bar

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
BULLETIN No. 1045

J. Contribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry
yey WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief

March 18, 1922

|| THE SUNFLOWER AS A’ SILAGE CROP

+ >< By

H. N. VINALL, Agronomist
Office of Forage-Crop Investigations

CONTENTS

Page
_ Early History of the Sunflower ..... 1 | Filling the Silo. .........2..
Present Distribution hae Yields of Silage
- Cultivation in the United States Feeding Value of Sunflower Silage ...

Areas Suited to the Production of
Sunflowers .

Value of Sunflowers in py Semiarid
Regions

Soil Relations and Effect on the Fol-
lowing Crop

_ Varieties
Growing Sunflowers for Silage
Date of Seeding .
Method and Rate of Seeding . .. .
Cultivation and Irrigation
Harvesting Methods
Time to Cut Sunflowers.......

j
*

e

Composition and Digestibility . .
Palatability
Color, Texture, and Odor
Acidity of the Silage
Results with Dairy Cattle
Feeding Tests with Beef Cattle...
Use of Sunflower Silage in Feeding
Sheep
Feeding Sunflower Silage to Hogs . .
Sunflowers as a Soiling Crop
Diseases of Sunflowers
Insects Attacking Sunflowers
Literature Cited ,

; WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

| LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
‘6 SECSIVED
7 MARR21922
PECUMENTS wie SION

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

} BULLETIN No. 1045 ,

Contribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry
WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief

Washington, D. C. Vv March 18, 1922

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP.

By H. N. Vinati, Agronomist, Office of Forage-Crop Investigations.

PAA
eens coe a PRLAS ae eae
; 4] a CONTENTS.
Page. | Page
Early history of the sunflower___~_- 1 Yields" of tsilagecns 2) Sess eee ile
Present) distribution=—==s— == — ss 2 Feeding value of sunflower silage___ 20
Cultivation in the United States___ 2 Composition and digestibility__ 20
Areas suited to the production Trek SAEED Lay ope ee ee 21
of sunflowers 22-4. ee 4 Color, texture, and odor_______ 23
Value of sunflowers in the semi- Acidity of the silage_________- 23
ards LeESOnS=s. 2 se =e eo 5 Results with dairy cattle______ 23
Soil relations and effect on the Feeding tests with beef cattle__ 26
followane, (crop. === tf Use of sunflower silage in feed-
Wartenies.— 2. ee 7 IM ey SHC Ds ee eee ee 27
Growing sunflowers for silage--___ 9 Feeding sunflower silage to
Date cot seedingwt = so = 10 NO pees ee ees eee ee 29
Method and rate of seeding___~ 10 Sunflowers as a soiling crop______~ : 29
Cultivation and irrigation_____ 11 | Diseases of sunflowers____________ 30
Harvesting methods__________ 12 | Insects attacking sunflowers_______ 31
Time to cut sunflowers________ ee Mehlrersaburer Citedee aoe ak oe ee 31
lines the silo ===. eee ee 15

EARLY HISTORY OF THE SUNFLOWER.

The common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) is generally recog-
nized as native of North America, although its natural range of dis-
tribution extends southward to Peru. It was one of the food plants
of the American Indians (14, p. 419)’, the seeds being eaten raw or
pounded up with other seeds, then made into flat cakes and dried in
the sun. The sunflower was grown as early as 1597 in the gardens
at Madrid, Spain. The Spaniards probably obtained the seed from
Peru, since it was given the name “ Peruvian sunflower ” by De Lobel,
a Flemish botanist, who published a description of the sunflower in
1576. Champlain in 1615 found the Indians in the vicinity of Geor-
gian Bay cultivating the sunflower. The oil which they obtained
from the seeds was used on their hair.

1The serial numbers (italic) in parentheses refer to ‘“‘ Literature cited’’ at the end
of this bulletin,

79165°—22 1

W BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

The suntiower under cultivation has been widely used as an orna-
mental, and its seeds are valued as a feed for birds and poultry. In
addition, the seeds are used as human food, and when pressed cold
produce a fairly good table oil. The resulting seed cake, after the
oil has been expressed, is used as a concentrate in feeding cattle and
horses. The above-mentioned uses are largely responsible for the
widespread distribution of the sunflower.

PRESENT DISTRIBUTION.

The sunflower plant is grown throughout North America, from
the southern Provinces of Canada to the Canal Zone. It is to be
found also in most parts of South America, but more especially along
the west coast from Colombia to Chile. In Australia, New Zealand,
South Africa, Egypt, the Mediterranean region of Europe, India,
and China the sunflower is grown to a limited extent. It has reached
its highest development and its greatest usefulness in Russia, where
several important varieties have been developed. It is grown exten-
sively there for its seeds and the oil therefrom, both being consumed
as food, and the stalks are utilized as fuel by the peasants.?, Next to
Russia, Hungary was perhaps the largest producer of sunflowers.
There were many mills in that country which were equipped espe-
clally for extracting the oil from sunflower seeds, and the oil content
of the Hungarian seed was higher on the average than that of seed
grown in Russia.°

CULTIVATION IN THE UNITED STATES.

Although the sunflower is a native of the United States and was
cultivated by the Indians, early settlers seem to have made little use
of it as a crop plant. Most of the sunflowers grown in early days
were harvested for seed, but insects, such as cutworms and also
those which live on the seeds, often made the crop an unprofitable
one. The United States Department of Agriculture investigated the
production of sunflowers in the United States and published the
results in 1901 as Bulletin 60 of the Division of Chemistry.

At that time there were no mills producing sunflower oil, and the
crop was being utilized largely as feed for cage birds and poultry,
the seed only being harvested. In 1895 and 1896 large areas of
sunflowers were grown in southern Indiana near Madison. <Accord-

2 Statistics published in the New York Drug Reporter in 1883 claimed a total produc-
tion of 228,000,000 pounds of seed in Russia from an area of 216,000 acres, mostly in
Kielce, Podolia, and the district of Bruitch in Veronez.

34 good summary of the information regarding the production of sunflower oil and
seed cake in Russia and Hungary is to be found in the articles of Richard Windisch in
Landw. Vers. Stat., Bd. 57, p. 305-316, and Dr. Th. Kosutany in the same publication,
Bd. 48, p. 255-269.

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 3

ing to the United States Department of Agriculture Market Re-
porter of February 5, 1921, there are now three important seed-pro-
ducing areas in the United States. These are southeastern Missouri,
southern Illinois, and the San Joaquin Valley of California. The
1920 seed crop in these three areas was estimated at 9,850,000 pounds.

The New York Agricultural Experiment Station (Geneva) re-
ported some results with sunflowers in 1883, the Vermont station
in 1893, and the Maine station in 1895 and 1896. The Canadian
E:xperimental Farms Report for 1893 also discussed the culture of
sunflowers in Ontario and other southern Provinces. The last-
mentioned work was devoted mainly to studying the value of the
silage mixture originated by Prof. James W. Robertson, of Ottawa,
Canada, and designed to produce a silage of such composition that
the quantity of grain needed in the ration could be reduced. Corn
and some legumes, such as the horse bean or soy bean, were grown
together in the field, and when ready for the silo the crop from 2
acres of this mixture was put in the silo with the sunflower heads from
half an acre. If it was found desirable to grow the legumes and
corn in separate fields; then the mixture was made up by combining
the crops as follows: One-fourth acre of sunflower heads, one-half
acre of horse beans, soy beans, or some other legume, and 1 acre
of corn.

Because of the high protein content of the legume and the high fat
content of the sunflower seed, this silage mixture possessed a high
feeding value. It was claimed that the Robertson mixture produced
results equal to those of pure corn silage and required 4 pounds less
of concentrate, such as grain or meal, with each 50 pounds of
silage fed.

In growing sunflowers for tests of the Robertson mixture in the
New England States and Canada most of the investigators obtained
a larger yield of sunflowers (total crop) than they did of corn. Some.
of them also recognized the possibility of utilizing the entire plant
for silage. Prof. J. N. Bartlett, of the Maine Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, says that “the very large total yield of sunflowers
(48,000 pounds per acre in 1896) would give them a high rank
among coarse fodder plants for silage material.” Notwithstanding
the heavy tonnage produced by the sunflowers and this apparent
realization of the value of such a crop for silage, none of these sta-
tions ever seriously attempted to make use of the whole plant by
ensiling. The idea seemed to prevail in the minds of all these in-
vestigators that there could be very little food value in the coarse
woody stalks of the sunflower.

Tests of the feeding value of the Robertson mixture were made
with dairy cows at the Vermont station and also in Canada: AI-
though the quantity of grain fed with the Robertson silage was

a BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

less than with the corn silage, the cows produced approximately
equal quantities of milk and butter. The Canadian authorities re-
ported that the butter made from the sunflower mixture had a richer
flavor and higher color than that from corn silage. Instructions
were issued to Canadian farmers regarding the growing and utiliza-
tion of sunflowers in the Robertson silage mixture, and it received
considerable attention for a few years. The practice of making
silage in this way did not become established in American agricul-
ture, however, and little has been heard about it during the past
10 years.

