SF 239 
 .P54 
 Copy 1 
 
 SOME OF THE INFI.UENCES AFFECTING MILK 
 PRODUCTION 
 
 BY 
 
 IvEROY ANDERSON 
 
SOME OF THE INFLUENCES AFFECTING MILK 
 PRODUCTION 
 
 WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE RELATION 
 OF FOOD TO MILK FAT 
 
 THESIS 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE 
 
 University Faculty of Cornell University 
 
 FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 LEROY ANDERSON, B. S., M. S. A. 
 
 ITHACA, NEW YORK 
 JUNE, 190a 
 
L?' TABlvE OF CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 Introduction 5 
 
 The Developing Influence of Natural Environment 7 
 
 Hereditary Influences 11 
 
 The Influence of Food 16 
 
 Summary of Experiments concerning the Relation of Food to 
 
 Milk Fat 18 
 
 Experiments at Cornell University 33 
 
 The First Experiment 1895-6 35 
 
 The Second Experiment 1896-7 38 
 
 Charts 45 
 
 Feeding Pabn-nut Meal 52 
 
 The Relation of the Temperature of the Cow to the 
 
 Secretion of Milk Fat 57 
 
 Influence of Oestrum 66 
 
 Influence of Spaying 67 
 
 Relation of Temperature to Secretion of Milk Fat 68 
 
 Charts 72 
 
 The Relation between Percentage of Fat and Total 
 
 Pounds of Fat 80 
 
 General Summary 85 
 
 Conclusions 88 
 
 Bibliography go 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 This paper contains a summary of investigations concerning 
 the relation of food to milk-fat and the record of considerable 
 original experimentation to determine the influence of food and 
 of certain conditions of the cow upon the secretion of milk. 
 That portion of the thesis which treats of the influence of food 
 was prepared primarily for publication as Bulletin No. 173 of 
 the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. The 
 experimental data obtained by Messrs. Johnson and Lauman 
 from their experiments of 1896 and 1897 respectively were entirely 
 worked over by the writer for publication in the above named 
 bulletin, and is, therefore, considered to justly have a place in a 
 paper of this kind. The report of the investigations concerning 
 the relation of the temperature of the cow to the secretion of 
 milk is offered as a line of study which is new in the field of 
 animal production. The other chapters and the general sum- 
 mary contain some of the conclusions that are believed to be 
 warranted by the knowledge concerning milk secretion which 
 has been secured up to the present time by historical record and 
 experimental research. 
 
 Acknowledgment is due Professor Henry H. Wing for his 
 helpful suggestions during the progress of these investigations. 
 
 Lbroy Anderson. 
 
 Cornell University, 
 
 Ithaca, N. Y., June, 1902. 
 
THE DEVELOPING INFLUENCES OF NATURAL 
 ENVIRONMENT 
 
 The varied influences which go to make up the life of an 
 individual or mould the character of^ an entire race are so manj' 
 and so potent that it would be difiicult to give to any one influ- 
 ence the place of first importance. Moreover, influences do not 
 work singly in their effect upon organic life and it is, therefore, 
 impossible to define the limits of each. It is more to the point 
 and more satisfactory to discuss the leading factors which have 
 had to do with organic development in a broad way, when we 
 may the more clearly perceive the relation to each other of the 
 minor forces which go to make up the main influences. 
 
 Among the strongest of these leading factors is the natural 
 environment in which a breed or race of animals has been 
 developed, i. e. the climate, soil, food and all of the other subtle 
 forces which go to make up the habitat of an animal. It is not 
 essential that the mind of man should have been present to guide 
 the mating and care of individuals according to some precon- 
 ceived and fixed type. Differences in the determining natural 
 forces named above, in which man plays only as an added force 
 in the natural selection, are sufficient to develop races of animals 
 possessing characters so widely varying as to form what we call 
 breeds. That the different breeds of cattle sprang from one 
 source is believed to be one of the established facts in the evolu- 
 tion of animal life. " The systematic naturalist, who generally 
 knows nothing of the art of breeding, who does not pretend to 
 know how and when the several domestic races were formed, 
 who cannot have seen the intermediate gradations, for they do 
 not now exist, nevertheless feels no doubt that these races are 
 sprung from a single source."* 
 
 We have but to notice the changes made in animal form, or in 
 the production of meat and milk during the past half century, 
 to make it readily conceivable that the antipodes of breed charac- 
 teristics could have developed from one parent stock during the 
 
 * Darwin. Animals and Plants under Domestication, Vol. II, p. 233. 
 
8 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 ages which cattle have undoubtedly been upon the earth. The 
 most noted and remarkable differences are found between the 
 cattle whose whole tendency is to produce meat and those whose 
 tendency is to produce milk. But it is more to our point to con- 
 sider the latter only and amongst these varieties are found breeds 
 which show marked characteristics. No better illustration of 
 opposites in development in dairy cattle could be imagined than 
 is afforded by the Jersey cattle on the one hand and the Holstein- 
 Friesian on the other. Their differences are indicated in form, 
 size, and quantity and quality of milk. 
 
 The history of Holstein-Friesian cattle is known, in legend at 
 least, for more than two thousand years, and the important part 
 in their history is a study of the soil, climate and food which 
 made up the formative portion of their environment during this 
 long period. The native home of these cattle is that portion 
 of The Netherlands lying contiguous to the North Sea where 
 the climate is cool and moist, both by reason of much fog and a 
 high degree of precipitation. The soil is of that dense, clayey 
 nature which, with the large amount of moisture prevailing 
 induces a luxuriant growth of grass. This combination also 
 produces a pasturage which carries a high percentage of water 
 and a correspondingly low content of dry or nutrient substance. 
 
 Holland dairy practice has been, for the most part, to have 
 the cows calve during the spring months so as to have them in 
 the flush of milking when turned from winter stable to pasture. 
 The cows, then, during their heaviest milking period and dur- 
 ing the time when they were obliged to consume the most food 
 in order to produce milk as well as to maintain life and growth, 
 were forced to obtain the needed sustenance from the prevailing 
 luxuriant but watery grass. In order to secure sufficient nour- 
 ishment, the cow must take into her body large amounts of this 
 succulent food, and the natural result of such feeding was to 
 develop a large abdomen with a correspondingly large digestive 
 capacity. The correlative effect upon the size was to make it 
 larger and upon the bony structure to make it somewhat coarse 
 and angular. But what is more to our present purpose is the 
 effect of these large quantities of watery food upon milk pro- 
 duction. The natural result has been to induce a flow of milk 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 9 
 
 which is not equaled in quantity by any other breed of cattle 
 a'nd which carries a lower percentage of butter fat and other 
 solids than the milk of any other of the improved dairy breeds. 
 
 Quite opposite to the above conditions were those under which 
 the Jersey cattle have been developed. Their native Isle in the 
 English Channel possesses a climate made mild and equable by 
 the Gulf Stream, and one much dryer than the climate of North 
 Holland and Friesland. The soil is a light loam, carrying in 
 connection with the relatively light precipitation, an herbage 
 which is not abundant, but is comparatively high in nutritive 
 substance and low in water content. Whether the Jersey cow 
 were at pasture or whether stall fed, at no time was she obliged 
 to consume large quantities of succulent food in order to pro- 
 vide the nourishment that her system required. Her digestive 
 organs were not, therefore, unduly distended and the correlative 
 effect of her food conditions were such as to develop a moder- 
 ately sized body and a rather fine bony structure. In the pro- 
 duction of milk, the result of her environment and food has 
 been to produce a moderate amount which is richer in fat and 
 other solids than the milk of any other breed of cattle. 
 
 That the wide variations found between the breeds under dis- 
 cussion are due in a large degree to different conditions of soil, 
 climate and food is believed to be quite true. What the original 
 type of animal was in either case before coming under the influ- 
 ences where history records their beginning as distinct breeds, 
 no one knows. What they are to-day and what has been their 
 habitat for centuries is known to all readers of animal history. 
 There can be but one conclusion, viz., that the natural condi- 
 tions and exigencies which go to make up the environment of 
 the respective countries are responsible in the largest degree for 
 the dissimilarity between the two breeds. 
 
 To-day the Jersey and Holstein-Friesian cattle are battling for 
 dairy supremacy in the same field. They have been in this 
 country in large numbers for a quarter of a century, and the 
 change in environment is being watched with deep interest. 
 Here they have been subjected to similar conditions of food, 
 care and climate. On the one hand, the Jerseys have exper- 
 ienced a change to a more succulent ration in the shape of corn 
 
lo Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 silage and like forage crops than their native Isle afforded. On 
 the other, the Holstein-Friesians have been fed more con- 
 centrated food and been obliged to range more over scant and 
 hilly pastures than they were accustomed to do at home. If 
 there be any definite change it is difficult to prove it by experi- 
 mental data. Breeders of Jerseys claim that the American type 
 is larger and coarser than the Island progenitor and also than 
 the Island type of to-day. It is also claimed that they yield a 
 greater amount of milk and of no decreasing quality. I^eading 
 breeders of Holstein-Friesians claim that the American type is 
 finer in form and bony structure, and gives richer milk than the 
 Holland ancestors. They contend also that the quantity of milk 
 has not decreased while the quality has been improving. None 
 of these claims as to milking qualities can be substantiated by 
 accurate data because no records of milk production were kept 
 twenty-five years ago as to-day. There is, however, no reason 
 for doubting the claims, for if we question them we would also 
 question the possibility of the improvement of animals, of which 
 there can be no doubt. That the larger and coarser animal 
 should grow smaller and finer and the smaller and finer animal 
 grow larger and coarser, when changed from the natural habitat 
 which had produced that largeness or smallness, to one and the 
 same land and to like conditions, is of interest and value in 
 bearing out the conclusions as to the influence of natural envi- 
 ronment in moulding the form and characteristics of animals to 
 so great an extent as to build up different breeds. 
 
HEREDITARY INFLUENCES 
 
 Another set of influences which is of very great moment in 
 the development of individuals and of races is that due to hered- 
 ity. Without this factor any eflfect which environment may 
 have upon one generation would be of no value to the succeed- 
 ing generation. It is not to the purpose here to discuss heredity 
 in all of its rami6cations, but rather to point to the larger 
 phases of the subject which have been found to be most instru- 
 mental in the upbuilding of the animal kingdom and especially 
 the dairy cow as it is found to-day. It will be sufficient at the 
 outset to take for a theme, the possibility that any or all charac- 
 teristics may be transmitted from generation to generation and 
 that whatever affects the parent may find expression also in the 
 offspring. 
 
 We have seen that the Holstein-Friesian cattle have, through 
 many centuries, developed a capacity for producing large 
 amounts of milk. We have seen that the Jersey cattle have, 
 through possibly a less number of centuries, developed a capac- 
 ity for producing a milk very rich in total solid substance. Did 
 we carry the study further we would find the Herefords follow- 
 ing a development that has induced the formation of flesh and 
 not of milk except to a very small degree. Still further we 
 would find the Shorthorns represented on the one hand by a 
 portion of the breed resembling the Hereford in meat and non- 
 milk producing power, and on the other hand by another portion 
 of the breed resembling somewhat the milking characteristics of 
 the Holland cattle and also the flesh producing feature of a more 
 approved beef strain. 
 
 These varied and quite opposite characteristics are due in the 
 first place to those conditions which have been discussed in the 
 preceding chapter. A change in the food or habit of the animal 
 induces a change in the organic being in order to render the 
 animal at home in its environment. In other words a variation 
 from the parental type has occurred, which variation will be per- 
 manent within the individual depending upon the permanency 
 of the altered environment. This variation may be good or bad 
 according to the character of the outward influence. If the 
 
12 Infi^uences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 change be in the direction of more and better food, more com- 
 fortable quarters and more hygienic use the resultant variation 
 is quite sure to be a beneficent one, and vice versa. 
 
 The possibility of variation entering the life and function of 
 an individual is dependent upon the fundamental principle of 
 the mutability of all organic beings, which in turn finds its 
 origin in the mobile nature of the living plasm of the cells that 
 combine to make up the organic being. Changes in form of 
 any portion of the animal body are due to a change in the nutri- 
 tion and use of that portion. The function of an organ is not 
 readily altered, but its capacity for production or secretion may 
 be easily influenced, e.g., the function of the epithelial cells of 
 the udder is to secrete milk ; abundance or scarcity of food, 
 good or bad use, may alter the amount of milk produced, but 
 nothing can change the primal function of the organ. Upon 
 the fixedness of function may be based the certainty of the 
 inheritance of organic life and upon the mobility of cellular pro- 
 toplasm, the principle of variation without which there could be 
 no improvement. 
 
 Given a permanent variation in an individual its offspring are 
 born with a tendency in a like direction, which tendency may 
 be accentuated by a continuance of the conditions causing the 
 parental variation. Improvement in animals begun by a desir- 
 able variation is, then, carried toward perpetuation by selecting 
 for breeding those individuals which show the most advance- 
 ment under the bettered environment. Improvement is most 
 rapid when the mind of man is present to guide the selection in 
 the direction of a preconceived standard. But even if a pre- 
 conceived ideal be not before the breeder's eye, he will uncon- 
 sciously mate such animals as show the most variation in the 
 desired direction, i. e., those which conform most readily to the 
 environment in which he has placed them. 
 
 The power of selection in rendering aid in animal improve- 
 ment depends upon the presence of variability, for were there 
 no variability between animals there would be no need for the 
 practice of selection. Selection in breeding has been the most 
 powerful ally of environment in moulding breed characteristics. 
 In fact, so far as man's work is concerned it may be said to be 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 13 
 
 the chief controlling force. By means of selection in taking 
 advantage of the effects of environment, the world now pos- 
 sesses its highly developed breeds of domestic animals. It may 
 overcome even the natural tendencies of food in developing a 
 breed. The possibility is that the native foods of the Tees 
 valley and of North Holland are such as to tend to build a race 
 of cattle to produce meat and milk^ respectively. But had the 
 men who are responsible for the breeds which there originated, 
 selected those Shorthorns which showed the greatest tendencies 
 toward milk production and the Holstein-Friesians showing the 
 strongest leanings toward meat production, the probability is 
 that the present classification in which these two breeds find 
 themselves would be reversed. We have previously referred to 
 such a possibility in the fact that part of the Shorthorn breed is 
 looked upon as dairy stock. The difference between them and 
 their beef producing sisters was brought about wholly by a sys- 
 tem of selection. 
 
 In the light of these facts we may even say that man is able to 
 direct the course of food nutrients in the animal by his use of the 
 power of selection. If he wishes to change a beef producing 
 breed to a milk standard his plan is to breed from such individ- 
 uals as show the strongest dairy tendency, although that tendency 
 be at first slight. In other words the breeder is transferring the 
 disposition of the animal's food from building tissue or body fat 
 to the work of secreting milk in the udder. There is not nec- 
 essarily any change in the process of digestion ; there is no 
 change in function of individual organs ; the change is in the 
 degree or extent of the function by lessening the activity of flesh 
 producing cells and increasing that of the cells which secrete 
 milk. By reversing the method of selection a dairy breed may 
 be changed to one producing beef. 
 
 The influence of selection in thus transforming cattle is greatly 
 enhanced by man's care of the milk secreting organ. By irreg- 
 ular and incomplete milking, the secretion tends to decline in 
 quantity until it ceases altogether, when if the same food supply 
 be continued, the animal lays on flesh. On the other hand, 
 regular, careful and complete withdrawal of milk from the udder 
 tends to keep up the milk flow. It is upon this basis that the 
 
J4 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 domesticated cow has been developed into a state of giving milk 
 for a year or more continuously, when in her wild, native con- 
 dition, the period of lactation was only of sufl&cient length to 
 provide food for the calf until he was old and strong enough to 
 subsist upon other food. An approximation to the wild state is 
 found to-day among the cattle upon the large stock ranges. 
 Often one of the cows is taken from the range herd with the 
 view of making a milch cow of her, but there is always disap- 
 pointment, for her milk flows only for a few months at the most. 
 Her environment and the method of selection has been such that 
 she inherits a tendency for a brief period of lactation. By proper 
 food and use and wise selection this tendency may be gradually 
 overcome until her descendants, several generations removed, 
 will possess a lactation period of approved duration. 
 
 Phenomena such as here described may not be substantiated 
 by what are to-day considered authentic experimental data. 
 Nevertheless they are a matter of history which is held to be true 
 by all reliable testimony. The influences of heredity as here out- 
 lined are slow in working out these changes in production, which 
 to the uninformed may appear beyond the realm of possibility. 
 
 Referring to the immediate influence of heredity upon the 
 secretion of milk we find experimental data largely wanting, both 
 in extent and in the certainty of conclusions. One example will 
 serve to illustrate : Cederholm * furnishes some data upon the 
 influence of heredity on the quality of cows' milk and says that 
 three of the bulls used caused a marked improvement in the 
 quality of the milk produced by their offspring. One bull had 
 five daughters, each of which gave poorer milk than her dam. 
 This bull was out of a cow that produced milk having an average 
 per cent of fat of 3.06. "In general the greatest improvement 
 was observed in case of cows producing the poorest grades of 
 milk. The data so far secured on this point are not considered 
 sufficient to permit of definite conclusions as to the relative 
 influence of the ancestors of a cow on the quality of milk pro- 
 duced by her, but they show, at any rate, that the bull exerts a 
 a decided influence for better or worse on the milk product of 
 his progeny. " 
 
 * I/andmannen, 11 (1900) p. 57, Abs. E. S. R. by F. W. Woll. 
 
 ^ 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 15 
 
 Tabulations of records in a similar way have been made in 
 other instances by various parties, but the usual result is that 
 the data are insufficient to furnish conclusive evidence. The 
 fact is thaf systematic records of milk production, and especially 
 of the quality of the milk, are of so recent beginning in dairy 
 practice that it is extremely difficult to secure a line of descent 
 of sufficient length to furnish data po^essing experimental value. 
 The influences which have developed the present milking powers 
 of the dairy breeds have been working for centuries and every 
 evidence adds to the belief that heredity works slowly in improv- 
 ing the quantity or quality of any animal product. No short 
 cut has yet been discovered whereby the individual yield of milk 
 or butter may be doubled among the members of the improved 
 breeds. On the other hand no one who is conversant with the 
 history of cattle will admit that there is not yet room for large 
 improvement. But the increase in production must come through 
 a careful fostering of such environmental conditions as will 
 induce desirable variations and then seeking to perpetuate those 
 variations through methodical selection. 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF FOOD 
 
 There are two main divisions of the question concerning the 
 relation of food to milk secretion. On the one hand is the rela- 
 tion of food supply to the quantity of milk produced and on the 
 other its relation to the quality of the milk by which is usually 
 meant the proportion of butter fat present. So far as the quan- 
 tity is concerned there is no doubt as to the immediate and ulti- 
 mate effect of the food supply. Given an abundant supply of 
 food furnishing nourishment in all necessary nutrients and we 
 may expect as large a flow of milk as the capacity of the cow will 
 permit. Let the food supply be restricted either in total digesti- 
 ble substance or in the essential nutrients and the yield of milk 
 will be less than the normal capacity of the cow. All experi- 
 ments bearing upon this subject have shown the intimate relation 
 between food supply and the yield of milk. 
 
 ^ Concerning the relation of food to milk-fat, experimental 
 research has been somewhat contradictory. Some experiments 
 have seemed to indicate that certain foods possess the power of 
 increasing the proportion of fat in milk, while others, and much 
 the larger number, show that the variations in the quality of 
 milk are not traceable to the food. All who are familiar with 
 the handling of milk know that variations in the per cent of fat 
 do exist and this with the same cow on the same feed and under 
 uniform environment. Why the quality of milk fluctuates so 
 widely under conditions which to all outward appearances are 
 the same, has never been determined experimentally. 
 
 Experiments conducted for the purpose of determining the 
 relation of food to milk production have usually shown that 
 where a sudden and radical change in the food has taken place, 
 this change has been accompanied by a more than ordinary var- 
 iation in the per cent of fat. This variation may be either an 
 increase or a decrease. After the cows become accustomed to the 
 new feed their milk returns to its former average per cent of fat, 
 which may be called the normal per cent. Such phenomena 
 would seem to indicate that the per cent of fat in milk is subject 
 to the peculiar constitution of the cow and that she will give milk 
 of a certain average composition so long as nothing occurs to dis- 
 turb the " even tenor of her way." 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 17 
 
 A definite knowledge of the relation of food to milk- fat would 
 solve the question as to whether or not the per cent of fat may- 
 be permanently increased by feeding. But concerning this point 
 we have little information except theories based upon the results 
 of many experiments. One theory has been long and largely 
 held that milk-fat is produced from the protein in the food. If 
 this were the case a natural supposition would be that by increas- 
 ing the amount of protein in the food, the proportion of fat in 
 the milk would be thereby increased. Another theory is that 
 milk-fat is produced from the fat in the food. Then feeding 
 an increased amount of fat might be supposed to result in a 
 higher per cent of fat in the milk ; or, on the other hand, a 
 decrease in the supply of food-fat would likewise cause a decrease 
 in the per cent of milk-fat. A third theory, and the one which 
 is most largely entertained, is that so long as the animal is well 
 nourished the per cent of fat in the milk is not appreciably 
 affected by even wide variations in the character of the food. 
 Experiments supporting these three theories will be found in 
 subsequent pages. 
 
 The question has a practical bearing in the economical man- 
 agement of the dairy. For, if by food we may increase the rich- 
 ness of the milk, then there is opportunity to enhance the value 
 of all our cows. Butter-fat is the most valuable constituent of 
 milk, and if the cow may be made to produce a milk richer in 
 fat by giving her certain foods, or foods containing a large pro- 
 portion of a particular nutrient, then the dairyman may increase 
 the value of his cows to the extent that they may be made to 
 respond to the particular foods by increased production of fat. 
 Again if feeding large amounts of protein tend to an increased 
 production of milk-fat, then the dairyman will need to purchase 
 foods containing a high proportion of protein, which foods usually 
 command higher prices than those containing less protein. If, 
 on the other hand, a large supply of protein is not essential to 
 the production of milk-fat ; or, if it is not governed by the food 
 so long as the cow is well nourished, then the dairyman is war- 
 ranted in feeding those cheaper foods which contain less protein 
 and more carbohydrates and fat. 
 
 The experimental work which has come within the immediate 
 
1 8 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 notice or supervision of the writer upon this mooted question is 
 herein described. The record is giVen of two long experiments 
 with rations having different nutritive ratios, and also a less 
 extended one with a ration containing varying quantities of 
 palm nut meal. Considerable space is given to a summary of 
 the leading experiments relating to the influence of food on milk 
 production with especial reference to the quality of the milk, by 
 which is meant here its percentage of fat. The records of these 
 experiments are gleaned from all reliable sources both domestic 
 and foreign. In collecting this data free use has been made of 
 all experimental literature obtainable and reference is usually 
 made to the original article. The Experiment Station Record 
 has been used freely, especially for translations of foreign exper- 
 iments which are reported in periodicals not found in the Uni- 
 versity library. The attempt has been to make this summary as 
 brief as possible and yet give a fair idea of the plan and scope of 
 the experiment, together with the results or conclusions obtained. 
 
 Summary of Experiments Concerning the Relation of 
 Food to Milk-Fat 
 
 Jordan* experimented on five cows with three different kinds 
 of rations during three periods, the rations being made up so as 
 to contain varying amounts of vegetable fats, and found that the 
 yield of milk diminished somewhat in passing from the ration 
 rich in fat to the one containing less fat, and increased slightly 
 after changing again to the fat rich ration. " The composition 
 of the milk varied but little and no more, or even less, during the 
 three periods than is often observed when the ration is not 
 changed." 
 
 In a later experiment f Jordan fed three cows during three 
 periods of 35 days each on two rations, one having a nutritive 
 ratio of 1:6.7 ^^^ the other 1:12.3 and found that " the yield of 
 milk from the nitrogenous ration was from one-fifth to more 
 than one-third larger than that from the carbonaceous ration. 
 In general the milk was materially richer while the cows were 
 
 * Maine Station Annual Report, 1891, p. 62. 
 tSame 1893, p. 73. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 19 
 
 fed the ration rich in protein. * * * The composition of the 
 milk solids seemed to be independent of the ration. In general 
 the proportign of fat increased throughout the experiment with- 
 out regard to what the cows were fed, and no evidence is fur- 
 nished in support of the notion that by changing the food it is 
 possible to produce more butter-fat without an accompanying 
 increased production of the other milk'solids." 
 
 Whitcher,* after studying the effect of pasture and silage, and 
 of changing the nutritive ratio on the quality of the milk, found 
 very little variation in the per cent of fat and concludes : "I 
 feel warranted in saying that a given animal by heredity is so 
 constituted that she will give a milk of certain average com- 
 position ; by judicious or injudicious feeding the amount of milk 
 may be largely varied, but the quality of the product will be 
 chiefly determined by the individuality of the cow." 
 
 Wood,t in experimenting on the effect of some coarse fodders 
 on quantity and quality of milk during several experimental 
 periods of two weeks each, found " no variation in the quality of 
 the milk that could be attributed to the character of the food." 
 
 Later, J he fed three cows for two weeks on a basal ration of 
 silage, clover hay, vetch hay, oats and middlings. Then in three 
 subsequent periods of two weeks each, palm oil, cottonseed oil, 
 corn oil, oleo oil, cocoanut oil and stearin were fed to different 
 cows at the rate of 12 ounces per 1,000 pounds live weight, mak- 
 ing a nutritive ratio of 1:6.8. The conclusions reached were : 
 " That the first effect of an increase of fat in a cow's ration is to 
 increase the per cent of fat in her milk." 
 
 " That with the continuance of such a ration the tendency is 
 for the milk to return to its normal condition." 
 
 " That the increase in fat is not due to the oils but to the 
 unnatural character of the ration." 
 
 " That the results of this experiment tend to confirm the con- 
 clusions expressed in previous bulletins from this Station ; that 
 the composition of a cow's milk is determined by the individu- 
 ality of the cow, and that although an unusual food may dis- 
 
 *New Hampshire Station Bulletin 9, 1S90. 
 f vSame, Bulletin 18, 1892. 
 I Same, Bulletin 20, 1894. 
 
20 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 turb for a time the composition of the milk, its effect is not 
 continuous." 
 
 Hills * studied the effect of heavy feeding of grains on milk 
 production by giving two cows for two months a continually 
 increasing amount of grain until they were receiving all they 
 would eat. He found that there was little change in the com- 
 position of the milk on increasingly heavy grain feeding, and 
 that no connection could be traced between the quality of the 
 milk and the food given. 
 
