SECTION IV._The Stock-Feeder's Manual the chemistry of food in relation to the breeding and feeding of live stock

STRAW AND HAY.

_Straw._--At the present time, when the attention of the farmer is

becoming more and more devoted to the production of meat, it is very

desirable that his knowledge of the exact nutritive value of the various

feeding substances should be more extensive than it is. No doubt, most

feeders are practically acquainted with the relative value of corn and

oil-cake--of Swedish turnips and white turnips; but their knowledge of

the food equivalents of many other substances is still very defective.

For example, every farmer is not aware that Indian corn is a more

economical food than beans for fattening cattle, and less so for beasts

of burthen. Locust-beans, oat-dust, malt-combings, and many other

articles, occasionally consumed by stock, have not, as yet, determinate

places assigned to them in the feeder's scale of food equivalents.

The points involved in the economic feeding of stock are not quite

so simple as some farmers, more especially those of the amateur

class, appear to believe. There are many feeders who sell their

half-finished cattle at a profit, and yet they cannot, without loss,

convert their stock into those obese monsters which are so much

admired at agricultural shows. The complete fattening of cattle is

a losing business with some feeders, and a profitable one with others.

Stall-feeding is a branch of rural economy which, perhaps more than any

other, requires the combination of "science with practice;" yet how few

feeders are there who have the slightest knowledge of the composition of

food substances, or who are agreed as to the feeding value, absolute or

relative, of even such well-known materials as oil-cake, straw, or oats!

"It is thus seen how inexact are the equivalents which are understood to

be established for the different foods used for the maintenance of the

animals. It is equally plain, when we reflect on the different methods

pursued for the preservation of the animals, that we are still far

from having attained that perfection towards which our efforts tend.

Visit one hundred farms, taken by chance in different parts of the

country, and you will find in each, methods directly opposite--a totally

peculiar manner of managing the stalls; you will see, in short, that the

conditions of food, of treatment, and of hygiene, remain not understood

in seven-eighths of rural farms."[29]

The straws of the cereal and leguminous plants are a striking

illustration of the erroneous opinions and practices which prevail

amongst agriculturists with respect to particular branches of their

calling. The German farmers regard straw as the most valuable

constituent of home-made fertilisers, and their leases in general

prohibit their selling off the straw produced on their farms. Yet

chemical analysis has clearly proved that the manurial value of straw is

perfectly insignificant, and that, as a constituent of stable manure, it

is chiefly useful as an absorbent of the liquid egesta of the animals

littered upon it. As food for stock, straw was at one time regarded by

our farmers as almost perfectly innutritious; some even went so far as

to declare that it possessed no nutriment whatever, and even those who

used it, did so more with the view of correcting the too watery nature

of turnips, than with the expectation of its being assimilated to the

animal body. Within the last few years, however, straw has been largely

employed by several of the most intelligent and successful feeders in

England, who report so favorably upon it as an economical feeding stuff,

that it has risen considerably in the estimation of a large section

of the agricultural public. Now, even without adopting the very high

opinion which Mechi and Horsfall entertain relative to the nutritive

power of straw, I am altogether disposed to disagree with those who

affirm that its application should be restricted to manurial purposes.

Unless under circumstances where there is an urgent demand for straw as

litter, that article should be used as food for stock, for which purpose

it will be found, if of good quality, and given in a proper state, a

most economical kind of dry fodder--equal, if not superior to hay, when

the prices of both articles are considered.

The composition of straw is very different from that of grain.

The former contains no starch, but it includes an exceedingly high

proportion of woody fibre; the latter is in great part composed of

starch, and contains but an insignificant amount of woody fibre. Dr.

Voelcker, the consulting chemist to the Royal Agricultural Society of

England, and Dr. Anderson, chemist to the Highland and Agricultural

Society of Scotland, have made a large number of analyses of the straws

of the cereal and leguminous plants, the results of which are of the

highest interest to the agriculturist. In the following tables the more

important results of these investigations are given:--

ANALYSES OF STRAW, BY DR. VOELCKER.

+--------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| | | | | | |

| | No. 1. | No. 2. | No. 3. | No. 4. | No. 5. |

| | | | | | |

+--------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| Water | 13.33 | 9.17 | 15.20 | 17.50 | 16.00 |

| _a_. Soluble in water | 1.28 | 0.06 | 0.68 | \ | 5.51 |

| | | | | }5.73 | |

| _b_. Insoluble in water| 1.65 | 2.06 | 3.75 | / | 2.98 |

| | | | | | |

| Oil | 1.74 | 0.65 | 1.36 | 1.17 | 1.57 |

| &c. (soluble in water) | 4.26 | 3.46 | 2.24 |\ | 16.04 |

| Digestible woody | | | | \ | |

| fibre and cellulose | 19.40 |\ | 5.97 | }71.44| 26.34 |

| Indigestible | | }82.26 | | / | |

| fibre &c. | 54.13 |/ | 66.54 |/ | 24.86 |

| _a._ Soluble | 1.13 | 1.29 | 2.88 | \ | 5.76 |

| | | | | }4.52 | |

| _b._ Insoluble | 3.08 | 1.05 | 0.38 | / | 0.94 |

| +----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+--------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| | | | | | |

