(o^ V Effect of Soybeans and Soybean Oil Meal on Quality of Pork By Sleeter Bull, W. E. Carroll, F. C. Olson, G. E. Hunt, and J. H. Longwell <8> THE LIBRARY OF THE MAY 2 931 'ERSSTY OF ILL- university OF ILLINOIS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 366 CONTENTS PAGE CONDITIONS OF FEEDING EXPERIMENTS 38 Animals Used and Their Previous Treatment 38 Rations Fed and Methods of Feeding. 39 Chemical Composition of Feeds 39 RESULTS OF FEEDING TRIALS 40 Soybeans Inferior to Tankage as Supplement to Corn 40 Addition of Soybean Oil to Soybean Oil Meal 42 Tankage During "Hardening" Period Still Leaves Soybean Gains In- ferior 44 Larger Pigs Utilize Soybeans More Effectively 45 Gains on Barley and Beans Comparable to Gains on Corn and Beans. . . 47 GRADING OF CARCASSES AND CUTS 48 RESULTS OF CARCASS STUDIES 51 Corn-and-Soybean Hogs Had Lower Dressing Percentages 51 Barley and Tankage Produced Slightly Firmer Carcasses Than Corn and Tankage 54 Twelve Percent or More of Soybeans in Ration Lowered Carcass Grades 55 Soybean Oil Meal Produced Carcasses of Satisfactory Quality 56 "Hardening" Ration Before or After Soybeans Had Little or No Effect on Firmness 64 Oil in Soybeans More Softening Than Oil in Corn 66 Soybeans Fed to Dams Had No Effect on Pork of Offspring 66 Type of Hog Had No Effect on Firmness of Pork 67 Soybeans Made Soft Carcasses Regardless of Finish 67 Firmness Not Affected by Rate of Gain or Initial Weight 70 SUMMARY 72 CONCLUSIONS 74 APPENDIX 75 Urbana, Illinois April, 1931 Publications in the Bulletin series report the results of investigations made or sponsored by the Experiment Station Effect of Soybeans and Soybean Oil Meal on Quality of Pork D By Sleeter Bull, W. E. Carroll, F. C. Olson, G. E. Hunt, and J. H. Longwell 1 URING THE past decade soybean production in the corn belt, and especially in Illinois, has increased greatly. Naturally the use of the crop as a feed for livestock has also increased. Since the beans are a high-protein concentrate, in fact practically the only high-protein concentrate that can be produced economically on the farms of the corn belt, it is only natural that they should be fed to hogs as a supplement to corn. Several years ago packers began to complain about the increase in soft and oily hogs on the northern markets. Such pork 2 is quite com- mon in the South, where hogs are fed largely on peanuts and mast. It has been known for a long time that these feeds produce soft, oily pork which is very unattractive and undesirable to the consumer. Lard from soft and oily hogs is a soft, semiliquid oil which does not harden even at freezing temperature (Fig. 1). The cured hams are flabby and greasy (Fig. 2). The bacon is less desirable than the hams, even a slight softness putting it into a lower commercial grade. Soft or oily bacon is very difficult to slice, even with a slicing machine (Fig. 3). Loins and other fresh cuts are soft, flabby, and oily-looking (Fig. 4). As a result, packers quote soft or oily hogs at 2 to 5 cents per pound live weight under the market for hard hogs of otherwise similar quality. Unfortunately it is impossible to distinguish between a soft and a hard hog until the carcasses have cooled out in the refrigerator. Pack- ers therefore assume that all hogs coming from the South are soft and buy them on that basis, much to the chagrin of the southern hog raiser. The increase of soft and oily hogs in northern markets indi- cated that a new feed was the cause. Suspicion pointed toward soy- beans because of their high content of low-melting oil. Soybeans contain about 18 percent oil, and this oil solidifies at temperatures considerably below the freezing point (5 to 18 degrees Fahrenheit). Fleeter Bull, Associate Chief in Meats ; W. E. Carroll, Chief in Swine Husbandry; F. C. Olson, First Assistant in Animal Husbandry; G. E. Hunt, Assistant in Swine Husbandry; and J. H. Longwell, formerly Associate in Animal Husbandry. 2 For a detailed review of the literature on the subject of soft pork, the read- er is referred to U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletins 1086, 1407, and 1492. 35 36 Bulletin No. 366 [April, In the spring of 1925 a series of five experiments was undertaken the purpose of which was to study the value of soybeans in the ration of market hogs and their effects on the value of the carcasses. Tho Fig. 1. — Lard From Soft and Firm Carcasses The lard on the left was from a hog fed a ration of corn and 18 percent soybeans. Such lard will not "stand up" even in cold weather. The lard on the right was from a "Hard" carcass. Hogs fed corn and tankage, corn and soy- bean oil meal, or barley and tankage usually produce carcasses of this grade. The temperature of both samples was 34° F. Fig. 2. — Soft and Firm Hams The ham on the left was from a soybean-fed hog and the one on the right from a tankage-fed hog. Hams from hogs fed barley and tankage or corn and soybean oil meal also are firm. Both hams shown above were removed from the cooler just before the photograph was taken. this series of experiments extended over five years, reasonably uniform experimental conditions were maintained thruout. In these experiments the points primarily considered were the effect of soybeans on rate and economy of gains, on dressing percentages, on shrinkage of carcasses in the cooler, and on firmness of carcasses and cured cuts (ham and bacon). An attempt was also made to find methods by which soybeans and their principal by-product, soybean oil meal, might be fed to hogs without deleterious results. 1931) Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 37 Such factors as rate and economy of gains, dressing percentages, and shrinkage may be measured accurately by ordinary weighing. The measurement of firmness is more difficult. While only a little exper- Fig. 3. — Effect of Soybeans on Bacon Bellies The hog from which the belly on the left was cut was fed a ration of corn and soybeans. Soft bellies are typical of this ration; they are very difficult to slice either with a knife or a slicing machine. This, together with their greasy appearance, puts such bellies into the lower grades of bacon which sell for sev- eral cents a pound less than the best grade. The belly on the right was from a hog fed corn and tankage, which ration produces firm pork in a finished hog. Bellies from hogs fed corn and soybean oil meal also may produce No. 1 bacon. Fig. 4. — Loins From Soft and Hard Carcasses The soft loin is a result of soybean feeding. Firm loins are produced by using tankage or soybean oil meal to balance the ration. The internal temper- ature of both loins shown was 34° F. Obviously, the chops from the firm loin will sell more readily than those from the soft loin. ience is needed to determine whether a carcass is hard or soft, even an experienced grader may not be able, in all cases, to tell how hard or how soft it is. The firmness of the carcasses in these experiments was estimated by four different methods: (1) by grading the chilled car- casses; (2) by grading the cured hams and bacon; (3) by the refrac- tive index of the fat; and (4) by the iodin number of the fat. The 38 Bulletin No. 366 [April, details of these methods are given later. The first two depend upon the judgment and experience of the graders. The refractive index is a physical measure which is accurately determinable but which some- times gives misleading results. The iodin number is a chemical measure, also accurately determinable but likewise giving inexplicable results at times. It was felt that the use of all four measures would give more reliable final grades than the use of only one or two of them. CONDITIONS OF FEEDING EXPERIMENTS Animals Used and Their Previous Treatment A total of 300 pigs have been used in this study to date. Because the study was not primarily one of comparing the feeding value of rations, fewer pigs were used per lot, except in the first test, than would otherwise have been used. 1 The number of experimental animals was reduced only after it was evident that the smaller number would not impair the interpretation of the carcass data. In allotting the pigs an attempt was made to have the groups as nearly uniform as possible in weight, sex, thrift, breeding, and general prospect. They were started on feed at average lot weights approximating 70 pounds and were removed from the test individually when their weights approximated 225 pounds. Individual weights were taken at intervals of two, and in some cases four, weeks thruout the tests and weekly as the final weight was approached. With the exception of 12 pigs that were purchased, all were raised on the University farm. For the most part they were purebreds of the recognized lard breeds, tho a few crosses of those breeds were used. Precautions were taken with the little pigs to keep them free from parasites and disease. They were immunized against hog cholera as baby pigs and were otherwise handled in ways assumed to keep them as thrifty as possible. Their ration during the period before they were put on experiment was based largely on corn and tankage, tho other farm grains and some wheat middlings were used to some extent. When pasture was not available, the protein supplement consisted of a mixture of 2 parts tankage, 1 part linseed meal, and 1 part alfalfa meal; otherwise tank- age was fed. The sex and breed of the animals, the length of time they were in a For a discussion of the feeding value of soybeans and soybean products, see Illinois Circular 369, "Utilizing the Soybean Crop in Livestock Feeding." 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 39 the experiment, their initial and final weights, and their total and average daily gains are given in Tables 24 to 28 of the Appendix. Rations Fed and Methods of Feeding The rations fed in the five tests were selected primarily from the standpoint of the carcass studies to be made rather than with the idea of comparing the productivity of the rations themselves. They were in the main, however, rations that could be adapted readily to practical farm conditions in case the quality of carcass proved satisfactory. With the exception of one lot of pigs fed on pasture the first year, the feeding thruout this study was in dry lot. In order to insure the proper control over the consumption of the different feeds, the feeds were, with few exceptions, all ground and mixed in definite propor- tions. The rations and minerals were self-fed in all cases, and water was kept before the pigs at all times. In general, the feeds were of good quality and of standard grade. Yellow corn was fed exclusively. There was some variation in the grade of corn, tho the average grade was approximately No. 3. The barley fed in the fifth experiment was No. 1 northern-grown of good quality except for an 11 -percent infestation with wheat scab. After the scab was discovered, there was some fear that the pigs might not eat it. Prior to the opening of the experiment, its palatability was compared with that of corn, and it was found to be entirely satisfactory. The tankage was from a large packing plant and was guaranteed to contain 60 percent crude protein. The soybeans were frequently mixed in color and varied consider- ably in quality. The yellow varieties predominated. The soybean oil meal fed during the first test was from a solvent process, while that fed during the second test was a pressure meal. A good grade of alfalfa meal was usually available, tho occasionally it was brown in color and stemmy. This was especially noticeable dur- ing the early part of the first test. Except for the first six weeks of the last test (January 26 to March 9), the pigs were fed in one-fourth acre