.1“ N‘. ,. ,y, VA. AGREIPT. sttttottt-"ILE; (193) _ TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. BULLETIN NO. 21. JUXE 1892. \ Etteet ot Cotton Seed and Cotton Seed Mezd in Feeding Hogs. AGRICULTURAL AND MEEIIANICAL CQLLEGE 0F TEXAS. All Bulletins of this Station are issued free. Any one interested in any branch of agriculture may have his name placed on our permanent mailing list, and secure future numbers, by ap- plication to GEO. W. CURTIS, Drmzcron, College Station, Brazos 00., Tex. In requesting Bulletins, write name and address plainly. BRYAN, TEXAS; COX, “THE NEAT PRINTER.” 1892. (194) TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OFFICERS AND STAFF. GOVERNING BOARD. . BOARD OF DIRECTORS A. AND M. COLLEGE. MAJ. A. J RosE, President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sa1ado. HoN. JNo. E. HoLLmosWoRTH, State Corn. Agr . . . . . . . . ." . . . . . .Austin. HON. W. R. OAVITT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bryan. DR. J. D. FIELDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Manor. HoN. J NO. ADRIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Oolumbia. TREASURER. PRESIDENT L. S. Ross, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .’ . . . . . . . . . ..Co11ege Station. STATION STAFF. GEo. \V. CURTIS, M. S. A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Agriculturist, Director. H. H. HARRINGTON, M. Sc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chemist. M. FRANCIS, D. V. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinarian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hortioulturist. D. ADRIANCE, M. S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Meteoro1ogist,_Asst. Chemist. J. W. OARsoN, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant to Director. J. M. CARSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Agrioulturist, P. S. TILsoN, B. S. A . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . .Assistant in Chemistry. (195) Texas Hgrvieulturval Experiment Station. EFFECT OF COTTON SEED AND COTTON SEED MEAL ABS FOODS FOR HOGS. (eEo. W. curvris, M. s. A.) (J. w. CARSON.) Since the organization of the Agricultural Department of the A. & M. College 0n its present basis in 1883, and especially later, since the establishment 0f the Texas Experiment Station in 1888, we have re- eeived numerous letters relative to the feeding value of cotton seed i in all its forms, and products therefrom for the different classes or kinds of our ordinary domestic animals. Turning attention first to the feeding value of cotton seed, and resulting products-cotton seed meal and cotton seed hulls, for cattle, our observations have been Worked out accurately, both as to beef and milk, and results of experiments already published. Bulletins numbers 6 and 1O of the Texas Station treat especially of the feeding value of cotton seed and cotton seed meal and hulls from the stand point of feeding for beef, while Bullet- ins Nos. 11 and 14 deal with the same problem from the stand point of milk production. We commendmhese Bulletins to all desiring facts in regard to the use of cotton seed and cotton seed meal and hulls in feeding cattle for either milk or beef. \Ve have also some Work under way which will be published later, following out much the same lslan in feeding for beef as hereinafter outlined in feeding for pork. l The question of profitable hog feeding with cotton seed and cotton seed meal is one that intimately concerns the Southern farmer. South- ern Agricultural papers for many years have contained notices in ir-e- ' gard to the good, bad and indifferent effects observed, and any amount of advice has been given as to proper methods of preparation of the seed in order to secure the best results. The many letters received from individual farmers and feeders and the frequent requests from progressive agricultural papers for our opinion, but serve to illustrate a public interest in the problem we have aimed to solve by actual test. Our first year’s work in 1891, gave out results so very marked that we ’ were loth to publish, and, indeed, concluded to reserve till further trial should confirm or set aside the marked results we had obtained. Our later tests, reported herein in detail, exactly correspond with first year’s Work on vital points at issue and make assurance dou- TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. ‘ bly sure that we have made no error in conclusions we have drawn. Our investigations had in view important evidence in more than one direction. ’l‘here were presented for solution queries, such as:—— (1.) Will cotton seed kill hogs? If so, in What proportion, how pre- pared, and for what age of hogs will be the fatal dose? (2.) If in any form it may be possible . to feed it, or its. product, meal, with safety, can we cheapen cost of gain per pound by use of low priced cotton seed or meal instead of high priced corn‘? If both the above be answered in affirmative, by What method of preiparing may We make ithe greatest gain? ‘ The questions as presented may be best discussed in reverse order s-taking up the third and second jointly as the tests were planned: CANGOTTON SEED 1N. ANY FORNI, OR COTTON SEED MEAL, BE