Drinkstone has long been distinguished on account of the successful
cultivation of remarkable plants. It lies some eight miles southeast
from Bury St. Edmund's, and is the seat of T.H. Powell, Esq. The
mansion or hall is a large old-fashioned edifice, a large portion of
its south front being covered by a magnificent specimen of the
Magnolia grandiflora, not less than 40 feet in height, while other
portions of its walls are covered with the finest varieties of
climbing roses and other suitable plants. The surrounding country,
although somewhat flat, is well wooded, and the soil is a rich loam
upon a substratum of gravel, and is consequently admirably suited to
the development of the finer kinds of coniferous and other ornamental
trees and shrubs, so that the park and grounds contain a fine and well
selected assortment of such plants.
[Illustration: THE SNOWFLAKE, LEUCOJUM VERNUM, AT DRINKSTONE
PARK.]
Coniferous trees are sometimes considered as out of place in park
scenery; this, however, does not hold good at Drinkstone, where Mr.
Powell has been displayed excellent taste in the way of improving the
landscape and creating a really charming effect by so skillfully
blending the dressed grounds with the rich greensward of the park
that it is not easy to tell where the one terminates or the other
commences.
The park, which covers some 200 acres, including a fine lake over
eight acres in extent, contains also various large groups or clumps of
such species as the Sequoia gigantea, Taxodium sempervirens, Cedres
deodora, Picea douglasii, Pinsapo, etc., interspersed with groups of
ornamental deciduous trees, producing a warm and very pleasing effect
at all seasons of the year. Among species which are conspicuous in the
grounds are fine, well-grown examples of Araucaria imbricata, some 30
feet high; Cedrus deodara, 60 feet in height; Abies pinsapo, 40 feet;
and fine specimens of Abies grandis, A. nobilis, and A. nordmanniana,
etc., together with Abies albertiana or mertensiana, a fine,
free-growing species; also Libocedrus gigantea, Thuiopsis borealis,
Thuia lobbii, Juniperus recurva, Taxas adpressa, fine plants; with
fine golden yews and equally fine examples of the various kinds of
variegated hollies, etc.
[Illustration: ODONTOGLOSSUM ROSSI MAJOR VAR. RUBESCENS, AT DRINKSTONE
PARK.]
Particular attention is here paid to early spring flowers. Drinkstone
is also celebrated as a fruit growing establishment, more particularly
as regards the grape vine; the weight and quality of the crops of
grapes which are annually produced here are very remarkable.--_The
Gardeners' Chronicle._
* * * * *
ON THE CHANGES WHICH TAKE PLACE IN THE CONVERSION OF HAY INTO
ENSILAGE.
By FREDK. JAS. LLOYD, F.C.S., Lecturer on Agriculture, King's
College.
The recently published number of the _Royal Agricultural Society's
Journal_ contains some information upon the subject of silage which
appears to me of considerable interest to those chemists who are at
present investigating the changes which take place in the conversion
of grass into silage. The data[1] are, so far as I know, unique, and
though the analytical work is not my own, yet it is that of an
agricultural chemist, Mr. A. Smetham, of Liverpool, whose work I know
from personal experience to be thoroughly careful and reliable. I have
therefore no hesitation in basing my remarks upon it.
[Footnote 1: _Royal Agricultural Society's Journal_, vol. xx.,
part i., pp. 175 and 380.]
We have here for the first time an accurate account of the quantity of
grass put into a silo, of the quantity of silage taken out, and of the
exact composition both of the grass and resulting silage. I desire
merely to place myself in the position of, so to speak, a "chemical
accountant."
The ensilage has been analyzed at three depths, or rather in three
layers, the first being 1 foot, the second 1 ft. to 1 ft. 6 in., and
the third 1 ft. 6 in. to 2 ft. from the bottom of the silo. By
doubling the figures of the bottom layer analysis, adding these to the
second and third layer analysis, and dividing by 4, we obtain a fair
representation of the average composition of the silage taken
throughout the silo, for by so doing we obtain the average of the
analyses of each 6-inch layer of silage. The results of the analyses
are as follows, calculated on the dry matter. The moisture was
practically the same, being 70.48 per cent, in the grass and 72.97 in
the silage.
_Composition of Grass and Silage (dried at 100°C.)._
Grass. Ensilage.
