OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY i e * *v AGRK :' * I . -.." .-m. - - - UBf'ARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS -NON CIRCULATING CHECK FOR- UNBOUND CIRCULATING COPY UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station BULLETIN No. 167 PROPORTIONS OF SHELLED CORN AND ALFALFA HAY FOR FATTENING WESTERN LAMBS BY W. C. COFFEY URBANA, ILLINOIS, MARCH, 1914 SUMMARY OF BULLETIN No. 167 1. OBJECTS. (a) To determine the proportions in which shelled corn and alfalfa hay should be fed to western lambs, (b) To compare the feeding and market qualities of wether and ewe lamts. (c) To ascertain the effects of early and late shearing on the feeding operation as a whole. Page 53 2. PLAN OP EXPERIMENTS. Western lambs were fed shelled corn and alfalfa hay in proportions ranging from the largest quantity of corn that it was possible to get the lambs to consume, with just enough hay to keep them healthy and thriv- ing, to a large amount of hay, with just enough corn to put them in choice market condition by the close of the feeding period. In Experiment No. 1, four lots of wether lambs were fed, and in addition two lots of ewe lambs were fed as nearly as possible like two of the lots of wether lambs. In Experiment No. 2, three lots of lambs sheared early were fed as nearly as possible like three lots sheared late. Page 53 3. CONSUMPTION OP FEED. The proportions of corn and hay varied from 1 part corn and 0.86 part hay to 1 part corn and 3.45 parts hay, but the total weight of feed consumed was about the same, regardless of proportions, in all lots within an experiment. The greatest proportion of corn that it was possible to get the lambs to consume at any stage of the feeding period was 1 part corn to 0.66 part hay. The lambs fed the greatest proportion of corn (which was also the greatest amount) were rather difficult to keep on feed. In Experiment No. 1 the lots con- suming the largest amount of grain also consumed the largest amount of water. Page 55 4. GAINS AND MARKET QUALITY. In each experiment the lambs receiving the largest proportion of corn made the largest gains. Proportions ranging from 1 part corn and 0.86 part hay to approximately 1 part corn and 2 parts hay were about equal in their effect on market quality. With the exception of one lot, the ten heaviest lambs in each lot made greater gains than the ten lightest lambs. Page 61 5. FINANCIAL ASPECTS. With various combinations of prices for corn and hay, excepting a combination of very dear corn and very cheap hay, it was demon- strated that the lots fed the greatest proportion of corn to hay produced the cheap- e&t gains and returned the most profit. It was also demonstrated that in order to make the feeding operation profitable with feeds of high cost, a margin of $1.00 per hundredweight based on home costs and weights, is necessary, but that with feeds of comparatively low cost this margin is not necessary. The fact is emphasized that the lamb feeder should grow all or part of his feed at the base of his feeding operations. Page 66 6. COMPARISON OP WETHER AND EWE LAMBS. The difference between wether and ewe lambs in feeding and market qualities was slight. Page 74 7. EFFECTS OP EARLY AND LATE SHEARING. Shorn lambs ate more feed than unshorn lambs in warm weather, but there was little difference between them in gains and no difference in market quality. Lambs left in the fleece until the end of the experiment sheared from 2 to 2.75 pounds per head more than early- shorn lambs, and on this account returned more profit. Page 76 CONCLUSIONS. Page 81 PROPORTIONS OF SHELLED CORN AND ALFALFA HAY FOR FATTENING WESTERN LAMBS BY W. C. COFFEY, CHIEF IN SHEEP HUSBANDRY OBJECT OF THE EXPERIMENTS Practically all sheep and lamb feeders want to know the propor- tions in which grain and roughage should be fed to fattening lambs. In this bulletin there is presented and discussed the data obtained from two experiments conducted at this station during the winter of 1906-07 for the purpose of ascertaining what quantities of shelled corn and alfalfa hay should be combined in the rations of fattening lambs in order to secure the most profitable returns. Such returns are dependent chiefly on the extent and cost of the gains produced and on the market quality secured in the animals. In the first experiment, a secondary object was a comparison of the feeding and market qualities of wether and ewe lambs; in the second experiment, a secondary object was a consideration of the effects of early and late shearing on fattening lambs. PLAN OF THE EXPERIMENTS In each experiment the lambs were divided into lots of twenty each. Corn and alfalfa hay were fed to these various lots in proportions ranging from the largest quantity of corn that it was possible to get the lambs to consume, with just enough hay to keep them healthy and thriving, to a large amount of hay with just enough corn to put them in choice market condition by the close of the feeding period. In Experiment No. 1, for the main part of the experiment, four