USED WITH PROFIT AS A FOOD FOR HOGS? RESULTS FOR 1892. \Ve began $11‘ preliminary feeding Feb. 8, 1892——selecting three shoats for eac 1 pen-one l.arge, one medium, and one small. Due re- gard was had to uniformity in size and vigor as between the different pens. The shoats designated as“large” Were from 1O to 12 months old; those designated as “medium” Were from 5 to 7 months old, and those designated as “small” Were from 35 to 4 months old. All ani- mals selected Were grades of the Essex breed and had not been fed at any time previous to the test more than sufiicient to keep them in healthy growing condition. So far as we could judge the animals se- lected were uniformly healthy and in even condition at the start. Each pen of three shoats, as above explained, was supplied each day at regular intervals-morning, noon and night with food allotted for consumption, and all were given water freely as desired. The waste was kept as low as possible by close watching of the appetite, and was so small that we have thrown it out entirely. Each pen was further kept supplied with ashes, salt and sulphur—-as ordinarily mixed-for such purpose. The surrounding conditions as regards heat, ventila- tion,'room‘ for exercise, etc., were the same for all. It will be noticed that just the same quantity of corn was allowed each of the first four pens-viz: 5 pounds per day shelled corn, or 165 pounds for the 33 days test period. The cotton seedor cotton seed meal for these same pens varied in amount to suit the appetite of individual animals-the aim being to induce each animal to eat as ‘much as possible of that s ecial food for which the food effect was wanted. Length of time in- vldlved was shortened by the death or sickness of animals in certain pens, as noted further on, weights being reported for the first 33 days ‘only—although the food was given for a much longer period. Weights of all foods given were taken dry and afterwards prepared for feeding as explained. The following tables, arranged by pens in order of number as the tests were planned, give results in form convenient for the general reader: COTTON SEED FOR HOGS. 197 A PEN No. 1. Fed Cotton Seed Meal and Corn-Water a8 Wanted. Live Weight at Dates Given-lbs. v . Average Gaim ‘Feb. 15,1802. Feb. 25,1802. Mar. 0, 1802. LIa1'.19,1892.!Tota1 Gain 8 _ 1 _ $ .3 days. Per day. Large .... .. 180 145 150 155 18 ~ 0.485 Medium. ... 78 81 87 95 l 18 0.570 Small . . . . . . 40 A 45 48 55 l 15 _ 0.454 Totals .... 0O} 257 i 271 , 285 805 i” 50 , 1.515 “W eight of Food Consumed-lbs. l PERIODS. COTTON SEED MEAL. i COPN. 1st. Period-IO days. . . . 30 50 2nd. Period-l?» days. . . . . 39 65 3rd. Period-IO, days. . . . . 30 L Totals 33 days. . . .. 99 165 Cost of Food Consumed. 99 Pounds of Cotton Seed Meal at $20.00 per Ton Cost - . . . . . . . . . . . . “$0.99 165 Pounds of Shelled Corn at 40 Cents per Bushel of 56 pounds, Cost. . . . 1.18 - Total Cost . . . . . . “$2.17 Cost of Gain Produced. - 50 Pounds of Gain, cost . . . . . . ..$2.17 1 Pound of Gain, cost. . . ... .. . . 0.0434 100 Pounds of Gain, cost . . . . .. 4.3-1 PEN No. 2. A Fed Raw Cotton Seed-Soaked- Water a8 Wanted. Live Weight at Dates Given-lbs. ‘Feb. 15, 1892.iFeb. 25, 1802.\Mar. 9, 1892.‘Mar. 19, 1892.! Total Gain Average Gain i 1 33 days. per day. Large .... .. 128 ‘ 180 - 185 189 18 a .0485 Medium, . . 94 96 91 100 6 0.182 Small .... .. .48 54 58 88 1 15 0.454 Totals... . .. 285 i 280 l 284 802 l 87 I 1.121 . Weight of Food Consumed-lbs. PERIODS. RAW’ COTTON SEED'- CORN- SOAKED. _ g 1st. Period—10 days . . . . .. 40 50 2nd. Period ~13 days.. . . . 52 65 3rd. Period—10 days. . . .. - 40 59 Totals . . . . .. 33 days. . . . . 132 _ 165 Cost of Food Consumed . 132 Pounds of raw Cotton Seed at $6.00 per ton, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . “$0.40 165 Pounds of Shelled Corn at 40cts. per bushel of 56 pounds, cost . . . . . . . .$1._18 g Total C0st....._.....$1.58 Cost of Gain Produced. 37 Pounds Gain, cost . . . . . . . “$1.58 1 Pound Gain, cost . . . . . . . . . .. 0.0427 100 Pounds Gain, cost . . . . . . . .. 4.27 198 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. PEN N5. s. Fed Boiled Cotton Seed and Corn--Water as Wanted. Live TVeight at Dates Given-lbs. i- Feb. 15, 1892. Feb. 25,1892. Mar. 9, 1892. lMar. 19, 1892. Total Gain Average Gain __ A 33 days. per day. Large . . . . . . 128 135 142 150 22 0.666 Medium . . . . 90 97 106 l 1 16 26 0.788 Small. . _. . . . 50 56 61 70 20 0.606 Totals . . f 268 l 288 l 309 l 336 68 2 .060 Weight of Food Consumed-lbs. PERIODS. COTTON SEED, BOIL- _ CORN. ED. 1st. Period-IO days... . .t 40 _ 50 2nd. Period—13 days. . . .. l 50 ' 65 3rd. Period—10 days. . .. ., 50 50 Totals... p. .33 days. . . . 140 1655 Cost 0f Food Consumed. 140 Pounds of Boiled Cotton Seed, at $8.00 per ton, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $0.56 165 Pounds of Shelled Corn, at 40cts. per bushel of 56 pounds, cost . . . . . . 1.18 Total cost. . . .$1.74 Cost of Gain Produced. 68 Pounds Gain cost . . . . . . . . .$1.74 1 Pound Gain cost . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0256 100 Pounds Gain cost . . . . . . . . . .. 