A digest of recent experiments on horse feeding

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
A digest of recent experiments on horse feeding
Series Title:
Bulletin / U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Office of Experiment Stations ;
Physical Description:
75 p. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Langworthy, C. F ( Charles Ford ), 1864-1932
Publisher:
G.P.O.
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Horses -- Feeding and feeds   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
by C.F. Langworthy.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029560586
oclc - 39667422
System ID:
AA00014588:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text












.%I
9 oil



OEMIW
HANm
vastQ& 1



inm



-mom



iA 0

VON.
FI
.7
05 MS
A.i
:Q
goI

%

























IrI
qj








U.i


A


DIGEST


OF




RECENT EXPERIMENTS ON IHORSL FEEDING.



BY


C. F. LANG-WORTItY, Ph. D.,
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS.


WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
1903.


. .....


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS-BULLkTIN NO.125.
SC. TRUE, Director.






























OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS.

A. C. TRUE, Ph. D.-Director.
E. W. ALLEN, Ph. D.-Assistant Director and Editor of Experiment Station Record.
W. H. BEA L-Chief of Editorial Division.
C. E. JOHNSTON-Chief Clerk.

EDITORIAL DEPARTMENTS.

E. W. ALLEN, Ph. D., and H. W. LAWSON-Chemistry, Dairy Farming, and Dairying.
W. H. BEAL-Agricultural Physics and Engineering.
WALTER H. EVANS, Ph. D.--Botany and Diseases of Plants.
C. F. LANGWORTHY, Ph. D.-Foods and Animal Production.
J. I. SCHULTE-Field Crops.
E. V. WILCOX, Ph. D.-Entomology and Veterinary Science.
C. B. SMITH-Horticulture.
D. J. CROSBY-Agricultural Institutions.
2














LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.


U. S. DEPARTMENT 'OF AGRICULTURE,
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS,
Washington, D. C., January 29, 1903.
SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a bulletin prepared by
C. F. Langworthy, Ph. D., of the Office of Experiment Stations, which
summarizes and discusses the results of experiments on the feeding
and care of horses, and especially the investigations of recent years.
The attempt has been made to include all the work which has been
carried on at the experiment stations in the United States as well as
some of the more important foreign investigations. Statistics were also
gathered regarding the rations fed horses used by express companies,
cab companies, fire departments, packing houses, breweries, etc., in
different regions of the United States, with a view to learning the nutri-
ents supplied to horses performing different amounts of work. The
data have been compared with similar values for horses fed at a num-
ber of the experiment stations under more or less definitely known
conditions. The rations fed army horses in this and other countries,
the horses of French and other cab companies, etc., have also been
included for purposes of comparison.
Thanks are due to Director W. A. Henry of the Wisconsin Station,
Director H. J. Patterson of the Maryland Station, and Mr. G. M. Rom-
mel of the Bureau of Animal Industry of this Department, for valu-
able suggestions, and to Mr. H. A. Pratt of the Department of the
Interior, for assistance in making the calculations involved in preparing
the material.
Believing that the bulletin will prove a useful summary of the infor-
mation at present available regarding the feeding of horses, I recom-
mend that it be published as Bulletin No. 125 of this Office.
Respectfully, A. C. TRUE,
Director.
Hon. JAMES WILSON,
secretaryy of Agriculture.
3












































































































































S;


















CONTENTS.

Page.
Introduction..........----------............................................. 7
Principles of nutrition ..........----...----------...................-------- 9
Composition of feeding stuffs -..........--......-- ..-..-......... --------- 12
Comparative value of feeding stuffs.....---......----------------.......------- 15
Cereal grains......----...........-..-------------------------..------- 15
Leguminous seeds -..-----.....----....--------...----....----------------... .--- 20
Oil cakes and other commercial by-products -..------......... --------.. 20
Forage crops, fresh and cured ........--- .--....----------....-- .. ----- 22
Roots and tubers ......-------......-------------...................-..----.-------- 27
Molasses and other by-products of sugar making..-....-..-----..- ..---. 28
Fruits, fresh and dried------...--....-----------------..........-.......-----..--.....-..----.------ 31
Injurious feeding stuffs ....-- .....-........--...--------...---------.. 32
Method of feeding.. .-------------... --....---------..----........-----....33
Cooked and raw feed......--..-----.. ----.......-------------..--...-- ....---- ..-- 34
Dry and soaked feed ...........----- .....------.-------......------..- 34
Ground and unground feed....------...--....----------------....----------. 34
Cut and uncut coarse fodder .-......--....--...............-----..... 35
Cost of a ration..---------------------..........-.----------..------.-----. 36
Fattening horses for market................---------........------------. 36
Watering horses................--------.. --------------.. ...-----------..- 37
Digestibility of feeding stuffs..........---...-.....--.----------- --------- 40
Comparative digestibility by horses and ruminants -- -..--.--------......... 44
Rations actually fed and feeding standards .......------------------... ----- 46
Method of calculating rations......-------...---.---.....-------------.---- 58
Muscular work and its effect on food requirements.--------------.----....-- 59
Measuring muscular work...--....--... ..... ....---..--....-----..---. 59
Muscular work in its relation to the ration ...----- -----...------------- 62
Effect of muscular work on digestibility---...........----...-......---- 65
Metabolism experiments and the deductions drawn from them --.....----------. 66
Measuring the respiratory quotient and the deductions drawn from it.---.-- 67
Proportion of energy of food expended for internal and external muscular
work -- ..--..-..-............................--..---------..--..-- 68
Energy required to chew and digest food...........--- -------...--....- 69
"True nutritive value" of feeding stuffs ---..-....- ....-..-..--- .---... 69
Fixing rations on the basis of internal and external muscular work ...... 71
Summary................................................................ 73
5


i












9j



































fr
;i
*i

I



















.,






B














RECENT EXPERIMENTS IN HORSE FEEDING.


INTRODUCTION.
The scientific study of different problems connected with the feeding
of farm animals has been followed for something over half a century.
Some of the very early work was with horses, but more generally it
was carried on with other domestic animals. Within the last few years
this phase of the problem has received much more attention, and feed-
* ing tests, digestion experiments, and more complicated investigations
have accumulated in considerable numbers. The bulk of this work
has been carried on in France and Germany; a creditable amount,
however, has been done in this country, notably by the agricultural
experiment stations, and the results of these experiments and obser-
vations have been published from time to time, and are very useful.
S Mention must be made also of the work of practical feeders, which is
of great value.
In the present bulletin the attempt is made to bring together some
of the more important results and deductions which may be gathered
from the American and foreign experimental work, especially that of
recent years. It is not the purpose to provide practical feeders with
directions for feeding according to a particular formula; indeed this
is not necessary, if it were possible, for practical feeders understand
the needs of their horses and how to meet them. The object is rather
to summarize matter which seems interesting and valuable, and which
in many cases may give the reason for something of which the wisdom
has long been recognized in practice.
In addition to the bulletins, reports, and other works cited in the
following pages, a large number of scientific and popular journals,
treatises on horse feeding, and similar publications have been consulted,
as well as reports issued by American and foreign experiment stations.
That a scientific study of the feeding of horses may not be without
direct practical value is shown by the work of Grandeau, Leclerc, Lava-
lard, and others for the Paris Cab and 'Bus companies. By means of
experimental studies of the food value and digestibility of different
feeding stuffs, carried on under definite conditions, it was possible to
so modify the ration fed to the thousands of horses belonging to one
of these companies that an annual saving of 1,000,000 francs or over
was effected, while at the same time the health and strength of the








horses were maintained at the usual standard. This was accomplished
in the instance cited by demonstrating the value of Indian corn, against
which there was a prejudice in France, and substituting it in part for
oats.
The returns from scientific studies are not always so immediate, but
the results are usually of use when the experiments have been well
planned and carried out.
The problem of horse feeding is one which each feeder solves more
or less for himself, the opinion regarding what is and what is not sat-
isfactory feed varying more or less with the time and place. Opinions
may differ as to the value of this food or that, but it is evident that
the actual food requirements of a horse performing a given amount of
work can not vary as a result of a change of opinion on the feeder's
part. With horses, as with all animals, including man, the real prob-
lem is to supply sufficient nutritive material for building and repairing
the body and furnishing it with the energy necessary for performing
work, whether it be that which goes on inside the body (the beating
of the heart, respiratory movements, etc.), or the work which is per-
formed outside the body (hauling a load, etc.). The body temperature
must also be maintained at the expense of the fuel ingredients, but
whether material is burned in the body primarily for this purpose, or
whether the necessary heat is a resultant of the internal muscular
work, is not known with certainty.
The problem of successfully feeding horses differs somewhat from
that encountered in feeding most domestic animals. Cattle, sheep,
and pigs are fed to induce gains in weight, i. e., to fatten them, or in
the case of milch cows to produce gains in the form of a body secre-
tion (milk) rather than as fat in the body. In a similar way sheep
are fed for the production of wool, and poultry for the production of
eggs. Sometimes cattle are also fed as beasts of burden. Horses are
fed almost universally as beasts of burden, whether the work consists
in carrying a rider or drawing a load.
Mares with foal require food for the development of their young,
and after birth the colt needs it for the growth and development of
the body as well as for maintenance. Such demands for nutritive
material are common to all classes of animals. Sometimes horses are
fed to increase their weight; that is, to improve their condition. For
instance, animals are often fattened by horse dealers before they are
sold. However, generally speaking, the problem in horse feeding is
to supply sufficient nutritive material for the production of the work
required and at the same time to maintain the body weight. The
almost universal experience of practical horse feeders, and the results
of many carefully planned experiments, agree that there is no surer
test of the fitness of any given ration than that it enables the horse
fed to maintain a constant weight. If the animal loses weight it






9

is evident that the ration is insufficient, while if gains in weight are
made and the animal becomes fat it is evident that more feed is given
than is necessary. Provided the horse is in good condition, it is seldom
desirable to induce any considerable gain in weight. Reference is not
made to the small daily fluctuations in weight, but to gains or losseA
which extend over a considerable period. The most satisfactory ration
must necessarily be made up of materials which are wholesome and
are relished by the horse. It should also be reasonable in cost. It
must be abundant enough to meet all body requirements, but not so
abundant that the horse lays on an undesirable amount of flesh.

PRINCIPLES OF NUTRITION.

The foundation principles of nutrition are the same in the case of all
animals, including man. A brief discussion of the properties of food
and the general laws of nutrition follows.
The study of foods and feeding stuffs has shown that although they
differ so much in texture and appearance they are in reality made up
of a small number of chemical constituents, namely, protein, fat, car-
bohydrates, and ash, together with a larger or smaller amount of
water. The latter can be often seen, as in the juice of fresh plants.
In dry hay no water or juice is visible. A small amount is, however,
contained in minute particles in the plant tissues.
Protein is a name given to the total group of nitrogenous materials
present. The group is made up mainly of the true proteids and
albumens, such as the gluten of wheat, and of nitrogenous materials
such as amids, which are believed to have a lower feeding value than
the albumens.
The group fat" includes the true vegetable fats and oils, like the oil
in cotton seed or corn, as well as vegetable wax, some chlorophyl (the
green coloring matter in leaves,-etc.), and other coloring matters; in
brief, all the materials which are extracted by ether in the usual labo-
ratory method of estimating fat. The name "ether extract" is often
and very properly applied to this group. Chemically considered, the
true fats are glycerids of the fatty acids, chiefly oleic, stearic, and
palmitic.
The group carbohydrates" includes starches, sugars, crude fiber,
cellulose, pentosans, and other bodies of a similar chemical struc-
ture. This group is usually subdivided, according to the analytical
methods followed in estimating it, into "nitrogen-free extract" and
"crude fiber;" the former subdivision including principally sugar,
starches, and most of the pentosans, and the latter cellulose, lignin,
/ and other woody substances which very largely make up the rigid struc-
ture of plants.
The proteids contain nitrogen in addition to carbon, oxygen, hydro-
gen, and a little phosphorus and sulphur. The fats consist of carbon,






10

oxygen, and hydrogen, as do also carbohydrates. In the carbohy-
drates, however, the oxygen and hydrogen are always present in
the proportions in which they occur in water, namely, two atoms of
hydrogen to one of oxygen.
The group "mineral matter" includes the inorganic bodies present
in the form of salts in the juices and tissue of the different feeding
stuffs, the principal chemical elements found being sodium, potassium,
calcium, chlorin, fluorin, phosphorus, and sulphur. The term "ash "
is often and very properly used for this group, since the mineral
matter represents the incombustible portion which remains when any
given feeding stuff is burned.
As noted above, the functions of food are (1) to supply material to
build and repair the body, and (2) to yield energy. The chemical
composition of a feeding stuff serves as a basis for judging of its value
for building and repairing body tissue. Its value as a source of energy
must, however, be learned in another way. The most usual way of
measuring energy is in terms of heat, the calorie being taken as a unit.
This is the amount of heat which would raise the temperature of 1
kilogram of water 10 C., or 1 pound of water 4 F. Instead of this the
unit of mechanical energy, the foot-ton (the force which would lift 1
ton 1 foot) may be used, but it is not as convenient. One calorie cor-
responds very nearly to 1.54 foot-tons. The heat of combustion of
foods and feeding stuffs is ordinarily determined with the bomb calo-
rimeter or other suitable devices. The fuel value of any food is equal
to its heat of combustion less the energy of the excretory products
derived from it and may be learned by taking into account the chem-
ical composition of the food or feeding stuff, the proportions of the
nutrients actually digested and oxidized in the body, and the propor-
tion of the whole latent energy of each which becomes active and use-
ful to the body for warmth and work. However, the fuel value may
be and often is calculated from the composition of the food material
supplied, since it has been found that 1 gram of protein furnishes 4.1
calories, 1 gram fat 9.3 calories, and 1 gram carbohydrates 4.1 calo-
ries, or 1 pound protein 1,860 calories, 1 pound fat 4,220 calories, and
1 pound carbohydrates 1,860 calories.a
The relation between the quantities of nitrogenous and nitrogen-free
nutrients in the ration is called the nutritive or nutrient ratio. In cal-
culating this ratio 1 pound of fat is taken as equivalent to 2.25 pounds 5
of carbohydrates-this being approximately the ratio of their fuel
a These values, which have been often used in the past, are known to be unsatis-
factory, but are retained because better and more generally accepted data, obtained
in experiments with animals, are not available.
In discussions relating to human food later and more accurate values have been
proposed, namely, 1,820 calories per pound for protein and carbohydrates and 4,040
calories per pound for fats.







i "


11


I
tiiiii!


values-so that the nutritive ratio is actually that of the protein to the
carbohydrates plus 2.25 times the fat.,
The body is necessarily made up of the same chemical elements as
occur in food. Nitrogen is the characteristic element of body tissue and
fluids. Carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen are also present, as well as the
elements making up the various mineral matters of the body. Protein
is the only nutrient which contains nitrogen, therefore this nutrient is
essential for building and repairing body tissues. The carbon, oxy-
gen, and hydrogen may be supplied theoretically by protein, fat, or
carbohydrates; but a well-balanced diet or ration contains all in proper
proportion. Protein, fat, and carbohydrates may be burned with the
formation of carbon dioxid and water, and therefore all may serve as
sources of energy.
The mineral matter in food is required for a number of different
purposes, a considerable amount being needed for the formation of
the skeleton. Some is also present in the organs and tissues. It can
not, however, be regarded as a source of energy, according to com-
monly accepted theories, since it can not be burned with the formation
of carbon dioxid and water. The water present in food is not a
nutrient in the sense that it serves for building tissue or yielding
energy, but it is essential, serving to carry the food in the digestive
processes, to dilute the blood, and for many other physiological pur-
poses. The oxygen of the air is required by all living animals for the
combustion, or oxidation, of the fuel constituents of food.
When foods are burned in the body, i. e., oxidized, they give up the
latent energy present in them. In determining the fuel value of pro-
tein, due allowance is made for the fact that combustion is not as com-
plete in the body as in a furnace. In the latter, practically all organic
materials are burned to carbon dioxid, water, and nitrogen; in the
body, to carbon dioxid, water, and some cleavage product containing
nitrogen, such as urea, uric acid, hippuric acid, and similar bodies
which require further combustion before the free nitrogen is liberated.
Combustion in a furnace and combustion in the body do not appear to
be at all similar, but, generally speaking, they are the same from a
chemical standpoint. The former takes place rapidly with the evolu-
tion of heat, and usually of light; the latter, more slowly and incon-
spicuously. If food is likened to fuel and the body to a furnace, the
respiratory products given off from the lungs correspond to the com-
bustion products which pass out through the flue. Ashes, in so far as
they consist of material which will not burn (sand, bits of rock, etc.),
and bits of coal which do not burn because they fall through the grate,
or for some similar reason escape combustion, represent the feces (the
indigestible and accidentally undigested material derived from the food).
The bits of coal found in the ashes which are partially burned, but
still contain some material valuable as fuel, correspond to the urea







12

and other incompletely oxidized nitrogenous bodies excreted in the
urine. There is this difference, however, the furnace would have
completed the combustion of the partly burned bits of coal if they had
not been shaken out with the ashes, while the body can not burn the
urea more completely. The body differs from a machine in a number
of important ways; for instance, it is itself built up of the same mate-
rials which it utilizes as fuel, and further, if an excess of fuel, i. e.,
food, is supplied, it may be stored as a reserve material for future use,
generally in the form of fat or glycogen.
The amount of work performed by a horse, for convenience in meas-
urement, may be resolved into several factors, as follows: (1) The
energy expended in chewing, swallowing, and digesting food, keeping
up the beating of the heart, circulation of the blood, respiratory move-
ments, and other vital processes;a (2) the energy which is expended
in moving the body, walking, trotting, etc., which is usually spoken of
as energy required for forward progression; and (3) the energy which
is expended in carrying a rider, as in the case of a saddle horse, or
drawing a load, as in the case of a draft animal or carriage horse.
The character of the road, whether level or up or down hill, is an
important factor in determining the amount of work. It is evident
that more energy is required to lift the body at each step and move it
forward when climbing an incline than when walking on a level. In
the same way, when a load is drawn uphill it must be raised as well
as drawn forward.
Work may be measured as foot-pounds or foot-tons, or by any other
convenient unit. A foot-pound is the amount of energy expended in
raising 1 pound 1 foot; a foot-ton, that expended in raising 1 ton 1
foot; a commonly used unit of force is the "ton power," equivalent
to 550 foot-pounds per second. Work may also be measured in terms
of heat, i. e., calories. This is especially convenient in discussing
problems of nutrition, since the heat of combustion is one of the factors
usually determined or calculated when foods are analyzed; and further-
more, the feeding standards which have been proposed for horses and
other farm animals show the requirements per day in terms of nutri-
ents and energy. One calorie corresponds, as stated above, very
nearly to 1.54 foot-tons.

COMPOSITION OF FEEDING STUFFS.

The feeding stuffs of most importance for horses are cereal grains,
such as oats and corn, either ground or unground; leguminous seeds,
as beans and peas; cakes, and other commercial by-products, as oil-
a The heat of the body is closely connected with this kind of work, and may be
derived either from the combustion of material directly for that purpose, or may be
the result of the energy liberated when internal muscular work is performed, or
may be due to both causes acting together.









Ii;


I


Kind of food
material.


GREEN FODDER.


Corn fodder .........
Corn leaves and husks
Cornstalks stripped ..
Kafir corn...........
Rye fodder..........
Oat fodder .........
Wheat fodder .......
Redtop in bloom ....
Tall oat grass in
bloom..............
Orchard grass in
bloom...............
Meadow fescue in
bloom ..............
Italian rye grass com-
ing into bloom .....
Timothy at different
stages .............
Kentucky blue grass
at different stages..
Hungarian grass .....
Red clover at differ-
ent stages .........
Alsike clover in
bloom a.............
Crimson clovera......
Alfalfa at different
stages ..............
Cowpea .............
Soy bean ...........
SILAGE.


Co
ii/ So
Re
So
Cc








L


rn silage...........
rghum silage.......
ed-clover silage.....
y-bean silage.......
wpea-vine silage...


Percentage composition.


Water.


Per ct.
79.3
66.2
76.1
73.0
76.6
62.2
77. 3
65.3

69.5

73.0

69.9

73. 2

61.6

65.1
71.1

70.8

74.8
80.9
71.8
83.6
75.1


74.4
76.1
72.0
74.2
79.3


Pro-
tein.


Per ct.
1.8
2. 1
.5
2.3
2.6
3.4
2.3
2.8

2.4

2.6

2.4

3.1

3.1

4.1
3.1'

4.4

3.9
3.1

4.8
2.4
4.0


2.2
.8
4.2
4.1
2.7


Fat.


Per ct.
0.5
1.1
.5
.7
.6
1.4
.7
.9

.9

.9

.8

1.3

1.2

1.3
.7
1.1

.9
.7

1.0
.4
1.0


1.1
.3
1.2
2.2


Nitro-
gen-
Tree
ex-
tract.


Per ct.
12.2
19.0
14.9
15.1
6.8
19.3
12.0
17.7

15.8

13.3

14.3

13.1

20.2

17.6
14.2

13.5

11.0
8.4

12.3
7.1
10. 6


15.0
15.3
11.6
7.0


Crude Ash
fiber.



Per ct. Per ct.
5.0 1.2
8.7 2.9
7.3 .7
6.9 2.0
11.6 1.8
11.2 2.5
5.9 1.8
11.0 2.3

9.4 2.0

8.2 2.0

10.8 1.8

6.8 2.5

11.8 2.1

9.1 2.8
9.2 1.7
8.1 2.1

7.4 2.0
5.2 1.7

7.4 2.7
4.8 1.7
6.7 2.6


5.8 1.5
6.4 1.1
8.4 2.6
9.7 2.8
6.0 2.9


Digestible material
100 pounds.


Pro- Fat.
tein.



Lbs. Lbs.





3...... ........
.....42 .......

.--75------
....... .......






....... .......





3........1

3.05 .......
2.42. .......

3.75 .......


Nitro-
gen-
free
ex-
tract.


Lbs.


] .......

10.94
8.91
6.80

9.96


Is in En-
ergy
S in 100
Ibs. di-
Crude gesti-
fiber.
fibernutri-
ents.

Calo-
Lbs. ries.
....... .......

....... .......











-------1-------



3.79 33,796

3.46 28,681
2.43 21,669

3.46 31,936
....... ......



.... .. ....
....... .......


a Digestibility calculated from values obtained with green alfalfa.


cake, gluten feed, and so on; fodder crops, green or cured; and differ-
ent roots, tubers, and green vegetables. In quite recent times cane

molasses, beet molasses, and other beet-sugar by-products, have

assumed more or less importance in this connection. The composition
of a number of these different feeding stuffs may be seen by reference
to the table below, which shows the average composition as determined

by analysis, and when possible the digestible nutrients furnished for

horses by each 100 pounds of the feeding stuffs, the latter data having

been calculated, as explained elsewhere (p. 40), by the aid of figures

obtained in digestion experiments with horses. In a number of cases

such calculations have not been made, for the reason that experiments
showing the digestibility of feeding stuffs had not been found, nor were

results of experiments made with similar feeding stuffs available. The

comparatively large number of feeding stuffs of which the digesti-
bility has not been determined indicates one of the lines of work which
might be profitably followed.

TABLE 1.-Average composition of a number of feeding stuffs.


13


,i."


-!-"~
-----I-----
------,
1..----. j -








14

TABLE 1.-Average composition of a number of feeding stuffs-Continued.


Percentage composition. Digestibole tera in s
100 pounds.
Kind of food Nitro- Nitro- Mit di-
material. PW eater.ru Fat. e Pro- at. Crude "
Water. rein. at" fiber. Ash tein.ble
ex- iber. teinx- fiber.
ex- ex- nutri-
tract. tract. enter.