| | No. 6. | No. 7. | No. 8. | No. 9. | No. 10.|

| | | | | | |

+--------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| Water | 16.00 | 16.00 | 19.40 | 16.02 | 14.60 |

| _a_. Soluble in water | 2.62 | 1.29 | 1.51 | 3.96 | \ |

| | | | | | }4.75 |

| _b_. Insoluble in water| 1.46 | 2.36 | 1.85 | 5.90 | / |

| | | | | | |

| Oil | 1.05 | 1.25 | 1.02 | 2.34 | 2.82 |

| &c. (soluble in water) | 10.57 | 3.19 | 4.18 | 8.32 | 8.72 |

| fibre and cellulose | 30.17 | 27.75 | 2.75 | 17.74 | 18.56 |

| fibre &c. | 31.78 | 41.82 | 65.58 | 42.79 | 43.12 |

| _a._ Soluble | 3.64 | 2.26 | 2.31 | 2.72 | 4.07 |

| | | | | | |

| _b._ Insoluble | 2.71 | 4.08 | 1.40 | 2.21 | 3.36 |

| +----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

| | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |

+--------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

[...] This table contains in a condensed form all the results of

Voelcker's analyses of the straws which are given in his paper published

in the _Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England_, vol. xxii.,

part 2. 1862.

Nos. 5, 6, and 7 were analysed shortly after being cut, when they

contained a high proportion of water. They have, therefore, been

calculated to contain 16 per cent. of moisture so as to arrive at

accurate relative results.

ANALYSES OF STRAW, BY DR. ANDERSON.

+----------------+-----------------+---------+-----------------+--------+

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| +--------+--------+---------+--------+--------+--------+

|Water | 10.62 | 10.93 | 11.15 | 11.44 | 11.15 | 11.10 |

| Soluble | 0.86 | 0.37 | 1.37 | 1.42 | 0.39 | 0.66 |

| Insoluble | 0.51 | 1.12 | 1.00 | 1.54 | 1.12 | 1.98 |

|Oil | 0.80 | 1.00 | 1.50 | 0.97 | 0.88 | 1.05 |

| | | | | | | |

| Soluble | 2.68 | 6.68 | 5.26 | 3.22 | 6.11 | 4.56 |

| Insoluble | 44.88 | 36.43 | 38.79 | 35.56 | 38.38 | 27.95 |

|Woody fibre | 32.88 | 34.78 | 35.01 | 41.34 | 36.62 | 47.53 |

|Ash | 6.20 | 8.04 | 6.32 | 4.21 | 5.62 | 4.85 |

| +--------+--------+---------+--------+--------+--------+

| | 99.43 | 99.35 | 100.40 | 99.70 | 100.27 | 99.68 |

+----------------+--------+--------+---------+--------+--------+--------+

+----------------+---------------+--------+----------+---------+--------+

| | | Oat | Oat from | | Oat |

| +-------+-------+--------+----------+---------+--------+

|Water | 11.70 | 10.95 | 12.60 | 11.28 | 11.70 | 10.55 |

| Soluble | 0.40 | 1.03 | 0.67 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.33 |

| Insoluble | 0.93 | 0.43 | 0.38 | 0.39 | 1.21 | 0.33 |

|Oil | 1.45 | 0.77 | 1.25 | 1.36 | 1.60 | 1.00 |

| | | | | | | |

| Soluble | 10.12 | 6.90 | 7.16 | 7.42 | 12.01 | 6.23 |

| Insoluble | 33.52 | 34.77 | 24.28 | 29.55 | 23.35 | 30.95 |

|Woody fibre | 35.36 | 38.73 | 48.49 | 44.40 | 45.27 | 47.40 |

|Ash | 6.36 | 6.28 | 5.11 | 5.07 | 3.95 | 3.62 |

| +-------+-------+--------+----------+---------+--------+

| | 99.84 | 99.86 | 99.94 | 100.39 | 100.14 | 100.41 |

+----------------+-------+-------+--------+----------+---------+--------+

[...] This table is compiled from Dr. Anderson's paper in the

Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland

for March, 1862.