Outside of the experiments carried out in Maine, Vermont, and
New York, there has been but little investigation of the value of sun-
flowers in the United States until recently, although desultory trials
of the crop have been reported by New Hampshire, Nebraska, Colo-
rado, and a few other States. In 1915 the Montana Agricultural
Experiment Station grew a small acreage of sunflowers under irriga-
tion at Bozeman. ‘The results were so satisfactory that the plantings
were enlarged in 1916, and the crop after being ensiled was fed to
dairy cattle. This preliminary test, described in Bulletin 118 of the
Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, demonstrated the high
feeding value of sunflower silage and resulted in a widespread inter-
est in the crop. Since the publication of this report numerous other
States, as well as the United States Department of Agriculture, have
experimented with sunflowers rather extensively as a silage crop.

AREAS SUITED TO THE PRODUCTION OF SUNFLOWERS. eae
Sunflowers are widely distributed in nature and can be grown suc-
cessfully in nearly every part of the United States. Their value in
any region, however, depends more on the measure of success attained
in the production of other crops than on their own adaptation to the
local climatic conditions. Thus, it is doubtful whether sunflowers
will ever be popular for a silage in the central and southern Great
Plains, because the sorghums do so well there, nor in the corn belt,
because corn so well fills the need for a silage crop. In the South- .
eastern States corn, sorghum, Japanese cane, pearl millet, and other
silage crops are well adapted to the climatic conditions, and sun-
flowers are not likely to find a place.

In the extreme northern part of the United States or at high alti-
tudes in the Western States where the temperatures during the grow-
ing season are relatively low, corn, sorghum, and other crops do not
produce heavy yields for silage. In such situations the sunflower is
recognized as an extremely valuable silage crop, and the acreage de-
voted to its production is increasing rapidly. Now that feeding ex-
periments have demonstrated the high quality of this silage, it is
probable that the sunflower will be grown quite widely in the New

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 5

England States, northern New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Min-
nesota, in North Dakota, Montana, Washington, and Oregon, and
also in some of the high valleys of the Rocky Mountain region, such
as the San Luis Valley of Colorado.

Sunflowers have been found much more resistant to frost than corn.
An observer in Michigan claims that they will “push back the frost
line three weeks” in that State. A correspondent in New York
writes that his sunflowers were green in the fall two weeks after corn
had been killed by frost. These observations explain why sunflowers
succeed in the high altitudes of Colorado and other Western States
where frosts often occur during the growing season.

Fic. 1.—A field in Ellis County, Kans., overrun by wild sunflowers during the wet season
of 1915.

VALUE OF SUNFLOWERS IN THE SEMIARID REGIONS.

On account of the fact that sunflowers grow wild in western Kan-
sas (fig. 1), Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota, as well as
in eastern Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado, it was anticipated that
they would be important as a silage crop in dry regions. This has
not proved to be the case. The yields at dry-land stations south of
the Dakotas have not been large enough to warrant their production
under cultivation. Field tests show that the sorghums give much
higher yields under such conditions.

At the Fort Hays Experiment Station, Hays, Kans., sunflowers
were grown first in 1913. This was an unusually dry year and the
plants made a very poor showing. None of them grew over a foot
and a half high, and the yield was small. The better varieties of
sorghum under the same conditions made a yield of 2 to 24 tons of

6 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

silage per acre. Sunflowers were not grown again at Hays until
1920. The rainfall was fairly abundant that year, and the general
crops were good. Sunflowers suffered from rust and insects and again
made a very poor showing in comparison with the sorghums.

At Akron, Colo., where the altitude is greater than at Hays, Kans.,
sunflowers were tested in 1911 and 1912. Only seed yields were ob-
tained in those years, but the growth was good and insects gave little
trouble. The estimated total crop was about three-fourths that of the
best varieties of forage sorghums.

At Amarillo, Tex., sunflowers were grown in 1911, 1912, and 1913.
The first two years the crop was fairly good, but the yield was hardly
more than half that of the sorghums. In 1913 the crop was almost
entirely destroyed by insects. In the semiarid region of the southern
Great Plains the value of sunflowers as a silage crop is sure to be
limited by the presence of numerous insects which attack the plant.

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station made some tests of
sunflowers on dry-land farms in 1918 (4, p. 9). The average yield
of silage on 13 different farms in eight counties was 10.3 tons per
acre. There was no basis for a comparison of this yield of sunflowers
with that of corn grown under similar conditions. The conclusion
at the Montana station, however, was that considering the low sea-
sonal rainfall the yield obtained was quite satisfactory and “that
sunflowers are promising dry-land forage producers.” This is per-
haps true in Montana, where the temperatures are low during the
growing season and sorghum and long-season varieties of corn can
not be grown.

Sunflowers were grown for ensilage in 1920 at the United States
Sheep Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho, at an elevation of
5,700 feet, on the range land of the station by dry-land farming
methods. The land is of lava-rock formation, and the area available
for cultivation is hmited. Although the annual precipitation is about
16 inches, it was so dry in 1920 that wheat on the farmed lands adja-
cent to the sheep reserve was a total failure. Regardless of this fact,
the sunflowers yielded between 44 and 5 tons of ensilage per acre.

To obtain a maximum crop of sunflowers by dry-land farming Mr.
McWhorter advises the following procedure:

(1) Summer fallow. Plow the land the previous spring. Keep the plowed
area free from weeds and covered by a dust mulch throughout the summer and
fall.

4The work at this station is conducted by the Bureau of Animal Industry of the
United States Department of Agriculture. Mr. V. O. McWhorter, who is in immediate
charge of the station, has kindly furnished, through Mr. D. A. Spencer, senior animal
husbandman in sheep and goat investigations, a preliminary statement of the results
obtained with sunflowers. All future statements in this bulletin regarding work at the
Dubois station are based on this report.

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. it

(2) Plant early. Plant the sunflower seed in a well-stirred yet firm bed as
early in the spring as the condition of the ground will permit. Although heavy
freezing is injurious to the young plants, light frosts do not hurt sunflowers.

(3) Harrow. When the young plants begin'to appear, use a spike-tooth har-
row adjusted for shallow cultivation. ‘

(4) Thin the plants in the rows. Make the rows as far apart as corn is
usually planted. When the shoots are well started, thin to one or two plants
to the hill, 30 to 36 inches apart in the row.

(5) Cultivate thoroughly. Cultivate lightly with an ordinary corn cultivator
as often as needed.

SOIL RELATIONS AND EFFECT ON THE FOLLOWING CROP.

No very definite information regarding the behavior of sunflowers
on different soil types is available. The best yields are obtained on
rich clay loams well supplied with humus, but the crop has been
grown successfully on sandy soil in northern Michigan and on poor
clay soils in West Virginia. Sunflowers will thrive on any soil which
will produce a good crop of corn.

It was observed on the fields of the Washington Agricultural Ex-
periment Station (77, p. 11) in 1919 and 1920 that the outside rows of
the sunflower plats next to the corn made a more vigorous growth
than rows in the centers of the plats. Conversely, the corn rows next
the sunflower plats were less vigorous than the rows in the centers
of the plats. This seemed to indicate an ability on the part of the
sunflowers to obtain a greater portion of the plant food and soil
moisture than corn when grown in competition with that crop. The
plats which produced corn and sunflowers in 1919 were seeded to
wheat in 1920. The average yield of wheat on the corn plats was
33.78 bushels and on the sunflower plats 28.36 bushels per acre. These
results at the Washington station indicate that sunflowers are more
exhaustive of the plant food and moisture in the soil than corn.
This can be accounted for in most part by the larger tonnage obtained
from the sunflowers. More experiments of this kind are necessary
before definite conclusions are possible.

VARIETIES.

The principai variety of the sunflower now grown in the United
States for silage purposes is the Mammoth Russian. This variety
usually has a single stalk with comparatively few branches and one
head 6 to 12 inches in diameter. The seeds are approximately half
an inch long and one-fourth to five-sixteenths of an inch wide. They
vary in color from almost pure white to black; most of them, however,
are white with longitudinal streaks or bands of gray or black. The
Mammoth Russian is a vigorous heavy-stemmed variety with large
leaves and produces heavy crops of seed.

8 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Wiley (19) says that three principal varieties are grown in Russia:
One with large white seeds, valued for its high oil production; one
with smaller black seeds, which are sweeter and regarded as best for
eating; and the intermediate form with striped seeds, used both for
food and for oil production.

The common wild sunflower of the United States often has a much-
branched stalk (fig. 2), with numerous heads 3 to 4 inches in diameter.
The yield of silage produced by this plant when grown on rich soil
under cultivation is usually somewhat less than that obtained from
the Mammoth Russian variety under the same conditions. At Red-

Fic. 2.—Two rows on the left, Mammoth Russian sunflowers; two rows on the right, wild
sunflowers, Redfield, S. Dak. Both varieties were seeded on April 28, 1920, and photo-
graphed in August.

field, S. Dak., in 1920 the total crop, green weight, of the wild sun-
flower was 13.9 tons per acre, while the Mammoth Russian in an
adjoining plat yielded 15.2 tons per acre.

There has been no extensive development of sunflower varieties
in the United States. The seed trade has advertised at times six
or eight supposedly different varieties, but many of these are only
slightly differing strains or selections of the same variety. Probably
the most extensive varietal trial made was that of the Department of
Agriculture of Ontario, Canada. In 1894 and 1895 seven varieties
were under test at Ottawa.° These varieties, elianthus globosus,

5 Ann. Rpt., Dept. of Agr:, Ontario, v. I, p. 261. 1896.

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 9

Texas Silver Queen, Black Giant, Mammoth Russian Giant, Com-
mon, Double California, and Silver and Gold, yielded in the order
named 10.63 to 4.87 tons per acre except the last-named variety,
which was tested only in 1895 and produced in that year at the
rate of 11.39 tons per acre. These same varieties were continued
under test in 1896, but a poor stand was obtained, and the year’s
results therefore were not included in the averages. The seed for
these tests ordinarily was purchased from seed houses in the United
States.