dirt lots with movable houses for shelter. During this six-week period the pigs were fed and housed in a central swine barn with a concrete floor. Chemical Composition of Feeds The feeds used in the first, second, fourth, and fifth experiments were analyzed by the division of Animal Nutrition of the Animal 40 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Husbandry Department. Unfortunately the samples of the feeds used in the third experiment molded badly and were discarded. Two samples of all feeds except barley were analyzed in the fifth experi- ment. The chemical composition of the feeds, together with the aver- age composition as given in Henry and Morrison's ' 'Feeds and Feed- ing," is given in Table 23 of the Appendix. In general, the feeds used, especially the soybeans, had practically the same composition as given by Henry and Morrison. The greatest differences were in the fat content of the corn, soybean oil meal, and tankage. The corn used was considerably lower in fat than Henry and Morrison's average. Both samples of soybean oil meal were lower in fat than the average. As noted elsewhere, the soybean oil meal used in the first experiment was made by the solvent process, which accounts for its low fat content. The tankage was considerably higher in fat than the average and the barley was a little lower. Except in case of the soybean oil meal, the variations in chemical composition prob- ably do not explain any of the experimental results. RESULTS OF FEEDING TRIALS Soybeans Inferior to Tankage as Supplement to Corn The first test (summer of 1925) was a simple comparison of soy- beans and soybean oil meal in dry lot, of soybeans on bluegrass pasture, and of tankage in dry lot as supplements to corn for growing- fattening pigs. All three groups of dry-lot pigs were given 5 percent of alfalfa meal until an average lot weight of 125 pounds was reached, after which the allowance was reduced to 2 percent. The dry-lot pigs were maintained in one-fourth acre lots, while an acre of bluegrass pasture was available to the pigs of Lot 4. The rations fed are summarized in Table 1. The mineral mixture, which consisted of equal parts ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt, was fed free-choice to all groups. Some "stiffness" was noted among the pigs of Lots 2 and 3 (soy- beans and soybean oil meal in dry lot) during July. After a better grade of alfalfa meal was secured on July 25, no more of this trouble was noted. The pigs of Lot 2 (soybeans in dry lot) were observed to root up their lot much more than the other pigs. This was especially true toward the close of the test. An interesting demonstration of the lack of palatability of soybeans was made by the pigs of Lot 4, to which soybeans were fed free-choice on bluegrass pasture. During the first four weeks the 20 pigs ate a 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 41 Table 1. — Rations Fed During First Experiment, 1 Started June 13, 1925 'All pigs had free access to a mineral mixture composed of equal parts ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt. total of only 15 pounds of the beans, while during the next two weeks, under the same conditions, these 20 pigs ate 219 pounds of soybeans. Evidently it took them about a month to become so accustomed to soybeans that they would eat them extensively enough to balance their ration. Table 2. — Summary of Gains and Feed Consumption During First Experiment, Started June 13, 1925 (Weights expressed in pounds) Lot 1 Corn and tankage Lot 2 Corn and soybeans Lot 3 Corn and soybean oil meal Lot 4 Corn and soybeans on bluegrass pasture Number of pigs per lot 20 108 64 232 1.55 5.17 .49 "."l8 .01 5.85 334 32 "ii" 1 379 20 174 63 231 .96 3.94 "'.91 " .' 14 .04 5.03 409 ' 95 ' " ii" 4 522 20 147 63 230 1.13 4.32 ".'69 .15 .03 5.19 382 "6i" 13 2 458 20 Average days to finish 118 Average initial weight 63 Average final weight 233 1 44 Average daily ration Ground corn 1 4.00 Tankage 1.03 Soybean oil meal Alfalfa meal Minerals 3 03 Total 5.06 Feed for 100 pounds gain Ground corn 1 278 Tankage Ground soybeans 2 72 Alfalfa meal Minerals 3 2 Total 352 'Shelled corn. 2 Whole soybeans were used in Lot 4. ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt. 3 Mixture was composed of equal parts 42 Bulletin No. 366 [April, As the test progressed, especially during the last weeks, the pigs of Lot 2, receiving corn and soybeans in dry lot, reduced their feed con- sumption to a point that made their gains extremely slow and expen- sive. The fact that it required an average of 174 days for this lot of pigs to finish, compared with 108 days for the corn-and-tankage pigs, illustrates this point. A summary of the weights, gains, and feed con- sumption of the pigs in this test is given in Table 2. As a supplement to corn in dry lot, both soybeans and soybean oil meal were inferior to tankage when judged by rate and economy of gain. The gain on the soybean ration was not quite 62 percent as rapid as the gain made on the ration supplemented with tankage, and the gain on the soybean oil meal was less than 73 percent as rapid as the gain on tankage. Over 37 percent more of the soybean ration and about 21 percent more of the soybean oil meal ration were required to produce 100 pounds of gain than was required of the tankage ration. On bluegrass pasture (Lot 4) the gain on the soybean ration was almost 93 percent as rapid as was the gain on the tankage ration in dry J lot (Lot 1). With the aid of pasture, for which there is no accurate measure in terms of concentrates, somewhat less of the soybean ration i was required for a unit of gain than was required by the check lot without pasture (Lot 1). It is likely, however, that the scant 8-percent i difference is not really significant. Addition of Soybean Oil to Soybean Oil Meal Soybean oil meal fed during the first test produced carcasses that were in the main of satisfactory firmness (Table 15). The object of the second test (winter of 1925-26) was to determine the approximate oil content of the ration that produces soft carcasses. Soybean oil meal (pressure process) was used as the supplement to corn in the three test lots of the second experiment. Lot 2 received only the basal soybean oil meal ration. To the ration of Lot 3 was added 1.3 percent of soybean oil. This amount of oil was equivalent to 12 percent beans in the ration. To the ration of Lot 4 sufficient soy- bean oil (2.8 percent) was added to raise the oil content of the meal approximately to the level of the original beans. Alfalfa meal was fed as in the previous test, and a mineral mixture composed of equal parts ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt was offered in separate feeders. The rations are shown in Table 3. The check lot this year (Lot 1) was a part of another experiment and was not strictly comparable to the test lots in initial weight, sex, 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 4J Table 3. — Rations Fed During Second Experiment, 1 Started December 19, 1925 From beginning to average weight of 125 pounds From average of 125 pounds to close of test Lot l 2 perct. Free-choice Free-choice 81 14 5 79.63 14.00 5.00 1.37 78.13 14.00 5.00 2.87 perct. Lot 2 85 13 2 Lot 3 83.75 13.00 2.00 1.25 Lot 4 82.27 13.00 2.00 Soybean oil 2.73 *Free access was allowed to a mineral mixture composed of equal parts ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt. 2 Lot 1 was not strictly comparable with other lots in ration and gain, as it was the check lot for another test. The pigs of this lot were started on feed November 14, at an average weight of 44 pounds. The supplemental mixture contained 2 parts tankage and 1 part alfalfa meal. and breed of animals. It was felt desirable to have some firm carcasses to study along with the experimental carcasses, hence this combination. Table 4. — Summary of Gains and Feed Consumption During Second Experiment, Started December 19, 1925 (Weights expressed in pounds) Lot 1 Corn and tankage Lot 2 Corn and soybean oil meal Lot 3 Corn, soy- bean oil meal, and soybean oil Lot 4 Corn, soy- bean oil meal, and soybean oil Number of pigs per lot 20 105 73 240 1.59 6.18 .38 " A3 ' 6.69 390 24 "8 422 15 121 66 235 1.39 4.89 ""78 .18 ".02 5.87 352 '56 13 ' i 422 15 128 66 233 1.30 5.10 " .' 83 .19 .08 .02 6.22 393 64 15 6 1 479 15 119 67 234 Average daily gain Average daily ration 1.40 4 94 Soybean oil meal 82 19 17 Minerals 2 . 02 Total 6 14 Feed for 100 pounds gain Corn* 353 Tankage Soybean oil meal 58 Alfalfa meal 14 Soybean oil 12 Minerals 2 1 Total 438 ^ot 1 received shelled corn, the other lots cracked corn, ground limestone, steamed bone meal, and salt. 2 Mixture was composed of equal parts 44 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Little need be said of the rate and economy of gain made upon these various rations, as there is no check lot with which to compare them and the addition of oil is not of interest from the standpoint of practical feeding. The gains were satisfactory in all the groups. A summary of the weights, gains, and feed consumption is given in Table 4. Tankage During "Hardening" Period Still Leaves Soybean Gains Inferior The object of the third test was to determine whether pigs fed corn and soybeans to weights of approximately 150 or 175 pounds could be "hardened" by subsequent feeding of corn and tankage to a final weight of 225 pounds. Information was also obtained regarding the effect of feeding a reduced amount of beans (15 percent) thruout the fattening period. When 15 percent of beans was fed, 5 percent of tankage was used in order to balance the ration from the standpoint of protein. The rations fed during this test are summarized in Table 5. Table 5. — Rations Fed During Third Experiment, Started January 8, 1927 From beginning to average weight of 175 pounds (Lot 3) 150 pounds (Lot 4) From change to close of test Lot 1 perct. Self-fed free-choice 80 20 ( 3 ) Self-fed 80 20 (»j Self-fed 80 20 ( 3 ) Self-fed 80 15 5 ( 3 ) Self-fed perct. Self-fed Lot 2 80 20 ( 3 ) Lot 3 Minerals 2 Corn Self-fed 90 10 ( 3 ) Self-fed Lot 4 90 10 ( 3 ) Self-fed Lot 5 Corn 80 15 5 ( 3 ) Minerals 2 Self-fed •Supplement was composed of 2 parts tankage, 1 part linseed meal, and 1 part alfalfa meal. 2 Mix ture was composed of 2 parts ground limestone, 2 parts steamed bone meal, and 1 part salt. 3 Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 received 5 pounds of alfalfa meal for each 20 pounds of grain mixture until the pigs reached weights of about 125 pounds; after which the allowance of alfalfa was reduced to 1 part to 50 parts grain mixture. 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 45 Ten pigs were fed in each of the lots except Lot 1, which contained 20 pigs and was not strictly comparable with the other lots in time of starting and initial weight. Twelve pigs were slaughtered from this lot, however, in order to have some firm carcasses as a basis for comparison. By referring to the daily gains of the pigs in this test (Table 26 in the Appendix) it will be seen that soybeans (Lot 2) did not supple- ment corn so satisfactorily as tankage did. Even the addition of 5 percent tankage to 15 percent beans (Lot 5) did not stimulate gains. Larger Pigs Utilize Soybeans More Effectively The fourth test (winter of 1927-28) was an attempt to determine whether soybeans may be safely fed during only a part of the fattening period, either the early part or during the final stages of feeding. Four lots of 10 pigs each were fed the rations outlined in Table 6. In order to avoid the problem of rancidity of oil in the ground beans an attempt was made during the early part of this test to feed shelled corn and whole soybeans mixed in the required proportions with the other feeds. Failure on the part of the pigs to eat the feeds in these proportions necessitated grinding and mixing the entire ration. The pigs of Lots 1 and 2 continued on the same ration thruout the Table 6. — Rations Fed During Fourth Experiment, Started February 4, 1928 From beginning to average weight of 160 pounds (Lot 3) 115 pounds (Lot 4) From change to close of test Lot 1 perct. 