YVXHLL ‘LLNIIOO SOZ VH8 ‘NOLLVCLS HDIETIOO ‘Hommlcr ‘crooqaaxmox a saanlssulqaaa awos a0 SGIHlOHd cmv ‘SNVSOlNHd ‘SEIHDHVLS ‘saw/ans 3H1 a0 ALHIEIILSHDIG MILSIWHHI) a0 NOISIAIG Z261 ‘LHVOHHEIH O62 'ON NLLKTIDH auamflwa ‘Tmzzra "a m SVXELL JO EISEITIOO TVOINVHOEIN (INV IVZIIIUIIIDIIIDV N0llV1S lNEIWIEIEIJXEI 1VHfl1Tfl9lll9V SVXEII 'I"WT7'ZZ8'6 8V STATION STAFFT ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Director CHARLES A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary" A. D. JACKSON, Executive Assistant CHARLES Gonzvcxr, Technical Assistant M. P. HOLLEMAN, J11. Assistant Chief Clerk a VETERINARY SCIENCE ’ *M. FRANCIS, D. V. M., Chief H. Scnmmr, D. V. S., Veterinarian J. J. REID, D. V. M., Veterinarian CHEMISTRY G. S. FRAPS, Ph. D., Chief: State Chemist S. E. AsBURY, M. S., Assistant Chemist S. LOMANITZ, B. S., Assistant Chemist J. B. SMITH, B. S., Assistant Chemist WALDO WALKER, Assistant Chemist HORTICULTURE H. NEss, M. S., Chief W. S. HOTCHKISS, Horticulturist ANIMAL INDUSTRY J. M. JoNEs, A. M., Chief; Sheep and Goat Investigations R. M. SHERWOOD, B. S., Poultry H usbandman G. R. WARREN, B. _S., Animal Husbandman in Charge of Swine Investigations J. L. Lusn, Ph. D., Animal Husbandman ENTOMOLOGY M. C. TANQUAnY, Ph. D., Chief; State Entomologist H. J. REINHARD, B. S., Entomologist . R. WATSON, A. M., Apiculturist . S. RUDE, B. S., Entomologist . H. ALEx, B. S., Queen Breeder . P. TnIcE, B. S., Assistant Entomologist RONOMY . B. CONNER, B. S., Chief; Crops . H. LEIDIGH, B. S., Agronomist; Soils . B. REYNoLns. M. S., Agronomist; Small Grains \ E. W. GEYER, B. S., Agronomist; Farm Superintendent **PEARL DRUMMOND, Seed Analyst PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY J. J. TAUBENHAUS, Ph. D., Chief COTTON BREEDING G. F. FREEMAN, D. Sc., Chief FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS A. B. Cox, Ph. D., Chief SOIL SURVEY "W. T. CARTER, Jn., B. S., Chief H. W. HAWKER, Soil Surveyor H. V. GEIB, B. S., Soil Surveyor FEED CONTROL SERVICE B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Director F. D. FULLER, M. S., Chief Inspector S. D. PEARCE, Inspector J. HH ROGERS, Inspector 9 g>nr A L11i>> (genetics) . Woon, Inspector SUBSTATIONS No. 1. Beeville, Bee County _ No. 8. Lubbock, Lubbock County I. E. COWART, M. S., Superintendent R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent No. 2. Troup, Smith County W. S. HOTCHKISS, Superintendent No. 3. Angleton, Brazoria County V. E_. HAFNER, B. S., Superintendent Beaumont, Jefferson County . PRINCE, B. S., Superintendent Temple, Bell County _ . KILLOUGH, B. S., Superintendent No. 4. A. H No. 5. D. T NcE 6. Denton, Denton Coun tr H. McDQWELL, B. S., Superintendent No. 7. Spur, Dickens County R. E. DICKSON, B. S., Superintendent - TAs of February 1, 1922. No. 9. Pecos, Reeves County V. L. Conv, B. S., Superintendent No. 10. College Station, Brazos County (Feeding and Breeding Substation) L. J. MCCALL, Superintendent No. ll. Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County G. T. NIcNEss, Superintendent **No. 12. Chillicothe, Hardeman County A. B. CRON, B. S., Superintendent No. 14. Sonora, Sutton-Edwards Counties E. M. PETERS, B. S., Superintendent D. H. BENNETT, V. M. D., Veterinarian *In cooperation with School of Veterinary Medicine, A. and M. College of Texas "In cooperation with United States Department of Agriculture. CONTENTS. _ _—_ Page Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 Methods of Work . . . . . . . F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. i5 Composition of Feeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~ . . . . . . 6 Composition by Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Percentage Distribution of the Constituents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Digestibility of the Feeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Digestibility by Groups of Feeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 Proteids and Non-proteids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2O Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Summary and Conclusions, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 ULLETIN N0. 290 FEBRIlARY, 1922 IGESTIBILITY OF THE SUGARS, STARCHES, PENTOSANS, " AND PROTEIN OF SOME FEEDING STUFFS. ' BY _ G. S. FRAPS. i. A knowledge of the composition and digestibility of -the sugars, arches, pentosans, and other ingredients of feeding stuffs, is impor- t". t for several reasons. It should throw so-me light upon the varia- j}: in the feeding valuesof different feeding stuffs. It may aid in lving the question why the digestible nitrogen-free extract of hays d fodders is less valuable to animals than the same quantity of estible nitrogen-free extract in concentrates. It may throw some f upon the preference shown by animals for one feed over another. 9A knowledge of the constituents of feeds is also» important in feed ntrol work, since it may aid in detecting illegal admixtures in feeds, _'i adulteration. It may aid in devising methods for the estimation the quantity of certain feeds, or certain classes of feed in mixtures. .The work here described is a continuation of that published in Bul- pins 175 and 196 of this Experiment Station. Bulletin 175 deals the distribution and digestibility of the pe-ntosans of feeds. Bul- 'n 196 deals with the digestibility of sugars, starches, and pentosans it roughages. Comparatively little work has been done upon the composition and estibility of the nitrogen-free extract of feeding stuffs. The writer r studied the digestibility of sugars and pentosans in Bulletin 1'72, rth Carolina Experiment Station (1900), and given a review of i literature up to 1900. Further data are given by the writer in ‘letins 104, 1'75, and 196, of the Texas Experiment Station. Dr. iam Frearhas studied the composition of timothy hay in detail n-nsylvania reports, 1903-04) and Dr. Headden has made quite nsive studies, which are described in Bulletin -124, Colorado Ex- fment Station, 1907'. See also Fraps’ Principles of Agricultural imistry, pages 374-8. The carbohydrates of the soy bean have been ied by Street and Bailey, J. Ind. lEC-ng. Chem. '7, 853 (1915) and he navy bean by Peterson and Churchill, J our. Am. Chem. Soc. 43, it (1921). . i; ' ' METHODS OF WORK. he materials used in this work were secured in the digestion ex- __ents described in detail in Bulletins 166, 203, and 245 of this ‘riment Station. ,- part of the work sugars were extracted with water, but later they extracted with dilute alcohol, and determined by the usual method. 7| the sugars are extracted with water as described in Bulletin 196, of the compound sugars are converted into reducing sugars. 