107 029 THE RELATIVE VALUE. OF REGULAR CORN SILAGE, GRAENLESS-QORN SELAGE AM} EARACORN EILAGE IN THE DAIRY RANON Thesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHEGAN STA}? COLLEGE K ~1meih M. Dunn 337347 T HESlS ‘)\‘ k! This is to certifg that the thesis entitled "The Relative Value of Regular Corn Silage, Grainless Corn Silege end Ear-Corn Silage in the Dairy Ration." presented bg Kenneth M. Dunn has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Dairy _ degree in“ _ M. S. p ofessor Date flit-4-21% 19A,? .- “-795 IEBIEIUHIVI'WMIEIOFIEIREAR.analSILMHE,GBEDMHEfiLOOENIEIAGI ANDIIMLJnMN'SDUMBiINEHHIIMIRIIMHIGN by 1947 TH! MY! VALUE 01' 12mm 0031 Sill-AGE, Gamma—com scum: AND EAR-00W SIZIAGE IN ME DAIRY RAMON '0! Kenneth I. Dunn Ams suntan to the Graduate School of names: State College othgriaulture and.Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requiruente for the degree 01’ “8TH or some: Dairy Department 194'! THESIS‘ NEWS The author of this thesis wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. 0. F. Huffhan, Research Professor in Dairying, for his aid in conducting the investigation and his kind and con- structin criticim of the nanuscript. Gratitude is also expressed to Ir. Ray 3. Ely, Assistant Professor in Dairying, for his aid in conducting the experiment, and to Dr. E. J. Beans, Research Professor of Agricultural Ch-istry, and his staff for taking the chuioal analyses used in this investi- gation. scar 4 .; JLL)-‘j’-1_UC) TABLE OF CONTENTS IN'IWNOTION REVIH 015' MW Ouparative Feeding Value of Corn Silage and Hay in Livestock nations Varieties of Corn and Feeding Value of Silage larly vs. late maturing varieties for milk production Hybrid Corn for Silage reading Value of Grainless-Corn Silage feeding Value of Ear-Corn Silage Losses During Storage and reading of Corn Silage Storage losses Ieeding losses Digestion Trials with Corn Silage rectors affecting digestibility Results of digestion trial Salary of Review of Literature 08110! new PBDGEURI lethods of Calculating Yield of Bern Silage and Bar to Stalk Ratio Care and Storage of Ear-Corn Animals Used for Milk Production Studies Animals Used for Digestion Trials: Gh-ical Coupoaition of Feeds Fed 0000000" 10 18 14 15 15 15 17 17 17 17 Digestihility of Deeds Fed leading 'i'rial Iethods arswrs Relative reading Value of the Total Digestible Nutrients in Clover Bay, GrainlessoCorn Silage and Ground Corn Grain for Iilk Production Relative reading Value of Regular Corn Silage and Grainless- Corn Silage Plus Corn-and-Goh Heal Relative Feeding Value of the Total Digestible Nutrients in Glover Hay, Ear-Corn Silage and Corn Grain for Iilk Production DISCUSSION 01' BELTS we! 11mins: arm mm 18 82 82 22 3" 39 anemones The ten 'silo" was used by the Greeks as a place for storage of dry grains during years of plenty for use during years of fanine. The use of the silo was taken from Greece into Spain and later passed into France. The early silos used for storage of grain were built above ground and filled fronthe top. Thegrainwas carriedupsteps and dupedin the topr send fra doors at the hotton of the silo. The silos were sealed with grass and straw to prevent surface spoilage of the grain. The use of silos for storage of green naterial was duonstrated in Guam and Hungary when hay was used for nailing. This silage was nade in the pit type silo and was described as 'sour' or "brown” hay (1). Johnston (8) in 1843 was the first worker to give a detailed descrip- tion of the process of nanng silage from green forage. The building of the first tower silo in the United States is credited to bed 1.. Hatch of Icnenry County, Illinois in l873 (3). In 1888 there were 92 silos in the United States and since that time the adv-ancaent of the silo has been very rapid. By 1980 the use of the silo and feeding of silage had beoone an accepted practice. [any green crops have been used for naking of silage, such as corn. alfalfa, grasses, potatoes, sugar beets and tops, soy- beans, sunflowers, sci-glam and weeds. 0f the above sentioned, corn is the nest m crop used for silage in the United States. The United States Departlant of Agriculture (4) reported that in 1944 the United States harvested 4,661,000 acres of corn for silage which produced 36,294,000 tons of silage. The sane year lichigan harvested 288,000 acres of corn for silage and produced 2,014,000 tons of silage. [any Iichigen Ianers harvest their corn crop with a corn picker and leave the stalks in the field. The con-on belief is that the stalks have very little feeding value and are not worth harvesting. The average yield of corn silage in Iichigan is estinated at 1 tons per acre. If the ears were moved and the stalks ensiled as stover silage, the average yield of stalk silage would be 4.2 tons per acre. One acre of this silage would produce 1,10 pounds of total digestible nutrients which would be equal to 2.2 tons of alfalfa hay. Another fan probl- in lichigan is the care and storage of frosted earn grain. Usually the silo is not large enough to hold the entire corn crop. Ii'here is a possibility, however, that i-ature ears nay be con- served in the silo as ear-corn silage. It is the purpose of this investigation to determine the relative feeding value of the total digestible nutriatts in clover hay and grainless- corn silage for nilk production; also, the relative feeding value of corn grain in the silo and ground corn-and-oob neal, and the relative feeding value of the total digestible nutrients in clover m, ear-corn silage and corn-aud-eob aeel. Early experinmts with can silage, that followed the introduction of the silo “the United States, indicated an increase in nilk production through the use of corn silage in the dairy ration. Bartlett (5) reported in 1889 that a pound of digestible latter fan corn silage produced slightly lore rapid growth in dairy heifers than a pound of digestible natter fru tinethy hay. The previous data which were collected frcn a linited nunber of feeding trials contributed a great deal toward the advancnant cf silage asking in this country. Christi (d a 1) in 1916-17 stated that corn silage was the nest econaical feed for both dairy and beef cattle. Hacker (8) reported an increase in nilk production when 14 pounds of tinothy hay re- placed 35 pounds of silage. A basal ration was fed containing 7 pounds of wheat bran, 4 pounds of corn, and 3 pounds of oil noel. 'i'he eninals on the hay ration gained weight during the experinent. In ma Iairchild and Wilbur (9) using dairy cows, investigated the value of corn silage using 88-day periods. A change frost silage to a non- silage ration caused a decrease of 86 pounds of milk per cow over a 28-day feeding period. then silage was added to the ration there was a 16 pound increase in nilk production for a 28-day period. The animals were fed grain with both rations. Aninals on the silage ration naintained their body weight Inch better than the aninals on a nonsilage ration. These investigators con- cluded that the best winter ration nust include a succulent feed. Carroll (10) in 1924 ccnpared alfalfa hay with corn silage and found that one ton of alfalfa hay was equal to 2.5 to 3.0 tons of corn silage for nilk production. Converse (11) in 1928 reported that a mall anount of corn silage added to the ration of good alfalfa hay and grain nixture gave no in- crease in nilk production. 'nie enperinent was designed to show the value of silage in an experimental ration and was not intended to show the replace- nent value of corn silage and alfalfa hay. A great den of the early work showed results in favor of a corn ail- age ratios; however, may workers have show: very little, if any, favorable results for the use of com silage in the ration. Snyder (18) reported a a percent greater silk production on a nonsilage ration. Iilliue and Cunning- han (13) eonpared a ration containing 30 pounds of alfalfa hay with a ration containing 80 pounds of hay and 35 pounds of corn silage. The cows fed hay alone produced 2 per cent nere silk than the cows fed hay and corn silage ration. lo grain was used in this experinent. Foster (14) and oo-werkers reported an increase in nilk production when alfalfa hay replaced corn silage in the ration, but there was a slight increase in total digestible nutrients when hq was fed. stealer (15) at al. reported that for eon-in milk production succu- lent roughage in sane fern is indispensible. The succulent feeds were more palatable and se-ed to act as a laxative in keeping the digestive tract in order. These workers reported that while silage was an excellent food for dairy cattle it is not a couplete ration within itself and nust be supple- nested with dry roughage and grain. Beef cattle, sheep, and horses showed favorable results when fed a ration containing acne silage. Zea-tan (16) re- ported that corn silage is the cheapest winter feed available, and that win- ter nilk production can be kept at a higher level through the use of a silo. Ihite and Pratt (17) oil-pared a heavy corn silage ration with a light corn silage ration. During three trials one group of cows received 5 pounds of silage per 100 pounds of body weight. Another group received 1.5 pounds of silage per 100 pounds of body weight. The aninals were fed hay ad libitu. The aninals in the light silage group ate nere hay and nain- tained their Iilk flow and body weight as well as the aninals on the heavy silage ration Gupta (18) reported that in India, due to the high cost of naking silage, a low level of silage feeding was advisable. In an experinent with beef cattle and beef calves locanpball and Iinchester (19) reported that beef cattle fattened on high quality corn sil- age dressed out as high a percentage as did cattle on a corn-grain ration. Beef calves when fed corn silage and cottonseed neal made 44 percent greater daily growth than did calves fed alfalfa hay rations. Jacobs and Duncan (80) concluded that the use of the silo was the nest econoIical nethed of preserving the corn crop for fattening cattle. llet returns per acre fru feeding silage were three tines greater than fra feeding shock corn or car corn. W W Jordan (21) in 1894 nade some of the earliest studies on the con- parative feeding value of silage nade fron various varieties