90 10 tt 85 15 0) 85 15 0) 90 10 0) Perct. 90 10 (i) Lot 2 Corn 85 15 0) Lot 3* Corn 90 10 ( l ) Lot4» 85 15 Alfalfa meal 0) »Alfalfa meal was fed to all pigs at the rate of 1 pound to 20 pounds of other feed until they reached weights of approximately 125 pounds, after which they were fed 1 pound of alfalfa to 50 pounds of other feed. All pigs had free access to a mineral mixture composed of 2 parts ground limestone, 2 parts steamed bone meal, and 1 part salt. 2 Each pig in Lot 3 was changed to the corn-and-tankage ration when he weighed 160 pounds, and Lot 4 pigs were changed to the soybean ration at individual weights of 115 pounds. 46 Bulletin No. 366 [April, test, the supplement for Lot 1 being tankage and that for Lot 2, soy- beans. Somewhat less than the optimum amount of beans was fed — only 15 percent. The ration for Lot 3 pigs was supplemented with 15 per- cent of soybeans until the pigs reached weights of 160 pounds, after which the soybeans were replaced by tankage. These same two rations were fed to the pigs of Lot 4 in just the reverse order; that is, the hardening ration (corn and tankage) was fed until the pigs reached individual weights of 115 pounds, after which, until the close of the test, the sovbean ration was fed. Table 7. — Summary of Gains and Feed Consumption During Fourth Experiment, Started February 4, 1928 (Weights expressed in pounds) Number of pigs per lot. Average days to finish. Average initial weight. . Average final weight. . . Average daily gain. . Average daily ration Corn Tankage Soybeans Alfalfa meal Minerals 1 Total Feed for 100 pounds gain Corn Tankage Soybeans Alfalfa meal Minerals 1 Total Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 1 Lot 2 Corn and Corn and soybeans tankage tankage soybeans followed by corn and followed by corn and tankage soybeans 10 10 10 10 144 161 146 108 70 752 722 97 230 2282 2322 229 1.11 .952 1.092 1.23 4.51 3.42 3.81 4.93 .50 .15 .10 .60 .44 .72 .17 .16 .15 .19 Trace .01 .01 .01 5.18 4.19 4.56 5.95 406 428 402 401 45 16 8 75 46 58 15 19 16 16 Trace 1 1 1 466 523 481 484 1 Mixture was composed of 2 parts ground limestone, 2 parts steamed bone meal, and 1 part salt. J For the pigs that finished. This test emphasizes again the inferiority of soybeans compared with tankage as a supplement to corn for pigs of light weight. The pigs receiving tankage thruout (Lot 1) gained nearly 17 percent more rapidly than similar, pigs did on a similar ration supplemented with soybeans (Lot 2). Twelve percent more of the soybean ration was required to produce a unit of gain than was required by the check ration. A summary of the weights, gains, and feed consumption is given in Table 7. The pigs of Lots 3 and 4 offer an illustration of the now well- known fact that larger pigs utilize soybeans to much better advantage than do young pigs. The data presented in the table cannot be looked 1931] Effect of Soybeans ox Quality of Pork 47 upon as full confirmation of this statement because ot the difference in the initial weights of the two groups of pigs. When the intermediate gains of the two groups are examined, however, it becomes evident that soybeans do not make as satisfactory a supplement to corn for light pigs as tankage does. From the standpoint of rate and economy of gain only, soybeans are apparently utilized rather effectively by pigs after they reach a weight of 100 pounds. Gains on Barley and Beans Comparable to Gains on Corn and Beans Barley has the reputation in Canada of making firm pork. The second test of this series indicated that the total amount of vegetable oil in the ration may be an important factor in the firmness of the carcass produced. These two ideas, coupled with the fact that barley contains less than half the amount of oil that corn does, suggested that by partial or complete substitution of corn with barley, the oil content of the ration might possibly be reduced below the amount that is detri- mental to the quality of the pork. Table 8.- —Rations Fed During Fifth Experiment, January 26, 1929 Started Ration Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 perct. 90 io perct. 90 10 (ij perct. 80 20 C 1 ) perct. 80 20 w perct. 85 15 0) perct. 42.5 42.5 Ground soybeans Alfalfa meal 15 ( l ) Alfalfa meal was fed at the rate of 1 pound to 20 pounds of feed until the pigs reached weights of 125 pounds; after which the proportion of alfalfa was reduced to 1 part to 50 parts of feed. All pigs had free access to a mineral mixture composed of 2 parts ground limestone, 2 parts steamed bone meal, and 1 part salt. Accordingly in the fifth experiment soybeans were compared with tankage as a supplement to both corn and barley and a mixture of equal parts of corn and barley. Soybeans were fed to the extent of 20 percent of the ration with both corn and barley and as 15 percent of the ration with barley alone and with the barley-corn mixture. Further details concerning the rations fed are given in Table 8; and a summary of the rate and economy of gains is shown in Table 9. When supplemented with tankage (Lots 1 and 2), barley proved to be about equal in value to corn. The barley-fed pigs gained some- what more rapidly than those fed corn, tho they also required a little more total feed in making a unit of gain. These differences (less than 4 percent in rate of gain and less than 8 percent in feed consumption) are too small, however, to be considered significant. 4$ Bulletin No. 366 [April, Table 9. — Summary of Gains and Feed Consumption During Fifth Experiment, Started January 26, 1929 (Weights expressed in pounds) Lot 1 Corn, 90% Tankage, 10% Lot 2 Barley, 90% Tankage, 10% Lot 3 Corn, 80% Soybeans, 20% Lot 4 Barley, 80% Soybeans, 20% Lot 5 Barley, 85% Soybeans, 15% Lot 6 Barley, 42.5% Corn, 42.5% Soybeans, 15% Number of pigs per lot Average days to finish Average initial weight Average final weight 10 110 66 231 1.51 5.54 '"o2 ".19 .01 6.36 368 *4i'" "13" .4 422 10 104 67 229 1.57 "6.H .69 ".'21 .01 7.12 396" 44 13" 1 454 10 132 67 230 1.24 3.96 " .' 99 .15 .04 5.14 319 '80'" 12 3 414 10 153 66 224 1.04 "3. '52 ".88 .14 .03 4.57 340'" ' 85 " ' 13 3 441 10 144 66 228 1.12 "4.44 " .' 78 .17 .05 5.44 395" 76" 15 4 484 10 139 66 228 1.17 Average daily ration 2.39 2.39 .85 .18 .04 Total 5.85 Feed for 100 pounds gain 205 205 72 15 3 Total 500 fixture was composed of 2 parts ground limestone, 2 parts steamed bone meal, and 1 part salt. When supplemented with 20 percent of soybeans, corn produced 19 percent more rapid gains than did barley similarly supplemented and produced them at a saving of a little over 6 percent in feed. Even this difference in gain is not particularly significant, however, in view of the fact that only 10 pigs were included in each lot. Reducing the beans to 15 percent of the ration with barley (Lot 5) did not materially change either the rate or economy of gain. The same can be said of a mixture of corn and barley in equal parts sup- plemented with 15 percent soybeans. The dirt lots in which the pigs were fed were again an interesting study of the manner in which the rations satisfied or failed to satisfy the pigs. The tankage- fed pigs did scarcely any rooting, while those fed soybeans kept their lot rooted thoroly from the time the lots thawed out until the pigs were removed. This was done in spite of a mineral mixture being available at all times. GRADING OF CARCASSES AND CUTS Slaughtering. Unfinished hogs, regardless of their ration, almost always produce carcasses that lack firmness. Hogs of the type used 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 49 in these experiments are usually well finished at 225 pounds. Hence the individual hogs were removed from the feed lot and slaughtered at weights approximating 225 pounds. By using individual weights rather than an average lot weight, it was possible to avoid variations in firmness that were due to differences in live weight. The hogs were fasted over night and then slaughtered by shackling and sticking. They were dressed head on, leaf in, and hams faced. The warm carcasses were weighed and put into the cooler at 30° to 32° F. Fig. 5. — Location of the Fat Sample A strip of fat about 6 inches long and 1 inch wide was taken from over the lumbar region of the loin and used for the determination of the refractive index and iodin number as indications of firmness. In the first four experiments the carcasses were chilled for 72 hours. In the fifth experiment they remained in the cooler for 48 hours. The weights of the chilled carcasses were then taken. The dressing per- centages were calculated from the fasted live weight taken just before slaughter and from the hot and cold carcass weights. Grading of Carcasses. The chilled carcasses were graded in the cooler just before weighing. The internal ham temperatures were 33° to 36° F. at time of grading. The grading was done by at least two of the investigators working independently and without knowledge of the lots from which the carcasses came. Each carcass was graded as Hard, Medium-Hard, Medium-Soft, Soft, or Oily. Refractive Index. Immediately after weighing the cold carcass, a sample of fat about 6 inches long and 1 inch wide was taken from the fat back of the right half of the carcass (Fig. 5). This sample was skinned, cut into small cubes, and rendered in a constant-temper- 50 Bulletin No. 366 [April, ature electric oven at a temperature of 115° C. for 4 hours. The refractive index of the rendered fat was determined by means of an Abbe refractometer. All readings were taken at a temperature of 40° C. The refractive index is a good measure of firmness, as it increases with an increase in the amount of low-melting or soft fats in the sample. The grade of each carcass was determined by its refractive index, the standards given by the U. S. Department of Agriculture 1 being used. These standards are as follows: Carcass grade Refractive index Hard 1.4597 and below Medium-Hard 1.4598 to 1.4601 Medium-Soft 1.4602 to 1.4605 Soft 1.4606 to 1.4618 Oily 1.4619 and above For example, a carcass whose fat had a refractive index of 1.4597 was graded as Hard, while one with a refractive index of 1.4612 was graded as Soft. Iodin Number. The iodin number also is a good measure of the firmness of fats, as most of the unsaturated fats are quite soft. Hence a low iodin number indicates a firm fat and a high iodin number a soft fat. Again the standards established by the U. S. Department of Agriculture 2 were used for determination of the grade. These are as follows: Carcass grade Iodin number Hard 66.9 and below Medium-Hard 67.0 to 70.4 Medium-Soft : 70.5 to 72.9 Soft 73.0 to 83.4 Oily 83.5 and above In all the experiments except the first, the sample of fat from the fat back was used for the determination of the iodin number. In the first experiment the lard made from fat backs, clear plates, leaf fat, and fat trimmings from each carcass was rendered separately in an open steam kettle and the iodin number of most of the samples was deter- mined by a graduate student in chemistry. Curing and Smoking. The hams and bellies were weighed, cured, smoked, again weighed, chilled, and graded. In the first experi- ment all the hams and some of the bacon were cured in a brine com- posed of 12 pounds of salt, 3 pounds of sugar, 3 ounces of sodium nitrate, and 6 gallons of water to 100 pounds of meat. The hams were cured 3 days and the bacon 2 days to a pound. The remainder of the bacon was cured in a dry-box cure composed of 3 pounds of salt. 1% Results of soft pork investigations II, U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 1492. Feb- ruary, 1928. 