725-15M TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIIIN AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS W. B. BIZZELL, President BULLETIN NO. 331 ' May, 1925 DIVISION OF POULTRY HUSBANDRY THE VALUE OF VARIOUS FEEDS IN THE CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN CHICKS B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS STAFF (As of May 1, 1925) ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Director A. B. CONNER, M. S., Vice-Director A. H. LEIDIGH, M. S., Asst. Director CHAS. A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary M. P. HOLLEMAN, JR., Asst. Chief Clerk J. M. SCHAEDEL, Executive Assistant C. B. NEBLETTE, Technical Assistant VETERINARY SCIENCE *M. FRANCIS, D. V. M., Chief H. SCHMIDT, D. V. M., Acting for Chief V. J. BRAUNER, D. V. M., Veterinarian CHEMISTRY G. S. FRAPS, Ph. D., Chief of Division; State Chemist S. E. ASBURY, M. S., Asst. Chemist WALDO H. WALKER, Asst. Chemist J. K. BLUM, B. S., Asst. Chemist J. E. TEAGUE, B. S., Asst. Chemist VELMA GRAHAM, Asst. Chemist K. KITSUTA, M. S., Asst. Chemist ADAH E. PROCTOR, B. S., Asst. Chemist N. J. VOLK, M. S., Asst. Chemist I-IORTICULTURE A. T. POTTS, M. S., M. S. C., Chief of Division; Citriculturist H. NESS, M. S., Berry Breeder RANGE ANIMAL I-IUSBANDRY J. M. JONES, A. M., Chief of Division; Sheep and Goats JAY L. LUSH, Ph. D., Animal Breeder (Genetics) FRANK GRAYSON, Wool Grader ENTOMOLOGY F. L. THOMAS, Ph. D., Chief of Division; State Entomologist H. J. REINHARD, B. S., Entomologist E. HOBBS, B. S., Asst. Entomologist C. S. RUDE‘, B. S., Chief Foulbrood Inspector H. S. CAVITT, B. S., Apiary Inspector AGRONOMY E. B. REYNOLDS, M. S., Chief A. B. CONNER, M. S., Agronomist, Grain Sorghum. Research A. H. LEIDIGH M. S., Agronomist, Small Grain Research No. 1, Beeville, Bee County R. A. HALL, B. S., Superintendent No. 2, Troup, Smith County W. H. HO FCHKISS, Superintendent No. 3, Angleton, Brazoria County V. E. HAFNER, B. S., Superintendent No. 4, Beaumont, Jefferson County R. H. WYCHE, B. S., Superintendent No. 5, Temple, Bell County A. B. CRON, B. S., Superintendent No. 6, Denton, Denton County P. B. DUNKLE, B. S., Superintendent No. 7, Spur, Dickens County, R. E. DICKSON, B. S., Superintenednt No. 8, Lubbock, Lubbock County R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent No. 9, Balmorhea, Reeves County J. J. BAYLES, B. S., Superintendent Members of Teaching Staff in the School of G. W. ADRIANCE, M. S., Associate Prof- fessor of Horticulture S. W. BILSING, Ph. D., Professor of En- tomology . A. BUECHEL, Ph. D., Professor of Agricultural Economics W. E. GARNETT, Ph. D., Professor of Rural Sociology H. V. GEIB, B. Agronomy S., Assistant Professor of *Dean, School of Veterinary Medicine G. N. STROMAN, Ph. D., Agronomist, Cotton Breeding C. H. MAHONEY, B. S., Asst. in Cotton Breeding R. H. STANSEL, B. S., Asst. in Crops PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY J. J. TAUBENHAUS, Ph. D., Chief FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS L. P. GABBARD, M. S., Chief B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Farm and Ranch Economist V. L. CORY, M. S., Grazing Research Botanist (Sonora) ***T. L. GASTON, JR., B. S., Asst. Records and Accounts ***A. S. BRIENT, B. S., Asst. Ranch Records and Accounts ***B. P. HARRISON, B. S., Collaborator SOIL SURVEY ***W. T. CARTER, B. S., Chief H. W. HAWKER, Soil Surveyor E. H. TEMPLIN, B. S., Soil Surveyor BOTANY H. NESS, M. S., Chief PUBLICATIONS A. D. JACKSON, Chief SWINE I-IUSBANDRY _ FRED HALE, B. S., Swine Husbandman DAIRY I-IUSBANDRY -———————, Chief POULTRY HUSBANDRY R. M. SHERWOOD, M. S., Chief MAIN STATION FARM D. T. KILLOUGH, B. S., Superintendent STATE APICULTURAL RESEARCH LAB- ORATORY (San Antonio) H. B. PARKS, B. S., Apiculturist in Charge A. H. ALEX, B. S., Queen Breeder FEED CONTROL SERVICE F. D. FULLER, M. S., Chief