‘Notwithstanding the fact that some of these varieties made a
very good showing, most of them were discarded and only three,
the Black Giant, Mammoth Russian, and White Beauty, were grown
in subsequent years. In the report for 1897 this action is explained
as follows: “As some of these varieties, however, did not give satis-
factory results nearly all of them were dropped from the list.”
Since a number of the seven varieties, such as the Helianthus glo-
bosus and Texas Silver Queen, made larger yields than any of the
varieties contained in the tests, it is evident that some consideration
other than the yield must have been responsible for the action of
the Ontario officials in discontinuing the tests of those varieties.
The average yield, green weight, of the varieties included in the
test for 16 years was Black Giant, 22.3; Mammoth Russian, 17.8;
and White Beauty, 16.5 tons per acre.

The Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station conducted a va-
riety test of sunflowers in 1918, but this test developed quite largely
into a question of rust resistance. The Mantica, developed by
Luther Burbank; the Kaeurpher, from South America; the Mam-
moth Russian; and the Double Mixed were tested. Of these va-
- rieties the Kaeurpher was the only one which proved rust resistant.
More experimental work with varieties will have to be conducted
before a decision can be reached as to the best variety for silage
purposes.

GROWING SUNFLOWERS FOR SILAGE.

Only within the past decade have sunflowers been grown extensively
in the United States for silage. In growing the crop for this pur-
pose it is, of course, important to use cultural methods that will
yield the largest tonnage. To attain this result it is usually neces-
sary to plant more thickly than where a seed crop is the object.

The same treatment of the soil that prepares the surface for corn
planting will answer for sunflowers. The ground is usually plowed
in the spring and worked down with a spike-tooth harrow, or if fall

6 Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quar. Bul., v. 3, no. 3, Feb., 1920, p. 128-129,

79165 °—22 2

10 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

plowed it can be put into condition for planting by disking in the
early spring.
DATE OF SEEDING.

The best date to plant sunflowers of course varies with the locality.
In the Upper Peninsula of Michigan at the Chatham Experiment
Station (15, p. 50) it was found that seeding May 26 gave a larger
yield and a better quality of silage than on June 2 and 9.

At the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Morgan-
town, W. Va. (3), June 5 proved a satisfactory date for seeding.
At the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station at Bozeman (4,
p. 9), seedings were made each week in 1918 from April 29 to June
10. The largest yields were obtained from seed sown on the earliest
date. Seeded on April 29 the plants appeared above ground in
12 days and the yield was 39.7 tons of silage per acre; sown one month
later, May 29, the young plants were up in 5 days and the yield
was 36.8 tons, green weight, per acre; sown June 10 the plants were
up in 3 days and the yield was 22 tons, green weight, per acre. The
seedings made between April 29 and May 29 gave lower yields than
the May 29 seeding, although they were higher than the yield for
June 10. The recommendations of the Montana station, based on
the rather inconsistent results obtained in 1918, are to defer seeding
in the higher altitudes until the ground is warm and in good condi-
tion. :

On the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project Experiment Farm, Mitch-
ell, Nebr., good results were obtained from seedings made on May
24 (8, p. 25). At the experiment stations at Akron, Colo., Hays,
Kans., and Amarillo, Tex., seedings have been made from May
15 to June 15.

These date-of-seeding tests indicate that sunflowers may be sown
at the same time the farmer plants corn.

METHOD AND RATE OF SEEDING.

In early experiments with sunflowers in Maine, Vermont, New
York, and in Canada the seedings were usually made with a corn
planter in rows 3 feet apart. It was advised that not more than
three or four seeds be dropped in each foot of row space. In some
cases the plats were thinned so that the plants stood 8 to 12 inches
apart in the row.

In later experiments carried on in West Virginia, Michigan, Mon-
tana, Nebraska, and other western points the ordinary grain drill
has been found better suited for seeding sunflowers than the corn
planter. The required space between the rows is accomplished by
stopping up a certain number of holes or feeds in the drill box. In
general, the largest yields and the best quality of silage have been

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. Pelt

obtained when the rows were 24 to 30 inches apart. For such seed-
ings 6 to 8 pounds of seed per acre are required.

At the Michigan station (15, p. 50) sunflowers were seeded in rows
6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, and 42 inches apart. The best yields were ob-
tained from the 30-inch rows. At Huntley, Mont. (7, p. 12-14),
sunflowers drilled in rows 20 inches apart produced 37.6 tons silage
per acre; in rows 30 inches apart, 32.9 tons; and in rows 40 inches
apart, 31.0 tons per acre. At Bozeman, Mont. (4, p. 6, 7), sun-
flowers were seeded in rows 8, 20, 24, 30, 36, and 42 inches apart,
the quantity of seed varying from 30 to 4 pounds per acre, according
to the width of row. The average yield of silage for the two years
1917 and 1918 was highest in the 36-inch rows, 44.1 tons per acre.
The 8-inch rows were second, with a yield of 39.8 tons per acre, and
the 30-inch rows ranked third, with 33.6 tons of silage per acre.

Other experiments designed to determine the comparative value
of planting in hills were carried out at Huntley and Bozeman, Mont.
Sunflowers were planted in hills 6 and 12 inches apart in all the
different row widths at Huntley and in hills 4, 8, and 12 inches apart
in each of the row widths, 24, 30, and 36 inches, at Bozeman. At
Huntley the average silage yield of the drilled plats in the three
different row widths was 33.8 tons per acre; for the 6-inch hills, 30.6
tons; and for the 12-inch hills, 30.2 tons per acre. At Bozeman
(4, p. 7, 8), although the highest single yield reported, 44.1 tons
per acre, was from drilled rows 36 inches apart and the lowest, 18.2
tons per acre, from hills 42 inches apart each way, the averages
showed larger yields for the plats planted in hills than for those
drilled. The actual difference in yield, however, was small. The
average for the three row widths in drilled seedings was 34.8 tons
of silage per acre; for the rows planted in hills 4 inches apart, 36.2
tons; in hills 8 inches apart, 35.8 tons; and in hills 12 inches apart
35.7 tons per acre.

The results at the two stations are contradictory, and further work
will be necessary to clear up the value of these two methods. It is
somewhat easier to drill the seed in the row than to plant in hills
at the distances obtaining in these experiments. It is evident from
the experiments already completed that where the hills are separated
by a considerable distance, as they are in checkrowed corn, the yields
are appreciably smaller than in drilled rows. :

?

CULTIVATION AND IRRIGATION.

If a crust forms on the soil before the plants come through or
immediately afterwards, a light harrowing will help to obtain a
good stand. After the plants are 4 to 8 inches tall the ordinary
corn cultivator may be used, just as with corn. In some cases, like

4 le BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

that reported by the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station,
the growth is so rapid that only one cultivation is necessary, after
which the plants shade the ground so thoroughly that weeds can not
grow. Ordinarily, however, two or three cultivations are necessary.

At the Huntley, Mont., experiment farm three irrigations were
given sunflowers seeded May 21, 1918, water being applied uniformly
to the field on July 9, August 2, and August 18 (7, p. 12-14). In
1917 five irrigations were given. The frequency and character of
cultivations and irrigations will necessarily have to be determined to
a large degree by the grower. The large growth produced and the
consequent high rate of water loss in dry regions means a correspond-
ingly high water requirement.

Fic. 3.—Harvesting sunflowers for silage with a row binder equipped with an elevator to
earry the bundles directly into a header barge.

HARVESTING METHODS.

The most efficient method of harvesting sunflowers for silage where
the crop has not lodged badly and the stalks are not too large in
diameter is with the ordinary corn or row binder. This machine
ties the stalks in bundles, making it easier to load and transport them
to the silage cutter. Everything possible should be done to reduce
to a minimum the handwork reauired. Farm laborers dislike to
handle sunflowers on account of the resinous exudation on the stems,
especially where they are cut or bruised, and also because of the
rough surfaces of the stems and leaves.

At the Dubois (Idaho) sheep station an elevator was devised to
earry the bundles directly from the row binder into a header barge.
(Fig. 3.) Sunflower plants 8 to 9 feet tall were handled by the

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 13

binder with this loader attachment. A machine thus equipped re-
duces the hand labor to a minimum.

Where the crop has lodged or a row binder is not available, the
sunflowers may be harvested with a sled to which knives have been
attached or with an ordinary corn knife (fig. 4). Either of these
methods of harvesting should be used only in an emergency. Many
farmers have reported that it is necessary to pay farm laborers
increased wages when such work is in progress.

TIME TO CUT SUNFLOWERS.

There has not been a sufficient number of experiments to determine
definitely the best stage of maturity at which to cut sunflowers for
silage. The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 20-
21) conducted feeding experiments with two lots of silage; one from

Fic. 4.—Cutting sunflowers for silage by hand. This method should be used only when
the crop has been tangled by the wind or is too heavy for a row binder to handle,

sunflowers cut early, when only 30 per cent of the plants were in
bloom, and the other lot from sunflowers cut later, when 90 per cent
of the plants were blooming. Unfortunately, no figures showing
the comparative yields of silage for the two methods are given, and
the results of the feeding test are not conclusive. The dairy cows
fed on the early-cut silage produced slightly less milk and butter
fat, but gained more in weight than those fed on the late-cut silage.
However, the cows fed the early-cut silage consumed a little more
silage and grain than those fed late-cut silage. The evidence, there-
fore, points to a slight advantage in the late cutting. The investi-
- gators conclude that sunflowers should not be cut for silage until 50
to 60 per cent of the plants are in bloom, not only because of the

i4 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

apparent higher feeding value of the late-cut silage, but because
there is also a greater loss of juices when the plants are harvested at
an earlier stage.

