By FREDK.  JAS. LLOYD, F.C.S., Lecturer on Agriculture, King’s College.

The recently published number of the Royal Agricultural Society’s Journal contains some information upon the subject of silage which appears to me of considerable interest to those chemists who are at present investigating the changes which take place in the conversion of grass into silage.  The data[1] are, so far as I know, unique, and though the analytical work is not my own, yet it is that of an agricultural chemist, Mr. A. Smetham, of Liverpool, whose work I know from personal experience to be thoroughly careful and reliable.  I have therefore no hesitation in basing my remarks upon it.

   [Footnote 1:  Royal Agricultural Society’s Journal, vol. xx.,
   part i., pp. 175 and 380.]

We have here for the first time an accurate account of the quantity of grass put into a silo, of the quantity of silage taken out, and of the exact composition both of the grass and resulting silage.  I desire merely to place myself in the position of, so to speak, a “chemical accountant.”

The ensilage has been analyzed at three depths, or rather in three layers, the first being 1 foot, the second 1 ft. to 1 ft. 6 in., and the third 1 ft. 6 in. to 2 ft. from the bottom of the silo.  By doubling the figures of the bottom layer analysis, adding these to the second and third layer analysis, and dividing by 4, we obtain a fair representation of the average composition of the silage taken throughout the silo, for by so doing we obtain the average of the analyses of each 6-inch layer of silage.  The results of the analyses are as follows, calculated on the dry matter.  The moisture was practically the same, being 70.48 per cent, in the grass and 72.97 in the silage.

Composition of Grass and Silage (dried at 100 deg.C.).

Grass.        Ensilage. 
Fat (ether extract)                       2.80            5.38
Soluble albuminous compounds              3.06            5.98
Insoluble albuminous compounds            6.94            3.77
Mucilage, sugar, and extractives, etc.   11.65            4.98
Digestible fiber                         36.24           33.37
Indigestible woody fiber                 32.33           31.79
-------         -------
93.02           85.27
Soluble mineral matters                   5.24           12.62
Insoluble mineral matters                 1.74            2.11
-------         -------
100.00          100.00

The striking difference in the mineral matter of the grass and silage I will merely draw attention to; it is not due to the salt added to the silage.  I may say, however, that other analysts and I myself have found similar striking differences.  For instance, Prof.  Kinch[2] found in grass 8.50 per cent. mineral matter, in silage 10.10 per cent., which, as be points out, is equivalent, to a “loss of about 18 per cent. of combustible constituents”—­a loss which we have no proof of having taken place.  In Mr. Smetham’s sample the loss would have to be 50 per cent., which did not occur, and in fact is not possible.  What is the explanation?