6 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Starch was determined by the diastase method in material which been extracted with ether and with alcohol. This would include ; i as well as starch. I Pentosans were determined in the usual way. The pentosans w determined in the crude fiber, prepared in the usual way. The n ferences between the total pentosans and the pentosans in the c ‘ fiber are taken to be the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract. The sugars, starch, and pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract w added together, and the sum taken from the total nitrogen-free ext :1 The remainder is termed the “residual nitrogen-free extract.” i. The pentosans were determined in the residue insoluble in N/5O . and N/50 alkali as in Bulletin 196. The pentosans in the crude i were subtracted, and the remainder is termed the “pentosans insolu in nitrogen-free extract.” The pentosans soluble in the nitrogen-l,’ extract were secured by subtracting the pentosans insoluble in i- nitrogen-free extract from the pentosans in the nitrogen-free ext f, The total residue insoluble in N /50 acid and N /50 alkali was F termined as described in Bulletin 196. From this residue was s tracted the crude fiber, the pentosans insoluble in the nitrogen- extract, and the protein insoluble in N/50 acid and alkali, dete u; on other preparations. The remainder is termed the “insoluble n; gen-free extract, free from pentosans.” This was subtracted from‘ residual nitrogen-free extract to secure the soluble residual nitrog free extract. . a The “soluble residual nitrogen-free extract” is thus the resid nitrogen-free extract which is dissolved by N/ 50 acid and alkali. The proteids were determined by copper hydroxide. The total p,’ tein less the proteids is termed the amides. This is not strictly corr for the nitrogen factor for the amides is different from that for proteids. i I 1 COMPOSITION OF FEEDS. The composition of the feeds is shown in Table 1. The ordinp, analysis is given in Bulletins 166, 203, and 245. The reducing sup in some of the feeds are. larger than shouldtbe the case, on account reversion of sugars when extracted by water. The reducing sugar alfalfa hay 953'?’ may be compared with that in alfalfa hay 7005. difference is due to the method of extraction. - '7 DIGESTIBILITY OF SUGARs, ETQ, OF SOME FEEDING STUFFS. o . 8H M32 oo.o .33 oo.N 32 ow.oN NooH hhA am; ma; . . . . . . . . . . wo .H .D Sn: @215 o lwNhh NN.o oN oooN oo.w .3: oo.o 3 .o NooN m}: hw.N om. HNN . . . . . . . . . :8 H 5H is Qcifi w Ihwmo oh.oN Nhmfi oo.N ow. hN. oo.N oo. oHA oo.N oo.w S .o 2. . . . . . . ..hh H AH £395“; fizswwm h lwoN: oo.o wo ow.oH ohoH ow; Noo oo.o ww.o hoo oo. an; wo. . . . . . . . . . .hh .H AH .215 M258.“ omlooN: oN.o wNA 2.2 2...: 5a wo.N ooh ow.: oN.o No.N Nh.N 84 . . . . . . . . ..oo .H AH i=5: 2.28m h IohoNH 2o oh} wmwfi 8§ wNA wo.N hw.o 32 oo.w oo.N oN. 2Q . . . . . . . ...No .H .215 pizam o lohNw Nh.h NwA mo? 2 w oN.w oN.w £5 wH .oN ow.h hN.w Hm.» E; . . . . . . . . . ..hw H .H .52 358m oN\oHoNH Nh.o oo H hhoH oo.w ho.N ow.o NoAN ho.oN hh.o om .o hoé 8o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Imus? osfiwm o lohoh oo.o mo. oo.: oo.w ohN oo.w mmsw ww.wN ooh wo.o owA oo.w . . . . . . . . ..ow .H .D dost, fizamfi o iwooh wo.w mm; owNH oo.o wo.w ho.o 54m wo.wN 2a wHH oo.w mfim . . . . . . . . . ..oh.H.H.>@s psfixfim INHN: oo.w whA wN.: Nwo Noo wN.w $2 hHwN ow.h oo.o 5m hN.N . . . . . . . . . ..oo .H .Q 59o 258m mTfiwm oo.w £4 moNH wwo woo ho.o £3 wh.oN oo.w oh.w ooé wwA . . . . . . . . . ..hh.H.H .52 Hzéafim INoNZ oo.NH oN.N oh.: oo.o woo NHw ow.o ~o.NN oh.o oo.w oN. oo.o ........ww.H.Q.>wo 58o @855 |Noow Ho. wh.wN woo wwfi 5m 8§ hhoN mmvfi $4 hm. oo. . . . . . . . . ..ow.H.H .omw._oh 052m lNom: . . . . oooH oo.o ooh 2 .N oo. oh.w 8.2 5E mo. ho.o . . . . . .ho .H .H .822 QNGE e22 Holooow oN.w ma; oNoN Noo wmfi oo.w 8.: owoN wo.h~ oo.N 4 oo. Ho; . . . . . . . . . ..oh H .Q awwé “Ewm oomloomfi .... . - . . . .. ..... . ..¢. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..WQOQQ rvfiQshzfim .... . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . Qm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..WQQZO QHQU HHcwNM . .. ow.w .. . . . . . oflo oo.w ooNm ow.w ho. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Imcwon xowoowlNwhw ho 2 2. oo.o oN.o oN.o oo.N woo oo.o 2a oo.oo hh. oo. . . . . . . . . . .oo H .D doom “Evfii oHIwHow oo.w oo. ow.NN woo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. wN.oN NfihH Nh.o 2. wo.o ..... .w H .H .H dosh; woifiwm wNIhNZH ooNH NoN oNoH oo.o woo oh.w woNH 8.2 oN.w oo.o wo. oo. . . tow .H .Q of»: 3%: wofifio oolwoHw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ow.h oo.w ow.o o ofio oo. ................_@oEovmmzoobonofiloooh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ZNoAN oo.o NooH oNA oH. oo. ...............dzsooouwcoooonoowlwwoh hw. HN ow.N oo NH ho.N woo oo.o oo .N wNNH wo.o o ooA NH. .ow .H AH Afiowcofico wwmmfig oEU ooloooNH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ........ ........ ...-... c Am.@. . ...@.oz @QQWQQPHOU @QWWUHQ oo.wN wo . H oooH oo.o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NoNH gfi o oNo Ho. . . . A dZ “$2880 oxafihg v20 w lhwho How ... wo.N oo.oN oo.w 3Q ow.w 8§ NooN 3.2 No.o 2. HwN ...w ow .H .H 55:3 Qwfim FSU o iwofiw . . . . . . . . . . . IoooN oo.w oooH oooH oh.oN Noé wHA .....................aw.~oa.~oUwolhooo 2Q oo. mwNN hho Mai wo.w Hoo No.wN 8.2 woo m: omé . . . . . . . . .Nh .H .H £2 éézwm N IHwooH ow.w oo. mNNN oo.w 8.2 NN.N ow.w NHwN mNwH wo.w 2; $4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1?; “Miami w lhNoo ... - . ¢ - - ¢ . . - . . . . . . - - . . - . - . - - - . - ~ - - Q ¢ - - - ~ a m§~u . - . . . ~ . -©m om 1n wHo oN.N 8.3 ow.o how oh.w $13 oooN 2a oo.N ho; :1. . . . . . . . .No|ww .H AH “ha: @:§< o INooNH 2a How oooH oo.o oN.w ow.o oo.o“ mwwN 8.2 wwA wo.N ho.o ............ww .H .H s2 51¢?» wolowfi No.o oo.N No.2 oo.o ww.w wo.w 5.3 wHoN No.w wo.N whA oo.N . . . . . ..ww.H.H 62 2E2 wN|hNNw oN.w NH .w E3 No.w 2 .w Nh.o oh.w.» m2: Q2: oo.N NH .N ow. . . . . . . . . . . Zoo .H .H $2 B132 wmlhooo oo.: oo.N 52 oo.o wo.N ho.o oh.hH wh.wN 5w oN.N am; wN.N . . . . . . . . . . . . ..N dZ Qfi .9222 oo\oooh 2.: oo.o oooH oo.o wwo 3w wN.oN ow.wN oo.w oo.N ooA 2 .N . . . . . . . . . . . .. . H dZ Sn: £32 oN|wNho ow.w oh; NhwH oo.o wo.o wo.w $12 $2 Nh.o oh; hwé oHA H615»: @237» hHIoHow 24m .3. 3 .oN oo.o owNH ow.o 8.: oo.NN E22 3; oo.o hH .o . 1.3m .Q $.22 ooqom bsoo< o lwow: QOQQ H H .Z H H .2 H H .Z whwwsw wbwwsw m2»: .30 <30? 25.6 5 E H H .Z H H .Z E £33m AH mi Aim doomzdw 5 03:15.2 Bniow Hanoi»... iwsoowofl wcmwoo |osovfi Bniow . éom wsuwoocum doooo o0 GOSMmOQEOU . H oEmP v PEXAs AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. EN cc. Qwmm “cm: mmim ma.“ mmmm m2: NNHN 3W. in; . . . . . . . . 1.: 4L .2 dwsfi ficfie m amza cm m. mm mm mm cc m Q 3 EN 5.2 fiihm mmpt mma i; i; . . . . . . .. 4; .2 5m: mwflflm Ecpfi- c Jam... vac wma. mcAm cc.m. flwfi 2.». cwc wwam m¢€ cfl; w»: 31m . . . . . . . 1Q i. .2 dwfiw. c225 $15K mcé $1 MI .2 8+ $1."- $4 wit Ram cfi b; m; a. 2: xx...