2.56 ‘a PEN No. 4. Fed Roasted Cotton Seed and Corn- Watei" as Wanted. Lifve Weight at Dates Gioene-lbs. lFeb. 17>, 1892.lFeb. 23, 1832.lMar. 9, 1892.l1\Iar. 19, 1892. Total Gain Average Gain. l ‘ 33 dayj; per day. Large .... 10s l 111 l 11s. l 12s l 15 0.454 Medium.... . 77 l - 84 91 98 21 _ 0.637 Small . . . . . . 4T l 52 A 57 64 l 1 M 0 .515 Totals . . . zsz l 247 l 254 l 285 l 5s 1.50s Weight of Food Consumed-lbs. _ O PERIODS. lCOTTON SEED, ROAST- CORN. A ED a 1st. Period-w days . . . . . 36.5 50 2nd. Period-Bdays. . . . . 39 65 3rd. Period-IO days. . . . . 40 50 Totals . . . . . .. 33 days. . . . . l 115.5 165 ' Cost of Food Consumed. 115.5 Pounds RoastedCotton Seed at $9.00 per ton, cost . . . . . . . . . .~ . . . . . . $0.52 165 Pounds ShelledCorn at 40cts. per bushel of56 pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . . 1.18 - 4 Total cost.. . .$1.7() "Cost of Gain Produced.” 53 Poimdfl. gain cost . . . . . .$l.70 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . .. .. 0.0321 100 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . . . 3.21 COTTON SEED FOR noes. 199 PEN N0. 5. Fed Corn Only-Water as Wanted. Live Weight at Dates Given-lbs. l Feb, 1.3, 1892. Feb. 25, 1892. Mar. 9, 1892._l\,4ar. 19,1892. Total Gain Average Gain h >;L*.*~;;-.~. 1' i l 33 days. per day Large . . . . . . L11 156 167 200 59 1.787 Medium. . . . 87 98 108 133 46 1.394 Small . . . . . . 42 1 49 53 68 26 0.788 Totals . .. .\ 220 i 303 32s 401 131 l 3.939 Weight of Food Consumed-lbs. PERIODS. CORN ONLY. 10 days . . . . . . . . . . . .' . 107 2nd. Period--13 days. . .- . . . . . . . . 159 3rd. Period—10 days............ 194_ Totals . . . . . . .33 days . . . . . . . . . . . . 460 Cost of Food Consumed. _ 460 Pounds Shelled Corn at 40cts. per bushel of 56 Pounds, Cost . . . . . . . . . $3.29 Cost of Gain Produced. 131 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . . $3.29 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0251 4100 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . . . 2.51 Placing the different foods in order of value as to cost per 100 pounds gain produced at prices given we have the following: 1st. Corn. 2nd. Corn and boiled cotton seed. 3rd. Corn and roasted cotton seed. 4th. Cornand raw cotton seed, soaked. . 5th. Corn and cotton seed meal. It will be noticed that, with exception of medium sized shoat in pen No. 2, which literally refused to eat until starved to it, the medium sized shoats, aged from 5 to 7 months, were able to make best use of cotton seed and cotton seed meal. The large shoats (10 to 12 months old)» and the small ones, (35 to 4 months old) rank nearly equal in gain per day, but when relative weights are considered it will be seen that the balance is largely in favor of the smaller shoats. In other words, classed by ages with reference to power of assimilating and producing gain from cotton seed or cotton seed meal theywould rank as follows: . , 1st. Hogs 5 to 7 months old. 2nd. Hogs 3 1-2 to 4 months old. 3rd. Hogs 10 to 12 months old. Reserving comment for the present we offer in corroboration of re- sults set forth in previous tables the following sumarized tabular statement of results from tests conducted in 1891—the year preceding. Bear in mind that in the following tables we do not claim a strictly accurate method of experiment. \Ve had previously tried to induce hogs to eat largely of cotton seed and cotton seed meal and had uni- formly found great difficulty, in _fact it had been almost impossible to induce them to eat suificient to insure a reasonable gain. \Vith this before us it became a practical question to induce a greater consump- TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. tion by tempting the appetite in all ways possible, while keeping at the same time the effect 0f principal food in view. For this reason, it Will be noticed, that all pens did not receive the same amount of corn as in our te r 1892; nor Were amounts of cotton seed, and meal, so strictly with reference to different pens. While noting these facts, We are o opinion that the results reached are fairly accurate—indeed they tally so closely with results for 1892 that We have thought best to publish as they stand. The hogs used were uniform in age for the different pens—5 in each pen—ranging from 8 . to 11 months old, and corresponding to large sized shoats in tests for 1892. Each hog was designated, and the records kept, by numbered tag in ear as noted in. the tables. , RESULTS FOR 1891. PEN No. 1. Fed Cotton Seed illeal and Corn zuith Skivn-wtilk-wcttev‘ as wanted. Litre Weight at Dates Given-lbs. ' EAR x0. ‘Jan. 4, 1S91JFeb. 3, 1891. Feb. 1f}, 1891. Feb. 23, 1891. Total Gain Average Gain i P 30 days. per day. 519 137 1 138 .144 - 156 19 0.633 521 149.5 fi 144 153 169.5 20 0.667 522 81 88 92.5 . 100 _ 18.5 0.616 523 90 l 98.5 105.5 110 20 0.667 _ s21 115 §__125 _ 130.5_._ggg1-??g___ggg up 22 0.733 Totals . . . .. 572.5 l 593.5 625.5 7 672.5 99.5 3.316 lVeiglzt of Food Consumecb-Jbs. lCOTTON SEED MEAL- l; CORN. SKIM-MILK. i i i Entire Period--30 days . . . . . . . 152 l 374 t 400 Cost 0f Food Consumed. 152 Pounds Cotton Seed Meal at $20.00 per, ton, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81.52 374 Pounds of Shelled Corn at 40 cts. per Bushel of 56 pounds, cost . . . . . . . 