The proportion of oil is evidently overrated in this analysis, and the error is attributed by Dr. Jackson to the solubility of the zeine or gluten of the corn in ether, which Payen used to dissolve the oil. The gluten being taken up by this process, was mistaken for oil, and credited in the analysis as such, when it should have been put under the head of nitrogenized matter. It is not surprising, he remarks that M. Dumas, in quoting this analysis, should observe that “individuals who eat corn for some time, present symptoms of an accumulation of fat in their tissue, which will not appear astonishing, when we consider that a bushel of corn would yield a quart (litre) of oil!” If this doctrine were true, those Americans, who derive a great part of their subsistence from Indian corn, would be an excessively fat people.
According to the analysis recently made in England by Professor Playfair, some specimens of corn of American growth, yielded, in one hundred parts by weight, the following proportions:—
By this analysis it would seem that maize contains less proteine or nutritive matter, than wheat, oats, or barley, but more than either rice or potatoes. In fact, it contains about three and a half times the quantity of nutritive matter that is found in potatoes, and a much larger proportion of starch, and less water. It also contains more fatty matter than any of these products, which is a very important consideration where the mere fattening of animals is taken into account. Hence, as an article of food, either for man or animals, it is superior to potatoes and rice, but inferior to wheat, oats, or barley. It is relished by all animals that are not exclusively carnivorous, and certainly is highly nutritious.