“ . . . . . . . . . 1c .13 .C dwfim 5E.» w Act. fikw 8.. ma: 2; ~52 <9». 5; $12 M52 g...» mm. EN . . . . . . . . . :3 .3 .C 22:5 F iccmc Ncfl mmcm 2;. wma; mwa. g... mm i mmb; ma: , ii 5%. . . . . . . . . . 1mm. .3 .2 ivdhm =22; c nxcic mic S. :1: m; é ~53 was. FA: F. 3 p53 S; “w; .9». . . . . . . . . . Inn .5 .C dfirac“ ~22; x 15...: wwum....w..........mwnmfl GHQ WHEN Mégf; HHMHHHMWAMW mm: 3M" mc... N; .2 a:€M.__.cQwémefluwwv? 43W . .. . A . .. A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _, .. . . . . , .. , . L . L : » N. Z ow ~ C N $1.... ti.“ £22.... Eb CECE ommmm c lwccc mi: ccb If: g ~ i Z m. HAN m3»; mccé. cm- S; ..........mc_\ .5 .2 5w: Eéwea $12K 5 c». mm i. cc m. cm m; mwtm Ecfi cmcm ~53 xcc é. ccpc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .>w; E__s_?_cv v lmmcc fifimw... ,..c~......... mwwwm m3“ cwcc...emw...;.cccncw.. aw s5 m1 a. $1.1. ....... .. § a c =l=flgwvwb¢www. .. . o fA gi . .. . . .. mm... Si. cc. i: . . . . . . . . . . IT. .2 .Q .9...C 5.3:; 1c . cc c 3cm mm. 53c > . . . . . . 1cm. .2 .._Q AVG ovfi wmwcfi m . . 4 f. . .. r u. . . . c a m: E .5. fiac . . . . :3 a .2 4 52 9i E Em 1. . I . . . . .. in: mmfc .2 ~ 5c v Se; m”? mmrm S: xc. . . . . . . . . . . . :5 E .Q .v.=_:_ 9:5 m $22 - . v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m?» . .. a. www am .32. .. “mum. . .. fianwz: mww mmg: e2 s. 2-. a a .5 QQW¢A_.@-MWMMW_ u . i. v -i . a . . . fih-A- °.N.%€ . . . . . . . . - . . . . . - . . I 2 Q AF A 5am Efw M55 2 < xc c $23 Iii ‘E... cc... cm; . . . . 1mm E .C in: v.35 mocésc c lwcmfl cm w i ~ bc. mm xfl v cc E 3+ Dim I cm mxf wm; 9w. 2.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . I5»: mwwcm. $2.25 m #9:. NW5.- i: Ncfl 5a hc. wag mmrm. Efimm“ mmw mm. mc. cc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iéc c Iwfia 3e mm. 2.5 wch mm I Efiv 2H2 chbm Q1: ma; cc. S; Iiiiiclmw 4L .C in: wcawi h ling Q}. wm. C 5 8+ 2a; 5+ if wmaa 2.2 El; i. i; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §€Ec cots i5 daxom. fisc 1 Qua oicfih w ImEw ccé mm. Edm 8e N92 Q4... 5.3 ccimm <93 Qw fix wmn . . . . . . . . . . . . ...w;.wcb 9:; A |0£ i5 dwxoF 52cm in: oiflfim mclwwcc 5pc Q m .Z HA wm .Z .m~ HA .Z Q wm ..Z wbwwsw wpmmsm 2%: . SQ 12.? wwio fi E 152.3. m m .2 5 gfifiw .5 mi Aim wowflbm» “S wfisicmsc mEEQw Bnfiom fimswiofi wcmwoc $35M » w mcmwccqofi a m ioncficoU|wwooc we ccGmmoQEcU A Esau. ' DIGESTIBILITY OF SUGARS, Ero, OF SoME FEEDING STUEEs. 9 The quantity of sugars in most of the feeds is comparatively small. With many of them, the total quantity is less than 3 per cent. The sample of cottonseed meal contains about 9 per cent, mostly consist- ing of raffinose. Peanut vines and peanut hay contain 5 to '7 per cent. of sugar, which is considerably more than that present in alfalfa. The samples of rice bran and rice polish contain nearly 5 per cent. (See also Bulletin 191 of this Station.) Sorghum hay contains 8 to 9 per cent. Sudan grass contains about 5 per cent. Non Zeyume Hays 177:1 Z eyu/ne Hays i 930/64) Ca/we/if/dffi‘ m / - laflféfl/aje (Expos/Wm Arm/yea’ 7/.- 5/00/42: 60 a ‘fl’*"' § w b \ Q k s § 15 " “- s x q; Q \ ‘u >‘ \ u Ks Q § k Q. ‘Q § “>2 m u x § k1 Lt u \ \ x <.<>___ \ o, K u": \ m Q § \ \> t °\ § ‘k ‘n \- ¥ S E fi b, x m \ Gg___ Q %\ ‘E w s s \ m S 3 3 \ 8* s w g \ § $ 33 ‘k Q \ Q \.b—- § "*- Q m. a“ \ c a \ <> W \ g §\§ °\ Q’ a Q, u §§> Q "fl § Q s W § >2 is FE: "‘ "t e The quantity of starch, as could be expected, is low with the rough- . ages and high with the concentrates, such as feterita seed, milo, corn, rice bran, and rice polish. The amount of starch in the» sorghum silage is comparatively high, especially when compared with sorghum hay, in which the starch is very low. The pentosans. are high in the carbo- hydrate roughages such as sorgo forage, bermuda. hay, feterita forage, kafir or milo forage, Rhodes grass hay, rice» hay, sorghum hay, and Sudan grass hay. They are somewhat lower in the legume forages, such as alfalfa hay or peanut hay. Concentrates, such as corn, kafir, a milo, rice polish, and rough rice, are still lower in pentosans. After adding together the sugars, starch, and pentosans in the nitrogen-free 10 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIoN. extract, and subtracting the sum from the total nitrogen-free extract, we secure the residual nitrogen-free extract. The sugars, starches, and pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract account very nearly for all the nitrogen-free extract of many of the concentrates, leaving only a comparatively small amount of the residual nitrogen-free extract. For example, With Argentine corn, there is only 1.82 per cent. residual nitrogen-free extract. With the sample of 'Jack beans, there is 5.13 per cent., feterita seed 5.56, kafir corn 0.22, milo 3.75, peanut kernels 1.16, rice polish 0.1.1, and rough rice 0.06 residual nitrogen-free extract. The case is quite different with the roughages. The amount of nitrogen-free extract not accounted for ranges between 20 and 30 per cent. of the total feed. Corn bran and whole-pressed cottonseed also contain high percentages of residual nitrogen-free extract. This portion of the nitrogen-free extract of roughages requires especial attention and investigation. The residual nitrogen-free extract is high in all of the hays and fod- ders. It is generally assumed that the nitrogen-free extract of hays and fodders and of other feeds consists of carbohydrates. While some of the residual nitrogen-free extract of hays and fodders can be con- verted to sugars, as shown in Bulletin 196 of this Station, it is pos- sible that a large percentage of it cannot be converted into sugars, and therefore does not consist of carbohydrates. There is a considerable field for investigation along this line. Even when part of this is con- verted into sugar, it is possible that some of it comes from the pento- sans, which are previously accounted for in the nitrogen-free extract. ' The column headed soluble residual nitrogen-free extract shows the residual nitrogen-free extract which is dissolved by fiftieth-normal acid and alkali. An examination of the table shows that comparatively large quantities of the residual nitrogen-free extract are dissolved by these comparatively weak solvents. Some of this may indeed be soluble in water, as has been shown in some investigations. About one-half of the residual nitrogen-free extract of accuff sorgo is dissolved by these weak solvents, and nearly three-fourths nitrogen-free extract of legumes seems to be more soluble than the non- legumes. This was pointed out with respect to pentosans in Bul- letin 1'75. The legume roughages contain smaller percentages of pentosans than the non-legumes. The percentage of pentosans soluble in N/50 normal acid and N/ 50 alkali is not very different for legumes and non-legumes, but since there is a much larger percentage of pentosans in the non-legumes, the proportions dissolved are greater for the legumes. These figures are given in the table. An examination of the figures for amides and proteids shows that while the amount of amides is usually small, it may sometimes make up a considerable proportion of the total protein. With alfalfa hay, one-third ofthe protein may be amide. The peanut vines.contain a smaller proportion of proteids than the alfalfa. COMPOSITION BY GROUPS. Table 2 contains the average composition of the feeds arranged by groups. Group 1 includes non-legume hays and forage, such as sorgo, of that of alfalfa hay. The residual _ \ . Drensrrsrnrrx or SUeARs, Era, or SoME FEEDING STUFFs. 