 Hillsf, in a series of feeding tests covering five periods of four 
 weeks each, and using thirty-one cows, experimented with vari- 
 ous coarse fodders, grains and mixed feeds. The invariable 
 conclusion was that there was no material change in the quality 
 of the milk as a result of the change in ration. 
 
 Hills I reports that unemulsified cottonseed oil and emulsified 
 cottonseed, corn and linseed oils were fed with bran or corn meal 
 and bran, hay and silage, as against the same rations without 
 the oil. Milk yields to the unit of dry matter eaten were always 
 increased when oil was fed, the increase amounting from three 
 to nine per cent. The amount of total solids and fat was 
 increased by the cottonseed oil feeding from two to fifteen per 
 cent, on linseed oil feeding two per cent and on corn oil feeding 
 not at all. The quality of milk was always improved at the out- 
 set of this class of feeding but quickly returned to normal qual- 
 ity or became poorer than usual when corn or linseed oils were 
 fed. The increased fat percentage — unaccompanied by rise in 
 the percentage of solids not fat — was fairly permanent, lasting 
 from four to six weeks, when either raw or emulsified cottonseed 
 oil was fed. The length of feeding periods was four to five 
 weeks. 
 
 Hills II conducted a series of experiments to learn the effect of 
 adding an excessive amount of single nutrients to a cow's ration. 
 The feeding periods were four weeks long, of which the first ten 
 days were considered preliminary. His general summary is : 
 
 * Vermont Station, Annual Report, 1890, p. 75. 
 f Same, 1S95, p. 203. 
 X Same, 1899, p. 269. 
 II Same, 1900, p. 417. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 21 
 
 "The addition of about one-fifth more digestible protein (in 
 Atlantic gluten flour) to a ration of amounts of this nutrient 
 greater than standard requirements was practically without effect 
 as. a milk stimulant. The addition of about one-fifth more 
 digestible carbohydrates (in brown sugar) to a ration containing 
 amounts of these nutrients equal to or in excess of standard 
 requirements had little or no effect upon either the quantity or 
 quality of the milk. The addition of a solid fat (palm oil) to a 
 ration already containing digestible ether extract in excess of 
 standard requirements increased its digestible fat content about 
 one-half. It had a slight effect upon the quantity and a pro- 
 nounced effect upon the quality of the milk. The total solid per- 
 centage was increased two per cent (0.24 per cent) and the fat 
 seven per cent. (0.36 per cent). The increase seems to have 
 been a permanent one. 
 
 Cooke, * in reporting an experiment in feeding sugar meal, 
 cream gluten meal and germ meal to nine cows for four months 
 in periods of four weeks each, says : " We are led to the con- 
 clusion that sugar meal and cream gluten have a slight effect 
 toward an increase in the richness of the milk." 
 
 Lindseyf fed six cows in nine and fourteen-day periods with 
 seven days preliminary feeding to each period on rations con- 
 taining amounts of protein which varied from i .3 to 3.76 pounds 
 per head daily, and the nutritive ratio varied from 1:4.4 to 1:10. 
 The periods were rather short, but the " indications are that the 
 composition of the milk, especially the fat, appeared to be favor- 
 ably affected by the addition of protein up to three pounds, 
 although there was considerable difference in the cows in this 
 respect." 
 
 L.indsey, Holland and BillingsJ varied the nutritive ratio of the 
 ration from 1:3.86 to 1:9.43 while feeding six cows in two lots of 
 three each, during four periods of 21 to 26 days each, with a 
 seven-day preliminary period. They conclude: "That the 
 same amount of digestible matter in the narrow rations produced 
 from II. 8 to 12.9 per cent more milk than did a like amount of 
 
 * Vermont Station, Bulletin 31, 1892. 
 
 f Massachusetts (State) Station Annual Report, 1894, p. 42. 
 
 I Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report 1896, p. 100. 
 
1 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 digestible matter in the wide rations, and that neither the nar- 
 row nor wide rations produced any decided change in the com- 
 position of the milk." 
 
 L/indsey* summarizes the results of a series of experiments 
 extending over a period of six years in which was studied the 
 effect upon milk production of feeding rations containing vary- 
 ing amounts of protein and of oil (in flaxseed meal) . He concludes 
 that "Different amounts of protein do not seem to have any 
 influence on the composition of the milk. Linseed oil in flax- 
 seed meal, when fed in considerable quantities (1.40 pounds of 
 digestible oil daily), increased the fat percentage and decreased 
 the nitrogenous matter of the milk. This fat increase was only 
 temporary, the milk gradually returning (in four or five weeks) 
 to its normal fat content. The nitrogenous matter also grad- 
 ually returned to normal, but more slowly than the fat. In 
 general, feeds containing much oil have a tendency to slightly 
 increase the fat content of milk when first fed. The fat per- 
 centage gradually returns to normal." 
 
 Jordan and JentnerJ changed the ration of a cow in three 
 ways : " (i) By decreasing the fat in the food from about the 
 usual quantity to practically none ; (2) by producing wide 
 variations in the protein supply and nutritive ratio, and (3) by 
 producing wide variations in the supply of total digestible 
 material." The cow was "fed ninety-five days on a ration 
 from which the fats had been nearly all extracted, and she con- 
 tinued to secrete milk similar to that produced when fed on the 
 same kinds of hay and grain in their normal condition." The 
 food-fat eaten during this time was 11. 6 pounds, 5.7 pounds of 
 which was digested, while the yield of milk-fat was 62.9 pounds. 
 Throughout the whole experiment, "the composition of the 
 milk bore no definite relation to the amount and kind of food." 
 
 Jordan, Jentner and Fuller X later conducted similar experi- 
 ments in which three cows were used : " Cow 12 fed a fat-poor 
 ration in which the protein supply was gradually decreased from 
 2.6 pounds daily to 1.6 pounds and then gradually restored to 
 
 * Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report, 1900, p. 14. 
 f New York (State) Station, Bulletin 132, 1897. 
 Ij. Same, Bulletin 197, 1901. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 23 
 
 the maximum, with accompanying increase and decrease in car- 
 bohydrates so that the digestible dry matter of the ration was 
 kept fairly uniform ; Cow 10 fed a ration with normal supply of 
 fat at first which was gradually increased to i .4 pounds daily, then 
 gradually restored to the normal ; Cow 2 fed the herd ration having 
 a nutritive ratio about 1.5.6. These rations were quite varied in 
 character and contained some fat-extracted foods ; yet showed a 
 quite uniform digestibility of about 70 per cent of the dry mat- 
 ter. It is believed that this figure represents fairly the digesti- 
 bility of rations made up in part of silage and containing a fair 
 proportion of high class grains. A widening of the nutritive 
 ratios appeared to render rations less digestible, especiallj^ the 
 protein. The marked changes in protein content and in fat con- 
 tent of rations did not produce noticeable changes in the charac- 
 ter or composition of the milk. In the former test, during 59 
 days, 18.4 pounds of fat was formed in the milk which could 
 not have had its source in food-fat or food-protein and could 
 hardly have been drawn from the cow's body fat as she increased 
 in weight 33 pounds in the same time. In this test Cow 12 in 
 74 days produced 39 pounds of fat similarly unaccounted for, 
 with a body gain of 15 pounds ; and Cow 2, in 4 days i ^ pounds. 
 These amounts of fat must have come from the carbohydrates in 
 the food." 
 
 "A lessening of protein supply in the food did not produce a 
 corresponding decrease of protein in the milk solids, but caused 
 a marked lessening of protein decomposition in the body. ^ * 
 
 " Over 40 per cent of the available energy value of the rations 
 was used for maintenance, over 30 per cent reappeared in the 
 milk solids, leaving a balance of from one-fifth to one-fourth of 
 the ration. The logical conclusion is that this balance, in part 
 at least, sustains the work of milk secretion." 
 
 Wing * added ordinary beef tallow to the usual grain ration 
 of ten cows, giving them at first four ounces per head, and 
 increasing the amount gradually until each cow was consuming 
 two pounds daily, which amount was fed for six or seven weeks. 
 He found " no increase in the per cent of fat in the milk as a 
 result of feeding tallow in addition to a liberal grain ration." 
 
 * New York (Cornell) Station, Bulletin 92, 1895. 
 
24 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 Waters and Hess * gave rations varying in nutritive ratio from 
 1:3.9 to 1:6.65 to nine cows through four periods of thirty days 
 each, and say : "It appears that the narrower nutritive ratio 
 tended to increase the per cent of fat." 
 
 Farrington f studied the effect of heavy grain feeding by giv- 
 ing three cows from Dec. i to June i, in eight periods ranging 
 from 6 to 51 days, an amount of grain increasing continually 
 from 12 to 24 pounds per head daily where it was held for two 
 months, when it was decreased gradually until the cows went to 
 pasture, May i. The nutritive ratio varied from 1:4 to 1:9.4. 
 He found " that the increase of feed was accompanied by a con- 
 siderable increase in the pounds of milk produced, and conse- 
 quently in the pounds of solids, fat, and solids not fat in the 
 milk ; but with the exception of one or two days, there were 
 no greater changes in the percentages of fat in the milk after 
 the increase of feed than before it was made. ' ' 
 
 Wilson, Kent, Curtiss and Patrick J compared corn and cob 
 meal with sugar meal by feeding them to four cows in alternat- 
 ing periods of 21 days each with a lo-day preliminary period, 
 and conclude that "quality of milk, so far as measured by its 
 percentage of fat, was changed by feed to a much greater degree 
 than was quantity. Sugar meal produced 17 per cent more fat 
 and six per cent more total solids per 100 pounds of milk than 
 did the corn and cob meal." 
 
 Armsby,|| during three periods of three weeks each with two 
 cows compared bran with corn meal and found that while there 
 were slight changes in the composition of the milk there was 
 " no indication that the feeding had anything to do with these 
 changes." Again in comparing in a similar manner bran with 
 oil meal there were slight changes as before, but " we may safely 
 conclude that whatever changes took place in the composition of 
 the milk- solids were due to advancing lactation and not to the 
 feed." 
 
 * Pennsylvania Station, Annual Report, 1895, p. 56, 
 
 f Illinois Station, Bulletin 24, 1894. 
 
 X Iowa Station Bulletin 14, 1891. 
 
 II Wisconsin Station Annual Report 18S6, pp. 115 and 130. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 25 
 
 Woll,* in comparing the feeding value of ground oats and bran 
 for milk production, found that " the cows invariably did better 
 on oats, going up in milk yield when coming on oats and going 
 down when bran was fed, while the fat content of the milk 
 remained the same on an average." 
 
 Linfieldf studied the effect of two rations varying in nutritive 
 ratio on the per cent of fat in milk ^ith ten cows during eight 
 periods of three weeks each. He concludes, " this test adds but 
 another item to the fairly well established fact that an increase 
 in the quantity of concentrated food in the ration of a cow, does 
 not increase the richness of the milk provided the cows are well 
 fed to start with." 
 
 Dean;j; carried on experiments during several years to ascertain 
 the effect of food on the quality and quantity of milk. The 
 results obtained from feeding coarse fodder with and without 
 grain, from comparing pasturage with and without grain, from 
 feeding slop, and from other experiments, generally agree with 
 this statement made in Bulletin No. 80, that" the general con- 
 clusion would seem to be that the food does not effect the quality 
 of the milk to any appreciable extent so long as the animals are 
 in good condition." 
 
 Speir [[ reports as least three different experiments on the effect 
 of foods on milk production. He tested a large number of dif- 
 ferent kinds of feeding stuffs both singly and in various combina- 
 tions during periods of four to five weeks in length. Some of 
 his conclusions are that " an increase of oil in the food does not 
 seem to give any increase of fat in the milk. Rations having an 
 extremely high albuminoid ratio seem to have a depressing effect 
 on the milk yield, well mixed foods giving the best results in this 
 respect. Every food when first given, seems to have more or 
 less effect in increasing or decreasing the percentage of fat in the 
 milk. This effect, however, is transitory and the milk returns 
 to its normal composition about the end of the first week." 
 
 * Wisconsin Station Annual Report 1S90, p. 65. 
 
 t Utah Station, Bulletin 43, 1S95. 
 
 :}: Ontario Agricultural College and Farm Report 1891, p. 154; 1893, p. 
 148 ; 1894, pp. 147 and 148. 
 
 II Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society, Scotland, 1S94, 
 p. 83 ; 1896, p. 269 ; 1897, p. 296. 
 
26 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 Stohtnan,*in experimenting with goats found that the fat 
 content of the milk was proportional to the fat content of the 
 fodder, but that by a great increase in the nitrogenous foods, the 
 milk-fat did not increase in the same way as when the fat con- 
 tent of the food was increased. 
 
 Kiihnf carried on extensive feeding trials with bean meal, 
 palm nut cake and malt sprouts, having in all 42 experiments 
 with 10 cows. The feeding periods varied from 21 to 47 days in 
 length. The grains were fed separately in addition to a normal 
 ration and in quantities of 1.5, 2 and 3 kilograms per head daily. 
 According to his results the fat content of the milk increased 
 proportionately with the increase of protein fed, but did not 
 decrease in the same proportion when the protein in the food was 
 decreased. He concludes "that the palm nut cake exerted on 
 the whole a favorable influence upon milk production and espec- 
 ially upon the fat content of the milk. " The bean meal and 
 malt sprouts did not have a like favorable effect. He found that 
 the addition of one-half kilogram of oil to the ration increased 
 the quantity and quality of the milk. But he considered " that 
 this added fat had no direct influence on milk production ; that 
 it has an indirect effect in this manner : that a certain quantity 
 of protein is thereby made available for milk production which 
 before the feeding of the fat was used in sustaining the animal 
 body, but the fat now performs this office and permits the pro- 
 tein to be used for producing milk. " He concludes also " that 
 these experiments, according to all observations, prove in the 
 clearest manner how greatly the milk production, and the possi- 
 bility of influencing arbitrarily through feeding the amount or 
 composition of the product, are dependent upon the individuality 
 of the animal. " 
 
 Heinrich \ compared peanut cake with cocoanut cake, the lat- 
 ter ration containing 350 grams more fat than the former. The 
 rations were alternated in periods of four weeks each and three 
 cows were used. He found that the fat of the milk was consid- 
 erably increased both in percentage and total amount, when the 
 
 * Journal fiir Landwirtschaft, 1S6S, pp. 135, 307 and 420. 
 
 fvSame, 25, (1S77), p. 332. 
 
 :):Abs. in Experiment Station Record 3 (1891), p. 67. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 27 
 
 cocoanut ration was fed, but there was much difference in the 
 animals regarding this point. It is his opinion that the increased 
 yield of fat may be accounted for by the increased amount of fat 
 in the food. 
 
 Kochs and Ramm * fed three cows during four periods of about 
 four weeks each, on rations which contained practically the same 
 amounts of dry matter, and nearly equal amounts of digestible 
 non-nitrogenous matter, but the amount of protein fed was such 
 as to make the nutritive ratio vary from 1:8.19 to 1:5 42 to 1:4.31 
 and to 1:8.19 in the successive periods. They found that "the 
 proportional fat content of the milk remained unchanged by the 
 very wide changes in the food. " 
 
 Klein t found that the addition of sunflower cake to the usual 
 ration of four cows was followed by an increased milk yield, 
 while it seemed to have no specific effect on the fat content of 
 the milk. 
 
 Maercker and Morgen J report a series of cooperative experi- 
 ments with farmers in which the effect of watery foods on milk 
 secretion was studied. Beet diffusion residue (beet pulp) was 
 fed alone and also with potato residue (from starch manufact- 
 ure) in addition to a basal ration of hay, straw and grain. The 
 amounts of residue fed daily were such as to give quantities of 
 water ranging from 43 to 150 pounds per head. The experi- 
 mental periods were ten days each. They found that the quan- 
 tity of milk increased regularly with the increase of watery food 
 up to 116 pounds, and that the increase in watery food was with- 
 out discernible effect upon the composition of the milk. 
 
 Juretschke || has found as a result of the addition of 4 to 5 
 pounds, per thousand pounds live weight, of cottonseed cake, 
 rape cake, and peanut cake to a basal ration consisting of hay, 
 straw, brewers' grains and wheat bran, that the " milk secretion 
 is not directly but only indirectly affected by feeding and that 
 the feeding of large amounts of fat does not increase the amount 
 of butter-fat in the milk." 
 
 * Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicber 21 (1892) p, 809. 
 t Milch Zeitung 21 (1892) p. 673. 
 
 X Abs. in Experiment Station Record, 3 (1892) p. 557. 
 I Molkerei Zeitung 7 (1893) p. 518. 
 
28 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 Backhaus * found by feeding ten cows on a basal ration of hay, 
 straw, brewers' grains, etc., and alternating in periods of two 
 weeks with peanut cake, palm nut cake and cottonseed oil cake, 
 that in order to bring about changes in the fat content of milk 
 very little can be accomplished by the kind of food, and that the 
 favorable effect of some concentrated foods which have been 
 found to increase the fat takes place only when large quantities 
 are fed, 
 
 Soxhletf reports some investigations on the production of 
 milk richer in fat. He says nothing of the plan or extent of his 
 experiments and gives nothing but the conclusions and a discus- 
 sion of theories. As compared with hay alone, the addition of 
 fourteen pounds of starch, treated with malt and given as a 
 sweet drink, with sixteen pounds of hay made no appreciable 
 increase in milk yield but a noticeable decrease (about 0.7 per 
 cent) in fat. The fat content was practically the same when four 
 pounds of rice gluten containing 71 per cent of protein was fed 
 as when hay was fed alone. When sesame oil, linseed oil or 
 tallow was added to the ration in the form of emulsions thoroughly 
 mixed with the drinking water, the milk contained as high as 
 5.8 per cent of fat. When 1.5 to 2 pounds of linseed oil were 
 added to 18 to 22 pounds of hay the milk averaged 5.24 per cent 
 of fat for four days ; when i to 2 pounds of tallow were added 
 to the same amount of hay the milk contained from 4.24 to 5.5 
 per cent of fat, the average for eight days being 4.7 per cent. 
 The author believes that the addition of oils to the ration in the 
 form of emulsions will increase the per cent of fat in the milk 
 while the addition of the same oils in other forms will not so 
 increase it, because the oils are more easily digested in the form 
 of emulsion. He does not believe that the fat of the food goes 
 directly into the milk, but that it forces the body fat, i. e. tallow, 
 over into the milk, and thus indirectly increases the quantity of 
 milk-fat. He further states that the fat of the food alone, and 
 not the protein or carbohydrates, is capable of bringing about a 
 one-sided increase in the fat content of the milk. 
 
 * Journal fiir Landwirtschaft 41 (1893) p. 328. 
 
 f Abs. Experiment Station Record, 8 (1897), p. 1016. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 29 
 
 Beglarian * studied the effect of linseed oil, given in water as 
 an emulsion and of ground flaxseed with four cows during four 
 periods of^eight days each. The cows shrank in milk yield while 
 •taking the oil ration and increased on the flaxseed ration. The 
 author considers the results entirely negative since the oil was 
 not accompanied by an appreciable rise in the fat content, while 
 it had an unfavorable effect on the digestion and comfort of the 
 cows. The ground flaxseed had no effect on the quality of the 
 milk and a less unfavorable influence on the animal's digestion. 
 
 Holtsmark f found that feeding cows as much as 77 pounds of 
 turnips per head daily in connection with a liberal ration of con- 
 centrated feed and cut straw, caused no decrease in the fat con- 
 tent of the herd milk, as compared with the feeding of the regular 
 ration of hay, straw, concentrated feed and a small quantity of 
 roots. 
 
 Ramm,J to study the effect of different foods on milk product- 
 tion gave ten cows a basal ration consisting of 14 kg. of hay, 6 
 kg. straw and 50 kg. of beets, to which, for periods of ten days 
 each, he added separately eighteen different foods. He found 
 much variation in the fat content of the milk but no marked 
 increase except with palm nut cake (7.91 kg.) alone and with a 
 mixture of equal parts (8.25 kg.) of palm nut cake and beet 
 molasses, this mixture being accompanied with a higher per cent 
 of fat and total fat in the milk than any other food. For this 
 reason the author thinks molasses has a greater effect on the 
 quality of milk than palm nut cake. He found no relation 
 between the fat content of the milk and the fat content of the 
 food. 
 
 In a later experiment, Ramm made further comparison of the 
 feeding value of various molasses mixtures. The mixtures used 
 were peat molasses (80 per cent molasses and 20 per cent peat), 
 liquid molasses, equal parts of molasses and palm nut meal, 
 molasses pulp (molasses mixed with fresh potato pulp and dried), 
 molasses chips (fresh beet pulp and molasses mixed and dried), 
 barley meal and palm nut cake of average quality. The basal 
 
 * Milch Zeitung 26 (1897) p. 522. 
 
 f Abs. in Experiment Station Record, 9 (1897) p. 92, by F. W. Woll. 
 
 :j: Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicher 26 ( 1897) pp. 693, 731. 
 
30 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 ration consisted of hay, straw and beets. There were seven 
 experimental periods of 20 days each, the last five days only 
 being used in comparison. Eight cows were used. He found 
 the barley meal to excel the molasses preparations for milk pro- 
 duction, but concludes that the latter induce an increase in the 
 fat content of the milk. 
 
 Winternitz* fed a goat on sesame oil mixed with a small 
 amount of iodin. He found a portion of the iodin was absorbed 
 by the milk-fat and thus concludes that a direct transmission of 
 the fat of the food into the milk may take place. 
 
 Albert and Maerckerf studied the effect of rations rich and 
 poor in fat, on ten cows during six periods ranging from 7 to 18 
 days, with preliminary periods ranging from 2 to 16 days in 
 length. The amount of protein in the rations was kept constant 
 while the fat was increased from .297 kilograms to 1.706 kilo- 
 grams per head daily. They found that the feeding of such 
 large amounts of fat increased the percentage of fat in the milk, 
 but reduced the yield so much as to make such feeding unprofit- 
 able. 
 
 Kellner and Andra J compared sugar beets with dried and 
 ensiled beet diffusion residue by feeding them alternately to 
 twenty-four cows during four periods of twenty days each. They 
 found that " the substitution of 4.4 kg. of dried diffusion residue 
 for 27.5 kg. of sugar beets increased the milk yield .953 kg. and 
 the substitution of 41.8 kg. of ensiled diffusion residue for the 
 above amount of sugar beets increased the milk yield 1.721 kg. 
 per cow (of 550 kg. live weight) without causing any material 
 change in the qualit}- of the milk," 
 
 Friis II reviews the cooperative cow feeding experiments con- 
 ducted by the Experiment Station at Copenhagen, Denmark, 
 since 1888, with especial reference to the effect of food on the 
 fat content of the milk. The summary of 76 series of experi- 
 ments is given. The rations used were such as could be regarded 
 normal for milch cows, such as are met with in the feeding prac- 
 
 *Zeitschrift PhysioL Chem. 24 (1898) p. 425, 
 
 f Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicher 27 (1898) p. 18S. 
 
 X Landwirtschaftliche Versuchs Stationen 49 (189S) p. 402. 
 
 II Abs. in Experiment vStation Record 10 (1898) p. 86, by F. W. Woll. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 31 
 
 tice on Danish dairy farms. The question whether abnormal feed 
 mixtures can appreciably change the fat content of milk was not 
 included in the investigation. The author says " it was found 
 that different feeding stuffs and food mixtures in a very large 
 measure influence the quantity of milk yielded as well as the 
 health and general condition of the cows. The feed under prac- 
 tical conditions as found in this countfy, exerts an entirely insig- 
 nificant influence on the fat content of the milk." 
 
 Rhodin * emulsified linseed oil is a specially constructed 
 machine and fed from 250 to 750 grams of the emulsion daily as 
 a drink in water to each of two cows during seven-day periods in 
 addition to a normal mixed ration. During the first periods of 
 feeding the oil, the fat content of the milk was increased, but 
 during the third period the per cent of fat not only ceased to 
 increase, but fell back to the same point as before the oil was 
 was fed. 
 
 Ramm and Winthropf made a comparison of some new feed- 
 ing stuffs using five cows for six mouths. The foods were corn 
 bran, cocoa-molasses (hot molasses and finely ground cocoa shells), 
 blood, molasses (blood, molasses and refuse of cereals) and 
 molasses distillery refuse (residue from manufacture of 
 alcohol from beet molasses). They found a wide fluctuation 
 in the fat content of the milk during different periods and believe 
 that the molasses increased the fat content wherever it was fed, 
 while the corn bran seemed to reduce the fat content. When 
 feeding rations rich in fat they could see no relation between the 
 fat content of the ration and the fat content of the milk. 
 
 Ramm and Momsen | report an experiment in which five cows 
 were fed for four periods of four days each (preceded by prelim- 
 inary periods) a basal ration of hay, straw, roots and peanut 
 meal. In addition, molasses was fed during the first and fourth 
 periods, raw sugar during the second period, and raw sugar and 
 molasses distillery residue during the third period, — the sugar 
 content of the three rations being the same. The cows 
 produced the most milk and the least butter fat when fed the 
 
 * Milch Zeituiig 27 (1898) pp. 306 and 323. 
 t Same, 27 (1898) p. 513. 
 :}:Same, 29 (1900) 28, p. 433. 
 
32 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 sugar ration, and the most fat and solids when fed the sugar and 
 molasses distillery residue. The content of fat and solids in the 
 milk produced on the molasses ration was respectively, 3.20 and 
 11.65 per cent, on the sugar ration 2.84, and 11.32 per cent, and 
 on the sugar and molasses residue ration 3.39 and 12,06 per cent. 
 The results are therefore considered as showing that molasses 
 has a greater feeding value for dairy cows than sugar, and that 
 the constituents in molasses other than sugar are especially val- 
 uable in the production of butter fat. 
 
 Hagemann * conducted some experiments to determine whether 
 a fat rich fodder produces a fat rich milk. During five periods, 
 varying in length from 21 to 35 days, he fed two cows on rations 
 containing from 175 to 720 grams of fat. In addition to a basal 
 ration the grains added were corn meal, linseed-oil meal, malt 
 sprouts and peanut cake mixed with cocoa molasses. In the 
 sixth period of seven days he gave i.i pounds of sesame oil to 
 each cow daily as an emulsion in drinking water. He concludes 
 that " the proportional and absolute fat content of milk is not 
 dependent upon the amount of fat in the food." 
 
 The reports of forty-nine separate experiments have been herein 
 reviewed. They may be classified in the following manner in 
 answering to the question : Was the percentage of fat in the 
 milk increased by the food given the cows ? 
 
 Feeding fat 
 
 Feeding protein and mixed foods. 
 
