A3 1 5-818-6111 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN NO. 232 AUGUST, 1918 DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY MINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOHN I. GUION‘, Ballinger, President. . . . . . . . . . . . L. J. HART, San Antonio, ViceLPresident . . . . . . E. H. Asrm, Bryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “J, R. KUBENA, Fayetteville. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. DAVIDSON, Cuero . . . . . . . . WILL A. MiLLER, JR., Amarillo. JOHN C. DICKSON. Paris . . . . . . . L. J. HART, Chairman GOVERNING BOARD, L. Downs, President, Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . P. CnARLEs RocAN, Vice-President, Austin . . . . . . . . J. E. Booc-Scorr, Coleman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R. M. Jonusrou, Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . - . - - - . - - - - - o - - - - - - - . o - H. A. BREIHAN. Bartlett . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . .. F. M. LAW, HOUSILOIL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........................Termexpires1919 . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1919 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1919 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1921 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1921 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1921 Term expires 1923 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1923 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1923 MAIN STATION COMMITTEE WILL A. MILLER, JR. STATE SUBSTATION S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1919 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1923 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Term expires 1921 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .Term expires 1918 STATION STAFF* ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Director A. B. CONNER, B. S., Vice Director CHAS. A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary _ _ W T. BRINK, B. S., Executive Assistant in Charge Library and Publication _ Eprrn M. PHILLIPS, M. S., Technical Assistant DIVISION OF VETERINARY SCIENCE _ **M. FRANcis, D. V. S., Veterinarian in harge _ _ H. SCHMIDT, D. V. M., Veterinarian D. H. BENNETT, Assistant Veterinarian DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY G. S. FRAPs, Ph. D., Chemist in Charge; State Chemist _ _ T. B. LEITH, B. A., Assistant Chemist _ WALDO VVALKER, B. S ., Assistant Chemist FRANcEs SUMMERELL, B. S., Assistant Chemist DIVISION OF HORTICULTURE _ NEss, M. S., Horticulturist in Charge W. S. HOTCHKISS, Horticulturist DIVISION OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY J. C. BURNS, B. S., Animal Husbandman, Feeding Investigations J. M. JoNEs, A. M., Animal Husbandman, Breeding Investigations _ P. V. EWING, Animal Husbandman, Swine Investigations. DIVISION OF ENTOMOLOGY _ _ F. . Pxpnocx, M. S., Entomologist in Charge; State Entomologist _ H REINHARD, B. S., Assistant Ento- ‘mologist _ , Assistant Entomologist County Apiary Inspector R. C. Abernathy, Ladonia; William Atch- ley, Mathis; J. W. E. Basham, Barstow; T. W. Burleson, Waxahachie; \V. C. Collier, Goliad; E. W. Cothran, Roxton; G. F. Davidson, Pleasanton; John Har- giolclg, Seguin; S. T. (1 ‘raham, Milano; King, Batesville; N. G. LeGear, . aco; R. . Little, Pearsall; S. H. tephens, Uvalde; M. B. Tally. Victoria; R. E. Watson. H-eidenheimer; M. E. Van Every, Fabens; R. A. Nestor, Buf- falo; E. Bush, San Antonia; H. A. Jones, Oakville; T. A. Bowdon, Palestine; E. R. Jones, Beeville. DIVISION OF AGRONOMY A. B. CONNER, B. S., Agronomist in Charge A. H. LEipiGn, B. S., Agronomist —-——i——— , Agronomist Louis WERMELSKIRCHEN, B. S., Agronomist 'DIVISION OF PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY _ J. TAunENnAps, Ph._ D., Plant Patholo- glst and Physiologist in Charge DIVISION OF POULTRY HUSBANDRY ——-—-—————, Pvllltrilman in Charge DIVISION OF FORESTRY E O.-SIEcKE, M. F., Forester in Charge; State Forester DIVISION OF PLANT BREEDING E. P. HUMBERT, Ph. D., Plant Breeder in Charge DIVISION OF DAIRYING . A. DOUBT, Dairuman in Charge ***SOIL SURVEY: T. H. BENTON, Soil Surveyor N EALE GERREALD, Soil Surveyor DIVISION OF FEED CONTROL SERVICE F D. FULLER, M.'S., Chief JAMES SULLIVAN, Executive Secretary . . H. Romans, Inspector . H. W000, Inspector . D. PEARCE, Inspector Uigw . M. WicxEs, Inspector . F. CHRISTIAN, Inspector . W. SNELL, Inspector J. J. KELLY, Inspector SUBSTATION NO. 1: Beeville, Bee County I. E. COWART, M. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 2: Troup, Smith County . S. Horcmuss, Superintendent SUBSTATION N0. 3: Angleton, Brazoril ounty E. A. MILLER. B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 4: Beaumont, Jeflerlon County H. H. LAUDE, M. S., Superintendent G. Punvis, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 5: Temple, Bell County D. T. KiLnoUGn, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION No. 6: Denton, Denton County C. H. McD0wELL, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 7: Spur, Dickens County R. E. DICKSON. B. S., Superintendent E. M. SMELTZER, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 8: Lubbock, Lubbock County R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent P. L. Jomzs, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 9: Pecos, Reeves County J. W. JACKSON, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 10: (Feeding and Breed- ing Substation)" College Station, Brazos County N. E. WINTERS, M. S., Superintendent L. C. WILKINSON, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 11: Nacogdoches, Nacog- doghes County G. T. McNEss, Superintendent SUBSTATION N0. 12: Chillicothe, Harde- man County _ _ A. B. CRON, B. S., Acting Superintendent V. E. HAFNER, B. S., Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. I4: Sonora, Sutton County _ _ E. M. PETERS, B. S., Acting Superintendent “éé CLERICAL ASSISTANTS DAISY LEE, Registration Clerk R, C. FRANKS, Stenographer MARGARET SHELDON, Stenographer RUTH LORD, Stenographer EMMA CAMPBELL. Stenographer Rum GILLIAM, Stenographer MRs. W. R. WALKER, Stenographer ARETUS H. BRADLEY, Stenographer ETHELWYN FRAZIER, Stenographer _ CONTENTS PAGE . Absorption of ash constituents from feeds . . . . . . .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 Uses of ash ingredients of feeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Details of the experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Composition of the feeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 Digestibility of the ash constituents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '7 Relation between quantity eaten and quantity digested . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Balance experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 Mineral requirements of sheep . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16 Summary and conclusions . . . . . . . .i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] BULLETIN N0. 