S. D. PEARCE, Secretary J. H. ROGERS, Feed Inspector W. H. WOOD, Feed Inspector G. M. MORRIS, B. S., Feed Inspector W. C. GAINEY, B. S., Feed Inspector C. D. WHITMAN, B. S., Feed Inspector K. L. KIRKLAND, B. S., Feed Inspector Farm SUBSTATION S No. 10, College Station, Brazos County (Feeding and Breeding Station) R. M. SHERWOOD, M. S., Animal Husband- man in Charge of Farm L. J. McCALL, Farm Superintendent No. 11, Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County G. T. McNESS, Superintendent ***No. 12, ChilIicothe, I-Iardeman County D. L. JONES, Superintendent No. 14,_Sonora, Sutton-Edwards Counties E. M. PETERS, B. S., Superintendent D. HSBENNETT, D. V. M., Veterinarian V. L. CORY, M. S., Grazing Research Botanist "*0. G. BABCOCK, B. S., Collaborating Entomologist O. L. CARPENTER, Shepherd No. 15, Weslaco-Mercedes, Hidalgo County W. H. FRIEND, B. S., Superintendent A. T. POTTS, M. S., M. S. C., Citriculturist No. 16, Iowa Park, Wichita County E. J. WILSON, B. S., Superintendent Agriculture Carrying Cooperative Projects G. P. GROUT, M. S., Professor of Dairy Husbandry V. P. LEE, Ph. D., Professor of Agricul- tural Economics E. O. POLLOCK, A. M., Asst. Professor of Agronomy W. L. STANGEL, M. S., Professor of An- imal Husbandry (Swine) R. C. WHITE, M. A., Asso. Professor of Rural Sociology "fin cooperation with United States Department of Agriculture SYNOPSIS The feeding of buttermilk materially decreased the mortality of chicks that were artificially infected, at eleven and twelve days of age, with Eimeria Avium, the germ of coccidiosis, a troublesome disease of chicks. The mortality for the lots getting no buttermilk was 63.6 per cent; for those getting the condensed buttermilk, diluted with water in the proportion of one quart of condensed buttermilk to six quarts of water, the loss was 44.8 per cent. With lots receiving condensed buttermilk, diluted in the proportion of one quart condensed buttermilk to three quarts of water, the mortality was only 26.0 per cent. No advantage was gained by the use of greens ex- cept in the case of a lot which received greens and no but- termilk. In this lot the loss was only 38.3 per cent while it was 69.9 per cent and 82.6 per cent in the other two lots receiving no buttermilk. Other data are needed to prove whether or not this lower loss was due to the feeding of greens. No advantage was gained by the use of cod-liver oil up to the time the chicks were eight weeks of age when the disease is considered to have run its course. The gain in weight was greatest with the chicks re- ceiving the 1-3 buttermilk and smallest with those re- ceiving no buttermilk. The amounts of grain, mash, and milk consumed were in proportion to the gain in weight. (3) Bulletin N0. 331 May, 1925 THE VALUE OF VARIOUS FEEDS IN THE CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN CHICKS R. M. SHERWOOD INTRODUCTION This is the first of a series of experiments at this Station to study whether any food materials or methods of management are of value in controlling coccidiosis. In this experiment the work was limited to a study of the value of buttermilk with and without greens andcod-liver oil. The disease, coccidiosis, is probably the worst that poultry raisers of this State have to contend with. This is especially true where large numbers of chickens are raised together and during seasons when rainfall is plentiful. The disease is caused by a parasite called Eimeria Avium or Coccidium Avium. This disease develops after the chicks are three to six weeks old and is accompanied by bloody diarrhoea. There is some dispute as to the carriers of this parasite. Hadley‘ stated that, “In infected yards, this or- ganism has been found as a pathologic agent in the guinea, duck, pheasant, grouse, quail, pigeon, and sparrow although the degree of susceptibility to the parasite varied greatly in these different