HAY AND DRY COARSE
FODDER.
Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. O4lo-
Corn fodder, field ries.
cured............... 42.2 "4.5 1.6 34.7 14.3 2.7 .................................
Corn leaves, fleldcured 30.0 6.0 1.4 35.7 21.4 5.5 ................. ..............
Corn husks, field cured 50.9 2.5 .7 28.3 15.8 1.8 .................................
Cornstalks,field cured 68.4 1.9 .5 17.0 11.0 1.2 ................................
Cornatover,fleldcured 40.5 3.8 1.1 31.5 19.7 3.4 ........... ....... .............
Kafir-cornstover, field
cured............... 19.2 4.8 1.6 39.6 26.8 8.0 ................................
Barleyhay............ 10.6 9.3 2.5 48.7 23.6 5.3 .................. ....... .......
Oathay............... 16.0 7.4 2.7 40.6 27.2 6.1 .................. ....... .......
Wheathay............ 8.8 6.0 1.8 55.3 22.5 5.6 .............. ................
Redtopcutatdifferent
stages ............. 8.9 7.9 1.9 47.5 28.6 5.2 4.51 0.39 26.93 11.35 81,234
Redtopcutinblooma. 8.7 8.0 2.1 46.4 29.9 4.9 4.57 .43 26.31 11.87 81,880
Orchard grass ....... 9.9 8.1 2.6 41.0 32.4 6.0 4.62 .54 23.25 12.86 78,036
Timothy.............. 13.2 5.9 2.5 45.0 29.0 4.4 1.25 1.18 21.29 12.36 69,873
Kentucky bluegrassa. 21.2 7.8 3.9 37.8 23.0 6.3 4.45 .81 21.43 9.13 68,836
Hungariangrassa.... 7.7 7.5 2.1 49.0 27.7 6.0 4.28 .43 27.78 11.00 81,905
Meadow fescuea...... 20.0 7.0 2.7 38.4 25.0 6.9 4.00 .56 21.77 10.28 69,415
Italian ryegrassa..... 8.5 7.5 1.7 44.9 30.5 6.9 4.28 .35 25.51 12.11 79,410
Mixed grassesa....... 15.3 7.4 2.5 42.1 27.2 5.5 4.23 .52 23.87 10.80 74,554
Rowen (mixed)a..... 16.6 11.6 3.1 39.4 22.5 6.8 6.62 .64 22.34 8.93 73,175
Mixed grasses and
cloversa............ 12.9 10.1 2.6 41.3 27.6 5.5 5.77 .54 23.42 10.96 76,967
Swamphay a......... 11.6 7.2 2.0 45.9 26.6 6.7 4.11 .41 26.02 10.56 77,413
Salt-marsh hay....... 10.4 5.5 2.4 44.0 30.0 7.7 ...............................
Red clover........... 15.3 12.3 3.3 38.1 24.8 6.2 6.85 .95 24.19 9.27 78,984
Red clover in bloom b. 20.8 12.4 4.5 33.8 21.9 6.6 6.91 1.29 21.46 8.19 73,450
Alsikecloverb......... 9.7 12.8 2.9 40.7 25.6 8.3 7.13 .83 25.84 9.57 82,630
White cloverb........ 9.7 15.7 2.9 39.3 24.1 8.3 8.74 .83 24.96 9.01 82,942
Crimson cloverb...... 9.6 15.2 2.8 36.6 27.2 8.6 8.47 .80 23.24 10.17 81,272
Alfalfa .............. 8.4 14.3 2.2 42.7 25.0 7.4 10.67 .42 29.98 9.75 95,520
Cowpea............... 10.7 16.6 2.9 42.2 20.1 7.5 ....... ............. .......
Soy bean ............. 11.3 15.4 5.2 38.6 22.3 7.2 ........ ... ...... ........
Flat pea............. 8.4 22.9 3.2 31.4 26.2 7.9 ....... ..... ....... ............
Soy-bean straw....... 10.1 4.6 1.7 37.4 40.4 5.8 .............. ............ .......
Wheatstraw ......... 9.6 3.4 1.3 43.4 38.1 4.2 .94 .85 12.20 6.74 40,544
Rye straw c............. 7.1 3.0 1.2 46.6 38.9 3.2 .83 .79 13.10 6.89 42,020
Oatstrawe........... 9.2 4.0 2.3 42.4 37.0 5.1 1.11 1.51 11.91 6.55 42,770
Buckwheat straw .... 9.9 5.2 1.3 35.1 43.0 5.5 ...................................
ROOTS AND TUBERS.
Potatoes............ 78.9 2.1 .1 17.3 .6 1.0 1.85 ...... .17.20 .05 35,525
Carrots............. 88.6 1.1 .4 7.6 1.3 1.0 1.09 ........ 7.13 ....... 15,290
GRAINS AND OTHER
SEEDS.
Corn, dent .......... 10.6 10.3 5.0 70.4 2.2 1.5 5.95 2.39 62.09 ....... 136, 636
Corn, flint............ 11.3 10.5 5.0 70.1 1.7 1.4 6.07 2.39 61.83 ....... 136,376
Corn, all varieties.... 10.9 10.5 5.4 69.6 2.1 1.5 6.07 2.58 61.39 .......136,363
Kafir corn........... 12.5 10.9 2.9 70.5 1.9 1.3 ..................... .... .......
Chicken corn......... 14.8 10.6 2.6 58.8 8.7 4.5 .............. ..................
Barley............... 10.9 12.4 1.8 69.8 2.7 2.4 ................................
Oats ................ 11.0 11.8 5.0 59.7 9.5 3.0 9.39 3.60 .45.25 2.82 122,062
Rye ................. 11.6 10.6 1.7 .72.5 1.7 1.9 8.51 .72 63.29 1.70 139,747
Wheat, all varieties.. 10.5 11.9 2.1 71.9 1.8 1.8 ............. ...................
Cotton seed, whole,
with hulls.......... 9.1 19.6 20.1 28.3 18.9 4.0 .............. ....... .............
Cowpea ............. 11.9 23.5 1.7 55.7 3.8 3.4 ..................... ....... .......
MILL PRODUCTS.
Corn meal........... 15.0 9.2 3.8 68.9 1.9 1.4 6.99 2.55 64.70 .38 144,454
Oats, ground ......... 11.7 11.0 3.9 52.3 18.0 3.1 9.06 3.12 45.03 2.59 118,727
Corn and cob meal... 15.1 8.5 3.5 64.8 6.6 1.5 .............. ....... ............
Barley meal.......... 11.9 10.5 2.2 66.3 6.5 2.6 ....... ........... .......
a Digestibility calculated from values obtained with meadow hay.
b Digestibility calculated from values obtained with red clover hay.
c Digestibility calculated from values obtained with wheat straw.





a:
ill


TABLE 1.--Average composition of a number of feeding tuhnffi -Con ti nu id.


Kind of food
material.




MILL PRODUCTS-COn.

Rye flour.............
Pea meal.............
Ground corn and oats
(equal parts) ......
WASTE PRODUCTS.

Corncob ............
Hominy chop.......
Corn bran ...........
Gluten meal..........
Gluten feed...........
Oat feed .............
Barley screenings ....
Brewers' grains, wet..
Brewers' grains, dried.
Rye bran.............
Wheat bran...........
Wheat middlings.....
Wheat shorts.........
Wheat screenings.....
Cotton-seed meal.....
Cotton-seed hulls.....
Linseed meal, old
process .............
Linseed meal, new
process.............
Beet-sugar molasses ..
Cane-sugar molasses..


Percentage composition.


Water.


Per ct.
13.1
10.5

11.9


10.7
11.1
8.7
8.6
7.8
7.7
12.2
75. 7
8.0
11.8
11.9
12.1
11.8
11.6
8.2
11.1

9.2

9.9
25.7
25. 1


Pro-
tein.


Per ct.
6.7
20.2

9.6


2.4
9.8
9.8
30.0
23.4
16.0
12.3
5.4
24.1
14.7
15.4
15.6
14.9
12.5
42.3
4.2

32.9

35.9
a7.3
a 2. 4


Per ct.
0.8
1.2

4.4


.5
8.3
6.2
8.8
8.3
7.1
2.8
1.6
6.7
2.8
4.0
4.0
4.5
3.0
13.1
2.2

7.9

3.0


Nitro-
gen-
ex-
tract.


Per ct.
78.3
51.1

71


54.9
64.5
62.6
49.2
53.2
59.4
61.8
12.5
44.8
63.9
53.9
60.4
56.8
65.1
23.6
33.4

35.4

36.8
h58. 2
b69.3


Crude
fiber.



Per ct.
0.4
14.4

.9


30.1
3.8
11.2
2.6
6.2
6.1
7.3
3.8
13.0
3.3
9.0
4.6
7.4
4.9
5.6
46.3

8.9

8.8

I-
H.. I
.....--'


Ash.


Per ct.
0.7
2.6

2.2


1.4
2.5
1.5
.8
1. 1
3.7
3.6
1.0
3.4
3.5
5.8
3.3
4.6
2.9
7.2
2.8

5.7

5.6
8.8
3.2


Digestible matcrialm in
100 pounds.


Pro-
tein.


Lbs.


Fat.


Ibs.


Nitro-
qen-

ex-
tract.


Lbs.


Cruide
fiber.


Lbs.


En-
ergy
111 100
Ibs. di-
gesti-
ble
nutri-
entls.


ries.
C.....


....... .......' ....... ...... ........
....... ....... o ... ...... .......


....... ....... ........ ...... -.......
....... ....... ....... ....... .......
....... .... ....... ....... .......


---- ---- I ------- --- ---


....... .....: .. ....... ....... ......
....... ...... ....... ....... .......





7 3 5 8 .2 2 9-8
3.2 ....... 69.3 -.---.9.398


a Largely nonalbuminoid nitrogenous materials.
b Very largely sugars.


COMPARATIVE VALUE OF FEEDING STUFFS.

CEREAL GRAINS.


It will be seen that the cereal grains resemble each other quite

closely in composition, being characterized by fairly low water con-

tent and a considerable amount of protein and nitrogen-free extract.

Some crude fiber, derived from the outer or bran layer of the corn, is

also present. The superiority of one grain over another must there-

fore depend, in large measure, if it exists at all, on some factor other

than composition. It has been urged by many that oats possess a

peculiar stimulating body called "avenin," and are on this account

superior to other grains for horses. Oats undoubtedly possess a

flavor or some such characteristic which makes them a' favorite food

with horses, but the most careful chemical study has failed to reveal
any substance of the nature of the theoretical avenin. Recent experi-

mentsa have shown that the fat of oats and oat straw is more thoroughly
digested than that of other cereals. This is suggested as a possible

explanation of the superior feeding value of oats.

aLandw. Jahrb., 29 (1900), p. 483.


SI I


15






16

It is believed by many that horses show more spirit when oats form
part of the ration. Discussing this subject, Director W. A. Henry,"
of the Wisconsin Experiment Station, says:
Horses nurtured on oats show mettle which can not be reached by the use of any
other feeding stuff. Then, too, there is no grain so safe for horse feeding, the ani-
mal rarely being seriously injured if by accident or otherwise the groom deals out
an oversupply. This safety is due in no small measure to the presence of the oat
hull, which causes a given weight of grain to possess considerable volume, because
of which there is less liability of mistake in measuring out the ration; further, the
digestive tract can not hold a quantity of oat grains sufficient to produce serious dis-
orders. Unless the horse is hard pressed for time or has poor teeth oats should be
fed in the whole condition. Musty oats should be avoided.
Horsemen generally agree that new oats should not be used, though Boussingault,
conducting extensive experiments with army horses, arrived at the conclusion that
new oats do not possess the injurious qualities attributed to them.
In the opinion of Lavalard:6
Not only may single grains and other single foods be substituted for oats, but more
or less complex mixtures may be used as well. We believe that both from a hygi-
enic and an economic standpoint our experiments have settled this matter, which
has provoked so much discussion. An examination of the statistics we have gath-
ered in the last thirty-five years show that, although a great saving has been effected,
it has not been at the expense of the productive power of the horses.
Boussingault, perhaps, first suggested on the basis of experiments
that other materials may be substituted for oats in the ration of
horses. He prepared a table of nutritive equivalents, using hay as a
unit of comparison. This was not very satisfactory, since the com-
position of hay varies within wide limits.
The grain most commonly substituted for oals in this country is
Indian corn or maize. It is so commonly used, especially in the South
and West, that it is difficult to realize the prejudice which has existed
against it in .other countries. It has been asserted that there are
climatic and other conditions which render corn a suitable horse feed
in America which do not exist elsewhere. This hardly seems reason-
able, and has not been borne out by the numerous experiments under-
taken in France, Germany, and other countries. Such experiments
have demonstrated the value of corn and shown the truth of the
opinions generally held in this country, namely, that it is a safe and
satisfactory feeding stuff for horses.
Barley, rye, and wheat are sometimes fed to horses. Their resem-
blance to oats will be seen by reference to the table. All these grains
should be substituted on the basis of chemical composition, and not
pound for pound. As would be expected, the ground grains differ
little from the same varieties before grinding.
Bran, shorts, middlings, and other by-products vary in composition,
but all have a low water content, while the crude fiber content is gen-

a Feeds and Feeding, Madison, Wis., 1898.
b Experiment Station Record, 12 (1900-1901), p. 4.






17

rally rather high. Their nutritive ingredients are principally protein
and carbohydrates. The high crude fiber content :s due to the fact
that these products represent the outer layers of the grain, which are
more hard and firm in construction than the interior portion, which
consists largely of starch.
The total number of tests to compare different feeding stuffs for
horses which have been undertaken by the agricultural experiment
stations in the United States is not large compared with the tests
made with other farm animals. The results obtained are, however,
interesting. Some of those which have to do with grain, whole and
ground, follow:
At the Maine Station Jordan a made a comparison with oats and a
mixture of one-third pea meal and two-thirds middlings for Percheron
colts. No advantage was observed for the oats over the mixture. A
comparison of oats with mixed grains middlingss, gluten meal, and
linseed meal), also made with colts, showed that considerably larger
gains were made on the mixed grain ration, which was also the more
nitrogenous.
At the Utah Station J. W. Sanborn" tested the effect of feeding
grains (rye, oats, and bran) and cut hay, mixed and separately. So
far as the test showed, the two methods of feeding were equally satis-
factory. No regular variation in the weight of the two lots of horses
was observed when the comparative value of the whole and cut hay
S (alfalfa and clover mixed) was tested.
The comparative value of corn and oats supplementing bran and
hay was also tested at the Utah Station.c The grains were ground
and mixed before feeding. In these and other tests referred to above
it appears that during the summer corn and timothy were not as good
as oats, wheat, and clover for maintaining horses. During the winter
corn and timothy were as satisfactory as oats, clover, and timothy in
maintaining weight. During the spring and summer wheat or bran
and mixed hay produced greater gains in weight than oats, wheat, or
bran and mixed hay. In another trial corn meal and timothy hay
did not sustain work horses as well as oats, wheat, and clover hay.
The value of oats versus bran and shorts, the feeding value of wheat,
wheat versus bran and ground wheat, were tested with horses and
mules by J. H. Shepperd at the North Dakota Station. Bran and
shorts were found to have practically the same feeding value as oats.
Unground wheat was poorly digested, and it was therefore believed
undesirable to feed it as a sole grain ration. When wheat was added
to a ration of bran and shorts 1:1 no advantage was gained. On the
Basis of tests reported, bran and ground wheat 1:2 was -considered
a Maine Station Rpt. 1890, p. 68. dUtah Station Rpt. 1892, p. 30.
Sb Utah Station Bul. 13. e North Dakota Station Bul. 20.
c Utah Station Bul. 36.
17399-No. 125-03- 2






18

a more satisfactory grain ration for horses at light work than whole
oats.
The New Hampshire Station a studied the value of different grain
mixtures for horses with the view to determining whether the cost of
a ration could not be diminished by lessening the amount of oats fed.
The rations consisted of different mixtures of oats, bran, corn, gluten
feed, linseed-oil meal, and cotton-seed meal. Fairly good results were
obtained with all the grain mixtures, the mixture containing cotton-
seed meal being least satisfactory, as it was not relished at first by the
horses. It is stated by C. W. Burkett, who carried on the tests, that
the oats proved no more satisfactory than the other concentrated feed-
ing stuffs, either in respect to the general condition of the animal or
the efficiency for work, and the conclusion was drawn that a combi-
nation of feeding stuffs, furnishing the desired nutriment at a reason-
able cost, should be considered in preparing rations for horses. A
mixture of bran and corn, half and half, is regarded as a good substi-
tute for corn and oats for work horses.
In a study of alfalfa hay and timothy hay for horses at the Utah
Station the comparative merits of oats and a mixture of bran and
shorts were also tested. The conclusion was drawn that the mixed
grain could be satisfactorily substituted for oats.
The barley grown on the Pacific coast is extensively used in the
feeding of horses, and its use for this purpose is old in other countries.
Elsewhere barley is not extensively used as a feed in the United States,
doubtless owing to the fact that it is in such demand for brewing pur-
poses that it is usually high in price. Wherever it is grown, how-
ever, it is frequently possible to secure at a low cost grain which is off
color owing to rain or fog during harvest, and which, for this or some
other reason, is unfit for brewing, but valuable as feed.
Barley may be fed whole to horses having good teeth and not required
to do severe work. Since ground barley, like wheat, forms a pasty
mass when mixed with saliva it is regarded as more satisfactory to
crush than to grind it, if for any reason it is considered undesirable to
feed the grain whole.
At the North Dakota Station J. H. Shepperdc has recently studied
the value of barley as a feed for work horses and mules. For some
months this grain was fed with timothy hay to three horses and two
mules. The mules did not eat the barley with marked relish at any
time, but for two months, during which time they were performing
light work, they ate enough to keep them in condition. The work was
then increased, but they would not eat a correspondingly greater quan-
tity of barley, and soon began to refuse it altogether for a day or so
a New Hampshire Station Bul. 82. c North Dakota Station Bul. 45.
b Utah Station Bul. 77.






19

at a time. The mules were then given oats on alternate months. This
grain was eaten with relish, and gains in weight were made. Although
the trial lasted nine months, the mules persistently refused barley.
Of the horses mentioned above, two were work horses. They were
fed alternately barley and oats with timothy hay for nine periods of
twenty-eight days each. They ate the barley without regard to the
amount of work required of them. On the oat ration there was an
average daily gain of 0.38 pound per horse. On the barley ration
there was an average daily gain per horse of 0.15 pound. In both
cases the horses averaged 5.50 hours' work per day.
This trial indicates that horses, when taxed to the limit by hard work,
can not be supported upon barley quite so well as upon oats, and that
it is worth slightly less per pound than oats with stock which is given
a medium amount of work. It indicates further that mules take less
kindly to barley than do horses, and that horses which are inclined to
be "dainty" will not eat barley so readily as oats.
Malted barley was compared with oats in a trial made with four
work horses. The two grains were alternated in different periods. Oat
hay was supplied as coarse fodder. The malted barley was prepared
as follows: After soaking in water for twenty-four hours the grain
was spread on the floor in a layer 6 inches or less in depth and allowed
to remain until the sprouts were 0.5 to 0.75 inch long; it was then fed.
On the oat ration there was a daily gain of 0.49 pound, and on the
malted barley there was an average daily loss of 0.76 pound per horse.
When fed malted barley the horses ate 0.1 pound more grain than
when fed oats. In this test the horses worked between five and six
hours per day on an average.
A mixture of malted barley and bran was also compared with oats,
the two rations being alternated as above. The grains were mixed in
the proportion of two parts of barley (before malting) to one part of
bran. As in the above test, oat hay was fed with the grain. The
horses worked some seven hours per day. When fed a barley and bran
ration they ate an amount equivalent to about 17.4 pounds of dry grain
per day. There was an average daily loss of 0.8 pound per horse.
When fed the oat ration an average of 16.2 pounds was consumed
per day, and there was an average daily gain per horse of 0.22 pound.
In other words, the horses did not maintain their weight on the bran
and malted barley, although they ate a larger quantity than when the
oat ration was fed.
These trials indicate that malted barley is not an economical feed
Sfor work horses, and that the addition of 1 part bran to 2 parts of
malt, as measured by the dry barley, from which it was produced, is
neither a cheap nor satisfactory feed for hard-worked horses.
Few experiments have been reported on the feeding value of Kafir
corn for horses. At the Oklahoma Station, according to Morrow and







20

Bone,a 41 bushels of ground Kafir corn were fed during a year to a
pair of work horses in addition to other grain and coarse fodder.
From this test and others made with different farm animals the con-
clusion was drawn that Kafir corn is a healthful, palatable, and nutri-
tious feed with a feeding value somewhat less than that of corn. This
grain is very flinty, and to secure the best results should be ground.
According to information recently received 'from the station, Kafir
corn is highly esteemed locally as a feed for horses, many being kept
throughout the year on this grain and prairie hay. The unthrashed
heads are commonly fed, a head of Kafir corn being regarded as
equivalent to an ear of corn.
At the Mississippi Station chicken corn, a variety of Kafir corn,
was compared with corn meal as a feed for mules doing heavy work,
mixed hay being fed in addition to the grain ration. The mules fed
the chicken corn lost in weight a little more than those fed corn meal.
According to those making the test "the feeding value of the chicken
corn is about as high as that of the corn."

LEGUMINOUS SEEDS.
Beans and other leguminous seed resemble the cereal grains in hav-
ing a low water content. In Europe horse beans are common feeding
stuff for horses. Lavalard says:C
The experiments made many years ago for the Paris cab companies warrant the
statement that when beans replace oats, only half the quantity should be used.
Tests made with army horses have confirmed this conclusion. The chemical compo-
sition of beans shows why they are regarded as more nutritious than oats alone.
Beans may be advantageously fed to horses required to perform long continued, sud-
den, or severe labor. The opinion is prevalent in England that in hunting it is always
possible to recognize horses fed with beans by their great endurance. In accord with
the practice of the leading racing stables, we used a large proportion of beans in the
ration of young horses which were being trained. The results obtained were most
satisfactory.
OIL CAKES AND OTHER COMMERCIAL BY-PRODUCTS.
The various cakes, gluten materials, and similar feeding stuffs are,
generally speaking, commercial by-products. Thus, cotton-seed cake
is the material left after the oil has been expressed from the cotton
seed. In the same way, linseed cake is the residue obtained in the
manufacture of linseed oil. If this cake is ground it becomes linseed
meal. In the manufacture of beer the malted grain is known as brew-
ers' grain and is best fed after drying. When starch is manufactured
from corn, the nitrogenous portion of the grain is rejected and consti-
tutes gluten feed and gluten meal. The cereal breakfast food com-
panies have placed many feeding stuffs upon the market made up of
a Oklahoma Station Rpt. 1899, p. 31. cLoc. cit.
b Mississippi Station Bul. 8.





'I


7
p
r;;

14'i
hk


a New Jersey Stations Bul. 92, Rpt. 1893, p. 179.
b North Carolina Station Bul. 109.
c Louisiana Planter, 28 (1902), p. 178.


