UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS 
 
 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 
 
 Trials with California Silage Crops 
 for Dairy Cows 
 
 BY 
 F. W. WOLL and E. C. VOORHIES 
 
 BULLETIN No. 282 
 
 August, 1917 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS 
 
 BERKELEY 
 
 1917 
 
Benjamin Ide Wheeler, President of the University. 
 
 EXPEKIMENT STATION STAFF 
 
 HEADS OF DIVISIONS 
 
 Thomas Forsyth Hunt, Director. 
 
 Edward J. Wickson, Horticulture (Emeritus). 
 
 Herbert J. Webber, Director Citrus Experiment Station; Plant Breeding. 
 
 Hubert E. Van Norman, Vice-Director; Dairy Management. 
 
 William A. Setchell, Botany. 
 
 Myer E. Jaffa, Nutrition. 
 *Eobert H. Loughridge, Soil Chemistry and Physics (Emeritus). 
 
 Charles W. Woodworth, Entomology. 
 
 Balph E. Smith, Plant Pathology. 
 
 J. Eliot Coit, Citriculture. 
 
 John W. Gilmore, Agronomy. 
 
 Charles F. Shaw, Soil Technology. 
 
 John W. Gregg, Landscape Gardening and Floriculture. 
 
 Frederic T. Bioletti, Viticulture and Enology. 
 
 Warren T. Clarke, Agricultural Extension. 
 
 John S. Burd, Agricultural Chemistry. 
 
 Charles B. Lipman, Soil Chemistry and Bacteriology. 
 
 Clarence M. Haring, Veterinary Science and Bacteriology. 
 
 Ernest B. Babcock, Genetics. 
 
 Gordon H. True, Animal Husbandry. 
 
 James T. Barrett, Plant Pathology. 
 
 Fritz W. Woll, Animal Nutrition. 
 
 Walter Mulford, Forestry. 
 
 W. P. Kelley, Agricultural Chemistry. 
 
 H. J. Quayle, Entomology. 
 
 D. T. Mason, Forestry. 
 
 J. B. Davidson, Agricultural Engineering. 
 
 Elwood Mead, Bural Institutions. 
 
 H. S. Eeed, Plant Physiology. 
 
 W. L. Howard, Pomology. 
 fFRANK Adams, Irrigation Practice. 
 
 C. L. Eoadhouse, Dairy Industry. 
 
 William G. Hummel, Agricultural Education. 
 
 John E. Dougherty, Poultry Husbandry. 
 
 S. S. Bogers, Olericulture. 
 
 David N. Morgan, Assistant to the Director. 
 
 Mrs. D. L. Bunnell, Librarian. 
 
 DIVISION OF ANIMAL HUSBANDEY 
 Gordon H. True E. C. Voorhies 
 
 F. W. Woll E. P. Eoyce 
 
 J. I. Thompson Cora J. Hill 
 
 E. F. Miller 
 
 * Died July 1, 1917. 
 
 f In co-operation with office of Public Eoads and Bural Engineering, U. S. 
 Department of Agriculture. 
 
Trials with California Silage Crops for Dairy Cows 
 
 BY 
 
 F. W. WOLL and E. C. VOOEHIES 
 
 In the central and eastern states where the silo first became gen- 
 erally introduced on dairy and stock farms, Indian corn is by far 
 the most important silage crop. This is at the present of minor im- 
 portance as a forage crop in this state and will probably always remain 
 so; we have, on the other hand, a number of other crops that have 
 proved well adapted for the silo, especially varieties of the sorghum 
 family, both of the saccharine and non-saccharine sorghums; also 
 small grains, Sudan grass, rye grass and clover, alfalfa, etc. Consider- 
 able practical experience with most of these crops has been accumu- 
 lated by this time, as regards their adaptability for the silo and the 
 value of the resulting silage. Accurate experimental data bearing 
 on these questions are, however, still limited, in spite of the interest 
 in the subject among dairy farmers and stock men and its importance 
 to them. 
 
 In order to furnish reliable information as to the value of .these 
 silage crops, especially to the dairy farmer, the Animal Husbandry 
 Division of the College has conducted a series of siloing and feeding 
 experiments with a number of the crops mentioned during the past 
 four years. This bulletin presents brief accounts of these experiments 
 and such general discussions of the subject as are deemed of direct 
 value to our farmers. Circular 138 of the College of Agriculture, 
 entitled "The Silo in California Agriculture," furnishes information 
 on the general subject of the making and feeding of silage, and only 
 conditions peculiar to the special crops mentioned will be discussed 
 in this bulletin. 
 
 During the period given, trials have been conducted at the Uni- 
 versity Farm with the following silage crops: Indian corn, milo, 
 feterita, sweet sorghum, alfalfa, Sudan grass, green oats and barley 
 (volunteer grain), and more or less extended feeding experiments 
 with these crops have been made with a view to determining their 
 value to the dairy and stock farmer. It has not been practicable to 
 make detailed studies of the chemical changes involved in the siloing 
 of these crops, or the losses of feed components in the siloing process, 
 but samples of the green forage crops and of the resulting silage have 
 been taken in all cases and have been analyzed in the Nutrition Labor- 
 
20 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 atory at Berkeley, through the kind assistance of Professor M. E. 
 Jaffa, chief of the laboratory. 
 
 SILOS AT THE UNIVEESITY FAKM 
 The. silo equipment of the University Farm during the past three 
 years has consisted of the four silos described in the circular referred 
 to above, 1 and of an Ideal Green-Feed Silo, erected October, 1915, 
 near the beef barn (dimensions 14 by 36 feet; cost of silo, complete 
 with roof and anchors, $281.95). With the four silos previously built, 
 this gives us a total theoretical silo capacity of nearly 600 tons of 
 corn silage, or slightly over 400 tons in case of silage crops that do 
 not pack as well as Indian corn. Since most tables of silo capacities 
 are constructed on the basis of data obtained with Indian corn cut 
 at a rather early stage of growth, the figures will be 20 to 30 per cent 
 lower in the case or* lighter materials containing less water or com- 
 posed of finer stems and leaves than Indian corn. Under our climatic 
 conditions the system of crop production can, however, be readily 
 arranged so that silos may be filled twice a year, and a given silo 
 capacity thus doubled. 
 
 The following two tables will show the main facts relating to the 
 silage crops during the past two seasons. It will be noted that the 
 following crops were siloed during the season of 1915: Indian corn, 
 milo, feterita, and sweet sorghum, and in 1916, Indian corn, alfalfa, 
 Sudan grass, feterita, and sweet sorghum. The crops were in all cases 
 grown on grain land and were, therefore, planted later in the season 
 than would be the case on spring-plowed land. The yields per acre 
 of the various crops, dates of planting, irrigation and harvesting and 
 total green forage placed in the silos are given in all cases. 2 
 
 The average yields per acre of the different crops during the two 
 seasons are as follows : Indian corn, 10.2 tons, milo, 11.3 tons, feterita, 
 10.0 tons, Sudan grass, 12.2 tons, and sweet sorghum, 14.7 tons (Early 
 Amber, 13.4, Honey, 19.3, and Orange, 22.7). These figures are for 
 crops grown on dry land or receiving one irrigation only. Since the 
 rainfall for the two seasons from which the data were obtained was 
 about normal, the figures may be taken to represent approximately 
 the yields of the various crops that may be expected under conditions 
 similar to those prevailing in central Sacramento Valley in case of 
 clay loam soils in a good state of fertility. 3 
 
 i Circular 138, p. 13. 
 
 2 The data as to growing of crops and filling of the silos have been furnished 
 by Professor Thomas Tavernetti, assistant to Dean of University Farm School. 
 