 Feeding watery foods 
 
 Feeding molasses preparations . . 
 Total 
 
 13 
 
 22 
 2 
 
 32 
 
 A tendency 
 
 to 
 
 increase 
 
 Of the six experiments where the fat in the food increased the 
 proportion of milk-fat, one reports so great a reduction in the 
 yield as to make such feeding unprofitable. The noted experi- 
 ment of Soxhlet whereby he increased the per cent of milk-fat 
 by feeding the cows oil emulsified in the drinking water, has 
 been repeated many times by other experimenters, but only one 
 of them, so far as we know, has reached a similar result. The 
 
 * Landwirtschaf tliche Jahrbiicher 28 (1S99) p. 485. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 33 
 
 protein foods which increased the per cent of fat were palm-nut 
 meal and sugar meal. The molasses preparations may owe their 
 power to increase the fat content of milk to their rather abnormal 
 character. 
 
 Experiments at Cornell University 
 
 These experiments were conducted for the purpose of deter- 
 mining the comparative effect of rations having different nutritive 
 ratios upon milk production. This question has been the sub- 
 ject of experimentation at various times and places as has been 
 already noticed, but further investigation along possibly differ- 
 ent lines may throw more light upon the problem. Much dis- 
 cussion has occurred over the matter of the length of time dur- 
 ing which a particular food should be tested and as to the accuracy 
 of conclusions drawn from feeding trials where two or more foods 
 were given during brief alternating periods. Some contend that 
 four or five weeks is sufficient time in which to secure the true 
 effect of a food, some think that a shorter time, even ten days, is 
 enough, while others hold that the longer the period the more 
 accurate and conclusive the result. It is well known that, when 
 a radical change is made in the food of a cow, the secretion of 
 milk is greatly affected. This is most apparent in the fat con- 
 tent, which may either rise or fall, but is more apt to rise. How 
 long the fluctuation may continue depends upon the ability of the 
 cow to accustom herself to the new feed, which time may be 
 only a few days or it may be weeks. And when the cow has 
 become accustomed to the changed feed, her milk falls back to 
 its normal average composition. However, if the experiment is 
 concluded before this time, or if the feed is again changed, then 
 conclusions drawn therefrom must be more or less warped. 
 
 In order that these sources of error might be obviated, these 
 experiments were not only continued for a long period, but no 
 changes were made in the kinds of foods given during the whole 
 time. The feeding trials lasted through two successive winters 
 and for a period of twenty-two weeks during each winter. The 
 effect of the different rations was studied by comparing the 
 influence of each upon the average milk production of the cows 
 used. We think this method to be satisfactory because, in the 
 first place, the cows were so selected as to make the different lots 
 
34 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 fairly equal as to age, breed and general characteristics : and in 
 the second place, if a given ration will produce any particular 
 effect upon milk production, then this ration will show its influ- 
 ence on the average composition of the milk from the lot of 
 cows to which it is fed when compared with the average compo- 
 sition of milk from other cows on other rations. 
 
 This study is confined to the yield of milk and its quality so 
 far as represented bj^ the percentage of butter-fat. The deter- 
 minations of fat were made by the Babcock test from samples 
 of milk taken from each cow during the last three days of each 
 week. These daily samples were tested separately and their 
 average taken for the average per cent of fat in the week's milk. 
 Each cow's milk was weighed as soon as drawn and the weekly 
 yield of milk multiplied by the average percent of fat gives the 
 total fat produced during the week. 
 
 The rations fed were of three kinds, one with a narrow, one 
 with a medium, and the third with a wide nutritive ratio. No 
 analyses of foods were made except of the oat chop which was 
 fed during the first year. The amount of dr}' substance and the 
 nutritive ratio were calculated largeh' from the average compo- 
 sition of feeding stuffs given in Bulletin No. ii of the Office of 
 Experiment Stations. 
 
 With one exception the same cows were used throughout the 
 two years of experiment. Moreover the same cows were fed 
 rations having practicallj^ the same nutritive ratio though made 
 up of different foods during both years, i. e. the cows receiving 
 a narrow ration the first year also received a narrow ration the 
 second year and likewise with the cows on other rations. None 
 of the rations are what would be called unusual, for similar ones 
 may be found in use on dairy farms in various parts of the coun- 
 try. During the whole length of both experiments it was the 
 aim to give the cows all the food they could readily consume. 
 
 The records as published contain only the average data obtained 
 from each lot of cows. In work of this kind, the average record 
 of several cows is of more value than individual records taken 
 singly, and it is from the average record that conclusions must 
 be drawn. For this reason and in order to eliminate many long 
 tables from these pages, the individual records are not published. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 35 
 
 The First Experiment, 1895-6. 
 
 This feeding trial began Nov. 6, 1895, and continued for 
 twenty-two weeks until Apr. 7, 1896. It was conducted by 
 James M. Johnson then a graduate student in the College of Agri- 
 culture. The names of the cows used are given below together 
 with their br'eed, age, number of days in milk and weight. 
 
 Name and breed. 
 
 Lot a : 
 GarnetValentine A.J.C.C.,73873 
 
 Belva 2d, }| Holstein 
 
 Julia, I Holstein 
 
 Lot B : 
 
 Chern-, grade Jersey 
 
 Dora, \f Holstein 
 
 Glista 4th H. F. H. B., 31408 
 Lot C : 
 
 Clara, grade Jersey 
 
 Glista Netherland, H.F. H.B 
 32442 
 
 May 2d, | Holstein 
 
 Age. 
 
 Number 
 of days 
 in milk. 
 
 Weight 
 begin- 
 ning. 
 
 Weight 
 end. 
 
 Gain. 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 67 
 49 
 
 S73 
 891 
 
 922 
 1088 
 
 119 
 
 197 
 
 4 
 
 25 
 
 II96 
 
 1370 
 
 174 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 49 
 62 
 
 721 
 1 146 
 
 849 
 1213 
 
 128 
 67 
 
 3 
 
 65 
 
 1064 
 
 1239 
 
 175 
 
 3 
 
 65 
 
 922 
 
 1063 
 
 141 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 1038 
 
 II27 
 
 89 
 
 3 
 
 54 
 
 I017 
 
 1223 
 
 206 
 
 The daily rations of the cows in each lot were made up as 
 follows : 
 Lot a : 
 
 Grain mixture 8 to 13 pounds. 
 
 Gluten feed 3 parts. 
 
 Oat chop 2 parts. 
 
 Cottonseed meal 2 parts. 
 
 Linseed oil meal i part. 
 
 Corn silage 40 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Clover hay 8 to 10 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio 1 14.5 
 
 Lot B : 
 
 Grain Mixture 8 to 10 pounds. 
 
 Gluten feed 2 parts. 
 
 Oat chop 3 parts. 
 
 Corn meal 1 part. 
 
 Linseed oil meal i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Clover hay 4 to 10 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio 1:6 
 
 Lot C : 
 
 Grain mixture 8 to 10 pounds. 
 
 Oat chop 4 parts. 
 
 Corn meal : 4 parts. 
 
 Linseed oil meal i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 40 pounds. 
 
 Timothy hay 4 to 8 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio 1:9 
 
36 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 Calculating each of these rations on the basis of 8 pounds of 
 grain, 8 pounds of hay and 40 pounds of silage, each cow would 
 receive the following number of pounds of digestible nutrients 
 per day : 
 
 
 Protein. 
 
 Carbo- 
 hydrates. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 Nutritive 
 ratio. 
 
 lyOt A, narrow ration 
 
 2.90 
 2.25 
 1.60 
 
 10.78 
 II. 61 
 12.68 
 
 1.09 
 •91 
 
 .75 
 
 1:4-5 
 1:6.0 
 1.9.0 
 
 Lot B, medium ration 
 
 Lot C, wide ration 
 
 
 Beginning with Dec. 14, each cow received 5 pounds of man- 
 gel-wurtzels per day in addition to the above rations. 
 
 Table I contains the average record of consumption of food 
 and production of milk and fat for each of the three lots of cows 
 named above. The data given includes the weekly average con- 
 sumption of dry matter per head, the average daily consumption 
 per 1000 pounds live weight, the nutritive ratio, the average 
 weekly yield of milk and fat and the average per cent of fat. 
 
 TABLE I— 1895-6 
 Average Record of Lot a. (Narrow Ration) 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Weekly product of milk and fat. 1 
 
 Week. 
 
 Dry matter consumed. j 
 
 Av 
 
 erage per head, 
 
 Per head 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 
 Nutritive 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 weekly. 
 
 daily. 
 
 Ratio. 
 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 I 
 
 159-46 
 
 23-34 
 
 1:4-53 
 
 219.50 
 
 3-64 
 
 7.98 
 
 2 
 
 164.01 
 
 23-59 
 
 1:4.50 
 
 221.33 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 7.08 
 
 3 
 
 164,71 
 
 23.66 
 
 1:4.50 
 
 220 92 
 
 3 
 
 35 
 
 7.41 
 
 4 
 
 166.27 
 
 23.24 
 
 1:4.51 
 
 208.67 
 
 3 
 
 55 
 
 7.41 
 
 5 
 
 170.55 
 
 23.46 
 
 1:4.43 
 
 202.42 
 
 3 
 
 52 
 
 7.13 
 
 6 
 
 171.19 
 
 23.26 
 
 1:4.38 
 
 200.33 
 
 3 
 
 42 
 
 6.85 
 
 7 
 
 17505 
 
 23-65 
 
 1:4-35 
 
 196.33 
 
 3 
 
 22 
 
 6.36 
 
 8 
 
 177-32 
 
 23.72 
 
 1:4 32 
 
 199.00 
 
 3 
 
 39 
 
 6.75 
 
 9 
 
 170.55 
 
 22.61 
 
 14.28 
 
 191.00 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 6.32 
 
 10 
 
 171. II 
 
 22.64 
 
 1:4.29 
 
 195.67 
 
 3 
 
 23 
 
 6.32 
 
 II 
 
 171.96 
 
 22.74 
 
 1:4.29 
 
 197.08 
 
 3 
 
 39 
 
 6.68 
 
 12 
 
 174.19 
 
 22.92 
 
 1:4.24 
 
 191.25 
 
 3 
 
 26 
 
 6.24 
 
 13 
 
 173.20 
 
 22.74 
 
 1:4.20 
 
 191.08 
 
 3 
 
 47 
 
 6.63 
 
 14 
 
 178.43 
 
 23.48 
 
 1:4.26 
 
 183.75 
 
 3 
 
 60 
 
 6.62 
 
 l.S 
 
 180.12 
 
 23.58 
 
 1:4-27 
 
 184.42 
 
 3 
 
 61 
 
 6.67 
 
 16 
 
 180.97 
 
 23-55 
 
 1:4 28 
 
 191-33 
 
 3 
 
 50 
 
 6.74 
 
 17 
 
 180.69 
 
 23-37 
 
 1:4.28 
 
 186.42 
 
 3 
 
 53 
 
 659 
 
 18 
 
 176.73 
 
 22.68 
 
 1:4.25 
 
 169.50 
 
 3 
 
 53 
 
 5-9S 
 
 19 
 
 177-44 
 
 22.57 
 
 1:4.26 
 
 176.83 
 
 3 
 
 86 
 
 683 
 
 20 
 
 178.71 
 
 22.56 
 
 1:4.23 
 
 177-17 
 
 3 
 
 63 
 
 6.44 
 
 21 
 
 179 13 
 
 22.45 
 
 1:4.27 
 
 166.83 
 
 3 
 
 60 
 
 6.01 
 
 22 
 
 179.16 
 
 22.26 ' 14.27 1 
 
 166.67 
 
 3 
 
 62 
 
 6.04 
 
TABLE I— ( Continued) 
 Average Record of Lot B. (Medium Ration) 
 
 ■ 
 
 Dry matter consumed. 
 
 Weekly product of milk and fat. 
 Average per head. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Per head 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 
 Nutritive 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 vveekriy. 
 
 daily. 
 
 1 ratio. 
 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 I 
 
 162.25 
 
 24.03 
 
 
 6.12 
 
 1S7.50 
 
 3-35 
 
 6.27 
 
 2 
 
 161.42 
 
 23.70 
 
 
 6.II 
 
 191.42 
 
 3-33 
 
 6.37 
 
 3 
 
 161.55 
 
 23-56 
 
 
 6.11 
 
 182.50 
 
 338 
 
 6.17 
 
 4 
 
 162.26 
 
 23-57 
 
 
 6.12 
 
 180.75 
 
 3-58 
 
 6.47 
 
 5 
 
 165.52 
 
 23-77 
 
 
 6.05 
 
 175-75 
 
 3-19 
 
 5.61 
 
 6 
 
 167.28 
 
 23.81 
 
 
 6.03 
 
 166.50 
 
 3-44 
 
 5-73 
 
 7 
 
 171.70 
 
 24-^5 
 
 
 5-97 
 
 177-75 
 
 3.28 
 
 5-82 
 
 8 
 
 173.29 
 
 24.16 
 
 
 5-94 
 
 167.58 
 
 3-i6 
 
 5-30 
 
 9 
 
 167.81 
 
 23-53 
 
 
 5.89 
 
 164.75 
 
 3-05 
 
 5.02 
 
 lO 
 
 163.72 
 
 22.66 
 
 
 5.89 
 
 167.33 
 
 3-07 
 
 5-14 
 
 II 
 
 171.23 
 
 23-51 
 
 
 5.96 
 
 169.25 
 
 3 45 
 
 5-84 
 
 12 
 
 168.72 
 
 23-14 
 
 
 5.96 
 
 164.92 
 
 3-32 
 
 5-48 
 
 13 
 
 170.II 
 
 23.29 
 
 
 5-95 
 
 165.67 
 
 3.32 
 
 5-49 
 
 14 
 
 168.18 
 
 23-05 
 
 
 5.88 
 
 152-83 
 
 3.40 
 
 5.20 
 
 15 
 
 169.63 
 
 23-47 
 
 
 5-93 
 
 154.08 • 
 
 3.60 
 
 5-55 
 
 i6 
 
 173.43 
 
 23-44 
 
 
 5-95 
 
 162.83 
 
 3.50 
 
 5- 70 
 
 17 
 
 174.34 
 
 23-49 
 
 
 5.96 
 
 159-17 
 
 3-52 
 
 5.60 
 
 i8 
 
 173.46 
 
 23.21 
 
 
 5-96 
 
 156.50 
 
 3-59 
 
 5-61 
 
 19 
 
 173.21 
 
 23.00 
 
 
 5.96 
 
 152.67 
 
 3-73 
 
 5-69 
 
 20 
 
 173-77 
 
 22.91 
 
 
 5.96 
 
 154-67 
 
 3-53 
 
 5.46 
 
 21 
 
 174.48 
 
 22.86 
 
 
 5-96 
 
 146,42 
 
 3-51 
 
 5.14 
 
 22 
 
 173-35 
 
 22.50 
 
 
 5-96 
 
 125-33 
 
 3-84 
 
 4.81 
 
 
 Average Record of Lot C. (Wide Ration) 
 
 
 
 Dry 
 
 matter consumed. 
 
 Weekly product of milk and fat. 
 Average per head. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Per head 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 
 Nutritive 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 weekly. 
 
 daily. 
 
 ratio. 
 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 I 
 
 150.20 
 
 21.56 
 
 1:8.79 
 
 180.83 
 
 3-31 
 
 5-99 
 
 * 2 
 
 149.62 
 
 21.28 
 
 1:8.78 
 
 177.92 
 
 3.20 
 
 5.69 
 
 3 
 
 145.43 
 
 20.52 
 
 1:8.73 
 
 173-S3 
 
 3-54 
 
 6.16 
 
 4 
 
 146.73 
 
 20.49 
 
 1:8.73 
 
 166.75 
 
 3-55 
 
 5-92 
 
 5 
 
 151.28 
 
 2095 
 
 1:8.65 
 
 162.00 
 
 3-37 
 
 5-46 
 
 6 
 
 147-63 
 
 20.35 
 
 1:8.43 
 
 152.67 
 
 3-43 
 
 5-24 
 
 7 
 
 150.14 
 
 20.50 
 
 1:8.30 
 
 164.25 
 
 3.08 
 
 5.06 
 
 8 
 
 147.16 
 
 19-93 
 
 1:8.19 
 
 164.92 
 
 3.22 
 
 5.31 
 
 9 
 
 148.75 
 
 20.07 
 
 1:8.22 
 
 145-25 
 
 3-74 
 
 5-43 
 
 10 
 
 146.44 
 
 19.62 
 
 1:8.18 
 
 154.92 
 
 3-25 
 
 5-03 
 
 II 
 
 151-65 
 
 20.17 
 
 1:8.27 
 
 154.25 
 
 3.30 
 
 5.08 
 
 12 
 
 146.15 
 
 19.33 
 
 1:8.16 
 
 153.42 
 
 3-31 
 
 5.08 
 
 13 
 
 147.62 
 
 1945 
 
 1:8.21 
 
 153.67 
 
 3-37 
 
 5.18 
 
 14 
 
 146.49 
 
 19.21 
 
 1:8.19 
 
 147-75 
 
 3-21 
 
 4.75 
 
 15 
 
 147.31 
 
 19.27 
 
 1:8.19 
 
 143.17 
 
 3.60 
 
 5.15 
 
 16 
 
 154.39 
 
 20.16 
 
 1:8.33 
 
 146.83 
 
 3-45 
 
 5.07 
 
 17 
 
 156.13 
 
 20.33 1:8.36 1 
 
 14633 
 
 3-29 
 
 4.82 
 
 18 
 
 156.13 
 
 20.29 
 
 1:8.36 
 
 142.75 
 
 3-52 
 
 5.02 
 
 19 
 
 157-72 
 
 20.33 
 
 1:8.39 
 
 139.92 
 
 3-87 
 
 5.42 
 
 20 
 
 158.73 
 
 20.26 
 
 1:8.41 
 
 141.67 
 
 3.58 
 
 507 
 
 21 
 
 160 76 
 
 20.32 
 
 1:8.45 
 
 136.50 
 
 3-65 
 
 4-98 
 
 22 
 
 161. 01 
 
 20.56 
 
 1 :8.46 
 
 135-33 
 
 3-63 
 
 4.91 
 
38 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 The Second Experiment, 1896-7 
 This feeding trial continued for twenty-two weeks from Nov. 
 II, 1896, to Apr. 13, 1897, ^^^ was conducted by the writer. 
 The names of the cows used are given below together with their 
 breed, age, number of days in milk and weight. It will be 
 noticed that these cows are the same that were in the first experi- 
 ment with the exception of Jennie 2d, in lot C who took the 
 place of Glista Netherland. 
 
 Name and breed. 
 
 Lot a : 
 Garnet Valentine, A. J. C.C. 73873 
 
 Belva 2d, jf Holstein 
 
 Julia, 7^ Holstein . . . , 
 
 Lot B : 
 Cherry, grade Jersey 
 
 Dora, II Holstein 
 
 Glista 4th, H. F. H. B. 31408... 
 Lot C : 
 Clara, grade Jersey 
 
 Jennie 2d, Jersej'-Holstein. 
 May 2d, JA Hols'tein 
 
 
 Number 
 
 Weight 
 
 
 
 Age. 
 
 of days 
 
 begin- 
 
 end. 
 
 Gain. 
 
 
 in milk. 
 
 ning. 
 
 
 5 
 
 74 
 
 920 
 
 1020 
 
 100 
 
 3 
 
 50 
 
 IOI2 
 
 1200 
 
 188 
 
 5 
 
 62 
 
 1247 
 
 1333 
 
 106 
 
 3 
 
 54 
 Calved 
 
 809 
 
 928 
 
 119 
 
 5 
 
 Nov. 20 
 
 I181 
 
 1213 
 
 32 
 
 4 
 
 60 
 
 II37 
 
 1289 
 
 152 
 
 4 
 
 68 
 Calved 
 
 1030 
 
 1062 
 
 32 
 
 3 ' 
 
 Nov. 8 
 
 857 
 
 952 
 
 95 
 
 4 
 
 44 
 
 1 124 
 
 1191 
 
 67 
 
 The daily rations of the cows in each lot were made up as 
 follows : 
 Lot a : 
 
 Grain mixture 8 to 1 2 pounds. 
 
 Gluten feed 3 parts. 
 
 Cottonseed meal 2 parts. 
 
 Wheat bran i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Clover hay 6 to 12 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio i :4.3 
 
 Lot B : 
 
 Grain mixture 8 to 1 2 pounds. 
 
 Gluten feed 2 parts. 
 
 Corn meal 2 parts. 
 
 Wheat bran 2 parts. 
 
 Linseed oil meal i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Clover hay 6 to 1 2 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio i :5.7 
 
 Lot C : 
 
 Grain mixture 8 to 11 pounds. 
 
 Corn meal 2 parts. 
 
 Wheat bran i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 40 pounds. 
 
 Timothy hay 4 to 8 pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio 1 19. 3 
 
 * 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 39 
 
 Calculating each of these rations on the basis of 8 pounds 
 of 'grain, 8 pounds of hay, and 40 pounds of silage, each 
 cow would receive the following number of pounds of digestible 
 nutrients per day. 
 
 
 Protein. 
 
 Carbo- 
 hydrates. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 Nutritive 
 ratio. 
 
 Lot A, narrow ration 
 
 Lot B, medium ration 
 
 Lot C, wide ration 
 
 3.08 
 2.37 
 1.56 
 
 -10.63 
 11.67 
 12.96 
 
 I-I3 
 
 .87 
 .67 
 
 I ■■4-3 
 1:5-7 
 1:9-3 
 
 Beginning with Jan. 6, each cow was fed five pounds of man- 
 gel- wurtzels per day, which amount was increased to 10 pounds 
 in a few days and so continued until the close of the experiment. 
 
 Table II contains the average record of consumption of food 
 and production of milk and fat for each of the three lots of cows 
 named above. The data given includes the weekly average con- 
 sumption of dry matter per head, the average daily consump- 
 tion per 1000 pounds live weight, the nutritive ratio, the 
 average weekly yield of milk and fat and average per cent of fat. 
 
 TABLE II— 1896-7. 
 Average Record of Lot A. (Narrow Ration.) 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Weekly product of milk and fat. | 
 
 Week. 
 
 Dry matter consumed. 1 
 
 Average per hes 
 
 d. 
 
 Per head 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 
 Nutritive 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 weekly. 
 
 daily. 
 
 ratio. 
 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 I 
 
 167.19 
 
 22.63 
 
 1:4.15 
 
 184.42 
 
 3-37 
 
 6.21 
 
 2 
 
 169.34 
 
 22.53 
 
 1:4.11 
 
 188.33 
 
 3-31 
 
 6.24 
 
 3 
 
 172.81 
 
 22.67 
 
 1:4.11 
 
 187-75 
 
 3-27 
 
 6.14 
 
 4 
 
 172.98 
 
 22.32 
 
 1:4.00 
 
 178.25 
 
 3-44 
 
 6.13 
 
 5 
 
 169.36 
 
 21.82 
 
 1:394 
 
 177.08 
 
 3-21 
 
 5.64 
 
 6 
 
 17530 
 
 22.48 
 
 1:4.01 
 
 176.17 
 
 3.20 
 
 5.64 
 
 7 
 
 176.12 
 
 22.47 
 
 1:4.03 
 
 166.50 
 
 3-25 
 
 5.41 
 
 8 
 
 1 78. 18 
 
 22.61 
 
 1 :4.04 
 
 169.92 
 
 3.08 
 
 5-24 
 
 9 
 
 163.61 
 
 20.50 
 
 1:3.98 
 
 153-33 
 
 3.26 
 
 5.00 
 
 10 
 
 142.36 
 
 18.59 
 
 1:4.12 
 
 i5o.5» 
 
 3-37 
 
 5-08 
 
 11 
 
 169.11 
 
 21.52 
 
 1 :4-03 
 
 161.75 
 
 327 
 
 5.28 
 
 12 
 
 163.36 
 
 20.74 
 
 1:3.96 
 
 152.08 
 
 3.17 
 
 4:82 
 
 13 
 
 169.52 
 
 21.56 
 
 1:3-95 
 
 147.92 
 
 3.15 
 
 4.66 
 
 14 
 
 171-13 
 
 21.55 
 
 1:3.90 
 
 156 83 
 
 3.34 
 
 5.23 
 
 15 
 
 173.60 
 
 21.76 
 
 1:3-93 
 
 155-67 
 
 3.26 
 
 5.08 
 
 16 
 
 178.23 
 
 22.07 
 
 1:3.92 
 
 ' 150.58 
 
 3-22 
 
 4.85 
 
 17 
 
 182.63 
 
 22.51 
 
 1:3.94 
 
 152.25 
 
 3.21 
 
 4.88 
 
 18 
 
 179.27 
 
 2f-93 
 
 1 :3 93 
 
 i 151. 17 
 
 341 
 
 5-15 
 
 19 
 
 176.46 
 
 21.52 
 
 1:3.92 
 
 148.83 
 
 332 
 
 4-94 
 
 20 
 
 174.74 
 
 21.16 
 
 1:3 9f 
 
 148.58 
 
 3-31 
 
 4.92 
 
 21 
 
 175.69 
 
 21.20 
 
 1:3.91 
 
 150.75 
 
 3-37 
 
 5-09 
 
 22 
 
 174.61 
 
 20.87 
 
 1:3.90 
 
 143-50 
 
 3.36 
 
 4.83 
 
TABLE \\— {Continued) 
 Average Record of Lot B. (Medium Ration) 
 
 
 
 
 Weekly p 
 
 roduct of milk and fat. 1 
 
 Week. 
 
 Dry 
 
 matter consumed. 
 
 " Average per head. 1 
 
 Per head 
 weekly. 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 daily. 
 
 Nutritive 
 ratio. 
 
 Pounds of 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 Pounds of 
 fat. 
 
 I 
 
 *l62.22 
 
 23.96 
 
 1:5-58 
 
 *i82.75 
 
 3-67 
 
 6.72 
 
 2 
 
 *l64.89 
 
 23.76 
 
 1:5-54 
 
 *i89.25 
 
 4.04 
 
 7-64 
 
 3 
 
 *i66.i5 
 
 23-44 
 
 1:5-54 
 
 *i8[.75 
 
 3-83 
 
 6-97 
 
 4 
 
 164.90 
 
 21.87 
 
 1:559 
 
 221.08 
 
 3-84 
 
 8.50 
 
 5 
 
 169.20 
 
 22.42 
 
 1:5-53 
 
 227-33 
 
 3-43 
 
 7-79 
 
 6 
 
 164.48 
 
 21.80 
 
 1:5-54 
 
 195-17 
 
 3-98 
 
 7.77 
 
 7 
 
 170.53 
 
 22.53 
 
 1:5-56 
 
 204.25 
 
 3-63 
 
 7-42 
 
 8 
 
 175-99 
 
 23.20 
 
 1:5-59 
 
 214-92 
 
 3-34 
 
 7.19 
 
 9 
 
 177.14 
 
 23-37 
 
 1:5-94 
 
 217.42 
 
 3.42 
 
 7.42 
 
 lO 
 
 180.81 
 
 23.87 
 
 1:5-93 
 
 216.16 
 
 3.36 
 
 7.26 
 
 II 
 
 176.58 
 
 23-32 
 
 1:5.46 
 
 210.33 
 
 3-51 
 
 7.38 
 
 12 
 
 ]66.oi 
 
 21.85 
 
 1:5.42 
 
 201.50 
 
 340 
 
 6.89 
 
 13 
 
 175-91 
 
 23.27 
 
 1:5-47 
 
 204.58 
 
 3-47 
 
 7.09 
 
 14 
 
 i7«-59 
 
 23-14 
 
 1:5.46 
 
 207.08 
 
 3.51 
 
 7.27 
 
 15 
 
 184.10 
 
 23.92 
 
 1:547 
 
 215.92 
 
 3-50 
 
 7.55 
 
 i6 
 
 186.78 
 
 24.03 
 
 1:5-47 
 
 205.17 
 
 3-57 
 
 7-33 
 
 17 
 
 186.35 
 
 23-75 
 
 1:5-47 
 
 208.42 
 
 3-43 
 
 7-16 
 
 i8 
 
 186.92 
 
 23-73 
 
 1:5.47 
 
 214.42 
 
 3-45 
 
 7-39 
 
 19 
 
 182.40 
 
 23.09 
 
 1:5.46 
 
 209.00 
 
 3-65 
 
 7.63 
 
 20 
 
 181.98 
 
 22.94 
 
 1:5.46 
 
 208.33 
 
 3-41 
 
 7.11 
 
 21 
 
 1S1.27 
 
 22.76 
 
 1:5.46 
 
 202.25 
 
 3.62 
 
 7-33 
 
 22 
 
 181.55 
 
 22.65 1:5-46 1 
 
 199-83 
 
 3-55 
 
 7.09 
 
 
 Average Record of Lot 
 
 C. (Wide 
 
 Ration) 
 
 
 
 Dry 
 
 matter consumed. 
 
 Weekly product of milk and fat. 
 Average per head. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Per head 
 
 Per 1000 lbs. 
 
 Nutritive 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 weekly. 
 
 daily. 
 
 ratio. 
 
 milk. 
 
 Per cent fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 1 
 
 *I29.38 
 
 17-37 
 
 
 8.87 
 
 *I79-75 
 
 3-63 
 
 6.53 
 
 2 
 
 141.92 
 
 20.56 
 
 
 9.02 
 
 189.08 
 
 3-96 
 
 7-49 
 
 3 
 
 147-75 
 
 21.21 
 
 
 899 
 
 186.25 
 
 3-95 
 
 7.36 
 
 4 
 
 144-32 
 
 20.71 
 
 
 8.95 
 
 174.17 
 
 4.09 
 
 7.12 
 
 5 
 
 135-80 
 
 19-52 
 
 
 8-79 
 
 169.92 
 
 3-89 
 
 6.61 
 
 6 
 
 149-93 
 
 21.48 
 
 
 9.08 
 
 169.33 
 
 3-78 
 
 6.39 
 
 7 
 
 153-89 
 
 21.97 
 
 
 9.12 
 
 156.75 
 
 3.63 
 
 6.18 
 
 8 
 
 156.10 
 
 22.23 
 
 
 9-15 
 
 169.42 
 
 3-73 
 
 6.32 
 
 9 
 
 155.15 
 
 22.12 
 
 
 8.90 
 
 167.50 
 
 3.99 
 
 6.68 
 
 10 
 
 158.99 
 
 22.56 
 
 
 8.76 
 
 161.42 
 
 4.05 
 
 6.54 
 
 II 
 
 158.09 
 
 22.37 
 
 
 8-75 
 
 160.92 
 
 4.06 
 
 6.53 
 
 12 
 
 152.95 
 
 21-53 
 
 
 8.75 
 
 157.08 
 
 4.10 
 
 6.44 
 
 13 
 
 159.51 
 
 22.42 
 
 
 8.80 
 
 155.83 
 
 4.06 
 
 6.32 
 
 14 
 
 J58.27 
 
 22.04 
 
 
 8.69 
 
 ! 157.42 
 
 4.06 
 
 6.39 
 
 15 
 
 159.68 
 
 22.44 
 
 
 8.69 
 
 158.33 
 
 3-99 
 
 6.32 
 
 16 
 
 152.38 
 
 20.90 
 
 
 8.55 
 
 147-92 
 
 4.18 
 
 6.18 
 
 17 
 
 154 93 
 
 21.04 
 
 
 8-56 
 
 X53-42 
 
 4.06 
 
 6.23 
 
 18 
 
 157.59 
 
 21.37 
 
 
 8.61 
 
 i 151-67 
 
 4.06 
 
 6.16 
 
 19 
 
 151-51 
 
 20.40 
 
 
 851 
 
 146 25 
 
 4.16 
 
 6.08 
 
 20 
 
 *i6o.5o 
 
 21.62 
 
 
 8-53 
 
 ' *i6i.38 
 
 3.64 
 
 5-88 
 
 * Average for two cows. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 41 
 
 Before entering upon any discussion of these records it is 
 necessary to make a few explanations in order that a clear 
 understanding of them may be obtained. The first experiment 
 went through without any irregularities, or illness of the cows, 
 sufficient to cause variations that should be noticed when draw- 
 ing conclusions. But during the second experiment there were 
 some irregularities that need to be noticed. 
 
 In lot A, Table II, Julia was taken sick during the ninth week 
 of the test and for a few days her milk yield fell off nearly one- 
 half. Her illness and slow recovery considerably reduced the 
 average milk and fat yield as may be seen by a glance at the 
 table. 
 
 In lot B, Dora did not enter the experiment until the fourth 
 week and was then fresh in milk. She was giving from 40 to 50 
 pounds of milk daily, which amount increased the average yield, 
 as is seen in Table II. During the sixth week she was "off 
 feed" and her milk fell from 325 pounds during the fifth week 
 to 232 pounds. At the same time her average per cent of fat 
 was over one per cent higher than during the week previous, as 
 well as during the following week. This explains the high 
 average of 3.98 per cent during the sixth week. She quickly 
 regained nearly her former flow and at the close of the experi- 
 ment was averaging 42 pounds per day. 
 
 In lot C, Jennie calved Nov. 8 and entered the experiment 
 the second week, fresh in milk. Her coming into this lot 
 increased both the average yield of milk and the per cent of fat 
 for the second and succeeding weeks. During the twentieth 
 week, Clara, of lot C, was taken suddenly ill with high fever 
 and died. Upon examination, she was found to have accumur 
 lations of fatty tissue in close proximity to the vital organs. 
 During the twenty-first week. May, of lot C, was taken ill in a 
 similar manner to Clara, but her life was saved. It will be 
 remembered that the cows in this lot received a highly carbona- 
 ceous ration. The grain consisted of two parts, by weight, of 
 corn meal and one part of wheat bran, while the silage was rich 
 in corn and had been increased five pounds each about a month 
 before the cows became sick. It may be that so highly carbona- 
 ceous a ration has a heating tendency upon the animal body. If 
 
42 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 this be the case, feeding the ration for so long a period, might, 
 in its cumulative effects, result as disastrously as mentioned 
 above. Although Jennie 2d came through the experiment 
 safely on the same ration, still, when the effect upon Clara and 
 May is considered, we cannot help concluding that the ration is 
 not a good one for long, continuous feeding. 
 
 To return to the study of the comparative effect of the three 
 rations upon the yield and quality of milk, the results show that 
 there is practically no difference between them so far as their 
 effect on the percentage of fat is concerned. In general, there 
 is a gradual increase in the richness of the milk from the begin- 
 ning of each experiment until the end, regardless of the kind of 
 food. An average of the per cents of fat for periods of four 
 weeks each will present the fact more clearly, and such an 
 average is given in tabular form below. The first two weeks are 
 omitted in striking the average in all cases. 
 
 
 
 1895-6. 
 
 
 
 1896-7. 
 
 1 
 
 
 Lot and kind of ration. 
 
 Lot an 
 
 d kind of ration. 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 c 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 c 
 
 
 Narrow. 
 
 Medium. 
 
 Wide. 
 
 Narrow. 
 
 Medium. 
 
 Wide. 
 
 
 per cent 
 
 per cent 
 
 per cent 
 
 per cent 
 
 per cent 
 
 per cent 
 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat 
 
 1st four weeks. . . . 
 
 3-46 
 
 3- 40 
 
 3-47 
 
 3-29 
 
 3-77 
 
 3.93 
 
 2d four weeks .... 
 
 329 
 
 3-14 
 
 3-32 
 
 3-24 
 
 3-44 
 
 3-85 
 
 3d four weeks. . . . 
 
 3 44 
 
 3-37 
 
 3-27 
 
 3-2.^ 
 
 3-47 
 
 4.07 
 
 4th four weeks. . . . 
 
 3-54 
 
 3-55 
 
 3-47 
 
 3.28 
 
 349 
 
 4.07 
 
 5th four weeks. . . . 
 
 3.68 
 
 3-65 
 
 3.68 
 
 3-34 
 
 3.56 
 
 
 
 An average of this kind balances the variations from week to 
 week, and places the per cents of fat in a light where conclusions 
 can be more readily drawn therefrom. The reason for the high 
 average during the first four weeks in lot B, year 1896-7, has 
 already been indicated in the discussion concerning Dora's enter- 
 ing the experiment when fresh in milk, and later becoming 
 reduced in flow and increased in fat by forced feeding. Omitting 
 this period, it will be noticed that the average for the remaining 
 periods bear the same relation to each other as those for lot A. 
 In the first experiment there was an increase from the beginning 
 to the end with each lot of about two-tenths of one per cent of 
 fat. In the second experiment this increase was about one-tenth 
 of one per cent. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 43 
 
 When we examine the yield of milk and of fat we do not find 
 the same uniformity as is observed in the per cent of fat. If 
 an average ^e taken of the yield of milk and fat for the first 
 four weeks after the first two, and for the last four weeks of the 
 experiments we find the following per cent of decrease from 
 beginning to end : 
 
 
 1895-6. 
 Lot and kind of ration. 
 
 1896-7. 
 Lot and kind of ration. 
 
 A 
 
 Narrow. 
 
 B 
 
 Medium. 
 
 C 
 Wide. 
 
 A 
 Narrow. 
 
 B 
 
 Medium. 
 
 c 
 
 Wide. 
 
 Per cent decrease in milk 
 Per cent decrease in fat 
 
 17-5 
 12.0 
 
 18.0 
 12.0 
 
 15-5 
 12.0 
 
 17.8 
 15.6 
 
 3-0 
 6.0 
 
 14.4 
 10.3 
 
 The decrease for 1895-6 was the same with all rations except 
 for a slight difference in favor of the cows receiving the wide 
 ration. During the year 1896-7 the yields are not so uniform, 
 but lot B shows a much smaller decrease than either of the 
 other lots. Taking both experiments into account it would 
 seem that the medium ration had a more favorable influence 
 upon the continued production of milk and total butter-fat than 
 either the wide or narrow rations. Yet, if individual cases are 
 considered, we find Belva 2d, on the narrow ration, holding out 
 in her milk flow during both years as well as, or better than, 
 any of the cows on the medium ration. 
 
 Number of Pounds of Dry Matter Required in Each Ration to 
 Produce 100 Pounds of Milk and One Pound of Fat 
 
 
 Lot a. 
 Narrow ration. 
 
 Lot B. 
 Medium ration. 
 
 Lot C. 
 Wide ration. 
 
 Milk. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 Milk. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 Milk. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 1895-6 
 
 i8q6-7 
 
 90.2 
 106.6 
 
 26.0 
 
 32.3 
 
 102.8 
 85.2 
 
 30.1 
 23-9 
 
 98.3 
 92.8 
 
 28.7 
 23-4 
 
 
 Average 
 
 97.5 
 
 28.8 
 
 93-0 
 
 26.6 
 
 95 7 
 
 25.9 
 
 Weight of Cows 
 
 Whether or not the different rations had any particular effect 
 upon the live weight of the cows may be studied by recourse to 
 data already given, but an average of the gain of each lot during 
 the twenty-two weeks together with their average age is tabu- 
 lated here, for more ready reference. During the first year none 
 
44 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 of the cows had reached full age and during the second year two 
 of lot A and one of lot B were five j^ears old. Since the cows 
 in lot A were older than the others, it might seem that the nar- 
 
 
 Lot a. 
 Narrow ration. 
 
 Lot B. 
 Medium ration. 
 
 Lot C. 
 Wide ration. 
 
 Age. 
 
 Gain per 
 head. 
 
 Age. 
 
 Gain per 
 head. 
 
 Age. 
 
 Gain per 
 head. 
 
 1896-6 
 
 4>^ 
 
 163 
 
 3 
 4 
 
 123 
 lOI 
 
 3 
 
 3% 
 
 145 
 65 
 
 i8q6-7 
 
 
 
 
 row ration had a tendency to fatten the animals more than the 
 other rations. However, the differences are so slight that it is 
 safe to say that the gains in weight are due more to growth than 
 to any particular effect of the food. 
 
CHARTS 
 
 The records for milk and fat production as given in Tables I 
 and II are shown diagramatically in the six charts immediately 
 following. They show the average daily yield of milk, average 
 per cent of fat and average weekly yield of fat for both experi- 
 ments. Passing from left to right in the charts each division 
 represents one week. Counting upward, each of the small 
 spaces represents one-half pound of milk, five one-hundredths 
 of one per cent fat, or one-tenth of a pound of fat as the case 
 may be. 
 
- Diagrain showing the average daily yield of -milk for each week 
 during the experiment of iSg^-6. Each space between the perpen- 
 dicular lines represents one week. Each space between the horizontal 
 lines represents one-half pound of nnlk. 
 
2.— Diagram shoiving the average daily yield of milk for each week 
 during the experiment of jSgd-y. Each space betiveen the perpen- 
 dicular lines represents one cLieek. Each space between the horizontal 
 lines represents one-half pound of milk. 
 
3- — Diagram showing the average per cent of fat for each week during 
 the experiment of iSg^-6. Each space between the perpendicular 
 lines represents one week. Each space between the horizontal lines 
 represents five one-hundredths of one per cent of fat. 
 

 4- — Diagram showing the average per cent of fat for each week during 
 the experiment of i8g6-j. Each space betiveen the perpendicular 
 lines represents one week. Each space between the hoiizontal lines 
 represents five one-hundredths of one per cent of fat. 
 
5. — Diagram showing the average weekly yield of butter fat during the 
 experirnefit of i8g5-6. Each space between the perpendicular lines 
 represents one week. Each space between the horizontal lines repre- 
 sents one-tenth of one pound of fat. 
 
—Dia(rraui showing the average weekly yield oj butter fat during the 
 experiment of iSg6-j. Each space betiveeft the perpendicular lines 
 represents one week. Each space between the horizontal Hues repre- 
 sents one-tenth of one potcnd of fat. 
 
52 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 Feeding Palm Nut Meal 
 
 To carry still further the study of the effect of food upon tnilk 
 production a trial was made with palm nut meal. This work was 
 carried on during the winter of 1897 by George N. Lauman, then 
 a Senior in the College of Agriculture. An experiment with this 
 food has a double interest because it is the one that Kiihn found 
 would increase the per cent of fat in the milk as has been seen in 
 the summary of his work on page 26. 
 
 Palm nut meal is the by-product resulting from the extraction 
 of the oil from the fruit of a species of palms which are native to 
 the west coast of Africa. It is a highly nitrogenous product, its 
 percentage of digestible composition being protein 16. 6, fiber 16.6, 
 nitrogen free extract 41.4 and fat 3.6. In Europe, and especially 
 Germany, it has long been a popular dairy food because of its 
 stimulative effect upon milk production, although not all feeders 
 and experimenters have found it to increase the fat content of 
 the milk as was reported by Kiihn. 
 
 The meal used in this experiment was imported from Germany. 
 Six of the University cows were chosen for the test and divided 
 into two lots of three each. Before giving them the palm nut 
 meal, their regular daily ration had consisted of from 8 to 10 
 pounds of a grain mixture composed of three parts gluten feed, 
 two parts cottonseed meal, and one part wheat bran, together 
 with what silage and mixed hay they would eat. 
 
 The names of the cows in each lot, together with their age, 
 date of calving and weights are given below : 
 
 Name of breed. 
 
 Lot No. i. 
 Glista Netherland, H. F. H. B. 32442 
 
 Gem Valentine, A. J. C. C. 57881 
 
 Mollie, {% Holstein 
 
 Lot No. 2. 
 Mabel 2d, Jersey Holstein 
 
 Ruby, f Holstein 
 
 Sadie, if Holstein 
 
 
 Date of 
 
 Weight 
 
 Weight 
 
 
 Age. 
 
 calving. 
 
 begin- 
 
 end . 
 
 Loss. 
 
 5 
 
 
 ning. 
 
 
 
 Oct. 21, 
 
 1339 
 
 1289 
 
 50 
 
 
 1895. 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Sept. 6, 
 1896. 
 
 107I 
 
 973 
 
 98 
 
 7 
 
 Oct. 24, 
 1896. 
 
 i34« 
 
 1267 
 
 81 , 
 
 2 
 
 Oct. 15, 
 1896. 
 
 902 
 
 832 
 
 70 1 
 
 8 
 
 Dec. 26, 
 1896. 
 
 1369 
 
 II9I 
 
 178 
 
 5 
 
 May I, 
 1896. 
 
 1407 
 
 1386 
 
 21 
 
 l! 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 53 
 
 .The feeding of the palm nut meal began Jan. 20, 1897, and 
 continued for six weeks. During this time the ration of lot No. 
 I remained- constant, while that of lot No. 2 was increased as 
 indicated below. The daily rations were made up as follows : 
 
 Lot No r : 
 
 Grain mixture ^. 10 to 13 poimds 
 
 Palm nut meal ' 2 parts. 
 
 Gluten feed 2 parts. 
 
 Wheat bran i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Mixed hay 10 to n pounds. 
 
 Nutritive ratio 1:6 
 
 Calculating this ration on the basis of 10 pounds of grain, 10 
 pounds of hay and 40 pounds of silage it would contain the fol- 
 lowing number of pounds of digestible nutrients : protein 2.7 
 carbohydrates 14. i, fat .96 and 26 pounds of dry substance. 
 
 Lot No 2 : 
 
 Grain mixture 
 
 Palm nut meal 4 parts. 
 
 Gluten feed 3 parts. 
 
 Cottonseed meal , 2 parts. 
 
 Wheat bran i part. 
 
 Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 
 
 Mixed hay 7 to 10 pounds. 
 
 The amount of coarse fodder given this lot did not vary mate- 
 rially during the whole experiment. The quantity of the grain 
 mixture fed was increased as follows : 
 
 January. 
 20-31. 
 
 Mabel 7 
 
 Ruby 10 
 
 Sadie 10 
 
 February. 
 
 1-6. 
 
 8.5 
 
 Febrviary. 
 
 7-2S. 
 
 ID 
 
 14 
 14 
 
 Calculating this ration according to the quantities eaten by 
 Ruby and Sadie, and considering the amount of silage and hay 
 consumed as 40 and 10 pounds respectively, we have the following 
 amounts of dry matter and the number of pounds of digestible 
 nutrients consumed daily during the different periods : 
 
 
 Dry matter. 
 
 Protein. 
 
 Carbo- 
 hydrates. 
 
 Fat. 
 
 Nutritive 
 ratio. 
 
 Per head. 
 
 Per :ooo lbs. 
 
 January 20-31. . 
 Febrviary 1-6. . . 
 February 7-28. . 
 
 26.06 
 27.87 
 29.68 
 
 20.00 
 21.51 
 
 22.83 
 
 309 
 
 3-52 
 3-96 
 
 13-52 
 14.42 
 15-32 
 
 1.08 
 1.22 
 
 1-35 
 
 1:5.16 
 
 1:4.84 
 1:4.64 
 
54 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 On Feb. 24 the proportion of palm nut meal was increased 
 from four to six parts in the grain mixture so that it made up 
 one-half of the grain ration. On the first of March the meal was 
 discontinued and all the cows returned to the same ration which 
 they received before the trial. 
 
 Table III contains the yield of milk and butter-fat of each cow 
 
 under experiment for six weeks before and six weeks after the 
 
 palm nut meal was fed as well as during the period of feeding 
 
 the meal. 
 
 TABLE III 
 
 Weekly Product of Milk and Fat of Lot No. i 
 
 Ration for 
 each period 
 
 Glista Netherland. 1 
 
 Gem 
 
 Valentine. 
 
 Mollie. 
 
 P^r 
 
 
 
 Per 
 
 
 
 Per - 1 
 
 of six 
 
 Povmds 
 
 cent 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Pounds 
 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Pounds 
 
 
 Pounds 
 
 weeks. 
 Usual 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 204.25 
 
 3.00 
 
 6.13 
 
 157.00 
 
 5.20 
 
 8.16 
 
 334-25 
 
 2.60 
 
 8.69 
 
 ration of 
 
 217.50 
 
 3.15 
 
 6.85 
 
 176.50 
 
 5.30 
 
 9-35 
 
 347.50 
 
 2.95 
 
 10.25 
 
 silage, 
 
 207.50 
 
 3.00 
 
 6.23 
 
 145.50 
 
 5-35 
 
 7.78 
 
 321.50 
 
 3.40 
 
 10.93 
 
 hay and 
 
 211.00 
 
 3.25 
 
 6.86 
 
 116.00 
 
 4.«5 
 
 5-63 
 
 313.50 
 
 3.00 
 
 9.41 
 
 grain. 
 
 202.75 
 
 3-25 
 
 6.59 
 
 118.50 
 
 4.85 
 
 5-75 
 
 305.50 
 
 2.65 
 
 8.10 
 
 Total 
 
 201.50 
 1244.50 
 
 3.50 
 
 3-19 
 
 7.05 
 
 131-25 
 
 5.50 
 
 5-20 
 
 7.22 
 
 299.50 
 
 3 10 
 
 9.28 
 
 39.71 
 
 844.75 
 
 43-89 
 
 1921.75 
 
 2-95 
 
 56.66 
 
 Palm nut 
 
 206.50 
 
 3.20 
 
 6.61 
 
 127-75 
 
 5.52 
 
 7-05 
 
 311.00 
 
 3.17 
 
 986 
 
 meal 
 
 196.50 
 
 3.38 
 
 6.64 
 
 123-25 
 
 5-88 
 
 7.25 
 
 293.50 
 
 3-26 
 
 9.57 
 
 ration . 
 
 182.25 
 
 .3.41 
 
 6.21 
 
 122.75 
 
 6.00 
 
 7-37 
 
 295.25 
 
 3-38 
 
 9-98 
 
 
 1S7.OO 
 
 3.75 
 
 7.01 
 
 "7-75 
 
 5-98 
 
 7.04 
 
 296.75 
 
 3.48 
 
 10.33 
 
 
 184.00 
 
 3-4« 
 
 6.40 
 
 117.50 
 
 5.57 
 
 6.54 
 
 298.75 
 
 3-35 
 
 10 01 
 
 Total 
 
 164-75 
 
 3-75 
 
 6.18 
 
 105.50 
 
 5.85 
 
 6.17 
 
 295.00 
 1790.25 
 
 3-53 
 3.36 
 
 10.41 
 60.16 
 
 1 1 21 .00 
 
 3.48 
 
 39-05 
 
 714-50 
 
 5-80 
 
 41.42 
 
 Usual 
 
 139-50 
 
 3-42 
 
 4-77 
 
 III. 50 
 
 5.73 
 
 6.36 
 
 285.50 
 
 3.07 
 
 8.76 
 
 ration. 
 
 *62.00 
 
 3.60 
 
 2.23 
 
 114.75 
 
 6.00 
 
 6.89 
 
 315.50 
 
 3-30 
 
 10.41 
 
 
 
 
 
 108.00 
 
 5.65 
 
 6.10 
 
 304.00 
 
 3-55 
 
 10.79 
 
 
 
 
 
 83.75 
 
 5-95 
 
 4.98 
 
 307.75 
 
 3-25 
 
 10.00 
 
 
 
 
 
 93.25 
 
 5-75 
 
 5.36 
 
 294.00 
 
 3-40 
 
 10.00 
 
 Total 
 
 201.50 
 
 3-47. 
 
 
 93-75 
 
 5.85 
 5.82 
 
 5-48 
 
 290.75 
 
 3-25 
 
 9-45 
 
 7.00 
 
 605.00 
 
 35-20 
 
 1797-50 1 3.31 
 
 59-14 
 
 * Went dry. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 55 
 
 TABLE III [Continued) 
 Weekly Product ok Milk and Fat of Lot No. 2 
 
 Ration for 
 
 Mabel 2d. 
 
 Ruby. 
 
 Sadie. 1 
 
 each period 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 of six 
 
 Pounds 
 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Poviuds 
 
 Per 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Per 
 
 Pounds 
 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 .3-90 
 
 of fat. 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 of milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 Usual 
 
 183.75 
 
 7.17 
 
 9 
 
 
 169.75 
 
 3.20 
 
 5-43 
 
 ration of 
 
 1S6.25 
 
 4.10 
 
 7-64 
 
 
 
 
 163.50 
 
 3-05 
 
 4.99 
 
 silage, 
 
 163.25 
 
 3.80 
 
 6.20 
 
 
 
 
 147.00 
 
 3-40 
 
 5.00 
 
 haj' and 
 
 167.50 
 
 3-95 
 
 6.62 
 
 336.25 
 
 3-75 
 
 12.61 
 
 141.25 
 
 3-60 
 
 509 
 
 gram. 
 
 176.00 
 
 3-90 
 
 6.86 
 
 385-25 
 
 3-80 
 
 14.64 
 
 148.00 
 
 3-45 
 
 5-11 
 
 Total 
 
 171.00 
 
 1047.75 
 
 3-45 
 
 5-90 
 
 408.00 
 1129.50 
 
 3.50 
 367 
 
 14.28 
 
 ^44-50 
 
 3-90 
 
 5 64 
 
 3-85 
 
 40.39 
 
 41-53 
 
 914.00 
 
 3-42 
 
 31.26 
 
 Palm nut 
 
 160.25 
 
 4-07 
 
 6.52 
 
 434-25 
 
 3.26 
 
 14.16 
 
 132.25 
 
 3.22 
 
 4.26 
 
 meal 
 
 148.75 
 
 4-58 
 
 6.81 
 
 439.00 
 
 3. 28 
 
 14.40 
 
 119-75 
 
 3.28 
 
 3-93 
 
 ration. 
 
