5 >31; 1s s5 4.s0; 233 0.02 0.4 23217.5 s5 4.40; 234; 0.05 1.1 2.35. 20 s5 4.40; 237 0.05 1.1 23521 s5 4.00; 23sl 0.0s 2.0 230‘ 17 s5 5.001 241 0.0s 1.2 2401s s5 4.40 242; 0.12 2.7 243 1s s5 4.70 245 0.13 2.s 244 20 s5 4.95 24s; 0.19 3.0 247 20 s5 4.40; 24s 0.13 2.0 24s 1s s5 4.40! 250; 0.0s 2.0 251 1s s5 4.s0l 253 0.07 1.5 _ 2521s s5 4.00,; 254lg_;0._0§ ;g1_;.g5_ ¥§Ye:es22..;_1. -_.2.-.27 - Q08- .w.--.-...l%v2r2 se§;.;-_~.; 9-19, l l l l l l l 1 l l l 1 1 l 721 , TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. It will be seen that there is really no difference in machine cream- ing due to food effect. The separator gets it all practically as shown by the above table: an average loss of but 1.8 lbs. without cotton seed or cotton seed meal, and but 2.3 lbs. with cotton seed meal-in every hundred pounds butter actually present in the whole milk. And this, too, from cows very far advanced in milk since calving-a con- dition shown to be fatal to effectiveness in gravity creaming. See alsot+~ TABLE No. 9. EFFlKf-T ON (FENTRIIYUGAII CREAMING \VITH COWS 191115811 IN BULK. illilk Itamlled acactly as in Table 8. Whole and skim milk accurately sampled for analysis. SET I.—(1'Vitizoztt Cotton 186661 or Cotton SET II .—( With Cotton. 18001] Meal.) 186651 Meal.) Four cows selected for uniformity in com- Four cows selected for uniformity in com- parison with Set II. parison with Set I. l . . (Same cows used 1n _Set I, Table 6.) _ (Same cows used 1n Set II,_ Table 6.)_ Average length of time since calving at be- Average length of time since calving, at be- ginning of test, 62.5 days. ginning of test, 58.5 days. Fed same as Set I, Table 8. Fed same as Set II, Table 8. i . , WHOLE MILK. a SKIM MILK. WHOLE MILK. SKIM MILK. A. .1» t: l l g +5 ' .2 t: A u Tmwm T "=9;- r‘ gqlfld. +;'U_.! "a; csgéw. $2.15; .51.‘ p" ,5 I” s *5 i _ EQYElQQ-Ir—! é +J'+—1I:‘= A _ 80% as"? A “MP4 $.25 o “"5 "bf-Rhea; o flu“ 9,," ~ o "W: ffibllciw“ O 51H“ 2.2:. ¢-< 5Q ' Olcpc-Sgf F‘ QLQ: Q27“! v-i a0 QJQQ: P" 951g a... Q15») gigyos-wi; Q os-ws "jsaip. Q4 +0 gig 08-451 Q- vfid "50 Elsi‘ 5§di5ZTE s‘ 552-18353’ s. 522552 é ssggsif-i‘: itq“ @2501.“ I‘ w cw“ ie-ISE! 0211A“ 9580f" ~11 an" ;a-<»:EE 250i 42 ss s00 I 201 0 l8 . 0.0 200§ss.5 ss s.00 202‘ 0.10 I 5.0 207; “s ss 13,20 200 0.01 1.2 20sjs7 ss s50 , 270 0.10 ' 20 295; 41 90 $1.20 297 010 i 2.4 296131 90 4.101 298 0.18 4,1. 305% 34 90 f3.80 307 0.14 i 3.7 306130 90 4.20 5 308 0.13 ; 3.0 313; 37 92 {+1.20 315 0.15 i 3.5 2314140 92 4.00 310 0.11 . t 713 92 i380 319 0.13 3.4 318338 92 4.00 320 0.1.7 i 4.0 321' 3 92 §4.00 323 0.15 3.8 1 1322,38 92 380 l 324 0.09 l 2.0 s5 02 4.40 s27 0.15 , s4 l 320s"; 02 p.00 ii s2s 0.09 g 2.5 s20: s0 00 @400 331 0.10 l 2.5 l 330i38 g 00 Iss0 sszi 0.10 I 2.7 3371 30 90 5.4.20 339. 0.12 i 2.8 1 338137 I 00 14.20 ii 340i 0.17 l 4 0 Averages. . . . 3.88 0.13 3.27 Averages. . . . 31.84 0.13 3.3 Here also is seen the effectiveness of the separator, and a further proof that there is no difference whatever due to food effect in cen- trifugal creaming: an average loss of 3.27 lbs., without cotton seed or cotton seed meal, and 3.3 lbs. with cotton seed meal, in every 100 lbs. butter actually present in the whole milk. The slight differ- ence on both sides, showing in iavor of milk from cows .\V(;?l1fi(1- vanced since calving is explained by the fact that the fresh milk t separations were done some time after the separations of milk from advanced milkers, and the upper beziring, already mentioned, was gradually wearing looser, and thus lessening the effectiveness of the machine. The tests were made with the De Laval machines l1ecaust+ we zire Iising that make. From reports of those who are usingotber makes of separators we have no doubt they may be equally effective. 1n __ m I ,,<;_ . a, > , M,‘ ‘..~,_.;.;;.,_~, ,. , 1 , -, w H, A"/ , , - . ~ . .;,.-.~_"H-;,_#¢_ éél>i_,,“g~_ - ~,J.~,_~,%. . sag; , -_» s" ; ~ w _‘_ , V ‘ ,3; -. ' - g , . ' l "u- -' ', r " 2. n. . _ ,‘ 14‘ " " w," L‘ ' ' . y a . A a < 1 i k-r- = , . W‘ , V‘. .~.., i . , . I FOOD STUIPFS FOR THE LDAIRY. 73 Bulletin No. 11, we called especial attention to the seemingly high prices at which, up to that time, separators had been held. We did this in a spirit of fairness toward all parties, and We are now glad to note that prices of some of the hand machines for small dairymen have been 1nateria1ly' reduced. “Te believe the centrifugal principle of separating cream from milk is very much superior to any form of gravity creaming yet de- vised, and this belief is based on a long practical experience, and is certainly borne out in full by the tests here reported. While noting this fact, and advising as before, that every dairyman who is making by gravity creaming, 1O lbs. of butter per day throughout the year cannot afford to do Without a hand separator; we are still mindful of the manywvho fail to accept such advice for reasons of their own. To all such, and to the small army of patrons of cream gathering cream- eries, in many parts of the United States We would invite a close at- tention to the marked effect of cotton seed and cot-ton seed meal on creaming by the gravity method, as reported in these pages.