Lara Moody, Executive Director of the Institute for Feed Education and Research (IFEEDER), opens the discussion by outlining IFeeder’s mission to advance understanding and trust in a sustainable animal feed and pet food supply chain. Founded in 2009, IFEEDER has steadily expanded its scope of work, recently releasing key industry resources including feed ingredient consumption reports, a comprehensive pet food ingredient report covering more than 600 ingredients, and a strategic assessment of vitamins and amino acids related to U.S. food security. (0:46) 

Lara then introduces Dr. Yan‑Tai Hung, IFeeder’s Senior Research Manager, whose background as a swine nutritionist brings additional technical depth to the organization’s research efforts. Dr. Hung discusses his experience in applied nutrition research and how IFEEDER is expanding beyond individual ingredients to address the broader animal food production chain and food availability challenges. (2:05) 

The conversation turns to IFEEDER’s funding model and organizational growth, with Laura explaining how the foundation has diversified beyond industry funding alone. Over the past five years, IFeeder has shifted from relying almost entirely on industry contributions to securing significant support through grants and partnerships with organizations such as the USDA, commodity groups, and other stakeholders—allowing annual project funding to grow substantially. (3:24) 

Dr. Chad Risley, Research Committee Chair, shares his long‑standing involvement with IFeeder and reflects on how the organization has evolved from early educational initiatives to a more focused, impact‑driven research foundation. He highlights the importance of IFEEDER’s sustainability toolkit and strategic planning in helping the organization gain momentum and relevance across the industry. (4:29) 

A major focus of the episode is the new IFeeder Research Submission Program, which formalizes how research ideas move from concept to funded projects. Previously, projects originated informally through committees and the board. The new process provides clear submission guidelines and evaluation criteria to ensure proposed projects align with AFIA priorities and deliver practical value to the industry. (8:39) 

The panel explains that while the submission process is newly approved, outreach is already underway with AFIA committees and industry stakeholders to encourage future submissions. With 14 AFIA committees representing diverse areas of animal nutrition, IFEEDER aims to ensure broad participation across the feed and pet food sectors. (11:28) 

Dr. Risley discusses how IFEEDER‑supported research has already driven regulatory and policy wins, including data used to demonstrate the economic impact of delayed feed additive approvals—a project that helped secure additional FDA resources to improve regulatory efficiency. (12:04) 

The discussion then shifts to collaboration with universities, where Laura emphasizes IFEEDER’s role as a bridge between academic research, industry needs, and nonprofit funding. By partnering with universities, IFEEDER helps align research proposals with real‑world challenges while strengthening grant competitiveness and knowledge transfer. (13:26) 

Looking ahead, the panel outlines research priorities for 2026 and beyond, including sustainability, foreign animal disease prevention, biosecurity risks, and improving communication around animal health and nutrition. Sustainability is framed not only as environmental stewardship, but as the long‑term viability and profitability of the animal feed and pet food industries. (16:21) 

Lara highlights strategic wins over the past five years, including the development of a formal strategic plan, increased industry visibility, and the creation of tools and datasets that support foot printing, feed formulation decisions, and industry advocacy. (18:59) 

The episode wraps up with discussion of IFEEDER’s feed consumption reports, which quantify the economic impact of the feed industry at state and congressional district levels. These reports have become valuable tools for educating policymakers and supporting science‑based advocacy efforts on Capitol Hill. (21:52) 

Final remarks encourage listeners to stay engaged with IFEEDER, subscribe to its newsletter, share research ideas, and support the foundation’s work through contributions and participation in its annual Day of Giving. (24:41) 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange. If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com.

Andrea opens by outlining IFCN’s global dairy data network and explains how annual farm‑level data collection and monthly updates allow IFCN to monitor milk production, prices, and costs across major dairy regions. She highlights a major industry milestone: global milk production surpassing 1 billion tons, driven by growth across multiple regions. (04:40)

The discussion then turns to recent production trends. The panel explains how the U.S. has shown consistent strength, while the EU experienced slower growth early before unexpected late‑season increases. China and parts of Latin America continue to grow production but remain dependent on international markets. Weather, animal health, and strong milk prices aligned to create production surprises in several regions. (17:30)

Andrea and Lucas examine global milk price dynamics, focusing on the growing divergence between butter and cheese prices over the last decade. Butter prices have increasingly driven global milk price signals, influencing producer behavior and trade flows. One notable shift discussed is the U.S. becoming a net exporter of butter in 2025 after more than a decade as a net importer. (25:10)

The panel also explores rising costs of milk production. IFCN data show that milk production costs have increased sharply over the last five years, with roughly 75% of countries now facing costs above $40 per hundredweight. These pressures are influencing farm investment decisions, particularly in regions with stricter environmental regulations. (28:30)

Herd dynamics and beef‑on‑dairy economics are another key theme. Lucas and Jeremy describe how record beef prices have reshaped breeding decisions in the U.S., increased calf values, and encouraged producers to keep cows longer. This dynamic has contributed to U.S. herd growth and stronger-than-expected milk supply, raising the question of whether current production trends represent a new normal. (35:00)

The conversation contrasts structural differences between Europe, and the U.S. European producers face tighter environmental regulations, land constraints, and aging farmer demographics, limiting expansion. In response, many EU farmers are diversifying income through solar energy, agri‑tourism, and land leasing rather than increasing milk output. Both IFCN and Rabobank suggest 2025 may represent peak milk production for the EU under current conditions. (45:00)

Attention then shifts to exports and demand. Lucas outlines where U.S. dairy exports are growing—especially in Mexico, Asia, and emerging markets—and explains why exports will be critical as domestic consumption grows more slowly than production. The panel also discusses rising consumer interest in protein, from high‑protein milk and beverages to whey ingredients, and how this trend supports long‑term dairy demand. (51:00)

Looking ahead to 2035, Andrea and Philip share IFCN’s long‑term outlook. The U.S. is expected to drive most global production growth, while Europe trends closer to self‑sufficiency and Oceania remains export‑focused. Demand growth—driven by population increases and more westernized diets in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East—is expected to outpace supply growth, supporting higher dairy prices over time. (57:30)

In closing, the panel reflects on key takeaways: the importance of data‑driven decisions, diversification of farm income, continued productivity gains through genetics and technology, and strong long‑term fundamentals for dairy. While risks remain, the group agrees the global dairy sector is well positioned for the next decade. (01:02:00)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends. Invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table. Please be sure to register for our upcoming Real Science Lecture Series webinars.

Finally, if you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The discussion quickly expands to nitrogen efficiency and environmental sustainability. Dr. Van Amburgh explains that dairy systems across Europe and North America are under increasing pressure to reduce nitrogen losses. By formulating more precise diets that better match amino acid requirements, cows can excrete significantly less urinary nitrogen while maintaining—or even improving—milk production, creating both environmental and economic benefits. (09:30)

An audience question shifts the conversation toward the challenge of quantifying amino acids in forages. The panel discusses the robustness of current CNCPS model libraries and explains why forage amino acid profiles tend to be relatively conserved. While management factors like heat damage or poor fermentation can alter availability, microbial protein ultimately supplies a large and consistent portion of metabolizable amino acids to the cow. (12:15)

Building on this, the panel explores where required amino acids actually come from. Dr. Van Amburgh emphasizes that microbial protein should supply roughly half of total amino acid needs, making rumen efficiency critical. However, as production levels rise, microbial protein alone is no longer sufficient—creating a clear role for rumen‑protected amino acids to close growing nutritional gaps. (16:20)

Dr. Usman Arshad then leads a deep discussion on choline and methionine in transition cows. He explains why these two nutrients are not interchangeable, despite both acting as methyl donors. Choline has a unique lipotropic role in supporting liver fat export and reducing fatty liver risk during early lactation, while methionine primarily supports milk production and protein synthesis. Research shows that choline supplementation during the transition period alone can generate lasting carryover improvements in milk yield later in lactation. (29:00)

The panel addresses a common industry question: how much choline is enough? Dr. Arshad reviews decades of research, including meta‑analyses showing a largely linear response between choline ion intake and milk production. While 12–13 g/day of choline ion remains the standard recommendation based on most available studies, data suggest additional benefits may exist at higher levels—even though more research is still needed. (34:00)

Attention then turns to amino acid nutrition in close‑up and fresh cows. Dr. Van Amburgh explains that recent infusion and feeding studies demonstrate much higher metabolizable protein requirements than traditionally assumed, driven in part by the important role of non‑essential amino acids. These nutrients support energy generation, glucose synthesis, and tissue metabolism during early lactation—contributing to substantial gains in energy‑corrected milk when requirements are met. (44:30)

The panel also discusses whether amino acid balancing can help cows cope with heat stress. While amino acids do not eliminate heat stress, improving metabolic efficiency appears to reduce wasted heat production and support immune function and gut integrity, potentially helping cows better navigate stressful conditions. (54:45)

From science to economics, producers raise questions about return on investment. The group shares real‑world examples showing that improving amino acid balance often increases milk components without increasing intake, frequently delivering returns of 2:1 or greater, depending on milk pricing and market structure. (58:00)

Dr. Van Amburgh then offers candid insights into rumen‑protected amino acid bioavailability, explaining that products on the market are not created equal. Independent testing has shown efficiencies ranging from as low as ~10% to as high as ~80%. The panel stresses that transparent, published bioavailability data are essential for accurate formulation and for maintaining credibility across the industry. (01:01:30)

A technical discussion follows on measuring amino acid bioavailability, comparing isotope dilution, selenium‑methionine, and in vitro approaches. The group agrees that no method is perfect, but understanding assumptions and applying methods consistently can produce reliable, actionable data. (01:06:00)

In the final phase of the episode, the panel examines modern high‑starch diets, monensin use, and intake regulation. Dr. Van Amburgh suggests many systems may now be producing excessive propionate, potentially limiting intake through chemical fill. He argues that rebalancing starch and NDF—rather than simply adding more concentrate—may unlock better efficiency and performance. (01:10:00)

The episode concludes with final audience questions and a call to rethink traditional nutrition paradigms. The panel emphasizes that precision amino acid nutrition—supported by sound science, verified bioavailability, and thoughtful diet structure—is becoming essential for meeting the production, economic, and environmental demands facing dairy systems today. (01:20:29)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

He outlines two primary mechanisms traditionally blamed for immune suppression: the cortisol surge at calving, which may impair neutrophil migration, and the metabolic changes of early lactation—high NEFAs, ketones, and low calcium—which appear to reduce neutrophil function in laboratory settings. (13:16)

Dr. Baumgard then challenges the central assumption: are cows truly immunosuppressed, or are they simply exposed to greater pathogen loads and stressors during a narrow window around calving? He argues that morbidity may reflect increased environmental and physiological challenges rather than a dysfunctional immune system. (15:25)

Dr. Fry shares field data from three herds representing over 100,000 calvings. After implementing management changes—primarily building a well-designed transition barn with lower stocking density, improved hygiene, and better cow flow—metritis rates dropped from 21.3% to 9.7%. Nutrition and innate immunity remained unchanged, suggesting management and environment were key drivers. (21:29)

The panel discusses the role of stress stacking during the transition period. Dr. Baumgard explains that multiple simultaneous stressors, such as overcrowding, heat stress, hygiene challenges, social stress, and nutritional shifts, may overwhelm cows. He emphasizes growing evidence that stress compromises gut integrity (“leaky gut”), potentially triggering systemic inflammation and increasing susceptibility in tissues like the mammary gland. (27:27)

Heat stress provides another example. While mastitis rates often increase during humid Midwest summers, they decline in arid regions like Arizona and Israel despite severe heat stress. Dr. Baumgard suggests environmental pathogen load—not immune suppression—is the primary driver. (27:43)

The conversation shifts to ketosis and hyperketonemia. Dr. Baumgard and Dr. Pralle discuss how elevated BHB and NEFAs may not always indicate disease but instead reflect normal metabolic adaptation to support milk production. The key distinction is productivity: cows milking well with high ketones may not require intervention, while cows with high ketones and poor milk production warrant deeper investigation into underlying causes such as metritis, mastitis, hypocalcemia, gut inflammation, or environmental stress. (37:13)

Dr. Fry reinforces the importance of whole-cow and whole-environment evaluation rather than treating metabolic markers in isolation. Monitoring milk yield, rumination, activity, and cow demeanor—along with assessing stocking density, pen hygiene, hoof health, and stockmanship—are critical to identifying true problems. (44:00)

The group emphasizes reducing pathogen load through simple, practical management: minimizing manure accumulation, maintaining clean and dry bedding, improving calving hygiene, and lowering stocking density—especially for close-up and fresh cows. (33:39)

Looking ahead, Dr. Baumgard describes his lab’s focus on modeling “stacked stressors” to better replicate the real-world transition period. Rather than studying stressors in isolation, his team is investigating how combined stressors influence physiology, particularly gut health. (47:11)

In closing, the panel encourages industry professionals to reconsider the immune suppression paradigm. Instead of trying to “fix” the immune system at calving, the emphasis should shift toward removing stressors and minimizing environmental challenges that create excessive pathogen exposure. (53:01)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Laarman wrapped up the  symposium with “Gut health in ruminants: Where to from here?” He agrees with Dr. Penner that we need to look beyond the rumen at all other gut organs. His group has researched rumen acidosis in calves and how it’s linked to hindgut acidosis and pH dynamics. Calves behave very differently from cows in this model. Gut health begins from birth and is the whole tract, not just the rumen.  (7:35)

Work in Dr. Penner’s lab showed that inducing inflammation in the mammary gland actually tightened permeability in the GI tract, which was opposite of their initial hypothesis. Dr. Baumgard’s lab found similar results in a heat stress model, and Dr. Laarman echoes that his group has also found this result.  The panel discusses possible mechanisms of action. Dr. Penner explains that diet may also have an influence on gut permeability. (11:01)

The panel talks more about what we know and don’t know about gut health. We probably know which regions of the gut are most likely to be affected by challenges, what those impacts are, how fast those gut changes occur, and how nutrient absorption can be affected by challenges. The group hypothesizes that pH alone does not have a negative effect, but if low pH occurs at the same time as other signals or molecules, then pathology happens. Dr. Laarman shares some of the observations his group has made with calves, which withstand low pH that would kill a mature cow if she experienced it. (18:40)

Guests talk about some of the reasons why we know less about ruminant gut health compared to monogastric species. They also visit about the microbiome and how perhaps what the microbiome is doing and producing is more important than who all is present in the microbiome. (23:44)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (29:33)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

How can we search for molecules that modify how feed is fermented in the rumen? Conventionally, we have used scientific literature to look for plant extracts and compounds that have been researched before. Now, we have computational technology that offers opportunities to model how molecules interact with rumen microbes. Once a candidate compound is selected, in vitro tools can be used to test dose responses before animal experiments. 

Recommendations for testing enteric methane-mitigating feed additives in ruminant studies.

Dr. Yáñez-Ruiz for Dr. Alexander Hristov (17:07)

Once compounds have been identified and selected, they need to be tested in the animal. These experiments are costly and best practices for experimental design, animals used, diets fed, delivery of the test compound, and measurement of methane should be followed. Some of these guidelines are strongly linked to the regulatory aspects that provide requirements for how in vivo trials need to be conducted. 

Feed additives for methane mitigation: Modeling the impact of feed additives on enteric methane emission of ruminants—Approaches and recommendations. Dr. Bannink (22:43)

Once experimental data is collected, it can be used to develop models to predict how effective an additive is, how it works, and its relevance. The intention is to quantify how an additive will work if you feed it to an animal. This can be complex due to variation among different datasets and natural fluctuation in methane production in the animal. One factor that plays a big role in the effectiveness of additives is the type of diet that animals are fed. 

A guideline to uncover the mode of action of antimethanogenic feed additives for ruminants. Dr. Belanche (30:03)

Understanding the mechanism of action for methane mitigants is challenging. We know some compounds work to reduce methane, but we don’t know how or why they are working. There are five main types of additives when grouped by mode of action: modify rumen fermentation to decrease hydrogen production; methane inhibitors that act specifically against methanogens; inhibit enzymes common to all methanogens; hydrogen sinks to redirect hydrogen away from methanogenesis and toward other metabolic pathways; and promote methanotrophs that oxidize methane. The most effective are methane inhibitors, which decrease methane but don’t increase animal productivity. Combining a methane inhibitor with a hydrogen sink may help redirect hydrogen and result in improved animal productivity.

Regulations and evidence requirements for the authorization of enteric methane-mitigating feed additives. Dr. Tricarico (41:22)

There are as many regulatory systems as there are jurisdictions. Two concepts that are shared across jurisdictions are regulatory status/legal classification and intended use. While each jurisdiction requires some legal classification of a feed additive compound, each has a different criteria base from which they classify products. For example, “inhibitor” is a legal classification in New Zealand, but doesn’t even exist in other jurisdictions. Sometimes, the same word may mean different things in different jurisdictions. Authorization of a compound is not a blanket authorization, it is an authorization of the intended use of the compound. This specificity is critical for all involved to understand.

Feed additives for methane mitigation: How to account for the mitigating potential of antimethanogenic feed additives—Approaches and recommendations. Dr. del Prado (49:42)

A major challenge in this area is what kind of accounting system will be used: farm level, lifecycle analysis, carbon markets, national greenhouse gas inventories, etc. An accounting system needs to be well tailored from the type of experimental data available to the complexity used on the scale of the method. Experimental data, modeling, and accounting move hand-in-hand. 

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (58:57)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Räisänen shares her path from Penn State to Finland, Switzerland, and now Aarhus University, where she is leading research within a large, multidisciplinary project focused on lifetime nitrogen efficiency in dairy systems. Her current work examines early lactation protein supply and rumen nitrogen balance. (7:32–10:07)

The discussion begins by establishing why protein nutrition plays a central role in sustainability. Ruminants are net protein producers, converting low-value feeds into high-quality milk and meat protein. However, inefficiencies in nitrogen utilization lead to urinary nitrogen excretion, contributing to ammonia emissions, nitrous oxide production, and nitrate leaching. Improving nitrogen efficiency, therefore, directly impacts environmental outcomes. (12:28–14:17)

The group discusses geographic differences in nitrogen regulation. European countries like the Netherlands and Denmark face intense scrutiny due to high livestock density on limited land. Similar regional challenges are emerging in concentrated U.S. dairy regions such as California’s Central Valley and parts of the Midwest. (15:17–18:19)

Dr. Nichols introduces the concept of metabolic flexibility—the ability of ruminants, and especially the mammary gland, to utilize different nutrients and metabolic pathways depending on supply. This flexibility helps explain why responses to protein supplementation are not always black and white, and why traditional limiting amino acid theory does not consistently predict milk protein responses. (24:58–26:23)

The conversation explores early lactation “protein boost” strategies inspired by post-ruminal amino acid infusion studies. Dr. Räisänen describes ongoing work using targeted concentrate supplementation to mimic infusion responses. Preliminary data suggest substantial early lactation milk yield responses, similar to infusion studies, when protein is delivered in a separate concentrate rather than blended into a TMR. (28:33–31:16)

Dr. Nichols discusses three key areas of flexibility highlighted in her webinar:

1. Energy source interactions (glucogenic vs. lipogenic supply),
   
    
2. Rumen nitrogen balance, and
   
    
3. Mammary gland amino acid metabolism. (32:21–33:50)
   
    

The panel explores how feeding systems may influence metabolic responses. PMR systems with separate concentrate feeding may allow temporal and metabolic “choice,” potentially improving efficiency compared to uniform TMR feeding. Robotic milking systems and automated concentrate feeders offer opportunities for more individualized protein nutrition strategies. (35:00–37:57)

Amino acid discussions highlight how flexibility challenges the traditional limiting amino acid model. Milk protein synthesis is not consistently limited by one amino acid, and mammary uptake patterns show that amino acids can serve multiple roles beyond direct incorporation into milk protein. Lysine, leucine, and histidine are discussed as examples of amino acids whose responses may vary depending on metabolic context. (41:07–45:25)

The group also examines energy source effects on nitrogen partitioning. Lipogenic diets (e.g., supplemental fats) may alter amino acid metabolism differently than glucogenic diets, but more research is needed to fully characterize these interactions. (49:24–53:11)

Dr. Räisänen emphasizes the importance of rumen microbial protein synthesis and improving prediction models for digestible amino acid supply. Better understanding and measurement of microbial protein output could significantly improve feed evaluation systems and nitrogen efficiency modeling. (54:04–56:05)

Dr. Nichols highlights endogenous nitrogen recycling and urea transport back to the rumen as another underexplored area. Improved mechanistic understanding of recycled nitrogen could refine models of rumen nitrogen balance and reduce overfeeding of dietary protein. (1:00:46)

The episode closes with a discussion of cow-to-cow variation in nitrogen efficiency and the potential for individualized feeding strategies to optimize the marginal efficiency of protein use. (1:02:00)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The panel discusses the mechanisms of action of cheese consumption on cardiovascular health, how much cheese is recommended daily, and whether different cheeses have different health benefits. Dr. Ricklefs-Johnson explains that the protein in cheese is primarily in the form of casein, rather than whey. Casein had been less utilized as it was thought harder to digest, but more research is showing the benefits of casein in muscle recovery and helping with sleep. (8:27)

Research supports that calcium from cow milk sources is more bioavailable compared to supplements or fortified calcium in plant milks. Cheese is also unique as a dairy food that contains vitamin K, which works in conjunction with vitamin D and calcium for maintaining bone mass. (15:07)

The panel visits about some of the other presentations at the symposium, including feeding cows to influence vitamin K or fatty acids in the milk and how to get the word out about the health benefits of cheese. (19:16)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (26:29)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Dou’s talk was “Alternative feed for livestock: Opportunities and challenges to support a circular food system.” She explains that a typical agriculture/food system is linear: take, make, and waste, which generates a lot of food residues. Her research aims to recover and recycle some of the food residues from other industries and evaluate their suitability for livestock feeding. (3:51)

Dr. Pinotti’s presentation was titled “Alternative foodstuffs in dairy ruminant nutrition: Basic concepts, recent issues, and future challenges.” His research focuses on using “former food” for livestock feeding and feeding insects not only as a protein source but also as a potential mineral source. (5:38)

Dr. Pinotti talks about the challenges around variability in alternative feedstuffs. He goes on to describe some of the bakery byproducts he has used in research rations. He calls them fortified versions of cereal. They contain quite a lot of starch and also contain a lot of fat. These ingredients are ideal for young monogastric animals and also have utility in lactating dairy cow diets. The panel discusses the EU animal protein ban and whether similar restrictions exist for animal fats. (10:16)

Dr. Rico notes that insects contain between 40 and 70% protein, depending on the type of insect. Crickets, mealworms, and black soldier fly larvae are the most popular. The fly larvae have a higher fat content compared to crickets and are a good energy source for monogastrics like pigs, chickens, or fish. Less is understood about the feeding value of insects in ruminant diets, and Dr. Rico’s lab has been conducting experiments to help define this in dairy cattle. He notes the chitin content of insects is a unique challenge due to its indigestibility. It comes out in the NDF fraction in a nutrient analysis, but it is animal fiber, not plant fiber. (21:27)

The panel talks about the scalability of insects as a protein source and confirms that the theory that insects are a cheap protein source is different from reality at this time. The group talks about small-scale insect projects at universities and in Africa. (27:17)

Dr. Pinotti explains that insects are quite good at accumulating minerals, bad and good. His group conducted an experiment using sodium selenite as the substrate and the insects made selenocysteine and selenomethionine. Future research will include zinc as well as selenium in the substrate, and insects will be fed in an in vivo trial to verify bioavailability. He does not envision issues with chitin interfering with bioavailability since the insects incorporate the minerals into amino acids. (34:27)

Dr. Rico talks about the amino acid and fatty acid profiles in insects. Essential amino acid content is relatively similar to other common protein sources. Insects contain higher levels of lauric and myristic acids than other common sources which could pose a challenge for lactation diets. He explains that there is a low-fat source of black soldier fly larvae with around 12% fat, compared to 30% in the full-fat version. The panel talks about variability in protein and fat content by insect type and the substrate the insects were grown on. (37:35)

Dr. Dou describes some of her circular feed research using fresh cull fruit (kiwi, citrus, apples; delivered daily) blended into the TMR. Later, she also ensiled the fruit with dry hay in an effort to preserve the fruit before spoilage. Dr. Pinotti notes that he has used cull material from a salad plant as feed as well.  (44:31)

Dr. Dou reports that one-third of food produced for human consumption never makes it to the human stomach. Globally, it’s estimated that 1.6-1.9 billion tons of food are lost and wasted each year. The panel talks about the biggest challenges keeping us from using more former food products in livestock feeding. (50:54)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (59:51)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.

Dr. Nelson gives some background on how the Hot Topic Panel idea came to be and introduces the rest of the guests. (1:07)

Dr. Devries describes his research program in dairy cattle behavior and nutrition, particularly using behavior as a metric for understanding nutrition and housing management and using automated tools. He has particular expertise in automated milking systems. He envisions incremental adoption of various automated tools to replace human labor in the manufacturing of milk. He predicts this will manifest not only in automated or robot systems, but also in increased automation in a traditional parlor system as well. (5:01)

Dr. Boerman, a nutritionist, collaborates with Dr. Amy Reibman, an engineer, at Purdue to research the use of video analytics on dairy farms. Projects include video prediction of cow intake and cow body weight combined with milk production information in an effort to make improvements in feed efficiency. She emphasizes that technology needs to be used across a large number of farms without disrupting the farm. The panel talks about what technologies are currently available, challenges in identifying individual cows, and specific issues created for technology in a dairy farm environment. Dr. Boerman notes that a collaborative effort with colleagues of different expertise leads to the most optimal outcomes. (15:42)

Dr. Giordano talks about monitoring systems for reproduction, health, and welfare. Wearable sensors are a good example of a technology that can be used to monitor both reproduction and health, as well as aspects of nutritional management. The goal of many research programs in this area is to touch cows as little as possible, yet intervene as early and intensely as possible with cows who truly need intervention. An intervention could be a treatment to ameliorate or reduce clinical signs, or it could be a preventative intervention that prevents the cow from developing a clinical health disorder. More work is needed to refine algorithms and integrate data, as well as distilling the data into what is most valuable to make the best predictions at the most reasonable cost.  (34:08)

The panel further discusses the challenges of data integration, adequate internet and power access on farms, human error for manual data entry, and future training challenges for dairy farm and allied industry employees.(38:32)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (52:26)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The main issues in managing genetic diversity in dairy cattle include inbreeding depression and continuing selection without exhausting the available variability in the population. These are difficult to investigate in a breeding population, as there is not a model algorithm where there is the luxury of designing an experiment. Dairy cattle closely resemble one another, so it is difficult to distinguish between the effect of selection from the effect of drift and the effect of deleterious mutation accumulation in the population. Researchers find proxies to estimate inbreeding and inbreeding depression because we don’t have good estimates of dominance effects.

Identifying genetic diversity within indigenous and highly commercialized breeds for improved performance and future preservation. Dr. Huson (12:24)

Dr. Huson covered four steps of thinking about genetic diversity in cattle: characterization of the genetic diversity, biological understanding of why we should preserve diversity, utilizing our understanding of diversity in breeding programs, and preserving and reassessing diversity over time. 

Harnessing indigenous African breeds for sustainable dairy production: Opportunities for crossbreeding to accelerate genetic improvement. Dr. Mapholi (16:52)

Dr. Mapholi emphasized the importance of tick and disease resistance for the sustainability of the African dairy industry. The indigenous African breeds had been overlooked due to small frame size and the perception they were not suitable for commercial farming, but they have excellent tick and disease resistance. Exotic breeds from the US and Europe struggled with the harsh environment. Crossbreeding indigenous and exotic breeds is allowing for simultaneous improvement in milk production and disease resistance. Genomics is particularly helpful to identify the best candidate breeds for crossing.

Genomic- versus pedigree-based inbreeding: 2 sides of the same coin. Dr. Macciotta (24:19)

It was thought that genomic selection would help in slowing the increase of inbreeding because we were looking at the DNA of the animal, not their pedigree. However, the traditional top animals were the population from which genomic selection began, and genomic selection shortens generation interval, so inbreeding continues to increase at a faster rate. Genomics offer new tools for investigating inbreeding, but there are 10-15 options to calculate inbreeding, all of which could provide a different answer. With pedigree selection, there is only one measurement of inbreeding. We are still investigating the best method for calculating inbreeding using genomic tools.

Managing genetic diversity: Strategies for sustainable livestock improvement. Dr. Baes (27:53)

Genomic selection has increased the speed at which animals become more related. There are negative implications of inbreeding, but today, the genetic and economic gains achieved through the current intense directional selection still far outweigh the inbreeding issues. No one knows where the edge of the cliff is, however. Dr. Baes envisions an international system one day where academia, AI companies, and producers all work together to understand and manage genetic diversity in livestock.

The panelists discuss key takeaways they got from the other speakers’ presentations and give perspectives on the topic of genetic diversity for their particular country and field of study. (34:58)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (46:10)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The panel explains chelated minerals from a chemistry standpoint, describing how organic ligands form stable ring structures around trace minerals, helping protect them from antagonists in feed and water. The discussion also extends beyond dairy into human nutrition, including examples such as magnesium and iron, highlighting how mineral interactions affect absorption across species. (09:20)

Dr. Weiss and Dr. Spinola discuss emerging research showing that mineral sources can influence rumen and intestinal microbial populations. The group also explores how inorganic minerals can accelerate the degradation of vitamins A and E in premixes, particularly over time and under heat, whereas organic minerals are largely inert and help preserve vitamin potency. (14:20)

The panel acknowledges the difficulty of trace mineral research due to limited biomarkers and subtle performance responses. They emphasize the importance of using averages for forage mineral contributions rather than relying on single samples, and caution against assuming zero mineral supply from forages. (25:00)

A candid discussion centers on over-supplementation, with consensus that many diets exceed trace mineral requirements, particularly for copper and vitamins. Dr. Weiss explains the difference between requirements and recommendations, noting that modest safety margins are justified to account for biological variability, but feeding two to three times the requirements increases cost and risk without clear benefit. (37:57)

The episode concludes with a warning against “too-good-to-be-true” organic mineral products, explaining why unusually high metal percentages often indicate inferior chemistry. The panelists emphasize that mineral quality, ligand structure and supplier credibility are important in the long term. The panel's final takeaways reinforce feeding minerals thoughtfully, enough to meet needs, but not in excess. Lastly, you need to consider the microbiome effects, vitamin stability and consistency in delivery when feeding these mineral products. (49:41)

Greg explains how external receiving and intentionally separated traffic flows eliminate cross-traffic between loaders and delivery trucks, which significantly improves safety and efficiency. The group discusses early design considerations, lessons learned from other operations, and how “R&D” (rob and duplicate) helped shape the final layout of the facility. (2:32)

Scott and Walt introduce footage showing how feeds are received, stored, and staged. Greg walks through the grain elevator, unloading, conveyor systems, bay storage, and handling efficiencies that minimize ingredient touches. (5:03)

Greg explains how strategic ingredient placement and facility layout shorten cycle time for high-use ingredients while maintaining flexibility for premixes and specialty feeds. He then goes into inventory management strategies, including rotating bins, tracking shrinkage, and maintaining ingredient freshness. (6:32)

The conversation shifts to dust control and shrink reduction, highlighting the enclosed facility design and the use of an industrial baghouse system to recapture nutrients. Feed processing is simplified by reducing complex operations to just a few controls. Greg highlights the impact of reducing corn handling to a single touch and how it accelerated ROI.  (8:28)

Finally, Greg discusses ration delivery innovations, including feed staging on conveyors and a custom delivery box that allows multiple loads to be staged and delivered efficiently. He shares how learning from other operations and refining those ideas to fit their scale and how it played a critical role in designing a system that maximizes efficiency without sacrificing flexibility. (15:08)

As we look ahead, join us for the next Real Producers Exchange on Tuesday, February 17, 2026, featuring Skylar Gerke, an Arizona dairyman with Midwestern roots. Skylar brings a unique perspective on what it’s like to transition from Midwest dairying to operating in the West. Registration is now open at balchem.com/real-science or agproud.com/real-producer. And as always, thank you to Walt for riding shotgun once again, and to our loyal listeners—thanks for being part of the journey. (20:39)

Dairy Welfare—Breeding and Management Strategies at the 2025 ADSA annual meeting. 

Jessica’s talk was titled “Herd Sustainability Index: Using milk recording data to evaluate dairy herd sustainability.” This index provides a national percentile ranking benchmark for producers relative to sustainability from DHI data. The index evaluates ten indicators in four major categories: longevity and culling, feeding and production, heifers, and health. (2:51)

Dr. Vasseur’s talk was titled “Improving welfare through inclusive innovation: The story of WELL-E.” This inclusive innovation delivers data-driven solutions with and for the Canadian dairy industry by integrating stakeholder and domain knowledge with cutting-edge tools and methods of the improvement of animal and human welfare. (4:48)

Dr. Vasseur talks about the development of the Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Dairy Cattle, which was published in 2023. This most recent code of practice included recommendations and requirements for more opportunities for movement for dairy cattle, particularly those in tie stall environments. Dr. Vasseur’s lab has conducted research in this area to help dairy producers with possible modifications of stalls and other recommendations to improve cow comfort. Jessica describes her master’s research in tie stall modifications. The guests go on to talk about how often cows in tie stalls bump into their stall, some proof-on-concept research looking at doubling stall size, and recommendations for cow comfort improvements in existing tie stall operations. (6:53)

Dr. Vasseur discusses the relationship between cow comfort and longevity. She also talks about the realities of converting a tie stall barn to a free stall barn. (20:12)

Jessica describes the indicators used in the Herd Sustainability Index in more detail. A minimum of six tests in the last 12 months with 50% of the cows being recorded are needed to calculate the index for a farm. Seven of the ten HSI indicators are required for the index to be calculated. She goes on to explain how producers can see their index compared to the rest of Canada as well as historical change in their index, and details an incentive program for high-indexing and most-improved herds. (24:07)

Dr. Vasseur talks about cow comfort and welfare comparisons among intensive dairy production countries. She envisions the development and implementation of technology to allow for more automation and reduced observer bias of processes such as lameness evaluation. (30:30)

So what is WELL-E? Dr. Vasseur gives some background and details about bringing together animal scientists, computer scientists, and stakeholders to develop cutting-edge tools for the improvement of animal and human welfare. (33:24)

Jessica talks about her PhD research in dairy cow behavior and pasture management. She conducted a study where pastures were mowed the morning of grazing compared to conventional grazing. Cows in the mowed pastures spent more time ruminating and drank more water, but no differences in milk production or milk components were observed. (38:02)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (43:07)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Rob and Adrian introduce themselves and share their family’s immigration story and early dairy roots in California, including how prior generations entered the U.S. dairy industry. (1:01)

The Diepersloot’s tell the story growth on their dairy operations, including expansion in California, the decision to diversify geographically and the opportunity that led them to build Wolf Creek Dairy in Colorado in 2017. (1:29)

Rob and Adrian describe how they build and empower a strong leadership team, emphasizing the importance of hiring the right people, expecting managers to think like owners, and conducting efficient and candid meetings that focus on the entire business. (6:25)

The conversation shifts to facility design and operational successes in Colorado, including no-headlock systems, sort gates, feed efficiency improvements, and later adopted in California. (9:59)

Sustainability initiatives are explored, including methane digesters, power generation, manure management and solar energy projects, with a comparison of approaches between California and Colorado. (11:10)

Rob and Adrian share lessons learned from technology challenges, including manure handling systems, activity collars, and feeding infrastructure, and how those experiences shaped future decisions. (15:46)

The discussion turns to the origin of WonderCow Nutrition, detailing how academic research on colostrum and personal family experiences led to the launch of a consumer colostrum brand in 2023. (17:47)

Rob explains WonderCow’s calf-first sourcing commitment, how colostrum is collected responsibly, and what differentiates whole colostrum products from skim-based alternatives. (20:19)

The episode concludes with a preview of the exclusive “Back 30” live Q&A, available only to live webinar attendees, and a reminder of upcoming Real Producer Exchange events including the next one on February 17 with Skylar Gericke out of Arizona which will focus on reproduction success and heat stress. (23:23)

Panelists introduce themselves and how they met Dr. Beitz. Tricky MS and PhD exam questions are also shared. Panelists emphasize Dr. Beitz’s love for biochemistry, teaching, and collaboration. (1:17)

Dr. Beitz shares about his early life, academic career, and family. (11:45)

Dr. Goff’s symposium presentation focused on Dr. Beitz and colleagues’ contribution to our understanding of transition cow hypocalcemia. He talks about studies on low calcium diets, investigating the metabolic pathways of vitamin D, and low phosphorus diets. Dr. Beitz also studied the impact of vitamin D on meat tenderness. (22:37)

Dr. Nelson’s presentation detailed the advances in understanding bovine immunology from the work of Don Beitz and his colleagues. From the milk fever vitamin D research, it was also discovered that vitamin D had an impact on the immune system, which led to further work with vitamin A and immunity as well. Dr. Beitz also had students investigate calf growth rate influence on immune system development as well as Johne’s disease. (27:22)

Dr. Drackley focused on Dr. Beitz’s work in understanding fatty liver and ketosis. The transition period was of interest to Dr. Beitz, which is reflected not only in his work in hypocalcemia, but also the lipid and carbohydrate metabolism of ketosis. Dr. Beitz and his colleague, Dr. Young, developed a successful ketosis model using a slight feed restriction and supplementing a ketone body precursor, which was used to investigate ketosis and fatty liver. (30:25)

Dr. VandeHaar spoke about Dr. Beitz’s passion for research and teaching in dairy science, biochemistry, and life. He emphasized the depth and breadth of Dr. Beitz’s work and teaching. He shared that Dr. Beitz has served as major professor for around 107 graduate students and has taught biochemistry to over 16,000 students. (35:02)

The panelists share stories about Dr. Beitz’s humility, care and support for students, and the many different professional societies he has been involved in over his career. (38:39)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (42:56)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Broderick’s presentation was titled “Protein analysis methodology.” The high points of his talk include recommendations for nitrogen analysis in feeds, potential improvements in determining protein degradability and undegradability in the rumen, and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIR) analysis of amino acid composition of feedstuffs. (7:57)

Dr. Hall’s presentation was titled “Success and continuing challenges in analyzing nonfiber carbohydrates.” She gives some history of the analysis of non-fiber carbohydrates and talks about starch assays and how water-soluble carbohydrates are not solely composed of sugars. She also explains how microbes make decisions on which substrates to ferment and which to store for later. (12:47)

The panelists talk about challenges in obtaining real-time nutrient analyses in order to make ration changes. They recommend using rolling averages rather than a single sample and using milk urea nitrogen as a way to evaluate if something is not quite right with a ration. (21:17)

Dr. Broderick notes he recommends that scientists no longer use the Kjeldahl method of nitrogen analysis, that we look for new or alternative methodology other than in situ digestibility to determine protein degradability, and that NIR analysis of amino acids be used to make ration decisions when calibrated for the feedstuff under consideration. (27:10)

Dr. Hall recommends using the appropriate carbohydrate standard when measuring water-soluble carbohydrates: sucrose for fresh forages, fructose for cool-season grasses with high fructan content,  etc. She also notes that some feeds, like bakery waste or amylase-modified grain, contain soluble starch, which shows up in both the starch category and the water-soluble category in a feed analysis, essentially double-dipping. Lastly, she suggests that nonfiber carbohydrates remain a bit of a nutritional black box and we continue to learn more with improved technology.   (29:36)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (43:31)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Johnson’s presentation was titled “Advancing dairy sustainability through feed-efficient genetics and genomics: Research insights and applications.” She gives an overview of her talk, which focused on data STgenetics has collected and how the company has applied that data to help their customers be more sustainable. She goes on to describe some of the residual feed intake research they’ve conducted in dairy cows. (4:20)

STgenetics has invested in feed efficiency technology and has shown that selection for improved feed efficiency is correlated to a lower carbon footprint. Dr. Johnson talks about the heritability of feed efficiency compared to other traits we select for in the dairy industry.  (8:16)

Dr. Pralle asks Dr. Johnson if STgenetics is measuring emissions from cows in their research. The company has partnered with Texas A&M to measure methane emissions in heifers divergently selected for feed efficiency. They found that more efficient animals produced less methane. Since that pilot project, STgenetics has purchased equipment to measure emissions at their own research facilities and has collected 2-3 years of data on beef, beef on dairy, and Holstein populations. Dr. Johnson emphasizes that the relationship between methane emissions and high milk production is somewhat of a balancing act. (11:29)

The group discusses feed additives purported to decrease methane emissions and the differences in rumen microbiomes between high and low efficiency animals. They also talk about how best to get information and technology in front of producers.  (17:59)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (23:39)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The panelists discuss the healthfulness of saturated fats, the resurgence of butter, milk’s bioactive compounds, and how best to reach the public about the health benefits of dairy. (10:41)

Eve talks about marketing to Gen Z consumers, who are motivated by novelty. How do we reimagine a food that’s been here for thousands of years? What new ways can we talk about it? What ways can we optimize dairy science and research to show up in generative systems like ChatGPT? (20:34)

The group then tackles the topic of lactose. Lactose and honey are the only two sugars not made by plants. Why is it lactose that is in the milk of mammals? Dr. Jiminez-Flores thinks lactose is a dark horse in dairy and we have much yet to discover about it. He notes that some milk oligosaccharides are not digested by babies, but are used by bacteria in the development of a healthy microbiome. Dr. Lucy notes that dairy also contains peptides that have been found to reduce hypertension. The group also delves into how dairy products can be part of preventative health care. (23:53)

Do consumers perceive dairy products to be minimally processed? Eve explains that dairy is perceived as a clean, fresh food. Given the current trend to reduce additives and food dyes, she sees potential for dairy food science innovation in this area. Dr. Aldrich talks about the glycemic index of lactose-free milk. (38:13)

The panelists agree that dairy has a great upcycling story to tell. Converting fiber into milk and meat and feeding non-human grade byproducts are just two examples. Eve notes that younger consumers care about sustainability, but there’s a huge “say-do” gap: 76% of North American consumers identify as caring about conscious and sustainable practices, but less than 40% actually act on those values when making purchases. The panel also notes that whey is another great upcycling story. Dr. Jiminez-Flores emphasizes how important consumer trust in science and research is, and how we are currently experiencing a loss of that trust. (45:48)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (1:01:01)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Lock gives an overview of the evolution of our knowledge of biologically important fatty acids in dairy cows. Much like we think more about amino acids than crude protein these days, we are starting to think about fatty acids rather than crude fat. There are 5 main fatty acids in dairy cow diets: palmitic, stearic, oleic, linoleic, and linolenic. Dr. Lock talks about the importance and role of each, especially that of oleic acid. (6:26)  

Dr. Bales shares some of the research she conducted in Dr. Lock’s lab during her MS and PhD, including a dose response study, raw versus roasted beans, and roasted beans plus supplemental palmitic acid. All studies have resulted in increased milk fat and milk yield, better feed efficiency, and usually a bump in milk protein. She also notes there is a nice synergistic relationship between the fat and degradable protein in the roasted high-oleic beans, which are high in lysine. (13:59)

Nate talks a bit about how the elevator positions high-oleic soybeans to the dairy producers in the area and how different farms have implemented feeding the beans, depending on size, infrastructure, and location. Dr. Bales chimes in with some additional examples. (21:02)

The panelists agree that quality control to ensure consistent sources going out into the field is the next big hurdle. Finding the optimal particle size for diets is also needed, as there is a wide variation currently, which may impact cow performance. (31:56)

Nate predicts no slowing down in the adoption of this technology in his area in the next few years. Dr. Lock notes there may be some potential for feeding high-oleic oil in areas not suited for growing the beans themselves. The panelists agree that the target groups who should receive high-oleic beans in their rations are fresh cows and high cows. Nate emphasizes the importance of having adequate digestible NDF and a healthy rumen to see optimal results. (37:10)

Dr. Lock talks about future research plans into high-oleic soybeans and other fatty acids. The panel comments on the yield of high-oleic soybeans and the availability of seed, both conventional and GMO. (48:48)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (59:15)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Abstract 2186: Effects of feeding alternative forage silages on early lactation performance and gas production in multiparous Holstein cows. (00:15)

Guests: Barbara Dittrich and Dr. Heather White, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Co-Host: Dr. Clay Zimmerman, Balchem

Barbara substituted rye silage, triticale silage, rye-camelina-hairy vetch silage, and triticale-camalina-hairy vetch silage to replace 10% of the alfalfa silage in the control diet for her experimental diets. Dry matter intake and gas production were similar across diets. Average milk yield was higher in the rye mix silage group compared to the triticale mix silage group, but no treatment was different than the control.  

Abstract 1602: Optimizing starch concentrations in low-forage diets. (11:22)

Guests: Irie Moussiaux and Dr. Kirby Krogstad, Ohio State University

Co-host: Dr. Jeff Elliott, Balchem

Irie investigated different levels of starch in a low-forage diet (12.5% NDF) by replacing soybean hulls with corn to yield 20%, 25%, or 30% starch. Dry matter intake and milk production were the same for all three starch concentrations; however, the low starch diet had the highest milk fat yield and energy-corrected milk yield. 

Abstract 2183: Effects of partial replacement of corn and oat silages with extracted stevia plant on production, behavior, and digestibility in dairy cows. (17:05)

Guests: Mariana Marino and Dr. Jose Santos, University of Florida

Co-host: Dr. Clay Zimmerman, Balchem

Mariana fed stevia plant byproduct as a replacement for corn and oat silage in lactating cow diets. All diets had 40% grain and 60% forage. Stevia byproduct was included at 0, 25%, or 40% of diet dry matter. The byproduct is of very fine particle size and is relatively high in lignin. This resulted in higher dry matter intake, but lower milk production for the highest stevia diet. 

Abstract 2472: Evaluating feed sorting behavior and TMR composition in roughage intake control feeding systems. (26:38)

Guests: Sophia Green and Dr. Heather White, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Co-host: Dr. Ryan Pralle, Balchem

Sophia evaluated feed sorting in a research intake control feeding system (RIC bins). Feed sorting primarily occurred in the last 12 hours of the feed day, and particle size was smaller at the end of the day than earlier. Compared to fresh feed at hour zero, the chemical composition of the diet did not change throughout the feed day. RIC bins did not introduce additional variance in nutrient consumption. 

Abstract 1603: Assessing an ex vivo assay with gastrointestinal tissue sections to investigate mucosal immune responses in dairy calves. (35:24)

Guests: Paiton McDonald and Dr. Barry Bradford, Michigan State University

Paiton challenged explants from the ileum and mid-jejunum in the lab with rotavirus or E. coli compared to a control. Pathogen stimulation increased mRNA abundance of TNF and IL6 above control. Ileal sections secreted more cytokines than jejunal sections. 

Abstract 1466: The short-term effect of increasing doses of palmitic and stearic acid on plasma fatty acid concentration and mammary arteriovenous difference in Holstein cows. (40:17)

Guests: Alanna Staffin and Dr. Kevin Harvatine, Penn State University

Co-host: Dr. Jeff Elliott, Balchem

Alanna fed mid-lactation cows 0, 150, 300, 500, or 750 grams of palmitic acid, stearic acid, or no supplement control. Palmitic acid increased milk fat yield at lower doses compared to stearic acid. Alanna found that the mammary gland increases its arteriovenous (AV) difference and uptake of palmitic acid when higher concentrations are provided, but AV difference and uptake of stearic acid did not change. 

Abstract 2006: Does hay improve performance in pair-housed dairy calves? (50:00)

Guests: Gillian Plaugher and Dr. Melissa Cantor, Penn State University

Gillian fed pelleted hay to pair-housed dairy calves along with milk replacer and calf starter. Control calves received milk replacer and calf starter only. Hay-fed pairs grew faster than controls after day 21 and were heavier at day 70. Hay feeding did not impact calf starter DMI or feed efficiency. 

Abstract 1463: Dietary metabolizable protein and palmitic and oleic acids affect milk production in early lactation dairy cows. (1:02:03)

Guests: Jair Parales-Giron and Dr. Adam Lock, Michigan State University

Co-host: Dr. Clay Zimmerman

Jair fed two different levels of metabolizable protein and 3 different levels of supplemental fatty acids from 1 to 22 days in milk followed by a common diet to evaluate carryover effects to day 50. Metabolizable protein and fatty acid supplementation had additive effects on milk production. Cows fed the highest dose of both metabolizable protein and fatty acids produced 8.9 kg more energy-corrected milk per day compared to the low metabolizable protein diet without fatty acid supplementation.

Dr. VandeHaar explains the idea behind creating the panel discussion for the opening session and his selection of the other three podcast guests as panel members. (2:02)

Dr. Baes was the genomics expert on the panel. Her talk focused on what types of data have been collected on dairy cattle in the past and in the future, as well as the collaboration needed among different disciplines to ensure the right information is being collected in the appropriate way. (4:54)

Dr. Hostens was the data analytics expert on the panel. He is a veterinarian by training, but has a strong interest and passion around big data. He notes that a “gut feeling is good, but data is better.” He talks about a project where an existing language model was trained with all Journal of Dairy Science abstracts since 1917 so that answers from chatbots would be fed by JDS knowledge. He talks about other ways this type of approach could be used in the future to provide answers to questions on-farm. (8:09)

Eve is the Senior Vice President of Strategic Intelligence at DMI and was the food futurist expert on the panel. She notes that dairy’s image is shifting to that of a health and wellness food. The question then becomes what is the future of health and wellness, and what does the dairy industry need to do to build towards that future? She talks about the roles of data and artificial intelligence in enabling us to design the foods of the future tailored to each individual. She advises that knowing more about your product than anyone else on the planet through technology and science allows you to anticipate what consumers are going to want and need in the future.   (14:33)

The panel talks about genetic selection to produce particular components “naturally” rather than through food processing, where the industry is headed in regard to total milk production, breeding dairy cows for health, providing tools for making wise use of resources especially in developing countries, and how the future of big data could impact decisions made on-farm. (20:12)

Eve talks about the consumer who has (processed) collagen in their coffee each morning but also demands clean, whole foods. Consumers want it all. She envisions a future where consumers will know the truth about how foods work in their body because they’ll have the technology to measure it. The group goes on to talk about wearable technology like continuous glucose monitors and the variability that exists in the human population compared to variation in Holstein cows, for example. (35:05)

The guests talk about where the gaps are in technology - what else do we need to take the next step? Dry matter intake might be one, but Dr. Baes notes that the Danish have technology through video of the feed bunk that allows them to predict intake with surprisingly high accuracy. (41:59)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (47:07)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Weiss shares about his early life, schooling, and academic career. (2:29)

Panelists introduce themselves and how they know Bill. Dr. Firkins started at OSU one month before Dr. Weiss, Dr. St. Pierre was in graduate school with Dr. Weiss, and Dr. Tebbe was Dr. Weiss’s last graduate student. (4:47)

Dr. St. Pierre and Dr. Firkins share about Bill’s deep contributions to the science of energy, protein, and trace mineral nutrition in dairy cattle. They note he was a great mentor to his students and an exceptional colleague. Dr. Weiss reflects on his career and the collaborations he had with his colleagues even though they were on different campuses. Dr. Tebbe underlines what a hard worker Dr. Weiss is, yet always had time for his students. (11:45)

Panelists share stories about Bill’s driving, winning 20 gallons of ice cream in a contest in graduate school, Bill’s less serious side, and his love for cars and golf. They also tease him a bit for being a glutton for punishment and serving on both the 2001 NRC and NASEM committees. (19:06)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (29:11)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Lock gave the highlights of his presentation on dietary opportunities for promoting milk fat.  (2:18)

Dr. St. Pierre’s presentation focused on the change we've had in the way milk and its components are priced. (5:25)

Dr. Van Amburgh’s symposium talk covered amino acid supplementation to high producing cows eliciting more of a milk fat response than a milk protein response. (9:31)

Dr. Van Amburgh and Dr. Lock talk about where butyrate fits into milk fat synthesis. Dr. Van Amburgh shares some of his experiences with grass-based dairy diets in Ireland and how those might influence milk fat production. The group discusses de novo and preformed fat synthesis and how diets may or may not influence those two mechanisms. (12:16)

The guests talk about an abstract from Dr. Van Amburgh’s lab at the ADSA meetings about supplemental lysine levels. This leads into a discussion of lactose production and fluid milk volume, as well as feedback from cheese processors and the impact of supplemental chromium on milk production parameters. (22:31)

Dr. St. Pierre talks about cheese processor concerns with increased milk fat concentrations, milk pricing structures, and milk perishability. (28:27)

The panel discusses metabolizable protein, essential, non-essential, and branched-chain amino acids, and how the view of fatty acids and amino acids has changed from simple substrates to make milk components to compounds with biogenic activities. (36:20)

Dr. St. Pierre talks about the inaugural Industry Day at the 2025 ADSA meetings and goals for similar future events. (43:01)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (48:13)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

MS Oral Presentation, Production

Guests: Trinidad Fernandez-Wallace and Dr. Lautaro Rostoll-Cangiano, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Co-host: Dr. Laura Niehues, Balchem

Abstract 1218: Immunity at the crossroads of cellular metabolism: Navigating T helper shifts in the periparturient period of dairy cows. (0:08)

Trinidad found that T-helper cell metabolism and proliferation were both upregulated after calving, which may impact the effectiveness of immune responses during the transition period. The group discusses if T-helper cells could be used as a marker of inflammation in the future and how Trinidad’s results may have been different if samples had been collected between 3 and 28 days after calving.

PhD Oral Presentation, Production

Guests: Natnicha Taechachokevivat and Dr. Rafael Neves, Purdue University

Co-host: Dr. Sion Richards, Balchem 

Abstract 1107: Relationships between systemic inflammation, subclinical hypocalcemia, and hyperketonemia in clinically healthy Holstein cows. (8:07)

Natnicha investigated the association of plasma haptoglobin (an inflammatory marker) on days 1 and 3 in milk with subclinical hypocalcemia and hyperketonemia. Systemic inflammation appears to be associated with subclinical hypocalcemia and hyperketonemia and reduced milk yield in multiparous cows. When multiparous cows exhibited both inflammation and metabolic disease indicators, they produced less milk; however, when primiparous cows exhibited both inflammation and metabolic disease indicators, they produced more milk. 

3 Minute Thesis

Guests: Savitha Saikumar and Dr. Diwaker Vyas, University of Florida

Co-host: Dr. Laura Niehues, Balchem

Abstract 1548: Effects of peripartal supplementation of prototype postbiotics on intake, rumen fermentation, colostrum quality, and performance in transition dairy cows. (15:14)

Savitha investigated the effects of a prototype postbiotic supplement in transition cows from 35 days before calving to 63 days after calving. Cows on the postbiotic treatment received 25 grams per day topdressed on their TMR. Before calving, the postbiotic had no effect on dry matter intake, body condition sore, body weight, or total VFAs. After calving, the postbiotic increased dry matter intake and milk yield after 6 weeks, and increased energy-corrected milk and fat-corrected milk with no effect on body weight, body condition score, or rumen fermentation profile.

PhD Poster 

Guest: Amanda Fischer-Tlustos, University of Guelph Abstract 2012: Characterization of dry-period mammary acetate and glucose metabolism and their association with colostrum production in multiparous Holstein cattle. (25:15)

Amanda’s research evaluated acetate and glucose metabolism in the mammary gland during the dry and calving periods to better understand how colostrum is made. Acetate uptake by the udder remained fairly constant until one week before calving, when it started to increase. Glucose uptake did not increase until the onset of calving. Previous lactation milk production and far-off mammary metabolism were both negatively correlated with colostrum production. Amanda hypothesizes that high producing cows who have trouble drying off may have high amounts of metabolic activity in the mammary gland when they should have low activity, which may result in lower colostrum production at the subsequent calving. 

PhD Oral Presentation, Southern Branch Division

Guests: Bridger Sparks and Dr. Clarissa Strieder-Barboza, Texas Tech University

Co-host: Dr. Ryan Pralle, Balchem

Abstract 1215: Adipose tissue neuro-like cell profile changes with ketosis in dairy cows. (33:05)

Bridger investigated neuro-like cells in the adipose tissue of cows with or without subclinical ketosis. The transcriptional profile of neuro-like cells changed when collected from cows with subclinical ketosis, which may indicate a potential regulatory role in adipose tissue metabolism. Perhaps modulation of neuro-like cells could potentially alleviate excessive adipose mobilization in the postpartum period. 

ADSA Graduate Student Division Highlights

Guests: Evelyn Yufeng Lin, North Carolina State University; Miranda Farricker, Cornell University; Conor McCabe, University of California-Davis; Dr. Maurice Eastridge, Ohio State University. (40:45) 

Dr. Eastridge is the chair of the ADSA Foundation and explains some of the Foundation’s current projects. Evelyn and Conor are past presidents of the ADSA Graduate Student Division, and Miranda is the incoming president. Each student gives a bit of background on themselves and their research and describes what the Graduate Student Division does and how they foster new graduate students in ADSA.  

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Dahl talks about geographical differences in whether farms provide cooling for dry or lactating cows. Cows get heat stressed long before humans. Some farms are concerned that using misters for cooling will add too much water to their manure handling systems. He notes a study comparing conventional misters and fans, no cooling, and smart soakers that only provide mist if a cow is present. When the total amount of water (drinking + cooling system) was evaluated, the smart soakers cooled as well as the conventional system, but used the same amount of water as the no cooling group.  (7:08)

During the dry period, a main impact of heat stress is a reduction in dry matter intake. However, there are dramatic shifts in immune function and effects on mammary development and redevelopment in cows who experience heat stress in the dry period. This sets the stage for lower productivity in the next lactation. In addition, there are many negative impacts on the in utero calf from heat stress. Calves from heat stressed dams are challenged from a growth standpoint, in addition to organ development challenges in the mammary gland, ovaries, and immune system. These calves are less likely to make it through their first lactation, are less productive, and pass their poor production and survival phenotype on to their offspring. (14:28)

Dr. Tao talks about when during the dry period to provide cooling for cows. Spoiler alert: the entire dry period! He also notes that bred heifers should have cooling provided for the last 60 days of gestation as well. Laura asks about the impact of heat stress on neonatal calves and how it may impact their mammary development. More research is needed in this area, and you also have to wait two years to collect data from the first lactation. Dr. Dahl notes that observations from season of birth data indicate lower longevity for calves who are born to heat stressed dams. (18:26)

Milk production is decreased by 8-10 pounds per day for cows stressed during the dry period, and they also produce a lower volume of colostrum. Calves from heat stressed dams also have a lower rate of passive transfer of antibodies from colostrum. The panel talks about why that might be, whether or not those gut differences persist after calfhood, and how that might be related to growth differences between heat stressed and cooled calves. (27:30)

What about reproduction? It appears that heat stress during the dry period has a negative impact on reproductive function in the subsequent breeding season. Recent research has indicated that calves experiencing heat stress in utero have poor gonadal development and lower follicular reserves. In addition, placental development is also negatively affected. Dr. Tao notes that heat stress negatively impacts mammary gland involution during the dry off period. All of this leads to a decrease in cow longevity. (35:36)

Dr. Dahl describes a retrospective records study using Florida and California herds to evaluate cows in their fifth through eighth lactations. In Florida, about three-quarters of those animals were born in cooler parts of the year rather than in hotter months of the year. The pattern in California was similar, though not quite as extreme. (44:02)

Dr. Tao and Dr. Dahl expand on the economics of cooling cows, including return on investment and the costs of not cooling. The guests also talk about some of their research abstracts at the 2025 ADSA meetings. (48:10)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (57:41)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Fessenden gives an overview of his presentation which covered both research and field information on automated milking systems. He recommends going back to basics and formulating a rumen-friendly PMR with a complementary palatable feed that encourages the cows into the robot system. (5:57)

The panel discusses ideas for driving cows to the robot on different types of PMRs, management of transition and late lactation cows in automated milking systems, and the use of custom pellets versus other supplemental feeds in the robot. (9:04)

Dr. Fessenden talks about some of his experiences visiting automated milking systems in Europe and some of the differences between European and North American approaches to diet formulations in automated systems. The group goes on to talk about different options for supplemental feed formulations in the robot. (18:38)

Dr. Fessenden and Dr. Tylutki share ideas for how feeding technology could help both traditional and automated milking farms in the future. They discuss more precise grouping of cows and targeted feeding of those groups to better match requirements, as well as how movement to different pens and diet changes can impact milk production. (23:45) 

Dr. Tylutki updates the group on advancements in the AMTS balancing tools for multiple robot feeds. He and Dr. Fessenden describe the challenges of developing new tools that are streamlined and user-friendly for nutritionists. They also delve into the role artificial intelligence and machine learning might play in ration balancing in the future. (29:32)

Dr. Fessenden encourages nutritionists to think outside the box when working with automated milking herds to make decisions that are right for that particular farm. Dr. Tylutki chimes in with advice to spend time actually watching the cows on the farm, and Dr. Van Soest echoes this sentiment when it comes to troubleshooting issues with the robots themselves. Don’t just assume it’s an issue with the ration - ask or observe for yourself what may have changed on the farm that could contribute to the issue the farm is facing. (40:02)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (45:20)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Schwanke begins by describing how we can shape cattle personalities through handling and management and adapting our strategies to accommodate different personality traits so as to not cause undue stress. Personality traits are consistent across time and context, which is nuanced by the other animals in a particular group. There are five generally recognized personality traits: boldness, exploration, activity, sociability and aggressiveness. Some debate exists as to whether dominance should be considered a sixth trait or if it’s just an outcome of the other five. (5:43)

Dr. Schwanke’s research focused mainly on how cows react to specific stressors, such as adapting to an automated milking system. In a robotic system, cows who are more independent, explorative and bold are more likely to do well. Some diversity is good because it can help to minimize long-term antagonistic interactions in a group. If we have cows that are very similar to each other, it will take longer for them to establish a social hierarchy.  (10:05)

The panel discusses where the research is in regard to on-farm applicability and potential genetic components of personality traits. In the future, Dr. Schwanke envisions automated assessments of cow personality through computer vision cameras in the barn, fed into an algorithm that creates a personality ranking of cows based on their behaviors. She also notes personality traits can help predict a cow’s coping style: proactive, reactive and intermediate. Proactive cows are more bold, explorative and aggressive. They thrive in predictable, stable conditions. Reactive cows are more fearful, less active and less dominant. They typically do better than proactive cows in unpredictable or changing environments because they’re better able to modify their behavior to the environment they find themselves in. (14:09)

The panel talks about future research goals in this area, including transition to automated milking systems, modifying feed management for behavioral and nutritional requirements and impacts of commingling stress. The guests also explore behavioral research in calves and brainstorm about future research with this age group, as well as talk about potential implications of making the wrong selection decisions for personality traits. (20:08)

Are there things dairy producers could do to condition calves to be more adaptable to an automated milking system later in life? If a calf is reared in an automated feeding system, do they adapt to an automated milking system more easily? We don’t have the research yet to answer these questions, but they’re great questions. The panel also talks about how to scale up personality trait information to large herds, how precision feeding systems and personality traits might interact and how machine learning and computer vision technology can automate personality trait assessments. (28:46)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (35:02)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Hutjens’ presentation focused on herds producing seven pounds of milk fat and milk protein per cow per day, and the genetics, on-farm management and nutrition to make that happen. The panel discusses where components could top out, how added dietary fat has influenced components and the importance of high quality forage to de novo fat synthesis. (4:09)

The panel explores how well nutritionists are keeping up with rapid genetic change in milk component production and how farmers respond to recommendations for things like rumen-protected fatty acids and supplemental fat. Dr. Nelson shares some of the unique challenges and opportunities faced by the California dairy producers he works with. (11:56)

Dr. Hutjens gives some benchmark values for energy and protein efficiency. The panel debates the merit of energy-corrected milk per stall as an efficiency measure, with the consensus being it might lead to crowding, which would then probably decrease milk and component production due to decreasing cow comfort. The group also discusses selecting for feed efficiency and the heritability of feed efficiency. (16:33)

The panel dives into the topic of feed ingredients. High-oleic soybeans and high quality forages are a focus in some parts of the country. Dr. Nelson discusses non-forage fiber sources available in the California market, such as citrus, plums, apples and carrots. The group talks more about how high-sugar byproducts influence rumen fermentation, which is different from starch, as well as benefits in palatability, digestibility and intake. (21:03)

Dr. Hutjens talks about benchmarks for milk components and different strategies for increasing component production. Rumen-protected amino acids, purchased fats, roasted high-oleic soybeans and urea are discussed. The group also talks about what might happen if milk processors start asking for less milk fat, for example. Dr. Hutjens talks about how nutritionists can help balance rations to yield different results for different markets. (33:04)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (40:33)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Firkins’ presentation covers key aspects of how to improve digestibility of different diet components: fiber, starch, fat and total diet. (4:31)

The negative relationship between starch in the diet and fiber digestion has been well known for more than 50 years. A recent meta-analysis showed the depression in fiber digestibility starts at very low starch concentrations. Dr. Weiss points out this can’t be due to low rumen pH at that starch level. Dr. Firkins agrees pH is probably only about half of the relationship and the other half is factors called the carbohydrate effect. He goes on to say adequate ammonia and amino acids are necessary for the fibrolytic bacteria in the rumen to maximize fiber digestibility, and urea alone is not adequate. The panel agrees there is little knowledge about what exactly the amino acid requirements of fibrolytic bacteria are or should be. (6:05)

Dr. Firkins shares some of his findings regarding how sugars impact fiber digestibility. Dr. Krogstad notes grain particle size can have key impacts on fiber digestibility and the panel discusses some of the challenges in nailing down optimal particle size. (13:39)

Dr. Weiss indicates diets should be formulated  for rumen degradable starch - but how do we get that number? Dr. Firkins explains some of the difficulty in making accurate, cohesive predictions. The panel discusses some field measures that may be helpful. (18:24)

Ruminants have lower fat digestibility than monogastrics. The panel explores biological factors that might be limiting fat digestibility. Dr. Firkins believes palmitic and oleic acids probably help the microbes and that is why we see improved diet digestibility when those fatty acids are supplemented. He encourages further exploration into the reason behind this and the mechanism by which it occurs. Dr. Krogstad mentions a Utah State study that also saw improved diet digestibility and also evaluated microbial fractions and phospholipids. (22:44)

The panel explores the relationship between rumen-degradable protein and fiber digestibility. What happens when RDP is too high or too low? What is the optimal level of RDP to maximize digestibility? How does the composition of the base diet influence how much RDP you might need? What role do peptides play in the rumen? (29:00)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (41:52)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Boerman notes we know cows experience a negative metabolizable protein balance in early lactation, which means they’re mobilizing skeletal muscle to make up for that. Dr. Boerman and her group have been interested in strategies to measure how much muscle they’re mobilizing, when they’re losing it and when they gain it back.  (3:51)

Cows are ultrasounded during the dry period to determine longissimus dorsi muscle reserves, then divided into low vs high muscle groups. Weekly ultrasounds follow them through lactation.  Animals with high muscle reserves during the dry period mobilized muscle before calving, which resulted in increased calf birth weights. Animals with less muscle during the dry period can gain muscle during that time and have more muscle reserves at calving than they had in the middle of the dry period. Dr. Boerman discusses possible nutrition interventions to manage muscle depletion and accretion, as well as timing of muscle loss and gain.  (5:14)

The panel discusses how cows were assigned to high- and low-muscle groups and how representative those groups might be to the general population of dairy cows. Dr. Boerman mentions they’ve recently started evaluating primiparous cows as well to see if they perform differently than multiparous cows. (10:33)

Dr. Boerman notes that cows are mobilizing between 30 and 35% of their longissimus dorsi depth during lactation and muscle biopsies have shown a reduction in muscle fiber size. They also measure 3-methyl histidine and creatinine as biomarkers of muscle loss and gain. The panel discusses increased calf birth weights and impacts on colostrum for high-muscle groups. Body condition score is not a good predictor of muscle depth. (16:52)

The group discusses how parity might impact protein loss and gain, the influence of genetics on these muscle measurements, how health events might affect muscle mobilization and what kind of hormonal regulation might be occurring to control muscle losses and gains. (23:41)

Dr. Weiss shares about a project from his group where muscle and fat losses were measured by dilution. They fed 20% protein diets using soy alone or with supplementation of rumen-protected amino acids. He emphasized the differences between heifers and cows, similar to what Dr. Boerman’s group has observed as well. (29:54)

Dr. Boerman shares some ideas of what kind of experiments she’d like to conduct next to continue this line of research. (33:42)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (35:29)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

After introductions, Dr. Lucy shares about the ADSA monthly podcast, Dairy Digressions, which he hosts. He discusses listener demographics, the diverse paths to becoming a dairy scientist and inspiring young people to pursue a career in dairy science. The panel goes on to discuss the camaraderie and friendships developed and nurtured at ADSA meetings. (2:44)

Dr. Kononoff asks the panel their thoughts on how to protect students, given the current and potential future funding concerns for science. Dr. Lucy notes he believes science will prevail. Dr. St-Pierre comments we have portrayed science as infallible, when it’s really self-correcting, and the machine of a university is faculty and students. Dr. Kononoff, originally from Canada, discusses the uniqueness of the land-grant system in the US. (8:31)

Dr. Lucy shares some of his favorite parts of being an ADSA member. (17:44)

Dr. Williamson, a neuroscientist, suggests the dairy industry could learn from human behaviorists regarding marketing their products. Dr. Ordway agrees, as someone who did not grow up in the agriculture industry. (20:42)

Dr. St-Pierre talks about presenting at his very first ADSA meeting when he was still learning to speak English. He goes on to discuss how meetings and students have evolved over the years. (23:03)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Carpenter gives an overview of her presentation. She summarizes an Extension risk management project regarding heifer development, assisting dairies in benchmarking their heifer growth and development. Key focus points include reducing morbidity and mortality and timely breeding to achieve goals for age at first calving. Dr. Carpenter also emphasized heat detection and conception, as well as recordkeeping as important considerations for success. (4:10)

Dr. Carpenter shares findings from a beef-on-dairy feeding experiment where any calf that had two or more lifetime respiratory events had lower carcass weight and lower return on investment. The panel discusses industry uptake of using lung ultrasounds to evaluate respiratory events. (11:53)

Guests talk about different feeding concepts in heifer development and trends in age at first calving over time. (14:31)

The panel dives into home-raising versus custom-developing heifers. Dr. Carpenter notes Penn State has great resources regarding custom rearing of dairy heifers. Pros and cons of both systems are discussed, and the panel also touches on rearing of beef-on-dairy calves as well. (19:17)

The group returns to the topic of age at first calving. Reducing variation at age at breeding is important, and producers should consult with their nutritionists and veterinarians for a team approach to success. (24:44)

Dr. Carpenter and Dr. Tebbe talk about how producers are dealing with replacement heifer shortages. (27:24)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (31:48)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Balchem’s Bourbon & Brainiacs event took place at the Frazier History Museum during the 2025 ADSA annual meetings in Louisville, Kentucky. This bonus episode features a rotating slate of guests throughout the entirety of the episode. 

The episode begins with guests talking about how many ADSA meetings they’ve attended and some of their favorite locations. Quebec City travel nightmares, side trips to the Grand Canyon, and university host sites with dorms featuring no air conditioning were highlighted. (0:08)

The group talks about the impact scientific meetings have on graduate students and how important the social and networking aspects are in the development of students’ careers. (9:44)

Formative moments in your career can be forged at ADSA meetings. Learning to step back and talk about the big picture of your work can be pivotal. Other panelists share their experiences in making the final decision on where to attend graduate school based on their experiences at ADSA meetings. (19:48)

Martin Bengtsson, Balchem’s Executive Vice President,  CFO and Animal Nutrition and Health General Manager joins the panel. He talks about his background and Balchem’s investment in animal nutrition research. He asks the panel what they’d like to see a company like Balchem do more of to have a bigger impact and be more helpful to the industry. (22:49)

A new wave of guests arrive. Topics include coaching quiz bowl and dairy challenge teams, softball games, rooftop lawn bowling and how one can go from being an up-and-comer to being one of the big names at ADSA to being a retiree. (36:24)

Panelists share some of the events at this year’s ADSA meeting they’re excited to attend, including a symposium about feed additives for methane inhibition in conjunction with the Journal of Dairy Science and an applied nutrition series geared toward field nutritionists. (42:06)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Jaborek gives an overview of his presentation including sire selection, how beef on dairy crosses compare, feedlot performance, liver abscesses and red meat yield. (6:21)

Beef sire availability and quality have changed over time with the development of selection indexes and selection criteria. Calving ease, growth, ribeye area,and quality grade are important traits. (10:03)

The panel discusses if milk replacer feeding protocols differ for beef on dairy calves. More research in this area is needed. The group then talks about liver abscesses, including etiology, prevalence, and animal welfare and performance impacts. Dr. Jaborek notes calves with liver abscesses gain about 0.2 pounds per day less, on average. The panel believes understanding the impacts of diet differences (beef calves vs. the dairy model) in early life on rumen development would be a fruitful area of research.  (16:00)

Dr. Jaborek talks about some of the differences in growth and performance among beef calves raised on their dam, beef embryos from Holstein recips raised in the dairy system, and beef-sired calves from Holstein and Jersey dams raised in the dairy system. The panel talks about why beef calves in the beef system are outperforming those raised in the dairy system, including milk composition differences between beef and dairy cows and milk quantity and availability. Free-choice robot milk replacer feeding systems might better mimic the beef system environment. (26:21)

The panel then explores how beef on dairy calves are fed post-weaning. Dr. Jaborek notes they generally continue to be fed a high concentrate diet which may contribute to the liver abscess and digestive issues given the long timeframe of exposure to concentrates. The panel ponders if backgrounding calves on pasture for some length of time after weaning would be beneficial. The group also delves into how maintenance requirements might differ for beef on dairy crosses and if feedlot nutritionists are making adjustments for these calves. (30:45)

Given the price of beef calves, would it be more profitable to put beef embryos into dairy cows instead of using beef semen to create a beef-dairy crossbred? Matt then asks if any dairy producers are retaining ownership of these calves past 1-3 days of age. The panel discusses risks and rewards of both questions. (34:29)

The panel talks about corn processing and potential impacts on rumen health and liver abscesses. Dr. Jaborek cites a study where feeding more fiber in the form of corn silage did not increase cost of gain, but improved liver abscess reduction by 30 percentage points. (38:47)

Dr. Jaborek talks about yield and quality differences in dairy-influenced carcasses and talks about his top priorities for research in the beef on dairy sector moving forward. (42:21)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (46:26)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

After introductions, Steve leads off in his role as the bourbon steward and describes the two bourbons and a rye whiskey for the tasting. (2:14)

Steve gives some instructions on the best way to taste bourbon like an expert, including determining your dominant nostril, the “Kentucky Chew,” the “Kentucky Hug,” and moving from lowest to highest proof. (4:48)

Steve leads the guests through tasting Buffalo Trace and Maker’s Mark 46 bourbons and Angel’s Envy rye whiskey. The panel discusses their impressions and talks about mash bills, crop variation and the health of the bourbon business.  (7:00)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Guests introduce themselves and how they knew Dr. Staples. (1:05)

Dr. Grummer shares when he and Dr. Staples were applying and interviewing for university jobs in the same pool, and how they eventually landed jobs at universities where the other was not in the pool. (7:22)

Drs. Santos, Grummer and Zenobi share about Dr. Staples’ early life, his undergraduate and graduate career, and his family and faith. (10:42)

Dr. Staples took a sabbatical at the University of Wisconsin in Dr. Grummer’s lab. He shares a story about taking Charlie smelt fishing, where the tradition is the newbie has to bite the head off a smelt. (18:04)

Dr. Zenobi and Dr. Santos talk about Dr. Staples as a teacher and mentor, giving examples of his caring nature and thorough teaching style. (22:30)

Dr. Grummer and Dr. Santos give a broad overview of Dr. Staples’ research career, including pioneering work in nutrition-reproduction interactions, fat supplementation and the separation of the energy effect and the fatty acid effect on reproductive performance, heat stress and choline supplementation. All panelists emphasized the collaborative and interdisciplinary nature of Dr. Staples’ work. (27:52)

Dr. Grummer shares about the fatty acid research he and Dr. Staples collaborated on during Charlie’s sabbatical, as well as the choline research he worked on with Dr. Staples when Dr. Grummer worked for Balchem. The panelists talk about how Dr. Staples was not afraid to reach out to experts in other areas of expertise to ask questions and how thorough he was in literature searches. They talk about a symposium paper he presented summarizing 30-plus years of choline research. (36:12)

The panelists talk more about the legacy Dr. Staples left behind - he was unassuming, humble, kind, collaborative and a man of principles. (44:14)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts about Dr. Staples’ dedication to dairy science, mentorship and innovation. (54:51)

The University of Florida established the Charles R. Staples Lecture Endowment to support the Charles R. Staples Lectureship Series. Each year, an invited speaker gives a seminar and meets with graduate students. If you'd like to support the endowment, you can do so by visiting the UF/IFAS Animal Sciences giving web page: https://give.ifas.ufl.edu/animal-sciences-giving/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Panelists introduce themselves and give some background on their interest in histidine (00:52)

Dr. Hristov gives an overview of his webinar presentation, touching on some of the first research projects that showed lower protein diets resulted in no change in plasma methionine, but a decrease in plasma histidine. When dietary protein decreases, the cow relies more on microbial protein to meet her needs. Histidine content is about 20% less than methionine content in microbial protein. He also notes there are some short-term reserves of histidine in the body, so short-term studies may not show a histidine deficiency when indeed there is one. (7:08)

Matt gives some perspective as a consulting nutritionist about the importance of histidine in diet formulation for his clientele. He agrees with Dr. Hristov about the higher requirement for histidine compared to methionine, and he generally formulates diets with 1.1 times more histidine than methionine. (12:38)

The panelists share their experiences with the responses observed from providing additional histidine to lactating cows, including milk and component yields and changes in dry matter intake and body condition. They also talk about how muscle loss can mask a histidine deficiency in the short term. (15:43)

The panelists discuss the challenges in determining histidine requirements and finding reliable sources of highly bioavailable histidine. (24:04)

Why is rumen-protected histidine not commercially available? Clay explains it is due to the high cost of histidine. There are no feed-grade sources, and using human-grade sources is cost-prohibitive. Dr. Hristov notes swine nutritionists are starting to pay more attention to histidine, which might bring the cost down if demand increases. Matt notes aquaculture is also interested in histidine. (33:58)

Matt comments that increasing fat content can be problematic for cheese plants. He sees increasing milk protein yield may be the next frontier of dairy nutrition and histidine might play an important role. The panel discusses the role milk pricing has played in the increased fat content. (37:32)

The panel discusses what other amino acids might be important in dairy nutrition as research continues. They also touch on methane mitigation and reducing methane intensity per unit of milk. (43:45)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (54:31)

View Dr. Hristov’s webinar on this subject by visiting https://balchem.com/anh/podcasts-webinars/histidine-a-limiting-amino-acid-for-dairy-cows-2/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Cantor gives an overview of her presentation at the conference, focusing on data from accelerometers and robotic feeders to predict calf sickness. While the correlations are there and we know calves change activity, behavior and feeding behavior before they get sick, there is more work to be done before the technology is ready for wide implementation. When data from both accelerometers and robotic feeders were used, Dr. Cantor’s group was able to find respiratory disease with a 96% accuracy six days before clinical symptoms. (2:36)

Dr. James and Dr. Cantor discuss the use of robotic feeders in the industry and the under-utilization of data collected by the feeders. Dr. James shares observations from a farm he works with about heifers coming in to the milking herd who were raised on robotic feeders compared to those raised in calf hutches. (6:15)

The panel discusses the accuracy, specificity and sensitivity of the predictions from monitoring technologies. They also touch on challenges around deciding what parameters to use to classify an animal experiencing the onset of clinical disease and how that will vary depending on the disease. They go on to share their experiences with training algorithms and how computer scientists have different goals than animal scientists with this type of technology. (11:17)

Dr. James talks about how data collection and using data can be a hard sell on some calf ranches. The panel talks about some of the challenges they have seen with adoption of technology and recordkeeping on dairies of various sizes. (28:30)

Dr. Giordano gives an overview of his presentation on using monitoring technology in fresh cows to predict disease. His group has worked with wearable sensors that monitor rumination time and physical activity. More recently, sensor companies have added eating behavior and body temperature. Variations in these parameters create a health alert to check on that particular animal. (39:08)

He goes on to describe two extremes in dairy farms. One spends little time and effort on looking for sick cows, while the other puts a lot of time and effort into this task. He discusses how bringing technology to these two types of farms benefits them and what drawbacks there are, along with an economic analysis for each. (43:14)

The panel discusses how implementing monitoring technologies require a change in management. Allowing animals the opportunity to express their natural behavior is critical to success. They also talk about how veterinarians view this technology and the target age for calves to best learn how to use a robotic feeder. (48:54)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (57:11)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Clare talks about the dairy’s experience incorporating high oleic soybeans into their rations, including pitfalls, growing pains and successes. (2:56)

Ryzebol Dairy uses the AfiCollar feed efficiency tool. Clare talks about how they’re using the data from the collars to make culling and breeding decisions, with an eye toward selecting more efficient cows to produce replacement heifers over time. (9:35)

Clare also shares about things the dairy has tried that didn’t work out so well, including the installation of solar. He notes that more research and discussion should have taken place among the dairy, the developer and the utility.  (16:28)

Scott and Walt invite listeners to the next Real Producer Exchange on Tuesday, August 26 at 11 am EST, featuring Rob Diepersloot, a seventh generation dairy farmer and founder of WonderCow Nutrition, a colostrum-based wellness company. Topics will include how the family started and manages a consumer colostrum product, and how it impacts the dairy; the many differences in management needs across three locations – two in California and one in Colorado; and the vital role sustainability plays in all aspects of both businesses. (19:57)

To register for the Real Producer Exchange webinar on August 26, visit balchem.com/realscience

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Stan begins with an overview of the dairy checkoff since its inception in 1983. At that time, dairy farmers were producing 139 billion pounds of milk, but only 122 million pounds were being consumed. Dairy promotion has evolved to focus on research and education about nutrition, crisis management and even partnerships with Domino’s, Taco Bell and McDonald’s. (3:02)

Stan and Marty detail some of the national and regional partnerships around dairy menu options. Walt notes that the grilled cheese burrito from Taco Bell is one of his son’s favorite fast food meals. The panel discusses some of the strategy behind the Taco Bell partnership as well as marketing to Gen Z consumers about how dairy fits into mind and body wellness. (6:39)

Walt comments the checkoff has done and is continuing to do a great job of being future-ready. He remembers a few years ago hearing about the gaming generation and partnerships with Mr. Beast and YouTube and embedding cows in Minecraft, and now his sons are playing Minecraft and gaming and are on YouTube. (13:43)

Stan notes in 1995, exports were at 3%. That has now increased to 16-17%. Marty gives some examples of partnerships with the Dallas Cowboys and HEB stores in Mexico to promote dairy. (16:09)

The panel discusses the US investments in processing, the “Dairy Renaissance”, research into dairy-as-medicine, and continued product innovations to meet consumer demands. (23:24)

Marty and Stan detail the agreement between the Dairy Checkoff and Mayo Clinic investigating the role of whole milk foods in treating and preventing cardiovascular and metabolic disease. (34:04)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (37:51)

You can find more information about the dairy checkoff at https://www.dairycheckoff.com/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Mike gives an overview of his three presentations at the conference regarding heifer supply. The panel discusses how the industry went from too many heifers to not enough heifers. (3:46)

Clay asks Dan about his breeding philosophy from a semen standpoint right now as a purebred Holstein breeder. He suggests skating to where the puck’s going versus where it’s been, and focusing on yield and protein after such a large emphasis on fat. He also emphasizes health traits, particularly because the industry needs cows to last longer due to low heifer supply. Mike notes that this can have negative impacts, including lower milk yield, more chronic mastitis, and perhaps elongating the generation interval of genetic gain. He shares that while huge strides have been made in genetic improvement for yield and components, we have gone backwards a bit on disease resistance and fertility in the last five years or so. Tom suggests that it just ups the ante on management, especially with an older milking herd. (10:55)

The panel talks about sexed semen (beef and dairy both) and IVF/embryo transfer. (14:49)

Mike details some research in Holstein herds that decreased their replacement rate and number of heifers calving from 2020-2022 (surplus herds) compared to 2023-2024 (short herds). Short herds kept cows 25 days longer in milk, but the net impact was an average of seven pounds less milk per day over the last 30 days prior to culling. He also noted an increase in chronic mastitis in the short herds.  (20:18)

Mike describes his presentation regarding the heifer completion rate: once a heifer is born alive, what’s the expected percent of heifers remaining at first calving? Many producers have a false high assumption of this number, around 90%. In 65 herds Mike analyzed in the last year, the median completion rate was 76%. He details the different life stages during which losses occurred, along with management considerations to reduce these impacts. Dan shares his perspectives on the heifer completion rate. (24:11)

The panel discusses a variety of topics around heifer supply, including whether heifers are entering the herd at a younger age to compensate for low inventories, appropriate heifer size at calving, optimal age at first calving, and just how short the supply of heifers is.  (29:01)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (38:35)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Lock begins with an overview of his presentation, discussing nutrition and genomics impacts on the speed of progress in milk fat production. He also talks about historic differences in milk fat production in Europe compared to the US. With the reduction in generation interval that genomics provides, a more complete understanding of rumen and mammary metabolism will continue to be imperative. How do we supply the nutrients she needs to meet her genetic potential? (3:34)

Can we feed too much 16:0? The panel discusses how palmitic and other fatty acids are incorporated into milk fat. They emphasize that no matter what, milk fat will remain a liquid at body temperature, so that does provide some limitations. Processors can alter their protocols to account for increased palmitic acid in milk fat and for increased milk fat in milk overall. (8:35)

There is a gene called DGAT that can explain about 50% of the variation in milk fat content. Dr. Lock discusses some research looking at more vs less favorable DGAT profiles and how feeding palmitic acid interacted with those profiles in milk fat production. (13:04)

The panel discusses whether there is a physiological limit for how much milk fat a cow can produce. Traditionally, when milk yield increased, fat yield decreased, but that is not the current case. We are learning more all the time about altering rations and using new oilseed ingredients like whole cottonseed and high-oleic soybeans. Dr. De Souza emphasizes that understanding de novo fatty acid synthesis is really important to keep pace with genomic progress. (16:08)

Amino acid supplementation has recently been linked with milk fat production, with the assumed mechanism of action being increased mammary gland enzyme synthesis and activity. Dr. Lock describes a study assessing amino acid-fatty acid interactions in fresh cows. The amino acid (metabolizable protein) effect was greater for fat yield than feeding fatty acids, which was interesting. But perhaps more exciting was the effects were additive. Feeding both high metabolizable protein and 2% palmitic:oleic acid blend resulted in 9.5 kg more energy-corrected milk and a carryover effect after supplementation ceased. (22:41)

Dr. Lock summarizes some of his group’s work on using oilseeds in dairy diets.(28:24)

Dr. De Souza and Dr. Lock give some perspective on just how much we have learned about milk components over the last several years. (34:38)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts, including practical advice on increasing milk fat production and what’s on the horizon for fatty acid nutrition research. (37:15)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Kononoff begins with some renewable fuels history. Since the renewable fuels standard in 2007, corn production for ethanol has increased to around 50% of the crop going to ethanol production. With the subsequent increase in fuel has come an increase in distillers grains and the industry has learned how to use them to feed cattle better. Later, the government created additional policy for next-stage renewable fuels, which has spurred biodiesel production. Currently, just under 50% of the soybean crop goes to fuel production. Soybean meal availability has increased and costs have decreased over the past few years. Most of the soybean oil is solvent-extracted.   (5:57)

Dr. Lock talks about increased acres of high-oleic soybeans in dairy-soybean crossover states. He summarizes some of the work his group has done on feeding high-oleic roasted whole soybeans as a replacement for soybean meal in the diet, citing the benefits of the oil in the diet as well as increased bypass protein. (15:41)

The panel discusses whether canola meal, which is fairly high in oleic acid, would show similar benefits to feeding whole roasted soybeans. They also talk about how tariffs may or may not impact canola meal and canola oil prices. (24:26)

Over time, the dairy industry has moved away from alfalfa as a protein source and toward soybean meal. The panel discusses the pros and cons of this change. (26:46)

Dr. Kononoff gives his perspective on just how much soybean meal can be fed in dairy cow diets. Nitrogen excretion is an important consideration. He reminds the audience that renewable fuels policy is the reason behind many of the feed ingredient changes we’ve observed in the past 15-20 years, and that policy can change very rapidly. He emphasizes the industry needs to remain nimble and prepared to adapt. The panel also touches on pricing of feed ingredients in different parts of the country and how distillers grains are currently used in dairy diets. (31:08)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (40:49)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. DeVries gives an overview of his presentation on the economics of feeding more than one ration to lactating cows, with special consideration for additional costs (beyond increased feed costs) such as delivering additional loads of TMR, labor cost and mixing errors. He notes that producer surveys indicate that simplicity and not making mistakes are reasons given for not feeding an increased number of different rations. The surveys suggest there is some real money to be made if appropriate rations are used. Diminishing marginal returns should also be considered: going from one ration to two will yield the largest gain in income over feed costs, with each additional ration yielding smaller gains. (1:52) 

Dr. Burhans and Dr. Overton discuss some considerations for feeding multiple rations, including environmental impacts, herd size, pen availability, feed costs and milk production impacts. Dr. DeVries emphasizes the costs of feed delivery are a big part of this as well. (9:20)

The panel discusses a spreadsheet that Dr. DeVries presented during his presentation to calculate delivery costs. Dr. Burhans mentions some of the on-farm software gives an assessment of how close the actual ration was to the formulated ration, allowing for adjustments if needed. (16:28)

The panel considers the importance of body condition scores and recording actual data during nutritionist walk-throughs of dairy herds. They also delve into feeding frequency and optimal feed refusals levels. (27:45)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (43:08)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Austin begins with an overview of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). Their membership consists of all government officials in the US and other countries who are charged by law to regulate animal feed, including pet food, in their jurisdictions. Canada, Costa Rica, and the US all participate in AAFCO. In the US, animal feed regulation is an integrated food safety system with a partnership between state and federal regulators as well as FDA. AAFCO’s ultimate goal is to harmonize animal feed regulation across all states and provide a level playing field for the industry. (8:14)

He goes on to explain that AAFCO and FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine had a long-standing MOU in place that outlined an ingredient approval pathway that ended on October 1, 2024. FDA chose not to renew that MOU to focus on improving their other regulatory pathways, the Food Additive Petition Process and the Generally Regarded as Safe (GRAS) Notice Program. The FDA also has a new Animal Food Ingredient Consultation Process for ingredient approval. AAFCO has partnered with Kansas State University’s Olathe Innovation Campus to scientifically review new ingredients, then bring them back through the AAFCO process to get formal approval. Ingredient companies can choose one of these four pathways for new ingredient approval. (10:05)

 

Dr. Starkey notes that the process a company chooses will depend on the ingredient. If it’s similar to ingredients proven safe on the market already, the KSU-AAFCO system would be a good route. If it’s something a little more sophisticated or a new chemical, that may be more appropriate for a food additive petition, where toxicology studies would be conducted. (12:49)

The panel discusses how scrutiny of GRAS rules might impact the pet food industry. Dr. Larson explains the scientific rigor involved in evaluating new ingredients. Dr. Starkey notes that there are different levels of GRAS, one of which is self-affirmed, which might be the one under the most scrutiny at this point. The panel agrees that transparency is critical for consumer confidence and ensuring health and safety of pets. (15:47)

Austin talks about some of the ripple effects of the federal reduction in force in the regulatory arena. He and Dr. Larson talk about how the AAFCO-K-State partnership came to be, how K-State is ramping up to manage this project, and future plans for the partnership. (19:52)

Dr. Starkey underlines the importance of timely ingredient approvals and how the new AAFCO-K-State partnership allows for companies to be more competitive due to the speed of approvals. Austin notes that an ideal submission with no follow-up questions or back-and-forth would have taken about 18 months to get approval under the old MOU between AAFCO and FDA, and a very small percentage of applications would be considered ideal. With the new AAFCO-K-State process, an expert panel reviews the submission in 60-90 days and the entire approval process is cut roughly in half, to about nine months. (25:55)

Scott and the panel discuss how approval pathways differ for ingredient approval based on the claim being made. For example, is it a nutrient or is there some sort of pharmaceutical claim? (28:36)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (37:19)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Baumgard begins with an overview of his presentation, “Importance of gut health to drive animal performance and health.” He notes the metabolic and inflammatory fingerprint of all stressors is essentially the same, indicating they likely all emanate from the gut. Overall, we’re gaining a better understanding of how typical on-farm stressors negatively influence gut barrier function. He thinks the most likely mechanism of leaky gut is the immune cell known as a mast cell. When an animal or human is stressed, the enteric nervous system releases corticotropin-releasing factor, which binds to the mast cell, the mast cell degranulates, and the former contents of the mast cell (TNF-alpha, proteases, histamine, etc.) causes the gut to become leaky. (4:20)

Once the GI tract barrier becomes compromised, antigens like lipopolysaccharide (LPS) can infiltrate, stimulating the immune system. Immune activation causes loss of appetite much like any other infection. The gut heals fairly quickly upon removal of the stressor(s), and the gut can also acclimate to stress such that the early stages of a stress event are more severe than later stages. Strategies to combat leaky gut remain scarce, and there is no silver bullet. There are a variety of dietary strategies to target the gut permeability issue itself. Another approach would be to bind pathogens or curb their proliferation at the membrane of the small intestine. (7:06)

Dr. Neiehues asks if an antihistamine would work on gut mast cells the way it does in other body systems. Dr. Baumgard isn’t sure that’s ever been looked at, although there have been some studies in pigs using a product targeted to prevent mast cell degranulation. Dr. Nelson wonders if we should interfere in some of these processes because they’re obviously there for a reason. Panelists discuss stress events related to parturition and transition, particularly for first-calf heifers. Dr. Baumgard notes that stacking stressors on top of one another compromises an animal’s ability to tolerate stress. (9:28)

We know stress can cause ulcers in humans and horses - what about ruminants? Dr. Baumgard thinks it is likely that it’s happening, but we aren’t looking for it. Few animals who die on-farm do receive a thorough postmortem exam. It could also be that these types of insults to the gut are not visible to the naked eye. (19:11)

Dr. Nelson asks what makes some cows, despite all the challenges, able to be up and milking 150 pounds a day in no time after calving. What makes them unique? Dr. Baumgard lists some possibilities, including lower pathogenic inflammation than other cows, less tissue trauma damage to the uterus during calving, and lower sensitivity to immune activation. The panel disagrees with the notion that high-producing cows are stressed. (23:16)

Dr. Niehues and Dr. Baumgard trade stories of experiments where cows maintained production even with high stress and inflammatory markers. The panel goes on to discuss subclinical infections and their impact on transition cows. Dr. Nelson notes there are retrospective datasets where cows who had metritis showed decreased feed intake even before calving. Dr. Baumgard feels that the decrease in intake has been incorrectly assumed to be the cause of the metritis. He says the decrease in intake is often around two weeks before calving and he doesn’t think it’s a coincidence that at the same time, the mammary gland is initiating lactogenesis. He hypothesizes the mammary gland is causing an immune response, resulting in a decrease in intake. Dr. Nelson wonders if measuring somatic cell counts of colostrum would show any differences in mammary gland inflammation during this prepartum period. (29:18)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (42:02)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Bach gives an overview of his presentation, highlighting that buffers make the rumen resistant to a decrease in pH while alkalizers immediately increase rumen pH. He prefers magnesium oxide, an alkalizer, over sodium bicarbonate, a buffer. Both are effective, but sodium bicarbonate requires a larger amount, thus taking up more room in the diet. The magnesium oxide must be of high quality and soluble in the rumen. (3:40)

Dr. Richards asks if we should use magnesium oxide more as a first line of defense against acidosis. Dr. Bach notes that the very best strategy is to avoid using either additive by making a proper ration balanced in terms of amount and rate of degradation of starch. But there are many constraints in the field, so he recommends using magnesium oxide before sodium bicarbonate. For the magnesium oxide to be effective, it must be solubilized in the rumen to magnesium hydroxide, and solubility can be tested in a variety of ways to determine quality. (7:35)

The panel discusses the impact of magnesium oxide in place of sodium bicarbonate on DCAD and which DCAD equation(s) should be used for calculations. Dr. Bach recommends removing sodium bicarbonate from rations containing less than 1% of the ingredient. It will have little effect on the rumen, but make room in the ration. The panel explores how this can impact farm-level economics. (12:39)

Dr. Bach also mentions probiotics and their impact on rumen function. In vitro studies have shown a wide variety of modes of action and positive results. Extrapolating in vitro doses to the cow often results in unsustainable amounts of the additive needing to be fed. Applied studies at the cow level have yielded inconsistent results. (23:29)

Scott asks how long Dr. Bach has been making the case for pulling sodium bicarbonate out and putting magnesium oxide in, and what kind of pushback he has received. Dr. Bach gives some of the reasons farmers have given for not wanting to make this management change. He also notes that farmers who do make the switch do not tend to go back to sodium bicarbonate. (25:18)

Dr. Bach and Maimie discuss grass silage diets and grazing diets with high amounts of moisture and how best to combat acidosis symptoms with those. In diets like this, where you’re not trying to make room for energy, sodium bicarbonate can be a good choice. Dr. Richards chimes in with questions about the ratio of the two ingredients; Dr. Bach indicates the ratio doesn’t mean much to him. (26:16)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (33:27)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Microbial protein has always been Dr. Frikins’ main interest. It’s the most important and consistent source of protein for the cow, with a very high amino acid content. Histidine is the only exception, but bypass protein sources high in histidine complement microbial protein well. Our assessment of microbial protein is all based on prediction models. In his presentation, Dr. Firkins talked about what we can do to have consistently high microbial protein production and how to make the best use of the models. He touched on starch and fat content as two areas of focus, emphasizing a balanced diet to achieve a balanced supply of microbial protein. (5:36)

Dr. Firkins notes that about 90% of the bacteria in the rumen can’t be cultured, and there is great diversity in the rumen. There’s a core group of bacteria that almost every cow has that are really good at their job because they’ve been co-selected along with the cow for fiber digestion. The panel discusses how much the microbiome changes over time, host interactions with the microbial population, and inoculation of calves at birth and weaning. (8:47)

Dr. De Souza and Dr. Faciola talk about starch associative effects and their impacts on fiber digestibility, how sugars impact the rumen and butyrate production, and the importance of butyrate in de novo milk fat synthesis. Dr. Frikins hypothesizes that when sugars improve fiber digestibility, the sugar stimulates how fiber digesters do their job. Some studies have shown an increase in rumen pH when sugars are supplemented, which may be part of the mechanism of improved fiber digestibility. However, he doesn’t recommend using sugars when there is a lot of starch in the diet. (13:38)

Dr. Faciola and Dr. Firkins discuss some of the finer points of the dietary starch and fiber digestibility relationship. What are you replacing when you add more starch? What is the proper amount of effective fiber in higher-starch diets? On the other hand, if you decrease starch a little bit, there might be more room for fat. Well-managed cows with adequate effective fiber can probably handle more starch. Dr. Firkins underlines that starch is more digestible than fiber and thus supports microbial protein, but an optimum level is desirable, perhaps 28-20%. (20:37)

The panel talks about microbial growth efficiency and the energy-spilling mechanisms some bacteria have. Some models suggest that starch-digesting bacteria have higher maintenance energy requirements. The group then pivots to methane production and available feed additives marketed to reduce methane. Dr. Firkins notes that there is quite a bit of variability in the additives. He emphasizes that if we’re using these products, we need to know and measure what’s in them and have them be consistent. This is challenging due not only to variability in product, but also rumen adaptation. Dr. Firkins also reminds the audience that improving the cow’s efficiency in general in a variety of ways will lead to a smaller environmental footprint. This can range from improving reproductive efficiency to understanding differences in the microbiome of cows who emit more or less methane and trying to shift microbial populations to those with lower emissions. (23:12)

Dr. De Souza and Dr. Firkins discuss fatty acid supplementation and fiber digestion relationships. Dr. Firkins explains that in the microbiology literature, it's common to culture bacteria in a simple or complex medium, then add yeast culture. Interestingly, the yeast culture contains a lot of palmitic acid, which has been shown to improve fiber digestibility. He suggests the cell membrane of the bacteria is very critical. When fat supplementation depresses fiber digestibility, he suspects it’s disrupting the bacterial membrane. Dr. De Souza recommends 1-2% palmitic acid in the diet for optimal results. (33:58)

The panel touches on the importance and relevance of in vitro fermentation work, why histidine is the limiting amino acid in microbial protein, and Dr. Firkins’ passion for protozoa. (43:08)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (53:40)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Hemme begins with a demonstration of three different-sized glasses of milk representing the daily average dairy consumption in China, Europe, and the world as a whole. He explains that when you make predictions, it’s good to identify the two main drivers of uncertainty in your industry. In the case of dairy, he cites whether or not people like dairy and whether or not they can afford it. He goes on to describe the four scenarios that can be created from those main drivers: people like dairy and can afford it, people don’t like dairy but could afford it, people like dairy but can’t afford it, and people don’t like dairy and can’t afford it.  (4:05)

Walt asks Dr. Hemme to give some perspective on what makes a country a reliable exporter built for the global economy. He gives a unique example of how American football versus soccer compares to exporting dairy from the US to the global market. Matt chimes in with his perspective on how DFA is positioning the industry for exports. He notes that we live in the world of VUCA - volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity - and that we have a lot of VUCA happening in the US right now. In general, he’s very bullish on our natural resources, management skills, and technical capability in the US dairy industry.  (10:17)

The panel discusses who in the world is going to be able to meet the building demand for dairy products, and what the US might need to do to be a major player - in essence, moving from playing football to playing soccer. Dr. Hemme gives culture, policy, and relationship building as potential challenges for the US. (16:37)

Matt is encouraged by the new investments in processing plants in the US and looks for a “build it and we will grow into it” scenario as we move forward. Dr. Hemme agrees that the processors are on board. But he wonders about the dairy farm side - no growth in cow numbers, not much growth in production, and breeding so many cows with beef semen makes him think the US is not believing in a growing dairy industry. He also talks about changing interest rates over time and impact on capital management. (25:50)

The panel discusses the US milk price compared to the world milk price, the cost of production, and exchange rates. (29:45)

Matt gives some perspective on beef-on-dairy. As the beef cycle levels back out and more beef heifers are retained, he forecasts fewer dairy cows being bred to beef semen and an increase in the supply and retention of dairy heifers. (34:31)

Dr. Hemme talks about dairy demand and global population growth trends and predictions. (39:38)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (42:02)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Net impacts on milk prices for a dairy will depend mostly on where they’re located, but also a little bit on how their milk is currently priced. Dr. Nicholson expects a decrease of around $0.32/cwt for dairies in his area. The panel discusses how a dairy might shift management and feeding to try to increase milkfat to recoup that loss. Dr. Zimmerman asks if the pricing changes will affect fat and protein pricing equally or differently. Butter and other non-fat solids are all going to have the same impact every month. But protein is slightly different because the formulas for protein pricing use both the price of cheese and the price of butter, and those factors interact. Brian comments the impacts for a cheese and powder type of dairy stand to be quite different from a fluid milk dairy. Chuck talks about some of the background as to why dairy cooperatives and dairy producers voted in favor of the milk pricing changes. (8:16)

The panel discusses the impact of cheese demand on component pricing and production. Billions of dollars worth of cheese processing capacity are coming online in the next couple of years, so demand should remain strong. Tariffs are definitely bringing a lot of uncertainty to the market. Some of the new cheese plants have a lot of whey processing capacity on the back end to add value. Whey products are one of our major exports. (13:54)

Brian talks about the shift in what’s considered an acceptable butterfat percentage over the span of his career. The panel talks about the influence of genomics and feeding management on that trend. Dr. Lock talks about a recently completed study in his lab feeding fresh cows two different levels of metabolizable protein and supplementing 0%, 1% or 2% of a 60:30 palmitic-oleic fatty acid blend. Cows fed a higher level of metabolizable protein and a 2% fatty acid blend produced 9.5 kilograms more energy-corrected milk in the first three weeks of lactation. He mentions the protein had more of an impact on milk fat than he had anticipated, that protein and fat supplementation showed additive positive effects, and there was a carryover effect after supplementation ceased. (21:04)

Dr. Lock summarizes some recent work on feeding high oleic soybeans to lactating cows. The panel chats about roasting vs. not roasting soybeans, transportation costs and economics. Dr. Lock’s group is now looking at feeding the oil from high-oleic beans to see how the response differs, if at all, from feeding the beans. (25:42)

Dr. Nicholson predicts a pretty good margin year for 2025, forecasting about $3 above the average long-term margin, even with the upcoming milk pricing changes. The big wild card is exports and trade policy, which could have a significant impact on what margins look like going forward. (31:32)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (33:36)

Scott invites the audience to Bourbon and Brainiacs at ADSA in Louisville - a bourbon tasting with all your favorite professors! Sign up here: https://balchem.com/anh/bourbon/ (37:55)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

In 2020, the Institute for Feed Education and Research (IFEEDER), American Feed Industry Association (AFIA), North American Renderers Association (NARA) and Pet Food Institute (PFI) collaborated to publish the Pet Food Consumption Report. The organizations collaborated again to publish a second edition in 2025, which Lara presented at Petfood Forum. Data sets from both brick-and-mortar sales and Amazon sales were used to create the report. (6:16)

Lara explains that data analysts reverse-engineered product labels from dog and cat food and treats in the dataset to identify trends, including ingredient use, value, tonnage, upstream value, and what pet food adds to the economy. Dry dog food makes up the largest volume of sales at 55%, and also takes the number one spot in value of sales at 38%. Dry cat food is the second largest by volume (16%), followed by dog treats (11%). However, dog treats are the second largest by value (20%), followed by dry cat food (12%).  (7:57)

Louise and Charles talk about trends in non-veterinary spending on pets, cultural shifts in consumer perceptions of pet ownership, pet food trends in developing countries, and consumer understanding of human and pet nutrition needs. (12:04)

Lara notes that the top five ingredients in the report are chicken and chicken products, whole grains, milled grains, beef and beef products, and marine-based ingredients. Chicken and chicken products made up 2.2 million tons, while marine-based products represented about 500,000 tons. Marine products doubled in volume from the 2020 report to the 2025 report, signifying a trend of higher value, more select ingredients coming into the pet food space. Salmon and cod are the primary marine ingredients. Lara remarks that the specialty ingredients side of the report is fascinating, with items like blueberries, tomatoes, peas, beet pulp, cranberries, and flaxseed making an appearance. Louise explains the 2020 report had less than 400 ingredients, while more than 600 ingredients appear in the 2025 report. Charles notes that since the last report, there has been a slight shift to more fresh meat products and slightly less rendered products. (16:10)

About half the cat and dog food is made up of upcycled ingredients. The panel discusses consumer perceptions of byproducts and co-products, the sustainability role that these products play in the industry, and their organizations’ commitments to education and policy efforts. (22:27)

Pet food manufacturers purchase 9.8 million tons of ingredients valued at about $13.2 billion, which then represents about $52 billion in sales. Lara talks about some of the upstream impacts of the pet food industry. Pet food is manufactured in 43 states, with the top five being Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Pennsylvania, and California. Each of these states is selling more than $700 million worth of ingredients to pet food manufacturing. Relatively few pet food ingredients are imported; amino acids, vitamins, minerals, and marine products would be the exception. Manufactured pet food has a fairly strong export market. (29:55)

Lastly, panelists share their take-home thoughts. (35:56). 

The 2025 report is available at https://www.ifeeder.org/. You can download the full report as well as graphics, and there is a feature that allows you to create your graphs and charts with the data. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The panel discusses their individual experiences with outbreaks in different states. Beth talks about her group’s microbial surveillance technology they used to compare rectal swabs from positive and non-positive herds. They noted elevations in specific virulent E. coli, Salmonella spp., and Clostridium perfringens in the HPAI-positive herds. Enrique noted that in California, the outbreak began in the South Valley during periods of heat stress, which exacerbated symptoms. He also felt that some dairies panicked a little and moved cows too much, which did not help. In the North Valley, the outbreak happened in cooler weather, and dairies purposefully did not move cows out of their pens and provided supportive therapy within the pen. (5:25)

Dr. Schcolnik emphasized making sure i’s are dotted and t’s are crossed in your nutrition program to help manage through an outbreak. The immune system is an obligate glucose utilizer, so energy is key, as are protein and trace minerals. He noted they also added binders to diets, and either probiotics or double doses of yeast to keep the rumen healthy. Decreasing intake is a big symptom, so he recommends vitamin B supplementation to stimulate appetite. (12:30)

The panel discusses how the Texas and California outbreaks differed from one another, including heat stress, recovery in milk production after infection, bird migration and cattle movement. Enrique notes that in California, it seemed like transmission was going downwind. Animal movement, wild birds and milk trucks were also implicated. (14:31)

Several companies are investing in vaccine development, but the virus mutation is a challenge. Dr. Spencer wonders if the vaccine will end up resembling the human flu vaccine where you hope to target the general structure of the virus to reduce impact. The panel talks about natural immunity and how cows will be impacted in the lactation after they were ill. Dr. Schcolnik has observed that a percentage of cows who were dry during the outbreak aren’t performing as well after freshening. He hypothesizes this could be due to mammary cell death during infection, as the virus lyses the cell as it exits the cell. (24:41)

The panel discusses practical recommendations for dairy producers to prepare for or help mitigate during an outbreak. Biosecurity is key. Vaccines are hopefully on the way, but until then, minimizing cattle movements within the herd, post-dipping cows as soon as possible after the machine falls off and minimizing splashing of milk are all good practices. The panel looks forward to more research about all the different ways the virus transmits. They’re also eager to learn more about treatment plans and what has worked for different dairies regarding giving fluids, altering rations, boosting the immune system, managing co-infections and impacts on calves and heifers. (29:18)

Lastly, panelists share their take-home thoughts. (37:33)

Scott invites the audience to Bourbon and Brainiacs at ADSA in Louisville - a bourbon tasting with all your favorite professors! Sign up here: https://balchem.com/anh/bourbon/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Laporta gives an overview of her presentation, focusing on the impact of heat stress during the dry period on the cow, her daughters and her granddaughters. She covers heat stress impacts on mammary gland involution, as well as fetal programming effects on the daughter and granddaughter. (3:37)

Daughters of heat-stressed cows have fewer sweat glands located deeper in the skin, thicker skin and more sebaceous glands. This was observed at birth, weaning and puberty. They sweat more than heifers who weren’t heat stressed in utero, but have higher rectal temperatures during the preweaning phase. Dr. Laporta hypothesizes that if those calves were exposed to additional stress, they would be more susceptible to illness because of the higher core temperature.  (6:34)

The panel discusses heat stress impacts on male fetuses and the potential for epigenetic changes to be transmitted through semen. Dr. Gerloff asks about differences in the impacts of heat stress on first-calf heifers compared to older cows. Dr. Laporta describes the survival rates of heifers who were heat-stressed in utero. Heifers are lost from the herd even before first calving, with more following in first and second lactation.  (11:00)

Dr. Laporta outlines the differences between heat-stressed and cooled treatments in her experiments. They measure respiration rates and rectal temperatures to assess the physiological impacts of heat stress in the cows. Scott asks how long the heat stress period needs to be in order to observe negative effects. Dr. Gerloff asks about calf mortality rates between the two groups. Dr. Laporta estimates a 12% death loss in the heat stress groups, who seem to be more susceptible to the usual calf illnesses. It appears that gut closure might occur earlier in heat-stressed calves - maybe even before birth, which does not bode well for their immune systems. (16:49)

Dr. Laporta details how heat stress impacts mammary gland involution. Early in the dry period, you want a spike in cell death to build new cells for the next lactation. In heat-stressed cows, the spike in cell death early in the dry period is diminished, not allowing those cells to die. This results in less proliferation of the mammary gland, and the cow starts her next lactation with older cells that weren’t renewed in full. Thus, producing less milk. Dr. Gerloff shares some of his experiences with heat stress in his area of Illinois. (22:17)

Heat stress has negative impacts on other organs as well. Heifers who experienced heat stress in utero are born with larger adrenal glands with altered microstructure. Dr. Laporta describes some of the DNA methylation that has been observed in these heifers. The panel discusses whether the response would be similar for other types of stressors, like cold stress or social stress. (26:19)

What can we do to mitigate these impacts? Cooling dry cows so they can thermoregulate during gestation is critical. Altering diets to account for heat stress is also an important strategy. Unfortunately, there is no magic bullet to “fix” cows who were exposed to heat stress in utero, but these negative implications can be prevented. Dr. Laporta has also focused on what she calls perinatal programming - after the calf is born, what can we do? She has been working to develop cooling mechanisms for calves and is interested in further investigating early life mammary development. (33:41)

When a dry cow experiences heat stress, she has fewer and smaller alveoli. Daughters of those cows have smaller udders with altered tissue growth. Granddaughters of those cows have fewer estrogen receptors in their udders and negative impacts on mammary proliferation. (44:30)

Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (47:52)

Scott invites the audience to Bourbon and Brainiacs at ADSA in Louisville - a bourbon tasting with all your favorite professors! Sign up here: https://balchem.com/anh/bourbon/ (54:31)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Grant gives an overview of his presentation at the conference, highlighting cow time budgets and the importance of natural cow behavior to health, welfare and productivity. The impacts of overcrowding, including rumen pH and de novo fatty acid synthesis, are a key component of his message. (7:07)

Eating, resting and ruminating are the big three behaviors we’ve studied for decades. In addition to their obvious importance to cow welfare, they have a real health and performance effect. Dr. Grant suggests the recumbent rumination - just lying down and chewing her cud - is really the cow’s superpower. Cows with the same rumination time who accomplish more while lying down have less subacute ruminal acidosis, greater dry matter intake, and higher fat and protein content in their milk. It all boils down to the balance between eating time and recumbent rumination time. (12:15)

The panel discusses the definition of overcrowding. Spoiler alert: it depends. (15:50)

Clay asks Rick if overcrowding of beds or feed bunks is more important. The easy answer is both, but Rick acknowledges he’d say beds if he were pushed for an answer. Resting is a yes or no; she’s either lying down or she’s not. From the feed bunk perspective, a cow can alter her behavior to a point for adjusting to overcrowding - eat faster, change her meal patterns, etc. A hungry cow will walk by the feed to recoup lost rest time. Cows should be comfortable enough to spend at least 90% of their rumination time lying down. (17:50)

Dr. Grant thinks of overcrowding as a subclinical stressor. A cow has different “accounts” for different activities: lactation, health, reproduction, etc., as well as a reserve account. To combat the subclinical stress of overcrowding, a cow uses her reserve account, but that’s hard to measure. If the reserve account gets depleted and another stressor comes along, the overcrowded pens are going to show greater impacts. The panel brainstormed ideas for how to better measure a cow’s reserve account. (19:39)

Clays asks if overcrowding is affecting culling rates. The panel assumes it has to be, though no one can point to a study. Dr. Grant notes there is data from France that shows decreased longevity in cows who don’t get enough rest, which is a hallmark of overcrowding. Given the low heifer inventory, the panel muses if the industry ought to pay more attention to the culling impacts of overcrowding and have a more dynamic approach to evaluating stocking density as market and farm conditions shift. (25:10)

Bill asks about nutritional and management strategies to reduce the stress of overcrowding. Rick notes that overcrowding tends to make the rumen a bit more touchy, so he talks about formulating diets with appropriate amounts of physically effective fiber, undigested NDF, rumen-fermentable starch, and particle size. (29:21)

Dr. Grant talks about the differences in rumination when a cow is lying down versus standing. The panel discusses cow comfort, preferred stalls, and first-calf heifer behavior in mixed-age groups with and without overcrowding. Bill and Rick agree that having a separate pen for first-calf heifers on overcrowded farms would benefit those heifers. Dr. Michael comments on evaluating air flow and venting on-farm. (33:49)

The panel wraps up the episode with their take-home thoughts. (47:55)

Scott invites the audience to Bourbon and Brainiacs at ADSA in Louisville - a bourbon tasting with all your favorite professors! Sign up here: https://balchem.com/anh/bourbon/ (52:02)

The paper referenced in this conversation from Dr. Bach can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030208711226

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The presentation was based on the idea that crowding is a subclinical presence. If you manage it with people and resources, a dairy can do very well. But if something happens in that crowded situation, like a disease or heat stress, it can tip performance over the edge. Evaluating time budgets for cows can allow for the identification of places to improve. Beds are vitally important. If a cow doesn’t have a bed due to crowding then she’s not lying down, chewing her cud, which is what allows her to be as efficient as possible. (3:19)

Jason thinks about time budgets as a tool for managing stress. Jim agrees and notes that crowding is part of every cow’s day, but we can manage to minimize that time in most instances. Jason and Jim talk about some of their approaches to evaluating crowding when they work with a dairy, and where pain points are often located. (5:57)

Jason liked Dr. Grant’s takeaway message that the cow doesn’t necessarily care she’s overcrowded as long as she has a bed she doesn’t have to fight for and room at the feed bunk she doesn’t have to fight for. He describes a very successful client who is overcrowded, but everything else is managed well. All other stressors have been removed, so the only stressor remaining is the overcrowding. But when additional stressors compound crowding, then dairies experience issues. He adds there is a huge opportunity for error when feeding to slick bunks in an overcrowding situation. (16:15)

Jim talks about different measures of efficiency. Is it milk per cow, milk per free stall, milk per parlor stall, or milk per pen? He thinks the real answer is “it depends,” and the answer might be different for each dairy. Jason notes that the bank wants to see assets on a balance sheet, and the cows are the assets. (19:24)

The group discusses geographical differences in overcrowding. Jim’s observations show crowding increases as one moves east in the US. Tom agrees and notes 20-30% of the available stalls are in his part of the world. Overcrowded cows eat faster, and this impacts rumen efficiency, probably leading to lower de novo fatty acid synthesis and overall lower components. The panel talks about whether or not there is such a thing as an “overcrowding ration.”(20:59)

The panel relays some real-world examples of crowding where dairies would cull cows to decrease milk production, but production would remain the same because the cows were now less crowded. They talk more about other management strategies that need to be on point if a dairy is going to overcrowd. (27:50)

The panel wraps up with their take-home thoughts for dairy producers and nutritionists. Jim and Jason share their contact information with the audience. (38:20)

Scott invites the audience to Bourbon and Brainiacs at ADSA in Louisville - a bourbon tasting with all your favorite professors! Sign up here: https://balchem.com/anh/bourbon/ (45:02)

The paper referenced in this conversation from Dr. Bach can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030208711226

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt

Dr. Shabtai gives an overview of her presentation. Afimilk has a new technology that includes a feed efficiency sensor to determine eating, rumination, heat stress monitoring and more. The Feed Efficiency Service combined with the AfiCollar can estimate dry matter intake, which, when combined with Afimilk’s milk meter data, yields an efficiency value of milk income over feed cost for each cow. She details how the algorithm works to predict intake and some of the challenges faced during the development of this technology. The algorithm was developed with Holsteins, but a Jersey algorithm is nearing completion. (5:33)

Shane and Emily share some of their experiences with beta-testing the Feed Efficiency technology on-farm to evaluate, including animal-to-animal variation and variation in different stages of lactation. The panel discusses how genomics could pair with this data to aid in selection decisions. (9:21)

Walt asks Dr. Shabtai to share how the company took the technology from research facilities to commercial farms, and asks Shane and Emily to share how the technology has proven itself on-farm. (13:11)

Shane notes that they’ve had a handle on the milk side of the efficiency equation of individual cows for a while, but they didn’t know much about the feed intake side of the equation. This technology allows for that. Shane also shares how this technology adds another tool to their dairy’s sustainability toolbox.  (18:50)

Walt asks both producers to share a metric that they thought was important before, but now that we have more knowledge and technology, it might not be as important as they thought. Shane’s pick is starch level in corn silage, and Emily’s is percent pregnant by 150 days in milk. (21:18)

Dr. Shabtai shares the basics that a producer would need to implement this technology. She details a few things that have changed and will change about the product based on data from beta testing and notes there are always new things to see and find on-farm. (22:59)

Scott asks Shane and Emily what metric they’d like to measure that they can’t measure yet. Shane wonders if there would be a way for AI to compile weather and market data to assist with milk or feedstuff contracting decisions. Emily would like to be able to use more on-farm technology to help manage people. She shares how the data she has now allows her to see different improvements that could be implemented for different milking shifts. Shane talks about need-to-know information versus neat-to-know information. (26:35)

The panel discusses how the technology is updated through software rather than hardware when new versions are available. They also share some tips for implementing the software on-farm. Walt asks each panelist their “I wonder if…” question. (29:58)

The panel wraps up with their take-home thoughts, and Dr. Shabtai shares where farmers can learn more about Afimilk’s feed efficiency technology by visiting afimilk.com. (36:49)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Sabine Mann, Cornell University; Dr. Will Mustas, Progressive Dairy Solutions; Dr. Don Niles, Dairy Dreams LLC; and Joey Airosa, Airosa Dairy Farms, introduce themselves. (0:48)

Dr. Mann outlines the high points of her presentation. Giving an adequate amount of high-quality colostrum quickly after birth is essential to equip the calf with the best chances to stay healthy. Colostrum is more than a solution of water and immunoglobulins, and we are continuing to learn more about other nutrients and growth factors that colostrum contains. (12:03)

Dr. Niles and Mr. Airosa talk about colostrum and maternity protocols on their dairies. Each has dedicated maternity staff in charge of postnatal calf care. Don mentions they often have public tours of their dairy and shares some anecdotes. Joey’s maternity staff try to get colostrum in calves within 30 minutes of birth and have worked out a good communication system to ensure seamless calf care when shift changes occur. (13:57)

Dr. Mann emphasizes the timing of colostrum delivery is critical. But what about the amount? Should every calf get four liters? Joey notes they bottle feed and have settled on three quarts for Holstein calves and two quarts for Jersey calves. Sabine says research backs that up - calves will not voluntarily drink much more than 3-3.5 liters. Using esophageal feeders to give four liters could be overfeeding in some cases, which could cause slower emptying of the stomach and thus slower arrival and uptake of immunoglobulins at the small intestine. The four liter recommendation came from the idea that good quality colostrum probably had about 50 grams per liter of IgG, and at that time, we wanted to get 200 grams into the calf. Perhaps making a sheet with recommended amounts based on calf weights could be helpful for maternity staff.  Dr. Mann also clarifies that the 50 grams per liter of IgG is not really good quality colostrum. Most herds average about 90-100 grams per liter of IgG in colostrum. She recommends every farm find out how good their colostrum is and optimize feeding amounts from there. (22:45)

Dr. Mann notes the importance of making sure dry cows are not deficient in protein supply and ensuring the dry period is long enough to create high-quality colostrum. While it’s commonly thought older cows have better colostrum than young cows, she underlines again the importance of measuring colostrum quality to know for sure. She also highly recommends measuring colostrum quality from individual cows before pooling so that poor colostrum does not dilute good colostrum. (31:04)

Dr. Mustas shares some of the challenges he’s seeing on dairies where he consults. What can we do to control the bacteriological quality of colostrum? He notes there’s no reason we can’t get very low bacteria counts pre-pasteurization. Making sure maternity areas are clean and sanitary, udders are prepped very well, and harvesting equipment is not neglected are all great strategies. (35:53)

Dr. Mann talks about individual cow variation in colostrum production and some factors that might influence including placental interactions, hormones, and genetics. (38:04)

Scott and Sabine discuss some of the research around supplementing with choline during the dry period and subsequent colostrum production. (41:28)

Dr. Niles comments that pasteurization of colostrum has been one of the most exciting technologies to come along. On his farm, the pasteurizer has given them much more control over colostrum quality and delivery time. Dr. Mann agrees storage of colostrum has given dairies the ability to be strategic about how they use colostrum, what colostrum they use, and to also plan for seasonal colostrum shortages. She agrees with Dr. Mustas that clean colostrum harvesting equipment is key to low bacterial counts. (44:13)

Dr. Mustas talks about how the beef-on-dairy phenomenon has altered colostrum protocols. Calf ranches are giving deductions for poor colostrum scores when calves are received. Some operations even offer premiums or discounts on daily yardage depending on individual calf colostrum scores. (50:21)

Joey, Don, and Sabine comment on the importance of finding the right people to work in maternity and instilling the idea that taking care of cows and calves is both a great responsibility and a great honor. (52:56)

The panel wraps up with their take-home thoughts. (58:31)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Gregg Doud, National Milk Producers Federation, begins with an overview of his talk regarding recent and ongoing investments in the dairy industry. Dan Siemers, Siemers Holsteins, notes they were able to build a new dairy and find a new milk market because Agropur built a new plant in their area. Corey Geiger, CoBank, describes that the US is approaching $9 billion of new investment in dairy plants coming online through 2027, over half of that in cheese. High-quality whey protein isolates are in equal demand as cheese, so that has been a large part of the investment as well. He mentions investment in class one beverage milk and extended shelf life, as well as growth in yogurt and Greek yogurt. The panel also discusses milk in schools.  (1:35)

Corey talks about the generational change on dairy farms regarding components. Dan mentions that in one generation, you can increase the fat percentage by 0.4 using bulls available today. The focus on pounds of fat and protein plus health traits has resulted in somewhat less milk. Dan feels that the industry needs to focus a bit more on pounds of milk as a carrier to get protein back in the business. Some plants indicate there might almost be too much fat, so a focus on protein pounds may be in order. (11:03)

Corey states that 92% of dairy farmers get paid on multiple component pricing, and 90% of that milk check is butter fat and protein. While some cheese plants don’t quite need all the butter fat that’s coming from dairy farms, it’s important to note that we are still not filling our butter fat needs domestically. There are definitely opportunities in the butter sector. The panel discusses some shuffling in domestic processing might also be needed to better use the sweet cream that’s available. (13:01)

Scott asks about export markets in developing countries. Gregg mentions that many Central American dairy products contain vegetable oil, so there is a lot of potential there. Corey agrees and states there is also similar potential in the Middle East and North Africa. He also notes that lack of refrigeration is still an issue in some parts of the world, so shelf-stable products are critical. Gregg mentions that drinkable yogurts are in demand in Latin America. (18:29)

The panel dives into the way beef on dairy has changed the industry. Dan notes the baby calf market has been a huge profit center, where the dairy can essentially break even and the calves provide the profit. This may be creating a challenge where a lot of dairies aren’t creating enough replacement dairy heifers. (23:16)

Data and how we use it is the next topic the group discusses. Gregg shares a story of an MIT grad who is developing an artificial intelligence algorithm to combine cow genetics with different diet ingredients and feed additives to decrease methane production while improving cow productivity. (28:49)

The panelists close out the episode with their take-home messages. Corey gives listeners a look at the impact of the domestic dairy market. Dan shares the sustainability story and climate impact of the dairy industry will continue to be important. Gregg is excited about new technologies, but asks for assistance in working with the federal government to get those technologies approved at the speed of commerce. The panel also discusses the impacts of tariffs on agriculture and how dairy farmers need to be communicating with their members of Congress. (32:56)

Please reach out to your Congress members. Start the conversation, and  help them understand!

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Goeser begins with three different ways to define forage quality: energetic potential, particle size as an interaction factor, and anti-nutritional components. He asks Dr. Kozlowski if these are the hot topics for his consulting clients. (6:53)

When evaluating the energy potential in feed, Dr. Goeser states there’s nothing new as far as measuring the nutrient content of feeds, but capturing the nutrient digestion potential in fiber, starch, and fatty acids is an area where we could stand to make sizable strides. We’ve been studying fiber and starch digestion for more than 50 years, and they're still really hard to measure because nutrient digestion potential is not linear. In the laboratory, ruminal fiber digestion is measured at many different time points to create curves, but if we want to get a good handle on the energy potential in feeds, we need to take a total digestible nutrients approach.  (9:31)

Dr. Goeser feels there are more similarities between laboratories in quantifying fiber digestion potential, but there is little agreement among labs for starch digestion. Research shows that seven hour starch digestion is dramatically affected by laboratory technique and starch digestion curves also vary widely among labs. Dr. Overton commends the lab for diligently working to understand these dynamics. (14:31)

From a fiber standpoint, Dr. Kozlowsk states that uNDF has probably been one of the most significant improvements in the tools he has to work with. He gives an example of cows on a 45% forage diet in the Southeast and cows on a 60% forage diet in the Northeast, both with similar uNDF concentrations. Those two groups of cows perform very similarly in terms of volume, fat and protein. (18:43)

Dr. Overton asks both guests for their take on feed hygiene. Dr. Goeser feels that there is at least 10 times more to learn about feed hygiene compared to fiber and starch digestibility. Merging veterinary diagnostics with commercial nutrition laboratory work shows promise for solving undesirable mold, yeast, mycotoxin and bacteria issues in feeds. In case studies, he states there is never just one issue at play; there are two or three that may have negative associative effects with one another. Dr. Kozlowski has been seeing varietal-dependent corn silage DON toxin levels in the last few years. Dairies are now looking at all aspects of the agronomy program in addition to all the other assessments of NDF digestibility and starch. (20:33)

Dr. Goeser goes on to describe some work on large dairies where they’re finding hidden nutrient variation and starch and protein flux that happens within a 1-2 week period that we aren’t able to capture with our current sampling techniques. For dairies feeding 2,000-15,000 cows, a diet formulation is on point today, but within that 1-2 week period at the volume of feed they’re going through, the diet is now out of spec. However, it’s not so out of line that the cows are giving feedback in terms of components or deviation in production or intake. (30:08)

On the cow side, new technologies like SCR are allowing insights into rumination dynamics, which can be applied to feed formulation. Some silage choppers now have NIR units measuring silage quality during harvest. The panelists discuss what other technologies might be on the horizon, including on-farm NIR units on front-end loaders or mixer trucks. Dr. Goeser mentions some of the challenges with these technologies, including feed moisture levels interfering with equipment and lack of trust in technologies. (34:21)

The panelists close out the episode with their take-home messages. (42:03)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Overton notes that milk replacements can be formulated differently to account for changes in mineral or vitamin requirements. In herds that feed whole milk, is there any reason to think about supplementing those calves? Dr. Drackley suggests that Mother Nature may have been smarter than us all along, as the composition of whole milk matches very well with the nutrient requirements of calves. (9:43)

Dr. Lundquist asked what the impetus was for the increase in vitamin E requirements. Dr. Drackley refers to a series of studies examining the role of vitamin E in immune function that have shown the previous requirements were too low to achieve optimum health outcomes. Many dairies give a vitamin injection after birth to help boost young calves. (11:45)

The panel discusses improved colostrum feeding efforts and the variation in successful passive immunity that still exists in the industry. (13:51)

Scott asks Dr. Overton what gaps he sees in calf nutrition from his Extension specialist perspective, and he suggests that best management for weaning is still a big topic. Dr. Drackley agrees this is an area that needs some attention. He feels the industry is doing better on the baby calf side by feeding more milk, but then that almost makes weaning more difficult because people are not changing their mindset about how to step calves down from milk or what age to wean calves. (16:39)

For people feeding more milk than the traditional 1.25 lbs of solids, Dr. Drackley recommends extending weaning time to eight instead of six weeks. He also recommends at least one step down in the amount of milk, which could be a week of feeding just once a day. Calf starter formulation and quality are also critical. Research shows that providing a small amount of forage, preferably grass hay or straw, before weaning is beneficial for buffering and rumination. (18:47)

Dr. Overton asks about the research gap in our understanding of transition cow management and how that impacts the calf in utero and after birth. The panel discusses heat stress and season of birth impacts on calf growth and first lactation performance. (26:08)

The panel wraps up with their take-home messages. Discussion includes pelleted versus texturized starters, sugars in a starter to promote rumen development, the value of increasing the quality and quantity of calf nutrition, the thermoneutral zone in baby calves, and outsourcing calf raising.  (33:10)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. DeVries’ research focuses on farm-level decisions and modeling. The University of Florida dairy has implemented the use of beef semen. Dr. DeVries describes some of the factors that go into a partial budget for this system as well as details some of the factors involved in implementing beef on dairy. The UF dairy genomically tests all their cows and the panel discusses some differences in beef and dairy selection based on genomics. (5:58)

Dr. Felix asks how the beef sires are selected for the UF dairy. Calving ease and fertility are key, as well as low cost. Dr. Johnson asks if spending a little more on beef semen might pay off in the longer term regarding beef quality. The panel agrees that in the current market, dairy producers are getting $800-$1000 for a day-old calf regardless of the beef sire, so perhaps beef sire selection has not been a major focus. (15:07)

Dr. DeVries describes some of the data he evaluates when deciding how many cows to breed with sexed dairy semen. Given the current beef prices, heifer retention has not been as high in either the beef or dairy sector as previously predicted. (19:22)

The panel discusses the importance of cow longevity in the dairy sector. Dr. DeVries explains the pros and cons of keeping cows in the milking herd longer. Dr. Nelson reminds listeners of the current cull cow market and how that also plays a role in decision-making for dairy and beef producers. (24:16)

Dr. Nelson describes the heifer development program for the UF dairy. Week-old heifer calves are shipped to Kansas for development and return to UF at about 200-220 days pregnant. This approach is very common in the southeast. Many of the beef on dairy calves will also be shipped to calf ranches out of state. (30:59)

Dr. DeVries’ model concluded that switching from conventional dairy to beef-on-dairy resulted in about $150 advantage per cow per year. On top of that was another $50 per cow because of the switch to sourcing your heifers from your best cows. (34:13)

The panel discusses the idea of transferring beef embryos into dairy cows. Could there be a day when this approach creates beef calves less expensively than the cow/calf sector can? They also delve into whether there will be any long-term negative impacts of breeding dairy cows with beef semen. (38:44)

Dr. Johnson mentions another paradigm shift of the beef-on-dairy system is feeding dairy-influenced heifers in the feedlot, which has not happened before. Technologies used to promote growth in the feed yard can induce spontaneous lactation in some of these heifers. Milk is considered an adulterant in the packing plant and requires trimming if it splashes on a carcass. Dr. Nelson suggests that until there is a discount for heifer beef on dairy calves, there won’t be a shift to using sexed male semen to create predominantly beef on dairy steers. (48:33)

The panel wraps up with their take-home thoughts. (57:46)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Johnson’s presentation at the symposium focuses on beef quality aspects of using beef sires on dairy cows. Using the same Angus semen, his research model compared Angus-sired beef calves raised in a conventional cow-calf system, Angus x Holstein calves, Angus x Jersey calves, and Angus-sired IVF beef embryos transplanted into Holstein and Jersey cows. The model evaluated how the management impacted feedlot performance and carcass quality. (6:37)

Dairy-influenced beef is tender and highly marbled. It also has more oxidative fibers prone to lipid peroxidation and higher myoglobin content which gives it a redder hue. When high-myoglobin beef is in retail packaging, it goes through discoloration faster than traditional native beef, and retailers shy away from that. Beef on dairy products have a retail display life more like native beef, and large retailers are embracing that product. (10:12)

Ribeye size was not different among any of the cattle groups in Dr. Johnson’s study, including straight calf-fed Holsteins. Beef on dairy calves have similar ribeye area and 0.15-0.20 inches less backfat than a straight beef calf, so their yield grades are lower, implying more red meat yield. In practice, however, they don’t have increased red meat yield compared to native beef because they give up so much muscle in their hindquarter. (14:14)

Dr. Felix asks if the selection criteria of the Angus sire Dr. Johnson used may have limited the findings from a yield standpoint. Dr. Johnson agrees that was definitely the case, as they chose a high-marbling sire on purpose, and he happened to be fairly light muscled. Dr. Johnson feels that improving the plane of nutrition of beef on dairy calves in the hutch for the first 60-70 days could vastly improve hindquarter muscling later in life. (19:39)

Muscle biopsies from the ribeye and hindquarter of hutch calves on low and high planes of nutrition found no difference in muscle proliferation in the ribeye. Hindquarter muscle proliferation was improved in calves on the high plane diet. Dr. Felix reiterated that there is a lack of literature in this area. (25:35)

If beef on dairy calves have less backfat, does that mean they have better feed efficiency? In Dr. Johnson’s study, the best feed efficiency group was the Angus x Holstein F1 cross. Dr. Felix and Dr. Johnson discuss changes in feedlot practices and days on feed and how the industry is moving to carcass-adjusted average daily gain and feed efficiency measures. (31:14)

The panelists discussed the impact of gut size on carcass value. In the dairy industry, we want cows to have high intakes for high milk production, which requires a large gut size. Dams of beef on dairy calves may pass on these traits. Dr. Johnson describes a beef calf and a beef on dairy calf out of the same sire where the beef calf was 40 pounds lighter at the end of the feeding period, yet both calves had the same hot carcass weight. That 40-pound difference was gut size. Dr. Felix and Dr. Johnson share their experiences with differences in fat and trim between beef and beef on dairy carcasses. (39:25)

Dr. Felix asks Dr. Johnson how the valuation of beef on dairy calves drives marketing decisions. Day-old dairy calves are extremely valuable right now. A high index beef on dairy calf will bring $800-$1100, depending on what part of the country you live in. If a dairy producer only has $200 in that calf, they should take the money and run. There is no way they will make $800 per head feeding out those calves. (47:30)

In closing, Dr. Zimmerman urges ASAS and ADSA to bring back Joint Annual Meetings so more cross-species interactions can be fostered. Dr. Felix notes there is a tremendous gap where the dairy nutrient requirements end and where the beef nutrient requirements pick up. We need to fill that gap to better target optimal muscle development in beef on dairy calves. Dr. Johnson is enthusiastic about the amount of progress the beef on dairy sector has experienced in a short period. We’re one or two tweaks away from beef on dairy carcasses rivaling native beef in quality. What we’re learning in this sector can also be applied to the native beef sector to improve meat quality and red meat yield. (56:52)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Felix’s first study in this area compared dairy calves with beef on dairy calves of unknown origin. They were placed in the feedlot and fed and implanted the same. Beef on dairy calves grew faster, but they ate more, so there was no difference in feed efficiency. They also had larger ribeye areas and slightly heavier carcass weights. In subsequent studies, calf growers indicated that beef on dairy calves were more hardy and got a quicker start in the calf systems. (9:16)

Dr. Johnson and Dr. Felix are both fans of using Charolais sires in beef on dairy systems. Dr. Felix emphasizes that while breed can be important, individual sires within breeds really make the difference when it comes to successful beef on dairy systems. (13:23)

The beef and dairy industries speak two different languages when it comes to genetic selection. Dr. Felix encourages education efforts across both segments to speak a common language. Bull studs are heavily invested in this effort. Just 2.5 million units of beef semen were sold in the US in 2017, compared to 9.4 million units in 2024. (16:15)

The use of beef sires increased gestation length by two days in one study of over 10,000 dairy records. Dairy producers may have to manage the dry period of beef on dairy cows differently to avoid loss of milk production. (20:46)

Last year, the National Association of Animal Breeders published a new category in their annual semen sales report: heterospermic beef, at 1.5 million straws. Genetic companies have started to market straws containing semen from two to three different beef bulls who have similar desired traits. The literature suggests that different cows’ reproductive tract environments have different “preferences” for semen. The theory behind heterospermic beef is by putting more than one bull in a straw, we may see increased fertility for that straw. (27:52)

Dr. Felix explains her sire selection process from her USDA research. Regardless of breed, she focused on yearling weight, carcass weight, and ribeye area. Because of this, little difference was found between breeds since the same terminal traits were of priority. Dr. Johnson agrees that the growth of beef on dairy has been beneficial to feedlots and that the beef cattle industry can learn from the beef on dairy systems. (32:36)

What challenges still exist with beef on dairy? Dr. Felix suggests we need to get past the block of dairy beef “only being 20% of the fed cattle” - why shouldn’t that 20% be as high quality as possible? Health will continue to be a challenge, particularly in the areas of liver abscesses and respiratory disease. (41:46) 

Adequate colostrum intake is critical for successful beef on dairy calves. Dr. Felix describes a project where calves who had adequate passive immunity were heavier at nine months of age than calves who had failure of passive immunity. Dr. Johnson concurs and reminds listeners that colostrum also contains bioactive components that appear to have value beyond immunity, even after gut closure. (44:36)

Dr. Johnson gives some perspective from the cow/calf side of the beef cattle industry regarding beef on dairy. He feels that there is much to learn from beef and dairy systems that can be applied to the cow/calf sector. Dr. Felix has received pushback from cow/calf producers that she’s trying to “put them out of business.” She counters that we had 20% dairy influence in fed cattle when they were Holstein, and there is still 20% dairy influence now that they’re crossbred cattle. We’re not changing how many calves come from the dairy industry each year, but we are increasing the amount of beef produced. (47:52)

Each panelist wraps up with their take-home messages. Dr. Zimmerman was interested to learn about the longer gestation lengths in beef on dairy crosses and the implications that has for drying off cows. Dr. Johnson reminds listeners not to forget about the maternal side of the beef on dairy industry. He wonders if dairy producers could select for improved muscling without a loss in milk production to make beef-on-dairy crossbred calves even more desirable to the packer. Dr. Felix comments that, at the end of the day, it’s about feeding people. The increase in beef production from beef on dairy is something to be proud of, and she hopes some of what has been learned can also benefit the cow/calf industry to improve sustainability for the entire beef supply chain. (54:16)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Baumgard begins with an overview of the structure and function of the gastrointestinal tract. More than 75% of an animal’s immune system resides in the gut. The focus of this webinar is how heat stress initiates leaky gut, how that leaky gut then influences the immune and hormonal systems, and ultimately, how that reduces productivity. (0:22)

Dr. Baumgard compares the metabolism of a cow 200 days in milk to a cow 10 days in milk. The 200-day cow is experiencing ad libitum intake and gaining weight. Her insulin levels would be high, and NEFAs would be low. On the other hand, the 10-day cow is experiencing suboptimal intake, and her insulin levels are the lowest they’ll ever be during the production cycle. Body tissue is mobilized, and NEFAs will increase. Research shows it takes 72 grams of glucose to make one kilogram of milk. Any disruption to the gluconeogenic pathway has the potential to decrease milk yield. (6:38)

Heat stress is estimated to cost the US dairy industry $1.7 billion each year. Regardless of climate change, heat stress will continue to be an issue because all economically important phenotypes in animal agriculture are heat-producing processes. Dr. Baumgard’s lab has been investigating the biology of heat stress to implement more effective mitigation strategies. (9:09)

How much of the reduction in feed intake during heat stress explains the reduction in milk yield? A pair-feeding experiment comparing thermoneutral to heat-stressed cows showed that about 50% of the reduction in milk yield during a heat wave is due to a reduction in feed intake. The thermoneutral cows lost weight in response to decreased intake, and their NEFAs increased. Heat-stressed cows did not have an increase in NEFA. Heat-stressed animals fail to mobilize adipose tissue despite their endocrine profile predicting that they should. However, insulin is high when we would expect it to be low, and that response to heat stress is highly conserved in all species. (10:43)

Heat-stressed cows produced about 400 grams less lactose per day than their pair-fed thermoneutral controls. This is nearly a pound! Is the liver producing 400 fewer grams of glucose each day? Or is some other extramammary tissue using more glucose per day? Dr. Baumgard’s work suggests that the immune system is where the 400 grams of glucose go in heat-stressed animals. During heat stress, vasodilation at the body surface occurs, with concomitant vasoconstriction in the gut. The gut epithelium is very sensitive to reduced oxygen delivery that would result from the vasoconstriction, and tight junction proteins do not function properly, resulting in a leaky gut. This results in an infiltration of antigens into the body, which causes an immune response.  (15:36)

Dr. Baumgard details how insulin fits into these immune responses via the Warburg effect. An activated immune cell prefers glucose and needs it in high quantities. The activated cell switches from the Kreb’s cycle to generate ATP to aerobic glycolysis. This requires high insulin. The immune system requires approximately one gram of glucose per kilogram of metabolic body weight per hour. (25:03)

By far, the biggest impact a dairy producer can make to alleviate heat stress is to modify the environment physically: shade, fans, soakers, misters, etc. Investing in cooling cows improves production efficiency and profitability, summer fertility, animal welfare and health, and sustainability. Other important heat abatement considerations include adequate water availability, reducing walking distance to the parlor and time in the holding pen, and improving ventilation. Dry cows should also be part of any heat abatement strategy, as the benefits of cooling dry cows extends far into lactation. Dr. Baumgard also discusses different dietary management strategies for heat stress situations. (32:43)

In summary, heat stress decreases almost every metric of productivity and costs everyone in the industry. Reduced feed intake is only part of the problem. Heat-induced leaky gut results in biological consequences incredibly similar to any other immune activation, such as mastitis or metritis. For dairy producers, heat stress abatement should by far be their biggest priority. Once those infrastructure improvements are in place, dietary interventions are another good strategy to minimize the negative consequences of heat stress. (47:43)

Dr. Baumgard takes questions from the webinar audience. (49:22)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Lock added fat and amino acid supplements to the LF diet to not lose milk production. The fat supplement was a palmitic-acid-rich prill. Dr. Lock does not think the response would have been the same if a different fat supplement had been used. The LF diet was higher in fat and palmitic acid, but most other fatty acids were fairly similar between the two diets. (16:25)

Milk yields were similar between the two diets. Cows on the LF diet consumed about 1 kg more dry matter each day than CON-fed cows. Cows fed the LF diet also had higher milk fat and milk protein yields and content which led to an approximately 2 kg increase in energy-corrected milk compared to cows fed the CON diet. Dr. Lock believes the fat and amino acid supplementation were a key part of achieving these results, and they would not have seen the same response if those supplements had not been added to the LF diet. The LF diet spared around 5.5-6 kg of forage per day, and cows gained body condition.  (22:03)

Dr. Weiss asks Dr. Lock to speculate if low-forage diets fed for longer periods would have negative health impacts. Dr. Lock feels that usually production would be negatively impacted by cow health issues, which was not the case here. However, if high-moisture corn had been used in the LF diet, he predicts they would have seen negative impacts. (27:18)

What about low-forage diets for early lactation cows? Dr. Lock suggests looking at diets in other parts of the world where forage is limited and see how dairy producers manage diets in those instances. He speculates that lower forage could be successfully implemented in early lactation cows after the fresh period. (31:09)

Dr. Weiss and Dr. Lock discuss the apparent improved digestibility of the LF diet given the increased production. While byproduct ingredients are often more fermentable in vitro, the results don’t always translate in vivo. Palmitic acid supplementation has been shown to improve fiber digestibility, so that may have happened in this experiment. (32:12)

On the protein side, we’ve moved away from talking about crude protein in the diet and toward amino acid concentrations. Dr. Lock would like to see the same trend in the industry for fat in the diet. A good leap was made recently from ether extract to total fatty acids, and he hopes to see individual fatty acids as the next step in that evolution. He recommends two questions be asked when considering a new fatty acid supplement. What is the fatty acid profile? What is the total fat content? The appropriate fatty acid profile is going to depend on the basal diet and what type of cow is being fed. Dr. Lock’s preference is a palmitic: oleic acid blend around 70:20 or 60:30 early in lactation, with a higher palmitic blend later in lactation. He expects the current work with different oilseeds to provide some good recommendations for feed ingredients to incorporate to increase dietary fat.  (35:53)

As genetics continue to improve and nutrient requirements of cows continue to increase, is it conceivable that someday we are going to purposefully decrease fiber in the diet? While that may be the case, Dr. Lock reminds listeners that about half of milk fat comes from acetate and butyrate produced in the rumen, so fiber is still going to be critical. While we may lower the forage in a diet, forage quality is going to remain very important. (39:45)

The panel wraps up with their take-home messages from this paper. Clay looks forward to more research with a factorial design to further evaluate low-forage diets. Dr. Weiss reminds listeners there’s no one recipe for diets to achieve high yields of milk components. Lastly, Dr. Lock is excited about the future of research in this area and refining diet formulation in the area of fat supplementation. (43:21)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper from JDS Communications here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001084

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Santos begins with a timeline of events that occur during the cow’s transition from the dry period to her exit from the fresh pen. He suggests that cows should be dried off at around 230 days of gestation, then moved to a closeup group at 250-255 days gestation which is around three to three-and-a-half weeks before calving. Dr. Santos recommends keeping multiparous cows separate from primiparous cows and feeding to minimize metabolic disorders in early lactation. After calving, cow health needs to be monitored for early detection and treatment of disease. In addition, diets that do not limit voluntary dry matter intake should be fed. During the early postpartum period, controlling excessive weight loss and lipid mobilization is the goal.  (00:27)

What is the association between time spent in the closeup pen and disease? Research shows that around three to four weeks in the prepartum group is associated with the lowest risk of morbidity, maximum milk yield and highest pregnancy rates. How does a change in body condition during the first 65 days in milk impact cyclicity? How does 90-day milk yield impact cyclicity? Cows that lose one or more units of condition are less likely to be cyclic at the end of the voluntary waiting period. There is a small statically positive association between milk yield and cyclicity. Dr. Santos’ first take-home message is to avoid excessive body condition loss after calving. Cows should lose no more than 0.5 body condition units from the week before calving to the first AI. This can be accomplished by minimizing over-conditioned cows at dry-off and reducing the risk of disease in early lactation.  (6:13)

What about feed efficiency? Dr. Santos describes experiments comparing the 25% most efficient to the 25% least efficient cows. All cows produced the same amount of energy-corrected milk, but the most efficient cows ate four kilograms less feed each day. The risk of morbidity and the culling rate was the same for both groups, as was reproductive performance. Dr. Santos suggests we should not be afraid of selecting for feed efficiency while still optimizing intake in early lactation.  (18:23)

Morbidity negatively impacts intake in early lactation. Around one-third of cows are affected by disease in the first three weeks of lactation and almost 80% of the first disease diagnoses occur during the first three weeks postpartum. The earlier in lactation disease occurs, the longer the legacy effects from that disease can impact cow health and performance. Dr. Santos describes an experiment in beef cattle evaluating how an inflammatory response impacts nutrient partitioning away from performance. Early lactation morbidity not only makes a cow not want to eat, it also may shift nutrients away from production toward survival, resulting in fewer nutrients available for milk production and reproduction. Dr. Santos describes a series of experiments evaluating the impact of early lactation disease diagnosis on reproductive performance. Dr. Santos’ second take-home message is to stimulate dry matter intake and minimize disease in the early lactation period. (22:21)

How can we formulate diets that will improve reproduction? First, we should formulate diets that reduce the risk of disease. Then we should incorporate nutrients that are known to improve reproduction in cows. Dr. Santos describes how supplementation with rumen-protected choline decreases triglyceride accumulation in the liver and improves milk yield. He also details the mechanisms of using acidogenic diets to reduce hypocalcemia. He recommends not using these diets for heifers and feeding them for around 21 days to cows rather than the entire dry period. Dr. Santos feels that forage quality has been neglected in the transition period and details how improved fiber digestibility during the transition period can have longer-term impacts. Lastly, he recommends feeding 1-1.5% supplemental fat in early lactation diets for improved reproduction and milk yield without negative impacts on body condition. In closing, Dr. Santos presents a summary of diet formulation recommendations for transition cows.  (34:13)

Dr. Santos leads an engaged question-and-answer session with the webinar audience. (51:11)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Drackley begins by telling the audience about his background and how he became a dairy scientist. He talks about several of his mentors during his schooling. (9:20)

Speaking of mentors, Scott asks Dr. Elliot, Dr. Overton, and Dr. Cardoso to describe Dr. Drackley’s mentorship of them during teaching, graduate school and beyond. They praise Jim’s thoughtfulness and hands-off approach that taught them to think critically. (14:06)

When it comes to major contributions to the industry, Dr. Drackley names two that he is most proud of: expanding the knowledge of controlled energy dry cow programs using straw and corn silage to help control energy intake and his work in baby calf nutrition, specifically feeding more milk on-farm to calves. Dr. Overton adds that a visionary paper Dr. Drackley wrote in the late 1990s where he referred to the transition period as the final frontier as another important contribution. Dr. Cardoso also emphasizes Dr. Drackley’s excellent teaching skills as another achievement of note. (20:58)

Dr. Drackley says the teaching part of the job was the part that scared him the most when he started. Graduate school offers little formal teaching training and experience so one learns on the job. Jim describes his teaching style as organized, and he liked teaching in an outline fashion, working from the main topic down through the details. He worked hard to get to know the students, learn their names as soon as possible, and be approachable and empathetic. Later in his career, he used a flipped classroom approach for a lactation biology course and enjoyed it. (28:45)

The panel then reminisces about how much technology has changed from a teaching perspective as well as statistical analysis. Lecturing has moved from chalkboard to overhead projector to slide carousel to PowerPoint. Statistical analysis has moved from punch cards or sending data to a mainframe computer to performing real-time statistical analysis on your computer at your desk. (33:00)

Jeff, Phil, and Tom share stories and memories of their time with Jim. (37:30)

Scott asks Jim what challenges will need to be tackled in the future in the dairy industry. He lists environmental aspects (nitrogen, phosphorus, and greenhouse gases), increasing economic pressure on farms, and improving forage production and efficiency of nutrient use. Dr. Drackley’s advice for young researchers is to carve out a niche for yourself. (47:40)

Dr. Elliott, Dr. Overton, and Dr. Cardoso share some final thoughts paying tribute to Dr. Drackley and his accomplished career. (1:06:18)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

How can we increase milk protein and capture that income opportunity? Dr. Van Amburgh describes the seasonal drop in milk protein observed in the summer months. Heat stress may play a role in altering insulin sensitivity and how the cow partitions nutrients. What can we do to avoid that seasonal decline in milk protein?  (0:01)

Simple things like cooling, fans, and sprinklers can reduce heat stress and increase cow comfort. Dr. Van Amburgh recommends promoting dry matter intake and lying time, with feed available 21-22 hours per day and more than 12 hours of lying time per day. (5:27)

Dr. Van Amburgh discusses basic formulation considerations for amino acid balancing including current feed chemical analyses that include NDF digestibility, characterizing the cows appropriately by using accurate body weights, understanding DMI and making sure actual milk lines up with ME and MP allowable milk, assessing body condition changes, and understanding the first limiting nutrient of milk production. Areas where mistakes are often made include using much lighter body weights than actual to formulate rations, not using actual DMI, and using feed library values instead of actual feed chemistry. (8:00)

Milk protein percentage and dietary energy are closely aligned. This is often attributed to ruminal fermentation and microbial yield. Sugars, starches, and digestible fiber sources drive microbial yield. While protein and energy metabolism are considered to be separate, that is an artificial divide and they should be considered together. Once adequate energy for protein synthesis is available, providing more dietary protein or amino acids can increase protein synthesis further. Dr. Van Amburgh provides some ranges of target fermentable non-structural carbohydrates, starch, sugar and soluble fiber appropriate for early peak and mid-lactation cows. He speaks about the benefits of adding sugars to the diet instead of trying to continue to increase starch. (11:15)

Dr. Van Amburgh details an experiment using more byproduct feeds in a lactation diet to successfully increase intake and subsequently, milk protein content. (24:04)

Milk protein increases with higher DCAD in diets, independent of protein level. Increasing DCAD can also lead to increased DMI, probably through better fiber digestion. The mechanism is not completely understood, but perhaps some rumen microbes have a higher requirement for potassium. In another study, feeding higher DCAD resulted in an 11% increase in milk protein yield and a 26% increase in milk fat yield. (32:39)

Feeding fatty acids may also improve milk protein via insulin signaling pathways. A 5.6% increase in milk protein was observed when the ratio of palmitic acid to oleic acid was around 1.5:1. (36:21)

Dr. Van Amburgh encourages the audience to pay close attention to digestibility of dietary ingredients and shares an analysis of ten different sources of feather meal that varied in digestibility from around 50% up to 75%. (40:10)

Dr. Van Amburgh details an experiment targeting optimum methionine and lysine levels for improved milk protein. In an example with 60 Mcals of ME in the diet, the targets were 71 grams of methionine and 193 grams of lysine. (42:00)

Questions from the webinar audience were addressed. They included information about the best type of sugars to add to diets, if protozoa are preferentially retained in the rumen, BMR vs conventional corn silage, amino acid supply when dietary crude protein is around 14-15%, using metabolizable energy instead of net energy, variability of animal protein blends, and methionine to lysine ratios. (48:23)

To end this podcast, Dr. Jose Santos steps in to invite everyone to the Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium in Gainesville held February 24-26.

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The low-fat diet contained 1.93% fatty acids and the high-fat diet contained 3.15% fatty acids. Fatty acid supplements were fed at 1.5% of dry matter and replaced soyhulls. The palmitic acid supplement contained 80% palmitic acid and 10% oleic acid. The palmitic + oleic acid supplement contained 60% palmitic acid and 30% oleic acid. Thirty-six cows were used in a split-plot Latin square design, with half the cows on each basal diet. Under each split-plot, cows were allocated to a 3x3 Latin square, evaluating a control treatment (no fat supplement), palmitic acid supplement, and palmitic + oleic acid supplement. (8:46)

Bill, Adam, and Clay discuss the increase in milk components the industry has experienced recently due to the powerful combination of genetics and nutrition. Hoard’s Dairyman reported that 2024 was the first year that the U.S. had averaged over 4% milk fat going back to 1924 when records began. (13:01)

Both fat supplements increased milk yield in low-fat and high-fat basal diets, but the magnitude of the increase was larger in the low-fat diet. The high palmitic acid diet increased milk yield more in cows fed the low-fat basal diet than the palmitic + oleic supplement did. High-fat basal diet cows had similar milk yield responses to both fatty acid supplements. The panel discusses the industry emphasis on milk components and if/when a threshold in performance might happen given the advancement of genomics and nutrition. (15:51)

Clay asks Adam to remind the listeners about the relationship between fatty acids and crude fat or ether extract. Adam recommends moving away from ether extract and focusing solely on fatty acid content. Bill, Adam, and Clay talk about the variability in the fatty acid content of various feedstuffs. (25:33)

Bill asks if the feed efficiency improvement with the fat supplementation was due to more of a gross energy or digestible/metabolizable energy effect. Adam suggests it may be a little of both. The diet is more energy-dense, but we also know now that some of those specific fatty acids have specific effects. Improvements in NDF digestibility are consistently observed with palmitic acid supplementation. Oleic acid improves fatty acid absorption and has an impact on adipose tissue metabolism and insulin sensitivity. Bill and Adam go on to talk more philosophically about the best way to measure feed efficiency in dairy cows. (29:02)

If Adam could do this experiment over again, he would have pushed the basal fat levels a bit more and had both lower-producing and higher-producing cows in the experiment. This leads to a discussion of how the results might have differed if distiller grains or soybeans were used instead of cottonseed in the experiment. Listeners should be careful not to extrapolate the results from this experiment to other fat sources. (33:55)

Adam emphasizes that we shouldn’t be afraid of feeding high-fat diets, either basal or supplemental fatty acids, especially to high-producing cows. We should be very mindful about where those fatty acids are coming from. We could provide the same nutrients by feeding either cottonseed or distillers grains, but how those ingredients feed out could be very different. (38:38)

In summary, Clay agrees we should take a fresh look at how much fat we’re feeding cows in basal diets and underlines the importance of the source of supplemental fatty acids. Bill concurs and commends Adam’s group for basically making cottonseed without fat in the low-fat basal diet, which allowed for very clean interpretations of the fatty acid supplement results. Adam underlines that we can feed higher fat diets, but the fatty acid profile of all of those ingredients we might use is going to be key. In addition to fatty acids in diets and supplements, de novo synthesis of milk fat from acetate is the other half of the equation. Bringing those together might be a strategy to keep up with genetic improvements and drive higher milk fat yield. (47:43)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper from JDS Communications here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910223001114

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Feeding rumen-protected choline in early lactation has consistently increased milk yield and energy-corrected milk yield, which is more pronounced when cows are fed diets low in metabolizable methionine. Choline feeding also increases milk fat and protein yield, minimizes body condition loss in early lactation, and reduces postpartum disease incidence. Dr. McFadden presents three topics about choline biology in the dairy cow. (01:45)

1. Why should we consider fatty acid feeding when feeding methyl donors like choline and methionine?
2. Choline degradation in the rumen and small intestine, focusing on the role of triethylamine oxide 
3. Why should we consider lysophosphatidylcholine as an immunomodulator in fresh cows and preweaning calves?

Fatty acid nutrition to optimize methyl donor efficiency. (4:02)

Fatty liver is a concern for fresh cows because of its relationship with ketosis, poor fertility and compromised milk production. Cows with fatty liver exhibit low circulating concentrations of phosphatidylcholine, which is a component of very low-density lipoproteins (VLDL) that transport triglycerides out of the liver. Feeding rumen-protected choline lowers liver triglyceride deposition by supporting the synthesis of phosphatidylcholine and thus, VLDL. 

Dr. McFadden goes on to explain the two different pathways for phosphatidylcholine in the liver and how those interact with fatty acid metabolism. He describes several experiments that have investigated how rumen-protected choline and supplemental fatty acids interact in lactating cows. 

Low phosphatidylcholine supply is a key feature of fatty liver in dairy cows, likely due to low polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) and low choline supplies. Delivery of post-ruminal PUFA may support phosphatidylcholine synthesis with accompanying improvements in insulin sensitivity, body condition maintenance, and inflammation, but interactions with dietary fatty acid digestibility should be considered. Dr. McFadden gives a list of considerations for fresh cow diets incorporating fat and choline supplementation. 

Gastrointestinal choline degradation and trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO)  (16:58)

Unprotected choline is almost totally degraded in the rumen. Microbes convert choline into trimethylamine (TMA) which is then converted to TMAO in the liver. Rumen-protected choline allows for a large proportion of choline to reach the small intestine intact. However, research shows that choline can also be degraded by microbes in the small intestine in the same pathway, limiting choline bioavailability. Plasma TMAO accumulation is associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, inflammation, insulin resistance, obesity, oxidative stress, and cardiovascular disease in rodent and human models. Little research was available regarding if the relationship between TMAO and poor health was causative or just associative. Dr. McFadden’s lab infused cows intravenously with TMAO and found that TMAO did not modify milk production or glucose tolerance in early lactation cows. 

TMAO does not appear to influence energy metabolism or health in early lactation cows. Choline is subject to both ruminal and lower-gut degradation to TMA, and that influence on choline bioavailability needs to be defined. Data in non-ruminants suggests that unsaturated fatty acid feeding can shift the gut microbes to slow TMA formation. 

Lysophosphatidylcholine and immunomodulation (28:45)

Dr. McFadden gives an overview of neutrophil activation and the oxidative burst that contributes to pathogen killing. The ability to elicit the oxidative burst is diminished in pre-weaned calves and transition cows. When cows were given endotoxin to cause an immune response, circulating lysophosphatidylcholine was decreased. In rodent models, lysophosphatidylcholine promotes the oxidative burst and suppresses long-term inflammation in response to bacterial infection. Dr. McFadden cultured neutrophils from pre-weaned calves with lysophosphatidylcholine and observed an enhanced oxidative burst.

Immunosuppression is characterized by low circulating lysophosphatidylcholine concentrations in dairy cows. In  vitro data suggests lysophosphatidylcholine can activate neutrophils, and rumen-protected choline increases circulating lysophosphatidylcholine. Future research is likely to define an immunomodulatory role for choline. 

Dr. McFadden takes questions from the webinar audience. (38:07)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Hernandez begins with an overview of how she came to study calcium metabolism in the mammary gland. Over the past number of years, she has worked on research to manipulate what’s happening in the mammary gland in the prepartum period to ensure adequate endocrine, nutritional, reproductive, and immunological status. (5:55)

The panelists discuss how “normal” has changed when it comes to transition cow health. Dr. Overton reminds listeners that 25 years ago, 6-8% of fresh cows in a herd having clinical milk fever was pretty typical. Now, we accept none of that. Subclinical hypocalcemia was not on the radar then, and we thought we had calcium all figured out. Dr. Hernandez’s work shows that this was not the case. She is pleased that a synergism of producers, veterinarians, and academics have been working together to understand the mechanisms of calcium metabolism to find solutions for individual farms based on their situation. (9:22)

Dr. Hernandez then discusses various interventions used in the industry, including low-potassium diets, negative DCAD diets, and zeolite clays. The clays are new to the US, and it seems that they work primarily through a phosphorus reduction mechanism and are best limited to feeding 10-14 days pre-calving. (18:14)

Dr. Overton asks Dr. Hernandez about a point in her webinar that cows are in negative calcium balance through 150-200 days in milk. She confirms that there are approximately 8.5 kilograms of calcium in the bones of a cow, but we don’t know how much of that she loses each lactation. Her dream scenario would be a CT scanner large enough to fit a dairy cow in to evaluate how her bones change throughout lactation. This leads to a discussion of whether or not we should be including higher rates of calcium in dairy cow diets. Dr. Hernandez would like to learn more about what’s happening with calcium absorption in the gut in real-time with endocrine status and stage of lactation, which is a challenging task. (23:17)

Co-host, Dr. Jeff Elliott, asks if the reason multiparous cows are more prone to milk fever is because they’re not as efficient at calcium resorption to the bone. Dr. Hernandez doesn’t have a definitive answer, but it could be due to less effective gut absorption with age, or it may be related to the influence of estrogen on bone density. She also mentions it could be endocrine-controlled or even stem cell-related.  (28:59)

Dr. Hernandez’s hypothesis has always been that you have to have a calcium decrease to trigger the negative feedback loop involved in calcium metabolism. Her advice is to wait until 48 hours to take a blood sample to analyze calcium. This aligns well with epidemiological research on the veterinarian side regarding delayed, persistent, transient, and normal hypocalcemic animals. (33:04)

Dr. Overton asks about a calcium-chelation study that Dr. Hernandez’s group conducted and whether or not chelating calcium had an impact on colostrum production. It did not in that experiment. Dr. Hernandez was surprised at how much chelating agent was needed to overcome the draw of the mammary gland, but that further underlines how much of a priority lactation is in metabolism. (41:45)

Scott asks both panelists their views on what the priority should be for research in this area. Dr. Hernandez’s ideas include more research on how zeolite clays work biologically, finding out what’s happening in the gut, mammary gland, and bone of a dairy cow at different stages of lactation. She emphasizes that research should be conducted at different stages rather than just extrapolating from one stage to another because lactation is incredibly dynamic. Dr. Overton seconded the idea of a better understanding of zeolite clays and their feeding recommendations, as well as research defining what happens to and where all the calcium is pulled from the bone during lactation. (45:32) 

In closing, Jeff, Tom, and Laura share their take-home thoughts. Jeff is excited to learn more about how zeolite clays work and if other products may come to the forefront to help in calcium metabolism management. Tom commends Laura on her work and how it has dovetailed so well with the epidemiological research from the veterinary side. Laura reminds listeners that the mammary gland is running the show and is thrilled that her work as a basic scientist is having an applied impact on the dairy industry. (51:17)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Most ration formulation software uses the 2001 NRC mineral equations. The basic concept of the 2001 NRC mineral requirements is to feed enough absorbable minerals to maintain adequate labile body stores and fluid concentrations. Minerals are lost each day via excretion in feces and urine, milk production, and incorporation into tissues or the fetus in the case of growing or pregnant animals. We have decent data to predict mineral concentrations of milk, growth, and the fetus; however, the endogenous loss in feces is much harder to capture. Absorption coefficients (AC) for most minerals are exceedingly difficult to measure. (0:29)

The NRC requirements are the means of several experiments. Feeding to the mean results in half the cows being fed adequately or in excess, and half are not fed enough. In human nutrition, recommended daily allowances for vitamins and minerals are calculated as the mean plus two standard deviations, which statistically meets the requirement for 97% of the population. Since the standard deviation of the requirement is hard to acquire, human nutrition uses the same standard deviation for energy metabolism, around 20%. Dr. Weiss feels this is a reasonable safety factor for minerals for animals as well. He recommends feeding about 1.2 times the NRC requirement while keeping an eye on the maximum tolerable limit for the mineral in question. (4:59)

How do we measure absorption? We measure the minerals in the diet, we apply AC, and we get grams or milligrams of absorbed minerals available for the animal to use. Dr. Weiss details some of the complex methodology involved in trying to obtain AC. Feces contain not only unabsorbed dietary minerals but also endogenous/metabolic minerals (e.g., intestinal cells, enzymes, etc.) and homeostatic excretion of minerals (e.g., dumping excess minerals). In the 2001 NRC, the endogenous fecal for almost every mineral is a function of body weight, which is incorrect. It should be a function of dry matter intake. (8:40)

Endogenous fecal losses can also be measured using stable or radioactive isotopes. This method is extremely expensive and if radioactive isotopes are used, management of radioactive waste becomes an issue. Thus, most of the AC for trace minerals that used these methods are 50-60 years old. (15:33)

Dr. Weiss details some of the issues with calcium requirements in the 2001 NRC leading to overestimation of calcium absorption for many calcium sources and overestimation of the maintenance requirement due to endogenous fecal being calculated using body weight. Organic and inorganic phosphorus have different AC, so partitioning between organic and inorganic will give a more accurate estimate of the requirement. (16:33)

Potassium has a linear antagonistic effect on magnesium. You can feed more magnesium to overcome this antagonism, but you won’t ever eliminate it. If you feed a few percent added fat as long-chain fatty acids, Dr. Weiss recommends feeding 10-20% more magnesium to account for soap formation in the rumen. (19:17)

It’s much more difficult to measure AC for trace minerals due to multiple antagonists, interactions among different minerals, and regulated absorption. In addition, AC for trace minerals is very low, which means a small change in the AC can have a huge impact on diet formulation. All feeds in the NRC system have the same AC for each trace mineral and we know that’s not right.  (25:39)

Dr. Weiss gives an overview of different trace mineral antagonisms and interactions and details his approach to formulation if he has absorption data for a particular ingredient. He also gives his estimates of revised AC for several minerals. (28:07)

In summary, the factorial NRC approach only fits 50% of the population. Feeding an extra 10-20% above the NRC requirement includes about 97% of the population. We need to continue to account for more sources of variation in AC. Interactions need to be top of mind when considering mineral requirements and diet formulation. (37:39)

Dr. Weiss takes a series of questions from the webinar audience. (40:50)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Feeding behavior of dairy cows is inherently tied to their dry matter intake (DMI) which is tied to milk production. If we want to change a cow’s DMI, it must be mediated by changing her feeding behavior. (00:23)

In a multi-variable analysis, Dr. DeVries found that DMI was most associated with feeding time and meal frequency. It’s important to allow the cow to maximize the amount of time she can spend at the bunk eating, as well as the number of times she can get to the bunk each day. In one study, about 30% of the variability in milk fat content in cows on the same diet was explained by their meal frequency, where cows who had more meals per day had higher milk fat. Dr. DeVries also talks about the impacts of feeding behavior on cow efficiency and rumen dynamics. (2:13)

As soon as a cow sorts the TMR put in front of her, she consumes a diet that’s variable in composition to what we expect. Cows who sorted against long feed particles had lower milk fat and milk protein concentrations. In another study, Dr. DeVries retrospectively analyzed cows with a low vs high risk of ruminal acidosis. Cows in both groups had similar DMI but a tendency for high-risk cows to have lower milk yield and numerically lower milk fat. Combining these resulted in significantly lower fat-corrected milk for the high-risk cows. Given that the diets and DMI were similar, the difference was attributed to sorting, which can have quite negative impacts on individual and herd-level production. (10:00)

Cows spend nearly twice as much time ruminating as they do eating. Rumination reduces feed particle size and increases surface area, leading to increased rates of digestion and feed passage. In a recent study, Dr. DeVries’ group calculated the probability that cows were ruminating while lying down using automated monitoring data from previous experiments. Cows with a higher probability of ruminating while lying down had higher DMI, milk fat, and milk protein than cows who ruminated while standing. This highlights that cows need not only time to ruminate but also space for sufficient rest. (16:44)

Diets and diet composition should be formulated to encourage frequent meals, discourage sorting, and stimulate rumination. Forage management factors including forage quality, forage quantity, forage type (dry vs ensiled), and particle size all play important roles. In a study with fresh cows, Dr. DeVries’ lab fed two different particle sizes of straw: 5-8 cm vs 2-3 cm in length. While DMI was the same over the first 28 days of lactation, cows fed the long straw spent more time with rumen pH below 5.8 because they were sorting against the straw. This also resulted in a yield difference, as the short straw-fed cows produced about 165 pounds more milk over the first 28 days compared to the long straw group. Dr. DeVries also comments on the use of feed additives on rumen stability and feeding behavior (22:54)

More frequent feed delivery should generate more consistent consumption and better feeding behavior, and improve rumen health and milk component concentration. Shifting feed delivery away from return from milking, while still ensuring cows have abundant feed available, results in more consistent eating patterns. Dr. DeVries emphasizes that we push up feed to make sure it’s present at the bunk, not to stimulate cows to eat. We want to make sure that eating behavior is driven by the cow: when she's hungry and goes to the bunk, we need to make sure feed is there. (30:02)

Dr. DeVries indicates we want to minimize the time cows are without feed completely. An empty bunk overnight plus a little overcrowding resulted in negative impacts on rumen health, including more acidosis and reduced fiber digestibility. Increased competition in overcrowding scenarios results in cows having larger meals, eating faster, and likely having a larger negative ruminal impact. In another study, every four inches of increased bunk space was associated with about 0.06% greater milk fat. Herds with high de novo fat synthesis were 10 times more likely to have at least 18 inches of bunk space per cow.  (40:04)

In closing, Dr. DeVries’ biggest takeaway is that how cows eat is just as important as the nutritional composition of the feed in ensuring cow health, efficiency, and production. Collectively, with good quality feed and good feeding management, we can gain optimal performance from those diets. Dr. DeVries ends by taking questions from the webinar audience. (43:40)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Bill and Normand discuss sources of variation, which they divide into true variation and observer variation. True variation means the feed has changed: a different field, change during storage, etc. Observer variation includes sampling variation and analytical variation. Some feeds may exhibit a lot of true variation and others may exhibit a lot of observer variation. And some feeds are high in both types of variation. Highly variable feeds should be sampled more frequently. Some feeds are so consistent that using book values makes more sense than sending in samples for analysis. Bill and Normand go on to give some examples and share sampling and analysis tips for different types of feedstuffs. (12:41)

Bill would often be asked if users should continue to average new samples with older ones or just use the new numbers from the most recent sample. He and Normand debate the pros and cons of the two approaches as well as discuss the use of a weighted average where recent samples would be weighted to contribute more. (26:02)

Next, our guests discuss how multiple sources of a nutrient reduce the TMR variation for that specific nutrient. For example, alfalfa NDF is more variable than corn silage NDF on average. Yet if you use a blend of these two ingredients, you end up with less variation in NDF than if you used all corn silage. Normand details the mathematical concepts behind this relationship. Both Bill and Normand emphasize that diets must be made correctly for the best results. (32:26)

How do feedstuffs and diet variations impact cows? Both guests describe different experiments with variable protein and NDF concentrations in diets. Some were structured, like alternating 11% CP one day and 19% CP the next for three weeks. Some were random, like randomly alternating the NDF over a range of 20-29% with much higher variation than we’d ever see on-farm. The common thread for all these experiments is that the diet variations had almost no impact on the milk production of the cows. (38:04)

Clay asks how variation in dry matter might affect cows. Bill describes an experiment where the dry matter of silage was decreased by 10 units by adding water. Cows were fed the wet silage for three days, twice during a three-week study. To ensure feed was never limited, more as-fed feed was added when the wet silage was fed. It took a day for cows on the wet silage treatment to have the same dry matter intake (DMI) as the control cows and milk production dropped when DMI was lower. However, when switching abruptly back to the dry silage diet, DMI increased the day following the wet silage and stayed high for two days, so the cows made up for the lost milk production. Bill and Normand underline that it is critical for the cows not to run out of feed and described experiments where feed was more limiting, yielding less desirable outcomes. (46:17)

In the last part of the paper, our guests outlined seven research questions that they feel need to be answered. Normand shares that his number one question is how long will cows take to respond to a change in the major nutrients? He feels that we spend an inordinate amount of money on feedstuffs analysis, and there are some feeds we should analyze more and some feeds we should quit analyzing. Bill’s primary research question revolves around controlled variation. What happens if you change the ratio of corn silage and alfalfa once a week? Will that stimulate intake? Data from humans, pets, and zoo animals indicate that diet variation has a positive impact and Bill finds this area of research intriguing. (50:43)

In closing, Clay encourages listeners to read this paper (link below) and emphasizes the take-home messages regarding sampling and research questions. Normand advises that if you are sampling feed, take a minimum of two samples, and try as much as you can to separate observer variation from true variation. He also reminds listeners to concentrate on a few critical nutrients with more repeatability for analyses. Bill encourages nutritionists to sit down and think when they get new data - before they go to their computer to make a diet change. If something changed, why did it change, and is it real? Take time to think it through. (1:01:38)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper from Applied Animal Science here: https://www.appliedanimalscience.org/article/S2590-2865(24)00093-4/fulltext

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Early in lactation, the cow is incapable of eating enough to meet her dramatically increased requirements. As the cow’s intake decreases near calving, there are fewer nutrient contributions from dry matter intake and she must alter nutrient partitioning to meet her increased needs by mobilizing fat and muscle stores. (1:18)

Triglycerides from fat stores are broken down into non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and glycerol. NEFA has two different fates in the postpartum cow: to the mammary gland as a precursor for milk fat synthesis, or to the liver to be oxidized for energy production. Glycerol enters the gluconeogenic pathway in the liver as a glucose precursor. (4:41)

The capacity for the liver to use NEFA for energy is limited by the capacity of the TCA cycle. When the TCA cycle is at capacity, excess NEFA can either undergo incomplete oxidation to ketones or be repackaged back into triglycerides. If the capacity for other tissues to use ketones for energy is exceeded, then blood concentrations of ketones rise and negative outcomes from subclinical and clinical ketosis can occur. If triglycerides accumulate in the liver, negative outcomes associated with fatty liver can occur. Triglycerides can be transported out of the liver via very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) export; however, VLDL export does not keep up with triglyceride concentration during the transition period in dairy cows, largely because of a limiting amount of phosphatidylcholine. (5:51)

Dr. White describes a series of experiments in her lab using liver cells in culture to investigate the relationship between choline supplementation and VLDL export. As choline supplementation to the cell culture increased, so did VLDL export from the cells into the media. In addition, increasing choline supplementation to the cell culture also decreased cellular triglyceride content. (10:54)

Using gene expression and radiolabeled tracers over a series of experiments, Dr. White’s group found that as choline supplementation increased, so did complete oxidation of NEFA to energy. This was accompanied by decreased incomplete oxidation to ketone bodies and decreased accumulation of lipids in the liver cells. Glucose and glycogen were also increased with increasing choline supplementation to the cell culture, and a decrease in reactive oxygen species was observed. In addition, choline-supplemented cultures exhibited an increase in metabolic pathways associated with methionine regeneration and methyl donation. (15:29)

Dr. White then details the complexity of the metabolic pathways that intersect between choline and methionine. In similar experiments supplementing cell cultures with increasing amounts of methionine and choline, there were no effects of methionine on lipid export, oxidative pathways, or glucose metabolism. The main benefit of methionine was a marked increase in glutathione production. It’s important to note that no interactions between choline and methionine were observed in this series of experiments. (19:37)

There seems to be a clear biological priority for different sets of pathways for choline and methionine. Choline seems to be influencing lipid, glucose, and oxidative pathways, while methionine is primarily serving its role as an essential amino acid for cellular protein structure and generation, acting as a methyl donor, and impacting inflammation. Importantly, both the choline and methionine results observed in cell culture are paralleled in transition dairy cow studies. (24:14)

Dr. White’s lab further investigated the impact of methionine on inflammation. When cells were challenged with LPS to provoke an inflammatory response, methionine mitigated the inflammatory response. Similar results have been observed in liver tissue samples of transition cows. Methionine mitigated inflammatory markers and increased glutathione but did not influence reactive oxygen species. Conversely, choline decreased reactive oxygen species but did not change glutathione. (27:47)

Choline and methionine are both essential nutrients, there are biological priorities for them as methyl donors, and they are not mutually exchangeable. The lack of interaction between choline and methionine in vivo or in vitro supports the idea of different biological roles for these nutrients. (32:09)

Dr. White takes questions from the webinar audience. (34:53)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Smart Cows, Smart Farms: Unleashing the Potential of Artificial Intelligence in the Dairy Sector 

Guest: Dr. Jeffrey Bewley, Holstein Association USA (1:58)

Dr. Bewley is the Dairy Analytics and Innovation Scientist at Holstein Association USA, where part of his role is collaborating with Western Kentucky University at the WKU Smart Holstein Lab. The group works with more than 30 technologies, including wearable, camera and machine vision, milk analysis, and automation technologies. At ADSA, Dr. Bewley’s presentation was part of a symposium titled “Applications of AI to Dairy Systems.” His talk focused on cow- and farm-level technologies using artificial intelligence. He anticipates a continued massive increase in the availability of technologies for dairy farms to assist with automating processes that are often monotonous tasks. One example of this is the wearable accelerometer technologies that allow for the assessment of estrous behavior, as well as rumination and eating behavior. In the future, camera-based technologies may become more commonplace for things like body condition scoring. Cameras may also be able to monitor rumination and eating behavior, and even perhaps dry matter intake. Dr. Bewley also sees an opportunity on the milk analysis side to be able to measure even more biomarkers to better manage for improved health, reproduction, and well-being. He reminds listeners that animal husbandry will continue to be a critical piece of dairy farming even with advancing technology. He gives examples of current and cutting-edge technologies on the horizon for dairy farms. On his wish list of technologies for the future, he includes dry matter intake measurement and inline measurement of somatic cell count, hormones, and metabolites in the milk. In closing, Dr. Bewley encourages listeners to be excited yet cautious about artificial intelligence and gives examples of how technology can collect phenotypic data to use in genetic evaluation. 

Explaining the Five Domains and Using Behavioral Measures in Commercial Systems 

Guest: Dr. Temple Grandin, Colorado State University (26:48)

Dr. Grandin’s presentation was also part of a symposium, titled “The Animal Behavior and Wealthbeing Symposia: Evaluating Animal Comfort and Wellbeing Using the Five Domains.” The five domains approach is gaining popularity. Previous guidance documents emphasized preventing suffering, cruelty, and discomfort. The five domains are nutrition, environment, health, behavior interactions, and the emotional state of the animal. Much of the information available is very theoretical. Dr. Grandin’s goal for this presentation was to gather easy-to-download scoring tools to assist in auditing the five domains in the field. She emphasizes the importance of good stockmanship for animal well-being and cautions that while artificial intelligence technologies can be used to assess the five domains, good stockmanship will always be necessary. Dr. Grandin recommends a three-legged audit: internal, independent third-party, and corporate representatives. She cautions against farming all audits out to a third party and anticipates that it has the potential to cause major supply chain disruptions. Lastly, Dr. Grandin recommends simple yet effective outcome measures for audits that can be taught in a short training session that includes practice audits.

View her five domains paper here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36290216/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

If listeners are interested in more detail on this topic, Dr. Baumgard suggests reading this 2021 review in the Journal of Dairy Science: “ Invited review: The influence of immune activation on transition cow health and performance—A critical evaluation of traditional dogmas.” 

Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030221006329

Dr. Baumgard highlights key concepts that underpin his thinking regarding transition cows: The best indicators of health are feed intake and milk yield, it’s too easy to overthink the immune system, Mother Nature is rarely wrong, and inconsistent or non-reproducible data should create doubt. He goes on to review the incidence of metabolic disorders in early lactation and the energy balance dynamics of the transition period. (4:29)

For decades, we’ve had the assumption that NEFAs and ketones are causing many of the health issues in transition cows. NEFAs, BHBs, and calcium have been correlated and associated with negative outcomes. However many other studies do not find these negative correlations or associations. Plasma NEFA is markedly increased following calving in almost all cows, yet only 15-20% get clinical ketosis. Dr. Baumgard suggests that it’s presumptuous and reductionist of us to assume we can use one metabolite to diagnose the disease. Little mechanistic evidence exists to explain how these symptoms cause metabolic disease issues.  (10:29)

If hyperketonemia, high NEFA, and subclinical hypocalcemia are causing disease, then therapeutically treating these disorders would improve overall cow health. NAHMS data does not back that up. Dr. Baumgard dissects the dogma of ketosis. In short, mobilization of adipose tissues and partial conversion of NEFA to ketones is essential for maximum milk yield. (18:35)

High-producing cows are more hypoinsulinemic compared to low-producing cows, and transition period insulin concentrations are inversely related to whole lactation performance. Low insulin concentrations coupled with insulin resistance allow for fat mobilization. (29:02)

Post-calving inflammation occurs in all cows. Sources include the mammary gland, the uterus,  and the gut. Severe inflammation precedes the clinical presentation of the disease. In one experiment, all cows exhibited some inflammation in very early lactation. However, cows that were culled or died before 100 days in milk were already severely inflamed during the first few days of lactation. Dr. Baumgard thinks inflammation is the simplest and most logical explanation for why some cows don't eat well before and after calving.  (31:13)

While clinical hypocalcemia (milk fever) is pathological and requires immediate intervention, is subclinical hypocalcemia detrimental to health, productivity, and profitability? (36:33)

Dr. Baumgard’s paradigm-shifting concept suggests that increased NEFA and hyperketonemia are caused by immune activation-induced hypophagia, and hypocalcemia is a consequence of immune activation. He goes on to use a high-producing, a low-producing, and a sick cow to illustrate this concept. (43:26)

In summary, the metabolic adjustments in minerals and energy during the transition period are not dysfunctional and don’t need to be “fixed.” The real fix is to prevent immune activation in the first place to prevent the cow from going off feed. Profitable production is a consequence of wellness. (52:19)

Dr. Baumgard takes a series of engaging questions from the webinar audience. Watch the full webinar at balchem.com/realscience. (56:04)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Whole Cottonseed and Fatty Acid Supplementation Affect Production Responses During the Immediate Postpartum in Multiparous Dairy Cows

Guests: Jair Parales-Giron and Dr. Adam Lock, Michigan State University (0:58)

The experiment had four treatment groups: no fat supplement, 10% of the diet from whole cottonseed, a 60:30 mix of calcium salts of palmitic and oleic acid at 1.5% of the diet dry matter, and a combination of both whole cottonseed and fatty acid supplement. Energy-corrected milk was increased by almost six kilograms in cows fed the whole cottonseed diet, with a similar increase of more than five kilograms in the fatty acid-supplemented cows during the first 24 days of lactation. However, no further improvement was observed when both whole cottonseed and fatty acids were fed together. The increase in milk production was not accompanied by increased weight loss or loss of body condition. 

Effect of Close-Up Metabolizable Protein Supply on Colostrum Yield, Composition, and Immunoglobulin G Concentration

Guests: Dr. Trent Westhoff and Dr. Sabine Mann, Cornell University (17:06)

In this study, cows were assigned to one of two diets 28 days before expected calving: one that provided 39 grams of metabolizable protein (MP) per pound of dry matter and one that supplied 51 grams of MP per pound of dry matter. This represents about 100% of the MP requirement and 140% of the MP requirement, respectively. Diets were formulated to supply equal amounts of methionine and lysine. Cows entering their second parity who were fed the elevated MP diet produced two liters more colostrum than second parity cows fed the control MP diet. This effect was not observed in cows entering their third or higher parity. Overall, higher MP supply did not impact colostrum quantity or quality. Dr. Westhoff also highlights an invited review he authored regarding nutritional and management factors that influence colostrum production and composition. The MP research has also been published; links to both are below.

MP paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030224010774

Invited review: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030224000341

Colostrum—More than Immunoglobulin G (IgG): Colostrum Components and Effects on the Calf

Guest: Dr. Sabine Mann, Cornell University (41:23)

Dr. Mann presented this abstract at an ADSA symposium titled “Colostrum: The Role It Plays In Calf Health, Development, and Future Productivity.”  Her focus was to give credit to the importance of IgG while reminding the symposium audience of the importance of other colostrum components like bioactive factors and nutrients. There is potential that measuring IgG could be a marker for all the other colostrum components that have been transferred as well. We have excellent and cost-effective ways to measure IgG calf-side, but very few bioactive factors can be measured as easily. Heat treatment of colostrum to control bacterial contamination has a detrimental effect on many of the non-IgG components of colostrum. More data is needed to learn how impactful this may be to the calf. Dr. Mann details parts of the heat treatment process that farmers can check to make sure heat treatment is having as little impact as possible. She also would like to have a way to measure the antimicrobial activity of colostrum and the concentrations of insulin and IGF-1 in colostrum on-farm. Lastly, she reminds the audience that we can focus a lot on making the best quality colostrum via transition cow management and best management practices for colostrum harvest, but we still need to get it into the calf. Colostrum must get into calves cleanly and safely, at an adequate amount, and at an optimal temperature.

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Shakespeare wrote, “The eyes are the windows of the soul.” Dr. Ollivett believes the lungs are the window to calf health management. The lungs are an indicator organ: respiratory disease is a symptom of management failure. Failure of passive transfer, diarrhea, septicemia, poor nutrition, a dirty environment, and heat or cold stress can all negatively impact the lungs. Often, this can manifest as subclinical pneumonia, where the lungs are abnormal but the calf externally appears completely normal. (3:51)

Dr. Ollivett reviews the defense mechanisms of the airway. When a veterinarian takes swabs to assess a respiratory disease problem, the bacteria and viruses that live in the nasopharyngeal area just ahead of the trachea are the most representative of those bacteria and viruses that are present in the lungs. The bacteria and viruses in the lower nasal passages are unreliable indicators of what is present in the lungs. (6:28)

Is coughing a good predictor of pneumonia? Research shows that if calves are coughing, it is highly likely they will test positive for a respiratory pathogen. One study showed that coughing was the best predictor of observing pneumonia on lung ultrasound, but only 37% of calves with pneumonia on ultrasound also had a cough. Dr. Ollivett observed similar results in commercial settings, where only about 10% of calves with pneumonia on ultrasound had an accompanying cough. This suggests that a cough is not a good early warning tool for pneumonia. (10:29)

Dr. Ollivett believes respiratory disease exhibits an iceberg effect, where considerably more subclinical respiratory disease exists than clinical respiratory disease. She provides examples of necropsied lungs from dairy calves to emphasize the point that calves can appear completely normal, but have the same or more damage to their lungs compared to calves exhibiting clinical signs of pneumonia. In her work, Dr. Ollivett has found that the sensitivity of lung ultrasounds to find lung lesions in animals with subclinical disease is 88%. (16:32)

What does it take to perform a lung ultrasound? Dr. Ollivett gives an overview of the process and describes what normal and affected lungs look like. Depending on the farm, 50-80% of cases can be subclinical for one to two weeks before we see signs of pneumonia. With lung ultrasounds, you can treat affected animals sooner while also getting a good assessment of where management can improve to better prevent pneumonia cases in the future. (27:37)

The prevalence of the disease is roughly equal to the incidence of the disease times the duration of the disease. Prevention of disease reduces the speed at which disease occurs, thus decreasing the incidence of disease and lowering its prevalence. On the other hand, identifying sick calves sooner should reduce the duration of the disease, also lowering its prevalence. In addition, effective treatment that reduces the duration of disease supports antimicrobial stewardship. Dr. Ollivett details criteria to evaluate treatment failure in your operation, as well as discusses antibiotic therapy in conjunction with lung ultrasounds. (34:29)

Dr. Ollivett emphasizes the impact that the gut has on the lungs on most dairy farms. She feels that as an industry, we are far too comfortable with abnormal manure in 7- to 14-day-old calves. After any abnormal manure, calves are more likely to have abnormal lungs in the next couple of weeks. Ensuring good passive transfer and maintaining a clean environment will reduce lung lesions. (50:50)

To keep calves breathing easy, Dr. Ollivett shares recommendations to reduce management failures before, at, and after birth. These can include clean and adequate space in maternity, clean calf bedding and equipment, the excellent establishment of passive transfer, adequate average daily gains in early life, and routine lung ultrasounds. (53:21)

Dr. Ollivett answers questions from the webinar audience about evaluating treatment protocols for effectiveness, technicalities and landmarks of performing lung ultrasounds, how soon after birth to begin lung ultrasounds, using lung score to determine when to treat with antibiotics, and if lung ultrasounds could be used to cull animals with lung damage before they enter the milking herd. Watch the full webinar at balchem.com/realscience. (55:44)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Nydam begins with a brief overview of the concepts from the webinar, all based on understanding and applying information from different types of studies on dairy cow health and performance. Dr. LeBlanc adds that their goal was for the webinar to be useful for people with a practical interest in feeding and managing dairy cows. (4:12)

Dr. Nydam discusses different kinds of bias in research. All studies have some bias in them to some extent, so acknowledging, understanding, and trying to control for that is critical. Dr. LeBlanc describes survivor bias. In the simplest sense, survivor bias can be thought of as who’s alive to be counted. Several examples of treatments causing animals to be removed from a study or a disease-causing animal to be culled are reviewed. (8:24)

Both guests give their perspectives on p-values. A p-value tells us the likelihood that a difference we observe is due to chance. There is active discussion among statisticians about the value of the p-value. Both guests suggest that readers should also assess if the study achieved its stated objective and if there are adequate numbers and statistical power to accomplish the objective. P-values help us understand risk. A p-value does not tell us how big a difference was or how important it was. (18:54)

Dr. Nydam reviews that there are two kinds of study validity: internal and external. Internal validity centers around whether the study was done well. Was bias controlled for and acknowledged? External validity centers around the applicability of the study to the population. Is a study about mastitis treatment in water buffalo in Pakistan applicable to a dairy farm on Prince Edward Island? Peer review usually takes care of assessing internal validity. External validity is more up to each reader to decide for themself and their situation. (29:01)

Scott asks about the validity of field trial data. Both guests acknowledge the inherent challenges of field studies and give some tips for success. Field studies can often have good external validity because they are done under real-world conditions and at scale. (34:23)

The group dives into the topic of industry-funded research. Some skepticism and cynicism about industry-funded research exists. Industry-funded studies are not inherently biased and often answer important and tangible questions for decision-makers. Government funding is rarely going to be awarded to that type of research, but the industry is interested in funding it. If an industry-funded study is well done by a reputable researcher, has gone through the peer review process, and has appropriate methods and statistics, Dr. Nydam sees no reason to discount it. (44:56)

Dr. LeBlanc reminds the audience when looking at different kinds of studies and different types of evidence, it’s not that one type of study is good and others are not. For a lot of health-related research in dairy cows, we don’t have good (or any) experimental models to reproduce things in a white-coat-science sort of way. At the end of the day, dairy managers and industry professionals want to know if a particular piece of science, whether experimental or observational, helps them make decisions on the farm. There’s a place for all types of research as long as it’s done well and in its own right.  (42:08)

Dr. Nydam’s key takeaway is that it’s important to remember to keep some faith in science and have open discourse about it as we move forward in dairy science and as a society. Dr. LeBlanc reminds the audience that even if listeners are not in the business of designing, conducting, and analyzing their experiments, they do not need to feel powerless as consumers of scientific information. It can and should be something they can engage with and use to answer questions in their day-to-day jobs. (52:26)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The primary goal of a replacement program is to raise the highest quality heifer that can maximize profits when she enters the lactating herd. She carries no limitations that would detract from her ability to produce milk under the farm’s management system. Ideally, one would wish to optimize profits by obtaining the highest quality heifer at the lowest possible cost, usually in the least amount of time. Dr. Van Amburgh presents a snapshot evaluation of benchmarks to assess the potential quality of replacements. (3:47)

When does the process of creating a quality heifer start? Probably before conception. In non-pasture herds, the first lactation cows giving birth to heifers produced about 1000 pounds more milk in the first two lactations. Heifers whose dams were supplemented with choline during the pre-fresh period had higher birth-to-yearling average daily gains and improved immunity. Choline also appears to enhance the quality of colostrum via increased absorption of IgG. This implies that maternal programming extends beyond the uterine environment via ingestion of milk-borne factors, known as the lactocrine hypothesis (14:29)

After the calf is born, the goal is anabolism or growth. The dam communicates with the calf via colostrum to direct calf development after birth. Not only does colostrum provide immunoglobulins, but it also contains a large amount of nutrients and non-nutrient factors that support gut maturation. In particular, IGF-1 and insulin may act on receptors in the gut to stimulate cell proliferation, cell differentiation, and protein synthesis. Dr. Van Amburgh summarizes several studies that showed increased colostrum feeding improved pre- and post-weaning growth and development. While the immunoglobulin content of colostrum is essential for passive immunity, the other components in colostrum are responsible for the increased growth performance. (27:39)

The hormones and growth factors in colostrum enhance protein synthesis, enzyme expression, and gastrointestinal tract development. This implies that the gut is now an even stronger barrier to infection, with more surface area for digestion and absorption, with an increased capacity to digest nutrients due to higher enzyme excretion. (36:33)

To investigate the impact of non-nutrient factors in colostrum, studies were designed where calves were fed either colostrum or milk replacer with the same nutrient content. Glucose uptake was increased for colostrum calves even though both groups received similar nutrient content. Plasma glucagon was higher in colostrum calves, indicating better glucose status and higher reserve capacity. Plasma protein levels were higher in colostrum calves, suggesting more amino acids available for growth and protein synthesis. Plasma urea nitrogen was lower for colostrum calves, indicating fewer amino acids were used for gluconeogenesis leading to more efficient growth. (46:55)

What happens to immune cells in colostrum? Leukocytes and other immune-related cells in colostrum are trafficked into the circulation of the calf. Maternal leukocytes can be detected in the calf by 12 hours, peak at 24 hours, and disappear by 48 hours. Long term, there appears to be greater cellular immunity in calves that received whole colostrum compared to cell-free colostrum. Uptake of cells from colostrum enhances cellular immunity in calves by providing, mature, programmed cells from the dam. (52:24)

The take-home message for colostrum management is to feed colostrum for four days. Give first-milking colostrum within six hours of birth and again at 12 hours. Give second-milking colostrum for day two feeding and third- and fourth-milking colostrum for days three and four. (56:04)

Dr. Van Amburgh answers a few questions from the webinar audience about dry cow management for colostrum quality and quantity, the impacts of pasteurization of colostrum on components, and the efficacy of colostrum replacers. Watch the full webinar at balchem.com/realscience. (58:25)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Mitloehner begins by sharing about the Clarity and Leadership for Environmental Awareness and Research (CLEAR) Center at UC Davis. He established this research and communications center to combat misinformation about sustainability in animal agriculture. One unique aspect of the center is a diverse communications department composed of journalists, filmmakers, and social media experts to help scientists communicate with the public. (6:04)

In his webinar, Dr. Mitloehner focused on animal agriculture’s impact on the climate, particularly via methane. Unlike other greenhouse gasses, methane is not only naturally produced, but it is naturally destroyed. It remains in the atmosphere for about a decade before it’s gone. Thus, if mitigation methods are used to reduce methane production, warming will also be reduced. (8:10)

Dr. Mitloehner urges continued research into improving efficiency in food production and encourages animal agriculture to take the public along with them. Stop portraying a romanticized, Old McDonald's version of animal agriculture and show what happens. There is nothing to be ashamed of, and we should be proud of the improved efficiencies and sustainability of livestock production. (13:00)

What methods or strategies exist for reducing methane? Improved ration development and feed additives to reduce enteric methane are two examples. Methane production is a heritable trait, and genomic tests are available to identify low and high methane producers. There are also ways to reduce methane loss from animal manure, including capping lagoons with anaerobic digesters to capture the gas and turn it into fuel. Dr. Mitloeher encourages voluntary, incentive-based adoption policies for these practices. (16:03)

Dr. Nichols describes her work in the Netherlands on reducing nitrogen losses. Improving protein efficiencies in livestock in the Netherlands is motivated first by environmental concerns and then by cost. Dr. Nichols expects increasing pressure in the United States regarding nitrogen load, particularly in intensively farmed portions of the country. At UC Davis, she plans to continue researching protein efficiency in dairy cows with a particular interest in optimal digestible amino acid profiles for efficient milk production.  (24:00)

Reducing crude protein in the diet decreases the amount of nitrogen excreted. As protein concentrations become more marginal, that’s when the composition of protein and amino acid in the diet becomes more critical. Dr. Nichols has found in infusion studies that the closer the digestible amino acid profile is to the essential amino acids in casein, the more efficiently dietary protein is incorporated into milk protein. (32:20)

Dr. Mitloehner gives some examples of some of the incentives available to farms in California, as well as what he sees for the future in this regard. Many of the incentives are based on improvement, which discourages early adoption and Dr. Mitloehner feels this is nonsensical. Dr. Nichols chimes in with some of the incentive-type structures in Europe. (36:21)

An additional challenge in the greenhouse gas arena is that there is no standardized protocol or measurement technique to quantify emissions. There is some effort from the United Nations and FAO to standardize some of these measures. Panelists agree that farmers are well served to document what they do and record benchmarks for things where measurements are standardized.  (44:49)

Conor’s big takeaway from this discussion is that research is ongoing to create a low emission sustainable future for animal agriculture that will take collaboration between science and policy to implement widely. Dr. Nichols reminds the audience that nitrogen should absolutely be on the minds of farmers and nutritionists, not only from an economic perspective of your ration, but also because of its environmental impact. Nitrogen mitigation is far more complicated than methane mitigation. She encourages listeners to take a look at the composition of the protein in their rations, keep good records, and see what kind of marginal changes you can make. Dr. Mitloehner encourages the audience to remember that environmental issues are intertwined with animal health and the profitability of an operation. We should not ignore emissions, we should become part of a solution. Lastly, we must find ways to effectively communicate about animal agriculture to the public. (55:31)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

The bioavailability of the different rumen-protected lysine products used in the studies ranged from 22 to 90 percent. If the paper's authors reported bioavailability values, they were used in the meta-analysis. If the paper did not provide bioavailability values, Dr. Arshad contacted authors or lysine product manufacturers to offer them. (13:53)

Dr. Arshad discusses the percentage of lysine as a percent of metabolizable protein in the diets as well as differences among the prediction of the flow of amino acids to the small intestine from NASEM, NRC, and CNCPS models. (16:45)

Around 40% of the meta-analysis dataset was from early lactation cows where rumen-protected lysine was supplemented starting from 20 days in milk. The rest of the dataset came from mid-lactation cows. The duration of lysine supplementation also varied. Cows supplemented with rumen-protected lysine for more than 70 days In early lactation produced 1.5 kilograms more milk than control cows. Mid-lactation cows supplemented for less than 70 days produced 0.8 kilograms more milk than control cows. Increasing lysine as a percentage of metabolizable protein linearly increased milk and component yield. (20:11)

During the transition period, cows not only experience negative energy balance but also negative protein balance, estimated at one kilogram of protein loss from skeletal muscle during that time. Plasma lysine starts to decrease around 21 days before calving but bounces back after seven days in milk. This suggests that lysine utilization by the mammary gland and other tissues is high during the prepartum period. Supplementing lysine before calving and during early lactation should improve the efficiency of protein synthesis and may explain the difference between early and mid-lactation responses observed in the meta-analysis. (24:10)

Lysine supplementation improved feed efficiency. Dr. Arshad discusses potential reasons for this and also points out that somatic cell counts were lower for lysine-supplemented cows, suggesting that this amino acid may be important for mammary gland health. He also discusses some of the interactions with methionine found in the meta-analysis. Dr. Zimmerman and Dr. Arshad also hypothesize about the mechanism of action of supplemental lysine increasing milk fat percentage. (30:44)

Dr. Arshad describes how he would design the next rumen-protected lysine study given what he learned from the different studies in the meta-analysis. In particular, he would like to see more work with primiparous cows, and dose-titration studies to pinpoint the optimal amount of lysine to supplement and to further explore the impact of lysine on immune function. (42:42)

The base diet and bioavailability of the rumen-protected lysine product are critical components to determine the supplementation rate for a particular group of cows. Dr. Arshad details the differences between this meta-analysis and previous meta-analyses regarding lysine supplementation. (46:40) 

In closing, Dr. Zimmerman was excited to see this meta-analysis and it validated observations from the field. Dr. Weiss underlines the strict inclusion criteria and regression analysis as particularly strong points in the paper. Finally, Dr. Arshad reminds the audience that creating a balanced ration should include essential and non-essential amino acids. He again emphasizes the importance of having an understanding of the bioavailability of rumen-protected products before conducting research projects with them. Lastly, he identifies a research gap regarding lysine supplementation of primiparous cows, which make up 30-35% of herd dynamics. (52:43)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper from the Journal of Dairy Science here: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(24)00499-5/fulltext

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Choline was discovered in 1862 in pig and ox bile (“chole” in Greek). It is a simple nutrient containing five carbons and a nitrogen. Choline is considered a quasi-vitamin since its requirements and de novo synthesis are both higher than the B vitamins it’s similar to. Pigs can synthesize more choline than chickens. Choline is considered to be a conditionally essential nutrient depending on the physiological stage and choline production ability of the species being considered. (3:29)

Choline is involved in cellular maintenance and growth at all life stages. In particular, it’s involved in neurotransmission as a component of both sphingomyelin and acetylcholine. Phosphatidylcholine is a major component of cellular and organelle membranes and is involved in lipoprotein synthesis for the transport of lipids. Choline is converted to betaine upon oxidation, and betaine plays an important role in one-carbon metabolism as a methyl group donor. (8:43)

Dietary-free choline is preferentially used for acetylcholine and phosphatidylcholine synthesis. Phosphatidylcholine is the most abundant form of choline in the body. In general, water-soluble forms of choline are absorbed faster and have a higher tissue incorporation rate than lipid-soluble forms. (14:58)

 

Clinical signs of choline deficiency include reduced growth and reproductive performance. In pigs and chickens, choline-deficient diets lead to lipid accumulation in the liver. In broiler chickens, perosis is a classic choline deficiency sign and may progress to slipped tendons. From human studies, we know that insufficient methylation capacity during early development increases the risk of neural tube defects and impaired cognitive function. (16:44)

As animals age, their dietary source of choline transitions from water-soluble forms to lipid-soluble forms. Mammalian young receive water-soluble choline from milk, and avian species from the egg yolk. After weaning in pigs and at the hatch in chickens, the dietary choline source transitions to lipid-soluble forms found in oilseed meals. Dr. Dilger goes on to describe choline concentrations in common feedstuffs and supplements. Feedstuff type and processing methods have a profound influence on bioavailable choline content. (19:16)

Dr. Dilger details some of his work with choline and betaine in poultry diets. The requirement for preformed choline is relatively high for poultry because they lack capacity in a particular methyl transferase enzyme responsible for de novo synthesis. They also have relatively high choline oxidase activity which favors the formation of betaine from choline. Betaine is critical as a buffer to counteract the toxic effects of uric acid in the avian kidney. Dr. Dilger describes choline dietary requirements for avian species. (27:38)

Pigs have more efficient methyl transferase activity for de novo synthesis of choline. Sufficient choline is provided by milk and practical diets. For growing pigs consuming corn-soybean meal diets where methionine can completely spare choline, there is little benefit of choline supplementation for growth. Choline requirements increase for gestating and lactating sows. Swine requirements for choline were set in the 1940s and 1950s. Dr. Dilger believes these requirements need a second look given the great changes in pig and crop genetics since the requirements were originally established. To that end, work in his lab has shown that choline intake during gestation and lactation influences sow milk composition, body choline concentrations and forms, metabolomic profiles and brain development of pigs. (35:18)

In conclusion, Dr. Dilger considers choline a pervasive nutrient due to its crucial metabolic roles. Species-specific idiosyncrasies drive choline requirements, and analytical data for choline-related compounds is lacking. Different forms of choline have different metabolic kinetics and the potential for choline deficiency remains a practical issue. (46:15)

In closing, Dr. Dilger answers an extensive set of questions from the audience. Watch the full webinar at balchem.com/realscience. (48:32)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Crude protein, NDF, fat, and starch were the nutrients evaluated in the study. (13:40)

Variation was positive for every nutrient on the vast majority of days. Dr. Kononoff attributes that to more feed being delivered than the diet formulation predicted animals would consume. Dry matter intake decreased with increasing positive deviation days in starch and increased with increasing positive deviation days in crude protein. NDF deviation did not impact dry matter intake. A narrow range of diets was used in the dataset and the main byproduct feed was high in NDF, so Dr. Kononoff speculates that there was not a wide enough range in NDF to have an impact on intakes. (17:04)

Milk yield increased with increased positive deviation days in starch and decreased with increased positive deviation days in NDF. The pregnancy rate increased with increasing positive deviation days in fat and decreased with increasing positive deviation days in crude protein. Unfortunately, milk urea nitrogen data was not available in the dataset to further investigate the crude protein/pregnancy rate relationship. (20:44)

There was little farm-to-farm variation in the data. (25:08)

As positive deviation days for starch increased, so did feed conversion. The opposite effect was noted for NDF. As positive deviation days for fat increased, feed conversion decreased. This result was a little surprising, as delivering more energy usually improves feed conversion. However, the dataset did not specify the source of fat or fatty acid profile, so there may have been some rumen fermentation interference from fat. (27:08)

Dr. Kononoff thinks it would be interesting to track individual cows through lactation and collect nutrient variation data. Dr. Weiss asks if the correlation between daily farm milk yield and nutrient variation was evaluated; it was not. Dr. Kononoff agrees that there may be some additional correlations that would be interesting to run. (33:22)

In closing, Dr. Zimmerman commends Dr. Kononoff’s work in tackling such a large dataset and looks forward to follow-up research. Dr. Weiss agrees and encourages more data extraction from the dataset. He was also very surprised at the low farm-to-farm variation observed and speculated if that would hold up if there were more variation in diets. Dr. Kononoff reminds the audience that taking a look at the TMR beyond the paper ration and digging into mixing techniques and TMR consistency is as important as evaluating bulk tank information or the amount of milk shipped. (37:20)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper from the Journal of Dairy Science Communications here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910224000760

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Segment 1: Evaluating the total mixed ration stability of rumen-protected lysine products.

Guests: Kari Estes, Balchem; Dr. Mark Hanigan, Virginia Tech

This research compared the TMR stability of a Balchem prototype, several commercially available rumen-protected lysine products and a positive control of unprotected lysine. (3:39)

A sample of TMR and the equivalent of one gram of lysine from each product were mixed and placed in a  plastic zip bag for 0, 6, 12, or 24 hours. After each time point, the sample was placed in a strainer bag, dipped in distilled water, and drip-dried. The solution was collected and analyzed for free lysine content. (5:28)

About 85% of the unprotected lysine was recovered at 0 hours. After 24 hours, around 50% was recovered. The rumen-protected lysine products varied widely; one product released nearly 87% of its lysine in 24 hours, while another only released 9%. TMR stability should be taken into account when determining feeding rates and handling of rumen-protected lysine products. (7:19)

Segment 2: Evaluating the total mixed ration stability of rumen-protected choline products.

Guests: Kari Estes, Balchem; Dr. Mark Hanigan, Virginia Tech

In this experiment, Kari evaluated TMR stability of five commercially available rumen-protected choline products, along with a positive control treatment of unprotected choline chloride. (14:04)

At 0 hours, about 80% of the unprotected choline was recovered and 50% was recovered at 24 hours. Results for the rumen-protected choline products were highly variable, ranging from 5% release to 100% release at 24 hours. Rumen-protected choline products should be evaluated for TMR stability in addition to rumen stability and intestinal release. (17:25)

Segment 3: Effect of dry period heat stress and rumen-protected choline on productivity of Holstein cows. 

Guests: Maria Torres de Barri and Dr. Geoff Dahl, University of Florida

The experiment had four treatments: heat stress with and without rumen-protected choline, and cooling with and without rumen-protected choline. Cows in the cooling treatment were provided shade, soakers, and fans, while cows in the heat stress treatment were only provided shade. (24:45)

Heat-stress cows had higher rectal temperatures and respiration rates than cooled cows. Heat-stress cows also had lower dry matter intakes, shorter gestation length, lighter calves, and produced less milk. (29:36)

For cows in the cooling group, choline supplementation increased milk production. However, cows in the heat stress group supplemented with choline produced less milk than cows who did not receive choline. (31:04)

Dr. Dahl suggests that not cooling cows in heat-stress environments when they’re receiving choline will not result in optimal results. (33:49)

Segment 4: Effects of dietary rumen-protected, ruminal-infused, or abomasal-infused choline chloride on milk, urine, and fecal choline and choline metabolite yields in lactating cows. 

Guests: Mingyang (Charlie) You and Dr. Joe McFadden, Cornell University

This experiment evaluated early and late lactation cows supplemented with choline via three different methods. Each treatment had 12.5 grams of choline ion provided daily: fed in rumen-protected form, continuously infused into the rumen, or continuously infused into the abomasum. (36:29)

Choline bioavailability was influenced by the delivery method of choline. Fecal and milk choline concentration was only observed in early lactating cows with abomasal infusion. Abomasal infusion increases the choline metabolite betaine in feces and urine. These results suggest there is potential saturation of choline metabolism in the lactating cow. (40:53)

Segment 5: The metabolic fate of deuterium-labeled choline in gestating and lactating Holstein dairy cows. 

Guests: Dr. Tanya France, University of Wisconsin; Dr. Joe McFadden, Cornell University

Dr. France explains that choline can be metabolized via two different pathways. Using deuterium-labeled choline (D-9 choline) allows researchers to know which pathway is used. If D-3 or D-6 choline is measured, the methionine cycle is used, and if D-9 choline is measured, the CDP choline pathway is used. The hypothesis was that the physiological stage (late gestation vs early lactation) would influence choline metabolism. (51:06)

Dr. France found that both choline metabolism pathways were used in both physiological stages. This experiment also confirmed that choline is a methyl donor and that choline recycling can occur. The research also evaluated the relative amounts of choline and choline metabolites in each pool. (53:40)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Throughout the last 30 years, the dairy industry has moved to producing highly concentrated versions of milk proteins. In cows’ milk, about 80% of the protein is casein and 20% is in the serum or whey phase. These ratios vary by species. There are three major caseins in cows’ milk: alpha-S-casein, beta-casein, and kappa-casein. The first two are rich in phosphate for calcium binding. Kappa-casein is critical in a micellar structure that allows these structures to stay suspended in the milk. (1:21)

Whey proteins also differ by species. In cows’ milk, about 50% of the whey protein is beta-lactoglobulin. It’s rich in branched-chain amino acids, and it is not present in human milk so it is a focus of allergy research. Alpha-lactalbumin is found in all mammals and is a cofactor for lactose production. (10:34)

Caseins and whey proteins are different from one another and are in completely different classes of proteins. From structure, to size, to amino acid content, to solubility; these two types of proteins are yin and yang. (11:51)

When fluid milk or whey is concentrated by removing water, some sugars and other materials dissolve via evaporation or membrane filtration. It results in dried powders, milk protein concentrate, milk protein isolate, whey protein concentrate and whey protein isolates. Concentrates contain 80-85% protein and isolates contain more than 90% protein.  (17:14)

What's driving the current and probably future popularity of these dairy proteins? One, is their versatility in many food applications, and the other is the superior nutritional quality of the proteins. Nearly half of the milk protein concentrate use is for mainstream nutrition and sports beverages. Similar trends have been observed for whey protein isolates. (20:05)

Dairy proteins are very rich in branched-chain amino acids (BCAA) like leucine. BCAAs help initiate protein synthesis, are important for muscle recovery, help with weight loss by maintaining blood glucose levels, are synergistic with exercise, and can promote healthy aging. Dr. Lucey gives several different examples of products utilizing dairy proteins. He predicts that the increased focus on nutrition products, interest in isolating individual proteins and improving export opportunities will continue to drive demand for dairy proteins in the future.  (27:21)

All of the main milk proteins have genetic variants, which are minor amino acid differences in the same protein. Variants occur at different frequencies among breeds. Beta-casein has two variants, A1 and A2. There is one amino acid difference out of 209 total amino acids, located at position 67 where a histidine is found in variant A1 and a proline is found in variant A2. When histidine is present, the beta-casein is prone to cleavage at position 67, creating a fragment called beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7). When proline is present, it hinders the cleavage of casein at position 67. BCM-7 is an exogenous opioid peptide with the potential to elicit opioid activity on a range of tissues and organs. It’s known as a “bioactive peptide” and some others from milk and cheese have been implicated as anti-hypertensive. (35:26)

In the late 1990s, some researchers claimed that A1 milk was implicated in diabetes, coronary heart disease, autism, and schizophrenia. Subsequent reviews and investigations by significant international bodies found no evidence of these claims. (40:34)

In closing, Dr. Lucey answers questions from the webinar audience. He talks about the potential of breeding cows customized for the production of minor milk components, milk components as renewable bio-plastics, and the superiority of milk proteins compared to plant proteins. Watch the full webinar at balchem.com/realscience. (47:41)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Overton begins by reminding listeners of the vast number of changes occurring in the fresh cow during the first two to three weeks after calving. Body fat and protein mobilization, some systemic inflammation, the potential for elevated NEFAs and ketones, and calcium dynamics all play a role in how the fresh cow starts her lactation period. (7:31)

When consulting with clients, Dr. Faldet uses research to guide his decisions. He likes to implement a 14-day pen for fresh cows, ranging from 10-17 days. He evaluates things like stocking rates, lockup times, and cow comfort, along with fine-tuning a diet for each individual farm setting. (9:14)

The panel discusses the importance of increasing effective fiber along with starch in fresh cow diets. Without adequate effective fiber in the diet, the risk of acidosis increases, resulting in cows going off feed. There is no silver bullet; each farm’s fresh cow diet is going to be different due to different forage bases and timing in the fresh cow group. (13:02)

Both Dr. Faldet and Dr. Overton stressed the diet is only one component of a successful fresh cow program. Other critical pieces include stocking rate, availability of feed, water quantity and quality, and cow comfort. Dr. Faldet suggests that if you do all these non-diet factors right, you could probably maneuver closeup and fresh pens a little differently and make the diet work with the ingredients you have. Dr. Overton’s group is conducting survey work evaluating the variability in particle size in closeup diets. A pilot study showed that as particle size variability increased, so did fresh cow health issues and poor postpartum metabolic status. (19:10)

Protein requirements of the fresh cow were another topic of Dr. Overton’s webinar. He described a recent experiment evaluating standard and high metabolizable protein concentrations in the diet for closeup and fresh cows. The postpartum MP gave a big milk response, around 15-16 pounds per day for the first 21 days after calving, with a carryover effect of 11-12 pounds of milk for the next 20 days after all cows went back on the same diet. It’s important to note that lysine and methionine were fixed regardless of treatment, so it seems that other amino acids are probably involved in the mechanism of action. (23:06)

Dr. Overton described an experiment designed to evaluate starch and fiber in fresh cow diets where higher fiber digestibility and increased corn in silage resulted in less fiber and more starch than anticipated in the diet. Fresh cows were a bit of a trainwreck, but the problem was resolved once another couple of pounds of straw were added to the diet. On the other hand, you can go too far with increased fiber in fresh cow diets, which results in ketosis, lower intakes, and less milk production. (35:19)

The panel then discusses far-off programs, fat supplementation in fresh cow diets, and vitamin and mineral concentrations for fresh cows. (42:37)

In summary, each panelist shares their takeaways. Dr. Elliott reminds listeners that we should think about starch, fat, fiber, and protein together and how they influence each other rather than considering them individually. Dr. Faldet’s take-home message is to know what your targets and bookends are and really hone in and implement your fresh cow diets accordingly. Dr. Overton suggests that the industry will shift to evaluating fresh cow diets as their own thing rather than trying to tweak a few things from your high cow diet. Implementing fresh cow diets consistently and well is going to be important. (53:30)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

For years, probiotics were known as direct-fed microbials (DFMs) in livestock and probiotics in humans. Terminology has been updated to reflect different modes of action and composition. (9:07)

A probiotic is defined as a living microorganism that will be beneficial to the health and/or performance of the host. Prebiotics are fermentable substrates that the host can’t use, but the microbes can. Dr. Steele agrees that terminology and definitions keep evolving; he uses “microbial-based solutions” rather than DFM. He believes that the ever-evolving terminology and definitions have led to some of the skepticism about these products in the industry. He recommends to farmers and nutritionists that a product should have a bare minimum of three publications in high-quality peer-reviewed journals showing efficacy before using them on-farm. (10:13)

Every farm is going to have a different set of challenges and goals that will play a role in determining the right choice of microbial-based solution. Weather and climate, water quality, pathogen challenges, ration grind size, and ration ingredients will all factor into the decision. (17:39)

Both guests agree that we don't know enough about the microbiome in cattle to define what a good versus a bad microbiome looks like. Dr. Steele suggests the next steps in research should look more deeply at the host’s physiological mechanisms in how they’re responding to a probiotic to truly understand when it’s going to work and when it’s not. (21:19)

Dr. Ordway asks how much microbial products could improve the absorption of nutrients. Dr. Steele responds that much of the research so far has focused on digestion and absorption has not been studied much. Some studies in calves fed microbials have shown changes in gut structure and the development of villi, and even papillae in the rumen. That gives us some high-level information about absorption, but we are not close to understanding the nitty gritty of the microbial mechanisms at play in absorption. Dr. Callaway adds that hindgut absorption in ruminants is more important than we have previously thought. Dr. Steele suggests the small and large intestines are equally as important as the forestomach, but they are not as well understood as they’re harder to study in ruminants. The conversation goes on to discuss possible modes of action behind increased liver abscesses observed in beef on dairy operations. (30:12)

Both guests share their thoughts regarding working together across disciplines, especially agronomy researchers since the feed base has such an impact on-farm. They discuss soil microbes, forge inoculants, and silage microbes. (43:23)

Dr. Ordway’s take-home message for nutritionists is to not forget to have conversations with your partners - the producer, the end user, the veterinarian, the crop team and the management team on the farm. Coordinated biology is not just within the animal, it’s all the factors coming into play that have been discussed in this episode. (58:32)

Dr. Steele reiterates his earlier advice to only use microbial-based solutions that have a bare minimum of three publications showing efficacy in a high-ranking journal. He also recommends you choose your metric of measurement properly. Focusing on cattle that are experiencing some stress or metabolic or infectious issues may allow you to truly evaluate the return on investment. There are great microbial solutions out there but you need to use a proven solution from a company that’s research-based. (59:48)

Dr. Callaway echoes Dr. Steele’s recommendation to be slightly cynical about companies that come in to sell you things. Ask how their product works, and ask to see the research. A company that tells you when its product works and when it doesn’t might be more trustworthy than one that says their product always works. Lastly, what does success look like for you as a farmer? Have a measurable, bite-size metric for determining if these products impact your bottom line. (1:01:28)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Goff sees three main challenges for transition cows: negative energy and protein balance, immune suppression, and hypocalcemia. About half of all older cows experience hypocalcemia, and around 3% will experience milk fever. Cows develop hypocalcemia if they are unable to replace the calcium lost in milk from either their bone or diet. Compared to the day before calving, a cow needs around 32 extra grams of protein the day of calving to meet her increased requirements. (2:00)

Dr. Goff reviews the pathways of calcium homeostasis and the actions of parathyroid hormone (PTH). Aged cows may have a harder time maintaining calcium homeostasis due to the loss of vitamin D receptors in the intestine with age and fewer sites of active bone resorption capable of responding quickly to PTH once they have finished growing. Blood pH plays a role in calcium homeostasis: when blood pH becomes alkaline, animals become less responsive to PTH. Dr. Goff reviews the impacts of high vs low DCAD diets and reviews the amount of time it takes for the kidney and bone to respond to PTH. (4:20)

There are several strategies to reduce the risk of hypocalcemia. One is to reduce dietary potassium so the cow is not as alkaline. Using forages from fields that have not had manure applied to them is one way to accomplish this. In addition, warm-season grasses (corn) accumulate less potassium than cool-season grasses, and all grasses contain less potassium as they mature (straw). A second strategy is to add anions such as chloride or sulfate to the diet to acidify the blood to improve bone and kidney response to  PTH. Research has shown that sulfate salts acidify about 60% as well as chloride salts. The palatability of anionic diets has led to commercial products such as Soychlor. (13:06)

Dr. Goff then discusses the over- and under-acidification of diets and gives his opinion on the appropriate range of urine pH for proper DCAD diet management, including a new proposed DCAD equation to account for alkalizing and acidifying components of the diet. He also gives some options for pH test strips to use for urine pH data collection. (18:30)

Dr. Goff’s lab has found that as prepartum urine pH increases, the calcium nadir decreases. The inflection point is right around pH 7.5, where above 7.5 indicates a higher risk of hypocalcemia. Data from other researchers suggests that urine pH lower than 6.0 may result in lower blood calcium, indicating an overall curvilinear response. Low urine pH (under 6.0) has also been associated with a higher incidence of left-displaced abomasum. (29:02)

Moving on to other minerals, Dr. Goff discusses phosphate homeostasis and how that interacts with calcium in the close-up cow. Feeding too much phosphorus can decrease calcium absorption and feeding low phosphorus diets before calving can improve blood levels of calcium. He recommends less than 0.35% phosphorus in close-up cow diets. For magnesium,he recommends 0.4% prepartum and immediately postpartum to take advantage of passive absorption across the rumen wall. (31:08)

Another strategy to reduce milk fever risk is to reduce dietary calcium prior to calving to stimulate parathyroid hormone release well before calving. A zeolite product that binds calcium is now available and may make this much easier to achieve. (42:59)

In closing, Dr. Goff reminds the audience that some level of hypocalcemia post-calving is normal and in fact, is associated with higher milk production. The key is making sure that the cow’s blood calcium levels can bounce back to normal by day two after calving. (51:23)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. DeVries begins with an overview of how his robotic milking research has evolved. In Canada, around 20%-plus of farms are using robotic milkers. He describes survey research in the US and Canada as to why producers choose to implement robotic milkers. (9:19)

In Trevor’s webinar, he discussed the large amount of variation in nutritional management of robot-milked cows across Canada. Some of his research with Dr. Penner has looked at the interaction between feed consumed at the feed bunk and feed consumed at the robot. Ideally, you wish to be able to accurately predict intake because that is a primary driver of milk production. Because cows can be supplemented individually at the robot, there is opportunity to better feed cows to match their individual needs. (13:50)

Trevor and Greg describe their respective university’s robot milking research facilities. The panel discusses additional technologies that would be useful for all robotic milkers, like load cells to measure feed delivery and disappearance. Cows typically consume around 250-300 grams of concentrate per minute, and that can vary by feed type (pellet vs mash, for example.) The panel also ponders whether the design of the feed bunk in the robots has an impact on intake rate. (17:35)

As a consulting nutritionist, Todd prefers to feed as little as possible in the robot and have a more consistent mix in the PMR. The level of milk production of the cows can have a large influence on how much pellet is fed at the robot versus the feed bunk. Todd goes on to describe his strategy for creating proportions of PMR and robot intakes for different scenarios. (26:06)

Clay asks the panel what the maximum amount of concentrate should be fed at the robot. They discuss factors that can influence concentration including individual cow variation, length of time in the robot per milking, and the number of visits to the robot per day. Clay goes on to ask how fast fresh cows can be stepped up in their robot feedings. The group has a lively discussion about all the different factors that play a role in that decision. Greg reminds the audience not to get so caught up with programming the robot that we lose sight of the fact we’re still feeding cows and good dairy management still applies. (31:29)

Todd describes some of the biggest challenges he observes as a consultant in robotic dairies, primarily centered around understanding cow behavior. Trevor underlines the importance of cow comfort and other non-nutritional factors in regard to their influence on the success of the nutrition program.(41:29)

Scott asks the panel what they think robotic milkers might look like in 2050 and what problems will have been solved by then. Greg’s wish list includes knowing PMR intake to better manage robot feedings and having cow body weights on every dairy. Trevor thinks we will have a much better understanding of how genetics influence cow performance in a robotic system and how we can raise cows to adapt to the technology to be better robot cows. Todd agrees that body weights are critical and also envisions more individualized milkings depending on each cow’s preferences. On his wish list is a drone that could be used to fetch cows to the robot who have not gone to be milked. (46:51)

​​Trevor and Greg discuss what’s next in their upcoming research projects, and Todd gives some wishlist ideas for future research. (54:18)

In summary, each guest gives their take home messages. Clay is intrigued by the precision feeding aspects of robotic milking systems. Todd encourages dairy producers not to be scared of robotic milking systems. Greg looks forward to research in the next 5-10 years to support or refute the preconceived notions we have about robotic systems. Trevor reminds listeners that cows must consume a certain amount of nutrients in order to produce milk. In the robotic system, those nutrients are delivered via two different components and research continues to understand the interplay between them. Lastly, animal behavior is a critical component of the success of robotic systems and our management approach should reflect that. (1:02:46)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Cannas outlines the topics he covered in his webinar, including nutritional requirement differences between small and large ruminants, particularly in late gestation. Small ruminants have a shorter gestation and are more prolific than cattle, for example, and this means they have more nutritional challenges in late gestation. Dr. Cannas covered supplementation, basal diet quality, and sorting ewes or does by number of fetuses. He also discussed how high milk-producing sheep and goats partition nutrients. (10:36)

Many people treat sheep and goats like smaller, low-producing cattle. Dr. Cannas considers this approach a big mistake. During pregnancy and lactation, sheep and goats are highly-producing animals that garner the same attention given to high-producing dairy and beef cattle. Dr. Texeira agrees and reminds the audience that just because sheep and goats are very adaptable animals doesn’t mean you should feed them low-quality diets. Jessica mentions that providing poor-quality feed may not allow the ewe or doe to meet her genetic potential. (21:51)

The panel discusses the importance of record keeping and data to evaluate management changes. (27:31)

Jessica asks about how Antonello fed rumen-protected choline in his experiments. They fed individually to ensure each animal received the correct dose but recommended to mix it into a TMR or mineral supplement for on-farm feeding. (33:12)

Izabelle asks how many groups most farms sort ewes or does into before lambing or kidding in Sardinia. Antonello says it depends on the individual farm because they are so diverse, but at least two groups, singles and twins. They may also sort based on the number of days pregnant as well. He describes some experimental results from feeding rumen-protected choline to ewes carrying singles versus twins. (35:35)

Dr. Teixeira describes some of the challenges sheep and goat producers face in her native Brazil due to heat stress. Jessica gives examples of management strategies to help manage heat stress based on her work at Cornell. (41:14)

The panel discussed challenges with body condition scoring goats using a sheep scale since goats store more fat internally or in other locations like the tail. They also discuss recommendations for target body condition scores at different stages of the production cycle. (48:00)

In summary, Jessica recommends that sheep and goat producers focus on what they do well, make small changes to improve their operation, and collect data to see what is working and what is not working. Izabelle encourages producers to understand what is happening physiologically in each stage of production to best manage nutritional challenges. Antonello reiterates that sheep and goats should be given the same attention and care as high-producing dairy cows. It is a complex business and there is much room for improvement in the management of small ruminants. (57:27)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Clay outlines four attributes of a good rumen-encapsulated product. They are feed and TMR stable, ruminal stable, nutrient bioavailability, and good efficacy biologically in the animal.  (6:21)

Kari describes a TMR stability test that Balchem has been perfecting based on a paper published in 2016. One to two grams of a rumen-protected product (based on the nutrient composition) is mixed with a half pound of TMR in a Ziploc bag, then the mixture incubates for 0, 6, 12 or 24 hours (based on feeding 1x, 2x, or 3x per day). Once a sample is finished incubating, it’s placed in a strainer bag in one liter of distilled water for one minute. Then, the amount of nutrient that was leached into the distilled water is measured. She describes some of the observations and trends they’ve seen from using this technique on different products. (8:24)

Mark asks about the impact of abrasion during the mixing process on encap stability. Kari describes a mineral mix technique using a small ribbon and paddle mixer. In this case, 5-10 pounds of encap product are mixed with 90-95 pounds of a mineral mix for three minutes. Then a sample is analyzed for damage to the encap. Clay does not recommend pelleting any encapsulated product because that will only reduce efficacy. It may not be 100% damage, but it will be significant. (12:41)

Scott asks about the freeze-thaw stability of encapsulates. Clay mentions that all of Balchem’s encapsulated products are freeze-thaw stable. If a product is not, there will be cracks in the coating and some ruminal stability will be lost. (19:34)

When it comes to ruminal stability, matrix encapsulates tend to have lower stability in the rumen, but it varies widely. Some have no ruminal stability; some lose less than 10% in the rumen. Encapsulation is a complex process and there are tradeoffs between some of the steps. For example, between TMR stability or rumen stability and bioavailability, the goal is to find the perfect mix of these to make a high-efficacy product on the farm. Kari describes a rumen stability test that can be conducted on-farm for protected choline and lysine products. Mark describes in situ experiments for rumen stability testing using small Dacron bags in rumen-cannulated animals. He mentions that creating an encap with high rumen stability and high intestinal digestibility is key.  (19:58)

Bioavailability is key, but methodologies for assessing bioavailability are a limitation. Kari and Mark discuss the pros and cons of various in situ/in vivo techniques, including mobile bag, abomasal pulse dose, and stable isotope. (29:25)

Clay mentions that in vitro techniques are a key piece to product development and testing, but may give erroneous results compared to in vivo testing. Kari describes an experiment she conducted with Mark comparing in vivo and in vitro techniques. She suggests that there may be an argument for creating specific in vitro tests built for different types of protected products.  For example, for a pH-sensitive product, a step mimicking abomasal enzymes would be important. For a fat-coated product, a step mimicking intestinal enzymes for fat breakdown would be important. Clay cautions that a product with only in vitro data should be regarded with skepticism. (44:25)

Biological response in the animal is the key final step. Ultimately, you want independent, peer-reviewed data to prove the efficacy of a product. Mark reminds the audience that even if animals don’t respond to a product, there are a host of different issues that could be causing that unrelated to the product being tested. Things like water quality, water quantity, stress, cow comfort - there’s a whole laundry list of things to consider. (50:39)

In closing, Kari recommends that when picking an encap product, ask for the research that hits the four pillars: TMR stability, rumen stability, bioavailability, and animal performance. Mark suggests that you can’t make a bad encap good, but you can make a good encap bad if you aren’t careful. Clay agrees that the more data, the better. Lastly, we need more work on the feed stability pillar which has been overlooked. It is a critical piece to encap products being effective in the field. (55:13)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

In his presentation, Dr. Santos discussed some of the latest research using rumen-protected choline in transition cows. There is substantial evidence that choline plays an important role in transition cow nutrition, particularly because of its consistent positive effect on the yield of energy-corrected milk and benefits that extend beyond the supplementation period. (1:16)

Dr. Reynolds’s presentation focused on protein nutrition in very early lactation cows. Cows are in a substantial negative balance for metabolizable protein in the first week or two postpartum. Recent research, with abomasal infusions of casein, or the amino acids in casein, immediately after calving, has resulted in substantial increases in milk yield. In his lab, Dr. Reynolds has used rumen drenches to supplement cows immediately postpartum as palatability of supplements has been an issue. Providing essential amino acids and total protein to cows immediately after calving is a challenging problem.  (2:10)

Dr. Zimmerman’s presentation discussed differences in rumen encapsulated products. There are four parts of a good ruminant encap: good ruminal stability, good intestinal digestibility, good feed mixing and TMR stability and biological response in the animal. (3:44)

Questions from speakers and attendees were as follows:

What is the optimum level of choline to feed to a transition cow? Given the close relationship between methionine and choline, is there a similar ratio between them like the 3:1 lysine:methionine ratio? (4:56)

Around 98-99% of dietary choline will be degraded in the rumen whereas, with lysine and methionine, we know there's an amount that escapes with the bypass protein fraction of the diets. Has the ruminant animal evolved not to require any bypass choline? (13:46)

Dr. Santos’s presentation focused on the benefits of choline supplementation to the transition cow. What are the benefits for the in-utero calf? (19:45)

What is the mechanism by which choline increases colostrum production? Is it just similar to the effect on milk yield generally? (28:21)

Does choline impact younger or older cows differently? (30:36)

Given the increase in intestinal length and changes in the architecture in early lactation, does this result in suboptimal absorption and scouring? Could it be a nutrient deficiency problem as opposed to something like acidosis? Should we analyze fecal samples to assess this? (34:50)

Do you think fundamentally we are underestimating metabolizable protein requirements in very early lactation? Or are we just not managing that transition particularly well? And if so, what sort of safety factors should we evaluate regarding protein nutrition? (41:45)

In the early lactation studies where metabolizable protein is supplemented in high concentrations, we see big milk and energy-corrected milk responses, but no increase in dry matter intake. Why is that? (43:34)

Dr. Santos describes an experiment in beef cattle, evaluating the inflammation impacts of pneumonia on essential and nonessential amino acids in the gut. This model might be quite similar to that of a dairy cow with metritis. (50:24)

Do you have any recommendations for amino acid supply for cows on grass? Is there anything new coming in that regard? Are there any specific recommendations for synchrony and/or ratios of energy and amino acid supplies? (55:58)

When should amino acids be fed after calving? (1:01:13)

In closing, each panelist provides a take-home message. (1:06:00)

Dr. Santos: Consider choline a required nutrient. 

Dr. Reynolds: Most of our cows have the genetic potential to produce a lot more milk than they are achieving in very early lactation. We need to look at that in terms of how we might be able to help them achieve that potential yield.

Dr. Zimmerman: Not all encaps are created equal. Make sure that you’re able to see published in-vivo research with these products, done by reputable institutions, to prove that these products are working in the animals. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

As Dr. Harvatine thinks back over his 15 years at Penn State, he didn’t think he’d do much fat supplement work. But we keep getting new questions, new products, and new challenges. One of these is high oleic soybeans, which could be an opportunity to grow some of our own fat on the farm. (6:35)

High oleic soybeans have been around for about seven years or a little longer. They were developed for fry oil (french fries and potato chips), but dairy nutritionists were interested in the opportunity to use 18:1 fats because of their lower risk of milk fat depression. (7:36)

Dr. Davis indicates that high oleic soybeans are a growing piece of the soybeans planted yearly. Seedstock availability is limited, but many companies have it in their pipeline. Pest and weed control traits will eventually be baked into the seedstock, but growers are taking a risk by choosing to grow high oleic soybeans. Dr. Davis’s company offers a premium for high oleic soybeans at their plants to encourage growers to take those risks. (13:15)

What factors should a producer or a nutritionist consider when using high oleic soybeans? Dr. Harvatine sees a couple of different ways folks are feeding soybeans. One, is using expeller soybean meal or roasted soybeans as a RUP source while accounting for the additional fat that it provides, and the other would be pulling the dry fat supplement out of the ration and feeding high levels of roasted soybeans to replace it. He has some hesitations about the latter approach and reminds the audience that high oleic soybeans are not at zero risk for milk-fat depression. Dr. Davis adds that a major consideration is economics. The market has been extremely volatile lately, with very high oil prices, recently, followed by a decline over the last year. As renewable diesel becomes more common and more crush plants come online, we could see depressed meal prices as well. (16:14)

Do we know what amount of oleic acid to be feeding? Dr. Harvatine shares that Dr. Andres Contreras at the Michigan State Vet School has seen molecular changes in adipose tissue metabolism with 50 grams per day of abomasally infused oleic acid, so it seems to be bioactive at reasonably low levels. The challenge, however, is we’re not sure how much actually gets through the rumen from different feed sources. In addition, there may be some interaction between fatty acids and the type of fiber on NDF digestibility that needs to be investigated. (26:50)

A concern with roasted beans compared to extruded products is the potential for higher variability with roasted beans. Dr. Davis gives some examples of considerations dairy farmers need to consider when roasting beans on-farm. (37:16)

Dr. Harvatine and Dr. Davis discuss how dairy producers may be able to take advantage of market volatility and be opportunistic in different settings regarding growing and feeding high oleic soybeans. Both guests agree that soybeans should be used in diets for all their nutrients, protein, RUP, and fat. They caution against pulling it into diets just as a fat supplement and not assessing what it’s doing for the protein side. (43:30)

We've seen a rapid increase in milk fat percentage in the US milk supply over the last few years. Why? Dr. Harvatine points out rapid genetic improvement, a better understanding of mitigating diet-induced milk fat depression, and better use of forages and fiber digestibility. Certainly, palm fat has helped, but it does not explain all of it. Dr. Davis adds that not only have genetics improved, but we have improved nutrition programs to support that genetic potential. (52:14)

In summary, Dr. Davis advises nutritionists and dairy producers to stay flexible as we’re still early on in the high oleic arena. Dr. Harvatine agrees there are great opportunities and lots of decisions to be made for each individual farm. Don’t forget the fundamentals of nutrition when considering this - view high oleic soybeans as a complete package, keeping in mind not only the protein, RUP, and fat but also quality control and roasting. (58:55)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

What is a biomarker, and what makes a good biomarker? Dr. Contreras defines anything that can help assess a physiological response or pathological state. Two examples would be BHBA (beta-hydroxybutyrate) and NEFA (non-esterified fatty acids), both fat mobilization measures. (2:56)

Dr. Contreras structured the paper in three sections of biomarkers: (3:54)

1. Ones that can be measured by looking at cow records, like how many DAs or hypocalcemias occurred over a period of time.
2. Cow-side measurements like BHBA in urine or blood.
3. Samples must be sent to a lab to be measured. These generally cannot be used to make decisions immediately but can help assess how a transition program is working, for example.

How many samples should be taken, and what cows should be sampled in a commercial dairy setting? Dairy size, pen size, and pocketbook size will all play a role in this decision. Experts usually recommend at least 10 head, and those 10 must represent the cows' population in your pen. If you have the ability to take more samples, Dr. Contreras recommends 10-12% of the cows in question. He then describes ideal times before and after calving to sample BHBA and NEFA for the most predictive value. (5:31)

Setting a target that integrates BHBA and NEFA the first week after calving with measures like body condition score and/or body weight is ideal. Cows will mobilize fat post-calving no matter what, so the goal is to moderate the degree and intensity of fat mobilization. (11:38)

Rumination and activity monitors are great for measuring biomarkers in real-time and are excellent tools for diagnosing problem cows early. Dr. Contreras has researched ultrasounds to measure fat mobilization, but this may not be practical in a commercial setting. Urine pH after calving might start to be a significant predictor of clinical ketosis. Healthy cows will have a higher urine pH than sick cows.  (14:44) 

A transition cow experiences several types of adaptations: lipid mobilization to address negative energy balance, skeletal muscle mobilization to address negative protein/amino acid balance, calcium mobilization to compensate for calcium loss, and oxidative stress due to generating energy. The goal is to target biomarkers that reflect the intensity of those adaptive mechanisms. Many of these require sending samples to a lab. A dairy’s nutritionist, veterinarian, and farm manager work together to create a targeted suite of biomarkers to assess their cows and reach their goals. (21:11)

Inflammation is often at the core of transition cow maladies. Measuring a panel of acute phase proteins the first week after calving and comparing the dynamics of how they occur through the year could help identify issues in closeup cows if those proteins are spiking. (26:03)

The group discusses the importance of using individual herds’ baseline data for prediction and assessment and focusing on closeup cows when fresh cow problems arise. They also discuss biomarkers for excessive protein catabolism and a liver functionality index. This leads to a discussion of whether creating an index might be a better overall measure than making decisions on just one diagnostic value. What if someday there might be one perfect predictive biomarker, and what might that look like? (27:50)

In summary, you should not rely on a single biomarker and start measuring early. Ideally, this would be in the dry period. If that’s too challenging, it would be at least a few days after cows go to the closeup pen. Cow-side biomarkers like BHBA, body condition score, and body weight can tell you a lot about transition cow health. Use all the biomarkers and herd records available to design your approach to transition cow health. (43:10)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Accelerated milk feeding of calves results in about a thousand-pound first lactation production increase. The mechanism is unclear: it could be isolated to the mammary gland or related to the functional ability of the digestive tract and liver to support lactation. Economic analyses have shown an advantage of $205 per calf. (6:04)

Regarding amino acid requirements of dairy calves, whey-based milk replacers require additional methionine; lysine is also common. Threonine can be limiting in soy-based milk replacers. Establishing amino acid requirements was beyond the scope of what the NASEM committee could do, and more data is probably needed for calves. However, CNCPS has amino acid requirements defined, so it’s possible to get in the ballpark for amino acids. (12:00)

What about feeding hay to young calves? The latest research has shown calves only over-consume alfalfa out of all the common forages. A study in Spain showed when offered alfalfa, calves consumed 14% of their total dry matter from alfalfa, decreasing the amount of starter they consumed. When offered grass hay or straw, calves only consumed 4-5% forage and they actually boosted starter intake and overall feed efficiency. Dr. Drackley recommends starting grass hay, wheat straw, or similar forages at 2-3 weeks of age. It should be just a sprinkling top dressed on their starter, or about 5% of the total if you’re feeding a mixed diet. (15:08)

Dr. Drackley covers five major accomplishments in this paper. (18:06)

1. Knowledge of colostrum, highlighting the establishment of different categories for passive transfer (excellent, good, fair, and poor) rather than just a yes or no. The four categories relate very well to the mortality and morbidity associated with young calves. 
2. Feeding more milk to young calves, highlighting a 2001 paper from Dr. Mike Van Amburgh’s lab that was the eye opener for the industry. 
3. The publication of the NRC in 2001, which had a separate chapter for calves, was perhaps the first time people started to think seriously about calves.
4. Major growth in behavior research, particularly related to feeding behavior, shows calves fed conventional, limited amounts of milk are hungry as demonstrated by vocalization and increased restlessness.
5. Publication of NASEM 2021.

From a welfare research perspective, Dr. Drackley thinks cow-calf separation and group vs hutch housing will continue to be issues of concern for consumers. In Europe, there’s demonstration research keeping calves with cows during the milk-feeding period. (20:44)

What about the post-weaning slump? The big issue is weaning too early before starter intake has increased adequately. Weaning at eight weeks instead of six weeks results in an improvement in total nutrient intake. A gradual step down in the amount of milk provided will also stimulate starter intake. Starter quality and composition is critical, and water availability can be an issue for many farms. (23:29) 

Concerning colostrum, a big advancement has been a better understanding of what colostrum does in addition to establishing passive immunity. The nutrition aspects of high protein, vitamins, minerals, and growth-promoting ingredients like hormones, growth factors, and cytokines all play a major role in calf health and development. Measuring colostrum quality is better and easier with the use of refractometers. Recent emphasis on how easily colostrum can be contaminated and how that negatively affects the calf has also been crucial. As much as we know about milk synthesis, we know very little about colostrum synthesis. Adequate metabolizable protein is important for quality and quantity, and immune-related vitamins and minerals are important. Beyond that, we do not have a good understanding of what regulates colostrum, particularly volume. (25:50)

What’s next in calf nutrition? Establishing a good amino acid model and trying to minimize both costs and nitrogen excretion, colostrum quality and quantity from the cow side, continued research into workable systems for accelerated milk feeding with a smooth weaning transition, and post-weaning feeding programs are areas where Dr. Drackley predicts fruitful research opportunities. (31:36)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

In the U.S., livestock competes with oil and gas for the top source of methane emissions. While “carbon-neutral” agriculture may be easy for modelers to show, Dr. Hristov feels this is misleading and probably impossible in practical dairy farming. However, mitigation can be addressed in several directions, and nutrition can have perhaps the largest impact. Management practices, genetic selection, and manure management can be added to achieve large reductions in total methane from an intensive dairy production system. (2:43)

As forage digestibility increases, methane yield and intensity will decrease. A forage with higher digestibility may gain a 10-15% improvement in methane intensity compared to a lower digestible forage. In addition, starch makes less methane than NDF does. Feedlot cattle produce half the methane of a normal dairy cow due to the increased starch in the feedlot diet. We know fats and lipids can decrease methane, but anything higher than 5-6% in the diet will disturb rumen function and lead to poorer performance. Comparing different forages, corn silage produces the least methane, with alfalfa in second place. (6:41)

Feed additives have the potential to deliver compounds for methane mitigation. One of these is 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP), the commercial version of which was developed in Europe. It is approved in Europe and Latin American countries. Australia and New Zealand are also working through the approval process. This compound inhibits the MCR enzyme (methyl coenzyme M reductase) which catalyzes the last step in methanogenesis. Dr. Hristov’s lab has consistently shown a 30% reduction in methane yield when diets containing 3-NOP are fed, with no impact on milk production and a slight increase in milk fat. 3-NOP is quickly metabolized, so it is most useful in a confinement system where it can continuously enter the rumen. The compound is stable in a TMR for up to 24 hours, and the optimum inclusion rate is 60-80 milligrams per kilogram of diet (60-80 ppm). (14:41)

Regarding regulatory approval in the U.S., the FDA has indicated that 3-NOP must be approved as a drug, not as a feed additive. Dr. Hristov has concerns about an adaptation of the cows to the compound. One study in Holland fed 3-NOP for a year, and there was a definite decrease in efficacy over time. Furthermore, efficacy may depend on diet, as 3-NOP is less effective with high NDF diets. It’s unclear if the decrease in efficacy over time is because the microbes break down 3-NOP before it affects methane synthesis or if the microbes shift to a different pathway of methane synthesis. (22:04)

Bromoform, a compound found in red seaweeds, is also a powerful methane mitigator. Dr. Hristov’s lab has observed 60-65% decreases in methane production early in the feeding period, dropping to 20-25% after 200 days. Other issues include the practicality of growing and transporting seaweed, the instability of bromoform, and the fact that bromoform is an ozone-depleting compound and a carcinogen. Seaweed extracts tend to decrease dry matter intake, and thus milk production and milk iodine increase dramatically. (25:54)

In the U.S. dairy system, where manure is usually handled as a liquid, methane emissions from manure and from the cow are equal. Methane digesters and flaring of methane are common mitigation methods. Acidification is another method whereby decreasing pH can decrease methane emissions and ammonia and nitrous oxide losses. Dr. Hristov predicts a lot of additives to decrease methane emissions from manure will eventually be available on the market. (31:16)

3-NOP has little effect on rumen dynamics but may increase butyrate. Dr. Weiss asks if different feed additives have synergistic effects, and Dr. Hristov thinks much more work is needed in this arena. (33:19)

While methane mitigation probably has no silver bullet, many little interventions can add up to a big impact. Looking forward, so many people are working in this area; we will have solutions for methane mitigation. (43:56)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

What is circular dairy farming? The concept is that instead of extracting or using natural resources and then discarding the wastes in a linear kind of fashion, economies should try to be increasingly circular. This would include the concepts of reusing, recycling, upgrading, upcycling, etc. Traditionally, the focus on methane was about the inefficiency and leakage of energy and finding a way to minimize that from the perspective of energetic efficiency and productivity. More recently, the focus on decreasing methane has been the environment. (3:19)

Dr. Newbold talks about the trade-off between circularity and methane. High fiber diets produce more methane than high starch diets. Adding fat to diets can also decrease methane production. However, starch and fat are human edible so if we leave starch and fat in feeds to decrease methane in dairy cattle, that leaves less starch and fat for human consumption. The concept of “local” also plays into circularity, whether that be feed production or milk processing. (7:01)

What are the metrics of circularity? Two approaches to this present in the literature. The first is  human edible efficiency: how much human edible food are we producing? In a dairy setting, the measurement would be how much human edible food are we putting into the cow compared to the amount of human edible food coming out of the system? The second metric is the alternatives for land use. (10:45)

What is the best way to express methane production? Dr. Newbold shares three, and they are generally used in different contexts. First is methane production, usually presented as grams per cow per day. This is an easily scalable measurement, but may not be the best or easiest way to manage interventions on-farm. The second common metric is methane yield which is generally expressed as grams per kilogram of dry matter intake. Lastly, methane emissions intensity is grams of methane per kilogram of milk. (12:26)

When considering the human edibility equation, the denominator consists of the human edible content of the feed. In principle, depending on how hard you worked and how much money you spent, you could extract some of the starch, fat, and protein and use it for human food. However, there's no consensus in the literature about this kind of edibility coefficient. In other words, what proportion of the protein in soybean meal or the proportion of starch that's left in wheat middlings or distillers grains is human edible? Greater consensus about what is and what is not human edible would actually be quite useful in allowing for better and more consistent calculations. (18:29)

Dr. Newbold gives examples of relative efficiency comparing U.S. dairy production, a grass-based system, and a tropical grass based system. Each of these have a different human edible efficiency and a different amount of methane produced. (19:59)

When it comes to lowering the environmental impact of milk production, don't focus on one metric in isolation of the rest of them. If you're setting off in a particular direction, whether that's trying to drive methane down or milk production up, think about the potential trade offs and unforeseen consequences. (32:12)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Van Amburgh presented “Amino Acid Nutrition for Maximizing Milk Component Yield.” When considering nitrogen efficiency, we generally compare intake nitrogen, which includes non-protein nitrogen, against milk nitrogen. In high producing cows, aggregate amino acid values are running about 70 to 73% efficiency. But when we work that up to total intake nitrogen, then we're down to 30 to 35% efficiency range. How do we reconcile ruminal nitrogen requirements to a point where we can optimize the capture of recycled nitrogen and reduce the amount of nitrogen that's being excreted in the urine? (2:27)

Dr. Hanigan presented “Understanding Amino Acid Bioavailability.” Our current methods for measuring bioavailability don’t all have the same precision. One of the classic methods, intestinal disappearance, has very low precision. Methods that rely on dilution of a marker or a label in blood or milk have much higher precision. Dr. Hanigan’s lab has worked to modify a carbon-13 labeled amino acid method to allow for evaluating changes in the supply of amino acids in the diet.  (5:01)

Dr. Lee presented “Current Understandings of Lysine Nutrition in Dairy Cattle.” Rumen-protected lysine has more variable responses than rumen-protected methionine or histidine. Amino acid requirements were developed based on the role of amino acids as the building blocks of protein. But there are many roles of amino acids which may influence their requirements. Dr. Lee suggests including that type of information in our modeling may increase the consistency of responses to feeding rumen-protected lysine. (11:24)

Dr. Hristov presented “Histidine: A Limiting Amino Acid for Dairy Cows.” His group has worked with rumen-protected histidine to develop a dataset to define requirements. Microbial protein has considerably less histidine than methionine yet they are secreted at about the same level in milk and are metabolized similarly. All this together points to a higher histidine requirement. (18:02)

The panelists agree that the advent of genomics have resulted in a rapid change in high producing cows and with that, their amino acid requirements (and other nutrients) are also changing. It’s a challenge for feeding and nutrition programs to keep up with rapid genetic change. (21:02)

A question was posed by the audience about how Dr. Van Amburgh used amino acids to increase butter fat. In the research he presented, the diets did not overfeed fat and fed a blend of fatty acids, and also increased the sugar and pulled back the starch. (28:35)

A discussion of histidine follows, including its unique body reserves, its role in hemoglobin concentrations, and its potential impacts on metabolic energy efficiency (34:08)

Dr. Zimmerman asks about plasma histidine in very early lactation cows. Dr. Hristov is currently conducting a fresh cow experiment to assess this. His hypothesis is that because of low dry matter intake and high metabolic demand for amino acids, there will be a response to histidine supplementation. Dr. Lee agrees and feels that the fresh cow stage may be one of the most practical ways we can utilize rumen-protected histidine (39:39)

A question from the audience about the use of blood meal in lower protein diets sparks a spirited discussion among the panelists. (41:55)

In closing, each panelist provides a takeaway. Responses range from bioavailability of rumen-protected products to challenges to progress for ruminant amino acid research to comparing biological potential and economic response. (46:58)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Dhuyvetter presented a March 5 webinar on dairy economics, which can be found at balchem.com/realscience. Key consistent data across time indicate that more profitable dairies tend to be larger. This doesn’t mean that all dairies must be large, but more the reality of the large number of fixed costs in dairying. Diluting costs by having high production per cow is also a mark of a profitable operation. Kevin reminds the audience that he’s talking about averages and there are exceptions to every rule. The key message is that you need to strive to get better. In the long run, profits are equal to zero in a competitive industry, and dairying is no exception. Dr. Dhuyvetter includes all economic costs in his analyses, recognizing all assets, including skills and capital, such as land, facilities, and time. (8:08)

Dr. Jardon suggests that exceptional operations emphasize efficiency and ensure they dilute maintenance costs well. Everything is fine-tuned: feed's always pushed up, stalls are full of bedding, and the time budget of the cows is usually spot on. Dr. Tully echoes this sentiment from his consultant experience. Phil also underlines the importance of focusing on how much it costs to make a unit of milk or income over feed costs rather than concentrating solely on saving money. Kevin agrees that all the little things done right and done consistently often make the difference in profitability. Further, if cutting costs negatively impacts production, then saving money is counterproductive in the long run (15:14)

Dr. Dhuyvetter reminds producers not to automatically assume they have lower costs because you raise your own feed. More often than not, the opportunity costs of producing that feed haven’t been evaluated. If you can produce nutrients more efficiently and cost-effectively on your land, then home-raised feed is a very good thing. But if you produce low-quality home-raised feed, it might be better to purchase feed elsewhere. In addition, growing high-quality feeds takes time and energy away from dairying. Phil saw this when he was a practicing veterinarian. Jim suggests that those larger operations can have a field crew and a herd health crew who aren’t the same individuals. The panelists discuss the shift from getting paid for protein in milk to getting paid for fat in milk and what that means from a cow nutrition and profitability perspective.

(22:51)

Dr. Dhuyvetter then discusses how culling practices impact profitability. He expects successful operations to have very low cull rates because they have healthy, well-managed cows doing all the little things right. On the other hand, unsuccessful operations may also have very low cull rates because they struggle to produce heifers, get them pregnant, and keep them in the herd, leading to keeping cows longer than one should. Jim and Kevin emphasize that the culling rate is individualized and will vary by operation. Phil suggests that perhaps some of the available software tools to help with culling decisions may be underutilized. (35:10)

Many dairies want to know if they should wait longer into lactation before rebreeding cows. Because production is up and reproduction has improved over the last 10-15 years, dairies are drying cows off while still giving a lot of milk. Dr. Dhuyvetter’s analysis of the data for Holstein herds in second- and greater-lactation cows suggests getting them pregnant as fast as possible and getting them back to peak milk sooner. (43:07)

Phil, Kevin, and Jim then touch on comparative advantage and revealed preference and how those relate to shifts in the dairy industry away from some states and toward others. (50:29)

In closing, Dr. Dhuyvetter suggests that the days of being very successful with gut-feel decisions are probably behind us. Making decisions based on the best information from data and analytics is the way forward. Constantly strive to get better, and don’t worry about what your neighbor’s doing. Control what you can control. (58:29)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Ms. Bertens is Dr. Penner’s Ph.D. student and explains some new methodologies she developed for measuring gut permeability using chromium EDTA and cobalt EDTA. It’s common to use an oral dose of chromium EDTA as a marker to measure total tract permeability. Claire’s work, using cannulated cows, used a ruminal dose of chromium EDTA for total tract permeability and an abomasal dose of cobalt EDTA for post-ruminal permeability. Both of these markers are indigestible, non-metabolizable and have no transcellular transport mechanisms. Claire is working to publish the new method as a complete validation study has been completed. (9:15)

While this method is currently limited to using cannulated animals, Greg and Claire could envision a less sophisticated and more applied on-farm technique to assess permeability. Until then, there are still a lot of management observations that can identify potential issues with gut permeability. The appearance of feces and the presence of mucin casts can both be indicative of gut issues. Certainly dry matter intake is a major influencer on gut health, and Claire also sees potential in new technologies like rumination collars or rumination ear tags. (13:47)

Are there certain time points in a dairy cow’s life when she is at risk for increased gut permeability? Dr. Penner describes research suggesting if weaning is implemented too abruptly, that really increases the risk for decreased barrier function of the gut. Erratic feed intake patterns resulting from withholding feed for any reason at any age can also increase the risk of leaky gut. For example, depressed intake during the transition phase, along with anything that drives a response through an underlying systemic inflammatory response, probably creates risky situations for leaky gut. Claire is currently running a study looking at the impacts of intramammary LPS infusion on gut function. Greg envisions that learning more about gut function could create a new philosophy for treating sick animals. In the past, only antimicrobials were used to treat mastitis, but now it’s common to also treat with a NSAID for pain. Perhaps in the future, we will also provide treatment to accelerate the recovery of the gut to prevent secondary disorders. (16:15)

How long does an off-feed event have to last to cause an issue in the gut? It seems a fairly acute time period is all that is needed. Most studies are trying to replicate what happens on-farm, for example during mastitis, heat stress or the transition period. Greg indicates that not only will permeability be impacted, but ruminal absorptive capacity can also decline rapidly in these conditions. In Claire’s LPS challenge study, cows’ rectal temperatures peak around six hours after the LPS infusion and usually resolve within 12 hours. But most cows do not eat for a solid 12 hours during the challenge, and they are slow to recover feed intake over the next few days. In cows that aren’t sick but experience feed restriction in experimental protocols, they tend to overeat when they are allotted the full ration and this can lead to ruminal acidosis. (21:57)

Increased incidences of liver abscesses in beef-on-dairy calves are being reported in the industry. Dr. Penner speculates that perhaps these calves are not always achieving adequate passive transfer, and may not be receiving high enough levels of milk replacer to support a more robust immune system. It may be the increased beef cattle genetics in the calves are putting an added requirement on growth or muscle development that may not be met by lower levels of milk replacer or even lower colostrum feeding levels. (34:40)

In closing, providing cows with a consistent environment where they can meet their needs by their own behavior such as free access to feed when hungry and to a comfortable stall when it’s time to rest. Cows reward consistency with health and production. Gut health in a commercial setting is a relevant issue and it might go undiagnosed or undetected. Research into where in the gut permeability is occurring will help define strategies to modulate response. While off-feed events for individual animals might be harder to recognize in a large dairy environment, new technology may allow for earlier diagnosis. (40:43)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Endres begins with a description of a dataset she collected containing individual body weights from 34 robotic milking herds. Weights were collected for every cow; every time that she came into the robotic milking station. Dr. Endres’ team was interested in the relationship between the amount of body weight change in the first 21 days of lactation and subsequent production. (7:34)

The team chose to use the first 90 days of production as their production measurement to make sure they had as many cows as possible in the dataset - the longer into lactation, the more likely to lose cows due to culling. Their results showed that 90-day production was extremely highly correlated with total lactation production. Drs. Weiss and Endres discussed the implications of young cows’ requirements for growth in the first and second lactation, which were easily observed in this dataset (13:13) 

Dr. Endres’ team found a quadratic relationship between body weight loss in the first 21 days and milk production in the first 90 days of lactation. This suggests that if cows don’t lose enough, they aren’t productive. Or, if cows lose too much, they aren’t productive. The optimum amount of weight loss for cows in their second or greater lactation was around 5%, while for the first lactation cows it was 7.4%. Dr. Endres hypothesizes that cows who lost more than the optimum may have been sick because they’re probably not coming to the bunk if they’re losing that much weight. And cows who gained weight might be animals who just do not have as much genetic potential to produce milk. (17:15)

Dr. Weiss and Dr. Endres emphasize that today’s dairy cows are designed to mobilize body weight early in lactation. They are not able to eat enough to compensate for the amount of milk they are producing. Intake is going up as they move through early lactation, and cows can lose some weight and not have issues. The guests discuss the importance of an aggressive fresh cow management plan and designing diets specifically for the fresh cow group. (22:09)

Dr. Endres explains at the extremes, the highest producing cows produced around 30-35 pounds more milk each day than the lowest producing cows. But even halfway in between, it was 10-15 pounds of milk per day and those are not small numbers! Monitoring and managing body weight change has tremendous management potential, particularly with the increasing technology available to dairy herds. Identification of poor performing cows could happen sooner and appropriate interventions could be identified earlier. (26:37)

Is there any reason this can’t be extrapolated to conventional farms that are not using robots? Dr. Endres thinks it would carry over, even though the conventional farms are feeding differently and can’t supplement individually like the robot systems. These results point to feeding fresh cows in their own group while paying close attention to access to feed and limit overcrowding. If Dr. Endres could do the study over, she would like to have reproduction and health records to compare with the milk production and weight loss data. (28:22)

Each panelist summarizes their takeaways from this research. Dr. Morrow suggests that the industry is probably not managing fresh cows nearly as intensely as they should. Their needs for calories as well as amino acids in early lactation are probably greater than we know, and we must do a better job supplying those nutrients and allowing cows to be comfortable, eat, and reach their peak potential. Dr. Weiss agrees and adds that female mammals are designed to mobilize body reserves. The idea that cows should not lose condition in early location is wrong. We don’t want them to lose too much, but losing some is perfectly normal. We need to work around that balance and include it in our formulation goals. Dr. Endres emphasizes the focus on fresh cows and suggests technology is going to allow for more and better data that will help monitor fresh cows and intervene as needed.  (33:38)

Dr. Endres wraps up with a brief description of the upcoming Four State Dairy Nutrition Conference in June and Balchem’s Amino Acid pre-conference symposium on the first day to open the conference. (35:40)

The paper can be found here: https://www.jdscommun.org/article/S2666-9102(23)00041-8/pdf

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Zimmerman begins with an overview of Balchem’s microencapsulation technologies in both human nutrition and health and animal nutrition and health businesses. (0:31)

Encapsulation is a generic term, and huge differences can exist between products that protect the same compound. Balchem’s microencapsulation technology consists of packaging a substance in a lipid capsule for protection. Encapsulates can differ in design, technology, and performance. When it comes to performance in ruminant encapsulates, stability in feed mixing and TMRs and animal performance are evaluated. (6:50)

Lipid encapsulation usually comes in one of two forms, a matrix encapsulation or a true encapsulation. A good analogy for matrix encapsulation is chocolate chip cookie dough, where some active compound is always at the surface. In the rumen, this leads to reduced protection and stability. True encapsulation, often called single-layer or multiple-layer encapsulation, is analogous to an m&m where there is no active compound at the surface, and this leads to greater protection and stability in the rumen.  (12:00)

So why do we encapsulate nutrients for ruminants? In general, for targeted delivery within the gastrointestinal tract of the animal because rumen fermentation often results in massive breakdown of most of these important compounds. For example, choline chloride is almost completely degraded in the rumen. (18:30)

When developing or improving rumen-protected products for nutrients such as choline chloride, methionine, lysine, or niacin, the primary goal is to protect them as much as possible from ruminal degradation while achieving post-ruminal absorption. Once prototypes have good ruminal stability and good intestinal release, the next step is feed and mixing stability. Dr. Zimmerman goes on to showcase different research techniques for evaluating encapsulates in these three areas as well as in animal performance. (20:39)

In summary, there are many differences in encapsulated products for dairy cows, due to the design of products; types, amount, and composition of coatings; manufacturing differences; and differences in nutrient content, bioavailability, and feed stability. True encapsulates, or multi-layered coating products, are preferred for ruminant applications due to their higher levels of ruminant and feed stability. Four really important features of a good ruminant encapsulate are good ruminal stability, good nutrient bioavailability, feed and TMR stability, and ultimately biological performance. (47:05)

Dr. Zimmerman then answers questions from the webinar audiences about in vitro techniques and bioavailability, coating ingredients, the importance of base diet for rumen fluid donors in in vitro techniques, variation in products from in vitro to in vivo results, how long it takes to develop a new encapsulated product (Balchem spends years and even decades researching before a product release), and why nutrient contents differ so much in similar encapsulated products on the market. (49:58)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Godden begins with the reminder that despite decades of research and definite advances in colostrum management, there's still a lot to learn and research. Her goal is to give an update on new findings that can be utilized in your colostrum management program. (0:21)

Promoting calf health and growth is a balance between maximizing immunity and minimizing infectious disease challenges. Colostrum is one aspect of maximizing immunity and provides passive immunity in the form of immunoglobulins. It also contains bioactive compounds, immune factors, growth hormones, leukocytes, and nutrients. (1:09)

We can measure adequate transfer of passive immunity via serum immunoglobulin G levels, where anything greater than 10 grams per liter is a pass. Passive transfer of immunity is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality, especially in the first 2-3 months of life. Successful passive transfer has many other intermediate and long-term benefits, including improved growth rate and feed efficiency, leading to even longer-term benefits of decreased age at first calving and potentially improved milk production in the first and second lactation. (4:18)

When building a comprehensive colostrum management program, Dr. Godden distills it down to the five Qs: quality, quantity, quickness, squeaky clean, and quantifying. Starting with quantifying passive transfer, in a perfect world, we would have a quick, inexpensive, on-farm serum IgG test that could be run on whole blood. Unfortunately, that test does not exist. In research studies, we send serum samples off to reference labs to have serum IgG tested. On-farm, we use indirect tests such as serum Brix or serum total protein. Historically, the literature has said that a serum total protein of somewhere between 5.0 and 5.2 grams per deciliter most accurately predicts that IgG value of 10 grams per liter. If greater than 10 g/L IgG is a pass, is a higher concentration better? Yes. A good goal would be for 90% of the calves to have serum IgG higher than 10 g/L. More specifically, goals are around 40% of calves in the excellent zone of 25 or greater, roughly 30% of calves in the good zone of 18-25, and around 20% in the fair zone of 10-18. Dr. Godden references the corresponding Brix and total serum protein readings in her slides. (7:24)

Quality refers to the concentration of IgG in the colostrum, and experts have suggested that be at least 50 grams per liter or higher. This corresponds to a Brix reading of approximately 22% or higher. Several factors influencing colostrum quality are under our control, including the dry cow vaccination program, feeding a balanced dry cow ration, avoiding stressors during the dry period, avoiding excessively short dry periods, and milking cows out as soon as you can after calving. (16:18)

When it comes to quantity, a larger volume at first feeding will result in higher IgG concentrations in the calves. One study compared feeding two or four liters at first feeding with a second feeding of two liters at 12 hours. The higher volume first feeding showed better results. (29:23)

As for quickness, IgG absorption efficiency is optimal in the first couple of hours after birth but is then slowly reduced as gut closure occurs. Ideally, we want to feed the calf as soon as possible, hopefully within one to two hours of birth when possible. (30:35)

The last Q is squeaky clean or cleanliness, specifically the level of bacterial contamination in colostrum. Obviously, we don't want to feed colostrum that is laden with pathogens that can cause disease. However, high bacteria counts in colostrum have also been associated with reduced absorption of IgG. Dr. Godden details a number of critical control points that can be assessed if colostrum cleanliness is an issue of concern. (38:19)

Dr. Godden finishes the episode by taking questions from the webinar audience, ranging from average colostrum volume collected at first milking to what temperature colostrum should be frozen at to heat stress impacting quality and quantity of colostrum. (49:20)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Primary response variables measured in the meta-analysis included dry matter intake, milk production, milk composition, and milk component yields. The researchers also calculated the efficiency of utilization of histidine and other amino acids supplied to the cow by the diets. Lastly, they calculated marginal recovery of histidine and evaluated the interaction between histidine supply and energy supply and how that impacts the efficiency of utilization. (7:38)

Dr. Lapierre gives a little history of histidine research. When recommendations were coming out about lysine and methionine requirements, the different studies recommended relatively similar amounts of lysine and methionine based on the proportion relative to MP supply. On the other hand, recommendations for histidine varied widely depending on the study, ranging from less than 2% to almost 4%. As emphasis has been placed on reducing the footprint of dairy production, interest has risen in feeding lower-protein diets. In this scenario, we would expect an increase in the microbial protein; however, microbes are relatively low in histidine content. If we look at the proportion of histidine relative to MP, as the crude protein concentration of a diet decreases, this proportion of histidine decreases. (8:34)

The meta-analysis revealed a clear response to histidine in milk production, dry matter intake, and milk true protein yield. Susanna and Helene are not sure if the dry matter intake response was due to a pulling effect because of increased milk and milk protein yield or if histidine has an independent impact on the brain, as has been observed in some monogastric studies (16:15)

Clay asks the guests what they think the histidine requirement is, and both agree that providing one number is not practical given the other interactions from basal diet to the efficiency of utilization to the concentration of other amino acids in the diet. (32:01)

Practical implications from the meta-analysis include an understanding that lower protein diets may very well need supplemental histidine for optimum performance, and cows pay a penalty when inadequate histidine is supplied. (35:09)

Helene’s take-home message is that histidine should be taken seriously. If you don't supply enough of it, then you'll have a penalty in your cows’ production. Further, the efficiency of histidine utilization will be affected by the energy supply, and we have tools with NASEM to assess if a herd is receiving sufficient histidine. Susanna echoes Helene’s message and adds that a rumen-protected histidine product on the market would be very helpful. (45:35)

The paper can be found here: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(23)00416-2/fulltext

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

There were 24 cows per treatment, and it was a continuous study rather than a Latin Square design. No differences were observed in dry matter intake, even though many studies in the literature have shown a higher DMI for canola meal-containing diets. Both diets had similar milk production and feed efficiency. Cows on the soybean meal diet had higher milk fat than canola meal-fed cows. (15:09)

Soybean meal-fed cows had higher total VFA production. Dr. Hristov attributes this to the additional free oil that was added to the canola meal diet having a slightly depressing effect on fermentation. The canola meal-fed cows had a higher proportion of propionate and a lower proportion of acetate than the soybean meal-fed cows. Serum amino acid concentrations were mostly similar with a few differences in individual essential amino acids. (21:40)

Serum glucose concentrations were higher for canola meal-fed cows. Dr. Hristov believes this was probably a result of the increased ruminal propionate since it is a primary precursor for glucose production. He goes on to describe the digestibility results. (28:30)

Bill and Alex discuss the nitrogen excretion data and how low in protein one could go before impacting milk production in an effort to reduce nitrogen excretion to the environment. (37:06)

Dr. Hristov’s take home message is when you are comparing these two feed ingredients in similar diets, if feed intake is not affected you'll have a similar response between extruded soybean meal and canola meal. Comparing solvent-extracted soybean meal with canola meal is not a fair comparison. (51:05)

The paper can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030223004101

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Nutrition, adequate dry matter intake, pre-calving vaccination programs, cow comfort, and dry period length are all factors impacting colostrum quality and, to some degree, quantity. Tricia and Sandra describe a seasonal effect observed for colostrum quantity and quality associated with the fall months. While the mechanism of action is unknown, it is thought that day length and cold stress may play a role. Tricia indicates she is hard-pressed to get a 24 or 25 Brix reading on her herd’s colostrum in October. To prepare for this, during spring and summer, the dairy freezes 26-27 Brix colostrum to have on hand for use in the fall. 

(14:14)

The relationship between the volume of colostrum produced and its quality is very weak. Dr. Godden recommends using a Brix refractometer to measure all colostrum. Tricia has observed a correlation between the amount of colostrum produced and udder edema, where more edema results in less colostrum. In Tricia’s system, she likes to feed anything over a 24 Brix as a first colostrum and anything from an 18 to a 22 as a second colostrum. They feed four quarts at the first feeding within the first two hours, shooting for the second feeding of two quarts within 8 to 12 hours. (29:18)

Tricia details the calf herd recordkeeping on the farm, which includes weekly serum protein data measured with the same digital Brix refractometer used for colostrum measurements. This data lets the farm see when the program isn’t working and when calves are stressed. The farm also records all treatments and can reflect on previous treatments over the animal's lifetime. She gives an example of a small problem in the colostrum management program having a large impact. The agitator flaps on the pasteurizer were in the wrong position resulting in denatured colostrum.(35:14) 

Dr. Godden details some of the critical points in colostrum management, including adopting a routine monitoring program to measure Brix readings in colostrum and follow up with bleeding calves to measure serum protein. Cleanliness is very critical, and she sees a huge opportunity for farms to clean up their colostrum more. Not only do we not want to feed contaminated colostrum from a pathogen exposure standpoint, but research has also shown that high bacteria counts in colostrum negatively impact the absorption of the IgG into the circulation of the calf. This can be monitored by culturing the colostrum being fed, then backtracking through critical control points to determine where the contamination occurs. Tricia describes some of the important steps she’s taken over her 15 years at Shadycrest to improve their colostrum program. (42:57)

Tricia reminds the audience to remember that your first feeding of colostrum is setting up your milking dairy cow. If you set her up to do poorly because her first feeding of colostrum is poor, you're going to end up with a poor milking cow. Every calf born on the farm needs to have supreme colostrum inside of them because they're going to become a supreme cow. Dr. Godden echoes this sentiment: there are long-term economic benefits to the producer for getting their colostrum program right. These include an improved rate of gain, lower age at first calving, and more milk in the first and second lactation. It's well worth your while to get that job done correctly and get that calf off to a good start. (1:01:32)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Our day two episode opens with Dr. Eric Ciappio and Dr. Jonathan Bortz of Balchem, summarizing day one’s focus on pregnancy and early life and previewing day two’s focus on the latest choline research targeting adult nutrition. (1:03)

The next guest on our roster is Dr. Mark Manary, a professor of pediatrics at the Washington University School of Medicine. Mark’s symposium talk discusses choline and food aid. Food aid products are specially designed to address needs from crisis situations. These specialized food aid products are standardized to meet great deficiency or inadequacy needs. On the most extreme side, there is a product called ready-to-eat therapeutic food for children who are starving to death. Other food aid products include those for severely underweight children. Dr. Manary’s research consists of clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa that include different nutrients in food aid to see if there are improvements in children’s responses. One trial with the inclusion of DHA found a 6-15 IQ point difference by adding fish oil or DHA. Mark hypothesizes that a doubling of that effect will be observed when choline is added. (6:42)

Dr. Rima Obeid from Saarland University Hospital in Homburg, Germany, joins us next. Her symposium presentation focused on choline and pregnancy outcomes. Their research group has found that low or insufficient amounts of choline in the mother’s diet during pregnancy are associated with a higher risk for serious birth defects in babies and that the liver health of the infants is also negatively affected by low choline intake of the mother during pregnancy. Rima’s future research includes investigating the impacts and interactions of folate and choline consumption during pregnancy on neural tube defects such as spina bifida. In another study, she will focus on the relationship between the severity of congenital heart defects compared to neural tube defects. In particular, they wish to look at the association with low choline in the blood of the children, the mother and the father, because a pilot study suggests a family pattern, which could be due to some genetic background. (17:18)

Our next guest is Dr. Susan Smith, Deputy Director of the University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute. One of her presentations centered on choline genetics and cognition. Her research has found genetic variation in choline uptake from the diet. One research question was, “Are there choline variants that affect how powerful that choline is in treating a disease condition?” In particular, Dr. Smith was investigating if choline could be used to treat children who have brain damage from prenatal alcohol exposure, and the answer is yes, it’s very helpful. Then, they evaluated if some children benefit more than others and found that there is a gene variant that affects how efficiently choline is absorbed from the diet. Children with the variant that reduced choline uptake benefitted the most from supplemental choline. In addition, there was an impact of the gene variant on cognitive function regardless of prenatal alcohol exposure. Children who carried one or two copies of this particular variant had reduced cognitive performance as compared to those children who were lucky enough to be born with the other variant. While we still don’t have a blanket recommendation for how much choline pregnant women should consume, Dr. Smith’s message to pregnant women is that eating enough choline lets your baby achieve its full potential. (23:32)

Dr. Isis Trujillo-Gonzales and Dr. Evan Paules, both with the University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute join us. Isis focuses on choline and brain/eye development, while Evan focuses on choline and metabolic health. Dr. Trujillo-Gonzales’s research has found that the neurons in the eye that receive light and connect to the rest of our brain are impacted by choline absorption. Her lab has also investigated the mechanism of action for choline’s effect on brain development. The stem cells in the brain that give rise to neurons are very sensitive to choline availability. If a pregnant mom is not consuming enough choline, these cells in the baby’s brain are not proliferating adequately. Choline is important in the microRNA that fine-tunes the regulation of this pool of stem cells. Dr. Paules’s research is focused on the metabolic symptoms of obesity and the impact of choline on them. For example, giving choline to someone who is deficient can ameliorate the symptoms of fatty liver disease.  One area emerging in his work is the loss of lean mass as people age. It appears that increased loss of lean muscle is observed in people who aren’t consuming adequate choline. This suggests that as we age, making sure we have sufficient amounts of choline intake may help prevent the loss of lean muscle tissue. (32:58)

Dr. Bryan White with the University of Illinois is our next guest, and his area of interest is the microbiome. In particular, he discusses the role of the microbiome in TMAO production. TMAO (trimethylamine N-oxide) is a metabolite that has been associated with cardiovascular disease. In short, the microbiome produces TMA (trimethylamine), which is converted to TMAO in the liver. Some of the seminal TMAO literature suggests that there is a diet effect on the production of TMAO and that diet changes the microbiome so that more TMAO is produced in the bloodstream. When it comes to microbiome research, there are generally four questions that can be asked about the microbial community: 1) Who's there? 2) How many of them are there? 3) What can they do (given their genetic potential)? and 4) What do they do? The seminal research used 16s ribosome technology to evaluate which microbes were present and their abundance in the microbiome of people consuming omnivorous versus vegetarian diets. It stated that there was a correlation between diet and blood levels of TMAO. Dr. White took the small read archives of that manuscript (the sequencing they did of 16s ribosomes) and got the opposite results of the original paper. (42:25)

Our next guest is Dr. Jonathan Bortz with Balchem Corporation, whose presentation was titled, “TMAO and Choline: A Mechanistic Perspective.” In the last several years, there have been concerns about choline advanced by a group of investigators who have claimed that excessive intake of meat, eggs, and other animal-source foods (resulting in choline and/or carnitine upon digestion) generate a substance in the blood called TMAO, trimethylamine oxide. Their hypothesis has been that TMAO has a negative effect on the cardiovascular system and has been associated with a high incidence of cardiovascular disease. However, Dr. Bortz presented multiple examples of how the concerns about choline with respect to TMAO having a causative effect on cardiovascular disease really cannot be supported. In other words, choline does not represent a risk to any users, young or old. (51:42)

Dr. Julia Maeve Bonner with Sanofi joins us next to give an overview of her presentation about choline and Alzheimer’s disease. In her postdoctoral work at MIT, Dr. Bonner focused on the apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene, which is involved in making a protein that helps carry fat in the bloodstream. Dysfunction in this process is thought to contribute to the development of Alzheimer’s. APOE4 is the most highly validated risk factor for Alzheimer’s. Dr. Bonner wanted to understand what is happening in APOE4 high risk allele compared to the APOE3 neutral risk allele of this gene in brain cells (astrocytes) in culture. She found that the APOE4 astrocytes accumulated neutral lipids, particularly triacylglycerols, to a much higher degree than APOE3 cells. These lipid droplets is associated with many different dysfunctions in the cell that can be associated with neurodegeneration. If APOE4 cells were grown in a choline-rich media, the lipid imbalance was shifted much closer to the APOE3 cells. Dr. Bonner’s group was able to pinpoint that phosphatidylcholine synthesis is the mechanism of action by which choline supplementation had the lipid-shifting effect in APOE4 cells. She has also studied choline supplementation in mice that have Alzheimer's disease genes knocked in where they accumulate the plaques that we see in human brains in Alzheimer's disease. In the background, they also have the human APOE knocked in, which means that they're expressing either APOE3 or APOE4. Again, they saw a protection against the accumulation of some of the Alzheimer’s-related damage as well as a lipid shift similar to the brain cell cultures. (1:03:00)

To summarize the Future Directions in Choline Symposium, Dr. Dr. Stephen Hursting and Dr. Susan Smith with the University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute join us. They give their perspectives on the advancements of the field of choline research and leave us with the take-home message that choline is a critical nutrient for the entire healthspan. (1:22:27)

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss an episode of Real Science Exchange. If you haven’t checked out day one from the Future Directions in Choline Symposium, we encourage you to do so. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Guests: Dr. Stephen Hursting & Dr. Susan Smith, University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute; Dr. Steven Zeisel, University of North Carolina; Dr. Kevin Klatt, University of California, Berkeley; Dr. Richard Canfield, Cornell University; Dr. Colin Carter, Columbia University; Dr. Joe McFadden, Cornell University

Today’s episode was filmed at the Future Directions in Choline Symposium put on by the University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute.

Our first guests are Dr. Stephen Hursting and Dr. Susan Smith, the director and deputy director of the UNC Nutrition Research Institute. Steve and Susan give some background regarding the inspiration behind the conference as well as what will be covered during the symposium. The gathering is an opportunity to get the leading choline researchers together to update each other and build the momentum of choline research. The last time choline researchers gathered was in 1998, when requirements were set. (0:50)

The next guest on our roster is Dr. Mark Manary, a professor of pediatrics at the Washington University School of Medicine. Mark’s symposium talk discusses choline and food aid. Food aid products are specially designed to address needs from crisis situations. These specialized food aid products are standardized to meet great deficiency or inadequacy needs. On the most extreme side, there is a product called ready-to-eat therapeutic food for children who are starving to death. Other food aid products include those for children who are severely underweight. Dr. Manary’s research consists of clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa that include different nutrients in food aid to see if there are improvements in children’s responses. One trial with the inclusion of DHA found a 6-15 IQ point difference by adding fish oil or DHA. Mark hypothesizes that a doubling of that effect will be observed when choline is added. (6:52)

Next up is Dr. Kevin Klatt with the University of California - Berkeley. His symposium talk consisted of choline and DHA, focusing on two areas of his work. The first is dietary choline’s impact on the production of phosphatidylcholine species enriched in the omega-three DHA, specifically in pregnancy. The second is interactions between lauric acid and choline, where a phosphatidylcholine species can actually bind to proteins that turn genes on and off. In one experiment, Kevin’s group hypothesized that inadequate choline intake during pregnancy compromises the efficient handling of DHA by the liver. They showed in a randomized controlled trial that supplementation with choline dramatically improved the status indicators of DHA status. (17:33)

Our fourth segment features Dr. Richard Canfield from Cornell University, whose symposium talk focused on choline and neurodevelopment. Rick is a developmental psychologist by training who works in infant and early child cognition. He has researched visual cognition and speed of information processing with babies in the first year of life for women who received a diet containing the recommended intake of choline and those who received double the recommended intake during pregnancy. They found that cognition improved for babies in the high choline group over their first year of age, which was maintained until seven years of age. The cohort is now 14 years old, and additional testing is being conducted to see if in utero exposure to choline still impacts the children 14 years later. (29:51)

Dr. Robert Colin Carter from Columbia University is our next guest. His talk focused on choline and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). His research has mainly been fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, with a particular interest in how both maternal and child nutrition might impact the teratogenic effects of alcohol. Prenatal alcohol exposure is the most common preventable cause of developmental delay worldwide, and a common view might be that women should just stop drinking. Dr. Carter argues that view is shortsighted because alcohol use is a really complicated problem for a lot of people. Asking someone who has an alcohol use disorder to stop drinking is probably not realistic for a lot of women. In animal models, supplementing a pregnant dam with choline seems to ameliorate at least some of the teratogenic effects of alcohol. Dr. Carter has completed a pilot study of 70 women from South Africa where beneficial effects of choline treatment during pregnancy were observed for growth, neurobehavior, and memory in their children. Another clinical study with 300 participants is now underway.  (51:38)

We end our day one episode with a wrap-up from Dr. Dr. Susan Smith with the University of North Carolina Nutrition Research Institute and Dr. Joe McFadden with Cornell University. Susan emphasized the recurring message that choline is so important in prenatal health and in early postnatal periods. Pregnant and lactating women generally don’t take enough choline, and choline is so important for healthy brain development in the fetus and the infant. Joe’s takeaways from the livestock side of things include the impact of choline on colostrum production in animals and early-life supplementation in young livestock. (1:08:42)

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss day two highlights from the Future Directions in Choline Symposium in future episodes. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

The experiment was designed as a factorial with four treatments combining the two different types of silage with either 25% or 30% starch in the total diet. Only the silage was amylase-enhanced, not the corn grain that was fed. Kirby expected the amylase-enhanced silage group at 25% starch to perform best because he expected some subclinical rumen acidosis and potentially some feed intake issues at the higher dietary starch concentration. (9:09)

The experiment was eight weeks long, consisting of a two-week covariate and then a six-week feeding period with 11 cows on each of the four treatments. Blood and milk samples were collected weekly. Total tract digestibility was evaluated twice over those six weeks, once soon after silage harvest (approximately 40 days) and again six weeks later to evaluate whether the impact or efficacy of the enhanced starch enzyme changed over time. (13:29)

One surprising result was that the two silages had different in vitro NDF digestibility during week one of the feeding period. The amylase-enhanced silage had higher fiber digestibility even though the genomic enhancement is for starch digestibility. Kirby is unsure of the mechanism but hypothesizes that the amylolytic enzyme may free up some simple sugars or polysaccharides that allow microbes to have greater action and more energy available to digest fiber. By week six, the in vitro NDF digestibility of the two silages was essentially the same (15:09)

Kirby mentions that if he could do this experiment again, he would do a longer-term study for 12 or 18 weeks and start feeding the silage as green chop right away to evaluate if ensiling takes away some of the benefits of the amylase-enhancement. (19:02)

From the production data, the alpha-amylase enhancement didn't provide a benefit, but a fairly consistent benefit of additional dietary starch was observed, including increased feed efficiency, increased energy-corrected milk, and increased milk protein yield with few to no interactions in these results.

Kirby also would like to have some data looking at the impacts of these types of diets on fresh cows since the cows in this experiment averaged 160 days in milk at the start of the feeding period. (24:11)

The alpha-amylase-enhanced silage did not impact body weight, body condition, or feed intake. Kirby anticipated that the higher starch-fed cows would experience greater body weight gain in the later lactation period, but he observed the opposite. At the end of the study, an interaction was observed for feed intake where the high starch cows ate a little less - around three pounds. This resulted in a difference in feed efficiency for the high starch cows, where their intake decreased, but they maintained milk production. (25:29)

Bill asks if the feed efficiency data was adjusted for the difference in body weight change, but Kirby responds that it was just gross feed efficiency, milk over feed. Bill wonders if that adjustment would make the two groups’ feed efficiencies closer together, where it’s more of a difference in how nutrients are being partitioned rather than a difference in feed efficiency (27:26)

Another follow-up experiment Kirby would like to conduct is another factorial with the enhanced silage variety and the non-enhanced combined with a higher and lower rumen degradable protein concentration. (35:16)

Bill wonders if this experiment was conducted with silage at a later maturity, say 40-42% dry matter, would the amylase have a bigger effect? Kirby thinks there is a chance that as the kernel dries down, the amylase may have a greater impact. (38:53)

Kirby’s take-home messages for the audience are to consider the amylase-enhanced gene as an approach to bridging an inventory challenge gap from year to year and not to avoid dietary starch due to worries about subclinical inflammation. 

Kirby’s paper can be found here: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(23)00309-0/fulltext

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Dr. Fricke starts this episode by describing the long-term negative trend for reproductive performance in dairy cows that took place from the mid-1950s to around 2000. 

The reversal of this trend is due to the use of genomics to select for fertility and the use of synchronization and fertility programs in dairy cows. (6:07)

Dr. Fricke explains the high fertility cycle starts with a change in body condition. Observations from the late 1980s and early 1990s showed that cows who calved at a higher body condition and lost condition after calving had worse reproductive performance than cows who calved at a lower body condition and did not lose as much condition after calving. This is known as the Britt Hypothesis.  (13:27)

Paul describes studies aimed at finding the mechanism of action for differences in fertility. One study split cows into groups based on performance in a superovulation and embryo flushing protocol. Cows who gained body condition after calving had the best quality embryos, while cows who rapidly lost condition and didn’t gain it back had very poor quality embryos. (18:50)

In another experiment, cows were body condition scored at calving and 21 days later to measure postpartum condition change. All cows were on a double ovsynch fertility protocol. About 40% of cows lost condition over that time period, 35% maintained condition, and 25% lost condition, but milk production was the same for all. This implies that cows gaining or maintaining condition were eating more feed than those losing condition. Cows who lost condition after calving had a 25% conception rate. Cows who maintained condition had around a 40% conception rate, and cows who gained condition after calving had over 80% conception. These differences were not dependent on the synchronization protocol. (21:18)

Megan said many large farms are starting to body condition score cows at calving and 21-30 days after calving to measure and manage this. She also said cows who lose are less fertile and have a higher pregnancy loss than cows who maintain or gain condition post-calving. In a study where cows who lost three-quarters of a condition score or more from dry off to 30 days in milk had a 25% conception rate, while cows who maintained or gained body condition over that same time period had over 50% conception. (26:24)

One of Megan’s studies found cows bred with sexed semen who were submitted to a double ovsynch fixed-time protocol showed a 6-7% advantage compared to cows submitted to AI after estrus detection. The entire treatment effect was observed in cows who lost the most condition after calving. (33:18)

Paul and Megan encourage dairy producers to body condition score cows at dry off, at freshening, and 21-30 days after that. If cows are losing a large amount of condition, that could be playing a critical role in reproductive performance. In addition, the first test, fat-to-protein ratios, also tells a story about fat mobilization. A cutoff of over 40% might indicate that cows are mobilizing body fat and losing condition rather than going up to the bunk to eat to drive milk production. (40:03)

Megan and Paul said that taking a herd from a low fertility cycle to a high fertility cycle includes an aggressive reproductive management program, evaluating somatic cell count and mastitis to ensure those aren’t impacting fertility, and taking a critical look at the nutrition program, including grouping cows with different rations. (46:54)

Megan’s final thought for the audience is that having cows in the high fertility cycle with aggressive reproductive management to increase our reproductive performance really gives us a lot of power. Managing cow body condition score drives profitability and allows a lot of opportunities. (1:01:05)

Paul concludes that over his 25 years on faculty at Wisconsin, he’s lived through the whole reproduction revolution in the dairy industry. Right now, the high fertility cycle is the big barrier to the performance on dairies, but this is very doable. If you get herds into the high fertility cycle, everything is easier. Cows are healthier. Milk production is great. Reproduction's good. (1:01:55).

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Our Real Science Exchange pubcast always has leading scientists and industry professionals discussing the latest ideas and trends, and tonight, we have two distinguished guests. Dr. Limin Kung and Bonni Kowalke join us to discuss wild yeasts in silage.

Dr. Kung begins by giving an overview of the impacts of wild yeast on silage, where they're either going to anaerobically ferment sugars to ethanol or aerobically; these wild yeasts can lead to spoiled silages and spoiled TMR. (8:32)

Bonni and Limin then go on to detail management strategies and practices for reducing the impacts of wild yeast on silage and TMR, including harvest speed, silage moisture content, pack density, feed-out rate, and additives. (10:59)

Bonni gives her perspective as a consultant about how she works with clients ahead of silage harvest to be able to prevent wild yeast infestation or any other problems. Most of her notes come right after harvest is finished with a list of things the farm wants to do differently next time, which she likens to a game plan for a team sport. (18:09)

Dr. Kung describes how to determine if you have an issue with wild yeast in silage. Primarily, one would see aerobic instability via heating and perhaps molding. There will be a distinct telltale odor as well. Unfortunately, there is no on-farm test; samples must be sent to the lab for analysis. (23:10)

Limin and Bonni give their top issues in regard to silage quality that they see in the field, along with ways to help producers get the very best quality silage off their fields each year. (26:40)

This takes a turn into a discussion about how drone technology could be used in the future for perfecting silage moisture content predictions in the field before chopping. (32:02)

Scott asks Bonni and Limin about the addition of NPN (such as urea or anhydrous ammonia) or sugar sources (such as molasses) to silage and what kind of impact that might have on silage quality. (37:24)

Bonni gives an overview of silage inoculants and additives. (47:13)

Limin and Bonni conclude by comparing the stability of legume silages and corn silages, an overview of inoculation best practices, and their take-home messages to ensure high-quality silage. (51:28)

As mentioned in the show, Bonni Kowalke’s contact information at Stem Ag Consulting is bonni@stemagconsulting.com.

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

In this journal club episode, Dr. Alex  Bach with the Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies joins Dr. Bill Weiss from the Ohio State University. 

Dr. Weiss introduces the paper as one that's immediately applicable to the industry and answers a question he received a lot during his Extension career: What's the cost of moving cows? This research gives us some real data to help producers on cow management. (3:49)

Dr. Bach states that grouping cows is necessary, and the goal is to feed cows as close to their requirements as possible. But in a practical world, that can be difficult, and producers may resist moving cows due to the increased work and perceived drop in milk production. Dr. Bach gathered data from the field to see if that's the case or not by evaluating three farms with different diets and evaluating income over feed cost. (4:33)

Dr. Bach goes on to describe the farms and the methods his team used for estimating individual cow intakes in a group pen setting. Cow pen/group changes coincided with a diet change. Individual farms made their own ration decisions and pen movement decisions. (8:17)

In general, cows moved from a high to a medium to a low diet over the course of lactation. Primiparous cows moved from the fresh pen to the medium diet. If diet differences were adequate between groups, the loss in milk was compensated by the lower cost ration, and producers made an additional 20-30 cents per cow per day in income over feed costs. However, if the diets were more similar, lower feed costs did not compensate for the loss in milk production. (15:30)  

Dr. Weiss asks Dr. Bach if he could only build two rations, a high and a low, how would he do that? Dr. Bach’s approach is to look at a histogram of milk production in the pen and split that into quantiles. His goal is to make a ration that satisfies at least 70% of the animals in the pen for the high diet and around 60% of the animals in the pen for the low diet. (24:36)

Dr. Bach also ran a sensitivity analysis evaluating how results would change if milk prices or feed costs (or both) went up or down. He found that the higher the milk price, the more resilient a farm will be to a single diet and that feed cost is the opposite. The most interesting scenario is high feed costs and low milk prices - that's where it's almost mandatory to make groups, if you want to survive on a dairy. (27:23)

Dr. Bach evaluated the change in nutrient intake for the diet switch and projected the milk production change from that nutrient change compared to how the cows actually performed. The cows always lost less milk production than predicted. Dr. Bach thinks the main reason is that the cows were overfed before moving. (37:46)

Dr. Bach invites the audience to experiment a little bit with grouping cows. Don't be afraid of losing milk, and look beyond milk. Put in place mechanisms on the farm that allow you to measure income over feed costs as the ultimate goal. Cows are flexible, so don't be afraid of making a mistake. If something goes wrong, it will go wrong for a short period of time. You can correct it. You can change the diet right away, and the cows will recover. (46:14)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper here: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2022-22875

Author: Dr. Alex Bach

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

In this episode, we welcome back the fan-favorite journal club podcast. Dr. Bill Weiss joins Scott and Clay for this episode, discussing a large study from Germany evaluating the time spent in the pre-fresh group and its impacts on health and production. 

Dr. Weiss begins with a description of the study’s overall research question of “How long should a cow stay in the pre-fresh pen?” - and the researchers’ hypothesis that time periods too short or too long would be detrimental to both cow health and production. (3:14)

The study had a wide range of days in the pre-fresh pen, ranging from around seven days to about a month, with a mean of 18 days. This is similar to the general industry recommendation of 21 days. (7:16)

Diets were typical of a U.S. diet, although DCAD concentrations would be considered moderate. (9:42)

The longer heifers were in the pre-fresh pen, the higher their milk production was. A quadratic effect was observed in the multiparous cows, where too short was detrimental to milk production, and too long was detrimental to milk production. (11:56)

If the time spent in the pre-fresh pen was less than seven days, both cows and heifers were at higher risk for retained placenta. (14:30)

On the other hand, more extended periods of time in the pre-fresh pen were related to higher incidences of clinical hypocalcemia. (16:40)

Metritis and ketosis were also higher for cows who spent shorter periods of time in the pre-fresh pen, with three weeks best for these health issues. (19:26)

From these results, Dr. Weiss recommended that if calcium metabolism is an issue on a farm, leaning toward a shorter pre-fresh period of around two weeks may be beneficial. On the other hand, if other issues like mastitis, metritis, and retained placentas are an issue, leaning toward three weeks may be most appropriate. Regardless, don’t put cows in the pre-fresh pen for less than a week or more than 35 days. (20:37)

Dr. Weiss suggested an interesting next-step study would be to feed a DCAD diet for the full dry period to both cows and heifers. (28:32)

Dr. Weiss detailed some of the differences observed between cows and heifers in this study and how more research needs to be done around first-lactation cows because heifers are not just little cows. (35:35)

You can find this episode’s journal club paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030223002230

Authors: P.L. Venjakob, W. Heuwiese, S. Borchardt

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

To conclude this mini series, Dr. Pete Hansen of the University of Florida presents on the topic of using methyl donors to regulate an early embryo and create an epigenetic effect. This talk was given at the 2022 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference, and is the fourth part of this series.

Beginning his presentation, Dr. Hansen highlights how nutrition can cause epigenetic reprogramming of the fetus. Methyl groups can be added to increase the pattern of DNA methylation in cells and change the phenotype. 3:55

To elaborate on DNA methylation, Dr. Hansen gives the example of placenta vs. embryo cells. A micrograph of both cell types shows that placenta cells have much larger amounts of methylation than embryo cells, indicating that placenta cells are specifically programmed while methylation of embryo cells can still be influenced by the environment. 4:57

Continuing on the topic of methylation, Dr. Hansen discusses how DNA methylation silences specific genes, such as in skin cells or mammary glands. The methylation in the dam can be recapitulated in offspring, representing an epigenetic pattern. 14:42

Opportunities to increase DNA methylation exist. Dr. Hansen points out that altering the environment of an embryo by growing it in vitro for just seven days changes the phenotype. 23:10

How can this knowledge be used to the advantage of the dairy industry?

Seeking to answer this question, Dr. Hansen and his graduate students added large amounts of choline (excellent source of methyl groups) to cultured embryos. They found the addition of choline to increase triglyceride accumulation and DNA methylation. 31:45

After allowing the choline-treated embryos to mature in the recipient cattle, Dr. Hansen and his colleagues found the dams to have longer gestation lengths. This likely led to the higher birth weight of the calves which persisted into weaning. While a high birth weight is not particularly beneficial, a higher weaning weight certainly can be. 36:30

Finishing up his presentation, Dr. Hansen refers to the common animal science equation: phenotype = genetics + environment. He praises the dairy industry’s proficiency in using genetic selection to create better offspring, but he states that improvements could be made in the environment, suggesting that more focus be placed on the prenatal environment. 41:37

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Part three of the podcast series from the 2022 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference is Dr. Eric Ciappio’s presentation about the importance of choline in prenatal human nutrition. Dr. Ciappio is with Balchem Corporation.

Dr. Ciappio begins with an overview of one of the main roles of choline in the body: supporting overall brain health and cognitive function, primarily through its role as a precursor to the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. (3:20)

Eric then reviews several key pieces of research from the literature, beginning with a prospective cohort study looking at choline intake of the mother during pregnancy and the visual-spatial memory of their child seven years later. Moms who were in the highest quartiles of choline intake were correlated with significant improvement in visual-spatial memory of their children measured seven years later. (5:45)

Researchers at Cornell investigated two levels of choline supplementation for pregnant women during the second and third trimester. One group received low choline, 25 milligrams, or 550 milligrams a day of choline, slightly more than the daily recommended intake for pregnant women. Women in the high choline group had higher blood choline throughout the experiment and that increased choline was also observed in cord blood at delivery. (6:48)

Another Cornell study compared two groups of pregnant women, one who received approximately the recommended daily intake for choline and one who received roughly twice the recommended daily intake of choline during the third trimester. These were achieved through a controlled diet prepared in a metabolic kitchen plus supplemental choline. Once babies were delivered, cognitive testing was performed regularly from four months to 13 months. Babies born to mothers who consumed the higher dietary choline level had significantly faster visual processing speed compared to those born to the lower dietary group of women. Additionally, the number of days of prenatal exposure to choline was actually significantly associated with a faster reaction time, even within the lower choline intake group. (8:39)

These same children were followed up at seven years of age with no additional intervention and subjected to a sustained attention test. Children born to the high choline-supplemented group of women had a significantly higher score overall on the sustained attention test. The beneficial effects of maternal choline supplementation during the third trimester of pregnancy are still present at age seven. (14:46)

Choline also has a second important role in lipid metabolism, primarily to help generate phosphocholine and phosphatidylcholine which play both structural and functional roles: a structural component in the overall cell membranes and helps to transport specific lipids throughout the body. In particular, choline is critical for DHA transport. DHA is critical for maternal nutrition, as it is implicated in reduction of risk of preterm birth and overall support of the development of the eye and the brain (19:54)

In the study with 25 vs 550 milligrams of choline supplementation during the second and third trimesters (6:46), the researchers also supplemented the two groups with DHA. Supplementation with choline plus DHA during pregnancy improved DHA status better than just supplementing with DHA alone. (22:48) 

In large dietary intake surveys of choline across the United States, just 6% of adult women in the United States get enough choline in their diet. Less than one in 20 pregnant women are getting enough choline in their diet relative to the daily recommended intake. Reviewers of the dietary guidelines showed that many prenatal supplements do not contain choline or only contain small amounts inadequate to meet recommendations. Similar observations have been reported worldwide. Furthermore, DHA inadequacy is common in pregnant and lactating women. (24:11)

Dr. Ciappio concludes his presentation with the reminder that choline is an essential nutrient that helps support the growth and development of the brain and supports brain health throughout the lifespan. Despite these benefits, just 4% of pregnant women in the United States get enough choline in their diet. Expert groups are calling on manufacturers to increase the amount of choline in prenatal supplements. (26:25) 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Covering the topic of Fetal Hyperthermia, Dr. Jimena Laporta of the University of Wisconsin is the second podcast at the 2022 Tri-State Dairy Conference. This makes up part two of the conference series.

Heat stress is known to be a significant issue for dairy cattle with both global temperatures and sensitivity of dairy cattle to heat rising. Dr. Laporta adds that negative effects of heat stress last for multiple generations and lactations. 1:16

While heat stress affects all cattle, Dr. Laporta focuses on dry cows and their offspring, to provide a more holistic view of its effects. Beginning with the dry cow, she notes that heat stress lessens milk production, as it derails involution and redevelopment. 3:59

Epigenetics play a role in fetal development in the dry cow - fetal hyperthermia creates changes in the DNA of the fetus, altering the epigenome. 11:22

What are the effects of fetal hyperthermia short term and long term, as well as across generations?

Dr. Laporta details many short term hallmarks of prenatal heat stress: the dam experiences a reduction in gestation length leading to a premature calf that has organ alterations, less of an immune response, less feed intake, and a higher core body temperature. 16:31

Analyzing a large data set of cattle affected by fetal hyperthermia, Dr. Laporta finds long term effects. The daughters had lower survival rates and less production each lactation, which carried over to the next 2-3 generations. Heat stress effects cost the dairy industry $1.4 billion. 23:08

Turning her focus to the molecular signature of heat stress, Dr. Laporta discusses her findings from inspecting a mammary gland, concluding that heat stress causes a lower cell proliferative capacity and negatively impacts protein synthesis. Both lead to compromised milk storage and synthetic capacity. 29:28

Wrapping up, Dr. Laporta states that heat stress negatively affects growth, organ development, immune function, survival, longevity, and milk yield for multiple generations. However, she believes that management and nutritional intervention can reduce such effects. 36:58

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

This is the first in a series of presentations given at the 2022 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference. Epigenetics of different environments and reactions is the topic at hand, presented by Dr. Jack Britt of Jack H Britt Consulting.

Dr. Britt begins by clarifying that epigenetics (transmittable changes in genetic behavior of an individual), are only beginning to be understood. This is partly due to the intricacies of DNA. For instance, the expression of DNA can vary greatly and the process of synthesizing a protein is much more complex than DNA to RNA to protein. 5:32

The tendency of DNA to change over time is the focus of epigenetics, creating positive DNA changes is the focus of multiple dairy cattle studies discussed.

After pointing out that epigenetics is mainly influenced by environment and management, Dr. Britt discusses its implications by giving an example of the pregnant cow. Each pregnant cow represents three separate generations at one time: the cow, fetus, and ovaries in the fetus. 8:34

Genes multiply to produce new life and continue multiplying after birth in various types of cells. Thus, Dr. Britt notes that a change in a gene, such as when a methyl group alters DNA expression, that alteration multiplies along with the gene, creating an epigenetic effect. 11:25

Studying epigenetics is commonly done in twins, Dr. Britt gives the example of his identical twin brother. His brother died of Parkinson’s disease a few years ago, demonstrating that the disease is an epigenetic (due to environmental change) disease instead of a genetic one. 14:56

What are areas where epigenetics have significantly impacted the production of dairy cattle?

Numerous cases are detailed by Dr. Britt, one being the decrease in fertility that correlates with a body condition score loss after calving. An oocyte matures in approximately 101 days, meaning it begins to develop soon after calving, when the cow is potentially at the lowest weight. The egg produced by this cow typically dies 4-5 days after fertilization. 23:07

Technology has created improvements in environment and management factors. Dr. Britt references the University of Guelph, where a new technology is being used to monitor and distribute calves’ energy intake to ensure they consistently gain weight during weaning. 28:57

Concluding his talk, Dr. Britt poses the question: How can technology be used to create a reputable activity score of important factors among each herd? Such a score would allow for long term comparison across herds, allowing for epigenetics to estimate performance. 33:45

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Our Real Science Exchange pubcast always has leading scientists and industry professionals discussing the latest ideas and trends, and tonight we have three distinguished guests. Dr. Jim Drackley, Dr. Mike Van Amburgh, and Dr. Jim Quigley join us to discuss the weaning period and why it can be so traumatic for dairy calves.

Dr. Drackley leads off by describing that this topic is popular because it's still a problem. The advantages of feeding more milk during the milk feeding period are clear, but there can be system failure around the weaning transition from large amounts of milk to starter. There's often some slump in growth or even calf loss in some cases. (04:40)

Dr. Drackley emphasizes the importance of a properly texturized feed, starch content in calf starter, weaning age, and feeding too much hay which leads into a discussion about the importance of butyrate over propionate in rumen development. (05:31) 

Dr. Quigley tackles the idea of weaning age and rumen development, stating that research has found NDF digestibility isn’t mature until the calf has reached a threshold of about 15 kilograms of cumulative NFC intake. The latest NAHMS study suggested a typical weaning age in the industry of about nine weeks and this usually coincides with the NFC threshold (10:39)

Dr. Van Amburgh suggests that patience may be lacking when it comes to the weaning transition. Research shows taking more time to transition from milk to solid feed in a stepwise manner can lessen or remove the post-weaning performance lag. (19:41)

Dr. Van Amburgh goes on to reiterate the importance of butyrate production in rumen development and that the inclusion of simple sugars into calf starters rather than high levels of starch are beneficial. (21:26)

Dr. Drackley then reaffirms the importance of a gradual transition from milk given the cow’s natural lactation curve. A calf would be receiving less and less milk each day, not an abrupt shift to a different diet which often is not mimicked in weaning transition programs. (25:18)

Dr. Morrow gives the veterinarian perspective and agrees with the panel that a proper weaning transition program could take away a lot of the respiratory disease impacts on post-weaning performance. (27:14)

The panel shifts to speak to the long term impacts of a poor weaning transition program. Dr. Drackley emphasizes calves who experience disease have both lower longevity and lower milk production in the herd. (29:26)

Dr. Van Amburgh cites European research that showed if nutrition from weaning on didn’t achieve target body weights at certain stages of physiological development, reproductive efficiency was decreased as a heifer and as a lactating cow. (30:13)  

Each panelist gives an overview of the “perfect” calf weaning program. Dr. Quigley emphasizes a slow transition with high diet quality before and after weaning (32:46)

Dr. Van Amburgh further underlines the importance of calf starter diet quality, focusing on simple sugars and amino acids, rather than starch and crude protein (37:29)

Dr. Drackley focuses on the fact that digestive tract development is allometric during this time in the calf’s life, where the digestive tract develops at a faster rate than the rest of the body. Ensuring the calf has adequate nutrition to support this growth is imperative, and is an important focus for future research. (41:37)

Dr. Van Amburgh suggests that changing the way starter is presented to calves so they know it’s feed is critical because they may not be in an environment where they can learn from others. (48:18)

The panel wraps up with one piece of advice for calf weaning programs: be patient! (50:33)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Today’s episode was filmed at the 2023 Poultry Science Association Annual Meeting in Philadelphia, PA and is the second podcast of two from PSA. Balchem’s technical team chose abstracts of interest from the meeting and those researchers are our guests today. 

We kick off the show with Emmillie Boot and Dr. Ramon Malheiros from North Carolina State University. Emmillie’s research compared bell drinkers and gender-specific (different lines for roosters and hens) nipple-type drinkers for broiler breeders. She looked at the differences between egg production, egg fertility, and rooster fertility between nipple drinker lines and bell drinker lines. The major takeaway was that egg fertility was higher in the nipple drinker lines at the end of the flock cycle. (01:46)

Emmillie’s abstract is titled: “Comparison of bell drinkers and gender-specific nipple type drinkers, without catch cups, on broiler breeder fertility and egg production”

Our next guest is Catherine Fudge from the University of Georgia. Catherine is working to develop a histomoniasis infectious model for broiler breeders. Her lab is an Extension lab and a grower made an interesting observation that whenever he would place cedar shavings in his house, he noticed a drop in his insect population, and insects carry histomoniasis into chicken or turkey houses by way of a vector. Catherine began to evaluate this via benchtop experiments investigating the ability of cedar shavings and cedar extract to repel darkling beetles. (07:20)

Catherine’s abstract is titled: “Evaluation of cedar products against Histomonas meleagridis in vitro”

Next up is Dr. Lisa Bielke from North Carolina State University. Dr. Bielke presented research about the use of feed additives such as probiotics, symbiotics, organic acids, or essential oils as a way to prevent disease in poultry with the result being less antibiotic use. She emphasized that if birds are sick, and antibiotics are needed, then the birds should be treated with antibiotics, but that prevention is also key to bird health. (15:18)

Lisa’s abstract is titled: “Role of Feed Additives for Improving Health and Controlling Disease in Poultry”

Our fourth guest is Kyle Venter from the University of Pretoria. His research focuses on reducing dependence on rock phosphate by improving the digestibility of phosphorus in feed ingredients. Kyle pointed out that once phosphorus digestibility has been maximized from the diet, then one should formulate to the bird’s actual calcium and phosphorus requirements on a digestible basis, rather than using a total calcium, available phosphorus system. (23:12)

Kyle’s abstract is titled: “Evaluating the efficacy of three commercial phytase enzymes based on broiler performance and production economics” 

Next in the lineup are Leticia Orellana Galindo from Auburn University, and Dr. Ken Macklin from Mississippi State University. Their research evaluates egg translucency and color intensity with egg quality parameters. Hatchability is a major issue in the broiler industry and previous research found that less translucent eggs had higher hatchability and darker color intensity eggs also had higher hatchability. In this abstract, Leticia evaluated the relationship between translucency and color intensity with internal and external egg quality parameters. 

(31:05)

Letecia’s abstract is titled: “Relationship between eggshell translucency and color intensity with egg quality parameters on broiler eggs”

When in Philadelphia, what better guest to have than Dr. Benjamin Franklin? Ben tells us about his scientific research regarding electricity and lightning and gives a perspective on agriculture in his day. (45:23)

Our final guests are Cara Cash and Dr. Giri Athrey from Texas A&M University. Cara’s research is data analysis based and she modeled the impact that decreasing broiler breeder fertility could have on broiler production, the climate, and the economy. Her model predicts that declining fertility could result in large increases in the amount of feed required for broiler production and the amount of greenhouse gasses created by broiler production. (49:14)

Cara’s abstract is titled: “The Effects of Broiler Breeder Fertility on Global Food Security”

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss an episode of the Real Science Exchange! 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Today’s episode was filmed at the 2023 Poultry Science Association Annual Meeting in Philadelphia, PA. Balchem’s technical team chose abstracts of interest from the meeting and those researchers are our guests today. 

We kick off the show with Andy Vance, Executive Director of the Poultry Science Association. Andy speaks to the growth of the conference, the presentations and attendance and reinforces that the Poultry Science Association exists to advance science in the poultry industry. (01:20)

Our second guest is Dr. John Halley with J. Halley Poultry Consulting. John conducted an industry survey about how companies handle data. Are companies digitizing data or just staying with what they’ve been doing? John’s presentation covered how data flows through poultry companies today, as well as where we may be going in the future. (05:56)

John’s abstract was titled: “Current Data Insights and Practices for a Poultry Nutritionist”

Next on the guest roster is Addison Elstner from Texas A&M University. Addison’s research objective was to use a different basal diet than traditional corn and soy to stress birds with high inclusions of other cereal grains. This effort was to create a preliminary model of different cereal diets and their impact on intestinal health, performance and animal welfare. This preliminary work builds a foundation for the addition of feed additives and enzymes to those nontraditional diets in the future. (12:04)

Addison’s abstract was titled: “Phase ingredients change in the diet formulation as a possible model to test feed additive efficacy in broiler chickens” 

Our fourth guest is Dr. Chasity Pender from DSM Nutritional Products. Her abstract presented data compiled over the past year for vitamin A recovery levels. The DSM internal laboratory had samples of broiler, broiler breeder vitamin premixes, and broiler and broiler breeder feeds. With those samples, they measured vitamin A recovery levels and evaluated the variation in the different feedstuffs. (15:09)

Chastity’s abstract was titled: “Evaluation of Vitamin A Recoveries in Broiler and Broiler Breeder Premixes and Finished Feeds”

The next guest in our lineup is Dr. Valentina Caputi with the USDA-ARS Poultry Production and Product Safety Research Unit in Fayetteville, Arkansas.The main objective of her research is to look for alternatives to antibiotics to fight the carriage of foodborne pathogens in the poultry industry. Dr. Caputi’s specific expertise is the study of the enteric nervous system, which is the nervous system that is intrinsic on the gut wall and is distributed throughout the overall gastrointestinal tract. Her abstract evaluated how heat stress during the pre-harvest stage of poultry production affects the enteric nervous system, the intestinal microbiota, and overall gut health and how this can predispose the animal to be susceptible to colonization by a food pathogen, such as salmonella or campylobacter. (21:34)

Valentina’s abstract was titled: “Heat stress induces regional-dependent modulation of aquaporin 4 expression in the enteric nervous system of broiler chickens”

Lastly, we are joined by Dimitri Malheiros and Dr. Ken Anderson, from North Carolina State University. Dimitri’s research assessed cage densities during the pullet rearing phase. While other previous studies focused on increased stocking densities, Dimitri and Dr. Anderson wanted to focus on lower stocking densities to evaluate if pullet welfare would be improved in less dense cages. (32:42)

Dimitri’s abstract was titled: “Influence of cage rearing density on pullet growth parameters and fearfulness.”

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss the additional highlights from the 2023 Poultry Science Association Annual Meeting in future podcast episodes. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

A Journal Club podcast is a staff and fan favorite, and joining us for today’s Journal Club is Dr. Gonzalo Ferreira from Virginia Tech and Dr. Bill Weiss from The Ohio State University. Dr. Ferreira will be discussing his paper about including alfalfa in multigravida Holsteins. 

Dr. Ferreira starts with an overview of his research and said that he did a preliminary trial in Virginia Tech and saw that the urine pH was being decreased by using a product called polyhalite. (5:36) 

Dr. Weiss pointed out that the study had a fair number of clinical hypocalcemia, about 10-15%, which is high. (27:39) 

Dr. Ferreira said that in testing the polyhalite, he included between 400-500 grams per cup per day. And everything was going well in the case of Calcium Chloride; it is stronger, so you can add less and have the same acidification process. (37:03) 

Dr. Ferreira wrapped up by encouraging people doing research not to get stuck in a theory. Sometimes you need to get out of the box and try different things. (48:45) 

You can find Dr. Ferreira’s paper here: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(23)00170-4/fulltext

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Our first guests are Dr. Corwin Nelson, University of Florida and Kari Estes, Balchem. Dr. Nelson is the overall committee chair for the conference and said more than 1,300 abstracts were submitted. Of those, 1,254 were accepted to present at the ADSA conference. (1:44) Ms. Estes, who was a poster judge mentioned she looks for the aesthetics of the poster, but was also impressed with the rigor of research, especially with the winning posters. (5:22) 

Our next guests are presentation winner, Ursula Abou-Rjeileh, Michigan State University and her advisor, Dr. Andres Contreras, Michigan State University. Ursula is a second-time winner and her research focuses on the effects of fatty acids on lipid accumulation and mitochondrial function in the post-partum phase. Her research showed that supplementing oleic acid with pulmonary acid, especially post-partum means cows don’t lose a lot of body weight. Her presentation name is Oleic acid promotes lipid accumulation and improves

mitochondrial function in bovine adipocytes.(10:11) 

Our third set of guests includes master’s poster winner Corienne Gammariello, The Ohio State University - Wooster and her advisor Dr. Ben Enger, The Ohio State University - Wooster. Corienne spoke about their research methods and how unique they were. She used dead bacteria and was able to elicit an immune response of an udder half, they used a split udder design model. Her poster title is Killed Staphylococcus aureus intramammary challenge

induces subclinical mastitis and clear changes in milk composition but not milk yield.(15:11) 

Next, we have Richard Lobo, winner of the Ph.D poster contest, from the University of Florida. Richard’s research was trying to replace soybean milk with algae. He saw that replacing 100% of soybean meal results in no fermentation. (20:15) More research is needed, because it is not yet known if protein that was not degraded in the rumen is going to be degraded later on, and absorbed. So we are still in the process of understanding how to use these protein sources with dairy cows. His poster title is Utilization of algae biomass as a partial replacement for

soybean meal in the diet of dairy cows in vitro. (21:25) 

Our last guests are Luke Quian, Cornell University and Connor McCabe, University of California Davis, who are the President and Vice President of the GSD (Graduate Student Division) at ADSA. Connor said that scientific presentation is a large reason to attend ADSA, but there are equal benefits and opportunities through networking, career development and professional pieces. (28:52) 

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss the additional highlights from the 2023 ADSA Annual Meeting in future podcast episodes. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Today’s podcast is the second podcast filmed at the American Dairy Science Association Annual Meeting in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Joining us are researchers with abstracts of interest chosen by the Balchem technical team.

Our first guests are Dr. Billy Brown, Kansas State University, and Dr. Heather White, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Dr. Brown said results from feeding choline in utero showed no differences in the weight of the animal or ribeye areas, but they did have greater marbling, which is exciting. (4:19) 

Dr. Brown’s poster title is: Effect of in utero choline exposure on Angus × Holstein carcass characteristics

Our second guest is Dr. Sergio Martinez Monteagudo from New Mexico State University. Dr. Martinez Monteagudo mentioned that while upcycling is not new and is used in other industries, it is more difficult to do in the food industry. Dr. Martinez Monteagudo turned lactose into something more used, sweeteners. 

Dr. Martinez Monteagudo’s presentation title: Upcycling strategies of dairy byproducts and waste for value-added applications.

Next up is Kelli Brost and Dr. Jim Drackley, both from the University of Illinois. Kelli found in her research that there is an effect on cow’s milk protein and fat percentages when looking at summer versus non-summer seasons. When you look at winter versus non-winter or winter versus summer, she saw the exact opposite. (27:50) 

Kelli’s Poster title is: Relationships between birth and calving season on first lactation performance of Holstein dairy cows in the Midwestern USA

Now, we’re hearing from Jair Parales Giron from Michigan State University. Jair’s research showed that fat has different effects from a low or high-starch diet. He also recommended that if you can’t have a high-energy or low-starch diet, fatty-acid supplementation could work. 

Jair’s presentation title is: Fatty acid supplementation interacts with starch content to alter production responses during the immediate postpartum in dairy cows

Joining us next are Tess Stahl and Dr. Pete Erickson from the University of New Hampshire. Tess studied the effects of a DCAD diet on Jersey cows. she found that minus 40 cals without and with nicotinic acid or niacin were equally feed efficient. And then there was a decrease with the minus 80. So she assumes that minus 80 is too harsh of a DCAD. (54:24)

Tess’ poster title is: Evaluation of colostrum quantity, quality, and bioactive compounds from Jersey cows fed two concentrations of dietary cation-anion difference with or without nicotinic acid and its effect on calf performance

Lastly, we have Dr. Vinicius Machado from Texas Tech University. Dr. Vinicius didn’t have any solid conclusions in his research but did notice that raising beef-on-dairy calves takes a different focus and approach than dairy cows or traditional beef cows. Throughout his portion, he hypothesizes what some options are. (1:38) 

Dr. Vinicius Machado’s presentation title is: Management of beef-on-dairy calves: Should we raise them differently?

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss the additional highlights from the 2023 ADSA Annual Meeting in future podcast episodes. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Today’s episode was filmed at the American Dairy Science Association Annual Meeting in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Joining us are researchers with abstracts of interest chosen by the Balchem technical team.

The first guest is Omid McDonald, founder of Vodcow, the chosen drink at tonight’s pubcast. Vodcow is made with a dairy byproduct called milk permeate. The sugar is fermented and turned into alcohol, with which they make vodka and blend it with Canadian Cream. (4:11) 

Our second guest is Andres Ortega and Dr. Mike Van Amburgh from Cornell University. In Andres's research, to represent mp, they tried to show metabolizing all proteins and break that down into the individual essential and nonessential amino acids. They created two diets; one that met all of the MP requirements and one that didn’t. Based on the difference of MP there, they knew how much they would infuse. (12:07) 

Andre's presentation is titled:  Abomasal infusion of essential and non-essential amino acids to evaluate energy and amino acid utilization, productive efficiencies, and metabolism in lactating dairy cattle. 

Next in our lineup are Matheus Santos and Dr. Eduardo Ribeiro from the University of Guelph. Matheus’ research found that lower feed intake and greater body weight had a less positive energy balance. A negative energy balance can lead to high immunosuppression and development of clinical disease. (24:14) 

Matheus' poster is titled: Prepartum feed intake level is associated with transition metabolism and subsequent milk production in dairy cows. 

Our third guest is Dr. Faith Reyes from the University of Wisconsin. Dr. Faith said that in dairies, we would like to see decreased competition. Previous literature has shown a linear relationship when you increase the stocking density leads to increased competition. In her research, Dr. Faith found that there was the most competition at a two-to-one stocking density. (35:02) 

Faith’s research is titled: Individual feeding consistency across stocking densities and feed efficiency in lactating cows. 

Joining us now is Mariana Marinho and Dr. Jose Santos from the University of Florida. Mariana mentioned that more efficient cows have improved rumination per kilogram of intake. More efficient cows also have lower pH and more concentration of ammonia nitrogen. With the findings from her research, Mariana suggests that the site of digestion plays a more important role in differentiating more efficient versus less efficient cows. (52:45) 

Mariana’s presentation is titled: Associations between residual feed intake(RFI) and digestibility or hepatic mitochondrial respiration in Holstein cows. 

Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss the additional highlights from the 2023 ADSA Annual Meeting in future podcast episodes. 

Lastly, we are joined by Alex Tebbe from Purina Mills. Alex is focused on transition cows, both the dry period and fresh period and how they are so influential to the cow’s long-term performance. Alex said that we could hone in on the nutrition of dry cows and fresh cows to produce a lot of milk in the future. (59:52)

Alex’s presentation is titled: Dairy nutrition to improve feed utilization - Recognizing the contributions of ADSA Fellow Dr. Bill Weiss beyond prevention of metabolic diseases: Feeding transition dairy cows for optimal performance. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Our Real Science Exchange pubcast always has leading scientists and industry professionals discussing the latest ideas and trends, and tonight we have two very well-known guests. Dr. Lance Baumgard and Dr. Jim Drackley join us to discuss cow management and the dogma that has developed over the years. 

Dr. Baumgard kicks off by explaining the dogma of the transition period - two metabolites reduce the animal’s immune system and predispose them to health disorders. (5:38) 

Dr. Drackley continued by saying he was influenced by research that could show in a clinical case of ketosis, there is an underlying subclinical, perhaps inflammatory pressure, causing the problem. (20:39) 

Dr. Baumgard mentioned utilizing ketones comes at a metabolic disadvantage: a loss of energy. So what could cows be doing if they’re able to increase their feed intake enough so they don’t have to make ketones? (27:18) 

Dr. Drackley said the million-dollar question is if inflammation is the key, what do we do about it? How do we prevent it or treat it? (31:38) 

Dr. Baumgard explained his thought process is that if even healthy cows have some level of immune activation going on in the transition period, some of this subclinical hypocalcemia that’s occurring in the transition period could be caused by immune activation. (43:50)

Dr. Drackley said as we select for high-milk production, perhaps part of that is enhanced ability to use ketones. The idea of a tenant of high milk production is you’ve got the time of lower insulin and high growth hormone driving lactation. Those are all tied up with genetic selection.  (46:40) 

Dr. Baumgard wrapped up by saying from a producer or veterinarian perspective, it’s easy to treat and get out, but what really needs to take place is a full examination; where did this immune activation come from? (54:56)

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

In this episode of the Real Science exchange pubcast Scott leads a discussion on cow monitoring technology and its benefits for cows, farmers and the environment. 

Ms. van Riemsdijk gives some history of cow monitoring, stating it started for identification of an animal and the feeding station for the purpose of separating milk. (6:58) 

Ms. van Riemsdijk said the sensors help see heat behavior as a whole in your barn, they help you find a scout and who has shorter heat periods, when heat starts and helps calculate optimal insemination time, even when you are not in the barn. (15:02) 

Mr. Borchardt said that a major drawback of the industry is integration, bringing these different technologies together into the herd management software. As an industry, how can we bring data and programs together to make smarter decisions? (26:29) 

Ms. van Riemsdijk said the sensors can be used while breeding cows. It can also be used as an intervention to understand why cows are not cycling correctly. (39:11) 

Mr. Borchardt said that when farmers adopt the sensor system, they realize there are some cows already showing a health alarm and most of the time they wouldn’t realize these cows are sick without the sensor. (47:23) 

In summary, Mr. Borchardt said that with farms, sensor technology and increased genomic data, we can get to a place where we are managing cows on an individual basis like precision feeding and reproductive management. (52:14) 

Ms. van Riemsdijk concluded by saying you can use data points from the sensor in heat behavior in the voluntary waiting period to make more strategic decisions with other experts on the farm. (58:40) 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Joining the pubcast to discuss insect protein as an alternative for the future is Katharina Unger and Dr. Pratibha Yadav. 

Unger is the CEO and founder of LIVIN Farms and an expert in edible insects and food innovation. She led the conversation by introducing her background and briefly mentioning the transformation of using insects as food protein. 8:35

Unger said she started questioning early in her career the required resources needed to produce livestock at a larger scale. After many years of research, carbon emissions studies and searching, an additive that can grow protein on the smallest possible footprint came to the forefront; insect protein. 9:41

Unger mentioned insect protein is highly digestible and for animals has an attractive taste. In addition, the environmental impacts of turning waste into protein is an effective organic byproduct. 11:05

Dr. Yadav discussed how the opportunity to utilize the black soldier fly was a decision based on its opportunity to offer low quality substrates and synthesize biomolecules into amino acids quickly. 19:30

While LIVIN Farms continues to have projects in Europe, Unger mentioned the team also does additional research in other regions which allows a wide variety of demographics to study when analyzing substrates and improvement factors. 23:17

Dr. Yadav said byproducts are already there for certain insect substrates and byproducts. In fact, she went on to say it’s a practical option as livestock production systems can be fed insects by crushing, mixing or distributing them as a way to save on costs and processing fees as well. 32:52 

While the entire insect larva process is vertical farming, Unger mentioned from the start of production to the automated warehouse and then into the two layer systems, they are never dependent on the soil. 39:10

In an effort to produce with the smallest possible footprint, the input substrate must have an adequate amount of protein, fat and carbohydrates during the nutrient composition, Dr. Yadav mentioned. 41:43

Wrapping up the conversation, Unger summarized the visionary work being done with insects as protein alternatives and restated the value the resource has on the planet's ability to secure the food system and provide indefinite solutions for the future. 1:07:25

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Gathering around the pubcast to discuss key environmentally sustainable animal agriculture practices are Lara Moody and Dr. Steve Lerner. 

Visionary leader and executive director for The Institute for Feed Education and Research (IFEEDER), Lara Moody, shared her background in stewardship and sustainability. She then introduced Dr. Lerner with Chr. Hansen. 2:30

Leading the conversation, Moody described the sustainability roadmap project and highlighted the value IFEEDER has found in delivering measurable sustainability metrics. In addition, she touched on the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social and governance. 

A roadmap project started 18 months ago and is aimed entirely at gauging a bigger picture of the sustainability landscape. Moody said it involves everything from understanding supply chain needs and how to support the industry. 14:51

Shifting gears to, Dr. Lerner shared that Chr. Hansen was founded by Christian Deli AOR Hansen who was the first to extract rennet from calves and now remains a highly effective research partner. 23:06

After deciding how to best bring sustainability innovation to the table by gathering with all different kinds of people, Moody shared that the Sustainable Agriculture Summit was founded in 2021 with the idea to collaborate about the World Wildlife Fund. Additionally, she said the summit collectively brought together the whole value chain to work on solutions, understanding that feed is 40 to 80 percent of the footprint for livestock and poultry production. 27:50

As dairy farms continue to consolidate, Dr. Lerner stated that he believes operational management has also improved through the addition of inoculants in their seed treatment, ensuring proper fermentation and staying focused on efficiency. 38:21

Not only does improving the overall health of both plants and animals increase nutrient absorption but research shows drastic benefits to gut health as well. So how are you speaking about sustainability? 

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Moody shared on the importance of shaping your story to highlight individual cost savings, efficiencies and the importance of utilizing the toolkit for the entire value chain. 57:47

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Joining together for another Journal Club to discuss vitamin D as a lactation influence on dairy cows are dairy leaders and nutritional experts Dr. Bill Weiss and Dr. Corwin Nelson. 

Dr. Weiss, professor emeritus at The Ohio State University spent nearly 33 years of his career focused on dairy cattle nutrition and has published more than 140 journal articles. He began the conversation, introducing the article “Effect of prepartum source and amount of vitamin D supplementation on lactation performance of dairy cows” and mentioning Mike Piondexter as the first publishing author. 2:20

Discussing the research study in depth was Dr. Corwin Nelson, Piondexter’s advisor. He began by introducing the Journal of Dairy Science article, highlighting the nutritional effects of supplementing vitamin D and the connection between feeding two different forms. 6:15

Dr. Nelson shared studies dating back to 1980 to indicate some vitamin D degradation. But added that most rations have between 30,000 to 50,000 units of vitamin D3 on top of basic international units. 9:40

In the article, the abstract shows productive measures such as body weight and condition, dry matter intake and factors. However, Dr. Weiss mentioned the majority of research data derived from cows during their last few weeks of weaning. 13:21

Dr. Nelson said that research also analyzed net energy between using colostrum and vitamin D, adding that feeding the 25-hydroxyvitamin D in the ration resulted in higher results of energy. 14:14

When looking at energy corrected milk, Dr. Nelson said in about 42 days he’s seen interaction between cows producing the most milk and the three milligrams per day of 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation. 19:01

Anti-inflammatory is another mode of action vitamin D has shown to effectively decrease in cows with lower serum. In fact, three to four weeks is the optimum benefit when it comes to supplementing less than the elevated 25-hydroxyvitamin D recommendation. 32:55

It was also mentioned that there may be a possible United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) grant opportunity to look at the long term effects of cow responses, maternal and neonatal vitamin D nutrition and a more focused approach to the immune system are all upcoming research modes of actions. 42:27

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Gathering together at the 2023 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference for the Balchem Mini-Symposium “New Revelations in Transition Cow Nutrition” are speakers Dr. Mike Van Amburgh, Dr. Jose Santos and Dr. Heather White. 

The mini symposium featured topics such as better understanding essential versus required nutrients, choline research as a nutritional requirement and insights on gaining the next five pounds of milk. 

Dr. Van Amburgh of Cornell University led the discussion, summarizing his report on essential and required nutrients such as amino acids and choline. He mentioned when formulating diets for lactating cows, it’s important to understand there are other nutrients that aren’t necessarily essential but are required. 4:53

Shifting the conversation, Dr. Van Amburgh said establishing an optimum value has now replaced nutrient requirements based on energy. Recent evidence indicates that feeding rumen protected choline (RPC) significantly improves milk production. In addition, supplementing choline shows an increase in low-density lipoproteins (VLDL) output from the liver.  7:21

Highlighting her research in supplementing choline, Dr. White shared that studies show a 20 to 25% increase from cells and culture after incorporating the nutrient. She added choline also increased the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA) capacity, indicating a shift in nutrient incorporation. 11:45 

As milk increases when infusing non-essential amino acids or even by using meta-analysis to supplement choline, how is glucose supply impacted? 

Dr. Santos, who focused his research on meta-analysis, said that even with the concurrent increase in dry matter intake, efficiency has still increased. He went on to say that studies from Wisconsin and Michigan highlight the basic understanding of a cow's variable ability to synthesis glucose differently with the ability to produce at least two kilograms more milk consistently. 21:30

Within some of Dr. White’s meta-analysis research, she mentioned mixing choline into the total mixed ration (TMR) allowed for the opportunity to analyze exact intake and also outcome production or energy corrected milk (ECM) fat. 34:08

If cost isn’t an issue, Dr. Santos mentioned that he’s seen experiments feeding choline longer than 21 days postpartum and into 105 days at 12.9 grams. While no major benefit showed at that dosage amount, he added that other studies have shown benefits feeding choline longer and into mid lactation. 39:41

Switching gears, Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem asked Dr. Santos about epigenetics and the effect choline has on behavioral changes. 44:59

Sharing that epigenetics shifts genomes without changing sequences, Dr. Santos mentioned that through a two-by-two factorial experiment on choline, research indicates calf behaviors shifting and performance increasing. He went on to mention that history shows 30% of calves that were born from control dams and fed colostrum from control dams died from lipopolysaccharide challenges. 51:10

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Zimmerman, podcast co-host and technical services manager for Balchem said that research speaks for itself. He stated that higher producing cows continue to prove choline as a required nutrient for transition cows. 55:50

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

The North American Intercollegiate Dairy Challenge Contest is a two day event that brings together students from around the world to gain real life, hands-on experience and learn from industry experts. Gathering together to discuss the 21st Annual Dairy Challenge are organizers, Amy tePlate-Church, Dr. Mike Van Amburgh, Kristi Fiedler and Barry Putnam.  

Fielder, Dairy Sales Manager for Cargill and Board Chair for the Dairy Challenge Committee began the conversation, explaining the value of Dairy Challenge as a networking opportunity for the next generation. (3:29)

Each team has four students and this year there were 31 competing teams. In addition, 142 students participated in the 10th Anniversary of the Academy, an intensive training program in conjunction with the Dairy Challenge contest. 

The Dairy Challenge is all about the next generation, Church mentioned. She said she believes it’s one place where students get the chance to meet many dairy leaders from various sectors, while growing and developing their skills at the same time. (3:58)

Host producers also joined in for the National Dairy Challenge Conversation, including Maxwell Chittenden from Dutch Hallow, Liam Hanahan from Turning Point Dairy and Kyle Getty from Ideal Dairy. 

As host farms, Hanehan shared that each producer opens up their operations for two hours during Dairy Challenge for students to take tours and analyze their facilities, cows and even records. He went on to say that bringing a fresh set of eyes is a bit scary, but the students think big picture and usually are able to point out great strengths and weaknesses. (12:13)

Not only do the students learn, but so do the producers. Getty said oftentimes students point out things they’ve missed or even offer feedback that turns into a simple fix. (16:50)

Stuart and Jessica Ziehm with Tiashake Farm were the 2023 Dairy Challenge Academy Host Dairy Producers. 

Sharing a few stories from the Academy, Jessica said they recently renovated a 200 year old barn into a farm store as an opportunity to not only sell their beef and pork products, but also other local products. She mentioned having students visit was a great opportunity that they hope to continue into the future. (25:09)

Also joining around the pub are National Dairy Challenge coaches Dr. Shaun Wellert, Dr. Joe Domecq and Dr. Lauren Mayo.  

Selecting just four students for each team is not an easy task, but Dr. Domecq said the process is simple as students develop new skills fairly quickly. As coaches, they figure out who works best together and their individual strengths. 33:29

Dr. Wellert shifted the conversation briefly, sharing a few changes he’s seen over the last decade. He mentioned that ten years ago each student was from an agricultural background, but now trends show only one student out of seven is from a dairy or has any industry background. (35:61)

Closing the conversation, Dr. Jeff Elliot, podcast co-host and technical service specialist for Balchem mentioned the 2023 four first place teams, students and their individual studies of interest. 

Placing first at the Dairy Challenge was four students from the University of Guelph including Madeline McClennan (Animal Biology), Allison Visser (Honors Agriculture), Corine Bateman (Food and Agricultural Business) and Johnathan Koot (Animal Science). 

In addition, Emily Starceski (Animal Science), Kevin Jess (Ag Science and Animal Science), Blake Wadsworth (Animal Science) and Caroline Lafferty (Agricultural Business) all students at Cornell University placed first as well. 

The University of Wisconsin River Falls team also won and included Alison Wagner (Dairy Science), Grace Haase (Agricultural Business), Ben Stone (Chemistry) and Haley Kirchoff (Agribusiness). 

Lastly, was Purdue University. Team members included Lane Bollenbach (Animal Science), Chad Patterson (Agriculture Systems Management), Tobyn Smith (Animal Science), Miriam Cook (Agriculture Economics). 

Congratulations to all participating teams from the 2023 North American Intercollegiate Dairy Challenge! 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Joining together around the pub to discuss methane emission metrics are experts Dr. Joe McFadden and Dr. Peri Rosenstein. 

Dr. McFadden, an animal science professor at Cornell University, has focused much of his research and career on studying the interactions between nutrition, environment and animal food production. 

After discussing mitigating enteric methane emissions during the Real Science Lecture series, more than 600 people listened to the episode. In fact, Dr. McFadden’s research in defending the dairy industry has been highlighted in both The Hill and Time magazines. 

Dr. McFadden began the conversation by mentioning he ultimately believes a percentage of total greenhouse gas emissions is methane. He went on to mention that reducing methane emissions does enhance production, and the industry should be in favor of the shift. 9:04

While methane remains a major contributor to agricultural food production, livestock emissions from the glimpse of total greenhouse gas emissions remain relatively low, raising questions on where the focus of enteric methane mitigation should be. 

Progress is moving the needle from management, genetics, nutrition and enhanced efficiency. 

Dr. Rosenstein and Dr. McFadden’s research focuses on South Asia, specifically India, as there are nearly 75 million small dairy farmers and about 300 million buffalo. Dr. McFadden shared that while the country produces around 20% of total global dairy production, it is also the highest producer of methane. 15:30

Cattle are a source of national food security and are a way of life for many people, Dr. Rosenstein added, mentioning the goal is not to pivot completely but instead offer resources to optimize cattle productivity through nutrition, animal health and breeding. 20:22

In addition to the Environmental Defense Fund studies in South Asia, Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem, asked about any other current research taking place. 22:03

Just recently, Dr. McFadden said the plans and proposals for the additional construction at the Cornell University research facility were implemented. He added he believes the opportunity to pivot not only allows his team the position to test the next solutions that reduce enteric methane but to continue acquiring various green feeding units. 23:25

Dr. McFadden then shifted the conversation to highlight the importance in studying feed duration through green feed study trials. Whether three weeks or three months long, he mentioned they offer a greater understanding when analyzing lactation, supplementation or even replacement strategies. 28:21

When discussing strategies for enteric methane mitigation, Dr. Rosenstein mentioned they not only have to have proper feed additives but also be safe for both humans and animals alike. 32:31

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. McFadden summarized the urgency in being transparent on effective additives and encouraged feed manufacturing and feed additive companies to think about markets in new countries as an opportunity to collaborate and expand. 44:10

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Joining together for the final episode of the New Revelations in Transition Cow Nutrition mini series from the 2022 Cornell Nutrition Conference to discuss animal nutrition requirements are remarks from Dr. Heather White of the University of Wisconsin and topical insights from Dr. Clay Zimmerman of Balchem. 

Discussing the challenges a cow faces during transition to lactation, Dr. White briefly began the series highlighting the impact both negative energy and nutrient balance has during each period. 3:58 

When a cow enters different cycles such as pre-partum, her energy requirements vary and balance among glucose, negative amino acids and macro and micronutrients becomes critical factors. 

So how can nutritionists maximize adaptive mechanisms to shift precursors or ingredients to maximize lactation efficiency? 

Beginning with key lactation performance supplements, Dr. White mentioned choline is a nutrient with the ability to impact milk yield and improve energy production. In fact, a 21-day choline study from the University of Wisconsin indicated a 4.6 pound per day increase and substantially greater carryover ratios. 15:28

Not only has research shown the immediate production benefits of choline, but also the positive impact the nutritional supplement has had on liver lipids during calving. 

Dr. White added that with three available methyl groups, choline also plays a valuable role in methyl donating which has long lasting effects on liver metabolism and overall nutrition. 20:21 

In addition, research shows that supplementing cows with rumen protected choline (RPC) ultimately improves calf growth, immune functions and metabolic health as well. 

However, when discussing health and clinical improvements in a prepartum cow, Dr. White mentioned the key is to understand the next generation is developing in utero. She then shifted the conversation, echoing the importance of choline supplementation in multiple generations as body score conditions fluctuate. 35:53

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Zimmerman summarized key points that Dr. White shared and highlighted the impressive milk yield results from the University of Wisconsin study. 45:32

If you would like to review Dr. White’s webinar from the 2022 Cornell Mini Symposium, you can view all four webinar series at balchem.com/realscience. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

On this third episode of the New Revelations in Transition Cow Nutrition from the 2022 Cornell Nutrition Conference four-part mini-series to discuss animal nutrition requirements are remarks from Dr. Barry Bradford of Michigan State University and topical insights from Dr. Clay Zimmerman of Balchem. 

Bringing forward recent research on transition cow studies, Dr. Bradford began the conversation by highlighting the 2022 Michigan State University study that aimed to understand metabolic physiology better. 3:30

While the focus is usually on refining nutritional strategies, Dr. Bradford suggested the bigger question is how dairy farmers will leverage efficiency and productivity in the future. 4:31

Focusing much of his professional career on better understanding nutrient requirements and capabilities in dairy cattle, Dr. Bradford remains dedicated to helping the industry understand ways to achieve the next five pounds of milk sustainably. 

When limiting cow health problems, Dr. Bradford shifted his focus to analyze epidemiological studies on lactation sustainability and the impact of conditions during milk production. 6:15

Influencing the microbiome continues to be a metric for achieving higher production levels, but what are other strategies? 

Dr. Bradford shared that choline continues to impact phospholipid synthesis and transportation to the mammary gland positively. He added that the focus of choline in transition cows directly affected liver health and suggested analyzing choline concentration in early lactation stages. 12:27

Within the study, Dr. Bradford mentioned research showed active choline cells became less responsive to inflammatory stimuli. He mentioned that choline concentration not only increased mRNA, but overall he saw an 80% increase in colostrum yield from the supplemented study. 25:27

Just a week into lactation, Dr. Bradford’s research showed cows produced nearly 100 pounds of milk daily. But what were some additional effects of choline on the cows? 

While there weren’t any negative impacts on productivity, Dr. Bradford mentioned the study showed baseline research on the anti-inflammatory significance and body circulation through plasma TNF. 33:31 

Dr. Bradford added they also looked at carryover effects of lipid protein (LP) in days 22 to 84, sharing they saw milk yield peak with added LP and choline supplementation. He shared that the LP carryover yielded another five pounds per day and remained steady for another two months post-challenge. 43:33

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Zimmerman summarized key strategies Dr. Bradford shared and mentioned the value in protecting choline during transitional periods to not only impact herd health but increase milk yield overall. 54:55

If you would like to review Dr. Bradford’s webinar from the 2022 Cornell Mini Symposium, you can view all four webinar series at balchem.com/realscience. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Joining together for the second episode of the New Revelations in Transition Cow Nutrition from the 2022 Cornell Nutrition Conference four-part mini-series to discuss animal nutrition requirements are remarks from Dr. Jose Santos, University of Florida and topical insights from Dr. Clay Zimmerman from Balchem. 

Bringing forward the most recent research on choline supplementation, Dr. Santos began the second in the series focusing on nutritional mechanisms and their essential benefits in animal growth and performance. 3:45

Choline was first introduced in the 1700s by chemists and pharmacists. Still, it wasn’t until about 40 years ago that Derek Lindsay from England discovered that most phospholipids in ruminants are synthesized de novo. 

Dr. Santos mentioned that studies show more than 90% of choline in feeds doesn’t show up past the rumen, adding to the lag in understanding when the essential nutrient shows up in the small intestine. 5:32

As a required nutrient, Dr. Santos shared that choline is required for the structural integrity of cell membranes, neural tissue and the components of phospholipids and sphingolipids. 7:01

As cows approach calving and during the first two weeks of lactation, Dr. Santos suggests that it is the optimum time to provide choline as a building block for phosphatidylcholine. 17:35

Sharing a heat map study on the effects of choline in hepatic tissue, Dr. Santos said it ultimately shows that supplementing choline reduces glycerol and increases the synthesis of phosphatidylcholine. He added that as studies focus on hepatic triglyceride, acid basis or dry matter basis, the benefits of choline at different dosage levels benefit the same.  22:30

But do low-body condition cows react to choline supplementation the same as high-body condition cows during the transition period? 

Dr. Santos shifted directions, adding that he’s found low body conditions cows responded to choline with more milk and energy. He added that studies show supplying choline to nutrient-deficient animals enhances their ability to transport and absorb nutrients from the gastrointestinal tract. 41:55

Dr. Santos mentioned not only does choline facilitate phospholipid synthesis and plays a large role in the transportation of fatty acids, he believes it’s an unquestionable supplementation that fits the requirements as a required nutrient.  46:35

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Zimmerman highlighted key points from Dr. Santos and summarized consistent responses the industry continues to see in the meta-analysis of added choline in a range of production levels. 49:15

If you would like to review Dr. Santo’s webinar from the 2022 Cornell Mini Symposium, you can view all four webinar series at balchem/com/realscience. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Here is the first episode of the New Revelations in Transition Cow Nutrition from the 2022 Cornell Nutrition Conference four-part mini-series. Essential versus required nutrition requirements is the subject matter from Dr. Mike Van Amburgh of Cornell University. Dr. Clay Zimmerman from Balchem adds his comments in this podcast as well.

Laying out a new way to think about essential and non-essential nutrients, Dr. Van Amburgh began the series by highlighting the value of understanding nutritional equivalencies such as amino acids and carbohydrates and reframing the function of energy. 2:28

While microbial proteins are made of both essential and non-essential amino acids, the key factor is remembering synthesis is energy intensive. 

Mentioning the adaptability of the organ, Dr. Van Amburgh shares that not only do the nutrient sources allow a cow to manipulate blood flow, but it allows for the ability of groups to form to maximize efficiency. 8:51

Beginning with the general understanding of optimal supply, Dr. Van Amburgh shifted his discussion to anabolic output responses. He shared that when considering the extraction of branched chains, lysine tends to undergo obligate metabolism in the mammary gland. 11:09

Ultimately milk protein synthesis requires key metabolic pathways, but how does an optimal supply of amino acids affect anabolic output? 

When analyzing shifts in nutrient profiles, Dr. Van Amburgh shared the transparency that occurs when building fatty acid diets. He mentioned he’s researching the value of pushing methionine up to 1.19 grams and then nearly 2.7 times for lysine. 17:25

So what does the future of nutrition modeling look like? Based on a meta-analysis, Dr. Zimmerman added the biggest goal in nutritional modeling continues to be focused on the differences between essential and required nutrients. 38:31

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Zimmerman shared key takeaways from Dr. Van Amburgh’s webinar and briefly mentioned the meta-analysis highlight of choline as a required nutrient in transitional dairy cows. 42:39

If you would like to review Dr. Van Amburgh’s webinar from the 2022 Cornell Mini Symposium, you can view all four webinars in the series at balchem/com/realscience. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Gathering for another Legacies Series to honor a true industry leader and pioneer are, Dr. Temple Grandin, Betsy Lerner and Kari Estes. 

Dr. Grandin, an animal science professor at Colorado State University and a well-known author and speaker, has been featured on national public radio stations, Time Magazine, The New York Times, Discover Magazine, Forbes, USA Today and others. In fact, her movie titled Temple Grandin sharing much of her life story is an Emmy Award-winning movie. 

While Dr. Grandin’s career has been nothing shy of exceptional, she led the conversation by explaining how her trials and tribulations at a young age with autism ultimately led her to where she is today. 8:40

After not speaking until the age of four, Dr. Grandin mentioned she began questioning how people think and their behaviors in her mid-twenties. 10:28

Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem, then asked about any new research on autism and what niche skills the autistic brain gives people. 14:37

Sharing a few stories and examples, Dr. Grandin mentioned that attention to detail, thinking in specific instances and extreme object visualization are all key characteristics of autism. 17:34

Also joining the conversation is Betsy Lerner, an author who previously worked with Dr. Grandin. She described the questionnaire for people to find out what kind of thinker they are, adding that Dr. Grandin scored 16 out of 18 in the visual thinker category, and she scored four out of 18. 18:41

Not only has Dr. Grandin focused her career on understandpeople's behavior, but animals as well. 

Opposite of humans, Dr. Grandin added that animals live in a sensory-based world. She mentioned Betsy gave her the book “The Immense World,” which solely focuses on animal sense and living in a sensory-baked world. 28:12

With decades of knowledge and research, Sorrell asked Dr. Grandin what advice she would have for pet or animal owners. 30:20

Dr. Grandin shared it’s no surprise that animals have emotions like fear, anger, separation anxiety and a few others. She went on to add her experience helping producers understand why certain behaviors trigger cows while handled. 36:40

Dr. Grandin said her big career breakthrough started after working with an Arizona farm magazine to write firsthand experiences from ag events and cattle topics that eventually led to speaking opportunities. 43:58

As the industry continues to shift, so does the future of animal handling and behavioral studies. Dr. Grandin shared the story of touring a new cattle handling facility with a slick floor just this last year, adding this is just one of the things she shares in her resources about the basics of cattle behavior and safety. 48:11 

Betsy closed by sharing she truly believes Dr. Grandin is an inspiration to everyone she meets. She added that while traveling to Colorado, Dr. Grandin was honored for her years of service and Betsy met many of Dr. Grandin’s students. While it was no surprise, Betsy mentioned each student said Temple truly changed their lives and believes she has made the world a better place. 55:08

Life is all about helping people and finding practical solutions, and Dr. Grandin closed by adding that’s truly what makes her happy. 59:13

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Joining together to discuss the changes in customer-driven expectations are Chris DuBois and Melissa Rodriguez, both with IRI, a leading provider of big data and analytics.  

Rodriguez led the conversation, describing IRI’s integration into data and technology innovation. She shared that IRI not only integrates retainer and media data, but also consumer and manufacturer data. 4:21

As inflation continues trending upward, Rodriguez added IRI is watching customer trends closely and finding shopping habits decreasing as prices continue to rise. 9:30

Multiple shifts have caused a change in spending habits for food consumption. From the changes of COVID-19 to an increase in the work-from-home community, DuBois said food consumption at restaurants has decreased. He went on to say that many restaurants sit empty as locations added drive through and to-go options. 13:25

Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem, asked if the IRI team had seen any shifts in protein consumption and what cuts of protein consumers are now consuming. 17:32

DuBois said ultimately, each protein is serving a different category of consumers, adding trends are shifting towards creativity for all kinds. Rodriguez then went on to say she’s seen a large shift to chicken thighs and chicken wings because of the consumer's option to smoke, grill or even use the air fryer for the cuts. 18:02

One of the largest innovations to the protein sector has been boneless thighs, DuBois mentioned, adding they are now one of the biggest products in the supermarket. 22:54

Without a doubt, the Ukrainian war has had a significant impact on both consumers and suppliers in the U.S. The largest impact came from the cost of feed for the west coast, DuBois said. He added that when grain comes from overseas, unless there is a form of vertical integration, managing the cost on the wholesale side becomes a large factor. 27:30

Shifting the conversation, Sorrell asked the IRI team what they believed the five biggest trends for the future might be. 28:45

For consumers, there isn’t a one size fits all approach. Rodriguez added that no two consumer generations are alike - the boomers, millennials, Gen Z, etc. She went on to say that 2030 looks to be a turning point for the U.S. population. The next ten years anticipate trend shifts towards product innovation, digital engagement, sustainability, consumer engagement and generational exposure. 32:10

As IRI continues to focus on the generational impact of food consumption and trends, DuBois said they had found generational trends to cycle, and now they are seeing some of the same items reoccur. For example, he mentioned that Asian cooking oils are on the rise versus vegetable oils and others, adding the focus is now on the buyer groups. 38:15

Trends are on the rise in the U.S., but are there the same trends and changes globally? 

DuBois said if he were to walk the supermarkets in Europe, he would see the same merchandising tactics and product marketing. He went on to say there seems to be a more open door in product communication between the processors, market and customers as the U.S. often lacks in the producer-to-consumer relationship. 48:21

Wrapping up the conversation, Rodriguez said she encourages the industry to focus on studying the response rate for key categories and how each generation responds to those changes. She added that these statistics would ultimately give direction as to what to expect for the next few years. 50:30

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Extension expert and professor of animal science at Cornell University, Dr. Van Amburgh guided the conversation by briefly touching on the history of the system and the changes to the latest version. He mentioned what has now evolved to a software platform with many equations, essentially began as a 30 year old spreadsheet. 5:45

For nearly three decades the dairy industry has been using various CNCPS versions to formulate rations and create management plans. While each version brings an added level of accuracy, Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem, asked what the dairy industry can expect from this improved version update. 8:42

Dr. Van Amburgh mentioned ultimately it’s all about finding a balance between the cow and the model. He added the new version moves away from the crude protein concept, but brings forward a three pool model of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) digestibility and gathers all the nitrogen recycling pools to improve nitrogen efficiency. 12:11

While the publishing timeline is yet undetermined, the last major difference between version six and version seven is resolving the amino acid requirements through fill and flux efficiency, Dr. Van Amburgh went on to mention. 14:51

Joining to discuss how his team utilizes CNCPS is Dr. Robb Bender, Manager Partner Consultant at GPS Dairy Consulting. He mentioned his team leverages the opportunity to fulfill rations through the system using the NDS platform and asked about the impact that variable criterias of forage selection has. 22:55

Dr. Van Amburgh said the most important number for forage moving forward is the 12 hour number given the labs are as efficient as possible. Ultimately, he added with high quality forages the earlier the time to estimate the length it takes to fill the fast pool the better. 24:31

While NDF is correlated to feed intake, uNDF is in fact forage remaining after digestibility within 240 hours. Dr. Mike DeGroot, owner at EDGE Dairy Consulting asked about the impact of uNDF in various rations. 30:15

The impact stems from cow performance changes, mentioned Dr. Van Amburgh. Adding to the research that version seven includes are several evaluations on forage fiber and the inversely related digestible and indigestible pool. 31:20

Within version seven, understanding the chemistry of feed additives and the nutrient values they offer is also a high level factor. In fact, Dr. Van Amburgh mentioned the updated version includes a 2015 study over water soluble carbohydrates, the extended study of starch and also the impact of sugars in any diet formulation. 44:42

So what does the future of CNCPS look like? 

Short term, Dr. Van Amburgh said he is working on a database that offers a full calf, heifer model and transition calf phase. He added working to frame the fatty acid and amino acid requirements is the next goal. 55:15

Dr. DeGroot wrapped up the conversation, mentioning he is looking forward to the new version of the CNCPS because he believes that as new models get better, science also gets better. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

A leading expert in metabolic and energy nutrition and professor at Penn State University, Dr. Harvatine began the conversation by introducing his guest, Dr. Boisclair. He mentioned the collaboration between the two first began when he was finishing his doctorate degree at Cornell University under Dr. Boisclair. 1:30

Focused initially on regulating hormones, Dr. Boisclair said he quickly acknowledged the importance of shifting his research to better understand molecular mechanisms in dairy cows. 3:11

In a recent Real Science webinar, Dr. Harvatine said nutrition and management are the best practices. While higher production levels result in more milk pounds Scott Sorrell, podcast host and director of global marketing for Balchem, asked about the importance of dairy cow synthesis and pathways. 11:00

Dr. Harvatine said he likes to think of the three assembly lines as lactose, fat and protein. Within milk, he added the assembly lines would be novo synthesized fatty acids and the preformed fatty acids. He then added that in milk fat depression, the minimum a dairy cow can produce is a 50% decrease. 11:25

Based on the basic endocrine regulation, researchers have been able to adjust basic nutritional factors. In fact, Dr. Boisclair mentioned the prolactin cycle is not only essential during the last few weeks in pregnancy but also in lactation performance. 14:50 

It’s not just about one enzyme. Metaphorically, the nutritional system works as a factory. When we think about making the assembly line of milk fat, it’s a series of enzymes we have to turn on, and when turned on, they go into molecular biology level. Dr Harvatine went on to mention the importance of understanding the correlation between the different components. 16:61 

On the protein side, Dr. Harvatine believes there is a limiting factor causing a minimized response. In fact, when thinking about nutritional factors, he added it’s hard to have a 50-pound cow make as much fat protein as a 100-pound cow. Adding the main factor always isn’t nutrition, oftentimes it’s the lactation stage and endocrinology history. 34:30

What are some key suggestions for nutritionists in terms of increasing milk fat on the dairy, Scott asked? 48:37

Dr. Harvatine suggested nutritionists tailor goals to fit various budgets and individual operations, adding a few scenarios where various fat levels can be accepted. 50:54

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Harvatine emphasized the importance of understanding the complete system when it comes to producing more milk fat. He added the physiology component and hormonal responsiveness are just as important as increasing nutrition and feed efficiency. 1:04:01

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Since 2020, the Real Science Exchange has provided in-depth conversations throughout a variety of webinar series. Joining around the pub to recap and reflect on the amazing guests and great conversations from 2022 are Dr. Clay Zimmerman and Scott Sorrell where they reflect on each of their top three favorite episodes of 2022.

The pubcast has a growing audience of over 56,000 views and listeners in all 50 states. In 2022, the podcast created 24 events featuring top dairy science topics through the lens of widely known dairy researchers. 

Dr. Zimmerman’s third favorite episode was Episode 44 that aired on May 24, 2022. The May Journal Club featured guests Dr. Bill Weiss, Dr. Chanhee Lee and Haley Zynda. 4:00

The episode highlighted different topics, including the impact of reducing DCAD in lactating cows and the multiplication of these diets in different environmental elements and nutrient digestibility. 5:10

Episode 44: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/may-journal-club-dr-bill-weiss-the-ohio-state-university/

Scott Sorrell said his third favorite was Episode 53, which aired on September 27, 2022. The episode featured the Kooler Kids program with guests including Stephanie Walsh, Melissa Malcolm-Cullison and Mark Inkrott. 8:29

He mentioned the episode features Dairy Farmers of America and Cooler Management and the significant work they are doing in bringing dairy products to the less fortunate. 9:01

Episode 53: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/real-science-exchange-kooler-kids/

In partnership with last year’s Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference, Dr. Zimmerman said his second favorite episode from 2022 was Episode 43 that aired on May 10, 2022 and included Dr. Jack Britt, Dr. Jimena LaPorta, Dr. Eric Ciappio, Dr. Pete Hansen and Dr. Clay Zimmerman as guests. 17:41

Dr. Zimmerman mentioned this episode featured the mini-symposium, highlighting utero influences on transgenerational challenges and performance in dairy cattle. 18:31

Episode 43: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/may-journal-club-dr-bill-weiss-the-ohio-state-university/

Ranking second for Scott Sorrell was Episode 38. This episode is one of the Legacy Series, where we celebrate industry pioneers and their impact on the industry. Specifically, this Legacy Series episode honored Dr. Peter J. Van Soest and his impact in the animal nutrition world. The episode aired on March 1, 2022 and featured guests Dr. Mary Beth Hall, Dr. Mike Van Amburgh and Dr. David Mertens. 25:30

Episode 38: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/legacy-series-dr-peter-j-van-soest/

Dr. Zimmerman said his top episode pick for the year was Episode 48. The episode aired on July 19, 2022 and featured guests Dr. Turner Schwarz and Dr. Joe McFadden. 35:17

He said the episode was recorded at the American Dairy Science Association’s Annual Meeting (ADSA) and featured graduate and research students. Additionally, he added his favorite part of the episode was experiencing the talented future industry leaders. 37:15

Episode 48: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/american-dairy-science-association-balchem-highlighted-research/

Scott Sorrell said his top pick was Episode 56 that was recorded at the World Dairy Expo and aired on November 8, 2022. The episode featured the Bateman family from Utah and highlighted their virtual farm tour presentation. Joining in for Episode 56 and its discussion was guests Brad Bateman, Jason Bateman, Steve Bateman and Laun Hall. 38:21 

He added that not only was Wayne Bateman a patriarch of the family and industry, but overall the family represents strong dairy values and a love of their livestock and land. Beyond the podcast being extra special, Scott also mentioned the process of videotaping their family farm was just as memorable. 39:40

Watch the Virtual Farm Tour: https://youtu.be/ccs9gVbUiOg

Episode 56: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/resources/virtual-farm-tour-batemans-mosida-farms/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Expert in equine nutrition and founder of Kentucky Equine Research (KER), Dr. Pagan led the conversation by explaining the company's history, his academic background and KER’s innovative philosophy in looking ahead into equine nutrition. 7:27

Also joining in on the conversation was leading equine nutritionist Dr. Jackson who described his leadership at Bluegrass Equine Nutrition and his experience in one of the largest breed industries, the thoroughbreds. 10:28

He acknowledged that with his background and horsemanship experience, most of his clients are usually thoroughbred owners or trainers ranging from central Kentucky to Japan. 12:47

Dr. Jackson added he believes good horses often come by happenstance, mentioning most folks making feed or giving recommendations read from the same book giving management the upper hand in success. 13:45

Innovation and science, the driving force behind equine nutrition success. 

Dr. Pagan mentioned when he first started, the industry was focused on sweet feed and straightforward programs. He added that it wasn’t until he was in graduate school the emphasis switched to the alternative energy source of feeding fat as a performance source. 18:16

However, he added that many in the industry are uncovering the consequences of feeding extremely high fat diets. Dr. Pagan then mentioned that current studies are taking place on polyunsaturated fats as a solution to help correct some of the diet concerns. 20:12

Professor at the University of Kentucky, Dr. Laurie Lawrence, also joined in on the discussion. She added that from her academic perspective, she believes a lot of nutritional horse practices have been modeled by those of other species. 27:52

What are some examples of low, moderate and high-performance horses? Dr. Estes, podcast co-host and Balchem Research Associate, then asked. 28:47

Giving a few examples, Dr. Pagan said racehorses are in the high category, while polo ponies would fit into the middle, and recreational horses would fit into the low level. He then added that he and his team are focused on utilizing technology to alert horse owners on their typical riding time and a nutritional program that would work for them. 30:20

While many factors fit into the nutritional space, Dr. Lawrence mentioned the importance of selecting long-stem and clean hay for the average horse rather than the suggested green, leafy and fresh hay quality. 31:15

Education is a large factor when it comes to accurate equine nutrition, she added. Suggesting the importance of university research, local agents and the potential that an educational pathway can have in this space. 36:20

Dr. Jackson mentioned that he believes the industry, in general, does a poor job of educating practitioners on nutritional needs and recommendations. He added the importance of continuing education for practitioners on various forage types, fat requirements and more. 43:29

Making sure the body condition is appropriate for the horse type and the condition is necessary, noted Dr. Jackson. He added the importance of communicating with your nutritionist about the horse's GI tract and forage types. 58:57

Dr. Lawrence rounded out the conversation by mentioning that as nutritionists, there is a lot of room for growth in educating horse owners, veterinarians and farriers. Additionally, she added that the industry has enough information to solve nearly 80% of the current nutritional concerns in the recreational horse industry. 1:02:42

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Co-Host: Dr. Jeff Elliott

Joining around the pub at World Dairy Expo to discuss the latest research about environmental factors and the effects it has on specific dairy cattle breeds are Dr. Bill Weiss and Dr. Michel Wattiaux. 

Dr. Michel Wattiaux, Dairy Systems Management Professor at the University of Wisconsin led the conversation by introducing the recent publication in the Journal of Dairy Science and authors M.E. Uddinn, O.I. Santana and K.A. Weigel. 2:28

What was the main reasoning behind the research and the treatments selected? Dr. Wattiaux said with help from the entire research team, they wanted to measure and compare methane emissions from two cattle breeds and evaluate the nutritional consequences between various fiber sources and concentrations. 3:55

He noted that another key motivation was an earlier research paper showing that jersey cows may in fact, be more environmentally friendly when compared to environmental impact per unit of cheese yield. 4:30

With breeds, forage levels and various forage sources at a focus, Dr. Wattiaux said they first looked to see if there was any interaction between variable fiber types, level of fiber on methane emissions, cow performance and digestibility. 5:30 

He said the research encompassed only first lactation cows, adding the various forage NDF and alfalfa silage corn NDF rations used. 6:45

Given methane is a major contributor to the carbon footprint, Dr. Wattiaux said they first measured and compared methane emissions between the holstein and jersey breeds and then evaluated the green feed system, its specifics and system measurements. 9:45

Dr. Bill Weiss, Professor Emeritus at The Ohio State University, asked about the production impact the two breeds had from the various diet treatment studies. 16:18

Dr. Wattiaux added there was no variability between the two breeds in terms of production differences. He added that the more cows consume, the more fermentation and, ultimately, the more methane produced. 18:45

But how can we know we are standardizing our comparison between the two breeds? Dr. Bill Weiss then asked that question. 20:10

Dr. Wattiaux mentioned the research paper showed methane emission as the only factor affecting the overall carbon footprint. He added that animal efficiency is ultimately not related to methane production per day but rather an energy law ideally used to make milk. 21:15

Additionally, he mentioned the study showed very little difference in manure composition between the two breeds as well. Emphasizing that media and consumers are focused on methane intensity and the carbon footprint, which ultimately is an extension of digestive system studies. 26:51

Dr. Jeff Elliott, podcast co-host and technical services representative for Balchem, asked how much the industry has improved feed production management in the last 10 years. 28:23

Dr. Wattiaux said when talking about production intensity, yield or even greenhouse gas emission there was a high level of variation. Adding when making an impact on reducing emissions, manure and crop management is just as important as the cow or environmental effects. 32:05

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Wattiaux mentioned despite the research showing differences between the jersey and holstein breeds; it emphasized the importance of a forage diet variability and nutritional options for all breeds and their environmental factors.t 42:14

Read the articles here: ​​https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32389470/ and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34955248/

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Jeff King is one of our guests from Kings-Ransom Farm in New York. Their operation includes registered holsteins and row crops, and they have a marketing program with registered holsteins. 

Kelly Reynolds is originally from Wisconsin but now lives in New York and works on Reyncrest Farm with her husband's family, which also has registered holsteins and row crops. 

Joey Ariosa comes from Airosa Dairy, his family’s operation in California with holsteins,  jerseys and row crops. 

When asked about philosophy, Kelly said as they have grown each person has been able to focus on their passion, which they hope trickles down to their entire team (7:52) 

Joey spoke about one of their biggest hurdles in California: regulations from the state. California has one of the highest minimum wages and requires overtime pay. So it is important to strike a balance between caring for your animals and putting their needs first, but living within the regulations the state of California requires (12:07) 

Jeff mentioned communicating with consumers is always an area for growth. A lot of consumers visit their operation and make assumptions. Spending 15 minutes chatting with that consumer and answering questions is necessary. (29:20) 

Kelly said that the global demand for dairy is real, with a growing demand for high-quality proteins. When they are making decisions about the future of their business, they keep that in mind. Our population isn’t getting smaller, and everyone has to eat. (40:35) 

Looking to the future, Joey said you have to work together to deal with your problems and fix them because basic things in life are important; clean air, clean water and safe food. In California, Airosa Dairy is trying to do its part with water management and use less water. (46:34) 

In summary, Jeff wrapped up by emphasizing you should never stop learning. The key to setting yourself up for success starts with the more you can open your horizons and learn at every turn. Look at someone who is successful and ask how did they accomplish what they are doing? (49:13) 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

The Batemans decided to diversify and added beef to their offering. Kaleb Bateman, joined the podcast via video, and says that Mosida Farms produces 40 to 100 beef calves a week. Those calves are fed and eventually sold in one of three Mosida Market locations. Mosida Market once was just the Bateman family selling beef to their neighbors before it evolved to where it is today. (15:03)

The Bateman family breeds their own beef and dairy crosses, including a Jersey x Charolais cross. Steve Bateman said the Jersey x Charolais crosses gain just as well as an Angus x Holstein cross. They are running trials with all different crosses and so far the Wagyu crosses are the flagship meat in the market. (27:30) 

A labor shortage has helped push the Bateman family to put in a robotic milking system. Brad Bateman said the family traveled to look at different systems before finding one that will work. The stress level of cows has decreased in the robotic barn and it has allowed them the option to grow at a different rate. (29:25) 

Brad Bateman says the family has a philosophy that if you take care of the cow, they will take care of you. To implement that idea there is weekly employee training. The desire of the Bateman family is to do what is best for the cow. (39:00) 

Laun Hall, nutritionist for Mosida Farms, says there are two different diets, one is acidifying rations and the other is more basic. While they want to meet the nutritional needs of the cow, they also want as few ration changes as possible. (42:31) 

Jason Bateman mentioned the robot barn is a controlled environment to test different feeds like specific hybrids of corn and the digestibility of different starches. By drilling down on this information, it will impact their bottom line. (52:30) 

Steve Bateman wrapped up the podcast by commenting that a lot of dairies don’t have family to succeed them. Steve says you have to work to make it possible for your kids to continue the business, and get them involved early to keep them there. (1:02:10) 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Gathering over cold drinks at the World Dairy Expo pubcast to discuss recent research on nutritional grouping among dairy farms are Dr. Bill Weiss, Dr. Victor Cabrera and Dr. Pete Morrow.

Dr. Bill Weiss, Professor Emeritus at The Ohio State University, began the conservation through the recently published research paper in the Journal of Dairy Science, introducing one of the authors, Dr. Victor Cabrera, Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 2:25 

Here is a link to the article: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(21)01082-1/fulltext

What strategies in dairy cow nutritional grouping does the research recommend? Victor added that along with help from a graduate student Jorge Bartos, research shows the opportunity to group animals with similar homogenous nutritional requirements. 3:40

He noted the underlying concepts like production, lactation, pregnancy stages and sometimes herd sizes are also drivers for grouping considerations. 5:70

Dr. Cabrera said he would first separate by lactation or production, but when calculating the density of nutritional requirements for each animal, he said the animal grouping typically happens naturally. 9:30

He also said nutritional requirements play a factor, adding the concept-lead factor of following the diet of the 83rd percentile cow. But how can we improve the nutritional accuracy and formulate the best diet for the group, Dr. Bill Weiss then asked. 12:40

Dr. Cabrera mentioned the research paper showed the overweight concern for animals within the transitional period and said another challenge the research indicated was the lower metabolic energy and body score conditions. He added that diets ultimately improve the health and welfare of the animals in all cases. 19:45

Dr. Pete Morrow, podcast co-host, said that early in his career he had a dairy do grouping according to production on a late lactation cow on a cheap diet. He added the diet was formulated for 10 pounds less of milk and later realized lead factors was instead the key measure. 24:20

There are two points to grouping, Dr. Cabrera said. The journal research was collected from a large farm in Wisconsin, with around 2,400 lactating cows used for the data. Within the grouping for this farm, cows were moved from the 14 different pens each week. Dr. Cabrera mentioned that there are multiple pens for each lactation type, adding the nutrition for the animal's changes based on feed prices and not requirements. 29:31

Dr. Cabrera said he and his team thought the roadblock in nutritional grouping for farmers would be fear that moving them frequently would decrease their productivity and labor management throughout the process. 34:49

From the paper, however, he added the research doesn’t show a decrease in milk production, but instead, the grouping concept yields opportunities for extra milk production, health gain, environmental benefits and more. 36:30

Wrapping up the conversation, Dr. Cabrera emphasized two points, mentioning he believes farmers have a great opportunity to improve nutritional accuracy and believes nutritional grouping offers an effective and efficient system.  41:48

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Co-host: Dr. Pete Morrow, Animal Health Specialist

Gathering around the pub to discuss body condition, productivity and the impact older cows have on herds are Dr. Ian Lean, Dr. Todd Duffield and Dr. Stephen LeBlanc. 

Dr. Ian Lean, Scibus Founder and Manager Director and leading authority in dairy cattle medicine, kicked off the conversation to discuss his data set research around cow removal and reproduction. 9:11

Ian noted those involved with the older cow research looked at the disease, reproduction and metabolic data differently than most people. Sharing the impact of various diseases in older cows. 11:03

What is the relationship between production and reproduction? Dr. Stephen LeBlanc, a veterinarian professor at the University of Guelph, added this is the common question he receives. Sharing the challenge as dairy scientists, Stephen said the importance of figuring out how to support a cow’s lifespan by choice instead of failing to stay healthy, fertile and productive. 15:20

Dr. Todd Duffield, a professor at the University of Guelph, believes there are misconceptions about older cow production and reproduction. He suggests that instead of wanting cows to live forever, profitability or not, he adds that it’s all really about limiting or reducing the farmers' decisions and optimizing the cows' health and performance. 20:29

Stephen discusses a win-win approach for the producer, herd and cow itself - optimization and economic longevity. But how do you create farm conditions to know when the optimum time to cull is, Stephen added. 27:04

Does a different feeding program matter, asked Ian. From the first webinar, he added that the older cows you could leave on 28 days and still have increased milk production and solids. He suggested when formulating diets for the average cow; he calculates eight pounds more and about three to five kilos more milk than the average cow. 33:18

Stephen added cows are both ketotic and have low blood glucose ultimately show varying production outcomes. Suggesting early lactation studies, tough calving and blood BHB all having different risk categories for each animal, said Stephen. 48:57

Rounding out the conversation, Stephen closed by suggesting there is an opportunity to possibly rethink some nutritional paradigms in terms of protein and bone metabolism. 1:00:38

Additionally, Todd mentioned the direct difference between heifers and older cows. Adding the importance in studying management and feeding qualities for both production and reproduction optimization. 1:04:39

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Joining us at the table to discuss what their organizations are doing to make significant impacts on food security and hunger are Stephanie Walsh, Melissa Malcolm-Cullison and Mark Inkrott. 

Stephanie Walsh, Director of Industry and Community Affairs for DFA (Dairy Farmers of America) highlights their Farmers Feeding Families Fund, ensuring community members receive the dairy products they need. 1:08

Vice President for Cooler Management, Melissa Malcolm-Cullison also joined the evening discussion, sharing her teams’ experience building infrastructure for food banks and food pantries across the country. 2:20

Co-Founder of the UpField Group and Owner of Cooler Management, Mark Inkrott also joined in on the discussion. For his entire career after sports, Inkrott noted that he’s been involved in supply chain work with both various brands and farmers alike. Since acquiring Cooler Management a few years ago, they have been specializing in cold storage ever since. 3:44

Analyzing the impacts COVID-19 had on the supply chain, Melissa talked about her connection with Charlie Benz of Balchem early in the pandemic. Adding that she saw wasted food due to the influx of food donations during that time, caused by a shortage in refrigerator space. 10:30

After brainstorming solutions with Charlie, Melissa said they realized infrastructure was the key to storing food donations safely to get them to families in need. Today, she added she is proud of the program because it offered a solution for nutritious foods like dairy to be donated without spoiling. 14:37

Stephanie said in support of food insecurity concerns, the DFA Cares Foundation offers education and scholarships to students studying agriculture. Additionally, she added that in 2022 the foundation provided 53 scholarships through the program. 15:22 

Bringing the Cooler Management team and DFA together, Stephanie added in 2020 the two established a partnership to help donate coolers across the country and dairy products to local food pantries. 19:15

Melissa noted most people usually think about donating food to food pantries, but not dairy products or even refrigeration needs until programs like Cooler Management or Kooler Kids (from Balchem) begin. 30:26 

To date, Mark said they have placed over 3,000 pieces of equipment into food pantries across the country. As for the Cooler Management team, they work with various retailers on finding adequate coolers for food banks and food pantries. 38:41

Healthy food equals a healthy family, Mark stated, adding that’s why investing 90 million dollars into 30,000 coolers for food pantries across the country just makes sense and keeps the team motivated. 48:09 

It’s September Hunger Action month and so far Stephanie said the Farmers Feeding Families Fund has raised more than $950,000. Their goal is to raise the last $50,000. If anyone is called to help, she encourages everyone to make sure their own fridge is full of dairy products and also asks people to volunteer at their local food pantry.  57:50

Donations for the DFA Farmers Feeding Families Fund can happen at DFA.

Wrapping up, Mark reflected saying we have an influx of food going into the system, but without proper infrastructure and foundation, it will go to waste. He said if the industry does something about the 30,000 coolers, in 10 years we won’t have to think about refrigeration.1:13:02

Be a part of feeding the hungry and bringing the benefits of fresh dairy, produce and meat to those in need. Contact Your Balchem Representative or email anh.marketing@balchem.com to learn more.

Learn more about these great programs:

https://www.coolermanagement.com/

https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/social-responsibility/kooler-kids-program/

https://www.dfamilk.com/our-commitment/dfa-cares

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to 

anh.marketing@balchem.com

. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you.

Co-host: Dr. Clay Zimmerman and Dr. Glen Aines

Diving into two recent Journal of Dairy Science publications, Dr. Bill Weiss, Emeritus Professor at Ohio State University is back again to discuss the latest ideas and trends in animal nutrition. 

Dr. Weiss highlights two papers published in the Journal of Dairy Science earlier this year, adding one is focused on production while the other highlights fermentation digestibility. One key point Dr. Weiss highlighted was the controversial discussion around supplementing molasses or sugar. 3:02

Dr. Clay Zimmerman with Balchem also joined the evening discussion, adding that currently it is common to add a liquid sugar source for a certain level of sugar to optimize microbial protein synthesis. 6:02

Diving into the first paper, Dr. Weiss suggested the positive response to molasses would be affected by the RDP (Ratio Degradable Protein), adding he believes this was a valid hypothesis. He went on to highlight fiber differences, digestibility measures and the impact of inputting the data into the NRC (National Research Council) old database. 9:09

Analyzing a few key conclusions and surprises from the first production study, Dr. Weiss pointed out his thoughts on the milk efficiency components and intake digestibility results. 16:04

On the 10-week intake study, Dr. Zimmerman noted the results showed cows were on a two-week covariate diet and then eight weeks on the treatment diet, plus adding in high moisture corn as a grain source. Additionally, he added the only key parameter that wasn’t negatively affected by the increasing molasses was fat. 24:26

In fact, Dr. Glen Aines with Balchem, who also joined in on the conversation, was surprised the journal cited about 42% of VFA’s coming out of the molasses due to the belief it will produce less acidosis. 29:16

In the second paper, Dr. Weiss mentioned the results of no impact to RDP (Ratio Degradable Protein) from the models. Dr. Weiss added if he expects the diets to be deficient in RDP, he would also expect increased intake and digestibility. 31:16

No models are ever perfect, so analyzing the results from any study is essential. 

Dr. Aines reflected on key takeaways from the second paper, highlighting the different fermentation battens between the various treatments and microbial population shifts. 49:54

Rounding out the conversation, Dr. Weiss closed suggesting the understanding that nothing works all the time and that’s why replicating experiments is so important. 53:41

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

Links to Papers: 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030222001874

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35346474/

Both joined together to lead the pubcast this evening covering dairy cow consumption and nutrition management. 

Dr. DeVries reflects on his career and shares insight into the synthesis between intake and production, adding that when trying to optimize production, optimizing dry matter intake for cows also occurs. His point being, if the goal is to have cows eat more, changing their behavior is important. 11:30 

Dr. Tylutki highlights his consulting experience in nearly 46 countries educating livestock owners by commercializing ration formulation packages and notes the critical importance in gathering research data to better understand behavior. 16:20

Dr. DeVries adds his perspective in forage quality variation and the studies of both him and Dr. Tylutki have done on fiber length and digestibility. One key point Dr. DeVries shares is the value in making specific recommendations instead of generalized solutions, due to varying factors, operation goals and even some breed differences. 25:32

Dr. Pete Morrow also joins the evening discussion, sharing his thoughts on rumination monitors for management practices, highlighting the potential artificial intelligence has through management data points. 37:14

Dr. DeVries suggested the cow’s behavior is just as important as the diet itself, which is ultimately impacted externally. Adding, continuous improvement in technology and automation management is also going to play a large role in welfare longevity. 1:04:37

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This week's episode is a favorite for many as part of our Legacy Series. We are toasting Dr. Mike Hutjens with the University of Illinois. Mike is a pioneer in the field and has combined his love for education and passion for the dairy industry throughout his career. He continues to keep learning to this day. Plus, he was the one who famously coined the term “pubcast” for the Real Science Exchange. The Real Science Exchange is the discussion that happens in the bar after scientific meetings, making the term “pubcast” even more relevant!

Joining us to toast Dr. Hutjens is Dr. Dave Fischer, University of Illinois; Dr. John Goeser, Rock River Lab and co-host Dr. Jeff Elliott, Balchem.

Dr. Hutjens reflects on his career, and one industry controversy that dates him was the discussion by producers between high moisture and shell corn. His point is, that there will always be new topics to discuss and research to share with producers. 11:45

Through Dr. Hutjens and Dr. Fischer’s tenure with Extension, priorities and approaches have evolved from regional experts who were an inch deep and a mile wide to very specific focus areas over time. 15:44

Dr. Goeser added his perspective as someone established as a researcher but still evolving in his career and how the specialization in the industry can also create silos of thinking with very narrow areas of focus. 20:42

Dr. Hutjens and Dr. Fischer highlighted one of their biggest accomplishments in evolving producer education is they have successfully moved all of their training online even though the doubters said it wouldn’t work for producers. 29:43

Dr. Goeser shared that we all know the industry is evolving, and research, producers and education must do the same. One obvious example is how much milk each cow produces today compared to 20 or 40 years ago. 42:27

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.

Dr. Starkey begins by explaining that changing eating habits of Americans has led to utilizing organ meats for pet food, as the supply is plentiful and the cost is low. (10:35) 

Joshua Flees said that while the research isn’t complete, by using these types of products (organ meats, wing tips) a few dollars worth of value can be added to a feasible product. (20:40) 

Dr. Altom summarized the process used to turn some of these products into a more usable protein, which is hydro coli technology, where a sodium algenate is blended into the meat mixture to be properly hydrated, then mixed with a calcium ion. (25:28) 

Dr. Starkey addresses the concern of bone fragments in pet food. He mentioned there are a lot of technologies such as x-ray to make sure fragments aren’t included. By grinding bone fine enough to be below the safe threshold, they can still utilize the protein and how it aids the hydrocoli technology and gelling. (36:51) 

Dr. Altom wrapped up by commenting that as the pet and human population grows around the world, pets and humans will be competing for the same protein and amino acid choices. We will have to find new and different ways to provide nutrition to pets, such as these co-products and whole animal opportunities. (54:15)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.

Lautaro Rostoll Cangiano joins us first.  Lautaro is the president of ADSA’s Grad Student Division (GSD) program, which provides networking opportunities at the ADSA meetings in addition to professional development opportunities. Lautaro is wrapping up his time as president. 

Our next guests are Dr. Corwin Nelson from the University of Florida and Kari Estes with Balchem giving us the judge's perspective on the contest. Each student is judged on four major categories including presentation, design, how they interpret results and the data itself. Kari said the enthusiasm of the students was the highlight for her. 

Third, we have Alisson Da Mota Santos from Michigan State University who presented on the effectiveness of GnRH as a resynchronization tool in lactating dairy cows. The main findings of the study were that treatments were effective in synchronizing cows. 

Next up is Jackson Seminara from Cornell University, winner of the PhD poster contest, discussing calcium dynamics and associated patterns of milk constituents in early lactation multiparous Holsteins. Cows with different calcium dynamics have different milk profiles, and the healthy cows had higher levels of proteins. 

Ursula Abou-Rjeileh and Dr. Andres Contreras from Michigan State joined us as the winner of the masters oral presentation. The study topic was oleic acid limits lipolysis and improves mitochondrial function in adipose tissue from periparturient dairy cows. The focus on oleic acid was to determine how it minimizes body condition score loss. The results showed oleic acid increased insulin sensitivity, minimized lipid mobilization and improved mitochondrial function.

Thaina Minela, also from Michigan State, spoke about her project. Her results showed that lactating cows inseminated following estrus have greater early pregnancy losses compared to the fertility program Double-Ovsynch. Thaina won the PhD oral competition. 

Our final guest is Conor McCabe from the University of California Davis. Conor just finished a term as Dairy Production Manager and is continuing on as the ADSA GSD Vice President in 2022. Looking forward, ADSA will be in Ottawa in 2023 and wants to look at ADSA as more than just a place for students to present their research. Conor mentioned a possible mentorship program available for GSD coming up. 

Abomasal infusion of branched-chain amino acids or branched-chain keto acids alter lactation performance in early lactation dairy cows. 

Joining us is Kristin Gallagher from Michigan State University discussing her research on branched-chain amino and keto acids. 

Associations of pen-level and herd-level management factors with biomarkers, health, milk-yield and reproduction. Associations of nutritional strategies with biomarkers, health, milk yield and reproduction. 

Joining us is Dr. Tom Overton from Cornell University discussing research on management factors and nutritional strategies. 

Linking amino acids to milk fat synthesis. 

Joining us are Yumi C.T. Taguti from Virginia Tech University and Izabelle Teixeira from the University of Idaho to discuss linking amino acids to milk fat synthesis. 

Relationships of blood-based indices of liver health during the transition period with performance and health. 

Joining us is Dr. Tom Overton from Cornell University to discuss blood-based indices of liver health. 

Effects of Feeding Rumen-Protected Methionine & calcium salts enriched in omega-3 fatty acids on lactation in periparturient dairy cows 

Joining us is Tanya France and Dr. Joe McFadden from Cornell University discussing her research on the effects of feeding rumen-protected methionine and calcium salts enriched in omega-3 fatty acids. 

Determining the relative metabolizable methionine content of rumen-protected products and their effect on production responses. 

Joining us is Jair Parales Giron from Michigan State University and Jonas de Souza from Perdue AgriBusiness discussing research on metabolizable methionine and its effect on production responses. 

Dry period environmental impact on colostrum volume and quality. 

Joining us is Kayla Alward from Virginia Tech University to discuss dry period environmental impact on colostrum volume and quality. 

Lipolysis inhibition improves clinical outcomes in the treatment of ketosis in dairy cows: an individually randomized multigroup parallel controlled trial. 

Joining us is Miguel Chirivi and Dr. Andres Contreras from Michigan State University, discussing their research on lipolysis inhibition. 

Lactational performance of dairy cows receiving supplemental His: A meta-analysis 

Joining us is Susanna Raisanen from Pennsylvania State University discussing her research on supplemental histidine and how it affects lactational performance. 

Effects of maternal dietary rumen-protected choline supplementation during late gestation on calf growth and metabolism.

Joining us is Turner Swartz from Michigan State University discussing his poster on the effects of maternal dietary rumen-protected choline during late gestation. 

In general during the study, calves born to pre-natal treated cows showed lower amounts of oxidative stress and reduced inflammation. Studies on these calves ended at 21 days, but it is possible if the study had continued through weaning, that the choline supplementation could have resulted in better calf growth. 

Additionally, cows that received choline produced 80% more colostrum than the control group, without diluting the IGG’s. 

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/5-Effects-of-maternal-dietary-rumen-protected-choline-supplementation-during-late-gestation-on-calf-growth-and-metabolism.pdf

Changes in plasma and milk choline metabolite concentrations in response to the provision of various rumen-protected choline prototypes in lactating cows.

Joining us is Tanya France and Dr. Joe McFadden from Cornell University discussing her research on the effects of choline. 

The goal of the study was to define the best rumen-protected choline technologies that enhance choline bioavailability. The study included two different experiments featuring mid and late-lactation cows. Varying doses of choline chloride were given as a ruminal bolus to the cow and measured the plasma in milk over the course of 36 hours. 

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/3-Changes-in-plasma-and-milk-choline-metabolite-concentrations-in-response-to-the-provision-of-various-rumen-protected-choline-prototypes-in-lactating-cows.pdf

Rumen-protected choline (RPC) reduces hepatic triacylglycerol content by increasing hepatic triglyceride-rich lipoprotein secretion.

Joining us is Usman Arshad from the University of Florida discussing his research on choline reducing hepatic triacylglycerol content. 

The study analyzes the effects of choline on reducing fatty liver at the cellular level, much more granular than studies done in the past. In the study the effect of choline was isolated, which proved that choline is a lipotropic agent that should be fed with other agents such as methionine. 

In the experiment, feeding choline resulted in fewer cows with fatty liver, which means better health and milk production. 

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/1-Rumen-protected-choline-RPC-influences-hepatic-metabolism-during-induction-of-fatty-liver.pdfhttps://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/2-Rumen-protected-choline-RPC-reduces-hepatic-triacylglycerol-content-by-increasing-hepatic-triglyceride-rich-lipoprotein-secretion.pdf

Rumen protected choline (RPC) influences hepatic metabolism during induction of fatty liver.

Joining us is Usman Arshad from the University of Florida discussing his research on how rumen-protected choline influences metabolism. 

For the study, cows were induced with fatty liver via caloric restriction, then fed them a diet high in fatty acids. Then they looked at triacylglycerides in the blood and collected lymphatic fluid. The study found that triacylglycerol levels were increased in both the blood and lymphatic system which suggests that choline increases digestibility of nutrients concurrent with enhanced absorption of triacylglycerols. 

The study also found that choline reduces inflammation in cows, which could result in less mastitis or matritus. Choline could actually impact the immune function of the cows. 

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/1-Rumen-protected-choline-RPC-influences-hepatic-metabolism-during-induction-of-fatty-liver.pdf

Increasing dose of prepartum rumen protected choline: Effects on milk production in Holstein dairy cows and Increasing dose of prepartum rumen protected choline: Effects on energy and nitrogen metabolism in Holstein dairy cows

Joining us is Dr. Henry Holdorf from the University of Wisconsin-Madison discussing his research on postpartum and prepartum rumen protected choline. 

These studies focused on higher producing cows, as they were second or greater lactation cows. The results of feeding rumen-protected choline still created an increase in milk production. While the cows had high intakes, they were very typical in size for a midwest dairy cow. 

An area of interest that requires more study is if choline impacts mammary gland function or rumen health and supply of nutrients. Considering carry-over effects that happen after stopping choline supplementations makes it a subject requiring more study. 

For more details, view the abstract summaries here: 

https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/7-Increasing-dose-of-prepartum-rumen-protected-choline-Effects-on-milk-production-in-Holstein-dairy-cows.pdf

https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/8-Increasing-dose-of-prepartum-rumen-protected-choline-Effects-on-energy-and-nitrogen-metabolism-in-Holstein-dairy-cows.pdf

Increasing dose of prepartum rumen-protected choline: Effects of in utero exposure on growth and feed efficiency in Holstein dairy calves.

Joining us is Dr. Henry Holdorf from the University of Wisconsin-Madison discussing his research on increasing the dose of rumen-protected choline and its effect on growth and feed efficiency via in utero exposure. 

The results of the study showed that higher doses of rumen-protected choline in the first two weeks of life increased the average daily gains and feed efficiency than the control group. For this experiment the choline was mixed into the ration, so the intake of choline by the cow was dependent on her dry matter intake. 

An important takeaway is that there are additional benefits for postpartum cows and their calves than what is established with choline. It’s a chance to help young, vulnerable animals. 

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/9-Increasing-dose-of-prepartum-rumen-protected-choline-Effects-of-in-utero-exposure-on-growth-and-feed-efficiency-in-Holstein-dairy-calves.pdf

Increasing dose of prepartum rumen-protected choline: Effects of in utero exposure on Angus x Holstein beef calves and Effects of in utero choline exposure on growth and metabolism in weaned Angus X Holstein calves.

Joining us is Dr. Henry Holdorf and Dr. Billy Brown from the University of Wisconsin-Madison discussing their research on in utero choline exposure in crossbred calves. 

The study by Dr. Holdorf fed choline mixed into the daily ration to prepartum cows and resulted in the male holstein/angus calves having improved rates of gain from three to eight weeks of age. It was linearly increasing with the increase of choline ingested by the cow. The results were not the same for female calves. 

Dr. Brown continued the study after weaning of the calves by weighing them monthly and discovered there was a tendency of increased body weight, hip and wither height. For producers, this allows them to gain value on calves right out of the gate, as the average difference in growth was approximately 30 pounds difference between the control group and the highest dosage of choline. 

For more details, view the abstract summaries here: 

https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/11-Effects-of-in-utero-choline-exposure-on-growth-and-metabolism-in-weaned-Angus-X-Holstein-calves.pdf

https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/10-Increasing-dose-of-prepartum-rumen-protected-choline-Effects-of-in-utero-exposure-on-Angus-x-Holstein-beef-calves.pdf

Effects of dietary rumen-protected choline supplementation during an intramammary lipopolysaccharide challenge in periparturient dairy cattle.

Joining us is Turner Swartz from Michigan State University discussing the effects of choline supplementation. 

The hypothesis of the study is that choline supplementation increases milk yield due to a reduction in inflammation. To prove this, cows were put into inflammation with a lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge, which traditionally would decrease milk yield. The study found the choline response was greater than the LPS response. Choline increased milk production by 3kg per cow per day. The LPS was reducing production by 2kgs per cow per day.  

For more details, view the abstract summary here: https://balchem.com/animal-nutrition-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/4-Effects-of-dietary-rumen-protected-choline-supplementation-during-an-intramammary-lipopolysaccharide-challenge-in-periparturient-dairy-cattle.pdf

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees. 

Co-host: Tom Powell, Director of Monogastric Business Balchem, Dr. Zack Lowman, Balchem Technical Service

Today’s episode is focused on a hot topic in the poultry industry and that is Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). The poultry industry has come a long way in how we manage HPAI outbreaks, and we will touch on what we continue to learn and how that will help us moving forward. 

Dr. Cardona starts with some background on HPAI. The outbreak in 2022 has so far affected more than 30 states and 50 million birds. (5:07) 

Dr. Helm explained that wild ducks and geese in North America carry many different strains of a low pathogenic AI. When high pathogenic strains come from Europe and Asia they intermix with the North American strains, which typically mellows the high pathogenic strains. (15:19) 

Myah Walker shared lessons learned from the 2015 outbreak, which includes ensuring biosecurity is tidied up. This can be employee training which is constant because of turnover, communication internally and externally about biosecurity processes and communication with peers to share best practices. (23:48) 

Dr. Cardona addressed free-range birds being infected by wild birds and said that wild birds are attracted to poultry farms either by food or water. By protecting feed and ensuring wild birds don’t come for feed, the outdoor spaces could have the same infection rate as indoor birds. (33:03) 

Myah Walker said in addition to economic impacts, there are mental health impacts of HPAI as well. Depopulating a house takes a mental toll on employees, owners, and growers because they feel a lack of control and sometimes blame themselves. (38:43) 

Dr. Helm wrapped up by saying if you’re in the industry, get to know the state person who will help you with a response and get to know them before an outbreak hits to go over your plans. (50:30) 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.

There are a few things present in almost all environments and one of them is mold. Today on the Real Science Exchange we talk about molds and toxins in agriculture and the opportunity they have to impact the health and profitability of animals and crops. 

Dr. Diaz begins by saying molds that produce toxins will grow in a building off of air particles because they are pretty adaptable. They can find a way to enter a system and produce toxins. (17:21) 

Dr. Whitlow mentioned molds cause problems in addition to mycotoxins. As the mold grows, it will use some of the nutrients and the feed will have less nutritional value. In some cases, molds may use individual amino acids, so it could change the amino acid profile. (29:31) 

Dr. Diaz recommends building a risk assessment model that takes into account the commodities you feed, where they’re coming from and how much of your total diet is made up of this ingredient. You use those data points to decide when to take a sample and see what is being brought in. (38:51)

Dr. Whitlow said one of the biggest effects of mycotoxins is suppressing the immune system. Dry cows are already immune suppressed so if you add the mycotoxin on top of that they don’t have any chance of getting started. You’ve got to keep clean feed in front of the dry cows and the calves. Calves don’t have the functional rumen which allows them to destroy mycotoxins. (51:55)

Dr. Whitlow emphasizes that for dairy farms management needs to be a big emphasis. Planting and harvesting at the correct time and rotating crops is vital. We know continuous corn will create more mold problems. In addition, follow best management practices for silage making and storage to reduce mold. (1:13:56)

Dr. Diaz summarizes by saying he would like to see more work on the identification of biomarkers of exposure. If we are better able to identify exposure to toxins through animal tissues or samples, we would eliminate errors associated with sampling. We would also have a solid diagnostic tool. Ideally, we’d get to a point where we can do diagnostics on-farm. (1:18:37)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees. 

In today’s podcast we are focusing on the costs and implications of poultry diseases and practical ways to reduce antibiotic resistance with Dr. TJ Gaydos and Andy Flickinger. 

Dr. Gaydos said that in the poultry industry, disease prevention through vaccines is the focus for birds' health, rather than the treatment of illnesses. (15:39) 

Andy mentioned that litter amendments, specifically PLT, is a mainstay at their operation on the non-organic side. PLT acidifies the litter and is used for ammonia and pathogen control. On the organic side however, there are fewer options available. (22:06) 

Dr. Gaydos said that intestinal health in general is an issue in the poultry industry and toxicosis is a part of that. Infectious bronchitis virus is a concern everywhere as well as blackhead disease, so the industry is always working to improve those situations. (27:34) 

Dr. Gaydos wrapped up by saying a lot of genetic research is being done to help with disease resistance and how that relates to performance in the industry, and will continue to be a focus for years to come. (34:56)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.  

Today’s episode is an installment of the Journal Club and is around an actual table once again! Our guests gathered at the Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference to discuss some of the newest research published in the Journal of Dairy Science surrounding reducing DCAD, nutrient digestibility and ammonia emissions from manure. 

Dr. Lee stated that by reducing DCAD, the urine or lactating cows would have a lower pH, leading to reduced ammonia emission. Traditionally this leads to decreased milk production. (7:48)

Haley Zynda mentioned that there was milk fat depression across all three diets, even the high or average DCAD diets. (16:50) 

Dr. Lee said their study saw a 15% decrease in ammonia, which is a significant environmentally beneficial benefit and increases the mineral value. (26:45)

Dr. Lee also mentioned that in this study, they saw a negative production effect, so at this time, it would not be economically viable. But over the next 5-10 years, we can improve upon the strategy and make it practical. (34:47) 

Haley Zynda wrapped up by commenting the natural next step in research would be a field trial and trying to grow these crops, especially those using sulfur to decrease the DCAD and soils that are sulfur deficient. (50:09)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.

Today’s episode was filmed live and in-person from the Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference! This episode will focus on the symposium exploring in utero influences on transgenerational performance. 

Dr. Jack Britt started by saying when managing your dairy herd, if the cow is pregnant, you are managing the next three generations simultaneously. We need to be focused on the long term in how we care and feed the animal. (5:10) 

Dr. Pete Hansen mentioned breeding for heat stress is challenging because there is so much movement of cattle across the U.S. However, there is genetic regulation of resistance to heat stress and how cells respond to hyperthermia. Dr. Hansen believes dairy cattle breeders will start to put out heat tolerance genetic data. (15:15) 

Dr. Eric Ciappio has studied the role of choline in human pregnancy and its increase in infant cognition. While there is currently no direct data supporting choline fed in human pregnancies will also help the child’s immune system as it does in cattle, you could someday make that assumption. (25:48) 

Dr. Clay Zimmerman shared a study that showed improved ADG through ten months of age when supplementing the cow with choline during pregnancy. Furthermore, the benefit was seen in utero, with less improvement but still some coming from colostrum. (38:19) 

Dr. Jimena LaPorta said that her research focused on understanding if you can reverse heat stress in utero. Heifers born to heat stress cows were cooled and provided the opposite environment, but they didn’t recover. They responded to the treatment physiologically, but growth wasn’t recovered. (44:28) 

Dr. Jack Britt wrapped up by emphasizing the importance of a single compound like a methyl group and how it could have a huge influence on the biology of an animal. You can look at big things, but we also need to look at the little things. (1:04:24)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.  

Co-host: Dr. Clay Zimmerman, Balchem

Air date – April 26, 2022

2203-045

Today’s podcast is the latest installment of the Journal Club where we take a closer look at some of the newest research published around the world. Today we are focused on research centered around dietary energy and genomic residual feed intake in bred heifers. 

Dr. Akins explained RFI is residual feed intake, and is the difference between the actual energy intake and the expected intake based on equations. If it’s negative, the animal ate less than predicted and a positive RFI means they ate more and were less efficient. (7:38)

Dr. Akins also said that diet, high versus low energy, had about a 9-10% reduction in intake, which is about two to two and a half pounds, which was right where predictions were. (19:00)

Dr. Akins compared strategies for bred heifers to limit feedings and said both are good options. Limit feeding takes a lot to manage dry matter, animal intakes and body measurements as underfeeding or overfeeding can have major effects and is less forgiving than a high fiber forage system. (32:15) 

Dr. Akins mentioned a big take-home for producers from this study would be that diet energy and fiber can be useful to control body weight. Use NDF and the diet as a control measure for dry matter intake and make sure you’re balancing the energy content to meet the needs of the heifer. (57:29) 

To read the article referenced in this podcast click here: https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(21)01092-4/fulltext

You can contact Dr. Akins for more information or questions at msakins@wisc.edu. 

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees. 

Today’s episode is focused on one of our most important resources: calves. Calves set the trajectory of our herd and represent our future productivity and profitability. In this Real Science Exchange episode, we will show how appropriate investment in young stock will pay off big in later years. 

Dr. Staley noticed in data there is a correlation between 10-week milk and the average annual herd of the whole dairy. (12:25)

Dr. Kertz spoke on the importance of height in addition to the weight of a calf. Height is the best indicator of the frame that weight will be deposited on and there are some consequences to heifers and cows with too much weight. (20:10)

Dr. Staley said it is worth the time to measure your dairy animals, somewhere in mid-lactation, to establish the genetic makeup and the genetic body condition score to know what you are aiming for. (31:46)

Dr. Kertz closed by saying it’s important to measure birth weights, weaning weights and heights periodically. By looking at those numbers a few times a year, you’ll have a good idea of where your dairy is at and what may need to be fixed. (56:47)

If you’d like to find Dr. Al Kertz’s book, you can find it here: https://outskirtspress.com/dairycalfandheiferfeedingandmanagement

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health. This podcast is sponsored by Balchem. All views expressed by the guests are the opinions of those individuals and are not the views of the Balchem, its affiliates or employees.  

Spring is upon us in most parts of the world and the heat of summer will not be far behind. The impact that heat has on our cows can be devastating. Today’s episode will focus on managing dairy cows in high heat environments which takes a combination of mechanical intervention and precise feeding. 

Dr. Israel Flamenbaum spoke about his summer lecture and the extreme environments that Israeli dairy farmers deal with. In the Jordan Valley, cows are under heat stress for almost six months per year. Whereas in the mountains there might be heat stress two or three months out of the year. But the cooling systems are the same. He explained that facilities there have high roofs and more space and lounging area for cows due to these extreme environments. (8:41)

Dr. Shimon Carmi discussed detecting stress in the herd and using different cooling practices to keep milk production steady. He mentioned farms starting the cooling practices early will still see a drop in milk production for a few days during those heat spikes but the farms starting their cooling practices later, and aren’t proactive about it, will experience decreased milk production for a month or longer after a heat spike. (28:00)

Dr. Lance Baumgard discussed data demonstrating in lactating cows, that lower producing cows will drink more water than higher producing cows. So the cow could be reducing milk yield to maintain healthy hydration. (37:15)

Dr. Shimon Carmi spoke about research to help desalinate water which could help immensely in the water depletion issues across the world. Cooling systems in dairy facilities are directly correlated to the water supply in that area and their water availability per facility. (49:08)

Dr. Israel Flamenbaum referred to a scientific committee that he heads whose mission is finding the appropriate cooling system for every kind of climate and dairy farm. (53:05)

Dr. Flamenbaum's articles he referenced can be found here:

https://outskirtspress.com/dairycalfandheiferfeedingandmanagement

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health.

Today’s episode dives into the genetic advancements made in the swine industry and the impact those advancements have on all other parameters. Joining us to help dig into this genetics topic are Dr. Tom Rathje and Dr. Jason Schneider, both with DNA Genetics. 

Dr. Rathje spoke about how genetic change has accelerated in recent years due to the adoption of genomic selection, which improves the accuracy with which we identify a superior animal. You use that information to decide which animals are retained to reproduce. (8:23)

Dr. Schneider mentioned that with genetic makeup changing, the nutritional needs for swine are changing as well. He said amino acids are ratioed off of lysine, and the assumption is if lysine levels are correct, you’re in the ballpark. But different breeds have different feed intakes and performances in lean gain, so changes to nutrition are coming. (17:38)

Dr. Rathje discussed that labor is always discussed as a big challenge in the swine industry, so we have to produce an animal that is more self-sufficient and able to produce and wean pigs on her own. The 14, 14, 21 program was designed to identify sows that have the ability to wean 14, 14lb pigs for 21 days on her own. (26:25). 

Dr. Schneider said the largest sustainability area we can increase is reducing mortality. If we can increase survivability through our genetic selection index, it’s a huge saver in less inputs to create the same amount of product. (46:56) 

Dr. Rathje wrapped up by saying research is taking place that looks at the activation of a pig's immune system and looks at the genes that might turn on. Now we have to figure out how to implement the knowledge. (51:40)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health.

Today’s episode is a fan-favorite, the Legacy Series. In this series we celebrate the pioneers of the industry, take a look back at their research, their impact and their lives. Specifically today we are honoring and memorializing Dr. Peter J. Van Soest. Dr. Soest passed away in March of 2021, but his legacy will forever be felt in the animal nutrition world. 

In this episode, we hear from three students of Dr. Van Soest who have gone on to illustrious careers of their own. Dr. Mary Beth Hall with USDA, Dr. Mike Van Amburgh from Cornell and Dr. David Mertens with Mertens Innovation & Research. 

Dr. Mertens said that Dr. Van Soest started his career at USDARS, and was given the mission to create an alternative to crude fiber. The breakthrough came from his knowledge of biochemistry and his work at Walter Reed hospital. Dr. Soest used detergents to remove protein from feed so you could measure fiber. (13:35) 

Dr. Hall emphasized that one of Dr. Van Soest’s legacies lives through the students he trained and the students they trained. Dr. Van Soest passed on the idea that you don’t stop with what you have and say it’s good enough. If new information presents itself, you consider them and test them and move on from there. (21:37)

Dr. Amburgh spoke about the lectures from Dr. Van Soest that are being digitized and will be available to listen to, which includes his popular periodic table lecture. (41:15)

Dr. Mertens recommended reading Dr. Van Soest papers on the development of ADF or NDF and AOAC. They give you an insight into how he did what he did - which was built on nothing that was done before. (56:12)

Dr. Amburgh believes that Dr. Van Soest’s legacy is teaching people how to think. He had a tremendous thought process and it wasn’t whether you were right or wrong, it was about what you learned in the process of thinking through all that. (1:10:53)

If you’d like to find Dr. Van Soest’s book, you can find it here on Amazon: https://amzn.to/3sYFpiX.

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health.

Brett Stewart thinks that with the expansion of the world-wide money supply, current prices won’t break lower, and especially not in commodity markets. (6:26)

John Bedell spoke about the five headwinds, which are: increased demand, constrained supply, commodity price pressure, domestic logistics and international logistics. Of these, the only one that John expects to change is demand. (13:18)

Richard Fritz spoke on the China trade agreement and he believes the most important aspect of the agreement is setting standards for animal health. However, it is an agreement made on price, not volume so it is a very unique agreement. (31:11)

Brett Stewart addressed the labor shortage and said that as wages increase to keep up with inflation, inflation will continue to increase as well. The labor shortage is not unique to the United States, some beef processors in South America are 30% below average slaughter rates because of lack of workers. (42:47) 

Richard Fritz mentioned the Russia/Ukraine situation and the impact on agriculture, mostly in grain export out of the Black Sea which could become a problem. (55:01) 

John Bedell added that Russia supplies natural gas to Europe and that can have a lot of trickle down effects as well. (56:04)

If you want one of our new Real Science Exchange t-shirts, make sure to screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll get a shirt in the mail to you. 

Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to bring more people to join us around the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  

This podcast is sponsored by Balchem Animal Nutrition and Health.