MILK ANALYSES

poor quality of milk as a direct result of overfeeding. The milk im- proved in quality when the quantity of fodder was properly re- gulated. In the fo...
2 downloads 0 Views 150KB Size
BY JOSEPH F. GEISLER. I n presenting this short paper on the monthly analysis of t h e milk of a herd of cows I desire briefly to call attention t o a few factors which deserve consideration in t h e production of milk. Variations in t h e quality of milk are widest in t h e milk from individual cows, while milk from a herd of cows approaches more nearly a common average in composition. Aside from t h e number of cows which may have contributed t o a given sample of milk, i t is a known fact t h a t the quality of t h e milk is directly affected by t h e breed of t h e cows, t h e condition of their health a n d surroundings, the time since t h e last parturition, t h e character as well as t h e quality a n d quantity of t h e food, a n d also t o some extent the se2tson and atmospheric conditions. All cows will not produce equally good milk from t h e same class of fodder, and strange as i t may seem it is reported upon good authority t h a t a certain herd of cows producetl a poor quality of milk a s a direct result of overfeeding. T h e milk improved in quality when t h e quantity of fodder was properly regulated. In the following tpble are given the monthly analyses of the milk from a herd o€ about twenty-five cows k e p t a t Washingtonville, Orange Co., New York. T h e samples submitted to me were fair average eamples for the days of the respective months and t h e d a t a will give a fair idea of the variations t o be expected i n the milk from a herd of common native corns kept in good condition a n d subsisting on t h e character of fodder :LS n o t e d in the accompanying table. On five occasions I wits enablcd to obtain the morning milk and the evening milk of the preceding clay. Eveni n g milk is generally somewlint richer in fat than the morning’s milk, b u t in two of these cases the variation was very slight. I t would have been interesting t o know the exact yield of milk but

121

JIILK AKALTSES.

I was unable to obtain the data. I n thirteen of t h e samples t h e milk sngar was estimated a n d t h e casein and albumen by difference. .T h e average for milk sugar was 5.05% mid for the casein a n d albumen 3.02$, the quantities fluctuating b u t very little from these averages. T h e fat w'i~sin all cases estimated by tlie Adunis o r coil metl~od(see Jour. Amer. Chcm. SOC., 12, 48s). F o r t h e taking of samples a n d t h e data as to feeding I a m indebted to t h e kindness of Mr. F. D. Tuthill, Assist. N . Y. State Dairy Commissioner. MOSTHLY A N A L Y S E S OF PURE H E R D JIILK.

-Sp. Gr. at

When taken.

60"

F.

Not Fat

1890.

J a n . lltli, a. m. 1.0321 89.074 12.92G4.297 1a.0310 86.97'7 13.0234.39G Fcb. 16th, p . 112. Feb. l7tli, a. m . 1.0324 57.308 12.692 3.77'; March lGth, p . ni. 1.032G 86.944 13.0564.222 March lSth, a. m. 1.0331 SG.614 1Y.38G 4.212 April 13t11, p . 111. 1.0311 87.377 lP.GP34.05S April 14tl1, a. m. 1.0321 57.094 12.90G4.110 May ? W I , p . nz. 1.0322 SG. 969 13.051 4.347 X a y 26tl1, a. m. 1.0519 S7.2001?.800 3.93; J u n e 14tl1, a. m. 1.0319 87.422 12.573 3.697 J u l y "lst, a. m. Not taken 87.546 12.454 3.878 Aug. IStli, a. m. 1.031s 87.155 12.545 3.890 Ang. 24th, p . nz. 1.0312 87.252 18.5484.181 Bug. 25tli, a. m. 1.0313 S7.558 13.442 3.716 1.0313 S7.855 12.745 3.917 Sept. 22d, a. m. Oct. 14tli, a. m. S o t taken S7.045 12.955 4.021 Nov. 24t11, a. m. 1.032.3 S7.192 12.808 4.001 Dec. IGtli, a. m. 1.0321 s7.299 12.701 :;.955

7.YG1 . 7 G S S.G29 ';.SO9 .78S 8.G2 S.lS4 , 7 3 1 S . 9 1 8.119 .715 S.83 3.414 .:GO 9.17 7.520 .745 S.5G 8.044 , 7 5 2 S.79 7.959 . 7 2 5 8. GS Y.133 .728 8.SG S.1GO 3 1 8.88 7.8313 .740 S.57 S.195 .;GO 8.!J5 7.928 .7S? 8.03 7.990 .73G 5.72 8.08s .740 S.82 S.ld? .752 8.93 8.037 3 0 Y.SO 7.995 . 7 5 1 2.74

-

DAILY FODDER R A T I O ~ ~ . *

J a n u a r y 1890,

3 B~islielBreweryGr;hins, 4 qts. Bran, 2 qte. Hominy

Februitry, 1590,

Meal, 4 Bushel Brc\rerp Grlzins, 4 qts. Bran, 2 qte. Horn i ny ;\leal.

.

* During the Winter

months tlie

COIVS

had all the hay they wanted.

March 1590, ;S Biisliel Brewery Grains: 4 qts. Brrrn, 2 qte. IIominy !deal. April, 1ScJO, 4 Bushel Brewery Grain?, 4 qts. Bran, P q t p . Coi,ii Meal. l h y , 1590, G r w s d o n e . J u n e , 1390, ‘ * July, 1590, August, 1590, Grass and 4 Uusliel Brewery Grain?. ii