of corn. Dur- ing a five-year period two varieties of corn were studied, Kaine field corn and a southern variety of corn. In 7 trials over the five-year period the Kaine field corn produced a yield of 4,224 pounds of dry matter per acre, while the southern variety averaged 5,036 pounds of dry natter per acre. The [nine variety produced 3,075 pounds while the southern variety produced 3,251 pounds of digestible dry natter per acre. Jordan concluded that the early maturing laine variety 'was the most economical variety to raise for silage in Maine, because the pounds of digestible matter per acre were about the sons with less green material to handle in case of the ear-corn variety. lhite et a1. (22) studied the comparative yields of milk per acre of various varieties of com for silage. Eureka, Leming and Pride of the North were studied. These workers concluded that Pride of the North, an early na- turing corn, produced Just about as much milk per acre as the larger growing late naturing varieties with less green material to handle. Slate and co- workers (25) repeated the above work and concluded that 0.77 acre of medium naturing and 0.82 acre of late maturing silage would be required to produce the sane amount of milk as one acre of'early naturing silage. The auount of extra labor and equipnent would have to be calculated in order to compare the economical values of the various varieties. Odland and Inoblanch (24) reported that late maturing varieties of corn produced larger quantities of green material, but the dry matter yield was about equal to medium naturing varieties. larly maturing corn did not produce enough dry matter per acre to warrant its use for silage. The author concluded that the best corn to use for corn silage was one that will, on the average, reach the dough stage of maturity by silage cutting tine. The following table was taken from Odland's report. Average Yield of Nutrients per Acre of Varieties of Bern Harvested for Silage 1931-1954 Variety Dry : : : N-free ‘lldfilz‘ m .mnm. £81 : 1122: 1111991 hreka 7,007 445 457 145 2,594 4,488 Iest Branch Sweepstakes 7,572 570 446 166 1,804 4,585 hrr Leaning 7,508 410 575 125 1,952 4,466 Lancaster Sure Crop 7,23 5“ 425 149 1,952 4,578 Canada Leaning 8,987 334 445 157 1,625 4,373 Rhode Island Ihite flint 6,807 452 448 182 1,485 4,282 Golda luggant 6,651 585 582 145 1,582 4,041 cornell 11 6,557 295 295 155 1,445 4,055 W levens (25) concluded that early maturing grain varieties were superior to late maturing varieties for silage purposes. The late maturing varieties yielded a greater weight of silage corn per acre than the grain varieties but yield of dry matter per acre was highest for the grain varie- ties. These data were true for the soils, growing conditions, and corn varieties used in the experiment but light not hold true in other locations or when using other corn varieties. Was. With the rapid increase in amount of hybrid corn planted for both silage and grain, the question arises as to the feeding value and yield of silage per acre of the hybrid varieties. Kevens and associates (26) com- pared hybrid corn varieties with open-pollinated corn. In these investiga- s e e . u e s e e . I: .Il.l|..|.(|2|l. (Ill'lfl. tions hybrid varieties cut-yielded open-pollinated varieties in both pounds of dry matter per acre and digestible matter per acre. The Mbrid silage was of better quality with greater nutritive value. According to Havens the best quality of silage should contain 50 percent dry matter. Roberts and Jones (27) reported that western hybrid varieties out-yielded open-pollinated connecticut varieties and southern types grown for corn silage in that state. Iisconsin woficers (28,29,50) report the hybrid and open-pollinated varieties of corn silage showed no difference in chancel analyses. The hy- brid varieties tended to cut-yield open-pollinated types, and lubrids that yielded the most corn per acre tended to yield the nest silage. The hybrid varieties stood up better for cutting than did the open-pollinated varieties. '7 cas- A limited amount of information is available on the feeding value of grainless or stalk silage. lokles (51) reported that one ton of good corn silage contained 5 bushels of corn. Corn and cob coupons about 40 percent of the silage, leaving 60 percent stalks. One ton of regular silage was equal to 2,700 pounds of grainless silage. To winter a 1,000 pound cow (dry) without loss of weight would require 35 pounds of regular silage and 2 pounds of alfalfa hay or 0.75 pound of linseed meal per day. It would require 50 pounds of grainless silage with 4 pounds of alfalfa hay and 4.5 pounds of lin- seed meal per day to replace the regular silage ration. The author concluded that the feeding of grainless-corn silage could be Justified when used as a maintenance ration but not for production of beef or milk. Jacobs and Duncan (52) made a very couplets study of comparative feed- ing value of regular corn silage and grainless-corn silage for beef production. The grainless silage was made by snapping the ears from the stalks in the field and letting the ears dry on the ground until ready to be husked and stored in a crib. The stalks were ensiled as grainless silage. There was a de- crease in feeding value of the ear corn due to weathering and heating. The following table gives comparative yields per acre of regular silage and grainless silage. Yield of Silage and Corn per Acre :Yield paraffin of:Bu. cf :Percentage Year : Silage : Acreage :acre from: corn per: corn perzyield of First (one Banal 5.15 7.7 51.0 4.0 100 silo di- “7'10“ on“. 4.” 6.5 31cc "" 71 Jana Nomal 9.5 5.2 58.0 5.2 100 Second Grain- 14.0( est.) 4.0(est.) - - as law Hamel 7. 75 7. 5 52. 2 7.0 100 Third Grain- 10.51 4.7 52.2 - 85 Jane . _ Jacobs et al. (52) also reported that steers fed grainless-corn sil- age gained 75.9 percent as fast as those fed normal corn silage. The steers fed nonal silage showed better market finish and sold for one dollar per humdredweight more than the steers fed grainless silage. These investiga- tors concluded that the making of grainless silage could be of value only when corn grain was needed for other farm animals and the grainless silage was to be fed as a maintenance ration or where a prelim was not paid for highly finished steers. N Livesay and co—workers (55) studied the relative feeding value of the dry matter from regular silage, grainless silage and ear-corn silage for year- ling steers. The steers nade the highest gains per pound of dry matter for ear-corn silage followed by regular corn silage, while grainless corn silage gave the poorest gains. The workers reported that 54.4 percent of the green weight, 45.2 percent of the dry matter, and 52.7 percent of the total digesti- ble nutrients were contained in the ears. Rusk and Snapp (54) conducted test to compare normal corn silage and green stover silage for wintering beef calves that were to be on pasture the following sinner. Two lots of 24 calves each were selected that were uni- fcna in age, size, and weight. In addition each calf received 1 pound of cot- tcnseed meal and 2 pounds of mixed hey a day. The stover silage was inferior to normal corn silage for wintering calves. Although the green stover silage was fresh and palatable and was eaten by the calves in generous quantity it was not nutritious enough for the calves to grow at a normal rate. The calves fed the regular corn silage gained 154.5 pounds during the l55-day feeding ‘ period while the green stover silage fed calves gained but 86.9 pounds. The green stover silage fed calves were thinner in flesh at the close of the test than they were when put in the feed lot the previous fall. 0n the other hand, the usual silage fed steers improved in condition as the feeding period progressed. Hamilton and Rusk (35) reported that stover silage has about as per- cent as much total digestible nutrients as the same weight of regular corn silage. However, experimental feeding trials indicate that in practical feed- ing stover silage is only about two-thirds as valuable as normal silage. The authors reported less less of material from exposure to rain and wind, an increased palatability and a much greater ultimate utilization of the nutrients of the corn crop as stover silage than when the stover is fed frm the shock or as pastured in the field. The ensiling of corn stover offers a method of utilizing the byproducts of corn culture in an effective and economial way without limiting the utilization of the main product, the grain. WW Rusk and Snapp (56) reported that green corn fed as ear-corn silage was as good as sound, well-matured corn fed as ccrn-and-cob meal, both from the standpoint of the gains made by each steer and the total gains made from an acre of corn. The steers fed ear-corn silage sold for a higher price, thereby paying a considerably more for each bushel of corn fed. Livesay et a1. (55) studied the digestibility of ear-corn silage, using Hereford yearling steers. He reported a total digestible nutrient value of 52.2 for the ear-corn silage as capared to 15.1 for stover silage. W W Turner (57) states that the dry matter loss in corn silage during storage was‘ld parent, while with corn stover the loss was 20 percent. Perkins (58) reported a loss of protein during the storage of corn silage. When no Juice was lost fra the silo there was a slight increase in nitrogen. The protein loss from the kernel was found in the Juice not as true protein but as products of protein hydrolysis. Ragsdale and Turner (59) reported nutrient losses from 54 silos and 18 shocks of corn over a period of four years. Loss of nutrients in the silos averaged as follows: dry matter, 7.59 percent; protein, 5.44 percent; ether extract, (a gain of 18.04 percent; ash, a gain of 5.94 percent; crude fiber, a loss of 1.95 percent, and nitrogen free-extract a loss of 10.29 per- cent. Intrient average losses of the corn shocks in the field were as fol- lows: dry matter, 15.12 percent; protein, 0.84 percent; fat, a gain of 5.82 -10.. percent, and nitrogen free-extract, a loss of 22.51 percent. The loss of nitrOgen_ free-extract and dry matter was about twice as great for the field cured fodder as for the corn stored as corn silage. lckles (51) found that the loss in feeding value was 5 to 10 percent in corn silage and so to 25 percent in corn fodder shocked in the field. There was also a loss of 2 percent for corn grain stored in a crib. The total loss in weight of corn silage while in storage was reported by Ragsdele and Turner (40). Two silos were filled with Leaning corn October 8. One was weighed out February 18 and the other lay 9. The two silos lost 4.84 percent and 7.4 percent respectively of weight or an average of 5.08 per- cent. Two other silos were filled with con stover from Leaning corn on October 2. One was weighed out February 18 and the other June .2. The two silos lost an average of 4.98 percent during storage. Stadler et el. (41) reported a dry matter loss of 7.59 percent in corn silage and a 15.12 percent in corn fodder. Storage losses in corn silage have been reported by Shaw and associ- ates (42). Dry matter loss was 10 percent, crude fiber 5.54 percent, and sue loss in total nitrogen. There was a slight increase in ether extract. Ohio workers (45) found that the dry matter content of corn silage in the early milk stage was only 15.7 percent and the loss in weight due to seepage would easily amount to 40 or 50 percent of the green weight. Iilt- ing tends to reduce the less of green weight in the silo, while pressure as obtained at the bottm of the silo increased the loss of Juice. Cutting corn fine resulted in a more capact silage which increased the loss of Juice though the more mature coin kept better when finely cut. W Becker and Oalup (44) reported that 8.47 percent by weight of the corn kernels of corn silage were voided in the feces when the cows were fed a ration of 50 pounds of corn silage and 10 pounds of alfalfa hay per 1,000 pounds live weight. 0f the whole kernels in the silage only 4.55 percent were recovered as whole kernels from the feces. Analyses of the corn kernels of the silage that passed through the cow's digestive tract showed slight losses of protein, ether extract, and ash. The kernels voided in the feces were calculated to contain 5.22 percent of the digestive crude protein and 5.25 percent of the total digestible nutrients in the corn silage. W W Jordan and Jenters (45) in 1897 made a study of the effect of the plans of nutrition and the digestibility of the silage. In their work they fed a ration containing corn silage at two different levels to sheep. The results showed that the higher levels of nutrition the digestibilities were lower than at the lower levels. . Iatson et a1. (45) made a very complete study of the effect of the plane of nutrition on digestibility of corn silage, using steers. Their first experiment was designed to stun digestibility of corn silage as a sole ration at five levels of silage intake, 8 kilos, 14 kilos, 20 kilos, 25 kilos, and ad libitum per animal per day. As the plane of nutrition in- creased there was a progressive decrease in the digestibility of the dry matter, organic matter, crude fiber, and nitrogm free-extract. The digesti- bility of nitrogen and ether extract tended to increase as the plane of nutrition increased. There was a loss of from 5 to 8 percent in digestible organic matter when on the higher plane of nutrition. A second trial was set up to study the effect of plane of nutrition on digestibility when the -12- plane of nutrition of both alfalfa hay and corn silage was increased. The results showed slight drop in digestibility values for animal on the higher plane of nutrition. Watson et a1. (47) reported in earlier work that plans of nutrition had no effect on the digestibility of alfalfa hay. The slight drop in digestibility with increasing plane of nutrition was thought to be the results of the silage with no drop resulting frost the hay. In the third experinent, increasing quantities of corn silage were added to a basal ration of 4.0 kilograms of hay and the digestibility of the resulting rations de- termined. It was detenined that in the case of dry matter, organic matter, crude fiber, and nitrogen-free extract, the digestibility of corn silage de- creased as the plane of nutrition increased. These data indicate that when the plane of nutrition is increased by feeding corn silage there will be a decrease in digestibility of the nutrients. christensen and Hopper (48) reported that a pound of corn silage produced less digestible crude protein but a much higher yield of total di- gestible matrients than did sweet clover silage on the dry matter basis. Oorn silage was about equal to sunflower silage in digestible crude protein but much higher in total digestible nutrients on a dry matter basis. W The following table gives the coefficients of digestibility of corn silage as reported in the literature. Digestion Coefficients for Corn Silage :N-fr—ee 3Organic=Total dig. 3N0. Type of Silage 3Protein3 Fat Sriberzextractzmatter =nutrients ztri- : f : : 5 z 1 : J : :3” Corn, dent,- '51]. matured 54.0 74.0 55.0 59.0 - 13.7 as All analyses (49) Corn, dent, i-ature, be- 52.0 75.0 57.0 55.0 - 15.5 41 fore dough stage (49) Regular corn silage, low 57.5 54.5 49.7 71.5 52.8 - 6 plans of nutrition (45) Regular corn silage, medium 58.1 50.5 48.7 71.9 52.5 - 5 plane of nutrition (45) Regular corn silage, high 50.5 «.2 48.5 71.1 52.5 - 5 plane of nutrition (45) Regular corn silage, aver- 58.5 55.7 49.0 71.5 52.8 - 18 age of all analyses (45) Oorn, all experiments (50) 45.0 ”.0 54.0 59.0 57.0 15.2 119 Oorn, Iilk stage (50) 44.0 75.0 71.0 72.0 ”.0 14.9 4 Con, nature (50) 55.0 82.0 74.0 72.0 75.0 15.7 , 2 Regular corn silage 59.1 82.0 70.4 79.5 75.0 17.8 5 (Shoes) (48) Regular corn silage 49.0 80.8 51.2 74.5 58.9 20.4 29 (Steers) (48) 001! ItOYtr . 50.0 66.0 67.0 67.0 - 13.6 8 (ears ruoved) 49) Oorn stover silage 58.0 50.0 57.0 55.0 59.0 14.5 - (ears ruoved) 50) larcorn silage (49) - - - - - 55.5 5 nor-eon silage (50) 54.0 90.0 54.0 30.0 72.0 52.1 a ___‘___ -14.. WW Corn silage is the cheapest succulent feed available for dairy and beef production. in acre of corn fed as silage will produce more feed nu- trients per acre than by any other nethod of curing and feeding. Oorn sil- age is not necessary in the dairy ration for maximi- milk production. The feeding of corn silage in the ration of dairy and beef cattle has increased feed consumption and general well being of the animals. Experiments have shown that 250 to 500 pounds of good quality corn silage will replace 100 pounds of good quality alfqlfa hay in feeding value for milk production. In experiments with beef cattle corn silage has she- a feeding value of 50 percent of alfalfa hay. Hybrid corns produce silage of equal feeding value to open-pollinated varieties. The yield of silage per acre has been greater for hybrid varieties than for most open-pollinated varieties. Oorn stover silage has a lower feeding value per pound than regular corn silage. The corn and cob composes about 40 percent of the entire corn plant. One ton of regular corn silage was equal in feeding value to 2,700 pounds of corn stover silage for dairy cattle. In experiments with steers corn stover silage was 75.9 percent as sfficimrt for beef production as reg- ular corn silage. Dar-corn silage was about equal to corn-and-cob meal on a pound of dry matter basis for beef cattle and dairy cattle. Der-corn silage has a total digestible nutrient value of 52.2 percent as compared to 15.1 percent for stover silage. Soft corn, resulting frm early frost, nay be stored as ear-corn silage. -15.. OBJECT The objectives of this investigation were as follows: a. To study the relative feeding value of the total digesti- ble nutrints in clever hay, grainless-corn silage and com grain for milk production. b. To stub the relative feeding value of regular corn sil- age~and grainless—corn silage plus corn-and-cob neal for nilk production. c. To study the relative feeding value of the total digesti- ble nutriuts in clover hay, ear-corn silage and corn-and- oob neal for nilk production. WWW The yield of corn silage was calculated in the field by a method ad-- vised by Dexter (51) whereby one thousandth of an acre of corn was out from ta different areas of the field by a definite plan agreed upon before start- ing the sapling. Saaples were taken diagonally across the field cutting 12 feet 0 inches out of every twentieth row. The rows were 42 inches apart; this gave l/loo of an acre. Heights were nade of the entire corn plant sen- pled and the yield of silage per acre calculated. The corn was hnaked frm the stalks and the yield of stalks and yield of ears were calculated per acre and the ratio of stalks to ears determined. asaller smples of stalks and ears were taken for aoisture deteninations. The samples were placed in a dry- ing rack in the lichigan State college Experimental Ian Crops barn. Table l -15- shows the yields of silage, ear corn and stalks, and the ear stalk ratio of the corn used in this experinent. Table 1. Yield of Silage per Acre Green basis (lbs.) Total lars Stalks i hrs 1 Stalks 10,510 3,660 6,850 34.3 $5.2 Dry natter basis (lbs.) 3,09‘ 1,430 1.65‘ “08 5308 Ear-stalk Ratio - 1 lb. of silage contains .348 lbs. ears, wet basis. It was the plan of the experinent to put part of the corn in the silo as regular corn silage and the rest in as grainless silage. This was done by hnaking the corn from the stalks of alternate strips and storing the ear corn which will be discussed later. Part of the grainless silage was nade by snapping the ears fron the stalks and throwing than into a wagon for ensiling as ear-corn silage. The corn was cut with a corn binder, hauled to the silo and run through a conventional silo filler set to cut 1/2 inch lengths. One silo was used for the regular silage and another for the stalk silage. The ear- corn silage nade from the snapped ears was run through the filler and'placed in the batten of the silo which was later used to store the grainless silage. Alternate strips of corn were used for the regular silage. The corn was out and put in the silo a day ahead of the grainless silage. This nade it possible to run wagons along the strips for ruoval of the huaked and snapped corn. W The can used in this phase of the experiment was of the King Cross variety and in the early dent stage. It is douth if the corn would have kept under crib