species.” Hadly’ further stated that, “A study of the morphology of the coccidium of the sparrow demonstrated that it was identical with the coccidium of blackhead in turkeys, and of coccidial white diarrhoea of chicks.” Johnson“ stated that his work did not bear out the findings of Hadley with reference to sparrows, turkeys, and ducks. Johnson stated that coccidian forms were found in sparrows but they were not those causing coccidiosis in chicks. Fantham‘ and Beachs found that buttermilk and sour skimmed milk were of value in controlling the disease. Johnson“ reported that chickens receiving sour milk and no water to drink did not respond to treatment and actually developed the disease. Beach and Corl“, in a late report, state that, “The constant feeding of buttermilk with the diet otherwise restricted ap- pears to be an effective means of controlling out-breaks of coccidiosis. Feeding sweet skim milk or a solution of condensed whey also appears to have considerable, although less marked value.” THE EXPERIMENT Time of Test: This experiment started May 15th, 1924, and continued eight weeks, ending July 9th, 1924. Objects: The principal object of the experiment, the first year, was to test the value of condensed buttermilk in the control of coccidiosis. This was fed with and without greens and cod-liver oil. The condensed butter- milk used in this experiment was analyzed by State Chemist Dr. G. S. Fraps. The analysis was as follows: (5) 6 BULLETIN NO. 331 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Protein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.50 % Fat.......... . . . . . . . . ...1.73% Nitrogen-Free Extract ...10.65‘7@ Water Ash . . . . . . . . . 2.64% The analysis of Dr. G‘. S. Fraps also showed 4.12% of Free Acid or Lactic Acid. Stock Used: Eight hundred and thirty Single Comb White Leghorn chicks, of similar breeding, were used in this experiment. They were hatched from eggs that were produced on the Station farm and were in- cubated in a" mammoth incubator. In dividing the chicks into nine lots Figure 1. Chicks at three weeks of age; just before they showed symptoms of coccidiosis. every precaution was taken to have the lots as uniform as possible. All lots were housed and brooded in a long brooder house and were supplied with heat by a coal-heated hot-water brooder system. Very little direct sunlight entered the house. The chicks‘ were not allowed on range at any time during the experiment. Feeds Used: Each lot of chicks received the same basal ration. Dur- ing the first two weeks the mash consisted of: White Corn Meal . . . . . . . .80 pounds Grey Wheat Shorts . . . . . .20 pounds Chick Size Oyster Shell... 5 pounds Chick Size Bone Meal. . .. 5 pounds During the last six weeks ten pounds of 65 per cent protein meat scrap was added to the ration. Cracked white corn was used for scratch feed throughout the experiment. ' CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN BABY CHICKS 7 Lots 1, 4, and 7 received water to drink; lots 2, 5, and 8 were given buttermilk diluted in the proportion of one quart of condensed buttermilk to six quarts of water; lots 3, 6, and 9 received buttermilk, diluted in the proportion of one quart of condensed buttermilk to three quarts of water. The chicks receiving buttermilk were given no additional water t0 drink. On June 3rd when the chicks were nineteen days old, each of the lots re- ceiving water was divided equally; one-half of the chicks were removed for other work. The size of the pens, for these lots, was also cut in half so that the floor space per chick, for the various lots, remained approximately the same. In all of the tables the data for lots 1, 4, and 7 are weighted to allow for the chicks removed. The data on all lots are, therefore, com- parable. Lots‘ 1, 2, and 3 received no feeds other than those described above; lots 4, 5, and 6 were supplied with greens. During the first two weeks let- tuce was fed; after that time growing oats and Sudan grass were sup- plied. The oats and Sudan grass were not very tender and the chicks did not eat them as readily as they did the lettuce. Lots 7, 8, and 9 received cod-liver oil. Two per cent was added to the mash. A fresh supply was mixed every three or four days. Infection of Chicks*: On May 26th and May 27th all chicks were artificially infected with Eimeria Aviuim (Coccidizmrz Avium) by feeding in- fectious material mixed with the mash. This ematerial consisted of drop- pings that were collected from chickens showing signs of coccidiosis. This fecal material which contained numerous oocysts was placed in cotton-stop- pered flasks, containing a 10 per cent solution of potassium bichromate, and was allowed to stand at room temperature (between 80° and 90° F.) for four and five days. Most of the potassium bichromate solution was removed by centrifuging and washing with saline solution. The fecal material was mixed with the mash in quantities sufficient to allow one-fourth gram to the chick. No efforts were made to prevent the already infected chicks from spreading the infection or becoming reinfected. Progress of the disease: On June 2nd, coccidian forms could be readily found in the cecal contents and scrapings of the mucus membrane of the ceca and duodenum of dead chicks. Coccidia could be found in large num- bers in practically all the chicks dying for three weeks following a six-to seven-day incubation period, after which time coccidian forms were diffi- cult to demonstrate on autopsy. Most of the chicks dying, after this time, appeared emaciated and very enemic. During the three-weeks period noted above, most of the chicks in all of the lots showed the characteristic symptoms of the disease. A *Credit is due Dr. R. C. Dunn, of the Veterinary Department of the College, for his cooperation in this project. He prepared the material for infection and made examinations of all dead chicks. - 8 BULLETIN NO. 33 l TEXAS AGRICULTURAL-EXPERIMENT STATION Figure 2. The chicks in lot 1 (receiving no buttermilk) at the close of the experiment. It must be remembered that one-half of the chicks from this lot were removed on June 3rd. Figure 3. The chicks in lot 2 (receiving 1-6 buttermilk) at the close of the experiment. CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN BABY CHICKS Figure 4. The chicks in lot 3 (receiving 1-3 buttermilk) at the close of the experiment. a Mortality: The mortality of the various lots is given in Tables 1 and 2. During the first week seventeen chicks were killed by a rat. These losses are not included in Tables 1 and 2 or in Figures 5 and 6. Table 1. Per Cent Original Number in Lots That Died Each Week 7 a ‘ Week Number '2 Feed in Addition to .. s Basal Ration flu Z g3 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 Total ,3 l ' Zr-a . lwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00,93 5.4 12.2 4.331.625.8 6.52.2 2.2 69.9 21-6 Buttermilk . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 92 4.3 4.3 3.3 6.515.22.23.3*4.343.5‘ 31-3 Buttermilk . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..93 1.1 4.3.... 2.2 2.2 2.23.2 2.217.2 4Water, Greens . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..81** 3.7** 3.7 6.2....14.84.92.5 2.538.3 51-6 Buttermilk, Greens . . . . . . ..86***4.7***2.311.6 5.8 5.8 2.3 7.0 4.7 44.2 61-3 Buttermilk, Greens . . . . . . ..92 5.4 3.3 2.2 7.6 6.53.31.1 ...29.3 7Water, Cod-Liver Gil . . . . . . . . ..92 4.3 7.6 9.8 19.621.7 8.76.5 4.382.6 81-6 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil...92 6.5 ‘9.8 8.7 6.5 6.54.32.2 2.2 46.7 91-3 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil...92 4.3 7.6.... 6.5 3.3 3.34.3 2.2 31.5 *One killed by accident, not figured in total. "Does not include eleven killed b ***Does not include six killed by rat. y rat. 1_() BULLETIN NO. 331 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 2. Per Cent Mortality at End of Test > Per Cent Mortality in Lots Receiving Lots Receiving N Add l ‘ C Average o itiona 1 o - iver Feeds l Greens Oil I I l I Water . . . . . . . . . . . . ..| 69.9 l 38.3 l 82.6 64.7 Buttermilk 1-6 . . . . ..\ 43.5 44.2 46.7 44.8 Buttermilk 1-3 . . . . ..| 17.2 29.3 31.5 26.0 Average* . . . . . . . . . ..; 43.5 37.3 ‘ 53 6 i 44.9 *Due to the slight variation in the number in each lot, the original numbers in all lots concerned were used to obtain these averages. It is noted in Tables 1 and 2 that in all cases except lot 4 the greatest loss was with the chicks receiving no milk and the lowest loss was with the chicks receiving the 1-3 buttermilk. Lot 4 received greens in addition to the feed given lot 1. This may partially account for the lower mortality. The greens were used to supply vitamines, which were lacking in the feed for lot 1, and protein in addition to that supplied lots 1 and 7. Week Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 s . 4- ,1: """ n . _. ---- -..1-s "o tte in: 2 f,» \ / ‘~~-~._.\_ No buiétenxrili k " v’ “1-5 buttermilk Per cent Mortality Each Week H N Figure 5. Per cent Mortality Each Week (Based on original number) In Figures 5 and 6 all of the lots receiving water are thrown to- gether as are those receiving the 1-6 buttermilk and the 1-3 buttermilk. Figure 5 shows that the mortality, for the lots receiving no buttermilk, was very high during the fourth and fifth weeks. This was during the latter part of the second week, the third week, and the early part of the fourth week following the infection, as the chicks were eleven and twelve days old when they were infected. Figure 6 shows the total per cent mor- CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN BABY CHICKS i 11 Week Number 1 2 5 4 5 6 '7 8 N0 buttermilk 1-6 buttermilk Figure 6. Total Per Cent Mortality at End of Each Week (based on orig- inal number). tality up to the end of each week. It is noted that the highest mortality- is in the lots getting no buttermilk and the lowest mortality is in the lots receiving 1-3 buttermilk. l Growth of Chicks: Table 3 gives the average weight of the chicks in each lot, at the end of each week. It is noted that in all cases the gains are lowest with the lots receiving no buttermilk and highest with the lots receiving 1-3 buttermilk. The chicks in lot 4 showed no advantage in gains over lots 1 and 7 even though they had green feed in addition to the basal ration. It is remembered that the mortality was low in this lot as com- pared with lots 1 and 7. Table 3. Weight per Chick, in Ounces, at End of Each Week l Week Number Lot Feed in Addition to Basal __ m" _ ,____,__,_, , _,,‘_. No. Ration ; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 i 1 ‘Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.1 3.0 4.3 5.2 5.8 2 ‘1-6 Buttermilk . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.7 2.3 2.8 3.5 4.5 5.7 6.8 7.8 3 1-3 Buttermilk . . . . . 1.8 2.4 3.2 4.0 5.0 6.4 7.7 9.0 4 IWater, Greens . . . . . . ... . . . . .. 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.9 3.9 5.1 5 I1-6 Buttermilk,Greens . . . . . .. 1.7 2.3 2.8 3.6 4.7 6.1 7.4 8.8 6 |1-3 Buttermilk,Greens . . . . . .. 1.7 2.5 3.0 3.7 4.8 6.4 7.5 8.7 7 IWater, Cod-LiverOil......... 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.9 2.4 3.0 3.4 4.1 8 1-6 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil.. 1.7 2 . 2 2 . 7 3 . 4 4 . 5 6. 0 7 . 0 8 .2 9 I1-3 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil.. 1.7 2.3 3.0 3.7 4.6 6.3 7.7 9.1 l 12 BULLETIN NO. 33 1 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 4. Average Weights, in Ounces, at End of Test Lots Receiving _ Lots Receiving . . I Average‘ N0 Addltwnal Greens 1 Cod-Liver Oil l Feeds i . I Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..I 5.8 5.1 4.1 5.1 Buttermilk, 1-6 . . . . . . . . . .| 7.8 8.8 8.2 8.3 Buttermilk, 1-3 . . . . . . . 9.0 8.7 9.1 8.9 Average’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.0 I 7.6 8.2 l 7.9 ‘Due to the slight variation in the numbers in each lot and to varying mortality the final weights of those in all of the lots concerned were used to obtain these averages. Table 4 shows the average weights of the chicks in the different lots at the close of the experiment. In all cases the 1-6 buttermilk lots are heavier than those receiving water and the 1-3 buttermilk lots are the heaviest of all. There is no great difference in weight of the lots receiving greens, cod-liver oil, or no additional feed. Week Nmnber 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 _,‘l.—‘3 buttermilk I ‘~, l-6 buttermilk /1 "" '“' 15 14.- 195 /"‘\\/ l2 11 1Q o buttermilk Gain in Weight per Chick in Ounces. l: a, Z0 Figure 7. Gain in Weight, in Ounces, per Chick per Week. In Figures 7 and 8 the lots are grouped as in Figures 5 and 6. These figures show that the rate of growth for lots receiving the 1-6 buttermilk and the 1-3 buttermilk was nearly the same after the first three weeks. During that time the lots receiving the l-3 buttermilk gained slightly faster than those getting the 1-6 buttermilk. CONTROL OF COCCIDIOSIS IN BABY CHICKS 13 Week Nwnber 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 buttermilk / —5 bUttGIWflTlK Weight in Ounces HHNNCRQPPUCJIGOIQ-qmwkb O I 001001601001001001001000 Figure 8. Average Weight, in Ounces, at End of Each Week. Table 5. Total Pounds Feed Consumed Nuniietzr m Feed Consumed I13? Feed in Addition to Basal Ration M ' 6F e a 2 Ti m E g "‘ u: w 5 4a 44,2 2 “'5 2 < b0 <fi O U E L’! A 1 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 8 26.9 58 3 96.4 2 1-6 Buttermilk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 51 31.9 68 1 224.7 3 1-3 Buttermilk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 77 37.0 85 6 282.0 4 Water, Greens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 50 39.6 64.6 31.8 101.9 5 1-6 Buttermilk, Greens . . . . . . . . . . . 86 48 34.1 67.0 25.7 203.1 6 1-3 Buttermilk, Greens . . . . . . . . . . . 92 65 41.1 68.6 29.3 240.3 7 Water, Cod-Liver Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 16 21 . 6 64 . 1 64 . 8 8 1-6 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil . . . . . . 92 49 35 . 0 74 . 2 204 . 6 9 1-8 Buttermilk, Cod-Liver Oil . . . . . . 92 63 39 . 5 79 . 6 234 . 3 Feed Consumed: Table 5 gives the feeds consumed by the different lots. The chicks were allowed all they would eat at all times except during the first week. In all cases the lots receiving the 1-3 buttermilk drank the largest amount of liquid and consumed the greatest amounts of grain and mash. In these lots the mortality was the lowest; therefore, as would be expected, the feed consumption per lot was high. Conclusions: The results of this experiment seem to justify the fol- lowing conclusions: 14 BULLETIN NO. 331 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Condensed buttermilk, diluted with water and kept before the chicks at all times, is of value in reducing the losses from chicks artificially in- fected with coccidiosis. The feeding of condensed buttermilk, as fed in this test, will not prevent the development of coccidian forms. The symptoms of the disease were marked in all lots, but the losses were much less in the lots receiving buttermilk than in the lots not receiving it. A 1-3 condensed buttermilk reduces mortality more than a 1-6 butter- milk. It is not known whether this is due to the greater amount of acid or to the greater amount of protein it contains. Greens did not prove to be of value in reducing losses or in increasing the weights of the chicks. One pen receiving greens showed lower mor- tality, but two other pens did not. Cod-liver oil did not reduce the mortality or increase the weight of the chicks. LITERATURE CITED 1 Hadley, P. B. (1910). Blackhead in Turkeys. A study in Avian Coccidiosis, Rhode Island Sta. Bul. 141. Idem. (1910). Studies in Avian Coccidiosis. 