The dry matter consumption of sheep on natural grazing in the Transvaal

OndeTStezJoort lm1rnal of rl'te'rinm'y Sc£ence and Animal Industry, Tloltt7ne 14, }\lumbers 1 and 2, Januarv ancl April, 1940.

Printed in the Union of South Africa L~· the GoH•rwnent Printer, Pretoria.

The Dry Matter Consumption of Sheep on Natural Grazing In the Transvaal.

By D. B. SM:UTS and J. S. C. MARAIS, Seetion of Nutrition, Onderstepoort.

0KE of the major p1oblems with whieh the sheep and eattle industry of the summer rainfall areas is continually confronted, is the tremendous loss in 1night of animals during the winter months.

This progressive decline iu \\·eight becomes eYen more complicated, when it is realized that the prevailing phosphorus deficiency of the pasture during winter is not exdusively responsible for this abnormal phenomenon of weight reduction. In fact it has been shown on numerous oceasions that the administration of phosphates or phos- phatic licks alone does not remelly this condition. It would, there- fore, appear as if the whole question of weight loss is either due to a complex nutritional deficiency or to an inadequate food consump- tion which may be associated with the fibrous and highly lignified state of the winter pasture. Ho1YeYer, these assumptions are at present mere speculations and can only be settled one way or another by a ,;ystematic analysis of the entire problem as it appears in prae- tice. It is also clea1·, that \vhatever method of attack is employed, one common and insurmountable factor, namely, the estimation of the a mount of gra11ing consumed per day, remains an obstacle in the ultimate and final solution of this Yery important economic problem.

Thus to show conclusi.-elv and in a scientific manner that either protein, phosphorus, ener.gy or the entire complex is deficient in winter grazing, it seems imperative that the amount of gnt11ing con- sumed, the quantities of these elements present as well as their utilizability by the animal, should be known. On this basis alone can the magnitude of sueh a deficiency be determined and scien- tifically rectified. Other methods of establishing nutritional deficiencies, such as differences in gain in weight between supple- mented and unsupplemented rations or changes in the chemical com- position of the blood or tissues, merely indicate the possibility that sueh a deficieney exists, but neglect the basic information of total intake and utilizability without which scientific and economic snpple- mentrttion of the deficient element become mere approximation.

Apparently little attention has been given to this aspect of work in the past. Recently, however, Garrigus an cl Rusk have measured the llry matter consumption of steers on reed canary and brome

THE DRY M.-I.TTElt CONSUMPTION OF SHEEP.

grasses. Their method consisted in determining the Jaily dry matter of the faeces voided and the percentage digestibility o£ the dry matter of these grasses. From these figures they could then calculate the dry matter consumed by their animals. vV oodman and Evans on the other hand utilized the organic matter of the faeces and the percentage digestibility of the latter elements to measure the grass consumption of their sheep. vV e have adopted the method of Garrigus and Husk for our work.

_ExPElUMENTAL.

The experiment to be described was conJucted at the Ermelo Experimental Station. The general conditions at this station in respect of rainfall, growth of pasture and seasonal fluctuations in protein content of the natural flora are fairly representative of the entire 'fransvaal. Twenty sheep belonging to a grazing flock were utilized for this work. In orJer to maintain the natural conditions of grazing, these sheep were not separated hom the rest of the flock.

At the start of each collection period, specially constructed metabolism bags, which fitted tightly round the hindquarters of the sheep, were put on to each sheep two days prior to the actual collection. This preliminary period was essential to accustom the sheep to the meta- bolism bags and prennt unusual restlessness. After this preliminary period the sheep did not seem to take any notice of the metabolism bags and grazed about normally. The collection period proper was then stal"ted. 'fhe metabolism bags were put on early in the morning and changed during the late afternoon. For the purpose of changing the metabolism bags a temporary camp eonsisting of wire netting fixed to a few poles >~·as constructed in the corner of the existing camp. The flock was then grazed slowly towards this temporary camp, and interned. \Vith the help of two native assistants the experimental sheep were carefully separated from the rest of the flock and the metabolism bags removed, while others were immediately put on. As soon as all the bags were changed, the wire netting constituting the temporary camp was let down and the sheep allowed to graze. The metabolism bags containing the faeces were removec1 to the laboratory, where the faeces were spreall out and allowed to sun-dry. The rlaily sun-dried faeces were then carefully weighed and 10 per cent. aliquots taken and stored in air- tight fruit jars. Total dry matter "·as then deter·mined on a repre- sentative sample of the entire 10 rlays' aliquot. During the 10 clays' collection period representative grazing was cut by following tht>

grazing sheep. This grass was utilized for the metabolism studies and the uetermination of the digestibility of the dry matter. From the daily dry matter of the faeces and the digestibility of the dry matter the dry matter consumption was calculated.