11 bermuda, fete-rita, corn silage, prairie hay, Rhodes grass hay, Sudan hay, rice hulls and rice hay. Group 2 contains legume hays, such as alfalfa, dolichos lablab, moth bean and peanut. Group .3 contains starchy concentrates, such as corn, feterita, kafir, milo, rough rice, rice polish, and Jack beans. Group 4 includes corn bran, rice bran, cold- pressed cottonseed, and kafir head chops. Table 2. Percentage composition arranged in groups. Pen- No. Reduc- tosans Soluble Total of ing Di. Starch in residual residual Samples sugars sugars N. F. E. N. F. E. N. F. E. 27 Group 1. Non-legume hays and forage . . . . . . .. 2.14 0.72 2.67 16.79 9. 73 21 .83 15 Group 2. Legume hays... 1 . 98 1 . 92 3 . 73 8. 48 16. 78 23 . 99 9 Group 3. Starchy con- centrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 41 1 . 15 55. 79 5. 81 0. 92 2.29 6 Group 4. Cottonseed pro- ‘ ducts, corn bran, rice bran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.34 3.30 17.96 11.04 2.69 10.74 This table helps to bring out the differences just dis-cussed. PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE CONSTITUENTS. Table 3 contains the percentage distribution of the constituents of the feeds. The sugars, starches, pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract, residual nitrogen-free extract, and soluble residual nitrogen-free extract are expressed in percentages of the total nitrogen-free extract. The soluble and insoluble pentosans, and pentosans in the crude fiber, are expressed in percentages of the total pentosans. The non-proteids are expressed in percentages of the total protein. - 12 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. . . zwwofi .53.» use fiwxoP £50m £22 owiubm www ww @6252. o2 ww wswwowcwm ww. aUNMHXQ owbéowowwwZ w.ww ww ww.ww ww ww 2w ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww. ww.w . w nwfiw w.ww ww.w ww.w_ ww ww w. .2 Eww ww .ww ww.ww ww.w. ww.. ww.w Aww: wwwwww .25 wfisw wwwww “w.ww wwwfim w nwwww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .@mw @%. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .%m .m wQ \@.N£ @@.:.~_Nhm x w.ww 2w #2 w.ww w.ww . . . . . . .. ww.w ww2 ww.ww ww.ww wwl . . . . . . . . . . 1R m .Q .w_w=.§_ wwwwww w lwww: w.ww w.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.ww 3w ww.? ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32. Hm d .215 wwwwww w awww: w.ww 2.2 ww.ww ww ww ww.w2 ww.w ww.ww ww.ww ww.w2 ww.: ww.w .w::....fww m .D .215 wwwwww w awwww2 w.ww w.2 wfiww ww.w ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w: 2.: ww; 2w.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ww m .Q M25 wwwwww w nwwww w.ww 2.2 ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww ww wfiww ww.w 2ws ww.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iww m .Q 2 wwwwwm ww|w2ww2 w.ww w.w2 Eww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww ww ww.ww _w.w2 ww.w wwwH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zwwwww» wwwwww w uwwww w.ww. wwH Hwww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.: ww.w ww.w g . . . . . . . . . . . . . ww.w .Q wwwwfwwwwww w uwwww w.ww wi ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww E ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w Hpru . . . . . . . . . . . ..ww m .Q E2 wwwwww w |w2w2 w.ww w.2 ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w2 ww.w 2w . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ww m .Q .52 wwwwww wTEww fiww w.: ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww wwgw ww.ww ww.: ww.w zww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. m .Q “ww.w wwwwww w uwww: w.ww w.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww t. ww ww.ww www2 ww.w2 ww. ww; . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. fi m dwwww =82 w uwwww w.ww w..w_ wwlw ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.? ww.w ww. ww; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ww m .Q wwwwww wEz w |www2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22w ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w; ww.ww 2w. ww. ww.w? 3R5 wEz wwnwwww w.ww w.w2 ww.ww ww.ww www2 Sww ww.ww w.ww wfiw ww2 _w.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zww m .Q wwwwwwwwwm wwwwww: - - o - - Q u ~ - Q - - - - lloINlN .---.- IIIUIIII Qunnntliwmih 2B0 -»----.---.-¢a|un-awgozocwvshcum - - - . - ~ - . - - - - - . ..®fi-¢ -.~.-¢- ..--.- ..--- 2m. wwo Nwu -..-..--n--.---w-uwgoazo w.ww w; ww.w ww.w ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w ww.ww 2.2 ww. m G wwww wwcwwww wTw2ww N-hw . . . . - . - - . . . . . . . . . . . - . - -. “fit - - . . . . . . Q - - - -... cwlmfi -Q w.ww 22 ww.ww ww ww E ww ww ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww 2w; ww; . . . . . . . . . . ..ww..m Czwww wwzw. wwwwwwa w |ww2w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zww; ww.ww w ww.ww ww. wwwiwwwwwwwwwu2lwwww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zwwww .................:.....ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww. 3. ..w==wwwww=wwwwuw|wwww w.ww ww2 ww.ww ww.ww ww ww ww.: 2.ww ww ww w ww.w 2w. . . . . . . . .ww m .Q wwwwwwwwww wwwwwww ww.w ww|wwww2 Q Q . - - . - - . - - - . . . . . - . - . - - - . - - - - - - . - - - . - - - - pow o n - » - - u - - a n I om 0oz x.m@ §.@ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .§€ o m3. . . . . . . . . . . . .% .oz @QQWHMOPPQU %vwQ.WW@HQ x w.ww w.ww www2 ww ww ww.ww ww ww ww Q ww.ww wwwH ww. we . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ww .O wwwww Ewu w uwwww . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ww.2 ww.ww ww.? ww.w ww.. .......=www=._wuw|.wwww w.ww w.w 2ww2 ww ww 2.2 2.2 ww.ww ww.ww 2w.w ww.w ww.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...ww m .Q >2 wwwewwm w LwwwH www: w.w_ ww.2 ww.ww ww.w 22w ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w . .... . . ww.ww wwiwzwm w Jwwww 0 - - . o - - - a . . - - - - - . . - - - . . - - - - - . - - - . - ~ - . . - 0 - . .?o| é mm: - - - - . - - . - - - ¢ - - u -©m m D w.ww wwH ww.ww ww.ww wwgw ww Q ww.ww ww.ww wfiw ww.w ww.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ww.ww Hm .Q E2 wwww? w |wwww2 wnww w.ww ww.ww Eww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w .:H%:..HHH . . . . . Iww .m .Q .22 wwwwwZ wwiwwfi w ww w.