232 AUGUST, 1918 MINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP G. S. FRAPS, Ph. D., CHEMIsT IN CHARGE; STATE CHEMIsr The ash constituentsrof feeds are important to animal nutrition, in that they supply substances needed for the building or upkeep of the animal body. In connection with digestion experiments partly pub- lished, certain ash constituents in feed, residues, and excrements were estimated. In connection with other digestion experiments, estimates were made of certain ash constituents in feeds, excrements and urine. The results of this work throw light upon the mineral requirements of sheep, and will be discussed in the following pages. ABSORPTION OF ASH CONSTITUENTS FROM FEEDS According to Armsby (Nutrition of Farm Animals, p. 142) the in- testines are the usual path for the excretion of calcium, and to some extent magnesium. Phosphoric acid under ordinary conditions is excreted in the faeces of herbivora. The difierence between the ash ingredients in the feed and in the solid excrement does not, therefore, represent the amount taken from the food, but is less than the quantity taken. A portion of the lime, magnesia and phosphoric acid has prob- ably been absorbed in the upper portion of the digestive organs, while other quantities have been excreted into the lower portions of the diges- tive organs. It is not, therefore, correct to speak of the digestibility of the ash ingredients of feed. The term is a convenient one, however, though in this particular -case it means the ash ingredients retained from the food, either more permanently or subsequently eliminated in the urine. USES OF ASH INGREDIENTS OF FEEDS It is a well established fact that an animal will die more quickly if fed upon food free from ash than if fed no food at all. The ash ingredients are, therefore, important to the animal. Some of the func- tions of the ash in the animal body are as follows: (1) They build up the body skeleton. The bones are composed chiefly of phosphate of lime, but they contain magnesium, fluorine and other elements. (2) They are constituents of soft parts of the body, where they perform important functions. v Phosphorus and sulphur are essential constituents of certain proteids. 6 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. (4) They are necessary constituents of the blood and assist in main- taining a proper concentration and a proper neutrality, and in elimi- nating an excess of acid. It is believed that the ash constituents of a feed should not be con- sidered singly, but as a Whole. An excess of one ash constituent may affect other constituents. (See Armsby’s Nutrition of Farm Animals, p. 399.) t Thus an excess of potash in certain feeds has been thought to cause harmful results, for the reason that in eliminating the potash, the animal also eliminates soda. This deficiency could be counteracted by feeding ordinary salt. Excessive acidity of the ration may cause a loss of lime and other bases, and, incidentally, a loss of phosphoric acid. A deficiency of bases in the feed could be obviated not by using cal- cium phosphate, which is not basic, but calcium carbonate. This matter is discussed here on account of its bearing upon the experimental results presented. DETAILS OF THE EXPERIMENTS Details of digestion experiments 1 to 18 are given in Texas Bulletin 147; 19 to 3'7 in Bulletin 166; 76 to 82 in Bulletin 203. The remainder Will be published in bulletins‘ to follow. COMPOSITION OF THE FEEDS The composition of the feeds is given in table 1. The ash ingre- dients are important also to show the draft of the plant on the soil, the possible needs of the plant, and the possible fertilizer value of the feed. ‘ Table 1.-—Comp'isit1on of fceds. per cent. _ Phos- Lab, Silica. Lime. . Mag- phoric Potash. N0, nesia. acid. 11438-9 Accuff sorgo forage-Exp. 81 . . . . . . .85 .84 .31 .20 2,85 3277-8 Alfalfa hay—-Exp. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .63 1.52 .40 48 3,45 6724-5 Alfalfa hay-F.xp 243-29 . . . . . . . . . . .48 2.36 .41 30 2.87 7005-6 Alfalfa hay-Exp. 37-31 . . . . . . . . . . 1 .85 1 38 .52 58 2.05 12952-3 Alfalfa hay—Exp. 88-92 . . . . . . . . . . 1.14 1 36 .33 70 2.05 4252-3 Bermuda hay—-Exp. 12 . . . . . . . . . . . 4.01 .63 .27 56 1.68 6027-8 Bermuda hay——EXD. 20 . . . . . . . . . . . 4.40 72 .21 36 1 .71 3609-10 Bur clover—Exp. 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.40 1.81 .53 1 01 3.50 3883-4 Buffalo grass-Exp. 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.05 1.02 .44 30 1.71 6907-8 Corn bran—-Exp. 28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 03 .30 93 .71 4557-8 Corn shucky-Exp. 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .49 23 .22 29 72 12965-6 Cold pressed cotton seed heated- Exp. 89. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .24 .26 .74 1.79 1.54 6748-9 Cold pressed cotton secd-—Exp. 25 .18 .21 .48 1.50 1.60 7034-5 Cold pressed cotton sccd—Exp. 34 .17 .23 .58 1.09 1.35 7048-9 Cottonseed hulls——Exp. 35 . . . . . . . . . .12 .19 .22 .12 1.06 7050-1 Cottonseed mval—-Exp. 36 . . . . . . . . . .4?- -34 -83 2.22 1-04 3220-1 Cowpea hay——Exp. 1. . . . . . . . . . . . 5.89 3.18 1.70 .36 1.24 3587-8 Johnson grass hay—-F.xp. 4 . . . . . .. 12.31 2.00 .52 53 1.09 4238-9 J -h'ison grass hay-Jixp. 10 . . . . . .. 3 8O 1.02 .31 51 1.82 4546-7 Kafir foddcw-Exp. 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.35 .43 .49 57 3.76 11299-300 Kafir foragc—-F.xp. 79. . . . . . . . . . .. 5.18 .87 .33 .17 2.65 7009-10 Kafir chops—Exp. 32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 .08 .30 .80 .52 LIINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP. _ 7 Table L-Composition of feeds, per cent.—Continued. Phos- Lab (silica. Lime. Mag- phoric Potash. NO- nesia. acid. 7031-2 Kafir head chops—Exp. 33 . . . . . . . . 1.28 .12 .42 62 .05 4247-8 M1llet—EXp. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.58 .42 .28 .41 1.60 3595-6 Oat hay-Exp. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 68 .36 .25 .54 1 .33 11212-3 Peanut hay-—Exp. 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 72 1 . 58 . 95 .29 1 . 52 4259-60 Peanut hay—Exp. 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.94 1.57 1 .30 .33 1 .02 2976-7 Peanut hulls—Exp. 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 .43 .29 .16 1 .00 4277-8 Para grass hay-Exp. 14 . . . . . . . . . . 4.34 60 .32 .38 .78 6064-5 Prairie hay—Exp. 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.94 60 .30 . 14 .70 6143-4 Prairie hay—Exp. 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.83 89 .30 .08 .47 11504-5 Rhodes grass hay-—Exp. 82 . . . . . . . . 6.65 51 .09 .65 1.48 6770-1 Rice bran—-Exp. 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.18 18 .98 1 .89 1 .30 11259-60 Rice hay-Exp. 78. . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.80 33 .29 .31 .89 13192-3 Rice hulls—-Exp. 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18.62 11 .11 18 .38 6879-80 Rice p0l1sh-—Exp. 1.26 .07 1.07 1.63 1.48 3625-6 Rice straw, Japan-—Exp. 7 . . . . . . . . 13.76 .35 . 15 .16 1 .66 4663-4 Rice straw, H0nduras—EXp. 18 . . . . 14.00 .18 .26 . 17 1.29 6998-9 Silage. sorghum and cowpea— Exp. 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .85 .19 .15 .09 .35 3224-5 Sorghum hay—Exp. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.35 .81 .54 .38 1.71 6033-4 Sorghum hay-Exp. 21.... . . . . . . . . 2.85 .57 .50 .28 1 .45 5912-3 Tabosa grass hay—Exp. 19 . . . . . . . . 8.65 3.99 .17 .25 .55 6288-9 Tabosa grass hay—Exp. 24 . . . . . . . . 9.4 .36 .12 97 .57 3649-50 Vetch hay—Exp. 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 91 1 38 .42 82 3 28 DIGE_STIBILITY OF THE ASH CONSTITUENTS The term digestibility is here used to denote the difference between the ingredients in the feed consumed and those excreted in the solid excre- ment. As already pointed out, and as will appear later on, some of the ash may have been excreted with the solid excrement. It is believed, however, that it is worth while to calculate the factors in the usual way and this has been done in table 2. The feeds are arranged in alphabetical order. Table 2.—-Coeflicients of digestibility. 8s w‘ '5 8 -=_;> "J3 Q . c-.-_. - 5 E - 8 fir: i. é‘ 5 E g S ‘f, o m g u GS Q‘ a H m C: g N J: m '8 '5' a 2 A m ._1 2 0-. Q4 u: G-i 11438-9 Accuff sorgo forage—Exp. 81.. . . 0 0 1.1 0 87.2 . . . . . . . . . . _ , 3277-8 Alfalfa hay—Exp. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 14.8 25.9 16.1 93.1 64 0 73 8 6724-5 Alfalfa hay—Exp. 24a-29 . . . . . . . 24.1 10.0 42.5 27.0 88.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7005-6 Alfalfa hay—Exp. 37-31 . . . . . . . . 9.2 12.2 43.3 20.4 92.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12952-3 Alfalfa hay—Exp. 88-92 . . . . . . . . 45.7 6.8 22.6 13.9 79.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4252-3 Bermuda hay—Exp. 12 . . . . . . . . .6 2.8 49.] 7.0 89.0 74 1 48.8 6027-8 Bermuda hay-Exp. 20 . . . . . . . . 0 0 24,8 0.6 87.0 . . . . . . 24.8 3609-10 Bur clover-Exp. 6 . . . . . . . . . . .. 41.1 27.6 40.1 36.5 98.2 74.7 80.7 3883-4 Buffalo grass—Exp. 9 . . . . . . . . .. 8.5 16.8 31.5 7.0 91.4 57.0 53.2 6907-8 Corn bran-F.xp. 28 . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 27. 9 27.2 84 .3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4557-8 Corn shucks-—Exp. 17 . . . . . . . . . 18.1 .5 41.7 13.1 64.4 7 2 12 5 12965-6 Cold pressed cotton seed heated —Exp. 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4O 5 0 21.9 41.6 92.8 . . . . . . . . . . .. 6748-9 Cold pressed cotton seed—Exp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 833 80.2 76 33.9 7034-5 Cold pressed cotton seed--Exp. 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0 56.1 1.9 37.9 90.9 . . . . . . . . . . .. 7048-9 Cottonseed hul1s—Exp. 35. .. . . ., 0 91 .1 65.2 40.3 91.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7050-1 Cottonseed meal—Exp. 36... . . . 0 48.4 7.0 37.9 22.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3220-1 Cowpea hay—Exp. 1 . . . . . . . . . . 30.6 34.2 47.3 9.7 91.1 74.1 72.3 3587-8 Johnson grass hay-Exp. 4. . . .. 34.4 33.9 51.3 21.0 81.3 27.6 41 .0 4238-9 Johnson grass hay——Exp. 10. . .. 15.0 23.0 52.1 19.1 93.6 42.4 51.8 4546-7 Kafir fodder-Exp. 15 . . . . . . . . . 25.7 4.9 37.9 22.4 95.2 46.0 63.0 8 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 2.—Coefficients of digestibility—Continued. i?’ d '2 <15 3Q "" S kw - a w ' - "" c *5 g <6 <5 g "579 '5 '5 g2 5’ s 3° g éé ~§ g2‘: § »-1 £75 .4 2 o. n. m o. 11299-300 Kafir forage——Exp. 79 . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 14.2 0 79.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7009-10 Kafir chops-Exp. 32 . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 10.0 5.0 24.0 98.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7031-2 Kafir head chups——Exp. 33. . . .. 0 75.5 3. 7 0 86.9 . . . . . . . . . . .. 4247-8 M1llet——Exp. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28.0 19.4 40.5 15.6 85.4 50.4 30.3 3595-6 Oat hay-Exp. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.4 19.5 45.8 0 86.0 41.7 58.5 11212-3 Peanut hay-Exp. 76 . . . . . . . . . . 0 7.0 37.0 9.0 94.5 . . . . . . . . . . .. 4259-160 Peanut hay-Exp. 13 . . . . . . . . .. 0 14.0 51.6 7.1 91.3 61.7 78.6 2976-7 Peanut hulls——Exp. 90 . . . . . . . . . 0 0 37.0 0 64.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4277-8 Para grass hay-Exp. 14 . . . . . .. 45.9 12.8 39.2 12.8 . . . . .. 56.8 9.9 6064-5 Prairie hay—-Exp. 22 . . . . . . . . . . 0 17.3 47.7 0 56.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6143-4 Pralrie hay-Exp. 23 . . . . . . . . . . 28.0 32.0 60.2 0 59.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 11504-5 Rhodes grass hay-Exp. 82. . . . . 12.5 0 4.0 5.9 88.8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6770-1 Rice bran-Exp. 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8 39.1 11.9 58.4 99.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . 11259-60 Rice hay—-.Exp. 78 . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 6.1 0 67.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 13192-3 Rice hulls——Exp. 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.7 29. 9 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6879-80 Rice pol1sh—-Exp. 27 . . . . . . . . . . . 21.8 10.0 11.4 40. 10.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3625-6 Rice straw, Japan-Exp. 7. . . . . .7 0 40.8 0 85.5 2.1 16.8 4663-4 Rice straw, Honduras-—Exp. 18 10.8 0 36.4 13.5 91.4 15.9 26.6 6998-9 Silage, Sorghum and Cowfer—- Exp. 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .6 2.1 30.5 0 77.0 . . . . . . . . . . .. 3224-5 Sorghum hay—Exp.2.......... 33.7 25.9 38.7 5.3 92.5 43.0 31.6’ 6033-4 §0rghum hay-Exp. 21 . . . . . . . . 0 .3 31.0 15.0 87.8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5912-3 Tabosa grass hay—-Exp. 19. . . .. 3.8 89.9 39.7 0 36.6 . . . . . . . . . . .. 6288-9 Tabosa grass hay—Exp. 24. . . . . 21.1 11.6 72.9 74-.0 61.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3649-50 Vetch hay-Exp. 8 . . . . . . . . . . .. 17.3 39.5 38.1 25.9 94.5 74.5 74.2 Potash. Potash is highly digested. The average digestibility is 83.2; In no case is the digestibility negative. Phosphoric acid. The average digestibility of phosphoric acid is 22.5. In some of the tests the digestibility is negative. The cause of this will be discussed later. Lime. The average digestibility of lime is 32.3 and, like phosphoric acid, in a number of tests the digestibility is negative. Magnesia. Magnesia has a digestibility of 32.3, practically the same as lime, but ivith no negative tests. In this respect, magnesia is more closelyrelated to potash than to lime. - Shilphar iriorcide. The sulphur is probably for the most part in protein compounds. The digestibility of protein is placed in the table for comparison. While there are individual variations, the average digestibility of the sulphur trioxide is nearly the same as for protein, being 47.9 for sulphur trioxide and 48.4 for protein. Silica. Silica is really the insoluble ash and the matter is com- plicated by the sand and dirt found on the feed. The average digesti- bility is 22.2 and there are a number of negative tests. MINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP. 9 Table 3.—-Grams eaten and digested per day. ‘ Phos- Silica. Lime. Mag- phoric Potash. Sulphur nesia. acid. (Frioxide. Accuff sor o fora e. D. E. 81 /Eatgen.....g.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28.99 3.55 1.31 85 12.06 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —5-14 —--30 -09 —-13 10-47 . . . . . . . . Accuff sor o fora e, D. E. 81 . —Eatgen....3 .............. .. 30.92 3.19 1.40 .90 12.86 ...... .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —3-81 '_-07 ~30 _-77 11-27 . . . . . . . . Alfalfa hay, Exp. 3—Eaten . . . . . . . . 3-46 8-36 2-20 2-64 19-01 3.62 Digested__,__ 0.96 1.15 0.63 0.05 17.05 2.27 Alfalfafhay, Exp. 3—Eaten . . . . . . .. 3.46 8.86 2-20 2-04 19-00 3.62 Digested_____ —0.56 1.60 0.78 1.27 17.57 2.32 Alfalfa hay, Exp. 3—Eaten . . . . . . .. 3-40 8-20 2- 16 2-60 18.64 3.55 Digested..... —0.62 0.95 0.47 0.08 18.10 2.36 Alfalfa hay, Exp. 24a—Eaten . . . . . . 2.40 11.80 2.05 1 .50 14.35 . . . . . . . . Digested .80 1.62 1 .30 0.68 13.38 _ _ , _ _ , _ _ Alfalfa hay, Exp. 24a—Eaten . . . . . . 2.40 11.80 2.05 1 .50 14.35 . . . . . . . . ige ed... .93 1.53 1.20 .42 12.28 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp. 29—Eaten . . . . . . . 2.40 11.80 2.05 1.50 14.35 . . . . . . . . Digested _ , , _ .20 .47 . 58 . 15 13. 55 . . . . . . . . Alfalfa hay, Exp, 29-—Eaten _ _ _ _ , _ _ 2.40 1_1 .80 2.05 1 .50 14.35 . . . . . . . . Digested. . .. .38 1.13 .72 .38 13.02 . . . . . . __ Alfalfa hay, Exp. 37—Eaten . . . . . _. 9.23 6.88 2.60 2.90 10.23 . . . . . . . . Digested. . . . .03 .73 .93 .62 9.65 . . . . . . . . Alfalfa hay, Exp. 37-—Eaten . . . . . . . 9.23 6.88 2.60 2.90 10.23 . . . . . . . . Digested.... 1.37 .83 1.07 1.03 9.18 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp. 31-—Eaten . . _ _ _ _ _ 9.25 6.90 2.60 2.90 10.25 . . . . . . . . Digested.... 1.18 1.02 1.18 .58 9.80 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp, 31—Eaten . _ . _ _ _ _ 9.25 6.90 2.60 2.90 10.25 . . . . . . . . Digested... .78 .78 1.25 .13 9.30 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp. 88—Eaten . . . . . ., 6.82 8.12 1.96 4.19 12.27 . . . . . . .. Digested. . .. 3.31 .61 .47 .02 7.54 Alfalfa hay, Exp. 88——Eaten . . . . . _ . 6.84 8.16 1 .97 4.20 12.30 _ _ _ , , , _ _ Digested. . .. 3.49 .76 .33 .87 9.86 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp. 92—Eatcn . . . . . ._ 6.84 8.16 1.97 4.20 12.30 _ , , _ , . , _ Digested. . .. 2.03 —.60 .50 .63 9.97 . . . . . . .. Alfalfa hay, Exp. 92——Eaten . . . . _ _ _ 6.84 8.16 1.97 4.20 12.30 . . . . . . .. Digested. . .. 3.67 .84 .47 .84 10.81 . . . . . . . . Bermuda hay, Exp, 12——Eaten. . . ._ 19.99 3.13 1 .35 2.80 8.37 3.64 Digested.. 0.11 0.13 0.6 0.56 7.32 2.58 Bermuda hay, Exp. 12—Eaten. _ _ _, 19.99 3.13 1 .35 2.80 8.37 3.64 Digested. _ 0.17 0.13 0.47 0.58 7.52 2.82 Bermuda hay, Exp. 12—Eaten. . . . _ 19.95 3.13 1.35 2.80 8.36 3.64 Digested. . 0.07 0.20 0.91 —-0.18 7.50 2.73 Bermuda hay, Exp. 20—Eaten. . . .. 24 -36 4-07 1 -20 2-09 10-62 - - - - - - -- Digested. . ~—-3.76 -.09 _ .14 —-1 . 