There has been trouble in several cases caused by the loss of juice
from sunflower silage. At the field station of the United States
Department of Agriculture, at Ardmore, S. Dak., 57 tons of sun-
flowers were cut about August 25, 1920, and stored in a wooden silo
12 feet in diameter. The silo was filled to a depth of 24 feet. Dur-
ing the first month it was estimated that several thousand gallons
of juice escaped through the cracks and around the doors. This
loss of juice was accompanied by a shrinkage of 40 per cent in bulk.
Other reports of the loss of juice from sunflower silage have been
received. In several of these instances, however, the sunflowers were
cut when one-third or less of the plants were in bloom. Such sun-
flowers might be expected to produce “ sappy ” silage.

At the Huntley, Mont., experiment farm in 1918 the sunflowers
were harvested for silage when “on about one-half the plants seed
heads were formed, and some were so far advanced that the seeds
were in the hard dough stage. The remainder of the plants were
in various stages of blooming.” The silage made from this crop
was not very readily eaten by the cows. This was seemingly due
to the fact that much of the silage remained hard and woody in the
silo. The report states that apparently the sunflowers were allowed
to become too mature before harvesting to make the most palatable
silage.

At the West Virginia station (3, p. 2, 6, and 7) the sunflowers were
cut for silage “ when the majority of the seeds of the plants were
in the light dough stage.” No difficulty was experienced either in
harvesting or ensiling the sunflowers at this stage of maturity, and
none of the silage was refused or not eaten by any cow during the
entire test. “After a few days the cows ate the sunflower silage
practically as well as corn silage.”

The composition of sunflower plants at different stages of ma-
turity is shown by a series of analyses made at the West Virginia
Agricultural Experiment Station in 1919 (3, p. 3). Additional
work of this nature has also been done by Shaw and Wright (78)
of the United States Department of Agriculture. They found that
sunflower plants 3 feet high contained 84.87 per cent of moisture;
6 feet high, 86.02 per cent; in first flower, 84.09 per cent; with rays
ready to fall, 83.9 per cent; with rays dry and partly fallen, 75.58
per cent; with rays all fallen, 74.37 per cent; and when the seeds
were hard and mature, 69.68 per cent. This decrease in the percent-
age of moisture as the plant grows older conforms more nearly with
the conditions existing in other plants than do the continuously high
moisture percentages found at the West Virginia station. The sun-

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 15

flowers used in the experiments of Shaw and Wright were grown at
Beltsville, Md. Corn grown in the same field had 68.69 per cent of
moisture at the time it was sufficiently mature to put in the silo.

The average amount of moisture in sunflower silage, as shown in
Table 2 of this bulletin, is 77.8 per cent. This is less than that of
silage made from immature corn and only 6.9 per cent greater than’
the percentage of moisture in silage made from mature corn.

The results of Shaw and Wright also indicate that the percentage
of proteids in the plant steadily declines as it matures. The sugar
content also decreases. The greatest difference, however, is in the
starch content. In corn at the time it is ready for the silo 24 per
cent of the dry matter of the plant is starch; in the sunflower less
than 1 per cent is starch. The starch and sugars combined consti-
tute 37 per cent of the total dry matter of the corn plant and only
11.2 per cent of the sunflower plant.

Shaw and Wright conclude from their chemical data that the best
time to cut sunflowers for silage is when the ray flowers have become

AV NED tO OIA eam
be EU ANT ty 74)

Fig. 5.—Low flat-topped wagons save much hand labor in loading sunflowers to be hauled
to a silo.

dry and are partly fallen. Judging from the limited information now
available regarding the use of sunflowers for silage, it is best to cut
the crop before the seeds have reached the hard dough stage. Most
writers advise harvesting sunflowers for silage when only 50 to 60 per
cent of the planis are in bloom. Decision regarding the best stage of
maturity at which to cut will depend somewhat on location, espe-
cially as to rainfall and atmospheric humidity. In dry climates the
plants ean be harvested at an earlier stage of maturity than in humid
climates.

FILLING THE SILO.

For hauling the sunflowers to the silo low flat-topped wagons,
such as are used for hauling corn silage, are desirable (fig. 5). The
ordinary silage cutter can be used for sunflowers, but one with a
wide throat is desirable in order to accommodate the large heads.
The knives should be adjusted to a quarter-inch cut and bolted on the
cutter securely, because the stalks of the sunflower are somewhat
hard and woody.

16 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Little trouble will be experienced in cutting sunflowers if the
plants are fed into the silage cutter tops first. Sunflower silage
packs more easily than corn silage. If harvesting has been de-
layed for any reason until the sunflowers are older and somewhat
dry it will be necessary to add water along with the silage. With
such silage more care is required to tramp it down thoroughly.

Sunflowers usually produce an inferior quality of silage if har-
vested later than the blooming stage.

A word of caution is necessary in regard to the strength of the
silo used in storing sunflower silage. Those who have had experi-
ence in ensiling sunflowers find that they pack much more closely

Fic. 6.—Filling with sunflowers the 200-ton concrete silo on the United States Sheep
Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho.

in the silo than corn. This close packing, of course, means heavier
silage and in large silos results in much greater pressure on the
walls of the silo. George M. Rommel, formerly Chief of the Animal
Husbandry Division, Bureau of Animal Industry, United States
Department of Agriculture, is authority for the statement that a silo
constructed to hold 200 tons of corn silage will hold nearly 300 tons of
sunflower silage.

Rommel says that a new monolithic concrete silo 14 feet in
diameter and 50 feet high was built with 6-inch walls and the ordi-
nary quantity of metal reinforcement on the United States Sheep
Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho, in 1920. (Fig. 6.) This
silo, while it was being filled with sunflowers that fall, began to
crack from the pressure when it was little more than half full. Fill-

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. d

ing had to be discontinued and the silo reinforced with steel bands
in order to save it. Rommel found on inquiry that many farmers
in the Northwest who had filled their silos with sunflowers had
had similar experiences.

One of the hoops on a wooden silo at Huntley, Mont., burst while
the silo was being filled with sunflowers, making it necessary to re-
inforce the silo with an iron band. Inquiries addressed to the Mon-
tana, Washington, and Oregon agricultural experiment stations,
however, elicited the information that no trouble of this kind had
been encountered at those stations, and none had been reported to
them by farmers.

Nothing definite is yet known about the comparative pressure
exerted on the silo walls by corn and sunflower silage. No advice
can be given, therefore, as to the additional reinforcement necessary
for silos intended to hold sunflowers. Care should be used, how-
ever, in building such a silo, and the ordinary silo should be watched
‘closely while it is being filled with sunflowers and until the settling
process is completed. If it shows signs of cracking, serious trouble
can be averted by reinforcing it with iron bands.

YIELDS OF SILAGE.

The yields of sunflower silage have been consistently larger than
those of corn or other silage crops in the northern part of the
United States and the higher altitudes of the Rocky Mountain region,
where the temperatures are low during the summer season. The
results of the more important of these comparative tests are listed
in Table 1.

Where the yields are recorded for different rates of seeding, as at
Huntley, Mont., that given in the table was obtained from drilled
rows 30 to 36 inches apart, because drilling in rows is the more com-
mon method of culture and the one which no doubt will be most
widely used by farmers. This method has not always given the
largest yield, as will be seen by reference to the paragraph on the
rate and method of seeding. The average yields of sunflowers, corn,
and sorgo are not given, because these three crops were not all grown
at a sufficient number of the stations to make the averages comparable.
In the first series of yields from Guelph, Ontario, the Mammoth Rus-
sian variety of sunflowers, which made the second highest yield
among the sunflower varieties tested, is compared with the second
highest yielding varieties of corn and sorgo. In the second series
the Black Giant variety of sunflower is compared with Wisconsin
No. 7 corn and Orange sorgo. These varieties made the highest
silage yields, respectively, of each of the crops under test.

18 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

TABLE 1.—Comparison of the yields per acre of sunflower, corn, and sorgo silage.

[Yields obtained under irrigation are given in italic figures; those not in italic were

- obtained without irrigation. ]
Yields per acre (tons).
Locality. Year. y Y
Sun- Sorgo
flowers. Corn! (cane).
PillmiantWwiashees sere eee SRE Re ti ae oe 1919 and 1920...-..| 6
Wimatilla jOneg sss 22 ee ossess= ' B
Moro; Oregiieias 2 sasscc ase acer. ci
Wallowa County, lOreg. 25. see ee ennai santa sees ee ;
ID) Oey eric ae ssicticeis sae anece cea wnes Weaeekebatcae :
RGN OsNG Wea ate ates ee eee agen eee secsene ssem :
1D) OS eee opine oe betas See eee eee ana neteiescer ers }
IMOSCO Wa NLC St O eyes hace nee oe cris aint Rateisinc isiccreetecte b
IBozenranMOmbs =e < ciee se ecee seen ae sie oncleecieeels 4
AD) Oa es EE tet ee RE EE oe tas oor SE c
IDO Se GaSe seis te epider Meee IRE et Setar Sea 3
LEI aeh ds Ko) ot Hoe eeigaeeaes Hee Sy Agad cornea saoctenem ater. :
MET ATG Oy eM OMG es ates ene eee eee ia remo eeccoeie L
DY Ose aie Sas See aes oot id Sb cerctes ister aie b
ABO Ee 5 Ane aaa See eG Re ice ea are ers a7.
aramilewwayiOucenistesseres sober behest oe seeasgeeeeeces 4
SiO Ca ieee, ING INS es sa oe lee Tes ee oak 1Q1O Reese eee 3
enue tn caniiNe Mex: ae seeps eject esas aise eit emisiaele 1920 bee Seeete tee 4.3 3:9"). eee
Dickinson, N. Dak....-- Pe aad eee ews Seances TOUS aca eet 10.5 6.0 |r
OTe ae Se Sake eau Seniesa 1919 :.28-cee seeeee 3.0 | 230) ¢ eee :
IP) OE ae cae eis Gee owen en me ct tatecisscaieeeine O20. 6 so eee Seema 8.3 | AO! etre ee
INO Well SiS 2 Dakites shot onetime cesar steamers TOU chet teeeas 12.6 0:10) 4))|SEeee ee
Oe ae ea SN aie de oe Seine Saas eelnceieiae MAS aS IOUS 2 See esses 12.8 8.2 c11.3
Redfield Sh Daksses seek cec as eases ete serciee rte ee 1920). - Saceen teeters 1572 10. 4 15.5
SCOtis bl UiINGbrisaas seas cene stasis cee eee secs es 1917 to 1919........| a 16.3 @14.167| sea
Shen ete bi ai Wah gay pee a eee Se ea eee Se ION QE Ss seen aise 10.0 10:0" 223 oe
NO) ELUTE Paina exer atere relate stecta st atatn crete tevotmtate rs 5 LONG eae eeoete 1853) secs seers 15.6
CBathaimbe Miche ies Sac sis ie aesnic eee ne Soest teeta ers 191934 See eels 25.0. (3228525208 | eee
Glintoni@ounitys Aes ao seco eecioe - scene ee LOLG SSeS ie eee 15.5 LLS0:} 2 eee
MorctantowieWe Wale ase cn ameeesnec. tosses =cee LO1Qu yale heed chee 18.0 | 8.57 ee ee
(CEYABMON iis INI5 Ze - waned onbaboscatesaanussasapesdcodes 1919). eee senses 18.0 (Dil | decrees
(Or ONC H MME ste dase s eo Se pa SSeraMas Sad Ase so Seeaonesc CERES ASeisGnconnon 24,4. | oc ee tackle eee
Guelph Ontario; (Canada: --ces-s-eeee ence ea ee eee (d) ily A 15.8 16.7
Oe clas Tae ocreno > Susan padet See ae neu SeSEeaseS (e) 20.3 16.9 L722
Calvary, Alberta, (Canadas. 2222252 assesses jcecme cs LOIS ene aera 39.0 14.0 \ eee aoee

a The yield given is the average for the years specified.

b The corn yields listed are those of the Payne White Dent, the highest yielding variety which matured
sufficiently to make good silage. Red Cob corn, asouthern variety, made an average yield of 13.15 tons per
acre for the two years, but was so immature when harvested that the silage was of very poor quality.

c The Red Amber sorgo was too immature when harvested to make good silage.

d Average yields of Mammoth Russian sunflower and White Cap Yellow Dent corn each for 13 years
and Minnesota Amber sorgo 15 years.

e Average yields of Black Giant sunflower and Wisconsin No. 7 corn each for 13 years and Orange
sorgo 15 years.

There are other tests of these crops mentioned in agricultural litera-
ture, but no definite yields are given. In the Quarterly Bulletin of
the Michigan Agricultural College for May, 1920, it states that in
1919 careful estimates of the yields on eight farms in Ogemaw, Grand
Traverse, Otsego, and Emmet Counties showed that “on an average
sunflowers yielded 20 per cent greater tonnage per acre than the corn
grown in the same fields. On the college farm at East Lansing, a
3-acre strip of sunflowers produced a 30 per cent greater tonnage than
an equal area of corn adjacent.” C. B. Tillson, county agricultural
agent of Clinton County, N. Y., writing in the Rural New Yorker,
February 21, 1920, says that there were 30 tests of sunflowers in Clin-
ton County in 1919 and that in many instances the sunflowers out-
yielded corn from 30 to 35 per cent. He adds that the sunflowers out-

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 19

yielded the corn most where the conditions were least favorable for
the corn. He believes that sunflowers will be grown most extensively
on farms unsuited to the production of silage corn.

The yields shown in Table 1 seem very favorable to sunflowers
because the tests were made mainly in those regions where the large-
growing varieties of corn suited for silage purposes are not adapted
to the climatic conditions. It can be said also that a large part of
these yields was obtained under irrigation. (Fig. 7.) Where the
crops can not be irrigated and in localities where silage varieties of

fod

Fic. 7.—Sunflowers grown for silage purposes under irrigation on the Scottsbluff Reclama-
tion project, near Mitchell, Nebr., 1917. Yield, 22.9 tons per acre, green weight.

corn mature properly, the comparative yields of corn and sunflowers
are much less favorable to the latter.

FEEDING VALUE OF SUNFLOWER SILAGE.

Considering the fact that only a few years have elapsed since an
interest in the use of sunflowers for silage was created by the experi-
ments at the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station in 1915, a
comparatively large number of feeding experiments have been car-
ried out. Most of these indicate that scenflower silage when properly
made is equal to corn silage for milk-production purposes. Sun-
flower silage has also been fed at the Montana station to beef cattle,
breeding ewes, and brood sows with good results.

7Prepared with the advice and cooperation of the Animal Husbandry Division of the
Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture.

20 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

COMPOSITION AND DIGESTIBILITY.

The composition of sunflower silage, as shown by chemical analyses,
compares very favorably with that of corn and the sorghums. While
somewhat lower in carbohydrates or nitrogen-free extract than the
corn and sorghums, it is, on the other hand, higher in fat and protein.
The analyses made at different places are presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2.—Comparison of the composition of sunflower, corn, and sorghum silage.

Constituents (per cent).

Num- 5
: : ber of i i
Kind of silage. Nitro- Authority.
Soa a Crude Crude} gen- | Ether
ples. /Water.) Ash. a fiber.| free jextract.
em extract.
Suntlowers ees = eee 4} 78.6 1.6 Pal 6.8 10. 4 0.5 | Mont. Bul. 131, p. 14.4
DOb to Ss. eecers 3| 78.5 2.4 2.4 5.8 9.8 1.1 | Jour. Agr. Res., v. 18, p.
327.
DORR wee eae ne 1} 67.8 3. 4 4.3 6.6 16.6 1.3 | M. J. Blish, for silage from
| Ardmore, Ss.
DOveeas soe eee 1 tO 2 2.3 1.9 teD 11.0 1.2 | W.Va. Cire. 32, oa
IDO: cee Fee eN 3) EPS} 3.0 1.9 4.8 eo 7 | Un Se, Dept: ” Agr., Bu.
Chemistry.
IDOSaae see eae LOH GONS 205 |. nou 9.1 14.6 9! U. S. Dept. Agr., Anim.
Hus. Diy.
D Oeste ae eee UG ee Ste 6.4} 10.0 1.8 | Wash. Bul. 158, p. 11.
Average (weighted). Lea eal aes||) eaaally OS 10. 4 9
Comma. see cee oe seco 730i NZONON|) LA BNA | 6.9 ily 9 | Beziers Bulletin 1240
Cornistover 2.2.5 6| 80.7 1.8 1.8 5.6 9.5 .6 “Feeding Farm Ani-
Sorghum.........-.--. 1G) TG Ts es) eT) ATO 1.1 | mals.”

a The cainen eee in these analyses was made from sunflowers harv re ren only 5 per cent of the
plants were in bloom and therefore without mature seeds.

» This analysis was made by Dr. M. J. Blish, of the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station. The
Sow ers were grown in 1920 by the Animal Husbandry Division on their sheep ranch near Dubois,

aho

The percentage of digestible nutrients in sunflower silage has been
determined by the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station and the
results are given fully in Bulletin 134 of that station (10). The silage
used in these experiments was made from sunflowers cut when only
5 per cent of the plants were in bloom. This explains the low per-
centage of fat (ether extract) shown by the Montana analyses in
Table 2. The coefficients of digestibility as determined for this silage
were as follows: Crude protein, 59.88; crude fiber, 42.33; nitrogen-
free extract, 69.75; and ether extract, 70.63 per cent.

Table 3 shows that the silage made from sunflowers is not equal
in digestible nutrients to that made from corn. The amount of diges-
tible crude fiber and nitrogen-free extract combined is higher in
corn silage than it is in sunflower silage, but this difference is partly
balanced by the higher percentage of digestible fat in the sunflower
silage.