Many very important conclusions are deducible from the facts recorded

in these valuable tables. We learn from them that straw is more

nutritious when it is cut in the ripe state than when it is permitted

to over-ripen, and that _green_ straw contains a far greater amount of

nutriment than is found even in the ripe article. It appears also that

the least nutritious kind of straw equals the best variety of turnips in

its amount of flesh-forming principles, and greatly exceeds them in its

proportion of fat-forming elements. We further learn that in general the

different kinds of straw will be found to stand in the following order,

the most nutritious occupying the highest, and the least nutritious the

lowest place:--

1. Pea-haulm.

2. Oat-straw.

3. Bean-straw with the pods.

4. Barley-straw.

5. Wheat-straw.

6. Bean-stalks without the pods.

It is a matter to be regretted that we possess so little accurate

knowledge of the chemical composition of the plants cultivated in

Ireland. No doubt the analyses of English grown wheat, beans, mangels,

and other plants, serve to give us a general idea of the nature of those

vegetables when produced in this country. But this kind of information,

though very important, must necessarily be defective, as differences

in climate modify--often to a considerable extent--the composition of

almost every vegetable. Thus, the results of Anderson's analyses prove

Scotch oats to be superior, as a feeding stuff, to Scotch barley,

whilst, according to Voelcker and the experience of most English

feeders, the barley of parts of England is superior to its oats. It

follows, then, that whilst the results of the analyses of straw, made by

Voelcker and Anderson are of great interest to the Irish farmer, they

would be still more important to him had the straw to which they relate

been the produce of Irish soil. In order, therefore, to enable the Irish

farmer to form a correct estimate of the value of his straw, we should

put him in possession of a more perfect knowledge of its composition

than that which is derivable from the investigations to which I have

referred. The straws of the cereals--which alone are used here to any

extent--should be analysed as carefully and as frequently as those of

Great Britain have been; and if such were done, I have no doubt but that

the results would indicate a decided difference in composition between

the produce of the two countries. Some time ago I entered upon what, at

the time, I had intended should be a complete investigation into the

composition of Irish straws; but which want of time prevented me from

making more than a partial one. The results are given in the following

tables:--

ANALYSES OF IRISH OAT-STRAW.

--------------------------------+--------+------------------------------

| No. 1. |Obtained in the Dublin Market.

|From Co.+---------+---------+----------

|Wicklow.| No. 2. | No. 3. | No. 4.

--------------------------------+--------+---------+---------+----------

Water | 14.00 | 14.00 | 14.00 | 14.00

Flesh-forming principles-- | | | |

_a._ Soluble in water | 4.08 | 2.02 | 2.04 | 1.46

_b._ Insoluble in water | 2.09 | 3.16 | 3.00 | 2.23

Oil | 1.84 | 1.40 | 1.26 | 1.00

Sugar, gum, and other | | | |

fat-forming matters | 13.79 | 12.67 | 10.18 | 11.16

Woody fibre | 59.96 | 61.79 | 65.45 | 65.29

Mineral matter | 4.24 | 4.96 | 4.07 | 4.86

+--------+---------+---------+----------

| 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00

--------------------------------+--------+---------+---------+----------

All the specimens of oats, the analyses of which are given in the

preceding table, are assumed to contain 14 per cent. of water, in order

the more correctly to compare their nutritive value. No. 1 contained

18.23 per cent. of water; No. 2, 12.90; No. 3, 12.74; and No. 4, 12.08.

Oat straw, before its removal from the field, often contains nearly half

its weight of water; but after being for some time stacked, the

proportion of moisture rarely exceeds 14 per cent.

ANALYSES OF IRISH WHEAT-STRAW.

-----------------------+--------+-------+-------+-----------------------

| No. 1. | No. 2.|No. 3. |

| Green, | | | Obtained in the Dublin

|changing| | | Markets.

| to | | Over |

| yellow.| Ripe. | Ripe. +-----------------------

|Kildare.|Dublin.|Dublin.| No. 4.| No. 5.| No. 6.

-----------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------

Water | 13.00 | 13.15| 12.14| 10.88| 11.22| 12.12

water | 1.25 | 0.98| 0.44| 0.06| 0.42| 0.30

water | 1.26 | 1.40| 1.41| 1.90| 1.00| 1.76

Oil | 1.22 | 1.13| 1.14| 0.90| 1.17| 1.08

fat-forming matters | 4.18 | 3.98| 3.88| 4.08| 3.89| 4.30

Woody fibre | 75.84 | 76.17| 77.76| 78.67| 79.18| 77.15

Mineral matter (ash) | 3.25 | 3.19| 3.23| 3.51| 3.12| 3.29

+--------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------

| 100.00 | 100.00| 100.00| 100.00| 100.00| 100.00

-----------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------

The results of these analyses are somewhat different from those arrived

at by Voelcker and Anderson. They show that properly harvested Irish

oat and wheat straws are far more valuable than those of Scotland, and

somewhat less nutritive than those produced in England. They also

show that wheat-straw is allowed to over-ripen, by which a very large

proportion of its nutritive principles is eliminated and altogether

lost, and a considerable part of the remainder converted into an

insoluble, and therefore less easily digestible state. Nor is there any

advantage to the grain gained by allowing it to remain uncut after the

upper portion of the stem has changed from a green to a yellowish color;

on the contrary, it also loses a portion--often a very considerable

one--of its nitrogenous, or flesh-forming constituents. It has been

clearly proved that wheat cut when green, yields a greater amount of

grain, and of a better quality too, than when it is allowed to ripen

fully; yet, how often do we not see fields of wheat in this country

allowed to remain unreaped for many days, and even weeks, after the

crop has attained to its full development!

The oat-straw obtained in the Dublin Market proved less valuable than

the green straw which I selected myself from a field of oats; but the

discrepancy between them was far less than between the nearly ripe

wheat-straw and the straw of that plant purchased in Dublin. During

visits which I have paid in harvest-time to the North of Ireland, I

noticed that the oats were generally cut whilst green, whereas wheat was

almost invariably left standing for at least a week after its perfect

maturation, probably for the following reasons:--Firstly, because

oats are more liable to shed their seed; secondly, because there is

a greater breadth of that crop to be reaped, which necessitates an

early beginning; and, lastly, because most farmers know that over-ripe

oat-straw is worth but little for feeding purposes, as compared with

the greenish-yellow article.