2.67 400 Pounds Skim-milk at 25 cents per 100 pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.00 Total Cost. . . .$,i5.19 Cost of Gain Produced. l 99.5 Pounds -gain cost . . . . . . . ..$5.]9 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . . . .. 0.0521 100 Pounds gain cost .. . . . . . .. 5.21 PEN No. 2. Raw Cotton Seed. (Omitted from test—1891.) Fed Cotton Seed, Boiled and COTTON SEED FOR HOGS. PEN No. 3. Corn with Skim-milk- Live Weight at Dates Given-lbs. 201 water as wanted. EAR m. Jan. 24, 1891. Feb. 8, 1891. Feb. 18, 1891. Feb. 28, 1891. Total Gain Average Gain A ~ 30 days. per day. 513 156.5 156.5 167.5 176.5 20 0.666 514 129 131 130.5 142 13.5 0.450 515 156 154 165.5 176 20 0.667 _ 517 78.5 78.5 82.5 92 13.5 0.450 518 88.5 89 99.5 99 10.5 0.350 Totals . . . . . W608.5 609 645.5 685.5 77.5 2.583 Weight of Food Consunted-Zbs. COTTON SEED—- l CORN. SKIM-MILK. r BOILED. Entire Period—30 days . . . . . . . .. 173 298 345 Cost of Food Consumed. 173 Pounds Boiled Cotton Seed at 88.00 per ton, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8069 298 Pounds Shelled Corn at 40 cts. per bushel of 56 pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . 2.13 , 345 Pounds of Skim-milk at 25 cts. per hundred pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.86 _l T8191 Cost. . . .8888 Cost of Gain Produced. 77.5 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . $3.68 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0475 100 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . .. . . .- . 4.75 PEN No. 4. Fed Cotton Seed, Roasted and Corn, with Skim-wiitlc-water as wanted. Live Weight at Dates Gotten-tbs. EAR NO. Jan. 24, 1891. Feb. 3. 1891. Feb. 13, 1891. Feb. 23, 1891. Total Gain Average Gain 30 days. per day. 507 139 147 159 169 30 1 508 154 161 166 170 16 0.533 509 136 147 146 152 16 0.533 510 78 82.5 89 " 91 13 0.433 511 97 104 104.5 104 . 7 0.283% 804 841.5 , 884.8 888 | 82 2.782 _ W eight of Food Consumed-lbs. COTTON SEED—_' CORN. I SKIM-MILK. ROASTED. Entire Period—30 days . . . . . . . .. 125 250 502 Cost of Food Consumed. 125 Roasted Cotton Seed at $9.00 per ton, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “$0.56 250 Pounds Shelled Corn at 40 cts. per bushel of 56 pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . 1.82 502 Pounds Skim-milk at 25 cts. per hundred pounds, cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.25 Total Cost. . . .$3.63 ‘ Cost of Gain Produced. 82 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . . $3.63 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . . . .. 0.0442 100 Pounds gain cost. . . .; . . . . .. 4.42 202 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. PEN N0. 5. Fed Corn Only-water as wanted. Live Weights at Dates Givem-Zbs. EAR NO. Jan. 24, 1891. Feb. 3, 1891. Feb. 13,1891. Feb. 23. 1891. Total Gain Average Gain " * 30 days. per day. 501 156.5 176 194.5 2'10 53.5 1.783 502 158.5 174.5 193 208.5 50 1.667 503 161 1.74.5 194 206.5 45.5 1.517 504 115 129 148 160.5 45.5 1.517 506 113 130 144 156 43 1.433 Totals . .. .. 704 784 873.5 941.5 237.5 7.914 Weight of Food Consumed-lbs. l com: ONLY._ Entire Period—30 days . . . . . . . .. 1079 Cost of Food Consumed. 1079 Pounds Shelled Corn at 40 cts. per bushel of 56 pounds, cost. . . .. . . . $7.71 Cost of Gain Produced. 237.5 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . .$7.71 1 Pound gain cost . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.0324 100 Pounds gain cost . . . . . . . . . .. 3.24 Placing different foods in order of value as to cost per 100 pounds gain produced at prices givenwe have the following: 1st. Corn. 2nd. Corn, roasted seed and skim-milk. 3rd. Corn, boiled seed and skim-milk. 4th. C. S. Meal and SKim-milk. c [Raw seed not tested] _ It will be noticed that results for 1891 agree with those for 1892 ex- cept in showing roasted seed a little cheaper than boiled seed in cost of gain produced. This we are inclined to believe erroneous for the following reason: Ear No. 507 on roasted cotton seed made a gain en- tirely out of proportion with others in his pen as shown by reference to the table. That he was able to make such gain we believe is large- 1y due to the fact that he was a ravenously quick eater, and remarka- bly apt in picking out the corn-even when ground in—from the roasted seed with which it was fed. Our observation and experience ‘have convinced us that boiled seed will give better results than roasted seed when used for hogs or in the dairy ration, and the explanation given for the slight balance in favor of roasted seed, as shown by the tables for 1891, we think is just and satisfactory. COMMENTS! Aftertwvo years successive tests in feeding cotton seed‘ and cotton seed meal to hogs with definite aim in view, and after practical at- tempts to use these products in a similar manner for the past ten years, we do not hesitate to express our candid opinion that there is no profit whatever in feeding ootzon seed in any form, or cotton seed meal, to hogs of any age. To ‘those who have tried it carefully and have taken pains to note exactly what their hogs were doing this COTTON SEED FOR HOGS. 