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 21

TaBLE 3.—Digestible nutrients in 100 pounds of sunflower, corn, and sorghum

silage.
Digestible nutrients (pounds). |
: Crude ae
Kind of silage. eae fiber Nutritive Authority.
- | Crude and Ether | Tatio.
protein. | nitrogen-| extract.
free
| extract.
Sunflower..........- | 3 steers... 1. 24 10. 13 0.37 28.8} Mont. Bul. 134, p. 8.
D ce 1.14 10. 85 .85 11.2 | W. Va. Cire. 32, p. 3.0
: hoke -91 10.1 bv ee
1.10 9. 62 “05 10.6 Jour. Agr. Res. v. 20, p. 881.
1.00 €8.17 1.45 11.4 | Wash. Bul. 158, p. 11.
1.09 9.30 91 | 10.4
Com esc] EB] HRS) 225 [prarmersButtetin 1240, «Feed.
Sorghum............ - | .87 12. 92 82 if ig eee TIS

a This figure was incorrectly given as 9.8 in Mont. Bul. 134.

b The coefficients of digestibility for sunflower silage determined in the Montana experiments were
used in computing the digestible nutrients of the silage made in West Virginia to show the difference in
results when a silage made from more nearly mature plants is considered. It isrecognized that this method
is subject to criticism, but the results, it is believed, are approximately correct.

¢ In Washington Bul. 162, p. 15, this figure is given as 8.29.

PALATABILITY.

There are some differences of opinion regarding the palatability of
sunflower silage. Most of the evidence from feeding trials conducted
in the United States and Canada leads to the conclusion that even
though animals may hesitate at first to eat sunflower silage freely,
they soon become accustomed to it and, with the possible exception
of corn silage, show no preference between it and other kinds of
silage. In a number of instances where adverse reports were made
as to the palatability of sunflower silage, it is apparent that the crop
was not in the right condition when it was put in the silo. At the
Huntley (Mont.) and Scottsbluff (Nebr.) experiment farms the sun-
flowers were not always cut before the seed had reached the hard
dough stage, and some of the silage remained hard and woody in
the silo.

Tt is difficult to determine just why the sunflower silage is so uni-
formly good at Bozeman, Mont., and so often of poor quality or at
least low in palatability at Huntley, in the same State. Chemical
analyses of sunflower plants grown at Huntley show a lower sugar
content than plants grown at Bozeman. This deficiency in sugar
may diminish the fermentation processes necessary to produce good
silage. A similar difference in the composition of the plants may
explain the difficulties which have been encountered at Scottsbluff,
Nebr. Holden (9, p. 26-28), in his report for the years 1918 and 1919,
says that while cows ate the sunflower silage in 1917 very well when
it was fed for short periods alternating with corn silage, they did

22 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

not eat as much of it as of the corn silage. In 1918, when they were
fed on sunflower silage continuously for a considerable period, both
dairy cows and beef cattle ate the sunflower silage very well at first,
but after 10 days or two weeks they would not eat as much. “It
seemed the longer they were fed sunflower silage the less they would
clean up. The cows also dropped off in their milk flow.”

In 1919 Holden added to the sunflower silage about 10 per cent,
by weight, of molasses from the sugar factory. Dairy cows, beef
cattle, and fattening lambs ate this silage fairly well, but even
with the molasses added they did not relish it as well as they did the
corn silage.

At the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station the leaves of
the sunflower plants had been killed by rust and drought so that the
crop was in poor condition when it was ensiled. T. E. Woodward,
in charge of the silage experiments at the experiment farm of the
Dairy Division of the United States Department of Agriculture at
Beltsville, Md., reports some difficulty in getting dairy cows to eat
the sunflower silage, although its quality appeared to be good. De-
tails are lacking regarding the condition of the sunflowers when they
were put into the silo at the Michigan station. It is impossible,
therefore, to explain its apparent lack of palatability. With the ex-
ception of the above-mentioned reports and that of the Pennsylvania
experiment station (see p. 24) there has been little complaint about
the palatability of sunflower silage.

At the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station: cattle, sheep,
and hogs ate sunflower silage readily and in sufficient quantities to
prove its availability in the rationing of these animals. The West
Virginia, Wyoming, and Idaho experiment stations, the University
of Saskatchewan, and the Manitoba Agricultural College, in addition
to numerous farmers, all report that sunflower silage is relished by
dairy cows. It is safe to say, therefore, that silage made from sun-
flowers which are in good condition and at the right stage of de-
velopment when cut will in most cases be consumed readily by dairy
cows and most other kinds of live stock, with the possible exception
of horses. .

COLOR, TEXTURE, AND ODOR.

Good sunflower silage is usually a dark olive-brown color, much
darker than corn or sorghum silage. In texture it compares favor-
ably with corn silage when the sunflowers have been harvested at
the right stage of maturity and stored properly. Most of the com-
plaints regarding the texture of sunflower silage are the result of
harvesting the crop too late. When the plants have been allowed
to stand until the seeds are in the hard dough stage or even nearer
ripe, the stems become woody and do not soften up in the silo. .

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 23

Sunflower silage has a peculiar odor, which is rather strong,
resinous, and somewhat sour, but not offensive. This odor may be
one of the reasons why cattle sometimes hesitate to eat the silage
when it is first offered to them.

ACIDITY OF THE SILAGE.

A determination of the acidity of sunflower silage was made by
the chemical department of the Idaho Agricultural Experiment
Station in 1919 (73). Three samples were used in the determinations.
Samples 1 and 2 were taken from the silo at depths of 2 and 6
feet, respectively. Both of these samples were somewhat spoiled,
as indicated by the dark color and disagreeable odor. Sample 3,
on the other hand, seemed to have undergone a normal fermentation
and had a good color and no disagreable odor. The total acids, con-
sidering only sample 3, were found to be 1.37 per cent. The acidity
of corn silage made from corn cut when the kernels were in the
glazed stage, as determined by the senior author of the above-men-
tioned article, varied from 1.34 to 2.16 per cent in 1915 and was
1.81 in 1916. For oat-and-pea silage it was 1.66 and for wheat-and-
pea silage 1.61 per cent. All these samples were taken from large
silos, and the percentages are given on the basis of the composition
of the silage as sampled (/2).

As will be observed from these experiments good sunflower silage
is less acid than corn silage or the silage made from a mixture of
peas and small grains, and there can be no objection to it on account
of its acidity.

RESULTS WITH DAIRY CATTLE.

The Montana, West Virginia, New Mexico, and Washington agri-
cultural experiment stations, the Manitoba Agricultural College, and
the University of Saskatchewan all report favorable results in feed-
ing sunflower silage to dairy cows. At variance with their results
are the rather unfavorable reports from the Pennsylvania and Michi-
gan agricultural experiment stations and the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture field stations at Huntley, Mont., and Scottsbluff,
Nebr.

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 18-20) in
a series of feeding experiments found that good sunflower silage can
be substituted for a large part of the hay in a dairy cow’s ration
without diminishing the quantity of milk produced. The results
indicated that 32 pounds of the silage equaled 1 pound of choice
alsike-clover hay and 2.83 pounds 1 pound of good alfalfa hay.

Sunflower silage was compared with corn silage in feeding ex-
periments with dairy cows at the West Virginia, Pennsylvania,

24 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Michigan, and Washington agricultural experiment stations, at the
United States Department of Agriculture field stations at Huntley,
Mont., and Scottsbluff, Nebr., and at the Manitoba Agricultural Col-
lege. The conclusions arrived at by the experimenters differ mark-
edly. It is impossible to determine from available data just why
the sunflower silage was palatable in one case and not in another.
There are a sufficient number of failures, however, to indicate that
more care and judgment are necessary to make good sunflower silage
than to make good corn silage.

At the West Virginia (3) station the cows fed on a sunflower-
silage ration produced per cow a daily average of 27.93 pounds of
milk and 1.05 pounds of butter fat, while those fed corn silage pro-
duced an average per cow of 29.17 pounds of milk and 1.05 pounds of
butter fat daily. In this test the milk produced by the cows fed
sunflower silage averaged 3.74 per cent of butter fat and that pro-
duced from the corn-silage ration 3.60 per cent. At the Washington
station (20) the cows ate more silage and less grain during the
periods when given corn silage than while they were being fed sun-
flower silage. During the sunflower-silage periods the cows pro-
duced more milk but lost a few pounds in weight. While fed corn
silage there was an appreciable gain in weight. The authors of the
report conclude that sunflower silage in this test was approximately
92 per cent as valuable as corn silage. At the Manitoba .Agricul-
tural College (7) a feeding trial was carried on with seven cows
from December 19, 1919, to April 1, 1920, the conclusion being that
the cows maintained their milk flow and body weight fully as well
~ on the sunflower silage as on the corn-silage ration.

The Pennsylvania station * conducted a feeding test with sunflower
silage in the winter of 1919-20 and with silage one-half sunflowers
and one-half corn in the winter of 1920-21. In each case the stand-
ard of comparison was a good quality of corn silage. In the first
test the cows while fed sunflower silage averaged 19.3 pounds of
milk and 0.92 pound of butter fat per cow daily; while they were
fed corn silage the average production per cow was 22.2 pounds of
milk and 0.98 pound of butter fat daily. When the cows were
changed from corn silage to sunflower silage there was a decrease
of 23.5 per cent in the milk and 18.5 per cent in the butter fat pro-
duced. When the cows were changed from sunflower silage to corn
silage there was an actual increase of 2.3 per cent in the milk pro-
duced, notwithstanding an advance of six weeks in the lactation
vania station in 1919 and 1920 was supplied by S. I. Bechdel, professor of dairy hus-
bandry at the Pennsylvania State College. A complete report on the sunflower-silage

feeding experiments wiil be published by the Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment
Statiou.