 3 Bull. 278, Coll. of Agric, Univ. of Calif., p. 343. 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 21 
 
 P « 
 
 3. o 
 
 9 CD cD p. 
 
 2 co cy 2 
 
 P CD £1 
 a cd 
 
 "^ 
 
 C CD 
 p CD 
 
 p Hs 
 CD 
 CD 
 Pi 
 
 XJ1 . 
 
 o 
 
 Q 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 
 i 
 
 P 
 
 ea 
 
 o 
 
 !-i 
 
 h 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 
 
 t-+- 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 co 
 
 & 
 
 
 j3 
 
 JET 
 
 
 
 Pj 
 
 Pj 
 
 P_ 
 
 P 
 
 o J 
 
 C_| C_, p 
 
 P P V 
 
 to 
 
 CD CD 
 
 ^1 ^ ^ 
 
 ox 
 
 33 
 o o 
 
 < < 
 
 £, 
 
 org Qrq ^ 
 l_i i_i to 
 
 to ?o ^ 
 
 £85© 
 
 h- tr" h 
 
 tfO O 
 
 *> o^ 
 
 CD P 
 P Hs 
 
 cS ^2 
 
 " COcT 
 
 Hs CD p 
 
 a-- «s 
 
 pi 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 fa. 5 
 
 OS 
 
 CD P p P 
 P/ Hs >-* p 
 
 cd q p h ; 
 
 CD ; 
 
 CD tOP < 
 
 Pj 
 
 CD 
 
 £L 
 orq 
 
 CD 
 CD 
 
 p 
 
 Hs 
 CD 
 CD 
 Pj 
 
 CO 
 
 cd crq S-^ 
 
 org ^ 
 
 P CD 
 
 Feter 
 Sweet 
 Sweet 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 P* 
 
 H 
 
 P 
 
 & 
 
 P 
 
 M 
 
 P 
 
 di 
 p" 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 Hs jo" 
 P Orq 
 
 CO CO rt- 
 
 5 o p 
 
 P 
 
 P 
 o 
 
 P 
 
 p 
 
 CfQ 
 
 H^ !! 
 
 P J3 
 
 hi »-i 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 org QTQ 
 
 
 
 Hj 
 
 p 
 
 CO 
 
 W 
 
 3* 3* 
 
 p 
 
 p 
 
 P 
 
 
 C 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 B B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 m". (C C£> 
 P & 
 
 CT5 
 
 to » g. 
 
 CO P* 
 
 5.0 
 
 OS m. , 
 
 s ? 
 
 CD 
 
 P S* 
 c£ P 
 
 P P- 
 
 p^ K 
 
 CD CD S 5 
 
 P H P 
 
 pL^ Ht 
 
 2 V f° 
 
 Pj 3 
 
 CD ^ 
 # Pj CD 
 V CD 
 
 ~. P 
 
 Hs m 
 
 H--3 
 P 
 
 Hs c-h 
 
 a? 
 
 c^cd 4 
 
 O c+ H 
 
 "* ° « & 
 
 i-j O CD 
 
 P CS Hs . _, P 
 
 P f ►^ ^^ 
 
 Pw P PS ^ 
 
 H CD =§ 
 
 h p cn £. 
 
 CD ^ H- <J 
 
 p 2 P P 
 
 en j^- 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 CD 
 
 P 7 
 
 P CD 
 CD 
 
 t—i p 
 
 co a^- 
 
 ■'CD ^ 
 
 b:^ . s - 
 
 fQQ 
 
 Hs X" 2T 
 
 - ■ hi o" a i 
 
 m ^ CD 
 
 §? p t— I L_l 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 si P ° 
 
 ^ H 
 
 & p VJ 
 
 ® |i CD' 
 
 ' CD P 
 ^OQ 2 
 
 CO CD Ms 
 
 h- p trr 1 
 
 § ^P 
 
 p ocrq 
 
 HJcrq • 
 CD t-i 
 
 O M- o 
 
 CO CO . 
 
 Hs p- H- 
 
 O CD O ' 
 H p 
 
 &2 CD ro 
 B'jO H 5 
 
 CTQOrq g 
 
 ^ O H- H 
 g ^ H TO" 
 
 gocT & 
 
 P Ps- 
 p SL < vj 
 
 gL *? ^o 
 
 p 
 
 h cn GQ 
 
 !\?o 
 
 ^ 
 
 to 
 to 
 
 O O 
 
 P^ 
 
 CD 
 P 
 
 on? 
 
 H 
 CD 
 CD 
 P 
 
 CD 
 CD 
 P-i 
 
 CO 
 
 HJ 
 O 
 
 m 
 
 CD 
 ►3 
 
 s e 
 
 & k 
 
 CD 
 
 
 H 1 CT5 ^ 4 O 
 
 H^« M 
 
 P p H 
 
 M UP 
 
 CO S3" 
 CD P 
 
 m-ctq 
 CfQ p 
 P £t 
 ^" » 
 
 CD Qj 
 Pj 1 ^ 
 
 o^f^|^ 
 
 e a 
 
 1-J M« ^. (_ | P 
 
 p- a. o g . os o 3 
 
 P(jqpB^oP2.t3) 
 
 S. p - g. £ ' B "g p 
 g ^ &°P «o gog p. 
 * ^ O * p 
 
 g' & «0 P H- P 
 
 7 v s a p, 
 
 
22 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 Data for average yields of dry matter and of digestible feed com- 
 ponents calculated on basis of average gross yields and percentage 
 dry matter and estimated digestible matter in the crops, are presented 
 in the following table. The figures given will indicate the relative 
 value of the respective silage crops for feed production. 
 
 Table III. — Average Yields of Silage Crops per Acre, 1915-1916 
 
 Dry matter, Digestible matter, 
 
 Tonnage pounds pounds 
 
 Indian corn 10.2 6622 4106 
 
 Sweet sorghum 14.7 5822 3318 
 
 Milo 11.3 5990 3294 
 
 Feterita 10.0 8740 4804 
 
 Sudan grass 12.2 4442 2530 
 
 The per acre yield of dry matter and total digestible matter for 
 feterita was higher than that of the other varieties, Indian corn com- 
 ing second, with milo, sweet sorghum, and Sudan grass following in 
 the order given. The feterita did not give as high tonnage as the 
 other silage crops, but the crop contained a considerably higher per- 
 centage of dry matter at the time of harvest than any of the other 
 crops, viz., 43.7 per cent, against 25.5 per cent for Indian corn, 34.1 
 per cent for Sudan grass, 26.5 per cent for milo, and 19.75 per cent 
 as the average for the sweet sorghum varieties. 'The feterita silage, 
 on the other hand, was less palatable to stock than any of the other 
 silages, in part at least due to the advanced stage of growth at which 
 the crop was siloed. The heads made up about 28 per cent of the 
 total weight of the crop at the time of cutting, when the seed was 
 hard and fully matured. Water was added to the green forage as it 
 went into the silo. The resulting silage was of good clean flavor, of 
 medium acidity and free from molds, but as suggested, was not eaten 
 by the stock as readily or in as large amounts as other kinds of silage. 
 With our present limited experience with this silage, it cannot be 
 stated definitely whether a better quality, so far as palatability goes, 
 might be obtained if the crop was siloed before the seed was fully 
 matured or if more water be added during the filling of the silo. It 
 may be said in general, however, that all the above crops experimented 
 with will make satisfactory silages and that the particular crop which 
 is likely to do best in each locality should be grown for the silo. So 
 far as palatability and general value as a silage crop goes, our present 
 experience would lead us to put Indian corn first for irrigated land, 
 with sweet sorghum a close second, while for dry farming or with a 
 limited water supply, the grain sorghums (milo and feterita) or 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 23 
 
 Sudan grass may be placed first. In regard to the latter crop, it 
 should be stated that a second hay or pasture crop may ordinarily be 
 counted on under the conditions prevailing in the interior valleys, 
 so that this crop would be of relatively greater value for the produc- 
 tion of stock feed than would appear from the figures given in the 
 preceding table. 
 
 FEEDING EXPEEIMENTS WITH SILAGE CEOPS 
 
 The feeding experiments described in the following pages were 
 conducted with cows in the University dairy herd during the past 
 four years in studying the relative value of different kinds of silage 
 to the dairy farmer, viz. : 
 
 1. Indian corn silage as a supplement to alfalfa hay. 
 
 2. Milo silage as a supplement to alfalfa hay. 
 
 3. The comparative value of silage made from Indian corn and 
 that from Sudan grass and from sweet sorghum. 
 
 The first of these experiments was conducted November, 1913 to 
 March, 1914; the experiment with milo silage, January to April, 
 1915 ; and those with Sudan grass and sweet sorghum silage during 
 the past season, November, 1916 to April, 1917. 
 