lots of wether lambs were fed ; and in order to accomplish the second- ary object, two lots of ewe Jambs were fed as nearly as possible like two of the lots of wether lambs. In Experiment No. 2, six lots treated as three pairs of duplicates were fed corn and alfalfa hay in three different proportions, or combinations. Early in the experiment one lot from each combination was sheared, while the other lot was left in the fleece until near the close of the experiment. THE LAMBS Western feeder lambs direct from the range were purchased on the Chicago market for each experiment. Those in Experiment No. 1 were ' ' fancy selected. ' ' Their dark markings indicated a strong inf u- ^v 54 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, sion of English Down blood, and they averaged about 69 pounds in weight at the beginning of the experiment. Such lambs are consid- ered suitable for finishing in a short feeding period. The lambs in Experiment No. 2 were of choice grade and weighed about 65 pounds at the beginning of the feeding period. They did not grade so high as the lambs in Experiment No. 1 because they were not quite so good in quality. TREATMENT OF LAMBS FROM TIME OF PURCHASE UNTIL PLACED ON EXPERIMENT Experiment No. 1. The lambs used in Experiment No. 1 were purchased in Chicago on October 11 and were dipped on the following day. They arrived at the University Farm on October 13, and until October 17 were grazed on very short timothy and blue-grass pasture. This run was given them in order to provide an opportunity for them to take on a fill gradually, to rest after their long journey from the range, and to recover from the effects of dipping. On the evening of October 17, they were put in a dry lot ; and from that time until Octo- ber 23, the date on which the experiment began, they were fed a small quantity of oats and shelled corn and 1.5 pounds of hay (clover and alfalfa) per head per day. Experiment No. 2. In order to get lambs direct from the range, it was necessary to purchase them early in December. Because it was winter, they were shipped from the Chicago market without being dipped. Upon reaching the University Farm, they were placed in a dry lot, where they were fed clover hay and corn stover until a few days before the experiment began, when the ration was changed to alfalfa hay. The corn stover contained a little corn ; hence the lambs were partially accustomed to this feed when they were placed on ex- periment. The lambs were kept on approximately a maintenance ration and so made practically no gains, but when the experiment began on Feb- ruary 19 they were thrifty and thoroly rested from their shipment from the West, and well prepared for the fattening period. FEED The corn used in each experiment was grown in the vicinity of the Experiment Station and would grade as No. 2 Yellow. In Experi- ment No. 1, the alfalfa fed for the first 47 days was locally grown, but because of unfavorable weather at harvesting, it was not of first quality. During the remainder of this experiment and thruput Ex- periment No. 2, choice alfalfa from the West was fed. Toward the close of Experiment No. 1, some soybeans were used to give variety to the ration, but since the largest total amount fed in any case was only 1.1 pounds per lamb, they are disregarded as such in the following discussion and reported as corn. PROPORTIONS OP CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 55 EQUIPMENT In each experiment the feeding was carried on in the north side of a shed that was 8 feet high at the center and 6 feet high at the side walls. Ventilators in the roof and numerous doors and windows in the sides provided a good circulation of air. Exclusive of racks, there were approximately 6 square feet of floor space to each lamb inside the shed and 12 square feet in a cinder lot just outside and north of each pen. In fair weather the lambs had access to the cinder lots during the day. This shed was of cheap construction and about the type that the average feeder would expect to use. It sheltered the lambs from storms and winds, but was only a fair protection against the cold. METHOD OF FEEDING The daily ration was given in two equal portions, one at 7 :00 a.m. and the other at 4 :00 p.m. All feed was placed in combination grain and hay racks inside the shed. Just before feeding time, the troughs were carefully swept, and the refuse from the previous feeding was placed in canvas bags, from which it was weighed at the close of every week. Before the grain was placed in the troughs, the lambs were driven out into the lots in order to make possible an even distribution of grain and give each lamb an equal opportunity to get feed. Hay was fed after all the grain had been eaten. It was a part of the method of feeding to have all edible feed consumed. When any such feed was left, some adjustment was made to prevent a repetition of the occurrence. If any clean corn was left, it was taken as an indication of over-feeding, and at the next feeding a reduction was made proportionate to the