The Genetics of culling rates and cow turnover

From the April-May 2014 Dairy Newsletter

Recently published USDA data from 2012 DHIA herd reports indicates that high culling rates continue to plague the dairy farmer’s income and equity statements.     While culling dairy cows when beef price is higher than normal is an aid to cash flow, the cost of raising heifers depends on feed costs (which are high enough to inhibit growth in the beef cow sector).     The simple math is, every time you turn a cow  into a cull and have to replace her, your equity takes a $1000 “hit” (the market difference between culls and replacements today).

Turns out that Holsteins have replaced Guernseys as the breed with the shortest “Productive Life”.   On 2012 data, this is how each major dairy breed “ranks”:

Breed            Cull rate                Breed             Cull rate               Breed              Cull rate                           

Holstein             32.7%                 Brown Swiss       29.8%               3x crossbred        26.9%                                                                                                                Red & White     32.0%                 M Shorthorn        28.6%               2x crossbred        26.1% 

Guernsey           30.8%                 Ayrshire              27.7%                Jersey                  24.9%

                 

Is crossbreeding the answer to improving cow turnover?     The data seems to suggest it, IF you ignore the obvious:    (a)  Jerseys are still better for herdlife than crossbreds;   (b)   crossbreeding beyond three generations is usually accompanied by a loss in milk volume;   (c)   Heterosis response [hybrid vigor] is greatest in the first generation, but declines with each added generation in which the same trait index is used (regardless of breeds added).      Thus crossbreeding alone does not replace gene trait selection IF your goal is to improve herdlife while maintaining or gaining on per-cow production.

Does selection on “health and fitness traits” work?

According to a recent article in Holstein International the low point in Holstein fertility levels was hit in 2005.    Since then, the average DPR (“daughter pregnancy rate”) of AI preferred sires has risen.   But so far, on the 2012 data above, Holstein cows still leave herds 30+% faster than Jerseys.    

How much of the Holstein disadvantage is due to lower fertility rates?

Keep in mind the commercial breed average for crossbreds as well as purebreds in any breed still show the “average” cow and “average” herds only get three lactations per cow.    Dairy profit margin over the cost of replacements would increase by 25% just by getting one more lactation per cow.    Longevity is a heritable characteristic, thus a breeding program seeking longevity will pay dividends in profitability.

The most important trait in selecting for longevity is clearly fertility.    Cows that do not rebreed do not stay in our herds.     Biological research in many different species clearly shows that fertility and a will to live are strongly correlated.    Thus selecting for better fertility will contribute to lower stillbirth rates and is linked to general health qualities in your herd.

How much of the Jersey advantage over all other Breeds is due to inbreeding?

What you really want to know is, “will this computer mating program that adjusts for inbreeding save me from shorter Holstein herdlife?” – and the answer is clearly NO.     In fact, the Jersey breed is the most “pedigree inbred” of all major dairy breeds, yet it remains the longest productive life breed.

Holsteins as a whole are 25% lower in average pedigree inbreeding (ibc%) than purebred Jerseys.  

(continued—how much is due to inbreeding?)

No computer sorting program leading you to the lowest “efi%” matings has ever been proven by any University study to work.    “Avoiding Inbreeding” when all AI sires in every Genomic breed are fast becoming closer related than ever before is a marketing ploy rather than an aid to herd improvement.  

This is why we continue to urge you to give the “aAa” Breeding Guide a try.    The proven solution to avoiding “inbreeding effects” is to recognize that a stronger, well-balanced physique avoids expressing “inbreeding depression”.     Trait selection on health and fertility traits associated with the problems of inbreeding will then synergize with the “aAa” mating to avoid producing “inbred” animals.

How much of Holstein herdlife is due to size?

Not as much as all the dialogue criticizing registered Holsteins would suggest.    Holstein USA studies are showing that the purebred Holstein has been gaining size at the rate of 25 pounds per generation.

If your facilities were built in the 1970s and you have not changed anything, today’s cow is likely 240 pounds bigger than the assumptions of your cow facilities (10 generations x 24 pounds/ generation).   