203 statement will not be at all surprising. _ It is a fact, which no amount 0f theory can over come, that i_t is practically impossible to prepare cotton seed or cotton seed meal in any manner so that hogs will eat it greedily. As a rule they eat it fairly well for 2 or 3, sometimes 6 or 8 days, but they soon tire of it and refuse to eat more than just suffici- ent to satisfy hunger. It is not disputed that cotton seed, or cotton seed meal, is rich in food elements—that fact is Well known; but it is also Well known to practical feeders that no animal can give best return for food consumed unless his appetite be whetted and himself be urged thereby to heaviest eating consistent With a healthy state of animal digestion and assimilation. This, We claim, cannot be done With cotton seed, or meal, and our conclusions in the matter, based on Work at this station for a number of years, are supported by the views of other feeders who know whereof they speak. The following extracts from letters received, illustrate so nicely the point under discussion that we may be pardoned for inserting here: ‘CARTERSVILLE, LA., Nov. 27, 1891. MR. G. W. CURTIS, College Station, Texas. DEAR SIR z-Seeing your request in ‘the Picayune in regard to roasted cotton seed—I have a seed roaster bought of G. J. Greene of Georgia, and have been feeding roasted seed to hogs and cows. "t ’* My hogs eat them with great avidity and seem to do well on them, and, in connection with the mast, are fattening veryrapidly. I believe if the seed was ground after roasting they would be much better—I feed mine whole. J. J. STUBBs. On Feb. 15, 1892, we wrote Mr. Stubbs requesting him to advise promptly as to his opinion after further trial. His reply below con- tains the milk of the cocoanut in the clauses We extract; the italics are ours: CARTERsVILLE, La, March 10, 1892. G. W. CURTIS, College Station, Texas. DEAR Smz-Yours of the 15th. ult. came in due time, but owing to my ab- sence from home delayed the response. I will state that my opinion has ma- terially changed in regard t0 roasted seed being fed exclusively t0 Izogs, especially un- ground-this being the only way I have used them. * * My hogs have not been sick or unhealthy from the use of seed, but do notfatteiz on tite-m. I have discontinued the use of the roasted seed for hogs. *‘ ‘f’ Yours very truly, ' J. J. STUBBs. In this connection we“ may say a word regarding roasted cotton seed: With the advent of the Greene roasters, came a flood of agricultural f literature and newspaper correspondence setting forth the great advan- tages of this particular method of preparing cotton seed for use as food. In many cases extravagant claims were made which actual test proves false beyond a doubt. That cotton seed when roasted is any more nutritious than when boiled, we think may safely be denied—indeed, analyses have shown this view to be well grounded. The only differ- ence which can be observed is that the dry heat, while not destroying any fat, does certainly change its character to extent of cutting off its laxative effect in feeding cattle. As above stated, we are still at work in this direction on the line of beef production, and shall not antici- pate results by any premature conclusions here. For ‘hogs or dairy cows it may be safely stated that not only do the animals prefer the 204 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. boiled seed to the roasted, but also, in a great majority 0f cases, will make thereon a cheaper gain in cost of food required. Our first year’s roasting (1891) was done with a home made roaster prepared from heavy sheet iron inthe form of an open pan about 3x6 feet-—‘8 inches deep, the pan set up on brick foundation with open pit and chimney for the wood and proper draught when burning. With this apparatus we could roast as nicely as we can with the Greene roaster used in later tests; but we did so at much expense and more trouble. The Greene roars. er consists of a wire cylinder revolv- ing inside a sheet iron cover which may be set down directly over a light-wood fire and removed at will, or the cylinder may be with- drawn at pleasure for examination, or to cheek too rapid burning. We used in our tests for 1892 the 3330.00 size, Greene roaster and have no fault to find with the machine. It does the work that should be claimed for it satisfactorily when operated by a skillful hand, and we believe, will show as great economy in time as any roaster yet devised. The roasting of cotton see-d is an Lindertaking which requires judg- ment and should not be left to cztreless hands at any time. It is quite a matter of moment to determine just when it i128 roasted long enough and not too long. A first attempt at roasting generally results in burning several bushels of good cotton seed in a vain effort to roast ofl" the lint. ‘We have seen statements that the roaster would do this; but any one who roasts seed nicely’ knows better without being told: The seed will not part company with its closest lint unless the heat is carried past thebrowning point and into actual burning—which latter utterly ruins food effect. We find the safer limit on the shorter side, and prefer a turn not quite sufficient, rather than a roasting carried far enough to burn—however slight. As above stated, we believe that cost aside, the roasted seed is inferior to boiled seed in actual food ef- fect for hogs or dairy cows. It may be equally as good, or better, in feeding for beef, but until our tests in this direction are accomplished we do not care to express an opinion on the subject. The cost of preparation in the different methods of preparing seed is easily ascertained and shows at once a relative increase of value for the method/d costing least in preparation. We have taken pains to count the cost exactly in boiling and in roasting seed and present herewith results of our investigation: Cost 0f Roasting Seed per Ton. ’ A man who understands his business will roast 800 lbs. per day with one of Greene’s $30.00 roasters. An expert hand will possibly in- crease this amount to 1000 pounds, but 800 pounds will be found above the average. Estimating his services at $1.00 per day including board we have the following: Cost of labor to roast 1 ton of seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.50 Wear and tear, and interest on investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Cost of fuel . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .25 Total cost of roasting one ton cotton seed . . . . . . . . . . . $3.00 COTTON SEED FOR HOGS. 20o Cost of Boiling Seed per Ton. A man who understands his business will really tend the boiler while performing regular work about the barn, and . scarcely miss the time; allowing however actual time demanded in filling, stirring and emptying boiler, at estimated price of i§~11.00 per day, including board, we have the following: Cost of labor to boil one ton ssecd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.50 Wear and tear, and interest 0n investment . . . . . . . . . . . . ..'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .25 (lost ot fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Total cost of boiling one ton cotton seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $2.00 Estimating raw seed at a valuation of $16.00 per to11—:tboi1t an aver- age price at shipping stations in the cotton belt—we obtain our valua- tion given in the tables, viz. boiled seed $8.00 per ton; roasted seed $9.00 per ton. If any difference at all we have erred in under-rating cost of roasting and over-rating cost of boiling. Our estimate for corn is 40 cents per bushel-about an average price in the lower portion of thecotton belt. Where corn is relatively cheaper the cost of gain pro- duced would be materially cheapened and this fact must be borne in mind in considering the tables presented. Even at the high price taken in our estimate the tables show that corn is far ahead of cotton seed in any form, or cotton seed meal, as food for hogs, and if we fig- ure on a lower price the difference in its favor will be greatly increas- ed. Our estimate for cotton seed meal is $20.00 per ton——about an average price for delivery to consumer, on track at consumer’s station. Our estimate for skim-milk is 25 cents per 100 lbs., or 2 cents per gal- lon. This may beta trifle low—especially when compared with sell- ing price of whole milk in a cotton growing country, but if we add in price, the cost of pork production with the cotton seed or meal in re- sults for 1892 will be just that much increased. \Ve have added no- thing to the cost of raw seed, for soaking, for the reason that the cost is so slight as to be of no practical importance. Without further comment on the question of profit in feeding cotton seed and meal to hogs we may now discuss the remaining, and, indeed the most important query: ' CAN WE FEED COTTON SEED IN ANY FORM, OR COTTON SEED MEAL, TO HOGS WITH SAFETY? That raw cotton seed will apparently kill hogs under certain condi- tions has long been believed by a great majority of Southern farmers‘ The explanations offered are varied and conflicting but the mam ones seem to be as follows: One belief is that in some myterious Way the looser lint adhering to the seed is directly responsible for the damage done; another View holds the large amount of fat accountable, and still another, reasons that the sharply broken pieces of the hulls swal- lowed by the hog in eating, set up an infiamation which may event- ually cause the animal’s death. On the other hand a few are found who believe that cotton seed has no effect to injure hogs at all, and that the trouble many have observed is due to some extraneous cause as yet not understood. 206 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. T0 overcome the trouble it has been generally recommended that the raw seed should besoaked from 12 to 36 hours before feeding; and also that by roasting off the lint, in accordance with one view, or by boiling the seed to soften up the hard and brittle ‘hulls, in accordance with another, the danger would be minimized if not entirely voided. It Will be noticed that our tests Were planned with special reference to the views set forth above. If the large amount of fat should be re- sponsible, Pen No 1—on cotton seed meal, the residue after fat extrac- tion, should certainly be exempt from loss of health; if soaking raw seed 36 hours can remove the trouble, Pen No. 2-—on raw seed, soaked, should eat it safely; if the sharp and brittle hulls of raw seed cause the damage, Pen No. 2—on boiled seed, Where the hulls Were rendered soft and friable by thorough boiling, ought certainly to have relief, and if the really harmless lint should be to blame, Pen No. 4—on roasted seed, Would be sure to have immunity. And now for the facts: ~ ~ Considering first our tests for 1892. As above stated We began pre- liminary feeding February 8th, all animals included in the tests. The following deaths occurred at dates given: . March 23, 1892, medium sized shoat, Pen No. 2, raw seed soaked. March 29, 1892, medium sized shoat, Pen No. 4, roasted seed. April 6, 1892, small sized shoat, Pen No. 4, roasted seed. April 7, 1892, medium sized shoat, Pen No. 1, cotton seed meal. April 11, 1892, smallsized shoat, Pen No. 1, cotton seed meal. April 11, 1892, small sized shoat, Pen No. 2, raw seed soaked. April 11, 1892, medium sized shoat, Pen No. 3, boiled seed. No animals have since died, although the feeding Was continued more than sixty days from April 11th, When the last deaths occurred. Considering next our tests for 1891: Preliminary feeding Was be- gun January 20th, all animals included in the test. The following deaths occurred at dates given: March 13, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 1, cotton seed meal. March 16, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 1, cotton seed meal. March 16, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 1, cotton seed meal. March 21, 1891, one hog, Pen Ito. 1, cotton seed meal. March 21, 1891, one hog, Pen No, 4, roasted seed. March 21, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 4, roasted seed. March 23, 1891, one hog, Pen N o. 1, cotton seed meal. March 26, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 4, roasted seed. March 30, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 4, roasted seed. April 4, 1891, one hog, Pen No. 3, boiled seed. No animals died after April 4th, although the feeding Was continu- ed more than 3O days longer. In corroboration of above results for tWo years in succession We have to state further, that three several times during the past decade the College herd of swine has suffered from attacks of apparently epidemic disease-cause not then 11nderstood—the symptoms, both before and after death, agreeing closely with the symptoms noted carefully in later tests. Since the later tests have warned us of a possible cause, We have definitely determined that in case of each and every outbreak in the College herd of swine-three separate times, sickness occurred Within a period of ten weeks after the first addition daily of a very small quantity of cotton seed meal (not cotton seed) to the slop on COTTON SEED FOR HOGS. 207 which the hogs were fed. As above stated the symptoms are remark- ably uniform, and, once seen, an intelligent observer Will hardly fail to recognize a recurrence of the trouble. The first sign of sickness, appearing in from 6 to 8‘ weeks after cot- ton seed meal is added to the ration, is a moping dullness of the ani- mal with loss of appetite and tendency to lie apart. lVithin the course of 12 to 36 hours, often Within shorter time, the animal be- comes restless; staggering in his gait; breathing labored and spasmod- ic; bare skin showing reddish inflamation; sight defective, and both the nervous and the muscular systems feeble and abnormal in action. The fatal cases all show “thumps”—spasmodic breathing; and in many ' instances the animal will turn in one direction only-following a fence, or building wall, so closely as to strike his nose against projec- tions in a vain endeavor to push outward in that one direction which he tries to take. If no fence or building intercept him he may travel in a circle—large or small according to the mildness or acuteness of the malady in his particular case. ~When exhausted by his efforts the animal drops down suddenly-some times flat upon the belly, some- times dropping on hishaunches with his fore legs well apart to keep from falling over-almost always with the evidence of more or less acute internal pain. _At death a quantity of bloody foam exudes from mouth and 1iostril-z The follovs'ing from Dr. M. Francis, Veterinarian to the Station, will be of special interest to all who wish a close description of the symptoms he observed in cases brought to his attention: Gno. \V. CURTIS, Director Texas Experiment Station. Srnzwln response to your request I hand you herewith a brief general state- ment of those cases ofcotton seed, or meal, poisoning of hogs that have fallen under my notice. These occurred after feeding the seed or meal about 40 to 50 days. The attack was sudden as a rule, 1n fact, in a majority of cases, an ani- ' mal was found dead that had been apparently well 12 hours before. In those cases which we were fortunate enough to witness, the symptoms were those of sudden contraction of the Diaphragm, producing a sound somewhat similar to hiccough in man. The animal stood with head near the ground, the flanks tucked up, the ears hanging pendulous and the tail straight and limp. Some would lie