amount not eaten. During the day the lambs had access to clean, fresh water, but at night it was withheld, since there was no way to keep it from freezing. Salt was either given twice a week or kept before the lambs all the time. Oat straw was used for keeping the pens and lots well bedded. Once each week the lambs were weighed in lots in the morning before they were given water or feed. They were also weighed individ- ually at the beginning and at the close of the feeding period. CONSUMPTION OF FEED Table 1, dealing with the consumption of feed per lamb per day during each period of each experiment, suggests three topics that are of importance to the lamb feeder, namely: the proportions in which corn and alfalfa hay may be fed in each period of the feeding operation; the influence of the proportion of corn to hay upon the total amount of feed that lambs are able to consume ; and the increase or decrease in the ability of lambs to consume feed as the feeding period advances. 56 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, PROPORTIONS IN WHICH CORN AND ALFALFA HAY MAY BE FED IN EACH PERIOD OF THE FEEDING OPERATION It will be noted that in the first period (29 days) the proportions in which corn and hay were fed ranged in Experiment No. 1 from 1 of corn to 2 of hay in Lot 1, to 1 of corn to 5.47 of hay in Lot 4. In Experiment No. 2, the range was not so wide, being 1 of corn to 1.57 of hay in Lot 1, and 1 of corn to 3.34 of hay in Lot 3. It will also be noticed that in all lots the corn formed a larger part of the ration in each succeeding period. The small proportion of corn in the ration in all lots during the first period, as compared with that of the other periods, is explained by the fact that it was necessary to limit the corn during this period ; for, as is well known, it is not safe to give sheep or lambs all they will eat of a heavy concentrate like corn until they become accustomed to it. As a result of limiting the corn, the hay in this period formed the greater part of the ration in all lots. But why was it possible for the corn to form a larger proportion of the ration in the third period than in the second? It is evident that this question applies only to those lots in which the lambs were fed as much corn as they would eat. The writer believes that there were two conditions present which help to answer the question : First, the lambs did not become well accustomed to corn until about the second week of the second period. This was particularly true of the lambs of Experiment No. 1, which, it will be remembered, received no corn prior to the beginning of the experiment. In Experi- ment No. 2, this condition was not so great a factor because the lambs had received a little corn in the stover that was fed them during the time they were on the University Farm prior to the beginning of the experiment, and consequently they were more nearly accustomed to it at the beginning of the second period than were the lambs of Experi- ment No. 1. This fact is evident in Table 1, which shows that the increase of corn in the third period was smaller in Lot 1, Experiment No. 2, than in Lot 1, Experiment No. 1. Second, the appetite of the lambs for corn seemed to increase gradually. Being direct from the range, the lambs were wholly unac- customed to this feed. It is true they ate it the first time it was offered to them, but with time their liking for it seemed to increase, and hence it was possible to make it a larger part of the ration in the third period than in either of the preceding periods. Altho the appetite of lambs for corn gradually increases, it is not to be assumed that the proportion of it in the ration can be in- creased indefinitely, for lambs are ruminants animals that are adapt- ed to handling a bulky feed and hence, even in the process of fatten- ing, they require a certain amount of roughage. It will be noted that in the third period about 3 parts of corn to every 2 parts of hay were fed to Lot 1 of each experiment. It was found that if the lambs were 1914] PROPORTIONS OP CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 57 fiiftf 6 Pt g CO d o ft 03 g "3 M CD =H r*"! S rH 9 '~j rt p ^ o^ 42 ^ J5 ft rH jiiit CO ft A be 1 fl d > '+3 o o? ^ 'S o O rd '<3 w g< =(H fl |g ft o In PM 0+i 1 cp 3 a PM h ^ ^-v J M o 42 IJlJIf ft ft H ^ a * CD ^ +3 w o l3 ^ 03 ^ ~ _g 1 %'* ^ rH CJ rrt C3 * J CO M co Jajlt i 2 ! Pi 03 pj CD a co CD f> PH F, <" 'C rt H CO S rrt CD '~ ' S s | rj & CD I! ft ^ w CO * -3 "a H ft gg, 73 03 PI j CD pi H rH j S f H^ ft4j O a? >> a k> o3 o PI 03 "w 9 ^H <* O o Q TO O5 ft fl rrj O "^ -* ^H O O w c ft bo a rrt o ' CP ft CO CM t- t- CO CD IO O (M CM CM CM CQ CO CO .2 'C rH t~ O )O LO O CM OO rH rH rH rH CD CM CM CM IO TjH O5 (> rH rH O5 U3 O t~ CO OO 00 W O O rH CM i-l iH rH rH C-J CM Cv5 O5 CM oq CM O5 O5 Ol CM CM m 03 rH 2 *H rH EH o * oq rH r-i rH IO CO O CO_ TtH rH rH i-H rH CD OO CO_ O t*; O* rH rH rH rH rH 00 00 00 Tjl IO IO oq CM oq 03 00 CM .2 o CD t- CO CO rH rH I-H rH oq oq Tj^ H O5 iH rH co o o t>- co_ oq O rH rH iH i-HrH rH t~ O CO CM CO CM CM CM 09 rH t~ t~ 05 CM O c CO ft CO iH rH r-i O O CO O5 t^ IO s us oq co rH Oq CO rH rHrH IH oq cc 58 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, to be kept on feed, it was not possible to reduce the proportion of hay further, at least to any appreciable extent. Just here it should be stated that thruout the experiment the lots which were fed a maximum amount of corn (Lot 1 of each experiment) were at times difficult to keep on feed. On rainy or foggy days they were more likely than the other lots to go ' ' off feed. ' ' Lots 3 and 4 of Experiment No. 1 were never "off feed," and the same was true of Lot 3, Experiment No. 2. There were a few times, however, when one or two lambs of Lot 2 in each experiment refused corn, but on the whole the lambs of those lots were not difficult to keep on feed. It would therefore seem best for persons without extended ex- perience in lamb feeding not to feed corn according to the propor- tions employed in Lot 1 of either experiment, but it would seem safe to use the proportions employed in Lot 2. As will be seen from Table 3 (page 63), the proportion of total corn to total hay in Lot 2 of each experiment was about 1 to 1.3, while in the lots where a maximum amount of corn was fed, the proportion was 1 part corn to less than 1 part hay. Under the heading "Feed per head per day" (Table 1), it will be seen that within any given period the total feed consumed (corn and hay) was very nearly the same in all the lots. The third period of Experiment No. 2 was the only period in which there was sufficient variation to be worthy of notice. The fact that the proportions in which corn and hay were fed had no profound influence upon the total feed consumed seems to indicate, at least within the limits of these experiments, that the total capacity for feed is very nearly a fixed quantity within which the feeder may operate in the use of corn and hay in whatever way may be the most economical, providing he can secure a proper finish. As a matter of fact, this finish was secured in all the lots of these experiments except Lots 3 and 4, Experiment No. 1. ABILITY OF LAMBS TO CONSUME FEED WITH ADVANCE OP FEEDING PERIOD An examination of Table 1 will show that in nearly every lot of the two experiments the power to consume feed increased in the suc- ceeding periods of the experiments. The one exception was during the third period of Experiment No. 1, when the consumption of Lot 2 remained stationary and that of Lots 3 and 4 decreased slightly. However, in view of the fact that during this period there were 6.59 inches of rainfall and 6.5 inches of snow, it is significant to note that the consumption was not materially reduced. The depressing effect 1914] PROPORTIONS OP CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 59 of these adverse weather conditions on the appetites of the lambs was evident, and undoubtedly kept the feed consumption from being larger. In Experiment No. 1 the daily consumption of feed per lamb (if the average of all lots is considered) was about 23 percent greater dur- ing the second and third periods than during the first period ; while in Experiment No. 2 it was only about 11 percent greater during the second period than during the first, and during the third period than during the second. It has been the experience of the writer that the increase in the capacity of lambs to consume feed as the fattening period advances is, if conditions are normal, about as indicated in Experiment No. 2. The much greater difference, in consumption of feed, between the first and second periods of Experiment No. 1 than between the first and second periods of Experiment No. 2 is probably explained by the fact that the lambs of Experiment No. 1 were placed on ex- periment within a very few days after they had come from the market, and, since corn and alfalfa were new feeds to them, it was necessary for a time to limit both to such an extent that the appetites of the lambs were not appeased. On the other hand, the lambs of Experi- ment No. 2, as already stated, had eaten some corn in the stover that was fed them before the fattening period began, and consequently it was unnecessary to limit their feed during the first period to such an extent as it was necessary to limit the feed of the lambs in Ex- periment No. 1. Lambs grow as well as fatten during the feeding period. That their added growth increases their power to consume feed seems quite possible, especially in view of another experiment conducted by the writer in studying age and weight as factors in lamb feeding. Three lots of native lambs were fed for a period of ninety-eight days. One lot was approximately S 1 /^ months old at the beginning of the ex- periment, another lot 7 months, and a third lot 5 months. The amount of feed consumed by the oldest lambs was about 30 percent greater than that consumed by the youngest lambs and 18 percent greater than that consumed by the lambs of intermediate age. But there are other factors which very likely have an influence on the