storage. In view of this fact the corn was placed in a drier until the noisture content was reduced to about 10 percent. The corn was then bagged and stored in a feed storage room The corn grain was not of very good quality because of its maturity. W The animals used for the milk production trials were selected fro: the lichigan State College experinental herd and included representatives of the Elstein and the Brown Swiss breeds. Aninals were selected that had hem nilking for at least two months and had leveled off to a normal milk produc- tion. All animals were put on clover hay alone for eighteen days before the trials started. W The animals used in digestion trials were selected from the Michigan State College experinmtal herd. Pour Holstein heifers approximately twenty months of age and weighing about 900 pounds each wore used. WWW Saaples of all feeds fed were taken during the feeding trials and chuical analyses were made by the liohigan State College Agricultural Chas- istry Department. The silage sanples were taken once a week and the results have been averaged and reported in Table 2 along with clover hay and corn-and- cob neal. The clover hay varied in quality from 100 percent clover to a mix- -13.. ture of clever and grass. Therefore, samples were taken from several bales in different areas of the barn. These samples were run through a hammer mill and the chopped hay wall mixed before the samples were taken for analyses. Silage sauples were taken from: the silo by digging down at least one foot under the surface before sanpling, thus preventing the sampling of silage that had been exposed to the air. Table 2. Ohuical Analyses of leads red Crude Ether l-free l'eed Ioisture Fiber Ash Nitrogen Extract Extract P 0a 1 1 f f S 15 1 1w Regular corn 07. 79 6.“ 1.68 0.513 0.99 19.80 .078 .119 silage Grainless-corn 69.59 8.30 8.33 .468 1.01 15.84 .051 .355 silage Dar-con silage 63.92 4.58 0.76 .552 1.20 26.12 .100 .009 Glover m 11.59 29.32 5.15 1.59 1.44 42.46 .14.: .786 mm'M'OOD 13e55 'e‘z . 1.50 1e“ Bel, 56.34 e822 e023 neal _ W The digestion trials included deteninations of digestibility of the various feeds fed. 'flle tricks were 10 days in length with a preliminary period of 7 days. The purpose of the preliminary period was to allow the aninals to become used to the digestion stalls and to detemine the amount of feed the animals would clean up, thus preventing weigh-backs during the period of the digestion trials. The digestion stalls were the mechanical type with an endless belt running under the stall raaoving the feces and depositing than in a basket in the basement. The urine was separated by a trough running along the edge o-u. u—w -au-~w*- _ _.e -19.. of the belt. The weight of the animal. weight of feces and feed consunptiou ware recorded each noming. Two percent of the feces were taken each day and caposited for a ten-day period for chauical analyses. The feces were preserved with concentrated hydrochloric acid. Table 5 reports digestibility of the clover hay fed in the experiments while Tables 4 and 5 report the digestibility of the grainless-corn silage and the regular corn silage. Table 5. Digestion Trials with Clover Hay Digestible 3Tota1 Digestible O. .0 .0 .0 til-free 3 Dry Aninalz Nitrogen: rat Hibermxtract: latter: Protein 3 Nutrients 32L : i : fi : : : : f : 1 A 54 49.19 54.49 51.18 661.54 55.80 4.89 47.69 A 55 46.79 49.55 55.23 60.64 54.44 4.65 47.60 ‘7'“. ‘7. 99 51.92 52s]. 7 ‘0e 99 55.18 ‘e '7 ‘7e 6‘ Table 4. Digestion Trials with Grainless-Oorn Silage =wammnmn...= : ‘— 3 3 : :N-free 3 Dry 3 Digestible :Total Digestible Alli-a1: litrogen= lat : ribonhtract: latter: Protein : Nutrients m : : : f z 1 : 5 : fi : i A 54 54. 74 68.71 78.56 71.85 67.95 1.61 19.59 A 55 55.18 67.69 68.58 70.87 66.56 1.56 19.45 476 51.97 68.78 78.81 ”.84 66.84 1.58 19.45 477 . 51.90 65.06 67.90 71.18 66.85 1.58 19.99 Table 5. Digestion Trials with Regular Corn Silage :Wmnimx = z z . : : :N-free : Dry 3Digestible ItTotal Digestible Aninal: nitrogen: rat : Tiber :Extract: latter: Protein : Nutrients a: z i : j : fl : $ : : : i A 54 50.56 71.51 59.56 71.72 65.49 1.68 20.41 A 55 51.85 72.66 66.69 75.01 68.91 1.65 21.57 476 55.07 74.46 67.55 76.09 70.05 1. 70 81.98 477 51.80 68.86 68.66 75.25 69.56 1.66 81.66 Average 51.52 10.52 55.52 74.51 68.45 1.55 21.59 W The method used in this investigation for determining relative feed- ing values of total digestible nutrients of various feeds was designed by mm (58). The animals were depleted on hay alone after freshening. This is considered as the point where the animal levels off in nilk production. A certain mount of total digestible nutrients are replaced by the sense anount of total digestible nutrients in the feed or feeds to be tested. Glover bay of the 1945 crop was used in this work. The hay which was of fair quality was out in nedius to late bloom stage. The corn-and-cob meal used was the corn hacked frus the stalks in the field. Daily silk and feed records were kept for all cows and three-day cano pesite nilk suples were saved for butterfat deteminations. All nilk records were recorded as three-day averages of four percent fat corrected milk. The aninals were milked three times a day. They were turned into an exercise lot daily which was free frm grass or any feed material. The animals had free access to water bowls. Salt was fed to all animals at the rate of 50 grams p.13 We li1 art: EA -21- light cows were used to study the relative feeding value of the total digestible nutrients in clover hay, grainless-corn silage, and ground corn grain for milk production. The annals were placed on 55 pounds of clever hay per day for a l5-day period. Twenty pounds of clever hay were then replaced by 55 pounds of grainless-corn silage for an lS-day period. The 20 pounds of hay and 55 pounds of grainless-corn silage each contained 10 pounds of total digestible nutrients according to Iorrison (49). At the end of this period the grainless-corn silage was replaced with corn grain on a total digestible nutrient basis and an additional 18-day feeding trial was run. Seven depleted cows were used to study the relative feeding value of regular corn silage and grainless-corn silage. plus corn-and-cob ideal for milk production. reed replacuents were made using the results of the ear to stalk ratio detenined fra field caleulations. The animals were placed on 50 pounds of regular corn silage and 10 pounds of clover bay for 18 days. The regular silage was then replaced with 58.5 pounds of grainless-corn silage plus 7.5 pounds of corn-and-cob noel. The cows were left on this ration for another 13-day feeding trial at which tile the ration was changed back to 50 pounds of regular silage and 10 pounds of clever hay. At the conclusion of the above trials, six aninals were selected to study the value of ear-corn silage and ground corn-and-eob neal as supple- mts to clever hay. Replac-euts were nade on the total digestible nutri- ent basis as described previously. The feeding period was reduced to 15 days because of a shortage of hay and ear-corn silage. The aniuals were fed 55 pounds of clever bay for a period of 15 days at which tine 25 pounds of ear- eorn silage replaced as pounds of clever hey. At the end of 15 days on this ration the ear-corn silage was replaced by 9 pounds of corn-end-cob neal. -22- The results obtained fro: replacing part of the clever hey ration with grainless-corn silage or ground corn grain on a total digestible nutri~ ent basis are presented in figure 1. The replacing of clever hay with grain- less corn silage resulted in an increase in 4 percent fab-corrected milk. This increase reached its peak during the second three-day period with an average increase of 1.1 pounds per day. The replacing of grainless silage with ground corn grain resulted in a marked increase in 4 percent fat-cor- rected milk. This increase reached its peak during the fifth three-day period with the average increase of 8.5 pounds per day. Iilk production de- clined slightly during the last six days of the trial which was probably due to the fact that several cows were nearing the end of their lactation. The nafied increase in production, therefore, appears very significant. Table 6 shows the individual average daily milk production, body weight, total digestible nutrients received and required and feeds fed for each experimental period. Table 7 shows the average daily (by three-day periods) body weight, nilk production and feed coneuption of aninal A 57. The results obtained free replacing regular corn silage with grain- less corn silage plus oorn-and-cob noel are presented in figure 2. The re- placing of regular corn silage with grainless-corn silage plus oorn-end-cob -23.. noel resulted in no significant change in milk production. All animals con- tinned their normal decline in milk production, resulting from increased du- ration of lactation. The same results were again noted when the grainless- corn silage plus corn-and-eob neal were replaced with regular corn silage. Table 8 shows the individual average milk production, body weight, total digestible nutrients received and required and feeds fed for each ex- perimental period. It is of interest to note that even though the replace- ment of regular corn silage with grainless—corn silage and corn—end-eob noel was made from field calculations, the calculated total digestible nutrient intake was approximately the same. Table 9 showe the average daily (by three-day periods) body weight, milk production and feed consuption of Who me ,1 O-L 1.: '4.“- 0 151.: T1? 1! -8t ' ON}! ”—‘t; ‘., 78 32.0219..er The results obtained from replacing part of the clever hay ration with ear-corn silage or corn-and-cob meal on a total digestible nutrient basis are presented in figure 5. The replacing of clever hay with ear-corn silage resulted in a marked increase in 4 percent fat-corrected milk. This increase reached its peak during the fifth three-day period with an average increase of 4.7 pounds per day. The replacing of the ear-corn silage with corn-and-oob meal resulted in no significant change in milk production. The production rasained at the higher level resulting fron feeding of ear-corn Silage. Table 10 shows the individual average daily milk production, body weight, total digestible nutrients received and required and feeds fed for Table 6. lilk Pro duetion" Relative reading Value of the Total Digestible Nutrients in Clover Bay, Grainless-Gorn Silage and Ground Oorn Grain for A57 8 74 461 419 3m'l cow 3Periods=kilk '15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 15 18 18 313 156 171 189 55% §§§ see 222 §E§ :Body I: 1890 80.4 1871 80. 7 1871 83.8 1195 9.0 - '03 " vol 900 17.8 - 18.3 " me]. 1189 85.8 - 26.2 - 26.3 1518 10.4 " 9e“ - 9.6 1241‘ 11.? 1855 9.9 1838 9.0 1189 17.1 1&5 17.4 1140 81. 7 1004 10.9 1058 10 .5 991 11.0 17.5 16.0 16.8 16.9 15.9 16.1 15.0 15.4 15.8 16.9 16.0 16.8 15.5 15.9 16. 8 17.0 15.1 16.8 17.1 15.8 16.1 15. 7 16.0 15.9 :Weight3F.G.l.3 Rec. : Req. : 15.7 17.0 17.5 15.1 18. 6 18. 4 15.0 15.1 15. 7 17.1 17.1 17.5 15.6 15. 5 15. 4 15. 7 15. 8 18. 9 15.0 15.1 16.5 11.5 11.4 11.5 Clover alone Clover In grainless silage Clover 45 corn grain Clover alone Clover l: grainless silage Clover 6: corn grain Glover alone Clover d: grainless silage Glover I: corn grain Clover alone Clover In grainless silage Clover 6‘. corn grain Clover alone Clover d. grainless silage clever as corn grain Clover alone Glover I: grainless silage Glover I: corn grain Glover alone Clover I: grainless silage Clover a corn grain Glover alone Clover I: grainless silage Clover a corn grain * The original data were compiled by three-day periods whereas the above values represent the scan values obtained for each experimental period. "At beginning of experinental period. -35- Table 7. Effect of Replacing 80 pounds Clover Bay with 56 pounds Grainless-Com Silage or 10.8 pounds Ground Oorn Grain M7 Days Grainless- Corn in Height I111: ‘l'est rat 1.0.113“ Hay Corn Silage Grain be h b 156 1288 25e4 301 0e 79 88.0 55.0 " - 15’ 1241 81.6 Beg e62 17e9 55.0 " - 1‘2 1321 “el 3e 3 em 21.5 55.0 ‘ " 1‘5 129‘ 28.4: 30 3 o 7‘ ”.0 35.0 " ‘- 1“ 1m 8200 Se 5 e ,7 ”.4 3‘0 7 - ‘- Average 1890 23.1 3. 4 . 74 80. 4 34. 6 - - 1'71 1875 85.8 5.6 .81 81. 7 15.0 55.0 - 1" 12,8 84.8 3e 5 e84 82. 6 1‘s Y 55.0 " l" 1515 85.5 5. 8 . ‘75 so. 'I 15.0 55.0 - 1m 1m 88. 7 3. 2 o 73 ”0° 1‘. 7 550° "’ 185 1850 81.8 5.2 . 70 19. 8 15.0 55.0 - 18‘ 1267 23e1 Sol 0 ’8 33.0 1500 55.0 - Average 12.71 83. 5 3.3 . 76 20. 1 14.9 56.0 - 18’ 1217 2601 5. 3 08‘ 2300 1500 - 10.8 198 1158 87.0 5.4 . 98 84. 6 15.0 - 10.8 195 11“ 850‘ 5. 5 .39 23.5 lSeO " 10.8 198 1179 86.8 5. 4 .89 85.8 15.0 - 10.8 801 1165 86.0 5.8 .85 88.9 15.0 - 10.8 ”4 1159 85.0 3e]. e 1'9 81.6 15.0 " 10.8 Average 1111 26.0 3.3 .06 23.2 19.0 - 10.0 *4 rat-«meted milk Relative reading Value 01' Regular Oorn Silage and Grainless- corn Silage plus Corn-endocob [eel for Milk Production" Table 8. zm'l zln Gov =Periodszli1k 138 18 168 18 186 18 804 127 10 210 18 288 18 246 4.12 18 106 18 123 18 141 460 18 110 18 188 18 806 337 18 160 18 187 18 805 338 18 89 18 107 18 126 486 18 36 18 64 18 12 830” *Weight 1320 1586 1589 1145 1175 1177 1148 1148 1160 1101 1120 1109 1185 1146 1155 1156 1155 1107 1198 1168 1146 3F.0.H.‘ RCOe 20.2 17.0 21.9 17.9 19.0 17.0 27. 7 17.3 20.0 10.0 17.0 17.0 24.2 17.2 23.0 10.0 23.0 17.4 20.2 17.0 23.0 17.0 21.. 17.0 20.2 17.0 10.0 17.9 17.0 14.9 10.0 17.1 15.1 17.0 10.0 14.0 41.3 10.0 31.0 10.0 20. 7 17.2 e e e 0 18.9 17.6 16.8 18.4 17.1 14. 9 17.8 17.1 17.0 16.9 16.8 15.8 15.5 14.8 14.5 14.4 15.8 15. 5 28. 7 19. 7 18. 7 Regular silage Grainless silage I: corn-and- oob neal Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a corn-0nd- oob neal Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a corn-and- oob noel Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a corn-and- eob neal Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a corn-and- oob neal Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a corn-and- oob neel Regular silage Regular silage Grainless silage a earn-and- sob noel Regular silage * The original data were oonpiled by three-day periods whereas the above values represent the mean values obtained for each experimental period. “At beginning of erperinental period. - 29 - Table 9. Effect of Replacing 60 pounds Regular Corn Silage with 32.6 pounds Grainless-Oorn Silage plus 7.6 pounds Oorn-0nd-Gob lleal _ M Days Regular Corn-and- u 17.15111; I111: Test Fat 1'. 0. ll."' Hay Silage Gob 11.4 0 a 1‘8 1862 ”e1 3e4 Oegg “e6 15.0 50.0 " 171 133’ 87.5 30‘ e" 85.0 15e0 50.0 " 1" 1329 35.5 5.4 ea? 85. 5 15.0 ”.0 - 1" 1338 “e9 3e 7 .98 ”e8 11.0 50.0 - 180 1340 24. 2 3.8 . 92 23.6 16.0 60.0 - 183 1311 23.8 3.8 . 90 23.1 16.0 60.0 - Average 1020 26.0 3. 6 . 92 24. 2 14.3 60.0 - Grainless Silage 186 1326 24.4 3.6 .88 22.9 13. 7 32.6 7.6 189 1322 23.4 3.6 .84 22.0 16.0 32.6 7.6 192 1367 23. 7 3.9 . 92 23. 3 12.3 32. 6 7.6 196 1310 22. 7 3.8 .86 22.0 16.0 32.6 7.6 201 1316 20. 3 3. 9 . 79 20.0 16.0 32. 6 7.6 Average 1326 22. 7 3.8 .86 21. 9 l4. 3 32. 6 7.6 Regular Silage 204 1302 19.4 4.1 .80 19. 7 14.0 60.0 - m7 135’ 80.7 3.8 e 79 20.1 15.0 50.0 ‘- 201 1314 21.8 4.1 .89 _ 22.1 14.0 60.0 - 213 1353 13. 8 ‘00 0 n 13.2 150° 50.0 - 216 1362 18.3 3.9 .71 18.0 12. 7 60.0 «- 219 1317 17.9 4.1 . 73 18. 2 16.0 60.0 - Average 1329 19.6 4.0 . 70 19.6 14. 3 60.0 - *4 fat-corrected milk . . . _ e .. . . , _ O . . y . s : eeeOeee eeOIeee OOOeOOo e .eeeeeee eeee-ee eeeOeee . , eOeeeee OOOeeoe OeOeeeO . . l . M . e _ 1.1 e eeeeee. spec-O. COCOeOO e O C 00.06.. 000.co- 08.0... e . . . eeeeese eeeeeee eeeeeee e _ 1...... ....... __._... . e I each experinmtal period. The results obtained with Cow 461 in Table 10 are or interest. lhan 26 pounds or ear-com silage replaced 16 pounds of clever boy on the 90th day of lactation, the average daily increase in tat- corrected milk was 4.8 pounds for the lS-day period. This increase in silk production was escapanied by a decrease in total digestible nutrimts mounting to 0.9 pound per day. Table 11 shows the average daily (by three-day periods) body weight, nilk production and feed consumption of Animal 426. ‘ Tab1e 10. -32- Relative reeding Value of the Total Digestible Nutrients in Glover Rey, Ear-Corn Silage and Oorn-and-cob 11001 for Hill: Production” 331191 ‘13 =Body ‘JLLL—i 00w :Periodsuiilk :Weight=I.C.M.= Rec. : Reg. 0 0 O b O : — 426 16 90 1166 22.0 17.0 16. 7 Clover alone 18 106 1160 26.3 16.6 16.8 clever as ear-corn silage 16 123 1148 26.7 16.8 16.9 Glover d. corn-and-eob neal 18 114 948 20.9 16.3 14.2 Glover d: ear-corn silage 16 132 920 21. 7 16.8 14.6 Clover a oorn-and-cob neal 460 16 218 1142 14.1 17.3 13.6 Clover alone 18 233 1130 18.2 16.8 14.9 Clover a ear-corn silage 16 261 1120 16.8 16. 7 14.6 Glover a corn-and-oob meal 337 16 223 1167 14.6 16.0 13.8 Clover alone 18 238 1136 17.0 16.3 14.6 Glover a ear-corn silage 16 266 1131 18.2 16.7 16.0 Clover e corn-and-cob seal 338 16 143 1163 12.2 16.2 13.0 Glover alone 18 168 1122. 13.4 16.8 13.6 Glover a ear-corn silage 16 176 1126 14.6 16.6 13.8 Clover 8: corn-0nd-cob noel 419 16 101 1069 21.1 17.4 16.6 Glover alone 18 116 1067 24.4 16.8 16.6 Clover 8: ear-corn silage 16 134 1066 26.2 16.6 16.9 Clover a oorn-and-cob neal * Ii'he original data were compiled by three-day periods as the above values represent the mean values obtained for each experimental period. "At beginning of experimental period. M18 11. Ma Silage or 9 pounds Corn-and-COb Heal Effect of Replacing 16 pounds of Clover Bay with 26 pounds has in Weight 90 1123 93 1120 96 1147 99 1192 162 1191 Average 1166 106 1166 108 1166 111 1139 114 1126 117 1160 120 1166 ‘Averege 1160 123 1160 126 1164 129 1126 132 1106 136 1096 Arerege 1148 *4; fat-corrected 1.111: lilk Test 29.7 3.0 27.6 3.1 23.9 3.6 22.6 3.1 22.2 3.1 26.2 3.2 26.4 3.1 30.1 3.2 31.0 2.9 29.9 2.8 30.0 3.1 28.6 3.4 29.3 3.1 29.1 3.0 32.0 3.0 29.9 3.1 28.8 3.1 28.6 3.6 29.7 3.1 Fat 0.89 .86 .84 .70 .69 .79 .88 O“ .90 .84 .95 .97 .90 .87 .96 .90 .89 1.00 .98 r. 0. 10* 85.8 85.8 28.1 19.5 19.8 88.0 82.8 86.5 85.9 84.5 85.9 85.9 85.5 24.7 27.2 26.4 24.9 26.4 85.7 Glover Ber-Corn Cornsand- Goblleal 387 58.5 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 54.1 18.7 80.0 18.5 20.0 80.0 18.7 19.5 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 Silage 85.0 85.0 85.0 85.0 85.0 85.0 85.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 DISCUSSIOH 0F BELTS The results of the digestion trials with grainless and regular corn silage are presented in Tables 4 and 6 respectively. The total digestible nutrient value obtained on a dry matter. basis for regular corn silage check very closely with that reported by Christensen and Rapper (48) and Morrison (49) but was 2 percent higher than that reported by Schnieder (60). On a dry natter basis, the grainless-corn silage carried 64.6 percent total di- gestible nutrients. Harrison (49) reported that the total digestible nutri- ents of grainless-corn silage were 60.2 percent on a dry natter basis. The experimental results indicate that a pound of digestible nutri- ents in grainless silage is slightly superior to a pound of digestible nu- trients in clover hay cut during late blocs stage for milk production. These results are not too conclusive, however, because the corn used for silage was of a very uneven quality. The m9]? of 1946 was a very poor growing season due to a severe drouth. Sue of the corn developed fairly nomally while sons failed to develop until after the fall rains. Therefore, at harvesting tine nest of the stalks were nature and the grain well developed while sons of the stalks that had some on after the fall rains were young shoots. Oorn grain has an unknown nilk producing factor which has been re- ported by Ruffian et a1. (66). This factor nay have been in the stalks not producing grain, thus increasing the value of the total digestible nutrients of the grainless silage. It has been reported by Jacobs et al. (32) that grainless-corn sil- age had a lower feeding value per pound than regular corn silage. Ickles (31) reported that grainless-corn silage could be used effectively for win- tering beef cattle. The results of this investigation indicate that grain- less-corn silage is equal pound per pound of total digestible nutrient. to clever hay cut during late bloan stage. When grain is fed to livestock the practice of asking and feeding grainless-corn silage would be of question- able value. It is an accepted fact that some grain should be included in the ration for good milk production. Oorn grain in the silage would par- tially fulfill this requirnmt. It is evident that when corn grain replaced the grainless corn sil- age, total digestible nutrients maining the same, there was a narked in- crease in nilk production. These data indicate that corn grain carries sue unknown factor or factors that stinulate milk production. These data also show that the total digestible nutrients from corn grain are superior to total digestible nutrients from clover hay out in the late bloom stage. The clover hay used in this study appeared to be low in these un- knovm factors. Unpublished data of the Iichigan Agricultural Experiment Station (64) indicate that alfalfa, tron. grass and timothy cut in the late bloc. stage are poor in these factors. The grainless-corn silage used in this investigation carried a .011 amount of this factor or factors. The percentage of stalks and ears and the ear stalk ratio check very closely to those reported by Livesay (33), and Ickles (31). The stalks nade up to 64 percent of the silage while the ears accounted for 36 percent of the green weight. It is evident that when regular silage was replaced by grainless- corn silage plus corn-and-cob seal there was no significant change in nilk production. These data indicate that a pound of dry matter in corn grain in silage was equal to a pound of dry matter in ground corn-and-cob meal for milk production. Rusk and Snapp (36) reported that corn grain in silage was of value in wintering beef calves. 'hen ear-corn silage replaced clover hay on the total digestible nu- trient basis, there was a marked increase in milk production which gave further evidence that the corn grain furnished some unknown factor or factors that stimlate nilk production. It was also of interest to note' that whn corn-and-cob seal replaced ear-corn silage, milk production remained at the higher level. Rusk and Supp (36) report that ear-corn silage was equal to corn-and-cob neel on a dry matter basis for beef production. The use of ear-corn silage is of questionable value. The labor re- quired for this practice would be very costly. In case of an early frost and linited silo space the silo could answer as a storage for i-ature grain. The practice would save the grain that might otherwise be lost by spoilage if left in the field or stored in a crib. 1. 5. 4. 6. 7. mm Fifteen lactating dairy cows depleted of ukuown lactation factors and four growing dairy heifers were used in these studies. The average total digestible nutrients cf the grainless-corn silage was 19.6 percent as compared to 21.39 percent for the regular corn silage. The digestible protein of the grainless and regular corn silage was 1.66 and 1.66 percent respectively. 1 pound of total digestible nutrients in grainless-corn silage was equal to a pound of total digestible nutrients in clover hay cut during late blocs stage for silk production. A pound of total digestible nutrients in corn grain was superior to a pound of total digestible nutrients in grainless-com silage for silk production. has corn grain replaced grainless-corn silage on a total) digestible basis, there was an average daily increase of 2.6 pounds of 4 percent fat-corrected silk. during the fifth three-day period. Oorn grain in corn silage was equal in feeding value to corn-and-eob seal pound for pound for silk production. The total digestible nutrients of ear-corn silage had a higher feeding value than the total digestible nutrients of clever hay for milk pro- duction. 10. 11. lhen ear-corn silage replaced clover hay on a total digestible nutri- ent basis, there was an average increase of 4.7 pounds of 4 percent fat-corrected silk during the fifth three-day period. Ear-corn silage was equal to corn-and-cob meal on a total digestible nutrient basis for silk production. Oorn grain and ear-corn silage carried some unknown factor or factors that stisulated silk production. The clover hay used in this study appeared to be low in these unknown factors. 1. 4. 6. 7. 8. 10. -39- um 01m Iiles, Ianly Silos, hsilage and Silage. Orange Judd Oospany, 761 Broadway, New York, N. V. 1889. Johnston, J. I. U. The leading Qualities of the Natural and Artificial Grasses in Different States of Dryness. Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland. 1943.46. Ruffian, 0. I. Silos and Silage. The Penn Quarterly 1:2, p. 61. 1946. flith, R. K. and Proehlich, P., Davis, I. 8., Gardner. I. 3., Rant. J. 8., Isaac, G. J., lendm, S. 71., kilos, J. 1., Southworth, H. I. and Verner, J. Agricultural Statistics. United States Department of Agriculture. 19‘s ' MOtt, Is He The Value of the Digestible latter of Bay as Oospared with the Digestible latter of Com Silage for [ilk Production. Ie. Agr. Exp. Sta. Rpt. pp. 69-96. 1889. Christi, G. I. The Silo and Dairy Production. Purdue Univ., Dept. of Agr. htension Leaflet No. 81. 1917. The Silo and Cattle leader. Purdue Univ. , Dept. of Agr. Cir. lo. 79. 1917. Raecker, T. 1.. - ‘ Silage vs. Ray as a feed for Dairy Cows. Iinn. Agr. hp. Sta. Rept. 1888. Iaircbild, L. H. and Wilbur, J. I. The Value of Silage in the Dairy Ration. Purdue Univ. Agr. hp. Sta. 36.1. nbe 297e 1925. «mm. He 30 00171 Silage in a Dairy Ration. Utah Agr. hp. Sta. Bul. lo. 190. 1924. Converse, R. T. The Value of Silage is the hperisental Ration. Jour. Dairy Sci. 10:5, 1). 17s. 1920. 18. 15. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 85. m4.r. 'e Pe . hperisents with Dairy Cattle. Heb. Agr. hp. Sta. Rpt. p. 34. 1924. “1118.8, Re no. and mm. We Be Alfalfa Ray vs. Alfalfa Ray and Silage for Dairy Cows. mac Aere hp. 358. Rpte pe “Be 1917. Poster, 1... and lelks, J. R. 06!!! 81158. "e Alfalfa Hay. no I. A8]... hp. 858.. .8111. he 122e 1980. Stadler, 1.. (J., Jones, I. 11., Turner, C. 3., and Bernard, P. Ii. Production and reading of Silage. kc. Agr. hp. Sta. Bul. No. 226. 1924. ' Zeasaan, 0. R. Silos Questions and Answers. lie. Agr. hp. Sta. Cir. 110. 87. 1917. “15., Ge ce. and Pratt, A. De Corn Silage Feeding Investigations - Optisus Ascunt of Silage in the Dairy Ration for leonaical Production. Conn. Agr. hp. Sta. 8‘11. lo. 169. 1930. Gupta, R. 8. Relative lei-its of High and Low Silage Peeding to Cows in Iilk. me “d “"8““ 1n India, ”1. 5, ”e 233.251" Ichpbell, C. 7., and Winchester, 8. B. Cattle Feeding Investigation. Ian. Agr. hp. Sta. Cir. No. 86. 1921. Jacobs, 71., and Duncan, 8. R. Casparison of Shock Corn, Crib Corn, and Corn Silage on an Acre Basis for Finishing Two-Year-Old Cattle. Univ. of Ten. Agr. hp. Sta. Bul. Re. 178. 1942. Jordan, I. 8. 00m 3. 3'81138. Crop. um. 631'. hp. 8“. Me ‘0. 11. 1895. Ihite, 0. 0., Chapan, 1.. In Slate, I. L. Jr., and Brown, 8. A. A Casparison of Early, lediu and Late laturing Varieties of Silage Corn for lilk Production. Conn. Agr. hp. Sta. Bul. lo. 121. 1924. Slate, I. L. Jr., Brown, 8. A., hits, 0. 0., and Chnpan, L. I. A Cuparisen of larly, ledim and Late laturing Varieties of Sil- age Corn for lilk Production. Jour. Dairy Sci. 6:6, pp. 382-392. 1923. O O O . . e O O O - I C e O I O O O D e 5 O I C O D I O O O s Q G D ,s 1. 7.1: ..r.rJ.r .. .5 wrn‘hlrc .n s h. 2‘. 27. Odland, 'r. 1., and Inoblanoh, n. 0. Oorn Varieties for Silage in Rhode Inland. Rhode Island Agr. hp. St... 3&1. no. 85'. 19“e Novena, I. 3., and Dnngan, G. E. Type: and Varieties of Don for Silage. Ill. Aer. hp. Sta. M. No. 391. 1933. Yields of Corn Hybrids Harvested tor Silage: And lethods to 13010111110 B.” T110 to 38".”. I11. me he Sta. Bill. H0. ‘9‘. 1942. hb.fl" In. I. and Jon... Do I. heilege Oorn Trials at It. canal, Connecticut. “no A“. We Sta. (“”)e 1940. Iieeonain Agricultural Experiment Station What's New in la:- Science. Bill. No. 443, p. 75. 1939. mt'a new in Fan Science. Dal. No. “9, pp. 74-78. 1940. mm 117: in run Science. m. Ho. 4.51. pp. 21-22. 1941. MOD, 0. no Stover n. lonal Silage. Board's Deirynan, ‘3, p. 80. 1922. Jacobs, 1. and Mean, E. R. A Comparison of Renal Oorn Silage with Grainleee-Oorn Silage for finishing Beef Cattle. Tenn. Aer. hp. Sta. Bnl. lo. 1“. 1930. Live-e1, I. A., Van Landinghan, A. L, and Schneider, B. R. can 811“. M’s. '0 Va. ‘81.. he Sta. mmt Me Me 1960. Ruck, E. P. and Snapp, R. R. Stove): Silage Interior for Iintering Beer calves. Ill. ‘31. m. St‘e Rpt. pp. 35-66. 1929. Rnilton, '1'. 8., and Rusk, H. P. A Technical Stub of the Digestibility of Oorn Stove: Silage for B.“ 00”. 111. Aer. hp. 5‘8. m. H0. 291. 1927. Rank, R. P., and Snapp, R. R. Livestock Investigations. Ill. Aer. hp. Sta. Rpt. pp. 78-99. 1931. O O O . a O C I O O O O C O _ _ - , . n--—*e—- O O a Q . 0 . O O O O .- .- - e u I O _. ‘_ ., ._._....:~ 0 O , .,. . ..,._. — ---- » l a O a 0 O o - O O O ' O .. . I ‘ . I O O 1 I . I . g . Q 1‘ g I O . 1 } . -e e - . I r , { a o -- ° I ‘ I. O D Q 0 37. 39 . 47. 49. -42.. Turner, I. I. Do You Need a Silo? Haas. Agr. Coll. ht. Cir. Ho. (4. 1917. Perkins, A. 1. Loans and Changes of Haterials During Storage of Oorn as Sil- age. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 3'70. 1923. Ragsdalo, A. 0., and turner, O. E. Losses or Nutrients in the Silo and During the Field Curing of come no me Exp. Sta. Me No. “e 1924. 81138. InVBB‘igationao “be We hpe :3th me NOe 189e 1921o Stadlor, L. J., Jones, I. 1., Turner, 0. H. and Bernard, P. l. Production and Peeding or Silage. Io. Agr. hp. Sta. m1. No. 826. 1924. Sh". Re no, and "right, Go Go Nitrogen and Other Losses in Insiling Corn. 0. 8. D. A. 3111. No. 953. 1921. Haydon, 'I. 3., Perkins, A. 3., and Monroe, 0. 1'. Loss of Juice tron Silage. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Dal. No. 58, p. ‘5, 192‘. ““01“, R. B. p and Gal-lap, W. D. Grain Losses in Ieeding Com Silage to Dairy Cows. Joure ‘sre R... :9: 3’ ”e 825.227. 1929. Jordan, I. R., and Jenter, O. G. Digestion and Feeding Experiments. N. Y. Agr. hp. Sta. Dal. Eco 1‘1. legvo ' Iatson, O. J., loodoard, J’. 0., Davidson, W. L, Robinson, 0. H. and lair, Ge we Digestibility Studios with Minute IV. Plano of Nutrition and Digestibility of Corn Silage. Sci. Agr. 19:10, pp. 622-651. 1939. Watson, 0. J., lair, G. W. and Davidson, I. I. Digestibility Studies with Rminants I. Plane of Nutrition and Digestibility of Ray. 801. Agr. 15:7, pp. 476-48?. 1935. Christensen, 1'. I., and Hopper, 1'. B. Digestibile Nutrients and letabolizable Inergy in Certain Silages, Rays and lined nations. Jour. Agr. Res. 57:7, pp. 477-512. 1938. Ion-icon, I. 3. reeds and Feeding. 80th 10.. The lorrioon Publi shing Ocupany, Ithaca, I. Y. 1943. 5t. Schneider, D. H. Feeds of the World. Jarrett Printing Company, Charleston, I. Va. 1947e Dexter, S. 1‘. Heasuring Oorn Yield by field Sampling. Personal Oomnication, lichigan Agr. hp. Sta. 1946. when, 0. P. A lethod or Studying the Deficiencies or Alfalfa Hay and the Feeding Value of Various Reeds as Suppluomts to Alfalfa Ray. Jour. Dairy Sci. 8125. 1938. Bataan, c. 1., Dexter, S. '1'. and Duncan, G. I. The Unknown Lactation rectors in Oorn Silage. Jour. Dairy Sci. 24:8. 1946. lichigan Agr. Exp. Sta. Unpublished Data. 1946. APPENDIX Table 1. Effect of Partial Replacanant of Clover Bay with Grainloss Silage or Oorn-and-Oob Meal on a Total Digestible Nutrient Basis 991m ___.__2__12at 2.121 Days Clover Grainlsss Oorn-and- in Weight [ilk Test Fat 1'. c. u.‘ may Corn Silage Gob Ileal [1].! lb ,, 11);, L, 125, 11);, 1,119I lbs. lbs, ‘8 - 2202 2.9 a.“ 18.5 35.0 " " 61 " 33.3 3.0 o61 17o3 35o0 - " 5‘ - 21.5 See ' .65 18.3 23.5 ‘ ‘ 5' " 21. 7 300 0‘5 180‘ 30.0 - - ‘0 “ 19.2 Sol 060 16.5 260° " " Average - 81.0 3.0 .63 17.8 29.9 - - 63 " ”.7 3.]. e64 17.9 1500 5600 '- ‘6 "’ 210‘ 5.0 0“ 18.2 9.0 55.0 " ‘9 " 31.9 5.8 .69 1901 1500 6500 - 72 " 20.2 3e 2 .‘5 17o° 12. V 55.0 " 75 "' 80.9 3. 8 069 18o 7 150° 55.0 " a " 19.9 3.3 066 1708 15.0 55.0 - Auras. " 33.8 3.2 066 18.5 13.6 550° - 81 " 22o3 3.2 .71 19e6 10.0 " 10e8 B4 - 24. 7 5.0 . 'M 21.0 15.0 - 10.8 8' " 23.4 2.9 .68 19e5 15.0 - 10o8 90 - 85o; 300 o N 21.5 15.0 " 1008 93 " 83.6 30° .7]. 20.0 15.0 " 10.8 96 "’ 23.0 2.9 .67 19.2 1500 " 10.8 A'.m° ° 24.0 3.0 e 71 mol l‘o 2 " 10.3 *4! rat-corrected milk. Table 2. Direct of Partial Replac-nent or Clover Hay with Grainless Silage or Corn-and-Oob Heal on a Total Digestible Nutrient Basis t w ~ Days . Clover Grainless Oorn-and- in Weight H111: 'l‘est Pat 1'. c. n.‘ Hay Oorn Silage Ooh Heal b b b 50 1150 320‘ go 8 0.91 86. 7 55.0 - - 53 1119 32.1 2.8 .90 26.3 35.0 - «- 5‘ 1114 ”o‘ 208 .83 24.3 3107 - - 59 1158 2908 308 1011 28.3 55.0 " - ‘8 1103 28. 9 3. 2 o ’2 25. ‘ 32. 3 - "' Ant-‘0 1129 “3.5 So]- .93 26.2 33.8 - - ‘5 - 30.6 2., ea“ 25.6 15o° 55.0 - ‘8 " 32o: Sol 1.00 27.9 14.3 55.0 - 71 - 320‘ 500 .97 27.5 15.0 55.0 " " "’ 290‘ 2.3 .88 “o1 14oz 56cc " '7 ' ”.1 3.2 a“ 86.5 15.0 55e° - m " ago? See on 85.4 15e0 5590 "’ AVON. - $08 3.0 .92 £602 14.8 550° - 83 - 50.9 3e]. .96 26o 7 150° " 1008 8‘ - 2906 208 .83 24.2 150° - 1008 89 - 29.9 3.4 1.02 87.2 15.0 - 10.8 92 - 30.8 5.9 1.80 30.3 15.0 " 10.8 95 - 31.8 8.8 e39 “o1 15.0 " 10.8 98 - 30.3 2.9 .88 25.3 15.0 - 10.8 AWN. - was 3.2 O“ 2‘06 1500 " 1008 .3 ‘4 tat-corrected nu. Table 3. Most of Partial Replacanant or Clover Bay with Grainless Silage or Corn-and-Oob laal on a Total Digestible Nutrient Basis M Days Clover Grainless Corn-and- u Ioight n11: Test let I. c. l.’ Bay Oorn snag. Cob Heal s s b 251 1313 13.3 3.3 0.46 12.4; 35.0 - - 80‘ 1299 11.3 3.0 .3‘ 9.‘ 35.0 - - 25' 1326 11., 3.4 .‘0 10.6 25.7 "' " 260 1353 10.5 3.3 .85 9.4 30.0 - - 865 1290 10.8 3.8 .39 9.9 87.5 - - Average 1512 11.5 3.4 .59 10.4 30.6 - - 2“ - 11.5 5.2 .3, 10.2 15.0 55.0 - “9 - 12.8 2.8 .3 10.5 12.3 55.0 " 272 - 11.0 8.9 .32 9.3 15.0 55.0 - 375 " 11.5 3.2 .35 9.9 15.0 55.0 - 27B " 11.2 3.0 .M ”.5 15.0 55.0 - 881 " 11.6 3.1 .3‘ 10.0 15.0 ”.0 " Average - 11.6 3.0 .35 9.9 14.6 55.0 - 284 - 12.2 3.1 .58 10.6 15.0 - 10.8 887 - 12.3 3.2 .39 10.8 18.0 - 10.8 290 " 10.5 3.3 .35 9.4 15.0 " 10.8 893 - 10.1 3.‘ ." 9.8 15.0 - 10.8 296 "' 9.2 3.‘ .3]- Bo‘ 15.0 - 10.8 2” " 9.0 3.5 .32 8.3 15.0 " 10.8 1mm. - 10.6 3.3 .35 9.0 15.0 - 10.8 *4 tat-corrected milk. - 47 - Effect of Partial Replsounent or Clover Bay with Grainlsss Silage or Com-and-Cob [951 on a Total Digestible Nutrient T551. 4. Basis 991.235: Days in Weight [ilk Test list 255 1227 16.5 5.5 0.54 14.7 258 1220 14.0 5.0 .42 11.9 261 1256 12. 7 5.5 .42 11.4 264 1255 11.2 5.2 .56 9.9 267 1246 11.6 5.5 .41 10.7 Average 1241 15. 2 5. 5 . 45 11. 7 270 1254 15.1 5.4 .45 11.9 275 1245 12.4 5. 2 . 40 10. 9 276 1500 11.4 5.2 .56 10.0 279 1255 9.2 5.9 .56 9.1 282 1256 10.5 5.5 .55 9.4 285 1244 9.5 5.0 .28 7.9 Aunge 1255 11.0 5.5 .57 9.9 288 1259 9.8 5.2 .51 8.6 291 1251 10. 7 5. 4 . 56 9. 7 294 1250 9.6 5.6 .55 9.0 297 1265 9.2 5.8 .5 8.9 500 1258 9.9 5.5 .55 9.2 505 1258 8.8 5.8 .55 8.5 Average 1244 9. 7 5.6 . 54 9.0 Clover Grainlsss I. 0. U.‘ Hay 35.0 35.0 31. 1' 35.0 33.3 36.0 15.0 14.7 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 55.0 53. 7 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 54.8 Oorn-and- corn silage Cob [051 10.8 10.0 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 ‘4 tat-corrected nu. m1. 5. Effect of Partial Rolalaoment of Clover Bay with Grainloae 8111330 or Corn-and-Cob Heal on a Tote-1 Digestible Nutriant Basia 0911.11.16 at Day: Clover Grainleaa Corn-and- 1n Weight :11]: Test rat I. c. E" Bay Corn snag. Cob Ian]. ‘1}! lbs, gag. i 1kg. 19:. 1b 8, lbs. lbs. 153 1221 ”.6 3.2 0.66 18.1 35.0 - - 15“ 1182 1'08 30‘ 0“ 160 7 $00 - - 159 11” 18.5 30‘ 063 16.8 32. 7 - - 162 1220 1,. 4 3. ’ 064 16.6 350° - " 165 1145 17.6 508 0" 17.1 380 7 - - Am. 1189 180‘ 305 .65 17.1 3401 " - 168 1216 1808 50‘ 063 17.1 150° 550° - 171 1230 18.2 3.7 .67 17.4 11.? 55.0 - I'M. 1257 19.2 3.4 .65 17.5 15.0 55.0 - 117 1173 1801 3.5 o 63 16. V 14.3 55.0 " 1w 1155 19.0 506 .68 17.9 150° 550° - 183 1189 1808 306 .68 17. 7 150° 550° " Anne. 1803 18. 7 3.5 . 66 1 7. 4 14. 3 55.0 - 18‘ 1153 w.9 30‘ o W 1906 1‘00 - 10.8 189 115C 2101 306 0 x 19.9 150° - 10.8 192 1160 24. 2 305 085 22.4 1500 "’ 10.8 195 1168 84. 7 3.5 .89 23.2 15.0 - 10.8 198 1115 8‘. 7 3.9 .96 24.3 15.0 - 10.8 801 1140 81.9 3.6 . 79 30.6 15.0 - 10.8 Ava-ago 1149 22.9 3.6 .83 21. 7 14.8 - 10.8 *4 tat-«meted milk. 10010 6. Effect of Partial Replaouent 0f Clover Hay with 6101111003 811030 or Corn-and-Cob 11001 on a Total Digestiblo Nutriont Basis m A Day: Clover Grainloas Corn-and- m Weight 11111: that rat 1'. c. n.* Hay Corn. snag. Gob Heal 2.52 971 13.5 3.8 0.51 15.1 5.0 - - 255 988 12.5 5.9 . 49 12.5 35.0 - - 2‘8 101’ 11.3 ‘0 2 0" 1106 2500 " - 271 103‘ 110‘ 401 0“ 1108 3500 " - 27‘ 1°06 1005 ‘0‘ 0‘5 1009 80.7 " - 1mm. 1004 11.0 4.1 .48 10.9 51. a - - 277 1025 11.5 3.8 .43 11.0 15.0 55.0 - 880 1025 1108 ‘00 0" 1108 1303 5500 " 88: 10” 100‘ 5.8 0‘0 1°01 150° “00 " 2“ 1°25 1005 30 V 039 100° 150° 550° "' 289 1019 9.8 4.0 .39 9.8 15.0 55.0 - 292 1°85 1°05 400 0‘2 1005 150° “00 " 1701.030 1032 10. 1 3.9 .42 10.5 14. 7 55.0 - 295 10“ 110 7 306 0‘2 1100 1303 - 100. 898 971 110. 402 0‘9 1109 1500 ‘ 1008 501 985 10.1 4. 8 .42 10.4 15.0 - 10.8 504 987 10.2- 4.2 .45 10.5 15.0 - 10.8 507 981 9.5 4.5 .40 9. 7 15.0 - 10.8 510 9’]? 8.5 4.1 .35 8. 'I 15.0 - 10.8 Ammo 991 10.3 4.1 .45 11.0 14. 4 - 10.8 *fi tat-corrected milk. Table 'I. mat of Partial Replaoanent 0f Clover Bay with Grain“: Silage or Corn-and-Oob 1100.1 011 a Total Digestible Nutrient Basia Day- Clover Grainleu Oorn-and- 1n W013ht 1111!: Int rat 1'. 0. M.‘ Hay Oorn snag. Gob Heel 1) 228 1195 11.3 3.2 0.35 9.9 55.0 - - 231 117’ 1108 305 039 100‘ 5500 " " 234 1198 10.8 3.3 .35 9.7 51. 7 - - 257 1219 809 30‘ 052 80‘ 3500 " - 240 1191 7.5 5.3 .25 5.8 35.0 - - Ava-0.0 1196 10.0 5. 5 . 55 9.0 55. 9 - - 845 " 8.‘ 30 3 0 38 705 1500 5500 " w - 808 208 085 708 12.3 550° - 249 - 9.0 5.0 . 27 7. 7 15.0 50.0 - 852 " 8. 3 5.5 7 . 29 7. 7 15.0 550° - 25.5 " 8.5 300 .26 9.£ 1500 $00 " 258 " 8.0 8. 7 .82 60‘ 1500 ”.0 - Auras. " 80 5 5.1 . 26 7.3 1‘06 560G - 2‘1 " 808 20 7 0 u 701 1‘00 - 1008 8‘4 - 8.6 2.6 .22 6.7 1500 - 10.8 267 " 804 3.0 .26 701 1‘0 7 " 10.8 270 - 9.5 5.1 . 50 8. 3 15.0 - 10.8 875 " 803 2.8 .83 ' 6.3 1500 " 10.8 3” H 8.3 2. 7 .22 5.7 15.0 - 10.8 Ava-0.0 - 8. 7 2.8 . 24 7.1 14.8 - 10.0 *4 rat-corrected 1111:. -51- Table 8. Effect of Replaeanent of Regular Corn Silage with Grainlees- Corn Silage Plus Corn-and-Cob Meal L Cow A27 3811:1911 Egg Days Clover Regular Corn-and- in Weight I111: Test rat I. c. u.* Hey Corn Silage Cob Heal mg 15;. mg. fi 15;. 11m. 111g. 1M. 1125. 210 1090 56.9 5.0 1.11 51.4 15.0 50.0 - 315 1157 31.8 301 .99 27.5 150° 5°00 " 216 1162 50. 7 5. 2 .98 27.0 15.0 50.0 - 219 1168 3105 3.2 1.00 27.5 11.7 50.0 "’ 222 1165 52.0 5. 2 1.02 26.0 15.0 50.0 - 825 1148 89.8 303 098 26.5 1303 50.0 - Average 1145 52.1 5. 2 1.01 27. 1 14. 2 50.0 - Grainlou Oorn Silage 228 1150 28.7 5.2 .92 25.5 15.0 52.5 I7.5 251 1180 29. 2 5. 2 . 95 25. 7 14. 5 52.5 'I. 5 254 1215 27.8 5.5 .92 24.9 15.0 52.5 7.5 25'] 1155 26. 7 5.1 .85 25.1 14.0 52.5 7.5 240 1155 25.9 5. 5 . 79 21.4 15.0 52.5 7.5 245 1182 25.1 5.5 .85 22. 5 15.0 52. 5 7.5 Average 1175 26.9 5.2 .87 25.8 14. 7 52.5 7.5 Regular Corn $119.30 246 1175 20.7 5.6 .75 19.5 15.5 50.0 - 2‘9 118‘ 190 v 305 069 18. 2 15.0 $00 "’ 352 11” 190‘ 30 7 0 72 18.5 140 1 5000 - 255 1302 17.4 306 .63 1604 15.0 50.0 - 358 1170 1604 306 .59 150‘ 1303 $00 - a]. 115‘ 1501 30 6 05‘ 1‘0 2 1500 50.0 - Average 117'] 18.1 5.6 .65 17.0 14.4 50.0 - *4 fet-oorreoted nu. - 52 - m1. 9. Hint of Replaounont of Regular 00m Silage with Ominous-Corn snag. Plus Corn-and-Cob Heal ' 91.412 Days Glover Ragular Oorn-ands in Ioight nun: that rat I. c. 11:“ Hay Corn Silage Cob Meal b 105 1210 85.5 3.5 0.89 23.6 1500 50.0 - 108 1148 27.2 3.3 .90 24.3 15.0 50.0 - m . 113‘ 86.5 3.3 .8, 23.7 150° 50.0 - 114 1133 27.2 3.2 .8? 23.9 12.3 50.0 - 11, 11“ 280‘ 30‘ 097 85.8 1500 50.0 " 180 111‘ 27.1 3.2 .87 23.8 , 11. 7 500° - Average 1148 27.0 3.3 .90 24.2 14.0 50.0 - Grainloss Corn Silas. 123 1133 27.7 3.2 .89 24.4 15.0 32.5 7.5 125 1131 28.0 3.3 .92 25.1 14.7 32.5 7.5 129 1203 26.4. 3.3 .81 23.6 15.0 32.5 7.5 132 1130 25.5 3.3 .84 22.8 14.7 32.5 7.3 135 1130 25.9 3.3 .85 23.2 15.0 32.5 1.5 138 1142 26.0 3.4 .88 23.7 15.0 32.5 7.5 Average 1148 26.8 3.3 .88 23.8 14.9 32.5 7.5 Regular Oorn $11330 1‘1 1153 85.1 30 5 .38 23. 2 14.0 50.0 " 144 1155 25.4 3.2 .81 22.4 15.0 50.0 - 1" 1150 85. 3 3. 1 o " 2‘0 3 1405 $00 " 150 1173 24.3 3.7 .91 23.5 15.0 50.0 - 153 1157 25.8 3.4 .88 23.5 13.3 50.0 - 1“ 1171 85.1 305 088 2302 15.0 ”0° - ‘7.” 116° 85. 8 30 5 o 88 23. 3 14. ‘ 50.0 - *4! rat-oorrootodulilk. -53- Table 10. Effect of Replaoment of Regular Corn Silage with Gratnleee- Gorn Silage Plus Oorn-and-cob Heal M t 4123.11 Days Clover Regular Corn-and- 1n Ieight Inn: Test lat r. c. I.’ Hay Oorn Silage Cob Heal b no 1090 36.9 3.5 1.05 27.3 15.0 50.0 - 173 1094 28.2 3.7 1.04 23.9 13.0 30.0 - 1” 1095 85. 6 Sea e92 Z‘e ‘ 15e° 50.0 - 1” 1102 25e3 3e: e89 23e“ 15.0 “e7 " 188 11m 25.? 3.3 e98 2‘e9 15.0 50.0 " 185 1105 “e 5 3.5 e93 23.8 15.0 45.3 " Average 1101 23.6 3. 7 .97 25.2 13.0 46. 7 - Grainleee Oorn Silage 188 1110 24.1 3.8 .92 23.4 15.0 32.5 7.3 191 1110 24.5 3.3 .88 23.0 9.3 32.3 7.3 194 1134 23.8 3. 9 .93 23.4 15.0 32.3 7.3 197 1113 23.3 3.3 .84 21.9 13. 3 32.5 7.3 200 1111 24.3 3.3 .87 22.8 15.0 32.5 7. 3 203 1109 23. 3 3. 9 . 92 23. 2 15.0 32. 5 7.5 AVOm. 11m 23., 3e 7 em 2300 13e8 32. 5 7.5 Regular Corn Silage m 1110 mes ‘e‘ e92 ' 22e0 1207 50.0 " m 1115 19e0 ‘e‘ e87 80. 7 15.0 50.0 "' 212 1100 82.0 ‘02 e92 22. 7 11.0 50.0 ‘- 213 1110 21.3 4. 2 .91 22.2 13.0 50.0 - 818 11m 21. 8 ‘00 .85 81.2 13.0 ”.0 - 821 1100 lee 7 ‘0: e” 19.5 15.0 50.0 '7 AVON. 1109 me‘ ‘e 3 e88 21.4 13e‘ 50.0 - *a rat-corrected 1111:. . -5... .- ..,_.—., Table 11. Effect of Replacement of Regular Oorn Silage with Grainleea- Oorn Silage Plus Corn-and-Cob Heal £91.93! Days clover Regular Corn-and- 1n Ielght I111: Test rat I. c. If any Oorn Silage 00b Meal ‘0 1‘. 1132 22.1 309 0.35 22e4 15e° 50.0 - 172 1104 21.9 3.8 .83 21.3 15.0 50.0 «- 1” 11” me‘ ‘eo e82 30.5 15e0 50.0 " 1m 1100 ”.2 303 o 7? 190‘ 15.0 36. 1 - 181 1132 19e4 3e 9 e ” 19e1 15.0 50.0 "’ 184 1161 18.8 3.8 . 71 ~ 18. 2 13.0 42. 7 - 17013830 1125 30.5 3.9 e N 33.8 15.0 “e6 - Gram”- Oern Silage 187 1125 18.9 3.8 . 72 18.3 13.0 32.3 7.3 190 1149 19.4 3.3 . 70 18.2 15.0 27.3 7.3 193 1192 19.1 3.8 . 73 18.5 13.0 32. 5 7.3 196 1150 18.9 3.3 .62 16.9 15.0 21.0 7.5 199 1131 18.6 4.0 . 74 18.6 15.0 32.5 7.5 202 1128 18. 2 3.8 .69 17. 7 15.0 32.5 7.3 Average 1146 18.9 3. 7 . 70 18.0 15.0 29.8 7.3 Regular Corn Silage 205 1181 Ive]. 4.0 e 68 l'el 15.9 “e 7 ’ m8 113‘ 17.5 3e9 e68 17e2 15.0 4°00 " 211 1120 18.1 4.0 . 72 18.1 15.0 34.0 «- 21‘ 1146 17e6 ‘02 e 7‘ 18.1 15.0 40.0 " 217 1159 17e9 4.0 e68 17.0 15e0 30.3 ' 220 1127 16.2 4.0 .64 16.2 15.0 40.0 - AVON. 1135 17e5 4e° e69 17e 3 16e° 35e1 - ‘4 rat-oorreoted nu. Table 12. Effect of Replaoment of Regular Corn Silage with Grainlees- Oorn Silage Plus Corn-and-Oob leal M Dave Glover Regular Corn-and- in v.13» lilk Test rat 1. c. If Hay Oorn Silage Gob Heal 8’ 11” we ‘ 3e1 Gee: 17.6 15.0 50.0 " 92 1140 20.0 3.0 .60 17.0 15.0 50.0 - 95 1107 19.2 3.1 .50 15.0 15.0 50.0 - 98 1132 lge‘ 3e]. e‘o 15.3 15e° 38.3 ' 101 1143 19.2 3e]. e60 16 e6 15.0 50.0 '7 10‘ 1152 18.]. 3e: e60 15.2 15.0 . “e3 - 1791130 1156 lge‘ 5e]. e61 10.8 15e° “e9 - Graineee Oorn Silage 107 1140 17.4 3.2 .59 15.3 15.0 32.5 7.5 110 1144 18.0 3. 3 .59 10.1 10.0 32.5 7.5 113 1&0 17. 3 3.1 .54 15.0 15.0 32.5 7.5 115 1144 17.4 2.9 .50 14.5 15.0 20.8 7.5 11’ 1138 1‘e 1 3e 2 e” 1‘e 7 15.0 ”e5 Yes 122 1143 17. 2 5. 2 .55 15.1 15.0 32.5 7.3 Average 1153 17. 3 3. 2 . 53 13.1 14. 2 30.6 7. 3 Regular Oorn Silage 125 1100 15o 0 3e ‘ e51 13. 7 lbeo 38. 3 " 128 1139 15e3 362 0‘9 13.5 15e° 40.0 - 131 1128 15. ‘ 5e ‘ e 66 1‘e 9 15e 0 ”e0 - 13‘ 1035 15e9 3e ‘ e54 1‘e 5 15.0 40.0 ‘7 13, 11.15 l‘e‘ 3e: .48 18e9 15.0 30.0 - 140 1122 12.8 3e ‘ e“ 11.3 15eo 40.0 "' Average 1107 15.0 3.4 . 50 13. 3 15.0 34.6 - *4 rat-corrected ailk. Table 13. Effect of Replacanent of Regular Corn Silage with Grainleee- Born Silage Plus Corn-and-Cob Meal ___ _ M , , a W W ”W _ Days Clover Regular Corn-and— in Weight 1111]: Test Fat 1‘. c. n.* Hay Corn Silage Cob Heal b b e a e 36 1254 43.0 3. 7 1.59 41.1 15.0 50.0 - 39 1218 43.8 5.1 2.23 51.0 15.0 50.0 - ‘2 1192 41oz ‘ee 1.90 “e9 15e0 50eo - ‘5 118‘ 39.6 4.1 1.62 ‘002 15e0 2803 - 48 1180 37c: 3.8 I.“ “e‘ 15e° 50.0 ‘7 51 1131 36.4 3.6 1.31 34.2 15.0 43.3 - Agerege 1198 40.3 4.2 1.68 41.3 15.0 45.3 - Grainlese Corn Silage 54 1161 36.3 3.5 1.27 33.6 15.0 32.5 7.5 57 1230 35. 2 3.5 l. 23 32.6 13. 7 32. 5 7.5 60 1185 33.8 3.6 1.22 31.8 13.0 32.5 7.5 63 1147 35. 7 3.5 1.23 33.0 15.0 25.8 7.5 66 1144 33.3 3.3 1.10 29.8 15.0 32.5 7.3 69 1143 32.1 3.5 1.12 29. 7 15.0 32.5 7.5 Average 1168 34.4 3.5 1.20 31.8 14.8 31.4 7.5 Regular Corn Silage 72 11% 50.5 3e3 1.01 27.3 11.7 ”00 " 75 1137 32.9 3.6 1e18 30.9 15e0 50.0 - 78 1160 31.9 See 1.02 88.1 13.0 50.0 " 81 1145 31.9 3.2 1.02 28.1 15.0 50.0 " 8‘ 1149 320‘ z. 7 .87 “.1 1500 “.3 - 87 1140 33.0 3e 7 1e 82 31.5 15.0 50.0 " Average 1146 32.1 3.3 1.05 28. 7 14.1 49.4 - ‘4 tat-corrected milk. w -57- Table 14. Effect of Partial Replacement of Clover Bay with Ear-Corn Silage or Corn-end-Cobnlieel on. a Total Digestible Nutrient 8881 a A; EV £9 Ratigg gag __ We . Clover Ear-Corn Oorn-and- in Weight nun: Test Fat F. c. x.* Hay Silage Cob Heel an; 11):. 1.“. fi lug. 11):, 122: 19;. 1mg. 101 995 23.8 3.0 6. 71 20.2 :4. 7 - - 10‘ 1103 23e ‘ 3e]. e 73 20.2 35.0 " ' 107 1°82 849° 3. 3 0 fl 2106 55.0 - - 110 um 25. ‘ 3e: e“ 22o 7 35o 7 - - 115 1063 24.3 3.0 e 73 m. 7 35.0 - - A702“. 1069 “e 2 Sol 0 N 21.1 “e 7 - " 115 1081 35. 5 3e]. e 79 ”.5 19. 7 25.0 - 11’ 10” 88.5 30 ‘ .97 8509 $00 5.0 - 122 1071 29. 7 2.6 o 77 23.5 20.0 25.0 - 126 1055 ”.3 3.1 .94 26.2 ”.0 2500 - 128 10'” 32.1 2.9 .93 25.8 20.0 25.0 - 1Q. 1075 28. 7 2e 7 e 77 23.1 lge 5 25.0 - Aura-8. 1067 age]. 5.0 e86 “e4 19.5 25.0 - 13‘ 1°” 50.‘ 3.2 a” 26.8 ”.0 - 9.0 137 1020 29. 5 2. '7 . 79 23.5 20.0 - 9.0 140 1054 27.9 30° .83 25. 7 20.0 “ 9.0 145 1050 29.5 3.1 .91 25. 5 19.8 - 9.0 1“ 10'” 31.3 3.0 eg‘ 25.5 18.0 " 9.0 A7013“. 1056 89. 7 Sea e89 25.8 1906 - 90° *4 tat-eorrected 111k. 61‘". u-.)'. K-U'IO» Table 15. Effect of Partial Replacement of Clover Bay with Ear-00111 Silage or Corn-.Gndcwb'lleai on a Total Digestible Nutrient Basie M Days - Clover larCorn Corn-end-Gob in Weight null: Test rat 1. c. n.* Hay Silage Heal 94W 163 1112 1‘e‘ 3. ‘ 0.49 13.1 23e3 " " 1“ 1151 12o 7 3e: 0‘2 11.4 350° - " 1“ 1161 12.8 30‘ O“ 11.5 35.0 " " 162 1153 15.2 Se: e“ 1202 mes - - 155 1188 13e6 305 .68 12.6 35.0 - - A7033. 1153 13e5 Se‘ e“ 12.2 30.5 - " 158 1174 13.8 3. 4 .47 12.5 15.0 25.0 - 151 1148 15.1 3.4 .51 13. 7 20.0 25.0 - 1“ 110° 15.4 5.2 e“ 13e‘ 15.0 ”.0 ' 167 1100 1509 2.8 .45 1390 ”.0 25.0 " 1” 1100 15.5 5.0 .50 14.0 ”.0 25.0 - 175 1110 15.5 3.1 .48 13.5 13.5 25.0 - Am. 1122 15o ‘ 3e 2 e 43 13. ‘ l7e 2 25.0 - 1” 1.110 150 7 301 0‘9 13e6 ”.0 " 90° 1” 1120 15. 4 5.1 . 50 14.1 $1.0 '- 9.0 182 1155 15.5 5.0 .49 14.0 20.0 - 9.0 185 1123 17e‘ 3.5 e51 l‘e 3 19.3 " 9.0 188 1138 16e8 3e‘ .57 15o 2 18.0 " 99° Average 1125 16.6 3. 2 .53 14.6 19.6 - 9.0 *4 tat-corrected milk. \(I l '2'704' Table 16. Effect of Partial Replacuent of Clover Bay with Ber-Oorn Silage or Com-and-Cob‘ Meal. on a Total Digestible Nutrient Beeia Ml Days Clover tar-Corn Oorn-end- in Weight nun: Test rat I. 0. ll.‘ Hay snag. Cob [ed 8 223 1133 15. 3 3. 9 0.60 15.1 34. 3 - - 2% 11 70 140 3 4e 5 e ‘1 14. 9 35.0 - - . 229 1155 13.0 ‘0‘ 06° 1‘. 2 35.0 " " 232 1180 15. 7 4.3. .59 14. a 20.3 - - 835 1187 13.6 4. 3 . 58 14. 2 35.0 - - Average 116'! 14.0 4.3 .60 14. 5 31.9 - - 238 1159 1‘00 4.0 057 1‘. 2 8e 3 25.0 "' 8‘1 n“ 17.0 3., .63 16.2 20.0 85.0 - m 1150 17e5 3., .68 17.2 10e0 2500 " “7 11% 19.0 3. 7 o '0 18.]. wee 25.0 - 850 1115 19.4 3.5 . N 18.2 20.0 35.0 - 353 11m 1806 3.8 . 71 18.0 10.0 86.0 - Average 11.35 17.5 3.8 .67 17.0 14. 7 85.0 9.0 85‘ 1120 19.0 3.5 .68 17.9 80.0 - 9.0 269 1130 19e8 ‘00 o 79 19.8 18.0 " 9.0 862 1130 17.5 3.8 .56 17.0 18.0 - 9.0 865 1150 19.: 4.0 0 ” 19.: 15.3 ' 9.0 258 1135 15.6 ‘0 7 o 73 17.2 80.0 - 9.0 Anna. 1131 18.5 4.0 .72 18.2 17.9 - 9.0 *4! tat-corrected nilk. L L” ‘nbf' ‘-mv f} 0 e o e e o O O O I o e O O O O O a o o O A 0 O O U o e n I O O O b O - - '. O O Tabl. 11. Exact or Parnal‘neplaoument of Clover Bay with Ear-Corn Silage or Corn-ands-Cob Heal on a Total Digestible Nutrient Basin 1 Com; Days Clonr Bar-Corn Oorn-and? in Weight n11: Test Fat 1'. c. u.* may Silage Gob Meal In; 1kg, 19;, i b be be 99 - 21.1 2.9 0.61 17.6 32.3 " - 102 - 18.9 3.1 .59 16.3 35.0 - - 106 " 1’.‘ 3.2 .56 15.5 35.0 " ‘- 108 " 16.8 3.4 .57 15.‘ “.0 " " 111 " 18.1 3.1 .56 15. 7 35.0 ' " Aurege - 18.5 3.1 .58 16.1 34.8 - - 114 981 19.9 3.4 .68 18.1 15.3 25.0 - 117 985 24.9 3.1 .77 21.5 ”.0 25.0 - 120 935 25.4; 2.8 . 71 m.8 18. 7 25.0 - 125 926 88.0 2.9 .81 23.‘ ”.6 85.6 '9 I“ 930 “.8 2.9 . 78 w. 7 ”.0 25.0 - 129 930 85.2 2.9 . 75 2.1.0 18. 7 25.0 - Anm. 9‘8 24. 7 3.0 . 7‘ 20.9 18.8 25.0 - 152 932 25. 5 2.9 . '4 21. 3 20.0 " 9.0 135 9“ 29.8 8.0 .81 83.1 ”.0 - 9.0 138 900 25.4 3.0 .” 21.“ m.0 " 9.0 141 910 25.0 3.3 .82 28.3 m.0 " ’.° 1“ '12 , 83., 3.1 .73 ”.5 ”.0 - 9.0 Atom. 920 25.9 3.1 . '7 21. 7 20.0 " ’.° *4 rat-«mated milk. _ . . _ . . . . O ‘ . . C a o 0 o o p o o . . o . o n o u . . I _ . O .J P... . I a O o I I o O o O I I o I O O . o I H“ . . . 9 . .1 U o c . o o a o o o o . . o o I o . . o o J O o m: . A o I . v . o o o I o O I o o . O o o . u > . . o . . I o o I c O . O O O o I . O o . a D n _ ._ E _ . 1 . . . . _ . . . 1 . u . . . o c - O _ . _ _ _ a _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . o o o o u ‘ . .> . . . n \ h1..".1,muvu‘|.l 5.! 3+ J L -51.. m1. 18. Effect of Partial Replacanent of Glover Hay with Ear-Corn Silas. or. Corn-.aimd-rCob Meal on a Total Digestible Nutrimt Basis mm: _ . ______W_____ Days 010":- Ear-Gorn Corn-and- in might run Tout lat F. o. If Hay Silage Cob Heal n]; 1b g, 1kg. t 19:. ' 1p 8. 123. 1kg. lbg. 818 10“ 1‘. 7 5.1 0. 75 1 7.1 3‘. 5 - " 821 1119 11.8 4.8 .57 15.2 35.0 " - 224 1187 11.4- 5.1 .58 13.3 35.0 - - 227 1127 11. 7 ‘. 7 .55 12.9 33.0 "' - 250 1191 12. 6 ‘.8 .60 14.1 35.0 "‘ " Auras. 1142 12. 8 4.9 .61 1‘.1 3‘. 5 " " 255 1141 13. 7 4. 'I .64 15.1 19. 3 25.0 - 255 1.120 17.5 4.4 . 77 18. 5 20.0 25.0 - 839 1120 18.1 3.9 . 71 17.3 19.3 25.0 - 342 1135 20.4 5. 1 . 75 19.5 ”.0 25.0 "' 245 mm 19.6 3.8 . 7‘ 19.0 20.0 85.0 " 248 1132 19.3 3.9 . 75 19.0 19.3 25.0 " Ann. 1130 18.1 ‘.1 . 75 18. 2 19. 7 25.0 - 251 1132 20.8 3.9 . 79 19.9 ' no.0 - 9.0 254. 1105 17.9 4.5 . '5 18.7 20.0 - 9.0 257 1135 15.3 4.4 .87 16.2 20.0 - 9.0 $0 1130 1‘.’ 4.6 .‘8 ' 15.2 19.3 "' 9.0 283 1100 12. 'l 4.5 .5? 13.6 20.0 - 9.0 A7.” 1120 15.2 4.3 .69 16.8 19.9 " 9.0 *4 tat-«meted milk. I . ' VI, qr p. (Julia; ..|1 1 x A 1‘1. . 1.II.rllrl I4. _,.--v o I O O O n _ o o c o O O I I o c n O C I 9 . O 0 I Q . . . . — u _ _ . . D «racD R. m M 'n.:-o } “if! (4 ./-_(( ‘ "I (“f {Ii ‘ JUL -- :3 '48 Feb 19 14.9 m ""- \ ‘,’. -11.). D9533 Dunn