3. Coccidiosis in the English Sparrow and Other Wild Birds. Reprint from Abdruck aus dem Centralblatt fur Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde und Infektionskrankheiten, 56 Band. Johnson, W. T. (1923). Avian Coccidiosis. Poultry Science. Vol. 2, No. 5. Fantham, H. B. (1915). Coccidiosis in Poultry and Game Birds. Jour. of the Board of Agri. London, Vol. 21, No. 10. Beach, J. R. (1917). Bacillary White Diarrhoea or Fatal Septicemia of Chicks and Coccidiosis or Coccidial Enteritis of Chicks. Calif. Sta. Cir. 162. _ _ 6 Beach, J. R. and Corl, J. C. (1925). Studies in the Control of Avian Coccidiosis. Poultry Science. Vol. 4, N0. 3 N) OI >J>OO No. 128 159 162 163 171 175 PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE Order by NUMBER BULLETINS Cottonseed Meal as a Human Food (Technical)——1910. Steer Feeding—1913. Composition and Digestibility of the Chloroform Extract of Texas Hays and Fod- ders (Technical)-1913. Digestion Experimets on men with Cottonseed Meal—19l3. Ammonia-Soluble Inorganic Soil Colloids—1914. Digestion Experiments with Texas Feeding Stuifs—1914. Commercial Fertilizers and Their Use--1914. The Total Fatty Acids and Other Ether-Soluble Constituents of Feedstuifse-IQIL Texas Feeding Stuffs; Their Composition and Utilization—1914. Losses of Moisture and Plant Food by Percolation——1914. Sudan Grass—1915. The Composition of the Soils of the Texas Panhandle—1915. The efiect of Organic Compounds in Pot Experiments——1915. Distribution and Digestibility of the Pentosans of Feeds-—1915. The effect of the Additions on Availability of Soil Phosphates—-—1915. Oxidation of Organic Compounds in the Soil--1915. Steer Feeding—1912. Moisture Relations of Some Texas Soils-——19 15. Cooperative Fertilizer Experiments with Corn—-1908-14. The Production Co-Efficients of Feeds (Technical)-——l916. Fattening _Lambs——-191 6. Sprays and Spraying——1916. Tile Drainage—1916. The Composition of Cottonseed Meal and Cottonseed—-1916. The Effects of Additions on the Availability of Soil Potash and the Preparation of Sugar Humus——1916. The Composition of Rice and Its By-Products—1916. Soils of Grayson, Lee, McLennan, Titus and Tyler Counties—1916, Japanese Sugar Cane as a Forage Crop—-1916. Digestibility of Sugar, Starches, and Pentosans of Roughages—-1916. Progress Report, Substation No. 3, Angleton, Texas——1909-14. Progress Report, Substation No. 4, Beaumont, Texas, 1909-14. Peanut Meal and Ground Whole Pressed Peanuts for Hogs-—1916. The Productive Values of Some Texas Feeding Stuifs——1916. The Recurving of Milo and some Factors Influencing It. (Technical)—1917- Poultry Houses and Poultry Equipment for Texas—-1917. The Fig in Texas—1917. Progress Report, Substation No. 2, Troup, Texas, 1909-14. Barns for Work Animals-—191’7. Field Experiments with Crown Gall—1913-17. The Availability of Phosphoric Acid in Rock Phosphate--1917. The Composition of the Soils of South Central Texas—-—1917. Progress Report, Substation No. l, Beeville, Texas--—1910-14. Progress Report, Substation No. 5, Temple, Texas—-1910-14. Progress Report, Substation No. 7, Spur, Texas-—1909-14. Progress Report, Substation No. 8, Lubbock, Texas—1910-14. Progress Report Substation No. 9, Pecos, Texas—-1910-14. The Composition of Peanuts and Peanut By-Products—1917. The Influence of Peanuts and Rice Bran on the Quality of Pork—-1918. Cooperative Soft Pork Investigations——1918. Studies of the Harlequin Bug-1918. The Influence of Peanut Meal on the Quality of Pork—1918. Experiments at Substation No. 3, Angleton, Texas—-1909-16. The Beemoth or Waxworm——1918. Mineral