ability of lambs to consume feed. Becoming accustomed to the confinement of the feed lot apparently has something to do with this ability. From the open range to the feed lot is a radical change for western lambs, and altho they may not be noticeably restless in their new surroundings, they have to learn to be content with mere eating and idleness. It would also seem that becoming accustomed to the feeds in the ration is another factor that plays a part in the increasing ability of lambs to consume feed. For example, the lambs used in these experi- ments had never eaten either corn or alfalfa on the range. Both feeds were at once palatable to them, but as they became more and more 60 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, accustomed to them, their desire for them seemed to increase. In this connection, the writer has observed native sheep learning to eat rape, a feed which is universally acknowledged as palatable to sheep. At first they ate of it sparingly and clearly showed their preference for an adjoining blue-grass pasture, but in time they learned to like the rape as well as the blue-grass, or even better. CONSUMPTION or WATER IN EXPERIMENT No. I 1 It is generally supposed that animals consuming a large quantity of protein will drink more water than those taking a less amount, but such was not the case in this experiment. As will be seen from Table 2, the lots receiving a large quantity of grain ( a smaller amount of pro- tein) were the largest consumers of water. For instance, in Lot 1, in which the protein consumption was smallest (0.235 pound per lamb per day 2 ), the amount of water taken from the pail was largest (4.02 pounds per lamb per day), while in Lot 4, in which the protein con- sumption was largest (0.251 pound per lamb per day 2 ), the amount of water taken from the pail was smallest (3.85 pounds per lamb per day). Thus, while the total quantity of protein consumed by Lot 4 was greater by 1.44 pounds per lamb than that consumed by Lot 1, the total quantity of water taken from the pail by Lot 1 was greater by 15.30 pounds per lamb than that taken by Lot 4. It should also be noted that the lambs of Lot 1 took 19 times as much water from the pail as from feed, and those of Lot 4 almost 21.4 times as much. These figures adequately demonstrate that clean, wholesome water is a very necessary requisite in lamb feeding. TABLE 2. WATER CONSUMED PER LAMB PER DAY IN EXPERIMENT No. 1 Lot Proportion of corn to alfalfa hay Moisture in feed 1 Water in pails Total in feed and pails 1 2 3 4 1 : 0.99 1 : 1.36 1 : 2.42 1 : 3.45 Ib8. .21 .22 .19 .18 Ibs. 4.02 3.89 3.87 3.85 Ibs. 4.23 4.11 4.06 4.03 Amount of water in feeds calculated from figures given in Henry 's ' ' Feeds and Feeding." a Owing to various causes, it was impracticable to keep a record of the con- sumption of water in Experiment No. 2. 2 See Table 3. 1914} PROPORTIONS OF CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 61 GAINS AND MARKET QUALITY In Table 3 is shown the proportion of corn to hay and the average amount of feed consumed per lamb per day during the entire feeding period. There is also shown the digestible nutrients consumed per lamb per day, the daily gain per lamb, and the feed required for one pound gain. This table offers an opportunity to study two things of importance and interest to those engaged in lamb feeding: first, the effect of different proportions of corn and alfalfa on the rate of gain and the market quality produced; and second, the economy of the gains from the standpoint of the amount of feed required to produce a pound of gain. EXTENT AND NATURE OF GAINS Under the heading ' ' Gain per lamb per day, ' ' it will be seen that, within each experiment, the greater the proportion of corn in the ra- tion, the larger was the rate of gain. This is explained by a study of the data under the heading "Digestible nutrients per lamb per day," which show that the rations fed varied with respect to their content of digestible nutrients, and that the lots in which corn formed the larger part of the ration received a greater amount of digestible carbohydrates and a lesser amount of digestible protein than those lots in which corn formed the smaller part of the ration. It would seem that the quantity of protein was sufficient in all lots to satisfy the needs of fattening lambs, but that the proper quantity of digestible carbohydrates was lacking when a comparatively large part of the ration was composed of alfalfa hay. Another point that should be kept in mind is that alfalfa hay is coarser and more bulky than corn. Very likely its bulky nature ac- counts for the fact that, taking the two experiments as a whole, those lots in which alfalfa formed a comparatively large part of the ration could not eat a materially greater weight of feed than the lots in which corn formed a comparatively large part of the ration, even tho the amount of digestible nutrients in the former ration was, on the whole, lower. Furthermore, undoubtedly more of an animal's energy is re- quired to convert