 150.75 
 
 4-33 
 
 6.53 
 
 418.75 
 
 3-25 
 
 13.61 
 
 119.50 
 
 3-33 
 
 3-98 
 
 
 152.00 
 
 4.53 
 
 6.89 
 
 423-25 
 
 3.26 
 
 13.80 
 
 122.50 
 
 4.06 
 
 4.97 
 
 
 148.75 
 
 4.35 
 
 6.47 
 
 422.25 
 
 3.21 
 
 13.55 
 
 122.75 
 
 3.23 
 
 3-96 
 
 
 149-50 
 
 4.18 
 
 6.25 
 
 415.75 
 
 3.35 
 
 13.93 
 
 113.75 
 
 3.46 
 
 3-94 
 
 Total 
 
 910.00 
 
 4.34 
 
 39-47 
 
 2553.25 
 
 327 
 
 83.45 
 
 730 50 
 
 3-43 
 
 25.04 
 
 Usual 
 
 162.25 
 
 3-69 
 
 5-99 
 
 409.50 
 
 3-00 
 
 12.29 
 
 104.25 
 
 3.12 
 
 3.25 
 
 ration. 
 
 169-75 
 
 3- 80 
 
 6.45 
 
 389-50 
 
 3- 20 
 
 12.75 
 
 IC4-75 
 
 2.30 
 
 2.41 
 
 
 170.50 
 
 385 
 
 6.56 
 
 422.75 
 
 2.80 
 
 11.84 
 
 97-75 
 
 3.40 
 
 3-32 
 
 
 171.00 
 
 4.00 
 
 6,84 
 
 397-50 
 
 3.25 
 
 12.92 
 
 86.75 
 
 3.30 
 
 2.86 
 
 
 173-25 
 
 4.35 
 
 7-54 
 
 374.25 
 
 3.25 
 
 12.16 
 
 77.50 
 
 3-70 
 
 2.87 
 
 Total 
 
 174.00 
 1020.75 
 
 3-75 
 
 6.53 
 
 345.50 
 2348.00 
 
 2.90 
 
 10.02 
 
 67.25 
 
 3-45 
 
 2.32 
 
 3-9T 
 
 39-91 
 
 3.07 
 
 71.98 
 
 538.25 
 
 3-i6 
 
 17.03 
 
 A clearer understanding of the variations in the per cent of 
 fat during the eighteen weeks may be obtained by finding the 
 average per cent in periods of three weeks each. A table of 
 such averages is given below. In order to make the study more 
 complete, there is placed in the same table the average per cents 
 of fat found in the records of three cows which were in the 
 second experiment described on page 38. The per cents are the 
 averages for the periods of three weeks each which are coinci- 
 dent with those in which palm nut meal was fed. It will be 
 remembered that the rations of the three cows were unaltered 
 during a term of twenty-two weeks. 
 
56 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE IV 
 Average Per Cent of Fat in Periods of Three Weeks Each 
 
 Usual ration 
 (Dec. 9-Jan. 19). . 
 
 \ 1st three weeks. 
 I 2(1 three weeks. 
 
 ^mTion"!.."'.^.^^ j . St three weeks 
 (Jan. 20-Mar. "2). "j 2d three weeks. 
 
 Usual ration 
 (Mar. 3-Apr. 13). 
 
 ( 1st three weeks. 
 / 2d three weeks. 
 
 Ration unchanged. 
 
 Dec. 9-29 
 
 Dec. 30-Jan. 19. 
 Jan. 20-Feb. 9. . 
 Feb. lo-Mar. 2 . 
 
 Mar. 3-23 
 
 Mar. 24- Apr, 13. 
 
 Lot No. I 
 
 
 Lot No. 2 
 
 
 Glista 
 Nether- 
 land. 
 
 Gem 
 Valen- 
 tine. 
 
 Mollie. 
 
 Mabel 
 2d. 
 
 Ruby. 
 
 Sadie. 
 
 3.06 
 3-39 
 
 5.28 
 509 
 
 2.98 
 2.92 
 
 3-94 
 
 3-77 
 
 367 
 
 3.21 
 3.63 
 
 3-32 
 3-64 
 
 5.80 
 5.80 
 
 3-27 
 3-45 
 
 4-32 
 4-35 
 
 3.26 
 
 3-27 
 
 3.28 
 
 3.58 
 
 3-47 
 
 5.80 
 5.84 
 
 3-31 
 330 
 
 3-78 
 4-03 
 
 3.00 
 3-14 
 
 2 92 
 
 3.48 
 
 Belvazd. 
 Narrow 
 ration. 
 
 Cherry 
 Medi- 
 um 
 ration. 
 
 Clara. 
 Wide 
 ration. 
 
 
 
 3.02 
 2.92 
 
 5-37 
 5-58 
 
 5-II 
 5-30 
 
 
 2.94 
 3 14 
 
 5-75 
 552 
 
 5-68 
 
 5-44 
 
 
 
 3-23 
 3-23 
 
 5-55 
 5-47 
 
 5-45 
 
 
 
 
 Among the cows that were fed palm nut meal it is seen that 
 all in lot No. i show in general a higher per cent of fat while 
 the meal was fed than before, but this higher average is kept up 
 for six weeks after the meal was discontinued. Mabel 2d of lot 
 No. 2, is the only cow that shows a lower average both before 
 and after feeding the palm nut meal than during that period, 
 but her total yield of fat was less on the palm nut ration than on 
 the usual ration. Rub)^ and Sadie each had a higher average 
 before the meal was fed and nearly as high after as during the 
 period of feeding the meal. Ruby's high average at the begin- 
 ning is probably due to her being fresh in milk. A comparison 
 of the records of all the cows in Table IV shows that with one 
 exception (Gem Valentine) there are no greater variations among 
 the cows which alternated from the usual ration to palm nut 
 meal than among those which were fed an unchanging ration. 
 Thus, taking everything into consideration we do not feel war- 
 ranted in saying that the feeding of palm nut meal increased the 
 per cent of fat in the milk. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 57 
 
 RELATION OF THE TEMPERATURE OF THE COW 
 TO THE SECRETION OF MILK FAT 
 
 Among the many theories concerning the cause of the varia- 
 tions in the percentage of fat in the ijiilk of a single cow is the 
 notion that the temperature of the animal body may be a govern- 
 ing factor in such variation. This idea may have found its 
 origin in the statement from some sources that a cow when in a 
 feverish condition is likely to give milk containing a proportion 
 of butter-fat higher than the normal content of her milk. The 
 inference might be that under ordinary conditions the variation 
 which is found in the per cent of fat from one milking to the 
 next might be accompanied by a corresponding rise or fall in 
 animal heat. In order to secure some experimental data upon 
 this question, a series of records was gathered along three lines: 
 One in which the record period comprises five days immediately 
 preceding and following the oestrum day of several cows and in 
 which the temperature of the cow was taken at the time of each 
 milking. A second in which is included the record of two cows 
 which were spayed and the temperatures were taken four times 
 daily, i.e. at the time of, and eight hours previous to milking. 
 And a third in which an attempt was made to find the average 
 temperature of each cow for the entire day by taking the temper- 
 ature at intervals of four hours. It is well known that an 
 animal's temperature varies somewhat and it was thought possi- 
 ble to obtain the more exact temperature of the cow during the 
 time in which her milk was secreted by recording her tempera- 
 ture at frequent intervals. 
 
 The cows from which the records were obtained were members 
 of the Cornell University dairy herd. They were fed the usual 
 stable ration of about eight pounds of mixed grain daily, seven 
 to twelve pounds of mixed clover and timothy hay and as much 
 corn silage as they would consume at a single feed. They were 
 fed twice daily and were usually kept in the stable only for 
 milking and feeding and, during the remainder of the night and 
 day, were in a covered yard. A watering place was provided in 
 the yard and no water was given in the stable. The cows were 
 
58 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 milked at five o'clock in the morning and at four in the after- 
 noon. This divided the time so that there were thirteen hours 
 between night and morning and eleven hours between morning 
 and night milkings. The difference in the interim accounts foi 
 the larger amount of milk being usually given in the morning 
 
 The series of records as outlined is given in the following 
 table. The study of the influence of oestrum is set forth in the 
 records of eleven cows covering seventeen different periods of 
 eleven days each. The oestrum day is indicated by the day of 
 the month being set opposite the data for that day. The other 
 days are indicated by numbers from one to five consecutively 
 before and after the initial day. So far as could be detected 
 from outward appearances, the period of oestrum seemed to be 
 confined to twenty-four hours. The records appear in Table V, 
 wherein are given the pounds of milk, per cent of fat, pounds of 
 fat and temperature of the cow at the time of milking. 
 
 The study of the influence of spaying upon milk secretion is 
 set forth in the records of two cows for thirteen days, i- e. six 
 days before and after the operation was performed. These 
 records are displayed in Table V, wherein are given the pounds 
 of milk, per cent of fat and pounds of fat secreted at each milk- 
 ing and also the temperature of the cow at milking time, eight 
 hours previous to milking and the average of the two temper- 
 atures. 
 
 The study of the constant temperature of the cow in its rela- 
 tion to milk secretion is set forth in Table V, wherein are given 
 the pounds of milk, per cent of fat and pounds of fat secreted 
 at each milking and also the temperature of the cow at milking, 
 four and eight hours previous to milking and the average of the 
 three temperatures. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 59 
 
 TABLE V 
 Relation of Temperature of Cow to the Secretion of Milk Fat 
 
 /. Influence of Oestrum 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 Ada. 
 
 Belle 
 
 Belva 2d . 
 
 Emma, 
 
 (I) 
 
 Days and 
 dates, 
 
 5 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 I 
 
 Nov. I 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 
 5 
 .4 
 3 
 
 2 
 I 
 
 Nov. 21 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 
 5 
 4 
 3 
 
 2 
 I 
 
 Nov. 14 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 5 
 4 
 3 
 
 2 
 I 
 
 Nov. 9 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 
 Pouuds of 
 milk. 
 
 A.M. P.M. 
 
 II. O 
 II. o 
 
 8.3 
 
 7-3 
 
 II-3 
 
 ii.o 
 
 12. 
 
 II.8 
 
 13.0 
 12,3 
 
 12.8 
 
 18.5 
 16.5 
 
 15-3 
 17.8 
 21.3 
 19.0 
 17.0 
 18.3 
 19-3 
 19.0 
 
 19-3 
 
 19-3 
 21.0 
 
 18.3 
 
 12-5 
 
 20.3 
 21.0 
 
 21.5 
 22.5 
 21.8 
 22.8 
 20.3 
 20.0 
 22.5 
 21.5 
 23-3 
 22.8 
 21.8 
 
 21.5 
 20.3 
 20.8 
 21.3 
 21.3 
 
 lO.O 
 
 9.8 
 
 9-3 
 9-5 
 0.5 
 1-3 
 2.0 
 i.o 
 1.8 
 
 I.O 
 
 0.8 
 
 7-3 
 
 4.T3 
 
 5-0 
 6.5 
 5-8 
 4-5 
 7.0 
 
 6.3 
 
 5.8 
 6.5 
 6.3 
 
 8.8 
 
 9.8 
 
 7-5 
 
 9-5 
 
 21.8 
 
 21.3 
 
 21.8 
 
 21.3 
 21.0 
 21.3 
 20.8 
 17.0 
 
 173 
 16.5 
 18.8 
 18.5 
 17-5 
 16.5 
 16.3 
 17.8 
 16.0 
 17-3 
 
 Per cent of 
 fatf 
 
 Pounds of 
 fat. 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 4.05 
 
 4.05 
 
 4.30 
 
 4.(>5 
 
 4-45 
 
 
 4.75 
 
 4.60 
 
 4.00 
 
 3-85 
 
 4.55 
 
 S.^'S 
 
 3.80 
 
 4.00 
 
 3-75 
 
 3-45 
 
 
 4-15 
 
 3-75 
 
 3.60 
 
 4.00 
 
 4.00 
 
 3.65 
 
 5-70 
 
 3-35 
 
 3-75 
 
 4.20 
 
 3-70 
 
 3.60 
 
 5-40 
 
 
 
 5.00 
 
 4.60 
 
 5-35 
 
 4.00 
 
 5.00 
 
 425 
 
 4-75 
 
 4..^5 
 
 4.90 
 
 4-05 
 
 4.60 
 
 4.20 
 
 4-55 
 
 2.75 
 
 4.20 
 
 2.80 
 
 3.25 
 
 3.00 
 
 4.00 
 
 3- 50 
 
 2.90 
 
 2.70 
 
 3-50 
 
 2.55 
 
 
 3-35 
 
 3-55 
 
 3- 40 
 
 3-75 
 
 3.10 
 
 3.10 
 
 3-05 
 
 3.05 
 
 2.80 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-25 
 
 3.00 
 
 3-25 
 
 3.00 
 
 3-'5 
 
 2-75 
 
 2.20 
 
 2.85 
 
 3-30 
 
 380 
 
 3-40 
 
 3.05 
 
 2.75 
 
 3-00 
 
 2.80 
 
 3.00 
 
 2.60 
 
 3.00 
 
 2 5,^ 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.60 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.70 
 
 2.70 
 
 A.M. I P.M. 
 
 I 
 
 •446 j .405 
 .473 , .456 
 •369 1 
 
 •347 -437 
 .452 .404 
 .501 .412 
 .456 .480 
 •443 , -380 
 
 j .490 
 
 .461 j .396 
 •512 .432 
 
 .675 .986 
 •553 ' -525 
 •555 
 .891 
 
 .790 
 .776 
 
 .680 j .850 
 •778 ; .774 
 .840 \ .774 
 
 •770 .759 
 .811 .752 
 
 .643 
 .641 
 
 .874 
 
 •521 
 
 .588 
 •549 
 .438 
 .■548 
 .536 
 .720 
 
 .765 
 .676 
 
 •695 
 .568 
 
 .650 
 .709 
 
 •473 
 .769 
 
 .775 
 •599 
 .602 
 .528 
 
 • 530 
 
 • 554 
 •575 
 
 .790 
 .644 
 .700 
 .566 
 • 763 
 
 •774 
 •799 
 .651 
 .650 
 .666 
 
 .510 
 .475 
 .470 
 .714 
 •564 
 .525 
 •495 
 •489 
 .49S 
 .448 
 .467 
 
 Temperature. 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 101. 6 
 
 102. 1 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 103.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.4 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 102.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 103.3 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.7 
 
 101.7 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.3 
 
 102.8 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 101.5 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.2 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 102.5 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.7 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 102.0 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 102.2 
 
 101.6 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.9 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.4 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.5 
 
 102.3 
 
 102.4 
 
 1030 
 
 102.8 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.2 
 
 103.0 
 
 102.7 
 
 101.2 
 
 ior.8 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.6 
 
 102,0 
 
 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.2 
 
6o 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE V— {Continued) 
 
 I. Influence of Oestrum 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 Per cent of 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Days and 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 Temperature. ] 
 
 
 dates, 
 
 1S98. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A.M 
 
 P.M 
 
 A.M. 
 3.00 
 
 P.M. 
 3-30 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 •512 
 
 A.M. 
 IOI.3 
 
 P.M. 
 
 Emma 
 
 5 
 
 18.8 
 
 155 
 
 •564 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 4 
 
 18.0 
 
 13.8 
 
 2.85 
 
 3.00 
 
 .513 
 
 •514 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 ^9-3 
 
 14.8 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.40 
 
 .540 
 
 •355 
 
 1 101.6 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 2 
 
 17-6 
 
 17-3 
 
 2.35 
 
 340 
 
 .411 
 
 •588 
 
 , 101.4 
 
 101.2 
 
 
 I 
 
 20 
 
 16.0 
 
 2-55 
 
 3.20 
 
 .510 
 
 .512 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.7 
 
 (2) 
 
 Dec. I 
 
 •9-3 
 
 15.8 
 
 2.65 
 
 2.90 
 
 • 5" 
 
 • 458 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 18.3 
 
 14.8 
 
 2 90 
 
 2.95 
 
 •531 
 
 437 
 
 104.0 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 19-3 
 
 15.8 
 
 2.60 
 
 3.10 
 
 .502 
 
 .490 
 
 101. 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 3 
 
 20.0 
 
 15.0 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.90 
 
 .560 
 
 435 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 4 
 
 18.0 
 
 15-5 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.85 
 
 •504 
 
 .442 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 5 
 
 19-3 
 
 16.0 
 
 2.60 
 
 1 
 
 2.90 
 
 .502 
 
 .464 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.3 
 
 Floss . . 
 
 5 
 
 16.3 
 
 II. 8 
 
 ' 4.60 
 
 4.80 
 
 .750 
 
 .566 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.7 
 
 
 4 
 
 14.0 
 
 12.5 
 
 4.20 
 
 
 .588 
 
 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 15-8 
 
 12.3 
 
 5.00 
 
 540 
 
 .790 
 
 .664 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 15.8 
 
 12.3 
 
 5-15 
 
 5.00 
 
 .814 
 
 .6:5 
 
 101. 
 
 101.5 
 
 
 I 
 
 14-5 
 
 12.0 
 
 4.65 
 
 5 75 
 
 .674. 
 
 .690 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 Oct. 26 
 
 14-3 
 
 10.8 
 
 i 4.90 
 
 4.60 
 
 .701 
 
 497 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 15-0 
 
 10.3 
 
 1 5-15 
 
 6.35 
 
 •773 
 
 • 654 
 
 101.6 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 2 
 
 13-5 
 
 II-3 
 
 ! 5-45 
 
 6.00 
 
 • 736 
 
 .678 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.3 
 
 
 3 
 
 13-8 
 
 10.5 
 
 5.65 
 
 5-35 
 
 .780 
 
 .562 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 4 
 
 *I4.4 
 
 4.0 
 
 4-50 
 
 -^- 
 
 .648 
 
 
 
 103.1 
 
 101.3 
 
 
 5 
 
 7.0 
 
 8.3 
 
 3.60 
 
 5-50 
 
 .252 
 
 •457 
 
 101.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 Ida 
 
 5 
 
 58 
 
 5-5 
 
 3- 80 
 
 3.20 
 
 .220 
 
 .176 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.8 
 
 
 4 
 
 7-3 
 
 6.3 
 
 2.90 
 
 3-55 
 
 .212 
 
 .224 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 8.3 
 
 6.8 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-75 
 
 .266 
 
 •255 
 
 102.5 
 
 103.0 
 
 
 2 
 
 8.8 
 
 6.8 
 
 340 
 
 3-70 
 
 .299 
 
 .252 
 
 103.8 
 
 103.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 10.3 
 
 7.8 
 
 3-75 
 
 4.00 
 
 .386 
 
 .312 
 
 ; 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 Nov. 27 
 
 10.8 
 
 7-3 
 
 i 3-35 
 
 3.85 
 
 .362 
 
 .281 
 
 102.4 
 
 101.5 
 
 
 I 
 
 II-3 
 
 8.5 
 
 3-75 
 
 3 75 
 
 .424 
 
 .311 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 2 
 
 10.8 
 
 90 
 
 3-55 
 
 3.55 
 
 •363 
 
 .320 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 3 
 
 12.0 
 
 9-3 
 
 1 3- 40 
 
 3-45 
 
 .408 
 
 ,321 
 
 IOT.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 4 
 
 11.8 
 
 103 
 
 1 3-00 
 
 3-15 
 
 •354 
 
 •324 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 5 
 
 12.5 
 
 1 0.0 
 
 13-35 
 
 3.10 
 
 .419 
 
 .310 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 Julia 
 
 5 
 
 22.3 
 
 21. 
 
 ! 3- 10 
 
 3-50 
 
 '.69t 
 
 .735 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.2 
 
 
 4 
 
 22.3 
 
 19.0 
 
 3-65 
 
 3.70 
 
 .814 
 
 .703 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 238 
 
 183 
 
 3-50 
 
 3-75 
 
 833 
 
 .686 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 22.0 
 
 20.8 
 
 2 80 
 
 4.20 
 
 .616 
 
 .874 
 
 100.7 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 20. 
 
 20.8 
 
 2.30 
 
 3-25 
 
 .460 
 
 ,676 
 
 100.7 
 
 101.3 
 
 (0 
 
 Oct. 19 
 
 16.8 
 
 248 
 
 1-55 
 
 4 75 
 
 .250 
 
 1.378 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 I 
 
 21.3 
 
 16.5 
 
 4-25 
 
 3-55 
 
 .905 
 
 .586 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.7 
 
 
 2 
 
 23-3 
 
 18.8 
 
 300 
 
 3.6j 
 
 .699 
 
 •677 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 3 
 
 21.5 
 
 18.5 
 
 3-IO 
 
 3-35 
 
 .667 
 
 .620 
 
 201.0 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 4 
 
 23.5 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.83 
 
 385 
 
 1 .670 
 
 .647 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 102.8 
 
 
 5 
 
 180' 21.8 
 
 ' 2.05 
 
 4 00 
 
 .369 
 
 _^^1 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 102.0 
 
 * One quarter of udder caked. 
 
Influences A^ffecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE ^—{Continued) 
 
 I. Influence of Oestrum 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 6l 
 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 Per cent of 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 
 Days and 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat.' 
 
 fat. 
 
 Temperature. 
 
 
 dates, 
 
 1898. 
 
 
 
 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 Julia 
 
 5 
 
 19.S 
 
 19.0 
 
 2.20 
 
 3- 70 
 
 •436 
 
 •703 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 20.8 
 
 19.0 
 
 2.50 
 
 3-65 
 
 .520 
 
 .694 
 
 101.3 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 
 3 
 
 23.0 
 
 18.5 
 
 3-40 
 
 345 
 
 .782 
 
 .638 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 
 2 
 
 19.S 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.85 
 
 3.20 
 
 •564 
 
 •538 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 1 00.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 20.5 
 
 17.3 
 
 2.65 
 
 3 60 
 
 ■543 
 
 .623 
 
 ICI.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 (2) 
 
 Nov. II 
 
 13.S 
 
 15-5 
 
 2.75 
 
 3-65 
 
 .380 
 
 .566 
 
 1 03. 1 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 
 I 
 
 18.3 
 
 153 
 
 2.90 
 
 3.00 
 
 •532 
 
 •459 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 
 2 
 
 18.5 
 
 14.0 
 
 2.70 
 
 3-30 
 
 .500 
 
 .462 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 17.0 
 
 14.8 
 
 2.60 
 
 3.20 
 
 .442 
 
 •474 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 102.5 
 
 
 4 
 
 16.0 
 
 15-.^ 
 
 2.85 
 
 3-35 
 
 •456 
 
 •513 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 5 
 
 18.3 
 
 15-8 
 
 3-co 
 
 3-75 
 
 • 549 
 
 .593 
 
 101.3 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 5 
 
 18.5 
 
 16.0 1 
 
 3.00 
 
 3.20 
 
 •555 
 
 .512 
 
 101.6 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 
 4 
 
 185 
 
 16.3 
 
 2.80 
 
 3-55 
 
 .518 
 
 • 579 
 
 101.7 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 
 3 
 
 19-3 
 
 15.0 
 
 2.80 
 
 3.00 
 
 ■ 540 
 
 • 450 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 2 
 
 17-3 
 
 1S.3 
 
 2.10 
 
 3-40 
 
 .363 
 
 .622 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 21.3 
 
 185 
 
 2.90 
 
 3-65 
 
 .618 
 
 .675 
 
 101.2 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 (3) 
 
 Nov. 30 
 
 20.5 
 
 16.0 
 
 2-75 
 
 2.80 
 
 .564 
 
 .448 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 19-5 
 
 16.5 
 
 3-15 
 
 3.C0 
 
 .614 
 
 •495 
 
 101.4 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 
 2 
 
 20.0 
 
 17.0 
 
 2.85 
 
 3.00 
 
 • 570 
 
 .510 
 
 101.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 3 
 
 20.3 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.80 
 
 3-35 
 
 .568 
 
 •563 
 
 101.8 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 
 4 
 
 2J.5 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.90 
 
 3-35 
 
 .624 
 
 •563 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 5 
 
 19.0 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.90 
 
 3.10 
 
 • 551 
 
 .521 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 Kate 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 II-3 
 
 ICO 
 
 3-15 
 
 3-40 
 
 • 356 
 
 .340 
 
 ior.9 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 3 
 
 II. 
 
 9-5 
 
 2.80 
 
 305 
 
 .308 
 
 .290 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 2 
 
 "•5 
 
 9-3 
 
 3-40 
 
 3-40 
 
 .391 
 
 .316 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 I 
 
 II. 8 
 
 8.5 
 
 3.20 
 
 3- 40 
 
 .358 
 
 •293 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.6 
 
 (I) 
 
 Nov. 2 
 
 11.8 
 
 9-3 
 
 3.20 
 
 3.80 
 
 •358 
 
 •353 
 
 102. 1 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 I 
 
 10.8 
 
 9-3 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-55 
 
 .346 
 
 •330 
 
 102.3 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 12.0 
 
 9.8 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-70 
 
 •384 
 
 •363 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 3 
 
 123 
 
 lO.O 
 
 3.15 
 
 3-70 
 
 •387 
 
 •370 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.5 
 
 
 4 
 
 12.3 
 
 10. 
 
 3. CO 
 
 4.00 
 
 •369 
 
 .400 
 
 102.2 
 
 — 
 
 
 5 
 
 12.3 
 
 9.3 
 
 3.10 
 
 3-8o 
 
 .381 
 
 •353 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.5 
 
 
 .5 
 4 
 
 11-3 
 
 10.3 
 
 
 
 3-30 
 
 
 .340 
 
 101.7 
 
 102.6 
 
 
 3 
 
 II-3 
 
 10 
 
 3.00 
 
 3.20 
 
 •339 
 
 .320 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 2 
 
 II. 
 
 9.0 
 
 2.80 
 
 2.80 
 
 .308 
 
 .252 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 II. 8 
 
 9.0 
 
 3.00 
 
 3.65 
 
 i .354 
 
 ■329 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 (2) 
 
 Nov. 21 
 
 10.3 
 
 8.5 
 
 3-40 
 
 4.00 
 
 •350 
 
 ■ 340 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.3 
 
 
 I 
 
 II-3 
 
 9-3 
 
 3-45 
 
 360 
 
 i -390 
 
 •335 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 2 
 
 11-5 
 
 9-5 
 
 3-45 
 
 3-25 
 
 1 ^397 
 
 •309 
 
 1 IOI.6 
 
 102.3 
 
 
 3 
 
 11-5 
 
 9.8 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-45 
 
 .368 
 
 .338 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.6 
 
 
 4 
 
 II. 8 
 
 9-3 
 
 3-25 
 
 3-40 
 
 .384 
 
 ■3'6 
 
 101.6 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 5 
 
 II-3 
 
 9.8 
 
 3-25 
 
 3.60 
 
 ' •.397 
 
 .353 
 
 101.6 1 102.6 
 
62 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE N— {Continued) 
 I. Itifluence of Oestrutn 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 Per cent of 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Days and 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 Temperature. | 
 
 
 dates, 
 
 1S9S. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A.M. 
 