 The experiments differ somewhat in plan and scope, due to differ- 
 ences in the special conditions under which each one was conducted. 
 The University dairy herd, like those of similar institutions, serves a 
 four-fold purpose, being used as instructional material, for the pro- 
 duction of milk, and of breeding stock of high quality, and for experi- 
 mental purposes in the study of nutrition problems and feeding prac- 
 tices. It is evident that experimental work conducted with the herd 
 must be planned and conducted with a view to its bearing on the other 
 purposes for which the herd is kept. The experiments described in 
 this bulletin are not, therefore, necessarily such in scope or details 
 as the authors would like to have them, but they were arranged each 
 year in such a way as to furnish the most satisfactory solution of 
 the problem studied which the conditions then prevailing would per 
 mit. In the conduct of the experiments, many thousands of weighings 
 of milk, feed, and animals, as well as Babcock tests, and lactometer 
 readings have been made, the complete record of which would fill a 
 large volume. Only summary figures for groups of cows for each 
 period of the various experiments are, however, given in this bulletin, 
 so as not to increase unduly the size and the cost of the publication, 
 and in order to facilitate the study of the results obtained and the 
 deductions drawn from them. 
 
24 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 OOM©© tOOOH 
 
 -*OHOO^ 
 
 
 fl)^2 5 
 
 ?0 d CO N 00 N (M 
 
 HH © b- b- HH 
 
 
 CO rH rJH CO CO tjh co 
 
 rH -tf CO LO CO 
 
 
 «p« 
 
 
 
 
 -O eg 
 
 
 
 
 '"S° 
 
 
 
 
 O) 
 
 
 
 Eh 
 
 ■SP a 
 
 
 
 
 A '53 
 
 q Tj| q h co Oj cm 
 
 t> W N CO iH 
 
 o 
 
 d h h to d a o! 
 
 * OS* t>* t>* Tt* 
 
 H 
 
 fH rH i— 1 CM rH 
 
 rH 
 
 « 
 
 Ph 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 Ph 
 
 <» 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 3 *h 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 13"* ^ 
 
 Tt< 00 lO HjH CO b- LO 
 
 cq cq hh b- oq 
 
 iH 
 
 O S "e3 
 
 d b-' b-' rH OS © CM* 
 
 ri" o" i> © co' 
 
 ^ SPS 
 
 ■* H IQ tO> t> t- t> 
 
 H WNNCO 
 
 1 
 
 Tj 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 HH t>- CD CO CM OS CD CM LO 
 CO* rA CO* © © © CO* CM* b-* 
 
 HHH^lONtOtOtO 
 
 ONOOH CM CO CO OS CO 
 rH ' * rH OS OS* lO* CD* CO* 
 
 b-HHCOOSlOCMCMHHHH 
 
 CO CO r-J OS 00 © b- 
 
 ©' CM* rH ©' ©' b* © 
 rH CM HH b- LO © CO 
 
 fl S fl 
 
 mm© 
 © o o 
 
 » © 0) 
 
 ftftft 
 
 LO LO lO 
 
 00 00 00 
 
 in Oi oq co oo co s !*2 12 S 
 
 r-* rH* CM* OS O* HH b-' "O "© "© 
 
 rH rH iH w 03 03 
 
 rtj 00 OS CM lO b- rH 
 
 volai 
 vola 
 volai 
 
 rH CO* HH rA OS OS CO* 
 rH CM LO 00 lO CO b- 
 
 cent, 
 cent, 
 cent, 
 
 CO © OS OO CO HH CO 
 TtJ © CO CO CO CO CO 
 b-' CM* CD CO* CM* lO LO* 
 
 0> -*> O lO ■* in (M b IM 
 
 £ cs ^ ^ L °. ■"*. C R °? ^ 
 
 «H £ CO LO* LO* CO b-" CO* CM* 
 
 £; >< COHlOtOtDCOH 
 
 rH CM O O O OS rH 
 
 ^ i> b tj| q q q 
 
 id to* oo* oc lo* b-' os 
 
 CM 
 
 -^ rH rH i— I © © LO © 
 
 c3 O0 b- 00 <M © HH CO 
 
 ^ rH* * CO HH* CM* CO* © 
 
 H -*NTJ(bCOCOH 
 
 pLl rH rH rH CO CM 
 
 *h 
 
 ftrjfbbOObLOO-* 
 "S rH LO © HH CM O0 LO CO 
 
 "3 -L b^ CO* rH* CM* OS O rH* 
 ^^nbHH rHrH 
 
 CM CO CM CO O0 
 
 LO © b- rH .OS 
 
 oq co oq cm lo 
 
 b-* o" CO CO* l> 
 
 rH HH CO HH LO 
 
 O rH LO O CO 
 
 LO TjJ b- b- O 
 
 HH CM LO* b-' O* 
 
 CM CM 
 
 O LO b- CM CO CO LO CM CO 
 
 osoqoqcqrHoqiqcqos 
 
 CM* rH rH* OO* CO* CM* CO CO* CO 
 
 COOCMb-CMOlOlOHH 
 OS CM b- HH rtj LO rH LO CO 
 
 HH* rH* CO* 00 r>-* 00 O0 OS CO 
 rHrHrHCOLO©LOHH© 
 
 OOOOCOlOTfCMOOO 
 
 iq oo oq >q b- i>- cm cq os 
 
 o" co' co* !>-' © co' h* os o* 
 
 rH CM rH rH rH 
 
 LO -HH "HH CM © ajrHlOrHOSOSlOCOOO-HH 
 
 CO LO HH © CM rH © ■* rH CM CS0 CM GO "HH OS 
 
 ' tH CM* t>* 
 
 cm oq © 
 
 rH* 
 
 
 rH 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 T3 rrj Tj 
 
 
 
 
 C3 
 
 3 
 
 V 
 
 03 
 
 C3 
 
 03 
 
 rH rH rrj! 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 
 Cu 
 
 H 
 
 X 
 
 X 
 
 <<5>, 03 © © 
 
 COLOLOCOLOrHOS ft ft ft 
 HH OS CO CO LO © © 
 
 CM CM* 00 CM* CO* CO* b-' °* <° ^ 
 
 lO CM OS O CO CO 00 
 
 LO 00 © LO rH HH © 
 
 O LO* rH* GO CO O t>* 
 
 rH CM HH CO LO CD CO 
 
 CM O CO HH rH O HH 
 CO CO CO b- HH CO rH 
 
 cm' od co" co" odd 
 
 CM rH CM CM 
 
 CO O 00 LO CO HH O 
 v OS O CM CM CO CO 00 
 
 rH rH rH 
 
 -*-i -M +j 
 
 i=i « pi 
 
 03 © a; 
 
 H H CO CM W b CD rH CO CM HH 00 
 
 LO CO O OS CM 
 CO CO OS rH OS 
 
 ^COHHb-OSLOCOOOCOOS 
 
 ft°. ** lo lo oq os i-h go co 
 
 rH CO* Oldb X CM* rA rA LO* rA rA b-* 00 CO* 
 
 T3 
 
 CD 
 
 JhOSCOCOCOOSCMOS 
 O CO CO # rH OS b- CO CO 
 
 ^CM* CO* CO* rA CO GO d 
 £ rH rH rH rH 
 
 CD CD <D 
 ft A PL, 
 
 rH CO ^ 
 TtH CO CM 
 
 rSrH ro 
 
 03 03 § 
 
 CD _CD m 
 
 Eh! P j3 
 
 ^ 45 ^ 
 
 ^ ti os c as ^7: 
 
 • © c3 
 
 S OJ0<H g -g rrj rH 
 
 £ JS rf -S CD ^ ^ 
 r=H -H ^_( rH r- r— i i— i 
 
 fl ^r^^rHrH 
 
 a 
 
 03 
 
 i 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 •p 
 ri 
 
 s 
 
 O 
 
 g 
 
 cs 
 
 
 o 
 
 *h3o 
 
 CD 
 
 bi 
 B3 
 
 % 
 
 © 
 
 Ch CD 
 
 >.CD 
 
 . O b- lO O CO 
 g CD CM < 00 LO OS 
 
 =J d oo* hh* oo d 
 
 H©bb 
 ojd 
 u 
 
 © : © : 
 « : cjd i 
 
 X ofi"^ be 
 ft S 03 m rt 
 t* r* ra h rD 
 3 « 3 S n 
 
 H ^ bJO f-H 
 o 
 
 CM b- HH b- V ~^CO OONHSO 
 
 b-OrHHH <£) CD CO LO b- HH o CM 
 
 b-' rH* 00* t>* HHCOCObOObb 
 
 rH OS GO LO 
 
 CD 03 
 O CD 
 
 03 c3 ?3 
 
 c3 o3 
 
 _ 03 H j. 
 