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww ww ww.ww wfiww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w . . . . .. .. ww m .Q E2 £32 w Awww w.ww w.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w Htrflrxmmru ..... ...w.w..m .Q .25 wwwww. w Awww wuww wnww wwmww www2 wfiww w.ww ww.ww 22w wwnw wwuw wwmw wwz E2 ww.ww? wwuwwww w.ww w.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.ww ww.ww ww.w ww.w ww.w . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 wz E2 ww.ww? wwéwww w.ww w 2 ww ww ww.ww ww2w ww.ww w.ww ww.ww wfw ww.w ww w . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 2w m a >2 ww.ww? 2|w2ww w w» w.ww 32w wwgw ww.ww w.ww ww.ww ww ww ww. w ww ww. 2w m Q wwwwww wwwww wwwi w swww: . wwww a m .2 m m .z m m .2 w. m .2 .. @202 A50 owsfiw . 3 flfi iwnfiwop Cw SOHNHW Aim £025.,» wfl QEEcES 223cm 033cm fiwzgwum wcwwow wwmwsw wwwwflw . awn .5 wa . |O5U®m .30 dbwwsw Ho zoflsniwwmw omwfiwouwum .m 93mm. 13 DIGESTIBILITY OF SUGARS, ETC., OF Some FEEDING STUFFs. ma“. “JmN mm ~N aim... 2.2 3...; mix. “Sig. M54... i: mwN .M..Q.wm.fim swonorw m umSm P? Nb am NN Mala “#9: amNN wNAm mm?“ ma... wmN Nw.m L... . . . . . . . . . . . . dZ >2 wmmhm .222“. m lwwNw GA“. ohN a“. mN aodm 2.2 54mm 3am mmflm w“..N xv 3m .@.D.www~w =25,» 5:93“ P5 Fw wwdN fihén Si“. 3am Nwdw Q95 wmé .34. 2x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. am M“ A“ Mwwum 925m q lmwn“. “.5 mw“ “kPoN 5W3 ma: “mwm 5.3 waam 3.». mm. $4.. M .21.“ H“ .w£..w=2.=w ~ lomNm 3c“. a aN NwéN 3.5 $0.: m... 2 fiwfi. Nm “m 34. . IA ma; W ....mw.m.c.wmw.a 53w a uwcfiw w “w ~XN~ ma. “N amtmm “.92 fiaw i? anew 2 a 3;. a...“ . . . . . . . . . . . . b“. M.“ wwwhw =£5w w “M52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .m Aw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rvc.“ @ mtww . 9S mN.“.N 5A5 E.“ Qvmm mm Q w“..wN mm.“ mm. wma“ . . . . . . . . . . . . zfiima“ i“: 62.3% N I25“. f5 Nd NQQN 5.2 “MT: wfi .mN t»? ww.wN Nm.“. mNA .21: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p5“: Efiwéw v Immow w? NWO“ mwdN 5mm 21mm E ~N #2:. $9. mN.m 3. wm; H awake“ ==2w a $.22 YS w.N 5m wan mi" . . . . . . .. o w?“ n35 “b. m“. . . . . . ........€...m.cgxv.@a.. zwsom Nimmw w ma. .. pd. 2Q 8.8 3.3. . . . . . . .. mo. m...“ 8.3 Q: om ..fi..m.o; .02 w? zmiom wlfimw “NAB 26 @042“ E2. “mam EN“ 2.; .wN. . . . . . . . . . . . Jam Qzziwam m|m2m~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ®Uwm “YNNII 8.2 om 3 5.: 3.8 $9?” fiwwm #5.: moN mmN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...w“.m.c E2 oomfi owlmmN: . ImNN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. gig oN.m~ wm.wm “bNfi Q5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zcmhnufifl fl Io“.“.w w N“. N “.N gm: “aew 701: . . . . . . .. ~53. awau. “m; wmN $5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% Q .Q ha: wwgw 835m a lwomNfi ma“ “AN Nfi .3 Mala QNJZ “b5; ~58. wmvmu. 0N5 ooN mme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15w: wwfiw wmacgm m 13...: Qww 7: 2.3 ma? M58. 5am m9?” 8w... mm; mo. wN. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . QSm m éfim P3. v.3 woem £15 wvNN mmfwN Nfiém awe». 24. 2: mwN :....:........@1@w.m .Q ha: 2.52m “. éfifi . . .56 4m a .Z Q HA .2 Q Z .Z 4m m .Z mum»... .03 35.8 E 5 Nnswmw»! Q wm . Z E zohfim . Aim dwEE< c“ oiiscwfi oiizsw 223cm Radium“ wcmwoa Emwsw mpmmsw _ . évm AD m5 loswofl 2: 3 =68...“ 0c“ mm wcmmoanwn“ . mm QUNQwKO UUFW-GQWOHZZ .UQUG$_HCUIIQQQ dhmwsw ho ccfisnwfiwmw wwwgcoouoh .m 2mm“. 14 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT‘ STATION. For example, the starch in accuff sorghum forage is 3.42 per cent. and- the pentosans 45.03 per cent. of the nitrogen-free extract. The ’ residual nitrogen-freer extract is 50.27_per cent. of the total nitrogen- free extract. Of the pentosans, 27.28 per cent. is soluble in N /50 ‘v hydrochlo-ric acid and alkali, 51.28 is insoluble in the Weak acid and alkali, but present in the nitrogen-free extract, and 21.44 per cent. is ‘i. found in the crude fiber; 23.8 per cent. of the nitrogen is present asw non-proteids. . ‘ ’ An examination of this table leads to» the same conclusions as those.‘ reached by examination of Table 1, although the results are stated in i- a different way. Thus, the sugars make up only small percentages com- a paratively of the nitrogen-free extract. The starches also make -up small f percentages of the nitrogen-free extract with the roughages but large i percentages with the concentrates. Of the nitrogen-free extract of Argentine corn, 87.96 per cent. consists of starch and 7.86 per cent. p‘; of pentosans. The pentosans make up a large percentage of the nitrogen- f" free extract of the grass-like roughages and a smaller percentage of the e nitrogen-free extract of alfalfa hay, peanut hay, and similar legume . roughages. The residual nitro-gen-free extract is a large per cent. with the hays and fodders, but is only a small per cent. with the concen- trates such as Argentine corn, kafir, milo, peanut kernels, etc. Some concentrates are really a mixture of a true co-ncentrate with larger or smaller amounts of the roughage material. This is the case with corn bran. In corn bran, 41.45 per cent. of the nitrogen-free extract con- sists of starch, 29.54 of pentosans, and there is a residue of 24.28. Rice bran is partly a concentrate, but contains some rice hulls. The sam- .4. ple examined contains 58.3 per cent. of the nitrogen-free extract as . " starch, 15.20 per cent. as pentosans, and has a residual nitrogen-free extract of 13.31. ' - DIGESTIBILITY OF THE FEEDS. The digestibility of the feeding stuffs has been calculated, and the digestible coefficients are given in Table 4. 15 DIGESTIBILITY OELSUGARS, Etna, OF SOME FEEDING STUFFs. l\@v—4©<‘0OG\O5 LQOONOOFUDQOOOPHNIFNQOQ§C7 QDQQ!‘PNOCOCOLOfiHONNDLOQOOFNKDQDFfiOONOOQQQOOOCOOOv-IQONG LCHQLOfiLOLOLOCOCOLOfiQOmI-OOUQFfiO5l\@l\OO0O0O€"©O50300¢D€‘®l-O¢fi©©©© ~22 fiNNON$Nvm~0mN~¢O N®®OhhmmOmOmmwNO - . ~ ¢ u - a . n u Q | n Q a ¢ ¢ ¢ o - ¢ - a a QDI\I\NYFO5COO5OOLOOI®LOl\r-100@OVC5®O5 F"! v-H-H-l v-l ....» - . . - uontooultihwlminhhaaaggdom . . . . . . . . . .N.m. .m .Q -MH.5.§ kfiflfi Hfl-AMdQm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOOOOIIIIIOmwgM>HsqmQm . . . . . . . . - . ... . .- ... -w§ 0m 0D . . . . . - - . . . . . . . . . . - -$£ um 0Q. . . . . . . . . . . - . . . - . ¢ - u§§ 0m 0D . . . . . . . . . . - . . . n -§§ um -Q . . . - . . - . - . . - um an . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 .ox .m am . . - . - . - . - -w -D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kwm. .Q @W.NHO% Hmwflm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0m 0Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nfi am 1Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12mm .m~ .Q mason x93. . . . . . . . . . - . . . - . - - 0mm om 1Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .¢N. {FF .Q QUWNHO.U_. NQT~UHUh . . . . . . . . . . . . .m .Q Qflds Q.N—Q.N@ MQ5U.Z@Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135 woownoawoU . . . . . . ..................w=:A©oom=ofi.oU aw H .Q woomcopaoo ©0395 goo wowfibmfi . . . . . . . . . . N dZ fiwwwcofipoo wowwva EQU . . . . . . . .mN Q .Q éoomcofioo v.33...“ EoU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ¢ - -£¢ om 0Q >..i..}...-..i..>-q-nuwmomomngd¢figgofiou .. ..N§¢m¢Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1m 0Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -m -Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .§@ -m ¢Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -Xx um ¢Q . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . -¢x ~m OQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -£AE- ¢m pm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . -x€ ¢m ‘Q . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . .x@ 0m ‘Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .m@ Om -Q .%.N§ . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . -§m ‘m 0Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0w. In . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . nmi.n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .%§ -m.m-Q >fi§ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .%AE. -m 0Q . . . . . . . . . . . . ..?w ‘m 1Q .30 awfie... wax... m2. 9%.. 0 .9...“ can 5Q. 9% ~43. 9Q. mam Ndm 9% o 9...... .92. 9E 9S Q 9% 9%.... w».-- 9% 93 NAN. . ..fi@... i? ...? 95.... @H~..<...... 99...: flimm “.5. 9mm 9Q. 9mm . . . . . . .. 98. Ywm m5“. w... 2:. .99. fiwm wan Néw 5m... 9N». m5? 9M9... FNMA... W69... 9% ma; 9Q. 0.»? w? mwfi Nfim #3 .58.. .m.m.z owsuo 5 GM 255025 wsmwowaoh <5 fimw m3 o 9% 9% ~28 9% 9% <2. 9w... .98. m4... o ma“. 9% ....$ 9mm Q62 o i... .99.. was. NH........... mé. .9 A99..- Axe»... 2...»... m3 .19.. w...“ 9m . 9E. mam. ma... v.5 fit. 9% mam mam Haw 9mm 5% 9E. A9F..: .9....9... 99...... 9E “ZR. 95 9:. @.Na 9:. 9o... mam ..m.m.z .M.m.Z 5 323m»! 28.3w 28.3w dQQQMOEQOU cofimowfi. 3.2295. A. 01GB .m.fi.m.Z in . wcwwoa éom JOHNHW I v 16 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION . . the. 4.1;; . ...? inixi. . . . . . . . . . . - . . - - . . . . . - . . .3 ...“. “..w“. 5w“. ma. “.2 ow“ wwm ww“. m...“ m? i; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12M“. H“ 693w swans“. Nam N? ca... 9% w“... ma. mam ww“. “I2. N? ma“. :3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..“.N d7“. .9...“ mwwpm wwofi“. w.mw 5w“. wmm ma... ma... w? w.“w “Ham as... ma... mi. “la . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2m“. M MmwACw 235m 5mm “.3 mww “m... www 5mm m2. “.2. oww. w.“.m w? “Iwm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2mm NM H“ ......» 3.5m . . . - - - - . - - . . - - .» -..-......-..--ulo© um m3 .38 “m... www “..w“. w.“w w? N.“w 5mm o.“.“. 92.. “:2 Nw.M.H“.wmm“mcw“:-m 5mm “.3 www oww w.ow awn 50w m“... w.“.w m? Ndm 5mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 2w“. M .H“ wwfim .395 N.®N . - - . - . - - . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . - . - . . - . . . . - . . - . . - . . . . - ~ . - - n T 1mm um an . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .. . .... ... . ....... . ...-.... . ..... . . .... .ox .m -Q w? 5mm “an “Zhw www waw “...... ww“. www .3 “..“.w .12. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1w“. .M H“-.>§“ 6.59am 5m “..“w fa w.mw w? mdw “Yaw “w. 9N“. 98 w.“.m 5am . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..“N.M.M .52“ EEwSm 6%.... w“... . “ww Nww 5Q “Kmw . ma“. . m6“. 5ww 5m“. 98“ ma“. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......w“..M.m“ Qwfiafiifii . . . . . . . - - - u | - - - - - | @ - - - ulunuaou -.~».-- -¢.--. nronoonn o --|-.-¢.--¢ouom om nag “.2. NA.“ “fiww o ww“. owe“ o o w.“.“ 5mm wwm “..“.w . . . . . . . . . . . . :2. .M .M “ .o7“ wot nwsom“ o “.“. m6“. mfi“. “Zmw “imw w.“.m m.“.m min“. .“..ww www . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..“m .M H“. wzsnoofl“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..@.@@ ........ ........ ........ a ...................§§-m -Q P? as... “..w“.. m3 o... N“... “.w“ wwm 9E. www “vi. m...“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....“ .M H“. .92“ v05“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . low“. ado “Yam w.“.m nflfioo?“ 9mm ww“. “..“.w “..“.w wfiw w.o“. wem ww“. w.“.w “..““. w? m.“.m . . . . . . . . . . . . Imw .M A“ x92“ wwfim .035“ 5mm mww “Z5 www Nflw “Kww 5w“. w“. 5mm “Row Ném “..“.m . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% .M H“ .92“ 3.3m 895m wwm w.“w 9S ow“. “I... www Mg... a“... 9o... “ w“. m...“ 9S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iww .M H“ .5...“ Qua...“ m“: ww“. m“. wdm “..“w “.ww m2 w“... m“. www mwm “Kwm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......ww .M H“ x92“ v3.3a“ w“. “.“.w “..“.w mww mam 5“.w ...... wwN .2 .. N3 35 9M3 ...“wo.““ .5“? “so wmxuP 5.5m x92“ was...“ wNw w “w ow“. 5m“. w H“. m“. cam “wow a am Nww w? w...» 230k“ 33o.“ “so 6.38.“. 5.5m .52“ 0......“ “..“.N “I5 “a... own ...... “..ww as... “v.8 N.“.w. w.m“. Nd“. Mia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..“w .M H“ x92“ @“..“Sm ..- - . . . . . . . . . . . -.m.ofihd . . . . - . . . . . . . - . . - - .-wN am 1Q mww “w: wwm ...“: m“: mww m3 ww“. “.3 “..“w m? “wa . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 10m .M H“ .212“ “sfium “ww mi. “.“.m 50w 9mm ma... “Ywm 9% o 5mm 98“ “.8 .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1M...“ H“ 21E “snack his .M M .7“ .M M .7“ .M ...“ .7“ Emmsw 93m“; wEo“ .3“. “w“o“. $5.5 s“ c“ .M M .7“ M M .7“ n“ £33m .“H“ ma“ Lin“ JQUICM“ c“ oiizowc“ wiiom “wzwfiuh “mswfiofl wcwwo“ . 535m“ . . 052cm |Gon“ @5232?“ ..“vosc““coUlnw“cv“om“ooo .8383“. @333“ v3.3“. Drensrrenirrx’ OF SUGARS, ETC., or Sous FEEDING STUFFs. 17 The digestibility of the sugars is generally high, and is usually practically 100 per cent. This confirms our conclusions in Bulletin 196. We Would be safe in considering the sugars as practically com- pletely digested. Table 5. Average digestibility of starch and total nitrogen-free extract. Number of Nitrogen- samples Starch. i free extract Starch below 80 per cent digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69. 6 54.2 15 Starch 80 to 9O per cent digested. .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85.3 61.0 23 Starch over 90 per cent digested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96. 2 - 73.2 27 The digestibility of the starch is more variable than that of the sugars, but is usually high. Table 5 shows the average digestibility of the starch compared With the ave-rage digestibility of the total nitrogen- /V00 éeyume fi/ayr ti: Leyume Hay: — 5mm!) ffl/lfiP/if/a/PS 15/- }. 2 “100/680/438 ZJ/yesf/fi/Uijv W/anyea’ m Group: R? ‘ t. t s i A h x b §~t—— N ‘i ‘c. ‘h ‘<4 ‘V s m { k ls w b ‘K i? ‘c s §o ‘ <5 ‘K .\§°--_- a \, Q, ‘Q “x ‘q m Q h. s ‘s s \- “’ ‘a 3 %‘ a s s .