TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS
_ FORT WORTH FEEDING STATION

BULLETIN NO. 135
November, 1910

Feeding Experiments With
Steers and Hogs

BY

J. T. CRUSE
Superintendent of Fort Worth Station

 

POSTCFFICE
College Station‘ Brazos County, Texas

AUSTIN IILXAS:
, vox BOECKLIANN-JOYES c0., PRINTERS
1911

A TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. .
OEEIOERS. ~
GOVERNING-BOARD.

(Board of Directors A. and M. College.) y
K. K. LEGETT, President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .Abi.le

  
    

  

i.

T. D. ROWELL, Vice-President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Jefferso:

A. HAIDUSEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .La Gran,‘

JAMES ORAVPINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .Housto;

WALTON PETEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Fort Worth’

E. R. KONE . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin‘"

A. R. llloC-OLLUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\Vaco*

W. P. SEBASTIAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Breckenridgeé;
- PRESIDENT OE COLLEGE. 

R. ‘T. hIILNEtR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .College Stationé
STATION OFFICERS. =

H. H. HARRINGTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Director“

J. W. CARSON . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Director and State Feed Inspector

M. FRANOIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinarian

G. S. FRAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Chemist

J. C. BURNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Anirnal Husbandry

H. NESS . . . . . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Horticulturist

RAYMOND H. POND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Plant Pathologist

"I"II'.I\ION NEWELL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . .Entomologist

H. L. ATOKNIOIIT. .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Ag'riculturist

N. C. IIAMNEIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Assistant Chemist

E. C. CARLYLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Chemist

J. B. RATHER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ASsistant Chemist

C. W. CRISLER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chief Clerk

F. R. NAVAILLIE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Stenographer

A. S. WARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Stenographer

SHKAIFIE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.
GOVERNING BOARD.

His Excellency, Governor T. M. CAMPBELL." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin
Lieutenant Governor A. B. DAVIDSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Cuero
Commissioner of Agriculture HON. E. R. KONE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin
_ DIRECTOR OF STATIONS.
H. H. HARRINGTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..College Station
SUrERINTIsNDRNTfS or STATIONS.
A. T. POTTS, Beeville Station . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . .Beeville, Bee County
J. L. WELOH, Troupe Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .T1'oupe, Smith County
W. S. IIOTCITKISS, Lubbock Station. . .  . . .Lubbock, Lubbock County
J . T. CRUSE, Fort Worth Station . . . . . . . . .FOrt Worth, Tarrant County

J. H. TOMI, Pecos Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Pecos, Reeves County

H. C. HOLMES, Denton Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Denton, Denton County

-—-—- —, "llemple Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Temple, Bell County

I. S. YORK, Spur Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Spur, Dickens County

, Angleton Station . . . . . . . . . . . ..Angleton, Brazoria County

J. K. FITZGERALD, Beaumont Station.  . .Beaumont, Jefferson County
NOTE.~—~Tl1€ main station is located on the grounds of the Agricultural
and Mechanical College, in Brazos County. The postoffice address is
College Station, Texas. Reports and bulletins are sent free upon appli-
cation to the Director. -

INTRODUCTION.

The Southern farmer and feeder has one great advantage in the eco-
nomical production of live stock—-that  the abundance of compara-
tively cheap protein feed in. the form of cottonseed meal. For many
years it has been the custom of the practical cattle feeders in the State
to feed a mixture of cottonseed meal and hulls to the exclusion of all
other feeds. The reason for this has been entirely a commercial one;
because he has found by practical experience that hardly any other feed
will yield the same net returns. The meal is, of course, a high eon-
centrate. The hulls are fed more as a filler and With the purpose of
regulating the digestion of the meal and thereby maintaining the health

fand vigor of the animal. The practice has been to feed all that the
;._ animal would eat without injury, and While this is successful so far as
i; turning out a well-finished animal in a reasonable length of time is con-
‘_;}'cerne<l, it would appear to some extent to be wasteful, because a consid-
 erable part of the feed passes through the animal undigested. That is

 to say], the manure from cattle fed on a mixture of cottonseed meal and V

ig-hulls is exceedingly rich in nitrogen. Of course, if this manure were
Eifalways saved and turned back to the cultivated fields, or if the cattle
1§were fed on fields that were to be put in cultivation during that season,
the loss would amount to little. It is interesting to note that this plan
of feeding on cultivated fields is coming more and more into practice as
the value of the manure is more generally and specifically appreciated.
But, even under this plan of feeding, there is considerable loss of
i manure by reason of the fact that the ground is frequently not level, and
‘the heavy rains wash away the plant food. In other cases the manure
is allowed to remain on the surface of the ground instead of being
plowed under, until there-occurs a considerable loss through fermenta-
tion and solution. One of the problems, then, that the intelligent stock
eeder should consider would be the proper balancing of cottonseed meal,
 feed very high in protein, with some other feed rather high in carbo-
yydrates, and then using the cheapest filler possible that would promote
he digestion and health of the animal. With this in view, the Station
ndertook to investigate the influence of rough red rice when combined
Tth cottonseed meal and the relative value of such a feed as compared
i. Kaffir corn (stalk and heads) with cottonseed meal.

;' The feeding test, however, was not confined to steers, but a similar
bject was sought in a feeding test With hogs. In this case cottonseed
eal as a protein feed was combined with corn chops as the carbohy-
rate, in comparison with cottonseed meal and rough red rice. With
nether lot of pigs tankage was tested against cottonseed meal, using
I ugh red rice as the carbohydrate. In still the fourth pen, alfalfa
teal was tested against cottonseed meal with rough red rice as the car-
‘hydrate, and, in Lot 5, alfalfa meal and corn chops, the corn chops
ling used, of course, against rough red rice. The extreme size and
ried climatic conditions of Texas makes it profitable to select feeds in
)1 section of the State that could not be usedin another, on account
the long freight haul. Thus in the Rice Belt, along the Gulf Coast,

 
   
   
    
   
  
  
   
  
    
     
    

.1
a

4 Tfuxiig AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

it may be possible to replace corn with rough red rice as a carbohydrate
basis of feed for either steers 0r hogs, using cottonseed meal with the
necessary roughage or filler to supplement the concentrates. In the Pan-
handle and Western part of the State, Kaffir corn and milo maize along
with cottonseed meal Would probably be the most desirable feed. But
in a Station feeding test the freight rate is eliminated, and the feeds are
put upon their actual commercial value.

As indicated above, the feeds discussed in this bulletin are cottonseed
meal, cottonseed hulls, Kiaffir head forage, rough red rice, corn chops,
tankage, alfalfa meal, and Johnson grass hay. In addition to these. a
short test was made, and is here reported, with cold pressed cottonseed
cake, as compared to cottonseed meal andcottonseed hulls. Some of
these feeds were high priced, and the experiments with Kaffir corn for-
age could not be completed, because the feed could not be obtained in
sufficient quantity. The rough red rice used in the feeding test was pur-
chased in Beaumont, at a cost of $2.00 per sack (162 pounds). This
price Was somewhat higher than the average selling price at a little later
date, and higher than the rice could have been bought for early this sea-
son, so that allowance must be made for this in determining the
value of the rice as a feedstuff. The Kafiir corn, consisting‘ of the
whole stalk (grain and forage), was purchased at Chillicothe, at a cost
of $12» per ton. It was free from weeds, but was a little below the aver-
age grade of the crop. The cottonseed meal and hulls were bought on
the Fort Worth market at a cost of $30 and $10 per ton, respectively.
The Johnson grass hay was inferior. It was impossible to get any choice
hay or even hay of average quality in considerable quantity during last
season, owing to the great drouth prevailing over the State. But, as it
was, it cost $17.50 per ton.

STEER FEEDING EXPERIMENTS.
USES or CONSTITUENTS OF FEED.

It is the amount of digestible nitrogen-free extract or carbohydrzites,
and the ether extract or the fat or oil, and the protein 0r nitrogenous

portion of a feed that gives it What value it may possess for fattening,

animals. ' A pound of fat is equal to 2;} pounds of carbohydrates. Au-
thorities are not agreed as to the amount of protein a fattening animal
should receive; however, it is the sole source of muscular growth, and
is used for other purposes. Growing animals need much more protein
than maturer ones, and it is because of the relatively low proportion of
protein—-some feeds, such as Indian corn that practical feeders have
come to prefer some feed such as cottonseed meal, wheat bran or shorts,
along with corn for young grovring stock.

(Yrzadmfibcw is made up of the woody portions of a feed. ‘Wheat and
corn bran contain considerable amounts of crude fiber. Crude fiber is
largely indigestible, and on this account it is desirable to have as little
as possible of this constituent in any feedstuff. Digestible crude fiber is
practically of the same feeding value as nitrogen-free extract.

The following tables will be of assistance in understanding more fully
the uses of constituents of feed: '
TABLE L-COMPOSITION OF COTTONSEED MEAL, COTTONSEED HULLS, KAFFIR
FORAGE, ROUGH RED RICE AND JOHNSON GRASS HAY.

‘ ' Percentage composition.

Nitrogen-free

Protein. Fat. Crude fiber. extract. Water. Ash.
‘Cottonseed meal . . . . . . . . . . . .  47.93 . 10.21 7 07 22.48 6 87 5.38

‘(bttonseed hulls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.55 1.79 46.75 35.25 9 21 2.45

j rforage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,  . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

{Rough red rice . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.25 2 10 10.00 63.88 9.39 6.38

ilohnson grass hay . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.20 2 10 28.50 45.90 10.20 6.10

t

QTABLE IL-i-DIGESTIBLE CONSTITUENTS IN COTTONSEED MEAL, COTTONSEED
V HULLS, KAFFIR FORAGE, ROUGH RED RICE AND JOHNSON GRASS HAY.

g Di gestible nutrients in 100 pounds.

 

 

1 Total dry matter
in 100 lbs. Protein. Carbohydrates. Ether extract.
g.

. 37 .2 16.9 12 .2

0.3 33.1 1.7

10.0 60.0 3 .0

4.6 61.9 0.2

Unknown Unknown Unknown

Kr/XFFIR FORAGE AS A STEER FEED.

 

 In connection with this experiment, it would certainly be unfair to
he Kaflir forage and to that section of the State so admirably adapted

6 TE-XAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT Siwmoxs. ;

FEEDING EiXPE-RIMENPS WITH STEnRs AND Hoes. 7

to its production to leave the reader free to draw conclusions as to the
feeding value of Kaffir forage Without a fair statement of the conditions
under which it was fed. -

The Kaflir forage Was of excellent quality, but could not be bought
on the market in a shredded condition, and because of a lack of neces-
sary equipment it was impossible to shred it here at the Station; there-
fore, it was fed unheaded and unshredded. During a feeding period of
thirty-four days, sixteen thousand nine hundred and sixteen pounds of
Kafiir forage was fed to two lots of eight steers each; thirteen hogs,
averaging one hundred and fifteen pounds, were allowed to follow the
steers, and the amount of undigested Kaffir corn passing through the
steers was more than the hogs would clean up. Fully 50 per cent of
the Kaifir corn eaten by the steers passed through undigested. With
such large loss of feed, fair or even average gains could not be expected.
When the records were checked, it was found that Lot I had‘ gained R90
pounds, while Lot II had gained 5'75 pounds, or an average daily gain
of less than 1.7 pounds. .

Because the steers had not gained as they should have done under
favorable circumstances, and, also, because it was practically impossible
to buy any more Kaffir forage this late in the season (March 9, 1910),
our supply being exhausted, it was decided to take the Kafiir forage
from the ration and substitute something else. This substituted ration
is discussed at another place in this Bulletin.

'l‘hongh this showing made by the Kafiir forage is unprofitable, we
do not believe that our experience would justify an unfavorable report,
but we believe it would be a profitable feed if the heads were previously
ground and the stalks shredded.

ROUGH RED RICE AS A SFEER FEED——-PRELII\IINARY STATELTENT.

Within recent years, Texas has been producing an immense quantity‘
of rice, a varying per cent of which is an inferior grade and, therefore,
can not be marketed for table use. This inferior or "rough red rice,”
as it is termed, has been placed on the market as a feedstuff. In some
instances, it has been highly recommended for feeding stock of all kinds.
Hence, it was decided to give it a trial in a ration for fattening steers.
Lot Ill was selected for this purpose, and eight steers were fed a ration
of cottonseed meal, rough red rice a11d J0h1zs0n gar-ass hay from Febru-
ary 4th until the close of the experiment. Their first day’s ration con-
sisted of 48 pounds of rice, 16 pounds cottonseed meal, and as much
Johnson grass hay as they would clean up. For the first thirty-"four
days of the experiment the rice was fed unground, and a large per cent
of it passed through the steers undigested. The steers scoured badly,
and, in some instances, bloated; both conditions attributed to the indi-
gestibility of the rice. At the end of the first eight days the ration was
reduced from 48 to  pounds of rice: still the steers continued to scour
and bloat, until finally it was (lecided to buy a mill and grind the rice
before feeding it. On March 10th, we begun feeding the same amount

Q (32 pounds) of ground rice daily to the eight steers. T-he steers imme-

diately stopped scouring and bloating and soon began to show better
gains and always met the feed wagon.
On March 9th, when the Kaffir forage was taken away from Lot II

TEXAS AGRIOULTITRAL EXPERIMENT STATION$,

anmfiiwmww

m5 we wfincwwmn 23, as b2 mmafiw

cowqsow wax do? v3 swim; N135 wvwwnopwou

822m: 983w

 

FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH STEERs AND Hoes. 9

and rough red rice and cottonseed hulls substituted, the steers stopped
scouring and bloating. This fact alone would seem t0 substantiate our
belief that the scouring and bloating of the steers in Lot II was due
directly to the indigestibility of the unground rice.

The results obtained in these feeding tests indicate that rough red
rice, in combination with certain other feeds, can be fed profitably to
steers. t

LINE OF EXPERIMENT.

On February 4th, the steers Were divided into three lots, each lot con--

taining six Poll Angus and two Herefords. Each lot was fed ninety

days.

Lot II received a ration of cottonseed meal and Kafiir corn forage
from February 4th until March 9, 1910, when the ration was changed
to a mixture of cottonseed meal, rough red rice, and cottonseed hulls.
Lot III was fed a ration of cottonseed meal, rough red rice and John-
son grass hay during the entire ninety days. Lot_IV received a ration
of cottonseed meal. and hulls throughout the experiment. They were
confined to pens and were. supplied with an abundance of fresh water.
They were salted once or twice each week.

At the beginning of the experiment, the total Weight of Lot II was
7550 pounds, Lot III 7860 pounds, and Lot IV 7960 pounds. The fol-.
lowing table gives a summary of feed. eaten, gains made, pounds of feed.
per pound gain, and average cost per pound gain.

   
 

LOT II.
Average weight of Feed eaten. Total gain. Lbs. feed per Average daily Average cost per
steers Feb. 4, 1910. lb. gain. gain. lb. gain.
943.7 lbs. 2920 lbs. cotton- 1910 lbs. 1.5 bbls. cotton- 2 .7 lbs. 9.16 ets.
seed meal; 9800 seed meal; 5.1lbs.
lbs. hulls; 2624 hulls; 44 lbs. Kaf-
lbs. rice; 8528 lbs. fir; 1.4 lbs. rice.
Kafiir forage;
LOT III.
| .
Average weight of _ | Lbs. feed per t Average daily Average cost pen
steers Feb. 4, 1910. Feed eaten. Total gain. lb. gain. i gain. lb. gained.
y l .
982.51bs. t 5222.9 lbs. rice; 1580 lbs. 3.43 lbs. rice; 2.19 lbs. i 12.29 ets.

3000 lbs. cott0n- 1.9 lbs. cottonseed
seed meal; 9040 meal; 5.7 lbsJohn-
lbs. Johnson grass son grass hay.
hay. l _

|

LOT 1V.
Average weight of Lbs. feed per Average daily Average cost per
steers, Feb. 4, 1910. Feed eaten. Total gain. lb. gain. _ gain. lb. gained.
1
995 lbs. 3592 lbs. cotton- 1760 lbs. 2.04 lbs. cotton- 2.44 lbs. 8.72 ets.

seed meal; 19,664 seed meal; 11.12
lb s. cottonseed 1 b s. cottonseed

hulls. hulls.

10 TEXAS AG-RIOIILTIJRAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

25 we wfisfiwwn

éflwsipwmxw
wsw i“ awfifi F50 imam was do? ca; swiok wcsogw £25m wwwwqopwou Jmwa wwwwsogboo wmriwow» E “EH E £95m

FEEDING EXrERIMENTs WITH STEERs AND Hoes. 11

The results show that Lot II, receiving cottonseed meal, Kaffir for-
age, rough red rice and cottonseed hulls, made a total gain of 1910
pounds, requiring 1250 pounds of feed for each 100 pounds gain; Lot
lIl, receiving rough red rice_, cottonseed meal and Johnson grass hay,
made a total gain of 1580 pounds, requiring 1103 pounds of_feed for
each 100 pounds gain; while Lot IV, receiving cottonseed meal and
hulls, made a total gain of 1760 pounds, requiring 1316 pounds of feed
for each 100 pounds gain.

KIND OF CATTLE.

Eighteen grade Angus and six grade Hereford steers of as near one
Weight and quality as possible were bought of the Cassidy Southwestern
Commission Company, purposely for the tests reported in this Bulletin.
The steers had been fed a ration of corn and were in a fair marketable
condition, they were three-year-olds and averaged nine hundred and
forty-seven 947) pounds. These cattle were fairly gentle, but not ex-
ceptionally so, and from the first ate freely of the feed kept before them.

SALE OF STEERS.

On May 4th, the steers were put on the market and sold Without the
buyer having any knowledge as to the feed given each lo-t. Lot II
brought $7.25; Lot III brought $7.00; Lot IV brought $7.50 per 100
pounds, respectively.

BLOCK TEsT.

After the steers had been killed, dressed and sent to the cooler, the
carcasses were cut. in a. manner to show the muscle and fat develop-
ment. The cuts were made in front of the shoulders, between the fifth
and sixth ribs, and across the loins, respectively. The first thing noted‘
in handling the carcasses was the firmness of flesh of all three lots. The
lean meat in the carcasses of the lot fed straight cottonseed meal and
hulls was the brightest cherry red and the grain of the flesh, or size of
muscle fiber, was much finer and the fat more evenly distributed than
in either Lot II or Lot III. The flesh of the latter two lots was more
of a pale red or chocolate color and was not interwoven with those little
pieces of fat which are so numerous and so evenly distributed through-
out the carcass of a steer that “kills well.” As far as quality of the
meat was concerned, Lot IV was superior to that of either of the other
lots. However, Lots II and III dressed a higher per cent, respectively.
This discrepancy is accounted for mainly in difference of intestinal fat
found in the steers making up Lots II and IV.

DISCUSSION OF RATIONS FED.

The results obtained in feeding the three lots of steers, leads to a
careful consideration of the rations fed. The following table gives the
composition of the feeding stuffsmaking up the rations and the per
cent of digestible nutrients. Credit is due the Chemical Section of the
Texas Experiment Stations, Dr. G. S. Eraps, Chief Chemist, for the
analyses of the cottonseed meal, cottonseed hulls a.nd the rough red rice

12- TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

used in this experiment. The analyses of the Kaffir forage and 
Jonson grass hay and the digestible nutrients of the several felts
stuffs are from tables showing average analyses. ’

FINANCIAL OUTCOME‘ .
TABLE SHOWING EXPENDITURES AND RECEIPTS FOR THE ENTIRE ‘I

EXPERIMENT.
Cost of feed Value of steers 
consumed. Total cost. Proceeds. at beginning. Balance net - .. V
1,01; II ............. .. s 17s s1 s 561 42 s ass s5 s ass 05 s 124 4s '7
Lot III . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 198 73 585 10 ‘ 660 80 400 86 61 21
Lot IV...; . . . . . . . .  152 20 538 57 729 00 405 96 170 84

 

‘COLD PRESSED COTTONSEED CAKE AND COTTONSEED
MEAL AND HULLS IN THE PRODUCTION OF BEEF.

On April 12th, (Jight steers, divided into two lots, were put on feed.
These steers had been fed 0n a ration of cottonseed meal, rough red
rice and Kaifir forage from February 4th until March 9th, when the
Kaffir forage gave out, and the ration was changed to rough red rice,
cottonseed meal, Johnson grass hay and a small quantity of corn chops,
one pound of corn chops to each steer, was added to the ration and
thoroughly mixed with the rice and cottonseed meal and proved to be
an excellent appetizer. This ration Was fed until April 12th, when the
eight steers were divided into- two lots: Lot I was fed a ration of cold
pressed cottonseed cake a.nd Johnson grass hay, while Lot II was fed a
ration of cottonseed meal and hulls. I

KIND OF CATTLE.

The steers used in the test were bought of the Oassidy Southwestern
'_ Commission Company, of Fort Worth, at the sa.me time as those used
y in the experiments just reported. There were eight in all and they
y consisted of six grade Poll Angus and two grade Herefords. They were
 three-year-oltls, and had been fed a ration of corn and were in a fair
 marketable condition at the time the experiment commenced. They
 averaged 947 pounds in weight.

LINF OF EXPERITIENT.

On February 4th, these eight steers were put on a ration of rough
 red rice, cottonseed meal, and Kaftir forage, and continued eating this
 rationuntil March 9th. The results are given in the following table:

     

TABLE I.
Average weight of Average daily Lbs. feed per Average cost per
j steers, Feb. 4, 1910. Feed eaten. Total gain. gain. . gain. lb. gained.
“r1114
952.5 lbs. 121s lbs. rice; 480 lbs. ' l 1.76 lbs. 1.36 lbs.
seed meal; 7270

680 lbs. cotton-
lbs. Kafiir forage. i

. From Table I, it will be seen that the steers made very poor gains.
The rice was fed unground a.nd passed through the cattle largely un-
5 digested, and had a tendency to bloat and s-cour them. The Kaffir for-
V‘ age was fed unheaded and unshredded, and fully 50 per cent of it was
 undigested, and, therefore, of little value to the steers. Had the Kaflir
forage been unheaded, heads ground, the stalks shredded, and the rice
ground before feeding it, this might have probably proved to be the

most economical ration for the production of beef fed at the Station the
,7 past winter.

 

  

 

14 “Farms AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

   
  
   

After March 9th, these same steers were fed a ration of rough Q
rice, cottonseed meal, Johnson grass hay and a small quantity of c0 i.
chops, one pound each per day, until the 12th of April. The results a i.
shown in the following table: '

 

TABLE II.

Average weight of Average daily Lbs. feed per l Average cost
steers. March 9, 1910. Feed eaten. Total gain. gain. lb. gain. lb. gain. if
1063.75 lbs. Cottonseed meal, 620 lbs. l 2.35 lbs. Cottonseed meal, 8.56 eta.

1048 lb s; r i c e, 128 lbs.; rice, 1

1552 1 b s.; corn _ lbs. oorn chops.

chops, 264lbs. .33 lbs.; J o h n-
son grass hay 4.03

‘ lbs .

From a study of the tables, it will be seen that the steers made bet-Z
ter avera.ge gains while eating the above ration than they gained on any 1
of the other rations during the same length of time, with the exception f.
of Lots II and IV. The rice was being ground, the small amount of .
corn chops mixed with the cottonsee-d meal and rice served as an ex-l
cellent appetizer, and the steers were always ready and willing to eat. ’
The average daily gain during this period was higher than that of any v
other single lot ‘during the same length of time. This higher average j
daily gain of the steers while eating this ration is attributed almost .1
entirely to the fact that, after March 9th, the rice was fed ground and 
was, therefore, more digestible, and, aside from this, the steers were not l,
troubled by bloating or scouring, as they had previously done while eat-
ing the unground rice.

On April 12th, the same eight steers used in tihe two previous tests <
were divided into» two lots of so near one size, weight and quality as f,
possible. Lot I was fed a ration of cold pressed cottonseed cake and 
Jonhson grass hay, while Lot II was fed a ration of cottonseed meal 
and hulls. '

It will be observed that the experiment was conducted during the
latter part of the spring, undoubtedly too late to secure the best results.

The record of the two lots is given as follows:

     

 

Average weight of steers, Average
April 12, 1910. Feed eaten. Total gain. daily gain. Lbs. feed per lb. gain.

Lot I, 1087.5 lbs. ' 5,376 lbs. cold pressed cot- 270 lbs. 1.25 lbs. 19.91 lbs. cold pressed cot-
ton seed cake; 3322.7 lbs. tonseed cake; 12.3 lbs. John- 1
Johnson grass hay. son grass hay. z

Lot II, 1092.5lbs. 5702 lbs. cottonseed hulls; 190lbs. .85 lbs. 7.15 lbs. cottonseed meal; §
1358 lbs. cottonseed meal. 30.01 lbs. cottonseed hulls. f;

Both of these feeds, at least one of theme standard, gave very un-
satisfactory returns, but this was in part due, perhaps, to the hot
weather and to the large number of fiies, both of which were very try-
ing on the steers during the last twenty or thirty days of the experi-
ment. But principally to the fact that the steers were already in a
good marketable condition.

The extra gain of Lot I over Lot II is most likely due directly to

FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH SrEEns AND Hoes. 15

assimilation rather than to the cold pressed cottonseed cake, being in
the form of a cake as it is, the steers were compelled to thoroughly
masticate it, and, therefore, could not gulp it down to the extent that
,-the cottonseed meal and hull steers gulp down the cottonseed meal,
owhen it happens not to ‘be thoroughly mixed with the hulls. Even
gthough the cottonseed meal and hulls are thoroughly mixed, some of
gthe steers will at times get too much of the cottonseed meal and, as a

sresult, either bloat or scour. With this fact in favor of the cold pressed

   
   
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  

ttonseed cake, it- is very doubtful Whether it can ever be fed alone
rofitably, owing to its high cost, but, if fed in combination with other
ncentrates, such as shelled or ground corn, it would probably prove to
an economical feed.

. The form of the cold pressed cottonseed cake and the convenience
with which it may be fed, are two items, which, in our opinion, will
ake it a favorite feed with the small dairyman and with people who
ave but one or two milch cows.

SUMIVIARY.

i. 1. While our experiments with Kaffir forage were unprofitable, we
lieve it would be a profitable feed for fattening steers if fed with
a yads ground and stalks shredded.
.2. Bough red rice in a mixed ration of cottonseed meal and hulls
ve better daily gains than a straight meal and hull ration, but not
eaper.
,1 3. When the price of Johnson grass hay is reasonably low, it can be
f» profitably as a roughage to fattening steers.
_ 4. It is apparent. that none of the feeds used, at the price paid, can
nomically take the place of cottonseed meal and hulls for fattening
*5. Johnson grass hay at $17.50 per ton proved to be a more eco-
mieal roughage than Kafiir forage (heads unground and stalks un-
redded) at $12 per ton for fattening steers.
_;6. Cold pressed cottonseed cake at $25. per ton can not profitably
e the place of cottonseed meal at $30, and hulls at $10 per ton, for
fa ening steers. '
l7. Cold pressed cottonseed cake and Johnson grass hay gave higher

1y gains than cottonseed meal and hulls, but at a much greater cost.
8. Feeding should begin early in the fall.

'. EXAS ‘AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

16

awcfiom w. fl

58w 55w mww$>< dwfimzbgmw was

352w

60E v3

Q5: was E3: wwwmcogboo @522»: wwom

HOG FEEDING EXPERIMENTS.
INTRODUCTION.

During the last year or two the industry of hog raising in Texas has
developed to a remarkable degree. There is scarcely a farmer in the
State who is not more or less interested in the hog business. In fact,
the demand for brood sows throughout the State has been more than
the home supply could meet, and, as a result, hundreds of farmers have
been compelled to go to other States for their supply. This demand
on the part of so many has been caused largely by the very high prices
paid for hogs by the packers during the last year, but, if the price were
to drop to 5 or 6 cents, it is probable that the number of hog raisers
in the State would be materially reduced. However, the increase in
the number of farmers raising hogs at the present time can not help
but add many thousands of dollars annually to the valuation of hogs
in the State.

At present, Texas is third among the States in number and sixth in
valuation of hogs. This fact is due largely to the careless Way a great
number of the Texas farmers have gone into the business. Heretofore,
only a very small per cent of the farmers have given their hogs any
attention. In most eases they have looked upon hogs as being of little
value and have been content with barely enough to supply the home
with meat, and, in. a great many localities where the conditions are
favorable for the successful production of pork, the supply is entirely
inadequate. Hog cholera is no longer a menace to the industry; and the
encouragement of the present high prices, together with the stimulus
which is being- given to the hog industry by the packers and railroad
companies of the State, gives reasonable assurance that the time is not
far distant when Texas will be the leading hog State of the Union.

FEED FED.

In planning these experiments, it was our desire to use the feeds
which are being most commonly fed by the farmers who are feeding
hogs either for the market or for home use. We felt that if we could
form rations in such way from these feeds as to increase the average
daily gains or to reduce the cost of production a. very small per cent,
that our work here would be worth many thousands of dollars annually to
the hog raisers of the State. With this idea. in mind, we selected cot-
tonseed meal, corn chops, tankage, rougjh red rice and alfalfa meal.
These feeds were high-priced. High-grade alfafa meal could not be
bought on the local market, and, since we were going to feed a very
small amount, it was not thought advisable to have it shipped from a
distance on account of the high freight rate. All the feeds were bought
on the local market, with the exception of the rough red rice, which was
bought in Beaumont, Texas.

18 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

KIND OF IIOGS FED.

The pigs used in conducting these experiments were grade Poland
China, grade Duroc Jersey and grade Berkshire. They were bought
for the Station by the Cassidy Southwestern Commission Company of
Fort Worth, and were the tops out of a car lot shipped from Lubbock,
Texas, and had prrobably been fed a ration of either Kaifir or milo for
twenty or thirty days previous to shipping. They averaged 108.4
pounds the 3d of February, when the experiment started.

LINE OF EXPERIMENT.

Fifty pigs were divided into five lots of ten each. Great care was
taken to get the pigs in each pen of as near one weight, size and quality
as possible. Owing to the danger usually accredited to the feeding of
cottonseed meal to hogs, it was thought advisable to choose the rather
inferior individuals of the lot for this feed.

The following rations were fed:

Lot I was started on 6.5 po-unds of cottonseed meal and 16.5 pounds
of corn chops per day. These amounts Were gradually increased until
the pigs were eating 12.5 pounds of cottonseed meal and '78 pounds 0f
corn chops. The cottonseed meal and corn chops were thoroughly mixed
and fermented preceding" each feeding.

Lot II was started on 7.5 pounds of cottonseed meal and 16.5 pounds
of unground rough red rice per day. These amounts were gradually
increased until the pigs were eating 33 pounds of rice and 10 pounds
of cottonseed meal per day. This is all that the ten pigs would con-
sume up until March 10th, after which date the rice was ground. From
March 10th the amount of cottonseed meal and rice were gradually
increased until the pigs were eating 15 pounds of cottonseed meal and
'70 pounds of rice daily. The cottonseed meal and rice was thoroughly
mixed and fermented from the beginning to the close of the experiment.

Lot III was started on 5 pounds of tankage and 15 pounds of 111l-
ground rough red rice per day. This tankage and rice was thoroughly
mixed but fed dry until February 10th, after which date it was fer-
mented. These amounts were increased until the pigs were eating 10
pounds of tankage and 110 pounds of rice by March 10th. On March
10th the rice was ground, thoroughly mixed with the tankage and fer-
mented. From this time on, the rice and tankage were gradually in-
creased to '75 and 20 pounds, respectively.

Lot IV was started on 5 pounds of alfalfa meal and 15 pounds of
unground rough red rice per day. This was fed thoroughly mixed but
unfermented until February 10th, after which date it was fermented.
The amount of alfafa meal and rough red rice was gradually in-
creased until on March 10th they were eating 10 pounds of alfalfa meal
and 40 pounds of rice. After March 10th the rough red rice was
ground a.nd was regularly increase-d until the ten pigs were eating '75
pounds of rice in addition to the 10 pounds of alfalfa meal.

Lot V was started on 5 pounds of alfalfa meal and 15 pounds of corn
chops. This was fed thoroughly mixed but unfermented until February
10th, after xivhich date the mixture was fermented. These amounts

IPEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH STEEns AND Hoes. 19

were gradually increased until the pigs were eating 10 pounds of alfafa
rneal and 70 pounds of corn chops per day.
The detailed record of each lot is given in the following pages:

TABLE I.—F‘EED EAT‘EN AND GAINS MADE BY LOT I RECEIVING CORN CHOPS
AND COTTONSEED MEAL.

No. of Average Total Lbs. feed per lb. Average Cost per l
PIES- Feggg Total feed eaten. gain. gain. daily gain. ’lb. gain. Balance.
e . .
10 99 lbs. 3661.5 lbs. cornchops; 1505 lbs. 2.43 lbs. corn chops; 1.8 lbs. 4.56 cts. $ 92 60
916 lbs. cottonseed .608 lb. cottonseed
meal. meal.

The first seven days these pigs were on feed they made a gain of 85
iounds, or an average daily gain of 0.85 pounds. This Was their low-
:st gain during any single Week, and their highest daily gain Was dur-
ng the fourth Week of the experiment, When their average Was 2.36
Jounds. Their next highest ‘gain Was during the twelfth and last week
>f the experiment. Teir average daily gain for this Week Was 2.22
)O11IIdS. Right here, the question might justly be asked, Why were they
LOld at this time, since they Were making such excellent gains? Be-
zause they had grown to be very fat, the Weather Was unusually hot for
:hat time of yea.r, and they had begun to suffer during the mid-day
irom excessive heat. At no time during the experiment did any of
liem show any signs of sickness. They were always ready and willing
1o eat at feed time.

FABLE II.—FEED EATEN AND GAINS MADE BY LOT II RECEIVING COTTONSEED
MEAL AND GROUND ROUGH RED RICE FERMENTED.

No. of Average Total Lbs. seed per lb. l Average Cost per

hogs. Bweight Total feed eaten. gain.‘ gain. w daily gain. lb. gain. Balance.
eb. 3.

9 131 lbs. 3950 lbs. rice; 1022.5 1166 lbs. 3.4 lbs. rice; .88 lb. 1.4 lbs. 5.74 cts. $ 63 90

lbs. cottonseed meal. cottonseed meal.

It will be noticed. that it required 0.27 pounds more of cottonseed
neal and 1.03 pounds more of rice than of corn chops to produce a
JOUIICl of pork. Lot I gained 4 pounds more per day than Lot II, and
t cost 5.74 cents to produce a pound of gain in Lot II, While it cost
vut 4.56 cents to produce a pound of gain in Lot I.

On April 2d one piggy sow weighing 170 pounds was taken out of
Qot II. There were no signs of sickness at any time during the ex-
ieriment. These pigs did not gain well. at the beginning of the ex-
ieriment, gaining onlv 230 pounds ‘during the first three wrecks, but
it the close of the experiment they were gaining at the rate of 2.37
)O1l11ClS each per day’, Which was equal to- the best. daily gains made by
Qot I. However, Lot I gained 1505 pounds in twelve weeks at a total
sost of $68.62, while it took Lot II thirteen weeks to gain 1166 pounds
Lt a total cost of $66.92.

 

 

dwniom wmé £35m wimw owahrwfi éwpcwfihmw wax wfldohw .32 v3 swig wqx dmdxcsp so www mmom

TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

20

FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH Srnnns AND Hoes. 21

LOT I—FRMENTED CORN CHOPS AND COTTONSEED MEAL FOR COMPARISON
l WITH LOT II.

No. of Average ' I
hogs. ivrveéglgt Total feed eaten. gain. gain. daily gain. lb. gain. Balance .
8 - .

I Total I Lbs. feed per lb. Average Cost per
I
I

10 99 lbs. 3661.5 lb s. c 0 r n 1503 lbs. 2.43 lbs. corn chops; 1.8 lbs. 4.56 cts. l $ 92 60
chops; 916 lbs. cotton- .608 lb cottonseed.
seed meal. ‘meal.

 

TABLE III.——FEED EATEN AND GAINS MADE BY LOT III RECEIVING TANKAGE
AND GROUND ROUGH RED RICE FERMENTED.

 

No. of Average l Total Lbs. feed per lb. Average Cost per
bogs. iwvekiglgt" ‘ Total feed eaten. I gain. gain. daily gain. lb. gain. Balance.
e . .

9 105.5 lbs. 4509 lbs. rice; 1156.5‘ 1055.5lbs.' 4.3 lbs. rice; 1.1 lbs. 1.28 lbs. 7.6 cts. 6 4i 33
s. tankage. | tankage.

 

LOT II-FERMENTED COTTONSEED MEAL AND ROUGH RED RICE FOR COM-
PARISON WITH LOT III. l

i .

No. of Average l Total Lbs. feed per lb. Average Cost per

hogs. peight Total feed eaten. i gain. gain. daily gain. lb. gain. Balance.
eb. 3.

9 131 lbs. 3950lbs. rice; 1025.5 1166 lbs. 3.4 lbs. 'rice; .88 lb. 1.4 lbs. ' 5.74 cts. $ 63 90

lbs. cottonseed meal. cottonseed meal.

 

The most striking feature between these two lots is the difference in
the cost of production. It cost 1.86 cents more per pound to produce

a pound of pork in_ Lot III than in Lot II, regardless of the fact that

Lot III ate 1.12 pounds per pig per day more than the pigs in Lot
II. Both lots were fed rice, While Lot II received cottonseed meal and
Lot III received tankage. Therefore, it is evident that the high cost of
production in Lot III is due to the tankage.

Tankage cost $38 and cottonseed meal cost $30 per ton, respectively,
leaving a difference of $8.00 in favor of Lot II. In our opinion, this
difference in the cost of tankage and cottonseed meal is not sufficient to
justify the high cost of producing a pound of pork in Lot III, while
the pigs, in Lot III ate their feed at all times. It may be that if we
had fed less tankage per day their gains would have been equally as
good and possibly better, and, therefore, would have been produced at
a less cost. Tankage is possibly equal to cotto-nseed meal as a feed for
pigs; at any rate, the feeder is not confronted “Tltll that feeling of un-
easiness that has thus far been associated with the feeding of cottonseed
meal; an uneasiness that may not be justifiable, and that rw<e hope further
experience will entirely remove. _

On April 28th one piggy sow iveighing 180 pounds was taken out 0f
Lot III.

1100's fed alfalfa meal and corn c110 )5 ferlnent
t) 7

FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH SrEEns AND Hoes. 23

TABLE IV.—FEED EATEN AND GAINS MADE BY LOT IV RECEIVING ALFALFA
MEAL AND ROUGH RED RICE FERMENTED.

N0. of Average

Total Average Lbs. feed per lb. Cost per
hogs. geight Total feed eaten. gain. daily gain. gain. lb. gain. Balance.
eb. 3.

8 105.5 lbs. 4116 lbs. rice; 5824 926 lbs. 1.26 lbs. 4.5 lbs. rice; .8 lb. 8.08 cts. $ 49 39
lbs. alfalfa. alfalfa.

     

TABLE V.—FEED EATEN AND GAINS MADE BY LOT V RECEIVING ALFALFA
MEAL AND CORN CHOPS FERMENTED.

N0. of Average Total Average Lbs. feed per lb. Cost per
hogs. Feggg Total feed eaten. gain. daily gain. gain. lb. gain. Balance.
e . .

55 lbs. alfalfa maal.

7 101 lbs. 4390 lbs. corn chops; 862 lbs. 1.14 lbs. 5.4 lbs. corn chops; 11.02 cts. $ 23 13
.77 lb. alfalfa.

Tables IV and V, like I and II, give a comparison of corn chops and
ground rougjh red rice. Strange to say, Lot I, receiving corn chop-s
and cottonseed meal, gave better results than Lot II, receiving ground
rough red rice and cottonseed meal, while Lot IV, receiving alfalfa
meal and ground rough red rice, gave-better results than Lot V, re-
ceiving alfalfa meal and corn chops. However, in the case of Lots I
and II, the difference in the cost of producing a pound of pork was
only 1.18 cents in favor of Lot I, and the difference in cost of produc-
tion in favor of Lot IV, over Lot V, was 2.94 cents per pound. There-
fore, a study of the tables would seem to place rough gro-und rice about
equal to corn chops when fed with cottonseed meal, and better than
corn chops when fed with alfalfa meal, for the production of pork.

Since it is a fact that a fattening animal receiving most near the
standard ration will, as a rule, make better gains than one wrvhose ration
does not conform to the standard, it is not difficult to understand why
the pigs receiving alfalfa meal and ground rough rice made better and
more economical gains than the pigs receiving alfafa meal and corn
chops. This difliculty could not be avoided, since a pound of alfalfa
meal per day was all that the pigs would consume. Therefore, any
extra feed added would have to be corn chops or ground rough rice, and
the more of these feeds added the further away from the standard
ration; and, since corn contains a higher per cent of carbohydrates than
the rough rice, it is quite evident that the pigs receiving the ground
rough rice and alfalfa meal were getting a ration more nearly approach-
ing the standard. The same explanation applies to Lots Iand II, re-
ceiving cottonseed meal and corn chops, and cottonseed meal and ground
rough rice, respectively. The ration for Lot I was a little wide, while
that for Lot II was narrow.

SUMMARY.

1. The lots receiving most nearly the standard ration made the larg-
est and most economical gains. _
2. Ground rough red rice fed with cottonseed meal is an economical

ration for fattening hogs.

4 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

$55M m; aEw x25. Pw~r5>< .365 wwwmcoioo Cid 22:. 2.50 @5333 mwo:

FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH STEERs AND Hoes. 25

3. Ground rough red rice fed with alfalfa meal gave better results
than corn chops fed with alfalfa meal. _

4. During these experiments the hogs were lot-fed, the feeding sea-
son extending xvell up into the hot Weather (May 10th), consequently
they were fed under conditions making the experiment more severe
than it would have been had the experiment commenced earlier in the
winter. '

5. At no time (luring the experiment were there any injurious effects
from the feeding of cottonseed meal. '