 ed 
 
 t^ : o3 
 
 ■3-s s 
 
 rO O *S 
 
 © 03 
 
 ft © be 
 X OJD c3 
 
 ft ft 
 
 ft o 
 
 ^-4 ' 1 V-' LJ r-H rW ^ !> r" 1 , ~ H 
 
 !M^r^ 
 
 © 
 O O o 
 
 PhPhQ 
 
 S H is >^i^ s 
 ° i5 -^ o3 T^ a 
 
 ., rn K h 2 ti ffl 
 
 ® 00 ^ g £ 03 hJ 
 
 42 _o3 -u c€ ^ pj 
 
 ^^^^•r^ 03^^^^.^ 
 
 
 Os 
 
 Ol 
 
 . — 1 
 
 CD 
 
 HH 
 
 CO 
 
 OQ 
 
 rA 
 
 
 00 
 
 GO 
 
 oo 
 
 T3 ^ ^5 
 
 
 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 o3 
 
 c3 
 
 a 
 
 T3 ^ th 
 
 © 
 
 0^ 
 
 <B 
 
 X 
 
 X 
 
 H 
 
 rH rH rH 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 25 
 
 The chemical composition of the feeding stuffs used in the various 
 experiments will be seen in table IV. The calculated digestible 
 components of the feeds are also given, based on average digestion 
 coefficients for the different feeds, or for feeds of similar character, 
 in cases where no digestion trials have been conducted. 
 
 I. INDIAN COEN SILAGE AS A SUPPLEMENT TO ALFALFA HAY 
 
 Alfalfa is the most important single feed in the main dairy sections 
 of the state, outside of the northern and central coastal counties. It 
 forms the sole feed of the cows in the large majority of cases, being 
 generally either pastured or fed green in corrals, or fed as hay during 
 the winter months. There is perhaps no better single dairy feed than 
 alfalfa, and rich alfalfa pasture or a good quality of green alfalfa 
 or of alfalfa hay can hardly be improved upon for feeding dairy cows, 
 except in the case of heavy-producing cows which will be likely to give 
 good returns for additional grain feed. 
 
 Experiments conducted in the University dairy herd during 1913 
 and 1914 led to the conclusion that on account of the increased pro- 
 duction obtained and the residual effect of the grain feeding, as well 
 as its favorable influence on the condition of the cows and their off- 
 spring, the practice of feeding grain to cows on alfalfa is economically 
 sound and may be recommended. 4 This holds true especially for 
 heifers and young cows, and for heavy-producing animals, which can- 
 not be brought to a maximum production on roughage alone, even if 
 this be as excellent and palatable a feed as green alfalfa or good 
 alfalfa hay. In the case of such cows it is, therefore, advisable to 
 add to the rations at least small amounts of feeds furnishing nutrients 
 in a more concentrated form than in either green or dry coarse feeds, 
 like cereal grains, mill feeds, etc. 
 
 With the introduction of the silo on dairy farms and the growing 
 of silage crops, like Indian corn, sorghum varieties, etc., another vari- 
 ation in the practice of feeding cows is rendered possible. These 
 silage crops are of a starchy composition and relatively low in protein 
 (flesh-forming substances), hence supplement well the nutrients in the 
 alfalfa and widen the nutritive ratio of the ration fed, making these 
 conform more closely to accepted feeding standards than alfalfa alone. 
 The practice of feeding silage as a supplementary feed to alfalfa has 
 been adopted by dairy farmers in different sections of the state and 
 appears to be gaining ground. The experiment described below was 
 planned to furnish accurate information as to the value of this method 
 
 4 See Bull. 256, Calif. Agr. Coll., p. 443 et seq. 
 
26 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 of feeding and is the first experimental study ever conducted of the 
 general value of this method of feeding dairy cows under conditions 
 like those prevailing in this state. 
 
 PLAN OF THE EXPEEIMENT 
 
 Twenty-six cows in the University dairy herd were separated into 
 two lots of thirteen each. The lots were made as even as possible as 
 regards breed, age, and body weight of cows, dairy production, and 
 distance from last and following freshening. They were fed as 
 follows during three periods of four weeks each, a preliminary feeding 
 period of one week preceding each period, in order to accustom the 
 cows to the rations fed during the subsequent periods. 
 
 Lot A — Alfalfa hay and Indian corn silage throughout the experi- 
 ment. 
 
 Lot B — Alfalfa and corn silage during Periods I and III, alfalfa 
 hay as sole roughage during Period II. 
 
 Eight of the cows in each lot were fed a grain mixture composed of 
 approximately equal parts by weight of wheat bran, rolled barley 
 and oats, with small amounts of linseed meal and cocoanut meal, while 
 the others received rough feeds only. The cows were fed grain in 
 proportion to their production ; as a general rule, one pound for every 
 four or five pounds of milk produced. The method of feeding and 
 care of the two lots was as similar as possible, with the exception 
 stated regarding the roughage fed. 
 
 The routine of conducting the experiment and the general handling 
 of the cows were otherwise as in the case of the general University 
 dairy herd, which has already been described in the bulletin referred 
 to above. Each milking from the individual cows in the experiment 
 was weighed and sampled, and separate composite samples of each 
 cow's milk were tested once a week. The cows were all in the early or 
 middle part of their lactation periods at the beginning of the experi- 
 ment, and those bred were at that time, on the average, about five and 
 one-half months from the next freshening. Lot A contained two 
 Holsteins, four Guernseys, two Jerseys and five grades, and Lot B, 
 three Holsteins, five Guernseys, one Jersey and four grades. The 
 average production, body weight, age, etc., for the cows in the two 
 lots at the beginning of the experiment were as follows : 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 
 
 27 
 
 Table V. — Average Data for Cows at the Beginning of the Experiment 
 
 Lot A Lot B 
 
 Milk per week, pounds 143.7 143.6 
 
 Solids per week, pounds 19.7 19.2 
 
 Fat, pounds 6.49 6.42 
 
 Average per cent solids 13.7 13.3 
 
 Average per cent fat 4.51 4.46 
 
 Average body weight, pounds 1047 1164 
 
 Average age, years 4.7 5.2 
 
 The experiment was conducted from November 20, 1913, to March 
 5, 1914. All the cows were apparently in good health and ate their 
 feed with relish throughout the experiment. This progressed as 
 planned without any serious accident, except that four of the cows 
 (one in Lot A and three in Lot B) decreased more rapidly in their 
 flow of milk than anticipated and were, therefore, taken off the experi- 
 ment during the last period. 
 
 Table "VI. — Average Feed Consumption, Body Weight, 
 
 Cows 
 
 and Production of 
 
 Lot A 
 Feed consumption per 
 day, lbs. 
 Hay 
 
 Period 
 I 
 
 Period 
 III 
 
 Alfalfa 
 
 Av. Period 
 I and III 
 
 and Silage 
 
 A 
 
 Period 
 II 
 
 Difference 
 
 betw. ave. of 
 
 Per. I and III 
 
 and Per. II 
 
 14.4 
 
 10.2 
 
 12.3 
 
 12.2 
 
 + -1 
 
 Silage 
 
 29.4 
 
 31.9 
 
 30.7 
 
 33.9 
 
 — 3.2 
 
 Grain . 
 
 2.3 
 1040 
 
 2.8 
 1044 
 
 2.6 
 1042 
 
 2.6 
 1045 
 
 
 Body weight, lbs 
 
 — 3. 
 
 Production per cow and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 per day 
 
 Milk, lbs 
 
 19.2 
 
 18.4 
 
 18.8 
 
 19.3 
 
 — .5 
 
 Solids, per cent 
 
 13.9 
 
 13.7 
 
 13.8 
 
 13.7 
 
 + -1 
 
 Solids, lbs 
 
 2.67 
 
 2.52 
 
 2.60 
 
 2.64 
 
 — .04 
 
 Butter fat, per cent 
 
 4.55 
 
 4.35 
 
 4.44 
 
 4.36 
 
 + .08 
 
 Butter fat, lb 
 
 .87 
 
 .80 
 
 .84 
 
 .84 
 
 
 Lot B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Feed consumption per 
 day, lbs. 
 Hay 
 
 
 Alfalfa and Silage 
 
 A 
 
 Alfalfa only 
 21.0 
 
 
 14.4 
 
 10.2 
 
 12.3 
 
 — 8.7 
 
 Silage 
 
 29.7 
 
 31.4 
 
 30.6 
 
 
 +30.6 
 
 Grain 
 
 2.3 
 1155 
 
 3.3 
 1069 
 
 2.8 
 1112 
 
 2.7 
 1078 
 
 + .1 
 
 Body weight, lbs 
 
 + 34. 
 
 Production per cow and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 per day 
 
 Milk, lbs 
 
 19.3 
 
 17.8 
 
 18.6 
 
 15.9 
 
 + 2.7 
 
 Solids, per cent 
 
 13.7 
 
 13.9 
 
 13.8 
 
 13.7 
 
 + 1. 
 
 Solids, lbs 
 
 2.63 
 
 2.47 
 
 2.55 
 
 2.18 
 
 + .37 
 
 Butter fat, per cent 
 
 4.45 
 
 4.45 
 
 4.45 
 
 4.61 
 
 — .16 
 
 Butter fat, lb 
 
 .86 
 
 .79 
 
 .83 
 
 ,7„ 
 
 . .10 
 
28 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 The data presented in table VI give the average results obtained 
 during the three periods of the experiment for both lots, the daily 
 feed ration and the production of milk and butter fat per head being 
 given in each case. 
 
 Considering first the data for Lot B, we note that, on the average 
 for all cows, the production was as follows: for milk, Period I, 19.3 
 pounds; Period III, 17.8 pounds, and Period II (no silage), 15.9 
 pounds, and for butter fat, .86, .79, and .73 pound, for Periods I, III, 
 and II, respectively. The production of milk was 2.7 pounds lower 
 and that of butter fat .10 pound lower during the second period than 
 the average data for the preceding and following periods when silage 
 was fed. The figures for Lot A show that a similar number of cows 
 as in Lot B fed alfalfa and silage throughout the experiment, averaged 
 .5 pound higher in milk during Period II than the average of Periods 
 I and III, while no difference occurred in the production of butter 
 fat. As the two lots were very uniform as regards the various factors 
 that influence milk secretion, we may be justified in considering that 
 the average milk production of the cows in Lot B, if these had been 
 fed similarly throughout the experiment, would also have decreased 
 .5 pound per head daily during Periods I and III, as compared with 
 Period II, and the production obtained should, therefore, be cor- 
 rected accordingly. This gives us an increase in the milk production 
 of 2.2 pounds and of butter fat .10 pound during Periods I and III, 
 as compared with Period II ; that is, on account of the feeding of silage 
 and alfalfa hay (with or without accompanying grain), the produc- 
 tion of milk and butter fat was raised by 14 per cent over the cor- 
 responding data for the period when alfalfa hay only was fed. 
 
 "Whether the observed improved nutritive effect of the silage 
 rations over those containing dry feed only was due to a larger supply 
 of digestible nutrients, or to a stimulating effect of the succulent feed 
 on the milk secretion will be discussed below in connection with the 
 composition of the rations fed, but so far as the practical aspects of 
 the case go, the evidence seems clear that an appreciable improvement 
 in production was obtained as a result of a partial substitution of 
 corn silage in the ration of alfalfa hay, or alfalfa and grain. 
 
 Since ten of the cows in the experiment were fed alfalfa hay only, 
 and the balance (sixteen), alfalfa and grain, the data secured supply 
 information as to the effect of the addition of silage to the ration in 
 either case. These data have been compiled for the different cows, 
 with results as shown in the following table : 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 29 
 
 Cows fed roughage and grain ^ ' • ° b g s ' ^ ' 
 
 Average of Periods I and III (alfalfa and silage) 17.7 2.46 .81 
 
 Average of Period II (alfalfa only) 17.2 2.40 .82 
 
 Difference +.5 +.06 —.01 
 
 In per cent 3 3 1 
 
 Cows fed roughage only 
 
 Average of Periods I and III (alfalfa and silage) 17.7 2.43 .80 
 
 Average of Period II (alfalfa only) 14.1 1.91 .63 
 
 Difference +3.6 +.52 +.17 
 
 In per cent 26 27 27 
 
 Both in the case of the cows receiving grain and of those fed 
 roughage only, very nearly similar amounts of dry matter were sup- 
 plied in the rations whether or not silage was fed. In the case of 
 cows fed grain, there was, however, only a slight increase in the pro- 
 duction of milk or milk components when silage was included in the 
 rations of the cows, viz., 1 to 3 per cent. The cows receiving alfalfa 
 hay only, on the other hand, responded in a striking manner to the 
 addition of silage to the ration, the production of milk being increased, 
 on the average, from 14.1 pounds to 17.7 pounds per head daily, that 
 of solids from 1.91 to 2.43 pounds, and that of butter fat from .63 
 to .80 pound, an increase in each case of 26 to 27 per cent. By 
 referring to the summaries of results for all the cows on the experi- 
 ment on page 28 it will be noted that an increase in production of 
 about 14 per cent was obtained for all the cows. In view of the 
 insignificant improvement in production by the cows fed grain, this 
 increase evidently came through the effect of the introduction of silage 
 in the rations of the cows receiving roughage only. 
 
 The results obtained in this single experiment suggest that the 
 feeding of silage to cows on roughage (alfalfa hay) only will produce 
 a marked improvement in production, while only slightly larger yields 
 can be expected through the addition of silage to rations containing 
 a medium allowance of grain feeds (average, 4.5 pounds per head 
 daily). It is perhaps significant that the cows in this experiment 
 were fed alfalfa hay of fair quality ad lib. If a less valuable forage 
 had been fed along with the grain, or the amount fed had been reduced 
 below what the cows were able to consume with a good appetite, it is 
 very likely that the addition of silage to the ration would have been 
 found of decided advantage also in the case of grain-fed cows. 
 
 According to the data given in table VII, the rations fed to the 
 cows in this experiment contained the amounts of nutrients shown 
 below during the different periods. 
 
30 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 Table VII. — Composition of Rations Fed to Cows, in Pounds 
 
 Digestible 
 
 Lot A ' ' — > 
 
 ^ . , _ ., „-,- , ., Dry Carbohvdrates Nutr. ratio, 
 
 Periods I and III (Silage matter Protein and fat 1: 
 
 throughout) 20.7 1.92 11.06 5.8 
 
 Period II 21.5 1.95 11.55 5.9 
 
 Difference —.8 —.03 —.49 
 
 Lot B 
 
 Periods I and III 20.8 1.94 1.117 5.8 
 
 Period II (no silage) 19.7 2.37 9.32 3.9 
 
 Difference +1-1 —-43 +1.85 
 
 Corrected +.3 —.46 +1.36 
 
 The cows in Lot B received somewhat more dry matter and digest- 
 ible carbohydrates and fat in their rations during Periods I and III 
 (dry feed and silage), than during Period II (dry feed only), 
 but the amount of digestible protein was considerably lower during 
 Periods I and III than during Period II, the nutritive ratio for the 
 former rations being 1 :5.8 and for Period II, 1 :3.9. By introducing 
 silage in the rations fed, the nutritive ratio of these were, therefore, 
 changed from very narrow to medium, i.e., one approximately in 
 accordance with that of the common feeding standards for dairy cows. 
 
 If the production of milk and milk components by the cows per 
 100 pounds of dry matter eaten during the different periods be cal- 
 culated, comparative figures for the efficiency of the different rations 
 will be obtained. The following table presents the data with regard 
 to this point. 
 
 Table VIII. — Eeturns per 100 Pounds of Dry Matter Eaten, Lot B 
 
 Milk, Solids, Fat, 
 
 lbs. lbs. lbs. 
 
 Periods I and III 89.4 12.3 3.99 
 
 Period II 80.7 11.1 3.71 
 
 Difference +8.7 +1.2 +.28 
 
 Corrected +9.7 +1.5 +.43 
 
 In per cent 11 12 11 
 
 The differences in production observed have been corrected in the 
 last but one line of the table, in accordance with the findings for Lot 
 A, which showed that the cows produced 1.0 pound more milk, .3 
 pound more solids and .15 pound more butter fat per 100 pounds dry 
 matter in the rations during Periods I and III than during Period II, 
 and the percentage differences have been calculated on basis of the 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 31 
 
 corrected figures. It will be noted that these show an increase of 11 
 to 12 per cent in the efficiency of the average rations fed during 
 Periods I and III over the rations fed during Period II. There was 
 no appreciable difference in the relative efficiency of the rations as to 
 the production of the cows that received grain and those fed rough 
 feeds only. Whether the improvement in the silage ration noted 
 is due to the wider nutritive ratio fed during the former period or to 
 a superior nutritive effect of the silage rations, cannot be decided by 
 the results of this experiment alone. This question will, however, be 
 further discussed in connection with the other silage experiments 
 reported in this bulletin. 
 
 II. MILO SILAGE AS A SUPPLEMENT TO ALFALFA HAY 
 
 This experiment was conducted with eighteen cows in the Uni- 
 versity dairy herd from January 14 to April 29, 1915. Owing to the 
 relatively small number of cows in the herd available for an experi- 
 ment of this kind during the season of 1914-15, it was decided to 
 feed all cows on the experiment alike, in so far as the kinds of feeds 
 go, except that ten of the cows received rough feed and grain, and the 
 others, which were rather advanced in their lactation period and were 
 low producers, received roughage only. The cows were fed as follows 
 during three periods of four weeks each : Periods I and III, milo silage 
 and alfalfa hay ; Period II, alfalfa hay. A week 's preliminary feeding 
 preceded each period. 
 
 The plan of the experiment was, in general, similar to that of the 
 preceding one. The silage and alfalfa hay were fed according to 
 the capacity of each cow for consuming roughage, while the amounts 
 of concentrates fed to ten of the cows in the experiment varied from 
 three to six pounds per head daily, according to their dairy produc- 
 tion. The concentrates fed consisted of a mixture of rolled barley, 
 cocoanut meal and dried beet pulp, in the proportion of 1 :2 :1 by 
 weight. Five of the cows were pure-bred Holsteins, three were pure- 
 bred Jerseys, one pure-bred Guernsey, two pure-bred Ayrshires, and 
 three grade Shorthorns. The cows averaged 1174 pounds in weight 
 at the beginning of the experiment, and produced, on the average, 
 25.6 pounds milk and 1.1 pounds butter fat per head daily. 
 
 Data of the average body weights, production, and feed consump- 
 tion of the cows for each period of the experiment are given in 
 table IX. 
 
32 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 Table IX. — Milo Silage for Dairy Cows 
 
 _ , , . Period Period Av. Period Period 
 
 Feed consumption per 1 m j and m n 
 
 day, lbs. Alfalfa and milo silage Alfalfa Difference 
 
 Hay 9.4 11.1 10.2 23.0 —12.8 
 
 Silage 27.2 38.0 32.8 +32.8 
 
 Grain 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.0 + .1 
 
 Body weight, lbs 1090 1091 1090 1071 +19. 
 
 Production per cow and per day 
 
 Milk, lbs 23.1 15.9 19.5 20.3 — .8 
 
 Solids, lbs 2.99 2.08 2.53 2.57 — .04 
 
 Solids, per cent . % 12.9 13.0 12.9 12.7 + .2 
 
 Butter fat, lb 934 .658 .796 .805 — .009 
 
 Butter fat, per cent 4.05 4.13 4.08 3.95 + .13 
 
 The average production of the cows on the two kinds of rations 
 was so nearly alike that one would be justified in considering the 
 rations of similar feeding value. The average milk yield was slightly 
 lower for Periods I and III (silage rations) than for Period II (dry 
 feed only), but the quality of the milk produced on the former rations 
 was somewhat improved over that of the milk produced during Period 
 II, making the average production of fat and other milk solids prac- 
 tically the same for the two kinds of rations. 
 
 The chemical composition of all feeds used in the experiment, and 
 their digestible components, will be seen from table III. The amounts 
 of dry matter and digestible components in the rations fed during the 
 different periods of this experiment calculated from the data referred 
 to, are shown in table X. 
 
 Table X. — Composition of Average Eations Fed, in Pounds 
 
 Digestible 
 
 Dry digestible Carbohydrates Nutr. ratio, 
 
 matter matter Protein and fat 1 : 
 
 Period I (alfalfa and milo 
 
 silage) 17.8 11.0 1.45 9.60 6.6 
 
 Period III (alfalfa and 
 
 milo silage) 22.2 13.3 1.69 11.83 7.0 
 
 Average 20.0 12.2 1.57 10.72 6.8 
 
 Period II (alfalfa) 22.0 13.7 2.55 11.06 4.3 
 
 Difference —2.0 —1.5 —.98 —.34 
 
 If the amounts of dry matter in the rations be compared with the 
 production of milk and milk components, the data shown in table XI 
 will be obtained. 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 33 
 
 Table XI. — Production per 100 Pounds Dry Matter in Eations 
 
 Butter 
 Milk, Solids, fat, 
 
 lbs. lbs. lbs. 
 
 Periods I and III (alfalfa and milo silage) 97.5 12.7 3.98 
 
 Period II (alfalfa) 92.3 11.7 3.66 
 
 Difference —5.2 —1.0 —.32 
 
 In per cent 5 8 8 
 
 The nutritive effect of the silage rations was, therefore, 5 to 8 per 
 cent higher than that of the same rations without the silage. This 
 is not as marked an improvement as in the preceding experiment for 
 Indian corn silage (11 to 12 per cent). If the results obtained with 
 the cows that received roughage only be calculated in a similar way, 
 we find that 100 pounds of dry matter in the rations of these cows 
 produced 91.4 pounds milk, 11.7 pounds solids and 3.71 pounds fat 
 during Periods I and III, and 83.7 pounds milk, 10.6 pounds solids 
 and 3.37 pounds fat, an increase of 8, 9, and 11 per cent respectively. 
 Also in the case of these cows, the average production on the silage 
 rations differed but slightly from those fed during the intermediate 
 period when the cows received dry roughage only, in fact there was a 
 slight decrease in production. Results with the corn silage in the 
 preceding experiment were not, therefore, corroborated in this case. 
 But when the production of milk or milk components per unit of dry 
 matter supplied in the rations is considered, it is shown that some- 
 what better returns were obtained by supplementing the alfalfa 
 rations with milo silage in case of the cows receiving roughage only, 
 than where the rations were composed of rough feeds and grain. 
 
 III. SUDAN GEASS AND SWEET SORGHUM SILAGE VS. INDIAN CORN 
 
 SILAGE 
 
 This experiment was intended to furnish accurate information 
 regarding the comparative value of Indian corn silage and silage 
 made from Sudan grass or sweet sorghum, for milk production. 
 
 A. Sudan Grass Silage vs. Indian Corn Silage 
 
 Sudan grass is a relatively new crop in this state and but little is 
 known as to its exact value for different classes of farm stock and for 
 different purposes. 5 No information is available as to its value as a 
 silage crop, the siloing experiment with this crop last year being, so 
 far as is known, the first one of the kind ever conducted. Under these 
 
 s See Bulletin 277 of this College, on "Sudan Grass," for a discussion of 
 the general value of this promising forage crop. 
 
34 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 conditions it seemed especially desirable to secure reliable data as to 
 the adaptability and value of the silage for feeding dairy cattle and 
 the experiment here reported was accordingly planned. 
 
 The experiment with Sudan grass silage was conducted from Sep- 
 tember 28, 1916, to" January 4, 1917, with twenty-one cows in the 
 University dairy herd, viz., eighteen pure-breds and three grades, 
 the different breeds being represented as follows among the former: 
 one Ayrshire, eight Jerseys, four Guernseys and five Holsteins, while 
 the grades were all Holsteins. All the cows but two were fresh or 
 in the early part of their lactation periods at the beginning of the 
 experiment. The average daily production of the cows at this time 
 was 27.8 pounds milk, 2.41 pounds solids, and 1.00 pound butter fat. 
 The experiment was similar to the preceding ones in plan and conduct, 
 three periods of four weeks' duration being arranged for, each one 
 introduced by a week's preliminary feeding. The cows were fed 
 alfalfa hay ad lib. and a grain mixture of dried beet pulp, cocoanut 
 meal, wheat bran, and rolled barle} r (4:1:1:1, by weight), according 
 to their production, on the average at the rate of one pound per five 
 pounds of milk. One cow, a Bolstein grade, received rough feed only. 
 The more important results obtained in the experiment are presented 
 in table XII, which includes average data for feed consumption, body 
 weights, and production of milk, solids and butter fat. 
 
