xt7gf18scv6c https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7gf18scv6c/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1962 journals 116 English Lexington : Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.116 text Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.116 1962 2014 true xt7gf18scv6c section xt7gf18scv6c       1962  
  ‘· 1   [ VV  T" - ,4 ;  _
V  ~ Vw; "·`V,*[:f"·=I"' 3 VV —   VV‘£· " · V- A {VV V?   V 4 V ,
V , V _—-.   Q:. -* `¤V __ V - V ‘ i g ‘ ° P V_ 0, · Y · V V x'
    V VV gz';. V   "   '
V ` V M" V a  ` · x ,      V » FV ·- V ,  "
V ‘ V V V-* , *V   V , ·.*` ;=_ ~ VV V  , ·V ‘ ‘
_ ` J ‘··V·', fj {JT; ·. T. `.¤ _- J' · V
···" ’ ‘ _ ’ ` · i~ ` i· V - · 2 V V ·»
VI Vb ¢ _V I     V A i VV   rr, V· ’     ' J VV ’V;¢—V
V V  ‘~ V )_ _ _ , - »4  ' V ‘ _ V _ , _ VV -' j·k2;.t",V
  V , V E ‘ V V _· _ _ , V} IV VV V _ fi   V — ·, VV  _ ,§>Z`_ V
VV  {xi"  { V _ V .  - ‘ y V · ' V" V V`,. _· `_ f5 V I > V   V V . V.   _
  VV VT V   V V   ’*¢1·“U f     ~    V   V V. VQYVQ _;   A V V _{iF’€??’?” L
VV' VV V ·* "   · I of ¢ » VV'? :’   T   ·   ' ‘·  
V O   _ _ ># ' 4 __ VV ·r _ VIM » V `A 5      1* V~ V _ I   - J  _ VV Y .·` -’t. V [_ :5 rvgi:
V — ~   A " V ` V V— V 7 `·:’J‘;·'·`·- Z '  l" · ' ` V I V ~¥’ ,·fi~_   ·
V'·   V V ‘   "     ` "`·   ‘ V -    V V V. — , ' V V;f·?T{·_'= ..V, Hi
f V ` i V l V jp _ V _   ' · _ V ’_· · I. '  V Irv > 4 ‘:;';;.>'¢' ,1%;. .2);*;, [',»’.$
{ V ·· l A  V · VV · V   Tri:   ~ En" _ V I: A _ I   V//;A_ ':_     `Mr   4 ·J giptbxg
· V ‘ V QV, ‘V 4 4 i · _·   » _'_V},_ ‘ V   ._ _¤ ‘· { V ·; V- T1? ·‘x,Z_i`.~.’:,,—; ,1%;:3%:
V V · °Vh.€‘·V;>__ V, V · “   § V r“—V k¤~. V Q V _   "/,·’ _ V~j~{·T ji    
V. { V V-V.V% · VL V V I ? " V V V · - V   ‘ V ·»?f.` V   /3f‘—‘·‘"· ;i"j:` .V ‘ ' *”·i§w"»
· V V V V _ · V · V "   Z_, V , V ‘ _ V   ‘»'f_,{{zV‘ ‘_ ;,   V, V J,-_ Iifjrtx,
  > V V V U `-tl . V V _, T r » r V _` _ ' I `._ _ -VA-V;. {1/7')_r:·   Z · ?4_ VV_Vl J"!  
; .   ` I ` V r V _V I I I V _ _ ; > . _ :» _:.:;/O//V_ ·   _ _ >, Trac ‘»·'r»;`,· q i
vV’   Li ‘° V ·. V - vi   V V· V ’   , V ·‘—V·g·¤‘·j‘· V -V ·. {J-Vj<_z;·_,,;··#+ »
 ·¤>i<-s   ” ‘ -»   .»;, ‘ V ·· V.Vr ‘ ‘· V -   ‘ ~ - · .zV··VV"»;.aV  “‘
  V V  /i{`6°5»"‘;;  · [ _   V" 'V /·_   V   V ·. "2`.··_?1 ·· , V   ‘
'Qi§é’·` #3-.,..    "   V I   ·V·V 4     V   ’V V. - *     V V. V, ·
  V, · Y g 'r/V Q   Vlé i;   A_ ' __  ei . ‘ * ' —  _·‘,’ _. V _ .
,V —/~3,<;f§ V·":;_:V.‘"‘ a~¢§,·9§»" V"   V V ‘· ~ .'   V V VV (
  _.VV___ V  Vj V   _V _ "_,   V; 5 V‘V I ·*; _ _V._ IJV ~ _', ~
V °   V if      V         V»__ V  V V ~_ ·‘   Q
V   `·   · VV »   V¤‘·—      ‘VVV‘   VV   V V     ‘h»~»,-  V  
· V , V·   g·'_VVY ;· ‘ __ _1  V F?[C>_,·l V ’ , V     _ ' ¤'_{   V_ V V VV;
Progress Report 116 july 1962 (Filing Code: 2)
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