2 Ibid. 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 51 pounds of sugar, and 4 ounces of sodium nitrate for 100 pounds of meat. This bacon was cured 3 days per pound. In the second experiment most of the hams were cured with the same brine cure as that used in the first experiment. Since these hams were a little too salty, a few were cured with a weaker brine consist- ing of 9 pounds of salt, li/2 pounds of sugar, 4 ounces of sodium nitrate, and 6 gallons of water to 100 pounds of meat. With this cure the hams were allowed to cure 4 days to the pound. The bacon was all dry-cured as in the first experiment. In the third, fourth, and fifth experiments the hams were cured 4)4 days per pound in a brine consisting of 9 pounds of salt, 3 pounds of sugar, 4 ounces of sodium nitrate, and 6 gallons of water to 100 pounds of meat. This formula produces a well-cured but mildly flavor- ed ham of high grade and excellent keeping qualities. The bacon in the last three experiments was cured by the dry-box cure given above, but was left in the cure only 21 days. Such bacon is mild and of excellent quality but it will not keep for a very long time except under refrigeration. After the meat was taken from the cure, it was soaked, allowed to drain, and then put into the smokehouse and smoked with hickory wood until a dark mahogany color was obtained. Grading of Smoked Cuts. After they were smoked, the hams and bacon were placed in the cooler and later graded for firmness when they reached an internal temperature of 33° to 35° F. In grading the cured meat only three grades, Hard, Medium, and Soft, were used. All cuts were graded by at least two of the investigators and without knowledge as to the hogs from which they came. RESULTS OF CARCASS STUDIES Corn-and-Soybean Hogs Had Lower Dressing Percentages The warm and cold dressing percentages are given in Tables 10 to 14 inclusive. In each experiment the average cold dressing percentage of the corn-and-tankage lot was greater than that of the corn-and-soybean lots. The average dressing percentage of the 65 hogs comprising the corn-and-tankage lots was 79.5. The average dressing percentage of 107 hogs fed corn and 12 to 20 percent soybeans (including 10 hogs of the fourth experiment which received corn and soybeans after they reached a live weight of 115 pounds) was 77.2. While there was con- siderable variation in the results, it seems safe to conclude that hogs fed corn and tankage dress higher than hogs fed corn and soybeans. 52 Bulletin No. 366 [April, When corn-and-tankage hogs were worth $12 per hundred pounds live weight, corn-and-soybean hogs were worth only $11.65 per hundred pounds on the basis of their lower dressing percentages. Table 10. — Dressing Percentages: First Experiment Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 1: Corn, 8% tankage 34bDJ 40bPC 66sPC . . . . 34sD J 49bPC... 4sDJ 99bPC 43bPC 4bDJ 5sDJ 3bDJ 49sPC 6bH lObH 2bH IOsH 3sH 23sH 96sDJ 23bH Average. 225 81.0 224 80.4 224 83.3 224 83.5 223 82.3 224 79.9 224 80.3 223 80.1 228 81.9 218 82.6 227 83.1 227 80.2 220 80.2 231 77.3 231 83.6 223 77.7 224 81.2 224 82.3 224 81.8 230 80.9 225 81.2 78.4 78.3 81.2 82.2 81.0 78.1 78.5 78.5 79.5 80.4 80.0 77.2 79.2 76.4 82.0 76.7 80.0 80.7 80.1 80.0 79.4 Lot 3: Corn, 13% soybean oil meal 76bPC 67bPC 35bDJ 66sPC 69bDJ 65sDJ 35sDJ 66bPC 99sPC 4sDJ 99bPC 29sPC lsDJ 23bH IsH 26bH 53bH IOsH 66bDJ . . . . 3sH Average. 226 82.1 221 81.0 220 79.4 213 82.2 222 79.1 225 76.1 223 77.6 220 77.9 217 78.3 218 77.0 224 77.4 226 77.4 221 82.1 226 75.5 233 75.5 232 78.7 227 78.1 221 78.4 221 82.0 234 76.6 224 78.6 80.4 79.2 77.6 80.0 78. 75. 76. 76 75. 75. 76. 76 80. 74.8 74.7 77.9 77.3 76.4 79.4 74.5 77.2 Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 2: Corn, 18% soybeans 99bDJ 66sPC 99sPC 40bPC 35sDJ 66bPC 65bDJ 4bDJ. ... 2sDJ 49b PC . . . . 35bDJ 13bH ObPC 9sH 2sH 23sH 2bH 4bH 5sDJ lObH Average. 218 79.7 221 80.7 220 77.8 227 79.5 237 76.3 228 82.0 227 80.3 223 79.7 224 78.8 228 79.5 227 80.4 227 79.6 231 78.3 230 75.5 224 79.3 215 79.5 229 79.2 225 78.1 233 78.6 226 76.6 226 79.0 78.7 79.6 76.7 78.5 75.1 80.4 79.5 78.9 77.9 78.6 79.1 78.7 77.1 74.8 78.7 77.9 78.1 76.5 77.7 75.3 77.9 Lot 4: Corn, 20% soybeans, bluegrass 34bDJ 4sDJ 42bPC... 40bPC . . . . 99bDJ OsDJ 69sD J 49bPC 35bDJ 99bPC 42sPC. . . . 49sPC . . . . 23bH 69bDJ. . . . 6bH 13bH 3sH lObH 23sH 26sH Average . 224 82.3 225 79.3 226 80.2 221 76.1 220 79.5 227 77.4 231 81.0 213 79.5 231 79.2 232 76.6 225 76.6 235 78.0 225 80.7 218 79.9 223 80.1 227 78.1 226 78.2 226 78.5 225 77.0 221 77.1 225 78.8 80.5 77.0 78.1 75.0 77.8 75.8 78.4 77.6 77.1 75.8 75.6 77.0 79.3 78.6 78.9 75.9 77.1 77.7 76.0 76.2 77.3 1 In this and succeeding tables the letters after the pig numbers have the following meanings: b = barrow; s = sow; CW = Chester White; DJ = Duroc Jersey; H = Hamp- shire; PC = Poland China; X = crossbred. When hogs were fed corn and soybeans and then finished on corn and tankage (Lots 3 and 4 in the third experiment and Lot 3 in the fourth experiment), and when tankage was fed along with corn and soybeans (Lot 5 in the third experiment), the dressing percentage was not lowered. In the fifth experiment the hogs fed barley and 10 percent tankage 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 53 dressed 78.8 percent, those fed barley and 15 percent soybeans dressed 76.7 percent, and those fed barley and 20 percent soybeans dressed only 74.8 percent. The hogs fed equal parts of corn and barley with 15 percent beans dressed 76.4 percent. Thus the substitution of soy- beans for tankage again reduced the dressing percentage materially. The use of soybean oil meal in place of tankage reduced the dress- ing percentage 2.2 percent in the first experiment and 4.2 percent in the second experiment. Table 11. — Dressing Percentages: Second Experiment Hog. No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 1: Corn, 6% tankage 97-9bPC . . . 97-30bPC . . 97-3sPC... . 97-9sPC... . 90-2 bD J.... 97-30sPC... 97-3bPC . . . 90-4bD J . . . . 23-3sPC... 23-30bPC . . 23-3bPC. . . 23-9bPC. . 90-lbDJ.... 90-4sD J 23-30sPC... Average. 247i 80.8 231i 79.7 2261 77.9 2241 80.0 233 82.7 235 83.8 263 83.7 241 82.2 221 81.8 230 83.1 225 82.5 238 83.1 222 86.1 231 82.3 225 84.1 233 82.3 78.9 77.8 75.5 79.1 80.0 81.9 82.0 80.6 79.5 81.5 80.6 80.9 84.6 80.2 81.8 80.3 Lot 3: Corn, 13% soybean oil meal, 1.3% oil 93sDJ 90sD J OsDJ ObDJ. ... 14bDJ 30bDJ 36sPC. . . . 2bDJ. ... 13sPC 25sPC 9bDJ 3sDJ 25bPC ObPC 66sPC Average . 2141 79.1 221 80.9 226 82.9 240 82.4 231 79.0 219 76.4 226 76.5 218 79.5 222 78.4 220 75.0 220 77.5 232 75.2 233 75.5 223 81.8 225 81.9 225 78.8 77.2 78.4 79.8 80.1 77.1 73.6 73.9 76.5 75.4 72.4 75.0 71.2 73.5 77.7 77.5 76.0 Hog. No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 2: Corn, 13% soybean oil meal 33sDJ 6sDJ OsDJ 2sDJ 2bDJ. ... 14bDJ 9sD J 25bPC . . . . 36sPC 3sDJ 3sPC 36bPC 30sD J 30sPC 55bPC Average. 231 78.3 236 79.1 222 79.1 233 77.9 243 77.4 227 79.6 231 82.8 226 78.0 228 77.1 219 220 76.1 216 78.1 223 77.5 225 77.2 225 78.2 227 78.3 75.9 77.1 77.9 76.6 76.2 77.8 80.0 75.1 74.2 76.1 73.6 76.1 75.0 74.6 75.1 76.1 Lot 4: Corn, 13% soybean oil meal, 2.8% oil OsDJ 2sDJ ObDJ 9bDJ 14bDJ. . .. 3sDJ 14sDJ 55bPC 13sPC. . . . 30sDJ 3sPC 25bPC OsPC 36sPC 9sDJ Average. 220 79.8 235 78.3 233 82.1 227 77.4 230 77.3 228 78.3 243 78.0 229 78.7 228 75.4 228 79.8 215 79.0 223 79.2 212 80.5 218 79.8 220 77.6 226 78.7 76.4 76.7 79.8 75.4 76.' 4 75.3 76.9 74.3 76.6 77.5 76.1 77.7 76.3 74.7 76.4 iFilled weight. The use of soybeans or of soybean oil meal apparently had no effect on shrinkage in the cooler. The higher dressing percentages of the tankage- fed hogs probably was due to their higher condition. This is shown in Tables 13 and 14, which give the condition of the carcasses from the hogs in the fourth and fifth experiments. The depth of fat over the loin (Tables 20 and 21) indicates the same thing. Unfortu- nately, the carcasses from the first three experiments were not graded for condition nor were they measured. 54 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Barley and Tankage Produced Slightly Firmer Carcasses Than Corn and Tankage It has already been explained how the carcass grades were deter- mined (pages 49 to 51). The detailed results are given in Tables 15 to 19. Table 12. — Dressing Percentages: Third Experiment Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 1: Corn, 10% tankage 2bDJ. . .. 29bDJ. . .. 5bDJ . . . . 59bDJ 92sDJ 14bDJ. . .. 64sD J 34sDJ 2sDJ 16sDJ 37bDJ. . . . 65sDJ Average. 218 79.3 225 80.7 225 82.2 224 80.4 222 81.9 224 78.6 222 77.4 231 78.3 232 76.7 223 78.4 230 0) 222 « 225 79.4 77.1 79.1 80.4 78.8 80.9 77.6 76.3 76.6 74.8 77.1 80.9 80.0 78.3 Lot 3: Corn, 20% soybeans, to 175 lbs.; corn, 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 35bX 64sD J 96bPC . . . 53sX 44bDJ 97sPC 35bDJ OsCW.... 16bPC 9sPC Average. 230 78.2 220 « 212 0) 222 0) 228 f 1 ) 220 0) 207 « 2t2 C 1 ) 228 01 231 C 1 ) 221 77.2 76.8 80.6 76.1 79.2 80 .2 78.7 78.8 81.3 78.6 78.7 Lot 5: Corn, 15% soybeans, 5% tankage 9bPC... 16sPC 59bX 53bPC ObCW . . . 32bDJ 3sPC 53sX 46bDJ Average. 213 « 215 (') 219 (!) 212 « 221 79.0 214 79.4 227 77.3 234 76.9 227 79.1 220 78.3 80.3 79.1 76.9 81.8 77.5 77.4 76.0 76.1 76.3 77.9 Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 2: Corn, 20% soybeans 69bDJ. 33bPC . 30bX . . 9sPC . 59sDJ.. 16bPC. 25sPC. . 53bX . . ObCW . 35bDJ . Average . 231 0) 223 (!) 222 C 1 ) 216 0) 240 C 1 ) 227 C 1 ) 211 77.7 225 79.3 227 77.5 229 80.8 225 78.8 75.5 77.1 76.3 78.2 76.5 78.8 76.3 76.4 74.9 79.3 r6.9 Lot 4: Corn, 20% soybeans, to 150 lbs.; corn, 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 5sX.. 2bDJ. 53bX. . 33bPC 34sD J . 96sPC . 46bDJ. 25bPC 3sPC. Average. 218 78.4 218 79.1 221 (l) 235 C 1 ) 224 0) 221 C 1 ) 202 ( l ) 215 82.3 227 80.3 220 80.0 76.8 78.0 78. 77. 80. 79. 79. 7Q 77.8 78.7 'Warm weight not taken. In this connection it should be noted that carcasses grading Hard and Medium-Hard are firm enough to make cuts of the first grade, assuming that they are good in other respects. Carcasses grading Medium-Soft, Soft, and Oily can be used only for the lower grades of cuts, regardless of how good they are in other respects. Corn and tankage nearly always produced carcasses of high quality. Sixty-five hogs thus fed produced 56 Hard, 8 Medium-Hard, and 1 Soft carcass. Barley and tankage produced slightly firmer carcasses 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 55 than corn and tankage, owing undoubtedly to the fact that corn is much higher in oil content than barley. Furthermore, corn oil is very soft. Probably the only reason why corn does not produce soft pork is be- cause the hogs do not get enough of the corn oil. The barley-fed carcasses were not so superior to the corn- fed carcasses as one might think, judging from the discrimination against corn-fed pork in the British markets. An examination of a large number of barley-fed carcasses in a Canadian packing house by one of the authors leads Table 13. — Dressing Percentages: Fourth Experiment Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 1: Corn, 10% tankage 99-3sPC... 66-9sPC . . . 24-99sPC. 66-9bPC . . 41-99sH... 29-90bH . . 45-99bDJ 50-9sH . . . . 29-9bH . . . Average . Lot 2: Corn, 15% soybeans 30-90bPC 30-99bPC . 30-9sPC . . 66-90bPC . 22sH 45-90sD J . 