HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Evvard, J. M. Articles by Hammond, W. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Evvard, J. M. Articles by Hammond, W. E.

Feeding Minerals to Pigs Fattening on Rape

Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station

Abstract

It appears that:

1. All lots that received minerals of whatever sort, excelled both check lots receiving the same feeds, fed in the same manner, but without minerals. The gains were more rapid, the appetite better, and the feed requirement for 100 pounds of gain less. This speaks well for sensible and rational mineral feeding.
   
2. Evidently, under the conditions of this experiment, the practicability of mineral feeding is strongly indicated both from the physiological and economical standpoints.
   
3. The method of mineral allowance is an important consideration. Self-feeding the minerals is the easiest way usually. In this trial the pigs self-fed their minerals ate about one-third less than those given an estimated allowance (but we may have allowed too much). It may be best to put some of the minerals in the feed, especially at the start, and use the self-feeder in addition. This test shows both hand and self-feeding allowance about equally good. Our general hand allowance plan is to give a pound of minerals per pig per month.
   
4. The mineral mixtures making the best all-round relative showing in this particular test are Mineral mixture A, consisting of equal parts of high-calcium limestone and common salt, and Mineral mixture D, carrying not only the limestone and salt, but also potassium iodid, sulphur, wood ashes, and spent bone-black.
   
5. The so-called "fairly complete" Mineral mixture C, relatively the same as D with the outstanding exception that Glauber's salt, Epson salt, and copperas are also included in small proportions, did not do so well as Mineral mixture D. However, the lots getting the Mixture C easily excelled the check lots, that did not receive any added minerals. It may be that under other conditions of feeding that the inclusion of the three materials mentioned may be of advantage, but that is problematical, requiring further experimental work to prove.
   
6. It is well to emphasize that the foundation of any high-class mineral mixture for swine should be made up of the ingredients that will furnish the outstanding deficient mineral elements, so-called, namely, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, chlorin, and iodin. The inclusion of common salt, high-grade calcium limestone, hardwood ashes, some good, sanitary, finely ground or precipitated bone product, and potassium iodid will supply these. These dependable ingredients insure a practical, stable, working basis. The inclusion of other ingredients is in our opinion justified, but it is well to thoroughly emphasize the "back-bone" ingredients, such as will supply the essential elements for the practical feed lot, namely, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, chlorin, and iodin.