flat on the belly, never on the side, while others would assume a sit- ting up posture with the fore legs well apart. In several cases there was a marked elevation of temperature-the thermometer registering 106 F. per rectum. The circulation seemed very weak and rapid. I noticed in several cases, in which the tail and ears had been cut off, a very few drops of blood would ooze from the cut surface. As a rule they were dead in an hour. At this writing I only remember one case that recovered. The gaspings became more and more frequent and violent, and after a few struggles the anirnaliwas dead. In the last moments great quantities of foam or froth would come from the nose or mouth. On post mortem examination the digestive organs appeared normal through- out. A few small Nematodes were usually found in the stomach, and afew Thorn Headed worms (Echinorhyvzchus gigas) were found attached to the mu- cus membrane of the small intestines. These probably had‘ no connection with the disease. The other abdominal organs appeared normal. The respiratory organs were full of foam,some few Nematodes were found in the bronchi-prob- ably Strongylus paradoxis. The lungs themselves were bright red and verv much congested and doughy. No examination of the nervous system was made. It may not be out of place to here state an experiment that was made to determine the toxic agent: 208 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Three medium sized hogs were confined on the following diet: Corn meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 lbs. Fld. Ext. C. S. Meal . . . . . . . .1lb. Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 lbs. continued 40 days with no injurious results. The fluid extract of cotton meal was prepared by moistening 1000 Drms. of the meal with 950 c c alcohol. Mix thoroughly and pack firmly in a percolater; cover with alcohol and when the percolate begins to flow cork the opening and allow to stand 21 hours. Then‘ percolate tili 1000 c c fluid extract are obtained. colgrglycerilirziel is usgd it flllovtvs wtrgry slowly. The fluid extract is of ared ,1 W116 ‘T 6118B IDGW 2t W1 ae. It was hoped that the above would cgncentrate the toxic agent so we could better control the experiment; but the results were altogether negative, and the question remains unsolved. M. FRANCIS, Veterinarian. COMMENTS! Sickness and usually death uniformly occurred within a period of 6 to 8 weeks from time of first fieeding cotton seed or cotton seed meal. In tests for 1892 the feeding began February 8, and the first death oc- curred March 23—exactl.y 6 weeks later. In tests for 1891 feeding be- gan January 20, and first death occurred March lid-almost exactly 7 Weeks later. In the outbreaks noted as occurring 1n the College herd; the trouble first began each time in less than 10 weeks from the time of feeding cotton seed meal. The trouble continues for a period of about 30 days and those animals which are not attacked within that time may safely be regarded as cotton seed proof. Following our tests for 1891 several of the shoats which were not attacked in the spring .were kept all summer on a diet largely cotton seed or meal; but, beyond a practical stoppage of growth and consequent permanent stunting of the pigs, no injurious effects resulted. It is noticed that in tests for 1892 the medium and the small sized shoats, in each of the different pens, were the ones which suffered most; L the large sized shoats in all of the pens resisting its effect and coming safely through. The fact is peculiar, but we think of no especial bear- zing further than to illustrate the point already mentioned, that some ' hogs resist the poison and are practically cotton seed proof. I The tests for 1891 where all hogs ranged in age and size about with large sized shoats in tests for 1892, give ample evidence that many hogs of that age are susceptible and cannot withstand the fatal action of the seed or meal. In the cotton seed meal pen every hog (5) died within ten days after sickness first appeared; in the roasted seed pen 4 out of 5 succumbed; in the boiled seed pen but one was taken. In tests for 1892, 2 out of 3 were lost from each pen except the boiled seed, where only one died. It is of course needless to state that the corn fed hogs in no case show- ed any signs of sickness whatever. The fact that much the lightest death rate was observed on boiled seed each one of the two years test- ed, and further that the single death that did occur each year was lat- est as compared with all the deaths recorded, would indicate that thorough boiling has effect to lessen danger in the use of cotton seed for hogs. A little more than a year ago we issued a letter for publication warning feeders to be careful in the use of cotton seed‘ meal roasted cotton seed for hogs, and stating that a possible danger certainlyfii-stedi. : We have care- fully reviewed our work and exactly duplicated tests. iiiftwo successive years ; and while we feel that we may yet be able to secure reliél from danger by some method now unknown, we cannot fail to give this public warning to the end that private feeders may not suffer heavy loss on some mistaken notions of economy in feeding hogs.