“s-— as s § s % ‘\ s. * ‘a s is“ Q s ‘Q ‘* ‘Q w» "r Q; ' m k5? a é i1: ‘Q 3'“ § 8. Q’ 92 s‘ x é E é ‘g \ \ m \ Q \ i‘ s Q i‘ a <1 <~ s Ii‘ free extract. With 15 samples, the digestibility of the starch Was less than 80 per cent. These are all roughages, containing comparatively small amounts of starch, so that a small amount of starch undigested Would cause a considerable decrease in the percentage of digestibility. For these 15 samples, the digestibility of the starch averaged 69.6, and for the nitrogen-free extract 54.2. With only one of these feeds, Rhodes grass hay, 12508-09, is the starch apparently digested less than the tically the same for the third group. The digestibility of the crude; 18 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. total nitrogen-free extract. In spite of the small percentage of starcir present, it is digested in considerably higher percentages than the tot. nitrogen-free extract. "it With 23 of thesamples, 80 to 90 per cent. of the starch was digestedf The digestibility of the starch was 85.3, and that for the total nitrogen: free e-xtract 61.0. i; With 2'7 of the samples, the starch was more than 90 per cent digested. The average digestibility of the starch in these feeds was 92.2, and for the nitrogen-free e-xtract it was 73.2. The digestibility of the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract is mo -* variable than that of the starch, and is generally lower. With 22 o: the samples,'this digestibility was less than 50 per cent., with 20 samé ples it was between 50 and 60 per cent., and with 26 samples it .<- over 6O per cent. ~ ' Table 6. Average digestibility pentosans in nitrogen-free extract, etc. Pen- tosans Residual‘ Soluble Nitro- Crude ‘ N0. 3 in» N. F. E. res‘ ual gen-free fiber samples f N. F. E. N. F. E. extract Pentosans in N. F. E. digested less a f than 50 per cent . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.7 39.0 42. 9 55. 1 44.0 22 P Pentosans in N. F. E. digested 50-60 per cent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54.8 48.6 57.3 60.2 53.8 20 i Pentosans in N. F. E. digested over < 60 per cent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 76.5 46.8 61.1 76.3 56.3 26 f The average digestibility of the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract, divided into the groups mentioned above, is given in Table 6. On ref-i erence to the table, it is noted that as the average digestibility of the" pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract increases, so- also increases the; average digestibility of the soluble residual nitrogen-free extract, the total nitrogen-free extract, and the crude fiber. The digestibility 0 the residual nitrogen-free extract increases from the first to- the second group, but decreases from the second to the third group. It is noticed that the digestibility of the residual nitrogen-free extract is less than that of the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract on an average. The. digestibility of the total nitrogen-free extract is greater than the digesti-rf bility of the pentosans therein for the first two groups, and prac-‘f fiber is nearly the same for the first two groups, but considerably less, for the third group. 5 It is also to be noted that the digestibility of the residual nitrogen-e free extract is les-sthan the digestibility of the crude fiber in all casess We have previously pointed out that there is a possibility that the. fermentation will so affect the crude fiber as. to cause it to be soluble? in the acid and alkali, and thereby cause it to appear as nitrogen-fr extract in the excrement of the animal. The lower digestibility of th residual nitrogen-free extract compared with the crude fiber seems be evidence that such may occur. - v a i s DIGESTIBILITY 0F SUGARS, Ero, or Soiun FEEDING STUFFs. 19 Table7. Average digestibility of residual nitrogen-free extract, etc. Pentosans Residual in Tot N0. of N. F. E. N. F. E. N. F. E. samples Residual N. F. E. digested below 40 per cent. . 21.7 58.4 26 Residual N. F. E. digested 40-50 per cent. . . . . 45.1 51.9 59 8 14 Residual N. F. E. digested over 50 per cent. . . 68.8 59.6 28 Table '7 shows the average digestibility of the residual nitrogen-free extract arranged in groups. With 26 of the samples the digestibility was less than 40 per cent. It must be observed that some of these samples, such as rice bran, rice polish, rough rice, and whole peanuts, contain very little residual nitrogen-free extract and this has a digesti- bility of 0. The average would be higher if these were excluded. The digestibility of the residual nitrogen-free extract is less than the digesti- bility of the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract fo-r the first two groups, but greater for the third group. It is also less for the total nitrogen-free extract for the first two groups, but practically the same for those over 50 percent. digested. The residual nitrogen-free extract had a digestibility of more than 50 per cent. chiefly with alfalfa hay, _ peanut hay, and other legumes. DIGESTIBILITY BY GROUPS OF FEEDS. Table 8 gives the average digestion coefficients by groups. The first group consists of non-legume hays and forages, such as Sudan grass, sorghum hay, and so on. The second group includes legume hays. The third group includes starchy concentrates such as kafir, rough rice, Jack beans, and feterita. The fourth group includes some miscellane- ous products, rice bran, corn bran, and cold-pressed cottonseed. Table 8. Average digestion coefficients by groups. Cotton- Non- seed legume Legume Starchy products, hay and hays Concen- rice bran, forage trates corn bran _Starch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 76.2 89.7 97.4 94.4 Pentosans in N. F. E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 52.7 47.4 75.1 83.6 Total residual N. F. E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.8 61.4 22.9 47.2 Soluble residual N. F. E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43.9 72.3 26.4 50.0 Pentosans soluble in N. F. E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.7 74.4 100.0 0 Pentosans insoluble in N. F. E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54.6 34.9 54. 8 81.1 Pentosans in crude fiber . . . . . . . . .~ . . . . . . . . . . . 56.5 54.1 18.2 38.6 Pentosans, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54.2 52.4 68.7 76. 7 Non-proteids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.2 85.7 34.9 76.9 Proteids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37. 9 68.1 84.8 66. 9 Starch is digested about completely from the starchy concentrates, next largest in the cottonseed-rice-bran group, next in the legume hay, and least in the non-legume hays and forages. - The pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract are digested to the great- est extent in the cottonseed products, next in the starchy concentrates, third in the non-legume hays, and fourth in the legume hay. The residual nitrogen-free extract is digested to a large extent in the legume 2O TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. hays, and to the smallest extent in the starchy concentrates. This group of materials is found only in small amounts in the starchy con- centrates; so here is a much greater possibility of error. The soluble residual nitrogen-free extract digested to the greatest extent in the legume hays, and next in the cottonseed products. The pentosans soluble in nitro-gen-free extract are digested to the greatest extent in the starchy concentrates, and ne-xt in the legume hays. The p-roteids are digested to the largest extent in starchy con- ' cent-rates, next in the co-ld-pressed cottonseed group, then in the legume hays, and least in the non-legume hays ‘and forages. The amides are digest-ed to the greatest extent in the legume hays. The averages in some of these cases are composed of rather varyfing figures, especially for some of the substances occurring only in small quantity. It is believed, how>ve\*er, that so-me of them show quite sug- gestive differences in the classes of feeds. A closer classification cannot be made on account of the limited number of samples examined. If a larger number of samples had been examined, it would be possible to split up some- of the groups and examine them more in detail. PROTEIDS AND NON-PROTEIDS. Proteids were determined in the feeds and excrements used in these experiment-s by Stutzer’s method. The percentage of proteids and non- proteids in the feeds is shown in Table 1. The distribution of the proteids is shown in Table 3, and their digestibility in Table 4.. The determinations of proteids and non-proteids were also made in the feeds and excrements used in the digestion experiments 1 to 18, and the results are given in Table 9. Table 9. Occurrence and digestibility of proteids in feeds used in experiments 1 to 18. _ Coefficient _ Per cent Pr0teids——100 digestibility Per cent on- proteids protein _ Non- Non- Proteids proteids proteids Proteids 3277- 8 Alfalfa hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.36 3.81 76.4 23.6 88.4 69.2 4252- 3 Bermuda hay . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.48 0.95 85.0 15.0 87.3 42.1 3609-10 Bur clover . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14.88 8.55 63.5 36.5 96.7 71.6~ 3883- 4 Buffalo grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.93 1.12 84.0 16.0 84.4 47.4 4557- 8 Corn shucks . . . . . . . . . . . 2.66 0.54 83.0 17..0 32.4 _ 0 3220-1 Cowpea hay . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.11 5.55 62.0 38.0 94.1 58.5 4552- 3 Guam grass . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7.98 0.45 94.7 5.3 38.3 52.4 3587- 8 Johnson grass hay . . . . . . . . 6. 57 0.87 88.3 11.7 88 ..2 34.4 4238- 9 Johnson grass hay . . . . . . . . 6.06 0.86 87.6 12.4 78.7 47.9 4546- 7 Kafir fodder . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.21 3.69 62.7 37.3 83.2 50.6 4247- 8 Millet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.89 0.33 92.2 7.8 89.1 25.2 3595- 6 Oat hay . . . . . . . . . . . 7.65 0.39 95.2 4.8 8.0 61.3 4259-60 Peanut hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.96 1.60 88.2 11.8 88.4 77.3 4277- 8 Para grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.01 0: 33 90.1 9.9 82.9 9.7 3625- 6 Rice straw, Japan. . . . . . . . 3.24 0.68 82.7 17.3 71.9 7.5 3625- 6 Rice straw, Honduras. . . . . 3. l7 0.81 79.6 20.4 68.1 22.5 4663- 4 Sorghum hay. . .- . . . . . . . .. 5.14 0.44 92.1 7.9 61.0 29.0, 3649-50 Vetch hay . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . 11.05 3.95 73. 7 26.3 92.0 67.9 Table 8 shows the percentage of proteids and non-proteids in the feeds as averaged by groups. An examination of Table 3 shows that one sample of alfalfa con- tained as high as 33 per cent. of the protein in the form of non-proteids. DIGESTIBILITY or SUeARs, Era, or SoME FEEDING STUFrs. 21 On the other hand, feterita seed contains only 1.2 per cent. of the pro- tein as non-proteids. ‘ An examination of the table of digestibility shows that the amides or non-proteids are almost always digested to a greater extent than the proteids. It must be recalled that this is apparent digestibility, and not real digestibility. Metabolic products in the excrements must A be in the nature of proteids. - The importance of the distinction between proteids and non-proteids in feeding stuffs is not as great as it was formerly thought to be, now that we know that animals utilize some of these amides as structural material in building up body protein. In the process of digestion, the ‘ proteids are split up into amides and other products to some extent, and from these the animal organism selects the materials for building body proteids. The nutritive ratio, or relation between protein and non-protein in a ration, is important to secure thorough digestion, but non-proteids seem to be as ‘effective in this respect as pro-teids. ACKNOWLEDGMENT. Analytical and other work involved in this ‘Bulletin has been done by S. E. Asbury, J. B. Rather, L. C. Ludlum, W. P. Sprott, and other members of the staff. i - ' SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. A This Bulletin deals with the quantity of sugars, starches, pentosans, and residual nitrogen-free extract of the nitrogen-free extract, and i their digestibility. The quantity of sugars in most feeds is comparatively small. Many i of them contain less than 3 per cent. The sugars are digested almost completely. The quantity of starch, as could be expected, is low with the rough- ages and high with the concentrates, such as corn, or rice bran. The digestibility of the starch is high in all feeds. The sugars, starches, and pentosans account for nearly all of the nitrogen-free extract of many of the concentrates. Sugars, starches, and pentosans account for only a small part of the l; nitrogen-free extract of roughages. It is probable that part of the nitrogen-free extract of roughages does not consist of carbohydrates. The legume roughages contain smaller percentages of pentosans than the non-legume roughages. _ ' While the amount of amides is usually small, it may sometimes make up a considerable portion of the protein. The digestibility of the pentosans in the nitrogen-free extract is more variable than that of the starch, and is generally lower. With 22 of the samples, this digestibility was less than 5O per cent; with ‘l’ 20 samples it was between 50 and 60 per cent., and with 26 samples 3 it was over 60 per cent. - The digestibility of the residual nitrogen-free extract was less than 40 per cent. with 26 of the samples, but some of the samples contained s, very little residual nitrogen-free extract. The digestibility of the resi- i, dual nitrogen-free extract was more than 50 per cent. with alfalfa hay, J peanut hay, and other legumes.