But if you built fairly recently, your building design would handle the larger cows of modern breeding.

USA type data is hampered in that it only measures “stature”.    Canadian type data measures both size (weight) and stature (height) and their trend lines may reveal the real problem:

1991 to 2001 birth dates:  average stature of first calf cows gained 5 cm (approx 2 inches)        

                                           average weight of first calf cows lost 7 kg (approx 15 pounds)

1996 to 2001 birth dates:  average stature of first calf cows was virtually unchanged; however

                                           average weight of first calf cows lost 21 kg (approx 46 pounds)

Basically, the near-universal preference in classification for a more angular frame (more tall than wide, more lean than fleshy) is producing new cows that are actually lighter in mass, are less sturdy on their front legs, have less muscle control over rear legs, have softer feet, than the sort of physique that gave their maternal ancestors a full productive lifetime.     

Again, the real causative problem is a lack of “balance” in genetic selection.   On the trait selection side, AI studs always preferred milk volume over component density, alongside earlier maturity of the production capability, with the result bigger heifers make the most milk.    Selection sets these trends.

 

It is disingenuous to blame breed type classifiers for problems that started from index rank selections.

The system they are using (linear trait scoring) was a product of the 1970s University view of “type” based on what sort of first-lactation cow produced the most milk volume.    This was a radical change from the breeder-developed type descriptions that were focused on cow longevity under forage feeding.    

Tell me how to rise from “average” to “exceptional”

If you wish to produce cows that have balance between “tall” enough and “wide” enough, use “aAa”.

If you wish to produce cows that have balance between “strength” and “dairyness”, also use “aAa”.

If you have herd issues with SCCs, fertility or component% levels, the PTA trait data is there to help.

Keep in mind that PTAs for Productive Life contain assumptions that may not fit your environment.

Thus while “PL” may help you avoid short herdlife cows, you need more information to gain herdlife.

Look for evidence of longevity in the maternal lines behind bulls you are considering.

It seems like every “expert” today is picking on the Holstein.

However, it remains true that 88% of the dairy cows in North America are “Holsteins”.

Only 5% are crossbreds, 5% are Jerseys, and 2% represent other traditional breeds.

Thus the productivity and profitability of the Holstein cow remains essential to dairy industry survival.     Holstein breeding must provide the genes to turn around negative trends that have led the Holstein to the shortest average herdlife in breed history.

Inside this newsletter you will find some recent facts and figures that we hope will add to your perspective of your opportunities and exposures in Holstein breeding.    

You might also ponder this idea:  you can create “outcross” hybrid vigor within any breed if in the next generation you pick your sires in a different way.    Different trait patterns require different DNA genotypes—and crossing different genotypes is how we stimulate a “heterosis” response to improve all “vigor” traits.

Mich Livestock Service, Inc  ** For the Best in Bulls ** ph “toll free” 1 (800) 359-1693 

Farm Energy Audits

You may notice on your electric bills lines for “Renewable Energy” and “Energy Efficiency”.    Moneys that public utilities collect on these fees go to pay for programs such as the “Farm Energy Audits”.   Contractors with engineering and electrical experience and farm backgrounds will evaluate all your powered systems and provide you available options for reducing utility energy costs.    I have a couple friends who do these, and if you have not yet considered having your farm checked out, they are:

                    Dan Schrauben      based in Ann Arbor, MI      ph (810) 602-3029

                   J T March                based in Lansing, MI          ph (517) 202-6997

There is no charge to you for these audits.     MSU pays the auditors from the utility funds mentioned.

The “genetics” of hoof trimming

A majority of dairymen today have a hoof trimmer on call, in fact may have a regular monthly or weekly hoof trimming day.    The growth of demand for hoof trimming is usually blamed on three things:  (1^st)

“Cows milk more than they used to, eat more grain, making their hooves grow out more”.   (2^nd)  “Cows are walking less, mostly on wet concrete, keeping their feet soft and vulnerable”.   (3^rd)   “Heel warts and hoof rot are everywhere, and don’t go away until treated and wrapped”.

A study done in Utah and Idaho in 2013 on heel warts

A major distributor of improved foot bath solutions wanted to understand why hoof problems recur even when hygienic solutions are being used.    They visually observed 16,000 cows over six months in large herd systems, and ultimately stumbled on a startling observation:

The weaker the front end structure of the cow, the higher the frequency of heel warts.

Foot angle didn’t matter; Set of rear hock didn’t matter; level of production didn’t matter.     Cows with “strong” front ends had the least heel warts observed, while cows with “frail” front ends had the most.

Note:  the designation of “strong” or “frail” was based on the “aAa” concepts of physical qualities.

Why does a “strong” front end lead to a “strong” foot on a cow?

This is the interrelationship of parts to function.    aAa “strong” (code 4) is a full, deep chest, which is the best visual indicator of high heart function.    The heart circulates oxygenated blood to the internal organs and external muscles of the cow.    For a cow to resist heel wart virus’ or other foot infections, she must have good blood flow to reach extremities like the hoof.    It is also noted that ‘strong” cows will have harder horn (hoof) tissue, thus protecting the sole underneath and resisting soft toe growth.

An observation of feet that refuse to grow evenly

The selection tendency toward narrower cows in high input, high feed energy dairies has produced a lot of cows who stand on uneven feet.     Looking particularly at front feet, you will see the outside toe is bigger (in both depth and length) than the inside toe, which appears to be carrying the most weight.   It is not unusual for such cows to “toe out”—and you lead them to the hoof trimmer each time he comes, in hopes he can make the cow “stand straight”.

By contrast, cows with some width of chest tend to stand sturdy, and the toes on their feet will be equal in size (inner and outer toes evenly formed and wearing evenly).    

Why does a “wide” front end lead to a “healthy” foot on a cow?

In another functional interrelationship, the aAa “smooth” (code 5) cow is more “balanced” in position of all four legs to stand the full width of the cow’s body, allowing for a straighter track and sturdy stance which, in combination, avoids uneven weight distribution side to side on the hoof.    Beyond that, wider chested cows (with wider heads) can breathe more fully and deeply, thus providing more oxygen in the lungs for reoxygenating the blood flowing to the legs and feet, aiding them in staying healthy.

DON’T  BLAME  THE  HOOF TRIMMER  FOR  CHRONIC  LAMENESS

Is your approach to mating using all the foot and leg information needed to breed better mobility ??

Harvesting all the genetics you select

Genetic selection when done well sets you up with the possibility of better production from healthier cows.

Mating that considers gene interrelationships in cow physiques sets you up to harvest genetic potential at an optimal level.

Random mating (the total population average) assumes the current (genomic) generation matches up equally with the prior (evaluation) generation, in spite of having transformed genotypes.    Thus 40% of the results are generally culled as failures (extremes).

If you are tired of 40% culling to harvest 60% of genetic potential, consider the effect of physical quality selection as a superior way to mate your cows to ranking bulls.

Mich Livestock Service, Inc    “For the Best in Bulls”    Independent AI genetic supplier    (800) 359-1693

  

What the market does with the milk we produce

2013 milk market information shows that USA dairymen produced 200.3 billion pounds of milk.

This raw milk volume contained 25.172 billion pounds of  milk solids:  these are primarily

 **  Butterfat   ** Protein   ** Lactose   ** Minerals

Thus, roughly 12.5% of the total volume of milk as blended from farms’ production is milk solids leaving roughly 87.5% as fluid carrier  (ie, water that flushed these milk solids from the mammary glands).

Of course, when we bottle milk as a beverage for drinking (or to pour on morning cereal) (or to mix into casserole or cake recipes), that “fluid carrier” still has a purpose as hydration.    In 2013, 26.1% of milk produced (52.3 billion pounds) went into a jug or bottle.

That left 148 billion pounds of milk whose processing involves removing some or all of the water.   It is this removal of water that is the biggest single [energy] cost in the milk processing industry.    It is in the transport of this excess water that milk hauling costs are more burdensome to dairymen, and the price of milk on your milk check is also proportionately reduced by the processing “make allowances”.

Of the milk not bottled, 37.1% (74.3 billion pounds) is made into cheese of various forms.   The average   cheese yield from commercial blended milk is 10%.     Thus 74.3 billion pounds of raw milk gets made into 7.45 billion pounds of cheese, leaving behind 66.85 billion pounds of whey.

Whey will contain the milk solids not formed into curds.    It can be dried into a powder that can be used in processed food or animal feed, as long as federal environmental rules are met.   Otherwise it becomes an industrial waste and thus must be handled similarly to sewage waste to recover the water.

18.9% of milk is “separated” (cream removed).    The cream is churned into butter and the skim milk is dried into non-fat dry milk powder which again will enter either human food or animal feed.

4.2% of milk becomes yogurt or other “cultured cream” products.

4.1% of milk becomes ice cream or other frozen packaged products.

This leaves 9.6% of milk that is processed into a myriad of other forms (eg, evaporated milk) some of which have very low value recovery, like pet food, or the result of rejected loads.

The genetics of increased value milk

We provide information on all milk components with the exception of lactose (milk sugar):

Butterfat percent        (bf%)   This is estimated to be 50% heritable, one of the higher traits measured

Protein percent          (pr%)    This is estimated to be 55% heritable, the highest of measured traits    

Somatic Cell Count   (SCS)    Estimated at 15% heritability, lower values lead to quality premiums

Beta Casein               (A2 preferred)   Directly heritable as a dual allele gene pairing

Kappa Casein            (B preferred)     Directly heritable as a dual allele gene pairing

Beta Casein is a health quality protein preferred by those with various autoimmune diseases

Kappa Casein is the form of protein that produces curds and will increase cheese yields 7% to 15%

FLECKVEIH: Last breed to arrive, best choice for crossbreeding heterosis

From the Dec 2013 Jan 2014 Conceptions Dairy newsletter

Taurus Service, Inc/ Affiliated Sires  now offers four sires from this dynamic and different breed that has become an international success story for their ability to remain productive and healthy no matter what environment, from the tropics to the mountains.    Second in numbers only to Holsteins in their native  Austria, Bavaria/Germany and Switzerland, they offer “vigor” both in heterosis response and gene traits.

Unlike most Euro Red breeds introduced earlier, where there seems to be only one prevalent phenotypic pattern, Fleckveih come in a full range of mating applications:

76FV147 Rotax aAa 513, 76FV647 Hades aAa 462, 76FV845 Rorb aAa 435, 80FV7610 Taurus aAa 432.

Perhaps the most successful example of “dual purpose” selection, where both milk volume from cows and beef yield from steers is competitive with breeds more specialized for milk or beef.    If you are an organic producer seeking a breed that can perform on a high forage, low grain ration, try Fleckveih.

 “So what is the big deal?”     Advertisement in the December 2013 “Cattle Connection”

Stardell Farms, Inc is owned by Hadwen Kleiss and his family.   Mr Kleiss

sold his first “proven” bull to AI in 1958 (Wis Supreme Crusader, Curtiss)

and three decades later (after growing from 35 to 250 cows) he came with

Stardell Valiant Winken and Stardell Chief Adan who were as successful in

the modern “PTA” era—examples of his understanding of the art as well as

the science of selective breeding.

Among Hadwen’s earlier “Cattle Connection” observations were that black

hooves meant more resistance to problems like heel warts, while Holsteins

had bred that out of the breed from color restrictions and linear trait “sharp”

quality preferences.

Now he is observing in his herd the inconsistency in young, higher genetic

Merit cows between their Genomic valuation and their actual performance.

At 80 years of age, Hadwen is no longer concerned with “follow the leader”

and can resist peer pressure to accept every new technology without a first

testing in “real world” conditions—typical of the successful entrepeneur.

Why is this Stardell advertisement relevant to your approach to genetic selection and mating?

Pretty simply, he has demonstrated an ET flush in which the heifer with the lowest Genomic value ends up the best producing and best type young cow while the highest Genomic value heifer proves to not be adaptable to a 250 cow free stall and parlor environment (also raising 2000+ replacement heifers to sell).

So what? You say—except the way in which the AI industry is using Genomics is to only keep the high one, and to reject the rest.     If these three heifers had been AI bulls, the worst performing one goes into AI and the potentially best performing goes to beef, trusting a value imputation that is only 65% Rel.

Much is made of the 40% market acceptance of Genomic sires as if they were “proven” equivalent to the sires who have survived the progeny evaluation screenings.      I would suggest that after five years, 60% of the Holstein and Jersey semen sold is still from progeny evaluated sires.     Genomics is the theoretical state of the art in genetic technology, but dairymen who dislike 40% culling rates continue to ask for “progeny tested” sires.

The entire basis of Genomics is not the DNA—it is the theory of accelerating generations which is dominating the interpretation of the DNA.     We take bulls resulting from mating the “best” bulls to the “best” cows (on a selection index ranking, not on actual realized productivity) and select the bulls and heifers with the “ideal” gene marker possession, we mate them as soon as pubescent, we rush the resulting heifers into IVF and bulls into semen collection, we mate them in turn.    We are now “two generations ahead of the cow population” therefore all must be a “base change” ahead of the progeny tested sires.    We assign TPI or LPI or $NM or JPI numbers accordingly—before anything calved.

In fact, what the realized data has consistently told us is that the highest G value sires are 200 TPI points overestimated on the average.      Thus today’s better “proven” sires are still highly valuable.  

What to expect on paper when you have extreme longevity performance

From the Dec 2013-Jan 2014 Conceptions Dairy Newsletter

When I was first breeding Holsteins and seeking “Red” color I used an older bull Agro Acres Marquis Ned from Canada, who was pegged a “show type” bull (he had four EX 95 daughters in the USA) and was minus for milk on progeny data, but what intrigued me was this:

His dam had 267,000 pounds lifetime not on test until she was five years old—and—

Her dam had 211,000 pounds lifetime not on test until she was eight years old!!

Not even Lakefield Fobes Delight (311,000 lb) and her dam Minnow Creek Eden Delight (278,000 lb) would have bettered these two by much, and they are the most productive dtr-dam pair ever recorded.

Our “Ned’s” were growthy, average milking heifers, got better as they got older—but what was more remarkable was their ability to produce high lifetime daughters (we bred eight known cows who passed 200,000m lifetime in our first seven years with Holsteins, and over half of them had Ned in the dam’s pedigree—the others had a sire with a 200,000 lb momma).     Thus in our experience, the best way to breed longevity into cows is to use bulls from longevity mommas and don’t expect them to be +2000m.

A couple current examples of easily overlooked sires from exceptional longevity cow lines are:

76HO 590   Wabash Way Thunder       aAa 534162       (+2.07 type, +484m, 1686 TPI, +0.1 DPR)

Sired by “Toystory” (his dam actually got over 150,000 lb lifetime on extended ET lactations)

His “Outside” dam is now 3E 94 with over 200,000 lb, her “Highlight” dam is 5E 96 over 300,000 lb.

This bull’s dam has a rump so wide I only recall Tora Triple Threat Lulu EX 96 as being wider.

6HO 1170   Karona Gold Luster          aAa 612543        (+2.56 type, +611m, 1713 TPI, +0.1 DPR)

Sired by “Goldwyn” (his “Storm” dam is the one Braedale cow to make a creditable lifetime total)

His “Morty” dam is EX 91 over 100,000m, next “Rudolph” dam is EX Can at 125,000m, and she is maternal sister to Idee Lustre EX 95 3E who has 359,879m  5.0% 18099bf 3.5% 12587pr lifetime.

(Members of the “Lustre” cow family can be viewed at Bott’s “Winterfield Farm” near Wheeler, MI)