=

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 25

period. The sunflower silage, which was fed to the limit of the

_ cows’ appetites, proved unpalatable. Considerable trouble was ex-

perienced in getting the cows to eat enough of it. In this test the
milk from the cows while fed sunflower silage averaged 4.75 per cent
of butter fat and while on corn silage only 4.39 per cent. In the
feeding test with the mixed corn and sunflower silage the cows
produced an average of 20.2 pounds of milk and 0.88 pound of butter
fat per cow daily, and 21.8 pounds of milk and 0.94 pound of butter
fat daily on the corn silage. Again there was a decrease, in this
case 14.5 per cent, in the milk produced when the cows were changed
from corn silage to the mixed silage containing sunflowers. The
corn silage used in the first test contained 30.6 per cent and the sun-
flower silage 26.6 per cent of air-dry matter. In the second test the
corn silage contained 32.9 per cent and the mixed silage 25.8 per cent
of air-dry matter.

Prof. Bechdel states his conclusions as follows: “From a study
of the complete data of these experiments it is concluded that the
use of sunflowers as a silage crop is not advisable on Pennsylvania
farms except in a very few localities where corn is not always a sure
crop. A mixture of sunflowers and corn, the crops being grown
either alone or together, affords no advantage when the poorer quality
of silage and the added difficulty of harvesting are taken into con-
sideration.” .

The Michigan Agricultural College (//) reported that the milk
production fell off 11.65 per cent when cows were changed from corn
silage to sunflower silage. When the cows were taken from a sun-
flower-silage ration and fed both corn and sunflower silages in equal
portions there was an increase of 7.06 per cent in the milk produced.
When the change was made from this mixture of silages to pure corn
silage there was again a decrease of 5.58 per cent in the milk pro-
duced. The results in Michigan seem to indicate that sunflower
silage is less efficient than corn silage as a milk-producing feed, but
that a combination of the two silages is preferable to either.

Holden (9, p. 27) in his report of the work at the Scottsbluff
(Nebr.) Experiment Farm for 1918 and 1919 makes the following
comment on the value of the different silage crops under test at that
station: “ From the data available at this experiment farm it is be-
lieved that the extra tonnage from silage corn over that from field
corn will more than make up for the better quality of the field corn.
It is further believed that the ensilage from silage corn is sufficiently
higher in quality to offset the greater yield of sunflowers.”

Sunflower silage was compared with sweet-sorghum silage as a
feed for dairy cows at the New Mexico station (J6) in the winter

26 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

of 1919-20. The author of the report states the results as follows:
“The cows did not consume the sunflower silage as readily as the
‘cane’ silage, and they sometimes left a small quantity of it; but,
notwithstanding this fact, the total amount of milk produced on
sunflower silage was greater than that produced on ‘ cane’ silage.”

In‘a short feeding test at the University of Saskatchewan (4)
sunflower silage was compared with oat silage as a roughage for
dairy cows. The former produced slightly more milk, pound for
pound, than oat silage.

The results at the University of Saskatchewan are supported by
the report of the county agricultural agent of Wallowa County,
Oreg., in the Farm Journal of January, 1921, p. 68. In response
to a campaign for a wider use of sunflowers for silage, 14 silos were
filled with sunflowers in 1919. Field peas and oats had previously
been the chief silage crop of that county, and the sunflower silage
proved more satisfactory than the pea-and-oat silage.

Another matter of considerable importance to the butter maker
has developed in the feeding of sunflower silage at the field station
of the United States Department of Agriculture at Ardmore, S. Dak.
F. L. Kelso, farm superintendent, claims that considerable difficulty
was experienced in manufacturing a satisfactory grade of butter
while the sunflower silage was being fed. He says, in correspondence
dated June 17, 1921: “It seemed almost impossible to get the butter
to harden, although the flavor was fairly satisfactory. An ordinary
churning required from an hour to an hour and a quarter while
this silage was being fed. Under ordinary circumstances when corn
or cane silage is fed it requires approximately 15 minutes to churn.
The first churning that was done after discontinuing the feeding of
sunflower silage required 22 minutes.” This question of the effect
‘on the butter is important and so far has been investigated very
little.

Notwithstanding these adverse reports, the conclusion seems war-
ranted that good sunflower silage is worthy of consideration as a con-
stituent in the rations of dairy cows in localities where better silage
crops are not available.

FEEDING TESTS WITH BEEF CATTLE.

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station reports tests im
feeding sunflower silage to beef cattle of practically all sizes and
ages. Calves were fed, with good results, rations in which one-half
or more of the roughage was sunflower silage. It was learned, how-
ever, that calves could not be put on a heavy feed of silage too
rapidly; when this was done they went “ off feed.” This difficulty
was not encountered with mature cattle. Two-year-old steers were

-

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 2

fed a limited ration of sunflower silage only for 30 days with good
results, and mature beef cows thrived when fed sunflower silage
in the morning and hay in the evening.

At the Wyoming station it was observed that cattle preferred the
sunflower silage to good alfalfa hay or oat-and-pea silage. The
silage was found especially valuable in Wyoming as a substitute for
pasture during the winter, keeping both dairy cows and beef cattle
in a thrifty growing condition.

The New Mexico station also fed sunflower silage to beef cows and
young beef stock. It was compared with sweet-sorghum silage for
this purpose and found to equal the latter in feeding value. What
difference there was in the gains produced favored the sunflower
silage (J6). .

At the University of Alberta (2) at Edmonton 54 steers were fed
for 140 days in a comparison of three kinds of silage. Eighteen
head were fed oat silage; 18 head, oat-and-pea silage, and 18
head, sunflower silage. The steers had all the silage and hay they
desired in addition to a two-thirds grain and linseed-oil meal ration.
The oat and oat-and-pea silages were both first-class. The sunflower
silage was not so good, because the crop had to be haryested while
it wasimmature. From 2 to 20 per cent of the plants were in bloom
and one field was frosted before harvest. No difficulty was expert-
enced in getting the steers to eat sunflower silage, and there was no
trouble from scouring even while they were consuming 73 pounds
of silage a day. In this experiment oat silage ranked first in rapidity
and economy of gains, sunflower silage second, and oat-and-pea
Silage third.

There is little doubt from these experiments that sunflower silage
can be used with good results in the rations of beef cattle.

USE OF SUNFLOWER SILAGE IN FEEDING SHEEP.

During the winter of 1917-18 the Montana Agricultural Experi-
ment Station conducted an experiment in feeding sunflower silage
to breeding ewes. This test was designed to indicate the value of
sunflower silage in replacing a part of the alfalfa hay in the ration.
The lot fed hay and oats was under test for 77 days, and the lot fed
hay, silage, and oats for 74 days. The average gain per ewe during
the test period was 13.2 pounds for the hay-fed lot and 12.4 pounds
for those in which silage was included in the ration. This slight
difference in gain was due for the most part, perhaps, to the slightly
greater quantity of oats received by the first lot. The conclusion
reached by the experimenters was that in feeding breeding ewes 23
pounds of sunflower silage is equal to 1 pound of alfalfa hay. No
unfavorable results were noted in feeding the sunflower silage either
before, during, or after lambing.

28 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

The Washington station (17, p. 17) found that “a lot of pure-bred.
lambs made an average daily gain of 0.225 pounds each when fed
a daily ration of 1 pound barley, one-half pound cull beans, four-
fifths pound of pea straw, and 24. pounds of sunflower silage.” At
the same station they were able to maintain breeding ewes in good
condition on a daily ration consisting of 2 pounds of alfalfa hay and
3 pounds of sunflower silage.

At the Wyoming station sunflower silage was fed to growing ewe
lambs in conjunction with native hay and three-fourths of a pound
of a grain mixture daily. In a 42-day feeding period this group
of lambs averaged 0.16 pound of gain daily. A similar group fed
a like ration in which pea-and-oat silage was substituted for the
sunflower silage averaged only 0.145 pound of gain daily.

The United States Sheep Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho,
completed about April 1, 1921, a 55-day feeding test on 1,700 ewes,
with the following daily ration for each sheep:

UMM OWEeRNCNSTa Ce east oie ee ee ee 2 pounds.
SX UI EES TEES WON ES ye Na AE gee na ee OT AT $ pounds.
INOM2 yellow CORN es sins Ro eee + pound.

The silage was fed from racks 12 feet long, each of these racks:
accommodating 18 to 20 ewes. The first day half a pound of ensilage
for each sheep was distributed. The quantity was gradually in-
creased till the fifth day, when the full 2 pounds, with 12 pounds of
hay and one-fourth pound of corn per head, were fed. This ration,
divided into two feedings, was continued through the test.

In this band of sheep were 1,300 pregnant Rambouillet and cross-
bred ewes from 2 to 7 years of age and 400 ewes coming yearlings the
following spring, all in good condition at the beginning of winter.
They were held on the range until a heavy snow on December 15;
then taken to the feed lot and given 4 pounds of alfalfa hay per head
daily until January 28. Because this hay was of poor quality the
sheep lost condition during the period. From January 29 to March
24 the sheep received the ration mentioned above, containing sun-
flower ensilage, without hay the last five days, when open range was
substituted. The test ended on March 24 when the sunflower ensilage
was exhausted. At that time the entire band of sheep was stronger
than at the conclusion of the alfalfa-hay feeding period on January
28, and was in good condition for lambing, with strong-stapled well-
grown fleeces. Although the sheep had not tasted ensilage before
this test, they ate it readily after the second day, preferring ensilage
to hay. Only two died during the period, neither death being due
to ensilage poisoning. Only three ewes were noticed that had lost
their lambs.

Since no water was available at the feed yard the sheep ate snow.
Although the sheep wintered well on the feed as described, it is be-

ed

Pi eere Vee O19

}

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 29

lieved that the ration could be improved by the addition of more
sunflower ensilage.

FEEDING SUNFLOWER SILAGE TO HOGS.

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 25-26) has
done the principal work in comparing sunflower silage with alfalfa
hay in a ration given brood sows. It was found that the sows would
eat sunflower silage readily. During a part of the feeding period
they consumed 4 pounds per head daily, in addition to a small
quantity of skim milk and grain. The silage was fed for two months
before farrowing began, throughout the farrowing period, and for
a period of about four weeks thereafter, with no unfavorable results.
Tt is acknowledged by the authors of the report on these experiments
that but little of the grain in the ration can be replaced by sunflower
silage. It did serve an excellent purpose, however, in keeping the
sows in splendid condition, being as satisfactory in this respect as
alfalfa hay.

SUNFLOWERS AS A SOILING CROP.

Sunflowers have been fed as a soiling crop to dairy cows by a
number of experimenters, with good results. The chief disadvan-
tage of this method of feeding is that the plants must be run through
a cutter before they are used.

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 22) com-
pared sunflowers to corn as a supplement to pasture. Both crops were
cut as needed and run through a silage cutter before being given
to dairy cows during the latter part of their grazing season. “The
cows ate the green sunflowers readily, kept up their milk flow, and
apparently did well on the feed.” The conclusion reached was that
under the conditions of the experiment as described the sunflowers
and corn were of equal feeding value.

A more extensive feeding test was later carried out at the same
station, comparing sunflowers and corn as soiling crops. Six cows
were fed all the chopped sunflowers they would eat and another
six cows all the chopped corn they would eat. Both lots had access
to a small pasture and in addition received the same grain ration.
At the close of the test the corn was in the roasting-ear stage and
the sunflowers were about 40 per cent in bloom. The cows fed sun-
flowers produced an average of 39.4 pounds of milk and 1.41 pounds
of butter fat and those fed corn 38.1 pounds of milk and 1.38 pounds
of butter fat per cow daily. During the feeding period of 28 days
the cows fed sunflowers lost 7.8 pounds and those fed corn 20.4
pounds of live weight. The slight difference in results favoring sun-
flowers is no doubt due very largely to the fact that one cow in the
corn-fed lot went “ off feed” during the period. The results seem to
confirm those of the first test and justify the conclusion that sun-
flowers can be used effectively as a soiling crop for dairy cows.

30 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
DISEASES OF SUNFLOWERS.

Rust’ is the most destructive disease of sunflowers. (Fig. 8.)
It is common in southern Russia and has been reported at several
points in the United States. Rust was prevalent on these plants
at Hays, Kans., in 1920, and has done considerable injury to sun-
flowers in experiments at both the Michigan and Wisconsin stations.
It decreases very decidedly the yield and also results in a poor
quality of silage.

The best method of preventing rust injury appears to lie in the
development of a rust-resistant variety. Frank Spragg and E, E.
Down, in reporting on a variety test of sunflowers at the Michigan

Fic. 8.—Mammoth Russian sunflowers with the lower leaves killed by rust at the Hays
Branch Station, Hays, Kans., 1920.

station in 1918 (see Mich. Agr. Quar. Bul., v. 2, no. 3, p. 128-129,

1920), claim for the South American variety Kaeurpher a certain

measure of rust resistance. It may be, therefore, that a resistant

variety will soon be found.

Some work in breeding a rust-resistant sunflower has been done in
Russia. It was found by the investigator, F. A. Sazyperov, that
the ornamental sunflower (/Zelianthus agyrophyllus) is resistant
to the rust. None of the ordinary commercial varieties are known
to be rust resistant. Hybrids were therefore made between one of
the commercial varieties and the ornamental sunflower. In the
second generation one-fourth of the hybrid plants were found re-
sistant to the rust, although the season was exceptionally favorable
to the spread of the disease. Among these resistant plants were

9Rust (Puccinia helianthi Schw.), the damping-off fungus (Pythium debaryanwm
Hesse), downy mildew (Plasmopara halstedii Farl), powdery mildew (ZHrysiphe ct-
choracearum), and wilt (Sclerotinia sp.), in addition to the parasitic plants Orobanche
cumana Wall. and Homeosonia nebulella Hb. are all said to attack sunflower plants.

THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. ou

individuals which appeared interesting from an agricultural stand-
point. Sazyperov concludes, therefore, that it is possible to obtain
an agricultural variety resistant to the rust.

INSECTS ATTACKING SUNFLOWERS.

In the warmer and drier parts of the United States insects do
considerable damage to sunflowers. At both Amarillo and Chilli-
cothe, Tex., the stalks of the sunflowers were girdled by a larva or
white grub which resembled very closely the larva of the June bug.
This larva worked at or just below the surface of the soil and usually
killed the plant completely or injured it so badly that all growth
ceased. Another insect, also at Chillicothe, girdled the stalk just
beneath the head, causing the head to drop over.

Besides the above insects several forms of beetles and grasshoppers
infest the heads of sunflowers at blooming time and do considerable
damage to the seed crop. In 1918 and 1919 grasshoppers very much
reduced the yield of sunflowers at Scottsbluff, Nebr., by eating out
the terminal bud before the plants headed. Thrips are often abun-
dant on the heads, and aphides, or plant lice, occur in quantity on
the leaves. Sunflowers are, however, less injured by chinch bugs
than corn, and in some localities where these insects are trouble-
some sunflowers may prove valuable in replacing corn as a silage
crop.

Strangely enough, these insects are all less abundant on sun-
flowers in the regions of low summer temperature where the plant

promises to be most important. Cockerell (6) presents a partial
: list of the insects which are known to visit sunflowers in Colorado,
but in most cases he does not indicate the damage caused.

LITERATURE CITED.

ANONYMOUS.
(em) 1920. Manitoba:—Sunflower ensilage for milk production. /n Agr.
: Gaz. Canada, v. 7, no. 10, p. 818-819.
| (2) 1921. Silage for fattening steers. (Summary of report by A. A.
| Dowell and G. L. Flack, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Can-
7 : ada). In Nor’-West Farmer, v. 40, no. 11, p. 627.
: (3) ANTHONY, Ernest L., and HENDERSON, H. O.
3 1920. Sunflowers vs. corn for silage. West Va. Agr, Exp. Sta. Cire.
; S2eSips, t. He:
(4) ATKINSON, ALFRED, NELSON, J. B., ARNETT, C. N., JOSEPH, W. E., and
TRETSVEN, OSCAR.
1919. Growing and feeding sunflowers in Montana. Mont. Agr. Exp.
Sta. Bul. 131, 29 p., 4 fig.
(5) BRACKEN, JOHN.
1919. Saskatchewan :—Sunflower silage. Jn Agr. Gaz, Canada, v. 6,
no. 6, p. 542-543.

od
4
q
ul
.
|

32 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

(6) CocKERELL, T. D. A.
1914. The entomology of Helianthus. Jn Entomologist, v. 47, no. 614,
p. 191-196.
(7) HANSEN, DAN.
1920. The work of the Huntley Reclamation Project experiment farm
in 1918. U. S. Dept. Agr. Dept. Circ. 86, 32 p., 5 fig.
HOoLpEen, JAMES A.
(8) 1918. The work of the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project experiment
farm in 1917. U.S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus., West. Irrig. Agr.
(W. I. A.) Cire. 27, 28 p., 1 fig.

(9) 1921. The work of the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project experiment
farm in 1918 and 1919. U. S. Dept. Agr. Dept. Circ. 1738, 86 p.,
2 fig.

(10) JosEpH. W. E., and BiisH, M. J.
1920. Studies on the digestibility of sunflower silage. Mont. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 134, 8 p.
{i1) MicHigaAn AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION.
1920. Sunflower silage. In Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul., v. 2,
no. 4, p. 163-164.

{12) Neriec, Ray B.
1918. Acidity of silage made from various crops. Jn Jour. Agr. Re-
search, v. 14, no. 10, p. 8395-409. Literature cited, p. 408-409.
and VANCE, LULU E.
1919. Sunfiower silage. Jn Jour. Agr. Research, vy. 18, no. 6, p.
325-827.
(14) PALMER, EDWARD.
1871. Food products of the North American Indians. Jn U. 8S. Dept.
Agr. Rpt., 1870, p. 404-428, pl. 19-28.
(15) Purnam, G. W.
1920. Sunflower experiments. Jn Mich, Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul.,
v. 3, no. 2, p. 49-52, 2 fig.
(16) QUESENBERRY, GEORGE R.
1920. Crops that may be used for silage. Im N. Mex. Farm Courier,
v. 8, no. 4, p. 4-6.
(17) Scuarrr, H. G., and WESTLEY, R. O.
1921. Sunflower production for silage. Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 162,
20 p., 4 fig. References, p. 19.
(18) SHAw, R. H., and WricHT, P. A.
1921. A comparative study of the composition of the sunflower and corn
plants at different stages of growth. Jn Jour. Agr. Research,
v. 20, no. 10, p. 787-793. Literature cited, p. 792-793.
(19) Witry, Harvey W.
1901. The sunflower plant: Its cultivation, composition, and uses.
U. S. Dept. Agr. Div. Chem. Bul. 60, 31 p., 2 fig., 1 pl.
(20) Woopwarp, E. G.
1920. Sunflower silage vs. corn silage. In Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta., 30th
Ann. Rpt., 1919/20 (Bul. 158), p. 18-20.

O

(13)

0 022 265 660 6

He
|