NUTWTNE VALUE OF ERQ'ED! aims FOR GROW’ENG AND FATTEEVEENG M5435 Thesis for trim Beam 04 Mn. 9. MiCHQQAN S‘FATE COiaEGE Gem-g9 Rabat!- Jehnsen i954 ' mists ‘ ‘ ‘ i g Thisisto certify that the _ I thesis entitled Nutritive Value of Dried Beans for Growing and Fattening Lambs presented by George hobert Johnson .7 ' has been accepted towards fulfillment . " of the requirements for I Mam ##me ,Q.J?J¢¢/w Major infessor Date MHZ I 7/:7 1‘1'r\ .. L. .;.. . ‘5‘ me I. Quit-5’5"- I‘ I. on _ 1-." 5.5. ‘ '_-I_ELE'JE_‘._E L": L'-Z’".I,_ _ NUTRITIVE VALUE OF DRIED BEANS FOR GROWING AND FA’ITENIN G IAMBS By GEORGE ROBERT JOHNSON A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Animal Husbandry 195,4 The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to his Guidance Committee Chairman, Doctor J. A. Hoefer, Professor of Animal Husbandry, for his supervision and assistance during this investigation and with the preparation of this manuscript. Grate- ful acknowledgment is extended to Guidance Committee members, Doctor R. H. Nelson, Professor and Head of the Department of Animal Husbandry; Doctor R. W. Luecke, Professor of Agricultural Chemistry; Doctor E. P. Reixn’ke ,Professor of Physiology and Pharmacology; and Doctor Frank Tharp, J r., Professor of Animal Pathology and Graduate Council representative for their suggestions and assistance. The writer is greatly indebted to Doctor J. P. Willman, Professor of Animal Husbandry at Cornell University, for his kind and valuable aid in making emerimental animals and facilities avail- able and for the use of his unpublished work on the problem. Sincere thanks is extended to Doctor R. G. Warner for his sug- gestions and help with this investigation, especially the nitrogen utilization and digestibility studies. Grateful acknowledgment is also due Doctor H. H. Williams for supplying the amino acid analyses, Doctor R. F. Davis for supervising the chemical analyses, and Doctor C. R. Henderson for his advice on the statistical procedures. The administrative assistance which made the tine and facil- ities available to conduct this work rendered by Doctor K. L. Turk, Head 'of the Department of Animal Husbandry; Professor S. J. Brownell, Project leader of Animal Husbandry Extension; and Professor M. D. Lacy, Supervisor of the General Livestock Extension Project, all of Cornell University, is deeply appreciated. The author wishes to thank Mr. Clifford Grippin and Mr. G. L. Hunt for their capable care and management of the experimental lambs used in these studies. Sincere thanks is due Mrs. Annie 0. Hover for typing and assist- ing in the organization of this manuscript. To his wife, Beatrice, the author extends his deepest appre- ciation for her continued encouragement which made the completion of this study possible. BIOGRAPHICAL ITEMS George Robert Johnson Born: August 2, 1917, Caledonia, New York Married: November 7, l9h2 to Beatrice Elizabeth Caton Undergraduate Studies: Cornell University, 1935-39 Graduate Studies: Michigan State College, l9hS-h7; l9SO-5h Experience: Instructor in Vocational Agriculture, Central School District No. 2, Corfu, New York, 1939442; Assistant County Agricultural Agent, St. Lawrence County, Canton, N. Y., l9h2-h3; Instructor l9h3- h7, Assistant Professor l9h7-h8, Associate Professor 19h8- in Animal Husbandry at Cornell University. TABLE OF CONTENTS mmeCTIONOOOO...0.0.0.0...0.0... REVIEWOFLITERATUIEOOOOOOOOOOO00...... Cull.Dry Beans for Feeding Sheep 0 o o o o o o o o o e Unpublished Work on Feeding Cull Beans to Lambs at Cornell University Agricultural Eacperiment Station. . CullBeansforCowsandSteers............ Feeding Cull Beans to H088 o o o e o o o o o o e e o 0 Raw Soybeans Compared to Heat Treated Soybean Oil Haal for Sheep 0 e e o e o e o o o o e o o o e e e o e o 0 Chemical Analysis, Coefficients of Digestibility and AminoAcid Content ofDryBeans . . . . . . . . . . . Protein Quality Of Dry Beans o o e o o o o o o o e o 0 Effect of Heat on Protein Quality of Legumes . . . . . Palatability and intake. 0 o o o e o e o o o o e o Digestibility, nitrogen utilization and role of amino 801d8 o o o e e o o e o o o o e Trypsin inhibitor 0 o o o o o 6 o o 0 Site of nitrogen absorption . . . . . Toxic substance - ”soyin". . . . . . . Methods of Determining‘Protein Quality . . Evaluating proteins for ruminants . . Determining biological values of proteins for sheep. EXPERDIENTALPROCFDURE............ Digestion Trial 1951-1952 . Animalsused...... o o e o o o e Designoftheexperiment....... Equipment. 0 o e o e o o e o o e o e 0 Feeds used 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o .0... Page 31 31 33 fit-In}! D‘ F 4t» Methods of analysis Feed intake 0 o e e e Fecal collection . . arts 0 o o o e e o o Calculations made . . FGGd Lot Trial 0 o o o o Lambs used . . . . . Treatment of lambs previous trial (October 25 to November 1h) . . Design of experiment ‘Weight records . . . Equipment . . . . . . Test rations e o o e FEBdS u38d o o o o 0 Methods of feed analysis . Feeding procedure . . . . . . Calculations and.measurements Nitrogen Utilization Studies - Trial Animals used . . . . Design of experiment Daily ration . . . . Feeds used . . . . . Feeding and management Collection of feces and urine Methods of analysis . . . . Shearing eoeooo Ration evaluations . Nitrogen.Utilization - Trial II Animals used . . . . Design of experiment Dailyrations........ to the start of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 O O O o e 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to be used . I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 O 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 Amino Acid Analysis of Red Kidney Beans . . . . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Feed Lot Trial 1952-1953 Daily gains . . coo Feedintake...... Feed efficiency 0 000...... Page 33 4 35 35 35 37 3? 37 38 39 to ho Feed cost for each one hundred pounds of gain. Healthofanimals.........s.... Livemarketgrade.............. Net return for each lamb . . . . . . . . . . . Digestibility of Rations Containing Raw and Cooked RedKidneyBeans oeoeoooooooeooeo Nitrogen Utilization . . . . . . . . . . Amino Acid Content of Red Kidney Beans . SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPEImH0000000000.0000000 0.00 Cull U‘lt'umi-I 10 12 13 15 l6 17 18 LIST OF TABLES FEEDDVGVALUEOFRAWKIDNEYBEANS............ ALLOTMENT OF LAMBS - Digestion Trial 1951-52 . . . . . . ' DIGESTION TRIAL DAILY RATIONS 1951-52 . . . . . . . . . . CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS 1952-53 . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR DAILY GAINS - Feed Lot Trial 1952-53 0 e o e o e 0 o e e e o e o e o e o e e o o o 0 AVERAGE AIR DRY FEED INTAKE AND DAILY GAIN - Feed Lot Triall952-53 ..................... AVERAGE DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS - 1951-52 . . . . . . . . AVERAGE DIGISTION COEFFICIENTS - Trial I - 1953 . . . . . DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS OBTAINED BI DIFFERENCE FOR RAW AND COOKED RED KIDNEYBEANS -Trial 11-1953 . . . . . . . AVERAGE DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS - Trial II - 1953 . . . . AVERAGE NITROGEN UTILIZATION - Trial I - 1953 . . . . . . AVERAGE NITROGEN UTILIZATION - Trial II - I953 . . . . . BIOLOGICAL VALUES OBTAINED BY DIFFERENCE FOR RAW AND COOKEDREDKIDNEIBEANs-TrialII-l953 .. . . . . . AMINO ACID CONTENT OF RAW AND COOKED RED KIDNEY BEANS . . CULL BEANS FOR FATI'ENING LAMBS 13146-117 (November 22 - Jannany 31). o o o e o e o o o e o o e e o o o e e e e o CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS 19A6-h7 (January 31 - Aprilla)0000000.0000000000000000 CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS l9h7-l9h8 . . . . . . . . CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS 19A8-h9 . . . . . . . . . Page 32 N9 50 51 55 56 5 7 58 6h 65 65 70 81 82 83 8h 19 20 21 22 23 2h 25 26 27 28 29 31 32 33 35 37 CUIAIJ BEANS FOR FATTENING M‘BS 19119-50 . o o o o o o o o . CULL BEANS FOR FAT'IENING LAMBS 1950-51. 0 . . . . o . . . CUIIL BEANS F OR FATTEN ING L'AMBS 1951.52 0 o o o o o o o o 0 AVERAGE FEED INTAKE AND DAILY GAIN - Feed Lot Trial 1952953 0 o o o o O 0 o o o o o O o o o o o o o o o o 0 AVERAGE FEED INTAKE AND DAILY GAIN - Feed Lot Trial 1952-53 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 AVERAGE FEED INTAKE AND DAILY GAIN - Feed Lot Trial 1952-53 0 o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o o o o INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS - Digestion Trial 1951.52 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o a o o INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS Trial I - 1953 . . . INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS - Trial II - 1953 . . . SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF APPARENT DIGI'B TIBILITY DATAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO COMHBITIGJ OF FEEDS, FECFS AND ORTS - Digestion Trial 1951“52 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o CWITIONOFFEEDS-Triall 0000000000000 COMPOSITION OF FECES AND CRTs DRIED AND ALLOWED TO STAND AT Roma TEMPERATURE AND MOISTURE - Trial I - I953 . . . CCMPOSITICIV OF FEEDS AND FECFS - Trial II - 1953 . . . . INDIVIDUAL NITROGEN UTILIZATION - Trial I - 1953 . . . . INDIVIDUAL NITROGEN UTILIZATION - Trial II - 1953 . . . . SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF NITROGEN UTILIZATION DATA...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO LIVE WEIGHT RECORD OF LAMBS BEGINNING OF EACH PERICD - Trial I ‘ 1953 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o a a o o o 0 LIVE WEIGHT RECORD OF LAMBS BEGINNING OF EACH PERIOD - Trial II - 1953 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O 0.0 o o Page 85 86 87 88 89 9O 91 92 93 9h 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 INTRODUCTION The ability of the farmer to feed efficiently influenced net returns in fattening lambs more than any other factor according to a Hichigan Farm Management study by Wright (1937). A thorough know- ledge of the relative nutritive and dollar value of various con- centrates and roughages enables the feeder to select the most ef- ficient and economical ration for a given set of conditions. During the develOpment of the lamb feeding industry in the United States, many by-products and waste feeds were utilized in an effort to lower feed costs. Many lamb feeding enterprises were started in the Northwest near flour mills when wheat screenings and other by-products of the milling industry were found to be useful feeds for lambs. Dry beans which include kidney, navy, pinto, Great Northern and similar beans are raised primarily for human food. During the processing and packaging of dry beans, discolored, shrunken, split and brolcen beans are sorted out. These waste products called "cull beans" are used as a livestock feed. I «According to the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (1952) the United States produced 838,850 tons of dry beans in 1952. The clean yield of this crop was 779,700 tons. A large part of the 59,150 tons sorted out during the processing for human food was cull beans available for livestock feeding. The five leading states in 1952 dry bean production were California, 215,750 tons; Michigan, 195,500 tons; Idaho, 112,100 tons; Colorado, 108,500 tons; and New York with 82,500 tons. The production in Michigan and New York is of special interest be- cause the studies being reported were carried out at the Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station by the writer while enrolled in the graduate school at Michigan State College. Michigan.produced 176,150 tons or 9h per cent of the total c1ean.navy bean crop in the United States. New York produced 57,550 tone or 82 per cent of the clean red kidney crop. The total 195,500 tons of beans produced in Michigan during 1952 had a clean.yie1d of 187,700 tons. New York State produced 82,500 tons with a clean yield of 77,h00 tons. The difference of 12,900 tons between the total yield and the clean yield of the combined Michigan and New York crOps indicates that over ten thousand tons of cull beans are available annually in these two states. The average production figures for the 19h1-1950 pe- riod are similar to 1952. The amount of beans available for live- stock may be increased considerably during a wet harvesting season. Morrison (19h8) reports the following percentage values for raw red kidney beans with reference to total composition, digestible protein and total digestible nutrients: dry matter 89.0, protein 23.0, fat 1.2, crude fiber h.1. mineral matter 3.9, nitrogenpfree extract 56.8, digestible protein 20.2 and total digestible nutrients 77.8. The percentages of the various nutrients especially protein {n I‘ are equal to or higher than many concentrates frequently fed. The feeding value, however, appears to be much lower. Feeding trials have shown that raw dry beans may'be unpalatable and cause scours. Due to these and other limitations,cull beans have not been a pOpular feed for livestock. The rise in prices of concentrates after World war II created renewed interest in greater utilization of low cost waste products for feeding livestock. At the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station raw red kidney beans were substituted for part of’the corn.in lamb fattening rations. During the course of these studies, which were initiated in 19%, (Willman 1953) found that the addition of small amounts of linseed oil meal to the ration and the cooking of the beans before feeding were beneficial and worthy of further study. The study now being reported was carried out to learn more about the feeding value of cull red kidney beans for lambs and how this value may be improved. Digestion trials, feed lot trials, ni- trogen utilization studies and amino acid composition analyses were used. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Cull Dry Beans for Feeding Sheep Wilson and Lantow (1926) fed pinto beans to fattening lambs. They demonstrated that raw pinto beans were about 85 per cent as efficient as corn in a single trial with two lots of ten lambs each averaging approximately 85 pounds. Working with lighter lambs, Maynard, Morton, and Osland (1931) found pinto beans to be worth only M; per cent the value of corn. Fairly satisfactory gains were made, but the bean fed lambs were not fat enough at the end of the regular 120 day feeding period and had to be fed an additional 30 days in order to satisfy market demands. Dry bean screenings consisting of split, shrunken, and small beans were fed by Miller (1927) to shorn grade Shropshire lambs averaging approximately 55 pounds. Three lots of h9 lambs each were fed to compare barley with bean screenings. The roughage for all lots was alfalfa hay. At the close of the first month of the trial,the lambs were getting a daily average of 1.2 pounds of con- centrates and 1.75 pounds of alfalfa hay. Scouring was noticed in the bean lot, particularly at the beginning of the trial. After being on experiment 20 days, the lot on bean screenings alone re- fused part of their feed and scoured severely. The ration was re- duced, and in a few days the lambs were back on feed. After 148 days the cull bean lot again went off feed. The concentrate was re- duced to 1.25 pounds daily until the lambs regained their appetite. In spite of sane severe cases of scours, there were no noticeable after effects. The results of this feed lot trial indicated that beans were about equal to whole barley in feeding value, but slightly laxative. Two years of work by Johnson, Rinehart, and Hickman (1931) did not fully support the above mentioned work of Miller (1927). They compared a mixture of 80 per cent barley and 20 per cent cull Great Northern beans with barley alone as a concentrate to be fed with alfalfa hay. The lambs receiving the beans made four per cent less average daily gain and the gain was more expensive. The authors concluded that cull beans of the Great Northern variety may be utilized where they are on hand and do not have market value. They found them objectionable to feed because they were not palat- able and often caused such digestive disturbances as scouring and bloating. The same workers, Rinehart, Hickman, and Johnson (1932) gave further support to their statements when they reported average data of six trials carried out at the University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station from 1926 to 1932. Under the conditions of their trials more hay was needed by the lambs men beans were substituted for 20 per cent of the barley. Since scouring and digestive troubles increased when the lambs were fed a concentrate mixture containing 30, ’40, or 50 per cent beans, they concluded that beans should be or. limited to no more than 20 per cent. In other work with Great Northern beans, Quale (1932) found a better feeding value than Rinehart, Hickman and Johnson (1932). Quale compared beans to equal parts beans and barley and found 100 pounds of barley had a replacement value of 113 pounds of beans and 35 pounds of alfalfa hay. Even though the cull beans tended to scour the lambs severely at times, the lambs never refused to eat them. Cull beans were also compared with cottonseed cake when add- ed to an alfalfa and barley ration. An average daily feed of 0.28 of a pound of cull beans added to a barley and alfalfa ration in- creased the daily gain very little. Their feeding value was about equal to the barley. Cottonseed cake added at the rate of 0.22 of a pound per lamb daily increased the rate of gain more than the beans. The lambs fed beans alone with alfalfa gained 0.25 of a pound ani those fed barley, cottonseed, and alfalfa 0.30 of a pourd daily. Unpublished Work on Feeding Cull Beans to Lambs at Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station Cull beans had been fed to breeding ewes for many years in New York State, but lamb feeders had not been too successful in using cull beans in fattening rations. winnan (1953) had long recs omized the need for practical feeding trials with cull beans and started work along this line in the fall of 191.6. Summaries of his unpublished work may be found in appendix tables 15 through 21. The feed lot performance over a period of six years by'White Face western.lambs averaging about 66 pounds initial weight, fed cull beans,led to the following general conclusions. Beans were able to replace up to one-half of the coma in lamb rations if at least 0.10 of a pound of linseed meal was added for each lamb daily; Soybean.oi1.mea1 in one trial was a satisfactory replace- ment for linseed mea1,but brewers' dried yeast failed to be satis- factory in another trial. .A commercial amino acid.mixture fed on an equal protein basis was about equal to linseed meal. .A com- nercial product containing aureomycin was added to the linseed meal for one trial. At a low level of intake it failed to produce any beneficial effect. If a protein supplement was not used,it was difficult to substitute beans for one-quarter of the shelled corn. When beans were fed as the only concentrate,very unsatisfactory results were Obtained. The main difference between.these studies and those reviewed where beans alone were quite satisfactory was the roughage fed. In the studies of Miller (1927), Quale (1932) and other earlier workers,alfalfa was the only roughage,‘but in the work of‘Willmen (1953) hay was limited.and corn silage was the main roughage. There was some indication in the studies by Willman (1953) that the lambs on a higher hay allowance and cull beans made better daily gains than those on.a.more limited.hay intake. The 1950-51 trial demonstrated that cooking the beam with Open steam and drying before feeding greatly improved their feeding value. During four of the six. years, raw beans and corn, equal parts by'weight, and linseed meal were compared to corn and linseed meal. Table 1 gives the average data for this four year compar- ison. The average value of beans was about seventy per cent that of shelled corn. One hundred pounds of cull beans replaced 95.8 pounds of corn less 5.8 pounds of linseed meal less 15.8 pounds of legume hay less 50.9 pounds of corn.silage. The highly significant benefit of adding small amounts of lin- seed meal to rations containing cull beans was demonstrated in the first studies started in.l9h6. The protein content of the cull bean rations was always above recommended protein allowances before the linseed was added. The average daily gains for lambs averaging 62 pounds for the first 70 days of the trial were 0.25, 0.15, 0.10, and 0.11 of a pound for the respective lots where one-fourth, one- half, three-fourths, and all of the corn was replaced by cull red kidney beans. During this same period, lambs receiving the control ration of corn, and linseed meal gained 0.31 of a pound daily. The gains were so low for the been fed lambs that the rations were adjusted for the last 77 days of this first trial. Summaries of the first 70 days and last 77 days of this trial.may be found in tables 15 and 16 in.the appendix. An example of the benefit of lin- seed meal was the coaparison of the early and late gains for lot IX which received the same cull bean and corn.mixture (equal parts) throughout the trial but 0.17 of a pound of linseed meal was added f‘ TABLE 1 meme VALUE or am: KIDNEY BEANS * Sfiefiefi corn Shelled Corn Cull Beans Linseed Meal Linseed Meal Hay Hay Corn Silage Corn Silage Salt Salt Lambsperlot........... 23 23 Daysfed............. 95 95 Av. initial wt. (lbs.). . . . . . . 68.8 69.1 Av. final wt. (1bs.) . . . . . . . 100.6 98.]. Av. daily gain (1bs.) . . . . . . . .337 .310 Av. daily ration (lbs. )8 Sh.corn............ 1.12 .514 Cullbeans.........'.. .50 Linseedoilmeal........ .097 .12 Leng........... .82 .82 Cornsilage .......... 2.07 2.21 Salt.............. .015 .016 Amount of feed per 100 lbs. gain (lbs.): Sh.corn............ 33b 176 Cullbeans........... 165 Linseedoilmeal........ 29 33-5 Legumehay........... 2146 272 Cornsilage.......... 612 696 *Average data for four trials. .10.' for each lamb daily during the last 77 days. The average daily gain for each lamb was 0.15 of a pound for the first 70 days and 0.110 of a pound for the last. 77 days. This early work was the basis of five more years of study summarized in tables 17 through 21 in the appendix. In addition to the linseed meal phase of the study, other factors and practices which might have a similar beneficial effect were investigated. 0111 Beans for Cows and Steers Huffman and Baltzer (1929) indicated that beans were a valu- able source of protein but were unpalatable . They concluded that 20 per cent of the total ration was the maximum amount of beans that could be used in a dairy cow ration. Steam cooked beans were found more palatable but difiicult to feed. The additional cost of cock- ing did not appear to be economical. Beans gave the best results when fed with alfalfa or clover hay, however, additional protein was beneficial when the cows were fed timothy hay. Ground cull beans, Great Northern, were fed to fattening yearling steers by Vinke and Pearson (1931). They compared the feeding value of cull beans with barley when fed with alfalfa hay. The bean content of the grain mixture had to be limited to 20 per cent because a mixture with a greater prOportion of beans was too laxative. Oats were a much better replacement for barley than beans under the conditions of their trial. Beans had no value when fed with barley and alfalfa hay as 20 per cent of the grain mixture. Hickman, Rinehart, and Johnson (19311) fed similar rations and found that beans could constitute up to 15 per cent of the grain mixture. Digestive disorders resulted if beans were fed in larger amounts. Each ton of cull beans replaced 2,3141 pounds of alfalfa hay and 1,707 pounds of barley. Feeding Cull Beans to Hogs Beans were fed at the Michigan Station by Shaw (1906). He compared beans alone, which were steam.cooked until soft, with a mixture of beans and corn where one-half of the corn was replaced by beans. Daily gains made by the hogs were 1.1 pounds on the bean rationand 1.52 pounds for the combination bean and corn ra- tion. Due to the low cost of the cull beans,the hogs receiving beans alone made the most economical gains. The higher market value, however, for the hogs fed a combination of corn and beans made this lot more profitable. While trying to find the best supplements for hogs on pasture, Thompson and Voorhies (1922) compared cooked cull beans to barley and tankage. The gains obtained were fair compared to other rations, but the packer did not like the carcasses because they were too soft and flabby. The bean.fed hogs had a very low dressing percentage of 63.8. Four trials at the Michigan Station reported by Brown (1931) also demonstrated that soft and medium.soft carcasses were pro- duced by feeding cull beans. In this series of trials, fattening pigs were used to compare a ration of two parts of cooked cull beans —12- and one part of ground grain to a ration of corn and tankage. All bean fed lots gained slower and required more feed per 100 pounds of gain than the corn and tankage fed lots. The Michigan workers concluded that the bean ration was unpalatable. Some more recent work by Connell (19104) demonstrated that cooked pinto beans gave satisfactory results and the carcasses were not soft. The beans were cooked by soaking them 25 hours and then steam cooking for 3 hours. Raw pinto beans were very unsatisfac- tory because of high cost gains and the pigs were not fat enough to sell. Raw Soybeans Compared to Heat Treated Soybean 0i1 Meal for Sheep Inasmuch as a search of the literature failed to reveal any nitrogen utilization and digestion studies with ruminants fed dry beans, work with soybeans was reviewed. Miller and Morrison (191114) conducted nitrogen balance exper- imnts with lambs to determine the effect of heat treatment and oil extraction on the digestibility and utilization of soybean protein. The additional heat treatment of solvent process soybean oil meal resulted in no appreciable improvement in the protein for lambs. They did note, however, that the protein furnished by raw soybeans or unextracted soybean flakes had a significantly lower digestibil- ity for lambs than the proteins furnished by solvent process soy- bean oil meal with or without special heat treatment. This dif- ference in digestibility was due apparently to the heat treatment given the meal. The difference in percentage of total nitrogen stored between the raw and heat treated meals was due chiefly to the difference in digestibility. The differences in biological values were so slight that they were not significant. Chemical Analysis, Coefficients of Digestibility and Amino Acid Content of Dry Beans In a search of the literature,it was soon discovered that dry beans grown primarily for human food were among the first legumes analyzed to determine protein content and energy value. Ladd (1885) analyzed navy beans and found the total albuminoids were 25.51 per cent. He compared navy beans with various farm.grains when digested in pepsin solution. He hOped that the albuminoid digestibility‘ny pepsin would be an indication of food value. The 9h.78 per cent digestibility of albuminoids for the navy bean was the highest value fer any of the concentrates tested. The digestibile nutrient content and.composition of kidney' beans as offered to sheep and goats has been reported by Schneider (19h?) as follows: Total dry matter 87.8% Ash. 3.6% Digestible crude protein. 13.6% Crude protein. 20.3% Total digestible nutrients 68.0% Crude fiber h.2% Nutritive ratio 1: h N-free extract 58.5% Ether extract 1.2% The average digestion coefficients compiled by Schneider (19147) were 80 for organic matter, 67 for curde protein, 1:9 for crude fiber, 88 for nitrogen free extract, and 35 for other ex- tract. Morrison (19h8) reporting data for all classes of livestock had similar determinations for kidney beans. Osborne and Clapp (1907) studied the protein content of the white bean and kidney bean and found a globulin, phaseolin, formed nearly all of the protein of these beans. On a water and ash free basis, they found that phaseolin had the following composition: glycocoll 0.55 serine 0.38 alanine 1.80 tyrosine 2.18 valine 1.01; arginine 14.89 leucine 9.65 histidine 1.97 proline 2.77 . lysine 3-97 phenylalanine 3.25 ammonia 2.06 aspartic acid 5.21; "typtophane" present "glutaminic" acid 111.511 No attempt was made to determine the cystine content because phaseolin was found to be less than 0.11 per cent sulphur. Thirteen years later Finks and Johns (1920) compared the amino acid content of phaseolin obtained by Osborne and Clapp (1907) with results they obtained by using the VanSlyke method. They obtained a value of 0. 81; per cent for cystine which Was not determined by Osborne and Clapp. Their values for arginine, histidine and lysine were slightly higher than those obtained by Osborne and Clapp. ,- -15.. Protein Quality of Dry Beans Studies by Mendel and Fine (1912) with a man and a dog show- ed the proteins of raw white beans to be ver;r poorly utilized. They were unable to explain fully the poor results obtained. Work by McCollum, Simmonds, and Pitz (1917), with rats fed beans as the sole source of amino acids, demonstrated clearly that beans had a very low biological value for rats. Rats had a very high mortality and grew poorly when fed only white beans as a source of protein. The level of protein was 19.8 per cent. Rats fed so that 19 per cent of the ration was bean protein and 3 per cent was casein pro- tein, had a marked improvement in growth and livability. They concluded that beans seemed to exert an injurious effect on rats which might be due to an unknown factor in the beans. They pos- tulated, however, that because the beans were high in hemicelluloses the micro-organisms in the digestive tract attacked the hemicellu- loses and considerable gas was liberated. This action was believed to cause swollen abdomens and injurious effects on the digestive tract. Osborne and Mendel (1917a) reported that they had worked with phaseolin, the chief protein in kidney beans, for several years. Phaseolin extracted by sodium chloride and used as the only protein failed to maintain rats. It was non-toxic because animals that ate enough remained alive. If phaseolin was boiled, then dried and fed, rats were maintained without growth. Raw phaseolin was 55 per cent - 16 - utilized and cooked phaseolin 82 per cent utilized. This work was no doubt carried out at approximately the same time as the similar and well known work with soybeans by Osborne and Mendel (1917b). The work by Johns and Finks (1920) with rats was similar to that reported by McCollum, Simmonds, and Pits (1917). They also reported no growth, but did not notice the swollen abdomens due to accumulation of gas. In an attempt to improve the nutritive value of navy beans, cystine was added to the diet because an analysis had indicated that beans were low in cystine. Rats fed phaseolin with added cystine maintained their weight, but still failed to grow satisfactorily. During the course of this study, phaseblin was digested with trypsin in 311312 and dried. Cystine was added to this dried digested phaseolin and fed to rats. The rats grew normally.If this particular part of the study had been deve10ped more fully, the presence of an anti-trypsin factor in raw beans might have received attention several years before other workers suggested such a factor was the reason for poor growth obtained by feeding raw soybeans. In this same study, cooked bean meal with added cystine gave normal growth. Biological values determined with rats, on a 10 per cent pro- tein ration by Mitchell (1921;) where cooked beans furnished all of the protein, were quite low and averaged 38.11. Hoagland and Snider (1927) also showed very poor growth when cooked navy beans were fed. -17.. More recent work by Everson and Heckert (191114) again showed that rats fed raw navy, kidney, or pinto beans rapidly lost weight and died. Cooking the beans for )45 minutes at 15 pounds pressure in an autoclave resulted in slight, but not normal growth. Russell, Taylor, Mehrhoff, and Hirch (19116) demonstrated that white rats fed lima or snap beans as the only protein at a 10 per cent level grew slowly. The addition of 0.1 per cent methionine caused an imnediate growth response, but even more growth was obtained when the methionine was raised to 0.6 per cent. This work supported pre- ~viouslly discussed work showing that many varieties of beans are low in sulphur-containing amino acids. Jaffe (19119) reported that he felt raw kidney beans contained a toxic material, part of which was destroyed by cooking. He soaked kidney beans overnight and then autoclaved the beans at 10 pounds pressure for 30 minutes.