As compared with white turnips, the nutritive value of oat-straw stands

very high, for whilst the former contains but little more than 1 per

cent. of flesh-formers, and less than 5 per cent. of fat-formers, the

latter includes about 4 per cent. of flesh-formers, and 13 per cent. of

fat-formers. Again, whilst the amount of woody fibre in turnips is only

about 3 per cent., that substance constitutes no less than 60 per cent.

of oat-straw. In comparison with hay--taking into consideration the

prices of both articles--oat-straw also stands high, as will be seen

by comparing the following analyses of common meadow hay with that of

properly harvested straw:--

Meadow Hay. Oat Straw.

Water 14.61 14.00

Flesh-forming constituents 8.44 6.17

Respiratory and fatty matters 43.63 15.63

Woody fibre 27.16 59.96

Mineral matter (ash) 6.16 4.24

------ ------

100.00 100.00

Woody fibre is as abundant a constituent of the straw of the cereals

as starch is of their seeds, and if the two substances were equally

digestible, straw would be a very valuable food--superior even to the

potato. At one time it was the general belief that woody fibre was

incapable of contributing in the slightest degree to the nutrition of

animals, but the results of recent investigations prove that it is, to a

certain extent, digestible. In the summer of 1859 two German chemists,

Stoeckhardt and Sussdorf, made a series of experiments, with the view

of ascertaining whether or not the cellulose[30] of the food of the

sheep is assimilated by that animal. The results of this inquiry are of

importance, seeing that they clearly prove that even the hardest kind of

cellulose--_sclerogen_, in fact--is capable of being assimilated by the

Ruminants. The animals selected were two wethers, aged respectively five

and six years. They were fed--firstly, upon hay alone; secondly, upon

hay and rye-straw; thirdly upon hay and the sawdust of poplar wood,

which had been exhausted with lye (to induce the sheep to eat the

sawdust, it was found necessary to mix through it some rye-bran and a

little salt); fourthly, hay and pine-wood sawdust, to which was added

bran and salt; fifthly, spruce sawdust, bran and salt; sixthly, hay,

pulp of linen rags (from the paper-maker), and bran. The experiments

were carried on from July till November, excepting a short time, during

which the animals were turned out on pasture-land, to recover from the

injurious effects of the fifth series of experiments--produced probably

by the resin of the spruce. The animals, together with their food,

drink, and egesta, were weighed daily. The amount of cellulose in the

food was determined, and the proportion of that substance in the egesta

was also ascertained; and as there was a considerable discrepancy

between the two amounts, it was evident that the difference represented

the weight of the cellulose assimilated by the animals. In this way it

was ascertained that from 60 to 70 per cent. of the cellulose of hay,

40 to 60 per cent. of the cellulose of straw, 45 to 50 per cent. of the

cellulose of the poplar wood, 30 to 40 per cent. of the cellulose of the

pine, and 80 per cent. of the cellulose of the paper pulp was digested.

In stating the results of his analyses of the straws, Professor Voelcker

sets down as "digestible" that portion of the cellulose which he found

to be soluble in dilute acids and alkaline solutions; but he admits that

the solvents in the stomach might dissolve a larger amount. The results

of the experiments of Stoeckhardt and Sussdorf prove that 80 per cent. of

the cellulose of paper (the altered fibre of flax) is assimilable, and

it is, therefore, not unreasonable to infer that the cellulose of a more

palatable substance than paper might be altogether digestible.

The facts which I have adduced clearly prove that the straws of the

cereals possess a far higher nutritive power than is commonly ascribed

to them; that when properly harvested they contain from 20 to 40 per

cent. of undoubted nutriment; and lastly, that it is highly probable

that their so-called indigestible woody fibre is to a great extent

assimilable.

The composition of cellulose is nearly, if not quite, identical with

that of starch, and it may therefore be assumed to be equal in nutritive

power to that substance--that is, it will, if assimilated, be converted

into four-tenths of its weight of fat. Now as cellulose forms from

six-tenths to eight-tenths of the weight of straws, it is evident that

if the whole of this substance were digestible, straws would be an

exceedingly valuable fattening food. When straw in an unprepared state

is consumed, there is no doubt but that a large proportion of its

cellulose remains unappropriated--nay more, it is equally certain that

the hard woody fibre protects, by enveloping them, the soluble and

easily digestible constituents of the straw from the action of the

_gastric juice_. I would, therefore, recommend that straw should be

either cooked or fermented before being made use of; in either of these

states its constituents are far more digestible than when the straw

is merely cut, or even when it is in the form of chaff. An excellent

mode of treating straw is to reduce it to chaff, subject it to the

action of steam, and mix it with roots and oil-cake or corn. Mr.

Lawrence, of Cirencester, one of the most intelligent agriculturists

in England, cooks his chaff, which he largely employs, in the following

manner:--"We find that, taking a score of bullocks together fattening,

they consume, per head per diem, 3 bushels of chaff mixed with just half

a hundred-weight of pulped roots, exclusive of cake or corn; that is to

say, rather more than 2 bushels of chaff are mixed with the roots, and

given at two feeds, morning and evening, and the remainder is given

with the cake, &c., at the middle day feed, thus:--We use the steaming

apparatus of Stanley, of Peterborough, consisting of a boiler in the

centre, in which the steam is generated, and which is connected by a

pipe on the left hand with a large galvanised iron receptacle for

steaming food for pigs, and on the right with a large wooden tub lined

with copper, in which the cake, mixed with water, is made into a thick

soup. Adjoining this is a slate tank of sufficient size to contain one

feed for the entire lot of bullocks feeding. Into this tank is laid

chaff, about one foot deep, upon which a few ladles of soup are thrown

in a _boiling state_; this is thoroughly mixed with the chaff with a

three-grained fork, and pressed down firm; and this process is repeated

until the slate tank is full, when it is covered down for an hour or two

before feeding time. The soup is then found entirely absorbed by the

chaff, which has become softened, and prepared for ready digestion."

