iiii^ iiiii ^^iiilMi t" £(■ *; 7^ ^ '; 'iv ji;__; ticit lift ^^?^^me^ / Class (p.33....'7..3 Number. .JV^iT. 3 Volume I .C;.<^. -^j Source Received. Cost Accession No. i 4- / O | 'b o / , / / r J u "^«L NEW HAMPSHIRE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT Station, HANOVER N. H., BULLETIN NO. 11 . PIG FEEDING EXPERIMENTS. PartI. Eesults of Feeding Skim-milk and uurn Meal versus Corn Meal and Middilngs. if: Part 2. digestion experiments. iNro"VE:M:BEiE,,-'i8 90. ORGANIZATION OF THE NEW HAMPSHIRE Airiciltural Experinifint Slation. BOARD OF CONTROL Hon, Warren Brown, President, Rev. S. C. Bartlett. LL.D., Hon. S. B. Whittemore, - Hon. G. a. Wason, Prof. G. H. Whitcher, Secretary, Hampton Falls. Hanover. - Colebrook. Nashua. Hanover. OFFICERS G. H. Whitcher, A. H. Wood, H. H. Lamson, - F. W. Morse, C. L. Parsons, - C. H. Pettee, J. M. Fuller, - D. E. Stone, C. W. Whitcher, Director. - Supt. Dairy Dept. Microscopist and Photographer. Chemist. Asst. Chemist. Meteorologist. Station Farmer. - General Assistant. - Clerk. The Bulletins of this Station are sent free to all farmers in the State who send a request for the same to the Director. FEEDING EXPERIMENTS WITH PIGS. PARTI G. H. WHITCHER. The work reported in this Bulletin was designed to show something of the feeding or pork producing value of skim-milk, a matter of no small importance in connection with dairy farm- ing. Within our state to- day there are probably 100,000 cowsi, producing 300,000,000 pounds of milk, of which about three- fourths, or 225,000,000 pounds, is made into butter. Now, oa an average we get not far from eighty per cent of the whole milk as skim milk, consequently the annual quantity of skim- milk that the farmers of New Hampshire have to dispose of is 180,000,000 pounds, and if this is worth twenty-five cents per hundred it represents a value of $450,000. While the original plan of these experiments covered only the financial side of the question, later it was found desirable to conduct digestion experiments to determine just how much of the food eaten was actually utilized by the pigs. This work was put into the hands of the Station chemist. Prof, Morse, whose re- port is to be found in Part II of this Bulletin, The six pigs selected for this work were bought of a neigh- boring farmer, August 24, 1889, at which time they were six weeks old. While of no particular breed, they evidently had a good proportion of Chester White blood, and proved rapid grow- ers and were remarkably uniform in shape and weight. August 24 each pig was marked and his weight recorded, and at the same time they were divided into two lots as follows: No. of Pig. 123 Lot I, live weight Aug. 24, 28 25^ 285^ Total, 82 No. of Pig. 456 Lot 2, live weight Aug, 24, 26 32^ 25 Total, 83^ During the preparatory period, from Aug. 24 to Sept. 3, each lot received daily thirty pounds of skim-milk, and at the 3 last nafmed date lot i weighed 963^ pounds, while lot 2 weighed 106 pounds. PLAN OF THE FEEDING WORK. To place the two lots on as equal a basis as possible it was decided that each should be fed a like amount of digestible mat- ter daily, that is, the total amount of digestible albuminoids and non-albuminoids in the two rations should be as nearly alike as possible, but in one case the source of this digestible matter should be skim milk and corn meal, while in the other it should be com meal and middlings, with water added. Of course the only pos- sible basis upon which to compute such rations was the " feed- ing standards" and "feeding tables," and to utilize these it was necessary to assume that the skim-miik, corn meal and mid- dlings were to be of average quality and digestibility. Luckily, subsequent analyses of the foods used, and determination of di- gestibility, did not show enough variation to affect the results ia any way. The amount of ^food required was estimated each week, from Wolff's "feeding standards," ^ to place it on a starch basis: TABLE I. 100 pounds. Digestibl Albuminoids. Mor .1 i-albuminoids. Nutritive mtio. Corn meal contain 7.92 76.91 I 19.7 Middlings contain 14.82 64.30 I :4-3 Skim-milk contain 329 5 S.82 I : 1.8 In Table II are given the details of the rations used; the first, second and third periods are of twenty-one days each, TABLE II.