Collection periods were so arranged as to take place during- the different seasons of the year. Hence collections took place during .January, April, July and October. In this way it was anticipated to obtain information on the plausibility of the assumption that sheep consume comparatively more grazing d uri nO' summer than durin o·

the winter months. ^{0 ' ''}

404

D. B. SMUTS AND J. S. C. MARAIS.

ExPERIMERTAL RESULTS.

In Table I is given the percentage digestibility of the dry matter of the grazing during the different seasons of the year. It vvill be noted from the data presented in the above table, that there is very little variation amongst the individual digestibility figures of the same period. Consequently it is only fair to assume that the average digestibility for the different periods is also representative of the natural grazing during those seasons of the year. On this basis, therefore, the mean dry matter digestibility of each period was utilized for the ultii)late calculation of the dry matter consumed from the dry matter contained in the faeces.

It is interesting to note that during July, when the grazing is dry, fibrous and highly lignified, the protein content drops as low as 3 ·1 per cent. During this period the digestibility of the dry matter of the grazing also reaches its lowest level, namely 43 per cent.

vVith the first summer rains and the beginning of the growing stage in October, the protein content of the natural flora increases rapidly to approximately 9 ·9 per cent. There is also a corresponding increase in the percentage digestibility of the dry matter during this month. During January there is apparently very little difference in the digestibility of the dry matter in comparison with that of October.

The average figures are 58 and 60 respectively. As soon as winter conditions set in and the grazing becomes dry as happens in April, there is again a decided drop in both the protein content and the digestibility of the dry matter. The average percentage digesti-

bility of 46 per cent. corresponds closely with the figure obtained (luring July.

In Tables 2, 3, 4 and 5 are reproduced the results relative to the calculation of the dry matter consumption of sheep during the di:fferen t seasons of the year.

Several interesting points arise from a detailed consideration o£

the data. Thus it will be noticed, that the average daily weight o£

the sheep increases or decreases according to the protein content of the pasture and the season of the year. During the middle of winter as represented by our July figures the protein content of the pasture as well as the average weight of the animals are the lowest for the year.

\Vhen the nitrogen content increases from 0 · 49 per eent. in July to 1·44 per cent. in October, there is also a corresponding increase in

\\"eight from 28 Kgms. to 33 Kgms. In January the nitrogen content is still fairly hig-h and averages 1·17 per cent. The average weight of the sheep is at its best during this month and aven1ges 40 Kgms.

From January onwards the grazing matures fairly fast, so much so that the nitrogen content drops to 0 · 73 per cent. in April. This decided drop in nitrogen also reflects on the weight of the sheep.

There is consequently a noticeable drop in weight to 39 Kgms.

during April.

Another interesting feature is the £act that the dry matter excretion on grazing does not seem. to bear any relation to the con- dition, stage of growth or to the seasonal fluctuations in protein content of the pasture. During October when the first blades of

THE DRY MATTElt CONSUMPTlO"' OF SHEEP.

green DTaSS appear and the pasture Can therefore Ue at>SUllled to Ue in its ~10st palatable stage, the dry matter excretion is less than in July. The aYeragP figure;; for the two months are 024 and 370 grams respectively. Similady the dry matter excretion during the more advanced state of maturity in April i;; higher than during January. In Aprillhe daily dry matter exnetiou is 465 gram;; daily, while it is only 363 grams in January.

A point ol pradical inq)orlance is the appan~ul relationship between dry matter consumption and th~· liYe weight of the animals. In July, when the :nerage dail.1· weight of the :sheep was 28 E.gms.

the dry matter consumptiou was at it,; lowest, namely 649 gram,;.

As t he;;e sheep in('rense<l iu 11·eight to ;):l E.gnt;;. in October, tht' dry matter consumption also increased to 7l.S gram,; daily. In Janua1·y, 11·hen the maxilllum aYerage weig-ht ''"a~ atbined, it 11·as accompanied by a maxintum dry .matter consutuphon of \:101 grants. ])uring April the average weight of the ;;heep tell to J9 KgJitt<. 'l'his dPnea,;e in 11·eight 11·as associated with a <·orrespoudiug dene:1se in dr)· mattPr consumptiOJt. '.l'he::;e figures ;;t..-ongly indicated that the• dry mattPr

<·onsumption of an ani1nal rna.1· he related to body 11·<'iglti, JlOII'PI' function of weight or surfac;e n rea, in lhe ~;nine 11·a:;r as the nlain- tenance protein requiren1eJti or the ba~al met.aboli:;nt. On this basi,;

the dry ntat ter consumpl ion for the <lifl:eren t pnioLb of llteasun•nlelt t IYas expres,;ed per kilog-ram burh· 11·eig-ht ~tncl per liljll:tre meter of body surfar·C:' as illustrated in f'Oluntus 14 and 15 of the respPf'tiYe tabh':;. In the latter r-ase the ,;urface nrea 11·n,; calcubt.ed ^frolll the fonmtla of Pierc·e and Lina,; nnn1t>h. S= ·1'21 1\'·⁵". 'rhere i~ in<lt>t>cl Yery little chfferenr·e hebn•en the. nYeragr value for the clift'ereilt periorls, 11·hen exp1·essed in this manner. In July the nven1gc• clr.'·

matter con,;umption per Kg-. i,; '23·4 gram and T+S gnns. per s.Jlt.

For October the aYernge Yalues nre '2:~·7 and 823 g-rams. }',lr January and April the Yaht<';; JWr E:g. are 22·7 ancl 22·2 and JWr sq.

lll. 840 nnrl 82:! gTams re,;ped i,·el,,-. Thr roefficient of Y<ll'iation neYer exc·eerl,; tlw 12 per CPJtt. nwrk in :Ill)' of the periods.

Kleiber eonf'hl<lPs that. as :1 \Yorking h)·potbesis the maxi!l:1\llt foo<l capacit.1· of nn anintal r·mt he J"<•p:arclecl as a similnr function ol' its 11·eight a;; thr ha:-;al mehcholi:-;m. He further show:; that ihe h:1s:ll metabolism of rlifferPnt species of nnimals r·an ],Pst he rrl::dPrl to the } pull't:'r fundion of ih> ' 'eight. On this bn,.;is hP eYoh<'rl the follo"·- ing g·eneral <'quat.ion B- 72\V! for ralculating the basnl metaholism of different speci<>s of nnimals.

\Ve ha1·p arloptc•d the Kleibe-r equation for rel:d·ing- dry t11:1ttC'1' consumption to hotly weigltt. The equation nO\Y reacl,;

n: :v [ =

k IV: 11·hne D:M: equals tlte dr)' matte1· in grams, k the eoust:tnt v:n·:;rino· in all prohnbilit:;· with different ronclitions and 1\T the \\'Pight in Cilo- ,

g·1·a1ns.

On this hn~is tht· Yalne o{ k wac; rleten11ined for en('h ]Wriocl from the mensured dr1· matter cou:;umption and !he respt•ctiYe wrights of the animals. I11 column 8 of the respedin tables t.he averag'e r·orr- stant. for the different perio<ls is giYen. Yery significant i~ the faet that thf'se constants for the different pPriocls of measurement repre- senting <'xtreme pastornl conditions, are almost of th~ same

40G

D. B. SMUTS AND J. S. C. ).[AlL\IS.

magnitude. 'l'hus the constant obtained under July condition:; is -54, for October 57, for January 56 and for April 55. By including the above constants in the Kleiber equation, the dry matter consumption was predicted from the weig-hts of the animals and compared with the dry matter consumption actually determined in each period. In column 10 of the tables the percentage deviation has been calculated.

From these figures it will be seen that the predicted figures agree extremely well with the determined values. The average percentage deviation in the July figures is ±9 per cent., in October ±9·8 per cent., in January ±8·8 per cent. and in April ±5 per cent.

These small variations together with the fad that the con ·tunts of the individual periods are very similar, opened the possibility of utilizing a common constant, for the general prediction of the dry matter consumption of grazing sheep over the year. In this way the average of the four constants was applied to the Kleiber equation and the predicted results compared with the determined value. 'l'hi:;

formula now reads as follows DM =56 vV~, "·here .DM equals dry matter in grams, and vV weight in kilograms. In colunm 11 of the 1·espective tables are given the predicted values of the Jaily dry matter consumption, according to the above formula. In column 12 these values are compared 1rith the determined Yalues and the per- centage deviation determined. As "·ill be seen the average percentage deviation in July is ±11 per cent., in October ±9·5 per cent., in .January ±8·8 per cent. and in April ±5·2 per cent. The average deviation from all the periods is only ±!) per cent. 'l'his deviation is extremely small when compared with such biological constants as basal metabolism and the endogenous nitrogen.

DISCUSSION OF HESUJ,TS.

From the results of this inYestigation, it is evident that while the average daily dry consumption ntries with the :;eason of the year, and consequently with the protein content of the pasture, it is extremely constant when exp1·essed per uuit of ,~·eight, per {t po11·er function of the 11·eight or per sq. meter of body surface. From these data it would further appear as if the capacity for dry matter con- sumption is 1·elateJ in the samP manner as the basal metabolism, to the surface area or

'i

pmYer function of the ''"eight. 'l'hi,; 11·oul<l mean, that there is no justification to as:;ume that sheep eat Pl"OlJOr- tionately more per unit of \\·eight of the summer grazing than of the winter grazing. In fact it appears as if the weight of the animal is the dominating factor a ud not the condition of the grazing. 'J'his interpretation would, therefore, favour the argument, that ihc loss in weight associated with winter g-razing is definitely not clue to the fact that sheep c:onsu1ne less 11·intPr g-razing but ju~tifies the vie,1·

that the winter g-razing is nutritionally inferior to the summPr grazing. In other words the nutritional deficiencies in the ,,-iuter grazing are so great that the same quantity of willtf'r grazing per nuit of weight cannot satisfy the 1equirements of the animals in thP same efficient manner as the smmner grazing. It can therefore be regarded as an established fact, that the periodic decline in weig-ht of animals during winter is associated with a deficiency of CPrtain es enti, l nutriti,,e elements in the winter grazing.

THE DRY MATTElt CONSUMPTION 0£' SHEEP.

From a scientific aspect it is interesting that the dry matter consumption under natural grazing conditions should be as closely correlated with the power function of the weight of an animal as the basal metabolism and endogenous nitrogen. The

t

^{power function}

of the weight of an animal is in all probability a very representative measure of the protoplasmic mass, which regulates the intensity of the basal metabolism as "il·ell as the endogenous nitrogen and may equally be responsible for the regulation of the appetite of an animal or in other words its feeding capacity. It is quite possible that both the basal metabolism and the endogenous nitrogen may be lowered during the winter months. In fact a few preliminary measurements of the endoge110Us niti·ogen under conditions similar to those of the winter grazing condition;; indicate strongly that such is the case. It can therefore readily be appreciated, that the lowered intensity of the protoplasmic reactions to conserve as far as is possible its own tissues, becomes a biological necessity. This natural condition of economic conservation, through a lowering- of the intensity of the protoplasmic reactions may in all probability also be extended to the appetite or food capacity of the animal and indirectly to its live- weight.

"'Whatever the explanation may be for this striking correlation between weight and dry matter consumption, it is nevertheless of practical importance that the dry matter consumption under grazing conditions can readily be calculated from the weight of the animals.

\Vhether the establishe!l eq nation will hold true under all conditions of gra.r.ing, and which factors may influence its general applicability, is a pwblem of the future. However, for comparative purposes it is interesting to compare the results of Garrigus and Rusk and Wood- man and Evans obtained under quite different conditions. According to our formula a 100-pound sheep would eat 981 grams of dry matter. Woodman finds that a sheep of 131 pounds would consume approxi- mately 3 · 0.1 pounds of dry matter. On the basis of a 100 lb., such a sheep would consume 1,044 grams of dry matter. Garrigus and Rusk finds that a 600-lb. steer would consume approximately 13 lb.

dry matter which is equivalent to 989 g-rams per 100 lb. Our calcu- lated value of 981 grams per 100 lb. uiffers by 63 grams from wood- man's .-alue and with 18 grams from the average value of Garrigus.

It ·would the1·efore seem as if the relationship between dry matter consumption and weight holds good for steers as well as sheep under unrestricted conditions of natural grazing.

SFMJ\JAHY AND Co:Kcrxsro:Ks.

From a study on the dry mntter consumption of sheep under natural conditions of g-razing, it is evident that the quantity con- sumed is not a factor in the loss of weight in sheep during winter.

It appears from these dnta that the decline in weight is specifirally due to a rapid depletion of nntritiYe elements from summer to ·winter gra.r.ing. It has further been shown that the dry matter consumption of sheep is correlated with the weight of the animals and that it- can be predicted "il·ith SLH.:cess from the following equation DM = 5G\V~, where DM equah dry matter in grams and \V weig'ht in Kilog-rams.

408

U. H. Sl\l"GTS AND J. S. C. ~IAl!AJS.

:REFERENCES.

·GARRIGUS, W. P. AND RUSK, H. P. (1935). The consumption of Reed Canary and Brame Grasses by Grazing Steers. Pror. 28th Meetiii!J Amr!l'.

I:Joc. Ann·ual. P1·od., p. 75.

KLEIBER, M. (1933). Tiergri)sse und .L<'utterverwertung. '.l'ierenliih1'1UI!J, Bclv. 1-12.

WOODMAN, H. E. EVANS, H. E. ANn .EDEN. A. (1937).

the Appetites of Sheep on Typical Winter Rations C:ritical Study of the Sheep Fe<'uing; Standards. l I.

Amounts of Grass Cons11mcd by Sheep on Pasture of J. Agric. Sci., Vol .27, p. ]91.

TAm.E 1.

J\IIeasuremellt at together with a Determination of Varying (~uality.

Digestibility o j D1·y Matter du1"£ng lJ1:jjerent Seasons of the

r

^enr.

Animal No.

l .................... . 2 .........•....

3 .................. . 4 ............... . . .

;), .... .

AVERAGE ..

38247 .......... . 49612 .... ' ..... . 38252 ........... . 38243 ............ . 39292 ........... .

AVERAGE . . ...

38248 .......... . 49612 ....... ' .. . 38252 .... ' ........... . 38240 ..... ' ..

38000 ............... .

AVERAG>: ..

JULY, 1938- 0·49 PER CENT N.

Weight.

Kilogl'anl. 46 45 42 50

Dry Matter Intake.

Dry Matter In Faec:es.

Grams. Grams.

448 257

426 261

I

431 214

422 237

42 I 378 224

1 - -- - -. - - - - --

i

- - --I

OcTOBER, 1938- l· 44 l'ER cEN1'. N.

56 53 44 48 52

611 723 470 602 622

JANUARY, 1939- 1·17 PER CENT. N.

32 52 42

1--!~ -

515 660 57B 692 469

!

APRIL, 1939- 0·73 PER CENT. N. 246 336 194 25:3

26:~

211 382 225 260 171

38248................. 43 430 218

49612...... ... . . . ... . . 46 455 240

38252............... . . 41 427 240

38240.............. 41 454 247

38249.............. 40 326 l79

J

Digestibility of lhy ~la.tter~

Per cent.

43 39 :iO 44 4l

60 54

;)9

58 58 58

59 ii6 61 62 64 60

.j.!)

.J-7 44 .J-6 4i) - - - --

AV.E:RAGE ... ..•.... 46

409

1'A1Jf.E 2. !Jota un the Urass Crn1s·umption of Sheep 1111der Nul11rnl Condiiions o.f Um:ing. }'IHST 'l'ES'l', J l'LY, l!J38.

---=-·, -= -

-~.~---~ Dai~f----~=-c.___-, -I --- Dry I

_ I

1 Daily Wei9ht

I _ I /

f Percent./ l'orcen1-Surfact• I l))l. I D:'ll. Ammal \r . h. Dry of Log Log _ \\' 3 Dm. = Dm. = age D'f. = ago ..-\rea 1 per 1 per No. . mg t I 'Ycight Grass D!\l. W. I ·f· I KW f. I :i4 W 7}.

I

De via-

I

56 W 1--Do1·ia-I i'i=_-121 1 Square Ktlo- 1· aeccs. Con-K. 11on. t 1011. 1 \\ · '9 "ctre. 1 Gra.m. Will~, i j' I ----~-~ --I I -_J_ ---L - I ..

c

G' ,-'

~~l!nL a ,_, ~': G','~m. . __

I . _ I _ c I

Gr :1 >~1. / _ . Gm '~- .~q. - ~ , ,~~~~ - -> ' _'' '~ -

.dGSfJ..... -6 :1.;,

I

.l.JJ 12· ul6jl·4LJO 11·-> ->1·4

I

G-2 I _,.z G4o 0 o 8_7 tL., -2 , :>1693... .... 30 :n:1 UG4 :2·8tr>6 1·4771

I

1:2 s 51-J 6n2 !i-8 718 I 10 o-noo 7:!.7 1 n-8 51694..... :26·:) 4:25 746 :2·8727 1·±:2:1:2 11·7 6:1-8 G:ll -1:)·4 (i:)4 -1:2 0·830 89:2 I :28·2 1-1'-51738. _ _ _ __ _ __ 26-:) :188 G81 I 2-8:131 1

1-4232 I 1.1-7

I

:>8.'-2 li:H

1-

7-3 6:)4 _ 4 0-83.(i 815 :!G-7 f-' 5175:>. 26 406 11:2 :2·8:>:2:5 1·+150 u-:) 61-!) (i:22 -12·6 ()45 -9 o-827 s61 I n-± 0 :)1757........ 26 3-l:l 602 12·7796 1·4150

I

11·5

I

:>2-:3 li:Z2 I :1-3 (i4fi 7 I 0·827 728 :!:1-2 Iil833... :!!J 3:n :j!JL 2-7716 1-~624 u. ,, n -:3 fi75 10.8 700 18 o. 88:2 li70 20 · 4 :)186:1. .........

I

28 4()4 70!J 2·8:>0611·44721 12-:1

I

58·2 1i66

1 -

G·l ti82 -4

I ()

86.41 821

I

:Ui-:1 :>1812.... .. . :!!J :His li4G :2·8102 1·402+ J2·ii :31·7 li7:> -1·5 700 8 u-882

I

7:33 :!2·3 :;ts~? . . . . . . 1 3~ _ ~. ~o 1

~~,~ 2-ss.:n 1 ;,o,-,~ I 1a-:> I ~~-8

I

72? 1-5 1 7?:~ ~ o-035 818 ~~-!J 518u2...

;2,,. , ,

.it4 tJ:>Ii 2·8169 1·40fh 11·4 :)t·8 b13 -G·G IJ.1:l -.l 0·818 802 2o·7 ;)188:, __ .... _ r 23 248 4.:10.) :l-3685 1 .. 1-3617 1 10-3 1 4-... 1-4 !)6.-7 I :30-:.~ f-188 -:1:) I 0 770 1 -.'>65 ~

1

LS-0 Ii1904.......... 26 :1:27 i)H 2·7:>89 1·41:30 11·5 4!)-!) G2:Z 8·3 645 12 0·827 !i94 :2:2·1 :!;92;.. .. .. .

I

~~

;)

2. 77 I ~~6 ~-6866 l-~:_·)·:~21 1~-? ~~ '.! 6:ll

I

29·8 ~~!~ :14

I

0-8~~ I ~81 .~~-3 ->-07.l.......... .32 411 121 2·8579 l·o0o1 13-o o3·u 726 0·7 1:>.3 ± 0·93.J 171

I

_:l-6 :)2010. . . . . . . . . I 26 355 623 2. 794ii

I

1· 4-J:'JO I ll· ii

I

54. l 6:!2

I

(i45 4 0. 827 7ii3 23.9 !)2025 ...... :30 382 670 2·8:261 1·4771 12·8 52·3 6!)2 :l<l 718 7 0·000 7-!4 2:2·3 52100 ........

I

:31·:) 381 6()8 12-824811.·4!)831 13·5 I 50·2 I 735 I 10·0 745 12 0·9271 721 21·2 :>2082.... . . . . . 30 47G 833 2·9206 1·4771 12·8 65·0 692 -16·9 718 -U 0·93:3 891 27·8 ,, 1765 .. .. . .. ..

I

2:5. ,,

I

3:)5 r 623 1 2. 794:) l . 4065

I

11 . 4

I

54. 9 1

(j 13 1

_ I . 6 6:Hi :2 0. 000 I (i\)2 1 :24.4 "'~ veragc ... .-.

I

28

I

370 6-1-!J 1

I I

5+ -1 !I ll -

I

748 2:3 · 4 i'-itandard Dev"t·

I

1 tiOP . • . . . . . . • . -' ---I 88 2 7 Uoef. of variation I -I ---

I

I ----12 l:?

::l >-' I:': c ~ ..-. :::: :>: >-: ~ (j c ?. [fi r. ~

"' "'

>--< 0 '/, 0 r-:: [/: ::c ... ;--:

TABLE 3. Data on the Gras~ Co11sumption of Sheer, under lVatu-ral Co11ditions of Gra::ing. SECOND TEST, 0C'l'OBEH, 1938. ---~ -====---==---====- I Daily

1 Daily 1 , Dry Percent-1 iiurfacc I \\'eight I I

1 ,

Percent-) .I HI. I DM. Animal I Weight I

" ~~: ht

of Log Log Wi/-.

I

Om. = Dm. = I age D:II. = age Area ' per per No. Grass D.\l. I w. KW i/-.154 \\-!/-., De,·ia-156 W !/-. Deyia-1 S= ·1,21 1

Square I Kilo-

I

Faeces. Con-

I

K. tton. tton. \V··9 ;\1ctre. Gmm. sumed. I _I

_ I --

D.Cir. I I ~--~ ----- I I Kgrn. 1 Gra.m.

I

Gmm. I Gram. Gram. Hq. J\1. Unun. I Gram. 5208:2 .......... :16 40:)

I

064

I '

9841 L 5563 14·7

I

65·6 838 1-13·3 82:l -Iii

I

1·002 !!62 I 26·7 51738 ......• il4 395 940 2·9731 1·5315 14· I 66·7 80:3 -14·6 78!) -16 0·96!l !J70 27·6 5188:3 ........ :32 352 838 2. 9232 1 . 5051 13. :) 62·3 767 -8·ii 7:3:1 -10 I 0. 93:1 896 I 26·2 51757 .... _ ..... I 33 361 860 2. 9345 I· -518.5 13·8 62·4 785 I_ 8·7 771 -10 0·952 !J03 26·1 :l3· 5 348 829 2·9186 1·52i\O 13·9 -~9· 8 7!)4 ~ 4 2 71>0 6 0·961 863 24-· 7 91904 ..... I .~zo79 ..........

I

:32 334

I

79.5 I 2·9004 I 1·5051 13·6 !:;9· j 767

1-

3·:) 7r;:; ;) 0·93r> 8:)0 24·8 .51765 .......... 29 26(! 640 2 · 8062 I · 4624 12·fi :31·2 713 lJ ·4 700 -!) 0·882 726 22·1 :-- 51833 .......... 36 251 836 2·9222 1· :356:3 14·7 :)6·9 838 I 82:3 2 1·002 8:34 I 23·2 to 51689 .......... 28· :) 289 688 2·8376 1·4548 12 -:l .5:5· 8 703 2·2 6!11 -0·876 788 24·1 52100 .....

n

297 707 2·8494 1·5682 14·1 47·1 855 I :20 9 840 Hl 0· 99:) 711 I 19·1 (/J !>' 51694 ........ 32 :J42

I

814 I 2·9016 1·5051 13·1) 60·4 767 -:)·8 7i):l -7 0·93!3 871 25·4 ,..., c: 51755 ........ 29 :317 755 2·8779 1· 4624 12·5 60·3 713 -.5· 7 700 -7 0·882 856 26·0 ~ 51693 ... :l7 ·;) 278

I

662 1 2·8209 1·5740 15·:2 43·7 8fi4 30·.5 849 28 1·027 64i5 17·7 (/J 51852 ........ 34 322 767 2·8848 1·5315 14. j :34·5 803 4·7 789 :J 0·96!) 792 22·6 ~ 52030 ..........