 In addition to alfalfa and concentrates, the cows received silage as 
 follows : Periods I and III, Indian corn silage. 
 Period II, Sudan grass silage. 
 
 Table XII. Sudan Grass Silage for Dairy Cows 
 
 Period Period Av. Period Period 
 
 I III I and III II 
 
 Feed consumption per day, lbs. Indian corn gi]age ^"fr* Difference 
 
 Alfalfa hay 23.8 11.6 17.7 21.6 —3.9 
 
 Corn silage 31.8 32.8 32.3 
 
 Sudan grass silage 23.2 
 
 Concentrates 6.8 5.8 6.3 5.9 + .4 
 
 Body weights, lbs 1174 1201 1187 1186 +1. 
 
 Production per cow per day 
 
 Milk, lbs 23.7 15.4 19.6 18.9 + .7 
 
 Solids, lbs 3.28 2.25 2.77 2.60 + -17 
 
 Solids, per cent 13.8 14.6 14.1 13.8 +.3 
 
 Fat, lbs 1.06 .772 .916 .879 + .037 
 
 Fat, per cent 4.47 5.01 4.67 4.65 + .02 
 
 It will be noted that the difference in the nutritive effect of the 
 two silage rations was but small and may be considered within the 
 limits of experimental errors inherent in feeding trials of this kind. 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 35 
 
 There was a slightly larger production of milk, solids and butter fat 
 during Periods I and III (corn silage) compared with Period II 
 (Sudan grass silage), 3.6, 6.1, 4.0 per cent respectively, but less silage, 
 somewhat less hay, and an average of A pound more concentrates per 
 head were eaten daily during the latter period than the averages 
 for the corn silage periods. 
 
 Evidently it is necessary to look into the contents of dry matter 
 and separate feed components in the two rations to determine the 
 efficiency of either for milk production. The results relative to this 
 point are presented in table XIII. 
 
 Table XIII — Composition of Average Eations Fed, in Pounds 
 
 Digestible 
 
 Total t K n 
 
 Dry digestible Carbohydrates Nutr. ratio, 
 
 matter matter Protein and fat 1 : 
 
 Period I (corn silage) 36.1 23.2 3.54 19.20 5.4 
 
 Period III (corn silage) 24.2 15.9 2.10 13.78 6.6 
 
 Average 30.2 19.6 2.82 16.49 5.8 
 
 Period II (Sudan grass silage) 32.4 20.1 3.18 16.12 5.1 
 
 Difference —2.2 —.5 —.36 +.37 
 
 The corn silage rations contained, on the average, 2.2 pounds less 
 dry matter and .5 pound less digestible matter than the Sudan grass 
 silage rations and had only a slightly wider nutritive ratio (1:5.8, 
 against 1:5.1 for the Sudan grass silage). If the production of the 
 cows on the different rations be compared with the dry matter fur- 
 nished during the three periods of the experiment, the data given in 
 table XIV are obtained. 
 
 Table XIV. — Eeturns per 100 Pounds Dry Matter, in Pounds 
 
 Milk Solids Fat 
 
 Period I (corn silage) 65.6 9.09 2.94 
 
 Period III (corn silage) 63.6 9.30 3.19 
 
 Average 64.9 9.17 3.03 
 
 Period II (Sudan grass silage).... 58.3 8.02 2.71 
 
 Difference 6.6 1.15 .32 
 
 In per cent +10 +13 +11 
 
 A comparison of the amounts of dry matter contained in the 
 rations fed and the average production of the cows, will show that 
 about 10 per cent better results were obtained from the corn silage 
 rations than from those containing Sudan grass silage. While a 
 single experiment with only twenty-one cows does not furnish suf- 
 ficient evidence for generalizations the conclusion is doubtless justified 
 
36 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 from the experience gained in feeding Sudan grass silage during the 
 past season, as well as from the results obtained in this experiment, 
 that it furnishes a good quality of silage for dairy cows and that its 
 nutritive effect will not fall far behind that of Indian corn, the 
 standard silage crop of the country. 
 
 B. Sweet Sorghum Silage vs. Indian Corn Silage 
 
 On the completion of the preceding experiment, the cows included 
 therein that still gave at least a fair amount of milk, and other cows in 
 the University dairy herd that had recently freshened, were placed in 
 a similar experiment as the last one, with sweet sorghum silage to be 
 fed during the second period in place of Indian corn silage, which was 
 fed during the preceding and the following period. The plan and 
 conduct of the experiment was otherwise similar to the earlier ones 
 of this series. 
 
 Twenty-eight cows were included in this experiment, viz., thirteen 
 grades (twelve Holsteins and one Shorthorn) and fifteen pure-breds 
 (two each of Ayrshires and Holsteins, five Guernseys and six Jerseys). 
 The cows were about three months from calving, on the average, at 
 the beginning of the experiment, and had an average daily production 
 at that time of 17.5 pounds milk, 2.40 pounds solids, and .75 pound 
 butter fat. All but three cows received concentrates in addition to 
 alfalfa hay and silage. The grain mixture fed varied somewhat dur- 
 ing the progress of the experiment, but was composed of the following 
 average amounts of the various concentrates during the period given : 
 dried beet pulp, 50 per cent ; cocoanut meal, 25 per cent ; wheat bran, 
 15 per cent, and barley and cottonseed meal 5 per cent each. 
 
 The experiment was commenced December 28, 1916, and continued 
 until April 5, 1917. The average results obtained as to the feed con- 
 sumption and the production of the cows are presented in table XV. 
 
 Here again only insignificant differences in the effect of the two 
 silage rations on the production of the cows are to be observed. In 
 fact, the results as to the amounts of feed eaten and of milk and milk 
 components produced, as well as average body weights of the cows 
 while on the two kinds of feed, were as nearly similar as might be 
 expected if the cows had been fed the same rations throughout the 
 experiment (p. 27). It remains to be seen whether any difference 
 occurred in the amounts of dry matter or digestible components sup- 
 plied in the two rations. As before the composition of the rations 
 and the returns per hundred pounds of dry matter eaten, have been 
 calculated, and the results will be found in table XVI. 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 
 
 37 
 
 Table XV. — Sweet Sorghum Silage for Dairy Cows 
 
 Period Period Av. Period 
 
 I III I and III 
 
 Indian corn silage 
 
 11.3 
 
 33.5 
 
 10.6 
 34.5 
 
 Feed Consumption per day, lbs. 
 
 Alfalfa hay 9.9 
 
 Indian corn silage .. 35.5 
 
 Sweet sorghum silage 
 
 Concentrates 8.8 7.6 8.2 
 
 Body weight, lbs 1089 1124 1106 
 
 Production per cow and per day 
 
 Milk, lbs 24.4 20.9 22.7 
 
 Solids, lbs 3.27 2.81 3.04 
 
 Solids, per cent 13.4 13.4 13.4 
 
 Fat, lbs 1.06 .89 .975 
 
 Fat, per cent 4.34 4.26 4.30 
 
 Period 
 II 
 
 Sweet sorghum 
 silage 
 
 9.8 
 
 35.4 
 8.4 
 1098 
 
 22.4 
 2.96 
 
 13.2 
 .977 
 4.36 
 
 'ifference 
 — .8 
 
 .3 
 
 .08 
 
 .2 
 
 .002 
 
 .06 
 
 Table XVI. — Composition of Rations, in Pounds 
 
 Digestible 
 
 Dry Digestible Carbohydrates Nutr. ratio, 
 
 matter matter Protein and fat 1 : 
 
 Period I (corn silage) 26.1 17.5 2.33 15.5 6.6 
 
 Period III (corn silage) 25.7 17.1 2.37 15.0 6.3 
 
 Average 25.9 17.3 2.35 15.2 6.5 
 
 Period II (sweet sorghum silage) 24.4 15.7 2.26 13.5 6.0 
 
 Returns per 100 Pounds Dry Matter 
 
 Milk Solids Fat 
 
 Period I (corn silage) 93.5 12.5 4.06 
 
 Period III (corn silage) 81.3 10.9 3.46 
 
 Average 87.4 11.7 3.76 
 
 Period II (sweet sorghum silage) 91.8 12.1 4.00 
 
 Difference — 4.4 — .4 — .24 
 
 In per cent 5 3 6 
 
 The differences in the efficiency of the two silage rations for milk 
 production as shown by the data given in the table are very small, 
 viz., about 5 per cent, indicating that the sweet sorghum silage has a 
 similar or slightly higher feeding value than Indian corn silage. This 
 is only what might be expected : the chemical composition of the two 
 kinds of feed is very nearly the same, and they differ but slightly in 
 digestible components, nutritive ratio, acidity contents or palatability. 
 Hence there is every reason to accept as conclusive the result of the 
 preceding experiment regarding the general value of the two silages 
 for milk production, and the choice of the crop to be grown for the silo 
 may, therefore, be decided on the score of the maximum yields of feed 
 
38 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 materials that may be secured and the labor of growing the crops 
 under the special conditions of each locality. 
 
 In the preceding four experiments with silage crops, the influence 
 of feeding silage made from Indian corn, milo, Sudan grass, and sweet 
 sorghum to dairy cows has been studied, and the nutritive effect of 
 rations composed of these silages with alfalfa hay, with or without 
 accompanying grain, has been compared. The effect of the introduc- 
 tion of corn or milo silage in rations made up of either alfalfa alone 
 or alfalfa and concentrates has also been studied. It has been shown 
 that the silage increased the efficiency of the alfalfa rations, as judged 
 from the amount of milk produced per hundred pounds of dry matter 
 eaten, by 5 per cent and 11 per cent on milo and Indian corn silage 
 rations, respectively, while the production of milk solids or butter fat 
 was increased by about 10 per cent in either case. On the other hand, 
 Indian corn silage produced about 10 per cent better returns per 
 unit of dry matter in the rations than the Sudan grass silage, and 
 sweet sorghum silage produced about 5 per cent better returns than 
 Indian corn silage. 
 
 A study of the data presented in connection with the various 
 experiments discloses the fact that the increased efficiency of the silage 
 rations in the first two experiments was accompanied by a widening 
 of the nutritive ratio of the rations fed, in the first experiment from 
 1 :3.9 to 1 :5.8, and in the second experiment from 1:4.3 to 1 :6.8. The 
 same was found in the case of the comparative trial of Sudan grass 
 and .corn silages; the wider nutritive ratio, 1:5.8 (corn silage ration) 
 proved more efficient than the narrower one, 1 :5.1 (Sudan grass). In 
 the case of the sweet sorghum-corn silage experiment, a somewhat 
 improved efficiency was, on the other hand, found in the case of the 
 ration with the narrower nutritive ratio (sweet sorghum, 1:6.0; In- 
 dian corn, 1:6.5). 
 
 The evidence seems conclusive as to the improvement of alfalfa 
 rations of narrow nutritive ratios (about 1:4) through the intro- 
 duction of silage made from low-protein crops, like Indian corn and 
 milo; even the ration containing Sudan grass silage was improved in 
 efficiency when this silage was replaced by corn silage and the nutri- 
 tive ratio thereby widened from 1 :5.1 to 1 :5.8. When the nutritive 
 ratio in case of the sweet-sorghum silage experiment was made wider, 
 however, by replacing this silage by Indian corn silage, no improve- 
 ment in returns per unit of dry matter eaten was obtained. In this 
 
TRIALS WITH CALIFORNIA SILAGE CROPS FOR DAIRY COWS 39 
 
 case the nutritive effect of the rations was approximately the same, 
 or slightly in favor of the narrower nutritive ratio (sweet sorghum 
 silage). It cannot be stated definitely from the evidence furnished by 
 these experiments which one of the two factors, the wider nutritive 
 ratio or the succulency of the silage rations, was of greater importance 
 in improving rations composed of alfalfa only or alfalfa with a small 
 amount of grain feed. Probably both contributed in a measure to 
 the result obtained; other contributing factors may have been the 
 favorable influence of the silage acids on the digestion and health of 
 the cows, the variety of protein substances furnished in the corn, etc. 
 Numerous feeding experiments with dairy cows have shown, however, 
 that the composition of the rations, so far as the relation between pro- 
 tein and starchy components goes, is a most important factor in 
 influencing the milk secretion of cows, and that the nutritive ratio 
 of alfalfa or rations made up essentially of this crop is, as a general 
 rule, too narrow to produce the best results as regards milk secretion 
 or returns for feed materials consumed. A widening of the nutritive 
 ratio, which is secured through the addition of low-protein grain feeds 
 or roughage, may, therefore, be confidently expected to bring about 
 an improvement in the results obtained with the dairy herd. 6 
 
 Such a widening of the nutritive ratio in case of alfalfa rations 
 will also bring these closer to that of accepted feeding standards for 
 milch cows. These are the outcome of studies of carefully conducted 
 feeding experiments in which the effect of rations of varying nutritive 
 ratios have been compared. An increasing number of dairymen in 
 this and other western states are every year supplementing alfalfa 
 rations for their cows with either low-protein concentrates or with 
 silage made from Indian corn, sorghum, milo, or similar crops, a fact 
 that furnishes the best evidence that such a change in the feeding 
 practice has been found to produce good and economical returns. 
 
 The preceding remarks should not be interpreted to mean that the 
 method of exclusive alfalfa feeding to dairy cows is always to be 
 avoided. The relative prices of dairy feeds are all-important, and 
 when alfalfa hay, as is often the case in this state, is the cheapest 
 forage crop available, it may be fed to advantage, except in the ease of 
 high-producing dairy cows that can only be brought to a maximum 
 production through the addition of concentrates to the ration. "Where 
 low-protein feeds can be provided, better results may in general be 
 secured than from exclusive alfalfa feeding. Such low-protein feeds 
 can be supplied more cheaply in the form of silage from Indian corn, 
 
 e Bulletin 256, California Experiment Station, p. 444. 
 
40 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 
 
 sorghum varieties, Sudan grass, etc., than grain feeds at present or 
 prospective market prices for feeding stuffs, and for milk cows of 
 average or only fair productive capacities, more economical results 
 will be secured by introducing them as a supplement to the alfalfa 
 rations than by feeding grain. Grain feeds, with or without silage, 
 will, however, be found necessary in order to secure the best results 
 in the case of good dairy cows, both amount and economy of produc- 
 tion being considered. High-producing cows yield the largest profit 
 to the dairyman, even though the feed they eat may cost considerably 
 more than that of average dairy cows. 7 
 
 SUMMARY 
 
 Experiments with silage crops conducted at the University Farm 
 during the past four years have shown that average yields of ten to 
 fifteen tons of green forage may be secured on grain land receiving 
 one irrigation, in case of the following crops: Indian corn, sweet 
 sorghum, milo, feterita, and Sudan grass. When cut at the right time 
 (about time of maturity for Indian corn; when fully matured for the 
 other crops) and carefully packed in the silo, all these crops and 
 doubtless other forage plants belonging to the same families will 
 produce silage of excellent quality and palatability and will furnish 
 succulent feed of special value for feeding dairy and beef cattle, as 
 well as sheep, during late summer or the winter season. 
 
 Through the addition of Indian corn silage or milo silage to rations 
 of alfalfa hay, or alfalfa with grain feeds, an increase in production 
 amounting to 10 to 25 per cent was secured in feeding experiments 
 with cows in the University dairy herd, and the efficiency of the 
 rations per unit of dry matter furnished was improved about 10 per 
 cent. Rations of alfalfa hay, with or without grain feeds, supple- 
 mented by Indian corn silage, Sudan grass silage, or sweet-sorghum 
 silage, produced similar amounts of milk and milk components. Per 
 unit of dry matter furnished in the rations, those containing sweet 
 sorghum silage proved slightly more efficient than the rations contain- 
 ing Indian corn silage, which in turn proved about 10 per cent more 
 efficient than the rations containing Sudan grass silage. 
 
 * Wisconsin Experiment Station Bulletin 226, p. 24; Research Bulletin 26, 
 p. 63; Massachusetts Station Bulletin 145, pp. 28-29.