a coarse, bulky feed like alfalfa into utilizable form than is required with a more concentrated feed like corn ; and this, too, reduced the efficiency of the rations in which the proportion of hay was comparatively large. This statement, however, does not at all presuppose that the less bulky the ration, the more efficient it is for fattening lambs. As stated in the discussion under Table 1, it was not possible to increase the proportion of corn beyond 3 parts corn to 2 parts hay, for lambs are ruminants animals that are adapted to handling a bulky feed and they therefore require, even in the pro- cess of fattening, a certain amount of roughage. At the close of the feeding period, Lots 1 and 2 of Experiment No. 1 were in prime condition and sold on the Chicago market for 62 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, $7.85 per hundredweight ; Lot 3 sold for $7.65, and Lot 4 for $7.50. Manifestly, the smaller gains made by Lots 3 and 4 were the chief cause for their selling below the price paid for prime lambs, but it also seemed that another cause lay in the fact that the gains were due, at least to a slight degree, more to growth and less to fat than were the gains made by Lots 1 and 2. If this was true, then the nature of the gains had a bearing on the way the lambs graded and sold. With the exception of a few unusually heavy individuals, all the lambs of Experiment No. 2 sold as prime lambs at $8.50 per hundred- weight. It is well to state, however, that Lot 6, which was a duplicate of Lot 3 except that it was sheared earlier (see Table 9, page 77), was considered worth slightly less than the other lots. That it sold at the same price was probably due to the urgent demand for fat lambs at the time the experiment closed. At such a time the market is not inclined to make such sharp distinctions with respect to quality and condition as in times when the supply is normal. The differ- ence in the extent and nature of the gains of the remaining lots was not sufficient to make a discriminating difference in finish with re- spect to market value even had conditions been normal. The fact that Lot 3 clearly belonged in the prime grade while Lot 6 barely squeezed into it, indicates that the proportions in which corn and hay were fed to those lots mark approximately the lower limit to which the proportion of corn in the ration can be reduced and a desirable market finish still be secured in a period of ninety-eight days. It is important for the feeder to know that within certain limits different proportions of corn and hay will produce an equally satis- factory finish in the same length of time. For example, in Experi- ment No. 1, a ration composed of 1 part corn and 1.36 parts hay equaled a ration composed of 1 part corn and 0.99 part hay in pro- ducing a desirable market finish; and in Experiment No. 2, rations in which the proportions varied from 1 of corn and 0.86 of hay to 1 of corn and 2.03 of hay were also equal in respect to producing a mar- ket finish. Since the above is true, the feeder is free to adjust, at least within the limits mentioned, the proportions of corn and hay in the ration. The economic significance of this point is discussed later on page 66. ECONOMY OF GAINS From the standpoint of the amount of feed necessary to produce a pound of gain, the rations containing a comparatively large propor- tion of corn are clearly shown by the last three columns of Table 3 to have been the most efficient. In Experiment No. 1, it took approxi- mately 12 percent more feed to produce a pound of gain in Lot 2 than it did in Lot 1 ; 36 percent more in Lot 3, and 44 percent more in Lot 4. In Experiment No. 2, it required iy 2 percent more feed to produce a pound of gain in Lot 2, and 18 percent more in Lot 3, than it did in 1914} PROPORTIONS OP CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 63 Q B ! CO S T3 r-J O T3 1 n 1 H o5 03 rrt. pj Q ?0 00 TH C-l rH rH CO o TH CT IO CT O S 3 s^-s ^io Oi CO' oi rH rH rH rH tt t^oooi i O t> eg O"* Pi O CO PH ^ w o *s ^ IB PH g S o S -S S . fn S a Pi P3 .r^ O j H u OO t^ iH OO O CT OI rH ft co co o 10 co o ia "^ in t^ oi 1 co'rjicd H 2 G5 e2 ^* g bo bo 1 3 * ' 1 P 1 a> 3 i | . 'c .3 is CT Oi t- CD rH OO CT CD rH in Oi S O ,g gr. 'o ^ CO CO CT o TjH CO* CT E S 5 *-" "S "i ^, H _s 8 CT o i |&|l| o ft " O Oi CD CO O CO rH O CO CT CM CT "B 1 ft rH O T* CO CT Oi CO CO CT 1 03 O 1? ^ B Q S3 & |t III ^j ^ 42 CS i rH O CO O * t- CO CC * CO CT r-1 1 rH rH O CO CD TtJ rH rH rH rH s s -s ft ^^ g . 