I

33·5 3:22 767 2·8848 1·5250 13. ,) I :55 ·1 794 3·5 780 2 0·962 707 22·0 t:l 51840 ....... 35·5 344 819 I 2·9133 1·5502 14·5 56·3 829 1· 2 81:3 -I 0·994 824 23·1 52010 ........ I 29 257 612

I

2. 7868 I ·4624 12·5 I 46·8 713 16·5 700 14 0·88:2 694 21·1 52025 ....... 375

i

362 838 2·9232 1·5740

I

15·2 5:3·2 864 :1· 1 84!) 1 1. 0:!7 816 22·3 JJ

I

---(l Average ........ :33·0 :124 718 --:)7 -I± !J 8 _:: n 82:3 :Z:l-7 Standard De via-;:; tion ........ 88 :2·7

"'

---!:: Cocf. Variation .. --11 ll·O :;.. "'< ------- '!'

'fABLE 4. Data on the Gmss Conwm,ption of Sheep under Natural Condit·ious of Gmzing. Animal No. Weight

Daily Dry ''Ieight Faeces.

Daily I Dry Weight of Grass Con- sumed, D.M.

---- - r I

Kgm.

t~r. j. Gram ~ (

Gram.

~ -- ---~

51693 ......... . ,.,.. 51694 ......... . ~ 51652 ......... . /';;) 51738 ......... . 51757 ....... . 51765 ..... . 51833 ......... . 51840 ......... . 51852 ......... . 51885 ......... . 51904 ....... . 51923 ......... . 52010 ......... . 52030 .......... I 52079 ......... . 52082 ...... . Average ....... .

42 43 38 41 37·5 33·5 43 41 40 41 . 42·5 1 37 40 41 36 42·5

355 413 336 421 322 367 382 393 371 444 408 307 261 399 286 341 40 363

888 1,033 840 953 805 918 955 983 928 1,010 1,020 768 653 998 715 853 907 I

2·9484 3·0140 2·9243 2·9791 2·9058 2·9628 2·9800 2·9926 2·9657 3·0043 3·0086 2·8854 2·8149 2·991 2·8543 2·9ao9

St~~~~ r -c ~: ~ -~~ j ~--

I

I -

I - Coef. Vanatwn .. J ____

-=-_j I

THIRD TES'l' : JANUARY, 1939. Log w. 1·6263 1·6335 1·5798 1·6128 1·5740 1·5250 1·6335 1· 6128 1·6021 1·6128 1·6284 1·5682 1·6021 1·6128 1·5563 l· 6281

W!. 16·5 16·8 15·3 16·2 15·2 13·9 16·8 16·2 15·9 16·2 16·6 15·0 15·9 16·2 14·7 16·6

Dm. = KW!. K. 53·8 61·5 54·9 58·7 52·9 66·0 56·8 60·7 58·4 62·3 61·5 51·2 41·1 61·6 48·6 51·4 56

-===--·--=--===-====·-.:..-=:::=::=: ---=--~~=---··---=

I

I Percent-i Percent-Surface

I

mvr. D!Vf. Dm. = age [ D71L = age Area I per per 54 W t· Devia-. :)6 W f. Devi<l-S=121 . 1

Square Kilo- tion. I tion. "1·59 Metre. i Gram.

~ :: ~-- : - 6 -~- ~: I ~ ~"o :; - G:: : lr : 7 _ ·~

940 -9·0 940 I-9·0 1·114 927 24·0 857 2. 0 857 2. 0 1· 038 809 22 ·1 907 I 4. 8 907 4. 8 1· 082 881 . 23. 2 849 5. 5 849 5. 5 1· 027 784 21· 5 780 4. 1 780 4 ·1 0. 962 954 27. 4 940 -1·6 940 ·-1·6 1·114 857 22·2 907 -7 . 7 907 -7 . 7 1 . 082 909 24. 0 891 4. 0 891 4. 0 1· 067 870 23.2 907 -9. 2 907 -9. 2 1 . 082 933 24. 6 932 8·6 932 -3·2 1·114 1 916 24·0 840 9·3 840 9·3 0·995 772 20·7 891 36·4

I

891 34·6 1·067 612 16-:3 907 --9·1 907 -9·1 1·082 922 24·3 823 15·1 823 15·1 1·002 714 20·0 932 9. 2 932 9. 2 1·114 766 20.0 .: 1--- 8·8 8·8 840 22·4 I

=

I

=

I

it

I l

~

· ,, ___.__ ___ !_ _____ )__

H iii t:'l 1:1 ;,; ~ ~ :» H H M f:d (") 0 !7; [FJ q 17 ...., "d H .... 0 ~ 0 ;,; [FJ "" ,.... M M >-:!