 II. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 9.8, 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 A.M. 
 .418 
 
 P.M. 
 .392 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 Mabel 2d ... . 
 
 5 
 
 ; 3.80 
 
 4.00 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 
 4 
 
 II.8 
 
 9-3 
 
 1 405 
 
 3.60 
 
 .478 
 
 .335 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 101.3 
 
 
 3 
 
 10.5 
 
 II-3 
 
 ! 2.70 
 
 4.15 
 
 .284 
 
 .467 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 2 
 
 II. 8 
 
 10.8 
 
 3-95 
 
 4.40 
 
 .466 
 
 •475 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 TI-3 
 
 lO.O 
 
 ' 3-55 
 
 4.10 
 
 .401 
 
 .410 
 
 IGI.O 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 (I) 
 
 Oct, 24 
 
 12.0 
 
 lO.O 
 
 3-50 
 
 4-15 
 
 .420 
 
 •415 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 12.3 
 
 10.3 
 
 4-55 
 
 4.15 
 
 .560 
 
 .427 
 
 100.8 
 
 102.3 
 
 
 2 
 
 II. 8 
 
 10.3 
 
 4-15 
 
 4.55 
 
 .490 
 
 .470 
 
 102.5 
 
 101.5 
 
 
 3 
 
 II-5 
 
 8.5 
 
 
 4.25 
 
 
 
 .361 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 103.8 
 
 
 4 
 
 II-5 
 
 7.8 
 
 4.20 
 
 4-45 
 
 •483 
 
 ■ 347 
 
 104.0 
 
 102.4 
 
 
 5 
 
 lO.O 
 
 8.8 
 
 
 
 4.00 
 
 
 ■ 352 
 
 IOI.3 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 5 
 
 *6.3 
 
 7-5 
 
 5.00 
 
 4.00 
 
 •315 
 
 .300 
 
 100.8 
 
 101. 
 
 
 4 
 
 12.3 
 
 9-5 
 
 4.80 
 
 3-85 
 
 •5^0 
 
 .366 
 
 IOI.9 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 3 
 
 II. 
 
 9.8 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-75 
 
 j -352 
 
 .368 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 2 
 
 lO.O 
 
 II-3 
 
 3.C0 
 
 3-65 
 
 1 .300 
 
 .412 
 
 101.6 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 
 I 
 
 12.3 
 
 10.5 
 
 4.20 
 
 3.65 
 
 1 -517 
 
 ■383 
 
 101.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 (2) 
 
 Nov. 14 
 
 12.3 
 
 95 
 
 3-50 
 
 4.00 
 
 ■431 
 
 .380 
 
 101.8 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 
 I 
 
 II. 5 
 
 95 
 
 3-95 
 
 4.25 
 
 • 454 
 
 .404 
 
 102.7 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 2 
 
 II. 8 
 
 9.8 
 
 4.'0 
 
 4-35 
 
 .484 
 
 .426 
 
 101.5 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 
 3 
 
 12.0 
 
 10.3 
 
 3-75 
 
 3-95 
 
 •450 
 
 .407 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 4 
 
 12.3 
 
 ID 
 
 3-90 
 
 3-75 
 
 .480 
 
 • 375 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 5 
 
 12.3 
 
 lO.O 
 
 3-70 
 
 3-90 
 
 ■•457 
 
 •390 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.8 
 
 Ruby 
 
 5 
 
 19-3 
 
 22.3 
 
 3 95 
 
 3-90 
 
 .762 
 
 .870 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 4 
 
 22.0 
 
 18.3 
 
 2.85 
 
 3-35 
 
 .627 
 
 .613 
 
 102.0 
 
 103.4 
 
 
 3 
 
 18.3 
 
 18.3 
 
 3.00 
 
 2.85 
 
 ■ 549 
 
 ■525 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.5 
 
 
 2 
 
 21.0 
 
 20.3 
 
 3.60 
 
 3-45 
 
 .806 
 
 .700 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 I 
 
 22.8 
 
 18.8 
 
 3-25 
 
 3-50 
 
 .741 
 
 .658 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 
 (1) 
 
 Nov. 4 
 
 22.8 
 
 16.8 
 
 3.00 
 
 3.60 
 
 .684 
 
 .605 
 
 103.2 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 I 
 
 22.0 
 
 18.5 
 
 i 3-40 
 
 3-25 
 
 .748 
 
 .601 
 
 102.2 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 25-3 
 
 20.8 
 
 3.10 
 
 3-75 
 
 .784 
 
 .780 
 
 102.6 
 
 — 
 
 
 3 
 
 24.8 
 
 21.5 
 
 2.80 
 
 3-70 
 
 .694 
 
 .796 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 4 
 
 23.8 
 
 22.0 
 
 3-25 
 
 3-35 
 
 .774 
 
 ■ 737 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 5 
 
 23-3 
 
 21.3 
 
 3-05 
 
 3-55 
 
 .711 
 
 .756 
 
 101.7 
 
 100.8 
 
 
 5 
 
 21.3 
 
 18.0 
 
 3.10 
 
 3-05 
 
 .660 
 
 .549 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 
 4 
 
 22.8 
 
 17.0 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-05 
 
 •730 
 
 •S19 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.2 
 
 
 3 
 
 21.0 
 
 15-5 
 
 2.80 
 
 3.00 
 
 .588 
 
 •465 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.7 
 
 
 2 
 
 18.5 
 
 iS.o 
 
 2.8) 
 
 2.80 
 
 .58 
 
 .504 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 I 
 
 19 8 
 
 19-5 
 
 3-25 
 
 3-40 
 
 .644 
 
 .663 
 
 101.0 
 
 101.8 
 
 (2) 
 
 Nov. 24 
 
 21.3 
 
 17-5 
 
 3-55 
 
 3-75 
 
 .756 
 
 .656 
 
 iuo.8 
 
 101.2 
 
 
 I 
 
 20.8 
 
 '7-3 
 
 3-25 
 
 3-30 
 
 .676 
 
 .561 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 2 
 
 21.0 
 
 19.0 
 
 3.20 
 
 3-55 
 
 .672 
 
 ■ 675 
 
 101.0 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 3 
 
 22.3 
 
 16.8 
 
 3-40 
 
 3.60 
 
 •758 
 
 .605 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.4 
 
 
 4 
 
 22.3 
 
 18.S 
 
 3-30 
 
 340 
 
 .736 
 
 .639 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 
 5 
 
 21.8 
 
 18.5 
 
 3-.'0 
 
 3-45 
 
 1 -719 
 
 .638 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.6 
 
 * Udder feverish and caked in one quarter. 
 
Infl,uences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 63 
 
 TABLE V— ( Continued) 
 I. Influence of Oestrum 
 Indivipual Records of Mii.k, Fat and Temperature 
 
 Ruth 
 
 
 Poun 
 
 dsof 
 
 Per cent of 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 
 1 
 
 Days aud 
 
 dates, 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat 
 
 fat. 
 
 Temperature. V 
 
 1S9S. 
 
 A.M. 
 
 16,3 
 
 P.M. 
 17.0 
 
 A.M. 
 4.20 
 
 P.M. 
 
 4'co 
 
 A.M. 
 .685 
 
 P.M. 
 .680 
 
 A.M. 
 
 P.M. 
 
 5 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 102.4 
 
 4 
 
 17.5 
 
 15.0 
 
 3.60 
 
 430 
 
 .630 
 
 .645 
 
 102.3 
 
 102.3 
 
 3 
 
 16.5 
 
 14.0 
 
 3-45 
 
 3-65 
 
 .560 
 
 .511 
 
 102.0 
 
 102. I 
 
 2 
 
 I5.« 
 
 13-3 
 
 ! 3-45 
 
 4.40 
 
 .545 
 
 .5«5 
 
 105.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 I 
 
 15.0 
 
 16.5 
 
 3.80 
 
 4-25 
 
 •570 
 
 .701 
 
 104.4 
 
 102.7 
 
 Nov. 16 
 
 16.5 
 
 14.5 
 
 3-95 
 
 4.20 
 
 .652 
 
 .619 
 
 102.4 
 
 103.6 
 
 I 
 
 15-3 
 
 15.8 
 
 3-9° 
 
 3.70 
 
 .597 
 
 •5«5 
 
 102.2 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 2 
 
 16.0 
 
 17-3 
 
 4.00 
 
 4.20 
 
 .640 
 
 .727 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 3 
 
 16.3 
 
 16.0 
 
 3.60 
 
 3-05 
 
 •577 
 
 .4^8 
 
 101.8 
 
 103.5 
 
 4 
 
 17-5 
 
 15.0 
 
 4.00 
 
 3-35 
 
 .700 
 
 •503 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 5 
 
 16.5 
 
 16.3 
 
 3-40 
 
 3-35 
 
 .5^1 
 
 ■ 546 
 
 101. 
 
 102.0 
 
 //. Influence of Spaying 
 
 EMMA, (3) 
 
 Individuai, Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 Date, 
 
 Time 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 Per cent Pou 
 
 1 
 
 nds of 
 
 Temperature. 
 
 8 hrs. 
 
 
 
 Nov., 1899 
 
 
 milk. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 before 
 milking. 
 
 100.6 
 
 At time of 
 milking 
 
 Average. 
 
 16 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 22.2 
 
 26 
 
 577 
 
 100.7 
 
 100.65 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 16. 1 
 
 3-0 
 
 483 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.45 
 
 17 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 21.7 
 
 2.7 
 
 606 
 
 100.6 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 100.80 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 15.8 
 
 2.9 
 
 458 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 100.9 
 
 101.30 
 
 18 
 
 5 a.m. 
 
 22.2 
 
 2.5 
 
 555 
 
 100.6 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 100.80 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 16.5 
 
 2.9 
 
 479 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 100.9 
 
 101.15 
 
 19 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 22.3 
 
 2.5 
 
 558 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 101.30 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 16.3 
 
 2.8 
 
 456 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.20 
 
 20 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 22.1 
 
 2.6 
 
 575 
 
 100.7 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.10 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 1 7. 8 
 
 3-0 
 
 534 
 
 101.5 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.75 
 
 21 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 21.5 
 
 3-0 
 
 645 
 
 101.3 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.40 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 16.7 
 
 2.6 
 
 434 
 
 101.7 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 101.45 
 
 22 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 21.7 
 
 2.6 
 
 564 
 
 100.7 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 101.05 
 
 
 *4 P.M. 
 
 15-1 
 
 3-5 
 
 529 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.4 
 
 102.10 
 
 23 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 10.2 
 
 4.9 
 
 500 
 
 102.0 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 101.90 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 8.1 
 
 3-8 
 
 308 
 
 102.4 
 
 103.2 
 
 J 02.80 
 
 24 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 15.0 
 
 3.2 
 
 480 
 
 101.9 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.55 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 13-5 
 
 3-4 
 
 459 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.65 
 
 25 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 17.7 
 
 2.9 
 
 513 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.40 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 14.2 
 
 3-0 
 
 426 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.55 
 
 26 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 18.7 
 
 2.5 
 
 468 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.20 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 15-2 
 
 3-0 
 
 456 
 
 ]Oi.6 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.80 
 
 27 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 17-3 
 
 2.5 
 
 .432 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.60 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 15-3 
 
 3-0 
 
 459 
 
 101.9 
 
 101.9 
 
 101.90 
 
 28 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 203 
 
 2.6 
 
 528 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.60 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 14.9 
 
 3-0 
 
 447 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.90 
 
 '■ Spayed at 2. p.m. 
 
64 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE V— ( Continued) 
 II. Influence of spaying 
 
 RUTH (2) 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 
 
 Date, 
 
 
 Pound.s of 
 
 Per cent 
 
 Pounds of 
 
 Temperature. 1 
 
 8 hrs. 
 
 
 
 Nov., 1899. 
 
 
 milk. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 fat. 
 
 before 
 milking. 
 
 At time of 
 milking. 
 
 Average. 
 
 16 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13-3 1 
 
 4.2 
 
 •559 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 101.50 " 
 
 
 *4 P.M. 
 
 11-3 ! 
 
 2.9 
 
 .328 
 
 102.0 
 
 103.2 
 
 102.60 
 
 17 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.2 
 
 
 
 
 103.0 
 
 104.0 
 
 103.50 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 7.2 
 
 4.1 
 
 •295 
 
 105.0 
 
 iot.6 
 
 103.30 
 
 18 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 14.0 
 
 4.6 
 
 .644 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.45 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 13.2 
 
 3-5 
 
 .462 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.50 
 
 19 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13.2 
 
 4.2 
 
 •554 
 
 X02.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 102 00 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10.6 
 
 3-2 
 
 .339 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.80 
 
 20 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.8 
 
 4.4 
 
 •563 
 
 103.2 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.50 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 12.7 
 
 3-7 
 
 • 470 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.85 
 
 21 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 15.7 
 
 4.0 
 
 .628 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.75 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 13.3 
 
 3-2 
 
 .426 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.55 
 
 22 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13.5 
 
 4.2 
 
 ■567 
 
 Id. 4 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.50 
 
 
 t4P.M. 
 
 8.8 
 
 2.8 
 
 ,246 
 
 101.4 
 
 102.2 
 
 101.80 
 
 23 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 7-7 
 
 5.6 
 
 • 431 
 
 102.8 
 
 101.7 
 
 102.25 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 8.8 
 
 4.4 
 
 •387 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.45 
 
 24 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.5 
 
 3.8 
 
 •475 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.30 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 12. 1 
 
 3-4 
 
 .411 
 
 102.0 
 
 103.0 
 
 102.50 
 
 25 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12. 1 
 
 3-4 
 
 .411 
 
 102.5 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.15 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10.7 
 
 3-1 
 
 •332 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.2 
 
 102.20 
 
 26 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 15.8 
 
 3-0 
 
 • 474 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.90 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 12.0 
 
 3-3 
 
 • 396 
 
 1 102.0 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.00 
 
 27 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 15.3 
 
 3-1 
 
 • 474 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.55 
 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 12.7 
 
 3.2 
 
 .406 
 
 101.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.90 
 
 28 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 14.3 
 
 3-4 
 
 .486 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.60 
 
 
 4 P.M. • 
 
 II. 7 
 
 3-0 
 
 •351 
 
 102.8 
 
 102.0 
 
 102.40 
 
 * One quarter of udder feverish. 
 + Spayed at 2 p.m. 
 
 ///. Temperature taken every four hours 
 
 GLiSTA DE KOL 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, P'at and Temperature 
 
 Date, 
 
 Nov. 
 
 6-7 
 7-8 
 8^ 
 9-10 
 
 lO-II 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 Pounds 
 
 Per 
 
 
 of 
 
 cent of 
 
 Pounds 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 II. 4 
 
 3^1 
 
 •353 
 
 14.0 
 
 3-2 
 
 .448 
 
 13- T 
 
 3^1 
 
 .406 
 
 12.8 
 
 3-2 
 
 .410 
 
 10.9 
 
 3-1 
 
 •338 
 
 I4.I 
 
 3.0 
 
 •423 
 
 II. 2 
 
 3-3 
 
 •370 
 
 13.3 
 
 3-2 
 
 .426 
 
 II.O 
 
 3-2 
 
 .352 
 
 12.7 
 
 3^1 
 
 .394 
 
 Temperature. 
 
 8 hrs. 
 
 before 
 
 milking. 
 
 IOI.4 
 IOI.2 
 IOI.6 
 lOI.I 
 102.0 
 IOI.6 
 IOI.6 
 IOI.7 
 IOI.6 
 IOI.5 
 
 4 hrs. 
 
 before 
 
 milking. 
 
 100.9 
 lOI.O 
 lOI.O 
 IOI.2 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 IOI.2 
 IOI.3 
 lOI.O 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 At time 
 
 of 
 milking. 
 
 IOI.3 
 IOI.8 
 IOI.6 
 101.8 
 102.0 
 101.3 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 IOI.2 
 IOI.5 
 
 Average. 
 
 101.20 
 101.33 
 101.40 
 101.37 
 101.80 
 101.50 
 101.30 
 101.47 
 101.27 
 101.57 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 65 
 
 TABLE \— {Continued) 
 III. Temperature taken every four hours 
 
 KATE (3) 
 
 Individual Records of Mii,k, Fat and Temperature 
 
 Date, 
 
 Nov. 
 1899. 
 
 Time. 
 
 Pounds 
 
 of 
 milk. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 
 fat. 
 
 Pounds 
 of fat. 
 
 Temperature. 1 
 
 8hrs. 
 
 before 
 
 milking. 
 
 4hrs. 
 
 before 
 
 milking. 
 
 At time 
 
 of 
 milking. 
 
 Average. 
 
 6-7 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 II-3 
 
 3-9 
 
 .441 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 100.5 
 
 lOl.S 
 
 101.37 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.0 
 
 4.1 
 
 .492 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 101.23 
 
 7-8 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10.2 
 
 3.6 
 
 .367 
 
 102.0 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 101.47 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13.0 
 
 3.8 
 
 .494 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 ior.5 
 
 101.20 
 
 8-9 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10. 
 
 2.9 
 
 .290 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 I0I.2 
 
 101.7 
 
 101.53 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13.0 
 
 2.8 
 
 .3b4 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lOI.I 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.20 
 
 9-10 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10.8 
 
 3-2 
 
 •346 
 
 102. 
 
 IOI.3 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.60 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 13-3 
 
 3-8 
 
 •505 
 
 100.8 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.07 
 
 lO-II 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9-5 
 
 2.4 
 
 .228 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.53 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.2 
 
 3.6 
 
 • 439 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 lOI 4 
 
 101.20 
 
 11-12 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9.0 
 
 2.7 
 
 .243 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 
 
 ior.5 
 
 101.45 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 12.8 
 
 3-3 
 
 .422 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 
 
 101.2 
 
 lOI.IO 
 
 ///. Temperature taken every four hours 
 
 vai^erie exile 
 
 Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperatures 
 
 Date, 
 Nov. 
 
 
 Pounds 
 of 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 
 
 Temperature. 
 
 
 Pounds 
 
 8hrs. 
 
 4 hrs. 
 
 At time 
 
 
 1 1S99. 
 
 
 milk. 
 
 fat. 
 
 of fat. 
 
 before 
 milking. 
 
 before 
 milking. 
 
 of 
 milking. 
 
 102.0 
 
 Average. 
 
 6-7 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 4-5 
 
 5-1 
 
 ■230 
 
 102.4 
 
 IOI.9 
 
 102.10 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 5-2 
 
 4.8 
 
 .250 
 
 IOI.9 
 
 IOI.7 
 
 101,8 
 
 101.80 
 
 7-8 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 4-5 
 
 4.2 
 
 .189 
 
 IOI.9 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 101.7 
 
 101.68 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 6.4 
 
 4-5 
 
 .288 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 IOI.3 
 
 IOI.9 
 
 101.57 
 
 8-9 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 4-7 
 
 4.2 
 
 •297 
 
 102.0 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.80 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 6.0 
 
 3-9 
 
 •234 
 
 IOI.6 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.73 
 
 9-10 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 5-0 
 
 4.8 
 
 .240 
 
 101.7 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.57 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 6.0 
 
 4.6 
 
 .276 
 
 101.7 
 
 101.7 
 
 IOI.8 
 
 101.73 
 
 lO-II 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 4.3 
 
 4.6 
 
 .298 
 
 102.0 
 
 101. 8 
 
 101.9 
 
 101.90 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 5-7 
 
 4.3 
 
 .245 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.3 
 
 101.8 
 
 101.63 
 
 11-12 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 4.5 
 
 4.5 
 
 .203 
 
 101.8 
 
 
 
 101.9 
 
 101.85 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 6.0 
 
 4.2 
 VALEE 
 
 .252 
 aE ST. 
 
 101.6 
 LAMBER' 
 
 r 
 
 102.0 
 
 101.80 
 
 6-7 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9.2 
 
 5-0 
 
 .460 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 101. 
 
 101.6 
 
 101.27 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 10. 
 
 4.^ 
 
 .440 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lor.o 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 7-8 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 10.5 
 
 4-9 
 
 •515 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.5 
 
 101.27 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 lO.O 
 
 ■ 4.7 
 
 .470 
 
 IOI.3 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.4 
 
 IOI.I7 
 
 8-9 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9-5 
 
 4-9 
 
 .466 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.2 
 
 101.07 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 II.O 
 
 4.6 
 
 .506 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 IOI.4 
 
 101.20 
 
 9-10 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 II. 
 
 5-0 
 
 •550 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 101.4 
 
 101.13 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 10.5 
 
 4-7 
 
 .494 
 
 IOI.2 
 
 100.8 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 IOI.I7 
 
 lO-II 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9-5 
 
 4.6 
 
 ■437 
 
 100.7 
 
 100.7 
 
 IOI.3 
 
 100.90 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 II.O 
 
 4.8 
 
 ..S28 
 
 100.8 
 
 101.3 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.20 
 
 11-12 
 
 4 P.M. 
 
 9-5- 
 
 4-5 
 
 .428 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 
 101.8 
 
 TOI.65 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 
 10.5 
 
 4.6 
 
 .483 
 
 lOI.O 
 
 
 IOI.5 
 
 101.25 
 
66 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 I. Influence of Oestrum 
 
 Referring at the beginning to the influence of oestrum upon 
 milk secretion the records show a variety of testimony. They 
 seem to demonstrate that whatever effect the oestrum may have, 
 its influence upon the yield and quality of milk may not be 
 shown only upon the same day that the cow is observed to be in 
 the heat period. This influence may manifest itself so far as the 
 milk is concerned a day or two before or after oestrum. A few 
 instances will serve to indicate this. The milk of Emma (i) 
 contained a higher percentage of fat on the two days preceding 
 oestrum than either on this particular day or any other day of 
 the period of record. And since the amount of milk given on 
 the two days was likewise slightly higher than the average daily 
 yield, the total amount of butter-fat for each day was correspond- 
 ingly higher than usual. The temperature of the cow remained 
 uniform. On the day preceding oestrum Julia (3) gave more 
 milk than on any other one of the eleven days of record. The 
 percentage of fat in this day's milk was slightly higher than 
 usual especially for the evening milking. She showed her 
 ordinary body temperature upon this day but her temperature 
 was higher than usual upon the day of oestrum. 
 
 Taken as a whole the influence of oestrum upon the yield of 
 milk is slight. About two-thirds of the records show no per- 
 ceptible change that can be attributed directly to this influence. 
 The other third show for the most part a decrease in the yield of 
 milk but the variation is slight. The influence upon the per- 
 centage of fat and the total yield of fat is more marked. From 
 one-third to one-half of the cows show an increase in this 
 respect ; one or two show a decrease, while the remainder show 
 little or no change. The instance of the most remarkable varia- 
 tion is that of Julia (i). On the morning of the oestrum day 
 she gave about four pounds less milk than usual which con- 
 tained 1.55 per cent fat. At the evening milking she gave four 
 or five pounds of milk more than usual which contained 4.75 per 
 cent fat. The result was that the total butter-fat produced was 
 .250 pounds in the morning and 1.378 pounds in the evening. 
 On the second day following oestrum she had returned to her 
 normal flow and quality of milk. Her temperature was higher 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 67 
 
 than usual upon the oestrum day but no higher than at the two 
 evening milkings four and five days following. 
 
 The temperature of the cows shows a noticeable rise in about 
 two-thirds of the records, on or near the day of oestrum. In 
 only one case, that of Ruby (2) was the body temperature lower 
 than the average on this particular ;iay. In one-third of the 
 instances there appears no perceptible variation in temperature 
 at the oestrum period. The most remarkable rise in tempera- 
 ture was that of Ruth. On the morning of the second daj^ 
 preceding oestrum her temperature was 105.4 a^d remained 
 above 102 until the evening of the first day following oestrum. 
 
 A general survey of the records leads to the conclusion that 
 the period of oestrum is accompanied by little variation in the 
 flow of milk ; by a rise in butter fat percentage in about one-half 
 the cases and no change in the other half ; by a variation in the 
 total fat secreted corresponding to the variation in per cent of fat ; 
 and usually by a rise in temperature. It cannot be held that the 
 individuality of the cow is a governing factor in this connection, 
 for in the three records taken from Julia she shows a larger 
 degree of variation than is found between the records of different 
 cows. A glance at the charts on subsequent pages will clearly 
 display this point. 
 
 II. Influence of Spaying 
 
 The records of the two cows given under this head show only 
 the immediate effect of spaying upon the secretion of milk and 
 they well illustrate how differently two animals may be effected 
 by the same operation. Both cows were spayed at two o'clock 
 in the afternoon. When milked at four o'clock Emma gave 
 within a pound or two of her usual evening flow. The percent- 
 age of fat was one-half of one per cent higher than usual for the 
 evening milking. Her flow of milk on the following day was 18.3 
 pounds as against 38.3 pounds for the day preceding the operation. 
 The milk of the following day contained 4.9 and 3.8 per cent of 
 fat for the morning and evening respectively, as against a per 
 cent ranging from 2.5 to 3.0 before spaying. Her milk returned 
 to its normal quality on the third day after the operation but the 
 
68 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 former quantity was not yet reached when the record ceased on 
 the sixth day. Her temperature showed a perceptible rise 
 immediately after she 'was spayed and became normal on the 
 second day following. 
 
 Ruth gave about four pounds less milk than usual at the milk- 
 ing immediately following the operation and the per cent of fat 
 therein was 2.8, which was four-tenths less than the usual even- 
 ing test for her milk. Her yield of milk was still less on the 
 following day after which it gained rapidly and reached the nor- 
 mal flow on the fourth daj' following spa^'ing. Her milk con- 
 tained a much higher per cent of fat than usual on the day after 
 the operation and then declined gradually until it reached a point 
 lower than before spaying. It should be said in this connection 
 that the milk of this cow was not normal, either in quantity or qual- 
 ity at the beginning of the record, owing probably to the feverish 
 condition of the udder. The quality of her milk as shown at 
 the close of the record period corresponds closely with the qual- 
 ity of her milk in previous years. In temperature, Ruth showed 
 a slight rise for twenty-four hours after spaying, but not to so 
 high a degree as was reached on several instances both before 
 and after the operation. 
 
 III. Relation of Temperature to Secretion of Milk 
 
 Fat 
 
 The problem to solve in this connection is whether or not the 
 variations in the percentage of fat occur simultaneously with 
 and in the same direction as the temperature of the animal and 
 also whether or not the total butter-fat secreted at each milking 
 varies in unison with the variations in temperature. A study of 
 the figures in Table V will show that there is no regularity in 
 either of these respects. On some days the lower temperature 
 occurs with the lower percentage of fat for the day's milking 
 and again with the higher percentage. The same feature obtains 
 as regards the relation of the temperature with the total butter 
 fat secreted. In order to render the data more easily interpreted 
 there is arranged in Table VI the number of days on which the 
 lower per cent of fat and lesser pounds of fat for each day occur 
 
InfIvUKnces Affecting Milk Production 
 
 69 
 
 with the lower and higher temperature for the day. That is, 
 taking each day separately, the table shows the number of times 
 that the lower per cent of fat and lesser pounds of fat fall simul- 
 taneousl}^ with the lower and higher temperature as recorded 
 for the day for each cow. It is unnecessary to tabulate the fig- 
 ures for the higher percentages and^ larger amounts of butter 
 fat since they are readil}^ obtained by taking the differences 
 between the figures given in the table and the total number of 
 days. In making up the table no account has been taken of the 
 days on which the temperatures, percentages of fat or pounds of 
 fat were the same for both morning and evening milking. 
 
 TABLE VI 
 
 • 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 days. 
 
 Number of days on 
 
 which the lower 
 
 per cent of fat 
 
 occurred with the 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 daj'S. 
 
 Number of days on 
 which the lesser 
 
 pounds of fat 
 occurred with the 
 
 Lower 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 Higher 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 Lower 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 Higher 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 Ada 
 
 Belle 
 
 Belva 2d 
 
 Emma ( i ) 
 
 Emma ( 2 ) 
 
 Floss 
 
 Ida 
 
 Julia (i) 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 II 
 
 .c' 
 
 9 
 13 
 II 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 2 
 6 
 4 
 5 
 6 
 
 5 
 3 
 9 
 7 
 8 
 
 7 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 3 
 6 
 
 4 
 9 
 4 
 3 
 2 
 
 4 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 3 
 4 
 4 
 3 
 I 
 
 3 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 7 
 4 
 4 
 5 
 4 
 7 
 2 
 
 4 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 7 
 9 
 9 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 • 8 
 
 8 
 
 q 
 II 
 
 7 
 II 
 
 9 
 13 
 II 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 3 
 • 3 
 3 
 4 
 4 
 7 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 3 
 2 
 
 4 
 2 
 
 5 
 2 
 
 4 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 I 
 
 4 
 6 
 
 7 
 6 
 
 4 
 6 
 
 3 
 6 
 
 8 
 7 
 5 
 8 
 
 5 
 7 
 7 
 8 
 
 9 
 I 
 
 5 
 I 
 2 
 
 Julia (2) 
 
 Julia (3) 
 
 Kate (I ) 
 
 Kate (2) 
 
 Mabel 2d (1) 
 
 Mabel 2d (2) 
 
 Rubv ( I ) 
 
 Rubv (2) 
 
 Ruth (I) 
 
 Emma (3) 
 
 Ruth (2) 
 
 Glista De Kol 
 
 Kate (3) 
 
 Valerie Exile 
 
 Valerie St. Lambert 
 
 Total 
 
 Per cent of total. 
 
 189 
 
 115 
 60,8 
 
 74 
 39-2 
 
 198 
 
 80 
 40.4 
 
 118 
 59-6 
 
 A glance at the figures in the table shows that on 60.8 percent 
 of the days of record, the lower per cent of fat in the cow's milk 
 for the day occurred with the lower temperature of the cow 
 recorded for the day : and that on 39.2 per cent of the days, the 
 
70 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 lower per cent of fat occurred with the higher temperature of the 
 cow. The reverse is true with the pounds of fat. On 40.4 per 
 cent of the days, the smaller yield of fat for each day occurred 
 with the lower temperature, and 59.6 per cent with the higher 
 temperature of the cow. If the lower per cent of fat was 
 always accompanied by the smaller yield of fat of the two 
 milkings of the day we would not expect the result as found 
 above : but since the total yield of fat depends quite as much 
 upon the amount of milk as upon the percentage of fat con- 
 tained therein, the result as shown in the table is not surprising. 
 
 While the general tendency of the individual cows was to pos- 
 sess the lower body temperature coincident with producing the 
 milk lower in fat content still there are a few which showed a 
 tendency in the opposite direction. Kate (i) and (2) produced 
 milk in which the lower per cent of fat for the day fell uniformly 
 with her lower temperature for the same days. But later (3) 
 two-thirds of her lower daily per cents of fat fell with the higher 
 body temperature. Her case is of interest likewise in that in (i) 
 and (2) all but one of her lower daily pounds of fat occurred at 
 the same time with her higher temperature for the day. This 
 same rule holds true in her later record (3). Referring to Table 
 VIII it will be noticed that Kate (i) and (2), on 16 out of 17 
 days, secreted a lower percentage of fat in her morning's than in 
 her evening's milk. But the total fat produced was greater with 
 the lower than with the higher percentages of fat. In (3) her 
 record was reversed in both respects. 
 
 Inasmuch as the temperatures of four of the cows were taken 
 at intervals of four hours and of two of the cows at milking time 
 and eight hours previous thereto, it will be of interest to compare 
 the records of the average temperature between milkings and of 
 the temperature at milking time on the basis of the foregoing 
 table. Such comparison is given in Table VII. The results 
 show that the average temperature compares more closely with 
 the figures in Table VI when considering the percentages of fat : 
 and that the single temperature taken at milking time compares 
 more closely with Table VI when considering the total pounds of 
 fat. In no case is there a strong indication that a close relation 
 can be traced either between the percentage of fat or total yield 
 of fat and the temperature of the animal. 
 
¥ 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 TABLE VII- 
 
 71 
 
 Comparison Between Results of Taking Temperature of Cow at 
 Time of- Milking Only, or of Taking the Average Tempera- 
 ture FOR THE Day, when Calculating the Number of Days 
 ON Which the Lower Per Cent of Fat and Pounds of Fat 
 Occurred with the Lower or Higher Temperature 
 
 » 
 
 Temperature taken at 
 milking only. 
 
 Temperature, average from 
 two or three observations. 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 days. 
 
 Emma (3) 
 
 Ruth (2) 
 
 Glista de Kol 
 
 Kate(3)..._. 
 
 Valerie Exile 
 
 Valerie St. Lambert 
 
 Total 
 
 Per cent of total . . 
 
 Emma (3) 
 
 Ruth (2) 
 
 Glista De Kol 
 
 Kate (3) 
 
 Valerie Exile 
 
 Valerie St. Lambert 
 
 Total . ." 
 
 Per cent of total. . 
 
 13 
 II 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 47 
 
 Number of days 
 
 on which lower 
 
 per cent of fat 
 
 occurred with the 
 
 Lower 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 Higher 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 51 
 
 49 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 days. 
 
 13 
 12 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 48 
 
 Number of days 
 
 on which lower 
 
 per cent of fat 
 
 occurred with the 
 
 Lower 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 10 
 6 
 2 
 2 
 
 4 
 3 
 
 27 
 56.3 
 
 Higher 
 tempera- 
 ture. 
 
 21 
 43-7 
 
 Num.ber of days on which the lesser pounds of fat occurred 
 in relation to temperature as per column heading. 
 
 13 
 II 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 47 
 
 21 
 44-7 
 
 8 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 26 
 
 48 
 
 15 
 
 • 55.3 
 
 
 31-3 
 
 33 
 68.7 
 
CHARTS 
 
 The following diagrams show the records of three of the cows 
 as taken from Table V. The influence of oestrum on milk pro- 
 duction is represented by the records of Emma and Julia, the 
 former having had two, and the latter three record periods. The 
 influence of spaying is represented by nine days each from the 
 records of Emma and Ruth. The time of milking is indicated 
 by the letters at the top of each chart, A and P meaning morn- 
 ing and evening, respectively. On the seven diagrams, each 
 space counting vertically, represents two tenths of one pound of 
 milk, one-tenth of one per cent of fat, one one-hundredth of one 
 pound of fat or one-tenth of one degree of temperature as the 
 case may be. The day on which oestrum or spaying occurred 
 is indicated by the heavj'^ vertical line drawn through the chart 
 midway between the points which are noted by A and P as the 
 morning and evening milkings of that particular day. 
 
7 —Diagram showitis; influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
 oesiriim day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A,mormng. F, 
 
 evening. 
 
8. — Diagram showing influence of oestriiin on 7iiilk production. The 
 oestrum day is indicated by tlie heavy vertical line. A, Diorning. P, 
 evening. 
 
9. — Diagram shozuinz influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
 oestrum day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
 evening. 
 
lo. — Diagram showing influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
 oestrum day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P. 
 evening. 
 
II. — Diagram showing influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
 oestrum day is indicated by theheavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
 evening. 
 
12. — Diagram shozving i-nflueucc of spaying on milk production. The 
 day o_f spaying is ijidicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
 evenins:. 
 
..~g 
 
 ifegl3H:u:j;K:iSm!itM;i3^??KH^HfeHh:^^ 
 
 13. — Diagram showing influence of spaying on milk production. The 
 day of spaying is indirated by iheheaiy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
 evening. 
 
So Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 THE RELATION OF PERCENTAGE OF FAT TO 
 TOTAL POUNDS OF FAT 
 
 A more important deduction than any yet made from Table 
 V, is that in the relation between the percentage of fat and the 
 total fat secreted at each milking. A large amount of experi- 
 menting has been done and a great deal of space devoted to dis- 
 cussion, to determine the cause of the variation in the quality of 
 the milk of individual cows, but very little study has been devoted 
 to the actual quantity of butter-fat secreted along with the vary- 
 ing percentages. It is not enough to know that a morning's 
 milk contains one per cent less of fat than the night's milk. The 
 question should be : is there as much butter-fat secreted in that 
 morning's milk or the milking containing the lower percentage 
 of fat as in the following milking of higher quality? So far as 
 the physiology of milk secretion is concerned it seems to be of 
 the highest importance to know if a cow will elaborate as much 
 butter-fat during the night as during the day, regardless of the 
 percentage of fat content. 
 
 The only reference to this question in Experiment Station 
 literature that has come to the writer's notice is by Linfield.* 
 The data which he gives however is based upon weekly com- 
 posite samples of the morning and evening milkings separately. 
 The period between evening and morning milking was thirteen 
 to fourteen hours and between morning and evening milking, 
 ten to eleven hours. Since the morning composite sample always 
 tested higher than the evening sample and since the greater yield 
 of milk was invariably given in the, morning, the assumption 
 was that the per cent of fat in each cow's milk was higher in the 
 evening than in the morning. This was quite probably not true, 
 since the higher percentage of fat does not always occur with the 
 smaller yield of milk, as has been shown in these pages. Of the 
 ten cows whose records were examined, Linfield says, " that five 
 of them gave the most butter-fat when they gave the least 
 milk," /. e. the evening milk which was higher in fat content 
 than the morning milk. 
 
 Utah Experiment Station Bulletin No. 68 p. 223. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 8i 
 
 . The data which are herein compiled show, in Table VIII, the 
 number of days on which the lower percentage of fat occurred 
 with the smaller yield of milk and with the larger yield of milk ; 
 and the number of days on which the lower percentage of fat 
 occurred at the evening and at the morning milking. Table IX 
 shows the number of days on whicl^ the lower percentage of fat 
 for each day occurred simultaneously with the smaller yield of 
 fat and the number of days with the larger yield of fat. This 
 table also shows the total pounds of butter-fat which were secreted 
 with the lower and higher percentages of fat respectively on each 
 day of the record. In making up Table VIII no account has 
 been taken of the days on which the percentage of fat or pounds 
 of milk were the same at both morning and evening. In like 
 manner, for Table IX those days were not included whereon the 
 percentages of fat or pounds of fat were the same at each of the 
 daily milkings. 
 
 It may be argued that the cows whose records are given were 
 under unusual conditions and that the data then secured may be 
 warped. Even granting this, it must be said that all of the cows 
 except two were in such condition as obtains in every cow's life 
 and with the exception of three or four records nothing devel-: 
 oped sufficiently abnormal to exclude the cows from a record of 
 this kind. Julia (i), Ruth (2) and Kate (3) showed unusual 
 variations as have' been previously noted and their records might 
 justly be excluded from those of the other cows. It will be 
 borne in mind that all the records have been compiled from the 
 weight of milk and test for butter-fat of each milking for each 
 individual cow ; and that the lower or higher percentage of fat, 
 larger or smaller yield of milk or of fat refers to the observations 
 taken within each twenty-four hours. The tabulated data follow : 
 
82 
 
 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 TABLE VIII 
 
 Ada 
 
 Belle 
 
 Belva 2d 
 
 Emma (i) 
 
 Emma (2) 
 
 Floss 
 
 Ida 
 
 Julia (l) 
 
 Julia (2) 
 
 Julia (3) 
 
 Kate (i) 
 
 Kate (2) 
 
 Mabel 2d (i) 
 
 Mabel 2d (2) 
 
 Ruby (i) 
 
 Ruby (2) 
 
 Ruth (I) 
 
 Emma (3) 
 
 Ruth (2) 
 
 Glista De Kol 
 
 Kate (3) 
 
 Valerie Eixle 
 
 Valerie St. Lambert 
 
 Total 
 
 Per cent of total . 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 days. 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 II 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 II 
 10 
 10 
 II 
 
 13 
 12 
 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 6 
 
 Number of days on 
 
 
 which the lower 
 
 
 per cent of fat 
 
 
 occurred with the 
 
 Total 
 
 
 number 
 days. 
 
 Smaller 
 
 Larger 
 
 yield of 
 
 yield of 
 
 
 milk. 
 
 milk. 
 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 I 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 II 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 II 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 II 
 
 — 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 II 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 62 
 
 149 
 
 214 
 
 29.4 
 
 70.6 
 
 
 Number of days on 
 
 which the lower 
 
 per cent of fat 
 
 occurred. 
 
 At even- 
 
 1 
 At morn- 
 
 ing. 
 
 ing. 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 — 
 
 II 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 — 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 2 
 
 7 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 164 
 76.6 
 
 50 
 23.4 
 
Infi^uencbs Affecting Mii,k Production 
 
 TABLE IX 
 
 83 
 
 
 Total 
 
 number 
 
 days. 
 
 Number of days on 
 which the lower per cent 
 of fat occurred with the 
 
 Pounds of butter 
 fat secreted 
 
 Smaller 
 yield of fat. 
 
 Larger 
 yield of fat. 
 
 At higher 
 percent fat. 
 
 At lower 
 per cent fat. 
 
 Ada 
 
 7 
 10 
 
 8 
 10 
 II 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 II 
 II 
 II 
 
 9 
 8 
 
 9 
 II 
 II 
 10 
 II 
 
 13 
 12 
 
 5 
 5 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 3 
 6 
 
 7 
 5 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 6 
 
 5 
 4 
 9 
 3 
 10 
 2 
 I 
 
 3 
 I 
 
 2 
 6 
 I 
 
 7 
 7 
 
 i 
 
 5 
 4 
 6 
 8 
 7 
 4 
 5 
 6 
 6 
 2 
 
 10 
 2 
 
 3 
 6 
 
 3 
 6 
 
 3.140 
 7-730 
 5-574 
 5-773 
 5-392 
 6.004 
 2.608 
 
 8.773 
 6.263 
 6.057 
 3092 
 2.728 
 4.034 
 4.689 
 7.810 
 6.292 
 6.908 
 
 6.331 
 6.120 
 1. 918 
 2.642 
 1-556 
 3.002 
 
 2.958 
 
 7.177 
 4.825 
 5-604 
 5-463 
 5-649 
 2.773 
 6.655 
 5-704 
 5966 
 
 3.247 
 2.891 
 
 3.724 
 4.352 
 
 7. 7" 
 6.617 
 
 6.399 
 6.598 
 4.700 
 2.002 
 1.989 
 1.446 
 2-775 . 
 
 Belle 
 
 Belva 2d 
 
 Emma (i) 
 
 Emma (2) 
 
 Floss 
 
 Ida 
 
 Tulia (i) 
 
 Tulia (2) 
 
 Tulia (x) 
 
 Kate (i) 
 
 Kate (2) 
 
 Mabel 2d (i) 
 
 Mabel 2d (2) 
 
 Rub}^ (I) 
 
 Rubv (2) 
 
 Ruth (i) 
 
 Emma (x) 
 
 Ruth (2) 
 
 Glista De Kol 
 
 Kate (t,) 
 
 Valerie Exile 
 
 Valerie St. Lambert 
 
 Total 
 
 214 
 
 108 
 50.5 
 
 106 
 49-5 
 
 114.436 
 5T.6 
 
 107.225 
 48.4 
 
 Per cent of total . . 
 
 In 211 days of record the lower percentage of fat occurred with 
 the smaller yield of milk 62 times, or 29.4 per cent, and with the 
 larger yield of milk 149 times, or 70.6 per cent. In 214 days of 
 record the lower percentage of fat for the day was found in the 
 evening's milk 50 times or 23.4 per cent and in the morning's 
 milk 164 times or 76.6 per cent of the whole number. In a like 
 number of days the lower percentage of fat occurred with the 
 smaller yield of fat 108 times or 50.5 per cent and with the larger 
 yield of fat, 106 times or 49.5 per cent of the whole number. 
 The total amount of butter-fat secreted by the fourteen cows in 
 214 days was 221.661 pounds of which 5 [.6 per cent was secreted 
 in that one of the two portions of the day's milk which contained 
 the higher percentage of fat, and 48.4 per cent was secreted in 
 that portion containing the lower percentage of fat. If the 
 records of Julia (i), Ruth (2) and Kate (3) are excluded the 
 
84 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 remaining figures show that 50.8 per cent of the total fat was 
 secreted at the higher percentage and 49.2 per cent was secreted 
 at the lower percentage of fat. 
 
 With the exception of the three records just named there was 
 little variation between the amounts of fat secreted respectively 
 at the higher and lower percentages of fat by the individual cows. 
 Emma (2) and (3), Ida, Kate (i) and (2), Ruby (2) and Glista 
 De Kol secreted more fat at the lower than at the higher percent- 
 age. All the other records show a reverse order as to the larger 
 production of total butter-fat. The conclusion to be drawn from 
 the data is that when there was a variation in the percentage of 
 butter-fat between the morning's and evening's milking, that the 
 amount of milk containing the lower percentage also contained 
 very nearly as much total fat as the amount of milk containing 
 the higher percentage of fat. It will be of interest and importance 
 to carry this sort of investigation to a large number of animals 
 and for longer periods. And it appears on the whole that exper- 
 imenters have been paying too much attention to the actual var- 
 iations in the quality of milk and not enough to the total fat 
 secreted. 
 
GENERAL SUMMARY 
 
 The influences which affect the secretion of milk may, for con- 
 venience in discussion, be classified as either transitory or per- 
 manent. By transitory is meant those influences which cause 
 such changes in the quantity or quality of milk as continue for 
 a more or less brief period and then the milk returns to its for- 
 mer normal amount and composition, regardless of whether or 
 not the moulding influence be continued. Under this head may 
 be classed heat, cold, fatigue, unusual or sudden changes in food 
 and the like. By permanent influences are meant those whose 
 effect is so fixed in the constitution of the animal that whatever 
 change has taken place in the milk secreted will continue so long 
 as the moulding influence be continued. Such influences as 
 heredity, environment or food may be classed as permanent, but 
 only and always upon the above named condition of the con- 
 tinuity of the cause of the change. 
 
 Reference has been made on page 33 to the effect of radical 
 changes in food upon milk secretion and in that connection the 
 matter of the proper length of experimental periods was dis- 
 cussed. A difference of opinion has arisen therein as to what 
 effects may be considered transitory and what permanent. Hills* 
 considers four or five weeks a sufficiently long period to secure a 
 permanent effect. L,indsey f holds that a period of such length 
 can not be counted upon to give permanent results, as is evi- 
 denced by the following quotation from the source named : " The 
 fat increase was only temporary, the milk gradually returning 
 (in four or five weeks) to its normal fat content." 
 
 But the root of the matter is not so much to fix the length of 
 period for all experiments as it is to ascertain the actual effect 
 of the food upon the animal. The proper length of any experi- 
 mental period is dependent upon the character of the food and 
 upon the manner in which the animal receives it. If the food 
 cause any disturbance of digestion or assimilation, the animal 
 will need, a longer time to become accustomed thereto. And 
 whether the animal does or does not become accustomed to the 
 
 * Vermont Station, Annual Reports, 1900, p. 417, 1901, p. 369. 
 f Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report, 1901, p. 14. 
 
86 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 food may determine the transitoriness or permanency of its effect. 
 
 Of the forty-nine experiments summarized in the earlier pages 
 of this paper, the large majority of them report experimental 
 periods of five weeks or less. And of those wherein was claimed 
 to be found an increase in the quality of milk as the direct influ- 
 ence of the food, Kiihn's experiment (page 26) is the only one 
 reporting periods of more than five weeks. Kiihn states that 
 his experimental periods were from twenty-one to forty-seven 
 days in length. Moreover, a glance at the tabulation on page 
 32, shows that the foods which seem most potent in increasing 
 the quality of milk, viz.: fat in various forms and molasses mix- 
 tures are the foods most likely to cause internal disorders of the 
 animal, outwardly noticeable or unnoticeable, and a consequent 
 fluctuation in the percentage of butter-fat. 
 
 In the light of these facts, may it not rightly be doubted that 
 any experiment has yet proven that a permanent increase in the 
 quality of milk is possible as the direct result of food ? May we 
 not go so far as to hold that the most that any experiment, cal- 
 culated to demonstrate the influence of food upon milk fat, has 
 done is to show a transitory eflFect as the result of the changed 
 feeding? It has been the fault of the investigator if he has not 
 carried the experiment long enough to prove beyond doubt that 
 the effect of the food might have been permanent rather than 
 transitory. 
 
 But so long as the cow is sufficiently nourished, why should 
 any food or combination of foods increase the proportion of but- 
 ter-fat in milk? According to the latest investigations* "the 
 fat of milk is a true product of secretion — a product of the 
 life activity of the cells and not a product of their degen- 
 eration." And it seems just to believe that the epithelial 
 cells of the udder are subject to similar physiological laws as 
 other secretory cells of the body. In defining metabolism, 
 Piersolf says that " the cell selects and assimilates from the sur- 
 rounding food materials those substances adapted to the partic- 
 ular needs of its own nutrition and function, so changing and 
 
 *Disselhorst in Ztschr. Fleisch und Milch hyg., 8, No. 8, p. 146. Abs. 
 in E. S. R. 10, p. 282. 
 t Histology p. 15. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 87 
 
 incorporating into its substance the materials thus acquired that 
 they became an integral part of the cell. By a still further exer- 
 cise of this process, the assimilated materials are converted into 
 new substances which may beietained within the cell or, as is fre- 
 quently the case, given up as the various secretions of the body." 
 According to Kiihn'*' "the living protoplasm of the animal cell 
 is not the same as the proteid on which it feeds. It is a much 
 more complex substance, mobile and constantly changing, which 
 receives into itself, and as a part of its unstable self, the nutri- 
 ents of the food, whether nitrogenous or non-nitrogenous ; and 
 the further changes which take place and which build up the 
 substances of the body, or produce its heat and force, are changes 
 depending on the unstable and ever changing nature of the liv- 
 ing molecule, and take place in the living substance itself. 
 
 . . According to this view the formation of fat does not 
 take place from proteids or from carbohydrates, or even from fats 
 themselves present in the food, but from the living plasm which 
 these go to nourish. Proteids or fats or carbohydrates may fur- 
 nish the material to make fat, but only by themselves first ceas- 
 ing to be proteid, fat or carbohydrate and becoming an integral 
 part of the complex living substance from which the fat is after- 
 wards split off." The protoplasm of each cell is, as it were, a 
 law unto itself and any change made in the form or function of 
 the animal must come through a variation in the cell nutrition 
 and secretion. 
 
 The matter depends, then, upon the question as to what extent 
 the secretion of milk fat is a part of the natural function of the 
 epithelial cells. But since milk fat has been found to be a true 
 secretory product it naturally follows that it is the function of 
 the epithelial cells to secrete this fat. The salivary glands of 
 the infant child do not secrete ptyalin. More or less food, rich 
 or poor food has no effect upon the secretion except so far as the 
 lack of food would impoverish and weaken the general system. 
 The salivary glands begin to secrete ptyalin when the infant 
 reaches the age that nature has provided for such secretion to 
 begin. And "what nature has provided" consists of the sum of 
 two factors, heredity and individuality. 
 
 * Landwirthschaftliche Versuchs-Stationen, 44 (1894) p. 257. 
 
88 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 The animal cell, whether secretory or non-secretory is what it 
 is in structure and function by reason of a long heredity made 
 up of habit, nutrition and use. The capacity for producing 
 milk and the composition of the milk produced is, therefore, 
 governed by the heredity of the cow plus that indefinable quality 
 called individuality, which may consist, however, more largely 
 of heredity than any observer can fathom. The amount of milk 
 that may be produced depends quite as largely upon the quantity 
 and quality of the nourishment provided as upon any hereditary 
 tendencies. There may be ever so rich an inheritance of cellu- 
 lar structure designed to elaborate milk, but if food for the cells 
 be wanting they cannot perform their natural function to the 
 full capacity. 
 
 Nothing contained herein is intended to be construed to con- 
 tradict the belief expressed in previous pages that the natural 
 tendency of a very succulent or watery diet is to produce milk 
 containing a low percentage of solids and of a concentrated diet 
 to produce milk containing a high percentage of solids. But 
 causes such as these must be continued for generations to become 
 fixed to such a degree that they may be looked upon as perma- 
 nent race characteristics. Such natural tendencies, however, 
 give the breeder the clew of how to improve the milking quali- 
 ties of his cattle. Abundance of proper food is necessary that 
 the animal may be sufficiently nourished in all of its parts and 
 the flow of milk kept thereby to the maximum capacity of the 
 animal. The tendencies are then in the right direction and vari- 
 ations are likely to occur in one generation after another, 
 whereby an improvement is quite as apt to be noted in the 
 quality as in the quantity of milk from succeeding offspring, 
 which variation may be accentuated by the practice of a wise 
 selection. The remarks made in this summary are rather 
 intended to point to the probability that no experiment has yet 
 proven that an increase in the percentage of fat in milk is possi- 
 ble as a result solely of feeding, and to indicate a few reasons 
 why the experiments have failed to prove this. 
 
 Conclusions from Experiments 
 For two terms of twenty-two weeks, nine cows were fed in lots 
 of three each on different rations, the nutritive ratios of which 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 89 
 
 were about 1:4, 1:6, and 1:9 respectively. During this time the 
 percentage- of fat in the milk of each lot increased slighth' and 
 gradually without regard to the kind of ration. For continuous 
 feeding, the medium ration appeared to give better results as to 
 yield of milk than either the narrow or wide rations. 
 
 When the food of six cows was changed from the usual ration 
 to one containing from four to seven pounds of palm nut meal 
 and then, after six weeks, to the usual ration again, there were 
 variations in the fat content of the milk, but no more nor greater 
 than when the food of the cows was unchanged. 
 
 The period of oestrum as observed with eleven cows was 
 accompanied by little variation in the flow of milk ; by a rise in 
 butter-fat percentage in about one-half the cases and little or no 
 change in the other half ; by a variation in the total fat secreted 
 corresponding to the variation in the percentage of fat : and 
 usually by a rise in temperature. Each cow returned to her nor- 
 mal milk secretion as soon as the oestrum period had passed. 
 
 Two cows that were spayed showed a large decrease in milk 
 flow, a wide fluctuation in the percentage of fat and a slight rise 
 in temperature immediately following the operation. Both cows 
 recovered their normal condition and flow of milk within a few 
 days. 
 
 The results of a study extending over a period of 214 days of 
 record with fourteen different cows indicate that there is no inti- 
 mate relation between the temperature of the cow and either the 
 percentage of fat or the total yield of fat- There appears to be 
 no difference in this respect whether the temperature be taken 
 only at milking time or at more frequent intervals. 
 
 In 214 days of record the lower per cent of fat for each day 
 occurred 62 times with the smaller yield of milk and 149 times 
 with the larger yield of milk ; 50 times at the evening milking 
 and 164 times at the morning milking ; and 108 times with the 
 smaller yield of fat and 106 times with the larger yield of fat. 
 
 In 214 days of record with fourteen different cows and com- 
 paring the morning's with the night's milking on each day, 51.6 
 per cent of the total butter-fat produced was secreted at the milk- 
 ings containing the higher percentage of fat, and 48.4 per cent 
 of the total butter-fat was secreted at the milkings containing 
 the lower percentage of fat. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Literature of Experimentation Touching upon the Production 
 
 of Milk 
 
 I. Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletins. 
 
 Alabama, 114. — Duggar and Clark. Feeding Experiments with Dairy 
 
 Cows. 
 Arizona, 39. — True. Dairy Herd Records. 
 California, 132. — Jaffa and Anderson. Feeding Farm Animals : Sugar 
 
 Beet Pulp. 
 Colorado, 20. — Quick. Influence of Food upon the Pure Fat Present in 
 
 Milk. 
 Connect cut (Storrs), 13. — Woods and Phelps. Rations Fed to Milch 
 Cows in Connecticut. 
 20. — Beach. A Study of Dairy Cows. 
 Delaware, 46. — Neale. Dairy Value of Pea Vine Silage compared with 
 
 that of June Pasture. 
 Georgia, 49. — Wing. Feeding Experiments. 
 
 Illinois, 17. - Farrington. Daily Variations in Milk Production. 
 24. — Farrington. Variations in Milk. 
 33. — Morrow. Certified Tests of Dairj- Cows. 
 
 51. — Davenport and Fraser. Variations in Milk and Milk Production. 
 Indiana, 24. — Wulff. Experiments in Milk Production. 
 
 47. — Plumb. Does it Pay to Shelter Milch Cows in Winter? 
 Iowa, 13. — Wilson, et al. Experiment in Feeding for Milk. 
 14. — Wilson, et al. Effect of Feed on Quality of Milk. 
 25. — W^ilson, et al. Feeding Winter Dairy Cows. 
 32. — Wilson, ct al. Feeding Dairy Cows and Feeding Cottonseed Meal 
 
 to Dair}- Cows. 
 36. — Wilson and McKay. Effect of Period of Lactation on Milk and 
 Quahty of Butter. 
 Kansas, Si.— Cottrell. Feed and Care of the Dairy Cow. 
 Maryland, 69. — Doane. The Influence of Feed and Care on the Indi- 
 viduality of Cows. 
 Massachusetts (State), 10. — Goessmann. Feeding Experiments with Corn 
 Ensilage. 
 12. — Goessmann. Notes on P'eeding Experiment with Gluten Meal as 
 
 Constituent of Daily Diet of Milch Cows. 
 32. — Goessmann. Experiments to Ascertain Cost of Food for Produc- 
 tion of Milk. 
 15, 22, 27, 35, 38, 41, 42. — Goessmann. Feeding Experiments with 
 Milch Cows. 
 Massachusetts (Hatch) , 39. — Lindsey. Economic Feeding of Milch Cows. 
 Michigan, \\. — Johnson. Warming Water for Dairy Cows. 
 149. — Smith. Feeding Dairy Cows. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 91 
 
 166. — Smith. A Grade Dairy Herd. 
 193. — Smith. Feeding Beet Pulp to Dairy Cows. 
 Minnesota, 4. — Porter. Comparative Value of Cold and Warm Water in 
 
 the Production of Milk. 
 35. — Haecker. Dairy Herd Record for 1893. 
 67. — Haecker. Investigations in Milk Production : Feeding Dairy 
 
 Cows. 
 •]i. — Haecker and Major. Investigations in M^lk Production. 
 Mississippi, 13, 15, 21, — Lloyd. Feeding for Milk and Butter. 
 
 60. — Moore. Feeding Cottonseed, Cottonseed Meal and Corn to 
 
 Dair}^ Cows : Influence of Feed on Quality of Milk and Butter. 
 70. — Moore. Feeding Dairy Cows. 
 Nebraska, 30. — Ingersol and Duncanson. Influence of Changes of Food 
 
 and Temperature on Quantity and Quality of Milk. 
 New Hampshire , 2, 8. — Whitcher. Feeding Experiments. 
 9, 13. — Whitcher. Effect of Food ^ipon milk. 
 18.— Wood. Effect of Food upon Milk. 
 
 20. — Wood. Effect of Food upon Milk : Feeding with Fats. 
 New Jersey, 10. — Cook. Rational System of Feeding Milch Cows. 
 
 137. — Lane. The Yield, Composition and Cost of Milk : Experiments 
 
 with Different Rations. 
 148. — Voorhees and Lane. Alfalfa Protein vs. Purchased Protein in 
 
 Rations for Dairy Cows. 
 Neiv York (State) Old Series, 33. — Sturtevant. Influence of Food on 
 
 Milk. 
 34) v35> 36- — Sturtevant. Feeding of Cows. 
 84. — Sturtevant. Silage for Cows. 
 104. — Sturtevant. Feeding for Milk. 
 ig6, no, 114. — Sturtevant. Inflvience of Acid and Putrefactive Food 
 
 upon Cows and their Milk. 
 New Series, 80. — Wheeler. Alfalfa Forage for Milch Cows. 
 97. — Wheeler. Corn Silage for Milch Cows. 
 
 105. — VanSlyke. Effects of Drought on Milk Production. ' 
 
 132. — Jordan and Jenter. The Source of Milk-Fat. 
 197. — Jordan, Jenter and Fuller. The Food Source of Milk-Fat. 
 210. — Wheeler. The Immediate Effect upon Milk Production of 
 
 Changes in the Ration. 
 New York (Cornell University), 22, 36. — Roberts and}Wing. Effect of 
 
 Grain Ration for Cows with Pasturage and with Green Fodder. 
 52. — Wing. Cost of Milk Production : Variation in Individual Cows. 
 92. — Wing. Effect of Feeding Fat to Cows. 
 152. — Wing and Anderson. Studies in Milk Secretion : Drawn from 
 
 Officially Authenticated Tests of Holstein-Friesian Cows. 
 169. — Wing and Anderson. Studies in Milk Secretion : Record of Uni- 
 versity Herd 1891-1S98. 
 173. — Anderson. The Relation of Food to Milk Fat. 
 
92 Influences Affecting Milk Production- 
 
 North Carolina, ii6. — Emery. Milk Records and Tests . Variations in 
 Milk. 
 143 — Emery. Feeding Experiments, Milk Records, etc. 
 169. — Emery and Johnson. Feeding Experiments. Milk Records, etc. 
 North Dakota, 16. — Sheppard. Dairy Herd Record 1S94 : Pasture vs. 
 
 Pasture and Grain. 
 Ohio, 10. — Thorne and Hickman. Ensilage vs. Field Beets as Food for 
 Cows. 
 20. — Thorne and Hickman. Corn Silage vs. Sugar Beets as Food for 
 
 Milk Production. 
 50. — Ttorne, Hickman and I'alkenbach. Experiments in Feeding for 
 Milk. 
 Oregon, 54. — French and Kent. Dairy Rations. 
 
 Pennsylvania, 17. — Hunt. The Value of Cottonseed Meal as Compared 
 with Bran for the Production of Butter. 
 24. — Waters, Caldwell and Weld. Influence of Quality of Food upon 
 
 Economy of Milk and Butter Production. 
 28. — Armsby and Hess. Cottonseed Feed for Dairy Cows. 
 41. — Hayward and W^eld. Tests of Dairy Feeds. 
 
 52. — Hayward. Rye Meal and Quaker Oats Feed for Milk Production. 
 56. — Hayward. Methods of Dairy Feeding. 
 South Carolina, 19. — Hart. Dairying. 
 
 Tennessee, 3, Vol. 5. — Vanderford. A contribution to the Study of 
 Economies of Milk Production. 
 2, Vol. 6. — Vanderford. Rational Use of Feeding Stuffs : Winter 
 Dairying in Tennessee. 
 Texas, 33.— Connell and Clayton. Feeding Milch Cows. 
 
 47. — Soule. The E;ffect of Food on Economic Dairy Production. 
 Utah, 43 — Liniield. Dairy Herd Record : Winter Feeding Experiments 
 with Dairy Cows. 
 68. — Linfield. Experiments with Dairy Cows. 
 Vermont, 31. — Cooke. Feeding Tests with Sugar Meal, Cream (Tluten 
 Meal and Germ Meal. 
 48. — Hills. Feeding Tests with Gluten Products. 
 Wisconsin, 4. — Experiments on Milk Production. 
 8.— Armsby. Oil Meal vs. Corn Meal for Milk. 
 15. — Woll. Ensi-ilage vs. Corn Fodder for Milk Production. 
 21. — King. Comparative Value of Warm and Cold Water for Milch 
 
 Cows in Winter. 
 33. — Woll. Rations for Dairy Cows. 
 38. — Woll. One Hundred American Rations for Dairy Cows. 
 
 II. Agricultural Experiment Station Annual Reports. 
 
 Connecticut. — Phelps. Feeding Experiments with Milch Cows on Soil- 
 ing Crops, 892, p. 127. 
 Woods and Phelps. A Study of Rations Fed to Milch Cows in Con- 
 
Influences A.ffecting Milk Production 93 
 
 • necticut, 1893, p. 69; 1894, p. 26 ; 1895, p. 41. Atwater and Phelps. 
 
 1896, p. 53 ; 1897, p. 17. Phelps. 1900, p. 130. 
 Kansas. — Gottrell. The Milk and Butter Product as Influenced by Feed- 
 ing, 1S8S, p. 69. 
 Maine. — Tests of Dair}- Cows, 1890, p. 17. 
 
 Jordan. The Influence of Widely Differing Rations upon the Quantity 
 
 and Quality of Milk, 1893, p. 73. , 
 
 Jordan. P'eeding Experiments with Milch Cows : Large or Small Hay 
 
 Ration, 1894, p. 44. 
 Bartlett. Wheat Meal vs. Corn Meal : Ensilage of Mature Corn, Sun- 
 flower Heads and Peas, 1895, p. 24. 
 Bartlett. Gluten Meal vs. Cottonseed Meal ; Ground Oats vs. Wheat 
 Bran : Silage vs. Grain : Nutriotone for Milk Production, 1S96, p. 37. 
 Bartlett. The Effect of Feeding Fat on the Fat Content of the Milk, 
 1898, p. 114. 
 Massachusetts (State). — A series of feeding experiments with milch cows 
 extending over several years. 
 Goessmann. Corn Ensilage : Corn Ensilage with Gluten Meal, 1884, 
 pp. 26, 42. 
 Various Grains and Coarse Fodders, 1885, p. 10. 
 Corn Stover vs. English Hay : Corn Ensilage vs. Beet Roots, 1886 , 
 
 p. II. 
 English Hay, Corn Fodder, Fodder Corn, Ensilage, Roots and 
 
 Soiling Crops, 1887, p. 11. 
 Various Grains and Dry and Green Fodders, 1888, p. 11 ; 1889, p. 12. 
 Old Process vs. New Process Linseed Meal : Various Green Fod- 
 ders, 1890, p. 12. 
 Old Process Linseed Meal vs. Chicago Gluten Meal : Chicago 
 Gluten vs. Cottonseed Meal : Various Green Fodders, 1891, p. 14. 
 Dent Corn vs. Sweet Corn : Corn Meal vs. Chicago Maize Feed : 
 Various Green Fodders, 1892, p. 14. 
 Lindsey. Various Grains and Dry and Green Coarse Fodders, 1893, p. 12. 
 Comparative Valve of Different Coarse Fodders : Effect of Food 
 upon the Cost and Quality of Milk, 1894, p. 32. 
 Massachusetts (Hatch). — Lindsey, et al. Chicago Gluten Meal vs. King 
 Gluten Meal and vs. Atlas Meal, 1895 pp. 62, 65. 
 The Effect of Narrow and Wide Rations on the Quantity and Cost 
 of Milk and Butter and on the Composition of Milk, 1896, p. 100. 
 Cottonseed Feed as a Hay Substitute for Milch Cows, 1897, p. 79. 
 Effect of Feed on the Composition of Milk, 1900, p. 14. 
 Michigan. — Johnson. Warming Water for Dairy Cows, 188S, p. 139. 
 Same as Bulletin No. 41. 
 Johnson. Experiments with Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Corn Fodder, 
 
 1889, p. 205. 
 Smith. Feeding Dairy Cows, 1898, p. 250. Same as Bulletin No. 149. 
 
94 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 New Jersey. — Lane. The Feeding Value of Ear Corn Compared with 
 Corn and Cob Meal, 1898, p. 21X. 
 Influence of Widely DilTering Rations upon the Yield of Milk and 
 
 Fat and upon the Composition of Milk, 1899, p. 202. 
 Experiments with Good and Poor Rations, 1S99, p. 216. 
 Influence of Wide vs. Balanced Rations upon the Yield of Milk 
 and Fat and upon the Composition of Milk, 1900, p. 266. 
 Lipman. The Yield and Composition of Milk Obtained when the Inter- 
 vals between Milkings are Unequal and when they are Equal 1899, 
 p. 220. 
 New York (State). — Sturtevant. Glucose or Starch Waste as Cattle 
 Food, 1885, p. 16. Effect of Food upon Milk, 1887, p. 15. 
 Ladd. Influence of Food upon Milk and Butter, 1888, p. 284. Relative 
 
 Feeding Value of Some Grain Rations, 1889, p. 198. 
 Collier. Effect of Various Foods upon Milk, 1890, p. 7. 
 The Source of Fat in Milk, 1891, p. 124. 
 Relation of Food to Milk, 1892, p. 143. 
 Relation of Fat in Food to Fat in Milk, 1894, p. 114. 
 Jordan and Jenter. The Source of Milk Fat, 1897, p. 491. Same as 
 Bulletin No. 132. 
 Vermont. — A series of feeding experiments with milch cows extending 
 over several years, with especial reference to quantity and quality of 
 milk produced. 
 Hills. Test of Various Coarse Fodders and Pasturage, 1889, p. 51. 
 
 Effect of Heavy Grain Feeding : Some Coarse Fodders : and Change 
 
 from Barn to Pasture, 1890, pp. 65-107. 
 Effect of Weather : Change from Barn to Pasture : and Change of 
 
 Quarters : Silage vs. Corn Fodder, 1891, pp. 59-118. 
 Effect of Weather : Change from Barn to Pasture : and Various 
 Grains and Coarse Fodders. Variations in Quantit}' and Qual- 
 ity of Milk from various Causes, 1892, pp. 89-197. 
 Effect of Weather and Change from Barn to Pasture. Feeding 
 
 Bone Meal and Various Ensilages, 1893, pp. 70-118. 
 Effect of Fatigue. Feeding Robertson Mixture, Corn Ensilage and 
 
 Beets, 1894, pp. 142-192. 
 Feeding Corn Ensilage, Beets, Carrots and Various Concentrates. 
 
 Variations in Milk due to Various Causes, 1895, pp. 157-236. 
 Feeding Trials with Silage and Potatoes : Studies in Methods of 
 
 Experimental Feeding Trials, 1896-7, pp. 134-220. 
 Effect of Fatigue : Feeding Tests and their Methods, iSq7-8. pp. 
 
 310-400: 1898-9, pp. 252-309 : 1899-1900, pp. 391-46C. 
 Effect of Feeding Germ-oil Meal : Addition of Excessive Amounts of 
 ' Single Nutrients : A Comparison of Feeding Trial Methods, 1900- 
 igoi, pp. 314-375- 
 Wisconsin. — Henry. Corn Stalks vs. Mixed Hay and Clover Hay, 1884, 
 p. II. 
 Armsby. Value of Cottonseed Meal and Malt Sprouts, 18S4, p. 78. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 95 
 
 Henry. Cut vs. Uncut Corn Stalks : Soiling vs. Pasturage, 1S85, pp. 
 
 9. 19- 
 
 Armsby.' New Process Oil Meal vs. Corn Meal, 1885, p, 97. 
 
 Henry. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn : Cut vs. Uncut Corn Fodder, j886, 
 
 PP- 25, 34. 
 Armsby. Bran vs. Corn Meal : Bran vs. Oil Meal : Influence of Nutri- 
 tive Ratio upon Milk Products, i8S6,'pp. 115, 130, 147. 
 Henry. Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder Corn, 1887-8, p. 5. 
 Woll. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn, 1887-8, p. 28. 
 Woll. Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder : Fodder Corn vs. Corn Ensilage 
 
 as Exclusive Feeds, 1889, pp. 71, 106. 
 Short. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn, 1889, p. 130. 
 King. Comparative Value of Warm and Cold Water, 1889, p. 146 ; 
 
 1890, p. 163. 
 Woll. Ground Oats vs. Bran : Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder Corn, 
 
 1890, pp. 65, 80. 
 Woll. Relative Value of Corn Silage and Field Cured Fodder Corn, 
 
 i89i,p. 49. 
 King. Influence of Imperfect Ventilation, 1891, p. 61. 
 Henry, Woll and Short. Feeding and Digestion Experiments with 
 
 Milch Cows, 1 882-1893 ; 1^93. PP- 64-94. 
 Woll. Comparative Value of Linseed Meal, Corn Meal and Wheat 
 
 Bran, 1894, p. 113. 
 Woll and Carlyle. Economy of Heavy Grain Feeding, 1899, p. 52 ; 
 
 1900, p. 37. 
 Carlyle. Effect on Dairy Cows of Changing Milkers, 1899, p. 89. 
 Carlyle. Record of University Dairy Herd, 1899, p. 68 ; 1900 p. 314. 
 Ilia. Ontario Agricui,tural College and Experiment Farm. 
 
 Annual Reports 
 Influence of Food on Dairv Products, 1883, p. 66. 
 Feeding Ensilage and Turnips, 1885, p. 114. 
 Effect of Extra Summer Fodder on the Quantity and Quality of Milk, 
 
 1887, p. 137. 
 The Effect of Food on the Quality and Quantity of Milk, i89i,p. 154. 
 Effect of Food on Milk and Butter, 1892, p. 204. 
 Effect of Food on Fat in Milk ; Feeding Slop and Wheat, 1893, pp. 
 
 148-151. 
 Feeding Silage : Effect of Feeding Turnips, 1897, pp. 59, 62. 
 Green Oats and Peas and Oats and Tares as Soiling . Crops for Milch 
 
 Cows ; Sugar Beets vs. Mangels, 1898, pp. 78, 80. 
 Mangels vs. Turnips : Mangels vs. Sugar Beets, 1899, pp. 71, 76. 
 Apples, Apple Pomace, Rape and Turnips for Dairy Cows, 1900, VI. p. 41. 
 
 Illb. Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural 
 Society, Scotland. 
 Spier. The Effects of Food upon Milk and Butter, 1894, p. 83 ; 1896, p. 
 269 ; 1897, p. 296. 
 
96 Influences Affecting Milk Production 
 
 IV. Some Foreign Experimentation on Milk Production. 
 
 Landwiytschaftlichen Vcrsuch s-Stationen. — Lehmann. Zusammenset- 
 
 zung der Milch einer perlsiichtigen Kuh, V. 3, p. 195. 
 Miiller. Die Veranderungen in der Zusammensetzung der Milch, 
 
 welche von der Zeit des Kalbens abhangen, V. 6, p. 376. 
 Fleischmann und Vieth. Beodachtungen iiber die Milchsecretion und 
 
 die Fettgehalt der Milch an einer grosseren Kuhheerde, 24 {1S80) 
 
 p. Si. 
 Siewert Ueber den Einfluss der ungeshalten BaumwoUsamenkuchen 
 
 auf die Milchproduction, 30 ( 1884) p. 145. 
 Gebek. Einwirkung des Kokosnusskuchen und Kokosnussmehl auf 
 
 die Mastung, Ertrag und Beschaffenheit der Milch, 43 (1894) p. 436. 
 Henkel. Ueber den Einfluss austrengender Bewegung auf die Milch- 
 production, 46 (1896) p. 329. 
 Kellner und Andra. Versuche iiber den Einfluss der Verfiitterung von 
 
 Runkelriiben, getrockneten und gesauerten Schnitzeln auf die INIilch- 
 
 production, 49 (1898) p. 401. 
 Morgen. Versuche mit Milchkiihen iiber den Einfluss der Arbeitslei- 
 
 stung auf die Menge und Zusammensetzung der produzierten Milch, 
 
 51 (1898) p. 117. 
 Landwirlsch%fllichc Jahrbucher. — Fleischmann. Untersuchung der Milch 
 
 von sechszehn Kiihen wahrend der Dauer einer Lactation, 20 (1891) 
 
 II, p. I. 
 Kochs und Ramm. Verschiedenartig Zusammengesetzte Futterrationen 
 
 in ihrer Wirkung auf die Milchsecretion und auf die Ausnutzung des 
 
 Futters durch die Milchkiihe, 21 {1892) p. 809. 
 Hittcher. Untersuchung der Milch von sechszehn Kiihen des in Ost- 
 
 preusnen rein geziichteten hollandischen Schlages wahrend der 
 
 Dauer einer Lactation, 23 (1894) p. 873. 
 Ramm. Versuche zur Ermittelung der Wirkung verschiedener Kraft- 
 
 futtermittel auf die Milchergiebigkeit der Kiihe. Ueber die Wirk- 
 ung verschiedener Melassepraparate auf die Milchsecretion, 26 (1897) 
 
 pp. 693. 732. 
 Maercker und Albert. Fiitterungsversuche mit Milchkiihen iiber 
 
 den Einfluss fettreicher und fettarmer Kraftfuttermittel auf den 
 
 Fettgehalt der Milch, 27 (1898) p. 188. 
 Hagemann. Beitrage zur rationellen Ernahrung der Kiihe, 24 (1895) 
 
 p. 283 ; 26 (1897) p. 555 ; 28 (1899) p. 485. 
 Andra. Die Waldplatterbse (Lathyrus silvestris), ihr Anbau und ihre 
 
 Verwertung als Futterfiir Milchvieh, 31 (1902) p. 55. 
 Journal fur Landwirtschaft . — Kiihn. Versuche iiber den Einfluss der 
 
 Ernahrung auf die Milchproduction des Rindes, 25 (1877) p. 332. 
 Backhaus. Die Beeinflussung des Fettgehaltes der Milch durch ver- 
 
 schiedene Kraftfuttermittel, 41 (1893) p. 328. 
 
Influences Affecting Milk Production 97 
 
 • Milch Zeiiung-.— Klein. Futterungsversuch mit Sonnenblumen kuchen 
 
 bei Milchkiihen, 21 (1892) p. 673. 
 Kammerer und Schlegel. Ueber den einfluss der Futternot auf die 
 
 Beschaffenheit der Milch, 24 (1895) p. 286. 
 Beglarian, Fiitterungsversuche mit Leinol uud geschroteten Lein- 
 
 samen an Milchkiihe, 26 (1897) p. 522. 
 Rhodin. Futterung von Milchkiihen mit Fett in Form von Emul- 
 sion, 27 (1898) pp. 306, 323. 
 Ramm und Winthrop. Versuche zur Ermittelung der Wirkung einiger 
 
 neuer Futterstuffe auf die Milchsecretion unter Beriicksichtigung 
 
 des Fettgehaltes der mit Futtermitteln gebildeten Ratiouen, 27 (1898) 
 
 P- 5«3- 
 Ramm und Miiller. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe, 28 (1899), mit 
 
 Tropon-Abfjillen p. 17 ; mit Brauer-Schlempe p. 97 ; mit Illipenuss 
 
 kuchen, p. 145 ; mit Palmkern-lllipekuchen, p. 225 ; mit Tropon, p. 
 
 241 ; mit Englisch Futterkuchen, p. 273. 
 Ramm. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe, 28 ( 1899) mit Maiskeim- 
 
 melasse p. 641 ; mit Maiskleber, p. 658 ; mit Rohzucker, p. 673. 
 Momsen. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe mit Kiirbissen, 29 
 
 (1900) p. 6. 
 Ramm, Momsen und Schumacker. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe 
 
 mit Palmkernkuchen, 29 (1900) pp. 291, 309, 340, 353. 
 Vieth, Futterungsversuche an Milchkiihe mit Palmkernschrot 29 
 
 (1900) p. 294. 
 
 V. Resumes of Investigations of Effect of Food upon Milk. 
 
 Handbook of Experiment Station Work (Bulletin No. 15, OflSce of 
 
 Experiment Stations) 1893, p. 209. 
 Milch Zeitung, 23 (1894), pp. 117-119, and 27 (1898), pp. 402-4. 
 Deut. Vierteljahr. off Gesund., 25, pp. 235-263. 
 Abs. in Molkerei Zeitung, 7 (1893), pp. 197-8. 
 Vermont Station Annual Report, jo (1896-7), p. 152. 
 Experiment Station Record, 5 (1893-4), p. 967. 
 Agriculture of Maine, 1895. 
 
 Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 173, 
 PP- 47-59- 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 002 854 939 8