18 8.34 . . . . . . .. Bermuda hay, Exp. 20——Eaten. . . .. 26.38 4.33 1.26 2.12 10.12 . . . . . . . . Digested. . —-.31 ——.22 .31 .01 8.81 . . . . . . .. Bermuda hay, Exp. 20——Eaten. . . .. 26.26 4.31 1.25 2.12 10.25 . . . . . . . . Digested. . —.44 .79 .28 -—.6l 8.24 . . . . . . .. Bur clover, Exp. 6—Eaten . . . . . . . .. 11.99 9.04 2.65 5.04 17.47 4.99 Digested..... 4.75 2.95 1.03 1.2 17.16 3.85 Bur clover, Exp. 6—Eaten. . . . ._ 11.99 9.04 2.65 5.02 17.44 4.99 Digested“... 5.10 2.05 1.08 2.47 17.11 3.60 Buffalo grass, Exp. 9—Eaten . . . . . . 35.25 5.10 2.20 1 .50 . 8.55 2.40 Digested..... 3.03 1.18 0.8 0.37 7.72 1.37 Buffalo grass, Exp. 9—Eaten . . . . .. 35.20 . 5.09 2.20 1.50 8.54 2.40 Digested.... —0.23 1.02 0.55 0.27 7.78 1.35 Buffalo grass, Exp. 9—Eaten . . . . . .. 34.96 5.06 2.19 1.49 8.49 2.38 Digested... 5.92 0.35 0.72 —-0.05 7.85 1.36 Corn bran and alfalfa, Exp. 28 -—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.95 7.14 1.93 3.78 10.75 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 .08 .73 .70 10.32 . . . . . . . . Corn bran and alfalfa, Exp. 28 —-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.95 7.14 1.93 3.78 10.75 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 .02 .68 1.28 9.80 . . . . . . .. Corn shucks, Exp. 17—Eaten . . . . .. 6.05 .94 .89 1.18 2.91 -74 Digested... —-1.03 —0.12 0.45 0.46 2.06 0.03 Corn shucks, Exp. 17—Eaten . . . . . . 5.99 .93 .87 1.16 2.89 .73 Digested... 0.32 0.01 0.37 —0.25 1.71 0.03 Corn shucks, Exp. 17—Eaten . . . . . . 5.98 .93 .87 I .16 2.87 .73 Digested... —0.40 ——0.57 0.29 —0.56 1.81 0.12 Cold pressed cottonseed and alfalfa, D. E. 25—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . 4.97 7.72 2.67 5.40 13.62 . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . . . . .. 3.50 1 . 18 .43 2.03 12.63 . . . . . . .. Gold pressed cottonseed and alfalfa, D. E. —-— aten . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.97 7.72 2.67 5.40 13.62 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . 3.33 1.27 . 73 1.48 12.73 . . . . . . . . 10 Table 3.—-Grams eaten and digested per day—Continued. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Phos- Silica. Lime. Mag- phoric Pot ash. Sulphur nesia. acid. Trioxide. Cold pressed cottonseed and alfalfa, - D.E.3 —Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.07 4.62 2.37 4.35 10.20 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 1 . 15 . 22 1 . 50 9. 63 . . . . . . . . Cold ressed cottonseed and alfalfa, xp. 34—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.07 4.62 2.37 4.35 10.20 . . . . . . . . Digested . . . . . . . . . .. 4.28 .62 .33 1 .08 9.10 . . . . . . . . Cold ressed cottonseed (burnt) and . a alfa, D. E. 89-—Eaten. . . . . .. 4.14 4.86 3.21 7.47 10.77 . . . . . . .. Di ested...“ 2.14 —.13 1.20 4.17 9.34 . . . . . . .. Cold pressed cottonseed ( urnt) and . alfalfa, . E. Eaten . . . . . .. 4.14 4.86 3.21 7.47 10.77 . . . . . . .. Digested. . . i. -—3.33 —2.49 .07 .87 9.04 . . . . . . . . Cottonseed hulls and meal and al- falfa. D. E. 35-—Eaten . . . . . . .. 6.47 4.99 3.46 6.05 10.42 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . —-5 . 30 1 .20 1 . 52 1 . 92 9. 23 . . . . . . . . Cottonseed hulls and meal and al- falfa, Exp, 35-_-Eaten , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6.47 4.99 3.46 6.05 10.42 . . . . . . . . Di ested . . . . .. —4.43 .87 1.22 1.77 9.69 . . . . . . .. Cottonseed meal and alfalfa, Exp. 36 —-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 83 5.15 3.27 7.75 11.07 . . . . . . .. C u Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —.52 1.28 —.30 3.40 5.92 _ _ , , , _ ,, o onseed meal and alfalfa, Ex . 36 —-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 5.15 3.27 7.75 11.07 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .02 .70 .30 2.08 10.12 . . . . . . . . CQWDea hay. Exp. 1—Eaten . . . . . . . 29.45 15.92 8.50 1.80 6.20 5 .80 Dige5ted___, .26 5.16 4.02 0.01 5.60 4.31 Cowpea hay, Exp. 1—Eaten . . . . . . . 29.45 15.92 8.50 1.80 6.20 5.80 Dige5ted,___ 8.73 5.68 4.09 0.01 5.70 4.28 Guam grass, Exp. 16—Eaten . . . . .. 17.35 2.15 1.40 2.75 8.55 1,85 Digested___, 0.5 0.37 0.68 0.56 6.77 0.58 Guam grass, Exp. 16—Eaten . . . . .. 17.35 2.15 1.40 2.75 8.55 1.85 igested___, 1.42 0.28 0.57 1.63 7.62 0.68 Guam grass, Exp- 16-—Eaten . . . . .. 17.35 2.15 1 .40 2.75 , 8.55 1.85 Digested,_,_ 0.92 —-O.41 0.21 0.00 6.33 0.63 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 4-—Eaten.. 53.71 8.73 2.70 2.32 4.77 1.57 Digested 25.32 3.09 1.38 -0.15 3.22 0.2 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 4-—Eaten.. 48.15 7.83 2.43 2.10 4.37 1.41 Digested 19.7 2.47 1.22 1.15 3.78 0.51 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 4-—Eaten. . 52.97 8 .60 2.66 2.29 4. 74 1 .55 Digested 25.22 2.97 1.38 0.16 4.25 0.52 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 10-Eaten_ 18. 95 5.09 1.55 2.54 9.07 1 .65 Digested 2. 75 1 . 35 0. 73 0. 35 8.45 0.73 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 10—Eaten. 18.97 5.10 1.55 2.55 9.09 1.65 Digested 0.45 1.0 0.62 0. 76 8.50 0.65 Johnson grass hay, Exp. 10——Eaten. 18. 97 5.10 1.55 2.55 9.09 1.65 Digested 1.31 1.16 1.06 0.35 8.56 0.71 Kafir fodder, Exp. 15—Eaten . . . . .. 31 . 75 2.15 2.45 2.85 18.80 1.65 Digested,_, 9.02 0.21 0.98 _1.01 18.27 0.88 Kafir fodder, Exp. 15—Eaten . . . . . . 31 .75 2.15 2.45 2.85 18.80 1.65 Digested... 6.81 0.26 0.92 0.32 18.15 0.77 Kafir fodder, Exp. 15—Eaten . . . . . . 34.21 2.31 2.64 3.07 20.25 1.77 Digested... 9.27 0.11 0.93 0.62 18.6 0.66 Kafir forage, Exp. 79—Eaten . . . . . . 24.98 4. 19 1 .59 82 12.78 . . . . . . . . Digested.... —-12.80 —.11 .36 ——.23 10.77 . . . . . . .. Kafir forage, Exp. 79—Eaten . . . . . . 25.09, 4.21 1 .46 .82 12.81 . . . . . . . _ Di ested.... —9.60 -—.17 .09 -—1.13 9.51 . . . . . . .. Kafir chops and alfalfa, Xp, 32 . —Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ——6.82 4.37 1.53 3.48 7.72 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 02 .82 .30 .90 7.28 . . . . . . . . Kafir chops and alfalfa, Exp, 32 ——Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.82 4.37 1.53 3.48 7.72 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .75 .75 .33 1.02 7.18 . . . . . . .. Kafir head chops and alfalfa, Exp. 33 ——Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.37 5.93 1.53 1.50 8.15 , . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 2.38 .33 ——1 .08 7.60 . . . . . . . . Kafir head chops and alfalfa, Exp. 33 -- aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.38 5.93 1.53 1.50 8.15 _ _ . . . . .. _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -——3-03 2-33 -17 ‘*1 ~25 7-42 . . . . . . . . Millet, Exp. 11—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . 32.62 2.09 1.38 2.09 7.32 1 .59 , Digested . . . . . . . .. 11.18 0.17 0.62 0.46 6.43 0.81 Millet, Exp. 11—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . 32. 74 2.09 1 .39 2.09 7.96 1.59 _ Digested . . . . . 7.65 0.50 0.55 0.72 2.59 0.75 . Millet. Exp. 11—Eaten . . . . . . . . . .. 32.65 2.09 1.39 2.09 7.94 1 .59 Digested . . . . . . . .. 8.6 0.53 0.51 1.08 5.82 0.83 Oat hay, Exp. 5—-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . 31.95 1.72 1.20 1 .60 6.40 2.59 Digested . . . . . . .. 8.01 0.03 0.58 -—0.63 5.7 1.71 Oat hay, Exp. 5—Eaten . . . . . . . . . .. 31.37 1.69 1.18 2.55 6.30 2.52 _ Digested . . . . . . .. 1.06 0.41 0.5 -—-0.18 5.27 1.48 MINERAL BEQUIREMENTs OF SHEEP. Peanut hay, Exp. 13—-Eaten. . . . . . . Digested. . . . Peaniit hay, Exp. 13~—Eaten. . .. . . . Digested. . . . Peanut hay, Exp. 13—Eaten. . . . . Digested. . . . Peanut hay, D. E. 76——Eaten. . . . .. Digested. . . Peanut hay, D. E. 76—Eaten . . . . . . Digesie . . Peanut hay and alfalfa, D. E. 90 — aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peanut hulls and alfalfa. D. E. 90 ——Eateii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Para grass hay, Exp. l4——Ea'ien . . . . Digested. Para grass hay, Exp. 14—Eaten. . . . Digested. Para grass hay, Exp. 14--Enten. . . . Digested . 22—Eaten . . . . . . _ Digested. . . . . . 22-Eaten . , , _ _ _ , Digested. . . . . 