A cheap plan is to mix the straw with sliced roots, moisten the mass

with water, and allow it to remain until a slight fermentation has set

in. This process effectually softens and disintegrates, so to speak, the

woody fibre, and sets free the stores of nutritious matters which it

envelopes. Some farmers who hold straw in high estimation, prefer giving

it just as it comes from the field; they base this practice on the

belief that Ruminants require a bulky and solid food, and that their

digestive powers are quite sufficient to effect the solution of all the

useful constituents of the straw. It may be quite true that cattle, as

asserted, can extract more nutriment out of straw than horses can, but

that merely proves the greater power of their digestive organs. No doubt

the food of the Ruminants should be bulky; but I am quite sure that

cooked or fermented straw is sufficiently so to satisfy the desire of

those animals for quantity in their food.

So far as I can learn, all the carefully conducted feeding experiments

to test the value of straw which have been made, have yielded results

highly favorable to that article. Mr. Blundell, in a paper on "The Use

and Abuse of Straw," read before the Botley (Hampshire) Farmer's Club,

states that in his experience he found straw to be more economical than

its equivalent of roots or oil-cake, in the feeding of all kinds of

cattle:--

I find (says Mr. Blundell) that dairy cows, in the winter months,

if fed on large quantities of roots, particularly mangels and

carrots, will refuse to eat straw almost entirely, and become

very lean; but they will always eat a full portion of sweet,

well-harvested straw, when they get a small and moderate allowance

of roots, say, for an ordinary-sized cow, 15 lbs. of mangel three

times per day, the roots being given whole, just in the state they

come from the store heap. Again, calves and yearlings being fed

with roots in the same way, will eat a large quantity of straw, and

when they have been kept under cover I have had them in first-rate

condition for many years past. Also, in fattening beasts, when they

get a fair allowance of roots, say 65 to 70 lbs. per day, with

from 3 to 4 lbs. of cake or meal in admixture, they will eat straw

with great avidity, and do well upon it, and make a profit. It is,

however, often the case that bullocks receive 100 lbs., or upwards,

of roots per day, with a large quantity of cake or meal, often

10 or 12 lbs. per day; they will not then look at straw, and are

obliged to be fed with hay. The cost price of these quantities

and kinds of food stands so high that the animals do not yield a

profit; for although they may make meat a little faster, yet the

proportionate increase is nothing compared to the increased cost

of the feeding materials used.

Mr. Blundell gives us also the tabulated results of one of his

experiments, which prove that by the use of straw there is to be

obtained something more than manure by the feeding of stock:--

COST OF FEEDING AN OX PER WEEK WITH STRAW, ETC.,

ACCORDING TO MR. BLUNDELL.

s. d.

4 lbs. of oil-cake per day,

or 38 lbs. per week, at L10 per ton 2 6

64 lbs. of roots ditto,

or 4 cwt. ditto, at 13s. 4d. ditto 2 8

20 lbs. of straw feeding,

or 1-1/4 cwt. ditto, at 30s. ditto 1 10-1/2

20 lbs. of straw litter,

or 1-1/4 cwt. ditto, at 15s. ditto 0 11

Attendance, &c., per week 0 1

----------

8 0-1/2

Deduct value of manure, per week 1 3-1/2

----------

6 9

Increased value of ox per week 10 0

Deduct cost of feeding 6 9

----------

3 3

If we now turn to the study of the composition of straw regarded from

an economic point of view, we shall find that the theoretical deductions

therefrom harmonise with the results of actual feeding experiments. Let

us assume that 100 parts of oat-straw contain on an average--

1 part of oil,

4 parts of flesh-formers,

10 parts of sugar, gum, and other fat-formers, and

30 parts of digestible fibre;

and if the price of the straw be 30s. per ton, we shall have at that

cost the following quantities of digestible substances:--

ONE TON OF OAT-STRAW, AT 30s., CONTAINS:--

lbs.

[31] Oil 22.4

Flesh-forming principles 89.6

Sugar, gum, and other fat-forming substances 224.0

Digestible fibre 672.0

-------

1,008.0

[32] Total amount of fat-formers, calculated as starch 952.0

Add flesh-formers 89.6

-------

Total amount of nutritive matter 1,041.6

We shall now compare this table with a similar one in relation to the

composition of linseed cake, which will place the greater comparative

value of straw in a clearer light.

A fair sample of linseed-cake contains, centesimally--

Flesh-formers 26

Oil 12

Gum, mucilage, sugar, &c. 34

Woody fibre 6

ONE TON OF LINSEED CAKE, AT L11, CONTAINS:--

lbs.

Flesh-forming principles 582.4

Oil 268.8

Gum, sugar, and other fat-formers 761.6

Woody fibre 74.4

-------

1,687.2

Total amount of fat-formers, calculated as starch 1,508.0

Add flesh-formers 582.4

-------

Total amount of nutriment 2,090.4

These comparisons are very instructive and important. We learn from

them that we pay L11 for 2,000 lbs. of nutriment, when we purchase a

ton of linseed-cake, whereas, when we invest 30s. in a ton of straw, we

receive 1,000 lbs. of digestible aliment. It cannot be said that I have

strained any points in favour of the straw; on the contrary, I believe

that when that article is cut in proper season and well harvested,

its composition will be found far superior to that detailed in the

comparative analysis. It must be borne in mind, too, that I take no

account of the 30 per cent. of the so-called indigestible woody fibre

which straw contains, and which, I believe, is partly assimilable

under ordinary circumstances, and could be rendered nearly altogether

digestible by proper treatment; on the other hand, I have assumed that

the woody fibre of the oil-cake is completely digestible, although

I believe it is in reality less so than the fibre of straw.

It is an important point in the composition of oil-cakes, that they

contain a large proportion of ready-formed fatty matters which can,

with but little alteration, be at once transmuted into animal fat.

There are some individuals of the genus _Homo_ to whose stomachs fat,

_per se_, is intolerable; nevertheless, as a general rule, fatty

substances exercise a favorable influence in the process of digestion,

and, either in a separate state, or intimately commingled with other

aliments, constitute a large proportion of the food of man. Digestion in

the lower animals is, no doubt, similarly promoted by mixing with the

aliments which are to be subjected to that process, a due proportion of

oily or fatty matter. Straw is relatively deficient in the flesh-forming

principles, and abounds in the fat-forming elements--of which, however,

the most valuable, oil, is the least abundant. Now, if we add to straw

a due proportion of some substance very rich in flesh-formers and oil,

the compound will possess in nicely adjusted proportions all the

elements of nutrition. Perhaps the best kind of food which we could

employ for this purpose is linseed meal. It contains about 24 per

cent. of flesh-formers, 35 per cent. of a very bland oil, and 24 per

cent. of gum, sugar, and mucilage. Linseed-cake may be substituted for

linseed-meal; but the meal, though its cost is 15 per cent. greater, is,

I believe, rather the better article of the two. Its flesh-formers are

more soluble, and its oil thrice more abundant and far more palatable

than the same principles in most samples of oil-cake. An important

point, too, is, that linseed, unlike linseed-cake, is not liable to

adulteration. As linseed possesses laxative properties it cannot be

largely employed; the addition, however, of bean-meal--the binding

tendency of which is well known--to a diet partly composed of linseed

will neutralise, so to speak, the relaxing influence of the oily seed.

If oil-cakes be used as an adjunct to straw, rape-cake will be found

more economical than linseed-cake. If it be free from mustard, well

steamed, and flavored with a little treacle, or a small quantity of

locust-beans, it will be readily consumed, and even relished, by dairy

and fattening stock.

_Hay._--There is no food substance more variable or more complex than

hay, for under that term are included, not only mixtures of grasses,

but also of leguminous plants--clover, for example. The herbage of no

two meadows is exactly alike; and the composition of the meadow plants

is so greatly modified by differences of climate, soil, and mode of

culture, that we have nothing to excite our wonder in the extreme

variability of hay.

The composition of the hay made from clover, lucerne, and various other

kinds of artificial grasses, is shown in the table--which is based on

the results of Way's analyses:--

COMPOSITION OF THE HAY OF ARTIFICIAL GRASSES.

+-------------------------------------------

| KEY:

| A.--Flesh-forming Substances.

| B.--Fatty Matters.

| C.--Respiratory Substances.

| D.--Woody Fibre.

| E.--Ash.

| F.--Water.

-----------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+------+-----

| A. | B. | C. | D. | E. | F.

+-------+------+-------+-------+------+-----

Red clover | 18.79 | 3.06 | 37.06 | 16.46 | 7.97 | 16.6

Purple clover | 15.98 | 3.41 | 35.35 | 21.63 | 6.96 | "

Crimson clover | 13.83 | 3.11 | 31.25 | 26.99 | 8.15 | "

Cowgrass | 20.27 | 2.97 | 30.30 | 20.12 | 9.67 | "

Do., second specimen | 15.64 | 3.98 | 41.38 | 15.70 | 6.64 | "

Hop trefoil | 17.07 | 3.89 | 36.55 | 18.88 | 6.94 | "

White trefoil | 15.63 | 3.65 | 33.37 | 22.11 | 8.57 | "

Common Vetch | 19.68 | 2.55 | 32.87 | 22.82 | 5.42 | "

Bush vetch | 19.23 | 2.40 | 27.62 | 25.87 | 8.21 | "

Sainfoin | 15.38 | 2.51 | 38.30 | 20.59 | 6.56 | "

Lucerne | 10.63 | 2.30 | 33.47 | 28.51 | 8.42 | "

Yellow clover | 20.50 | 3.38 | 27.76 | 22.66 | 9.03 | "

Rib grass | 11.91 | 3.06 | 33.58 | 27.56 | 7.23 | "

Burnet | 13.96 | 3.34 | 39.50 | 19.89 | 6.64 | "

Millefoil | 8.62 | 2.09 | 37.88 | 27.24 | 7.50 | "

+-------+------+-------+-------+------+-----

Mean | 15.81 | 3.18 | 34.42 | 22.47 | 7.59 | 16.6

-----------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+------+-----

Very many analyses of hay have been made by British and Continental

chemists, the results of which are of great interest to the

agriculturist. The composition of the natural and artificial grasses,

which is shown in the tables given in pages 158-9 will, if we reduce

their per-centage of water to 16, give us an approximation to the

composition of hay. If the herbage, too, be sown in the proper time, and

the hay-making process be skilfully conducted, there will be but little

difference, except in the amount of water, between the plants in their

fresh and dry state; but owing to inopportune wet weather, and

carelessness in manipulation, excellent herbage is not unfrequently

converted into inferior hay.

According to Dr. Voelcker, the average composition of meadow-hay, as

deduced from the results of twenty-five analyses, is as follows:--

Water 14.61

Flesh-forming constituents 8.44

Respiratory and fatty matters 43.63

Woody fibre 27.16

Mineral matter (ash) 6.16

------

100.00

Dr. Anderson's analysis of meadow-hay, one year old, and of inferior

quality, gave the following results:--

Water 13.13

Flesh-forming matters 4.00

Non-nitrogenous substances 77.61

Mineral matter 5.26

------

100.00

The results of the investigations of Way prove that the herbage of

water-grass meadows is more nutritious than that of dry meadows--results

perfectly harmonious with the experience of practical men.

It is a somewhat general belief, that the aftermath, or second cutting,

is less nutritious than the first cutting; but there appears to be no

chemical difference between the two crops, provided they be saved under

equally favorable conditions. According to Dr. Anderson, the composition

of clover-hay of the second cutting is as follows:--

Water 16.84

Flesh-forming principles 13.52

Non-nitrogenous matters 64.43

Mineral matter (ash) 5.21

------

100.00

I have already shown the importance of reaping in proper season--not

less necessary is it to mow before the plants ripen fully, and even

before they flower. The results of the experiments of Stoeckhardt,

Hellreigel, and Wolff, in relation to this point, are very interesting,

and are well worthy of reproduction here.

RESULTS OF STOeCKHARDT'S AND HELLREIGEL'S EXPERIMENTS.

--------------------------+-----------------------++-----------------------

| Stem. || Leaves.

+-------+---------------||-------+---------------

| | Hay. || | Hay.

| Water +--------+------|| Water +--------+------

| in |Flesh- | || in |Flesh- |

| Fresh |forming | Ash. || Fresh |forming | Ash.

| Plant.|Matters.| || Plant.|Matters.|

+-------+--------+------||-------+--------+------

Clover cut on the | | | || | |

4th June, quite young | 82.80 | 13.16 | 9.71 || 83.50 | 27.17 | 9.42

23rd " ready for cutting| 81.72 | 12.72 | 9.00 || 82.68 | 27.69 | 9.00

9th July, beginning to | | | || | |

flower | 82.41 | 12.40 | 6.12 || 77.77 | 15.83 | 10.46

29th July, full flower | 78.30 | 9.28 | 4.63 || 70.80 | 19.20 | 9.58

21st August, ripe | 69.40 | 6.75 | 4.82 || 65.70 | 18.94 | 12.33

--------------------------+-------+--------+------++-------+--------+------

RESULTS OF WOLFF'S EXPERIMENT.

-------------+------------------------------++-----------------------------

| Red Clover. || Alsike Clover.

+--------------+---------------++---------------+-------------

| Beginning | Full || Beginning | Full

| to flower, | flower, || to flower, | flower,

| 11th June. | 25th June. || 23rd June. | 29th June.

+--------------+---------------++-------+-------+------+------

|Fresh.| Hay. | Fresh.| Hay. || Fresh.| Hay. |Fresh.| Hay.

+------+-------+-------+-------++-------+-------+------+------

| pct. | pct. | pct. | pct. || pct. | pct. | pct. | pct.

Water | 83.07| 16.66 | 76.41 | 10.66 || 86.98 | 16.66 | 82.60| 16.66

Ash | 1.43| 7.04 | 1.67 | 5.90 || 1.12 | 7.17 | 1.45| 6.94

Woody fibre | 4.24| 20.87 | 8.88 | 37.37 || 3.79 | 24.26 | 5.11| 24.47

Nutritive | | | | || | | |

substances | 11.26| 55.43 | 13.04 | 46.07 || 8.11 | 51.91 | 10.84| 51.93

-------------+------+-------+-------+-------++-------+-------+------+------

During the operation of converting the grass--"natural" or

"artificial"--into hay, there is more or less loss of nutritive matter

sustained by fermentation, the dispersion of the smaller leaves by the

wind, and other agencies. But this unavoidable loss is trivial when

compared with the prodigious waste sustained, in Ireland at least, by

allowing the hay to remain too long in cocks in the field. "Within the

last three or four years," says Mr. Baldwin, of the Glasnevin Albert

Model Farm, "we have made agricultural tours through twenty-five of

the thirty-two counties of Ireland; and from careful consideration

of the subject, and having in some instances used a tape-line and

weighing-machine to assist our judgment, we have come to the conclusion

that one-twentieth of the hay-crop of Ireland is permitted to rot

in field-cocks. The portion on the ground, as well as that on the

outside of the cocks, is too often only fit for manure. And the loss

of aftermath, and of the subsequent year's crop (if hay or pasture),

suffers to the extent of from sixpence to one shilling per acre. If we

unite all these sources, the loss sustained annually in this country is

something serious to contemplate. On an average, for all Ireland, it is

not under 20 per cent., or a fifth of the actual value of the crop."

This is a startling statement; but I do not believe it to be an

exaggeration of the actual state of things.

_Damaged Hay and Straw._--Damaged corn and potatoes, so much injured as

to be unfit for human food, are generally given, and with apparently

good results, to the inferior animals. The "meat manufacturing

machines," as the edible varieties of the domesticated animals are now

generally termed, are not very dainty in their choice of food; and

vegetable substances which would excite the disgust of the lords of the

creation are rendered nutritious and agreeable by being reorganised in

the mechanisms of oxen, sheep, and pigs.

Now, although it is pretty generally known that musty corn and

diseased potatoes form good feeding stuffs, it is not so patent whether

or not the natural food of stock, such as hay and straw in a diseased

state, is proper food for those animals. This question is worthy of

consideration. Firstly, I shall describe the nature of the diseases

which most frequently affect fodder; these are, "mildew" and "mould."

These diseases are produced by the ravages of minute and very low forms

of vegetable life, termed by the botanists _epiphytical fungi_. The

mildew (_Puccinia graminis_) generally attacks the grasses when they are

growing, and is more frequently met with on rich and heavily manured

soils. In localities where heavy night-fogs and dews are of common

occurrence, this pest often destroys whole crops. On the other hand, in

light, sandy, and well-drained soils, and in warm and dry districts,

the mildew is a rare visitant. The "blue mould" (_Aspergillis glaucus_)

attacks hay and straw in the stack or rick, and without any regard to

their origin--no matter whether they were the produce of the wettest or

the dryest, the warmest or the coldest of soils. The chief condition

in the existence of the blue mould is excessive moisture. If the hay or

straw be too green and succulent when put up, or if rain get at them

in the rick, the mould is very likely to make its appearance, and the

well-known odor termed _musty_ will speedily be developed.

Neither the mildew nor the mould can, strictly speaking, be regarded as

parasites, such as, for example, the flax-dodder, which feeds upon the

healthy juices of the plant to which it is attached. It appears to me

that the tissues and juices of the fodder-plants decay _first_, and then

the mould or the mildew appears and feeds upon the decomposing matter.

Now, as these vegetables belong to a poisonous class of fungi, it is

more than probable that they convert the decomposing substance of the

straw or hay into unwholesome, if not poisonous matter; and it is not

unlikely but that the disagreeable odor which they evolve is designed by

nature as a sign to the lower animals not to partake of mouldy food.

There is no doubt but that most animals will instinctively reject fodder

in this state; and the question arises, ought this odour to be destroyed

or disguised, in order to induce the animals to eat the damaged stuff?

The experience of most feeders who have largely consumed mouldy provender

is, that although cattle may be induced to eat it, they never thrive

upon such stuff if it form a heavy item in their diet. The reason of

this is obvious. The nitrogenous portion of the straw is that which is

chiefly assimilated by the fungi. And as this constituent is the one

which contributes to the formation of muscle, and is naturally extremely

deficient in straw and hay--more particularly the former--it follows

that the animals fed upon mouldy fodder cannot elaborate it into lean

flesh (muscle).

In the case of young stock, mouldy fodder is altogether inadmissible,

for these animals require abundance of flesh-forming materials--precisely

those which the fungi almost completely remove from the diseased fodder.

As large quantities of mouldy or mildewed provender are at the present

moment to be found in many farmsteads, and as they are unsaleable,

and must therefore be made use of in some way at home, it is well to

consider the best way to dispose of them. In the case of straw, the

greater portion will be required for litter, and if the whole of the

damaged article can be disposed of in this way so much the better. If,

however, there is more than is necessary for the bedding of the stock,

it may be used in conjunction with sound fodder, but always in a cooked

state. The greater part, if not the whole, of the diseased nitrogenous

part of the straw is soluble in warm water, so that if the fodder be

well steamed the poisonous matter will be eliminated to such an extent

as to leave the article almost as wholesome as good straw, but not so

nutritious. The straw cleansed in this way will be very deficient in

flesh-forming, though not in fat-forming power, and this fact should

be duly considered when the other items of the animal's food are

being weighed out. Beans, malt-combs, and linseed-cake are rich in

muscle-forming principles, and are consequently suitable adjuncts to

damaged fodder; but the latter should never constitute the staple food,

or be given unmixed with some sweet provender.

When the fodder is considerably damaged it becomes, after steaming,

nearly as tasteless as sawdust. To this kind of stuff the addition of a

small amount of some flavorous material is very useful. For damaged hay,

Mr. Bowick recommends the following mixture:--

Fenugreek (powdered) 112 parts.

Pimento 4 "

Aniseed 4 "

Caraways 4 "

Cummin 2 "

A pinch of this compound will render agreeably-flavored the most insipid

kinds of fodder.

Mr. Bowick states that he had fed large numbers of bullocks on damaged

hay, flavored with this compound, and that their health was not thereby

injured in the slightest degree.

The Stock-Feeder's Manual the chemistry of food in relation to the breeding and feeding of live stock · 第 4 / 9 章