— Lot i. DAILY BATIONS. bc X) =2 f gain, ai-milk cwt. © • 11 .4-^ "S o be ^ IS s^ t, bo M . ^ o +i c4 ^ so Pi c« "^ t> M M 00 0. ~.a V "■ bC,.; £ a' " 1 n PL, > a a i Ib^ a a o lbs. be lbs. t-<' lbs. 0 CD !- be II > 2.2 3S. oa^ 5j§2 > ,■« 2.2 Q ft .a — bCu •- © Q p. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. 1 1 96K 7 S'A 12 11.7) to .0306 Sept. 2 108j^ 9 5 22 18.4 f • .0230 .0.^55 17» 3 24. 3 13 >>^ 12 6 24 16.8) iH .0263 2 4 i^i/2 4 4 10 19 11.6) W5 .0340 Sept. 24 5 ilS'A 5 5 10 22 11 9> • .0865 .0550 271 toOct 15 ^ Wo}i 6 6 15 22 J^ 10.9) tH .04:W 3 7 218 17 10 30 J^ 13.1 ) !>• .0327 Oct 15 8 248>^ 19 loy?. 28 10.7 > • .0375 .0550 248 to Nov. 5 9 276>^ 22 11 33 J^ 11.4) fH .0344 10 310 9 9 *30 34 J^ 10.4 .0420 4 11 3-1 4K 10 10 34 28^ 7.9 00 .0.565 Nov. 5 to 12 373 10^ 10^ 38 30 7 71- • .0562 .0560 3Ut$ Deo. 10 13 403 10'/^ 1014. 38 27 J^ 6.6 .0615 14 430>^ 11J4 n'A 37 27 J^ 6.2 .0672 15 4.58 36 17 46 9.6 0396 5 K) 504 36 20 *2 49 J^ 9.4 WS .0410 Dec 10 17 5.53>^ 37 22 3 oV/z 8.9}- 6 7 • GO .0425 .0434 304 toJaD.l4 18 605 37 22 3 42 .0520 19 647 i 39 23 4 53 7 8J .0432 TABLE II.— Lot 2. lbs. lbs. lbs lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. : lbs lbs. 1 1 106 2'^ 2'^ 6 8 7 3) fH .0503 Sept. 2 114 3}4 3J^ 8 W2 13.5 > i eo .0:342 .0316 226 3-24 3 13! I>^ 4 4 10 26 J4 18.5) 1 ^ .0243 2 4 1.57 12 6 16 9.7 ) »s .0:394 bept. 24 I) 173 14 8 31^ 16 6> i k« .0256 .0270 189 toOct.15 6 204>^ 16 10 42 18.6) 1H .0233 3 7 246>^ 7 7 16 25 9.7) 91 .0452 Oct. 15 8 271>^ 1% 7'^ 18 24 J^ 8.7^ • as .0493 .0460 328 to Nov. 5 9 298 8 8 20 29 9.3' ,0445 10 325 27 14 *6 50^ 14 41 .0287 4 11 375>^ 30 16 7 40 J4 10.2 '^ .0406 Nov. 5 to 12 416 33 18 8 41 9.5 \ 1 • .0448 .0363 262 Dec 10 13 457 33 18 8 41 8.6 fH .0448 14 498 36}^ 19'^ 8 68 12.8 .0295 15 666 14 14 46 34 J^ 5.9 .0650 5 16 60014 15 15 45 45 7.2 CO .05.37 Dec. 10 17 Uhy2 16 16 48 41^ 6.2 • >0 .0620 .0633 460 toJan.l4 18 687 16 16 48 27 J4 3.9 3.6 .0936 19 714>^ 8>^ J>^. 25 25-^ .0502 ♦Extra water in both lots while the fourth and fifth are of thirty-five days each. The lota were alternated from the skim-milk and corn meal ration to the mixed grain ration, and vice versa at the beginning of each pe- riod, thus equalizing any variation in the natural thriftiness of the two lots. Table II is arranged as follows : Commencii:ig at the left the first column gives the period and date covered ; the second column gives the number of the week since the experiment com- menced ; the next four columns give the kind and amount of food fed per lot daily ; the gain per week for each lot comes next ; then the gain figured to one hundred pounds of live weight, followed by the same averaged for the entire period ; in the next column is given the cost per pound of growth for each week. In order that this might be figured out it was nec- essary to assume some value for skim-milk, and I have taken this at twenty-five cents per hundred pounds ; following this is the average per period. This table contains the more important results of the exper- iment. The most noticeable thing about it is the superiority of the skim-milk and corn meal ration over that made up of corn meal and middlings, notwithstanding the fact, as will be shown later, that the former ration did not contain as much digestible matter as the latter. Table III is condensed from Table II for the purpose of showing that this superiority is a decided one, both as to rate of growth and cost of growth, TABLE III. LOT ONE. LOT TWO. Average Avearge gain per Average cobt gam pel") Average T3 week for per pouud of week., for cost per lb. 'C each lOO.lbs. jgrowtb. each 100 lbs. ^-f growth. t live weight. live weight. Skim- Mix'd Skim- Mix'd Skim Mi-'d Skim- Mix'd milk. gram. milk. grain. milk. gram. milk. grain. lbs. lbs. cts. cts. lbs. lbs. cts. cts. 1 15.6 2.58 13.1 3.16 2 11.5 3.8 14.9 2.70 3 11.7 3.50 9.2 .4.60 4 7.8 5.6 11.1 3.63 5 8.5 4.34 5.3 6.33 A glance will show that the growth per one hundred pounds of live weight is much larger in each lot when the ration is skim- milk and corn meal than when it is corn meal and middlings, and it is likewise noticeable that this gain decreases with the same ration as the pigs grew older. It is also evident that the cost of growth follows the same rule, being lowest when the gain is greatest. The following averages were obtained during the one hun- dred and thirty-three days covered by this work : Average weekly gain for loo lbs live Lot j. Lot 2. weight, on skim-milk ration, 11.3 ) 12.6 | on mixed grain ration, 9.2 \ "* 8.5 \ Average cost of i pound of growth, on skim-milk ration, 3.9 > 3.4) on mixed grain ration, 5.1 | ^'^ 5.3 [ ^'^ The figures for the skim-milk and corn meal ration are put n black faced type, and it is at once seen that the rate of gain is unmistakably greater on the skim-milk and grain than on grain alone, the percentage in favor of the former being 23 and 47 on lot I and 2 respectively, while the cost of growth on lots I and 2 is 1.2 cents and 1.9 cents greater per pound when the food was mixed grain ; this difference is well worthy of careful consideration. With grain costing, as this did, $30.00 per ton for corn meal and $26 for middlings, such pigs as these were can- not be fed without loss when pork sells at four cents alive, or five cents dressed. With skim-milk, however, the case is different, for two rea- sons : first, less " raw material," that is digestible matter, is re- quired to produce a pound of growth, as shown below. DIGESTIBLE MATTER PER HUNDRED POUNDS OF GROWTH. Average digestible dry matter required to produce 100 pounds gain : L©t i. Lot 2. Skim-milk and corn meal, 24* 220^ Meal and middlings, 334^ 334^ Average for entire time, 279 288^ and secondly, because with skim-milk and corn meal a greater quantity of food can be handled daily. Thus, by both of these factors the time required for producing a two hundred pound pig is reduced very materially. This point is not sufficiently 8 appreciated by many who feed pigs. With the present price* there is but one way in which pork can be produced at a profit, and that is by producing a two hundred pound pig in the short- est possible time. We see from Table II that the cost of growth and the amount of food required to produce one hundred pounds of growth in- crease as the pigs grow older, and it would have been much more profitable to have sold them when averaging one hundred and seventy-five pounds each than when averaging two hundred and forty pounds. Thus far we have, for convenience, figured all results on the assumption that the skim-milk used was worth twenty-five cents per hundred pounds. We will now see what its value actually was under the con- ditions of this experiment, the price of live hogs being four cents per pound, and the cost of grain as previously mentioned. For ourfpresent purpose we will neglect the first cost of the pigs and note the value of tliegatn of live weight for each period, where skim-milk was used as a part of the ration. TABLE IV. LOT ONE. LOT TWO. Value of gain for peri- od, @ 4c. lb. Value of corn meal fed. Value of skim-milk by differ'nce Amount of skim-milk fed. Value of skim-milk per lUO lbs. Value of gain for peri- od, @ 4c. lb. Value of corn meal led. Value of , gkim-milk by differ'nce Amount of skim-milk fed. Value of skim-milk per 100 lbs. $ $ $ lbs. cts. $1 $ $ lbs. CtB. 1 2.32 1.01 1.31 196 67 3 3.58 1.68 1.90 294 64 Ji S 3.68 2.20 1.48 406 36^ 4 9 64 5.98 3 62 1116 3'iJi 5 9.68 7.28 2.40 1295 18K To'l 16.68 10.49 5.19 1897 13.22 7.66 5.58 1410 Av. 27>^ 89>i This table is constructed by determining the value of the gain for each skim-milk period and subtracting therefrom the cost of the corn meal which was fed with the skim-milk, the re- mainder j represents the value of the skim-milk, which, divided by the^ amount gives the value per hundredfpounds. The show- ing is certainly a favorable cne, and vith ihrifly pigs trcm twenty 9 to thirty cents per hundred ought to be and can be realized for skim-milk, when live hogs sell at four cents per pound. It must be constantly kept in mind, however, that they must be sold by the time they reach a live weight of from two hundred to two hundred and thirty pounds. FEEDING WITH GRAIN ALONE. Table V gives the results of feeding with com meal and middlings. TABLE V. LOT ONE. 1 LOT TWO. Value of gain,® 4c. per lb. Cost of gain fed. Cost of gain per lb. Value of gain,@ 4c per lb. Cost of grain fed. Cost of gain per lb. $ 1 2 2.54 3 4 5.92 5 S 2.41 8.29 cts. 3.8 ; 5.6 1 $ 2.04 3.14 6.96 $ 1.61 3.61 11.02 cts. 3.1 4.6 6.3 Total 8.46 Av'ge 10.70 5.0 12.14 16.25 5.3 This table seems conclusive, so far as these^pigs were con- cerned, and we are obliged to say that on grain alone there was a loss of more than one cent for every pound of growth. These results show us that we cannot blindly follow the teachings of feeding tables, for should we so do one of these ra- tions would be as good as the other, but as a matter of fact, while chemically the skim-milk ration was not quite as rich in nutritive material as the grain ration, yet the former was, on an average, thirty per cent, more efficient in actual results than the latter. lO PART II. DETERMINATION OF DIGESTIBILITY OF RATIONS. F. W. MORSE. The comparative digestibility of the two rations was de- termined as follows : One pig from each lot was taken and placed in a box or cage, so constructed that the food would not be wasted and none of the dung would be lost. The pigs did not seem to mind this confinement and con- tinued to gain in weight as before the beginning of this part of the experiment. Fortunately, the weather was mild and no wide variation in temperature occurred during this period. The food for each was weighed night and morning and samples taken at each weighing for subsequent analysis. Equal parts of the morning and evening samples of skim-milk were mixed together and analysed on the following day, before it be- came sour. Equal parts of the daily samples of corn meal and middlings were mixed together, and at the close of the experi- ment a small sample was drawn from each for analysis. By this means the average composition of each food stuff was deter- mined. This composition is given in the following table : TABLE I. '53 9 si 'z o i2 ® a .a ■a p 6 s Corn meal, 14.22 85.78 1.71 3 85 9 23 1.54 69.45 Middlings, 12.30 87 70 3.09 3.89 16.75 2.67 61.30 Skim-milk, 90.61 9.39 0.77 0.33 3.29 5.00 The pigs were carefully watchdd, both day and night, and the dung was collected and put into glass jars. The dung was weighed each day, and at the close of the period was placed in a large porcelain dish and dried as quickly as possible, until it II was in a condition to be mixed together Jthoroughly, when a small sample was taken for an analysis. The composition of the dung of each pig is shown in the following table : TABLE II. u •tj p 3i *a L O o flbr a ^s. * &• J3 3 g^ Q < w V.- O c: Pig A, 68.55 31.45 4 41 2.43 6.62 4 28 15.71 PigB, 67.14 32.86 7.11 3.86 8.24 2.93 10.72 During the digestion period Pig A consumed twenty-two pounds and five ounces of corn meal, twenty-two pounds and five ounces of middlings, together with eighty-four and one-half pounds of water, and voided ten pounds and ninety-three one- hundredths of dung. Pig B consumed forty-two pounds of corn meal, seventy-seven pounds skim-milk, and twenty-one pounds of water, and voided six pounds and sixty-seven one hundredths of dung. From these figures and the composition of the food stuffs and dung, is calculated the following table, showing the amount of each nu- trient eaten, voided and digested ; the amount digested being the difference between the amount eaten and the amount ob- tained in the dung. TABLE III. PIG A. PIG B. '6 I '6 a 9 (fi a s 73 to 73 <1> 1 X 'O Q O t> Q lbs. lbs lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Water, 90 41 7.49 96.74 4.48 . ■■i Di y matter, Ash, 88.71 3.44 35.27 43.26 2.19 41.071 107 .48 .59 1.31 .47 .84 Ether extract, 168 .26 1.37 1.87 .26 1.61 Crude protein. Crude fibre. 5.80 .72 5.08 6.41 .55 5.86 .94 .47 .47 .65 .19 .46 Nitrogen-free extract, 29 17 1.72 27 45 33.02 .71 32.31 By this table it is shown that Pig B, on the skimmilk ration, consumed more food than Pig A, and digested more of each nu- 12 trient. This difference amounted in all to five and eight-tenths pounds of dry matter. He also gained two and twenty-five one- hundredths pounds more in live weight than Pig A. The pigs were weighed each day, at the same hour, and showed a continued increase in weight, amounting in all to three and seventy-five one-hundredths pounds for Pig A, and six pounds for Pig B. Pig A did not eat readily, and on two occasions his daily rations had to be reduced below that originally planned for him. Pig B ate freely at each feeding and consumed the full ration planned for the experiment, and apparently would have eaten more if it had been given him. This fact was probably owing to the greater digestibility of the ration. This greater digestibility of the skim-milk ration was no- ticeable for each nutrient ; but especially so for the crude fibre, as the following table of percentages of digestibility will show: TABLE IV. ® c3 a '5 C 6 a 73 O X i3 « b 3 S 91.11 W o o 't Pig A, 84.04 87.58 ft .00 94.10 PiffB, 94 93 86.09 91.4: 70.77 97.85 To be sure the crude fibre does not occur in large quanti- ties in the food of pigs, yet there was a difference in the dung of the two pigs, apparent to the eye. The dung from Pig A was dry and hard and contained many undigested hulls or scales from the middlings and corn meal, while Pig B passed a soft dung. The nutritive ratios calculated from the actually digested nutrients vary but slightly in the two rations, being i to 6.17 for the corn meal and middlings, and i to 6.27 for the corn meal and skim-milk. 13 CONCLUSIONS. 1. For each one hundred pounds of live weight eight pounds of skim-milk and four pounds of corn meal make an am- ple and well proportioned daily ration. 2. In the absence of skim-milk, two and one-half pounds of corn meal, two and one-half pounds of middlings, and eight pounds of water, will give an equal amount of nutritive matter. 3. One hundred pounds of digestible matter in the skim- milk and corn meal ration was equal to one hundred and forty- six and six-tenths pounds in the corn meal and middlings ration. 4. The superiority of the skim-milk ration is due in part, doubtless, to its greater digestibility ; but still more, in my opin- ion, to the fact that there is less waste matter, that is indigestible matter, to be crirried through the system, and to the noticeable dif- ference in t-c character of the dung, mentioned by Prof. Morse in Part II of this Bulletin. The pigs, on mixed grain invariably grew constipated, while those on skim-milk was not so affected. 5. The cost of a pound of gain on skim milk and corn meal was three and six-tenths cents, on mixed grain ration, five and two-tenths cents. 6. Digestible dry matter required to produce one hundred pounds of gain of live weight on skim-milk and corn meal, two hundred and thirty-one pounds, on mixed grain, three hundred and thirty-four and one-half pounds. ( Lot I, when dressed, shrunk 19.6%. 7" j Lot 2, when dressed, shrunk 18.4%. 8. Calling skim-milk worth twenty-five cents per hundred and we get the following balance sheet, on the basis of the cost as given in " Conclusion No. 5 : " 30 lb. pig, first cost, $2.00 170 lbs. of growth on skim-milk and corn meal, @ 3.6 cts., 6.12 200 lb. pig cost, $8.12 which equals 4.06 cents per pound. 30 lb. pig, first cost, $2.00 170 lbs. of growth on com meal and middlings, @ 5.2 cts., ^8.84 200 lb. pig cost, , $10.84 which equals 6.42 cents per pound. G. H. WHITCHER, Director. »4 . ■■. J . / ; ^ ■i' Hi- :^1P15^ ilfilfl ,'ifKr: iiliifi!» '■■■ ffiillH