03 V 2 "* TJ 5-2 o 01 z si .3 ^ ^ | " O fH CO ^j ^ g 2 BS fr a> I ~ H O> QJ _, -M bo o^ PI CO 0) ,Q IO rH l^ rH CO Tj< * in CT CT CT CT I 1 OO rH O ID OO Oi CT CT CT bo g A, g a B 1 Q fU a> ft S 1 H "< be ffl ^ *^ ^ HH ^ W a> *|H 4J Q ^ * r-l fl M* 1 " 1 CD CD CT rH ^ CO CO CO in co CD CT CT CT 1 pj g .2 Q 1^ ^ S ^45 ^ n' rH rH i-H r-i cS rH rH rH ,s M S ^ r^J ft i-s OS o S o * g g> * K CO 05 rH o i 2 aH 's'^ CT CT O b in J CO * 00 00 rH OO s Q P fl 9 b U rH rH rH rH r2 cT ^8 1 o PH > w i* Oi CD CT in rt CO rH CD a 1 0) cd -j* r^J Oi CO ^ ^ O CO OO A O -Bs>> -3 O O rH CT CO' OO Oi CT rH O ** ^J T< o ri Oi rrj 04 O O " r^ ft rr_J O O *H O O 1 O-M a c o rH rH rH rH 1 rHrHrH 13 (D N co* bo bO tj 9 -4J .S >r 3 1 o "fi -H CT 00 * rH CT CO < H N PH 64 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, Lot 1. Were the value of a ration determined solely by the quantity of feed required to produce a pound of gain, the data presented would be conclusive in favor of a ration in which the grain slightly exceeded the hay, as in Lot 1 of each experiment. EFFECT OF INITIAL WEIGHT ON RATE OF GAIN No matter how carefully selection is made, it is practically impos- sible to secure a band of feeder lambs without including individuals considerably different in weight. These differences may be in size of body or in condition, or both. In selecting the lambs for the experi- ments under discussion, a great deal of care was taken by parties ac- customed to handling thousands of feeder lambs to select uniform ani- mals, and yet in Experiment No. 1, in which the average initial weight was about 69 pounds, the lightest lamb weighed 52.5 pounds and the heaviest 86.5 pounds ; and in Experiment No. 2, in which the average initial weight was about 65 pounds, the lightest lamb weighed 44 pounds and the heaviest 80 pounds. It is next to impossible to avoid these variations, for they exist in the feeder end of almost every band of lambs sent to market. Moreover, it is not feasible to break up the feeder part of the band and mix those lambs with lambs from other bands in the hope of securing greater uniformity in weight. It is therefore of interest to study the gains of light and of heavy lambs in a given band, and Table 4 is presented for the purpose of such a study. TABLE 4. AVERAGE GAIN OF LAMBS OF LARGEST INITIAL WEIGHT IN EACH LOT COMPARED WITH AVERAGE GAIN OF LAMBS OF SMALLEST INITIAL WEIGHT Lot 10 lambs of largest initial weight, average gain 10 lambs of smallest initial weight, average gain Difference in favor of heavy lambs Experiment No. 1 1 2 3 4 Ibs. 29.20 28.65 17.65 17.95 Ibs. 23.90 21.60 20.70 17.40 Ibs. 5.30 7.05 3.05 0.55 Experiment No. 2 1 2 3 30.25 34.10 29.10 28.00 27.65 25.40 2.25 6.45 3.70 It will be noted that in all the lots except one (Lot 3, Experiment No. 1) the ten lambs with the largest initial weight made a larger average gain than the ten lambs with the smallest initial weight. This fact seems to be sufficient evidence to warrant the statement that in a given band of typical feeders the 50 percent belonging in the group of heavy lambs will, in general, make a greater average gain than the 50 percent belonging in the group of light lambs. There are good rea- sons for the careful limitations placed on this statement. First of all, 1914] PROPORTIONS OP CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 65 it is necessary to limit the statement to a given band of lambs because a band of heavy lambs may not surpass or even equal a band of lighter lambs in extent of gains. Second, it is necessary to make the statement apply specifically to two large groups within a band, one representing the upper half of the band and the other the lower half, with respect to weight, because the heaviest lamb in a band may not surpass or even equal the lightest lamb in extent of gains. That in individual cases initial weight is not a sure indication of ability to make gains is shown by the fact that in Lot 1, Experiment No. 1, of two lambs, each weighing 61.5 pounds, one made a gain of only 19 pounds while the other made a gain of 31 pounds. Again, in the same lot, a lamb with an initial weight of 63 pounds gained 31.5 pounds, while another weighing 86.5 pounds gained only 25 pounds. Yet the ten heaviest lambs in the lot made an average gain of 5.3 pounds more per head than the ten lightest lambs. But why do the 50 percent belonging in the heavy group of lambs make a greater gain than those in the light group ? On such markets as Chicago, Omaha, and Kansas City, the feeder lambs are usually those that are left of the large shipments from the West after the fattest lambs have been sold to the packers. Some of the lambs rejected by the packers are not far under the require- ments for the ' ' killing class, ' ' and these usually make up the heavier lambs in a feeder band. Others are more noticeably lacking either in size or condition, or both, and as a rule (there are exceptions of course) these make up the group of lightest lambs. This latter group, therefore, being made up of less thrifty individuals and those that thru some defect have been the least able to attain size and fat, does not make so much gain in the feed lot as the group of heavier lambs. With respect to economy of gains, there is no information that will afford a comparison of the two groups, for in these experiments there was no way to determine whether the lambs of smallest initial weight consumed less or more feed than those of largest initial weight. Neither could it be determined from these experiments what effect unevenness of size among lambs of the same lot may