 PROGRAM FOR l962 ANNUAL LIVESTOCK FIELD DAY
LEXINGTON PRINCETON
July l8, l962 July 20, l962 _
Morning Morning
Chairman · C. F. Buck Chairman · S. J. Lowry p I
Coldstream Farm · Conducted tours showing Livestock Farm West Kentucky Substation · if y
beef, sheep and swine research will Conducted tours showing beef, sheep
start at regular intervals beginning at and swine research will start at regular H!
9 a.m. (EST). Last tour starts at IO intervals beginning at 9 a.m. (CST).
a.m. Last tour starts at IO a.m.
Noon Noon
Lunch Lunch I
Courtesy of Bluegrass Stockyards, Lexington Courtesy of Farmers Elevators, Inc. and
Field Packing Company, Owensboro
_ Afternoon I
“ Chairman, W. P. Garrigus
l:l5 Address · Progress or Perish Dr. Ronald H. Nelson
Head, Department of Animal Husbandry
Michigan State University
East Lansing
Cover Picture: This is an architect's model of the new laboratory and office building in the
proposed Agricultural Research and Science Center at the University of Ken- .
tucky. Plans for this building have been completed and construction is to
begin in the fall of l962

 BEEF CATTLE SECTION
  I · 4 A L - __’i'   f `;_ x ¥s% 
  _ , .·‘ I,   M.2E5_ ····  T 
I. ‘ · .v,__‘;j "\»   M l·,~..~, r,,i_ *.2 ‘ ‘ •. `_   ·.
l if E if   `""‘~$-· 7+7 “ T "  
,g ·.___, _     , ` ‘ ·· . " · f` l'
  .i~—»`ZZ· ·· “l·
is I __3T   V   A      
' ` “‘   »—_.L1t*;f’*"·*—-—s,__Q‘¤`. ‘
A .   5 _. "g"‘"  .,___ _. I- ¥ r_ _w `
if F     * ml if  
BEEF CATTLE FACILITIES AT PRINCETON, KY.
These facilities are currently being used for drylot feeding of steers and for
beef bull performance testing as a part of the beef cattle improvement program of
the University of Kentucky. The barn and I2 feedlots were constructed in I96I and
are adequate for handling I2O animals at a time.
~   JM i-`~   "'°'f»t  gsi J. C    .,-\·· 2-if ".. . {Y ·—·v A  
      —       ·°-·       ··   ..
 >i···* *      I *  »~‘—~  <.»‘Z‘*¤  ‘:-··i:.f;~*·=
~ ` *     **4* ir—    ·. "`»fia;- ?.`*" 'Yi`»· *·? `  
' ’ I ··r··   i    ‘·    .>.z=¤¤*·.~i»   ·‘ ‘·{§¢*¤7***   —
WW1-  4- .   " I,  't’’   it  I‘·=» ’¥Q"   . ¤,`%€‘='·*Z’2i‘·{-fi', ‘
  ·tr—·—:——- A .‘ ·’°‘i*!M¥¤Tmw = i—»~~# i  " t  · < ·$ ·$·‘·*‘:*=.+
Sww is ~ _».a-_,, ‘¢· _ra¤=:=ms- ·
f   ,7(Vt1              
I 4;    ‘ < I¤ e  ,     T K F °  
il "5'?j»»~.M.-...     O V I ‘H J§
~ ‘ · .   » F H ’ .
I     ¤¢Hf]GsNcr».l y -
I I   Z; v EA {-ISION SE / .
  it  i · I        *··+ {  ii   I M';
  _,   _ — ii  " ";__   i'
  ~v‘i   t J L. ii,—· · ¤    M   »  \   I  ——~" `
  *.·;  » i I ii.  y  I‘sv  {   · I  ·· » ¤
A M€`;}v?‘A-IE"- ;.iEvt.ri-'Av  v_ », '> _‘v ‘____ · `v*   ` ' `I V ` J
SONOSCOPE IN OPERATION
The sonoscope is being used to measure fat thickness and loin eye area at the
twelfth rib. It employs electronic principles in making various body measurements on
live animals which are indicative of potential carcass value. Sonoscope measurements
are available through the University's Beef Cattle Performance Testing Program.