22-—Eaten . _ , , _ , _ Digested. . . . . 23—Eaten . . _ . _ _ , Digested. . . . . 23—Eaten . . . . . . . Prairie hay, Exp. Prairie hay, Exp Prairie hay, Exp. Prairie hay, Exp. Prairie hay, Exp. Digested. . . . . 23——%aten . . . . . . . . t d. . . . . Rhodes grass hay, D. Edgeg e aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rhodes grass hay, D. E. 82 aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prairie hay, Exp. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice bran and alfalfa, Exp. 26 —— aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice bran and alfalfa, Exp. 26 —Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice hay, D. E. 78-—¥l)aten . . . . . . . _ igeste . . . . . . Rice hay, D. E. 78—Eaten . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . Rice hulls and alfalfa. D. E. 91 aten . . . . . Rice hulls and alfalfa. 155914551 ' ' ' ' _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice polish and alfalfa, Exp. 27 — aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice polish and alfalfa, Exp. 27 _ -—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice straw, Japan, Exp. 7—Eaten. . _ Digested Rice straw, Japan, Exp. 7—Eaten. . _ Digested RICE straw. Japan, Exp. 7—Eaten. . _ Digested Rice straw, Honduras, Exp. 18 —-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice straw, Honduras, Exp. 18 -—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rice straw, Honduras, Exp. 18 Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Table 3.——Grams eaten and digested per day.-—Continued. 1 Phos- Silica. Lime. Mag- phqric Potash. Sulphur nesia. acid. rioxide. 9.70 7.85 6.50 1.65 5.10 2.35 —2.76 1.37 2.46 —0.35 4.46 1.48 '9.70 7.85 6.50 1.65 5.10 2.35 ~5.68 0.58 3.33 —-0.33 4.77 1.35 9.70 7.85 6.50 1.65 5.10 2.35 ——6.8 1.32 4.26 —0.1l 4.73 1.51 10.32 9.48 5.70 1.74 9.12 . . . . . . .. ——1.69 .76 1.90 .31 8.61 . . . . . . .. 10.29 9.45 5.68 1.73 9.10 . . . . . ... —1.66 .57 2:31 .09 8.57 . . . . . . .. 4.47 5.32 ' 1.82 2.57 9.01 . . . . . . .. 1.44 ——0.4 .70 —-.22 6.90 . . . . . . .. 4.53 5.37 1.86 2.58 9.15 . . . . . . .. 1.09 —-.54 .36 ——.71 —6.64 . . . . . . .. 20.55 -2.85 1.51 1.79 . . . . . . .. 3.84 1.6 0.37 0.58 0.1 . . . . . . .. 2.12 21.49 2.98 1.59 1.86 . . . . . . .. 4.01 5.17 0.10 0.52 0.61 . . . . . . .. 2.25 18.19 2.51 1.34 1.59 . . . . . . .. 3.40 6.5 0.55 0.61 ——0.77 . . . . . . .. 2.00 19.79 2.51 1.14 50 2.54 . . . . . . .. —1.06 .90 .46 -- 72 .77 . . . . . . .. 23.47 2.82 1.46 .66 3.26 . . . . . . .. —1.60 .42 .64 — 49 2.39 . . . . . . .. 24.44 3.00 1.49 70 3.49 . . . . . 1.32 .36 .88 — 20 2.34 . . . . . . .. 18.81 2.32 1.40 .16 1.24 . . . . . . .. 8.38 .11 .11 —.26 -1.00 . . . . . . .. 33.47 4.24 1.44 .39 2.52 . . . . . . .. 8.87 .79 .76 -— 74 1.25 . . . . . . .. 33.87 4.37 1.45 .39 2.56 . . . . . . .. 6.42 1.33 .70 —.60 .96 . . . . . . .. 28.21 2.16 38 2.76 6.28 . . . . . . .. 3.29 —.16 —.O3 .33 5.50 . . . . . . .. 40.04 3.07 .54 3.91 8.91 . . . . . . .. 5.31 —.49 .43 —.03 7.03 . . . . . . .. 13.97 7.62 4.17 6.57 10.73 . . . . . . .. 1.73 1.13 .88 3.82 11.28 . . . . . . .. 13.97 7.62 4.17 6.57 10.73 . . . . . . . .. .42 .63 .85 3.27 11.70 . . . . . . .. 41.17 1.06 93 1.00 2.86 . . . . . ... —3.79 —1.14 —— 23 ——.59 1.40 . . . . . . .. 73.14 1.88 1.77 1.77 5.08 . . . . . . . .. ——6.31 —.94 .20 —.09 4.37 . . . . . . .. 26.31 3.84 .97 2.23 6.39 . . . . . . . .. 12.98 —-.19 .31 .54 5.67 . . . . . . .. 58.05 4.39 1.31 2.63 7.26. . . . . ..- .62 -—.84 .41 —.94 4.59 . . . . . . .. 5.22 9.03 4.45 5.78 13.05 . . . . . . . .. .87 2.95 1.05 2.12 11.92 . . . . . . .- 5.22 9.03 4.45 5.78 13.05 . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.12 12.33........ 61.26 1.55 .66 .71 7.37 .97 1.27 ——0.25 0.23 —0.96 5.96 .06 56.68 1.44 .61 .69 6.79 .89 —0.4 —0.08 0.35 0.01 6.01 .05 59.00 1.50 .64 .70 7.07 .90 ——0.07 —0.05 0.18 ——0.27 6.16 .01 55.95 .73 .10 .67 5.16 .87 6.48 —0.52 0.46 —0.12 4.63 0.16 56.77 .74 1.05 . .69 5.24 .89 10.25 -—0.25 0.21 ——0.58 4.81 0.22 42.40 .55 .79 .51 3.91 .66 1.15 —0.97 0.35 —0.54 3.62 0.02 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 3.—Grams eated and digested per day-Continued. Phos- Silica. Lime. Mag- phoric Potash. Sulphur nesia. acid. Trioxide. Silage, sorghum and cowpea, Exp. 30 —— aten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.75 2.85 2.25 1.35 5.25 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .15 .12 1.15 -——1.02 4.25 . . . . . . .. Silage, sorghum and cowpea, Exp. 30 ——Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.71 2.83 2.25 1.35 5.23 . . . . . . .. Digested . _ _ _ _ _ , . , _ _ , , _ , , _ _ ——1 .82 ——.03 .23 -——.93 3. 82 . . . . . . . . Sorghum hay, Exp. 2—Eaten . . . . . . 26.10 4.86 3.24 2.27 10.26 1 .97 Digested.... 8.31 1.03 1.15 —0.02 9.02 0.81 Sorghum hay, Exp. 2——Eaten. _ _ _ 21 .77 4.05 2 70 1 .90 8.55 1 .65 Digested.... 7.4 0.87 1 06- ——0.06 7.98 0.71 ‘Sorghum hay, Exp. 2—Eaten . . . . . . - 21-73 4-05 2 70 1 - 90 8-54 1 155 Digested.... 7.68 1.42 1.11 0.03 8.21 - 0.73 ‘Sorghum hay, Exp. 21—Eaten . . . .. 15.39 3.08 2.74 1 .52 8.16 . . . . . . .. Digested... ——.92 —-.10 .96 — 69 6.76 . . . . . . .. Sorghum hay, Exp. 21——Eaten. . . . _ 16.99 3.40 2.92 1.66 8.74 . . . . . . . . Digested... —2.21 ——.31 .98 ——.64 7.96 . . . . . . .. Sorghum hay, Exp. 21——Eaten. . . . _ 14.94 3.00 _ 2.57 1.55 7. 54 . . . . . . .. Digested... —2.85 .02 .62 ——.18 6.75 . . . . . . .. Tobosa grass hay, Exp. 19- —Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 27.24 15.54 .51 .83 1.70 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 10 14.29 .21 ——.30 .74 . . . . . . .. Tobosa grass hay, Exp. 19 —-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.55 15.93 .67 1 00 2 20 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.80 13.98 , .25 —— 39 66 . . . . . . . . Tobosa grass hay, Exp. 24 -—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.76 1.79 .60 4 8O 2.84 . . . . . . . . Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.88 .40 .38 4.00 1.56 . . . . . . . . Tobosa grass hay, Exp. 24 ' -—Eaten..._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 47.00 1.80 .60 4.85 2.85 . . . . . . .. Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.86 .05 .50 3.64 1.91 . . . . . . .. Velch hay, Exp. 8—Eatcn . . . . . . . .. 39.55 6.90 .21 4.1 16.40 4.5 Digested . . . . .. 6.83 2. 72 0.8 1 .06 15 .48 3 .35 RELATION BETWEEN QUANTITY EATEN AND QUANTITY DIGESTED The results secured were studied in order to see if any relation could be traced between the quantity of the ingredients in the food eaten and the quantity digested. For this purpose, the tests were divided into groups according t0 the quantity of the ingredients eaten. Some strik- ing results were secured, which will be discussed in detail below. Table 3 shows the grams eaten and digested, arranged according to the kind of feed. Table 4.—-Average lime eaten and digested. Grams eaten (Group) . v 0-2 2-4 4-6 6-8 8-12 12 + Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.25 2. 73 4. 78 7.38 9.32 15.83 Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 29 32 . 15 19 4 Number of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9 9 0 1 0 Number of gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 20 23 15 18 4 Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . ——. 27 +. 13 . .59 1.08 1.67 9.78 Increase fed over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . 1.48 2.05 2.60 1 94 6.51 Increase digested over preceding ' 4 group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .40 .46 .49 .59 8.11 Digestib 'ty of increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 23 18 30 100 Lime. The average results for lime are presented in table 4. The number of losses is somewhat irregular in the various groups. There. is, on an average, a relation between the quantity of. lime eaten and the quantity fed. The quantity of lime digested in the first group of MINERAL REQUIREMENTS or SHEEP. 13 tests is negative, and after this, there is a regular increase in the quantity of lime digested, as the quantity of lime fed increases. These facts could only be brought out by using a large number of tests, as here given. If the increase in. the quantity of lime fed in each group over the preceding group is considered in connection with the increased quantity of lime digested, the digestibility of _the additional lime is found to be 18 to 30 per cent. The digestibility of the lime may be taken to average 25 per cent. These figures point to a fairly constant digestibility of lime by the animal, and a fairly constant excretion of lime in the solid excrement. In the first group, the quantity excreted is .greater than the quantity digested, and so there is an apparent loss. The amount of the excre- tion may be‘ estimated from the data. In the first group, if a digesti- bility’ of 25 per cent. of the 1.25 grams lime fed is assumed, the amount digested would be .31 gram, and this, added to the .27 gram lost, would give .58 gram excreted in the solid excrement. In group 2, a digesti- bility of 25 per cent. would yield .68 gram digested, and, if the .13 gram retained is subtracted, it would give .55 gram excreted in the solid excrement. In group 3, 25 per cent. of 4.78 is 1.19, and sub- tracting .59 there is shown to be .60 gram excreted in the solid excre- ment. Hence one is justified in assuming a digestibility of 25 per cent. for lime and a daily excretion of .60 gram in the solid excrement. Table 5.—Average phosphoric acid eaten and digested. Grams Eaten (Group). } 0-1 i 1-2 2-3 | 3-5 I 5 + Average grams eated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 64 1.56 2.54 4. 05 6.29 Number 0f tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 34 33 15 14 Number of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 16 8 1 0 Number of gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 18 25 14 14 Average digested. grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - —.46 —|-.OO4 +.34 1 .21 2.34 Increase fed over the preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 92 .98 1.51 2.24 Increase digested over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 .34 .87 1 . 13 Digestibility of increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5O 34 58 50 Phosphoric acid. -The results of the phosphoric acid tests are given in table 5. The number of losses in the tests decreases regularly as the quantity of phosphoric acid fed increases. There are no gains in the first group and no losses in the last one. There is a loss of phosphoric acid in the first group, and after this there is a gain in the quantity absorbed, increasing as the quantity fed increases. If the preceding group be subtracted from the next group, there is found to be a digestibility of 34 to 58 per cent. for the addi- tional phosphoric acid fed. These figures point to a fairly constant digestibility of phosphoric acid by the animal, and a fairly constant excretion of phosphoric acid in the excrement. The digestibility of the phosphoric acid may be taken to be 5O per cent. In the first group, 50 per cent. of the .64 gram fed would be gram, and this, added to .46 gram lost, would be .78 gram excreted in the solid excrement. In the AVERAGE GRAMS DIGESTED 14 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. second group there is practically no phosphoric acid digested. A digesti- bility of 50 per cent. would give .78 gram phosphoric acid lost in the solid excrement. In group 3, 1.27 grams phosphoric acid would be digested. This, less .34 gram, would give .93 gram in the solid excre- ment. '- One is justified in assuming a digestibility of 50 per cent. for the phosphoric acid, and a loss of .8 gram per day of phosphoric acid in the solid excrement. (a! IN) .\ /_ a a z a 4 5 6 7. i 5 9 Ava RAGE gala/KM s g EAT E N i Chart showing relation of lime and phosphoric acid digested by sheep to the amount eaten. Relation of Zimve to phosphoric acid. In group 2 of the phosphoric acid tests, where one to two grams are fed, there are 16 losses of phosphoric acid and 18 gains. ' These tests were tabulated with respect to the lime digested as shown in table 6. In test 19, an excessive quantity of lime was eaten and it is excluded from the discussion. Table 6.—Relation of lime to phosphoric acid lost or gained in group 2. ' Loss. Gain. Diff. Phosphoric acid digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ——.43 +.39 .82 Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 18 . . . . . . . .‘ Lime eaten, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.38 7.69 3.31 Lime digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.18 1.44 .26 Lime eaten, exclusive of N0. 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.39 . . . . . . . . 4.30 kyime digested, exclusive of No. 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 . . . . . . . . 1,11 The lime eaten when there were losses of phosphoric acid average 3.39 grams, and when there were gains, 7.69 grams. Thus, a higher consumption of lime was accompanied by a better retention of phos- phoric acid. An increased consumption of 4.30 grams lime and an increased digestion of 1.11 grams lime, was accompanied by an in- creased retention of .82 gram phosphoric acid. An increased digestion of 1 gram lime was thus accompanied by an increased retention of .74 MINERAL REQUIREMENTS or SHEEP. 15 grams phosphoric acid. The ratio of lime to" phosphoric acid in tri- calcium phosphate is 1:0.80. Table 7.--Average magnesia eaten and digested. Grams Eaten (Group) i 0-1 1-2 l 2-3 x 3 + Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 1 .47 2.23 4.92 Number 0f tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16" 35 44 17 Number 0f losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 O 0 0 Number 0f gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 35 44 17 Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 .49 .77 1 .81 Increase fed over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81 .76 2. 69 Increase digested over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 .28 1 .04 Digestibility 0f increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (42) 26 36 39 Magnesia." The quantity of magnesia digested increases with the quantity fed (table 7). There is no evidence of any excretion of mag- nesia in the solid excrement. Only two losses of magnesia. occurred. Potash. The quantity of potash digested increases with the quantity of potash fed. There is no evidence of excretion of potash into the solid excrement. Table 8.—Average potash eaten and digested. Grams Eaten (Group) O-5 I 5-10 10-15 15-20 Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.97 7. 64 13 68 18 .42 Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 48 36 49 Number of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 O 0 Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.87 6.43 10.26 17 .49 Silica. With the exception of the second group, the quantity of silica (insoluble ash) increases as the quantity fed increases. This is evidence that there is actually a digestion of silica by sheep. Table 9.——Average silica eaten and digested. l f‘ h.‘ Grams Eaten (Group) l 0-5 5-10 ‘ 10-20 20-30 ‘ 30 -|— Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.40 7.22 16.12 25. 11 43.27 Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 26 23 17 30 Number of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7 5 6 4 Number of gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 19 18 11 26 Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 .39 1.79 3.26 6.58 Increase fe over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.82 8.90 8.99 15.16 Increase digested over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1.49 1 .47 3.32 Digestibility 0f increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (22) 0 16 16 22 BALANCE EXPERIMENTS In twenty tests with ten rations, the urine Was analyzed in addition to the feeds and solid excrements, this constituting a balance experi- ment. (See table 12.) These tests have been divided into groups as given in tables 10 and 11., but the number of tests is not suflicient to make averages that are as significant as those just discussed. 16 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 10.