have on the gains. It may be well to state, however, that practical feeders do not like to have large, strong lambs and smaller, weaker lambs together in the feed lot ; for it has been found by experience that the smaller lambs are crowded away from the feed and hence are retarded in fattening, while the larger lambs may get too much feed. While this discussion of the effect of initial weight on rate of gain does not bear directly upon the main topic of this bulletin, it has been included here because it emphasizes the importance to lamb feeders of one or two points in connection with the buying of lambs : First of all, even tho a band of lambs is carefully selected, there will always be considerable variation in weight. This means, of course, that all the lambs in a particular band will not reach market finish at 66 BULLETIN No. 167 [March, approximately the same time, and thus emphasizes the advantages of buying lambs in lots of at least two carloads, so that an early ship- ment can be made of those that finish early and the underfinished ones can be retained for later shipment. This practice, known as ''top- ping out," is advocated by many who have had considerable expe- rience in lamb feeding. Further, if a feeder buys only one load of lambs with a view to returning all of them to the market at the same time, especial care in selection is necessary, for, as stated above, altho carefully selected, the lambs will still vary considerably in weight. Disregard of this point will lead to such variations in gains that re- turning all the lambs to market in desirable market finish at the same time will be quite out of the question. A FINANCIAL STUDY OF THE EXPERIMENTS Several facts have already been brought out in this bulletin rela- tive to the effect that the feeding of different proportions of shelled corn and alfalfa hay had on the extent of gains and on the market quality of the animals in these experiments. There yet remains to be studied the effect of these different proportions on the cost of gains, which of course has a significant bearing on the profit or loss of the feeding operation. After the feeder learns what proportions of corn and alfalfa hay will put lambs in prime condition, he must then de- termine the particular proportions that will be most profitable to him ; and in this determination he must be guided by the relative prices of corn and hay, and by the efficiency of the proportions in which these feeds are used in the production of gains. Both of these factors are involved in the study shown in Table 5, altho only the first receives direct consideration. COST OP GAINS What effect has the proportion in which corn and hay are fed on the cost of a pound gain when both these feeds are cheap, when they are dear, or when they are of medium price? In the column under corn at 35 cents per bushel and hay at $8 per ton it will be seen that when these feeds are comparatively cheap, the greater the proportion of corn fed, the lower is the cost of gain per pound. In Experiment No. 1, in which the range in the propor- tions of corn and hay was wide, the difference in favor of a large pro- portion of corn in the ration is pronounced. In Experiment No. 2, however, the difference is so slight as to be almost negligible. Turning now to the cost of a pound gain when both corn and hay are high, we see that with corn at 65 cents per bushel and hay at $16 per ton, a pound gain is still cheapest in those lots in which the largest proportion of corn was fed. The same holds true when the prices for corn and hay are medium, as will be seen under corn PROPORTIONS OF CORN AND ALFALFA FOR FATTENING LAMBS 67 o S- o 1C to cg T I 46- QO H w M O 5 'o PH r-t GJ * t-H g CO 1C 1C 09 i T(< T-H 89- o Q E H 00 * fe H i ^ -t- 3 H A ^ o I^H H> i c I ! rH t~ C] 1C 00 00 O O O O r-l r- 1 O * i tO O5 CO 1^ l^ 00 CO t- tO tO t^ t- GO 00 R.0. 3 on T3 d 3 OS O r-l to t~ t^ ^ Thl tO O GO 5 to to l^ tO .. o 3 * & in to -i-T ^ 05 O OS to to ic g # i-t to rH ; t^ CO O5 O 3 o 3 -ee- &c 3 &: "rt n O CO GO t- (> t- 00 3 5O lH r-l C 1 (M 1C CO T)H ^ Tt< T(H 1C 1C R <= . . a o 3 * C 8 P tD a rH T3 O rH CO "* Tj< * 00 i H Ol tO (M 1C : Oi co ^ ^ 4 O rH Ol I J iH rH iH iH i I eriment rH rH i-H in | rH p s- OS -u to (M IO t~ t^ ^.1^-^005 i>; t>; t-^ to tn oo in 00 b-; TT deducted ~ O rH *H P iS _j - * ' Oj O ^ M ^ o O g ea Pn PH o A IB H .g fi Oi ^ co >o .H fH ^ jj ^ tO (M 00 O5 to CO CO rt |^ "^ 4^ ^.t- in rH O oo t^ in to to to to g to' to' to' T3 0) 1 g rH -.s 'S is is P 2 - - 1 . o co TJ< co * 1- *' 05 OO' .5 Th CO 00 *-' *rj S g fl o Q^P-H rj Pn _ , ^ o 00 -** -*j "C w 14 S, ,0 to co* oo t-^ ~ O5 O5 OO OO & in w w 05 05 Ci s i g 11 s >> CS 3 'S 00 & fTj ^ . <*< b co m C5 t- (M_ OS >> a> cj S"X M rt ** HH .2 2 o t^ T! oo IS rH (M in tO o T(5 tO H^ P T. 8 PI rH rH rH i 1 "C & rH rH rH i w be J;H rgS S tO 'a s o os os o 10 C 03 . o rH l^ r-j b- co co IN 00 CO 00 CO \ 50 ^ rH in in in *> oi O -u OS T|< O3 U1 ^ ?O rH CO OS CO * -^ o oo co o jjj O rH N CO B S O rH D1 BULLETIN. URBANA 166-181 1914-15 130112019528436 ft