 BEEF CATTLE SECTION
Page
Effects of Taractan and Tranimal on Beef Steers Being Fattened §
in Drylot ———-—---————-—-——-——-————-—-—-—--—— —· -————— 3 i
Tranimal and Diethylstilbestrol Implants for Fattening Beef Steers ———-— 5 e
Effects 0f Physical Form and Soybean Meal, Corn and Alfalfa Hay
on the Utilization of Soybean Hulls by Beef Steers ————--———-——-——— 9
Ground, Flaked and Pelleted Corn for Fattening Beef Steers ---- L --—-- 12 .
Effects of Sire, Breed and Sex on Preweaning and Postweaning
Performance of Hereford and Hereford X Red Poll Calves —---—----- 15
Effect for Beef Steers of Fat and Urea on Fattening Rations ——-------- 19
Effect of Stilbestrol Implants During the Preweaning Period on
Postweaning Feedlot Performance of Steers and Heifers
Receiving Stilbestrol Orally -------—-————-——-——-———----—-— 22
Effect of Nitrate Feeding on Serum Carotene and Vitamin A in Steers ———— 26
Stability of Gelatinized Vitamin A Mixed with Salt ——----———-—-—-——— 29
Pasture Evaluation with Feed Supplementation for Beef Production —————— 31
Cattle Grub and Internal Parasite Control Studies —--—————-—--—-—-— 33
é

 -3-
BEEF SECTION
EFFECTS OF TARACTAN AND TRANIMAL ON
BEEF STEERS BEING FATTENED IN DRYLOT
N. W. Bradley and B. M. Jones, Jr.
University of Kentucky
g Most of the experiments dealing with tranquilizers as feed additives for beef cattle
A have not revealed consistently beneficial results. Even so, beef cattle researchers should
be alert for any new feed additives which may improve performance of beef cattle. There
. is a variety of tranquilizers and, also, a variety of conditions under which they possibly
could prove to be beneficial. This study was to evaluate two new compounds with tran-
quilizing properties fed to beef steers being fattened in drylot.
Sixty rather fleshy yearling Angus steers were allotted on the basis of body weight
to six different lots for use in this experiment. They were fed a fattening ration com-
posed of ground shelled corn, corn silage and soybean meal for 4 weeks before they were
allotted andbefore the different tranquilizer treatments were imposed. Steers in Lot l,
the control group, received only the regular feed ration for fattening on drylot. Steers
in lots 2 and 3 were fed 4 and 8 mg Taractan, respectively, per steer daily during the
entire 137-day feeding period. Steers in Lot 4 maintained a I0 mg level of Tranimal
for the 137-day period, those in Lot 5 received a 25 mg level of the tranquilizer for
the first 70 days of the experiment, and those in Lot 6 received a 50 mg level of
Tranimal for the first 42 days. The treatments for steers receiving the 25 and 50
nig level of Tranimal were discontinued at the end of 70 and 42 days, respectively,
and the steers which had been on these levels of treatment received no tranquilizer
during the rest of the feeding period. All the steers in the six lots were implanted
with 36 mg of stilbestrol. The results of this experiment are summarized in Table l.
Neither the 4 mg or the 8 mg level of Taractan had any beneficial effect on feed-
lot performance. At the end of 42 days, when the 50 mg level of Tranimal was dis-
continued, there was an increase of 0. 2l lb in average daily gain for steers which had
been receiving the higher level of tranquilizer. At the end of 70 days. steers which
had been receiving the 25 mg level of tranquilizer were gaining at about the same
` rate as control steers. The l0 mg level of Tranimal which was fed during the entire
137 days resulted in O. 10 lb faster average daily gain than that of control steers.
Any advantage for the 50 mg level of tranquilizer which may have existed at thc end
* of 42 days had disappeared by the end of the feeding period.
Results of another experiment in which a 40 mg level of Tranimal was used
during the latter part of the feeding period are reported elsewhere in the beef cattle
section of this publication.

 BEEF CATTLE SECTION
Page
Effects of Taractan and Tranimal on Beef Steers Being Fattened at
in Drylot ———-----————---——-——-————-—-—————-- —· ----—— 3 ‘
Tranimal and Diethylstilbestrol Implants for Fattening Beef Steers ————— 5 i
Effects of Physical Form and Soybean Meal, Corn and Alfalfa Hay
on the Utilization of Soybean Hulls by Beef Steers ———-—-———-—-—-—— 9
Ground, Flaked and Pelleted Corn for Fattening Beef Steers -—-— L --—-- 12 .
Effects of Sire, Breed and Sex on Preweaning and Postweaning
Performance of Hereford and Hereford X Red Poll Calves ———------— 15
Effect for Beef Steers of Fat and Urea on Fattening Rations ——----—--- 19
Effect of Stilbestrol Implants During the Preweaning Period on
Postweaning Feedlot Performance of Steers and Heifers
Receiving Stilbestrol Orally ——-—--——--———-————-—-—--—--—-— 22
Effect of Nitrate Feeding on Serum Carotene and Vitamin A in Steers ———— 26
Stability of Gelatinized Vitamin A Mixed with Salt ——---———--—-—-——- 29
Pasture Evaluation with Feed Supplementation for Beef Production ——-—-— 31
Cattle Grub and Internal Parasite Control Studies —-——-———----—---— 33
é

 -3-
BEEF SECTION
‘ EFFECTS OF TARACTAN AND TRANIMAL ON
BEEF STEERS BEING FATTENED IN DRYLOT ·
N. W. Bradley and B. M. Jones, Jr.
University of Kentucky
A _ Most of the experiments dealing with tranquilizers as feed additives for beef cattle
°` have not revealed consistently beneficial results. Even so, beef cattle researchers should
be alert for any new feed additives which may improve performance of beef cattle. There
i is a variety of tranquilizers and, also, a variety of conditions under which they possibly
could prove to be beneficial. This study was to evaluate two new compounds with tran-
quilizing properties fed to beef steers being fattened in drylot.
Sixty rather fleshy yearling Angus steers were allotted on the basis of body weight
to six different lots for use in this experiment. They were fed a fattening ration com-
posed of ground shelled corn, corn silage and soybean meal for 4 weeks before they were
allotted andbefore the different tranquilizer treatments were imposed. Steers in Lot 1,
the control group, received only the regular feed ration for fattening on drylot. Steers
in lots 2 and 3 were fed 4 and 8 mg Taractan, respectively, per steer daily during the
entire 137-day feeding period. Steers in Lot 4 maintained a 10 mg level of Tranimal
for the 137-day period, those in Lot 5 received a 25 mg level of the tranquilizer for
the first 70 days of the experiment, and those in Lot 6 received a 50 mg level of
Tranimal for the first 42 days. The treatments for steers receiving the 25 and 50
mg level of Tranimal were discontinued at the end of 70 and 42 days, respectively,
and the steers which had been on these levels of treatment received no tranquilizer
during the rest of the feeding period. All the steers in the six lots were implanted
with 36 mg of stilbestrol. The results of this experiment are summarized in Table l.
Neither the 4 mg or the 8 mg level of Taractan had any beneficial effect on feed-
lot performance. At the end of 42 days, when the 50 mg level of Tranimal was dis-
continued, there was an increase of 0.21 lb in average daily gain for steers which had
been receiving the higher level of tranquilizer. At the end of 70 days. steers which
had been receiving the 25 mg level of tranquilizer were gaining at about the same
` rate as control steers. The 10 mg level of Tranimal which was fed during the entire
137 days resulted in 0. I0 lb faster average daily gain than that of control steers.
Any advantage for the 50 mg level of tranquilizer which may have existed at the end
‘ of 42 days had disappeared by the end of the feeding period.
Results of another experiment in which a 40 mg level of Tranimal was used
during the latter part of the feeding period are reported elsewhere in the beef cattle
section of this publication.

 -4,
Table T . · Effect of Taractan and Tranimal on Beef Steers /Being Fattened in Drylot (137 Days) ‘
___Taractan Tranimal — -
Control 4 mg 8 mg l0 mgg 25 mg? 50 mgl .
No. ofsteers l0 T0 l0 l0 l0 l0  
Initial wt 783 783 783 783 783 783 —
Final wt ll00 l063 l09l `lll2 l066 l089 A
Av. daily gain
42 days 2.66 2.72 2.76 2.32 2.34 2.87 :
70 days 2.45 2.47 2.46 2.58 2.50 2.54
l37 days 2.3l 2.05 2.25 2.4i 2.07 2.24 _
Feed/cwt gain (silage on 33% air dry basis) »
l37 days 875 99l 904 843 982 906
Av daily ration (silage on as Fed basis) ·
Corn silage l0.6 l0.6 l0.7 l0.7 l0.7 l0.6
Corn T4.7 l4.8 T4.8 T4.7 l4.8 l4.8
sBoM" 2 2 2 2 2 2
Carcass grade C C C C+ C C »
 
l The 50 mg level of Tranimal was discontinued at the end of 42 days.
2 The 25 mg level of Tranimal was discontinued at the end of 70 days.
3 The l0 mg level of Tranimal was fed during entire l37·clay feeding period.
4 SBOM · Soybean oil meal
C

 -5...
TRANIMAL AND DIETHYLSTILBESTROL IMPLANTS »
FOR FATTENING BEEF STEERS
N. W. Bradley, David McKechnie, Melvin Reitnour
and Nelson Gay
University of Kentucky
A previous feedlot trial in which Tranimal was used indicated that at the end of 42
days a 50 mg level of the tranquilizer produced a beneficial rate of gain response.
A
The current experiment was conducted to determine the effects of feeding LO and 20 mg
levels of Tranimal during the entire feeding period; a 40 mg level during the latter partof the
° period.
· These tranquilizer treatments were imposed on another trial designed to study
variability of feedlot performance among steers of different origins. One hundred and
· twenty heavy Hereford calves, in rather fleshy condition, were used in this study. Forty
of them were purchased at a feeder calf sale in October 1961. These 40 calves came
from 18 different farms in the central Kentucky area. Forty other calves, all sired by
the same bull, having complete preweaning performance data, and having had very uni-
form preweaning treatment, were purchased from a farm near Lexington. The remain-
ing 40 steers were also purchased from this farm. These steers had the same pre-
weaning treatment and performance records as the one—half—brother steers, but their
dams had been field bred by six or eight different sires. The results of this variability
study will be reported at a later date after all data have been completely analyzed.
Each of the three groups of 40 steers were divided into four groups of 10 steers
each and assigned to lots and treatments in the following manner:
40 steer calves from feeder calf sale
Lot 1 - Control
Lot 2 - 10 mg Tranimal/head daily
Lot 3 - 20 mg Tranimal/head daily
Lot 4 — 40 mg Tranimal/head daily (last 104 days)
40 one—half—brother steer calves
Lot 5 — Control
" Lot 6 — 10 mg Tranimal/head daily
Lot 7 — 20 mg Tranimal/head daily
~ Lot 8 — 40 mg Tranimal/head daily (last 104 days)
40 steer calves sired by 6 or 8 different bulls
Lot 9 — Control
Lot 10 — 10 mg Tranimal/head daily
Lot 11 — 20 mg Tranimal/head daily
V Lot 12 — 40 mg Tranimal/head daily (last 104 days)

 -6-
Une halt of the steers in each of the 12 lots were implanted with 36 mg of diethyl—
>}`lll)(}SlY"l. I
All steers weri- fed a ration of corn silage. ground shelled corn and soybean meal
•~· ii ws tliiv pt.·i·i<»<.l. The riititin was supplemented with vitamin A at the rate of 10, 000
1 ll. pei head daily. l l
The results are summa rized. according to tranquilizer treatments, in Table 1. » l
liltitine the tiist #4 diivs there were essentially no differences in rate of gain for steers _ ·
ii·t·t·ii ing t~itlit·r 10 nr 20 mg of tranquilizer and the control steers. Steers in lots 4, é _
s iinrl 12 i··~iii·ii ing no tranquilizer during the first 84 days gained somewhat slower »
than st~t»i s in lets 1.   and 9, that also received no tranquilizer during this period. t
During the last 104 davs of the feeding period steers receiving 10 and 20 mg of
tiiiiiittiilixw gitinetl 0. 1:3 and 0 16 lb more per steer daily. respectively, than steers
. .»t·t·iving no trainquilizer. Steers receiving the 40 mg level of tranquilizer gained
0 2i lh pi r st»·t·i tltiilv taster than control steers. This highly significant increase °
in rate ttl gain during the last 104 days might be questioned due to the possibility that _ ‘
these stt·i·rs were ciinipensating l`or a somewhat slower rate of gain during the first
><1 <1:i_vs. This possibility seems likely in view of the fact that the weight gain advan-
1:tg_<· 1`er steei s on the 40 nig level of tranquilizer was 24 pounds per head during the
1.ist 101 dtivs while the weight gain advantage was only 14 pounds during the entire
IM iliivs Nt·vt·rtht·1ess. it is 1'elt that the small but consistent increases in rate of
git in during the liittet part ol the feeding period are encouraging enough to warrant
1iit*llit·1 wt»i·l< with this rather new tranquilizing agent. _
The t ttt·t·ts 01 st ilhest i·i·l implants within tranquilizer treatments are shown in
'l`:ihlt· 2. During the tirst 84 days there were no consistent increases or decreases in
izite tit gain tlui- to the zitldition ol` either 10 or 20 mg of the tranquilizer. During the
lzist 10/1 LlS VCU F. V
Thirty yearling Hereford steers were used in this experiment. They were each
implanted with 36 mg stilbestrol prior to the start of the experiment. The steers were
assigned by weight to the three treatments and placed in individual pens. Each individ-
ual pen was equipped with a self feeder. waterer, and salt and mineral box. The corn
was self-fed. while soybean oil meal and hay were fed once each day. Salt, bonemeal · ·
and limestone were available at all times. The hay was good quality alfalfa, and the V
soybean oil meal contained 50 percent crude protein and was pelleted. The ground
and pelleted eorns were purchased from a common source. Flaked corn was not 4
available from this source necessitating its purchase from a different source. S
l ·*
Various experiment stations have reported that differently processed feeds result ’
in altered rumen fermentation products. The volatile fatty acids produced in the rumen _ ‘
during f`ermentation of feeds have a significant role in the energy metabolishm of rumi-
nant animals. For this reason, a secondary objective of this experiment was to com-  
pare the molar ratios of volatile fatty acids in rumen contents of steers fed ground, i .
flalaed or pelleted corn. `
Samples of rumen contents were taken from each steer by a stomach tube on the
final day of the experiment. Sampling time was from 5 to 7 hours following the morning T
feeding of supplement and hay. Volatile fatty acids in the rumen contents were deter- 1
mined quantitatively by gas ehromatography.
The results of this experiment are summarized in Table 1. The steers fed pel-
leted eorn showed a larger average daily gain than the steers fed ground or flaked =
eorn. 'l`he additional 0. El lh per day gained by the steers receiving pelleted corn
I

 -l3_
_ represents an 8 % increase over the steers fed gound corn. Pelleted corn was more
efficiently converted to steer gains than the other two types of corn, only 772 lb of feed
‘ being required per 100 lb of gain. The steers fed ground corn required 11 % more feed
per 100 lb of gain than the steers fed pelleted corn. Although the steers fed flaked corn
A gained only slightly more than the steers on ground corn, this gain was produced with
1. 3 lb per day less corn; thus the steers receiving flaked corn were 7 % more efficient
` in converting feed to gain than those on ground corn.
‘ The increased rate of gain and improved feed conversion of steers fed pelleted
- corn in comparison to ground corn in this experiment are in agreement with the results
from this station of the previous year when corn silage was included in the ration. The
·` failure of flaked corn to increase steer gains is not in agreement with past results. In
the previously reported experiment. steers fed flaked corn consumed more grain than
~ steers fed ground or pelleted corn. The decreased intake of flaked corn in this experi-
ment may be partially responsible for the lack of increased gains. Greater intake
would have probably increased gain. This is suggested by the fact that flaked corn was
more efficiently converted to gain than ground corn. It also should be noted that the
flaked corn was not from the same source as the other two types of corn. The proxi-
mate analyses (Table 2) indicate that the flaked corn was slightly lower in crude pro-
tein. Protein intake was above reported requirements for all treatments. thus the
influence of this factor in the differently processed corns would seem to be of little
significance. The difference in gross energy content of the corns may have been an
V influencing factor in addition to physical form.
No differences in carcass grades were noted due to feeding the differently `
' processed corns. The carcasses of steers on all treatments had an average grade
y of high good.
‘ I Steers fed pelleted corn had a larger proportion of propionate in rumen contents
` at the time sampled than steers fed ground or flaked corn. The valu