Are you curious about how the August CDCB updates will impact your herd? Learn what changes in yield traits and heifer livability mean for your farm’s future.
Summary: Have you been keeping up with the latest updates in dairy farming evaluations? August 2024 brought significant changes to the CDCB evaluations, impacting everything from yield traits like Milk, Fat, and Protein to Heifer Livability. Are you curious about how these updates could affect your herd? These changes are designed to make evaluations more accurate and reflective of current herd conditions: the introduction of the 305-AA standard for yield measurement, significant shifts in PTAs for different breeds, updated Heifer Livability values, and new SNP List and BBR reference population updates affecting crossbred evaluations. Understanding these changes can offer invaluable insights for making more informed breeding decisions. The 305-AA standardization uses a 36-month average age for yield data, improving PTAs for Holsteins but not for Jerseys. These improvements aim to enhance the precision and accuracy of genetic tests, allowing dairy producers to make better-informed choices about their herd’s future. The latest SNP and BBR updates have resulted in variations that could financially impact dairy farms with crossbred animals. Are you interested in how this might play out for you? Keep reading to gain more insights.
August 2024 updates in CDCB evaluations introduce significant changes affecting Milk, Fat, Protein, and Heifer Livability traits.
The 305-AA standardized yield measurement now uses a 36-month average age, which impacts Predicted Transmitting Abilities (PTAs).
Holsteins observed an increase in PTAs for Milk, Fat, and Protein, while Jerseys saw a decline.
Updated Heifer Livability values reflect two years of additional data, enhancing reliability.
SNP List and BBR reference population updates bring notable changes for crossbred animal evaluations.
These changes aim to provide more accurate and contemporary genetic assessments to aid in better breeding decisions.
Have you ever wondered how the newest genetic evaluation updates may affect your herd? Or what would these upgrades imply for your future breeding decisions? If you answered yes, you’ve come to the correct spot. This August, the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) announced several significant modifications in genetic assessments that would impact the dairy farming environment. We’re discussing new standards like the 305-AA yield measurement, Heifer Livability updates, SNP list revisions, and Breed Base Representation (BBR) values. These may seem complex, but stay with me—understanding them might be a game changer for your farm. These adjustments are more than modest modifications; they significantly influence the parameters you use to make essential breeding and management choices. I’ll review each one, from how Holsteins are increasing in milk, fat, and protein to why Jersey PTAs are declining.
You’ll also learn about the rippling effects on qualities such as Productive Life and Cow Livability. The August 2024 genetic examinations resulted in momentous developments that might change how you see your herd’s genetic potential. This is important because, let’s face it, keeping on top of genetic examinations will improve your herd’s production and, ultimately, your bottom line and open up new possibilities for growth and improvement on your farm. Intrigued? Let’s dig in and see what these changes imply for you and your farm.
The August 2024 CDCB Evaluations Brought Several Noteworthy Updates. Let’s Break Them Down:
The August 2024 CDCB evaluations brought several noteworthy updates. Let’s break them down:
305-AA Standardized Yield Measurement: This revision establishes a new standard for yield records, moving from 305-ME mature equivalent to a 36-month average age. It also revises age, parity, and season adjustment factors. This standardization is more precise in capturing environmental variables and is breed-specific.
Heifer Livability: The revised Heifer Livability ratings incorporate two years’ worth of lost data and additional editing criteria tailored to herd circumstances. This increases dependability and influences linked qualities such as Productive Life (PL) and Cow Livability (LIV).
SNP List and BBR Reference Population Updates: These changes include a new SNP list and a BBR reference population update, affecting purebred and crossbred animals’ status and genetic assessments. This modification has raised assessment variability, particularly in hybrid animals genotyped at low density or with incomplete pedigrees.
Why the 305-AA Change Matters for Your Dairy Farm’s Future
The launch of 305-AA has sparked interest among dairy producers. This is a gradual change but a substantial shift in how yield data are standardized. So, what precisely is 305-AA? Essentially, it is a technique of standardizing yield data that uses a 36-month average age rather than the older 305-ME (mature equivalent). This implies that the new approach considers the average age, parity, and seasonal modifications for five climatic areas in the United States. These improvements are intended to provide a more realistic picture of environmental variances. It is also breed-specific; therefore, the influence varies according to the breed.
Why does this matter? Accurate yield data is critical for making educated breeding and herd management choices. The new changes consider more specific environmental characteristics, providing a more precise evaluation customized to each breed.
Let’s get specific. For Holsteins, the 305-AA modification improved the Predicted Transmitting Ability (PTA) for Milk, Fat, and Protein. This has resulted in a minor increase in the Lifetime Net Merit $ (NM$) index, which typically ranges from +10 to +15 NM$, depending on whether we’re talking genetic or proven bull groupings. This is a welcome improvement for anyone interested in Holsteins.
On the other hand, the Jerseys have not fared well. Their PTAs for milk, fat, and protein decreased significantly—by around 100, -6, and -6 pounds, respectively. As a result, their NM$ index declined by an average of -70 to -50 NM$. Jersey breeders may be concerned about the long-term economic worth of their herds. Understanding the reasons for these changes in the Jersey breed is essential, as they can influence future breeding decisions.
You may ask why these adjustments were made. The fundamental goal is to improve the precision and accuracy of genetic tests, allowing you to make more informed choices about the future of your herd. While the change may be difficult for certain breeds, notably Jerseys, the ultimate objective is to use more accurate data to increase productivity and profitability. This reassurance should give you the confidence to make the best decisions for your herd.
Spotlight on Heifer Livability: Unpacking the CDCB Updates
The most recent CDCB revisions concentrate on heifer longevity values. Incorporating two years’ worth of previously overlooked data has resulted in larger-than-usual adjustments. Consider this: all of those missed records are suddenly coming into play! This change contributes to a better picture of heifer longevity, boosting animal dependability.
But that is not all. New editing criteria also focus more on herd circumstances. Although this is a modest change, it has a significant effect. Dairy producers like you can make better choices with more thorough and accurate data.
These Heifer Livability alterations also affect linked attributes. Productive Life (PL) indicates a minor average reduction of roughly -0.2. Cow Livability (LIV) is also indirectly impacted. How does this affect your day-to-day operations? Reliable data allows you to trust these assessments, knowing that the figures you’re looking at are more realistic representations of your herds.
SNP List and BBR Updates: What’s the Impact on Your Crossbred Animals?
The newest upgrades to the SNP list and BBR reference population have resulted in significant modifications. What’s fascinating is how these updates affect crossbred animals and the variation in their judgments. The reduced SNP list provides a more focused view of genetic markers, resulting in more accurate statistics.
However, increased accuracy leads to more considerable variability in crossbred assessments. Animals genotyped at low density or with inadequate pedigrees are especially vulnerable. In these circumstances, variations in BBR levels may substantially impact whether they are purebred or mixed. This directly affects the final Predicted Transmitting Abilities (PTAs) for crossbred animals, resulting in a wider variety of assessment outcomes.
The haplotype status has also changed due to the SNP list update. Specifically, changes to HH6 (the sixth Holstein haplotype regulating fertility) and JNS (Jersey Neuropathy with Splayed Forelimbs) have been improved to integrate more direct data. This implies that your herd’s genetic assessments are more accurate than ever. Be prepared for unexpected changes in particular animal ranks, but rest assured that you are now equipped with the most precise information to adapt to these changes.
Picture This: You’re Making Breeding Decisions and Planning for the Future of Your Herd
The most recent revisions to the CDCB assessments might be game-changers. How, you ask? Let’s dig in.
First, the new standardized yield measurement, 305-AA, significantly impacts yield attributes. An increase in Predicted Transmitting Ability (PTA) for Milk, Fat, and Protein may lead you to consider breeding Holsteins. “The slight upward trend of about +10 to +15 NM$ depending on the bull group can improve your herd’s overall productivity,” says industry expert Paul VanRaden [source]. In contrast, the significant fall in PTAs may cause you to rethink utilizing Jerseys for yield-based objectives for Jersey cattle.
The latest revisions to Heifer Livability include larger-than-usual modifications due to incorporating two years’ worth of missing information. This may influence your judgment on which heifers to keep or cull. Since Productive Life (PL) declined by an average of -0.2, you may choose heifers with higher livability ratings to maintain a more productive and long-living herd.
These modifications may have a financial impact on your income sources. For example, the new SNP list and BBR reference population updates may induce heterogeneity in crossbred animal assessments, particularly for those genotyped at low density or with incomplete pedigrees. If your farm uses mixed animals, you should reconsider the economic sustainability of retaining or growing this segment of your herd.
Consider the implications of HH6 and JNS haplotype status updates. With these new genetic insights, choosing animals that test negative for certain illnesses may become a priority, affecting your financial plans. Jay Megonigal emphasizes the need for rigorous herd management, citing recent studies that show high relationships between changes.
What’s the bottom line? These updates need dynamic changes to breeding techniques, herd management, and financial estimates. As a dairy farmer, remaining knowledgeable and adaptable is critical for adjusting to changing requirements and maintaining a healthy enterprise.
The Bottom Line
To wrap it up, the August 2024 CDCB evaluations have introduced significant changes essential for your farm’s sustainability and profitability. These adjustments can impact your herd’s genetic evaluations and overall performance, from the 305-AA standardized yield measurement to Heifer Livability, SNP lists, and BBR values updates. Staying informed about these updates can help you navigate the changes and plan effective breeding decisions. So, how will you adapt to these new evaluations to ensure your herd’s success? Keeping a close eye on these evaluations and understanding their implications can give you a competitive edge. Remember, your proactive approach could mean the difference between thriving and just getting by.
Real Syn, a Rover son, is leading the B&W RZG Interbull Genomic ranking for the third time, with an impressive +166 RZG. Right behind, we have the Arizona brothers—Alaska at +163 RZG and Argentum at +161 RZG. Over in the R&W Interbull Genomic ranking, Simply Red takes the top spot at +159 RZG. He is followed closely by Malaga Red, a Mask Red son, with +158 RZG. Party P, Skill Red, and Redwood are sharing the third spot, all at +157 RZG.
Explore how transitioning from linear selection to genetic indexes can transform your dairy breeding approach. Are you prepared to maximize your herd’s capabilities?
For decades, dairy breeders have relied heavily on linear selection, prioritizing traits such as “taller,” “stronger,” and “wider.” While linear selection provided a straightforward blueprint, modern dairy operations showcase shortcomings. The key to success lies in accurate information. As genetic herd audits and sophisticated indexes become commonplace, the emphasis shifts toward traits like health, fertility, and lifetime productivity. The industry has been conditioned to believe that bulls with negative linear traits would sire inferior progeny. However, this concept is becoming increasingly outdated. Understanding the limitations of linear selection is essential as the industry evolves. This isn’t just theoretical—it’s about providing dairy breeders with the tools they need to thrive in an ever-changing agricultural landscape.
Accurate Information: The Cornerstone of Modern Dairy Management
Accurate information is not just important; it’s paramount in dairy management. It’s the bedrock for productive and profitable decisions. As the dairy industry evolves, the reliance on precise data becomes even more critical. Outdated methods and obsolete data can significantly misguide breeding choices, resulting in unfavorable outcomes. The role of accurate information in dairy management cannot be overstated, as it underlines the importance of data-driven decisions and the potential risks of relying on outdated methods.
For example, continuing to use linear selection as the sole criterion despite its directional simplicity can lead to the accidental selection of traits that do not align with contemporary herd needs. When the industry previously emphasized parameters like height and strength, it inadvertently cultivated cows with extreme stature, resulting in too tall and frail animals for optimal health and productivity. Such misguided selection pressures are evident in traits like rear teat placement, which suffered due to linear selection focused on front teat placement.
In contrast, indexes offer a more holistic approach, integrating multiple traits and their relative importance tailored to specific herd environments. They enable producers to weigh diverse factors such as health, fertility, and lifespan, resulting in more accurate breeding decisions that align with the desired outcomes. By employing up-to-date and comprehensive genetic audits, dairy managers can avoid the pitfalls of outdated methodologies, ensuring that their decisions are grounded in the most current and relevant information available.
Ultimately, the shift from traditional linear selection to more nuanced approaches underscores the critical role of accurate information. It empowers dairy producers to navigate the complexities of modern herd management effectively, allowing them to cultivate genetically superior cows that meet the industry’s evolving demands.
Enter the Genetic Index: A Holistic Approach to Herd Management
Enter the genetic index—a tool that presents a more stable and comprehensive selection method than the often rigid linear selection. Genetic indexes aggregate various trait data into a weighted value that better represents an animal’s overall genetic potential. This method effectively transcends the restrictive and sometimes misleading binary of linear selection.
Unlike the linear approach that prioritizes specific traits in isolation, genetic indexes consider a spectrum of factors influencing health, fertility, and productivity. For instance, an index can balance the importance of traits such as mastitis resistance, milk yield, and udder conformation, providing a holistic view of an animal’s genetic worth. This balance ensures that no single trait is disproportionately emphasized to the detriment of overall functionality and longevity.
Moreover, genetic indexes introduce flexibility into breeding decisions, allowing dairy producers to tailor selection criteria based on their herd’s unique challenges and goals. Genetic indexes support more precise and effective selection strategies by weighting traits according to their relevance to a dairy operation’s specific environmental and management conditions. This not only optimizes the genetic development of the herd but also enhances the adaptability and resilience of the cattle population, providing a sense of reassurance and security in the face of changing conditions.
The Limitations of Linear Selection in Modern Dairy Breeding
Linear selection, by its very nature, is limited in scope due to its two-dimensional approach. This method tends to focus on individual traits in isolation, often ignoring the broader genetic interconnections and environmental factors that also play crucial roles in a cow’s productivity and overall health. By simplifying selection to terms like “taller” or “stronger,” breeders are led to prioritize specific physical characteristics without fully understanding their implications on other vital aspects such as fertility, longevity, and disease resistance.
Moreover, the reliance on isolated traits can lead to unintended consequences. For instance, selecting taller cows might inadvertently result in too frail animals, as the emphasis on height could overshadow the need for robust body structure. Similarly, the traditional approach of choosing bulls based on their linear traits might not account for the holistic needs of a modern dairy operation. It creates a scenario where the ideal cow for a particular environment is overlooked instead of one that fits a historical and now possibly outdated, linear profile.
Such an approach also fails to account for the dynamic nature of genetic progress. While linear selection might have worked under past environmental and market conditions, today’s dairy industry demands a more nuanced and comprehensive strategy. The ever-changing landscapes of health challenges, market preferences, and production environments necessitate a departure from the rigid, two-dimensional framework that linear selection represents.
The Evolution of Linear Selection: A Historical Perspective on Dairy Breeding
Understanding the evolution of linear selection in dairy breeding requires a historical lens through which we observe genetic trends and the shifting paradigms that have guided these trends. Over the past five decades, one prominent example is the selection for stature in U.S. Holsteins. Initially intended to produce taller cows, this linear selection was driven by the belief that larger animals would be more productive. From a base stature of 52 inches (132 centimeters) in the early 1970s, selective breeding practices have seen this trait rise by an average of 5.5 inches (14 centimeters). Today, the daughters of Holstein bulls with an STA of 0.00 for stature typically measure around 57.5 inches (160 centimeters).
However, as cows grew taller, unintended consequences emerged. Larger cows often experienced greater strain on their skeletal structures and faced increased incidences of lameness. Additionally, the shift toward extreme measurements, such as overly tall and frail cows, suggested that these changes might have overshot the ideal productive physique for dairy cows. The selection pressure inadvertently guided breeding decisions to focus on traits that, although historically perceived as desirable, began to conflict with emerging dairy production environments and herd health priorities.
These changes also had profound implications for other linear traits. For instance, as the focus shifted towards enhancing front teat placement, little attention was paid to rear teat placement, creating new challenges for dairy breeders. This historical perspective underscores the adaptability required in breeding practices. It suggests the necessity for a more balanced, holistic approach moving forward—a lesson clearly illustrated by the evolution of indices in modern selective breeding. The need for a more balanced, holistic approach in breeding practices is a crucial takeaway from past experiences, highlighting the industry’s adaptability.
Refining Genetic Evaluations: Understanding Standard Transmitting Abilities (STAs)
Standard Transmitting Abilities (STAs) is a refined way of expressing genetic evaluations for linear-type traits, offering a clearer and standardized metric for comparison. Calculating STAs involves transforming Predicted Transmitting Abilities (PTAs) into a common scale, making disparate traits easily comparable.
To calculate STAs, PTAs are first derived using advanced genetic models that consider various data points, including parent averages, progeny records, and contemporary group adjustments. These PTAs are then converted into STAs, standardized values representing animals’ genetic merit relative to a modern population base. The practical range of STAs spans from -3.0 to +3.0, with most bulls and cows falling within -2.0 to +2.0, ensuring a bell-curve distribution that simplifies interpretation.
Understanding STAs involves recognizing their role in evaluating linear-type traits with precision. For instance, an STA of 0.00 indicates an animal is average for the trait in the current population, while positive or negative values denote deviations above or below this average. This standardization allows producers to make informed breeding decisions by identifying superior genetics that align with specific breeding goals. By focusing on STAs, breeders can strategically select traits that enhance overall herd performance, ensuring that each generation successfully builds on the genetic progress of the previous one.
The Case of Stature: Unintended Consequences of Generational Linear Selection
The case of stature vividly illustrates the unintended consequences of linear selection over generations. Initially, breeders prioritized increasing the height of cows, associating taller stature with improved dairy production and greater robustness. However, this singular focus on height overlooked other crucial traits, including udder health and reproductive efficiency. As a result, while stature improved dramatically—rising by an average of 5.5 inches (14 centimeters) over the past five decades—dairy cows’ overall performance and longevity faced unforeseen challenges.
Consider the comparative example of Holstein cows. A bull with a Standard Transmitting Ability (STA) of 0.00 today would sire daughters averaging 57.5 inches (160 centimeters) in height—significantly taller than the 52-inch (132 centimeters) cows at the same STA level five decades ago. If breeders were to select bulls with a -3.00 STA for stature now, their daughters would still be 56.5 inches (143.5 centimeters) tall, which reveals the lasting impact of generational selection for height.
This relentless push for increased height did not occur in isolation. Physical attributes and health traits were often compromised to achieve a taller stature. Breeders globally started observing cows “too tall, too frail,” with structural deficiencies such as “short teats and rear teats being too close together.” These physical alterations posed significant management issues—cows with excessively tall stature frequently experienced increased stress on their skeletal systems and a higher propensity for lameness, negatively affecting their productivity and well-being.
Consequently, this relentless focus on linear selection for stature resulted in a breed that, while visually impressive, often struggled with underlying health and productivity challenges. This is a stark reminder that breeding programs must consider a holistic approach, acknowledging the multifaceted nature of genetic traits, to develop a well-rounded, high-performing herd suited for sustainable dairy farming.
The Overlooked Consequence: Rear Teat Placement and the Pitfalls of Linear Selection
The issue of rear teat placement offers a stark example of the unintended consequences that can arise from linear selection focused predominantly on front teat traits. Historically, the selection protocols that emphasized front teat placement, aiming for a “Plus” positioning, did not account for the correlated effects on the rear teats. As a result, we observed rear teats becoming too close together, an outcome that was neither anticipated nor desired. This misalignment can compromise udder health and milking efficiency, leading to increased mastitis and difficulties in machine milking. The focus on improving one set of traits—front teat placement—without considering the holistic impact on the overall udder structure underscores the pitfalls of a unidimensional approach to selection. By shifting towards more integrated evaluation methods, like indexes that incorporate multiple relevant traits, we can better address such complex genetic interrelations and enhance the overall functionality and health of the herd.
Redefining Priorities: From Linear Extremes to Balanced Herd Management
Linear selection has driven the dairy industry’s breeding decisions to a point where the traits we once sought to enhance have become liabilities. The focus on extremes—stature, strength, or teat placement—has created cows that are often too tall, frail, or have inefficient udder configurations. These unintended consequences affect the cows’ health and productivity and create additional management challenges, thereby impacting the overall efficiency of dairy operations.
A paradigm shift is necessary, moving from the myopic focus on linear traits to a more balanced and holistic breeding approach. The comprehensive indexes available today offer a more nuanced and multi-dimensional framework. Unlike linear selection, which tends to prioritize singular traits often to the detriment of others, indexes provide a weighted consideration of a range of characteristics that directly impact a cow’s longevity, health, and productivity. This method aligns with the practical realities of modern dairy farming and supports the creation of robust, well-rounded cows capable of thriving in diverse environments.
Relying solely on linear selection is an outdated practice in a time of paramount precision and efficiency. The industry’s future is leveraging complex genetic evaluations and indexes incorporating various health, productivity, and fertility traits. Such a move will ensure the creation of an optimal herd that meets both contemporary market demands and the rigorous demands of modern dairy farming.
Embracing Indexes: A Paradigm Shift from Linear Composites
Indexes represent a modern and holistic approach to genetic selection that contrasts significantly with traditional composites. While composites aggregate linear values into a single selection metric, they often fail to account for the nuances needed for specific herd environments. On the other hand, Indexes maintain each trait’s integrity by assigning a weighted value to it based on its relevance to the optimal cow profile for a given environment. This method ensures that traits essential to the animal’s health, productivity, and longevity are prioritized according to their real-world importance. For instance, if mastitis is prevalent in a particular region, the index would appropriately weigh this health trait to screen for less-prone genetics. By doing so, indexes facilitate a targeted and balanced breeding strategy, allowing producers to cultivate not only productive but also well-suited cows to thrive in their specific operational conditions.
Indexes: A Multifaceted Approach Beyond Linear Selection
Indexes offer a multifaceted approach to dairy breeding, transcending the limitations of linear selection. One of the primary advantages of using indexes is their capacity to integrate a wide array of traits, including those related to health and overall performance. Indexes provide a more comprehensive assessment of genetic potential by weighting each trait according to its relevance and impact on the ideal cow for a specific environment.
This holistic approach ensures that essential health traits, such as mastitis resistance and fertility, are factored into breeding decisions. By incorporating these traits, indexes help identify cows that are not only high performers but also robust and resilient, enhancing their longevity within the herd. The ability to screen for low-heritability traits, which might otherwise be overlooked in linear selection, further refines the selection process, aiding in avoiding genetic extremes that could compromise herd health and productivity.
Moreover, indexes facilitate more accurate and adaptable breeding strategies that align with a given dairy operation’s specific challenges and goals. Whether the focus is on increasing milk yield, improving udder health, or selecting moderate frame sizes, the weighted values in an index can be tailored to match the unique conditions of the herd’s environment.
In essence, indexes empower dairy producers to make informed decisions that balance productivity with sustainability, ultimately leading to the development of cows that excel in performance and longevity. This strategic approach not only optimizes genetic gains but also promotes the welfare and durability of the herd, ensuring a more stable and prosperous future for dairy operations.
Navigating Genetic Index Selection: Tailoring Traits to Your Herd’s Needs
Choosing the right genetic index for your dairy cows involves understanding and prioritizing the traits that align with your herd’s needs and environmental conditions. Here are essential steps to guide you:
Identify Herd Goals: Define what you want to achieve with your herd. Are you focusing on milk production, fertility, health, or longevity? Your goals will determine the traits you must prioritize in your genetic index.
Analyze Current Herd Performance: Use data from sources like the DHI-202 Herd Summary Report to evaluate your herd’s strengths and weaknesses. This helps identify traits that require improvement.
Consider Environmental Factors: Consider the environmental conditions your cows face. Weather, feed quality, and herd health can influence which traits are most beneficial to focus on for optimal performance.
Review Trait Heritability and Economic Impact: Not all traits are equally heritable, and some have a more significant economic impact than others. To maximize genetic progress, focus on traits with higher heritability and substantial financial benefits.
Weight Traits Appropriately: Use the relative importance of each trait in your selected index. Traits that significantly impact your herd’s productivity and profitability should have higher weightings in the index.
Utilize Comprehensive Genetic Audits: Engage in periodic genetic audits to track the progress and effectiveness of your breeding decisions. This ensures your genetic selection continues to align with your evolving herd goals.
Consult Industry Experts: Work with genetic consultants or utilize industry tools and resources to refine your genetic indexes. Expert advice can provide valuable insights and help tailor indexes to your herd’s unique needs.
By thoughtfully choosing and applying the proper genetic indexes, dairy producers can enhance the overall genetic quality of their herd, achieving a balance between high productivity and sustainable herd health.
The Bottom Line
As we navigate dairy breeding, shifting from linear selection to genetic indexes is revolutionary. Indexes align breeding strategies with modern needs, ensuring cows are robust, fertile, and productive over their lifetimes. While linear selection once worked, it shows limitations like increased stature and flawed teat placement. In contrast, genetic indexes consider health, fertility, and productivity dynamically. Indexes breed cows that are better suited to their roles by weighting traits for specific environments.
Adopting genetic indexes has profound implications. Herds become more resilient, operations more sustainable, and the genetic health of dairy populations improves. This approach reduces breeding extremes, fostering balanced herd management that adapts to varying challenges and environments. Embracing genetic indexes addresses past shortcomings and shapes the future of dairy breeding.
Key Takeaways:
Shifting from linear selection to genetic indexes can provide more stability and adaptability in herd management.
Linear selection has historically led to unintended consequences, such as overly tall cows and poorly placed rear teats.
Genetic indexes offer a holistic approach by weighting traits based on their importance to the specific herd environment.
Utilizing indexes enables producers to make more informed decisions, balancing traits like health, fertility, and productivity.
Transitioning to genetic indexes requires understanding and interpreting Standard Transmitting Abilities (STAs) for accurate selection.
Indexes can integrate lower heritability traits, including health factors like mastitis resistance, enhancing overall herd performance.
Adopting index-based selection helps mitigate the risk of extreme genetic profiles and promotes balanced genetic improvements.
Summary:
The dairy industry has traditionally used linear selection, prioritizing traits like “taller,” “stronger,” and “wider,” but this approach has shown shortcomings in modern operations. Accurate information is crucial in dairy management, and outdated methods can lead to accidental selection of traits that do not align with contemporary herd needs. Genetic indexes offer a more holistic approach, integrating multiple traits and their relative importance tailored to specific herd environments. Genetic indexes aggregate various trait data into a weighted value, better representing an animal’s overall genetic potential. This method transcends the restrictive binary of linear selection, considering factors influencing health, fertility, and productivity. Linear selection is limited in scope due to its two-dimensional approach, ignoring broader genetic interconnections and environmental factors. Standard Transmitting Abilities (STAs) offer a refined way of expressing genetic evaluations for linear-type traits, allowing breeders to strategically select traits that enhance overall herd performance and build on the genetic progress of the previous generation.
Discover how genetic innovations have reversed declining fertility in U.S. Holstein cows. Can improved breeding and management boost both productivity and sustainability?
For years leading up to 2000, U.S. Holsteins grappled with a critical issue. As milk productionsurged, fertility rates saw a discernible decline. This concerning trend stemmed from the inherently negative correlation between production and fertility in dairy cows. The genetic traits that facilitated increased milk yields also predisposed these cows to diminished reproductive efficiency. As milk production soared, reproductive performance faltered—a biological trade-off rooted in dairy cattle genetics.
The Year 2000 Marked a Significant Turning Point for U.S. Holstein Fertility
The turn of the millennium initiated a pivotal shift in breeding strategies, pivoting towards a more holistic approach emphasizing long-term health and productivity beyond mere milk yields. Previously caught in a downward spiral due to an exclusive focus on production, dairy cow fertility began to experience a much-needed resurgence.
What catalyzed this change? The cornerstone was the broadening of genetic ambitions. Until the turn of the century, breeding initiatives were singularly geared toward maximizing milk production, often at the expense of crucial traits such as fertility. However, starting in the late 1990s, the industry began recognizing the importance of herd longevity and overall fitness.
In particular, 1994 marked a watershed moment by including the ‘Productive Life’ trait in the Net Merit index. This move indirectly promoted better fertility rates through extended productive lifespans. By integrating longevity and its beneficial link to fertility, breeders indirectly enhanced fertility within herds.
The early 2000s heralded the advent of direct fertility metrics in selection indexes. With the introduction of the Daughter Pregnancy Rate (DPR) in 2003, the dynamics of dairy genetics underwent a transformative change. For the first time, dairy producers could target fertility directly without compromising milk production.
These strategic adjustments fostered a balanced approach to genetic selection, resulting in favorable milk yield and fertility trends. This dual focus arrested the decline in fertility and spurred ongoing improvements. It exemplifies the synergistic power of cutting-edge genetic tools and strategic breeding objectives.
DPR Introduction (2003): Impact of Directly Selecting for Cow Fertility
Introducing the Daughter Pregnancy Rate (DPR) into the Net Merit Index 2003 catalyzed a paradigm shift in dairy breeding strategies. By directly targeting cow fertility, dairy producers gained a valuable tool to enhance reproductive performance with precision. This strategic emphasis on fertility bolstered pregnancy rates and significantly advanced herd health and sustainability.
Before DPR’s inclusion, fertility was frequently marginalized in dairy cow breeding, overshadowed by the relentless focus on milk yield. The incorporation of DPR empowered breeders to select bulls whose daughters exhibited superior reproductive efficiency, thereby directly confronting fertility challenges. This resulted in marked gains in pregnancy rates and decreased inseminations required per conception.
Moreover, selecting for DPR extends well beyond fertility improvement; it enhances herd longevity. Cows with higher conception rates typically experience fewer health issues, leading to extended productive lifespans. This improves animal welfare and translates into substantial economic advantages for dairy producers, such as decreased veterinary expenses, reduced involuntary culling rates, and streamlined herd management.
Environmental gains are also significant. Increased fertility and prolonged productive lifespans of cows mean fewer resources are needed to sustain the herd, thereby decreasing the environmental footprint of dairy farming. Enhanced pregnancy rates are critical in lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, leading to more sustainable dairy production practices.
Integrating the Daughter Pregnancy Rate within the Net Merit index has redefined the dairy cattle breeding landscape. Dairy producers have successfully pursued holistic and sustainable genetic progress by balancing fertility with production traits. This strategic evolution highlights the essential nature of a comprehensive breeding approach—one that equally prioritizes production efficiency, animal health, and environmental responsibility.
National Database Contributions: Establishment of Sire, Cow, and Heifer Conception Rates (2006 and 2009)
When the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) introduced the national cooperator database, it marked a seminal development in dairy genetic evaluation. Initiated between 2006 and 2009, this comprehensive database encompassed vital traits such as Sire Conception Rate, Cow Conception Rate, and Heifer Conception Rate. By leveraging millions of phenotypic records, the database enabled more nuanced and precise genetic evaluations, refining the selection process for enhanced fertility. This pivotal innovation empowered dairy producers to manage their herds with unprecedented precision, ultimately propelling productivity and sustainability to new heights.
The emphasis on phenotypic data facilitated an exceptional breadth of analysis, unearthing insights previously beyond reach. This treasure trove of data has informed more sophisticated decision-making and laid the groundwork for continuous improvement. Through the evaluation of observed data from millions of dairy cows, breeders have been able to discern patterns and correlations that are instrumental in shaping future breeding strategies. The granularity of these genetic evaluations has translated into tangible, on-farm benefits, optimizing herd performance and driving real-time improvements.
Integrating traits such as Sire Conception Rate, Cow Conception Rate, and Heifer Conception Rate has profound implications. These metrics serve as critical indicators of reproductive efficiency, highlighting areas where improvements are needed and celebrating successes. By monitoring these traits closely, producers can implement targeted management practices to overcome specific bottlenecks in reproduction, thereby enhancing the overall health and productivity of the herd.
The national cooperator database also spotlighted the efficacy of collaborative efforts. With contributions from dairy producers, geneticists, veterinarians, and advisors, the database has evolved into a formidable knowledge repository, driving the evolution of breeding strategies. This collective approach expanded the genetic tools available to producers. It propagated best practices across the industry, ensuring that advancements were comprehensive and widely adopted.
The ripple effects of this initiative are far-reaching. These extensive datasets have facilitated enhanced accuracy in genetic evaluations, leading to the development of more effective breeding programs. Dairy producers are now equipped to breed cows that are not only more productive but also exhibit greater resilience, improved health, and better adaptability to modern dairy farm conditions.
The national cooperator database has been a transformative force in U.S. dairy cattle breeding. It has provided a vital infrastructure supporting ongoing genetic advancements, resulting in higher fertility rates and enhanced overall productivity for cows. This progress is not merely theoretical; it manifests in improvements in dairy operation efficiency, economic profitability, and environmental sustainability. The integration of fertility traits within this framework has set the stage for a future where genetic and management practices coalesce to produce more robust and productive dairy herds.
Evolution of Selection Indexes: How Selection Indexes Define Breeding Goals
Selection indexes have long been integral to cattle breeding by summarizing multiple traits into a single numerical value. This composite score drives genetic progress, ranks animals, and simplifies management decisions for producers. Each trait in the index is weighted according to its genetic contribution toward farm profitability.
Weighting of Fertility Traits in Net Merit Formula
In the modern Net Merit formula, fertility traits have been given significant importance. For example, the daughter’s Pregnancy Rate (DPR) is weighted at 5%. Additionally, Cow and Heifer Conception Rates collectively account for 1.7%. These weightings ensure a balanced selection approach that prioritizes both productivity and reproductive efficiency.
Incorporation of More Health and Fitness Traits
Over the years, the Net Merit index has evolved to include an array of health and fitness traits beyond fertility. Including traits like cow and heifer livability, disease resistance, and feed efficiency has resulted in a more holistic and sustainable breeding strategy. This balanced approach recognizes that a cow’s overall health and lifespan directly impact her contribution to the farm’s profitability.
Genetics and Management Synergy: Improvement in Dairy Management Practices Alongside Genetic Progress
While genetic tools are the foundation for enhancing cow fertility, the critical influence of progressive dairy management practices cannot be understated. By refining reproduction protocols, adjusting rations, optimizing cow housing, and improving environmental conditions, dairy producers have cultivated an environment conducive to realizing the full potential of genetic improvements.
A tangible testament to this synergy between genetics and management is the notable reduction of insemination attempts required for successful pregnancies. Among U.S. Holsteins, the average number of inseminations per conception has decreased from 2.5 in 2010 to 2.0 in 2020. This trend is similarly reflected in U.S. Jerseys, where breedings per conception have declined from 2.2 to 1.9 during the same timeframe.
This decreased need for insemination underscores dairy operations’ financial savings and efficiency gains, emphasizing the necessity of a comprehensive strategy that integrates advanced genetic insights with meticulous management practices.
Fertility and Stewardship: Impact on Dairy Operation Efficiency and Profitability
Dairy producers are keenly aware of the benefits of improved reproductive practices—fewer days open, quicker return to calving, reduced involuntary culling, and substantial savings in insemination, veterinary care, and other operational expenses. These advances are vital for enhancing operational efficiency. Furthermore, shorter calving intervals and improved reproductive efficiency expedite genetic improvements, leading to permanent and cumulative gains.
Often overlooked, however, are the profound sustainability benefits. Today’s consumers demand responsible production practices, particularly concerning animal welfare and environmental impact. Healthier cows with better fertility exhibit a longer productive life—a critical factor in sustainable dairy operations.
Enhanced reproductive efficiency reduces the need for replacements and lessens resource consumption to maintain herd size, subsequently lowering emissions. For example, improving pregnancy rates significantly diminishes the U.S. dairy greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint; a 10% reduction in herd methane equates to a $49 per cow per year profit increase.
Additionally, reducing the age at first calving in heifers by two months (when bred at optimal weight) cuts the heifer’s carbon footprint by 30%, translating to a $150 saving per heifer.
Sustainability encompasses three crucial dimensions: social, economic, and environmental. Socially, healthier cows mean reduced hormone use and less involuntary culling. Economically, better reproduction results in animal-specific savings and increased profitability. Environmentally, fewer replacements and inputs are necessary, which reduces emissions.
Dairy geneticists, producers, veterinarians, and other industry experts have united to enhance U.S. dairy cow fertility. A persistent focus on improved reproduction is evidently beneficial—it promotes animal welfare, advances dairy farm profitability, and ensures sustainability.
Sustainability Aspects: Social Benefits of Animal Health and Reduced Hormone Usage, Economic Savings and Profitability Enhancements, Environmental Improvements Through Reduced Resources and Emissions
Examining the broader spectrum, enhancing cow fertility is pivotal for sustainability across multiple dimensions. Socially, healthier cows necessitate fewer interventions, minimizing stress and reducing hormone usage. Consequently, the rates of involuntary culling drop significantly. This benefit is advantageous for the cows and enhances herd dynamics, alleviating ethical and practical challenges associated with animal health management.
Economically, the advantages are equally profound. Improved reproductive efficiency translates into cost savings by lowering insemination, veterinary care, and feed expenses. Shorter calving intervals further drive genetic progress, significantly bolstering long-term profitability for dairy operations. Every phase of a fertile cow’s lifecycle is fine-tuned to deliver maximal returns in milk production and breeding outcomes.
Perhaps the most compelling argument for prioritizing fertility improvement lies in its environmental impact. Fertile cows are more resource-efficient, requiring less feed and water to maintain herd size, thus leading to reduced emissions. Enhanced pregnancy rates can markedly decrease U.S. dairy farms’ greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint. For example, boosting pregnancy rates can significantly cut methane emissions, benefiting the environment. Additionally, reducing the age at first calving decreases the environmental footprint associated with heifer rearing.
Advancing fertility in dairy cows yields extensive social, economic, and environmental benefits. By concentrating on these facets, you not only enhance your profitability but also contribute to a more sustainable and ethically responsible dairy industry.
The Bottom Line
It is manifest that the once-prevailing narrative of declining fertility in U.S. Holsteins has been fundamentally altered. Dairy producers have successfully reversed this trend through deliberate modifications in genetic selection protocols and an integrated strategy that merges advanced data analytics with enhanced management methodologies. Presently, the industry witnesses tangible benefits in elevated pregnancy rates and diminished insemination attempts, coupled with significant advancements in sustainability and profitability. This comprehensive emphasis on genetic advancement and bovine welfare delineates an optimistic outlook for dairy farming, evidencing that enhanced production and bolstered fertility are compatible objectives.
Key Takeaways:
Strategic changes in genetic selection have reversed the decline in U.S. Holstein fertility.
Advanced data tracking and improved management practices play crucial roles in this positive trend.
Improved pregnancy rates and fewer insemination attempts reflect the success of these efforts.
Enhanced fertility in dairy cows contributes significantly to sustainability and farm profitability.
Holistic genetic progress that includes cow welfare heralds a promising future for dairy farming.
Increased milk production and improved fertility can coexist successfully.
As you navigate the path toward achieving optimal dairy cow fertility, staying informed about the latest genetic and management advancements is crucial. Implement these strategic changes in your breeding program to improve your herd’s reproductive efficiency and boost profitability and sustainability. Take the step today: consult with your veterinarian or a dairy geneticist to explore how you can incorporate these tools and practices into your operation. Your herd’s future productivity and health depend on it.
Summary:
In the past, U.S. Holsteins experienced a decline in fertility rates while milk production soared due to a negative correlation between production and fertility in dairy cows. Genetic traits that enabled cows to produce more milk but predisposed them to lower reproductive efficiency led to this decline. In 1994, the Net Merit index was expanded to include traits beyond just production, such as Productive Life and Somatic Cell Score, laying the groundwork for a more holistic approach to dairy cow breeding. The introduction of the Daughter Pregnancy Rate (DPR) in 2003 marked a turning point in dairy breeding strategies, enabling more accurate and effective selection for cow fertility. The Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) introduced the national cooperator database between 2006 and 2009, enabling comprehensive genetic evaluations and refining selection for fertility. Selection indexes have long been integral to cattle breeding by summarizing multiple traits into a single numerical value, driving genetic progress, ranking animals, and simplifying management decisions for producers. Modern Net Merit formulas have evolved to include health and fitness traits beyond fertility, such as cow and heifer livability, disease resistance, and feed efficiency.
Discover how genetics, barn design, and nutrition can help modern dairy cows combat heat stress. Are your cows suffering in the summer heat? Learn effective solutions now.
Every summer, as temperatures rise, dairy farmers face a hidden crisis: heat stress in dairy cows. This silent issue leads to decreased milk production and suppressed fertility rates, resulting in significant economic losses and impacting the global dairy supply. What makes modern dairy cows less resilient to heat stress than before?
The answer lies in selective breeding for higher milk yield, which has inadvertently reduced heat tolerance. Heat stress is not just about animal health and comfort; it has substantial financial repercussions, costing farmers millions annually.
We aim to explore solutions to mitigate these effects through genetics, improved barn design, and nutritional strategies.
Join us as we uncover innovative solutions that promise relief to cows and farmers.
Adapting to Modern Challenges: Genetic Selection and Heat Stress in Dairy Cows
As dairy farming has evolved, genetic selection for high milk production has made cows more vulnerable to heat stress. Heat tolerance, the ability of an organism to withstand high temperatures, is a critical factor in this. The increased metabolism needed for higher yields generates more internal heat, compromising their heat tolerance. This physiological challenge necessitates interventions to ensure cow wellbeing and productivity.
Countries like Australia and Italy have recognized the importance of heat tolerance by implementing genetic evaluations. These assessments involve analyzing the genetic makeup of animals to identify those better suited to handle heat. For instance, Italian data shows that daughters of bulls rated 105 for heat tolerance produce about 1.5 kg more milk under heat stress than those sired by bulls rated 95, translating to an economic difference of $1 per day per cow. The impact is significant, with 180 days of high temperatures annually in Italy.
Integrating genetic evaluations into breeding programs can significantly reduce the effects of heat stress. Selecting heat-tolerant animals improves animal welfare and boosts productivity. As climate variability increases, the focus on genetic selection for heat tolerance will continue to grow, ensuring sustainable and profitable dairy farming worldwide.
Impact of Heat Stress on Feed Intake and Milk Production in Dairy Cows
Heat stress significantly impacts the feed intake and milk production of dairy cows. Under heat stress, cows reduce their feed intake by 8-12%, leading to a drop in milk output. When a cow’s core body temperature rises above 38.8⁰C, it stands longer to dissipate heat, reducing blood flow to the udder and decreasing milk production. Cooling the cow’s core body temperature with fans providing wind speeds of at least 7 km/h and evaporative cooling systems can help. These methods imitate sweating, cooling the cow, improving comfort, and boosting milk production.
Maximizing Airflow for Heat Stress Mitigation: Modern Barn Designs and Fan Technology
Effective air movement is crucial for cooling dairy cows. Modern barns feature retractable side walls to enhance natural airflow and reduce heat stress.
Natural ventilation might not suffice on still, humid days. Thus, fans are essential. Eric Bussem from Abbi-Aerotech BV recommends positioning fans to blow fresh outside air into the barn, which improves airflow and energy efficiency.
Cross-ventilation ensures all cows get fresh air, preventing competition for more excellent spots. Advanced fan technology, like direct-drive models, further boosts energy efficiency and cuts maintenance costs. New fans from Abbi-Aerotech, for example, use only 15 W/h under standard conditions, much less than a typical light bulb.
By using modern barn designs and advanced fan systems, dairy farmers can better manage heat stress, improving animal welfare and productivity.
Enhancing Cow Comfort and Productivity through Cross Ventilation in Barns
Cross ventilation in barns, achieved by placing fans to blow air across from the sides, offers significant benefits over traditional end-to-end systems. This setup shortens the air travel distance, providing constant fresh air throughout the barn. Directing airflow from the sides gives each stall the same cooling effect, reducing cow competition for the best-ventilated spots. This cross-ventilation system is critical in enhancing cow comfort, promoting better rest, and increasing milk production.
Even cooling across the barn enhances cow comfort, promoting better rest and increased milk production. Equalized air distribution encourages cows to lie in their stalls, which is crucial for optimal milk synthesis. This system reduces stress and distributes the herd more evenly, improving overall welfare and productivity.
Overlooked Heat Stress: The Critical Impact on Dry Cows
While lactating cows often get the most attention, the heat load on dry cows is a crucial yet frequently overlooked issue in managing heat stress in dairy herds. Dr. Geoffrey Dahl from the University of Florida has highlighted significant consequences of heat stress during the dry period, affecting subsequent lactation, overall health, and calf development. His research shows that cows experiencing heat stress during these six weeks produce about 2 liters less milk per day in their next lactation than cooled ones. Heat-stressed dry cows also have fewer alveoli in the udder, reducing milk production, and are more susceptible to retained placenta, mastitis, and respiratory diseases.
The adverse effects extend to the offspring as well. Calves from heat-stressed mothers are born earlier, with lower birth weights and poorer survival rates. These issues persist through weaning and puberty, affecting growth rates and immune status. Reduced milk yields are also seen in these calves’ daughters, continuing the cycle of heat stress impacts into future generations.
Comprehensive Heat Stress Management: A Responsibility for Dairy Farmers
Maintaining hydration is critical to managing heat stress in dairy cows. Easy access to clean water is essential, but effective hydration management goes beyond that. Comprehensive strategies are needed to cool cows from the inside out, supporting feed and water intake, replenishing nutrients, and promoting gut health during heat stress.
Bovine BlueLite from TechMix is a leading product designed to maintain optimal hydration in dairy cattle. Available in soluble powder and pellet forms, it combines electrolytes with energy sources to preserve cell volume and fluid balance. Fortified with vitamins and antioxidants, BlueLite helps combat oxidative stress, reducing heat’s adverse effects on production and reproduction.
Research shows that supplementing cows with Bovine BlueLite during heat stress helps decrease body temperatures and sustain milk production. Integrating BlueLite into a farm’s heat stress management can improve herd well-being and productivity during challenging summer months.
The Slick Gene: A Beacon of Hope for Heat Tolerance in Dairy Cows
Introducing the “slick” gene—known for its short hair coat and extra sweat glands—is a game-changer for boosting heat tolerance in dairy cows. This gene, from Bos Indicus or Zebu cattle, was integrated into Holsteins via the Senepol breed to enhance their productivity and adaptability in hot climates.
Pioneering this effort, Raphy Lopez of Puerto Rico combined top US Holstein lines with Senepol cattle to develop high-producing, heat-tolerant cows. The University of Florida furthered this work by importing slick genetics, making notable bulls like Slick Gator and Slick Blanco available.
A breakthrough came with the breeding of El-Remanso Sinba-Red. This homozygous slick bull ensures that all offspring carry the slick gene. Mark Yeazel’s homozygous slick red and polled bull, Ja-Bob Eclipse, has recently sparked renewed interest in slick breeding.
Beyond the Americas, Rudolf Haudenschild and the KeepCool Syndicate in Switzerland actively promote slick genetics in Europe. These global efforts highlight the slick gene’s potential to help dairy cows stay productive and healthy despite rising temperatures worldwide.
The Bottom Line
Modern dairy cows face increasing vulnerability to heat stress due to selective breeding for higher milk production, which has inadvertently decreased their heat tolerance. Utilizing a holistic approach that includes genetic selection for heat tolerance, improved barn designs with better ventilation, and nutritional strategies to maintain hydration and reduce internal heat production can significantly mitigate these adverse effects.
Global implementation of genetic evaluations and the slick gene integration show promise. Evidence from Italy and Australia demonstrates real-world benefits like increased milk production and better overall bovine health. Additionally, innovative barn designs, advanced fan technologies, and thorough hydration strategies offer practical solutions to this pervasive issue.
It’s important to acknowledge the broader implications. Heat stress affects not only immediate productivity and health but also the long-term well-being of future generations, impacting calves and subsequent lactations. The economic losses are substantial, amounting to millions annually, highlighting the need for proactive measures.
Addressing heat stress in dairy cows requires a comprehensive approach. By leveraging advancements in genetics, technology, and nutrition, the dairy industry can develop more resilient herds capable of thriving despite rising temperatures, thus ensuring sustained productivity and animal well-being.
Key Takeaways:
Genetic Selection: Modern dairy cows are less heat tolerant due to selective breeding for higher milk production.
Heat Mitigation Strategies: Housing with better temperature control, nutritional strategies to reduce internal heat, and incorporating the “slick” gene are crucial measures.
Air Movement: Effective ventilation through fans and open barn designs enhances cooling and cow comfort.
Dry Cow Consideration: Heat stress during the dry period significantly impacts future lactation yields and overall cow health.
Hydration: Rehydration is essential for maintaining feed intake and overall health during heat stress.
Summary:
Heat stress in dairy cows is a significant issue that leads to decreased milk production and suppressed fertility rates, causing economic losses and impacting the global dairy supply. Selective breeding for higher milk yield has reduced heat tolerance, necessitating interventions to ensure cow wellbeing and productivity. Countries like Australia and Italy have implemented genetic evaluations to reduce heat stress effects, improving animal welfare and productivity. Modern barn designs with retractable side walls and advanced fan systems can help dairy farmers manage heat stress, improving animal welfare and productivity. Cross-ventilation in barns shortens air travel distance, provides constant fresh air, and directs airflow from the sides, reducing competition for the best-ventilated spots. Heat stress affects lactation, overall health, and calf development, resulting in lower milk production and poorer offspring. Dairy farmers must manage heat stress comprehensively, including maintaining hydration, supporting feed and water intake, replenishing nutrients, and promoting gut health during heat stress.
Explore the impact of pedigree errors on genetic evaluations in cattle breeding. How do these mistakes skew validation studies and influence breeding choices? Learn more here.
In the world of cattle breeding, precision is paramount. Yet, a single misstep in pedigree records can set off a chain reaction of errors. Consider the shock of discovering that a prized lineage is flawed due to a simple record-keeping mistake. This isn’t just a minor blip—it can throw the entire genetic evaluation process into disarray, distorting results and sowing seeds of doubt in breeding programs.
Pedigree errors, such as incorrect parentage, can significantly impact breeding. They distort the perceived relatedness of individuals, misguiding selection and reducing efficiency. Accurate pedigree information is essential to:
Ensure the integrity of breeding values
Maintain genetic diversity
Maximize desirable traits
Reliable pedigree records are the backbone of genetic evaluations, guiding everything from daily management to long-term breeding strategies. With accurate data, the advanced predictions of models like the single-step model retain their power.
“Pedigree errors are like silent assassins, stealthily undermining the foundation of trust and accuracy in cattle breeding,” a renowned geneticist warned.
This post explores the impact of pedigree errors using accurate Fleckvieh cattle data. We’ll reveal how minor discrepancies can compromise predictions and breeding outcomes by examining various scenarios with erroneous records. Join us in understanding the importance of accurate pedigree information and learning how to protect the genetic legacy of future cattle generations.
Understanding Pedigree Errors in Cattle Breeding
Type of Pedigree Error
Approximate Error Rate
Incorrect Sire Assignment
5% – 20%
Incorrect Dam Assignment
1% – 5%
Missing Parent Information
10% – 15%
Recording Errors
2% – 10%
Pedigrees, the family trees of cattle, play a crucial role in breeding decisions by mapping out lineage and ensuring breeders make informed choices. However, pedigree errors can disrupt these evaluations, leading to inaccurate Estimated Breeding Values (EBV) and misjudging an animal’s genetic potential.
Studies show that pedigree errors have serious consequences. Before genomic data, these errors caused misguided evaluations. With the integration of genomic information, it’s essential to understand how these inaccuracies affect modern genetic evaluations using the single-step model.
Research on Fleckvieh cattle, using a dataset of 361,980 pedigrees and 25,950 genotypes, revealed the impact of pedigree errors. Researchers simulated True Breeding Values (TBV) and phenotypes with a heritability of 0.25 to measure the mistakes at 5%, 10%, and 20% levels in conventional and single-step models.
The results were precise: higher rates of pedigree errors reduced the correlation between TBV and EBV and lowered prediction variability. These errors acted like random exchanges of daughters among bulls, masking actual genetic differences. This effect was more evident in progeny-tested bulls than in young selection candidates.
In forward prediction scenarios, pedigree errors caused an apparent inflation of early predictions, misleading breeders. This confirms that correcting pedigree errors is essential for reliable genetic evaluations and better breeding decisions.
Accurate pedigree records are vital; they are the lifeblood of breeders, enabling precise genetic evaluations and promoting genetic progress. With genomic data integrated into assessments, maintaining accurate pedigrees becomes even more critical, marking a new era in precision cattle breeding. Your role in this process is invaluable.
The Role of Pedigrees in Genetic Evaluations
Pedigrees are essential in livestock breeding, serving as the recorded lineage of animals. Accurate pedigrees predict an individual’s genetic potential by tracing inherited traits. However, errors in these pedigrees can lead to significant misinterpretations in genetic evaluations.
When pedigree errors occur, they disrupt the assumptions about genetic relationships among individuals. This misrepresentation can distort breeding program outcomes, affecting the accuracy of estimated breeding values (EBVs) and genetic gain, especially in genomic evaluations that combine pedigree and molecular data.
The single-step model, which integrates pedigree and genomic information, aims for more precise genetic predictions. Yet, pedigree errors can still undermine its efficacy. Even a tiny percentage of incorrect records, such as misattributing sires, can skew data and forecasts, as shown in studies on traits like carcass quality.
Correcting and verifying pedigrees are not just crucial, they are a constant battle in genetic evaluations. Many breeding programs invest in algorithms and DNA testing to correct these errors. Despite these efforts, eliminating pedigree errors remains challenging, requiring constant vigilance and improved data collection methods. Your dedication to this cause is essential.
The impact of pedigree errors can vary. In progeny-tested animals, reliance on offspring data means errors can significantly reduce genetic prediction variation. This results in progeny appearing more genetically similar, leading to inflated early predictions and potentially overestimating genetic merit.
Understanding and mitigating the impact of pedigree errors is an ongoing priority in animal breeding. With continued research and improved methodologies, the accuracy of genetic evaluations is expected to be enhanced, supporting future livestock improvement.
Why Accuracy Matters: The Impact of Pedigree Errors
When errors are embedded in pedigrees, the accuracy of estimated breeding values (EBVs) takes a significant hit. These mistakes distort animal genetic relationships, leading breeders astray and ultimately hindering genetic improvement. Our study showed that as pedigree errors increased from 5% to 20%, the correlation between actual breeding values (TBVs) and EBVs dropped markedly. This reduction means predicting an animal’s genetic potential becomes less reliable, complicating efforts to enhance desirable traits.
These errors also affect validation studies, especially in forward prediction scenarios. We observed a 5-6 percentage points decrease in validation reliabilities with incorrect pedigrees. Errors randomize genetic ties within the herd, particularly when wrong sires are assigned to non-genotyped females. This randomization causes less variation in animals with progeny, inflating early predictions and skewing perceived genetic accuracy.
The broader impact of these inaccuracies on breeding strategies is profound. Misjudged animals can lead to poor mating decisions, reducing genetic progress over generations. This is especially critical for traits like carcass quality in cattle, where our data showed that EBV accuracy and heritability estimates suffer due to pedigree errors. These findings highlight the need for stringent pedigree validation and the use of genomic data to counteract the adverse effects of erroneous records.
Decoding Pedigree Errors: Causes and Consequences
Pedigree errors can seriously disrupt genetic evaluations. These errors often arise from misidentifications or incomplete records, which are common in large-scale cattle breeding. One frequent issue is sire misidentification, where the recorded sire isn’t the biological father. This can result from human error or accidental mismatching during the breeding process.
The consequences of such errors are significant, leading to a decline in the accuracy of estimated breeding values (EBV). Distorted pedigree information skews genetic relationships, making animals appear more genetically similar than they are. This perceived homogenization reduces genetic variation, which is essential for accurate selection and breeding decisions. Higher rates of pedigree errors correlate with lower standard deviations in breeding value predictions, indicating a contraction in perceived genetic diversity.
Progeny-tested bulls are particularly affected compared to young selection candidates. Bulls with progeny show more pronounced decreases in EBV variability due to repeated errors over generations. This false sense of similarity among bulls levels the playing field, erroneously elevating or undervaluing their breeding values. Consequently, pedigree errors deflate the precision of genetic evaluations and disrupt validation processes.
In forward prediction validation scenarios, early predictions can appear inflated due to artificial genetic uniformity caused by pedigree errors. As animals mature and their progeny are evaluated, the true magnitude of these errors becomes evident. The initial over-inflation of genetic merit misleads breeding success perceptions, disillusions breeders, and complicates breeding strategies.
Two primary methods introduce pedigree errors: wrong sire information (WSI) and missing parent information (MPI). WSI introduces errors by randomly assigning incorrect sires, while MPI omits parental data. Each method misrepresents familial links, distorting the genetic blueprint and affecting the entire pedigree mapping and evaluation process.
Pedigree errors pose a multifaceted challenge in cattle breeding, impacting genetic evaluations and breeding progress. Recognizing and mitigating these errors is crucial for maintaining genetic predictions’ integrity and advancing cattle genetics. Advocating for stringent data verification and integrating genomic information to cross-verify pedigrees is essential to ensure accurate and reliable breeding data.
The Domino Effect: How Pedigree Errors Skew Genetic Predictions
Pedigree errors do more than misclassify animals; they ripple through genetic evaluation systems, distorting the entire breeding program. Accurate familial relationships are crucial, especially in single-step models where misassigned pedigrees lead to biased genetic merit estimations. The models need to know which animals share genetic backgrounds to predict breeding values accurately.
Interestingly, the impact of these errors varies with the animal’s reproductive status. Bulls with many offspring show a steep drop in the correlation between actual breeding values (TBV) and estimated breeding values (EBV) as errors increase. This is because incorrect sire assignments make offspring appear more genetically similar than they are, blurring the distinction between different bulls and misleading breeders.
Young candidates without progeny are less affected since their evaluations rely more on their genomic data than offspring records. However, they aren’t immune; indirect links to erroneous pedigrees still introduce biases.
Worryingly, pedigree errors can inflate early predictions in validation studies. When inaccuracies create undue uniformity among progeny-tested bulls, initial predictions for young candidates may seem overly favorable, misleading breeders. Given that forward prediction is vital for breeding strategies, maintaining accuracy in these predictions is critical to long-term success.
Therefore, meticulous pedigree recording and validation are crucial. As genetic evaluations increasingly incorporate genomic data, pedigree integrity remains essential for accuracy. Continuous improvement in pedigree accuracy and robust genomic integration will enhance genetic assessment, leading to a more productive and genetically superior livestock population.
Strategies for Minimizing Pedigree Errors
Dealing with pedigree errors demands an intelligent strategy. Here are some essential methods to reduce these errors and improve genetic evaluations:
DNA Testing for Parentage Verification: DNA testing ensures accurate parentage records by verifying true lineage through genetic markers, thus minimizing incorrect identifications.
Regular Audits of Pedigree Records: Routine audits help spot and fix discrepancies before they spread through the breeding program, ensuring data consistency and accuracy.
Breeder Education on Proper Pedigree Management: Educating breeders on meticulous record-keeping and the impacts of pedigree errors is essential. Training should cover best practices, data management tools, and the effects of mistakes on genetic evaluations.
Importance of Validation Studies in Ensuring Data Accuracy
Validation studies are crucial in ensuring the accuracy of genetic data in livestock breeding. These studies cross-reference pedigrees with genetic markers, making them essential for detecting and correcting errors that could undermine genetic evaluations.
The role of validation studies extends to identifying anomalies that could distort genetic predictions. Forward prediction validation, for example, shows how pedigree errors can inflate early predictions, emphasizing the need for precise validation. When validation reliabilities decrease due to higher error rates, the integrity of genetic assessments is compromised, leading to poor breeding decisions.
Collaboration between breed associations and researchers is vital to address these challenges. Breed associations’ extensive records and practical insights, combined with researchers’ technical expertise, can improve data validation methods. This partnership not only corrects existing inaccuracies but also strengthens breeding programs against future errors, ensuring a solid genetic foundation for the livestock industry.
The Bottom Line
In conclusion, pedigree errors can seriously distort genetic evaluations. Mistaken relatedness assumptions reduce the correlation between actual breeding values (TBV) and estimated breeding values (EBV). For progeny-tested bulls, this leads to decreased prediction variation and inflated early predictions, undermining reliability in validation studies.
Accurate pedigree records are crucial for reliable genetic evaluations in cattle breeding. They empower breeders to make informed selection decisions, which is essential for genetic progress and sustainable breeding goals.
Call to Action: Breeders should prioritize accurate pedigree records. Implement robust tracking systems and verify pedigree information routinely. This ensures reliable genetic evaluations, enhancing the success and sustainability of cattle breeding programs.
Key Takeaways:
Pedigree errors incorrectly assume the genetic relationships between individuals, thus affecting the quality and reliability of genetic evaluation models.
The single-step model, which combines pedigree and genomic data, is highly susceptible to even small percentages of incorrect records, leading to skewed data and forecasts.
Errors in pedigrees cause a decrease in the correlation between true breeding values (TBVs) and estimated breeding values (EBVs), complicating selection and breeding programs.
The impact of these errors is more pronounced in progeny-tested bulls compared to young selection candidates without progeny.
Forward prediction validation studies reveal an apparent inflation of early genetic predictions due to decreased variation caused by pedigree errors.
Mitigating pedigree errors requires persistent effort, improved data collection methods, and continuous research to enhance genetic evaluation accuracy.
Summary: Pedigree errors, such as incorrect parentage, can significantly affect cattle breeding by distorting the perceived relatedness of individuals, misguiding selection, and reducing efficiency. Accurate pedigree information is crucial for maintaining genetic diversity and maximizing desirable traits. These errors disrupt assumptions about genetic relationships among individuals, distorting breeding program outcomes and affecting the accuracy of estimated breeding values (EBVs) and genetic gain. The single-step model, which integrates pedigree and molecular data, aims for more precise genetic predictions, but even a small percentage of incorrect records can skew data and forecasts. Correcting and verifying pedigrees is a constant battle in genetic evaluations, requiring constant vigilance and improved data collection methods. Understanding and mitigating pedigree errors is an ongoing priority in animal breeding, with continued research and improved methodologies expected to enhance genetic evaluation accuracy and support future livestock improvement.
If you were the coach of an NFL football team, would you select your players based solely on looking at them or would you want to see their performance statistics, in order to decide how to assemble the best team possible? That is the question that Don Bennink (Read more: NORTH FLORIDA HOLSTEINS. Aggressive, Progressive and Profitable!!) asked at the recent genomics conference. (Read more. Genetics in the Age of Genomics – Seminar Recordings and Recap) While it’s a pretty simple question, it may forever change the way you make your mating decisions.
For generations, we have all been taught to look at a cow the same way, and that’s the way we continue to teach the next generation to look at dairy cows today. But just because that is the way it has always been done, does not mean that we have been doing it correctly. We all start out learning the parts of the dairy cow and have learned the same way as we always have on how to evaluate cows. In fact, one major publication did seven editions in a row about how to evaluate cows, and each one presented the same way it’s been done for generations. It doesn’t seem to matter that evaluating type or conformation has been proven not to be the most accurate way to determine longevity (Read more: She ain’t pretty she just milks that way).
For years, it has been assumed that, if a cow had “high type” and lots of production, she was the perfect cow. But we all know that perfect cows don’t always exist (Read more: The Perfect Holstein Cow). Nevertheless, we have bred for these two key areas: high type and lots of production. We totally disregarded that we did not make substantial gains in profitability. And, furthermore, herd life actually decreased, even though we all bought into to the theory that a high type cow is a long lasting cow. Unfortunately, actual performance data shows that, as we bred for this the cows were actually lasting less time than before. In fact mortality rates increased; conception decreased and the number of lactations that most cows lasted decreased.
Through the years, the use of high production and low fertility bulls has actually decreased overall herd conception rates. Don points out that when he “first started milking cows, and AI was in it’s infancy, farmers up and down the road, had a 60% conception rate. Today people brag if they have a 30% conception rate.” Don also points out that in 1996, 93.4% of the calves that were born in the US lived, (i.e. a 6.4% stillborn rate). In 2002, the stillborn rate increased to 11% (i.e. 89% lived) and by 2007, 14% of the dairy calves died at birth. It’s only in more recent years that the industry has acknowledged this trend and has started to put more emphasis on conception and the significant impact it has on profitability. The reason for this is we put so much emphasis on a two-year-old production that we were killing reproduction. That is because cows that get back in calf regularly drop in production because they have to use some of their energy to support the development of their calves. So the sires that gave the maximum amount of milk were also the sires who had the lowest conception rates. We all know that a cow that is milking hard is the hardest cow to get back in calf. No matter what their conformation.
The thing is that we have the systems and technology to make the changes we need to make for the future. As Don points out, we don’t need to go to the 125-year old technology of type evaluation to solve this problem. Instead of having to use theory to predict longevity, we can actually measure productive life through the actual length in months that cows last in herds compared to their herd mates. We don’t need type evaluation to guess who will last longer; we have the actual information. We have the ability to see just which cows will last longer, not from trying to figure out what type trait links best to longevity. We have actual longevity data, SCS, fertility, conception, still births, etc.
We are all armchair quarterbacks. We are all willing to second guess the mating decisions of others after the fact. The challenge is that, with the technology we have available today, we don’t have to do as much second guessing as in the past. Tools like genomics and new performance data such as DPR, Still Birth Rate, and Productive Life tell us everything we need to make an informed decision. Don asks, “Can you just pick the perfect team by just looking at your players? Or would it help to know which players have drug issues, which ones will end up in jail, which ones will last a full season, and which quarterbacks can actually complete a pass, or know how many sacks your linebackers have made in the past. As a coach, you want all this data to choose your team. Well we are not coaches we are dairy farmers, and we make our money milking cows. Don’t you want that data on your animals? Or are you just going to keep looking at them and think that you can guess which ones could perform?”
In today’s day and age, we not only have traits that are more directly connected to longevity than type evaluation, we also have genomic testing that can more accurately predict what sires and cows will last longer. Every Tuesday we now receive genomic predictions on animals. We don’t need to wait till for a quarterly classification visit, that may or may not catch a cow on her best day, to evaluate what we think from looking at her is the probability that she will last more lactations. We can actually get much more accurate data at a younger age on how long she will stay in the herd.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Sometimes it can be hard to change the way we have always played the game. When something has been done for generations, there will always be those who are resistant to change. However, the industry has changed and the amount of information available today to make mating decisions is light years ahead of what it was just a few years ago. The game is changing, and you need to change what you base your breeding decisions on. . The best coaches and quarterbacks make their decisions based on performance data, not on hypothesis. Genomics has helped take away the guessing game. We can now know at a very young age, what the genetic potential of that calf is. We can make better decisions faster. In the past art and practical knowledge was what drove mating decisions. However, today’s breeding world calls for a different approach. It takes a level of focus and commitment, and it’s a business. It is just like football, where the coaches now use all the information possible to decide what players to put on the field and how to use those players for the big game on Monday nights. Tools like genomics have changed the game forever.
Not sure what all this hype about genomics is all about?
Want to learn what it is and what it means to your breeding program?
Go to any purebred dairy cattle sale and listen to the pedigree person. What are they saying? Usually is an exhortation to buy the animal in the ring because it has a gTPI of 2700 or her dam was Grand Champion at prominent show or she comes from eight generation of Excellent dams. In essence what we are being told is that this animal is at the top of the breed and you should buy it. So does dairy cattle breeding work by identifying one number, one show or one family and only using that information to make decisions on. I think we all know the answer to that question … and the answer is…. “NO”! But let’s step back and, regardless of a breeder’s focus, look at how the understanding of all the numbers could be simplified when it comes to genetic information on sires.
But let’s get back to the numbers, numbers for sires.
So many of them. Often expressed differently. What is good and what is not so good? What’s this thing about a base roll on December 2nd and what does it mean for dairy cattle breeders? Why oh why can’t the brainy folks who compile the numbers make them so breeders can quickly look at a number for a proven or genomic bull and know if he is a standout, middle of the road, an also ran or an out-and-out loser. Don’t the genetic types know that bottom-line focused milk producers want quick and simple answers on bull rankings as they plant and harvest crops, handle manure, feed and manage cows, coach 4-H or FFA and yes, educate their children.
What is #1? Does it Matter?
However at the same time that milk producers are asking for simplification, many breeders are striving to have Mr #1 Sire. First it was 2500 gTPI and now it is 2700 gTPI. Or first it was 1000 NM$ and now it is 1150 NM$. Can the difference between 2600 and 2700 gTPI be quantified when it comes to mating cows? If a breeder has a cow that needs improvement in protein yield and feet and legs which sire should he use? Is a sire with 39 lbs of protein and 1.81 for Feet & Legs Composite good enough? Bottom line focused breeders need a universally expressed number for all traits so they can say to their genetic advisor whether to include a sire in the mating program. Of course having a breeding plan that includes needs and priorities is needed for a mating program to be successful. (Read more: What’s the plan?)
Percent is Universal
Every student is trained to understand that 100% is the best mark possible, 75% shows good proficiency and 50% is just a passing grade. So why couldn’t the same thing apply to genetic evaluation results? That way breeders would not need to know what is the very best value, how to distinguish if this is on the new or old base or where a sires daughters are inferior.
Breeders Want to Know
Breeders do not want to carry several files on their electronic device on what is top, good, okay or bad for each trait. All they want to know for the sire they are looking at is – what are his strengths and weaknesses relative to his contemporaries?
Breeders expect their nutritional advisors to know the fine details about balancing rations. As well they expect their genetic advisors to know all about how to improve their cows and herd from a genetic perspective. In both cases breeders expect their advisors to use the KISS principle – Keep It Simple Stupid. (Read more: gPs– Genetic Profile Systems – Dairy Cattle Breeding Made Simple)
Does This Fit Breeders Needs?
The following charts are provided so Bullvine readers can consider if breeding the females in their herds would be easier for them if sire indexes were expressed on a percent basis. A percentage of what the very best contemporary’s index is.
Table 1 – Top Ten gTPI Daughter Proven Sires (Aug ’14) Expressed as a Percent*
Segment
#
Avg. LPI
Avg. Sale Price
Price/LPI Point
>3000LPI
80
3286
$60,021
$18.26
>2000 LPI <3000
164
2589
$16,384
$6.51
<2000 LPI
56
1637
$8,879
$5.42
R&W
26
2093
$24,600
$11.75
Polled
26
2275
$37,076
$16.30
Show Heifers or All-Canadian Pedigree
52
2005
$17,154
$8.56
* Percent of the index for the #1 sire for the trait within the category
A quick review of Table 1 shows:
Facebook achieves the #1 position based on his high production and good type classification conformation
Dorcy, AltaGreatness and Large daughters have the udders
AltaGreatness, AltaFairway and Junior are below average compared to their marketed contemporaries for Feet & Legs
As a group all these sires can be expected to produce daughters that are very high for gTPI
Breeding on gTPI only will miss the fact that sires have strengths and limitations
Using only the top gTPI sires is not likely to produce show winners
Table 2 – Top Ten gTPI Genomic Sires (Aug ’14) Expressed as a Percent*
RANK
NAME
# OF DAUGHTERS
PTAT
Udder Comp
F&L Comp
Body Comp
Dairy Comp
Stature
1
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
55
3.03
2.59
2.56
1.93
2.03
3.1
2
REGANCREST ELTON DURHAM-ET
21
2.47
2.31
2.13
1.7
1.98
2.13
3
KHW KITE ADVENT-RED-ET
19
2.53
2.24
1.6
2.04
1.65
2.41
4
REGANCREST DUNDEE-ET
18
2.06
2.18
0.75
1.29
1.55
1.18
5
GEN-MARK STMATIC SANCHEZ
14
3.07
2.17
2.44
3.34
2.83
3.91
6
WILCOXVIEW JASPER-ET
11
2.89
1.94
0.73
2.56
2.52
3.22
7
ERBACRES DAMION
8
3.2
2.22
3.17
2.83
2.72
2.76
7
MAPLE-DOWNS-I G W ATWOOD-ET
8
4.16
3.41
3.46
3.44
2.97
4.31
9
PICSTON SHOTTLE-ET
6
2.66
1.97
1.79
2.42
2.3
2.71
9
ROYLANE JORDAN-ET
6
2.07
1.94
0.32
1.53
2.06
1.93
* Percent of the index for the #1 sire for the trait within the category
A quick review of Table 2 shows:
Very little separates #1 and #10 on the list. Remember that genomic bulls are 70% Rel.
Within individual traits there is considerable variation among these sires
The percentages identify that every sire has one or more limiting factors
As is always recommended use several genomic sires instead of one or two
Supershot, Delicious Coin, Delta and Rubicon are high for production
Alta1stClass, Kingboy and Monterey stand out for conformation
Table 3- Top Ten NM$ Daughter Proven Sires (Aug ’14) Expressed as a Percent*
Segment
#
Avg. LPI
Avg. Sale Price
Price/LPI Point
>3000LPI
80
3286
$60,021
$18.26
>2000 LPI <3000
164
2589
$16,384
$6.51
<2000 LPI
56
1637
$8,879
$5.42
R&W
26
2093
$24,600
$11.75
Polled
26
2275
$37,076
$16.30
Show Heifers or All-Canadian Pedigree
52
2005
$17,154
$8.56
* Percent of the index for the #1 sire for the trait within the category
A quick review of Table 3 shows:
The vast majority of these sires will have daughters that produce high volumes of fat and protein
Yano, Erdman, Marian944 and Twist stand out for Productive Life
Robust is in a league all his own for Daughter Calving Ease
Twist claims #3 position on NM$ and has high PL, SCS and DPR.
SCS needs to be interpreted carefully as sires with poor SCS are not returned to active service
Table 4 – Top Ten NM$ Genomic Sire (Aug ’14) Expressed as a Percent*
Segment
#
Avg. LPI
Avg. Sale Price
Picks
74
2789
$28,622
Heifers
203
2528
$24,588
Cows
23
2330
$46,839
Total
300
2476
$27,289
* Percent of the index for the #1 sire for the trait within the category
A quick review of Table 4 shows:
Percentages make it quick and easy to identify both strengths and limitations for a sire
Delta, Supershot and Dozer do not have significant limitations
Eight of the sires have over 80% for Productive Life
SCS, DPR and DCE percentages vary quite a bit but that’s to be expected for sires that do not have milking daughters
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Understanding index values is important but having multiple ways of expressing the results of genetic evaluations can result in breeders saying “Too much information. Give it to me in terms I can quickly comprehend”. Being a good dairy farmer requires that managers know a great deal about many disciplines. A good dairy farmer understands that effective breeding requires equal parts art (cow sense) and science (number crunching). Simplifying the expression of genetic evaluation results could be a step forward for all breeders.
Not sure what all this hype about genomics is all about?
Want to learn what it is and what it means to your breeding program?
For the 1% of breeders who deal in seed stock Proof Days are like Christmas 3x times a year. But for the remaining 99% of dairy breeders proof days, the days when the latest Genetic Evaluations are released, are not that big a deal. But they should be.
The following are three reasons all dairy producers should be checking out the latest genetic evaluations.
All producers should be using the best genetics possible
Analysis conducted as a cooperative effort between Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) and the milk-recording agency in Québec, Valacta, examined the association between the average profit per cow at the herd level and the genetic potential of the herd for various traits.
Figure 1 shows the relationship between the average LPI and the average profit per cow per day in each herd studied. While there are some exceptions to the rule, the dark line in the graph reflects the average relationship across the LPI scale, which indicates that herds with higher average LPI levels of their cows also have higher profit values. This positive correlation between LPI and profit clearly shows that genetics is a significant contributing factor but that management also plays a major role. On average, for every 100-point difference in LPI at the herd level there is an increase in profit per cow per year of $50, which accumulates from year to year. From a sire selection perspective, this equivalence translates to a difference of $50 more profit per daughter per year for every 200-point difference in the sire’s LPI value. Based on a 50% conception rate, that would indicate that the semen from a sire who is 400 LPI points higher than the average sire, should cost $50 more. Applying this to the current sires available, by using a sire such as AltaRazor who has an LPI of +3038 you will generate and extra $187.50 compared to a sire with an LPI of 1500. This is from direct daughter profitably and does not even factor in the increased performance of any progeny this cow would produce. So then investing $50 to $100 more for semen that will deliver over $180 in return is certainly a profitable decision even for commercial milk producers.
The Grass Is Always Greener on the Other Side of the Fence
I often hear many producers quote the minimum levels for certain traits that they are willing to use. The challenge with that is while this approach is great for setting basic criteria, it fails to look at how these sires compare to other sires. By using “any” sire that meets their criteria they are missing out on maximizing the genetics gain, and therefore the profitability of their herd. As demonstrated above setting a minimum threshold, instead of going for maximum return, is leaving dollars on the table, and not in the milk check. Then there is the case where some milk producers prefer to deal with only one semen sales representative or A.I. company. No A.I. company has all the best sires (Read more: Stud Wars: Episode II – April 2014), so by employing this practices any savings or efficiencies you gain from negations, are negated by the amount you are costing yourself in loss of genetic potential. (Read more: Rumors, Lies, and other stuff Salesmen will tell you and Are There Too Many Semen Salesmen Coming In The Lane?)
Are You Sure You Are Getting What You Pay For?
With the latest reports indicating that genomic young sire use is approaching 60% in North America, many producers have embraced genomics in a significant way (Read more: Why 84% of Dairy Breeders Will Soon Be Using Genomic Sires!). I have even come across herds that have gone to 100% genomic young sire use. With such a heavy usage of sires that are 60-70% reliable, are you sure that the sires that you are using are delivering on the other end? A great way to check this is to see how the sires you are investing in, are doing when they receive their official daughter proof. Sure that may not mean that you go back and use these sires once they are proven, but it does help you get a better understanding of the reliability of the genetics that you have invested in.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
I am not saying that all dairy producers should be waiting with baited breath at 8 am on proof day. However, there is certainly value in taking the time to check out the latest sire evaluations, to see how the sires you have been using are performing and what other sires are out there that could help you increase the profitability of your herd. No matter what your management style, there are certainly enough reasons for you to get excited on proof day.
Making breeding decisions is complicated and time consuming. Traits such as fertility, calving ability, and inbreeding make mating decisions challenging. Having said that, there are great tools available to analyze animals and assist in making breeding decisions. However, the challenge with these tools is that they are based on analysis of the visual observation of an animal, and do not take into account the rising challenges and opportunities of today’s genomic and advanced genetic evaluation era. To help leverage the greatly improved evaluation data that is available, we at the Bullvine have developed gPs – Genetic Profile System, to help modern dairy breeders simplify breeding decisions.
gPs looks at six key areas: Production; Components; Durability; Fertility; Calving Ability and Inbreeding. These areas directly represent the key areas that all breeders need to consider when making their mating decisions.
For a bull, gPs letters show the qualities he adds to a mating listed in order of improvement priority, from left to right. For example the letters CPADIF shows that the bull’s greatest gPs qualities are his ability to improve C-Components, P-Production, A-Calving Ability, D-Durability, I-Inbreeding and F-Fertility. gPs assigns a percentage to each bull in comparison to the best one available.
For a cow, gPs shows the qualities that she needs, in order of improvement priority, from left to right. The letters PACDIF for example, show that a particular cow’s gPs prioritized needs are P-Production, A – Calving Ability, Components, D-Durability, I-Inbreeding, F – Fertility.
Determining and then matching a cows gPs letters to those of a bull will accelerate the rate of genetic gain in the herd, while making mating decisions much faster and simpler. For example if you have a cow that needs improvement in C-Components, D-Durability and A-Calving Ability, consider using bulls with gPs letters that start with CDA, CAD, DAC, DCA, ACD or ADC. This is a fast and effective way to correctively mate, using all genetically rated traits that directly influence the profitability of the dairy operation.
Let’s take a look at a couple of sires and see how this applies. The current highest genomic Net Merit $ sire in the world is Supershot. Supershot’s gPs letters break down as follows: P-Production 86.4%, C-Components 86.1%, D-Durability 79.5%, F-Fertility 49.2%, A – Calving Ability 76.5%, I-Inbreeding 42.1% resulting in a gPs value of PCDAFI. This is achieved by ordering his letters from that of his greatest strengths, P-Production, C- Components, and D – Durability, to those areas that he is likely to have the least improvement, A – Calving Ability, F – Fertility and I – Inbreeding. This does not mean that he will not be able to improve these areas. It simply highlights that these are the areas that he will have the least improvement impact upon. In fact sires with a value of 80% or higher for a specific letter will provide significant improvement in that area, 60-79% will provide moderate improvement, 40-59% will provide little to no improvement for that area , and below 40% could actually decrease the performance of the resulting progeny relative to other possible mattings. Robust, the popular sire of sons and the #1 proven TPI sire in the world,has a gPs code of DCAPIF. That means he sires daughters that are durable, with high components and strong calving ability. The area that you need to protect Robuston is his fertility. It is not surprising that Massey also has a gPs code of DCAPIF, as they tend to sire similar patterns in their progeny.
Notable Proven Sires gPs codes
Birth year
LPI
Milk
Fat
Fat %
Protein
Protein%
CONF
Mammary
Feet/Legs
Strength
HerdLife
SCS
Daus Fertility
2012*
3378
1885
94
0.22
81
0.17
14
13
11
8
111
2.71
103
2011
3293
2048
97
0.1
80
0.17
12
11
8
6
110
2.69
103
2010
3196
1871
91
0.14
76
0.14
11
11
9
5
109
2.77
102
2009
3058
2033
95
0.18
74
0.08
8
8
6
2
108
2.76
100
Notable Genomic Sires gPs codes
Birth Year
LPI
Milk
Fat
Fat%
Protein
Protein%
Conf
Mammary
Feet/Legs
Strength
HerdLife
SCS
Daus Fertility
2013*
3516
2218
108
0.24
99
0.18
14
13
10
8
113
2.66
104
2012
3448
1995
103
0.28
89
0.15
13
13
11
7
112
2.7
103
2011
3316
2359
98
0.1
84
0.08
12
12
9
6
109
2.77
101
The following is a listing of the top genomic and proven sires in each of the key areas.
P – Production
Key Traits: Milk lbs, Fat lbs. & Protein lbs
Name
Score
Sire Name
Owner(s)
JACOBS GOLDWYN BRITANY
96
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
FERME JACOBS INC, CAP SANTE, PQ, (418) 285-2674
WILLOWHOLME GOLDWYN JESSICA
96
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
FERME BLONDIN, ST. PLACIDE, PQ, (450) 258-2904
PIERSTEIN GOLDWYN SUNSHINE
95
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
PIERRE BOULET, MONTMAGNY, PQ, (418) 248-6150
MORSAN GOLDWYN LILAC
95
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
DONNANVIEW FARMS LTD, STIRLING, ON, (613) 395-3697
IDEE GOLDWYN LULU
94
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
DAVID R. DYMENT, DUNDAS, ON, (905) 308-1008
MS GOLDWYN ALANA-ET
94
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
PIERRE BOULET, MONTMAGNY, PQ, (418) 248-6150
ROSIERS BRAE GOLDWYN
94
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
CRASDALE FARMS, HUNTER RIVER, PE, (902) 963-3515
BIRKENTREE CARISMA RAEANN
93
DUPASQUIER CARISMA
BIRKENTREE HOLSTEINS, HUNTER RIVER, PE, (902) 963-2021
CHRIPHI GOLDWYN SUSIE Q
93
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
CHRISTIE FARMS LTD, LYNNFIELD, NB, (506) 466-4305
CITYVIEW SHOTTLE ACE
93
PICSTON SHOTTLE-ET
FERME YVON SICARD, ST. JUSTIN, PQ, (819) 227-2067
DUBEAU GOLDWYN SVASTIKA
93
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
FERME YVON SICARD, ST. JUSTIN, PQ, (819) 227-2067
LOLISEE TALENT MERRILL C
93
LADINO PARK TALENT-IMP-ET
FERME LOLISEE, CHATHAM, PQ, (450) 562-2554
VALLARDIERE APPLAUSE TARA
93
LINDENRIGHT APPLAUSE
FERME AGRIVENTE, ST. ALBAN, PQ, (418) 268-3922
WEEKSDALE GOLDWYN HOLIDAY
93
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN
ELMER WEEKS, BREADALBANE, PE, (902) 886-2152
ALTONA LEA SEPTEMBER BUBBLES
93
PURSUIT SEPTEMBER STORM
FRANK BARKEY & FAMILY, BLACKSTOCK, ON, (905) 655-3561
In analyzing the top genomic and proven sires for gPs some key trends present themselves.
The negative correlation between production and fertility makes it hard to find a sire that has both P and F in his first three letters.
There is a positive correlation between low inbreeding numbers and durability and calving ability.
Most of the top TPI sires are high durability and production but low fertility and inbreeding.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Making complex breeding decisions is something that many breeders struggle with. Through the introduction of gPs the Bullvine hopes to help make breeding decisions much easier while still providing optimum genetic gain.
Please note for clarification and breeder confusion reasons we have changed the name from gAa, to gPs.
Not sure what all this hype about genomics is all about?
Want to learn what it is and what it means to your breeding program?
Dairy breeders are continually taking steps to be more exact about the way they farm and the products they buy, produce and sell. However when it comes to the genetic make-up of our animals there remains significant difference of thought, amongst breeders, about the actual accuracy of the genetic information. Breeders are presented with a wide range of facts. Gold Medal, Extra, Star Brood, DOM, proven, genomic, photos, Supreme Champion … no wonder many breeders are confused. The Bullvine feels that breeders need to be objective about the animal information they see and to think in terms of the accuracy of the information. Now we are not talking about whether or not an animal meets the ideal. We’re talking about how much we can rely on the facts we see in hard copy or from virtual communication sources.
In the Beginning
In the nineteenth century milk cows were mostly dual purpose and herd size was small. People wanting to get into dairying purchased a cow or bull based on what the seller said were the animal’s merits. In time breed societies were formed to document lineage. That was followed in the early twentieth century with third party authentication of both yield and conformation. The third party oversight of parentage and performance were the beginning steps to know the accuracy of the information. That was the start.
Many Steps Along The Way
Having a milk record or type classification authenticated for a single one cow in a herd was initially thought to be very useful information. The next move was to compare a cow to her dam to see if improvement had been made. But that did not help much as the cow and her dam were not simultaneously at the same age and, in some cases, not in the same herd. Of course, over time we have learned that we need to know the performance of the cow’s herdmates. That was the stage where breeders started to compare animals within a herd with the desire to know which animals were superior, or, conversely, inferior for a trait. The biggest breakthrough in accurately determining the relative genetic merit of an animal came when Dr Charles Henderson, Cornell University, developed the analysis technique that he called B.L.U.P. (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction). Forget about trying to understand the term, what it does is compare all animals within a herd and then compile the results across all herds to produce genetic rankings for males and females.
What About Accuracy?
From a genetic merit perspective it is important to know two things. Firstly where does the animal rank in the populations? And secondly, and also very important, how accurate is the prediction? How much trust can a breeder put in the animal’s genetic rating? If information is of limited accuracy, then it may be nice to know, but it does little for constructive breeding or to provide the opportunity to drive up on-farm profits. Accuracy produces confidence; confidence accelerates advancement, and negligence ruins the reputation which accuracy had raised. (Read more: Has Genomics Knocked Out Hot House Herds? And The Hot House Effect on Sire Sampling)
Let’s Compare Accuracy
The range in accuracy of genetic evaluation indexes goes from 0 to 99% and is called Reliability. The following chart is an approximation of the accuracy of predicting an animal’s total merit index (i.e TPI, NM$, LPI, or any other national total merit index) from the information that is known on the animal.
Reliability In Predicting An Animal Total Merit Index
As far as accuracy goes the winners, as a result of incorporating genomic information into our genetic evaluation systems, have been young bulls, young heifers and brood cows. Adding genomic information has resulted in a doubling of the accuracy of their indexes. For further information on accuracy an interesting read is Two Ways to Look at Accuracy for Genomic Young Bullspublished by Canadian Dairy Network.
What’s Ahead?
As more and more animals are genomically tested and recorded for their performance, the accuracy of all genetic indexes will increase. Three other steps that will assist in increasing the accuracy of total merit indexing are needed:
Have every milk weight, fat %, protein% and SCC automatically captured at every milking;
Have information on new economically important traits collected; and
Have more economic information available on more traits.
Breeders will be the benefactors of having more and more accurate information so that they can make more and more accurate decisions.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Having genomic information has been a significant step forward for increasing the accuracy of genetic indexes. But it will go beyond genetics and genomics in the future. Read past Bullvine articles for further details about genomics for health and management (Read more: Herd Health, Management, Genetics and Pilot Projects: A Closer Look at ZOETIS) and what lies beyond genomics (Read more: Forget Genomics – Epigenomics & Nutrigenomics are the Future). When buying genetics breeders need to check that the animals, semen or embryos they are considering will both follow their breeding plans (Read more: What’s the plan?) and that the information is accurate. Breeding dairy cattle is faster paced every year. The accuracy of the information used is an important consideration.
From when to plant, fertilize or harvest our crops to what sire to use, breeders are always looking for reliable assistance. For most dairy farmers, there are two things they love to complain about. One is the weather and the other is bull proofs. No one ever says that predicting the future is easy. Sure we put more credibility into Al Roker’s weather forecast than we do the one given by the young blonde, who seems to be there more for eye candy than for knowledge set. But the question remains, “How accurate is either weather forecast?” At the Bullvine we decided to look at how the genetic evaluations system compares to the predictions of meteorologists.
In many ways Dairy Cattle Genetics and Meteorology are very similar. Both use complex mathematical models to predict the future. The formulas and complexity of these models make most people’s heads spin. But after all the numbers and formulas are calculated, who does the better job?
To compare these two prognosticators we looked at the accuracy of the average 3 day weather forecast from the National Weather Service last year and compared them to initial genomic proofs of young sires and then to a bull’s first daughter proofs. What we found was that the average 3-day weather forecast is accurate, within e degrees, 71.19% of the time. For genomic young sires, we know that the average sire with a 50K test compared to a proven sire is about 72% reliable. So the average young sire’s proof is as accurate as a 3-day weather forecast. Sure things can change quickly but more than 70% of the time you can rely on the information to be accurate and 95% of the time you can expect a genomic tested young sire to perform at least within 20% of their expected values. (Read more: The Truth About Genomic Indexes – “show me” that they work!)
When comparing a next day forecast to that of a 1st crop proven sire, we find the advantage for accuracy goes to the geneticists. The next day weather forecasts for the national weather service’s jump up to 87.24% accurate to within 3 degrees, and 1st crop proven sires with a genomic test are 90% accurate. To put things into perspective. A non-genomic tested young sire’s proof is as about as accurate as a 7 day weather forecast. Both are well below 50% accuracy and are more or less only good enough to forecast a general trend.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Sure there are those who prefer not to use genomic young sires, when it comes to their breeding programs. However I would hazard a guess that they are also using the Farmers’ Almanac, instead of the weather forecasts, to predict when to plant their corn or harvest their hay. (Read more: Dairy Breeders vs. Genetic Corporations: Who are the True Master Breeders?) For those breeders that are willing to let a little science help them to make their job easier, genomic proofs have considerably improved the accuracy. Today’s average genomic young sire is about as accurate a prediction of performance as a 3-day weather forecast. Accurate enough to make informed decisions, but not able to guarantee that a freak storm won’t come in and change things.
Over the past few years the management and genetic sides of the dairy cattle industry have been handed a huge data opportunity. One example comes from Lely who report that their robotic system can capture more than 120 different values per cow per day. Sounds excessive doesn’t it? For some breeders that number is beyond comprehension. However, before offering a final assessment on volume of data, let’s dig deeper.
Dairy farm operators know very well the challenges resulting from high feed cost and narrow margins. But they do not have the numbers to get down to the exact profit at each individual cow level. Do they breed Bessie back? If so what should she be breed to improve her? Or is she the next cow to be culled based on revenue generated less expenses? The challenge has been that managing Bessie has always been in hindsight and what is needed is real time management of her situation. Add to that the fact that wages and labor laws in many developed countries are causing breeders to rethink the degree of automation to apply to their operations. Many sensors already exist for measuring and monitoring cows and many are in the process of coming to market. It all comes down to having the numbers to manage, breed, feed and farm. There are many management considerations that discerning breeders should reflect on as they plan for future success in the dairy cattle industry.
Eight Numbers for Better Cow Management Decisions
Animal Weight– Ways of capturing a cow’s weight available many more factors can be added to what is known on an individual cow basis. Factors like feed intake, loosing or gaining weight and individual cow profit per day for the past week come quickly to mind. These sensors also allow for monitoring of negative energy balance determined by body weight changes and milk solid ratios.
Rumination– Having a healthy rumen is paramount to having a productive profitable dairy cow. Since it is not possible to determine DMI (Dry Matter Intake) on an individual cow basis, rumen activity sensors are used to endure that a cow’s digestive system is functioning well. The sensors also allow for consistent monitoring of feed delivery to ensure feed truck operators are doing their job.
Components / Milk Quality – Many on-farm systems can now capture fat %, protein %, lactose %, milking time, SCC, Conductivity and color of the milk at every milking (SCC is not equal to conductivity and color of the milk indicates mastitis alerts as well). These numbers and some of the relationships one to another give important information on both a daily and lactation basis. Knowing about problems immediately is by far the best way to address them. Wouldn’t all breeders like to be able to know about a pending SCC spike and address it immediately?
Temperature– is captured as either milk temperature or can be electronically read from a device such as a bolus in the rumen. The milk temperature is taken 2 – 4 times per day and is a start. However having an internal device provides for real time cow management. The obvious use of temperature changes is general cow health throughout lactation in order to detect differences from normal. Knowing a cow’s temperature after calving has been found to be very useful in getting her off to the right start. New to management tools could be monitoring a cow’s temperature, hour by hour, during her heat period. Breeding at exactly the right time is being studied and preliminary results are showing greatly increased pregnancy rates when body temperature is considered. Think how beneficial it would be to have a 65% conception rate instead of a 35-40% rate.
Heat Detection– In addition to the idea, just mentioned, of breeding by temperature during heat, there are many systems working successfully that record cow movement and thus signal to breeders that a cow is more active and should be closely observed for being in heat. Yet another device is one that measures hormone levels signalling an on-coming heat (Read more: Better Decision Making by Using Technology). Just think of the savings in labor, drugs, vet costs, semen, extra days spent in dry pens and days of lower milk production at the end of lactation if conception rates could be 70% or higher in cows and 85% or higher in heifers.
Milk Yield Every Milking – On a milking to milking basis nothing is more important than to know if a cow has produced to the expected level. All automated milking systems can do that and so breeders with those systems have a very important tool at their disposal. Cows falling below expectation are highlighted for attention by the herdsman either immediately or on a list that can be reviewed at any time.
Listings – Every automated system is capable of generating lists and graphs from the data captured. When a breeder first gets an automated system, they use the lists to find the problems or underperforming cows. However after a time breeders also find the reports to be very beneficial for setting goals for their cows and herd. A list can be as simple as knowing which cows, in a robotic herd, have not been milked. Or are they sick or lame? No matter what, the herdsman has a reason to find the cow and investigate. Breeders not only benefit from knowing what goes on in their own herd but the equipment providers are able to use the data from across herds in establishing benchmarks. And it is not only the breeder that benefits, his veterinarian and feed advisor now have information that they can use to make better recommendations.
Heifers – The heifer herd is the forgotten part of the dairy herd (Read more: Should you be raising your own heifers?). Automated calf feeding systems are now being used successfully. Many of the devices mentioned above, for cows, can be used for heifers as well. Just think of what the saving would be if age at first calving could be reduced by 3-4 months, $400 saved per heifer raised amounts to $20,000 savings per year in a 100 cow herd.
Numbers to Breed Better Cows
Having better management tools is only 50% of the success equation. The other half is breeding better cows. The data that would separate the best from the rest is a long and growing list.
Milk Yield Every Milking – The most accurate lactation production is when a weight from every milking is known. By having a weight captured at every milking, a genetic index could be calculated for a bull’s daughters peak production and persistency of production. Knowing such details may in fact help breeders determine the performance pattern that they want from their cows.
Components / Milk Quality – Here as well, having more observations will increase the accuracy of genetic indexes in order to breed cows that produce the milk that processors and consumers demand.
Milking Speed – The current genetic indexes are calculated using breeder assigned subjective rating. Fast, average or slow. Automated milking systems are now capable of capturing milking times. As more herds move to automated systems it will be possible to know if a bull’s daughters take 30 seconds less or 30 second more to milk. Time to milk determines the number of cows per robot or the size of the parlor. Milking speed is not consistent throughout the life of a cow and has variations even in the lactation. More over the robot gives an honest measurement which is not affected by the fear of the cow for the milking appraiser.
Adaptability / Temperament– Breeder know that not all cows are equal when it comes to be handled, milked and cared for. Using data from automated systems it will, in the future, be possible to produce genetic ratings for how bull’s daughters work within automated systems, their temperament, and other factors that breeders see as being necessary.
Reproduction / Fertility– Currently the data we have on cows, bulls and embryos are stored on many different databases. Bringing that information to a linked data system, studying it and then developing genetic bull rankings could well be a significant development when it comes to increasing the reproductive performance of dairy cattle.
Feed Efficiency – One of the most read articles that The Bullvine routinely produces is the one listing sires that will produce the most feed efficient cows (Read more: Feed Efficiency: The Money Saver and 50 Sires that will Produce Feed Efficient Cows ). Bullvine readers want to have genetic evaluations for feed efficiency. For some Bullvine readers sire rankings cannot come too quickly. Research is currently underway to determine the relationship between feed efficiency and other genetic indexes. However if feed intake data could come from automated on-farm systems it would be a big step forward.
Lameness / Mobility – On a herd and industry basis, mobility issues are a big financial drain due to animal cull, lost production and added costs. Breeders know that cows that avoid lameness, that are able to easily get to the feed bunk or pasture and that spend the majority of their time resting, are the kind of cows that make the most profit. With more complete data from automated systems and with perhaps additional sensors it will someday be possible to have genetic indexes for mobility.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
The definitive statement, when it comes to information and data on dairy farms, is that we have currently only scratched the surface. Definitely much more data from automated on-farm systems will soon be available for breeders to use to operate their dairy enterprises and to select their sires. Decisions made by dealing with the exceptions or past performance are old concepts. What is needed is more condensed and focused information and data to manage with on a real time basis. More data from automated data capture systems can and will make this a better industry. Let’s welcome in the future.
Recently there has been a lot of discussion about the future of the dairy breeding industry. New technology, new information and new organizations are entering the industry at record rates. The problem is that along with all the changes there is also concern about who is leading these changes and protecting the interests of the average breeder. One of the ongoing battles is the one surrounding the production and publication of US genetic evaluations. The recent development of the Council for Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) has sparked a war between CDCB and Holstein USA over access to information. Both sides are threatening to take their toys and go home.
”He who controls the information controls the world.”
Is anyone even considering the answer to the question, “Who does the information belong to?” As we wrote back in March of 2012 the conflict is over who will have control of the information. (Read more: Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding: Land of the Free and Home of the Brave?) Now more than 2 years later this battle is coming to a head. Rumors suggest that Holstein USA is threatening that they won’t share type data with CDCB/USDA because they are not in support of positions and actions being taken at CDCB and are even considering producing their own genetic evaluations for production in addition to the evaluations they currently do for type. Now let’s be clear. Up until this point Holstein USA has cooperated fully in the exchange of data. However, they have been very upfront about their concerns regarding material licensing agreements (MLAs) and the usage of Holstein data.
Enemy at the gates
When you consider that larger and larger corporations have now started to enter into the dairy genetics marketplace, whoever has access to the information will have the power. If these new players get instant free access to this information, what does that mean to breeders? I would guess that it would not be positive to seed stock producers or to those who market and sell dairy cattle genetics that has already seen significant decline in their animal values.(Read more: An Insider’s Guide to What Sells at the Big Dairy Cattle Auctions 2013, Who Killed The Market For Good Dairy Cattle? and Is There Still Going To Be A Market For Purebred Dairy Cattle In 10 Years?) You see the big nasty label should not be applied to the AI companies but rather to multinational supply companies. That is the enemy I think the large AI companies are most threatened by. Not the smaller AI organizations taking market share but rather these significantly larger corporations that have the resources to squash the large AI companies like a bug.
Imperfect Track Record
Now let’s say that USDA’s recent track record leaves some questions in many breeders’ minds. Their decision to restrict breeders’ rights to genomic test their own bulls for a period of time certainly raised the ire of many. Now the heated debate includes the formation of CDCB comprised of Breeds, DHI and AI (each with 3 seats on the board). There doesn’t appear to be any apparent savings and no intention to reduce the USDA budget as a result of this decision. And with the makeup of the board, it is felt that it is controlled by NAAB and the large AI organizations.
Once again this has me asking who exactly controls the information.
Holstein USA has been very vocal about stating that they have their members’ best interests at heart. I respect that. However I also see the other viewpoint that points out that this is the same information that members have paid for and yet they don’t get free access to it as in other countries. Moreover, the limited amount of information that they do get access to comes with additional charges. In the US is costs $8US to register a calf, in Canada it costs $9 CDN to register a calf. Considering the exchange values these are about the same expense. Though in Canada all information is then made publicly available to all. In the US everyone has to pay an additional $3US per animal in order to get that information. So does Holstein USA really have their members interests at heart? Or are they driven by their own survival and pocket book? This is why the relevance of breed associations and programs like type classification are becoming key issues for many breeders. (Read more: What is the Role of a Dairy Cattle Breed Association? and She Ain’t Pretty – She Just Milks That Way!)
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Am I saying that I am in full support of CDCB’s actions? No. It seems to be heavily weighted against breeders and towards the interest of the larger AI companies. I am most concerned that breeders have access to information. As more and more AI companies get into owning females and developing of their own bloodlines, the very livelihood of seed stock producers is threatened (Read more: Should A.I. Companies Own Females?, Why Good Business for AI Companies Can Mean Bad Business For Dairy Breeders, and What the Experts Won’t Tell You about the Future of the A.I. Industry). So I understand why Holstein USA should be concerned. The majority of the membership, and especially those at the board level, is made up of these very seed stock producers. So if they were truly concerned about these breeders, why don’t them allow them access to all the information? It’s not about control. It’s about breeders’ success. Nobody wins if infighting prevents progress.
For almost sixty years dairy cattle breeders have relied on daughter proven sires to drive the industry forward. There was a time when over 70% of the genetic advancement depended on knowing which sires left the best daughters and using them extensively. However that era is fast coming to a close. The Bullvine sees changes in the not too distant future for both breeders and breeding companies, all of whom have built their business and breeding models around the daughter proven sire.
A Quick Look at History
Before the 1950’s unproven sires were the norm. Yes some of them may have had some limited daughter information but it was most often in a single herd and was actually just phenotypic observations (i.e. 12,500 lbs milk, 3.8%F, 5 VG & 10 GP daughters). A.I. was primarily a tool to get cows in calf without having to feed and handle a mature bull. Truth is that genetic progress, at that time, was only slightly above zero. From the 1970’s onwards considerable progress was made, based on the use of proven sires. During that time breeders and breeding companies were more selective in which young sires were sampled, more herds were milk recorded and type classified, genetic evaluations used B.L.U.P. technologies (i.e. +1100 lbs milk, +0.25%F, PTAT +2.24) and high ranking total merit proven sires got extensive use.
New Technologies Will Turn the Tide
Now let’s deal with how new technologies will change the timing and accuracy of genetic decision making. Simply put ‘time waits for no one’ and ‘the future is in the hands of those that search out the new, decide and apply the best of the new”. That applies to all areas of dairy farming but just now let’s stick to the genetic component. Let’s focus on why daughter proven sires will become a thing of the past
Accurate and More Accurate
To date genomic genetic evaluation has resulted in a doubling of the accuracy of indexes for young animals. It will not stop there. With refined knowledge in the genome we can expect production indexes on young animals to go from 65-70% REL. to as high as 85-90%. in the next five years. As well with more on-farm data being captured and collected in Genetic Evaluation Centers we can expect the REL for productive life, type, health and fertility traits to approach 70-80%. Part of the increase in REL, from their current 50-65%, will come from more accurate field data and part from in-depth study of the genome. The end result will be that if total merit is known with 85% REL for young animals, then daughter proven bulls and older brood cows will not be used as the parents of the next generation. In short the pace of the trend of using younger and younger animals as the parents of the next generation will speed up even more.
Sexing Technology
Dairy cattle breeders are hearing that genomics is the biggest advancement in genetic improvement since the introduction of the proven sire. Recent information on what’s ahead in sexing technology is on the brink of speeding up the rate of genetic gain. (Read more: Sexed Semen from Cool Technology to Smart Business Decision and SEXED SEMEN – At Your Service!) That does not even factor in epigenomics and nutrigenomics will hold out significant promise. (Read more: Forget Genomics – Epigenomics & Nutrigenomics are the Future) Proactive breeders will need to stay tuned to what’s ahead and be ready to adapt the breeding plans. (Read more: What’s the Plan?)
We know that young bulls do not produce large volumes of sperm per ejaculation as mature bulls do, so we’ll need to collect from extra young bulls but there will come a day when all young bull semen will be sexed. Having more young bulls being used will help to counteract inbreeding.
The changes could well go much further than that. How much sexed semen will be needed in another fifteen years? It could be that embryo and embryo transfer technology will advance to the stage that, once identified, the very top genetic ten to twelve month old heifers will have many oocytes collected and fertilized in vitro and then implanted into 99% of the females on a farm.
Of course exactly what will happen has yet to play out but we need to be prepared for major advances in the technologies relative to both genetics and reproduction. Regardless the use of daughter proven sires will be a thing of the past.
Maximum of 50,000 Doses Only
In the past superior proven bulls have remained active and in use well past ten years of age. They have produced, on average, 130,000 – 140,000 doses per year. In some cases they have sold more than one million doses of semen in their lifetime. Although profitable for their owners this extensive use has contributed to inbreeding and narrowing of the genetic base. The question that has always been asked ‘what do we do about too much Blackstar, Valiant or more recently Oman and Planet?’. We will not need to have that concern in the future as genetic progress will be so quick that the maximum a sire will get used in his lifetime is 50,000 doses. That does however change the value that any one sire will have. The industry savings on feed and maintenance costs beyond collecting 50,000, likely sexed, doses is significant considering the thousands of bulls that have been annually sampled around the world in the past.
It could be that 50,000 is far too high a number of doses. Take the case of Kulp-Dale Golden PP Red. (Read more: $10,000 a dose Polled Semen and The 24 Polled Bulls Every Breeder Should Be Using To Accelerate the Genetic Gain in Their Herd) Five doses and $50,000 may be the numbers that will be attached to his contribution to changing the Holstein breed from horned to polled. Another factor to think about is that high genomically evaluated young sires are often used exclusively by breeding companies before general release and, when released, are priced at $200 to $1000 per dose. However after a few months their semen price is dropped to the $40 – $60 range. By the time they have been on the market for a year they are often down to less than $20. Why? Because their time of demand has passed. If the sire is no longer a list topper for at least one important trait he is history.
Alternatives Exist
A couple of months ago The Bullvine wrote about using all natural sires in a herd. (Read more: Natural Breeding – Could It Work For You?) These sires can quite easily have high genomic indexes. Think about it. A breeder focused on producing milk saving on labor to heat detect and inseminate his cows and heifers. Perhaps 10% of a herd’s labor cost could be saved. With robotic technology advancing quickly it could well be that the safety factor for workers by having yearling and two year old bulls around the farm may be minimized as there will be fewer workers to be exposed to the bulls. Definitely the need for daughter proven A.I. sires would be zero.
Are We Ready?
The pace of change is fast and will become faster. In a few years it could be that the only need for daughter proven sire information will be to check the accuracy of genomic indexes or to develop the formulae for indexing for new traits that breeders wish to include in their breeding programs. It could well be that breeders are more ready for the future than are some breeding co-ops and companies that have built their business model on having the vast majority of their revenue coming from daughter proven bulls. Having said that, progressive breeding companies are taking steps to control their costs and to specialize their product lines, including owning high ranking females. Daughter proven bulls will not be the focal point for those companies.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Having moved to daughter proven sires for accuracy and selection intensity reasons, we can now expect to see a move away from those sires for the reasons of speed of turning of generations and of having very accurate knowledge at the gene level. Anyone doubting these changes needs only to look at male selection in the plant, fish, poultry and pig industries. The downside for bull breeders is that their bulls will have less value. The upside for all other breeders is that they can continue to make rapid progress in breeding profitable healthy cows. Daughter proven sires were a major force in getting us to where we are but they will now be replaced by more advanced technology.
Five years ago dairy cattle breeders were first hearing the word genomics. Over many generations of cows they had followed the recommended practice of using plus proven A.I. sampled sires on the majority of their herd with limited use (20-30%) of high indexing young unproven bulls. This practice had made it possible for them to improve their herd, help the breed improve and to generate revenue from the sale of breeding animals. And then along came a new way to look at accuracy for young animals and the merits of a cow without having to wait for her to have many milking daughters.
For most of us it was something that shook the foundation of what we knew about breeding cattle. How could an analysis of the genes change the method of breeding we knew and had been very comfortable with using? As expected breeders have had a variety of reactions. Some instantly adopted genomics. Some cautiously considered and used it to a limited extent. Many took a wait and see approach.
Today much has changed to the point where half the semen used is that of genomically evaluated bulls. We are learning more every month and every index run about genomics. The Bullvine decided to address some of the current questions and thoughts about genomics that we are hearing expressed by our readers.
Learning from Observer
DE-SU OBSERVER
De-Su Observer, a former high ranking genomic bull, born in November 2008, received his first official proof, which included daughter performance, in April 2013 and he had a gTPI of 2332. However with last week’s index release (Read more: August 2013 Holstein Sire Evaluations Highlights From Around the World) his gTPI dropped by 188 points to 2144. Many breeders are asking why? Can we trust genomics and the very first proofs with daughter performance included? Let’s think this one through.
High genomic bulls are now used by A.I. and breeders as mating sires for the next generation mostly using ET. The female mates of these bulls, with few exceptions, are also high indexing. Their progeny’s genetic evaluations will be adjusted for their parent’s high genetic merit by the genetic evaluation centres. However the extra care and treatment breeders give to these future star females, from birth to the end of their first lactations, cannot be totally adjusted for in the genetic evaluations. This means we can expect these young bulls to be over-evaluated in their first official proof based on the performance of their first 30-60 daughters. Until we can capture more details at the herd level for yields, health, reproduction, herd management, type assessment and heifer performance we can expect that high genomic bulls, after they get their very first official proof, will subsequently fall back slightly in some part of their proof.
This just happened to Observer. Between April and August he added 582 milking daughters to reach 800 and 283 classified daughters to reach 349. In April he was and in August he still is a 99%RK gTPI sire but he dropped from #1 to #21 on the TPI list (#8 among those with 99% reliability for MF). His breeding pattern for type did not change. His daughters have outstanding mammary systems but are only average feet and legs and below average dairy strength. His ratings for fertility and longevity were essentially unchanged. If anything they are up slightly. However Observer’s ratings for the yield traits dropped. The decreases were milk -14%, fat -26% and protein – 21%. He is still a top proven bull and a good bull to have in the pedigree or to use to make productive profitable cows. With the high number of daughters now in his proof we can expect he will not changed to a similar extent in December.
Considering a bull’s rank on a total merit index list is the first step in selecting bulls. However knowing how his strengths and limitation match your herd’s genetic needs is the important second step.
What about Robust, Bookem, AltaMeteor and AltaRazor?
All these bulls had their first official proofs in August after being highly rated on their genomic information. Their August Reliabilities range from 89% to 91%. So we can expect some movement in their indexes, as they have information added on daughters, the same as happened with Observer. Remember they can go up as well as down. They are all top of the class graduates but like all new graduates we can expect to know their attributes more exactly come December or next April. For discerning breeders this means use them but not any one of them to an excessive amount. Between them these four bring to the industry high NM$, high protein yield, high udder composite and high fat yield. All things commercial breeders include in their breeding plans (Read more: What’s the plan?).
Can more Genomic Related Information be Published?
To most breeders, it seems that genomic indexes are high, and constantly increasing. It is almost impossible to keep up. Go to an auction sale and hear the pedigree person say that ‘this bull is leaving many high genomic progeny” and what is the average breeder to take that to mean. It can be confusing even for people “in the know”. But what about people who do not follow the results closely? Furthermore for breeders that follow more than one breed, they see what is top numbers in one breed may seem ordinary in another breed. Has the time come to consider changes such as:
Publishing the %RK for indexes – that way an animal’s strengths and limitations was be easily seen
Widely publishing the levels for all indexes for 99%RK, 90%RK and 50%RK
Identifying animals that leave top genomic progeny for all traits not just for the total merit indexes.
Keep moving Forward
Genetic Evaluations Centres around the world are studying ways to use the records from bulls’ daughters where the bull may not have been randomly sampled. Excluding records from analysis is not as easy as not using the data from ET daughters or for the first 50 to 100 daughters born. These steps could be well and good if this matter only involved the genetic side of our business. But it impacts marketing and revenue generation from top animals and therefore it gets complicated. It could well be some time before we have a solution.
Breeders need a breeding and marketing plan for their herd. And then they need to use the most up-to-date genetic indexes for both bulls and cows. It does not change the process: first sort the bulls by your preferred total merit index; and then correctively mate your cows or group of cows with the best mate on your selected list. It is up to each breeder to decide whether to use the genomic information or not. The advantages from using genomic information are a faster rate of genetic improvement by having more accurate indexes on young animals and the use of the very top animals, especially bulls.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
Breeding is about creating animals that are genetically superior to our current herd of animals. It does not simply happen by adding one and one to get two. It involves using all the skills including planning, cow awareness, genetic theory, accurate information, the turning of generations,..etc. Genomics is proving to be a good new tool. No doubt it and genetic evaluations will improve considerably over the next five years. More knowledge is always a good thing.
In this information age it is surprising how difficult it can be to get the latest information on proof day. For that reason the Bullvine has compiled a quick summary of the genetic evaluations from the United States and Canada.
US HIGHLIGHTS
DE-SU OBSERVER debuts as #1 gTPI sire in the USA.
Call it validation or even redemption but, if Observer’s first proof had him falling drastically, it might have put the industry back a few years. With over 195 sons already being sampled, there is no question that the industry could not afford to have him not achieve a successful daughter proven proof. Fortunately for all, he not only held his most recent (December 2012) genomic index, but he actually went up. The biggest change in his numbers was an increase of 142 lbs. of milk, while maintaining his component percentages. Observer also saw significant increases in his type composites, something the breeders who had been milking Observer daughters had already been forecasting. While he still needs to be protected on body depth and F&L, he is now over 3 points for udders and has a solid score for rumps. (Click here for a High Ranking Sire Report (April 2013) and Top 100 TPI International Bulls (April 2013) )
ZAHBULLS UNO GULLIVER new #1 gPA TPI Sire in the USA
While there were not many new sires in the top gTPI list other than Observer, the same is not true for the gPA TPI list. Leading the way is ZAHBULLS UNO GULLIVER (Though Supersire may still be the #1 gPA TPI available sire at this time). GULLIVER is a NUMERO UNO from a DORCY then Toystory and Rudolph. His dam ZAHBULLS DORCY GLAMOUR was fresh in December and is yet to be classified. His 2nd dam JOHNAN TOYSTORY GLITTER is classified EX and has a 4yr record of 29,220 lbs. of 3.5%f 3.0%P. Look for GULLIVER to sire strong components, especially fat, with solid type. He will need to be protected slightly on his straight legs and depth of heal, but will greatly improve bone quality and foot angle. His daughters will not win many shows, but they will be large enough however, they will need protection on body depth. He will bring loads of genetic potential in the areas of health and fertility, especially productive life. (Click here for Top 100 gPA TPI Sires April 2013) (Please note semen available is subject to stud and age)
BUTZ-HILL SUPERSIRE 1757 new #2 gPA TPI Sire in the USA
From the EASTSIDE LEWISDALE GOLD MISSY EX-95-CAN, Supreme Champion WDE and RAWF 2011, family. Missy could, by the end of this week, also be the 2012 Canadian Cow of the Year (Read more: Eastside Lewisdale Gold Missy: 2012 Canadian Cow of the Year Nominee). 1757 has it all. He is a Supersire from a Man-O-Man followed by Dolman then Goldwyn. Look for him to bring a balanced package. With no real holes in his type breakdown, strong components and very desirable health and fertility traits, he is sure to be on many peoples’ must have list. (Click here for Top 100 gPA TPI Sires April 2013) (Please note semen available is subject to stud and age)
LADYS-MANOR DORCY AMIRA debuts at #5 gTPI Cow in the USA
From the same family as the long-standing #1 gTPI Cow, Ladys-Manor PL Shakira, Amira is a VG 86 Dorcy from 85 point Planet. While from a different line of the Ladys-Manor Delightful Jem family, Amira certainly packs a strong genetic punch. (Click here to see Top 25 GTPI Cows)
CDN HIGHLIGHTS
BADGER-BLUFF FANNY FREDDIE new #3 gLPI Sire in Canada
Already having over 2,200 registered daughters born in Canada, Badger-Bluff Fanny Freddie (O Man x Die-Hard) hits the mark with his first official domestic evaluation at #3 LPI. Coming in almost exactly where his MACE proof and genomic test would have indicated, Freddie’s Canadian proof shows the same strong production as in the USA, with great health and fertility, while needing to be protected on conformation, especially dairy strength. At just 65% GP or better and only 12 VG 2yr olds in Canada (on 253 daughters), Freddie is certainly not a type specialist, but can give you that great shot of herd life, daughter fertility, and calving ease when needed. His daughters excel at herd life, daughter fertility, body condition score and production traits from shallow smooth fore uddered mammary systems. It is recommended that he be used on large framed females, with strong median suspensories. He breeds a consistent pattern of worky functional daughters that should be robot compatible. For breeders wanting to move their genetics along quickly, they may consider using a high genomically evaluated Freddie son from a large framed dam. (Click here to read a full breakdown of the Canadian Holstein Evaluation Highlights – April 2013)
END-ROAD O-MAN BRONCO new #6 gLPI Sire in Canada Bronco (Oman x BW Marshall) has his first Canadian proof coming in at #6 LPI progeny proven sire. Like his sire, Oman, he leaves functional cattle but Bronco’s daughters excel at production. He is in the top 1% of the breed for both milk and protein yields. His daughters have good Dairy Strength and Foot Angle is steep and Heel Depth is deep. Rear teat placement is slightly wide and udders are slightly shallow which will work well for robotic milking systems. His daughters are likely the ones milk producers hardly notice as they go about producing large volumes. (Click here to see Top LPI Canadian Proven Holstein Sires)
REGAN-ALH DIPLOMAT #7 gLPI and Highest New Release Sire in Canada Regan-ALH Diplomat*RDC (Mr Burns x O Man) takes the spotlight as the highest young sire graduate this round at #7 LPI and the new leader among red carrier sires proven in Canada. His dam A-L-H DESTINY has many superior progeny including top sons, Danillo and Goldday, in Europe (Read more: 12 Holstein Sires to Maximize Genetic Gain) and his second dam is none other than Markwell Durham Daisy (Read more: Markwell Durham Daisy – 2012 Golden Dam Finalist). DIPLOMAT ( Mr Burns x Oman x Durham) has his first proof based on 62 classified and 123 milk recorded daughters. His production and durability ratings are well above average and he earns the distinguished Class Extra rating. Care needs to be taken, as he is slightly below average for milking speed and calving ability. He will likely qualify as a sire of sons mating sire, especially for red.
SUNTOR JOYRIDE new #1 gPA LPI Sire in Canada JOYRIDE is from the same family as Oconnors Jay, as his 2nd dam OCONNORS GOLDWYN JASMINE EX-92 is the Goldwyn sister to Jay (Read more: The Bloom is On Oconnors Goldwyn Jasmine). His dam SUNTOR MAN O MAN JELENA VG-2YR sold for $30,000 in the 2012 Sale of Stars (Read more: Genomic Stars Shine at Sale of Stars), a steal for a cow that has proven she can throw extremely high genomic progeny. No doubt the commission from semen sales on this one will be larger than the sale price of the dam. Joyride, sired by Epic, offers extreme production (+106 kgs protein) from outstanding type with strong health and fertility traits. With a DGV of +19 for conformation, there is no question that Joyride will leave you those nice sharp cut calves that will draw attention and top dollar at all the genomic sales in a year’s time. (Click here to see Top LPI Genomic Holstein Young Sires)
Some might call it a quieter round in North America, with only one new top proven sire in the US and many of the new Canadian sires already proven in the US. However, this round is certainly an emphatic validation for the different proving programs. The fact that Observer came out where he did validates the genomic evaluation system. Additionally, having many sires that receive their official proofs in Canada matching the US MACE conversion also validates the Interbull MACE system. Many new genomic sires were released this time, providing terrific opportunities to discover the next Observer.
Often I find as an industry we are guilty of living in a bubble. While sometimes that has served us well, other times there are situations where it for sure has hurt the dairy breeding industry as a whole. However, like all bubbles, this will have to burst in order for the industry to advance, otherwise the dairy cattle breeding industry will become irrelevant.
There is no question that the dairy breeding industry is going through times of great change. Genomics has had a massive effect on not only how we prove bulls, but also on the sources of revenue and the focus of many breeding programs. There has been great discussion about what the changes in April will have on the industry (Read more: How Genomics is Killing the Dairy Cattle Industry). There are some far greater issues that many breeders need to think about.
Some Big Hitters Are Coming To the Plate
One such issue is the entry of Pfizer/Zoetis into the animal genetics game. There is no question that companies like Pfizer have the resources and the experience to come into industries and dominate. When you compare the size and revenue of the Animal Health market to that of the dairy cattle breeding industry, you really have to wonder why Pfizer would even bother. There is no question that DNA testing is a very cool science, but companies like Pfizer don’t do things because they think that it is cool. They do it because they know they can make money.
When you step back and look at this from a 50,000-foot view, I start to think, is this Pfizer wanting to come and take over dairy cattle breeding? On the other hand, is it that Pfizer sees how they can protect their much larger revenue source, animal health? Walk with me on this one. If it is possible to understand genomics to such an extent that we can breed a better cow, does that not include a cow that is more resistant to disease, parasites, and bacteria? Now we’re talking about core revenue sources for Pfizer animal health, now called Zeotis.
Also of interest about this move was that instead of being signed by all the members of the industry it was done very selectively. Instead of being signed by say Canadian Livestock Genetics Association it was done exclusively with the Semex Alliance. Is there a partnership between Semex and Pfizer that we are not aware of? Have we as an industry, or our representatives, on our behalf made decisions that we may all regret? While I am sure from first glance this agreement looked pretty basic, I can’t help but wonder if there are much greater ramifications that have not really been thought through.
Information is Power, But who controls the information?
With these questions about genetic evaluations and genomics, you can’t help but think about the heated discussion around the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) and who controls genetic evaluations in the US (Read more: Council On Dairy Cattle Breeding: Land of the Free and Home of the Brave?). The Cooperative Agreement with the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) pertaining to the transfer of the USDA-‐ARS dairy genetic evaluation service to the CDCB has certainly had many asking who does have control?
While the Bullvine has request several times to do an interview with CDCB officers , Ole Meland, (Chair), Jay Mattison (Vice Chair), Becky Payne (Secretary) and Gordon Doak (Recording Secretary), we have still not yet been granted the opportunity.
No Demand Means No Market
Of course there is a much bigger issue I think every breeder needs to think about. While in Canada most breeders are pretty immune to having to think about market demand, you only have to look at the US and Australia to see what happens when market demand goes south. If consumers are not drinking milk, it does not take long for the industry to dry up.
Worldwide milk consumption in relation to population growth is falling. While yes total consumption is increasing, we are not keeping pace with other beverages.
With greater international supply and less demand, it doesn’t take long to drive price and revenue down (Read more: Why the Future of the North American Dairy Industry Depends on Supply and Demand). There is no question that breeders and the industry as a whole, needs to pay greater attention to consumer demand as it will have the greatest impact on our future.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
There is no question the world is changing. It always is and always will. The question becomes are you ahead of the change or behind it? If we continue to operate in a bubble or stick our heads in the sand, we will not be the ones driving our own future, but instead will be handed the scraps from the future decided by others. That is why it is important to know who is controlling the dairy breeding industry?
Every country loves to tell you that they have the best Genetics in the world and that their cattle are superior to any others. At a recent International Committee for Animal Breeding (ICAR) Session in Cork Ireland, a group of leading geneticists got together to discuss lots of highly scientific and many mind boggling things. Tables upon tables of stats and graphs that look more like maps of the solar system and would make most people’s heads spin. However, from that session there were some really interesting presentations about genetic improvement around the world that just needed to be “translated” into dairy speak. The following is the Bullvine’s attempt to de-nerd the nerdy.
Look Who`s Talking
Canadian Dairy Network Researchers, along with an associate, presented a paper entitled “Genetic improvement: a major component of increased dairy farm profitability’. To be totally honest it was the ‘profitability’ word that first drew our attention but on reading the paper, studying the power point presentation and listening to the video of the presentation on the Internet (http://www.icar.org/Cork_2012/index.htm) we garnered many interesting facts about the genetic merit of bulls and genetic trends by year for many traits in seventeen countries for the time period 1997 to 2006. Sixteen of the seventeen countries studied were sampling more than 200 dairy bulls per year and in the USA both the TPI™ and Net Merit were included in the analysis since both are widely used total merit indexes.
Genetic Progress –Which Countries are winning the genetic race?
Are breeders in these 17 countries making genetic progress? Definitely yes! It is difficult to compare across countries given the multitude of ways of expressing sire proofs for traits across countries. Therefore, the researchers converted the expression to standard deviation units (SD unit) and summarized the results in the accompanying graph comparing the time periods 1997-2001 to 2002-2006.
Yearly genetic progress by country and trait (bulls born 2002‐’06)
It is interesting to see that while many of the major genetic markets in the world are advancing at similar rates, the Nordic countries are giving the United States a run for their money and the Canada was the sixth fastest advancing country, almost 18% behind the genetic advancement rate of the US and the Nordic Countries.
Canada`s NOT First
So I am sure many of my fellow Canadians are saying that we are ahead in the race, others may be gaining on us, but we still have the best cattle there are. Well folks I hate to burst your bubble but as the following chart shows, for bulls born in 2005-2006, it’s actually the United States that are out ahead followed by France and Italy. Canada comes in sixth, behind the Nordic regions and the Netherlands.
Average EBV of bulls born 2005‐’06 ‘for the 17 country average index
Genetic Progress by Trait – The Leaders and the ‘Also Rans’.
Protein Yield: Increasing rates of genetic gain have been achieved by all countries except for Ireland and New Zealand where progress has been flat lined due to the major selection emphasis being on fertility and other management traits. The leaders for the increased genetic progress in protein yield are France, Nordic Countries and the Netherlands.
Overall Udder: The rate of genetic progress for udder is also building at an increase rate with the leaders being Italy, Canada and the USA. Selection for udder improvement was not part of the breeding strategy in New Zealand and Ireland and no genetic progress was made for udders in those countries.
Longevity: Very significant progress was made for longevity in all countries with the leaders being Ireland, Italy, New Zealand and the USA with France following behind the rest of the pack.
Somatic Cell Score: No genetic gain was made in any country from 1997-2001 for SCS. However that turned around after 2001 and all countries made progress with the leaders for genetic progress being the USA, the Nordic Countries and Canada.
Calving to First Service: Ireland and New Zealand have made progress since 1999 and are significantly out in front of all other countries. For the other countries there was negative progress until about 2003. Since then all countries have started to give attention to this trait and the tide has turned to where slight progress was being made by 2006. After Ireland and New Zealand, The Nordic Countries are leading the other countries in increasing their rate of genetic progress for this fertility trait.
So what happened to production?
There is Reduced Emphasis on Production. By way of example the researchers provided a graph (below) showing how The Netherlands and Ireland have gone from 100% emphasis on production traits in their total merit index in 1995 to approximately 30-35% in 2012. While the USA and Canada have been more moderate in their reduced emphasis on production traits, from 70% to 45-50% in their 2012 total merit indexes. There is more to breeding than all out selection for production but it is still an important component in the total scheme of things.
Relative emphasis in national selection indices
What Traits are Driving Progress?
When you take a look at the average genetic progress by trait across countries (graph below) you see that the rate of genetic advancement in each area reflects the relative weighting change in each country`s major index. With the rate of genetic gain on longevity, health and fertility greatly improving and that for the production trait (protein) actually showing a slightly slower rate of genetic gain. It is interesting to note that in the period of 1997-2001 the primary emphasis on protein improvement actually had a negative impact on the rate of improvement for fertility.
Average genetic progress by trait across countries
Different Strokes for Different Folks
As the chart below indicates, the relative weights each country put on each trait in their national indexes has a huge impact on the rate of genetic gain for those traits. We understand that not every country dairy’s under the same circumstances. Hence why for Japan places 72% of the emphasis on protein, fat and milk while the Netherlands places 26% of the emphasis on protein and fat yield. Ireland and then the Nordic countries place the most emphasis on Health, Fertility and other management traits. South Africa then USA (TPI™), Spain, The Netherland and Canada place the most emphasis on overall type. Italy places the most emphasis on udders. In addition, the USA (Net Merit) places the most emphasis on longevity.
Relative weighting of selection indices worldwide
The 2012 average weights placed on the various components in the 18 indexes are:
Production 48%
Type 17%
Longevity 11%
Fertility 11%
Udder Health 8%
Other 5%
Increased emphasis on functional traits in most countries has resulted in more genetic progress for these traits. These advances were achieved without a reduction in the rate of progress for key production and conformation traits and without the use of genomic selection, since that new tool was not yet available. As genomic genetic evaluations were not occurring from 1997 to 2006, it will be interesting to see the trends for the five and ten years following 2006 when extensive use of gnomically evaluated bulls has occurred.
The Bullvine Bottom-line
Neither the art nor the science of dairy cattle breeding is dead. In fact it can likely be said that rates of genetic improvement are about to accelerate. Are we ready to keep up?
With some countries not releasing proofs till next week, here is a break down of the North American Proofs for August.
USA
Massey Jumps to #1
Moving up from his debut at #3 in April is Co-Op Bosside Massey. With an increase in his production ratings as well as all major conformation composites Massey passes the well respected Man-O-Man (now #2).
Dorcy New #3 Debuting at the #3 spot is the popular genomic sire Coyne-Farms Dorcy. Siring outstanding udders and feet and legs with strong production, Dorcy is ideal for commercial environments. While needing to be protected on strength traits, Dorcy excels in herd life and calving ease.
Freddie Drops to #4
While actually increasing his TPI by 6 points, Freddie drops in ranking to the #4 spot.
Three New Cows in the Top GTPI ranks Moving into the top 10 is MS PRIDE PLNT TASKET 788 (#3) and SEAGULL-BAY OMAN MIRROR (#9). Tasket is from the Genesis breeding program and has been a breed leader for Lifetime Net Merit, but now joins the top GTPI cattle as well. Mirror is the granddaughter of the brood cow extraordinaire Lynmead Celcius Minnow-ET EX-91 GMD DOM and moves up from her #11 spot in April. Debuting in the top 10 is COOKIECUTTER MOM HALO (#4). Hola is the maternal sister to Heineken at ABS and Henry at Accelerated as well as full sister to Hefty at Semex. Her Epic daughter topped the National Convention Sales at $76,000.
Canada
Plant Drops but still maintains #1 Spot
Although Esenada Taboo Planet loses 216 LPI points this round, he retains his stronghold as #1 LPI with a lead of 363 points.
Top New Release & #2 LPI– Gen-I-Beq Brawler Gen-I-Beq Brawler is the highest among the first group of Baxter sons progeny proven in Canada and is also the oldest of 50 registered progeny of his outstanding dam, Gen-I-Beq Shottle Barbi, a granddaughter of Braedale Baler Twine. Brawler’s LPI is over 600 points above his parent average but within 30 points of his DGV. Since Brawler was popular as a genomic young sire and already has over 2,200 registered daughters in Canada.
Other Top Newcomers – Jay & Boris Coming in at #6 LPI and the #2 new release sire is OConnors Jay. Jay is a Bolton from an EX 6* Durham and then a EX 2E Marcis Marvelous. An extreme feet and leg improver, Jay is almost 600 points over his parent average but only 33 points over his DGV’s. Following Jay as the #3 new release sire and the #10 LPI sire is Morsan Boris. Boris is also a Bolton x Durham cross, coming from the world renowned Ocean-View Durham Doris. Much like many of the descendants of Snow-N Denises Dellia, Boris sires outstanding conformation with strong components and herd life. Boris is just 100 LPI points over his PA and 36 points below his DGV.
New #1 LPI Cow
With her first official GLPI, OConnors Planet Lucia is crowned Queen of the Breed at #1 GLPI combining high yields and components with desired conformation (#1 Protein, tied #10 conformation). Lucia is a daughter of Comestar Goldwyn Lilac (#29 GLPI) and granddaughter of the famous Lylehaven Lila Z. As is consistent in this family, Lucia is well above her outstanding parent average by over 800 points, and is also over 300 LPI points above her DGV. Lucia sells in the upcoming Genetics by Design Sale on November 6th.
Two New Top 10 LPI descendants from Crockett-Acres Mtot Elly
The dam of the #8 LPI sires (Eight) also has 2 new descendants on the top cow list. The first is Calbrett Planet Eve debuting tied at #7 GLPI (maternal line is Wabash-Way Evett-ET by Shottle x Crockett-Acres Elita-ET x Elly). The second is the only of the three cows who are entering the Top 10 GLPI that is not a Planet daughter, namely Stantons Manoman Ezra at #10 spot (her dam is Crockett-Acres Echo- ET, a daughter of Elly by Outside).
Every genetic evaluation round I am reminded of some of the major differences between the different support systems breeders have around the world. Breeding great cattle can be challenging enough, but having a great support and marketing system around them can help greatly. With this in mind, I take a look at the differences that breeders on both sides of the CAN-USA border have available to them.
Genetic Evaluations
Probably the most glaring difference that comes to light for me is the difference in availability of information. While both Canadian Diary Network (CDN) and USDA Animal Improvement Laboratory do a great job of calculation the genetic evaluations. There could not be a greater difference in how they share that information with breeders. USDA does provide the basic top lists, but if you want to get the top TPI list you need to go to Holstein USA. Even there you can only get the top TPI™ lists for domestic and International bulls.
Conversely, CDN provides the following at 8 am proof day for each release (for all breeds as well):
Genetic Evaluation Highlights
Top Bull Lists for
LPI
Milk
Fat
Protein
Conformation
MACE
Genomic Young Sires
Top Cow Lists for
LPI
Milk
Fat
Protein
Conformation
Genomic Heifers
Big deal you say! Well actually, it is a big deal. The ability to have such detailed information at the time of release gives A.I. companies marketing Canadian proven sires and breeders a great advantage over their competitors. They can have detailed analysis of what’s new, what’s changed, and what’s happening long before most other countries even have the list of top bulls.
Animal Inquires
Probably one of my biggest challenges between the two systems is the general access to information for researching cow families and top genetics. This really comes down to Holstein Canada vs. Holstein USA.
For free in Canada, you can get:
Ownership information
Production and Confirmation breeding values
Production and award records
Progeny Summary
Family Tree
Direct Genomic Values (for those tested)
Type Classification breakdown
Show records
In the US for $2 per inquiry
Genetics
Ancestors
Classification
Maternal Siblings
Ownership
This makes a huge difference when it comes to the marketability of cattle. If prospected buyers can do a detailed search finding the specific animals that, meet their requirements online, where do you think they will buy? Even when it comes to US sires, I find myself searching in Canada looking through pedigrees there and then only when I need official US information do I query that animal and purchase that pedigree when needed. This saves me a great deal of time and money.
TPI vs. LPI
While you can argue the merits and weighting of each of these. In reality, there is not a drastic difference. The bigger difference is the percentage of the marketplace that understands each index. Due to the sheer size of the US market, the number of breeders that understand TPI vs. LPI is far greater. While you will find many Canadian breeders who understand TPI you will not find that many US breeders that understand LPI. That is why if you are looking to market your Genetics in the US or the world for that matter, you are best to target the top TPI lists.
Canadian breeders and breeding companies also have the advantage, for breeding and marketing, of having only one combined index, LPI. In the USA there are two combined indexes, TPI and NM (Net Merit). LPI contains the important heritible traits for both breeders and milk producers. Whereas TPI is directed at purebred breeders and NM is directed at milk producers. Another, not often used, service that CDN offers is customizing of a total selection index. I have found this service useful when comparing bulls.
The Bullvine Bottom Line
It for these reasons that you can tell why Canada has such a disproportionate amount of the world market. I would say there is a far greater difference in the systems supporting the marketing of top cattle in the two countries than there is in the genetics. In a world where knowledge is power, the ability to share information with as many people as possible gives Canada a distinct advantage in marketing their animals. I wonder is the $2 per inquiry that Holstein USA receives not costing breeders more in the lost potential genetics sales?
Planet is in an orbit onto himself With his first official domestic CDN proof Ensenada Taboo Planet-ET (Taboo x Amel) takes the coveted #1 LPI with #3 Milk, #2 Fat and #3 Protein. Displaying much greater type than his sire stack would have you believe Planet’s domestic conformation score comes in at +11. The first 15 GLPI cows are Planet’s and 5/6 top GPA LPI heifers are from Planet daughters.
Highest New Release – De-Su Gillespy #2 LPI The highest debuting young sire graduate, De-Su Gillespy-ET (Bolton x Shottle, full brother to Gavin in the US), lands #2 LPI (#7 Fat). Displaying outstanding production numbers and solid functional conformation traits Gillespy is a production and durability stand out, though does need to be protected on health and fertility traits.
New Release – Gen-I-Beq Topside at #3 LPI
Another newly proven Bolton son is Gen-I-Beq Topside at #3 LPI, who is out of the bull factory, Braedale Bailer Twine, and therefore a maternal brother to Goldwyn. Much like his brother, Topside needs to be protected on Rump, but offers high components with outstanding udders. Both Topside and Gillespy early sons of Bolton with signs of more to come.
Big Jumper – Butoise Bahamas jumps from #16 to #4
Catapulting from #16 last round with a gain of 167 points over and above the 160-point genetic base adjustment for LPI, Butoise Bahamas (Jefferson x Titanic) breaks into the Top 10 at #4 LPI. While offering outstanding mammary systems and strong production Bahamas needs to be protected on feet and legs
Previous Sires Holding Steady Previous LPI leader, Lirr Drew Dempsey (Goldwyn x Derry) drops 232 points but holds his own at #5 LPI and becomes tied at #1 Conformation (with Pine-TreeSid-ET). UFM-Dubs Olegant-ET (Elegant x O Man) climbs from #10 to #6 LPI experiencing little change to his proof profile. Kilobyte (Goldwyn x Durham) increases 160 LPI points and jumps from #20 last round to become #7 LPI. Three bulls lose their placing, but remain in the Top 10 LPI, namely O-Bee Manfred Justice becomes #8 LPI, Skalsumer Jorryn takes #9 LPI and Crackholm Fever (Goldwyn x Blitz) completes the lineup at #10 LPI.
Planet Daughters Dominate Top GLPI Cows Twenty-one of the Top 25 and the complete list of Top 10 GLPI cows are daughters of the newest breed leader, Planet. In fact, his domination is so strong that seven of the Top 10 GLPI cows are Planet daughters with their first official LPI.
Noticeable Red Daughters in Top GLPI Cow List Three red carriers still rank among the Top 50 GLPI cows this round. Misty Springs Planet Brice*RDC increases 126 points to land at #29 GLPI, KHW-I Aika Baxter*RDC drops from #12 to #41 GLPI after losing 188 points in concordance with the genetic base adjustment and Charpentier Mr Burns Sibelle*RDC slides from #39 to #47 GLPI.
USA
Freddie Still #1
BADGER-BLUFF FANNY FREDDIE (O MAN x DIE-HARD) holds his #1 ranking with no real change in daughter numbers
Man-O-Man moves to #2
LONG-LANGS OMAN OMAN-ET (O MAN x ALTAAARON) rides a 40 point increase in his TPI™ to move into the #2 spot with the addition of more 2nd crop daughters to his proof.
#1 New Release Sire is Massey CO-OP BOSSIDE MASSEY (Mascol x Bret) a graduate of the Genex Genesis Program is the #1 new release sire. Transmitting outstanding production, durability and health traits Massey offers a functional type break down but should be protected on Rump and Feet & Legs.
Hill Jumps from #11 to #6 Climbing into the top ranks is LOTTA-HILL SHOTTLE 41-ET (Shottle x MW Marshall) with the addition of 171 daughters into his proof.
Steady as She Goes
Seeing little change to his numbers CO-OP O-STYLE OMAN JUST (O Man x Teamster) see himself move into the top 5 TPI. Followed by CHARLESDALE SUPERSTITION (Boliver x O Man) who holds his numbers but sees his rank drop from #4 to #6. Also holding steady and maintaining their top ranks are REGANCREST ALTAIOTA-ET (O MAN x ITO), MORNINGVIEW LEVI (BUCKEYE x O MAN), and CO-OP OMAN LOGAN-ET (O MAN x BW MARSHALL) holding on to their top 10 rankings.
New Top Genomic Young Sires
Joining the likes of UNO & MOGUL in the top 10 Genomic TPI Young Sires are: SEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE, DE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174, FARNEAR-TBR-BH CASHCOIN, DE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY, LADYS-MANOR MAN-O-SHAN, FARNEAR-TBR-BH CASHMONEY, SEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER, SULLY MANDORA CRI.
International Sires
SNOWMAN Still #1 International Sire FLEVO GENETICS SNOWMAN added 39 daughters to his proof and only slight change when taking into the 160 point base adjustment. With 874 daughters in his proof and strong Direct Genomic Values sees Snowman as the #1 demand sire of sons worldwide, though limited semen supply has caused challenges filling the demand.
New Release from Italy – MASCALESE Coming from a Italian maternal line well-known for high production records with extreme protein tests ZANI BOLTON MASCALESE (Bolton x Justice) combines extreme production and components. Possessing greater conformation than his sire stack would indicate MASACLESE sires strong dairy cattle that are durable and poses good health and fertility traits.
ALTAESQUIRE Jumps Adding 168 daughters sees UFM-DUBS ALTAESQUIRE (Justice x AltaSam) jumping and drawing close to his Direct Genomic Values. Offering a very functional proof, AltaEsquire sires strong components from product healthy cattle, though needs to be protected on teat placement and udder depth.
Little afraid of this Shark Coming in as the #3 non USA or CDN sire is VH SHARKY SILAS. This Sharky X O Man has strong production numbers with great component deviations. The scary side comes to his type numbers. Sitting at 0 or below for all major traits (except F&L where he is a 2), offers great production, durability and health and fertility numbers but will probably see limited use with such low type and no genomic information at this time.
New Shottle son from Strong International Sire Stack
Coming from a Italian show cow CHEMELLO JOCOBENGE VG-87-2YR-ITA, BG E T SHOTTLE is a Shottle X Jacko Besn X Mtoto. He sires strong productive cattle that have functional type.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