Fat (ether extract) 2.80 5.38
Soluble albuminous compounds 3.06 5.98
Insoluble albuminous compounds 6.94 3.77
Mucilage, sugar, and extractives, etc. 11.65 4.98
Digestible fiber 36.24 33.37
Indigestible woody fiber 32.33 31.79
------- -------
93.02 85.27
Soluble mineral matters 5.24 12.62
Insoluble mineral matters 1.74 2.11
------- -------
100.00 100.00
The striking difference in the mineral matter of the grass and silage
I will merely draw attention to; it is not due to the salt added to
the silage. I may say, however, that other analysts and I myself have
found similar striking differences. For instance, Prof. Kinch[2]
found in grass 8.50 per cent. mineral matter, in silage 10.10 per
cent., which, as be points out, is equivalent, to a "loss of about 18
per cent. of combustible constituents"--a loss which we have no proof
of having taken place. In Mr. Smetham's sample the loss would have to
be 50 per cent., which did not occur, and in fact is not possible.
What is the explanation?
[Footnote 2: _Journ. Chem. Society_, March, 1884, p. 124.]
I am, however, considering now the organic constituents. Calculating
the percentages of these in the grass and silage, we obtain the
following figures:
_Percentage Composition of Organic Compounds._
Grass. Ensilage.
Fat (ether extract) 3.01 6.31
Soluble albuminous compounds 8.29} {7.01
}10.75 11.43{
Insoluble " " 7.46} {4.42
Mucilage, sugar, and extractives 12.52 5.84
Digestible fiber 38.96 39.14
Indigestible woody fiber 34.76 37.28
------- -------
100.00 100.00
The difference in the total nitrogen in the grass and silage is equal
to 0.68 per cent. of albuminoids. Practically it is a matter of
impossibility that the nitrogen could have increased in the silo, and
it will be a very safe premise upon which to base any further
calculations that the total amount of nitrogen in the silage was
identical with that in the grass. There may have been a loss, but
that is not yet proved. Arguing then upon the first hypothesis, it is
evident that 100 parts of the organic matters of silage represent more
than 100 parts of the organic matter of grass, and by the equation we
obtain 10.75:11.43 :: 100:106 approximately. If now we calculate the
composition of 106 parts organic matter of grass, it will represent
exactly the organic matter which has gone to form 100 parts of that
present in silage.
The following table gives these results, and also the loss or gain in
the various constitutents arising from the conversion into silage:
_Organic Matter_.
In 106 pts. In 100 pts. Loss or
Grass. Silage. Gain.
Fat (ether extract) 3.19 6.31 +3.12
Soluble albuminous compounds 3.49 7.01 +3.52
Insoluble " " 7.91 4.42 -3.49
Mucilage 13.27 5.84 -7.43
Digestible Fiber 41.30 39.14 -2.16
Indigestible woody fiber 36.84 37.28 +0.44
------- -------
106.00 100.00
These calculations show, provided my reasoning be correct, that the
chief changes which take place are in the albuminous compounds, which
has already been pointed out by Professors Voelcker, Kinch, and
others; and in the starch, gum, mucilage, sugar, and those numerous
bodies termed extractives, which was to be expected. But they show
most conclusively that the "decrease in the amount of indigestible
fiber and increase in digestible" so much spoken of is, so far as our
present very imperfect methods of analyzing these compounds permit us
to judge, a myth; and I have not yet found any sufficient evidence to
support this statement. A loss, then, of 6 parts of organic matter out
of every 106 parts put into the silo has in this instance taken place,
due chiefly to the decomposition of starch, sugar, and mucilage, etc.
And as the grass contained 70 parts of water when put into the silo,
the total loss would only be 1.7 per cent. of the total weight. This
theoretical deduction was found by practical experience correct, for
Mr. Smith, agent to Lord Egerton, upon whose estate this silage was
made, in his report to Mr. Jenkins says the "actual weight out of the
silo corresponds exactly with the weight we put into the same."
In my judgment these figures are of interest to the agricultural
chemist for many reasons. First, they will clear the ground for future
workers and eliminate from their researches what would have greatly
complicated them--changes in the cellulose bodies.
Secondly, they are of interest because our present methods of
distinguishing between and estimating digestible and indigestible
fiber is most rough, and probably inaccurate, and may not in the least
represent the power of an animal--say a cow--to digest these various
substances; and most of us know that when a new method of analysis
becomes a necessity, a new method is generally discovered. Lastly,
they are of interest to the agriculturist, for they point out, I
believe for the first time, the exact amount of loss which grass--or
at least one sample--has undergone in conversion into silage, and also
that much of the nitrogenous matter is changed, and so far as we know
at present, lost its nutritive value. This, however, is only comparing
silage with grass. What is wanted is to compare silage with hay--both
made out of the same grass. Then, and then only, will it be possible
to sum up the relative advantages or disadvantages of the two methods
of preserving grass as food for cattle.--_Chem. News_.
* * * * *