Requirements of Sheep-—-1918. Grain Sorghum Improvement—1918. The Utilization of Yucca for the Maintenance of Cattle—19l8. The Need of Texas Soils for Lime———1919. Composition of the Soils of Archer, Franklin and Harrison Counties—-1919. Feeding Values of Certain Feeding Stuffs-——l919. The Chemical Composition of the Cotton Plant—-1919. Beekeeping for Beginners. Report of Experiments at Substation No. 4,iBeaumont, Texas—-1915-l8. Nitrification in Texas Soils (Technical)——1920. The Searing Iron vs. the Knife for Docking or Detailing Lambs—-1920. Rations for Fattening Steers—1920. Grain Sorghum vs. Corn for Fattening Lambs—-1920. A Study of the Black and Yellow Molds of Ear Corn—-1920. Sweet Potato Fertilizer Experiments at Substation No. 2-1921. Type and Variability in Kafir (Technical)—-1921. Composition and Feeding Value of Wheat By-Products—-1921. Beekeeping for Beginners. The Blueweed and Its Eradication. 295 Correlation between External Body Characters and Annual Egg Production in White Leghorn Fowls. 296 Grain Sorghum vs. Corn for Fattening Baby Beeves——l922. 805 Swine Feeding Experiments-—-1923. 307 Texas Root Rot of Cotton and Methods of its Control——1923. 308 The Sweet Potato Weevil——1923. " 809 I. Fattening Steers on Cottonseed Hulls With and Without Corn.-——II. The In- fluence of Age on Fattening Steers--1923. 310 The Interpretation of Correlation Data—1923. 811 The Influence of Individuality, Age and Season upon the Weights of Fleeces Pro- duced by range Sheep—1923. $12 Commercial Fertilizers in 1922-23. 325 Effect of Cropping upon the Active Potash of the Soil. 326 Breeding Experiments with Blackberries and Raspberries. 313 Rice Bran and Rice Polish for Growing and Fattening Pigs——l923. 814 Commercial Feeding Stuffs, Sept, 1, 1922 to Aug. 31, 1923. 315 Digestion Experiments with Oat By-Products and other Feeds, Report No. 11-1924. 816 The Soils of Brazos, Camp, Ellis and Washington Counties—-1924. 817 Comparative Influences of Various Protein Feeds on Laying Hens——1914. 318 The Relation between Rents and Agricultural Land Values in Theory and in Pram-- tice-—-1924. 319 Field and Laboratory Notes on a fatal Disease of Cattle Occurring on the Costa] Plains of Texas (Loin Disease)—1914. 820 The Influence of Individuality, Age and Season upon the Weights of Fleeces Pro- duced by Angora Goats under Range Conditions——1924. 321 Cotton Variety Experiments at the Main Station-—1912 to 1922. 822 Commercial Fertilizers in 1923 and 1924. I23 The Price of Feed Utilities. 325 Effect of Cropping Upon the Active Potash of the Soil. 326 Breeding Experiments with Blackberries and Raspberries. 327 An Agricultural Economic Survey of Rockwall Countv Texas. 329 Energy Production Coefficients of American Feeding Stuffs. 330 Farm Mortgage Financing in Texas. 332 Biometrical Studies of Lint and Seed Characters in Cotton. 333 Heritable Chlorophyll Deficiencies in Seedling Cotton. 335 Commercial Fertilizers in 1924-25. CIRCULARS 1 Strawberries Under Irrigation in South Texas——1914. 7 Insect Enemies of Sudan Grass——1915. 10 Housing Farm Implements—1015. 22 The Malvaceous Plants of Texas——1920. 26 Cost of Production; I‘ts Relation to Price——1920. 30 The Practicability of the Milking Machine——1923. 31 Standard Fertilizers and their Use (Reprint)—-—1923. 82 Cotton Boll Weevil Control in Texas——1924. 83 Texas Agricultural Experiment Station System——1924. 34 The Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. 35 Suggestions on Queen Rearing. 36 Foulbrood Control and Diseases of Bees——Foulbrood Law and Revised Regulations. ANNUAL REPORTS 25th for 1912; 26th for 1913; 27th for 1914; 28th for 1915; 29th for 1916; 32nd for 1919; 35th for 1922, and 36th for 1923. Address all communications to B. YOUNGBLOOD, Director, College Station, Texas. Agricultural Experiment Station, Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas,