ABS Beef Conference Albury March 2018
Introduction to Genus & ABS • Genus Plc, the parent company, is listed on the London Stock Exchange (GNS on FTSE 250) • Genus has 4 main business entities – – – –
ABS - the world’s largest bovine genetic company PIC - the world’s leading porcine genetics company IVB - the largest IVF business in the world Promar – International Agri-Food consultancy
What does Genus & ABS do? Produce differentiated animal genetics
Driving genetic improvement faster than ever,...
Efficiently Distribute these genetics
...delivering improvement to our customers more quickly and efficiently...
Share in the value delivered
...and capturing a share of the value we deliver to our customers
3
Our Vision “Pioneering animal genetic improvement to help nourish the world�
Dairy
Pork
Beef
GENETIC IMPROVEMENT
SHARED PROPRIETARY TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM GENOMIC SELECTION
BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING GENOME SCIENCE
GENE EDITING
Genetic gain example Progress in 40 years
+7 +50% pigs/yr per litter
more
+7 +33% Kgs of lean meat
more
-7 Kgs -33% of feed
1962
2009
-50% Less manure
less
ABS’s track record in innovation
Gene Editing
RWD®
HCR
Genomic Testing in AU GMS
Infocus
Sexcel
The ABS Genetic Philosophy • Creating more from less, sustainably to feed the world – Production efficiency – Robust, trouble free cows – Improved health & fertility traits – Disease resistance – Never Stop Improving
ABS Beef Conference Albury March 2018
ABS HCR Initiative With Fletch Kelly, Beef Key Account Manager Southern Australia Region
What’s Important to a Beef Farmer’s Breeding Program?
Dairy vs. Beef........Are they that different?
What About Beef? • Australian Beef producers are among the most progressive, technology focussed farmers in the world Global demand for Australian beef bulls Globally renowned for producing high quality meat, and one of the top 4 global meat exporters Closely monitored and supported by industry bodies such as MLA, Breed Societies
• Still fail to scientifically address one of the most fundamental issues that can ruin profitability in both seedstock AND commercial herds • Poor pregnancy rate in breeding programs – Heat Detect (HD), Fixed Time AI (FTAI) or Embryo Transfer (ET)
Conception Rates & Semen Fertility
Semen Fertility – What We Know Semen Fertility – What We Think We Know • Semen is collected, and if it meets certain QC thresholds, it’s fine to use in all forms of AI and ET programs • Once semen is approved for AI, it will automatically result in a conception rate consistent with other bulls used in a program • Semen that shows a high total motility (TM) score and sound overall rating will perform well in any type of program
• If semen performs well in a HD or ET program, it should perform well in a FTAI program as well
Conception Rates & Semen Fertility • Nutrition Condition AI tech Vaccinations Environment
• Semen lab report • But why can we still get an average result?
Perhaps the greatest challenge in male reproductive physiology today is a recognition of the limitations in accuracy and precision of laboratory sire fertility estimates – Mel DeJarnette
Conception Rates & Semen Fertility • Semen Fertility Estimates are limited to two primary functions: Serve as a barometer to estimate the adequacy of the semen quality control program Serve as the basis for predictions of the fertility potential of a given sire if used in the imminent future
• Key word – ‘estimate’ • Is there anything we can learn from the dairy industry in regards to sire fertility? • Can we make this ‘estimate’ more accurate for beef sires?
ABS HCR Initiative • Humble beginnings in February 2017 - simply started collecting conception rate data from a number of key clients through PTIC reports • Became intrigued by how our bulls performed in FTAI programs Then HD, ET data began to flow in.... We became confused!
ABS HCR – What Did We Find? • Initial Findings Some bulls very well suited to FTAI programs, and some not so well Likewise for use in HD, TAI and ET programs Range of ~42-81% for individual average sire conception rate (ACR) in FTAI programs
While some bulls performed well in all programs, it became evident that for some bulls, an inverse relationship can be seen between FTAI Performance and ET, HD programs
ABS HCR – What Did We Find? 84.00%
90.00% 80.00% 68.00%
70.00% 60.00% 50.00%
42.70%
40.00% 30.00% 20.00%
10.00% 0.00% Fixed Time AI
Heat Detect
Embryo Transfer
Figure 1: Variations in conception rate seen in Sire “X” for Fixed Time AI, Heat Detection and Embryo Transfer Programs respectfully.
ABS HCR – What Did We Find? 90.00%
81.00%
80.00%
70.00% 60.00% 52.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Fixed Time AI
Embryo Transfer
Figure 2: Variations in conception rate seen in Sire “Y” for Fixed Time AI and Embryo Transfer Programs respectfully.
ABS HCR – What Did We Find? • Collected and analysed ~8000 individual pregnancy test results from around Australia over 3 years of joinings (2015-2017) Data on all catalogued ABS domestic and US Angus Sires Data on sires sold privately by studs
Data on sires from most other companies
ABS HCR – What Did We Find? • Three key findings from post-thaw microscopic and PT data analysis: Semen with a high total motility score will likely be effective in HD and ET programs but may not be as effective in FTAI programs Semen with an average motility score seems to perform well in FTAI programs, and not so well in some ET and HD programs
Semen test reports are great for demonstrating whether semen is adequate in terms of QC (motility, concentration, defects), however is limited in its ability to predict performance in a reproductive program
Why Do We See This?
Potential Explanations • Energy supplied to sperm within the extension mixture is finite • Therefore, semen with a higher active total motility (TM) may metabolise this energy source at a faster rate, or effectively “burn out” prior to fertilisation • Fine for Heat Detect and Embryo Transfer – egg is ready
• But for FTAI, ovulation may be delayed for several hours post AI • Therefore semen with a lower TM rating may in fact “last the journey”
The App! The first of its kind- Domestically and Globally
Your HCR Report
HCR – Into The Future • A number of advancements in the pipeline
Regional reports – focussing on FTAI results in your specific region highlighting climate & drought Comprehensive ET reports Multi breed availability - Hereford, Wagyu, Simmental, Shorthorn, Charolais HCR reports available
• By 2020, goal to have over 100,000 PT results from ABS, private stud and other company AI sires • Expand HCR program through our ABS Global business, with HCR data to monitor sire performance across multiple regions
HCR – FTAI Class Toppers
Summary • Sire fertility is a key requisite for dairy farmers, so why not for beef as well? • Shouldn’t we be striving for better breeding program outcomes? • Some sires are well suited to FTAI, others more so for HD and ET programs • The HCR app is good for ABS, but it’s even better for you- the producer
Knowledge is power, and knowledge drives profit Access to PT reports at your fingertips Monitor your reproductive performance year in, year out Make educated decisions around what bulls will work well in your breeding program from empirical data
Thank You
Incorporation of Reproductive Technologies to Enhance Efficiency of Cattle Operations Dr. G. Cliff Lamb Professor and Head Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University
Background
Impacts of Reproduction to the Poultry Industry YEAR
1957 Day 43
2010
Day 57
Day 71
Day 85
(Miles et al., 2011)
Impacts of Reproduction to the Dairy Industry 180% decrease
375% increase
(Capper et al., 2009)
WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT REPRODUCTIVE BENCHMARK IN A BEEF OPERATION?
The % of cows calving early in the calving season!
Understanding embryonic loss/survival
Time course of early bovine embryo development Event
Day
Estrus
0
Ovulation and fertilization
1
First cell division
2
8-cell stage
3
Migration to uterus
5-6
Blastocyst
7-8
Hatching
9-11
Maternal recognition of pregnancy
15-17
Attachment to the uterus
19
Placentation
25
Definitive attachment of the embryo to the uterus
42
Birth
285
% Pregnant
95-100
75-80
70-80
65-75
55-70
Data adapted from (Shea, 1981; Flechon and Renard, 1978; Peters, 1996; Telford et al., 1990)
Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment
Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment • Effect of the sire • Nutrition • Temperament/handling stress
Acclimation of Heifers 100
P < 0.01
% of pubertal heifers
Acclimated
Control
80
**
60
**
**
40 20 0 August
Cooke et al. (2009)
September
October
December
Acclimation of Heifers â&#x20AC;˘ Pregnancy during the breeding season % of pregnant heifers
100
Acclimated
Control
P < 0.01
80
60
**
**
40
** 20
0 1 Cooke et al. (2009)
2
3 4 5 6 7 Week of the breeding season
8
9
Acclimation of Heifers 70
Acclimated
**
Control
60
Pubertal, %
50
**
Treatment x Month P = 0.02 ** P < 0.01
40
**
30 20 10
0
October
November
December
January
February
Month of the study Cappellozza et al. (2012)
March
April
Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment • Effect of the sire • Nutrition • Temperament/handling stress • Shipping stress
Fertility of a Single Service 100
95
Early Embryonic Loss
Percentage, %
80
70
Late Embryonic/Early Fetal Loss 62
60
60
~ 25% Loss
~ 8% Loss
40 20
0
Fertilization
Meta Analysis: Reese et al., Submitted
Pregnancy D 28-32
Pregnancy D 60-100
Calving
Bovine Pregnancy Associated Glycoproteins (PAGs) • Pregnancy associated glycoproteins – Placental proteins belonging to Aspartic Proteinase family – 1st discovered during attempts to develop an early pregnancy test in cattle – Can be used to monitor embryo/fetus and placental function • Pohler et al., (2013), (2016a), (2016b)
– Biological roles of PAG remain unknown – Secreted by binucleated trophoblast cells into maternal circulation
Scoring the Patches: Estrus before TAI • Patch scores from 0-4 – 0 Lost patch – 1 < 25% – 2 25-50% – 3 50-75% – 4 >75%
Pohler et al., 2016
Estrus and Pregnancy Pregnancy rates 0.8 a
0.7
a
0.6
b
0.5 0.4
c
0.3 0.2 0.1 0
score Path 1Estrotect Path 2 patch Path 3 Path 4
Pohler et al., 2016
Pregnancy Loss 14%
Pregnancy Loss
12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
1+2
3+4 Pohler et al., 2016
Breed of Sire Pregnancy Rate at day 30 (%)
Nelore x Nelore
65.53Âą3.23a
Nelore x Angus
50.95Âą1.57b
Franco et al.,
Breed of Sire Pregnancy Rate at day 30 (%)
Late Embryonic Mortality Rate (%)
Nelore x Nelore
65.53±3.23a
10.39±1.93a
Nelore x Angus
50.95±1.57b
4.94±1.07b
Franco et al.,
Enhancing production efficiency by focusing on fertility
Pregnancy Rate by Herds 80
Pregnancy rate, %
70 60
65.8
62.1 56.9
50.4
50
45.2
48.5 45.2
44.4
40 30 20
10 0 1
2
3
4
5 Herd
6
7
8
UF-NFREC Case Study
Changes in Income from Cattle Sales Total income from cattle $400,000
Income, $
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
2016 YTD $52,809 $107,253 $92,765 $183,803 $158,776 $202,820 $185,233 $217,717 $306,115 $366,014 2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Year
2013
2014
2015
Pregnancy has 4 times greater economic impact than any other production trait!
Influence of Calving Period on Reproductive Longevity
(Cushman et al., 2012)
Influence of Calving Period on Weaning Weights
(Cushman et al., 2012)
Estrus Synchronization and AI in Beef Cows
Cidirol
Estrus Synchronization and TAI in Beef Heifers
Cidirol
Does estrus synchronization have a negative impact on subsequent expression on estrus? n=275
60
57 90% Overall pregnancy rate
50
Percent
40 30
??
20
n=37
10
8
n=85
18
n=34
7
0 TAI
First 21 d 21-42 d Calving group
42-63 d
Estrus response of cows following the 7-day CO-Synch+CIDR protocol
40.0
37.5
97.5% return to estrus rate!!
35.0
Percent
30.0
Average Interval to estrus = 20.9 days
25.0 20.0
20.0 15.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
7.5
7.5
5.0
5.0
2.5
2.5
0.0 17
18
19
20 21 22 Days after GnRH
23
24
25
2006
UF-NFREC Case Study Remove bulls
Start breeding season
120
1
2007 Start breeding season
Remove bulls
120
2008 AI heifers
AI cows
AI late calving cows
1
8
49
AI late, late calving cows
70
Remove bulls
110
UF-NFREC Case Study 2009 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
AI late, late calving cows
Remove bulls
65
88
2010 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
Remove bulls
80
2011 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
Remove bulls
75
UF-NFREC Case Study 2012 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
Remove bulls
70
2013 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
Remove bulls
72
UF-NFREC Case Study Change in calf value: Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Mean calving day
79.2
80.9
59.2
56.2
53.7
47.2
39.5
38.7
Difference from 2006/2007
0
0
21.7
24.7
27.2
33.7
41.4
42.2
Per calf increase in value
0
0
$87
$99
$109
$135
$166
$169
Per calf increase in kg
0
0
19.8
22.5
24.8
30.7
37.7
38.4
Herd increase in value
0
0
$19,100
$29,700
$32,700
$40,500
$49,800
$50,700
UF-NFREC Case Study
120
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Percentage
100 80 60 40 20 0 1
11
21
31
41
51
61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 Calving day
Incorporation of Reproductive Technologies to Enhance Efficiency of Cattle Operations Dr. G. Cliff Lamb Professor and Head Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University
Understanding the effects of injectable mineral nutrition on reproduction
Mineral Deficiencies: Primary vs Secondary • Primary Deficiency – Deficient mineral intake – Rare in improved agricultural practices
• Secondary Deficiency – Adequate mineral intake, but deficient status due to the antagonistic influence of another compound – Most common type of mineral deficiency
Applications for injectable trace minerals in a commercial cow/calf production system • Contains 60, 10, 5, and 15 mg/mL of Zn, Mn, Se, and Cu, respectively. • Results in a rapid increase in trace mineral status. • Excreted rapidly. • Less injection site reactions with the EDTAbased formulations.
Pregnancy attainment, %
Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 100 95 90 85 80 75 1
2
3
Body Condition Score Category
Pregnancy attainment, %
Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 100
MultiMin Saline
95 90 85 80 75
1
2
3
Body Condition Score Catagory
MultiMin advantage, %
Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5
1 2 3 Body Condition Score Category
Altering gestational nutrition to enhance cattle performance
Differences During Early Embryo Development
Reciprocal Embryo Transfer Approach Angus
Brangus
Angus
Brangus
Reciprocal Embryo Transfer Approach Brangus
Angus
Angus
Brangus
Brangus
Angus
Feeding Scheme Angus Angus
Brangus
Brangus
Angus Angus
Brangus Restricted
Restricted
Brangus
Maintenance
Restricted
Maintenance
Restricted
Maintenance
Maintenance
Experiment Design - Recipients
GnRH
GnRH PGF2α GnRH
Embryo Transfer
ISGs
d0
d7
d18 d21
Plasma PSBP + Embryo Measurements Weekly
CIDR d-20
d-9
d-2
d28
Period of superimposed feeding scheme
d91
Embryo Morphometries
Crown to nose length
Crown to rump length
Recipient Body Condition Score 70
Body condition score
6
*
5.5
100
*
*
77
84
5
*
4.5 4 * Diet Ã&#x2014; Day, P = 0054
3.5 3 28
35
42
49
56
63
Day of gestation
70
91
Effects of Recipient Breed on Early Embryo Loss 90
a
70
Embryo loss, %
80
100 ab
70 60 50
b
b
40 30 20 10
0 Angus
Brangus
Recipient Breed
Figure 1. Effect of recipient breed and diet on early embryonic loss (Breed Ă&#x2014; Diet interaction, uncommon superscripts differ, P < 0.05).
Effects of Embryo Breed on Early Embryo Loss 100 70
Embryo loss, %
90 80
100
a
70 60
ab
ab b
50 40 30 20 10 0 Angus
Brangus Embryo breed
Figure 2. Effect of embryo breed and diet on early embryonic loss (Breed Ă&#x2014; Diet interaction, uncommon superscripts differ, P < 0.05).
Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item CON Cobalt, ppm Cotyledon 0.13a 0.09a Calf liver Copper, ppm Cotyledon 3.88a 362a Calf liver Manganese, ppm Cotyledon 22.0 5.82 Calf liver Zinc, ppm 65 Cotyledon 456a Calf liver
INR
ORG
P=
0.20b 0.12b
0.24b 0.13b
0.02 < 0.01
4.75ab 428ab
5.11b 450b
0.10 0.18
18.2 5.22
22.9 5.83
0.73 0.43
66 562ab
68 660b
0.87 0.01
Item Item Calving results Maternal diet (DM) Birth BW TDN, % results Weaning Weaning BW, kg CP, % Feedyard Co, ppm BRD symptoms, % Cu, ppm ADG, kg/d Mn, ppm Carcass HCW, kg Zn, ppm
CON CON
INR ORG Required P= INR ORG
42.1
Sulf Av-4 41.6 40.8
61
61
61
a ab 212 236b 14.4 223 14.4 14.4
1.03 2.18 42.3a 59.1a 10.3 20.8 1.69 1.71 55.9 74.0
0.63 53 0.04 7.8
2.14 0.10 b 20.0 0.02 20.6 10 1.74 0.66 74.3 40
a ab 409 418 428b 30.6 63.9 63.7
0.10 30
Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item CON Cobalt, ppm Cotyledon 0.13a 0.09a Calf liver Copper, ppm Cotyledon 3.88a 362a Calf liver Manganese, ppm Cotyledon 22.0 5.82 Calf liver Zinc, ppm 65 Cotyledon 456a Calf liver
INR
ORG
P=
0.20b 0.12b
0.24b 0.13b
0.02 < 0.01
4.75ab 428ab
5.11b 450b
0.10 0.18
18.2 5.22
22.9 5.83
0.73 0.43
Item Calving results Birth BW
CON
INR
ORG
P=
42.1
41.6
40.8
0.63
212a
223ab
236b
0.04
Weaning results Weaning BW, kg Feedyard
BRD symptoms, %
42.3a 59.1a
20.0b 0.02
ADG, kg/d
1.69
1.71
1.74
0.66
409a
418ab
428b
0.10
Carcass 66 562ab
68 660b
0.87 0.01
HCW, kg
Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item
CON
PUFA
SEM
P=
18:2 n-6
19.5
38.7
3.1
< 0.01
18:3 n-3
2.01
3.73
0.59
< 0.01
20:4 n-6
0.55
2.08
0.19
< 0.01
22:5 n-3
0.10
0.44
0.06
< 0.01
22:6 n-3
0.00
0.57
0.05
< 0.01
PUFA
22.6
44.9
4.0
< 0.01
Total ω-3
2.25
4.80
0.65
< 0.01
Total ω-6
20.4
41.1
3.4
< 0.01
Item Calving results Maternal diet (DM) Birth BW TDN, % results Weaning
CON SEM Required P= CON PUFAPUFA Palm oil SB + Fish 40.9 41.7 0.6 61 61
0.42 53
Weaning BW, kg CP, % Feedyard ADG, kg/d Fatty acids, Growing lot% Finishing(18:2 lot n-6), % Linoleic Carcass EPA (20:5 n-3), % HCW, kg DHA (22:6 n-3), % Marbling
241 10.2 242 10.2 3
0.82 7.8
3.52 1.22 3.490.03 1.12 1.87 0.44 1.98 0.690.04
??? 0.05 0.06 ???
0.00 0.13 391 407 6 0.00 539 0.11 16 489
??? 0.05 ??? 0.01
Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item
CON
PUFA
SEM
P=
18:2 n-6
19.5
38.7
3.1
< 0.01
18:3 n-3
2.01
3.73
0.59
< 0.01
20:4 n-6
0.55
2.08
0.19
< 0.01
22:5 n-3
0.10
0.44
0.06
< 0.01
22:6 n-3
0.00
0.57
0.05
< 0.01
PUFA
22.6
44.9
4.0
< 0.01
Total ω-3
2.25
4.80
0.65
< 0.01
Total ω-6
20.4
41.1
3.4
< 0.01
Item Calving results
CON
PUFA
SEM
P=
40.9
41.7
0.6
0.42
241
242
3
0.82
1.12 1.87
1.22 1.98
0.03 0.04
0.05 0.06
HCW, kg
391
407
6
0.05
Marbling
489
539
16
0.01
Birth BW Weaning results Weaning BW, kg Feedyard ADG, kg/d Growing lot Finishing lot Carcass
BCS 3
BCS 5
BCS 7
Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Restriction
Re-feeding
(FAT)
??
BCS 7
Resumption of estrous cycles
BCS 5 (MODERATE)
Termination of estrous cycles
Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Treatments Item
MODERATE
FAT
Initial BW, kg
425a
515b
Initial BCS
5.0a
7.1b
BW at anestrus, kg
354
380
BCS at anestrus
3.1
3.3
Days to anestrus
66.5a
155.9b
Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Treatments Item
MODERATE
FAT
BW at anestrus, kg
354
380
BCS at anestrus
3.1
3.3
BW at 1st estrous cycle, kg
455a
513b
BCS at 1st estrous cycle
5.2a
6.0b
Days to 1st estrous cycle
67.7
78.9
Advanced Reproductive Management Developments
Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology
(Honaramooz et al., 2013)
Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology
(Honaramooz et al., 2013)
Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology ď&#x201A;§
Use stem cells from genetically superior bull transplanted into testis of less desirable bulls
ď&#x201A;§
Use stem cells from bulls in bulls that are adapted to tolerate tough climatic conditions (i.e., heat stress)
Opportunities for Transgenic Technology Transmission of sex from males carrying Tcr transgene Trt
No. of sires
Males
Females
Total
% male
Tcr
7
217
114
331
65.5
No Tcr
5
231
240
471
49 (Herrman et al., 1999)
Final thoughts
Calving Distribution After Exposure to Bull Planned 1st day of calving season 10
% calving
64 days postpartum at start of next breeding season! 43% of cows < 50 DPP at start of the next breeding season
5 44%
0 1
11
21
31 41 51 Calving season day
61
71
Calving Distribution After Exposure to AI and ES
% calving
Planned 1st day of calving season 10 79 days postpartum at start of next breeding season! 7% of cows < 50 DPP at start of the next breeding season
5 88%
0 1
11
21
31 41 51 Calving season day
61
71
https://animalscience.tamu.edu/ibca/
International Beef Academy • Program Curriculum – 9 cores online courses / 6 required for certificate – 30 h / course in 6 weeks – 12-month cycles – September to August - Global Beef Production | Sept/Oct
- Breeding and Genetics | Mar/Apr
- Cattle Welfare/Behavior | Oct/Nov
- Immunology and health | Apr/May
- Forage Management | Nov/Dec
- Safety of Beef products | May/June
- Nutritional Management | Jan/Feb
- Beef quality | June/July
- Cattle Reproduction | Feb/Mar
- Residency/Graduation | Aug
Acknowledgements People Dr. John Arthington Dr. Reinaldo Cooke Dr. Carl Dahlen Dr. Alfredo DiCostanzo Dr. Travis Maddock Dr. Jeff Stevenson Mrs. Tera Black Ms. Luara Canal Mr. Jim Cassady Ms. F. Ciriaco Mr. Pedro Fontes Mr. Darren Henry Dr. Guilherme Marquezini Dr. Vitor Mercadante Ms. Nicky Oosthuizen Mrs. Carla Sanford Ms. T. Schulmeister Mrs. Kalyn Waters Graduate students Technical staff Support staff Collaborators Co-authors Beef cattle producers
Funding and Product Support ABS Global, Inc. Blandin Foundation Intervet Animal Health IVX/Teva Animal Health
Merial Animal Health MN-AURI NAAB Pfizer Animal Health Select Sires, Inc.
Univ. of FL Univ. of MN OR State Univ. USDA-AFRI USDA-CSREES
USDA-TSTAR
Thank you! Cliff Lamb, Professor and Head Department of Animal Science College of Agriculture and Life Science 2471 TAMU | College Station, TX 77843-2471 Tel: (850) 557-0168 Email: gclamb@tamu.edu
My Expectations for EVERY Female in the Herd • • • •
Must calve by 24 months of age Cow must have a calf every 365 days Cow must calve without assistance Cow must provide sufficient resources for the calf to reach it’s genetic potential • Calf must be genetically capable to perform • Cow must maintain their body condition score for my conditions • Must not be crazy (disposition)
Influence of Calving Period on Reproductive Longevity
(Cushman et al., 2012)
Influence of Calving Period on Weaning Weights
(Cushman et al., 2012)
Can we increase the percentage of heifers becoming pregnant early in the breeding season?
Effect of timing of gain on attainment of puberty and reproductive performance
Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance ADG, kg/d d0-112
Body weight, kg
350
EVENGAIN - 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.11 EVENGAIN
ADG, kg/d d112-168 EVENGAIN – 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.91
EVENGAIN
300
LATEGAIN LATEGAIN
ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.45
250 d0
d 112 Feeding Period
d 168 (Lynch et al., 1997)
Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Year 1
ADG, kg/d d0-112
Body weight, kg
400
EVENGAIN - 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.26 EVENGAIN
350
ADG, kg/d d112-168 EVENGAIN – 0.80 LATEGAIN – 0.95
EVENGAIN
300
LATEGAIN LATEGAIN
ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.57 LATEGAIN – 0.49
250 d0
d 112 Feeding Period
d 168 (Lynch et al., 1997)
Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Year 2
ADG, kg/d d0-112
Body weight, kg
350
EVENGAIN - 0.39 LATEGAIN – 0.05 EVENGAIN
300
ADG, kg/d d112-168
EVENGAIN LATEGAIN
250
LATEGAIN
EVENGAIN – 0.74 LATEGAIN – 1.30 ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.53 LATEGAIN – 0.50
200 d0
d 112 Feeding Period
d 168
(Lynch et al., 1997)
Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Item
EVENGAIN
LATEGAIN
Age at puberty, d Year 1 Year 2
388 386a
384 407b
Weight at puberty, kg Year 1 Year 2
330 314
315 314
ab Means
within row differ (P < 0.01) (Lynch et al., 1997)
Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Item
EVENGAIN
LATEGAIN
First service PR, % Year 1 Year 2
55.3 56.4
55.5 71.1
Overall PR, % Year 1 Year 2
87.2 87.5
86.8 87.5 (Lynch et al., 1997)
Estrous cyclicity responses of heifers of distinct body conditions to energy restriction and repletion
We know how to synchronize cattle!
Impact of Fixed-Time AI on Calving and Weaning
Control
Natural mating
TAI + GnRH GnRH
TAI
PGF CIDR
Natural mating
(Rodgers et al., 2011)
Impact of Fixed-Time AI on Calving and Weaning Treatment Item
Control
TAI
No. of cows
615
582
Weaning rate, %
78
84
Weaning weight, lb ab Means
within row differ (P < 0.01)
176 ± 4a
17 kg
193 ± 4b (Rodgers et al., 2011)
UF-NFREC Case Study 2009 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
AI late, late calving cows
Remove bulls
65
88
2010 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
Remove bulls
80
2011 AI heifers
1
AI cows
8
AI late calving cows
49
Remove bulls
75
UF-NFREC Case Study
120
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Percentage
100 80 60 40 20 0 1
11
21
31
41
51
61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 Calving day
UF-NFREC Case Study Breeding season pregnancy rates: Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
PR
81%
86%
84%
86%
82%
94%
92%
93%
Mean calving day
79.2
80.9
59.2
56.2
53.7
47.2
39.5
38.7
BS length
120
120
110
88
80
75
70
72
Distribution by Days Postpartum â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Herd 1 25 20 15
% 10 5 0 34
44
54
64
74 84 94 Days postpartum
104
114
124
Distribution by Days Postpartum â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Herd 5 25 20 15 % 10 5 0 34
44
54
64
74 84 94 Days postpartum
104
114
124
Changes in Income from Cattle Sales Total income from cattle $400,000
Income, $
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
2016 YTD $52,809 $107,253 $92,765 $183,803 $158,776 $202,820 $185,233 $217,717 $306,115 $366,014 2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Year
2013
2014
2015
What were the negative factors affecting the productivity of the operation? • Long breeding season – Extra labor during the calving season – No uniformity in the calf crop – Decreased value of the calves at market
• Use of natural service sires – – – – –
No proven sires Increased dystocia Differing calf types among sires group Cost of maintaining and managing bulls Risk of bull becoming sterile
• Cow and calf management – Differing vaccination, weaning , and/or branding dates
Difference among bulls for TAI?
Scenario: In a herd where 20 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 20 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?
Odds of pregnancy
95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
82 72 64
60
Bull A 50
56
50
50
Bull B
50
50 44
54 50 46
53 50 47
40 36 28 18
10
20
50
100
300
500
1000
Difference among bulls for TAI?
Scenario: In a herd where 100 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 100 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?
Odds of pregnancy
95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
82 72 64
60
Bull A 50
50
50
56
50
Bull B
50 44
54 50 46
53 50 47
40 36 28 18
10
20
50
100
300
500
1000
Difference among bulls for TAI?
Scenario: In a herd where 500 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 500 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?
Odds of pregnancy
95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
82 72 64
60 56 50
50
50
50
50 44
40 36
Bull A 54 50 46
53 50 47
Bull B
28 18
10
20
50
100
300
500
1000
ABS Bulls
successes and whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new Bill Cornell, ABS AU Beef Product Manager ABS Seminar March 19 2018
NHIA SEMEN MARKET SURVEY 2017 RESULTS - BEEF Breed Angus Belgian Blue Brahman
ABS Market Share 51% 10% 1%
Brangus Charolais Hereford Limousin Murray Grey Senepol Shorthorn Simmental Wagyu Other - Bos Taurus Other - Indicus
45% 17% 38% 37% 10% 0% 62% 22% 30% 4% 1%
Total domestic sales Angus
Total Market 79%
Total Export Sales Angus
Total Market 73%
BREEDS Angus Hereford Shorthorn Wagyu
Domestic Use 37% 57% 79% 74%
ABS RESULTS
total market share
domestic Sales export sales
46% 88%
ANGUS SIRE LIST March 2018 PROG 2YRS
HERDS
TOTAL ANLY
DAU
SCANS
CARCASS
MATAURI REALITY
2073 1993 1672
131 261 190
2972 6456 4224
65 918 372
1048 3640 2186
0 52 5
4
GAR PROPHET
1448
81
2346
194
1063
28
5
AYRVALE BARTEL E7
1327
185
5416
1040
2826
17
6
SYDGEN BLACK PEARL
7
MILLAH MURRAH KINGDOM
8
V A R GENERATION 2100
9
PATHFINDER GENESIS
1189 1132 973 953
91 69 59 53
2287 1108 1203 1134
1 0 0 41
1146 421 332 393
0 0 0 9
753 696 648 608 590
50 41 71 75 156
735 986 1290 754 4546
0 29 62 0 574
269 433 698 252 2693
0 0 0 1 22
1
EF COMPLEMENT
2
TE MANIA EMPEROR
3
13 MILLAH MURRAH KLOONEY 14 ARDROSSAN HONOUR 18 V A R RESERVE 19 RB TOUR OF DUTY 20 RENNYLEA EDMUND
ABS has 7 of the top 9 and 12 of the top 20 sires
Sire Selection • Hard job, have to provide the full range of breeds that are profitable to sell. • AN, KB, HH/HP, SM, CH, LM, SH, FP • As AN is 79% of market
– lots of variety needed – Temperament, structure, looks<>performance – Sustainable, suited to environment, maternal
• Hardest part is selecting bulls that one does not like to fit a market slot
ANGUS SIRE LIST March 2018 top 10% DOC (20) CE/BWT(3.3)
BWT (2.4)
400(97) 600 (123)
EMA(7.4)
FAT(1.4)
IMF(3.0)
EF COMPLEMENT
7
3.8
2.6
97/122
8.4
1.1
2.0
TE MANIA EMPEROR
3
1.8
5.1
95/127
4.5
1.4
3.3
MATAURI REALITY
3
6.6
1.1
79/98
3.7
5.4
3.1
SYDGEN BLACK PEARL
-5
4.9
3.1
87/122
7.8
0.6
1.9
MILLAH MURRAH KINGDOM
14
-10.2
8.7
96/135
8.7
-0.6
-0.3
V A R GENERATION 2100
35
-0.7
4.5
103/118
11.6
-0.9
1.3
PATHFINDER GENESIS
23
1.0
6.8
110/150
9.8
2.3
1.8
MILLAH MURRAH KLOONEY
4
3.4
5.8
87/117
6.2
0.9
2.0
ARDROSSAN HONOUR
-14
0.6
4.1
79/105
3.4
1.4
3.5
V A R RESERVE
28
3.6
2.6
84/110
7.6
-2.2
1.9
RB TOUR OF DUTY
-20
1.7
4.5
106/136
6.1
-4.0
0.2
RENNYLEA EDMUND
11
5.1
1.1
70/90
6.4
3.2
4.2
Top 10%
Bottom 10%
LD CAPITALIST 316
LD CAPITALIST 316
Clunie Range Legend L348
Legend L348 Leading first up domestic sales sire Extremely short Gestation (-10 days), Superb CE Direct. Growth in top 5-10% Very good scrotal Bull is one of quietest ever. Just magnificent, been placid as a calf and can always enjoys a scratch in the field. Clunie Range have one of the larger auctions selling 140 bulls at $11,500 ave. Bull as an individual captures large sales due to his combination of CE + growth with the huge volume and capacity, high docility and structure. Use on heifers and hard keeping cows.
BALDRIDGE COMMAND
G A R FAIL SAFE
V A R FOREMAN
Millah Murrah Loch Up
BYERGO TITUS 6340
Milwillah Marble Bar J53 AMF, NHF, CAF, DDF,MAF, OSF, DWF
Marble Bar Of all Red Angus bulls pre single step on the Angus Australian breedplan Marble Bar No. 1 Angus Breeding Index No. 2 Domestic Index No. 1 Heavy Grain Index No. 1 Heavy Grass Index No Red Angus matches Marble Bar for the combination of CE, Short GL, Growth, SS and Carcass Semen exported to South America, NZ and USA Marble Bar is a legend in the making. Usage is wide and varied; his performance data opens him to all segments of the Red Angus breed, Progeny are quiet and showing great phenotype
Making the FINAL CUT – Genotypic and Phenotypic Difference Maker Offers one of the most complete EPD packages the
FINAL CUT Sire: MGS:
29BN0034
CB FINAL CUT 924X CB HOMBRE 541T3
Trait
Brangus breed has seen in years with exceptional type and kind Ranks in the top 20% of the breed for seven traits including calving ease, maternal, weaning and yearling performance and red meat yield As an individual he was dominant in his stout contemporary group – 83 lb BW, 770 lb WW, 108 WWR, 1344 YW, 104 YWR, 15.23 REA, 107 REAR and .41 IMF, 101 IMFR Phenotypically FINAL CUT is as complete, attractive and sound an individual as you will find
EPD
CED +6.0
BW -0.3
WW +42
YW +83
MILK +9
CEM +4.6
ACC
.38
.51
.41
.33
.27
.28
TM +30
SC +1.1
REA +.57
%IMF +.01
FAT -.041
.42
.43
.34
.40
December-17
CHAROLAIS Trait leader for BWT, 200, 400, 600 Absolute curve bender 14 traits in top 10%
LIMOUSIN Top 10% in 15 traits Trait leader in 8 traits 265 anly progeny 81 herds Has the phenotype and docility
Poll Hereford 560 anly prog in 36 herds Trait leader in 5 traits 15 traits in top 10% Super calving Outstanding daughter reports
SHORTHORNS 332 anly prog in 16 herds 3 times triat leader 9 traits top 10% CE, CARCASS , SS
SIMMENTAL ,
ALL TIME
SIMMENTAL , NEW STANDARD
Number of Herds: 6 Progeny Analysed: 224 Scan Progeny: 179, Number of Dtrs: 42 Performance Data 2nd to none No.1 in NZ BLG Progeny test for weaning and yearling, Total of 55 sires from US, Aus, & NZ representing Simmental, Charolais, Angus, Hereford & Stabilizer Homo Polled Breed leading Calving ease Growth Carcass Weight Marbling Docility High Accuracy 224 Progeny
WAGYU Macquarie Prelude M0495
Prelude The hot selling Wagyu bull in AU The highest available Wagyu bull for Terminal Carcase Index Bought as a 9 month bull for $100,000. Fortunately is health cleared for all countries. Tested free for all genetic conditions SCD AA (only 18% are AA) Best option on EBVS $ Index for creating terminal carcass.
ABS Beef Appreciation Luncheon At Deforest July 2006
To say Thank you For all attendees of the ABS Seminar 15% of the RRP of all ABS BEEF sires Offer expires on April 6th 3PM Exceptions not on offer LD Capitalist and Cowboy Up Subject to stock availability
FARMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT! MARK LUCAS PASTURE AGRONOMY SERVICE TUMUT
BACKGROUND • HAWKESBURY AG COLLEGE – Dip Sci (Ag) • SYDNEY UNIVERSITY – Dip Ed • JOINED then DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1980 • INITIATED PASTURE AGRONOMY SERVICE 1992
GRAZING INDUSTRY Slow to adopt change Challenges: • Climate / costs • Return on investment (ROI) • Land values? • Expansion • Skilled labour drain
OPTIMISM • Improved returns • Market intelligence – ECI 438c/kg – Aug 2018! • Research/breeding basis of success – RLEM clover • New germplasm for new climate
heat tolerance persistency • Water use efficiency (WUE) - MEXICO
TETRAPLOID technology
TETRAPLOID technology
OPTIMISM CEREALS – Frost tolerance LONG TERM – summer dormant Mediterranean fescue/phalaris GRAZING CANOLA CL970 LUCERNE – add soil tolerance
1980 • High rainfall period –
1980 continued • Pastures comprised some phalaris, silver grass, Patterson's curse, capeweed • 80% work was weed control • SPRAYSEED/24D • Glyphosphate on horizon ($32-42/L) • Full cultivation • Direct drilling new technology • Advent of tetraploid ryegrass • Super sweet corn • Minor feed lotting sector
2018 • Better understanding pasture/ weed management • Soils – still complex
2018 continued: • Seasons – more erratic • Dire t drilli g the or • Feed lotti g or
– crops/pastures
2018 continued: • Land values – 8-10 fold increase • Pasture: Best livestock managers equal profitability to cropping (2015-2018) Market specification becoming more rigid. Segments: • GRASSFED • WAYGU • BREEDS
AGRONOMY – COMPLEX MATRIX SOILS: • Poor understanding • Annual health check • Chemistry parameters – pH, phosphorus, sulphur, Molybdenum • Soil health/soil moisture balance – organic matter/carbon – micro/macro biology - Boring but paramount - FERTILIZER – biggest single cheque written
PASTURES • Assess enterprise requirements • New technology – persistency/insect resistance • Livestock/pasture interface observations • Research – Launch of product Agrian RADIATE (root growth regulator) Insert picture
Pastures continued • Analyse perennial/annual/other • Biggest break through – tetraploid ryegrass technology • WINTERSTAR/VORTEX /CONCORD II etc. • Maximise cool season growth = $ $ • 5 year spring rest impose
WATER USE/SOIL MOISTURE – not rain • Climate change • Seasonal predictions – recurring cycles (36 yr) • Future winners → elevate soil OM% → Soil i ro iology o posts → Seaso al progra i g
WATER • Stock water quality • Drought management – backup options Government disinterest
ENTERPRISE INNOVATION • Age – work smarter than harder
ENTERPRISE INNOVATION • SEASONAL STOCKING RATE REVIEW • SOIL SURFACE TRASH/MOISTURE management • INTENSIFICATION – Centre of Innovation Nebraska State - USA
CHANGE E pe t it, do ’t resist it
• GLOBALISATION • CENTRE PLATE PROTEIN • GROWING MIDDLE CLASS – BEEF CONSUMPTION • LIVESTOCK EXPORTS
• ANIMAL PRODUCTION – de-intensification • TECHNOLOGY
CATTLE SNAPSHOT • • -
REILAND ANGUS est 1972 Currently running: 1500 cows (800 registered) 2500 ewes 200 bulls 700 AI or Embryo transfers STRONG NEW ZEALAND BASE/HAZELDEAN
BREEDING PHILOSOPHY • • • • • •
Produce what consumers want to buy Avoid extremes Favour elite cows cf bulls Ensure cattle suit/thrive in environment A oid siss o s SELECTION – cull outliers/temp/fertility No structural soundness compromise • Bull selection – personalised identity for herd
FUTURE A farmers footsteps /observation will rival future technology embrace
Common sense breeding research: 1) Know what drives science research – whole supply chain On farm – calving ease/birth/growth/fertility – 50% Backgrounder - growth Feed lotter - growth/marbling/fat 50% Processor – marbling/beef yield NO COMSUMER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT!! Index – artificial selection tool (Cows + calves) → VERTICAL INTERGATION est
FUTURE continued 2) Acknowledge breeding antagonisms 3) Maintain genetic diversity â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 036/FD/Mytty
4) Avoid extremes â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Gestation length/calf survival 5) Your environment management overrides all the above. What environment does Breedplan best predict for?
FUTURE continued 6) Pharo cattle company lowest 20% growth
FUTURE continued 7) WAYGU - Fast track marbling – Angus challenge - Sustainability → 0 da s o feed to - Human health - Welfare → o su er per eptio 8) AGRONOMY foresight – Svalbard Global Seed Vault in NORWAY – past seed genetics stored 1260 Australian breed wheats 956 Australian grass varieties Livestock gene security? – grass conversion
FUTURE continued 9) Enjoy what you do! â&#x20AC;&#x201C; At least 80% time. Surrou d ourself ith positi e people Dr David Johnstone AGBU) Have a well earnt holiday/downtime (without guilt)