50-9bH . . 45-3bD J . . Condi- tion 215 82.2 79.8 238 80.5 77.7 237 78.9 75.5 225 83.1 80.0 216 83.1 81.7 225 82.2 80.9 217 82.1 80.5 212 82.8 81.1 222 83.4 81.9 223 82.0 79.9 Good Excel. Excel. Excel. Fair Good Good Excel. Excel. 225 76.4 73.3 216 82.6 80.6 217 80.9 79.5 216 81.0 79.6 218 81.4 79.8 218 81.6 79.8 200 79.0 75.7 220 82.0 78.9 216 80.6 78.4 Good Excel. Good Good Good Good Fair Good Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Condi- tion Lov 3. Corn, 15% soybeans, to 160 lbs. 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 30-99sPC . Q-9bDJ.. 65-3bDJ.. 63-3bPC. 41-0sH.. . 9-99bD J 50-99bH.. 29sH Average. 225 81.8 79.1 225 81.5 78.2 225 83.1 81.8 215 83.0 81.4 220 77.7 73.4 215 81.2 80.2 215 82.0 80.5 218 79.8 78.2 220 81.3 79.1 Excel Good Excel. Good Poor Good! Excel. Good Lot 4: Corn, 10% tankaae, to 115 lbs. 15% soybeans, to 225 lbs. 30-33sPC. 31-3bPC. 4-3sPC . . . 67-99sX... 4-99sPC. 23-39bH... 3-39bPC. 45-9sDJ.. . 29-90sH.. . 41-9sH Average . 225 76.2 75.1 220 82.9 81.1 212 82.3 79.5 218 79.6 76.8 220 78.9 76.1 230 78.8 75.9 221 81.4 79.3 215 83.7 81.0 225 80.4 77.6 230 78.5 75.3 222 80.3 77.8 Good Excel. Good Good Good Good Excel. Fair Good Fair to the same conclusion. In other words, the discrimination in England and Canada against corn- fed pork is largely unwarranted so far as firmness is concerned. Ten hogs fed barley and tankage produced 8 Hard and 2 Medium-Hard carcasses. Twelve Percent or More of Soybeans in Ration Lowered Carcass Grades Fifty- four hogs fed 18 to 20 percent soybeans with corn in dry lot produced 2 Medium-Hard, 7 Medium-Soft, 38 Soft, and 7 Oily car- casses. Twenty hogs similarly fed on bluegrass pasture produced 4 Medium-Hard, 8 Medium-Soft, and 8 Soft carcasses. Twenty-three hogs fed corn and 12 to 15 percent soybeans in dry lot resulted in 5 56 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Medium-Hard, 6 Medium-Soft, and 12 Soft carcasses. In other words, it was impossible to use as much as 12 percent soybeans as the nitrog- enous supplement to corn without lowering the grade of the carcasses materially. Table 14. — Dressing Percentages: Fifth Experiment Hog. No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Lot 1: Corn, 10% tankage 6-3sDJ... l-30bCW. 44-9sDJ... 27-30bX. . 32-9sPC... 43-9bPC . . 31-33sPC. 29-9sPC... 47-90sX... Average . Lot 2: Barley, 10% tankage 33-3sX.... l-3bCW.. 32-9bX . . . 29-3sPC... 35-3bPC. . 56-9sX . . . . 43-9sPC... 90-3bPC . . 20-3sH . . . . 36-3sDJ . . . Average . Lot 3: Corn, 20% soybeans 31-30sPC 90-90bX . 13-3sX... 10-9bDJ. 56-90sX.. l-9bCW. 43-90sPC. 29-30sPC. 56-3sDJ.. Average. Condi tion 215 81.4 79.5 217 81.3 80.6 227 82.6 81.1 230 82.8 82.0 227 81.7 80.6 226 81.4 80.1 218 81.2 79.8 233 79.8 78.1 230 78.9 77.6 225 81.2 79.9 Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. 222 79.7 78.4 215 80.5 79.5 210 80.5 79.5 220 78.9 78.2 220 77.9 77.0 220 79.5 78.4 218 79.4 78.4 225 80.7 78.9 213 81.0 79.6 227 81.3 80.2 219 79.9 78.8 Excel. Excel. Excel. Good Good Good Good Excel. Excel. Good 220 82.3 81.4 220 77.9 76.8 230 77.6 75.9 219 81.0 80.4 215 79.1 78.1 225 78.7 77.8 223 76.2 75.1 221 79.9 78.7 230 77.0 75.4 223 78.9 77.7 Excel. Good Good Excel. Good Excel. Good Excel. Good Hog No. Live weight lbs. Dressing percentage Warm Cold Condi- tion Lot 4: Barley, 20% soybeans 32-99bX... 32-3sPC... 6-30sCW . 96-3bPC . . 10-3sDJ... 27-3sX l-9sCW. . 99-30bPC . 43-30sPC. 56-30bX... Average. 233 77.0 75.5 230 75.6 74.6 228 77.2 75.9 225 75.1 74.0 215 76.7 75.3 222 78.1 76.8 222 74.8 73.2 228 73.5 72.1 222 76.6 75.0 200 77.7 76.0 223 76.2 74.8 Good Good Good Good Poor Poor Good Fair Fair Fair Lot 5: Barley, 15% soybeans 31-3bPC . 6-93sX... 92-30bX... 99-3bPC . 6-33sCW . 90-9sX.... l-30sCW. 69-30sPC. 43-99sPC. 10-99sDJ.. Average. 225 77.6 76.9 220 79.3 77.5 220 77.5 76.8 213 80.5 79.6 232 74.1 73.3 222 80.2 78.8 220 77.5 76.1 220 77.7 76.1 221 75.6 73.8 222 79.7 77.9 222 78.0 76.7 Excel. Good Excel. Good Good Excel. Good Good Fair Fair Lot 6: 42.5% barley, 42.5% corn, 15% soybeans 24-3bPC . 90-9bX.... 46-30bX... 43-3sPC... 47-9sX . . . . 35-90bPC 30-3sDJ... 96-3sPC... 31-9sPC... l-3sCW. . Average. 217 78.3 77.2 216 78.5 76.8 227 80.6 78.6 222 78.4 77.5 220 77.3 75.2 230 77.0 75.4 219 78.8 77.4 222 79.7 78.1 223 76.2 74.9 222 74.1 72.5 222 77.9 76.4 Good Good Excel. Good Good Excel. Excel. Excel. Excel. Fair Soybean Oil Meal Produced Carcasses of Satisfactory Quality Soybean oil meal is the by-product left after the removal of the oil from soybeans for industrial purposes. It is made by two methods called the solvent and expeller processes. In the solvent process the oil is extracted by a solvent which is later evaporated. In the expeller process the oil is removed by pressure. The latter method leaves more oil in the oil meal than the former. In the first experiment soybean oil meal made by the solvent, or extraction, method was fed. In the 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 57 8z ■2E. ^ (AifiwviwwinwtfKmrxsuntAwixiwwvxf) wt/)W(f)in(/)W(/)WiS}(mnX(S)Win(/)cmn '■ X X IXw w w O'<^NO^^NO1'f^OOir,X\OOiv:i)0fl c/3coaic/}c/3aic/3ait/ico- X -O en -O .O X) J3 no en en X) X> en X! Oi'OOiOiT'Oi'J'tM^i'X^OO'NWfSTl'uiO » C 0> 't fO C O ■«* CO •** tN '- Kffiw ffi Xwwin mww w WC/3WC/3^!C/3C/3aiC/3aiC/3C/3C/3aiWC/3C/)C/3C/3C/) wwttiyjwwwaiwwwttiwSEc/jwcflc/jc/i HH HH MM MM MM MM NMOWNOKOO-'OHOHHiOOOOO'Hro a»0'-artO>ooO'"HO>»oiOMOO-o c/jt/irz) X X www | ->^>UU'-»->>-)0'-»Urjn •>-> X en X X X ai en X) X X xn co X X X X en X en en CO 't-^Ov >0 ■* CO On ■<* -tf tN vO ^h ^CNCN fe 60 rt a) •ago 5iS t>O«lWtNO-HON«tNONr<)TjiuoroO\OOtNO^'<5'Oro CO ■>* *0 CO •<* O-* ■* ~< — (NOCN ^ X X XX X xxx^xxxxxxxxxx^x^^x^ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx^xx : ,E^E£KKEE£EE£KE£SeS wX wX w XXX xx%^, :xxxx%^x^x^^^ : : HffiffiEHffiSSffiwHHHMffi^HKHHH OiOOOHO\NOinioa>OOOoO**HioON oooooovxt^occcoooocxjooovoooocoooooo uiirjiflifliomiAifliO'fluTOinLOi'liOi'lLOiOiOin ffi ffi ffi K ffic/3 XX X x^x^xx^x^xxxx^^x^^x^ XXXeoXeocnXcncnXcncnXcoXXcoXto NCfUOiOOflCO 0>tN cm cn u-> «■* vO 58 Bulletin No. 366 [April, « 2 a m P aaaaaaatoaaaa K ^io^aaaa^aaS^a^a SS^S^KXwwStfitfiSi a a 73 a co Ktcm a a 73 w aaaaaaa^a^aaa^a : aa^a^aa^a a co a P P Q P 9 Q P O; ft! P oJ % P Cu £< 73 a 7373 <$73^73^S73C07373C073737373 a • S to '^SStoStOtOtOtOtO S^aS ^737 CO 73 73 CO C0 C0 73 73 CO 73737373 -73 737307300CCO ■ a73 7373 CO ^^a73aa^^C0^7373737373 ■ ooaoooaoo-o--o--c 7373^737373 73 7373737373737373 ■ c -> QQ'Q Q P PP Ch ^ QPU Oh £ £ P" toto-G,O.Qtoto.OtototoX>tr. 10 91 OtNOC"tf5'l'ifltOO«uiOOO> II « 2 C3 M CM fcfl •2 Bo 2 °£ P lis aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa —» *-,*-,—* ,-u ,—, 'SS^SKhmKh aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa a aaa^a :a hUShhShhmhhhUhXSi-UhhSShh WO0O0O0O0O0OO00O000O00O0OOOQ000 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa PH^p - CL,PM^PcuxieH( : MPp^. JDO to to X2 © .O.O to © .£> XI .C toO a73aaa73coa 737373 S^^S^^SScocoS^l^coco aaaaaa^a^ScoS^i a73^aa 73737373737373737373 to 73 a aa 73 ScoScoScoSSOOScotjcot) : a acoa 73 aasaa^SS7373a^737373 -H00NtOv««HOO'*^»ON« CO 7373 73 7373CO 73 73 Sco^SSS^Sco^cocoScooo pppPPPcCPaifcPpa.fca,^ to m to X X X to X to to X x — X to ^000"*0>ON«)inatOioOO C-. C\ — <*: <*5 h(s cn O 1931] Effect of Soybeans ox Quality of Pork 59 -z « C c £ m C o C-o £2 rt CS M c-o W csfl •Sg6 g °2 CO 0<~~ CJ cfl c . u =5 ° oZ, 222 o*- T3 z 41 •0 o •ago 2 °2 O^HH c . ~ a "2 S-a c 2 O'T' > 3 T3 2 bt CLI £ C 2 M O l ffi aaaaaaaaaaaa :a :saKiiawa axiaia^iiiaa : aaaaaaaaaaaa «Xi^fC^OM^!NONO- laaaaaaaaaa: i/-> u-> u-, in u": u~, u"> io u"5 1/5 i/~, u-, ir; :aaaaa^aaaaa QQQQqQqqqqQq .Q .O .Q .Q co J2 en co co Oi Si CO Mam » ^^ "i")i m « mo CN i/l C> -« O t»J «C)iO X Cfl X 73 73 73 73 '73 73 1 73 73 X 73 73 73 73 37373^ i 73 73 7373^7373 73 73^ ! XXXXXXCXxa ^rt^^r^O-OWHON a a73 XXXxSxO^^a CNNN-OtO-'tOO 73 73 73 S 73 73 73 X 73 73 S a X! .Q jO co o)J3 coXJJ3JD O^OOOOiOfCO'O OfOfO iy, r-. cn io f) tx xa axxa ISxx^xSxxx SxSt X <5 X X t •*■*** Tf tJ- * rf Tf tJ< £} co -Q co -C co -Q a. £: co io <* 60 Bulletin No. 366 [April, fo M C «u OT3 y « PQ M CT3 hh t,o ■Sfl,«5 2 °£ O' — i CO c . u ii ~ ?££ o^ TJ z 4) •o rt o ■Sfl,<5 2°£ o-~ c . oZ rt B "2 s, o s rt 222: o- > H-l TJ £ x: M Effiffi 73 7373^^^7373^73 '. 0^73 73^73^^73 OlOiON«i XS io <*5 f5 ■* >0 "0 IT <*5 lO f. f*5 O •<* CN *Q £S 73 73 73^73 73 73 73 73 73 7373^7373^737373 : 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73737373 73 73737373 t^O\r0^fC^<*5^-OOv 7) 73 . 7373^7373737373^ : O-*CN0\000G00iOCNO 0<-<0©CO~ -tOO ffi 7373 <5 73 S S 73 73 73 73 73 ^£X%S^X XI tnXJXlXX) en en 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 61 2*o o* "2B © 2 2^ ll 2 2^ 0^~ IS T3 1-1 bo o K^MtflwffiffiK ffiKKKWKKWK lOf^^Tj o* ©* o ^ o o^ o^ ©^ ©* o* iO tf) >0 iO O i/) ifl "1 1/) ifl &h (X, w Oh o5 i2 .O ffi ffi ^ 03 [»OiJjO>0^ uj .Q *• fO ©* ©* O* ©* ©» © o* o* ^ 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 7)7)73 73^73 73 73 73 7) 73 7) "^73 73 73 7)73 7)7)7)7)7)7) 7)7)7)7)7)73 73 73 73 K 73 73 S 73 73 73 S 73 S 073 730073073 \^ \q *o *o o o o *o *o 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 .0.0 0, XI ,"*H> OW 03 © ►- © .O .O ^ Ov Ov 0> 0> " Oi O^ f) 62 Bulletin No. 366 [April, •7-1 C 2pZ II S2 l- 73 73 73 S 73 S 75 73 S 73 73 7373737373 < 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 S 73 73 *7 ^ 73 73 73 73 73 73 53 73 73 73 73 72 73 73 537353535! 53 i fC 00 -^ (^ to i 73 73 73 73 73 2 73 73 ! „«_ — _ c — o — 73 73 73 73 S 73 73 ^ X' 7! 51 73 73 t*5 f5 O* O <"0 t— ■*** 730730C730 O O O O O O nO Tf Tf •* Tf Tj< -* Tf OCCOOOI ooimfo-aooi f*5 . . . 225 GS 1.4622 o 82.4 s S-S S-S o 10-3sDJ 215 P S 1.4636 o 83.8 o S-S S-S o 27-3sX 3 222 P S 1.4629 o 84.4 o S-S S-S o l-9sCW 222 GS 1.4620 o 80.8 s S-S S-S o 99-30bPC 228 F S 1.4621 o 80.7 s S-S S-S o 43-30sPC . . . 222 F S 1.4624 o 81.5 s S-S S-S o 56-30bX 200 F S 1.4636 90.9 o-o S-S o Average. . . 223 1.4625 82.8 Lot 5: Barley, 15% soybeans 31-3bPC 225 E S 1 . 4608 S 73.5 S S-S S-S S 6-93sX 3 220 GS 1.4618 s 80.2 S S-S S-S s 92-30bX3. . . . 220 ES 1.4616 s 70.6 MS S-S S-S s 99-3bPC 213 GS 1.4615 s 77.4 S S-S S-S s 6-33sCW.... 232 GS 1.4618 s 72.8 MS S-S S-S s 90-9sX3 222 ES 1.4610 s 77.2 S S-S M-M s l-30sCW.... 220 GS 1.4612 s 77.9 s S-S S-S s 69-30sPO.... 220 GS 1.4622 o 81.6 s S-S S-S o 43-99sPC 221 F S 1.4621 o 81.9 s S-S S-S o 10-99sDJ . . . 222 F S 1.4612 s 76.0 s S-S S-S s Average. . . 222 1.4615 76.9 *E = excellent; G = good; F = fair; P = poor. 2 See footnote to Table 15 for explanation of grade. 3 Dams fed a ration of corn and approximately 13 percent soybeans. ( Table is concluded on page 64) 64 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Table 19. — Concluded Hog No. Live Condi- Grade Iodin Grade Grades Grades weight tion and Nd from No from of of lbs. grade Nd I No. hams bacon Lot 6: 42.5% corn, 42.5% barley, 15% Final grade soybeans 24-3bPC 3 . 90-9bX». . 46-30bX.. 43-3sPC . . 47-9sX3... 35-90bPC3. 30-3sDJ . . 96-3sPC3.. 31-9sPC. . l-3sCW.. Average . 217 GS 1.4619 O 81.5 S S-S s-s 216 GS 1.4619 O 78.2 S s-s S- 4 227 ES 1.4614 S 78.3 S s-s s-s 222 GS 1.4619 O 82.5 S s-s s-s 220 GS 1.4624 O 77.4 S s-s s-s 230 ES 1.4620 O 81.2 S s-s s-s 219 ES 1.4611 S 71.5 MS s-s s-s 222 ES 1.4620 O s-s s-s 223 ES 1.4620 O 82.5 S s-s s-s 222 F S 1.4623 O 82.3 S s-s s-s 222 1.4619 79.5 3 Dams fed a ration of corn and approximately 13 percent soybeans. 4 Only one bacon side graded. second experiment oil meal made by the expeller process, which is more commonly used, was fed. Thirty-five hogs in these two experiments were fed a ration con- taining approximately 13 percent soybean oil meal. These hogs pro- duced 16 Hard, 17 Medium-Hard, 1 Medium-Soft, and 1 Soft car- cass. In other words, a balanced ration of corn and soybean oil meal produced acceptable carcasses in 33 out of 35 cases. The addition of 1.3 percent soybean oil to this ration (corresponding to 12 percent soybeans) produced 5 Medium-Hard, 6 Medium-Soft, and 4 Soft carcasses. The addition of 2.8 percent soybean oil (corresponding to 19 percent soybeans) produced 1 Medium-Hard, 3 Medium-Soft, and 11 Soft carcasses. From these results it is concluded that (1) soybeans produce soft pork because of their high oil content, and (2) soybean oil meal fed in sufficient amounts to balance corn does not ordinarily produce soft pork. "Hardening" Ration Before or After Soybeans Had Little or No Effect on Firmness Having established that corn balanced with soybeans produces soft pork, it was thought that it might be possible to feed corn and soy- beans during the early part of the feeding period and then produce firm pork by finishing the hogs on corn and tankage, since the latter ration almost always produces firm pork when fed thruout the grow- ing-fattening period. In order to determine how much, if any, hardening took place after the hogs were changed from the corn-and-soybean to the corn-and- tankage ration, a small sample of fat from the fat back was taken from 1931] Effect «f Soybeans «n Quality gf Pqrk 65 each hog at the time the change in ration was made. This sample was taken from the left of the center of the back just opposite the sample taken later from the right half of the carcass. The method of obtain- ing the sample was practically the same as that used by Scott at the Florida Experiment Station. 1 The fat was rendered and the refrac- tive index and iodin number determined. Ten hogs fed corn and 20 percent beans to individual weights of 175 pounds and then fed corn and 10 percent tankage to 225 pounds produced 3 Medium-Hard, 4 Medium-Soft, and 3 Soft carcasses. Comparing the refractive indexes of the fat at the end of the corn-and- soybean period with those at the end of the corn-and-tankage period, it is seen that there was a material increase in the firmness of the fat. The increase was not sufficient, however, to produce carcasses of good quality. The iodin numbers, with one exception, 2 also indicated some hardening upon the corn-and-tankage ration. Nine hogs fed corn and 20 percent beans to 150 pounds and then finished on corn and tankage produced 2 Medium-Hard, 2 Medium- Soft, and 5 Soft carcasses. The refractive indexes (except in case of Hog 53bX) again showed that there was considerable hardening on the corn-and-tankage ration but not enough to produce pork which meets the demands of the market. From these results it was decided that it is impossible to feed 20 percent soybeans in the ration for a reasonable length of time and then produce firm pork by finishing the hogs on corn and tankage. Thinking that better results might be obtained by reducing the amount of soybeans during the earlier part of the feeding period, 8 hogs were fed corn and 15 percent soybeans to 160 pounds and then finished on corn and tankage. Again there was some hardening on the corn-and-tankage ration but not enough to recommend the practice, for 3 Medium-Soft and 5 Soft carcasses were the result. Hoping that better results might be obtained by feeding a harden- ing feed during the early part of the feeding period and then finishing on corn and soybeans, 10 pigs were fed corn and tankage from wean- ing time to 115 pounds and then corn and 15 percent beans to 225 pounds. One carcass of this lot was Medium-Hard, 2 were Medium- Soft, and 7 were Soft. Nine hogs were fed corn, 15 percent soybeans, and 5 percent tank- age to 225 pounds in the hope that the hard fat of the tankage would 'Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 160. 1921. 2 The fat samples were too small to permit a repetition of the determination of any of the iodin numbers. 66 Bulletin No. 366 [April, counteract the soft oil of the soybeans. This combination gave 1 Med- ium-Soft and 8 Soft carcasses. Oil in Soybeans More Softening Than Oil in Corn Corn oil is practically as soft as soybean oil. According to Leach, 1 corn oil solidifies at 10 to 14 degrees Fahrenheit, while soybean oil solidifies at 5 to 18 degrees. Their refractive indexes and iodin num- bers are about the same. We might expect the corn oil, therefore, to have as softening an effect on the carcass as the soybean oil. Corn contains an average of 5 percent oil, and soybeans contain an average of 18 percent oil. Thus a hog getting a ration of 4 pounds of corn and 1 pound of beans receives .38 pound of oil in his ration, which produces soft pork. A hog getting a ration of 4.3 pounds of corn and .7 pound of soybean oil meal receives .24 pound of oil per day and produces firm pork. Therefore it seems logical to assume that firm pork might be obtained by substituting barley for the corn, thus reducing the total oil content of the ration. Consequently in the fifth experiment 10 hogs were fed barley and 20 percent beans. This ration contained the same amount of oil as the ration of corn and 13 percent soybean oil meal which, as previously stated, produced acceptable pork. This ration produced 10 Oily car- casses. Another lot of 10 hogs fed barley and 15 percent beans pro- duced 8 Soft and 2 Oily carcasses. These results suggest that corn oil is not so softening as soybean oil, in spite of the similarity in their physical and chemical constants. A ration of corn and barley in equal parts and 15 percent beans gave 7 Soft and 3 Oily carcasses. Apparently the solution to the soft- pork problem is not to be obtained by feeding barley instead of corn with soybeans. Soybeans Fed to Dams Had No Effect on Pork of Offspring The results of the fifth experiment throw some light on the question as to whether or not the feeding of soybeans to brood sows has a soft- ening effect upon the carcasses of their pigs. Quite a number of the pigs used in this experiment were from dams which had received a ration of corn and approximately 13 percent soybeans. The dams of the other pigs received various brood-sow rations, all of them contain- ing tankage and none of them soybeans. The pigs whose dams received the sovbean ration are indicated in Table 19 bv footnote 3. ^each, A. E. Food inspection and analysis. 528. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. 1920. 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 67 The results pertaining to this phase of the experiment are summar- ized as follows: Ca rcasses of pigs from Carcasses of pigs from dams receiving dams not receiving soybeans soybeans Ration H MH MS SO H MH MS S O Corn, 10 percent tankage 1110 15 Barley, 10 percent tankage 1 1 7 1 Corn, 20 percent soybeans 1 2 6 Barley, 20 percent soybeans 2 8 Barley, 15 percent soybeans 00031 00051 Corn, barley, 15 percent soybeans. .00014 00023 These results, while not conclusive, indicate that soybeans may be fed in the ration of the brood sow without deleterious effects on the pork of her progeny. In this connection it may be noted that soybeans have been fed experimentally to brood sows with entire success. 1 Type of Hog Had No Effect on Firmness of Pork The carcasses of the hogs in the fourth and fifth experiments were measured 2 to find whether the type of hog, as determined by its carcass measurements, had any effect on the firmness of pork. It is claimed by some that the shorter, earlier-maturing hog utilizes soybeans with less detriment to his meat than his longer, later-maturing cousin. An inspection of the detailed data (Tables 20 and 21) reveals that there were many long hogs and short hogs of equal firmness or softness in the same lot. There also were numerous instances of long hogs being firmer than short hogs on the same ration. In general the results in- dicate that the type of hog had no effect on the firmness of pork. Soybeans Made Soft Carcasses Regardless of Finish In the fourth and fifth experiments the carcasses were graded for condition as well as for firmness. These results also are given in Tables 20 and 21. It is generally conceded that unfinished hogs usually kill soft re- gardless of their ration. In the Illinois experiments on swine type 3 it was found that the degree of finish had considerable influence upon the firmness of the carcass. All these hogs received hardening rations. Most of the hogs receiving corn and soybeans were not so well finished as those getting corn and tankage. The same was true of the hogs on barley and soybeans compared with those on barley and tankage. The carcass of only one hog receiving tankage graded lower '111. Agr. Exp. Sta. 42d Ann. Rpt., 88-90, 1929. 2 A detailed description of the measurements taken is given in 111. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 322, p. 401, 1929. 3 Ibid. 68 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Table 20. — Grade, Condition, and Measurements of Carcasses: Fourth Experiment (Measurements are expressed in inches) Hog No. Condi- tion and grade Depth of fat Snout to toe Snout to first thoracic vertebra H-bone to first thoracic vertebra H-bone to rear toe Chest Circ. of fore- leg Length of fore- leg Lot 1: Corn, 10% tankage 99-3sPC . . 66-9sPC . . 24-99sPC . 66-9bPC. 41-99sH. . 29-90bH. . 45-99bDJ . 50-9sH . . . 29-9bH. . . Average G H 1.4 72.4 18.5 30.3 24.3 13.6 5.9 EMH 1.8 74.0 18.0 31.5 25.3 13.6 5.9 E H 1.8 72.3 17.0 32.0 24.0 14.1 5.5 E H 2.0 69.6 17.5 30.3 23.1 13.8 6.0 F MH 1.0 74.0 18.8 31.3 24.5 13.8 5.6 GH 1.5 73.8 19.3 31.5 24.3 13.8 5.6 G H 1.5 72.0 18.0 30.4 24.1 14.0 5.8 E H 1.9 71.5 18.3 30.0 24.3 14.0 5.5 E H 1.8 71.8 18.4 30.8 23.8 13.9 5.5 1.6 72.4 18.2 30.9 24.2 13.8 5.7 14.8 15.0 14.9 13.9 14.9 15.0 15.0 14.4 14.8 14.7 Lot 2: Corn, 15% soybeans 30-90bPC... GS 1.5 71.0 18.0 29.3 24.0 13.9 5.8 14.8 30-99bPC ES 2.1 70.3 18.0 28.8 24.0 14.3 6.0 14.5 30-9sPC GS 1.5 71.3 18.3 29.0 24.5 13.6 5.8 15.3 66-90bPC... GS 1.5 72.5 18.5 30.0 24.5 13.4 6.0 15.1 22sH GS 1.4 73.5 18.5 30.8 24.5 14.0 5.3 14.8 45-90sDJ GS 1.3 74.5 18.3 31.0 25.5 13.5 5.8 15.8 50-9bH F S 1.1 73.5 18.5 31.5 24.8 12.9 5.6 15.0 45-3bDJ GS 1.5 71.5 18.3 29.8 24.3 14.0 5.7 15.0 Average. . . 1.5 72.3 18.3 30.0 24.5 13.7 5.7 15.0 Lot 3: Corn, 15% soybeans, to 165 lbs.; corn. 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 30-99sPC .... E MS 2.3 72.0 18.5 29.8 24.1 14.3 6.0 14.1 9-9bDJ GS 1.4 72.1 17.8 31.0 24.0 14.1 5.8 14.5 65-3bDJ E MS 1.5 74.9 19.0 31.5 24.5 14.9 5.8 15.4 63-3bPC GS 1.4 74.9 18.3 31.8 24.5 13.9 5.8 14.8 41-0sH P S .8 73.8 19.0 32.0 23.8 12.9 5.3 15.1 9-99bDJ .... GMS 1.5 71.5 18.5 30.0 23.3 12.9 5.5 14.4 50-99bH E S 1.5 74.5 18.8 30.5 25.8 13.5 5.3 15.1 29sH GS 1.5 74.5 19.0 30.8 24.5 14.1 5.5 14.5 Average. . . 1.5 73.5 18.6 30.9 24.3 13.8 5.6 14.7 Lot 4: Corn, 10% tankage, to 115 lbs.; corn, 15% soybeans, to 225 lbs. 30-33sPC . 31-3bPC. 4-3sPC . . 67-99sX . . 4-99sPC . 23-39bH. . 3-39bPC. 45-9sDJ . . 29-90sH . . 41-9sH. . . Average GS 1.4 71.5 18.3 30.5 23.9 13.8 5.6 E MS 2.0 69.3 16.6 29.1 23.8 13.8 6.3 GS 1.8 71.3 18.3 30.3 23.4 13.4 5.8 GS 1.5 71.8 18.5 30.0 24.0 13.3 5.6 GS 1.6 71.5 17.8 30.0 23.8 13.6 5.8 GMS 1.5 72.3 18.8 30.6 23.5 13.5 5.6 E MH 2.3 68.8 18.5 28.5 21.9 13.9 5.6 F S 1.4 72.0 17.8 31.3 23.8 13.9 5.9 GS 1.4 73.8 19.3 32.0 24.3 13.6 5.8 F S 1.0 72.0 18.0 31.0 23.5 13.0 5.9 1.6 71.4 18.2 30.3 23.6 13.6 5.8 14.6 14.5 14.3 13.8 14.4 14.6 14.8 15.9 15.3 14.8 14.7 than good, so far as finish was concerned, and that carcass was Med- ium-Hard. Only one tankage hog graded lower than Medium-Hard in firmness, and that carcass was excellent in condition. The soybean hogs graded all the way from poor to excellent in condition. There was no relationship among the soybean hogs between con- dition and firmness, so far as these results are concerned. The hogs fed soybeans thruout the entire feeding period to a weight of 225 pounds produced Soft or Oily carcasses regardless of their condition. In other words, tankage, when used as a supplement to corn or barley, 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 69 Table 21. — Grade, Condition, and Measurements of Carcasses: Fifth Experiment (Measurements are expressed in inches) Hog No. Snout H-bone Circ. Depth Snout to first to first Chest grade of fat to toe thoracic thoracic leg vertebra vertebra Length of fore- leg Lot 1 : Corn, 10% tankage 6-3sDJ . . l-30bCW 44-9sDJ . . 27-30bX.. 32-9sPC . . 43-9bPC. 31-33sPC. 29-9sPC . . 47-90sX . . Average 33-3sX . . . l-3bCW . 32-9bX... 29-3sPC . . 35-3bPC. 56-9sX . . . 43-9sPC . . 90-3bPC. 20-3sH . . . 36-3sDJ . . Average E H 1.8 68.5 17.8 29.5 22.0 14.5 5.9 E H 2.3 70.0 16.5 31.0 23.0 13.4 5.5 E MH 1.8 71.8 17.5 31.3 23.3 14.5 5.8 EMH 1.8 73.8 18.8 30.5 24.5 14.4 5.9 E MH 1.8 71.8 17.8 31.0 23.5 14.4 5.8 E MH 2.1 70.9 17.8 29.9 23.8 14.4 6.0 E MH 1.9 71.3 17.8 30.3 23.8 14.3 6.0 E MH 1.9 71.3 17.8 29.8 23.0 14.5 5.6 E MS 1.8 73.5 18.8 31.0 24.5 14.3 5.5 1.9 71.4 17.8 30.5 23 5 14.3 5.8 13.3 13.8 14.1 14.8 14.0 14.3 14.8 14.3 15.3 14.3 Lot 2: Barley, 10% tankage EH 1.9 73.5 18.5 32.5 24.0 14.5 5.6 E H 2.0 70.5 16.3 31.5 23.0 13.1 5.8 E H 2.0 70.3 17.0 30.3 22.8 13.3 5.8 GMH 1.6 72.0 18.0 31.3 23.5 13.0 5.6 GMH 1.5 71.0 17.5 31.0 23.8 13.9 6.1 GH 1.3 75.0 19.3 32.3 24.0 13.6 5.9 GH 1.5 72.0 18.3 30.5 23.8 14.5 5.9 E H 1.6 73.5 18.5 30.8 24.5 14.9 5.8 E H 1.5 71.0 18.0 29.5 24.4 14.3 5.3 GH 1.3 76.8 19.3 32.8 25.0 14.0 6.1 1.6 72.6 18.1 31.2 23.9 13.9 5.8 14.5 13.5 14.5 14.0 13.9 15.0 14.5 14.6 14.5 15.5 14.5 Lot 3: Corn, 20% soybeans 31-30sPC. 90-90bX . . 13-3sX. . . 10-9bDJ. . 56-90sX . . l-9bCW. 43-90sPC . 29-30sPC . 56-3sDJ . . Average ES GO GO EO GO ES GO EO GO 2.0 1.1 1.3 70.3 75.8 76.5 70.5 73.5 73.5 73.0 72.5 73.5 73.2 18.3 19.0 18.8 17.8 18.5 18.8 18.0 17.8 18.3 18.3 29.3 30.8 32.0 29.5 31.0 30.8 23.8 25.5 26.0 24.0 24.0 24.5 24.3 23.8 25.0 24.5 13.9 14.1 13.4 13.4 13.8 14.0 14.4 13.5 13.8 13.8 5.9 6.0 5.8 6.0 5.6 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 5.8 13.8 15.6 15.5 14.8 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Lot 4: Barley, 20% soybeans 32-99bX. . 32-3sPC . . 6-30sCW. 96-3bPC. 10-3sDJ . . 27-3sX. . . l-9sCW.. 99-30bPC . 43-30sPC . 56-30bX. . Average . GO 1.5 74.8 19.0 31.5 25.0 13.9 6.0 GO 1.1 73.3 18.5 31.8 24.0 13.6 5.9 GO 1.8 70.8 18.0 29.5 24.3 13.0 5.8 GO 1.3 73.8 19.0 30.8 24.8 13.3 6.0 P O .5 75.3 18.5 32.8 25.3 13.0 6.0 P O 1.0 77.5 19.4 33.4 25.8 13.5 6.0 GO 1.5 73.0 19.0 31.0 23.8 13.8 6.0 F O 1.0 73.3 18.8 29.8 25.0 13.4 6.1 F O 1.4 73.0 19.5 29.3 25.0 13.8 5.9 F O 1.3 73.8 18.3 29.8 25.5 13.3 5.8 1.2 73.8 18.8 30.9 24.8 13.4 5.9 15.5 14.5 14.9 15.3 15.6 15.3 14.8 16.0 15.4 15.3 15.2 Lot 5: Barley, 15% soybeans 31-3bPC... ES 1.8 70.8 18.0 29.9 23.5 14.4 6.1 13.8 6-93sX GO 1.8 74.0 19.0 32.3 24.0 13.5 6.0 14.5 92-30bX ES 1.5 75.0 18.5 31.5 25.0 13.5 6.0 15.3 99-3bPC .... GS 1.8 70.3 17.8 29.8 24.0 13.6 6.1 14.5 6-33sCW... GS 1.6 72.5 17.5 30.8 24.4 13.9 5.9 14.8 90-9sX ES 1.6 73.5 18.5 31.3 24.5 13.3 5.8 15.1 l-30sCW... GS 1.5 71.3 18.0 30.5 23.8 13.3 5.9 14.3 69-30sPC . . . GO 1.8 72.3 18.5 30.5 24.3 13.3 5.9 15.5 43-99sPC . . . F O 1.5 73.0 18.0 31.5 23.8 14.0 6.1 15.5 10-99sDJ . . . F S 1.3 74.5 18.5 31.5 25.0 13.8 6.0 15.5 Average. . 1.6 72.7 18.2 30.9 24.2 13.6 6.0 14.9 (Table is concluded on page 70) 70 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Table 21. — Concluded Hog No. Condi- tion and grade Depth of fat Snout to toe Snout to first thoracic vertebra H-bone to first thoracic vertebra H-bone to rear toe Chest Circ. of fore- leg Length of fore- leg Lot 6: 42.5% barley, 42.5% corn. 15% soybeans 24-3bPC. 90-9bX . . . 46-30bX.. 43-3sPC . . 47-9sX. . . 35-90bPC. 30-3sDJ . . 96-3sPC. . 31-9sPC. . l-3sCW. Average GO 1.4 73.5 17.9 31.0 24.8 14.1 5.9 GO 1.1 74.3 18.3 31.1 24.9 14.1 5.8 E S 1.5 73.0 17.8 31.5 24.3 13.8 5.9 GO 1.5 73.5 18.5 30.8 24.8 14.0 6.0 GO 1.6 74.0 18.0 32.0 24.5 13.8 5.9 EO 1.4 71.3 19.0 30.8 25.0 13.5 6.0 ES 1.8 72.0 18.5 31.0 23.5 14.3 6.0 ES 1.8 71.8 18.3 30.3 23.5 13.8 6.0 EO 1.9 73.0 19.0 30.5 24.0 13.3 6.0 F O 1.8 71.8 18.0 30.8 23.8 13.3 6.0 1.6 72.8 18.4 31.0 24.3 13.8 5.9 14.3 14.6 15.0 14.8 15.4 15.8 14.8 15.0 15.3 15.0 15.0 produces firm pork in finished hogs but soft pork in unfinished hogs ; while soybeans, similarly used, produce soft pork even when the hogs are highly finished. Firmness Not Affected by Rate of Gain or Initial Weight Investigations reported by the U. S. Department of Agriculture and cooperating experiment stations 1 found that rapidly gaining hogs on corn and soybeans were firmer than slow-gaining hogs. Consequently coefficients of correlation between firmness and rate of gain were de- termined for the hogs fed various combinations of soybeans. Coeffi- cients of correlation between initial weight and firmness also were calculated, since other investigators 2 have reported a distinct relation between degree of softness and initial weight. The entire group of hogs was not studied as one population because the variation in amounts of soybeans fed materially affected the grades of the carcasses. To simplify the terms used to grade the firmness of the carcasses, they were given the following numerical values: Hard, 1; Medium- Hard, 2; Medium-Soft, 3; Soft, 4; and Oily, 5. All coefficients of correlation were determined by the method of least squares and in- dividual deviations. If in any group of hogs each individual graded in hardness directly proportional to its rapidity of gain, that is, if the faster-gaining hogs graded firmer, the perfect coefficient of correlation would be —1. If, on the other hand, each individual graded inversely proportional to its rate of gain, that is, if the faster-gaining hogs graded softer, the per- fect correlation would be -f-1. If the hogs with the smaller initial weight graded harder than the heavier pigs, the coefficient of corre- 1 U. S. Dept. Agr. Annual Statement of Results from Cooperative Soft Pork Investigations (1929), and Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 452, 1930. 2 U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 1407, 1926. 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 71 Table 22. — Coefficients of Correlation Between Firmness and Rate of Gain, and Between Firmness and Initial Weight Ration Num- ber of hogs Average firmness 1 Average daily gain Coefficient of correla- tion, firm- ness to daily gain Average initial weight Coefficient of correla- tion, firm- ness to ini- tial weight Corn plus — 20% soybeans 54 3.92 ± .06 lbs. 1.20 + .02 -.12 + .09 lbs. 63.2 + 1.04 +.23 + .09 20% soybeans, on blue- grass pasture 20 3.20 + .11 1.46 ± .03 -.55 ± .11 63.3 ± 2.02 -.31 ± .14 20% soybeans to 175 lbs. \ 10% tankage to 225 lbs./ 10 3.00 ± .05 1.30 ± .01 +.18 ± .21 52.6 ± 1.62 +.65 ± .12 20% soybeans to 150 lbs. \ 10% tankage to 225 lbs./ 9 3.30 ± .18 1.20 ± .04 -.30 ± .20 53.9 ± 1.28 +.10 ± .22 15% soybeans! 9 3.80 + 09 1.09 + .20 +.04 + .22 54.3 + 2.12 -.12 + .22 5% tankage J 15% soybeans to 165 lbs. 1 10% tankage to 225 lbs./ 8 3.60 ± .12 1.11 + .04 -.48 + .18 73.2 ± 2.04 -.28 ± .22 10% tankage to 115 lbs.) 15% soybeans to 225 lbs./ 10 3.70 ± .10 1.24 ± .03 -.09 ± .21 96.9 ±1.74 -.60 ± .14 13% soybean oil meal. . . . 35 1.63 ± .08 1.29 ± .03 +.10 ± .11 64.5 ± 1.49 -.06 ± .11 12 to 15% soybeans 23 3.30 ± .11 1.22 ± .04 -.79 ± .05 69.5 ± 1.97 -.13 ± .14 12% soybeans 15 2.93 + .13 1.36 + .05 -.67 + .09 66.3 + 2.66 -.33 + .16 8 4.00 ± .96 ± .03 + 75.4 + 2.00 + n = Hard, 2 = Medium-Hard, 3 = Medium-Soft, 4 = Soft, 5 = Oily. lation would be positive, while if the heavier pigs graded firmer, the coefficient of correlation would be negative. Table 22 gives the coeffi- cients of correlation obtained for the various rations fed. In all but one group the individual data were quite homogeneous. In only one group, the group receiving 12 to 15 percent soybeans, did a significant coefficient of correlation exist between the degree of firm- ness and the rate of gain. In this group the 8 hogs of the lot receiving 15 percent soybeans made much poorer daily gains (.96 pound) than did the 15 hogs that received 12 percent soybeans (1.36 pounds). In the 15-percent-soybean lot all the hogs graded soft, which, with their slow gains, partly accounts for the large negative coefficient (—.79 ±.05) obtained for the 12- to 15-percent-soybean group. The effect of eliminating the variation due to the 8 hogs of the 15-percent-soybean lot is shown in the next two lines of the table. Since there was no difference in the grades of the 15-percent-soybean hogs, the coeffi- cients were zero, while the 15 hogs on corn and 12 percent soybeans gave a coefficient of correlation of —.67 ±.09. Since no other group showed a significant relationship, it is almost conclusive that this one was due to chance rather than to the effect of the rate of gain. 12 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Two apparently significant correlations were obtained between the degree of firmness and the initial weight of the hogs, but since one of these was positive and the other was negative, they probably were due to chance. An explanation of the difference between the results of these and the experiments previously mentioned may be found in the slaughter weights of the hogs. As stated, the hogs in these experiments were removed and slaughtered when they reached individual weights of approximately 225 pounds. In many, if not most, of the soft-pork experiments by other investigators the hogs were slaughtered when the average weight of the lot reached a definite point. Obviously such a lot would contain some hogs much heavier and some much lighter than the average. In other words, some of the hogs would be overfinished and some would be underfinished. As already stated, underfinished hogs kill softer than finished hogs on the same ration. Variation of individual weights from the average of a lot is due to a difference in rate of gain, or in initial weight, or in both. Of course the rapidly gaining hog will be heavier than his slow-gaining brother of the same initial weight if both are slaughtered at the same time. Also he will be harder, provided the lighter hog is still unfinished at time of slaughter. Thus there would be an apparent correlation between rate of gain and firmness. In the case of two pigs, one with a light and the other with a heavy initial weight, if both gained at the same rate, the light pig would be lighter and the heavy pig would be heavier than the average weight at slaughter. As a matter of fact, the pig with the higher initial weight probably would make more rapid gains because he is larger. The lighter hog probably would be softer. That is, there would be an apparent correlation between initial weight and firmness when, as a matter of fact, the causal factor is not rate of gain or initial weight but degree of finish. SUMMARY 1. Soft Pork Has Increased in Corn Belt. Soft pork has increased in the northern markets coincident with the increase in soybean pro- duction in the corn belt. Realizing the advantage of the use of a home- grown protein supplement in the hog ration, the authors have conduct- ed five experiments in an attempt to find methods of feeding soybeans and their by-product — soybean oil meal — to fattening pigs without deleteriously affecting the quality of the pork. 2. Combinations of Soybeans and Other Feeds Studied. The effects of various combinations of corn and soybeans ; corn and soybean oil 1931} Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 73 meal ; corn, soybeans, and tankage ; corn, barley, and soybeans ; and barley and soybeans were studied. Several tests were made on the effects of feeding corn and soybeans to different weights and then finishing the hogs on a hardening ration (corn and tankage). In one test the pigs were fed a hardening ration during the early part of the feeding period and then finished on corn and soybeans. 3. Soybeans Were Unpalatable. Soybeans proved to be unpalatable to pigs, as indicated by the reluctance with which pigs ate them at first ; excessive rooting of the ground even when a mineral mixture was available ; and an apparent loss of appetite for the ration of corn and soybeans during the latter part of a long feeding period. 4. Soybeans Reduced Rate of Gain. Pigs fed rations of corn and soybeans did not, on the average, gain so rapidly nor so economically as pigs fed corn and tankage. Soybean oil meal was superior to soybeans in this respect. 5. Heavier Pigs Made Better Use of Soybeans. Pigs above a weight of 100 pounds when first fed soybeans made better use of them than lighter pigs did. 6. Soybean Oil Meal Was Palatable and Produced Good Gains. Soybean oil meal was apparently more palatable than soybeans. From the standpoint of rate and economy of gain, rations supplemented with soybean oil meal were superior to those in which soybeans were used as the supplement. 7. Soybean Oil Meal Compared With Tankage. In the one test in which soybean oil meal and tankage were compared directly as sup- plements to corn, the gains on the soybean oil meal ration were only 73 percent as rapid as the gains on tankage and the feed required to produce a unit of gain was 21 percent higher. 8. Soybeans Reduced Dressing Percentages. In all five experiments the corn-and-tankage hogs dressed higher than the soybean hogs. The average dressing percentage of the 65 hogs fed corn and tankage was 79.5, and that of the 107 hogs fed corn and soybeans was 77.2. The difference in favor of the tankage hogs was probably due to higher condition. When hogs were fed corn and soybeans and then finished on corn and tankage, and when tankage was fed along with corn and soybeans, they dressed as high as hogs fed corn and tankage. The use of barley and soybeans reduced the dressing percentage 2 to 4 percent compared with barley and tankage. Soybean oil meal, when substituted for tankage, reduced the dressing percentage a sim- ilar amount. 74 Bulletin No. 366 [April, 9. Soybeans Lowered Carcass Grades. The number of carcasses in the different grades were as follows: Number Me- Me- of dium- dium- Ration hogs Hard Hard Soft Soft Oily Corn and tankage 65 56 8 1 - Barley and tankage 10 8 2 Corn and soybeans 18 to 20 percent soybeans 54 2 7 38 7 20 percent soybeans 1 20 4 8 8 12 to 15 percent soybeans 23 5 6 12 13 percent soybean oil meal 35 16 17 1 1 Corn, soybeans, and tankage 15 percent soybeans, 5 percent tankage. . 9 18 20 percent soybeans to 175 pounds; 10 percent tankage to 225 pounds 10 3 4 3 20 percent soybeans to 150 pounds; 10 percent tankage to 225 pounds 9 2 2 5 15 percent soybeans to 160 pounds; 10 percent tankage to 225 pounds 8 3 5 Tankage to 115 pounds; 15 percent soy- beans to 225 pounds 10 1 2 7 Barlev and soybeans 20 percent soybeans 10 10 15 percent soybeans 10 8 2 Corn, barley, and soybeans 15 percent soybeans 10 7 3 ('On bluegrass pasture.) 10. Quality of Pork Unaffected by Feeding Soybeans to Sows. Soybeans were fed to brood sows to the extent of 13 percent of the ration. There was no indication that the pigs were any softer than those from sows fed a hardening ration. 11. Type Did Not Affect Firmness. Type, as determined by car- cass measurements, had no effect on the firmness of the pork. 12. Soybeans Produced Soft Carcasses Even When Finished. While an underfinished hog on a hardening ration usually produces a soft carcass, there was no relationship between softness and condition in the carcasses of the soybean hogs ; that is, hogs fed soybeans pro- duced soft carcasses regardless of their condition. 13. Rate of Gain and Initial Weight Did Not Affect Firmness. Contrary to the results reported by other investigators, the rate of gain and the initial weight had no effect on the firmness of the pork pro- duced by hogs fed soybeans. CONCLUSIONS 1. Hogs fed thruout the feeding period to a live weight of 225 pounds on corn or barley with sufficient soybeans to balance the ration produce soft pork. 1931] Effect of Soybeans ox Quality of Pork 75 2. Hogs fed a balanced ration of corn and soybeans to 150 pounds live weight or more and finished on corn and tankage produce soft pork. 3. Hogs fed corn and tankage to a weight of 115 pounds and then finished on corn and soybeans produce soft pork. 4. The high content of low-melting oil in the soybeans is the cause of soft carcasses. 5. Hogs fed corn and soybeans have a lower dressing percentage than hogs fed corn and tankage. 6. A ration of corn and soybean oil meal produces pork of accept- able quality. 7. Soybeans may be fed advantageously to brood sows. 8. To date no method has been discovered for using soybeans in the ration of market hogs without lowering the quality of the pork. ' 9. From the standpoint of rate and economy of gains soybeans do not make as satisfactory a supplement to corn or barley as does tankage. 10. Soybean oil meal is a promising protein supplement for grow- ing-fattening swine. APPENDIX Table 23. — Comparison of Chemical Composition of Feeds Used With Average Composition (Henry-Morrison) 1 (Results expressed in percentage) Source of Dry sub- Crude N-free Crude Fat Ash analysis stance protein extract fiber Corn Henry-Morrison 1st experiment 85.2 87.9 9.6 8.9 67.6 72.2 1.9 2.3 4.8 3.1 1.4 1.4 2nd experiment. . . . 77.4 7.6 62.8 2.6 3.3 1.1 4th experiment 85.6 8.2 70.2 2.6 3.5 1.2 5th experiment 80.3 7.3 68.0 2.1 1.7 1.0 5th experiment 86.9 8.4 70.7 3.1 3.4 1.3 Henry-Morrison. . . . 1st experiment 90.1 91.1 36.5 35.9 26.5 26.8 4.3 5.5 17.5 18.4 5.3 4.5 4th experiment 89.7 37.8 20.4 10.7 16.5 4.3 5th experiment 86.7 35.5 18.5 9.6 18.6 4.5 5th experiment 89.8 35.7 20.8 11.4 17.8 4.1 Soybean oil meal. . . Henry-Morrison. . . . 90.5 43.2 29.5 5.3 6.6 4.9 1st experiment 89.6 39.9 33.6 6.3 3.0 6.7 2nd experiment. . . . 89.8 41.6 29.9 5.2 4.9 8.2 Tankage 92. 1 60.4 3.7 5.3 7.4 15.3 1st experiment 92.7 63.1 -4.3 1.0 8.5 24.4 2nd experiment. . . . 90.2 53.3 2.9 .7 10.6 22.6 4th experiment 92.4 56.8 .5 .4 12.4 22.3 5th experiment 91.4 61.4 .1 1.3 9.2 19.5 5th experiment 93.0 55.5 3.7 1.2 10.6 22.0 Alfalfa meal Henry-Morrison. . . . 91.2 14.3 35.8 30.1 2.0 9.0 1st experiment 91.5 15.9 38.8 27.4 1.9 7.6 2nd experiment. . . . 88.4 16.4 36.1 21.6 1.8 12.4 4th experiment 85.5 13.2 36.4 26.5 2.6 6.8 5th experiment 86.6 16.6 34.6 25.0 1.7 8.6 5th experiment 87.0 17.7 34.8 24.6 1.7 8.1 Barley Henry-Morrison. . . . 90.7 11.5 69.8 4.6 2.1 2.7 5th experiment 86.8 11.7 65.1 5.8 1.7 2.4 J A11 analyses except those taken from "Feeds and Feeding" by Henry and Morrison were made by the division of Animal Nutrition of the Animal Husbandry Department. 7o Bulletin No. 366 [April, o rt IflftlOOHOOHrt' (S (N (S fO Tf t^ f) fO ro i CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN< CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN ^ Q - X co .O OCOiTf«*VD -<*rr)i-i CN -n ^ IClOOCWtO^^tNCNfJCStNrSN' CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNcNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN Xl co JO .O .O co CO.Q.O.Q co co ,Q X> -O X co X co C> rf ** O O ^ fO O tJ< rf CN *C i-h i-h CN cu." St) cd » T3 HO«5O»00f0rtiflrHNiO'O , 000ONCSt0NCN c^CNfOfOcNCN^rOfccNr-ococNrorOCNfOror^rricr) CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN Q £& £>J3 en co-Q coXJ2Xl co.Q cOrQXX co co co co .Q ^OO-*c>Tt»W^i0c<)O\0OMO«c0>0f0 f} ■* *© f> •* CK^ rt< r-i »-( CNCNCN C>cNlOV0\000OCN\0CNt^r^t-»O fOCNCNcNCNfOrOCNCNCNCNfOCNCNr) ( ~ )( -> l ^?0^ > '-> h -> c - ) U H ^- ) , --\J "iJfcJ ■£? "<3 %%QfcQQQ%£Q%*QKKEKKQa J3,QJ3coXlcocoXJcoco^JOTcoXcoX3^JcoJ2ai OMoooioifl«a>^o\0"H«Hvo^o>0'0 NOMOOO^OO On CN CN CN iO »H O 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 77 H Z H 5 w p< x w p o u W CO en < O P H W o s < «.§ M cfl rtM 0> >» >^ «« ci C o «) H M ?! ^ 6 «•« c.£P o c >> o a! .c g5 '•3.SP ~£ ""' c o c U >> cy cs 03 «-> *J P 3 X* 0JT3 ofc »T1 bfl C o « B . 00 •* 0\ er> r* m ■* \© 00 CS OvO> rO f*5 lO •C. CS CS CN CS CS CS CN CN CS CS CS CN CS CN g? ii0^iO-*^f^f^r^«SCN^H> l^*t'Tj©«/}*OOr^CSCSCS'* l t>Tti CS^TfcocifOTfrocnr^cSfOCSCSCNro CSCNCSCNCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCNCSCNCNCS OnOOirCtrjTjiifl^OKluiOiCOv o rt 5§"° o nj r^-H\0-*vO^OOO00 00O-*t^O^->*rcO"*O '*POCN(NT}CSCNCSf < T<*'<*r<)r*)rO CSCSCSCSCSCNCNCSCNCSCSCSCSCNCSCS rji co en Xj -Q .o coiJ co en .£> wjjXj en ^OOO^OiOtNW^aroiOOO OC\ ~Hf)f5 -h cs cs >o 78 Bulletin No. 366 [April, Table 26. — Initial and Final Weights and Gains: Third Experiment Hog No., sex, and breed Days in test Initial weight Final weight Total gain Average daily gain Lot 1: Corn, 10% tankage 2bDJ 112 112 112 112 123 123 135 135 135 135 158 158 129 lbs. 55 73 80 62 63 84 50 70 57 62 54 52 64 lbs. 221 230 230 225 2221 2241 2221 2311 2321 223i 244 235 228 lbs. 166 157 150 163 159 140 172 161 175 161 190 183 165 1.48 29bDJ 1.40 5bDJ 1.34 59bDJ 1.46 92sDJ 1.29 14bDJ 1.14 64sD J 1.27 34sDJ 1.19 2sDJ 1.30 16sDJ 1.19 37bDJ 1.20 65sDJ 1.16 Average 1.28 Lot 2: Corn, 20% soybeans 69bDJ 130 130 130 138 138 152 169 186 204 225 160 64 56 53 67 55 44 55 46 53 45 54 244 221 222 226 256 241 221 232 242 235 234 180 165 169 159 201 197 166 186 189 190 180 1.38 33bPC 1.27 30bX 1.30 9sPC . 1.15 59sDJ 1.46 16bPC 1.30 25sPC .98 53bX 1.00 ObCW .93 35bDJ .84 Average 1.12 Lot 3: Corn, 20% soybeans, to 175 lbs.; corn, 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 35bX 114 137 137 137 137 137 144 144 144 153 138 71 52 52 58 48 56 50 44 52 43 53 230 232 226 236 237 234 225 226 241 241 233 159 180 174 178 189 178 175 182 189 198 180 1.39 64sDJ 1.31 96bPC 1.27 53sX 1.30 44bDJ 1.38 97sPC 1.30 35bDJ 1.22 OsCW 1.26 16bPC 1.31 9sPC 1.29 Average 1.30 Lot 4: Corn, 20% soybeans, to 150 lbs.; corn, 10% tankage, to 225 lbs. 5sX 121 121 129 129 144 152 156 186 186 147 56 57 56 65 52 57 49 45 48 54 228 229 221 235 234 228 215 219 233 227 172 172 165 170 182 171 166 174 185 173 1.42 2bDJ 1.42 53bX 1.28 33bPC 34sDJ 1.32 1.26 96sPC 1.12 46bDJ 1.06 25bPC .94 3sPC . .99 Average 1.18 Lot 5: Corn, 15% soybeans, 5% tankage 9bPC 129 144 152 156 169 169 169 169 186 160 67 48 68 40 62 49 59 51 45 54 222 225 227 223 224 224 233 247 233 229 155 177 159 183 162 175 174 196 188 174 1.20 16sPC 1.23 59bX 1.05 53bPC 1.17 ObCW .96 32bDJ 1.04 3sPC 1.03 53sX 1.16 46bDJ 1.01 Average 1.09 lEmpty weight. 1931] Effect of Soybeans on Quality of Pork 79 H Z w s 2 Pd X W K H P '- In z O z < H = a - u M e O tf CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN^ to lO fj t"» —« 30 «h o o *-< V) lO = > uu -o ? ? ? ? w ? ? ^ ? ? ©©©*Ocnu->©u">»-0 ^ rr. cmoi/:oo:cio©-«000 cncncncncncncncncncncn O-*C>O©v©O0COOO 3 K&mKsS s ! C5 ro O O C5 fO O © to^ >S3 <4 c.2? ~* V c o {« io CN !*> r*i c*i CN f} CN tN rr> •O CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN n, cu « ftj ■ jfi .o K I- O^O^'^CNlOt^t^O'^'tN CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNi-i^CN o — — — CO o o > ©* ©* f^ c^ O C^ C^ I 80 Bulletin No. 366 2£ 3.S O Cfl •O CM CN CS CS CS CS CN (N CN H f) f) tJi lO lO > O 030X1 03 03 mOOO^ CA fl (*3 f) f) f) ^ f) O «5 c u l u fOioo>oeo(Nioo^Hoo f)CNC*3f*3CNf3rNr*3CNCSeS (MCNCNCNCNCNCSCNCNCSCN OOU3(^C3vOf) fOf^OOOOOOOCO^OO <*)fO(NCN Ov C> Of3 f) C> U3'O'O*C>OlOtNNt0 00 r*7CNCNCNCS<*)tNCNCSC3CN (N(M(NCS(SCSfSCSCSCS(N " (CiW COX (O O) M 01> J2r0 0£) r<3 toOOOO*"- f*) t> C3 «3 fO O t<3 ^ 0> Ov