- Rats fed treated beans, at a 10 per cent protein 1eve1,made slight growth, but when methionine was added the growth was much better and equal to cooked soybeans plus methionine. He concluded that methionine was the limiting factor in all cases. It must be concluded from these studies on protein quality that raw dry beans are not a satisfactory protein for rats but may be improved either by the addition of sulphur-containing amino acids, cystine and methionine, or by heating. The maximum effect may be obtained by both heating and adding methionine. f‘. Effect of Heat on Protein Quality of Legumes The unique beneficial effect of heat on the nutritive value of legumes has been of theoretical and practical interest to re-. search workers since Osborne and Mendel (1917) demonstrated that cooking soybeans greatly improved their value for growth in rats. The development of how this is accomplished has been well reviewed by Liener (1950), Griswold (1951) and Norris (1951). Various reasons have been given on how cooking improves the protein quality of legumes. Proposed explanations include improved palatability and greater food intake, higher digestibility of protein, greater utilization of the nitrogen, making the amino acids more available, destruction of a trypsin inhibitor, changing the site of nitrogen absorption in the digestive tract, and destruction of a growth in- hibitor. Most of this work has been done with soybeans, but much of it should apply to dry beans, such as the kidney bean. Everson and Heckert (19hh) demonstrated that the beneficial effect of heat on navy, kidney and pinto beans was more pronounced than on soy- beans. A review of these theories follows. Palatability and intake. Rats fed by Osborne and Mendel (1917) had greater growth on cooked soybean oil meal than on raw meal. The meal was cooked on.a steam bath for’three hours. They concluded that the failure of the rats to grow was mainly due to insufficient food intake. The cooking improved the palatability. Hoagland and Snider (1927) working with navy beans felt that low -19- food intake might be the main reason for poor growth on navy beans alone because intake varied considerably. Digestibilijy, nitrogen utilization and role of amino acids. Papsin digestion work, in zi_t_r__o, by Waterman and Johns (1921) demon- strated that cooking improved digestion (pepsin followed by trypsin). They used the protein phaseolin fran the common bean. In one study only 28.8 per cent of the total nitrogen in raw phaseolin was digested by pepsin followed by trypsin. Phaseolin, which was cook- ed for 145 minutes, had 1111.07 per cent of the nitrogen digested. As a result of these studies, Waterman and Johns (1921) suggested that the main reason for greater growth with cooked dry beans was due to the increase in digestibility of the protein. Recent work by J affe (1950) with rats showed that the proteins of autoclaved kidney beans, soybeans, and lima beans were 12 to 15 per cent better digested than raw beans. Greatest improvement was with red kidney beans where a digestive coefficient of 56 per cent was obtained for raw and 79.5 per cent for the autoclaved beans. Work by Johns and Finks (1920) demonstrated both the value of cooking and adding cystine to phaseolin. Approximately normal growth was obtained by cooking the phaseolin and adding cystine. Unpublish- ed work by Osborne and Mendel using phaseolin and navy bean meal cited in the review of literature by Johns and Finks (1920) support- ed these results. Hayward, Steenbock, and Bohstedt (1936) working with soybeans found that the addition of 0.3 per cent cystine prac- tically doubled the nutritive value of soybeans for rats. When the -20.. soybeans were autoclaved for one hour under 15 pounds of steam pressure, similar results were obtained. When cystine was added to the cooked soybeans, no increase in nutritive value was noted. his is in contrast to the earlier work of Johns and Finks (1920) with navy beans where they had an increase in growth when cystine was added to cooked phaseolin. This might indicate a difference in the proteins found in soybeans and navy beans. Hayward, Steenbock and Bohstedt (1936) concluded that cystine in raw soybeans must be in a form which is not available and that heating makes this cystine available. Working with both rats and chicks, Hayward and Hafner (1914.1) found that methionine was a more effective supplement to raw soy- beans than cystine. They suggested that this could be due to the fact that methionine may be converted to cystine, and that both are needed. Their results showed that raw soybeans with added methionine and cystine were still not equal to cooked soybeans with either cystine or methionine added. This work was in disagreement with the earlier work of Hayward, Steenbock and Bohstedt (1936). Hayward and Hafner felt that all increased growth from heated soybeans was. not explained by making cystine and methionine more available. Sulphur and nitrogen balance work with rats by Johnson, Parsons and Steenbock (1939) had also shown the nutritive value of soybeans improved by heating . They felt that a complex containing sulphur and nitrogen might be absorbed but was not available unless properly heated. .-—h -21- A slightly different approach was offered by Melnick, Oser, and weiss (19146). Their work showed that raw and heated soybeans had approximately the same protein digestibility, but heated soy- beans had a much higher biological value. By using enzymic di- gestion,they found that the methionine was released much faster in heated than in raw soybeans. The release of leucine and lysine was also faster in the heated beans. They concluded that the actual amount of methionine released was not changed by heating, but the time of release was changed. They felt that the methionine was released from heated beans at a time when it was most needed, and therefore better growth resulted. Work reported later by Geiger (1950) gave sane support to such a theory. Geiger reported that all of the essential amino acids for the rat must be available at one time in sufficient quantities for maxinmm protein tissue synthesis. Work with swine by Eggert, Brinegar, and Anderson (1953) did not fully support this theory for swine. Growth was as rapid and nitrogen utilization as efficient when the protein supplement to a corn ration was fed at a 2).; hour interval as when it was available at all times. Delaying the supplementation to 36 and 118 hour intervals decreased the gains by 7 and lb, per cent. Riesen, Clandinin, Elvehjem, and Cravens (19h?) demonstrated that the amount of each of the essential amino acids liberated by acid hydrolysis from soybean meal was not changed by heat treatment. O\ -22... The amount of amino acids liberated by pancreatic hydrolysis, how- ever, was increased by proper heat treatment. Later work by Clandinin and Robblee (1952) used the amino acid values obtained by enzymatic hydrolysis to determine the rel- ative nutritive value of various soybean meals. They found that meals processed at various temperatures and for different lengths of tithe which were equal in actual feeding tests were not equal in amino acids values obtained by enzymatic hydrolysis . Riesen, Clandinin, Elvemem, and Cravens (19117) demonstrated the destructive effect of over heating soybeans. Lysine, arginine and tr'y'ptOphane were destroyed by over heating. Evans and Butts (19118) showed by enzymatic digestion i_n li_t_._r_o that 110 per cent of the lysine was destroyed and 60 per cent less lysine was available in soybean oil meal after autoclaving four hours. Sucrose appar- ently caused the lysine destruction because very little loss occurred in the absence of sugar. Part of the lysine, however, was converted to a form not liberated by enzyme digestion. When 20 per cent sucrose was added to the meal,50 per cent of the lysine was destroyed by over heating. Dry heat was not nearly as de- structive as the moist heat in the autoclave. gypsin inhibitor. Independently, Ham and Sandstedt (19M) and Bowman (1911,11) showed that extracts of raw soybeans inhibited digestion of protein i_n 11313 by trypsin. Bowman studied the effect of this trypsin inhibitor obtained from soybeans and navy beans on the digestion of casein with trypsin, in vitro. His results showed ,‘ -23- that the extract of navy beans decreased the digestibility of casein protein from approximately'9h to 13 per cent while the ex- tract of soybeans decreased the digestibility from.9h to h3 per- cent. Studies by Ham, Samstead, and Mussehl (l9h5) demonstrated that partially purified solutions of this trypsin.inhibitor would decrease growth. They also found that the intestinal contents of chicks fed raw soybeans would inhibit trypsin digestion, E 11232. Their work gave further proof that a trypsin inhibitor'might be the reason for the poor utilization of raw soybeans by living an- imals. Kunitz (19b6) crystalized the trypsin inhibitor which he isolated from de-fatted soybean.meal. A difference between.the soybean trypsin inhibitor and the many bean fraction was pointed out by Bowman (l9h8). He found the navy bean.preparation.much more active. ‘Westfall and Hangs (l9h8) found by several observations that.the trypsin inhibitor found in.raw soybeans was probably the major cause for their poor utilization. Further importance of this inhibitor was shown'oy Chernick, Lepkovsky, and Chaikoff (19h8) when they fed chicks raw and cooked soybean.mea1 and then examined their pancreas. They found that the pancreas of chicks fed raw soybeans was greatly enlarged and also contained a greater amount of trypsinogen. They pr0posed that this increased size and enzyme content of the pancreas was due to acinar tissue stimulation by the inhibitor or a product of incomplete protein digestion. One of the first indications that the beneficial effect of heating soybeans might not be due entirely to the destruction of an anti-trypsin factor was suggested by Riesen, Clandinin, Elvehjem and Cravens (l9h7). In their work when.excessive pancreatin.was used to overcome any possible anti-trypsin activity in.raw meal,the amino acid liberation was still below that of heated meal. Jaffe (1950) was unable to find any definite correlatiOn between the growth depressing effect of crude legume seeds studied and their trypsin inhibitor action. About the same time,Borchers and Ackerson (1950) were unable to find any correlation between the imp proved nutritive value after autoclaving and the presence or ab- sence of a trypsin inhibitor in raw legume seeds. Further work by Borchers and Ackerson (1951) found that tryp- sin powder would counteract the growth inhibitorin raw soybeans, but its action did not depend on.its trypsin activity because auto- claved trypsin powder had the same effect as powder not autoclaved. Autoclaving the trypsin.powder should destroy its trypsin activity. Site of nitrogen absorption. Carroll, Hensley, and Graham (1952) determined that all,or nearly all, of the nitrogen to be ab- sorbed from pr0perly heated meal was absorbed in passage through the small intestine of the rat. They found the nitrogen of raw meal, however, was absorbed primarily from the large intestine or cecum. They found by conventional methods the protein of raw soyh beans 77 per cent digested and the protein of heated soybeans 82 per cent digested. By using the contents of the terminal 20 per -25 _ cent of the small intestine instead of the feces, they obtained coefficients of protein digestibility of 79 per cent for the heat- ed meal and 33 per cent for the raw meal. As a result of this work, the authors suggested that the nitrogen absorbed from the large intestine had little growth promoting ability. They also felt that when proteins escaped to the large intestine substantial pancreatic and intestinal secretions also escaped. They suggest- ed that this loss might be related to the hypertrophy of the pan- cross and the concentration of trypsinogen in pancreatic tissue re- ported by Chemick, Lepkovsky and Chaikoff (191.8). Borcher (1953), determining digestibility by a similar pro- cedure, was unable to confirm the work of Carroll, Hensley and Graham (1952) . Borcher did not find that the apparent digestibility of raw soybean nitrogen was significantly different from autoclaved soybean nitrogen in the terminal 20 per cent of the mall intestine of the rat. These conflicting reports leave this eaglanation to be confirmed or rejected. Toxic substance - "”113“. A protein toxic to rats and de— void of anti-triptic: activity has been found in raw soybeans. This protein which shows a marked hemagglutinating action was called 'soyin" by Liener (1953). He estimated that one-half of the growth inhibit- ing effect of raw soybeans was due to the soyin content and one-half to something which may be counteracted by crude trypsin powder. It is interesting to note that Liener (1953) feels that the growth ~ impairment due to "soyin" is probably due mainly to the decrease in food intake which was the reason given by Osborne and Mendel (1917) when they first discovered the benefits of heating. Methods of Determining Protein Quality The work of Mitchell (l92ha), (l92hb), (191m), (191414) has had considerable influence on the deve10pment of various methods for determining the value of food proteins. Three methods of measuring protein value were outlined and discussed by Mitchell (19%). They were the amino acid content of the protein, the ratio of gain in weight to a unit of protein intake, and a measure of gain in nitro- gen by the animal when fed the protein to be tested. Mitchell (191th) felt that amino acid content was a valuable measure of protein quality for monogastric animals especially where the essential amino acids are known. The digestibility of proteins, however, is largely independent of the amino acid make-up and the effect of heat and storage on protein quality does not seem to be shown by an amino acid analysis. The correlation of the amino acid composition of proteins - and their nutritive value has been well discussed by Block and Mitchell (191:7). In discussing the evaluation of protein feeds by their growth promoting ability for each unit of intake, Mitchell (191th) gave simplicity as the main advantage. This method does not give full account to the maintenance requirements forprotein which are prob- " ably not constant and are influenced by age, size, rate of growth and the quality of protein. He also pointed out that weight gain varies widely in its make-up and is not all protein. 'When a rapid gain was made more of the increased weight was fat. Mitchell (l92h) described the ThomaséMitchell method of de- termining biological value of proteins. The formula for this method may be stated as! B.V. . Absorbed Nitrogen Retained QX~B9g32100 Absorbed Nitrogen OR _ N intake-(fecal N-metabolic N)e(urinagy N-endogenous E) N intake ~(fecal N-metabolic N) X100 BeVO This measure of protein quality was more fully described by JMitchell (l9h3). The fecal nitrogen is divided into two fractions, one which is of dietary origin and the second which is of body origin and is called.metabolic nitrogen. The urine nitrogen is divided into exogenous and endogenous nitrogen, the exogenous ni- trogen is the result of part of the absorbed dietary nitrogen being formed into compounds which are not synthesized into body protein. The other fraction is the endogenous nitrogen which is the constant nitrogen excretion due to catabolism.related to body size and other factors. Schoenheimer and Rittenberg (l9h0) challenged this dis- tinction between the two types of nitrogen catabolism.on which the conception of biological value is based. They demonstrated by the use of isotopes that a state of dynamic, not static, equilibrium .. .u -28- existed.between the tissue proteins and the amino acids of the blood plasma and intercellular fluid. Maynard (1951), commenting on endogenous and exogenous catabolism, stated that only a small fraction of the protein appears to be involved in the dynamic state and the endogenous nitrogen is the excess left over as anabolic and catabolic processes come into balance. Mitchell (l9h3), comment- ing on the effect the work of Schoenheimer and Rittenberg (l9h0) had on his method of determining biological values, stated that there was nothing in this work that denied the existence of a constant type of catabolism in the tissue of nitrogen containing compounds. He felt the theory of protein metabolism.upon which the calcu- lation of biological values are based was still sound. Mitchell (l9hh) pointed out that proper nitrogen.metabolism.studies should give the most information on protein value. Both protein digest- ibility and protein utilization.may be determined. He pointed out the disadvantage that all determinations were based on nitrogen so that sources of non-protein nitrogen as well as the proteins were included. Evaluating proteins for ruminants. At the present time, there is fairly good agreement among research workers on.the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods for evaluating proteins for non-ruminants. There does not, however, seem.to be such good agree- ment among workers on the method of evaluating proteins for ruminant animals, such as sheep. The value of various protein supplements has been studied by feed lot trials. The value of the protein -29.. supplements is estimated mainly by the rate of gain and economy of gain made by the animals. Swanson and Herman (19143) have shown that biological values of feed proteins secured with rats may not be correlated with bio- logical values of the same feeds secured with ruminants due to the activity of the rumen flora in the utilization of protein. They decided that the digestibility of the protein and of the non-nitro- genous nutrients were the most important factors to consider in evaluating feed proteins. Johnson, Hamilton, Mitchell and Robinson (19:42) demonstrated that biological values determined with ruminants were always near 60 for crude protein regardless of the ration fed. They suggested the slight differences in biological values were obtained because ruminants ultimately used micro-organismal protein rather than food protein. The reason for this nearly constant biological value of proteins for ruminants has been further ex- plained by McDonald (1952). Working with sheep, he studied the role of ammonia which is readily released in the rumen by the action of micro-organisms on proteins. The formation of this ammonia leads to two opposing mltritional tendencies. Non-protein nitrogen, such as ammonia, may be acted upon by micro-organisms to form protein used by the animal. Ammonia may be lost, however, by absorption through the rumen wall. It is believed that this ammonia enters the blood stream and eventually may be lost as urea in the urine. Small amounts may be returned to the rumen through the saliva. McDonald (1952) believes that the interaction of these two opposing 11" Illlllltr ‘ - 30.. forces is probably the reason for a nearly constant biological value of protein for ruminants. Synge (1952) also discussed the two opposing forces in the use of nitrogen by ruminants. He states that we must know which process predominates when a certain protein is fed in order to preperly evaluate its food value. For this reason he states that regular digestibility studies are unsatis- factory for rating proteins for ruminants. Growth studies and nitrogen balance studies are more acceptable measures according to Synge (1952). Determining biological values of proteins for sheep. 4A number of workers have used sheep to determine the biological value of proteins for ruminants. Swanson and Herman (19h3) reviewed several such studies. Harris and Mitchell (l9hl) while working with sheep determined.endogenous nitrogen to be 0.033 grams per kilogram of body weight and metabolic nitrogen to be 0.55 grams per hundred grams of dry matter intake. Miller and.Morrison (l9hh),also work- ing with sheep, obtained similar values of 0.037 grams of endoge- nous nitrogen daily per kilogram of body weight and 0.55 grams of metabolic nitrogen per hundred grams of dry matter intake. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE Digestion Trial 1951-1952 Animals used. Eighteen native wether lambs with weights ranging from.69 to 97 pounds were selected for the trial from the Cornell University flock. Design of the experiment. The digestibility of three rations, raw red kidney beans and alfalfa.hay; cooked red kidney beans and alfalfa; and shelled corn, linseed meal and alfalfa were compared. Six lambs were fed each ration. The lambs were alloted by selecting six.trios with similar individual weights within each trio. Two tries were selected for each of three collection periods by average weight. Heaviest tries were placed on collection first. Individual lambs within a trio were assigned test rations by randomization. The allotment of the lambs has been listed in table 2. EQEiEEEE.’ During each seven day collection,one trio was placed in collection cages as illustrated in Morrison (l9h8) page 8h, and one trio was placed in collection stanchions where movement was restricted. The allotment of tries to collection equipment was also by random. (I -32.. TABLE 2 ALLOI'MENT 0F LAMBS Digestion Trial 1951-52 Collection Collection Lamb No. Wt. Concentrate-l! Equipment Period 273 96 Raw beans Stanchion 1 286 97 Corn and L.0.M. Stanchion 1 1031; 97 Cooked beans Stanchion 1 lOLL5 9h Cooked beans Cage 1 1011; 90 Corn and L.0.M. Cage l 672 90 Raw beans Cage l 161 89 Corn and I..0.M. Cage 2 250 93 Raw beans Cage 2 257 93 Cooked beans Cage 2 671 76 Raw beans Stanchion 2 181 76 Cooked beans Stanchion 2 3h 76 Corn and L.0.M. Stanchion 2 128 71 Gem and L.O.M. Stanchion 3 166 714 Cooked beans Stanchion 3 256 75 Raw beans Stanchion 3 bl 69 Corn and L.0.M. Cage 3 126 70 Cooked beans Cage 3 190 71 Raw beans Cage 3 al- Beans were cull red kidney - 33 - Feeds used. Raw red kidney beans - Cull beans consisting primarily of split, shrunken and discolored beans obtained from a.New York State bean plant. Cooked red kidney beans - The same lot as the raw beans but cooked by steam without pressure for two hours and then oven dried (80° to 90° C.) for about 60 hours. Shelled corn - A composite sample of'the corn purchased on the open.market for the feed lot lamb trials. Linseed oil meal - Purchased on Open market. Alfalfa hay (chapped) - Second cutting purchased near Ithaca, N. Y. The composition of the feeds was Obtained from composite same ples taken during the weighing of the feeds for each collection period. Separate analyses were made of the alfalfa for each collec- tion period. Beans were cooked at two different times so two sam- ples were analyzed. All composite feed samples were prepared for analysis by grind- ing in a Wiley mill and obtaining a sub-sample. Methods of analysis. .All the analyses were made in the Animal Nutrition.Division laboratory. The methods employed, except nitro- gen, were those suggested by Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (l9h8). The nitrogen was determined by the Kjeldahl mod- ification using boric acid suggested by Scales and Harris (1920). - 3h - TABLE 3 DIGESTION TRIAL DAILY RATIONS 1951-52 Ratio Period Lamb Equip- Raw Cooked Concentrate No. No. ment(l) Alfalfa Corn L.0.M. Beans Beans Roughage Ems gm. Ems Ema 1 273 s h50 350 1: 1.28 1 286 s 850 175 175 1: 1.28 1 103k 3 n50 350 1: 1.28 l thS c uso 350 1: 1.28 1 lOlh c h50 175 175 1: 1.28 l 672 c h50 350 1: 1.28 2 - 161 C 500 350 50 1: 1.25 2 250 c 500 too 1: 1.25 2 257 o 500 36h(3) 1: 1.37 2 671 3(2) n50 300 l: 1.5 2 181 s h50 270(3) 1: 1.66 2 3h 3 hso 250 so 1: 1.5 3 128 3 too 250 so 1: 1.5 3 166 5 too 270(3) 1: 1.h8 3 256 3 too 300 1: 1.33 3 hi 0 500 350 50 1: 1.25 3 126 c 500 36h(3) 1: 1.37 3 190 C 500 ' hOO l: 1.25 )S-Smfifim *c-mg 2; Collection made in cage with 3rd group (3 Dry matter equal to corresponding raw bean diet -35- Feed intake. The intake on all groups of three lambs was limited to the amount of raw beans consumed by the lamb on this concentrate. Total intake on an air dry basis was only 60 to 70 per cent of the recommended daily nutrient allowance as given by National Research Council (1919). After the first period, the cook- ed and‘ raw beans were fed on an equal dry matter basis. The daily ration for each lamb has been listed in table 3. Fecal collection. Feces were collected daily and placed in large glass jars. A preservative (95% alcohol and 3% HCL) was used in small amounts on the feces during the collection period. The total seven day collection was weighed, and mixed well. Representative samples of 1400 or 500 grams were taken and placed in the drying oven at approximately 85° C for 1:8 hours. After drying, the samples were allowed to stand for at least h8 hours in the open at room temperature before being weighed to determine dry matter content on an air dry basis. The air dry feces sample was ground in a Wiley mill and sub-sampled for use in making moisture, protein, ether extract, crude fiber and ash determinations. Q_r_t_._s. Orts were handled similar to the feces except no pre- servative was used. Calculations made. Apparent digestibilities for dry matter, protein, ether extract, crude fiber and nitrogen free extract were determined. The total digestible nutrients in the ration for each lamb was calculated based on the various digestibility coefficients ob- -36- tained, with digestible ether extract multiplied by 2.25. The design of this trial did not allow values for raw or cooked beans alone to be determined by difference. Feed Lot Trial Lambs used. The 105 ewe lambs used in this trial were part of a carload of 2911 white faced lambs from Utah. The average weight at the start of the trial was approximately 511 pounds. Treatment of lambs previous to the start of the trial LOctober 25 to November 11.). Upon arrival the lambs were given low grade grass hay and water and allowed to rest. Good quality mixed grass and legume hay was soon substituted for the poor grass hay and small amounts of bran and cats were fed. The roughage was gradually changed so that by the end of the adjustment period the lambs were receiving the proposed limited alfalfa hay allowance of 0.75 pound daily and about 1.5 pounds of corn silage. Shelled corn was grad- ually added to the wheat bran and oats mixture. The cull red kidney beans were not fed until the start of the experiment. External parasites were controlled by hand dusting all lambs with a one per cent rotenone dust. Each lamb received 1% ounces of a one per cent copper sulfate and nicotine sulfate solution for in- ternal parasites. Each lamb was vaccinated for "over eating" disease. The heads were clipped to prevent any wool blindness. Metal ear tags were inserted for identification. Design of experiment. Five lots of 21 ewe lambs were used with one lot. for each ration to be tested. Each lot was fed ad libitum to reach an average weight of 90 to 95 Pounds. Lambs were assigned to each lot as follows: the 105 lambs were listed in order according to weight, heaviest to lightest; outcome groups were selected by placing the five heaviest lambs in group one, the next five heaviest in group two, and in like manner until twenty-one outcome groups had been selected; the five lambs with- in each outcome group were assigned by random to the five test rations. Weight records. One day weights were used for initial, bi- weekly, and final weights as suggested by Bean (19118). The various lots were weighed in the same order and at approximately the same tine each weigh day. I Feed records included the weight of the daily allowance of each reed and the total refused feed. flipmen . Each lot of 21 lambs was fed in a pen 12 feet wide and 18 feet long in the barn with an outside exercise lot 12 feet wide and 20 feet long. The pens and the feed rack were illustrated by Willman, Morrison, Klosterman (19346) and Morrison (19h8). Sufficient feed rack space was provided for all lambs to eat at one time. Test rations. Lot XI -. Shelled corn and cull red kidney beans, raw, equal parts Linseed oil meal, 0.10 lb. per head daily Corn silage, full fed Alfalfa hay, limited 0.75 pound daily Plain salt Lot XII - Shelled corn and cull red kidney beans, raw, equal parts Corn silage, full fed Alfalfa hay, limited 0.75 pound dail Plain salt ‘ Lot XIII- Shelled corn and cull red kidney beans, cooked, equal parts Linseed oil meal, 0.10 pound per head daily Corn silage, full fed Alfalfa hay, limited 0.75 pound daily Plain salt Lot XIV - Shelled corn and cull red kidney beans, cooked, equal parts Corn silage, full fed Alfalfa hay, limited 0.75 pound daily Plain salt Lot XV - Shelled corn and cull red kidney beans, rawg equal parts Brewers' dried yeast, 0.08 pound per head daily Corn silage, full fed Alfalfa hay, 0.75 pound daily Plain salt Feeds used. Raw red kidney beans - Cull beans from the 1951 crop were purchased from a local bean plant. They consisted of Split, shrunken, and discolored beans relatively free from dirt. Cooked red kidney beans - They were from.the same shipment as the raw beans but cooked in a laboratory autoclave at 15 pounds of steam.pressure for 30 minutes. Raw beans were placed in trays with hardware cloth bottoms at a depth of 2% to 3 inches. The trays ex '~ '- ex .1 as - 39 - were placed in the autoclave with 1/h of an inch Space between trays. Eighty-five pounds of beans were cooked at one time. The exhaust valve was left open for six.minutes for air escape. The beans were cooked for 30 minutes after 15 pounds of pressure (250° F.) was reached. At the conclusion of the cooking time the steam wasreleased, the beans removed and placed in large chick incubator’trays to cool and dry. Electric fans were used to cool and dry the beans at first. The use of fans was discontinued, how- ever, when still air was found to be effective. After the beans were cool and dry (12 hours) they were placed in feed bins at the experimental barn. Beans were cooked throughout the trial but it ‘was planned not to feed beans until after two weeks in the bins for moisture stablization. Shelled corn - Number 2 dent corn purchased on the cpen mar- ket. Linseed oil meal - Purchased on the cpen market. Corn silage - Made from well cared corn grown on the Cornell University farm. Alfalfa hay - First cutting alfalfa purchased locally graded U. S. No. 2. Salt - Plain salt was fed free choice. Methods of feed analysis. All routine analyses except the nitrogen.determination, were conducted by methods suggested by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (l9h8). The Kjeldahl ’a - ho - determinations were carried out by the boric acid modification suggested by Scales and Harris (1920). All methods were standard for the Animal Nutrition Division feed analysis laboratory. Feeding procedure. The lambs were fed twice daily, about 8:00 a.m. and h:00 p.m. Full time employees fed the experimental lambs so the feeding schedule had to conform.to their regular work- ing hours. The concentrate mixture was fed first followed by the corn silage and hay. The amount of feed offered was regulated by keeping the refused feed less than 10 per cent of the total offer- ed. The total amount of feed offered, however, was charged to each lot and considered as the amount consumed. No attempt was made to keep the various lots on an equal intake after the first part of the trial. Calculations and measurements to be used. The average daily rate of gain.and amount of various feeds consumed for each one- hundred pounds of gain were the most important measures used to determine the relative value of the test rations. Economy of gain, live market grade of lambs, and net return per lamb (selling price less initial cost of lamb, feed costs, services and mortality charge) were other factors considered. The differences in daily rate of gain were analyzed statis- tically. Nitrogen Utilization Studies - Trial I A nitrogen utilization study was made of four rations similar to those fed in the feed lot. Animals used. Four white faced ewe lambs from.the same car- load as those fed in the 1952-53 feed lot trial were used. Design of experiment. .A latin square design (h.x h) was used so that each lamb would receive each of the four rations and in a different order. Lambs were assigned to the four series of rations by chance. The organization of the trial may be diagramed as follows: Lamb Lamb Lamb Lamb loh6 h06 h85 323 Period 1 D A. B C u 2 A B C D " 3 C D A B u h B C D A Daily'ration. A - Raw red kidney beans 160 grams Shelled corn 206 Alfalfa hay (chOpped) 3&0 Corn silage - 300 Salt (block) B - Raw red kidney beans 160 grams Shelled corn 160 Linseed.meal h6 Alfalfa hay (chopped) 3h0 Corn silage 300 Salt (block) Daily ration (continued) 0 - Cooked red kidney beans 160 grams Shelled corn 206 Alfalfa hay (chopped) 3110 Corn silage 300 Salt (block) D - Cooked red kidney beans 160 grams Shelled corn 160 Linseed meal 146 Alfalfa hay (chopped) 3110 Corn silage . 300 Salt (block) The estimated daily dry matter intake for all of the rations was 70).; grams. This was 86 per cent of the minimum, Morrison (19118), standard for a sixty pound lamb. These intakes based on an air dry basis were 82 per cent of the National Research Council (19119) sug- gested air dry feed allowance for a fifty pound lamb fed to gain 0.25 pound daily. The maintenance requirement determined by Armsby of .72 theme of net energy for each one-hundred pounds of body weight as reported by Maynard (1951) was met, although the intake was below accepted feeding standards for fattening lambs. By using Morrison's (19118) tables to estimate the net energy value, the rations furnish; ed about 1.09 therms daily for these 60 to 70 pound lambs compared to the maintenance requirement of .72 theme for one-hundred pounds of body weight. The concentrate to roughage ratio was 1 to 1.3 on an air dry basis. - h3 - Feeds used. The alfalfa hay, shelled corn, linseed meal, raw red kidney beans and cooked red kidney beans were selected from the supplies used in the feed lot study. The alfalfa hay, however, was fed chopped instead of whole. The corn silage was from a different silo which was necessary because the lambs on the nitrogen balance study were not housed at the experimental sheep barn. Salt blocks were available at all times. Feeding and management. The lambs were kept in digestion cages as illustrated in Morrison (l9h8) at all times. A.prelims inary period of six weeks was required to get the lambs accustomed to the cages and on a constant intake for two weeks before collec- tion started. The first attempted collection had to be terminated because one lamb injured a foot and refused to eat for three feed- ings. After this lamb recovered and all lambs had been on a con- stant intake for two weeks, the first recorded collection was made. Each collection period was for ten days with at least a fourteen day adjustment period between collections. The first collection started April 13 and the last collection was terminated July 9. Lambs were weighed at the start and finish of each period. All feeds except the corn silage were weighed and sub-sampled for each collection period before collection started. The corn silage was weighed daily and a composite sample made for the entire period. Feeds, except corn silage, were prepared for analysis by grind- ing samples in a'Wiley mill. The corn silage composite sample was oven dried (85° C.) and allowed to stand in the Open air at least l‘ L8 hours to gain moisture equilibrium before grinding. Total orts were saved and handled during analysis the same as the corn silage. Collection of feces and urine. The feces were collected daily and placed in a large glass jar in the laboratory freezer. At the end.of each period,the total feces were weighed and a 10 per cent sample placed in the oven (85° C.) for drying. Cne quart of fresh feces was placed in the freezer for possible future use. The dried sample was allowed to stand at room temperature in the Open air for at least h8 hours before grinding and sampling for analysis (dry matter, protein, crude fiber, ether'extract and ash). Five per cent samples of the total urine production were saved and stored in a refrigerator for analysis. The samples were preserved by acidifying with HCL and using a few drOps of toluene. methods of analysis. The feed and feces samples were analyzed in the same manner as for the digestion and feed lot studies. Nitro- gen determinations of the urine were made by the Kjeldahl modif- ication suggested by Scales and Harris (1920) using 5 and 10 gram samples. Samples were pipetted into a small beaker for weighing. After pouring the sample into the Kjeldahl flask,the beaker was wash- ed twice with distilled water and the washings were also poured into the Kjeldahl flask. The pipette was washed.with the next urine sample before pipetting the sample into the beaker. Sheaflg. All of the lambs were shorn at the end of the third collection period. -h5- Ration evaluations. Apparent digestibility of dry matter, protein, crude fiber, ether extract and nitrogen free extract were calculated. Estimated true digestibilities of the protein and the bio- logical values of the rations (Thomas-Mitchell method) were cal- culated using the values for metabolic and endogenous nitrogen sug- gested by Miller and Morrison (19104). (Metabolic nitrogen estimated at 0.55 grams per 100 grams of dry matter intake. Endogenous nitro- gen estimated at 0.03? grams daily for each kilogram of live weight. The nitrogen data was calculated as total grams retained, per- cent of dietary nitrogen retained and per cent of absorbed nitro- gen retained. Nitrogen Utilization - Trial II In order to obtain more information on the digestibility and utilization of red kidney bears, a second nitrogen balance study was conducted using raw and cooked red kidney beans as the only con- centrate and alfalfa hay as the only roughage. Trial I was based on the complete rations as fed in the feed lot. Animals used. Three ewe lambs averaging about 73 pounds used on the previous nitrogen study were used on the second study. Design of experiment. A latin square (3 x 3) was used to study rations of hay alone, hay and raw red kidney beans, and hay and cooked red kidney beans. This experiment may be diagramed as follows : I. -hé- Lamb No. Lamb No. Lamb No. h66 hBS loué Period 1 A B C " 2 B C A " 3 c .A B Daily rations. A - Alfalfa hay (2nd cutting) 1000 grams salt (block) B - Alfalfa hay (2nd cutting) 650 grams Raw red kidney beans 350 grams Salt (block) 0 - Alfalfa he;r (2nd cutting) 650 grams Cooked red kidney beans 350 grams Salt (block) Each series of rations was assigned to a lamb by chance. This design made it possible to calculate by difference some values for beans alone. Seven day collection periods and fourteen day adjustment peri- ods between collections were used. Shorter periods were used be- cause Hall and Wolfolk (1952) had found even shorter periods ade- quate. The three lambs were fed all hay until the maximum intake was reached. The lambs to be fed beans were then given beans to replace part of the hay. Hay was gradually replaced by beans until the apparent maximum intake of beans was reached. These amounts were then held constant for the entire trial. The other experimental procedures were the same as for Trial I. -m- Amino Acid Analysis of Red Kidney Beans Samples of the raw red kidney beans and the cooked red kid- ney beans used in the 1951-52 digestion study were analyzed for their amino acid content. The determinations were made by Doctor Harold H. Williams in the laboratory of the Department of Bio- chemistry and Nutrition at Cornell University. The amino acid composition of these beans was estimated by microbiological assay procedures discussed by Williams (191:7). The eleven amino acids estimated were arginine, isoleucine, threonine, tryptophan, tyrosine, valine, histidine, leucine, methionine, phenylalanine, and lysine. Doctor ~Williams reported his results as the grams of each amino acid in 100 grams of the feed being studied. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Feed Lot Trial 1952-1953 .A practical method of measuring the value of various feeds has been to feed test rations to livestock and record their perfor- mance. Table h is a summary of the 1952953 feed lot trial set up to test the feeding value of raw and cooked cull red kidney beans, and the value of adding linseed meal or brewers' dried yeast to such cull bean rations. Daily gains. The average daily gains attained by the five lots of lambs show that the addition of linseed meal (.10 lb. per lamb daily) and the cooking of the cull red kidney beans increased the rate of gain. In order to compare the rations for the same number of days fed, average daily gains for 126 days are given in a foot- note to table h for those lots finishing at other than 126 days. The beneficial effects of adding linseed meal and cooking the cull red kidney beans secured in this trial further confirmed the results of previous trials reported by Willman (1953) and summarized in tables 15 through 21 in the appendix. Brewers' dried yeast was fed in lot XV as a substitute for lin- seed meal. The slower gains obtained in lot XV compared to lot XI indicated that dried brewers' yeast was not a satisfactory substitute for linseed meal when fed on an equal protein basis. -149... TABLE h CULL BEANS FOR Parisian LAMBS 1952-53 Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans (raw) (raw) (cooked) (cooked) (raw) L.0Jfl. Silage L.0.M. Silage Brewers' Silage Hay O.75# Silage Hay 0.75# Yeast Hay 0.75;? Salt Hay 0.7S# Salt Silage Salt Salt Hay 0.757;! Salt L01} NO. 0 O o o e e e XI XII XIII XIV XV lambs per lot. . . . . 20.7 19 7 21 21 21 Days lambs were fed. . 126 lShla) 119(3) 126 lh0(a) Av. initial weight . .1bs 5h.2h(b) Sl.29 suit“) Sh.2h(b) AV. final weight . . .1bs 92.95 91.89 93.67 93.86 91.76 AV. gain per lamb. o .1bs 37.83 36070 390143 39071 37052 Av. daily gain . . . .1bs 0.301. 0.238 0.331 0.315 0.268 1.013(0) 2.013(0) 1.013(0) 3013(0) 2.013(0) Av. daily ration: Shelled corn. . . . .1bs 0.52 0.50 0.53 0.59 0.198 Cull beans, raw 0 o ele 0.52 0.50 “- -'"' 001:8 01111 beans, COOkedo .1bs “.- ""."' 0.52 0.58 “.- Linseed oil meal. . .1bs 0.098 -- 0.097 -- -- Brewers' dried yeast.1bs -- -- . -- ~--» 0.08 Alfalfa- hay e c e o .1bs 0.75 0075 0075 0075 0.75 Corn silage o... o . ole 1.96 2.01 2.32 2.16 2.02 Plain salt . . . . .1bs 0.015 0.011; 0.011; 0.015 0.015 Am't. of feed_per cwt. gain: Shelled corn . . . .1bs 1711.37 211.63 158.93 186.01 179.16 Cull beans, raw . . .1bs 172.90 208.87 -- -- 177.70 Cull beans, cooked. .1bs -- -- 157.5h 183.61 -- Linseed oil meal. . .1bs 32.h6 -- 29.38 -- -- Brewers' dried yeast.1bs -- -- -- -- 29.75 Alfalfahay . . . . .1bs 2119.55 315.25 226.15 237.71: 279.60 Corn silage . . . . .1bs 651.85 8th.5h 701.57 685.1.9 752.51. Plain salt 0 o e o .1bs 5.11 5095 14-023 11.80 0' Feed cost per cwt. gain.$ lh.27 15.65 13.38 13.13 18.00 Initial cost per cwt.. 3 23.81 23.81 23.81 23.81 23.81 Est. S.P. per cwt. . . $ 2h.03 23.71 2h.62 2h.53 23.91 Grade on foot . . . . . 2.53(d) 2.33(d) 3.1001) 3.0001) 2.h8(d) Initial cost per lamb. 3 12.91 12.93 12.91 12.89 12.91 Cost of feed per lamb. 3 5.110 5.7h 5.28(e) 5.21(e) 6.75 Total cost per lamb. . 3 18.31 18.67 18.19 18.10 19.66 Est. S.P. per lamb . . $ 22.33 21.78 23.06 23.02 21.9h Net return per lamb. . $ h.02 3.11 h.87 h.92 2.28 (a) Lot 111 at 126 days: av. weight 8h.83 lbs; av. daily gain 0.235 lb. Lot XIII " " Lot XV H " (b) Range: 52-58p0unds (c) Standard error of the mean " 96.19 ’.' 85.118 n I! 0.333 ” 0.2h8 " (d) Grades (based on fatness): h-prime; 3-choice; 2-good; 1-utility (e) Feed cost does not include cost of cooking beans .19.. TABLE h CULL BEANS FOR Farrnmtc LAMBS 1952-53 Sh. Corn 3h. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn 5h. Corn Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans (raw) (raw) (cooked) (cooked) (raw) L.0.M. Silage L.0.M. Silage Brewers ' Silage Hay 0.75# Silage Hay 0.75# Yeast Hay 0.75# Salt Hay 0.7S# Salt Silage Salt LotNo. .o..... XI XII XIII XIV XV Lambs per lot. . . . . 20.7 19 7 21 21 21 Days lambs were fed. . 126 1514(8) 119(3) 126 110(8) Av. initial weight . .1bs 511.21.“) 514.2900 5mm numb) 51.2w?) Av. final weight . . .1bs. 92.95 91.89 93.67 93.86 91.76 AV. gain per lamb. . .1bs 37.83 36070 39014-3 39071 37052 Av. daily gain . o e .1bs 0.301 0.238 0.331 0.315 0.268 :.oi3 Aegean assesses ens sooam an soonoaon osas> eBmHsono mes sowonpfis mo Baum ma non mambo empmasoawo mes mopeds hue Ho madam 00H mom usage 83:2. .3 .2 .HQ he commoners caddy 05 m.“ room we mean» 00H pom 98am AAAAA m .2? Ln \O I‘- VVVVV -70.. 239.88 N35 «damped www.mm one: mambo. honeflm eon emxooo M3 c.2539: mm.” anathema Montana one: Eamon phenom to.» 3mm .5 2m.0 H.2 wmom H~.o mo.o omom -.o w©.o meaneshe or.o N.a mo.a rm.o o~.o ao.a am.o o~.o nsnaobnans ra.a «.3 am.m rm.a as.a ma.m mo.a as.a unease os.a 0.: as.m ba.o om.o mm.m mm.o om.o osasoosna rm.a a.m ma.m mr.a omta mm.m mr.a om.a unasoasaasosa om.o o.m aa.o mm.o mmso mo.a r~.o mm.o onanossooa aa.a r.m oa.r mm.m Na.~ N~.a rm.~ am.~ shaman om.m o.o am.~ ao.m sr.a ao.~ Na.~ ar.a osaoaoa mm.a 5.: No.4 mu.a wa.a mr.a om.a om.a osmosoaooH re.o m.~ rm.~ oo.o oo.o am.~ oo.o rm.o osasasnsm oo.m a.a mo.m am.a am.a rr.m Nona ms.a nonsense he Ge «my be 5 E 3 5 some no 2 to 2 no .s.n mo some to z to .s.n no noon to ease oases .sm ooa .ew oa .sm oa .sw ooa .sm ooa .ew ea .sm ooa .sm ooa pod .em you .Ew and 5% you .Sm Ame .em mom 5% mom .5 you .sw sea atom Amvnssom_aoasse our oosooo Aavuasoniaosoae sum ear whom l.‘ “I; I IE8 Asomgasoo new empmfl” modem 9233 92mm Mmaam am @300 92¢ 3am do 5.39200 Bod 075,2 4: EBB. On. SUMMARY Several thousand tons of the discolored, split, and broken beans sorted out during the processing of dry beans for human food are available annually for feeding livestock. The states of Michigan.and New York have about ten thousand tons of these "cull beans" each year. The nutrient content of I'cull beans" may be similar to concentrates frequently fed to livestock, but the feed- ing value appears to be lower. A.feed lot trial, a digestibility trial, two combined nitro- gen utilization and digestibility studies, and an.amino acid com- position analysis were conducted to determine how cooking and the addition of linseed meal improved the feeding value of cull red kidney beans and if further improvement was possible. work with lambs at the Cornell Agricultural.Experiment Station indicated that cooking the beans, adding linseed meal, or a combination of the two, produced higher feed lot gains than those obtained with raw beans. A.basal concentrate mixture of equal parts of shelled corn and cull red kidney beans was fed to 105 lambs in five lots. The value of cooking the beans, adding 0.10 of a pound of linseed meal to cooked or raw beans and adding dried brewers' yeast to raw beans was studied. Both cooking the beans and adding linseed meal in- - 72 - creased the daily gains and shortened the feeding period. Brew- ers' dried yeast failed to be a satisfactory substitute for lin- seed meal. Highly significant differences in gains were found among rations. The variation in feed intake among lots appeared to be a major reason for differences in gains. A comparison of the digestibility of the dry matter, crude protein and the non-nitrogenous nutrients in three studies failed to show any large differences in.digestibility among rations con- taining raw and cooked red kidney beans with or without linseed meal added. The only significant difference was the higher crude fiber digestion coefficient for an alfalfa and cooked red kidney bean ration compared to a ration of alfalfa and raw beans. Re- sults obtained with other rations, though not significant, indi- cated that cooking the beans or adding linseed meal may slightly influence the crude fiber digestibility of the entire ration. The digestion coefficients calculated by difference for raw red kidney beans were: dry matter 86.9, crude protein 82.7, ether extract 50.6, crude fiber 61.9, and nitrogen free extract 90.5. The corresponding values for cooked beans were: dry matter 92.3, crude protein 82.8, ether extract h5.6, crude fiber 99.3, and nitrogen free extract 92.5. The values for crude fiber and ether extract are reported, but may not be dependable because red kidney beans contain only small amounts of these nutrients. The total digestible nutrient percentages were 76.2 for raw beans and 82.1 for cooked beans. Nitrogen utilization in addition to digestibility was studied with the lambs on the two 1953 trials. An analysis of the data on grams of nitrogen retained, the per cent of absorbed nitrogen retained, the per cent of dietary nitrogen retained, and bio- logical values determined by the Thomas-Mitchell method failed to show significant differences anong rations. There were, however, a few significant differences among the lambs used and the collec- tion periods. A microbiological amino. acid analysis demonstrated that cook- ing did not appreciably alter the amino acid content of red kidney beans. They were, however, low in a number of amino acids, espe- cially methionine and tryptOphan. After analyzing all phases of this study, it appeared that the faster gains which resulted from changing a cull red kidney bean ration by adding linseed meal or cooking the beans were due primarily to greater feed intake. LITERATURE CITED Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 19h8. Methods of Analyses, Washington, D. C. Bean, H.'W. l9h8. Single weight versus a three-day average weight for sheep. Jour. of An. Sci. 7:50-5h. Block, R. J. and H. H. Mitchell. 19m. The correlation of the amino acid composition of proteins with their nutritive value. NUtro Abs. and Rev. 1632).].9-278. Borchers, R. and C. W. Ackerson. 1950. The nutritive value of legume seeds. Effect of autoclaving and the trypsin inhibitor test for 17 species. Jour. of Nutr. hl:339-3h5. Borchers, R. and C. W. Ackerson. 1951. Nutritive value of legume seeds. XI. Counteracting the growth inhibitor of raw soy- beans. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 78:81-83. Borchers, R. 1953. Concerning the site of nitrogen absorption in rats fed autoclaved or raw soybeans. Science 117:h82. Bowman, Donald E. l9hh. Fractions derived from soybeans and nawy beans which retard the tryptic digestion of casein. Proc. Soc. Expt'l. Biol. Med. 57:139-h0. Bowman, Donald E. 19h8. Further differentiation of bean trypsin inhibiting factors. Arch. Biochem. 16:109-113. Brown, George A. 1931. Report of the section of animal husbandry. Mich. Exp. Sta. Seventh Annual Rpt. :2h5. Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S. D. A. 1952. Annual sump mary of acreage, yield, and production of principal cr0ps. Crop Production: 73-7h. Carroll, R. w., G. N. Hensley, and W. R. Graham. 1952. The site of nitrogen absorption in rats fed raw and heat-treated soy- bean.meals. Science 115:36-39. -75- Chernick, S. 8., S. Lepkovsky, and I. L. Chaikoff. l9h8. A dietary factor regulating the enzyme content of the pancreas: changes induced in size and proteolytic activity of the chick pancreas by the ingestion of raw soybean meal. Amer. Jour. of Physiol. 155 :33-hl. Clandinin, D. R. and A. R. Robblee. 1952. The effect of process- ing on the enzymatic liberation of hysine and arginine from soybean oil meal. Jour. Rutr. h6:525. Connell, W. E. l9hh. Cooked waste pinto beans found by tests to be good protein rich feed for hogs. 0010. Farm Bul. VI. h:h. Eggert, R. G., M. J. Brinegar, and C. R. Anderson. 1953. Delayed protein supplementation of corn diets for growing swine. Jour. oleutr. SO:h69-h77. Evans, R. J. and Helen Butts. l9h8. Studies on the heat inacti- vation of lysine in soybean oil meal. Jour. of Biol. Chem. 175:15-20. Everson, Gladys and Ada Heckert. l9hh. The biological value of some leguminous sources of protein. Jour. Amer. Dietet. ASSOC. 203 81"820 Finks, A. J. and Carl 0. Johns. 1920. Distribution of the basic nitrogen in phaseolin. Jour. of Biol. Chem. hl:375. Geiger, E. 1950. The role of the time factor in protein synthesis. Science 111:59h-599. Griswold, R. M. 1951. Effect of heat on the nutritive value of proteins. Jour. of Amer. Dietet. Assoc. 27:85-93 (a review). Hall, G. and P. G. Wblfolk. 1952. Comparison of different length preliminary and collection periods in digestion trials with lambs fed chopped alfalfa hay. Jour. of An. Sci. 11:762 (abst.) Ham, w. E. and R. M. Sandstedt. 19th. A proteolytic inhibiting substance in the extract from.unheated soybean meal. Jourz of - B101. Chem. 1514.. 505. Ham, W. E., R. M. Sandstedt, and.F. E. Mussehl.‘ l9h5. The pro- teolytic inhibiting substance in the extract from unheated soybean.meal and its effect upon growth in chicks. Jour. of Biol. Chem. 161:635-h2. - 76 - Hayward, J. W., H. Steenbock, and G. Bohstedt. 1936. The effect of cystine and casein supplements upon nutritive value of the protein of raw and heated soybeans. Jour. of Nutr. 12:275- 283. Hayward, J. W. and F. H. Hafner. 19hl. The supplementary effect of cystine and methionine upon protein of raw and cooked soy- beans as determined with chicks and rats. Poultry Sci. 20:139. Harris, L. F. , and H. H. Mitchell. 19111. The value of urea in the synthesis of protein in the paunch of the ruminant. I. In maintenance. Jour. of Nutr. 22:1671-182. Hiclonan, C. W., E. F. Rinehart, and R. F. Johnson. 19314. Fatten- ing Idaho range cattle. Idaho Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 209: Hoagland, Ralph and G. G. Snider. 1927. The value of beef protein as a supplement to the proteins in certain vegetable products. Jour. of Agr. Res. 3hz297-303. Huffman, c. F. and A. c. Baltzer. 1929. Barley, cull beans and potatoes as feeds for dairy cattle. Mich. kt. Bul. 73. Jaffe, Werner G. 19h9. Limiting essential amino acids of sons legume seeds. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. and Med. 71:398-399. J affe, Werner G. 1950. Protein digestibility and trypsin inhibitor activity of legume seeds. Proc. Soc. Earp. Biol. and Med. 75:219-220. Johns, Carl 0. and A. J. Finks. 1920. II. The role of cystine in nutrition as exemplified by nutrition experiments with the proteins of the navy bean, phaseolus vulgaris. J our. of Biol. Chem. 111:379. Johnson, B. Connor, Tom S. Hamilton, H. H. Mitchell, and H. B. Robinson. 1942. The relative efficiency of urea as a pro- tein substitute in the ration of ruminants. Jour. of An. 5010 1:236’2h50 Johnson, L. Margaret, Helen T. Parsons, and H. Steenbock. 1939. The effect of heat and solvents on the nutritive value of soybean protein. Jour. of Nutr. 18:1;23-10’4. Johnson, R. F., E. F. Rinehart, and C.- W. Hickman. 1931. Lamb feed- ing investigations. Univ. of Idaho Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 176. Kunitz, M. 19146. Crystalline soybean trypsin inhibitor. Jour. Geno PhySiOIOgyc 29:1119‘15ho - 77 - Ladd, E. F. 1885. Report of assistant chemist. N. Y. Agr. Exp. Sta. Rpt. :312-315. Liener, I. E. 1950. The effect of heat processing and storage on the nutritive value of proteins of importance in the cereal industry. Trans. Amer. Assoc. Cereal Chem. 8:162 (a review). Liener, Irvin E. 1953a. Soyin, a toxic protein from the soybean. I. Inhibition of rat growth. Jour. of Nutr. h9:527-S39. Liener, I. E. and E. G. Hill. 1953b. The effect of heat treatment on the nutritive value and hemagglutinating activity by soy- bean oil meal. Jour. of Nutr. 16:609-620. McCollum, E. V., N. Simmonds, and W. Pitz. L917. The dietary de- ficiencies of the white bean, phaseolus vulgaris. Jour. of Biol. Chem. 29:521-536. McDonald, 1. W. 1952. The role of ammonia in ruminal digestion of protein. Biochem. Jour. 51:86-90. Maynard, E. J ., G. E. Morton, and H. B. Osland. 1931. Colorado drylot fattening rations for lambs. Colo. Exp. Sta. Bul. 3793h60 Maynard, L. A. 1951. Animal Nutrition. Third edition. :vIcGraw Hill Book Company, Inc. , New York. Mendel, L. B. and M. 5. Fine. 1912. Studies in nutrition. IV. The utilization of the proteins of the legumes. J our. of Biol. Chem. 10:)433-1458. Melnick, 0., B. L. Oser, and S. Weiss. l9h6. Rate of enzymic digestion'of proteins as a factor in nutrition. Science 103: 326“329o Miller, R. F. 1927. Raisin by-products and bean screenings as feeds for fattening lambs. Univ. of Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. R31: 9‘16. ‘ Miller, J. I. and F. B. Morrison. 19341;. The effect of heat treat- ment and oil extraction on the utilization of and digestibility of soybean protein by lambs. Jour. of Agr. Res. 68:35-h8. Mitchell, H. H. l92ha. A method of determining the biological value of protein. J our. of Biol. Chem. 58:873-903. Mitchell, H. H. 1924b. The biological value of proteins at dif- ferent levels of intake. Jour. of Biol. Chem. 58:905-922. - 78 - Mitchell, H. H. 19h2. The evaluation of feeds on the basis of digestible and metabolizable nutrients. Jour. of An. Sci. 1:159“l739 Mitchell, H. H. l9h3. Biological methods of measuring the protein values of feeds. Jour. An. Sci. 2:263-277. Mitchell, H. H. 19hh. Determination of the nutritive value of the proteins of food products. Indust. Eng. Chem. Analytical Ed. 16:696-700. Morrison, F. B. 19h8. Feeds and Feeding. The Morrison Publishing 00., Ithaca, No YO, 21 ed. ' National Research Council. 19h9. Recommended nutrient allowances for domestic animals. V. Recommended nutrient allowances for sheep. National Research Council, Washington. Norris, L. C. 1951. New evidence on factors effecting avail- ability of amino acids. Proc. Cornell Nutr. Conf. :h5-57. Osborne, T. B. and S. H. Clapp. 1907. Hydrolysis of phaseolin. Amer. Jour. of Physiol. 18:295. Osborne, T. B. and L. B. Mendel. 1917a. Nutrition. Carnegie In- stitution of Washington Yearbook. 16:32h-330. Quayle, N. L. 1932. Fattening lambs in the sugar beet districts. Univ. of wyo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 191:22-25. Riesen, W. H., D. R. Clandinin, C. A. Elvehjen, and W. N. Cravens. l9h7. Liberation of essential amino acids from raw, prOperly heated and over-heated soybean oil meal. Jour. BidL.Chem. 1673lh3-1500 Rinehart, E. F., C. W. Hickman, and R. D. Johnson. 1932. Fatten- ing range lambs in Idaho. Univ. of Idaho Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 19h=3l-32. , Ruf, E. W., W. H. Hale and Wise Burroughs. 1953. Observations -upon an unidentified factor in foodstuffs stimulatory to cellulose digestion in the rumen and improved live weight gains in lambs. Jour. of An. Sci. 12:731-739. Russell, W. C., M. W. Taylor, T. G. Mehrhoff, and R. R. Hirch. 19h6. The nutritive value of protein of varieties of legumes and the effect of methionine supplementation. Jour. Nutr. 32:313- 325. o. -79.. Scales, F. M. and H. E. Harrison. 1920. Boric acid modification of the Kjeldahl method for crop and soil analysis. Jour. Ind. Eng. and Chem. 12:350. Schneider, B. H. l9h7. Feeds of the world. West Virginia Agr. Exp. Sta., Morgantown. Section IV:208-209. Schoenheimer, R. and D. Rittenberg. 19h0. The study of inter- mediate metabolism of animals with the aid of isotOpes. Physiological Reviews 20:218-2h8. Shaw, R. S. and A. C. Anderson. 1906. Cull beans as a food for swine. Mich. Exp. Sta. Bul. 2H3. Swanson, E. W. and H. A. Herman. l9h3. The nutritive value of Korean lespedeza proteins and the determination of biological values of proteins for growing heifers. Mo. Agr. Ickp. Sta. Bul. 372. ' Synge, R. L. M. 1952. The utilization of herbage protein by animals. British Jour. of Nutr. 6:100-10h. Thompson, J. I. and E. C. Voorhies. 1922. Hog feeding experiments. Calif. Bul. 3&2. Part I. Vinke, Louis and Paul Pearson. 1931. Alfalfa hay and small grains for fattening yearling steers. Mont. Exp. Sta. Bul. 251:16. waterman, H. C. and C. 0. Johns. 1921. Studies of the digestibility of proteins in vitro. 1. The effect of cooking on the digest- ibility of phaseolin. Jour. of Biochem. h6:9-17. 'Westfall, R. J. and S. M. Hauge. 19h8. The nutritive quality and trypsin inhibitor content of soybean flour heated at various temperatures. Jour. Nutr. 35:379-389. ‘Williams, Harold.H. 1950. Studies of amino acid composition of feedstuffs. Proc. of Cornell Nutr. Conf.:76-79. Willman, J. P., F. B. Mbrrison, and E. W. Klosterman. l9h6. Lamb feeding experiments. Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 83h. 'Willman, J. P. 1953. Lamb fattening experiments 19h6-h7, 19h7-h8, l9h8-h9, l9h9-50, 1950-51, 1951-52. Unpublished mimeographed reports and oral communication. Wilson, G. P. and J. L. Lantow. 1926. Bean feeding. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 155. ‘Wright, K. T. 1937. Economic aspects of lamb feeding in Michigan. Sp 9 B111. 281‘. 1‘ APPEND IX -81- TABLE 15 CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS 19116-147 November 22 - January 31 I Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Cull Beans Corn Silage Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Corn Silage Hay 0.25# Corn Silage Corn Silage Corn Silage Hay 0.25# LOM 0.20# Hay 0.2571}é Hay O.25# Hay 0.25# 0a., Salt Ca., Salt 03., Salt 08.13811: can Salt Lot NO... . .... VII VIII IX X XI 118111133 per lOt . . . . 20 19.8 19.8 19.6 19.11 Days lambs were fed 70 70 ~ 70 70 70 AV. mt. Wt. . . . .1bs 61.9 61.8 61.7 61.6 62.]. Av. final wt. . . . .lbs 83.8 80.6 73.1 70.3 69.6 Av. gain per lamb . .1bs 21.9 17.3 10.7 7.0 7.9 Av. daily gain. . . .1158 0.31 0.25 0.15 0.10 0.11 Av. daily ration: Sh. 00m. . . . . .1133 .85 .73 03h .16 .011» Cull beans. . . . .1bs --- .23 .29 .37 .245 Linseed meal. . . .le .16 .01 -"-' u...- .- whOle oats. . . . .1bs .002 .002 .002 .002 .002 Alfalfa hay . . . .1bs .25 .25 .25 .25 .25 Corn silage . . . .1bs 11.01 3.33 3.92 3081‘» 3089 Gr. limestone . . .1bs .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs .029 .03 .03 .03 .026 Am't. of feed per cwt. ain: Sh. corn. . . . . .1bs 27h.l 291.4 221.8 163.3 38.1; Cull beans. . . . .1bs -- 92.1 188.7 367.7 39908 Linseed meal. . . .1b3 51.1 14.39 “- --- “ WhOlB oats. . c . .1bs .69 .88 1.112 2.19 1.96 Alfalfa hay . . -. .1bs 79.6 100.14 162.0 2118.0 219.8 Corn silage . . . .1bs 1286.7 1319.6 2563.). 381.2.8 31511.5 Gr. limestone . . .lbs 5.73 8.11 13.08 19.8 18.11 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 9.11 11.99 19.31: 29.93 23.53 .1. ‘ 0 (O, > O O u 82 . TABLE 16 CULL BEANS FOR FATI‘ENING LAMBS 19116-747 January 31 - April 18 __._ Sh:LCErn. Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn‘:j‘ Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Corn Silage Corn.Silage Corn Silage Corn.Silagel Hay o.25# Hay'0.25# Hay o.25# Hay 0.7o# 0a., Salt LCM 0.l7#' LCM o.l7# LCM 0.60# 0a., Salt 0a., Salt 0a., Salt LOt NO. . o . . 0,. . VIII IX _ X XI 108111138 per lOt . . . . 19 19 18 18 Days lambs were fed . 77 77 77 77 AV. 11111}. W. . .. . .1bs 80.6 73.1 , 70.3 69.6 AV. final‘flt. . . . .1bs 92.6 ,103.6 100.7 101.9 AV. gain per lGMb . .1bs 11.9 30.5 30.8 32.h ‘ AV. daily- gain. 0 O .1138 0.16 0.11.0 0.39 0.1.2 Av. daily ration:, _ . Sh. corn... . . . .1bs .70 Oh? . .63 .75 Cull beans....... .1bs .23 Oh? .21 .25 Linseed.meal. ... .1bs .-’ .17 .17 .10 Alfalfa hay ... . .1bs .25 .25 .25 .70 Corn Silage,. ... .1bs 3035 h017 h.09 3.0h Gr. limestone . . .1bs 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 0.03 0.035 0.01:5 0.019 Amlt. of feedgpgr cwt._gain: Sh. corn. . ..... .1bs 4E5206 117.5 . 159.9 . 177.6 00.11 beans. . .1bs 151.0 117.5 53.3 59.2 Linseed meal. . . .1b8 "- 82.5 82.8 28.1 Alfalfa hay . ... .1bs 161.1 . 63.2 . 63.3 166.h Corn silage . ... .1bs 2157.2 1052.5 1035.5 722.8 Gr. limestone . . .lbs 13.6. _ 5.0 5.03 . 2.35 Salt. . . .... .1bs 18.1 8079 11033 hosl -83- TABLE 17 CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS l9h7~h8 Sh. Corn. Sh. GSEEE Sh. Corn Sh.‘00rn ‘Sh. Corn Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Hay 0.28# Lam 0.17# Hay 0.28# L0M LOM Corn Silage Hay'0.28# Corn Silage Hay 0.70# Hay 0.28# 0a., Salt Corn Silage 0a., Salt Corn Silage Corn Silage 0a.. Salt Co-Cu 0a.. Salt 0a., Salt :LOt N0. . . . o . O . VI VII VIII IX X Lambs per lot . . . . 22.69 23.38 28.00 28.00 22.5h .Days lambs were fed . 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 112.0 AV} init. Wt. . . . .1bs 62.0 62.1 61.9 62.1 62.0 AV. final Wt. . o . .1bs 90.5 95.7 91.9 96.1 92.6 Ar. gain per IaMb . .1bs 28.2 33.3 30.0 3h.0 30.3 AN. daily‘gain. . ..lba 0.252 0.297 0.267 0.308 0.271 Aw. dai rations Sh. com. . . . . .1b3 0.67 0.69 0.69 0.714- 0.,-Ill Cull beans. . . . .1bs 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.h2 lWhOlB oats. . o . .1bs 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Linseed meal. . . .1bs "' 0.17 ..- 0.09 0.08 Corn Silage . . . .1b8 3.25 3.08 3.02 2.22 3.12 Alfalfa hay . . . .1bs 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.72 0.28 Gr. limestone . . .1bs 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 0.026 0.020 0.031 0.021 0.027 .km't. of feed per out. gain: Sh. corn. . . . . .1bs 266.2 230.0 258.2 2101.0 162.9 0111]- beana. . . . .183 87.8 76.5 85.14 80.9 156.3 Whole oats. . . . .1bs 2.03 1.67 1.81 . 1.59 1.9 Linseed meal. . . .1bs --- 55.7 -- 30.6 27.9h Corn silage . . . .1bs 1289.2 1035.9 1129.6 729.9 1151.2 Alfalfa hay . . . .IbB 111.1 93.8 108.0 238.5 108.5 Gr. limeStone . . .1bs 7.97 6.19 7.72 3.06 6.99 Salt. . .‘. . . . .1bs 10.31 6.01 11.60 6.85 9.9h Feed cost per out. gainfi 21.28 20.88 20.08 21.25 18.25 Indt. cost per cwt. . 3 23.8h 23.8h 23.8h 23.8h 23.8h Grade OI). £0013 . . . . 2.73(8) 2.87(a) 3.014(8) 2.62(a) 2.614(a) Est. S.P. per cwt.. . 8 20.95 21.06 21.17 20.88 20.90 Init. COBt per lamb . $ 18.78 18.80 18.76 18.80 18.78 Cost of feed per lamb S 5.99 6.95 6.02 7.22 5.53 Total cost per 1&Mb . 8 21.h7 22.85 21.h8 22.72 20.01 ESt. S.P. per lamb. . 3 18.96 20.15 19.16 20.07 19.35 Net return per lamb . S -2.51 -2.30 -2.62 -2.65 -l.66 (a) Grades (based on fatness): h-choice; 3-good; 2-medium - an - TABLE 13 CULL BEANS FOR FANENMG LAMBS 1911,8449 Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn Sh. Corn LOM .1075l Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beans Hay l.0# Hay l.0# LOM .10# LOM .10# Corn Silage Corn Silage Hay 1.0# Hay 1.0# Salt Salt Corn Silage Corn Silage Salt Salt LOt N0. . . . . . . . VII VIII Ix x Lambs per lot . . . . 2h 21; 2h 23.1 Day's lambs were fed . 112 112 112 112 AV. init. Vt. . . . .1b8 63.2 6b.? 63.5 6h.3 AV. final Vt. . o . .1bs 97.3 914.11 96.8 9307 AV. daily gain. . . .1bs 0.305 0.270 0.297 0.260 Av. daily ration: Sh. com. . . . . .le 1.16 0.87 0.85 0.56 01111 beans. . . . .1bs ~- 0.29 0028 0055 Linseed meal. . . .1bs 0.10 --- 0.10 0.10 Clover hay. . . . .1bs 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.01 00m Silage . . . .1bs 1.31 1.28 1.22 1.29 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 0.017 0.019 0.019 0.021 Am't. of feed per cwt. ain: Sh. corn. . . o . .1bs 380.h 323.h. 287.3 215.9 Cull beans. . . . .1b8 "‘ 10701 9503 21103 Linseed meal. . . .1bs 31.3 .— 32.2 36.9 Clover hay. . . . .1bs 327.8 370.8 336.8 386.8 corn silage . . . .1b8 1430.6 h7h.8 1109.1 8496.6 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs Sol-t6 7.05 6.35 8.1.2 Feed cost per cut. gainS 18.01 16.71: 16.25 16.38 Init. cost per cwt. . 3 23.72 23.72 23.72 23.72 Grade on foot . . . . - 3.h6(“) 3.21(a) 3.0h(a) 3.17(a) E313. S.P. per cut... 3 214.06 23.76 23.60 23.72 Init. cost per lamb . 8 1h.99 15.23 15.06 15.25 Cost of feed per lamb 3 6.11; . 5.111 11.82 Total cost per lamb . 3 21.13 20.29 20.h7 20.07 Est. S.P. per lamb. . $ 23.141 22.143 22.814 22.23 Net return per lamb . 8 2.28 2.1).; 2.37 2.16 is.) Grade—s Tbased on fatness): h-choice; 3-good; 2-medfinn 0 ' ‘ -85- TABLEl9 CULL BEANS FOR FATTmmG LAMBS 19149-50 S . orn . orn . orn . orn LOM 0.10# Cull Beans Cull Beans Cull. Beans Corn Silage Hay 0.75# Hay 0.75# Hay 0.7S# Salt Corn Silage Corn Silage Corn Silage Salt Salt Salt LOtNooooooooo XI XIII XIV XV Lambs per 101': o o o o 2h 2h 2h 2’4 Days lambs were fed . 1.10 110 110 110 AV. 1111130 W13. 0 o o olbs 61408 6507 6605 6600 AV. final Wt. o o . olbs 101.8 97.2 101.2 98.8 AV. gain per lamb o ole 3700 31.5 3,407 32.8 Av. daily gain. . . .1bs .336 .287 .315 .297 Av. daily ration: Sh. corn. . . . . .1bs 1.03 .h9 .h? .249 cull beans. 0 o o olba ...... 0’48 0’46 0148 Linseed meal. 0 o .1bs .095 .0914. .180 O‘- Amino acid mixture .1bs -- --- --- .077 Alfalfa hay o o 0 .lbs 075 075 075 075 Corn silage . . . .lbs 2.17 2.12 2.27 2.16 salt. 0 o o o o o olbs 0012 0009 Om9 00% Am't. of feed per cwt. gain: _ Sh. corn. 0 o o o 0158 307.3 168.9 150.15 16602 C1111 beans. 0 o o olbs -" 16507 1,4703 162011 Linseed meal. 0 o olbs 28011» 3209 S703 "'" And-no aCid mumolba ... u... m 25.9 Alfalfa bay 0 o 0 .lbs 2214.3 262.1 238.8 253.1 Corn silage . . . .1bs 6147.9 739.7 720.2 725.2 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 3.348 3.09 2.70 2.17 Feed cost per cwt. gain$ 16.09 1h.72 114.55 114.12 Init. cost per cwt. . 3 214.86 214.86 214.86 214.86 Grade on foot . . . . . 3.2900) 3.0800) 2.9603) 3.120)) E5150 S.P. per Moo 0 :2: 27.114 26.92 26.82 26.95 Init. cost per lamb . 3 16.11 16.33 16.53 16.141 Cost of feed per lanb t 5.97 h.6h 5.05 14.63 Total cost per lamb . 3 22.08 20.97 21.58 21.01. Est. S.P. per lamb. . a 27.63 26.17 27.11; 26.63 Net return per lamb . $ £55 j.20 5.56 5.55 (afTrhe amino acid mixture (A.A.) is a by-product in the manufacturing of mono sodium glutamate and contained about 56% protein. It was supplied through the courtesy of Internation Minerals and Chemical Corporation, Chicago, Ill. (b) Grades (based on fatness): h—choice; 3-good; 2-medium - as - TABLE 20 CULL BEANS FOR FATTENING LAMBS 1950951 Sh. Corn Sh. Corn. Sh. Corn Sh. Corn' Sh. CornI Corn Silage Cull Beans Gull Beans Cull Beans Cull Beam LOM 0.10# (raw) (raw) (cooked) (cooked) Hay 0.75# Corn Silage ~Corn Silage Corn Silage Corn Silage (2)06-0u Salt L0M 0.20# LOM 0.20# L0M 0.20# Hay 0.75# Hay 0.7S# Hay 0.75#' Hay O.7S# Co-Cu Salt Go-Cu Salt Co-Cu Salt Co-Cu.Salt L013 N0. . o o . o o . XI XII XIII XIV XV .Lambs per lot . . . . 21 21 21 21 21 Days lambs were fed . 76 76 76 76 76 AV. mt. W13. 0 O O .1135 72.1 71.8 71.9 71.8 72.2 AV. final mo 0 o o olbs 10001 9609 9603 9900 9605 AN. gain per lamb . .1bs 28.0 25.0 2h.h 27.3 2h.3 AV. daily gain. 0 o ole 0.37 0033 0032 0036 0032 .Av. daily_ration: Sh. corn. 0 o o o .1bs 1.17 0053 0.148 0.59 0.69 01111 beans. 0 o . .1bs ..- 00’43 0.38 001-17 0055 Linseed oil meal. .1bs 0.098 0.186 --- 0.186 --- 3.00M. 0 o o o . .1bs .....- “-- 0.182 ..- m Alfalfa hay . . . .1bs 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Corn Silage . . . ole 1.93 2.2).]. 2.38 2.12 1.67 CoCu Salt . . . . .1bs 0.015 0.02 0.015 0.02 0.0111 Am't. of feed per cwt. ain: Sh. com. o o o . 0E5 16.0 160.6 114908 163011 2116018 c1111 beans. . o . .1bs ... 128.8 1.19.6 129.2 171.3 Linseed on male .1bs 26.5 56.1 "" 51.7 ..- Soo’Mo o o o o o .1bs --- ...-... 5607 """" """' Alfalfa ha. 0 O . .1bs 203.3 227.6 23308 208.9 2311.3 Corn silage . .‘. .1bs 520.2 667.2 738.7 588.5 518.6 (Jo-Cu $8.113 . o o .1bs (4.0 5.97 11.073 5.58 14.29 Feed cost per cwt. gainfi 15.66 lh.00 . 13.80 13.36 13.33 Init. cost per wt. 0 $5 33036 33036 33036 33036 33036 Grade on foot . . . . 3.05(a) 2.90(a) 2.76(a) 2.95(a) 3.10(a) Est. S.P. per cwt. . 8 35.50 35.30 35.13 35.h2 35.56 Init. cost per lamb . 8 2u.05 23.96 23.99 23.9h 2h.08 Cost or feed per lamb 2; m9 3.51 3.37 3.6503) 3.01.03) Total cost per lamb . 8 28.hh 27.h7 27.36 27.59 27.32 Est. S.P. per lamb. . 3 311.13 32.68 32.17 33.28 32.67 Net return Er lamb . 3 j.69 5.21 11.81 5.69 5.35 (1) Corn and cull beans fed in equai parts by weight the first—{72 days and 6 parts corn to )4 parts cull beans by weight thereafter. (2) Co supplied at the rate of 3/h oz. per 100# salt (21 g. of Co 012 6H20) Cu supplied at the rate of 2%- oz. per 1005‘ salt (63 g. of Cu 5°11 5H2O) (a) Graded (based upon fatness): h-choice; 3-good; 2-medium (b) 1116 cost of feed does not include a charge for cooking the beans. -37- TABIE 21 CULL BEANS FOR FATI'ENING LAMBS 1951-52 Sh. 06m Th. c‘Tm "‘"“Sh. 'c“orn'"" “Sh. 06m 5115033“ LOH 0.1075! Cull Beans 0qu Beans Cull Beans mm 0.102%» Hay 0.751? L014 0.1074 Brewers' LOM 0.107% Hay 0.75# Silage Hay 0.75# least 0.08# Hay 0.75# Silage Salt Silage Hay 0.75# Silage Salt ' Salt Silage Salt A Salt LOtNO........ XI XII XIII XIV XV Lambs per lot . . . . 21 21 21 21 21 Days lambs were fed . 83 83 83 83 83 Av. init. wt. . . . .1bs 75.1: 7h.6 7h.2 7h.3 711.3 Av. final Vb. . . . .1bs 103.5 1014.8 101.8 99.1 103.2 Av. gain per lamb . .1bs 28.1 30.2 27.5 214.9 28.9 AV. daily gain . . .1bs 0.338 0.3614. 0.332 0.299 0.3118 Av. daily ration: Sh. com. . . . . .le 1.13 0.57 0.58 0.56 1.13 Cull b68118. . . . .1bs -"'"" 0.56 0.57 0.55 """"' Linseed meal. . . .1bs 0.097 0.097 --- -- --- LCM 8C amonwcj-n. .1bs -""" -.. ~" 0.096 0.097 Brewers' yeast. . .1bs -- -'--- 0.08 ...... --- Alfalfa hay . . . .1bs 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0079 Corn silage . . . .1bs 2.88 3.19 2.82 2.69 2.67 Salt. . . o . . . .1bs 0.015 0.015 0.013 0.015 0.018 - Am't. of feed per cwt. gain: : Sh. corn. . . . . .1bs 333.62 156.82 1711.03 187.51 32u.28 Cull beans. . . . .1bs ..- 15’4030 171.26 18h.hh ...- Linseed meal. . . .1bs 28.78 26.78 --- "- “.- LOM 8: MOWCSLD. .1bs ...-... """ -... 32.111 27.97 Brewers' yeast. . .1bs -- “- 214.27 “'- ~- Alfalfahay . . . .1bs 232.).ll 216.28 237.214 262.69 225.91 Corn silage . . . .1113 850.00 877.76 850.52 898.28 767.87 Salt. . . . . . . .1bs 11.58 17.26 3.81 5.17 5.27 Feed cost per cwt. gainS 21.07 16.014 19.52 18.58 20.21 Init. cost per cwt. . 8 33.79 33.79 33.79 33.79 33.79 Grade on foot . . . . a 2.71“) 2.76(a) 2.86(a) 252(9) 2.86(a) E813. S.P. per cm. . $ 29.00 29.03 29.11 28.78 ’ 29.15 Init. 0081'. per lamb . $ 25.,47 25.20 25.09 25.10 25.10 Feed cost per 18an . 8 5.29 11.811 5.37 14.6203) 5.81703) Total cost per lamb . 8 31.39 30.01. 30.1.6 29.72 30.91; Ert. S.P. per lamb. . S 30.01 30.141 29.62 28.511 30.08 Net return per lamb . & -l.38 0.37 -0.8h -l.18 $.86 il- Linseed meal contained Aurofac A which contained 1.8 grams of aurecmwcfn per pound. Aurofac was added at the rate of 8817 grams per 100 pounds of Lot XIV was fed this amount for two weeks and then the linseed meal. amount was reduced to 17112 (a) Grades (based on fatness : rams per 100 pounds of LCM. h-prime; 3-choice; 2-good. (b) Cost of feed per lamb does not include a charge for Aurofac A. -88.. .843 .93 3.132.. 3283.88 we 35.. 333....“ e8 85» .333 be he 6.8. H33 vengeance." 36580 nauemom 303% one no 039:3qu 9.3 a.“ ceased? 92 name hem A3 .339 has .33 as so 2.. page: owed? Eco may . H. mm DH.“ M“ . NH OM. pm. .P4 m. W.g 0.0m N:.N m5. #3. H0. H0. HIH on. MONO ”.8 QON m&. 44. H0. H9. CH m«. 0.3 0.3 .3.« me. .3. .3. S. m m«. m.m« mes om.« me. 3. 8. 8. m mm. «a: m.«m R.« 2.. mm. «m. «m. 1. mm. 33 4.8 S.« E. mm. «m. _ «m. o m«. 0.3 «.8 . «o.« 2.. «m. S. S. m m«. «.3 m.5 S.« me. an. «m. «m. a HH. “Cam HOQQ mOON mNO NJ. 4:. j. m o«. mém 93 «o.« me. mm. on. on. « m". «.mm «.8 £4 fl. am. m«. cm. H H: p3 R0 mtmm R.“ m“. B- DMD. mm. “M. 0.?4 an. Nam. 38 $.« 3. 3. S. .25 2.. m m«. SE flow 8.« me. R. S. .3. me. o .3. :6» ago mm.« me. an. S. 8. 8. a. on. ...me .18 «.3 me. mm. 3. S. 3. 0 mm. v.2. .33 m«.« me. mm. 3. mm. mm. m m«. .30 0.5 3.« me. m«. 3. mm. mm. : ««. ...«e «.2 R.« me. me. 3. 3. 3. n 8. 5mm QR oa.« me. 3. S. «m. «n. « o«. «.3 .33 me; i. mm. mo. ««. o«. a He e3 5.. .29 m .2: 5: ...fl .3 .fl .3» 58 2.5 38833 seem We fivemadm d8: 83m 38 A33 .5 .33 £3 82 been E Fab 8 a e Stem .5 .5 $8 nee gee 83mm .3: o .85 1111 Eda Han n24 5:95” Eh g4 3.33 3.; peg seem «mama. - 39 - .Amsma .mddv mpnwflmz muaucommmpnoo Mo unswa mafiamppdm you ambfim .mfimmn mud Add pummm Hmpop vmvamesooou Hmonsoo nonmomom adaoapwz onv Ho mmmpnwonmm asp ma moqwzoadfi omz puma 9mm Amy omflmdn. .hHU a a do w...” Haw—”03 OwdHHm ECO MHW , .uofloa 32. 35 am E has a mHm. m.mm mm.“ Mp. pm. mm. mm. .p4 mm. m.Hm m.om Hp.~ mp. mm. mp. mp. m am. o.pm o.mm pm.~ mp. mm. pp. pp. m N4. :.~m m.mm om.~ mp. mm. mp. mp. p mm. m.op w.mw w;.~ mp. mm. pm. po. 0 mm. m.Hp m.am ma.~ mp. pm. am. mm. m pm. N.po m.mw e~.m mp. pm. pm. pm. ; am. o.mo 0.4m p~.~ mp. mm. m4. mg. m Hp. 4.00 n.4m pa.~ mp. 0p. mm. mm. m mm. m.mm m.:m mm.a :p.. mm. mm. on. H pHN pom mm. o.am o:.~ mp. ma. pmo. mm. mm. .pq mm. m.~m o.mm mp.~ mp. ex. ea. . :p. :p. Aavm mm. :.mm o.Hm mp.~ mp. 4:. 0H. up. up. c m:. n.4m m.Hm mo.~ mp. :4. 9H. we. me. p pm. p.mp o.mm pm.~ mp. mg. ca. we. me. n ma. m.~p m.om ma.m mp. 0:. 0H. om. mm. m om. m.po H.0m om.~ mp. mm. 0H. mm. mm. 4 ON. m.mo m.mm om.~ mp. mm. oa.. «4. mg. m mm... 0.00 o.~m ma.“ mp. so. 0H. mm. an. N am. n.0m 0.:m mm.a 4p. mm. mo. mm. mm. H HHHN peg .fl .2: m .2: .na -..: .3 . .fl :3 - 5.8 3.3 $3333 comp [film admin Ham: 8.8 58 :55 .3 .33 £3 82 fifin E 93p doomed... 868 39.3 c325 .hd .hd anon um. proe acapwmmhafiwn o umhd it 2Hdo MHHdQ 924 MMdHZH mama mu< mmrmmma Adana pad 600% mm mumda - 90 - .Amgma .m54v upnmflmz mcwoflommmphoo Ho magma mqaomppwm you :mbam «mamas put Had «comm H33 among—zoom." .3238 nonmomom 3:0.“me 05 Ho mwwpaooumm 9.3 m... 093.30% 92 9:00 pom A3 .mwmwn and had ad :0 ma unwamz.mwwaam once may mg. “0% MWON m“. E. mo. mm. mm. .pd ma. . w.mm o.wm m4.~ mp. ma. Hmo. oo. oo. 0H mm. o.mS m.mS Sim mp. m... So. oo. oo. m S. o.mp 1S .3.~ mp. m... So. mm. mm. S .3. 04: 33 SS mp. 3. So. am. ...m. p mp. m4... ...8 p3 mp. mm. So. m... m... m mm. ...mo «.3 So.~ mp. pm. So. .3. .3. m pH. ~.me :.mm mm.m mp. m4. Hwo. mm. mm. 4 mm. m.mm m.om mo.m mp. on. Hmo. :4. an. m pH. :.pm «.mm mo.~ mp. mm. Hmo. um. mm. m .3. ~.mm «.3 SA ..p. am. So. «N. 8. 3 pm 0.3 . 3 63 m 63 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 . 38 ...... Amoogaoa 3.... .3. Emmfla .33 33m 58 p.55 .3 .338 .33 omz 33. wag 8.8 . $9.25 .83 @336 3.3.8.. 1%.... .5 .38 .3. d3? 832. bfimMmfioé L. '\ 2H3... H420. 924 gazH 9am mgd nmummma 333 .33 co... :m mqmqa Ill‘ - 9o - .Amzma .mnqv magma»: wcwooommonnoo no magma maacmppmm you cobam .mwmon puo had «600% Hopop omoomeeoooa Haoqsoo nonwommm Hocoapmz can no mwopooonoo on» ma ooqmzoada omz puma pom NV .oamon_hno Add no :0 ma onwamz wwwHAo nnoo Hy mm“. Wowm MNON M“ O 0 mo. mm. Ila-OI Opq m... . 3... 9% o...« mp. m... So. 8. 8. 2. mm. o.mm m.mw w:.~ mp. ma. Hmo. oo. on. m Hm. o.mp H.4m ::.~ mp. m4. Hmo. mm. mm. m .3. oz: 9S ..m.« mp. 3. So. ..m. ..m. p mm. m.mo :.om pH.« mp. om. Hwo. m4. m4. 0 mm. 4.mo «.mw mo.« mp. pm. Hmo. 4:. :4. m p3. «.«o ...mm m«.« mp. «... So. «m. «m. .. mm. m.mm m.om mo.~ mp. om. Hwo. :4. :4. m pH. :.pm «.mm mo.« mp. Sm. Hoo. mm. «m. m :H. «.mm «.mw mm.H :p. :m. moo. «N. o«. H >N pom . 3 63 m .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 . 3.... 33 312383 8.... as. Admmwflo £33 8.3 88o own... .3 3.23 33 omz 33. £3.34 58 Egopm sum Sahfim .32... [Ian .>« anoo ummw‘ ampmMI{x noapmm wmfiwmmmmmuohd mmn«mm3 33$ 93 oomo ES «.33 9,2 853 SE. mafia... ..« Em: - 91 - TABLE 25 INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS Digestion Trial 1951952 (Raw and cooked kidney beans vs. shelled corn and linseed meal fed with alfalfa hay) ‘I_' Itgi Crude Ether N-free Lamb Equip-(3) Dry Pro- Ex- Crude Ex- No. Ramona)Period(2) ment Matter tein tract Fiber tract TDN % i z % % % 250 2 C 70.1 77.2 h9.9 hh.9 80.5 58.5 671 2 S 67.2 77.1 h7.h 39.2 78.2 56.0 190 3 C 72.9 80.6 37.0 51.9 83.3 62.5 256 3 S 72.1 81.6 27.9 30.2 82.6 61.5 AV. 71 o 7 79 a; 52 06 o 82 OE 66.? 103h Cooked l S 72.9 73.6 h5.3 h8.5 8h.0 6h.1 1085 1 C 7h.9 76.2 53.0 53.9 85.0 66.6 257 2 c 69.8 73.8 51.9 h8.3 80.1 61.2 181 2 s 72.8 78.h 53.9 55.6 80.9 63.1 126 3 C 68.h 71.8 38.6 h8.§ 80.0 61.2 166 3 S 71.0 76.3 h6.l 52.1 81.6 63.6 Av. 71.6 75.0 17871. '31:? "8175' T373" 286 Control 1 s 72.h 80.2 56.1. h5.8 83.5 63.u 101k 1 C 73.7 79.h 65.9 h8.h 8h.1 6h.l. 161 2 c 72.h 76.5 66.9 h6.h 83.1 63.0 3h 2 s 72.1 78.8 6u.9 h7.2 82.2 62.0 hl 3 C 69.2 73.3 63.2 h2.5 82.1 62.0 128 3 S 72.9 76.8 61.h 50.6 8h.h 6h.8 AV. 720if 77o; 630$ 0 83o5 3302 (1) Ration: Raw - ‘Raw red kidney beans and alfalfa hay. Cooked - Cooked red kidney beans and alfalfa hay. Control - Shelled corn, linseed meal and alfalfa hay. (2) Period: Each collection period 7 days. (3) Collection equipment: S - Stanchion C - Cage - 92.. TABLE 26 INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS Trial I - 1953 r j Crude Ether N-free Daily(l) Dry Pro- Ex- Crude Ex- Lamb Ration Period Matter tein tract Fiber tract TDN 27 % i %’ 8’ i 323 A. h 73.h 73.7 56.1 50.7 83.0 63.8 h66 l 70.h 69.2 63.5 85.5 81.8 62.7 1th 3 a: 22 22:3 532-: 22: gt: 0 00 0 0|- 0 Av. 71.3 69.3 62m“ 7. T23" 3. 323 B 3 73.3 75.3 67.h 53.1 83.h 65.9 h66 2 6h.h 63.8 h8.l 36.2 78.6 58.3 has 1 75.1 75.9 68.8 62.0 82.5 66.5 10h6 h 72.5 76.1 60.0 51.7 82.2 6h.9 AV. 7i03 5903 6000 3007 8107 5309 323 C 1 70.2 71.2 65.6 h1.8 ' 81.h 62.8 866 h 73.9 73.0 59.3 5h.7 83.6 66.3 gfig 2 29.6 28.2 59.2 h7.8 81.3 $3.; 1 3 2.1 8.1 é9.3 5%.1- 77. 7. AV. 0 6706 O. o 80.8 2. 323 D 2 65.8 68.1 h5.1 36.8 79.5 59.6 h66 3 72.6 68.3 6h.h 57.9 82.7 65.3 885 h 73.5 75.9 57.5 53.5 83.1 65.7 1086 1 70.6 71.5 68.1 hh.9 81.h 62.8 Ave 7006 7009 3708 5803 81.7 8301: (1) Daily'ration: A - Raw red kidney beans 160 gm. C - Cooked red kidney beans 160 gm. Shelled corn 206 Shelled corn 206 Alfalfa hay (chopped) 3&0 Alfalfa hay (chopped) 300 Corn silage 300 Corn silage 300 Salt Salt B - Raw red kidney beans 160 gm. D - Cooked red kidney beans 160 gm. Shelled corn 160 Shelled conn 160 Linseed meal h6 Linseed meal h6 Alfalfa hay (chapped) 3&0 Alfalfa hay (chOpped) 3&0 Corn silage 300 Corn silage 300 Salt Salt -93- TABLE 27 INDIVIDUAL DIGESTION COEFFICIENTS Trial II - 1953 (1) Dry Pro- Ex- Crude Ex- Lamb Ration Period Matter tein tract Fiber tract TDN %’ 5’ % % 5 5 1.66 A 1 60.2 71.2 0.0(8) 1.2.7 71.9 52.2 has 2 62.2 72.9 0.0 10.8 73.3 53.9 10116 3 62.2 71.5 0.0 147.3 73.6 53.8 Av. "6175" 7179" ‘0.0"' 1678' 72.9 53.3 1.66 B 2 70.3 75.0 8.1: 51.5 82.1 61.2 10122 3 69.7 72.3 13.1 11:73.9 32.5 4651.0 1 1 70.7 7 . 19.0 .0 2. 1.7 Ave 7602 7608 T303 0 fl 103 u66 C 3 72.1 76.3 28.2 53.0 82.9 63.2 h85 1 73.5 80.2 20.7 52.2 817.0 611.2 10176 2 711; 71.. 0.0 56.0 82. 62.8 Ave 7203 700 $09 530: 30 3305 jlffiation: A - malfa hay 72nd cuttingT 1000 grams B - Alfalfa hay (2nd cutting) 650 grams Raw red kidney beans 350 grams C - Alfalfa hay (2nd cutting) 650 grams Cooked red kidney beans 350 grams (a) Ether extract digestion coefficients listed as 0.0 were minus values . - 9h - 33263 as 6.83383... 6.2033 at 383m3683333 * «.3 m4. 4.3 0.0 3.0 m .803 «*0. ~43 4.23.01.14.30 «200 momém mém tum 4.mm $0.04 0.00 m 063363 0.0 0.0 mm. 3. 00.0 0.0 00.3 3.m 00.0 0.0 N 3.03.8.3 40. m.0 mm.3 p. 04.3 0. N 35 $3 0.4 3.0 0.0 m 0383 37303 0.00 To 4.44 3.m~ m.~3 0.03 0 .383 30. m.m3 3w. 4.3 mm. puma mm. 0.03 mm.3 4.03 .04. 0.m m 8333 40.0 0.000 30. 4.m p~.m «.m43 a0~.m m.~m3 100$ 0.00 4~.m 9pm m 33.80 04.m m.0m3 40. 0.0 m0.m 4.mm3 mm. 0.3 33.m 0.00 R3 0.03 m .383 31303 0.0 4.m 0.03 0.40 0.0 p.03 3 .893 00.: 0.m3 mp. p.~ 03.0 «.03 ermm.a3 0.3pe 3m.m «.00 cm. «.3 w ecapea mm.m 0.43 mm.m 3.03 om. m6 No.4 m.mm3 mm. ~34 , 3». m.m3 N 003.3033 mum-.303 13 203.3 ...3 0.33am .m 830m .m mhwddm m 0.303% ..H 0.353% 80000.3 0053.333 303.39 3.3mm: 330$ 3302 3302 $62 ddmz HO MO 293 900.3me 93.3 00.9.6 0.0.0.33 :33on .33pr ha newsman condom ccamnz acres - oceao - «add HBHAHmHBmmoHQ 92.....mqmm4 no "“5335; ,m0 3”quva mo Hgm mm as - 95 - 00.44 00. 0 04.00 00.3 30.00 30.0 000 0 003 00.00 00.0 03.00 03.0 00.03 00.0 003 3 4003 00.00 00.0 00.40 00.3 00.00 00.0 430 3 000 0000 30.00 00.03 03.00 30.0 30.03 00.0 0403 0 003 40.00 00.0 00.00 30.0 40.00 00.0 0003 0 003 40.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 40.03 30.0 3003 0 34 30.00 00.03 00.00 00.4 00.43 00.0 0403 0 000 40.00 00.0 00.00 40.0 30.03 00.0 0003 0 003 00.00 40.0 00.00 00.0 00.43 04.0 4003 0 003 00.30 03.0 40.04 00.4 00.03 00.0 0003 0 40 40.00 00.0 00.40 00.0 00.03 00.0 0003 0 303 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 40.03 30.4 0003 0 300 00.00 00.0 00.40 04.0 30.03 00.0 0003 0 000 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.03 03.4 0003 0 000 00.30 03.0 00.00 00.4 00.03 00.0 0003 0 303 00.00 00.0 00.00 04.4 40.03 30.0 0003 3 000 30.00 00 .0 00 .00 30.0 00. 03 00.0 0003 3 4303 30.00 00.0 00.40 00.4 00.00 30.0 3003 3 0403 40.00 30.0 03.40 00.4 03.30 00.4 0343 3 4003 00.00 00.0 04.00 00.4 00.43 03.0 0003 3 000 40.00 43.03 00.00 30.4 00. 03 00.0 0 003 3 000 080.0 04.00 00.0 40.30 00.3 30.03 30.33 0 000 0030030 30.00 00.0 00.00 04.0 00.03 00.03 0 000 0030033 30.40 40.0 03.00 00.0 30.03 00.33 3 000 0030030 00.00 30.0 00.0 04.0 00.40 04.0 33d 3003 0000033 04.30 00.3 03.0 00.0 40.0 00.33 330 0000 0033000 30.00 30.0 00.4 00.3 40.00 00.0 0 0 00000 000000 03.00 00.4 00.4 00.3 04.00 00.0 3 00000 000000 00.00 00.4 00.0 00.3 00.00 40.03 330 00000.000 0 0 :0 0 0 0 .50 0000000 004 00030 0000300 0300000 0900030: 3003000, 003000 030000 mohunz 00.0.30 .3503 0.0.0.30 60033on 30000 I“ 00r3003 30300 003000030 0000 024 00000 .00000 00 20303000000 mm as - 96 - TABLE ‘30 COMPOSITION OF FEEDS Trial I - 1953 Crude Ether Crude N-free Feed PBriod. Moisture Protein Extract Fiber Ash Extract 3 % % % % % Alfalfa hay’ l 10.11 11.70 1.71 31.18 5.16 36.21 Corn silage(l) 8.25 8.13 2.08 25.11 1.51 51.62 Shelled corn 12.33 8.36 1.12 2.11 1.21 71.21 Linseed meal 10.11 35.60 2.22 9.63 5.30 37.11 Cooked beans(2) 9.80 26.02 1.52 1.50 3.16 51.70 Raw beans 12.61 23.98 1.31 1.11 3.81 53.82 Alfalfa hay 2 8.12 12.72 1.75 32.66 5.91 38.51 Corn silagem 6.66 8.51 3.80 27.30 1.31 19.39 Shelled corn 10.88 . 8.19 3.80 2.37 1.21 73.22 Linseed.meal 9.32 33.56 1.09 10.25 5.17 10.61 Cooked beans<2) 9.61 21.17 1.52 1.60 3.88 56.22 Raw beans 10.60 23.13 1.31 3.75 3.75 56.39 Alfalfa hay 3 8.15 11.05 1.71 33.65 6.21 35.87 Corn silage (1) 6.16 8.23 1.86 21.71 1.93 53.81 Shelled corn 10.12 8.18 1.15 2.68 1.17 73.70 Linseed meal 8.88 33.70 1.23 11.22 5.59 39.38 Cooked beans(2) 8.11 21.00 1.70 1.72 1.02 57.15 Raw beans 9.314 23033 1056 ’4053 14007 57017 Alfalfa hay 1 9.12 13.32 1.08 33.91 5.91 36.63 Corn silage(l) 7.18 7.21 1.93 23.89 3.65 56.11 Shelled corn 10095 8018 2039 2.08 1.29 75.11 Linseed meal 8.19 33.11 1.10 10.19 5.95 10.86 Cooked beans<2> 8.85 21.11 1.38 1.56 1.18 56.59 Raw beans 9070 23083 1.2,-l 3089 1.51 56083 (1) Corn silage: Composition listed is for oven.dried corn silage. The silage as fed was 71.2 percent moisture on an oven dry basis. (2) Cooked beans: Cull red kidney'beans autoclaved 30 minutes at 15 pounds of pressure. - 97 - 11111: 31 COMPOSITION OF FECES AND ORTS DRIED AND ALLOWED TO STAND AT ROOM TEMPERATURE AND MOISTURE Trial I - 1953 Total Produced Crude Ether Crude N—free Lamb Period (Dried) Moisture Protein. Extract Fiber Ash Extract Feces: 7 323 1 2212 6.85 11.72 2.91 35.77 6.91 32.81 185 1859 6.57 16.06 3.38 28.81 9.57 33.58 1016 2201 6.31 15.88 2.93 35.33 7.81 31.71 166 2200 6.23 15.63 3.10 31.12 8.33 32.59 323 2 2609 6.59 11.36 3.77 35.80 8.51 30.97 185 2300 6.91 11.59 3.38 31.95 9.53 33.61 1016 2378 6.53 15.67 3.12 31.02 9.77 30.89 166 2710 6.52 15.19 3.37 31.52 8.83 31.27 323 3 2030 7.25 11.19 2.72 33.99 10.01 31.51 185 1980 7.16 11.15 2.80 30.81 10.05 31.70 1016 2910 7.03 15.76 2.60 33.16 9.88 31.57 166 2080 7.39 17.99 2.92 30.07 9.65 31.98 323 1 2010 6.91 13.18 2.57 31.26 8.57 31.18 185 2010 6.83 13.98 2.16 31.31 9.21 33.18 1016 2120 7.36 13.26 2.18 31.08 9.13 33.69 166 2000 6.70 11.10 2.52 33.25 8.99 31.11 Orts: 185 2 81 6.80 7.79 0.95 15.72 3.93 31.81 1016 2 352 7.53 10.16 1.70 32.15 35.50 12.66 323 3 95 7.10 11.37 1.05 28.82 8.63 12.76 166 3 113 6.72 27.53 1.51 11.78 7.63 11.79 323 1 153 6.56 11.15 1.11 25.10 7.36 - 98 - 2.3 5.6 8.6m 664 om.m 02m fimm m 33 238 84H mmdm 8.: :2: 86 meow m m2 am.a~ so.oa «H.4m -.m 64.6H -.m «mud n 66; 23$ .84" 32R m1m 13.: 6.6 33 m 33 2.4a firm Ram 3.4 3.3 8.m mama m mm: 8.13 323 8.3 mm.: ~13 8.6 «93 N 62 ~a.om mm.oa o~.em mm.m 6a.:H no.6 made a once «98 8.6 3.3 «0.: mm .1: 11m .6 8: a mo: mag Rs 3.3 8.: RA.” $.m $8 a 63 noooa mo.mm RA «m3 $4 3.3 8.2 ad. .83 use no.6m oa.m No.4 m~.H an.:~ mo.m Has oases ooxooo om.on am.m o~.- mm.a a~.ma mo.oa Has hen_oeaouaq La L« a V m u .5 posses ens noses posses £326 23 3oz €688 ooflom oweam oaMIz 03.5 993M ova—ho n00 9m 11%!!! mmmd I H define 80mm Q24 mg .13 ZOHBHmOmzoo mm as -99.. Home Cowman“ mean 983. heavy coxooo ... n Home woman—H 3.3 983 hodufl 3am .. m, «soon .8501 88186 n o nqsos mosses sum 7.. 4 ac GHQ O 0 ON. m. RH w. NQH Opd mm Moom momm comm noun“ v.3." homom H a 6:3” mm 5.8 m.m~ a. 0.2 5.2." new? a a 1 m2 .3 «.3 «.3 momm. noam méma ~63” m m we: on come «emu 0.4m. won: Hommd 0.3..” N a mum. mm 6.8 mam 1mm fin mam LEE: .5. S m.8 13 4:: 6%: ”8..” and: m o 6:3 «m 1.3 mda ~21“ a S 6.1:.” 6.3; m 0 m3 .3 0.0m 9mm «.mm. m6: 0 :3 p o: a o 3: mm 4.3 1S 06m 5.3 Q53 6.8.“ a o mum “om.” MOM“ mfimm O O O 0.?4 mm 0.3 «:3 ~29. 9m: momfi méma : m 30H om m.mm H.N~ , dam 0.13 Toma m6? a m mm: mm 0.18 11.3 Tom CR «.3 .32 N m 63 we 9mm odm QB meme 1?: «.03 m m mum. mm m. mm m. mm m. Hm m.mm m.mHH m.mma :2 a: «.3 N25” u. 5” mg.” 6.8..” H234” N 4 30H mm «.8 osmm mean 9% méfi HAS m 4 m3 3 ~38 7mm men; «Am m.mm.n :6: H 4 8: mm Hém m.m~ 11mm mum: NMMH «WW 11 4 mmm R I?“ O O O and; «AWE oofioeom 6838.18 68.28me seasoned 68.868 3.221383% .22 10.80..” .35 nomofifiz . ammonpfiz :09."sz demon»; sowed—9H2 nag 10am Cap $90.27 donnog HI 'lu mmma I H Hana mooflom 5306.300 .03 dog. ppm 3.3 23939: 385.3 dun—Hausa” mm as mnwmn_hoq6fix umxooo dam ham I o unmmn.hvzvfix sun and ham I m .4 has ham .. a B m.mm 9% 04m v.3 m.mmH Whom :3 a: m.Hm w.mH N.HN mon 4.:mH N.NON N QJOH A o.Nm m.4N o.Hm o.Hm N.oQH N.>ON H mm: pm 1mm mean «.3 93 N63” N.~.0N m o 8: Mn TR mJN mém HQ m.mmH WEN .3. . 3 :.mm NAN I 9mm «:5 0.8..” fimom a Boa o 3 5. 93 3“ ER .33 28 m as m om fig NAN «.mm «.3 Quma fimom N m 8: . mm “.8 mum“ mém mam mfim 045 ‘ .5 N >.Hm :.HN m.mN 0.0m N.NNH o.ANH m wand m: .H.mm 0.0H m.HN m.NN 0.:NH o.H>H N mm: do :.Hm 0.0m N.N: m.Hm ~.HNH o.H>H H d 00: N R R 0% 03m .Ew osam> A.pmmV donflmpwm vmcfimpmm Umqflmpmm vonhomnd dosdmnoo uoanomAHVnoapwm .oz HmOHmoa .wan ammonflnz nowoupwz ammoupfiz cowonpwz ammgfluz 9.83 ..on «Ba $9.3 89.85. am? I H H35 Sofia 838.38 .93 85m. .8.“ 33 289352: zmmomfiz agaiafi . 4m. as -100 - names honuwx Umxooo and ha: I o «amen hanHx sun and ham I m d 38 fix I 3 mm m.mm o.mm o.Hm pom: o.mmH momom o>¢ H: m.Hm womH N.Hm mamm zoamH Nowom N oJOH m: 0.5m mozm Oon oon NowwH wowom H mm: hm Homm m.Hm moo: w.:o N.me ~.~om m 0 we: mm Nona m.H~ mopw m.mm m.mmH womom .>< p: nomm Nomm comm no»: CoowH womom H 0:0H H: ~.mm 0.0H w.Hm m.mm 4.9mH ~.mom n ma: om mon Noam Noun «.m: mommH homow m m 00: mm H.um m.mm m.Hm m.mm m.N~H o.H~H .>< N ~.Hm :.HN m.m~ oowm «.mmH o.H>H m 0:0H m: H.mm o.oa m.Hm m.- 0.:NH o.H~H N mm: Ho don 0.0m mom: Mon poHNH OoHNH H H 00: 03% .5m gHm> vmcprom umcfimpwm onHmvom UmpuomnH unadmnoo onnomAHVQOprm .oz HQOHMOH .MHQ qwmoupflz domoanz somoupflz ammongHz amm0hwwz Dana :98 8.5 533 R535. 33 u HH H33 mUOHnom GOHpomHHoo hum no>om Mom wpwn $82355: zmoomfiz fiafifiefi . 4m mumda nHm>mHmev pumoflmH:Mfim .x wow :J NJ. 3.0 N .895 . :3 3m :4 3 a. .3 84 mfl N 83% 1 R3 3m :3 3 fifi «.3 8.2 «:3 N 829" m mHooH m.m0H :04“ m.: 3.3 0:2.~ *mm.mm monH m mnfimq HHnmmmH . 04H ooHH ~63 momm o .885 mm. n3 mm. m.m 3. T? m. 95m m. 838m $4 mam ad 3m mm; 36 N3 «.3 m 328 #NH. u now» mH.m. 0.0m omoH ~43 $3.: m.onH m «83H HummmH ..n. gamma m onadm .m gnaw ..H Pawn—wow aocmmnm ooquuw> Huang S32 admz :32 832 Ho no 83> Tana .mE ugmmuz @833ng $2me . 8.38 HaofimoHOHm mane undaman connomnq . pqoonoumfl ammo.“ 0F wnmonwn 4949 ZOHB .mo mHmHAdad mo gm mm as ~102- mmlmfilo gosh. mammnh Hwy mm. + mm. + an. + am. I 8.2% name 33 no 5H.» :5 mm. + E. + m . .. mu. .. $3 .3 58 fig? 8.? 85% 3.8 at. Ermm mm: damn 03 31mm 33 smog mum : AmvmmIm mm. + a. + om. + mm. + .33 .8 53 $33 3.3 Ram mm.mm 3.6 8:3 84 3.3 Boa 3.3 mmm R.mm mg m To mm. I 0.0 mm. ... ooo mmOH no 339 84m 33m mm.mm 3.mm Hmum «mean mam 3.4m m3 23m 8: 91% Boa u Sum NH ... om. + mm. ... mneq. mmoH .8 5mm 29% 8.3 mem 938 SI: Ram Boa «13 man o~.~m m2 34m 03 a 3.: .mx 62 .mm .02 $a .02 .mm .02 82mm 83 ...E £3 £3 £3 2.5 £3 2.5 33 I! a 83mm 0 83mm mrcofiaww 4 83mm 1' I! $3 I H Have 8H? mo; mo 92m 924 gHHEAHQmm 83 mo 959mm “.5ng MRS, om. Ema -103- TABLE 3? LIVE WEIGHT RECORD OF LAMBS BEGII‘EIING AND END OF EACH PERIOD Trial II - 1953 Ration i Ration B Ration C Date Period No. Kg. No. K}? No. Kg; 8-3 1 h66 35 .1 1016 35.1 has 36.7 8.10 36.3 .%05 37.9 Gain or 1083 +1.? +1 +1. 8'22 2 1:85 38.3 1466 36.7 10146 33.1 8-29 39.2 2 7J4 39.0 Gain or 1038 *009 4'00? 4'009 10-11; 3 10116 38.5 h85 . 39.2 166 37.9 10-21 38.5 111.5 38.8 Gain or loss 0.0 + .3 40.9 Av. gain or loss +0.7 +1.5 +1.0 . Room us: (mu 1 "§ ”$3 ‘5‘ {1‘11 Apr 4 58 RGUM [Lag out”, . I . . ‘ ' .. ..1 . . 1.1.- -. . '. . ... . . “-1-1 . , '_1.'._' l'.‘ .2:- :L' _l_iLLl_h-_-_J__'___n_‘lt_M_-_-___-_-‘_.—_—_-__—_‘__‘