—Ph0sph0ric acid gained or lost in balance experiment. Grams Eaten (Group) 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-5 5 + Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.84 1 .56 2.56 4.14 5.40 Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 5 5 2 Number 0f losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 2 2 0 Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' ——.56 —. 11 +. 17 .44 2.52 Average 1n urine,_grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .03 .02 . 11 .05 1.07 Loss or gain, retained grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ——. 59 ——. 13 .06 .39 1.45 Increase fed over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 1 .00 1 .58 1 . Increasedigested over preceding group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 .28 .27 2.25 Digestibility of increase . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 ' 28 17 . . . . . . . . Increased retention over preceding group. . . . . . . . . . . .46 . 19 .33 1 .06 Percentage retained . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 19 21 83 Phosphoric acid. The quantity of phosphoric acid digested (table 10) increases with the quantity fed. The quantity in the urine is fairly constant. The average quantity retained in the body increases with the quantity fed. The percentage retention is irregular. Lime. The averages (table 11) are irregular and show the danger of drawing conclusions from a small number of experiments. With the exception of the first group, the quantity of lime in the urine is fairly constant. Table 11.-—L1me gained or lost in balance experiment. Grams Eaten (Group) 0-2 2-4 4-6 6-8 8--2 +12 Average grams eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .47 3.28 4.69 7.47 8. 75 . . . . . . Number of tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 5 2 6 . . . . . . Number of losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 5 2 1 . . . . . . Average digested, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —1.04 ——.24 —.34 —1.31 .48 . . . . . . Average in urin, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 .09 .07 .07 .08 . . . . . . Loss or gain retained, grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . —1.25 ——.33 —.41 —-1.38 .40 . . . . . . Increase fed over preceding group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.81 1 .41 0 1.28 . . . . . . Increase digested over preceding group. . . . . . . . . . . . .80 0 0 1.79 . . . . . . Digestibility of increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . Increased retention over preceding group. . . . . . . . . . .92 0 O 1.78 . . . . . . Percentage retained . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 0 O . . . . . . . . . . . . Silica, magnesia, potash. In some cases, the balances are negative, in others they are positive. On an average there are gains of 1 gram silica (insoluble ash), .18 gram magnesia and .19 gram potash per head per day. The silica in the urine averages .44 grams. MINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP The experiments presented throw some light upon the mineral re- quirements of sheep. The sheep used were one to three years old, weighing about 100 pounds. Phosphoric acid. With an average of .80 gram in the solid excre- ment and .05 gram in the urine, the amount digested for a balance should be .85 gram per day. With a digestibility of 50 per cent. the amount required in the feed for a balance would be 1.70 grams per day. _ MINERAL REQUIREMENTS OF SHEEP. 17 Li/nze. With an average excretion of .60 grams in the solidi» excrement and .09 gram in the urine, the amount digested per day should be .69 gram. With a digestibility of 25 per cent, the amount required in the feed for a balance would be 2.8 grams per day. The animal may get along with less than this quantity, but will probably need more. Potash. Although potash is found in Wool fat, and hence is stored by the animal in this form,'it is probable that the needs of the animal for potash are small and easily met. A retention of .2 gram per day is indicated by the balance experiment. Sufficient potash is probably furnished sufficient for the needs of the animal by all feeds. Magnesia. The work throws no light upon the needs of the animal for magnesia. With .32 gram in the urine and an average digesti- bility of 32 per cent, balance would be maintained with 1 gram per day. The balance experiment showed. a retention of 18 grams, which would involve .54 gram additional, probably making the average needs of the animal 1.54 grams per day. The amount of magnesia needed is small and probably supplied in all cases. " ~ Table 12.—-Income and outgo of minerals of feeds per day. Silica. Lime. Mag- Phos- Potash. nesia. phorie acid. Period 76—Peanut hay. _ Sheep 1—Total eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.32 9.48 5.70 1.74 9.12 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —1.67 0.75 1.89 0.31 8.62 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .19 .05 .54 .01 6.42 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . —1.86 . 70 1.35 .30 2.20 Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.30 9.45 5.68 1.73 9.09 . Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~—1.65 .57 2.31 .08 8.59 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .12 .19 .50 .01 6.94 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —1.77 .38 1.81 —.09 1 .65 Period 78—Rice hay. Sheep 1—-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +41 . 17 1.06 .93 1.00 2.86- Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —3 . 79 —1 . 14 ——. 23 —. 59 1.40 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .10 .15 .24 .03 3.10 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —3.89 —1.29 —.47 —.62 —1 .70 Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +7313 1.88 1.77 1.77 5.08 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ——6.31 ——.94 —.20 —-.09 4.37 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .08 .27 .45 .03 6.26 Loss 0r gain . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —5.39 —1.21 —-65 ——.l2 —1.89- Period 79—Black kafir forage. _ Sheep 1—Eaien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24.98 4.19 1.59 .82 12.78 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —12.80 ——. 11 .36 —.23 10.77 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -12 -09 28 .02 9.78 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —l2.92 —.20 .08 ——.25 .99‘ Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +25.09 4.21 1.46 .82 12.81‘ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ‘—9.60 ——. 17 .09 ——1 . 13 9.51 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .28 .08 .17 .03 10. 161 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —9.88 —.25 —.08 —1.16 —.65~ Period 81—Acuff sorgo forage. Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.98 3.55 1.31 .84 12.06‘ Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —5.14 —.30 —.09 —.13 10.47 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 19 .03 . 10 .04 8.68‘ Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —5.33 — 33 ——.19 ——.17 1.781 Sheep 3—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.92 3.79 1.40 .90 12.86 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~—3.81 —.07 .30 —.77 11.27 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .26 .08 .76 .03‘ 10.24 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. —4.07 -—.15 —.46 ~.80 1.03 18 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 12.—Income and outgo of minerals of feeds per day——C0ntinued. Phos- Silica. Lime. Mag- phoric Potash. nesia. acid. Period 82-—Rhodes grass hay. Sheep 2—-Ea_ten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +28.2l 2. 16 .38 2.75 6.28 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 3.29 -—-. 16 ——.03 .33 5.50 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .16 .06 .15 .02 5.20 Loss 0r gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.13 —— 22 ——.18 .31 0.30 Sheep 3——Ea_ten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +40.04 3.07 .54 3.91 8.91 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.31 — 49 .43 -—.03 7.03 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 .27 .29 04 7.36 Gain 0r loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.99 —.76 .14 ——.07 —.33 Period 88—Alfalfa hay. - eep 1——Ea_ten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.82 8.12 1.96 4.19 12.27 Digested . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 3.31 .61 .47 —-.11 7.54 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .61 .05 .32 .03 8.32 Gain or loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.70 .56 .45 —.14 —.78 Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.84 8.16 1 . 97 4.20 12.30 Digested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.49 .76 .33 .87 9.86 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .47 .09 .32 .04 10.24 Gain or loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.02 .67 .01 .83 —.38 Period 89—-Alfalfa hay and burned cold pressed cottonseed. Sheep 1—-Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.97 7.22 2.67 5.40 13.62 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-14 ——.13 1.20 4-17 9-34 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .77 .04 .32 2.07 6.88 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.37 —.17 .88 2.10 2.46 Sheep 2—Ea_ten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.97 7.72 2.67 5.40 13. 62 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _-3-33 *2-49 -07 -87 9-04 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 -09 -47 -07 3-00 _ Loss or gain . _ , , _ , , _ , _ _ _ _ _ __ ——3.89 —2.58 ——.40 .80 1.04 Period 90—Peanut hulls and alfalfa hav. Sheep 1—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..'..... 4.47 5.32 1-32 57 9-01 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 44 —— 04 . 70 —.22 6 . 90 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95 05 .40 .16 6.24 Loss or gain . . . _ , _ _ , _~ _ _ , _ , _ , .49 —~ 09 .30 —.38 .66 Sheep 2-—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.53 5.37 1.36 2-53 9115 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1-09 —-54 -35 *-71 5-04 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .92 .11 .37 .05 7.76 Loss 0r gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .17 —--65 ——-01 —'-70 —1-02 Per1od-91—Riee hulls and alfalfa hay. Sheep 1——Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25-31 3-34 -97 2-27 5-39 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.98 —-.19 .31 .54 5.67 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .69 ' .03 .16 .28 5.52 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12-29 —--24 .15 .20 14 Sheep 2—-Ealen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 58.05 4.37 1.31 2.63 7.26 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 — -84 .41 .94 4.59 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .40 06 .08 .06 5-04 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 —— 90 .33 .85 ——-45 Perlod 92.—-Alfalfa hay. Sheep 1—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.84 3 16 1-97 4.20 12-30 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 03 ——. 60 . 50 . 63 9.97 In urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .75 04 .28 .10 9-28 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.28 -— 64 .22 .53 .69 Sheep 2—Eaten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.84 8.16 1.97 4.20 12.30 Digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 67 .84 .47 .84 10.81 I21 urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .76 .06 .12 .05 9.92 Loss or gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.91 .78 .35 .79 .89 MINERAL REQUIREMENTS or SHEEP. 19 Table 13.—Grams excreted per day in urine. _ Phos- Lab- Silica. Lime. Mag- phone Potash. No. nesla ac 11225 Sheep l-D. E. 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0 192 0.045 .539 .013 6.42 11226 Sheep 2-D. E. 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 . 193 .498 .008 6.94 11297 Sheep l-D. E. 78 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 100 146 .237 .027 3.10 11298 Sheep 2-D. E. 78 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O78 273 .452 .030 6.26 11339 Sheep 2-D. E. 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 090 284 .023 9.78 11340 Sheep 3-D. E. 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 080 172 .032 10. 16 11500 Sheep 2-D. E. 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 186 033 O97 .036 8.68 11501 Sheep 3-D. E. 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 076 762 .028 10.24 11526 Sheep 1——D. E. 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 .058 149 O22 5.20 11527 Sheep 2-D. E 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 268 288 036 7.36 12956 Sheep 2-D. E. 88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 610 050 322 034 8.32 12957 Sheep 3-D. E. 88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 090 324 040 10.24 12969 Sheep 2—D. E. 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 768 011 316 2 072 6.88 12970 Sheep 3—D. E. 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 088 468 072 8.00 12980 Sheep 2-D. E. 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 O49 402 0 158 6.24 12981 Sheep 3-D. E. 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 920 110 368 048 7.76 13198 Sheep 2—D. E. 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 688 052 160 276 5.52 13199 Sheep 3—D. E. 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 058 080 064 5.04 13213 Sheep 2-D. E. 92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 748 .040 284 096 9.28 13214 Sheep 3——-D. E. 92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 760 .064 120 048 9.92 Average (20) except phwsphoric acid of 12969 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.435 .095 .316 .055 7.57 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1. Mineral constituents were estimated in one hundred thirteen tests on fifty rations, of which twenty tests on ten rations were bal- ance experiments. . 2. Potash has an average digestibility of 83 per cent., magnesia 32.3 per cent., with no negative tests. With lime and phosphoric acid the digestibility in some cases is negative. The average for phosphoric acid is 22.5 per cent. and for lime 32.3. 3. The average digestibility of sulphur trioxide is 47.9 per cent. and for protein in the same tests 48.4. The sulphur may be in com- bination in the protein. 4. The average digestibility of silica (insoluble ash) is 22.2 per cent. and there are many negative tests. 5. The experiments are grouped according to quantities fed and averaged. The average quantities of lime and phosphoric acid digested increased as the quantities fed increased. v 6. When the quantities fed and excreted in one group are subtracted from the succeeding group, the additional quantities of lime and phos- phoric acid are found to have a fairly constant percentage digestibility. The digestibility of the additional lime averages about 25 per cent., and i of the additional phosphoric acid, 50 per cent. '7. There are average losses of lime and phosphoric acid in the. tests in the first group, in which the lowest quantities were fed, and aver- age gains in all the other groups. 8. These facts point to a fairly constant digestibility of lime and phosphoric acid by the animal and a fairly constant excretion of lime and phosphoric acid by the animal in the solid excrement. ‘The aver- age excretion of lime is .60 gram, and of phosphoric acid .80 gram. 2O TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. 9. When one to two grams are fed, there are both losses and gains of phosphoric acid, and an increased consumption of lime was accom- panied by an increased retention of phosphoric acid. A digestion of 1 gram of lime was accompanied by an increased retention of .74 gram phosphoric acid. 10. There were average gains of 1 gram silica (insoluble ash), .18 gram magnesia and .19 gram potash per day and head in the bal- ance experiments. The silica in the urine averaged .44 gram. '11. The amount of phosphoric acid required in the feeds for a. balance would average 1.70 grams per day and head for sheep weigh- ing about 100 pounds. The amount of lime required in the feed for a balance would average 2.8 grams per day. The amount of magnesia. would average 1 gram- per day.