21


various by-products obtained in the manufacture of their breakfast
foods and similar products. These feeding stuffs vary in value, but
may generally be said to represent the branny portion of the grains
from which they are derived.
A comparison was made by E. B. and L. A. Voorhees" of dried
brewers' grains when substituted for oats, pound for pound, at the
New Jersey stations, eight horses heavily worked during the summer
being used. As shown by weight and general condition of the animals,
the brewers' grains were fully equal to the oats, pound for pound,
while their cost was considerably less. In a second trial, dried
brewers' grains were compared with a mixture of wheat bran and
linseed meal 5 : 1.5 when fed in addition to timothy hay and corn. The
uniformity in the amount of feed consumed and the weight of the
animals, taken in connection with the work performed, indicates that
there was no material difference in the value of the two rations.
According to calculations made (timothy hay at the time being worth
$18, wheat bran $17.50, corn meal $22, dried brewers' grain $17, and
linseed meal $29 per ton), a farm horse weighing 1,000 pounds can be
fed for $30.84 during the six months of the year when the most work is
performed if dried brewers' grain furnishes the bulk of the necessary
protein, and for $33.49 if wheat bran and linseed meal are the chief
sources of this nutrient. If the fertilizing value of the feeding stuffs
is taken into account the difference in favor of the brewers' grains is
less marked.
In tests made by Emery b at the North Carolina Station horses were
satisfactorily fed 2 pounds of cotton-seed meal per head daily as part
of the mixed ration. When the amount was increased to 3.5 pounds
the results were not as favorable. It is stated that neither of the
horses used in the test showed any symptoms which indicated that
cotton-seed meal disagreed with them. It is also stated that at the
Biltmore estate 2 pounds of cotton-seed meal per head daily were fed
to the horses and mules with 13 to 15 pounds of cut hay and finely cut
corn feed, 4 pounds of wheat bran, and 6 pounds of corn meal. On
Sunday the ration was made up of whole corn and oats and uncut hay.
According to later information the feeding of cotton-seed meal has not
been found satisfactory at Biltmore. In the tests with mixed rations,
carried on at the New Hampshire Station (p. 18), the cotton-seed mix-
ture was least satisfactory.
In the opinion of Director Stubbs, c of the Louisiana stations, cotton-
seed meal may be fed with satisfactory results to horses and mules.
At the Louisiana stations 1 or 2 pounds per mule per day have been
fed with success. Six pounds is regarded as the maximum quantity




bI
pf


22


which it is desirable to feed, and, in Director Stubbs's opinion, this
amount should be led up to gradually. He notes that only bright yel-
low cotton-seed meal of a nutty, pleasant odor and taste should be
used, and that no reddish or musty meal should be fed. It is stated
that excessive quantities of cotton-seed meal should be avoided, since
it is a very concentrated feed. It should be gradually added to a
ration, carefully mixed with other feeds, until mules learn to relish it,
and no uneaten residues should be allowed to ferment in the feed boxes.
The cereal grains, ground and unground, commercial by-products,
leguminous seeds, oil cakes, and similar products are very frequently
called concentrated feeds, the name being suggested by the fact that,
generally speaking, the food value, especially the protein content, is
high in comparison with the bulk. So far as the general experience
and the results of American and foreign feeding experiments go, most
of the common feeding stuffs in the group are wholesome and valuable
for horses. If any one of these feeding stuffs is substituted for oats,
which may be taken for a standard, the substitution should be propor-
tional to the composition of the two feeds and not pound for pound.

FORAGE CROPS, FiSH AND CUBED.
The various forage crops-grass, clover, Kafir corn, corn, etc.-all
have a high water content; that is, they are more or less succulent
and juicy. They contain, however, considerable nutritive material,
usually protein and carbohydrates, and are valuable feeding stuffs.
The leguminous forage crops-alfalfa, clover, cowpeas, soy beans,
vetch, etc.-are richer in protein than the grasses. When the forage
crops are dried and cured the resulting hay is richer in proportion to
its bulk than the green material; in other words, it has been concen-
trated by the evaporation of the greater part of the water present
However, this is not the only change which has taken place. When
hay is properly cured it undergoes a peculiar sort of fermentation or
oxidation which materially affects its composition.
As shown by Holdefleis'sa recent investigations, fermentation
improves the hay by diminishing the quantity of crude fiber and by
increasing the relative amount of other nutrients, especially nitrogen-
free extract. The greater the fermentation the more the crude fiber
is diminished, and this is especially marked when hay is dried on
racks. Hay which has undergone proper fermentation has a better
flavor and agrees better with animals and is apparently more digesti-
ble than hay which has dried quickly in the sun without fermentation.
Fermentation apparently diminishes the amount of pentosans in hay,
especially in the case of hay from grasses. It also seems that the
relative amount of true protein is increased.
a Mitt. Landw. Inst. Univ. Breslau, 1899, p. 59.






23

The feeding value of different forage crops, fresh and cured, depends
in considerable degree upon the stage of growth, as has been shown
by a number of chemical studies of the composition of different crops
and cuttings of alfalfa, young and more matured corn forage, etc.
Generally speaking, the nutritive value of the crop increases until
growth is complete and diminishes somewhat as the plants mature or
become overripe. Straw, the fully ripened stalk of cereal grains,
contains some nutritive material, but is less nutritious than the same
portion of the plant cut before ripening. In the perfectly ripe con-
dition the nutritive material, elaborated in different portions of the
ordinary forage plants, has been conveyed to the seed and used for its
development or stored as reserve material.
* Green forage crops are frequently preserved by ensiling. In this
process the material undergoes a peculiar oxidation which correspond-
ingly changes it in composition and food value. Some of the carbo-
hydrates are changed into alcohol, acetic and other acids, and crude
fiber is undoubtedly softened somewhat, and possibly the silage is thus
rendered more digestible. Bodies having peculiar flavor and odor are
also formed.
The green crops, hay, straw, other cured crops, and silage are fre-
quently called coarse fodder" or roughage." This term is due to
the fact that they contain a comparatively small amount of nutritive
material and a high proportion of crude fiber as compared with their
total bulk. Although inferior to concentrated feeds in composition,
they are an essential part of the ration of horses and other farm ani-
mals, serving to give the required bulk to the food and being useful in
other ways.
It is believed that unless the food, when taken into the stomach, is
comparatively bulky and the mass is more or less loose in structure,
it is not readily acted on by the digestive juices. The intestinal tract
of the horse is long in proportion to the size of the animal, and food
remains in it for several days. Experiments indicate that crude fiber,
which is only slightly digestible by man, is quite thoroughly digested
by horses, and even more thoroughly digested by ruminants, owing its
digestibilityy to the fact that it is fermented for a comparatively long
period by micro-organisms in the intestines.
Regarding the need of straw in a ration to supply the necessary bulk,
Lavalard's" opinion follows:
The statement is often made that horses can not do without straw [to supply coarse
fodder]. This is an error, for we have fed horses hay and oats during very long
periods, and have never noticed that they suffered any inconvenience or detriment.
This is a matter of importance, since it is often inconvenient to obtain straw [even
for bedding], and in such cases peat, sawdust, sand, etc., may be profitably used as
bedding in place of straw.
t Loc. cit.






24


This does not mean that crude fiber, one of the important constitu-
ents of coarse fodder, is not required, but rather that a sufficient
amount of crude fiber was supplied by the hay and oats in the cases
cited by the author. As part of a series comprising some fifteen
experiments carried on at the Maryland Station,' an attempt was made
to feed the horses on oats alone. At the beginning of the trial one
horse consumed 6,000 grams (13.2 pounds) and the other 6,750 grams
(14.9 pounds) of oats per day, but after a few days refused to eat. The
experiment could not be continued long enough to permit the determi-
nation of the coefficients of digestibility. Under the experimental
conditions it was regarded as impossible to maintain horses on a grain
ration alone; it seemed certain that they required some coarse fodder
in addition. From such experiments the general deduction is obvious
that the common practice of feeding horses on a ration of grain and
coarse fodder is reasonable and based on the actual physiological
requirements of the animal.
A number of feeding experiments have been made on the compara-
tive value for horses of different forage crops, fresh and cured. The
American experiment stations have studied the more important coarse
fodders in use in this country. A summary of their work follows.
D. 0. Nourse of the Virginia Station reported a number of trials
of the value of corn silage for horses and mules. Gradually increas-
ing amounts were fed until they were given all the silage they could
eat, with hay and grain in addition. Provided animals are gradually
accustomed to it, as shown by these tests, silage is a satisfactory feed
for horses and mules.
In tests carried on by J. H. Shepperdc at the North Dakota Station
oat straw and prairie hay were compared. Oat straw was found to be
a cheaper horse fodder than hay, but when it was used more careful
feeding was necessary to keep the horses in good condition. In a
subsequent test brome grass hay gave as good results when fed to
work horses as timothy hay.
In a study of different grain mixtures for work horses, carried on
at the New Hampshire Station,' the relative merits of timothy hay
and corn stover were also studied. The rations consisted of 12pounds
of hay and corn stover alone or mixed, fed with 14 pounds of mixed
grain. During the test, which covered nearly three months, the two
sorts of coarse fodder were found equally satisfactory. Although the
corn stover cost only one-third as much as the timothy hay, the con-
clusion was drawn that it has a feeding value equal to timothy hay fed
with suitable mixtures of either corn and oats or corn and bran, and
that when corn stover or timothy hay supplied the coarse fodder in a
aMaryland Station Bul. 51. 'INorth Dakota Station Bul. 45.
bVirginia Station Bul. 80. eNew Hampshire Station Bul. 82.
cNorth Dakota Station Bul. 20.






25

ration, oats and corn, half and half, and bran and corn, half and half,
have generally equivalent feeding values.
Bermuda grass hay and timothy hay, fed in addition to corn, were
compared with working mules at the Mississippi Station." No marked
differences in the cost of the rations nor in the gains made by the
mules were observed.
i The Oklahoma Station b reports a test in which Kafir corn stover was
fed to horses and mules, the amount eaten by the horses averaging
some 32 pounds per day and by the mules some 41 pounds. From
this and tests of other farm animals the conclusion was drawn that
SKafir corn stover is about equal in feeding value to corn stover, and
that running stalks through a thrashing machine is a satisfactory
method 4f preparing this feeding stuff.
At the Utah Station a ration of timothy hay and grain was com-
pared with one consisting of clover, oats, and wheat, two lots of work
horses being used. The nutritive ratio of the first ration was 1:14.8;
of the second, 1:5.5. For more than half the test the grains were fed
unground. Somewhat better results were obtained with a ration hav-
ing the narrower nutritive ratio. However, in a second test," the
ration having a wide nutritive ratio (1:15.2) gave results as satisfactory
as the one having a narrower ratio (1:7.8).
Later, at the Utah Station, the comparative merits of alfalfa hay and
timothy hay were investigated by L. A. Merrill e in tests with work
horses and driving horses, which extended over four years. In some of
the tests as much as 25 pounds of alfalfa or timothy hay with 10 pounds
of bran and shorts was fed per head daily. In other tests the amount
of hay was considerably smaller and the amount of grain larger. In
some cases oats were-fed instead of bran and shorts. Generally speak-
ing, the timothy ration was the more expensive and the horses did not
maintain their weight on it as well as on the alfalfa ration.
Tests were also made in which the feeding value of an alfalfa ration
without grain was studied. It was found that 20 pounds of this mate-
rial was sufficient to maintain the weight of a horse weighing nearly
1,400 pounds, provided no work was performed. When at hard work
some 33 pounds of alfalfa hay was barely sufficient to maintain the
weight. When the work was very severe 40 pounds of alfalfa hay was
not an adequate ration, although it was about the limit which could be
eaten. Regarding the experiments, the statement was made in effect
That it is doubtful if there is any economy in feeding a horse 40 pounds
of alfalfa per day. It is certain that better results can be secured by
limiting the amount of hay to 20 pounds and substituting for the extra
20 pounds enough grain to make up the cost. This would secure at


aMississippi Station Bul. 15.
bOklahoma Station Rpt. 1899, p. 18.
c Utah Station Rpt. 1892, p. 30.


d Utah Station Bul. 30.
e Utah Station Bul. 77.





26


current prices [1902] 8 pounds of bran and shorts or 3.6 pounds of oats
per day, and this amount with 20 pounds of alfalfa will make a better
maintenance ration than 40 pounds of alfalfa. Aside from the finan-
cial consideration it should be emphasized that if digestive disorders
are to be entirely avoided concentrated foods must make up part of
the diet of the horse.
Considered as a whole the experiments are very favorable to the
use of alfalfa hay as a coarse fodder for horses. The fact is recog-
nized that, like other leguminous crops, it contains a larger amount
of protein in proportion to its bulk than timothy. Feeding alfalfa
did not exercise any bad effects on the health of the horses. It is
stated that attacks of colic and other digestive disorders can be pre-
vented by a judicious system of feeding. The amount of hay fed on
most Utah farms, it is believed, could be reduced at least one-half.
It may be economical to reduce the amount of hay and increase the
amount of grain fed to horses. In this connection the author says:


It is folly to claim that a horse will not eat more than is necessary if allowed the
liberty of the stack and the grain bin. The argument is sometimes made that a
horse under natural conditions, on pasture, never eats more than is necessary, and
that under these conditions he is never subject to digestive disorders. While this is
undoubtedly true, it must be kept in mind that as soon as we stable the horse and
require work of him, we have taken him away from his natural condition and placed
him under unnatural environments.
It was observed that larger amounts of water were consumed on the
alfalfa ration and that the amount of urine excreted was also larger
and had a higher specific gravity. The excess, however, was never
found great enough to cause any inconvenience. These experiments
at the Utah Station are especially interesting since they confirm the
results of twelve years' practical tests of the feeding value of alfalfa.
During this period the station horses have always received this
material as a coarse fodder, except when they were fed other rations
for experimental purposes.
From a study of the comparative digestibility of alfalfa hay and
meadow hay by horses, Miintz and Girarda concluded that the former
is superior as regards nitrogenous constituents and the latter as regards
carbohydrates.
In studies at the Wyoming Station, undertaken by F. E. Emery".to
determine what constituted maintenance rations for horses performing
little work, alfalfa hay constituted the principal feed, no grain being
supplied. It was found that farm horses required to perform very
little work maintained their weight on an average daily ratibn, per
1,000 pounds live weight, of 13.75 pounds alfalfa hay and 2.25 pounds
oat straw. A driving horse maintained his weight on a daily ration
of 17.71 pounds alfalfa hay and 2.83 pounds oat straw per 1,000 pounds
live weight.


b Wyoming Station Press Buls. n. ser. 5, 10.


aAnn. Agron., 24 (1898), p. 5.


"1
'I







27

In discussing the subject of alfalfa for horses, the California Station
says in effect that in regions where it is a staple crop the quantity of
protein which can be supplied in green and cured alfalfa is so great
that much less grain is required than when the coarse fodder consists
of cereal hays only. For the Pacific coast, where cereal hays replace
so largely those from meadow grasses, the station recommends a ration
of alfalfa hay with wheat hay or barley hay and grain.
In a recent discussion of the problem of horse feeding under local
conditions, Director Stubbs,b of the Louisiana stations, emphasizes the
value of cowpea vine hay.
The outcome of the different experiments is in accord with the
observation of careful feeders, viz, that the various common coarse
fodders may be fed to horses as circumstances demand. Although
timothy hay is in many regions regarded as the preferable coarse feed,
yet.experience has shown that corn fodder, hay from wheat, barley, and
other cereal grains, and from clover, and alfalfa may be substituted for
it. That this is what might be expected is shown by a study of the com-
position of these feeding stuffs. As will be seen by reference to the
table above (p. 13), they resemble each other very closely in the char-
acter and amount of nutrients which they contain-alfalfa, clover,
and other leguminous hays being richer in protein than the cured
grasses and cereal forage. Straw is not much fed to horses in the
United States, but is a common feeding stuff in Europe. As shown by
its composition and digestibility (pp. 14, 41), it compares quite favor-
ably with other coarse fodders. The substitution of one coarse fodder
for another in a ration should always be made on the basis of compo-
sition and digestibility, rather than pound for pound.
Very few tests have been made on the comparative value of differ-
ent uncured feeds or different sorts of pasturage in horse feeding,
though all the common forage crops are regarded as wholesome if
properly fed. In discussing green crops for horses, Lavalard says:
Such feed is very dependent upon the fertilizer used for the crop, the method of
harvesting, and the condition of the animal fed. Green fodder does not contain
sufficient nutritive material to make it in any real sense a feeding stuff for horses
performing much work. The same may be said of certain plants which have been
much advertised from time to time, such as furze, couch grass [sacchaline], etc.
ROOTS AND TUBERS.
Carrots, Swedish turnips or ruta-bagas, and other roots and tubers,
green vegetables, and fruits contain a high percentage of water and
small amounts of the different classes of nutrients. Generally speak-
Sing, the percentage of crude fiber is smaller than in the green forage
crops; but since the proportion of nutritive material is small in com-
parison with the total bulk, they are ordinarily referred to as coarse
aCalifornia Station Bul. 132.
b Loc. cit.
c Experiment Station Record, 12 (1900-1901), p. 4.






28


fodder. The use of these materials as food for horses has been
attempted at different times with varying success, but it is not fol-
lowed to any great extent in this country. In the opinion of a recent
German writer, about 12 pounds of raw potatoes per 1,000 pounds live
weight may be fed to horses with advantage and, if supplemented
with proper feed, there need be no fear of physiological disturbances.
When fed in this amount the potatoes should be mixed with hay or
cut straw to insure their being properly chewed. If small, they may be
fed whole; if large, they should be sliced. In any case only healthy,
ripe, unsprouted tubers should be used. It is said that horses should
not be watered immediately after a ration containing potatoes.
MOLASSES AND OTHER BY-PRODUCTS OF SUGAR MAKING.
The beet chips, diffusion residue, and other by-products obtained in
the manufacture of beet sugar, consist of the sugar beet from which a
considerable portion of the carbohydrates has been removed. The
total amount of nutritive material present, however, is fairly large.
These products, properly speaking, are also coarse fodders. Molasses,
which consists almost entirely of carbohydrates (sugars), was used as
early as 1830 as a feed for horses, and has recently attracted consider-
able attention in this connection. When used for this purpose it is
usually sprinkled on dry feed, being first diluted with water, or it is
mixed with some material which absorbs it and renders it easy to
handle, such as peat dust, or with some material rich in nitrogen, as
dried blood. In the latter case the mixture more nearly represents a
concentrated feed than the molasses alone, or molasses mixed with an
absorbent material only. Cane-sugar molasses is also used as a feed-
ing stuff. It differs from beet molasses in that it contains glucose in
addition to cane sugar, and has a much smaller percentage of salts.
In this connection the experiments reporting the successful feed-
ing of cane molasses to over 400 work horses at a sugar plantation in
the Fiji Islandsa are of interest. As high as 30 pounds of molasses
was fed per head daily at different times, but the ration finally adopted
consisted of 15 pounds of molasses, 3 pounds of bran, and 4 pounds of
maize. In addition, green sugar cane tops were fed. The health of
the horses remained excellent. Molasses did not cause diarrhea, but
rather constipation, which was counteracted by feeding bran. Feeding
molasses effected a saving of over $45 per head per annum. However,
it was believed that such a saving was possible only by reason of
large quantities of waste molasses and valueless cane tops available on
the spot. In discussing these experiments the following statements
were made:
For working horses the sugar in cane molasses is a satisfactory substitute for starchy
food, being readily digested and 15 pounds can be given to a 1,270-pound
working horse with advantage to the health of the animal and to the efficiency of its
aAgr. Gaz. New South Wales, 9 (1898), p. 169.







29

work. It produces no undue fattening, softness, nor injury to the wind. Tie high
proportion of salts in it has no injurious effect. An albuminoid ratio as low as 1:11.8
has proved highly suitable for heavy continuous work when a sufficient quantity of
digestible matter is given.
According to W. C. Stubbsa of the Louisiana stations, cane-sugar
molasses has been used extensively with success for a number of years
for feeding horses and mules in Louisiana, many feeders keeping
mules exclusively on a ration of rice bran and molasses in addition to
cowpea hay. The general custom is to feed the molasses from a large
trough, allowing the mules to eat it ad libitum. It is said they will con-
sume with apparent relish from 8 to 12 pounds per head daily. The
mules at the Louisiana stations have been fed molasses daily ad libitum
for eight or ten years, and, according to Director Stubhs, show its good
effects "in their splendid condition, lively action, and endurance of
work."
In this connection it is interesting to note the results obtained by
G. E. Griffinb in the experimental feeding of cane-sugar molasses to
army horses in Porto Rico. In accordance with the local custom, this
material was fed with chopped grass, the ration being gradually sub-
stituted for the usual ration of oats and hay. The molasses was diluted
with 25 per cent of water, and as much as possible was mixed with the
chopped grass. The remainder was added to the drinking water. The
test reported continued some five months and led to the deduction that
35 pounds of grass and 13 to 15 pounds of molasses daily per 1,000
pounds live weight is sufficient to maintain a horse in good condition
in a climate like that of Porto Rico. This method of feeding, it was
believed, had some disadvantages, which were as follows:
Molasses attracts insects, notably flies and ants; it sticks to the animal's coat,
smears his face and breast, halter and halter strap, soils the clothing and equipment
of the men, and causes some trouble and delay in mixing it with the grass, which
must be cut fine.
G. H. Bernsc reports the successful feeding of molasses to 100.draft
horses working ten hours a day hauling very heavy loads usually at a
walk. The horses averaged 1,700 pounds in weight and were fed per
head, night and morning, 1 quart of molasses diluted with 3 quarts of
water and thoroughly mixed with 6 pounds of cut hay of good qual-
ity, 1.5 quarts of corn meal, and 2.5 quarts of coarse bran. In addi-
tion they were fed 5 quarts of dry oats in the middle of the day and
11 pounds of long hay at night. It is stated that the horses gradually
improved in condition and gained in weight during the fourteen months
covered by the test, their coats becoming sleek and glossy, while the
amount of work performed was the same as before the molasses ration
was adopted. In the meantime their general health is said to have
a Loc. cit. Amer. Vet. Rev., 26 (1902-3), p. 615.
S Amer. Vet. Rev., 25 (1901-2), p. 894.






30


been excellent, and cases of acute indigestion or spasmodic colic very
rare, although formerly quite frequent. The molasses ration was
decided upon after its value had been demonstrated in a test with two
horses. A ration similar to the above was also fed with success to a
number of driving horses.
In general, no disturbance was observed in changing from an ordi-
nary to a molasses ration. As part of a mixed ration, the author
calculates that 1 quart of molasses will replace 3 to 4 quarts of oats of
good quality. He believes that "molasses of a good quality is a most
nutritious food for horses, easily digested and assimilated, and will in
many cases correct faulty digestive processes," and that "molasses-
fed horses will do fully as much work and at the same time remain, as
a rule, in much better general condition than animals fed on dry food,
while the cost of feeding is reduced from 25 to 33 per cent."
As an outgrowth of this work Dr. Berns states that molasses has
been successfully fed, under his direction, to 2,500 or 3,000 horses.
The value of beet-sugar molasses as a part of a ration for horses and
other farm animals was tested several years ago by Dickson and Mal-
peaux a in France. The test with horses was made with four animals fed
a total ration of 15.4 pounds of oats, 11 pounds of alfalfa hay, and
11 pounds of wheat straw. Molasses was gradually substituted for
part of the oats, until 13.2 pounds of the latter and 2 of the former
were fed. The molasses was mixed with the drinking water. The
feeding was continued for about six weeks, and all the horses gained
slightly in weight. The authors regard the substitution of molasses
for part of the oats as entirely satisfactory, since it was readily eaten
and the vigor and weight of the horses were maintained.
Grandeau b has very recently described a number of practical tests
in which molasses mixtures were added to the rations of horses. The
cost of the ration was diminished and the health and condition of the
animals maintained. Similar results have been reported by other
investigators in France and by Wibbensc in Holland. From all these
investigations it seems fair to conclude that molasses can be safely
fed to horses when its cost in comparison with other feeding stuffs
warrants its use. Apart from the nutritive material it supplies, it has
a value as an appetizer and frequently renders poor hay or other feed
more palatable.
The feeding value of blood molasses (a mixed feed containing dried
blood and beet-sugar molasses) was studied in Denmarkd with 23
horses belonging to a Copenhagen milk company. The horses were
divided into two lots. One lot was fed a ration of barley and oats 1:2
aAnn. Agron., 24 (1898), p. 353.
bJour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 4 (1902), pp. 569, 599, 697.
cCultura, 14 (1902), p. 520.
d Landmandsblade, 32 (1899), p. 349.






31

during part of the test, and later of oats and hay. Lot 2 was fed
the same ration except that blood molasses was substituted for part of
the grain in the ratio of 1 pound to 2 pounds; 2.5 pounds to 3 pounds,
and, later, of 3 pounds to 4 pounds. This latter ratio represents about
what was considered the comparative value of the molasses feed. In
earlier Scandinavian experiments a the successful feeding of 2.2 pounds
of beet-sugar molasses per head daily to work horses was observed;
other similar tests might be cited.

FRUITS, FRESH AND DRIED.

Although horses are often given apples as they are given lumps of
sugar, fruit is not generally thought of as a feeding stuff, yet its use
for this purpose is by no means novel. The Arabs, according to E.
Daumas,b commonly feed their horses fresh dates. In such dates the
pits are soft and are eaten with the pulp. Sometimes 3 or 4 pounds
of fresh dates are mixed with water to a sort of mush before feeding.
It is believed that dates are fattening, but that they do not produce
muscle.
In California and possibly in other regions fruit, especially prunes
and other dried fruit, is sometimes fed when the market is overstocked
or when for some other reason it can not be profitably sold. Accord-
ing to a recent statements small prunes of low market value have
been successfully fed to horses for a long period. It is stated that
the horses eat them with relish. The pits should be crushed before
feeding.
The California Station a has reported analyses of a number of fresh
and dried fruits and discussed their value as stock feed. A recent
report of the Arizona Station e gives the composition of almond hulls
or pericarps, the portion of the almond removed before the nut is
marketed, and states that this material has been found to be a fatten-
ing feed for horses.
All common fruits whefi fresh are very succulent, containing on an
average 80 to 90 per cent water, the nutritive material consisting
almost entirely of carbohydrates. When dried-i. e., concentrated
by evaporation-they are much more nutritious. Raisins, prunes,
dried peaches, etc., contain about 25 per cent water and about 70 per
pent carbohydrates, of which a considerable part is sugar. The value
of sugar as a nutrient is recognized, and it is not surprising, therefore,
that fruits, especially after drying, should have a considerable feed-
ing value.

aK. Landt. Akad. Handle. Tidskr., 34 (1895), p. 246.
b Les Chevaux du Sahara. Paris: Calmann IAvy, 1887, p. 134.
cPacific Rural Press, 60 (1900), p. 402.
d California Station Bul. 132.
eArizona Station Rpt. 1902, p. 269.






32


INJURIOUS FEEDING STUFFS.
In feeding horses precautions should always be taken to avoid mate-
rials harmful in themselves, or those which have become harmful.
Dirt, small stones, etc., should be removed from grain by proper
screening, and all feeding stuffs should be clean. On this subject
Lavalarda says:
Some of our recent experiments have had to do with the methods of feeding. They
cover a number of points. The first and perhaps the most important is the advantage
of cleaning the grain. Grandeau showed in his experiments that oats could be sat-
isfactorily freed of foreign grains and impurities by some of the well-known screen-
ing devices. He studied the composition of the impurities, and found that some of
them were injurious to the health of the horses.
The importance of proper cleaning is illustrated by a point in our own experience.
A few years ago, after a very severe drought, we were compelled to feed oats containing
tares and leguminous seeds, some of which were those of the species of Lathyrus.
Symptoms of Lathyrus poisoning were noted in a number of horses. The attacks
were frequently severe and sometimes fatal. When oats were properly cleaned this
trouble was entirely obviated. Cleaning also increases the density of the oats by
removing mineral matter and dust, which may sometimes induce attacks of intestinal
obstruction, colic, etc.
There are a number of plants which are poisonous to horses when
eaten in any considerable amount. The loco plants, mostly species of
Astragalus, are ordinarily regarded as of this class. These plants have
been studied by the Colorado, Kansas, South Dakota, Montana, and
Oklahoma stations among others, and by this Department, but the
results obtained are not entirely conclusive. The poisonous properties
of rattlebox (Crotalaria sagittalis) were demonstrated by the South
Dakota Station, and those of some lupines by the Montana Station.
According to recent experiments at the Vermont Station b the common
horsetail (Equisetum arvense) may cause poisoning when present in hay.
It was found that when horses were fed cured horsetail equal in amount
to not more than one-fourth of their coarse fodder ration, symptoms
of poisoning were noticed, and if the feeding was continued the horses
died. The symptoms of poisoning were less noticeable with young
than with old horses, and also when a liberal grain ration was supplied.
It was also observed that the green plant was less harmful than the
dry, possibly owing to the fact that green fodder is somewhat laxative.
Eeeds which are ordinarily wholesome may under certain conditions
be harmful. Thus there is a widespread and apparently justifiable
prejudice against moldy or decomposing feeding stuffs. Experi-
ments carried on at the Kansas and Indiana stations showed that the
continued feeding of moldy corn induced intestinal and nervous dis-
orders of a serious nature. It is a matter of common observation that
food which has been wet will ferment or sour readily and cause intes-
tinal disorders. This has to be guarded against especially in warm
aLoc. cit.
b Vermont Station Bul. 96.






33

climates. Plants which are ordinarily wholesome may become harmful
if infested with ergot. The effect of ergot on horses has been studied
by the Iowa, Kansas, and Montana stations and others. It is gener-
ally conceded that the presence of ergot is a cause of rheumatism.
Some feeds which are regarded as wholesome when properly fed may
sometimes prove injurious if fed for a long time, or in improper
quantities. Thus, millet hay, in many sections of the Western United
States, is believed to cause the so-called millet disease of horses. This
question was studied by the North Dakota Station.a It was found
that long-continued feeding of millet hay caused lameness and other
symptoms of poisoning. From the experiments and observations the
conclusion was drawn that feeding millet alone as a coarse fodder is
injurious to horses, since it produces an increased action of the kid-
neys and causes lameness and swelling of the joints and an infusion
of blood into the joints. It may also injure the texture of the bones,
rendering them soft and less tenacious. The bad effects due to long-
continued feeding of millet were observed whether the crop was cut just
when the heads were fully ripe or earlier, although there is a popular
belief that the trouble is due to harvesting the crop before the heads
are fully ripe. The investigation seemed to show conclusively that
feeding millet produced millet disease, but the specific cause tb which
the dangerous properties of millet are due was not learned, though
later work at the station indicates that it is a glucosid.
An explanation of the poisoning of stock by young sorghum and
some other forage plants is offered by the discovery by Dunstan and
Henry of a cyanogenetic glucosid in a number of varieties of sorghum
(Sorghum vulgare), which under the influence of a special ferment
present in the plant liberates prussic acid. It is thought probable that
this acid may be likewise liberated in the digestive tract of animals
feeding on the young plants. They did not find the glucosid in the
mature sorghum. For a number of years Peters, Avery, and Slade,
at the Nebraska Experiment Station, have studied sorghum poisoning,
and have recently demonstrated the presence of cyanic acid in the
green leaves of young and old sorghum plants and Kafir corn.

METHOD OF FEEDING.
The method of feeding is a subject which is often discussed, the
questions of especial interest being the comparative merits of cooked
and raw feed, dry and soaked grain, ground and unground grain, and
cut or chaffed and incut coarse fodder. The number of experiments
which have to do with these topics is not numerous.
a North Dakota Station Buls. 7, 26, and 35.
bProc. Roy. Soc. [London], 70 (1902), p. 153.
c Nebraska Station Rpt. 1902, pp. 50, 55; Jour. Comp. Med. and Vet. Arch., 23
(1902), p. 704; Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc., 25 (1903), No. 1, p. 55.
17399-No. 125-03- 3






34

COOKED AND RAW FEED.
Boussingault compared oats and an equal volume of rye boiled until
the grain burst. The results were not favorable to cooking the feed.
According to another of his tests 30.8 pounds of mashed steam pota-
toes could not replace 11 pounds of hay. The potatoes were mixed
with cut straw and fed cold.
It is often claimed that cooking feed increases its palatability and
digestibility. The general conclusion drawn from tests with farm
animals is that this belief is not warranted.and that the cost of cooking
is not made up for by the increased value of the ration. Prof. W. A.
Henry" states that boiled feed is useful for colts, brood mares, and
stallions if fed two or three times per week, and that draft horses
which are being prepared for sale or for exhibition may be given
cooked feed once a day. In his opinion an excellent feed for horses
is made by boiling barley and oats in a kettle with considerable water
and pouring the mass over chaffed hay, allowing the whole to stand
until the hay is well softened. Bran, roots, and a small quantity of oil
meal may be added also.
DRY AND SOAKED FEED.
It is often said that soaking feed, especially hard grain, renders it
more easily masticated and improves its digestibility. It is doubtful
if the matter is as important with horses as some other classes of farm
animals. According to Wolff b healthy horses with good teeth digested
dry beans and corn as well as the same materials which had been soaked
in water for 24 hours.
Soaking or wetting feed may sometimes be of importance as regards
the health of horses. According to the experience of an English
feederc chaffed straw, which was fed on account of a shortage in the
hay crop, gave better results when soaked than when dry. The dry
material caused colic and constipation. It was also observed that the
horses relished soaked grain (corn and oats 1:1).
It is believed that the dust in hay causes heaves, and to avoid such
trouble both long and cut hay, especially clover, is very often damp-
ened before feeding to lay the dust.
GROUND AND UNGROUND FEED.
Opinions differ as regards the advantages of grinding grain. In
Professor Henry'sa opinion, for horses which are out of the stable
during the day and worked hard, all grains, with the possible excep-
tion of oats, should be ground, and for those at extremely hard work,
all grain should be ground and mixed with chaffed hay. For idle
aLoc. cit. c Live Stock Jour., 39 (1894), p. 30.
b See footnote, p. 60.






35

horses, oats or grain should not be ground, nor should hay or straw
be chaffed. In other words, provided the animals have time to niasti-
cate their ration thoroughly, grinding is not necessary. When this
is not the case, grinding takes the place of thorough mastication to
some extent and increases the assimilation of the ration.
When whole oats were compared with ground wheat and bran by
Shepperd" at the North Dakota Station the horses fed the former
ration ate somewhat more, and showed a slight loss in weight, while
doing a little less work than those fed the ground grain.
In a test of the comparative merits of timothy hay and corn and
clover, oats, and wheat made with two lots of work horses at the Utah
Station" the grains were fed unground for somewhat more than one-
half of the experimental period and ground during the remainder of
the period. The ground and unground grains were regarded as equally
satisfactory.
At the Iowa Station Wilson and Curtiss c compared whole and ground
grains (oats, corn, and barley) for colts, and found that somewhat
larger gains were made on the ground feed.
In the study of the digestibility of the different feeding stuffs car-
ried on at the Maryland Experiment Station Pattersond compared a
number of whole and ground feeds. His results show that ground
oats and corn were more thoroughly digested than the unground grain.
In this connection it should be noted that similar results have been
obtained in tests with other farm animals, but it is commonly believed
that the difference in digestibility is often not sufficient to pay for the
additional cost of grinding.
From the American tests and those which have been made in
Europe it appears fair to say that there is no very marked advantage
in grinding grain for healthy horses with good teeth. Lavalard says:
Contrary to the opinion of some experts, the writer believes t is not necessary to
grind grain for horses. This is especially true in the case of oats. In sbme of our
earlier experiments, where ground grain was fed, it was noticed after a few months
that the horses preferred to crush it themselves. Of course this does not refer to old
horses [i. e., horses having poor teeth]. They can be fed ground grain to advantage.

CUT AND UNCUT COARSE FODDER.
It is perhaps the general opinion that when horses have ample time
for chewing and digesting their feed there is no necessity for chaffing
or cutting hay and straw. When the time for feeding is limited
chaffing and cutting coarse fodder is regarded as advantageous. This
is an item of special importance with hard-worked horses kept in the
stable only at night. Furthermore, chaffed feed occupies less space
for storage than uncut hay or straw and can be readily handled.
aNorth Dakota Station Bul. 20. clowa Station Bul. 18, p. 470.
bUtah Station Bul. 30. dMaryland Station Bul. 51.






36


Shredding corn fodder is regarded as an economical practice, but
apparently few experiments on the comparative merits of shredded
and whole corn fodder for horses have yet been reported. No marked
variation was observed in the weights of two lots of horses fed whole
and cut timothy or whole and cut alfalfa and clover hay mixed in a
test carried on at the Utah Station."
At the Maryland Station Patterson," who studied the digestibility
of a number of whole and ground feeds, found that grinding corn
shives--i. e., cornstalks from which the blades, husks, and pith are
removed-until the material resembled coarse bran did not destroy its
value as a coarse fodder and that the finely ground material supplied
the necessary bulk to the ration as well as the same material unground.
It was further claimed that the finely ground coarse fodder possessed
an advantage over the unground material in that it could be mixed
with grain to form a well-balanced ration and fed to horses on ship-
board, or under similar conditions, more readily than unground fodder
and grain.
COST OF A RATION.

The cost of a ration made up of the ordinary grains and coarse
fodders has been investigated by at least three of the American experi-
ment stations. The Massachusetts Hatch Station c recorded the kinds
and amounts of foods consumed by three farm horses for five years,
with a view to learning the average cost of the daily feed. In the
different years the cost of the ration, which consisted of hay, corn, oats,
and other common feeding stuffs, varied from 18.5 to 24.8 cents per
head daily.
At the Oklahoma Station d statistics of the cost of feed of work
horses were also recorded in tests of the comparative value of Kafir
corn and maize. Red Kafir corn and maize at 20 cents per bushel,
oats at 2 cents per bushel, and bran at 25 cents per hundredweight
were used. The average cost per horse of a day's labor was estimated
to be 17 cents.
Using mixed-grain rations, according to the New Hampshire Sta-
tion, the average cost of feed per horse per year was $74.32. The
average cost for feed per hour's work performed during the two years
covered by the test was 3.4 cents.
The data recorded above are too limited for general deduction.

FATTENING HORSES FOR MARKET.
Fattening horses so that they will reach market in good condition
for sale is quite an important industry in some regions. For instance,
in Iowa there are a number of feeders who thus prepare large num-
a Utah Station Bul. 13. d Oklahoma Station Rpt. 1899, p. 31.
b Maryland Station Bul. 51. New Hampshire Station Bul. 82.
c Massachusetts Hatch Station Rpt. 1893, p. 179.






37

bers of horses for the Chicago market. Though few, if any, experi-
ments have been carried on at the stations to show the feed required
per pound of gain, the relative cost of gain,.etc., J. A. Craig and
H. W. Brettell,a of the Iowa Station, have described this industry on
thp basis of data gathered from local feeders extensively engaged in it.
The horses are usually purchased in the fall, after the farm work is
over, and are stabled and fed an abundant ration, care being taken to
accustom them gradually to full feed in order to avoid colic. When on
full feed the horses studied were given, per head, 10 to 14 ears of corn
in the morning, at noon, and again at night, with 3 quarts of oats and
bran 1:2 and hay ad libitum in the middle of the forenoon and also in
the middle of the afternoon. Recognizing the importance of a long
period of rest, no feed was given from 6 or 7 at night until 5 o'clock
in the morning. The horses were watered twice a day and were given
all they would drink. On account of the large number fed, the horses
could not be exercised, but as a rule were kept idle in the stable until
a few days before they were marketed. To insure good condition it
was found advantageous to give 0.5-0.75 pint Glauber salts per head
twice a week. Oil meal, it is stated, may also be given to good advan-
tage, as it aids greatly in putting on flesh and also makes the skin soft.
The importance of keeping mangers and feed boxes clean is insisted
upon, and attention is especially directed to the need of examining the
horses' teeth and removing with a float any sharp points which would
make the gums sore and thus prevent the horses from masticating their
feed properly.
With such feeding and care satisfactory gains were generally real-
ized. In one instance, it is stated, a horse fed in this manner made a
gain of 5.5 pounds per day for a period of fifty days, or 550 pounds in
one hundred days. In several instances, with as many as a dozen
horses, a gain of 3.75 pounds per head per day was obtained through-
out a period of ninety days.

WATERING HORSES.
A discussion of the subject of watering horses should take into
account the reasons why water is needed, the amounts required,
the proper time for watering, and related topics.
Horses, like other animals, require water to moisten their food so
that the digestive juices may permeate it readily, to dilute the blood
and other fluids of the body, and for other physiological uses. It
may be assumed that under any given normal condition the body con-
tains a definite amount of water. When any considerable amount
of water is lost from the body, a sensation of thirst is experienced,
showing that more water is needed to take its place. Practically all
aBreeders' Gaz., 35 (1899), p. 781.






38

the water excreted leaves the body in the feces, urine, perspiration,
and breath. The amount eliminated in each, according to Wolff, ,
increases with the amount of water consumed, the largest amount
being excreted in the feces. In experiments which he carried on, the
total amount of water consumed ranged from 17.363 kilograms to
34.272 kilograms (38.3 to 75.6 pounds). The feces contained from
40.3 to 47.3 per cent of the total amount excreted; the urine from
21.2 to 34.9 per cent.
In addition to the water drunk by horses, a considerable amount is
obtained in the more or less succulent food eaten. The amount of
water required is influenced by a number of factors, including the
season of the year, temperature of the surrounding air, character of
the feed, the individual peculiarities of the horse, the amount and
character of the work performed, and probably others. The amount
of water needed increases with the temperature and with the amount
of work performed, since it is very evident that both of these factors
increase the amount which is given off from the body in the form of
perspiration. Muscular work also increases the amount of water
vapor excreted in the breath. According to Grandeau and Leclerc,6
a horse used in one of their experiments, when at rest, evaporated 6.4
pounds of water per day; when walking, 8.6 pounds; when walking
and drawing a load, 12.7 pounds; when trotting, 13.4 pounds, and
when trotting and drawing a load, 20.6 pounds. It is evident from
these figures that the amount of water excreted, and hence the amount
required, varies with the work performed.
It has been found that less water is required when the ration con-
sists largely of concentrated feed than when large amounts of coarse
fodder are consumed, and it is a matter of common observation that
less water is consumed when green, succulent feeds form a consider-
able part of the ration than when it consists of dry feed. That the
amount of water taken, even in dry feed, may be considerable is shown
by the fact that a ration of 12.1 pounds oats and 15.4 pounds hay,
according to Wolff'sa calculation, furnishes some 4.1 pounds water.
A succulent ration would furnish much more. In Grandeau and
Leclerc's experiments with the Paris Cab Company's horses it was
found that with a mixed ration the average proportion of water drunk
to dry matter supplied was 2.1:1 when the horses were at rest, and
3.6:1 when they were used for cab work. In some of Wolffs experi-
ments the proportions varied from 2.35:1 to 3.5:1. The effect of the
amount of work performed and of individual peculiarities on the
amount of water required is illustrated by the following figures
obtained by Grandeau and Leclerc: Two horses consumed respectively
24.9 and 30.7 pounds of water per day when their work consisted only
a Landw. Jahrb., 1887, Sup. 3.
bAnn. Sci. Agron., 1888, II, p. 276.







39

of walking; when the horses walked and in addition drew a load, the
amounts of water consumed were 28.9 and 35.4 pounds; when trotting
without a load, 31.3 and 27:6 pounds, and when trotting and drawing
a load, 52 and 50.7 pounds, respectively.
In a number of feeding experiments carried on with horses at the
experiment stations in the United States the amount of water con-
sumed has been recorded. In tests at the New Hampshire Station," in
which the ration consisted of different grain mixtures, with timothy
hay and corn fodder, it was found that the quantity of water con-
sumed varied from 70.94 pounds to 90.4 pounds per horse per day. It
was observed that both the ration consumed and the amount of work
performed influenced the quantity of water drunk, although the indi-
viduality of the horse had the most marked effect.
The amount of water consumed by horses on rations of timothy hay
and alfalfa hay (with oats) was studied at the Utah Station." It was
found that on an average larger amounts were consumed with the lat-
ter than with the former, the average amounts per day being some
78.51 and 88.85 pounds, respectively. The greater consumption of
water on the alfalfa ration induced a greater elimination by the kid-
neys, but so far as could be observed this was not attended by any bad
results nor was it found inconvenient.
At the Oklahoma Station c a pair of mules, during hot summer
weather, drank 113 pounds of water per head daily, and on one day the
pair drank 350 pounds. On an average a pair of mules and horses,
each weighing 2,130 pounds, drank 107 pounds of -water per head per
day while at moderate work. In these tests the grain ration consisted
of Kafir corn, maize, oats, and bran.
The proper time to water horses is a matter concerning which
opinions differ. Many feeders believe that they should be watered
before feeding, while others are equally certain that feeding should
precede watering. Experiments made on this subject at the Utah
Station did not lead to definite conclusions.
The subject was recently investigated by Tangl dat Budapest. The
rations fed consisted of different mixtures of corn, oats, hay. and straw,
and a number of experiments were made in which the only condition
which varied was the time of watering. In some of the tests the
horses drank before and in some after eating, and in others after the
grain portion of the ration was eaten but before the hay.
Regarding these experiments Professor Tangl makes in effect the
following statement: So far as was observed the time of drinking had
a New Hampshire Station Bul. 82.
b Utah Station Bul. 77.
cOklahoma Station Rpt. 1899, p. 31.
d Landw. Vers. Stat., 57 (1902), p. 329; Twentieth Century Farmer, 1892, No.
82, p. 1.






40

no effect on the digestibility of a ration of grain and hay. When hay
only was fed there seemed to be a slight advantage in watering before
feeding. In general, horses may be watered before, during, or after
meals without interfering with the digestion and absorption of food.
All these methods of watering are equally good for the horse, and each
of them may be employed, according to circumstances. It is obvious
that certain circumstances may make it necessary to adopt one or other
method. For instance, after severe loss of water, such as occurs in
consequence of long-continued,,severe exertion, the animal should
always be allowed to drink before he is fed, as otherwise he will not
feed well. Although all methods of watering are equally good for the
horse, it is not desirable to change unnecessarily from one method to
another. Animals, or at least some of them, appear to be not altogether
indifferent to. uich a change. In the experiments referred to above it
was found that whenever a change was made from the plan of water-
ing after feeding to that of watering before, the appetite fell off for
some days; not that the horses did not consume the whole of the food
given to them, but for some days together they did not eat with the
same avidity as before, and took a longer time to consume their rations
completely. A similar effect was not observed when the change was
from watering before to watering after feeding, or from watering
after to watering during meals, or when the change was in the oppo-
site direction to the last. It is possible that the method of watering
before feeding, until the animal has become accustomed to it, produces
a certain feeling of satiety. The time of drinking exercised a marked
effect on the amount of water consumed and upon the amount of water
excreted. The horses drank the greatest amount of water when it
was given after feeding and the least when it was supplied before
feeding. This was especially noticeable in the morning when water
was sometimes refused if offered before feeding. The excretion of
urine was directly proportional to the amount of water consumed.
When it is desired to increase the excretion, the author recommends
watering after feeding. The method of watering had no effect upon
the amount or qualitative composition of the feces. Body weight
varied with the amount of water consumed.

DIGESTIBILITY OF FEEDING STUFFS.

In the preceding pages reference has been made to the composition
of different feeding stuffs and to the tests of the comparative value of
different concentrated feeds and coarse fodders. The real value of any
feeding stuff is determined, not alone by its composition, but also by
its digestibility; that is, by the amount of material which it gives up
to the body in its passage through the digestive tract. It is evident
that if two feeding stuffs have practically the same composition, but


L- -







41

one gives up more material to the body than the other, that is, is more
thoroughly digested, it must actually be more valuable than the other
material. The bulk of the substance of almost all feeding stuffs is
insoluble when eaten. Only material in solution can pass through the
walls of the stomach and intestines into the circulation and be utilized
by the body, therefore digestibility consists chiefly in rendering insol-
uble materials soluble. This is effected by the aid of digestive fer-
ments and also by bacteria.
Digestion experiments are frequently made to learn how thoroughly
a given feeding stuff or ration is assimilated. The usual method is to
feed the material under consideration for a longer or shorter time, the
amount and composition being determined. From the total nutrients
consumed, the amount excreted and undigested in the feces is deducted,
showing the amount of each retained in the body. It is the usual cus-
tom to express the amounts digested in percentages, the results thus
obtained being termed coefficients of digestibility.
The digestibility of a number of different feeding stuffs has been
tested with horses in this country and in Europe, although the number
of such experiments is much smaller than in the case of cattle and
sheep. The most extended series of American experiments with
horses was carried on by Pattersona at the Maryland Experiment
Station. In the table below the American and foreign digestion
experiments with horses are summarized. In a few cases values
obtained with ruminants are also included in the table, since no coef-
ficients of digestibility, obtained with horses, were available, and the
data were needed in computing the value of rations discussed later
(p. 48).

TABLE 2.-Summary of coefficients of digestibility obtained in experiments with horses.

Coefficients of digestibility.
Kinds of fodder. Nitrogen- Crde
Protein. Fat. free irue
extract. fiber
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
Alfalfa, uncured .......... .............................. 78.2 .......... 81.0 46.8
Alfalfa hay ............................ .................... ... 74.6 19.1 70.2 39.0
Alfalfa (hay) stalks........................................... 72.6 .......... 63.9 40.3
Alfalfa (hay) leaves ......................................... 75.5 ......... 76.6 2.1
Red clover hay .... ................................. 55.7 28.7 63.5 37.4
Meadow hay, best quality .................................... 63.5 22.0 65.5 48.2
Meadow hay, medium quality.......................... 57.5 18.0 58.1 39.0
Meadow hay, poor quality................................. 54.6 23.6 52.2 37.6
Meadow hay, average ..................................... 57.1 20.7 56.7 39.7
Timothy hay............................................... 21.2 47.3 47.3 42.6
Corn stover .............................................. 64.1 73.6 68.2 73.8
Ground corn shives........................... ................ 67.5 59.8 47.0 54.6
Wheatstraw............................................... 27.7 65.7 28.1 17.7
Speltstraw.................. ................................ 22.9 20.2 17.9 30.0
Corn silage .......................... .................... 49.3 80.0 68.6 66.7
Carrots.........................................9............. 99.3 ......... 93. .........
Potatoes ............... ................................... 88.0 .......... 99.4 9.1
Shelled corn............... ............................... 57.8 47.7 88.2 ........
aMaryland Station Bul. 51.
bCoefficients of digestibility of corn fodder as fed to ruminants.
e Coefficients of digestibility as fed to ruminants.







42

TABLE 2.-Summary of eoefficents of digestibility obtained in experiments eaih
horse-Continued.

Coefficients of digestibility.
Kinds of fodder. Nitrogen- Crude
Protein. Fat. free fbe
extract. fber.
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per et,
Corn meal .................................................... 76.0 67.1 93.9 20.2
Oats ........................................................... 79.6 72.1 76.8 29.7
Ground oats................................................... 82.4 79.9 86.1 14.4
W heata-............................................. ........ 79.6 72.1 75.8 29.7
Rye.................................................. ....... 80.3 42.4 87.8 3 100.0
Cotton-seed meal c............................................ 88.4 93.3 60..6 55.5
Field beans................................................... 85.9 13.2 93.6 65.4
Lupine seeds.................................................. 94.2 27.3 60.8 60.8
Peas ............................................... .......... 83.0 6.9 89.0 8.0
W heat branch ................................................. 77.8 68.0 69.4 28.6
Wheat shorts ................................................ 77.8 68.0 69.4 28.6
Dried brewers' grains ........................................ 79.3 91.1 57.8 52.6
Gluten mealc ................................................ 88.2 94.4 89.8 ........
Linseed meal c ............................................... 85.2 96.6 86.1 80.4
M olasses ...................................................... 100.0 .......... 100. ..........

aAs oats, no coefficients of digestibility of wheat having been found.
b This value is without doubt much too high.
cCoefficients of digestibility as fed to ruminants.
d As bran, no coefficients of digestibility of shorts having been found.

In addition to the experiments reported above, a number have been
found on record which show the digestibility of a mixed ration, but,
generally speaking, the total number of digestion experiments with
horses is small and, as will be seen, the tests are limited to a compara-
tively small number of feeding stuffs. Some 36 experiments were
found on the digestibility of oats and 30 on the digestibility of meadow
hay. The total number reported with alfalfa hay was 12, and in all
other cases the number was very small. It is evident that more diges-
tion experiments are needed with some of the common feeding stuffs,
and that the digestibility of many additional materials should be
studied.
As will be seen in the majority of feeding stuffs, the percentage of
protein digested is fairly high, greater in grains and seeds than in hay
and grasses, and least in the case of timothy hay and spelt straw.
The high values reported in the table for protein of carrots and
molasses need some explanation. The percentage of protein in the
former is comparatively small, and it is doubtful if the figures reported
show the actual digestibility, as it is difficult to determine in the case
of a nutrient present in small quantities. In the case of molasses, the
greater part of the nitrogenous material consists of amids or other
nonalbuminoid bodies. It should be remembered that neither carrots
nor molasses is fed for protein, but rather for the carbohydrates which
they contain.
Generally speaking, the values obtained for the digestibility of fat
are rather low, the fat of oats being most digestible and that of peas
least digestible. In general it has been found that the determination
of the coefficients of the digestibility of fat presents more difficulty
than that of other nutrients.







43

It will be seen that nitrogen-free extract is quite thoroughly assim-
ilated, the values ranging from 100 per cent in the case of molasses to
17.9 per cent in the case of spelt straw. The high value obtained for
the digestibility of this nutrient in molasses is doubtless due to the
fact that carbohydrates exist in it in soluble forms and hence in a con-
dition very favorable for assimilation. Possibly the comparatively
small amount of crude fiber present in carrots and potatoes accounts
for the high digestibility of the starch which makes up the greater
part of the nitrogen-free extract of the e feeds. The principal sources
of nitrogen-free extract in the ration are the cereal grains and their
by-products, and it is interesting to note that the coefficients of digest-
ibility of nitrogen-free extract of these materials is high. In the
majority of feeding stuffs the crude fiber is not very thoroughly
digested, the coefficients of digestibility being on an average less than
50 per cent. The high value given in the above table for the crude
fiber of rye is unusual, and should be confirmed by further experiments
before it can be accepted.
The digestibility of the different materials which make up the car-
bohydrate group has been recently studied by Weiser and Zalischek"
with horses and other farm animals. The following table shows the
results obtained with a horse fed different combinations of meadow
hay, broom-corn seed, and oats.

TABLE 3.-Digestibility of different carbohydrates by a horse.

Cellulose Undeter- Total ni-
Rations. or crude Starch. Pento- mined trogen-
fiber, sans. constitu- free
fberents. extract.

8.1 pounds meadow hay and 10.8 pounds broom- Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Prr cent. Per cent.
corn seed........................................ 45.6 84.9 53.2 35.8 70.3
Pounds meadow hay, 6.6 pounds broom-corn
seed, and 6.6 pounds oats ........................ 30.5 97.7 33.8 34.0 70.9
8.3 pounds meadow hay and 7.7 pounds oats...... 48.7 96.7 49.7 57.0 72.0

As will be observed, the starch is much more thoroughly digested
than the other carbohydrates. In all the experiments the values
obtained for digestibility of the group, "nitrogen-free extract," were
comparatively low. The authors attribute this to the presence of the
material called "undetermined constituents," and advance the opinion
that this material does not consist of carbohydrates though included
in this group by the ordinary analytical methods. The thoroughness
with which the different members of the carbohydrate group were
digested by the horse and other farm animals is discussed in the fol-
lowing section.


aArch. Physiol. [Pfluiger], 93 (1902), p. 98.




wU ,----- ,,.. :|U! |||


44


COMPARATIVE DIGESTIBILITY BY HORSES AND RUMINANTS.

In computing the digestible nutrients furnished by different feeding
stuffs, it has been a common custom to use available data obtained from
digestion experiments with farm animals without distinguishing
between ruminants and nonruminants, although differences had been
pointed out by a number of observers. The extended investigations
of Wolffa and his associates on the comparative digestive power of
horses and sheep furnished much information on the subject. Dietrich
and Konig6 summarized the available data regarding the question and
discussed it. The matter was also considered in the summary pre-
pared by Jordan and Hall.*
The following table compares the coefficients of digestibility obtained
with ruminants (chiefly sheep) and horses, the values given being the
average of a large number of European and American experiments.

TABLE 4.-Comparison of digestibility of a number of different feeding stuffs by ruminants
and horses.

Num- Nitro-
ber of
Feeding stuffs exp Protein. Fatfreex- fiber.
ments. tract.


Meadow hay:
Rum inants ................. ............................
Hoes................ ................................
Difference in favor of ruminants......................
Timothy hay:
Ruminants................................... ...........
Horses........ ..........................................
Difference ............................................
Red-clover hay:
Ruminants...............................................
Horses...................................................
Difference ............................................
Alfalfa hay:
Ruminants..............................................
Horses..................... .............................
Difference ........ ...............................
Wheat straw:
Ruminants ............................................
Horses.................. .................................
Difference........... ...........................
Ground corn shives:
Rum inants .............................................
H orses.................. ................................
Difference.............. ........................
Oats:
Ruminants .................................................
Horses........................................................
Difference........... ................ .................


Per ct.
58.6
57.1


Per d.
53.6
20.7


Per d.
63.5
56.7


........ 1.5 32.9 6.8 21.2

6 48.1 52.7 64.0 46.6
2 21.2 47.3 47.3 42.6
........ 26.9 5.4 16.7 4.0

56 58.6 57.2 65.7 50M0
5 55.7 28.7 63.5 37.4
........ 2.9 28.5 2.2 12.6

32 72.7 48.8 -66.6 48.7
12 74.6 19.1 70.2 39.0
........ -1.9 29.7 -3.6 4.7

3 23.4 35.6 38.7 55.6
6 27.7 65.7 28.1 17.7
........ -4.3 -30.1 10.6 37.8

9 46.7 78.2 60.4 57.0
2 67.5 59.8 47.0 54.6
........ -20.8 18.4 13.4 2.4

19 79.0 84.9 76.8 80.2
36 79.6 72.1 75.8 29.7
........ -0.6 12.8 0.5 0.5


a Loc. cit., p. 60.
b Zusammensetzung und Verdaulichkeit der Futtermittel, 2. ed., vol. 2, pp. 1070,1128.
c U S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experimental Stations Bul. 77.







45

TABLE 4.-Comparison of digestibility of a numbelcr of differret feeding stuffs by ruminnuts
and horses-Continued.

Num- Nitro-
berof gen- Crude
Feeding stuef. Protein. Fat. fr ex-
Feeding tufs experi- free cx- fiber.
ments. tract.

Corn meal: Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct.
Ruminants.................................................. 13 71.1 92.4 94.3 53.M
Horses................ ....................................... 4 76.0 67.1 93.9 20.2
Difference........................................................ -4.9 25.3 0.4 33.6
Field beans:
Ruminants.............................................. 18 88.1 86.7 91.6 71.9
Horses.................................................. 5 85.9 13.2 93.6 65.4
Difference............... .............................. ........ 2.2 73.5 -2.0 6.5
Potatoes: |
Ruminants........................................... 11 56.1 2.4 90.3 ........
Hores ................... ...................... ......... 1 88.. 99.4 9.1
Difference ...................................................... -31.9 2.41 -9.1 -9.1


As it will be seen in nearly every case the ruminants digested a larger
percentage of fat, carbohydrates, and crude fiber than horses, the differ-
ences being most marked in the case of the crude fiber. These results,
are, it seems fair to say, in accord with what might be expected from
differences in the digestive organs of the different classes of animals.
The ruminants have an opportunity to chew their food more thoroughly
than horses and retain it longer in the digestive tract. It is said that
on an average horses retain their food 4 days or less; cattle, 3 or 4 to
7 or 8 days; sheep or goats from 3 or 4 days with ordinary rations to
7 or 8 days when straw is eaten. That the food is actually more finely
divided by ruminants in chewing and digesting is indicated by the
mechanical condition of the feces; those from horses containing an
abundance of fairly large fragments of hay and other coarse fodders,
etc., while the feces of cattle commonly contain undigested residue in
a finer state of division. In the case of sheep the feces contain the
undigested residue in still smaller fragments. It is well known that
fineness of division is an important factor in considering the thorough-
ness of digestion. The length of time any given food material remains
in the digestive tract is also important. It is perhaps generally believed
that crude fiber is chiefly digested by the action of bacteria in the
intestine and it is obvious that the longer materials remain in the intes-
tine the greater the opportunity for the action of such micro-organisms.
Weiser and Zalischek,a in their investigation of the digestibility of
the different constituents of the carbohydrate group, report results
obtained with a horse and other farm animals. In nearly every case
the rations were made up of different combinations of meadow hay,
broom-corn seed, and oats. It is interesting to compare the average
digestibility by different farm animals of the constituents into which


aLoc. cit.






46

the carbohydrate group was divided. In the case of pentosans a steer
digested on an average 63.4, sheep 53.6, horse 45.5, and swine 47.9
per cent. In the case of crude fiber the values were, steer 56, sheep
55.1, horse 40.6, and swine 22.8 per cent. The values for starch were,
for a steer 96.6, sheep 89.4, horse 93.1, and swine 98.3. The values
for the undetermined constituents were, for a steer 44.8, sheep 32.9,
horse 42.3, and swine 28 per cent, and for total nitrogen-free extract,
steer 74.7, sheep 68.5, horse 71.1, and swine 85.6 per cent. As will
be observed the horse, generally speaking, digested different carbo-
hydrates less thoroughly than the ruminants but more thoroughly than
the swine.
The fact that, other things being equal, horses digest their feed less
thoroughly than cattle, i. e., retain less nutritive material from any
given ration when it passes through the digestive tract, has been long
recognized. For this reason horse manure is richer than manure from
cattle. In other words, the horse manure contains a larger proportion
of the ration than cow manure, and hence, more of the nitrogen and
mineral matter, especially phosphoric acid and potash, originally pres-
ent in the ration. Investigations carried on by I. P. Roberts, G. C.
Watson, and others at the New York Cornell Station a have to do with
this subject.
The value of the manure produced by horses was studied by Armsby b
at the Pennsylvania Station. Observations made with a number of
horses indicate that a horse produces annually about 12,700 pounds of
fresh manure, not including the amount dropped while at work. This
quantity, which would be worth about $13.50 as fertilizer, would
require the use of about 2,500 pounds of straw for bedding. According
to the author's calculations a ton of wheat straw economically used for
bedding horses may result in 6 tons of fresh manure, although in gen-
eral practice the amount is not likely to exceed 5 tons and may be
much less if few animals are kept or the manure is infrequently
removed.

RATIONS ACTUALLY FED AND FEEDING STANDARDS.

The amount of the different feeding stuffs required and hence the
quantity of nutrients supplied to horses may be learned by observa-
tion or experiment or a combination of the two methods. Doubtless
all practical horse feeders supply rations which they believe are suited
to their horses' needs, and in stables where horses are fed in any con-
siderable number economy demands that the amount fed shall be fixed
and not vary according to the wishes of the feeder. When the feed-
ing stuffs used are weighed and the condition of the horses is noted, a
a See especially New York Cornell Station Bul. 56, p. 169.
b Pennsylvania Station Rpt. 1892, p. 79.






47

feeding experiment results. Using average values obtained from
many more or less complicated feeding experiments and other investi-
gations, so-called feeding standards have been devised which are
designed to show the amount of the different nutrients required per
day for various conditions of work and rest. For the sake of uni-
formity, the standards are usually calculated on the uniform basis of
1,000 pounds live weight. The feeding standards show the amount of
protein, fat, and carbohydrates required daily, and often the nutritive
ratio also; that is, the ratio of protein to the sum of the carbohydrates
and 2.25 times the fat. It is also possible to express the feeding standards
in terms of protein and energy, since the functions of food, as pre-
viously stated, are to build and repair tissue and supply energy,
protein alone serving for the former purpose, while all the nutrients
yield energy. The best known feeding standards for horses and other
farm animals are those computed by Wolff and revised by Lehmann.
Very frequently so-called standards for horses have been proposed
which have shown the quantities of feeding stuffs required; for instance,
the pounds of oats and hay needed per day per 1,000 pounds live
weight. Such standards, or more properly standard rations, have
been adopted in many countries for army horses, and in other cases
where large numbers of horses are fed under uniform conditions. The
digestible nutrients furnished by such standard rations can be calcu-
lated by the aid of figures showing the average composition and diges-
tibility of the feeding stuffs. Such calculations have been often made,
especially by earlier investigators, on the basis of data secured by
digestion experiments with ruminants. However, this method can not
give the most satisfactory results. If possible, coefficients of digesti-
bility obtained in experiments with horses should be used.
Standard rations and feeding standards have been proposed by
Grandeau and Leclerc, Lavalard, and others. These French investi-
gators based their recommendations chiefly on investigations with the
horses of the Paris cab companies and the French army. The work
extended over a number of years and thousands of horses were
included. In connection with the work the digestibility of the ration
was determined.
In compiling this bulletin letters were addressed to express com-
panies, cab companies, fire companies, and other organizations in dif-
ferent cities of the United States using large numbers of horses,
requesting information regarding the rations fed. Information was
also secured regarding the average weight of the horses. Similar
values regarding horses fed by a number of cab companies, etc., in
foreign countries were compiled from available published data. The
rations fed army horses in the United States and other countries were
also learned by correspondence and by compilation from various








48


sources and included for purposes of comparison as were also data
regarding the rations fed in a large number of experiments carried on
at the experiment stations in this country, only those tests being
selected in which the horses maintained their weight.
No attempt has been made to gather statistics regarding race horses,
hunters, fancy coach and driving horses, and similar animals, as the
main purpose of the table was to learn the value of the rations fed farm
and other work horses in this country. The table below shows the
nutrients furnished per 1,000 pounds live weight by these rations and
also the calculated digestible nutrients and the total energy supplied by
them. In most cases the values for digestible nutrients were calcu-
lated by the aid of coefficients of digestibility obtained in experiments
with horses and referred to on a preceding page (41). From the data
thus collected the average quantities of nutrients furnished by the
rations of horses performing like amounts of work were calculated.
For purposes of comparison the Wolff-Lehmann feeding standards are
also included in the table as well as standards or averages proposed by
Lavalard and a number of other investigators.

TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in rations
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight.


Nutri
1,00
wei

o Rations
.C actually fed.
C

I -
P4

ARMY HORSES.
Lbs. Pounds. Lbs.
United States:
Cavalry .......... 1,050 Ha, 14 ... 2.14
Oats, 12 .......
Artillery .......... 1,125 Hay, 1..... 2.00
y, 14.....----
Mules ............ 1,025 O{a,9----.. 1.84
Great Britain: I
Oats, 10.......
In quarters........ 1,125 Hay, 12....... 2.16
Straw, 8 ......1
In camp........... 1,125 aLy 12 ....j-2.11
S Oats, 10....... .i
Cabs............... 1,125 OHa, 10-...- 1.92
Hay, 12-.......
Oats, 12.......
With extra issue.... 1,125 Hay, 12-.. -- 2.35
i Straw, 8-......
Mules (heavyOats, 10o....... I
rules (he 1 025Hay, 12...-: : 2.37
work). Straw, 8......
Mules in camp .... 1,025 at, ..12..... 231'
Oats, 5........
Small mules....... 850 Hay, 10....... 2.22
Straw, 13.....
Small mules in Oats, 6........
i 8503Oats, 6...... 2.04!
camp. J Hay, 12.......
ORegistereats, 18------ 2.52
Registered horses.. 1, 1252.52
Nay, 10 .......I I


ents in ration per
0 pounds live
ght.


0
I -






Lbs. Lbs.

0.90 12.82
.84 11.96
.78 11.39


.84 12.42

.80 10.76
.711 9.72

.92 13.46

.92 13.63

.88, 11.81

I
.86 14.24

.71 10.12
1.02 13.12


a)
.0
0
'0


Lbs. I

4.95
4.62
4.80t
I


6.23

3.80
3.61

6.42

6.84

4.17

9.21

4.28
3.92


Digestible nutrients In
ration per 1,000
pounds live weight.


0

PI-


Lbs.


1.25'
1.16'
1.00


1.38

1.47
1.321

1.531

1.51

1.61

1.26

1.34
1.83


L


a







be. Lbs.

D.57 8.00
.53 7.48
.48 6. 88


.44 7.3

.43 7.5
6 6.57

.51. 8.1

.49 8.04

.471 8.27


7.14

6.60
9.28


4 .

4)



Lbs.

1.97
1.84
1.94


1.79

1.38
1.32


1.601
1.37


a










Cbto-
ries.
23,300
21,750
20,250


21,400

20,750
18,650


1. 84123,500


1.5122,750

2.33 21,800


19,050
25,800


~1


0









49


TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digentible nutrients and energy in rations
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live treight-Continued.


ARMY HORSES-cont'd.

France:
Peace footing,
maintenance ra-
tion-
Reserve .......

Line..........

Light cavalry .
Artillery and
train.
Mules ........
War footing, main-
tenance ration-
Reserve .......

Line.........
*
Light cavalry .
Artillery and
train.
Germany:
Heavy ration-

Garrison.......


March.......


Field ........

Light cavalry I
in garrison.

Light cavalry
on march.

Light cavalry
in field.
Light ration-


Garrison.......


March.......


Field ..........


OMNIBUS HORSES.

France:


Paris, 1879.........


Paris, 1880.........


Rations
actually fed.


Pounds.


14.7 .....
8.82 .....
13.54....
7.72 .....
11.76....
6.61 .....
14.2.....
8.49 .....


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


0.


s. Lbs. Lbs.

83 10.811 3.41
bo















73 9.50 2.99
I-
8. ZLb.. 1118.

83 10.81 3.41

73 9.50. 2.99

80 10.42 3.24

77' 10.07 3.19

77 9.99 3.18


.90

.83

.88

.86


11.75

10.65

11.39

11.07


11.29


9.59


9.77


10.97


9.15


9.58


10.35


8.66


8.971


16.44


16.41


3.,58

3.20'

3.41

3.38


5.19,


3.41


3.45

5. 13


3.33


3.27


5.03


3.24


3.30'


5.19



4.971


Digestible nutrients in
ration per l.r(MO
pounds live weight.


a,
o -
I .






Lbs. Lb.

1.50! 0.49

1.31 .43

1.45 .47

1.39 .45

1.38 .44


1.63 .54

1.48' .50

1.59 .54
1.53 .51
.51



1.25 .50


1.19' .48


1.22 .419


1.21 .18


1.13 .46


1.21 .49


1.10 .44


1.07 .42

1^1 I 1


1.10


1.73


-.


7.56'

6.65

7.32

7.03

6.98


8.28

7.52

8.05

7. SO


6.81


6.36


6.50


6.57


6.04


6.45


6.11


5.66


44 5. 90


10.55


2 10.6
.42 10.60


ci
-'4


~cic


Lb.s. Calo-
Sries.
1.2121,150

1.0618,550

1.11 20,400

1.1319,650

1.1319,500


1.2623,050

1.1220,900

1.1922,400

1.1821,700



1.3319,550


.9317,800


.9418,150


1.3118,950


.9016,950


.9017,950


1.2917,650
I 0
.8815,900


.89 16,550





1.4327,350



1.3127,000
1


17399-No. 125-03--4


i
I








50

TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in ration
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


OMNIBUS HORSES-
continued.

France-Continued.


Paris, 1884.........


Lbs.



1,240


Paris, 1885......... 1,240


Paris, 1886.........



Paris, 1887........


Average .........

STREET-CAR HORSES.

Great Britain:

London ...........


1,240



1,240


1,150


Liverpool ......... 1,150


Glasgow...........



Dublin ............

Various European
cities:

Bremen .........



Brussels ..........


Bordeaux, winter.


Bordeaux, summer


Hamburg........


1,150



1,150





1,150



1,150


1,150


1,150


1,150


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


Rations
actually fed.


Pounds.

Beans, 1.4 ....
Bran, 0.9......
Corn, 8.5......
Oats, 8.7......
Hay, 8.5...---
Straw, 8.7....

Bran, 0.8....
Corn. 11.3....-
Oats, 6.2......
Hay, 8.5......
Straw, 8.4 ....
Beans, 0.1 ....
Bran, 0.5 ....
Corn, 13......
Oats, 5.5......
Hay, 8.6......
Straw, 7.3 ....
Corn, 10.8....
Oats, 8.1.....
Hay. 8.7 ......
Straw, 8.2.....


Lbs.



2.66




2.49




2.32



2.33


Corn, 7 .......
Oats, 3........
Peas, 3 ....... 1.87
Hay, 12.......
Straw, 1 ......
Beans, 4......
Corn, 12...... 2.55
Bran, .......
Hay, 14.......
Corn, 11 ......
Oats, 6........
Bran, 0.5...... 1.73
Hay, 8.5 ......
Straw, 1......
Corn, 14 ......
Oats, 3........ 1.91
Bran, 0.5......
Hay, 12.......

Corn, 14.3.....
Oats, 2.2......
Peas, 1.1...... 1.81
Hay, 8.8......
Straw, 2.2.....
Corn, 7.7......
Oats, 11....... .62
Hay, 4.4 ......
Straw, 3.3.....
Corn, 15.4.....
Hay, 13.2 ..... 1.82
Straw, 1.1.....
Corn, 11 ......
Oats, 4.4 ...... 1.86
Hay, 2 183.2
Straw, 1.1.....
Corn, 17.6 .....
Oats, 1.7 ...... 1.80
Hay, 7.7 .....
Straw, 4.4.....


Lbs.



0.78


a)









Lbs.



16. 18




.16.26




4. 16.06



i 16.16
16.18




.16.26




i: 16.06



16.16


4,





Lbs.



S4.64


Digestible nutrients
in ration per 1,000
pounds live weight.


a
2
d
"S
e i
p^


Lbs.



1.751


Lbs.



0.43


4.38 1.58 .


4.04



4.41


1.43



1.44


ow




Lb.












11.09




11.22
10.98
a






Lbs.








11.09




11.22



10.98


p.
a)
.0





Lbs.


0







ri

Cal




ries.


1 28 27,550


1.20 27,350


1.11 27,000


1.22


...... 1.60 .40i10.88 1.26


- -I- I I ----- I


9.52



11.52



10.66



11.60





11.46


.57 10.44


11.61


11.23


12.84


1.94



2.74



2.24



2.46





2.27



2.26


2.64


2.90


2.48


1.23 .15



1 72 .13



1.11 .25



1.16- .19


1.11



1.10


1.04


1.13


1.03


7.01



8.95



8.13



9.01





8.80



7.64


8.87


8.33


9.70


.90 17,650


1.04



.73



.87





.71



.64


.91


1.01


22,380


21,360





20,480



18,930


20,700


.69 22,030







E


TABLE 5.-Rations actually ifed to horses and digestible nutrients ind 'nwrgyy in rrtioln
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


STREET CAR HORSES-
continued.

Various European
cities-Continued.

Munich...........


Vienna...........


o

0








Lbs.


1,150


1,150


Average ............


HORSES WITH LIGHT
WORK.

Driving horse, Wyo-
ming station.
Carriage horse ........

Average.........

Fire company horses:

Boston, Mass .....

Chicago, Ill.......

Portland, Me......

Albany, N. Y.......

St. Lous, Mo.......

New York, N. Y...

Average..........

General average
for light work.

HORSES WITH MOD-
ERATE WORK.

Express horses:

S Richmond, Va.,
summer.


Richmond,
winter.


Va.,


Jersey City........


Boston ............

Average .........


1,200

1,050


1,400

1,350

1,360

1,350

1,350

1,350


}1,400



}1,400



1,325


1,325


Rations
actually fed.


Pounds.

Corn, 6.6......
Oats, 11.......
Hay, 5.5 ....
Straw, 4.4.....
(Oats, 15.4.....
Hay, 11.......
Straw, 2.2.....

.................



IAlfalfa, 21.25 .
Straw, 3.2.....
{Oats, 10......
Hay, 12......



Groundgrain,
9.38.
Hay, 18.......
Oats, 4.......
Hay, 15......
Oats, 6........
Hay, 10.......
Oats, 12.....
Hay, 12......
Straw, 10.....
Oats, 10.......
Bran, 2.5......
Hay, 7........
Oats, 12.......
Hay, 9........


................


Nutrients in ration per I Digestible nutrient*t
1,000 pounds live in ration per 1,000
weight. pounds live weight.


*4-






Lbs.


1.64


1.84

1.86



2.38

2.06


'&4
I-
0
Iu.









Lbs. Lbs.


0.58 10.59


.73 10.02
.7 00


I-




Lb.
I-








2.64


3.39


.54111.061 2.54


5.87

10.42


a






L0s.
Lbs.


,S
2


Lbs.


111 0.35


1.29

1.1S



1.76

1.40


1.68


L.













7.46


.43' 6.55

.23 8.22



.05! 3.58

.40 6.97

.221 5.27


Lbs.


0.74'


1.13


2.22


8.15


3.10


3


:0


7-



Calo-






18,800


18,490


.81 20,075


.912

1.44

1.18


11,855

19,935

15,895


- 'I I *I* *.*****-I :1 I I


1.65

1.00

.96

1.58


}1.46

1.44

1.35


.68

.43

.41

.67

.58

.62

.56


9.57

6.77

5.99

9.30

7.76

8.30

7.95


4.57

3.50

2.57

3.42

2.38

2.78

3.20


.87

.42

.52

.96

.99

.92

.78


.411 6.14

.24 3. 70

.25 3.59

.42 5.91

.39 5.16

.40 5.4

.35 4.99


1. 73

1.45

1.04

1.35

.90


15
jO


18,000

11,365

10,650

17,050

14,700


1.01715,550


1.26 14,66555


1.7 .54 8.00 3.18 .99 .32 5.06 1.2414,890


Corn, 4.67.....
Oats, 5.33.....
Bran, 0.83 .... 9 .78
Corn meal,4.16
Hay, 15.......
Corn, 4.38.....
Oats, 7.5......
Bran, 0.83 .... 00 .86
Corn meal,.164 2.0
Hay, 16......
Corn, 2.......
Oats, 19....... 24 1.
Bran, 1.5 .....
Hay, 9.5......
Corn, 12. .....
Oats, 5.25. ... 2.38 1.04
Hay, 20.......

................ 2.16 .9


11.78 3.64 .97 .45



12.88 3. 99 1.12 .60


13.45 3.57 1.66 .67


14.96 5.32 1.28 .60

13.27 4.13 1.26, .65


8.19



8.93


9.37


9.75


1.46



1.59


1.32


2.12


9.06 1.62


21,650



23, 750


25,800


27,000

24,550


- I 1-1 1 1


51









52


TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in rations
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


HORSES WITH MODER-
ATE WORK-COnt'd.

Cab horses, United
States.
New York, N.Y ...


Philadelphia, Pa..



Washington, D.C..

Do...........

San Francisco, Cal.


Average ..........


Farm horses:
Wyoming Station..

New Hampshire
Station.


Do.............


Do...........

D o.............


Do.............



D o.............


Do............


Do.............


Do............


Do............


Do............

Do...........


Lbs.


Rations
actually fed.


Pounds.


1 00 Oats, 14.......
1 0Hay, 10.......
Corn, 17......
Oats, 9.28.....
1,200 Groundgrain.
i,2 4.40.a
Hay, 13.50 ....
Straw, 7.10....
Oats, 10.......
1,200o Corn, 5 .......
Hay, 23.......
S Oats, 12.......
13 Hay, 12.......
, 350 Oats, 8........
S3lHay, 16.......


Alfalfa, 13.75
Straw, 2.25....
Bran, 2.......
Corn, 6.......
Gluten meal, 6
Hay, 10......
Bran, 2 .......
Corn, 6 .......
Oats, 8........
Hay, 10.......
Hay, 10......
Bran, 7.......
Corn, 8 ......
Corn, 8 ......
Linseedmeal,4
Hay,10.......
Bran, 2 ......
Corn, 8 ......
Cotton-seed
meal, 1.
Hay, 10......
Bran, 2.......
Corn, 6 ......
Oats, 8.......
Hay, 10......
Bran, 7.......
Corn, 8 ......
Hay, 10......
Corn stover, 6.
Hay, 6.......
Corn, 7 ......
Oats, 4........
Bran, 3......
Hay, 12.......
Oats, 7.......
Corn, 7.......
Corn stover, 12
Oats, 7.......
Corn, 7.......
Corn stover, 12
Bran, 7.......
Corn, 7........
Hay, 12 ......
Bran,7 .......
Corn,?7.......


1,000

1,235


1,220


1,230


1,220


1,250



1,170


1,280


1,290


1,230


1,300

1,175


1,280


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


--- -- --I--


Lbs.

0.79


.82



1.12

.67

.59


9.30
. 87






Lbs.

10.72


12.13



16.50

9.30

8.87


Lbs.

3.53


4.13



6.43

3.42

4.00


Digestible nutrients
in ration per 1,000
pounds live weight.


1.20


1.19



1.28

.95

.70


0
be .
a)
Ic.

I




Lbs. Lbs.

0.53 7.06


0
I-





Lbs.

1.87


2.01



2.56

1.58

1.39

1.88


1.85


2.37


2.03


2.03

2.35


1.73



2.11


1.96


1.74


1.85


1.56

1.94

1.98


6.27

10.49


11.92


11.21


9.46


9.11



12.43


75 10.80


71 10.44


81 11.75


9.87

10.57


.751 10.97


2.90


3.26


3.00

2.80


2.65



3.41


2.89


2.88


3.501

2.451

2.67


3.33
i


1.37 .03

1.59 .64


1.21 .50


1.18 .41

1.52 .36


.98 .39



1.27 .44


1.14 .40


1.05


1.01


1.04

1.30

1.11


8.05



10.42

5.91

5.21

7.38


Lo
4,






Lbs.

1.37


1.64



2.60

1.63

1.64

1.72


4.031..


7.47


8.18


7.65


6.64


6.18



8.53


7.36


7.59


8.14

7.72

8.07


7.38


ak



at







CO/o-
riea.
20,100


22,350



29,250

17,050

15,550

20,860


8,240


1.03 21,465


1.24 21,880


1.14


1.24


20,275

19,000


1.05 16,915



1.29 22,485
i
1.10 19,545


1.40 20,360


1.37 21,510

1.49 21,005

1.63 22,105


1.30 19,900


a Corn meal and bran, 3.07:1.33.


.8011.51 4.30 1.06, .49


I


1
I





r




53


TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in rations
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


HOSBES WITH MODER-
ATE WORK--cont'd.

Farm horses-cont'd.


New Hampshire
Station.


Do ............


Do...........


Do...........


Do...........


Do....-.......


Do.............


Do.............


Utah Station .....


Do............


Do............


Do.............


Do.............


I-



bo





Lbs.
Nj

Ca.


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weoiht


Rations
actually fed.

d

o -


Pounds.

Hay, 12 .......
Corn,?7 ........
Oats, 4........
Bran,3 .......
Hay, 12 .......
Corn, ........
Oats,7 ........
Hay,6 ........
Bran, 2 ......
Corn, 4!.......
Dried brewers'
grain, 8 .
Hay,6 ........
Bran, 2 ......
Corn,4f.......
Oats. 81 .......
Hay,8 ........
Corn meal,6.25
Dried brewers'
grain, 6.15.
Hay,8 ........
Corn meal,6.55
Linseed meal,
5.40.
Hay, 18.......
Wheat bran, 2.
Provender, 6=
crushed
corn, 2.73;
oats, 3.27.
Hay, 20.......
Wheat bran,2.
Provender, 6=
crushed
corn, 2.73;
oats, 3.27.
Hay, 15.......
Wheat bran, 2.
Provender, 4=
crushed
corn, 1.73;
oats, 2.27.
Hay, 15.......
Wheat bran,3.
Provender, 6=
crushed
corn, 2.73;
oats, 3.27.
Timothy hay,
25.8.
Corn, 23.7.....
Clover hay,
26.1.
Oats, 11.8.....
Wheat, 11.8...
Clover hay,
22.4.
Oats, 9.7 ......
Wheat, 9.7....
Timothy hay,
22.4.
Corn, 19.4.....
Alfalfa hay,
24.5.
Bran and
shorts (1:1),
10.


Lbs.


S1.87


*1.70


3.21



2.23


2.24


2.61



* 1.85




S1.96




1.53




1.85



* 3.12


4.96


* 4.44


2.44


3.59I


Lbs..


0.78


.77


.89



.89


.65


.49



.76


C,

a

M.





Lbs.


11.20


10.78


10.81



12.11


9.55


8.81



11.85


.811 12.66


Digestible nutrients in
ration per 1,000
pounds live weight.


.0
CC c
ii -
- I *-
3 I
i- i-




Lbs. L bs.


3.36


3.21,


3.09!



2.68'


2.82


2.45



5.25




5.77


V



CX
4~rb


Ibs. Lbs.


1.03 0.42 7.66


.93 .42 7.47


2.22



1.45


1.49


1.88



.85




.87


9.621 4.431 .70


.73 11.21



1.30 26.06


1.10, 21.67


.98 19.33


1.01 20.50


.69 11.43


4.58



7.05


7.03


6.39


5.70


4.96


.94



1.43


3.35


3.00


1.10


2.711


.65 6.99



.5f; 8.65


.48 6.53


.35 '6.60



.41 7.04




.44 7.43




32 5.58




.41 6.85



.61 18.60


.60 15.36


.53 13.67


.48 14.51


.28 7.99


1.2519,620


1.38 22,440


1.00


1.24


1.17



2.14


2.37121,705


1.81116,200


1.8519,660



2.6844,815


2.5342,040


2.3036,520


2.1835,115


1.8824,580


S













Calo-
sr.'
c





ries.

20,370


9.

CC.



7a.




1.31


23,010


19,250


19,425



20,385


-r,


I


I









54


TABLE 5.-Ration actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in raim
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


HORSES WITH MODER-
ATE WORK-cont'd.

Farm horses--cont'd.


Utah Station ......



Do .............



Do--..--------I.

Do.............

Do..............



Do.------------



Do...........



Do.............


Do..............

Do............

Do............

Do............


Virginia Station...


Do ............. I

Average ......... .

General average.
for moderate
work.


Farm mules, Virginia
Station.


o Rations
. actually fed.
-5
c
-a


Lbs.


Pounds.


Alfalfa hay,
25.
1,370 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
10.
Timothy hay,
22.8.
1,325 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
L10.
T othy hay,
23.5.
1,420 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
12.2.
Alfalfa hay,
24.5.
1,400 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
12.2.
Alfalfa hay,
25.
1,400 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
14.6.
Alfalfa hay,
16.
1,120 Bran and
shorts (1:1),
12.6.
Timothy hay,
1,230 13.7.
Oats, 12.......
Alfalfa hay,
1,235, 14.7.
Oats, 11.5.....
1,385 Alfalfa hay,
19.7.
1,385 Alfalfa hay,
19.9.
1,420 Alfalfa hay,
32.6.
Hay, 19.3.....
1460 Corn, 11.3.....
1 Corn silage,
23.1.
1,15 Hay, 16.......
1 Corn, 14.1 .....



..... ................


1,310


Do................. 1,190


Do................ 1,020


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


a
2
-4

04


-4
OS
(d


Lbs. Lbs.


3.72



2.17



2.28



3.82



4.14



3.75


1.81


2.80
2.80


2.04


2.06

3.28


1.95


2.10

2.46

2.38


Hay, 15.2 .....
Corn, 10.5.....
Corn silage,
10.5.
Hay, 14.5.....
Corn, 9.2......
Hay, 9.8 ......
Corn, 6.1......
Corn silage,
12.2.


0.71


Ci
s
Id
601
bD4
ON
&'-4
z


5
I-
0
.0


Lbs. Lbs.



11.83! 5.16


.751 11.93



.781 12.20


.751 12.29


.72

.31

.32

.51


.92


1.00

.75


13.39



12.32



10.84


10.65

6.07

6.14

9.80


13.70


14.73


5.611



5.51



5.09



5.321

I

3.96



4.15'


4.66:

3.56

3.59

5.74


4.92


4.28


11.92


77111.99


12.00


10.86


10.29


4.06

4.08


4.00


3.70


3.61


Digestible nutrients
in ration per 1,000
pounds live weight.


-4





Lbs.


I
2.81S



1.11



1.23



2.89



3.14



2.86



1.06


2.15

1.52

1.54

2.45


.81


.92


Los.




/--S
0.29



.42



.44



.31!






-38





.48


.38

.06

.06

.10


.49


.48


S

ule


ON
540


1;
4)
.0
C
C
a0


Lbs. I lus.


6.56



6.82



8.58



9.36



8.-60



6.79


7.79

4.26

4.31

6.88


9.18


10.44


1.67

1.49


.42


.34


.36


8.09

8.09


8.22


7.34


6.96


1.62

1.63


a














ris
ne


2.311 20,346


2.25


21,015


1.91 26,615


1.99


S28,566


1.45 25,615


1.65


1.42

1.39

1.40

2.24


19,700


22,715

16,435

13,740

21,940


2.25| 24,815


1.71


26,335


22,700

22,710


21,655


19,000


18,670


1 __ 1-i .-. ---=I.


8.27 1.96 25,480










55


TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in rntions
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


HORSES WITH MODER-
ATE WORK-COnt'd.


Farm mules, Virginia l1, 08
Station. J

Do................. 1,275


Do................


Rations
actually fed.


I- I II


Pounds.

fHay, 13.4.....
Corn, 11.8.....
Hay, 15.6.....
Corn, 10.5.....
Corn silage,
14.6.
Hay, 11.7.....
Corn, 9.9......


Average ............ ...............


HORSES WITH SEVERE
WORK.

Truck and draft horses:
Chicago, Ill., daily
ration.

Chicago, Ill., holi-
day ration.

SouthOmaha,Nebr.

New York, N. Y....
Washington, D. C.,
summer.

Washington, D. C.,
winter.


Average (omit-
ting holiday
ration).

Draft horses, heavy,
hard work. Sid-
ney's estimate.

FARM HORSES, SETTE-
GAST'S ESTIMATE.

Light work............

Moderate work.......


Heavy work...........

FEEDING STANDARDS
AND AVERAGE RA-
TIONS.


Light work,
Lehmann.
Medium work,
Lehmann.
Heavy work,
Lehmann.


Wolff-

Wolff-

Wolff-


1, 600

11,600

1,500

1,600

1, 600


1,600


2,000





1,250


1,250

1,250


Oats, 7.5 ......
Hay, 20 .......
Oats, 2........
Bran, 2.5......
Oil meal, 0.2..
Hay, 20.......
Oats, 15.......
Hay,12.......
Oats, 23.......
Hay, 12.......
Oats, 19.......
Hay, 13.......
Oats, 12.5 .....
Corn, 6.75.....
Ground grain,
a 4.
Hay, 10 ......


Beans, 6 .....
Oats, 13......
Corn, 3........
Clover, 15.....


Oats, 8........
Hay, 7.6......
Straw, 3......
Oats, 10.......
Hay, 10.......
Straw, 3......
Oats, 13.......
Hay, 12.......
Straw, 3.....


1,225


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


Lbs.

1.88

1.84

1.41


1.64


1.38

1.25


1.>65

2.14

1.88


1.93


1.80


3.87





1.29


1.64

2.04


Lbs.

0.90


881


a)
0
bt-a





Lb .

13.18

12.96


9.93


a)
rC
a)1
Vr
I-


2.94


Digestible nutrients
in ration per 1.000
pounds live weight.


S
0
S.


Lbs.

0.44

.46

.32


I-
i.i
Ct-
0

z


Lbs.

9.34

8.84

7.00


I I I I I I'


.78111.54


8.99

7.74

9.57

11.96


791 10.74


11.19


3.74


4.34

4.16

3.27

3.54

3.49


2.83


.69 ,.91 7.96


5.11

4.11


6.23

8.10

7.11


8.16


6.94


.64

.53

1.04

1.44

1.21


1.25


-I- lI -1-1


76110.49


3.49


1.12


- I _______ I*~ I ____ I _____ I _______:


11.72


.501 7.45


9.23


11.31


3.11





2.83

3.50

4.16


1.94





.87

1.11


1.40


.28





.29

.35

.45





.40

.60

.80


Lbs.

1.54

1.96
i.c1


5.86





4.61

5.80


7.24


9.5

11.0

13.3


ries.










23,510


] 23,480


a Bran, cornmeal, and cut hay 2: L6: 4.


Lbs. Lbs.

3.83 0.82

4.381 .78


1.18' 17,700

1.60 20,676





1.79 15,450


1.75


13,000


1.27 17,800

1.33 22,800

1.34 20,200


1.03 21,550
-

1.35 19,560



1.56 18,590





.91 13,10)


16,500

20,550


.2, 150

26,700

32,750


___


__


1








56

TABLE 5.-Rations actually fed to horses and digestible nutrients and energy in rations
calculated to basis of 1,000 pounds live weight-Continued.


FEEDING STANDARDS
AND AVERAGE RA-
TIONs-continued.
Maintenance, moder-
ate work, original,
Grandeau.
Maintenance, moder-
ate work, modified,
Grandeau.
Paris Bus Co., horses,
Lawes & Gilbert's
computation.
Ordinary work, Lava-
lard.
Severe work, Lavalard.
AMERICAN EXPERI-
MENTS.
Horses with light
work:
Driving horses ....
General average...
Horses with moderate
work:
Express and cab
horses.
Farm horses.......
General average...
Mules with moderate
work: Farm mules.
Horses with severe
work: Truck and
draft horses.


0
->




Lbs.


Rations
actually fed.


Pounds.


Nutrients in ration per
1,000 pounds live
weight.


Lbs.


Lbs.

Lbs.


.I. ---- ----


a'

oN
1.0
4.


a'
.0r
C
C)


Lbs. Lbs.

...... ......



...... ......

....... o.....
I


-- ......


Digestible nutrien
ration per
pounds live wei


Lbs. Lbs.
2.14' .52

1.95 .44

1.60 .40

1.101
1.30





1.58 .22
.99 .32

1.06 .49
1.57 .40
1.49. .42
.69 .39
1.12i .49


C
8'

4a
OM





Lbs.
11.


9.


12.

a 11.0
all.0


ts in S
1,000 5
ght.
A-
ri





I


.~Zs. C
,15 26,900

93 23,950

14 27,200

22,610
22,880


5.27 1
5.06 1

7.33 1
8.09 1
8.09 1
7.95 1
6.94 1


.18'15,895
. 2414,890


.72
.62
L63
.60
.36


20,860
22,760
22,710
20,676
19,560


a This value represents total carbohydrates plus 2.25 times the fat.

The figures in the above table, showing the amounts eaten by army
horses in the United States and other countries and by horses- belong-
ing to cab companies, etc., in foreign countries, were compiled from
various sources, though in many cases the data have been recalculated,
using, as previously noted, the values for composition and digestibility
included in Tables 1 and 2. These figures are included chiefly forpur-
poses of comparison with those showing the nutrients and energy in
the ration of American work horses, especially those used by cab com-
panies, express companies, and other private firms, and by farmers in
different regions of the United States.
It will be noticed that the number of feeding stuffs used in making
up the rations fed is not large, oats and corn being the common grains,
and hay, usually timothy, the common coarse fodder. The amounts
of nutrients and energy in the different rations of the horses making
up the different groups varied within rather wide limits, which is not
surprising when it is remembered that the horses were fed under many


j


"""("""






57

different conditions and by a large number of feeders whose opinions
regarding what constituted a proper ration naturally differed. Taken
as a whole it does not seem unfair to assume that the figures are rea-
sonably trustworthy, since it is highly probable that the private firms
fed their horses rations which experience had shown were satisfactory
and in the case of the farm horses, which were without exception fed
at the experiment stations under controlled conditions, the rations
were undoubtedly adequate, since the only results included are those of
feeding tests in which the horses maintained their weight. As will be
seen, the average values for the protein and energy in the rations of
the horses performing light work are considerably less than similar
values for horses performing moderate work. The data for the for-
mer group is much more limited than for the latter, but the relation is
in accord with the commonly accepted theories. The farm mules con-
sumed a ration furnishing less protein and practically the same amount
of energy as horses performing similar work, though the tests with
mules are too few for general deductions. The rations of the truck
and draft horses performing severe muscular work furnished less pro-
tein and energy on an average than the rations of the horses with mod-
erate work. This is not in accord with commonly accepted theories
and may be explained in part perhaps by the fact that the data for the
group performing severe work is much less extended than that for
the group performing moderate work. There is every reason to sup-
pose that the truck and draft horses received rations sufficient for
their needs, as the firms owning them are known to make the effort to
maintain their horses in good condition. Such truck and draft animals
are often employed at work which is performed at a slow pace, and
undoubtedly this has a bearing on the fact that they were able to per-
Sform a large amount of work on a comparatively small ration, as the
speed at which work is performed has a marked effect upon the food
requirements.
It will be seen that the average values, representing the amounts
which were fed to American horses performing light, moderate, and
severe work, differ somewhat from the commonly accepted feeding
standards. The average values for horses at moderate work (express
horses, cab horses, and farm horses), namely, 1.49 pounds digestible
protein and 22,710 calories per 1,000 pounds live weight per day are
considerably less than those called for by the Wolff-Lehmann standard
or by Grandeau's estimates. The agreement with Lavalard's figures
is much closer, the protein being a little larger and the energy very
nearly the same. The average values for horses at light work, namely,
0.99 pound digestible protein and 14,890 calories per 1,000 pounds
live weight, are also less than the values called for by the Wolff
standard. The greatest difference, however, is observed in the values
for horses with severe work, the American average being 1.12 pounds







58


digestible protein and 19,560 calories. It would be going too far to
propose the adoption of these average values as standards in the place
of those which have been commonly accepted. It is undoubtedly true
that a feeding standard should be based on other data than the results
of feeding experiments; however, in so far as the results represent
the average practice of successful feeders they are worthy'of con-
sideration, and certainly emphasize the importance of undertaking
investigations with a view to revising the standards. It should be
remembered that the amounts of digestible nutrients in the rations
actually fed were calculated with the aid of coefficients of digestibility
obtained with horses and are, therefore, considerably lower than would
be the case if average values obtained with ruminants had been used,
a method of calculation which has been often followed in the past, but
which does not seem desirable.

METHOD OF CALCULATING RATIONS.

The feeding value of any ration may be readily calculated and com-
pared with the standards. Suppose a horse at moderate work and
weighing 1,200 pounds is fed 11 pounds of oats and 10 pounds of tim-
othy hay daily. The Wolff-Lehmann feeding standard for horses at
moderate work calls for 1.8 pounds of protein and 26,700 calories per
thousand pounds live weight. A horse weighing 1,200 pounds would
therefore require 1.2 times as much, or 2.2 pounds protein and 32,000
calories. Oats contain 9.39 pounds of digestible protein and 122,100
calories per hundred pounds. Eleven pounds would therefore furnish
1.03 poundsof protein (9.39 x 0.11 =1.03), and 13,430 calories (122,100 X
0.11=13,430). Timothy hay furnishes 1.25 pounds protein and 69,850
calories per hundred pounds. Ten pounds would therefore furnish
0.13 pounds protein (1.25x0.10=0.13) and 6,985 calories (69,850X
0.10=6,985). The sum of the nutrients furnished by 11 pounds of
oats and 10 pounds of hay would therefore be 1.16 pounds protein and
20,415 calories, or 1.04 pounds protein and 11,585 calories less than
the standard calls for. This may be made up by adding more oats,
hay, or other feeding stuff. The amount of oats required to furnish
the necessary protein may be learned from the proportion 100: 9.39::
x: 1.04; or, in other words, by dividing 1.04 by .0939, which gives
11.07. This quantity of oats would also furnish 13,517 calories, mak-
ing the total protein of the ration 2.2 pounds and the total fuel value
33,932 calories. The fuel value of the ration is in excess of the stand-
ard, though the agreement is close enough for all practical purposes.
As previously stated, it is not necessary that the amounts furnished
in a ration shall exactly equal those called for by the standard, but
rather that they approximate them, being greater rather than less
through a long period. Rations which will furnish the amounts called







59

for by other feeding standards, or by the average values deduced from
American rations, can, of course, be calculated in the same way. As
will be noted, the amount of feeding stuffs necessary to provide nutri-
ents equal to the amount called for by the Wolff standard for a horse
at moderate work is large compared with the amounts ordinarily used
in this country. (See discussion on pages 57, 58.)

MUSCULAR WORK AND ITS EFFECT ON FOOD REQUIREMENTS.

It is commonly said that the amount of food required by horses is
proportionate to their weight; it being self-evident that a large horse
would require more material than a small horse to build and repair
the body and to carry on all the vital processes which constitute
internal muscular work. Investigations have shown that the require-
ments are more nearly proportional to the surface areas than to
the body weight. Individual peculiarity is, of course, a factor which
must be reckoned with, but the general statement is justified. The
factor which has the greatest influence on the ration required is the
amount of work performed, the ration increasing with the work.
When horses which have been consuming a large ration and perform-
ing work are compelled to rest, even for a few days, the ration should
be diminished. Girarda found that the horses at the Meaux farm,
doing hard work, were well nourished with a maximum ration of 16-20
lite.s (15-19 quarts) oats, 6.5 kilograms (14 pounds) hay, and straw
ad libitum. If the work stopped for three days and the ration was
not diminished the horses were subject to paralysis, resulting in death.
It was therefore recommended that on Sundays and holidays the ration
consist of 6 liters (5.7 quarts) oats at noon, and 6 liters (5.7 quarts) of
bran mash night and morning, with the same amount of hay and straw
as before. The disease practically ceased after this practice was fol-
lowed. The facts brought out above are quite generally recognized
by large feeders and it is a common custom to diminish the rations on
Sunday and holidays.
In order to study the effects of work upon the amount of food
required it is necessary to have some means of measuring and com-
paring the different kinds of work done.
MEASURING MUSCULAR WORK.
It has been said already that the total work performed by a horse con-
sists of internal and external muscular exertion. The former includes
the force expended in the digesting of food, the beating of the heart,
Setc.; the latter that expended in moving the body, i. e., in the motion
of forward progression, and in drawing or carrying a load. The latter
factor is the one of most importance in considering the horse as a
a Quoted by Lavalard, loc. cit.


--J






60


beast of burden. The amount of such muscular work has been calcu-
lated or measured in various ways. The methods of calculation are
often complex and need not be discussed in detail. The amount of
muscular work performed has usually been measured with some form
of dynamometer. An extended series of experiments in which such an
instrument was employed was conducted by Wolff.a The dynamometer
which he used consisted of a revolving arm, turning on a base, which
could be weighted so as to increase the friction and hence the amount
of work required to turn it. There were special devices for recording
the number of revolutions made.
According to the classic experiments of James Watts, a horse can
exert a power equal to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute, i. e., in 1 minute
can exert a force sufficient to raise 33,000 pounds 1 foot. This value
has been termed 1-horse power and has been accepted as a common
unit for the measurement of force. In countries where the metric
system is employed the more common unit is the kilogrammeter.
This unit is equal to 7.2 foot-pounds. According to Watts's values, a
horse working eight hours per day would perform work represented
by 33,000 X 60 X 8 = 15,840,000 foot-pounds. Later estimates give
lower values. It has been calculated that an average horse will pro-
duce only about 22,000 foot-pounds per minute, which would be
equivalent to 10,560,000 foot-pounds in a working day of eight hours.
According to Wolff's experiments," the day's work of a horse haul-
ing a load eight hours on a level road amounted to 7,999,800 foot-
pounds. Working the same length of time with a dynamometer the
work amounted to 12,996,000 foot-pounds. As will be seen by the
figures given below (p. 61), Lavalard obtained larger values in his
calculations representing the amount of work performed daily by
army horses.
Mention should be made in this connection of some comparatively
recent investigations carried on at the American experiment stations
and other institutions. At the Utah, New York (Cornell), Michigan,
and Missouri stations and at the University of Tennessee, Sanborn,
Roberts, Fulton, Waters, and Carson have studied the draft of differ-
ent kinds of wagons under different road conditions and related topics,
thus securing data for estimating the work done by horses under the
conditions studied although the experiments were not made from this
standpoint. A number of the experiment stations have also devoted
considerable attention to testing the draft of plows and other agricul-
tural implements.
a For full accounts of the extended experiments of Wolff and his associates con-
cerning the digestibility of different feeds, the production of muscular work, etc.,
see Landw. Vers. Stat., 20 (1876-77), p. 125; 21 (1877-78), p. 19. Landw. Jahrb.,
8 (1879), Sup. 1; 13 (1884), p. 257; 16 (1887), Sup. III; 24 (1895), p. 125; also
Grundlagen filr die rationelle Fiitterung des Pferdes, Berlin, 1885.








61

When a horse does road work it is evident that a large animal must
expend more energy than a small one for the motion of forward pro-
gression. Lavalard a made weighing in experiments with some 30,000
horses belonging to the Paris cab companies and to the French army.
He gives the average weight of horses of different kinds and of mules
as follows:
TABLE 6.-Average weight of horses.


Heavy draft horses ..........................................................
Light draft horses ........................................................
Fancy horses, reserve cavalry horses, and horses of the line................
Carriage horses and light cavalry horses ................................. ...
Artillery and train horses ..................................................
Mules.................................................... .... ...


Weight.
Kilograms. Pounds.

700-800 1 1,540-1,760
500-600 1,100-1,320
450-510 990-1,120
P80-400 835-880
480-495 1,055-1,090
430 945


Taking into account the average amount of muscular work expressed
in foot-pounds, the speed at which work is performed, the duration of
the work, and the amount of work done at a walk and trotting, the
total work done per day by army horses carrying a rider weighing 80
kilograms (175 pounds) without a pack, and 120 kilograms (265 pounds)
with a pack, and 90 kilograms (200 pounds) with accouterment for
maneuvers, was calculated to be as follows:

TABLE 7.- Work performed by army horses per day.


Work per day.


Weight
carried.


ORDINARY WORK (RIDER WITHOUT PACK).
Pounds.
Walking.................................. 176
Trotting.................................... 176
Total ................................... ..........
ROAD WORK (RIDER WITH PACK).
Walking.................................... 265
Trotting..................................... 265
Total ............................................
MILITARY MANEUVERS (RIDER WITH LIGHT
PACK).
Walking.................................... 198
Trotting.................................... 198
Total ...................................'..........


Velocity Work per
per second.
second.


Feet. Foot-lbs.
5.446 958.5
9.022 1,587.9
.......... ............


5.446
9.022


1,443.2
2,390.8


5.446 1,078.3
9.022 i 1,786.4


I I


Duration
of daily
work.


Hrs. Min.
2 30
1 30


Amount
of work at
different
gaits.


Foot-lbs.
8,626,500
8,574,660
17,201,160


7,793,280
12,910,320
20,703,600


7,762,760
19,293,120
27,055, 880


According to the calculation of an English army officer, Maj. F.
Smith,6 the mean ratio of carrying power to body weight is 1: 5.757;
that is to say, it takes, roughly speaking, 5.75 pounds of body weight
to carry 1 pound on the back during severe exertion (racing excepted).
The rule he gives for ascertaining the carrying power of a horse is to


b Queensland Agr. Jour., 4 (1899), p. 493.


I


a Loc. cit.






62

divide his body weight by 5.757, and if intended for only moderate
work to add to the product 28 pounds. It has to be noted that the
observations were made upon military horses. It is doubtful if it
would work out so accurately if applied to all horses used for the
saddle.
According to Lavalarda the general opinion of cavalry officers who
have studied the question is that measuring the distance covered and
the rate of speed is practically the only method for determining the
work done by a saddle horse. He states that Marcy computes that
the work accomplished in a given time is proportional to the square of
the velocity, his coefficients being 3.42 for walking or pacing,. 16 for
trotting, 28.62 for cantering, and 68.39 for a full gallop. In other
words, 4.5 times as much work is performed when trotting as when
walking, 1.75 times as much when galloping as trotting, and 2.5 times
as much at a full gallop as on an ordinary trot or canter. These val-
ues are calculations rather than results obtained by experiments.
According to Poncelet6 a horse carrying a weight of 120 kilograms
(265 pounds) and traveling at a speed of 1.1 meters (3.6 feet) per second
for 10 hours per day performs 4,752,000 kilogrammeters (34,214,400
foot-pounds) of work. If the weight carried equals 80 kilograms (363
pounds) and the speed is 2.2 meters (7.3 feet) per second, 4,435,000
kilogrammeters (31,932,000 foot-pounds) of work will be performed
in 7 hours.
The Prussian cavalry horses, according to Ellenberger'sb estimation,
perform 1,500,000 kilogrammeters (10,800,000 foot-pounds) of useful
work daily during the winter months. In the spring and summer
months extra military duties increase this amount by 200,000 kilo-
grammeters (1,440,000 foot-pounds) daily. Different values have been
proposed by other investigators for saddle horses of various kinds.
The speed at which the horse travels, the way in which the load is
distributed, the external temperature, and other conditions evidently
have an effect upon the work performed.
According to Colin'sb figures a horse walking 1 kilometer (0.63
mile) in 10 minutes travels at a speed of 1.66 meters (5.4 feet) per
second. Trotting the same distance in 4.25 minutes the distance cov-
ered is 3.92 meters (12.9 feet) per second. The average speed of a
trotting horse was calculated to be 2.72 meters (8.9 feet) per second.
These values refer especially to army horses.
MUSCULAR WORK IN ITS RELATION TO THE RATION.
Many experiments have been made, chiefly in Europe, to determine
the exact relation between the amount of muscular work performed
and the amount of the different nutrients required per day. It is the
opinion of Wolff and Muntz, and others who have been especially
a Experiment Station Record, 12 (1900-1901), p. 4.
b Quoted by Lavalard, loc. cit.


... n:.. i.






63


active in the study of these problems, that provided a sufficient amount
of protein is supplied for physiological maintenance, i. e., to replace
the wear and tear of body tissue, it is immaterial which of the three
classes of nutrients (protein, fat, and carbohydrates) furnishes the
energy necessary for external muscular work performed by horses.
The opinion of these investigators, which is quite generally accepted,
has been summarized as follows by Warington: a
The doctrine laid down by Wolff and his fellow workers at Hohenheim is a very
simple one. He distinguishes between the food necessary to maintain the horse at
rest without loss of weight and the extra food which must be given when work is
performed, if the horse is again to be maintained, without its weight suffering loss.
Between the weight of digestible matter in this extra food and the quantity of work
accomplished there is a tolerably uniform relation. Wolff reckons that digested
nutritive matter equivalent to 100 grams of starch is capable of producing 85,400 kilo-
grammeters of work, or, expressed in English terms, 1 pound of starch digested by a
horse will accomplish 1,232 foot-tons of work. This is 48 per cent of the full work
which the starch could accomplish if burned outside the body. The result is the
average of many experiments with different diets.
The horse requires for its maintenance in weight while at rest a certain daily sup-
ply of albuminoid substance [protein], which must never fall below a certain quan-
tity; but the extra food given when work is to be performed may consist indifferently
of any digestible combustible substance, whether albuminoids or not. The horse
keeper is thus at liberty to select from a wide range of foods, and is not obliged to
give a preference to those which are specially nitrogenous. It should, however, be
borne in mind that what has just been said applies strictly only to horses which are
already in good working condition. Horses which are low in condition, and must
gain in weight of muscle before they are fit for hard work, must, of course, receive
a more nitrogenous diet.
A view very commonly held to-day is much the same and in accord
with the above, viz, that provided an adequate quantity of protein
and energy are available for maintenance, it is theoretically immaterial
which class of nutrients furnish the energy for muscular work,
although carbohydrates and f it are practically better suited for this
purpose than protein, since any great excess of the latter is costly and
may prove injurious to the health. In this case the term maintenance
is not used in its strict physiological sense, but refers to a condition
in which no appreciable amount of external muscular work is per-
formed, and in which the internal muscular work is fairly uniform
from day to day and the body weight practically constant. Most of
the experiments reported on the effect of muscular work on the
amount of nutrients required have had to do with external muscular
work. A number of these investigations are referred to below. The
effect of internal muscular work on food requirements has also been
studied, especially in recent years. The experiments of this sort are
referred to on page 68.
a Jour. Bath and West of England Soc., 4. ser., 4 (1893-4), p. 188.







64

The experiments which have had to do with the rations best suited
for horses employed at different kinds of work are obviously attempts
to suit the food to the amount of work performed.
Lavalarda calculated the amount of food required by army horses
and mules to maintain weight on a peace and war footing as follows,
the amount of work in the latter case being more than in the former.
TABLE 8.-Clculated ration of French army horses and mules.

Peace footing. War footing.
Oats. Hay. Oats. Hay.
Pounds. Pounds. Pounds Pounds
Cavalry horses, reserve..................................... 13 8.8 14.7 88
Cavalry horses, line.........-.......-........ ................. 11.5 7.7 1.56 7.7
Light cavalry horses..................... .................... 10.4 6.6 11.8 6.6
Horses of artillery and train.......... ..................... 12.3 8.5 14.2 8.6
Mules ....................................................... 10.8 7.5 .... ....

Similar calculations, which have been made by others, have been
summarized in Table 5, page 49.
Grandeau's experiments have shown the marked effect of pace on
the amount of labor performed and food required. He showed that a
horse walking 7.8 kilometers (5.8 miles) per day neither gained nor
lost in weight on a daily ration of 8,800 grams (40 pounds) of hay,
while a ration of 10,886 grams (49.5 pounds) was not sufficient, pro-
vided the horse trotted the same distance. When the horse walked
tne above distance and drew a load, the additional work being equiva-
lent to 60,449 kilogrammeters (437,080 foot-pounds), a ration of 11,975
grams (26.4 pounds) of hay was sufficient for maintenance. A ration
of 14,787 grams (32.6 pounds), all a horse would consume, was not
sufficient for maintenance when the same work was done trotting.
According to Grandeau" a horse of 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds)
weight by the motion of forward progression through a horizontal
distance of 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) at a speed of 1.5 meters (4.9 feet)
per second loses 2.4 kilograms (5.3 pounds) in weight. A horse of the
same weight covering a distance of 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) at a speed
of 1.5 meters (4.9 feet) per second and producing 190,000 kilograms
of work loses about 3.8 kilograms (8.4 pounds) in weight. Some of
the reasons given for the fact that rapid work is less economical than
slow work are the increased action of the heart when the horse is trot-
ting or galloping; the lifting of his own weight at each step only to
allow it to fall again, thus developing heat; and the increase of body
temperature with exertion and the loss of heat by the evaporation of water
through the skin and lungs. Grandeau determined the average amount
of water thus evaporated under different conditions of work and rest
with four different rations, the distance covered in every case being the


bSee note, p. 66.


a Loc. cit.







65

same, and found that it-varied from 6.4 pounds with a horse at rest to.
20.6 pounds with a horse trotting and drawing a load. (See also p.38.)
The heat required for the evaporation of this amount of water is
quite large and necessitates the combustion of a considerable amount
of nutritive material in the body, thus diminishing the quantity of
material available for the production of work.
EFFECT OF o MUSCULAR WORK ON DIGESTIBILITY.
Grandeau's and Leclerc's experiments also indicate that the kind of
work performed has some effect on digestibility. If the total amount.
of organic matter digested while at rest be represented by the number-
1,000, the proportion digested during different kinds of work is shown,.
they consider, by the following table:

Relative proportion of total organic matter digested by horses at different conditions of rest"
and work.
At rest ......... -.... --.................................... 1,000,
W alking..................................................... 1,032:
At work walking...--.........--.......------ --.........-..----.... 1,007
Trotting ----------------...........------.......---------....--...... 976
At work trotting ..--..--------............. .........-----...-- 973
Drawing a cab ..--- .....--.-- .....--..--- ..-- ....-----------. 959
We see here that the moderate exercise is accompanied by a small but distinct
improvement in the digestive functions, but that as soon as trotting commences
digestion becomes less efficient than when at rest, while hard work while trotting
still further diminishes the proportion of food digested. When we look into the
details we find that the starch and sugar in the food are perfectly digested under all
conditions of labor. The digestibility of the fat increases with exercise and does not
diminish by labor below the point reached in repose. The digestibility of the
albuminoids increases rather considerably with exercise and diminishes sharply
when trotting commences. The principal matters usually grouped as soluble car-
bohydrates, but which in this case are merely the more digestible constituents of
the fiber, undergo the greatest amount of variation, their digestibility rising consid-
erably with exercise and falling still more considerably with hard labor. In the
case of the more soluble portion of the fiber there is no rise in digestibility by exer-
cise; the maximum rate of digestion is here obtained in repose, and diminishes con-
siderably with increased bodily exertion. On the whole it appears that the constitu-
ents of the food which are most affected by rapid exertion are those whose digestion
takes place to a large extent in the lower part of the intestines; the motion of the
horse probably determines their more rapid progress through the system.
From the results of earlier experiments with German farm horses,
Wolff, Kellner, and associates" concluded that muscular work dunin-
ished digestibility little, if at all. The coefficients of digestibility of
the ration when work was performed were slightly lower, but the dif-
ferences were so small that they are regarded as of no importance.
Grandeau's and Leclerc's values are within 3 per cent of those found
by Wolff, and it seems fair to say that from a practical standpoint the
diminished digestibility due to muscular work is not very important.

a Landw. Jahrb., 8 (1879), sup. I., p. 73.
17399-No. 125-03- 5







... :'..ii.. :i' ::|p
METABOLISM EXPERIMENTS AND THE DEDUCTIONS DRAWI
FROM THEM.

There are many other complicated questions in horse feeding wCitpi;i
have received much attention from investigators. As in experima uii 4 t
with man, the factors which serve as indices of changes going on0 i.1U':i
the body have been studied in this connection, the principal ones'
being (1) the balance of income and outgo of nitrogen, or nitrogen a'nd
carbon (as in metabolism experiments and respiration experiments),
which is quickly modified by variations in food, work, and other eo 1
editions; (2) the amount of carbon dioxid produced per second asJ"
compared with the amount of oxygen consumed from the ait, iL e.
the respiratory quotient, which changes very quickly when any chang -
takes place in the vital processes or in other forms of internal muscular, i
work or when the amount of external muscular work varies. In deter-
mining the income and outgo of nitrogen the food, urine, and feces
must be measured, and the amount of nitrogen in each determined.
No very complicated apparatus is required, and such experiments are
comparatively numerous. Where the income and outgo of carbon is
determined, as well as that of nitrogen, the experiments necessitate the
use of a respiration apparatus. In such experiments it is possible to
calculate the balance of income and outgo of matter. If at the same
time devices are used which permit the measurement of heat, the bal'
ance of income and outgo of energy may be studied also. The experi-
ments of Boussingault, Wolff, Kellner, Hofmeister, Henneberg, and
others, in which the balance of income and outgo of nitrogen were
determined, have led to a number of interesting conclusions, some of
which have already been referred to. Others follow.
Boussingault, who was one of the first to study these problems,
showed that no nitrogen was assimilated from the air, but thit all
which was used in the body came from nitrogen compounds con-
sumed in the food-a very important deduction, since it showed
that no nitrogen could be taken from the air, and, that nitrogenous food
was essential. The investigations of Grandeau, Leclerc, and their
associates form one of the most extended studies ever undertaken
with farm animals. The work was carried on with a very large num-
ber of horses belonging to one of the Paris cab companies, and extended
over many years. There were seven series of experiments.a In the
first, a mixed ration consisting of "maize cake," horse beans, maize,
oats, hay, and straw was fed. The maize cake was made from starch
factory and distillery waste, and contained a considerable portion of
potato and barley as well as corn refuse. In the second series th
a Ann. Sci. Agron., 1884, II, p. 325; 1885, I, p. 326; 1886, II, p. 351; 1888, II, p. 811;
1892, 1, p. 1; 1893, I, p. 1; 1896, II, p. 113.
t~ ::...E







67

ration consisted of hay; in the third series, of oats and straw; in the
fourth series, of hay and straw; in the fifth series, of maize and straw;
in the sixth series, of horse beans and oat straw, and in the seventh
series, of maize cake and oat straw. Analyses were made of the food,
urine, and feces.
The effect of the rations and their digestibility was studied while the
hbrses were at rest, walking, trotting, at work while walking, and at
work while trotting. The work consisted in turning the arm of a
dynamometer a definite number of times. Experiments were also
made in which the horses drew a vehicle. The effects of the rations
under different conditions of rest and work on temperature and weight
of the animals were studied. Many of Grandeau's and Leclerc's
deductions have already been referred to, one of the most interesting
being a demonstration of the high value of maize as a food for horses.

MEASURING THE RESPIRATORY QUOTIENT AND THE DEDUCTIONS
DRAWN FROM IT.

Experiments in which the respiratory quotient was determined are
perhaps less numerous than those mentioned above. A determination
of the respiratory quotient necessitates the measurement and analysis
of the air taken into the lungs and excreted from them. The experi-
ments which have been made in Germany are ordinarily carried on
with the aid of a mask which covers the head, or by the insertion of a
silver tube in the trachea. In both cases the air is breathed in and
out through tubes provided with suitable valves, so that the air enters
through one tube and leaves through the other. The air is measured
and the samples analyzed. The ratio of oxygen consumed to carbon
dioxid expired in a unit of time is called the respiratory quotient.
Zuntza and Hagemann and their associates have carried on a very
extended series of investigations with horses. In most of these cases
the respiratory quotient was determined. In many other cases other
determinations, including the balance of income and outgo of nitrogen
and carbon, were also made. Work was performed with a sort of
treadmill and the amount could be measured. The deductions drawn
from these experiments are of great interest, and some of the principal
ones follow.
A horse weighing from 400 to 500 kilograms (880 to 1,100 pounds)
excretes 26 to 40 liters (27 to 42 quarts) per minute from the lungs
when no work is performed. If a horse takes exercise by walking
the amount is increased to 80 to 90 liters (84 to 95 quarts) per minute.
If 75 kilograms (542 foot-pounds) of work is done per second the
respired air increases to 300 liters (317 quarts) per minute. If the
aLandw. Jahrb., 27 (1898), Sup. III; see also Deut. Landw. Presse, 23 (1896),
pp. 561, 571, 579.


~






68
..... ... .E
work is still further increased the respired air amounts to 450 to 50
liters (475 to 528 quarts) per minute-in other words, 14 to 15 times whatk-U
it was when no work was performed. However, in these different.
cases the ratio of carbon dioxid to oxygen has been found to vary4
very little.

PROPORTION OF ENERGY OF FOOD EXPENDED FOR IThEBNATL
AND EXTERNAL MUSCULAR WORK.

A horse converts 38.3 per cent of the energy of food into mechanical
work. On account of the energy required for respiration, the beating
of the heart, etc., only about 34 per cent of the energy of the food is
actually available for external muscular work. The best record for a
steam engine is said to be an efficiency per indicated horsepower of
22.7 per cent on the basis of total heat supply. Per delivered horse-
power the amount is probably 10 per cent less. The animal is there-
fore seen to be a much more efficient machine than the engine.
Tests were made with a horse walking on a level, walking up an
incline, and hauling a load on a level, and it was found that in the last
case the energy of the food was not quite so economically used as in
the first case. On the basis of his experiments, Zuntz computes that a
horse weighing 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) and performing no work
requires 3,201 grams (7.1 pounds) of total nutrients containing 1,382
grams (3 pounds) of crude fiber. By total nutrients is metint the sum
%of the protein, carbohydrates, and fat multiplied by 2.4.e Of this quan-
tity of total nutrients not less than 2,100 grams (4.6 pounds) is required
for the internal muscular work expended in digesting and assimilating
the food, and 1,100 grams (2.4 pounds) for other purposes (largely
some form of internal muscular work). Zuntz found that the amount
of food required was affected by anything that disturbed the horse.
In one experiment a horse confined in a stable was much disturbed by
lies and consequently restless. The increased work in fighting the
flies caused an increase of 10 per cent of the carbon dioxid excreted.
This means that more food material was burned in the body than was
the case when the horse was quiet, for the combustion of food in the
body, it will be remembered, furnishes the carbon dioxide excreted in
the breath.
In addition to other matters, Zuntz noted that the effect of body
conformation had a marked effect on the economical production of
work. He found that defects in external conformation and move-
ments necessitate an increased amount of muscular exertion. This
has an important bearing upon the market value of the horses. Too
aZuntz uses this factor instead of 2.25, the factor commonly used by American
investigators.






69
low a stall temperature also increases the amount of material required
for maintenance. In many cases observed, this increase was hardly
covered by 2 pounds, of oats daily.
ENERGY REQUIRED TO CHEW AND DIGEST FOOD.
One of the most interesting of the lines of investigations followed
by'Zuntz was the determination of the energy required to chew and
digest different foods. The experiments were complicated and too
extended to describe here except in very general terms. As has been
said, the respiratory quotient is a very delicate index of the changes
which take place in the body, and it was found that the internal
muscular work expended in chewing, swallowing, and digesting food
could be determined by the variations in the respiratory quotient and
the amount of carbon dioxid excreted when this kind of work was per-
formed, as compared with the amount when the animal rested. Different
feeding stuffs modified the respiratory quotient in different ways, and
it was evident that some required more labor for digestion and assimi-
lation than others. This is a matter of considerable importance, and it
is evident that if two feeding stuffs of practically the same composition
are digested with equal thoroughness but one requires for digestion
and assimilation the expenditure of more internal muscular work than
the other, it is really less valuable; in other words, the two may con-
tain the same amount of digestible nutrients, but one causes the
body more labor to assimilate than the other. On the basis of his
average figures of composition and digestibility, 2.2 pounds of hay (1
kilogram) furnishes 0.862 pound of total nutrients, and 2.2 pounds
(1 kilogram) of oats 1.353 pounds of nutrients. As regards nutri-
five value, hay and oats are therefore commonly said to be to each
other as 400:600. As shown by Zuntz's experiments, 0.265 pound (115
grams), or 20 per cent of the total nutritive material present in 2.2
pounds (1 kilogram), of oats is expended in the labor of chewing and
digesting them. In the case of 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram) of hay, 0.448
pound (205 grams), or 49 per cent of the total nutritive material, is
required for the same purpose. Therefore hay and oats stand really in
the proportion of 203:480. In other words, oats surpass hay in feed-
ing value two and one-half times instead of one-half times, as they are
ordinarily assumed to do.

TRUEE NUTRITIVE VALUE" OF FEEDING STUFFS.
Taking into account the internal muscular work required to chew
i and digest foods and deducting this from the digestible nutrients pres-
ent in the foods, Zuntz calculated what we may call the "true nutri-
tive. value" of a number of feeding stuffs with special reference to
horses. The results are shown in the following table:







70 .

TaBLEn 9.-Calculated "true nutritive value" of 1 pound of different feeding g A.i

Labor expended in .h.. '
chewing and di- Tr. e i i.
Total di- gestion.' T S .
Feeding stuffs. Dry mat- Crude gestible 1111
~1 ter. fiber. nutri- .. .. .. .....N !
r. ber. nutr- In In terms In
ents terms of of nutri- termsof oa
energy. ents.a energy. m *eii
Per cent. Pound. Pound. OsCord. Pound. r QiBwi
Meadow hay (average qual-
ity).................. 85 0.260 0.891 376 0.209 MS 0,fi.
Alfalfa bay cut at begin-
ning of bloom ............ 84 .266 .453 394 .219 42 a
Red clover bay ............. 84 .802 .407 429 .239 .g
Winter wheat straw........ 86 .420 .181 535 .297 --0 m.11
Oats (medium quality)..... 87 .103 .615 224 .124
Maize ..................... 87 .017 .785 148 .082 1,265
Field beans ................ 86 .069 .720 200 .111 1,06 9
Peas........................ 86 .059 .687 183 .102 1,04 .0.
Air-dry disembittered lu-
pines .................... 86 .157 .645 294 .163 807 A P
Linseed cake.............. 88 .094 .690 225 .125 1,01& .56
Potatoes.................... 25 .010 .226 49 .027 358 .,
Carrots.................... 15 .016 .113 37 .021 166 .U

a Protein, plus carbohydrates, plus crude fiber, plus fat multiplied by 2.4.

As will be seen, the nutritive value of straw is negative in the above
table. The authors call attention to the investigations which showed
that so long as heat alone is considered, the digestible nutrients in
straw should be given their full value as shown by the heat of combus-
tion. Provided the labor of digesting a mixed ration does not exceed i
2,100 grams (4.63 pounds, or 8,316 calories), the digestible nutrients in
straw have a positive value. Provided the labor of digestion is greater
than this an excess of straw would only increase the internal musr~ cular
work, so that approximately 116 grams (0.256 pound) of nutrients per
kilogram is of no value for the body.
From the table the amount of any food or combination of food
required for maintenance may be calculated, according to the authors, '
as follows: When a horse weighing 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) isfed
hay alone, 8.2 kilograms (18.04 pounds) would be necessary, since, as
previously stated, 3,200 grams (7.05 pounds) of nutrients are required
for maintenance. As shown by the table, a kilogram of hay contains
391 grams (0.86 pound) total nutrients.
If the ration consists of 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds) of hay and 1 kilo-.
gram (2.2 pounds) of straw and it is desired to make up the balance
with potatoes, the amount necessary may be calculated as follows: 1

Grams. Pounds..

Three kilograms (6.6 pounds) of hay furnish total nutrients amounting to.......... 1,178 83 L
One kilogram (2.2 pounds) of straw furnishes total nutrients amounting to ........ 181 .-
Total............................................................ ................. 1,54 WA

Since the horse requires for maintenance 3,200 grams (7.058 pounds) I
nutrients, there remain 1,846 grams (4.07 pounds) total nutrients to bw'.
supplied by potatoes. This, divided by 226, the total nutrients in a
kilogram (2.2 pounds) of potatoes, gives 8.2 kilograms (18.04 pounds)i
as the amount which must be added to the ration.


. i i




- w a


71

FIXING RATIONS ON THE BASIS OF INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL
XVSvULAR WOBK.

Zuntz believed that a ration suited to the performance of any kind
Sof work can be calculated on the basis of the nutritive material and
energy required for maintenance plus that needed for the work per-
formed. The calculations are simplified by using the figures for "true
nutritive value" given in the table above. On the basis of his experi-
ments and observations he has calculated that a horse weighing 500
I kilograms (1,100 pounds) requires for maintenance 3,201 grams (7.056
l pounds) of true available nutrients. The amounts of true available
Nutrients and the energy required for the performance of work of dif-
ferent kinds and under different conditions by a horse weighing 500
kilograms (1,100 pounds), with a harness weighing 20 kilograms (44
pounds) are shown in Table 10. The value of total nutrients repre-
sents the protein + the carbohydrates + the fat X 2.4. Fat is multi-
plied by 2.4, since, as stated on another page (68), it yields, according
to Zuntz, that much more heat per gram than protein or carbohydrates
when burned in the body.

TABnt 10.-Available nutrients and energy needed for different kinds of work.
Total nutrients Energy
required, required.

Grams. Pounds. Calories.
Forward progression per kilometer (3,281 feet) on level at speed of
S66.7 meters (218.8 feet) per minute.................................... 37.6 0.083 149
Forward progression per kilometer (3,281 feet) on level at speed of 90
meters (296.4 feet) per minute .................................... 47.7 .105 189
Forward progression per kilometer (3,281 feet) on level at speed of
176-205 meters (577.4 feet-672.6 feet) per minute....................... 71.5 .158 283
Climbing a gentle incline, raising body 100 meters (3,281 feet) ......... 90.0 .198 356
Climbizn a steep incline, raising body 100 meters (3,281 feet) .......... 91.7 .202 363
Descending an incline, lowering body 100 meters (3,281 feet) on road
with 5 per cent dip saves a ............................................ 37.8 .083 150
Drawing a load on level 268 (work equivalent to plowing one hour,
i.e. drawing a plow weighing 67 kilograms (147.4 pounds) a distance
of 4 kilometers (13,124 feet):
Not including forward progression.............................. 508.9 1.122 2,015
Including forward progression..................................... 659.3 1.454 2,611
Raising a load weighing 75 kilograms (165 pounds) 0.2 kilometer
(656.2 feet) up incline of 10 per cent:
A. For the 0.2 kilometer (656.2 feet) of forward motion ............ 7.52 .017 29.8
B. For raising the body and harness 20 meters (656.2 feet).......... 18.33 .040 72.6
C. For 1,500 kilogrammeters (10,800 foot-pounds) mechanical work. 39.15 .086 155.0
Total............................................................ 65.0 .113 257.4
Trotting on level 1 kilometer (3,281 feet) with load of 75 kilograms
(165 pounds):
A. For forward motion, 1 kilometer (3,281 feet) .................... 71.5 .158 283.0
B. For 75,000 kilogrammeters (540,000 foot-pounds) calculated me-
chanical work.................................................... 142.4 .314 563.9
-Total ............................................... ...... ....... 213.9 .472 846.9
!I& Progression on level 1 kilometer (3,281 feet) with 100 kilograms (220
pounds) load:
A. At speed of 5.4 kilometers (17,717.4 feet) per hour ............... 59.2 .131 234.5
B. At speed of 10.5-12.6 kilometers (34,451 feet-41,341 feet) trotting. 91.0 .201 360.4
/ Climbing 1 kilometer (3,281 feet) on an incline of 10 per cent with 100
kilograms (220 pounds) load at speed of 5.4 kilometers (17,717 feet)
per hour:
A. For forward progression .............. ................... 59.2 .130 234.5
B. For 60,000 kilogrammeters (432,000 foot-pounds) mechanical
work (climbing) .................................................. 108.8 .229 411.0
Total ........................................ .................. 163. 0 .359 645.5

a As compared with forward progression.







72

As will be seen, the amount of total nutrients required increases -wit
the increased speed; furthermore, a greater amount is required MitW :1
climbing an incline than for forward progression on a leveL In; :.
descending a gentle incline a much smaller amount of nutrients is
required than in climbing the same incline, and as compared with the:
motion of forward progression there is also a saving in the amount of
nutrients needed. In general, it was found that the energy expended
was less than in traveling on a level, provided the incline was less than
50 45'. At this point it was equal to the amount expended in travel-
ing on a level. If the incline was greater, energy was required to
keep the body from descending too rapidly and the expenditure wasI
greater than on a level. The different values given in the above table
for the nutrients required for the performance of different kinds of
work are obtained by taking the sum of the requirements for the dif-
ferent components into which the work can be resolved; thus, in trot-
ting 1 kilometer (3,281 feet) with a load of 75 kilograms (165 pounds)
the total work consists in that expended for forward progression and
for moving the load over the distance covered.
An example of the way in which the value of a ration was calculated
by Zuntz follows:
If a farm horse weighing 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) walks eight
hours drawing a load at a speed of 4 kilometers (2.5 miles) per hour,
the work performed and the total available nutrients required would
be as follows:
TABLE 11.-Total nutrients required for work.

Total nutrients.

Grams. Pounds.
32 kilometers (20 miles) forward progression..................................... 1,203 2.654
2,144,000 kilogrammeters (15,436,800 foot-pounds) mechanical work .............. 4,071 8.975
Maintenance (exclusive of labor of digestion) .................................. 1,100 2.425
Total....----.........-....-.....--...-... ... ... ----.-----.----. ............. 6,374 14.064

The ration selected consisted of 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds) hay, 1.5
kilograms (3.3 pounds) straw, 2 kilograms (4.4 pounds) field beans, and
a sufficient amount of oats to bring the total nutrients of the ration up
to the required amount. The nutrients furnished by the hay, straw,
and field beans would be as follows:
TABLE 12.-Total nutrients furnished by tentative ration.

Total nutrients.

Grams. Pound.
3 kilograms (6.6 pounds) of hay, requiring per kilogram (2.2 pounds) for diges-
tion 627 grams (1.38 pounds) ..................-...... .......... ........ ..... +546 +1.204
1.5 kilograms (3.3 pounds of straw, requiring per kilogram (2.2 pounds) for diges-
tion 445 grams (0.98 pound) ...................................................... -174 .884
2 kilograms (4.4 pounds) of beans, requiring per kilogram (2.2 pounds) for diges-
tion 222 grams (4.9 pounds)..................................................... +1,218 +2.685
Total, 1,294 grams (2.85 pounds) ........................................... +1,590 +3.0&s




w s-fl S


78

Subtracting 1,590 grams (3.505 pounds) from 6,374 grams (14.054
pounds) gives 4,784 grams (10.549 pounds), the total available nutri-
ents which must be supplied by the oats. Dividing this sum by 491,
the total available nutrients in a kilogram (2.2 pounds) of oats, gives
9.74 kilograms (21.43 pounds) ss the amount required. This quantity
of oats would require the expenditure of 1,208 grams (2.660 pounds)
nutrients for the labor of digestion (9.74 kilograms x 0.124 1.208
kilograms) (2.660 pounds). The total expenditure of nutrients which
the ration necessitates for the labor of digestion would therefore be
S ,502 grams (5.514 pounds) (1,294 grams+1,208 grams=2,502 grams)
(2.854 pounds+2.660 pounds=5.514 pounds). This exceeds by some
400 grams (0.882 pound), the value which is thought most desirable
for the normal maintenance ration, i. e., 2,100 grams (4.630 pounds).
The expenditure of this amount of nutrients for the work of digestion
is thought desirable, because it would liberate the amount of heat which
Zuntz calculates is required for maintaining the body temperature.
The ration may be adjusted on a more reasonable basis by diminish-
ing the straw to 0.3 kilogram (0.66 pound) and the oats to 9.46 kilo-
grams (20.812 pounds). The total quantity would be the same as
before, and the amount required for the labor of digestion would be
practically equal to that which is considered most desirable. The
ration as adjusted would be as follows:

TABLE 13.-Calculated ration for farm horse at work.

Requires for the Yields total nutri-
Ration. labor of digestion. ent.
Grams. Pounds. Grams. Pounds.
8 ilograms (6.6 pounds hay.............. ................ 627 1.382 546 1.204
2 klograms (4.4 pounds beans ............................. 222 .489 1,218 2.685
0.3 kilogram (0.66 pound) straw.............................. 89 .196 -35 .077
9.40 kilograms (20.812 pounds) oats .......................... 1,173 2.586 4,645 10.241
Total................................... .............. 2,111 4.653 6,374 14.207

This ration is, according to Zuntz, more satisfactory on economic
grounds, since it does not contain an excess of material which must be
wastefully assimilated. The fact is also pointed out that it might not
prove satisfactory otherwise, since it contains a small amount of
coarse fodder. The other examples given by Zuntz are more com-
plicated.
SUMMARY.

S Some of the principal deductions noted in this bulletin follow:
Horses, like other animals, require a definite amount of nutrients
and energy per 1,000 pounds live weight for maintenance, and an
extra amount, chiefly energy-yielding nutrients, for muscular work,
the amount being proportional to the character and amount of work
performed.
17399-No. 125--03- 6

*


- --..M







74

The amount of nutrients required increases with the amount of woark1'"]3
done and with increased speed. More energy is required for climbli
ing an incline than for traveling on a level. In descending an incline
of less than 50 45' less energy is required than in traveling on a level.' t
If the incline is greater than 50 45', more energy is expended (to pr.e
vent too rapid descent) than in walking on a level.
The ration should consist of concentrated and coarse feeds. The ratio
by weight of coarse fodder or bulky feed to concentrated feed in the
ordinary ration has been found to be about 1:1. Crude fiber may
perhaps be fairly considered as the characteristic constituent of coarse
fodder. The ratio of crude fiber to protein in the average of a large
number of American rations has been found to be about 2:1.
Theoretically at least any sufficient and rational mixture of whole-
some grains, by-products, roots, and forage crops, green and cured,
may be used to make up a ration, though there is a very general prej-
udice in favor of oats and hay, corn and hay or corn fodder, and bar-
ley and hay (frequently that made from cereal grains), the first-named
ration being perhaps that most commonly regarded as satisfactory for
horses. A corn ration is very commonly fed in the middle West and
Southern United States-that is, in the corn-producing belt. The
barley ration is quite characteristic of the Pacific coast region. In
the semiarid regions of the United States Kafir corn and alfalfa have
proved to be of great value, owing to their drought-resisting qualities.
Both crops have been found useful for horse feeding. Of the two
alfalfa has been used much more commonly, and has given very satis-
factory results.
Investigations have shown that it is often best to modify a ration, for
instance, by substituting corn wholly or in part for oats, so that the
horses remain in good condition, while at the same time the cost of the
ration is diminished. Where large numbers of horses are fed this is
often a matter of considerable importance.
Horses require a considerable amount of water daily, the quantity
varying with different seasons of the year, the amount of work per-.
formed, etc. The time of watering, whether before or after feeding,
is a matter of little importance, and, generally speaking, may be regu-
lated to suit the convenience of the feeder. Horses become used to
either method of watering, and irregularity should be avoided, as
sudden changes are apt to prove disturbing.
Judging by the average results, representing the practice of a large
number of successful American feeders, and also the results of many
tests at the experiment stations in different parts of the United States,
horses with light work consume on an average a ration furnishing per
day 0.99 pound of digestible protein and 14,890 calories of energy
per 1,000 pounds live weight. Similar values for horses at moderate
work are 1.49 pounds digestible protein and 22,710 calories, and for
": .:E J





75
horses at severe work 1.12 pounds digestible protein and 19,560 calo-
ries. It is believed that these last values do not come as near repre-
senting a general average as the others, since they are based on a
comparatively limited amount of data, and possibly the pace at which
the work was performed may be responsible in a measure for the
comparatively small amounts of nutrients and energy. Generally
speaking, all these average values are less than those called for by the
commonly accepted German feeding standards for horses perform-
ing the same amounts of work, yet from what is known regarding the
American horses it seems fair to say that they were well fed.
Additional experiments are much needed which will result in a series
of standards suited to American conditions.
Generally speaking, horses digest their feed, and especially the
nitrogen-free extract and crude fiber in it, less thoroughly than
ruminants.
The general deductions which have been drawn for horses apply
with equal force to other animals of the same group, such as asses
and mules.
O


min


..;. ... .. ..































































































...:. ll























*'1
.: iii



























d.K





...

































xx
" '.iiiia i


."" ::




































.... ;; 'ii













IrI


4sI


Alll


oll 4 'e v #I, 1 11 -





in/

fill
41E
tSm
to

va ira
JIM
A N,..51" A 1 O







UNIVERSITy OF F/ORIDA

3 1262 08927 8867

























ri;




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EW0THIJP8_M18VQ8 INGEST_TIME 2013-11-15T22:39:08Z PACKAGE AA00014588_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES